Customer Discussions > History forum

Ten Tips to Becoming an Accomplished Conspiracy Cultist


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 254 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2012 3:00:56 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 1, 2012 3:04:12 PM PST
Suet says:
What all conspiracy cults have in common is a methodology that marks them out as categories of counterknowledge*. People who share a muddled, careless or deceitful attitude towards gathering evidence often find themselves drawn to each other's fantasies. If you believe one wrong or strange thing, you are likely to believe another.

Counterknowledge, by Damian Thompson

* Misinformation packaged to look like fact.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 19, 2012 8:56:29 AM PST
Allan says:
Global Warming conspirators?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 19, 2012 8:29:13 AM PST
Suet says:
If the New World Order doesn't exist, who's behind the chemtrails?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 19, 2012 7:38:20 AM PST
Allan says:
''Until then, G'day mate.''

Promises, promises.

Sincerely hope you'll keep this one.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 19, 2012 7:34:27 AM PST
So it appears that Allan believes that conspiracies are all around him ("CONSPIRACIES ARE ALIVE AND WELL ALL OVER THE BLOODY PLACE.") yet every time a noted conspiracy theory is mentioned he claims he doesn't believe in it.

Trying to nail this guy down on anything concrete is like trying to grab an eel.

If you ever DO decide what you DO believe in Allan then we will chat.

Until then, G'day mate.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 19, 2012 1:27:53 AM PST
Allan says:
What is it with you, SVA? You getting treatment for this?

First you accuse me of having an attitude towards SFK, now it's the New World Order and the Trilateral Commission. Next thing you know you'll be frothing at the mouth about the Bilderbergers.

Seems there are nutters on both sides of this Conspiracy Theory debate.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 19, 2012 1:15:53 AM PST
No one argued that conspiracies don't exist. Clearly critical reading is not a strong point for you. Everyone that responded to your obvious point agrees that conspiracies exist, the level-headed scholar however doesn't not see conspiracies behind ALL major events. THAT was the claim people made in response to your simple-mindedly obvious post. The discussion everyone was engaged in concerned the Kennedy assassination and the 9/11 attacks. You came along and totally missed the point of the thread and began rambling on about the Trilateral Commission, the Masons, and who knows what else.

No one cared about your point of view so no one responded to these claims. This thread is clearly not for you...no one cares about someone who is afraid of a New World Order or the Trilateral Commission.

It is clear you have nothing to add to the subject being discussed here and I'm sure there are a LOT of nutty conspiracy-believing sites in need of one more believer.

Send me a picture of you in your aluminum foil hat.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 9:30:52 PM PST
Allan says:
You ARE a twit, SVA. Here's my original post which so got your knickers in a knot.

Just one thing all youse anti-Conspiracy Theory atheists are missing, and as a life-long dedicated true-blue, born-again Conspiracy Theory believer I can prove it. I have seen the light.

CONSPIRACIES DO EXIST!

Banks conspire, oil companies conspire, tyre companies conspire, shipping magnates conspire, auto manufacturers conspire, governments conspire, politicians conspire, lawyers conspire, university fraternity and sorority clubs conspire, fishing clubs conspire, even the High School Parents and Citizens' Committees conspire.

CONSPIRACIES ARE ALIVE AND WELL ALL OVER THE BLOODY PLACE.

And if you do not convert soon and join one you will be condemned to spend the entire rest of your lonely life in the devilish misery all you heathens and heretics deserve.

I'm outta here.

Too lonely, there being no lobby groups.

Thanks for proving my original point.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 9:19:31 PM PST
YOU haven't said ANYTHING about the Kennedy assassination conspiracy all you've done is to allude, nervously, and vaguely to vast global conspiracies that allow you the latitude to make sweeping allegations without the burden of offering any concrete proof. That is why your comments aren't taken seriously. I brought up the Kennedy assassination as an example of a simple crime with NO conspiratorial connections of any kind as proof that not all conspiracies are real. You disagreed and claimed that conspiracies are all around us. I asked for proof to support your claim, and you stood silently, unable to come up with one single fact of piece of evidence showing that Kenned was assassinated as a part of any conspiracy.

Therefore it appears we agree on that point. The Kennedy assassination? No conspiracy.

Thanks for proving my original point.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 9:07:55 PM PST
Allan says:
S. V. Anderson says: So it appears from Allan's silence concerning EVIDENCE of a Kennedy assassination conspiracy Benjamin Franklin was right once again:

Allan: Did I REALLY upset you so much that you are driven to lie about me?

When did I ever say anything at all about JFK?

I have asked you before, of course, but I will do you the courtesy of accepting I may have missed your response.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 4:55:17 PM PST
So it appears from Allan's silence concerning EVIDENCE of a Kennedy assassination conspiracy Benjamin Franklin was right once again:

"An empty drum sounds the loudest."

Now that Allan has been disposed of is there ANY conspiracy cultist that has any actual evidence of a Kennedy assassination conspiracy or all all conspiracy cultists simply making shallow allegations with no supporting evidence?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 4:48:57 PM PST
Suet says:
I was just reporting their doings at second hand, Allan.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 1:36:14 PM PST
Allan says:
Did you actually see them, were you part of their Bacchanalian sprees?

Or is this just envy because you were not invited?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 12:46:24 PM PST
Suet says:
Bugger the Twelve Caesars! Most of them did anyway.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 7:38:29 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 18, 2012 7:41:47 AM PST
Suetonius writes: "4. If two buildings that size had collapsed, the shockwaves would have started a tsunami that would have wiped out New Jersey. Somebody would have noticed."

Delayed reaction! Delayed reaction!

Sure, they blamed it on "Sandy", a non-hurricane hurricane, but it was really the tidal surge that took out most of the Jersey Shore (but not Snookie, unfortunately). What's a tidal surge but a mini-tsunami?

C'mon, open your eyes!

Hank

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 6:00:07 AM PST
Debunker says:
You make a powerful case for the "truthers". Are you sure you're not one in disguise?

Posted on Nov 18, 2012 4:48:24 AM PST
Suet says:
The fact that there is not a single example of total top-down progressive collapse outside of the alleged examples of the Twin Towers makes it entirely unscientific to presuppose that the alleged phenomenon was operative here.
- D. R Griffin, Debunking 9/11 Debunking, page 164.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwFHEoiUZ7o

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 4:18:42 AM PST
Allan says:
You trying to make me feel redundant, Gaius Tranquillus?

Stick with The Twelve Caesars, OK?

Posted on Nov 18, 2012 4:04:02 AM PST
Suet says:
TEN REASONS WHY THE WTC TOWERS COULD NOT HAVE COLLAPSED

1. They were designed to withstand airliners, mamathermite, nukes, big ray guns, etc. Underwriters Laboratories certified this.

2. If they had collapsed at free-fall speed, they would have fallen through to China in 45 minutes. Instead it took several months for the steel to get there.

3. The Empire State Building didn't collapse when an airplane hit it and that was built when New York was still in the Empire.

4. If two buildings that size had collapsed, the shockwaves would have started a tsunami that would have wiped out New Jersey. Somebody would have noticed.

5. Richard Gage's cardboard boxes didn't collapse when he dropped them, so why would buildings made of steel and concrete collapse?

6. No other 110-storey buildings hit by jetliners and set on fire have ever collapsed in Manhattan.

7. Each storey was 12 ft high. It takes 0.87 secs for an object to fall 12 ft. Do the math: 110 x 0.87 = 95.7. It would have taken a minute and a half for each of those towers to collapse!

8. The pyroclastic clouds would have suffocated everybody in Manhattan. See #4.

9. The New World Order loves tall buildings, that's why they hang out at the UN. They would never have allowed it.

10. How could two 1300 ft buildings collapse without damaging the surroundings? At least one other building would have collapsed later.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 17, 2012 6:47:41 PM PST
Allan says:
S. V. Anderson says: When asked to provide three specific items of evidence to support his suspicions Allan wrote:

Allan: Which suspicions were those, SVA?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 17, 2012 11:30:40 AM PST
When asked to provide three specific items of evidence to support his suspicions Allan wrote:

Can someone please take SVA aside and explain to him what's been going on?

"I'm far more interested in the Illuminati and the Freemasons, the Rhodes Scholarship, and the general dumbing down of this generation (à la the Protocols) than I am in the machinations of United Stater politics..."

See what I mean? The BEST disinfectant for the conspiracvy cultist is to ask for evidence. Since they don't have any they change the subject.

This thread started with a list I wrote of ten tips to becoming a conspiracy cultist. Allan just demonstrated point number four: Always change the subject when cornered. Conspiracy nuts always do this. I asked for evidence of a conspiracy...Allan not having any such evidence (since there is none) changed the subject to the Illuminati, the Freemasons, etc... While this tactic may fool some readers it doesn't fool mne. I've been dealing with these kooks for nearly forty years and they never change. Until Allan offers something concrete to debate he needs to hang around conspiracy-believers because they are the only nuts that will take his evidence-free claims seriously.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 17, 2012 8:06:32 AM PST
Allan says:
You're in with the wrong mob, mate.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 17, 2012 8:02:40 AM PST
But I do wonder if I am being compensated fairly.

Oh well, as the saying goes, you get what you pay for.

Hank

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 17, 2012 7:10:10 AM PST
Allan says:
Makes a pleasant change.

Someone here thinking in the long term, that is.

More elections in two years time in the USA if I've got it right? (How much will that cost, and who will pay for it?)

SOMEONE doesn't want the USA to think in the long term.

Wonder who it can be?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 17, 2012 6:54:35 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 17, 2012 6:57:51 AM PST
JagdTiger says: "No wonder why this country is going broke!."

Yes, I've got a million dollar contract, but I hardly think a buck a year for a million years is really contributing that much to the national debt.

Hank
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  History forum
Participants:  27
Total posts:  254
Initial post:  Oct 25, 2012
Latest post:  Dec 1, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions