Conspiracy theorists... are they all just a bit thick?
Discussion
paulguitar said:
survivalist said:
On a more positive note, I’m glad that I ignored as much of this nonsense as possible - at least I got to enjoy some epically empty roads in 2020.
How could you have possibly known it was 'nonsense' at that time?Just the same as he doesn't know now.
As I said. He wants to rewrite history because he has been continually wrong about it.
paulguitar said:
Exactly, it's pretty much all down to incompetence and corruption. I think conspiracy theorists are often paranoid and see stuff that simply isn't there.
Plus, in many cases, present or past drug use is often a dfactor.
Corruption tends to occur between more than one individual though.Plus, in many cases, present or past drug use is often a dfactor.
So if it’s two people being corrupt, they conspire.
And if they conspire, others may have a theory about their conspiring.
Ie, the MPs close associates making money off the PPI.
That’s corruption, and up until it was news, it was a conspiracy theory.
You can’t just call all conspiracy theorists nutty or mental.
You can however reasonably say ‘theory X’ is b
ks, and anyone who subscribes to it is a loony.In my view, the conspiracy theories you read about “on the internet” are probably fed to the idiots by those who really are conspiring and plotting, and serve as ludicrous distractions.
It’ll be the subtler and more insidious stuff that’s really happening and people are oblivious because they’re too busy worrying about video compression artefacts being misconstrued as lizard people, or high up politicians eating pizza and children or whatever that one was
Mr Whippy said:
Corruption tends to occur between more than one individual though.
So if it’s two people being corrupt, they conspire.
And if they conspire, others may have a theory about their conspiring.
Ie, the MPs close associates making money off the PPI.
That’s corruption, and up until it was news, it was a conspiracy theory.
This may be where the problem occurs. Two people conspiring, and somebody having a theory about it, isn't a conspiracy theory.So if it’s two people being corrupt, they conspire.
And if they conspire, others may have a theory about their conspiring.
Ie, the MPs close associates making money off the PPI.
That’s corruption, and up until it was news, it was a conspiracy theory.
Mr Whippy said:
In my view, the conspiracy theories you read about “on the internet” are probably fed to the idiots by those who really are conspiring and plotting, and serve as ludicrous distractions.
Now that's a conspiracy theory 
captain_cynic said:
paulguitar said:
survivalist said:
On a more positive note, I’m glad that I ignored as much of this nonsense as possible - at least I got to enjoy some epically empty roads in 2020.
How could you have possibly known it was 'nonsense' at that time?Just the same as he doesn't know now.
As I said. He wants to rewrite history because he has been continually wrong about it.
It was obvious within weeks what the risk actually was - all of the published data shows who is actually at risk and it’s a tiny subset of the overall population.
I’m not rewriting anything. My position hasn’t changed since March 2020. If millions had dropped dead in the streets (as the more hysterical elements were predicting) then I would have changed that posting but, surprise surprise, none of that stuff materialised.
survivalist said:
I’m not rewriting anything. My position hasn’t changed since March 2020. If millions had dropped dead in the streets (as the more hysterical elements were predicting) then I would have changed that posting but, surprise surprise, none of that stuff materialised.
"Nobody knew what was going to happen, but my guess was right" is not a strong position from which to argue.deckster said:
survivalist said:
I’m not rewriting anything. My position hasn’t changed since March 2020. If millions had dropped dead in the streets (as the more hysterical elements were predicting) then I would have changed that posting but, surprise surprise, none of that stuff materialised.
"Nobody knew what was going to happen, but my guess was right" is not a strong position from which to argue.Pretty clear advice that that vast majority of people shouldn’t be worried.
So hardly a guess. Just following government guidance rather than being a visionary.
The hysteria that followed though, that require some specialist skills to analyse - mainly not being a moron.
98elise said:
Blown2CV said:
DanL said:
Blown2CV said:
IQ was discredited as an intelligence measure decades ago. Unfortunately I did a degree in psychology before I realised that was pointless (apart from pub and forum superfluous chat) and went back and did something different.
That’s interesting - what replaced IQ as a measure? I assume something…As you say though, high IQ is not the one and only form of intelligence (for want of a better word) though.
A good example would be the "Chasers" on "The Chase" TV show. They appear to be very "intelligent" but in fact what they doing is extreme recollection of facts. That takes a good memory and a drive/passion to collect those facts in the first place.
It's different to IQ though
king idiot. IQ tests are also fairly westernised. The fact that you can teach yourself to perform better in an IQ test just proves how bullst and skewed they are. paulguitar said:
survivalist said:
On a more positive note, I’m glad that I ignored as much of this nonsense as possible - at least I got to enjoy some epically empty roads in 2020.
How could you have possibly known it was 'nonsense' at that time?If the Titanic had seen the iceberg and enacted some extraordinary sharp manoeuvres to avoid it at the cost of some people going overboard and some being thrown against
against bulkheads would there still have been CT’s in the stoking room or stowage determined they didn’t see the iceberg so it was a lie and ‘look - the liner is still afloat and whatabout who pays the captain’. Probably yes.
V6 Pushfit said:
paulguitar said:
survivalist said:
On a more positive note, I’m glad that I ignored as much of this nonsense as possible - at least I got to enjoy some epically empty roads in 2020.
How could you have possibly known it was 'nonsense' at that time?If the Titanic had seen the iceberg and enacted some extraordinary sharp manoeuvres to avoid it at the cost of some people going overboard and some being thrown against
against bulkheads would there still have been CT’s in the stoking room or stowage determined they didn’t see the iceberg so it was a lie and ‘look - the liner is still afloat and whatabout who pays the captain’. Probably yes.
Seems to me that a lot of people are emotionally invested in all of the ludicrous measures that were put in place, otherwise they might look back and feel a bit silly that they willingly followed them. You only need to look at the behaviour of those who implemented this nonsense to see that they also considered it to be nonsense, but felt the need to implement them in order to keep the hysterical elements in society happy.
CarCrazyDad said:
Blown2CV said:
as if i'm going to read all of that ste. It's been said a million times. If you're making claims, then you need to substantiate it in a way that is believable, trustworthy, considered, logical... otherwise no one - not just me - is going to take you seriously, other than other loons who get a kick out of it. I refuse to argue with you about it so i am stopping there. You're not winning.
You're not interested in a discussion or debate, that's the problemte. It's been said a million times. If you're making claims, then you need to substantiate it in a way that is believable, trustworthy, considered, logical... otherwise no one - not just me - is going to take you seriously, other than other loons who get a kick out of it. I refuse to argue with you about it so i am stopping there. You're not winning.I explain my personal viewpoint and some links to back it up (eg about the lab leak and also the data on mask efficacy)
You then say "i'm not going to read that it's too long" - it would take 10 minutes to have a scan and get a general idea,
If you are too lazy or ignorant to read it, that's your problem
I don't view it as winning or losing, it's discussing , I dont' have a discussion with the intent on "winning" - but you clearly want an argument and you have no interest in listening to my points and you boil it down to winning or losing - classic troll - I hope you go through life hoping to "win" at every written or verbal interaction you participate in
Enjoy
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-cor...
The trouble is it was investigating months after the outbreak so couldn't trace the origin.
Then two other major studies also dismissed the lab conspiracy theory
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/26/coro...
Thats major studies, not someone googling on the internet.
captain_cynic said:
paulguitar said:
survivalist said:
On a more positive note, I’m glad that I ignored as much of this nonsense as possible - at least I got to enjoy some epically empty roads in 2020.
How could you have possibly known it was 'nonsense' at that time?Just the same as he doesn't know now.
As I said. He wants to rewrite history because he has been continually wrong about it.
Did we get it wrong, definately at the start with not locking down early, opening up holidays too early. Did we then go on too long with restrictions, again probably, but the local restrictions were flouted so often that I doubt they felt they had any other choice. Those people saying "I ignored as much of this nonsense as possible...".
It was unprecedented, with most of the planning being for a flu outbreak, not a highly contagious new disease.
The US have just hit 1m covid deaths - now almost exclusively those dying are those who refused to take the vaccine
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/15/1-mi...
Survivalist is right about one thing. The first 3 months of lockdown were brilliant for empty roads for us classed as essential workers who had to travel. I put lots of miles on the TVR
Edited by Byker28i on Monday 16th May 10:02
Byker28i said:
The World Heath Organisation carried out an investigation and concluded it was “extremely unlikely” that covid-19 could have been caused by a lab accident and that it was highly likely to have jumed from bats to humans via some intermediary animal.
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-cor...
The trouble is it was investigating months after the outbreak so couldn't trace the origin.
Then two other major studies also dismissed the lab conspiracy theory
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/26/coro...
Thats major studies, not someone googling on the internet.
That's the same World Health Organisation that changed it's definition of what Herd Immunity is simply because of the Covid vaccine?https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-cor...
The trouble is it was investigating months after the outbreak so couldn't trace the origin.
Then two other major studies also dismissed the lab conspiracy theory
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/26/coro...
Thats major studies, not someone googling on the internet.
Apparently the hundreds of years of infection-derived immunity went out of the window when it comes to "Herd Immunity" - excuse me if I don't believe them
As for the other studies, there's no link to read the core study data, but I'll have to take it at their word!
Although - whether it came from a lab or not is largely irrelevant but there was certainly dodgy dealings from the NIH to the Wuhan Institute . Whether it was organically spread or leaked from a lab doesn't really change the fact that we all had our lives heavily impacted.
Whatever the truth is we'll never know. Maybe Batman could help
Byker28i said:
The World Heath Organisation carried out an investigation and concluded it was “extremely unlikely” that covid-19 could have been caused by a lab accident and that it was highly likely to have jumed from bats to humans via some intermediary animal.
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-cor...
The trouble is it was investigating months after the outbreak so couldn't trace the origin.
Then two other major studies also dismissed the lab conspiracy theory
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/26/coro...
Thats major studies, not someone googling on the internet.
They don't dismiss it, if by 'dismiss' you mean prove it wrong/impossible, they say: “Geographical clustering of the earliest known Covid-19 cases and the proximity of positive environmental samples to live-animal vendors suggest that the Huanan seafood wholesale market in Wuhan was the site of origin of the Covid-19 pandemic.” https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-cor...
The trouble is it was investigating months after the outbreak so couldn't trace the origin.
Then two other major studies also dismissed the lab conspiracy theory
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/26/coro...
Thats major studies, not someone googling on the internet.
Other scientists have questioned aspects and conclusions to these reports as well, i.e. being the nexus of spread amongst the population doesn't mean it was the origin of it: Read pgs 7-8 of the WHO report and the article in Nature: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00584-8
--
The much-delayed-by-China WHO 'investigation' had the very person who was doing the GoF research in the first place doing the investigating, the same guy that then rallied a load of scientists 'with no conflict of interest' to say a 'lab leak' was 'conspiracy theory' in The Lancet. That stymied all discussion but later had to be retracted as all but one of the 27 were found to be "linked to its Chinese researchers, their colleagues or funders".
Statements in the WHO report that push a lab related link down the probability scale relied predominantly on the self-reporting of Wuhan staff and records and an investigation by the very people that were heading up GoF research there. Tedros himself said the investigation was 'inadequate' and much of the original data and records are still missing to this day.
WHO explicitly state in their report [Feb-21] that there were no indications of staff being ill in any way [p. 119] in the weeks and months prior, however the WHO investigators mention it at the time: "Marion Koopmans, a Dutch virologist on that team told NBC News in March that some WIV staff did fall sick in the autumn of 2019, but she attributed that to regular, seasonal sickness." https://archive.ph/20JW4#selection-4239.23-4239.21... I'll ignore the US Intel on the 3 sick workers in DEC-19...
--
Now, 'lab leak' covers a multitude of sins, from escape of engineered virus to merely the virus being transported by staff that collected bat samples in caves and worked on them in relatively low BSL levels, i.e a zoonotic origin but vectored by lab workers doing lab work. The closest natural bat virus that has been found [Sep 21] was a bat cave in Laos. Funnily enough this was also the same location Wuhan researches went in 2015 to collect samples. But neither does this 'prove' anything, it's all circumstantial.
What would be strange to a professional investigator would be that if you start from a point of view that it may have been lab work that had something to do with the origin then everything circumstantial downstream of that fits the premise. Do you consider China to be trustworthy, involved scientists to be trustworthy, WHO to be unaffected by politics - bearing in mind the magnitude of damage if it were? https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2414
But, like wearing a mask, political attachment is a heavy swayer of priors, Trump said it [without evidence] so it can't be true. I wonder if opinions would be different if that hadn't been the case, I still wonder why Daszak is at liberty for causing such a breach of trust and diverting such an important investigation, I still wonder why for a year journalists weren't curious about this.
Bear in mind all the above is the tip of this iceberg.
So, status: Unknown. If we knew, we'd know, we don't yet; the above may strengthen the case for natural origin, but it's not conclusive and doesn't really 'dismiss' the possibility at all. Officially, it is no longer a 'conspiracy theory' though, and hasn't been for a while. It's a hypothesis.
The trouble with the lab leak is when the WHO mention it they mean an accidental transmission caused by lax safety standards in the Chinese lab.
When a conspiracy theorist says “Lab Leak” they mean a deliberate release of a mutated/engineered virus by those dirty commies to stop the CT going to the pub and to enable “them”* to establish the new world order.
* them is probably “the Jews” if you dig deep enough.
When a conspiracy theorist says “Lab Leak” they mean a deliberate release of a mutated/engineered virus by those dirty commies to stop the CT going to the pub and to enable “them”* to establish the new world order.
* them is probably “the Jews” if you dig deep enough.
MBBlat said:
The trouble with the lab leak is when the WHO mention it they mean an accidental transmission caused by lax safety standards in the Chinese lab.
When a conspiracy theorist says “Lab Leak” they mean a deliberate release of a mutated/engineered virus by those dirty commies to stop the CT going to the pub and to enable “them”* to establish the new world order.
* them is probably “the Jews” if you dig deep enough.
Quite a few of them are still ranting on about a NWO or The Great Reset as though it’s some big plan by Gates / Bezos / whoever to do…. something (no, they can’t tell you why). When a conspiracy theorist says “Lab Leak” they mean a deliberate release of a mutated/engineered virus by those dirty commies to stop the CT going to the pub and to enable “them”* to establish the new world order.
* them is probably “the Jews” if you dig deep enough.
The people who are ranting and raving about that now are the same who a year or so ago were saying all the restrictions were in place solely to run hospitality into the ground (no, they couldn’t explain why either).
CarCrazyDad said:
I'm a science led person - I believe in Gravity for example, because it can be proven and measured repeatedly
This seems an odd understanding of what science (and gravity) is. There is a force (well, to be accurate according to the currently accepted theory, a spacetime curvature) that can be measured repeatedly that frankly your belief or not in it makes no difference. The force acted the same on the Celts as on us, even if they had no word for it. If you believed in 'intelligent falling' as an explanation it would make no difference to gravity. Edited by CarCrazyDad on Saturday 14th May 01:30
Over the centuries, we have developed different versions of a theory called gravity to explain this force (called gravity as it is a force that interacts with mass) Oddly enough, it is probably the least understood force out there and the most theoretically flaky, despite the one that we all feel at a human scale and are comfortable with. Issue is that gravity is so much weaker than the other forces it just isn't funny - which makes experiments to prove or disprove theories of gravity very very difficult
For example gravity waves were only detected in 2015, we have to use 'dark matter' to explain some observations, gravitons haven't been detected, and aren't compatible with quantum mechanics and the standard model, thus all the interest in string theory. Wikipedia tells me that there are over 20 competing theories of quantum gravity at the moment. Why is gravity so much weaker than the other forces? - personally I like the concept of branes, where the other forces only act in our observable dimensions/ slice, but gravity leaks across and interacts with the other dimensions and slices .
Or maybe Einstein was right, and gravity just is different and can't be explained the same way as the others. But the other forces are so symmetrical, it just seems to make unscientific 'gut sense' that there is a theory of everything.
TLDR: You would be better off saying that you believe in the electroweak force than gravity - it has a stronger foundation in theory and observation
Edited by wisbech on Tuesday 17th May 08:04
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff