The Achilles Heel of virtually all conspiracy theories

[Borsia]

The fatal flaw in almost every conspiracy theory is the sheer numbers of people who would have to not only conspire but keep their mouths shut, something that us humans have never been able to do.

Look at contrails / chemtrails as an example. They have been around since the first plane flew high enough to encounter extreme cold. But lets look more at the time span that the chemtrail crowd likes, the last 10-20 years.

Think about the numbers of lips that are involved.
You would have to start with those who are behind the scheme, let's use a conservative number of 1,000.

Next you have the administrators and contractors, again conservative 10,000.

Now you have all of the pilots over that time 500,000.

Next we have all of the ground crews and support 5,000,000.

It just keeps getting bigger as you get into all of the people involved in manufacturing the chemical agents. Over 15 years it would be tens of millions.

Does anyone really believe that that number of people could keep quiet for that length of time?
I certainly don't!

It is rare that a group of 10 people, all with something to loose, manage to keep a secret very long.

With chemtrails you have tens of millions and for the most part they have nothing to loose by revealing what is going on, and most would gain since they would be just as subject to the fallout as everyone else.

Anyone who wants to really crack the truth, good or bad, can do it quite simply.
Wait for a day when there are lots and lots of trails and set out a empty, sterile, large jar, something like a mayonnaise jar, with a plastic lid. Leave the open jar in a location that is unlikely to gather much dust overnight, then put the lid on.
Take that jar to a lab and have them swab the jar and analyze whatever they find. There will be some dust so there will be some trace levels of the things one would expect in dust.
But if the chemtrail myth is true you should show extremely high levels of aluminum and barium along with the supposed biological elements of spraying.

One final point about the chemtrail theory; If this has been going on all of these years how do you explain the lack of response by the victims?
Certainly people would be dropping like flies in the heavily sprayed regions. But the fact is that Americans are living longer and healthier than at any time in the past.

 

[RolandD]

This is almost exactly how I feel. Unfortunately, this is not a sufficient argument to dissuade believers. I would also propose that most incidents that are considered conspiracies are actually just cover-ups, or conspiracies after the fact. Watergate would be an example of this type.

 

[jvnk08]

Another big hole I find in conspiracies that involve eugenics/population control/mind control/"elite" or NWO trying to rule the world etc, is that if the "elite" actually communicated with each other(they don't) and wanted to do something like this, it would already be done. Sometime in the 1900s ourselves or our parents would've been living in prison camps or exterminated, and most certainly we wouldn't be discussing this on the Internet.

Often times most of these people who believe this stuff live in rural areas where they don't really see any of the good stuff going on in the world. They don't realize that there's a not only huge number of people out there from a variety of income levels who are greatly enjoying life, but that number is growing. A lot of these people want a scapegoat that is completely out of their control to blame their personal misfortunes on(even better - the nefarious intent of someone else!).

In terms of living standards, there isn't really a "1%" so much as a "~30-40%".

 

[Borkowskowitz]

One of the warning flags for me is whether or not there is a clear accusation that can be made.

Take a look at the Watergate scandal, that made sense as a cover up because someone broke into a room with actual political importance. There was a clear reason for authorities to be involved, there was a clear reason to ask G. Gordon Liddy who sent him, and there were clear event that had to be washed from people's hands.

Now look at Benghazi: Besides general negligence, something that goes on in government all the time, what are people being accused of? Not telling the American people who did what with what motives early enough? Speculating before all the facts were in? Trying to deflect blame like pretty much any other administration?

And what of trying to connect Petreaus and his scandal to it? Why in the hell would you NOT want the guy who sold Bush's surge (at a time when the war was almost universally unpopular) on the stand? Why would you sacrifice your best soldier, when your Secretary of State already took the blame. That's like putting your queen in gambit, then adding your rook for good measure.

Even with a scandal as questionable as the Valerie Plame thing, there was an actual law that was sort of violated if you read it out of context. Is is indeed illegal to leak the name of a covert agent.

The Sandy Hook shootings are a great example of coverups that don't add up. Are we saying that the government staged the event? Are we saying that they hired actors to make people more sympathetic? There's no agreement. For example, the maker of the video points out that before 9/11, the London bombings, and the Sandy Hook shootings, there were government agents conducting drills and classes in the vicinity of the respective ground zeros. Now, ignoring that one of those was FEMA, and that the 9/11 drills were bio terrorism related and not about planes crashing into buildings, what does that mean? That these events were staged as an exercise? For a class? Were the first responders in the area government spooks who had to get to the scene first to plant evidence? So the government chose...FEMA? Not exactly MiB. What tactical advantage did the government gain by having these classes coincide? The youtube video is odd because it throws a lot of evidence at the wall, but the evidence suggests several different conspiracy theories. There isn't a mountain of evidence, just a dozen small molehills.

 

[David Fraser]

For me it is the scale that some of the conspiracies are on that make them fall apart. Yes, there have been conspiracies in the past and they have been blown open by investigative journalism. For crying out loud we have just had an enquiry in the UK into the press tapping phones and the like. We have plenty of reporters that have gone undercover to expose failings in one organisation or another, yet all these conspiracy sites with their 'investigators' have yet to be able to manage it. I live near an airport, and it is a major employer for the area. Many of the staff are not employed directly by the companies but through agencies on an as when basis (this even goes for cabin staff I believe). It takes no stretch of the imagination to see that it would be relatively easy to get an unskilled job there, as long as you pass the security checks. In the 20 years of chemtrails no one has managed that. I think that answers itself.

 

[Fitbuudy]

But isn't it fair to say that people didn't keep their mouths shut and that is how we know about it in the first place?

Is there any way to go back and find out how many conspiracy theories actually turned out to be true?

 

[Mick West]

But isn't it fair to say that people didn't keep their mouths shut and that is how we know about it in the first place?

Is there any way to go back and find out how many conspiracy theories actually turned out to be true?

Conspiracies tend to be either secret (so you've never heard of them) or exposed (so you know they are real). Often the first you hear of a conspiracy is AFTER it's been exposed. What we describe as "conspiracy theories" are complex explanations for events that the people supposedly involved deny exists. It's a state between secret and exposed.

Have a look at this list of 33 "conspiracies that turned out to be true"
http://www.infowars.com/33-conspira...out-to-be-true-what-every-person-should-know/

Sure, some of them turned out to be true (some only turned out to be true in the opinion of Infowars), but were any of them ever "conspiracy theories" and are now generally regarded to be correct?

 

[Chew]

Another big hole I find in conspiracies that involve eugenics/population control/mind control/"elite" or NWO trying to rule the world etc, is that if the "elite" actually communicated with each other(they don't) and wanted to do something like this, it would already be done. Sometime in the 1900s ourselves or our parents would've been living in prison camps or exterminated, and most certainly we wouldn't be discussing this on the Internet.

On another forum a member asked for help about a coworker's anti-vax claim that vaccines kill 40,000 Americans every day. I pointed out to him that with those numbers, half of the population of the US would be dead in 14 years, which also means about half of the people he knows would have died from a vaccine in that time span.

 

[Twenty2AcaciaAve]

Have a look at this list of 33 "conspiracies that turned out to be true"
http://www.infowars.com/33-conspirac...n-should-know/

Infowars even shoots themselves in the foot several times with that list. Alex Jones and his followers go on about how the media, ALL the media, is controlled by the media. Yet in several of there examples, it's the media that exsposes the theories.

 

[Fitbuudy]

So then is it safe to say that a conspiracy theory will alway be considered suspect until it is proven to be true? Can they ever actually be proven false? That's like asking someone to prove that Mickey Mouse doesn't exist.

 

[Mick West]

So then is it safe to say that a conspiracy theory will alway be considered suspect until it is proven to be true? Can they ever actually be proven false? That's like asking someone to prove that Mickey Mouse doesn't exist.

You can prove something false if its presence would generate some evidence and that evidence is lacking. That's called "evidence of absence".

For example, if I claimed people were sneaking into my house every night and stealing food from my fridge, then you would expect that video recording of the fridge would reveal this. If you then record video of the fridge for a week, and no food goes missing, then you can conclude the theory is false.

The key thing in debunking though is generally not in disproving conspiracy theories, but in showing there is no evidence to support those theories. If a theory were disprovable then it generally would not exist any more. Generaly what ends up happening is that people modify their conspiracy theory so that it requires no evidence. Like the theory of demolition of the WTC. Since conventional demolition would leave lots of evidence, the theory gradually gets modified until you end up with future-military grade nano-thermite that's painted onto the columns and detonated wirelessly and totally via some kind of novel microwave resonance causing a collapse that just looks like progressive collapse.

But then since you've got a theory that requires no evidence, the question is why do you believe it?

 

[Unregistered]

So, are there any particular theories the members of this website have not been able to debunk? Or at least one that has proven particularly difficult/convicing.

 

[MikeC]

Generaly what ends up happening is that people modify their conspiracy theory so that it requires no evidence.

I'm not sure that is true - anecdotally, my experience is that when evidence gets debuked the believers simply refuse to beleive the debunking.

 

[Mick West]

So, are there any particular theories the members of this website have not been able to debunk? Or at least one that has proven particularly difficult/convicing.

Millions. But I think you need to be more specific as to what type of theory.

It's hard to FULLY debunk a theory, especially if it's rather vague, like "Bush did something bad relating to 9/11". It's the specifics that are what actually gets debunked. Proposed evidence.

Some things you might never debunk, because the involved parties are not talking. Take what happend with Valarie Plame, Cheney, and Libby. It seems almost certain there was some kind of conspiracy there - but it's unlikely it will ever come out.

But if you are talking about the "conspiracy theory" theories - things of an ilk to 9/11, JFK, Moon Landings, etc, then there are always going to be both aspects of those theories, and other theories, that cannot be debunked, because they rely on assertions that cannot be verified or falsified.

Did you have something in mind?

 

[George B]

I think the assumption that many people cannot effectively keep secrets (even thousands) over years and years is IMO bogus . . . the secrets do not have to be totally kept to be effective (rumors will always exist but can be neutralized and ridiculed into irrelevance) . . . the Mafia, Masonic Orders, Military, NSA, CIA, possibly FDRs prior knowledge of the attack of Pearl Harbor, human experimentation which remained covert for decades and on and on . . .

 

[MikeC]

all of which were revealed sooner or later, a small number of people in an environment where information was relatively easy to control, and some serious controls to do so. And even then the existence of hte mafia and masonic orders was never a secret, nor that the military has "black" projects, nor that the CIA conducts clandestine operations. And the Soviets apparently knew about the Manhatten Project before the bombs were dropped!

Even human experimentation was not actually secret most of the time - lots of people knew about servicemen getting exposed to nuclear weapons - they had public film reels of it happening showing in cinemas! The ones that "no one knew about" involved relatively small numbers of people "in the know"

got any better examples of hundreds of thousands of peole knowing "a secret" and no word leaking at all??

 

[Jay Reynolds]

So many avenues are available for anonymous public disclosures to be made today, it simply has to be harder than ever to maintain secrecy of an illegal harmful activity for which an opposition force exists.

 

[George B]

all of which were revealed sooner or later, a small number of people in an environment where information was relatively easy to control, and some serious controls to do so. And even then the existence of hte mafia and masonic orders was never a secret, nor that the military has "black" projects, nor that the CIA conducts clandestine operations. And the Soviets apparently knew about the Manhatten Project before the bombs were dropped!

Even human experimentation was not actually secret most of the time - lots of people knew about servicemen getting exposed to nuclear weapons - they had public film reels of it happening showing in cinemas! The ones that "no one knew about" involved relatively small numbers of people "in the know"

got any better examples of hundreds of thousands of peole knowing "a secret" and no word leaking at all??

There are several but you will never hear about them or substantiate their validity . . . many at significant levels within the military, CIA, NSA, etc. know several but won't and most likely will never reveal them . . .

 

[George B]

So many avenues are available for anonymous public disclosures to be made today, it simply has to be harder than ever to maintain secrecy of an illegal harmful activity for which an opposition force exists.

Who said the people keeping secrets think an action is illegal or harmful?

 

[Dan Wilson]

As well as people who need to conceal the "truth" there are quite a few people who dig to uncover the truth. Investigative journalism and scientists are large groups that independently try to get down to the facts. For example, in science we are taught to scrutinize experiments in a ruthless manner so as to eliminate uncertainty and go by what nature tells you. In other words, you go by what you can demonstrate and not by any kind of belief system. So for instance if a conspiracy theory were demonstrated to be valid, then others could independently demonstrate the same thing and a fantastic discovery would be made. Add in all of the lay-people who do research from home and bring attention to topics and it gets even more difficult to keep secrets on the scale of chemtrails and a 9/11 conspiracy in an information age.

 

[George B]

As well as people who need to conceal the "truth" there are quite a few people who dig to uncover the truth. Investigative journalism and scientists are large groups that independently try to get down to the facts. For example, in science we are taught to scrutinize experiments in a ruthless manner so as to eliminate uncertainty and go by what nature tells you. In other words, you go by what you can demonstrate and not by any kind of belief system. So for instance if a conspiracy theory were demonstrated to be valid, then others could independently demonstrate the same thing and a fantastic discovery would be made. Add in all of the lay-people who do research from home and bring attention to topics and it gets even more difficult to keep secrets on the scale of chemtrails and a 9/11 conspiracy in an information age.

IMO you overestimate the capabilities of investigators, press, and potential opponents as well as your own capabilities versus the full weight and abilities of covert operators and operations . . . there are so many things that are simple misinformation and misdirection . . . remember camouflage is a military tool well practiced over the eons. . . .

 

[MikeC]

There are several but you will never hear about them or substantiate their validity . . . many at significant levels within the military, CIA, NSA, etc. know several but won't and most likely will never reveal them . . .

So if you can't establish their validity why are we supposed to think they exist - because you say so? Or, more appropriately here, because you say "they exist but I'm not going to tell you what they are"?

And to address another post - people who do not think something is illegal can still knowingly or unknowingly reveal information about the something

 

[George B]

So if you can't establish their validity why are we supposed to think they exist - because you say so? Or, more appropriately here, because you say "they exist but I'm not going to tell you what they are"?

And to address another post - people who do not think something is illegal can still knowingly or unknowingly reveal information about the something

Just because you know the Mafia exists and some information about them does not reveal their entire membership, influence or extent of operations . . . nor will you ever . . . same for the covert governmental operations . . . you know many times what they want you to know as they lead you down the rabbit paths to the wonderlands of their choice . . . do you even know the membership of the KKK or Skull and Bones . . . No, not until decades after the fact . . . just one small example . . . did you know the location of King Tutankhamun Tomb . . . hundreds and possibly thousands did . . . we stumbled over it thousands of years after the fact . . .

 

[George B]

And to address another post - people who do not think something is illegal can still knowingly or unknowingly reveal information about the something

Sure they can . . . but people who have signed non disclosure agreements or taken oaths . . . are motivated by patriotism, fear of prosecution, ridicule, or loss of a nice comfortable pension . . . they say very little and if they do is almost always off the record and only to others with similar backgrounds . . . people doing the talking are the ones who know very little and who are making what they think are logical assumptions and have nothing to lose . . .

I agree people seldom keep their mouth shut forever, but that isn't necessary to keep operations secure . . . people who engage and manage such operations are aware of human behavior and have developed many ways to deal with such things . . .

 

[George B]

From MikeC

So if you can't establish their validity why are we supposed to think they exist - because you say so? Or, more appropriately here, because you say "they exist but I'm not going to tell you what they are"?

The question of this thread . . . is not . . . is a particular conspiracy True . . . but, if an operation like (for example) CT existed, could it long exist without being outed by the people involved or the people trying to prove or disprove its existence. I am saying I do think some type of an operation can be designed, implemented and in operation. In saying that, I will agree that I don't think chemtrails could long exist as they are envisioned by the vast majority of adherents without disclosure. . .

 

[George B]

Here is a Mafia leak about Jimmy Hoffa . . . Lol!!!

"The master plan was, that I understood, was that they were going to put him in a shallow grave here. Then, they were going to take him from here to Rogers City upstate," Zerilli said. "There was a hunting lodge and they were going to bury in a shallow grave then take him up there for final burial. Then, I understand, that it just fell through."

TESTS COME BACK NEGATIVE IN HOFFA SEARCH


It was unclear why Zerilli chose to speak now about the 37-year-old mystery that has elicited dozens of false leads and conspiracy theories in the past. Zerilli said is to be ailing and penniless since his release from prison in 2008. WNBC reported he is promoting an upcoming book titled "Hoffa Found."
http://m.nydailynews.com/1.1240294

 

[JRBids]

On another forum a member asked for help about a coworker's anti-vax claim that vaccines kill 40,000 Americans every day. I pointed out to him that with those numbers, half of the population of the US would be dead in 14 years, which also means about half of the people he knows would have died from a vaccine in that time span.

I believe that was how the "X" number of children are kidnapped every day claim was put to rest.

 

[JRBids]

The fatal flaw in almost every conspiracy theory is the sheer numbers of people who would have to not only conspire but keep their mouths shut, something that us humans have never been able to do.

Well, DUH! They're all being PAID OFF!

 

[George B]

Well, DUH! They're all being PAID OFF!

You are not a member of a fraternal order, Mafia, KKK, Hell's Angels, Nazi Party, Skin Heads, Aryan Nation, NSA, CIA or the military obviously . . .

 

[Dan Wilson]

IMO you overestimate the capabilities of investigators, press, and potential opponents as well as your own capabilities versus the full weight and abilities of covert operators and operations . . . there are so many things that are simple misinformation and misdirection . . . remember camouflage is a military tool well practiced over the eons. . . .

I'm saying that combining the difficulty of pulling off a secret operation on the scale of 9/11 or chemtrails with the amount of skilled investigators, it becomes increasingly unlikely that a such a secret would be kept over so much time. From there when you look at the evidence concerning such theories it becomes clear that there is no reason to believe that these large covert operations are taking place without anyone finding proof. Now, if a conspiracy theorist suggests that the reason we do not have proof is because it IS being kept secret successfully, then what you're left with is essentially an idea that involves invisible people performing invisible acts. This does turn out to be the logic of most popular conspiracy theories.

We know there are secrets, foul play, and things carried out without public knowledge, but that's not enough to go as far as to say that there are huge operations against the general public on a regular basis.

 

[George B]

I'm saying that combining the difficulty of pulling off a secret operation on the scale of 9/11 or chemtrails with the amount of skilled investigators, it becomes increasingly unlikely that a such a secret would be kept over so much time. From there when you look at the evidence concerning such theories it becomes clear that there is no reason to believe that these large covert operations are taking place without anyone finding proof. Now, if a conspiracy theorist suggests that the reason we do not have proof is because it IS being kept secret successfully, then what you're left with is essentially an idea that involves invisible people performing invisible acts. This does turn out to be the logic of most popular conspiracy theories.

We know there are secrets, foul play, and things carried out without public knowledge, but that's not enough to go as far as to say that there are huge operations against the general public on a regular basis.

Our positions are separated by degree (size, complexity, & duration) of a potential coverup not by the reality that coverups and conspiracies may exist. I find myself somewhere in the middle . . . for example. . . I think 911 has many secrets that are intentionally hidden from the public because it is felt we cannot handle the real truth of the events . . . what exactly they are I really don't know but I doubt the official story as much as I doubt the conspiracy theorists . . .