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.

 

The Dark Side of "Conspiracy Theory"

page: 9
71
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by euwhajavb
This could very well be the most intelligent post I've seen here. Ever. Conspiracies exist, but they constantly get over dramatized.


Over-dramatized is a really good word of describing what goes on. Its a kind of Hollywood-mentality, as another poster already mentioned.




posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


christianity, however, doesn't as readily lend itself to conspiracy theory as this post of yours suggests, particularly as regards anti-government sentiment. scripturally-speaking, we are told to follow the laws of the land in which we live, unless or until the laws ask us to not follow christ.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   
skyfloating you always have interesting threads.

I understand where you are coming from and these are just things we have to endure.

I will say with some subjects such as ufo's and aliens for example sometimes proof is mixed in with hoaxes so it comes down to each individual.

I know the things I have written about dealing with ufo's and alien's is truth and I share freely and it is up to each to decide for themselves how they feel about what I write. I can't expect anyone to believe my words BUT as I see it in time what I write will either come to light or it will not it's only me that will look bad if it never comes to light.

Actually I have to chuckle to myself because most people here just never even respond to anything I write but as I see it...... I got it out there and if they read it then they know.

The human being is quite strange and unique in my eyes compared to the life Beings I have had the priviledge to interact with over my human lifetime.

I give you a star and flag something I don't do all that often



[edit on 26-7-2009 by observe50]



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


ahh, i see. i thought perhaps you had posted a thread on the subject and i had missed it.

i'd also add, "reptilian" doesn't automatically mean the person is evil, either, at least not from what i've read on the subject so far. the whole seraph/serpent research comes to mind.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
christianity, however, doesn't as readily lend itself to conspiracy theory as this post of yours suggests


One of the first conspiracy-theories in history was contained in the Book of Revelation.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
i'd also add, "reptilian" doesn't automatically mean the person is evil, either, at least not from what i've read on the subject so far. the whole seraph/serpent research comes to mind.


Thats a whole other episode.

David Icke is something else though. He's the prototype of what I mean by "dark side of conspiracy theory". It does not get any darker than Icke. He takes popular concepts such as "The Matrix" and "Serpents" and mixes it into his own brand of libel and slander against anyone who disagrees with him.
Someone disagrees with him and that person is immediately labeled an alien, a disinfo agent, a pedophile (something Icke uses frequently) and whatnot.

And the guy is an underground bestseller.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   
[edit on 26-7-2009 by Skyfloating]



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   
I find these kinds of threads really helpful in that they provide a sobering viewpoint on a site that, though I enjoy immensely, can get a little out of hand and ridiculous sometimes. The 9/11 threads being one of the best examples. Your very right Skyfloating when you say that it all doesn't have to be a conspiracy. But on the other hand I also applaud you in your denouncement of "skeptics" and their unbelievablely narrow viewpoints.

My one concern is to where did you get these percentages? Are these just personal views or are they actually based on a study or some similar paper that you've read? They just seem to be a bit arbitrary.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


theoretical?

you're living dangerously these days


it's prophetical, not theoretical. now you could argue that prophecy is theoretical i suppose but then you'd have to argue that all prophecy is theoretical.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Solomons
 


Because some of them are evil, or to use a better word: Misguided. Emphasis on some.


Then why do the the policies still continue if it is just *some* people that are evil,yet year in year out decade after decade the policies are still for the most part the exact same and the death count continues to rise.I would say it is the system that is inherently evil,and like a moth to a flame it attracts people with evil intentions.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 


All wars start with fear, hate & paranoia.

A conspiracy-theorist tends to think that this is orchestrated. That may be the case. But if you think its all orchestrated, it would be wise to discern between the orchestrators and the innocent rather than labeling everyone malevolent.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Excellent thread, and encapsulates a lot of what has been frustrating me on ATS lately.

If you do not slavishly believe the most outlandish theories as if they were cold hard fact, you must be a "useful idiot" or "disinfo agent"


I came here to investigate unusual hypotheses and because I did not want to assume that the party line was fact - I prefer to evaluate the facts for myself.

However there has developed a kind of groupthink here, where everuything in the MSM is to be treated as absolute falsehood, and the claims of CT's are to be taken as absolute ironclad truth, regardless of lack of evidence or logical inconsistencies.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Personally I see this thread backfiring at the OP.
I believe your intention was good, but the way you developed your ideas lead you straight to hell (in my perspective of the world).

I understand that you tried to say that we have way too much false information because of the lack of seriousness that people give to the sharing of information. Is that correct?

From my point of view I see that the excess of seriousness is what really complicates the whole situation (and I am also referring to you here, Skyfloating).

First you come up with a bunch of numbers that at least for me seem just invented. I doubt that you have a solid base backed with deep research accompanied by real statistical calculations to get to those numbers. I think you just thought of what would be convincing and look nice. Maybe I am wrong, and if so, it would be interesting for us that you shared how you got to those numbers.

Now, besides the issue with numbers I also see an issue with your "psychological judgments". From my perspective, with your thread you fit quite well in all the categories that you pointed out yourself (narcissism, broken trust in childhood, megalomania, etc...). I do not intend to explain why I see it this way because its pretty quite obvious for me. But if you have a hard time understanding my perspective I will be glad to explain it.

Truth is all.
Truth is not something separate from ego and entertainment.
Truth is ego, entertainment and much more.

I could keep going on and on and on about this.
But I think my point is already made:
This thread is more of an auto-analysis then anything else.

IMHO.


[edit on 26-7-2009 by Geladinhu]



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Geladinhu
Personally I see this thread backfiring at the OP.
I believe your intention was good, but the way you developed your ideas lead you straight to hell (in my perspective of the world).

I understand that you tried to say that we have way too much false information because of the lack of seriousness that people give to the sharing of information. Is that correct?

From my point of view I see that the excess of seriousness is what really complicates the whole situation (and I am also referring to you here, Skyfloating).

First you come up with a bunch of numbers that at least for me seem just invented. I doubt that you have a solid base backed with deep research accompanied by real statistical calculations to get to those numbers. I think you just thought of what would be convincing and look nice. Maybe I am wrong, and if so, it would be interesting for us that you shared how you got to those numbers.

Now, besides the issue with numbers I also see an issue with your "psychological judgments". From my perspective, with your thread you fit quite well in all the categories that you pointed out yourself (narcissism, broken trust in childhood, megalomania, etc...). I do not intend to explain why I see it this way because its pretty quite obvious for me. But if you have a hard time understanding my perspective I will be glad to explain it.

Truth is all.
Truth is not something separate from ego and entertainment.
Truth is ego, entertainment and much more.

I could keep going on and on and on about this.
But I think my point is already made:
This thread is more of an auto-analysis then anything else.

IMHO.


[edit on 26-7-2009 by Geladinhu]


I agree whole-heartedly with the OP, and his evidence is right here on ats for all to find for themselves.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Geladinhu
Personally I see this thread backfiring at the OP.


Since I did not intend to gain anything with this, there can be no backfire.



your ideas lead you straight to hell


"Fear is a path to the dark side" - Yoda



I understand that you tried to say that we have way too much false information because of the lack of seriousness that people give to the sharing of information. Is that correct?


I said that entertainment, internet-clicks and making-an-impression are favored over truth and that a society that ignores the importance of truth will fail.



From my point of view I see that the excess of seriousness is what really complicates the whole situation (and I am also referring to you here, Skyfloating).


Humor and Lightheartedness have their place. But when it comes to the political, the religious and worldviews in general, false info and fear/hate-based info causes downfall, decay, war and more.



First you come up with a bunch of numbers that at least for me seem just invented. I doubt that you have a solid base backed with deep research accompanied by real statistical calculations to get to those numbers. I think you just thought of what would be convincing and look nice. Maybe I am wrong, and if so, it would be interesting for us that you shared how you got to those numbers.


Those estimates are based on a long road of research. Back in the day when I used to believe in nearly every conspiracy-theory out there I actually WENT to the places talked about in the theories. For example, I read about secret societies orchestrating world events, so I joined them.
Or I read about Area51, so I contacted people who work there. And so forth and so on. Lots of experience, lots of research.

But honestly: Take a look at the "recent posts" page of this Board. How much do you figure is based on agenda, personal entertainment, boredom, anger and how much do you figure is based on genuine research? 70% not having truth as an intention is a generous figure.



Now, besides the issue with numbers I also see an issue with your "psychological judgments". From my perspective, with your thread you fit quite well in all the categories that you pointed out yourself (narcissism, broken trust in childhood, megalomania, etc...).


If you say so.




Truth is not something separate from ego and entertainment.


That reflects precisely the attitude of the Internet-Generation. "Who cares, its all the same", right?

I think thats questionable.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex

However there has developed a kind of groupthink here,


Group-think by the people who dislike group-think. Ironic, isnt it. It happens to the best of us.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   
If you did not intend to gain anything with the thread why did you create it in the first place? I'm pretty sure that if you didn't really want anything from it you wouldn't care to create it.

I wasn't trying to evoke fear in anyone, nor am I afraid of anything if thats what you meant with the Yoda quote. Maybe the word hell was not adequate there.

Do you even know what truth is to be speaking of it? If you do know, why don't you create a thread about truth instead of creating one about non-truth? I don't believe truth can be ignored (since truth in my perspective is all). Maybe it can. But it is like pain. Difficult to ignore.

There is no such thing as false or hate/fear based info. Info is just info. Whatever characteristics info has it is totally subjective. It is the receiver of information that creates its meaning. The giver may also have its own meaning, but the receiver always creates its own no matter what.
For instance, even if I say something seemingly absurd, it will only be absurd if you interpret it in a specific way.

So your estimates are based on your own experience. But interestingly enough this thread seems to be including all experiences and not only yours.

"Its all the same, who cares?". I wish that was the attitude of the internet-generation. I wish that was the attitude of everyone, actually. "It is all the same" is one of the greatest spiritual insights ever.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   
How wise and certainly too, in need for, and by clear dialogue.

"powerstruggle"...and power struggle for being correct, above everybody, and sombody also mentioned an aspect, that is, over-dramatic, I feel that this is a concept of somewhat a principle and personality by morality devided in within ourself.

But imagine this.

How often do we put a smile on our faces while we turn our computers back after several hours sessions, and get to work, bed & sleep or outside activitis with friends. When we constantly feed ourselves with preceptions of poor preceptions of the dooms, and how this world has turned it's ugly feet upon us, and our future are unseen.

We become paranoied, dysfunctioned and mental ill.

We has free will. So what are we doing about it all these dooms?

We get Acrimonious, tell others how they must think, believe and act, without doing our evolution step dance, and prevail a sound ground for our reasoning.

Remeber, we can walk on a train, but not jump on to it while still it's in full force and their engines are running...human beings are the same way built. With us human beings. We can never influence others by putting them down and trying to press down our knowledge into their troats, they start to choke it up faster than you can say "daylight".

It's human nature, and it's rather natural.

That's how I detest all these doom & gloom conspiracy videos. Speak of now, what happend, save us the spewy parts form past motional images of the past dooms, speak of what is now.

I found this the other day, two days ago infact. By browsing astrology web sites I saw that I depart of "father" /sun/father

For the sake of feeling good, I post this and maybe somebody can turn their life around with these answers from our planets, the suns(stars) and starts and within symbols of astrology.



Variable DECADE, 13-22

Anyone who has the sun in this part of the wave has a zeal to make judgments that can make these hasty. He wants to have set standards to live by, but are rarely in full agreement with itself about what they should be. The one principle may be in contrast to the other, and sometimes it is a huge mess. Yet he hurry to the views and the greatest willingness to abide by the strictest laws. The variable scale is concerned by conflicts, but not always easy to solve them. His own desire for forgiveness is almost limitless, as long as he sees that it would be beneficial objectives. Fairness is a central concept, and each example of the injustice he observes upsetting him huge. The moving wave can easily find that life is a struggle between good and evil, and sometimes hesitant on who draws the longest straw. For simplicity is rarely the variable scale model, because he has the ability to understand the complexity and realize that not everyone can be drawn over a comb. Shades and adaptation is highly possible in his ethics. He thinks often quite a problem can be as simple as many claim. His quest for harmony can sometimes seem exaggerated, as if he feared labile state, which is not the case. Anyone who has the sun in this part of the wave has a zeal for loyalty, but understand to keep it within reasonable limits. The logical mind believe that it never reaches a full, reasonable picture of reality. This road is really the one who has difficult to decide. Relationship with father shifts, although proximity and mutual trust is the normal state. They discuss and question without leading to deep disagreements. They appreciate each other a lot and draw big lessons from each other. They may tend to catch up on little things in each other's lifestyle or to lose touch with each other in the absence of a common denominator, but are still always his band.
Traslation I did through Google translator.

^^

Mod edit: Changed to EX tags to preserve page margins

[edit on 7/26/09 by FredT]



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Geladinhu
If you did not intend to gain anything with the thread why did you create it in the first place? I'm pretty sure that if you didn't really want anything from it you wouldn't care to create it.


Some threads I make to gain something...gain insight, gain collaborators, gain whatever. This one was made to share.



Do you even know what truth is to be speaking of it?


Yes, I know many conspiracy-theories to be false from experience - as described.



(since truth in my perspective is all)


So if I sell you a book full of lies, is that truth?



There is no such thing as false or hate/fear based info.




Info is just info. Whatever characteristics info has it is totally subjective.


In the OP I called this attitude "abuse of relativism". Following that reasoning I could call the color red blue and give you fake money instead of real money.

You see this attitude all over here. Someone says: "The Holocaust never happened" (you see that one on a daily basis here). I say: "Yes it did". He says: "Thats only your perspective. Everyone has his own subjective truth".



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 05:15 PM
link   
I suspect the # is more like 90% then 70%. Most of what anyone believes to be true is, in some way, incorrect. You also have information promoted by the "Illuminati" simple as a barometer to see how quickly those under their thumb obey and how willingly people accept or reject. Probing is being done continuously. Lies are constantly being spread. The very nature of the world is Illusion. As above, so below. The world is a reflection of high regions which are reflections of higher regions. Everything in the material worlds is a reflection in order to make it seem like home. It is modeled after what can be known because creativity doesn't below to the devil. He can only imitate what he is aware of and the creativity comes from the Supreme Being and is original in the purely spiritual worlds.

If you think you are going to document something as absolute truth, you can't. If the Illuminati put out 1,000 lies a day and you spend weeks or months trying to prove 1 thing is true, your information will not only likely not be absolutely correct and could be very incorrect but it will be lost in the plethora of lies.

What may help people is to arrive at some simple way at estimating if the rational of an event is commonsense? Lets make up an equation:
Rare * Rare (to the nth power) = A probably lie or the more statistically unlikely a series of related events is to have occurred the improbably it is to be true. The likelihood that at the time of a statistically rare event there is also a statistically rare response or series of rare responses is most probably a lie.

For example: The towers collapsed because they where hit by planes that resulted in their twisting inwards blah, blah, blah. The towers being hit by a plane is a rare event, collapsing from the impact is another rare event, collapsing because of twisting is a rare event.
Versus: The towers collapsed - the cause is a known, established phenomenon of control demolition. The towers collapsed is rare but controlled demolition is not rare. Access to the building is somewhat rare but the new owners could do what they wanted.

President JFK is shot. The cause is one guy who fired multiple shots in a short time frame and one bullet did some amazing things. -- The President is shot is rare. A single gunman hitting multile targets with a bad riffle in a short amout of time is rare. A bullet doing some amazing things is rare. Rare*Rare*Rare = a probably a lie.
Versus: JFK is shot, a rare event. Multiple gunmen hit multiple targets, not rare. No magic bullet - not rare. More likely the truth.



new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join