A lot of the draw for these people is a feeling of being special, and basically a lot of people who are losers in real life need to have something to feel smarter than everyone and an excuse for their being losers. So they are drawn to these fringe ideas as it validates themselves as being so smart compared to everyone else.

This should be good. RF please address the above quote and explain how a FE model would create a round shadow like this:



Don't forget to factor in that in your map you posted before with the sun and moon arbitrarily orbiting above the FE there is nothing between the two that would cast a shadow.

This thread has caused me to rethink all of my previous beliefs regarding...

It used to be a "conspiracy theory" that the NSA listened to everyone's phone calls.

It used to be a "conspiracy theory" that the CIA was involved in the importation of drugs (Iran-Contra Scandal). Do you think Gary Webb was murdered or committed suicide?

It used to be a "conspiracy theory" that banks rigged interest rates (LIBOR scandal).

It used to be a "conspiracy theory" that the Golf of Tonkin incident never happened.

Look into declassified documents like Operation Northwoods or Operation Gladio.

I'm sure that the Reichstag Fire being a false-flag and Nazi concentration camps were considered conspiracy theories by the German people back then.

It was a "conspiracy theory" that there were agent provocateurs at the Montebello, Quebec protests in 2007.

The COINTELPRO operation used to be considered a "conspiracy theory."

There are many more examples... but at one point in time, people would have been labeled "conspiracy nuts" for believing in this stuff before it was admitted to be true.

GreenMagi,

Thing is, there's a conspiracy theory for pretty much anything so of course some of them eventually may come out as true.

Ok, I'm still trying to understand the logic behind this part:

if everything is flat, how does the water ever obscure the boat, regardless of the distance?

Even just 10 years ago, you were considered a "conspiracy theorist" if you claimed that the US government was recording all our phone calls without warrants. The typical response from the sheeple was: "So all the phone companies are in on it too? And there are thousands of people involved in this secret program and no one is speaking out? You're an idiot conspiracy theorist!"

The odds that the Gov was doing that was greater than 0.0%, the odds that the earth is flat is 0.0%. We can prove the latter, EASILY. It would be virtually impossible to prove the former at the time.

Source?

You're right, lizard people probably rule the earth.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/po...anted=all&_r=0

This is 10 years ago. I don't see the NYT article about the fake moon landing in that issue.

Agreed. So that means that sometimes a "conspiracy theorist" will use sound logic and reasoning and present solid evidence... but they will still be ridiculed by the masses and called a nut job.

I'm obviously not claiming that all conspiracy theories are true... but some of them clearly are... but nevertheless, some people IIT dismiss all conspiracy theorists as being as crazy as a flat earther and basically believe that there is no chance that they are correct and that they're nuts, or believe in this stuff to feel special or whatever other nonsense they use to feel more secure about their own world view.

Yes, this is when the program started to be exposed. Prior to this, it was a "conspiracy theory" that was only believed by people wearing tin foil hats.

Thats because if you start talking about phone taps and the next thing you say is 'LIZARD PEOPLE' yeah, they're going to think you're a nutbag. I dont know much, if ANY conspi****** that only believes in a really small and reasonable set of conspiracies because he finds the evidence overwhelming.

lol. this is a perfect example of what i'm talking about.

No, because they don't actually provide solid evidence. What they think constitutes solid evidence doesn't constitute solid evidence to people with half a brain.

No. Find a source where people suggesting that the government recording phone calls gets treated the same way as fake moon landing or FE nonsense. You won't. Some people may have believed it, some not, but no one ever thought that the government monitoring communication was ever anything like tinfoil hat lizard people conspiracy.

I think that I believe in a reasonable set of conspiracies. I obviously don't believe in Lizard people. I don't believe the earth is flat.

But I do believe that the Twin Towers were brought down in a demolition. But since most people think that this couldn't possibly be true, I'm just labeled as a nut job and most people think that there's a 0% chance I'm correct about this (even though there are thousands of architects and engineers who support the controlled demolition theory).

Isn't that just a truism? Someone who only believes in a very small and reasonable subset of conspiracies would not generally be considered a conspiracy theorist.

And in the end of it all. If you believe in something but have no proof, there's really no point in arguing about it with random people as it won't bring it closer to being revealed even if you'd manage to convince them.

Yes, any conspiracy theory seems reasonable when compared to the lizard people conspiracy. That doesn't mean that the NSA spying wasn't still considered a conspiracy theory before it was revealed.

Yes. But the conspiracy nuts love to try to bring them into their fold. You think Oswald didn't act alone or that the government was listening to phone conversations? You're one of us.

If someone believed in no other "conspiracy theories" other than the Twin Towers being brought down in controlled demolition... they are still considered a "conspiracy theorist nut job" by most sheeple.

Conspiracy has a regular meaning where two or more people plan on doing something illegal. No one in the world thinks that that never happens.

Which was sort of my point, these are not all seen as conspi******s. Reasonable is obviously not very objective but I'd rather listen to someone taking the 'US knew' angle vs. 'controlled demolition' for example. Just because its less absurd. Anyone saying anything about the Illuminati can suck my dick though.