What conspiracy theories do you believe in? - Put your tinfoil hats on

Vendetta™

In Vino Veritas
kiwifarms.net
I think the idea that there are no complex and both subtle and obvious differences between groups is the superficial way of perceiving this. Because the skin tone of an italian man and an arab, or a chinese man and a frenchman isn't that different. They are instead a linguistic placeholder for recognizing differences of genetics. And nothing predicts personality better than genetics. Even if you're adopted, the most likely factor that you'll be a smoker is whether your biological parents were smokers.
You keep painting with these incredibly broad strokes and I'm having to wonder where the source is on this? I know for an absolute fact, that genetics does not pick one's culture. A Hispanic child raised by two white parents is still far more likely to have a predisposition to, and participate in white culture. If you can back up the "culture/behavior is a result of genetics" I'm all for reading it.


Because it has been made politically unacceptable to study this, it is a very understudied subject and I wish not venture deep into guess territory, but it's quite likely that we can discover big differences between genetic groups in the big five, the most accurate personality model we have discovered so far.
Agreed, no science should be outlawed simply because of social taboos.

These differences result in groups developing a different culture. And no matter the effort we've expended to be color-blind, and certainly I've lived most my life that way (or tried to), people in general among each group do not seem to be able to really surpass that and have a prefference for their own, even if they have to discover this after a while.
There's that again. People will generally prefer others who share their value and culture, and this is more to do with the fact that, yes, racial groups generally share the same values. However, it's disingenuous to imply that people always enjoy being around others like them, even when the share little outside of aesthetic similarities. I myself generally do not enjoy being around others like me outside of family (likely due to growing up in the dominant culture), and tend to gravitate towards others who are a part of the same culture, not racial group.

That prefference doesn't mean you have to hate any other groups either. I don't hate lettuce, I just prefer broccoli.
This is generally the assumption because folks with these beliefs often do use it to spread hate, propagate segregation and even outright displacement/genocide (See: Black Lives Matter and the Neo-Nazi movement), Doesn't mean it's always the case, but there is a strong correlation.
 

Lemmingwise

Blamer
kiwifarms.net
You keep painting with these incredibly broad strokes and I'm having to wonder where the source is on this? I know for an absolute fact, that genetics does not pick one's culture. A Hispanic child raised by two white parents is still far more likely to have a predisposition to, and participate in white culture. If you can back up the "culture/behavior is a result of genetics" I'm all for reading it.
Of course I'm painting with a broad brush, we're discussing the broad strokes and for that it would be useless to discuss the fine print until you have reason to zoom in into part of it. I always try to use the correct level of magnification in discussing something.

My main source for this, besides unquantifiable personal experience and observations, is the studies of Robert Plomin.

I could link to the studies, but from previous discussions I find that this video communicates it better for general purposes:

Should also start at the relevant part at 16:00

It isn't 100% genetic, but it is predominantly genetic. Robert Plomin also studied the differences between in environment for siblings and how it contributes to different results. All in all very interesting work.

-----

There's that again. People will generally prefer others who share their value and culture, and this is more to do with the fact that, yes, racial groups generally share the same values. However, it's disingenuous to imply that people always enjoy being around others like them, even when the share little outside of aesthetic similarities. I myself generally do not enjoy being around others like me outside of family (likely due to growing up in the dominant culture), and tend to gravitate towards others who are a part of the same culture, not racial group.
There is nothing disingenuous about what I wrote. I was very clear and open about the fact that it is a generalization and therefor not true in every case, but true in general and you seem to mostly agree with that.

You instead attribute this to environment/culture. I don't think you will continue that view if you read Plomin's work and consider its implications.

If you can improve on that work, I would be glad and open and happy to learning about it.

This is generally the assumption because folks with these beliefs often do use it to spread hate, propagate segregation and even outright displacement/genocide (See: Black Lives Matter and the Neo-Nazi movement), Doesn't mean it's always the case, but there is a strong correlation.
I suppose it depends on how you define hate. I think there is a distinct difference between elective segregation and forced segregation.

Just as I think there is a difference between elective integration and forced integration.

Since integration is failing practically everywhere, we'll continue seeing more and more forced integration.

The banning of burka's in france is one example. The change of UK police to be allowed to wear hijabs is another example. Both of these are light examples of forced integration, one at the expense of native population, the other at the expense of the migrant population.

I think forced integration is the more hateful of the two, one that leads to lower trust and social cohesion, as we know from putnam's study. Very different from elective integration, something that I personally am the product of. Though the difference as far as I can tell are moral rather than difference of result.

Would you define a group of black people who want an all black college as inherently hateful? Is segregation hateful by definition? And if it is, who has the moral authority to impose integration?
 

Vendetta™

In Vino Veritas
kiwifarms.net
Of course I'm painting with a broad brush, we're discussing the broad strokes and for that it would be useless to discuss the fine print until you have reason to zoom in into part of it. I always try to use the correct level of magnification in discussing something.
Fair enough, I suppose I should have considered your perspective first.

I could link to the studies, but from previous discussions I find that this video communicates it better for general purposes:
-SNIP-
Thanks for the link, I hadn't heard of Plomin's studies and it does communicate your point rather well. Plomin's take of potential and inheritability of IQ/behaviors does make good biological sense, but could generally be applied between any two people, even of the same race. I understand you're arguing that the differences between two racial groups would be different anyway (based on the genetic culture model), and I can understand that.

Early on, I kinda got the sense that Plomin would be making a arguments for eugenic sciences, but he was genuinely just studying the genetic factors, so that was a pleasant surprise. It's a good take, and I hope it won't be received like The Bell Curve has been.

You instead attribute this to environment/culture. I don't think you will continue that view if you read Plomin's work and consider its implications.
Well, not entirely, it'd be hard to argue that it's ONLY environment and cultural factors at play, when we know that personality is influenced by genetics. Mainly though, I had never experienced the whole "genetic culture" thing in my personal life, infact , it has been always the opposite. For example, one of my best friends growing up was a born-in-Norway Norwegian, but he moved to the states at a fairly early age, and he behaved as American as the rest of us yanks (didn't even know or bother learning his family's language or traditions), even though his family still retained their old values.

With this in mind, I'm not really quite sure how to feel. On one hand, I know there is truth to the genetics angle, on the other, I feel that both still need be considered. As a biology major (Forensics) I would have thoughtlessly contributed this to personality genetics, rather than cultural.

If you can improve on that work, I would be glad and open and happy to learning about it.
I don't have anything to add, currently, besides personal anecdotes. Once I get the chance, I'll see if I can dig up some of my older studies on the subject, and see what your take is.

Since integration is failing practically everywhere, we'll continue seeing more and more forced integration.
Do you mean between refugees and migrants? or the countries' native populations? I'm witnessing more of a problem with the former than the latter, and would agree it's not going well (See: The mosque fiasco and fallout)

I think forced integration is the more hateful of the two, one that leads to lower trust and social cohesion, as we know from putnam's study. Very different from elective integration, something that I personally am the product of. Though the difference as far as I can tell are moral rather than difference of result.
Certainly, forcing anything is going to be met with some protest and feelings of discomfort. However, while I'm not fond of forcing people together that don't necessarily want to be (excluding things like the Civil Rights movement), I'm not a fan of forcefully parting them either. You're a European, yes? Over here, things are not quite as bad as media would portrays them. There aren't massive racial marches in the streets everyday, and even in the deep American south (a place known for it's racial issues), you can witness people of many different colors coexisting, at least those that share the same cultural values.

Most don't consider this, and think that just because some behave like cretins, it needs to be the absolute end of us getting along. I've even see people arguing on this forum that slavery/segregation shouldn't have been abolished (which disgusts me), simply because some half-wit on twitter likes complaining about race or whatever. It's heartbreaking because all I can see is a bunch of conflict-seekers ripping apart the very country I grew up loving so much. I'd rather die/not exist than to watch it unfold that way.

Would you define a group of black people who want an all black college as inherently hateful? Is segregation hateful by definition? And if it is, who has the moral authority to impose integration?
Not inherently hateful, no, but stupid in a few ways.

1. With such a homogeneous group, you're losing out on a lot of perspectives you would otherwise hear, challenge or agree with.

2. American Black culture, for the most part, is damaging and dangerous even for black kids. I think I would know better than most, my last few years in high-school, a good portion of our school were from the inner-city. Pretty much all of the black kids absolutely despised me (a "fellow" darkie, for you tribalists out there), I got called an uncle tom, a white devil sellout and even a house nigger. It's incredibly toxic, and the black kids who want to do well would absolutely be better off without that sort of homogeneity.

3. You might not define segregation as hateful, but most normal people do. Like I said, no one should be forced to mingle with others if they so choose, but no government or authority should be forcing them apart either. I mentioned those education-seeking black kids earlier, well, imagine that they absolutely can't go to a different school because most of them are white-owned, why should they have to endure poor-quality schools because their peers acted like fools? If we're going to accept that whites shouldn't be blamed for each others actions, past and present, then no other group of people should be blamed for the actions of others in their circle, either.

One more thing, if a man shares all of your values, your culture, your intelligence and ideals (and yes, I realize this is uncommon), does his skin color still matter? Further, do you believe we should be allowed to separate by gender, class or sexual orientation? This isn't an argument, but I'm simply curious what your thoughts are.

I've been enjoying our discussion thus far, and you seem like you'd be a good person to wax about life with.
 
Last edited:

Mewtwo_Rain

Drown in the cesspool of darkness
kiwifarms.net
Please add it here. The information you have shared so far is interesting.
Agreed, although I don't agree with segregation more than I believe we should selectively choose who we let in the country based on their values but it is indeed an interesting point of contention none the less.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Vendetta™

Lemmingwise

Blamer
kiwifarms.net
Please add it here. The information you have shared so far is interesting.
Agreed, although I don't agree with segregation more than I believe we should selectively choose who we let in the country based on their values but it is indeed an interesting point of contention none the less.
Fine. The message I sent was too full of powerlevelling though, so I'll give a new reply. I need to cool down anyways and typing these things on the bus always calm me down.

Do you mean between refugees and migrants? or the countries' native populations? I'm witnessing more of a problem with the former than the latter, and would agree it's not going well (See: The mosque fiasco and fallout)
Integration is failing practically everywhere. Chinese may be in some sense a model minority, but they too don't integrate. Less mixing pot and more salad bowl.


Certainly, forcing anything is going to be met with some protest and feelings of discomfort. However, while I'm not fond of forcing people together that don't necessarily want to be (excluding things like the Civil Rights movement), I'm not a fan of forcefully parting them either. You're a European, yes? Over here, things are not quite as bad as media would portrays them. There aren't massive racial marches in the streets everyday, and even in the deep American south (a place known for it's racial issues), you can witness people of many different colors coexisting, at least those that share the same cultural values.


Most don't consider this, and think that just because some behave like cretins, it needs to be the absolute end of us getting along. I've even see people arguing on this forum that slavery/segregation shouldn't have been abolished (which disgusts me), simply because some half-wit on twitter likes complaining about race or whatever. It's heartbreaking because all I can see is a bunch of conflict-seekers ripping apart the very country I grew up loving so much. I'd rather die/not exist than to watch it unfold that way.
The diversity experiment has failed conclusively. Diversity is a weakness. The thoughtleaders in pushing diversity know this. They push it because it is a weakness.


721070


There is a reason why jewish splc have a list of european white percentage at their desk.

Not inherently hateful, no, but stupid in a few ways.

1. With such a homogeneous group, you're losing out on a lot of perspectives you would otherwise hear, challenge or agree with.
You are arguing both for races are inherently different AND for only ideology matters and these logically can't both be true.

If being a different biological background matters for having different perspectives, it also matters for having your values be upheld in society.

3. You might not define segregation as hateful, but most normal people do. Like I said, no one should be forced to mingle with others if they so choose, but no government or authority should be forcing them apart either. I mentioned those education-seeking black kids earlier, well, imagine that they absolutely can't go to a different school because most of them are white-owned, why should they have to endure poor-quality schools because their peers acted like fools? If we're going to accept that whites shouldn't be blamed for each others actions, past and present, then no other group of people should be blamed for the actions of others in their circle, either.
Most people know nothing about most things. People are forced to mingle. As I said, one could not have an all white night club. As for students, most school are indoctrination factories anyways. It's not something one can trust the state with doing well. People should find likeminded parents and form classes of 6-8 kids.

One more thing, if a man shares all of your values, your culture, your intelligence and ideals (and yes, I realize this is uncommon), does his skin color still matter? Further, do you believe we should be allowed to separate by gender, class or sexual orientation? This isn't an argument, but I'm simply curious what your thoughts are.
I think of it as genetic background rather than skin color. But I wouldn't want to dodge. Yes, it still matters. Personally, not so much for friendship or employment, whether you'd be my boss or I yours. But outside of that? Significantly different. Because even if I decided that it didn't matter (as I did for most of my life), it matters to other people. If you'd wife my sister it would likely mean my nephews and nieces would have a harder time through life and would not be part of any tribe naturally.

And the illusion of building a world where everybody does not see something so readily apparent is trying to build an emperor's clothes world. A fool's errand.

I've been enjoying our discussion thus far, and you seem like you'd be a good person to wax about life with.
Right back at ya, but I already said that in the personal message.
 
Last edited:

Glad I couldn't help

Ohai!
kiwifarms.net
  • The US Government gently encouraged UFO conspiracies to help hide real top secret aviation and astronautical projects.
  • The Syrian government has spies embedded within the recent wave of Syrian refugees. Furthermore, they may have help ISIS grow, to destroy the unity of the opposition and deter Western governments from imposing a No Fly zone (cf. Algeria and the GIA in the civil war there). It would be surprising if the ISIS attack in Western Europe at the time had a helping hand from the Syrian gov't of the time.
 
im not saying i beleve this 100% but i still dont understand how 1 plane can make a top of the line best in the world skyscraper fall down in less than 2 hours
You could use 1 wheel off the landing gear for 1 plane and make a skyscraper fall down in less than 2 hours, depending on how fast you get it moving. What does that even mean? Is it because 1 is less than 2?

Like, ICBMs with nuclear warheads on them are smaller than that plane. Do you have trouble believing a nuke could take down a skyscraper?
 

Mewtwo_Rain

Drown in the cesspool of darkness
kiwifarms.net
I think of it as genetic background rather than skin color. But I wouldn't want to dodge. Yes, it still matters. Personally, not so much for friendship or employment, whether you'd be my boss or I yours. But outside of that? Significantly different. Because even if I decided that it didn't matter (as I did for most of my life), it matters to other people. If you'd wife my sister it would likely mean my nephews and nieces would have a harder time through life and would not be part of any tribe naturally.

And the illusion of building a world where everybody does not see something so readily apparent is trying to build an emperor's clothes world. A fool's errand.

I'll have to heavily agree on this stance.

It's basically like this analogy I give to real life.

I walk into a building I hold the door open, no matter the race, sex, nationality, religion, etc. I will hold the door open and act the same when holding the door. Treatment of every other group the same.

However, when you live among certain groups you can't act as if they don't treat you different or act differently depending on your race, sex, political affiliation, etc. That's when the "egalitarian delusion" falls apart.

An easy example using the same race to ignore the race issue, is many of my Black friends look to me when it comes to politics, and voted Trump. Their parents and family do not know they voted Trump and in the area where they live other Black Trump voters have been not only called names but directly threatened with violence. One such man was shot dead, for going against the racial voting block in that area and being proud of it.

Now, the people who think it's ok if they become a majority then have to understand it's not merely because of their race that them becoming the majority is the issue, but if they can't openly say who they supported because of a racial block/violent habit, just imagine how much in fear of their life they'll be if they become a majority and they vote for the wrong person or against the collective majority. They already are the minority who believe in not standing with the racial voting block, which is not a good culture but it is still existing. (80% vs. 20% in the Black community alone) Voting against the tribe in heavily tribal communities is a death sentence and a quick sure-fire way to get your head put on a pole.

Just because my Black friends and many of my other friends of different creeds, nationalities, etc. share my beliefs to a decent extent doesn't mean that western countries will behave the same when or if Whites become a minority, many of them disagreeing with the majority of their own group would then become outcasts, potentially exiled or just a hated pariah or even lead to their eventual death if they don't conform.

I think what it really comes down to is people end up in a double speak conundrum where they value MLK's concepts of individuality but fall on their own sword when it comes to certain groups. Like the "Not all" argument. Sure, it's true not all of any group act the same, but that is hardly relevant if a majority do. I'm sure you could find a non-racist, decent human White supremacist, but as many show on this site with double speak in regards to the stereotype of the evil supremacist, I doubt you'd find that many willing to concede that point that not all Nazi's are evil/White Supremacist are abhorrent. They can't have both ideologies, if they believe not all or not grouping generalizations then they can't believe all White supremacist by the same standard are evil, and in vice versa if they make a blanket belief of White supremacist, they can not make excuses for majorities or use the "not all" argument when looking at direct data that contradicts what they want to believe of racial, national, sexual, religious, philosophical, ideological, and other characterizing groups.

In a sense, you can choose not to care about race, sex, religion, etc. That doesn't mean the other groups don't care about your specific race, sex, religion,etc. Which is where the real danger comes in. Self-projection of tolerance, doesn't mean those groups will tolerate you in the same way you tolerate them or if they become a ruling class will adhere in kind favor to the tolerance you showed them. Tolerance to intolerance is not tolerance so to speak.

Edit: Oh and thanks Lemmingwise for posting your response/continued argument.
 
Last edited:

Megaroad

Space Adventure
kiwifarms.net
Someone in the U.S. government (but not Bush) knew about 9/11, and it was absolutely funded by a foreign government. (All buildings collapsed from fires and instability from weakened columns, however)
Someone in the US government knew about 9/11. It was definitely funded by Saudi Arabia and probably by Israel
I believe either through wikileaks or the freedom of information act, it was known since June of 2001 Osama was plotting 9/11 but the government chose to do nothing citing "why would he want to bring attention to himself?

I'll find the source later.

Adam and Eve lived on a testing habitat on a space station, Tower of Babel was a Space Elevator or a Radio-Station, capabale of inter-stellar signals - or a space station so that might've been where they lived, the flood was caused during a war between aliens from mars and the destroyed planet that now makes up the inner asteroid belt (Mars was"lucky" enough to just be turned into a uninhabitable desert) Noah's Arc was a Spacehip or gene-bank/-storage that saved mankind, Atlantis existed in the times during the biblical flood, the Moon is hollow and actually a space ship that brought refugees from Mars to Earth and they built the Pyramids which are actually a power plant.

I could go on and on about this but I think you get the point.
Sounds like the plot to Xenogears, but I agree we're some kind of experiment.

There are truths to some of the outlandish stories in the bible: great flood was a land dam collapsing flooding a region. Sodom and Gomorrah were recently discovered to be possibly real cities vaporized by an asteroid impact.

As for shit I believe:

-Moon landings are probably bogus.

-An elite pedophile ring definitely exists, with history and current events backing it up.

-Clinton murders are real. That whole family practically flaunts it's corruption in the open.
 

Kalishnakov

kiwifarms.net
Years ago I laughed at conspiracy theories, but it is hard to suggest that this one is a 'conspiracy' but rather it is very much in progress,



What is 'Identity politics" really about?
 
planes are made from aluminium and dent really bad from hitting birds, imagine that same plane hitting structural steel
View attachment 721221
the only structural damage a plane could do is the engines exploding
Or, perhaps, fuel tanks full of jet fuel? Yeah, an unfueled aircraft flying into the twin towers would have been far less damaging, but still, you can definitely knock down steel with aluminum if you just get it moving fast enough. F = MA always.

I mean, watch a video of a lead bullet hitting a steel target. Lead is much, much softer than aluminum, yet it's still able to blow a steel target up because it's moving really fucking fast.

But at least understand the official story before you try saying its wrong. The official (and I would say real) story is that the exploding fuel tanks created a super hot pressurized environment, and once you get the floors to start falling down the chain reaction keeps going.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: SilkGnut
A

AF 802

Guest
kiwifarms.net
I guess I'm more agnostic on the white genocide theory - as in, even with the documents and proof I've seen, all I can think is, do we really know if this is the intent, or is it a subtle trend (in the way of cultural Marxism)? I mean, yeah, I guess bringing in that many people could be a bad thing, but from the American side, all I can think is that it has something to do with the ideals lined with cultural Marxism rather than bringing in massive numbers of immigrants from the middle East/Africa, mainly because I don't see myself, people purposefully looking to fuck Jamal instead of Steve most of the times. I guess it could be different somewhere, but who knows?
 
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino