Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 42

Thread: Conspiracy Theories Forum

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    15,801

    Conspiracy Theories Forum

    Should the "theories" in the Conspiracy Theories Forum include any conspiracy theory, or be restricted to those related to Space and Astronomy -- like the fora grouping implies.

    There seem to be several, way more than enough, 9/11 threads there now.
    0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...
    Skepticism enables us to distinguish fancy from fact, to test our speculations. --Carl Sagan

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    27,846
    They can really be about anything, of course, since we're all into space and astronomy, I expect the majority will cover spacey conspiracies.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    3,364
    Right now there appears to be seven 9/11 threads but some of them were started by the same poster (who is now banned). In my experience some topics become a fad for a while, have a number of threads, then die out. Geocentrism was a big fad a couple of years ago. PX as well. Evolution threads tend to appear in bursts every now and again, etc.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    6,626
    Is it bad that I kind of want a new theory to pop up? The old ones have been debunked to death.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,743
    Quote Originally Posted by The Supreme Canuck
    Is it bad that I kind of want a new theory to pop up? The old ones have been debunked to death.
    You're not alone.

    By the way: You can start by debunking my theory that demons invented civilization, and have always had control over government (through churches, monarchies, etc.)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pontoise France
    Posts
    2,319
    very nice program , but just connecting to this forum i got an advertisement for Nostradamus

    NOSTRADAMUS ONLINE et bla bla bla aka
    War World III revealations
    Hidden profecies revealed
    and last but not the least 2006 2012 Endtimes

    Google ads as a trojan horse !

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,293

    Full Disclosure

    Is there anyone out there willing to put aside silliness and grant highly respectable men an opportunity to express their witness to extra-terrestrial beings on and in our planet? Or are we all Sagan-ists (as in Carl, God rest his soul) who prefer looking only through long tubes at distant spects and hypothesizing like ground hogs on the true meaning of life? Dr. Greer of The Disclosure Project has made many interesting friends available to the astronomy community. Would anyone in this universe like to discuss their testimony as it affects astronomy today? If not here, then how about a polite referral to some other planet where astronomy and reality might dialogue. I believe these men Dr. Greer has united have a lot to offer astronomers with open minds. I would truly be honored to make acquaintance with any others in this universe (-the forum here) who aren't afraid to hypothesize on the implications for space-travel and physics as we know it today.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16,643

    Re: Conspiracy Theories Forum

    Quote Originally Posted by Fr. Wayne
    Is there anyone out there willing to put aside silliness and grant highly respectable men an opportunity to express their witness to extra-terrestrial beings on and in our planet? Or are we all Sagan-ists (as in Carl, God rest his soul) who prefer looking only through long tubes at distant spects and hypothesizing like ground hogs on the true meaning of life? Dr. Greer of The Disclosure Project has made many interesting friends available to the astronomy community. Would anyone in this universe like to discuss their testimony as it affects astronomy today? If not here, then how about a polite referral to some other planet where astronomy and reality might dialogue. I believe these men Dr. Greer has united have a lot to offer astronomers with open minds. I would truly be honored to make acquaintance with any others in this universe (-the forum here) who aren't afraid to hypothesize on the implications for space-travel and physics as we know it today.
    Science doesn't work by using testimony of witnesses. Nor does it work by using the opinions of authority figures. It works by using objective evidence, repeatable experimental results, and mathematical constructs that successfully predict behavior.

    Re "extra-terrestrial beings on and in our planet", objective evidence such as actual physical specimens would then allow a scientific examination, the result of which might be a working hypothesis, which, with more reliable objective evidence, repeatable experimental results, and a working mathematical model, might evolve into a theory. So far that objective evidence is lacking.

    No scientific hypothesis will be developed when the only "evidence" presented consists of testimonies, accounts of witnesses, and other types of anecdotal data. All that can be done with such information is speculation, which is outside the realm of science.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,304
    Quote Originally Posted by Maksutov
    One wonders what the tally would be per CT/HB if one went back into the archives and counted how many times the same debunked claims have been brought up.

    I agree with jt-3d, there should be a sticky that could be pointed to, relieving us of the need to go over the same ground for the 100th+ time.
    I totally agree, having looked through the archives I'm often struck by seeing the same things over and over, and I thought that people weren't supposed to duplicate threads!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,092
    Quote Originally Posted by Fr. Wayne
    Is there anyone out there willing to put aside silliness and grant highly respectable men an opportunity to express their witness to extra-terrestrial beings on and in our planet? Or are we all Sagan-ists (as in Carl, God rest his soul) who prefer looking only through long tubes at distant spects and hypothesizing like ground hogs on the true meaning of life? Dr. Greer of The Disclosure Project has made many interesting friends available to the astronomy community. Would anyone in this universe like to discuss their testimony as it affects astronomy today? If not here, then how about a polite referral to some other planet where astronomy and reality might dialogue. I believe these men Dr. Greer has united have a lot to offer astronomers with open minds. I would truly be honored to make acquaintance with any others in this universe (-the forum here) who aren't afraid to hypothesize on the implications for space-travel and physics as we know it today.
    Everyone, respectable or not, is welcome to express himself on this and other astronomy related (and even not astronomy related) subjects on this board. You just have to abide by the rules, but basically they say be polite, don't discuss religion and politics (except when astronomy related, and even then cautiously), and try to answer questions (the answer "i don't know" is allright of course). Nothing there that prevents you or anyone from relating their testimonies.
    Politeness of course includes not starting by implying that astronomy as it discussed here has nothing to do with reality. This seems to me not to be the best way to achieve an open mindedness towards your testimonials here.
    Anyway, having said all that, don't be surprised if your testimonials either turn out to have been discussed before, or get scrutinized heavily and probably dismissed for being self contradictory, unverifiable, or easily explainable.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    8,774
    If the purpose of the CT forum is not to debunk space/astronomy-related material, then it would be better placed on the 'General' section, imo.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,293

    I can dig it

    The strict scientific method is fine with me. Evidence should be scrutinized. I concede that theorizing off of observed phenomena is a gamble of one's reputation (so many astronomers could be listed here). I appreciate all of your patience and polite efforts. I apologize for inferring that this forum is closed-mined to reality. The writings of Copernicus and Gallileo attempted to jump start the dialogue between astronomy and reality. Many Astronomers have no problem speculating on observed phenomenon without getting it mixed up with solid data. May I assume that no fruitful speculation from testimonials of non-scientists can be gleamed from the Disclosure Project of 2001? I can dig that- I can move on. Thanks for saving me years!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    264
    I had never heard of Dr Greer so I looked him uphttp://www.disclosureproject.org
    Seems like the typical buy my book CT stuff to me.
    Its like I tell my kids who watch these infomercials on how to be a millianaire with little to no money down. If the system is quaranteed , then why dont they take thier 29.95 out of my first check that I pull from using thier ingenius method. Sagan would have a field day with this guy... I sure do miss that guy. Sagan afterall , out of anybody , realy did want to believe in Extra-terrestials. In fact he did, its just he could not credit any claims that we have been visited. It Sucks sometimes to be sceptical.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    14,782
    Quote Originally Posted by TriangleMan
    Geocentrism was a big fad a couple of years ago.
    In the Usenet sci.astro discussion group, a kook who claims to
    have disproved Einstein's relativity theories said that relativity
    is as obviously stupid as geocentrism. I challenged him to show
    (not "prove") that Earth is NOT at the center of the Universe.
    I offered him $200 to do it, since it might make a nice page for
    my Space and Science website. He didn't even try. After the time
    limit on the challenge ran out, I posted one line of attack he
    could have used: The distribution of globular clusters, which is
    centered on a point about 30,000 light-years away in the direction
    of the constellation Sagittarius, in line with the Milky Way-- a
    pretty good indication that Earth is not at the center of the
    Milky Way galaxy.

    -- Jeff, in Minneapolis

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,293
    Sagan would have a field day with this guy- Wayneee
    "It now seems quite clear that Earth is not the only inhabited planet." -Carl Sagan
    also: Geocentrism is based on cosmological dimensions, not galactic ones.
    We may still turn out to be Grand Central Station someday.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,293
    The key to genuine conspiracy theories is to present a claim that is falsifiable by observation techniques. St. Albert the Great even described the ET debate as"one of the most wondrous and noble questions in Nature." Wherever there is life, there is intelligence. Wherever there is light, there is life. The more spectral classifications of stars we can catalog, the more varieties of intelligent creatures we have identified. Since such a theory is unfalsifiable, it remains useless to the scientific method. But the cataloging of spectral classes of stars in a manner that a zoo-ologist tagging mammals in the jungle via DNA signatures for the purpose of gathering data is astronomy's only tool, is it not? How else can astronomy not be cornered into an elite club of "bird-watchers?" Bottom line conspiracy theory: Astronomy's only tool is the prism. That should be falsifiable? Sorry no bets, just chit- chatting with co-conspirators here.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    15,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Fr. Wayne
    just chit- chatting with co-conspirators here.
    May I suggest actually using the Conspiracy Theorem Forum for that purpose? This is in About BAUT, a forum for discussing the board, and I started this thread to ask what topics were suitable for discussion within that other forum -- what goes where.

    If you don't have an actual conspiracy to discuss, but merely conspiracy-flavored philosphy, perhaps Off-Topic Babbling -- not a pejorative -- might be the place.
    0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...
    Skepticism enables us to distinguish fancy from fact, to test our speculations. --Carl Sagan

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,293
    Quote Originally Posted by 01101001
    May I suggest actually using the Conspiracy Theorem Forum for that purpose? This is in About BAUT, a forum for discussing the board, and I started this thread to ask what topics were suitable for discussion within that other forum -- what goes where.

    If you don't have an actual conspiracy to discuss, but merely conspiracy-flavored philosphy, perhaps Off-Topic Babbling -- not a pejorative -- might be the place.
    Ok - then I would like to discuss the conspiracy of defending the theory of the speed of light. Why? Because http://openseti.org/Docs/Hall_Photon...ce_Paper_B.pdf
    re-opens the possiblity of categorizing photons sources in which the spectral bands of stellar objects (for example) red- shifts may have an alternative interpretation than the Einsteinian-Doppler distance theory. Besides I never did believe that light was ever limited to such a constant (c) no matter how clever the concept may be, do you? 10010110 not withstanding.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16,643

    Re: Conspiracy Theories Forum

    Quote Originally Posted by 01101001
    May I suggest actually using the Conspiracy Theorem Forum for that purpose? This is in About BAUT, a forum for discussing the board, and I started this thread to ask what topics were suitable for discussion within that other forum -- what goes where.

    If you don't have an actual conspiracy to discuss, but merely conspiracy-flavored philosphy, perhaps Off-Topic Babbling -- not a pejorative -- might be the place.
    Agreed, with an additional suggestion.

    Fr. Wayne should take this to either this thread in the Conspiracy Theories forum or this thread in the Life in Space forum.

    goodastronomy and, especially, William_Thompson appear to be very kindred spirits.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,083

    Talking

    I think the forum should be fair game for any conspiricy theory. After all, the CTers usually link any CT back to aliens and space anyway - with no evidence to support their CT of course!

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakenorrish View Post
    I think the forum should be fair game for any conspiricy theory. After all, the CTers usually link any CT back to aliens and space anyway - with no evidence to support their CT of course!
    agree

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    15,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Gargoil View Post
    agree
    Welcome to BAUT Forum.

    Do you realize you're reviving a discussion that wound down over two years ago? Next time, please, could you weigh whether it's worth revisiting a long-quiet topic? Sometimes it is, when new data is available, or when outside forces otherwise make a topic current again. Usually, when just adding a message of agreement with something already said, it isn't. Thanks.

    Anyway, to the point: in the mean time, about a year ago, management decided to disagree with your position and implement restrictions of conspiracies to the special interests of this forum -- space and astronomy. See topic New Change for Conspiracy Theory section: only space and astronomy.

    Based on your revealed agreement with another's sentiment, maybe management will reverse course and once again throw open the Conspiracy Theories subforum to all manner of conspiracy topics. Somehow, though -- maybe just based on my experience here -- I kind of doubt it.
    0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...
    Skepticism enables us to distinguish fancy from fact, to test our speculations. --Carl Sagan

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    13,423
    Quote Originally Posted by 01101001 View Post
    Based on your revealed agreement with another's sentiment, maybe management will reverse course and once again throw open the Conspiracy Theories subforum to all manner of conspiracy topics. Somehow, though -- maybe just based on my experience here -- I kind of doubt it.
    Yes, but we can keep trying. The CT threads were really hoppin' back then and I learned a Great Deal about a great many subjects.
    A little reviving may work wonders.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,712

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Yes, but we can keep trying. The CT threads were really hoppin' back then and I learned a Great Deal about a great many subjects.
    A little reviving may work wonders.
    I realise this is a Lazarus of a thread but I have tried my best to inject a little extra into the conspiracy section. Perhaps I should try a little harder.

    So the content must be based on astronomy and move from there ... right?

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    102
    Yes, I try my best to liven it up some days even if they do seem absurd. But I do learn a lot also. I would like to suggest having a wild claims conspiracy section.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    13,423
    Quote Originally Posted by SLF:JAQ SFDJS View Post
    I would like to suggest having a wild claims conspiracy section.
    That's called a 'bar'.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pontoise France
    Posts
    2,319
    The baut forum is not the place to discuss conspiracy.IMO Even those threads related to astronomy are generally good to nothing. Several reasons to that , one being the Baut came from the fusion between UT and The Bad Astronomy forum a debunking site.There is no discussion possible with debunkers on any subject.They just want you silenced or banned.And the competitive style of discussion with obligation to answer any silly question thrown at you by any debunker don't help.

    Well I must confess I am not very interested in conspiracies. (Except UFOs to be short).

    Another point I don't see why the BAUT conspiracy thread should treat any topics.I fully support the actual restriction to astronomy or astronomy related subjects And discussing political point for example will bring to much passion and bad mood for all the forum.
    The stars they shine for everybody , and astronomy is a common interest for every poster on the planet . On the contrary other topics like Politics are mostly an American thing , that we , posters form the rest of the world, don't care about.
    Last edited by galacsi; 2008-Jan-01 at 09:56 AM. Reason: too short

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    9,120
    but politics is a front for the Illuminati, which is itself run by space lizards; so politics IS a space related, conspiracy subject.
    ................................

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    13,423
    Quote Originally Posted by galacsi View Post
    The baut forum is not the place to discuss conspiracy.
    Is there a good logical reason why?
    Oh... Let's keep reading...
    Quote Originally Posted by galacsi View Post
    IMO Even those threads related to astronomy are generally good to nothing.
    You don't like them and consider them 'good for nothing' simply because it shatters your fantasies and gives you a dose of reality?
    My apologies.

    Well, debunking is not good for nothing.
    It is good for the encouragement of critical thinking, analysis, skeptisism and learning real science.
    ..IMO...
    Quote Originally Posted by galacsi View Post
    Several reasons to that , one being the Baut came from the fusion between UT and The Bad Astronomy forum a debunking site.There is no discussion possible with debunkers on any subject.They just want you silenced or banned.
    Not at all. Their motives are to debunk irrational, illogical or otherwise fantastic claims. Lacking evidence means you don't have a leg to stand on.
    If they wanted you silenced- they simply would not hold a discussion with you.
    They would not bother replying in the CT section- nor reading it. It wouldn't exist...

    But it does exist.
    I myself signed up on BAUT primarily for the CT section. I hardly ever left the CT threads until the rule change to limit them to astronomy only- made the CT forum a bit more boring.
    Consider that claim debunked
    Quote Originally Posted by galacsi View Post
    And the competitive style of discussion with obligation to answer any silly question thrown at you by any debunker don't help.
    It absolutely helps. Because without it- people can make wild claims without backing them up. You must address questions that shake the foundations of your claim.

    This promotes critical thinking- as well as a necessity to do proper research and learn the actual science involved. For many- this means that they learn their mistakes- overcome their misconceptions and get 'Good Astronomy.'

    Quote Originally Posted by galacsi View Post
    Well I must confess I am not very interested in conspiracies. (Except UFOs to be short).
    Then you are interested in conspiracies.

    Quote Originally Posted by galacsi View Post
    Another point I don't see why the BAUT conspiracy thread should treat any topics.I fully support the actual restriction to astronomy or astronomy related subjects And discussing political point for example will bring to much passion and bad mood for all the forum.
    The stars they shine for everybody , and astronomy is a common interest for every poster on the planet . On the contrary other topics like Politics are mostly an American thing , that we , posters form the rest of the world, don't care about.
    Ok so you are simply saying you support the rule change that has been already made?

    Galasci, you like the idea of Aliens and UFO's.
    It's aesthetic. Pleasing. Good for the imagination and wonder...

    But there is no evidence.

    Even the CT claims hold not only no proof- but the claims themselves are usually illogical, silly, outrageous or just plain outright wrong.

    In order for you to overcome your distaste for how posters treat irrational ideas, you must first accept that the ideas are irrational.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pontoise France
    Posts
    2,319
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    In order for you to overcome your distaste for how posters treat irrational ideas, you must first accept that the ideas are irrational.
    Not at all.I am not here to debunk , I am here to learn. And anybody has the potential to teach me something.So if I begin to read a thread , I try to understand what the poster means. Try to evaluate the value of his idea on its own merits or lack of it. Sometimes It is above me ,if I lack some skills like maths or other information.
    Sometimes I reserve my opinion , it just important to know other people think out of the box.
    And sometimes I discover something new.True I did it only in the ATM forum , the Conspiracy forum like I said elsewhere is not interesting.

Similar Threads

  1. There is a conspiracy on this "conspiracy theories" forum
    By homo_cosmosicus in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 283
    Last Post: 2006-Jul-06, 03:54 PM
  2. new forum on http://conspiracy-theories-hoax.com
    By Conspiracy Cam in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 2005-Apr-14, 01:34 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •