NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE

AS-NS Has upgraded and moved to a new name.... It;s the same people just all new software, and a new name. Please come and join us http://forum.asexual.me

You need to sign up a new... But it is SOOOO Worth it...

http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me http://forum.asexual.me



NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE - NOTICE





Conspirasaay.

LordGrep
LordGrep
edited July 4 in General
What is your favourite theory, and do you think it's really a conspiracy, or just a load of crap?

I will use the best suggestions to start new threads (god I can't wait to have AVEN software, I totally want a "Conspiracy" Section. I love shit that scares the shit out of me, and I also love learning why it was stupid to think it was a conspiracy. 

I want also need to stop the rumours that AS-NS is run by a secret cabal of tortoise people that are after total domination of the asexual scene online... WE ARE BIRD PEOPLE ALRIGHT !!!!
Redshirt_Jim

Comments

  • Toffington
    Toffington
    Posts: 742
    Illuminati is not real.  :p
  • Gloomy
    Gloomy
    Posts: 262
    Aliensdidit.

    I do believe that in a universe this big Earth can’t be the only planet with life, but whether or not aliens have actually came here to our planet, I’m not so sure.
  • Tercy
    Tercy
    Posts: 47 edited July 5
    Most convincing:

    JFK was assassinated by the CIA (or something along those lines) - and that even if we went to the moon in the 60's/70's (of which I'm not convinced either) at least some (if not all) of the video and photos were faked. I'm also skeptical of vaccines. I'm 99% sure the McCanns lied about what happened to Madeleine.

    I've not done the research to verify this one myself, but if what I've seen so far is true, United Utilities (I think it was) at the very least accidentally - but possibly intentionally - caused the Cumbria flooding of (I think) 2009. As an extension of that, you do have to wonder if Derek Bird's (alleged?) killing spree was part of a coverup, seeing as the 2nd person shot was a lawyer uncovering and suing for the aforementioned flooding goof.

    You also don't hear about this much, but I think some branches of science (especially physics) are being corrupted by financial interests i.e. theories and research programs are being given more merit than they deserve, purely because it sells books, TV appearances, magazine articles, etc. Anyone investing in quantum computing in particular might as well just set that money on fire (or give it to me).

    False flag terror attacks happen. There's that one a few months ago which to my knowledge is still hosted on various mainstream news sites as though it was real - the one where CCTV footage got leaked, proving the whole thing was staged with crisis actors. You do have to wonder why those articles have never been retracted or corrected.

    Somewhat convincing:

    I have outstanding doubts about 9/11, Sandy Hook and a few others. Enough high profile government/military/scientific people have come forward about UFO encounters that there may be something to that, but I'm also aware that humans... y'know... lie. There's several theories about the true nature of the Manson murders/case, but I'm more inclined to believe the theory that it was a coverup with Mafia involvement.

    Less convincing and/or crazy:

    The whole "lawful rebellion" ideology being promoted around 2008 or so, where supposedly the wording of legal documents had to be a certain way under some divine law - and you could opt out of criminal charges, fines and taxes and such by exploiting various loopholes (such as refusing to use capital letters in your name, refusing to be referred to as a "person" and instead referring to yourself as a "free man of the land" etc).

    The UK royalty being shapeshifting lizards. The idea that civilization is and always has been overwhelmingly patriarchal and women have always been oppressed innocent victims whilst men have always been privileged evil aggressors (what they call "feminism").

    People who claim to have been targeted by government agencies with energy weapons that give them joint pains, make their electronic devices act strangely, etc. I spent a while diving into this world and from their own social interactions with each other (they tend to naturally find each other and form communities and such) you'd be forgiven for concluding they're all mentally unstable / paranoid fantasists. For example there was this one public exchange between a girl who was quite active on YouTube and some guy who found her videos and emailed her one day, where they start out talking normally (hi, sorry you're one of us but glad to have found someone else in my situation, let's work together, tell me your story, etc) and it devolves into them accusing each other of being government shills and all kinds of shit.

    I feel like there's a load I'm missing. They'll come to me eventually.

    Illuminati is not real.  :p

    There may not be a group who go by that name with all its bells and whistles, but if you don't think there's currently at least one group of individuals trying to control people/whatever on some level, I have a bridge to sell you. :p
  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686
    @Tercy Thank you so much for giving me so much to go on... I will give answers to many of your points soon... You have mentioned some things I spent ages looking in to.
  • cavalier080854
    cavalier080854
    Posts: 2,175
    Wherever there is a conspiracy theory, there is someone selling a book, dvd or selling a venue where you can buy the aforesaid items.
    Read "Chariot of the Gods" by Erich von Daniken. Aliens did it in the past. Everthing has been debunked. But it was phenomenal when it can out.
    See "Red Dwarf" for the truth about the assassination of JFK.
  • Toffington
    Toffington
    Posts: 742
    The ultimate conspiracy, that ties all other conspiracies into it. Is ironically the Jewish conspiracy. 
  • cavalier080854
    cavalier080854
    Posts: 2,175

    What ever it is.


    I DID IT


    My boss says so.


  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686
    Talking of such, if anyone fancies leading the "Ask a Muslim" OP on AVEN to a train crash, I would suggest asking them about Hamas, not too directly, you just want to get them to say what most Muslims say, and that is that "Hamas is all about the charity work"(the cry of all religious organisations). ONce you get a "I support them" then just bring up the fact that Hamas pushes the same Jewish conspiracy that led Hitler to his beliefs. I cant find it all at the moment, but the whole conspiracy thins used to be on the front page of the Hamas web site. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas_Covenant <-- Has some info under "Antisemitism". A bit more googling and you would have a really good "And this is why people have "issues" with Islam".  

    I would happily play this game, but I am trying to keep my AVEN nose clean for elections. I have nothing against the guy, I just dislike religious hypocrisy, and the whole "Islam is a religion of peace". crap.
  • cavalier080854
    cavalier080854
    Posts: 2,175

    Ask how he feels about Gay Men and should homosexuality be banned.

    51% of muslims want it banned in the UK

  • cavalier080854
    cavalier080854
    Posts: 2,175
    This is why if you support LGBT then you cannot support Islam (not muslims, but the religious ideology which throws Gay men from tall buildings)
  • cavalier080854
    cavalier080854
    Posts: 2,175
    There is a London Bus on the Moon. I have seen the pictures in a newspaper.
  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686
    I want to give you my best evidence that the moon landings were not faked, and it is something that just doesn't come up. It's about one of my specialist subjects. Raido...

    The thing is that all the video, and the audio was transmitted  in the clear. This means that many raidio hams, and hundreds of privately operated radio telescopes, and large dishes could pick up both sides of the communications to and from the space ships and the moon.

    To have faked the moon landing they would have had to do two things. 

    1. Send a repeater to the moon and relay all the dodgy moon footage from earth to the moon, and then send it back to earth again and match all the parameters that the "fake" craft would have had.
    (Ok now many people say "that is feasible".

    2: They would have had to invent a way of communicating faster than the speed of light.
    The thing is that both sides could be heard by the astronomers / radio hams. and if the thing was on a sound stage or what ever the signal would have taken more than twice as long, and the amount of time is considerable. The time it takes light to get to the moon is about 1.3 seconds, the delay heard on the recordings, and those recordings were taken one from the feed from the ground station, and the other one with HUNDREDS of antennae pointing at the moon.

    So at a bare minimum to get the signal out of the studio then up to the moon, and then for it to bounce back again would be closer to three seconds. 

    In the words of Scotty from Star Trek. "Ya canny change the laws of physics". 

    If the Russians had detected any foul play don't you think they would be all over it? Don't you think they would be the first to cry foul, as that record should have been theirs. 

    Now once you say "we have been there", I just don't see any point at all in questioning one or two photographs, and I have seen a ton of evidence about those. I wanted though to share that debunk on the issue as I am pretty sure you will not have heard it anywhere else, as it's totally a Grep™ idea. I know many countries monitored the feed directly as my father was both a radio ham, and also worked for the BBC in Daventry at the time on their big antennae, and if you don't take my word for it that it was possible to listen in, then see the time that Jodrell Bank picked up the first space craft to see the far side of the moon. The Russian one, Jodrell bank picked it up, thought it sounded like a fax so they recorded it, then played it back though a fax machine, and the first news paper in the world to publish the picture of the far side of the moon was the Daily Mail. 
  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686
    Shit talking of conspiracies the Russians have gone nuts with their poison again.
  • Gloomy
    Gloomy
    Posts: 262
    I did kind of used to believe the moon landing was fake and 9/11 was an inside job. My dad sometimes watched stuff about conspiracy theories and I guess I picked up on it lol.
  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686 edited July 4
    9/11 is the most interesting of all conspiracies. Mainly because it was a truly shocking event, but also there are so many things that could have been tampered with.
  • cavalier080854
    cavalier080854
    Posts: 2,175
    Tampered !!! So much fakery, I'm surprised the building wasn't an inflatable decoy. The girders showing thermite cutting actions were done to clear the debris. How many people filmed it as it happened prior to the news getting in on the act.
    I'm surprised that to get to the basement they buried from the surface, why not from the subway station ?
  • Tercy
    Tercy
    Posts: 47 edited July 5
    @LordGrep The radio aspect has been covered quite a bit. If I'm not wrong, you're making the following points:

    1. It would be impossible to fake the radio comms due to the added delay.

    This isn't true. In a scenario where we assume there's dudes on Earth (let's call them A) and dudes actually on the moon (let's call them B (...)), the expected flow might be:

    - A sends signal to B, which takes ~1.25 seconds.
    - B receives signal and sends a response to A which also takes ~1.25 seconds.
    - Estimated total time is approx 2-2.5 seconds.

    But if we relocate B to Earth and add a relay C on the moon, you could say:

    - A sends signal to C, which takes ~1.25 seconds.
    - Information from A is also sent directly to B (who might be in a room next door) with a negligible delay.
    - B replies immediately, sending their reply to C which takes ~1.25 seconds but is being transmitted roughly in parallel with the signal from A to C.
    - The reply from B is possibly also sent to A next door (again with a negligible delay) but this part isn't necessary.
    - C relays the signal from B to A, taking ~1.25 seconds.
    - Estimated total time is still approx 2-2.5 seconds.

    In other words, the whole "added delay" argument rests on A and B actually having to wait for the signals to be relayed... which they don't. They just communicate directly.

    People also raise the question of whether these side channels of communication would have been detected, but a) there's plenty of methods to avoid eavesdropping* and b) there's no account of anyone even trying to detect such things anyway.

    * Some quick examples being encryption, using phased arrays (which transmit in "beams" and are less likely to be detected outside of an intended area) and/or transmitting above the atmosphere at frequencies not detectable on Earth (due to their inability to pass through the atmosphere), etc. This was all done/known/possible in the 60s.

    2. Hams tracked everything.

    There's a few different responses to this, roughly from strongest to weakest:

    - If relays were being used, hams may have picked up something, but it wasn't necessarily humans or craft containing humans.
    - It's known that individual hams actually couldn't track the trips to and from the moon because a) it's very difficult to know where to aim and b) you eventually lose line of sight. You'd need a global network for the same reason that NASA and the Russians needed a global network for their missions.
    - Apollo's transmission frequency was out of the range of most commercial radio equipment i.e. some pros may have had custom equipment, but this idea that everyone with a radio in their bedroom could listen in doesn't hold. (You also have to ask yourself why reporters made such a big song and dance about people like Larry Baysinger if literally everyone could do and/or was doing what he did)
    - There's no account of any individual tracking the to/from trips, nor detecting signals anywhere along the way; all recordings and accounts are from lunar orbit or the lunar surface.

    3. The video was sent "in the clear"

    This part is somewhat true, but the point again stands that it could have been relayed (and the delay isn't even a problem with a video broadcast) or even pre-recorded footage physically sent to and then broadcast from the moon.

    It's also much less feasible that individuals were able to watch the video broadcast because the signal wasn't compatible with TVs (it was some custom camera/protocol due to bandwidth constraints). So while it's possible someone figured out how to decode it and convert it to be able to watch it on their TV, I'm hesitant to believe anyone did - nor do I know of any such footage, nor any accounts of anyone who claims to have done so.

    Unless I've missed something, it's pretty well established that the video broadcast was received by NASA's tracking station in Australia, where it was then sent to Houston to be converted to be compatible for TV, where it was then sent out worldwide to all the TV stations. I'm not aware of the BBC or anyone else having their own hardware to receive and decode the broadcast directly from the moon.

    4. The Russians would have blown the whistle.

    Again, the Russians (nor anyone else) would have any way of knowing that something was amiss if signals were convincingly relayed. But also there's some uncertainty over whether Russia even tracked Apollo themselves. Maybe their tracking stations were too busy with Luna 15. Maybe they weren't interested in investing time/effort/money in tracking Apollo, knowing/believing that plenty of other people would be doing it anyway. Either way, it's suggested that Russia merely got their data on Apollo from other sources - and if that's the case, they could have easily been fed bullshit.
  • Tercy
    Tercy
    Posts: 47
    I've just remembered something else conspiracy-related: Does anyone know of and have any particular opinion of Miles Mathis? I've been trying to figure him out for years. He says some things that are objectively true; then he says some things that are interesting; and then he goes completely off the deep end (e.g. his theory that serial killers have never existed and that those supposed murders were all hoaxes).

    I caught him with his pants down once too. I don't remember where or why, but in one of his articles he says something about the picture of JFK Jr saluting at JFK's funeral - claiming that it wasn't a salute, but just a moment where the sun was in his eyes and the opportunistic media sold it as a salute. If you watch the video... to my mind, it's pretty obviously an intentional salute; he's given the cue, puts his book down, moves forward, comes to attention and salutes. (Now that I think of it, this may have been an article where he makes the claim that JFK was never assassinated, but rather faked his own death to "rule from the shadows" or something)

    Like I said above, my confusion comes from the fact that in between all this madness he speaks a lot of sense.
  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686
    @Tercy you are missing the point here. The coms were detected from both sides separately. So people like the russians could see the signal being sent from the earth separate from the return signal. 

    In other words they would have no way of making the delay slower if a repeater was used. You also have the added problem of the detection of the signal being sent that is to be sent back. 

    There is no if's or but, the majority of the signals from the moon missions were unencrypted.

    As I said though, this is just my own thoughts on why I think it happened.

    There are just heaps of others.

    I have not seen anyone give a good explanation about why they would want to fake it, when they had spent as much money as they had, and lost the people they lost. It just doesn't seem like the technological brick wall the hoaxers make it out to be. 

    The van-allan belts were pretty much avoided, and the radiation levels would have been bad for a short period of time. People make out that there belts totally encompas the earth in every direction, and it just isn't so. The idea that one would have to travel through them is not true. The way to avoid the radiation there for, is to "Avoid the radiation". 

    Here is a representation of the belts:


  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686
    The moon is 1.3 light seconds away. There for a signal leaving the earth, and being bounced off the moon takes 2.6 seconds. A transmitting from the surface of the moon takes 1.3 seconds. 

    If you get a reply in less than 2.6 seconds you KNOW it has to have originated from somewhere other than on earth.  Get it in under 1.3 seconds, and you know its not come from the moon.

    The thing is that they knew what directions the signals were coming from cos that's what directional antennae do for you. 

    I really think that the effort they would have had to have gone to to fake this would be compatible with the effort it would take to just go to the moon. 
  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686
    This is my list of 9/11 anomalies that I have not seen an answer for that I would call satisfactory. 

    - Building 7 while I don't accept any of the "we saw explosives" stuff the building did come down in a highly suspicious manner, and while I have seen lots of apparent explanations it really does look like it was brought down in a controlled way.

    - If the trade centres collapsed the way we are told they did then why didn't the centre pillars remain?

    - The pentagon plane knocked over lamp posts but made no markings in the grass, also the windows in the places where wings, and stabilisers were, were intact.

    - While I accepts that it was an error in reporting that said that people used their mobile phones to call family and friends, in reality they used plane phones. Some people DID use their mobiles, and these just do not work at the altitude they were reported to be at. I have actually tried to get a mobile signal while on a flight, and you just cant get any bars of signal on a flight.

    - The debris at the pentagon just did not look consistent with a plane crashing in to it, also the lack of footage here and the fact that the FBI went to great efforts to get all the footage it could and has not released it is highly suspicious along with the glaring errors with the footage it did release. 

    - The one thing that gets overlooked but is in my mind the biggest smoking gun. The huge pools of moltern metal at the base of WTC;s as well as the satellite heat maps. Sure I accept that heat could weaken steel, and I could accept a collapse in the way it has been postulated, but you can't get things hotter than the temperature of the fire.

    Here are some of the points I just think are lies, or misrepresentations:

    - The buildings did not fall at free fall speeds. Many videos say they do but looking at other footage you can tell that they took nearly twice as long to collapse as videos like loose change make out. 

    - There were no "squibs" going off in WTCs. This was just the effect of ari compression by the falling floors above them. If you are going to say "it was thermite" then why would you want to have squibs going off?

    - There was no thermite poring out of windows. Sure Thermite would be the best way to silently bring down the buildings, but I don't think that those that carried this out could have predicted exactly which floors would be hit, and rig things up to burn through materials on these floors. 

    - The powder residue stuff is just too easy to fake, and be tampered with.

    - The planes were real and had real people on them.

    This though is another one of those situations where neither side has done it's self any favours by exaggerating claims, and mixing in lies with facts.

    I don't think that the government was "all in on it", though I can easily accept that some branches at the top of government could have known there was going to be an attack, and decided to use the attack as a premise to make things worse. The pentagon could have been a test of some kind though I think it is more likely it was symbolic. It is possible that there was no 4th plane, and the third plane was the one allegedly brought down by the passengers, and something else was used to plough/ into the pentagon, but that is just a speculation. 

    I have over the years become to doubt more and more of the conspiracies regarding 911, but there are some of the events, and the way the decent was dealt with that makes me believe there is way more to it than the gov. admits. 
  • Tercy
    Tercy
    Posts: 47 edited July 5
    I'm struggling to think of another way to illustrate my point on the delay. I thought my original post would be enough. Let me try this:

    We'll stick with your figure of 1.3 seconds to transmit to or from the moon. The "delay" is the amount of time between one party asking a question and another responding (there is no other meaningful definition of a delay). Let's say the announced comms frequency is 2Ghz - so observers (Russians, hams, etc) know they can listen in on this frequency and hear exchanges between the moon and Earth.

    For the first scenario, we'll assume Earth really is communicating with someone on the moon.

    - Earth asks moon via the 2Ghz channel, "How are you today?" 
    - 1.3 seconds later, moon hears it.
    - Moon responds via the 2Ghz channel, "I'm very well thanks."
    - A further 1.3 seconds later, Earth hears the moon's response.

    The delay between Earth asking the question and receiving the response was 2.6 seconds.

    In the second scenario, Earth isn't communicating with someone on the moon, but rather someone on Earth pretending to be on the moon - who we will call Tim. Instead, there's a relay on the moon and an additional channel of communication between Earth, Tim and the relay - let's say 60Ghz. In addition, Earth and Tim have another channel of communication - let's say via wire, due to Earth and Tim both being... on Earth. The delay of wire communication (especially over short distances) is negligible so we'll just say it's instantaneous for simplicity.

    - Earth asks Tim, "How are you today?" This is sent via wire and also the 2Ghz channel.*
    - There's no delay on the wire so Tim immediately hears the question and replies "I am very well thanks" - this reply being sent via the 60Ghz channel, to the relay on the moon.
    - So 1.3 seconds after Earth first asked the question, both Earth's question (on the 2Ghz channel) and Tim's reply (on the 60Ghz channel) arrive at the moon at the same time. 
    - When the moon relay now relays the response via the 2Ghz channel, it takes 1.3 seconds to get back to Earth.

    * This is only sent on the 2Ghz channel for the sake of keeping up appearances; Tim isn't even listening to the 2Ghz channel.

    The delay between asking the question and receiving the response was still only 2.6 seconds - and to those listening on only the 2Ghz channel, nothing is out of place.

    In the real world there's plenty of ways to obscure this 60Ghz channel - and this assumes people would even be looking for it in the first place.

    As for motives for faking it, I could think of quite a few, but trying to base any arguments on guessing at human psychology and geopolitics is futile. My stance is, NASA made a claim, their evidence isn't irrefutable, therefore it could all be BS.
  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686
    I am starting to see what you are saying now @Tercy I had ignored the fact that there would be an inherent delay in there in the first place with the message getting to the astronauts. Its probably why no one else brought up the delay as a debunk, cos it's shit.. <grin>
  • Tercy
    Tercy
    Posts: 47
    Glad we got there eventually. :p I'll try to find the energy to weigh in on the 9/11 stuff at a later date.
  • cavalier080854
    cavalier080854
    Posts: 2,175
    In all these conspiracies, Titanic (insurance), Moon landings, 9/11. The question is if true, why ?
    The Chinese have now an orbiting satellite which clearly shows all the lunar landings, you can even see the footprints. All lunar bases have a reflector which they use to bounce a lazer and get an acurate distance to the moon.
    Wjy would you kill a load of the richest people in the world to claim insurance, bearing in mind that the insurance at that time only paid the value of what was saved (USA) and that was the lifeboats and life jackets.
    The UK insurance was for the tonnage of ship, so it made no difference in either the Oceanic or Titanic went down.
    Why would they kill 3000 people in the twin towers ? To what ends ?
  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686
    The twin towers one is the one where the motive is the most believable, as it is something that has happened again and again. IE False flag military action. Most people forget but at the time things looked bad for the US Military's suppliers. Annoyingly peace was breaking out everywhere, and the relevance of the defence industry was waning. 9/11 really was a boost to the militarily.
  • User-43756e74
    User-43756e74
    Posts: 77
    Everyone is after us!

    conspiracy of the year
  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686
    Trumpy is a lizard person after all. 
  • cavalier080854
    cavalier080854
    Posts: 2,175
    LordGrep said:
    Trumpy is a lizard person after all. 
    Nah, he is an offspring of the "Orange Cheetos" people.

  • LordGrep
    LordGrep
    Posts: 2,686
    Too True @cavalier080854 too true... 
Sign In or Register to comment.
© Copyright 2014 - Creative Dreams | Powered by Vanilla
All times are UTC