Top Ten Conspiracy Theories

September 5th, 2009 at 9:01 am by David Farrar

The Herald looks at the top ten conspiracy theories:

  1. 9/11 orchestrated by US Government
  2. Moon landing faked
  3. Princess Diana murdered
  4. Area 51 and Roswell
  5. Alternative energy sources suppressed by oil companies
  6. Secret group controls Earth
  7. JFK assassination
  8. Microsoft ‘Wingdings’ messages
  9. Nazi alien affiliation
  10. Facebook and the CIA

No 9 was new to me, but the others all old hat.

Tags:

63 Responses to “Top Ten Conspiracy Theories”

  1. andrei (2,570 comments) says:

    Obama Birth certificate – say no more

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. TripeWryter (716 comments) says:

    Well, there are people who ask where was the wreckage of the aircraft that hit the Pentagon — the remains of jet engines, for example.

    As for the death of Diana, Princess of Wales (to be pedantic, she was never Princess Diana), reports persist of very bright lights being flashed from a man on the back of a motor-cycle into Henri Paul’s eyes (the driver of the car) in the tunnel before the crash; and there was the white car that has never been traced, and which apparently might have nudged the Mercedes out of control and into a pillar.

    How much Paul had drunk also remains disputed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Michael E (274 comments) says:

    Slippery John’s Secret Right Wing Agenda as written by Crosby Textor – who are the real power behind the Government – It’s about to implemented, anytime, just you see … um, still waiting, but it’s about to happen, they’re just refining it … if we don’t all go back to supporting Labour now we’ll all regret it!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Rakaia George (313 comments) says:

    TW – kind of made irrelevant by the fact that she would likely have survived, if she’d been wearing a seatbelt…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Obama Birth certificate – say no more”

    Duh…

    So dull.

    I’d say that’s not on the list because not too many people are so stupid they can’t tell the difference between a legitimate requirement of the US constitution and a tenuous and fantastic belief.

    All Obama needs to do is show his birth certificate, and not keep pretending that the Certificate of Live birth is that document.

    It amazes me that so many people are prepared to give Obama a pass on proving he was born in the US. Whatever you think of the situation, why can’t Obama (as so many on the left and right have asked) just show his birth certificate and end the doubt?

    If there is anything going on here, or if there is not, the situation is only worsened by Obama’s stubborn refusal to show the certificate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Captain Crab (351 comments) says:

    ” but the others all old hat”
    Made of Tin foil of course

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Patrick Starr (3,674 comments) says:

    I just love Buzz Aldrins response to a reporter who claimed he was a coward, liar and a thief.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU

    good reason to maintain the defence of provocation

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Steve (4,547 comments) says:

    Keep an eye on those Wingdings

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. WraithX (283 comments) says:

    Wow – what a coincidence that a mere few weeks after I offered to supply the Herald with Top 10 Lists from my website (which they declined) they publish one that is extremely similar to this one from my site:

    http://listverse.com/2007/08/21/top-10-conspiracy-theories/

    Thanks NZ Herald – real integrity there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Shunda barunda (2,981 comments) says:

    “Nazi alien affiliation”

    Its true, just look at the ss helmets and those of the Empire, Darth Vader was clearly involved ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. JC (949 comments) says:

    The Jews are behind all these. Everyone knows that.

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. s.russell (1,621 comments) says:

    If anyone finds out the identities of the secret group that controls Earth, please let us know so we can punish them for their incompetence.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Ross Nixon (559 comments) says:

    The most insidious conspiracies of our time:
    1. Nothing created everything (molecules-to-man evolution).
    2. Climate Change is significantly anthropogenic and dangerous.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “If anyone finds out the identities of the secret group that controls Earth, please let us know so we can punish them for their incompetence.”

    Sue Bradford is one. Waterboard her, and she’ll spill her guts on the rest.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    That’s so right Mr. Nixon.

    Why isn’t man made climate change at the top of the list??

    (where are the rising sea levels??)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    Yes of course JFK was killed by LHO acting alone.

    The full story’s been told, as everyone who’s looked into it knows. The Warren Commission was completely accurate in every respect.

    Not.

    Exactly the same with some of those others listed. Some of those listed are indeed lunatic and idiotic. Some of them aren’t. It’s quite common to taint the real issues by conflating them with the lunatic. It’s also common to focus and discuss only strawman aspects within the real issues.

    You can fool some of the people all the time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. DRHILL (121 comments) says:

    I would dispute the Area 51 theory. Everyone knows there’s an Area 51 (just look at Google Earth). The dispute would be is aliens involved. (I think no, U.S.A. just use it for testing new aircraft etc).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. emmess (1,427 comments) says:

    I would have thought Holocaust Denial would have been included and at number 1

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. joe90 (273 comments) says:

    Elders of Zion to Retire
    Backward: A Purim Spoof

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. backster (2,152 comments) says:

    REID:;;;My thoughts exactly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. dimmocrazy (286 comments) says:

    In a long ago past, Dimmo dabbled some in engineering, and hopes to understand a little about such matters.
    He advises the cynics about the 9/11 conspiracy stories to have a look here: http://www.ae911truth.org/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    Listen to Coast 2 Coast AM ( USA) most nights all of the above have been discussed over the 4 years I have been listening. Fascinating show and some really far out subjects, some are borderline and best taken with a very large grain of salt but some really get you thinking. Take No5 for example, sometime back they interviewed engineers from McDonnell Douglas skunk works who worked developing the B2 bomber. These engineers were taking the Department of Defense to court for breach of contract. It seems that these guys had been told that any technology used in the B2 could be developed for commercial airlines after 20 years of the B2 being operational. This technology involves running a high voltage on the outside of the leading edge of the wing. Anyhow it somehow develops some sort of gravity wave which the plane rides, much like a surfer rides a normal wave. It is also claimed that this technology could save airline companies between 40 to 60% in fuel savings. The DOD has reneged on the deal and will not allow these engineers to release it for commercial interests. I believe there is a long explanation for this on the website “earthfiles” for anyone interested.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    Yes backster, I think the view I expressed is a lot more common than some, such as the Herald’s writer, would have us think.

    [Most] people aren’t stupid, but expressing a view that there’s something fishy going on, exposes one to ridicule.

    The most common error people make, is thinking that just because they can’t imagine how it could be done (e.g. an ongoing official coverup of JFK’s assassination), because, they think, it would involve too many people and surely one or more of them would have talked; doesn’t mean it can’t be done.

    It’s quite an illogical position that such people take because it’s a fact that, once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must in fact be the case. Did JFK’s head snap forward or snap back for example. If it was the latter then it’s impossible to conclude it was LHO acting alone. Thank goodness we have the Zeebrugge film since that very real question would never have been raised otherwise. The trajectory of the magic bullet is another example of an as-yet unanswered fact.

    With something like JFK, it’s a palpable fact that the official story does not adequately answer all the known events and that no attempt has ever been made by either the MSM or the official agencies to comprehensively address such. That is not a theory, it’s a palpable fact. Even completely uncomplicated incidents such as an explanation as to why the FBI has never to this day returned all the home movies that they immediately confiscated which would shed considerable light on the shooting, is never dwelt upon. And yet people such as I referred to above see nothing significant in such things.

    The THEORY about JFK is who did it, why and how. The unquestionable fact about JFK which is not theoretical in any way, is that it did not happen the way the official story has portrayed it and however desperate such people are to believe that it does, that FACT remains.

    Why many people can’t seem to make any distinction between fact and theory when considering those listed events is a fascinating study in mass delusion.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    5. Alternative energy sources suppressed by oil companies

    Of course there are many, but even a brief look at Tesla and his work reveals that this is more than just the stuff of conspiracy theory. Don’t tell me there aren’t vested interests regarding energy.

    And don’t get me started on the green agenda where even legitimate energy forms are [or will be] ‘taxed’ to make them less attractive options. For example NZ’s vast coal reserves in the south island.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    side show bob,

    As we’re talking about conspiracy theories. I think you provided a link regarding this the other day Bob.
    How about the pre-Maori settlers of NZ [and I'm not just talking about the Moriori]; the ‘Patupaiarehe’.

    Patupaiarehe: the pre Maori settlers of European stock [blond hair, blue eyes, etc].

    Maori believed them to be mythical human-like creatures, but some Maori acknowledged they were actually the people already in the land when the first Maori arrived. Very interesting area. And if true would certainly cast a different light on the treaty.

    For those interested:
    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_Patupaiarehe
    http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/first-peoples-in-maori-tradition/5
    http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/patupaiarehe/1

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. malcolm (1,952 comments) says:

    Redbaiter wrote:

    (where are the rising sea levels??)

    How much time do you have? We’re getting 1-2 mm per year at present.

    cheers

    Malcolm

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    That’s right gopolks. That’s why as I’ve said above, the rational approach is to address only the facts, and take it from there.

    Do try not to confuse theory and fact, it only makes you look like a nutcase.

    I mean, imagine how stupid it would be to allege that all the known facts about JFK for example, have been adequately addressed. That would only make one look like a village idiot, wouldn’t it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. emmess (1,427 comments) says:

    Ok own up
    Who are are the Nazis that gave me 5 (so far) negative karma for me saying I thought Holocaust Denial is the biggest conspiracy theory?

    Also, what about the Commuinist theory that the Americans created AIDS to kill black people?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Cerium (23,479 comments) says:

    The most insidious conspiracies of our time:
    1. Nothing created everything (molecules-to-man evolution).

    But what about:
    Something created everything (waved it’s wand/hand and it all just appeared out of nowhere. Or did it first create the components it used to create things with, but what did it create those out of?)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Herman Poole (297 comments) says:

    Cerium,

    If you were smart you wouldn’t go there.

    Science can only shift the question along, it never answers it. You can say evolution created man, then you have to ask where did evolution come from? Biochemical soup created evolution, but where did the soup come from? Sub-atomic particles, but where did they come from? The big bang, and where did the big bang come from?

    There is no philosophical or intellectual high-ground in science over religion, all it does is exchange the words ‘The Garden of Eden’ with ‘The Big Bang’, you are still stuck with the same philosophical question which IMO is unanswerable by the human mind and frankly non of our business.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Ed Snack (1,851 comments) says:

    Reid, Reid, Reid, where to start. Perhaps just two points to demolish on JFK.

    The so called “magic bullet” follows a nearly straight line path (some very minor deflection by people) because, JFK and Connelly were not sitting at the same level or in a straight line (looking from the back of the car). Connelly is in a seat that is inboard of and below JFK, hence that bullet went through JFK’s neck and then hit Connelly. That bullet too, is quite clearly proven to have come from Oswald’s rifle, it is damaged but not excessively so, because it is a military style jacketed bullet that didn’t hit any major hard bones until Connelly’s wrist at the end.

    Second, the head movement. When someone is hit in the head by a bullet like JFK, the normal reaction will be for the head to move forward a little under the impact, and then to snap back. In Zapruder, this is precisely what happens.

    The alternative energy ones always amuse me, if any oil company controlled a viable alternative energy source they’d pushing it for all it was worth, they exist to make money, not to protect oil interests. Viable cheap energy has got to be a gold mine for anyone who can sell it.

    The “Birther” issue is interesting. Unlike all the other items, there is a source of data that will almost certainly prove or disprove the theory on the spot, the original Hawaiian birth records. If Obama consented, these could be released and immediately (probably) settle the matter. I say probably because unfortunately for those who so cheerfully decry the birther theory, in 1960 it was possible to get a Hawaiian birth certificate without any proof that you were born in Hawaii. If you as the parents (or grandparents) of a baby went to the appropriate official, you could claim that your child was born in Hawaii not in a medical facility and unattended by any medical person, and you would be granted a birth certificate stating the place of birth as Hawaii. This issue would also trigger the birth notice in the paper. The actual birth record does record IF KNOWN, the place of birth and/or medical officer attending, that detail is not shown on the COLB form that has been released. Obama has claimed he was born in a hospital in Hawaii, therefore his records should show that detail. If it does then there should be no argument whatsoever of his place of birth. If (and personally I very much doubt this, but it is so far unknown) however it shows no such details, then the birth was registered on his parents (or relations) say so, and his place of birth is not unequivocally established. Some like to claim Obama is resisting the release for this reason, I think it far more likely that it is tactical, it is a great way to distract the more extreme fringe and to make those pursuing the birther line open to ridicule. Me, I think he was born in Hawaii, but I would have to say it hasn’t been proved so beyond any doubt.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Rex Widerstrom (5,349 comments) says:

    What about the one that holds that DPF gets his stuff directly to the National Research Unit?

    Sure it sounded plausible at first, but ask yourself this: would they be giving their best stuff to DPF and leaving Key with the meaningless waffle and doublespeak?

    :-D

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Kris K (3,570 comments) says:

    Cerium 3:07 pm,

    The most insidious conspiracies of our time:
    1. Nothing created everything (molecules-to-man evolution).

    But what about:
    Something created everything (waved it’s wand/hand and it all just appeared out of nowhere. Or did it first create the components it used to create things with, but what did it create those out of?)

    Hmmm.
    • Nothing ‘created’ everything?
    or
    • ‘Something’ created everything?

    As an engineer, and a person of faith, I have to go with the ‘Something’ option.
    Even purely on a rational basis.
    But on a faith basis, it’s much easier to believe in something than nothing.
    Especially when one considers DNA alone. Now there’s some serious coding if I ever saw some!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Cerium (23,479 comments) says:

    • Nothing ‘created’ everything?
    • ‘Something’ created everything?

    On a rational basis neither of these could have happened. As Herman was angling at, what created the creator, or where did anything come from? I’d rather accept it as probably unanswerable. We don’t have to know everything.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    Ed, Ed, Ed.

    Yawn.

    You can’t do those two JFK issues justice even if you took all night to write your post. Many people have spent thousands collectively millions of hours on them and written thousands perhaps millions of words on them, so if you think you can successfully demolish those arguments in one or two sentences, forgive me if I don’t respond. Secondly, bear in mind those are only two of the many issues in JFK, and JFK is only one of the issues.

    The point is, some people can’t look at these things with an open mind and one can tell this because when you engage with them it’s quickly apparent they haven’t even bothered to look at the myriad aspects of the issue because they know nothing about it. For example, with 911, it’s rather common to find people who still say “what” when you raise WTC7. It’s clear that such people have merely superficially delved into the issues and evidently prematurely concluded it couldn’t possibly be true because they appear to have some fantasy that the world doesn’t work like that and therefore, whatever the facts of the particular issue is, it could not possibli be true so they prefer “not to waste their precious time thinking about it.”

    To me that’s a rather stupid and biased way of looking at the world because it doesn’t follow a rational approach but rather relies on emotion (it threatens their sense of security) and I’d personally prefer to get to the truth of a matter, even when it raises disturbing conclusions. That was my point and my only point and frankly, I get sick of talking about particular aspects of things like JFK and 911 because when you take the totality of the evidence it’s utterly apparent to anyone with a 3-digit IQ that the official story is bollocks whatever the truth is about any particular aspect.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. fishe (161 comments) says:

    Kris K,

    Great for you. Go with the something option as the ultimate beginning. But I just hope you’re not blinded enough to not see the evidence of the progression from that beginning. A progression that doesn’t necessarily require supernatural explanations.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. malcolm (1,952 comments) says:

    What am I doing…

    Kris K, your argument is a few strawmen short of a bonfire.

    There are at least three options:

    1] Nothing ‘created’ everything?
    2] ‘Something’ created everything?
    3] We don’t know yet (and may never know), but we’re making good progress and none of it’s pointing toward 2 or any of the supporting myths that go along with 2.

    2 is the “it’s magic” answer. Most kids could see through it by the age of 10. Assuming they aren’t too brainwashed by all the threats and dogma that go along with it.

    cheers

    Malcolm

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Herman Poole (297 comments) says:

    wtf malcolm?

    1) is also an “it’s magic” answer…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. malcolm (1,952 comments) says:

    Herman Poole write:

    1) is also an “it’s magic” answer…

    Sorry, quite right.

    Except no one is proposing 1. Certainly not any physicists any way. It’s a strawman.

    2, on the other hand, has a good following.

    cheers

    Malcolm

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    “Most kids could see through it by the age of 10.”

    Yes, that’s about the time that the arrogance of modern humankind breaks through the wonder of (natural) childhood and pretends that it knows all the answers.

    As Kris says, if you want to look at random events, then pray explain how our particular DNA design came about by accident. Then do it for each of the other animals.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. ross (1,437 comments) says:

    I would’ve thought that the best conspiracy was Richard Nixon’s attempts to cover up the illegal actions of his officials, the so-called Watergate affair. It’s ironic, David, that you’ve focused on bogus conspiracy theories but seem content to ignore real conspiracies. How about you list the top 10 real conspiracies?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Herman Poole (297 comments) says:

    Except no one is proposing 1. Certainly not any physicists any way. It’s a strawman.

    Quite right, in fact alot of quantum and astro physicists become or are religous. I can’t remember who its was but one of the famous old scientists stated that his scientific aim was to find god in all things or something like that.

    Stephen Hawking:
    “the universe is governed by the laws of science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws.”

    Albert Einstein:
    “I believe in Spinoza’s God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind.”

    Isaac Newton:
    “Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. malcolm (1,952 comments) says:

    reid wrote:

    “Most kids could see through it by the age of 10.”

    Yes, that’s about the time that the arrogance of modern humankind breaks through the wonder of (natural) childhood and pretends that it knows all the answers.

    It’s the “God made it all” bunch who are claiming to know everything. With their big bold baseless assertion.

    Then they try the little trick of saying: “..but of course we don’t know how God works and how can we because we are merely his creations…. so we’re not at all like those arrogant scientists and rationalists who claim to know everything”.

    But science doesn’t claim to know everything. It has a good idea about some things, backed by experimentation and evidence.

    And the best part is that any intelligent person who wanted to spend 20 years could probably get to the cutting-edge of any field of science. And every step along the way they could access peer-reviewed science. No leaps of faith required.

    As Kris says, if you want to look at random events, then pray explain how our particular DNA design came about by accident. Then do it for each of the other animals.

    No ideal. Something to do with natural selection I think. We could both find out what is known at the moment, because it’s a science – it’s all out there. Plenty of books for laypersons.

    cheers

    Malcolm

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. malcolm (1,952 comments) says:

    Herman Poole wrote:

    Except no one is proposing 1. Certainly not any physicists any way. It’s a strawman.

    Quite right, in fact alot of quantum and astro physicists become or are religous.

    And quite a lot are not religious. Doesn’t prove much either way.

    Which is probably why science relies on experimentation and peer-review, rather than a show of hands down at the pub :-)

    cheers

    Malcolm

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Falafulu Fisi (2,179 comments) says:

    Malcolm said…
    1] Nothing ‘created’ everything?
    2] ‘Something’ created everything?
    3] We don’t know yet (and may never know), but we’re making good progress and none of it’s pointing toward 2 or any of the supporting myths that go along with 2.

    I’ll go with number #3.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. kiki (425 comments) says:

    Getting away from god.

    I’d like to add my five cents as to why conspiracy theories are created.

    We look for WMD that aren’t there but are used to start a war. A boat full of communist weapons and attacks on American warships that never happened. Then the paranoid communists with their rightist, revisionist or wrecker purges.

    It is about those in power lying to achieve their aims or to cover up. If something bad is done or happens then lie. “I didn’t have sexual relations with that woman” through to “they were all insurgents that we killed”. First step lie then release fuzzy facts or conflicting information draw out time, further the distance from the action so more people forget.

    Or create heightened fear, they have nuclear weapons that they will use now, we must attack to save ourselves now. No time to think just do but after the do people find out that they’ve been deceived so begin to wonder what else are they being lied to about.

    When a health ministry official or prison official tells you that the systems have been changed after a failure do you believe them?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Cerium (23,479 comments) says:

    Conspiracy theories may be a communist plot.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. malcolm (1,952 comments) says:

    Conspiracy theories are an irresistible labour-saving device in the face of complexity.*

    *can’t remember who said it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. transmogrifier (522 comments) says:

    If I were part of a government, I’d be secretly feeding crazies conspiracy theories till the cows come home. It would make it easier to sneak the odd actual conspiracy through. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    reid @ 4.14 – well put.

    I don’t say I believe the conspiracy theories but 9/11 and JFK don’t belong on that list. Those two have major problems with the official version of events. The others in the list are fruit loop material except maybe the alternative energy one though I haven’t looked into that too much.
    One of the biggest problems I see is that when people go to the levels they do in Loose Change, Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist Addendum (for example) and make their documentaries free to watch and download – http://www.archive.org/details/Zeitgeist.Addendum – I ask myself why? They portray a compelling and believable version of events and if they are put together with trick photography and clever editing again I ask why? What is the gain?

    Zeitgeist Addendum focuses more on showing that our Western money system is an elaborate Ponzi scheme, something that looks more apparent with every billion the Fed throws at the financial industry in the US. This got me reading “Lost Science of Money”, a history of money and it’s evolution, half way through – fascinating!

    I try and look at both sides of stories but when you look at 9/11 there is a wealth of seemingly authoritative “conspiracy” material. When I try to disprove it the best I can find seems to be Popular Mechanics which does a dismal job. If what they say is such ridiculously pathetic conspiracy garbage then why don’t the relative authorities quickly shoot it down with evidence that should be easy to provide and shut them up once and for all?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. radar (319 comments) says:

    “Redbaiter (7395) Vote: 11 15 Says:
    September 5th, 2009 at 9:49 am
    “Obama Birth certificate – say no more”
    Duh…
    So dull.
    I’d say that’s not on the list because not too many people are so stupid they can’t tell the difference between a legitimate requirement of the US constitution and a tenuous and fantastic belief.”

    http://www.mentalhealth.org.nz/page/5-Home

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    ross – On the surface that looks bona fide.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. big bruv (13,728 comments) says:

    1.9/11 orchestrated by US Government
    2.Moon landing faked
    3.Princess Diana murdered
    4.Area 51 and Roswell
    5.Alternative energy sources suppressed by oil companies
    6.Secret group controls Earth
    7.JFK assassination
    8.Microsoft ‘Wingdings’ messages
    9.Nazi alien affiliation
    10.Facebook and the CIA

    Theories 1-4 are only supported by nut bars

    5 may have some basis in fact.

    6 is for complete loonies

    7 is something we will never know the real truth about, I sure as hell do not support the “lone gunman” theory.

    8-10 are also for people with far to much time on their hands.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    BB – Agreed except for 9/11, there are a shitload of unanswered questions around what happened. To say it is only supported by “nut bars” isn’t really conclusive scientific proof.

    I am NOT saying that the US Govt.orchestrated it, that IS nut bar material but for some reason there are a ton of issues that could have been shut down quickly and simply by officials. Why would you let something like zeitgeist – zeitgeist.com – do the rounds and gain increasing support and kudos amongst many people (including professionals pilots and engineers) when a handful of simple steps, video and information releases would shut them down in a heartbeat and really make them look like “nut bars”?

    zeitgeist addendum on the banking system in the West is fascinating. My point is that as a government I would be trying to counter shit that I thought was undermining our position. Unless of course I was so arrogant that I didn’t give a shit what people thought…..hmmm that sounds familiar.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    Quite right, kaya.

    Amazing isn’t it that no matter how many times you point out the significant and obvious difference between on the one hand the question of who, how and why and on the other hand, the significant issues that genuinely remain unexplained, some people still don’t, won’t and apparently can’t listen and instead, continue to return like a dog to it’s own vomit, to those who, how and why questions.

    I mean, fuck.

    As I said above, it’s a fascinating study in mass delusion.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    Kris K, fully believe that there were people here will before Maori. In our local area there was a story in the local rag about legends of a fair skin people living in land Taranaki ( about two weeks ago). My wife’s mother (Maori) when she was alive told me that the old people always spoke about a separate white race that live inland from Waitara. I also have mates that while deer hunting found a large are in the Kaimanawa forest? that is fenced off and visitors are not welcome, they claim there are large stone ruins inside. Who knows they were probably pissed but there are to many bits of evidence that goes against the preferred view of academia and some Maori that only want one thing, the status quo. As Mulder would say “the truth is out there”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Put it away (2,878 comments) says:

    9 and 10 are both new to me, but I’m sure Phool can fill us in…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Zapper (1,019 comments) says:

    reid 2:00 pm

    They have been addressed. Read Case Closed by Gerald Posner. I used to believe the JFK conspiracy theories after first seeing the movie JFK as a naive teenager. The only thing that movie got correct was the date. It’s understandable that those who don’t do research may believe such nonsense about the JFK assassination, and there will always be the occasional nutbar who will convince themselves.

    As for 9/11, there are people who ask about the wreckage of the plane that hit the pentagon. Those people have done no research or are retarded. There are tons of photos, easily found on the internet, of this wreckage. Every nutbar theory about 9/11 is absolutley laughable. Bombs in the towers? Uh, why crash a plane into them then? And why did none of the thousands of people who work there see anyone planting these bombs? WTC 7? It was known hours before it collapsed that collapse was imminent. Building sized debris from 1 and 2 hit the building for f**ks sake.

    Occams Razor most certainly applies to JFK and 9/11.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.