Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Move along, nothing to see here!
User avatar
fiby41
Posts: 654
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:09 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by fiby41 » Fri Dec 11, 2015 4:07 am

The conspiracy theory in most of these was who was responsible for it as opposed to natural causes:

https://www.rt.com/shows/documentary/31 ... on-people/
Last edited by fiby41 on Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:15 am, edited 8 times in total.

User avatar
fiby41
Posts: 654
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:09 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by fiby41 » Fri Dec 11, 2015 9:33 am

Subhash Chandra Bose, who organised the Indian National Army, dies from a plane crash and conspiracy theory is reported within hours of the news of the death.

Government of India has instituted three commissions of inquiry, two of which confirmed the death in the plane crash but the third stated that Bose faked his own death. This report was rejected by the government without citing any reasons.

User avatar
fiby41
Posts: 654
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:09 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by fiby41 » Tue Dec 29, 2015 2:08 pm

Thank you all for your posts. Digging into the 'for's and 'against's of some of these is really making for some cheap entertainment and sometimes satiating morbid curiosity.

Here's the against for the above conspiracy theory.

User avatar
fiby41
Posts: 654
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:09 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by fiby41 » Sun Jan 24, 2016 3:10 am

'Love Jihad'.
http://www.islam-watch.org/authors/73-b ... uslim.html

In Islam, a person of either sex marrying a Moslem has to convert first, along with a new firstname but talakh (divorce) or not, leaving the faith is punishable by death. The theory is this process has institutional support and gets encouragement.

Nassim Nicholas Taleb gives more examples.

User avatar
fiby41
Posts: 654
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:09 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by fiby41 » Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:26 am

fiby41 wrote:Subhash Chandra Bose
There is renewed interest in this conspiracy theory as two days ago it was announced that 164 related secret files will be declassified.

User avatar
Chad
Posts: 3769
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Chad » Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:26 pm

This suggests the vast majority of conspiracy theories are bogus:

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35411684

User avatar
akratic
Posts: 663
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:18 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by akratic » Tue Feb 02, 2016 4:07 pm

I'm not sure that this counts as a conspiracy theory, but I have my doubts about whether all types of recycling are worth it.

There's an environmental cost to transporting/processing recyclables that's often just plain ignored.

And there's a psychological cost with recycling that it's okay to generate a bunch of trash as long as you put it in the recycle bin. Nobody should feel like they are "saving the environment" by filling an entire recycling bin. :evil:

Toska2
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 8:51 pm

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Toska2 » Wed Apr 20, 2016 12:35 pm

I'm going to state my own conspiracy theory.
There will be an acute diabetes drug shortage within 5 years. This theory arises from previous mentions of Medicaid costs ($245b) and an online article pointing out that 10% of the sick are causing 40-50% of the costs (80:20 rule sorta?) A fungal contamination sounds most plausible.

I can only assume that less than 10% of diabetics will die. The tiny blip would cause shipments to no longer be automatic. However, a week delay can be deadly.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 3806
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Ego » Sun Mar 26, 2017 9:41 pm

The Trump-Putin conspiracy is getting rather interesting. Seth Abramson produced a good 50-post twitter mega thread about it with links to stories about each point.

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status ... 3129772032

It looks like Chris Steele may testify before a televised session of the intel committee. I don't have the slightest idea if it is true and I suspect it will be difficult to prove considering the main source of the information was found dead in Moscow. We shall see.

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Spartan_Warrior » Mon Mar 27, 2017 6:38 am

^ Hey look, it's the conspiracy theory I deem most likely to have been invented to cover up the conspiracy theory I deem most likely to be true. ;)

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Spartan_Warrior » Mon Mar 27, 2017 6:56 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36arQMNldaw

They can drum up all the evidence of Russia involvement that they want. What they'll never do is prove that it influenced the election outcome in any way because that argument hinges on the condescending implication that Bernie supporters were "duped" into hating Clinton. Nope. Sorry. We just hate Clinton. People like me, actual leftists, not centrists, hated Clinton since 2008. Her campaign in 2016 was garbage. Democrats were slimy cheaters. The media were blatant liars.

So I'll be curious to see if Chris Steele's testimony reveals how the Russians kept the Clinton campaign out of Michigan and Wisconsin. Or how the Russians made Donna Brazile leak debate questions to Clinton. Or how the Russians forced Clinton to make all those Wall Street speeches. Or how the Russians wrote internal DNC memos discussing elevating and legitimizing Trump as a strategy. Or how the Russians made Bill Clinton illegally electioneer in Massachusetts polling places. Or how the Russians made the US media invent "flying chairs" at a Nevada caucus. Or...

Farm_or
Posts: 140
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2016 8:57 am
Contact:

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Farm_or » Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:37 am

'They" are spraying the skies to counter global warming

Jean
Posts: 245
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 8:49 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Jean » Mon Mar 27, 2017 3:39 pm

Scrubby wrote:
Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:40 am
Chad wrote:Obviously, Putin isn't the good guy here, but the US/NATO hardly have the moral high ground. The US/NATO has been trying to pull Ukraine out of Russia's sphere of influence for a while. This is quite literally poking the bear. Neither the US/NATO or Russia actually care what the Ukrainians want.
In my opinion the side who is pro democracy and openness automatically has the moral high ground. It doesn't matter much if they benefit from it themselves. In this case it is the US and partly the EU.
At least, Putin doesn't pretend to care, he always states that he works for the interest of Russians and Russia.
Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:10 am
^^ Yep, George Carlin said it best.

For me, it's 9/11 being a false flag inside job. No real evidence. Just fits my personal narrative and image of the American empire, and it's not like it hasn't happened before...

http://listverse.com/2014/11/10/10-insi ... n-enemies/
Daniele Ganser seems to have some solid points about this subject.

And I would had that what we learn about the holocaust is very unlikely to be true, but I fear that even here, this is outside of what we can talk about.
But I'm open to have my mind changed, and if someone wants to provide answer to the few points I have, and this forum is probably the only place where I might get answers.

User avatar
bryan
Posts: 641
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 2:01 am
Location: mostly Bay Area

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by bryan » Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:03 am

"North Korea" hasn't hacked anything. Ever.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 5191
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by jennypenny » Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:24 am

Hard not to think of WTC 7 with Grenfell Tower still standing, although many have admitted it was pulled at this point.

User avatar
Chad
Posts: 3769
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Chad » Tue Jun 20, 2017 6:49 am

Chad wrote:
Tue Feb 02, 2016 12:26 pm
This suggests the vast majority of conspiracy theories are bogus:

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35411684
Just bumping the thread with this again.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 5191
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by jennypenny » Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:43 am

@Chad -- That doesn't mean they're all bogus. Even Kerry and McCain have let it slip that WTC 7 was pulled. That doesn't mean I think the images of planes flying into WTC 1 & 2 were holograms or that the illuminati planned the attack. It just means that there's another story there that was buried under the main story (sorry for the bad pun).

It's not that there's some vast conspiracy every time. Most of the time, it's probably just poorly thought out excuses to cover up stupid mistakes by those in authority (sometimes I think old-school types forget that everything is recorded and captured these days so they can't ignore evidence hoping it will go away). And any cop will tell you that there's always a piece of evidence that doesn't fit the scene so sometimes there are facts that can't be reconciled.

Every once in a while though you get something like WTC 7 ...

User avatar
Chad
Posts: 3769
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Chad » Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:53 am

No, but how many end up being true? An incredibly small amount. Even the ones that end up being "true" mostly don't tend to be conspiracy theories by strict definition.

Could you post the links for the evidence of WTC 7? I don't remember ever seeing anything that seemed legitimate.

Old-school types definitely forget about tech/being recorded constantly. It always amazes me what these people put in emails.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 5191
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by jennypenny » Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:22 pm

I'm not home so I don't have access to my list of references, but here's link to the current campaign from the big architects and engineers group determined to get NIST to change their report. They (A & E) have been relentless because, they say, you can't say that steel buildings that catch fire simply fall down. If that were true, any high rise steel building would be vulnerable to collapse in the event of a fire.

You can also search youtube for their videos and the ones of McCain, Kerry, Silverstein (the owner) and first responders indicating they were pulling the building.

I don't know why it was done and have no idea whether the charges could have been set during the 8 1/2 hours between the first tower being hit and the collapse of WTC 7 shortly after 5pm that day.

Stahlmann
Posts: 194
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 6:05 pm

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Stahlmann » Tue Jun 20, 2017 2:28 pm

jennypenny wrote:
Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:22 pm
I'm not home so I don't have access to my list of references, but here's link to the current campaign from the big architects and engineers group determined to get NIST to change their report. They (A & E) have been relentless because, (1) they say, you can't say that steel buildings that catch fire simply fall down. If that were true, any high rise steel building would be vulnerable to collapse in the event of a fire.

(2) You can also search youtube for their videos and the ones of McCain, Kerry, Silverstein (the owner) and first responders indicating they were pulling the building.

I don't know why it was done and have no idea whether the charges could have been set during the 8 1/2 hours between the first tower being hit and the collapse of WTC 7 shortly after 5pm that day.
My response is from this perspective: normal guy (before 8 years ago) -> real hardcore nut about conspiracies (8-7 years ago) ->try to not care, but be normal (nowadays) (I spend so much time there :lol: )

(1) Catch a light steel bar. Put into the fire. Find a hammer. Put out the bar from the fire. Use the hammer to play with the steel. You do not need to cross X temperature to obtain plastic steel. Above certain temperature steel tends to be ductile anyway. This the science they should teach in the schools . (This tackles the most common objection about right temperature)

I must say that I know fellow mech engs who do not catch that :lol: The irony is they are further in career, even in R&D! :D

(2) Insurances tend to be lower than the cost of the thing you want to cover. Do you think somebody wants to earn X money when they paid Y money (X<Y)? That makes no sense.

Personally, I must say that that kind of movies are really convincing... You are being caught by them or not. I have not figured why it works that way.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1672
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Riggerjack » Tue Jun 20, 2017 7:40 pm

They (A & E) have been relentless because, they say, you can't say that steel buildings that catch fire simply fall down. If that were true, any high rise steel building would be vulnerable to collapse in the event of a fire.
OK, forgive my ignorance, but is anybody still blathering about the collapse of the WTC? I thought this was over with 15 years ago. (I was literally trying to figure out what the WTO had done to set off conspiracy fanboys this time :roll: world trade conference #7? What could they be talking about?!?)

Annealed streel us way too weak to support modern steel buildings. Fortunately, modern steel buildings are made of steel and concrete. All that burns is the carpet and furniture, not enough heat to anneal steel.

Add impact damage and a jet full of fuel, and the situation changes.

This isn't something someone with Google and an engineering toolbox website couldn't verify with less time than it would take to write it up.

A comparable situation happened in El Paso, in the early 90's. A fuel truck hit the center divider on an overpass over I-10. The fire annealed the steel beams of the overpass, and it also had to be rebuilt.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 5191
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by jennypenny » Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:02 pm

WTC 7 wasn't impacted or doused by jet fuel.

Official report https://www.nist.gov/pba/questions-and- ... estigation

Campitor
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by Campitor » Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:19 am

It seems that collapse of all WTC buildings during the 911 event can be explained logically by engineering principles which debunk any theory regarding controlled/planned demolition. Its mind boggling that anyone still believes the feds planted explosives in any of the buildings "undetected" which caused the buildings to collapse.

My plausible conspiracy theory - the radio telescopes being used to track heavenly objects are being used for surveillance.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 5191
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by jennypenny » Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:38 am

one more time ...

As I said, I'm not talking about the twin towers or any fed conspiracy on 9/11. And I only became interested in WTC7 after seeing the owner of the building talk about pulling the building on a PBS special in 2002. First responders said they had been told to evacuate the area because they were going to bring it down, and heard the telltale tones of warning. Kerry and McCain have said that a decision was made to bring it down in a "controlled fashion" which makes perfect sense. It seems reasonable to me that they would decide bringing it down was the best course of action given the events of that day. So why would an official report issued 5 years later (separate from the Commission report) insist that it had collapsed? I find that odd, especially given how many qualified people find the explanation of spontaneous collapse implausible. But of course the minute you question anything about 9/11 people assume you're a member of the Jesse Ventura thermite paint brigade and dismiss you as a nut job.

I wonder how many of you think it's possible that United 93 was shot down. I actually think it's unlikely, but I know a lot of 'normal' people who feel differently and are afraid to say it.

I wear my tin foil hat proudly. :D

ffj
Posts: 1401
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:16 am

Re: Conspiracy theory you deem most likely to be true

Post by ffj » Wed Jun 21, 2017 9:21 am

@jenny
Unfortunately 9/11 is yet another topic one can't talk about without huge divisiveness. But my attention would focus on how the hijackers were able to fly the plane into the Pentagon at ground level and why there isn't more footage of said plane. Think about how incredible it would be to be able to commandeer a plane you've never flown before under highly stressful conditions and actually find and hit your target so precisely. Not saying it is impossible but highly improbable.

Regarding the collapse or non-collapse of certain building one thing I immediately noticed about Grenfell is that the majority of the fire was on the exterior in regards to the cosmetic panels. That makes a difference. And I thought that I had heard that in regards to WTC 7 that the diesel tanks for the emergency generators had been compromised and were burning? If true, that would make a difference too.

I read the 9-11 report cover to cover and according to that publication, it was impossible to have shot down Fight 93 because they didn't know where it was until it crashed and the response times of the scrambled fighter jets didn't jive with the downing of the plane.

I haven't gotten too far down this rabbit hole in regards to 9-11 partly because we lost 343 firefighters that day. I don't want to think they were disposable.

Post Reply