• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How to Respond to an Anti-'Conspiracy Theorist'

Status
Not open for further replies.
Grand Mal said:
Once more, which conspiracy is referred to that the news media is involved in?
Click to expand...

What part of "...to manipulate the public perception..." do you not understand?
 
Thoreau72 said:
What part of "...to manipulate the public perception..." do you not understand?
Click to expand...

Don't get friggin' snarky with me, son. This is what I replied to on the first page of this thread...

"You're absolutely right. I agree with you 100%. It is impossible to totally cover up a conspiracy so massive. That's why I know about it! What you must understand is that they don't have to cover it up totally. Even a bucket that has a few leaks can still do the job of carrying water from here to there! They only need to fool 80% of the public, which isn't hard to do when you control the major networks and newspapers."

My question was, and still is, who is the 'they' referred to, and which conspiracy are 'they' using their control of the media to cover up? You, and the guy I was first engaging with, have nothing but weak-sauce generalities, vague phrases that would just lead around in circles, can't be proven or refuted.
Tell me, don't be afraid, who are 'they' and what conspiracy is referred to in that quote? "Manipulate the public perception..." just doesn't come close to "a conspiracy so massive". "Manipulate the public perception" is what every writer since the invention of writing has done.
 
Grand Mal said:
Don't get friggin' snarky with me, son. This is what I replied to on the first page of this thread...

"You're absolutely right. I agree with you 100%. It is impossible to totally cover up a conspiracy so massive. That's why I know about it! What you must understand is that they don't have to cover it up totally. Even a bucket that has a few leaks can still do the job of carrying water from here to there! They only need to fool 80% of the public, which isn't hard to do when you control the major networks and newspapers."

My question was, and still is, who is the 'they' referred to, and which conspiracy are 'they' using their control of the media to cover up? You, and the guy I was first engaging with, have nothing but weak-sauce generalities, vague phrases that would just lead around in circles, can't be proven or refuted.
Tell me, don't be afraid, who are 'they' and what conspiracy is referred to in that quote? "Manipulate the public perception..." just doesn't come close to "a conspiracy so massive". "Manipulate the public perception" is what every writer since the invention of writing has done.
Click to expand...

OK, I now understand your point. Yes, I completely agree that pronouns without antecedents makes for poor public discussion.

I didn't start the thread, but in an effort to answer your question as to exactly who it is that conspires to manipulate the public perception, I would say the term "the powers that be" might be about as descriptive as an ordinary kept-in-the-dark and indoctrinated citizen might get.

Deep State as a term has become quite popular too, and equally descriptive.

Who do you think it is that is manipulating the public perception?
 
Thoreau72 said:
OK, I now understand your point. Yes, I completely agree that pronouns without antecedents makes for poor public discussion.

I didn't start the thread, but in an effort to answer your question as to exactly who it is that conspires to manipulate the public perception, I would say the term "the powers that be" might be about as descriptive as an ordinary kept-in-the-dark and indoctrinated citizen might get.

Deep State as a term has become quite popular too, and equally descriptive.

Who do you think it is that is manipulating the public perception?
Click to expand...

Like I said, every writer since the invention of writing has been 'manipulating the public perception'. Including you, me, and everyone else on this board.
I still don't know which conspiracy is being referred to. Since nobody can tell me, all I can conclude is that every conspiracy theory anyone here favours gets to cite 'they' who 'control the major networks and newspapers.' Every conspiracy, the same 'they'.
Get's to the point where conspiracy theorists themselves become a 'they'.
 
Thoreau72 said:
What part of "...to manipulate the public perception..." do you not understand?
Click to expand...

Public perception of what? Baseball scores? He's asking you which coverup or deception they are involved in.
 
The best way to respond to an anti-"conspiracy-theorist" is to agree, since they will have facts and reality on their side. :doh
 
For me the most damning piece of evidence against conspiracy theories in general is that belief in them correlates even when the bodies of "evidence" are completely independent. You're more likely to believe 9/11 wasn't real if you also believe the moon landing wasn't real. However that doesn't address any specific claims.

If you want to advance a specific conspiracy theory, you need mountains of evidence to counter the mountains of evidence provided by the standard account (e.g. the 9/11 commission report). You can't simply advance some sort of "conspiracy of the gaps" theory where any aspect of the event not explained to your satisfaction is evidence that it was GWB with missiles. All of the conspiracy theorists need to provide much more positive evidence for their claims - like why a conspiracy to blow up the twin towers, convince Bin Laden to pretend he did it, convince hijackers to attend flight school and pretend they did it, etc etc is easier than most other justifications for the Iraq war. Instead you get bs like "hurf durf steel doesn't melt at those temperatures" when it only needs to soften.

Interesting that people who challenge the 9-11 groupthink get death threats The 9/11 conspiracy theorist who changed his mind - Telegraph .
 
Thoreau72 said:
OK, I now understand your point. Yes, I completely agree that pronouns without antecedents makes for poor public discussion.

I didn't start the thread, but in an effort to answer your question as to exactly who it is that conspires to manipulate the public perception, I would say the term "the powers that be" might be about as descriptive as an ordinary kept-in-the-dark and indoctrinated citizen might get.

Deep State as a term has become quite popular too, and equally descriptive.

Who do you think it is that is manipulating the public perception?
Click to expand...

I call them "The Powers That Shouldn't be". Another name is "The scum of the Earth"

Well, they are most people in high places, but not the one you see, like presidents and what have you, they are just dumb puppets on a string. If you go higher you will meet 13 families, called the illuminati or the Olympians is how they call them selves, But, to be honest, of you go higher then that you will enter other dimensions from which this earth is really ruled.Maybe there is even something behind that. I don't know.
Anyway, these families are satanic to the core,and in their rituals they connect with these other dimensions.
They are very very sick and insecure people and deeply need control. They own the media. and because they crave control, everyone important in the media is controlled. They are control-freaks.They also lack empathy (How else could you kill children in satanic rituals????) Hence they have no trouble at all killing 3000 people at 9/11. Or kill poor people in a firing tower in Londin! Get my drift?
 
Last edited:
Grand Mal said:
Like I said, every writer since the invention of writing has been 'manipulating the public perception'. Including you, me, and everyone else on this board.
I still don't know which conspiracy is being referred to. Since nobody can tell me, all I can conclude is that every conspiracy theory anyone here favours gets to cite 'they' who 'control the major networks and newspapers.' Every conspiracy, the same 'they'.
Get's to the point where conspiracy theorists themselves become a 'they'.
Click to expand...

No every writer since the invention of writing has not manipulated the public perception. Yes, each writer may or may not influence the perception of the individual READER of his writing, but not so much the public perception.

OTOH, those writing and selling what they write, by way of "newspapers", "books" "magazines" DO influence and manipulate to one degree or another, depending upon how susceptible the individual READER is.

Those in the business of writing for public consumption have a much greater influence on the manipulation of the public perception than do you and I, sitting here pecking away on a keyboard in the cyber world.

Men have recognized that for a very long time, and that is one of the reasons Woodrow Wilson hired Edward Bernays to work for the government in "public relations". Public Relations means at least attempting to control and manipulate what the public perceives.

And each individual reader will respond differently to any given stimulus. Some are more gullible than others. Some are more informed by way of life experiences than others.

Conspiracy is very common amongst humans. I'm defining the word to mean 2 or more persons plan to achieve a goal of some sort, usually nefarious. Most humans conspire fairly commonly.

In retrospective analysis of events, most form theories about how and why those events might have occurred. It's not unusual behavior, it is normal behavior.
 
Deuce said:
Public perception of what? Baseball scores? He's asking you which coverup or deception they are involved in.
Click to expand...

Public perception of anything, of domestic and world events, of reality.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Public perception of anything, of domestic and world events, of reality.
Click to expand...

Yep, the rabbit hole goes very very deep and 'they' manipulate 'reality'. They let us think we are living in a 'real' world, while in reality it is a hologram! And it's construction has a lot to do with consciousness. Hence the lack of 'consciousness' in 'scientific' research. To understand this world consciousness is key!
 
Thoreau72 said:
Conspiracy is very common amongst humans.
Click to expand...

The word 'conspiracy" and it's negative connotation were invented by the cia after Kennedy was aasasinated (yes, by the illuminati!). to discredit anyone researching and finding out that the official story was wrong. very very wrong.

Now, just mention the word 'conspracy' and people close off by knee-jerk reaction! Exactly as intended.

But 'they' are getting desperate and loosing!!! Yeah!!!!!!
 
Last edited:
Thoreau72 said:
Public perception of anything, of domestic and world events, of reality.
Click to expand...
I feel like Donny Boy would have spilled the beans on something this big. Dude is just not capable of keeping his mouth shut.
 
Deuce said:
I feel like Donny Boy would have spilled the beans on something this big. Dude is just not capable of keeping his mouth shut.
Click to expand...

Donny Boy is not nearly as well informed or knowledgeable as you might think. And if he were, he is nowhere near brave enough to inform the public and lose his life in the process. He doesn't give a GGD about the public. He tells them what they want to speak, but that's about it.
 
Pin dÁr said:
The word 'conspiracy" and it's negative connotation were invented by the cia after Kennedy was aasasinated (yes, by the illuminati!). to discredit anyone researching and finding out that the official story was wrong. very very wrong.
Click to expand...

WRONG ... the words "conspiracy" and "theory" both LONG PREDATE the CIA or JFK.

WHY are you so il-informed and unknowing of simple things ???
 
I_Gaze_At_The_Blue said:
WRONG ... the words "conspiracy" and "theory" both LONG PREDATE the CIA or JFK.

WHY are you so il-informed and unknowing of simple things ???
Click to expand...

Well, you don't read very well, do you?

I wrote something different, mate. I wrote 'conspiracy theory" ANd it's negative connotation.
In 1967, the CIA Created the Label "Conspiracy Theorists" ...
to Attack Anyone Who Challenges the "Official" Narrative

Conspiracy Theorists USED TO Be Accepted As Normal
Democracy and free market capitalism were founded on conspiracy theories.

The Magna Carta, the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and other founding Western documents were based on conspiracy theories. Greek democracy and free market capitalism were also based on conspiracy theories.

But those were the bad old days …Things have now changed.

The CIA Coined the Term Conspiracy Theorist In 1967
That all changed in the 1960s.

Specifically, in April 1967, the CIA wrote a dispatch which coined the term “conspiracy theories” … and recommended methods for discrediting such theories. The dispatch was marked “psych” – short for “psychological operations” or disinformation – and “CS” for the CIA’s “Clandestine Services” unit.

The dispatch was produced in responses to a Freedom of Information Act request by the New York Times in 1976.


CIA-conspiracy.jpg


In 1967, the CIA Created the Label "Conspiracy Theorists" ... to Attack Anyone Who Challenges the "Official" Narrative | Zero Hedge
Click to expand...



So, I_Gaze_At_The_Blue, please do your homework next time and read better!
 
I also have to laugh when they try to discredit 'conspiracy theories' in the media.

First they never did that, they even didn't talk about that.

Now they are ridiculing 'conspiracy theories"'

Very good:

First-they-ignore-you-saying-and-quote.jpg

This is progress!!
 
anti-conspiracy theorists even resort to mathematics, jus showing how desperate they are!
Most Conspiracy Theories Are Mathematically Impossible

The CIA killed Kennedy. Or maybe it was the Mafia. And the government definitely used a crashed UFO at Roswell to build the stealth bomber at Area 51. Oh, and there definitely, DEFINITELY are human barcodes on the way, courtesy of the Bilderbergs and the New World Order.

Or not.

Oxford physicist David Robert Grimes just published a paper in PLOS ONE about the nature of conspiracy theories. More specifically, the mathematical nature of conspiracy theories. And most conspiracy theories don't add up. This is especially true if more than 100 people become involved. Once that threshhold is reached, the attempt at secrecy begins to fall apart.

Grimes didn't focus on Area 51, JFK, or Tupac / Elvis. Instead, it's some of the more popular conspiracy theories out there like climate change denial, vaccines, or the moon landing "hoax" theories, ones that purport that the entire scientific community is covering up a hoax against the public.

In order for each of these theories to hold up, climate change and Apollo hoaxers would need 400,000 sworn to secrecy, without a single leak. No paper trail, no footage, no leaks to the press. In addition, 22,000 people would need to be silent about the link between vaccines and autism, and 710,000 doctors and researchers would be needed to cover up cancer cures.

Most Conspiracy Theories Are Mathematically Impossible
Click to expand...

So, you see, they even don't have a clue how conspiracy theries worlk, AND they haven't done their homework!


Sadly, people fall for this sort of crap!
 
Last edited:
Pin dÁr said:
So, I_Gaze_At_The_Blue, please do your homework next time and read better!
Click to expand...

The FAIL is STILL all yours I am afraid.

1870 ... The Journal of Mental S: Volume 16 - Page 141

The theory of Dr. Sankey as to the manner in which these injuries to the chest occurred in asylums deserved our careful attention. It was at least more plausible that the conspiracy theory of Mr. Charles Beade, and the precautionary measure suggested by Dr. Sankey of using a padded waistcoat in recent cases of mania with general paralysis—in which mental condition nearly all these cases under discussion were—seemed to him of practical value.
Click to expand...

1890 ...
The conspiracy theory may be well founded, but then again it may not. And rather than be dependent upon the evidence of it which may be furnished through the self-sacrificing efforts of the gentlemen who are so ardently engaged in that behalf, we should rather see the party stand on its own foundation, and Mr. Quay on his record, whatever it may be. Then the plot might be proved or disproved, and still the party could live for the further service of the country.
Click to expand...

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...esc=y#v=onepage&q="conspiracy theory"&f=false

1895...

Yet Davis was in favor of delay, and Toombs, in spite of his vehement language at Washington, could not keep pace with the secession movement in his State; while the South Carolina radicals murmured that the people were hampered by the politicians. The conspiracy theory is based on a misconception
Click to expand...

The term AND its meaning LONG PREDATE the CIA and JFK.

FACT !!!
 
Pin dÁr said:
anti-conspiracy theorists even resort to mathematics, jus showing how desperate they are!


So, you see, they even don't have a clue how conspiracy theries worlk, AND they haven't done their homework!


Sadly, people fall for this sort of crap!
Click to expand...

Yet here you are Pin ... WHOLLY UNABLE to do anything to refute the hard figures with anything but empty hot air.

Funny that !!!
 
Pin dÁr said:
... theries worlk, AND they haven't done their homework!
Click to expand...

Think it is kinda obvious just who here needs do their own homework.

Starting with some remedial spelling classes first, eh! Pin dÁr.

Here, a gift for you ...

Capture.jpg


Don't say I ain't kind !!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom