Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

The conspiracy of conspiracy theories

117 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

MasterPo
Your argument is circular and always ending with you claiming that the other person is a CT psycho. Anytime you are at a loss for more insight to make your point you simply assert that the person your arguing with is a conspiracy nut. I can go to the local pub where the "drink special" has lowered the IQs and here the same babble. I'm sorry "mister poo poo pants," but I'm not going to resort to name calling. :D

Good! Because I haven't either. Being neurotic and/or paranoid is a clinical definition, not an insult. If you take it as such I can't help that. Maybe it's a conspiracy too? ;)

I shouldn't be surprised by this. You (not just you personally) can't support the notion of "vast conspiracies" all over the place spanning centuries and can't accept that bad things happen in life so you insult the person who burst your bubble. Typical.

Do you use a pad lock or combination lock on your coffee urn? :rofl:

Edited by MasterPo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Cornelius

My understanding of the dropping of the Bomb on Hiroshima was that the war was all but over and the Japanese were ready to capitulate. Dropping the bomb was the last opportunity the American government had to see what their new toy could do to real people so they went for it. No conspiracy there then - just evil intent.

My take on Conspiracies in general is that for two or more people to conspire together will give a competitive advantage over anyone not involved in that conspiracy, or someone who shares his information freely. It is pure evolutionary logic to say that there is survival advantage in conspiring, and therefore for there not to be conspiracies would be highly improbable and illogical. From there you have to decide what extent those conspiracies take.

America is a direct result of Freemasonic conspiracy to break away from the British yoke. Freemasons on both sides of the conflict seem to have been involved because they shared the goal of setting up a state based on the principles of Freemasonry rather than Kingship. It happened - proof of the effectiveness of conspiracy to achieve a shared aim. I think it is highly unlikely that those same conspirators simply packed there bags and shut up shop with the declaration of Independence. Certainly it seems that rather a lot of Americas elected Presidents have been members of Free masonic organisations, which by there very structure are conspiratorial.

It is interesting to note that just as there were air exercises at the time of the 9/11 attacks, which caused much confusion over whether the attacks were real or not, the same thing happened in London when the subway bombs went off. There was an interview taking place on national radio with a private firm of security consultants who were conducting an exercise on dealing with a terrorist attack on the subway system. He was staggered to hear that attacks were taking place in real time on exactly the station in which he was conducting his exercise's. He described, on air, the "hairs on the back of his neck rising" as new filtered in. Again the security exercise made it very difficult to decide whether the events were part of the exercise or really taking place. Also there were lots of "private firm" staff milling around the stations as the incident took place. These could all be just coincidence, but to me they speak of methodology.

The list could go on, and the list is huge. These are the fingerprints of conspiracies which have to be accounted for. It really does seem to me that denial of CT is wishful thinking and grossly delusional, but the subject is tainted and therefore not taken seriously.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oen Anderson
Logic, objectivity and common sense does not require citation.

When Einstein was asked what the difference was between genius and stupidity, he said that genius has limits. Your argument that logic, objectivity and common sense do not require citation can just as easily be used by the people who know conspiracies exist. That we should believe they do not exist based only on your say so gives the article no credibility and the article looses its integrity! I expect better than that from you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norm breyfogle

The choice we face isn't between "conspiracy" (as the word is typically defined, i.e., as a human or human-like conscious, secret plan and manipulation) or sheer random events. No, the universe is clearly not random but is highly, intricately ordered. Even without any humanoid conspiracies at all, physical law (and therefore order) would still exist, not random chance.

So, Po, I exhort you to better define your terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoCrazes
Good! Because I haven't either. Being neurotic and/or paranoid is a clinical definition, not an insult. If you take it as such I can't help that. Maybe it's a conspiracy too? ;)

I shouldn't be surprised by this. You (not just you personally) can't support the notion of "vast conspiracies" all over the place spanning centuries and can't accept that bad things happen in life so you insult the person who burst your bubble. Typical.

Do you use a pad lock or combination lock on your coffee urn? :rofl:

I rest my case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoCrazes
Time out!

If you're going to go down that road there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of laws and regulations that "we the people" never voted on but were enacted or otherwise forced upon us by the ones that "we the people" selected to represent ourselves. That's the nature of a Republic style of government.

Yes, that is how a Republic generally works; however, you again are taking one's statements out of context. You asserted, "So they (government) have to cut back a little on the rights not because they want more control but because we the people want them to keep us safer." in a prior post.

I am simply pointing out that you seemed confused by stating "THEY" (the government) and "We" (the people) when referencing our republic. I am simply pointing out your unusual choice of words of "They" and "We" when it should have been "They" and "They" or "We" and "We". It is called parallel writing. Maybe, subconciously, you believe some of these conspiracy theories. Don't fear if you do, there are conspiracies everywhere; from co-workers "setting-up" a date for two unknowing co-workers, to multi-national corporations determining the price of their product on the "open" market. You may someday believe secret meetings exist on Capitol Hill, the White House, the Supreme Court? And, just maybe someday, you may believe that these same price-fixing corporations make huge contributions to political leaders to sway their law-making.

Edited by SoCrazes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoCrazes
Do you use a pad lock or combination lock on your coffee urn? :rofl:

Neither, I love pee in my coffee. :P

Edited by SoCrazes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoCrazes

I'm curious MasterPo, what do you think were the reasons for the U.S. (et al) to invade Iraq? The government stated that WMD was the main reason. Do you believe WMDs were the reason?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
I'm curious MasterPo, what do you think were the reasons for the U.S. (et al) to invade Iraq? The government stated that WMD was the main reason. Do you believe WMDs were the reason?

Start a thread in the CONSPIRACY forum.

That's not the purpose of this article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
Yes, that is how a Republic generally works; however, you again are taking one's statements out of context. You asserted, "So they (government) have to cut back a little on the rights not because they want more control but because we the people want them to keep us safer." in a prior post.

I do not recall that post. Post the link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoCrazes
Start a thread in the CONSPIRACY forum.

That's not the purpose of this article.

What is the purpose of this article...to put down anyone who believes in conspiracy theories? The title of this article, which was started by you, is: "The conspiracy of conspiracy theories, Columnist: MasterPo." Now, if I can't defend offenses made by you in this thread against myself, and others, then the whole purporse of this forum is defeated as well as any purporse of any article. You made assertions, I question your assertions, you state that it isn't the purpose of the article. Why did you make attacks if it wasn't the purpose of the article?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Cornelius

The original post was a biased review of the CT field. At no point did it attempt to balance the position that CT are the product of uncritical minds jumping to unreasonable conclusion. It never once acknowledged that Conspiracy's obviously do take place. If it had then it would have been far better received.

When obvious examples of conspiracies have been pointed out to you, you have not countered them, but stuck to your original tak. You have insulted those who have diligently researched this subject, instead prefering the easy stance of lumping us all together with the obvious crazies.

The real problem is that without full disclosure of the facts it is literally impossible to divine the full extent of those CT which do leave a trail of evidence behind. In this situation the amazing pattern recognition capabilities of the human brain will and does run riot - hence the wilder fringes of CT speculation. The reluctance to admit the existence of CT is an obvious response to this gapping maw of wild and mad speculation. Unfortunately it requires us to take all evidence at face value and apply our best powers of critical judgement to try to work out what is going on and why. Knee jerk dismissal is far from helpful.

Br. Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
What is the purpose of this article

To, once again, point out that **** happens in life, one event feeds into the next and so on, and not everything - not even most things - are the result of deep dark conspiracies involving vast thousands of people spanning centuries.

To point out that it is easier, perhaps more comforting, to believe in a network of vast conspiracies than to accept events happen.

And to once again state that "vast" and "conspiracy" are oximoronic concepts that require a total suspension of logical thinking to be accepted.

If this wasn't clear enough in the article, I'll type slower next time. :D

to put down anyone who believes in conspiracy theories?

Your interpretation.

Edited by MasterPo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
The original post was a biased review of the CT field. At no point did it attempt to balance the position that CT are the product of uncritical minds jumping to unreasonable conclusion.

I am not Fox News. :rolleyes:

There are more than enough conspiracy theorists, articles and threads on this site that offer another view.

In fact, my article is the "attempt to balance the postion" (your words) since I can find no other article here saying 'vast conspiracies' don't exist. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Cornelius

Will you at least admit that conspiracies do exist and that we do not know the extent of those conspiracies.

That to me seems like a reasonable and balanced position to take.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
Will you at least admit that conspiracies do exist and that we do not know the extent of those conspiracies.

That to me seems like a reasonable and balanced position to take.

Br Cornelius

There is nothing to admit. I never said conspiracies and plans to manipulate don't exist. Of course they do. Taken in the broadest sense of the word everyone conspires with someone else at some point in their lives. Heck, your friends plan a surpsie birthday party for you - that's a conspiracy of sorts! :)

But will you admit that not everything bad (or good) that happens in the world is the result of a broad all-encompassing organization of vast conspirators?

Will you admit there is a tendency to have a knee-jerk reaction to blame a conspiracy for accomplishing what seemed impossible rather than someone found away to actually do it?

Will you admit that some answers are still out of reach inspite of years of research rather than being suppressed by dark forces?

Will you admit that perhaps the conspiracy is getting people like yourself to believe in conspiracies all over the place and thereby distract you from the reality of the situation?

Will you just admit that "vast" and "conspiracy" are oximoronic terms when used together??

Edited by MasterPo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Cornelius
There is nothing to admit. I never said conspiracies and plans to manipulate don't exist. Of course they do. Taken in the broadest sense of the word everyone conspires with someone else at some point in their lives. Heck, your friends plan a surpsie birthday party for you - that's a conspiracy of sorts! :)

But will you admit that not everything bad (or good) that happens in the world is the result of a broad all-encompassing organization of vast conspirators?

Will you admit there is a tendency to have a knee-jerk reaction to blame a conspiracy for accomplishing what seemed impossible rather than someone found away to actually do it?

Will you admit that some answers are still out of reach inspite of years of research rather than being suppressed by dark forces?

Will you admit that perhaps the conspiracy is getting people like yourself to believe in conspiracies all over the place and thereby distract you from the reality of the situation?

Will you just admit that "vast" and "conspiracy" are oximoronic terms when used together??

I freely admit all your points, and it seems that we have met on some sort of common ground.

I do however think that there is plenty of evidence for extensive and planned conspiracies taking place all the time. This is my "belief" based on my own research and others that I respect. I do not attribute all bad or good events to these conspiracies. I am totally uncertain about the overall intent of those conspiritors and am more than willing to accept that they may be directed at the overall good of mankind or nations. The problem is that because they operate in secret I have very little to base my belief of their intent. This is essentially the problem that the general public faces when trying to decide what is true. By this stage we all know with a fair degree of certainty that our governments are chronic liars and do not always have our best interests at heart. Governments have created this atmosphere by their actions and as certain as anything the effect is that people are unwilling to take their explanations for events at face value. This is an inevitable consequence of the devaluing of truth. I believe that the publics widespread belief in conspirices is inevitable given the circumstances and a very reasonable assessment of the facts that do emerge. I think the major problem that many face is that they filter these observations through the distorting mirror of other belief systems such as Christianity, which inevitably leads to gross distortion and loss of information.

Where we differ is in our interpretation of degrees and your opinion certainly seems no more valid than my own given the evidence.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoCrazes
There is nothing to admit. I never said conspiracies and plans to manipulate don't exist. Of course they do. Taken in the broadest sense of the word everyone conspires with someone else at some point in their lives. Heck, your friends plan a surpsie birthday party for you - that's a conspiracy of sorts! :)

But will you admit that not everything bad (or good) that happens in the world is the result of a broad all-encompassing organization of vast conspirators?

Will you admit there is a tendency to have a knee-jerk reaction to blame a conspiracy for accomplishing what seemed impossible rather than someone found away to actually do it?

Will you admit that some answers are still out of reach inspite of years of research rather than being suppressed by dark forces?

Will you admit that perhaps the conspiracy is getting people like yourself to believe in conspiracies all over the place and thereby distract you from the reality of the situation?

Will you just admit that "vast" and "conspiracy" are oximoronic terms when used together??

You finally agree that conspiracies exist. Now, what is your definition of "vast?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoCrazes

"

Edited by SoCrazes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoCrazes
There is nothing to admit. I never said conspiracies and plans to manipulate don't exist. Of course they do. Taken in the broadest sense of the word everyone conspires with someone else at some point in their lives. Heck, your friends plan a surpsie birthday party for you - that's a conspiracy of sorts! :)

But will you admit that not everything bad (or good) that happens in the world is the result of a broad all-encompassing organization of vast conspirators?

Will you admit there is a tendency to have a knee-jerk reaction to blame a conspiracy for accomplishing what seemed impossible rather than someone found away to actually do it?

Will you admit that some answers are still out of reach inspite of years of research rather than being suppressed by dark forces?

Will you admit that perhaps the conspiracy is getting people like yourself to believe in conspiracies all over the place and thereby distract you from the reality of the situation?

Will you just admit that "vast" and "conspiracy" are oximoronic terms when used together??

You write as though if a person believes there is some credibility to one CT, that s/he is an idiot that believes in any CT. Not so with me (and I believe for most others). The list of CTs that I don't believe in is "hundreds" of times longer than list of CTs I believe may have some truth to them (Again, I believe this is true for most others here on this forum.). MasterPo, I'm still awaiting your response to the question: "Why did the U.S. (et al) invade Iraq?" (Please answer this, it does have to do with the subject we are discussing.). Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
You write as though if a person believes there is some credibility to one CT, that s/he is an idiot that believes in any CT. Not so with me (and I believe for most others). The list of CTs that I don't believe in is "hundreds" of times longer than list of CTs I believe may have some truth to them (Again, I believe this is true for most others here on this forum.).

Maybe not you personally but this article wasn't addressed to you specifically.

MasterPo, I'm still awaiting your response to the question: "Why did the U.S. (et al) invade Iraq?" (Please answer this, it does have to do with the subject we are discussing.). Thank you.

And I'm still saying that I'm not going to debate such things in this thread. Start one in the conspiracies forum if you want to go over old news again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
You finally agree that conspiracies exist. Now, what is your definition of "vast?"

You tell me.

Look back at all the articles on the home page recently about conspiracy-this, conspiracy-that. For example, recently there was an article and thread (too lazy to look for it now) that someone claimed there are 15,000 people world wide that are controlling the "new world order". The person went on to claim that Hitler was only trying to kill the 15,000 and thus do the world a favor and save us from the new world order. That seems like a "vast conspiracy" to me.

There is a vast conspiracy to hide Rosewell and UFOs.

The vast conspiracy to hide the cure for cancer and AIDS.

The vast conspiracy about global warming.

And there is the constant "vast right-wing conspiracy" the Clintons et al frequently speak of.

So you as a conspiracy theorist need to define "vast" in terms of conspiracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoCrazes
You tell me.

Look back at all the articles on the home page recently about conspiracy-this, conspiracy-that. For example, recently there was an article and thread (too lazy to look for it now) that someone claimed there are 15,000 people world wide that are controlling the "new world order". The person went on to claim that Hitler was only trying to kill the 15,000 and thus do the world a favor and save us from the new world order. That seems like a "vast conspiracy" to me.

There is a vast conspiracy to hide Rosewell and UFOs.

The vast conspiracy to hide the cure for cancer and AIDS.

The vast conspiracy about global warming.

And there is the constant "vast right-wing conspiracy" the Clintons et al frequently speak of.

So you as a conspiracy theorist need to define "vast" in terms of conspiracy.

Maybe I'm not as well read as I thought. The first I've seen the word "vast" in conjunction with the word "conspiracy" is in your posts. Since you use the word frequently, I assume you knew the definition. Please enlighten me as to the definition of "vast" or please do not use terms you know not or unable to define...somebody may think you're an uneducated rube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SoCrazes

MasterPo, I'm still awaiting your response to the question: "Why did the U.S. (et al) invade Iraq?" (Please answer this, it does have to do with the subject we are discussing.). Thank you.

And I'm still saying that I'm not going to debate such things in this thread. Start one in the conspiracies forum if you want to go over old news again.

The title of YOUR post is "The conspiracy of conspiracy theories" and I beleive this question ("Why did the U.S. (et al) invade Iraq?" ) cuts at the heart of the issues you posted here. You've made some accusations and now are seemingly running and hiding from the issues. You even ask others to define a term (vast) that you use repeatedly in your posts.

I making a simple request: define a term you use in your posts (vast) and answer the question, "Why did the U.S. (et al) invade Iraq?".

Do I smell chicken? KFC must have started-up their broilers next door because there is a strong smell of poultry in this thread.

Edited by SoCrazes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
MasterPo, I'm still awaiting your response to the question: "Why did the U.S. (et al) invade Iraq?" (Please answer this, it does have to do with the subject we are discussing.). Thank you.

Let me try to type slower for you....

This article wasn't about debating any particular conspiracy theory. It was about the concept as a whole.

I'm not going to galvanize the discussion by going off on conspriacy-this or conspiracy-that tangents. The Iraq war has been pulverized in other forums here already.

But since this topic is obviously important to whatever point you're trying to make then please go ahead and tell us why you think it was done. Let me guess: Oil, money, power, control of the world economy, etc etc etc.

Do I smell chicken? KFC must have started their broilers.

You start the thread and I'll bring the BBQ sauce. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.