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.

I have put some words down but you have read something else because that something else is what you want to see for your own interests, self-esteem etc.

 SolarCross wrote:
I have put some words down but you have read something else because that something else is what you want to see for your own interests, self-esteem etc.

which you claim, yet what is stopping this interpretation of an interpretation beeing nothing more then your own interest beeing laid bare?

Well not to interrupt this vital POLITICAL debate about Late Stage Capitalism.... I ran across a new Conspiracy Theory that has to do with history! That is many of our favorite subjects!

Phantom Time
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_time_hypothesis

Basically, the theory is that due to flaws in the calendar and interpretations of the Calendar, we are actual 297 years off the true date. Okay.

Now it gets weird. It also posits that the early Dark Ages never really existed. Instead, they were "filled" in by Holy Roman Emperor Otto to place his reign near 1000 AD.

I ran across this while glancing at a coffee table book about Historically significant numbers. Just a fluff book really.

Page 4 has something on it in this very thread.

And 5 has an intersting response from Voss.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 SolarCross wrote:
I have put some words down but you have read something else because that something else is what you want to see for your own interests, self-esteem etc.

which you claim, yet what is stopping this interpretation of an interpretation beeing nothing more then your own interest beeing laid bare?

Naturally it is. My interest is to call out your deliberate misunderstanding as I perceive it. I have self-esteem too and I am not claiming immunity from subjectivity.

Please don’t get my thread locked.

Please.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Please don’t get my thread locked.

Please.

Why would it get locked?

 SolarCross wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Please don’t get my thread locked.

Please.

Why would it get locked?

Aye?
The debate about concioussness , interaction of it with reality (if it exists) can be at the core of the fundamental understaing of HOW we as a species form epistemical knowledge, if that is even possible at all, is rather decisive in our understanding of right and wrong.

And by extension of that our understanding of if something is a conspiracy theory or not.

Granted it is certainly more a root discussion.

If you want to continue it, just take it to PM and leave the thread alone.


Also, I am unsure how I missed the Phantom Time reference earlier! I might be suffering from personal phantom time!

 SolarCross wrote:
Ha, so we have some orthodox believers of Late Capitalism here. How orthodox are you though? Do you reject the heretic? Obviously not everyone in the world accepts this story as gospel. What about those people? Are they not obviously crazy, stupid or even a bit evil? Surely there is something wrong with them, no? Something has to be done about them.

And this response is frankly more conspiracy theorist than anything I've ever heard from someone using the words late capitalism. I seriously think you're overestimating things here.

Have you considered that you're just not as smart or informed as you think you are? Most instances I've seen of the phrase are for memes mocking <politics> or memes mocking <politics>. The craziest I've seen are fringe anarchists and such, and while they are nutters, I wouldn't qualify them per se as subscribing to any particular conspiracy theory. They're mostly just garden variety hipsters who consider referencing an old idea clever.

 Easy E wrote:

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

Yeah this is one of my more favorite wacky 'I'm not a historian but' ideas. Especially all the wacky ways people try to use it to justify other pseudo-historical nonsense that just doesn't make any sense.

Borrowing from another thread (and also not quite a conspiracy theory) there's all the controversy coming at historians from the LGBTQ community. Namely the accusations that historians are refusing to acknowledge LGBTQ persons in history and historians have done a generally gak job of explaining their position. Go back 2000 years, and I doubt you'd find anyone who really understood the distinction. Rigid ideas of sexual preference and identity are very new for humans, historically speaking, and very western. It's not something a 1st century Roman would subscribe to at all. Historians don't deny that people had gay sex in the past, or engaged in transitive behaviors, but to retroactively qualify such people as 'gay' or 'trans' violates numerous precepts of present historical practice. Namely, a harsh taboo against presentism/anachronism (the juxtaposition of modern ideas onto past persons, places, and things).

I've seen things get pretty heated up to and including people accusing historians of trying to culturally genocide LGBTQ people from history.

 LordofHats wrote:

 SolarCross wrote:
Ha, so we have some orthodox believers of Late Capitalism here. How orthodox are you though? Do you reject the heretic? Obviously not everyone in the world accepts this story as gospel. What about those people? Are they not obviously crazy, stupid or even a bit evil? Surely there is something wrong with them, no? Something has to be done about them.

And this response is frankly more conspiracy theorist than anything I've ever heard from someone using the words late capitalism. I seriously think you're overestimating things here.

Have you considered that you're just not as smart or informed as you think you are? Most instances I've seen of the phrase are for memes mocking <politics> or memes mocking <politics>. The craziest I've seen are fringe anarchists and such, and while they are nutters, I wouldn't qualify them per se as subscribing to any particular conspiracy theory. They're mostly just garden variety hipsters who consider referencing an old idea clever.

If it makes you feel superior do keep that narrative; that is a completely conventional purpose for a narrative.

People prefer to see the world according to what they want it to be rather than how it is. It's pretty simple.

Deep down, we all want something. We all want one big explanation that will make sense of it. And we already have a desired answer in our head. Thus we collect and acknoledge anything than can satisfy the truth that we desperatly want to believe in.

Religious people will interpret anything as a proof of the existence of God, because deep down they want a God that created this world for them and will save them from the inescapable dread of the grave.

Flat earthers want the Earth to be flat, because they want a world-wide lie to exist, showing that all along they knew better than everyone else.

Conservatives, antisemites, etc. Dream of a big world wide New Order conspiracy involving Soros, reptilians, liberals, jews and / or etc. because it would give them an excuse to justify their bigotry towards these damn pedo-satanist jew elite reptilians.

In sort, people believe in things that they want to believe in.

A smart person is someone that recognize that even if he want's to believe in something, that thing might be false, non-existent, etc. And therefore he should move on and take care of more srious matters at hand.

Just imagine how the world would be better if instead of praying to a God to make everything alright, people would actually act to make thing better. But that would mean that there is a possibility that there is no God or that God doesn't give a damn about any of us, and thus that would break the dream of these poor fools. Thus they don't act and keep waiting for the one and only event that will prove that God exist and love them.

And yes, I have the nerve to say it : God is just an hypothesis, one that is as well proven than any conspiracy theory. Sorry for the admin, I know we aren't supposed to talk about politics and religions, but hey, you just can't talk about conspiracy theory without talking about religion. Both are the shame, but with a different shade.

 SolarCross wrote:
f it makes you feel superior do keep that narrative; that is a completely conventional purpose for a narrative.

If it makes you feel superior to be kind of an ass, that's pretty conventional for a narcissist who thinks too much of themselves. Just don't be surprised when everyone else gets bored of listening to you thinly praise yourself while talking down to everyone around you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Khornate25 wrote:
Just imagine how the world would be better if instead of praying to a God to make everything alright, people would actually act to make thing better.

I mean, if we're going there I'd say after the last decade especially, I'm mostly over this 'what are the right answers' pseudo-philosophical nonsense most of society is playing. I'd be happy to see more people get over themselves and behave with more compassion. It's especially rough being a god believing type watching other believers behave in general like total ass clowns. I'm going with Ecclesiastes on this one. The answers people want don't exist, probably don't matter even if they did, and we'd all be better off if we treated each other like the greatest dramady duo of all time. Which is probably a bit hypocritical coming from me cause I'm generally 100% on board with treating people like crap when they're being donkey-caves but I'm not making the argument that I'm perfect here XD

 LordofHats wrote:

 SolarCross wrote:
f it makes you feel superior do keep that narrative; that is a completely conventional purpose for a narrative.

If it makes you feel superior to be kind of an ass, that's pretty conventional for a narcissist who thinks too much of themselves. Just don't be surprised when everyone else gets bored of listening to you thinly praise yourself while talking down to everyone around you.

That's the perception you have chosen because it suits your purpose. You don't know me at all and never will and nothing I could say on an internet forum could ever convey it to you even if I knew it myself which I probably don't and you certainly would not want to know it either because it would not be useful enough for own narcissism. It's all projection.

 SolarCross wrote:
That's the perception you have chosen because it suits your purpose.

The purpose of being on a discussion board where someone says something kind of weird, and instead of explaining the position goes into a deep dive word soup while talking down to everyone else in the thread?

You don't know me at all and never will and nothing I could say on an internet forum could ever convey it to you even if I knew it myself which I probably don't.

Like this.

Seriously. In a conspiracy theory thread, you said late stage capitalism was a conspiracy theory and a few people got question marks about what that means or how it even qualifies. Instead of responding to that, you responded with a non-response that was basically just talking down to everyone from some imaginary pedestal and meandering your way through some philosophy 101 spiel.

It's all projection.

For you, maybe. Namely self-projection cause I'm not making judgements about you as a person. I'm making judgements about you as a poster and I guess you can call that judgement a projection, but welcome to the world. How you act around them is all anyone has to go on in making judgements about you. Suppose the bright side is that if you decide their judgement doesn't matter, you can be as gak a poster as you please so A plus, but that's all some text book assholery to me so...

 LordofHats wrote:

 SolarCross wrote:
That's the perception you have chosen because it suits your purpose.

The purpose of being on a discussion board where someone says something kind of weird, and instead of explaining the position goes into a deep dive word soup while talking down to everyone else in the thread?

I can't defend your misperceptions. You will just have to live it, but most people get by just fine that way. It probably doesn't matter anyway.

It is human nature to enjoy having a secret, or discovering something that most people don't know. It's why you see so much success out of documentaries showing what REALLY happened, and the shocking tell all. We're more likely to believe a complicated, well concealed conspiracy than a plain old boring truth because it's more exciting.

Isn't it more interesting to think that there's a nationwide conspiracy of vote rigging and influence of counters, rather than just accept the dull reality that counting millions of votes with any sort of accuracy does take days?

Solarcross is kind of serving as a great example of the conspiracy theorist in miniature. He knows something you don't know (whatever Solarcross's actual opinions are) and refuses to explain them, instead smugly pointing out that you don't know what you're talking about- but he does.

I'd disagree about the quasireligious breakdown between orthodoxy and heresy- instead I'd say you have the difference between open knowledge and hidden knowledge. Conspiracy theories don't work with open knowledge- then they just become a different theory of events. Many people have differing views of events without the need for complicated overarching conspiracies.

Conspiracy theories thrive in the shadows, where you can't google the answers, but if you follow me into these private facebook groups, subreddits, or parlers then I can show the guys who really know what's going on! Once you accept this secretive source as more accurate than widely available, open knowledge, you become a conspiracy theorist, and believe in the unverifiable. The fact that something can be verified means that those responsible want you to know it!

So I'd say your typical conspiracy theorists just starts off with favoring certain sources of information over others, then runs into some fact they don't want to accept- and if a questionable source disputes that fact, then it's often easier to accept the questionable source might be right about this. Then they might be right about other things- and gradually they reject all readily available knowledge in favor of their special sources.

 SolarCross wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 SolarCross wrote:
That's the perception you have chosen because it suits your purpose.

The purpose of being on a discussion board where someone says something kind of weird, and instead of explaining the position goes into a deep dive word soup while talking down to everyone else in the thread?

I can't defend your misperceptions. You will just have to live it, but most people get by just fine that way. It probably doesn't matter anyway.

So true. After all, your experience of Lordofhats is just a depiction of your experience as derived from the subjective facets of the constructivist homogenisation of cultural neo-relativistic empiricism. Or rationalism. Whichever one means people can't argue with me.

Am I doing this right?

 Ketara wrote:

Am I doing this right?

Only you can say.


At which point, we can all wander back to the actual topic, please...

I have read all the pages over the life of this thread but can't recall seeing my two pet hates. If they have been addressed it's obviously the lizard people's mind rays working because I forgot.

Tartaria and mud floods.

I legitimately thought they were troll CS when I first heard them, poor attempts at comedy but it seems like the idiots who spout them *believe* them. I can't even.

I honestly blame the internet. That may be my own CS I know but I've seen a couple of memes get taken way too seriously by fringe elements, like the Boogaloo Boys. That started out as dark humour and has now become a racist political movement (with around 1500 actual members the last time I looked I to it)

Because of the ease of communication the Internet has given us the fringe elements can congregate in their own echo chambers and pick up momentum.
"Oh you want to dress in Hawaiian shirts and rig Roombas with claymores for the Alphabet Boys? Haha, good one crazy uncle Bob. What do you mean the meeting is next Thursday? The password is Swordfish?!?!"

I just had two posts removed. Why?

 SolarCross wrote:
I just had two posts removed. Why?

 insaniak wrote:

At which point, we can all wander back to the actual topic, please...

Kayback wrote:
I have read all the pages over the life of this thread but can't recall seeing my two pet hates. If they have been addressed it's obviously the lizard people's mind rays working because I forgot.

Tartaria and mud floods.

I legitimately thought they were troll CS when I first heard them, poor attempts at comedy but it seems like the idiots who spout them *believe* them. I can't even.

I honestly blame the internet. That may be my own CS I know but I've seen a couple of memes get taken way too seriously by fringe elements, like the Boogaloo Boys. That started out as dark humour and has now become a racist political movement (with around 1500 actual members the last time I looked I to it)

Because of the ease of communication the Internet has given us the fringe elements can congregate in their own echo chambers and pick up momentum.
"Oh you want to dress in Hawaiian shirts and rig Roombas with claymores for the Alphabet Boys? Haha, good one crazy uncle Bob. What do you mean the meeting is next Thursday? The password is Swordfish?!?!"

Mud floods has been brought up by old man grotsnik. Quite early actually, as for the Later yeah those Lot are somewhere between ridicoulus and dangerous, and the shortened communication is quite likely a key component

I would like everyone to remember the first rule of the Internet: Do Not Feed The Trolls.

Then recall the first rule of Dakka: Be Nice.




After that, the Baltic Undersea object is a fun one. This huge unknown shape picked up on sonar under the Baltic sea that looks vaguely like the Millennium Falcon.

I also am interested in the "underwater Pyramids" in the Caribbean and off the coast of Japan. Not enough to know much about them, but just enough to know they exist as a conspiracy theory.

But are they pyramids though? If its just topography we could be looking at reefs, natural geography hills.

If its a sub marine discovery then we should have footage and therefore no longer a conspiracy.

I have to admit I don't know much about these. I do recall the story about strange object in the Baltic but I thought it was deemed a WW2 ship wreck ?

@ Easy E RE: calendar - Im not sure how much of "the phantom time" is an issue. Modern day calendar aka the gregorian calendar was in 15th century by *drum roll* pope Gregory. But is in fact a slightly adapted Julian Calendar which the Byzantines/romans were using since "the" ceasar in 45 BC. Basically the only thing that changed is they worked out the leap year a bit different because the earth wobbles so we loose a day here and there...

And we know the Romans really loved their admin and we have records going back all the way back for various things so if a drastic change like 200 ytears beign taken off the clander would be have to be agreed across the entire chrisendom/latin world.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What I want to know is -

What is on the moon ?
Did Murica really go to the moon?
Was it exactly like we know?
Officialy there were 6 sucessfull moon landings between 69-72

If we accept they have what about the subsequent missions and logs getting redacted?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKUVgIuQ4Nc

So whats there?

Why is china completing their moon mission now ?
Are we alone ?

A timely reminder about on Andrew Wakefield, the god father of anti-vaccination.

As the U.K. has approved the Pfizer vaccine, let’s look at the origin of the anti-vaccine movement.

It’s true that Andrew Wakefield published a (now thoroughly debunked, discredited and withdrawn) paper, claiming the Combined Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR) vaccine had a link to rising rates of autism.

But, he was not claiming all vaccines did the same. Like. At all. Oh no. It’s dodgier than that.

See, his paper (remember, debunked, discredited, withdrawn) was in support of three separate jabs for Measles, Mumps and Rubella. He also failed to disclose a pretty significant grant from a legal firm, representing parents that claimed their children were “vaccine injured”.

So the man is a total fraud, his claims probably baseless. And his claims have been wildly misinterpreted ever since. Sad, isn’t it?

Historians don't deny that people had gay sex in the past, or engaged in transitive behaviors, but to retroactively qualify such people as 'gay' or 'trans' violates numerous precepts of present historical practice

On the other hand, it is *amusing* when you have burials of male skeletons with feminine burial goods, or female skeletons with weapons and male goods, and they can't just say "burial of a trans person". Seeing as those types of burials are very rare and not cultural norm, it seems to be the obvious conclusion. They might've not thought of themselves as "trans", but by gods what makes more sense, that it's a burial of a trangender person or some bizarre, one-off burial of a cis woman that just happened to be buried with male decorations even though no other woman in the same site was?

Likewise with gay people in history. There is a very strong tendency to go "oh, they're just gals being pals". Or if you have two male "lifelong friends" who left a whole lot of passionate letters, it's just "such good friends".
LGBTQ+ people get a bit miffed cause this is exactly the same behavior they tend to encounter IRL, so it's really easy to spot. Some historians will tie themselves into pretzels before admit gay people existed before the '60s...

As I recall regarding the underwater pyramids, they don't exist. They're what you get when you zoom in on only the y-axis of a sonar image of a slight incline of the seabed while traveling onto and then off it at constant speed - which the sonar equipment used to make those images is programmed to automatically do.

As for Wakefield's study, IIRC, it wasn't even against three jabs in general, it was against a specific brand of vaccination, and the study was paid for by a competitor, not a bunch of parents. And on top of the paper being retracted, Wakefield lost his medical license over tge whole affair.

He also had a financial stake in a rival Measles vaccine.... but as science writers Ben Goldacre and Stuart Ritchie have pointed out, the way that science journals publish papers (or don't, as the case may be) has to shoulder some responsibility.

But yeah, the harm that Wakefield has caused is almost incalculable and anyone who cites him as a champion of some sorts need to be calmly shown where they sit on a Dunning-Kruger graph.

Aristotle had some nice things to say about knowing and knowing that you don't know...
Pretty much describes the same effect.