Oh yes, 9/11 is what dragged me deep into this rabbit hole. Deeper than I ever imagined. Thank you James Corbett for showing what a farce the official story is. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98
I wouldn't believe something crazy like that unless I saw it unfold on live television right before my eyes!
As Richard Pryor would say, who am I going to believe: You, or my lying eyes?
P.S I'm a huge sheep, I love the mainstream media, I don't bother researching anything on my own and I blindly believe one group of people who protects me from that other group of people they say are wrong about stuff!
Mine are a toss up. There's always the JFK/RFK assassinations, the moon landing, 9/11, and DIA. However, the one that always gets me going is John Rockefeller's quest to control the oil industry. The conspiracy theory is that every war that the US has been involved in since WWI was a strategic move on the part of the Rockefellers to gain further control of the world's oil. They have also sought to ensure the world's dependency on oil - which is why we have cars on the road in 2012 that actually get worse mileage than cars developed in the 1930's and 1940's as well as the lack of technological advancements to steer us away from oil.
Another way I see this one being presented is that we DID go to the moon, however, the footage that we all saw was fake. This was done for security reasons, to keep Russians from seeing what we actually used up there, while still showing that we did it.
Viewed in this light it seems to make a bit more sense.
I would be much more inclined to believe this instead of "we have never went to the moon at all". That's a little bit silly if you ask me. I personally think the footage is real. But I respect that you stated your position clearly and gave a reason instead of the near psychotic paranoid ramblings most people present as fact around here...
I'm not actually sure where I stand on this one. There are a few weird things in the videos that I have seen that make me question it. But that is all I can do at this point...question. So I'm on the fence.
A lot of folks do seem to go a bit nuts, but I think it's the nature of the conspiracy beast. Can't blame them really, it's exciting and hard to keep a tight grip on things that are shadowy to begin with. But we could always use a good self look at WHY we actually believe what we believe.
I totally understand. Some conspiracies I believe (9/11) some I'm on the fence about (government knowledge of extraterrestrials, area 51, etc) and some I have written off as complete nonsense (Illuminati, musicians selling soul to the devil, moon landing hoax). But I can respect that you are actually looking at both sides and not just pointing fingers at the big evil government.
You can't blame them, once you see some discrepancies in one conspiracy it's a slippery slope and it's very easy to just start believing all the conspiracies out there without examing BOTH sides of evidence. If someone comes to a conclusion based on evidence, great. But when people start citing their only evidence as "the government is out to get us man" or "they lied about this so they MUST be lying about this too".
As someone who has a dual major, with one part being Philosophy, it is critical for me to see that people aren't using logical fallacies to support their claims.
We never went to the moon. Primary problem was protecting astronauts from the Van Allen radiation belts among many others. Yes, a lie this big can be perpetuated for over 40 years. It is overwhelmingly obvious that we never went to moon once you've seen the evidence.
There is no way to verify.
The scientists working on the space program were nazis.
The effects of leaving the earths magnetic field and the human brain. There are a few reasons why one would question
There is a difference between leaving the earths protective magnetic field and going into space. All of the space shuttle and soyuz missions have been in low earth orbit and within the earth magnetic field. As you leave the earths magnetic field you start to run into the Van Allen radiation belts which would quickly kill a person unless very very thick lead shielding was used.
It took Apollo only about an hour to pass through the worst part of the radiation belts - once on the outbound trip and once again on the return trip. The total radiation dose received by the astronauts was about one rem. A person will experience radiation sickness with a dose of 100-200 rem, and death with a dose of 300+ rem. Clearly the doses received fall well below anything that could be considered a significant risk. Despite claims that "lead shielding meters thick would have been needed", NASA found it unnecessary to provide any special radiation shielding.
The hoax advocates also make the mistake of limiting themselves to two-dimensional thinking. The Van Allen Radiation Belts consist of a doughnut-shaped region centered on Earth's magnetic equator. The translunar trajectories followed by the Apollo spacecraft were typically inclined about 30 degrees to Earth's equator, therefore Apollo bypassed all but the edges of the radiation belts, greatly reducing the exposure.
So the I.S.S. is a lie? Scientific experiments conducted in space and on the moon are a lie? Many major NASA missions have been a lie? What about the Challenger and the Voyager?
can any of us verify beyond visual and auditory effects? we have holograms and special effects. think about how the brain interprets what it sees vs what is actually there.
we get most of our news from tv/radio/internet. all mediums invented and controlled by the cia and military. we could be the rats in a truman show lab experiment just to get objective data on humans react to certain stimuli.
on that note, how many witnesses actually saw the plane hit the south tower or even the north tower (that isn't a media type or military or a ceo) only one i can think of, and how do we know they weren't actors?
now why would they do this? i dont know. is it possible? sure, anything is possible.
where is the hard evidence for the moon landing?
tv doesnt count.
there is zero independent data, only nasa, and nasa was infested with men who used to torture humans for science.
now that is a discussion, the fact we got into space because of the torturous experiments nazis pulled. You may refuse to entertain that everything we have been told through the medium has been a lie but I hope you understand that nazis were used in the space race at least.
Oh I don't know. Moon rocks. Experiments conducted on the moon. Numerous videos and photos which have stood up to 40 years of scrutiny. Retroreflectors placed on the surface of the moon still used to this day. Various private observatories and citizens who have documented all of this.
you mean petrified wood? any independent experiments on the moon or only nasa? videos and photos do not = reality. 40 years of what scrutiny? anyone dares suggest the moon landing may not have been real, well you're called a loon. so because nasa said retroreflectors were placed on the moon i suppose it makes it true. remember who was in nasa if you have the inkling to trust a govt agency to tell you the truth. where are these private observations of man landing on the moon? where are these documentations from citizens that prove that the US put men on the moon? so give me hard evidence if you are so inclined to believe i'm an idiot. otherwise stfu because there is no independent verifiable data that science requires for any experiment to be considered scientific. so far no one can verify because no one can get to the moon.
The retroreflectors places on the surfaced are still used to this day to navigate satellites and other things. If the photos and videos are not real don't you think in the 40 years since the landing there would be hard evidence showing they are without a doubt fake?
As far as people who tracked the moon landing that aren't part of the government here is some for just apollo 11:
The Bochum Observatory director (Professor Heinz Kaminski) was able to provide confirmation of events and data independent of both the Russian and U.S. space agencies.[30]
A compilation of sightings appeared in "Observations of Apollo 11" in Sky and Telescope magazine, November 1969, pp. 358–359.
The Madrid Apollo Station, part of the Deep Space Network, built in Fresnedillas, near Madrid, Spain tracked Apollo 11.[31]
Goldstone Tracking Station in California tracked Apollo 11.[32]
At Jodrell Bank Observatory in the UK, the telescope was used to observe the mission, as it was used years previously for Sputnik.[33] At the same time, Jodrell Bank scientists were tracking the unmanned Soviet spacecraft Luna 15, which was trying to land on the Moon.[34] In July 2009, Jodrell released some recordings they made.[35]
Larry Baysinger, a technician for WHAS radio in Louisville, Kentucky, independently detected and recorded transmissions between Apollo 11 astronauts on the lunar surface and in the command module.[36] Recordings made by Baysinger share certain characteristics with recordings made at Bochum Observatory by Heinz Kaminski (see above), in that both Kaminski's and Baysinger's recordings do not include the capsule communicator in Houston and the associated Quindar tones heard in NASA audio and seen on NASA Apollo 11 transcripts. Kaminski and Baysinger could only hear the transmissions from the Moon, and not transmissions to the Moon from the earth.
As far as moon rocks go:
A total of 382 kilograms (842 lb) of Moon rocks and dust were collected during the Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17 missions.[1] Some 10 kg (22 lb) of the Moon rocks have been destroyed during hundreds of experiments performed by both NASA researchers and planetary scientists at research institutions unaffiliated with NASA. These experiments have confirmed the age and origin of the rocks as lunar, and were used to identify lunar meteorites collected later from Antarctica.[2] The oldest Moon rocks are up to 4.5 billion years old,[1] making them 200 million years older than the oldest Earth rocks, which are from the Hadean eon and dated 3.8 to 4.3 billion years ago. The rocks returned by Apollo are very close in composition to the samples returned by the independent Soviet Luna programme.[3] A rock brought back by Apollo 17 was accurately dated to be 4.417 billion years old, with a margin of error of plus or minus 6 million years. The test was done by a group of researchers headed by Alexander Nemchin at Curtin University of Technology in Bentley, Australia.[4]
Where do you get "petrified wood" from? You keep asking questions but you've yet to point toward ONE piece of evidence that the landing was faked.
why do you need evidence to show that the moon landing was not real? that is the same as asking an atheist to provide evidence for no god. it sucks that a people believed in such fantasy, myself included. ah yes, another "source" from the medium. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird puts all media in question.
gold is petrified sunshine. I used my scrying mirror to determine the age of each speck of gold. believe me? no? there is no way you can verify what I said because you have zero idea how to use a scrying mirror and have zero idea what you are looking at. the same thing can be said of moon rocks (which by the way, one does not need to go to the moon to get, they are here on earth, along with rocks from mars)
so to be honest having a moon rock proves nothing. i wonder if I still have my "moon rock" that was bought for me back in the day.
thats right i am asking questions. it doesnt mean i beleive it was a hoax. but the lack of evidence, scientific verifiable data, indicates to me that this was one big mind fuck. why? there is no telling why nazis do what they do. we are moths the moon landing was the porch light.
The thing is when an atheist is asked why he/she doesn't believe in god they are able to point out reasons why they don't. Like I said, you are just rambling in a nonsensical way that is very paranoid in nature. You aren't taking an objective and critical view on the situation. You accuse me of already having my mind made up when you are doing the same thing.
I ask for proof the moon landing was a hoax because otherwise you are just going based on faith. And as an atheist you know that faith isn't a good reason to believe in something.
And why are you bringing up Nazis? Are you implying everyone involved in the moon landing and the space program is a Nazi?
how is what i say nonsensical? because you have no clue of your history? there is no independent data for the moon landing. photos and videos and anything coming out a medium can be manipulated to give illusions.
it is you who is not taking the objective view. you are basing your opinion on faith and faith alone.
The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one.
Adolf Hitler
and yes, we got to space because of the knowledge that the nazis (paperclip) had obtained from the experiments preformed on the Jews during the holocaust.
You use a plethora of "If, then" statements. You keep saying that since A is true then B must also be true. And that is simply not correct. You are also using the "slippery slope". Since A is true then you are taking B and C to be true without even bothering to explain why.
If you'd like I will go through all your replies and show you. But for the sake of brevity I wont do that right now. I have to be in class in about 10 minutes!
I hope you realize this is no personal attack. I am enjoying the conversation. I am just imploring you to take a step back and look at all this without your own personal filters.
that is the if then argument, that i portrayed to demonstrate your logical fallacy. i dont think you are comprehending anything i am saying.
because the only thing that can be attested to is that there are images on tv that have convinced people that we have landed on the moon.
you want me to take your side of things because you simply cannot wrap your mind around the possibility of deception. for you, it takes a greater leap of faith to believe it to be a hoax. I completely understand this viewpoint. For me it is easier for me to be sceptical since there is no independent verifiable data, which is required in science if one is to further investigate phenomena.
I can wrap my mind around deception. There are plenty of conspiracy theories out there I totally believe. This just isn't one of them. I'm not asking you to think my way. We are having a discussion here. I'm just providing my view and why it's my view and asking you to consider it. Not accept it as fact.
In most instances I take the skeptic side. The moon landing is just one that I find overwhelmingly hard to refute.
yes but you are accusing me of logical fallacy and i ask you, after class if you can to provide examples of my logical fallacy.
if you had read one of my many replies that i had believed it to be fact as well. i have read from many "authorities" about the moon landing. but talking about it doesn't make it so. it only reinforces the idea but doesn't indicate hard evidence. that's the thing, there is no way to independently verify the moon landing.
I totally agree there. There is no way to verify it. But I choose to believe it because the evidence for it. Like I said I don't want to change your mind. Just have an intelligent discussion. Which we are doing.
I don't always believe things like this. I'm an atheist, I think the government had a major role in 9/11, I think there is more to aliens than we know, and many other things. I just don't think the moon landing was a hoax.
evidence? i guess it relies on one's definition of evidence. i dont want to think that the moon landing was a hoax but as far as i am concerned it may not be as real as we have been led to believe.
the soviets used to be amazed at what the American's believed.
9-11 was an inside job and so were the anthrax attacks.
You're right. It does. I personally think all the reasons I mentioned earlier (moon rocks, science, reflectors, etc) are evidence enough whereas you don't. That's fine. Different opinions. Like I said, I don't wanna change your mind. Just discuss both sides.
That video is very interesting, thank you for sharing. I do think 9-11 was an inside job. I'm not informed enough on the anthrax attacks to have an opinion either way.
By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise. - adolf hitler
You're arguments are based on nothing but logical fallacies. Are you college educated? If not, I suggest taking an intro level philosophy class, it'll help you in shaping your arguments greatly.
how so? tell me my logical fallacies? that i don't believe in what the tv tells me? my parents talked about the moon landing as if they witnessed it first hand. they didn't witness it first hand.
so if the tv shows you a man bouncing up and down on a set and the populace trust and believe, have faith in their medium and govt, then that equals a moon landing? because the reality is this; there are videos of men in space suits shown bouncing (maybe slowed tape) and a medium to propagate this image. seeing is believing and many people have no inkling to question what is presented to them by the authority that rules them. most people do not have the mind frame of their rulers. the belief of humans and a tv image. that's all we have
to "prove" we had man on the moon.
i mastered philosophy. i also mastered neurobiology. and yes, college is a waste unless you have the connections and or the talent to get you where you want to be. ex. all those students who can't get jobs .
I am not saying any one should believe what the TV tells them. You are making this more than what it is. I don't have a problem with questioning superiors. I was simply arguing the moon landing hoax.
How have you mastered both philosophy and neurology. I don't think there a human being alive who has actually mastered either of these on their own, let alone together.
And what if one isn't interested in college as a means to an end? What if they just like to learn? Is it still a waste?
but you are believing what the tv tells you. you do accept what nasa tells you w/o question. most people do because they have no understanding of the matter. that is very relevant to this discussion. if you dont trust the source of information how do you expect to accept it as truth? i know that science and politics are closely linked. just wait and see.
you are in college you will see.
learning is never a waste. you do not need to attend a university to learn.
entertain the idea that it was a hoax. you will probably end up in the agnostic area (where i am at)
mirrors on the moon dont mean jack. we landed a rover on mars. russia has sent orbital around the moon. still doesn't prove man was ever on the moon.
I'm not believing it because the TV tells me too. I believe it because I think the evidence for it is overwhelming. You are over generalizing here and insulting my intelligence.
I personally think all the reasons I mentioned earlier (moon rocks, science, reflectors, etc) are evidence enough whereas you don't. That's fine. Different opinions. Like I said, I don't wanna change your mind. Just discuss both sides.
While the International Bankster Cartel is one of my modern/contemporary peeves, my most fascinating interest is in ancient civilizations, ala the myth that stone aged people built pyramids all over the earth with copper chisels and rocks.
yes. my favorite also. the fact that so many of the ancient sites around the globe contain so many similarities. from the structures they built, the massive stones used to build them, the art they created, etc... it's impossible to deny they were connected and had a shared knowledge. i think the evidence also points to civilization being much, much older than we are led to believe. because all this evidence exists, which points to fascinating possibilities, and it's not taken seriously by mainstream researchers makes one think there has to be some sort of conspiracy at play here.
Yeah this is one I'm finding I agree with. We simply don't know much about what, how and why the ancients did what they did. I've actually heard that Egyptian sources about their Kings Dynasty and Lineage (it went back much farther in history than our models allowed) was just ignored because it didn't work. Simply, we think we know more about the Egyptians than the Egyptians knew about themselves.
Humans have been around for a long time. If shit hit the fan here and now, what do we think would be left of our world in even a few thousand years? We don't inscribe much of anything on rocks, it's all intangible data on computers. Our books won't last long. Our common house made of wood, gone. Nature reclaims it all when we stop upkeep.
And we just keep getting new information that refuses to fit in our models. We are going to have to admit we just don't have enough data. Gobekli Tepe is a neat example.
And don't dare to /r/askscience about their arrogance and irresponsibility. They hate that shit ("How dare you point out our 'fear our science' fraud!")
Nice. Have you seen "the revelation of the pyramids"? Have you seen the insane stonework from Tiwanaku / Puma Punku? I'm looking for more on those in addition to the ancient pyramids if you happen to have some.
When I'm home I'll shoot you a few more I've enjoyed.
Yes, I'm very interested as well. Were these the same "quakes" that they said didn't register like normal earthquakes on the scales/monitors? I'll look and see if I can find that anywhere...
Also, the quake that created the Tsunami in Japan last year was supposedly man made as well. Japan wasn't playing with the Black Hats, so they detonated a bomb on a fault line of the coast of japan.
It is interesting because these quakes, Japan, Virginia, and Colorado all had unusually shallow points of activity. They also didn't have a P wave which natural quakes MUST have by their nature.
Pretty intriguing but I can't verify this as much as I want to. It is a hopeful conspiracy however, to think that an equally powerful group of humans are fighting for us. I wish them luck if they truly are and would love to help in anyway possible!
You got it. It's really tough to find much of anything outside of himself and what he says. Of course, what he talks about is mostly already out there (the NWO and the like). It's his unique stories that are hard to pin down.
I recently saw a video of him saying we need to just rise up and detain or kill those who are behind the current state of affairs. I wonder why his white hat group doesn't take action? Surely they have more power and direction than the current divided-and-conquered people?
sigh He brings up a fascinating and brilliant figure like Phillip K. Dick and all he can talk about are the tragic and unfortunate mental problems he developed toward the end of his life.....sit and spin, Mr. Jones.
The UNITED STATES corporation one. About common law vs maritime admiralty. STATE OF MICHIGAN vs Michigan State. Unlawful vs Illegal. A lot of word analysis in that one.
HAARP, personally. Because, "controlling the weather" means you can also cause earthquakes. Because weather has a huge effect on plate tectonics. Also, the leading "scholar" of this particular conspiracy theory also believes in (not shitting you at all) mole people.
The inclusion of "mole people" of any kind guarantees it a spot in my top ten, to be honest. There is no conspiracy theory that wouldn't benefit from the involvement of mole people, let's be honest with ourselves.
The "Titanic didn't really sink" thing and the Philadelphia Experiment also rank pretty high, despite no mole people, however.
I think you're using sarcasm (not sure,though), but the links between electromagnetic waves, the weather, and earthquakes are unclear. They are not as disjointed as you believe.
You should read up on it before dismissing it as impossible.
I have not heard of this "leading scholar" who believes in mole people, nor do I care to. Even if he is as crazy you make him out to be, his personality has no bearing on the HAARP/weather control/earthquake discussion.
Your mentioning of mole people is nothing more than a weak attempt to discredit HAARP with out any evidence.
I got a similar impression, except my impression was a little more leaning toward mockery and ridicule. Read the first paragraph again. He set up HAARP to be ridiculed via a disjointed connecting of leaps of conjecture, then landing on "mole people" (which he mocks in the first paragraph, and then lauds in the second). Aufbruch is trolling this thread... and got upvoted for it.
EDIT: See Spacemanseeds' comment for another troll.
I was a big fan of the Elenin comet conspiracy. Mostly because of this video: "OUTSIDE THREAT IMMINENT." I also have a belief that we're fundamentally more than the result of random evolution and we're heading into a new era of human history that could be fantastic or terrible depending on how we prepare for it. Reading predictions and possible end game scenarios from theorists and the comet's generally odd reception across the globe made me think about who we are and where we're heading in a new way.
AIDS was a deliberately engineered bio-weapon for the purpose of population control against undesirables (Gays/Africans/Drug Users). Also, there are many cures for cancers, including natural cures, but they are suppressed because it would hurt the economy if cancer was cured outright and not expensively treated/managed.
Gonna have to go with ultrasonic mind control or whatever you want to call it, because it's both far-out and plausible.
Decades old: two ultrasonic transducers of high power and precision can be directed at a target. When they are properly aimed and tuned, the interference can be in the audible and or tactile range. This can be used to create sounds audible only to the target, as well as tap-like sensations only they can feel.
Fast forward to ~ a decade ago: Sony patented a similar device, except it was discovered that with precise tuning/aim such a device can also be used to stimulate individual/small clusters of neurons. I don't know where the actual brain-mapping is now; it varies from person to person, and sometimes drastically so. But a few years from now or now, this device or some other similar incarnation could serve as a useful "neural input" device. Or a potent mind-control device. I don't think the software/brain atlas is there yet, personally, but hey, it's a conspiracy theory, so who knows.
Just google the shit, plenty of quacks out there who will pour their hearts out about it. And there is a Sony patent (Google Patents). Have fun freaking the fuck out!
That Amy WHinehouse was killed last year to ensure that she was part of the 27 Club since the producers knew that she was way over due on promises to produce any new albums, all she had done was some tunes with a couple other people and they were in danger of losing profits. He "dying" was a blessing in disguise as they can now use this angle to sell her crap for decades to come.
That a group of investors (the ones who basically kept MJ solvent in the last year or so of his life) had him killed for access to his massive catalog and such. They knew he'd never be able to complete the 50+ dates of his tour and so they paid the Doctor (Dr. Conrad Murry) to kill him with the understanding that he does a shit-bit of jail time, never practices medicine again but he and his family are 'taken care of' for the rest of their lives.
Look at how quickly Michael's name has been thrown to the commercial wolves since he died. Suddenly his music is being licensed everywhere (he was pretty strict about how the music he owned was used and licensing was rare, if at all). Some of the Jacksons were pissed at the time, but they've all been happily paid into silence. His kids are taken care of, but they don't even own their dad's music, the investors do.
TL;DR a small group of people made a shit-load of money very fast off of Michael Jackson's Death.
In reviewing the original documents—the correspondence of Leibniz and Papin and the Royal Society papers—one cannot help but think of today's antiscience faction and their determination to implement a new Malthusian order by stopping technological development and theoretical science. In this case, a 100-year delay in the implementation of fusion power and full nuclear development would have devastating consequences for mankind. What America needs now is enough 20th-century XXXXXX XXXXX and Robert Fultons to get rid of the obstructors of progress for good.
...
In 1690, Papin published an historic article in the Acta
Eruditorum of Leipsig, "A New Method of Obtaining Very
Great Moving Powers at Small Cost " from which we can
precisely date the beginning of the Steam Age. Here, for
the first time, Papin proposed using the power of expand-
ing steam to operate an engine. In the new invention,
steam replaced the gunpowder charge of Huygens's cylin-
der, creating a more complete vacuum under the piston
and thereby taking advantage of the full force of atmos-
pheric pressure (Figure 4).
Papin's concept was appropriated in toto in the Newcomen
engine more than 20 years later. However, although
Papin mentioned in passing the utility of his invention to
"draw water or ore from mines," the article featured a
lengthy and detailed discussion of the application of steam
power to propellirig ships equipped with paddlewheels
...
The Savery Hoax
Despite the publicity given to Papin's invention, the
British Parliament awarded an exclusive patent for "Rais-
ing Water by the Impellent Force of Fire" to one Thomas
Savery, variously described as a "sea captain" and a "mili-
tary engineer." The terms of the patent meant that any
steam-powered device Papin might invent in England would
come under the control of Savery.
Although news of Savery's patent reached Germany by
1699, it was not until 1704 that Leibniz, via "Hanoverian
envoys" in London, was able to acquire some sort of
description of Savery's device. Leibniz forwarded a sketch
of the English "engine" to Papin, along with an evaluation
of its capabilities. Based on further intelligence reports
from his envoys, Leibniz concluded—correctly—that Sav-
ery's device did not work in full size.
1708-1712: The Royal Society appropriates Papin'sresearches without remuneration.
1712: Papin "disappears." The first Newcomen engine, limited to pumpingwater from flooded mines, is erected
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/50C32.txt
from what i gather, as long as it is for "peaceful purposes" they can douse us with whatever chemical they choose.
we are the second phase of the nazi experiment.
That a group of investors (the ones who basically kept MJ solvent in the last year or so of his life) had him killed for access to his massive catalog and such. They knew he'd never be able to complete the 50+ dates of his tour and so they paid the Doctor (Dr. Conrad Murry) to kill him with the understanding that he does a shit-bit of jail time, never practices medicine again but he and his family are 'taken care of' for the rest of their lives.
Look at how quickly Michael's name has been thrown to the commercial wolves since he died. Suddenly his music is being licensed everywhere (he was pretty strict about how the music he owned was used and licensing was rare, if at all). Some of the Jacksons were pissed at the time, but they've all been happily paid into silence. His kids are taken care of, but they don't even own their dad's music, the investors do.
TL;DR a small group of people made a shit-load of money very fast off of Michael Jackson's Death.
98 comments
47 [deleted] 2012-01-31
[deleted]
8 bumblingmumbling 2012-01-31
Oh yes, 9/11 is what dragged me deep into this rabbit hole. Deeper than I ever imagined. Thank you James Corbett for showing what a farce the official story is. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98
2 derpledooDLEDOO 2012-01-31
This. And yet we still have no new investigation into this fiasco.
2 Purplehayess 2012-01-31
Yeah!
I wouldn't believe something crazy like that unless I saw it unfold on live television right before my eyes!
As Richard Pryor would say, who am I going to believe: You, or my lying eyes?
P.S I'm a huge sheep, I love the mainstream media, I don't bother researching anything on my own and I blindly believe one group of people who protects me from that other group of people they say are wrong about stuff!
18 UnkleJesse 2012-01-31
That the Government puts fluoride in the water because they care about our teeth
12 mrmyxlplyx 2012-01-31
Mine are a toss up. There's always the JFK/RFK assassinations, the moon landing, 9/11, and DIA. However, the one that always gets me going is John Rockefeller's quest to control the oil industry. The conspiracy theory is that every war that the US has been involved in since WWI was a strategic move on the part of the Rockefellers to gain further control of the world's oil. They have also sought to ensure the world's dependency on oil - which is why we have cars on the road in 2012 that actually get worse mileage than cars developed in the 1930's and 1940's as well as the lack of technological advancements to steer us away from oil.
7 UpInNope 2012-01-31
oh whats the one about the Detroit Institute of Art? I would like to hear that one.
3 ServoNO1 2012-01-31
...can't tell if kidding... Denver International Airport I think is what he was talking about
6 [deleted] 2012-01-31
The moon landing.. really? That is one that I will never understand people not believing.
3 Kilaya 2012-01-31
Another way I see this one being presented is that we DID go to the moon, however, the footage that we all saw was fake. This was done for security reasons, to keep Russians from seeing what we actually used up there, while still showing that we did it.
Viewed in this light it seems to make a bit more sense.
2 [deleted] 2012-01-31
I would be much more inclined to believe this instead of "we have never went to the moon at all". That's a little bit silly if you ask me. I personally think the footage is real. But I respect that you stated your position clearly and gave a reason instead of the near psychotic paranoid ramblings most people present as fact around here...
2 Kilaya 2012-01-31
I'm not actually sure where I stand on this one. There are a few weird things in the videos that I have seen that make me question it. But that is all I can do at this point...question. So I'm on the fence.
A lot of folks do seem to go a bit nuts, but I think it's the nature of the conspiracy beast. Can't blame them really, it's exciting and hard to keep a tight grip on things that are shadowy to begin with. But we could always use a good self look at WHY we actually believe what we believe.
Thank you for asking people that question.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
I totally understand. Some conspiracies I believe (9/11) some I'm on the fence about (government knowledge of extraterrestrials, area 51, etc) and some I have written off as complete nonsense (Illuminati, musicians selling soul to the devil, moon landing hoax). But I can respect that you are actually looking at both sides and not just pointing fingers at the big evil government.
You can't blame them, once you see some discrepancies in one conspiracy it's a slippery slope and it's very easy to just start believing all the conspiracies out there without examing BOTH sides of evidence. If someone comes to a conclusion based on evidence, great. But when people start citing their only evidence as "the government is out to get us man" or "they lied about this so they MUST be lying about this too".
As someone who has a dual major, with one part being Philosophy, it is critical for me to see that people aren't using logical fallacies to support their claims.
0 hartrw 2012-01-31
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4oMYGU9aB8
We never went to the moon. Primary problem was protecting astronauts from the Van Allen radiation belts among many others. Yes, a lie this big can be perpetuated for over 40 years. It is overwhelmingly obvious that we never went to moon once you've seen the evidence.
4 [deleted] 2012-01-31
If you're going to use youtube videos to back up your claim than I will use this thorough article to back up mine
0 Purplehayess 2012-01-31
Apparently that same radiation belt has been exposed to your brain.
Few things in this world are "overwhelmingly obvious" and I don't think your claims would be ranked very high on that short list.
-1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
There is no way to verify. The scientists working on the space program were nazis. The effects of leaving the earths magnetic field and the human brain. There are a few reasons why one would question
3 [deleted] 2012-01-31
You would go as far as to say that we have never even been to space?
2 hartrw 2012-01-31
There is a difference between leaving the earths protective magnetic field and going into space. All of the space shuttle and soyuz missions have been in low earth orbit and within the earth magnetic field. As you leave the earths magnetic field you start to run into the Van Allen radiation belts which would quickly kill a person unless very very thick lead shielding was used.
2 [deleted] 2012-01-31
It took Apollo only about an hour to pass through the worst part of the radiation belts - once on the outbound trip and once again on the return trip. The total radiation dose received by the astronauts was about one rem. A person will experience radiation sickness with a dose of 100-200 rem, and death with a dose of 300+ rem. Clearly the doses received fall well below anything that could be considered a significant risk. Despite claims that "lead shielding meters thick would have been needed", NASA found it unnecessary to provide any special radiation shielding.
The hoax advocates also make the mistake of limiting themselves to two-dimensional thinking. The Van Allen Radiation Belts consist of a doughnut-shaped region centered on Earth's magnetic equator. The translunar trajectories followed by the Apollo spacecraft were typically inclined about 30 degrees to Earth's equator, therefore Apollo bypassed all but the edges of the radiation belts, greatly reducing the exposure.
-2 cowextreme 2012-01-31
no one got to the moon ever. especially with a wash machine made from metal sticks, aluminum foil and packing tape.
the rest is just debunking and wishful thinking
3 [deleted] 2012-01-31
Wow, your argument is flawless. And I love how you back it up with facts. Way to go.
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
no. i think they may have attempted it. i think that low orbit is possible w/o having the human go batty.
4 [deleted] 2012-01-31
So the I.S.S. is a lie? Scientific experiments conducted in space and on the moon are a lie? Many major NASA missions have been a lie? What about the Challenger and the Voyager?
-2 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
can any of us verify beyond visual and auditory effects? we have holograms and special effects. think about how the brain interprets what it sees vs what is actually there. we get most of our news from tv/radio/internet. all mediums invented and controlled by the cia and military. we could be the rats in a truman show lab experiment just to get objective data on humans react to certain stimuli.
on that note, how many witnesses actually saw the plane hit the south tower or even the north tower (that isn't a media type or military or a ceo) only one i can think of, and how do we know they weren't actors? now why would they do this? i dont know. is it possible? sure, anything is possible.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
Listen to yourself... I thought this was an intelligent discussion. I was expecting hard facts or some sort of backup to your argument.
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
where is the hard evidence for the moon landing? tv doesnt count.
there is zero independent data, only nasa, and nasa was infested with men who used to torture humans for science. now that is a discussion, the fact we got into space because of the torturous experiments nazis pulled. You may refuse to entertain that everything we have been told through the medium has been a lie but I hope you understand that nazis were used in the space race at least.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
Oh I don't know. Moon rocks. Experiments conducted on the moon. Numerous videos and photos which have stood up to 40 years of scrutiny. Retroreflectors placed on the surface of the moon still used to this day. Various private observatories and citizens who have documented all of this.
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
you mean petrified wood? any independent experiments on the moon or only nasa? videos and photos do not = reality. 40 years of what scrutiny? anyone dares suggest the moon landing may not have been real, well you're called a loon. so because nasa said retroreflectors were placed on the moon i suppose it makes it true. remember who was in nasa if you have the inkling to trust a govt agency to tell you the truth. where are these private observations of man landing on the moon? where are these documentations from citizens that prove that the US put men on the moon? so give me hard evidence if you are so inclined to believe i'm an idiot. otherwise stfu because there is no independent verifiable data that science requires for any experiment to be considered scientific. so far no one can verify because no one can get to the moon.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
The retroreflectors places on the surfaced are still used to this day to navigate satellites and other things. If the photos and videos are not real don't you think in the 40 years since the landing there would be hard evidence showing they are without a doubt fake?
As far as people who tracked the moon landing that aren't part of the government here is some for just apollo 11:
As far as moon rocks go:
A total of 382 kilograms (842 lb) of Moon rocks and dust were collected during the Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17 missions.[1] Some 10 kg (22 lb) of the Moon rocks have been destroyed during hundreds of experiments performed by both NASA researchers and planetary scientists at research institutions unaffiliated with NASA. These experiments have confirmed the age and origin of the rocks as lunar, and were used to identify lunar meteorites collected later from Antarctica.[2] The oldest Moon rocks are up to 4.5 billion years old,[1] making them 200 million years older than the oldest Earth rocks, which are from the Hadean eon and dated 3.8 to 4.3 billion years ago. The rocks returned by Apollo are very close in composition to the samples returned by the independent Soviet Luna programme.[3] A rock brought back by Apollo 17 was accurately dated to be 4.417 billion years old, with a margin of error of plus or minus 6 million years. The test was done by a group of researchers headed by Alexander Nemchin at Curtin University of Technology in Bentley, Australia.[4]
Where do you get "petrified wood" from? You keep asking questions but you've yet to point toward ONE piece of evidence that the landing was faked.
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
why do you need evidence to show that the moon landing was not real? that is the same as asking an atheist to provide evidence for no god. it sucks that a people believed in such fantasy, myself included. ah yes, another "source" from the medium. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird puts all media in question.
gold is petrified sunshine. I used my scrying mirror to determine the age of each speck of gold. believe me? no? there is no way you can verify what I said because you have zero idea how to use a scrying mirror and have zero idea what you are looking at. the same thing can be said of moon rocks (which by the way, one does not need to go to the moon to get, they are here on earth, along with rocks from mars) so to be honest having a moon rock proves nothing. i wonder if I still have my "moon rock" that was bought for me back in the day.
thats right i am asking questions. it doesnt mean i beleive it was a hoax. but the lack of evidence, scientific verifiable data, indicates to me that this was one big mind fuck. why? there is no telling why nazis do what they do. we are moths the moon landing was the porch light.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
The thing is when an atheist is asked why he/she doesn't believe in god they are able to point out reasons why they don't. Like I said, you are just rambling in a nonsensical way that is very paranoid in nature. You aren't taking an objective and critical view on the situation. You accuse me of already having my mind made up when you are doing the same thing.
I ask for proof the moon landing was a hoax because otherwise you are just going based on faith. And as an atheist you know that faith isn't a good reason to believe in something.
And why are you bringing up Nazis? Are you implying everyone involved in the moon landing and the space program is a Nazi?
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
how is what i say nonsensical? because you have no clue of your history? there is no independent data for the moon landing. photos and videos and anything coming out a medium can be manipulated to give illusions. it is you who is not taking the objective view. you are basing your opinion on faith and faith alone.
The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one. Adolf Hitler
Read more: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/adolf_hitler_2.html#ixzz1l8cKGFsP
and yes, we got to space because of the knowledge that the nazis (paperclip) had obtained from the experiments preformed on the Jews during the holocaust.
0 [deleted] 2012-01-31
As said in my other response. Your arguments are riddled with logical fallacies.
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
please explain how they are logical fallacies. provide examples please.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
You use a plethora of "If, then" statements. You keep saying that since A is true then B must also be true. And that is simply not correct. You are also using the "slippery slope". Since A is true then you are taking B and C to be true without even bothering to explain why.
If you'd like I will go through all your replies and show you. But for the sake of brevity I wont do that right now. I have to be in class in about 10 minutes!
I hope you realize this is no personal attack. I am enjoying the conversation. I am just imploring you to take a step back and look at all this without your own personal filters.
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
that is the if then argument, that i portrayed to demonstrate your logical fallacy. i dont think you are comprehending anything i am saying.
because the only thing that can be attested to is that there are images on tv that have convinced people that we have landed on the moon. you want me to take your side of things because you simply cannot wrap your mind around the possibility of deception. for you, it takes a greater leap of faith to believe it to be a hoax. I completely understand this viewpoint. For me it is easier for me to be sceptical since there is no independent verifiable data, which is required in science if one is to further investigate phenomena.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
I can wrap my mind around deception. There are plenty of conspiracy theories out there I totally believe. This just isn't one of them. I'm not asking you to think my way. We are having a discussion here. I'm just providing my view and why it's my view and asking you to consider it. Not accept it as fact.
In most instances I take the skeptic side. The moon landing is just one that I find overwhelmingly hard to refute.
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
yes but you are accusing me of logical fallacy and i ask you, after class if you can to provide examples of my logical fallacy. if you had read one of my many replies that i had believed it to be fact as well. i have read from many "authorities" about the moon landing. but talking about it doesn't make it so. it only reinforces the idea but doesn't indicate hard evidence. that's the thing, there is no way to independently verify the moon landing.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
I totally agree there. There is no way to verify it. But I choose to believe it because the evidence for it. Like I said I don't want to change your mind. Just have an intelligent discussion. Which we are doing.
I don't always believe things like this. I'm an atheist, I think the government had a major role in 9/11, I think there is more to aliens than we know, and many other things. I just don't think the moon landing was a hoax.
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
evidence? i guess it relies on one's definition of evidence. i dont want to think that the moon landing was a hoax but as far as i am concerned it may not be as real as we have been led to believe.
the soviets used to be amazed at what the American's believed.
9-11 was an inside job and so were the anthrax attacks.
here is something to wrap your head around...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2GrPYhwd7M
talk about a loop.
2 [deleted] 2012-01-31
You're right. It does. I personally think all the reasons I mentioned earlier (moon rocks, science, reflectors, etc) are evidence enough whereas you don't. That's fine. Different opinions. Like I said, I don't wanna change your mind. Just discuss both sides.
That video is very interesting, thank you for sharing. I do think 9-11 was an inside job. I'm not informed enough on the anthrax attacks to have an opinion either way.
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise. - adolf hitler
Read more: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/adolf_hitler.html#ixzz1l8Zu9pt5
If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed. Adolf Hitler
Read more: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/adolf_hitler_2.html#ixzz1l8aQuLgX
0 [deleted] 2012-01-31
You're arguments are based on nothing but logical fallacies. Are you college educated? If not, I suggest taking an intro level philosophy class, it'll help you in shaping your arguments greatly.
EDIT: Is college a conspiracy as well?
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
how so? tell me my logical fallacies? that i don't believe in what the tv tells me? my parents talked about the moon landing as if they witnessed it first hand. they didn't witness it first hand. so if the tv shows you a man bouncing up and down on a set and the populace trust and believe, have faith in their medium and govt, then that equals a moon landing? because the reality is this; there are videos of men in space suits shown bouncing (maybe slowed tape) and a medium to propagate this image. seeing is believing and many people have no inkling to question what is presented to them by the authority that rules them. most people do not have the mind frame of their rulers. the belief of humans and a tv image. that's all we have to "prove" we had man on the moon. i mastered philosophy. i also mastered neurobiology. and yes, college is a waste unless you have the connections and or the talent to get you where you want to be. ex. all those students who can't get jobs .
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
I am not saying any one should believe what the TV tells them. You are making this more than what it is. I don't have a problem with questioning superiors. I was simply arguing the moon landing hoax.
How have you mastered both philosophy and neurology. I don't think there a human being alive who has actually mastered either of these on their own, let alone together.
And what if one isn't interested in college as a means to an end? What if they just like to learn? Is it still a waste?
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
but you are believing what the tv tells you. you do accept what nasa tells you w/o question. most people do because they have no understanding of the matter. that is very relevant to this discussion. if you dont trust the source of information how do you expect to accept it as truth? i know that science and politics are closely linked. just wait and see. you are in college you will see. learning is never a waste. you do not need to attend a university to learn.
entertain the idea that it was a hoax. you will probably end up in the agnostic area (where i am at)
mirrors on the moon dont mean jack. we landed a rover on mars. russia has sent orbital around the moon. still doesn't prove man was ever on the moon.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
I'm not believing it because the TV tells me too. I believe it because I think the evidence for it is overwhelming. You are over generalizing here and insulting my intelligence.
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
tell me this evidence.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
I personally think all the reasons I mentioned earlier (moon rocks, science, reflectors, etc) are evidence enough whereas you don't. That's fine. Different opinions. Like I said, I don't wanna change your mind. Just discuss both sides.
11 blarbdadouche 2012-01-31
Stanley Kubrick filmed the Apollo moon landing and the movie The Shining is his confession.
10 treebright 2012-01-31
I hate them all. I wish there were no conspiracies. But you have to go where the evidence and rational thought take you.
10 [deleted] 2012-01-31
While the International Bankster Cartel is one of my modern/contemporary peeves, my most fascinating interest is in ancient civilizations, ala the myth that stone aged people built pyramids all over the earth with copper chisels and rocks.
3 armleglegarmhead 2012-01-31
yes. my favorite also. the fact that so many of the ancient sites around the globe contain so many similarities. from the structures they built, the massive stones used to build them, the art they created, etc... it's impossible to deny they were connected and had a shared knowledge. i think the evidence also points to civilization being much, much older than we are led to believe. because all this evidence exists, which points to fascinating possibilities, and it's not taken seriously by mainstream researchers makes one think there has to be some sort of conspiracy at play here.
3 Kilaya 2012-01-31
Yeah this is one I'm finding I agree with. We simply don't know much about what, how and why the ancients did what they did. I've actually heard that Egyptian sources about their Kings Dynasty and Lineage (it went back much farther in history than our models allowed) was just ignored because it didn't work. Simply, we think we know more about the Egyptians than the Egyptians knew about themselves.
Humans have been around for a long time. If shit hit the fan here and now, what do we think would be left of our world in even a few thousand years? We don't inscribe much of anything on rocks, it's all intangible data on computers. Our books won't last long. Our common house made of wood, gone. Nature reclaims it all when we stop upkeep.
And we just keep getting new information that refuses to fit in our models. We are going to have to admit we just don't have enough data. Gobekli Tepe is a neat example.
3 [deleted] 2012-01-31
[deleted]
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
Yep yep yep.
And don't dare to /r/askscience about their arrogance and irresponsibility. They hate that shit ("How dare you point out our 'fear our science' fraud!")
2 sunshine-x 2012-01-31
Cool!
That's my personal fav too.
Any good documentaries / books you could recommend?
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
The best two documentaries I've seen about the pyramids have actually been posted in this subreddit in the last month or so. One focused on the potential that they might be giant tesla coil/free energy generation plants, and the other focused on all of the precise mathematics of their sizes, locations around the world (in relation to magnetic north), etc. <-- I would love to see these two combined and/or in succession.
1 sunshine-x 2012-01-31
Nice. Have you seen "the revelation of the pyramids"? Have you seen the insane stonework from Tiwanaku / Puma Punku? I'm looking for more on those in addition to the ancient pyramids if you happen to have some.
When I'm home I'll shoot you a few more I've enjoyed.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
Links would be good, yeah. I like that stuff.
10 [deleted] 2012-01-31
[deleted]
2 dmaloney92 2012-01-31
Please, tell me more information on this
1 hooperX101 2012-01-31
Yes, I'm very interested as well. Were these the same "quakes" that they said didn't register like normal earthquakes on the scales/monitors? I'll look and see if I can find that anywhere...
2 [deleted] 2012-01-31
[deleted]
1 hooperX101 2012-01-31
Wow, thanks for the link! It's a very interesting theory.
1 Kilaya 2012-01-31
Also, the quake that created the Tsunami in Japan last year was supposedly man made as well. Japan wasn't playing with the Black Hats, so they detonated a bomb on a fault line of the coast of japan.
It is interesting because these quakes, Japan, Virginia, and Colorado all had unusually shallow points of activity. They also didn't have a P wave which natural quakes MUST have by their nature.
Pretty intriguing but I can't verify this as much as I want to. It is a hopeful conspiracy however, to think that an equally powerful group of humans are fighting for us. I wish them luck if they truly are and would love to help in anyway possible!
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
[deleted]
1 Kilaya 2012-01-31
You got it. It's really tough to find much of anything outside of himself and what he says. Of course, what he talks about is mostly already out there (the NWO and the like). It's his unique stories that are hard to pin down.
I recently saw a video of him saying we need to just rise up and detain or kill those who are behind the current state of affairs. I wonder why his white hat group doesn't take action? Surely they have more power and direction than the current divided-and-conquered people?
9 Spacemanseeds 2012-01-31
That the cia takes dmt to get instructions from the clockwork elves on how to run the world
8 [deleted] 2012-01-31
Sounds legit.
1 Spacemanseeds 2012-01-31
http://youtu.be/BGrBu1CgK4o
3 Aufbruch 2012-01-31
sigh He brings up a fascinating and brilliant figure like Phillip K. Dick and all he can talk about are the tragic and unfortunate mental problems he developed toward the end of his life.....sit and spin, Mr. Jones.
6 lmfao_bot 2012-01-31
-GIRL LOOK AT THAT BODY
3 [deleted] 2012-01-31
i work out!
3 9000sins 2012-01-31
Facepalm.
2 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
Dmt is today's LSD
9 UpInNope 2012-01-31
The UNITED STATES corporation one. About common law vs maritime admiralty. STATE OF MICHIGAN vs Michigan State. Unlawful vs Illegal. A lot of word analysis in that one.
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
Ooohhh care to give links? I would love to jump down this rabbit hole.
2 UpInNope 2012-01-31
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME7K6P7hlko
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lhPhos88_g
The occuld world of commerce http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMGmQKHhGQE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzjv20sC5CY&list=FLMR2l5Bf6hALWhRmk6czVDQ&index=53&feature=plpp_video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6729904244308031068#
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cci5MSvsSmc&list=FLMR2l5Bf6hALWhRmk6czVDQ&index=54&feature=plpp_video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbp6umQT58A&list=FLMR2l5Bf6hALWhRmk6czVDQ&index=34&feature=plpp_video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNx8rIYinsg&list=FLMR2l5Bf6hALWhRmk6czVDQ&index=56&feature=plpp_video
This should get you started.
1 SlimFastForYou 2012-01-31
/r/commonlaw
8 Aufbruch 2012-01-31
HAARP, personally. Because, "controlling the weather" means you can also cause earthquakes. Because weather has a huge effect on plate tectonics. Also, the leading "scholar" of this particular conspiracy theory also believes in (not shitting you at all) mole people.
The inclusion of "mole people" of any kind guarantees it a spot in my top ten, to be honest. There is no conspiracy theory that wouldn't benefit from the involvement of mole people, let's be honest with ourselves.
The "Titanic didn't really sink" thing and the Philadelphia Experiment also rank pretty high, despite no mole people, however.
4 UpInNope 2012-01-31
Hmm never hear the "titanic didn't really sink" one but I've heard the one that the titanic was sunk on purpose.
2 thewhiz 2012-01-31
I think you're using sarcasm (not sure,though), but the links between electromagnetic waves, the weather, and earthquakes are unclear. They are not as disjointed as you believe.
You should read up on it before dismissing it as impossible.
I have not heard of this "leading scholar" who believes in mole people, nor do I care to. Even if he is as crazy you make him out to be, his personality has no bearing on the HAARP/weather control/earthquake discussion.
Your mentioning of mole people is nothing more than a weak attempt to discredit HAARP with out any evidence.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-31
I got a similar impression, except my impression was a little more leaning toward mockery and ridicule. Read the first paragraph again. He set up HAARP to be ridiculed via a disjointed connecting of leaps of conjecture, then landing on "mole people" (which he mocks in the first paragraph, and then lauds in the second). Aufbruch is trolling this thread... and got upvoted for it.
EDIT: See Spacemanseeds' comment for another troll.
6 Smurfalot 2012-01-31
I was a big fan of the Elenin comet conspiracy. Mostly because of this video: "OUTSIDE THREAT IMMINENT." I also have a belief that we're fundamentally more than the result of random evolution and we're heading into a new era of human history that could be fantastic or terrible depending on how we prepare for it. Reading predictions and possible end game scenarios from theorists and the comet's generally odd reception across the globe made me think about who we are and where we're heading in a new way.
6 bumblingmumbling 2012-01-31
Oh, my other favorite is the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zions. It is like the Zionist playbook.
5 FagMuffin 2012-01-31
AIDS was a deliberately engineered bio-weapon for the purpose of population control against undesirables (Gays/Africans/Drug Users). Also, there are many cures for cancers, including natural cures, but they are suppressed because it would hurt the economy if cancer was cured outright and not expensively treated/managed.
4 anonydon 2012-01-31
To me most of them stem from the one main conspiracy, NWO/Illuminati.
4 lmfaopizza 2012-01-31
Gonna have to go with ultrasonic mind control or whatever you want to call it, because it's both far-out and plausible.
Decades old: two ultrasonic transducers of high power and precision can be directed at a target. When they are properly aimed and tuned, the interference can be in the audible and or tactile range. This can be used to create sounds audible only to the target, as well as tap-like sensations only they can feel.
Fast forward to ~ a decade ago: Sony patented a similar device, except it was discovered that with precise tuning/aim such a device can also be used to stimulate individual/small clusters of neurons. I don't know where the actual brain-mapping is now; it varies from person to person, and sometimes drastically so. But a few years from now or now, this device or some other similar incarnation could serve as a useful "neural input" device. Or a potent mind-control device. I don't think the software/brain atlas is there yet, personally, but hey, it's a conspiracy theory, so who knows.
Just google the shit, plenty of quacks out there who will pour their hearts out about it. And there is a Sony patent (Google Patents). Have fun freaking the fuck out!
2 NineIronKnight 2012-01-31
shit, why do you think we wear tin-foil hats? :D good find.
3 lmfaopizza 2012-01-31
lol yeah it's an oldie but a good(bad?)ie.
Doesn't get much attention because it seems so far fetched, and requires too much knowledge of actual science to explain (to most people).
4 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
Chandra levy and Timothy mcveigh
Moon landings
3 bumblingmumbling 2012-01-31
The Rothschilds Banking/Money Creation monopoly and its relationship to the atheistic Zionist political movement and Israel.
3 allmen 2012-01-31
That Amy WHinehouse was killed last year to ensure that she was part of the 27 Club since the producers knew that she was way over due on promises to produce any new albums, all she had done was some tunes with a couple other people and they were in danger of losing profits. He "dying" was a blessing in disguise as they can now use this angle to sell her crap for decades to come.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/27_Club
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Winehouse
I like it since it is dumb and yet playful and I really do not care. Whereas with the 9/11, black ops and crap I get worked up.
3 Conspiro 2012-01-31
The better conspiracy is the Michael Jackson one:
That a group of investors (the ones who basically kept MJ solvent in the last year or so of his life) had him killed for access to his massive catalog and such. They knew he'd never be able to complete the 50+ dates of his tour and so they paid the Doctor (Dr. Conrad Murry) to kill him with the understanding that he does a shit-bit of jail time, never practices medicine again but he and his family are 'taken care of' for the rest of their lives.
Look at how quickly Michael's name has been thrown to the commercial wolves since he died. Suddenly his music is being licensed everywhere (he was pretty strict about how the music he owned was used and licensing was rare, if at all). Some of the Jacksons were pissed at the time, but they've all been happily paid into silence. His kids are taken care of, but they don't even own their dad's music, the investors do.
TL;DR a small group of people made a shit-load of money very fast off of Michael Jackson's Death.
Food for thought:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91543823
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-07-07/news/17927724_1_wall-street-fortress-investment-group-michael-jackson
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43477688/ns/today-entertainment/t/la-toya-jackson-my-brother-feared-his-life/#.TylojYFMuuI
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewarticle/articleid/3340190
http://www.michaeljackson.com/ar/node/1200535
http://www.mediaandmoney.net/2009/08/03/michael-jackson-finds-new-fans-in-investors/
2 necromanser 2012-01-31
Denis Papin Steam Engine, Circa 1690.
In reviewing the original documents—the correspondence of Leibniz and Papin and the Royal Society papers—one cannot help but think of today's antiscience faction and their determination to implement a new Malthusian order by stopping technological development and theoretical science. In this case, a 100-year delay in the implementation of fusion power and full nuclear development would have devastating consequences for mankind. What America needs now is enough 20th-century XXXXXX XXXXX and Robert Fultons to get rid of the obstructors of progress for good.
...
In 1690, Papin published an historic article in the Acta Eruditorum of Leipsig, "A New Method of Obtaining Very Great Moving Powers at Small Cost " from which we can precisely date the beginning of the Steam Age. Here, for the first time, Papin proposed using the power of expand- ing steam to operate an engine. In the new invention, steam replaced the gunpowder charge of Huygens's cylin- der, creating a more complete vacuum under the piston and thereby taking advantage of the full force of atmos- pheric pressure (Figure 4).
Papin's concept was appropriated in toto in the Newcomen engine more than 20 years later. However, although Papin mentioned in passing the utility of his invention to "draw water or ore from mines," the article featured a lengthy and detailed discussion of the application of steam power to propellirig ships equipped with paddlewheels
...
The Savery Hoax
Despite the publicity given to Papin's invention, the British Parliament awarded an exclusive patent for "Rais- ing Water by the Impellent Force of Fire" to one Thomas Savery, variously described as a "sea captain" and a "mili- tary engineer." The terms of the patent meant that any steam-powered device Papin might invent in England would come under the control of Savery.
Although news of Savery's patent reached Germany by 1699, it was not until 1704 that Leibniz, via "Hanoverian envoys" in London, was able to acquire some sort of description of Savery's device. Leibniz forwarded a sketch of the English "engine" to Papin, along with an evaluation of its capabilities. Based on further intelligence reports from his envoys, Leibniz concluded—correctly—that Sav- ery's device did not work in full size.
1708-1712: The Royal Society appropriates Papin'sresearches without remuneration.
1712: Papin "disappears." The first Newcomen engine, limited to pumpingwater from flooded mines, is erected
Relevant: coldfusio3. www.cspenergy.eu. instant hidrogene generating 5-10 liter/minute
2 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
another conspiracy theory is this debt we owe. to whom do we owe this debt? where did the bailout money really go?
1 clintonsclit4u 2012-01-31
the never ending cluster fuck between the western power structures to establish a global fascist world order.
1 TruthWillSetUsFree 2012-01-31
I'm not a mind-reader, so I avoid claiming to know what someone else does in secret...
1 EyesfurtherUp 2012-01-31
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/50C32.txt from what i gather, as long as it is for "peaceful purposes" they can douse us with whatever chemical they choose. we are the second phase of the nazi experiment.
2 lmfaopizza 2012-01-31
"rest in peace" they say...
1 Byahhhhh 2012-01-31
Chem "motherfuckin" trails hoes!!!
3 9000sins 2012-01-31
Facepalm.
3 Conspiro 2012-01-31
The better conspiracy is the Michael Jackson one:
That a group of investors (the ones who basically kept MJ solvent in the last year or so of his life) had him killed for access to his massive catalog and such. They knew he'd never be able to complete the 50+ dates of his tour and so they paid the Doctor (Dr. Conrad Murry) to kill him with the understanding that he does a shit-bit of jail time, never practices medicine again but he and his family are 'taken care of' for the rest of their lives.
Look at how quickly Michael's name has been thrown to the commercial wolves since he died. Suddenly his music is being licensed everywhere (he was pretty strict about how the music he owned was used and licensing was rare, if at all). Some of the Jacksons were pissed at the time, but they've all been happily paid into silence. His kids are taken care of, but they don't even own their dad's music, the investors do.
TL;DR a small group of people made a shit-load of money very fast off of Michael Jackson's Death.
Food for thought:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91543823
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-07-07/news/17927724_1_wall-street-fortress-investment-group-michael-jackson
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43477688/ns/today-entertainment/t/la-toya-jackson-my-brother-feared-his-life/#.TylojYFMuuI
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewarticle/articleid/3340190
http://www.michaeljackson.com/ar/node/1200535
http://www.mediaandmoney.net/2009/08/03/michael-jackson-finds-new-fans-in-investors/