Are there any credible conspiracy theories?

King Mob

ShatterAlan wrote: »

It's not a tangent at all. You're trying to say that the passport and the ring passed through a flaming fireball of a plane crash conflagration and landed on the pavement and the reason I have to believe this is because these items were found.


It's exactly the same as me saying that the cat's body was placed on the ground by aliens and you have to believe this because the cat's body was found.

Are you disagreeing that the items (of which there are dozens more beyond just the ring and passport) were found?
Yes or no?

You've been asked this before, but guess what, you ignored that point too.
Conspiracy theorists have a lot of trouble with yes or no questions cause it gives very little room to weasel out or twist things, so usually they ignore them completely.

IAMAMORON

I think it is getting towards a well established fact that the Scorpion Pop/Rock Crossover anthem " the winds of change " was in fact written by the CIA to help initiate the collapse of the iron curtain.

The Podcast is well worth a listen, although the episodes are poorly edited and each first and last 5 minutes seem repetitive, but worth a listen.

BTW the lead singer of the Scorpions has categorically denied this is plausible and is adamant it did not happen.... go figure.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/may/15/wind-of-change-did-the-cia-write-the-cold-wars-biggest-anthem

Dohnjoe

IAMAMORON wrote: »

BTW the lead singer of the Scorpions has categorically denied this is plausible and is adamant it did not happen.... go figure.

If you wrote a song, and someone from the internet claimed it was from the CIA, would you agree with that? Pretty sure you wouldn't, unless you were taking the piss.

weisses

I Think its a credible CT that big pharma conspired to not release the covid vaccine announcement until after the election ... therefore possibly hindering a Trump re election

ohnonotgmail

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I think it is getting towards a well established fact that the Scorpion Pop/Rock Crossover anthem " the winds of change " was in fact written by the CIA to help initiate the collapse of the iron curtain.

The Podcast is well worth a listen, although the episodes are poorly edited and each first and last 5 minutes seem repetitive, but worth a listen.

BTW the lead singer of the Scorpions has categorically denied this is plausible and is adamant it did not happen.... go figure.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/may/15/wind-of-change-did-the-cia-write-the-cold-wars-biggest-anthem

well he would say that, wouldn't he?

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Again, this is not coming from me personally. I'm not the source of this information. It's mind-blowing that this has to be explained to you.

These are the facts, perishable stuff physically survived from the plane impacts. It physically exists, and some of it is on display in NY.

What is your basis, apart from incredulity, that this stuff doesn't exist and that the investigation was wrong about this?

You ARE saying this.


You are saying that a passport can survive a fireball and your reasoning is that is can because "they" found one.


By the same logic aliens put the dead cat on the ground because people found him. I keep trying to hammer that into you and you are choosing to ignore your flawed logic.



You may not be the source of the information personally, i.e. you didn't witness the passport get ejected from the plane through the fuselage and flutter down into the street (but then nobody did) and you didn't personally find it but you are saying that this is how events transpired, so you're told.

King Mob

ShatterAlan wrote: »

You ARE saying this.


You are saying that a passport can survive a fireball and your reasoning is that is can because "they" found one.

But that's not the argument.
You're using a lazy, dishonest strawman again.

There are dozens of items that have been recovered from the crashes.
Even you can't bring yourself to dispute that fact.
You keep running away from the point.

So since objects like the passport did survive the crash, we can conclude that it is possible that the passport survived the crash.

And then if it is possible the passport survived the crash, then your argument and insistence that it is impossible is shown to be false.
This has been explained to you many times, but you ignored it, deflected from it and ran away.

If you had addressed it directly, honestly and like an adult, you wouldn't be finding yourself going around in circles.
But again, if you were capable of that, you wouldn't believe your silly conspiracy.

ShatterAlan

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I think it is getting towards a well established fact that the Scorpion Pop/Rock Crossover anthem " the winds of change " was in fact written by the CIA to help initiate the collapse of the iron curtain.

The Podcast is well worth a listen, although the episodes are poorly edited and each first and last 5 minutes seem repetitive, but worth a listen.

BTW the lead singer of the Scorpions has categorically denied this is plausible and is adamant it did not happen.... go figure.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/may/15/wind-of-change-did-the-cia-write-the-cold-wars-biggest-anthem

Wasn't the song released well over a year AFTER the wall came down?

The Nal

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Wasn't the song released well over a year AFTER the wall came down?

It was. If there was ever a CIA agent at work, its this guy.

storker

King Mob wrote: »

The BBC report was a mistake.

That bit of BBC non-evidence is actually quite funny. It presumes that the 911 conspiracy project plan contained an action that required the news networks to be informed that a skyscraper that everyone was already looking at had just collapsed...because otherwise the news networks...er...might not have noticed... :rolleyes:

storker

ShatterAlan wrote: »

I don't believe in God. You tell me he/she exists. I still don't believe you. Is that an argument from incredulity.

No, because your argument fits the evidence. When it comes to belief in god, though, the argument from incredulity usually comes from believers, who claim they they just can't believe that there's nothing there.

I show you a dead cat lying on the side of the road. I tell you that aliens dropped the cat's carcass there. You don't believe me. Is that an argument from incredulity?

No, because there are other explanations for the cat's body being there that don't require the invocation of aliens. The same is true with the passport - being planted there by the 911 "conspirators" is not the only way it could have got there, now matter how often you claim that to be the case.

Look the cat's corpse is right there!!! How else did it get there if the aliens didn't put him there?

It died in the gutter. As per the official version. Aliens not required.

King Mob

storker wrote: »

That bit of BBC non-evidence is actually quite funny. It presumes that the 911 conspiracy project plan contained an action that required the news networks to be informed that a skyscraper that everyone was already looking at had just collapsed...because otherwise the news networks...er...might not have noticed... :rolleyes:

Yea, it's usually why conspiracy theorists never address this part of the conspiracy. They know it's idiotic, but but they can't admit it. So they just ignore instead.

Some have suggested that the conspirators gave the information out early so the BBC et al would be ready to report on the collapse. But then the BBC made a mistake and reported it early.
Which is odd since the conspiracy hinges on the notion that it can't possibly have been a mistake cause news organizations wouldn't make a mistake so obvious.

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

You ARE saying this.

Nope. It's not some "opinion" I have. I am simply sharing the facts of the case.

You are saying that a passport can survive a fireball and your reasoning is that is can because "they" found one.

Again nope. It's a fact perishable stuff survived the impacts. There is no evidence of any other explanation.

Unless of course something else did happen, e.g. all these items were planted? all of them were faked? But there needs to be a basis for those theories, none exists

Coming back to my question, which is simple, yet you are plainly dodging, I'll ask again -

What is your basis, apart from incredulity, that this stuff doesn't exist and that the investigation was wrong about this?

King Mob

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Coming back to my question, which is simple, yet you are plainly dodging, I'll ask

And this is what perplexes me.
Conspiracy theorists like Alan here know they are dodging. They know they're being dishonest.

Why are they resorting to these tactics if their conspiracies have merit?
If you have to lie and evade and be completely dishonest to argue in favour of a conspiracy, to me that's an indication that it's not true.
I can't wrap my head around how someone can justify this to themselves.

storker

King Mob wrote: »

And this is what perplexes me.
Conspiracy theorists like Alan here know they are dodging. They know they're being dishonest.

Alan is unusual, however, in that he doesn't link-dump or provide references to hour-long YouTube videos, which appears to be the standard approach. I think he's just enjoying a bit of a leg-pull.

Dohnjoe

storker wrote: »

Alan is unusual, however, in that he doesn't link-dump or provide references to hour-long YouTube videos, which appears to be the standard approach. I think he's just enjoying a bit of a leg-pull.

I've considered this, but having had a lot of experience on this forum, there have been more than a few who've been quite serious.

storker

The Nal wrote: »

It was. If there was ever a CIA agent at work, its this guy.

Did you see him swimming in the Spongebob movie?. Very handy for covert ops on foreign shores I'd say. It all fits...

ShatterAlan

storker wrote: »

No, because your argument fits the evidence. When it comes to belief in god, though, the argument from incredulity usually comes from believers, who claim they they just can't believe that there's nothing there.



No, because there are other explanations for the cat's body being there that don't require the invocation of aliens. The same is true with the passport - being planted there by the 911 "conspirators" is not the only way it could have got there, now matter how often you claim that to be the case.



It died in the gutter. As per the official version. Aliens not required.

Well if you want to be mathematical about it here is what we have:


It's reported that a passport of one of the hijackers was found in the street before the building came down. So if this is true then how did it get there? Well it had to have been ejected from on the person who possessed it (no trace of that person or his clothes survived the fireball), passed through the fuselage of the plane and fallen to the street. It can't have come to rest inside the building as it was reportedly found before the building collapsed. So the only way for it to fall Earth is at the point of impact or with fuel and debris that blew through an exit hole in the building.


Would that be fair to say?

King Mob

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Well if you want to be mathematical about here is what we have:


It's reported that a passport of one of the hijackers was found in the street before the building came down. So if this is true then how did it get there? Well it had to have been ejected from on the person who possessed it (no trace of that person or his clothes survived the fireball), passed through the fuselage of the plane and fallen to the street. It can't have come to rest inside the building as it was reportedly found before the building collapsed. So the only way for it to fall Earth is at the point of impact or with fuel and debris that blew through an exit hole in the building.


Would that be fair to say?

No that's not fair to say as that's just a long rambling and childish strawman you've constructed.

For example you keep claiming that the item has to be ejected from the person or "it crawled out of their jacket" etc. How do you know where the item was exactly?

You keep claiming that no trace of the person survived. But again how do you know this? How do you know that some trace of the person didn't survive, it just wasn't found?

You also say that the items can't have been in the building for a time. But again you don't explain how you know this. How do you know that they didn't land in the building, but were pushed out before the collapse due to one reason or another such as a fuel explosion, a partial collapse of some floors or maybe even just an updraft of a fire. Hell, could have been a person chucked them out for all we know.

You don't know any of this stuff, yet you only present one narrow strawman version because you want to deflect from the issue you can't address.

Items survived the crash and where found. This is a fact.
If some items can survive then other items can survive. Therefore the passport can survive. Therefore you claim that the passport could not have survived is false.

Unless you've another explanation for how ALL of the other items survived?

storker

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Well if you want to be mathematical about it here is what we have:


It's reported that a passport of one of the hijackers was found in the street before the building came down. So if this is true then how did it get there? Well it had to have been ejected from on the person who possessed it (no trace of that person or his clothes survived the fireball), passed through the fuselage of the plane and fallen to the street. It can't have come to rest inside the building as it was reportedly found before the building collapsed. So the only way for it to fall Earth is at the point of impact or with fuel and debris that blew through an exit hole in the building.


Would that be fair to say?

I don't know. I'm still waiting for the mathematics you seemed to be about to post.

ShatterAlan

storker wrote: »

I don't know. I'm still waiting for the mathematics you seemed to be about to post.

Well like your other post, storker, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I deal with the science of things rather than speculation.


When someone asks me "Well, what else could have happened then, smarty-pants?" I say that speculating and guessing is not my purview.

And you don't know if it's fair to agree with what I posted above?

Dohnjoe

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Well like your other post, storker, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I deal with the science of things rather than speculation.


When someone asks me "Well, what else could have happened then, smarty-pants?" I say that speculating and guessing is not my purview.

Your views so far display quite a bit of faulty thinking and logical fallacies.

I believe you suggested that you thought 9/11 might be an inside job?

Conspiracy theorists will often entertain something they have no supporting evidence for, but will endlessly attack something which has overwhelming evidence. Also, in my experience, they will rarely detail their conspiracy theories.

King Mob

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Well like your other post, storker, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I deal with the science of things rather than speculation.

yet you keep insisting unscienfitic things like the idea that it is impossible for the items recovered to survive.

And yes, you are a conspiracy theorist because you believe in the conspiracy theory around 9/11

ShatterAlan wrote: »

When someone asks me "Well, what else could have happened then, smarty-pants?" I say that speculating and guessing is not my purview.

But that's not the argument you've been presented.
You keep making these strawmen and ignoring when they are explained to you.
You also keep ignoring points you can't address.
That's dishonest and frankly a bit cowardly.

And yes, you are speculating and guessing as you've claimed the passport indicates a conspiracy.
The only way this is possible is if you believe the passport and other items were all faked and planted.
You aren't admitting to this because you're not honest about your position, but we all know this is what you were getting at. (If it's not, feel free to correct this and explain your position.)
You've no evidence that the passport and other items were faked beyond your provably false claim that "it is impossible for them to survive."
Hence, you are guessing and speculating.

What you really mean here is that you don't wish to be honest about your position because you know you can't support or defend it and you know it undermines your other arguments.

growleaves

Mr_Muffin wrote: »

I've never come across a conspiracy theory that I thought could actually be true. It seems that when you delve into one, it doesn't take long to see if it usually based on questionable logic.

Admittedly, I've never delved into any conspiracy with great detail, as I found it difficult to decipher the facts from some wack jobs take on things.

Are they are that actually hold-up if you take a closer look?

Yes, there must be, and for instance John Mitchel was both a conspiracy theorist and a conspirator.

Also a lot of anti-conspiracy theory discourse rests on the assumption that people in power have no reason to behave badly ('what would they have to gain?') and therefore won't and aren't.

This is belied by historical examples of tyrannies: Communism, Nazism, medieval kings, slaves states like ancient Sparta, dictators like Chiang Kai-Shek etc., etc.

Obviously the ugly side of human nature, psychotic and deliberate evil, exists and isn't all that unusual. So utilitarian question-begging leave me unmoved.

King Mob

growleaves wrote: »

Also a lot of anti-conspiracy theory discourse rests on the assumption that people in power have no reason to behave badly ('what would they have to gain?') and therefore won't and aren't.

As some conspiracy theorists will point out to you I've been here for a while.

I've not once seen this argument nor have I every once used it.

growleaves

King Mob wrote: »

As some conspiracy theorists will point out to you I've been here for a while.

I've not once seen this argument nor have I every once used it.

I've encountered it on other forums on this site and in real life discussions.

Dohnjoe

growleaves wrote: »

Also a lot of anti-conspiracy theory discourse rests on the assumption that people in power have no reason to behave badly ('what would they have to gain?') and therefore won't and aren't.

I don't agree at all, it rests on the fact that a theory simply has no evidence.

For example, almost every major shooting and terrorist attack to occur in the last 20 years has been labeled a conspiracy theory, many have made it to this forum, yet none that made it here (in my experience) have had any supporting evidence, yet alone a credible theory

As previously mentioned, conspiracies, collusion and corruption do happen on a regular basis, but they rarely make it to conspiracy forums. Instead conspiracy forums seem to focus on the more "popular" and "fantastical" conspiracies, for which there is little or no credible evidence

Approved User Assesment

There are plenty of reasonable theories on a weekly, if not daily basis across the world.
This weeks two most prominent are:

1. China 5G's (microwaves - energy weapons) Indian soldiers, during their recent border dispute, causing a sudden onset of sickness (not death). Perhaps by high energy microwaves causing sudden heatstroke symptoms, skin vessel boiling or some such. Widely reported across media earlier in the week. May also have some context to injuries suffered by US folks in Cuba, inducing loss of hearing and neurological effects.
https://www.theweek.co.uk/108688/china-deploys-microwave-weapons-against-indian-troops
China denies this.

2. Conspiracy of collusion in NI - Twenty-four members of the United States Congress have called for a public inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-55083453

Plenty of theories galore, each and every week, roll up, roll up.

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Your views so far display quite a bit of faulty thinking and logical fallacies.

I believe you suggested that you thought 9/11 might be an inside job?

Conspiracy theorists will often entertain something they have no supporting evidence for, but will endlessly attack something which has overwhelming evidence. Also, in my experience, they will rarely detail their conspiracy theories.

You may be correct, DJ, but I don't recall alluding to an inside job.


With reference to logical fallacies...your own logic would most definitely fall with these parameters. To wit .... "A passport can survive a fireball; the passport was found; hence the passport survived a fireball."


This is along the same lines as those inane "proofs" that god exists, e.g.:


- God created trees
- Trees exist
- Therefore God exists.


QED

ShatterAlan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Your views so far display quite a bit of faulty thinking and logical fallacies.

I believe you suggested that you thought 9/11 might be an inside job?

Conspiracy theorists will often entertain something they have no supporting evidence for, but will endlessly attack something which has overwhelming evidence. Also, in my experience, they will rarely detail their conspiracy theories.

And what faulty thinking?