The ascent of Abstract Expressionist Art was largely due to CIA intervention.
Fails the “too many cooks” test, but I’ve always been partial to the idea that Norton, McAfee, etc write viruses to help promote need for their products.
That the Rosenbergs were completely innocent, but were scapegoated, because the US government didn’t want its citizens to know that the USSR was capable of coming up with the ability to make nuclear weapons all on its own. I know lots of people who believe we landed on the moon, that Oswald acted alone, and have known since the beginning that Andrew Wakefield was a crook, who think the Rosenbergs are completely innocent.
I had barely heard of this controversy*, much less it being described as a conspiracy. I am puzzled how a feud between the Smithsonian and Orville Wright over the Smithsonian’s boosting Langley as the pioneer of powered flight could somehow have morphed into a conspiracy to deny the claims of Gustave Whitehead.
If we’re to buy into a Smithsonian conspiracy to deny Whitehead, it looks as if Scientific American and the Royal Aeronautical Society (among others) are in on it, too.**
*an indication of how deep the coverup goes?
**along with the states of Ohio and North Carolina.
And superior special FX which simply didn’t exist back then.
Michael Jordan served a secret suspension from the NBA for gambling during the time he went to play baseball.
Not ridiculously unbelievable, it only required a few people to be in on it: Jordan, his agent, NBA commissioner’s office, and a couple executives from the Chicago Bulls.
It’s somewhat similar to when a high ranking executive suddenly resigns at a large company, there’s always a rumor mill, but the truth is usually only known by a few people.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The JFK conspiracy I have heard that makes a lot of sense to me is the cover-up was not Russians or the CIA but rather in the confusion after Oswald fired, a Secret Service agent’s gun went off accidentally killing JFK and that is what is being covered up. It fits many of the fact and explains the “Magic Bullet” and other inconsistencies in the event.
I have always believed this. :o
I also believe that Sarah Palin’s youngest “son” is actually the offspring of her oldest son and an unidentified girlfriend.
I don’t believe that theory at all but at least it is not obviously absurd.
The US government also managed to fake up some KGB files?
LBJ and Hoover were accessories after the fact in the JFK hit. This is NOT to say they were part of any conspiracy to clip JFK, but rather that they had their own reasons for covering up. In LBJ’s case, it was to prevent incrimination of the USSR, likely leading to pressure for war. In Hoover’s case, the FBI certainly knew more than they let on, so covering up prevented exposure of their failure to act (or at least, the appearance of such a failure).
Never to be proven, but at least plausible: Mr. Christ made a deal with the Romans to leave the country. Why would he have done so? Because they threatened his wife Mary and any children they might have had. Someone else was crucified, and either no one was buried, or Christian zealots reported no one in the grave, establishing the ultimate in “fake news.” JC and family subsequently took a slow boat to Japan and spread the Word there…
That seems unlikely to me. The point of suspending a player is to demonstrate you’re enforcing the rules of the sport. Suspending a player in secret doesn’t send that message.
If people were going to collude to protect Jordan’s reputation, the simplest way of doing that would have been to let him play.
I didn’t say I believed it. Also, when it was at its height, no one in the US had access to the KGB files.
I’ve just never understood this idea that Shakespeare didn’t write Shakespeare. He was reasonably well educated for the time and came from a fairly affluent middle class family. His life is pretty well documented compared to many of his contemporaries. It’s no theory that Shakespeare the Stratford guy was in the theatre in London.
Why does his work have to be written by some secret Lord? It’s like people imagining Robin Hood was some disavowed Earl’s son.
JFK for me, too. I absolutely believe Oswald did it and acted alone- the official story, in other words- but I can see where a conspiracy theory came from.
This is what I think, too, but I think the reason for not doing an initial thorough investigation, or possibly destroying evidence (if this happened), wasn’t to protect reputations. I think once it was found that Oswald had been to the USSR, the possibility loomed large in those Cold War minds that the Soviets were behind the assassination. If it was, in fact, confirmed that the Soviets had killed the POTUS, it would have been World War III, nuclear Armageddon, etc. Good reason to just hastily close the book, with the side effect of looking a lot like a conspiracy theory.
How about one of the biggest conspiracies in the world, which is not only plausible but actually true.
Hundreds of millions (billions?) of people in the US and around the world consciously conspiring to keep the truth from those not in the know, even to the point of fabricating evidence. Politicians on both sides of the aisle are complicit in covering up the truth as are the majority of the media and several federal agencies from NORAD to the Post Office.
Santa Clause
Your post is quite reasonable in tone. But if I responded to your post it might encourage other people to join in. And I have found through unpleasant experience that there are people here who are quite unreasonable on this issue. They take what I regard as a minor historical puzzle and get way too emotionally involved. So I don’t get into discussions of this issue.
The theories are usually proposed by people who don’t know much either about literature in general, Elizabethan/Jacobean literature specifically, history in general, or Elizabethan/Jacobean history in particular. For them, Shakespeare is so monumentally important, he might as well be the only English playwright ever, before Shaw.
It’s sort of hard to blame people for having that impression, because Shakespeare is sort of taught that way in schools, especially American high schools. I had to read three different Shakespeare plays in high school, but not one Marlowe, Webster, Jonson, Kyd, nor anyone else who wrote for theater before, well, Shaw. Because the old language is a bit of a slog for people not accustomed to it, we were told again, and again how totally brilliant Shakespeare was, and how important is was to read his plays.
But anyway, a lot of the first people backing an alternate Shakespeare candidate were lawyers backing the lawyer Bacon. The people currently backing de Vere are his descendants.
Fascinating post! I had no idea…
I’ll point out that it wasn’t just modern materials, modern engines far lighter than anything available to Gustave were needed. I have no idea why or if there was any conspiracy involved here, but it doesn’t sound unusual for underhanded dealings by inventors of that time period. The part that is hard to explain is why there were a number of photographs of the machine taken, some at the time of purported flights, but none showing it in flight. I’m not sure what the quality of cameras available was at the time, possibly short brief flights weren’t captured, but I think more likely it’s because they didn’t happen.
Now, when it came to aviators and engineers in Europe and South America who initially though that their experimental flights had preceded the Wright Bros, as far as I know they all conceded that they had not achieved controlled, manned, powered flight after see the Wright flyer in action. That is of course what is recognized, not just any machine that managed or appeared to fly for a few moments, but what we consider a manned aircraft to be, something that can take off from the ground or water, and fly under it’s own power, change course, and return safely to the ground under the control of a human pilot.