Favorite conspiracy theories

Page 2 of 2 [ 30 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,147
Location: temperate zone

30 May 2023, 5:24 pm

There was a WP member who posted many Flat Earth videos- made by Utubers trying to prove that the earth is flat. And he would start debates. When we all asked him "why would the powers that be lie to us about the shape of the earth?" He replied "for the same reason that they would lie that the earth is not really the center of the Universe, and wasnt really created six thousand years ago, and ...to undermine our faith in God".

Its true that pretty much every scientific discovery of the last five centuries (Galileo's heliocentrism, Darwin and evolution and so on) has been something that pushes man away from the center of the known universe...and thus has challenged the notion we are central to God's creation. But this guy took it as a given that these discoveries were fabricated...in order TO...undermine religion...on purpose by...some centuries long conspiracy.

That would be a whopper of conspiracy. That would be a "favorite".
===============================
Not exactly a "conspiracy" theory I did encounter someone who believed that folks should stop making authority figures out of pocket calculators. She was also here on WP some years ago.

A lady insisted that "zero times [any whole number] equals that whole number". Zero times three is three, and zero times ten is ten, and so on.

We all chimed in to explain to her that "no, zero times three equals ZERO. NOT three!".

One guy said "I am a CPA who does taxes and I can tell you that zero times three equals zero", as he tore his hair out in exasperation.

Then several folks chimed in that "it says it right here on my pocket calculator...zero times three is zero".

She would respond to that by saying "I dont know why folks blindly follow what calculators say instead of thinking for themselves. I say that...zero times three equals three ".

Finally I buttonholed her and said "okay...according to you 'zero times three equals three'. Right?"

She said "right".

"But...one times three ALSO equals three. Wouldnt you agree?".

"Yes".

"So wouldnt that make zero and one the same number?".

I sensed that she was giggling when she replied "I guess that your right. I hadnt really thought of that."

That ended the conversation.

But...I have thought about that conversation many times since.

Maybe we all DO need to throw off the yoke of...this CONSPIRACY of adding machines, calculators, and calculator functions on computers and cell phones... and start thinking for ourselves.

If your landlord says "you failed to pay the rent three times in a row" just tell them that "that means Ive paid it every time because three times zero is three...stop kowtowing to your calculator". :lol:

Veggamattic
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

Joined: 28 May 2023
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3
Location: London, On, Can.

30 May 2023, 6:17 pm

kitesandtrainsandcats wrote:

Veggamattic wrote:

If you are a relatively well informed citizen and you don't believe in some conspiracy theories,

That bit brings this to mind,

Quote:

Video Abstract Transcript - Who is a Conspiracy Theorist?
Are you a conspiracy theorist?
Most people would not readily admit that they are, but would perhaps sooner call
somebody else a conspiracy theorist.

In this paper, I look at different definitions and conceptualizations of the term conspiracy
theory and conspiracy theorist, starting with what I call the simple definition, commonly
found in the dictionary. it states that a conspiracy theory is a theory that explains an event
where a conspiracy is cited as a salient cause. And a conspiracy theorist is simply a person
who believes (or is committed) to such a theory in some sense.

By the simple definition then, the philosopher Charles Pigden argument that, it is enough
that you believe the nightly news or the history books to be a conspiracy theorist. And if you
don’t, presumably it is because you believe that somebody has conspired to fake them. So,
either way you are a conspiracy theorist.

But with such a conclusion we get a rather worrisome dilemma. On the one hand most
people don’t think they are conspiracy theories and on the other, we all are. I call this the
problem of self-identification. A second problem arises from the conclusion, namely that the
construct is essentially theoretically useless. It would be like defining a pyromaniac as
someone who has ever lit a fire, or intelligence in a way that makes everyone intelligent.
In my paper I suggest that these problems are currently causing confusion in the literature
and present us with a dilemma, the conspiracy definition dilemma. I present an analysis of
the literature and what are on my reconstruction the solutions on offer, and argue that
none is satisfactory. Either a) the solution will solve the problem of self-identification or b) it
will potentially provide a theoretical fruitful definition, but no account does both. Check out
my paper to find out how I come to this conclusion!

Put so much more eloquently than I.

AnonymousAnonymous
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 70,190
Location: Portland, Oregon

30 May 2023, 6:26 pm

IMO, many conspiracy theories are so annoying that they just need to go away for good.

Some infamous examples (obviously not the only ones, mind you):

9/11 was a "false flag operation" to justify war with Afghanistan.

Barack Obama was not born in the US.

The Earth is flat.

Water fluoridation is a secret method of mind control.

The 1969 moon landings never happened and were filmed on soundstages.

The US government does indeed secretly hide aliens at Area 51.

Paul McCartney was killed in a car accident and was replaced by a look-alike.

Kyron Horman is alive & well in Oregon despite no evidence ever being found since he disappeared in 2010.

(I could post some more, but this is all I'll post for now.)

_________________
Silly NTs, I have Aspergers, and having Aspergers is gr-r-reat!

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,147
Location: temperate zone

30 May 2023, 6:55 pm

So many to choose from.

"Replacement theory" is both asinine and scary (scary because so many buy into it).

And the belief that Trump won the last election.

Many who believe that they faked the Moon Landing to hide our lack of technology also believe in the Philadelphia Experiment (that the US Navy, with help from Einstein managed to get a big Navy destroyer and its crew to time travel back in 1942). We both pretend to HAVE technology we dont have (we cant really get men to the moon), and pretend that we have LESS tech than we really have ( conceal our ability to make big objects and hundreds of men time travel)at the same time!

kitesandtrainsandcats
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2016
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,965
Location: Missouri

30 May 2023, 8:37 pm

Just crossed my path via their Tumblr,
"
Updated 31 May, 2023 - 01:53 Robbie Mitchell
From Devil's Pacts to Digital Hoaxes: The History of Conspiracies (Video)

In a world where information can be just one click away, conspiracy theories have the power to captivate minds and ignite curiosity. From ancient times to the digital age, these narratives have shaped our understanding of the unexplainable and fueled our desire for answers. But are conspiracy theories purely a modern phenomenon? The answer remains elusive but by looking at the hidden past of conspiratorial beliefs, where knights, secret societies, and shocking practices merge into a tapestry of intrigue we might find a clue. From medieval plots of King Philip IV and the Templars, to the Moon landings and Pizzagate, the allure of conspiracy theories persists across centuries.
"
https://www.ancient-origins.net/videos/ ... es-0018545

_________________
"There are a thousand things that can happen when you go light a rocket engine, and only one of them is good."
Tom Mueller of SpaceX, in Air and Space, Jan. 2011

Canadian Freedom Lover
Raven
Raven

Joined: 16 Dec 2022
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 110
Location: Vancouver Canada

30 May 2023, 9:20 pm

Veggamattic wrote:

I think a definition of what a conspiracy theory is might help. Many things considered theory, are facts known to some but not others. For example, Americans using false flags to incite and justify war. They have done it in almost every major war they have every been involved in and much of it is not even open for debate any more. Is this considered a theory?

I'd also like to comment on the term conspiracy theorist. This is such a ridiculous term. If you are a relatively well informed citizen and you don't believe in some conspiracy theories, then you are either delusional or suffer from serious cognitive dissonance. It just makes me roll my eyes when someone get's labeled as "a conspiracy theorist"...if your not...to some degree...then you are either an idiot of willfully ignorant.

I agree 100%, the reason I used the term conspiracy theory is because that is what most lay people understand.

kitesandtrainsandcats
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2016
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,965
Location: Missouri

31 May 2023, 4:32 pm

One could ask, are those "chemtrails" just a conspiracy theory or not?

https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1000289

Quote:

SANDIA REPORT SAND2010-7571 Unlimited Release
Printed October 2010
Unintended Consequences of Atmospheric Injection of Sulphate Aerosols

Barry Goldstein, Peter H. Kobos, and Patrick V. Brady
Prepared by Sandia National Laboratories
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 and Livermore, California 94550

Sandia National Laboratories is a multi-program laboratory managed and operated
by Sandia Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation,
for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under
contract DE-AC04-94AL85000.

Approved for public release; further dissemination unlimited.

2
Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States Department of
Energy by Sandia Corporation.
NOTICE: Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of
their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees,
make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility
for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product,
or process disclosed, or represent that its use would not infringe privately owned
rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by
trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or
imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States
Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors or subcontractors. The
views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the
United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors.
Printed in the United States of America. This report has been reproduced directly
from the best available copy.

Available to DOE and DOE contractors from

U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information
P.O. Box 62
Oak Ridge, TN 37831
Telephone: (865) 576-8401
Facsimile: (865) 576-5728
E-Mail: [email protected]
Online ordering: http://www.osti.gov/bridge

Available to the public from

U.S. Department of Commerce
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Rd.
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: (800) 553-6847
Facsimile: (703) 605-6900
E-Mail: [email protected]
Online order: http://www.ntis.gov/help/ordermethod

Quote:

Abstract
Most climate scientists believe that climate geoengineering is best considered as a potential
complement to the mitigation of CO 2 emissions, rather than as an alternative to it. Strong
mitigation could achieve the equivalent of up to −4Wm−2 radiative forcing on the century
timescale, relative to a worst case scenario for rising CO2 . However, to tackle the remaining
3Wm−2 , which are likely even in a best case scenario of strongly mitigated CO 2 releases, a
number of geoengineering options show promise. Injecting stratospheric aerosols is one of the
least expensive and, potentially, most effective approaches and for that reason an examination of
the possible unintended consequences of the implementation of atmospheric injections of
sulphate aerosols was made. Chief among these are: reductions in rainfall, slowing of
atmospheric ozone rebound, and differential changes in weather patterns. At the same time,
there will be an increase in plant productivity. Lastly, because atmospheric sulphate injection
would not mitigate ocean acidification, another side effect of fossil fuel burning, it would
provide only a partial solution.

Future research should aim at ameliorating the possible negative unintended consequences of
atmospheric injections of sulphate injection. This might include modeling the optimum rate and
particle type and size of aerosol injection, as well as the latitudinal, longitudinal and altitude of
injection sites, to balance radiative forcing to decrease negative regional impacts. Similarly,
future research might include modeling the optimum rate of decrease and location of injection
sites to be closed to reduce or slow rapid warming upon aerosol injection cessation. A fruitful
area for future research might be system modeling to enhance the possible positive increases in
agricultural productivity. All such modeling must be supported by data collection and laboratory
and field testing to enable iterative modeling to increase the accuracy and precision of the
models, while reducing epistemic uncertainties.

_________________
"There are a thousand things that can happen when you go light a rocket engine, and only one of them is good."
Tom Mueller of SpaceX, in Air and Space, Jan. 2011

kitesandtrainsandcats
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2016
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,965
Location: Missouri

31 May 2023, 4:38 pm

Part 2, are chemtrails conspiracy theory or not?

https://keith.seas.harvard.edu/publicat ... ations-and

HOME / PUBLICATIONS / ACADEMIC PUBLICATIONS /
Liability for Solar Geoengineering: Historical Precedents, Contemporary Innovations, and Governance Possibilities
Citation:
Joshua Horton, Andrew Parker, and David Keith. 2015. “Liability for Solar Geoengineering: Historical Precedents, Contemporary Innovations, and Governance Possibilities.” NYU Environmental Law Journal, 22, Pp. 225-273. Publisher's Version

Quote:

HORTON_READY_FOR_PRINTER5.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 2/25/2015 11:16 AM
225
LIABILITY FOR SOLAR
GEOENGINEERING: HISTORICAL
PRECEDENTS, CONTEMPORARY
INNOVATIONS, AND GOVERNANCE
POSSIBILITIES
JOSHUA B. HORTON, ANDREW PARKER, AND DAVID KEITH*
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. 225
I. THE EVOLUTION OF INTERNATIONAL LEGAL LIABILITY............. 228
II. POSSIBLE SAI DAMAGES, POSSIBLE LIABILITY
SOLUTIONS............................................................................... 237
III. STATE LIABILITY AND THE SPACE LIABILITY
CONVENTION ........................................................................... 245
IV. COMPENSATION AND THE OIL SPILL REGIME .......................... 250
V. THE PROBLEM OF ATTRIBUTION ............................................... 259
VI. DISCUSSION ............................................................................ 265
CONCLUSION ................................................................................ 271

INTRODUCTION
The prospect of geoengineering, or the “deliberate large-scale
manipulation of the planetary environment to counteract
anthropogenic climate change,” carries with it a varied set of
technical challenges.1 Yet it is the governance challenges
associated with geoengineering that are likely to be far more
difficult to overcome if deployment, or even large-scale
experimentation, is ever seriously contemplated by the
international community. Questions about decision making,
political legitimacy, policy objectives, risk management, and other

* We would like to thank our colleagues at the Harvard Kennedy School
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs for their valuable insights and
feedback on earlier versions of this article. We would also like to thank the staff
of the New York University Environmental Law Journal, whose considerable
efforts helped refine both the manuscript and our overall thinking on the topic.

1 See THE ROYAL SOC’Y, GEOENGINEERING THE CLIMATE: SCIENCE,
GOVERNANCE AND UNCERTAINTY 1 (2009).
BibTeX
Tagged
EndNote XML

Download
176.horton.keith_.liabilityforsolargeoengineering.pdf 545 KB
See also: Public Policy, Solar Geoengineering, David Keith, Joshua Horton, Academic Publication
Last updated on 05/27/2021

Quote:

Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), a fast-acting SRM
technique that would introduce aerosol particles to the upper
atmosphere to reflect a small amount of solar radiation away from
Earth and thereby decrease temperatures, has received particular
attention from the geoengineering research community, and much
of this attention has focused on the governance challenges posed
by questions of liability. If a country were damaged by negative
effects from SAI, should that country be compensated for its loss?
If so, by what mechanism? Could such effects be persuasively
linked to SAI? Who should pay for damages, and how much
should they pay? The extraordinary difficulties presented by this
issue have led some observers to conclude that building a just and
effective system of liability and compensation for SAI would be
virtually impossible.3 In the absence of a credible liability system
available as recourse in the event of miscalculation or accident, the
international community would (arguably) be unlikely to agree to
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 E.g., SOLAR RADIATION MANAGEMENT GOVERNANCE INITIATIVE, SOLAR
RADIATION MANAGEMENT: THE GOVERNANCE OF RESEARCH 44 (2011); Adam
D.K. Abelkop & Jonathan C. Carlson, Reining in Phaethon’s Chariot: Principles
for the Governance of Geoengineering, 21 TRANSNAT’L L. & CONTEMP. PROBS.
763, 799–801 (2013); Daniel Bodansky, May We Engineer the Climate?, 33
CLIMATIC CHANGE 309, 319 (1996); Lisa Dilling & Rachel Hauser, Governing
Geoengineering Research: Why, When, and How?, 121 CLIMATIC CHANGE 553,
560–61 (2013); David W. Keith, Geoengineering the Climate: History and
Prospect, 25 ANN. REV. ENERGY & ENV’T, 245, 275–76 (2000).
3 E.g., Alan Robock, Will Geoengineering With Solar Radiation
Management Ever Be Used?, 15 ETHICS POL’Y & ENV’T 202, 203 (2012);
Bronislaw Szerszynski et al., Why Solar Radiation Management and Democracy
Won’t Mix, 45 ENV’T & PLAN. A 2809, 2811–12 (2013).
HORTON_READY_FOR_PRINTER5.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 2/25/2015 11:16 AM
2015] LIABILITY FOR SOLAR GEOENGINEERING 227
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
any form of SAI implementation.4 Thus, future SAI
geoengineering may be contingent on, among other things, solving
the liability problem.
Yet liability for stratospheric aerosol geoengineering is not
necessarily as intractable as some suggest.

_________________
"There are a thousand things that can happen when you go light a rocket engine, and only one of them is good."
Tom Mueller of SpaceX, in Air and Space, Jan. 2011

kitesandtrainsandcats
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2016
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,965
Location: Missouri

31 May 2023, 4:43 pm

Part 3, next to last part, is geoengineering by "chemtrail" just a fantasy and a conspiracy theory?

MIT
Technology
Review
Climate change
Researchers launched a solar geoengineering test flight in the UK last fall

The experiment, largely designed to test equipment, took place despite deep concerns about the technology.
By James Temple archive page
March 1, 2023

https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/0 ... last-fall/

Quote:

Last September, researchers in the UK launched a high-altitude weather balloon that released a few hundred grams of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, a potential scientific first in the solar geoengineering field, MIT Technology Review has learned.

Solar geoengineering is the theory that humans can ease global warming by deliberately reflecting more sunlight into space. One possible means is spraying sulfur dioxide in the stratosphere, in an effort to mimic a cooling effect that occurs in the aftermath of major volcanic eruptions. It is highly controversial given concerns about potential unintended consequences, among other issues.

The UK effort was not a test of or experiment in geoengineering itself. Rather, the stated goal was to evaluate a low-cost, controllable, recoverable balloon system, according to details obtained by MIT Technology Review. Such a system could be used for small-scale geoengineering research efforts, or perhaps for an eventual distributed geoengineering deployment involving numerous balloons.

The “Stratospheric Aerosol Transport and Nucleation,” or SATAN, balloon systems were made from stock and hobbyist components, with hardware costs that ran less than $1,000.

Andrew Lockley, an independent researcher previously affiliated with University College London, led the effort last fall, working with European Astrotech, a company that does engineering and design work for high-altitude balloons and space propulsion systems.

They have submitted a paper detailing the results of the effort to a journal, but it has not yet been published. Lockley largely declined to discuss the matter ahead of publication, but he did express frustration that the scientific process was being circumvented.

_________________
"There are a thousand things that can happen when you go light a rocket engine, and only one of them is good."
Tom Mueller of SpaceX, in Air and Space, Jan. 2011

kitesandtrainsandcats
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2016
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,965
Location: Missouri

01 Jun 2023, 6:57 pm

Part 4, final part of are chemtrails merely an imaginative conspiracy,
just remembered this from Rutgers University.
https://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/ ... solGeo.pdf

Quote:

Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering
ALAN ROBOCK
ABSTRACT
In response to global warming, one suggested geoengineering response
involves creating a cloud of particles in the stratosphere to reflect some
sunlight and cool Earth. While volcanic eruptions show that strato-
spheric aerosols cool the planet, the volcano analog also warns against
geoengineering because of responses such as ozone depletion, regional
hydrologic responses, whitening of the skies, reduction of solar power,
and impacts of diffuse radiation. No technology to conduct geoengi-
neering now exists, but using airplanes or tethered balloons to put
sulfur gases into the stratosphere may be feasible. Nevertheless, it may
be very difficult to create stratospheric sulfate particles with a desirable
size distribution.
The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project, conducting
climate model experiments with standard stratospheric aerosol in-
jection scenarios, has found that insolation reduction could keep the
global average temperature constant, but global average precipitation
would reduce, particularly in summer monsoon regions around the
world. Temperature changes would also not be uniform; the tropics
would cool, but high latitudes would warm, with continuing, but re-
duced sea ice and ice sheet melting. Temperature extremes would still
increase, but not as much as without geoengineering. If geoengineering
were halted all at once, there would be rapid temperature and precipi-
tation increases at 5–10 times the rates from gradual global warming.
The prospect of geoengineering working may reduce the current drive
toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and there are concerns
about commercial or military control. Because geoengineering cannot
162
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issues in Environmental Science and Technology, 38
Geoengineering of the Climate System
Edited by R.E. Hester and R.M. Harrison
r The Royal Society of Chemistry 2014
Published by the Royal Society of Chemistry, www.rsc.org

Quote:

This chapter will first discuss how it might be possible to create a per-
manent cloud in the stratosphere. Next it will survey climate model simu-
lations that inform us of some of the benefits and risks of stratospheric
geoengineering. Since full implementation of geoengineering to test these
theoretical calculations might be dangerous, lessons from volcanic erup-
tions, the closest natural analog to stratospheric geoengineering, are used to
inform the model results. The next section discusses the ethical and gov-
ernance aspects of both geoengineering research and potential geoengi-
neering implementation. Finally, the potential benefits and risks of
stratospheric geoengineering are summarized.

2 How to Create a Stratospheric Cloud
2.1 Why the Stratosphere?
Every so often, large volcanic eruptions inject massive amounts of sulfur
dioxide (SO 2 ) gas into the stratosphere, the layer of the atmosphere from
about 12 km up to 50 km, which resides above the troposphere where we
live. The SO 2 is oxidized in the atmosphere to sulfuric acid which has a low
enough vapor pressure to form a cloud of droplets. Only volcanic eruptions
that are strong enough to get sulfur into the stratosphere have an important
impact on climate. They do this by scattering some of the incoming sunlight
back to space, thus cooling the surface. 7

_________________
"There are a thousand things that can happen when you go light a rocket engine, and only one of them is good."
Tom Mueller of SpaceX, in Air and Space, Jan. 2011

FleaOfTheChill
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2020
Age: 309
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 2,941
Location: I'm stuck in the dryer

01 Jun 2023, 7:12 pm

I'm not sure if the missing 411 phenomenon counts as a conspiracy, but if it does, it is likely my favorite. I find it all fascinating. If it doesn't count, I stumbled across the dead internet theory a bit ago and that one had my interest for a minute.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,147
Location: temperate zone

01 Jun 2023, 7:19 pm

There is a theory of a kind of "passive conspiracy". That the U.S. Park Service knows all about bigfoot creatures, and just keeps quiet about it.

mrpieceofwork
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 May 2023
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 719
Location: Texas aka hell

01 Jun 2023, 7:25 pm

Mine is probably the one that claims there's a giant alien craft IN a mountain in... France? I forget which country, def. Europe. Someday it will pop out and take all the believers off to a better planet.

Oh, wait... that's not a conspiracy theory. Uh... gee... this one is tough. There's so many juicy ones. That the USSR was an evil empire.

_________________
EAT THE RICH
WPs Three Word Story (WIP)
http://mrpieceofwork.byethost33.com/wp3/
My text only website
https://rawtext.club/~mrpieceofwork/
"Imagine Life Without Money"

mrpieceofwork
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 May 2023
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 719
Location: Texas aka hell

01 Jun 2023, 7:32 pm

Qanon! Damn, I must have blocked that one out.

_________________
EAT THE RICH
WPs Three Word Story (WIP)
http://mrpieceofwork.byethost33.com/wp3/
My text only website
https://rawtext.club/~mrpieceofwork/
"Imagine Life Without Money"

Page 2 of 2 [ 30 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2

Jump to:

Favorite conspiracy theories Post Reply New Topic

Favorite conspiracy theories