Conspiracy Theories You Believe In

[Douchepool]

I don't doubt that there's a human contribution to climate change, but even scientific studies have suggested that a single volcano releases more sh*t into the atmosphere than all human emissions combined throughout history. And when governments want to censor or imprison people for daring to suggest that maybe the science isn't "settled" (science is NEVER "settled;" science is the collection of knowledge into testable explanations and predictions, not a final word) as so many liberal talking heads hallucinate on the topic of climate change, one is left wondering just how "settled" the science really is. People who go on about "settled" science have agendas; they also (willingly or inadvertently) put themselves into the same basket as the people who insisted the earth was the center of the universe and that the sun revolved around the earth. The science was "settled" in those cases, too.

Yes, I just compared climate change acolytes to Catholic leaders. It is not an apples and oranges comparison, unless you think the climate change acolytes are somehow the kinder, gentler version of oppressors (kind of like how "democratic" socialism is somehow preferable to regular socialism).

[the captain]

I don't doubt that there's a human contribution to climate change, but even scientific studies have suggested that a single volcano releases more sh*t into the atmosphere than all human emissions combined throughout history. And when governments want to censor or imprison people for daring to suggest that maybe the science isn't "settled" (science is NEVER "settled;" science is the collection of knowledge into testable explanations and predictions, not a final word) as so many liberal talking heads hallucinate on the topic of climate change, one is left wondering just how "settled" the science really is. People who go on about "settled" science have agendas; they also (willingly or inadvertently) put themselves into the same basket as the people who insisted the earth was the center of the universe and that the sun revolved around the earth. The science was "settled" in those cases, too.

Yes, I just compared climate change acolytes to Catholic leaders. It is not an apples and oranges comparison, unless you think the climate change acolytes are somehow the kinder, gentler version of oppressors (kind of like how "democratic" socialism is somehow preferable to regular socialism).

I agree with much of that, actually. Science is never quite settled, because the entire process is always open to the next refutation or discovery. (That said, there are certainly things that we can feel pretty confident about.) There is something to be said for consensus of experts, though. I don't mean to say their words should be considered gospel, but they should be given appropriate weight, especially in areas in which we individually lack the expertise. One must decide whom to trust (and how deeply to trust them), giving appropriate consideration to their possible motivations as well as their actual scientific work. There are also of course the potential consequences of various positions, and one's action or inaction.

[Douchepool]

I can certainly respect scientific consensus (or at least something in the neighborhood of such as all scientists will never agree). However, when refusal to "believe" the "settled" science can be seen as a criminal offense in the eyes of the government, that's something to be worried about. It leaves me (an eternal skeptic on just about everything, even conspiracy theories) with the impression that the euphemistic language given to the process known now as "anthropomorphic climate change" is not "science" but religion.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/10/us-attorney-general-we-may-prosecute-climate-change-deniers/

[the captain]

While I struggle to read Breitbart because it raises my sodium levels to unhealthy levels*, I will say this: if the administration were to prosecute based on fraud, that's one thing; if it did so based on denying consensus, that's another. I know NY AG Schneiderman is investigating whether some fossil fuel companies (Exxon Mobil, I think) believed and acted one way in private while making public statements to the contrary, they should be charged for it. If some scientist took a contrary position to the consensus, that's quite another.


*i.e., it requires more than just a grain of salt. Ha! I'm funny! Right!? ... Anyone? Anyone?

[the captain]

Oh and to bring it back to my family members' aversion to the idea, I want to be clear: nothing in their position is based on investigating the actual science. It's entirely based on what their religious leaders and those people's preferred politicians have said. For years, their main objection was that the Bible says that after the Flood, God said he wouldn't destroy the world again by flooding. And since scientists warning about climate change talk a lot about sea levels rising and causing widespread damage, well, that's just not acceptable. So it must be fake.

[Douchepool]

Ha! Imagine being the one among my fellow pagans who openly has conservative political viewpoints. One of my former friends refused association with me when I openly criticized the "settled" science of climate change. Apparently, that's now classed alongside "hate speech."

[alf wiedersehen]

It's entirely based on what their religious leaders and those people's preferred politicians have said.

I love when politicians preface their views of climate change with "I'm not a scientist, but..."

[alf wiedersehen]

To show the other side of this, here are 10 conspiracy theories that turned out to be true.

[Emily]

This is the quote Loretta Lynch was responding to:

"The similarities between the mischief of the tobacco industry pretending that the science of tobacco’s dangers was unsettled and the fossil fuel industry pretending that the science of carbon emissions’ dangers is unsettled has been remarked on widely, particularly by those who study the climate denial apparatus that the fossil fuel industry has erected.

Under President Clinton, the Department of Justice brought and won a civil RICO action against the tobacco industry for its fraud. Under President Obama, the Department of Justice has done nothing so far about the climate denial scheme."

The exchange was specifically in the context of energy companies intentionally spreading misinformation for their financial benefit.
Beware Breitbart. They have been shown repeatedly to intentionally manipulate their reporting with the intent of manipulating their readership. Unfortunately they've been extremely successful.

[KDS]

but he also doesn't like bacon, so I'm not sure what's up with that guy.

Well if he doesn't like bacon, I'd say his credibility is questionable at best. 

Must be one of them "reptilian" people!

Did I miss sth.? Why such reaction to disliking bacon? If you like it, doesn't mean everybody else have to. I hate bacon, ice cream etc. So what? Tastes differ.

There has been a "cult" of bacon in recent years in the USA. It's added to things everywhere, people talk about how great it is, it's added to strange things (including ice cream, for example). But TRBB's joke is about the idiotic conspiracy theory mentioned earlier in this thread that some people think Jews are reptiles. No bacon. Jews. Make sense?

I've noticed that too.  Bacon has always been popular, but it seems like it's attained a brand new sense of popularity the last few years. 

They have bacon candles and bacon Pop Tarts now. 

They even have a bacon vodka, which is absolutely dreadful. 

[Juice Brohnston]

One thing that's frustrating is that in most of these govt/police/military conspiracies, there are a bunch of head scratching blunders by authorities that just add fuel to the fire, i.e.: OJ

Now one with a BB connection is Manson. Over the years, the more I read about this, the more I move away from the Prosecutor's explanation. Not that Manson wasn't involved, but the motives seem to point in different directions.

[Julia]

The government didn't plan 9/11 but allowed it to happen to suit their agenda. The people who used to get all offended at the suggestion and profess "our gov't would never!" should read up on Operation Northwoods...or just watch the damn news...and then tell me our gov't and the intelligence agencies always act in perfect benevolence.

A lot of the bullshit studies arguing in favor of circumcision (IE male genital mutilation) are done to placate the millions of innocent men who've been robbed of the majority of erogenous tissue against their will by a cruel, unjust social crusade. (Look up how it became normalized in the US.) If the majority of men really understood the gravity of what was done to them, and weren't silenced by unwillingness to admit there's something wrong down there, there'd be riots in the streets.

Women know a lot of feminism (or if you insist, I'll call it 4th wave intersectional feminism, ie what's commonly called "wokeism") is bullshit and against even their own nature but cynically push the narrative because it benefits them over men. Look, Im all for equal rights, respect and opportunity--this isn't "hate speech," this isn't "let's roll back hard won victories." I'm just arguing in favor of honestly acknowledging human nature. Women say they want emotionally-sensitive men who cry and are in touch with their feminine side. Maybe they do in some contexts...but not their man. Woman say it's "sexist mansplaining" if a guy disagrees...they know they're being held only to the same standards, but why not play your most effective trump card to "win" a confrontation? Women say they can do anything men can do...but why aren't they pushing for more female miners, trash pickers, ditch diggers? Why is it just STEM and politics that get the push for more female applicants (with less rigorous requirements than their male counterparts)? Why don't they push for women to have to sign up for the draft? The reason support for feminism isn't higher and seems to be dropping among young men is because of these inconsistencies...some might say willful hypocrisies...that no one is allowed to talk about or get labelled an incel. There's absolutely a cabal at work pushing these narratives especially in Hollywood, where the last 10-odd years have had endless "deconstructions" of beloved male heroes, forced Mary Sue inclusions and feminist talking points or stereotypes inserted into everything.

Bigfoot exists. There's several 911 calls I've heard (the most convincing is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntgR_bbpdyo) where reasonably sounding people have reported sightings with no rational reason to lie, this being the 90s before such things might be faked for internet points. If the guy's doing a bit he had no audience and is a better actor that plenty of folks in Hollywood. I absolutely believe this man saw something. There's much more unexplored wilderness than people realize and we find new species all the time. I think the detractors underestimate things like that. Also, of course there's a lot of fake sightings and hoaxes too.

The government was already a crypto-fascist surveillance state during the Bush and Obama terms at least, Trump just went full mask off about it. Hopefully if we survive this admin with a republic intact it might spur more people to realize why these systems MUST be torn down. It's far too much power and there's no guarantee the President will be a rational actor behaving in good conscience.

Transgenderism or what have you is a real medical condition where the brain and body are mismatched. I do believe that. However I also believe it's gone way too far lately and has been pushed both my media types as a "look at me, Im special" fad, embraced by some men as a "hey Im not an evil white male--im a victim too, stop hating me!" (who could blame them, the demonization of men is out of control) and pushed by big pharma as a way to sell people drugs/operations they dont actually need.

Cash is being phased out to force everyone to use electronic payment methods that can be "service fee'd" up the wazoo and even shut off for anyone who doesn't toe the party line. The bankers got us all by the balls.

The Great American Streetcar scandal happened and things of the sort continue to happen, where the rich/businesses team up to buy up and/or shut down any beneficial social policies/programs to make life worse for everyone if it makes us use their crappier alternatives. With knowledge of "enshittification" and "shrinkflation" becoming more widely known, hopefully this isn't as controversial anymore.