Aye.

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

-Aristotle

And it's the mark of an average reddit user to accept a thought without entertaining it.

I agree with whatever you just said.

And it's the mark of an average reddit user to accept or reject a thought without entertaining it.

Both are equally bad.

tl;dr but I agree

[deleted]

It truly is and it's how I approach topics. I'll entertained anything and come to my own conclusion.

I like what Aristotle said but I don't believe it. :)

Why don't you believe it?

I think it was just a bit of a joke.. considering the content of the quote. =]

It was a joke, i will keep my day job, don't worry.

Haha! I got it. But yeah.. keep the day job. :p

It is what Aristotle would do. Yes. :)

I always try to entertain the ideas. Then I give my opinions on why some of the fringier ideas are bad or illogical. I'm then accused of being a shill or told that I'm a fool for not believing.

It's one thing to entertain an idea. It's another to dispense with logic and emotionally defend an idea with attacks instead of evidence.

the problem is that barely anything holds up to intense logical rigor, not even the scientific method.

I don't intense scientific rigor. I never demand extraordinary evidence. I merely request solid logic. Something beyond baseless assertions and misconstrued understandings or shoddy reporting.

I'm open to conspiracy stuff. I understand that if something is meant to be hidden then solid evidence is hard to come by. I used to frequent this sub a lot when I first joined Reddit. The shill attacking culture has really pushed me away. And probably a lot of people. People will be saying 'who cares if we discredit the sub' until it's just a small paranoid insular echo chamber.

I'll listen to any topic, but it must be well-reasoned. Some of the posts here are just plain incoherent.

A lot of "conspiracies" of today were inchoerent 5 years ago, 10 years ago, 15 years ago, etc...

Ancient Aliens has been around forever, and it makes as little sense now as it did back then. Still unfalsifiable, which is how it survives. These kinds of beliefs need to be treated like religious beliefs, which survive in the same manner, not like a conspiracy which should be based on facts.

Lot's of things are unfalsifiable but never the less accepted through pure logical reasoning including but not limited to our very existence.

Try to falsify what came before the big bang and see how far you get

Try to falsify what came before the big bang and see how far you get

I think bubble universe and multiverse theories are only as valid as ancient aliens and religion. There is no evidence to suggest anything existed before the big bang. In fact it's totally unscientific for science magazines to run those things as serious stories rather tham acknowledge that it is, in fact, sci fi.

There is no evidence to suggest anything existed before the big bang.

Of course that's part of the paradox that makes all of existence absurd and the real reason that I'm a radical skeptic and ontological relativist in the first place.

Does no evidence of anything before it mean there was nothing before it? Then what started it? I've seen some new theories calling upon virtual particles smaller than a planck length expanding forever essentially saying that our universe is smaller than a planck length in reality. Okay and what created those virtual particles?

If I'm honest I think the big bang is flat out wrong as well.

Does no evidence of anything before it mean there was nothing before it? Then what started it? I've seen some new theories calling upon virtual particles smaller than a planck length expanding forever essentially saying that our universe is smaller than a planck length in reality. Okay and what created those virtual particles?

I don't think there was nothing before the big bang, nor do I think there was something. The answer lies with new information we don't have yet or will maybe never have. It's fun to speculate but that's about it.

So then that means the big bang itself is unfalsifiable, because assuming we live in a world of cause and effect we must be able to detect causality in all things.

No, just because a phenomenon is observed with a unknown cause doesn't mean the phenomenon isn't real, I don't know why you would think that. Gravity didn't start being real only after humans understood it.

No, just because a phenomenon is observed with a unknown cause doesn't mean the phenomenon isn't real

Well as you admitted early we can probably never know the answer. You seem to think this is just some technological limit and I disagree. No matter how much tech we develop you will never understand where it all came from or what the cause is. Probably due to some Godelean system limitation.

Gravity didn't start being real only after humans understood it.

Gravity isn't actually real it's just a human lingustic description of a natural constant. This sentence resembles a tautology

You seem to think this is just some technological limit and I disagree. No matter how much tech we develop you will never understand where it all came from or what the cause is. Probably due to some Godelean system limitation

I don't make any statement about being able to see beyond the bounds of our universe. Maybe we develop technology to do so, maybe we don't. If we can, we can develop a great theory of how the universe came to be. If we can't, we're stuck with what we have. These events don't make the big bang more or less likely to have happened, either it did or it didn't, it only affects our ability to know.

For me something like the big bang is unbelievable because I can't leave things this sloppily understood if I'm to believe it. Aliens coming here seems magnitudes more likely of being a real thing than a big bang that came from nothing.

But my main point here is that lot's of people are fine with believing in unfalsifiable things not just aliens. I'm talking about "credible" scientific people. Also I'd seriously contest the idea that aliens are unfalsifiable.

Aliens absolutely are not unlikely. But the truth is that there's no evidence available to us now to conclusively show they did or didn't visit. If you're going to hide behind "they're super advanced aliens that covered their tracks, therefore I am sure aliens visited because it accounts for everything" then you have an unfalsifiable belief, which os exactly what the vast, vast majority of ancient aliens conspiracies does. Because it's not inherently a conspiracy until you add that part.

Yeah there's not much evidence unless you interpret certain mysteries that way. My point is that it is not unusual to extrapolate with nothing but pure logic, it's what we do for realizing blackholes.

You're right, it's very common, but I'm taking the position that making such extrapolations is in the realm of science fiction, not science. Multiverse theories, ancient aliens, fields inside of black holes, it's all science fiction until we definitively establish that it's not.

Can't edit on mobile:

I think I may have misunderstood what you were thinking, but you're still wrong, the big bang is not an unfalsifiable theory.

You can never convince a believer in god that he doesn't exist despite all the evidence you want, because it doesn't apply to their belief system of "oh god can do anything, he doesn't have to play by the rules".

The big bang is not like that. If it turns out there is evidence against the big bang, we can just create a new theory. For now the big bang is the best explanation of what happened in the early moments of the universe where we've observed it expanded rapidly, but if there is evidence to show something else actually happened, that's fine, we can dump the big bang theory because it's not unfalsifiable.

Evolution is also infalsifiable.

No, evolution is demonstrable. Evolution is exceedingly easy to both observe and cause.

You should be careful how you word that. Evolution, i.e. adaptation, is observable. Darwin's theory of evolution claims that those adaptations are the ONLY reason we are the way we are today. No God, simply natural selection and nothing else... the 'religion' of the Age of Atheism (propagated by Darwin, the Huxleys, etc. back when intellectually elite clubs and eugenics were really popular).

Why do you need anything else?

I can't comment on whether you need anything else. I know NOTHING about the true workings of reality and will readily admit that. I do know that you can't assume a lack (or the non-existence) of something else just because you already have something you understand. You don't necessarily need a self-aware God for adaptation to work, but that doesn't mean there isn't one behind the introduction and evolution of life. And that also doesn't mean that natural selection, i.e. adaptation, is the only driving force behind evolution.

So Russell's teapot then? Logically/rationally you must assume a claim is false until proven otherwise.

You're both discussing a problem of language really. Mixing up evolution and Darwinism or neo-Darwinism.

This is partly because the dominant ideology (modern synthesis neo-darwinism) deliberately words their ideology in a way that makes it seem like a complete synonym with word evolution when i reality is just an interpretation.

But as we know Lamarck, Kropotkin and Lysenko believed in a theory of evolution as well.

Lamarck

There is zero observational evidence to support Lamarck's theory of hereditary acquired characteristics. Epigenetic inheritance plays a role for sure but this effectively falls under the remit of evolution via natural selection of random mutation and several observations have found that a significant degree of epigenetic reprogramming occurs during embryogenesis to remove histone methylation etc.

Kropotkin

There is nothing about evolution via natural selection which prevents or even disfavours mutualism. Check out Dawkins' 'The Selfish Gene' for a better analysis than I can provide here but suffice to say competition occurs between genomes, not individuals. Why else would symbiotic relationships be so common?

Lysenko

You realize the application of his theories was a major contributing factor to famines in the USSR right?

More generally I think you might have the (not uncommon) misconception that 'survival of the fittest' means survival of the strongest or what-have-you (or maybe are confusing the theory of Evolution with Social Darwinism which is something quite different and also not a scientific theory) when in fact it means survival of the organism best adapted to its local environment.

There is zero observational evidence to support Lamarck's theory of hereditary acquired characteristics. Epigenetic inheritance plays a role for sure but this effectively falls under the remit of evolution via natural selection of random mutation and several observations have found that a significant degree of epigenetic reprogramming occurs during embryogenesis to remove histone methylation etc.

You know that sterile worker bee larvae will become queen bees if fed royal honey? Bacteria and even more complex organisms like sponges to centipedes have been shown to have horizontal gene transfer. Darwin had a Lamarckian theory called panspermia himself.

I'm unconvinced by modern synthesis hand waving of epigenetic and envrionmentally induced evolution. Either way my point is that evolution is not a stand in word for modern synthesis theory of biology, well my bad they recently started calling it "extended" synthesis because of epigenetic factors. That is of course an ad hoc rationalization.

As for Kropotkin I mentioned him because he was a Lamarckian in the sense that Darwin was.

Lysenko is an interesting character but his ideas although failures weren't just pulled from his ass.

sterile worker bee larvae will become queen bees if fed royal honey

Because caste the divide is largely epigenetic.

Bacteria and even more complex organisms like sponges to centipedes have been shown to have horizontal gene transfer

So? This is not inheritance of acquired traits but exchange of genetic material. This fits in perfectly with the idea of the gene as the base unit of evolution rather than the whole organism. Again, check out 'The Selfish Gene', it covers all these pretty thoroughly.

modern synthesis hand waving of epigenetic and envrionmentally induced evolution.

So you're point is what...? That the early theories of evolution didn't manage to come up with a comprehensive theory that fully explains how speciation and evolution occur before we had a full understanding of how the genome operates and interacts with the environment?

Because caste the divide is largely epigenetic.

Yeah, relevant bit is that extreme morphological changes occur from the same basic organism due purely to environmental factors. The larvae do not have different dna or genes but develop differently according to their diet.

So? This is not inheritance of acquired traits but exchange of genetic material. This fits in perfectly with the idea of the gene as the base unit of evolution rather than the whole organism. Again, check out 'The Selfish Gene', it covers all these pretty thoroughly.

The dna is the base and the genes for the varying morphology and traits are all there, but the expression is epigenetic. It's not a primitive Lamarckian inheritance of acquired traits no but it's nothing like what neo-Darwinism suggests that nearly all evolution is random selection and genetic drift. All of the attempts to fit epigenetics into modern synthesis are ad hoc realizations and if we'd have known about them in the 30s perhaps neo-darwinism would have lost out to more updated Lamarckian theorists.

The competing idea is that the DNA in every species to evolve is already there and just needs to be expressed either naturally through environment or artificially by us.

Oh lawd

Bring da h8 m8.

When I say incoherent, I mean the writer or narrator doesn't even attempt to tie their sentences together or totally devoid of arguments or evidence.

It has nothing to do with how far-fetched the theory is. It's impossible to read or learn from a person who doesn't care about logic.

That "discredit this sub" shit is overused, and generally only used by shills and/or assholes.

That "discredit this sub" shit is overused, and generally only used by shills and/or assholes.

Yup. You can't discredit the sub for giving everybody a platform to speak. That's stupid. It's the sub's greatest strength.

Counterpoint: "Shills are everywhere" is a well-known psy-op, shill.

except nobody says that. we all know they are here, or do you disagree?

Are you one of those that constantly brays about "discredits this sub"? Yeah, I gave you a 50/50 choice there bud. Oh, and just for the record, I think that flat earth shit is disinfo of the worst kind.

I'm just saying your troublemaking is on the same level. We can call the cranks shills, the people calling the cranks shills shills, and so on until infinity for all the damn good it will do us. The only way forward on a board like this is to argue to the truth and not to people.

Sounds like no fun at all. I've been arguing with shills for many years now (so many that I know who Kent and Curmy are), and I can say with authority that facts have no place whatsoever in an argument with the plethora of shills that have been proven many times over to infest the conspiracy community. Calling them assholes is far more satisfying, and fun.

Sounds like no fun at all. I've been arguing with shills for many years now (so many that I know who Kent and Curmy are), and I can say with authority that facts have no place whatsoever in an argument with the plethora of shills that have been proven many times over to infest the conspiracy community. Calling them assholes is far more satisfying, and fun.

Also true. You can't reason with unreasonable people. But like another poster pointed out to me just the other day: you should always write like you are speaking to a neutral audience. You never know who might read your stuff, or which path of learning it might set them upon.

I honestly don't buy that they have invested as much resources to the conspiracy community as you appear to think they have. I could buy one or two agents assigned to the typical cointelpro shit, maybe a watchdog to sound the horn the if they get ahold of something really damning. What I don't buy is countless man-months devoted to internet slapfights.

"I honestly don't buy"... Like I give a fuck what you do or don't believe. I don't know how far back you go, but I've seen multiple genuine shills outed with concrete evidence over the years since GLP got bought for a motorcycle. The guy that posted his shill handbook as part of a copypasta was gold. Meh, zero fucks given. The only reason for this sentence is I'm bored.

Why not have a good conversation instead of dismissing me with every reply? Why not just stop replying? My instinct is that much more shill resources are devoted to the mainstream social channels and only a token amount is given to fringe outlets and instead of countering that you're referencing personal allegations I have zero familiarity with.

Why not have a good conversation? Because you don't strike me as genuine, that's why. Nothing personal, I meet you every day on the internet and care less about you every time I do. Every now and then I come across a genuine seeker, but they're becoming increasingly rare. Soon I'll just become a genuine pure troll, and vanish with the dinosaurs. No great loss.

give james a chance!

Did. He's saying there are hardly any shills in here. He's either not been paying any attention to this site, or he is one.

Please do disappear. Your attitude is toxic. You've let your paranoia get the better of you and you're striking out blind in all directions.

What better way to tear apart a community than sow the seeds of mistrust by making people think anyone can be a shill.

"Striking out blind" Heh, nice sense of proportion there champ. If my posting on the internet is so toxic to you that you feel the need to tell me to go away, I'll stay a bit longer. Thanks for cheering me up!

You said yourself you're quickly becoming a troll. While also claiming to be some arbiter of who the true seekers are and making baseless assertions of fakery based on gut feelings. You're the type of person who tears communities apart. You're the type of person who keeps me from visiting here much anymore. So stay if you want. I won't notice.

But as the numbers slip and the post quality declines. As insulted non true believers leave in frustration. Consider how you might have helped to cultivate instead of fracture this commnity. And then consider who that really helps at the end of the day.

u wanted a genuine seeker, u found one. tell me, am i a fool for not trusting what i cant examine without flying, and feel strangely drawn to, if not a flat earth, then atleast a still earth with unknown shape? im usually not as quick to believe in things, putting great stock in my religion (my one big 'almost' unverified assumption/sin) and using it to test everything else i hear. also tell me if u r interested in, or have some knowledge of, occult/esoteric matters, both in daily life and as they relate to world conspiracies.

I'm not following the logic that the reason there aren't "many shills" is that "they" don't have enough resources. Isn't it easy to believe that they have close to infinite resources? At least when discussing the amount required to pay hundreds of individuals to maintain shill-ish behavior across the entire internet? How much could this possibly cost?

Even if they paid $100,000 per year to each shill, it would cost $100 million per year for 1,000 shills to run rampant with psy-op objectives. Is that a lot of money for wealthy elite organizations? I'd suppose if the objective was worthwhile (tainting the web and the people's trust in it, or general subversion of the mass-mind opinion,) I'd think 1 billion would be more in order, which would buy an army of 10,000 shills (whom may be assigned multiple websites/forums to hang around.) I think the point and effect of shills is quite worthwhile if I put myself in the shoes of an organization which seeks general control and order of their liking and benefit.

If you have strong beliefs that something grand is being hidden from us (the public) then this money is rather a requirement; a mandatory investment to keep knowledge hidden, obfuscated, tangled in a twisted information web .... and ultimately blocked from meaningful consensus (which is needed for action, change, revolution etc).

Or they hire a few shills and let the community tear itself apart by everyone accusing everyone of being shills and destroying real conversation and meaningful debate.

Well yes I'd agree there is some optimum number of shills to start the fire and then some other optimum (less) to maintain the fire. It seems your point is that the damage is already done when the community is cognizant that shills are a real thing, thus devolving the internet into a much more uncertain, tangled territory of information and discourse...

I completely concur, while adding the notion that the number of shills might have reduced since the program(s) inception. It still is happening with an unknown number of participants to maintain the uncertainty.

What's interesting is that some shills might even be hired to be "caught" or be told tactics which only more perceptible individuals pick up on. This would duly serve the purpose of confirming in the community's collective psyche that we simply can't trust everyone.

What's the best way to handle this when the potential to trust is already in flames?

Fight arguments with logic, not ad homenims. Don't get dragged into personal fights.

Or they could pay a handful of people to instigate the idea that there are shills everywhere and watch open communities descend into rabid echo-chambers where all dissenting voices are immediately classed as 'them' and not 'us'.

Also, to feed the paranoia - Bots are cheap and are pretty good at writing short sentences.

yep they're trying to use reverse psychology. but I notice they don't say it towards "fringe" stuff like flat earth just towards anything mentioning Zionism or Israel.

I get down voted so much its hard to speak freely about the topics I want to because the system does not allow it, you are limited to how frequent you can post with very low or negative Karma.

Reddit is all about community voice and you can speak about as much "free thinking" and tolerance as you like, but it isn't true. Lets look at this from the sidebar rules:

This subreddit is a thinking ground. Above all else, we respect everyone's opinions and ALL religions. We hope to challenge issues which have captured the public’s imagination, from JFK to 9/11. This is a forum for free thinking, not hate speech. Respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind.

That is the biggest load of crap, it is not enforced and it is not adhered to. There is a gang mentality here and very obvious.

I have only posted a few topics but have recieved more than 500 downvotes for my "free thinking" about the Flat Earth.

People even said they wished I was dead.

Sub stats: 333,481 free thinkers.

Sure.

For what it's worth, I get sad seeing every flat earth post at zero points. Every. Single. One. The top comments are always derisive and hateful. It's abhorrent. I won't argue either way on the subject because I do not have a rocket ship to prove it one way or the other, but so many feel they have some intellectual high ground on the subject and their haughtiness shows. It also shows that the majority of the "free thinkers" here would rather not go much further down the rabbit hole than seems necessary. 9/11 and political conspiracies are about as far as most will go. Hell, most won't even consider the false flags/hoaxes/staged shootings concepts. They stay where the consensus is nice and comfortable...and I think that's shameful.

Thank you for sharing a mature opinion.

Thank you for expressing your dismay. I'll start speaking up in your threads and other controversial ones when I see them. Those of us who wish to protect other users' right to express their ideas without being attacked should do the same. If the mods won't do their jobs, I will try to make sure the users who break the rules know we are aware of their disgusting behavior. I know it won't do much, but I won't stand by any longer. I know that the mods tend to stay out of things unless someone reports a user, so maybe I'll also start being annoying and sending reports for the users I see who won't keep an open mind.

I get a small amount of this kind of negative attention for trying to raise awareness of geoengineering and chemtrails. I see the shills come in to detract, but I expect them. The users that bother me are the ones who go along with the shills in their character assassinations of me and the others who try to share this information. Just because it does not fit your worldview does not mean it isn't happening or doesn't exist.

It happens a lot more than people think it does on a majority of political/serious subs and its looked over.

We need a lot more of this and its all good, we all enjoy a debate, thats maybe why we're here, i'll flag you as a cool guy on Res too. cheers

Have a happy new year! Cheers back.

I have a question. Sphere's do seem to form in nature and the moon certainly looks spherical to me, why wouldn't the earth be as well?

Short answer, if you were born in Asia and only seen Asian people for 10 years of your life, doesn't mean there is only Asian people in the world.

Ok so I'll start by saying you're free to think whatever you want and in saying this I honestly do not mean you any disrespect whatsoever.

Disclaimer done. Bollocks. People have known the Earth is roughly spherical for thousands of years. This is easily achievable through the measurement of shadows cast at a specific time of day in different latitudes among other methods. You really do not need a spaceship to figure this out!

But aren't shadows mutable? Like when you put a stick in the water and it appears to make a 90 degree bend through the reflection, the reflection or shadow in this case doesn't demonstrate much about reality just a lensing effect.

So don't do the measurements underwater? Ensure you're at sea level for all measurements and that there are as few mitigating factors as possible. Like I said, scholars thousands of years ago were capable of calculating the size of the Earth to a pretty good standard without any real knowledge of space, planetary formation, or gravity.

I've got nothing, I'm not heavily vested in this subject just asking the questions I think need addressing. In another post I asked a question that was skeptical of this theory.

I'll make you an approved submitter. Hopefully that'll help you out with that post frequency limitation you're dealing with.

That's nice, that goes a long way to remove the sour taste I have, thank you so much for just letting me have an equal voice.

It's no problem at all, I think that's one of the dumbest rules this website has (among many dumb rules). I pretty much always approve users who ask unless there's a specific reason for me not to.

Your username makes your mod decisions appear mysteriously farcical.

mysteriously farcical

I'll make this my next username if this one ever gets banned.

Hah! Hopefully you won't need to.

The whole "discredit the sub" is just another attack vector to divide us. As if we need validation from the stupid masses.

If you never want to change anything maybe.

we can change things by discovering the truth, not exclusively by gaining more subscribers. thats the wrong approach imo

You can't discover the truth by demanding that all theories are equally valid. Theories need to stand up to attacks. While you're debating whether each and every mass shooting is filled with fake blood and fake parents there are activists and lobbyists and unions and politicians everyday changing the face of the world.

There is real corruption. There are real mysteries. When you spread yourself thin on any and every theory, even after thorough debunking you're wasting time and energy.

Sure the fringe stuff is fun. I've enjoyed reading almost any theory from Aspertame to zombies for a bit. But when I see the lack of evidence or logic I move on to better prospects. There are only so many hours in a day. So many sunsets. We should all consider what we spend them on.

This is so important! It completely undermines the entire point of this place. Saying something discredits is an absolute joke. What credibility is there to dis? Even after proof is provided most people still won't accept... Im curious how deep the hole is, even if it's not a rabbit hole. Telling me not to Look so I can protect the group is... Telling.

Truth is always by consensus. How do you know 1+1=2? Because someone sold you on a mathematical model of logic that's how. You could also use the symbolism of logic for metaphorical demonstration: 1+1=1 which is the formula for conception or 1+1=0 which is the formula for war. Life is about trying to understand reality amongst competing models of Truth.

That said, our best model is the consensus one given to us by and through culture. Therefore, the role of /r/conspiracy is to raise awareness of these conspiracies and convince a majority of people in our culture of the facts around them, thereby shifting opinion towards consensus and dragging the conspiracy into the light of public acceptance.

In a world of critical theory and hateful relatvism--which defines our culture now--there really is not objective truth, so we must make do with 'generally accepted as true'

Truth is not by consensus, end of story.

More truthful means less lying.

Objective means not lying, so if you actively lie you're discredited.

Subjective means open to more facts.

Truth is always by consensus.

Nah, that would make truth subjective. Truth is objective and it is us who are subjective.

Truth is always by consensus

This is a dangerously idiotic comment. The truth exists in and of itself, even if not a single person knows it.

I respectfully disagree with your first and last sentence.

Fringe topics are why I'm still subscribed. I don't believe in lizard men but maybe, just maybe, there are.

Anti matter bombs on Jupiter. Bases on Mars. I personally enjoy the science fiction type conspiracies more than the magical ones.

Whenever people bring up/ask me about reptillians/ancient aliens/moon being an artificial satellite etc etc I always say the same thing, "I don't think it's the truth, but I wouldn't be too surprised if it were."

Artificial moon?! I've never heard of that one. I'll have to look into it though.

I like the way reptilians are portrayed as shapeshifting evil masterminds. Maybe the dinosaurs never went extinct!

Ancient aliens are the most feasible conspiracy of the three for me. I still don't believe it. But worldwide monolithic structures made by ancient man gives me pause.

Artificial moon?! I've never heard of that one. I'll have to look into it though.

David Icke has a recent talk you can find on youtube, "The Lion Sleeps No More" or something. He goes into the Art.Moon idea a good bit in there somewhere. It's long but worth a watch if you've got the spare time.

I like the way reptilians are portrayed as shapeshifting evil masterminds. Maybe the dinosaurs never went extinct!

I've always thought of them as an allegory of sorts. A colorful caricature illustrating the type of people that strive for political office/positions of power for their own personal desires. Political Office/Executive positions seem to be a magnet for psychopaths in the end.

Ancient aliens are the most feasible conspiracy of the three for me. I still don't believe it. But worldwide monolithic structures made by ancient man gives me pause.

Agreed, I think in the end though we are going to discover that all of these ancient, unexplained wonders are actually the direct works of super ancient humans that made it pretty damn far before being hit by some sort of extinction level event that brought us back to square 1. That or they are the works of super ancient peoples that gained this knowledge from even more ancient peoples. I'm talking civilizations for 100-300k years ago possibly.

The more I learn about the concept of such ancient structures being "time capsules" meant to cast the collective mathematical/spiritual/historical knowledge of mankind out into the future for tens of thousands of years if not more, for those with the tech n' brains to figure the clues out. The more the puzzle pieces start to fall together. Check out Graham Hancock & Randall Carlson on all of the recent Joe Rogan Podcasts they have done if you haven't seen/heard them yet.

I used to be fascinated by the Ancient Aliens theory (still am to a degree, especially in terms of Panspermia etc.) but you should check this out, it really blew my mind, you'd be surprised how much complete and utter bullshit gets passed off as 'evidence'.

tl;dr for the video - Two points: i) Those monolithic structures you speak of were often build over decades or centuries of hard, back-breaking labour by armies of dedicated slaves doing nothing but work on their construction. We greatly underestimate the ingenuity and resourcefulness of our ancestors imo and ii) What the hell would be the point? I know its silly to second-guess alien psychology but if you have the technology to travel between star systems, why the hell would you bother erecting relatively tiny stone structures?

Two points: i) Those monolithic structures you speak of were often build over decades or centuries of hard, back-breaking labour by armies of dedicated slaves doing nothing but work on their construction. We greatly underestimate the ingenuity and resourcefulness of our ancestors imo and ii) What the hell would be the point? I know its silly to second-guess alien psychology but if you have the technology to travel between star systems, why the hell would you bother erecting relatively tiny stone structures?

1. The problem is that some of these structures such as the great pyramids and the temple of Osiris are pretty much impossible no matter how many people or years you dedicate to the task. 1000 tonne blocks are just too big to move especially in that environment. I've heard about the wet sand theories and my response is okay reproduce it to scale then let's see it.

You have to assume some pretty advanced technology which is a conspiracy in of itself.

two) If they're roughly our size then these buildings aren't relative small they're fittingly big.

1000 tonne blocks

Source? The largest blocks used according to a quick google search were the 80 tonne blocks used to support the ceiling above the King's Chamber.

too big to move

Doesn't seem like it. As I said, I think we're very prone to underestimate the ingenuity of our ancestors. You're right though, there are countless theories on this and it's impossible to say which is correct but I've no doubt in my mind that it was possible.

these buildings aren't relative small they're fittingly big

For what though? Even with our technology today we're capable of building structures that are nearly a kilometre tall using some pretty nifty polymers and metal alloys. Surely a civilization capable of crossing the interstellar void could do better than piling stones up to a few hundred metres?

edit: And just to re-iterate, watch the video. I used to believe in most of this stuff myself but this guy just destroys all of the theories presented in the Ancient Aliens show at least.

Source? The largest blocks used according to a quick google search were the 80 tonne blocks used to support the ceiling above the King's Chamber.

My bad on the wording. The three 1000 tonne blocks were used in the construction the Trilithon of course, not the pyramids. The point remains.

As I said, I think we're very prone to underestimate the ingenuity of our ancestors. You're right though, there are countless theories on this and it's impossible to say which is correct but I've no doubt in my mind that it was possible.

Problem is that no such contraption has ever been found in Egypt or depicted anywhere on the walls. In fact apparently there is nothing around the pyramids showing how or who constructed it.

I'm actually a radical skeptic and so I don't actually believe aliens did but being a skeptic I have to see proof and so far no one has reproduced. That means we have to reason with pure logic, the field of philosophy is often criticized for this reason (no experimental evidence needed)

So being a skeptic I have to conclude that no science thus far is satisfactory for explaining it.

For what though? Even with our technology today we're capable of building structures that are nearly a kilometre tall using some pretty nifty polymers and metal alloys. Surely a civilization capable of crossing the interstellar void could do better than piling stones up to a few hundred metres?

You seem to have different values than me because I consider using alloys and polymers that can be welded and melded to be a lot less impressive than "piling big(BIG) stones".

And just to re-iterate, watch the video. I used to believe in most of this stuff myself but this guy just destroys all of the theories presented in the Ancient Aliens show at least.

Alright i'll watch it if you take a look at Nassim Haramein's lecture on this subject on youtube titled The Pyramids and Orions Belt.

The funny thing is that like you I recently had a shift in opinion. Days ago I thought this wasn't even a question that we built these things. Now my paradigm has shifted and I can't logically make sense of how ancients could do it unless they were just more advanced than us.

Problem is that no such contraption has ever been found in Egypt or depicted anywhere on the walls. In fact apparently there is nothing around the pyramids showing how or who constructed it.

Yes and I completely agree this is a very interesting mystery. I'm actually a big fan of some of Graham Hancock's (and others) theories about the history of civilization probably being several thousand years older than the current narrative suggests. The Sphinx especially seems to bear this out given the water-erosion marks, inconsistencies in the dimensions and amount of erosion of the head compared to the rest of the body etc.

I consider using alloys and polymers that can be welded and melded to be a lot less impressive than "piling big(BIG) stones"

Well you said it yourself, they require the use of far more advanced technology to put together and then also consider the design elements involved. The Burj Khalifa, for example, is designed such that it can sway with the wind without placing undue stress on the structure etc. It requires a far better understanding of mechanics and physics to even contemplate building such a structure.

Nassim Haramein's lecture

This one? I'll give it a watch cheers :) Is it similar to Robert Bauval's talks/books? I did quite like him and thought it was a real shame he took so much flak for what seems like a pretty decent hypothesis.

Well you said it yourself, they require the use of far more advanced technology to put together and then also consider the design elements involved. The Burj Khalifa, for example, is designed such that it can sway with the wind without placing undue stress on the structure etc. It requires a far better understanding of mechanics and physics to even contemplate building such a structure.

I see what you're saying but I feel like my point hasn't been addressed satisfyingly; because what I'm saying is that despite the more primitive approach of building a pyramid like a giant playing with lego blocks, there is no giant to appeal to here.

Technically speaking the technology for making polymers and buildings that sway is actually easier to develop than a technology that can place stones that big with such accuracy.

For instance, if you wanted to put the moon on top of a giant wooden cylinder it'd be harder than synthesizing a new element to do advanced nuclear technologies, even though technically all you would need to put the moon on top of a wooden pole is a REALLY big person with a really big space helmet.

I'll give it a watch cheers :) Is it similar to Robert Bauval's talks/books? I did quite like him and thought it was a real shame he took so much flak for what seems like a pretty decent hypothesis.

That's the one. I'm not familiar with Robert Bauval's work actually, like I said I'm just getting these idea because I found it through Nassim first. Once I watch your video I'll hit you up with my thoughts or reconsiderations but it might be a while as i make my reddit argument rounds haha

For instance, if you wanted to put the moon on top of a giant wooden cylinder...

Yeah fair enough that makes sense. In which case our disagreement revolves around how hard it is to move large blocks of stone around such distances and heights.

Exactly! Only a fool believes he knows everything!

The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

What's your opinion on ancient (or current) aliens?

I believe in other forms of life in the universe. The odds are just overwhelming. I'm assuming that there are intelligent life forms among those.

As for human contact with aliens? I want to believe. It's really difficult explaining ancient monoliths. The ones in South America are amazing! Ancient aliens are a compelling argument for what may have been human ingenuity ( or psychic powers! Or magic! )

Then there are all the modern day sightings. Those are on par with ghosts and spiritual phenomenon for me. There may be a scientific explanation for many. I like to believe that ghosts are the result of multiple dimensions interacting with each other. But back to aliens! Modern day sightings may be a plethora of different things. Secret government programs to time traveling humans. Who knows.

TlDr- I want to believe!

Breakaway civilization is my favorite conspiracy.

Thank you my friend, you get it. There is only one thing that would "hurt the credibility" of this sub, and that is if the mods caved in to the walking brain-dead who are screaming for certain subjects to be "off limits".

Fortunately, the mods here are wise enough to realise that, so it won't ever happen.

My advice to those here who feel uncomfortable with this free-speech policy is to stop whining, and put their efforts into starting their own conspiracy-style subreddit with a sidebar list of "banned subjects". See how that works out.

Disagree.

At the end of the day we want more people to wake up to what is going on in the world.

If they come in here and see a flat earth post being seriously entertained...they are gonna leave and never come back.

Yes. Thank you. I wish I could send friends here but 90% of the posts are complete garbage. I just want some sort of scientific approach to these topics. If every theory could just be covered by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth I would be so happy.

Truth is stranger than fiction.

[deleted]

[deleted]

I downvote things I know aren't true. Like the flat earth. I'm not an astronaut, but I've been in a commercial airplane that has flown into dawn and we were high enough to see the earth was round from the airplane window. I was like 6 yrs old going to Hawaii. Maybe you should get on a plane--we can even crowdfund your ticket if you're truly that ignorant.

I personally don't mind upvoting unknowns like UFOs and ETs, but if we have shills coming in and trying to make this sub and it's people look like super stupid ignorants by accepting absolutely provable bullshit, then I think we should all just go home.

This is why I think 'flat earth' stuff is a distraction and a taint technique

I thought you had to go higher than 30k feet. The Virgin Galactic goes over 50k though.

You do. OP is confused about what a "horizon" is.

I wish I could say every flat earther is a shill but unfortunately there are some truly idiotic people out there. There is no talking sense into one of those people.

Downvoting shouldn't be used to show your disagreement. Flat Earth is as valid as most of the other theories here. Even more

Flat earth is laughable. They ignore math and physics stating that "science is bullshit ". They whole heartedly deny any photos or info from NASA and are all-round idiots.

I have watched a few YouTube videos and can rarely make it a few minutes in without yelling at them or starting to type replies (usually delete rather than post) and the only one I like is the cute-ish chick who does these "experiments" determining things like the distance to the sun. Entertainment ...yes. Conspiracies...no.

Her

Flat earth is laughable. They ignore math and physics stating that "science is bullshit ". They whole heartedly deny any photos or info from NASA and are all-round idiots.

Surely you mean all-flat idiots?

Heehee

Now that woman right there, knows exactly what she is doing! ;)

[deleted]

[deleted]

BECAUSE IT"S DUMB

Also, the Garfield conspiracy to create monarchs through stupid cartoons.

The HULK was created by Nazis

Salmonella was created by the Chinese to fix erectile dysfunction but got repurposed

Dolphins are the most intelligent life on earth, that's why they created the original computers.

Radio shack was created by the US government to fund nuclear weapons by overcharging for LEDs

Google created Ultron and it did 9/11 and blamed it on the jews and cheney

.....and many more I just made up

Now now. Leeches have been used in modern medicine to help circulation on reattached limbs. They might not be the cure all they once were but some medieval thinking wasn't all bad.

I could totally see the Radio Shack one!

[deleted]

[deleted]

A better one is /r/TheEarthIsFlat which has actual people posting and commenting.

But Flat Earth is not an actual conspiracy

it has real conspiracy aspects to it tho like how full of shit NASA is.

While not required, you are requested to use the NP domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by prefacing your reddit link with np.reddit.com.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Ideas like flat earth do make this sub look stupid. Another quote "the audience determines what is credible."

flat earth? concave earth? lol

I enjoy readig atheism just for that reason.

read what you want, upvote what you want, I may disagree but will fight to the death for your right to upvote!

I go to new and upvote the majority of posts, unless they are absolutely ridiculous. Most aren't.

The fringe is elsewhere. This is reddit, a corporate site.

Thank you for saying this. Fuck those arbiters of "truth".

Probably the most offensive thing I can think of is when you try to investigate the industry and ideology of modern science especially in fields like biology. It's a bigger taboo than aliens and time travel.

Personally I'd like to see more debunking of modern science

I agree. I think every subreddit could have a conspiracy section. There are so many.

Bravo! Well said.

Lizard people and flat earth conspiracy proponents have no place in the conversation. These "theories" are blatant counter operations against people asking legitimate questions concerning the global leadership. You don't have to be a reptile-human hybrid to abuse a position of power.

While I would agree completely I wouldn't make you disavow anything. This is what you call a slippery slope. That's why people make stances about absolutes like this.

Suggestion: don't participate. If you can see it's bullshit and don't comment collectively it will be super evident. After all how much can you get from a thread like that? It'll just be a bad improv reality internet tvshow forum thread of botsNshills n shit. A spectacle.

Lizard people and flat earth conspiracy proponents have no place in the conversation.

Sure they do. Keep in mind, I'm not defending these ideas but making more of a censorship point.

Shouldn't we encourage all types of topics lest we censor out a topic that later proves true? Isn't it better to keep an open mind?

These "theories" are blatant counter operations against people asking legitimate questions concerning the global leadership.

Wait so /r/conspiracy is only for people asking legitimate questions concerning the global leadership? That's not true at all.

You don't have to be a reptile-human hybrid to abuse a position of power.

Agreed but just because you don't want to read about that stuff doesn't mean they don't have a place here.

Lizard people is actually a conspiracy, just not what you think, because you haven't looked more into it. It could either mean those who are psychopaths and use the reptilian part of their brain. There are also theories (imo credible) of the two bloodlines of Cain and Abel (occult/esoteric). Don't be so quick to write stuff off, without looking into it.

I'm familiar with both theories. One is semantics (want to call human psychopaths lizard-brained? Fine. Whatever.) the other is blatant counter operations. The fact that you assume the only reason these idea are being rejected is because people are ignorant of them is alarming. I don't know how else to say it other than you're wrong. The earth is round and humans are evil. No lizard-hybrids required.

I'm familiar with both theories.

No, you really don't appear to be and you think that shit gets posted here. That would be youtube. Also, please explain to me what you "are familiar" with, in regards to the second theory I mentioned.

The earth is round and humans are evil. No lizard-hybrids required.

humans are evil no JFK conspiracy required, humans are evil no Builderburger(sp?) required etc etc

That's a bit of a reach. The JFK and builderburg topics represent basic human behavior and power dynamics. Lizard people not so much.

likewise some lizard people theories make room for benevolent or otherwise agreeable beings. mostly based on DMT/Salvia trip reports and alleged abductees.

Lmfao

?

What kind of drugs are you on? What part of the human brain is reptilian? What fucking credible proof is there of the "Theory" for lizard people descended from the ( mythical) Cain and Abel?

Well, you sound like a peach.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triune_brain
2. As for Cain and Abel: https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3xrvon/the_two_bloodlines_of_cain_and_abel/

This is the definition of a trollish shitpost. Please read the rules on the sidebar.

Who, the guy I'm replying to? Ikr

I don't agree with most of those fringey theories, but oh, do I enjoy them. Sure, most of them seem to serve a fear mongering agenda, subconsciously scaring gullible people into a state of complacency by making them and foreign forces believe the powers that be are too smart and technologically advanced to stand up against. But with a grain of salt fringe politics comes off as the new science fiction, I'm the vein of Orwell and Huxley. It gets people to question authority, which at the end of the day is the whole point of this sub. Think of it at the gateway drug to more reasonable alternative media. I like hearing about Obama Stargates to Mars and subterranean aliens, its a nice break from the depressing bleakness of the IDF spraying Palestinians with sewer water.

David Icke did more to expose the WWIII and NWO than everybody in this sub together. I don't think you understand his theory and should educate yourself. There is a reason why reptilian Anunnaki don't want us to know about the flat earth. It's not a good reason. And you are helping them

tbh sometimes i think this whole sub is a concerted grand effort to show us 'real' (read : surface level) conspiracies and an infinite number of facts and exposes about them, but keep us away from flat/still earth kind of huge life-changing conspiracies. look at how much people shitpost about isis, hillary (one candidate in one country of the world), evil jewa and palestinians killed, etc. the same cycle of posts going over and over. yes, we know cia created isis, please make a masterpost of links, sticky it, and submit neq relevant info that adds to it, not 'random guy accuses us govt'. same with shillary. id much rather see posts on gmos, vaccines, fluoride water, bad meat, and other things which inform me in my daily life, and discussion about whats the end goal in harming us like this; atleast if big 'out there' topics r not to be discussed.

otherwise ill take honest flat earth, aliens, god beings, 'we r creators who forgot', occult world powers etc. discussion anyday.

What is your proof for that to be true?

You have no proof. Anything and everything can be questioned.

Whether or not they are "counter operations" doesn't mean they should be banned from a thread which seeks people to ask the question.

What should be banned are blatantly political posts (eg the circle-jerk ones that are posted about making sure to vote for Bernie Sanders nightly and daily).

I do not enjoy them. They should banned on federal level like religion.

Sure, it's a slippery slope, who will decide what is what isn't appropriate for a conspiracy discussion, but if you think about it, just like a religion, it is a planned movement based on lies. Anyone can literally make anything up, call it a religion, a few followers later, you influence politics and internal and social affairs based on your lies.

We all know it's lies, we can't ban them because free speech shit and yet they organize and they take advantage of a weak, gullible human mind.

Democracy is a sham.

I don't intense scientific rigor. I never demand extraordinary evidence. I merely request solid logic. Something beyond baseless assertions and misconstrued understandings or shoddy reporting.

I'm open to conspiracy stuff. I understand that if something is meant to be hidden then solid evidence is hard to come by. I used to frequent this sub a lot when I first joined Reddit. The shill attacking culture has really pushed me away. And probably a lot of people. People will be saying 'who cares if we discredit the sub' until it's just a small paranoid insular echo chamber.

It truly is and it's how I approach topics. I'll entertained anything and come to my own conclusion.

While I would agree completely I wouldn't make you disavow anything. This is what you call a slippery slope. That's why people make stances about absolutes like this.

Suggestion: don't participate. If you can see it's bullshit and don't comment collectively it will be super evident. After all how much can you get from a thread like that? It'll just be a bad improv reality internet tvshow forum thread of botsNshills n shit. A spectacle.

Are you one of those that constantly brays about "discredits this sub"? Yeah, I gave you a 50/50 choice there bud. Oh, and just for the record, I think that flat earth shit is disinfo of the worst kind.

Lizard people and flat earth conspiracy proponents have no place in the conversation.

Sure they do. Keep in mind, I'm not defending these ideas but making more of a censorship point.

Shouldn't we encourage all types of topics lest we censor out a topic that later proves true? Isn't it better to keep an open mind?

These "theories" are blatant counter operations against people asking legitimate questions concerning the global leadership.

Wait so /r/conspiracy is only for people asking legitimate questions concerning the global leadership? That's not true at all.

You don't have to be a reptile-human hybrid to abuse a position of power.

Agreed but just because you don't want to read about that stuff doesn't mean they don't have a place here.

Lizard people is actually a conspiracy, just not what you think, because you haven't looked more into it. It could either mean those who are psychopaths and use the reptilian part of their brain. There are also theories (imo credible) of the two bloodlines of Cain and Abel (occult/esoteric). Don't be so quick to write stuff off, without looking into it.

I don't agree with most of those fringey theories, but oh, do I enjoy them. Sure, most of them seem to serve a fear mongering agenda, subconsciously scaring gullible people into a state of complacency by making them and foreign forces believe the powers that be are too smart and technologically advanced to stand up against. But with a grain of salt fringe politics comes off as the new science fiction, I'm the vein of Orwell and Huxley. It gets people to question authority, which at the end of the day is the whole point of this sub. Think of it at the gateway drug to more reasonable alternative media. I like hearing about Obama Stargates to Mars and subterranean aliens, its a nice break from the depressing bleakness of the IDF spraying Palestinians with sewer water.

except nobody says that. we all know they are here, or do you disagree?

David Icke did more to expose the WWIII and NWO than everybody in this sub together. I don't think you understand his theory and should educate yourself. There is a reason why reptilian Anunnaki don't want us to know about the flat earth. It's not a good reason. And you are helping them

The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

What is your proof for that to be true?

You have no proof. Anything and everything can be questioned.

Whether or not they are "counter operations" doesn't mean they should be banned from a thread which seeks people to ask the question.

What should be banned are blatantly political posts (eg the circle-jerk ones that are posted about making sure to vote for Bernie Sanders nightly and daily).

No, evolution is demonstrable. Evolution is exceedingly easy to both observe and cause.

Oh lawd

I can't comment on whether you need anything else. I know NOTHING about the true workings of reality and will readily admit that. I do know that you can't assume a lack (or the non-existence) of something else just because you already have something you understand. You don't necessarily need a self-aware God for adaptation to work, but that doesn't mean there isn't one behind the introduction and evolution of life. And that also doesn't mean that natural selection, i.e. adaptation, is the only driving force behind evolution.

You're both discussing a problem of language really. Mixing up evolution and Darwinism or neo-Darwinism.

This is partly because the dominant ideology (modern synthesis neo-darwinism) deliberately words their ideology in a way that makes it seem like a complete synonym with word evolution when i reality is just an interpretation.

But as we know Lamarck, Kropotkin and Lysenko believed in a theory of evolution as well.

No, just because a phenomenon is observed with a unknown cause doesn't mean the phenomenon isn't real, I don't know why you would think that. Gravity didn't start being real only after humans understood it.