Ghost - Leicester Conspiracy

[ghostrider]

was involved in an ufo conspiracy with the raf to the extent of i knew what happened as opposed to the view of the doubting thomas's guesses still find it quite amusing

What was that about?

[pboromag]

i have seen a ufo
it was investigated
and it was classed as a ufo

however i was involved in a crop circle scam in bulford many many years ago
watching all these college lot taking photos and the like for about 3/4 days
we sat on the kiwi watching them work it out
im sure they clicked on eventually

[nufcwelsh93]

My problem with this conspiracy and most conspiracies is people are involved.

Perhaps im wrong but the logistics involved in pulling something like this off would be quite large with many people involved the likelihood of everyone keep their mouth shut are is really low in my opinion. Particularly in an industry filled with ego.

Im not ruling it out but im not convinced i dont have that much faith in people lol

My main problem with conspiracy theories is they take away from legitimate proven theories i.e operation paperclip, operation northwood etc etc

[ghostrider]

My problem with this conspiracy and most conspiracies is people are involved.

Perhaps im wrong but the logistics involved in pulling something like this off would be quite large with many people involved the likelihood of everyone keep their mouth shut are is really low in my opinion. Particularly in an industry filled with ego.

Im not ruling it out but im not convinced i dont have that much faith in people lol

My main problem with conspiracy theories is they take away from legitimate proven theories i.e operation paperclip, operation northwood etc etc

People generally look at conspiracies as being unworkable due to the amount of people having to be involved in keeping something quiet, then and for later.
It's always a case of, someone will surely spill the beans...and I could easily go along with those that think on these lines and yet will refuse to look any further than those lines.

That's one of the reasons among many that gives potential conspiracies a sort of legitimacy and generally renders the few conspiracy theorists as being basically, cast off as fantasists, clowns, unstable or basically just cast off as wrong to mass opinion that goes along with the official narrative....and in a way it's fair enough because that's literally how we generally go with things in life.

In the cases of something that apparently involves too many people...if thought about, it does not have to involve too many...it just depends on how certain things are pulled off or are they what they've been portrayed to be.

Leicesters supposed miracle could've consisted of player enhancement, plus the aid of a handful of officials and a few other top people to pull strings and keep the wolves from the fox's door, so to speak.

You could go back to many things and ask yourself, well how did the Manhattan project manage to stay a secret, which can be looked at in a few ways and not just the narrative the majority accepted.

D.Day landings.

The great escape.

The moon landings.

The Joseph Kittinger jump from a supposed 31 km height... to similar exploits of recent past of, Felix Baumgartner.

And so on and so on.
In all you can say " well how can hundreds, thousands or hundreds of thousands of people keep their mouths shut and nobody spills the beans?"

Possible because most of it was not what it was purported to be, so didn't actually require the people that people believed were required.
The official narrative could've been just a fairy story in some and the reality was maybe much more simple and different which required very few people in the real physical know of what was really going on.


You see, very few of us trust media. Very few of us trust politicians...and basically many of us are sceptical of a lot of stuff....yet collectively most people will follow a narrative given out as official because it becomes a do as you do/we do, we all do and those that oppose it are outcasts.
It just depends how something is sold to the populations.

That's the natural way in life. Always has been and always will be, most likely.

If you can't be persuaded by words...maybe a few pictures, or video. If we don't buy into one there's always other teasers and it comes right back down to the old arguments of " the camera doesn't lie. There's video proof, so there's no argument. And so on.
The thing is...if we can live in a world full of actors and manipulations by being told they're just acting...we can absolutely be duped by actors and manipulations of anything that is cast out as legitimate.

Most people do not like so called stand alones. Most people don't like to be associated with minority views.
The thing is, it takes a lot for a person to delve into stuff that goes against the grain and even more resilient efforts to actually edge towards an alternative theory...especially if that theory has been dubbed " a conspiracy theory" because most people just assume conspiracy theories are studied by nutters or oddballs.
It's not the ordinary persons fault for doing this...it's a deliberate coaxing by the mass media into that mindset. Brainwashing at its best to garner compliance.

This is why those at the top have and everyone else just gets by in a belief that they're all ok, even as they're getting stripped of almost everything....but that's another story.

Anyway, a long post but each to their own.

[nufcwelsh93]

People generally look at conspiracies as being unworkable due to the amount of people having to be involved in keeping something quiet, then and for later.
It's always a case of, someone will surely spill the beans...and I could easily go along with those that think on these lines and yet will refuse to look any further than those lines.

That's one of the reasons among many that gives potential conspiracies a sort of legitimacy and generally renders the few conspiracy theorists as being basically, cast off as fantasists, clowns, unstable or basically just cast off as wrong to mass opinion that goes along with the official narrative....and in a way it's fair enough because that's literally how we generally go with things in life.

In the cases of something that apparently involves too many people...if thought about, it does not have to involve too many...it just depends on how certain things are pulled off or are they what they've been portrayed to be.

Leicesters supposed miracle could've consisted of player enhancement, plus the aid of a handful of officials and a few other top people to pull strings and keep the wolves from the fox's door, so to speak.

You could go back to many things and ask yourself, well how did the Manhattan project manage to stay a secret, which can be looked at in a few ways and not just the narrative the majority accepted.

D.Day landings.

The great escape.

The moon landings.

The Joseph Kittinger jump from a supposed 31 km height... to similar exploits of recent past of, Felix Baumgartner.

And so on and so on.
In all you can say " well how can hundreds, thousands or hundreds of thousands of people keep their mouths shut and nobody spills the beans?"

Possible because most of it was not what it was purported to be, so didn't actually require the people that people believed were required.
The official narrative could've been just a fairy story in some and the reality was maybe much more simple and different which required very few people in the real physical know of what was really going on.


You see, very few of us trust media. Very few of us trust politicians...and basically many of us are sceptical of a lot of stuff....yet collectively most people will follow a narrative given out as official because it becomes a do as you do/we do, we all do and those that oppose it are outcasts.
It just depends how something is sold to the populations.

That's the natural way in life. Always has been and always will be, most likely.

If you can't be persuaded by words...maybe a few pictures, or video. If we don't buy into one there's always other teasers and it comes right back down to the old arguments of " the camera doesn't lie. There's video proof, so there's no argument. And so on.
The thing is...if we can live in a world full of actors and manipulations by being told they're just acting...we can absolutely be duped by actors and manipulations of anything that is cast out as legitimate.

Most people do not like so called stand alones. Most people don't like to be associated with minority views.
The thing is, it takes a lot for a person to delve into stuff that goes against the grain and even more resilient efforts to actually edge towards an alternative theory...especially if that theory has been dubbed " a conspiracy theory" because most people just assume conspiracy theories are studied by nutters or oddballs.
It's not the ordinary persons fault for doing this...it's a deliberate coaxing by the mass media into that mindset. Brainwashing at its best to garner compliance.

This is why those at the top have and everyone else just gets by in a belief that they're all ok, even as they're getting stripped of almost everything....but that's another story.

Anyway, a long post but each to their own.

Good post and i understand what you're saying and to some degrees on some points i agree. People like Alex Jones & Eddie Bravo are not good for the "conspiracy" theorist because their antics overshadow the times they are right and they have been right sometimes for example Alex Jones was spot on regarding chemicals in our water (turning frogs into transgenders) however his delivery of this made it a show.

I also understand your part about brainwashing however i would like to offer you a different perspective. Don't you think its quite egotisical to think out of the billions of people who believe a certain thing particularly scientist. Actually lets use flat earth as an example, dont you think its egotisical that people who do not and have not dedicated their life to study astronomy, the earth etc believe THEY have the truth regarding the earth and everyone else is wrong and only I have the answer, if you believe in Eric Dubay than you believe that man has unearthed Hitler, Flat Earth, Dinsoaurs being fake, Atlantis, the New World Order etc. I would tend to believe that rather than that man being some kind of genius that has solved all of the worlds issue that more than likely he is full of **** and is pocketing millions of ego driven dumb dumbs.

Also, i listened to David Icke just to see what he's about and he makes Some crazy claims but never provides any reference, any evidence. Nothing he just says a bunch of **** in a charismatic way and people believe him.

I don’t know man, I think a lot of people look for conspiracies in everything and its just not true and is harmful to the legitimate conspiracies that happen. Conspiracies are fun its fun to believe that we are ruled by reptilian overlords but the likelihood is very low.

Do I believe there are powerful individuals running **** . yes. Do I believe they control world events, do some degree maybe im not sure but its definitely a possibility. Do I believe they control everything that happens in the world? No. Just like the big bang, the world has a lot of randomness to it.,

[ghostrider]

Good post and i understand what you're saying and to some degrees on some points i agree. People like Alex Jones & Eddie Bravo are not good for the "conspiracy" theorist because their antics overshadow the times they are right and they have been right sometimes for example Alex Jones was spot on regarding chemicals in our water (turning frogs into transgenders) however his delivery of this made it a show.

Any and all people like Alex Jones I take as a mucky mixture of everything.
I believe they're masters at manipulation.
Basically truth's mixed in with misinformation and disinformation in set orders to muddle the average brain.
They are what I class as people who give out pieces and it's up to each individual to try and sort the wheat from the chaff of their words. Not easy and generally best ignored, because all it does and is likely designed to do, is to group all theorists together to be cast off as conspiracy nutters.

I also understand your part about brainwashing however i would like to offer you a different perspective. Don't you think its quite egotisical to think out of the billions of people who believe a certain thing particularly scientist. Actually lets use flat earth as an example, dont you think its egotisical that people who do not and have not dedicated their life to study astronomy, the earth etc believe THEY have the truth regarding the earth and everyone else is wrong and only I have the answer, if you believe in Eric Dubay than you believe that man has unearthed Hitler, Flat Earth, Dinsoaurs being fake, Atlantis, the New World Order etc.

Absolutely egotistical... but then again are they any more egotistical than those that push stuff as official when it borders on the same?
I think each theorist has their own plus points and many minus, as well as some that (like I said) muddy the waters...but anyone that says "I'm right and you're wrong" without physical proof, is doing no better than pushing their own scripted narrative and passing it off as legitimate rather than the hypothesis it actually is.

I generally get hit with stuff like " ohhh, you're trying to push your belief's onto us" or " you think you're right and everyone else is wrong."

I don't...but it gets construed that way because people do not like official lines being questioned, so will create a scenario where it makes one person look egotistical and arrogant, whilst they do exactly the same thing they accuse their opponent of doing but in a belief they have jurisdiction because they appeal to authority to close the argument/debate off.

I would tend to believe that rather than that man being some kind of genius that has solved all of the worlds issue that more than likely he is full of **** and is pocketing millions of ego driven dumb dumbs.

No doubt some people (could be Dubay as well) are in it to make money and it's hard to work out whether they're making money by simply studying an alternate path and reciting it or they're making money by giving their genuine views on what they believe to be alternate to mainstream.

Also, i listened to David Icke just to see what he's about and he makes Some crazy claims but never provides any reference, any evidence. Nothing he just says a bunch of **** in a charismatic way and people believe him.

I find it quite odd with him and many.
However, this goes back to earlier about truth's mixed with misinfo to muddy waters.
I don't buy into lizard stuff but that doesn't mean I discard different species of human like people or whatever anyone would want to call them...but maybe they're inhabiting part of this Earth that we are forbidden to see.
It could well turn out to be nothing like that but then again we are only as intelligent as we're made to think.
Take a look at us from birth to death. Mimic artists. Followers by mass. Follow a leader. Easily canvassed into anything and the opposite which is easily distracted from things we aren't needed to know.

We all think we know something but what do we actually really know?

I don’t know man, I think a lot of people look for conspiracies in everything and its just not true and is harmful to the legitimate conspiracies that happen. Conspiracies are fun its fun to believe that we are ruled by reptilian overlords but the likelihood is very low.

Correct. Lots of people do see oddities and turn them into their own conspiracy. I mean, I don't know what's really what in this world and I'd be a liar if I said I do...but then again I don't just sit there and come up with stuff. I study stuff that gives out different possibilities to what we've been sold in life.
As for reptilian overlords...I mean...like I said, lots of stuff gets thrown into the mix to muddy the waters and it gives people impressions of spaceships with lizards from whatever so called planet, to underground human like greys or reptilian like skinned humanoids...and so on.

The point is, we're coaxed into a belief that what we are shown, is all there is, barring a few obscure creatures that are apparently just a mere extra gnat....yet is that all there is and is the entire world mapped?
Because a so called mapped ball gives no more real scope to this Earth...right?

But what if the Earth is far from being the ball or even half explored or even a quarter...and what are we in terms of intelligence against what else is around this Earth.
If anything it bears thinking about for interested parties...but anyone who simply accepts what they're told.. will naturally just wave it all away in favour of acceptance of mainstream scientific views, that may not all be fact.

Do I believe there are powerful individuals running **** . yes. Do I believe they control world events, do some degree maybe im not sure but its definitely a possibility.

The best way to look at it is to ask yourself how it can be run without a small group at the top pulling the strings from the top of the human pyramid.
Just look at a school and how that school runs.
Bottom of the pyramid is the pupils who are indoctrinated by the teachers who are controlled by a head master who has a deputy head and heads of year...but that's all under one section.
It becomes higher because the teachers have to be indoctrinated into the criteria of teaching the pupils by being trained by a higher tutor who is governed by heads of those....and so on and so on and so on....but the end result has got to be those who are operating all of the strings from the very top who can be no more than a select few families who could potentially be under the rule of something we are not allowed to know.

But figuring out the absolute truth of it all may never be realised by any of us minnows...but it doesn't stop any of us postulating.

Do I believe they control everything that happens in the world? No. Just like the big bang, the world has a lot of randomness to it.,

[HughieG]

People who claim that the Earth is flat and the moon landings didn't happen though... I simply don't have time for that. It really is seriously stupid and anti-scientific.

[ghostrider]

People who claim that the Earth is flat and the moon landings didn't happen though... I simply don't have time for that. It really is seriously stupid and anti-scientific.

You don't have to have time for it and you're quite entitled to claim anything you wish, as long as you understand that you have no direct proof of your claims, other than accepting mainstream explanations and so called reality photo's and video.

I could stand about saying I have no time for people who believe we spin on a globe at over 1000 mph, going around a central sun that is almost supposedly 800,000 miles in diameter at 66,000 mph but I'm in acceptance that we are brought up to believe all this stuff, so anyone that goes against it is naturally deemed a waste of time to anyone who has no reason to question it.

As for being anti scientific...I'd say it's being scientific but is being anti mainstream, like I said earlier. Going against the accepted grain.

So to react to your comment on people being seriously stupid for believing in alternate theories to the indoctrinated one, I'd say it's far from stupid. Far from it.

Some people get the idea of a flat Earth and just think of pancake flat, they don't take time to look at any of it because it doesn't fit their interest or upbringing.
It's not too different to an upbringing of religious belief's. One person will have their belief and another will have theirs. Some belief's are masses strong and others are sectioned, with alternate one's, including non-belief are spread out in smaller sections.

I once believed it all. I was told from being a kid about the 8 minutes it takes for the suns light to hit us from it's 93,000,000 mile distance in so called space and a 240,000 mile so called moon.

Most people accept it all as I did and most people will expire with that mindset.
I say each to their own but when a person makes a claim against another, unless they have absolute proof, then it's really all down to sorting the wheat from the chaff and being interested enough to see both sides of an argument from a person's own points and not guided by points gleaned from books or mainstream say so as some kind of truth and whole truth and nothing but a truth.

Anyway, read this or bypass it. That's my two penneth and we'll leave it at that.

[HughieG]

You don't have to have time for it and you're quite entitled to claim anything you wish, as long as you understand that you have no direct proof of your claims, other than accepting mainstream explanations and so called reality photo's and video.

I could stand about saying I have no time for people who believe we spin on a globe at over 1000 mph, going around a central sun that is almost supposedly 800,000 miles in diameter at 66,000 mph but I'm in acceptance that we are brought up to believe all this stuff, so anyone that goes against it is naturally deemed a waste of time to anyone who has no reason to question it.

As for being anti scientific...I'd say it's being scientific but is being anti mainstream, like I said earlier. Going against the accepted grain.

So to react to your comment on people being seriously stupid for believing in alternate theories to the indoctrinated one, I'd say it's far from stupid. Far from it.

Some people get the idea of a flat Earth and just think of pancake flat, they don't take time to look at any of it because it doesn't fit their interest or upbringing.
It's not too different to an upbringing of religious belief's. One person will have their belief and another will have theirs. Some belief's are masses strong and others are sectioned, with alternate one's, including non-belief are spread out in smaller sections.

I once believed it all. I was told from being a kid about the 8 minutes it takes for the suns light to hit us from it's 93,000,000 mile distance in so called space and a 240,000 mile so called moon.

Most people accept it all as I did and most people will expire with that mindset.
I say each to their own but when a person makes a claim against another, unless they have absolute proof, then it's really all down to sorting the wheat from the chaff and being interested enough to see both sides of an argument from a person's own points and not guided by points gleaned from books or mainstream say so as some kind of truth and whole truth and nothing but a truth.

Anyway, read this or bypass it. That's my two penneth and we'll leave it at that.

Of course I'm going to read it as you've taken the time to respond to my comment. And you're right we probably should leave it at that because we will never agree on this. Let me just say that I respect your views because you are entitled to them, but I will fight them because I don't want people who know nothing about science to present unqualified views on it, just as I don't like dogmatic religious beliefs to be part of government. To say that we're simply talking about "going against the accepted grain" and that people don't have "time to look at it as it doesn't fit their interest" are extreme claims in my opinion. You talk about evidence. If you have actually taken the the time, like you claim other people don't, and examined the evidence, you'd know that there is much more evidence in support of the moon landings and the Earth being round than the other way around.

People work with science in so many shapes and forms every day all over the world, trying to make us wiser. To say that people are denying conspiracies because it's not in their interest is wrong - science, unlike religion, will happily admit its wrong because that's its very nature. For it to be proven wrong or right, evidence needs to be presented. "One person have that belief, another has a different one" - that rule simply does not apply to science. So gravity is a matter of opinion? Nope, it's just a fact.

But yeah, let's leave it at that

[ghostrider]

Of course I'm going to read it as you've taken the time to respond to my comment. And you're right we probably should leave it at that because we will never agree on this. Let me just say that I respect your views because you are entitled to them, but I will fight them because I don't want people who know nothing about science to present unqualified views on it, just as I don't like dogmatic religious beliefs to be part of government.

To be fair none of us has a clue whether someone is presenting unqualified views unless we believe a certificate on some theory makes a person more qualified for the truth, based on studying and mimicking that study.
I'd say it makes that person more qualified to recite that study by process of higher/accepted percentage that dictates a qualification and nothing more.
It's not a physical proof of truth.
Science that we can all verify, leaves little scope for alternate views.
Unverified science leaves it all wide open for alternate views.

To say that we're simply talking about "going against the accepted grain" and that people don't have "time to look at it as it doesn't fit their interest" are extreme claims in my opinion.

Maybe but people are people and that's what we generally do. We tend to follow protocol by mass.

You talk about evidence. If you have actually taken the the time, like you claim other people don't, and examined the evidence, you'd know that there is much more evidence in support of the moon landings and the Earth being round than the other way around.

Do you mean much more evidence because the tabloids said? Or people supposedly involved said? Or is it pictures and video being a proof?

I'd argue that there's much more evidence against it all but it comes down to circumstantial and logical evaluation against 50 years of storytelling that easily fooled the public at the start but slowly started to look like the monstrous heap of garbage that I believe it to be.
However, you can claim everything is totally above board and you don't see any issues at all and that's fine by me.
Anyone can choose to think what they wish.
I'm 100% convinced it didn't happen and you're 100% convinced it did...in how we were told. Fair comment.

People work with science in so many shapes and forms every day all over the world, trying to make us wiser.

Yep and they do a fantastic job.
But there's scientists and pseudo scientists, right?
There's actors and realists...right?
It's all about sorting the wheat from the chaff.

To say that people are denying conspiracies because it's not in their interest is wrong - science, unlike religion, will happily admit its wrong because that's its very nature.

But people do. If someone is not interested in a theory outside of the indoctrinated one then they can simply deny it and be done with it...not wishing to engage in debate/argument over it...which again is absolutely fine.

My wife just accepts everything on the news or in the papers. I ask her why and she just says " because I can't be bothered questioning any of it, I just want to spend my time watching my soaps and doing my own stuff, as well as washing my clothes on your super six pack once a week."
Ok the last bit could potentially be a stretch of the truth. lol

For it to be proven wrong or right, evidence needs to be presented. "One person have that belief, another has a different one" - that rule simply does not apply to science.

Science in itself is about exploring what we are and part of, so yes it is about what one persons belief is against another.
It's about hypothesis to theory to actual nailed on truth and can only be a nailed on truth when it can be physically proven to be that....otherwise is remains a hypothesis or a theory and is open to argument/debate/interpretation.

Unless of course you're bound by mainstream scientific theory which is sold as a truth but passed as theory as a contingency in case of the house of cards falling. In my opinion.

So gravity is a matter of opinion? Nope, it's just a fact.

Yep, it's a matter of opinion.
Not all people believe it exists and it cannot be proven to exist, except for inconclusive experiments that really prove nothing.
Having gravity on a spinning ball goes against logic but having pressure against density inside a container makes more sense to me.
Our own cell of life under pressure of atmosphere, not fictional gravity, in my opinion.

But yeah, let's leave it at that