Ask Me A Question About Conspiracy Theories

I've spent a lot of time watching documentaries. There are seemingly disparate dots that can be connected if one looks hard enough.

 

Or not so disparate dots than can be connected with just a little bit of critical thinking. The thing is, most people are conditioned to believe whatever they're told by the news is true, so most people are not used to questioning things coming from corporate news sources since to them it must automatically be true. Just like it was "true" that bin Laden carried out the attacks on 9/11, which we were told within just minutes of the attacks without a shred of proof ever being shown to prove this.

 

Rat you seem like a smart guy. Do you have any reason to believe the official story of 9/11, JFK, The Moon Landings, Sandy Hook, The Boston Bombing, or The German Holocaust? Would you be so kind as to give a synopsis of any conclusions you've reached regarding these events?

 

Mustn't we conspire to do as you have asked?

 

Conspiracy theories are often created by disinformation agencies as a form of cognitive dissonance to stop the general populace from believing in any common social reality base at all,in the interest of creating a general sense that social reality is always already fixed and beyond comprehension.It is
often only when real social praxis comes into being that real historical forces are forced beyond their own negation into a life-world of consequence that does little more however than overlay a cosmetic seal of imagined and for the most part synthesized futurities that however well applied cannot escape the historicity of the self-perpetuating Sci-Fi hell on Earth agenda that is beyond the control of any mind-consciousness based system.

 

I don't believe the official story about any of those things, because the actual evidence flies in the face of everything we have been told about those incidents. I am not really in the mood to give a synopsis on each one of those things since I have shared my feeling on them already. If you have any specific questions about any of those things, I will answer them however.

 

the moon landings would have been harder to fake, live and in real time, as they were actually broadcast, then actually doing them. (that we could easily do so now, doesn't count. now is now and then was then) that wanting it to have been faked would be in the interest of fanatical 'religious' loonies, is one more reason to seriously question the bases for denying them. i don't know what's to question about sandy hook or the holocaust. as for 9-11, what we are mislead about, isn't how it was done, but what kind of interests masterminded the event, what motivated them to do so, and of course, who they actually were. likewise kennidy. we keep being told oswald was in town and had a rifle that that could have done the job. but no one can actually put him and the gun together at the time of the shooting, nor explain the entry wound in his neck and the exit wound in the back of his head, which could only have resulted from below and in front, not above and behind. even the grassy knowl was too elevated a position. pretty much a discharge from hip level, and thus most likely accidental, of someone sitting in front of him in the same car, or near it, or someone popping up out of a manhole, could account for that. and there's no evidence of the latter either. the kennidy thing will never go away, precisely because oswald was shot and thus silenced. that a person sitting infront of him was also shot in the foot, seems to me an indication of gun fail and of the person shot in the foot. there were lots of people who had selfish reasons for wanting him dead, could have been lots of all kinds of conspiracies to do so, and probably were, but really the only place it could actually have come from, was not any kind of elevated position.

 

Building 7

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs5qsk0pc6Y

 

Guy with no legs in a wheelchair at boston marathon bombing. Crisis actor

 

Crisis actor and piece of shit.

 

No lie.

As i put above about building 7. It, to me, is really something i am surprised is not questioned. That building wasn't hit by a plane, yet it collapsed like the others. A steel building collapsing from being on fire, just ridiculous. Yet, nothing is ever said. `Pull'

 

see, there's a problem here, and that's the fact that we never have access to all of the information involved. we are not worthy of knowing such things ... we must blindly trust the powers that be and not question them (actually, we really should .. but that's frowned upon and might get you thrown in prison)

 

It is questioned, but not by nearly enough people. For most it's easier to hate Muslims and swallow the official version of events. After all, nobody wants to be seen as "weird" by holding such "extreme" beliefs.

 

some conspiracies are easier than others to debunk. take for example the moon landings. i think that one is the easiest to debunk, and in my opinion the simplest empirical evidence we have for this are the reflectors left by astronauts on the moon which can be shot at by lasers and we can detect the reflection.

theres some however, that because we dont have 100% of the evidence or information just cant be proven or debunked.

 

i know you could probably write a book about all the suspicious info about 9/11, but who do you think was behind the hijackings? and if its not osama bin laden and alqaeda connection, then why all the evidence connecting them which doesnt come from our government but was provided by intelligence services from other countries?

 

Dig deeper. The Russians put 2 reflectors on the moon with unmanned probes. One works perfectly, the other less than perfectly.

Here's a debunking spokesman in a debate over the moon landings. Let's just say he comes up short when it comes to removing doubt. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDLFm-DRPQg&list=PL36400656F62E502E

 

wow, still surprised people believe it was a hoax.

i think ive dug deep enough to be fully satisfied. if the moon landing was a hoax, alot of countries would have to be in on it.

think about this, countries that have soft landed on the moon had no choice but to leave many man made objects on the moon.
countries that couldn't get to the moon but have sent orbiters had to leave man made objects on the moon.
all countries with powerful telescopes can all see these man made objects on the moon.

thats too many countries to be in on this hoax. the moon landing was real, if you dont believe it than theres no point debating anything else because you probably think im a reptilian.

 

btw, when the united states put reflectors on the moon, they had manually calibrate them because thats just the technology we had back then.

mythbusters also debunked most of the stuff joe talked about to my satisfaction. especially the photos. if anything, just watch the portion where they do a great, great, great, job debunking all the stuff about photographs. they clearly show how they can get different shadow angles with just one light source.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0 part 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0

btw, i listened to the video, and the guy had a great counter argument to all of joes points that were, according the that clip, unrefuted by joe rogan.

come to think of it, the fact that you chose this clip and Mr. Joe Rogan is your "whistle blower" just shows how much "digging" you did. also, your logic that you agree unmanned landings have happened but manned landing are a "conspiracy" is just uhhh, not smart to put it kindly.

 

"This is ridiculous. The simulation is nothing like what it would have been on the moon. Look at the relative distance of the key light to the models, how is that in relation to the moon and its distance from the sun. Move that light back a couple of miles and see if you can pull off that topography bullshit. What a farce. Shame Mythbusters." This was the best post I saw, and my first thoughts on that MythBuster episode.

Try to play the ball and not the man. I'm in the top 99% on every test I've ever taken. I'm almost certainly smarter than you, but it's possible you're a genius and you're smarter than me.

"all countries with powerful telescopes can all see these man made objects on the moon"

If you can find any pictures taken of the moon landing site objects (rover) from earth based telescopes that would basically debunk me right away. I think it shows your lack of scientific accumen to think that's possible. We can't even get clear pictures from our probes that orbit the moon.

As far as all countries being in on the game, I think they have no proof to offer. It's a very hard think to prove didn't happen. It's hard to prove there's no supernatural GOD too huh? If you come at it from an unskeptical perspective, you won't be swayed by anything other than 100% hard evidence which isn't going to happen. What would that look like? What evidence would actually sway you?

I don't have 100% evidence either way. I'm 80% convinced we did NOT send men all the way through the Van Allen belts, and risk their instant death to an unlucky solar flare. I think:

1. The US government had reason to fake it. (100% success rate, "win" the space race, establish perceived technological dominance)

2. The US government had the ability to fake it. (Hollywood, director talent, best movie magic in the world)

A highly compartmentalized, secretive organization, NASA, sent astronauts into earth orbit, and had them return several days later to lie to the public
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RcKLAo62Ro

The farce continued with more missions, more elaborate missions including a ridiculous mars rover.