Ok, this might look like trolling but it's not.

Is seems to me that everyone here (conspiracy) is awfully willing to accept what ever crappy theory is offered up, I have seen very little questioning of the facts here despite the fact that that's what this whole forum is about.

ps. If you disagree please try not to post a two page long flame-ing that I wont read, but if you do disagree please post some evidence or at least something thats not all caps

There are exceptions to almost every rule, and most of the time if people disagree with a certain theory, they find it a waste of their time to add comments on how wrong the other person is.

I almost never post here, but I do frequently read the threads, just for amusement. I take very few, in any, of the things seriously. I also have http://www.abovetopsecret.com bookmarked for the same reason. I'm pretty skeptical, and I'm a pretty logic, math, science, and reason-based person, but you've got to admit that reading about people's plans for what to do when cyborgs take over is pretty fun.

I see what you're up to, OP. Don't think for a minute that you can plant seeds of doubt in our forum. We're too perceptive to fall for your tricks, slyboots.

Ian Rogers, Australian grandmaster of chess, hasn't written a book; articles, yes, but not a book. So...what does your name REALLY mean???

"Ian Rogers book" is an anagram for "A Sobering Rook." Aha! A chess analogy! Ian retired for "health reasons," i.e. to sober up after years of travelling the hard-drinking life of a chess grandmaster.

Or...it's an anagram for "Airborne Gooks," a reference to the impending invasion by the Korean Air Force. Take cover, everyone!

Or...it's an anagram for "Barrio Keg Soon," a hint that the Latin-American ghettos in the US will soon be subject to a massive plot to get them all drunk and ship them back over the border. Beware, my brown-skinned allies!

Or..."Kaiser or Bongo," a clear inference to the recent choice Americans faced in the 2008 election.

Your move, my worthy adversary.

I'm very skeptical.

Unlike all the nutjobs who buy into all the shit they are presented with.





I don't trust the media.
I don't trust the government.
I don't trust politicians.
I don't trust corporations.
I don't trust banks.
I don't trust the education.
I don't trust a lot of oranizations and agencies.
I don't trust a lot of medications.
And so on.


See how skeptical I am?

Ian Rogers, Australian grandmaster of chess, hasn't written a book; articles, yes, but not a book. So...what does your name REALLY mean???

Your move, my worthy adversary.

I almost pissed myself reading this post, I laughed so much. Did it take you several hours to think this up or do you just have some ungodly ability to create anagrams and conspiracy theories? I'm sorry to pop your bubble though, my name is Lan Rogers its just the lowercase l looks like an uppercase i.

I almost never post here, but I do frequently read the threads, just for amusement. I take very few, in any, of the things seriously. I also have http://www.abovetopsecret.com bookmarked for the same reason. I'm pretty skeptical, and I'm a pretty logic, math, science, and reason-based person, but you've got to admit that reading about people's plans for what to do when cyborgs take over is pretty fun.

This is a good point I will take to heart


I don't trust the media.
I don't trust the government.
I don't trust politicians.
I don't trust corporations.
I don't trust banks.
I don't trust the education.
I don't trust a lot of oranizations and agencies.
I don't trust a lot of medications.
And so on.

This is the point I was trying to make earlier, because some of what "the media" say is a lie you then think all of what "the media" says is a lie and close your eyes to the truth.

I almost pissed myself reading this post, I laughed so much. Did it take you several hours to think this up or do you just have some ungodly ability to create anagrams and conspiracy theories? I'm sorry to pop your bubble though, my name is Lan Rogers its just the lowercase l looks like an uppercase i.

Damn. Okay, uh...Lan Rogers, ummm...

Ogre Snarl?
http://www.gumbopages.com/looka/images/snarl.jpg

Okay, since you're being cool about it, and realizing that I'm just posting silly bullshit all the time (you're the first, you know), I'll tell ya:

http://wordsmith.org/anagram/

I do like anagrams, and I come up with them on my own for fun, but using that site is a helluva lot easier. The rest of it came from my own demented li'l noggin, though. Glad you enjoyed it.

I dont believe any of this shit. Its just fun to pretend and imagine what could be.

This is the point I was trying to make earlier, because some of what "the media" say is a lie you then think all of what "the media" says is a lie and close your eyes to the truth.

Don't tell me what I think and what I do.

I said I don't trust them.

Is seems to me that everyone here (conspiracy) is awfully willing to accept what ever crappy theory is offered up, I have seen very little questioning of the facts here despite the fact that that's what this whole forum is about.

How can you question the facts when the Illuminati are concealing them from you? ;)

How can you question the facts when the Illuminati are concealing them from you? ;)

you forgot the reptilians(annonaki?) stopping us from asking questions by drinking menstrual blood

If I saw a thread with some dumbass theory in it, 9 times out of 10 I wouldn't post even to call people stupid. Conspiracy nuts are impossible to argue with, as they can just say "they just planted all that contrary evidence to make you think that" no matter how strong the case against them. This not-bothering policy is probably one held by most of the people on this forum who aren't clinically insane, thus giving you the impression that everyone here is clinically insane and believes everything they read.

vlad, you're officially hilarious.

Donkey shins. Speaking of hilarious, I saw this (http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comments.pl?IDLink=4026213)thread today, and wished to be a part of it the way kids 50 years ago wanted to play for the Yankees.

It's in reference to that story (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/treasurecoast/sfl-1118sandwich-arrest,0,7370389.story)from a couple days ago, about the guy who hit his girlfriend with a sandwich.

But, I don't mess with Fark. Too many rules, too much of a club, like Wiki.

I love lurking in Conspiracy!, theres nothing quite as amusing as watching retards who don't know they're retarded from a (safe) distance.

This is the point I was trying to make earlier, because some of what "the media" say is a lie you then think all of what "the media" says is a lie...

It's not all a lie, just most of it.

Although nowadays they've got this new bulshit buzzword they put on it called "spin".

Is seems to me that everyone here (conspiracy) is awfully willing to accept what ever crappy theory is offered up, I have seen very little questioning of the facts here despite the fact that that's what this whole forum is about... Is there even ONE skeptical person here?

Well...

ps. If you disagree please post a two page long flame-ing

Will do!!

Anyways... I on rare occasion read Conspiracy!, and on slightly more common occasion read through other conspiracies on the 'net. While I'm not a "sceptic" per se - in fact, I'm the exact opposite of a sceptic - I might actually still fit the criteria you're looking for.

My basic process when I read is to ask myself a simple question : can I apply this to my political interests right now? If the answer is "yes," then I assume the article is 'true,' regardless of whether or not they have any evidence - maybe the scapegoat-per-se has nothing to do with it, or the specific instance of such action is a mistaken derivation, but there's enough people on the planet that I figure that anything I feel I could immediately utilize in politics has probably been applied by someone, somewhere, at some point in time.

Conversely, if no actionable information is included in the conspiracy theory, I assume it's 'false' - and even if the events claimed did happen, a person who cannot supply the nuts-and-bolts hasn't done enough research to be a legitimate source of information.

As you can see, I'm the exact opposite of a sceptic - I believe, in some form or another, anything that can be credibly believed, though not neccisarily exactly as it was presented - but it still might possibly meet the criteria of "something different than the crap you described," despite being just-short-of-infinitely-credulous, by falling short of, well, being infinite in its credible assignments, even if they are a bit generous. ;)

So far, the best conspiracy theories I've found have tended to involve things like corporate use of assumed business names (http://tobaccodocuments.org/landman/) in both somewhat-questionable public relations actions, and the laundering (http://www.counterpunch.org/schaefer12152007.html) of proxy finance... as well as a few other things which I'm not going to get too heavily into because, well... I tend to use them. ;)

On the flip side of things, I tend to discard most things which mention neodruids outside of a treatise on comparitive religion, most of the theories involving "evil mind control" (as a practicioner and consultant in applied media psychology, I'm a firm believer in 'mind control' and even pervasive mind control - but as an occasional practicioner and frequent consultant, I also know that despite its constant presence in our society, what usually gets described in conspiracy theories is not only not the real thing but is far less efficient than the real thing, and the corporation which owns Dove did a much (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei6JvK0W60I) better job (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHqzlxGGJFo) at documenting "pervasive mind control" than the average conspiriacy theorists : as a pro-tip, kidnapping/torture/drugs/etc are simply less effective techniques)... and, well...

...and frankly, I actually know enough about "teh illuminati" to know that most people who blab about "the illuminati" are remarkably full of fucking shit. It's not that hard, people, it was an open and well-documented organization. Long story short, it was a club to discuss a philosophy that was prevalent at the time, and just as a little hint, the concealment of a matter is pretty damn well the opposite of the illumination of a matter, isn't it?

Hell, you could've just looked at the philsophy of the time to figure that out. The notion that history/art/science illuminated the human mind and the human soul pretty much underpinned the entire fucking enlightenment, and while yes there was the belief that those who held some illumination into the clarity of a matter were better capable of acting than those who were not, but "intellectual anarchomeritocracy" is not some club you can kick someone out of, and one's knowledge either provides illumination into some matter or it doesn't, without needing the approval of any third party. Fuck, that's one of the things we like about it, ffs...

...but... to wrap up this rant... my policy of "unlimited credit until the search for concrete, credible knowledge is broken" may be the opposite of skepticism... but, it may still fit your criteria of the search for "at least something seperate from what you describe."

Now, if you'll pardon me, the antaerean insect-people are informing me that they need to make adjustments on my mind-control chip again. Cheers! :)

I'm skeptical, but I just came in here because I saw the thread in hot topics. :)

I'm skeptical, but I just came in here because I saw the thread in hot topics. :)
I'm just posting to let you know you've qualified for the "Ten Best Tosteans" toplist.

I'm just posting to let you know you've qualified for the "Ten Best Tosteans" toplist.

Where can I see this list?

1. Bend over.

2. Stick head up ass.

3. Follow directions (they will be written in Morse code with polyps).

the skeptical people don't generally post in forums called "Conspiracy!"

the skeptical people don't generally post in forums called "Conspiracy!"

Oh i c wut u did thar...

There are exceptions to almost every rule, and most of the time if people disagree with a certain theory, they find it a waste of their time to add comments on how wrong the other person is.

This.

Ok, this might look like trolling but it's not.

Is seems to me that everyone here (conspiracy) is awfully willing to accept what ever crappy theory is offered up, I have seen very little questioning of the facts here despite the fact that that's what this whole forum is about.

ps. If you disagree please try not to post a two page long flame-ing that I wont read, but if you do disagree please post some evidence or at least something thats not all caps

Because this is reverse scientific method man....We make conclusions then look for things to prove them.

DUH!!!


srcsm

I think the mods here are doing a great job of keeping the spirit of this forum alive, and keeping the misplaced elements out. It didn't used to be this way; it was just basically a collection of nay-sayers and attention-whores, denying everything they see here just out of principle and self-centeredness. There were many users who turned this place into an SG-like environment, and I ended up leaving in disgust after trying in vain to rid this forum of their ilk.

When you want to play poker, you don't go to a bowling alley to do it. When you want to watch a good movie, you don't go to the opera to do it. This forum is for the discussion of things that very may well be, but for which there is no hard evidence to support either way, regardless of how much evidence is brought forth.

So when someone says they believe they have a genuine conspiracy, we in this forum comment on the possibility of it being true, or we don't comment at all. If we wanted to discuss the things proven, we would go to Humanities or Politics to do it. Here, we discuss the unknown, the unproven, the likely, the mysterious plot, the under-currents of an evil world laid just under the skin of the world we all love and admire. This is Conspiracies.

I think the mods here are doing a great job of keeping the spirit of this forum alive, and keeping the misplaced elements out. It didn't used to be this way; it was just basically a collection of nay-sayers and attention-whores, denying everything they see here just out of principle and self-centeredness. There were many users who turned this place into an SG-like environment, and I ended up leaving in disgust after trying in vain to rid this forum of their ilk.

The breaking up of PD changed most of that, and Arm's putting the biggest nay-saying attention-whore in charge was a move of which Sun Tzu would have approved. ;)

Glad to see you posting in here, BTW.

The breaking up of PD changed most of that, and Arm's putting the biggest nay-saying attention-whore in charge was a move of which Sun Tzu would have approved. ;)

Glad to see you posting in here, BTW.

I did get to the point of pulling my hair out with you, I must admit... even going so far as to make a "Let's Get Rid Of Slave of the Beast That Attention-Whoring Bastard" thread in Bitch&Moan. I guess it's because I'm very big on preserving the integrity and spirit of a forum, and it's too much like me just letting someone kill the place when I stand by and see that going on. I would feel the same way in Vogan, if I liked the forum a lot and saw a bunch of users posting anti-poetry propaganda there. Personally, I've always liked your style of expression, its intuitive spirit and the frankly awesome intelligence behind it.

I'm logical, not sceptical. Sceptical is just another word for sucker.