Princess Diana - was she murdered?

So if someone proposes a theory and can't explain how it works, can't explain why they believe it or why it's convincing, can't explain the obvious flaws and contradictions in it and can't provide any evidence to show that the factual claims them make are true, why should anyone take that theory seriously?

How can we tell the difference between such a theory and one that's entirely fictional?

How do we know that the theory is an example of something that turns out to be right and not one of the thousands of examples of conspiracy theories that turn out to be false?

The way it normally works is that you come with a theory, then you examine the evidence to see if it supports that theory. If there is any evidence that contradicts the theory, you modify the theory to fit. If there is a part of the theory for which no evidence exists, then you discard it or park it as unproven until more evidence emerges that supports or refutes it.

In terms if Diana being murdered, there is as yet no evidence of any intent act to cause Diana's death, therefore the theory of murder is unproven. There's also a theory that she was kidnapped by fairies and replaced with a demon, which has just as much evidence for it.

Yes, you're entitled to think whatever you want, but if it's going to be any random nonsense, it seems kind of pointless for there to be a discussion forum for it. Better to set up a creative writing blog if one needs an outlet for just pouring out random thoughts for others to read and not challenge.

The only people who are demanding what can and can't be posted are conspiracy theorists.

"Sir this is a Wendy's"

It doesn't seem to matter what the thread title is anymore, forum appears to be an unmoderated twilight zone, and maybe that's the best thing for it

Well Mohamad Al-Fayed was friends with George De Mohrenschildt, who was friends with Oswald.

This is how bad conspiracy theories start.

Her full name was Diana Zapruder Secret Nazis Grassy Knoll Spencer

What I always found odd.. the driver, Henri Paul was just over 3.5 times the legal driving blood alcohol limit… he was the ‘acting’ head of security….. you have that responsibility in addition high profile guests who would be targets of paparazzi and indeed possibly various nefarious groups who in theory could target them…. So what the fûck are you doing at work 3.5 times over the limit when you are aware that it’s possible you could be called upon to think fast, act on and make decisions at a moments notice and possibly drive a very high powered vehicle at speed…

so much about what happened leaves you scratching your head… more questions then facts….

Nothing. Cheerful just wanted another thread to dump his rants on.

If you want discussion on Diana, try the UFO thread. Or maybe the vaccines thread.

Nothing. Its indicative of the scatter brain of a garden variety conspiracy theorist.

No attention spam to stay on one topic, one point or even one thread.

Most people aren't interested answering basic questions about their theory. So they leave.

Exactly.. the truth won’t ever be known.

There were 14 cameras in the tunnel but none captured the crash…. Which is weird.

2 years it has been since this bet was proposed, accepted and agreed upon. You owe Temple Street Children's Hospital €250.

As I'm feeling in a good mood today, you can leave it at €100. I'd take your word for it, only your word ranks lower than a snakes ballbag around here so you'll have to post proof of the donation or forever be tarnished as a spoofer and a welcher. Whatever shred of credibility you once had will be gone forever.

Nobody will ever treat your crazy ramblings with any degree of credibility ever again. Up to you, pal......