The problem I have with conspiracies.

You can almost assert that anything is a conspiracy about anything. There are even conspiracies that this years super bowl team is already chosen because "the powers that be" (I hate that term. Hate it.) are in some way profiting from said chosen team.

Of course, there are the popular conspiracies about UFOs, ET being all tight with the US government, the moon landing, jfk, etc. Some of these conspiracies hold some legitimate value, but others are a crock and why I have a problem with these crock theories is that they're disrespectful.

When you assert that our government knows about alien life but won't tell the public for reason A or reason B, you are discrediting and disrespecting the immense amount of work (often life-long devotion) of the scientists who are actually searching for extra terrestrial life. The same can be said about the moon landing. Do you have the academic knowledge to design and build a rocket that can travel from the earth to the moon? Probably not, but some people do. And some people used their years of training and intellectual genius to create a machine that would take teams of people to our moon, and for what? They get told that it was filmed in a desert and never actually happened. Imagine the satisfaction you'd have if your years of doing algorithms from 9-5 every day for years finally paid off when you got that confirmation that we'd landing on the moon. That level of satisfaction is almost unimaginable. And yet, how deflating it would be to have someone turn around and say, too good to be true. Didn't happen.

Someone who can imagine that satisfaction is the athlete who has worked his entire life towards the goal of holding the super bowl, or lord stanley's cup in the air. Years of training, working out, studying film and honing your skills, finally paid off. For what? To be told it's all part of the game, and you were going to win anyhow.

I'll admit, the athlete idea is the least of my worries, because that conspiracy is pretty far-fetched, and not really acknowledged all that much. But the point is relevant and valid.

Believe everything you see and hear? No, of course not. Have an open mind. But should your mind be so open that your brain falls out? No. And that's the point of this post. Not necessarily a rant, just an attack on the general idea of a conspiracy and how hurtful they can be.

reply to post by Schmidt1989

If there is money (energy/power) to be gotten... somebody is conspiring to maximize how much of it they be gettin'.

It it true conspiracies can be hurtful.

I was deeply hurt my government was spying on it's Citizens.

Not too hurt though. Because I already knew it because of Conspiracy Theorists.

There is lots of clutter out there. You can get caught up.

Looking back the past few years, Conspiracy Theorists look like prophets.

reply to post by Schmidt1989


it's impossible to be cynical enough to know what people are actually up to.

people invented the devil, imo, because they could not deal with how evil the human race is.

why would the financial sector be the cause of it's own demise?
they control the governments and write their own poker rules.
and infinite greed makes them create more scams to rip off the world economy.
untill they self destruct.

the us congress is so arogant, proud and delusional, that like the ancient romans think themselves forever.

what a creative writer you would need to devulge their conspiracy of self destruction.

reply to post by Schmidt1989


While I agree that one should be open minded but not so open minded that one's brain falls out (in fact I say those exact words A LOT), i disagree that one should determine their opinion on a conspiracy theory simply on the basis of its respectfulness. In fact, I would hazard that some of the most questionable conspiracies that have occurred actually relied on respect as a cover for their actions. Respect isn't given; it is earned. Should we respect the research of scientists simply because they "spent years" on that research? It depends on what that research was. Perhaps I am misunderstanding your statements but using respect for someone's years of research would seem to excuse such real events like the testing of amnesia inducing drugs on cancer patients in hospice. (Source: www.intelligence.senate.gov... ) If we were to use respect for scientific research as a reason to not question whether a conspiracy exists or not, then we would have never had the uncovering of the MK-ULTRA program.

In fact, I would hazard that the realization that a conspiracy may exist almost requires an inherent disrespect as it is the act of asking those questions that many would find uncomfortable to ask and against the status quo. Conspiracies exist in areas where acceptance and respect are granted without question. Using the idea that asking those questions which may be hurtful to another person's years of research or effort as a factor in deciding whether a conspiracy exists is completely illogical. Accusers of possible steroid use for Lance Armstrong were considered to be immensely disrespectful both on the basis of all of his years of effort and on the basis of his being a cancer survivor. However, at the end of the day, those accusers were correct and Armstrong, himself, admitted to the indiscretion. If we all just operated under the appreciation of X years of effort for everyone, then we all might as well be wearing rose colored glasses for fear of hurting another person's feelings.

Humanity, pockets of groups and individuals can do both great things and horrific things. As an anthropology major, have you read Victims of Progress by John H. Bodley yet? Do you comprehend that people can spend years of their life working on something or doing something only to have it go absolutely foul? To operate under the presumption that everyone always acts in a positive way, especially if they are more vested by X years of effort, risks ignoring both reality and history, itself. Has there ever been a case where a star athlete agreed to throw a game? Absolutely. Has there ever been a case where a scientist fudged their data? Absolutely.

Have you ever heard the story of Bernie Madoff? Bernie Madoff was the creator and founder of NASDAQ. He might as well have been a god of the markets. Yet, when people started saying that something was going on with Madoff and began accusing him of possibly operating a Ponzi scheme, those people were ignored, all the way up through the SEC. So many warnings and complaints went completely ignored because Madoff was so successful throughout his life. He created NASDAQ, after all. In the end, it took his own sons turning Madoff in for his Ponzi scheme. The sheer unthinkable act of one's children reporting their father's wrongdoing was the only thing that shook Madoff off of his pedestal, uncovered his crimes and put him in jail. Everyone else respected Madoff far too much for all that he had done over the years.

When I see people's brains falling out is when they cherry pick evidence while ignoring evidence to the contrary, which is a logical fallacy. Can years of effort be used to prove that something occurred? Absolutely as it may provide a cohesive timeline of evidence that leads to proving that something did, in fact, occur. However, to err is human. To think that there is no error in judgment or goodness is to deny our own humanity. That is just as much a logical fallacy as cherry picking is.

reply to post by Schmidt1989


I would ask you who do you think brought these various conspiracies to life?
The answer is that it was not "who" but WHAT. And the what is not people writing with a wild spins of thought, but the discovery of information, sometimes years later, that they and everybody else was being lied to by TPTB.

Where do you want to start, with bankers, the start of WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Iraq, etc.? Or maybe you would like to start with the mysterious UFOs that give every indication of being alien craft but which both science and government fail to adequate investigate because they already know the startling truth? Or how about the underhanded work of the CIA, NSA, and on and on?

Frankly, any aware person today in the Western world that does not have some suspicions that they have had their lives changed and ruled by secret shenanigans of governments, the UN, and financial institutions and the elite is an utter fool that believes too strong in what they are told by TPTB and not enough in gauging for him or her self the world around them.

In short, it is no stretch to say that conspiracies have a birthing in facts and even rumors that misdeeds were or are being done on a multiplicity of levels day in and day out.

And, the cannon fodder are waking up, if partially and sometimes wrongly, to glimpses aspects of the revealed truth.

Conspiracies exist because TPTB have taken as their first rule the words of Jack Nickelson in the movie A Few Good Men. "The truth! You want the truth? You can't stand the truth!" And so it is....

Every trial conducted in court that's based on circumstancial evidence is a "conspiracy theory". That's all it is. But there's enough evidence to bring up the case. There's no difference. If there's enough evidence to support a theory then it stands. And with enough evidence it becomes plain as daylight just like it does in a courtroom where the trial is based only on circumstancial evidence. And no they didn't go to the moon, get real.

reply to post by Schmidt1989


Lack of Transparency = Speculation

President John F Kennedy Secret Society Speech version 2
www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces
www.youtube.com...