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

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Last edited:
Just saw 2 posts come across my feed from today (one was Forbes) talking about 2024 YR4 hitting the moon. The same asteroid they said when they first found it, it was going away from us and hard to see and figure out what it was going to do. An asteroid that isn't coming back until 2032, which by the way is also the same year Apophis (an actual extinction level asteroid should it hit us that is why it's named such) comes back.

We're getting hit by something around 2032.

And just to make this a true schizo post it would have to be Nibiru.
 
Sugriva said:
I thought the "harvesting baby foreskins" was a joke, are you telling me that's real?
Click to expand...
Abortion leftovers will work too. Fetal cels counts as "medical waste" and it can be suspiciously sorted out to end up in some cosmetics, allegedly. It's hard to prove, but we all know how they are censoring and playing with definitions and words.

Judging how neurotic and obsessed women are with age, especially after hitting "the wall" + no kids meme and adding all the stories about witches kidnapping babies etc in old folklores. I think there is something to this. The foreskin stuff is just the top of the iceberg.
 
snowdunes said:
Abortion leftovers will work too. Fetal cels counts as "medical waste" and it can be suspiciously sorted out to end up in some cosmetics, allegedly. It's hard to prove, but we all know how they are censoring and playing with definitions and words.

Judging how neurotic and obsessed women are with age, especially after hitting "the wall" + no kids meme and adding all the stories about witches kidnapping babies etc in old folklores. I think there is something to this. The foreskin stuff is just the top of the iceberg.
Click to expand...
The visual of young boys being chopped up as soon as they're born to harvest materials for the skincare routine of elite women sounds like some shit you'd read about is a fantasy book about some kinda evil witch queen
But I suppose the reason it's so is because it's been happening in our world for ages

Most of fiction has always been an allusion to reality even when it doesn't directly reference it
 
Otterly said:
I believe it’s one of them, yes. I also think that evil exists as not simply an action but as ‘thing’ and that it delights in the suffering and destruction of innocence. But that’s the kind of thing one can only say in conspiracy threads on shady websites…
Click to expand...
It is called the Learned Elders of Zion.

It isn't metaphysical. It is very real and kvetches a lot.

Now the whole usual AOC spergery got me thinking.

A woman's worth is her looks, a man's worth is his wallet. That's a raw deal for both.

Maybe sexual reproduction is just not a good fit with sentience/sapience and yet it is perhaps necessary to evolve to that point.

Would this be a Fermi Paradox filter?
Would sentient societies based on sexual reproduction collapse, unless they manage to move to artificial non sexual reproduction, like how kittle grey men have no genitals?
 
Overly Serious said:
I am happy to report that after a month of listening to classical music, I am indeed slightly smarter.

Specifics: I started listening to classical music whilst doing various tasks on my computer. Whilst this is not the only variable that changed in the complexities of my life, I found that listening to it helped me sustain my focus a little bit more than usual. I don't listen to music whilst doing things for the most part so it's possible that any music could have this effect. However, I'm not so sure because the reason I don't usually listen to music whilst doing things is because it makes things harder to focus on. Classical Music, in particular Beethoven, seemed to have the opposite effect.

Outside of when actually listening to it, I did find some of the melodies playing in my head later on which was honestly quite uplifting.

N.b. listening to Mussorsky gave me a vague urge to invade the Donbas so I stopped before I got into trouble and Mozart becomes a little annoying after a while.
Click to expand...
Oh, can you recommend me some?
 
Jhonny Jhon said:
Oh, can you recommend me some?
Click to expand...
Ah, I already replied to someone asking the same further up. But in brief I found full orchestral felt best in terms of helping me focus. Something about it being a full atmopshere of sounds as opposed to say single piano pieces which were beautiful but tended to draw in your focus more actively. Orchestral simply works better as background. That said it's not a hard rule and my mix certainly included pure piano pieces but usually tending towards the gentle. Chopin's 12 Etudes Op 10: No 12 in C Minor is one of my favourite pieces of classical music. But if I play it I just end up listening to it rather than doing whatever else I was doing.

Obviously nothing with lyrics you can understand, so if you're fluent in old Italian, you're out of luck. But mostly I wasn't listening to opera anyway. The most important thing of all is that it's a block of music you can just put on and play without pausing to juggle playlists or reaching the end. For that reason and because it's just so rich, I recommend just putting on the complete works of Beethoven. That should give you a solid few days of listening before having to hit start and the dude is one of the most famous composers of all time for a good reason. His stuff is really great. Just put it on and carry on with your reading/studying/shit-posting whatever you're doing.

Enjoy!

Male Idiot said:
A woman's worth is her looks, a man's worth is his wallet. That's a raw deal for both.
Click to expand...
Never ask three things:
  • A woman her age.
  • A man his salary.
  • A White Nationalist the ethnicity of his girlfriend.
Edit to save double-post
Male Idiot said:
Would sentient societies based on sexual reproduction collapse, unless they manage to move to artificial non sexual reproduction, like how kittle grey men have no genitals?
Click to expand...
What a piece of work is man [...] the paragon of animals.
It's an interesting question - how much must we distance ourselves from our animal nature in order to be like the angels. I'd suggest it isn't a spectrum one rises or falls on, but a rock we cling to and if we let go can be washed away or learn to swim. Much of what is wrong with our society is the result of letting go of our animal instincts and setting reason above them. Our instincts tell us that a man who thinks he's a woman is unsettling. But people can be taught to let go of their instincts and say "yes, this is a woman". Equally, our instincts tell us "Mmmm, sugar - must consume it to survive the famine" but our reason can say "maybe a second piece is a bad idea".

Reason is a tool we have developed but it doesn't carry inherent meaning. There's a risk when one displaces Instinct from the governor's chair and sits Reason in its place, that we lose our motivations. There's little that you can't vivisect with Reason and find arbitrary. At least depending on how good you are at using Reason. Most people are not so very good at using this tool and attempting to move on from Instinct opens them up to all sorts of horrors. Some people are very strong in Reason, have exercised it over the years and when they let go of instinct or learned morality, re-discover it from first principles and in more refined form. Some learn to swim, others get washed away.

For humanity, is there a valley we have to get across - on the one side Thog and Thag beating each other with clubs, on the other enlightened beings of pure reason and peace? And right now we're in some great gap of confusion? Personally I think both are needed in harmony. If we move too far away we lose our drive, our competitiveness, maybe even some individuality if we govern ourselves not by our own desires but by arguments that society can impart to us and which seem true to us.

I think we have to transcend our instincts because the increasing power we wield is so destructive. I don't mean merely to others, I mean to ourselves as well. We can hack the body's own reward system with drugs, we can fool its sexual drives with porn (not quite, but some young men don't understand what is missing), we can eat until we die from eating. But I don't see some humanity that has done this as cold, homogenous scientists. I think that's a trap that would lead to stagnancy and death. I see it more as fierce and joyful individuals who retain their passion but have a degree of aestheticism and discipline more than we do. You need both vitality and mastery of the tools of reason to prosper. The challenge ahead of us I think is to retain both at once.
 
Last edited:
I don't think individuality is at all required for a succesfull space civilisation.

Genetical engineering will work in new drives.

I just feel that it will be (((Them))) putting in new instincts to create the perfect goy.

Nor do I think humans are by divine destiny assured to survive a million years, much less get into space.
 
i'm finding it more and more likely that a living human being never got to the moon, or past it
i believe we got to space, and we sent unmanned drones to the moon and past it, but a living human never landed on the moon

the US had every incentive to fake a moon landing when they saw how the soviets were beating them in the space race
and the soviets didn't beat the US in the space race because they were communists- they beat them because they were russians, and russians are weird motherfuckers, it never proved or would've proved communism can work, it simply would've proved boris can do anything even with a retarded handicap like communism
 
Cuntspiracy Man said:
i'm finding it more and more likely that a living human being never got to the moon, or past it
i believe we got to space, and we sent unmanned drones to the moon and past it, but a living human never landed on the moon

the US had every incentive to fake a moon landing when they saw how the soviets were beating them in the space race
and the soviets didn't beat the US in the space race because they were communists- they beat them because they were russians, and russians are weird motherfuckers, it never proved or would've proved communism can work, it simply would've proved boris can do anything even with a retarded handicap like communism
Click to expand...
I constantly hear the retarded reddit excuse "it was real because the russians agreed it was real". They only accepted it because they use the same propaganda tools as the Americans, moving pictures (film) to manufacture "evidence". No state want to open up that can of worms and ruin the illusion that TV is fake to the public. Let the US have the "win" and keep the illusion up so shit doesn't collapse.

Male Idiot said:
I don't think individuality is at all required for a succesfull space civilisation.

Genetical engineering will work in new drives.

I just feel that it will be (((Them))) putting in new instincts to create the perfect goy.

Nor do I think humans are by divine destiny assured to survive a million years, much less get into space.
Click to expand...
Creativity needs individuality to some extent. Remove that and you will have a problem with getting researchers and people needed to maintain a space civilisation.

If you want the great filter for humanity: The African negroid and women rights
 
Male Idiot said:
I don't think individuality is at all required for a succesfull space civilisation.

Genetical engineering will work in new drives.

I just feel that it will be (((Them))) putting in new instincts to create the perfect goy.

Nor do I think humans are by divine destiny assured to survive a million years, much less get into space.
Click to expand...
Without individuality you lack conflict and competition which will retard your civilisation. Furthermore without instincts and competitive drives, what purpose would motivate exploration? The mindset that would reduce mankind to a servile being is one that accomplishes nothing by Space exploration. If you have all your needs satisfied on Earth and are driven solely by rationality and lack threats from competition or conflict, there's no logical reason to expend effort and invite risk by going elsewhere. Space exploration is hard. Space colonisation orders of magnitude harder. We're not going to conquer the galaxy by being solely rational. Meaning is required.
 
snowdunes said:
"it was real because the russians agreed it was real".
Click to expand...
there is no worse "evidence" to prove something thab "well a guy who was really unlikely to agree with this, agreed with it... so... no fake?"

the same thing is constantly done in court, just because the accused pleaded guilty doesn't mean he actually committed the crime
people are oftentimes forced to agree with narratives of crimes they didn't commit because all evidence seems against them or because there is some social pressure to say they did it lest the dreaded 'consequences' we must all be thinking of come into play
or simply because his lawyer thinks he will be very difficult to prove innocent and wants to at least get him a lighter sentence

the written, technical, agreed upon "truth" is not always the physical objective truth
 
No way the soviets would not have rubbed the US's face in the moon landing.

Everyone knew TV was fake in the USSR/WP. Only westerners are Naive and Autistic enough to believe the electric Jude.

So either the Soviets were convinced or they were fooled. At that point, fooling the ruskies by faking radio triangulation would have been more impressive than actually moon landing.

As for a logical reason for space exploration, resources to do more le soyence.

On drive and motives:

I am speaking about aliens, not current 21st century homo sapiens. You could just crank up curiosity by fiddling with the right genes.

Would even explain why ayyy-lmaos are interested in probing butts and letting Uncle 56% keep shooting at them too.

Also makes you think that the stories that the aliens are purpose cloned for single tasks and ruled by AI.
 
Nuclear Poisoning said:
Well, what is this story about? I won't let you memoryhole it yourself.
Click to expand...
Ok, I figured it out, it was the One More Orbit flight
1750527153341.webp1750528156394.webp


The debunking above is a bit misleading (I'm not a flat earther, but I don't believe we're allowed to know everything that's in Antarctica, either.) Ironically enough, though, it's easier to see what I was getting at on a Flat Earth map.
1750527932487.webp
Red = 1979 transglobal flight, impossible on a flat earth
Green = One More Orbit, possible on a flat earth but ALSO possible if the government says "Fly over the pole and you're a dead man"
1750528446009.webp
It's kind of hard to see, and you can check it yourself on Google Earth if you don't believe me, but this flight doesn't have to go over either pole, and there's no transponder data near the poles anyway.
1750528538037.webp1750528963570.webp
 
NoReturn said:
Ok, I figured it out, it was the One More Orbit flight
Click to expand...
Did they give an explanation as to why they took those 60° right turns at each pole, rather than keep straight? One justification could be it was the only re-fuelling itineray they could organize. But surely it wouldn't be that hard to organize re-fuelling stops at airports that are more along a straight line, such as I dunno, Krasnojark and Jakarta instead of Kazakhstan and Mauritius?
More interesting would be to know the location of all the "flight trackers" that the guy mentions in the video you linked. How far south is the farthest one?
 
Nuclear Poisoning said:
But surely it wouldn't be that hard to organize re-fuelling stops at airports that are more along a straight line, such as I dunno, Krasnojark and Jakarta instead of Kazakhstan and Mauritius?
Click to expand...
The explanation I was given once on /x/ was that it was "too dangerous" to go straight across, but that doesn't make sense because if you go to the middle of the continent, then are you not at the south pole? It shouldn't matter if you're in the middle, because it's not like people would have to launch a rescue mission all the way from the Davis Sea to the center, you could just come from the Shetland Islands if the plane went down, or even just tell the crew "If you crash, it's your own problem."
1750551770937.webp

It really does seem more that if they went straight across from top to bottom and then around the other side, they'd be going too close for comfort to a military installation or something. You can see user data on the Strava map on both the Antarctic peninsula
1750552106241.webp
South of Cape Town
1750552270921.webp
And a few other places. We know there are known bases, but it also doesn't seem unreasonable that people would be moving around outside those areas, too.

Nuclear Poisoning said:
More interesting would be to know the location of all the "flight trackers" that the guy mentions in the video you linked. How far south is the farthest one?
Click to expand...
This is the FlightAware ADS-B map (https://www.flightaware.com/adsb/coverage/), south view:
1750550506129.webp
What's a bit odd is if you click those dots at bottom, the names don't match their locations. The furthest south orange one says "Hulhule Island" but that's in the Maldives. Directly above it are receivers registered to operators out of Tampa and New York (x2). The "true" Antarctic receivers are that pair off to the east; one just says "Antarctica" and the other is "McMurdo Station".

In the north we have:
1750550772571.webp
And those dots DO line up with where they are. The one at the top of Alaska is Utquiagvik, AK, west of there is Deadhorse. From there heading east there's Cambridge Bay, furthest north in Greenland is Sisimiut; furthest north in Europe is Mehamn; in Russia proper it's Salekhard; and way off to the far east that one across from Alaska is Ossora. All of these line up with their real world locations.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom