The conspiracy of conspiracy theories

[MasterPo]

The Genesis (my inspiration) for writing this article came from the prior article "2012 and the economy" posted here last month. That was all about the world economy being taken over by the "new world order", someone introduced the concept of the 15,000 who control everything, Hitler's quest to help the world by killing those 15,000 etc etc. Soon that article was followed by the "Supressed technologies" article and ensuing comments which implied much of the same.

These, and especially the comments that followed, were not by far the first conspiracy theory stories I had read (both here and on other sites). But I don't make conspiracy theory a hobby nor do I live my life by it as some seem to (must be hard to get up in the morning?).

It occurred to me that a dose of reality needed to be injected into the conversation. Someone had to say "The Emperor has no clothes!".

This article has been far more successful than I had ever dreamed! Really knocked over the ant hill good. Hopefully someone reading it and the drama that followed will be inspired to take a moment and consider (or re-consider) the nature of the world and human behaviour.

At 100 posts my work as an author is done for now.

Good day.

[Guest]

At 100 posts my work as an author is done for now.

Good day.

Unless you are prepared to discuss particular evidence presented by people to support their belief in CT, your work hasn't even begun.

Br Cornelius

[Spiral]

Logic, objectivity and common sense does not require citation.

Hollow and unsubstantiated declarations with no proof demand and require examples especially when the proponent's supposed and believed logic, objectivity and common sense are based upon illusions, lies and deceptions.

[Oen Anderson]

The Genesis (my inspiration) for writing this article came from the prior article "2012 and the economy" posted here last month. That was all about the world economy being taken over by the "new world order", someone introduced the concept of the 15,000 who control everything, Hitler's quest to help the world by killing those 15,000 etc etc. Soon that article was followed by the "Supressed technologies" article and ensuing comments which implied much of the same.

These, and especially the comments that followed, were not by far the first conspiracy theory stories I had read (both here and on other sites). But I don't make conspiracy theory a hobby nor do I live my life by it as some seem to (must be hard to get up in the morning?).

It occurred to me that a dose of reality needed to be injected into the conversation. Someone had to say "The Emperor has no clothes!".

This article has been far more successful than I had ever dreamed! Really knocked over the ant hill good. Hopefully someone reading it and the drama that followed will be inspired to take a moment and consider (or re-consider) the nature of the world and human behaviour.

At 100 posts my work as an author is done for now.

Good day.

The article you refer to on "2012 and the Economy" was written by Phillip Tilley, a published author. In the section of Tilleys book about the author it says he spent four years researching before writing the book. That alone does not make him an expert, so I checked the Bibliography, which is eight pages long with 247 references, many of which I check for myself, a Glossary thirty-seven pages long with 457 relevant words defined, now that makes him an expert in my opinion. Now I'm supposed to believe you were inspired by a well written article by an expert in his field to write your opinion piece, and that is just what it is, your opinion, and you think your work as an author is done! My God, lets hope so!

[pallidin]

Conspiracy is nothing more than 2 or more individuals of a group agreeing in some form to create a collective action for a desired result.

I conspired with my wife to have a child, for example.

Or a robber conspires with their accomplice to commit a crime.

So, the RESULT of conspiracy can be good or bad, but conspiracy itself is a natual aspect of life... we see it in nature all the time.

[MasterPo]

I conspired with my wife to have a child, for example.

LOL! Though I suspect it was more her "leadership" than yours.

So, the RESULT of conspiracy can be good or bad, but conspiracy itself is a natual aspect of life... we see it in nature all the time.

Agreed. But "conspiracy" or "plot" sell more books, attracts more listeners, and get more traffic than "plan" or "agreement". There is also a strong connotation of something big and all encompassing when the word "conspiracy" is used.

Edited September 9, 2008 by MasterPo

[el midgetron]

Conspiracy is nothing more than 2 or more individuals of a group agreeing in some form to create a collective action for a desired result.

I conspired with my wife to have a child, for example.

Or a robber conspires with their accomplice to commit a crime.

So, the RESULT of conspiracy can be good or bad, but conspiracy itself is a natual aspect of life... we see it in nature all the time.

Agreed. But "conspiracy" or "plot" sell more books, attracts more listeners, and get more traffic than "plan" or "agreement". There is also a strong connotation of something big and all encompassing when the word "conspiracy" is used.

I don't think that usage of "conspiracy" makes much sense. A "conspiracy" implies something "illegal, wrongful, subversive, a crime, illegal action or sinister design". It is not just a simple "argeement" or consent of intent, so its unclear how exactly you and your wife "conspired" to have a child. Unless maybe if she was only twelve years old and you were at least 10 years her senior...

1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2. A group of conspirators.
3. Law. An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.

As well, since the concept of "law" is unique to the intelect and philosophies of people, I think its quite a strech to suggest "conspiracies" are actually observed in nature. While you could say "those bears conspired to kill some fish", you are actually giving those bears imaginary human characteristics, because those bears have no ill intent other than to feed themselves.

Notice how in the 4th definition they also use an example which deals with elements from nature. However, it is not an actual conspiracy or even any kind of mutual argeement. In that example its usage is "as if", again subscribing human characteristics to something non-human (the bears acted "is if" they were human).

The fact that man knows right from wrong proves his intellectual superiority to the other creatures; but the fact that he can do wrong proves his moral inferiority to any creatures that cannot. ~Mark Twain,

Anyway Po, even though you claimed "your work here was done", I do thank you for returning to agree with such a suspect understanding of the fundamentals of the subject. I think it illustrates the level of knowledge that you employed in the writing of the OP.

Edited September 10, 2008 by el midgetron

[MasterPo]

Anyway Po, even though you claimed "your work here was done", I do thank you for returning to agree with such a suspect understanding of the fundamentals of the subject. I think it illustrates the level of knowledge that you employed in the writing of the OP.

As your lawyer colleague SoCrates might say in court, that presumes facts not entered into evidence.

I never held myself out as an expert on the subject. I never claimed to have researched any particuarl conspiracy theory, have evidence one way or another, etc. That was all anointed on me by the conspiracy subscribers here. I have no interest in conspiracies or researching them. Life is too complex already to waste time looking over your shoulder or looking for alterior motives in everything.

I'm just a guy employing basic common sense - which is generallyed agreed to be far to uncommon these days - along with basic logic and calm rational thought with a touch of Occam thrown in to express an opinion based on a more grounded train of thought. As Plato wrote of Socrates being the "gadfly", sting people into self reflection. And I think when people were forced to see the reflection (i.e. the painfully obvious transparency and fragility of most conspriacy thoeries) they didn't like what they saw. Hence the supernova-like responses from people here.

I leave the readers of this article, most of whom lurk without replying, to draw their own conclusions.

Edited September 10, 2008 by MasterPo

[BlindMessiah]

Ok, you two are beating a dead horse now. Hopefully this one doesn't find its way into another person's signiture.

[MasterPo]

Ok, you two are beating a dead horse now. Hopefully this one doesn't find its way into another person's signiture.

You're right.

I said I was done.

Peace.

[el midgetron]

As your lawyer colleague SoCrates might say in court, that presumes facts not entered into evidence.

It seems like you are calling me (and SoCrates) "lawyers" because we actually present arguments to defend our views. You on the other hand seem to think the best argument is to simple claim how mighty your brain power is rather than demonstate it in any kind of actual debate.

"I'm just a guy employing basic common sense along with basic logic and calm rational thought with a touch of Occam thrown in to express an opinion based on a more grounded train of thought."

I never held myself out as an expert on the subject. I never claimed to have researched any particuarl conspiracy theory, have evidence one way or another, etc. That was all anointed on me by the conspiracy subscribers here. I have no interest in conspiracies or researching them. Life is too complex already to waste time looking over your shoulder or looking for alterior motives in everything.

Not only have you demonstrated that you lack a basic understanding of what a "conspiracy" is but you have also now suggested that you have never even researched or even had any interest in the subject. While you claim life is to complex to waste looking over your shoulder, I guess it isn't to complex to waste your time writing about something you have no real knowledge of, or interest in. Perhaps that is a telling demonstration of your "basic logic"?

I am also sort of confused as how you got "anointed" by the "conspiracy subscribers" here if you have never researched or had any interest in conspiracies? Did they seek you out like the baby Jesus or were you wasting your complex life reading about something in these threads which you claim isn't worth wasting your life over? And what about you telling me to go to conspiracy web sites? Doing so suggests you have knowledge of whats those sites contain. Now you are claiming that all that you know was given to you by the conspircy folk here and you have never been nterested in seeking that information out for yourself. Exactly, how then did you find yourself wasting your complex life away at these vauge and mysterious "conspiracy web sites" in the first place?

As Plato wrote of Socrates being the "gadfly", sting people into self reflection. And I think when people were forced to see the reflection (i.e. the painfully obvious transparency and fragility of most conspriacy thoeries) they didn't like what they saw. Hence the supernova-like responses from people here.

Tall words for someone who refuses to participate in an acutal disscusion. I can't help but feel as if anyone has been forced to see their reflection it is you. I am more than happy to have my beliefs examined, as are meny of the people in this thread who have tried to get you involved in a legit discussion. Its you who has backed away from those discussions, not us. As well, after 100 pages, all you really have to support your views are some metaphorical "blurry photos of specks of dust" which you claim as being ghosts (or in other words, you don't have squat to back up your wild claims and despite your self proclaimed mental prowess, you can't even recognize it).

[el midgetron]

Ok, you two are beating a dead horse now. Hopefully this one doesn't find its way into another person's signiture.

I think that poor pony has been being abused since before I got here.

You're right.

I said I was done.

Peace.

You said that before. You will be back.

[MasterPo]

September 11, 2001

[el midgetron]

You said that before. You will be back.

Honestly I though it might require some further discussion to draw you back again. I guess not......

BTW, might you care to share with us what the relevance of "9/11" is to a thread about why people believe in conspiracy theories? Maybe you can explain why the only two threads you posted your tribute was this one and one called "September 11, 2001". You have said you will not discuss any specific conspiracy theories in this thread, so its confusing why you would make a post about a heated issue like 9/11 here when you passed on posting it in equally relavent threads you posted in since.

Frankly, its obvious to me you don't bat with even the worst of the players here.

But whatever, since you decided to open a discussion about 9/11 in this thread -

[MasterPo]

You have a jumbo size ego for thinking that post and this entire article is about feeding your fantasy and playing in your little world.

Since logic and common decentcy have been replaced with paranoia and being self-centered let me spell it out for you: The above post was not about you! It is to honor and respect those who died 7 yeras ago today and who have died since so that you can remain safe in your dillusions.

And you have a brass pair for making a comment like that today of all days.

(MasterPo turns his back on you and this thread.)

Edited September 11, 2008 by MasterPo

[el midgetron]

Since logic and common decentcy have been replaced with paranoia and being self-centered let me spell it out for you: The above post was not about you! It is to honor and respect those who died 7 yeras ago today and who have died since so that you can remain safe in your dillusions.

And you have a brass pair for making a comment like that today of all days.

Its obviously why you posted it here. You started a thread for it in the current events section, then came here to include it in your "CONSPIRACY" slobber. Why? Why not also post it in the other threads you posted in after that -

Jesus was a community organizer

Sarah Palin: Extremist

Ron Paul: US in Georgia for pipeline

Bush-Cheney ensure Obama next President

Today of all days is the day to remember what happened and keep asking for answers. Sorry to rain on your badge of moral superiority.

(MasterPo turns his back on you and this thread.)

lol, thats the third time you have made the dramatic exit....

[norm breyfogle]

PO:

The entire USA - over 300 million people - were lied into a war which has killed at least 100,000 people and has nearly bankrupted the USA and has helped destabilize world markets. It was based on lies, at least partly very intentional lies. This is a MAJOR conspiracy.

Your article's generalized downplaying of conspiracy theorizing doesn't change this fact. Your article was non-specific, and therefore doesn't really say anything of importance at all. You may as well have simply touted your own ignorance about specifics more directly, for this is what you've done in an indirect manner anyway. But then, "I don't know anything specific" doesn't maintain the appearance of an article worth reading now, does it?