9/11 Trutherism and what I just can't figure out about the conspiracy crowd

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > 9/11 Trutherism and what I just can't figure out about the conspiracy crowd

«‹›236 »

Randalor: Sep 4, 2011

QuarkJets posted:

So I encountered this graphic recently:

Is this a thing? It seems like the image is trying to suggest that a beam fell on a building nearby therefore conspiracy?

And the person who posted that image just keeps linking to this site over and over whenever I ask anything about it: http://www.ae911truth.org/

What the gently caress

Is the beam the bit hanging out from the large hole in the upper half of the picture? Because if so, you could point out that, for a dart, it tore a pretty drat big chunk out of the wall above it, a good 3-4 floors worth for something that was shot straight. Or, more realistically, it fell from a higher angle, and then the weight caused it to collapse the wall beneath it so it tilted down after the fact.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 06:04

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 17:17

withak: Jan 15, 2003; Fun Shoe

Not sure what the conspiracy is supposed to be, but it looks like a lot of other poo poo hit that building also.

withak fucked around with this message at 06:49 on Jan 27, 2014

# ? Jan 27, 2014 06:08

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

It's just a newer, more complex version of truthers talking out of their rear end because they don't understand what happens when a building collapses.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 06:37

Amused to Death: Aug 10, 2009; google "The Night Witches", and prepare for

So why again is the "government found guilty of killing MLK" thing stupid.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 06:54

Gen. Ripper: Jan 12, 2013

Amused to Death posted:

So why again is the "government found guilty of killing MLK" thing stupid.

It was a civil lawsuit (IIRC) which basically means dick-all.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 06:57

SlipUp: Sep 30, 2006; stayin c o o l

The lawsuit was more about recouping damages from a restaurateur trying to sell a bullshit account of a conspiracy for fame and money.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 08:22

duck monster: Dec 15, 2004

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8

I did it. I found the craziest person.

duck monster fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Jan 27, 2014

# ? Jan 27, 2014 12:37

BiggerBoat: Sep 26, 2007; Don't you tell me my business again.

Butts McGee posted:

The Supertramp thing isn't new per se. Political cartoonist and diagnosed Schizophrenic David Dees did a infographic on it... a while ago. It's hard to say when, thanks to his site's abysmal layout. Nothing's dated on it, so who knows.

I thought they were going to say that the orange juice was a reference to The Godfather since Coppola used oranges in several of the death scenes.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 15:10

Randalor: Sep 4, 2011

duck monster posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8&t=32s

I did it. I found the craziest person.

I... but... wait... There is so much concentrated crazy-stupid in that video I don't even know how to respond to it.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 16:40

Alec Bald Snatch: Sep 12, 2012; by exmarx

That lady's not crazy, just really dumb.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 16:42

Slanderer: May 6, 2007

duck monster posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8&t=32s

I did it. I found the craziest person.

I've always loved this video. There's a humble sort of magic to this.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 19:16

duck monster: Dec 15, 2004

Sorry did I say rainbow sprinkler lady was the craziest person? I mean this person is!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsdeAF_Prfo

But no, not the craziest.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search=Search&resnum=0&oi=spell&search_query=vinegar+chemtrails&spell=1&sa=X

Theres a whole loving movement of raging loving lunatics that stand around squirting vinegar bottles in the air to fight chemtrails.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 19:37

Armani: Jun 22, 2008; Now it's been 17 summers since I've seen my mother

But every night I see her smile inside my dreams

duck monster posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8

I did it. I found the craziest person.

I love it. This will be the mental place I escape to when my friends start talking about poo poo. Aerosol rainbows.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 19:40

duck monster: Dec 15, 2004

This is actually really interesting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVeA07d2F_I

Its Ken Hovind, who is one of the architects of the Creationist movement. Now in Jail for tax fraud or something like that.

But this guy's theology has had a massive effect on american religion as one of the original big name creationists, and a LOT of the arguments you hear from young earth creationists come from this guy.

Anyway, he also believes other stuff too! This video has it all, chem trails, vaccines causes autism, mass depopulation conspiracies , GM is a depopulation scheme, freemasons, etc etc etc.

I wonder how much of the spread of these ideas comes from these guys pushing these theories in the 80s and 90s.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 20:02

HootTheOwl: May 13, 2012; Hootin and shootin

Will this nix the debate with Bill Nye?

# ? Jan 27, 2014 20:54

twistedmentat: Nov 21, 2003; Its my party
and I'll die if
I want to

duck monster posted:

I wonder how much of the spread of these ideas comes from these guys pushing these theories in the 80s and 90s.

Along wish porn, the simpsons and anime, Conspiracy Theories were among the first big things on the internet. It's not too hard to imagine that the wingnut class saw "There's this thing that exists were I can say whatever I want AND everyone in the world could possibly see it? Finally, the evidence I collected that Bill Clinton has Angel wings for lunch will be seen!!!!"

# ? Jan 27, 2014 20:58

Pook Good Mook: Aug 6, 2013; ENFORCE THE UNITED STATES DRESS CODE AT ALL COSTS!

This message paid for by the Men's Wearhouse& Jos A Bank Lobbying Group

HootTheOwl posted:

Will this nix the debate with Bill Nye?

Different Kens. Bill Nye is debating Ken Hamm, an equally stupid Creationist who was the most public face behind getting the Creationism museum built.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 21:04

duck monster: Dec 15, 2004

twistedmentat posted:

Along wish porn, the simpsons and anime, Conspiracy Theories were among the first big things on the internet. It's not too hard to imagine that the wingnut class saw "There's this thing that exists were I can say whatever I want AND everyone in the world could possibly see it? Finally, the evidence I collected that Bill Clinton has Angel wings for lunch will be seen!!!!"

Yeah, conspiracy theories are a big part of why I don't have as optimistic a view of the internets influence on society as most. This bloody websites motto somewhat aptly sums up my view of the net, actually.

And I say that as a person who's devoted a major chunk of my adult life to the loving thing. The Net has fed me, clothed me, entertained me, kept me in contact with disparate social circles and let me shoot people from reddit in imaginary spaceships. But I still am not entirely convinced its going to be a net positive for humanity if certain political trends continue. I'm not sure it wont be a net positive either. I just don't know, but I find the continuing spread conspiracy theory deeply unnerving. It may well be the worlds fastest growing religion, to be a bit hyperbolic.

# ? Jan 27, 2014 23:37

duck monster: Dec 15, 2004

http://theconversation.com/climate-and-vaccine-deniers-are-the-same-beyond-persuasion-22258

quote:

Climate and vaccine deniers are the same: beyond persuasion
Clive Hamilton (Vice Chancellor's Chair, Centre For Applied Philosophy & Public Ethics (CAPPE) at Charles Sturt University)

Governments are worried. Vaccination rates are falling under the influence of a campaign of misinformation by a small minority of fanatics.

Scientifically there is no debate about immunisation, with every relevant health authority strongly endorsing vaccination. But anti-vaccination activists refuse to accept the evidence, claiming that �every issue has two sides�.

They believe vaccination is ineffective and unnecessary and that vaccines contain toxins and cause autism. They seize on the occasional dissenting study and exploit it for all it�s worth even after it has been discredited. They go hunting for instances of apparent adverse responses among children and advertise them as proof that jabs are dangerous and should be abandoned.

Anecdotes that seem to confirm their opinions trump mountains of carefully collected scientific evidence.

They spread theories about cover-ups, information-suppression and conspiracies among medical experts. They claim to be protecting our freedom and talk darkly about the government trying to take away our liberty. They portray themselves as David bravely fighting Goliath.

The anti-vaccinators attempt to hide their fanaticism behind a fa�ade of respectability, adopting misleading names for their organisations and promoting the views of �experts� who look credible, but who cannot seem to convert their expertise into publications in peer-reviewed journals. While claiming to have better access to scientific truth, the anti-vaccinators show no respect for best scientific practice and dismiss the established experts as frauds.

These tactics are common knowledge. But every one of them is also used by climate science deniers. And yet the same kind of unhinged repudiation of an overwhelming body of scientific facts is treated not as the private obsession of a handful of nutcases, but as a legitimate part of the �debate� over global warming.

The media treat the anti-vaccinators with the disdain they deserve, but sections of the media see no contradiction in actively promoting the same type of anti-science fanaticism when it comes to climate.

The Australian recently supported attacks on �political correctness� in the school curriculum, giving voice to a teacher who argued that �there�s no Asian way of looking at physics�. Quite so; yet it routinely warns its readers about �left-wing" climate science.

Unhealthy advice

What would we think if Prime Minister Tony Abbott declared �immunization science is crap�? Or if he appointed Meryl Dorey, who runs the Australian Vaccination Network (which was recently ordered to change its misleading name), as chair of the National Preventive Health Agency�s Advisory Council?

Yet Mr Abbott has appointed climate denier Maurice Newman to be chair of his Business Advisory Council. In 2010, while chairman of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Newman told journalists they should present both sides of the debate. Back then he felt the need to restrain himself. Now unleashed, Newman is in full flight mimicking the anti-vaccinators. Writing last month in The Australian (where else?) he declared that the evidence for human-induced climate change is a �scientific delusion�.

Newman professes to believe that the scientific establishment is engaged in �mass psychology� because it is �intent on exploiting the masses and extracting more money� (to what purpose he did not say). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change � the main global body that reports the scientific evidence on the issue � allegedly �resorts to dishonesty and deceit� and promotes �the religion behind the climate crusade�. Newman insists there are �credible� scientists who say the Earth is cooling rather than warming.

He says that governments that promote renewable energy are engaged in a �cover-up�, while state health departments are �hiding� evidence on the health dangers of wind farms. He declares that unless someone soon puts a stop to this �climate change madness� most of us will �descend to serfdom�.

Bizarre understanding

In a sane world this kind of fulmination would disqualify anyone from public office. But not today. The same ravings now issue from the mouths of many politicians who ought to know better.

One wonders how a man with Newman�s bizarre understanding of the state of the world can provide the government with sound advice about Australia�s business future, particularly when his claims about how climate policies have �decimated� our manufacturing industry have been rebuffed time and time again by systematic economic analysis.

If a private corporation appoints to its board someone with Newman�s views then that is of no public concern. But to have such a man in a senior public advisory role ought to worry every citizen.

I�m guessing that Newman supports immunisation and would not recognise in himself the kind of primitive thinking noted by The Lancet way back in 1927. In an article titled �The Psychology of Antivaccination� the prestigious medical journal commented on the passion of anti-vaccinators in terms that apply with eerie resonance to modern climate science denial.

It noted that the value and limitations of vaccination against smallpox had been thoroughly researched and understood by scientific medicine, and yet it went on to add:

quote:
�We still meet the belief � that vaccination is a gigantic fraud deliberately perpetuated for the sake of gain� The opposition to vaccination � still retains the �all or none� quality of primitive behaviour and, like many emotional reactions, is supported by a wealth of argument which the person reacting honestly believes to be the logical foundation of his behaviour.�

The anti-immunisation brigade is still at it, yet giant strides have nevertheless been made in protecting public health. There is no such luxury in the case of climate change, and it is the anti-environmental paranoia of men like Abbott and Newman, and Andrew Bolt and George Pell, that endangers the health of our planet.

I'm not actually convinced conspiracy theorists are beyond sanity. I've personally spent a couple of years talking with a large number of friends in the activist world who had all sorts of conspiracy theories and brought them back around to more sociological/anthropological view points about human society actually works. I haven't had much luck with the anti-vax crowd admittedly, but a friend of mine works as a vaccination educator for the health department and she's a loving pro at it. It *can* be done, but it has to be done patiently and you need to provide a more plausible world-view for them to replace the underlying world-view that breeds it.

But I don't know if that can be done at a mass scale, instead of the one-one one sort of interactions people can use to re-educate conspiracy theorist friends.

With that said, Health promotion sciences do have a great idea called 'peer education' where advocacy groups actually target people best positioned to educate peers. So for instance in the gay community this works by targetting influential gay figures in communities with information about HIV/safe sex/etc and then they operate within the community to pass the information and behaviors on. Its quite a successful strategy. IMHO this could be adapted in combatting conspiracy theories.

# ? Jan 28, 2014 00:07

Miss-Bomarc: Aug 1, 2009

The problem is that most of the people who come to conspiracy theories use actual logic to get themselves there. But it's more like "well you can't PROVE this DOESN'T happen" kind of logic, which is impossible to refute in the way that they need you to.

"I think the Jews made 9/11 happen!"
"No they didn't."
"Well, can you PROVE that they didn't?"
"No, I can't prove it, because the reasons you think they did are--"
"Well, there you are then! You can't prove I'm wrong!"

My father-in-law is exactly this sort of person. He figures that if you can't immediately slap down a fully-detailed study with extensive sources showing that what he said was wrong, then he's right--and even if you did somehow have such a study, then clearly they're funded by Monsanto or Al Gore or the Israelis or whoever and so the study's fake.

Like I said earlier, these people have heard of logical skepticism, and they know it's something that smart people do, and Dunning-Krueger lets them believe that they're smart, so they think in ways they believe are logically skeptical and that's how you end up with apparently-sane people believing crazy conspiracy poo poo.

# ? Jan 28, 2014 06:14

Alec Bald Snatch: Sep 12, 2012; by exmarx

Yeah there's the old Seth Finkelstein essay on the way the axiomatic thought process with erroneous initial assumptions leads people to conclude the stupidest poo poo imaginable.

# ? Jan 28, 2014 13:34

Grouchy Smurf: Mar 12, 2012; "Interesting Quote"
-Interesting guy

Miss-Bomarc posted:

The problem is that most of the people who come to conspiracy theories use actual logic to get themselves there. But it's more like "well you can't PROVE this DOESN'T happen" kind of logic, which is impossible to refute in the way that they need you to.

"I think the Jews made 9/11 happen!"
"No they didn't."
"Well, can you PROVE that they didn't?"
"No, I can't prove it, because the reasons you think they did are--"
"Well, there you are then! You can't prove I'm wrong!"

My father-in-law is exactly this sort of person. He figures that if you can't immediately slap down a fully-detailed study with extensive sources showing that what he said was wrong, then he's right--and even if you did somehow have such a study, then clearly they're funded by Monsanto or Al Gore or the Israelis or whoever and so the study's fake.

Like I said earlier, these people have heard of logical skepticism, and they know it's something that smart people do, and Dunning-Krueger lets them believe that they're smart, so they think in ways they believe are logically skeptical and that's how you end up with apparently-sane people believing crazy conspiracy poo poo.

Come on. This is the easiest thing to use yourself against him. I am sure he has a favourite team. Tell them that they only win because they bribe officials. He must own a couple of cheap guns. Tell him that they are only cheap because the company makes money by selling guns to African warlords. Before long he will get frustrated.

# ? Jan 28, 2014 15:56

amanasleep: May 21, 2008

Miss-Bomarc posted:

"I think the Jews made 9/11 happen!"
"If that's true there will be global apocalypse, agreed?"
"Uh, yeah!"
"Okay, for global apocalypse you better have some pretty damning evidence. Prove it."
"(.txt)"
"I remain unconvinced. Do you have any other evidence? Can you prove this?"
"No, I can't prove it, because the reasons you think they didn't are--"
"Well, there you are then! You can't prove I'm wrong!"

Fixed that for you.

# ? Jan 28, 2014 16:16

E-Tank: Aug 4, 2011

Miss-Bomarc posted:

My father-in-law is exactly this sort of person. He figures that if you can't immediately slap down a fully-detailed study with extensive sources showing that what he said was wrong, then he's right--and even if you did somehow have such a study, then clearly they're funded by Monsanto or Al Gore or the Israelis or whoever and so the study's fake.

Show him this website, and hopefully enlighten him unto the logical fallacy known as Burden of Proof.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

# ? Jan 28, 2014 18:09

withak: Jan 15, 2003; Fun Shoe

You can't reason someone out of a position that they didn't reason themselves into.

# ? Jan 28, 2014 19:06

Silver2195: Apr 4, 2012

withak posted:

You can't reason someone out of a position that they didn't reason themselves into.

This is a popular cliche around here, but I don't really believe that. People can be reasoned out of beliefs they hold for irrational reasons, just not always and almost never in one conversation.

# ? Jan 28, 2014 21:19

DesperateDan: Dec 10, 2005; Where's my cow?

Is that my cow?

No it isn't, but it still tramples my bloody lavender.

Silver2195 posted:

This is a popular cliche around here, but I don't really believe that. People can be reasoned out of beliefs they hold for irrational reasons, just not always and almost never in one conversation.

When you ~~troll~~ debate conspiracy loons, you never hope to convert or persuade the one you are talking to, it's too confrontational, people don't want to back down. You might, however, plant seeds of doubt in the ones watching from the sidelines, and persuade those on the fence into sanity-ville. It's why, beyond the simple pleasures of trolling aspect, beyond the exercising your own reasoning, arguing with the afflicted is a good idea.

DesperateDan fucked around with this message at 00:04 on Jan 29, 2014

# ? Jan 29, 2014 00:02

fuck off Batman: Oct 14, 2013; Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah!

DesperateDan posted:

When you ~~troll~~ debate conspiracy loons, you never hope to convert or persuade the one you are talking to, it's too confrontational, people don't want to back down. You might, however, plant seeds of doubt in the ones watching from the sidelines, and persuade those on the fence into sanity-ville. It's why, beyond the simple pleasures of trolling aspect, beyond the exercising your own reasoning, arguing with the afflicted is a good idea.

Don't troll them. If you do, chances of them seeing reason becomes null. Silver2195 is right.

# ? Jan 29, 2014 00:48

Evil Fluffy: Jul 13, 2009; Scholars are some of the most pompous and pedantic people I've ever had the joy of meeting.

twistedmentat posted:

Along wish porn, the simpsons and anime, Conspiracy Theories were among the first big things on the internet. It's not too hard to imagine that the wingnut class saw "There's this thing that exists were I can say whatever I want AND everyone in the world could possibly see it? Finally, the evidence I collected that Bill Clinton has Angel wings for lunch will be seen!!!!"

I remember sites like Shoutwire (I forget what torrent site it was always part of) and Digg were just full of that poo poo. Loose Change is a masterpiece of cinema compared to the utter insanity that filled these sites.

# ? Jan 29, 2014 01:01

twistedmentat: Nov 21, 2003; Its my party
and I'll die if
I want to

Evil Fluffy posted:

I remember sites like Shoutwire (I forget what torrent site it was always part of) and Digg were just full of that poo poo. Loose Change is a masterpiece of cinema compared to the utter insanity that filled these sites.

Youtube is where they all live now. I love looking at the LIZARDMAN PROOF videos. Or ones that prove demons are real with a slideshow of bible quotes, images taken from RPGs and fantasy stuff, pictures of people with tattoos and piercings.

yep, that dude with the horns and puzzle pieces tattoo all over his body is sure proof of demons. There's also a good Illuminati proof series that looks at pictures of famous and powerful people and looks for triangles by them.

The more I think about that interview with the ancient languages expert I listened to a few weeks ago, the more I realize that the whole "the ancients didn't have a way to describe aliens and spaceships" argument doesn't hold up. I'm 100% sure the words silver, disk and flying exist in the majority of languages spoken by people who wrote down stories and myths.

My raw milk friend got into a fight on FB with people who i guess he's befriended through raw milking about vaccines. He posted something about how they work, and some raw milkers, who are also anti-vax took issue with him, and started calling him a plant and asking how he can support good science like raw milk, but bad science like vaccines. He then made some crack about them being truthers too and whoo boy, that exploded. It was pretty funny to watch. I don't think my friend honestly realized how deep the rabbit hole goes, he is just a health nut (to his credit, he was 45 and weighting nearly 350lbs and then went crazy healthy and lost nearly 150lbs, which at that age is amazing).

# ? Jan 29, 2014 01:31

America Inc.: Nov 22, 2013; I plan to live forever, of course, but barring that I'd settle for a couple thousand years. Even 500 would be pretty nice.

duck monster posted:

Yeah, conspiracy theories are a big part of why I don't have as optimistic a view of the internets influence on society as most. This bloody websites motto somewhat aptly sums up my view of the net, actually.

And I say that as a person who's devoted a major chunk of my adult life to the loving thing. The Net has fed me, clothed me, entertained me, kept me in contact with disparate social circles and let me shoot people from reddit in imaginary spaceships. But I still am not entirely convinced its going to be a net positive for humanity if certain political trends continue. I'm not sure it wont be a net positive either. I just don't know, but I find the continuing spread conspiracy theory deeply unnerving. It may well be the worlds fastest growing religion, to be a bit hyperbolic.

I believe this might be a separate topic but doesn't the Internet merely facilitate what was already being spread? The Internet is only a tool; if humans are so caught up in superstitious ways of thinking then modern conspiracy theories would have slowly eked their way around the world anyway. The Internet is also a fantastically efficient tool for bringing more scientific modes of thinking to mass audiences. Like the printing press, radio, and TV, the Internet is merely a reflection of the physical institutions that surround it. Change those institutions and you change the structure of the web.
Would you argue that the printing press and radio made people more ignorant and superstitious? Or are the eras in which these technologies arose, and the format of the medium itself, too different to use for comparison with the Internet?

America Inc. fucked around with this message at 13:44 on Jan 29, 2014

# ? Jan 29, 2014 13:41

Alec Bald Snatch: Sep 12, 2012; by exmarx

Direct mail probably had more of an impact on propagating conspiracy theories. It's basically how Ron Paul made a living for decades.

# ? Jan 29, 2014 14:53

duck monster: Dec 15, 2004

comes along bort posted:

Direct mail probably had more of an impact on propagating conspiracy theories. It's basically how Ron Paul made a living for decades.

More than the internet? I highly doubt that.

# ? Jan 30, 2014 03:10

twistedmentat: Nov 21, 2003; Its my party
and I'll die if
I want to

Direct mail was pretty popular among the right wing nutbars in the 80s and 90s before the internet was available, but I really doubt direct mail did anything but keep the flame alive. No matter how many "Whites are superior and gold is good" pamphlets Ron Paul put his name on (but had nothing to do with) he mailed out to people in cabins it would never have the impact as one lovely geocities webpage.

# ? Jan 30, 2014 03:32

Chamale: Jul 11, 2010; I'm helping!

I think a key factor in the Internet is that someone with the beginnings of a belief in conspiracy theories can easily find large communities dedicated to espousing those theories. At some point a conspiracy theorist is a member of the community, and someone debunking conspiracy theories is attacking the conspiracy community itself.

# ? Jan 30, 2014 04:01

Rime: Nov 2, 2011; by Games Forum

AATREK CURES KIDS posted:

I think a key factor in the Internet is that someone with the beginnings of a belief in conspiracy theories can easily find large communities dedicated to espousing those theories. At some point a conspiracy theorist is a member of the community, and someone debunking conspiracy theories is attacking the conspiracy community itself.

This, and it's especially dangerous for teenagers. I discovered the whole "conspiracy underground" when I was in highschool and it sucked me in for years. Was a moderator on ATS and lost a whole lot of friends because I definitely devolved to lunatic levels around the age of 18. Finally woke up and kicked the habit, and now I'm just overly concerned about the Internet and its effect on unstable individuals.

I mean, not just with conspiracies, there's a reinforcing community out there for literally anything you can think of. Believe you spontaneously generate wires under your skin? There's a forum out there full of other people willing to support your belief that the government is out to kill you, and it's only a click away.

# ? Jan 30, 2014 05:42

ReV VAdAUL: Oct 3, 2004; I'm WILD about
WILDMAN

Evil Fluffy posted:

I remember sites like Shoutwire (I forget what torrent site it was always part of) and Digg were just full of that poo poo. Loose Change is a masterpiece of cinema compared to the utter insanity that filled these sites.

Ironically digg was the victim of a right wing conspiracy: http://www.alternet.org/story/147765/a_vast_right-wing_digg_conspiracy_expose_shows_journolist_scandal_to_be_a_lot_of_conservative_hot_air

# ? Jan 30, 2014 07:31

Thomas13206: Jun 18, 2013

twistedmentat posted:

Youtube is where they all live now. I love looking at the LIZARDMAN PROOF videos. Or ones that prove demons are real with a slideshow of bible quotes, images taken from RPGs and fantasy stuff, pictures of people with tattoos and piercings.

yep, that dude with the horns and puzzle pieces tattoo all over his body is sure proof of demons. There's also a good Illuminati proof series that looks at pictures of famous and powerful people and looks for triangles by them.

Please post some of these!

# ? Jan 30, 2014 08:13

twistedmentat: Nov 21, 2003; Its my party
and I'll die if
I want to

pd187 posted:

Please post some of these!

Here's a couple I found quickly on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI7ZR_4nJxs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8meA6WMsXrg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh5XolWxLn4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiTezfoev9c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnZ7vSDQaOQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEz--2U5XK0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3IR4nw6p9U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50ZedImnF0c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVoRFHqMDMQ

Sorry, I didn't do them in any order. But with the Lizard people videos, there is a bunch of unifying features; they all feature a tv screen being recorded, not raw footage. Its clear to anyone who has used modern digital cable that all the so called shape shifting is just the kind of static you get because most cable providers are lovely and their signals get messed up. And for the lizard eyes, there's actually something that is known by anyone who does studio lighting.

Blame it on Outerspace called this kind of stuff Fat Guy Journalism because the producers are almost always fat guys. Also, if you're making loving youtube videos that are nothing more than strung together clips, GIS images and bible quotes, you're not a Director nor a Producer.

I don't think any are the "lizard SS agent" because its so loving stupid.

# ? Jan 30, 2014 10:28

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 17:17

Fuck You And Diebold: Sep 15, 2004; by Athanatos

Fake snow! :supaburn:

# ? Jan 30, 2014 18:59

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > 9/11 Trutherism and what I just can't figure out about the conspiracy crowd

«‹›236 »