The World Trade Center buildings were brought down by terrorists who crashed planes into them.
A dozen humans have walked on the Moon, starting in 1969.
Kennedy’s assassination and the WTC attacks were kicks in the gut. In Kennedy’s case, I can understand the confusion. But it was proved almost 20 years ago that there was no need for a ‘magic bullet’, and that Oswald acted alone. The WTC attacks were so devastating that many people find it hard to believe that the buildings could be destroyed by a bunch of fanatics with a simple plan. If only they ignore the evidence and the physics, they are safe from terrorist attacks. They only have to worry about the government. But somehow it’s more comforting that a massive conspiracy involving thousands of people is required to commit such an atrocity, then it is to believe that people who want to kill you, will.
Moon Hoax Believers? Oy… As a pilot, one-time Defense worker, and space- and aviation history buff, it’s beyond comprehension that people believe we didn’t visit the Moon. Even after being shown the science, even after how each and every bit of ‘evidence’ they bring up to disprove the landings has been shown to be incorrect, even after having it carefully and meticulously explained how it was done, even after having been shown that their theories are ludicrous, they still insist it didn’t happen.
IMO these people are either deliberately obtuse, willfully ignorant, or completely mental.
Because normally, NORAD is just champing at the bit for a chance to jump into action and shoot down unarmed planes filled with hundreds of innocent civilians, and do so upon the slightest chance of trouble.
And this is a prime example of the kind of blithe ignorance that feeds conspiracy theorists; they take some alleged discrepancy that they really don’t understand and spin it out as evidence that the “official story” is a cover for some highly concealed international cabal run by a select group of Yale graduates.
For the record, NORAD is tasked with defense of the United States against strategic attacks from outside the nation. It’s primary tools and areas of operation are against intercontinental ballistic missiles and strategic bombers issuing from Eastern Europe and Asia. In the post Cold War world, this extended to surveillance of aircraft suspected in transporting drugs or weapons across the United States boarder. Since the American Airlines and United Airlines flights hijacked and used in the attacks originated and terminated within the borders of the United States, they were not within the immediate purview of NORAD, and there was no particular reason, prior to the impact of AA Flight 11 into 1WTC, for NORAD to identify anything as being out of the ordinary.
Next up: how Jet A fuel, with an autoignition temperature of 210°C, could melt steel beams with a structural failure temperature of around 700°C. Hint: the heat produced by the combustion doesn’t just magically disappear.
Not that I disagree with you, but what’s the difference between being deliberately obtuse and wilfully ignorant?
Other common motivations behind stubborn adherence to debunked conspiracy theories include deficient critical thinking skills, ego-tripping (I know so much more than the common run of sheeple) and bigotry (I hate X, therefore I gravitate to theories that X was behind it).
Someone who is deliberately obtuse (as I used it in my post) knows full-well the facts, but insists on being contrary. Trolling, if you will. Someone who is willfully ignorant refuses the evidence and actually believes the nonsense.
There’s a sense that big, history-altering events must have big causes. If none are immediately obvious, there must have been some big secret cause that needs to be uncovered, instead of simply accepting that sometimes shit just happens.
Take the near assassination of Reagan. I’ve never heard any theory that speculated John Hinckley was anything other than a lone nutjob trying to impress Jodi Foster. I suppose if I google it which I’m not going to do at the moment I might find something. But if it’s out there, it certainly isn’t getting hour-long state-of-the-hoax documentaries like Oswald’s on TLC on a regular basis. That’s likely because he didn’t manage to succeed, and he didn’t alter history in an easily appreciable way. He COULD have, he ALMOST did; an inch or two’s difference in the placement of the bullet might have killed Reagan, and if it had, it’s likely that there’d be all sorts of websites now dedicated to figuring out whose patsy he really was. You never hear about the underground effort to UNCOVER the TRUTH about CIA INVOLVEMENT in the staging of an unsuccessful assassination attempt because nobody cares. It wasn’t a historically big event, ergo it didn’t need a big cause. I seriously don’t think the accepted explanation about Hinckley would have gone unexamined by people as nutty as he is, if Reagan had died.
Regarding the moon hoax people, well, I can’t really tell what their problem is. I think it starts with a distrust of government, and perhaps the sense that the problem of space travel is just too hard for them to understand, therefore *nobody *could possibly understand it, and somehow a huge government+NASA+mass media-wide conspiracy to make the whole world think they landed people on the moon is more feasible than, you know, landing people on the moon, which is just not possible.
A spacecraft isn’t all that different from an airplane in many respects. And yet they believe in airplanes, even if they don’t know Bernoulli from bat’s piss.
I suspect the difference is that airplanes fly every day and for a not unreasonable amount of money you can go and fly on one yourself, while putting men on the moon is something we did a handful of times some 40 years ago and never since, and couldn’t do now without a massive reinvestment of money and time.
At first glance this seems stupid. I mean why can’t something go a bit faster? Of course if you spend a couple of hours with a good physics book it makes sense
But if you’re not willing to invest those hours to learn WHY light acts in this manner it will always seem “off” to you.
Oh the joys of the early Internet. I used to love reading Conspiracy Theories as entertainment.
I particularly liked the ones about all the missing children in the USA being kidnapped to feed aliens in secret underground bases.
Foreign troops going to take over the USA, guided by strange reflective strips on the backs of road signs.
The Juxtaposition of the “we never landed on the moon” crowd versus the crowd that insists that we have secret space ships and bases on the moon and Mars.
But as far as the Moon thing, that just falls into the “I’m not bright enough to figure out how it was done, so it has to either be a lie, or aliens did it” category of Human Denial. Right up there with Stonehenge and the Pyramids.
