I smell a conspiracy!

meglome · 05-04-2009 2:49am

espinolman wrote: »

The one about surveilance cameras in cable TV boxes is a conspiracy theory that Alex Jones debunked , so that one is a lie .
I have looked at all the CTs he 'believes' on that link and there are a dozen i agree with so after reading that i have decided i am going to listen to Alex Jones more often , i am going to buy a new mp3 player tomorrow so i can listen to AJ every day. And thanks for the link.

Well despite all the NWO talk you are very entitled to do that. As Alex Jones is entitled to say pretty much what he likes. The NWO really need to get their act together.

hkcharlie · 05-04-2009 3:58am

Purple Gorilla wrote: »

Anyone can be suspicious of everything but that doesn't make their suspicion correct. I can be suspicious that coke is actually fanta

it is ! ! !

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanta

Heineken Helen · 05-04-2009 3:43pm

Kraken wrote: »

just my opinion but if they really wanted to put satalite up and watch every thing you do i dont think they would broadcast it. yes they would have to announce it eventually but probably only it small bits like just put 2 up to watch x when they might already have about 50 floating up there.

they could use any excuse they wanted.

as far as the fires in aus well i think anything that could save lives is a good idea.

if your afraid of people watching you your probably up to no good.

I'm not AFRAID of people watching me and I'm not up to no good... I just don't like it. Extreme example: if there were two people peering through your window as you sat watching tv would you just think 'well I'm not doing anything wrong so LET them watch me' or would you think 'hang on, I've done nothing wrong, they've no right to invade my privacy in this way'. I'm gonna be presumptious and think you'd go for the latter.

I'm not comfortable with government intrusion into everyday life simply because it gets stronger and stronger and they give themselves more right to pry into our lives... where does it end?

Heineken Helen · 05-04-2009 3:45pm

meglome wrote: »

Okay. But I posted a map of earthquakes that shows a lot of them in the area of the seedbank and over large areas of the planets surface, including Ireland for that matter. So if these are normal day to day events (which can be proven) why would it be suspicious to you? Are you suspicious of everything all the time or how do you work this out? I'm really curious.

An earthquake of such magnitude is certainly not an everyday event. I know there are earthquakes quite frequently that we can't feel but when that suddenly becomes 6+ on the richter scale and happens twice in the space of a year... well I'm going to question that.

thecommander · 05-04-2009 6:48pm

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Well, as I drive around Australia more it seems more likely to me that there was a Nuclear war here probably 100 - 150 thousand years ago.

Do you really believe that?

Mahatma coat · 06-04-2009 3:01am

Seems highly likely TC

have you been over here?

thecommander · 06-04-2009 9:07am

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Seems highly likely TC

have you been over here?

No I haven't. Cant see how it seems highly likely. Other than a vast expance, there doesn't appear to any other evidence. Any radioactive readings, or evidence of a past technological civilisation been dug up?

Edit: where did you pluck the dating from?

Undergod · 06-04-2009 11:17am

An earthquake of such magnitude is certainly not an everyday event. I know there are earthquakes quite frequently that we can't feel but when that suddenly becomes 6+ on the richter scale and happens twice in the space of a year... well I'm going to question that.

So, how are these earthquakes traceable to Svalbard?

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 11:29am

Undergod wrote: »

So, how are these earthquakes traceable to Svalbard?

Lol, they were IN Svalbard

The Irish and the English ones were tremors or aftershocks of the Svalbard one.

Undergod · 06-04-2009 11:36am

Heineken Helen wrote:

It does seem a bit suspect that a lot of weird earthquakes (even take the Melbourne ones this year... following the one in Svalbard) seem to be traceable back to this small island

Heineken Helen wrote:

Lol, they were IN Svalbard

You said they were in Melbourne. How were the earthquakes in Melbourne traceable to Svalbard?

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 11:40am

Undergod wrote: »

You said they were in Melbourne. How were the earthquakes in Melbourne traceable to Svalbard?

The post you quoted was specifically related to the Svalbard earthquakes... I don't think the Melbourne ones got as high as 6+ ?

I just mentioned the Melbourne earthquakes cos they're pretty unusual too... didn't mean to suggest they came from Svalbard... although I'd certainly be interested in discussing where they came from. An Aussie friend of mine seems to think it's some drilling being done out to sea that may have caused it.

Undergod · 06-04-2009 11:43am

Heineken Helen wrote:

a lot of weird earthquakes (even take the Melbourne ones this year... following the one in Svalbard) seem to be traceable back to this small island

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I just mentioned the Melbourne earthquakes cos they're pretty unusual too... didn't mean to suggest they came from Svalbard...

Are you sure?

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 11:54am

Undergod wrote: »

Are you sure?

Yes I'm sure... I mentioned Melbourne SIMPLY because it followed within days of Svalbards (again largest ever earthquake in Norway) 2nd earthquake... Melbourne doesn't generally get earthquakes... neither do Ireland or England and yet we had one directly following one in Svalbard.

I probably shouldn't have mentioned the Melbourne one but I'm always a little bit suspicious when natural disasters occur in strange places so I threw the Melbourne one in there. Are you gonna just focus on that or address any of the other points raised?

Undergod · 06-04-2009 12:12pm

I'm sorry, I thought that saying seemed to be traceable to something else meant there was some kind of connection between them.

sadly too true! Look at all these diseases that pop up every now and then and threaten to end humanity... SARS, etc. I've a feeling that one of these days it will actually be much worse... something that we will ALL have to buy a vaccination for

So you think that diseases are engineered by drugs companies to sell treatments and preventative medicines? Possible.

I don't believe there was a prehistoric nuclear war, but there is some interesting evidence. Something about radiation levels in stratified ice caps. It's not entirely implausible.

The planets did grow up to their present size by some way or another by accretion or whatever...

Gravity?

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 12:25pm

Undergod wrote: »

I'm sorry, I thought that saying seemed to be traceable to something else meant there was some kind of connection between them.

So you think that diseases are engineered by drugs companies to sell treatments and preventative medicines? Possible.

I don't believe there was a prehistoric nuclear war, but there is some interesting evidence. Something about radiation levels in stratified ice caps. It's not entirely implausible.

Gravity?

Well it's POSSIBLE there's a connection... but considering the distance between Norway and Australia it's something that I'M not capable of trying to figure out... so I'm willing to accept they're entirely unrelated. Not with the Irish/English earthquakes though

I think it's certainly possible that diseases CAN be engineered by drug companies... they ARE in it for the profit and look at the power those big American drug companies can even have over the government and some high up government officials even have massive shares in them... so it's entirely possible that all their work isn't for the better good. I don't think I'm the first person to come up with this idea. Perhaps these diseases aren't even leaked on purpose but accidents happen.

I'm intrigued by the possibility of a prehistoric nuclear war... I don't believe it either but I only heard of the possibility a couple of days ago.

meglome · 06-04-2009 3:02pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Well it's POSSIBLE there's a connection... but considering the distance between Norway and Australia it's something that I'M not capable of trying to figure out... so I'm willing to accept they're entirely unrelated. Not with the Irish/English earthquakes though

I think it's certainly possible that diseases CAN be engineered by drug companies... they ARE in it for the profit and look at the power those big American drug companies can even have over the government and some high up government officials even have massive shares in them... so it's entirely possible that all their work isn't for the better good. I don't think I'm the first person to come up with this idea. Perhaps these diseases aren't even leaked on purpose but accidents happen.

I'm intrigued by the possibility of a prehistoric nuclear war... I don't believe it either but I only heard of the possibility a couple of days ago.

Can, could, might. If wishes were cash an all that.

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 3:22pm

meglome wrote: »

Can, could, might. If wishes were cash an all that.

AGAIN :rolleyes: please read the first post and try and grasp the concept of this thread.

There's no wishing here... I'd happily be proven wrong on all of this.

Diogenes · 06-04-2009 3:36pm

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Well, as I drive around Australia more it seems more likely to me that there was a Nuclear war here probably 100 - 150 thousand years ago.

Does anyone else imagine an Australian Charlton Heston standing over the remains of Sydney Opera House;

"Strewth, you flaming idiots, you only gone and done it, well thats just bloody marvellous, isn't it!"

meglome · 06-04-2009 3:44pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

AGAIN :rolleyes: please read the first post and try and grasp the concept of this thread.

There's no wishing here... I'd happily be proven wrong on all of this.

How can we prove you wrong when you very vaguely say that something could happen. Many many things are possible, it's why I like most of the books I read as the stories are just possible enough to make them a better read. But in the real world most of these things are highly unlikely.

We are pretty confident that gravity works exactly as the science says it does but we can't actually prove this.

meglome · 06-04-2009 4:01pm

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Well, as I drive around Australia more it seems more likely to me that there was a Nuclear war here probably 100 - 150 thousand years ago.

are people so arrogant to think that we are the first humans ever to be clever?

Humans have existed as we are now, 'fully evolved' if you wish for over 250 thousand years.

we reach points of great zenith and then we slide back into the darkages, so yeah ancient nuclear weapons, or ships, quite possible.

Or we could ask you is it not arrogant to think you know more that most world experts in these fields?

There is no evidence of humans in Australia before forty thousands years ago. And even then no one can figure out exactly how they got there.

It's about accumulation of knowledge and better means of sharing it. Technology was lost when civilisations were wiped out as they had no mean other than person to person to share it.

Ireland didn't have a dark age like the rest of Europe and people are starting to believe the dark ages weren't quite as dark as we initially thought.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

if you open your mind to the possibility that your narrow little view of the world might not be quite as infallible as you believe then you might just start joining the dots and seeing the bigger picture

I love a good story I really really do. But what's you're saying has basically zero evidence. We can find traces of animals from millions of years ago but nothing for this nuclear war. We can dream and speculate all we want, I mean many great scientific discoveries started this way. So open your mind, but if you want strangers to believe you then I'd imagine you'd need to prove it in some way.

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 4:16pm

meglome wrote: »

How can we prove you wrong when you very vaguely say that something could happen. Many many things are possible, it's why I like most of the books I read as the stories are just possible enough to make them a better read. But in the real world most of these things are highly unlikely.

We are pretty confident that gravity works exactly as the science says it does but we can't actually prove this.

Because this thread was intended to have some fun and list POTENTIAL CT's. If you keep going on about proof I'm just going to have to ignore you and I don't like ignoring anyone.

You coulda had a bit of fun with this thread too ya know???

meglome · 06-04-2009 4:28pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Because this thread was intended to have some fun and list POTENTIAL CT's. If you keep going on about proof I'm just going to have to ignore you and I don't like ignoring anyone.

You coulda had a bit of fun with this thread too ya know???

Okay what I'm trying to say here is I don't think an interesting/scary story is automatically equal to a conspiracy theory. We can fantasise about anything we like, really anything at all. But to take this idea and make it a conspiracy theory you need to be able to spell out in some logical way why it is a conspiracy theory. Picking events and saying there's something you find odd about them and not being necessarily able to say why you think it's odd won't make it a conspiracy theory. Also showing a serious lack of understanding of some topics and still saying they're suspicious even when it's explained to you doesn't help. I got some flack for this already but here is a creative writing forum if you just want to make up stories and there is a CT forum if you want to spell out the CT.

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 4:37pm

meglome wrote: »

Okay what I'm trying to say here is I don't think an interesting/scary story is automatically equal to a conspiracy theory. We can fantasise about anything we like, really anything at all. But to take this idea and make it a conspiracy theory you need to be able to spell out in some logical way why it is a conspiracy theory. Picking events and saying there's something you find odd about them and not being necessarily able to say why you think it's odd won't make it a conspiracy theory. Also showing a serious lack of understanding of some topics and still saying they're suspicious even when it's explained to you doesn't help. I got some flack for this already but here is a creative writing forum if you just want to make up stories and there is a CT forum if you want to spell out the CT.

Since when do conspiracy theories require proof in order to BE a conspiracy theory? :rolleyes: if they have proof, it's the truth. If you like, I could find a link to ANOTHER conspiracy theorist and their opinion on the same matter... somebody you'll just dismiss as being crazy straight away. Is that what constitutes truth?

These aren't fantasies. These are things that I, and some other people, are suspicious of. Doesn't mean there's a grain of truth to them but, if something doesn't seem right, it's worth looking into. I thought by posting them here others might be interested or post other interesting things that are worth looking into. So far many people have got the gist of it... and I'm going to stop explaining what I was aiming for cos it's ruining the thread

meglome · 06-04-2009 4:42pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Since when do conspiracy theories require proof in order to BE a conspiracy theory? :rolleyes: if they have proof, it's the truth. If you like, I could find a link to ANOTHER conspiracy theorist and their opinion on the same matter... somebody you'll just dismiss as being crazy straight away. Is that what constitutes truth?

These aren't fantasies. These are things that I, and some other people, are suspicious of. Doesn't mean there's a grain of truth to them but, if something doesn't seem right, it's worth looking into. I thought by posting them here others might be interested or post other interesting things that are worth looking into. So far many people have got the gist of it... and I'm going to stop explaining what I was aiming for cos it's ruining the thread

Strange I didn't think I'd used the word proof in my last post at all. Maybe you can show me where I said that?

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 4:47pm

meglome wrote: »

Strange I didn't think I'd used the word proof in my last post at all. Maybe you can show me where I said that?

Sorry, I'm just so used to seeing it in your posts, I just assumed it was there

but well done.

In fairness, you asked for logic... I've used logic as far as I'm concerned. Does something have to be considered logical by YOU in order for it to qualify as logic? We're both looking at stuff from different points of view... what's logic to you may be far from it to me.

Undergod · 06-04-2009 5:04pm

Meglome wrote:

But what's you're saying has basically zero evidence.

As I said earlier, there is some evidence relating to radiation in ice caps- I can't find the link but I'm working on it. It's quite thin evidence, but with a gulf on the scale we're talking about here, it would be.
To be honest though, this isn't really a conspiracy theory. Where's the conspiracy?

Heineken Helen wrote:

Since when do conspiracy theories require proof in order to BE a conspiracy theory? if they have proof, it's the truth.

I think evidence is more what we're looking for.

meglome · 06-04-2009 6:59pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Sorry, I'm just so used to seeing it in your posts, I just assumed it was there but well done.

In fairness, you asked for logic... I've used logic as far as I'm concerned. Does something have to be considered logical by YOU in order for it to qualify as logic? We're both looking at stuff from different points of view... what's logic to you may be far from it to me.

No problem and you're right I'd usually be looking for proof.

All I'm personally looking for here is a bit of logic and some idea of why exactly it's a CT in the first place. Even if you don't have real proof hopefully the CT will make some sense.

Heineken Helen · 06-04-2009 8:06pm

Undergod wrote: »

As I said earlier, there is some evidence relating to radiation in ice caps- I can't find the link but I'm working on it. It's quite thin evidence, but with a gulf on the scale we're talking about here, it would be.
To be honest though, this isn't really a conspiracy theory. Where's the conspiracy?

I think evidence is more what we're looking for.

again, if I had evidence it would be the truth and it would bypass this forum altogether.

Meglome, I still don't understand what it is you want... it's logical to me:o

jackiebrown · 06-04-2009 8:34pm

meglome wrote: »

How can we prove you wrong when you very vaguely say that something could happen. Many many things are possible, it's why I like most of the books I read as the stories are just possible enough to make them a better read. But in the real world most of these things are highly unlikely.

We are pretty confident that gravity works exactly as the science says it does but we can't actually prove this.

Can I have your definition of the real world please?

Okay what I'm trying to say here is I don't think an interesting/scary story is automatically equal to a conspiracy theory. We can fantasise about anything we like, really anything at all. But to take this idea and make it a conspiracy theory you need to be able to spell out in some logical way why it is a conspiracy theory. Picking events and saying there's something you find odd about them and not being necessarily able to say why you think it's odd won't make it a conspiracy theory. Also showing a serious lack of understanding of some topics and still saying they're suspicious even when it's explained to you doesn't help. I got some flack for this already but here is a creative writing forum if you just want to make up stories and there is a CT forum if you want to spell out the CT.

Whats wrong with dreaming, if you cant imagine something how can you make it real.

The OP has said many times this thread was a bit of fun which your trying interpret with logic. So what if its illogical to you.? The OP smells a rat and so do I. For us its a conspiracy and in its rightful home.

I have no proof.

bonkey · 06-04-2009 9:40pm

Heineken Helen wrote: »

again, if I had evidence it would be the truth and it would bypass this forum altogether.

There is a distinction between "having some evidence" and "having sufficient evidence to establish truth".

I smell a conspiracy!

Comments