Of Fake News and Conspiracy Theories

[Szdfan]

What happens when a theory becomes fact?

Then it’s no longer a conspiracy theory. Part of defines a conspiracy theory is that it relies more on faith instead of fact. Dots are connected with insufficient or no evidence. Relationships between disparate things are assumed without evidence that they are actually connected.

If there’s adequate evidence to support these connected dots, it’s not a conspiracy theory.

Do you have examples of conspiracy theories that turned into fact?

I truly wonder how Hitler achieved his goal. Was anyone warning? We're they seen as conspiracy theorists? What about the spread of communism. Russia- was anyone connecting dots? Trying to warn? How wiill the AntiChrist eventually rise to his power? If the Church is going through the Great Tribulation like the Orthodox Church had always taught, will Christians be inclined to sense but way of the Holy Spirit what is happening & just put up ,& shut up, or will it be our Christian duty to use what we see happening as an open door to share our faith?

I think that the moves the Nazis and Communists made as they seized power were apparent to anyone who was paying attention. After all, both Hitler and Lenin were open about their intentions. Hitler laid it all out in Mein Kampf — a “Make Germany Great Again” manifesto that propagated the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about secret Jewish cabals that were used to justify the Holocaust. Lenin publicly advocated a proletarian revolution in Russia long before 1917.

Neither of these were shadowy forces manipulating history in secret even if they were conspiring to seize power. Again, conspiracies are not the same thing as conspiracy theories.

I’m a skeptic When it comes to End Times prophecies, not because I doubt the truth of Scripture, but because I doubt the interpretations of End Times “prophets.” My grandfather was seriously into eschatology and believed he would see Christ while he was still alive. He predicted several dates that Jesus would return. He thought Saddam Hussein was the Antichrist. He was wrong. The Millerites were wrong. Harold Camping was wrong. The Jehovah’s Witnesses were wrong. There’s been lots of connecting the dots over the past two thousand years and none of that dot connecting ended up being true.

I think both Daniel and Revelations are important and theologically rich books that have a lot to teach us about what it means to follow Christ in the midst of hardship and oppression. I don’t think they are roadmaps to the end of the world.

Christ himself says that he will return like a thief in the night and that not even the angels know the date of his return. Perhaps we should pay attention to that.

[Szdfan]

I truly wonder how Hitler achieved his goal. Was anyone warning? We're they seen as conspiracy theorists? What about the spread of communism. Russia- was anyone connecting dots? Trying to warn? How wiill the AntiChrist eventually rise to his power? If the Church is going through the Great Tribulation like the Orthodox Church had always taught, will Christians be inclined to sense but way of the Holy Spirit what is happening & just put up ,& shut up, or will it be our Christian duty to use what we see happening as an open door to share our faith?

Is sharing our faith supposed to be about the good news of the kingdom of God, or about the bad news of the kingdoms of this world?

Well Jesus did both. So did the prophets. God wanted us to be aware apparently or the Bible would be really short.

I also think the answer is both. The prophetic books have a bad news/good news structure. Bad news: your society is corrupt and your religious rituals are meaningless. Good news: a voice cries in the wilderness, “Make the way for the Lord.”

For me, this dynamic is similar to being a Cubs fan as a kid. This year sucked and the Cubbies haven’t won the World Series in almost a century. But there’s always next season.

[appleman2006]

Then it’s no longer a conspiracy theory. Part of defines a conspiracy theory is that it relies more on faith instead of fact. Dots are connected with insufficient or no evidence. Relationships between disparate things are assumed without evidence that they are actually connected.

If there’s adequate evidence to support these connected dots, it’s not a conspiracy theory.

Do you have examples of conspiracy theories that turned into fact?

I truly wonder how Hitler achieved his goal. Was anyone warning? We're they seen as conspiracy theorists? What about the spread of communism. Russia- was anyone connecting dots? Trying to warn? How wiill the AntiChrist eventually rise to his power? If the Church is going through the Great Tribulation like the Orthodox Church had always taught, will Christians be inclined to sense but way of the Holy Spirit what is happening & just put up ,& shut up, or will it be our Christian duty to use what we see happening as an open door to share our faith?

I think that the moves the Nazis and Communists made as they seized power were apparent to anyone who was paying attention. After all, both Hitler and Lenin were open about their intentions. Hitler laid it all out in Mein Kampf — a “Make Germany Great Again” manifesto that propagated the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about secret Jewish cabals that were used to justify the Holocaust. Lenin publicly advocated a proletarian revolution in Russia long before 1917.

Neither of these were shadowy forces manipulating history in secret even if they were conspiring to seize power. Again, conspiracies are not the same thing as conspiracy theories.

I’m a skeptic When it comes to End Times prophecies, not because I doubt the truth of Scripture, but because I doubt the interpretations of End Times “prophets.” My grandfather was seriously into eschatology and believed he would see Christ while he was still alive. He predicted several dates that Jesus would return. He thought Saddam Hussein was the Antichrist. He was wrong. The Millerites were wrong. Harold Camping was wrong. The Jehovah’s Witnesses were wrong. There’s been lots of connecting the dots over the past two thousand years and none of that dot connecting ended up being true.

I think both Daniel and Revelations are important and theologically rich books that have a lot to teach us about what it means to follow Christ in the midst of hardship and oppression. I don’t think they are roadmaps to the end of the world.

Christ himself says that he will return like a thief in the night and that not even the angels know the date of his return. Perhaps we should pay attention to that.

Szdfan, you and I disagree on some things but it appears that when we agree we really really do agree.

[RZehr]

Ditto.

[Szdfan]

I truly wonder how Hitler achieved his goal. Was anyone warning? We're they seen as conspiracy theorists? What about the spread of communism. Russia- was anyone connecting dots? Trying to warn? How wiill the AntiChrist eventually rise to his power? If the Church is going through the Great Tribulation like the Orthodox Church had always taught, will Christians be inclined to sense but way of the Holy Spirit what is happening & just put up ,& shut up, or will it be our Christian duty to use what we see happening as an open door to share our faith?

I think that the moves the Nazis and Communists made as they seized power were apparent to anyone who was paying attention. After all, both Hitler and Lenin were open about their intentions. Hitler laid it all out in Mein Kampf — a “Make Germany Great Again” manifesto that propagated the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about secret Jewish cabals that were used to justify the Holocaust. Lenin publicly advocated a proletarian revolution in Russia long before 1917.

Neither of these were shadowy forces manipulating history in secret even if they were conspiring to seize power. Again, conspiracies are not the same thing as conspiracy theories.

I’m a skeptic When it comes to End Times prophecies, not because I doubt the truth of Scripture, but because I doubt the interpretations of End Times “prophets.” My grandfather was seriously into eschatology and believed he would see Christ while he was still alive. He predicted several dates that Jesus would return. He thought Saddam Hussein was the Antichrist. He was wrong. The Millerites were wrong. Harold Camping was wrong. The Jehovah’s Witnesses were wrong. There’s been lots of connecting the dots over the past two thousand years and none of that dot connecting ended up being true.

I think both Daniel and Revelations are important and theologically rich books that have a lot to teach us about what it means to follow Christ in the midst of hardship and oppression. I don’t think they are roadmaps to the end of the world.

Christ himself says that he will return like a thief in the night and that not even the angels know the date of his return. Perhaps we should pay attention to that.

Szdfan, you and I disagree on some things but it appears that when we agree we really really do agree.

Thanks. I think that even though we tend to focus on disagreements, that most of us here share some fundamental agreements on some things.

Making peace with Revelations was one of the major theological journeys of my life.

[Valerie]

I saw this post and there was something that I called attention to in this proclamation- but was met with vehement opposition in not agreeing with this-
Is there anything that you see in this 'connecting the dots' that you don't agree with? I'm running it by here because sometimes y'all straighten me out on things


Connecting the Dots.
•Gates
•Walmart stock holder 11 million shares
•Costco, stock holder investor in Costco Poultry Center 1.7million chickens slaughter a week in Nebraska
•Raikes, Microsoft, former CEO Gates Foundation, Costco, AAGR
•Komi Annon , World Health Organization AAGR + GATES
ARE WE SEEING WHY BIG BOX STORES STAYED OPEN AND
SMALL BUSINESSES CLOSED??!!

[barnhart]

I saw this post and there was something that I called attention to in this proclamation- but was met with vehement opposition in not agreeing with this-
Is there anything that you see in this 'connecting the dots' that you don't agree with? I'm running it by here because sometimes y'all straighten me out on things


Connecting the Dots.
•Gates
•Walmart stock holder 11 million shares
•Costco, stock holder investor in Costco Poultry Center 1.7million chickens slaughter a week in Nebraska
•Raikes, Microsoft, former CEO Gates Foundation, Costco, AAGR
•Komi Annon , World Health Organization AAGR + GATES
ARE WE SEEING WHY BIG BOX STORES STAYED OPEN AND
SMALL BUSINESSES CLOSED??!!

What you are observing is very real, the economy is increasingly given over to the powerful to make themselves even more powerful. But this was the trend for decades. COVID has only illuminated and accelerated the reality that has been playing out in slow motion. So slow that most don't notice. BUT, correlation is not causation. Just because two events occur simultaneously does not prove one cause the other.

I would say the economic aristocracy are opportunists, narcissistic, blind to the plight of the common man, and God will judge them for all that, but I don't yet see evidence they are intentionally creating, promoting or sustaining plague for economic dominance.

[JohnHurt]

Unfortunately I think this authors approach assumes way too much and seems dualistic. Conspiracy theories and real stories can both have so many problems and not always because they are fake or true but because of the way they presented and sometimes information inserted to prove a point.

For example: I am not saying they landing on the moon or they didn't - but I have looked at pictures of the moon landing and have not seen stars in the background - Why? I've seen pictures of dust flying up from the moon rover but yet heard on the radio an experiment a few years back where they intentionally flew a space ship into the moon and there was no dust because it has no atmosphere - so how did the moon rover kick up dust? How come space scientists in Europe recently claimed that the moon is in earths atmosphere? - So what does this mean to the original moon landing? And what I heard on the radio?
For me there are too many contradictions for me to say that we landed on the moon but neither do I run around saying that they didn't and they are lying. However just because I am unwilling to say one way or the other I get called a conspiracy theorist is what often happens? It seemed like the writing leaned that way a bit... Unless I misunderstood?

I'd rather just say I don't really know for sure and I have questions about many things, while still believing most main stream science - I hope that is okay.

Wade, here is the only explanation about the moon landings that makes sense to me:

They really went to the moon, and there are artifacts on the lunar surface to prove it.

But they lacked the bandwidth to send back real-time video, and this was unacceptable to Richard Nixon. This was the biggest "live" TV event in history and Nixon made them come up with a solution. If you were alive then, you would remember - that even crime was lowered during that time, as everyone was glued to the TV to watch the moon landing.

But the bandwidth technology to transmit the video just wasn't there in 1969. And Nixon demanded a solution.

So they got Stanley Kubrick to open up his studio in London, where he had filmed "2001 - A Space Odyssey". For this service, NASA later let Kubrick use their advanced imaging cameras to film "Barry Lyndon" using only candlelight as NASA said it was "payment for services rendered." You also see references to Apollo 11 in "The Shining" (the sweater the kid wears) and other Kubrick films. Kubrick thought the US governemnt would kill him if the truth got out, and lived as a hermit the rest of his life. He would not leave London, and every set Kubrick used and every film Kubrick made was produced in London after this point.

Kubrick was meticulous and left very few holes in the original Apollo 11 videos, but the later Apollo film makers did have errors.

So that is why you see an Astronaut skipping past the American flag on the "moon" and causing the flag to wave from the wind coming off his body. I believe that was Apollo 12. There are other "light logic" and many other errors in the videos.

The moon videos are slowed down to make it look like there is less gravity on the moon so that the astronauts "float" over the surface as they skip around. Speed the video up, and they are just skipping around normally. No one is jumping 10 feet off the ground in 1/6th of the gravity.

By slowing the videos down to mimic less gravity, many times the activities of the astronauts do not match their conversations, as the slowed down video has to lag the real time conversations. It is quite embarrassing, really.

But yes, they did actually go to the moon, the moon rocks they brought back are real, and they left reflectors on the lunar surface that will still bounce a laser. And they made some legitimate videos of the actual landing from inside the lander - that are really awesome. It was quite an achievement.

But the supposed "real time" videos that everyone saw, they are a complete hoax. They had to be.

John

[Ken]

Unfortunately I think this authors approach assumes way too much and seems dualistic. Conspiracy theories and real stories can both have so many problems and not always because they are fake or true but because of the way they presented and sometimes information inserted to prove a point.

For example: I am not saying they landing on the moon or they didn't - but I have looked at pictures of the moon landing and have not seen stars in the background - Why? I've seen pictures of dust flying up from the moon rover but yet heard on the radio an experiment a few years back where they intentionally flew a space ship into the moon and there was no dust because it has no atmosphere - so how did the moon rover kick up dust? How come space scientists in Europe recently claimed that the moon is in earths atmosphere? - So what does this mean to the original moon landing? And what I heard on the radio?
For me there are too many contradictions for me to say that we landed on the moon but neither do I run around saying that they didn't and they are lying. However just because I am unwilling to say one way or the other I get called a conspiracy theorist is what often happens? It seemed like the writing leaned that way a bit... Unless I misunderstood?

I'd rather just say I don't really know for sure and I have questions about many things, while still believing most main stream science - I hope that is okay.

Wade, here is the only explanation about the moon landings that makes sense to me:

They really went to the moon, and there are artifacts on the lunar surface to prove it.

But they lacked the bandwidth to send back real-time video, and this was unacceptable to Richard Nixon. This was the biggest "live" TV event in history and Nixon made them come up with a solution. If you were alive then, you would remember - that even crime was lowered during that time, as everyone was glued to the TV to watch the moon landing.

But the bandwidth technology to transmit the video just wasn't there in 1969. And Nixon demanded a solution.

So they got Stanley Kubrick to open up his studio in London, where he had filmed "2001 - A Space Odyssey". For this service, NASA later let Kubrick use their advanced imaging cameras to film "Barry Lyndon" using only candlelight as NASA said it was "payment for services rendered." You also see references to Apollo 11 in "The Shining" (the sweater the kid wears) and other Kubrick films. Kubrick thought the US governemnt would kill him if the truth got out, and lived as a hermit the rest of his life. He would not leave London, and every set Kubrick used and every film Kubrick made was produced in London after this point.

Kubrick was meticulous and left very few holes in the original Apollo 11 videos, but the later Apollo film makers did have errors.

So that is why you see an Astronaut skipping past the American flag on the "moon" and causing the flag to wave from the wind coming off his body. I believe that was Apollo 12. There are other "light logic" and many other errors in the videos.

The moon videos are slowed down to make it look like there is less gravity on the moon so that the astronauts "float" over the surface as they skip around. Speed the video up, and they are just skipping around normally. No one is jumping 10 feet off the ground in 1/6th of the gravity.

By slowing the videos down to mimic less gravity, many times the activities of the astronauts do not match their conversations, as the slowed down video has to lag the real time conversations. It is quite embarrassing, really.

But yes, they did actually go to the moon, the moon rocks they brought back are real, and they left reflectors on the lunar surface that will still bounce a laser. And they made some legitimate videos of the actual landing from inside the lander - that are really awesome. It was quite an achievement.

But the supposed "real time" videos that everyone saw, they are a complete hoax. They had to be.

John

You are forgetting about the cold war which was still at a peak in the late 1960s with Vietnam, the Czech uprising in 1968, the 6-Day war and so forth. The Soviets had a space program that nearly the rival of NASA as well as all the same deep-space radio-telescopes and monitoring equipment. Had the US tried to fake the moon broadcasts and send it from terrestrial location it would have been immediately and gleefully exposed as a fraud by the Soviets. Who were, of course, monitoring every step of every Apollo mission. Just as we monitored theirs. The Soviets, as well as many other scientific installations around the world had the technological capacity to monitor the source of radio broadcasts. That isn't something you can fake. With just three antennas you can pinpoint the exact location of any transmission in space. Any university physics department could easily do it. Many of them were.

You are also calling the astronauts and many hundreds of scientists at NASA liars and frauds. Every single one of them decided to participate in a massive fraud on the say so of Richard Nixon? Who wasn't even particularly popular in the scientific community at all? That's not even remotely plausible.

[JohnHurt]

You are forgetting about the cold war which was still at a peak in the late 1960s with Vietnam, the Czech uprising in 1968, the 6-Day war and so forth. The Soviets had a space program that nearly the rival of NASA as well as all the same deep-space radio-telescopes and monitoring equipment. Had the US tried to fake the moon broadcasts and send it from terrestrial location it would have been immediately and gleefully exposed as a fraud by the Soviets. Who were, of course, monitoring every step of every Apollo mission. Just as we monitored theirs. The Soviets, as well as many other scientific installations around the world had the technological capacity to monitor the source of radio broadcasts. That isn't something you can fake. With just three antennas you can pinpoint the exact location of any transmission in space. Any university physics department could easily do it. Many of them were.

You are also calling the astronauts and many hundreds of scientists at NASA liars and frauds. Every single one of them decided to participate in a massive fraud on the say so of Richard Nixon? Who wasn't even particularly popular in the scientific community at all? That's not even remotely plausible.

Ken,

You made some really good points.

So why did the flag on the moon wave in the wind when the astronaut skipped past it?