Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Conspiracy Theorists

12357…14

Comments

  • #122
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Take your pick

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=576

    I could list countless examples. It's quite rare to see one conspiracy theorist actually disagree with another despite having completely contradictory views, e.g. someone who believes that Covid is a secret plan to install global Communism agreeing with someone else who believes that Covid is a secret plan to install global Fascism.


    I'm apparently a conspiracy theorist.
    YPFlyer insists I agree and in fact subscribe to bullshit.

    I don't believe that a bunch of kids who were filmed in Syria in 2 places at the same time and chlorine tanks and "barrel bombs" landed into a house and landed on a bed intact.


    But I'm equated with nutcases who peddle gibberish about lizard people.


    I don't believe that WMDs were found in Iraq nor that babies were thrown out of incubators (the claimant who was not even there to "witness" such horrors), yet I am the doubting Thomas.


    I don't believe a lot of things. But I'm derided for "just asking questions".



    Let's stick to one point, shall we? So you can't turn the whole thing into a circular argument.



    I don't BELIEVE that British Security Forces and their government handlers did NOT conspire to commit atrocities in order to further an agenda or even an advantage for that agenda. That makes me a conspiracy theorist.


    By the same token, according to the OP I agree with 100% of those who hold wild ideas about alien abductions or Martian colonies controlling our heads and are balls.


  • #123
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    YFlyer wrote: »
    You go along with what Dolores Cahill says?


    I fail to see how that question is relevant.


    What does she say?


    You're the one who says that all "conspiracy theorists" agree with each other. That was in your initial posting.



    You said so and slapped "100%" in there to boot.
    I'm obviously a conspiracy theorist since I am aware of the South Yorkshire Police conspiring to fit up, and frame a false narrative, surrounding the Hillsbourough Disaster. The police conspired, the government conspired and it has all come out in the wash.


    PRIOR to it coming out in the wash, if you were to question the official narrative, you were a conspiracy theorist. Now that it's out and the government have accepted culpability....it's no longer a conspiracy. It's a "scandal" or a "mistake".


    So, can you answer my questions?


    What has Dolores Cahill got to do with anything I've written?


    I could just as well ask you, or rather state, "You go along with Santa and The Angel Gabriel"? Yes?


    What does she have to say?


  • #124
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    I suppose it all boils down to a schism between someone who believes something and someone who isn't so sure.


    The person who isn't so sure is lambasted by those who believe the story, despite their skepticism being quite understandable.


    As the old phrase goes.. "It's a lot easier to fool someone than to have them admit they were fooled."


    Would you call the little boy who stated "The King is naked" a conspiracy theorist?


  • #125
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,907 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    I suppose it all boils down to a schism between someone who believes something and someone who isn't so sure.


    The person who isn't so sure is lambasted by those who believe the story, despite their skepticism being quite understandable.


    As the old phrase goes.. "It's a lot easier to fool someone than to have them admit they were fooled."


    Would you call the little boy who stated "The King is naked" a conspiracy theorist?

    No more than I would call Simba a real Lion.


  • #126
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,087 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    I'm apparently a conspiracy theorist.
    YPFlyer insists I agree and in fact subscribe to bullshit.

    I'd fully agree

    Conspiracy theorists repeatedly use the same bad logic:
    • That something can't have occurred because they don't understand it
    • That something can't have occurred because they can't believe it
    • No interest in refuting the evidence properly
    • No interest in detailing what alternatively happened

    As an example of this (from another thread), you maintain that a passport can't have survived the plane impacts on 9/11. Your evidence for that is a) you can't believe it and b) you can't understand it. That's it. So it can't have happened according to you.

    The passport(s) and many perishable objects did survive the impacts and are evidenced by the fact that they exist (and some are even on display in a museum). You were unable to address or refute any of that. You were unable to provide any credible alternative explanation.

    That's directly in line with many 9/11 conspiracy theorists, they use exactly the same bad logic. You are literally on the same page as them.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Take your pick

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=576

    I could list countless examples. It's quite rare to see one conspiracy theorist actually disagree with another despite having completely contradictory views, e.g. someone who believes that Covid is a secret plan to install global Communism agreeing with someone else who believes that Covid is a secret plan to install global Fascism.


    Well you have labelled me as a conspiracy theorist.


    YPFlyer has concurred that the likes of myself agree (100%) with other conspiracy theorists.


    The reason I requested an example was to expose or rather challenge the original allegation. I doubt the official narrative of The Gulf of Tonkin.....ergo I am a "conspiracy theorist". Yet I have no truck with anyone who tries to peddle the idea of lizard people or the Earth being flat.


    So what's it going to be, YPFlyer? Either all of us CT-ers agree with each other or we don't?

    It was your posting, after all.


  • #128
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    YFlyer wrote: »
    Covid man made, Rothschilds, Soros, Pizzagate. Whatever Icke says. Perpetual motion machine. Moon landing. It all gets connected together. Even not paying mortgage.


    You just said that conspiracy theorists agree with each other. 100%



    First off, you have demonstrated that you are not quite sure what a conspiracy is. So if you could verbalise what a conspiracy "theorist" is then you might start to approach a point regarding your original post. That which opened this thread.


  • #129
    branie2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,336 ✭✭✭✭branie2


    Tinfoil hat wearers


  • #130
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,865 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Conspiracy theorists with contradictory views will often agree with each other on the same subject. I provided an example of it, and the conspiracy theory forum is full of examples of it. They see the facts as a common enemy that they have to pour doubt on and try to deny.

    The only thing that forum is full of is people who dedicate an inordinate amount of time to disproving things they claim are self evident in their lack of validity against a small roster of believers who they seemingly get a buzz from arguing against.

    There are regular posters there with post counts in the thousands arguing against ideas they feel are stupid who are literally the lifeblood of the forum.

    If you don't feel something is valid and the people who believe it are idiots, why spend so much time talking to them?

    Glazers Out!



  • #131
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,087 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    nullzero wrote: »
    The only thing that forum is full of is people who dedicate an inordinate amount of time to disproving things they claim are self evident in their lack of validity against a small roster of believers who they seemingly get a buzz from arguing against.

    There are regular posters there with post counts in the thousands arguing against ideas they feel are stupid who are literally the lifeblood of the forum.

    If you don't feel something is valid and the people who believe it are idiots, why spend so much time talking to them?

    ****ty information and lies should be challenged. It's been left to fester on the internet and we all see the repercussions of it. Not to mention some of the disinformation is actually harmful.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,865 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    ****ty information and lies should be challenged. It's been left to fester on the internet and we all see the repercussions of it. Not to mention some of the disinformation is actually harmful.

    Not to pour scorn on your crusade to keep the Internet safe but you and approximately 4 other posters have more posts on that forum than anyone (a cursory glance shows you have started 12 threads there in the last 3 years for example).

    You're giving that sh1tty information more oxygen than anyone else.

    There's a line between refuting the odd poorly constructed argument and spending all your time shooting fish in a barrel.

    Glazers Out!



  • #133
    banie01
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,055 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    ****ty information and lies should be challenged. It's been left to fester on the internet and we all see the repercussions of it. Not to mention some of the disinformation is actually harmful.

    Would thank this twice if I could.

    Just on our own CT forum, it's not about disproving posters or implying they're idiots.
    It is about seeking the evidence CTer's base their beliefs on and testing it's veracity and it's actual cogence against the "accepted".

    There are of course conspiracies and some things that we will have taken as "fact" will undoubtedly be proven to be based on a lie or conspiracy at some point.

    My own aim when posting in the CT forum, is strange as it may seem, to learn.
    A poster may present evidence or a theory in support of a claim that I haven't read before, or a tangent that could well bear investigation or review.

    I will say in all my time posting over there, I have learned quite a lot but never, not once have I read any evidence in support of a theory raised over there and in particular the 9/11, Pentagon, WTC and Kennedy threads that stood up to scrutiny or could not be refuted.

    Some of the displays of outright mental gymnastics over there really are something to behold.
    If one wants some entertainment, I'd recommend the freefall and the pentagon threads.


  • #134
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Yet you are active in the conspiracy theories forum and fit right into conspiracy theory thinking denying stuff from 9/11 to Bin Laden's death.

    People with faulty logic or extreme views love to paint themselves as some objective person not being afraid to "question" history, but in reality they are often deniers who attack events in history (and history in general) that threaten their world views.


    I'm not denying anything. These are your words. I'm "questioning" them...and this is what you don't like.


    When someone expresses doubt, that contravenes what YOU believe, you either insist that they are denying it and the onus is upon them to provide proof OR they are doubting it and as a result they are arguing from "incredulity" which has no basis on what you insist the truth is.


    You do this time and time again. You argue in circles and then deliver illogical conclusions.



    Your M.O. is this:


    A: Mary got pregnant without having sex.


    B: I don't believe it. You can't get pregnant without having sexual intercourse.


    A: So just because you don't believe it means it didn't happen? You're arguing from "incredulity".




    According to you I'm not only chickening out by "questioning" something but I'm not proffering evidence to prove otherwise. and that's pretty feeble.




    BUT,


    My issue is with YPFlyer.


    I'm a conspiracy theorist because I doubt certain narratives (that have proven to be false). It's his contention that I, and many like me, agree 100% with all others that he might deign as conspiracy theorists....the ones who talk about alien abductions or faked moon landings.


    So....my question is this. Since I am a conspiracy theorist because I have always doubted the bullshit story of that faked and staged and farcical pantomime of Jessica Lynch being "rescued" (a crock that she herself said was a hoax). Since I doubt these fables that so many others choose to believe, I am a conspiracy theorist or some kind of subversive upstart. Hence I believe in, and agree with, those who state that Atlantis or Area 51 or faces on Mars is factual?


  • #135
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,865 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    banie01 wrote: »
    Would thank this twice if I could.

    Just on our own CT forum, it's not about disproving posters or implying they're idiots.
    It is about seeking the evidence CTer's base their beliefs on and testing it's veracity and it's actual cogence against the "accepted".

    There are of course conspiracies and some things that we will have taken as "fact" will undoubtedly be proven to be based on a lie or conspiracy at some point.

    My own aim when posting in the CT forum, is strange as it may seem, to learn.
    A poster may present evidence or a theory in support of a claim that I haven't read before, or a tangent that could well bear investigation or review.

    I will say in all my time posting over there, I have learned quite a lot but never, not once have I read any evidence in support of a theory raised over there and in particular the 9/11, Pentagon, WTC and Kennedy threads that stood up to scrutiny or could not be refuted.

    Some of the displays of outright mental gymnastics over there really are something to behold.
    If one wants some entertainment, I'd recommend the freefall and the pentagon threads.

    The whole raison d'etre of so many of the posters on that forum appears to be grandstanding over the nincompoop's who believe what is supposedly self evident rubbish.

    I can't understand the mentality of either side of most of the discussions I've read there tbh, and as for recommending it as a source of entertainment, maybe that's a fair assessment if you're talking to a masochist, because what regular posters there see as victories of logic are in reality just tedious drudgery.

    Glazers Out!



  • #136
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 821 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    This time last year, if you said that face masks reduce the spread of respiratory viruses, that CV-19 leaked from a lab in Wuhan and that by next summer you'll need a vaccine passport to travel internationally - you would have been censored by tech companies and branded a right wing conspiracy theorist who spreads dangerous information which is putting peoples lives at risk.


  • #137
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,865 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    brenbrady wrote: »
    This time last year, if you said that face masks reduce the spread of respiratory viruses, that CV-19 leaked from a lab in Wuhan and that by next summer you'll need a vaccine passport to travel internationally - you would have been censored by tech companies and branded a right wing conspiracy theorist who spreads dangerous information which is putting peoples lives at risk.

    The ironic thing about these dangerous conspiracy theorists is that they have all be effectively deplatformed over the last 18 months. They can't reach the average person anymore, but we need to be defended from their toxic ideas by the courageous people on the boards conspiracy forum. Give me a break.

    I can accept that some people like to be the smartest person in the room at all times and an opportunity like the conspiracy forum offers ample situations when they can be that person but dressing it up as some sort of an altruistic act of public service is nauseatingly narcissistic rubbish.

    Glazers Out!



  • #138
    cj maxx
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,062 ✭✭✭✭cj maxx


    I normally pay absolutely no attention to conspiracy theories, or the lunes that espouse them . I will , however, admit that I think the authorities sanctioned the demolition of the twin towers as the lesser of two evils .


  • #139
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,865 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    cj maxx wrote: »
    I normally pay absolutely no attention to conspiracy theories, or the lunes that espouse them . I will , however, admit that I think the authorities sanctioned the demolition of the twin towers as the lesser of two evils .

    The twin towers of the old Wembley stadium?

    Glazers Out!



  • #140
    Big Gerry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 897 ✭✭✭Big Gerry


    The latest conspiracy theory doing the rounds in the mainstream media is that the covid virus was made in a Chinese bio weapons lab.


  • #141
    Cheerful S
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,341 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    cj maxx wrote: »
    I normally pay absolutely no attention to conspiracy theories, or the lunes that espouse them . I will , however, admit that I think the authorities sanctioned the demolition of the twin towers as the lesser of two evils .

    Gerald Posner a renowned JFK skeptic who says Oswald acted alone, came out with a new book recently and confirming the official story about 9/11 wrong.

    https://www.amazon.com/Why-America-Slept-Failure-Prevent/dp/0375508791


    Now claiming in his new book, two countries had foreknowledge and helped the attacks take place. Of course, that's Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. This a position held for years, the hijackers not recruited by Bin Laden, but were operatives trained and supported and provided foreign and state support. You have to be braindead to believe the official narrative that bin laden on his walkie-talkie inside a mountain cave organized this.

    Demolishing the buildings on 9/11 is a conspiracy because nothing official said about it .The official version fire caused a collapse. You always have a hot debate about this subject, with people online.

    Official story problematic. Fire never resulted in tall buildings with a steel frame collapsing before in such a way anytime in history. On 9/11 unique things are said to have happened to the structural integrity, but that's another debate.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    pearcider
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,040 ✭✭✭pearcider


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Take your pick

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=576

    I could list countless examples. It's quite rare to see one conspiracy theorist actually disagree with another despite having completely contradictory views, e.g. someone who believes that Covid is a secret plan to install global Communism agreeing with someone else who believes that Covid is a secret plan to install global Fascism.

    It’s been pointed out numerous times that there is no difference between national socialism (fascism) and international socialism (communism). Both are collectivist ideologies that seek to put the power of the state over the individual. Both are authoritarian and use propaganda to protect their elite. Both rely on central planning of the economy. You of course ignore this.

    I’ve suggested you read books such as “the road to serfdom” by Hayek which show the danger to human liberty of the system the elite have installed. I also suggested the “Anglo American establishment” by Carol quigley which strongly argues that most of 20th century history was a conspiracy of the elite against the rest. He was actually the historian of the council of foreign relations and its English counterpart the royal Institute of international affairs and had access to their archives. Also “secret history of world war 1” and the sequel “prolonging the agony” which basically show World War One was instigated by the Anglo American elite and tightly controlled by the Milner group to establish a world government. Furthermore the creature of Jekyll island about the establishment of the federal reserve and the group behind it (same people)...You of course have no interest in learning about the very real conspiracies that sent millions to the slaughter in the 20th century and continue to rule through committees, think tanks, not for profits and transnational organisations to this day. You only post to ridicule others. You’re an anti skeptic.

    You continue to ignore facts, information and the many other thoughts that people present and generally just sneer and deride posters in your own obtuse and boring way. You are the most close minded poster I’ve ever read which is the height of irony considering your self styled moniker of “the healthy skeptic”. You do not come across as educated you come across as a fanatic. Look at your post history you are anything but a healthy skeptic. You’re obsessed. You’re the biggest troll on the CT forum and if there was any justice you’d be banned long ago. But there isn’t you’re protected by the mods in there because they’re just as close minded as you.


  • #143
    Cheerful S
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,341 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    Big Gerry wrote: »
    The latest conspiracy theory doing the rounds in the mainstream media is that the covid virus was made in a Chinese bio weapons lab.

    It's a conspiracy for some people. When documentation available Chinese Scientists transported bats with unknown viruses from Yunnan China to lab centers in Wuhan, you then have a source to where it likely came from. It does not take a genius to think China was probably experimenting on what they took from the bat insides for years, until some incident hit the lab, and got out of the lab and Wuhan residents got sick. Untouched virus the Bat had originally is basically a relative of Covid-19.


  • #144
    ShatterAlan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,807 ✭✭✭ShatterAlan


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    If someone denies something happened, they have the address the evidence that supports that something. Incredulity and disbelief alone is not addressing the evidence and is completely meaningless.

    Conspiracy theorists often rely on incredulity to cast doubt on the evidence/details of an event, e.g. 9/11. It's a deliberate technique of avoiding actually addressing the evidence/details.

    Likewise, when it's obvious that something occurred (e.g. 9/11 attacks), and they are casting doubt and denial on it, then they need to provide an alternative. Denial isn't enough when something occurred.


    But they don't. The onus is not on the doubter to prove the protaganist wrong. Only to express disbelief. And you keep trying to say that a person who "doubts" something is actually DENYING it.

    If someone doesn't believe something then that doesn't mean that they are insisting it is untrue. Merely that they are not convinced of what you might call its copperfastened veracity.


    I don't believe for one moment that statues can move. Many insist that they have witnessed such a spectacle. Your argument is that because I, personally. don't believe it then I am arguing from incredulity.



    So you see. I don't believe a lot of things. And I certainly don't believe some of the dross that you try to make "conspiracy theorists" like me (who are labelled as such because I don't believe stories that Venezuelans had to survive on flamingoes or starve to death).


    So I am a conspiracy theorist...apparently. But according to the OP I agree with clowns 100% ... those who peddle the alien abduction and lizard people narrative.


    YPFlyer? You made this claim. Would you care to wade in?


  • #145
    Cheerful S
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,341 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    If someone denies something happened, they have the address the evidence that supports that something. Incredulity and disbelief alone is not addressing the evidence and is completely meaningless.

    Conspiracy theorists often rely on incredulity to cast doubt on the evidence/details of an event, e.g. 9/11. It's a deliberate technique of avoiding actually addressing the evidence/details.

    Likewise, when it's obvious that something occurred (e.g. 9/11 attacks), and they are casting doubt and denial on it, then they need to provide an alternative. Denial isn't enough when something occurred.

    Many reasons to doubt the official narrative about building seven.

    Refuse to accept any alternative line of thinking about the matter. Substantial evidence the collapse could not have started in the way NIST outlined. Wrongly held believe fire caused the steel to lose strength inside WTC7.. NIST is very clear, reason the collapse started was a girder on the east side of the structure expanded due to heat, not steel losing strength.

    Thermal expansion they allege resulted and caused a shift of the girder to come off its seat between a column and beam. Seat in the diagrams are unsupported. This is one of the reasons many doubt many engineers studied this report. The girder in the NIST study has no web stiffeners and stiffener plate and missing 32 shear studs lodged and bolted between the concrete floor and the long floor beam. Steel girder held in position by just bolts to the column. This a very deceptive practice to eliminate construction parts from the trigger event location and claim later you did an unbias judgment to what caused the structure to fail.


  • #146
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,087 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ShatterAlan wrote: »
    I'm not denying anything.

    Off the top of my head, you denied Bin Laden died in 2011, denied the Salisbury poisoning, denied stuff about 9/11, and more. So yes, that is denial. You do it via a mixture of disbelief and scoffing at the facts, never addressing them, nothing of substance.

    Very similar to how conspiracy theorists "question" an event, endlessly attempting to discredit the facts so they can hint at some conspiracy they often can't detail.


  • #147
    storker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,739 ✭✭✭storker


    YFlyer wrote: »
    Exactly. They don't reference their research. May throw in a video.

    Usually a long video, with the idea that you won't actually watch it, but will assume that it does in fact support their case. Which it doesn't.


  • #148
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,087 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful S wrote: »
    Many reasons to doubt the official narrative about building seven.

    The key reason for you is the fact that you believe the Twin Towers and Building 7 were literally blown up in secret controlled demolitions in the middle of New York in broad daylight with the entire world watching.


  • #149
    dxhound2005
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,215 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    Cheerful S wrote: »
    Many reasons to doubt the official narrative about building seven.

    Refuse to accept any alternative line of thinking about the matter.

    In the same way that I refuse to accept alternative thinking about the moon landings or lizard people.


  • #150
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,087 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    storker wrote: »
    Usually a long video, with the idea that you won't actually watch it, but will assume that it does in fact support their case. Which it doesn't.

    The longer and more inane a video is, the less likely rational people are to watch it.

    One of the moon landing hoax ones is over 5 hours long.


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,087 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    All the boards conspiracy theorists coming out of the woodwork now.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement