What conspiracy theories do you believe in? - Put your tinfoil hats on

[Meriasek]

Explain for us smaller of brain, if you would?

Basically, Gödel's incompleteness theorem states that in any consistent formal system you can have statements in the language describing that system that can neither be proven or disproven.
It's something from logic, but with a bit of squinting you could say that the universe can be seen as a consistent formal system (as in, the universe is causal and repeatable [quantum mechanics might disagree, but for the purpose of logic it would still hold up]) and the language describing it is physics. Even a complete set of physics could, according to the theorem, still have somehow statements that can't be proven or disproven. As such it is transcendent and cannot be fully grasped. The universe itself can thus be equated to God.

In reality I don't think you can actually argue like that, I was being a bit tongue in cheek throwing around big philosophical sounding words that don't really work like that.

 

[Rei is Shit.]

Got a new one for you guys: The aboriginal Australians genocided the people who were there before them.
I was talking to someone online and he told me to look into the "Lake Mungo remains". They're ancient remains found in a dry lakebed, but when you read the story, it raises the same alarm bells for me as what happened with Kennewick man re: "Oh no, you can't see the remains! It's cultural tradition! We got rid of it provided it with a traditional burial! Stop asking questions!"

The language distribution in Australia strongly suggests a second immigration wave that conquered most of the continent.

 

[Overly Serious]

If you have the land, I would suggest buying up a few older vehicles and storing them away safely if you can. It's what I am planning on doing. Just in case some jeet crashes into you and irreparably destroys your older car, you won't have to resort to a newer computerized nightmare car.

The danger however, is that once the number of people who own such vehicles is small enough that they're unlikely to generate much upset, the State will outlaw the vehicles on whatever pretext and simply seize them (then charge you for the cost of seizing them). I agree with you though, and that doesn't mean one shouldn't try.

Explain for us smaller of brain, if you would?

@Meriasek has already replied and though I would question whether one can extrapolate from 'no description can be complete and self-consistent' to 'a thing described cannot be complete and self-consistent', he has firstly already self-critiqued and secondly, I honestly kind of like his idea of the Universe being self-contradictory. Every fucking else thing is, so As Above, So Below? (I feel like reality is conceptually below description but that's probably an intuitive approach developed from modelling systems half my life).

 

[big pauper]

the universe can be seen as a consistent formal system (as in, the universe is causal and repeatable [quantum mechanics might disagree, but for the purpose of logic it would still hold up]) and the language describing it is physics.

quantum physics likes to get corrupted by new age hippy gobbedygook because they're both more or less jewish relativism. jewish relativism could be summed up succintly with the idea that "if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, it doesn't make a sound" which sounds smart but it's objectively just incorrect. the same thing applies to quantum mechanics, i've heard countless times that quantum concepts like the pauli exclusion principle, uncertainty principle, and wave function collapse are manifestations of how consciousness influences the universe.

ontologically it doesn't matter if you or a rube goldberg machine opens schrodinger's box, the cat will be dead every time.

 

[Meriasek]

quantum physics likes to get corrupted by new age hippy gobbedygook because they're both more or less jewish relativism. jewish relativism could be summed up succintly with the idea that "if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, it doesn't make a sound" which sounds smart but it's objectively just incorrect. the same thing applies to quantum mechanics, i've heard countless times that quantum concepts like the pauli exclusion principle, uncertainty principle, and wave function collapse are manifestations of how consciousness influences the universe.

ontologically it doesn't matter if you or a rube goldberg machine opens schrodinger's box, the cat will be dead every time.

Problem is that quantum mechanics are rather abstract and frankly weird. It's weird mathematics that are somehow real and observable, but the weird hippy shit only comes in at the interpretations of said mechanics. Particularly when it comes to wave function collapse. So basically, the fundamental quantum mechanical equation, the Schrödinger equation, deals with complex wave functions. Unlike, say, the Maxwell equations that describe electromagnetic waves, the Schrödinger wave function is a complex function that isn't something directly tangible in reality. It only collapses into a real measurement value when you observe it somehow. This is where it gets a bit weird and easily misunderstood, because we tend to ascribe a certain will and consciousness to "observe", but the quantum mechanical measurement really means any form of interaction. The wave function collapse and its results can be observed (the famous double slit experiments for example, and pair entanglement), but they're... Weird and we don't really know where they come from. There are several interpretations, the most common being that the Schrödinger equation describes a probability wave that collapses into a real value. So the equation describes something abstract, not something tangible.
Like the theory of relativity by Einstein, which is also not very intuitive and annoying to do the math more, but sadly also found to be pretty damn solid with experimental evidence. We all wished it wasn't because it'd make physics a lot easier, but nope, shit's sadly real.
Fun fact about the tree in the forest, one could say that if nobody is there to observe the tree falling, it'll be in a state of quantum superposition and be both standing and fallen at the same time. In reality, of course, it definitely fell because the wave function collapsed by all the interaction with its surroundings (not to mention that the wave function description doesn't really hold up for macroscopic objects anyway, where quantum mechanics become commensurate with classical mechanics).

@Meriasek has already replied and though I would question whether one can extrapolate from 'no description can be complete and self-consistent' to 'a thing described cannot be complete and self-consistent', he has firstly already self-critiqued and secondly, I honestly kind of like his idea of the Universe being self-contradictory. Every fucking else thing is, so As Above, So Below? (I feel like reality is conceptually below description but that's probably an intuitive approach developed from modelling systems half my life).

You can probably argue with information density that you can't "simulate" or describe the entirety of the universe down to the last elementary particle because you can't actually put that much information into code somehow. Maybe each subsequent universe in the cycle gets a little bit smaller or has to use increasingly restrictive weird physics like quantum mechanics and relativity to optimize the required information density... It's simulations all the way down, and at the bottom the universe is basically Conway's Game of Life because its parent universe is marginally bigger.

 

[Overly Serious]

You can probably argue with information density that you can't "simulate" or describe the entirety of the universe down to the last elementary particle because you can't actually put that much information into code somehow. Maybe each subsequent universe in the cycle gets a little bit smaller or has to use increasingly restrictive weird physics like quantum mechanics and relativity to optimize the required information density... It's simulations all the way down, and at the bottom the universe is basically Conway's Game of Life because its parent universe is marginally bigger.

I can compress a large quantity of information down to a smaller set than the thing itself by using algorithms. In fact, I've just done so to send you this. So if the Universe is real, maybe we can simulate it with less than the whole. Though if the Universe is an information system and was created by an intelligent being, perhaps it was already compressed. What does an uncompressed universe look like?

I adore Conway's Game of Life, btw. I'll have to think about what you said more properly when I have time. Conway's game takes place in an infinite expanse of Space. The Universe, I am told, includes Space (and Time). It's its own board.

EDIT: Conway's Game of Life online for anyone who fancies a quick play around on their lunch break.

 

[big pauper]

Like the theory of relativity by Einstein, which is also not very intuitive and annoying to do the math more, but sadly also found to be pretty damn solid with experimental evidence. We all wished it wasn't because it'd make physics a lot easier, but nope, shit's sadly real.

general relativity is quite intuitive and most people understand how it works pretty well with the trampoline analogy. it's a simpler way to explain newton's laws in a mathematical framework. the problem is special realtivity is an attempt to use that framework to also describe superluminal and quantum phenomena, which is confusing, nonsensical, and doesn't describe how physical things work because it only attempts to describe things at speeds and scales that humans basically won't be able to manipulate for quite some time - it's theoretical. The problem is that special relativity was published first, the physical framework is based on the ontological framework.

so you have this framework presented as a singular unified concept that is riding on un-proveable assumptions that we're assuming we're going to discover in the future... and we're supposed to take its general ease of use and apparent but untested correctness as the justification for why the framework is correct? I hate to say this but there is no wave function collapse. we made that idea up to explain something confusing - that's not reality, that's a framework to describe a simulacrum of reality that works most of the time.

 

[Among Us Gaming]

Can we just talk about consumer level cars for a minute here?

I think a lot of this is a result of both the global market and cheap labor, and how retarded the average consumer is.

Yes some cars now have unserviceable transmissions, thats true. This has been the case in other cheaper industries (such as riding lawnmowers) since the early 2000s at least. I do not think this is from any malice or supreme hand wringing, but rather because car companies have found that it is simply cheaper to just sell cheap unserviceable transmissions, rather than support a dealer tranmission (tranny haha), repair chain, parts support, and engineer in repair capabilites into the transmission. Keep in mind the average consumer here, who will on average, take their transmission to a tranny shop anyway and spend about the same amount of money. Automatic (aka automagic) transmissions have virtually always been black boxes to anyone who isnt a tranny tech.
Similarly, to many farmers, even since the 60s when they were introduced, the Hydrostatic heavy equipment transmission has always been a black box that you take to the dealer.

Now we advance to the year 2025, when foreign manufacturing is cheaper than ever, and the the consumer market larger, lazier, and stupider than ever, making things repairable doesn't make financial sense, and the consumer doesn't care either way. The whole car to them is a black box. The fact that it has more computers in it than an IT department, and likely won't last beyond 100,000 miles doesn't matter to them, because they don't and wouldn't work on it, and they won't keep it beyond 80,000 miles, assuming it doesn't get totalled in some way before that point.

The real villain here more than anything else is globalism and finance run companies. We've minmaxxed mass manufacturing so much that nearly every product is cheaper to replace than to repair, because overseas labor is so cheaper, and domestic labor is so expensive (and yet those that do it still get paid poorly). Another microcosm of this phenomenon is hand tools. Used to back when sears was big and good still, if you took a craftsman ratchet to the store fornwarranty service, they would merely replace the guts and give you your tool back. Now, instead you take your ratchet into lowes, and they give you another brand new ratchet, because maintaining service of the ratchets and supplying parts therein costs more money than just replacing it entirely.
Once again, globalism leads to this. What the solution is i do not know; its such a complex issue that an answer is beyond me, but rest assured, this is why we see these things happening

 

[big pauper]

the world is run by sabbatean occultists who are trying to create an artificial messiah so they can rule over the world as artificial gods. if they are in control of the material conditions for which the text states the messiah will come, then they are the arbiters of what the messiah is, not the text. yes this is literally the plot of neon genesis evangelion

by sabbatean occultists i mean they're a breakaway sect of crypto-jews that appeared around the 17th century where the jews had a string of messianic movements that failed to catch on, eventually culminating in the hassidic jewish movement. that was basically the 95 theses of judaism where the movement fundamentally split into sects that still exist to this day but they don't want to admit to maintain the singular front of jewish identity. half of them have a religious obligation to keep their heads down and their blinders on and the other half have no intention of ever doing that but have to keep up the appearance of it to maintain their identity

 

[Meriasek]

general relativity is quite intuitive and most people understand how it works pretty well with the trampoline analogy. it's a simpler way to explain newton's laws in a mathematical framework. the problem is special realtivity is an attempt to use that framework to also describe superluminal and quantum phenomena, which is confusing, nonsensical, and doesn't describe how physical things work because it only attempts to describe things at speeds and scales that humans basically won't be able to manipulate for quite some time - it's theoretical. The problem is that special relativity was published first, the physical framework is based on the ontological framework.

so you have this framework presented as a singular unified concept that is riding on un-proveable assumptions that we're assuming we're going to discover in the future... and we're supposed to take its general ease of use and apparent but untested correctness as the justification for why the framework is correct? I hate to say this but there is no wave function collapse. we made that idea up to explain something confusing - that's not reality, that's a framework to describe a simulacrum of reality that works most of the time.

Eh, the trampoline analogy is a very, very simplified way of explaining how curved spacetime is gravity. Actual General Relativity isn't intuitive at all. And it has all the reference frame stuff from Special Relativity, except it goes a step further and adds acceleration and spacetime tensors. Neither have anything to do with quantum phenomena.
Alright, I gotta clear some shit up here.
Special Relativity describes the physics of inertial frames at very high speeds close to the speed of light. Inertial meaning that they do not change their velocity/direction. General Relativity, well, generalizes this to accelerating reference frames and particularly gives a description of gravity. Where Special Relativity is mostly about the transformation of frames of references and how the fact that the speed of light is the same in all of them leads to weird shit, General Relativity introduces a whole new way of describing space itself. Gravity is a result of spacetime being curved, and mass curving spacetime. Special Relativity was published first because it's the simpler part, and started by the works of Lorentz and Poincare, nothing quite ontological about it.
Neither actually allows superluminal movement (as in, faster than the speed of light in vacuum) per se, although one can in principle use speeds faster than the speed of light (just not exactly the speed of light) if there are imaginary masses. Which are maybe mathematically valid, but never observed.
Quantum mechanics describes very small, low energy physics. The opposite of what Relativity does.
Relativity and quantum mechanics are also fundamentally incommensurate. It's actually the big task in physics to eventually unify relativity and quantum mechanics, because right now they don't work together. They're entirely different theories working on very different areas, even the math is very different. There is quantum electrodynamics, which is the application of special relativity to quantum mechanics, but the big deal about General Relativity is its description of spacetime as a field and gravity as a property of that, and so far nobody has worked out a working quantum gravity model.

And yes, Special and General Relativity have predictions that are observable. So does quantum mechanics. Some examples:
Special Relativity: Particle accelerator experiments show time dilation. Muons accelerated to very high speeds have a longer half life compared to muons in the lab system, also cosmic particles measured on Earth display length contraction.
General Relativity: Gravitational lensing has been observed, General Relativity has also been observed with various atomic clock experiments and the Mercury orbit anomaly.
Quantum mechanics: The whole weirdness about observers affecting outcomes and wave functions has been shown in double slit experiments. With photons and even large molecules like C60 "Buckyballs". Quantization of energy states is also fundamental to how lasers work, and quantum numbers are used in things like NMR machines and many other applications. The tunnel effect, very much a demonstration of quantum mechanical probability, is used in tunnel electron microscopy.
And many more for each.

Basically, individually these theories work and describe what we observe very well. But we don't know why shit is like it is. Schrödinger came up with his equation kinda out of nowhere and it turned out to work. Only later did someone derive it properly.

 

[Dr Cruel]

The language distribution in Australia strongly suggests a second immigration wave that conquered most of the continent.
View attachment 7147079

Sounds like what the Hopi did to the Anasazi.

"Toward the end of the 13th century, some cataclysmic event forced the Anasazi to flee those cliff houses and their homeland and to move south and east toward the Rio Grande and the Little Colorado River. Just what happened has been the greatest puzzle facing archaeologists who study the ancient culture. Today’s Pueblo Indians have oral histories about their peoples’ migration, but the details of these stories remain closely guarded secrets. Within the past decade, however, archaeologists have wrung from the pristine ruins new understandings about why the Anasazi left, and the picture that emerges is dark. It includes violence and warfare—even cannibalism—among the Anasazi themselves. “After about A.D. 1200, something very unpleasant happens,” says University of Colorado archaeologist Stephen Lekson. “The wheels come off.”"

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/riddles-of-the-anasazi-85274508/

"The term Anasazi is a Navajo word meaning ancient enemies, and many of the culture’s descendants resent the characterization. Hopis, for example, use the term Hisatsinom, meaning the people of long ago.

They also object to Turner’s conclusions, arguing that the claim of cannibalism is a slanderous stain on their ancestors."

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-dec-20-me-55814-story.html

 

[I'm a Silly]

The danger however, is that once the number of people who own such vehicles is small enough that they're unlikely to generate much upset, the State will outlaw the vehicles on whatever pretext and simply seize them (then charge you for the cost of seizing them). I agree with you though, and that doesn't mean one shouldn't try.


@Meriasek has already replied and though I would question whether one can extrapolate from 'no description can be complete and self-consistent' to 'a thing described cannot be complete and self-consistent', he has firstly already self-critiqued and secondly, I honestly kind of like his idea of the Universe being self-contradictory. Every fucking else thing is, so As Above, So Below? (I feel like reality is conceptually below description but that's probably an intuitive approach developed from modelling systems half my life).

What about the custom car/antique/restoration community? I don't forsee them being outlawed.

 

[The Mighty Banth]

View attachment 7147633

Sounds like what the Hopi did to the Anasazi.

"Toward the end of the 13th century, some cataclysmic event forced the Anasazi to flee those cliff houses and their homeland and to move south and east toward the Rio Grande and the Little Colorado River. Just what happened has been the greatest puzzle facing archaeologists who study the ancient culture. Today’s Pueblo Indians have oral histories about their peoples’ migration, but the details of these stories remain closely guarded secrets. Within the past decade, however, archaeologists have wrung from the pristine ruins new understandings about why the Anasazi left, and the picture that emerges is dark. It includes violence and warfare—even cannibalism—among the Anasazi themselves. “After about A.D. 1200, something very unpleasant happens,” says University of Colorado archaeologist Stephen Lekson. “The wheels come off.”"

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/riddles-of-the-anasazi-85274508/

"The term Anasazi is a Navajo word meaning ancient enemies, and many of the culture’s descendants resent the characterization. Hopis, for example, use the term Hisatsinom, meaning the people of long ago.

They also object to Turner’s conclusions, arguing that the claim of cannibalism is a slanderous stain on their ancestors."

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-dec-20-me-55814-story.html

That's very interesting, I listen to this elder Navajo who talks about his culture, experiences, stories, ect and at one point he mentions that a great calamity hit the Anasazi as sent by the Holy People as punishment for their evil predation on other tribes. I think he characterized it as them raining down arrows and wind but dont quote me on that.

Interesting to have outside confirmation of some of the events.

 

[30+GameOvers]

My mother mentioned some sort of a myth/conspiracy of an ancient civilization of people who went to Antarctica and were never heard from again. Presumption is that they still live there, probably underground(why they haven't been found), or they reached some sort of Agartha like place where they ascended to another plane. Apparently the nomads were muslims or some other religious group, altho why they would go to a giant icecube, especially in the ancient times, is beyond me.

Search results bring me nothing, is there any theory that has any sort of basis for what I am talking about here?

 

[Cuntspiracy Man]

What about the custom car/antique/restoration community? I don't forsee them being outlawed.

it's not difficult to imagine that you'll only be permitted to pretty them up for looks but not drive them
maybe they'll deem them all not road legal, or create some kinda law about how they can only be referred to as show cars and all show cars must not have an engine or something

 

[NoReturn]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRoeWzi8k48

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoQpVeY2Oss

They also object to Turner’s conclusions, arguing that the claim of cannibalism is a slanderous stain on their ancestors."
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-dec-20-me-55814-story.html

Mother FUCKER, we KNOW THERE WERE CANNIBALS. Stop trying to lie to whitey! For god's sakes you think the Mexica just magically stopped at the border of modern-day Mexico? We know they ate people, why they fuck WOULDN'T they come for a visit and/or to capture sacrifices and snacks?

My mother mentioned some sort of a myth/conspiracy of an ancient civilization of people who went to Antarctica and were never heard from again. Presumption is that they still live there, probably underground(why they haven't been found), or they reached some sort of Agartha like place where they ascended to another plane. Apparently the nomads were muslims or some other religious group, altho why they would go to a giant icecube, especially in the ancient times, is beyond me.

Search results bring me nothing, is there any theory that has any sort of basis for what I am talking about here?

Yes, actually. The Selk’nam, for example, used to live down there in Tierra Del Fuego and had some interesting biological adaptations that allowed them to live in the super-cold. They could have easily made it to Antarctica and lived similarly to the people of the far north (e.g. Lots of seals to eat).
Check out their body painting, think how well that would have worked among the ice. It's pretty cool to think about.

https://designyoutrust.com/2017/03/the-lost-tribes-of-tierra-del-fuego-rare-and-haunting-photos-of-selknam-people-posing-with-their-traditional-body-painting/

 

[30+GameOvers]

Yes, actually. The Selk’nam, for example, used to live down there in Tierra Del Fuego and had some interesting biological adaptations that allowed them to live in the super-cold. They could have easily made it to Antarctica and lived similarly to the people of the far north (e.g. Lots of seals to eat).
Check out their body painting, think how well that would have worked among the ice. It's pretty cool to think about.

That's interesting. Is there any historical record of an entire group of people taking an expedition there and never coming back? Not researchers, but soldiers, tribes ect. that were not expected to survive, but some speculate they did, by similarly adapting to the climate. Google is showing me that apparently there is a belief that people build pyramids out there in Antarctic, they had to be build by people obviously.

 

[Overly Serious]

What about the custom car/antique/restoration community? I don't forsee them being outlawed.

it's not difficult to imagine that you'll only be permitted to pretty them up for looks but not drive them
maybe they'll deem them all not road legal, or create some kinda law about how they can only be referred to as show cars and all show cars must not have an engine or something

Having thought about this more after reading these comments, I could honestly see it going either way. My experience is that in the general case when the number of people invested in something is small enough the State no longer feels restrained from trampling their rights. But on reflection, there's likely not much reason to outlaw them if they are such a small minority.

I would say it would happen under one of two circumstances: it interferes with the majority traffic / traffic management systems (we don't want to have to deal with non-centrally managed vehicles or there are some high profile accidents involving recalcitrant 70 year old "petrol heads"); or their popularity isn't going away and they want to force the issue.

I guess time will tell. In which case stashing away a few human-driven petrol cars might not be a bad idea.

They also object to Turner’s conclusions, arguing that the claim of cannibalism is a slanderous stain on their ancestors."

Well, the would, wouldn't they?

EDIT: @NoReturn Fucking Hell, am I the only one that looks at those last two pics and sees the something Lovecraftian about that? They resemble the Elder Things from At the Mountains of Madness. I'd have nightmares if I saw either of those coming towards me through the ice!

 

[NoReturn]

That's interesting. Is there any historical record of an entire group of people taking an expedition there and never coming back? Not researchers, but soldiers, tribes ect. that were not expected to survive, but some speculate they did, by similarly adapting to the climate. Google is showing me that apparently there is a belief that people build pyramids out there in Antarctic, they had to be build by people obviously.

Oh there's lots of stuff like that. Search this thread for "Antarctica" for some of the stuff that's out there, but also because there's some interesting objections (e.g. a discussion of German typography) to the claims in here as well.
That's part of what makes conspiracy stuff so fun. It's not just about the wild claims, it's about "Oh here's something new to learn" or "The claim is wrong but it's based on a truth and here's an explanation of what that is."

 

[Cuntspiracy Man]

Having thought about this more after reading these comments, I could honestly see it going either way. My experience is that in the general case when the number of people invested in something is small enough the State no longer feels restrained from trampling their rights. But on reflection, there's likely not much reason to outlaw them if they are such a small minority.

I would say it would happen under one of two circumstances: it interferes with the majority traffic / traffic management systems (we don't want to have to deal with non-centrally managed vehicles or there are some high profile accidents involving recalcitrant 70 year old "petrol heads"); or their popularity isn't going away and they want to force the issue.

I guess time will tell. In which case stashing away a few human-driven petrol cars might not be a bad idea.

Something that may not cause trouble now could be a potential saving grace for people if they ever get a reason to start using it in the future
Maybe not a lot of people wanna drive non computerized cars now, but if anything big enough to finally make the frog notice it 's being boiled pops up, a lot of semi-normies can potentially go "right, that's it, that's the final straw, i'm going innawoods classic car!"

If you ban them while they're comparatively more niche there will be a lot less outcry, people won't yet question why they oughta care
Always keep it in mind when something super random and obscure gets banned for seemingly now reason

>Haha they're banning anti super-mecha-death-cannon-manfucker shields? That's so random, who even needed those? Take them I don't care, no loss for me!
>Hey why is there suddenly a super-mecha-death-cannon-manfucker walking through town?