Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
I smell a conspiracy!
-
03-04-2009 3:27pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Lads, read the OP again and try get an idea of what this thread is about. Not every thread isa debate thread and people dont need to post in every thread.
Thank you... I was hoping for something light and friendly:p
The bushfire thing... while I think the fires were awful (my sister's living near Melbourne so it was quite scary) the fact that almost immediately the govt started talking about satellites kinda made me think a bit... usually if a crime is committed (they were talking about arson) you have to think who is set to benefit from it. And, I'm sure that it is genuinely just a good idea to try and prevent it happening again... but it still made me question intentions or using natural (or other) disasters to give a government more power as is often the case
The big bang thing... well to me (someone who knows and cares little for science admittedly ) just seemed completely ridiculous. 0 -
-
Ooohh one I've seriously been questioning recently. Remember the earthquakes in Ireland and England a year or two ago? Well the papers said that they were aftershocks from Norways biggest ever earthquake in Svalbard (a Norwegian island). Well I was wondering why that sounded familiar... around the same time, that was where they opened the 'Global seed vault' (literally within a week of eachother... just seemed strange to me:o
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svalbard_Global_Seed_Vault
Only a couple of weeks ago, Svalbard had another earthquake... eclipsing the previous 'biggest ever in Norway'
http://www.norwaypost.no/content/view/21728/26/0 -
Heineken Helen wrote: »Thank you... I was hoping for something light and friendly:p
Sorry if I was unfriendly but just don't see any CT.Heineken Helen wrote: »The bushfire thing... while I think the fires were awful (my sister's living near Melbourne so it was quite scary) the fact that almost immediately the govt started talking about satellites kinda made me think a bit... usually if a crime is committed (they were talking about arson) you have to think who is set to benefit from it. And, I'm sure that it is genuinely just a good idea to try and prevent it happening again... but it still made me question intentions or using natural (or other) disasters to give a government more power as is often the case
It's called pyromania http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyromania
How do you think they should stop it in this vast country/continent?0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Heineken Helen wrote: »Ooohh one I've seriously been questioning recently. Remember the earthquakes in Ireland and England a year or two ago? Well the papers said that they were aftershocks from Norways biggest ever earthquake in Svalbard (a Norwegian island). Well I was wondering why that sounded familiar... around the same time, that was where they opened the 'Global seed vault' (literally within a week of eachother... just seemed strange to me:o
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svalbard_Global_Seed_Vault
Only a couple of weeks ago, Svalbard had another earthquake... eclipsing the previous 'biggest ever in Norway'
http://www.norwaypost.no/content/view/21728/26/
There are earthquakes all over the world every day, even in Ireland (although not every day). There are something like 25 large seed banks around the world, how many are in earthquake zones?0 -
Sorry if I was unfriendly but just don't see any CT.
It's called pyromania http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyromania
How do you think they should stop it in this vast country/continent?
That's ok
I don't know... and I'm pretty sure it IS a good idea... BUT, back to the original post, something doesn't quite sit right with me about it and I'm not sure why.
I know what pyromania is, thank you
0 -
-
There are earthquakes all over the world every day, even in Ireland (although not every day). There are something like 25 large seed banks around the world, how many are in earthquake zones?
There are no seedbanks like this one (built into a mountain.. can withstand a nuclear holocaust... and yet.. how the hell is anyone gonna find it much less OPEN if after a holocaust? Considering the vast security measures).
Of course there are earthquakes all over the world every day... just seemed strange that I'd never heard of that island before and, within a week, it made the news twice... it's quite conceiveable that something built into a mountain and able to withstand nuclear holocaust may not necessarily be what it seems.0 -
Heineken Helen wrote: »That's ok
I don't know... and I'm pretty sure it IS a good idea... BUT, back to the original post, something doesn't quite sit right with me about it and I'm not sure why.
I know what pyromania is, thank you
You know what pyromania is but the only suggestion you offered for arson is profit. When to my understanding most fires are accidental or intentional (not for profit) and only a small number are shown to be for profit.
Every day humans have feelings, intuitions perhaps that something isn't quite right. Sometime these proven to be founded in some reality and sometimes they are not. Now since you seem to see quite a number of CT's in many different places maybe, just maybe you are seeing more than is actually there.0 -
-
-
You know what pyromania is but the only suggestion you offered for arson is profit. When to my understanding most fires are accidental or intentional (not for profit) and only a small number are shown to be for profit.
Every day humans have feelings, intuitions perhaps that something isn't quite right. Sometime these proven to be founded in some reality and sometimes they are not. Now since you seem to see quite a number of CT's in many different places maybe, just maybe you are seeing more than is actually there.
Oh I know I do... that's just cos I find conspiracy theories to be more fun than the accepted story.
I still think you're missing the point of this thread 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Heineken Helen wrote: »Oh I know I do... that's just cos I find conspiracy theories to be more fun than the accepted story.
I still think you're missing the point of this thread
I believe there is a creative writing forum if you wanna make up some fun stories.0 -
-
-
-
-
I think you're being a little unfair. It makes sense to be suspicious of events when they're dramatic and you have no way of getting the full story. The problem lies with trying to inform yourself.So the logic here is: "I don't understand something therefore it must be a conspiracy"?
A good example is the whole "US government being behind 9/11" thingy. Many people claimed that it was all planned and listed out what they saw as inconsistencies in the official story. Others pointed out that many of the inconsistencies were wrong. But some CT'er would not be swayed. Some felt that the US government had to be involved and so no matter what evidence was given to them, they would refuse to accept it.
I'm sure the opposite could be claimed too, where skeptics are concerned. So, this is a long winded (and pointlessly confusing) way of saying that it's OK to have a staring position of suspicion as long as your willing to take the evidence on what it is, and not try and fit the evidence to what you believe.
Does that make any sense? Or should I just leave and have a nap? 0 -
Advertisement
-
Heineken Helen wrote: »The big bang thing... well to me (someone who knows and cares little for science admittedly ) just seemed completely ridiculous.
Well to be blunt, I'm not surprised. You haven't looked into it, don't know much about science and referring to it as the "big bang thing" is inaccurate and sensationalist to say the least.
Edit: It's not a "big bang" thing, it's a particle accelerator. It will (hopefully) demonstrate the existence (or lack thereof) of some theorised particles (higg bosons) and some other ideas. Particle accelerators are nothing new. This is just the most powerful built to date.0 -
I think you're being a little unfair. It makes sense to be suspicious of events when they're dramatic and you have no way of getting the full story. The problem lies with trying to inform yourself.
A good example is the whole "US government being behind 9/11" thingy. Many people claimed that it was all planned and listed out what they saw as inconsistencies in the official story. Others pointed out that many of the inconsistencies were wrong. But some CT'er would not be swayed. Some felt that the US government had to be involved and so no matter what evidence was given to them, they would refuse to accept it.
I'm sure the opposite could be claimed too, where skeptics are concerned. So, this is a long winded (and pointlessly confusing) way of saying that it's OK to have a staring position of suspicion as long as your willing to take the evidence on what it is, and not try and fit the evidence to what you believe.
Does that make any sense? Or should I just leave and have a nap?
I agree with you within reason.
The only thing i'd mention is the OP wasn't pointing out any specific conspiracy nor supplying any evidence for any conspiracy. So it's difficult to help especially with the topics the OP is suspicious about, which frankly don't seem suspicious at all.0 -
-
-
Blue_Lagoon wrote: »Heineken Helen... I'm still waiting for you to connect the dots and demonstrate how this qualifies as a conspiracy theory.
Relax... I was at the pub
Ok... firstly when governments start talking about satellites straight after a natural disaster, it's slightly suspicious.
An international group build a big underground collection of tunnels costing millions.. for a science experiment? An experiment which I've yet had somebody adequately explain to me... so it's recreating the conditions directly after the big bang... how is that more important than finding a cure for cancer?:o
I've already stated the strange connection between the vault and the biggest earthquake ever in that part of the world... leading to other biggest earthquakes ever in other parts of the world (both Ireland and England). I think there's a chance that the vault is being used or being used to cover up something else.
Anyway I was hoping to have some fun with this thread
hoping others might come in with other suspicious stuff or stuff THEY consider suspicious. But I don't see anyone else having fun with it???????:o 0 -
toiletduck wrote: »Well to be blunt, I'm not surprised. You haven't looked into it, don't know much about science and referring to it as the "big bang thing" is inaccurate and sensationalist to say the least.
Edit: It's not a "big bang" thing, it's a particle accelerator. It will (hopefully) demonstrate the existence (or lack thereof) of some theorised particles (higg bosons) and some other ideas. Particle accelerators are nothing new. This is just the most powerful built to date.
I HAVE looked into it... and I've had people explain it to me but, for me, it still doesn't add up. Sensationalist?????
0 -
Advertisement
-
I think you're being a little unfair. It makes sense to be suspicious of events when they're dramatic and you have no way of getting the full story. The problem lies with trying to inform yourself.
A good example is the whole "US government being behind 9/11" thingy. Many people claimed that it was all planned and listed out what they saw as inconsistencies in the official story. Others pointed out that many of the inconsistencies were wrong. But some CT'er would not be swayed. Some felt that the US government had to be involved and so no matter what evidence was given to them, they would refuse to accept it.
I'm sure the opposite could be claimed too, where skeptics are concerned. So, this is a long winded (and pointlessly confusing) way of saying that it's OK to have a staring position of suspicion as long as your willing to take the evidence on what it is, and not try and fit the evidence to what you believe.
Does that make any sense? Or should I just leave and have a nap? thanks... I think!
I'm perfectly willing to hear any evidence... people seem to take the big bang one quite personally for some reason I've gotten into a few heated drunken debates over that one and the Aussie one I'm willing to leave... but can we discuss the Norwegian one? It does seem a bit suspect that a lot of weird earthquakes (even take the Melbourne ones this year... following the one in Svalbard) seem to be traceable back to this small island... which never had a significant earthquake before this vault started operating 0 -
-
I don't think you have looked into the LHC properly.
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4109 Maybe you should start here.
Can you tell us exactly what doesn't add up about it?
so a retired nuclear safety officer filed a lawsuit???
If you're expecting me to say I believe it will be the cause of the end of the world you're wasting your time cos I don't believe that... in fact, I simply don't believe any of it. I do understand the official story of what it's supposed to do... I just don't readily accept everything I'm told. I'm sure the whole science of it adds up but how do you KNOW what's going on down there? 0 -
Heineken Helen wrote: »so a retired nuclear safety officer filed a lawsuit???
If you're expecting me to say I believe it will be the cause of the end of the world you're wasting your time cos I don't believe that... in fact, I simply don't believe any of it. I do understand the official story of what it's supposed to do... I just don't readily accept everything I'm told. I'm sure the whole science of it adds up but how do you KNOW what's going on down there?
Because there is pictures among other things, including the scientific research that already goes on at CERN.
Why do you believe there is something sinister going on?0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Heineken Helen wrote: »I HAVE looked into it... and I've had people explain it to me but, for me, it still doesn't add up. Sensationalist?????
Yes all the cries along the lines of end of the world (not from you) were sensationalist.An international group build a big underground collection of tunnels costing millions.. for a science experiment? An experiment which I've yet had somebody adequately explain to me... so it's recreating the conditions directly after the big bang... how is that more important than finding a cure for cancer?
That's a loaded question. We don't pour all scientific research into curing diseases quite rightly. I'd suggest checking out the Horizon special on it, "The Six Billion Dollar Experiment"
So it doesn't add up to you... Great. Who's in on it by and by do you reckon?0 -
toiletduck wrote: »Yes all the cries along the lines of end of the world (not from you) were sensationalist.
That's a loaded question. We don't pour all scientific research into curing diseases quite rightly. I'd suggest checking out the Horizon special on it, "The Six Billion Dollar Experiment"
So it doesn't add up to you... Great. Who's in on it by and by do you reckon?
:rolleyes: have you read my first post? I'm going to stop explaining what I was getting at... and maybe somebody else will join in... and understand what's going on... cos the majority of you don't seem to get it. If I knew or thought I knew who's in on it, I probably would have said that in the first three pages. The purpose of this thread is not facts or even necessarily opinions but possibilities or something that doesn't seem right. It was supposed to be fun I'm not having fun!:p
I'll have another beer... maybe that will help 0 -
-
Well, in fairness, pharmaceutical companies, in fact all companies, are in it for the money. The government could spend billions on research, but it's better to let the professionals handle it and take the expenses hit. It makes sense. The government would be shooting themselves in the foot if they tried doing this all themselves, especially when there are no guaranteed results.
Also, there are many cures for cancers, it just depends on the type and the severity. Just a couple of months ago the Irish branch of a major US pharmaceutical company made a major break through. And it was on the news, too.
Ah jaysus, can you imagine the government being put in charge of finding a cure for ANYTHING??? Even if it was just the common cold They'd pump 5 billion into it and then recommend taking an aspirin or something... except Enda Kenny would of course refute that and say we should only take lemsip... that it's immature and nonsensical of the government to be recommending aspirin :rolleyes: it would go on for years. 0 -
-
Advertisement
Advertisement