Happy Atheist Forum

As annoying as religion can be, I think conpsiracy nuts bug me a lot more. Lately I've been getting a barrage of MySpace bulletins with links to
YouTube videos like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ4iIM8Eljc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ4iIM8Eljc)

This is a known hoax, even within the conspiracy theorists circles, apparently.

Also didn't realize until today that flouride is still a hot topic in such circles, I feel like responding to some of the bulletins and comments with a link to the clip from Dr. Strangelove in which General Ripper tells Mandrake about his precious bodily fluids/life essence.

Then there's all the stuff about FEMA making all these 3-person coffins, and from what I've been able to find out they're actually just coffin covers that keep out water and protect from land sinkage. I'm still not very informed on a lot of these things,never really cared, so I can't say for sure what the conspiracy theorists are right/wrong about, but my instincts tell me they're mostly wrong, and that brings me to what's troubling me: Google and YouTube seem to bring up more pro-conspiracy blogs/videos/articles/websites/forums than they do things that explain things more rationally, so the general impression I get is that there are more people who believe in all this stuff than those who don't.

What also confuses me about these people is that they don't seem to know what the goals of these conspiracies are, or rather why the percieved goals exist.
A lot of it seems to be along the lines of "Well, the governmetn wants to kill 80% of the population becasue the fat cats/illuminati/world puppeteers just want it that way." Seriously, the psychology behind these modes of thought are kind of disturbing, almost like the bizarro-version of religion: Beleiving in something for which you have no proof, but not for comfort, for the opposite of comfort, a sort of masochistic excitement.

I should get my hands on a DTV tuner. If there's a camera in there, I'll find it.

Conspiracy theories aren't all inherently crazy or wrong. They're unproven hypothesis. Those that believe unproven hypothesis are simply incorrect in their logic, the same as a religious person believing in the supernatural despite any evidence to support their beliefs. In other words, ask questions and make hypothesis to your heart's content; that's the genesis of discovery. Just don't put your cart before your horse.

People thought the Tuskegee Syphilis Study was nothing but rubbish. We now know it's true that the US government intentionally infected 400 poor, black American citizens with syphilis over the course of 40 years. 200 innocent men died. It was a very dark chapter in our country's history.

There was a counter-conspiracy programme aired on channel 5 last year about 9/11. It was basically a direct response to loose change. It went over every pont made in loose change and systematically ripped every conspiracy hypothesis apart. The main difference between these two programmes was the fact that one used lots of eye witness and professional statements from the people who were there and the other simply used conjecture and heresay to put forward its points.
They even interviewed the loose change creator who, after some questioning, started throwing swear words and insults around because he was being asked questions he couldn't answer, or, that those questions showed him to be massively wrong about a lot of his ideas. That made me happy.

I'm quite happy for these people to make up what stories they want because in the most part, the general population just see them as crackpots. The thing that pisses me off is when they start to get nasty and accuse ordinary people (a lot of which lost a lot of friends/family in 9/11) of being a part of the conspiracy. Most of the 9/11 conspiracies would have to have tens of thousands of ordinary workers in on this nefarious plot to kill almost 3000 innocent people.

Bullshit. Pure and simple.

The moon hoax people piss me off too. One guy (whilst i was trying to chill out in the pub after a hard weeks work) even tried to persuade me that Armstrong 'met' aliens on the moon. After 10 more minutes of ranting he started telling me how the moon landings were faked! So, i asked him which farce he eventually wanted to settle with as both these points were completely contradictory... The fact his only source of reference was youtube was kind of lost on him. I guess that goes to show how these theories usually perpetuate. Someone sees something written on teh interwebz and without any critical analysis, take it all as verbatim and then spread it around until some other gulliable idiot listens.

If i was to hazard a guess, 98% of all conspiracy theory is hot air. If a government really wants to keep something secret, it will.

Will, you're absolutely right, and I do beleive that conspiracies like the syphalis tests do happen; I certainly don't trust government [very much]. It's these people who jump on every little element of change that annoy me, the ones who think that there's some darker agenda behind everything that happens and that's it all part of some master global plan, or the NWO. Interestingly, while researching the DTV video, I found that there are even people who beleive that the boxes transmit mind control waves. Craziness!

Karadan, moon theorists piss me off, too. I actually had a friend who didn't beleive they landed on the moon and she brought up the usual {perfectly explainable] "proof" like the "prop number" on one of the rocks in one of the photos and the way the flag moved in the video. Not surprisingly, she also thought the Bush administration was responsible for 9/11 and that all of those workers were in on it. What gets me about the moon people is that they're so adamant about it, like it would hurt them to think that we made it to the moon. Again, whether or not we made it to the moon isn't something I really care about; if I did find out it was fake I wouldn't be enraged or depressed, so i can't understand why these people put so much stock in a belief that doesn't really affect their day to day lives. Maybe since they're often "counter-culture" types its just another thing for them to go against the grain about.

Quote from: "Miss Anthrope"Karadan, moon theorists piss me off, too. I actually had a friend who didn't beleive they landed on the moon and she brought up the usual {perfectly explainable] "proof" like the "prop number" on one of the rocks in one of the photos and the way the flag moved in the video. Not surprisingly, she also thought the Bush administration was responsible for 9/11 and that all of those workers were in on it. What gets me about the moon people is that they're so adamant about it, like it would hurt them to think that we made it to the moon. Again, whether or not we made it to the moon isn't something I really care about; if I did find out it was fake I wouldn't be enraged or depressed, so i can't understand why these people put so much stock in a belief that doesn't really affect their day to day lives. Maybe since they're often "counter-culture" types its just another thing for them to go against the grain about.

Absolutely. I'm quite sure if a study was conducted investigating the average age of the moon hoax believers, the results would say that most of these people weren't even alive when Apollo 11 touched down on the lunar surface. Anyone old enough to remember the moon landings will be quite happy to believe it as real. I guess it is easier for people to subscibe to bullshit theories when they can't actually remember the event for themselves. Correct me if i am wrong, but i don't know of anyone proclaiming the moon landings to be faked during, or directly after the mission in 1969.

If i did find out it was faked, i'd be hugely upset. It would make a complete mockery of science. I'm very passionate about the science of space exploration. That's just me, though

There has to be a balance, though. As skeptics, it's our responsibility in being true to ourselves to hear people out. Naturally, after we've heard people out, we apply deductive logic and an application of science in order to determine if the explanation they've offered fits the facts, or if the facts themselves are even questionable, but you have to make the initial attempt to listen.

I'll give you an example (please, bear with me):
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvisibility911.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2008%2F07%2Fpentagon-hole.jpg&hash=bdc382507375fde92d69c2d380aa5f15a729908d)
This is a picture taken by an amature photographer of the initial impact at the Pentagon on 9/11 before the roof collapsed. Here is a closeup:
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F911review.org%2Fbrad.com%2Fpentagon%2Fpurdue%2Fhole2.jpg&hash=211c91644d48647a37cb70ad3abcd683b972d676)
Upon seeing this, people essentially went completely nuts. "It was a missile!" "It was the nosecone!" "It was a directed energy weapon!"
The mistake these people made wasn't to propose unlikely hypothesis, it was to stop at the hypothesis. Sure, it's not impossible that there was a directed energy weapon or missile, but without making your case no one is going to think your guess is anywhere near likely. In other words, they didn't finish. They were lazy.

Here's how I would do it:
Based on the sizes of the windows in the picture, it's likely that the hole is 8-12 feet (2.4-3.6 meters) wide. While the cabin is about 12 feet wide, the engines, wings, and tail would have terrible trouble fitting in that hole, unless the planes have the ability to fold in the wings and tail in the case of a crash. This would suggest that the NIST's official explanation that the plane entered the building and broke up on the interior is incorrect. Further study is needed.

Probably like most interested people I have viewed alot about the attack on the pentagon and the official released version ... that just does not make sense ... we have all seen the cosequences of a real plane crash and ... that just does not make sense ... The size of the hole to the size of the plane ... that just does not make sense ...  

A plane or a missile "possibly friendly fire" actually hitting the pentagon and they just do not want us to see the real pictures and are playing a double bluff :D  

As for conspiracies ... well of course there are real conspiracies going on all the time... I just hope the majority are meant for our benefit ... There are people who want to create their particular version of a new world order as there are people who want to oppose that version and bring in their own ...

LETS JUST HOPE THE GOOD GUYS WIN

What about two satelites crashing? It just seems incredibly unlikely...

Quote from: "karadan"If i was to hazard a guess, 98% of all conspiracy theory is hot air. If a government really wants to keep something secret, it will.

I agree with the first statement. As for the second one, our government can't get anything right here in America. I don't think they'd be able to keep anything big a secret for too long, there has to be a certain level of competence for that.

Maybe thats what they want you to think!

They leak the minor stuff out ( 9/11 scam etc ) to distract us from the REAL goings on ( Aliens? Illuminati? Dolphins? ). At least one of the former has to be true, otherwise they wouldn't let all the 9/11 conspiracy theories exist.

Just becuase I'm paranoid doesn't mean their NOT out to get me.

Quote from: "Miss Anthrope"Karadan, moon theorists piss me off, too. I actually had a friend who didn't beleive they landed on the moon and she brought up the usual {perfectly explainable] "proof" like the "prop number" on one of the rocks in one of the photos and the way the flag moved in the video.

I didn't (and don't) think the original filmed moon landing occurred, but never realized there was a "conspiracy theory" surrounding it until a few years ago.  It has nothing to do with the science or examples you used above, it's just that it was too convenient for the US to land first when we were so far behind the Russian's and I am skeptical about the technology at the time.  The race was on an we were not leading the pack, I just have difficulty believing it happened at that time and then so many failed attempts occurred in missions afterward.  I don't sit around thinking about it or pointing out the things in the video that don't make sense to me, just find it hard to believe.  

Well, I think the body of evidence for the moon landing video's authenticity is pretty telling, but of course I can't witness the event or the evidence first hand, so the moon landing is another one of those things which I don't think we can fully beleive or have non-belief in without taking a leap of faith in varying degrees. Personally, i certainly wouldn't put it past humans to try to fake such a thing, particularly during a cold war. But I still thing such a conspiracy would have been very difficult to pull off. I'd even say that I have some trust in the astronauts, but honestly I don't really trust people I don't know (or some that I do know )

But yeah, it's some of the arguments of "proof" in the videos that I take issue with, not really the actual non-belief itself (again, it's not something I really care about). I think the one that annoys me the most, as an illustrator, is the "inaccurate shadows" argument concerning the shadows being cast by rocks on the moon. Perpsectives of shadows can be misleading on non-flat terrain and there's nothing "wrong" with the shadows. Also, what gets me about it is that if it was filmed on a set, why would the shadows be cast in the "wrong" way?

Quote from: "VanReal"

Quote from: "Miss Anthrope"Karadan, moon theorists piss me off, too. I actually had a friend who didn't beleive they landed on the moon and she brought up the usual {perfectly explainable] "proof" like the "prop number" on one of the rocks in one of the photos and the way the flag moved in the video.

I didn't (and don't) think the original filmed moon landing occurred, but never realized there was a "conspiracy theory" surrounding it until a few years ago.  It has nothing to do with the science or examples you used above, it's just that it was too convenient for the US to land first when we were so far behind the Russian's and I am skeptical about the technology at the time.  The race was on an we were not leading the pack, I just have difficulty believing it happened at that time and then so many failed attempts occurred in missions afterward.  I don't sit around thinking about it or pointing out the things in the video that don't make sense to me, just find it hard to believe.  

Read up a bit more on the history of the space program. We were behind the Russians at first, but poured more money into our space program and zoomed by them. Also, just because it seems too convenient to you, doesn't make it fake. That's not a logical assumption. Also, what were the "so many failed attempts" afterward?

Guys, if you believe the lunar landings didn't occur, I encourage you to put the same thought and effort into learning about them as you do your atheism. This is analogous to trying to debate a creationist on evolution. They have no evidence for their stance, yet they believe they are right. I have as much of a hard time understanding why people believe we didn't go to the Moon as I do understanding why people think the Earth is only 6000 years old.

Quote from: "McQ"Read up a bit more on the history of the space program. We were behind the Russians at first, but poured more money into our space program and zoomed by them. Also, just because it seems too convenient to you, doesn't make it fake. That's not a logical assumption. Also, what were the "so many failed attempts" afterward?

Guys, if you believe the lunar landings didn't occur, I encourage you to put the same thought and effort into learning about them as you do your atheism. This is analogous to trying to debate a creationist on evolution. They have no evidence for their stance, yet they believe they are right. I have as much of a hard time understanding why people believe we didn't go to the Moon as I do understanding why people think the Earth is only 6000 years old.

I wasn't talking about the US's subsequent attempts failing but moon landing attempts failing after in general.  According to NASA's records we did not zoom right past them.  And it's just convenient that everything went so right at the time, landing, walking, all cameras operational, etc.  Doesn't have to be logical, I'm not submitting a hypothesis on why or how it was faked.  http://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/HumanExplore/Exploration/EXLibrary/docs/facts/LSumm1.htm I think not having been born until 1974 probably causes a lot of my skepticism as well, I don't have the emotional attachment to its importance.

As far as obtaining evidence to support my stance I don't feel the need to do so just as I don't try to find evidence to support my non-belief in a God.  I don't really care either way about the moon landing and don't try to find proof that it didn't happen, just from gut I don't believe it happened much like from gut I don't believe in any God.  I don't run around describing or screaming about a conspiracy though, just not that important to me.  (It is fun to mention it to my boyfriend though because it drives him absolutely crazy.)  I just mentioned this to say that not everyone who doesn't believe it happened is a conspiracy theory nut, I don't pay any attention to what those guys use as "evidence" and don't feel like any of it is legitimate scientific support of it not happening.  I've never even googled it. (And I google everything.   )

Conspiracy theories just seem counter-logical to me. Did you ever try keeping a secret between just 3 or 4 people? It's just about impossible. Now, imagine trying to keep a secret between thousands of people. This,I believe, would be totally impossible.

Quote from: "verybigv"Conspiracy theories just seem counter-logical to me. Did you ever try keeping a secret between just 3 or 4 people? It's just about impossible. Now, imagine trying to keep a secret between thousands of people. This,I believe, would be totally impossible.

It is very difficult to keep secrets, thus the creation of conspiracies.  I like how Dallas created the conspiracy theory museum in the book depository at Dealy....put everything out there, makes you not believe there was one at all.  Sometimes they are fun to explore, taking them too seriously or getting too crazy about them takes the fun out of it.  I think the creation of organized religion was and is a big conspiracy and "they" managed to keep their secret and are still pulling the wool over people's eyes.  

Disclaimer: All the below stuff is meant as if we were having a very friendly, but animated debate. I am not in the least bit angry, miffed, pissed, or otherwise upset with VanReal!
I like good lively debates at times, and am just calling out some things that need to be called out. Cool? Ok, cool.  :)

Quote from: "VanReal"According to NASA's records we did not zoom right past them.  And it's just convenient that everything went so right at the time, landing, walking, all cameras operational, etc.

How much of NASA's records have you read? I'll have my cousin send you reams of stuff if you want. He's been launching rockets from the Cape since the 70s. Second, it was not "convenient" everything went so right. For one thing, everything did not go "so right".  There were screw-ups galore! For Pete's sake, Armstrong was seconds away from drilling the Lunar Module into the Moon's dusty old surface! Apollo 11 alone had more than its share of glitches, not to mention Apollo 13. And Apollo 13 was the only subsequent mission than failed to achieve a lunar landing after Apollo 11. For another thing, the missions planned for thousands of options, malfunctions, etc. So by being successful, they weren't lucky, or convenient. That's kind of a strange way to put it...convenient.

Quote from: "VanReal"Doesn't have to be logical, I'm not submitting a hypothesis on why or how it was faked.  http://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/HumanExplore/Exploration/EXLibrary/docs/facts/LSumm1.htm I think not having been born until 1974 probably causes a lot of my skepticism as well, I don't have the emotional attachment to its importance.

That's fine if you don't want to be logical. And I'm not trying to be a killjoy, but you are, in fact, making a claim that Apollo 11 never actually went to the Moon. Which is important as to your next analogy, of comparing it to not having to prove there isn't a god. Totally different. It's fine also if it's not important to you and you don't feel like keeping this thread going. I'm happy to let it go too. But if that's the case, then don't make the claim in the first place that it was faked. By doing that, you do need supporting evidence, and you should be expected to show it. As for "my side" of this....ummm....what other evidence do you need than the thousands of people who were part of it, the photos, lunar samples, Tang, etc...?  :D

Quote from: "VanReal"I just mentioned this to say that not everyone who doesn't believe it happened is a conspiracy theory nut, I don't pay any attention to what those guys use as "evidence" and don't feel like any of it is legitimate scientific support of it not happening.  I've never even googled it. (And I google everything.  :D  (just kidding about the shut up thing...it fit so well into the sentence to not put it in!).

Really though, if you ever want more real good data on any of the lunar missions there is no end to the information at your fingertips, and I'd be happy to supply you with some too.

No need for the disclaimer McQ!  No offense taken at all, and it certainly sounds like you know your stuff.  My other half would be so proud, better make sure he never sees this.  :confused:

Quote from: "Ihateyoumike"

Quote from: "karadan"If i was to hazard a guess, 98% of all conspiracy theory is hot air. If a government really wants to keep something secret, it will.

I agree with the first statement. As for the second one, our government can't get anything right here in America. I don't think they'd be able to keep anything big a secret for too long, there has to be a certain level of competence for that.

O'Rly? :)

Quote from: "Miss Anthrope"Well, I think the body of evidence for the moon landing video's authenticity is pretty telling, but of course I can't witness the event or the evidence first hand, so the moon landing is another one of those things which I don't think we can fully beleive or have non-belief in without taking a leap of faith in varying degrees. Personally, i certainly wouldn't put it past humans to try to fake such a thing, particularly during a cold war. But I still thing such a conspiracy would have been very difficult to pull off. I'd even say that I have some trust in the astronauts, but honestly I don't really trust people I don't know (or some that I do know )

But yeah, it's some of the arguments of "proof" in the videos that I take issue with, not really the actual non-belief itself (again, it's not something I really care about). I think the one that annoys me the most, as an illustrator, is the "inaccurate shadows" argument concerning the shadows being cast by rocks on the moon. Perpsectives of shadows can be misleading on non-flat terrain and there's nothing "wrong" with the shadows. Also, what gets me about it is that if it was filmed on a set, why would the shadows be cast in the "wrong" way?

It would have been harder to pull off the conspiracy than it would have actually landing on the moon. The fact the Russians would have fallen over themselves to expose the ruse seems to be lost on the conspiracy theorists. The Russians tracked Apollo 11 all the way there and back. They would have used triangulation to work out where the radio signals were coming from.

At the end of the second world war, the US poached almost all of the scientific talent from the Third Reich. The principal scientists working on the V2 became the lead rocket engineers on the Apollo program. The quantum leap in advancements in propulsion technology are almost entirely attributable to the German scientists poached after the war.

The human race has proven many times exactly what can be achieved when we pour unlimited manpower, resources and wealth into something. Putting a quarter of the GDP of the US over 10 years into the project (by todays currency, about 4 trillion) is the reason the Apollo mission was successful after 10 years of planning.

NASA didn't actually think Apollo 11 would succeed. That is why Aldrin and Armstrong were actually the 17th least qualified to go up. The chances they would die during the mission were so high that they decided to put the last people in line, on the first flight.

Ever since my dad gave me 'Time Magazine' with the picture of the Saturn V on the front when i was 7 years old, i've been studying all aspects of space travel. I have books and books on the subject. It just saddens me that when, through collective effort, we manage to pull off something as spectacular as the moon landings, some idiot sitting in an armchair, simply says 'BOLLOCKS, THAT NEVER HAPPENED'. Fuck those people. They irritate me more than any other type of human being in existence.

I will always defend the moon landings. I'll always be there to counter any crackpot imbecile who thinks he knows better than NASA. Anyone who truly believes in this hoax can kiss my puckered asshole.

Rant over. I just hope that made my position on this subject clear :p

Quote from: "VanReal"

Quote from: "verybigv"Conspiracy theories just seem counter-logical to me. Did you ever try keeping a secret between just 3 or 4 people? It's just about impossible. Now, imagine trying to keep a secret between thousands of people. This,I believe, would be totally impossible.

It is very difficult to keep secrets, thus the creation of conspiracies.  I like how Dallas created the conspiracy theory museum in the book depository at Dealy....put everything out there, makes you not believe there was one at all.  Sometimes they are fun to explore, taking them too seriously or getting too crazy about them takes the fun out of it.  I think the creation of organized religion was and is a big conspiracy and "they" managed to keep their secret and are still pulling the wool over people's eyes.   :crazy: does not mean that conspiracies do not exist.  

The truth usually comes out in the end, however, the fact that our governments have laws that protect information for 30 to 50 years proves that many secrets are kept by many people and then only admitted when the information can no longer do any harm to the people involved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiraci ... nspiracies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracism#Proven_historical_conspiracies)

QuoteRant over. I just hope that made my position on this subject clear :p

Karadan, I don't think I understand, please tell us how you really feel..... [attachment=0:36d2zd0h]moon-landing-hoax.jpg[/attachment:36d2zd0h] Compliments of Chris Madden at http://www.chrismadden.co.uk/moon/moon-landing-hoax.html

I'm all for people investigating claims of moon landings, after all, every idea should be scrutinised and held up for testing.

When people start coming to conclusions that are obviously wrong though, in the face of insurmountable evidence, it makes me a little sad.

You can actually see some of the lunar objects from earth now (you need a research grade cassegrain telescope, sure, but thats not the point! ).

Quote from: "VanReal"

QuoteRant over. I just hope that made my position on this subject clear :p

Karadan, I don't think I understand, please tell us how you really feel..... :D

Quote from: "SSY"You can actually see some of the lunar objects from earth now (you need a research grade cassegrain telescope, sure, but thats not the point! ).

Wow. That sounds 'spensive. That is super cool though.

People who believe these types of things are the same type of people who supported bush, just the opposite end of the spectrum.  Think for yourself.  You're capable of that.

Quote from: "Rev.RonnieReynolds"People who believe these types of things are the same type of people who supported bush, just the opposite end of the spectrum.  Think for yourself.  You're capable of that.

I supported very little of Bush's implementation, and fewer of his ideas - however I wouldn't necessarily lump all of those that did in with every other nutter.

Quote from: "SSY"I'm all for people investigating claims of moon landings, after all, every idea should be scrutinised and held up for testing.

When people start coming to conclusions that are obviously wrong though, in the face of insurmountable evidence, it makes me a little sad.

You can actually see some of the lunar objects from earth now (you need a research grade cassegrain telescope, sure, but thats not the point! ).

Hmmm, when this thread was resurrected, I just noticed this.

What justification is there to "investigate claims" of the lunar landings? You don't investigate things that actually happened and are already documented (some of the most documented events in human history). Maybe you "investigate" details of how well the missions performed, but that's about it.

You can not see objects left behind from the lunar missions, even with the Hubble Space Telescope. Not even close. The Keck telescope would need to be 75 meters in diameter just to see the Lunar Rover. To see any of the U.S. flags a telescope would need to be 200 meters in diameter.

The Moon Landing Hoax people are actually more idiotic than the Holocaust Deniers or the 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists, IMHO.  

Some links to start with on the Apollo "Hoax":

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html (http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html)

http://www.bautforum.com/ (http://www.bautforum.com/)