The week in conspiracy

Via xkcd.com – Thanks Krittika

 

Donald Trump says he will attempt to release redacted information on 9-11 if elected – “Americans deserve answers and I would definitely request a new investigation so that this horrible tragedy never happens again”.

David Icke appears on the Richie Allen Show – a show that he funds – and gets a positive response. He talks mostly about his new book, The Phantom Self. Then, again, the next week, following Terry Wogan’s death. 

Meanwhile, the first episode of the new series of the X-Files uses Icke’s “problem-reaction-solution”, coming from the mouth of a character based on Alex Jones and Glenn Beck. Which is ironic as Glenn Beck is essentially a character based on Alex Jones.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “The week in conspiracy

  1. Jim February 22, 2016 / 4:53 pm

    Thanks David. It is interesting how the 9/11 official timeline and details have been proven false by so many experts in their respective scientific and professional fields that the preponderance of the evidence is overwhelming. Groups like Pilots for 911 Truth for example is made up of professional pilots , many of whom were actually trained in and flew the planes reported to have been used on that day. They claim the physical capabilities and properties of the planes make the official story impossible. They also say as professional pilots of these planes with years or decades of experience would be incapable of the maneuvers suggested in the official data. Another group and perhaps the most irrefutable is Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. They do not claim they know the details of what happened but they can prove what did not by scientific means, The most glaring and irrefutable is the ability for any structure to symmetrically collapse in it’s own footprint at freefall speed defying the basic laws of physics. Another scientific view shared shared by the Pilots group is that it is impossible ( not improbable – but IMPOSSIBLE ) for a giant commercial airliner to hit the pentagon at 499+ MPH and initially only make a 16′ round hole with no debris from its 124′ wingspan . All photos of the building which collapsed approx. 45 minutes later made the damage of impact appear much bigger but all that footage still showed no damage from the wings, and most importantly the 2 massive jet engines. All physical evidence points to a different scenario than the official narrative. No need to go on as the volume of evidence against the official narrative is vast. Scientific evidence aside, what I find most interesting is the ability for people to hear these facts yet not hear them and consider if they are true or not nut to react as if they were just told The Queen of England is a shape shifting Reptilian who eats babies. Aside from claims of scalar waves downing the 3 world trade center buildings and an Illuminati conspiracy people hold more dearly in there belief of the official story, in direct opposition to overwhelming scientific evidence, as some hold onto the notion dinosaurs are made up by Satan to test the faith of Christians. Now neither of those groups I mentioned claim the Illuminati were involved with the dripping blood of fresh newborns still wet on their lips. Nor do they profess to know who was responsible. They just prove the official story is false. What this points to is the power of the official narrative over rational thought. Unless one person alone was responsible for the official narrative and the documented cover-up of so many of the actual events of that terrible day then it is by definition a conspiracy. And yes that makes all those scientists and professionals in their respective fields “conspiracy theorists” That is irrelevant in public debate. The real question is “are they right?”. Academia , as a whole, tries so desperately attempts to address the psychology of those making claims and not the evidence, especially physical evidence ( present company excluded David). The academic approach is most always “why do people believe something we believe to be true without looking at the validity of their claim” as opposed to why do people accept the official narrative over the enormous body of evidence disproving it. Or even more fascinating why is it taboo to even question? But then David you know all this. Sorry, I have been in a particular mood to vent over the past months as the US national presidential debates and rhetoric from all sides kind of answers my last two questions…sigh. Which then points to one of your other conspiracy subjects this week , David Icke ( minus the Reptilians ) , LOL. Your nutter friend – Jim

    • adamkadmon February 22, 2016 / 6:31 pm

      Thanks Jim. Of course, I’ve heard these arguments – and equally convincing arguments from the other side. For what it’s worth, I have serious concerns about how it was used to legitimise repeatedly invading or destabilising Middle Eastern countries. But I am not particularly concerned with “the truth” here – more with how the various players use these claims and terms to position themselves. Trump is positioning himself against the “official line” by deliberately appealing to these conspiracy narratives, which only goes to show how much currency they have. Some of these supposedly marginal ideas are in fact held by the majority. But it suits those with power to have a term that delegitimizes those they are dominating.

      But the academic position is changing, Jim – my work is not so unusual anymore, and there’s a real turn towards seeing “conspiracy theories” in terms of power relations. I’ll be presenting at a conference on critical approaches to conspiracy theories in June, in fact. The problem now is the media – the mainstream still has that “tin-foil hat” mocking approach, but the alternative media is nowhere near rigorous enough. And social media has an echo chamber effect where we only hear more of what we already agree with. I’m not sure what the best way forward would be, but having a conspiracist President would certainly rattle a few cages…

  2. Jim February 22, 2016 / 7:41 pm

    Excellent David Thanks for that.Yes much is about power or as is commonly stated : ” follow the money” This is true of small local misconduct as well as in county, state, and national power structures. I know that you tend to look at these things as movements or narratives and how those can be fitted into a sociological understanding or be used to support a theory. I am interested in the truth, or more accurately the dissemination of all scientific evidence, all facts, and all personal narratives without which Academia isn’t playing with a full deck ( pun intended ). I am glad you see a trend towards scholars not having to choose between ruining their careers or following information or hunches, wherever that may take them, even if is unpopular and challenges whatever orthodoxy is concerned. On those days when I am feeling either particularly pragmatic or slightly hopeful I think maybe things will be fine and almost none of it really matters – Taoist for a day. Good luck with your writing and lectures, and most of all enjoy your family and friends.

  3. quibuslicet February 24, 2016 / 2:31 am

    World News Daily Reports is a satire site, that doesn’t actually say that they are and thus they have conned all sorts of people, garnering millions upon millions of visitors in the process.

    • adamkadmon February 25, 2016 / 9:48 am

      They are certainly more interested in click-bait than they are in facts.

      It’s a good example of the echo-chamber effect of social media – what comes up in our news feeds is from a self-selected set of sources, so we tend to have our already-existing ideas reinforced, rather than challenged. So positions become more polarised. Thus an explosion of media means LESS exposure to alternative ideas, rather than more.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s