Rise of the conspiracy theorists?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 40035
  • Start date
Nukehasslefan said:
If many parts to a story do not add up to appearing wholly truthful then people will question them.
By questioning official lines, any person becomes a conspiracy nut, just like that. And as simple as that.
If the conspiracy theorist argues many different points to a sold story of apparent fact, they become the enemy of the masses who buy into the story as a fact on blind faith or adherence to mass opinion..

99% of ordinary people who have a pop at conspiracy theories, calling them nonsense, are doing so because they're simply following a narrative and find it much easier to simply accept and follow the mass opinion on something, which generally gives them a stance among peers as being the sensible/intelligent people among the so called unintelligent tin foil hat questioners of stories that at best can potentially read as a lot of fiction but are argued as pure 100% fact.

The more a person argues against official lines with good arguments, that person becomes more disliked. More prone to abuse. More attacked by the masses.
In the end the very same people who do bring up good questions against official narratives...they're set apart as someone who thinks they're smarter than everyone else.

This is not the truth, it's just different ways of trying to attack the person so they don't get a foothold into people's minds and actually make them think " hmmm, that makes sense."

The reality (for now) is, most people aren't interested in questioning official lines, unless it directly affects them.
As for so called achievements and such like, sold to us....with some people not buying into it......it's immediate bile and hatred in the extremities to mere regular digs and name calling on a regular basis to keep the questioner from questioning.



The saying is very simple.
"Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect."
Click to expand...
That's a good post, very balanced. The problem with CTs is they can be dangerous and damn right insulting to people who have suffered tragedy. There is a big difference between harmless ones like flat earth or aliens existing to absurd ones like conspiracy theorists saying that somebodies kid didn't die in a school shooting.
I recently joined a CT website and believe me every single thing that happens in the media is immediately posted on that site as a CT, every hour or so there is a new video showing supposed evidence something happening in the media is a staged fake event, some of the videos are quite convincing yet some are absolutely bat shit crazy.
Some well educated people think the media is a propaganda machine and although this has been proven correct in some cases it doesn't mean every story they report on is done so to meet some sort of agenda, if CTs didn't say almost every event is some kind of hoax maybe normal people would start taking them more seriously.
 


niceonemarra said:
That's a good post, very balanced. The problem with CTs is they can be dangerous and damn right insulting to people who have suffered tragedy. There is a big difference between harmless ones like flat earth or aliens existing to absurd ones like conspiracy theorists saying that somebodies kid didn't die in a school shooting.
I recently joined a CT website and believe me every single thing that happens in the media is immediately posted on that site as a CT, every hour or so there is a new video showing supposed evidence something happening in the media is a staged fake event, some of the videos are quite convincing yet some are absolutely bat shit crazy.
Some well educated people think the media is a propaganda machine and although this has been proven correct in some cases it doesn't mean every story they report on is done so to meet some sort of agenda, if CTs didn't say almost every event is some kind of hoax maybe normal people would start taking them more seriously.
Click to expand...
I agree with what you're saying in terms of some conspiracy theorists. Some talk facts without knowing the facts....and you're right, it isn't helpful and can be downright dangerous and insulting to people who may be genuinely going through turmoil and having to see people calling it a false flag or whatever.

However, in saying that, the lines are so blurred it becomes impossible to know what is real and what is fake.
It's so easy for people to just say " well just treat it all as truth and go with the flow." It's quite easy to do that and many people do, aided by the media and such like, to become a mass against minority, rendering any person who questions it to be placed in exactly the same boat as every conspiracy theorist, whether it's a legitimate look into potential fabrications of the truth or whether a person just jumps right in and basically...deliberately (maybe) stirs up a hornets nest of turmoil by being blunt and dismissing of the truth without having any real facts other than words and gossip.


But bear in mind that to create a false flag or a hoax, it would help massively if emotion, even strong emotion can be attached to it. It can easily stop people from actually arguing a point and give the person who believes a story as fact, a massive pedestal and backing to stamp down on any person who dares to question something which carries emotion as backing.

As an instance, I could say to you, "ahhh I don't think the moon landings were real" You could immediately turn round to me and shout " you cruel git, you know people perished in rockets trying to aid in preparing for those landings...did they die for nothing then?"
You see, you can kill an argument by using this (not saying you would...just using examples) and you would likely gain the backing of many people who would quickly become more vocal and maybe violent towards someone questioning something like that.

It's one of the reasons why I will never debate with anyone who brings up emotion in order to argue something...for two very good reasons.....one being exactly what I've just explained.
The other being, it's an argument based on acceptance of emotional stories told as facts and believed as facts but argued without genuinely knowing the true facts.

Basically a massive reliance on official lines of history books and Chinese whispers of sorts.
 
Lefty Frizzell said:
Just conspiracies marra. Putting theory as the second word immediately gives negative and disparaging connotations.

No, I don't believe that there are extra terrestrial beings visiting earth in flying saucers.
Click to expand...
ok marra thanks for letting me know nice one.
 
We don't teach critical thinking is half the problem. You'll find very few people who only believe some conspiracy theories - it's all or nothing, which includes some provably barmy stuff, negating all the more plausible ideas.

David Icke is a case in point. A lotvof his stuff about manipulation is very interesting and plausible, you get to the last ten minutes thinking 'don't say it Dave, don't say it' and then it's 'so to summarize, shape shifting lizards run the world' and all the interesting stuff goes out the window.
 
Barnacle Boy said:
The people who lap them up are even more inadequate
Click to expand...
What if they are right marra?
Nukehasslefan said:
I agree with what you're saying in terms of some conspiracy theorists. Some talk facts without knowing the facts....and you're right, it isn't helpful and can be downright dangerous and insulting to people who may be genuinely going through turmoil and having to see people calling it a false flag or whatever.

However, in saying that, the lines are so blurred it becomes impossible to know what is real and what is fake.
It's so easy for people to just say " well just treat it all as truth and go with the flow." It's quite easy to do that and many people do, aided by the media and such like, to become a mass against minority, rendering any person who questions it to be placed in exactly the same boat as every conspiracy theorist, whether it's a legitimate look into potential fabrications of the truth or whether a person just jumps right in and basically...deliberately (maybe) stirs up a hornets nest of turmoil by being blunt and dismissing of the truth without having any real facts other than words and gossip.


But bear in mind that to create a false flag or a hoax, it would help massively if emotion, even strong emotion can be attached to it. It can easily stop people from actually arguing a point and give the person who believes a story as fact, a massive pedestal and backing to stamp down on any person who dares to question something which carries emotion as backing.

As an instance, I could say to you, "ahhh I don't think the moon landings were real" You could immediately turn round to me and shout " you cruel git, you know people perished in rockets trying to aid in preparing for those landings...did they die for nothing then?"
You see, you can kill an argument by using this (not saying you would...just using examples) and you would likely gain the backing of many people who would quickly become more vocal and maybe violent towards someone questioning something like that.

It's one of the reasons why I will never debate with anyone who brings up emotion in order to argue something...for two very good reasons.....one being exactly what I've just explained.
The other being, it's an argument based on acceptance of emotional stories told as facts and believed as facts but argued without genuinely knowing the true facts.

Basically a massive reliance on official lines of history books and Chinese whispers of sorts.
Click to expand...
What do you make of David Icke?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
niceonemarra said:
What if they are right marra?

What do you make of David Icke?
Click to expand...
Not too sure to be perfectly honest.
On the one hand a lot of what he comes out with seems way off the wall but then again a lot of stuff can seem way off the wall to most , if not all of us if we don't understand something and just dismiss it as not being in our sort of schooled thinking, kind of thing.

I certainly wouldn't proclaim him to be correct on anything but then again I can't claim he's wrong, because I literally do not know the reality or why he actually says what he says and where he actually gets the info from.

I can keep a sort of open mind about a lot of stuff, even if it appears to be so off the wall as to be simply discarded by the masses.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
Not too sure to be perfectly honest.
On the one hand a lot of what he comes out with seems way off the wall but then again a lot of stuff can seem way off the wall to most , if not all of us if we don't understand something and just dismiss it as not being in our sort of schooled thinking, kind of thing.

I certainly wouldn't proclaim him to be correct on anything but then again I can't claim he's wrong, because I literally do not know the reality or why he actually says what he says and where he actually gets the info from.

I can keep a sort of open mind about a lot of stuff, even if it appears to be so off the wall as to be simply discarded by the masses.
Click to expand...
I can confirm David is just another Derek Acorah. Two different subjects yet self proclaimed celebrities making money from deceit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
niceonemarra said:
I can confirm David is just another Derek Acorah. Two different subjects yet self proclaimed celebrities making money from deceit.
Click to expand...
You could well be correct. I don't know, but then again I don't simply accept what anyone says, no matter who they are.
I've watched a lot of stuff pertaining to conspiracy theories, narrated and aired by many people, including Jesse Ventura as another instance and yet he can come across as very plausible in what he says but is an actor at the end of the day...and former wrestler, which is another form of acting entertainment, mostly...and also a former seal as he tells us.

Then you have Alex Jones and a whole host of other conspiracy theorists. It's a mish mash of all kinds of variations of certain stories. A massive blurring of the lines, kind of thing.

You could argue that it's a deliberate act to confuse and lump all conspiracy theorists into the same pot, with each having their version of one particular topic and each one sounding more batty than the next, which can lend credence to the mass opinion that any person who questions official lines is immediately cast off as a tin foil hat lunatic.

It basically means that nobody can question anything without looking like a nut case to the masses.
Most people likely back down under this immediate thought and would likely find it easier to just follow the crowd.

I simply ask people if they can honestly say they know the truth. Many will argue black and blue that they do know the truth and when asked how they know, they immediately appeal to authority as their truth.

The reality is, we know we get lied to and if we get lied to, it's fair to assume that we get lied to a lot more on many levels. For people to believe otherwise is their prerogative.
Most people would basically accept any authority on any level if everything ticks along in life for them...and who can blame anyone for doing that?
 
There was a few on here today, when the power went off there was people saying it may have been a big 'hack'. One guy even said it was Russia. Now people are saying its due to Brexit. Imagine being a conspiracy theorist and not even knowing it.
 
Alcoholic_Author said:
The latest one is there is to be an orchestrated “attack” in Seattle tonight, let’s see what happens, almost certainly nowt.
Click to expand...
I've heard Seattle tower is to be a target but its just what the conspiracy theorists are saying.
I'll admit to taking party in mind control - got my work sent to thousands of people telling them mind control is not an acceptable thing to do and all my work should be forgotten and ignored. I should probably find a job in the military dealing with mind control warfare I know its happening as we speak so I could sort it out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
pillars of hercules said:
Although some CTs are so far fetched to contemplate, many are as plausible as the established theory. I think not having an open mind shows a lack of intelligence. While thinking certain things are unlikely, I very rarely dismiss things out of hand.
Click to expand...

Many conspiracy theories are perfectly plausable to a point, and raise valid questions. The problem is in many cases the conspiracy theorists go too far and the genuine questions get lost up among a load of crap.

Im no 9/11 inside job comspiracist. But there were some very questionable things raised by conspiracists.
Most are likely these things can be explained as coincedences, putting 2 and 2 together to get 6 or are simply freak occurances caused by unique circumstances

Problem is, the conspiracy theorists dont know when to stop, and if plausable explanations are given, a new conspiracy must emerge to disprove the explanation. Before you know it the whole conspiracy is so complex and tenuous, the genuine questions get lost up in it.
 

Back
Top