Originally Posted by Doctorb:
“The chocolate orange one, annoying and probably true.”
“The chocolate orange one, annoying and probably true.”
Say what?
Most annoying conspiracy theories
5 of 9
Originally Posted by lemoncurd:
“I'd never heard of the Sandy Hook CT until I read this!”
“I'd never heard of the Sandy Hook CT until I read this!”
Welcome to the abyss. Gaze into it long enough and crisis actors will gaze back at you.
Rockets work by issac newton's 1st law. "to every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction''.
Speed of light is fastest you can travel. But, there's also relativistic time dilation. If you go at lightspeed, time passing (''proper time'') also freezes .........
There's also the possibility of epr bridges, or ''hyperspace wormholes'', making faster than light travel possible ........
Originally Posted by nattoyaki:
“So I was always led to believe during my history and politics A-levels and then degree, where MLK was added to the mix. The one that struck me at school was the ballistics report from Robert Kennedy - it's all simply impossible from a lone gunman.
JFK I've looked into a lot more since and am convinced, you don't need much to prove it. No expert gunman in the world has ever been able to shoot three bullets in such a short time from that kind of gun (let alone hit a moving target from distance with each one).
Then there's testimony from multiple folk at the Warren Commission that the car slowed and Kennedy stood up and said something before the fatal shot, which was dismissed. The Zapruder film always supported the official line but recent forensic investigations into the missing frames apparently show it was altered (in one frame the join is obvious). Zapruder himself said Kennedy stood up...but that isn't in his film!
There's a lady who claims she was Oswald's lover who's very interesting and quite convincing, though I haven't read her book.
Interestingly, wasn't it in the early 60s that the CIA itself coined the phrase 'conspiracy theory'?
!”
“So I was always led to believe during my history and politics A-levels and then degree, where MLK was added to the mix. The one that struck me at school was the ballistics report from Robert Kennedy - it's all simply impossible from a lone gunman.
JFK I've looked into a lot more since and am convinced, you don't need much to prove it. No expert gunman in the world has ever been able to shoot three bullets in such a short time from that kind of gun (let alone hit a moving target from distance with each one).
Then there's testimony from multiple folk at the Warren Commission that the car slowed and Kennedy stood up and said something before the fatal shot, which was dismissed. The Zapruder film always supported the official line but recent forensic investigations into the missing frames apparently show it was altered (in one frame the join is obvious). Zapruder himself said Kennedy stood up...but that isn't in his film!
There's a lady who claims she was Oswald's lover who's very interesting and quite convincing, though I haven't read her book.
Interestingly, wasn't it in the early 60s that the CIA itself coined the phrase 'conspiracy theory'?
!”
There's been two interesting documentaries on Blaze TV, Freeview 83, these last two nights about the JFK assassination. Last night's was mainly about Oswald's last two days alive. They were made by the History Channel in 2013 for the 50th Anniversary but I'd never seen them before.
They did a gun test and said it is possible that Oswald fired three shots from that type of gun. He was good marksman but certainly not a brilliant one even though he'd been in the US marines. Also, anyone just about to shoot the President would have nerves and adrenalin running through them which could affect their shooting accuracy,
Originally Posted by Elvisfan4eva:
“ He was good marksman but certainly not a brilliant one even though he'd been in the US marines. Also, anyone just about to shoot the President would have nerves and adrenalin running through them which could affect their shooting accuracy,”
“ He was good marksman but certainly not a brilliant one even though he'd been in the US marines. Also, anyone just about to shoot the President would have nerves and adrenalin running through them which could affect their shooting accuracy,”
As I recall, the results of two tests of his marksmanship are on record. In the earlier of the two, he made the second level, missing the highest level by quite a small margin. His score on the later test was rather lower, In the meantime, he'd had a number of disciplinary problems, and left the Marines a little later, so it's possible that, through disillusionment, he just didn't make the effort for that one.
Nerves and adrenaline can go either way. They might cause "the shakes" and an unsteady aim, or they might lead to what novelists sometimes call a "deadly calm" and improved performance. Doubtless advocates of any particular theory will find that one of those options suits their purposes!
The most annoying conspiracy theories are the "satanic panic' ones simply because they have the most potential to cause harm to innocent people. The whole freeman on the land / common law nonsense is dangerous rubbish too.
This thread is already well out of date as I see that 'fake news' is now the preferred term, as 'conspiracy theory' doesn't quite cut it anymore 
Yes there are myriad whackjob theories out there of course (I put Roswell in that bracket personally), but it doesn't mean you throw the whole lot out. Plenty have been admitted to/finally outed in the past e.g. the US mind control programme. Keep a critical mind and do your own research I say.
I don't understand why rockets don't need to push against anything in outer space, which we're told is a vacuum. Why not, when all land based vehicles have to push against something
The rest of your answer makes sense, thank you.
The second paragraph - if all the evidence suggests that faster than light travel isn't possible then why is Eistein's E = MC squared even entertained as possible. C = the speed of light in that equation, doesn't it, so how can you square it if it's not possible to do so
Many thanks though so far
Sounds a very wise approach to me. Keep an open mind and do your own research.
I'd be interested to see the gun tests because numerous independent expert analysis have previously said you simply cannot reload and fire that weapon three times in the time he's said to have done it. Adrenaline plays no part in affecting mechanics - if I'm excited to eat my dinner the oven doesn't cook it quicker!
This thread's got my interest up a lot! I found some very interesting statistics about all the strange deaths around the Kennedy witnesses, never knew that!
Also this flat earth stuff is interesting and I have a number of basic scientific questions there for anyone who can help, but is there a separate thread for that?
Yes there are myriad whackjob theories out there of course (I put Roswell in that bracket personally), but it doesn't mean you throw the whole lot out. Plenty have been admitted to/finally outed in the past e.g. the US mind control programme. Keep a critical mind and do your own research I say.
Originally Posted by TerraCanis:
“They don't need to "push against" anything (although you could argue that they're pushing against their own exhaust) Rockets work by "throwing" relatively small amounts of marerial backwards at speed: because the rocket has to "push" this material backwards, the material also pushes the rocket forwards.
Honest answer: nobody really knows. But, all the evidence so far suggests that it isn't. There might be ways round that evidence, but all result in the laws of physics being rather different from how the evidence suggests they are. So, most likely, no.”
“They don't need to "push against" anything (although you could argue that they're pushing against their own exhaust) Rockets work by "throwing" relatively small amounts of marerial backwards at speed: because the rocket has to "push" this material backwards, the material also pushes the rocket forwards.
Honest answer: nobody really knows. But, all the evidence so far suggests that it isn't. There might be ways round that evidence, but all result in the laws of physics being rather different from how the evidence suggests they are. So, most likely, no.”
I don't understand why rockets don't need to push against anything in outer space, which we're told is a vacuum. Why not, when all land based vehicles have to push against something
The rest of your answer makes sense, thank you.The second paragraph - if all the evidence suggests that faster than light travel isn't possible then why is Eistein's E = MC squared even entertained as possible. C = the speed of light in that equation, doesn't it, so how can you square it if it's not possible to do so
Many thanks though so far
Originally Posted by Trulytrue:
“I don't know about "normal vaccines" but Has anyone looked into the HPV vaccine though? Seems to be a lot going on with that one, yet they are now going to be testing it on newborn babies
I would not just dismiss anything out of hand, just because it sounds daft any more.”
“I don't know about "normal vaccines" but Has anyone looked into the HPV vaccine though? Seems to be a lot going on with that one, yet they are now going to be testing it on newborn babies
I would not just dismiss anything out of hand, just because it sounds daft any more.”
Sounds a very wise approach to me. Keep an open mind and do your own research.
Originally Posted by Elvisfan4eva:
“There's been two interesting documentaries on Blaze TV, Freeview 83, these last two nights about the JFK assassination. Last night's was mainly about Oswald's last two days alive. They were made by the History Channel in 2013 for the 50th Anniversary but I'd never seen them before.
They did a gun test and said it is possible that Oswald fired three shots from that type of gun. He was good marksman but certainly not a brilliant one even though he'd been in the US marines. Also, anyone just about to shoot the President would have nerves and adrenalin running through them which could affect their shooting accuracy,”
“There's been two interesting documentaries on Blaze TV, Freeview 83, these last two nights about the JFK assassination. Last night's was mainly about Oswald's last two days alive. They were made by the History Channel in 2013 for the 50th Anniversary but I'd never seen them before.
They did a gun test and said it is possible that Oswald fired three shots from that type of gun. He was good marksman but certainly not a brilliant one even though he'd been in the US marines. Also, anyone just about to shoot the President would have nerves and adrenalin running through them which could affect their shooting accuracy,”
I'd be interested to see the gun tests because numerous independent expert analysis have previously said you simply cannot reload and fire that weapon three times in the time he's said to have done it. Adrenaline plays no part in affecting mechanics - if I'm excited to eat my dinner the oven doesn't cook it quicker!
This thread's got my interest up a lot! I found some very interesting statistics about all the strange deaths around the Kennedy witnesses, never knew that!
Also this flat earth stuff is interesting and I have a number of basic scientific questions there for anyone who can help, but is there a separate thread for that?
Originally Posted by nattoyaki:
“This thread is already well out of date as I see that 'fake news' is now the preferred term, as 'conspiracy theory' doesn't quite cut it anymore Yes there are myriad whackjob theories out there of course (I put Roswell in that bracket personally), but it doesn't mean you throw the whole lot out. Plenty have been admitted to/finally outed in the past e.g. the US mind control programme. Keep a critical mind and do your own research I say.
I don't understand why rockets don't need to push against anything in outer space, which we're told is a vacuum. Why not, when all land based vehicles have to push against something The rest of your answer makes sense, thank you.
The second paragraph - if all the evidence suggests that faster than light travel isn't possible then why is Eistein's E = MC squared even entertained as possible. C = the speed of light in that equation, doesn't it, so how can you square it if it's not possible to do so
Many thanks though so far
Sounds a very wise approach to me. Keep an open mind and do your own research.
I'd be interested to see the gun tests because numerous independent expert analysis have previously said you simply cannot reload and fire that weapon three times in the time he's said to have done it. Adrenaline plays no part in affecting mechanics - if I'm excited to eat my dinner the oven doesn't cook it quicker!
This thread's got my interest up a lot! I found some very interesting statistics about all the strange deaths around the Kennedy witnesses, never knew that!
Also this flat earth stuff is interesting and I have a number of basic scientific questions there for anyone who can help, but is there a separate thread for that?”
“This thread is already well out of date as I see that 'fake news' is now the preferred term, as 'conspiracy theory' doesn't quite cut it anymore
Yes there are myriad whackjob theories out there of course (I put Roswell in that bracket personally), but it doesn't mean you throw the whole lot out. Plenty have been admitted to/finally outed in the past e.g. the US mind control programme. Keep a critical mind and do your own research I say.I don't understand why rockets don't need to push against anything in outer space, which we're told is a vacuum. Why not, when all land based vehicles have to push against something
The rest of your answer makes sense, thank you.The second paragraph - if all the evidence suggests that faster than light travel isn't possible then why is Eistein's E = MC squared even entertained as possible. C = the speed of light in that equation, doesn't it, so how can you square it if it's not possible to do so
Many thanks though so far
Sounds a very wise approach to me. Keep an open mind and do your own research.
I'd be interested to see the gun tests because numerous independent expert analysis have previously said you simply cannot reload and fire that weapon three times in the time he's said to have done it. Adrenaline plays no part in affecting mechanics - if I'm excited to eat my dinner the oven doesn't cook it quicker!
This thread's got my interest up a lot! I found some very interesting statistics about all the strange deaths around the Kennedy witnesses, never knew that!
Also this flat earth stuff is interesting and I have a number of basic scientific questions there for anyone who can help, but is there a separate thread for that?”
JFK assassination and Marilyn Monroe are not on my list of annoying conspiracy theories. Those were thought suspicious long before the habit of assuming everything is a conspiracy or actors became prevalent.
Originally Posted by bollywood:
“JFK assassination and Marilyn Monroe are not on my list of annoying conspiracy theories. Those were thought suspicious long before the habit of assuming everything is a conspiracy or actors became prevalent.”
“JFK assassination and Marilyn Monroe are not on my list of annoying conspiracy theories. Those were thought suspicious long before the habit of assuming everything is a conspiracy or actors became prevalent.”
Agreed. The problem is, if you accept that part(s) of the American government were involved in taking out JFK, why shouldn't we question everything else?
In fact, isn't it a duty of a moral person to do so?
Originally Posted by nattoyaki:
“Agreed. The problem is, if you accept that part(s) of the American government were involved in taking out JFK, why shouldn't we question everything else?
In fact, isn't it a duty of a moral person to do so?”
“Agreed. The problem is, if you accept that part(s) of the American government were involved in taking out JFK, why shouldn't we question everything else?
In fact, isn't it a duty of a moral person to do so?”
Where there is evidence. False flag idiocy is not evidence.
Originally Posted by bollywood:
“Where there is evidence. False flag idiocy is not evidence.”
“Where there is evidence. False flag idiocy is not evidence.”
There is evidence of things very not right all around Sandy Hook, for example. Wouldn't you rather work together to try to work out what happened there? I would.
People who believe that Michelle Obama is a transgender male just because s/he has a penis and the body proportions of a man. Hundreds of You-Tube videos to "prove" this. And that Joan Rivers was murdered because she publicly announced this "fact". Very irritating.
People who believe that 9/11 was an inside job just because it's impossible for two aircraft to demolish three buildings and because it's impossible for aircraft fuel plus burning furniture to melt steel.
People who believe that the Clintons are paedophiles just because they visited a private island, several times, where children were "misused". And Hilary exchanged some oddly worded emails.
People who believe the earth is flat just because they've never travelled around it in an aircraft.
You just couldn't make it up.
People who believe that 9/11 was an inside job just because it's impossible for two aircraft to demolish three buildings and because it's impossible for aircraft fuel plus burning furniture to melt steel.
People who believe that the Clintons are paedophiles just because they visited a private island, several times, where children were "misused". And Hilary exchanged some oddly worded emails.
People who believe the earth is flat just because they've never travelled around it in an aircraft.
You just couldn't make it up.
Originally Posted by nattoyaki:
“There is evidence of things very not right all around Sandy Hook, for example. Wouldn't you rather work together to try to work out what happened there? I would.”
“There is evidence of things very not right all around Sandy Hook, for example. Wouldn't you rather work together to try to work out what happened there? I would.”
I have not looked into the Sandy hook attack.
My own personal "elephant in the room" is the Nice truck. How does a truck that maimed and killed over 200 people stay so clean. Anyone who has ever hit a deer or a person or seen a road accident knows how far flesh and blood go.
We had people disembowelled, decapitated, limbs ripped off and yet the truck is clean. That makes my head hurt as I know its not possible and yet everyone believes it is.
Im sure most of us have seen or heard things that didn't make any sense but to say anything puts you into the nutter bracket. Self policing really and it shouldn't be, everything that does not sit right should be questioned.
Why do they never advertise the children who have died after a vaccine and yet one child dies of the disease its in every paper for days. One sided news is not keeping informed. Not wanting a vaccine does not make you a anti vaxx CT, but maybe a anti unsafe vaccine.
Why is it wrong to question what goes into your baby.. Why are there so many vaccines now even for things not life threatening for 99.9% of children.
Originally Posted by nattoyaki:
“This thread is already well out of date as I see that 'fake news' is now the preferred term, as 'conspiracy theory' doesn't quite cut it anymore. ”
“This thread is already well out of date as I see that 'fake news' is now the preferred term, as 'conspiracy theory' doesn't quite cut it anymore. ”
Fake news is a very different beast from a conspiracy theory.
Quote:
“I don't understand why rockets don't need to push against anything in outer space, which we're told is a vacuum. Why not, when all land based vehicles have to push against something”
“I don't understand why rockets don't need to push against anything in outer space, which we're told is a vacuum. Why not, when all land based vehicles have to push against something”
You can do the experiment on land. Sit in a wheelchair with the brakes off and a pile of bricks on your lap. Proceed to throw the bricks in front of you. You will move backwards in accordance with the same physical laws that rockets rely on. If you can minimise the friction by running on rails, the experiment will work even better.
Quote:
“The second paragraph - if all the evidence suggests that faster than light travel isn't possible then why is Eistein's E = MC squared even entertained as possible. C = the speed of light in that equation, doesn't it, so how can you square it if it's not possible to do so”
“The second paragraph - if all the evidence suggests that faster than light travel isn't possible then why is Eistein's E = MC squared even entertained as possible. C = the speed of light in that equation, doesn't it, so how can you square it if it's not possible to do so”
C is just a number. Of course you can square it. The equation (of itself) tells you nothing about C as the ultimate speed limit. It does tell you that mass and energy are different forms of the same thing.
Quote:
“Also this flat earth stuff is interesting and I have a number of basic scientific questions there for anyone who can help, but is there a separate thread for that?”
“Also this flat earth stuff is interesting and I have a number of basic scientific questions there for anyone who can help, but is there a separate thread for that?”
You could start one. Or you could ask here.
Originally Posted by MartinPickering:
“People who believe that Michelle Obama is a transgender male just because s/he has a penis and the body proportions of a man. ...(”
“People who believe that Michelle Obama is a transgender male just because s/he has a penis and the body proportions of a man. ...(”
Isn't having a penis 'a bit' of a sign you're not a biological female?
Originally Posted by nattoyaki:
“There is evidence of things very not right all around Sandy Hook, for example. Wouldn't you rather work together to try to work out what happened there? I would.”
“There is evidence of things very not right all around Sandy Hook, for example. Wouldn't you rather work together to try to work out what happened there? I would.”
Ugh no.
Im constantly flummoxed by CT's who claim there is an agenda to brianwash child into becoming trans. They have no idea what it means to be trans.
I all dont like the way the truth movement gets hijacked by far right ideologies....
I all dont like the way the truth movement gets hijacked by far right ideologies....
Originally Posted by Fairyprincess0:
“Im constantly flummoxed by CT's who claim there is an agenda to brianwash child into becoming trans. They have no idea what it means to be trans.
I all dont like the way the truth movement gets hijacked by far right ideologies....”
“Im constantly flummoxed by CT's who claim there is an agenda to brianwash child into becoming trans. They have no idea what it means to be trans.
I all dont like the way the truth movement gets hijacked by far right ideologies....”
I watched a David Icke video the other week, he seemed to be feeling sorry for those who supported Trump and for those who are on the left have so much venom. I always thought he was supposed to be all love and light.
The trans thing imo is not so much brainwashing but not taking into account that all children go through stages and confusion and not all are trans, but they seem to be being pushed ( not sure that is the right word, more guided maybe) towards surgery etc at a very young age now.
I would really like to see how after everything has died down , how those who have had surgery cope after a few years do they think they did the right thing for them.
Originally Posted by Trulytrue:
“I watched a David Icke video the other week, he seemed to be feeling sorry for those who supported Trump and for those who are on the left have so much venom. I always thought he was supposed to be all love and light.
The trans thing imo is not so much brainwashing but not taking into account that all children go through stages and confusion and not all are trans, but they seem to be being pushed ( not sure that is the right word, more guided maybe) towards surgery etc at a very young age now.
I would really like to see how after everything has died down , how those who have had surgery cope after a few years do they think they did the right thing for them.”
“I watched a David Icke video the other week, he seemed to be feeling sorry for those who supported Trump and for those who are on the left have so much venom. I always thought he was supposed to be all love and light.
The trans thing imo is not so much brainwashing but not taking into account that all children go through stages and confusion and not all are trans, but they seem to be being pushed ( not sure that is the right word, more guided maybe) towards surgery etc at a very young age now.
I would really like to see how after everything has died down , how those who have had surgery cope after a few years do they think they did the right thing for them.”
No they are not!!! No child is getting hormones or surgery.
They make be put on blockers, which delay puberty until they can make a decision.
Otherwise, they are given counselling until they can make a thorough decison. This is not something you should enter into lightly, child or not....
Originally Posted by Fairyprincess0:
“No they are not!!! No child is getting hormones or surgery.
They make be put on blockers, which delay puberty until they can make a decision.
Otherwise, they are given counselling until they can make a thorough decison. This is not something you should enter into lightly, child or not....”
“No they are not!!! No child is getting hormones or surgery.
They make be put on blockers, which delay puberty until they can make a decision.
Otherwise, they are given counselling until they can make a thorough decison. This is not something you should enter into lightly, child or not....”
I have read of children aged three and four in the USA and Australia going though
" sex-change procedure" Its not something I am up to date on but if that is true WTF are they thinking. My granddaughter last year wanted to be a boy, this year she hated boys. I expect if we had encouraged her "I want to be a boy" then she would still be thinking that way, but we didn't say anything at all to her. as she was 3yo and will change her mind over 1000s of things in the coming years.
Originally Posted by Trulytrue:
“I have read of children aged three and four in the USA and Australia going though
" sex-change procedure" Its not something I am up to date on but if that is true WTF are they thinking. My granddaughter last year wanted to be a boy, this year she hated boys. I expect if we had encouraged her "I want to be a boy" then she would still be thinking that way, but we didn't say anything at all to her. as she was 3yo and will change her mind over 1000s of things in the coming years.”
“I have read of children aged three and four in the USA and Australia going though
" sex-change procedure" Its not something I am up to date on but if that is true WTF are they thinking. My granddaughter last year wanted to be a boy, this year she hated boys. I expect if we had encouraged her "I want to be a boy" then she would still be thinking that way, but we didn't say anything at all to her. as she was 3yo and will change her mind over 1000s of things in the coming years.”
The "sex-change" procedure, is just that. A procedure. One that takes many years. Surgery, is just the last part of that.....
Originally Posted by Fairyprincess0:
“The "sex-change" procedure, is just that. A procedure. One that takes many years. Surgery, is just the last part of that.....”
“The "sex-change" procedure, is just that. A procedure. One that takes many years. Surgery, is just the last part of that.....”
But any procedure at that young age is wrong. Can you not see that?
I don't know about pushing a agenda I don't have a TV or read papers etc but if they are encouraging very small children in this then I will have to agree with those people who say kids are being brainwashed
Originally Posted by nattoyaki:
“The second paragraph - if all the evidence suggests that faster than light travel isn't possible then why is Eistein's E = MC squared even entertained as possible. C = the speed of light in that equation, doesn't it, so how can you square it if it's not possible to do so”
“The second paragraph - if all the evidence suggests that faster than light travel isn't possible then why is Eistein's E = MC squared even entertained as possible. C = the speed of light in that equation, doesn't it, so how can you square it if it's not possible to do so
”
Please tell me you're taking the piss.
5 of 9
