2 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

Works the same as in every stock market crash. Many Frauds etc.
MILLIONS of intelligent experts all agree on something furiously - then it all turns to be <deleted>.
Too many examples to mention.

"...It's what you believe to be true that just isn't so"

GL!

Agreeing on something and working on something for years is quite different.

Anyone the actually believes the Apollo program was fake is delusional, or just stupid.

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

One engineer would easily develop a crate of documents a year, thousands of engineers, and the program lasted ten years. 22,000

Private companies and universities each of which generated crates of documents

720 is nothing

Wind-up

Wonder where all the documentation/evidence got to?

My appols; it was 720 thousand crates.

Just now, Stiddle Mump said:

Wonder where all the documentation/evidence got to?

My appols; it was 720 thousand crates.

Sure it was

Just now, Yellowtail said:

Agreeing on something and working on something for years is quite different.

Disingenuous.

Multi Billion $ corporations are Public so have to publish their accounts etc and do investor calls etc to Wall Street etc. Thousands of outside experts checking their numbers on behalf of millions of investors. Working on this stuff FOR YEARS.
Maybe watch the videos provided to undertsand rather than arguing the toss for some attention.
All of those examples involve the top experts in their fields - sCiEnTisTs etc. - who were just plain fooled.

Millions working on and checking the data and then it ALL turns out to be a fraud.

Your question: Why did no one noice and/or say anything?
Either Consiracists/perpetrating the fraud, on the payroll and trapped in the fraud/lie, too compartmentalised to see the big picture (many) or in the vast majority of cases just outright NPCs.
I made an exception to explain this to you in good faith but won't explain more as I think u may be an NPC.
Sorry but not really : )

Honestly, get yer booster!
Or don't - up to u!

Edited August 22Aug 22 by Tourist2

5 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

Disingenuous.

Multi Billion $ corporations are Public so have to publish their accounts etc and do investor calls etc to Wall Street etc. Thousands of outside experts checking their numbers on behalf of millions of investors. Working on this stuff FOR YEARS.
Maybe watch the videos provided to undertsand rather than arguing the toss for some attention.
All of those examples involve the top experts in their fields - sCiEnTisTs etc. - who were just plain fooled.

Millions working on and checking the data and then it ALL turns out to be a fraud.

Your question: Why did no one noice and/or say anything?
Either Consiracists/perpetrating the fraud, on the payroll and trapped in the fraud/liecor, too compartmentalised to see the big picture (many) or in the vast majority of cases just outright NPCs.
I made an exception to explain this to you in good faith but won't explain more as I think u may be an NPC.
Sorry but not really : )

Honestly, get yer booster!

This was from 1960-1972, and it was NASA, not a muti-billion-dollar corporation

You already told your lame booster joke.

4 hours ago, kwilco said:

The OP asked why there are so many conspiracy theorists,

It's because real/thinking people are not limited to 5 newspapers and 3 channels in terms of news sources anymore. They are harder to fool and, with the internet and tools to help decipher information freely available they can check things.

They also now know that Saddam did NOT have WMDs, coldvid (if you believe it wasn't simply cold/flu rebranded) was massively hyped, and that 2 planes cannot knock down 3 concrete and stell building etc etc etc etc.

In short they know the media, politicians and corporations con-spire and lie to them ALL THE <deleted> TIME.

4 hours ago, kwilco said:

and what can be done about it.

 

Stop the lying media, politicians and corporations etc.
This is done by so-called conspiracy theorists - checking people's work.

Short-sellers in the stock market are my favourite conspiracy theorists.
They see the lie, and make millions - even billions - as in Michael Burry's case for exposing the lie and bringing the truth to light.

Truth tellers are often hated though (“A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his own family” (Matthew 13:57):

12 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

This was from 1960-1972, and it was NASA, not a muti-billion-dollar corporation

Millions working on and checking the data and then it ALL turns out to be a fraud.
Happens in the private sector where people are paid to check all of the numbers for large investors.

As I said before though, youre old (less flexible thinking and ability / energy to think) and it doesn't really matter what you think anymore.

I for one don't care anyway.

Anyway you've earned a place on my ignore list (with the rest of the retarded, argumentative, attention seekers). Well done - you deserve it!

4 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

Millions working on and checking the data and then it ALL turns out to be a fraud.
Happens in the private sector where people are paid to check all of the numbers for large investors.

As I said before though, youre old (less flexible thinking and ability / energy to think) and it doesn't really matter what you think anymore.

I for one don't care anyway.

Anyway you've earned a place on my ignore list (with the rest of the retarded, argumentative, attention seekers). Well done - you deserve it!

It does not happen in the private sector,

You can't answer a simple question, so you put me on ignore.

Go with God brother

5 hours ago, kwilco said:

The second part of the OP—what can we actually do about it?—has received even less attention.

Can you define who "we" are?

14 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Sure it was

Anyway, it was mostly stored in a Maryland - although more was stored in Texas - warehouse 50 x 35 metres wide. By all accounts it was getting onto head high at the edges. And it all disappeared.

The records, of perhaps man's greatest achievements, and it seems like the documentation was taken away and destroyed. But not all. The film reels were overwritten to save some money. Real shame that. Must have been the Russians. Or the Iranians.

15 hours ago, johng said:

It was used to ramp up cases to drive fear and compliance.

Nope it was ysed to identify exposed people and seoarate them for better containment. Granted it was taken a bit too far in some instance by some countries but the intent was the same.

13 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Too much belief in the white-coats and MSM for you Sir.

No such thing as a covid virus. All made up.

Well after 25 years working in the medical industry i would say your statement is clueless unless you can show proof your just an empty talking head

On 8/18/2026 at 9:47 AM, Yellowtail said:

No, he said is was AI assisted. Is that not true?

Yes they are he just wouldnt answer directly. Nothing wrong with AI assisted writing. Deflecting away is the strange part.

Comments that are littered with em dashes are usually assisted by or written by AI.

On 8/23/2026 at 3:19 AM, blaze master said:

Yes they are he just wouldnt answer directly. Nothing wrong with AI assisted writing. Deflecting away is the strange part.

Comments that are littered with em dashes are usually assisted by or written by AI.

"AI-assisted" is not the same as "entirely written by AI". There is nothing wrong with people using AI to proofread their texts. But entering "please refute this argument" (and pasting the post one wishes to reply to) as an AI prompt before copy-pasting the result as if it was one's own work is preposterous. Those who do it aren't usually the sharpest tools in the box and they would probably last no more than half a second in a live, unassisted debate.

Edited August 24Aug 24 by rattlesnake

4 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

"AI-assisted" is not the same as "entirely written by AI". There is nothing wrong with people using AI to proofread their texts. But entering "please refute this argument" (and pasting the post one wishes to reply to) as an AI prompt before copy-pasting the result as if it was one's own work is preposterous. Those who do it aren't usually the sharpest tools in the box and they would probably last no more than half a second in a live, unassisted debate.

Gonna be difficult going forward telling the difference. I've already experienced replies to my posts that are almost identical to an AI passage. But not quite; a couple of words different.

AI, is most commonly being used in order to shoot the messenger. I recently put a link up to 'Dissolving Illusions' a very good read on health. The posts that followed were dozens of words saying what rubbish it was. AI all over.

I quite like AI. Better than using Goodgirl.

41 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

"AI-assisted" is not the same as "entirely written by AI". There is nothing wrong with people using AI to proofread their texts

Yes and I said this. I just find it extremely lazy and weak.

My opinion.

1 hour ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Gonna be difficult going forward telling the difference.

So far, I don't find it difficult at all to identify AI-written text, there are clear markers. But yes, the more people "feed the beast", the more convincing the simulation will be.

On 8/24/2026 at 3:47 PM, rattlesnake said:

the more people "feed the beast", the more convincing the simulation will be.

Not sure - it may start eating it's own slop and devolve.

Problem is, if everyone starts relying on it to do all of the heavy lifting the average ability to calculate, think, express thoughts and ideas etc. will drop even lower than it already has. A sign of this development is shop assistants (in the UK at least) struggling with coins and basic addition and subtraction. Lord knows what they were doing in maths classes.

6 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

Not sure - it may start eating it's own slop and devolve.

Problem is, if everyone starts relying on it to do all of the heavy lifting the average ability to calculate, think, express thoughts and ideas etc. will drop even lower than it already has. A sign of this development is shop assistants (in the UK at least) struggling with coins and basic addition and subtraction. Lord knows what they were doing in maths classes.

I agree, I don't see it leading to anything else than a general drop in intellectual performance. Unfortunate consequence… or all by design?

On 8/24/2026 at 8:05 PM, Stiddle Mump said:

AI, is most commonly being used in order to shoot the messenger.

This is the euphemism that numbskulls use when their 'proof' and/or reasoning is shown to be nonsense. I guess it sort of works with the dimmest of the dim.

Edited August 26Aug 26 by gamb00ler

10 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

I agree, I don't see it leading to anything else than a general drop in intellectual performance. Unfortunate consequence… or all by design?

All by design imo - just as schooling was introduced by Rockefeller inc etc to replace education.
Why? Cos morons are much easier to manage.

Edited August 26Aug 26 by Tourist2

On 8/24/2026 at 12:55 PM, kwilco said:

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/d0/c9/5d/d0c95dac8a849139472a76e4df6c3826.jpg

A skeptic might rightfully reply that the earth is disc-shaped ...

or even a half-sphere ...

But here's the killer skeptic question: What does the turtle stand on? If the answer comes back, "The turtle doesn't need to stand on anything," then the next questions are, "Why do the elephants need to stand on the turtle or the Earth rest on the elephants?" If the turtle can exist without a support platform, why can't the elephants or Earth do the same?

Occam's Razor is a very useful tool in discussing both metaphysics and co,spiracy theories!

Edited August 26Aug 26 by Evil Penevil

21 hours ago, Evil Penevil said:

A skeptic might rightfully reply that the earth is disc-shaped ...

or even a half-sphere ...

But here's the killer skeptic question: What does the turtle stand on? If the answer comes back, "The turtle doesn't need to stand on anything," then the next questions are, "Why do the elephants need to stand on the turtle or the Earth rest on the elephants?" If the turtle can exist without a support platform, why can't the elephants or Earth do the same?

Occam's Razor is a very useful tool in discussing both metaphysics and co,spiracy theories!

Occams Razor: Iraq dEfINIteLy has WMD cos my TV programming channels said so.
Why would they lie?

Tourist2 Razor: Politicians and the media lie about everything important all of the time.

Mine's better IRL (living as a retiree in Thailand / on AN don't count as real life - u guys are living in the dream - or nightmare).

Let's not forget the title of the thread – it's not about conspiracy theories; it's about the THEORISTS and what to do about them discussion of a theory is actually off topic in most cases.....

I've just read a couple of articles offering advice on how to deal with conspiracy theorists.

The recommended approach is remarkably civilised.

Be patient.

Be empathetic.

Don't ridicule them.

Ask questions.

Find common ground.

Understand their concerns.

Examine their sources.

Challenge the evidence.

Don't expect to change their minds.

In other words, apparently when someone arrives announcing that Big Pharma, governments, the WHO, the media, billionaires, scientists and probably the bloke who delivers the newspapers are all part of one enormous plot, we're supposed to respond like a kindly therapist.

“And how does that make you feel?”

We're advised to ask:

“What evidence would convince you that you're wrong?”

This is particularly entertaining because, with the committed conspiracy theorist, the answer is usually:

Nothing.

That's because conspiracy thinking comes with its own beautifully constructed escape hatch.

No evidence?

They're hiding it.

Evidence against it?

That's what they want you to believe.

Scientists disagree?

They're bought.

Scientists agree?

They're all in on it.

Fact-checker debunks it?

Paid shill.

Government denies it?

Confirmation of the cover-up.

You produce 47 independent sources?

“Do your own research.”

And if you ask for their evidence?

YouTube link.

At this point you've discovered the remarkable intellectual advantage of the conspiracy theory:

It cannot lose. - Reality can contradict it endlessly and somehow the conspiracy emerges stronger. - But here's the bit apparently being missed in this thread.

The subject isn't conspiracy theories.

It's CONSPIRACY THEORISTS.

That's quite an important distinction.

A theory is a proposition that can be tested against evidence.

A theorist is the person who constructs, promotes and defends the proposition.

And that distinction matters because we've already seen many of the standard techniques on display:

Cherry-picking.

Only the convenient evidence gets invited to the party.

Gish galloping.

Throw 25 claims into one post and demand that somebody else spend three hours debunking them.

Moving the goalposts.

Refute claim A, and suddenly we're discussing B, C and something somebody said on YouTube in 2017.

Appeal to authority.

“Doctor X says…” — conveniently omitting that Doctor X is a retired dentist discussing virology on Facebook.

False equivalence.

One dissenting opinion is supposedly worth the same as decades of accumulated evidence.

Just asking questions.

Not actually making an argument, merely spraying insinuations everywhere and expecting someone else to disprove them.

The Gish gallop's more paranoid cousin:

“Have you looked into...?”

Followed by a list longer than a Thai visa application.

And then there's the ultimate trump card:

“You can't prove I'm wrong.”

No.

That's not how this works. - The person making the extraordinary claim has the responsibility to provide the evidence.

Otherwise I can announce that invisible purple elephants control the Bank of Thailand and demand that you prove they don't.

And if you fail?

Congratulations.

Purple elephants confirmed.

And here's the really fascinating part. - Conspiracy theorists frequently describe themselves as independent thinkers.

They are questioning everything.

They don't blindly follow the crowd.

They have done their research.

They are asking questions nobody else dares to ask.

Yet somehow thousands of people who have never met each other manage to arrive at exactly the same conclusions, using exactly the same YouTube videos, memes, dubious websites and recycled Facebook screenshots.

That's not independent thinking. - That's a subscription service.

And anyone who challenges it is immediately labelled a:

“sheeple”

“NPC”

“leftie”

“mainstream media puppet”

“pharma shill”

“government stooge”

Apparently the great independent thinkers have a remarkably comprehensive collection of pre-packaged insults.

So what should we actually do?

The academic answer is:

Remain calm. Be patient. Encourage critical thinking. Establish common ground. Don't mock.

Fine.

Try that.

But there comes a point where repeatedly explaining evidence to somebody who has already decided that evidence is part of the conspiracy becomes less like debate and more like feeding a slot machine that only accepts goalposts.

At that point, perhaps the most appropriate response isn't another 3,000-word explanation.

Perhaps it's simply:

“No. You made the claim. You provide the evidence.”

And if they respond with another 17 links, three screenshots, a video from an anonymous bloke in his garage and the immortal words “WAKE UP!”...

Then perhaps we should finally take the advice of neither science nor psychology.

Perhaps we should resort to the ancient and remarkably effective human tradition of taking the piss.

Because if someone repeatedly substitutes paranoia for evidence, treats ignorance as enlightenment and interprets every contradiction as proof that they're right.. Continuous, merciless ridicule may not change their mind — but it might at least make everyone else less inclined to take them seriously.

And frankly, after reading some of the contributions to this thread...

the material is practically writing itself.

Off topic deflection post removed.

Pigeon chess – ethos and pathos – this explains the mindset of a conspiracy theorist so well, and of course the problems of debating with one...

Yet another explanation of conspiracy theorists – if you see yourself, it's time to review your life...

4 hours ago, kwilco said:

Yet another explanation of conspiracy theorists – if you see yourself, it's time to review your life...

People do need to question the official narratives for sure.

The biggest problem facing the world - especially in the west - is apathy and ignorance. And that suits the deep state.

A look at all the so called conspiracy theories that were shown to be true is in order.

2 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

People do need to question the official narratives for sure.

The biggest problem facing the world - especially in the west - is apathy and ignorance. And that suits the deep state.

A look at all the so called conspiracy theories that were shown to be true is in order.

Insightful video.

Basically losers trying to feel special.

I also think the social media algorithms reinforce the fantasies.

6 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

Insightful video.

Basically losers trying to feel special.

I also think the social media algorithms reinforce the fantasies.

Why should it be that anyone challenging the 'official' narrative is a CT?

For me, there are many 'truths' that are anything but. Is it wrong, or foolish, to think that we are not being told the truth, or that evidence is being omitted?