Phillip Marshall, 9/11 Conspiracy Theorist, Apparent Suicide? Or What?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cairenn

Senior Member.
The police also have hundreds of other cases to investigate. To them he not a part of some elaborate conspiracy theory, he was just a mentally ill guy that killed himself and his children. It happens everyday in cities across the US.

Last year the mayor of a upper income Dallas suburb killed herself and her college bound daughter. It seems that the mom had 'borrowed' some city funds when she had some money issues. It was about $5,000, enough for a conviction, but well within someone getting a minor punishment.
 
The police also have hundreds of other cases to investigate. To them he not a part of some elaborate conspiracy theory, he was just a mentally ill guy that killed himself and his children. It happens everyday in cities across the US.

Last year the mayor of a upper income Dallas suburb killed herself and her college bound daughter. It seems that the mom had 'borrowed' some city funds when she had some money issues. It was about $5,000, enough for a conviction, but well within someone getting a minor punishment.

The burden of proof is on you. Prove he was even mentally ill.

Also you sound like a fearful mother trying to protect the kids from an irate dad, who is just trying to make sure that the kids act responsibly.

Stop! If all you require from your representatives and public servants is excuses... that explains much about the current state of politics. ;-)

So no. That is not even close to being an appropriate explanation. Besides all they ever do up there are meth busts.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The sheriff's report point by point (part 2).

re. The impression left by the Glock 9mm gun barrel muzzle established that when he shot himself he held the gun rotated in an inverted (upside down) position.

* That's quite a bit of detail determined from a round barrel pushed into the head. The barrel
of most hand guns is round. The barrel of a Glock Model 19 is round.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ogygunglock.jpg/220px-Criminologygunglock.jpg

Behind the round barrel is the assymetric top and bottom sections. What would make a man push the gun so hard into his own head to leave an impression of that part of the weapon?

A muzzle impression is not made by pressing the gun hard into the skin.

The Glock 19 has a very distinct muzzle configuration that would leave a very distinct impression that lets you tell which way up the gun is.

Look at this image (Warning: mild gore) of an actual contact gunshot from a very similar looking gun. You can obviously tell which way up the gun was.
https://www.metabunk.org/sk/skitched-20130401-143507.jpg

So given this, then that's proof that the gun was against his head, and upside down.
 
Last edited:

Cairenn

Senior Member.
And meth busts aren't important? And meth dealers aren't dangerous? Don't tell that to the folks around Dallas. One of the next door counties has has an ass DA shot down on the town square and this weekend, someone kicked in the DA's door and shot him and his wife. The current line of thought is that it because of meth prosecutions.

I don't understand your statement, about be trying to protect kids.
 
A muzzle impression is not made by pressing the gun hard into the skin.

The Glock 19 has a very distinct muzzle configuration that would leave a very distinct impression that lets you tell which way up the gun is.

Look at this image (Warning: mild gore) of an actual contact gunshot from a very similar looking gun. You can obviously tell which way up the gun was.
https://www.metabunk.org/sk/skitched-20130401-143507.jpg

So given this, then that's proof that the gun was against his head, and upside down.

Point goes to Mick. (Good find.)

Now which way was the gun held? Handle down or inverted.

Recall that 'inverted' was claimed to be the 'natural way to hold the gun' when committing suicide.

Why did they add that detail and why is it even important unless they are trying to fill in blanks left by not even taking autopsy photos.

What was that photo you posted. Was it not an autopsy photo?

Two questions to Mick.

1. Was the gun held inverted in the photo posted (not of Phillip Marshall).

2. Is the "natural" way to hold a gun to your head "inverted"?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Point goes to Mick. (Good find.)

Now which way was the gun held? Handle down or inverted.

Recall that 'inverted' was claimed to be the 'natural way to hold the gun' when committing suicide.

Why did they add that detail and why is it even important unless they are trying to fill in blanks left by not even taking autopsy photos.

What was that photo you posted. Was it not an autopsy photo?

Two questions to Mick.

1. Was the gun held inverted in the photo posted (not of Phillip Marshall).

2. Is the "natural" way to hold a gun to your head "inverted"?

1. It looks handle side down, not inverted. But the point was to show the impression.

2. It's physically easier to get a straight shot upside down, you don't have to twist your wrist. but I don't know about "natural".

I think the point though is that it's impossible for an assailant to run into the house, shoot the two kids without waking them, and then shoot Marshall with a contact shot to the side of his head, gun upside down, no silencer, no blood spatter voids or disruption, and and no sign of a struggle, and then go and shoot the dog for good measure, then leave.
 
And meth busts aren't important? And meth dealers aren't dangerous? Don't tell that to the folks around Dallas. One of the next door counties has has an ass DA shot down on the town square and this weekend, someone kicked in the DA's door and shot him and his wife. The current line of thought is that it because of meth prosecutions.

I don't understand your statement, about be trying to protect kids.

Meth busts and a few other things. But look, this isn't the issue.

If you must, see for yourself how busy the cops are and what they're doing all the time that you suggest excuses their laziness and for them for accusing a guy that has the presumption of innocence until proven guilty simply because they "decided it was so".

Here's the link to the busy sheriffs' dept and their press releases.

http://www.sheriff.co.calaveras.ca.us/PressReleases.aspx

They deserve honor -- when they are honorable. Lots of it. But this.... no freaking way, man. But there is NO EXCUSE for this. And I won't respond to any more of this kind of nonsense or badge worship or whatever you might call this.
 
1. It looks handle side down, not inverted. But the point was to show the impression.

2. It's physically easier to get a straight shot upside down, you don't have to twist your wrist. but I don't know about "natural".

I think the point though is that it's impossible for an assailant to run into the house, shoot the two kids without waking them, and then shoot Marshall with a contact shot to the side of his head, gun upside down, no silencer, no blood spatter voids or disruption, and and no sign of a struggle, and then go and shoot the dog for good measure, then leave.

:)

All of that "evidence" is hearsay, for starters.

So all I can do is point out the inconsistencies in their "rationalizations" that support their foregone conclusion. And I think I can do a pretty darned good job of that since their's SO MUCH OF IT.

:)

And no... it wouldn't have been impossible for them to get in and who said they had no silencers, and why was the dog shot in a bedroom if the kids and the dad were in the living room.... it's all hearsay.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
:)

All of that "evidence" is hearsay, for starters.

So all I can do is point out the inconsistencies in their "rationalizations" that support their foregone conclusion. And I think I can do a pretty darned good job of that since their's SO MUCH OF IT.

:)

And no... it wouldn't have been impossible for them to get in and who said they had no silencers, and why was the dog shot in a bedroom if the kids and the dad were in the living room.... it's all hearsay.

It's the police report, it's not hearsay, it's sworn testimony backed by physical evidence.

There was no silencer because silencers don't leave a Glock 19 shaped impression, they leave a round impression.

Obviously you are suggesting that it is entirely made up. So why argue about any of the details? If you are simply going to say that the report is a lie, then what's the argument? You are just left with "the police are doing an amazing job of covering up a CIA assassination, because that's the type of thing local police departments do".
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
By your leave, admin, I shall post ALL of them I can find. ;-) We're only 2/3rd of the way through the alleged 'investigation' report.

Feel free, however that's what's known as a Gish Gallop and is not going to help anyone. It's already been shown that major points you've raised have had no real basis for suspicion (like the muzzle imprint, and the blood spatter). I'm not going to play whack-a-mole with the rest. List all you like, but if you want them discussed, then pick the biggest one.
 
Newcomers, the first two "point by point" analyses of the sheriffs' report are on page 5.

It's the police report, it's not hearsay, it's sworn testimony backed by physical evidence.
<snip>

There are oaths and there are oaths. And 'affirmations'.

Tell me, 'what physical evidence'?

There may be some still, but most of the physical evidence doesn't exist anymore. It's hearsay.

Now, if you suppose that the "sworn affidavit" is a magical recipe for the truth, perhaps that's not always the case. I can think of several cases involving American Indians where "the government lied". And even one case involving the reason for invading Iraq.

So let's look at the evidence we do have. And it's like a teenager, expanding and filling in missing pieces of a lie, to try to convince their parents that things occurred the way they AND their parents would PREFER to believe they happened.

Tell me. Was Phillip or were the kids drinking alcohol that night. Ctrl-F "alcohol" on page 5.

So this is weird, is it not? That they said "an open 12 pack of beer was found in the home"? Not "found in the refrigerator", which they have determined is almost as loud as firing an unsilenced glock pistol. (Within 5 dB -- not sure we got to that part of the analysis yet.)

Can the hard core skeptics really be this gullible? ;-)
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
I open a 12 pk of cokes and put some in the fridge and the others are left outside the fridge. Most of my friends do that. Only folks without food in the fridge put the entire 12 pk in it.

That is not unusual and not really important. Please explain why you think it is.
 
I open a 12 pk of cokes and put some in the fridge and the others are left outside the fridge. Most of my friends do that. Only folks without food in the fridge put the entire 12 pk in it.

That is not unusual and not really important. Please explain why you think it is.

With pleasure. If you had read the "point by point" analysis I've posted so far you'd have seen that it was the kids than had been drinking alcohol. Not the dad.

Try to keep up. ;-)
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
With pleasure. If you had read the "point by point" analysis I've posted so far you'd have seen that it was the kids than had been drinking alcohol. Not the dad.

Try to keep up. ;-)

I'm having trouble. What is suspicious here? The beer was not in the fridge?
 
Feel free, however that's what's known as a Gish Gallop and is not going to help anyone. It's already been shown that major points you've raised have had no real basis for suspicion (like the muzzle imprint, and the blood spatter). I'm not going to play whack-a-mole with the rest. List all you like, but if you want them discussed, then pick the biggest one.

Only you consider the four points argued against are "the major points". The 8 or nine other points no one has even attempted counter still stand. And any one of them could be "major" to someone else's way of thinking.

If I haven't raised the issue yet (since I have more of the point by point stuff and I can't remember where I left off), the time of death is CRITICAL. It's not unimportant. It's critical to one part of the bogus investigation as it applies to 'when the kids slept on the couch'. Weekdays too?

What's wrong with this picture.

And how many kids do you think were over every weekend at Seanie's house when the kids were staying with her. About ten! Every weekend. So this does get a bit more interesting when we drag Seanie into it, but I have avoided that simply because of her situation (greiving).

But there's more. And there's a really interesting "conspiracy theory" to go with the Seanie thread, which I'll try to avoid if I can. But it doesn't look like I'll be able to.

Again, I don't personally know any of these people, nor do I even know anyone that knows them. The pieces come from the internet only.

And who fed Wayne Madsen the bogus story about Phillip getting shot in the left temple? Dunno if I posted it here, but I probably did. That was a decoy, it was a bum detail fed to the conspiracy buffs to throw a wrench into their theories and attempt to debunk the entire CIA connection... which (again I say) we haven't even begun to look into out of respect for the mom who must still be in a world of hurt.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Only you consider the four points argued against are "the major points". The 8 or nine other points no one has even attempted counter still stand. And any one of them could be "major" to someone else's way of thinking.

Well pick one then, what do YOU think is major? And exactly why?

But first, what point were you making about the beer?
 
I'm having trouble. What is suspicious here? The beer was not in the fridge?

They didn't say where it was. They didn't have a problem specifying other rooms or places in the house. AND... as I'm sure you are aware by now, the kids, not the dad, had been drinking alcohol.

So you tell me. Where do you think the booze was? It probably wasn't in the safe with the drugs and the bullets. On that we might agree.

Need another overhead shot of "the home" where the booze was found?


http://www.bollyn.com/public/Marshall_house_in_Murphys.jpg

The pix in Madsen's docs are even better. You can see both stories of the house.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
They didn't say where it was. They didn't have a problem specifying other rooms or places in the house. AND... as I'm sure you are aware by now, the kids, not the dad, had been drinking alcohol.

So you tell me. Where do you think the booze was? It probably wasn't in the safe with the drugs and the bullets. On that we might agree.

Need another overhead shot of "the home" where the booze was found?

http://www.bollyn.com/public/Marshall_house_in_Murphys.jpg

Why is this suspicious?
 
Newcomers: The first two parts of the "point by point" analysis of the sheriffs' report is on page 5.

Now where were we. Ah....

re. the kids drinking alcohol and not the dad and the lack of specifying WHERE in the home the beer was found.

Why is this suspicious?

Because the dad kept the pot in his safe.

Figure it out.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Newcomers: The first two parts of the "point by point" analysis of the sheriffs' report is on page 5.

Now where were we. Ah....

re. the kids drinking alcohol and not the dad and the lack of specifying WHERE in the home the beer was found.



Because the dad kept the pot in his safe.

Figure it out.

No, lay it out for me.

Dad keeps pot in the safe, but does not keep beer in the safe. That's what you want to discuss? That's what raises to the level of suspicion?

Explain exactly why it is suspicious. Beer in a house is a perfectly normal thing. Millions of parents have beer in the house.
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Do you really think that they made a list of exactly where everything in the house was? If it had been in some unusual place, like hidden under a bed or under clothes in a closet, that might have been worth mentioning, but finding it in the kitchen or the pantry would be normal.

The police NOTE what is out of place. An empty wine glass in a bathroom, would be noted, not the ones in cabinet.
 
No, lay it out for me.

Dad keeps pot in the safe, but does not keep beer in the safe. That's what you want to discuss? That's what raises to the level of suspicion?

Explain exactly why it is suspicious. Beer in a house is a perfectly normal thing. Millions of parents have beer in the house.

Good gosh, Mick. It's obvious. At least it is to me. If the guy put his pot in the safe, he would in NO WAY approve of his kids getting high -- especially on a school night!

He himself had an alcohol problem. (His wife Sean had a narcotics addiction.) They both cleaned up about 4 years ago. The booze was almost certainly NOT PHILIP'S.

Now the question to you is... had you thought Phillip was drinking?

And that's where it could get interesting. You read the report and came to the wrong conclusion. How does that happen?

Count the number of feet on this elephant.

http://rainbowsally.net/rainbow/poli/images/opt-elephant.JPG

The mind's eye is no less susceptible to shifting perspective, especially if you WANT to believe something. Even if it's blatantly untrue.

So you say the beer issue is a "major point". I say it's just one of many points. And the others unravel the same way the booze issue does.
 
Do you really think that they made a list of exactly where everything in the house was? If it had been in some unusual place, like hidden under a bed or under clothes in a closet, that might have been worth mentioning, but finding it in the kitchen or the pantry would be normal.

The police NOTE what is out of place. An empty wine glass in a bathroom, would be noted, not the ones in cabinet.

Maybe. Stay tuned.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Good gosh, Mick. It's obvious. At least it is to me. If the guy put his pot in the safe, he would in NO WAY approve of his kids getting high -- especially on a school night!

He himself had an alcohol problem. (His wife Sean had a narcotics addiction.) They both cleaned up about 4 years ago. The booze was almost certainly NOT PHILIP'S.
If they made up the entire report, why would they add booze?

How do you know if he approved or not, or if he even had any say in the matter? Or even if he was home while they were drinking? Or if they drank at home? All you know is:

A) There was some booze in the house
B) The kids had been drinking


Now the question to you is... had you thought Phillip was drinking?

And that's where it could get interesting. You read the report and came to the wrong conclusion. How does that happen?

Count the number of feet on this elephant.

http://rainbowsally.net/rainbow/poli/images/opt-elephant.JPG

The mind's eye is no less susceptible to shifting perspective, especially if you WANT to believe something. Even if it's blatantly untrue.

So you say the beer issue is a "major point". I say it's just one of many points. And the others unravel the same way the booze issue does.

It does not unravel. You are just trying desperately to make something of nothing.
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
I can almost see him coming in, finding the beer and the kids asleep, or the most likely thought drunk, so he snapped.
 
To newcomers, the first two parts of the analysis of the sheriffs' report are on page 5. Ctrl-F "point by point".

If they made up the entire report, why would they add booze?

How do you know if he approved or not, or if he even had any say in the matter? Or even if he was home while they were drinking? Or if they drank at home? All you know is:

A) There was some booze in the house
B) The kids had been drinking

It does not unravel. You are just trying desperately to make something of nothing.

It didn't unravel for you, apparently, because you had already known that the kids, not the dad, had been drinking. You apparently had already understood that he did not approve of his kids smoking pot at all... certainly didn't share his with them, which you'd expect if he had approved of it. Since it's much safer to give your kids pot than to let them go out on their own and get it from who-knows-who. And to smoke it who-knows-where.

So what we see developing here is a crazed drug addicted mentally ill man who knew how to prevent his kids from getting into his stash.

And we wonder why the location of the booze wasn't specified because being ANYWHERE in the home would have been unusual. He kicked booze four years prior to the incident. Seanie (the mom) kicked opiates at around the same time.

Now where did the kids pick up the alcohol problem? "Angels camp the cave"?

But I really don't want to get into the mom's problems yet, and hopefully I never will. I'm counsel for Phillip's defense (posthumously). I am not prosecution (of Seanie who is still alive and probably grieving beyond endurance right now).

So if you see the Angle's Camp problem (for example why did Macaila have more alcohol and 'diphenhydramine??' in her tox results), perhaps we can keep it under our hat, and just open our minds to the 'defense' part of this situation.

I'm not holding her hostage in the debate (for anyone who might pick up this note). I'm just saying, I fully intend to show the world the truth about Phillip Marshall himself.

Even dead guys deserve a defense.

Amendment 6.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Compulsory process. Counsel for his defense. That's me.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Sorry, this is going nowhere. There was beer in the house, the teenagers (aged 14 and 17) had been drinking at some point, somewhere. Marshall kept his pot in a safe. That's it.
 
I can almost see him coming in, finding the beer and the kids asleep, or the most likely thought drunk, so he snapped.

What was there to "snap"? You haven't even proven him to be mentally ill.

If you want to prove it, use the exact wording from the sheriffs' docs. They hedged their bet. You should too.
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
He was being treated for mental illness, he had been dismissed several years before because of his mental illness.

I hate to tell you, teens drink, even ones whose parents don't. Teens mix alcohol and drugs.

He is NOT being prosecuted.
 

JonJson

Active Member
Agreed.

Ready for part 3?

Please before you post part 3 would you read through the reports completely and select one point at a time. Don't simply list off everything in the report. It is already clear that you don't agree with any of it. If you would post one item at a time we could have a real discussion about each item. I have a job and can't always post through out the day. I do want to just point out one of the problems in what you have posted so far. It is with regards to the decibel testing.

Over a period of time the detectives fired a total of sixteen rounds from inside the home while the decibel meter was positioned at various points outside the Marshall home. One point of measurement included inside the home of the nearest neighbor who shared a property line with the Marshall property. The neighbor's house sat approximately 50 feet from the Marshall house.
Throughout the test, while inside the neighbor's home, the detectives received an average decibel reading of 50 decibels. They also received an average decibel reading of 50 decibels at various points of measurement outside the Marshall home. A prior control test inside of a closed room with a running refrigerator compressor registered 45 decibels on the decibel meter.

The decibel testing was an attempt to see if any of the neighbors could have heard the gunshots. The test wasn't conducted to see if it would have woken the children.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
* Why was the confiscation of the computers not mentioned in the initial reports. Or any of their famously inaccurate 'leakes', either for that matter. Why wasn't the planned ballistics test mentioned either. In fact when were these tests ordered. Were the tests even requested at the DoJ before the conclusion drawn about Marshall being the shooter?


You seem to think that the the public is entitled to extremely detailed reports. Perhaps they could have read the entire police report on the 6 oclock news?
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
The blood spatter would be in the direction the gun was fired. That's incredibly inane. Even folks not familiar with fire arms would not point the gun back toward themselves and fire at a target between themselves and the gun.


OK who says you don't learn something from TV. THe other night on the movie about Phil Spector I learned that if one puts a gun in one's mouth and shoots themself, if the back of their cranium is not blown off, the blood will come out the nose and month and splatter whomever was standing in front of them. So a blood splatter is NOT necessarily in the direction a gun is fired. So much for inanity. You are grasping at straws and straining gnats.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
Now which way was the gun held? Handle down or inverted.

Recall that 'inverted' was claimed to be the 'natural way to hold the gun' when committing suicide.

Why did they add that detail and why is it even important unless they are trying to fill in blanks left by not even taking autopsy photos.

THat is very interesting. First you claim you didn't get enough details from the report, when it goes into detail you wonder "why did they add that detail and why is it even important."
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
Now where did the kids pick up the alcohol problem?

Where did they "pick it up"? What does that mean. One is either an alcoholic or one isn't. Apparently you know as much about alcoholism as you do about blood spatter.

"Angels camp the cave"?

OK you lost me. What the heck does that mean?

Compulsory process. Counsel for his defense. That's me.

I'm glad you're having a good time. I think you're a bit loony. I'm out of this one.
 

RolandD

Active Member
Sally, you are also assuming that just because there was no alcohol in his system at time of death, that he hadn't started drinking again and the alcohol wasn't his. I can't imagine that, if he was a recovering alcoholic and still on the wagon, he would have allowed any in the house or approved of his kids drinking.
 

JeffreyNotGeoffrey

Active Member
Here is a thought is there ANY proof to impugn the entire law enforcement apparatus in that county including coroners and lab techs?
Really show us why this particular county law enforcement is deserving of suspicion and not generalize all law enforcement. Further I double dog dare you to debunk and find inconsistencies in the lab techs' past work. Specifically please indicate which cases local judges threw out their evidence due to flawed methodology or contamination. Further if they can be accessed check Internal Affairs to see if any of these people have been reprimanded for evidence tampering. This is the kind of evidence to prove your suspicions.

If you cannot come up with any, these accusations are frivolous and show your disdain for any of the officers who insure our safety. Again I am not fond of police, but I have even more disdain for uneducated (in those relevant areas of expertise such as ballistics etc) armchair QBs. Or is a supposedly unbiased squad of super civilians supposed to investigate all crimes...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
JFDee New York Times: Talking to family members fallen for conspiracy beliefs Practical Debunking 3
T Is it less rational to believe in several conspiracy theories than only one? Conspiracy Theories 31
C Iran promotes anti-semetic conspiracy theories via American Herald Tribune Conspiracy Theories 0
GeorginaB Twitter is banning accounts linked to QAnon conspiracy Conspiracy Theories 0
Agent K Ghislaine Maxwell was arrested in New Hampshire Current Events 11
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Mick West Discussing 5G EMF Concerns, Theories, and Conspiracy Theories 5G and Other EMF Health Concerns 15
JFDee 9/11 Conspiracy Idea Slipped into Academic Course Material (France) 9/11 8
Mick West TFTRH #33 – Anthony Magnabosco: Street Epistemology and Conspiracy Theories Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 1
Mick West TFTRH #31: Professor Elizabeth Loftus – Memory and Conspiracy Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 6
Mick West TFTRH #15: Brad - Math vs. Conspiracy Theories Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 21
Mick West TFTRH #13: Professor David Keith – Geoengineering Research and the Chemtrails Conspiracy Theory Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 2
Marin B Facebook moderators believing in conspiracy theories Conspiracy Theories 4
Critical Thinker Russia's role in promoting conspiracy theories General Discussion 20
Rory The Conspiracy Theory Spectrum Practical Debunking 12
Mick West Conspiracy Theory or "Devil Theory" of Politics Conspiracy Theories 0
Mick West Alex Jones Deplatforming and Related Conspiracy Theories Current Events 49
Mick West Paper: How paranoid are conspiracy believers? Practical Debunking 21
Mick West Eruption of Kilauea Volcano in Hawaii – Conspiracies and Science Current Events 34
Mick West Perspective on the popularity of conspiracy theories. Practical Debunking 23
Leifer The Where's Waldo game, and the Conspiracy version. General Discussion 15
qed Roy Moore yearbook signature faked? Conspiracy Theories 111
M Bornong Can Belief in Chemtrails and/or other Conspiracy Theories Lead to Violence? Contrails and Chemtrails 4
G Applications of Game Theory to Assessing the Plausibility of Conspiracy Theories Practical Debunking 1
skephu Solar geoengineering and the chemtrails conspiracy on social media Contrails and Chemtrails 3
DannyBoy2k Are There Any Professional Groups Rebutting 9/11 Conspiracy Theories? 9/11 13
Mick West Explained: Unburned trees next to burned down structures as evidence of secret "energy weapons" Wildfires 120
Cube Radio What British Muslims think about 9/11 Conspiracy Theories 9/11 26
ZoomBubba Las Vegas Massacre - Surveillance Footage? Conspiracy Theories 115
Mick West Debunked: Hurricane Harvey, Project Stormfury, Conspiracy Theories Current Events 40
Mick West Dylan Avery - Director of the 9/11 Conspiracy Film "Loose Change" Escaping The Rabbit Hole 2
Mick West Hurricane Harvey. Cat 4. Major flooding. Conspiracy Theories. Current Events 10
Mick West Consensus Messaging vs. Message Targeting in Science Communication Practical Debunking 16
Mick West 2016 Berlin Truck Attack Conspiracy Theories Current Events 13
Mick West Current Events Forum Guidelines Current Events 0
skephu Changing Conspiracy Beliefs through Rationality and Ridiculing Practical Debunking 25
Marin B Garrett Graff : "Bungling" is a more likely explanation for government conspiracy theories Conspiracy Theories 7
Dick Holman How many people follow multiple conspiracy theories? Practical Debunking 12
Jay Reynolds New Dutch paper Analyzes how Conspiracy Theorists see themselves Conspiracy Theories 3
Mick West Conspiracy? Trump Repeating Falsely Attributed Quote from Russian Media. Conspiracy Theories 26
txt29 Conspiracy Theory: No blood on truck in Nice Conspiracy Theories 34
qed On Skeptoid's definition of Conspiracy Theory General Discussion 15
Mick West When Absence of Evidence is Evidence of Absence in Conspiracy Theories Practical Debunking 35
endoplasmic_reticulum Debunked: iPhone in 350-year-old painting [Letter, Tim Cook was Joking, Obviously] UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 17
MikeG Body Armor Order Indicates Major Military Deployments Conspiracy Theories 1
Whitebeard Manchester Terror Drill and bad reporting. General Discussion 1
Mick West Explained: Head Of The Army Admits to "Little Green Men" [Covert Russian Agents] Conspiracy Theories 7
Mick West Vice: 'It Was Like a Cult': Leaving the World of Online Conspiracy Theories Escaping The Rabbit Hole 4
Mackdog Justice Scalia death: No autopsy as evidence of conspiracy Conspiracy Theories 15
deirdre Zika Virus: News, microcephaly and conspiracy theories Health and Quackery 14
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top