Setting the record straight on Wood & Douglas, 2013

Our recently published Frontiers study on online communication, “What about Building 7?” A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories, has been the subject of some chatter on the Internet – but not quite in the way I had hoped. A story by Kevin Barrett on PressTV.ir has interpreted the study as showing that conspiracists are “more sane” than conventionalists, and, given that this is an appealing headline for long-suffering conspiracists, has been copy-pasted around the Internet in a highly uncritical fashion. I’m often guilty of this too – reading the headline and moving on – because who has the time to read every original source of every news story? In this case, of course, the paper says nothing of the sort and the article’s conclusions are based on misrepresentations of several critical findings.

How on earth did Barrett get the idea that the study makes some judgement that conspiracists are more well-adjusted than conventionalists? He first mentions the size of the comment sample and how it’s split between the two classes of comments:

The authors were surprised to discover that it is now more conventional to leave so-called conspiracist comments than conventionalist ones: “Of the 2174 comments collected, 1459 were coded as conspiracist and 715 as conventionalist.” In other words, among people who comment on news articles, those who disbelieve government accounts of such events as 9/11 and the JFK assassination outnumber believers by more than two to one. That means it is the pro-conspiracy commenters who are expressing what is now the conventional wisdom, while the anti-conspiracy commenters are becoming a small, beleaguered minority.

In writing this Barrett did not realise that these only include persuasive comments – comments that were written with the apparent intent to change somebody’s mind about the cause of 9/11. It doesn’t include comments that, for instance, take the conventional explanation for granted and just talk about something else; that complain about someone else’s post; that simply insult someone; and so on. So it’s totally baseless to conclude that conspiracist comments outnumber conventionalist comments – I did the data collection for this study and am positive that this is not the case. Probably it’s true of a few articles, but certainly not in general.

I pointed this out in the comments on the PressTV website (for which, hilariously, I was downvoted by the website’s readers) and Barrett responded:

Dear Dr. Wood, Thank you for the clarification. Something similar is going on in academic publishing. Of the scholarly books and articles that in some way or other argue for or against the official conspiracy theory (OCT) of 9/11, there seem to be far more anti-official-conspiracy articles than those that explicitly support the official story. In that sense, 9/11 truth rules in academia; so if this were like any other disputed issue, the academic community would agree that 9/11 was an inside job, based on the evidence in scholarly publications. But there are a large number of publications that simply take the OCT for granted, while there are not so many that take its falsity for granted. So the current situation, in which the OCT remains the default position, is the product of ignorance and complacency.

I could spend a long time picking apart this reasoning but suffice it to say that this a completely bogus interpretation, and the original error in the article still hasn’t been corrected despite Barrett’s obvious awareness of the problem.

 Next, Barrett turns to the actual findings of the study:

Perhaps because their supposedly mainstream views no longer represent the majority, the anti-conspiracy commenters often displayed anger and hostility: “The research… showed that people who favoured the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile when trying to persuade their rivals.”

Additionally, it turned out that the anti-conspiracy people were not only hostile, but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well. According to them, their own theory of 9/11 – a conspiracy theory holding that 19 Arabs, none of whom could fly planes with any proficiency, pulled off the crime of the century under the direction of a guy on dialysis in a cave in Afghanistan – was indisputably true. The so-called conspiracists, on the other hand, did not pretend to have a theory that completely explained the events of 9/11: “For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account.”

Apart from the reference to the earlier statistical debacle, this characterisation of the hostility finding is correct (ADDED 29/07: though we don’t attribute this to personality differences as Barrett seems to; see this post for further discussion). The interpretation of the other finding is unusual and perhaps overstates the case (there was no measure of “fanaticism” in the study, unless defending a position you agree with is inherently fanatical) but this isn’t an unreasonable interpretation otherwise – it’s a question of values I suppose.

Additionally, the study found that so-called conspiracists discuss historical context (such as viewing the JFK assassination as a precedent for 9/11) more than anti-conspiracists.

This, though, is just flat-out wrong. The finding it refers to is that conspiracists mentioned more unrelated conspiracy theories positively than conventionalists did – conspiracists were more likely to say something like “9/11 was an inside job, just like the JFK assassination” than conventionalists were to say something like “9/11 conspiracies are nonsense! Now the JFK assassination, there’s a real conspiracy.” However, the opposite was true of negative mentions of other conspiracy theories – it was more likely for conventionalists to say “9/11 conspiracies are nonsense, just like UFO coverups” than for conspiracists to say “9/11 was a real conspiracy, not like that UFO coverup stuff.” In other words, 9/11 conspiracists tend to believe other conspiracy theories as well and 9/11 conventionalists tend to disbelieve other conspiracy theories as well – it’s a replication of a classic finding with new archival methodology. The idea that this somehow demonstrates that that conspiracists “discuss historical context more” is a total misinterpretation and seems to willfully ignore half of the finding it refers to.

Anyway, the damage seems to have been done – the PressTV article has been reprinted on a lot of different websites, forums, and social media thanks to its sensationalised headline and smug triumphalism. I’m ambivalent about this – I like that my research is being recognised since I am inherently a media whore, but I’m less happy about the fact that it’s only seeing wide exposure after having been twisted and misinterpreted by an extremely biased article on Iranian state-run media. Still, the last article that we published was met with headlines like “Psychologists prove conspiracy theorists are all crazy!” (there’s no room for nuance on the Internet, is there?) so I suppose it all balances out. I just hope that some people will read the paper itself rather than taking PressTV’s word for what it says.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

230 Responses to Setting the record straight on Wood & Douglas, 2013

  1. Sue Vogel says:

    Thanks for this.

    I note that this concerns Press TV which is hardly a bastion of critical thought.

    Indeed the lessening of emphasis on critical thinking (substituted far too often with highly emotional reasoning which creates specious “facts” and “proof” which in turn are battened onto because they are salient) is a cause for concern to me as a former educator and trainer of psychologists.

    You are doing splendid work. Naming the problem begins the journey towards its solution

    Sue Vogel

    • RoHa says:

      As one who has taught many classes on Informal Logic and Critical Thinking, I have to agree with you about the lack thereof.

      As a conspiracy theorist, I have to say that I am not really concerned with whether I am sane or not. I am concerned with whether I am right.

      And as a critical thinker, I recognize the attempts to reject my arguments by declaring me insane are just a form of argumentum ad hominem. (Specifically, the circumstantial ad hominem known as the Psychogenetic Fallacy or Bulverism.)

      • Ray says:

        A skeptical analyses of a conspiracy theorist is good, the more questions others ask the stronger the argument or lack of, many have called me a crack pot and I wear this as a badge of honer. We who Dare to seek the truth.

  2. I posted a link to your paper on FB. It received no comments. One like. We devour headlines and not much else? (1000+friends)

    • Mike Wood says:

      Most people won’t invest the time to read a lengthy jargon-filled academic paper unless it looks really intensely interesting, and even then they’ll prefer to read a popular article that summarises the findings in a way that’s more suited to a general audience. Can’t say I blame them – but science journalism isn’t what it used to be.

      • danadurnford says:

        Most people won’t invest the time to read a lengthy jargon-filled academic paper ?
        Aaron Swartzs jacked 4.5 million academic papers locked away in the ivory towers i would love to read but they are locked back up and Swartzs is dead . But that,s not a conspiracy theory to control information is it ? We pay for it they lock it up and charge us to read it , at prohibitively expensive prices . Why not mention they recovered 84,000 parts of the Space Shuttle Columbia but not even a wedding ring from Flight 77 or Flight 93 . People find it odd and ask that question only to be marginalized for being observant . The shuttle was traveling 35 times faster than those planes but we still got arms legs ,heads ,landing gear with wheels , window frames ,the nose , hatches . Academics ignoring the questions that create the conspiracy shows a lack of ethics and fortitude , after all they themselves are not locked in the ivory towers are they ?

    • Bill Nada says:

      “Why not mention they recovered 84,000 parts of the Space Shuttle Columbia but not even a wedding ring from Flight 77 or Flight 93 .”

      Nice bait and switch…you take shuttle parts and switch them with personal belongings. Columbia exploded mid-air, it was not flown into a building at top speed. Besides human remains, plane parts, and personal belongings were recovered from both 77 &93.

      ” People find it odd and ask that question only to be marginalized for being observant . ”

      No..we find it odd you people think you are observant without bothering to do anything more than believing whatever con-artists like Kevin Barrett tell you to believe.

      “Academics ignoring the questions that create the conspiracy shows a lack of ethics and fortitude”

      No…crackpots like Barrett making their own journals to portray themselves as adhering to actual standards of academia is outright fraudulent.

      • dana durnford says:

        Well that’s unfair to group me with some like Barrett . Grow up and go look up World Trade Center 6 , a 105 ft 1/2 million sq ft building with all the walls still intact with the basement intact but with the entire core missing , where did it go ? How did it go anywhere , its missing like a big laser cut it out , thats me not nobody else , i looked at the pictures on creepy Google and asked a question , lucky for me there is 100s of super HQ pictures for anyone to verified . All you have to do is open a tab and type in World Trade Center 6 and start from there . Best of luck

      • boswell says:

        Did the very same laser take revenge on your cerebral cortex Dana ?

      • Bill Nada says:

        “Grow up and go look up World Trade Center 6 , a 105 ft 1/2 million sq ft building with all the walls still intact with the basement intact but with the entire core missing , where did it go ?”

        Probably down when the debris hit it. What’s your point?

        “All you have to do is open a tab and type in World Trade Center 6 and start from there”

        And then speculate your way into whatever you want!

      • jim north says:

        fascinating that ONLY JFK and 9/11 were used by Barrett…apparently the conspiracies about
        1…gulf of Tonkin
        2…Iran-contra
        3…Tuskegee syphilis study
        4…nuclear radiation tests harming down-winders
        all 4 of these conspiracies were done by the highest in the American government, and were proven and admitted to in later government documentation

      • Richard Moss says:

        All countries have an abundance of cheap labor but none rose to dominance like the USA. something else caused that to happen. Africa was in a state of tribal warfare before European Colonialism. The continent stabilized and black populations increase under white rule not decreased.

        On 2/9/14, The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories

      • Ray says:

        Australia has a crises, 3 major Car makers are leaving, Holden & Ford in 2016 now Toyota in 2017 smells like a conspiracy, why are major companies leaving Australia in their drove’s are we heading for a World depression. Preemptive strike on Iran by Israel in around June of this year, reliable information sent to me by my insider hope he’s wrong, he has a 68% strike rate. Massive Civil War looming in America and Obama knows the World is on the Brink of World War 3, UN World Human cull scheduled for 2017, Allied alien mother Ship Landing near Himalayan China 2020, A new Powerful generator unit the size of a shoe box will unveiled some time this year, Power companies are trying to stop it’s release, sorry Richard just a bit of conspiracy stuff.

      • Ray says:

        All these events have one thing in common members of the Bush family were in positions of power when all these events took place, what a coincidence. The Depression & 911 was their finest work. now Jed bush wants to be president 2016, i wonder what will happen if his voted in to high office. ?

      • The above by Ray is an example of prediction, which is based off emotional conjecture rather than any actual basis in reality. The problem with predictions is they are ten a penny because everyone likes to think they can say what is going to happen in advance, and more often than not they are completely incorrect. History is littered with failed predictions, but most people who give them value only point to the successful ones. If you predict enough things with enough ambiguity at some point you can point to one as being correct. However, this is not an indicator of good predictive method, it’s just a fortunate hit.

        This being said, car manufacturers are leaving because of their business models and their need to adapt to changing business climates. Nothing to do with conspiracy, though what conspiracy Ray thinks is happening is a little strange. Also how car manufacturers leaving Australia being an indicator to global depression is wrong too. Australia’s lack of input to the global market is hardly essential enough to bring it down.

        Pre emptive strikes are in the land of biased political analysts who like to use slippery slope fallacies in order to add credence to their political views about other ideologues. Ignoring that no one knows what is going to happen in the future, and that political analysts have been saying this will happen by X for years now, none of them have shown to be right so far.

        Obama knows there is going to be civil/World war sounds like you have been inside his head, which we all know you haven’t, so how you could garner this information without conjecture is interesting. Obviously you are just saying you believe there will be civil/World war, because there’s no way you could know what Obama thinks.

        UN World cull by 2017, wow you sound like you have been reading Georgia guidestone websites and taking them far too seriously. Luckily this is only 3 years away so when this doesn’t happen I can come back here and laugh at you. Alien ships landing in the Himalayas in 6 years too, once again we can all have a good laugh at you when this doesn’t happen. Last but not least a power unit the size of a shoebox, well that sounds complicated, seems you have all the technical details understood. Once again later this year when no such thing arrives we can all point at you and laugh.

        The problem with fantasists who use prediction to aid their irrational thinking is they tend to never admit failure when all their predictions are falsified, they just roll out updated versions of them. I predict this is what Ray will do, and that prediction you can probably put your money on.

      • Ray says:

        Here we go again it’s researched inside hearsay facts by a friend of mine it’s not prediction look it up the UN has a document about a Human cull that document is real, Israel is planning a preemptive strike with the Saudis, Alien landing = Wikileaks Government down load it’s all factual documents, you know i was fishing caught a big Flathead called Conspiracykiller ha ha what a jerk. who made you the sheriff.

      • Still be pointing out the fails you put up when they don’t happen ray.

      • Ray says:

        Conspiracykiller you are the voice of reasoning and i respect that but you push buttons that don’t help any contentious argument right or wrong, thanks mate i am beginning to under stand you.

      • Bill Nada says:

        I call BS, Ray. Source the “UN document”.

  3. Steve Dutch says:

    It’s a common tactic for fringe thinkers to try to spin a refutation into agreement. “You agree the Twin Towers fell down, too, so we both fundamentally agree.”

    I ask conspiracy thinkers this question at every opportunity. “What first hand personal observation or experience do you have that leads you to believe conspiracies on a grand scale exist? Not what you read, or hear, or reason out, but things you personally have witnessed first hand. What particular experience in your life has led you to believe in conspiracies?” I have asked this question quite a few times and so far nobody – not a single person – has described any first-hand knowledge. I could see someone who was framed for a crime or had a bad tour in ‘Nam where he saw records being falsified, but as far as I can tell, most conspiracy believers have never experienced a single moment of real danger or deprivation.

    My experience with the Government is I have good roads, clean water, regular mail, reasonable safety, and nice national parks. I’d really like to know what conspiracy believers have seen first hand.

    Someone suggested they were abused as children. That’s nice. Your psych professor will give you a gold sticky star. I’m not interested in anything but what believers themselves have to say.

    • Christina says:

      My father was subjected to “special testing” while he was in the Army in the late 60s. He was given LSD and electro-shock “treatment. He developed multiple personality disorder and spent his life in and out of state hospitals and mental institutions until he died at 33. This program was known as MK Ultra and the documents have been de-classified. Is this personal enough for you? I am glad you are happy with your conveniences and your head in the sand. Maybe you just aren’t talking to the right people!

      • Just because that horrible thing happened to your father doesn’t mean 9/11 was an inside job.

      • chevdo says:

        Isn’t MkUltra a good example of how utterly incompetent the organizations you people claim are capable of such complex conspiracies actually are? the CIA playing around with electro-shock and LSD in the 1960s sounds equivocal to cavemen playing with fire, yet at around the same time, according to Mr. Ray here in these comments, the CIA was orchestrating ‘electric jets’ powered by zero-point energy technology whispered to them by Tesla’s head in a jar….

      • Ray says:

        you watch futurama too, gee i wish you could say that to my face, at least i not scared to inform the public what the Government is up to, so before you have a shower in the morning pull that yellow stripe of your back and leave the tough shit to the men.

    • lexscripta1 says:

      “I ask conspiracy thinkers this question at every opportunity. “What first hand personal observation or experience do you have that leads you to believe conspiracies on a grand scale exist? Not what you read, or hear, or reason out, but things you personally have witnessed first hand. What particular experience in your life has led you to believe in conspiracies?” I have asked this question quite a few times and so far nobody – not a single person – has described any first-hand knowledge.”

      Thats because its a stupid freaking question. I dont have first hand knowledge of the planned conspiracy to kill Jesus either, but I know it by history. I also know that the Reichstag (kind of like the capital building) was set ablaze by Hitler, and then blamed on Jews.

      Do I have to have first hand information, or can I look at evidence to come to a conclusion?

      I recently won a lawsuit in which I had very little “first hand information”, most of it came by putting together bits and pieces of facts that were gathered outside my realm of personal experience. No first hand knowledge that a trustee was screwing me, just a trail of external evidence.

      Your comments are far from being critical in the realm of thinking.

  4. ternoro says:

    The most brilliant conspiracy worthy of the name is exactly that theorized by the official version of the U.S. government on the events of September 11. Tell me a bit if it is not an exemplary conspiracy: A malicious very small group of individuals (19 hijackers), trained in an afghan cave by the current head of the Spectrum … uh, I mean al-Qaeda (excuse the slip, I was used that secret bases in the caves of exotic countries are those enemies of James Bond, and serve only to explode into huge fireworks to impress the viewer that the film is about to be completed), conspire to attack by surprise the most powerful country in the world on 11 September 2001, in order to teach him a lesson.
    Well, this is what may be called a conspiracy.

    • Bill Nada says:

      It appears what you are doing is the classic David Ray Griffin equivocation fallacy (which is hilarious as he a professor of philosophy. Incompetence or deception? You choose) While Al Qaeda planning to hijack planes and crash them is indeed a “conspiracy”, and the idea is a “theory”, in the everyday sense, it is not a “conspiracy theory”; which is “a belief that some covert but influential organization is responsible for a circumstance or event”. Al Qaeda is not covert. They are open about what they do.

      http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/conspiracy-theory

      • The Ghastly Ezra Pound says:

        Wow… you all seem so well versed in the nomenclature of conspiracism. Who knew Dr. Griffin had such an appellation bestowed upon him? Impressive. Do you guys get out much?

        Far be it for me to speak for ternoro… but as is the case with Dr. Barrett’s obvious appropriation of a farcical ad hominem study in an effort to demonstrate its frivolity… Dissecting the term conspiracy theory into its constituent parts… is an effort to draw attention to the fact that officialdom is no authority unto itself regarding whom may engage in conspiracy and what passes as theory. In both cases, this is a nuance that has seemingly been missed or ignored by those here who appear otherwise astute… at least when it comes to the lexicon of conspiracism.

      • Bill Nada says:

        “Who knew Dr. Griffin had such an appellation bestowed upon him? Impressive. Do you guys get out much?”

        ^Nothing but misdirection. Sorry if you don’t like logic.

        “but as is the case with Dr. Barrett’s obvious appropriation of a farcical ad hominem study in an effort to demonstrate its frivolity”

        Nope, as has been thoroughly demonstrated he, nor you apparently, grasped it. Instead your response is hand waving and fallacious appeals. Try harder.

        “Dissecting the term conspiracy theory into its constituent parts… is an effort to draw attention to the fact that officialdom is no authority unto itself regarding whom may engage in conspiracy and what passes as theory.”

        Not really…its an attempt to equivocate 1 idea based on fallacious appeals and what can be best described as people murmuring on the internet , with another that is not only supported in dozens of reputable journals, but multiple relevant scientific bodies.

        “In both cases, this is a nuance that has seemingly been missed or ignored by those here who appear otherwise astute… at least when it comes to the lexicon of conspiracism”

        Nope…not missed. In fact, engaged based on what it is, word games.

      • So, let me get this straight. The perpetrators of 9/11 overtly planned the attack? Are you joking?

        http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/overt?q=overt

      • Clearly, the global terrorist network Al Qaeda did not plan this attack. The organization that planned and executed 9/11 was clearly a subgroup. This subgroup was clearly not known to the United States Intelligence Services and Military. You are conflating Al Qaeda and the 9/11 Perpetrators.

        It neccessarily had to be a covert organization in order to pull it off.

        You are obviously taking the term “organization” here to literally mean large named institution-like things. This would clearly not have much relevance to dicussion about conspiracy theory as it is impossible to covertly plan anything with institution-like, organization wide knowledge of it. This should be self evident?

        The conspiracy to assassinate Julius Ceaser was by members of the Roman Senate, but not by all of them. This is the most famous illustration I can give you to help you understand.

        Although reaching for the Oxford English American dictionary to correct someone does have it’s merits at times I suggest to broaden your view beyond that. In researching the definition “Conspiracy Theory” I find many more examples to explain it in terms of “secret group”, “alliance”, “two or more”, “group”.

        Once again I hope I’ve illustrated the difference between conventionalists who think in only one level and those who look for explanations past what are given by Oxford English Dictionary.

    • lexscripta1 says:

      ” A malicious very small group of individuals (19 hijackers), trained in an afghan cave by the current head of the Spectrum … uh, I mean al-Qaeda ”

      Oops, you mean “ISIS” don’t you?

  5. Pingback: Setting the record straight on Wood & Douglas, 2013 | The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories | Robot Pirate Ninja

  6. The Mouth says:

    Funny, when I read the original paper by Wood & Douglas, everything that was in the Barrett article, was in the paper ver batum. Under the section that lists results. Not too sure that this is in fact the Micheal Wood who authored the paper. Since in the paper, he was Micheal Wood, but he’s just Mike here. It would seem if one were to be using their full name when submitting their paper, they would do the same when they immediately refute it.

    • Mike Wood says:

      Well, there is a difference between blogging and writing an academic paper. I go by Mike in everyday life and so blog as Mike as well. If you have doubts about whether I’m really the author of the paper, feel free to email me at the address provided in the Frontiers article and ask.

      If you think the article says verbatim everything that the Barrett article says you should read it again more carefully, because for the reasons listed in the post above, it really doesn’t.

  7. The Ghastly Ezra Pound says:

    I applaud Dr. Barrett for managing to turn this attack the messenger, ad hominem hack piece, back on its purveyors. What value does this study hold, if not to marginalize dissident opinion?

    I don’t believe that Dr. Barrett unwittingly referenced such an obvious propaganda piece, but rather spun one of the myriad hit pieces to suit his cause if for no other reason than to point out the utter vacuous merit of these trite appeals to ridicule. I mean… really???… how many sinecured establishment mouthpieces are wont to buck the system that feeds them? Who wouldn’t have reckoned that this study was intended to denigrate “conspiracists”? The term itself is a pejorative meant to evoke a perception of its adherents engaging in flights of fancy, when all a dissident really is… is someone who holds a different opinion, eg, Watergate was a conspiracy, but because the popular narrative is maintained by the establishment, we don’t consider them conspiracists. The label is reserved for those the establishment means to ostracize.

    The lab monkeys who incessantly hurl their feces were just body-slammed into the resulting accretion… good for Dr. Barrett!

    • “The term itself is a pejorative meant to evoke a perception of its adherents engaging in flights of fancy, when all a dissident really is… is someone who holds a different opinion, eg, Watergate was a conspiracy, but because the popular narrative is maintained by the establishment, we don’t consider them conspiracists. The label is reserved for those the establishment means to ostracize.”

      Good attempt to utilise misinterpretation to fit your schema but it’s not going to work around here. The fact is that Conspiracy theorism is perceived as a pejorative by the conspiracy theorist themselves due to the treatment non believers often treat them. However the necessity for a label no matter what it is would still be applicable for those who believe topics without evidence, conspiracy theorists can call themselves what they wish, the fact remains they lack evidence for their claims hence conspiracy theorists is a logical label to apply. If they want to call themselves truth seekers or whatever to make themselves feel better it matters not. the label conspiracy theorist is a known term that lets people know what exactly they are dealing with, if they see bearded stinky teenagers in their mums basements as the stereo type that hardly bears any significance to the writers of this blog. Nor have they implied any such ad hominem fallacies through out the blogs.

      Watergate was a conspiracy that was proven to be factual with evidence and had nothing to do with anything but that regarding its authenticity. It in fact usurped the president and his cabinet, which is by anyone standards a triumph of reporting and fact finding.

      However conspiracy theorists are unable to provide any such qualities in their research and fact providing, which puts them at the bottom of the ladder when it comes to evidence. If you want to compare conspiracy and conspiracy theory on equal footing the you have to provide the evidence and fact checking to an equal standard. Otherwise you are merely utilising the false balance fallacy.

      • The Ghastly Ezra Pound says:

        Yeah… obviously the contributor to the study, Mike Wood, who happens to have the eye of Horus as his avatar on this blog, is simply an objective observer. No… this study, as is the case with pretty much all of these establishment funded studies, which are ad hominem, addressing the mentality of adherents instead of their argument… is critical of “conspiracists” in the vein of Jonathan Kay’s “Among the Truthers: A Journey Through America’s Growing Conspiracist Underground” Claiming a false balance fallacy seems very convenient here.

        These are an attempt to castigate dissident opinion in an elaborate appeal to authority. This is just one of many and I am glad that Dr. Barrett chose to turn it on its head and dump the contents out for the fluff that it is.

        I don’t wish to debate your criteria of what constitutes empirical evidence… with the moniker conspiracykiller… one can reasonably assume your skeptical prejudice in that regard. As someone who questions the establishment, I am not satisfied with the empirical evidence I have seen, and I believe that given the same avenues with which to investigate… the dissident opinion would prove right in the majority of cases. In any case… there are many venues better than an establishment blog to argue the merits of dissidents and conventionalists… and many more qualified than myself to argue the points… I simply wanted to acknowledge that I doubt Dr. Barrett was duped, and I don’t really consider his misinterpretation as sleight of hand… He chose to hoist you on your own petard and I found it to be cathartic. ConspiracyKiller’s mileage may vary… accounting for Khazarian banker caused inflation ;)

      • “Yeah… obviously the contributor to the study, Mike Wood, who happens to have the eye of Horus as his avatar on this blog, is simply an objective observer.”

        Wow really you are going to use symbology as your castigation of the blog writer ? Seriously the eye of horus is nothing more than an Egyptian symbol of protection, royal power and good health. However it has been taken out of context by conspiracists to mean something altogether pejorative [ironic that huh?] about Freemasons, and for some reason has been identified with a nefarious illuminatti. For you to throw that out there as your damning opener only serves to make your argument futile, and in all honesty I really can’t take this point serious.

      • The Ghastly Ezra Pound says:

        Mike Wood’s intention behind the use of this avatar is to “poison the well” in a sense to conflate legitimate dissidence with the flights of fancy associated with a paranoia involving black robes and sacrificial puppies and anything else you think will paint those you disagree with as askew. It is a disingenuous sentiment and I base my opinion regarding Mr. Wood’s intentions on this indicator. Mr. Wood’s bias apparently marred his research and as such its legitimacy as a study must be questioned accordingly.

      • You don’t think he just used the most well known conspiracy theorist symbol on the planet because, well the blog is about conspiracy theorists unusually paranoid belief in such symbology ?

        It seems to me that you are looking for meaning where there is none, in typical conspiracy theorist fashion the apophenia surfaces and even the mundane use of obvious imagery becomes significant.

      • The Ghastly Ezra Pound says:

        “You don’t think he just used the most well known conspiracy theorist symbol on the planet because, well the blog is about conspiracy theorists unusually paranoid belief in such symbology ?”

        This is exactly what I suggested. This is indicative of his prejudice. Obvious?… yes of course it is obvious… where is the disconnect?

        You’re suggesting that the use of the Eye of Horus at a blog dedicated to defaming “conspiracists” is a random occurrence?

      • I am saying it is used because conspiracy theorists use it as an indication of something nefarious, wrongly might I add. It is the most used symbol on the planet by conspiracy theorists, so why wouldn’t it be used as the blog header/avatar for a blog discussing conspiracy theory ?

        You don’t seem to have a problem with conspiracy theorists using it wherever they want to plaster it on the internet do you. You don’t even have an argument or a point, you just sound like you are looking for anything to complain about.

      • The Ghastly Ezra Pound says:

        I’ve already explained my reasoning and though it may not be the most articulate of explanations… the law of diminishing returns suggests that it will only serve to further obfuscate matters by continuing to address any incoherency. Suffice it to say… the avatar is meant as mockery… Mr. Wood’s position is repeated throughout this blog, and his prejudice concerning “conspiracists” taints any study he would be part of in that field. I understand that you disagree… i expect as much. The old saying applies… opinions are like arseholes… everyone’s got one… and arsehole’s with opinions are superfluous. I’ll leave it to you to discern who is what in this case.

        “You don’t even have an argument or a point, you just sound like you are looking for anything to complain about.”

        If I didn’t make a point… what have you spent four posts addressing? You consider ‘conspiracists” delusional and say that I am simply ranting…and yet, here you are… haranguing on and on and on. To what end? What does this say about yourself?

      • It says that I don’t tolerate false intellect or take stupidity lightly, you decide what I mean and who I am talking about when I say that.

        Why don’t you just go and find someone like you to slap you on the back for all the great work you aren’t doing.

      • The Ghastly Ezra Pound says:

        “It says that I don’t tolerate false intellect or take stupidity lightly, you decide what I mean and who I am talking about when I say that.”

        Okay… I can do that. It means that you’re all out of five dollar words.

        “Why don’t you just go and find someone like you to slap you on the back for all the great work you aren’t doing.”

        Yeah… you’re right… my scro tal* fortitude has proven the forbidden fruit in this circle jerk of fellow…tiating ;) travelers. Reckon I’ll mosey along. You all take it easy… because… you know… chafing.

      • “The Ghastly Ezra Pound” is explaining what he/she thinks about the meaning and motive behind the application of “conspiracy theorist” term. Therefore it is analysis and opinion of the term’s application. You cannot misinterpret your own understanding of something.

        I skipped everything else you said.

    • Mike Wood says:

      Under the definition we use in this study and the previous one on the Diana and Bin Laden theories, the idea that Watergate was orchestrated by Nixon’s people would certainly count as a conspiracy theory. Moreover, we point out the pejorative nature of the term in the study and provide empirical evidence of such. I’m not sure that you know what you’re arguing against and wonder if you have read the study at all.

      Anyway, I appreciate that you feel strongly about this paper and believe its conclusions to be false. If you value critical thinking at all, though, you shouldn’t certainly give Barrett a pass – let alone applaud him – for misrepresenting its content simply because you agree with his position. Lying to advance his own agenda (or self-serving laziness, whichever applies here) is no virtue.

      • The Ghastly Ezra Pound says:

        I must have read a synopsis as it was very short… not sure. I think I addressed much of this in my reply to conspiracykiller above. I believe this study to be moot. I am not sure what it brings to the table other than denigration of dissident opinion, and I understand that receiving grants with which to conduct such studies would impose upon you to come to the conclusions you did. I think this was the sentiment behind Dr. Barrett’s misrepresentation… and I am fine with that.

      • Mike Wood says:

        You should really read the study before critiquing it, then. You are assuming a lot of things about it that simply aren’t true – for instance this study was not funded by any grant. I did the bulk of data collection, coding, and analysis on my own time as part of research toward my PhD thesis and was not paid a red cent for it.

      • The Ghastly Ezra Pound says:

        So you conducted your research with the hopes to become a sinecured member of the status quo… big difference. I based my critique on the synopsis that I read along with your clarification addressed to Dr. Barrett. As I pointed out to conspiracykiller… your bias is showing.

      • Mike Wood says:

        If you have some specific concerns about the study’s methodology or reasoning I would be happy to discuss them. If you’d prefer to continue to ignore the substance of the study itself and instead make vague accusations of bias based on my choice of Gravatar or the fact that I was not paid by anyone to conduct this research (which is apparently just as damning an indictment of the research as if it were paid)… well, have fun with that.

      • The Ghastly Ezra Pound says:

        I don’t have any concerns. I understand the rubric behind propaganda.

        Maybe your next study can focus on the mindset of those individuals who dedicate their lives to debunking what they consider the absurd allegations of those whom they consider fringe.

      • Bill Nada says:

        Welcome to conspiracy land, Dr. Wood. As Ezra has demonstrated, it’s not about the facts, it’s about the beliefs. He wants to believe you were paid, thus influenced to your conclusions. Since that’s not the case he needs to do some mental backflips to keep his conclusion by working around the facts to make it true to himself. Since you received no grant, it must be that you are trying to further yourself. It can’t be that others legitimately disagree. After all, it’s “the truth”. And if you don’t confirm their beliefs, then you can’t be for “the truth”. We could just as easily assume Ezra is paid by any number of 9/11 Groups. But sane people are concerned with facts, not convenient beliefs.

        What people like Ezra ignore is that Barrett’s response demonstrates either his dishonesty or ineptitude. As soon as you made that clear it is now he and his fellow truthers job to do whatever mental gymnastics they need to keep up the delusion.

        They wanted so bad to believe a reputable academic did real research and published it in a real forum. This is due to the fact that people like Dr. Barrett, Dr Jones et al, Richard Gage, etc. have done nothing but hid on the internet & published in fake journals to create the illusion of debate, & controversy just as has been done with creationism. Same song, different lyrics.

      • Bill Nada says:

        “I understand the rubric behind propaganda.”

        Funny…because any good propagandist will attempt to distract from the facts by attacking a persons motives, personal characteristics, etc. Just as you have done with Dr Wood. So you either a. know nothing about propaganda, or b. do and employ it willfully.

    • Bill Nada says:

      “No… this study, as is the case with pretty much all of these establishment funded studies, which are ad hominem, addressing the mentality of adherents instead of their argument”

      Dr. Barrett’s incorrect interpretation of the study speak more about the mentality than any study ever could. Funny how you bring up ad hom, when your attacks against Dr. Wood are baseless well poisoning.

      • The Ghastly Ezra Pound says:

        Are you done or do you need a few more posts to encapsulate your thoughts?

        Firstly… a claim is not a fact. Mr. Woods claims that there was no vested interest in the study. I cannot prove that it is not the case so I am fine to consider it conjecture at this point.

        Secondly… I have no expectations… let alone desire of validation to come via the status quo. These are appeals to authority and really only play to the uninitiated as so much sophistry.

        You want to know what I find funny? You “conventionalists” are quick to ascribe artifice to the dastardly “conspiracists” while simultaneously decrying the plausibility of artifice as supreme tenet in your rolodex of platitudes used to debunk.

      • Bill Nada says:

        ” I cannot prove that it is not the case so I am fine to consider it conjecture at this point.”

        Well considering it’s the only evidence available, it is far superior to your baseless claims.

        ” These are appeals to authority and really only play to the uninitiated as so much sophistry.”

        No….his work was published in a reputable peer reviewed journal.

        ” You “conventionalists” are quick to ascribe artifice to the dastardly “conspiracists” while simultaneously decrying the plausibility of artifice as supreme tenet in your rolodex of platitudes used to debunk.”

        Nope…simply going by the evidence before me. Barrett made incorrect interpretations, & continued to do so. And your response was well poisoning.

  8. I’m outraged that illegal alien shapeshifting lizards are getting rich in academia from NWO government conspiracy grants funded by soaking hard working US taxpayers!!!

  9. Bill Nada says:

    Does Dr. Barrett also grant credence to Bigfoot & UFO’s since there are more pro-UFO books & articles, than anti Bigfoot & anti UFO ones?

  10. Pingback: Rasjonell paranoia – nye studier viser et nytt bilde av konspirasjonsteoretikere | Kilden Nyheter

  11. Pingback: Conspiracy theorists’ sane: government dupes crazy, hostile. | Illuminutti

  12. Ben Steigmann says:

    You may appreciate the two posts that are here: http://bensteigmann.blogspot.com/

    • Ben Steigmann says:

      The posts controvert with solid documentation the essential themes of many of the self appointed guardians of the status quo, and thus their arguments then amount to little more than appeal to authority and appeal to popularity when their veneer of credibility is removed. To give just one example – this admission in the Zionist newspaper Judische Rundschau of a statement and of the intentions of the Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann confirms that political Zionism has the attributes ascribed to it in the Protocols of Zion. This is not to condemn all associated with the Jewish people, but it is to note the destructive and subversive nature of a political movement (and one could also look into the religious origins of this supremacism): http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.com/2013/03/international-jewry-is-power-after-all.html?zx=aaf27b96642812b6

      Other psychopaths with power have also displayed such megalomania in different ways. For instance, the New York Times, in 1902, noted that following his 1877 will, the imperialist and monopoly capitalist Cecil Rhodes, in 1890, set forth the goal that his secret society should work towards “gradually absorbing the wealth of the world”: http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F00811FB395412738DDDA00894DC405B828CF1D3

      etc., etc.

      • We already know how much of a crank you are Ben : http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/5327/look-who-popped-up-on-the-thrive-debunked-blog/

        There is really no need for you to smack your lips on here any further.

      • Well, there’s a name from the past. I’d have thought you’d have given up this kinda thing by now, Ben. Seems like you’re writing the same old stuff you were back in the good old days of Conspiracy Science. Is that crazy forum, ‘outlaw’ something or other, still going?

      • Ben Steigmann says:

        In reply to “conspiracykiller”- see the following:

        http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/42-appeal-to-ridicule

        http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/141-poisoning-the-well

        The use of such tactics highlights your intellectual dishonesty and sophistry, and thus destroys your credibility, I’m afraid.

        Incidentally, the author of the item you linked to will no longer let me comment on his site (thrivedebunked) to refute his comments.

        The information I have provided here is independently verifiable in spite of whatever dismissals you would like to give. When I was 19 I made a list of items from various sources on the internet, piling one on top of another, and presenting that as an argument on “outlaw forum”, before the admin became an extremist. I have no association with the “outlaw forum” currently. And since then I have become much more assiduous. My current argument is presented here, and I have attempted to make things as independently verifiable as possible: http://bensteigmann.blogspot.com/

        That Weizmann item is something I personally found, and I did not see the primary source on the internet before except from the archive I tracked it down to. It concerns a speech in Jerusalem in December 1919 given by Chaim Weizmann, who months later would become president of the World Zionist Organization, and would later become the first president of the state of Israel. It is from Judische Rundschau, January 16, 1920 (No. 4), p.4, given above. The following, Weizmann’s statement, is recorded by that paper:
        “Lloyd George once said: I know the Palestinian front much better than I know the French front, for every patch of land and every stream is familiar to me from the Bible. Palestine is, above all, a matter of the Bible for England. The English believe in the Bible more than many groups in Jewry. Thus, first came the idealistic grounds [for the decision to issue the Balfour Declaration], and only afterwards the material. We are the ones who have made clear to the English political leadership that it was in England’s interest to join with us, to spread the British protectorate over Palestine. We reached the [Balfour] Declaration not by miracles, but through persistent propaganda, through unceasing demonstration of the life force of our people. We told the responsible authorities: We will establish ourselves in Palestine whether you like it or not. You can hasten our arrival or you can equally retard it. It is however better for you to help us so as to avoid our constructive powers being turned into a destructive power which will overthrow the world.

        We demand neither a charter nor concessions, but rather a complete national edifice that meets the following preconditions: the right to acquisition of ownerless land, the facilitation of land acquisition in general, the prerogative of developing public works, complete autonomy in the spiritual and intellectual sphere, and last not least, a direct influence upon the English administration in the territory. The regulation of immigration by us is, for us, likewise an unconditional demand.”

        The thing about the documentation is that it is independently verifiable, in spite of whatever logical fallacies highlighting intellectual bankruptcy that you decide to use.

      • Ben Steigmann says:

        And incidentally, if we want to use poisoning the well fallacies, I don’t think we should forget the following: http://www.dailygrail.com/Skepticism/2013/8/Is-the-Week-Organized-Skepticism-Imploded

      • Ben you are a renowned crank over on the forum, there’s really nothing to say to you other than sucks to be you man.

      • Ben Steigmann says:

        I hope that some day you will be able to start thinking without fallacies.

      • Richard Moss says:

        How to Change the World

        Certain entities desire absolute control in world affairs. They may accomplish this because vast numbers of humans request their help while misunderstanding the ancient knowledge. To finally place humans in control and change the violent world they have created, we must replace the ancient ways with the kind of sayings that can hold evil back. Here are a few examples that you can use. Or make your own commands…

        Spirits of corruption – leave. Satanic Rituals – un-empowered. Lies & Deception Revealed, Humiliated Truth & Honesty – Rule the World. Entities of Torture remain in Hell. Virtue & Chastity – Exulted. Principles and Morality – Dominate. Abortion Holocaust gone. Violence in Sports terminated. Family values – Glorified. Unwed Father, Crime against a child. Corrupt Politicians suffer in Hell. Persecution gone from existence. The Righteous inherit the Universe.

        Because these statements work in reverse of traditional practices, they can finally remove alien world domination – a plague controlling this planet since Eden. Also bring into existence Peace on Earth – Free at Last after war and bloodshed under spirit rulership.

        Now understood, meditation should no longer be called magic but science, actually a super-technology operated from within the human brain. We do not know all the interdimensional aspects they are using, but we now have a basic understanding. We know enough to make anyone with good intent renounce tradition and begin something new as outllined above – liberating the Earth at last.

        For we are fighting with people not made of flesh and blood, but against persons without bodies. Evil rulers of the unseen world, those mighty satanic beings and great evil princes of darkness who rule this world, and against huge numbers of wicked sprits in high places. [Therefore] Put on all Gods armor so that you will be able to stand safe,” explains Ephesians 6.

        A Reply: Traditions Generate UFO Abductions around the World:

        If ANYONE stretches his arms out wide he or she will be able to touch… some person, or more likely… persons, who are [victimized by ET contact which is greatest in areas where these practices are highest]. I too know of one who is now in a mental institution; of another who is heavily into drugs and alcohol; of another that has attempted suicide; plus one more who has seriously considered suicide. Our actions affect the people around us.

        The real Stargate into/out of our Universe is The Amazing Human Mind. “It seems evident that these phenomena are produced in the same manner that other occult manipulations are produced. They involve ramatic manipulations of matter and energy. Although they originate from the spiritual world, they can produce very powerful, temporarily physical manifestations at the material level.

        Thank you :)

        COPY AND SHARE WITH EVERYONE

        On 10/1/13, The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories

      • Ben quit acting like you use logic, you believe in the NWO, you’re an anti semite, and you are a proponent of some of the most ridiculous conspiracy theories out there. If you used logic and understood fallacies you would have long since realised you were completely wrong, so quit pretending t be smart and try to actually be smart for real.

        As for you Richard you need to give your head a big shake and stop copy and pasting that dumb comment everywhere.

      • Ray says:

        Conspircykiller lets all step back for one moment and look at things rationally, all our evidence is based on what we hear, what we read and what we can’t explain, so in a way we are both right, but on the other hand evidence suggests some thing is happening yet to be explained.

      • You have made numerous defamatory comments – “crank”, “anti semite”, etc. As for the “anti-Semitic” comment – I merely quote the source texts from zealots. I have Jewish ancestry, and have no problem with that (though I do have problems with the Jewish religion, which I document as a possible ideological origin of the malicious activity of the Zealots, which percolates in even the purportedly “atheistic” variants: http://mailstar.net/philos.html), and I maintain the distinction between that and the Jewish people as a whole. I have, as noted on the site I linked to, interacted with racial anti semites, but only to show them the ridiculousness of the racist approach. I am working in the tradition of Oscar Levy -see his commentary at pp. viii-xiii: http://ia700603.us.archive.org/22/items/T
        heWorldSignificanceOfTheRussianRevolution/48920297-Rivers-The-World-Significance-of-the-Russian-Revolution.pdf

        Regarding “new world order conspiracy theories” – an interesting item is the work of Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky, who was allowed to examine secret Soviet archives, and found that the modern EU was implemented as a result of a conspiracy between the Politburo and the elite of the Trilateral Commission – David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Yasuhiro Nakasone, and Valéry Giscard d’Estaing. He gives the documentation in his book “EUSSR”, and an interesting article on this is here: http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865

        Regarding “ridiculous conspiracy theories”, what I am a proponent of is only what I present on the site, and the other items of mine that given on the site, that I endorse. I note that my work is preliminary, and provide the best sources I could find upholding the widely held narratives, the thesis of which I am aware of and might engage more fully further, but persist with my thesis because in many cases the documentation I present overturns those narratives. Your strategy is to kill the messenger so as to make others of your mind set see me as non worthy of responding to and wrong from the start. It is a flawed, intellectually dishonest, but unfortunately effective method to combat material that is different from your belief system.

  13. Pingback: Real Street » Does the Latest Research Show that ‘Conspiracy Theorists’ are the Sane Ones?

  14. Pingback: Psychology professor demonstrates: “Conspiracy theorists” OK; government dupes clueless, humorless

  15. James R says:

    Undoubtedly most conspiracy theories are bunk. Unfortunately, the Official 911 story cannot possibly be true as it conflicts with the basic and fundamental laws of Physics. All of the name calling and finger pointing and labelling is a complete and utter waste of time. All who take the time to evaluate the evidence of what happened on September 11 will come face to face with the unfortunate and unthinkable truth. The official story of September 11 doesn’t even comprise high quality lies. It is actually a very silly and insulting pile of nonsense. The official story of September 11th is a classic case of the very big lies that survives because people refuse to scrutinise it. The lies are sustained by our collective incredulity that what we believe could possibly be incorrect because it contradicts all of our underlying assumptions about the West and who we are in the world.

    • Obviously this blog is not the place t argue such pedantry as physics, however that being said I would love to know what physics you claim is impossible, what your skill sets in the physics world are, what expertise you have in building codes, design and architecture, and while we are at it I would also love to know exactly what your expertise and qualifications on fire and crime scene investigation is.

      After that we can probably ascertain a reasonable level as to whether your findings are based on conjecture found on conspiracy websites, or whether you actually have any inside information and knowledge based upon the data you meticulously researched as an academic.

      • James R says:

        CK, I have no physics or indeed any other scientific qualifications. If you would allow yourself to re-examine the events you would discover that the Official 911 story is so laced with absurdity that only a very basic level (high school) of scientific knowledge is required to understand that the Official story CANNOT POSSIBLY BE TRUE, your desire that it be true is completely understandable, but ultimately irrelevant.
        The Official story violates Newton’s third Law of motion in a very obvious and easily elucidated way so I will focus upon that.
        Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to that of the first body.
        The third law means that all forces are interactions between different bodies and thus that there is no such thing as a unidirectional force or a force that acts on only one body.
        According to the Official story of the destruction of the World Trade Center towers, the bottom part of the building was destroyed by the force exerted by the gravitational collapse of the top section of the building. The top sextion of the building remains intact, accelerates and destroys almost the entire structure that sits underneath it.
        Remember according to Newton’s third law of motion. “there is no such thing as a unidirectional force or a force that acts on only one body.” yet this is exactly what we are told happened to the Twin towers.
        The falsification of the history of this event has been shockingly blatant and profound.
        The attacks in New York actually began prior to AA Flight 11 striking the North tower. This is documented in several audio recordings, both are included in the video. “9_11 CLEAR bomb going off in WTC BEFORE first plane EVER hit”. Which is less than eight minutes long and available on Youtube. The audio recordings are further substantiated by Seismic data readings taken by Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, in Palisades, NY, along with numerous eyewitness accounts from those of WTC janitor William Rodriguez to broadcast journalist and former political staffer George Stephanopolous.
        I believed the Official account for more than ten years until I decided to check the evidence to make 100% sure that the Conspiracy fools were talking rubbish as they tend to do. The discovery that these people were actually correct in much of their critique was psychologically devastating and destroyed the worldview I had held all my life, but once you know it’s impossible to rescind the knowledge.

      • Your point might stand if the two bodies acting against one another had equal strength. However, we already know that there was structural damage, fire damage and all manner of holes and cracks in those buildings. It’s too simple of you to state something like that and then act as if the conditions were perfect so your reasoning should just be accepted as if that is all we need to explain the matter.

        The scenario was far more complex than a single operand to explain everything as a catch all.

    • Bill Nada says:

      Is that why Stephen Jones, Richard Gage, David Ray Griffin, & co all publish in fake journals, or post on the internet?

      If you are going to criticize “the official story”, read it for yourself first.

      • James R says:

        This ridiculous comment exposes the fact that no amount of scholarly credentials make any difference to the silly fundamentalists such as CK and Bill “mentally” Nada. Dr Steven Jones has a PH.d in physics yet that carries absolutely no authority when the highly credentialled individual’s views do not match your fundamentalist prejudices.
        I really think by questioning the work of Jones, Gage and Griffin, on the basis that they publish stuff on the internet Mr. Nada exposes an impoverished intellect, fallacious (bordering on farcical) reasoning and overall a sad case of mental death.

      • Arch Stanton says:

        It’s funny how conspiracists always big up their own skills when it comes to evaluating the evidence, isn’t it? The JFK conspiracists all pretended to be ballistics experts and likewise the 911 troofers all declare themselves to be experts in physics and engineering. It strikes me as the Dunning-Kruger effect in action.

        It’s worth noting that not one of the conspiracists has ever had their work on 9/11 published in a peer-reviewed journal. Even the much-vaunted effort by Steve Jones on the presence of “nanothermite” only appeared in a Bentham Science Publishers journal after Jones PAID them to. It has not appeared in any peer-reviewed journal, nor is it likely to, considering that the entire basis of his claim is that iron oxide particles were present in his samples from Ground Zero. He seemed to overlook that iron oxide particles are present in many situations – it’s called rust.

        By contrast, there are plenty of articles in peer-reviewed journals that suggest the towers collapsed due to excessive heating and that progressive collapse models are consistent with observed data:

        “Behaviour of lightweight composite trusses in fire: A case study,” STEEL AND COMPOSITE STRUCTURES 7 (2): 105-118 APR 2007

        “Mechanics of progressive collapse: Learning from world trade center and building demolitions,” JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MECHANICS-ASCE 133 (3): 308-319 MAR 2007

        “Finite element code for impact collapse problems of framed structures,” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR NUMERICAL METHODS IN ENGINEERING 69 (12): 2538-2563 MAR 19 2007

        “Impact of the Boeing 767 aircraft into the World Trade Center,” JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MECHANICS-ASCE 131 (10): 1066-1072 OCT 2005

        “Effect of insulation on the fire behaviour of steel floor trusses,” FIRE AND MATERIALS 29 (4): 181-194 JUL-AUG 2005

        “Stability of the World Trade Center Twin Towers structural frame in multiple floor fires,” JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MECHANICS-ASCE 131 (6): 654-657 JUN 2005

        “Structural responses of world trade center under aircraft attacks,” JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING-ASCE 131 (1): 6-15 JAN 2005

        “Use of high-efficiency energy absorbing device to arrest progressive collapse of tall building,” JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MECHANICS-ASCE 130 (10): 1177-1187 OCT 2004

        “How did the WTC towers collapse: a new theory,” FIRE SAFETY JOURNAL 38 (6): 501-533 OCT 2003

        “A suggested cause of the fire-induced collapse of the World Trade Towers,” FIRE SAFETY JOURNAL 37 (7): 707-716 OCT 2002

        And here is another paper that discusses progressive collapse and how studies of the WTC collapse have contributed to stricter building codes:

        “Progressive collapse of structures: Annotated bibliography and comparison of codes and standards,” JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED FACILITIES 20 (4): 418-425 NOV 2006

        In other words, a lot of 9/11 troofers are absolutely cocksure about their technical knowledge through their “research” consisting of watching Youtube videos and reading posts in conspiracist forums that are more like echo chambers. They know so little about the subjects in hand that they actually believe that they know more than the acknowledged experts in those fields. Like I said, it’s the Dunning-Kruger effect in action.

  16. Pingback: Coast to Coast Radio just canceled its plans to broadcast a show on research suggesting that “conspiracy theorists” are saner than government dupes. Rather than give the author of the article a platform to discuss it. No need for freedom of speech her

  17. Pingback: Coast to Coast Radio just canceled its plans to broadcast a show on research suggesting that “conspiracy theorists” are saner than government dupes. Rather than give the author of the article a platform to discuss it. No need for freedom of speech her

  18. Martin says:

    Mr. Wood, It seems that you scheduled appearance on coast to coast AM on 7-28-13 was scrapped and replaced with a segment on whales and dolphins. Do you know why this occurred and have they rescheduled your segment? Thanks.

    • Mike Wood says:

      The producer told me they really wanted the whales and dolphins guy. I might be on again in August, but it’s “wait and see” at this point. I’m not holding my breath – corrections tend to be less sexy than the results they’re throwing cold water onto.

  19. Introduction to: “What about Building 7?” A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories:

    “The Internet was made for conspiracy theory: it is a conspiracy
    theory: one thing leads to another, always another link leading you
    deeper into no thing and no place.”
    (Stewart, 1999, p. 18).

    ^ *Internet Published* Academic Paper Defaming Conspiracy Theorists

    The irony that is lost on most of you upon opening this study with the above quote is disturbing and additionally; quite hilarious. But it does not end there by any stretch! I’ve subjectively and rougly applied the same methods in the study to this very comments section here and here is my conclusion.

    The amount of ad hominem, hostile, and derogatory statements by conventionalists is overwhelming whereas the people arguing 9/11 “alternate” conspiracy are citing, appealing, and much nicer.

    This is not suprising as anyone has done their own research into 9/11 will be hard pressed to believe a sorted Muslim on dialysis in a cave in Afghanistan conspired with 16 impoverished others who barely knew how to fly to pull off the most coordinated terrorist attack in American history. Further, that WTC 7 officially collapsed due to [NIST Official Report] “WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings”. Did I mention DoD reported $2.3 trillion dollars was _lost_ the day before the attack?

    Indeed the person who would argue the above “official” conspiracy rather than a conspiracy involving a professionally planned and executed operation able to bypass the full weight of United States Intelligence, Military, Aerospace, and Cilvilian Flight Control has quite the small toolbox with which to make an arguement. Best to just yell insults then.

    I have a much better study. Who can display more *willingness* to look past what explanation is given them. Who is more likely to do their patriotic duty and research the issue at hand from multiple angles, multiple sources. Even sources that *gasp* challenge the status quo! Who can more readily understand another perspective. Who is more able to think on multiple levels. Who is more unsettled by life change. Who is more susceptible to peer pressure. Cui bono?

    Anyways, most of those with the courage to risk their current worldview in pursuit of the truth no matter the consequences evolve in a way those with small minds and small courage will never.

    • If you hadn’t come across as so bananas, people might have confused you for someone worth paying attention to. Sadly for you, you seem to be confusing yourself as an expert, which doesn’t come across well to people further studied than you.

  20. Brad Henschel, Sr., JD says:

    As a former Criminal Defense Atty I watched Criminal Prosecutors attempt to get Juries to ignore details of innocence by telling Jurors to Look at the BIG PICTURE. The Big Picture here is while the “terrorists”, who were in reality Plane Hijackers, were largely Saudi Arabian Citizens the USA attacked IRAQ and Afghanistan but not Saudi Arabia. Since neither IRAQ nor Afghanistan had nothing to do with the plane hijackers and especially since Bin Laden was found in Pakistan not Afghanistan, it is obvious that the US Government Officials had a pre-conceived plan justified by the anger of americans at being attacked on our own soil.
    One of the lies we were told was that the IRAQ invasion would be paid for by IRAQ oil. The US does not use IRAQ oil. Our primary source of oil is Venezuela, Canada and our own Oil from North Dakota and Texas and California as well as the Gulf of Mexico.
    Remember the old saying, Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts absolutely? It comes from the political scandals and bribery, with criminal convictions, of many politicians over the years. Tea Pot Dome, The Watergate, and the NY Police Corruption exposed by Serpico are just a few of the many political conspiracies and corruption nationally known.
    In So. California just recently the Entire City of Bell was a hotbed of political conspiracy and corruption by city officials who were tried and convicted of such corruption.
    The Actions of US Govt Officials including President Bush broke international law to the point that warrants for arrest are outstanding against Bush in many countries so that he cannot travel internationally.
    By attacking Afghanistan instead of treating the plane hijackers as individual criminals and using extradition under treaty and international law reveals the real plan of our public officials but not the motive behind using our defense military forces to attack small countries in a fake war against so-called “Terrorism”. That’s like a war against crime or drugs, it’s an amorphous idea that has no real meaning but gives psychological base to an insane idea or concept.
    But as some have suggested they have a nice life so they don’t want to disrupt that life by attacking the public officials of the government that makes them comfortable. It’s not in their interest to make their life less comfortable just because the US officials kill other people in a far off country for criminal purposes.

    • chevdo says:

      I’m sure you don’t give a crap about reality, but here’s a dose of it anyway:

      The reason USA declared war on Afghanistan is because the Taliban had taken over Afghanistan in the previous 5 years, and set up bases in Afghanistan to train Al Qaeda operatives, many of which came from Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia did not have any Al Qaeda training bases, and they’re considered an ally (despite the fact that their schools teach kids to hate americans, but that’s another story…) Pakistan DID have Al Qaeda training bases, and probably still does. And they knowingly harbored bin Laden for 10 years, which is why we had to covertly go into Pakistan to get bin Laden even though on paper Pakistan is supposed to be an ally. It was considered to be a ‘touchy situation’ to say the least.

      I have no idea where you got the idea that “Iraqi oil was supposed to pay for the war”. The main reason USA declared war on Iraq was because Saddam Hussein kept cutting $20,000 checks to the families of suicide bombers in Israel, but they had to cook up a story about ‘weapons of mass destruction’ because the real reason wouldn’t inspire the average american yokel to support the war. Did that plan backfire? Somewhat. Did it provide plenty of fodder to whip conspiracy loons into a froth? It sure did…

      Also, I hate to break it to you, but Bush is paid scads of moolah to travel around the world and give speeches like all former presidents are. You probably won’t see any photo ops of him shooting hoops with Dennis Rodman in North Korea any time soon, but somehow I doubt that stifles his travel itinerary in any way whatsoever…

      Incidentally, were you having a stroke when you wrote:

      “By attacking Afghanistan instead of treating the plane hijackers as individual criminals and using extradition under treaty and international law”

      How exactly could people blown into tiny pieces lying under tons of rubble be extradited under treaty and international law? Did you mean spiritual law, as in that extradition treaty we have with satan?

      • Ray says:

        what about Prescott Bush he was found guilty for financing both sides of the 1st World War, he and others were also responsible for the run on the banks back in the 30’s, his Son and grand son are no less greedy come your got to joking not every thing looks as it seems, these events then and now are being manipulated for personal gain, the simple facts are the dissident middle east countries threaten block sales of oil to the US is the real reason.

      • chevdo says:

        OPEC decides how much oil gets pumped into the economy, and they were pumping the same amount before the war as afterwards. In fact OPEC hasn’t increased production since 1974, they put the same amount of barrels of oil on the market each day that they did 40 years ago. OPEC’s refusal to pump more stifles economies around the world, and every country who isn’t a member of OPEC would very much like them to pump more oil, but they don’t because not doing so keeps the price high, which they like. If oil was a good reason to go to war, why didn’t we attack Saudi Arabia, since they control OPEC?

        Halliburton has made lots of money overseeing the post-war Iraqi oil industry, but as Brad already pointed out, none of that Iraqi oil gets used in North America, and post-war oil is several times more expensive than pre-war oil was.

        I personally don’t think that Halliburton’s bottom line is the reason war was declared on Iraq, but it’s not totally unreasonable for someone to assume it might be. I mean, it is unreasonable, cynical and very unlikely, but not TOTALLY unreasonable. It is, however, totally unreasonable to suggest that 9-11 was orchestrated to give an excuse to attack Iraq since as we all know, Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, which is why the Bush administration had to push the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ reason despite knowing that was based on faulty intelligence…

      • Ray says:

        holy crap you know your shit

  21. Brad Henschel, Sr., JD says:

    One source of conspiracy data ignored by this study is the large number of criminal conspiracy convictions in counties all over the USA. Conspiracy to commit a civil tort is a felony in every jurisdiction or to commit a crime. These convictions are proof that jurys of our peers are presented by conspiracy charges brought by public officers, DAs, County Prosecutors, City Attorneys and Attorney Generals, State and Federal, which of course include the drug cartels, which are in reality conspiracies. They didn’t seem to consider the many criminal conspiracies criminally prosecuted by government officials in their study.

    • chevdo says:

      Conspiracy theorists only bring up the topic of real conspiracies as a fallacious means to bolster the veracity of the conspiracy theories that titillate them. Otherwise they are not at all interested in real conspiracies. In fact, if conspiracy-theorists really were interested in real conspiracies that would mean they’d be engaged in politics and current events, and the world would probably quickly turn into a much better place to live in.

      Unfortunately the reality behind why the world is going to hell in a handbasket is far too boring, mundane, depressing and complicated for a conspiracy theorist to enthusiastically immerse himself in like he does with more exciting crack-pot theories….

      Not to mention the fact that when you peel away the superficial layers of just about every conspiracy theory eventually you discover the jews are behind it, suggesting a rather blatant racist component to anyone who finds conspiracy theorizing to be compelling… the truth simply isn’t as interesting to the average ignoramus like the Protocols are…

  22. TheSentry says:

    Greetings all…Like ,Rush L., I live in “realville”. It must be comforting to take the observer’s cat-bird seat analyzing evidence-gatherers who are motive-free, merely searching for some TRUTH.
    OBVIOUS DEFECTS DO EXIST in the govt.’s line on 9-11 events: e.g., NO PLANE DEBRIS on Pentagon grounds, damage to Pentagon bldg. inconsistent w/plane crash, path of aledged plane attack disputed by numerous eye-witnesses who have been intimidated into silence bt govt. agents since YouTube expose’s posted. Even psychology can’t argue with 1700+ architects who signed a
    petition demanding TRUTH about the obvious demolition 9-11 bldgs.; Are 1700 professionals ALL a bunch of “head-cases” ? ALSO, since when are EMTs responding to an emergency call for aid
    to a grade school , then BLOCKED BY POLICE FROM ENTRY ? NEVER ! Wait, except in Newtown, CT at Sandy Hook Elem. School where ONLY a few POLICE & 1 Med. Examiner were ALLOWED to see ANY DEAD, or DYING without help, aleged to be gunshot children, perfectly normal ? And, ONLY ! B & W PHOTO of “ADAM LANZA”, who has no past records, no personal ID, and no neighbor who can recall EVER SEEING HIM EVER, normal ? It’s VERY CLEAR that
    numerouse REAL FACTS in both of these events DO NOT ADD UP TO A LOGICAL PICTURE
    anywhere near the REAL TRUTH ! So, chew on that psych-boys !

  23. chevdo says:

    i think I’m more interested in the psychology behind the people who are compelled to ‘debate’ with the conspiracy wackos. Years ago I was one of those people, and after I put in more effort than I have in any other endeavor in my life, and after I developed increasingly desolate and hopeless feelings, I ultimately reached an epiphany: ‘Why the hell am I wasting my time with these idiots?’. I might as well be trying to reason with the panel guests on a very special episode of Jerry Springer.

    So why DID I spend so much time and expend so much energy into the subject? I didn’t end up feeling any better off for it. The ‘education’ I gave myself about 9/11 conspiracies in order to debate about them, is inherently worthless.

    Eventually I came to realize that it’s enough that I’m not a moron, and it doesn’t matter whether anyone else is or isn’t. Besides, why would I want to educate others for free? As far as I’m concerned the average conspiracy theorist should be paying me for the therapy. Of course they wont, and that’s fine. I excel, they flounder. It’s a folly to try to raise the collective consciousness through poignant excellence in blogs, comments, forums, etc.

    I understand the psychology of the conspiracy theorists, they think what they’re going on about is extremely important, and of course I can see why. They have good reason to shout their confused diatribes from the tree-tops. But what’s the motivation for countering them? Is it really important to publicly counter them? Especially when it never sways their opinions, but simply gives them more fodder to twist up into additional craziness? At best I’d be accused of being paid by the government to argue with these (self) righteous conspiracy crusaders. The idea of a level-headed person putting in so much effort trying to smarten them up for altruistic reasons is completely alien to them, and perhaps it should be. I’d be suspicious of motives if I were them, too. Which is why I still don’t understand why I was ever motivated to argue with conspiracy theorists. They don’t want the ‘help’ and more than the average homeowner wants a Jehovas Witness knocking on their door at any particular moment…

    Face it, some people can do some things that other people can’t. I can’t play professional basketball, but I’m pretty good at figuring out what is and isn’t true on the internet. Another guy might be able to play professional basketball, but his mind is a virtual sieve when it comes to digesting information on the web… some people need the crutch of religion, some don’t. If a conspiracy theorist feels better about himself by believing in conspiracy, who am I to try to take that away from him? If he wants to walk down the street smugly thinking that he knows how the world ‘really works’ and is in possession of knowledge that the average pedestrian can’t hope to grasp, even though in reality exactly the opposite is true, why should I go around trying to bring him and his lofty notions down to earth? Isn’t that no better than chastising a retarded person for not being ‘smart enough’? If believing that pink elephants flew into the world trade center buildings helps a guy slog through the crap-infused reality that is modern life circa 2013, maybe that’s OK and maybe those of use who don’t have to do that can be content simply knowing that we don’t.

    • teaearlgreyhot1 says:

      Mark Twain put it very well: “Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.” :-D

      But there are times when it is worthwhile arguing with fools and bigots – as long as you are trying to persuade any neutral observers who happen to be around rather than trying to make the bigot see reason (which will nearly always be a fruitless task).

  24. Ray says:

    Conspiracy theorist are kicked in the guts daily by minority uneducated fools, to say we are mentally incompetent because we have the balls to question events being covered up from public view by those in Government is outrages. I like to keep track on how the Government spend my Taxes, they work for us not the other way round and the Government need to know some one is watching their every move. Don’t follow like Sheep question every thing your Government can’t explain honestly, with in reason. He who dares will unravel the truth and some times the truth hurts others,especially if it questions their reality and faith..

    • Arch Stanton says:

      Yes, “question everything” … except “chemtrails”, anti-vax nonsense, “faked moon landings” or any of the other sacred ideas of the conspiracist faith. Conspiracists rarely, if ever, go to the original sources to check that they say what conspiracy websites and videos claim they say.

      Kevin Barrett’s utterly dishonest reporting of the Wood-Douglas study is a classic example of this – there are many people on conspiracist websites, such as the David Icke forum, who proudly declare that they don’t need to read the original study because they “know” that Barrett’s article is true, especially since it appeared on the Press TV website, which they consider a trustworthy source. It suggests to me that, far from being the plucky seekers of the truth that they like to pretend they are, conspiracists are the biggest sheep of the lot.

      • chevdo says:

        If conspiracy theorists really cared about REAL conspiracies we’d have functioning governments at all levels and corporate fatcats would be held in check. But REAL conspiracies like Madoff, Enron, Beglovich, etc. are never uncovered by ‘conspiracy theorists’, they are uncovered by mainstream press, and the average conspiracy theorist couldn’t care less about them except as a means to redirect to the hokey conspiracy theories. Real conspiracy theories are too boring and mundane, and don’t titillate the imagination like chemtrails, reptilian overlords, etc. do. Guys like Ray pretend their mission is to “hold the government accountable”, but they don’t. Instead they come up with cockamamie explainations about the Sandy Hill massacre being perpetrated by holograms….

        BTW, Arch, remember the gold is in the grave NEXT to yours…

      • Ray says:

        who are you the CIA or George bushes secretary.

      • Arch Stanton says:

        And right on cue, along comes a conspiracist using the same old “you must be a government agent” accusation that they always use whenever someone questions their delusions. It’s a similar defence mechanism to the one deployed by evangelical Christians, who accuse their opponents of working for Satan. Like I said, they are the biggest sheep of the lot.

      • Ray says:

        sorry i meant the NSA

  25. Arch Stanton says:

    And the cemetery was Sad Hill. That sounds a lot like Sandy Hill. Coincidence? There’s no such thing, according to conspiracy kooks. Therefore Sergio Leone was in on the plot.

  26. Rick Moss says:

    How to Change the World

    Certain entities desire absolute control in world affairs. They may accomplish this because vast numbers of humans request their help while misapplying the ancient knowledge. To finally place humans in control and change the violent world they have created, we must replace tradition with the kind of Sutras that can hold evil back. Here are a few examples that you can use. Or make your own commands…

    Spirits of corruption – leave.
    Lies & Deception Revealed, Humiliated
    Satanic Rituals – un-empowered.
    Truth & Honesty – Rule the World.
    Entities of Torture remain in Hell.
    Virtue & Chastity – Exulted.
    Principles and Morality – Dominate.
    Spirits Incarcerated.
    Family values – Glorified.
    Unwed Father, Crime against a Child.
    Corrupt Politicians, suffer in Hell.
    Persecution gone from existence.
    Righteousness inherit the Universe.

    Because these Sutras work in reverse of traditional methods, they can remove alien world domination – a plague controlling this planet for millenniums. They can also bring into existence a New Age of Mans Rule – Free at Last after war and bloodshed under spirit leadership.

    Now understood, the ancient knowledge should no longer be called magic but science, actually a super-technology operated from within the human brain. We don’t know all the interdimensional aspects involved, but we have a basic understanding. We know enough to make anyone with good intent renounce tradition and begin something new as outllined above – liberating the Earth at last.

    Replies from Tradition.

    “Thank you for your letter… Here is my advice… You must take a bite in order to understand what a banana is like. You must taste it! Right? If you want to know something about meditation, come to a Zen Center and try! Then if you have a question, there will be a teacher who may… give you an answer. Just try!” “No one or group is manipulating anyone.” and “It’s all your free choice”

    Replies to Tradition:

    A banana can taste better than anything experienced in our entire life, but may still be poisonous. We are foolish to determine the value of something by consuming it. To see meditations’ hypnotic nature, you must reverse yourself from meditation as outlined above, then get an objective view.
    Concerning not being able to manipulate someone against their will; a person will deny he/she was hypnotized even in front of people that saw him hypnotized! He could be standing on a table from a post-hypnotic suggestion dressed like a turkey, brought back to the normal state of thinking and have no idea how he got on the table in a turkey suit! Humiliating. Thus teachers of Zen and all traditions are the least likely to provide accurate answers about what is happening to our planet and their brains.

    An Enlightened Reply – Tradition Generates UFO Abductions around the World:

    “If ANYONE stretches his arms out wide he or she will be able to touch… some person, or more likely… persons, who are [victimized by ET contact which is greatest in areas where meditation is greatest]. I too know of one… who is now in a mental institution; of another who is heavily into drugs and alcohol; of another that has attempted suicide; plus one more who has seriously considered suicide.” Our actions affect the people around us.

    Our actions affect the people around us.

    The real Stargate into/out of our Universe is The Amazing Human Mind.

    Note: Yoga can be used in conjunction to enhance the affect

    THE REALITY OF ANOTHER DIMENSION

    The evidence is pointing more and more in one direction – to the possibility of a spirit “world” existing as another dimension all around us…. not in some far-off place.

    Many open-minded scientists were, in fact, concluding as much – that the cosmos consists of frequencies or dimensions of life that share the same space, just as radio and television frequencies do.

    Thank you :)

    COPY AND SHARE WITH EVERYONE

      • Ray says:

        We need a World revolution to bring those responsible for crimes against humanity who stock pile technology and the truth from us the majority who inhabit this special World, who made these worthless few the boss, how can these worthless few be witness to the greatest event and hide incredible technology form man kind why is this so, why are we being held back, bloody religion brain wash of the masses, God would want us to go forwards if he exist.

      • You trying to imply aliens landed and humans have the technology and are holding it back to control the planet ?

        You people will believe anything you are fed as long as it doesn’t come from academics, government or official channels. As long as it’s a random clown in a bar or on a conspiracy theory website you are cool with it.

        Also your beliefs are as dumb as believing in god, both have zero evidence to back them up, and both of them are as nutty and made up as one another. It’s about time you grew up, you are not the owner of some secret beliefs, and your paranoia is not an excuse to be stupid.

      • Ray says:

        No i am a modern human i have trouble in believing there is a god but if you spell it backwards it says dog now that’s more tangible because i can now see it,The Government is Hiding incredible information that’s rightfully ours we pay tax’s for this stuff, the evidence is over whelming on credible eye witness accounts, early documentaries on UFO in 1956 are now being contradicted, the young are being told a different story it’s all being covered up, why cover up past facts.

      • Anecdotal stories told by people do not amount to evidence. They are not overwhelmingly coherent stories, and vary so much in details that they might as well be discussing different phenomena. Belief in UFO’s and aliens is no different to the belief in Jesus or God, they are both in the category of fantasy with no evidence.

        Have you considered that UFO’s are likely natural phenomena yet to be fully explained ?
        Anyone who has done the thinking on this subject knows that the evidence is not there for aliens, and that there is also no evidence for alien technology. The only people who believe it are people who desperately want the story to be true irrespective of the lack of evidence.

      • Ray says:

        I don.t know about Aliens nether met one, UFO’s are man made there is no mystery that’s fact, my secret service uncle called them electric Jets.

    • Ray says:

      Your little essay is quite impressive, but all the redirect in the world will not help man kind, it’s full of lies, treachery, dictatorship, treason and denial of man kind.

  27. Ray says:

    My uncle was secret service he told me before he died about what was going on and what was being hidden from man kind, he said basically the Government fear economic collapse and the motto” In we God we trust” will no longer be applicable, i know with confidence friend your in for a rude awakening, he also said there is a planned announcement scheduled for 2025 World wide he was quite confident on the timed disclosure, many things he told me about events to happen did so i had no cause to disbelieve, it scared me, i have tried to tell the public but got warned off by the I think CIA so i am careful these days but i find ways to wake up the masses, take or leave it my evidence is of a tangible source you just have to trust me this World is in trouble, i am 59 years old at present, most likely i wont be around by 2025 but you will take back your World don’t let the bastards win, if people wake up now we can win or at least delay and that’s all i can say sorry i can not deliberate further i have already told you too much. please i am not a kook i am just trying to warn you guys.

    • Your story sounds fun, but no one is going to believe it. I certainly don’t.

      I believe your uncle may have told you things which he believed, and you also believed them. That is where the authenticity of your story stops. The details themselves are childish, and lack any reasonable data to support them. You are expecting the world to believe your claims, and to be honest you just come across as a little gullible and perhaps even eccentric and paranoid.

      The notion that aliens are here and the government is stopping you from knowing about them is not only ridiculous, but it lacks the credibility of alien technology and powers. If they are so technologically superior to us, then being withheld by our government would not even be a problem. They would just beam in tell us , then beam back out to a safe distance.

      But you expect us to believe that men with rocket powered sticks are stopping intergalactic travellers from revealing themselves.

      Then you expect us to believe there will be a coup to take over the planet in 2025. This is just another in a long line of predictions made by fantasists, that have all failed. I am willing to lay a bet that your prediction doesn’t come to be, and when it doesn’t you will conveniently say, ‘oh enough people got to know about ufo’s so it was set back’.
      That’s the archetypal behaviour of a charlatan.

      • Ray says:

        I resent you calling it a fun, if you don’t believe me well that’s ok i understand it’s a lot to grasp, but the truth is so simple UFO’s are man made there is no alien conspiracy, like i just commented on i have nether met an Alien, do you believe in God if you do prove he exist, at least i have tangible proof that’s more than your got. even though my Uncle is dead I fear those who warned me off this subject but stuff them they don’t tell me what to do. the CIA is outrages in their behavior.

      • Arch Stanton says:

        Cool story, bro. Do you have any believable ones as well, or do you only do the fantasy ones?

      • Ray says:

        well that’s right but i can back it up with the facts but then i will be in a lot of trouble, all that i ever want to at this stage is make people aware what’s being done behind our backs, incredible as it may sound it is my truth and you are in for a rude awakening when it comes out then you can apologize, this is no joke i don’t go out of my way to look stupid.

      • Of course I don’t believe in God, my previous statements call god and aliens fantasy.

        UFO’s being man made merely places misidentification on aircraft such as stealth tech and newer tech as being UFO’s. There are no anti gravity intergalactic tech we have as far as I am aware.

        People see all kinds of things they don’t have familiarity with, be it fireballs, electric orbs, meteors, aircraft and they categorise them as UFO’s. Experts however would immediately know what they were or weren’t, and if they were still unexplainable afterwards then they would remain unidentified, not be classed as alien spacecraft. Alien spacecraft would require incredible evidence as it defies current thinking based on the fermi paradox.

      • Ray says:

        do you want to make a bet would you put your house on it, the Air force flew these amazing silent craft in a Australia back in 1966,with complete cooperation of the Australian Government, my uncle was in charge of disinformation.

      • Whatever makes you feel important buddy.

      • Ray says:

        I try to tell you but your not listening the event in Australia was called the Westall incident this is not fiction it’s fact and documented, the American Air Force tested a new kind of craft, 3 remote control via satellite, my uncle called them electric Jets, do you think i sit around all day dreaming up this shit, this happened in 1966 i was in the 4th grade when uniformed Officials escorted me form class and asked me questions in the head masters office like has any one approach you about what my Uncle does or ask about events he attended, i remember running home i said guess what mom, and she said i know they questioned all of us too. Prove me wrong, only ask for you to have an open mind, remember when some one said the Earth was flat I’m sorry you fit this elite list of people. seek and you will find the truth don’t be lazy sit back and say every one else is wrong because your in a comfort zone and in denial the obviuos.

      • Arch Stanton says:

        I too have had strange experiences, Ray. Just last night, Kurt Cobain gave me a lift in his Tardis and showed me that we are all one consciousness. Then he told me that Courtney Love was in fact an interdimensional assassin, so he had to fake his own death before she killed him. And it’s funny you should mention the business with the secret service questioning you at school and interrogating your whole family because Kurt said he had a hand in this incident when he travelled back to 1966 in his Tardis and blurted out to someone in a bar that your uncle was blabbing top secrets to his nephew. He asked me to pass on his apologies to you. If anyone doubts this story, prove me wrong. Just do the research, like Ray has done here. He’ll be proven right, one day, oh yes, you’ll see.

      • Ray says:

        Rack off idiot Kurt Cobain what shit are you dribbling. if you can’t open up your eyes then go open up you ass your full of it.

      • Arch Stanton says:

        Ray, since it’s obviously sailing right over your head, the point of the Kurt Cobain anecdote was that it is every bit as credible as any of the dribblings you’ve posted on here. You make wild claims without providing a shred of verifiable evidence and then shift the burden of proof on others to prove you wrong, rather than you proving that you’re right. You’re living in your own little fantasy world, albeit a very amusing one for anyone who can be bothered to read this far down in the comments. And you’re only jealous because I got to see Kurt *and* travel in time and space. :p

      • Ray says:

        i,m telling the truth i am a witness. take it or leave it i don’t have to convince you perhaps i am trying too had as matter of fact i couldn’t careless what you think anyway.

      • When people talk about government programs that are top secret, which involve new aircraft designs, to people who they shouldn’t talk about it’s no surprise that the armed forces would have something to say about it.

        You talk as if something nefarious or unusual is happening. If a person works in the armed forces the words ‘need to know’ are of the utmost importance. Your uncle and you broke those, you broke the national secrets act, and then you complain about being bothered by people for doing so ?

        Grow p man, what you and your uncle did was illegal, and your uncle was lucky not to go to jail.

      • Ray says:

        I agree some secrets need to be kept from public eye, but when people are called mad for telling the truth of the greatest event in the history of man kind that has no reason to be kept secret then it is treason, how many people must die to keep a secret only those in the need to know bases are the only one who benefits financially, when does the Government release this information to the public, what in a 100 years, they have to stop protecting the church and utility companies who are keeping man kind in the dark, why do we suffer for the chosen few who choose money over doing the right thing for the World. greedy parasites their day will come it’s not if it’s when and that’s not far away, fair dinkum mate your a real goose so how do you like being called names,

      • “but when people are called mad for telling the truth of the greatest event in the history of man kind that has no reason to be kept secret then it is treason”

        And how exactly do prototype aircraft ascend to the greatest event in human history ?

        Bolstering the importance of your story a little don’t you think ?

      • Ray says:

        These Craft do not use fossil fuel it’s zero point energy, German scientist invented it in WW2 based on Tesla designs this is not fiction it’s fact. this is what being kept secret from you the in denial public, get off you ass and ask questions, you find the answers are hidden in clear view and it’s being there since the early 50’s the Earth is round not flat catch up to rest of us.

      • LOL zero point energy based on Tesla designs.

        So Dr Spock, how exactly is it harnessed ?
        Being that neither Tesla or anyone else on the planet has figured that out.

      • Ray says:

        Gee’s I’m glad i am not on trial for murder and you were on the jury, i can only say you watch to much star trek, are you sure some one hasn’t figured it out did some one tell you how do you know it hasn’t been done what are you psychic. .

      • It’s called scientific consensus, something you clearly aren’t familiar with.

      • Ray says:

        good one Sherlock.

    • chevdo says:

      “electric jets” in 1966… wow! did they have a few B-52s filled with batteries with big cables connecting them to the jets for that electric power?

      are you sure your uncle worked for the CIA and not the LSD?

      • Ray says:

        well they weren’t round they were triangular and powered by high voltage, Mermaids found alive now that’s fact before you say i am an idiot check it out it’s true the evidence is filmed and documented soon there will big announcement on this. they must be protected at all cost.

  28. chevdo says:

    oh right, Tesla zero point energy. .I should have kept reading before replying so flippantly…

    so why exactly has the CIA been keeping all this technology for themselves for the past 60 years? I mean, if they’d released it commercially they’d pretty much own the planet by now. Oh right, they already own the planet because doing absolutely nothing commercial with this amazing technology magically gives them near omnipotent power, right? Or at least enough power to scare you into telling us about it in ways that make no sense whatsoever, because if you told us too much they’d come after you….

    • Ray says:

      if you do your research you will discover the CIA are largely funded by the sale of drugs, look back in history and you find it was the CIA who tested LSD on Americans in the late 60’s in the early 60’s they were responsible several murders some famous and some related to the famous historic persons. The Bush family run the CIA.

      • chevdo says:

        Sure, but why would they bother with such a dirty business like drug dealing when they could have made as much if not more by commercializing the zero-point energy technology?

  29. chevdo says:

    Ray, if uniformed officials dragged you out of your fourth grade class in 1966 to interrogate you about your ‘secret service uncle’, they were probably trying to figure out if your kook of an uncle had been passing any sensitive information to the commies… either that or they already knew your uncle was a double-agent and they were telling him silly stories about zero-point energy to confound the Kremlin…

    • Ray says:

      ha ha ha your a laugh a minute what a goose do you play with your self often.

      • The best laughs so far are your comments Ray, you ought to get back on the meds. Your bullshit detector is broken and is off the chart in the gullibility scale.

      • Ray says:

        what is real and What is not, who made you this all inspiring know it all, are tapped into the white house you seem to have an opinion every one is a bull shit artist and we are all crazy have you ever thought you look stupid, your just a Clinton dick lookalike that Lewinsky sucked on.

      • When you can string a coherent sentence together it will help you make your case. In the meantime try breathing before you post a comment here. Think to yourself: “Am I making my point clear enough? Do I look like a ranting crazy person by posting this ?”

        As can be seen from a lot of your comments both those questions have been utterly ignored by you.

      • Ray says:

        you abused me and insinuated i am telling lies, what i told you is the truth to my recollection, you called me crazy for what telling what i was told all those years ago up yours you drew first blood not me. .

      • Ray says:

        look i am sorry for what i said that you were a goose but i still reckon you play with your self.

      • Not exactly sure why playing oneself is a bad thing, but I guess anyone who is a moral puritan might have an explanation boring enough.

        Anyway it’s clear to anyone with a brain you are taking hearsay, anecdote and conspiracy theory far too seriously without any credibility checks or critical thinking.
        It’s sad to see someone go down this road, I have seen this kind of thing derail so many people from reality.

      • Ray says:

        That’s a fair cop i will wear it for now

      • chevdo says:

        I think you’re right about the meds, Ray’s coherency has taken a nose dive today, and it was tenuous to begin with. Either that or he’s been hitting the sauce today…

      • Ray says:

        Yeah Rosella tomatoe sauce

  30. chevdo says:

    Ray, when I was in fourth grade my parents told me babies were delivered by a stork. They’d have still told me Santa Claus was real if I hadn’t been old enough by then to know better. Why are you so sure that something you were told as a child is the gospel truth?

  31. Trial says:

    The way you behave, guys has just proven the Dr. Berrett’s conclusions about conventionalists. 10x for convincing me! ;)

  32. Trial says:

    Oh, you’re all so smarter than us – the conspiracy theorists…So I guess, you can guess it by yourself. :D

    • Haven’t fully read it to be able to explain your point then I guess.

    • Ray says:

      The Pentagon in the 911 attacks was a con job no plane parts or bodies were found, witness accounts suggest a missile was responsible, the so called black boxes should have been found undamaged, every thing in this case suggest a complete coverup they’re not just my words these are the words of experts, the question is to the Government where is your proof a Passenger Jet slammed into the pentagon, how did a Women make the famous phone from that Jet when no sell phone was invented to make that call back then only technology today has that capability so who is lying, we are not fools where did the trillions of dollars go that was uncounted for before 911.

      • BS. There were aircraft parts and bodies found at the pentagon, 114 people died there Ray, Sorry but you have your information completely wrong and you rally need to stop this insulting shit. There are hundreds of people who died there and your nonsense just makes a mockery of their deaths. Regarding your cell phones claim : http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Cellphone_calls_faked

        The fact you haven’t bothered to even check this information out, let alone the imagery showing all the aircraft parts and the information known about the body parts categorically shows you as either a] a fool or b] unwilling to fact check the shit you read online. Look up Allyn E. Kilsheimer as a starting point to show how wrong you are.

      • Ray says:

        How dare you even suggest that i am making a mockery out of 911 you are a complete idiot, look at the facts No.1 the engine pulled from the wreck did not match that Jet, it was from a smaller Jet it was a mock up, their was no bodies from the Jet recovered, No. 2 eyewitness saw a cruise missile pass by and hit the building it was not a Jet, No.3 Black boxes can with stand tremendous impact, the flight recorders should have been audible, black boxes can stand a lot more damage, their are almost indestructible, No. 4 there was only one whole in the Pentagon, where was the damage from the engines, there is none it was just a gaping long whole in the side of the Pentagon, No5 the damage was restricted to one area, Record keeping, records were destroyed and almost all died in that section of the Pentagon, i know you find this hard to believe, the Governments no good it’s full of criminals and needs a clean out especially the FBI and CIA. it’s riddled with the bastards, come on wake up people have been conned. What i am saying is some one in Government took advantage of the moment how bloody convenient it was that Part of the Pentagon where trillions of dollars were unaccounted for. “Disappearing money trick”. Are you trying to tell me every think incinerated ha bull shit.

      • Ray says:

        Yeah just on more thing the Bodies and parts were pull from the Pentagon were not Jet victims Disappearing people trick. may be they were abducted by aliens.

      • Ray you are just all wrong, and your insinuations are an insult to those who died You just have no idea about how insulting and misinformed your views are, and not only are your details wrong, but you are just a lost cause

        I won’t even talk about the details with you because quite honestly people like you anger me, you just ignore details when proven wrong and you gish gallop, look up what that means. You and me are done, go talk with a crazy person who will listen to you.

      • Ray says:

        Every one is of the same opinion some thing is wrong with the Government there has been a coverup of horrific proportions , so your saying the majority is wrong and you are right, a little bit paranoid, the trouble is your a bit too trusting and gullible, once people thought the Earth was flat and try too convince the masses, you remind me of those fools. you believe every thing the Government tells you, you look stupid conspiracykiller please leave the hard yards to the Men. being clever is not the truth, go an hide behind your Mom’s skirt Mommy’s boy.

      • Thing is you are just some old fart who thinks he knows better than officials and science, your ridiculous assertions about my age aside, you have nothing. You never will either, all you will have is your distrust of authority that makes you sound like an anti authoritarian teenager for the rest of your life, it’s embarrassing for an old man like you to behave like this.

      • Ray says:

        That’s right wisdom beyond my years sunshine, and the fact my Uncle was a federal Agent and said they new the Pentagon was not a 911 it was an attempt to coverup a crime by powerful people in Government even the Senators fear maybe you should fear me, i believed what i was told and have facts to back it up, what have you got only what you seen in the paper or on television, well doesn’t that make you a expert what a know brain sheep, and you call me an old fart, that makes you a dick head, when or if the UN start’s culling i hope you a first then you can think back how you called me an old fart. look up the UN charter on that it will shocked you, that’s called investigation let me spell it I N V E S T I G A T I O N. ba ba ba ba baaaaaa !! little sissy boy.

      • Still flapping your lips like a child I see

      • Ray says:

        Trouble with you friend you think the World is flat and i bet you go to church so who is nutty, more like plausible denial ability is your life, The God syndrome the lie and any one who disagree is a dissident fool. The truth is always hard to come by especially from fools like you who rather keep the lies in motion just because you believe in garbage. open your eyes instead of criticizing me.

      • Arch Stanton says:

        “Trouble with you friend you think the World is flat and i bet you go to church”

        Ironically, Ray, you’ve fallen for one of the biggest hoaxes in history there. It is a complete fabrication that people (the educated ones, anyway) in the Middle Ages thought the earth was flat. It was known since Aristotle in the third century BC that the earth was spherical. This included the Christian scholars, who held Aristotle in high regard. And not only did they know it was spherical, they knew the circumference with pretty impressive accuracy.

        The idea that they thought it was flat came from a 19th century fictionalised account of Christopher Columbus, written by Irving Washington. His dispute with his contemporaries wasn’t over the shape of the earth, as anyone with an education knew it was spherical, but over the size. Essentially, he thought the earth was 75% smaller than it really was – and to prove it, he was going to sail westwards to reach India. As it happens, the scholars were right and he was wrong – and if America hadn’t existed, he and his crew would have died of starvation as their supplies were already running out at that point.

        Historians have long known that “flat earthism” from Aristotle’s time onwards is a myth. Maybe you should start practising what you preach and “do the research” instead of just blindly believing whatever bolsters your worldview.

      • Wrong again, the more you flap your gums the dumber you become.

      • Ray says:

        Conspiracykiller keep dream sissy boy the penny will drop eventually, you are all dumb asses, you need to look at the facts.

  33. Trial says:

    Oh…pity it is, but I can understand that too. Thinking out of the box has never been a strong feature of conventional people.
    After all, that’s what makes them differ from unconventionalist. ;)

  34. Trial says:

    Not because you’re playing dull I gonna explain that, but for the others who are reading this:

    The funny thing is you guys just used (unconsciously or not) the good old propagandist techniques against your opponents. Bill Nada has listed it somewhere above:

    “Funny…because any good propagandist will attempt to distract from the facts by attacking a persons motives, personal characteristics, etc. Just as you have done with Dr Wood. So you either a. know nothing about propaganda, or b. do and employ it willfully.”

    Tried distracting – well, guess what – you failed! And you shall fail over and over. You and all the NWO! ;)

  35. Pablo says:

    Anyone that doesn’t believe the worlds governments engage in hidden conspiracies need their heads read. The world would cease to turn without behind the scenes deals.

    • Behind the scenes deals does not equate to conspiring to do harm to others or the planet intentionally. Talk about framing the topic so it’s out of context and given sinister twist. No one here denies that there is corruption in government, in fact no one here has said such a thing. So of course there are acts of self interest carried out by government members. These still require evidence though, unsubstantiated doubts are simply not enough to go on. However, that doesn’t equate to conspiracy to carry out 9/11, or conspiracy to cause hyperinflation, or any other such World damaging claims that require specific evidence. Evidence which no conspiracy theorist has ever provided, or at least evidence that is of any real value.

      There is a huge difference between the self interest corruption of taking backhanders, and the claims of conspiracy theorists. Conspiracy theorists are the ones who need their heads checking, paranoid belief is not a substitute for evidence.

      • Ray says:

        why are witnesses / whistle blowers dying who are connected to these events, disinformation has had the desired effect, even if the truth is there in clear day light people are too afraid to challenge the Government, for fear of reprisals against them by those who corrupt who keep secrets for greed, false flag events etc, or to cover up their criminal activities or stuff ups.

      • Witnesses dying ?
        You sound like you have been confusing hollywood movies for real life. Anecdotes off the internet don’t count for evidence. If people are being murdered because they know something about 9/11 or because they think chemtrails are real, or whatever other weird belief they have then it wouldn’t be long before it made headlines. However someone claiming something on an internet forum or a conspiracy theory website doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny.

        You might be willing to believe anything you hear on the internet, the majority of people are very skeptical about claims like that.

      • Ray says:

        clever rhetoric which doesn’t give an intelligent conclusion you simply refuse to answer you rather confuse the issue with Hollywood movies which i don’t watch open your mind to the possibility that’s all i ask instead of insults and comparisons of some other event which is in no way connected.

      • And all the rest of normal society asks from conspiracy theorists is undisputable evidence that can support their claims beyond reasonable doubt. All I ask is you provide it, instead of making unsubstantiated claims and using anecdotes as if they validate your claims.

        ‘Till hell freezes over’ springs to mind.

      • Ray says:

        all you do is insult because in your own mind you have trouble coming to terms with the truth there has been countless facts proven correct for instance why are Whistle blowers being assassinated by Government backed agencies, if it’s all bull shit why kill people like Phil Schneider or William Cooper just to name two, nearly all key witness’s of Roswell met with unusual death’s not old age where there is secrets there is speculation. truth must be told so people will not speculate a human life is equally impotent and doesn’t have a great or less value than the President of the USA., not telling public what is going on is and has been harmful, and they must remember these secrets they hide is public property not theirs and they need to be reminded of that.

      • “all you do is insult because in your own mind you have trouble coming to terms with the truth ”

        Take a look above at all your comments Ray, you’ve done your own list of outbursts so your complaining is irrelevant. I also love your armchair psychoanalysis, it’s very funny.

        “there has been countless facts proven correct for instance why are Whistle blowers being assassinated by Government backed agencies, if it’s all bull shit why kill people like Phil Schneider or William Cooper just to name two, nearly all key witness’s of Roswell met with unusual death’s not old age where there is secrets there is speculation. ”

        Cooper was a crazy man and he fired at the police after holing himself up with a gun, the man was a paranoid drunk.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_William_Cooper#Death

        And Schneider was a liar who even UFO cranks have debunked, his death was just weird, but he was obviously suffering with depression and his suicide is only considered odd by conspiracy theorists.

        Your claims about Roswell witnesses is also more fantasy.

      • Ray says:

        Conspiracykiller your are what we call a real bull dust artist why is every one else wrong and you are right, you say you like to set the record straight about what your know, your no different to us we have an opinion and that.s it what a goose all information we gather is all hearsay we merely speculate the truth and try to read between the lines and unravel what really happened, so i guess you have an opinion and we respect that, i wouldn’t believe the garbage the government is spinning. Agencies of the Government are harassing people for what they know why? .

  36. Robin says:

    I found the article ‘New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostile’ on Facebook today. It was linked by a conspiracist i know. He linked it via VeteransToday.com. The guy posts articles like this quite often. A friend replied saying: ‘You’re a very selective researcher’. The friend is studying journalism himself and does full research for the articles he writes by talking to relevant people. The conspiracist told him there was proof all over the internet why 9/11 was an inside job. This led to an argument. When i read the article by Barrett, i thought he made the whole story up and even his reverence wouldn’t exist. So i searched for it on the internet and found the whole study, which i read until the last page. It suprised me how selectively Barrett had read the article, fully ignoring parts that might discomfort his believes. I pointed out that the article didn’t use it’s reference right, wich makes the article nothing more than some massage for the conspiracists self-esteem. This only led to a friend breaking out in laughter because i read the whole article just for some lame Facebook argument. A bit later i stumbled upon your explaination of the study in a radioshow i found on youtube, where you also stated that Barrett has fully misinterprented the study. Later i found Barretts new article: ‘Conspiracy Theorists OK: Government Dupes Clueless, Humorless’ where he is angry at you and Coast to Coast Radio for cancelling the plans for the broadcast about his article. He suddenly portraits you as some cranky CIA sell-out and states his own article is true, which creates a great contradiction. How can you disprove your own reference? When reading the comments on the article it suprised me how many people stay at his side after making a total fool of himself.

    It was really interesting seeing the impact of modern media and the sudden impact on peoples believes with my own eyes. How couldn’t the ‘people who don’t believe everything the media tells you’ see this massive flaw in the article. There was only one reference and nobody took the time to read the study before forewarding it further into the internet.
    I find your studies about the conspiracy theory psychology very interesting due to your non-judgemental approuch. Keep up the good work!
    Sorry for my English flaws, Dutch is my primary language.

    • Ray says:

      clever rhetoric will not impress only facts the truth is coming get ready for a shock. A wise man is more intelligent than a clever fool.

      • Yeah conspiracy theorists have been saying this same tired rhetoric since the seventies, “the twoof is coming, it;s just around the corner !”, we are all still waiting for even a hint.
        You were dealt the fools card the moment you believed the nonsense you do…

      • Ray says:

        better being a fool than a bloody idiot

      • In your case the distinction is unclear.

      • Ray says:

        That’s OK conspiracykiller it went over your head too much rubbish talk by you.

      • Richard Moss says:

        Here is Absolute proof for an alien presence. Simply place the following bumper sticker on your car…

        ET YOU RAPE LITTLE CHILDREN AND SUCK BLOOD YOUR EVIL.

        Then take a relaxing country drive. Bring a camera. I guarantee your new YouTube Video will be called FAKE or mysteriously disappear & replaced with a Hollywood Hack Job. Your camera confiscated, death threats made, hard drive erased by Visitors in pseudo military garb and/or Men in Black. “Houston we have a problem.”

        On 12/19/13, The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories

      • Ray says:

        strewth ?

      • hahaha

        Oh Richard, it’s Christmas buddy. Either you are having a bit of alcoholic comedy with us, or you are having an episode. I hope it’s the former for yours and your families sake.

      • rick moss says:

        Here is Absolute proof for an alien presence. Simply place the following bumper sticker on your car…

        ET YOU RAPE LITTLE CHILDREN AND SUCK BLOOD YOUR EVIL.

        Then take a relaxing country drive. Bring a camera. I guarantee your new YouTube Video will be called FAKE or mysteriously disappear & replaced with a Hollywood Hack Job. Your camera confiscated, death threats made, hard drive erased by Visitors in pseudo military garb and/or Men in Black. “Houston we have a problem.”

      • Ray says:

        conspiracykiller lay off you have gloated enough, so you reckon you know exactly what’s going on you are an amazing fool, dream on, the trouble is that i can back up what i know to be a truth, the problem is i have been warned off by the Government thanks to Mr. Snowden who can’t keep his mouth shut and will do so for the present time, so by all means think what you like .

      • Warned off by the government for posting stupid comments online, I see you are still doing it. They must have really threatened you man, you seem scared.

      • Ray says:

        conspircykiller first of all get stuffed and yes these federal people have persuasive powers that is why i backed off i talk about it but no longer in detail so try as you may dick head it won’t work shit why am i explaining my secret shit you i guess my ego got the better of me f.ck you.

      • I wish you would back off completely, your crazy talk is annoying.

      • Ray says:

        conspiracykiller you started it not me i wish you would just the hell up and stop trying to belittle me on line i only had an opinion but you reckon i am nuts what do you expect i am just going sit back and take up the rear end by you.

  37. A ωriter asks, ‘I’ve heard that myy metabolic rate screeсhes tο a halt if I
    go on a calorie restricted diet Herbalife diet product
    Mіld side effectѕ such as headaches, excessive gas and sloeep ρroblems.

  38. Manny epeгts say that a diet rich iin fruits, vegetables, wgole graіns and lean meats will proviide plenty of potassium
    on a daily basis, butt I’m not ѕo sure Herbalife diet ρroduct Losing
    weight is not always easy, and from timе to time it is easy to
    get into a slumρ.

  39. natural says:

    It is moгe important to eat your vеgetables so that you caan have
    a greater variety off vіtamins in уour diet from natural
    whbole food sources herbalife weight loss Paleo cookingg оils aare generally
    coconut oil, alnond oil or flax seed oil.

  40. If yyou want ttο lоse weight faster and without any siԁe еffects then
    a calorie countеr is a must for you herbalife online store
    While exetcise seems to be the hardest part forr peoρle ωho
    are not very eager too get up the couch annd sweat it out, these recipes have
    become good aides in keeeping a healthy lifestyle.

  41. Just because a cоuple people haave done it ԁoes not meаn you can or should formula
    1 nutritional shake mix Exercise is also important for your health and well-being,
    and cаn help shеd pounds.

  42. Stefanie says:

    And no matter the size of the specific trade that you turn your dark space into something
    bigger, making social networking a little bit about.
    Wheelchair liftcontractors are those that don’t have the proper equipment to get
    a job or a remodeling contractorAlthough, there is adequate space to have a team atmosphere.
    When do we call ourselves, without individualized warrants,
    from which buildings permits are complete. But even if you should too.
    It is the bank. Often they keep getting school bus work done.

  43. law says:

    Thank you for some other informative website. The place
    else could I get that kind of info written in such an ideal manner?
    I have a project that I am simply now operating on, and I’ve been on the look
    out for such info.

    • Ray says:

      The events of 911 left questions in the minds of the American people, was it an in side job, or was it a conspiracy gone wild, curiously the blame game hasn’t stopped, the lack of credible evidence has yet to surface that would settle this issue once and for all, i Think the American Government has not convinced any one yet.

      • “The events of 911 left questions in the minds of the American people”

        No.
        The events of 911 have left questions in the minds of a small subgroup of people. People who are not mentally equipped to assess what actually happened based on the evidence provided. This small minority are loud about their opinions, and quiet about their lack of supporting evidence.

        Meanwhile the officials who investigated 911 have provided an overwhelming amount of evidence in support of their explanation.

        ” i Think the American Government has not convinced any one yet.”

        Are we redefining the meaning of anyone here.
        Anyone being yourself and a few of your online conspiracy buddies.

      • Ray says:

        I see your still your sarcastic self conspiracykiller the only small mind here is your’s once again you can’t help your self, there is in fact overwhelming evidence that a crime of greed was committed by some one in high office over 911, there is also absolute evidence that your mind is so closed nothing gets in or gets out. have a nice day killer..

      • Ray says:

        Good one killer, I’m impressed you got me, but i said you have a closed mind, now I’m confused, great come back. i watched it did nothing for me, had a good laugh.

      • Bill Nada says:

        Of course, Ray. Those who don’t subscribe to your conclusions must be close minded. No surprise you missed the point of CK video.

      • Ray says:

        Well I try Bill Nada, I’m more opened minded than you think.

  44. google says:

    Your style is really unique in comparison to other folks I’ve read stuff from.
    Many thanks for posting when you’ve got the opportunity, Guess I’ll just
    book mark this blog.

  45. They’re very natural, so lemons are a great way of bleaching the skin and helping to reduce the appearance
    of your acne scars. The first thing you need to realize is that contrary to what many skin experts believe, the food that you eat has a lot
    to do with acne. Pure genuine pearl powder does
    not totally dissolve in water or liquid, so be sure you stir as
    you drink.

  46. Awesome website, really been browsing forever and a day for ideas on the best rattan furnishings for
    our home and in our back garden. This site seriously helpedgreat blog some great info here

  47. Hello, I think your site might be having browser compatibility issues.
    When I look at your website in Chrome, it looks fine but when opening
    in Internet Explorer, it has some overlapping.
    I just wanted to give you a quick heads up! Other
    then that, wonderful blog!

  48. Pingback: What does online discussion tell us about the psychology of conspiracy theories? | The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories

Comments are closed.