web feature Muse Urges Its Fans To Take The Red Pill

[Niall]

I should elaborate that I was referring specifically to them happening outside of CA, because this is for Muse discussion. And as for what the band do and don't believe in these days, don't assume too much.

 

There are some things that are corrupt that indeed should be discussed, like a few select individuals monopolising media, eg. Murdoch. These aren't conspiracies, it is pretty obvious how the political leanings filter down and influence gullible people (call it brain washing if you want, but that sounds like some whacky sci fi thing and will turn a lot of people off). Take a look at the Daily Mail or wikileaks threads for example.

 

This isn't some golden truth that only the a select few have some how come to realise, and treating it as such makes you look foolish. You have to remain rational and non sensationalist about things like this, lest you come across as ridiculous. And pick the right battles. Global warming is loaded with good science to back it up. Sure there may be some corruption involved in the political handling of it, but don't let that block your view of something that is real and should be worried about.

 

The world is full of terrible things without the need to invent some crazy conspiracies, and these are the things that really need discussing.

[Niall]

Oh that's interesting. Is that the band or their management though I wonder?!

 

Odd that they'd keep the links here to the conspiracy sites then.

 

Okay I take back what I said about suppressing their interests if you've had instructions.

 

We haven't had instruction per se. But I know that thing about Matt calling 9/11 an inside job is inaccurate, and they've distanced themselves from it, for example.

 

I think Matt has said in interviews that conspiracy theories are worth discussing, but should themselves be viewed very critically. Of course, everything should be.

 

And I don't think we accept people pushing through conspiracy theory propaganda because it distracts from constructive discussions.

 

As stickied in current affairs:

 

Please if you are thinking of making any threads with the slightest connection to 9/11 and any conspiracy regarding it to use the 9/11 thread or if you genuinely consider your idea to warrant its own individual topic to contact a moderator first to check. The reason for this is at the time of writing this we are getting swamped by a small minority of users who are ignoring all rules and warnings and just using this area as a place to flood our forum with their own ideas/propaganda in a way that is making it difficult for people to use this area normally. By making new threads on this topic there is a good chance you will be banned permanently, so please consider this a warning.

 

Please note this isn't a restriction on what you can post, you're fully welcome to discuss conspiracy theories in the 9/11 thread but our usual rules apply.

[vinya12]

Did you know that swine flu is man made. Yep it was made in a laboratory. By men. So why did it get released to the public? In the 70s they released a form of swine flu in to the population. And then developed a vaccine. The vaccine did more harm than the flu .

The vaccine was considered unsafe. A new form of swine flu was made and released . This swine flu was no more harmful than any other flu. They started to use the vaccine again. THE SAME VACCINE . the one that had been teased as unsafe .

So why?

The human population is out of control. There are to many of us. Its not good for the big guys as we rely on them for food heating housing and so on. So, how to control the population? How do you control to many rabbits in a field ? The best way to control the populasiin is mass illness. If people die because there are ill they don't question as much as they would if a bomb was drooped.

REMEMBER SWINE FLY IS MAN MADE

[Niall]

Did you know that swine flu is man made. Yep it was made in a laboratory. By men. So why did it get released to the public? In the 70s they released a form of swine flu in to the population. And then developed a vaccine. The vaccine did more harm than the flu .

The vaccine was considered unsafe. A new form of swine flu was made and released . This swine flu was no more harmful than any other flu. They started to use the vaccine again. THE SAME VACCINE . the one that had been teased as unsafe .

So why?

The human population is out of control. There are to many of us. Its not good for the big guys as we rely on them for food heating housing and so on. So, how to control the population? How do you control to many rabbits in a field ? The best way to control the populasiin is mass illness. If people die because there are ill they don't question as much as they would if a bomb was drooped.

REMEMBER SWINE FLY IS MAN MADE

 

Evidence?

 

And I mean objective evidence.

[pinkfloyddsotm]

we could sit here all night and day comparing different graphs that prove anthropogenic global warming is/isnt happening,ive been through this time and time again with others and leaked emails prove that scientists were tampering with data to make it look worse than what it is ,yes you can say an "independent inquiry" cleared the people involved but that "independent inquiry " wasnt really "independent " since the investigation was led by sir russell muir , a member of the royal society of edinburgh which is a vehemont supporter of anthropogenic global warming, and clearly contradicts the "independent inquiry" , lets say if it was happening ,its no where near as catastrophic as the UN make it out to be , they depict apocalyptic style consequences once again spreading fear into the public. Al gore saying CO2 rises then temperatures rise is actually the other way around,once again another lie by gore himself.

They called the climate scare " global warming" then when the warming stopped they called it " climate change" , then when the climate changed no more than usual they called it "energy security" then they would try call it " ocean acidification" eventually calling the climate scare for what it really is " absolute bullshit"

 

There is just way to many variables in this subject matter to say we are the only sole reason for global warming.

 

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/globalwarming.html

[CarrieB]

We haven't had instruction per se. But I know that thing about Matt calling 9/11 an inside job is inaccurate, and they've distanced themselves from it, for example.

 

I think Matt has said in interviews that conspiracy theories are worth discussing, but should themselves be viewed very critically. Of course, everything should be.

 

And I don't think we accept people pushing through conspiracy theory propaganda because it distracts from constructive discussions.

 

As stickied in current affairs:

 

Okay that's fair enough.

 

While on the subject there is also the thing about who the conspiracy theories might attract. While I agree they are worth discussing, I have seen stuff from people who believe them without question and there was stuff where these people got the idea that Muse were traitors working for the NWO because of symbols in their videos, which is a little concerning.

[Niall]

Potential and rebuked accusations of data tampering at one institution does not equal a global conspiracy to fake data.

 

Climate change is a more general term. It is still called global warming, although is term can be misconstrued as a uniform increase in temperature, as apposed to an increase in temperature anomaly, because with global warming some areas may indeed get colder as global climate changes.

 

Ocean acidification is a recorded side effect of increased CO2. Simply because when CO2 dissolves in water it forms an acid, therefore an increase in CO2 will obviously increase the acidity of any bodies of water exposed to it.

 

Energy security is a no brainer. Oil isn't reliable. It is dependent on finding new sources of it, and it is always running out. Also, its availability is subject to an increasingly unreliable economy and a politically complex infrastructure. New oil takes millions of years to form naturally, whereas we're pumping out vast quantities of it ever day. Things like the sun and the wind are not so potentially variable, so they are a secure means of obtaining energy.

[Niall]

Okay that's fair enough.

 

While on the subject there is also the thing about who the conspiracy theories might attract. While I agree they are worth discussing, I have seen stuff from people who believe them without question and there was stuff where these people got the idea that Muse were traitors working for the NWO because of symbols in their videos, which is a little concerning.

 

These people are typically trained to spot things that aren't necessarily there, akin to religious people "seeing" God's work everywhere they go. If you are always looking for something, let's say, you "enrich" what you see with what you want to see. It is the misinterpretation of of things as intentional symbols because your gear your brain to spot certain symbolisms and apply unwarranted significance to them whereas such a significance simply isn't there under a critical analysis, or if it is intended, may very well be entirely misinterpreted.

[vinya12]

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/27/science/sci-swine-history27

[vinya12]

http://www.naturalnews.com/026866_swine_flu_flu_vaccine_swine_flu_vaccine.html

quote-, what we really have with the swine flu vaccine is an untested, potentially dangerous cocktail of chemicals and viral fragments that could plausibly be linked to a devastating neurological condition.

[vinya12]

[Niall]

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/27/science/sci-swine-history27

 

All that article says is how there was an ineffective vaccine made for what turned out to be a limited epidemic in 1976.

[Niall]

http://www.naturalnews.com/026866_swine_flu_flu_vaccine_swine_flu_vaccine.html

quote-, what we really have with the swine flu vaccine is an untested, potentially dangerous cocktail of chemicals and viral fragments that could plausibly be linked to a devastating neurological condition.

 

That's a website...referencing the Daily Mail!

 

That's a long distance away from being objective evidence, or evidence at all.

 

Science is what I'm after. Not scaremongering media report. Find me some scientific publications, something with some authority, not a website with an agenda referencing the biggest scaremongering, agenda-laden tabloid in the UK. The DM isn't taken seriously.

 

Even if that is believable, it doesn't support what you're saying. It only goes to show that government didn't properly test it, resulting in an incredible small minority of side effects that probably has no statistical significance whatsoever.

 

And as for the youtube video, well, it's a youtube video. The best that could be is a form of entertainment rather than evidence. It's entitled "conspiracy" so it is hardly objective from the outset.

[pinkfloyddsotm]

Potential and rebuked accusations of data tampering at one institution does not equal a global conspiracy to fake data.

 

Climate change is a more general term. It is still called global warming, although is term can be misconstrued as a uniform increase in temperature, as apposed to an increase in temperature anomaly, because with global warming some areas may indeed get colder as global climate changes.

 

Ocean acidification is a recorded side effect of increased CO2. Simply because when CO2 dissolves in water it forms an acid, therefore an increase in CO2 will obviously increase the acidity of any bodies of water exposed to it.

.

 

But there is already 70 times as much CO2 dissolved in the oceans as there is concentrated in the earths atmopshere, that if we double the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere this century 1/3 of the extra CO2 will end up the oceans and therefore the oceanic partial pressure can only increase by at most 30% of 1/70th of what is already there or a tiny 0.4% not to mention henrys law says that the oceans will outgas CO2 substantially compensating for the higher atmospheric concentration. The effects are minimal, the ipcc exagerate to the max about their temperature data calculations.

[Zaphod Chizzlebrox]

Off-topic thread is off-topic.

[pinkfloyddsotm]

im sure nial will correct me if im wrong

[vinya12]

I spent weeks researching this and it would take weeks to fine the evidence you want. But believe me if you have the time resurch this as much as you can. You will be surprised what you find, but it wil take a lot of your time. i dont have the time to do it all again for you.

[Zaphod Chizzlebrox]

I spent weeks researching this and it would take weeks to fine the evidence you want. But believe me if you have the time resurch this as much as you can. You will be surprised what you find, but it wil take a lot of your time. i dont have the time to do it all again for you.

 

Weeks? Christ, that's nearly forever!

 

People have been researching things like this their whole lives and still haven't reached any consensus on it. You haven't researched, you've just read a few articles that have somehow convinced you that what you read is true.

[pinkfloyddsotm]

Weeks? Christ, that's nearly forever!

 

People have been researching things like this their whole lives and still haven't reached any consensus on it. You haven't researched, you've just read a few articles that have somehow convinced you that what you read is true.

 

yer but when most of the facts are quoted from actual scientists are you then disregarding their work and calling them a liar ?

[Niall]

I don't think applying high school chemistry and misunderstand the term "partial pressure" is quite accounting enough for such a complex system. Simplistic attempts at modelling aside, it isn't real evidence.

 

This letter was published in Nature a while ago and is pretty worrying. There's tons of literature about it.

[pinkfloyddsotm]

i think niall is a total denier of everything he is told unless it is presented in some type scientific peer reviewed paper.

[Zaphod Chizzlebrox]

i think niall is a total denier of everything he is told unless it is presented in some type scientific peer reviewed paper.

 

Niall is a clear thinker who doesn't believe something just because it's been posted in a newspaper.

[Niall]

I spent weeks researching this and it would take weeks to fine the evidence you want. But believe me if you have the time resurch this as much as you can. You will be surprised what you find, but it wil take a lot of your time. i dont have the time to do it all again for you.

 

"Evidence" that you've conveniently lost? That's a bit of a cop out. Besides, scientific evidence is easy to find. All papers are available as PSD or PS on the internet these days. Or if not, what sort of evidence are you talking about?

[CarrieB]

These people are typically trained to spot things that aren't necessarily there, akin to religious people "seeing" God's work everywhere they go. If you are always looking for something, let's say, you "enrich" what you see with what you want to see. It is the misinterpretation of of things as intentional symbols because your gear your brain to spot certain symbolisms and apply unwarranted significance to them whereas such a significance simply isn't there under a critical analysis, or if it is intended, may very well be entirely misinterpreted.

 

Yeah I agree, it might not even be on purpose because it's natural psychologically to notice things more if you have a particular interest in them and attribute them greater and wider significance than they have in reality when tested.

 

I'm sure there is misinterpretation of tongue in cheek references as well.

 

Personally I don't think science is foolproof and has all the answers. It too is open to errors in judgement (and influenced by money and commercial interests and political interests incidentally). I've been studying that from a social science rather than natural science perspective. If science could tell us everything, and was always right incidentally, there would be no point in scientific investigation continuing. That is why I don't ever think people should be closed minded, but honestly some of the stuff these "conspiracy theorists" come out with is BS, I'm sure.

[pinkfloyddsotm]

I don't think applying high school chemistry and misunderstand the term "partial pressure" is quite accounting enough for such a complex system. Simplistic attempts at modelling aside, it isn't real evidence.

 

This letter was published in Nature a while ago and is pretty worrying. There's tons of literature about it.

 

lets put a tax on volcanoes !!