Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Too many people would have to keep it a secret...

2456715

Comments



  • You made an extraordinary conspiracy claim then dodged every question on it. Now you are playing the victim card and ranting.





  • I assume you meant that posts like:

    "What do you believe and why do you believe it?"

    Or

    "This claim you made is demonstrably false."

    ...are spam and stifling.

    Yet posts that are just empty link dumps and tactics such as lying and ignoring are totally fine.

    You have a very backwards idea there.





  • I'm not posting anything relating to any topic for the very reason that it will attract a mob of so called "debunkers" who will make the thread so unwieldy and unattractive to read that nobody will come back.

    Secondly, you don't come across as sincere and genuinely interested in learning of real conspiracies. You come across as someone who just wants confirm their own mainstream opinion to give yourself a sense of place and validation amongst peers.

    Tell me if I'm wrong and I'll happily point you in the direction of lots of interesting material. Otherwise, you can take your position as just another conspiracy hating "debunker" of the soulless conspiracy forum.





  • Lol again your are whinging in a very hypocritical way.

    How does asking you to explain your beliefs make threads unpleasent?

    How does pointing out where you guys say things that aren't true make the thread unwieldy?

    How does constantly ignoring these things do the opposite?


    If you and your fellow conspiracy theorists just addressed points directly and honestly you'd probably be having a better time. Though you probably start thinking about your conspiracy theories a bit too much.





  • No. You could go to any forum and if you brought up your claim that the space program is fake you'd get questions from everyone. Your belief is a lie, you know it, and that's why you deliberately dodge questions on it. It's a hobby that requires an extreme level of dishonesty.



  • Advertisement


  • Is your question a tacit admission that you believe truly critical thinking has no place in a forum that discusses conspiracy theories?





  • What are you talking about? Did you come to the conspiracy forum looking to test your level of wit or something? Why dont you do that in any of the other forums? I have no interest in engaging with you on any topic.

    In all likelihood if you did what you are doing here in any other forum, you'd be banned. Simple as that. But because the conspiracy forum is seen as some kind of "alt-right extremist" "neo-nazi" "antisemite" central hub by thought-policemen like you, it is allowed to go on and so has been rendered an unusable and uninteresting bore-fest that nobody wants to post in.



  • Advertisement


  • What do you think would happen if I went to the Astronomy/Astrophysics forum and started posting in every thread asking questions such as "What proof do you have that we've been to space? What flimsy evidence do you have that SpaceX launches rockets every month?"

    What do you think would happen if I went to the farming forum and started posting in every thread accusing the farmers of "denying science" and they should quit farming because it's bad for the environment?

    What do you think would happen if I went to the coronavirus forum and posted in every thread saying covid19 is fake and you have no proof that it is real?


    I would be banned and rightfully so. Why? Because I would be stifling the discussion with post after post of off topic and contrarian questions killing any momentum of interesting discussion that people would want to read.


    How is that any different to what you and your fellow "debunkers" do in the conspiracy forum? For as long as the internet is a thing and even long before people have been interested in discussing conspiracy theories. The developers of Boards recognised this years ago so they created a forum that would allow discussion of the range of conspiracy theories there are out there. It was intended to work like any other forum - if you are interested in a thread, you click on it and read/join the discussion. If you are not interested in it, you don't click on it.

    But for the last 10 years the conspiracy forum on boards has been a cesspit of derailed junk debates at the hands of virtuous knights in shining armor, with an unhealthy obsession and dedication to encumber every thread in the name of social justice and righteousness to a nauseating level and have thus turned the conspiracy forum into a ghost town that nobody is interested in posting in. And when called out on this you justify it with ridiculous lines like "misinformation is dangerous to society" "Conspiracy theories are anti-science" "believing in conspiracies causes mass shootings". A truly laughable attitude, as the very people you feel are "dangerous" you've now forced out of a public forum where we would see in broad daylight the types of things that people can believe in. Sunlight is the best disinfectant as they say and you and your fellow debunkers have pushed them underground.

    Job well done lads.





  • So you want a forum where conspiracy theories are not allowed to be questioned or doubted.





  • That's it in a a nutshell. At appears that the poster doesn't want Conspiracy Theories discussion forum, he wants a "Conspiracy Theories Tut-Tutting" or "Conspiracy Theories Outrage" forum, where the truth of any conspiracy theory is taken for granted and any discussion happens within the boundaries of that premise. This has all the appearance of a sulk by someone who has been proved wrong but can't handle it, and instead of some possible worthwhile self-examination, prefers to engage in name-calling.

    Personally I think the CT forum has done a good job in exposing the nonsensical arguments and half-baked (at best!) evidence that the CT fanboys offer up as conclusive proof - not to mention the outright lies. I don't take any credit for that because I'm here too infrequently and to be honest, I don't know how you guys do it. You probably should be doing something more productive with your time instead of banging your heads off this particular wall. 😀





  • One of the things is notice is that people are ok with conspiracies related to the past. In the first Afghan war from 1839-1842 the consensus now is that build up to war was manufactured by hawks who feared Russia. The historian William Dalrymple says the war


    was based on intelligence about a virtually non-existent threat: information about a single Russian envoy to Kabul was exaggerated and manipulated by a group of ambitious and ideologically-driven hawks to create a scare — in this case, about a phantom Russian invasion. As John MacNeill, the Russophobe British ambassador wrote from Tehran: “we should declare that he who is not with us is against us… We must secure Afghanistan.”

    This is a conspiracy theory but nobody disregards it on that basis. It’s generally assumed to be true.





  • I'm not even going to address those weak analogies, the problems with them should be obvious to anyone capable of...oh, never mind.

    If you have a problem with the way discussions about your claims, or others that you support, have gone, then maybe you should look at the arguments and evidence presented by you and your fellow-travellers and instead of crying foul. Seriously, how old are you?





  • That's the thing though, it's not even that. Conspiracy theorists have shown that they aren't actually interested in discussing conspiracy theories at all.

    They aren't interested indiscussing conspiracy theories beyond the ones they personally buy into, and all others are dismissed as obviously silly and idiotic. We see it all the time when conspiracy theorists whinge about being compared to other conspiracy theorists.

    And they aren't at all interested in people asking them anything about their own conspiracy. How many times have we heard "Do your own research" etc etc?

    What conspiracy theorists want is a place to dump links they find from the various twitter/bitchute/parler cranks they follow and not have them questioned or doubted.

    Marky made an OP and in the first few posts he was provided with detailed and thought out answers to his points. His response? Throw a tantrum and declare he is not going to answer any questions. All he wanted was to have a nice rant about how stupid everyone else is. We ruined that.





  • That’s not much of an argument. Obviously sometimes there are conspiracies that are more likely than others. Therefore somebody can legitimately say “I believe this but I don’t believe that”.





  • most people who believe in jesus got that belief from their parents and community so that is not an appropriate comparison



  • Advertisement


  • "What do you think would happen if I went to the Astronomy/Astrophysics forum and started posting in every thread asking questions such as "What proof do you have that we've been to space? What flimsy evidence do you have that SpaceX launches rockets every month?"

    What do you think would happen if I went to the farming forum and started posting in every thread accusing the farmers of "denying science" and they should quit farming because it's bad for the environment?

    What do you think would happen if I went to the coronavirus forum and posted in every thread saying covid19 is fake and you have no proof that it is real?"


    If you did do that in those forums you wouldn't get banned, you would be told to take that shìte to the conspiracy theories forum (AKA here) and rightly so.





  • Sure. But then every other conspiracy theorist can say that about their preferred conspiracy.

    But that's not the issue. The issue is that conspiracy theorists don't want to discuss conspiracy theories they don't believe (and often dismiss out of hand). It seems a bit hypocritical to then turn around and moan about skeptics wanting to discuss conspiracy theories they don't believe? Isn't a bit odd to describe that as "killing discussion"?


    And then, who decides which conspiracy theories are more likely?

    Marky himself has posited that *all* space flight is faked. This is a very ridiculous think to believe. I'm hard pressed to think of something less likely. If someone believes something like this, how could they fairly dismiss any other conspiracy theory as "unlikely."

    We've had people here claim that the twin towers were destroyed by secret silent explosives. We've had people claim it was space based energy weapons. We've had people claiming the US can control the weather. We've had people claim that school shootings are all fake. We've had Holocaust denial. All of these are equally ridiculous by all rational measures.

    Know what I've never seen? One conspiracy theorist ask another why they believe something.





  • The dumb conspiracies all involve too many actors and too much complication. And the conspiracists seem to leave deliberate clues behind. Take 9/11, I could buy that a intelligence service fooled the Arabs into the plot or that some intelligence agencies knew about. There are people who believe that no planes exist and that it was all CGI, this kind of conspiracy actually makes anything sane also be discredited

    This contrasts with say, the idea that dr Kelly was killed - that’s entirely plausible





  • Sure but again, we never see any conspiracy theorists here actually post about the reasonable version of 9/11 conspiracies. It's all stuff like silent explosives and faked passports and extra planes.

    The reason is that these claims are attention getting and exciting. The reasonable version is too dry and boring.





  • You're quite right. In fact, the one 9/11 that I think is most likely is that it was known that an attack was going to happen and nothing was done about it because it would be such a handy exclude for military actions that Bush & Co wanted to take anyway. Of course that raises questions about how much details was known and what could realistically have been done. Nevertheless, acknowledging the possibility of such a scenario requires a much shorter leap of faith than space lasers, CGI Boeing 757s and Super-Dooper-Silent-Thermite. Somehow, though, that isn't sexy enough. Likewise Building 7 and the obsession with "pull it", whereas there is another possible conspiracy theory that might be more worthy of investigation, i.e. that inferior materials were used in the construction and that is what contributed to its collapse. Again, a much more believable scenario. Instead, the CT fanboys ignore this in favour of the bigger, sexier conspiracy.

    But conspiracy theorists damage their own credibility in other ways too:

    • Instead of focusing on key evidence, they grab at anything and everything.
    • The exhibit vary poor levels of critical thinking. Instead of seeing the problems with their own evidence, they conclude that anyone unconvinced by it must have been brainwashed.
    • They lie. A lot. Or they just regurgitate other peoples' lies because they do no fact-checking on what they've been told.
    • They appear to be unable to tell the difference between the possibility that something might have happened from the certainty that it did happen.
    • They are unable to tell the difference between innuendo and evidence. If it would have suited someone's purpose to conspire to make something happen, apparently that's sufficient to prove that they did in fact do it.
    • They don't present their own arguments, preferring to link-dump, frequently to very long screeds or videos and with no indication of where the key points are. I'm convinced that this is deliberate to discourage the target audience from examining it in detail.

    And they still complain about not being taken seriously, or about their claims being challenged.





  • And ironically, the unsexy version of the 9/11 conspiracy would require a very small amount of people being involved.





  • This thread is just hilarious. Right now we have 45 out of 56 posts that have nothing to do with the topic of the thread - all dedicated to attacking conspiracy theories and theorists.

    A perfect example of how the forum has been brought to it's knees by one or both of the following, take your pick:

    1) Those who loathe conspiracy theories and think the whole forum should be shut down as it is a danger to society!

    2) Those who have proven to be incapable of normal, civil online interaction in all the other forums and who now find themselves in the last place boards will allow them to exist

    It truly is pathetic






  • It's a public discussion forum and you are throwing a tantrum because people aren't blindly validating your views.

    As for your conspiracy belief (that the space program isn't real), it's been pointed out it would require literally millions to keep that a perfect secret over many decades. You haven't addressed that, plus the multitude of many other glaring holes on it.





  • No dude, we addressed your points directly in the first few posts of this thread. You received several lengthy posts that explain both why your argument is wrong, but how your beliefs are a particularly good example of why your argument is wrong.

    You did not address these. Instead you went off on a ramble about people who disagree with you. You are again showing yourself up as a massive hypocrite.



  • Advertisement



  • I have argued that I don't believe that a paper passport can escape a fireball and be found intact yet the jacket/wallet/body of the owner has been incinerated.

    The argument was...."just because I don't believe it happened doesn't mean that it didn't"

    The passport, after all is there for all to see, hence it must have happened the way that is reported. And this is the logic. If a result is proffered than it must have happened according to a narrative.

    There is a bicycle at the end of the stairs. The narrative is that Santa came down a chimney and put it there. One questions the chimney story but the counter argument is "The bicycle is there! How can you doubt the means by which it happened to be there? How else could the bicycle have gotten there?"

    So then there is the "passport" found and stuck in a glass case. Again the argument is that it survived and was found and handed to a cop. Not only was this passport picked up by a nonchalant pedestrian but after it fluttered to Earth amongst the crashing debris it was again picked up and calmly handed over to a cop. Meanwhile everyone was running for their lives.

    Even the BBC laughed at the report and Christ knows they like to cover things up.

    The thing is, when people don't believe something as it is reported, there are those who pillory them demanding an alternative explanation. When one isn't forthcoming, that doubt is cast into further doubt.

    The "argument via incredulity" comes into play. I believe that the term is "just because you don't believe something happened, that doesn't mean that it didn't".


    I don't believe that a fat man in a red costume came down the chimney and deposited a train-set in the living room. Despite the fact that the train-set is there for all to see.

    I don't believe that a woman wrapped a man in a cloth and his face was bonded onto that cloth. Despite the fact that that shroud exists for all to see.

    I don't believe that a paper document could survive a fireball and be found by a person just strolling around an effective bombsite Despite that passport being there for all to see.

    It's true that aircraft that have come to pieces in mid-air and luggage was found all over the place with dolls or shoes or seats or all manner of other detritus found on the ground or in the sea.

    So a passport was found, handed over to a cop, that cop then reported the finding. It didn't take long for this passport to be attributed to a hijacker. Cool-headed cop. Even cooler-headed passerby as the buildings were crumbling.


    Forgive me for not believing this or a WORD of the narrative.



Advertisement