The Conspiracy Theories Thread(was: 911 Conspiracy theories) — Page 6

What?

Bingowings said:

You can't figure this sort of stuff out with out prompting?

Bingowings said:  Maybe I overestimate the intelligence of the contributors of these boards including yourself. The alternative is to act like you are all children and write very slowly in big text.

Warbler said:

Bingowings said:

You can't figure this sort of stuff out with out prompting?

 

Bingowings said:  Maybe I overestimate the intelligence of the contributors of these boards including yourself. The alternative is to act like you are all children and write very slowly in big text.

 

I usually give a few more clues than a sound expressed between two asterisks.

I'm saying is that there are legitimate queries worthy of investigation and speculation like, if the phones are still ringing why doesn't someone triangulate the signal and find the plane? Do Malay phones work differently explaining why they may seem to ring when the plane is destroyed? etc, etc

and there are news outlets bunching these sorts of questions together with such notions as  the plane was abducted by aliens or the illuminati or aliens in the employ of the illuminati etc.

I'm not saying the plane was abducted by aliens (which happens to be the plot of the Doctor Who story The Faceless Ones which has also disappeared without trace...ironically) if that's what you are signing about.

Bingowings said:

if the phones are still ringing why doesn't someone triangulate the signal and find the plane?

You assume the phones are actually still ringing.  That vid you linked to does not convince me.  Has any legit news source reported this is happening?

It will be interesting to see how this pans out.  With those Chinese satellite images you'd think they would have found something. 

With the state of the world as it is, one never truly knows I guess. 

Warbler said:

Bingowings said:

if the phones are still ringing why doesn't someone triangulate the signal and find the plane?

You assume the phones are actually still ringing.  That vid you linked to does not convince me.  Has any legit news source reported this is happening?

I assume nothing. If they aren't ringing and this is a hoax the answer to the question is they aren't ringing.

Here is The Mirror (a tabloid but not Alex Jones or David Icke), here is INN.

The usual explanation is that the phones are playing the dial tone to the relatives but the phone is destroyed. If you phone someone who has their phone off in my experience and (and most people asking) it goes to voice mail instead of the ring tone.

Which is why I mentioned the possibility that their phones work differently to ours.

Mirror, being a tabloid is not a legit news source.   INN, I know nothing about.   Has any major news network reported this?  CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, BBC, ect?

CNN

NBC

As I say both 'debunk' the ringing phenomena as being down to the technology sending the dial tone regardless of the plane and the phones being destroyed. None of them suggest that the story is hoax or that the relatives are deluded.

But that would suggest their phones don't work the same way as ours as ours go straight to voice mail when the phone is answered (it's a trope of romantic tragedy these days that the partner of a fictional recently deceased person rings the phone of the dead person to hear their voice mail message).

This is how conspiracy theories snow ball.

In 9/11 we were told that people on the flights called their relatives when the technology to do so wasn't apparently yet available. Something that could probably be explained in a sober fashion but usually gets lumped in with phrases like tin-foil-hat. Similarly the recipients reported that some of the messages sounded robotic (which could be put down to stress both from the caller or recipient) but is often laughed out.

I have no problem with people asking questions or daring to speculate. I can see why some of the speculations should be open to ridicule but the questions in these cases tend to be valid.

Fox news has always had a tabloid mentality but I've been shocked recently by just how tabloid the BBC news page is getting.

I don't need to know about microwaved cats or a man left on the road with his penis cut off. Where's the news in that?

Bingowings said:

CNN

NBC

As I say both 'debunk' the ringing phenomena as being down to the technology sending the dial tone regardless of the plane and the phones being destroyed. None of them suggest that the story is hoax or that the relatives are deluded.

But that would suggest their phones don't work the same way as ours as ours go straight to voice mail when the phone is answered (it's a trope of romantic tragedy these days that the partner of a fictional recently deceased person rings the phone of the dead person to hear their voice mail message).

perhaps they are differment there.

This is how conspiracy theories snow ball.

no.  I'll tell you how conspiracy theories start.   They start with stories like this.  But instead of asking logical and rational questions and doiing research and learing about how cell phones work,  they assume the craziest and wildest explanations must be the truth.   Off they go ranting and raving about how the government is evil and is lying to us and that they have hidden the plane somewhere and are doing who knows what with the crew and passengers.   Sometimes they create fake evidence and other bs like that and what not off we go.   Many of these sorts are biggoted against the goverment/establishment.   Some other crazies listen to these guys and assume that the conspiracy theory and the "evidence" as gospel truth.   They will never listen to logic and reasoning.   To many it is all a game to them.   Something they harrassing the victims and their families.   Other times they harrass heros that risked their lives to benfit mankind.  

In 9/11 we were told that people on the flights called their relatives when the technology to do so wasn't apparently yet available.

not really sure what you are talking about here.   Cell phones did exist in 2001.  It is well documents that people on the planes called their families.   Remember the guy from the plane that crashed in PA ending his call with "lets roll"?

Something that could probably be explained in a sober fashion but usually gets lumped in with phrases like tin-foil-hat.

not really sure what the point here is.

Similarly the recipients reported that some of the messages sounded robotic (which could be put down to stress both from the caller or recipient) but is often laughed out.

never heard anything about the messages sounding robotic.  

I have no problem with people asking questions or daring to speculate. I can see why some of the speculations should be open to ridicule but the questions in these cases tend to be valid.

 I don't have a problem with people asking reasonable questions and logically speculating.   It is when the questions and speculation turns crazy and then crazy conclusions are made that an asinine conspiracy theory is true is where I have a problem.

*sigh*

Bingowings said:I don't need to know about microwaved cats or a man left on the road with his penis cut off. Where's the news in that?

 I think they are more news worthy than some idiot's insane conspiracy theory game playing.

Bingowings said:

*sigh*

 what?

I guess this is such a nutty conspiracy too.

The technology to call from high altitude was what I referring to.

9/11 was in 2001 that ability was apparently not possible until 2004.

Here however is a critique without name calling.

Warbler said:

Bingowings said:I don't need to know about microwaved cats or a man left on the road with his penis cut off. Where's the news in that?

 I think they are more news worthy than some idiot's insane conspiracy theory game playing.

 That's says more about your taste in reading than the act of speculating about conspiracy. We know conspiracies happen so speculating as to wether one mysterious event is part of one makes some sense. Reading about some evil bitch putting a cat in a microwave is just sensationalism.

I suggested dropping the first three digits of the thread title because the subject is bound to recycle the same arguments and information regarding speculations of these kinds which is why I didn't start a new thread too.

Bingowings said:

I guess this is such a nutty conspiracy too.

The technology to call from high altitude was what I referring to.

9/11 was in 2001 that ability was apparently not possible until 2004.

Here however is a critique without name calling.

 I didn't call you any names here.

SilverWook said:

Perhaps discussion of the missing Malaysian jet deserves it's own thread? I don't see the point hitching it up to this thread.

 Bingo doesn't want to discuss the missing flight,  he wants to discuss conspiracy theories behind and around it.   He is free to discuss them here or make a new thread for these conspriacy theories.   As for discussion of the flight itself.  Perhaps that could go in the Current events thread.

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Current-Events-No-debates-Light-political-discussion-allowed-but-if-it-turns-into-a-debate-take-it-to-the-politics-thread-and-include-a-link-here/topic/15013/page/1

Bingowings said:

I suggested dropping the first three digits of the thread title because the subject is bound to recycle the same arguments and information regarding speculations of these kinds which is why I didn't start a new thread too.

 this makes so sense to me.

He's saying that you should drop the "911" to make it a generic conspiracy theory thread since a new conspiracy thread would probably result in the same arguments, etc. that were already brought up in this thread.

ok fine, I'll change the thread title.

Warbler said:

ok fine, I'd change the thread title.

 You'd change it, but...? ;)

I meant I'll, not I'd.  That typo has been corrected and the thread title has been changed.

I'm sorry, I'm a terrible grammar Nazi (meaning I'm good at pointing out people's errors and teasing them about it). :D

Warbler said:

Bingowings said:

I guess this is such a nutty conspiracy too.

The technology to call from high altitude was what I referring to.

9/11 was in 2001 that ability was apparently not possible until 2004.

Here however is a critique without name calling.

 I didn't call you any names here.

I didn't say you did.

I was suggesting you are dismissing the whole enterprise of speculating about conspiracies with name calling those who do it and I present you with a critique which doesn't take that approach.

Nice move on the title BTW possibly you best joke yet :-D