There are more conspiracies. Here are some well-verified ones:
- Epstein and way too many important people.
- The big one from the 1970s onward to increase the return on capital by lowering living standards, the "Powell memorandum".[1] That's the founding document of the modern conservative movement.
- Facebook/Meta being behind schemes for age verification.[2]
I wonder if it gets a mention? It does get a mention in the recent Bruce Campbell movie https://www.ernieandemma.com/ - which looks to be even more poignant with his recent cancer diagnosis :-(
Obviously Bigfoot is too smart to fall for those traps
> The trap's door has been bolted open since 1980 for visitor safety.
"visitor safety" indeed!
Human or bear?
Why are explanations so popular? You gotta wonder.
Supposedly exposes the Patterson-Gimlin film as a hoax, which is a big deal in the Bigfoot community.
IMO, that was done years ago.
If you look up that film stabilized [1], it becomes really apparent that it's just a guy in a ape costume. The shaky camera is the only thing that makes it harder to determine what's going on.
It makes me a little bit sad, I knew it was very unlikely, but I still had hopes just because it would be so cool to find that big foot is real.
Read the comments on that video to see how many conclude the opposite!
Is the number of people high enough to make them right?
For example if one doctor says I have cancer but 100 electricians say I don't I'm cancer free
9 out of 10 experts agree. It's that last one. That one person is just enough for people to latch on. Then, of the 9, 6 of them get tired of yelling at clouds and quit. The 6 get replaced with those that believe the one so that there's not 7. That goes on for long enough, you get people in charge that do away with vaccinations and measles has a come back.
Is it? Because plenty of other hoax-based bullshit, like Flat Earth Conspiracy Theorists and those who believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old continue on in their bubbles regardless of how much evidence is provided to the contrary.
There’s no possible evidence against so called “last Thursdayism”, so you are certainly misrepresenting the state of affairs.
What's strange is that many people who believe in a Mature Creation (as I've heard it; "Last Thursdayism" is new to me) will readily accept it as the explanation for ancient starlight but then deny evolution and claim that the fossil record is actually evidence of the biblical flood. Which is an unnecessarily weak position to take when you have already accepted a perfectly unfalsifiable cop-out! The truth is that most of them don't want to think too hard about it.
Of course. It's not about being reasonable, it's chasing some emotional need that's unrelated to the truthfulness of the belief. But keep alert for the faith-based beliefs you yourself might find yourself defending with flimsy logic too. It's easy to get sucked into the belief that since all the authorities you respect tell you something is true, then it must be, and you don't have to bother much with how valid your justification is because you already believe the conclusion.
A good self-test is asking yourself how you know the Earth isn't flat. Don't do any research, just try to work it out from what you've already observed and think what makes you believe that conclusion.
There's nothing wrong with Last Thursdayism. It's unfalsifiable. You're welcome to hold it.
Most people find that it's more complicated to work with, since it requires a vastly more complicated set of initial conditions. But if you find that it works for you it isn't actually wrong.
I've always assumed that committed conspiracy theorists are just trolls rolling with it (because nobody could be so stupid as to actually believe in the conspiracy's premise). So no amount of evidence is going to "convince" them, because they already know the truth, and don't care.
But then perhaps over time, they somehow attracted people who genuinely are that stupid, and uncritically believe? That demographic is obviously going to be too stupid to critically assess any new evidence either.
Do you think the same way about religious believers? This is a rhetorical question to help you understand why people hold false beliefs. Of course Mohammed wasn't really the messenger of God, but it's a popular false belief for some reason that isn't stupidity or trolling.
and this is your theory for…all theories?
or just the “obviously stupid” ones?
Plenty (most?) of the people you interact with every day primarily form their worldview based on what feels good emotionally. It's not a matter of stupidity, plenty of smart people delude themselves into thinking easily falsifiable things.
We are barely sentient shit slinging apes.
What does bigfoot have to do with conspiracy? Doesn't bigfoot qualify as folklore/urban legend/pseudoscience/hoax/mythology? Is there widespread belief the government is actively covering up its existence for some reason?
Nothing in the linked story explained it. Did someone make a whole documentary and couldn't get the most basic info right? Or did the reporter mangle the article write-up?
I'm pretty sure almost everyone who believes in UFOs also believes that bigfoot is some kind of alien. So that's a lot of people.
Cryptozoology is pretty big in the conspiracy mediascape.
[dead]
Given that a large portion of the population has a HD or higher quality camera in their pocket most of the time these days, most cryptid style conspiracies seem pretty well debunked at this point.
The documentary does not, in fact, help explain the conspiracy zeitgeist. Human nature has been reason enough through modern history.
This MSN "article" seems oddly out of place on HN.
I used to look down on conspiracy theories, now I think many are actually true, or are mixed with truth. Its really unlikely that a theory circulates widely but has no basis in reality
“Reality” applies pretty much zero selection pressure on ideas that are by definition non-actionable.
That’s the real bread and butter of conspiracy theorizing: claims that don’t matter to anyone’s real lives whether they’re actually true or not.
Therefore they propagate primarily for entertainment value and face none of the friction that you’re imagining being generated by “doesn’t actually make useful predictions about the world.”
Popular conspiracy theories are psyops to either discredit people, movements or ideas
The government spent a lot of time and energy pumping up UFO conspiracy theories to hide sightings of classified aircraft, and they're getting pumped up again in the age of developing cheap weaponized drones.
I would not be surprised that the whole human sex trafficking and Qanon related conspiracy theories are also psyops to hide what's actually going on in plain sight. Obviously, Hillary Clinton wasn't trafficking kids in the basement of a pizza parlor, but there is literally a cabal of elite sex trafficking pedophiles that own and run everything, and one of them is the president.
They're all on a spectrum between flat earth and Epstein didn't off himself, with some clustering at either end
A few years ago, the "tinfoil hat crowd" had this absurd claim that Ghislaine Maxwell was a reddit powermod:
Wasn't Epstein a conspiracy theory once? Epstein cover up has made me believe that cover ups DO happen, and if this one was covered up, what else has been cover up?
It still is, and it is plainly a true conspiracy. Hence its placement at the top end of the spectrum.
What else has been covered up? Oh boy...
I don't understand the Epstein thing. In particular, I don't know why everyone doesn't agree "Epstein had help offing himself". That's the most natural inference from the evidence I'm aware of, and also satisfies the conspiracist urge for drama. Everyone should be happy with this, but I've hardly ever heard anyone else put it forward. What am I missing?
[dead]
Conspiracy theories arise from the natural tendency of human brain to look for patterns even where there are none.
That being said, nowadays it seems that a difference between conspiracy theory and confirmed fact is 12-24 months
There are more conspiracies. Here are some well-verified ones:
- Epstein and way too many important people.
- The big one from the 1970s onward to increase the return on capital by lowering living standards, the "Powell memorandum".[1] That's the founding document of the modern conservative movement.
- Facebook/Meta being behind schemes for age verification.[2]
[1] https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/powellmemo/
[2] https://techoversight.org/2025/07/29/bloomberg-meta-google-l...
Physics is needed to fully understand the demolition of 3 towers..
There's a Bigfoot trap in Oregon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigfoot_trap
I wonder if it gets a mention? It does get a mention in the recent Bruce Campbell movie https://www.ernieandemma.com/ - which looks to be even more poignant with his recent cancer diagnosis :-(
Obviously Bigfoot is too smart to fall for those traps
> The trap's door has been bolted open since 1980 for visitor safety.
"visitor safety" indeed!
Human or bear?
Why are explanations so popular? You gotta wonder.
Supposedly exposes the Patterson-Gimlin film as a hoax, which is a big deal in the Bigfoot community.
IMO, that was done years ago.
If you look up that film stabilized [1], it becomes really apparent that it's just a guy in a ape costume. The shaky camera is the only thing that makes it harder to determine what's going on.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPlRr_OfxZI
It makes me a little bit sad, I knew it was very unlikely, but I still had hopes just because it would be so cool to find that big foot is real.
Read the comments on that video to see how many conclude the opposite!
Is the number of people high enough to make them right?
For example if one doctor says I have cancer but 100 electricians say I don't I'm cancer free
9 out of 10 experts agree. It's that last one. That one person is just enough for people to latch on. Then, of the 9, 6 of them get tired of yelling at clouds and quit. The 6 get replaced with those that believe the one so that there's not 7. That goes on for long enough, you get people in charge that do away with vaccinations and measles has a come back.
Is it? Because plenty of other hoax-based bullshit, like Flat Earth Conspiracy Theorists and those who believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old continue on in their bubbles regardless of how much evidence is provided to the contrary.
There’s no possible evidence against so called “last Thursdayism”, so you are certainly misrepresenting the state of affairs.
What's strange is that many people who believe in a Mature Creation (as I've heard it; "Last Thursdayism" is new to me) will readily accept it as the explanation for ancient starlight but then deny evolution and claim that the fossil record is actually evidence of the biblical flood. Which is an unnecessarily weak position to take when you have already accepted a perfectly unfalsifiable cop-out! The truth is that most of them don't want to think too hard about it.
Of course. It's not about being reasonable, it's chasing some emotional need that's unrelated to the truthfulness of the belief. But keep alert for the faith-based beliefs you yourself might find yourself defending with flimsy logic too. It's easy to get sucked into the belief that since all the authorities you respect tell you something is true, then it must be, and you don't have to bother much with how valid your justification is because you already believe the conclusion.
A good self-test is asking yourself how you know the Earth isn't flat. Don't do any research, just try to work it out from what you've already observed and think what makes you believe that conclusion.
There's nothing wrong with Last Thursdayism. It's unfalsifiable. You're welcome to hold it.
Most people find that it's more complicated to work with, since it requires a vastly more complicated set of initial conditions. But if you find that it works for you it isn't actually wrong.
I've always assumed that committed conspiracy theorists are just trolls rolling with it (because nobody could be so stupid as to actually believe in the conspiracy's premise). So no amount of evidence is going to "convince" them, because they already know the truth, and don't care.
But then perhaps over time, they somehow attracted people who genuinely are that stupid, and uncritically believe? That demographic is obviously going to be too stupid to critically assess any new evidence either.
Do you think the same way about religious believers? This is a rhetorical question to help you understand why people hold false beliefs. Of course Mohammed wasn't really the messenger of God, but it's a popular false belief for some reason that isn't stupidity or trolling.
and this is your theory for…all theories?
or just the “obviously stupid” ones?
Plenty (most?) of the people you interact with every day primarily form their worldview based on what feels good emotionally. It's not a matter of stupidity, plenty of smart people delude themselves into thinking easily falsifiable things.
We are barely sentient shit slinging apes.
What does bigfoot have to do with conspiracy? Doesn't bigfoot qualify as folklore/urban legend/pseudoscience/hoax/mythology? Is there widespread belief the government is actively covering up its existence for some reason?
Nothing in the linked story explained it. Did someone make a whole documentary and couldn't get the most basic info right? Or did the reporter mangle the article write-up?
I'm pretty sure almost everyone who believes in UFOs also believes that bigfoot is some kind of alien. So that's a lot of people.
Cryptozoology is pretty big in the conspiracy mediascape.
[dead]
Given that a large portion of the population has a HD or higher quality camera in their pocket most of the time these days, most cryptid style conspiracies seem pretty well debunked at this point.
The documentary does not, in fact, help explain the conspiracy zeitgeist. Human nature has been reason enough through modern history.
This MSN "article" seems oddly out of place on HN.
I used to look down on conspiracy theories, now I think many are actually true, or are mixed with truth. Its really unlikely that a theory circulates widely but has no basis in reality
“Reality” applies pretty much zero selection pressure on ideas that are by definition non-actionable.
That’s the real bread and butter of conspiracy theorizing: claims that don’t matter to anyone’s real lives whether they’re actually true or not.
Therefore they propagate primarily for entertainment value and face none of the friction that you’re imagining being generated by “doesn’t actually make useful predictions about the world.”
Popular conspiracy theories are psyops to either discredit people, movements or ideas
The government spent a lot of time and energy pumping up UFO conspiracy theories to hide sightings of classified aircraft, and they're getting pumped up again in the age of developing cheap weaponized drones.
I would not be surprised that the whole human sex trafficking and Qanon related conspiracy theories are also psyops to hide what's actually going on in plain sight. Obviously, Hillary Clinton wasn't trafficking kids in the basement of a pizza parlor, but there is literally a cabal of elite sex trafficking pedophiles that own and run everything, and one of them is the president.
They're all on a spectrum between flat earth and Epstein didn't off himself, with some clustering at either end
A few years ago, the "tinfoil hat crowd" had this absurd claim that Ghislaine Maxwell was a reddit powermod:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/incoherent-conspiracy-sugges...
The article above is from 2020, and later the FBI itself used the user maxwellhill as evidence in Ghislaine's investigation:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Epstein/comments/1qsf6y6/reddit_pos...
Wasn't Epstein a conspiracy theory once? Epstein cover up has made me believe that cover ups DO happen, and if this one was covered up, what else has been cover up?
It still is, and it is plainly a true conspiracy. Hence its placement at the top end of the spectrum.
What else has been covered up? Oh boy...
I don't understand the Epstein thing. In particular, I don't know why everyone doesn't agree "Epstein had help offing himself". That's the most natural inference from the evidence I'm aware of, and also satisfies the conspiracist urge for drama. Everyone should be happy with this, but I've hardly ever heard anyone else put it forward. What am I missing?
[dead]
Conspiracy theories arise from the natural tendency of human brain to look for patterns even where there are none.
That being said, nowadays it seems that a difference between conspiracy theory and confirmed fact is 12-24 months
[dead]