To ask what conspiracy theories you actually believe are true?

[AlternativePerspective]

Following on from the thread where OP was looking for conspiracy theories for her kids to look at, I was wondering whether anyone actually believes any of the outlandish conspiracies.

We’ve all read about how people believe that Elvis didn’t die/Paul McCartney did die/the royals are all lizards/the earth is flat. But I’ve never encountered anyone who actually believes any of them, only people who talk about people who (apparently) believe in them.

So, what conspiracies do you actually believe and why?

I believe mumsnet is overrun by tory bots pretending to be normal people - does that count?

@KarensChoppyBob. I cannot find anything about a Stephen fry conspiracy

@Branleuse

we are existing in a slightly different dimension since they switched on the large hadron collider and it created a black hole. Thats why David Bowie is dead and Snape and everythings been shit ever since

I like this one!

PA has yet to be properly grilled by the FBI in US.

No one see a to be kicking up a fuss about that.

COVID won't be much of a factor with the tests available and private jets at his disposal.

Seems to be

Pizzagate is completely ridiculous, fabricated by the far right with roots in anti-semitism.

The moon landing was real but the film of it was done in a studio.

Diana was bumped off.

I too think Diana’s death wasn’t an accident.

With regard to the Mandela effect, the CEO of a Canadian (I think) wholesale food company has done a video based on the fact that his customers were noticing changes in their regular orders like product names etc and despite a forensic analysis of the software they couldn't explain it. He was theorising quantum entanglement ( or it's a fun marketing exercise ).

You are really not thinking or are trying yourself in knots to avoid admitting your theory is completely unsustainable.

I did say that the facts as presented may very well be the truth. I just like to consider the potential options without any preconceptions. Media blackouts are not uncommon nor impossible for much less earth-shaking events – look at all the superinjunctions, the actual existence of many of which we never even know, because a celebrity has had an affair or something. The royals and their people are highly experienced at planning things with perfect military precision, a long time in advance. Plus, as we’ve seen, if you were to release ‘official’ photos (or leak semi-official ones) that show one thing and then a journalist/paparazzo/member of the public releases a contradictory one, all you have to do is shout “FAKE!!!”, condemn them as a deluded conspiracy theorist with too much time on their hands and, should they get too close to the truth, make life very, very ‘uncomfortable’ for them. The vast majority would never believe that the 'official' story could possibly be the fake. People have already stated that journalists throughout the world know facts that they aren’t allowed to print (or which would be very inexpedient for them if they did).

The ‘Big Lie’ is a well-known propaganda/control tool, whereby the more brazen and far-reaching the lie is, the more people will think that it simply couldn’t be a lie. Just about everybody tells little lies often, so they don’t question that those in power might/would do so as well; but because the average person on the street would never dream up the idea of staging or manipulating huge events for an evil ulterior motive, they simply can’t comprehend that a government or powerful person could possibly do so.

Apologies is posted upthread. I love these comedy conspiracy bits:

@dottiedodah

PrawnCocktail Pringles That was really interesting. Thank You .Never heard of the Fermi Complex before . Have bookmarked it for future ref .Did you see pictures from BBC space (Not sure of link here) showing the beginnings of the universe and Earth showing up as a red dot? Really interesting and thought provoking .

No, will see if I can find it!

It's over fifty years since the moon landing and nobody has bothered to go back. Why not. Maybe the cost is too high and they wouldn't learn much. But it still seems strange that despite the huge advances in technology nobody has been back.

Not convinced the crewed moon landings happened...

John F Kennedy laid out the plan for reaching the moon in his famous speech but the space programme was riddled with problems (11 successive failures in terms of launch or spacecraft issues) but managed one US space probe before his death in 1963.

Nixon - not exactly known for his integrity (Watergate, impeachment process etc) - was heavily involved with the space programme and approved a joint US-USSR space exploration programme.

Suddenly when Nixon took over as president, the US space programmes improved significantly to having the first moon landing with Apollo 11 (1969), Apollo 12 (1969), Apollo 15 (1971). Apollo 16 (1972) and the last US lunar landing in 1972 with Apollo 17. Most of these were with the same small group of astronauts.

Then Watergate trial begins early 1973 and, as the first president, Nixon resigns in 1974.

Basically, all the crewed moon landing happened during Nixon's reign and after that there were no 'soft landings' achieved at all on the moon until 2006!!

So, I think it is reasonable to possibly think that, yes, there were moon landings but these were not crewed. People say it would have been impossible to fake as so many people involved but, really, how many would have been involved with the transmission of the pictures/sound? Not that many.

The photos look faker than fake. Even if they faked it again it would at least look a lot more realistic.

[quote Sbowiegirl]@KarensChoppyBob. I cannot find anything about a Stephen fry conspiracy[/quote]
My conspiracy theory is that the poster who first mentioned Stephen Fry did so as a joke to make everyone google him, and there is in fact no conspiracy at all.

I don't like some of these conspiracy theories.

I know people who live in NYC, people who work in US military, people who work in NASA, people who work in US politics.

Can't say how I know but the theories about 9/11 and moon landing are just insulting to those very skilled people, to their country and to those who died in 9/11.

That said, I do think there is more to the JFK assassination. I don't think it was related to any political party though.

I don't think there was anything more to diana's death other than a drunk driver, no seat belt, paparazzi chasing them.

[quote HmmSureJan]Meghan video. It's suspect for sure

[[https://micky.com.au/meghan-markle-conspiracy-theory-duchess-video-allegedly-shows-fake-pregnancy]]/[/quote]
I don’t see anything suspect in it 🤷🏼‍♀️

She’s a very fit person, big on yoga so she could definitely crouch down like that, lots of woman who are very fit can do this during pregnancy. I don’t see anything unusual about the bump, mine changed shape throughout pregnancy and depending on my position looked completely different at times.

Not sure what the noise is, but I doubt a fake bump would make that noise, maybe she farted....

The reasons people give for the RF possibly wanting to bump off Diana are laughable and say more about how (non aristocratic)English people see the world.

• Princess Diana and Charles were NOT the first royals to divorce! Not only that, divorce has always been much more common in aristocratic circles than in the general population. The parents of both Diana and Sarah Ferguson were divorced. Upper class people have always lived

different kinds of lives to us. Lots of travelling and different homes, being able to afford divorces, women having inherited income. This led to a separate bedrooms/turn a blind eye culture. Plus the fact that if you are upper class you really don't have to worry about being seen to be respectable. You simply are respectable by virtue of your position.

• Dodi Fayed being a Muslim would really not be a problem for the RF. It's only a problem for Daily Mail/Express readers. Aristocrats have always mixed with people from different countries/cultures including (shock!) Muslims.

• Princess Diana was not pregnant! Why do people keep repeating this? The autopsy showed she was not pregnant and her good friend Rosa Monckton has said she was not pregnant.

Why do people project their own ideas about respectability on to the royal family? In my opinion there are perhaps reasons why Princess Diana was a thorn in the side of the royals but it was little to do with having been divorced or having a Muslim boyfriend.

@Viviennemary

It's over fifty years since the moon landing and nobody has bothered to go back. Why not. Maybe the cost is too high and they wouldn't learn much. But it still seems strange that despite the huge advances in technology nobody has been back.

What do you mean, no one has gone back since “the moon landing”. There’s been more than one moon landing (although I appreciate not for quite a while).

@Viviennemary there have been 14 uncrewed moon landings in the last 30 odd years, only 3 successful.

@Viviennemary

It's over fifty years since the moon landing and nobody has bothered to go back. Why not. Maybe the cost is too high and they wouldn't learn much. But it still seems strange that despite the huge advances in technology nobody has been back.

There is a q&a section on NASA’s website which one of them asks why we haven’t been back since.

The NASA engineer answrrrd it saying ‘we’ve lost the technology that allowed us to do it’

Most laughable response I’ve ever heard

Can you explain? I’ve googled and still have no idea what this refers too @WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll**

Which one - the Dando/Kate one?

@elevenplus2021

Not convinced the crewed moon landings happened...

John F Kennedy laid out the plan for reaching the moon in his famous speech but the space programme was riddled with problems (11 successive failures in terms of launch or spacecraft issues) but managed one US space probe before his death in 1963.

Nixon - not exactly known for his integrity (Watergate, impeachment process etc) - was heavily involved with the space programme and approved a joint US-USSR space exploration programme.

Suddenly when Nixon took over as president, the US space programmes improved significantly to having the first moon landing with Apollo 11 (1969), Apollo 12 (1969), Apollo 15 (1971). Apollo 16 (1972) and the last US lunar landing in 1972 with Apollo 17. Most of these were with the same small group of astronauts.

Then Watergate trial begins early 1973 and, as the first president, Nixon resigns in 1974.

Basically, all the crewed moon landing happened during Nixon's reign and after that there were no 'soft landings' achieved at all on the moon until 2006!!

So, I think it is reasonable to possibly think that, yes, there were moon landings but these were not crewed. People say it would have been impossible to fake as so many people involved but, really, how many would have been involved with the transmission of the pictures/sound? Not that many.

It's referenced on the Infinite Monkey Cage episode I linked to earlier, but the moon landings are mentioned as one of the most common conspiracy theories. Robin Ince said that within hours of Neil Armstrong dying (aged 82 in 2012) there were people on social media stating that "the state" had killed him because he was about to reveal that the moon landings were fake. Because there's no other reason that an 82 year old with coronary heart disease would just die is there...

[quote Daftasabroom]@Viviennemary there have been 14 uncrewed moon landings in the last 30 odd years, only 3 successful.[/quote]
Exactly and there were no soft landings at all after Nixon resigned until 2006. In fact all the crewed landings that have been successful EVER were all during his reign. That's odd, isn't it??