|
Post by lunatic on Sept 14, 2006 3:30:01 GMT -4
Do any of the more staunch Apolloists believe that there are any conspiracies going on at all, I mean other than the moon landings?
It appears that you all believe exactly what the media feeds you with out question.
The world you occupy does not have lying politicians, propaganda departments, spies, government assassins or greedy corrupt businessmen.
Sorry to spoil your fantasy world but these are all facts, that can be proved beyond all reasonable doubt, much more so than the Apollo Missions.
Some conspiracy theory are a bit week and I do not give much or any credibility to, such as The Priory of Sion protecting the decedents of Jesus the Nazarene. This would seem purely for the purposes of selling books.
UFO abductions, bored people with dull lives, I think this make them feel special or chosen
I am pretty sure that crop circles are a conspiracy well not quite a conspiracy but a group people getting together to fool others, I say not really a conspiracy it is dishonest to claim that alien made them but it is kind of harmless not really malicious.
Not sure about 911 but it would seem a bit far fetched to kill all those people when a few well places lies would have been enough to start it all off.
Some conspiracy theories I do think are a bit more credible are JFK assassination every thing about it OJ Simpson acquittal very fishy indeed
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Sept 14, 2006 6:15:41 GMT -4
I'm sure that there are. Iran/Contra, Watergate, Bush tapping phones. The difference with real conspiracies that are shown to be real conspiracies and the Conspiracy Theory is that the deeper you dig into things like Watergate the more evidence you come up with. The more you dig into the 9/11 Theories, JFK assasination, Apollo Hoax, the less evidence you find, it all falls away when you start to find that the claims just don't stack up, that they are based on lies, misquotes and ignorance of the appropriate sciences.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Sept 14, 2006 7:08:01 GMT -4
I keep thinking I ought to write a credo for CT debunkers. It would go something like this. (Note that it's 4 AM here and I'm on meds that cause drowsiness but aren't putting me to sleep, so forgive any incoherence.)
I believe conspiracies can, do, and have exist. From a legal perspective, they exist all the time, and the historical record is full of them.
However.
I believe that every conspiracy has a potential to leave evidence of itself. I believe that, the bigger the conspiracy, the more evidence it will leave. I believe that, the more people are involved, the more likely someone is to tell someone who isn't part of the conspiracy and therefore, the more likely the conspiracy is to be uncovered.
I believe that governmental conspiracies, such as Watergate and Iran-Contra, get uncovered very quickly. I believe no governmental agency is truly capable of a 40-year-long coverup.
I believe that conspiracy theorists need to stop claiming that anyone who reveals "the real truth" ends up dead. I believe they ought to take a good long look about how many books, TV shows, movies, and websites espouse their side and then look at how many of the creators of same are still around, spouting the things they claim the government they claim kills people on a whim doesn't want people to hear.
I do not believe the US sent men to the Moon, Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK, or Big Frickin' Planes coupled with Big Frickin' Fires brought down the WTC. I have evidence that shows all of those to be true. I believe that an objective examining of the evidence usually shows the simplest explanation to be true. I believe that, the more research you do, the more evidence you should find to support the truth. If the evidence doesn't support your point of view, the odds are very, very good indeed that you are wrong. I believe that incompetence is simpler an explanation than malice.
I believe that no evidence will ever convince some people, but I also believe that we must put as much effort as possible into trying, because there are those who will be, even if they never enter the argument, and I believe that it is my duty as an educated person to educate more people, even if the ones who need it most remain willfully ignorant.
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Sept 14, 2006 7:42:35 GMT -4
Jack White puts credence into just about every crackpot CT he hears. He believes: the Moon landings were faked, in chemtrais, that Katrina was the result of weather changing technology, that the dikes were intentionally blown up, that no planes (or at least not Boeing 757/767s) crashed into the Pentagon, WTC and the field in PA.), 6 WTC was blown up when flt. 175 hit 2 WTC, the Zapruder film and most images of the JFK assassination were faked and I'm sure a few others.
Jim Fetzer and John Costella who collaborated on a book with White "proving" that the "Z-film" was faked have stated they believe the Apollo photos were faked. They also believe that the plane crash that killed (U.S.) and 7 other people was provoked by an electromagnetic pulse type weapon. Fetzer is additionally a major backer of 9/11 nonsense. Costella believes that: -Dealy Plaza (where JFK was shot) is kept under surveillance via rain sensors that are really listening devices and a low resolution webcam, -a teacher who subbed for him and his (now ex) wife were CIA agents and -the CIA sabotaged his electric razor, shirts and digital camera.
Eric Hufshmidt a prominent promoter of 9/11 conspiracy theories believes the Holocaust never happened and that the moon landings were faked.
It’s not uncommon on forums for people to say they believe the landings were faked and that they believe other theories
"It appears that you all believe exactly what the media feeds you with out question.
"The world you occupy does not have lying politicians, propaganda departments, spies, government assassins or greedy corrupt businessmen"
This is a strawman based on not examining the evidence. If you actually had looked at the treads which deal with the various CT presented our criticism of them is not based on blind acceptance of what we are told but examination of the evidence. I’ve looked into the claims made by CTists regarding 9/11, the Wellstone crash and the supposed faking of JFK assassination images and found almost none of them stand up to scrutiny and those that do prove little.
A closer examination of the threads would have shown to you that many of us are suspicious of “the official explanation” of more than one event.
For all the CTists talk of ‘sheeple’ that epitaph seems to better fit them they believe any manner of nonsense they read on sites like whatreallyhappened or infowars without examining the evidence themselves.
Len
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Sept 14, 2006 9:52:40 GMT -4
Sure conspiracies happen all the time. We had a big one here in Houston a few years ago called Enron. It had been going on for years until it blew up in the conspirators faces. It was widely known that something was wrong but no one had any solid evidence. To make the situation even better, the lead conspirator mysteriously died before he could be sentenced, damaging the government’s attempts to collect his ill gotten gains.
Then we have 9/11. That was a conspiracy by a group of disgruntled Saudis. Then, as others have mentioned, Iran/Contra, Watergate etc. There are other secret government plots that occur as well although they could not be called conspiracies such as the plan to rescue the hostages at the US embassy in Iran. That was a fiasco but wisely President Carter came on TV to explain the actions before the news got a hold of the story.
Those of us who have examined the evidence for Apollo and found it convincing are not the kind of people you think we are. We live in a world where there is no evidence of a monolithic media power that can easily manipulate us. In a world where there is ever increasing diversity in the sources of information. It is hard to imagine why you think it is easy to manipulate people that demand proof of claims as opposed to those who propose their own beliefs simply because they don’t like the accomplishments of others. Your opinion of us is poorly founded.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Sept 14, 2006 12:00:23 GMT -4
Interestingly enough, the OJ Simpson acquittal is an example of a conspiracy theory (the defense theory that OJ was framed) rather than an actual conspiracy causing an injustice. The jurors were just gullible enough to do possibly irreperable damage to public confidence in the US Justice system. "Never ascribe to malice what can adequately be explained with stupidity."
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Sept 14, 2006 17:50:03 GMT -4
Interestingly enough, the OJ Simpson acquittal is an example of a conspiracy theory
This is actually an iteresting thing. Science and the Courtroom Jury are really two opposites.
Both take the availible evidence, they do the same thing, but they then reach their conclusions in entirely different ways. With both science and the courtroom we place the evidence out, and examine it to get a story of best fit. The difference is then in the handling. Science says that the story of best fit is "True" if it requires less assumptions than any other story that would fit the evidence on the table. The Jury says that a story is true if and only if it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. It seems that many CT's are willing to take the CT they want to belive in as a default, but then demand that the official story is proved to the court system, beyond a reasonable doubt, or in some cases even unreasonable doubts. This is why in a court system a CT can flouish, because all it has to do is cast doubt on the best fit story to invalidate it. In the science system it's not a case of casting doubt on the best fit story, but rather providing enough evidence that it overtakes and becomes the best fit. CT's seem too stuck in the jury system and aren't willing to move to the science one.
|
|
|
Post by lunatic on Sept 20, 2006 6:44:52 GMT -4
So you are saying that you only believe the official government story for every thing? And that only conspiracies that are stupid enough to get caught are guilty? Most unsolved crimes have little or no evidence it does not mean they are not a crime, only the perpetrators were very good at covering their tracks or the investigators were inept.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Sept 20, 2006 6:47:56 GMT -4
So you are saying that you only believe the official government story for every thing? And that only conspiracies that are stupid enough to get caught are guilty? Most unsolved crimes have little or no evidence it does not mean they are not a crime, only the perpetrators were very good at covering their tracks or the investigators were inept. You know, the "official government story" for Watergate for quite some time was "where's Watergate? What Watergate?" Heck, I believe Reagan was intimately involved in Iran-Contra, and Bush the Elder sure was, too. Large conspiracies, along the nature of, oh, the size a conspiracy to fake a moon landing, are pretty much impossible. Unsolved crimes are almost certainly committed by individuals, and when they aren't, it's usually the mob, where it's more an issue of which member actually committed the crime and getting enough admissible evidence to prosecute. You don't know a lot about the law, do you?
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Sept 20, 2006 7:53:15 GMT -4
So you are saying that you only believe the official government story for every thing?
No, I believe what the evidence says.
And that only conspiracies that are stupid enough to get caught are guilty?
Conspiracies don't last very long, they never have, sooner or later someone talks to the wronmg person and everyone knows. Remember that the US President couldn't get a quickie in the Oval Office with just two people in the room without it becomning International news. You expect a conspiracy of thousands of people to remain quiet? Look at all the things that come out in the US. The Abu Grabe photos, torture of terror suspects, mystery flights of terror suspects, Watergate, White Water, Clinton and Monica, Iran/Contra, The Whitehouse's Global warming cover up, Enron. Someone will talk sooner or layer, it's human nature, even if it's done via a plain brown envelope. The bigger the conspiracy, the shorter the life span possible.
Most unsolved crimes have little or no evidence it does not mean they are not a crime, only the perpetrators were very good at covering their tracks or the investigators were inept.
No, most unsolved crimes have little direct evidence to the perpetrator of the crime. There is always plently of evidence that a crime occured. If there was no evidence of a crime actually occuring, how can you prove that one did in fact occur?
|
|
|
Post by lunatic on Oct 2, 2006 12:49:43 GMT -4
gillianren, Unsolved crimes are almost certainly committed by individuals? What are you going on about? If they are are unsolved how would you or any one esle know It is you that knows little about the law.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 2, 2006 16:02:07 GMT -4
Unsolved crimes are almost certainly committed by individuals?
What are you going on about? If they are are unsolved how would you or any one esle know It is you that knows little about the law.No, she's right. The reason is that when you have a group, someone is often likely to talk or do something stupid and bring down everyone else. Individuals are better at concealing crimes than groups. She didn't say that all were, merely that the vast majority were.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Oct 2, 2006 19:50:53 GMT -4
I mean, look at how most criminal conspiracies are detected. Heck, the Manson crimes were solved because Susan Atkins couldn't keep her mouth shut--it was only after she talked that they discovered that a ton of evidence they already had pointed to that group.
|
|
|
Post by lunatic on Oct 2, 2006 22:42:11 GMT -4
what a load of rubbish if they are unsolved no body knows who committed them, you are just making an assumption based on your personal lack of knowledge.
You are if fact admitting you know nothing at all, there have been thousands of unsolved conspiracies, go ask you local FBI agent. There are what's known as dark figure crime meaning that the crimes that are detected are just the tip of the iceberg.
Most crime is not only unsolved but actually undetected, especially white collar crimes.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Oct 2, 2006 23:01:31 GMT -4
If it's undetected, how do you know?
|
|