-
<p>Oh yeah. I used to work for a Government Minister (the NSW Racing Minister, which made it all the more bizarre), and we once got this letter from a bloke claiming the Port Arthur Massacre was actually an operation carried out by the Army, ordered by the Government so they could outlaw semi-automatic weapons.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Collated a whole bunch of 'evidence', clippings, forensics, the works. It's apparently a real thing, despite the fact that Bryant plead guilty to all charges.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tim" data-cid="554141" data-time="1453689628">
<div>
<p>Hmm, I wonder what the comments are like at the NZ On Screen website?</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.nzonscreen.com/title/until-proven-innocent-2009/comments'>http://www.nzonscreen.com/title/until-proven-innocent-2009/comments</a></p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Oh.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Â </p>
<p>He plead guilty to the massacre, he also set up a video camera to record it. Poor old Noelline has severe case of "the wingers"</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="barbarian" data-cid="554168" data-time="1453699767">
<div>
<p>Oh yeah. I used to work for a Government Minister, and we once got this letter from a bloke claiming the Port Arthur Massacre was actually an operation carried out by the Army, ordered by the Government so they could outlaw semi-automatic weapons.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Collated a whole bunch of 'evidence', clippings, forensics, the works. It's apparently a real thing, despite the fact that Bryant plead guilty to all charges.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Loons in the states have alleged Sandy Hook was staged too, they've actually harassed grieving parents because they believe they are actors paid by the government.</p> -
CIA releases 1950s UFO reports...<br>
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://i.stuff.co.nz/science/76238844/CIA-declassifies-hundreds-of-UFO-documents'>http://i.stuff.co.nz/science/76238844/CIA-declassifies-hundreds-of-UFO-documents</a><br><br>
Can't be bothered reading them myself ... will wait for the experts to analyse it and publish a story ... then believe which ever expert agrees with my predetermined bias and dismiss the other side. -
<p>just wait for the movie, or in the meantime, you could watch the long running documentary, X-Files, of which a new series has just started, they should give you enough info to make a sound decision!</p>
-
I'll just drop this here ...<br><br><a class="bbc_url" href="http://m.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11580607">http://m.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11580607</a><br><br><blockquote class="ipsBlockquote"><p><strong>Conspiracies: How would it stay secret?</strong><br><br>
A scientist says a faked Moon landing cannot be true or it would have been exposed within a few years. Photo / Supplied<br><br>
By Sarah Knapton<br><br>
Major conspiracy theories such as a faked Moon landing cannot be true or they would have been exposed within a few years a scientist has concluded.<br><br>
Dr David Grimes, an Oxford University physicist, worked out a mathematical formula to calculate the chances of a plot being leaked by a whistle-blower or accidentally uncovered.<br><br>
He was able to show that the more people involved in a conspiracy, the shorter its lifespan is likely to be.<br><br>
For a plot to last five years, the maximum number of plotters turned out to be 2,521. To keep a scheme undetected for more than a decade, fewer than 1,000 people could be involved, while a century-long deception had to include fewer than 125 collaborators.<br><br>
Since Neil Armstrong became the first man to walk on the Moon in 1969, conspiracy theorists have proposed that the landing was faked. They point to photographs showing the American flag blowing in the breeze, despite there being no atmosphere and the fact the astronauts' shadows do not match the lunar module light source.<br><br>
But applying Dr Grimes' formula to the Moon landings, which would have involved an estimated 411,000 people who worked at Nasa, any hoax would have been found out in three years and eight months.<br><br>
"It is common to dismiss conspiracy theories and their proponents out of hand but I wanted to take the opposite approach, to see how these conspiracies might be possible," said Dr Grimes. "To do that, I looked at the vital requirement for a viable conspiracy - secrecy." Dr Grimes's conspiracy equation factored in conspirator numbers, length of time, and even the effects of conspirators dying, whether of old age or non-natural causes.<br><br>
Also required was a realistic estimation of any one individual disclosing a conspiracy. This was based on three genuine conspiracies, including the United States' National Security Agency Prism spying programme revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden.<br><br>
Dr Grimes, whose research appears in the online journal Public Library of Science ONE, said his work was inspired by the numerous communications he receives from people who believe in science-related conspiracies.<br><br>
"A number of conspiracy theories revolve around science," he said. "While believing the Moon landings were faked may not be harmful, believing misinformation about vaccines can be fatal. Not everyone who believes in a conspiracy is unreasonable or unthinking. I hope that by showing how eye-wateringly unlikely some alleged conspiracies are, some people will reconsider their anti-science beliefs.<br><br>
"If we are to address the multitudinous difficulties facing us as a species, from climate change to geopolitics, then we need to embrace reality over ideologically motivated fictions. To this end, we need to better understand how and why some ideas are entrenched and persistent among certain groups despite the evidence, and how we might counteract this."<br><br><strong>Four famous conspiracy theories and the length of time it would take before their secrets leaked out into the public domain:<br><br>
Moon-landing hoax</strong><br><br>
Many people still believe that Nasa faked its Apollo missions, and has never landed a man on the Moon.<br><br>
However, Nasa had 411,000 employees at the time of the Moon landing and one of them should have blown the whistle within three years and eight months.<br><br><strong>Cancer cure cover-up</strong><br><br>
It has been claimed that big pharmaceutical companies are hiding a cure for cancer to maintain profits for chemotherapy drugs.<br><br>
But if everyone from Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Merck and Co, and Johnson and Johnson, to GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca were involved it would amount to 714,000 people and the story would get out within three years and three months.<br><br><strong>Climate change fraud</strong><br><br>
If man-made climate change was a myth, a huge number of scientists, academics and policymakers would need to be involved in the cover up.<br><br>
Including members of the American Geo-Physical Union, American Academy for Advancement of Science, European Physical Society, the Royal Society, and Nasa, as well as published climate scientists, 405,000 would have to keep quiet. That would be possible only for three years and nine months.<br><br><strong>Unsafe vaccine conspiracy</strong><br><br>
If unsafe vaccines were being produced, a cabal of the Centre for Disease Control the World Health Organisation, and almost certainly pharmaceutical companies would be needed adding up to 736,000 people. Such a plot would crumble within three years and two months.</p></blockquote>
<br>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote"><p>Dr David Grimes, an Oxford University physicist, worked out a mathematical formula to calculate the chances of a plot being leaked by a whistle-blower or accidentally uncovered.<br><br>He was able to show that the more people involved in a conspiracy, the shorter its lifespan is likely to be.</p></blockquote><br>Is that a joke? Someone has come to the astonishing conclusion that the more people who know something, the less likely they'll all manage to keep their mouths shut?<br><br><blockquote class="ipsBlockquote"><p>However, Nasa had 411,000 employees at the time of the Moon landing and one of them should have blown the whistle within three years and eight months.</p></blockquote><br>Try three minutes and eight seconds.
-
<p>It always amazes me how often shit is exposed & frankly, no one gives a shit. People get so fixated on stuff that isn't true and yet when they are presented by something that has been exposed as true they do... nothing.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Look at what is happying in Flint in the US over its water. By any definition that should fit right in the wheehouse of any number of "its a conspiracy!" nutters. Hell the Califonia Methane leak is fucking HUGE. But they would rather focus on stuff that never happened. Cause if they focus on actual issues, they need to do something about them, and also the issues go away. People bleat on about the moon landing, but there has already been a conspiracy re NASA - the design oversights on the Challenger. And it came out 30 seconds after it happened. And no one really gave a shit. People went "oh.. so beauracracy & human error, well thats boring as fuck, show me Area 51!!!"Â </p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Or when a guy works at Goldman Sachs, or Haliburton or Exxon. Then becomes a senator or VP or president with financing from Goldman Sachs, or Haliburton or Exxon, and passes laws that help Goldman Sachs, or Haliburton or Exxon, then ends his term & goes back to work at Goldman Sachs, or Haliburton or Exxon. Thats kinda the definition of the shit Con. Theorists should be wanking over & yet... nothing.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>9/11, the moon landing, autism, even climate change denial, these are not going anywhere. Those making a living - or just milking the publicity & smugness of "I've done the research!" can milk that forever (or in the case of CCD their lifetime at least). Its akin to saying "the earth will end 2072!" & starting a cult. You can milk that right thru'. Saying "the earth will end 2012" was good in 1950, but a beginers error if you were saying it in 2008.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Its the difference bettween worshiping the Sun (as our ancestors did) & God (as many of us do). One of those can be proven to not actually be a giant glowing chariot ridden across the sky, so that is not the one you want to harp on about 24/7.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Conspiracy theorists don't want to be proved right, because they can't be. They've cherry picked their causes for that reason. </p> -
<p><img src="http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/20165/KETCH1_620x310.jpg" alt="KETCH1_620x310.jpg"></p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Riiiiight. The Sounds Mystery has been solved...</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Billy Tell" data-cid="554584" data-time="1453915807"><p><img src="http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/20165/KETCH1_620x310.jpg" alt="KETCH1_620x310.jpg"><br><br>
Riiiiight. The Sounds Mystery has been solved...</p></blockquote>
<br><a class="bbc_url" href="http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11580510">http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11580510</a><br><br>
Thanks Billy. Link is to the Herald article. <br><br>
I thought it was a some pulicity for Wishart's book. But perhaps it's an attempt to undermine it's release? There's a conspiracy for you ... someone at NZME doesn't like Wishart ... didn't he used to work at TV3? Does he still work for the opposition? -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="554582" data-time="1453902225">
<div>
<p>Conspiracy theorists don't want to be proved right, because they can't be. They've cherry picked their causes for that reason. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Â </p>
<p>They suffer for their art.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tim" data-cid="554141" data-time="1453689628">
<div>
<p>Hmm, I wonder what the comments are like at the NZ On Screen website?</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.nzonscreen.com/title/until-proven-innocent-2009/comments'>http://www.nzonscreen.com/title/until-proven-innocent-2009/comments</a></p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Oh.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Â </p>
<p>I'll have $10 on Noeleen Wood having exchanged letters with Martin Bryant and falling in love with him.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Smudge" data-cid="554620" data-time="1453933627"><p>I'll have $10 on Noeleen Wood having exchanged letters with Martin Bryant and falling in love with him.</p></blockquote>
<br>
She could be in for a disappointment there, according to a news story last year he's now obese and gives bjs in exchange for chocolate bars. If that not an argument against the death penalty I don't know what is. I bet his fellow inmates are looking forward to the day the last of his teeth rots out. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="554582" data-time="1453902225">
<div>
<p>It always amazes me how often shit is exposed & frankly, no one gives a shit. People get so fixated on stuff that isn't true and yet when they are presented by something that has been exposed as true they do... nothing.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Look at what is happying in Flint in the US over its water. By any definition that should fit right in the wheehouse of any number of "its a conspiracy!" nutters. Hell the Califonia Methane leak is fucking HUGE. But they would rather focus on stuff that never happened. Cause if they focus on actual issues, they need to do something about them, and also the issues go away. People bleat on about the moon landing, but there has already been a conspiracy re NASA - the design oversights on the Challenger. And it came out 30 seconds after it happened. And no one really gave a shit. People went "oh.. so beauracracy & human error, well thats boring as fuck, show me Area 51!!!"Â </p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Or when a guy works at Goldman Sachs, or Haliburton or Exxon. Then becomes a senator or VP or president with financing from Goldman Sachs, or Haliburton or Exxon, and passes laws that help Goldman Sachs, or Haliburton or Exxon, then ends his term & goes back to work at Goldman Sachs, or Haliburton or Exxon. Thats kinda the definition of the shit Con. Theorists should be wanking over & yet... nothing.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>9/11, the moon landing, autism, even climate change denial, these are not going anywhere. Those making a living - or just milking the publicity & smugness of "I've done the research!" can milk that forever (or in the case of CCD their lifetime at least). Its akin to saying "the earth will end 2072!" & starting a cult. You can milk that right thru'. Saying "the earth will end 2012" was good in 1950, but a beginers error if you were saying it in 2008.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Its the difference bettween worshiping the Sun (as our ancestors did) & God (as many of us do). One of those can be proven to not actually be a giant glowing chariot ridden across the sky, so that is not the one you want to harp on about 24/7.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Conspiracy theorists don't want to be proved right, because they can't be. They've cherry picked their causes for that reason. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>The Flint water supply thing is seriously fucked up, especially when you read the thing that could have saved all the issue would have cost about $100 a day. </p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>America is a pretty fucked up country, with a really scewed moral compass. </p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="mariner4life" data-cid="554667" data-time="1453937465">
<div>
<p>The Flint water supply thing is seriously fucked up, especially when you read the thing that could have saved all the issue would have cost about $100 a day. </p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>America is a pretty fucked up country, with a really scewed moral compass. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Â </p>
<p>And yet, people are told from a very early age that if they work hard enough, they can get anywhere. It may be true that education and hard work will improve any circumstance, except in the face of unforseeable tragedy, but ultimately where you start from has a BIG say in where you go:</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://thewireless.co.nz/articles/the-pencilsword-on-a-plate'>http://thewireless.co.nz/articles/the-pencilsword-on-a-plate</a></p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>I liked this as an explanation of privilege - you don't have to be rich.</p> -
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://thespudd.com/survey-anti-vaxxers-do-not-believe-dunning-kruger-effect-applies-to-them/'>http://thespudd.com/survey-anti-vaxxers-do-not-believe-dunning-kruger-effect-applies-to-them/</a></p>
<p>Â </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
<p>Â </p>
<p>Survey: Anti-Vaxxers do not believe Dunning-Kruger Effect applies to them</p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>1.6k</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>Â </div>
<p>Researchers from Yale University released the results of a study which discovered that anti-vaxxers do not believe the Dunning-Kruger effect applies to them. The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias where unskilled individuals tend to suffer from <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority'>illusory superiority</a>, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than is accurate.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>In the study, 2,359 parents were culled from the donor list of the National Vaccine Center of Information, an anti-vaccine group. Subjects were asked a series of questions on their attitudes and general knowledge about vaccines. They were then shown the following explanation of the Dunning–Kruger effect:</p>
<p>Â </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“<em>Incompetence does not leave people disoriented, perplexed, or cautious. Instead, the incompetent are often blessed with an inappropriate confidence, buoyed by something that feels to them like knowledge.” </em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Â </p>
<p>In the main part of the study, subjects were asked to rate whether they felt the explanation applied to them. According to the lead study investigator, Dr. Allison Ditz, “We were completely unstunned. The results blew absolutely no one away. Only 1% of the anti-vaxxers felt that the  Dunning–Kruger effect applied to them in the slightest. This is despite the fact no one scored higher than a 58% on our vaccine quiz and none were able to explain the difference between a T and B lymphocyte.”</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Instead, 98% of the subjects rated their knowledge of vaccines  as “extremely, highly superior” and felt the Dunning–Kruger effect best applied to vaccine advocates such as Dr. Paul Offit as well as everyone at the CDC, FDA, WHO, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, UNICEF, and anyone who works for a pharmaceutical company</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>In a follow-up study of 1,419 of the original study subjects, 97% of them explained their original responses by saying “I did my own research.”</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Â </p>
<p>From The Spudd.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Donsteppa" data-cid="554714" data-time="1453946285">
<div>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://thespudd.com/survey-anti-vaxxers-do-not-believe-dunning-kruger-effect-applies-to-them/'>http://thespudd.com/survey-anti-vaxxers-do-not-believe-dunning-kruger-effect-applies-to-them/</a></p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>From The Spudd.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>More Winger bait, he's been busy saying Gardisal kills on another forum lately.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/76303256/no-evidence-that-hpv-vaccine-caused-an-upper-hutt-teenagers-unexplained-death'>http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/76303256/no-evidence-that-hpv-vaccine-caused-an-upper-hutt-teenagers-unexplained-death</a></p>
Your favourite conspiracy theories