Advertisement
Where is Report Post on mobile? We've made a slight change, see here
Have your say on the future of the 'Save Draft' feature in this poll
MODs please see this information notice in the mod's forum. Thanks!
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards

Are there any credible conspiracy theories?

1246734

Comments



  • The only one I believe is that the St. Phelim was hit by a drone, most likely accidentally but covered up none the less. The fact they accused both pilots of sightseeing over New Ross I find particularly disgusting.




  • The Nal wrote: »
    No there was not. Stop spreading lies.

    There was a fitting for the bubble top. There was no glass in it.

    rawImage.jpg

    .

    That's factually untrue, the car was fitted with privacy windows. You can see the glass here. Someone would have to deliberately remove the glass for it to be no longer there. Just another angle to the conspiracy ;)
    522278.png

    Either way missing glass or not, theres no evidence a piece of human bone impacted the glass here. We have plenty of evidence for gunshots and Kennedy and Connelly hit by bullets.




  • The Nal wrote: »
    Its the only possible theory. That r bullet fragments.

    That some bullet here doing all this with just a very tiny piece at the edge of the tip broken off. Even debunkers have failed miserably here trying to replicate the shape here after firing a rifle. Everyone of the bullets they found after firing the rifle, got bent and warped out of original shape.

    Connelly 5th rib got hit here, it's a joke to think the bullet would be like this still. Especially the round top where it's hit hard bone.

    This bullet just got stuck inside Connelly pants and just happens to fall onto a stretcher at Parkland?

    522281.png




  • Mod: specific CT discussions should go in their own threads.




  • 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?
    You may or may not find this interesting: https://listverse.com/2017/08/18/top-10-conspiracy-theories-that-were-actually-true/


  • Advertisement


  • joeguevara wrote: »
    One conspiracy theory that I definitely believe is that the US war on drugs is a front. So much evidence of government agencies being bigger dealers than the cartels my favourite being the CIA plane crash because it was so overladen with cocaine. https://wikispooks.com/wiki/2007_Yucatan_Gulfstream_drug_crash

    I listened to a podcast recently which claimed that the Scorpions cross over hit single " winds of change " was actually penned by the CIA with the insinuation that it was written to promote perestroika and to facilitate anti communist sentiment amongst the youth of the former soviet bloc. It was number 1 all over eastern europe and in Russia. The song was translated into Russian, German, English.

    Not all that far fetched. The podcast also investigated the acquital of a drugs smuggler who was caught red handed with a boat of charlie in the carribbean in the early 80's. The same guy brought a host of popular US bands to Moscow for a rock concert the same year the Scorpions song was released. Intriguing enough conspiracy all things considered. Seemingly the podcast producers found it astonishing that the band manager/drug smuggler walked from the drugs charge, did no time whatsoever. 3 years later he is bringing skid row, bon jovi ,poison , scorpions etc to moscow for a gig as big as Live Aid.




  • splinter65 wrote: »
    The only one I’ll even near entertain is princess Diana.
    The most convenient thing to happen for the most famous and powerful royal family in the world to happen at that time in their history was that Diana would die.
    And that is exactly what happened a perfectly healthy young woman of 37. And no one really knows what happened.

    I do. A drunk limo driver drove too fast and crashed. The passengers that were not wearing seatbelts - Diana, Dodi - were fatally injured.




  • Hoop66 wrote: »
    I do. A drunk limo driver drove too fast and crashed. The passengers that were not wearing seatbelts - Diana, Dodi - were fatally injured.

    Yup but if you can't explain every tiny detail and nuance of the event to someone, then that someone can claim there's "something fishy" going on, without having to detail what it is exactly.

    That is the backbone of most modern popular conspiracies, e.g. the princess Diana death




  • Operation Himmler is probably the biggest proven theory I can think of. Well, somewhere between a conspiracy theory and a false flag but interesting either way.




  • The Nal wrote: »
    Operation Himmler is probably the biggest proven theory I can think of. Well, somewhere between a conspiracy theory and a false flag but interesting either way.

    Operation Northwoods.

    Should have mentioned this at the start of the thread honestly.


  • Advertisement


  • Mandatory vaccinations was always considered a conspiracy theory but it looks like they're going for it in Australia.




  • Mandatory vaccinations was always considered a conspiracy theory but it looks like they're going for it in Australia.

    Not really a conspiracy, more just down to the way that vaccinations work. Wasn't an issue in the past, but now, due to all the quacks and loons on the internet creating false info about vaccinations the uptake is lower, which has negative effects (e.g. measles making a comeback)

    I believe Germany has also mulled the notions of making vaccinations mandatory to combat this issue




  • The Aussie PM stated on radio "as manditory as you can possibly make it", and is now trying to backtrack on this statement of intention.
    The only backtrack however is regarding any 'compulsary' factor.

    If they do roll this out, aiming for 90%+ penetration, other key countries will likely have to follow suit, esp in order for the potential 'Canzuk Union' to be realised.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/08/18/australia-calls-freedom-movement-part-post-brexit-trade-deal/

    Maybe they'll give everyone a free tattoo arm/wrist stamp at time of manditory jab, so they can be scanned quickly at their airports (digital immunity certification).
    If you can't ever enter or return to the land of Aus, without the manditory jab: this 'implies' compulsary (if wanting to ever enter/re-enter their country).




  • Maybe they'll give everyone a free tattoo arm/wrist stamp at time of manditory jab, so they can be scanned quickly at their airports (digital immunity certification).
    If you can't ever enter or return to the land of Aus, without the manditory jab: this 'implies' compulsary (if wanting to ever enter/re-enter their country).
    All of this is wild nonsensical speculation based on a bizarre religious belief in the mark of the beast.

    There's no maybe about it.




  • Maybe they'll give everyone a free tattoo arm/wrist stamp at time of manditory jab, so they can be scanned quickly at their airports (digital immunity certification).
    If you can't ever enter or return to the land of Aus, without the manditory jab: this 'implies' compulsary (if wanting to ever enter/re-enter their country).

    I have a feeling you'll yet again be disappointed by reality




  • Good chart

    FB-IMG-1603054753779.jpg




  • What kind of question is "are there any credible conspiracy theories"?

    That's the same as asking is there anything in this world that hasn't been one hundred percent proven beyond doubt that might be true.




  • Hqrry113 wrote: »
    What kind of question is "are there any credible conspiracy theories"?

    That's the same as asking is there anything in this world that hasn't been one hundred percent proven beyond doubt that might be true.

    Conspiracies happen all the time.

    The topic is probably related to popular "conspiracy theories", e.g. JFK, 9/11, chemtrails, HAARP, etc, etc




  • Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Conspiracies happen all the time.

    The topic is probably related to popular "conspiracy theories", e.g. JFK, 9/11, chemtrails, HAARP, etc, etc

    Ok well in that case you would have to be extremely gullible to believe that JFK was killed by one random lunatic and there's nothing more to the story than that.

    Also it's unlikely John Lennon of all people was assassinated by one crazed lunatic with all of his highly controversial political stances and how the intelligence agencies really didn't like him.




  • Hqrry113 wrote: »
    Ok well in that case you would have to be extremely gullible to believe that JFK was killed by one random lunatic and there's nothing more to the story than that.

    Okay, this is called "argument from incredulity" and it's the cornerstone of how many conspiracy theorists make their arguments.

    If a lone gunman didn't kill JFK, who did? You'll find there is no one who can answer that question with any semblance of a coherent theory or structured evidence.

    You'll notice that people who try to present that it was a conspiracy rarely detail that conspiracy, rather they use a classic and tell-tale technique of getting you to doubt the "official story" through clever framing of information and denial.

    Maybe something else did happen, but there's little or no evidence for it. Whereas the evidence we do have all points (quite overwhelmingly) towards the lone gunman theory.


  • Advertisement


  • Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Okay, this is called "argument from incredulity" and it's the cornerstone of how many conspiracy theorists make their arguments.

    If a lone gunman didn't kill JFK, who did? You'll find there is no one who can answer that question with any semblance of a coherent theory or structured evidence.

    You'll notice that people who try to present that it was a conspiracy rarely detail that conspiracy, rather they use a classic and tell-tale technique of getting you to doubt the "official story" through clever framing of information and denial.

    Maybe something else did happen, but there's little or no evidence for it. Whereas the evidence we do have all points (quite overwhelmingly) towards the lone gunman theory.

    Sometimes people just don't believe something, they can't tell you exactly what happened but they will not believe the drivel fed into the media.

    Take all the Irish "conspiracy theories" for example like the Dublin monaghan bombings, loyalist mi5 collusion, most of this stuff years ago would have been regarded as "unbelievable" but yet every year it's becoming more and more probable even factual.




  • Hqrry113 wrote: »
    Sometimes people just don't believe something, they can't tell you exactly what happened but they will not believe the drivel fed into the media.

    JFK's assassination is one of the larger events of the 20th century, and one of the more studied. Journalists generally did their job and reported on it - what part of those reports were "drivel"?




  • Dohnjoe wrote: »
    JFK's assassination is one of the larger events of the 20th century, and one of the more studied. Journalists generally did their job and reported on it - what part of those reports were "drivel"?

    The vast majority of Americans don't believe that Oswald acted alone, there is good reason for this and not just that the majority of americans are crazed conspiracy theorists.

    I can't give you a definitive answer here, I can just look at all the details and know for sure in my head with no bias whatsoever (couldn't care less really) that this was not the act of a crazed gunman acting alone.




  • Hqrry113 wrote: »
    The vast majority of Americans don't believe that Oswald acted alone, there is good reason for this and not just that the majority of americans are crazed conspiracy theorists.

    40% of Americans believe in ghosts. The general public is not a barometer of intelligence or basic critical thinking or indeed, the facts of the case.
    I can't give you a definitive answer here, I can just look at all the details and know for sure in my head with no bias whatsoever (couldn't care less really) that this was not the act of a crazed gunman acting alone.

    That's fine, but there are people, who "know for sure in their head" that the world is flat. However when challenged, these people can't provide concrete evidence. If you can provide credible evidence of an alternative to the lone gun-man theory, I am all ears (and not one of those hokey 3 hour youtube videos)




  • Dohnjoe wrote: »
    JFK's assassination is one of the larger events of the 20th century, and one of the more studied. Journalists generally did their job and reported on it - what part of those reports were "drivel"?

    I'm not an academic on the subject I can't speak about it like I can similar subjects in Ireland, one similar story in Ireland (Pat Finucane an Irish solicitor) which has now been proven beyond doubt that although a loyalist gunman had pulled the trigger, it was the intelligence services that pulled the strings.

    Of course there are many people who will believe that this killing and a couple of others were "isolated incidents" and that the only time some of the greatest intelligence services tried a simple assassination like this they were dumb enough to get caught red handed.

    For a long time what happened to Pat Finucane would have not been believed by anyone in England and it was just another crazy conspiracy theory, the vast majority of people (at least on foreign matters) won't believe anything like this until the evidence becomes so overwhelming that the leader of the country stands up and says it's true




  • 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?


    What's your take on Operation Gladio?




  • Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Conspiracies happen all the time.

    The topic is probably related to popular "conspiracy theories", e.g. JFK, 9/11, chemtrails, HAARP, etc, etc


    Lumping the credible possibility that more than a lone gunman acted in the assassination of Kennedy in with the inane notion of chemtrails is a popular method of shutting down debate. It's a cheap trick but if it's all you've got then go for it.




  • Dohnjoe wrote: »
    40% of Americans believe in ghosts. The general public is not a barometer of intelligence or basic critical thinking or indeed, the facts of the case.



    That's fine, but there are people, who "know for sure in their head" that the world is flat. However when challenged, these people can't provide concrete evidence. If you can provide credible evidence of an alternative to the lone gun-man theory, I am all ears (and not one of those hokey 3 hour youtube videos)


    There's alos a large percentage of people with otherwise sound analytical minds and a healthy skepticism who also believe in god and an afterlife.




  • Lumping the credible possibility that more than a lone gunman acted in the assassination of Kennedy in with the inane notion of chemtrails is a popular method of shutting down debate. It's a cheap trick but if it's all you've got then go for it.
    People often claim this, but they can't seem to explain the difference between conspiracy theories they believe and conspiracy theories they understand are ridiculous.

    Both the idea of the Kennedy assassination theory and the notion of chemtrails share a lot of the same sort of bad logic and arguments.
    The same with Kennedy and the moon hoax theory.
    Same with holocaust denial and flat eartherism.

    Another one that is very very close in nature to the Kennedy Assassination is the notion of school shootings being faked.
    They share a lot of arguments specifically around witness statements, uneducated opinions about how guns work and big weird elaborate plots that don't make any sense.

    How do you personally tell the difference between real conspiracy theories and fake ones?
    You said you don't believe in the notion of Chemtrails. Why not? Have you looked into it at all or have you dismissed it out of hand?


  • Advertisement


  • Hqrry113 wrote: »
    Ok well in that case you would have to be extremely gullible to believe that JFK was killed by one random lunatic and there's nothing more to the story than that.

    Well thats what happened. The story itself is very interesting. Just as interesting as a conspiracy in its own small way.

    You would have to be extremely gullible to believe there was a conspiracy when theres no evidence for it.
    Hqrry113 wrote: »
    Also it's unlikely John Lennon of all people was assassinated by one crazed lunatic with all of his highly controversial political stances and how the intelligence agencies really didn't like him.

    Again, baseless, evidence free and yeah - argument from incredulity. Lennon was killed in late 1980 after being out of the spotlight and not politically active for 6 or 7 years.

    Theres no evidence that Chapman was involved in a conspiracy.

    Sure why not say George Harrison had him killed? They weren't speaking at the time. Or Yoko? To get all his money.

    You can't just find a convenient fit like that.


Advertisement