Conspiracies

[Tomoreno]

This type of inferiority complex usually inspires the need to believe in conspiracy theories simply so they can feel one of the knowledgeable few.

If you ever want to go beyond conspiracy theories, there are plenty of sources of knowledge you can access to try and understand how things work. For example, many universities offer free online courses. You can also go with subscription services like

Stream Entertaining Nonfiction Learning | Plus

www.thegreatcoursesplus.com

But I guess it's easier to just imagine your own reality.

I dedicate my response to you and those who think like You.

Here's why some people always have to be right...

Hope I don't damage your fragile egos.

Why Some People Always Need to Be Right

Here’s how to handle the know-it-alls in your life

www.menshealth.com

 

[shack]

I dedicate my response to you and those who think like You.

Here's why some people always have to be right...

Hope I don't damage your fragile egos.

Why Some People Always Need to Be Right

Here’s how to handle the know-it-alls in your life

www.menshealth.com

What's really unfair is when people use facts to win their arguments.

 

[basketcase]

I dedicate my response to you and those who think like You.

Here's why some people always have to be right...

Hope I don't damage your fragile egos.

Why Some People Always Need to Be Right

Here’s how to handle the know-it-alls in your life

www.menshealth.com

Strange that people would rather be right than wrong. Chose whichever you want.

And seriously, there is a ton of good academic content out there that can answer a lot of the questions you have.

 

[luvyeah]

I'm not sure what to say, other than this is amusing.

Men who are physically strong are more likely to have right wing political views

Research published in Psychological Science found that while stronger men like Arnold Schwarzenegger are more likely to be right wing, weaker men are more likely to support the welfare state.

www.dailymail.co.uk

New study confirms everything you suspected about gym bros

The longer a man spent in the gym the less they believed in the redistribution of wealth, according to the findings

www.independent.co.uk

Gym Bros More Likely to be Right-Wing Assholes, Science Confirms

No time to worry about socio-economic inequality when you've got to finish your reps, brah!

www.vice.com

 

[Tomoreno]

I'm not sure what to say, other than this is amusing.

Men who are physically strong are more likely to have right wing political views

Research published in Psychological Science found that while stronger men like Arnold Schwarzenegger are more likely to be right wing, weaker men are more likely to support the welfare state.

www.dailymail.co.uk

New study confirms everything you suspected about gym bros

The longer a man spent in the gym the less they believed in the redistribution of wealth, according to the findings

www.independent.co.uk

Gym Bros More Likely to be Right-Wing Assholes, Science Confirms

No time to worry about socio-economic inequality when you've got to finish your reps, brah!

www.vice.com

This is beyond hilarious.

 

[luvyeah]

This is beyond hilarious.

This should produce an audible chuckle as well.

What is it like to fire an AR-15? It’s horrifying, menacing and very very loud

It felt to me like a bazooka — and sounded like a cannon. One day after 49 people were killed in the Orlando shooting, I traveled to Philadelphia to better understand the firepower of militar…

www.nydailynews.com

 

[Tomoreno]

This should produce an audible chuckle as well.

View attachment 29488

What is it like to fire an AR-15? It’s horrifying, menacing and very very loud

It felt to me like a bazooka — and sounded like a cannon. One day after 49 people were killed in the Orlando shooting, I traveled to Philadelphia to better understand the firepower of militar…

www.nydailynews.com

Don't give a gun to a pussy.

Btw, violence doesn't require guns...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trump-dc-rally-maga/2020/12/11/8b5af818-3bdb-11eb-bc68-96af0daae728_story.html

 

[shack]

Btw, violence doesn't require guns...

BTW, the only intent and result of gun use is violence.

 

[luvyeah]

BTW, the only intent and result of gun use is violence.

Yeah the shooting range is very violent.

 

[shack]

Yeah the shooting range is very violent.

Guns were not invented to be used at ranges. They were invented to hurt and kill.

Ranges are for practising to be good at violence.

 

[Tomoreno]

Guns were not invented to be used at ranges. They were invented to hurt and kill.

Ranges are for practising to be good at violence.

Weapons can be used to take lives or save them... depends on who's using them.

They can be used to feed people.

They can be used to defend against invaders.

And most importantly, guns don't kill people. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!

 

[shack]

Weapons can be used to take lives or save them... .

By violence either way. The reason for guns.

They can be used to feed people.

Once upon a time. Today, not so much. Not at someplace like Yonge and Dundas or Jane and Finch.

They can be used to defend against invaders.

The War of 1812 for Canada.

And most importantly, guns don't kill people. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!

But it sure makes it a hell of a lot easier. Strangle or shoot. Which is easier. Especially when you've been practising at the range.

 

[Tomoreno]

One incident that comes to mind is St. Louis... McCloskey family. If it wasn't for AR-15, they likely would've met their maker.
That mob wasn't there for a friendly chit chat.

On a side note... anything can be used as a weapon.

Jet Li's movie Kiss of the Dragon exhibits how many items can be used as a weapon.

Billiard ball, chopsticks, needles etc.

A human body can be a weapon!

 

[squeezer]

One incident that comes to mind is St. Louis... McCloskey family. If it wasn't for AR-15, they likely would've met their maker.
That mob wasn't there for a friendly chit chat.

You're referring to the dumbasses who were charged and will be paying dearly to defend themselves? They sure sound like neighbors I'd like to have, NOT! LOL

The St. Louis couple charged with waving guns at protesters have a long history of not backing down

But public records and interviews reveal a fuller picture than emerged two weeks ago. They show the McCloskeys are almost always in conflict with others, typically over control of private property, what people can do on that property, and whose job it is to make sure they do it.

They filed a lawsuit in 1988 to obtain their house, a castle built for Adolphus Busch’s daughter and her husband during St. Louis’ brief run as a world-class city in the early 20th century. At the McCloskeys’ property in Franklin County, they have sued neighbors for making changes to a gravel road and twice in just over two years evicted tenants from a modular home on their property.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/the-st-louis-couple-charged-with-waving-guns-at-protesters-have-a-long-history-of/article_281d9989-373e-53c3-abcb-ecd0225dd287.html

 

[Tomoreno]

These days it's hard to believe anything media puts out there, but here's the law of the state...

Missouri Self-Defense Laws

Created by FindLaw's team of legal writers and editors | Last updated July 01, 2020
If a person is under attack and in fear for their life, they have the right to use force to protect themselves. Every state has self-defense laws that detail the circumstances under which an individual can use self-defense (and the limits of the force that may be used) to justify their conduct without being convicted of a crime.

About half of the states have some version of "stand your ground" laws. These laws don't require people to back down from an attacker even when withdrawal is possible. A common variation on this concept is the "castle doctrine" which allows individuals to defend themselves against threats in and to their homes (expanded in some states to include cars and/or workplaces) without the duty to retreat.

Missouri Castle Doctrine
Missouri recognizes the "castle doctrine" and allows residents to use force against intruders, without the duty to retreat, based on the notion that your home is your "castle." This legal doctrine assumes that if an invader disrupts the sanctity of your home, they intend to do you harm and therefore you should be able to repel their advances.

Missouri's law is more extensive than the law in other states because it permits property owners to use the amount of force reasonably perceived as necessary, including deadly force.

 

[Robert Mugabe]

A human body can be a weapon!

Or in my case, a punching bag.

 

[Mencken]

Once in a while an event occurs that requires a statement or an explanation from a government or big corporation. Normally we accept it as the truth, but sometimes it leaves us with more questions than answers. We start questioning the validity of an answer, especially if it contains many irregularities, anomalies, contradictions etc.
Some events occur out of sight and some unfold before our eyes.

Man on the moon... 1969-1972... 12 people supposedly were on the moon and then it just became too expensive to go again. No government or company was able to replicate such success in nearly 50 years.

9/11 - an event that defies laws of physics, nature, chemistry, logic. Multiple anomalies that are nearly impossible and all happened on the same day.

Malaysian Airlines MH370 and MH17. Both were a Boing 777-200ER. One's identification # was 9M-MRO and the other's 9M-MRD.
One vanishes over Pacific and the other one is shot down couple months later over Ukraine after veering off course by 500km and flying over war zone.

There are many other so called conspiracies.

Any thoughts?

Opinion only. Takes no conspiracy belief to answer any of these.

Some coincidences are probable because you're retroactively selecting those that have happened. You have no measure for the millions of coincidences that didn't happen. So every time a one in a million thing happens people say...oh, impossible. They miss the other 999,999 completely.

 

[cynalan]

Yeah, I don't go for every single one.
I'm more of a guy who thinks that a building made of concrete and steel shouldn't just disintegrate because a plane flew into it.
And not just that! I believe that a paper passport can't survive a plane explosion.

The World Trade Centre did not come down as a direct impact of the plane. That is obvious because it stood so long after impact. The building came down because the jet fuel was burning at such a high temperature that it melted the steel structure supporting the upper floors. Once the structural integrity was lost, the building came down.

 

[Tomoreno]

The World Trade Centre did not come down as a direct impact of the plane. That is obvious because it stood so long after impact. The building came down because the jet fuel was burning at such a high temperature that it melted the steel structure supporting the upper floors. Once the structural integrity was lost, the building came down.

Ah, finally explained!

Fuel actually doesn't burn in explosion and keeps burning indefinitely until building comes down.

Thank you for breaking it down.

 

[MissCroft]

I will tell you what the real conspiracy is. Are you people aware that a few years ago, Reese's Peanut Butter Cups got smaller? AND the price went up!?! And that they have tried to hide it?