Are there any credible conspiracy theories?

robinph

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120313977#Comment_120313977

It crontradicts your claims that people have been suppressed from talking about an accidental lab leak with no nefarious plans behind it, or that people have even been suggesting that as their theory from the conspiracy theorists side of things.

An accidental lab leak wasn't what people have been suggesting when talking about lab leak conspiracy theories, and it isn't what Musk has been told to stop tweeting about.

silliussoddius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120313237#Comment_120313237

So the accidental leak is now an accidental leak of a man made virus, what will the hop scotch lead us to next?

silliussoddius

I admit this isn’t credible and the men in the white coats are folding the tinfoil as we speak, but hear me out.

“Entrepreneur” with a Tony Stark complex who has failed to deliver on numerous flights of fancy is stoned one night and offers to buy a social media company for a groin wrecking price. Then he tries to back out of it, but then says it’s about free speech (which naturally leads him to ask for Saudi investors) and the importance of public discourse (thank god he reinstated David Icke and Ron Watkins).

He then does the whole “it’s my ball and I’m taking it home” approach to running his over priced middens heap and advertisers bail. He now needs money via check marks and is trying to drive traffic to it by trying to attract conspiracy theorists.

AmberGold

That the COVID vaccine is more dangerous than COVID. Statistically this now seems to be the case.

Being pro Vax myself this one surprised me.

https://youtu.be/fbFayD_S_54

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120314790#Comment_120314790

It's also untrue, Ireland had 4-5 COVID deaths in the last week, no known vaccine deaths.

The nurse has fallen far (I think he just realised there was more youtube clicks and money pandering to the anti-vaxxer crowd post pandemic).

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120313666#Comment_120313666

So that's the extent of the conspiracy? That facebook and twitter "censured" (dunno what you mean by that) for a few months while tackling the floods of misinformation coming for conspiracy theorists?

And ok, which of these scientists who were only suggesting that that could be case were labeled conspiracy theorists and were censored for it?

Hoop66

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120315103#Comment_120315103

But if you look a bit closer at the data you’ll see that there’s a circle drawn around a number, so...

lumphammer2

The term conspiracy theory is ... generally an insult ... to out a wild poorly researched statement presented by an agenda driven individual or org as 'fact' ... think Trump ... think someone writing a book about being a friend of an alive and well Elvis .... think some Youtube video theory on 9/11 ...

But ... are there any credible conspiracy theories?? ... yes ... but they are ones labelled as that thing not really being that thing ... enter Covid 19 pandemic ...

For sure Covid gave us wild conspiracy theories ... 5G anybody ... or Trump and his magical bleach cure ... but everyone who criticised long and now known to be unneeded lockdowns were branded conspiracy theories even if they were not doing anything other than criticising the lockdowns and stay at home orders ... sure Gemma O'D, Dolores C and John W were all spouting rubbish ... but not everyone criticising long lockdowns were of their ilk ... people had very legit concerns and NPHET/etc were contradicting themselves all the time ... one minute masks had no purpose then they had ... it seemed there was no way they'd budge from lockdowns for weeks on end in mid 2020 ...

So ... criticising lockdowns that were 2 months old and showing no signs of stopping ... and suggesting mask wearing and/or antigen testing and/or upping the PCR tests with contact tracing to replace lockdowns ... was actually considered to be a conspiracy theory by lockdown hardliners ... since then almost everyone knows long lockdowns were anythng but helpful ...

Apart from this I am certain the Khamenei kingdom that rules Iran would consider legit protests about the way they run (ruin?) Iran as baseless conspiracies invented outside Iran by the West ... Putin's whole war in Ukraine is based on his/hardliners in the regime's conspiracy theory ... but the regime dismisses legit opposition to it as 'conspiracy' ... so yes 'conspiracy theories' labelled as such can be credible ... but none of them are really conspiracies though ... they are legit concerns ...

geospatial

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120315332#Comment_120315332

censured = typo for censored, would have thought obvious.

I don't recall saying anything about social media conspiracy theories, they are private companies and can decide for themselves what to censor/block/ban etc. and people are also free to use their platforms or not.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120315427#Comment_120315427

Ok. So in what way were they censored?

Was this at the behest of a government conspiracy to cover up or discredit the idea of a lab leak?

geospatial

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120315459#Comment_120315459

They were censored by having their posts removed from social media.

tt does appear from the Twitter files that in the US the government was requesting that Twitter delete posts that it deemed misinformation. If true, seems an obvious infringement of the first amendment and frankly a bit fascist. Hopefully not something we will see spread to other democracies, freedom of expression is a cormnestone of democracy.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120315537#Comment_120315537

Ok. Let's pretend that's true.

Why did they prevent people from posting about a lab leak? Why the government do this?

You object to them doing this for the notion of a lab leak, but do you extend this to the conspiracy claims that you agree are false?

Big Bag of Chips

Off topic posts deleted. Rereg of banned user removed.

All posters are reminded to not comment on posters on thread. Any issue with any poster report it. Commenting on thread is off-topic and can result in warnings and bans.

geospatial

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120315547#Comment_120315547

Why did the US government want to suppress the lab leak theory? I wquld say the most parsimonious explanation is because the US government was funding the lab where it is alleged the leak originated, so an ass covering exercise.

I don't think the government should be censoring the media at all, unless a law is being broken. What I think on individual issues is irrelevant, it's a matter of principle, individuals either have a right to free expersssion of opinion or they don't. Do we want the government deciding what ""misinformation" is? If someone answers yes to that question, then they have to accept a government they are opposed to doing the censoring.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120317155#Comment_120317155

Didn't see much "suppression" going on. The Biden admin openly said they didn't know the true origin of Covid.

Unfortunately, from day 1 of the pandemic, there was a tidal wave of disinfo and conspiracies from the internet. It was so bad that platforms like Google and Youtube had to take action. Hundreds of people died from fake cures peddled on the internet.

When public health is at stake, certain disinformation can be dangerous and does have to be tackled.

geospatial

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120317808#Comment_120317808

There was active suppression of lab leak from February 2020 (the Promimal origins paper) to mid 2021 when the story broke that the DOE (Lawrence Livermore) had issued a report concluding the lab leak was plausible and warranted further study. After this reporting the US government including the NIH became more balanced in their comments.

If you haven't read it this is a good summary of the suppression in that timeframe.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120318075#Comment_120318075

Yeah this has come up in the thread previously. This DRASTIC group, they didn't seem to find much in the end.

The Lancet report was signed by 27 scientists who didn't believe the virus to be man-made. That's where we still are.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120317155#Comment_120317155

OK. So if the US government wanted to supress the idea, why did they reverse their censorship of Twitter?

Why did they allow the FBI to say what they did?

So you believe that Twitter and other media outlet should take no action against any misinformation even if it's obviously false or obviously dangerous.

geospatial

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120318706#Comment_120318706

As I said, the US government changed it's stance on Covid origins around mid 2021 and since then have had a balanced approach indicating lab leak or natural spillover are both plausible, which of course was always true. It would have been impossible for them after mid 2021 to continue to refer to lab leak as a "conspiracy theory" when their own agency (DOE) were saying it was plausible, contradicting the NIH. As an aside I think it's very dofficult for governments to keep anything secret for long these days, everything seems to eventually leak.

There is no evidence that the US government has stopped censoring social media companies other than Twitter. What changed with Twitter? Elon Musk fired the group involved in censorship and has published how the process worked between Twitter and the US government prior to his purchasing the company. Presumably the weekly meetings between Twitter executives and the FBI / DHS that Yoel Roth testified under oath were happening are no long happening. So the apparent change is at Twitter, not the US government.

I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying on censorship. Twitter or any private company can censor or ban who they like, there is no first amendment issue there. The issue is when the government intervene and request that information is censored or removed. The first amendment only applies to government actions, the gpvernment cannot infringe on an individuals right to express an opinion, unless they are breaking the law.

The question is who should decide what "misinformation" is? If you out it in the hands of the government then you risk every criticism of government being deemed "misinformation" and actual misinformation from the government deemed the unquestioned truth. It all sounds a bit totalitarian, or fascist if you like.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120318834#Comment_120318834

Sorry you haven't answered my question still.

If the US government was censoring the idea and working to have people dismiss it as a conspiracy theory, why did the FBI announce what they did?

This is the central problem with the conspiracy theory being purposed any every single conspiracy theorist refuses to address it.

Please address it now or explain why you are avoiding it.

geospatial

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120318860#Comment_120318860

I've just answered that, it's incredibly rude to accuse someone of avoiding a question who has just given you a comrpehensive answer.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120319273#Comment_120319273

No you haven't answered the question at all. No where in your previous post is there any mention of the FBI.

You do not explain why the US government would go to all of this bother to suppress the idea of a lab leak, but then not inform the FBI or prevent them from issuing the statement they did.

This is the fatal flaw in the conspiracy theory you guys are suggesting is credible. Yet you keep having to bend over backwards to avoid and ignore it.

Personally I find it very rude to avoid questions in the first place.

geospatial

Once again, I'm not avoiding any questions. I have explained clearly why there was suppressiona of lab leak from 2020 to mid 2021, and why now there is less suppression.

The US intelliegence community (18 agencies) made no public comment at all up to mid 2021, and even then the DOE report was based on a leak. The NIH were the only agency giving an opinion on origins from 2020 to mid 2021, and this became the defacto position of the Executive branch after Biden took office.

The only government body who made any early determination on Covid origins were the NIH, not an intelligence agency. They declared in February 2020 that Covid was zootonic and suggestions of a lab leak were conspiracy theories. Throughout 2020 and early 2021 apparently there was significant discussion of lab leak within the US State department and intelligence agencies, but this was suppressed due to a desire to avoid opening "a can of worms". The can of worms being the fact that the NIH were funding the lab in question.

What changed everything was the reporting in mid 2021 that the intelligence agency within the DOE regarded lab leak as plausible and had sent a report to the rest of the intelligence communities. This directly contradicted the NIH position, and the NIH quickly reversed their position to a neutral one. Since mid 2021 the US government stance on Covid origin has been neutral.

The recent disclosures by the FBI and DOE change everything again, now there are two intelligence agencies saying lab leak is likely. So we have gone from the NIH saying lab leak = onspiracy theory in 2020 to the DOE saying lab leak possible in 2021 to two agencies saying lab leak likely in 2022. It must be hard for the Executive branch to keep up.

The conspiracy theory is that the Executive branch of the US government, and specifically the NIH, tried to distance themselves from lab leak as they were funding the lab in question. There are congressional hearings (separate branch of government) starting this week, where the NIH will have to testify..It will be interesting to hear why they were so adament regarding zoonotic and so dismissive of lab leak.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120319312#Comment_120319312

But this is still not an answer to the question I asked. You said previously that you had answered it, but now you're declaring that you have answered an entirely different topic.

Let's try one last time. Please answer directly and without dodging or waffle:

Why did the US government not prevent the FBI from making a statement supporting the idea of a lab leak?

If the conspiracy worked as claimed then the government would have easily prevented the FBI from saying what they said.

If they could not have prevented the FBI from making a statement then the conspiracy makes no sense as the government doesn't seem to be able to control anything.

I think you can't answer this because what you're proposing doesn't match with reality.

robinph

What on earth is the origins of a virus doing getting a statement from the FBI anyway? In normal course of things it should never be any concern of theirs or any other of the intelligence agencies.

I suspect that they have only been prompted to issue statements to try and shut up conspiracy theorists. But it's really not the field of expertise of the likes of the FBI.

geospatial

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120319316#Comment_120319316

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120319312#Comment_120319312

Why did the US government not stop the FBI? lmfao Ask JFK

The US is not a totalitarian country (yet anyway), you get public disagreements between branches of government all the time, and even within branches. Tension between the intelligence agencies and the White House are not uncommon, have you heard of Watergate?

It is quite obvious what is happening, I'm sure you can grasp it on this third attempt. NIH were acting in their own self interest when they labelled lab leak as a conspiracy theory and convinced the Biden administration of such. However, well sourced reports (see the article I posted earlier) say that various intelligence agencies had made no conclusions on origin, but were aware of the issues with NIH funding. The sh1t is about to hit the fan with Congressional hearings starting this week, the FBI and DOE are distancing themselves from the White House and the NIH. I think I would be doing the same.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120319321#Comment_120319321

OK so then your conspiracy doesn't make sense.

Why can they control the NIH and other bodies but the Department of Energy and the FBI are not in their power?

Why does that control extend to all media except Twitter when they just say no?

Your theory for it to make sense requires that the US government is one singular conspiracy. Yet the statements from the various organizations show that its not. Like you said.

So again we've an example of a not very credible conspiracy theory.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120319333#Comment_120319333

You really are deliberately ignoring what the poster has already explained to you. The NIH were acting in self interest.

Sealioning is a term I had to look up when another poster accused you of it. I understand the term now.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120322455#Comment_120322455

And asking people what they believe and why is not sealioning. Conspiracy theorists misuse a term they don't really understand as an excuse to avoid questions they don't want to answer.

The conspiracy theory being proposed does not make sense if agencies can act in their own self interest. If this was the case then the US government is not able to exert any control on any of the people or organisations it needs to to engage in the this campaign of censorship. It also means that if they tried it would be in the self interest of some of these organisations to expose this attempt.

The FBI has not said anything about themselves being censored or that they were investigating any obstructions or attempts at a cover up. How can you conspiracy theorists explain this without defaulting back to the lazy notion that they are controlled by the Conspiracy.

It also doesn't make sense since according to the claims, organisations can just ignore the attempts at censorship like Twitter apparently did.

And all of this is before we even start to question what "censorship" actually took place. But given that it took a few pages to address the first question...

So do you agree with the poster that the US government is not able to completely and totally control every agency and media organisation?

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120322728#Comment_120322728

“pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity ("I'm just trying to have a debate")”

Is that sealioning as you understand it?

And this from you in the last few posts alone

“Why did they allow the FBI to say what they did?”

Sorry you haven't answered my question still.

“why did the FBI announce what they did?”

“Please address it now”

“No you haven't answered the question”

“You do not explain why”