# Why do we flat out reject CT's? \[Conspiracy Theories\] **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 2, 2012, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841 "2012-06-02T03:24:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/361 "2012-06-24T02:43:04Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Conspiracy theories are _the limits_ of my understanding of world affairs and politics. We figured that out many pages ago. > [@Lord James](#): > > …you come up with a claim of total bullion And that’s putting it politely. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/362 "2012-06-24T03:01:24Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > We figured that out many pages ago.And that’s putting it politely. 🙂 And it took me 8 pages to figure out: Politics begins in [wonder](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007%E2%80%932012_global_financial_crisis) and ends in [horror](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_pill). ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/363 "2012-06-24T03:16:27Z")
I’m actually still more horrified for the Monty Python logic used to find those links. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/364 "2012-06-24T04:04:40Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Evidence. Ok. However, in presenting my evidence, I want a reply from both **Marley23** and **tomndebb** as to the validity of the evidence presented. Validity of what evidence? You have one member of the House of Lords making a public speech that a secret organization approached him about bailing out the UK in order to solve the current world recession/depression. He claims that they will only deal with heads of state, yet he is not a head of state or even a serious player in the UK government. If they actually existed and wanted to talk to the top guy, they should have been talking to Cameron, as Prime Minister, or, at least George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Or, if they really wanted to get things moving, they should have been approaching Obama or Secretary Clinton or Secretary Geithner.) As to the current financial crisis, there is nothing to wonder about, there. Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of economics understands how and why it happened. There is nothing magical about it and it did not take any shady maneuvering by unseen forces to bring it about. A lot of people wanted to make money and found ways to play games with investments. Some players were able to increase their wealth on paper, prompting more people/institutions to try to get in on the same game until they overextended and a market failure caused the whole house of cards to collapse. By and large, their actions were stupid but not illegal. If the Illuminati caused the collapse, (they didn’t), why would they try to fix it 18 months ago and then why did they not follow through? If the Illuminati did not cause the collapse, then they were hardly all-seeing since they failed to see it coming and failed to take steps to prevent it. (And, frankly, offering to save the world economy by giving money to the UK is rather dumb. It would have made much more sense, (for far less money), to prop up Ireland, Iceland, Greece, Italy, and Spain, thus giving breathing room to the US, UK, Germany, France, and Belgium who probably have the reserves to pull their own chestnuts out of the fire if they are not dragged down trying to help the failing national economies. And even more sense to simply inject some cash into the system to prevent the beginning of the collapse while “manipulating” the various spendthrift nations into more modest austerity measures six years ago when they could more easily afford them.) So, your “evidence” is a single speech by a single member of a non-governing advisory board to the British government that has been followed by no action and your apparent lack of understanding regarding the current world economy troubles. From that you draw the conclusion that there is a body of unknown people controlling all the world governments without their knowledge who are, themslves, ruled or manipulated by an individual for whom there is not even a suggestion of evidence that he actually exists. Your whole argument boils down to “_something happened that I do not understand and I am going to pretend that a totally secret group about whom no one knows anything made it happen_.” That is not even a theory; it is more handwaving. It certainly provides no reason for anyone reading your posts to be persuded that you even understand what you are imagining. ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/365 "2012-06-24T06:25:12Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > You have one member of the House of Lords making a public speech that a secret organization approached him about bailing out the UK in order to solve the current world recession/depression. Yes. > [@tomndebb](#): > > He claims that they will only deal with heads of state, yet he is not a head of state or even a serious player in the UK government. Yes and [QUOTE=Lord James of Blackheath] they did not exchange telephone numbers in order to follow up the meeting [/QUOTE] and [QUOTE=Lord James of Blackheath] They expect to be contacted only by someone equal to head of state status or someone with an international security rating equal to the top six people in the world. [/QUOTE] and [QUOTE=Lord James of Blackheath] These things can be done, if wished, but a senior member of the Government has to accept the invitation to a phone call to the chairman of Foundation X - and then we can get into business. [/QUOTE] So they knew that Blackheath dealt with the finances of the IRA and a North African terrorist group. Blackheath facilitated a meeting with the Leader of the House of Lords, Lord Strathclyde, and a representative from Foundation X. Since no phone numbers were exchanged, it was Strathclyde’s move. Then they would contact Strathcylde and then David Cameron would be invited to a phone call, which he could accept or decline and then, of course, David Cameron would be in discussion with the Queen, The President of the United States, reporters for _The Guardian_, _The Daily Telegraph_, _The Wall Street Journal_, _The New York Times_. > [@tomndebb](#): > > If the Illuminati caused the collapse, (they didn’t), why would they try to fix it 18 months ago and then why did they not follow through? _They_ never got a phone call. > [@tomndebb](#): > > If there is a body of unknown people controlling all the world governments without their knowledge who are, themslves, ruled or manipulated by an individual for whom there is not even a suggestion of evidence that he actually exists. Which is why _they_ had someone contact the chairman of a City of London firm to contact Lord James of Blackheath. Had they contacted David Cameron then _they_ would not be controlling all the world governments without their knowledge of who _they_ are. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/366 "2012-06-24T06:29:58Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Some people yesterday learned about Alan Turing and a few days ago probably couldn’t have told you _anything_ about him. What’s on Google today matters. Speaking of which, I didn’t get to try all of the Turing machine puzzles, and I can’t find a way to get at them again now that Google’s dropped that particular doodle. Is there another copy stored somewhere? ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/367 "2012-06-24T06:43:43Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Speaking of which, I didn’t get to try all of the Turing machine puzzles, and I can’t find a way to get at them again now that Google’s dropped that particular doodle. Is there another copy stored somewhere? No, however there still is Google Pac-Man. Just Google it. Google should have the ability to set the date and time and then search. So you’d be able to have functional doodles to play like the Turing machine puzzles. And then you’d be able to search what Google “knows” on a particular date and time. So what was on Googlle still matters. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/368 "2012-06-24T12:43:44Z")
> [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > Was by Heinlein? Because if so, I know what one you’re talking about, although I don’t remember the title, but if not, I want to read that one. Not Heinlein. I’ll PM you the title of the one I’m thinking of, if you’d like. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/369 "2012-06-24T14:23:40Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Yes. There was a meeting that was described in [this](http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/101101-0003.htm) speech given on the floor of British Parliament, 1 Nov 2010 : Column 1538. Based on the evidence at hand, I find it unlikely that this meeting every took place, or if some meeting did take place it with someone trying to hoax or swindle Lord James. There’s no evidence of a secret organization actually existing. > [@](#): > > 😕 Serious question: What does that _mean_? Assume I know nothing about world affairs and politics. It means there are a lot of gullible people in the world, and a fancy title doesn’t make you immune. > [@](#): > > And what about Blackheath’s claim that the total value of the Vatican bank reserves would claim to be more than the entire value of gold ever mined in the history of the world? He’s wrong, and wildly so. > [@](#): > > Is Foundation X legitimate? No, clearly not. > [@](#): > > The 2007 - 2012 global financial crisis is nothing less than fantastic. Completely false. The causes are pretty well understood and the main actors motivations and actions have been documented. It’s not the first major financial crisis and I doubt it will be the last. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/370 "2012-06-24T14:33:33Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Which is why _they_ had someone contact the chairman of a City of London firm to contact Lord James of Blackheath. Had they contacted David Cameron then _they_ would not be controlling all the world governments without their knowledge of who _they_ are. I’m sorry, but this is silly. Ultimately, there has to be contact. Ultimately, they have to make themselves, (or some representative), known to the head of state. You (or Lord James) claim that they said that they would take action if a phone call was placed. Then, you say that these great controllers of all things did not act in the way that they apparently wanted to act because the did phone call did not occur. Are they idiots? Any 16 year old girl could have arranged to get invited to a dance by her secret crush with more ease than they managed to lose their big chance at contact with the UK government. And these guys are supposed to be the “real” rulers of the world? You are inventing excuses for why your odd CT does not actually work and you have still not presented a single shred of evidence that there is any such group. You have pointed to no action or event in the last 227 years, (since the real Illuminati were really disbanded), that does not have real world antecedents and explanations that are not actually more believable than the odd Conspiracy Theory. So I am back to my earlier question: what in the world would prompt you to believe this silliness? What is the point of pretending that there are “mysterious forces” that are manipulating the world when those “mysterious forces” are not able to do anything that is not already happening (and are, apparently, pretty incompetent at their own jobs)? ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/371 "2012-06-24T15:52:06Z")
> [@Andy\_L](#): > > Not Heinlein. I’ll PM you the title of the one I’m thinking of, if you’d like. Sure. That would be great! ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/372 "2012-06-24T15:59:17Z")
> [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > Sure. That would be great! Done. ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2012, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/373 "2012-06-26T18:22:48Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Ultimately, they have to make themselves, (or some representative), known to the head of state. You (or Lord James) claim that they said that they would take action if a phone call was placed. Ultimately, the head of state, David Cameron, has to make himself (publicly) known to them. One of their representatives contacted the chairman of a City of London firm and the chairman of the City of London firm, in turn, contacted Lord James of Blackheath. Blackheath faciliated a meeting between _them_ and Lord Strathclyde, the Leader of the House of Lords. No telephone numbers were exchanged. They don’t exchange telephone numbers. As they might say, “You can’t contact us. We’ll contact you.” And so Lord James of Blackheath implored his peers saying, “These things can be done, if wished, but a senior member of the Government has to accept the invitation to a phone call to the chairman of Foundation X - and then we can get into business.” Did you notice how nervous Blackheath sounded while giving his speech? Suppose Strathclyde (who was not present for Blackheath’s speech) followed with his own speech. The next day he would get a phone call… ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2012, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/374 "2012-06-26T18:39:23Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Did you notice how nervous Blackheath sounded while giving his speech? You realize none of this is evidence, right? It’s speculation and very poor speculation at that. Super powerful cabals that want to do something secretly wouldn’t do so in such a piss poor, overly complex, unsecured, and ultimately public method. They would just do it. If you start with the assumption that these extremely powerful, long lived, and secretive organizations exist then it naturally follows that they know how to achieve their goals better than these jokers. A third-grade recess discussion has more security than this mess. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/375 "2012-06-27T00:13:46Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Ultimately, the head of state, David Cameron, has to make himself (publicly) known to them. So a sooper sekrit society is only going to act if a major politician comes out and publicly acknowledges that they exist, thus blowing their cover and making them no longer secret? I am beginning to see how you can believe in CTs. I still have seen no reason from you why you believe this nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/376 "2012-06-27T16:46:04Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Ultimately, the head of state, David Cameron, has to make himself (publicly) known to them. Uh, the head of state, David Cameron, is known to you, to me, and to everyone else in this thread. Are you saying the secret rulers of the world couldn’t just look up the UK government on Wikipedia, like any elementary-school child? Or are you implying he had to acknowledge them in a speech before they’d deign to talk to him? What sense does that make – they’re too secretive to give out a phone number, even form a disposable prepaid cell phone, but they want their existence announced in a speech by a world leader? Makes no sense, none. ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2012, 6:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/377 "2012-06-28T06:11:23Z")
> [@Stink Fish Pot](#): > > Is it something psychological in us as Americans that don’t want to see ourselves (and as an extension of ourselves, the goverment) as cheaters, no better than say the USSR, who were masters of propaganda and never told their people the truth? There’s propaganda for the people. You understand that. Then there’s propaganda for the propagandists. Do you understand that? > [@Stink Fish Pot](#): > > Well, what IS the truth? What you know _today_. > [@Telemark](#): > > There have always been powerful leaders and nations. There has never been any evidence for secretive, far reaching cabals that control world events for their own agenda. You mean like François Hollande, Angela Merkel, and Vladimir Putin? Why do you believe that there is no evidence for secretive, far reaching cabals that control powerful leaders and nations? > [@Telemark](#): > > Super powerful cabals that want to do something secretly wouldn’t do so in such a piss poor, overly complex, unsecured, and ultimately public method. They would just do it. What do you mean, “They would just do it.”? > [@tomndebb](#): > > So a sooper sekrit society is only going to act if a major politician comes out and publicly acknowledges that they exist Well, a minor politican came out and publicly acknowleged that they exist. > [@Sailboat](#): > > Or are you implying he had to acknowledge them in a speech before they’d deign to talk to him? Not in a speech. More like in newspapers where it would be made public that “Foundation X” offered to bail out the UK and that David Cameron is “working” with “Foundation X” on disseminating their great wealth and funds toward the recovery of the economy. Of course, there would be plenty of anonoymous sources and, of course, one anonymous source would have an anonymous name - Foundation X. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2012, 11:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/378 "2012-06-28T11:09:13Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > There’s propaganda for the people. You understand that. Then there’s propaganda for the propagandists. Do you understand that? Like much in this thread, this makes no sense. Can you give an example of what you are talking about, because the vague descriptions you use are meaningless. > [@](#): > > You mean like François Hollande, Angela Merkel, and Vladimir Putin? Why do you believe that there is no evidence for secretive, far reaching cabals that control powerful leaders and nations? Are you claiming that the presidents of France, Germany, and Russia are somehow secret world leaders? They are democratically elected leaders of major countries, who engage in public diplomacy. How in any way possible does this bolster your case for secretive cabals controlling world leaders? Are you claiming that they are being controlled by others? If so, what evidence do you have of this? Because as far as anyone else can tell this is politics as usual. > [@](#): > > What do you mean, “They would just do it.”? If these cabals were powerful as you claim, they would simply save the world economies. They shouldn’t need a politician to publicly acknowledge them (in fact, it would seem to be counter productive for the whole “secret” thing). Since they hold all the cards they would just do what’s in their best interest. The overly complex and counter productive plan that you presented makes no sense. > [@](#): > > Not in a speech. More like in newspapers where it would be made public that “Foundation X” offered to bail out the UK and that David Cameron is “working” with “Foundation X” on disseminating their great wealth and funds toward the recovery of the economy. Of course, there would be plenty of anonoymous sources and, of course, one anonymous source would have an anonymous name - Foundation X. Ah, yes, what better way to stay anonymous than to have major politicians acknowledge you in the media, with detailed descriptions of how you are going to save the economy. Do you even read what you are writing? ---
**Author:** ![grude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47774/32.png) [@grude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grude)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2012, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/379 "2012-06-28T11:32:13Z")
Quite a lot of the details surrounding the “war on terror” stink of corruption, but the mundane variety not fantastical. You often get the feeling bias and boogymen in the public mind are being exploited by charlatans for profit. BTW could I interest you gentlemen in some magic terrorist detectors? [http://www.geek.com/articles/news/airport-full-body-x-ray-scanners-proven-to-be-useless-2012037/](http://www.geek.com/articles/news/airport-full-body-x-ray-scanners-proven-to-be-useless-2012037/) ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2012, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841/380 "2012-06-28T12:06:17Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > Like much in this thread, this makes no sense. Can you give an example of what you are talking about, because the vague descriptions you use are meaningless. So that we don’t talk past one another could you give an example of propaganda for the people and then I will give an example of propaganda for the propagandists. The OP made a good point about propaganda as it relates to conspiracy theories. > [@Telemark](#): > > Are you claiming that they are being controlled by others? If so, what evidence do you have of this? Because as far as anyone else can tell this is politics as usual. To use current examples, the Saudis and the Iranians are excluded from the Syria talks. In a _New York Times_ editorial today, it was mentioned that: “Nearly four dozen “bundlers,” or people who solicit checks from others, were invited to a state dinner for Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain; two were seated at the head table.” There’s also a photograph of the Queen shaking hands with Martin McGuinness. Oh, but don’t be naive. As _The New York Times_ reported, “A first private handshake took place without the cameras present.” It could easily be imagined that there could be a private handshake without cameras present - without a second public handshake. Now, _who_ do you suppose would be receiving (or giving) that handshake? > [@Telemark](#): > > Ah, yes, what better way to stay anonymous than to have major politicians acknowledge you in the media, with detailed descriptions of how you are going to save the economy. A private handshake without the cameras present - and no second handshake for the cameras. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-we-flat-out-reject-cts-conspiracy-theories/623841.md?page=20)