There are allegations that people with ASD are more prone to following conspiracy theories than the average Joe. How do you define a conspiracy theory?
There is a comprehensive definition here:
This succinct definition is from Oxford Dictionaries:a belief that some covert but influential organization is responsible for an unexplained event.
Perhaps one of the major ones of recent years is one that I can't help myself but subscribe to. 9/11. Too much that happened that day simply doesn't add up. I'm not sure who was responsible... but when I read testimony from architects, structural engineers, demolition experts, munitions experts, air crash investigation engineers, scientists, police patrol men, firemen and countless others who've either investigated the disaster or were present on the day, I can't help but believe that the world was sold a lot of half-truths at best, and a huge bunch of lies at worst.
In the simplest terms, WTC 1 and 2 should never have collapsed in the way they did. And WTC 7 should never have collapsed at all, considering the minimal amount of damage it suffered. Come to that, 1 and 2 shouldn't have collapsed at all, either. Even a fully-laden passenger airliner striking structures of their size and strength would be the equivalent of a high-velocity rifle bullet being fired into a fence post. It might do considerable damage to the post... put it would remain standing!
But that's just my tuppence-worth on the subject....
Maybe one man's conspiracy theorist is another man's truth-seer!
I’ve got an inquisive/observant mind but I think conspiracy theories are misleading. I see it more as truth-seeing, but if it’s thought of as a conspiracy theory, people treat it like it’s a piece of gossip or something, it’s alomst like they accept it while speaking outrage about it. People have been pulling strategies like 9/11 for hundreds of years. It’s all a big crazy game.
Wikipedia is not always a reliable source of information. It's usually first rate for STEM articles but non-STEM articles can be biased or even misleading.
Remember that there are people who are paid £££ by organisations with vested interests to write an edit Wikipedia pages to reflect the vested interests of these organisations.
I'm not going to discuss the technicalities of 9/11 here but what I'm intrigued about is why there is still much interest in 9/11 but hardly anybody in Britain is interested in 7/7 any more.
A friend researches 7/7 so he is well aware of the near total lack of interest in the event. He is particularly interested in the mystery Jaguar and is trying to find out if there were any connections between Germaine Lindsay and Morten Storm.
That's right. And once you start going down the route of some kind of collusion between the media and higher powers of government, then you soon begin to question what it is you actually know. How much are we being manipulated by powers who have vested interests in maintaining a certain status quo, or in creating a climate of opinion (against, say, Muslims)? People have a general tendency to accept things that they read in the newspapers and see or hear on the news, irrespective of any bias that might be being presented. They expect correspondents to have researched the facts that they themselves haven't the time to research, and can only accept in digested form in brief spaces during the day. People also, I think, tend to consume news media as it both identifies with and enforces their view of the world and their ideas of 'truth'. People, for instance, regurgitate the 'facts' of any particular issue as they've read them in The Daily Mail, The Sun, The Mirror, or whatever. So you have a polarisation of opinion as well as an 'adjusted' (at best) and a distorted, partisan, fabricated (at worst) version of anything you care to mention. The tendency, too, of people to accept things they read on social media (memes, etc) shows how very easy it is to manipulate and distort what's actually going on in the world.
And who knows what that is?
Something to take into account is that the news media was traditionally ephemeral but in more recent years has become archived. This enables independent researchers to easily collect then carefully analyse reports on certain issues.
One problem is when the media tries to present an event in a way that the public would have wanted to have happened rather than what actually happened.
To illustrate this point, 7/7 shows all the hallmarks of an attack by the IRA rather than Al Qaeda if you study the history of the styles of attacks by the two outfits. Had 7/7 taken place exactly 5 years earlier in 2000 then the public and the media would have pointed their fingers at the IRA irrespective of whether the IRA had carried out the attack because they were the violent terrorists at the time. Although there is no evidence (in the public domain) that would stand up in a court of law that the four alleged 7/7 bombers (that the Metropolitan Police still call suspects today) were even on the trains and the bus that exploded, the story presented by the media is the one that the public wanted to have happened. The IRA cannot be ruled out of carrying out 7/7 with the evidence that exists but the way that the media has handled the event completely jeopardises investigations by the police and the intelligence services.
I often wonder what is a reliable source of information - especially online.
As Marshall McLuhan said: 'The medium is the message.'
It’s all part of the crazy game of power and control, it’s all part of the grand illusion. It’s insane and the minute we pay any attention to any of it, we become part of the problem as we are giving it validity, where really, there is none. There isn’t even such a thing as a ‘terrorist’,it’s a joke, but people everywhere believe it.
I’m currently learning more about my neighbour’s native homeland in Africa, the island of Bioko, and it’s funny because the natives of that island were originally called savages because they resisted being kidnapped and sold into slavery by Europeans who came across the island when they were going around kidnapping people for slavery!!!!
9/11, 7/7 etc etc are just a greater manifestation of what is already inside of us, all of us, and the only way to prevent these great big acts of violence is to stop the violence in our heads which occurs the moment we identify as anything. Whether that be man, woman, Christian, Buddhist, Muslim or whatever, even postman, electrician, whatever. The minute we identify as anything we are committing an act of violence and from that we see that violence outplayed in our lives in a multitude of ways and people everywhere accept it.