Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

they are everywhere! funny how this seems to have worked out to me. you have 2 utterly disparate camps. used to be that conspiracy theorists were scoffed at. now it would appear that if you do NOT subscribe to conspiracy theory you're scoffed at. movies like zeitgeist and loose change seem to have played a hand in the shift. so, IS the truth really out there?

is there a secret cure to cancer that pharmaceutical companies are hiding? does the gov't have aliens hidden away? were terrorists behind 911? did oswald act alone??

i'm curious--what are your opinions on conspiracy theories in general and which ones--if any--do you subscribe to?

Well, like, look at 9/11. It actually was a consipracy. People around the world conspired to fly planes into buildings.

I actually think it cuts both ways. Calling something a "conspiracy theory" can be a way of discrediting ideas that do challange authority, but at the same time, being lumped in with "conspiracy theories" give us the plausible but untrue through to the absolutly insane. Call some theory about shapeshifting aliens a "conspiracy", and it almost gives it more credibility.

lol, I cant say for sure which I believe, I don't trust the intelligence community, but that is more a matter of incompotence than the evil that conspiracy theories seem to assume

At this point, I am more inclined to believe that the Financial Elite is "tweaking" the politico-economic environment to serve its own ends more than to benefit the cattle.

'Tis good to be king.

This past September there was a special on the History Channel about the various popular 9/11 conspiracies. They had engineers, physicists, ballistics experts and demolitions experts soundly destroy every single conspiracy theory. During one of the talking heads, one of the experts said that a real investigative journalist connects all the dots and presents their findings. But a conspiracy theorists just draws a bunch of dots and then tells you to connect them.

One conspiracy that I think might have some truth to it, is the one about 'big oil' sabotoging the advancement of the electric car so it wouldn't become commonplace.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
This past September there was a special on the History Channel about the various popular 9/11 conspiracies. They had engineers, physicists, ballistics experts and demolitions experts soundly destroy every single conspiracy theory. During one of the talking heads, one of the experts said that a real investigative journalist connects all the dots and presents their findings. But a conspiracy theorists just draws a bunch of dots and then tells you to connect them.

One conspiracy that I think might have some truth to it, is the one about 'big oil' sabotoging the advancement of the electric car so it wouldn't become commonplace.

The problem is there is another bunch of experts who say the opposite to what those experts say.

I suscribe to the "elite ruling the world, and treet us like sheeple" area of thought.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
The problem is there is another bunch of experts who say the opposite to what those experts say.

Are they relevant experts? There was some biologist who said the only possible thing that could have destroy the WTC was a particle beam from space but she's neither a physicist or an engineer so I don't trust her expertise on the matter.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
The problem is there is another bunch of experts who say the opposite to what those experts say.


What kind of "experts" are they? They're either fringe scientists, or they're consiracy theorists themselves. Either way, they're definitely not objective. Just because the towers collapsed in a manner that might seem counter-intuitive to some, it doesn't therefore follow that the US govt "clearly" had something to do with it.

On board United 93 (the plane that went down in PA), many of the passengers talked on phones to their families because by then, the WTC attacks were all over the news. Some of those conversations were recorded, and there's even conspiracy nuts who claim that they were all faked, as if the families of the victims are in on some big secret. Ay guey, I mean c'mon now...

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
What kind of "experts" are they? They're either fringe scientists, or they're consiracy theorists themselves. Either way, they're definitely not objective. Just because the towers collapsed in a manner that might seem counter-intuitive to some, it doesn't therefore follow that the US govt "clearly" had something to do with it.

On board United 93 (the plane that went down in PA), many of the passengers talked on phones to their families because by then, the WTC attacks were all over the news. Some of those conversations were recorded, and there's even conspiracy nuts who claim that they were all faked, as if the families of the victims are in on some big secret. Ay guey, I mean c'mon now...

I know there were rediculous claims made, even holographic airplanes

But you have to admit some of the things which happened on that day are a bit unusual.

one of my personal faves that caught on for a while was the moon landing being faked. seriously??

Kubrick was in on it

Originally posted by inimalist
Kubrick was in on it

shifty

9/11 is a conspiracy. Whole thing never happened.

you mean the towers never fell?

That's right. The whole thing is a government conspiracy to oppress the people somehow.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
That's right. The whole thing is a government conspiracy to oppress the people somehow.

you could be right, I've never seen the wtc, how am I supposed to believe there were towers there in the first place

The "expertise" around the pentagon being hit by a plane said that it was a plane and used elaborate explanations.

But even my "newb" self could see the massive holes in their physics logic.

There was a "response" from the conspiracy about the pentagon attack that, imo, soundly beat the shit out of the idea that it was a plane and raped the illogical MIT expert physics analysis.

I have searched far and wide for that video response on youtube but I aboslutely cannot find it: it was a diamond among the conspiracies out there.

These "consipracy theorists" are NOT arguing that the Pentagon wasn't attacked or that it was an inside job: they believe that it was a terrorist attack. However, they ARE arguing that it was a ballistic weapon and not a plane and that the government does not want to admit that due to how "incompetent" or "unsafe" the people would think the government is.


If anyone can find that youtube vid, it would be great. It's one of the very few conspiracy theories that are sound and, imo, backed up soundly by science. The dude that "headed" the argument in the video was a tall, thin man with a beard or something. He had dark brown hair and he explained some of that stuff on a monitor, TV, or something. It had a computer simulated animation from the MIT experts. Does anyone remember that vid?

With this thread already veering off into the sheer insanity of the 'Pentagon was not hit by a plane' gibberish, this is being closed. Conspiracy threads in the conspiracy section, thank you.