Jump to content
The Education Forum

Why conspiracy theories spread faster than ever


Douglas Caddy
 Share

Recommended Posts

The Guardian article fails utterly to delve into why so many individuals disbelieve the official U.S. stories on 9-11, the Apollo moon landings, and other matters of national interest. It's that the official stories don't match with observed and observable facts of central importance.

The New World Order may or may not exist. Certainly, many believe there is such group. But that's a distraction.

The commission established to report on 9-11 wasn't some NWO entity. It was a U.S. Government-created body. Which served up Warren-Commission-quality baloney.

The problem here isn't the CT-ers. It's the government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Respectfully, I would assert that the desire for a conspiracy to exist is too often the first, and most necessary, ingredient in believing in a conspiracy. Of course, the believer's personal aggrandizement (i.e. unique possessor of gnostic-like knowledge, to achieve financial gain, etc.) can neither be overlooked nor should fail to be fully considered, as it is often a very close - by a razor's edge - second.

It's the Myth of the Texas Sharpshooter (no pun intended, given the subject matter), played out on the grandest scale, if not universally, then in the vast majority of cases.

Given the option, many forego the cold reality of fact and logic, and choose the story, instead.

My $.02

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Guardian article fails utterly to delve into why so many individuals disbelieve the official U.S. stories on 9-11, the Apollo moon landings, and other matters of national interest. It's that the official stories don't match with observed and observable facts of central importance.

Interesting that you include the moon landings. You believe they were faked? My main question about them being faked is, where did the fakers find rocks that were over four billion years old? They didn't find them on Earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Respectfully, I would assert that the desire for a conspiracy to exist is too often the first, and most necessary, ingredient in believing in a conspiracy.

That's right. Evidence has nothing to do with it. That's why almost two decades passed before I realized (I did some reading) that Oswald didn't act alone. Even after watching Oswald get rubbed out on live TV, I was too dumb to suspect anything.

I even laughed as a kid when the pastor at our church said that the Revised Standard Version of the Bible was part of the Communist conspiracy. If only I had a desire to believe!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Guardian article fails utterly to delve into why so many individuals disbelieve the official U.S. stories on 9-11, the Apollo moon landings, and other matters of national interest. It's that the official stories don't match with observed and observable facts of central importance.

Interesting that you include the moon landings. You believe they were faked? My main question about them being faked is, where did the fakers find rocks that were over four billion years old? They didn't find them on Earth.

I don't know what to make of this but it is interesting.

http://www.disclose.tv/news/where_on_earth_are_nasas_rovers_sending_pictures_from_devon_island_canada/125944david

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Respectfully, I would assert that the desire for a conspiracy to exist is too often the first, and most necessary, ingredient in believing in a conspiracy.

That's right. Evidence has nothing to do with it. That's why almost two decades passed before I realized (I did some reading) that Oswald didn't act alone. Even after watching Oswald get rubbed out on live TV, I was too dumb to suspect anything.

I even laughed as a kid when the pastor at our church said that the Revised Standard Version of the Bible was part of the Communist conspiracy. If only I had a desire to believe!

I respect your belief that a conspiracy to assassinate JFK existed. But, do you mention Oswald's murder, and particularly the use of the phrase "rubbed out", as a means to infer that Ruby's actions were also part of the conspiracy in which you believe existed?

I don't want to assume, so I ask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I respect your belief that a conspiracy to assassinate JFK existed. But, do you mention Oswald's murder, and particularly the use of the phrase "rubbed out", as a means to infer that Ruby's actions were also part of the conspiracy in which you believe existed?

Of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron,

I include the Apollo moon landings for various reasons.

As for the rocks, modern theory is that the moon was created out of Earth matter when a Mars-sized object collided with Earth. If this theory is correct, moon rocks would be of material that forms Earth rocks.

That's true, but the oldest known rock on Earth has been dated at just over 4 billion years. The oldest moon rocks are about 4.5 billion years old. So moon-landing fakers couldn't simply go out and find rocks that old on Earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I respect your belief that a conspiracy to assassinate JFK existed. But, do you mention Oswald's murder, and particularly the use of the phrase "rubbed out", as a means to infer that Ruby's actions were also part of the conspiracy in which you believe existed?

Of course.

Why do you believe that Ruby killed Oswald as the result of a conspiracy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you believe that Ruby killed Oswald as the result of a conspiracy?

Because that's how criminal enterprises, whether government or private, operate. JFK was assassinated by accomplished criminals. Oswald, as he publicly stated, was a patsy. And it's a well-known, time-honored principle in criminal circles that dead men tell no tales.

Why am I having to explain this? And why am I doing it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...