ChrisWeigant.com

From The Archives -- The Biggest Conspiracy Of All

[ Posted Thursday, December 17th, 2015 – 18:24 UTC ]

Program Note: I'm busily putting together the first installment of our year-end "best/worst" lists, and so am unable to write an original column today. Tune in tomorrow to see the result. For now, please enjoy the following, where I uncover a worldwide conspiracy that each and every one of you has participated in at one point or another in your lives. Yes, you! You're a co-conspirator just like all the others....

 

The Biggest Conspiracy Of All
[Originally published December 23, 2009]

Speaking as someone who generally enjoys a good conspiracy theory just for the "creative writing" aspect alone, in all good conscience I simply must report this shocking news: I have uncovered a big, fat conspiracy that is no mere theory. We're either being lied to, or we're joining in the propagation of the lie ourselves, with merriment. In actual fact, it would not be hyperbole to call this the father of all conspiracies.

And almost every single one of us has participated in this gigantic hoax, in one form or another, at least once in our lives. For many, it happens like clockwork on a regular basis. And it seems to prove Hitler's point about the "Big Lie" -- if you repeat it often enough, sooner or later a certain segment of the populace will accept it as being true.

This vast conspiracy is not limited to even America, although it certainly has a red, white, and true-blue-American following. While not exactly world-wide, the conspiracy reaches about as far as any such enormous falsehood has ever reached on our globe, so that even peoples who don't buy into the conspiracy's underlying storyline still participate in the conspiracy with jolly abandon.

The conspiracy itself is insidious and highly discriminatory, since the targets of the falsehood are a tiny segment of the population who are vulnerable and impressionable. That's right -- an enormous majority of society has banded together to repeat this lie to a minority, and the deciding factor for who is "in" the conspiracy and who is lied to is based purely on physical characteristics -- a throwback to a darker era when society deemed it permissible for such blatant and overt discrimination. The rules of the conspiracy are plain and simple, and are so prevalent that when one who has not been let into the conspiracy meets a complete and utter stranger -- virtually anywhere in this country -- without any prompting or other instigation, they will almost without exception be lied to by this complete stranger (who would rather die of shame than admit the truth).

This conspiracy, looked at from a certain light, is no better than fratboy "hazing" rituals, since the members of the conspiracy -- every man and woman of them -- were themselves lied to for a period of time before being allowed to join in the ritual of misleading others who have not been so initiated. It's as if the entire country had an unspoken agreement to join in this monstrous prank on a small group of fellow citizens.

Those being lied to have a rational and logical choice in what to believe -- either almost everyone they know and even complete strangers that they meet and an agency of the federal government to boot are lying shamelessly and absolutely consistently to them; or, conversely, what everyone is telling them must be true. The scope and size of the conspiracy mean that applying Occam's Razor in the usual fashion will lead them to believe the lie, instead of uncovering the truth of the matter. In other words, the lesson taught is that almost nobody they've ever met in their entire lives can be fully trusted any more. This is why the conspiracy is such a negative one -- because it results in finally accepting the paranoid notion that everyone really has banded together to make a fool out of you. Which leads to disillusionment and loss of innocence. Stumbling out of the dark, in this particular instance, leads almost immediately to doubting all the stories told by the perpetrators of this myth.

This may, in the end, do some good. Because a healthy skepticism is almost a required trait to deal with the modern world. No facts or stories should be taken on faith in the person speaking such, as it is obvious that informed people should view people saying "It's true! Really!" with a seriously jaundiced eye from that point on. Which, as I said, is actually a good thing, in the end.

This conspiracy has a name. And it is no coincidence that this lie is alphabetically correspondent with Satan, since as I said the evil of divisively selecting one segment of the public -- on physical characteristics alone -- and then repeatedly lying to them is a horrendous practice which should, quite obviously, be denounced by all upstanding folks who wish to allow American society to grow out of this juvenile behavior and mature as a society.

Because that's really the key to the whole conspiracy -- a juvenile falsehood told by those who have no excuse for such childish behavior. No excuse whatsoever, since (almost by definition) none of the members of the conspiracy can defend their actions as childlike, rather than childish.

I realize I am fighting a headwind by exposing this insidious lie, and that merry members of the conspiracy are simply never going to change their behavior, since they are all convinced that lying to a physically-challenged minority is somehow for their own good.

Sigh.

Maybe they're right after all. It's so much easier just to believe the lie, and (by doing so) avoid tilting at this particular windmill. Screaming the truth in a crowd would not make me friends -- in fact it would likely put me in fear of turning such into a mob screaming for my blood.

It's so much easier to avoid all of that. And, after all, this conspiracy has been ongoing for hundreds of years, so I guess it does no real harm. So, count me in, and allow me to say without any hint of dishonesty or smirking irony:

"Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus."

Santa

Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night!

 

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

44 Comments on “From The Archives -- The Biggest Conspiracy Of All”

  1. [1] 
    Michale wrote:

    :D Always a classic.. :D

    Michale
    475

  2. [2] 
    Michale wrote:

    Neil,

    I brought this comment forward because my response was stuck in the NNL filter... Hopefully in it's no location, I can avvoid that fate...

    Michale: which Democratic nominee rejects peer reviewed science and what do they reject?

    This has to be something major and generally accepted by mainstream science, similar to the rejection of climate change or evolution by many if not all of the Republican nominees.

    Look up the works of Judith Curry and Richard Lindzen..

    Democrats categorically deny their peer reviewed science..

    And that's just TWO scientists.. There are tens of thousands of scientists just like these that Democrats ignore..

    Like I said, Democrats ONLY accept the science that supports their agenda..

    Global Warming is a religion.. And, like with ALL religions, the priests of the chosen religion are right and the priests of all other religions are heretics..

    Michale
    476

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    Neil,

    I brought this comment forward because my response was stuck in the NNL filter... Hopefully in it's no location, I can avoid that fate...

    Unfortunately, I could not avoid that fate..

    So, here it is in pieces...

    Michale: which Democratic nominee rejects peer reviewed science and what do they reject?

    This has to be something major and generally accepted by mainstream science, similar to the rejection of climate change or evolution by many if not all of the Republican nominees.

    Look up the works of Judith Curry and Richard Lindzen..

    Michale
    476

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    Neil,

    I brought this comment forward because my response was stuck in the NNL filter... Hopefully in it's no location, I can avoid that fate...

    Unfortunately, I could not avoid that fate..

    So, here it is in pieces...

    Michale: which Democratic nominee rejects peer reviewed science and what do they reject?

    This has to be something major and generally accepted by mainstream science, similar to the rejection of climate change or evolution by many if not all of the Republican nominees.

    Curry, Lindzen

    Democrats categorically deny their peer reviewed science..

    And that's just TWO scientists.. There are tens of thousands of scientists just like these that Democrats ignore..

    Like I said, Democrats ONLY accept the science that supports their agenda..

    Global Warming is a religion.. And, like with ALL religions, the priests of the chosen religion are right and the priests of all other religions are heretics..

    Michale
    476

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    Neil,

    I brought this comment forward because my response was stuck in the NNL filter... Hopefully in it's no location, I can avoid that fate...

    Unfortunately, I could not avoid that fate..

    So, here it is in pieces...

    Michale: which Democratic nominee rejects peer reviewed science and what do they reject?

    This has to be something major and generally accepted by mainstream science, similar to the rejection of climate change or evolution by many if not all of the Republican nominees.

    http://sjfm.us/temp/cw-commentary10.jpg

    Michale
    480

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:
  7. [7] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Mele Kalikimaka, Hau'oli Makahiki Hou to all!

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    Mele Kalikimaka, Hau'oli Makahiki Hou to all!

    Gesundheit... :D

    Michale
    485

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    Neil,

    You also have to ask yourself one question..

    If the Global Warming "scientists" are so sure of their data and so sure of their theory...

    Why are they calling for dissenting scientists to be charged with a CRIME and JAILED!!???

    Think back on your history..

    Think back to the Dark Ages... A group of "scientists" wanted a different group of scientists jailed and burned because of their "heretical" science...

    History surely shows us that the "scientists" who call for the extermination of dissenters are usually on the WRONG side of "science"...

    Wouldn't you agree???

    Michale
    488

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am also constrained to point out that "peer reviewed" doesn't really mean dick these days, since it's been well-documented that Global Warming religion "scientists" have conspired to game the peer review process to suit their own agenda..

    Michale
    490

  11. [11] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Two antidotes for the usual Santa Treacle:

    Bad Santa, directors cut, on Amazon Prime. Billy Bob has been in some bad movies, but he's always outstanding in every movie. Surprisingly redemptive...like a good single malt.

    And, with a special nod to "I can give it to you wholesale" Michael, A Very Murray Christmas. Murray's version of a traditional TV celebrity laden holiday special. It mirrors The Arc of Murray's career: from cringingly odd, yet funny to master of timing genius. George Clooney is a very good sport.

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hay CW,

    Looks like the NNL filters are on a rampage... :D

    Michale
    493

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale
    493

    Hay.. I wrote them so I get credit for them!! :D
    494

  14. [14] 
    TheStig wrote:

    I'm weathering Christmas Season really well this year. Partly because of the spring like weather, but mostly because of on-line commerce. I haven't been near a mall since Thanksgiving. That's the way to do it.

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    In his meeting with the columnists, Mr. Obama indicated that he did not see enough cable television to fully appreciate the anxiety after the attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, and made clear that he plans to step up his public arguments.
    -President Barack Obama

    So, let me see if I have this straight..

    Obama has hundreds, if not thousands of advisers to keep him abreast of what's going on in the country and how Americans are feeling and fairing..

    But, he doesn't watch enough Cable TV so he is not able to be clear about what Americans are feeling!!????

    WOW.....

    Simply.... WOW...

    Michale
    495

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    "THE DNC IS IN THE TANK FOR HILLARY CLINTON!!!"
    -Sanders Campaign

    "DOOOOOYYYYYYYYYY"
    -Vanillope Von Schweetz, WRECK IT RALPH

    :D

    Say what you want about the GOP Primary...

    But at least it's a real primary...

    Not a coronation...

    Michale
    499

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, looks like Democrats got EVERYTHING they wanted in the current budget deal...

    Someone want to remind me again about the "evil" and "terrorist" Republicans??

    Michale
    500 TAA DAAAA :D

  18. [18] 
    neilmcgovern wrote:

    Michale[2]:

    The Democratic nominees agree with mainstream science on climate change and evolution, most of the Republican nominees deny both of these. Many of the Republican nominees also believe or pretend to believe that the earth is only 6,000 years old.

    Again, what scientific issue do the Democratic nominees disagree with mainstream science on (and whether anybody like it or not, there are only a tiny number of climate scientists who deny AGW)?

    And remember, I'm not interested in your opinion on whether the science is right or not (it is right btw), just a widely held mainstream scientific theory that one of the Democratic nominees disagrees with?

    Gravity? Germ theory? What is it?

    It should be simple - you've been telling us that they deny lots of science. Pick one and give us a link to a reliable source.

    Otherwise I stick to my point, the people running for the Republican nomination are science deniers and that is pathetic in 2015.

  19. [19] 
    neilmcgovern wrote:

    Also, Judith Curry and Richard Lindzen are two (slightly crackpot) voices in their own scientific wilderness (if you don't count all the people that *know* the science is wrong but haven't read a single climate science paper, or even the IPCC summaries).

  20. [20] 
    TheStig wrote:

    M-

    I just got the new desktop up and running on windows 10 home edition. Admirable speed and memory for the money, but I've lost the ability to run some programs that worked with windows 7. Actually, recent upgrades to 7 killed the same programs recently, I'm not exactly sure when probably within the last two months.

    Does Windows pro allow you to emulate older versions of windows? Are their any emulators that would allow me to run programs from around the year 2000? Especially Mathematica iv, which was installed with 8 bit loaders that haven't been supported since XP.

    I keep an older system running on XP just to support the old stuff, but this is clunky and takes up space....but explains the active market on Amazon and elsewhere for ancient computers with vintage OS.

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    Neil,

    Also, Judith Curry and Richard Lindzen are two (slightly crackpot) voices in their own scientific wilderness (

    Thank you for proving my point.

    YOUR scientists are right..

    All the other scientists are wrong.. :D

    Michale
    502

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    All the other scientists are wrong.. :D

    All the other scientists who DON'T agree with the Global Warming religion are "crack pots"... :D

    Michale
    503

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    TS,

    I am not sure if 10-Pro will meet your needs regarding 7 compatibility...

    Sounds like your usage of the OS is way beyond my pay grade..

    Even when it comes to computers, I am a knuckle dragging ground pounder.. :D

    Michale
    504

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    Also, Judith Curry and Richard Lindzen are two (slightly crackpot) voices in their own scientific wilderness (

    But the funny thing is, is that they are ONLY "crackpots" BECAUSE they don't worship the Global Warming god...

    It's like the old saying in the Soviet Union...

    People are put away by authorities because they are "insane"... But the ONLY reason they are "insane" is because they want to leave the motherland.. Only an "insane" person would want to do that!!

    It's the same with the Global Warming religion...

    They dispute the Global Warming god so they MUST be "crack pots"... :D

    Of course, they were respected and well-renowned scientists.... RIGHT up to the point they disputed the Global Warming god..

    THEN they were "crack pots"... :D

    You see the irony???

    Michale
    505

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    Again, what scientific issue do the Democratic nominees disagree with mainstream science on (and whether anybody like it or not, there are only a tiny number of climate scientists who deny AGW)?

    33,000 at last count...

    But yer right... That's a "tiny" number.. :D

    Michale
    506

  26. [26] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale -

    You're right, the spam filter was picking on you (and you alone) this time. I think what set it off was you responding to my comment with the two links in it for last year's best/worst columns.

    Posting multi-link comments is a no-no (although with my godlike powers at CW.com, I am alllowed to do so -- which is where the confusion came from).

    In any case, all comments have been restored, and I took the time to try to "educate" the filter that you weren't a spammer, so hopefully things will be easier for you from now on.

    Mea culpa.

    -CW

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    And in other news..

    SANDERS FILES SUIT TO REGAIN ACCESS TO DNC VOTER DATABASE
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEM_2016_SANDERS_DATA?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-12-18-17-25-03

    DEM ON DEM VIOLENCE!!! :D

    Michale
    507

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    Thanx CW... :D I know the NNL filters are not directed at me.. :D But I do get a touch of a complex now and again.. :D

    Michale
    508

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    In any case, all comments have been restored, and I took the time to try to "educate" the filter that you weren't a spammer, so hopefully things will be easier for you from now on.

    Put me in a room with your NNL filters!!

    I'll edumacate them!!! >:) heh

    Michale
    509

  30. [30] 
    neilmcgovern wrote:

    Michale:

    You're ducking the question my friend. Let me know what mainstream scientific theory you claim the Democratic nominees deny, and let's see some sources to back it up.

    Curry and Lindzen are not taken seriously because they do not present serious evidence to back up their hypotheses, not because there is some conspiracy afoot. However that is yet another inconvenient fact that the denier community don't like.

  31. [31] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    TheStig-

    Look for reviews of virtualization software for windows. Windows Virtual PC is by microsoft and is/or used to be free. Also, Oracle puts out VirtualBox, actually an old Sun project. It's also free for most uses.

    I use VirtualBox to run Windows 2000 pro on OSX, but I am not sure what is good on Windows these days. Mathematica is such a well known tool that I bet any dedicated Mathematica forums would direct you to the best choice...

  32. [32] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    TS....

    Q10 works well with many legacy programs (you can still use IE, which they are trying to kill) .....

    Right click on the problem program, go to properties, click on the compatibility tab...select the NATIVE OS the program was authored in. ... and Michale is your uncle.

    It may take some experimenting. It did for me. If your email server is an old exchange 2007 server avoid office 2016 as it will make your whole world cranky. ..

    Overall Q10 gets high marks in my book.

  33. [33] 
    rdnewman wrote:

    @The Stig [#20]

    Does Windows pro allow you to emulate older versions of windows? Are their any emulators that would allow me to run programs from around the year 2000? Especially Mathematica iv, which was installed with 8 bit loaders that haven't been supported since XP.

    Did you try right-clicking on the program in File Explorer and selecting a different OS in the Compatability Mode option? Generally you can get a lot of mileage here and run some pretty old programs without issue. I generally just set the shortcut to use the right capatability mode, then I never have to think about it again.

  34. [34] 
    rdnewman wrote:

    @goode Trickle [#31]

    (sheepish...) Sorry didn't see that you just commented that...

  35. [35] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Goog trickle, rdnewman and M

    Thanks for the replies. The general buzz from the tech press was, if it runs in 7 or .8, it will almost certainly run in 10. So far I am 2 for 4. Red Baron 3-d circa 1998 runs great, so does Statview from 2002. No go on Corel Draw and no on some Talon Soft games that ran well on 7 until
    an update sometime in
    October.. I will try your suggestions but.....

    As of now, I'm scrubbing the whole operating system and restoring the factory settings.
    When I fired up my machine for the second time I got a very long update from Microsoft and everything went to hell. Firefox was hijacked by bing and the shortcuts were all screwed up. A ton of ads started popping up, and the computer became unusable. Looks like the scrub /reset will take a few hours, it's late, I've got to get up early for a long run. Tomorrow afternoon is free,
    I'll give it a go then.

    If my experience is at all typical, MicroS will never live this down. I've been using pcs since the Apple llc, I have never experienced an upgrade this awful.

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    You're ducking the question my friend. Let me know what mainstream scientific theory you claim the Democratic nominees deny, and let's see some sources to back it up.

    That's not the question because it's not the issue..

    The issue is do Democrats accept ALL science??

    Or just the science that supports their ideological agenda??

    And the answer to THAT question is clear..

    Democrats ONLY accept the "science" that supports their agenda...

    Curry and Lindzen are not taken seriously because they do not present serious evidence to back up their hypotheses,

    No.. They are not taken seriously by the Left Wingery because they don't toe the Global Warming religious line...

    You never answered my question..

    If the Global Warming "science" is so "mainstream", why do Global Warming "scientists" advocate the prosecution and INCARCERATION of scientists, REAL scientists, who dispute the theory..

    Back in the dark ages, so called "scientists" who believe the world was flat and that the universe orbited the earth ALSO advocated the suppression of REAL science..

    The Global Warming crowd is absolutely NO DIFFERENT than the Flat Earthers....

    Michale
    511

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    GT,

    Right click on the problem program, go to properties, click on the compatibility tab...select the NATIVE OS the program was authored in. ... and Michale is your uncle.

    ??? :D

    Overall Q10 gets high marks in my book.

    Agreed... :D

    Michale
    512

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    . Firefox was hijacked by bing

    I HATE when that happens...

    If my experience is at all typical, MicroS will never live this down. I've been using pcs since the Apple llc, I have never experienced an upgrade this awful.

    XP to VISTA was worse IMNSHO :D

    Michale
    513

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    I mean, think about it, Neil...

    With the Democrat Party, EVERY bit of "science" they believe in lines up perfectly and is 1000% in line with their ideology..

    What are the odds that real science would line up so ideologically perfect??

    Astronomical bordering on impossible...

    So, once again, employing Occam's Razor, the most logical answer is that Democrats pick and choose which "science" is valid and which "science" isn't....

    That's not science..

    That's faith....

    Michale
    518

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    With the Democrat Party, EVERY bit of "science" they believe in lines up perfectly and is 1000% in line with their ideology..

    "In the dictionary, under 'redundant', it says 'See Redundant'.."
    -Robin Williams, LIVE AT THE MET

    :D

    Michale
    519

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    Since we're talking computers..

    After the recent Win10 update, I no longer see the COPY/PASTE window when I copy files from one location to another.. This is mildly annoying as it's difficult to know when the files are done copying..

    Anyone know how to get this back???

    Thanks..

    Michale
    524

  42. [42] 
    rdnewman wrote:

    @Michale [#40]

    I just use TeraCopy. One of the first things I install on a Windows system since my XP days. Actually I don't really need it so much now that xcopy is better and part of Windows since Vista, but I'm so used it now and I like the confirmation of the CRC match check. First installed way back when since copying whole directories was such a chore to do safely before.

  43. [43] 
    rdnewman wrote:

    @TheStig [#34]

    I've upgraded most of the machines here to Win10 (my WHS2011 server is still WHS2011 though). The only one that had any real issues was my personal workstation which was originally WinXP from 2008 (the innards have been upgraded several times) that I had previously upgraded to Win7 and hadn't had a clean OS install in at least 5 years.

    That machine upgraded to Win10 soon after its release, but the start menu was pretty munged up, so I finally bit the bullet and swapped a new harddrive in (made the old one a slave drive so files still available) and installed Win10 fresh. Happy with it now (and a lot less old junk laying around on the HDD). As it was though, I was pretty impressed that Win10 upgraded handled it as well as it did.

    The other two machines I upgraded (a Win7 laptop and a Win8.1 HTPC) went without a hitch. So I'm thinking your experience may be atypical.

  44. [44] 
    TheStig wrote:

    goode trickle,rdnewman, Michael

    The scrub and reset to factory status took 6 or 7 hrs but I was able to get a clean installation this early am by unchecking some boxes that I suspected were loading up the pile of junk and/or malware. If you read the lengthy user agreement, there is a warning that "features" may connect you to servers that are not secure. Quite so. Maybe Microsoft should be a bit more picky?

    My OS is functional again, and the second installation of Corel Draw runs fine without any tinkering. This program is mission critical, so I'm a happy fella.

Comments for this article are closed.