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.

What's your feeling on Conspiracy Theories?
(*no judging, no name-calling *)
Like....
Area 51 houses alien technology.
The government has a weather control machine.
Lizard people walk among us/sit in power.
The Illuminati exists.

Not saying I subscribe to any of those, just giving examples.

Without going into super detail, why do you believe in your theory? Or conversely, why don't you (again, no super huge detail needed).

I'll go first:
Talking the other day with someone about the super fast advancement of computer technology. It has always felt (to me) that there had to be some kind of "outside" influence or knowledge that enabled humanity to go from tube tech to chip tech in such a short amount of time.

ENIAC was a 50 ton tube computer finished in 1946...the first computer.....then to go to the first computer chip in 1959....whilst in between that time the Roswell crash happened....just seems like a pretty big leap, as I said. And in top of that, the pace at which technology has moved since then feels...astounding.

Perhaps it isn't, though. Something worth investigating would be the advancement in different techs (in years) in a society after the discovery of some primary kind of tech. Like...computers and chips. Or cell phones after the first phone (nearly 130 years!). As I said....woulod be curious to see if our tech age/advancements is in line with other ages advancements/pace.

Conspiracy theory’s is to broad a topic to blanket anyone as a believer or nonbeliever imo.

 Zognob Gorgoff wrote:
Conspiracy theory’s is to broad a topic to blanket anyone as a believer or nonbeliever imo.

Not sure what you mean by believer or nonbeliever...? Not sure how blanketing would be happening?

I mean...like...believing in alien life in the universe in some form is not a conspiracy theory...for example.the

As Zognob said, it's a word that encompasses so many things that general discussions on the topic have little meaning.

But regarding your question about the development of early computers, the gap between big tubes (these glass-contained transistors) and micro-chip (solid state transistors) as we see today was filled by semiconductors. The theoretical groundwork predates computer by a lot. Some people actually thought about doing solid state transistors way before the first ones were produces (and way before roswell). I don't know much about the topic myself, but this is something that is easy to research. There are dozens of books that explain the advancement of computer technology, and on each step of the way you have publicly available patents and scientific articles that show how the progress was made. It's not like one day a guy from the military showed up with a super advanced stuff no-one understood anything about.

 TheMeanDM wrote:

Area 51 houses alien technology.

That's just what the government wants you to think.

All the real gak happens at Area 52

The government has a weather control machine.

Well we couldn't just let COBRA keep it.

Lizard people walk among us/sit in power.

Well sure, but do you have any idea how prejudiced society is against lizardfolk? Just cause they ain't human doesn't mean they don't have a valid opinion about tax reform. Kindly check your privilege

The Illuminati exists.

Well who else would have made Oswald's magic bullet?

They typically sound completely paranoid and nuts. Occasionally they happen to be true. But I mostly roll my eyes at them

Thanks for the info fres...I will have to look into the history of chips and such. Humans are pretty smart cookies, for sure.

One thing that's interesting is to read the history of MK Ultra: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra It's usually an article of faith that "conspiracies wouldn't work because someone would blab". Yet despite the scope of the experimentation, that one stayed hidden for over 20 years. Let's all be grateful it didn't work.....right?

I also think that, if anything, the information-saturated society we live in would make it easier to keep a hypothetical conspiracy hidden. If I linked you to a Youtube video or blog presenting ironclad evidence of UFO's or covert superweapon testing, or vampires living among us.....the actual evidence wouldn't actually matter, the vast majority would assume it was a fake, a lone kook rambling on--or maybe viral marketing for a new movie. Heck, put me in charge of covering up UFO abductions, and I'd recruit a dozen or so easily mockable "I'm not saying it was aliens but it was aliens" guys to muddy the waters.

So probably nothing to them--but it's always worth remembering that the only conspiracies you hear about, by definition, are the failures.

 Elemental wrote:
I also think that, if anything, the information-saturated society we live in would make it easier to keep a hypothetical conspiracy hidden. If I linked you to a Youtube video or blog presenting ironclad evidence of UFO's or covert superweapon testing, or vampires living among us.....the actual evidence wouldn't actually matter, the vast majority would assume it was a fake, a lone kook rambling on--or maybe viral marketing for a new movie. Heck, put me in charge of covering up UFO abductions, and I'd recruit a dozen or so easily mockable "I'm not saying it was aliens but it was aliens" guys to muddy the waters.

But at the same time, things like "flat earth theory" are gaining momentum. Some people really want to believe they're being lied to.
And with information saturation, it's very easy to only read things that reassure your views. You just watched a video about a specific conspiration theory on youtube? Guess what, youtube is recommanding 10 similar videos (and none that say otherwise), making it easy to convince yourself this is a sensible point of view that many share.

 Elemental wrote:
If I linked you to a Youtube video or blog presenting ironclad evidence of UFO's or covert superweapon testing, or vampires living among us.....the actual evidence wouldn't actually matter, the vast majority would assume it was a fake, a lone kook rambling on--or maybe viral marketing for a new movie.

Unless you share it on Facebook, and make it nice and vague on any actual verifiable details, at which point people will be passing it on before they've even finished reading the title.

"OMG, Facebook is taking down pictures of the flag covered in army badges because the lizard people are actually Libertarian Muslim Lesbians who faked the moon landing, put LSD in McDonalds Fries and want to stop children from saying 'Happy Birthday!' in school! I have to warn my friends and family!"

The majority are simply products of a paranoid mind, and occasionally Snake Oil Salesmen.

Those ones are easy to debunk, as they have significant logical holes to take them apart with.

Consider the 9/11 'truthers'.

They really solely on repetition of interpretation of shonky footage, and an assertion 'steel doesn't melt'.

But one need barely scratch the surface to see they're full of it. The Steel doesn't have to melt, just lose some of it's structural integrity. The weight of the floors (pretty much suspended from a central column) then does the rest. And as they start to collapse, gravity and momentum take over, causing further floors to follow suit. That creates a pressure wave preceding the collapse, blowing out windows (and further damaging structural integrity).

Now, was there some kind of prior warning the attack was coming? Who knows. There's actual genuine evidence that's what happened at Pearl Harbour - and that Roosevelt allowed it to happen to break the USA's then isolationist stance. He basically saw what was happening in Europe, and knew the US had to pick a side sooner or later.

Then there's proper nonsense like Chemtrails, and the frankly dangerous peddling of Anti-Vaccination mis-information. That then leads on to cretins like David Wolfe and Gwyneth Paltrow, who actively seek to turn people away from proven medicine to their (expensive) flim-flammery.

 TheMeanDM wrote:

 Zognob Gorgoff wrote:
Conspiracy theory’s is to broad a topic to blanket anyone as a believer or nonbeliever imo.

Not sure what you mean by believer or nonbeliever...? Not sure how blanketing would be happening?

I mean...like...believing in alien life in the universe in some form is not a conspiracy theory...for example.the

Not sure how you do not understanding my stance - you used the words conspiracy and believe in your first post. So I’m not going to say I believe or disbelieve in conspiracy theory - it’s just a non term. Lizard people, governments testing chemicals, faked moon landing, flat earth, false flag attacks, fake news, geo engineering. Can we really compare these kinds of things/talk about them under one header. I think not.

Conspiracy Theories are where people turn when they can no longer contend with the trevails of modern experience. Real life is too daunting, so they turn to Conspiracy Theories and other mumbo-jumbo in a deluded effort to find stability in a chaotic system.

That being said, I think it is really fun to read and learn about them. It is like ghosts and crypto-creatures. Sure, they do not exist but it is a lot more fun to believe they can!

The funny thing about conspiracy theories is that they seem to have little in common, and yet those who subscribe to one often buy the whole package. I think they appeal to a certain kind of person.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Then there's proper nonsense like Chemtrails, and the frankly dangerous peddling of Anti-Vaccination mis-information. That then leads on to cretins like David Wolfe and Gwyneth Paltrow, who actively seek to turn people away from proven medicine to their (expensive) flim-flammery.

I can actually understand (NOT sympathise with) the medical ones. Reading about some of the stuff that was considered legitimate and unquestionable medicine in the past is pretty hair-raising. While I think it's rubbish, I can understand why people prefer blaming vaccines for making your kids autistic to the older view that it was the fault of mothers for being emotionally distant (heck, I've read a book written by a doctor in 2012 that's still blaming the parents).

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Now, was there some kind of prior warning the attack was coming? Who knows. There's actual genuine evidence that's what happened at Pearl Harbour - and that Roosevelt allowed it to happen to break the USA's then isolationist stance. He basically saw what was happening in Europe, and knew the US had to pick a side sooner or later.

Well this actually is a myth/conspiracy most historians don't really give much credibility. The US knew that war with Japan was likely coming, but did not know about the surprise attack of Pearl Harbor. What 'evidence' there is is circumstancial at best.

You know what the worst part about this myth is? The Europe angle
Pearl Harbor did nothing for the isolationist stance (as in so far it existed) towards Europe because Roosevelt never declared war on Germany. Hitler declared war on the US. So the European angle behind letting Pearl Harbor 'happen' is one of the most basic mistakes when looking at historical facts.

Most conspiracy theories are utter horse/bull-manure but just on the vast number of them out there a handful at least must be true, the only problem would be figuring out which ones. The Pearl Harbour conspiracy theory is usually pretty easy to debunk, just the premise alone that the US Navy would deliberately allow a hostile power to attack and sink its most powerful symbols of naval power (Remember this is pre- Coral Sea, Midway, etc, Taranto is largely unknown and Battleships are still seen as the benchmark of Naval power) just to green-light a declaration of war is ridiculous when you consider that the Japanese attack alone would be in effect a declaration of war, even if the US was alerted, prepared and managed to ambush the attacking force.

I've wasted quite a bit of time browsing conspiracy theory sites, usually I find it quite fun even if what I'm reading is obviously nonsense. I think one of the better Pearl Harbour conspiracy theories I can recall reading was by someone claiming that there was no way with 1941 technology the Japanese fleet could have sailed undetected close enough to launch the attack, the conclusion the author made was that the Japanese must therefore have launched the attack from a secret moon base.

I've fairly recently got into watching Ancient Aliens which has made it over here to the UK, again pretty entertaining if you take it with a massive dose of salt. But a part of me finds it kind of depressing how much genuine human achievement is dismissed by the show as only explainable by extra-terrestrial influences (Yes, I know that guy became a meme for quite a while, I didn't realise though until I started watching the show quite how close to reality that was!)

Most conspiracy theories and theorists ultimately boil down to a lack of sufficient knowledge to understand what they're actually looking at and an unwillingness to accept alternative, more rational explanations. A good example IMO is the one MDG gave earlier regarding the World Trade Centre and the melting point of steel beams.

simonr1978 wrote:
I've wasted quite a bit of time browsing conspiracy theory sites, usually I find it quite fun even if what I'm reading is obviously nonsense. I think one of the better Pearl Harbour conspiracy theories I can recall reading was by someone claiming that there was no way with 1941 technology the Japanese fleet could have sailed undetected close enough to launch the attack, the conclusion the author made was that the Japanese must therefore have launched the attack from a secret moon base.

Did they build it next to the Nazi one?

Conspiracy theories are like alcoholic drinks. Most of us are fine with some exposure, but some of us, for some reason, can't get enough and ruin our relationships over it.

I should point out that I consider myself a Fortean.

That is, I'm a willing disbeliever. If you claim Ghosts, I'll examine the evidence to rule it out. But I am prepared to be in a position where 'well, you know, that is starting to look like the only explanation'.

I've a particular interest in Cryptids. Whilst many are just bogeymen, you'd be surprised at the species that were once considered Cryptid - such as the Mountain Gorilla (no, really!)

And as science continues to discover entirely new species, I think the Fortean mind is the right way forward in that field. Whilst one would imagine some would be kind of easily spotted (the alleged dinosaur in the Amazon which blocks the river with its bulk, the name of which currently escapes me), others, such as the Adjule are far more within the realms of possibility.

simonr1978 wrote:
I've wasted quite a bit of time browsing conspiracy theory sites, usually I find it quite fun even if what I'm reading is obviously nonsense. I think one of the better Pearl Harbour conspiracy theories I can recall reading was by someone claiming that there was no way with 1941 technology the Japanese fleet could have sailed undetected close enough to launch the attack, the conclusion the author made was that the Japanese must therefore have launched the attack from a secret moon base.

What an idiot. Everyone knows they and the Nazis came from the Hollow Earth.
Not all conspiracy theories are the same. Some (basically everything including supernatural or unscientific elements) are obvious bogus, but many others fall well withing the realm of possibility. "Lizard people" and "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" fall in the first category, but "Boris Nemtsov was murdered on orders of Putin" would be in the second.

 feeder wrote:
Conspiracy theories are like alcoholic drinks. Most of us are fine with some exposure, but some of us, for some reason, can't get enough and ruin our relationships over it.

Its always fun and interesting right up until someone takes it way too seriously and ruins it for everyone.

its also always fun and awkward to watch drunk people get silly. or horrific if they take it too far and other people get hurt.

Conspiracy theories? I have one reaction to them. Zzzzzzzzzz....

 Iron_Captain wrote:

What an idiot. Everyone knows they and the Nazis came from the Hollow Earth.

Led by Hitler riding a dinosaur, of course.

Not all conspiracy theories are the same. Some (basically everything including supernatural or unscientific elements) are obvious bogus, but many others fall well withing the realm of possibility. "Lizard people" and "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" fall in the first category, but "Boris Nemtsov was murdered on orders of Putin" would be in the second.

Agreed. There are historical examples too, the Gleiwitz Incident probably counts. Going further back I'd guess the sinking of the Mary Rose could count too as it's been suggested that she was really sunk by French cannon fire and the real cause was covered up since it was too politically embarrassing to have Henry the VIII's flagship sunk by enemy gunfire. Once you stray into David Icke or Flat Earther territory though... It's hard to tell in some cases whether some of those are genuine beliefs or just outright trolling, in a lot of cases I almost hope for the latter.

I worked with a guy who got heavily into the whole Conspiracy theory/Illuminati/New World Order stuff and as a result of his "research" he went first vegetarian, then vegan (Nothing wrong with that, if that's how you want to live), by the last time I saw him just before he went back to Bulgaria he'd become convinced that all the nutrition he needed was water and sunlight. This was apparently because the idea you needed food was just what they wanted you to think... Don't know what happened to him since, but I can't imagine that it ended well sadly.

The real danger is in the conspiracy theories that can't be separated from reality by anyone less than an expert. Take for example, Docherty and Macgregor's 'Hidden History':-

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hidden-History-Secret-Origins-First/dp/1780576307

Lovingly crafted with a multitude of persuasive looking footnotes and a good grasp of context; this appears to be a perfect primer to someone looking to prove that evil armaments barons, upper class monsters, and bankers planned and caused the First World War. It points out lots of wonderful facts and figures, and is really quite convincing.

That is, unless you actually happen to be an academic specialising in the subject and can pluck every single reference in it off your bookshelf. In which case, you're aware of how limited and clueless so many of the 'sources' from the time actually were, the mound of archival evidence which disagrees with it, and the bits which have been shaped and twisted out of context. Then it appears for the Frankenstein of a conspiracy theory it actually is.

But to your average punter, angling for seemingly reliable sources to confirm your views about rich Jews/Freemasons/Illuminati/whatever running the world? It's an absolute gem.

 Ketara wrote:
The real danger is in the conspiracy theories that can't be separated from reality by anyone less than an expert. Take for example, Docherty and Macgregor's 'Hidden History':-

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hidden-History-Secret-Origins-First/dp/1780576307

Lovingly crafted with a multitude of persuasive looking footnotes and a good grasp of context; this appears to be a perfect primer to someone looking to prove that evil armaments barons, upper class monsters, and bankers planned and caused the First World War. It points out lots of wonderful facts and figures, and is really quite convincing.

That is, unless you actually happen to be an academic specialising in the subject and can pluck every single reference in it off your bookshelf. In which case, you're aware of how limited and clueless so many of the 'sources' from the time actually were, the mound of archival evidence which disagrees with it, and the bits which have been shaped and twisted out of context. Then it appears for the Frankenstein of a conspiracy theory it actually is.

But to your average punter, angling for seemingly reliable sources to confirm your views about rich Jews/Freemasons/Illuminati/whatever running the world? It's an absolute gem.

Yeah, history has quite a few 'convincing' books like that. For WW2 there are a few big ones like Icebreaker and Hitler's Willing Executioners that were absolutely destroyed by the academic community. Yet both had quite a big public following, especially the last book in Germany. People didn't know enough about it to know it was bad, but its exactly what they wanted to hear. There are more books like that, some providing a Marxist view of history that is pretty good, but obviously biased, to books about the Vietnam War that have political color that people would not notice without already having in depth knowledge.

In that sense popular history is full of half truths and omissions.

My thought/experience with people who ardently follow the more ridiculous theories is that there's a heavy element of narcissism to it. And maybe that's why conspiracy theories can be addicting - because they reassure the believer "you're special, you have THE TRUTH, you have this hidden knowledge everyone else doesn't".

There's nothing wrong with popular history necessarily; you can get some very good and very accurate ones.

I've found that the dedicated amateur has often spent half their lives picking at one particular topic; and consequently knows more than someone who spent a few years researching it. There's an absolute wealth of knowledge locked away in the brains of the layperson who publishes that one book they always meant to write. Often they miss odds and sods, but it's through a lack of training or knowledge of context; not any deliberate malice. Such authors usually immediately hold up their hands if challenged on such a point; because they're aware of their own limitations.

Meanwhile, any sufficiently skilled writer can usually do sufficient justice to a topic to be effectively indistinguishable from a professional historian. Often you find that such works rely entirely on professional work for source material to begin with; making them reasonably reliable in their contents. But these books are often commissioned by another source, or chosen for a more general love of the topic (Max Hastings for example), and whilst rarely original, aren't out to subvert or preach, but to tell a story as best as they can.

The problem is when all these things combine, and a sufficiently skilled writer/researcher deliberately sets out with an agenda on a topic that they spend years looking at due to a personal obsession. The book I referenced above has been put together by two men who have spent literally decades scrabbling around trying to find any and all evidence to support their finished conclusion. That's what makes it so persuasive to the layperson. To them, it reads well, sources well, and looks every bit as legitimate as something turned out by David Stevenson.

That is what makes it so very dangerous. Whilst the metaphorical dragon of David Irving was decisively slain by Richard Evans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_v_Penguin_Books_Ltd), few other such works receive equivalent scrutiny and debunking. The damage your average lizard person theory promulgates is really nothing compared to the power of a sufficiently popular skilled historical writer with an axe to grind.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ScarletRose wrote:
My thought/experience with people who ardently follow the more ridiculous theories is that there's a heavy element of narcissism to it. And maybe that's why conspiracy theories can be addicting - because they reassure the believer "you're special, you have THE TRUTH, you have this hidden knowledge everyone else doesn't".

There's a lot to that analysis. It also goes for politics, religion, and everything else more generally however. People like to feel special and in the right.

Does Courtney killed Kurt count?

I'm on board with that one.