Reconciling Opposing Conspiracies
I'm a new member as of about a month ago. I came here through a friend who heard Greg on Chris Jericho's show.
I'm wondering how people are reconciling all the info from these podcasts? For example, I listened to the podcast with John Brandenburg, where he claims that they can show there was a nuclear attack on Mars. I then listened to Crrow and Greg in Crrow's second interview, where he doesn't think that we have made off the planet. I seem to remember there are claims of a catastrophic event on our planet about 13000 years ago, which could coincide with Brandenburg's info too. Yet, Crrow makes excellent points about the state of control and the potential disinfo of NASA.
I have also listened to a guy like Brooks Agnew, feeling that he seemed somewhat credible. Obviously, he's a very bright guy, but does that make him better at disinfo? I'm wondering if there is a consensus on who is trustworthy? I think people are being decent about the Greg's guests in the podcast comments. Is this just everybody's way of being polite?
One of things I love about Greg is that he gives his guest a respectful platform to have their say whether or not he agrees with the information. There is a loud part of my mind that wants to pin everything down and have a coherent picture of the world but I don't think that's possible, or even all that important. There are some theories I agree because of evidence, there are some theories I agree with or disagree with from my psychic sense and there are even some theories that I don't agree with but they are interesting or entertaining to ponder. I think many people have a piece of the puzzle but it is very challenging for any of us to get a complete picture.
I appreciate what you're saying Sylviatrilling. I like Greg's style of interviewing very much. I like to hear what his guests say without too much opposition. He's good at that.
I am not going to say who I think is trustworthy because its all a matter of opinion... What I recommend is exploring the "conspiracy community", things will begin to fit together. One persons narrative will gel with another persons narrative and pretty soon things begin to fit, not perfectly, forget about that. We are all blind men trying to figure out wtf the elephant looks like. I am not saying you should believe anything completely without checking into it yourself, but after a while it does become abit easier to spot the bullshit artists and people that are just trying to make money. Greg seems to do a good job and he has some quality researchers on here. Sure there is a zinger here and there but that stuff is just as important. You have to stay on your toes. THC provides people in this field that have something to say, a means to do that. Its our job to listen to what is said, then utilize the information how we see fit. Rather than pushing an agenda or a narrative, THC keeps it neutral and that my friend, is priceless.
Great question and topic!
I think sometimes the guests can have differing views but both be 'sort of' right at the same time.
I believe both Crows theory about we can't go off planet AND the theory of the Mars devastation/space war. I think we can't go off planet in the traditional 'get in a rocket and shoot off into the sky' scenario, I believe the radiation belt or something or other prevents us from doing it that way.
But I do believe we CAN go in other ways and that's the big trillion dollar black budget secret. Whether it's interdimensionally or through reverse engineered UFO tech or both...
I also love that Greg gives a platform for all ideas and theories and let's us do our own piecing together. He often says himself that researchers can get bogged down in their own material and leave out other crucial pieces of evidence or information.
It's a frustratingly fun guessing game in the conspiracy world for sure!
One of my favorites is bluebeam contrast with roswell.
Fake alien invasion vs real undergroud greys etc.
I find both can coexist depending on the level of the rabbit hole.
That can apply for many things.
I think the best bet is finding sources that are reliable and pulling on the threads yourself. Often you find people who are so certain that they seem too sure of themselves vs people who are simply open minded and asking you to draw your own conclusions.
I think most people who are interested in the topics on here are in search of the truth and open to many different theories. If you take just one theory as fact it cuts off otger aspects of other theories that might lead to the truth. I think most of us will hold ALL theories in their mind and try to make correlations between all of them until a bigger picture unfolds or a certain theory stikes a chord and feels right to them.
I feel the above states of mind also relates to the comments section. If you are open minded and willing to hold all theories in your mind until enough proof sifts other accounts as untrue then you will see a willingness to hear All guest's point of view.