Top Ten Conspiracy Theories

[Red Phoenix]

Have just seen the description on his profile, I'm not having it that he's actually being serious, think he's just pretending to be : Stephenson Billings - Dr. Stephenson Billings is an award-winning Investigative Journalist, Motivational Children's Party Entertainer and Antique Soda Bottle Collector all in one special, blessed package!

 

http://harddawn.com/author/stephenson-billings/

 

Fuck's sake, he has to be having a laugh, here's another article :

 

 

 

Great educational institutions are the bedrock of American society. They give intelligent young people advantages not know in other nations. That, in turn, has helped make the United States the true, democratic leader of the free world.

 

Yet while each and every person has the right to attend a university, does the government have an obligation to send them there? This question is vitally important in an age when our youths have become wasteful and reckless, and our Federal coffers have been ravaged to the breaking point. Sadly, it is our hardworking middle classes who are losing the battle for limited educational resources. This loss threatens ingenuity, entrepreneurship and the very idea of American freedom itself.

 

The culprit behind the looting of this country’s future? To put it bluntly, it’s the lower classes.

 

Why do children today think they deserve to go college in spite of their economic background? When did this idea take hold that the taxpayers are obligated to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars so that every leech and half-wit, juvenile delinquent and illegal alien can attend a four-year party about homosexuality and communism? That’s essentially the equation of higher education in the age of Obama. And it’s destroying our nation from within.

 

http://harddawn.com/do-poor-people-really-deserve-college/

 

If I thought he was being serious I'd maybe troll at the site for a bit, but am just going to leave it!

[Red Phoenix]

So it is a satire site after all, thought it was (even if I was slow to catch it.) Check their twitter account for more madness : https://twitter.com/OfficiaHardDawn

 

Have got to love the Chemtrail Immunity Suit they have on offer there.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Some interesting/depressing/scary facts about climate change.

 

http://www.iflscience.com/environment/let-s-call-it-30-years-above-average-temperatures-means-climate-has-changed

 

If you’re younger than 30, you’ve never experienced a month in which the average surface temperature of the Earth was below average.

Each month, the US National Climatic Data Center calculates Earth’s average surface temperature using temperature measurements that cover the Earth’s surface. Then, another average is calculated for each month of the year for the twentieth century, 1901-2000. For each month, this gives one number representative of the entire century. Subtract this overall 1900s monthly average – which for February is 53.9F (12.1C) – from each individual month’s temperature and you’ve got the anomaly: that is, the difference from the average.

The last month that was at or below that 1900s average was February 1985. Ronald Reagan had just started his second presidential term and Foreigner had the number one single with “I want to know what love is.”

These temperature observations make it clear the new normal will be systematically rising temperatures, not the stability of the last 100 years. The traditional definition of climate is the 30-year average of weather. The fact that – once the official records are in for February 2015 – it will have been 30 years since a month was below average is an important measure that the climate has changed.

Temperature history for all Februaries from 1880-2014 NCDC

How the Earth warms

As you can see in the graphic above, ocean temperature doesn’t vary as much as land temperature. This fact is intuitive to many people because they understand that coastal regions don’t experience as extreme highs and lows as the interiors of continents. Since oceans cover the majority of the Earth’s surface, the combined land and ocean graph strongly resembles the graph just for the ocean. Looking at only the ocean plots, you have to go all the way back to February 1976 to find a month below average. (That would be under President Gerald Ford’s watch.)

You can interpret variability over land as the driver of the ups and downs seen in the global graph. There are four years from 1976 onwards when the land was below average; the last time the land temperature was cool enough for the globe to be at or below average was February 1985. The flirtation with below-average temps was tiny – primarily worth noting in the spirit of accurate record keeping. Looking at any of these graphs, it’s obvious that earlier times were cooler and more recent times are warmer. None of the fluctuations over land since 1976 provide evidence contrary to the observation that the Earth is warming.

Some of the most convincing evidence that the Earth is warming is actually found inmeasures of the heat stored in the oceans and the melting of ice. However, we often focus on the surface air temperature. One reason for that is that we feel the surface air temperature; therefore, we have intuition about the importance of hot and cold surface temperatures. Another reason is historical; we have often thought of climate as the average of weather. We’ve been taking temperature observations for weather for a long time; it is a robust and essential observation.

Temperature history for every year from 1880-2014. NOAA National Climatic Data Center

Despite variability, a stable signal

Choosing one month, February in this instance, perhaps overemphasizes that time in 1985 when we had a below average month. We can get a single yearly average for all the months in an entire year, January-December. If we look at these annual averages, then the ups and downs are reduced. In this case, 1976 emerges as the last year in which the global-average temperature was below the 20th century average of 57.0F (13.9C) – that’s 38 years ago, the year that Nadia Comaneci scored her seven perfect 10s at the Montreal Olympics.

I am not a fan of tracking month-by-month or even year-by-year averages and arguing over the statistical minutia of possible records. We live at a time when the Earth is definitively warming. And we know why: predominately, the increase of greenhouse gas warming due to increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Under current conditions, we should expect the planet to be warming. What would be more important news would be if we had a year, even a month, that was below average.

The variability we observe in surface temperature comes primarily from understood patterns of weather. Many have heard of El Niño, when the eastern Pacific Ocean is warmer than average. The eastern Pacific is so large that when it is warmer than average, the entire planet is likely to be warmer than average. As we look at averages, 30 years, 10 years, or even one year, these patterns, some years warmer, some cooler, become less prominent. The trend of warming is large enough to mask the variability. The fact that there have been 30 years with no month below the 20th century average is a definitive statement that climate has changed.

The 30-year horizon

There are other reasons that this 30-year span of time is important. Thirty years is a length of time in which people plan. This includes personal choices – where to live, what job to take, how to plan for retirement. There are institutional choices – building bridges, building factories and power plants, urban flood management. There are resource management questions – assuring water supply for people, ecosystems, energy production and agriculture. There are many questions concerning how to build the fortifications and plan the migrations that sea-level rise will demand. Thirty years is long enough to be convincing that the climate is changing, and short enough that we can conceive, both individually and collectively, what the future might hold.

Finally, 30 years is long enough to educate us. We have 30 years during which we can see what challenges a changing climate brings us. Thirty years that are informing us about the next 30 years, which will be warmer still. This is a temperature record that makes it clear that the new normal will be systematically rising temperatures, not the ups and downs of the last 100 years.

Those who are under 30 years old have not experienced the climate I grew up with. In thirty more years, those born today will also be living in a climate that, by fundamental measures, will be different than the climate of their birth. Future success will rely on understanding that the climate in which we are all now living is changing and will continue to change with accumulating consequences.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

 

 

[Phoenix]

Surely this Nemtsov murder has to be added to this list of conspiracy theories. With worlds current bogeymen locked up for his murder.

[Dr Nowt]

Textbook.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKlUS1ztLsU&list=PLvPJZ2RUXZxkbHeBzjR7oJ_U_BK3QEkCH

[dennis tooth]

Yes, that's exactly what a lizard-man hybrid would say.

 

Petty morality? Apt.

[VladimirIlyich]

If just like to say, these nutty American god types are ace and deserve applauding. I'll give my full reasoning in the near future.

Its because they go like a train isnt it? Or ride you like its the eve of the apocalypse?

The cries of Jesus during sex are not a result of your efforts but their love of JC. (They dont want him sacked apparently.)

[setreal]

[Bobby Hundreds]

Monsanto is a company that needs rocket punching

[Bobby Hundreds]

Textbook.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKlUS1ztLsU&list=PLvPJZ2RUXZxkbHeBzjR7oJ_U_BK3QEkCH

Love how irate he gets at sadowitz. You fucking..... Clown

[Dr Nowt]

Love how irate he gets at sadowitz. You fucking..... Clown

 

It's brilliant isn't it.  There's another couple of videos where he expands his views on the subject, saying Sadowitz and Savile may be the same person and if not that they were mates, and if I remember correctly says "Sadowitz, you, bloody...fucker" in one of them, which made me spit my tea out.

 

Never mind the fact the guy barely scrapes a living out of comedy, and has always made people take his footage down immediately because he thinks it should only be seen live - agree with it or not, entirely in keeping for someone who's become a comedy gollum of wretchedness due to his refusal to compromise - this goon reckons he's paying people to attack his individual You Tube channel, to thwart free speech. 

 

The fact Sadowitz is such a terminal iconoclast that the second it became completely mainstream to joke about Savile being a rapist - I saw him about a week before the documentary broke, and he was absolutely lashing it into him about fucking corpses and kids and doing it with a cigar and a smirk on primetime TV - he went the other way, now saying in gigs how people should "leave the poor cunt alone", is obviously a front for him trying to keep a massive Jewish conspiracy running, rather than a desire to go against the grain no matter what.

 

This guy is like every parody of conspiracy theorists brought to life knowingly as a comedy character, just outstandingly ridiculous and I lost half an hour listening to this stuff the other day and pissing myself.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

I've not bothered reading this, but here it is...

http://anonhq.com/2015-year-truth-putin-reveals-possession-911-satellite-imagery-u-s-complicit-false-flag-attack/

 

Reports are slowly starting to flood unfiltered news sources that Putin is preparing to release evidence of the involvement of the US government in the attacks on 9/11, including satellite imagery. The original report was published on February 7th by the Russian political newspaper, Pravda (also inEnglish).

Many have concerns of the validity of the report as Pravda is associated with the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. Originating in 1912, Pravda was the leading newspaper of the Soviet Union, and even after it was sold off by Russian President Boris Yeltsin, it still sold millions of copies per day during its peak. The news source now only sells 100,000 copies per day and is considered by American critics to be a “conspiracy theory website that buys into everything anti-U.S. with non-satirical conviction.”

Regardless of one’s opinion on Pravda, the idea that Russia has been withholding evidence relating to the attacks on 9/11, and the U.S. government’s involvement, has been around for a while, even withreports that Putin claimed an inside job would be impossible. Some believe this is because it’s merely a rumor, while others believe Russia has been saving the evidence as political ammunition. Either way, Putin is bound to keep silent on the topic to the media.

It appears the first copy of this article to reach the U.S. was through Veterans Today:

“The article below was forwarded to us for publication in the U.S. and translated from Russian.”

 

Moscow (Pravda):  American experts believe that despite the fact that relations between the US and Russia reached the worst point since the Cold War, Putin delivered until Obama only minor troubles. Analysts believe that this is the “calm before the storm.” Putin is going to hit once, but he’s going to hit hard. Russia is preparing the release of evidence of the involvement of the US government and intelligence services in the September 11 attacks.

The list of evidence includes satellite images.

Published material can prove the US government’s complicity in the 9/11 attacks and the successful manipulation of public opinion. The attack was planned by the US government, but exercised using her proxy, so that an attack on America and the people of the United States looked like an act of aggression by international terrorist organizations.

The motive for deception and murder of its own citizens served US oil interests and the Middle East state corporations.

The evidence will be so convincing that it utterly debunks the official 9/11 cover story supported by the US government.

Russia proves that America is no stranger to using false flag terrorism against its citizens in order to achieve a pretext for military intervention in a foreign country. In the case of “the September 11 attacks,” the evidence will be conclusive satellite imagery.

If successful, the consequences of Putin’s tactics would expose the US government’s secret terrorist policies. The government’s credibility will be undermined and should bring about mass protests in the cities leading to an uprising, according to American analysts.

And as the United States will look on the world political arena? The validity of America’s position as a leader in the fight against international terrorism will be totally undermined giving immediately advantage to rogue states and Islamic terrorists.

The actual development of the situation could be much worse, experts warn.

 

Regardless of one’s position on the topic of 9/11, articles such as these have been appearing at increasing rates, as more people are becoming aware of the evidence that contradicts all the official reports. There are still those who fear that if Putin produced evidence of the U.S. government’s involvement in the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. will already have a plan to counter:

“The U.S. government will attempt to use the Saudis and a few expendable individuals in the Bush administration as ‘fall guys’ to take the blame for an ostensibly unauthorized ‘inside job.’ According to 9/11 truthers, those officials in the Bush administration chosen to take the blame will be branded as rogue elements within the Bush administration who worked with the Saudis without the knowledge of the president and key officials of his administration.”

Only time will tell if the claims made by Pravda will come to fruition.

[Red Phoenix]

I've not bothered reading this, but here it is...

 

 

No offence to you Angry, but if I'd have done the same, especially about 9/11, it would've probably been an interesting response, and fairly fast too. I'm not responding to what comes after this (if anything does), just saying.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Looking forward to this conclusive evidence. It'll either actually be conclusive, incontrovertible evidence, which if it exists is great for the American people, as it will expose perhaps the biggest scandal ever, or it's a load of made up bollocks, won't be released, or will just be a load of bullshit.

 

If I had to put a fiver on it, I'd go with the latter. Why? Because it will obviously be a load of bollocks, just like most other things to do with 9/11.

[Rotpeter]

Looking forward to this conclusive evidence. It'll either actually be conclusive, incontrovertible evidence, which if it exists is great for the American people, as it will expose perhaps the biggest scandal ever, or it's a load of made up bollocks, won't be released, or will just be a load of bullshit.

.

Or, some guy will make a couple of grand serving up ads to gullibles.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

No offence to you Angry, but if I'd have done the same, especially about 9/11, it would've probably been an interesting response, and fairly fast too. I'm not responding to what comes after this (if anything does), just saying.

I think the difference between what AoT did and what you did is fairly clear. He said 'I've not read this', meaning he hasn't given his opinion on it. You'd say something like, 'looks like I was right about 9/11, the corrupt bastards are clearly hiding something and all you pseudo intellectual idiots got it wrong'. One makes no statement about the article, so it's hard to respond to anything other than the article (I'm not interested in the article, I'm interested in poster's beliefs), and the other tries to declare a bunch of nothing as proof of their open minded, enlightened brilliance.

 

HTH.

 

Or, some guy will make a couple of grand serving up ads to gullibles.

Heh, quite possibly. But surely these people aren't motivated by greed. It's those they're exposing that are.

[Red Phoenix]

Yeah ok, I'll bite for one I guess Numero.

 

You'd say something like, 'looks like I was right about 9/11, the corrupt bastards are clearly hiding something and all you pseudo intellectual idiots got it wrong'.

 

When I posted in response to a 9/11 video last year :

 

I think it would've been better if the poster hadn't added the "pretend" bit at the end, because it doesn't need it. Apart from that I think that there's some good points here and that it's well said.

 

Not really the same is it? It's called a straw man (HTH.)

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Firstly, it isn't called a straw man; I'd suggest you stop using terminology you don't well understand, but that's up to you. Secondly, it doesn't help because it's in no way relevant to anything I said.

[Red Phoenix]

Firstly, it isn't called a straw man; I'd suggest you stop using terminology you don't well understand, but that's up to you.

 

Yes it is, you distorted my take on 9/11, it was a straw man. To finish before I go : you're a liar (goodbye.)

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

No, I didn't. You've used the term straw man incorrectly a number of times over recent days. I'd suggest rather than parrot it from your latest favourite blog, you look up what it means. I made no reference to any argument you made, just how I think you'd present an article. I can link you to you recent outbursts which I mimic'd, if you'd like? I'm sure you remember them from such posts as...

 

As for being a liar, is there any chance you can back that up?

[Red Phoenix]

As for being a liar, is there any chance you can back that up?

 

 

"I'm on the phone but I'll respond soon."

 

You responded to my point with distortion too, still a straw man, you liar. I guess you don't like that I point out flaws with something like that and you'd rather I didn't. Unlucky mate, and now I'm definitely done, no matter how you twist this. Go on, try me. I'm off to listen to music (it's saturday night incase you hadn't checked.) Was fun while it lasted though.

 

*waves bye, and spares the forum another long running load of bullshit*

 

edit : haha, still doing neg runs on my posts. Like I said, I think that's funny.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

"I'm on the phone but I'll respond soon."

In what way is that a lie? I use my phone for about 80% of my forum viewing. When I was back at the computer I replied to you. I think you'd be wise to take a step back. You seem on edge again.

 

You responded to my point with distortion too, still a straw man, you liar.

No, I didn't. I said what I thought you'd do had you posted in response your needless attention seeking, victim card playing, 'if I did that' style bullshit. My comments refuting your self-pity is based it on posts like this:

 

 

 

But yeah, fuck ya mainstream, corrupt, fundamentalist, fake, science. Tesla would turn in his fucking grave at some of this weak, bought and paid for, fucking pseudoscientific fucking shite.

the science cartel would just arrange the right "peer review" and discredit it. remember they're the anti-religion cult. And yes they are a cult.

You don't like it do you? That so much of science is a cult. Your own religion really, isn't it? Boo-hoo. Your sacred barrier against true reality. Well it fucking is a cult.

You science people are just as backwards as fundamentalist religious people. You cannot stand it can you? That we might be right?

 

 

That all seems to tally pretty well with what I said. I'm happy to stick with my comment. You're not victimised, you're responded to. Your posting style gets a response. That's it.

 

I guess you don't like that I point out flaws with something like that and you'd rather I didn't.

You've just done it. You've just done what I said you'd do in my 'lie'. You've declared yourself right, then told me my reaction to it. You seem to be attempting to create your own little reality.

 

edit : haha, still doing neg runs on my posts. Like I said, I think that's funny.

What on Earth are you talking about? As far as I can tell, you've been negged by Lizzie. I negged a few of your insulting posts a while back, but this 'neg run' nonsense has nothing to do with me. Having just looked back, you've been negged a lot by Lizzie. I can't speak for him, but he probably thinks about as highly of your posting style as I do.

[Rico1304]

In what way is that a lie? I use my phone for about 80% of my forum viewing. When I was back at the computer I replied to you. I think you'd be wise to take a step back. You seem on edge again. No, I didn't. I said what I thought you'd do had you posted in response your needless attention seeking, victim card playing, 'if I did that' style bullshit. My comments refuting your self-pity is based it on posts like this: 

 

That all seems to tally pretty well with what I said. I'm happy to stick with my comment. You're not victimised, you're responded to. Your posting style gets a response. That's it. You've just done it. You've just done what I said you'd do in my 'lie'. You've declared yourself right, then told me my reaction to it. You seem to be attempting to create your own little reality. What on Earth are you talking about? As far as I can tell, you've been negged by Lizzie. I negged a few of your insulting posts a while back, but this 'neg run' nonsense has nothing to do with me. Having just looked back, you've been negged a lot by Lizzie. I can't speak for him, but he probably thinks about as highly of your posting style as I do.

He does find him strangely attractive though.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

He might be batshit, Rico, but you can't deny he's got junk in his trunk. He knows how to shake his stuff. Lizzie is only human. A red blooded male at that.

[Red Phoenix]

Haha, sorry Numero, didn't realize it was Lizzie. I'd just got that used to you doing the same thing.

 

I'd not have posted back but that was clearly wrong so that's cool. I can happily go back on saying there was no way I was posting back if I'm clearly wrong. Keep dancing around that straw man too, laters.

 

Back to tunes, and hey Numero : you really should've tried being a politician. Actually maybe not, you might have been a bit too good at fucking people over with twisted, manipulative, bullshit. You're actually a bit scary to be honest with that stuff.

 

Still never admitted you've been wrong on anything yet? Or is that just when you bail and not respond? You took a while crafting that last response, I noticed. Anyway, later.

 

(I'm done now, sorry all. I won't go back on my word with this one, I'm out.)