Put a question to Bridget Phillipson, Shadow Education Minister

My feed

to access all these features

MNHQ have commented on this thread


To think conspiracy theorists are an infuriating mix of arrogance, stupidity and lazy thinking

401 replies

EmperorTomatoRetchup · 29/09/2018 21:37

Having thought I'll leave it, I'll leave it, I found myself arguing with a conspiracy theorist.

Christ alight these people are utterly lacking in any sort of critical thought. This tool was trotting out one of the most popular of the conspiracy theories - 911 as an inside job, Madelline McCann was murdered by her parents, moon landings were faked, Diana was bumped off by Mi5 etc. and they seemed to be impervious to any of the logical flaws in their argument, that researching a matter didn't mean watching YouTube videos made by fellow conspiricists spouting unsourced, unreferenced nonsense and claiming that non adherents were 'sheeple' buying 'the official line'.

To take the example jokingly referenced on another thread, the Paul McCartney is dead conspiracy theory, how many people coroners, doctors ambulance staff, Paul's family and friends, would have had to be bought off in order to allow him to be replaced by a lookalike who could be trained to speak, act, play musical instruments left handed and pass for one of the world's most famous men in the full glare of the media . In 50 years not a single person involved in this dastardly plan, not a single one of this vast army of people cooped into it has blown the whistle despite their being unparalleled financial rewards for doing so.

No musicologists have detected a change in composition or playing or singing style. No one asking what happened to the bloke who became fake Paul', might their family not be curious as to why their son/brother disappeared off the face of the earth in the late 60s.After going to such extraordinary lengths the Beatles so desperate to cover up this audacious act, left a series of clues in their songs as a signal to their fans.

AIBU to think that this combination of scepticism, lack of critical thought, logic, probability twinned with overwhelming arrogance is infuriating and wonder how I should deal with these fuckers in future? Especially when any attempts to point out the flaws in their arguments are taken as signs you are one of the sheeple or a Co conspirator.

OP posts:
LaDaronne · 03/10/2018 13:36

Pastis does smell, but of aniseed not spirits.

On Peter Sutcliffe, relying on a confession as evidence is well dodgy ground. Of course that doesn't mean there wasn't a ton of other evidence against him as well.

Yourenotericlove · 03/10/2018 13:40

There was a lot of evidence, including his confession which included details known only to the killer. And he's never prorested his innocence. Yet some weirdo makes a website reporting it to have been someone else.

Paranoid personality types.

sashh · 03/10/2018 14:24

Apparently the Romanovs didn't speak Russian as that was the peasants' language. They only spoke French.

French was the official language of the court, Alix (who became Alexandra) was German but spent a lot of time in England. Letters between her and Nicholas are in English.

When they were imprisoned one of the conditions imposed on them was that they had to speak only Russian so their guards could understand.

The grand duchesses worked as nurses and nursed Russian soldiers, the sailors who carried 'baby' as his parents called him would not have spoken French.

The Tzar was an absolute monarch, if you wanted a divorce you had to petition the Tzar, you would NEED to know Russian to rule.

QueenOfTheAndals · 03/10/2018 15:00

Yes, they would've definitely spoken Russian but just not to each other!

Lweji · 03/10/2018 15:06

I'm just surprised that Camilla's ex didn't meet an untimely death by the time of her wedding to Charles.

Perhaps it will occur shortly after Queen Elisabeth dies.

Grimbles · 03/10/2018 16:06

I do think her death was very convenient for the Royal family as she would have continued to be a thorn in their side had she lived

Also very convenient for arms dealers too, given her campaigning.

[CT] Apropos of nothing, Dodi's maternal uncle is Adnan Khashoggi. Wake up sheeple! [ /CT]

SamanthaBrique · 03/10/2018 16:25

Why would Andrew Parker Bowles need to be bumped off? He's led a fairly blameless life since their divorce and has been married again and widowed since.

ISendNoComplimentsToYourMother · 03/10/2018 16:31

Echoing Samantha - why on earth would APB need to be bumped off?

Security services could have ordered Diana’s death. Luckily for them she got into a car with a drunk driver & didn’t wear a seat belt.

Lweji · 03/10/2018 16:48

Because Camilla divorced him. If they get rid of him, then she'd be widowed and free to be Queen. She missed a trick there.

I don't think Diana made a big dent on arms dealer's dealings. Not enough to have her killed for ruining their businesses. Grin

SamanthaBrique · 03/10/2018 17:10

That's ridiculous! I think the reason they're saying she won't be queen is more a sop to the memory of Diana than anything. Once Charles is king she's perfectly entitled to call herself queen. She seems rather fond of her ex-husband so I doubt she'd want him to have a nasty accident.

ISendNoComplimentsToYourMother · 03/10/2018 17:12

Also you only have to look at the footage of Charles following Diana’s death to see he was distraught.

Lweji · 03/10/2018 17:17

That's ridiculous!

That was kind of my point... Wink [laugh]

Gersemi · 03/10/2018 18:18

By the time Charles accedes, if he does, I really doubt that there will be serious opposition to Camilla being Queen. It's not as if there aren't precedents - witness Queen Anne and Queen Catherines 2 and 3 in Henry VIII's time.

LaDaronne · 03/10/2018 18:37

including his confession which included details known only to the killer

My point was more that the police have been known to interfere with / make up confessions. I have no doubt PS is guilty, I have to say.

Badbilly · 03/10/2018 18:44

In 1969 we had telexes. Fax hadn’t been invented until the late 1970s. Car phones were late 70s as well. A man on the moon does seem a bit implausible.

Faxes were invented in 1843, and car-phones were invented in 1959.

Please forgive me if someone has already posted this, but I am only half way through this fascinating thread.

NameChanger22 · 03/10/2018 19:19

Why would anyone not believe the Royal family are capable of things like murder when they have a very long history of it?

There are a lot more psychopaths in the rulings classes than you'll find anywhere else. They didn't get where they are being nice to people.

RomanyRoots · 03/10/2018 19:20


Exactly, just another way of saying "off with her head"

EmperorTomatoRetchup · 03/10/2018 19:52

My point was more that the police have been known to interfere with / make up confessions. I have no doubt PS is guilty, I have to say.

He was caught with a sex worker in his car (on false plates) by a cop in South Yorkshire, he disgarded a ball pein hammer a knife and some rope at the scene and was wearing a bizarre outfit under his trousers made from a v neck jumper that exposed his penis that allowed him to masturbate over the victims and had padding on the knees. Not only did his bloodgroup match, but he also secreted blood in his semen, matching samples that were recovered from other corpses.

OP posts:
Lweji · 03/10/2018 20:01

There are a lot more psychopaths in the rulings classes than you'll find anywhere else.

But that's those who become rulers. Nowadays, it's mostly their sleepy heirs.

In any case, my point is, why stop at Diana? Surely there are enough targets.
Look at Putin, one former agent isn't enough. That's a proper psycho. Respect.

SPOFS · 03/10/2018 21:39

I think we all know that we only heard a tiny part of the Saville scandal. There's much more to come. Sad

Onlyhappywhenitrains1 · 03/10/2018 22:53

Flat earth isn't just a conspiracy theory, not like Diana etc.

It's actually a way of explaining that the Christian God and religion is correct in the face of mounting scientific discoveries proving otherwise.

Flat earth is more about science being evil and being a means of hiding God from us.

People believe it because they want to believe that there is a God. He did create us, were not in a vast and meaningless universe, but a nice little bubble being looked after.

Lweji · 03/10/2018 23:51

Maybe, but, still, a round Earth isn't against the idea of God. Or of a planet specially chosen by God. Even the Big Bang points towards an origin, which could have been the point of Creation.

Unlike Evolution, particularly by natural selection (and most creationists seem to ignore the neutral theory, but I digress), which completely dispenses with God and more difficult to observe directly.

So, I can understand Creationists, up to a point, but not flat earth conspiracy theorists. It's just blatant pig headedness in the face of easily observable facts.

user1497863568 · 04/10/2018 01:00

You just have to look at WW1 and WW2 for evidence of conspiracies. And they always benefit the same small group of people. It's really nothing personal if they wipe you and your community out, it's just business.

EmperorTomatoRetchup · 04/10/2018 06:17

I think we all know that we only heard a tiny part of the Saville scandal. There's much more to come.

I don't think 'we all know' this. Speak for yourself, you suspect or have a hunch that Saville was part of a wider high-level conspiracy, but nothing more. Are or were there sex offenders among the ruling classes, of course, just like there are in every walk of life , but a vast network acting in concert with Saville at the heart of it as the procurer in chief isn't supported by any evidence.

OP posts:
QueenOfTheAndals · 04/10/2018 06:28

I think a lot of people confuse "suspect" with "know". Though in Savile's case he appears to have been hiding in plain sight - apparently his autobiography is full of lurid tales about his exploits with underage women Confused

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.