Conspiracy Theory: The Government - Tilted Forum Project - TFP - Sexuality, Philosophy and Political Discussion

Sun Tzu · 11-04-2007, 05:35 PM

I used wikipedia for the following terms for convenience only if anyone has better definitions from a source they find to be of credible nature feel free to use it.

Reality:
Reality, in everyday usage, means "the state of things as they actually exist." The term reality, in its widest sense, includes everything that is, whether or not it is observable or comprehensible. On a much broader and more subjective level, the private experiences, curiosity, inquiry, and selectivity involved in the personal interpretation of an event shapes reality as seen by one and only one individual and hence is called phenomenological. A common colloquial usage would have "reality" mean "perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes toward reality," as in "My reality is not your reality." This is often used just as a colloquialism indicating that the parties to a conversation agree, or should agree, not to quibble over deeply different conceptions of what is real. For example, in a religious discussion between friends, one might say (attempting humor), "You might disagree, but in my reality, everyone goes to heaven."
Reality can be defined in a way that links it to worldviews or parts of them (conceptual frameworks): Reality is the totality of all things, structures (actual and conceptual), events (past and present) and phenomena, whether observable or not. It is what a worldview (whether it be based on individual or shared human experience) ultimately attempts to describe or map.
Certain ideas from physics, philosophy, sociology, literary criticism, and other fields shape various theories of reality. One such belief is that there simply and literally is no reality beyond the perceptions or beliefs we each have about reality. Such attitudes are summarized in the popular statement, "Perception is reality" or "Life is how you perceive reality" or "reality is what you can get away

Truth:
According to the less realist trends in philosophy, such as postmodernism/post-structuralism, truth is subjective. When two or more individuals agree upon the interpretation and experience of a particular event, a consensus about an event and its experience begins to be formed. This being common to a few individuals or a larger group, then becomes the 'truth' as seen and agreed upon by a certain set of people — the consensus reality. Thus one particular group may have a certain set of agreed truths, while another group might have a different set of consensual 'truths'. This lets different communities and societies have varied and extremely different notions of reality and truth of the external world. The religion and beliefs of people or communities are a fine example of this level of socially constructed 'reality'. Truth cannot simply be considered truth if one speaks and another hears because individual bias and fallibility challenge the idea that certainty or objectivity are easily grasped. For Anti-realists, the inaccessibility of any final, objective truth means that there is no truth beyond the socially-accepted consensus. (Although this means there are truths, not truth).

Fact:
A fact or factual entity is a phenomenon that is perceived as an elemental principle. It is rarely one that could be subject to personal interpretation. Instead, it is most often an observed phenomenon of the natural world. The proposition 'viewed from most places on Earth, the sun rises in the east', is a fact. It is a fact for people belonging to any group or nationality, regardless of which language they speak or which part of the hemisphere they come from.

This is the foundation of debate, and in some cases even war. When one person perceives as reality differs from another the effects are not generally positive. This could be because one feels that the reality of another casts a negative effect on themselves and those that perceive reality the same way as themselves. A simpler possibility is one experiences straight agitation because others have not subscribed to the same belief utilizing information common to all. The effects from this can range from harmless to earth shattering.

An example is the “Holy Land”. Today’s generation has to rely on historical documentation to determine what their reality of what has happened in the past. So about 70 years ago the Zionist Manifest Destiny was initiated with validation from a story written by Hebrews a few thousand years ago. That is reality to them, just as is not a reality to the Palestinians. So what is the reality? A person’s reality will depend on what source they gather enough information to create what is a substantial reality to them.
The reason for this thread is I’m curious in what criteria people today use for their perception of “what is going on”. While this could be applied to subjects such as astrology, Bigfoot, loch ness monster, ghosts, and similar I want to focus on an area, that IMO sometimes borders being in the paranoia section- the government. This subject umbrellas out into several areas, but all point to a generalized theme- the government.

The National Geographic defines a conspiracy theorist as: someone who postulates on the existence of secret agreements between two or more people or government to perform unlawful acts. It is common practice for those disagreeing with CTs to begin referencing tin foil hats and similar.

Postulates has two meanings: A mathematical statement that is accepted without proof, and when used interchangeably with the term axiom- any starting assumption from which other statements are logically derived.

Here is where the split of perception happens. An example is JFKs assassination. From the research I’ve done I don’t see how anyone could dispute a cover-up. Even with evidence such as this:

people will still maintain the Warren Commission was telling the truth. Fast forward to today. I see the same practice happening. Ultimately I’m wondering do the people that point out tin hat candidates believe everything the government tells them? Do they have the belief that there is no reason for the government to act in any way other than what it states (both parties)? Do they have the belief that since we have a relatively higher freedom than other countries we shouldn’t “rock the boat”?
What criteria do people that believe what they are told use to arrive at their perceptions? The news, historical documentation?
Using the above image as the epitome: I see the photo the grassy knoll behind JFK when he was shot, is of a man holding a rifle with a muzzle blast. The other side will call it a blemish that doesn’t prove anything.
I see Bushes behaviors such as getting caught in a straightforward lie about 911, refusing to testify under oath, and a string of other behaviors to spell it out clearly. His supporters will defend these actions as someone who was under stress.

Perhaps if I can learn the ways people arrive at the perceptions; understanding why will be possible.

Cynthetiq · 11-04-2007, 05:50 PM

I dunno it looks like early photos of nebulas and galaxies to me. Does that mean that I don't have the same reality?

Sun Tzu · 11-04-2007, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

I dunno it looks like early photos of nebulas and galaxies to me. Does that mean that I don't have the same reality?

yes it does. Not right or wrong, but yes.

Ustwo · 11-04-2007, 06:27 PM

Old Jewish looking guy.

Its a grey or a zombie.

Guy typing on a lap top.

Just once, I want my conspiracy to be in focus.

Baraka_Guru · 11-04-2007, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Guy typing on a lap top.

I swear it looks like a Rottweiler with kaleidoscope eyes.

Sun Tzu · 11-04-2007, 07:20 PM

just so Im clear is this everyones way of stating people will see what they want to see? While to me its obviously a person holding rifle in the exact area close witnesses starting running toward after they claim hearing a gunshot and seeing smoke, to the three of you its nothing.

Its not the JFK conspiracy itself that I find astonishing its the theme of what is happening here. It still happens to 911 to this very moment.

WHat I see as very apparent lies straight in your face lies, others are going to see as "mistakes" or verbiage taken out of context.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EYI7JXGqd0o&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EYI7JXGqd0o&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Ustwo · 11-04-2007, 09:38 PM

I used to spend a lot of time alone in the woods.

Once you are in them you are no longer a creature of civilization, but just another creature.

There were three real dangers, three director actors. Bear, moose, and of course man. Of the three the most likely would have been a bear, though I did encounter a moose (which can be deadly in the mating season), and the nature of the land had not many men, and few you would consider dangerous to a fellow woodsman.

But whats interesting is your danger sense increases. A million years on the savanna don't just disappear from your genes. You listen more, you look more, you note things which seem out of place.

What can happen though is you get spoked. Suddenly every shadow seems ominous, every anomaly seems malicious. You jump at every bird call, you keep thinking you hear branches breaking just out of earshot.

Undoubtedly there are some real conspiracies out there. Some dark and secretive, and its good to look for those, the problem is that once someone thinks they find one, they seem to get spoked. If THAT was true, what about this one? Everywhere they look, they peer into murky shadows, ignoring whats in the light.

In the woods, when you get that spooked feeling, that feeling of dread, I like to sit still and listen. You start to hear the squirrels climbing the trees, the birds calling, and the wind blowing. It resets your danger sense, you relax a bit, you no longer feel suffocated by the trees.

I recommend the same for the conspiracist. If every dark place you look seems to contain a conspiracy then sit down and think a bit. Yes there are dangers out there, yes there are dark places you should be afraid to go, but most of it is nothing so dark, even if you don't know the entire story. Look for the bears, but don't assume the bears must be there just because you can't see to far.

Sun Tzu · 11-05-2007, 01:27 AM

Ustwo · 11-05-2007, 06:40 AM

ottopilot · 11-05-2007, 10:30 AM

It's me inside my car looking out the passenger-side window during a heavy snow saying, "look at all that snow on my passenger-side window".

... sorry, interesting topic, but the picture does remind me of if you looked really closely from the inside at thick snow partially covering a car window.

Sun Tzu · 11-05-2007, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

It's me inside my car looking out the passenger-side window during a heavy snow saying, "look at all that snow on my passenger-side window".

... sorry, interesting topic, but the picture does remind me of if you looked really closely from the inside at thick snow partially covering a car window.

Sure by itself it could be a bowl of ice cream. Its a section of a picture taken behind the president as he was shot in direction witnesses starting running to after. Laptops, galaxies, snow packed cars, whatever. The Warren Commission did its job well on some. Ill ask the same question again. What criteria are people using to arrive at their conclusions?

Cynthetiq · 11-05-2007, 12:10 PM

Please post the original picture that you this one is referencing.

Sun Tzu · 11-05-2007, 12:26 PM

Leto · 11-05-2007, 12:30 PM

Looks like a nebula to me.

Sun Tzu · 11-05-2007, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leto

Looks like a nebula to me.

Ustwo · 11-05-2007, 12:38 PM

Well I didn't need to see JFK's head blown off for the 50th time, but the rest of that video is batshit insane.

You know I wouldn't be shocked if there were a conspiracy around JFK's murder, but give me more than a single frame of fuzz. I've seen clearer images in clouds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

and he looked innocent to a jury of his peers

Ummmm enough with the inane youtubes, they do nothing for your case.

Seriously, get out of the woods.

Sun Tzu · 11-06-2007, 02:40 AM

edit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Well I didn't need to see JFK's head blown off for the 50th time, but the rest of that video is batshit insane.

In your opinion. Just like its my opinion the Warren Commission is full of shit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

You know I wouldn't be shocked if there were a conspiracy around JFK's murder, but give me more than a single frame of fuzz. I've seen clearer images in clouds.

Oh that’s interesting, you wouldn’t? I don’t know . . . Fox hasn’t stated there was a cover up so you should really reserve yourself from going down that road. Even if you did, what could you do about it right? After all, if indeed it were a cover up, it happened years ago, it doesn’t affect you, so forget about it, things like that wont happen in this day and age, truth and justice prevail in these times- no one is above the law. As long as suburbia is intact, and “the squirrels are climbing the trees” and there are enough “moose to mate with” things are good.

It’s not just the fuzzy picture, but the information linked together with it. Someone like you probably gives absolutely no second thought to coincidences regardless of how many exist. With government conspiracies ranging from back then up to now there are always multitudes of them. Even when officials are openly caught lying- hey everybody does it right, it doesn’t prove anything . . .

Most official stories can fall apart applying this same mindset:

The common arguments
Test 1: Is the argument factually correct?
It's remarkable how many conspiracy theories are based on arguments which are simply factually incorrect. If you're presented with a conspiracy theory argument, the first thing to do is to check the surrounding facts. Many incorrect arguments are repeated in ignorance. But it's also been my unhappy experience that there are some purveyors of conspiracy theories who knowingly repeat arguments they know are incorrect.

Test 2: Is the argument relevant to the theory?
A second common problem with conspiracy theories is that they cloud the issue by attaching true, but irrelevant, arguments. Just because an argument is true doesn't mean it's relevant to the theory you're testing. This is a form of guilt by association, and gives the impression that the theory is being padded.

Test 3: If the argument is true, what implications does it have in other areas?
An argument on its own may appear to be plausible. But if we apply the argument to related fields or subjects, does it continue to make sense? Or would it require the world to be very different from how we see it?

Test 4: Is the argument consistent with other arguments used to support the theory?
There's a temptation to judge a theory simply by the number of supporting arguments, regardless of how they interact with each other. But amongst all these arguments, there's the danger that two or more of them contradict each other. This immediately means that at least one of the arguments is wrong, but in the context of conspiracy theories, it's perhaps worthwhile doubting both.

Test 5: What do relevant experts say about a particular argument?
Conspiracy theorists often tout their apparent expertise with a body of knowledge in order to bolster their arguments. But, perversely, they also often decry other experts in the field. This is often because the expert consensus in that field is contrary to the argument presented. Similarly, they often quote experts speaking inaccurately outside their field of expertise.

Test 6: Is there actually an argument in the argument, or is it just an opinion?
An argument which merely expresses an opinion, but which doesn't have any supporting evidence, adds nothing to the theory, and should be ignored.

Test 7: Does the argument offer any supporting evidence?
Some arguments are presented with weasel words such as "could have" or "maybe". Without any supporting evidence, these aren't arguments - they're just speculation. They too should be ignored.

Test 8: Is the explanation provided by an argument the only possible explanation for the evidence?
There are cases when an argument presents two alternative explanations for an event. One is the conspiracy explanation, while the other is said to be the official explanation. When the official explanation is debunked, the conspiracy explanation appears to be correct by default. Problems arise, though, when the apparently official explanation turns out to be a straw-man misrepresentation of the official explanation.

Test 9: How does the argument deal with positive arguments which contradict it?
Theories aren't built out of opposition to other theories. Instead, they're created to better explain the evidence than previous theories. Therefore, any conspiracy theory has to address evidence which contradicts it. Ignoring the evidence isn't acceptable, and should be treated as a major weakness of the theory.

Test 10: Would an experiment of your own help shed light on an argument?
Some conspiracy arguments rely on you accepting them without question, perhaps by an appeal to common sense. Sadly, common sense can lead us astray. This is where simple experiments, or even just careful observation of the world around us, can provide useful insights into the accuracy of an argument.

Conclusion: Is the conspiracy theory a coherent theory?
A problem with many conspiracy theories is that they exist only as a challenge to the official version of events. Yet if the conspiracy theory is true, a series of events must have occurred to bring the conspiracy to fruition. However, many conspiracy theorists aren't willing to spell out exactly how they think the conspiracy was achieved. This appears to be a tacit acceptance that their arguments don't add up to a coherent theory. What they often have, instead, is an ad hoc collection of arguments which, if put together, create an implausible, self-contradictory, and ad hoc narrative.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Ummmm enough with the inane youtubes, they do nothing for your case.

The George bush one was inane, the second was very intentional, responsive, and pleasure to whip up in 5 minutes with imageready. The third was IMO better than posting a picture that someone else requested (origin).

It doesn’t matter to me that you didnt read the initial information posted and answer the question. The fact that you think I’m trying to “prove my case to” tells me I was obviously not clear enough in that question. It could also be clarity was irrelevant because you came into this thread to do what you think you do best, or enjoy the most.

You have your way of communicating, I have mine, unless I violate the rules I'll post in any way I feel conveys my point. Aside from your own inane contributions to this forum, your intermittent sarcasm combined with patronizing wit has become a signature style for you. I’m sure you get up from any post you make with a smile a level of satisfaction that can only be obtained with flexing your interpretation of the ways things are. The open admissions on several occasions referencing your intolerance for conspiracies, and throwing in your typical responses which you think are exceedingly clever; once again confirms why you even posted in the first place. I could care less how your motivating objectives influence the way you respond to any thread in this forum, to hear you bark orders doesn’t bother me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Seriously, get out of the woods.

Maybe you should consider pulling your head out the sand first, seriously.

ratbastid · 11-06-2007, 06:01 AM

Don't worry about Ustwo, Sun Tzu. Conspiracy talk hooks him like a big juicy nightcrawler on a #5 hook. He sees conspiracy talk even when there's nothing there to see.

Though, I gotta say... Ppulling a human form out of a bunch blobs feels a little stretchy to me. There may well have been more to JFK's assassination than was publicly told, but a blown up bunch of blobs probably isn't the smoking gun.

fastom · 11-07-2007, 05:42 PM

I've seen clearer pictures and video where i can actually make out something there at the fence. Read up on the James Files confession.

UsTwo wouldn't believe there was any conspiracy in the 9/11 deal if Bush held a news conference to announce how they did it.

Ustwo · 11-07-2007, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fastom

UsTwo wouldn't believe there was any conspiracy in the 9/11 deal if Bush held a news conference to announce how they did it.

But I'm suppose to believe easily debunked crap from internet crack pots.

Please brutha.

Sun Tzu · 11-10-2007, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

But I'm suppose to believe easily debunked crap from internet crack pots.

Please brutha.

Deny "internet crackpots" with information you state is easily debunked, but yet give full trust to liars. Sure.

11-04-2007, 05:35 PM	#1 (permalink)
Sun Tzu Conspiracy Realist Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: The Event Horizon	Conspiracy Theory: The Government I used wikipedia for the following terms for convenience only if anyone has better definitions from a source they find to be of credible nature feel free to use it. Reality: Reality, in everyday usage, means "the state of things as they actually exist." The term reality, in its widest sense, includes everything that is, whether or not it is observable or comprehensible. On a much broader and more subjective level, the private experiences, curiosity, inquiry, and selectivity involved in the personal interpretation of an event shapes reality as seen by one and only one individual and hence is called phenomenological. A common colloquial usage would have "reality" mean "perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes toward reality," as in "My reality is not your reality." This is often used just as a colloquialism indicating that the parties to a conversation agree, or should agree, not to quibble over deeply different conceptions of what is real. For example, in a religious discussion between friends, one might say (attempting humor), "You might disagree, but in my reality, everyone goes to heaven." Reality can be defined in a way that links it to worldviews or parts of them (conceptual frameworks): Reality is the totality of all things, structures (actual and conceptual), events (past and present) and phenomena, whether observable or not. It is what a worldview (whether it be based on individual or shared human experience) ultimately attempts to describe or map. Certain ideas from physics, philosophy, sociology, literary criticism, and other fields shape various theories of reality. One such belief is that there simply and literally is no reality beyond the perceptions or beliefs we each have about reality. Such attitudes are summarized in the popular statement, "Perception is reality" or "Life is how you perceive reality" or "reality is what you can get away Truth: According to the less realist trends in philosophy, such as postmodernism/post-structuralism, truth is subjective. When two or more individuals agree upon the interpretation and experience of a particular event, a consensus about an event and its experience begins to be formed. This being common to a few individuals or a larger group, then becomes the 'truth' as seen and agreed upon by a certain set of people — the consensus reality. Thus one particular group may have a certain set of agreed truths, while another group might have a different set of consensual 'truths'. This lets different communities and societies have varied and extremely different notions of reality and truth of the external world. The religion and beliefs of people or communities are a fine example of this level of socially constructed 'reality'. Truth cannot simply be considered truth if one speaks and another hears because individual bias and fallibility challenge the idea that certainty or objectivity are easily grasped. For Anti-realists, the inaccessibility of any final, objective truth means that there is no truth beyond the socially-accepted consensus. (Although this means there are truths, not truth). Fact: A fact or factual entity is a phenomenon that is perceived as an elemental principle. It is rarely one that could be subject to personal interpretation. Instead, it is most often an observed phenomenon of the natural world. The proposition 'viewed from most places on Earth, the sun rises in the east', is a fact. It is a fact for people belonging to any group or nationality, regardless of which language they speak or which part of the hemisphere they come from. This is the foundation of debate, and in some cases even war. When one person perceives as reality differs from another the effects are not generally positive. This could be because one feels that the reality of another casts a negative effect on themselves and those that perceive reality the same way as themselves. A simpler possibility is one experiences straight agitation because others have not subscribed to the same belief utilizing information common to all. The effects from this can range from harmless to earth shattering. An example is the “Holy Land”. Today’s generation has to rely on historical documentation to determine what their reality of what has happened in the past. So about 70 years ago the Zionist Manifest Destiny was initiated with validation from a story written by Hebrews a few thousand years ago. That is reality to them, just as is not a reality to the Palestinians. So what is the reality? A person’s reality will depend on what source they gather enough information to create what is a substantial reality to them. The reason for this thread is I’m curious in what criteria people today use for their perception of “what is going on”. While this could be applied to subjects such as astrology, Bigfoot, loch ness monster, ghosts, and similar I want to focus on an area, that IMO sometimes borders being in the paranoia section- the government. This subject umbrellas out into several areas, but all point to a generalized theme- the government. The National Geographic defines a conspiracy theorist as: someone who postulates on the existence of secret agreements between two or more people or government to perform unlawful acts. It is common practice for those disagreeing with CTs to begin referencing tin foil hats and similar. Postulates has two meanings: A mathematical statement that is accepted without proof, and when used interchangeably with the term axiom- any starting assumption from which other statements are logically derived. Here is where the split of perception happens. An example is JFKs assassination. From the research I’ve done I don’t see how anyone could dispute a cover-up. Even with evidence such as this: people will still maintain the Warren Commission was telling the truth. Fast forward to today. I see the same practice happening. Ultimately I’m wondering do the people that point out tin hat candidates believe everything the government tells them? Do they have the belief that there is no reason for the government to act in any way other than what it states (both parties)? Do they have the belief that since we have a relatively higher freedom than other countries we shouldn’t “rock the boat”? What criteria do people that believe what they are told use to arrive at their perceptions? The news, historical documentation? Using the above image as the epitome: I see the photo the grassy knoll behind JFK when he was shot, is of a man holding a rifle with a muzzle blast. The other side will call it a blemish that doesn’t prove anything. I see Bushes behaviors such as getting caught in a straightforward lie about 911, refusing to testify under oath, and a string of other behaviors to spell it out clearly. His supporters will defend these actions as someone who was under stress. Perhaps if I can learn the ways people arrive at the perceptions; understanding why will be possible. __________________ *None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. -Johann Wolfgang Goethe* Last edited by Sun Tzu; 11-04-2007 at 05:39 PM.

11-04-2007, 05:50 PM	#2 (permalink)
Cynthetiq Tilted Cat Head Administrator Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Manhattan, NY	I dunno it looks like early photos of nebulas and galaxies to me. Does that mean that I don't have the same reality? __________________ I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an asshole or you're not. What's the best nation in the world? DO-NATION!

11-04-2007, 06:27 PM	#4 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes Join Date: Apr 2003	Old Jewish looking guy. Its a grey or a zombie. Guy typing on a lap top. Just once, I want my conspiracy to be in focus. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

11-04-2007, 07:20 PM	#6 (permalink)
Sun Tzu Conspiracy Realist Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: The Event Horizon	just so Im clear is this everyones way of stating people will see what they want to see? While to me its obviously a person holding rifle in the exact area close witnesses starting running toward after they claim hearing a gunshot and seeing smoke, to the three of you its nothing. Its not the JFK conspiracy itself that I find astonishing its the theme of what is happening here. It still happens to 911 to this very moment. WHat I see as very apparent lies straight in your face lies, others are going to see as "mistakes" or verbiage taken out of context. <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EYI7JXGqd0o&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EYI7JXGqd0o&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> __________________ *None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. -Johann Wolfgang Goethe*

11-04-2007, 09:38 PM	#7 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes Join Date: Apr 2003	I used to spend a lot of time alone in the woods. Once you are in them you are no longer a creature of civilization, but just another creature. There were three real dangers, three director actors. Bear, moose, and of course man. Of the three the most likely would have been a bear, though I did encounter a moose (which can be deadly in the mating season), and the nature of the land had not many men, and few you would consider dangerous to a fellow woodsman. But whats interesting is your danger sense increases. A million years on the savanna don't just disappear from your genes. You listen more, you look more, you note things which seem out of place. What can happen though is you get spoked. Suddenly every shadow seems ominous, every anomaly seems malicious. You jump at every bird call, you keep thinking you hear branches breaking just out of earshot. Undoubtedly there are some real conspiracies out there. Some dark and secretive, and its good to look for those, the problem is that once someone thinks they find one, they seem to get spoked. If THAT was true, what about this one? Everywhere they look, they peer into murky shadows, ignoring whats in the light. In the woods, when you get that spooked feeling, that feeling of dread, I like to sit still and listen. You start to hear the squirrels climbing the trees, the birds calling, and the wind blowing. It resets your danger sense, you relax a bit, you no longer feel suffocated by the trees. I recommend the same for the conspiracist. If every dark place you look seems to contain a conspiracy then sit down and think a bit. Yes there are dangers out there, yes there are dark places you should be afraid to go, but most of it is nothing so dark, even if you don't know the entire story. Look for the bears, but don't assume the bears must be there just because you can't see to far. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

11-05-2007, 01:27 AM	#8 (permalink)
Sun Tzu Conspiracy Realist Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: The Event Horizon	<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Nj_rOrlk7bs&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Nj_rOrlk7bs&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> __________________ *None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. -Johann Wolfgang Goethe*

11-05-2007, 06:40 AM	#9 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes Join Date: Apr 2003	<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vdX_OBUeHb4&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vdX_OBUeHb4&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

11-05-2007, 10:30 AM	#10 (permalink)
ottopilot capstan flanging Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Waddy Peytona	It's me inside my car looking out the passenger-side window during a heavy snow saying, "look at all that snow on my passenger-side window". ... sorry, interesting topic, but the picture does remind me of if you looked really closely from the inside at thick snow partially covering a car window. Last edited by ottopilot; 11-05-2007 at 10:37 AM.

11-05-2007, 12:10 PM	#12 (permalink)
Cynthetiq Tilted Cat Head Administrator Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Manhattan, NY	Please post the original picture that you this one is referencing. __________________ I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an asshole or you're not. What's the best nation in the world? DO-NATION!

11-05-2007, 12:26 PM	#13 (permalink)
Sun Tzu Conspiracy Realist Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: The Event Horizon	<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hn1-dy5-Ebs&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hn1-dy5-Ebs&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> __________________ *None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. -Johann Wolfgang Goethe*

11-05-2007, 12:30 PM	#14 (permalink)
Leto Junkie Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: The Danforth	Looks like a nebula to me.

11-06-2007, 06:01 AM	#18 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Yonder	Don't worry about Ustwo, Sun Tzu. Conspiracy talk hooks him like a big juicy nightcrawler on a #5 hook. He sees conspiracy talk even when there's nothing there to see. Though, I gotta say... Ppulling a human form out of a bunch blobs feels a little stretchy to me. There may well have been more to JFK's assassination than was publicly told, but a blown up bunch of blobs probably isn't the smoking gun.

11-07-2007, 05:42 PM	#19 (permalink)
fastom Psycho Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: way out west	I've seen clearer pictures and video where i can actually make out something there at the fence. Read up on the James Files confession. UsTwo wouldn't believe there was any conspiracy in the 9/11 deal if Bush held a news conference to announce how they did it.

11-10-2007, 07:52 PM	#22 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes Join Date: Apr 2003