Conspiracy theories

Toothache

Let the music play!
is a Community Leader Alumnus
I am fascinated with the idea of conspiracy theories. Not the theories themselves, some of those are pretty wild and fantastic and too impossible to be true. The attitude people have towards conspiracies is the aspect that fascinates me the most.

Now, it is pretty clear the governments of the world keep a lot of secrets, for many different reasons. There are legitimate reasons to keep these secrets from the genuine public. There are many reasons while secrets are kept in order to protect someone who really should be investigated though, so it is not a perfect system by any means. People with power will use that power to cover their asses if they can, and people in government do have a lot of influence.

As for the more fantastic conspiracies, there is an element of truth in all of them, but people often jump to the wrong conclusions. "Oh there's mysterious craft and lights sighted from Area 51, it must be UFOs." Not to mention that Area 51 has been the testing ground for highly advanced aircraft for over 50 years. Even the conspiracies with a strong element of truth, like the assassination of JFK, has a few holes.

Here's my concern. Governments need to be held to account. If a government official or representative does something wrong, or orders something illegal, they need to be held to account. Governments often have to do things that they know will be unpopular with the public at large, so they try to give it as little public light as possible. If people try to bring that into the public eye, is it a conspiracy?

So I suppose my real question is - Is is a conspiracy if it is true? Of course, proving a conspiracy to be true is hard at best and downright impossible at worst, which is why they are called conspiracy theories. A lot of people believe that JFK's death was a government action. There are people who believe 9/11 was an inside job. Are they crazy, or is there some real evidence to support these theories?

It is no secret that they are growing over 90% of the world's opium in Afghanistan, even though 8 years before the Taliban actually destroyed the poppy crops and drug production. Does the American government have a hand in world drug production? Some might argue they do, and have had for decades. You can see how people can take simple facts like this (growing opium) and string it into a convincing sounding theory (American government manages the illegal drugs industry). It certainly doesn't work to destroy the theory, no matter what you believe.

There is obviously real conspiracy and real corruption. With the dismissive attitude of a lot of people who investigate these conspiracies, it is hard for real corruption to be rooted out. It is no good for government to investigate themselves, because that is a good way for them to hide the real truth.

tl;dr, basically how do you feel about conspiracies, and which conspiracies really should be independently investigated and which ones are really just people blowing hot air?
 
I try to avoid reading about conspiracy theories as much as possible, because I'm already paranoid enough about our government.

One conspiracy theory that I used to research a lot though was the Roswell UFO crash thing that is p interesting imo. However there is so much mixed information that you don't really know what to believe!!
 
There is no doubt in my mind that there have been conspiracies, and there will be more. Unfortunately the nature of a conspiracy theory is that it is just that - a theory. Of course Governments want to cover their asses, even when it comes to their opponents, because admitting to cheating causes such uproar (Nixon), and is really detrimental to the entire Government, and other Governments. As long as you are on the outside of anything, Government or Post Office, you will never truly know how it functions, and what it doesn’t tell us.

On the other hand, being overly- paranoid is not advisable. Mostly for mental health issues but really, even a theory needs at least some plausible evidence. There are many factors to consider with conspiracies: why are they brought up? Who wants it to be known/ kept secret? Only by understanding the context of what the theory implies to others, and who would benefit can you get a true understanding of conspiracy origins. Also, most theories usually derive from a certain “truth”, which is tangled/ morphed (like area51 was seen with advanced aircraft taken to be UFOs).

I think the middle ground is to have a little faith in the Governing bodies. The way human society works naturally appoints leaders or a leader, who ultimately have the most influence or power. But in general I trust the people behind the jobs enough that I think the public would learn if something truly awful approached, if not they probably have a pretty good reason not to say. Again, I just hope it’s not for their personal gain. If anyone denies information wrongly, I do feel they should be accounted for. It’s just “wrongly” is such loose terminology. Usually public opinion decides the course of action, even if public opinion is massively influenced by the press and news (which the Government can censor in the first place). That is why it’s vital to make choices and opinions on a logical basis, rather than reading magazines and chatting. Ultimately, too my people are influenced by the media that you won’t get very far going against it, and that will probably never change. The only thing that can really hold a corrupt/ secretive Government to justice is another Government. And the Governments will have similar interests when it comes to conspiracies. But again, try and put some faith in the Government, because it was the people who voted them in, and the people who can vote them out.
 
In the case of the 9/11 conspiracies, I believe a factor in people believing them is they're too scared by the alternative. The idea that a bunch of guys in a house in Afghanistan can successfully pull off the mass killing of three thousand people in New York. I suspect that, perhaps on a subconscious level, it's people not wanting to believe that that makes them believe something else caused 9/11.

And then, of course, anti-Semitism is alive and well, and always seems to be a driving force behind a lot of conspiracy theories.

And the Governments will have similar interests when it comes to conspiracies.
On the other hand, the Obama administration would love to "out" some big conspiracy committed by the Bush administration - although they might seek to wait until the next presidential election. (And the Bush administration would have done the same to the Clinton administration if it could have.)
 
Or they can rig the voting machines to ensure they stay in power.
I meant most MEDC Governments are voted in on votes. Of course there are so many examples where this has not been the case. Anyone who is in Britain knows the voting system needs a change: the liberals got 25% of the vote with less than 9% of seats. I'm not ~that~ familiar with American voting policies, but on the whole I was under the impression that public opinion usually wins. Again, the people in power naturally have the most influence and well, power.

cantab said:
On the other hand, the Obama administration would love to "out" some big conspiracy committed by the Bush administration - although they might seek to wait until the next presidential election. (And the Bush administration would have done the same to the Clinton administration if it could have.)
Again i'm unfamiliar with the workings of the American Government, but honestly anything that deters people's faith in the Government is bad for the whole Government. This isn't about Candidate vs. Candidate, because if Obama has done [whatever] it is detrimental for the whole Government, not just Obama and his party. People want politics to be fair and relatively simple. Because people want to see that, that is another reason why most conspiracies and shunned.

cantab said:
In the case of the 9/11 conspiracies, I believe a factor in people believing them is they're too scared by the alternative. The idea that a bunch of guys in a house in Afghanistan can successfully pull off the mass killing of three thousand people in New York. I suspect that, perhaps on a subconscious level, it's people not wanting to believe that that makes them believe something else caused 9/11.
Excellent point on what people "want to believe". Although, I think it is probably a bit more than "a bunch of guys in a house". It's much easier to destroy something than to make something - that's a pretty much universal rule. Subconsciously, people will think a lot more, but normally the only ideas that actually surface need some sort of catalyst - like the media or gossip - to ignite sufficent interest.

9//11 was awful, and I am unsure whether that particular incident was terrorist or otherwise. In some ways, the Government may have benefited from an "attack", even if indirectly. I'd even be sceptical to assume something of a controlled pact - almost like in "iron man". On the other hand, 9/11 was so awful, I don't see any Government wanting to destroy some of it's own major buildings and kill so many people. But you could argue because it was so bad, that's why it is believable, etc. You can almost always make an argument either way on these conspiracy theories. If 9/11 was a conspiracy that would be so disasterous for Governments Globally. However, on this particular case my personal bias thinks 9/11 was not a conspiracy. Some other examples I am much sceptical of.
 
I love conspiracy theories too! The crazy ones are always good for a laugh and some of them actually make you think. I believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was not a lone gunman and more of a lackey (he did fire shots, but he was meant to be caught). I want to see that one investigated.

Also I want to know about Area 51 and Hangar 18. I am almost certain nothing involving UFOs goes on there other than the creation of advanced aircraft that, possibly, might look like UFOs. I am just curious as to why its so damn top secret.
 
I am just curious as to why its so damn top secret.
Perceived military advantage to the secrecy. Remember most of the Area 51 stuff was in the Cold War.
Incidentally nowadays I doubt anything really important happens at Area 51, it's too well known. The real secret stuff will have moved somewhere else.
 
Speaking of conspiracies, I've always been really like, concerned about the "Illuminati"...
The (possible) fact that people in our government are in on it without anyone knowing is kind of scary...

Events like Roswell show how the government can hide things
 
Area 51 has some cool stuff going on. Mostly it probably is some military airplane research base. It probably focuses on trying to make fighter jets that can go into space and be invisible and perhaps even jetpacks.
 
I don't really know much about conspiracy theories, but stuff like the Illuminati one and the 9/11 stuff sound really creepy to me, and when you get to think that the Government is really just made out of people like any of us, who may lust for power, and could actually let themselves be corrupted by it, it just makes them scarier =S.
 

cim

happiness is such hard work
is a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
Or they can rig the voting machines to ensure they stay in power.
Oh come on. An article by a random source claims early voting machines for a notoriously unpopular candidate were rigged... before the election... in a manner completely visible and transparent to the voter, when technology exists that can rig machines without any notification? Please. You can't just parrot this one incredibly dubious article out every time you want to claim governments are evil.
 

Fatecrashers

acta est fabula
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Top Artist Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Historically, the CIA has permitted drug trafficking in Latin America at one time or another in order to support certain groups or individuals; one such example was the protection they gave to Manuel Noriega so he would not be prosecuted by the US Drug Enforcement Administration. I really wouldn't be surprised if the US government still has a hand in the illegal drug trade today.
 
I don't subscribe to many conspiracy theories, but I've read my fair share of them.
Some just seem a little far-fetched, like the moon landing conspiracies but a particular DVD I watched about 9/11 was pretty convincing.

It focussed on the fact burning point of jet fuel was not high enough to melt the steel supports and that 'super-thermite' residue was found on said supports. Also that the site was closed and so tightly controlled/concealed after the blasts.

I was under the assumption that the deaths for 9/11 were comparitively low in relation to how many deaths could have been? Planned? I don't think anyone will know what really happened for a long time.
 

Toothache

Let the music play!
is a Community Leader Alumnus
On the subject of 9/11, has there been any real explanation about what happened to building 7? It's the most fascinating aspect to me, especially since Reuters was apparently reporting about it an hour before it collapsed, and BBC even did a video report saying building 7 had collapsed [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7SwOT29gbc]WITH THE BUILDING STILL STANDING IN THE BACKGROUND[/url]. It wasn't hit by a plane like the Twin Towers, and it was too far away for any debree to have hit, let alone cause it to collapse in freefall.
 
BBC even did a video report saying building 7 had collapsed WITH THE BUILDING STILL STANDING IN THE BACKGROUND.
It was on fire with a twenty storey hole in the side. Fire-fighters pulled out because they thought it was going to collapse. Quite possible the BBC would have misreported.

It wasn't hit by a plane like the Twin Towers, and it was too far away for any debree to have hit
That's a fucking lie. The Verizon building was right next to WTC7, it got hit by debris from the towers, you're saying WTC7 was too far away? The Deusche bank building was a similar distance, this is what it looked like ten days after the collapse. I hope I don't need to highlight the few storey long chunk of the outside of the main WTC towers stuck in the side of the dozen-storey gash. Please, do some research.
 
People make conspiracy theories because of the human tendency to see connections between events even if there actually aren't any. The brain is very good at piecing together clues that seem to be related, even if they are not, and would rather believe something that turns out to be false than not believe something that turns out to be true. Imagine an early human who sees some rustling in the grass. If the proto-human thinks it's a predator when it's actually something harmless, nothing is lost, but if he thinks it's a harmless animal when it's actually a predator, the proto-human dies. Humans have evolved to perceive risk even when there isn't any.

People also make conspiracy theories when facts don't fit into their ideologies. Instead of changing their ideologies, people change the facts they believe. Take the 9/11 conspiracy theories. At the time of 9/11, some liberals did not want to believe that there was an external enemy that was bent on murdering American citizens. Such an enemy would have to be handled militarily, and an enemy that required war didn't fit into some people's isolationist ideologies. So instead of changing their views on war, those liberals instead chose to believe a different set of facts, one in which there was no external enemy and the 9/11 attacks had instead been perpetrated by a warmongering government. By choosing to change their conceptions of the facts, conspiracy theorists cement their ideologies even further, and feel good about having their ideologies "confirmed."
 
Some of my favourites are the Pearl Harbour conspiracy and the moon landing. Now, the moon landing conspiracy is absolutely ridiculous, but it is still pretty funny. Hell, Mythbusters even proved a lot of the facts that were the basis of the conspiracy wrong. I have no doubt the moon landing actually happened.

Pearl Harbour, however, is a very interesting conspiracy, and actually brings up a few very valid points. Now, I doubt there are very many people here who haven't heard of the Attack on Pearl Harbour, but on the off-chance there are, a basic outline:

During World War II, Pearl Harbour was America's biggest naval port on the West Coast. On December 7, 1941, the Imperial Japanese launched a surprise attack on Pearl Harbour, in order to prevent American interference in Japan's war in South East Asia. This attack put the United States into World War II.

Now, the conspiracy states that President Roosevelt knew of the attack beforehand, and let it happen to gain the support of the American people entering the war on the side of the Allies. Now, there is a bit of evidence to back this up.

First of all, none of America's three Aircraft Carriers in the Pacific Fleet were stationed at Pearl Harbour at the time of attack. Aircraft Carriers are very important, and the significance of them not being at America's largest naval base in the Pacific is very odd. Secondly, Chins supposedly picked up a Japanese message on Nov. 30th, 1941, saying that Japan was declaring war on the United States. Now, it is unknown whether or not this is true.

But, what is true, and what is probably the most significant piece of evidence to support this theory, is the fact that NONE of America's three aircraft carriers in the Pacific were stationed at Pearl Harbour at the time of attack. Now, what is the truth? Hard to know, all I'm saying it that there is evidence that the United States could have known about the attack before it happened.
 
Pearl harbour conspiracy
There is quite literally a mass of evidence for Pearl Harbour. America practically stopped all trading with Japan at this time, and essentially starved Japan of what it needed. At the same time America was offering a huge tax-free help to the Allies. Quite interesting policies for a "neutral" country. It was definitely within Roosevelt's interests to enter WW2, but he needed an "excuse". America definitely wanted Pearl Harbour, or something similar, to occur. Japan had little reason not to attack in 1941. As conspiracies go, Pearl Harbour is probably one of the most obvious examples. I don't think the question is if it was a conspiracy, the question is more along the lines of how far America really provoked Japan into attacking, or "how big was the conspiracy".

Although, I think overall that this is not a bad example of the Government's contraversial choices. What did happen (America entering) is far better than what could of happened if Pearl Harbour didn't happen (possible complete Facist domination of Europe). I'm pretty sure America did win the War, and apart from the horrendus bombing and the cold war to follow, overall WW2 was a pretty lucky escape for everyone, and if it derived from a conspiracy then I'm okay with that.
 
I'm not sure I see the need for any conspiracy regarding Pearl Harbour. Imperial Japan wanted to make such an attack, conspiracy or not. Indeed, they attacked precisely because they thought the USA would enter the war anyway. The Pearl Harbour attack made Japan's expectations a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Although, had the Americans had intelligence of the impending attack, I can see that not being used fully - but not for conspiratorial reasons, instead to ensure they can gain future intelligence the same way. The last thing you want to do is let someone know you've broken their codes.

On the absence of the aircraft carriers - that statement means little without the context of how common or rare it was for all three to be not at Pearl Harbour.
 
I don't really believe in any alternate accounts of 9/11. I think the JFK killing was done also by accomplices of Lee Harvey Oswald. Some people seriously think Israel owns the US. This is called the Zionist conspiracy theory. They basically launch hate tirades against Jews on the same level as Martin Luther did.( The German dude who played a key role in starting Protestantism and hated by the Catholic Church, not the black guy who helped end white oppression of his race.) They keep parroting on about why Israel is evil and is trying to exterminate Palestinians through military aggression. The biggest rebuttal to all this nonsense is looking at Palestinian demographic figures. Palestinians are growing faster than Jews in Israel. They show no signs of abnormal killings or anything genocidal. This simple fact shows that Israel isn't doing some covert genocide of Palestinians. Anyway I feel that it is all crap stated by Arab nationalists to get support for a massive war to push all the Jews out of their rightful land.
 

Eraddd

One Pixel
is a Community Leader Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
I'm not sure I see the need for any conspiracy regarding Pearl Harbour. Imperial Japan wanted to make such an attack, conspiracy or not. Indeed, they attacked precisely because they thought the USA would enter the war anyway. The Pearl Harbour attack made Japan's expectations a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Although, had the Americans had intelligence of the impending attack, I can see that not being used fully - but not for conspiratorial reasons, instead to ensure they can gain future intelligence the same way. The last thing you want to do is let someone know you've broken their codes.

On the absence of the aircraft carriers - that statement means little without the context of how common or rare it was for all three to be not at Pearl Harbour.
I doubt they had broken the Japanese codes in any way. The codes that the Japanese primarily used were broken by the Americans later in the war (and probably led to the Japanese's defeat).

On the subject of the aircraft carriers, they were carrying planes to various outlying ports and I believe their home port was at Pearl Harbour. I'm not sure the frequency by which these carriers leave the harbour to deliver airplanes/supplies/other stuff to places, but don't usually most ships dock at their home port for regular maintenance?
 

Toothache

Let the music play!
is a Community Leader Alumnus
There are conspiracies that affect us on a daily basis, sometimes without realising it. For instance, flouride in the water. Flouridation occurs in drinking water in most countries, but the negative effects are not talked about by and large. Dental flourosis in children is perhaps the most widely reported on, since it is recommended that children should not have flouridated water because it will damage the teeth from an early age.

Another, less known aspect is that the flouride that is put in the water is a brand name, and as such can mean dozens of different chemicals, not just the sodium flouride people think of. Many of these chemicals are the byproducts of industrial processes, and because of international laws these chemicals cannot be dumped into the sea. These chemicals are repackaged as flouride, and put into the water supply.

There are conspiracies around food too. Bisphenol A is one such chemical, which is a byproduct of the plastics industry. This substance is found in the lining of food cans, in baby plastics and many other places. This substance is not chemically inert like glass however, and has been proven to leak into the food. Bisphenol A has been linked to impotence and cancer, and there are now calls for it to be removed from packaging and baby products - in fact, several countries are doing so or are making moves to do so.

The conspiracy revolving around Bisphenol A concerns population reduction. This substance was discovered in the 1890s, and then the negative side effects were apparently known. This substance was then encouraged to be put into packaging by design with the hope of reducing the population growth and killing people with cancer. The conspiracy around flouride involves dumbing down the population to make them more docile and manageable. Are both of these true? Well, it is hard to say - there is evidence that the negative effects of both flouride and Bisphenol A were known about but either supressed or otherwise discourage people from looking into it. Despite that, many people have been concerned about flouride for decades, and several states in the US do not flouridate the water.

However, there is a new push for babies to drink water with flouride added, even though it does not help babies, and in fact, the ADA advice is to not give flouridated water in formula to babies under 12 months. Get em while they are young?
 
It seem easy to suspect that the conspiracy theories are themselves conspiracies. Staraptor Call touched on this - are 9/11 conspiracy theories being orchestrated by those seeking to make the Bush administration (or just government in general) look bad? American people seem stupid - politicians and businesses involved in education don't want people to point the finger at poor quality schooling, so instead they create stories about fluoride making kids dumb. There are those who don't think NASA should get the budget it does, so they claim the Moon landings were faked in an effort to reduce support for NASA.

Honestly, conspiracy conspiracy theories are far more believable than the original conspiracy theories. Astroturfing is somewhat similar, in that a viewpoint is put forward apparently by the general public but in reality by those with an agenda.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top