Conspiracy Theories: is there any truth in it?
 

i like to think of da vinci code as factual x]

If you are calling my comment "flaming" in the other thread, you need to grow some skin. I just said don't base everything you believe on one movie.

live and let live? xD

post and let post?

i prefer using unadapted cliche's
:D

That's the difference betwixt you and me.

adaptation? xD

Don't overthink it. I didn't mean it to mean anything.

figured as much xDD
haha~

just be the 1%....

let the system work for you ;)

The funny thing about conspiracy theories is when people who want to believe in them so desperately try hard enough 2+2 can appear to equal 5. This is of course when you realize that you're actually supposed to have drawn a second loop under neath the second two being added to the first two because the mathematician that invented the simple law really had a whisker on the original notes suggesting that there's always a "hidden" curl to make the second two a three. Therefore, 2+2=5.

LOL! :D

Peace!:)

Sometimes I think we still benefit from even the most outlandish of conspiracy theories. They are usually a string of unrelated facts, held together with extremely illogical suppositions and laced with a flood of someone's overactive imagination.

But in that mosh pit of illogical theorizing, there is frequently the one or two unpulicized and overlooked facts that find the light of day because of the rantings of the inexplicable believers.

If it weren't for all the conspiracy threories about JFK's assassination, there would far less known about the CIA operations in Cuba, Marilyn Monroe's realtionship with JFk and few other tidbits about Dallas in the early 1960s. not that all of this is worth much, but some of what has been brought to light is valueable.

So I say "Rave On, you gullible loonies." The rantings of lunatics are sometimes the only voices of sanity, tortured by those who refuse to see reality as it is. The true challenge for us is distinguishing which is which.

Everyone feels the same way. We all want to think there is more out there.

Sometimes.

What a sham
 

your title suggests conspiracy theories, but Zeigeist isn't a conspiracy theory movie (well the 9/11 part is). For the most part it's about money.

I watched it. It promotes the destruction of America through calculated means (and only denounces America and no other nation...hmmm) and promotes a purely Communist society in its stead. It follows the basic tenants of Karl Marx,

1. No individuality, no religion
2. No money to imbalance the equality
3. No philosophy of "progression" or technological advancement.
4. Every person will do their part, but must above all believe in what they do.
5. The people are the government, the government are the people, and all are one.

The movie makes its case, repeatedly denouncing technological advancements, denouncing religion, denouncing individuality. It claims we are nothing more than stardust and should be treated as such. The movie says money is inherently evil, yet asks for monetary support for the "Venus Project". Even when it denounces technology, it ignores it own hypocrisy about creating a society entirely dependent on technology.

It ultimately removes all credit for itself, by spending two hours denouncing everything American, asking people to literally destroy America, calling America lying, evil, and hurtful to mankind, yet almost entirely relies on American inventions, American inovation, American money to fund it's proposed utopia.

I agree with most of the "facts" in the movie. The money system is silly. But its conclusions I cannot agree with. Whoever made the movie took a leap into the stratosphere, they spend most of the movie denouncing one thing, and the rest promoting the other, but never addresses the reasoning. Only stating things that are opinion as fact, to act as a "logic" bridge between the movies' hatred and love.

I'll give you an example, declaring money to be bad for people, because America's current system uses debt. That is not logic. I can argue that debt (also known as investment in most cases, especially in these contexts) is the driving force for all of humans greatest achievements. Turning it completely on the movie itself, it requires vast amounts of "debt" (investment) to create this utopia it promotes. It will give nothing in return for years (accruing debt) until it is complete. But you would say "Venus Project" would be worth the investment. Very good, now you understand why debt isn't evil.

I've always thought Conspiracies were just stories built off and exaggerated from truths... so, the truth is there, deep, hidden. And it's not always what we wanna hear. Oh, well. That's the way the Universe is.

As long as man places value on certain things over others, money will exist. That's how it always has been. As society progresses so does trade. Money is just a way to say "Instead of giving you all my pelts for all your fish NOW, I can get some of your fish now, and some of it later."

Money isn't the problem, it's human nature.

Find a time when man did not place a value on things, and I will show you a society without money.

Of course human nature exists. Of course our behavior has changed as society has evolved, but human beings are not blank hard drives upon birth. There are needs and desires ingrained. That is human nature.

You don't think phehistoric man put value on things? A lot of times it was women. They invaded other tribes and took their women.

There is more than just surviving, there is procreating: a part of "human nature". To procreate you need women. The more women you have access to, the more you can procreate, therefore women were valuable.

i'll procreate w/ a yamaha r1
or even a hayabusa....
hell i'll even settle for honda cbr's
._.'''''

How?

Prehistoric man didn't know WHY he wanted to procreate, he just knew he wanted to so bad he was willing to kill men in other tribes to take their women.

You don't think value was placed on things like shelter, food, fire, water, etc?

i think that the lass is talking more about the value placed on wants now as opposed to the needs of back then >.>'''

now a days, we actually confuse our wants with needs.

You are personifying money as the source of evil. Money isn't evil. It is a tool for trade, and that's how it has always been. Instead of me giving you something you don't want for something I want, I can give you money: therefore you can buy something you want with money I give you for, say your fish.

Put it this way.

I have a car, but no fuel.

You have fuel, but no car. Instead you have a horse.

I have no horsefeed, so you have no reason to give me fuel to power my car.

So you are stuck with fuel and no horsefeed and I am stuck with a car and no fuel.

With money I can pay you for your fuel, you can then turn around and buy the horsefeed so you can ride to work and I can drive to work.

Why would you think eliminating money would make the rich poorer and the poor richer?

All it would mean is that precious commodities (like fuel and food) would turn into money.

Eliminating money wouldn't make everyone equal because you assume that money is what makes people unequal, but it is only one thing.

So either you are calling for a communist society, where the government distributes food and services equally among all people, or else you are calling for anarchy, where it is every man for himself, left to fend on his own.

Neither seems very attractive to me.

i think Karl Marx had some of the right ideas. i think some ideas of communism are better than some of those in capitalism. but dont you think we're too far into the capitalist side of things now? instead of in the middle?
the only thing that made communism bad are some of the leaders being too power hungry i think

But remember, you are not redistributing wealth, because there isn't any, but food and needed items.

So under your system, with no money, what if I want to leave my lights on all day? What if I have a 400 dollar electricity bill, when my neighbors is only 100?
What if I want to leave the water running all day? Is there any reason not to? Whose paying for it, right?

Capitalism has it's problems, but it is built for a long-term lifespan. History has shown that Communism and Marxism isn't built to last, despite some nice idea on paper.