Are Conspiracy Theorists 'Nuts"

[taxme]

21 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Here is the problem with that. About two dozen astronauts have gone to the moon, either in orbit or on the surface. The conspiracy theory is that they were actually on a set with a film crew. That is nine missions. So, you have the people who built the sets, the film crews and the astronauts them selves. Add the administrators and you probably have 40 + people with direct knowledge. How do you keep something like that secret. In the last 40 years, how do you explain not one of these people spilled their guts. That defies human nature. 

The truth is, they spent very little time in the radiation belt and received more radiation after they passed beyond the belt though still not enough to do any lasting harm. A trip to Mars will need more protection.

Those people will be told that for top security reasons no one in this room will inform anyone as to what has taken place here. If they do they will be fired and then arrested and charged for treason. Faced with that kind of prosecution everyone in on the hoax will keep their mouths shut. They will be made out to be liars by the government and the media. Maybe all of them were a part of the conspiracy. Hey, you never know. But if America had gone to the moon why have they not gone back since? By now one would think that there now should be plenty of NASA bases and astronauts all over the moon. The moon would be great stop over and resting place for astronauts to stay awhile before they head for Mars. 

I for one have no idea as to what really took place except for what has been told to me by NASA and the government that they did land on the moon. But I am certainly not going to call the NASA engineer a liar either.  She certainly sounded pretty reliable to me in what she was saying that America never went to the moon. Unless you and I had gone to the moon ourselves, I will still go with my hunch that the moon landing was all a conspiracy. 

[taxme]

On 3/18/2018 at 6:39 AM, Penderyn said:

Millions of people of all sorts were murdered, especially Russian prisoners and Jews, the Nazis having trained on Socialists and Communists, and the Nazis were full of ill-conceived eugenicist bilge, like so many at the time.   The problem is the total chaos at the end of the War, with vast numbers of hungry people wandering about after the liberation of the camps and the spread of disease made numbers almost impossible to calculate, which left people, in effect, to think of a number.   It is this that makes the 'haulocaust' deniers able to get way with a bit of their nonsense - woolly estimates turned into 'facts' suit so many interests.    I knew blokes who liberated the camps:  you ask them if there were mass murders!

When the camps were liberated there was no one being gassed or killed in the camps on that day. They may have found plenty of bodies but the question is how did they really die? Liberating a camp does not actually mean that you actually saw as to what went on before you arrived on the scene. Now you ask historical revisionists if what they saw and investigated and reported on from their investigations where in their reports they said that they did not see any evidence to support the story of the 6 million. To the victors goes the stories and the lies. 

[taxme]

On 3/16/2018 at 7:03 AM, Queenmandy85 said:

I suspect a lot of it is entertainment. I used to believe all the urban folklore that I heard because it was entertaining. With conspiracy theories, there is the obvious fact that very few people can keep a secret. The second fact, or rule of thumb, is in a criminal investigation, the obvious suspect is usually the perpetrator. (still presumed innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law.) It is fun to delve into fictional theories, but that is all they are, fiction. Conspiracy theorists are not nuts, just suffer from arrested maturity. Also, there is the potential for a lot of money for the scammers who write the books.

And there is plenty of money in it for those who are willing to take the chance and lie for money. Think about that one. 

[taxme]

On 3/16/2018 at 5:32 PM, Scott Mayers said:

Why does EVERYONE associated with doubt, though, get an assigned presumption of guilt BY the incidental association? It drives me "nuts" when I see particular news 'reporters' opt to describe all people associated with a stance against tearing down Confederate statues in the U.S. as "white supremacists" (for instance, that is). This in fact ACTS as a form of media 'conspiring' against the mere association as it deviates from 'reporting' to become a form of biased advocacy. Reporters are supposedly trained to use NEUTRAL terms to describe stories at distance. If they have opinions, they are 'editorials' but the confusion of the difference of journalists in power are hard to determine when or where they are uniform without alternative co-journalists taking  counter challenges. And the fact that most are of in some favor to some strong commercial interests of one sort or another, the 'reporting' itself is often presented in clever ways to appear less biased than they are.

For every 'conspiracy theorist' accusation, there is an opposing 'conspiracy' theorized against them. And it only feeds upon itself except for those willing to recognize that unless you can provide rationale for WHY it is impossible for such a conspiracy to exist, antagonist against a conspiracy is just as questionable. It's like how calling one a 'troll' is sufficient to empowering the accused TO 'troll'. If they are going to be labeled as though the label itself is sufficient to assure it is true, this makes those with sincere views feel violated justify BEING more violent in reaction. 

It is a well known fact that the media is great at making up false stories or just flat out lie. They do it all the time. The media can never be trusted on what they report because they do have their biases and prejudices. 

[taxme]

On 3/16/2018 at 6:12 PM, Queenmandy85 said:

Taxme, there are a lot of books detailing the Nuremberg trials and the history of Germany in the 20th Century. John Toland's biography of Hitler and Edward Crankshaw's book on the Gestapo. Another is Albert Speer's book, Inside the Third Reich.

But what is written in those books is not true, but all lies and propaganda? You see when one is not there at the time of the event then how can one believe what others say about an event is true or real? It's a sad fact but there are people out there who will lie just to sell a book and make some money off of it.  

[taxme]

8 hours ago, eyeball said:

They're not stupid.

But then again, maybe they are stupid. How can anyone believe that conspiracy's do not exist?  Conspiracy's have been going on for centuries. Anyone who doubts that has to be stupid. 

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, taxme said:

But then again, maybe they are stupid. How can anyone believe that conspiracy's do not exist?  Conspiracy's have been going on for centuries. Anyone who doubts that has to be stupid. 

Sure but lumping garden variety political or corporate machinations and conspiracies to commit kidnapping or rob banks in with governments secretly demolishing skyscrapers filled with citizens or serial faking moon landings is simply retarded.

[taxme]

48 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Sure but lumping garden variety political or corporate machinations and conspiracies to commit kidnapping or rob banks in with governments secretly demolishing skyscrapers filled with citizens or serial faking moon landings is simply retarded.

So, what you are trying to say here is that this NASA engineer is lying? What makes you the expert as to whether there were many moon landings or not and not her?   

[taxme]

On 3/16/2018 at 6:12 PM, Queenmandy85 said:

Taxme, there are a lot of books detailing the Nuremberg trials and the history of Germany in the 20th Century. John Toland's biography of Hitler and Edward Crankshaw's book on the Gestapo. Another is Albert Speer's book, Inside the Third Reich.

I just watched a show on TV and it was all about what happened to the German soldiers and the German people after the war was over. The atrocities that were done against innocent women and children and soldiers was totally disgusting to say the least. The communists went about rounding up as many Germans as they could and put them in their communist owned concentration camps and started to kill thousands of Germans and as many as they could. They even put up six to twelve year old children up against the wall and shot them dead. And people think that the Nazi's were bad. Think again. And those children were crying for their mothers before they were shot. What kind of animals were those scum that would do something like that to children crying for their mothers. Four children were ordered to dig a hole and bury their mother in one of these camps because she was murdered by the camp soldiers. That was a holocaust which the MSM will never report on because the MSM of today is pretty much owned by zionist communists. 

No my friend, I think that what you need to do is to start watching shows like that and reading what others have written about what had took place after the war was over and to the German soldiers and civilians. I am sure that you can find something about it on the internet. I did. There was a book written by Michael Walsh called "How  Allies Treated German POW'S".   The show was called 1945: The Savage Peace. Channel 731 on Telus. 

Edited March 22, 2018 by taxme

[Scott Mayers]

5 hours ago, eyeball said:

Sure but lumping garden variety political or corporate machinations and conspiracies to commit kidnapping or rob banks in with governments secretly demolishing skyscrapers filled with citizens or serial faking moon landings is simply retarded.

Usually, but not always, the forum of conspiracy theorizing is as much about both entertaining the possibilities if only to TEST them and even practice one's intellectual skills at the logic involved. "Big Foot" is one such theory. As to something relatively POSSIBLE without concerning oneself about whether creatures or aliens exist, the questions some of these proponents question relate to HOW or WHY one would could not even fathom the 'possibility' of conspiracy in issues like 9/11 cover-up theories. The question to question things should not be exhausted  nor censured [rebuked] nor censored [removed or deplatformed], but rather encouraged without demeaning the people who suggest or argue these as conspiracies. 

For the 9/11 theories, it isn't a huge leap of imagination to fathom many possibilities of conspiracies to be real. What the anti-conspiracy theorists may not realize is that their own comforts in reality can make them as equally vulnerable to interpret actual realities with biased faith about their environment  as one with experienced discomforts that distrust that same environment. AND, the opposite is just as true. Both may be wrong. Both may be partially correct. We need to allow others to at least present the possibilities. It certainly doesn't HARM anyone directly to accuse some general "them" by contrast to the present paradigm of those accusing many of certain assaults today that DO harm the "them" specifically. [like the sex abuse charges against named specific people by protected anonymous accusers! [This alone should be proof THAT something 'conspiratorial' is possible!!]

 

 

[Penderyn]

11 hours ago, taxme said:

When the camps were liberated there was no one being gassed or killed in the camps on that day. They may have found plenty of bodies but the question is how did they really die? Liberating a camp does not actually mean that you actually saw as to what went on before you arrived on the scene. Now you ask historical revisionists if what they saw and investigated and reported on from their investigations where in their reports they said that they did not see any evidence to support the story of the 6 million. To the victors goes the stories and the lies. 

No - clearly no killings were going on, but the people could talk and the evidence was extremely convincing as to what had happened.    Numbers, as I said, were another matter.   And blokes from my neck of the woods were not meek hearers of the word - they dislike Churchill and weren't into tory propaganda.

[Queenmandy85]

Nobody has covered up the Soviet atrocities at the end of WW2. The news was full of it when I was a kid. Stalin was the most evil human being in history. Ever here of the Berlin air lift? The Marshall Plan was the greatest foreign policy program in the history of the World. Here was the most powerful victor deciding how to treat a defeated enemy. George Marshall decided to treat the Germans with forgiveness and magnanimy (sic). While the Soviets were exacting revenge, the Americans fed, protected and rebuilt west Germany. 

Nobody has yet answered the question: A conspiracy, by definition, requires the participation of several people. Experience in law enforcement and the study of history demonstrates the perpetrator of a crime has an overwhelming need to confess. There are exceptions, but those are rare and will be defeated by the less discrete co-conspirators. Why hasn't anyone confessed to any of these conspiracies?

[eyeball]

5 hours ago, Scott Mayers said:

Usually, but not always, 

 

 

This is one of those times you can say usually.

[taxme]

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Nobody has covered up the Soviet atrocities at the end of WW2. The news was full of it when I was a kid. Stalin was the most evil human being in history. Ever here of the Berlin air lift? The Marshall Plan was the greatest foreign policy program in the history of the World. Here was the most powerful victor deciding how to treat a defeated enemy. George Marshall decided to treat the Germans with forgiveness and magnanimy (sic). While the Soviets were exacting revenge, the Americans fed, protected and rebuilt west Germany. 

Nobody has yet answered the question: A conspiracy, by definition, requires the participation of several people. Experience in law enforcement and the study of history demonstrates the perpetrator of a crime has an overwhelming need to confess. There are exceptions, but those are rare and will be defeated by the less discrete co-conspirators. Why hasn't anyone confessed to any of these conspiracies?

One takes their life into their own hands if they dare try to expose a conspiracy that they were involved with. Not all, but some. In the case of this NASA engineer, I doubt that her life would be in jeopardy. 

[taxme]

10 hours ago, Scott Mayers said:

Usually, but not always, the forum of conspiracy theorizing is as much about both entertaining the possibilities if only to TEST them and even practice one's intellectual skills at the logic involved. "Big Foot" is one such theory. As to something relatively POSSIBLE without concerning oneself about whether creatures or aliens exist, the questions some of these proponents question relate to HOW or WHY one would could not even fathom the 'possibility' of conspiracy in issues like 9/11 cover-up theories. The question to question things should not be exhausted  nor censured [rebuked] nor censored [removed or deplatformed], but rather encouraged without demeaning the people who suggest or argue these as conspiracies. 

For the 9/11 theories, it isn't a huge leap of imagination to fathom many possibilities of conspiracies to be real. What the anti-conspiracy theorists may not realize is that their own comforts in reality can make them as equally vulnerable to interpret actual realities with biased faith about their environment  as one with experienced discomforts that distrust that same environment. AND, the opposite is just as true. Both may be wrong. Both may be partially correct. We need to allow others to at least present the possibilities. It certainly doesn't HARM anyone directly to accuse some general "them" by contrast to the present paradigm of those accusing many of certain assaults today that DO harm the "them" specifically. [like the sex abuse charges against named specific people by protected anonymous accusers! [This alone should be proof THAT something 'conspiratorial' is possible!!]

 

 

The lie about the WMD's in Iraq was exposed by no doubt some "conspiracy nut or nuts". When an historical event is being questioned or challenged well then there is someone or some group out there that thinks that there is something wrong with the picture, and so it should be reviewed and investigated further. It does not mean that they are nuts but curious as to what and how an incident was told to them by the media that appeared not right. The firefighters at 9/11 said that they heard loud explosive sounds coming from the basement of the towers. Are we to call them nuts for reporting this? People who no doubt no what explosives going off sound like. I will bet that they had questioned and concerns about what really did bring down those towers. 

For anyone to say that this NASA engineer is pretty much a liar or nut case for telling us what she should know about what goes on at NASA Is pretty much someone who has a closed mind and does not show much intelligence. It never hurts to question, challenge or investigate anything historical or present day event told to we the people if something looks very suspicious. No one is going to be nuts enough to say that the 1st and 2nd world wars did not happen. We have all the proof that we need to know that it did happen and there would be no nut out there who would dare try to deny those wars never happened. The lie will be nixed in no time. Whether anyone wants to deny that plenty of conspiracy's go on and do exist well let them go for it. Not all of us have to believe 100% that what they are being told is the truth especially when something looks suspicious. It's just human nature to do so. 

[Queenmandy85]

4 hours ago, taxme said:

Not all, but some. In the case of this NASA engineer, I doubt that her life would be in jeopardy. 

First of all, he is not a she. The Orion mission is designed to examine methods of shielding astronauts and equipment from long term exposure to radiation. The Apollo missions were not orbiting in the Van Allan Belt. They passed through it in a short time. The Orion is going to examine what happens on a long term mission beyond the Earth's magnetic field. As for conspiracy participants, as soon as they get wasted in a bar, they will start trying to impress a woman...or man. Very few people can resist talking. Remember the interrogation of Colonel Russ Williams? He was facing first degree murder charges and with all his training, he still spilled his guts.

[taxme]

20 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

First of all, he is not a she. The Orion mission is designed to examine methods of shielding astronauts and equipment from long term exposure to radiation. The Apollo missions were not orbiting in the Van Allan Belt. They passed through it in a short time. The Orion is going to examine what happens on a long term mission beyond the Earth's magnetic field. As for conspiracy participants, as soon as they get wasted in a bar, they will start trying to impress a woman...or man. Very few people can resist talking. Remember the interrogation of Colonel Russ Williams? He was facing first degree murder charges and with all his training, he still spilled his guts.

I was not aware that Kelly was a man. I only assumed that she was a female by her name. I stand corrected. 

Hey, he said that it could not be done, and that it is impossible for anyone going thru the belt to survive the onslaught of radiation. You wrote that the "Orion is to examine as to what happens on a long term mission in space". To the moon and back is a pretty long mission, and was done several times. Anyway, NASA after all those missions should have found out by then as to what the effects would do to astronauts after their returning to earth from the moon because they supposedly already sent many astronauts to the moon and back thru that radiation belt. And yet the NASA engineer has told us that no one will survive a trip thru the belt. Who do we believe here? And of course since the last supposed mission to the moon they have not gone back since. Maybe because they never did go to the moon in the first place because of that belt. Hey, you never know. 

Come on, don't you think that if they have already gone to the moon and back and the astronauts that went there appeared to have survived all the radiation poisoning for years after, with no effects, then don't you think their should be colony's of astronauts living on the moon today?  Just what is NASA waiting for to put more people on the moon for possible future missions into outer space? As I already pointed out that the threat of prosecution for some act of treason or spilling some sensitive military secret's against anyone s enough to make anyone think twice before opening their mouths. It may appear as though there were tens of thousands involved but maybe it would only take but a few hundred in some kind of studio to make it appear as though America went to the moon. And besides why have not other countries like Russia or China gone to the moon yet? They are both involved in their own space programs. Maybe because they already know that it is impossible to go to the moon, for now. 

As I said already, I am going to believe what the NASA engineer has told us first before I take what you have to say and your belief that America did go to the moon. The NASA engineer works for NASA, you do not. 

Russ Williams is a different story. Remember that if a NASA employee or whomever involved in the supposed event of America going to the moon, did go to a bar and got drunk and said that America never went to the moon, it was all a joke, the guy/gal would later be dismissed as having had too much to drink by the government and the government would tell the media and the people that the guy/gal was having marital and debt problems. The government does it all the time when they want someone shut down. The media and the people would believe what the the government tells them and no doubt that would be it. The incident would end there. 

 

[Queenmandy85]

3 hours ago, taxme said:

Hey, he said that it could not be done, and that it is impossible for anyone going thru the belt to survive the onslaught of radiation.

Werner von Braun famously stated, "If God had meant for man to go to the moon, He would have given him money."  Have you already forgotten the public reaction after Apollo 11?  

It was basically, ho hum, been there, done that, lets spend the money here on earth. The networks paid scant attention to subsequent apollo missions except for the Apollo 13 mission accident. Missions were cancelled because Congress cut their funding. It is a tragedy because the Apollo program cost about the same as three months of the War in Viet Nam. 

3 hours ago, taxme said:

To the moon and back is a pretty long mission,

No, the trip to Mars is a long mission. The moon is just two weeks round trip. The radiation exposure was the equivalent of a couple of chest x-rays.

I'm not sure where you are reading this stuff. If you could provide the information on the books, it would help.

 

3 hours ago, taxme said:

As I said already, I am going to believe what the NASA engineer has told us first before I take what you have to say and your belief that America did go to the moon

Why do you accept your mistaken version of what Smith actually said and not the statements of thousands of other NASA engineers. I actually had a conversation with a NASA engineer. His name was James Lovell. He commanded Apollo 13. He said he went to the moon. I saw no sign of radiation poisoning.

 

3 hours ago, taxme said:

Come on, don't you think that if they have already gone to the moon and back and the astronauts that went there appeared to have survived all the radiation poisoning for years after, with no effects, then don't you think their should be colony's of astronauts living on the moon today?

As I said, NASA has been starved for money since 1970.

Edited March 24, 2018 by Queenmandy85

[taxme]

20 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Werner von Braun famously stated, "If God had meant for man to go to the moon, He would have given him money."  Have you already forgotten the public reaction after Apollo 11?  

It was basically, ho hum, been there, done that, lets spend the money here on earth. The networks paid scant attention to subsequent apollo missions except for the Apollo 13 mission accident. Missions were cancelled because Congress cut their funding. It is a tragedy because the Apollo program cost about the same as three months of the War in Viet Nam. 

No, the trip to Mars is a long mission. The moon is just two weeks round trip. The radiation exposure was the equivalent of a couple of chest x-rays.

I'm not sure where you are reading this stuff. If you could provide the information on the books, it would help.

 

Why do you accept your mistaken version of what Smith actually said and not the statements of thousands of other NASA engineers. I actually had a conversation with a NASA engineer. His name was James Lovell. He commanded Apollo 13. He said he went to the moon. I saw no sign of radiation poisoning.

 

As I said, NASA has been starved for money since 1970.

1. Or the funding was cut because they never went to the moon in the first place. Why spend any more money trying to convince or fool the people that we went to the moon when we did not. 

2. If what the NASA engineer says is true, I would think that the radiation those astronauts would have received would be a lot higher that what a few chest x-rays would give them. The NASA engineer even told us that NASA does not have the technology as of yet to be able to figure out how to go thru the belt and make it safe for astronauts. But according to you that engineer has no clue as to what he is talking about, right? Did you check the website out for what this engineer had to say at all? I did and it did not appear to me to be all just bs. 

3.Liveleak.com website was where I read and got this information from. Check it out for yourself. 

4.So, basically what you are trying to say here is that this NASA engineer is full of chit, right? He has no clue as to what he is talking about even though he does work for NASA and not you. I don't care if you had a talk with Lovell or the Pope. He probably commanded the Apollo 13 all from within some made up I went to the moon and back studio in some obscure out of the way desert location. I could say that I went to the moon also but that does not mean that I did go to the moon.  Were you looking for any radiation signs at the time? I doubt it. 

As i just said that the missions to the moon maybe did not happen at all, and that may be why the government decided that funding must be pulled for the time being. It all comes down to what or why or who do we want to believe. I know what side I am betting my money on. 

[Queenmandy85]

6 hours ago, taxme said:

The NASA engineer even told us that NASA does not have the technology as of yet to be able to figure out how to go thru the belt and make it safe for astronauts. But according to you that engineer has no clue as to what he is talking about, right? Did you check the website out for what this engineer had to say at all?

No, I said you misunderstood what he said. But now you say you got this off the internet? That and television are the two worst sources of information.

However, I doubt we are doing you any favours by trying to educate you. I would hate to think we added to your vulnerability.

[Michael Hardner]

8 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

That and television are the two worst sources of information.

Television and Internet are not 'sources' but 'media'.  'People' and 'Books' can be sources too, but those descriptors say nothing about the rigor, or objectivity of the information presented.   The phenomenon wherein curious minds jump onto new media to inform themselves is understandable, and it's probably natural for there to be charlatans jumping in to take advantage.

I see the best approach to this new information as for those of us to know better to push back against the charlatans and expose their agendas.

[Queenmandy85]

Far better response than I could give. Well said, sir.

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, Queenmandy85 said:

Far better response than I could give. Well said, sir.

[removes monacle and nods]

[taxme]

18 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

No, I said you misunderstood what he said. But now you say you got this off the internet? That and television are the two worst sources of information.

However, I doubt we are doing you any favours by trying to educate you. I would hate to think we added to your vulnerability.

I don't think that I misunderstood anything at all. Matter of fact I understood it very well. If you refuse to believe what this engineer told us well that is your problem, not mine. To say that television and the internet are bad sources of information, then I guess whatever we hear on TV or read on the internet should just be ignored because it is all just a bunch of bull chit news, eh? Sorry, but I cannot go along with that.        So, I guess that all those lies about Trump are just that, all lies, eh?   

Trying to educate you appears to be just an exercise in futility. Just saying.  

[Penderyn]

On ‎25‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 11:44 PM, taxme said:

 

 

On ‎22‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 3:51 PM, Queenmandy85 said:

Nobody has covered up the Soviet atrocities at the end of WW2. The news was full of it when I was a kid. Stalin was the most evil human being in history. Ever here of the Berlin air lift? The Marshall Plan was the greatest foreign policy program in the history of the World. Here was the most powerful victor deciding how to treat a defeated enemy. George Marshall decided to treat the Germans with forgiveness and magnanimy (sic). While the Soviets were exacting revenge, the Americans fed, protected and rebuilt west Germany. 

Nobody has yet answered the question: A conspiracy, by definition, requires the participation of several people. Experience in law enforcement and the study of history demonstrates the perpetrator of a crime has an overwhelming need to confess. There are exceptions, but those are rare and will be defeated by the less discrete co-conspirators. Why hasn't anyone confessed to any of these conspiracies?

Without wishing to justify conspiracy theories, once upon a time, in the RAF, I was involved in activities that came under the Official Secrets Act, and if I'd talked I'd have been locked away.   Now, I can make all sorts of allegations, some of them interesting, but those who knew me would just think, Oh, bloody Penderyn showing off!, and our memories would tend to differ anyway.     The more interesting a story is, the more difficult to confirm.