Coincidence...or conspiracy?

crazychile said:

   
I agree with this, but why is it people tend to believe the "official" version of the story that the media and government perpetuates without question, yet the burden of proof is always on the alternative perspective?

Click to expand...

Because often the "alternative" perspective is unsupported paranoid wacko whackery.

Not exactly a 'conspiracy' but I will bite.. Whatever everyone else say is bigfoot, I am a believer.
 
I saw a 'bigfoot' of whatever you would describe as a Bigfoot. I have seen what everyone else has seen so I believe in Bigfoot, not kidding.  Saw near Four Corners, USA around 2AM crossing the road.

All dem conspiracy theories must be true, becuz I feel conspired against.
 
The question should be:- Which ones aren't true........?

billheiser said:

 
Because often the "alternative" perspective is unsupported paranoid wacko whackery.

Click to expand...

Yes, this is the case sometimes, assuming my definition of "unsupported paranoid wacko whackery" is the same as yours. But sometimes the alternative theory has more science and common sense on it's side than the official story.
 
One example might be the OKC bombing. The official story was that a Ryder truck loaded with explosives was detonated in front of the building which caused it to come down with a single blast.
 
The unofficial viewpoint by some is that this could not be correct. Eye witnesses have said there were 2-3 blasts, and the damage pattern of the rubble is inconsistent with where the truck was allegedly parked. Both points are verifiable from archived video footage and photos.  So on it's face the unofficial viewpoint appears to be more reasonable.
 
Of course some might claim that the government conspired with aliens and they used invisible spaceships and advanced weapons to bring the building down. I believe that this falls into the category of "unsupported paranoid wacko whackery". Not because it's impossible, (I am careful in this age of technology before I determine something to be impossible) but because it has no supporting evidence, along with being highly improbable.

iq160plus said:

  Not exactly a 'conspiracy' but I will bite.. Whatever everyone else say is bigfoot, I am a believer.
 
I saw a 'bigfoot' of whatever you would describe as a Bigfoot. I have seen what everyone else has seen so I believe in Bigfoot, not kidding.  Saw near Four Corners, USA around 2AM crossing the road.

Click to expand...

 
Yeah I don't consider Bigfoot to be a conspiracy, because I haven't seen any evidence that anyone has intentionally created hype for this, or attempted to cover up supporting evidence if it exists. Except in the case of the dumb@ss who dressed up in a Bigfoot suit a few years ago to prank people in the woods. I seem to recall he got shot....but I digress.
 
I have never personally seen a Bigfoot, but I know that some people really believe they have. So I think it's a possibility, but without more evidence I remain neutral on this one. I've always wondered though why we never find any Bigfoot bones.

There is a website authored by a group who claim:
 

1. They are the Illuminati.
2. They are not the evil secret society that conspiracy theorists say they are and are in fact the good guys.
3. The conspiracy theories about them were mostly created by the establishment in order to discredit them.
4. And many other things.

 
I'm not sure what is actually allowed to be discussed on this site, since we're not "supposed" to discuss politics, but...
 
Here's the link: http://www.armageddonconspiracy.co.uk
 
It would take weeks or months to read through it all. Some of the information is very interesting. Covers just about every topic.
 
To avoid a flame war, I suggest silently coming to your own conclusions about it.

those dudes are conspiring against themselves...

billheiser said:

There is a powerful being watching us. Including when we have sex. Creepy.

Click to expand...

 
In other words you have a cat?