Conspiracy theories I don't believe in

As you can see from the index page, I have been writing quite a lot about conspiracy theories in general, but not much about any conspiracy theories in particular (except something about the Moon landing hoax conspiracy theories). So I decided to make a list of some concrete conspiracy theories I don't believe in, with some arguments why.

Note that this is not a debunking article (you can find those easily with google), simply a brief summary of some of the reasons why I don't believe in those theories. The list is not by any means comprehensive (about either which conspiracy theories I don't believe in, nor about all the reasons why I don't believe in them).

The Moon landings hoax conspiracy theories

The conspiracy theorists claim that man has never been on the Moon and, in fact, not even outside of low Earth orbit, and that all six Moon landings were staged on Earth (and maybe partially on low Earth orbit).

A small minority of conspiracy theorists claims that only the first landing was staged and the subsequent ones were genuine. An even smaller minority claims that all the landings were genuine but the photographs and videos were staged.

I have written about some of the reasons why this is basically impossible in this other article. However, here's a brief summary of some of the reasons why I don't believe in the conspiracy theory:

Conspiracy theorists have presented literally hundreds of pieces of "evidence" of a hoax in photographs and videos. Every single such claim is completely bogus. The vast majority of the claims are very easy to explain and there simply is nothing to them. Some details may need more expertise in physics (eg. about how gaseous fumes behave in vacuum), but are equally easily explained. There is nothing in the photographs or videos which could be considered a genuine sign of a hoax.
Likewise all the claims that conspiracy theorists make about the physics of the Lunar landings are completely bogus, and no physicist agrees with them. All physicists in the world (from different countries and cultures) would need to be in a huge conspiracy to keep quiet about these things if there was indeed something physically impossible in the landings. There isn't even a single claim that could be considered a genuine sign of a hoax.
The logistics needed to pull off a hoax of such a magnitude, with the hundreds and hundreds of people involved directly in the project (including external contractors) as well as with external observers watching (such as the Soviet Union), is just way too much to be successful even once, not to talk about doing it six times.
It's hard to explain how the radio transmissions were always being sent from the correct direction if the whole thing was a hoax. A satellite orbiting the Earth cannot send the radio signals from the proper direction (both because it moves in orbit way too fast and because it can't be on the correct direction from all points on the surface of Earth).
It's hard to explain how NASA succeeded in sending a corner box reflector to the surface of the Moon (including the design of the landing system) if the whole thing was a hoax, especially with the USSR watching the whole time. There is absolutely no doubt that there is such a reflector on the Moon.
It's hard to explain how NASA succeeded in bringing over 380 kilograms of Moon rocks from the Moon to the Earth if the whole thing was a hoax. These rocks have been studied for 40 years, and no peer-reviewed scientific publication doubts that the rocks come from the Moon.
Photographs taken by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter as well as the ones taken by the Japanese SELENE project show expected evidence of the Moon landings. (What possible reason could there be for Japan to maintain a possible hoax by NASA?)

There is no plausible evidence in favor of a hoax in either the photographic material nor in the claims made about the physics of the landings, plus there's no plausible explanation for the radio transmissions, reflectors nor lunar rocks if the whole thing was a hoax, plus there's independent evidence of the lunar landings (eg. by the the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency).

Thus there is absolutely no reason to believe in the hoax theory.

The 9/11 terrorist attack conspiracy theory

Conspiracy theorists claim that the terrorist attacks were actually put forward by the United States government, killing thousands of their own people, and that the two World Trade Center towers were brought down by controlled demolition rather than any damage caused by the planes. Many also claim that what hit the Pentagon was not a plane but a missile.

The flagship of the whole conspiracy theory is the "documentary" called Loose Change, which is a quite cleverly edited video with a huge amount of claims of "evidence" that the whole thing was an inside job of the US government.

While quite cleverly done, this "documentary" is nothing but a bunch of cherry-picking and misdirection which has been debunked over and over. While it pulls all this off quite convincingly, studying the claims further shows huge holes in them. Curiously, even some 9/11 conspiracy theorists criticize Loose Change.

Other claims made by conspiracy theorists don't stand much scrutiny either. People who are actual experts in the involved fields have debunked these claims over and over. Many of the experts are from countries and cultures which have absolutely no reason to defend a possible conspiracy of the US government.

The Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory

Claims by conspiracy theorists on this subject are varied, but all of them agree at least on these claims:

Lee Harvey Oswald was either not involved in the assassination at all, or at the very least, he was not the only shooter.
It was impossible for one single shooter to cause all the wounds and damage that resulted from the incident.
The assassination was not planned by Lee Harvey Oswald alone, and instead there were bigger organizations behind it (which ones exactly varies depending on the conspiracy theorists).
The Warren Commission report is bogus and a big coverup.

Yes, I have seen "JFK", the film by Oliver Stone (and yes, when I first saw it, it was pretty alluring). Yes, I have read numerous conspiracy theory websites.

I have also read debunking websites as well as relevant parts of the Warren Commission report, and I simply find these counter-claims more plausible and rational, and the Warren Commission report sound and competent.

It is perfectly possible for one single shooter to cause all the wounds and damage resulting from the incident, from the alleged 6th floor window, and this has been corroborated countless times. Unlike the JFK film claims ("back and to the left, back and to the left, back and to the left"), Kennedy's head movement after being shot is not indicative of the direction where the bullet came from; that's not how being shot works, and this has been corroborated countless times and is a fact known for a long time even before this event. None of the other claims made by the conspiracy theorists withstand any scrutiny either.

As long as actual convincing evidence is not presented, with no rational explanation other than there being two or more shooters or other type of conspiracy, and which causes peer-reviewed scientific publications to be accepted by the scientific community, I have no rational reason to believe there was any conspiracy.

The climate change conspiracy theory

There are two versions of this conspiracy theory, and it doesn't seem like the theorists can even agree on which one is correct:

The global temperature is raising, but the cause is not humanity, and it's completely normal and natural.
The global temperature is not raising at all, but in fact it may be declining.

The funny thing about this conspiracy theory is how much it resembles the Moon Landing and the 9/11 conspiracy theories, as well as creationism. The exact same tactics are used to craft meticulously made pseudodocumentaries, literature and lectures. You can see all the same dishonest means.

Such a conspiracy is basically impossible. It's even more impossible than with the Moon Landing and 9/11 conspiracy theories (because it's not something that just happened somewhere in the past and which we have little evidence of anymore; it's something that's happening right now, and can be studied and measured by anybody). There's no reason to doubt the scientific findings on this. (And yes, I have seen those pseudodocumentaries and lectures. No, they do not convince me. I have also seen the actual explanations, something that most believers don't bother to even try to find out.)

The most ridiculous thing about this conspiracy theory in particular is the alleged motivation behind it, as well as the potential consequences even if we assumed that it was indeed a conspiracy. ("OMG! They are trying to make us pollute less and care about the environment... How dare they! Those monsters! Have they no shame?")

UFO conspiracy theories

Ufology is a very wide field of quackery, with an ample range of different claims, but some of the claims made by believers are, roughly from more generic (accepted by more believers) to more outlandish (there may be more difference of opinions even among ufologists):

Intelligent extraterrestrial beings visit Earth on a regular basis, and have done so during the entire history of mankind, usually by physical interstellar or intergalactic spacecraft.
Sometimes these spacecraft leave visible evidence of their visits on the ground, and many have been photographed.
Some people have been abducted by these extraterrestrial spacecrafts, seemingly for study, and returned later.
In 1947 an extraterrestrial spacecraft crash-landed near Roswell, New Mexico, and the United States military covered up the whole incident. One or more bodies of extraterrestrial beings might have been recovered. (Other alleged crash-landing claims exist as well around the world, but Roswell is by far the most known.)
Some of the extraterrestrials recovered in the Roswell incident might have been alive.
At least the United States government (or some branch of its military), maybe also some other governments (eg. Russia), know for certain about the existence of extraterrestrial visitors but keep quiet about it. They might even have made contact successfully.
Not only have they made contact, but they have even exchanged technology and/or information. Some US military aircraft is based partially on this technology.
Extraterrestrial beings have infiltrated high positions of the United States and other governments (either with or without humans in those governments knowing about it, depending on the conspiracy theorist), and are running things for their own purposes.

The major problem with the entirety of ufology is that it relies solely on eyewitness testimony, besides photographs and videos, all of which can be faked or staged. There is not a single piece of actual physical evidence which has ended up in scientific laboratories for study.

Eyewitness testimony on UFOs is plenty. The problem is that eyewitness testimony is extremely unreliable. Even when the reports are honest (in other words the witness is not outright making things up), eyewitness testimony is greatly affected by assumptions, optical illusions, false memories, and arguments from ignorance ("I don't know what that light is, it must be something supernatural or extraterrestrial"). Most "eyewitness testimony" is, in fact, people who actually haven't seen anything themselves but are only repeating what they have heard from others (the Roswell incident being a good example). And naturally repeating what other have said always causes the claims to be changed just so slightly...

The amount of reported UFO sightings is significantly lower among the people who watch the skies the most, ie. amateur astronomers. That's because amateur astronomers know what they are looking at and thus fewer things are unidentified to them. They do not confuse Venus for an UFO because they know when they are looking at Venus.

Argument from ignorance is a completely bogus argument. Even if a photo or video is completely untampered and genuine, and it truly shows a genuine phenomenon which happened (instead of the phenomenon being staged), and even if it's truly something that scientists have no plausible explanation for, nothing at all can be concluded from that. Making any claims at all from that is argument from ignorance, and thus completely bogus. If you don't know what it is you just can't conclude that it must be an extraterrestrial spacecraft or a supernatural phenomenon. It simply means that it's a phenomenon which scientists have not had a chance of studying in order to get an explanation (which might often be rather mundane).

Most UFO photographs and videos can be demonstrably faked or staged without problems, so their value as evidence is questionable. Some of them present natural phenomena, even if unusual.

As said, so far there is no actual tangible evidence of UFOs visiting the Earth other than eyewitness testimony and photographs which are easy to fake or stage. As long as this is the case, there's no rational reason to believe that UFOs have ever visited Earth (if they even exist).

And that's just the least outlandish of the claims.

There's plenty of material debunking the Roswell extraterrestrial spacecraft crash-landing out there, so I won't bother repeating that here. Suffice to say that there simply is no convincing evidence.

(Back to index)