Post by stratogustav on Sept 9, 2018 4:11:28 GMT
My point is that people have agendas, and agendas come in many different forms and motivations. They can be political, monetary or for attention, which is sometimes followed by $$$
My theory, about the Beatles theory, is that they created the 'Paul is Dead' theory to manipulate the public into buying more of their stuff.
Besides that, the sexual harassment claim against Julian Assange (Wikileaks) was clearly politically motivated because he leaked things not meant for the eyes of the public. False accusations are a good way to hurt peoples' credibility.
Then, TJ Kirk became the 'Amazing Atheist' and began a crusade against religion because a priest molested him.
Finally, Anita Sarkeesian, who said: "everything is sexist, everything is racist, everything is homophobic, and you have to point it all out to everyone all the time." Why would you want to live like that all your life? You'd have to be either addicted to drama or...maybe her agenda is not about respect for women, but stirring people up for $$$! From a 'Tropes vs Women' that looks like it cost way less that what she received on Kickstarter (that money was mainly house bricks), to faking death threats, she's a con artist. I believe her main goal is to tap into a market of outrage.
Dan Brown/Da Vinci Code author wrote a good story about an ancient conspiracy and marketed a good chunk of it as 'fact'. It sold a lot. James Cameron tried to jump on the bandwagon and claimed he found the secret tomb of Jesus and Mary Magdalene.
In conclusion: sometimes, people are truthful, but sometimes, people are taking the piss out of you.
The public likes to thinks it's woke, but it's still suspectible to the crap the media churns out, because sorting the wisdom from the bullshit is a too much work.
You'l have to excuse me if I've become cynical in my older years.
You didn't understand my point though.
All those things you mentioned are completely unrelated to each other, or to what we were talking about, so even if they are all false they don't belong in the same conversation.
People should be smart enough to understand case by case scenarios. Not everything is black and white, in fact most things are grey.
Also people need to understand that just because a piece of information is wrong does not mean the rest of the information is false too. Mixed truths are very common in any kind of topic.
Take for example what you said about Dan Brown. A lot of the references he used were misguided, completely false, or misinterpreted by him. However it doesn't mean his suspicions were false. Even if his sole intention was to make money, it still doesn't mean he was entirely wrong.
For example he mentioned the Dead Sea Scrolls as a reference, that don't even talk about Jesus at all. However the Nag Hammadi library confirms those very things he was attributing to the Dead Sea Scrolls, and he didn't even mentioned those.
And again, that has absolutely nothing to do with what we were talking about. What we were talking about doesn't even classify as conspiracy theory.
For example I gave you some information disclosed by the CIA on an official goverment site. A conspiracy theory is the opposite of that, and usually refers to the things they deny, or that they don't want to tell you.
The same goes with stories from our ancestors. Those are stories from our ancestors, and do not relate at all to The Beatles, or Edward Snowden, or Julian Assange, etc..
Also how can a ancient stories told by our ancestors on walls be considered conspiracy theories? They are just stories, regardless of whether they are true or false. We have to be reasonable enough to understand that difference.