Which Conspiracy Theory Should You Believe?

by metatron 38 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  DJS

  I wouldn't say they are all fake, but I've seen no rational factual evidence based support for any of them. When I do I will change my mind about the one with actual facts. I feel the same way about god; if she ever shows up with the other super heroes in Times Square and does something cool I will become a believer. Conspiracy theorists don't seem to understand that EVERYONE associated with their pet has to be stupid, incompetent, kept in the dark, corrupt and/or bought. That strains credibility.

  I have friends who have conducted hundreds of investigations, one was a former FBI agent, then a high ranking gov. offiicial (now retired). The other was a former DOE investigator turned director who is now my co-worker. They were both impeccably trained and both have the highest ethical standards. My friend is working on his second Master's degree (this one I think is in the Psychology of Abnormal Human Behavior or something like that). These are men you want on that wall. Neither have ever been asked to conspire and neither would have if asked. They are very very good at what they do and are guided, unlike theorists and so many on this site, by facts. And they have investigated some of the more high profile incidents in this country over the past few decades.

  These are the types of individuals responsible for investigating the Sandy Hook and 9/11 type incidents. They are often supported by other country's intel agencies who concur or agree with assessments (they all share data). They are not stand alone operating in a vacuum people. To extrapolate that all of those responsible for these types of incidents are all stupid, incompetent and corrupt defies rationality and is simply untrue. And that is what would have to occur for most of the conspiracy theories to be true.

  How would the typical theorist feel if he/she was criticized, condemend and accused from others who were not familiar with their profession and how they responded to an issue. Whether teacher, banker, window washer or candle stick maker, it is extremely likely that the theorists take pride in what they do and would consider themselves experts at doing it. Yet they quckly arrive at their arrogant narcissistic judgments over events and incidents not of their knowledge and out of their scope of understanding and condemn all of those involved as being incompetent and corrupt.

  I have a healthy degree of cynicism and skepticism, but I have been trained to rely on facts and evidence, something which theorists find distasteful. I see that on this site routinely, a knee-jerk, reactonary, emotional and immature immediate response to events, casting judgment at those responding or investigating.
• 

  Band on the Run

  Yes. I worked for a few federal government agencies. My stint at the U.S. Senate was revealing. Govt. is run by consensus, a not too bright bureaucracy. People love to drop names. Ted Kennedy's office was an exception. The Senator I worked for was chair of the Joint Intelligence Committee. When I met that staff for a few minutes, I was so reassured. Government is clumsy. I threw myself on corporate America.
• 

  DJS

  BOTR,

  Yes, I have experienced much the same, but the individuals I work with there are typically bright, caring and competent. But trying to accomplish a lot within that structure, as you state, is a challenge. But the people I'm talking about worked in field offices before going into 'management.' The people I work with who respond to such incidents (both in the government and private secotors) typically have advanced degrees in stuff like blast engineering, forensics, nuclear engineering, etc., or they have degrees in emergency response and advanced training in Incident Command. They are not without flaws, but the bad ones are few compared to the good ones.

  The typical consipracy theorist has a high school diploma and an Internet account.
• 

  EndofMysteries

  Let's talk about a few conspiracy theories then.

  Government/Healthcare corruption - The theories that big business pharma has influenced the government whether by the politicans owning and having stakes in the pharma companies or bought and paid for, that they are not looking out for the best health interests and the result is to keep people sick and dependant on them for more money.

  A few very rational examples that may lead one to believe that.

  1. Our bodies are like machines and if not properly maintained will start to break down and show symptoms of issues. They need a certain amount of nutrients, vitamins, cleaning out toxins, etc. to function. Also people many have allergies to certain foods and additives. Now, a person goes to a doctor complaining of fatigue, ibs, pain, sexual side effects, etc. Logic would dictate that first they should have blood tests to make sure they are not having deficiencies in any vitamins and nutrients which may account for some of those issues. Food allergy tests could be done as well. Possibly tests to check for toxins as well. If all of those things checked out, then it would be time to look for other possibilities. However, not only are none of those done, insurance won't pay for any of it. Instead the doctor will prescribe medications to treat those 'symptoms' without addressing the root cause. Those medications will likely be for life and likely produce side effects requiring more medications to manage those side effects. This person will pay thousands, or hundreds of thousands in their life for this. If they had other tests they may have realized they had to make some adjustments in their diet or they are severely lacking in something that if they fixed it, the issue would have resolved itself and the pharma companies would not make any more money on it.

  2. Vaccines - they are a hot topic! Phama companies make a LOT of money on neurological and autoimmune disorders, as well as vaccines. Now vaccines have had benefits, but let's get to the main controversy. Vaccines contain adjuvants to stimulate an immune response and put the immune system into hyperdrive. One is aluminum. Aluminum is also know to a be a neurotoxin. When FDA approves vaccines, they only test the individual vaccine. They don't test the adjuvants nor do studies on them individually. If you go to the FDA's own website on this, they consider the adjuvant a part of the vaccine so don't test the adjuvants. Perhaps the amount of aluminum in one vaccine is not enough to cause bad long term side effects. But perhaps doing that 17 times within an 18 month timespan will amount to long term side effects. (what's given to newborns). Logic would dictate that they run studies on the ajuvants and find out exactly how much, and in what amount of time, etc, is needed for long term side effects. If only 1 or if past a certain amount, etc. No studies are done on the adjuvants and they claim it's safe and only a tiny fraction may get something. They say no links to autoimmune disease or neurological because they look at 1 individual vaccine vs the adjuvants. That's equilvalent to saying that a tiny amount of radiation is safe as long as each dose is tiny. It doesn't matter if you do 10, 1,000, or 100,000 doses and whether in 1 day or 20 years, studies haven't shown a tiny dose of radiation to be harmful. So since ONE vaccine isn't shown to cause neurlogical problems, then that means 20 w/ the same toxic adjuvants taken at any point won't be either.

  Why would they not do studies on them? The people and general health of the population would benefit in knowing. The only ones to lose out would be the pharma companies. Losing on treatment for the disorders caused by them as well as the sales of the vaccines themselves, etc, until finding a safer way to administer.
• 

  snare&racket

  OMG .....close the box, close the box ! Pandora go F**k yourself !
• 

  DJS

  EOM,

  I'm not an expert on health issues and won't play like I am. But a few years ago my daughter, who was expecting twins, discussed her concerns about vaccines (based on the comments made by Jenny McCarthy, another conspiracy theorist who has done more harm than can be imagined) and other news reports. I proceeded to conduct a lot of academic level research for her. This was a serious matter. I was surprised to learn that at least for the types of vaccines my daughter was concerned about there had been more very good research by several different countries than any other issue ever.

  None of the very good studies showed any correlation between the type of vaccines my daughter was concerned about (i.e, the Jenny McCarthy vaccines) and the issues of concern (such as autism, etc.). None of them. I shared those studies with her (I think they were done by the Brits, U.S. and Dutch, but that's been about 5 years ago and my memory isn't perfect).

  Governments have a compelling reason to get it right with vaccines. The U.S. has been critiized for delaying the implementation of vaccines and other meds for decades because of their requirements (can you say thalidomide?). They don't always get it right, but to think that there is some nefarious dark force behind such decisions is ridiculous. I hurt for Jenney; I really do. But once again a knee jerk, reactionary, emotional and irrational response to such events is not the answer. Vaccines, and their effects of peoples, are one of the most studied topics around the globe, for a good reason. The data is there.

  Snare, weigh in. You are an expert in this area.
• 

  DJS

  BOTR,

  It aint easy being green. Or bringing a vaccine into the market. From the FDA's website:

  Following FDA's review of a license application for a new indication, the sponsor and the FDA may present their findings to FDA's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC). This non-FDA expert committee (scientists, physicians, biostatisticians, and a consumer representative) provides advice to the Agency regarding the safety and efficacy of the vaccine for the proposed indication.

  Again, it strains credibility to think all of these professionals are stupid, incompetent and on the take. From what little I know, this is a time consuming process. Makers of vaccines can expect years to pass before their vaccine is accepted for wide use. Snare?????
• 

  DJS

  I wasn't looking for this; it's on CNN right now. Get a grip people.

  Drugs for the dying: Compassionate use

  By Elizabeth Cohen, Senior Medical Correspondent updated 10:47 PM EDT, Sat April 5, 2014 (CNN) --

  At first, Sandy Barker decided to behave nicely and sit silently in the audience as an official from the Food and Drug Administration extolled the virtues of a program to get experimental drugs to desperately ill patients. Then she couldn't take it anymore. Barker's hand shot up.

  "I've been sitting here for the past hour trying to be quiet, but I want to tell you what happened to my son," she said. Barker looked down at a picture of Christian on her lap. She started to cry, but regained enough composure to describe how her son was diagnosed eight years ago with a rare form of leukemia when he was 13. A bone marrow transplant was supposed to help, but instead the donor's cells attacked Christian's body.

  Christian's graft-versus-host disease was quickly getting worse. His life was on the line. Nothing was working. The Barkers searched for studies he could join but found none. Christian's doctors desperately wanted to try an experimental drug, but first the FDA had to give its blessing.

  The Barkers and their doctors begged the agency to allow Christian to use the medicine. By the time permission was given, more than three weeks had passed, and the graft-versus-host disease had moved to stage 4, the most severe stage. Christian died two months later.
• 

  mynameislame

  So DJS are you saying the government is 100% honest with us?

  There are many things that would be considered a conspiracy that are absolutely true.

  NSA, We sold guns to the Mexican Cartels, Tuskegee, Watergate. The list goes on and on.
• 

  What is Truth?

  If One wants to uncover anything just follow the money, Whom has the most to gain? For instance 9/11, That event kind of didn't work out to well for old Ben however, the Bush's are doing pretty well.