As Alex Jones proclaimed in Conspiracy Rising: “No one is safe, do you understand that? Pure evil is running wild everywhere at the highest levels.”
On his Infowars.com Web site, Jones headlines his page with “Because There Is a War on for Your Mind.” True enough, which is why science and reason must always prevail over fear and irrationality, and conspiracy mongering traffics in the latter at the expense of the former.
SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN ONLINE
Comment on this article at ScientificAmerican.com/sep2012
Subscribe
Buy This Issue
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
107 Comments
Add CommentThe lure of conspiracies is that it makes the believer special, in his own eyes and the eyes of many. He knows the secret, he has the inside scoop. It's a matter of having inside information nobody else has, unless they are wise enough to be in on the matter
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHe mentions the JFK assassination. The single shooter version never rang true to me, even back in 1963 when I read the account then. According to Jessie Ventura’s Conspiracy show, he revealed that E. Howard Hunt, the convicted Watergate Burglar during Nixon’s administration, confessed on his death bed to helping plan the assassination. The tape of the confession was played on the show. His son lives in hiding and in possession of the tape. Jessie’s show has since been taken off the air. Our government told him they didn’t like what he was doing, that is broadcasting the truth. He now lives in Mexico due to government harassment. I hope this meets with your test of science and reason.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI would also point out the Bolivian Grove in California, where the influential and wealthy heads of state and other personal citizens meet to discuss world matters. Also the Builderbergers recently met in June at the Westfield’s Marriot hotel in Chantilly, Virginia. I suppose they all met at these locations to talk about the Superbowl or upcoming Olympics. I don’t think so. Their secrecy germinates rumors and conspiracy theories. It would be wonderful if they would admit to their meetings and tell us what their agendas are. Does this meet your test of reason?
The major financial institutions including the Federal Reserve Bank and their secret owners cause more suspicion as they continue to manipulate stocks and currencies around the world. It’s no wonder we have conspiracies as we outsiders are forced to fill in the blanks and read between the lines of the mainstream news reports, which we know are controlled. (More conspiracy to add to the list)
I don’t read Alex Jones website regularly, but I should more often. I say hooray for him.
These above points raise enough questions for me to meet the reason part of your skepticism.
I mispelled Jesse's first name and it is the Bohemian Grove, not Bolivian.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI live so near the Bohemians, that the private jets the conspirators arrive and depart in, fly over my house...escorted by UFO's.... On another note I have always wondered why UFO's needed windows in the 1950's and if they have stealth technology and also why they have landing lights at night...it's a puzzlement!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisto conspire: to plan secretly with others.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSounds like the way a lot of the world works, especially governments and finance. Hence, the world is awash in conspiracies, Doctor Shermer. But then governments and financial institutions are typically the sources of the "official narratives" that are distrusted. Your article might be more useful if you could suggest some way around this problem for the rest of us folks trying to avoid conspiracy theorizing as a vocation. Also remember that the best place for a nefarious conspirator to hide is inside a conspiracy theory which by its nature is infinite in complexity, there is always another layer needed to cover up the inconsistencies.
The best way for two people to keep a secret is for one to kill the other. As stated in the article, conspiracies are non-falsifiable hypothesis. There are the refuge for those without proof.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis, and the article refered to, are very unscientific. First, they assume that there are no conspiracies by people in power. This is falsified by both operation Gladio where Nato deliberately killed, kidnapped, and maimed people posing as communists to discredit the communsits; and by operation Northwoods where the Joint Chiefs of Staff plotted to blow up people in Miama and blame it on the Cubans to start a war with Cuba. Both of these are documented facts.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis article does not present any facts for any of its pooh poohing, its lumping of all conspiracy theories as delusions.
The Dinosaur Illuminati would like to thank you for believing all their propaganda over the past 200 years, and for continuing to terraform the planet back to a Dinosaur-habitable climate despite the increasingly frantic screeching of most of your scientists over the past half-century or so.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWith your help, soon the world will once again be restored to habitability for Dinosaur-kind, humanity will have driven itself extinct in the process, and with that, the dinosaur reclaimers will emerge from their cryo pods on the dark side of the moon, and will return to the Earth triumphant.
It couldn't have been done without you.
That's the thing. There are actually bizarre government programs and conspiracies, but actual conspiracy theorists are prisoners of the argument to logic.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf MK-ULTRA is real (the program where the U.S. military experimented with LSD on servicemen) then certainly, every other weird thing must be real. I also believe that, without enough wishful thinking in conspiracy theories, agencies will actually embrace the facade of conspiracy imagery. A good example of this is the very terrifying UFO-like appearance of the newest lines of drones. How horrifying would an actual working flying saucer secretly built by the military actuall be? Why not... There's no shortage of money.
My general thought as well. It's not productive to obsess on speculations but, to the extent that there's reliable evidence that they really are out to get you, you're not paranoid!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEveryone agrees that there is nothing more annoying than this new floating facetwit bar, a true pain in the back. Now, and I can prove this, this is a ploy by the climate change deniers to get intelligent readers away from SciAm. Indeed, if you look at the enormous amount of garbage posted on facetwit, it is obvious that there is very little intelligent life on those sites. So the climate deniers' conspiracy is meant to drive intelligent SciAm readers away with that irritating floating idiocy while at the same time subliminally pushing them towards facetwit where they will run into intellectual low-lives of the worst kind who will then bombard them with utter climate-denial garbage until the warmists give up. The result will be more nuclear fission plants, cheaper gas, double-size hamburgers and a down-sized government. Unfortunately this plot is being countered by the communists in the US army who plan to make the armed forces more bio efficient. Fortunately Paul Ryan has a plant to save the planet from those democrats who want to destroy Wall Street which is the guarant of international freedom, liberty and equality. I also have this theory that the new batman crap is in fact a PR stint sponsored by a secret billionaires' club. Think about it: an ultra-rich billionaire is "saving" the world from someone who is trying to help the poor and the homeless in a city exploited and enslaved by a very few, very rich investors. The conspiracy is to make an enormously expensive movie with a lot of blinding gimmicks that passed the ultra-rich as the good one and portrays the one who wants to save the poor as a joker. Think about it, floating toolbar crap... how did the batty man become rich... only possible because SciAm is owned by the saudi-russian alliance for world power.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisjctyler: Nah, too fantastical.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat pooh, poohing. jimmywat? The article is about the psychology of conspiracy theorists. It makes no claim to any insight into the truth or otherwise of the various concoctions of conspiracy held to be true by such people, other than stating the rather obvious truth that it cannot be the case that someone both faked their own death and was murdered, for example.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI like conspiracists. They keep people from finding out what's really going on! Mwahaha!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisProbability is inherently flawed by its first dependence upon context (which can be faulty) and second dependence upon a mean. It rules out exceptions and new trends, therefore probability is a gamble like any other, simply a slightly better gamble.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSchizotypal brain types are highly adept at pattern recognition. It's much like overclocking a computer in that there is a risk trade for better performance.
What we have then is the extremes at both ends, those that believe in nothing but the norm, the mindless sheep awaiting orders. And at the other end those that believe nothing they are told and no longer have a coherent grasp of reality because of their missing pool of shared experiences.
Do you choose to get every last bit of the signal and end up with a lot of noise or do you choose to weed out every last drop of noise and end up with very little signal?
It's quite obvious that most people sit at the edges and are mentally disabled in one form or the other. (with insanity being the more easily noticed of the two disabilities)
But where is the middle?
On the positive side, conspiracy theories have diminished with the rise of more media sources. Society is less influened by 'a' authority figure.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn the 1970's if some whacko wrote the 19th 'fool proof' book on the JFK assasination, alien construction of the pyramids, area 51, etc. then society collectively was tuned into the same interview on NBC, Johnny Carson, etc. It was 'the buz at work the next morning. Today the whackos have more media outlets but only command a niche following of fellow whackos. Much of the population no longer 'defers' to false authority. We have become are cynical of 'experts'. There never was a Commie under the bed... Vietnam ('nuff said)... WMD's in Iraq...we've become jaded in a positive way.
"Does this meet your test of reason?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNo, of course it doesn't! Death bed 'confessions' from spy novelists (you know, people who make stuff up for a living!)? Hearsay evidence from sons (who, of course in no way benefit from the publicity and the media attention!)? A show 'taken off the air' that you can still view every episode of on the TruTV website and a man skulking in Mexico who has been so often seen in America in the past year that one begins to wonder whether anyone else is ever mentioned in the US media (and incidentally has just published a new book without intervention in the country that apparently holds him in fear of his life)? And just to top it off, he's an ex pro-wrestler, a profession in which nobody ever conspired to fake anything or stretch credibility?
Curmudgeon...well stated
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI don't see why believing that HIV was created in a lab would be considered a conspiracy or a theory worth rejecting. It's been known that vaccines are grown in monkeys, particularly chimpanzees, and that the end product was not properly screened to remove foreign DNA/RNA. This is evident in the cases of SV40, where people inherited a cancer causing disease from polio vaccines ... 1977 was the Hepatitis B vaccine program. I see no problem in discussing that the theory of a hunter who accidentally got cut would be a greater threat to the world than a world renowned health institution intentionally spreading something to get rid of the chaff (the tax burden that so many rich people want to avoid).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisConspiracies thrive because some people cannot accept that anything is outside of human control.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisrscott...you DO realize, don't you that it has been scientifically PROVEN that all shots that were fired at JFK came from the EXACT same spot. So if there was a second shooter, they were standing right next to each other in the same window. As for Jesse Ventura...his show was taken off the air for TERRIBLE ratings.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSeriously...you need to seek professional help for your delusions. Oh...and Ron Paul has ZERO chance of getting nominated. Just thought you might like to know that.
hey, if you look into the evidence of how 9/11 was a conspiracy, I'm willing to say every mainstream news official story is fair game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eZI3xL-7fQ
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisConspiracy theories thrive because of people who can't accept the world the way it is. In a perverse way, they want something evil to be going on because it would add excitement to their dull lives, so they suspend rationality to let themselves believe it. They just have too much time on their hands. It's like how I wished there were a creator who loved me and was waiting for me in paradise at the end of my life. The difference being that I'm (almost) certain there isn't. Either that or they're mentally unstable or susceptible to delusions because some sort of drug abuse.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI wonder how much such beliefs are correlated with other silly beliefs like religion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSeriously, if you're brought up with the worldview that it's OK to believe in nonexistent things (as opposed to understanding "The emperor's new clothes"), doesn't that make you more susceptible to crackpot ideas?
I find conspiracy theorists believing in mutually exclusive conspiracies very similar to some supporters of alternative medicine. People often simultaneously believe in various forms of alternative medicine that seem to be logically exclusive of one another.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThey said Operation Mockingbird was a conspiracy. The Church committee exposed it. Google it, because it's still going on right here on this site. They also exposed the former theory, now confirmed fact that the CIA assassinates people left and right.
The reasons people believe in ANY theory is how compelling the evidence is.
Saying that "conspiracy theories" "traffic" in "fear and irrationality" is like telling a police officer that he's scaring people with irrational nonsense when he says that whomever robbed the bank had to have a key, and therefore it's an "inside job".
When a wife has sex with her brother in law, the two are conspiring behind the husband's back to have an affair. If I tell you she's screwing your brother and you tell me that this is a theory based in fear and irrationality, and can't refute the evidence then you're in denial.
It's disrespectful and childish to treat people that way. "Conspiracy theory" was what J. Edgar Hoover called the mafia. Guess what, the mafia is real people.
Asbestosis was a conspiracy theory for 30 years. Agent Orange being toxic was a conspiracy theory. Cointelpro was a conspiracy that actually happened. The Federal Reserve was created by a now famous one between various bankers on Jekyll Island.
Don't be ignorant and afraid of Operation Mockingbird, understand it, and don't let this propaganda rule over you.
No, the truth is that nobody wants to believe those things. Some people are gullible. But most of the people who believe in those "theories" believe in them for the same reasons that a police officer "believes" in a theory about the bank robbery being an inside job when the vault wasn't even scratched.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJ. Edgar Hoover called the mafia a conspiracy theory. People called Operation Mockingbird one as well. The Church committee found out it was true. Same with CIA assassinations Same with MK-ULTRA.
The truth is that the people who don't believe in such theories are often ignorant of certain facts, or afraid to admit the ghastly reality that the priest they leave their child with on Sundays could be molesting them. You don't believe it because then you'd have a responsibility to change it. Most people are too cowardly to accept that or their own role in such things like CIA or other people you pay to murder innocent civilians.
You can only view those episodes online if you have a subscription. Otherwise you have to find them on youtube or something.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd yeah, their 9/11 episode was not re-aired like the other episodes because of pressure from Turner/TimeWarner.
Apparently that bothered them more than the congressman saying things about martians before Ventura hands the legislation to him that the guy signed making preparations for interning citizens.
The implication here is that people *want* to believe in conspiracy theories. Perhaps some do. I don't. I don't believe in UFOs or aliens, and have zero interest in debating the legitimacy of the Apollo moon landing. With regard to 9/11 in particular, I'd much rather believe the official story.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHowever, it is precisely because "science and reason must prevail over fear and irrationality" that I cannot accept the premise of the official account. Neither can countless credible physicists, engineers and architects, as well as pilots and aviation experts. In fact, the 9/11 Commission report was dismissed as a whitewash by 60% of the commissioners themselves.
Once one is able to extricate him or herself from the mire of emotionalism and fear that so easily clouds clear judgement, one is able to see the attacks of 9/11 for what they were, terrible as that reckoning may be.
Anyone who doesn't like a good conspiracy theory needs to get a life. You don't have to believe it to explore the logic of the theorists. The official 911 report is so full of holes you would have to be feeble minded not to believe a conspiracy was behind that insurance scam. Does that mean I believe every conspiracy theory that comes down the pipeline? No, of course not. We all know our own government would never plot to kill thousands of people or the president. Right?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI hate conspiracy theories because they can never be resolved to any degree of certainty. They are a perpetual source of frustration.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDespite this, I certainly, wouldn't be so stupid as to claim conspiracies, don't exist. Not all paranoia is irrational, and there are plenty of NGOs and less benign groups conspiring to advance their agendas. After all, it is why they created the CIA... another conspiracy group, conspiring to meet their mandated mission.
Using blanket disbelieving terms does not decrease the conspiracy flux or alter the sometimes dangerous world we live in. GK
The very term "conspiracy theory" has become something of a pejorative these days, and not entirely by accident.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOn November 10, 2001 - some two months following the attacks of September 11 - George W. Bush said in an address to the United Nations: "We must speak the truth about terror. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11..." preemptively relegating any unauthorized theories to the "conspiracy" dustbin. Conspiracy is a secret agreement among two or more persons to commit an act or carry out an action, notably for nefarious purposes
In fact conspiracy is among the most frequently prosecuted crimes in the world. Conspiracy to commit insurance fraud, for example, is rather common.
One of the problems with this article is its attempt to conflate patently ridiculous theories with more sensible ones, making the latter seem equally ridiculous by association. People who reject the findings of the Warren Commission Report as unscientific also believe Stalin was half werewolf, sort of thing.
The question of why people believe conspiracy theories is separate from the question of whether conspiracies exist. Conspiracies provably do exist, whether people acknowledge them or not.
The question is which theories are supported by facts, and which are not. Though, it's probably easier to prove Stalin was half werewolf than it is to prove Oswald acted alone. Maybe that's why Specter came up with that ridiculous "magic bullet" theory.
Jones is clearly a poseur and professional wannabe rabblerouser. If the only tool in your tool box is a hammer, then all the world is a nail.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDespite the ranting of Jones and his credulous followers, sometimes a "conspiracy" really IS a conspiracy! Guy Fawkes really did try to blow up Parliament; A. Lincoln was really killed by J. Wilkes Booth, a conspirator; Julius Caesar did NOT die of old age, etc.etc. Most germane to this article, the reference to the JFK assassination may indeed have been a conspiracy. The principal immediate benefactor was an ambitious vice president who would probably never held the office of president had Kennedy not been killed. He had enormous influence in Texas at the time of the murder. Most of the evidence of the crime has been destroyed or altered, the assassin was conveniently removed by another assassin, and the subsequent investigation consisted of extensive obfuscation and temporizing over a very lengthy time period to allow public sentiment to somewhat abate, before producing results which could only be believed by the most credulous naif. That Johnson was capable of conspiracy and untruth at the highest levels has subsequently been established by his perpetration of the fabricated Gulf of Tonkin incident, which he then used as justification for the Vietnam War escalation. We may never know the full extent a conspiracy to murder JFK, as the evidence is no longer available, but the conjecture is quite strong. When you see one man point a rifle at another, see a puff of smoke and hear a loud report, then see the other man clutch at his chest and collapse in a pol of blood, you didn't actually see the bullet that killed the second man but it is a very reasonable assumption that he was shot by the first one.
The Gulf of Tonkin incident is a good example actually - a proven example - of a false flag attack being used as a pretext to justify the initiation or escalation of military action. The attacks of 9/11, it cannot be denied, were similarly used as a pretext for such purposes and regardless of whether the attacks were, to borrow a phrase from Henry Kissinger, "real or promulgated."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs to the Kennedy case, there's no need to rely exclusively on conjecture and assumptions. Much evidence still exists, including film documentation of the assassination (in addition to the somewhat compromised Zapruder film) shot from a vantage point opposite of where Zapruder himself was located.
According to History Matters, "The voluminous files of the HSCA and the many depositions taken in the investigation are a fertile field for today's researchers."
Even according to the official findings of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, which attributes all successful shots to Oswald and is often derided for this and other reasons as a "limited hangout," Kennedy likely died as the result of a "conspiracy."
Included in the summary of their findings and recommendations: "Scientific Acoustical Evidence Establishes a High Probability that Two Gunmen Fired at President John F. Kennedy," and that "The Secret Service Was Deficient in the Performance of its Duties."
Hmmmm...I'm not sure I'm brave enough to tell my friend I'm not out to get her because she's not worth it. But I'm at a loss as to what to do. There's just no convincing some people.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you want to talk about believing several contradictory arguments at once in the face of all logic and evidence, talk to a religious person.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs others have said, the article assumes that all conspiracy theories are delusions. A healthy questioning of what our governments and media tell us is a good thing and should be encouraged. Of course you'll find quite a high number of people with delusions or some kind of paranoid disorders who are drawn to that kind of thing, but sometimes there IS evidence, and sometimes intelligent, respected members of the community stand up and question, say, the 9/11 story.
By the way, the article also failed to give any real examples of theories than contradict each other. If I were a conspiracy theorist now, I'd say that this article was deliberately designed by "them" to try debunking all theories by labelling anybody who questions the status quo as crazy. Nice try, folks.
There are many types and many possible causes for "paranoyas", Cannabis' products and other drugs use being among them. From a delusion of being attacked, people may get the satisfaction of feeling having reached an status of VIP that was not obtained in the real life. Delusions of conspiracy may follow after somebody internalizes by external pressures the values and goals of others, and builds an imaginary punishment when he/she feels having acted or thinking against the other group's interests, the so called "guilt paranoia". Delusional jealousy builds up as a defense against a growing desire that the person that in an imaginary way is making horny the delirious, actually does it, as having sex with a person is a way of having sex with another having sex with the same one, and thus, a hidden homosexual desire. In the USA, Lyndon LaRouche, supposedly a former Trotskyist, is reportedly having written about "The dark ages conspiracy", about some governments actively participating in drug trafficking. As somebody wrote in SciAm not long ago, the right approach to ideas of conspiracy would be "May be I'm paranoid, but they're after me", whatever they do, persecuted will never escape his/her enemies, be them real or imaginary, as once the idea of conspiracy enters somebody's mind, the persecutors always will be there, because the goals of persecutors have entered the victim's set of internal behavior and goal-achievement rules. Another good way to escape from conspirators is joining some kind of a group strong enough and organized enough as to offer the persecuted some reliable protection or the feeling of having it, the group won't change the situation, but will make you more relaxed. Associations of victims don't offer this, but probably produce an increase in fears and a reinforcement of delusional thoughts, and the persistence of the traumatic or offending episode in the minds of "persecuted". Do you feel persecuted?: ask for help, please!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thismethinks the author doth protest too much
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAgain the for the third time SA has published an article on conspiracy theories. Why is SA publishing again and again the same attacks on those who do not believe the official story? Always linking 911 with deniers of the holocaust and flat earther,s etc. A common them is that somehow these people are deluded or are trying to somehow make themselves feel superior. The stupid argument does not to hold up for typical SA readers so it is not being used like elsewhere.
Now what we are being told is that you should not be believed your lying eyes and that physics laws can be broken if some one is fanatical enough. Just go to youtube and watch WTC collapse from several angles. Look for photos of the pentagon before it collapsed where a 757 all squeezed into a 18 foot hold and left no marks on the building where a 40'tail/128' wingspan was supposed to strike at 400MPH. Also explain how WTC steel melted from office fires (2,000F max) or 20 minutes jet fuel (about 1800 max). All these events defied physics so now ignore your science training and go back to sleep. Denial is better than coping with the horrible alternative.
This article is obviously another attempt by the Tri-Lateral Commission to obfuscate the truth. The fact that they were able to co-op SA into publishing this article is proof of their existance and goal of global domination by subverting well meaning institutions to act as mindless lackeys.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Also explain how WTC steel melted from office fires (2,000F max)"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs I understand it, office fires, that is, carbon fires, burn cool at around 700 F and hot at around 1200 F. The WTC fires appeared to be rather inefficient in that they were spewing black smoke, indicating low oxygen (fuel).
The melting point of carbon steel is approximately 2800 F, on average. Its mechanical integrity can be compromised at lower temperatures.
Heat generated from office fires is generally not sufficient to effect a catastrophic weakening or melting of steel.
It is precisely for this reason that things like skyscrapers, battleships, and log racks for the fireplace are made of steel. The Windsor Building in Madrid burned for 24 hours - a literal towering inferno - and though badly damaged, did not collapse. There can be some toppling and crumbling and asymmetric deformations, creaking and groaning and twisting, but not spontaneous global collapse.
Furthermore, the vast majority of structural steel was not on fire.
The fires were located on several floors in the area of the impact zone.
In fact, even if *all* the steel in the area around the impact zone *had* melted, the buildings would likely not collapse in the manner that they did, suddenly, symmetrically and at near free-fall acceleration.
"or 20 minutes of jet fuel"
Most of the jet fuel exploded into the huge fireball that we all saw, upon impact. The rest ignited scattered office fires.
You don't have to be a scientist to prove something. Just try to use a little common sense. Look at how Oswald was a CIA asset used as a guined pig for MK ULTRA. Not to mention the strange presence of CIA agents in Dallas that day. http://pecangroup.org/declassified/mk-ultraproject-monarchmajestic12 http://newsbuster.com/Pages/content/assassination-of-president-john-f-kennedy-cia-memorandum-admits-lee-harvey-oswald-was-a-cia-asset.html
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWho trained al-Qaeda?
What happened to all the steel at the WTC and where was it taken?
Why did our government wire money to Inter Service Inteligence?
And why did the Bush administration shoot down an investigation?
That's what no one will answer.
Neither will Shermer he's too cowardly to debate anyone.
The UFOs have landing light on at night so the several million (professional and amateur) astronomical telescopes photographing the night sky 7x24 can't see them .-)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen people say "Oh, so you believe in conspiracy theories" I like to ask them if they believe that the Bush Administration made up the stories about weapons of mass destruction. They usually yes, I suppose, and then I say well, you are quite a conspiracy theorist to believe that your government conspired to lie this country into a war of that magnitude!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's interesting that anti-conspiracy theorists usually bring out the most bizarre attributes of some of the (studied?) subjects. Why is this? I think I know how the conspiracy theorists (CT) would answer this but at the least, there is a tendency these days to be too impatient or rushed to listen to what others have to say unless they're on a priority list. Whether or not a closer examination of their mental state would reveal they're fully functioning, rational people. Nonetheless, they're dismissed as being crackpots the moment they use the appropriate buzzword. Are they all? And has everything they believe been debunked by a panel of authorities? Where are the studies that the anti-CT's rely on for evidence?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPeople who point and laugh at the crazy people are themselves quite capable of relying on argumentum ad ignorantiam and weapons of mass destruction.
Truth be told, the realm of conspiracy theory has no monopoly on the negative perception and effects of conflicting information. In a society of alienated persons, it's not a stretch to believe that the resulting confusion and skepticism is owed to design rather than incompetence. One of the best examples I can mention of an event that would cause people to go over to the dark side, which by the way, I have an overwhelming urge to call a conspiracy, is the recent bonus grab of corporate officers after the mortgage collapse. But I suppose that was a blatant, right up in the face dupe, hardly your standard CT, so let's just dismiss it. I don't know, you do the logic.
With the kind of delusional ideas in the background of some feeling victims of a conspiracy, it must be pointed that in the cases when this is a disease, they can have a full normal life, and nobody would notice anything unusual unless the subject of the persecution or other self-reference ideas is dealt with, as in those endorsing a flat earth that will remain peaceful until you discuss the certainty of their assertions, this would be one of the reasons why that kind of a nuisance is more easily hidden in a country environment, when people has few opportunities to meet something confronting their persecution situation.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnother use of the term monological is with the phrase of Mikhail Bakhtin, "monological theoretism," which refers to the presentation of a single narrative and/or sole source to determine what is correct or true. Our networked world is challenging the monological theoretism often expressed in the halls of academe, not to mention across any number of rigidly hierarchical institutions.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou are so right. There is a definite sanctimonious tone. I am seeing this over and over again in communities where community water fluoridation is being challenged by the anti-fluoridationists – on the grounds that for the last 65 years the fertilizer industry has been secretly conspiring with the US government, the ADA, scientists, the CDC, and 175,000 dentists to poison the public. (Oh, and they say that Hitler started it by using fluoride to pacify the Jews.) Just check out the online discussions about fluoridation. (Portland, Santa Fe, Wichita)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI agree. To lump everyone together in this way is absurd, as if people who believe in aliens and UFOs can be likened to the many engineers, architects and physicists who, looking at the scientific evidence of 9/11, rightly challenge the official story. Neither Dr Neils Harrit nor Dr Judy Wood are halfwits.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGood for you. Why do those that disparage so-called conspiracy theories too often do it in the form of personal attacks rather than address the logic and/or chain of evidence? At least the Scientific American article used logic. Which is maybe why it's so unconvincing....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"They" didn't do just one bad.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFor me this article is so perfectly timed. Last night I actually thought to myself: "I am addicted to conspiracy theories" after watching a youtube vid called "This is the Truth 2012". You are exactly right Mythusmage, this is pretty much how i have been feeling lately and there IS a certain allure.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhy does the military Publication JANAP 146E has a section that says you will not reveal any information regarding the UFO phenomenon under penalty of $10,000 fine and ten years in jail. So the secret has been kept. pp. 145, 146.The Author may have never researched any of the Conspiracy Theories he spoke of in the article.
Many great Physicists like Stephen Hawkins said mathematically there is a 100% chance Aliens exist and since 1951 there have been over 400,000 photos and video of UFO's taken world wide. To say the government has not covered up Alien visitation when over 500 Military and Government Personnel, including civilian contractors; many in which holding "Top Secret" clearances who all are testifying to the government suppression of back engineered advanced anti gravity technology (UFO'S). And knowledge of extraterrestrial beings.
Astronauts, Admirals, CIA Chief Reveal UFO Cover-up
Fred Burks, US Intelligence Examiner, July 5, 2011, http://tinyurl.com/44996ls
Concise Summary of the Book Disclosure
Government & Military Witnesses Testify on Major UFO Cover-up
The Cover-up: UFOs
Mercury & Gemini Astronaut, Colonel Gordon Cooper
A saucer flew right over, put down three landing gears, and landed on the dry lake bed. [The cameramen] went out there with their cameras towards the UFO. It lifted off and flew off at a very high rate of speed… I had a chance to hold [the film] up to the window. Good close-up shots. There was no doubt that it was made someplace other than on this earth.
FAA Chief of Accidents and Investigations, John Callahan
The UFO was bouncing around the 747. [It] was a huge ball with lights running around it….Well, I’ve been involved in a lot of cover-ups with the FAA. When we gave the presentation to the Reagan staff,
United Kingdom Chief of Defense (1971 – 73), Admiral Lord Peter Hill-Norton
I have frequently been asked why a person of my background—a former Chief of the Defense Staff, a former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee—why I think there is a cover-up [of] the facts about UFOs. Governments fear that if they did disclose those facts, people would panic. I don’t believe that at all. I’ve said so in print. There is a serious possibility that we are being visited by people from outer space.
5000 whining atheists vs the Great Prophet
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisforum.thatfatatheist.com/topic/9684634/1/#new
youtube.com/watch?v=s3lwG4MytSI
one applicant right here...
get the POINT, Randi....
Just a brief anecdote.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWas in LV last year and stayed with some folks who are also members off my travel club. Made the mistake of asking our guest about the "grays" depicted on his socks (!) and he launched into an extended discussion of UFO's and alien visitation. While he was drawing a breath, I slipped in this question: "Tell me, with just about every human on the planet being in possession of a cell phone, and many of those phones having HD photo and video capability, how do you explain the dearth of recordings or pictures of UFO's ?"
He looked around the room, as if someone might be eavesdropping and responded, soto voce, "The aliens are intelligent enough to appreciate our advances in photographic and video technology, and have become much more cautious regarding the risk of exposing themselves ".
I was left speechless, at several levels...
Who is your department being funded by, the Rockerfellers, the Fords, the Soros's etc. Are they also funding your personal research into why people treat their secrecy with suspicion. Alex Jones and Jesse Ventura make perfect sense if you actually take the time to really listen to what they are saying and do some of your own research.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf governments, banks and business are open and don't conspire, then why did they put a block on funds going to WikiLeaks, if they are transparent, then there would be nothing to fear from WikiLeaks.
Your article is so simplistic, to call it scientific is an insult to real science, I can hardly believe that you are respected Dr. People are waking up to the spin doctors who do the dirty work of the industrial/military/political complex, by slowly but surely conditioning us to believe their bullsiht. I really feel sorry for people like you who believe that people don't conspire when their are billions if not trillions of dollars at stake. By the way, why is it that we don't hear from Ron Paul in the media anymore, when he was way up in the polls before they chose Mit to lead the way into Iran.
But, to be honest, I don't believe for one minute that you believe what you wrote, because I know too much first hand about how the PR industry works by recruiting so called experts to fudge the figures to meet their agenda.
What a boring article, only kept alive by trying to create polarity, the oldest trick in the book, usually reserved for hacks, not so called "scientists". Do you support the Patriot Act? By the way, how exactly did the World Trade 7 tower come down in what looked like a controlled demolition, 1700 professional architects and engineers (http://www.ae911truth.org/) say it's impossible to have not been a controlled demolition, so what is your "expert" explanation, are they also conspiracy theorists? Get real.
I'm a securities analyst, and for years kept hearing rumors that the Libor rate was being manipulated. I kept thinking, "Yeah right, another dumb conspiracy theory".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think conspiracy theories are like lotteries, most tickets don't win, but people keep buying them because the odd one does.
Yes, and why would they arrest CIA "Asset" Susan Lindauer and try to have her medically lobotomized ? Michael Sherman, read her book "Extreme prejudice The terrifying story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq" and quit writing nonsense. Start researching facts/evidence. Psychologic interpretations are not scientific evidence. This article reads like something one would expect to find in one of Rupert Murdock's rags.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTruth has never been revealed as human entangled minds are not in possession of unentangling transforming space as time reverses.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"By the way, how exactly did the World Trade 7 tower come down in what looked like a controlled demolition..."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA fair and sensible, and even obvious, question.
It's impossible really for anyone with even a modicum of scientific curiosity or common sense to avoid asking that question, and which is just as relevant to the towers as to building 7.
The towers and building 7 alike were highly redundant structures. All three buildings could sustain the loss of significant sections of structural support without giving way globally. Any given floor was capable of withstanding forces many times greater than those exerted by standard static loads.
The towers were specifically designed to withstand the impact of one or more fully-loaded jetliners. As an engineer who worked on the project put it, it's like poking a pencil through the screen netting of a storm door. It punctures the screen but does nothing to the overall integrity of the grid.
Indeed, never before in skyscraper history has any steel-framed structure completely collapsed due to fire and/or localized impact damage. On 9/11 that record was broken three times, and building 7 was not hit by an airplane.
There's nothing wrong in asking why people believe in conspiracy theories and with attempting to answer that question.
But this has no bearing ultimately on the case of building 7 from an investigative standpoint.
What are we saying here? - that the collapse of building 7 displays all the characteristics that typically define a controlled demolition, but because there's some people out there who believe in wacky conspiracy theories we can't investigate any further?
Now that's what I call unscientific thinking. In fact, many of the arguments posted here attempting to rationalize why people believe in conspiracy theories seem equally if not more applicable to those who accept unquestioningly the official version of events, proven time and again to have been, shall we say, not entirely accurate.
which conspiracy theory do they believe? you generalize without content
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this5000 whining atheists vs the Great Prophet
forum.thatfatatheist.com/topic/9684634/1/#new
youtube.com/watch?v=s3lwG4MytSI
one applicant right here...
get the POINT, Randi....
I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster as the all-powerful all-knowing Supreme Being and head of the Government of the Universe. Prove me wrong.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSome conspiracy situations may test the general public's reaction to information. Some psychologists test people's unscientific believes. This might be a study in convincing people to accept propaganda / misinformation.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat this means is that UFO's aren't a conspiracy by the government. Instead they are a government test of the power of persuasion.
I appreciated the article on conspiracy believers. I teach and research on risk and safety topics. I suspect that many of the conspiracy fans just enjoy the intellectual exercises involved in examining the possibilities of conspiracies. They are also adrenalin junkies. Unfortunately, conspiracy adherents and the for profit media often contribute to an atmosphere of fear. They may instill fear and reluctance to get a flu shot, evacuate in the face of a dangerous oncoming storm, and stop flying after 9/11. The number of auto accidents in the months following the 9/11 attacks rose significantly because large segments of the public believed that they could no longer be safe in the air.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThanks for providing a valuable forum and article for helping us to reduce fear and keep our focus on reason and scientific method.
Hal Marchand, Ph.D.
I was hoping the article would explain (or at least suggest) why some individuals are more susceptible to the lure of conspiracy theories than others. Defensive and angry personalities? Strongly religious? Feel abused? Borderline Paranoia? Overwhelming Feelings of helplessness? Severely depressed? Any ideas why?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWill check out entre Journal Article . . . ïf"I'm permitted to do so." Who knows, perhaps only the Inner Circle of The "Illuminati are allowed entre'!
"I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster..."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's easier to prove God doesn't exist than it is to prove Oswald acted alone.
"I suspect that many of the conspiracy fans..."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe very use of the term "conspiracy fans," and later, "conspiracy adherents," implies the pursuit of baseless if not fascinating theories for its own sake or for the sake of monetary gain. This is undoubtedly sometimes the case.
But the characterization is also broad to the point of potential inaccuracy. After all, is the House Select Committee on Assassinations, which found a greater than 95% probability of a second shooter in the Kennedy case, really comprised of little more than "conspiracy fans" pursuing the enjoyment of pointless intellectual exercises?
I suspect most people with regard to the Kennedy case, expert and layman alike, would much prefer to believe the official theory if they could, that is, if only the facts supported it. Unfortunately the facts do not support the official theory, which hinges largely on the discredited notion of a magic bullet whose purported flight path - and ability to cause multiple injuries while emerging unscathed - defies the laws of physics. The physicians who attended to President Kennedy at Parkland Hospital had observed, and whose observations are stated on record, a massive *exit* wound in the occipital parietal area, indicating a shot from the front and which is consistent with HSCA's findings.
Serious investigators do not generally engage in conspiracy theorizing for its own sake. They are simply endeavoring to find the explanation as to what occurred which is best supported by the facts, according to the scientific method. The alternative in this case is subscribing to the notion of a magical bullet which, pausing midair and making left and right-hand turns of its own accord, is more at home in the world of cartoons than in the real world. Fortunately and to their credit, the majority of Americans realize this.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this5000 whining atheists vs the Great Prophet
how the divine pen of Michel Nostradamus crushed the international atheist movement
dissidentphilosophy.lifediscussion.net/t1310-the-boobquake-911
________________________
youtube.com/watch?v=s3lwG4MytSI
one applicant right here...
get the POINT, Randi....
__________________________
for lies on top of lies
youtube.com/watch?v=bbmXpNEFipE
do you think you can threaten my right to FREE SPEECH?
what if I told you that I am not who you think I am….
Not Dennis Markuze - but a FAN!
_________________
youtube.com/watch?v=nvatDdOWcLw&lc
you're not the center of the universe!
____________________________
youtube.com/watch?v=3yRpSNIOwA4
a dishonest liar
WHICH CONSPIRACY THEORY DO THEY BELIEVE IN, EH, SHERMER?
5000 whining atheists vs the Great Prophet
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishow the divine pen of Michel Nostradamus crushed the international atheist movement
dissidentphilosophy.lifediscussion.net/t1310-the-boobquake-911
________________________
youtube.com/watch?v=s3lwG4MytSI
one applicant right here...
get the POINT, Randi....
__________________________
.....
Every theory is a "conspiracy" in the sense that it is an explanation as to why something happens based on a primary cause. Einstein, Hawking, Feynman all sought out the conspiracies of what drives what we see happening...not content to say, well, the sun just rises.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs far as "conspiracy theorists" I believe that many of them find our accepted conspiracies lacking and so fill in the blanks. Global warming? What about the Medieval Warming. And so on...our society crunches explanations into bite sized form, so we can get down to business...and generate tax revenue from it...that sort of thing. Is it any wonder a few sit up and bark, even if it is only as good as barking?
Indeed, barking has its place. Barking saved my neighbor's life, when her faithful pet alerted her to the presence of a fire. A smoke alarm on four legs as it were. Saved my lawn too.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBarking can alert a homeowner to the presence of an intruder, or a fireman, to the presence of a survivor. The town crier is essentially a barker. Paul Revere once famously barked "The British are coming! The British are coming!" and, who among us hasn't enjoyed a Beatles tune or two thanks to him?
Yes, dogs bark. Watchdogs and lapdogs and seals alike.
Evolution exists. Humans have evolved to recognize conspiracies. Sometimes their very lives depend on it. It is frequently less costly to think a conspiracy exist and not follow a course of action than to follow a particular pattern.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe Gulf of Tonkin Conspiracy led 58,000 Americans to their deaths and 20 times that number of Vietnamese to theirs. While it cost some of those opposing the conspiracy dearly, it cost those accepting the conspiracy even more.
Thus, it is quite important for us to distinguish if we are purchasing useful products and services at a fair price or if we are victims of a con game.
In Vietnam, we were victims of a con-game. Governments play con games. Conspiracies exist.
"Humans have evolved to recognize conspiracies."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI once witnessed the family cat knock over a trash can and then sit quietly in the corner as the family dog took the blame, and quite nearly the punishment.
That's the essence of a false flag.
But yes. One reason "why people believe conspiracy theories" is simply because governments have a history of misrepresenting the facts, from Gulf of Tonkin to the Iraqi WMD intelligence fiasco.
Yes, do remember that the Gulf of Tonkin was a terrible attack that definitely justified the Vietnam War where how many thousands of Americans were killed? It doesn't matter, because those stories of Agent Orange are just conspiracies! No birth defects haunt innocent Vietnamese to this day. And remember kids, 9/11 was perpetrated by 19 Saudi Arabian nationals, which is why we invaded Iraq. Because of the "weapons of mass destruction" - Bush, Cheney, Rice. What crazy conspiracies these civilians partake in! HA HA HA
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm uncertain which conspiracy Steve Mirsky assigned to "Limbaugh" and the "2009 flu". There was a public outcry at the time over the inadequate supplies of HN1 flu vaccine. This was partly because of a government regulation that required individual dose packaging rather than multiple dose vials. HSS Secretary Sebelius missed the warnings and failed to boost production in a timely fashion. The result was a vaccine shortfall. Despite your implied accusation that Limbaugh promoted a 'conspiracy theory' he had no complaint about a conspiracy, only incompetence.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisyoutube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswhich WORLD-VIEW will not exist, sh*thead?
______________
5000 whining atheists vs the Great Prophet
how the divine pen of Michel N. crushed the international atheist movement
sguforums.com/index.php?topic=43121.0
youtube.com/watch?v=s3lwG4MytSI
one applicant right here...
get the POINT, Randi....
I do not know if Oswald was acting alone or was a part of a conspiracy, such as LBJ or even in league with Hoover as has been suggested in the past, unfortunately Ruby put paid to us finding out the truth behind his motives, and Ruby’s motives were never investigated fully, for some unknown reason.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat I do know is that there was definitely a second bullet, that can not be denied, it is a Scientific “FACT”, as any hunter will tell you, an entry wound will be roughly the size of the trajectory, as in the case of the front of JFK’s forehead, and the exit wound will be extremely larger such as the brain exploding exit wound that killed him. This is an undeniable FACT, no whitewashing of the “facts” from any inquiry can overlook this, there is no way Oswald could possibly have shot Kennedy from behind and left a small exit wound and a large entry wound, it is simply physics.
Where that second bullet came from is up for speculation, but then again so is the “fact” that Oswald even shot him at all, given that his rifle was tested by a US Marine marksman over the same distance and he couldn’t even hit the standing target more than about 20 out of 100 shots let alone in quick succession in the time that Oswald was supposed to have fired all three shots, at a moving target. The rifle was so badly looked after and misaligned.
But then, personally I don’t believe in Conspiracy Theories, or I didn’t until I researched my father’s military history, and found that the Australian government gave him a Military funeral 27 years before he actually died. I found that he had continued to serve the Australian Armed Services from his “death” in 1962 until his actual death in 1989. He had served as an SAS member during WWII through Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia and other fields of service, he had been a marksman, and taken out some very influential officers and in 1962 the powers to be decided he should disappear, the best way for that to happen was for him to die and his body to be unrecognisable and cremated, and was given a military service. When he eventually did die in September 1989 he was again given another military service. By which time he had a whole new family.
I was only 4 when he “died” in ’62 so I feel cheated, having never known my father, when I could have spent those 27 years with him.
"Ruby's motives were never investigated fully, for some unknown reason."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe reason officially ascribed to Ruby was simple revenge, for what Oswald had done to Kennedy, and also for Ruby to show that a man like him "could have guts." Of course Ruby merely prevented his supposed hero's case being solved.
It seems clear his motive, or rather his assignment, was to eliminate Oswald, for reasons other than love of Kennedy. Those that knew Ruby express the opinion that he was anything but fond of JFK.
Apparently, before his untimely death in prison, which occurred shortly before he was due to testify in Congress, Ruby made efforts to make his motives known to members of the Warren Commission, and expressed concern for his safety, but to no avail.
He wrote letters and spoke personally with others to say JFK was indeed assassinated as part of a larger plot. A well-known reporter in whom he confided, Dorothy Kilgallen, and who announced to a friend that she now had the "scoop of the Century," died unexpectedly and her notes were never recovered.
"(Oswald's) rifle was tested by a US Marine"
By a Marine and several others, including an Olympic marksman, and generally without success.
There's some confusion as to whether the Italian Carcano alleged to be Oswald's rifle was the actual weapon fired that day.
A group of Dallas Police Department detectives, including Roger Craig, say they found not a Carcano, but a German Mauser, hidden beneath some boxes. The word "Mauser" according to Craig and one of his superiors was stamped unmistakably on the rifle. Walter Cronkite himself reported the rifle's make as a Mauser.
The FBI later announced the detectives had gotten it wrong - the televised and press reports were revised - and all the detectives except Roger Craig changed their minds as to what they saw. Craig, suffering professional setbacks thereafter and wracked with various pains resulting from several unfortunate accidents which he believed to be attempts on his life, eventually committed suicide in the mid-1970s.
It was written, "science and reason must always prevail over fear and irrationality."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat is the science behind UFO's?
Isn't the science pure speculation without any facts?
The explanation of UFO sightings is always "the observers don't know what they are seeing." That assumption is not scientific at all.
The paper's authors define a conspiracy theory, as most do, as "a proposed plot by powerful people or organizations working together in secret to accomplish some goal," typically for nefarious purposes.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAccurate enough, though the individuals involved are not required by definition to be powerful, as many average persons conspire to commit crimes as well, such as insurance fraud.
The authors then qualify this basic definition by adding that such theories are non-falsifiable, because each new piece of disconfirming evidence is rationalized away, which, though oftentimes applicable in context, technically exceeds the limits of the definition of a conspiracy.
Sometimes conspiracy theories are resistant to falsification not because "new layers of conspiracy (are) added to rationalize each new piece of disconfirming evidence," but because there is no disconfirming evidence, and the official conspiracy theory is even less plausible than the alternative conspiracy theory.
In fact it is very often supporters of the official theory playing catch-up in light of evidence that disconfirms their own unscientific claims.
Even when it comes to potentially silly subjects like aliens the paper's definition of a conspiracy runs into problems. This claim or that one regarding visitations and such can be discounted, but no one can claim to have scoured the entire cosmos in search of aliens and lived to tell about what they did or did not find.
Besides, one can always point to the human race itself as proof of the existence of alien life forms. It all depends on one's point of view after all who's the alien and who isn't.
Seriously though these questions are rather abstract, the answers ever-elusive. It's like trying to prove God doesn't exist, however much one is convinced he does not. Hard evidence is hard to come by, and there's no persuading believers anyway, even in the face of it, even if one had it.
When it comes to more mundane matters however like assassinations and false flag attacks, tangible evidence to support unauthorized or alternate theories *is* available. Whatever value the University paper may otherwise have, there are many sociologists and mental health professionals who say questioning the official narrative is the rational thing to do.
According to Washington's Blog, "Sociologists say fear of terrorism has made people blindly accept false justifications for war - including the false claim that Saddam Hussein had a hand in 9/11."
correction: the opening should read, "the paper's authors define a conspiracy..." not "define a conspiracy theory"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thistherefore..."adding that theories concerning such are non-falsifiable"
I have it on good authority that good authority stinks.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisyoutube.com/watch?v=wHs0vM3gRTA
you can thank RANDI
now for some SYMBOLIC TWO-DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS!
on the TIMELINE
0 min 33 sec - Randi in the RED SHIRT - signifying the *bl..dy deed* that is about to happen
1min 18 sec - Banachek talks about respect for the claimant and then they mock "these kind" of people in the final part
3 min 20 sec - the test of the power bracelet that increases a person's energy and balance. Notice our challenge is all about POWER & BALANCE, proving the existence of a HIGHER POWER
5 min 15 sec TEST BEGINS. Skeptics one by one stand in CRUCIFIXION POSE
1 hr 10 min 21 sec Test is ended in failure
1 hr 10 min 30 sec request is made to make change in the PROTOCOL
1 hr 10 min 51 sec Applause is made by all those who wanted him to fail from the very beginning
1 hr 25 min 39 sec Now they talk about the Nightline clip that was filmed in Manhattan, also the scene of the 9/11 event
1hr 28 min 42 sec - They talk about make-shift tests. They think that because no one can win the prize that psychic phenomena does not exist
1 hr 29 min 45 sec Banachek says "the majority of *these* people.'" A contemptuous reference that occurs repeatedly
1 hr 31 min 53 sec The reference to envelopes. Remember the 911 in Angel's envelope!
1 hr 37 min 11 sec Swiss says he is not worried about a paranormal event happening. Little does he know what is actually taking place
1 hr 39 min 50 sec The mocking of SPIRITS!
1 hr 40 min 27 sec Reference made to the TERROR of witnessing a supernatural event, i.e, the blood leaving the face
1 hr 41 min 15 sec Reference to "these people"
1 hr 41 min 40 sec Belief in the supernatural is claimed to be a psychological defence mechanism to cope with reality. Swiss talks about how desperate the psychics become when debunked. Little does he know what is happening to the skeptics!
1 hr 42 min 11 sec WHEN PROPHECY SUCCEEDS! KABOOM
___________
youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU
which WORLD-VIEW will not exist, sh*thead?
______________
5000 whining atheists vs the Great Prophet
how the divine pen of Michel N. crushed the international atheist movement
skeps.org/5000-whining-atheists-vs-the-great-prophet-t644.html
youtube.com/watch?v=s3lwG4MytSI
one applicant right here...
get the POINT, Randi....
for lies on top of lies
youtube.com/watch?v=bbmXpNEFipE
do you think you can threaten my right to FREE SPEECH?
what if I told you that I am not who you think I am….
youtube.com/watch?v=nvatDdOWcLw&lc
you're not the center of the universe!
The past only exists as memories, archeology, geology, recorded information and other remnants. These remnants can be seen in the present.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs there a physical past that still exists at the end of some worm hole?
Some people believe that there is.
Are these people more susceptible to conspiracy theories?
"Is there a physical past that still exists at the end of some worm hole?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYes. It's called Hollywood.
The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMoves on; nor all your Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it.
-- The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam
Science fiction can imagine that this is not true but science has yet to prove it false.
Conspiracies may never happen but I don't know why that is scientifically true.
Conspiracies can happen and they can be so convincing that we are tricked into accepting them.
"Are these people more susceptible to conspiracy theories?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere are none so susceptible to conspiracy theories as those who believe in magic bullets.
"Conspiracies can happen and they can be so convincing that we are tricked into accepting them."
No doubt. Conspiracies can happen and do happen, and have throughout history. But it is the theory behind the conspiracy, not the conspiracy itself, that is either convincing or not, and that people are either tricked into accepting or not.
In the case of the Warren Commission Report, the magic bullet theory *is* the conspiracy theory, though it would appear not a very convincing one, judging from the numbers, let alone the science.
According to a 2009 CBS poll, only one in ten Americans believes Oswald acted alone, putting supporters of the official fairy tale rather severely in the minority.
And how could they? How could anyone, especially those among us casting ourselves as champions of reason and of the scientific method, possibly subscribe to so baseless and even fanciful a notion?
Ignorance, if that be the reason, can be overcome, the triggering of a psychological defense mechanism understood, while witting denial is another matter entirely.
If anything less than complete obedience to the official narrative in this case is indicative of a social or even mental disorder, what remains to describe those that do pledge their obedience and subscribe to the notion of a magic bullet?
To think that the government never manages information is naive, but what alternatives are there?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCan an assault be made on people who fit the conspirator's description? Should we go to war?
What have all the naysayers to the Warren Commission accomplished? Do we have one unofficial version that the 90 percent agree on?
There may be hidden motives for all military action, but we will never know for sure.
Well, please bear in mind the context of this article and thread. According to the sentiments and theories contained herein, to suggest that governments "manage information," as you put it, is to engage in conspiracy theorizing, whereas you yourself have stated that to believe otherwise would be naive.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf course with regard to the Warren Commission Report the information is not so much managed as manufactured from whole cloth.
"What have all the naysayers to the Warren Commission accomplished?"
I assume from your use of the term "naysayers" - unless you consider yourself to be a member of that group - that you accept the Commission's findings as scientifically valid?
For one thing, persistent questions concerning the feasibility of the official explanation did lead to the launching of a new investigation under HSCA some fourteen years after the fact, and though the Committee's findings were far from all-embracing, do represent one step closer to the truth. And getting at the truth, or least the facts, is an altogether necessary component to the preservation of a free and civil society. An informed citizenry is absolutely crucial to the maintenance of a Constitutional Republic. That in part is what the First Amendment, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, is all about.
The naysayers must be accomplishing something regardless, otherwise there wouldn't be this concerted and continuing effort to debunk any and all theories which deviate from and contradict the official account.
And there's nothing wrong with the pursuit of truth for its own sake.
Or to honor the memory of a man who in my opinion died for his country, as countless others have. In my opinion, President Kennedy deserves better than the Warren Commission Report.
"Do we have one unofficial version that the 90 percent agree on?"
The 90 percent do agree on one thing: that Oswald could not possibly have acted alone, and that therefore, by definition, was part of a larger conspiracy, if only in his unwitting role as patsy. We do have an official version with which practically no one, neither expert nor layman, agrees.
It doesn't matter if I agree or disagree. Can a plan be made to bring this to a final resolution or not?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think not.
But, if I am wrong and a plan can be made, then it should be made and then the plan should be implemented.
"When the press is free and everyman able to read, all is safe"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this- Thomas Jefferson
Logically the inverse is true. When the press is not free and everyman functionally illiterate, nothing is safe.
Expanding on the so far unaddressed facts which I attempted to lay out back at post 59, pertaining to a peculiar mode of failure with regard to the WTC towers, in support of the hypothesis that the three respective buildings did not fail by way of a purely gravitational collapse:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1) Rapid onset of destruction - no gradual and visible deformations.
2) Symmetrical collapse - all the vertical columns and support structure failed nearly simultaneously and though which in tact and not on fire offered no resistance to the ensuing wave of destruction, and as a result of asymmetrical loading.
3) Near free-fall acceleration, the building descending through the path of greatest resistance, the opposite of what one could expect in a gravitational collapse.
4) Pyroclastic flows - the concrete, all 90,000 tons of it, veritably leaping into the air, pulverizing itself, forming into an enormous pyroclastic could and barreling its way across the Hudson. What energy could have produced these clouds of pulverized concrete?
5) Lateral discharge of debris at high speed- hunks of steel weighing up to 300 tons flung upwards of 400 feet.
6) Sequentially timed squibs observed in advance of demolition wave, sometimes up to 20 or more stories in advance.
7) Heat generated from hydrocarbon fires insufficient to melt steel, yet three weeks after attacks occurred, molten metal still flowing in sub-basement, according to WTC engineer, firemen, and etc. The fires burned for over three months, setting a new record.
8) NASA measured temps of 1300 plus degrees F at surface of pile. At the source, temps were greater than twice as high, inconsistent with temps produced by office and jet fuel (hydrocarbon) fires.
9) Meteorites - molten metal and concrete fused into a single element, again indicating extremely high temperatures.
The 9/11 Commission Report makes no mention of 7 WTC, and NIST did not investigate the possibility, despite evidence to the contrary, of anything other than a gravitational collapse.
"...it makes the believer special, in his own eyes and the eyes of many. He knows the secret, he has the inside scoop. It's a matter of having inside information nobody else has, unless they are wise enough to be in on the matter"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI used to belong to a religion just like that!
Who needs religion when there's magic bullets?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe main problem with conspiracy theories is that people talking about them are generally not trustworthy. On the other hand, if they are addressed by reliable sources, it is very likely that something will come out to bury the whole story.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe article is mistaken in several key aspects.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFirstly you will find that so-called 'conspiracy theorists' are the more intelligent, logical and rational people around as they think critically and don't believe everything the mainstream media tells them.
While it is true that some irrationally believe a conspiratorial explanation over the alternative, the majority base their conclusion on facts and probability.
As various 'conspiracies' have been proven to be true, e.g 911 is scientifically proven to be a controlled demolition and logistically must thus be an inside job (a mass cannot accelerate under gravity through resistance greater than it's static weight). There is also the man made global warming conspiracy which is proven to be a scam. There is zero evidence to support the Anthropogenic Global Warming scam yet a mountain of evidence against it, e.g. nothing unusual about the 70s to 2000 incline in the record, no warming for last 16 years, no mid tropospheric hotspot, the mediaeval warm period hotter than today, record antarctic ice coverage, no sea level rise increase, no sea temperature increase etc....
People that deny the afore-mentioned facts suffer from cognitive dissonance, their world view cannot cope with the conspiracy theories being right, with the fact that the authorities would commit such heinous atrocities and deception against the public. There fore despite the evidence they will stick to their belief system that government is good and those in authority care about us, regardless of the evidence.
The global government has been openly stated and only the least intelligent, or most cognitively dissonant among us could fail to see it unfolding as the world is becoming rapidly conquered and centralised by the group that own the World bank, the Federal reserve, the IMF and the bank of international settlements, the credit crisis fiat manipulation has put the world in debt to these 'elite'. following the money illustrates this.
Knowing these facts puts modern events into context, it is natural to assume given the history of governments killing it's own people to achieve political goals (The Reichstag, 911, 7/7,Operation Northwoods plan, the Gulf of Tonkin etc) that tragic emotive events such as shooting sprees that accomplish one of the established key goals of the Globalists, disarmament, are false flag attacks by the CIA. This cannot be proven but it is logical and rational to say that there is a great possibility that this is the case given empirical evidence.
just scan through this link ....then tell me what you think about these FACTS that took place not long ago..Individuals are still running the show today, or this just a theory as well? Don't use the word theory to somehow minimize or ridicule ones ideas. The theorist only says hey what about this scenario? Open minded and unsatisfied with another sources "absolute" answer or story, mostly unexplained, or with out real data.. ..The theorist states another possibility, and the need to label anyone as a conspiracy theorist should also just label themselves a know it all....or one who believes whatever there told..because it needs to be this way out of "respect" for the lives lost..Respect has nothing to do with ignoring or debating....It has nothing to do with silence or memorial...It has nothing to do with any thing except 100% truth and thats it...Don't be a know it all...Not even a witness usually has the whole story...Read this link....Blow your mind....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_experimentation_in_the_United_States
I realize that I contradict myself with what I call facts....But there not disputed now as they were many years ago....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCall me "paranoid" but its almost as if this article aims to dismiss all conspiracy theories under the guise of logical and rational thought. Of course if you bring up a radical like Alex Jones you're gonna get a negative connotation of conspiracy theorists but what about someone like Jesse Ventura, who's very calm and collected and speaks very rationally. I think its illogical not to question your government. If we don't learn from history we're doomed to repeat it. There's corrupt officials in government all over the world, you really don't think it could happen in America?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMr Shermer,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs a skeptic, you have revealed yourself to be nothing more than a premier disinformationist.
I am astonished that you continue to post your unscientfic nonsense in Scientific American.
This is not Popular Mechanics, which has been totally debunked regarding 9/11.
I hereby challenge you to a debate the scientific method and mathematical analysis I presented in this post which proves conspiracies are all around us. You must be paid well for your efforts.
http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2012/05/26/conspiracy-theories-and-mathematical-probabilities/
Of course if publications supposedly with reputations for being scientific don't do their science by explaining how 1400 foot building can come down in less than 30 seconds, then they help create an environment for conspiracies.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisConspiracy Theory practices are not required in order to engineer social outcomes. This is a red herring for your distraction. This is common knowledge in political and psychology circles. Michael understands this well, or he should, being a psychology professional. That is not how the social mind operates. Why would a professional, with advanced degrees in psychology, delivery us a message which is so, ...pedestrian in its professional underpinning?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSee "What is Pseudoscience" at The Ethical Skeptic: http://theethicalskeptic.wordpress.com/2013/03/10/deskeption-what-is-pseudoscience/
Hmm... Where to begin...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis article speaks against the concept of the monological conspiracy, as if that somehow disproved the existence of smaller-scale localized conspiracies. In doing so, it actually falls victim to the opposite variety of monology; an unwarranted trust in all forms of official authority.
If I were to tell you that the government was currently sterilizing the population through fluoride-related water additives, I would be labelled a conspiracist. But if a debunker tried to say, "Baloney, the government wouldn't sterilize people!" all the believer must do is point to the compulsory sterilization laws enacted in 26 US states in the early 20th century. And if, while sterilizing people then, they decided they wanted to continue, why would they avoid hiding it?
Likewise, if I had attempted to state anytime prior to 1992 that the US government owned a secret bunker capable of housing Congress through a significant chunk of the aftermath of a nuclear holocaust, I would have been labelled a conspiracist. Thanks to Ted Gup of the Washington Post, this conspiracy is now considered fact.
As to the idea that somehow secrets are incapable of being kept, one must only look to the secret societies of Yale and Harvard, Cambridge and Oxford. Those societies have no pressing reason to deny their own existence any more than does the Bohemian Grove; but both maintain high levels of secrecy around that which happens in their respective communities.
And unfortunately, science and reasoning have in fact and indeed failed to explain a whole host of things about the world. When a satellite probe uses the Earth for gravity assist, it gains approximately an extra 13mm/s of velocity more than predicted, the flyby anomaly. Space roar, the radio signal coming from deep space, is six times louder than expected. That someone diagnosed with liver cancer and given two months to live should still die in two months, even when an autopsy later reveals that the tumor was extremely small and entirely benign... is a nocebo neither I nor science can explain.
So what is the article trying to say, that generalized distrust of authority leads one to bend the rules of logic to support one's belief? Fine. But this idea leads me to think that perhaps a generalized trust of authority has led the author to bend logic by implying that NO localized conspiracy has ever been true, and that therefore NO localized conspiracy will ever be possible.
Because sometimes, the "innocent" kid who blamed big brother grows up to be a Big Brother no less innocent.
To those who'd like to do some research (I mean research, not "research") I submit a list of known examples of currently-popular conspiracy-types.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThings that Happen:
9-11 conspiracies/Flouride/Chemtrails, i.e.
Attempts at Social Control:
Operation Northwoods (simulated Cuban crisis in Miami)
Project MKUltra (LSD-based behavioral engineering)
6521 Project (Chinese governmental crackdown on political dissidents)
Los Desaparecidos (people abducted, tortured, and killed for political reasons in Argentina; the Argentine Holocuast)
at lest one aspect of the Flouride conspiracy, i.e.
Eugenics:
Compulsory sterilization of the early 20th century (reported to have occurred in Canada, the US, Peru, the Nordic countries, Switzerland, Nazi Germany (obvious), Czechoslovakia and the descendant state of the Czech Republic, Russia, Uzbekistan, India, China, and Japan.)
UFOs phenomenon, i.e.
Military Coverups:
Operation Morning Light (US cleanup of a Soviet nuclear-powered spy satellite in northern Canada; public was not informed about the crash until long after)
the Manhattan Project ('Cuz let's be honest: at the time, it was a top-secret military project... which means that top-secret military projects do actually happen...)
Illuminati/NWO/certain UFO people, i.e.
Clandestine Cooperation among the Elites.
Western Union
Standard Oil
Honourable East India Company (all monopolies made to give power to the elite)
Monsanto (included because for some reason the law favors putting small farmers out of business for planting the seeds they grew)
Partition of Poland
Partition of Africa
Euro-Japanese "Spheres of Influence" in China
Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (Partition of Europe between Nazis and Soviets)
NATO and SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization)
Operation Keelhaul, following Yalta (the agreement on the part of the US and UK to repatriate refugees fleeing the Soviet armies in states which would eventually form the Eastern Bloc)
(The above are examples of powerful people deciding to work together to achieve ends that neglect the weak. It's not that difficult of a concept; powerful people sometimes scratch each others' backs to advance their own goals. When this "normal politics" means that the elites ignore the needs of the powerless, New World Order is simply the natural result.)
The fact is, big people and big systems sometimes do bad things to lots of little people. And usually, those bad things are the result of the conspiring of big people working together. Saying that these bad things are nonetheless not conspiracies is semantic play.
The principle of Occam's razor states that the most likely explanation is the one that makes the fewest assumptions. Science does not follow this suggestion as a hard and fast rule, but science is about getting down to the truth, no matter how bizarre the truth may be. The scientific method starts with an assumption, although they call it a hypothesis. Then they try to prove it. Usually by repeated testing. Perhaps conspiracy theories are just assumptions for which sufficient effort and time have not been invested to prove. If science does not remain open to all possibilities, it would doom itself to becoming a closed minded pursuit, and would eventually become limited and useless.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisExactly!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI just want to share my experience and
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thistestimony here, Monica spell is definitely
one of a kind!! She is a great spell caster
to know . she is a healer to all broken-heart,
she can fix a broken home , she can stop a
divorce process ,she can cast a spell for you
to have your own child, she can bring back
your lost lover back to you ,he is a master of
love-spell which is for a better life . please
you can contact hervia:monicaspell@hotmail.com
and to think these nuts say the government is spying on all of us...so far fetched!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this