It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

All Conspiracy Theories Are False

page: 7
15
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat

originally posted by: captaintyinknots

Or is this thread really just a "gotcha" thread which gets its kicks by semantical paradox?


BINGO!
yeah, kinda thought so.

Once a theory is proven it ceases to be theory, and becomes just a conspiracy.

Thus, it is impossible to have a proven conspiracy theory by the op and phages standards.

Yay for semantics.




posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: captaintyinknots

Conspiracies used to be theory, and then WERE proven. Every example I stated fits.
Not really.

When was there a conspiracy theory about the Gulf of Tonkin? What did that theory say about it? How did the theory fit the facts?

When was there a conspiracy theory about Paperclip? What did that theory say about it? How did the theory fit the facts?

When was there a conspiracy theory about Fast and Furious? What did that theory say about it? How did the theory fit the facts?

NSA mass surveillance a revelation only in scale.

When was CIA drug trafficking a conspiracy theory? What did that theory say about it? How did the theory fit the facts?

American funding of Hitler? Yes, that is a conspiracy theory. One that has not been proven.
americanfreepress.net...



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Jimmy Saville a serial sexual abuser who was part of a ring enabled/tolerated by the BBC, i believe that Jerry Sadowitz started saying this in the 80's, maybe early 90's?

Turned out he was something of a cad.........



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Your fascination with words and their definitions is not showing your true intelligence.

You know as well as EVERYONE who read the OP that this was not about words, and meaning of words.

The OP was discrediting all conspiracies talked about on ATS in the last 9 years, not just the one's that remain only in theory. Unless of course I am making a poor assumption, and you actually did fail to understand the OP.

edit on 26-10-2014 by sacgamer25 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Maybe it would be prudent to realize that even the OP (whom is on ATS now according to their profile) hasn't even come back to attempt to redeem his/her stance on the debate. Hint much?



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

1) yes.If youve read anything about the gulf of tonkin youd know that there was a coverup and an attempt to conceal the perpetrators. The only reason it is known what happened is because people on those boats floated their THEORIES that they had seen israeli ts attacking. It was later admitted.

Conspiracy theory became conspiracy fact.

2) yes. The theory was that project paperclip existed, which was publicly denied until the documents were declassified.

Conspiracy theory became conspiracy fact.

3) yes, fast and furious was leaked, and denied, until proven.

Conspiracy theory became conspiracy fact.

4) nsa mass surveillance is the most blatantly obvious one here...interesting that it is the one you dont even try to touch on.

5) cia drug trafficking accusation were made, and denied (though it actially goes back to the dea). Declassified documents have proven it true.

Conspiracy theory became conspiracy fact.

5) are you honestly claiming that the bush family has not been proven to have funded hitler?

Im not even sure how to continue with this conversation....
edit on 26-10-2014 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Here is how I explain "conspiracy" theories.

Take a double hand full of pennies and toss them in the air. Take out the ones that land tails up, these are the false stories. The remaining heads up are the stories with a grain of true. Pick those up and toss them again. Again remove the tails and set them aside in a stack from the all false stack. The remaining heads up are the stories left that are at least 1/4 true. Do this again. The next heads up are 1/2 true. Do again, now the heads up are 3/4 trues. Do it again. The remaining heads up are the 100% true stories. take the tails up out and put the next to the stacks of tails. These represent stories with at least some degree of truth in them. It is up to you to sort through these and find the threads of correlation that pictures the whole truth from many sources.

This pretty much works out as the law of averages and is a good analogue for explaining this phenomenon.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: sacgamer25
a reply to: Phage

Your fascination with words and their definitions is not showing your true intelligence.

You know as well as EVERYONE who read the OP that this was not about words, and meaning of words.

The OP was discrediting all conspiracies, not just the one's that are only theory. Unless of course I am making a poor assumption, and you actually did fail to understand the OP.



i agree the OP was discrediting both conspiracies and the theories made about them.

To discuss a conspiracy is to theorize about it so i see no difference between saying

"all conspiracy theories are false"

And saying

"All conspiracies are false"

you can mince words all you want but these are both essentially the same statement.

which of course is absurd, as are the assertions in the op.

OG



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
I have been a member of this forum for nine years. During that time, I have become acquainted with literally dozens of conspiracy theories, most of which I never suspected the existence of until I read about them here.

Few of these theories can easily be proven or disproven. If they could, they would not have such long lives as they do. However, the 'evidence' adduced by conspiracy theorists for their theories is always quite easy to disprove. In many cases,the 'evidence' presented does not substantiate the theory at all. Some theories are presented without evidence; usually these are the more absurd ones, which end up in the Gray Area or the Skunk Works.

The fact is that, in nine years as a member of the world's most popular conspiracy web site, I have yet to see a single conspiracy theory proven true.

This does not surprise me. Conspiracy theories are not conspiracies. They are, instead, made-up explanations as to how and why certain historical events occurred (or are held not to have occurred, as in the Moon landing conspiracy theory). They are folklore, not fact.

Here is list of popular conspiracy theories from Wikipedia. It is not exhaustive but it covers a pretty broad spectrum. All of them have been discussed on ATS. In some cases the theories are decades, even centuries old. To date, not one has been proven, despite the undoubtedly diligent efforts of their proponents to prove them.

I say to you, my friends, that all conspiracy theories (as opposed to genuine conspiracies discovered after the fact) are false, imaginary and/or impossible to prove. I would be interested to see if anybody can show me that I am wrong.

By the way, this thread was inspired by another, in which I argue much the same thesis: www.abovetopsecret.com...


The Pentagon conspires to keep secrets every day. So do all the Black Projects, basically the Pentagon. So does the White House...etc., etc., FBI, CIA, etc., etc.,....



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: Astyanax
I have been a member of this forum for nine years.

Thanks for sticking around.



During that time, I have become acquainted with literally dozens of conspiracy theories,

That's all? There's hundreds you know. Possibly even triple digits with 9/11 alone.



The fact is that, in nine years as a member of the world's most popular conspiracy web site, I have yet to see a single conspiracy theory proven true.


huh

Maybe you're not paying attention.

We outlined a government conspiracy to suppress a private company here.

We exposed the effects of the government conspiracy to allow unchecked campaign spending here and here.

We exposed aspects of the government conspiracy in the war on drugs here.

Looking broader, the long-standing over-arching "conspiracy theory" of vast government surveillance and monitoring of its citizens has been proven by the Snowden revelations. Seriously, this was a very significant and broad core conspiracy theory for more than a decade, proven to be true.

Let's see… Iran Contra was a "conspiracy theory" gaining momentum on nascent BBS boards and independent counter-culture newspapers until it was exposed as true.

Oh… and then there's Watergate that was dismissed as a "conspiracy theory" before it (and more) was proven to be true.

Then there's the CIA and FBI's involvement in the drug that was also long considered a "conspiracy theory", then proven to be true.

There's also the FBI's COINTELPRO programs in LA that "radicalized" gangs and created the gang wars. It was originally a "conspiracy theory", proven to be true about 10 years ago.

We also have that pesky really big "conspiracy theory", the Gulf Of Tonkin incident, which was the pretext to get serious with the Vietnam war -- but never happened, and proven as such. It was a "conspiracy theory" for decades.

And right now we have a fairly large "conspiracy theory" about to be exposed, with the administration's Fast and Furious shenanigans about to come to light.


I could go on, there's lots more. With that in mind, how have you come to the absurd conclusion outlined in your opening post?




I don't know why this thread didn't die after this post, it basically blew the OP's assertion out of the water; honestly without intending to sound nasty and just making an observation, given the above post, which is just a fraction of what on here disproves the OP's assertion and is quite easy to find, the OP looks like he/she is either trolling or slightly delusional.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: captaintyinknots


The only reason it is known what happened is because people on those boats floated their THEORIES that they had seen israeli ts attacking.
Israelis? What is it that you think actually happened?


The theory was that project paperclip existed, which was publicly denied until the documents were declassified.
Evidence, please? Evidence that there was a theory that the program existed. Evidence that it was denied.



yes, fast and furious was leaked, and denied, until proven.
There was a conspiracy theory about it before it was leaked?



nsa mass surveillance is the most blatantly obvious one here...interesting that it is the one you dont even try to touch on.
I did. I said that it didn't take a conspiracy theory to know that the NSA was spying on citizens.




cia drug trafficking accusation were made, and denied (though it actially goes back to the dea).
Did those accusations come from conspiracy theorists?



are you honestly claiming that the bush family has not been proven to have funded hitler?
Yes. If you are arguing that investments in pre-war German companies were intended to fund Hilter rather than make money. But again, was there a conspiracy theory about that before it was "discovered?"
edit on 10/26/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

It's moronic to clump all of these together calling them "conspiracy theories".




as opposed to genuine conspiracies discovered after the fact)


Ah I see, you mean like JFK's assassination and such like.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Look. I gets it. You are going to cling to semantics here. I love this movement of the goalposs in particular:

Did those accusations come from conspiracy theorists?


So now, not only can it not be a proven conspiracy, but it only counts if the accusations come from conspiracy theorists. Whats next? Saying it only counts if its shown up on this site 10 times?

This is honestly one of the dumbest things ive seen on this site.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: captaintyinknots




So now, not only can it not be a proven conspiracy, but it only counts if the accusations come from conspiracy theorists.


That's the point, isn't it.
Name a conspiracy theory which has been proven to be true. We know there are conspiracies. And they have been revealed through investigation, not by conspiracy theorists. Read the OP.

The point is that conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists have not uncovered any actual conspiracies.

edit on 10/26/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: captaintyinknots




So now, not only can it not be a proven conspiracy, but it only counts if the accusations come from conspiracy theorists.


That's the point, isn't it.
Name a conspiracy theory which has been proven to be true. We know there are conspiracies. And they have been revealed through investigation, not by conspiracy theorists. Read the OP.
really, phage, carry on with your fake superiority.

This is just stupid.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I don't care who did the investigation. When the government gives the people one story and someone else gives us the true story what do we call that person?

What is a conspiracy theorist? One who believes that the government has covered up something that the people would consider a conspiracy. Can we agree with that simple definition?

You can call them investigations done by investigators. But don't the investigators have to believe that thier might be a conspiracy in order to begin an investigation?

Just because conspiracies aren't solved by conspiracy theorists sitting at home on ATS, even though Skeptic Overloard already posted that ATS did in fact help the FBI once, someone had to have a theory that the government was conspiring to do something wrong.

Again you can call them investigators, but I can call them conspiracy theorists. And I have used the words correctly.
edit on 26-10-2014 by sacgamer25 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: captaintyinknots

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: captaintyinknots




So now, not only can it not be a proven conspiracy, but it only counts if the accusations come from conspiracy theorists.


That's the point, isn't it.
Name a conspiracy theory which has been proven to be true. We know there are conspiracies. And they have been revealed through investigation, not by conspiracy theorists. Read the OP.
really, phage, carry on with your fake superiority.

This is just stupid.


I really dont get it? Do folks simply skip over posts on a thread that dont fit with their flawed beliefs? Posts, which if read, completely invalidate their arguments?

Very convenient indeed, and when things get hairy, to start to cling to semantics really does reek of desperation and is a last resort at that point.

OG
edit on 10-26-2014 by OrionsGem because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Sorry
edit on 26-10-2014 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: captaintyinknots

originally posted by: OrionsGem

originally posted by: captaintyinknots

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: captaintyinknots




So now, not only can it not be a proven conspiracy, but it only counts if the accusations come from conspiracy theorists.


That's the point, isn't it.
Name a conspiracy theory which has been proven to be true. We know there are conspiracies. And they have been revealed through investigation, not by conspiracy theorists. Read the OP.
really, phage, carry on with your fake superiority.

This is just stupid.


I really dont get it? Do folks simply skip over posts on a thread that dont fit with their flawed beliefs? Posts, which if read, completely invalidate their arguments?

Very convenient indeed, and when things get hairy, to start to cling to semantics really does reek of desperation and is a last resort at that point.

OG
naw, I think t ou do get it. Youre either just playing D.A., or flat trolling, and I have neither the time nor inclination to sit and play semantics with someone who denies fact amd moves the goalpost when caught. Its foolishness, and it accomplishes nothing.
\\

Huh? are you sure your replying to the right person? I havent been caught with anything nor am I moving any goal posts? I agree completely with your post.

OG



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Error post
edit on 26-10-2014 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
15
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join