It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Are we conspiracy theorists?

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 09:31 PM
As this board has matured, and grown, are we finding in general that conspiracy theories are possibilities, or that they are in fact a fiction that by and large have been proven false time and time again?

A simple question really - do you, an ATS'er, regard conspiracy theories as a fun hobby, or as something that are a real possibility?

[edit on 19-2-2006 by paranoia]

posted on Feb, 20 2006 @ 12:02 AM
Well, I didn't even know about conspiracy theories before coming across this site. I found ATS website while googling for military stuff, more precisly I was searching for "USMC M2C2" topic.

I must say from a newbie perspective that some of the conspiracy theories here are fascinating or at times damn right clever, and makes you question what if the events really happened that way. Great materials to read.

Some other conspiracy theories, though, are so ridiculous and an insult to our intellect and makes you question whether the ATS member posting this stuff is a lonely person living in a small apartment with too many cats.

posted on Feb, 20 2006 @ 12:27 AM
I think it would be foolish to not believe conspiracies exist, and it is natural to theorize on things that we don't know many facts about, so that would definitely make such people conspiracy theorists.

That said, there are a lot of nutty conspiracy theories out there by either people looking for money or attention... or misguided people who mean well but have their facts wrong and the theory gets picked up by masses of people and spread around. And because of that, it's good to be skeptical of both the subjects of the conspiracy theories and the theories themselves.

posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 12:21 AM
The only events that could possibly occur without human influence are natural events. All events left over are caused directly or indirectly by humans. Since it is difficult to do anything of any magnitude with only one human, it's best to have several humans working together.

An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.

If an event takes place that is illegal or harms another human, and that event is not a natural disaster, then it is a conspiracy by definition. A conspiracy theorist is doing nothing more than trying to figure out the 'who and why' of an already existing conspiracy. The reason they made "conspiracy theorist" into a naughty 'bad bad' label was to keep people from thinking about the 'who and why'.

In other words, society is build on conspiracies. That is only logical.

posted on Feb, 24 2006 @ 06:30 PM
First things first...let's start with the facts...

Etymology: Middle English conspiracie, from Latin conspirare
1 : the act of conspiring together
2 a : an agreement among conspirators b : a group of conspirators

Etymology: Late Latin theoria, from Greek theOria, from theOrein
1 : the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2 : abstract thought : SPECULATION
3 : the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art
4 a : a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action b : an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances -- often used in the phrase in theory
5 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena
6 a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : CONJECTURE c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject

Conspiracy (crime)
In the criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more natural persons to break the law at some time in the future, so a natural person identified with the mind of a legal entity cannot conspire with the company alone. There is no limit on the number participating in the conspiracy and, in most countries, no requirement that any steps have been taken to put the plan into effect (compare attempts which require proximity to the full offense). For the purposes of concurrence, the actus reus is a continuing one and parties may join "the plot" later and incur joint liability and conspiracy can be charged where the co-conspirators have been acquitted and/or cannot be traced. Finally, repentence by one or more parties does not affect liability but may reduce their sentence.

Now we can assuredly say "yes" conspiracies are real as are theories...when one puts the two together does it make them unreal?
In other words do two wrongs make a right or do two rights make a wrong?

One's mere theory may be anothers hard fact and until theories are brought together, digested and disected between others the facts cannot be distinguished.

People are charged with "conspiracy" all the time BTW...

[edit on 24-2-2006 by ChatBrat]

posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 01:26 AM
the way you posted all those definitions about conspiracy is great
i was very happy to see conspiracy does not have to always be defined as bad.i should would like to see a few more positive conspiracy's.right now i am tired and can't even think of one. anybody else?

posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 01:37 AM
I definately enjoy the whole conspiracy concept as a form a entertainment and I appreciate it at its basic level because at worst it provokes thought, and that can never be a bad thing. I do believe that many of these ideas that you read about on here are closer to actual facts than many would like to believe. Face it, governments are designed and exist to keep the masses distracted and afraid. So far the only conspiracy topic that I shy away from is the whole reptilian concept. Just cant quite wrap my brain around that one But hey...who am I to say it isn't true.

posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 11:50 PM
I'd have to answer both.

new topics

top topics


log in