Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Crispy78 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


There’s also ‘but what of detrimental mutations’. Well....guess what. That’s also evidence for Evolution. If a mutation is truly detrimental (carnivore with an allergy to meat, or less able to digest meat, for curt examples?) then the sufferer is far less likely to breed in the wild. Rinse and repeat a few generations, and whatever predilection to that mutation exists will likely be bred out, strengthening the gene pool.

Sickle-cell anemia is a good example. Despite it being a nasty thing to have, it is still relatively common in Africa as it conveys a resistance to malaria as a side effect.

Was reading an article a few months back about misconception and sickle-Cell was brought up as one of the biggest. . . Apparently, proportionally more people in Adriatic/Mediterranean regions on the European side have sickle-cell than the proportion of people on the African continent. As a result, more Greek people have an immunity to Malaria than do continental Africans.

Being off topic: the point of the article was based more in how misconceptions (such as the sickle-cell thing) can have a negative impact on things like funding for health programs. This also gets into some implied biases and "racism" (albeit in this case, unintentionally) involved with genetic things like sickle-cell and others like it.

Not Online!!! wrote:


Hello, i am catholic, nice to meet you. I am also a philosophy student.
Please don't throw me in the same category of creationists or other nutjobs.

I wouldn't dream of it.
As you notice, I was talking about religious apologists - not every single religious person.

Guys, a lot of conspiracy theories are racist. I mean an old one was "the protocols of zion" which was nothing but anti jewish propaganda and used to help justify the holocaust.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion

 Matt Swain wrote:
Guys, a lot of conspiracy theories are racist. I mean an old one was "the protocols of zion" which was nothing but anti jewish propaganda and used to help justify the holocaust.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion

The basic fundamentals of the protocols stem from tsarist russian secret police.

I also fail to See how x versions of conspiracy theories that exist are classifyable as alot .
F.e. how many versions Off the 9/11 Towers one are there.
Alot of them are not rascist.
In many ways the conspiracy community is just a usefull idiot for political entities that Gamble on power. Vitorio mutilata, dolchstosslegende , etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Steelmage99 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:


Hello, i am catholic, nice to meet you. I am also a philosophy student.
Please don't throw me in the same category of creationists or other nutjobs.

I wouldn't dream of it.
As you notice, I was talking about religious apologists - not every single religious person.

That wasn't my Main point.

The mainpoint is the realisation Of the ilusion of absolute individual controll.

I was citing one example of a racist conspiracy theory.

People have claimed that 911 was a jewish conspiracy to create a "new world order" under the control of the jews.

People have claimed that 'the arabs' are behind 'the conspiracy' to prevent the development of alternative fuel sources to petroleum.

The KKK and neonazis have so many racist conspiracy theories and are such a distaste subject I won't even start going into them here.

 Matt Swain wrote:
I was citing one example of a racist conspiracy theory.

People have claimed that 911 was a jewish conspiracy to create a "new world order" under the control of the jews.

People have claimed that 'the arabs' are behind 'the conspiracy' to prevent the development of alternative fuel sources to petroleum.

The KKK and neonazis have so many racist conspiracy theories and are such a distaste subject I won't even start going into them here.

And for any of them you get one from the other political side aswell.

It's Like i said it's a bunch of gullible manouvre mass for political groups of the more extreme denomination.

OK doke. Totes subtle change of direction away, away from the religious edge. I know it’s genuinely hard to keep away from it with certain CTs, but I think we need a breather.

Here’s a corker I don’t think has come up yet....Mud Flood...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aW_RjfMVXX8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf4IlAs1WDE

Oh yeah. This is hilarious, and completely mental (the CT, not the videos!)

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

Crispy78 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


There’s also ‘but what of detrimental mutations’. Well....guess what. That’s also evidence for Evolution. If a mutation is truly detrimental (carnivore with an allergy to meat, or less able to digest meat, for curt examples?) then the sufferer is far less likely to breed in the wild. Rinse and repeat a few generations, and whatever predilection to that mutation exists will likely be bred out, strengthening the gene pool.

Sickle-cell anemia is a good example. Despite it being a nasty thing to have, it is still relatively common in Africa as it conveys a resistance to malaria as a side effect.

Was reading an article a few months back about misconception and sickle-Cell was brought up as one of the biggest. . . Apparently, proportionally more people in Adriatic/Mediterranean regions on the European side have sickle-cell than the proportion of people on the African continent. As a result, more Greek people have an immunity to Malaria than do continental Africans.

Being off topic: the point of the article was based more in how misconceptions (such as the sickle-cell thing) can have a negative impact on things like funding for health programs. This also gets into some implied biases and "racism" (albeit in this case, unintentionally) involved with genetic things like sickle-cell and others like it.

Sickle-cell certainly predominates in the eastern Med/Western Asia. Which few doctors in the west are aware of, and some of us have to do lots of reminding about the tests needed during pregnancy because they've filled you in the 'not-black-so-no-notable-difference' mental box.

Steelmage99 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:


Hello, i am catholic, nice to meet you. I am also a philosophy student.
Please don't throw me in the same category of creationists or other nutjobs.

I wouldn't dream of it.
As you notice, I was talking about religious apologists - not every single religious person.

Is there perhaps confusion here in using 'apologists' which, in a Catholic (or wider Christian) context, signifies something different than it does otherwise? The vast majority of people involved in Christian apologetics, for instance, will absolutely accept evolution and a great many of them are scientists. Real scientists, not biologist from Patriot Bible University 'scientists'.

Away from the religious edge, please.

Speaking of conspiracy theories, here's a fresh one for you.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumpists-believe-bill-gates-is-using-coronavirus-to-implant-brain-chips?fbclid=IwAR3OYrVbNAqmd9I_fPUyNJrfHzh8iX1M7Y5e05S_hEvQVCWq08sAv9P2_l8

I'm not a big fan of Billy. Yeah he appeared in a Mr. Spock costume, yeah he comes of as infinitely more human than lord zuck, but then again so does a walrus devouring a baby seal.

He was an arrogant little jerk, he vowed to eliminate and choice in what OS people would use, he vehemently crushed competition by any means fair or foul, but I always suspected he had at least a chunk of humanity in him, and maybe as he passe dmiddle age and realized he wa snot immortal maybe he wanted to rack up some good karma before going on the great journey. I'm willing to let him have some benefit of the doubt despite his earlier days.

To accuse him of this... Welcome to wackoworld, boys.

When will they realise that companies don't have to sneak tracking chips into you? All they need is the Apple Palm iChip and people will flock in vast numbers to voluntarily have a chip installed in their hand which can let them wave payments; check their facebook and download dozens of tracking apps and junk.

 Matt Swain wrote:
Speaking of conspiracy theories, here's a fresh one for you.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trumpists-believe-bill-gates-is-using-coronavirus-to-implant-brain-chips?fbclid=IwAR3OYrVbNAqmd9I_fPUyNJrfHzh8iX1M7Y5e05S_hEvQVCWq08sAv9P2_l8

I'm not a big fan of Billy. Yeah he appeared in a Mr. Spock costume, yeah he comes of as infinitely more human than lord zuck, but then again so does a walrus devouring a baby seal.

He was an arrogant little jerk, he vowed to eliminate and choice in what OS people would use, he vehemently crushed competition by any means fair or foul, but I always suspected he had at least a chunk of humanity in him, and maybe as he passe dmiddle age and realized he wa snot immortal maybe he wanted to rack up some good karma before going on the great journey. I'm willing to let him have some benefit of the doubt despite his earlier days.

To accuse him of this... Welcome to wackoworld, boys.

Dude there's legit some weird gak going around the FB and conspirasphere in regard to mr gates and current events.

One group I'm in, there's an otherwise nice and thoughtful kiwi lady who, per her own words has been driven to "panic attacks" because of the things she's reading about covid/coronavirus. . . Now, she's always been (since I've met her via the fb group we're mutually in) an anti-vaxx nutter. . . But now, she's neck deep in conspiracy with this stuff.

apparently she's found "proof" that Bill Gates somehow owns the WHO, and is using the drive for a Covid-19 vaccine and the mandates that will come with it for, reasons. . She's convinced of the 5g thing, etc. . . I have pointed out to her that we're all of us, literally in a new place right now. None of us really knows what to "do" about any of this. I followed up with "but this constant seeking and finding conspiracy theory nonsense is definitely not helping you, especially if its driving you to actual panic attacks." I naturally pointed out that if she's wanting to find good reliable sourcing for whatever it is she's looking for, look for an .edu or .gov website


I mean really, theres so much to unpack with her views on Mr. Gates specifically in regard to current events. . . . I mean, theres the conspiracy on "owning" the WHO. There's the conspiracy of using the WHO for the creation of this nano-tech "vaccine" thing (still no idea what the ultimate aim is for it. . . is it simple location tracking? is it mind control? wtf is it??), there's the "mandate" on vaccines that she's convinced is coming, I mean this really does seem like a great confluence of many smaller conspiracies into one giant spaghetti dish of whacko

More then one Type it seems.

Yeah, well....dad just shared an article with me claiming all the things the Gates Foundation has done with "their" vaccines and the whole thing had my wife and me about pissing ourselves in laughter. Like how it claimed that the Gates foundation secretly sterilized half a million women in Africa hidden in an otherwise worthless vaccine, and how the Gates Foundation calls their vaccines "population control". Evidently they tried to make kids in India each take 50 (50, they claim!) polio boosters during their childhood, instead of the the couple we get normally killing hundreds.

Also because they are involved in C19 vaccine testing, we should be worried that this is their secret plan to put tracking chips into the vaccines.

Seems like these things would have been in.....the news?

Don’t underestimate the sheer power of They when it comes to conspiracy theories!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A thought.

I’m watching a documentary on Dinosaurs on Disney+. And it’s about how our understanding of them has changed as new discoveries are made.

So far, so good. It represents Science accurately, where findings are inherently open to challenge and reinterpretation. That’s literally what makes science reliable.

Yet.....yet.....

It’s introducing interpretations new to my mere Pleb brain. And counter points. The thing it doesn’t do is offer any indication as to which, if any, are mainstream, fringe and gathering pace, or whacko views.

That’s a problem to me, as it gives equal credence to each view, when that’s not necessarily accurate.

Granted, in an hour long documentary it’s hard if not impossible to give each suitable air time as to the why and why not.

And I’m not singling out this particular docu. Just trying to demonstrate how hard it is for Proper Science to make itself heard.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Don’t underestimate the sheer power of They when it comes to conspiracy theories!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A thought.

I’m watching a documentary on Dinosaurs on Disney+. And it’s about how our understanding of them has changed as new discoveries are made.

So far, so good. It represents Science accurately, where findings are inherently open to challenge and reinterpretation. That’s literally what makes science reliable.

Yet.....yet.....

It’s introducing interpretations new to my mere Pleb brain. And counter points. The thing it doesn’t do is offer any indication as to which, if any, are mainstream, fringe and gathering pace, or whacko views.

That’s a problem to me, as it gives equal credence to each view, when that’s not necessarily accurate.

Granted, in an hour long documentary it’s hard if not impossible to give each suitable air time as to the why and why not.

And I’m not singling out this particular docu. Just trying to demonstrate how hard it is for Proper Science to make itself heard.

Soft tissue found in dinosaur fossils?

Steelmage99 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Don’t underestimate the sheer power of They when it comes to conspiracy theories!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A thought.

I’m watching a documentary on Dinosaurs on Disney+. And it’s about how our understanding of them has changed as new discoveries are made.

So far, so good. It represents Science accurately, where findings are inherently open to challenge and reinterpretation. That’s literally what makes science reliable.

Yet.....yet.....

It’s introducing interpretations new to my mere Pleb brain. And counter points. The thing it doesn’t do is offer any indication as to which, if any, are mainstream, fringe and gathering pace, or whacko views.

That’s a problem to me, as it gives equal credence to each view, when that’s not necessarily accurate.

Granted, in an hour long documentary it’s hard if not impossible to give each suitable air time as to the why and why not.

And I’m not singling out this particular docu. Just trying to demonstrate how hard it is for Proper Science to make itself heard.

Soft tissue found in dinosaur fossils?

It's rare even on the scale of fossils, but it does happen. Once in a blue moon or so, circumstances come together where some of the soft tissues mineralize alongside the bone.

Much more common are soft tissue impressions. Not the soft tissues themselves, but molds made by material around the soft tissue, and sometimes even material filling those molds and making a casting of the soft tissues.

The "soft tissue in dinosaur fossils" issue shines a light on a conspiracy stable.

1. Scientist A releases paper.
2. News sources and blogs sensationalises finding for clicks and views.
3. Conspiracy theorists and others draws further conclusions, based on headlines.
4. Scientist A points out the actual findings DOES NOT support the conclusions drawn.
5. Scientist A is ignored....or even better, accused of being an untrustworthy shill for [ insert enemy here ].

A important part of the conspiracy theories univers are untrustworthy authorities.

In France for example they straight out told at tv
1/that masks were totally useless against the virus
2/ even if you had one you would probably not wear it correctly.

And now masks are said to become mandatory (they already are in some places and cities), with figures like 69% reduction in infection being told .
Instead of just acknowledging the lack of it. Just to avoir looking like they had no answer they prefered to say there was no answer.
And now, everyone doubt everything they say.

This is an actual and accurate topic so I thought I would bring it up.
Why would people believe such authorities when they say vaccines are fine or that this drug / medicine doesn't work, just after lying to the whole country ? People can be easily lost by all that.
I think authorities have a great responsabilities in this phenomenon

For you american people, we could speak about the LSD testing project (MK Ultra) or when they gave syphilis to some black people instead of vaccines to study the infection.
This kind of things, that actually happened, make people wonder what they could be working on today.

Touched on in the early posts (don’t worry, it’s a long thread!).

Essentially some conspiracy theories do turn out to be surprisingly, even entirely true. But the wider Conspirasphere twists those examples into evidence all must be true.

It’s the equivalent of finding out that the Puffer Fish is highly toxic - and then insisting therefore all Fish are highly toxic.

Time for another group example I feel!

Chemtrails. Oh yes. It’s a classic, and utterly, utterly ludicrous.

It’s not one I’m especially knowedgable on, but the claim is essentially the vapour trails behind planes are actually chemicals being sprayed upon the wider populace.

The main ‘proof’ they have is a photo (possibly various photos) of passenger planes clearly kitted out with large, liquid filled barrels. The theory maintains that’s all nasty chemicals.

Except....the truth behind such photos is far more innocent. In short, the barrels are filled with water, with pump equipment to shift the load. It’s part of safety testing, to help figure out ballast type stuff (I know that’s almost certainly the wrong term, but my brain insists)

And like all good CTs? The one question they can’t answer, so rarely if ever bother trying, is the height of the aircraft, and the inherent dispersal of anything at that height would be pointless. And that’s without factoring in how long any given vapour would hold itself together due to density etc.

Oh sorry haha
And do we know if some areas, some countries etc are more prone to conspiracy theories than others ?
Or some populations (I would think more poor people) ?

That’s kinda hard to gauge.

I mean, to me the YouTube videos tend to come from the UK and the US.

But then, YouTube’s algorithm, and a preference for videos in English make it awfully hard to tell - even before we factor in relative populations as a percentage of the world’s population with ready and reliable access to the necessaries to make such videos.

I suspect is a pretty even spread, when properly analysed, especially if we include folklore as a form of CT.

Example? The Tokoloshi, a mythical creature in certain African countries. It’s blamed for various things.

Which is an interesting thought point really. What is the actual difference between Conspiracy Theory, and Folklore?

Also, welcome to the thread and thank you for your contribution

 godardc wrote:
A important part of the conspiracy theories univers are untrustworthy authorities.

In France for example they straight out told at tv
1/that masks were totally useless against the virus
2/ even if you had one you would probably not wear it correctly.

I think there's a certain distinction being lost on this one, at least in the media that I've seen. . . Locally during the initial stages where reporting on masks was being done the *full* statement on masks was "masks are useless in preventing you GETTING the virus and you're wearing them wrong"


Now, the reporting is "wearing a mask will prevent you TRANSMITTING the virus" . . . which is a massive difference because the aim is entirely different as they are linking bodily fluids emitted while talking/breathing/sneezing/coughing, etc and so preventing yours from getting too far aids in slowing the spread.


But. . . . to the conspiracy theorist "its all just lies trying to control you!!!"



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


Which is an interesting thought point really. What is the actual difference between Conspiracy Theory, and Folklore?

Much of folklore doesn't really rely on an Illuminati or "They" as controlling everything around you. . . Much of folklore is tied to local mythic and religious traditions, so if there's a Spirit or deity "controlling" things, it is viewed in those terms rather than the material/physical/political world.

I guess the biggest difference between folklore and conspiracy is the level of human involvement?

I’m not sure it’s so easily divisible (to be read as conversational!)

See, folklore pins the blame on Faeries etc.

Bad Harvest? Faeries or Witch.

House burned down? Well. You whistled on Tuesday, so Deity punished you.

Planes deliberately piloted into civilian structures? Must be Those Behind the Government.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So in each (very broad) example, there’s those assigning unseen and malicious influence.

I guess in the absolute broadest sense, the difference between conspiracy and folklore is non-existent. . . .

Which is why I think if we get into it, conspiracy theory requires a "human" version of They acting as the unseen malicious influence. . . The difference being that there's a level of "the grocer checking out your stuff could be secretly in on It", you can theoretically meet someone who is part of the conspiracy in your day to day. In folklore, you generally never see the Fey creature in question while you're awake.

The rare instances where a Fey creature is seen in the mortal realm and you're awake, a lot of stories revolve around being in a special place at a special time, with beliefs that the two opposing sort of converge there.

Where the line particularly blurs?

Alien ‘abductions’. There was an absolutely fascinating article in Fortean Times a few years back, which demonstrated modern tales of UFO abductions are surprisingly close matches for Faerie abduction stories of decades and centuries passed.

Further interesting blurring? Witchcraft often included a knowledge of healing herbs. Now, the practitioner likely only ever knew that they worked, not the how.

Good example? Willow Bark. It has natural analgesic properties, and if I’ve got the right one (never guaranteed), was eventually studied, with aspirin being the end result (active compounds identified, and either harvested or synthesised for efficiency)

Now, to someone of a certain, vindictive mind? We’re back to near Conspiracy Thinking - ‘If I cant explain it, then it must be unnatural (or in the modern day, therefore inexplicable).

Perhaps the person creating the medicine did mumbo jumbo, handy wavy as they did it. That’s entirely possible. A hand me down of ‘holy theatrics’.

OK. Skirting a bit too close to religion bashing here, so I’ll post up and pop off to better gather my thoughts.

But reading up on such things has always interested me

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

And like all good CTs? The one question they can’t answer, so rarely if ever bother trying, is the height of the aircraft, and the inherent dispersal of anything at that height would be pointless. And that’s without factoring in how long any given vapour would hold itself together due to density etc.

Well, the answer to that is obvious. The mind control story was just put out there as a false flag to destroy the credibility o people asking about the liquid canisters. All so that, years later, the chemicals would be present, and their presence regarded as completely normal, on the planes which crashed into the WTC towers. Jet fuel might not burn hot enough to melt steel but the liquid in those canisters sure can.

It was a multi decade conspiracy involving using another conspiracy as cover, until such a time as the domino could be taken out, toppling their bullseye like a house of cards. Checkmate.


/sarcasm of course.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
In folklore, you generally never see the Fey creature in question while you're awake.

And if you do, then you are most likely insane. Purely from the folklore aspect wherein the insanity grants you the ability to perceive the truth that is hidden from those of sound mind (case in point in Johnathan Strange & Mr Norrell, not the reality of seeing something which is not there

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Where the line particularly blurs?

Alien ‘abductions’. There was an absolutely fascinating article in Fortean Times a few years back, which demonstrated modern tales of UFO abductions are surprisingly close matches for Faerie abduction stories of decades and centuries passed.

I think alien abductions are both "folklore/mythology" and potential CT. I think they only become a CT once you start claiming there is some kind of cover-up going on. If a particular person's alien abduction story just involves being grabbed from their truck in the middle of nowhere and experimented on they're probably just plain old nuts.

So I think the definition from a few posts back is the best I can think of too - CTs require a human element, some kind of cover-up or intervention from people.

Folklore is famously difficult to define in anthropological terms (just like religion and myth). Put simply, some definitions of folklore will overlap with some definitions of conspiracy theory, but on a case-by-case basis there are probably few narratives that can be categorised as both.

I feel like a lot of abduction stories are the combination of peoples lack of understanding of a deep sleep state (and the process your brain goes through, be they logical or not) and a lack of ability to critique their own experiences, essentially removing themselves from the experience to be objective about it - elements of this are also linked to the mandela effect.

The reason I say this is firstly, I've had dreams that I was convinced happened at the time, to the point some were quite dark and I was truly worried for a time when I woke up that they happened. Interestingly, whilst I know these dreams did not happen, there is an element of my conscious that evidently still entertains the possibility that I did, as I get anxious (both somatic and cognitive) at the thoughts and then question if they happened again. (For those wondering, I dreamt I accidentally killed a friend in a gardening accident, and ridiculously hid the body in the dream as well, I have confirmed many times since that dream that the particular friend is alive).

I believe a similar thing can happen with people who have abduction stories, and also why they are so convinced they happened, because they get physical and cognitive markers that they may have happened also.

The mind is a powerful device.