Why People Believe in Conspiracy Theories

[Merc14]

The very same logic presented in the paragraph you quoted can be applied to those who don't believe in conspiracies.

Instead of stating they possess a "severe distrust of authority" you simply change it to stating they have "a strong preconceived trust in authority and mainstream media/news outlets" and apply that reasoning to the non-conspiracy minded portion of the population.

Sorry but this is not true and has nothing to do with most skeptics thinking. Very very few skeptic ever say "Well, the government just wouldn't do that." They might ask "Whys would the government do that?" as in what is the big up side for this heinous act you are theorizing about.

This is more like wishful thinking on your part. You take offense that your ideas are so easily skewered and want to dismiss your tormentors as simpleton clods that trust the evil government. Fits with your delusions and is teh worst insult in your world. If you approach your detractors with this attitude you will always lose because it isn't true. Just sayin'.

[DecoNoir]

I don't blame you at all........lol

Its not my fault that panto debunkers yourself don't understand or refuse to address the plumes (plums?? lol) of so called dust which travel back up the buildings which disprove your dust theory.

But it's OK, I don't blame you. You just assume the OCT is the truth because you have blind faith.......lol

That's the problem, none of you pantomime debunkers understand the official story, that is why you have the NIST who say there was no pancake collapse and the dumbest pantomime actors who say there was.

No, I understand the official story, the physics, the time frame of events, all of the little events and factors that come together to create one catastrophic event.

So if you can't understand why I laugh at your lame debunking, then I am kind of like a troll.

If you want me to stop laughing at you and your debunking cohorts, then get serious.

Debunking cohorts? Haha! Are you one of those idiots who thinks everybody who disagrees with them is some disinfo agent on EbilGu'ment payroll? Ha! What a lovely egotistical world you live in.

I mean how can I take someone seriously who thinks...

It requires tons of explosives to demolish the WTC, yet also believes that none were needed because planes/fire damage was enough.

When did I say I believed it takes multiple explosives to bring down the WTC towers? Its the idiot Truth movement at ground zero with their slogans touting that only explosives could bring it down.

or

Someone who demand photographic evidence of molten steel, but doesn't demand photographic evidence of molten aluminium

Do you not realise how retarded that logic is?? lol

Do you realise how more retarded it is when you realise that all the independent eyewitnesses, at different locations and different times refer to the molten metal as steel, yet none of them mention aluminium. Not a single person!

But the evidence apparently supports aluminium! Even though there is no photographic evidence of it and no one mentions it!!

Lets see. Get fuel burns at a temperature that aluminum can melt at, but not hot enough to melt steel (but can weaken its structural integrety by 60%) and there's a giant airframe of a Boeing 767 that, gasp, is composed of aluminum. Who'd of thunk it?

And yet you just continue the idiot cycle by refusing to post anything other than eyewitness accounts of molten steel that couldn't possibly be generated! No explosive on the planet can generate, and most importantly SUSTAIN, temperatures to melt steel. Other than nuclear weapons of course, but I'll let BR elaborate on that with his rejected Tom Clancy scifi.

[Stundie]

No, I understand the official story, the physics, the time frame of events, all of the little events and factors that come together to create one catastrophic event.

Well please feel to elaborate and employ the laws of physics to explain this catastrophic event.

That means no pointing to Bazants 1D mathematical model, magic indestructible upper blocks or debris cushions.

Debunking cohorts? Haha! Are you one of those idiots who thinks everybody who disagrees with them is some disinfo agent on EbilGu'ment™ payroll? Ha! What a lovely egotistical world you live in.

Disinfo agents?? lol Oh dear, I think you have me confused......lol

Yes, I am talking about you and your debunking cohorts who use the same tactic of logic and debate which is based on your belief and not the evidence.

When did I say I believed it takes multiple explosives to bring down the WTC towers?

You didn't say multiple explosives....you said this...

DecoNoir - "Or believes that explosives were planted throughout the buildings (which would have taken weeks mind you)"

Therefore, your argument is that it would take weeks of planting explosives.

Even though you believe none were needed.

Lets call your argument against explosives, a false premise shall we...unless you want to remain hypocritical and suggest that lots of explosives would be needed that would take weeks to plant and believe that none were needed for your theory? lol

Its the idiot Truth movement at ground zero with their slogans touting that only explosives could bring it down.

Its a good job I'm not part of this idiot truth movement or have been to GZ then isn't it?

Lets see. Get fuel burns at a temperature that aluminum can melt at, but not hot enough to melt steel (but can weaken its structural integrety by 60%) and there's a giant airframe of a Boeing 767 that, gasp, is composed of aluminum. Who'd of thunk it?

There is so much wrong with this statement, its funny.

Just because jet fuel can melt aluminium, does that mean that jet fuel did?? Notice the word "Can"......lo

And just because fires can weaken steel by 60%, does that mean a building will collapse? Considering that...

1. The majority of the WTC is undamaged (less than 5%) and there is plenty of steel which wasn't weakened.
   
2. That fires have never caused a high rise structure to collapse entirely from weakened steel.
   
3. That even planes hitting other building and the subsequent fires didn't collapse buildings.
   
4. That the WTC was designed to withstand multiple plane impacts
   

And yet you just continue the idiot cycle by refusing to post anything other than eyewitness accounts of molten steel that couldn't possibly be generated!

No, I also posted a meteor which is a fusion of molten steel and concrete along with the FEMA and RJ Lee report which prove it's existence at GZ.

However, no doubt you will continue the idiot cycle by refusing to post ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that proves that everyone was mistaken and they saw molten aluminium.

No explosive on the planet can generate, and most importantly SUSTAIN, temperatures to melt steel.

Except therm?te....lol

Other than nuclear weapons of course, but I'll let BR elaborate on that with his rejected Tom Clancy scifi.

So will I as I know nothing of it either.....lol

[TheSpoon]

To answer OP's question is simple, given reasonable doubt it is human nature to be curious. 'Reasonable doubt' is given through governments around the world failure to be transparent.

As for the 9\11 argument been brought here, again reasonable doubt. Coupled with the reactions of a liar (vague and controlled answers, along with it being labeled a disrespectful topic among MM). Reasonable doubt (in my mind) because as the towers fell, the miles of vertical steel would have built kinetic energy as it collapsed sending sections shooting out the structure or at the very least protrude out and damage much of the surrounding area.

Edit: My vote on the Towers is an unknown (Publicly or even militarily) tech.

Edited February 4, 2014 by TheSpoon

[Babe Ruth]

Says the guy who loves talking about molten steel yet never shows photographic evedince of such, nor can provide a mechanism to generate such. Or believes that explosives were planted throughout the buildings (which would have taken weeks mind you) occupied by thousands of people, and nobody seemed to noticed. Laugh out loud indeed!

Does this mean that you are one of those fellows who denies or cannot understand the existence of something that he cannot see a picture of? Sounds like it.

[Frank Merton]

People believe in conspiracy theories mainly because they want to. Some aspect of their personality is not wired quite right. I know people who are friendly and sociable and loyal and good neighbors who harbor some of the oddest notions and get quite fanatical if the subject comes up.

[Babe Ruth]

People believe in conspiracy theories mainly because they want to. Some aspect of their personality is not wired quite right. I know people who are friendly and sociable and loyal and good neighbors who harbor some of the oddest notions and get quite fanatical if the subject comes up.

Not so much they want to, but that they are forced to because a certain segment of the population prefers to deal with the truth. Once a person like that realizes he has been deceived, by whomever, he seeks to find out what really happened.

Now if a person never realizes he has been tricked, then that's a different matter.

But once the average person understands he's been fooled, he wants to find out what actually happened.

And in the case of government, as more and more are beginning to realize, once a person understands that the pattern of deception goes back decades, then the curious person starts to examine other major events by which he might have been deceived in the past and never knew it.

[Frank Merton]

I think you create an excuse for irrationality. We all get deceived all the time, but don't go off on irrational tangents.

[stereologist]

Not so much they want to, but that they are forced to because a certain segment of the population prefers to deal with the truth. Once a person like that realizes he has been deceived, by whomever, he seeks to find out what really happened.

Now if a person never realizes he has been tricked, then that's a different matter.

But once the average person understands he's been fooled, he wants to find out what actually happened.

And in the case of government, as more and more are beginning to realize, once a person understands that the pattern of deception goes back decades, then the curious person starts to examine other major events by which he might have been deceived in the past and never knew it.

Conspiracy theorists are not looking for the truth. That is quite evident from your posts and others supporting these notions.

What actually happens is that CTers decide they have been deceived. Then they create a fantasy to support their starting point which is that they have been deceived. Every once in a great while they might stumble onto something. The vast majority of the time they construct an elaborate hoax just to maintain their initial and unchangeable position that they have been deceived.

Take you for instance. You begin with the idea that you are challenging Bush Do-No-Right. You decide that he is always wrong or that he always lies. Whatever the starting point is that becomes for you an unchangeable truth. Then you begin to construct a hoax to support your so-called truth. The hoax du jour for you is nukes at WTC. No matter how idiotic that claim becomes and how overwhelming the evidence is against it you continue on that foolish line of illogical thoughts because it supports your starting point.

These hoaxes only makes sense to those, like yourself, that have an uncontrollable urge to latch onto these starting points. These hoaxes allow you to sputter out false claims such as telling falsehoods about the Zagroda bill or sputtering out phrases such as sizzling neutrons. For the CTer it does not matter because they cannot allow their starting point to be altered.

[Agent0range]

I think you just hit the nail on the head. That is why it doesn't matter if it was nukes, no planes, 1 plane, 1 big plane 1 little plane, thermite...none of that matters. As long as the starting point isn't altered, anything thrown into the middle and end is fine.

[Merc14]

I never understood what it is the CTers thought Bush would get out of this destruction? If it was to just destabilize the country therer are far easier and legal ways to go about it (see Obama administration and debt load).

My second question is always "Just how in the hell did Bush make all this happen in just 8 months of assuming office?" Remember the democrats had him wrapped up in court for over a month so he had less time than normal to establish his staff yet he managed to get in office and then plan and execute one of the mast elaboarate attacks in history, on his own country no less.

Lastly, how could any administration keep all this quiet? Obama arrested and threw in jail a guy who made a stupid video to cover-up the Benghazzi attack and even with the press on his side the secret was out in a matter of hours. Bush most certainly didn't have the press on his side, in fact they reviled the man and yet not one reporter could ever make these allegations stick. Not one leaker.

Does anyone here think that the press wouldn't kill to have taken Bush down and made him the most hated man in US history? Chris Matthews still foams at the mouth at the mere mention of the man.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Merc14

[stereologist]

Demographic studies of truthers shows that many were once what is known as hippies. That is how a religion professor becomes one of the leaders of the movement. The movement was not based on evidence. It was based on ideological reasons. The counter culture created and fostered a distrust of authority. That is what we see in the truther movement.

[+OverSword]

Demographic studies of truthers shows that many were once what is known as hippies. That is how a religion professor becomes one of the leaders of the movement. The movement was not based on evidence. It was based on ideological reasons. The counter culture created and fostered a distrust of authority. That is what we see in the truther movement.

I would say that most truthers are much too young to have ever been hippies. People once known as hippies are in thier 60's and 70's now. Where do you get your information? Can you post this demographic study or are you blowing hot air?

[Merc14]

I would say that most truthers are much too young to have ever been hippies. People once known as hippies are in thier 60's and 70's now. Where do you get your information? Can you post this demographic study or are you blowing hot air?

Maybe he means people liek teh unwashed morons doing the Occupy Wall Street stuff. The ones of which Nancy Pelosi said "God bless them." as they were tearing up various downtown areas..

Edited February 4, 2014 by Merc14

[Space Commander Travis]

it does seen like all these theories suppose a level of competence and fiendish cunning rarely demonstrated in the real world by any government within living memory. And having pulled off such a gigantic plot flawlessly, if it was intended to be an excuse to occupy whatever oil-rich countries you wanted, why weren't these techniques and technologies used in those wars, and if it was to give an excuse to round up the population into prison camps and declare Martial law, then well, why are we still waiting?

[SHaYap]

Gold, Recovery of

The Towers’ buried treasure.

• By Geoffrey Gray
  
• Published Aug 27, 2011
  

Earlier in the morning, before the attack, an ­armored truck had made its way through an underground tunnel below the World Trade Center. Inside the truck was millions of dollars’ worth of bullion. Through a maze of underground tunnels, the truck had just left a vault in which Comex, the commodities exchange, kept thousands of gold [G2] and silver bars stacked on pallets, a warehouse of megariches beneath the city surface.

.... All told, there were 379,036 ounces of gold, stacked in 30-pound ingots. There was much more silver, in bars as big as bread loaves, weighing 70 pounds per loaf. Eventually, workers hauled out all 29,942,619 ounces.

All the precious metal under the Towers was accounted for. At one point, as workers were hauling out the treasure, they broke for lunch. There were no tables or chairs. Instead, they ate their meals on stacks of gold bars.

An investigation reported in the Journal of Business concluded there was "Evidence of unusual option market activity in the days leading up to September 11 that is consistent with investors trading on advance knowledge of the attacks."

[isn't it interesting, how many of these entities, seven years later, during the "Global Financial Meltdown" were deemed "too big to fail" and were bailed out by US Taxpayers?]

And then, there was the gold: $166,770,000,000 worth of gold bullion that went missing from where it was being stored in the basement of the WTC complex, with only $230 million of it recovered, all of that having been stored in Building 4 and found in an abandoned truck, accompanied by an escort of several abandoned cars, which were found in a delivery ramp under Building 5 - apparently, attempting to escape, at a time when not even the firemen knew the skyscrapers were going to collapse. This recovery of a potential gold heist attempt is described chillingly by a rescue worker who feared he'd be shot at the scene. - See more at: http://www.forbidden...h.H0z3MB1l.dpuf

• nymag link
  

Missing Gold Stolen is the word

A King's Ransom in Precious Metals Seems to have Disappeared

The basement of 4 World Trade Center housed vaults used to store gold and silver bullion. Published articles about precious metals recovered from the World Trade Center ruins in the aftermath of the attack mention less than $300 million worth of gold. All such reports appear to refer to a removal operation conducted in late October of 2001. On Nov. 1, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani announced that "more than $230 million" worth of gold and silver bars that had been stored in a bomb-proof vault had been recovered. A New York Times article contained: 2 Two Brinks trucks were at ground zero on Wednesday to start hauling away the $200 million in gold and silver that the Bank of Nova Scotia had stored in a vault under the trade center ... A team of 30 firefighters and police officers are helping to move the metals, a task that can be measured practically down to the flake but that has been rounded off at 379,036 ounces of gold and 29,942,619 ounces of silver ..

• max keiser link
  

The most valuable coin in the world sits in the lobby of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in lower Manhattan. It’s Exhibit 18E, secured in a bulletproof glass case with an alarm system and an armed guard nearby. The 1933 Double Eagle, considered one of the rarest and most beautiful coins in America, has a face value of $20—and a market value of $7.6 million. It was among the last batch of gold coins ever minted by the U.S. government. The coins were never issued; most of the nearly 500,000 cast were melted down to bullion in 1937.

• business week link
  

.... He brings up Larry "Pull it" Silverstein, the leaseholder of the WTC complex, who sued to collect $7.2 billion in damages from the attacks (double his policy), by claiming that each plane constituted a separate terrorist attack. The courts initially rewarded him with a paltry $2.2 billion. He kept fighting and by 2007, he'd collected a total of $4.6 billion.

.... However, the names of other companies whose activity showed spikes for the kinds of trades where they would profit from losses created by the WTC attacks (a.k.a. "put-options") are publicly known, including: Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Bear Stearns, Fidelity Investments and TD Waterhouse, Raytheon, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, the parent companies of American, Continental, Delta, Northwest, Southwest, United and U.S. Airways, as well as Carnival and Royal Caribbean cruise lines. The insurance companies, AIG, Axa, Chubb, Cigna, CNA Financial, John Hancock and MetLife were also involved. Several giant companies that were former tenants in the WTC also showed irregular trading: Morgan Stanley; Lehman Brothers; Bank of America; and the financial firm Marsh & McLennan. Other major companies included General Motors, LTV, WR Grace, Lone Star Technologies, American Express, Bank of New York, Bank One.

• activist post link
  

An investigation reported in the Journal of Business concluded there was "Evidence of unusual option market activity in the days leading up to September 11 that is consistent with investors trading on advance knowledge of the attacks."

[isn't it interesting, how many of these entities, seven years later, during the "Global Financial Meltdown" were deemed "too big to fail" and were bailed out by US Taxpayers?]

And then, there was the gold: $166,770,000,000 worth of gold bullion that went missing from where it was being stored in the basement of the WTC complex, with only $230 million of it recovered, all of that having been stored in Building 4 and found in an abandoned truck, accompanied by an escort of several abandoned cars, which were found in a delivery ramp under Building 5 - apparently, attempting to escape, at a time when not even the firemen knew the skyscrapers were going to collapse. This recovery of a potential gold heist attempt is described chillingly by a rescue worker who feared he'd be shot at the scene.

• forbidden knowledge tv link
  

~

[stereologist]

I would say that most truthers are much too young to have ever been hippies. People once known as hippies are in thier 60's and 70's now. Where do you get your information? Can you post this demographic study or are you blowing hot air?

I read the study several years ago. I did not say that all or the majority were, just that many were. And to place them in their 60s or 70s is an exaggeration on your part. I know lots of places where people still consider themselves hippies.

I do not have the study available which I read nearly 8 years ago. I'll see if I can locate it.

[Babe Ruth]

I think you create an excuse for irrationality. We all get deceived all the time, but don't go off on irrational tangents.

Some are more easily deceived than others. Depending upon subject matter and such, and of course the knowledge base and training level of each individual.

It is irrational to believe known liars. It is rational to ask questions of suspicious or unknown events and facts.

Some people are tall, others are short. Some are gullible, others not so much.

I think you just hit the nail on the head. That is why it doesn't matter if it was nukes, no planes, 1 plane, 1 big plane 1 little plane, thermite...none of that matters. As long as the starting point isn't altered, anything thrown into the middle and end is fine.

What is the starting point?

[Babe Ruth]

I never understood what it is the CTers thought Bush would get out of this destruction? If it was to just destabilize the country therer are far easier and legal ways to go about it (see Obama administration and debt load).

My second question is always "Just how in the hell did Bush make all this happen in just 8 months of assuming office?" Remember the democrats had him wrapped up in court for over a month so he had less time than normal to establish his staff yet he managed to get in office and then plan and execute one of the mast elaboarate attacks in history, on his own country no less.

Lastly, how could any administration keep all this quiet? Obama arrested and threw in jail a guy who made a stupid video to cover-up the Benghazzi attack and even with the press on his side the secret was out in a matter of hours. Bush most certainly didn't have the press on his side, in fact they reviled the man and yet not one reporter could ever make these allegations stick. Not one leaker.

Does anyone here think that the press wouldn't kill to have taken Bush down and made him the most hated man in US history? Chris Matthews still foams at the mouth at the mere mention of the man.

This was not a one man show. Bush is and was but a dyslexic sock puppet. The people who planned and executed this would have done it even if Al Gore had won the election. And Al Gore would have gone along with it too, though Bush's Family had much more to gain than Gore might have.

In all probability this was planned years in advance, at least many months, as the buildings had to be prepared.

The press has been pro-government for quite some time. Recall that the supposedly "liberal rag" NYT concealed Bush's crimes regarding NSA spying with AT&T and others for about a year, thereby allowing him to win his second term.

Only a very naïve person really things mainstream media is adversary to the government. They are sycophants to the government, and it's plain as day.

Some people involved were killed, in the same strange ways that certain players in the JFK attempt were killed. Silence.

[Babe Ruth]

it does seen like all these theories suppose a level of competence and fiendish cunning rarely demonstrated in the real world by any government within living memory. And having pulled off such a gigantic plot flawlessly, if it was intended to be an excuse to occupy whatever oil-rich countries you wanted, why weren't these techniques and technologies used in those wars, and if it was to give an excuse to round up the population into prison camps and declare Martial law, then well, why are we still waiting?

It was not really flawlessly executed, but it was well executed and very well planned.

Some apparent failures? Somebody seems to have pushed the wrong button, as the first building struck was the last to come down. Also the damage done was grossly inconsistent with burning office furniture. Another big error was the feds being a day late and a dollar short at Shanksville. By the time they got there, the honest locals had already spilled the beans to the media. Great recovery by the feds, but the execution was not flawless there.

So too at the Pentagon. The exterior walls stood longer than anybody thought, and so everybody first on the scene commented that there was no entry hole. So too having a lousy rookie pilot having to perform an impossible aerodynamic maneuver.

No, it was not flawlessly executed, but all things considered it was well executed. Vigilant Guardian got the ball rolling.

[Sundew]

Benjamin Franklin said, "Three men can keep a secret if two of them are dead." Take NSA spying, the blithering incompetence alone that allowed Snowden to pilfer thousands of secret documents, shows how hard it is to keep secrets. While it is possible that we have alien spacecraft at Area 51, or that there are "chem-trails" being sown in the clouds, a fake moon landing or whatever your pet conspiracy is, it would seem sooner or later the truth would come out. It's easy to blame whatever and whoever you want under such vague circumstances, President Bush, the government, the Bilderberg Group, the Freemasons, the Jews, the Illuminati and so forth. A conspiracy always needs a boogieman. To be sure, our government and those of other nations have secrets, they spy, they do clandestine things, and there are organizations who have less than the best interests of the common man at heart, but the scope and reasoning behind some of these theories is laughable.

[Merc14]

This was not a one man show. Bush is and was but a dyslexic sock puppet. The people who planned and executed this would have done it even if Al Gore had won the election. And Al Gore would have gone along with it too, though Bush's Family had much more to gain than Gore might have.

In all probability this was planned years in advance, at least many months, as the buildings had to be prepared.

The press has been pro-government for quite some time. Recall that the supposedly "liberal rag" NYT concealed Bush's crimes regarding NSA spying with AT&T and others for about a year, thereby allowing him to win his second term.

Only a very naïve person really things mainstream media is adversary to the government. They are sycophants to the government, and it's plain as day.

Some people involved were killed, in the same strange ways that certain players in the JFK attempt were killed. Silence.

I will answer you tomorrow

[gtimeh]

In the 1st. chapter of the Book, Adam lied to God, in the 4th. chapter we find Cain faced with a bigger challenge :

Then the LORD said to Cain: Why are you angry? Why are you dejected? 7If you act rightly, you will be accepted;^* but if not, sin lies in wait at the door: its urge is for you, yet you can rule over it.^b

8Cain said to his brother Abel, “Let us go out in the field.”^* When they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him.^c

Cain conspired to kill his brother over jealousy. We were shown very early in mankind's history that man is not the most trustworthy of creatures. So, here is where it started. Was Abel paranoid, I don't believe so. Is it not our right to question those who now have our lives in their hands. From the beginning of our history we have dealt with evil people, I believe there's a few still around. It's not paranoia, it's basic human nature!

[stereologist]

I don't think that questioning or checking is the same as constructing conspiracy theories.

[Babe Ruth]

Stereo

Speaking only for myself, I have not "constructed" any particular theory, though I have engaged in speculation, and I KNOW it is speculation. I understand the meaning of the word, and use it openly and freely. I do not pretend to know all the details of who did what and why.

It is NOT speculation to observe and analyze the evidence that is available. That is merely analysis of known facts.

It is NOT speculation, nor conspiracy theory, to understand that the official version of events is false. Any person with an open and curious mind who studies the facts comes to the same conclusion. I've seen it happen many times. Those who continue to embrace the official story, even as they look at the facts and evidence, are merely acting out cognitive dissonance. They reject facts because, simply put, ignorance is bliss, even and especially willful ignorance.

The main theory fails, so alternative theories are advanced. Some are plausible, some are not. The only alternative theory that passes is the most general theory that it was an inside job, somehow or other. It was deception, with a military flair, AKA False Flag.