RE: [Conspiracies] The Psychology of Conspiracy Theorists

[daznez]

or maybe we don't believe the non sense that spews out of the media/ education machine any more and can think for ourselves, unafraid to stand apart from the majority manufactured consensus?

consider the fact you may be under the influence of people who don't have your best interests at heart, even for a minute, and that your mind has been closed to any deviation from the prescribed groupthink views.

i'll leave this photo here, if you can explain it i'll be very impressed.

Comments

[conradino23]

So education is a danger now? And then what, ignorance is the blessing?

[daznez]

is it education, or indoctrination?

shall i start you off with - gulf of tonkin, uss liberty, the history of the federal reserve (and modern banking) ?

or do you already know everything there is to know?

[conradino23]

I think I got an education, which apart of absorbing the knowledge is mostly about learning how to critically analyse the facts or any available information to form a conclusion, that's gonna endure falsification.

You weren't really speaking about anything specific, so I assumed you were going for the flat earth theory... but if it's about the economy and casus belli, then it's a different thing entirely!

[daznez]

i mentioned four historical events, none of which are taught in schools. schools are indoctrination centres. education happens when we uncover the truth. you can choose to trust what you were taught first, or keep learning, the choice is yours.

[johngreenfield]

oi, I know this thread is easier, but don't ignore my questions. You're doing exactly what I said you would in this post, picking and choosing your arguments.

[johngreenfield]

"S72-35613 (22 April 1972) --- The Apollo 16 Lunar Module (LM) "Orion" in early lunar liftoff phase is featured in this lunar scene at the Descartes landing site. The still picture is a reproduction taken from a color television transmission made by a TV camera mounted on the Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV). While astronauts John W. Young, commander; and Charles M. Duke Jr., lunar module pilot; descended in the Apollo 16 LM to explore the Descartes highlands landing site on the moon, astronaut Thomas K. Mattingly II, command module pilot, remained with the Command and Service Modules (CSM) "Casper" in lunar orbit."

[johngreenfield]

"The radiation dosage for a year on the moon is between 110 mSv and 380 mSv. On Earth, that dosage is 2.4 mSv, or higher, depending on where you are exactly. Bottom line, the few days in Lunar orbit would have aged the film due to radiation between 50-150 days/ day in orbit maximum, thus it would be the equivalent of film that was aged a few years at most. The environment at the Moon is more likely to have high energy effects, which I'll get to later. Chernobyl produced about 80 mSv/ second after the incident, considerably more than on the surface of the Moon! To this day, the dosage at the center of Chernobyl is around 10 mSv/ second.
The Apollo missions were launched near the Solar Minimum, which would tend to have more higher cosmic ray strikes, and higher overall radiation, but fewer solar storms.
Furthermore, there actually ARE signs of radiation in some of the images, if you look carefully. At the very least, it's dust in on the film, the two can be difficult to tell apart. For instance, look in high resolution at the dark portion of this image. The lines that run through it are quite possibly signs of radiation strikes, or even (gasp!) stars."

[johngreenfield]

Spec for the Lunar TV Camera: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/WEC-Engineer-3-1968.pdf

[johngreenfield]

I can only imagine you were trying to imply that this still image is proof that Stanley Kubrick faked the moon landing? Apollo 16 as well as Apollo 13, not heard that one yet. Or maybe not, you never actually said. You've left that image there thinking it's some grand evidence supporting your claims, but it really isn't bud.
You are perfectly entitled to your beliefs, I don't understand why you lot get so angry when people don't believe you though. Why not just shrug, slyly smile to yourself knowing that the sheeple shills are being fooled. Why is it that you think I should take your word? Why is my own analytical thinking not good enough? Why do you refuse to let others think how they want to? I have no intention to challenge your points further, as I have already mentioned in this post, it would be wasting both our time.
Another point that I've failed to make so far is that I have Autistic Spectrum Disorder, which means my brain is physically different to yours. I think differently, I experience things differently. Yet you lot are so set on trying to force people into your way of thinking, it's pathetic.

[johngreenfield]

I can only guess that you were so impressed with my response it's left you speechless.