Author Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into  (Read 9011 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« on: August 19, 2013, 01:00:51 PM »
My college roommate from back in the 70s had a poster on his wall that read, "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you."

With that in mind, I think just because so many wingnuts espouse lunatic fringe conspiracy theories, that doesn't mean some such theories might not have some basis in fact.  The question is, which such theories do you buy into, at least to some level?

To get the ball rolling, here are three I accept to some degree or another, although admittedly not for the reasons our nutjob friends might:
 
1)  Government "Cover-Up" of UFOs--Of course there are things the governments of the world know about UFOs that are highly classified.  I worked black a/c programs where our planes were reported as UFOs.  Naturally, the USAF didn't go on national TV and say, "That UFO reported last week near Bodfish, CA, was a classified a/c, code named "Tacit Blue."  Even if we accept there are extraterrestrial UFO, I believe the governments of the world keep what they know classified.  We certainly keep classified what were know about potential enemies on Earth, so why would we approach non-Earthly potential enemies any differently?

2) TWA 800--No question in my mind this a/c was brought down by a missile, most likely a shoulder-launched MANPAD (Stinger, SA-16, Blowpipe etc) fired by terrorists.  Commercial airliners have been brought down, or at least fired on, by terrorists with missiles numerous times over the past thirty-plus years.  Just a few years after TWA 800 was destroyed, an attempt was made to take down an Israeli airliner with MANPADs in Kenya.  The theories about a US Navy warship, or even goofier, a USN sub, taking down TWA 800 are bunk. 

3) The US Knew About the Pearl Harbor Attack Beforehand--Not so much a conspiracy theory talked about on C2C, but a longstanding subject that, when viewed sixty years on, makes a lot of sense.  Bottom line for me, the US knew the Brits were hanging on by a thread, and needed a way to get into the war.  Hitler wasn't going to be stupid enough to add the US to his list of enemies, he was already fighting the Soviets and the Commonwealth.  Conversely, Roosevelt knew the American people wouldn't unite in support of the war just to save the Brits.  The attack by Japan provided the impetus needed to get us into the war.

Note, I'm not suggesting this topic necessarily to debate specific theories, although I'm sure that's going to happen.  What I personally am more interested in is to what degree you buy into any  conspiracy theories and why.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2013, 01:57:38 PM »
I've mentioned it before (I think)..but I grew up as a teenager with books about UFO's (There was no talk then of NWO or chemtrails)...and read a LOT of it. Some of which made sense.  Wanting to believe? Maybe. I read the hardback Communion by Streiber and literally had nightmares for a week just looking at the cover! It shook the hell out of me.
I've also had a lifelong interest/obsession with all things that fly and so UFO's that might come from other worlds wasn't a stretch to me. People had seen these things, revealed them under hypnosis, sometimes years later in perfect clarity.

As my interest and knowledge of flying things increased, I also got into experimental aircraft that never got past the prototype, the British and the US leading the way with engineering feats borne from the wreckage that had been WW2. We'll gloss over that our own government committed in my view treachery and gave over the MB52 supersonic test aircraft prototype, blueprints and jigs to the Americans..who came up with the near identical Bell X1!  The more I read the more I realised that a UFO is just that; unidentified. The lay person wouldn't know what a secret supersonic test aeroplane would look like because it's not common knowledge. These things are s compartmentalised, that those in the next hanger might not know what's going on. The F117 was flying around at least five years before it was front page of Flight magazine. people had reported a strange black weird shaped aircraft flying around Nevada for years, and put it down to a 'UFO'...

I've seen what I think is a VERY fast VERY high altitude aircraft flying a few years ago over Manchester in England..In comparison a couple of airliners were at (I'm guessing) 30-35000 feet east-west..above them both flying the same direction was a dark aircraft; size/shape unknown because it was at an unbelievable altitude. Clear blue sky so I could see clearly a very odd vapour trail like a row of hoops on a rope behind it. It traveled the distance in my field of vision across the sky in about three to five seconds. The airliners were still there thirty seconds later. It wasn't Blackbird because this is in the last few years and post it's retirement.

I'm of the opinion now that if someone can come up with irrefutable proof that UFO's are alien in origin I'll accept it (I don't mean dodgy YT videos that scream PROOF WTF(?) UFO), otherwise they're likely to be explainable in one way or another--but I remain open minded.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2013, 02:45:23 PM »
I think it more likely that TWA 800 was taken down by one of Ramsey Yousef's bombs that was assembled on the plane.  Less than two years before he had set a bomb on a Philippines Airlines flight that went off just behind the center fuel tank, so the plane was able to land.  This time, he got the bomb over the center fuel tank.


Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2013, 03:06:12 PM »
Have you ever seen Mark Lombardi's drawings?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Lombardi

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #4 on: August 19, 2013, 04:33:29 PM »
I think it more likely that TWA 800 was taken down by one of Ramsey Yousef's bombs that was assembled on the plane.  Less than two years before he had set a bomb on a Philippines Airlines flight that went off just behind the center fuel tank, so the plane was able to land.  This time, he got the bomb over the center fuel tank.

There have been numerous commercial a/c brought down with bombs, so I agree a bomb on TWA 800 is not out of the realm of possibility.  I tend more toward the missile theory based on the testimony of a USAFR C-130 pilot flying in the area on an exercise who saw and reported a missile that night.  He was the primary source for a lengthy article that appeared the week following the crash in "Aviation Week & Space Technology".  (AW&ST is the Bible of the aerospace industry for those unfamiliar with it.) 

The C-130 pilot was in a perfect location to see the missile, and he was trained in missile identification/tracking.  I read what he told the AW&ST writer, I have no question he saw a missile.  Lots of others claimed to have seen a missile as well, and maybe they did, but as far as I know the C-130 pilot was the only one trained to do so.

By the way, there are a good number of us in the aircraft mishap investigation field who believe the Air France 747 that went down in the Atlantic five years or so ago was taken out with a bomb.  The similarities between that crash and the Air India 747 lost to a bomb back in mid 80s and the Lockerbie crashes are striking.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #5 on: August 19, 2013, 07:56:12 PM »
As conspiracies go, it seems to be a given that there were massive coverups with regards to UFOs and the Kennedy assassination. I'm skeptical, but open minded about some of the other theories floating around, unless they border on the Alex Jones fringe.

Flight 800 is interesting. It took place about 50 miles from where I live in an area where we used to fish when I was a kid, a calm, peaceful place. Smith's Point, the local beach surely had people out that night as it was still summer and quite hot. My cousin was flying with the Air National Guard on routine maneuvers which quickly became search and rescue. To my recall, he didn't mention seeing a missile, but he did see the explosion. When he pulled people out of the water, a lot of them were mangled, including one who was burned to the bone on one side which seemed to be indicative of sitting next to an explosive device.

When the plane went down,everyone here figured a bomb inside brought it down because, you know, WTC. I've never been truly satisfied with the answer the NTSB came up with because some kind of structural problem in hot weather would have led to more than a one off aircraft explosion just as icing on the wings did in other instances.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #6 on: August 19, 2013, 08:08:04 PM »
I think the government is playing dumb about UFOs. Read Hynek's UFO book. I don't believe the government has captured tech however. That aliens would be able to cross vast cosmic distances but then crash here seems inconsistent

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #7 on: August 20, 2013, 03:02:20 AM »


By the way, there are a good number of us in the aircraft mishap investigation field who believe the Air France 747 that went down in the Atlantic five years or so ago was taken out with a bomb. 

Or even an Airbus 330..  ;)...It wasn't a bomb. It was a combination of things, not least of all pilot fatigue extremis.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18720915

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #8 on: August 20, 2013, 11:21:40 AM »
Or even an Airbus 330..  ;)...It wasn't a bomb. It was a combination of things, not least of all pilot fatigue extremis.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18720915

You're correct, the Air France a/c was an Airbus, not a 747.  Thanks for the correction, guess I had 747 on the brain.  I'd also read about the claim of pilot fatigue on the AF mishap, but I'm still skeptical.  One of the TCCA guys I knew was ex-RCN.  He had PoCs in either the French or Brazilian Navy, don't recall which, who told him about specific physical evidence recovered that was indicative of a bomb, or at least an explosion, aboard the aircraft while still in flight.  It was the same guy who brought up the Air India flight which TCCA helped investigate since the a/c originated from Canada and the bulk of those killed were Canadians.  As always, everyone is entitled to believe what they wish to believe.

Your post reminded me of something I've long found interesting.  Ever notice C2C types will berate "main stream media", but when they wish to support a point, it's a main stream media source they cite.  I suppose that's because if they cite sources like Alex Jones, they'd have zero credibility outside the C2C realm.  Not picking on you Pud, and I personally get all my international news from the BBC.  In fact the BBC News site is my home page, I respect it as the best international news source in the world.  It's just ironic how that plays out.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #9 on: August 20, 2013, 12:33:10 PM »
You're correct, the Air France a/c was an Airbus, not a 747.  Thanks for the correction, guess I had 747 on the brain.  I'd also read about the claim of pilot fatigue on the AF mishap, but I'm still skeptical.  One of the TCCA guys I knew was ex-RCN.  He had PoCs in either the French or Brazilian Navy, don't recall which, who told him about specific physical evidence recovered that was indicative of a bomb, or at least an explosion, aboard the aircraft while still in flight.  It was the same guy who brought up the Air India flight which TCCA helped investigate since the a/c originated from Canada and the bulk of those killed were Canadians.  As always, everyone is entitled to believe what they wish to believe.

Your post reminded me of something I've long found interesting.  Ever notice C2C types will berate "main stream media", but when they wish to support a point, it's a main stream media source they cite.  I suppose that's because if they cite sources like Alex Jones, they'd have zero credibility outside the C2C realm.  Not picking on you Pud, and I personally get all my international news from the BBC.  In fact the BBC News site is my home page, I respect it as the best international news source in the world.  It's just ironic how that plays out.

I only linked to the BBC piece because it seemed the most neutral..there is a Telegraph link here... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/9231855/Air-France-Flight-447-Damn-it-were-going-to-crash.html

and here are the comments in reference to the above link from an aerospace engineer (He's quite dismissive of 'civilians'!) and another guy who as far as I know works at Rolls Royce in Derby.

Quote
Anyone who knows about the subject can see the errors for themselves, and those who don;t are rarely interested in the facts because they get in the way of a good story!

But how *any* pilot can decide that holding handfuls of back-stick on an aeroplane that is departing at altitude is a rational thing to do escapes me. ATPL Pilots are specifically trained to identify the symptoms of common-mode failures like air-data failure, both in initial training and in the recurrent training - they're supposed to simply revert to "known attitude, trim and power" until they've established what has happened, and mostly they do just that. There must be some reason why they didn't in this instance.

Quote
it's all too difficult to explain better than the official reports without being able to illustrate it.  However I think the issues boil down to the lack of visual cues. 

Ignoring how the junior pilot arrived in this situation, the two senior pilots were unable to recognise what he was doing wrong until too late.  The fact that the auto-throttles on Airbus aircraft do not move the physical throttle sticks on the console has been criticized in earlier crash reports - I thought it was supposed to be being fixed?  Couple with this the fact that the side stick does not move significantly (it registers force not movement) and it is difficult to immediately comprehend what is happening.  As a friend of mine who spent a long time in flight test work said "If the Captain had entered the cockpit and seen that the junior pilot was flying with the yoke pulled hard back into his chest, he would have immediately  registered what was going on and corrected before it was too late."

Sorry! I've hijacked things...  :-[

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #10 on: August 20, 2013, 02:15:44 PM »
I'm a bit of an aviation buff and the Air France crash caught my interest. From what I've read and watched (PBS had a show about it and I'm sure there were more), the initial cause was pitot tube icing which led to faulty airspeed readings. The crew apparently spent more time trying to manage the systems and warnings than actually attempting to fly out of the trouble. When they did, it was too late. They tried to pull up sharply, but this made the tail hit the water. This crash has led to a call to provide pilots with more real flying experience over learning how to manage and react to warning systems.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #11 on: August 20, 2013, 02:28:17 PM »
The crew apparently spent more time trying to manage the systems and warnings than actually attempting to fly out of the trouble.

That's my understanding..as the crisis unfolded, they became analysts rather than aviators. Compounded by having no visual references and the confusing instrument signals. Although they would have had artificial horizon and ASI. The most obvious and basic things they possibly didn't take heed of as they tried to make sense of what was going wrong. But we might never know the entire story; but I do remember that at the time there were all sorts of stories from CT that it had been grabbed and torn up by a UFO and thrown into the sea. I haven't to my knowledge seen a CT retraction of that supposition. Funny that.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #12 on: August 20, 2013, 04:19:55 PM »
Until I hit 40 or so I was a classic show-me skeptic (I must use the US spelling - otherwise we think it has something to do with infection/germs). But about the time I started listening to Art - damn you, Bell! - I became persuaded, mostly by the quantum of evidence and the type of presentation given by people such as Stan Friedman (who I think is one of the most effective advocates for the existence of UFOs there is), that that there is more going on in our skies and our near space than our government has told us. Now, I don't buy in to the existence of extra-terrestrial agreements, underground compounds (Dulce), wars in space, moon or Mars habitation, or a hollow earth inhabited by our Reptilian overlords, etc.

But I do think our military and commercial pilots have had many UFO incidents. Just as I believe there are many things floating/zipping across our skies which are not ours - meaning "man's". I have no idea if they're extra-terrestrial, extra-dimensional or even "extra-temporal", meaning "us" from the future. But there is something there which we didn't cause, and over which we have no control. And I think our government tries to suppress reports about them. Although I don't know how successful they are.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #13 on: August 25, 2013, 10:43:37 PM »
Does anyone believe the "electronic harassment" thing? I have a very hard time believing most of it... it sounds like a lot of sick people being exploited by a few "experts."

I'd be curious how much weight anyone else gives this topic

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #14 on: August 25, 2013, 11:11:11 PM »
JFK assassination.




Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #15 on: August 25, 2013, 11:19:51 PM »
The one where George Noory posts on Bellgab.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #16 on: August 25, 2013, 11:55:32 PM »
The one where George Noory posts on Bellgab.

 ;D

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #17 on: August 26, 2013, 01:24:53 AM »
JFK assassination.

Add MLK and RFK to the list. Maybe you could add Malcolm X too. Throw in some intentional failures to adequately respond to actionable intelligence. That's not to mention a long list of documented historical conspiracy *facts*.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #18 on: August 26, 2013, 10:25:03 AM »
Does anyone believe the "electronic harassment" thing?  it sounds like a lot of sick people being exploited by a few "experts."


That's my take, too. I also don't believe the official story about the JFK assassination. Had to be at least two shooters.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #19 on: August 28, 2013, 02:28:44 PM »
These may not be commonly accepted conspiracies but these are a small sampling of ones I have come to at least consider because, well, no reason other than I'm weird.

Things that contribute to cancers: cigarette filters, sunglasses, suntan lotion.

Things that are good for you: fatty foods, salt, Cannabis, lysergic acid dietheylamide

Your bible sez Christ rose on Monday, do the math, get over it.

Aspartame is Rumsfield's demonic, addictive contribution to the gods of death and war.

Modernism is a hypnotic stage show whose Oz-like tentacles are not visible by those who prefer the past or those who rush the future but only by mastering the experience of presence.

And stuff.




Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #20 on: August 28, 2013, 02:51:31 PM »
i think the kennedy assassination is a conspiracy i can buy into, although my confidence in certain aspects of the conspiracy has been shaken over the years. 

for instance, oswald did have enough time to shoot the president and then make his way downstairs to be seen by others without being flustered, sweaty, and short of breath.  a man of similar build demonstrated that.

the "badgeman" image in the mary moorman photo was repeatedly disproved by multiple sources as a photographic anomaly.  see this for further info.


the magic bullet wasn't magic at all.  this video decisively explains that:



however, as i see things, none of this explains the head shot.  until the physics of that head shot can be explained and that explanation can be reconciled with what the ER physicians saw, described, and drew... then i think we still have a conspiracy.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #21 on: August 28, 2013, 03:41:52 PM »

   Maury Terry's "The Ultimate Evil" book that has the Son of Sam case being more than merely a chubby Jewish/Pentecostal postal worker taking orders from a murderous dog next door.

      He has it beginning with a murder at Stanford in October '74(possibly before) and being a widely dispersed cult's doing. The ringleader being John Carr...who's father was SAM Carr. John and his brother Mike died of "suicide" in 78/79 respectively.

         In short. Berkowitz didn't act alone. No way. He didn't even fit the survivors descriptions in some cases.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #22 on: August 28, 2013, 03:59:31 PM »
   Maury Terry's "The Ultimate Evil" book that has the Son of Sam case being more than merely a chubby Jewish/Pentecostal postal worker taking orders from a murderous dog next door.

      He has it beginning with a murder at Stanford in October '74(possibly before) and being a widely dispersed cult's doing. The ringleader being John Carr...who's father was SAM Carr. John and his brother Mike died of "suicide" in 78/79 respectively.

         In short. Berkowitz didn't act alone. No way. He didn't even fit the survivors descriptions in some cases.
Hells no, he didn't.  Ever hear the rumor that artist Robert Mapplethorpe possessed a copy of the Stacy Moskowitz murder?  Apparently someone (Mapplethorpe himself?) was able to film the murder because of a cult called The Process (to whom Berkowitz allegedly belonged) which did thrill kills for the Snuff Film market for major cash.
There isn't a whole lot out there on this but it's a pesky rumor no one is alive to refute.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #23 on: August 28, 2013, 07:20:14 PM »
The one where George Noory posts on Bellgab.

^^^^^ This ^^^^^

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #24 on: August 28, 2013, 07:33:09 PM »
Hells no, he didn't.  Ever hear the rumor that artist Robert Mapplethorpe possessed a copy of the Stacy Moskowitz murder?  Apparently someone (Mapplethorpe himself?) was able to film the murder because of a cult called The Process (to whom Berkowitz allegedly belonged) which did thrill kills for the Snuff Film market for major cash.
There isn't a whole lot out there on this but it's a pesky rumor no one is alive to refute.

        Yup, that's in the book. The Moskowitz snuff tape reportedly ending up with "producer"/coke dealer Roy Radin. Whether that lead to his murder is murky, but like you say, there's a whole bunch of dead people who can't confirm or refute.

    Maplethorpe was believed to be a "friend" of Michael Carr, and they filmed politicians/judges being involved in gay orgies at parties that sound like something out of Eyes Wide Shut.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #25 on: August 28, 2013, 07:34:04 PM »
Does anyone believe the "electronic harassment" thing? I have a very hard time believing most of it... it sounds like a lot of sick people being exploited by a few "experts."

I'd be curious how much weight anyone else gives this topic

Someone merely mentions that topic, and it brings out a cavalcade of paranoid delusional/schizophrenic types like nothing else can.  That's why it's actually kind of a good topic for Coast, regardless of who's hosting.  Ranks pretty low on the believability scale, somewhere near the urinal fish guy.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #26 on: August 28, 2013, 10:47:53 PM »
i think the kennedy assassination is a conspiracy i can buy into, although my confidence in certain aspects of the conspiracy has been shaken over the years. 

for instance, oswald did have enough time to shoot the president and then make his way downstairs to be seen by others without being flustered, sweaty, and short of breath.  a man of similar build demonstrated that.

the "badgeman" image in the mary moorman photo was repeatedly disproved by multiple sources as a photographic anomaly.  see this for further info.


the magic bullet wasn't magic at all.  this video decisively explains that:



however, as i see things, none of this explains the head shot.  until the physics of that head shot can be explained and that explanation can be reconciled with what the ER physicians saw, described, and drew... then i think we still have a conspiracy.

Solid post.

Oswald could of been the only shooter and it could still be a conspiracy. The shooting is a huge part of the evidence and if it can be proved that there were two shooters then of course its a slam dunk that it was a conspiracy, however even if it was just Oswald there are sooooooo many crazy things that happened before and after the assassination to make it possible that he was set up, etc.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #27 on: August 29, 2013, 01:10:54 AM »
Hells no, he didn't.  Ever hear the rumor that artist Robert Mapplethorpe possessed a copy of the Stacy Moskowitz murder?  Apparently someone (Mapplethorpe himself?) was able to film the murder because of a cult called The Process (to whom Berkowitz allegedly belonged) which did thrill kills for the Snuff Film market for major cash.
There isn't a whole lot out there on this but it's a pesky rumor no one is alive to refute.

Maury Terry made the conspiracy seem very believable. His book was like Six Degrees Of Charlie Manson, and some critics claimed that he forced links to fit his theory. They said that it veered into the global cabal of satanism fad that was in vogue when the book was written and sold. It sure was a fun read, though. I never looked at "The Cotton Club" in quite the same way again. The book's theory might have been a combination of speculation and tunnel-vision in parts, but a simpler, smaller version of its central thesis might have carried weight. The Son of Sam could have had help from a small group of neighborhood devil-worshippers.

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #28 on: August 29, 2013, 04:08:17 AM »
The big conspiracy theory I believe is that they're all out to get me!1!1!!!11

Re: Conspiracy Theories You Buy Into
« Reply #29 on: August 29, 2013, 05:35:08 AM »
That Bobby Riggs set up, then threw his match against Billie Jean King in order to get out of trouble from gambling debts.  Carlos Marcello and Santo Trafficanti were involved.
http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/9589625/the-match-maker

Funny thing is that his matches against women may have made women's tennis.  Before that, no one paid much attention to the women's game.  But after Riggs, folks tuned in and saw epic battles between Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova and others and continued to watch.