Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The Aluminum Foil Hat Thread: Conspiracy Theories

1678911

Posts

  • Gabriel_PittGabriel_Pitt Damn you, eidetic memory! Registered User regular
    Ha, no, all of the skulls that have been allowed to been analyzed have all proven to be manufactured by modern methods, modern stretching from the 19th century to today. Allegedly. It's always possible the shadowy organizations who want acquire them for their own ends have infiltrated the research teams that analyzed them and forged the results to make them easier to acquire for their own nefarious purposes.

    Origin ID: Null_Cypher
    Thomas-Vail.png
  • MahnmutMahnmut Registered User regular
    Ha, no, all of the skulls that have been allowed to been analyzed have all proven to be manufactured by modern methods, modern stretching from the 19th century to today. Allegedly. It's always possible the shadowy organizations who want acquire them for their own ends have infiltrated the research teams that analyzed them and forged the results to make them easier to acquire for their own nefarious purposes.

    Unless -- it's proof that the ancients were far more advanced than we know!

    Steam/LoL: Jericho89
  • JebusUDJebusUD Registered User regular
    edited January 2012
    Skoalcat wrote:
    And do we know how the statues on easter island were erected?
    The Easter island statues were large statues. Made by people over a pong but not ridiculous period of time. Because they thought making statues was important. The poor guys had a fucking awful colonization experience. They didn't collapse mysteriously. They weren't really mysterious at all, people just don't bother looking up their contact with the west.

    The Easter Island statues are well documented. The culture that existed there made the statues as a symbol of status and power. Captain Cook, I think, visited there some time before any other Europeans, and reported it as a thriving island. When Europeans returned later, they found the island barren and the people starving. They had cut down nearly all the trees on the island to erect these statues. Many of the statues now have parts broken off, because afterwards people were so pissed at what had happened they defaced them. And rightfully so. The whole thing was dumb as hell.

    People often use it as a lesson about environmentalism and ecology.

    JebusUD on
    You haven't given me a reason to steer clear of you!
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    Jebusud, little bit of collapse by jares diamond

  • DasUberEdwardDasUberEdward Registered User regular
    Stone Balls in costa rica.

    steam_sig.png
  • dojangodojango Registered User
    JebusUD wrote:
    Skoalcat wrote:
    And do we know how the statues on easter island were erected?
    The Easter island statues were large statues. Made by people over a pong but not ridiculous period of time. Because they thought making statues was important. The poor guys had a fucking awful colonization experience. They didn't collapse mysteriously. They weren't really mysterious at all, people just don't bother looking up their contact with the west.

    The Easter Island statues are well documented. The culture that existed there made the statues as a symbol of status and power. Captain Cook, I think, visited there some time before any other Europeans, and reported it as a thriving island. When Europeans returned later, they found the island barren and the people starving. They had cut down nearly all the trees on the island to erect these statues. Many of the statues now have parts broken off, because afterwards people were so pissed at what had happened they defaced them. And rightfully so. The whole thing was dumb as hell.

    People often use it as a lesson about environmentalism and ecology.

    Their collapse happened about the time of first contact. Jared Diamond said it was because they had no more trees to make boats/fuel so they starved to death... although Cook could have easily brought smallpox as well. Smallpox definitely accounted for most of the population loss, Peruvian slave raids in the 1850s took most of the rest, leaving it the desolated island anthrpologists found in the 1900s.

  • Technicus RexTechnicus Rex All your base.Registered User regular
    Ha, no, all of the skulls that have been allowed to been analyzed have all proven to be manufactured by modern methods, modern stretching from the 19th century to today. Allegedly. It's always possible the shadowy organizations who want acquire them for their own ends have infiltrated the research teams that analyzed them and forged the results to make them easier to acquire for their own nefarious purposes.

    Or they already aquired all the originals and replaced them with modern replicas....

    People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazi's. You can't trust people. - Super Hans.
  • JebusUDJebusUD Registered User regular
    dojango wrote:
    JebusUD wrote:
    Skoalcat wrote:
    And do we know how the statues on easter island were erected?
    The Easter island statues were large statues. Made by people over a pong but not ridiculous period of time. Because they thought making statues was important. The poor guys had a fucking awful colonization experience. They didn't collapse mysteriously. They weren't really mysterious at all, people just don't bother looking up their contact with the west.

    The Easter Island statues are well documented. The culture that existed there made the statues as a symbol of status and power. Captain Cook, I think, visited there some time before any other Europeans, and reported it as a thriving island. When Europeans returned later, they found the island barren and the people starving. They had cut down nearly all the trees on the island to erect these statues. Many of the statues now have parts broken off, because afterwards people were so pissed at what had happened they defaced them. And rightfully so. The whole thing was dumb as hell.

    People often use it as a lesson about environmentalism and ecology.

    Their collapse happened about the time of first contact. Jared Diamond said it was because they had no more trees to make boats/fuel so they starved to death... although Cook could have easily brought smallpox as well. Smallpox definitely accounted for most of the population loss, Peruvian slave raids in the 1850s took most of the rest, leaving it the desolated island anthrpologists found in the 1900s.

    maybe. either way though it is pretty certain aliens didn't build the statues.

    I just don't get why people think aliens would travel interstellar distances or further only to use rock as a construction material.

    You haven't given me a reason to steer clear of you!
  • useless4useless4 Registered User regular
    JebusUD wrote:
    dojango wrote:
    JebusUD wrote:
    Skoalcat wrote:
    And do we know how the statues on easter island were erected?
    The Easter island statues were large statues. Made by people over a pong but not ridiculous period of time. Because they thought making statues was important. The poor guys had a fucking awful colonization experience. They didn't collapse mysteriously. They weren't really mysterious at all, people just don't bother looking up their contact with the west.

    The Easter Island statues are well documented. The culture that existed there made the statues as a symbol of status and power. Captain Cook, I think, visited there some time before any other Europeans, and reported it as a thriving island. When Europeans returned later, they found the island barren and the people starving. They had cut down nearly all the trees on the island to erect these statues. Many of the statues now have parts broken off, because afterwards people were so pissed at what had happened they defaced them. And rightfully so. The whole thing was dumb as hell.

    People often use it as a lesson about environmentalism and ecology.

    Their collapse happened about the time of first contact. Jared Diamond said it was because they had no more trees to make boats/fuel so they starved to death... although Cook could have easily brought smallpox as well. Smallpox definitely accounted for most of the population loss, Peruvian slave raids in the 1850s took most of the rest, leaving it the desolated island anthrpologists found in the 1900s.

    maybe. either way though it is pretty certain aliens didn't build the statues.

    I just don't get why people think aliens would travel interstellar distances or further only to use rock as a construction material.

    so they didn't have to bring construction materials with them.

  • OctoparrotOctoparrot Registered User
    Heisenberg wrote:
    How do you account for the magic bullet?

    That's right the bullet was magical. Magic does exist, we've known this for some 2000 years.

    the GOP shouldn't give a rats ass about them since they won't vote for them. If someone won't vote for you they might as well not exist.
  • Technicus RexTechnicus Rex All your base.Registered User regular
    An interesting and infomative conversation covering several topics mentioned in this thread...

    People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazi's. You can't trust people. - Super Hans.
  • Technicus RexTechnicus Rex All your base.Registered User regular

    People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazi's. You can't trust people. - Super Hans.
  • BagginsesBagginses __BANNED USERS regular
    dojango wrote:
    JebusUD wrote:
    Skoalcat wrote:
    And do we know how the statues on easter island were erected?
    The Easter island statues were large statues. Made by people over a pong but not ridiculous period of time. Because they thought making statues was important. The poor guys had a fucking awful colonization experience. They didn't collapse mysteriously. They weren't really mysterious at all, people just don't bother looking up their contact with the west.

    The Easter Island statues are well documented. The culture that existed there made the statues as a symbol of status and power. Captain Cook, I think, visited there some time before any other Europeans, and reported it as a thriving island. When Europeans returned later, they found the island barren and the people starving. They had cut down nearly all the trees on the island to erect these statues. Many of the statues now have parts broken off, because afterwards people were so pissed at what had happened they defaced them. And rightfully so. The whole thing was dumb as hell.

    People often use it as a lesson about environmentalism and ecology.

    Their collapse happened about the time of first contact. Jared Diamond said it was because they had no more trees to make boats/fuel so they starved to death... although Cook could have easily brought smallpox as well. Smallpox definitely accounted for most of the population loss, Peruvian slave raids in the 1850s took most of the rest, leaving it the desolated island anthrpologists found in the 1900s.

    The latest I've seen was that the Easter Island environment was about as natural as a farm in Las Vegas, and therefore required careful maintenance and was incredibly fragile.

  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    JebusUD wrote:
    Skoalcat wrote:
    Some Guy wrote:
    And do we know how the statues on easter island were erected?
    The Easter island statues were large statues. Made by people over a pong but not ridiculous period of time. Because they thought making statues was important. The poor guys had a fucking awful colonization experience. They didn't collapse mysteriously. They weren't really mysterious at all, people just don't bother looking up their contact with the west.

    The Easter Island statues are well documented. The culture that existed there made the statues as a symbol of status and power. Captain Cook, I think, visited there some time before any other Europeans, and reported it as a thriving island. When Europeans returned later, they found the island barren and the people starving. They had cut down nearly all the trees on the island to erect these statues. Many of the statues now have parts broken off, because afterwards people were so pissed at what had happened they defaced them. And rightfully so. The whole thing was dumb as hell.

    People often use it as a lesson about environmentalism and ecology.

    Woah!

    That's actually

    completely incorrect! Jared Diamond is a hack. The Europeans enslaved and murdered a huge number of the islanders including their king, and the islanders had to deal with some severely inclement weather systems that caused drought and removed a lot of the traditional sources of fuel, which forced them to burn more wood. This happened over a period of time in which they were actually quite in contact with other people. They are in no way a mystery.

    The statues were just... a thing they liked for a ceremony. They in no way were a whole island existing solely to serve as some ridiculous anecdote about how we need to behave. They were a real people who did some impressive shit and drew a series of very short straws.

    Also that first quote ain't me.

    And seriously, fuck Jared Diamond. He doesn't know anthropology from his asshole.

  • BagginsesBagginses __BANNED USERS regular
    So, I have a couple of conspiracy theories I've heard that I'm not sure about the veracity of;
    1) The "October Surprise" theory, in which Reagan made a deal with Iran to push back the release of the hostages in the hostage crisis until after the election to make sure Carter didn't get any credit.
    2) The theory that the civil war in the Congo was/is set up and funded by the Belgian government, with one large part being the abduction of Patrice Lumumba by Belgian special forces.

    Are either of these considered credible? They both sound like something the conspirators would have done if able. Especially Belgium.

  • Caveman PawsCaveman Paws Registered User regular
    edited January 2012
    I used to listen to Coast to Coast AM and watch the X-Files growing up so I love all things conspiracy. UFO videos and abduction stories are still my favorites, bigfoot a close second, and then ghost stories.

    Once in a while I'll youtube search for UFO videos. I think my favorite is still the Mexican air force one. Or maybe it is a tie between that and the NASA ones.

    Caveman Paws on
  • Anarchy Rules!Anarchy Rules! Registered User regular
    In regards to the Congolese civil war, the country was so screwed up by Belgian exploitation and mismanagement large scale turmoil was fairly likely. How far the Belgians further provoked this is perhaps conspiracy theories.

    I recall reading that a Belgian committee had decided that the Belgian government were well aware of threats against Lumumba but didn't act to prevent them (they wanted him dead, but by law they are meant to intervene).

  • BersheliBersheli Registered User
    edited January 2012
    Here's one that's not as popular - probably too icky.

    Bersheli on
  • Anarchy Rules!Anarchy Rules! Registered User regular
    Ugh, AIDS denialism is some of the worst. Most of the other conspiracy theories don't really affect things a great deal, but this is playing around with the most widespread pandemic.

    In addition, I bloody hate Cary Mullis so much. Won the Nobel prize in chemistry for jointly discovering/inventing PCR, now just makes lots of remarks about fields he has no knowledge of whatsoever.

  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    edited January 2012
    JebusUD wrote:
    Skoalcat wrote:
    Some Guy wrote:
    And do we know how the statues on easter island were erected?
    The Easter island statues were large statues. Made by people over a pong but not ridiculous period of time. Because they thought making statues was important. The poor guys had a fucking awful colonization experience. They didn't collapse mysteriously. They weren't really mysterious at all, people just don't bother looking up their contact with the west.

    The Easter Island statues are well documented. The culture that existed there made the statues as a symbol of status and power. Captain Cook, I think, visited there some time before any other Europeans, and reported it as a thriving island. When Europeans returned later, they found the island barren and the people starving. They had cut down nearly all the trees on the island to erect these statues. Many of the statues now have parts broken off, because afterwards people were so pissed at what had happened they defaced them. And rightfully so. The whole thing was dumb as hell.

    People often use it as a lesson about environmentalism and ecology.

    Woah!

    That's actually

    completely incorrect! Jared Diamond is a hack. The Europeans enslaved and murdered a huge number of the islanders including their king, and the islanders had to deal with some severely inclement weather systems that caused drought and removed a lot of the traditional sources of fuel, which forced them to burn more wood. This happened over a period of time in which they were actually quite in contact with other people. They are in no way a mystery.

    The statues were just... a thing they liked for a ceremony. They in no way were a whole island existing solely to serve as some ridiculous anecdote about how we need to behave. They were a real people who did some impressive shit and drew a series of very short straws.

    Also that first quote ain't me.

    And seriously, fuck Jared Diamond. He doesn't know anthropology from his asshole.

    Damn you beat me to it, I second the fuck Jared Diamond sentiment
    Bagginses wrote:
    So, I have a couple of conspiracy theories I've heard that I'm not sure about the veracity of;
    1) The "October Surprise" theory, in which Reagan made a deal with Iran to push back the release of the hostages in the hostage crisis until after the election to make sure Carter didn't get any credit.
    2) The theory that the civil war in the Congo was/is set up and funded by the Belgian government, with one large part being the abduction of Patrice Lumumba by Belgian special forces.

    Are either of these considered credible? They both sound like something the conspirators would have done if able. Especially Belgium.

    I always (incorrectly?) thought #1 was true and not a crazy theory

    A european country fucking things up in Africa for their own purposes is so common that it's hard to manufacture a story that isn't at least partially true though

    override367 on
    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
  • rockrngerrockrnger Registered User regular
    JebusUD wrote:
    Skoalcat wrote:
    Some Guy wrote:
    And do we know how the statues on easter island were erected?
    The Easter island statues were large statues. Made by people over a pong but not ridiculous period of time. Because they thought making statues was important. The poor guys had a fucking awful colonization experience. They didn't collapse mysteriously. They weren't really mysterious at all, people just don't bother looking up their contact with the west.

    The Easter Island statues are well documented. The culture that existed there made the statues as a symbol of status and power. Captain Cook, I think, visited there some time before any other Europeans, and reported it as a thriving island. When Europeans returned later, they found the island barren and the people starving. They had cut down nearly all the trees on the island to erect these statues. Many of the statues now have parts broken off, because afterwards people were so pissed at what had happened they defaced them. And rightfully so. The whole thing was dumb as hell.

    People often use it as a lesson about environmentalism and ecology.

    Woah!

    That's actually

    completely incorrect! Jared Diamond is a hack. The Europeans enslaved and murdered a huge number of the islanders including their king, and the islanders had to deal with some severely inclement weather systems that caused drought and removed a lot of the traditional sources of fuel, which forced them to burn more wood. This happened over a period of time in which they were actually quite in contact with other people. They are in no way a mystery.

    The statues were just... a thing they liked for a ceremony. They in no way were a whole island existing solely to serve as some ridiculous anecdote about how we need to behave. They were a real people who did some impressive shit and drew a series of very short straws.

    Also that first quote ain't me.

    And seriously, fuck Jared Diamond. He doesn't know anthropology from his asshole.

    Damn you beat me to it, I second the fuck Jared Diamond sentiment

    Can you elaborate on this?

  • YarYar Registered User regular
    Lawndart wrote:
    The Mob was totally involved with the JFK assassination...

    Probably.


    There was a nice interview on NPR a few months ago about this. The sealed records were released, and, yeah, pretty much, it was the Mafia.

  • RiemannLivesRiemannLives Registered User regular
    JebusUD wrote:
    Skoalcat wrote:
    And do we know how the statues on easter island were erected?
    The Easter island statues were large statues. Made by people over a pong but not ridiculous period of time. Because they thought making statues was important. The poor guys had a fucking awful colonization experience. They didn't collapse mysteriously. They weren't really mysterious at all, people just don't bother looking up their contact with the west.

    The Easter Island statues are well documented. The culture that existed there made the statues as a symbol of status and power. Captain Cook, I think, visited there some time before any other Europeans, and reported it as a thriving island. When Europeans returned later, they found the island barren and the people starving. They had cut down nearly all the trees on the island to erect these statues. Many of the statues now have parts broken off, because afterwards people were so pissed at what had happened they defaced them. And rightfully so. The whole thing was dumb as hell.

    People often use it as a lesson about environmentalism and ecology.

    The eco-collapse theory has been pretty strongly argued against as well. The best arguments I've seen is that the society collapsed (like so many others) when all the new diseases were introduced into a functioning society at first contact. So by the time later europeans showed up everything had gone to hell because of disease wiping out most of the population.

    My free Chrome Extension for checking the size of images. Optimized for the PA board rules!
    The source code for the extension can be found here.
    Feel free to PM Me with ideas for other extensions that would be useful for PA posters.
    New Minecraft server going live Sunday 8/31! Will use Minecraft 1.7.10 along with IndustrialCraft2, Thaumcraft and a few other mods.
  • BagginsesBagginses __BANNED USERS regular
    Yar wrote:
    Lawndart wrote:
    The Mob was totally involved with the JFK assassination...

    Probably.


    There was a nice interview on NPR a few months ago about this. The sealed records were released, and, yeah, pretty much, it was the Mafia.

    The mafia is like Goldman Sachs: they're involved with everything, be it legitimate or less so.

  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    I believe the Reagan October Surprise conspiracy theory, primarily because it fits in so well with his other ACTUAL conspiracy, (Iran-Contra) which is also technically a conspiracy theory, but only because it was (somehow) politically unfeasible to investigate and impeach Saint Reagan the Holy. Honestly that is the strangest part of the 80s, in hindsight Reagan was so OBVIOUSLY terrible but people loved him, and after a short dip where everyone pretended he hadn't existed they started loving him again. I just can't see a situation where there would not be immediate accusations of treason if any of today's politicians were caught as red-handed as Reagan was.

    But enough about Reagan, I'm getting off topic.

    Conspiracy theories. I'm sure someone already posted the XKCD comic on it and confirmation bias, and I try to dismiss most as nonsense. But in spite of that there are a few which I can't help but find compelling, even believable. The thing about conspiracies is they are almost never truly "secret." They are simply overlooked on purpose. Detonating tons of TNT secretly packed in the WTC towers? That's nonsense. The twin towers were brought down by some terrorists who hijacked a plane, that's it. JFK being shot by gay martians working for the homosexual mafia illuminati? No, he was killed by a nutjob with a rifle named Oswald.

    But The possibility that they knew, and did nothing? That's the kind of thing that happens all the time. I have (VERY apocryphal) personal accounts from former FBI agents who say Hoover had people on that grassy knoll and they were specifically watching to specifically do nothing in case something went wrong. We had all KINDS of information on the boys involved with 9/11 and a memo saying something big was coming but we somehow failed to stop them. The thing is conspiracies always seem to fall apart because their plans are complex and every extra member is an extra way to bring it crashing down. But if the conspirators are 1-5 guys, and their conspiracy is, "be incompetent, but in a way that doesn't get you fired," well, goddamn if that isn't a rock-solid plan. Your entire intention is to succeed by failing, and the worst that can happen is you get punished for screwing up.

    There is a reason "strategic incompetence" is in my personal lexicon.

    I don't think Bush had detailed plans of airplane-bombs crashing into buildings or timetables, but I think he knew something was coming. He also knew if he cut funding to the FBI (which he did) and beat the "smaller government, less Big Brother" drum then either a terror plot would succeed and boost his ratings or it would fail he could claim his policies were right. Try to remember that in 2001 we were coming down from the "90s high" of amusing X-files-induced paranoia (Federal Government Conspiracy theories were a FAVORITE topic nationwide) and whenever a nation is attacked they tend to start liking their existing leaders a LOT more. After that all he had to do was spend a lot of time bitching about Clinton's evil machinations with scary, scary China (who we still kept favored nation status with) and ignore the FBI. And after 9/11? He still ignored the FBI, perhaps because he truly believed a law enforcement approach to terrorism was not as good as a military approach (despite the FBI being the one with the best track record) or perhaps because he didn't care about success, he cared about playing cowboy and putting on a show.

    The conspiracies that make the most sense are not the ones where people DO things differently, but where they THINK things differently. Maybe Bush was an idiot. Maybe all the national security agencies just failed. Maybe the imagined "passenger plane bomb" attack that was in speculative fiction since the 1960s (hell, 1996 Steven Seagal movie "Executive Decision") DID somehow slip by the people who are supposed to be so smart as to be able to wargame EVERYTHING. Or maybe a very small number of people said, "let us simply allow events to unfold naturally, and pick up and reassemble the pieces however they want.

    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • BersheliBersheli Registered User
    I just have to take this chance. Not that I'm trying to imply some sort of conclusion, but seriously how do the words of the discoverer of HIV in that documentary affect you? Do you not find it interesting? Do you find the implications sensationalist? Did you watch the documentary?

    Here as a token in return I offer this. I do find it rather suspicious how relatively neat the collapse of the towers during 911 was. I hope you see that I cannot be sure of any elaborate scheme or sure of any particular motivations or conspirators - only that even considering the extra debris and damage from the initial impact of the planes, it is difficult to comprehend how relatively neat the collapses are and how they occurred at near free-fall speed.

    And even considering that the impact plus jet fuel burning was enough to bring down such a building; what are the chances that this would happen in so little time (completely unprecedented) and twice in one day? We are talking less than an hour compared to multiple days worth of hours.

    I even concede that WTC7 did sustain damage from debris and fire, but the collapse itself was also relatively neat.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus IT'S DARE! Registered User regular
    Structural engineers will tell you that the buildings' collapses were far from neat as actual controlled demolitions, and also that as with pretty much all skyscrapers the buildings are designed to collapse into their profile as much as possible.

    spartasig.gif
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
  • dbrock270dbrock270 Registered User regular
    Building 7 had a CIA base in it, they wanted to take it down so that people wouldn't find any evidence. Well, that's what the conspiracy theorists say with no evidence to back that up.

    I doubt the 9/11 conspiracy theories will ever go away, everyday people will watch Loose Change and think to themselves "oh my god, this is brilliant! It all makes sense now! I'm totally superior to the rest of those sheep!"

  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    Here as a token in return I offer this. I do find it rather suspicious how relatively neat the collapse of the towers during 911 was. I hope you see that I cannot be sure of any elaborate scheme or sure of any particular motivations or conspirators - only that even considering the extra debris and damage from the initial impact of the planes, it is difficult to comprehend how relatively neat the collapses are and how they occurred at near free-fall speed.

    Basically? None of that happened. This is the fault of two things, Hollywood and the media, but it was not malicious. Hollywood has given us bad ideas about building collapses in the same way we think that explosions can be outrun and car blow up if you shoot them. The building fell down at real-world speed instead of sexily smashing each individual floor with a pause at each floor and maybe snapping in half like a stick or a spine. This is real, but not awesome, so Hollywood doesn't do it. Other things Hollywood lies about include sound in space, Kaiju structural integrity, and this sentence should end before I turn into TVtropes.

    The "neatness" of the collapse was the fault of poor coverage, but since lots of graphic shots of the wreckage and corpses strewn across (q&d estimate ho) a square mile would be considered "graphic" and "unsuitable" by most. It was not shown out of a relative sense of decency and cleaned up quickly ("get dis rubble outta heeyah, I got a bidness to run!") but it *was* a mess.

    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    edited January 2012
    Bersheli wrote:
    Here's one that's not as popular - probably too icky.

    I hate every piece of filth that peddles this deadly superstition. Identifying & isolating HIV on a shoestring budget was a major accomplishment, and the fucktards want to frame it as though the CDC was just making a cash grab, and spooky 'ol Big Pharma now runs the AIDS thing.

    I hope the director of this film practices what he preaches, doesn't bother with safe sex and contracts HIV for himself. Wonder if he'l still cling to his conspiracy theory when ordinary household fungus is literally eating him from the inside out.


    EDIT: Gotta love the clever editing the film makers use when speaking with rural Africans. 'Pfft, sure, these people think a horrible disease is killing them. But they live in shacks. Don't listen to these stupid shack savages. Listen to the well-dressed radio talk people in Joburg.'

    The Ender on
    TOG Solid wrote:
    If that guy wasn't white he would have gotten popped by so many tasers simultaneously that Marvel could use that as the new origin for Electro.
  • BagginsesBagginses __BANNED USERS regular
    Boring7 wrote:
    Here as a token in return I offer this. I do find it rather suspicious how relatively neat the collapse of the towers during 911 was. I hope you see that I cannot be sure of any elaborate scheme or sure of any particular motivations or conspirators - only that even considering the extra debris and damage from the initial impact of the planes, it is difficult to comprehend how relatively neat the collapses are and how they occurred at near free-fall speed.

    Basically? None of that happened. This is the fault of two things, Hollywood and the media, but it was not malicious. Hollywood has given us bad ideas about building collapses in the same way we think that explosions can be outrun and car blow up if you shoot them. The building fell down at real-world speed instead of sexily smashing each individual floor with a pause at each floor and maybe snapping in half like a stick or a spine. This is real, but not awesome, so Hollywood doesn't do it. Other things Hollywood lies about include sound in space, Kaiju structural integrity, and this sentence should end before I turn into TVtropes.

    The "neatness" of the collapse was the fault of poor coverage, but since lots of graphic shots of the wreckage and corpses strewn across (q&d estimate ho) a square mile would be considered "graphic" and "unsuitable" by most. It was not shown out of a relative sense of decency and cleaned up quickly ("get dis rubble outta heeyah, I got a bidness to run!") but it *was* a mess.

    Of course, I could see Bush trading in a few favours to have no one know that the architects designed the buildings with a plane impact in mind because it would make him look like even more of a goddamn idiot.

  • dbrock270dbrock270 Registered User regular
    I love when truthers say that the World Trade Center was designed to handle a plane impact. Actually, when they designed the building in 1963, they had in mind a small plane hitting the towers, like the bomber that crashed into the empire state building in 1945. Plus, there was no jetliner around in the 60s as powerful as the ones that hit on 9/11/

  • CanadianWolverineCanadianWolverine Registered User regular
    I stopped paying the 9/11 Truthers any mind when I saw video from that day that clearly outlines the buildings coming down were anything but "neat". The chunks of building that come off are horrifying. Take a look if you need a reminder:



    That thing is not coming straight down almost immediately and I am actually a bit shocked with myself I didn't take notice of it sooner, my mind couldn't make sense of much of the footage first either. Frankly, its amazing more people weren't killed.

    But I agree with Boring7, Bush and Co. do not get a free pass on this, let alone a pat on the back or praise for a job well done. Conspiracy of criminal negligence, indeed. How's that adherence to ideology over reality working out? Sure isn't doing us any favours here in Canada with our Conservatives who for all intents and purposes are great fans of your Republicans.

    steam_sig.png
  • BersheliBersheli Registered User
    edited January 2012
    I stopped paying the 9/11 Truthers any mind when I saw video from that day that clearly outlines the buildings coming down were anything but "neat". The chunks of building that come off are horrifying. Take a look if you need a reminder:



    That thing is not coming straight down almost immediately and I am actually a bit shocked with myself I didn't take notice of it sooner, my mind couldn't make sense of much of the footage first either. Frankly, its amazing more people weren't killed.

    But I agree with Boring7, Bush and Co. do not get a free pass on this, let alone a pat on the back or praise for a job well done. Conspiracy of criminal negligence, indeed. How's that adherence to ideology over reality working out? Sure isn't doing us any favours here in Canada with our Conservatives who for all intents and purposes are great fans of your Republicans.


    That certainly is a different angle than the usual squared off perspective that many conspiracy documentaries use. Still, since you quoted me, I don't think you'll mind me quoting myself when I ask; does that make it "relatively neat"? Relative to the fact that it is still a buildng that has a plane lodged in it. I would also have to consider that even if there were other factors other than the impact of the planes - that does not necessitate a perfectly controlled demolition. If you wanted to attach intent behind it (which I really hate to do to be honest), there is no need to assume that a perfectly controlled collapse was the goal. Even if we start to assume those kinds of goals, just enough to sufficiently collapse the buildings and remove them from the landscape would be enough.

    I really need to do more research to see if any controlled demolitions of buildings this tall have been done in such densely populated areas. My guess would be that most buildings these large don't get demolished until the very same factors that caused it's demolish affect the surrounding buildings and neighborhoods in the same way (devaluing real estate and obsolescense), and again that's only with controlled demos. I am saying that the demolitions are probably avoided because even the most controlled can still cause a lot of damage or debris to surrounding areas.

    I also have to admit that the video you provided makes me more curious about the other building and why it had such a similar collapse when the point of impact was much higher and closer to the top of the building. Of course I only mean similar in the fact that virtually the entire building was collapsed, because the second collapse was even more "relatively neat" than the first.

    Bersheli on
  • BersheliBersheli Registered User
    DarkPrimus wrote:
    Structural engineers will tell you that the buildings' collapses were far from neat as actual controlled demolitions, and also that as with pretty much all skyscrapers the buildings are designed to collapse into their profile as much as possible.

    I could understand this within reason. I mean you would hope that we would have the foresight to make and future demolition of a skyscraper involve the building collapsing into their profile, especially if the building is in such a densely populated area. It's still so hard to imagine sometimes with the closely knit grid of steel throughout the entire building that's designed to absorb even the impact of a plane as a web almost.

    This makes me wonder what kind of actions are taken when buildings in similar areas are demolished in a controlled fashion. Do the neighbors have to vacate for a period of time? How many blocks? Damn it - looking into this will take a while.

  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    edited January 2012
    Do you guys realize how massively huge the WTC was? There haven't ever been controlled demolitions of buildings that size, we just started building them in the last 30 years or so and I imagine they're designed to last.

    This is what happens when you ram a plane into a skyscraper, it collapses. There really isn't a legitimate other explanation.

    AManFromEarth on
    Lh96QHG.png
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    But

    What if my half-assed investigations in my free time on Youtube have broken open a truth that everyone is just too afraid to see?

    I'd better spend another couple hours looking up building facts on wikipedia between masturbating before we call this off. I'll have you all on speed-dial if we need to transport Bush to the Hague.

  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    But

    What if my half-assed investigations in my free time on Youtube have broken open a truth that everyone is just too afraid to see?

    I'd better spend another couple hours looking up building facts on wikipedia between masturbating before we call this off. I'll have you all on speed-dial if we need to transport Bush to the Hague.

    Considering we didn't do it for his torture, illegal wiretapping, and burning a covert CIA operative...

    Oh there's another conspiracy theory. That the White House disclosed Valerie Plame's identity to punish her and her husband for not politically supporting them.

    If memory serves, it has never been proven who leaked the info, no one has been punished for the leak, (scooter was jailed for perjury) and no one is investigating it. It is also a conspiracy of incompetence, where someone simply "let something slip" and then allowed events to unfold as such events always do, with the gossip they told telling EVERYONE he could. It didn't take an army of hyper-competent secret-keeping individuals, it took (most likely) ONE person failing to keep a secret and then everyone around him covering it up because, hey, they could get in trouble for it too.

    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    dbrock270 wrote:
    I love when truthers say that the World Trade Center was designed to handle a plane impact. Actually, when they designed the building in 1963, they had in mind a small plane hitting the towers, like the bomber that crashed into the empire state building in 1945. Plus, there was no jetliner around in the 60s as powerful as the ones that hit on 9/11/

    Well, that's not totally true: WTC 1 & 2 were designed to withstand the kinetic impact of a DC-9, traveling at cruising speed, which would deliver roughly equivalent force to a 747. Fire was not factored-in, because the assumption was made that the fire-retardant insulation & sprinkler system would prevent a long-term burn.

    You'll note that the buildings did withstand the impact itself, which means the impact-resistant design was successful. Ultimately, it was a combination of the structural damage and fire, over a longer period of time, that caused the collapse.
    That certainly is a different angle than the usual squared off perspective that many conspiracy documentaries use. Still, since you quoted me, I don't think you'll mind me quoting myself when I ask; does that make it "relatively neat"? Relative to the fact that it is still a buildng that has a plane lodged in it. I would also have to consider that even if there were other factors other than the impact of the planes - that does not necessitate a perfectly controlled demolition. If you wanted to attach intent behind it (which I really hate to do to be honest), there is no need to assume that a perfectly controlled collapse was the goal. Even if we start to assume those kinds of goals, just enough to sufficiently collapse the buildings and remove them from the landscape would be enough.

    Sigh.

    The 747 was not 'lodged' in the building. The aircraft were traveling around 400~ mph and blew right through the towers, only leaving behind what little that wasn't sprayed-out onto the streets below (the engines were found on different buildings throughout Manhatten) or liquefied on impact.

    This is what an actual explosive-based demolition looks like:



    Explosives produce bursts of light, very audible bangs and immediately compromise the entire superstructure as a whole. Note how the entire building falls at once, rather than collapsing from the top down as WTC 1 & 2 did.

    It someone had planted TNT in either of the towers and started setting it off, there would be no ambiguity about what happened.

    TOG Solid wrote:
    If that guy wasn't white he would have gotten popped by so many tasers simultaneously that Marvel could use that as the new origin for Electro.
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    edited January 2012
    Oh there's another conspiracy theory. That the White House disclosed Valerie Plame's identity to punish her and her husband for not politically supporting them.

    That's not really a conspiracy theory. Someone most certainly did stick a knife in Plame's back as a result of the op-ed her husband wrote; it's just a matter of debating who did the stabbing.

    The Ender on
    TOG Solid wrote:
    If that guy wasn't white he would have gotten popped by so many tasers simultaneously that Marvel could use that as the new origin for Electro.
Sign In or Register to comment.