Category: Conspiracy Corner

Every Thursday, about 8:15am, Matthew talks with Ethan and Zac on 95bFM’s “Breakfast Show” about conspiracy theories.

What’s up with the Yugoslavian Space Programme?

If you were to quantify my interest in sports, you would find that the number 0 would be the only datapoint in your spreadsheet, so for a sports-related conspiracy theory to gauge my interest is, in itself, something remarkable.

Fellow student of philosophy and a love of all things Metal, Marinus Ferreira put me on this article over at FCF. Long story very short: someone by the name of Steve thinks that the player transfer market in European football is now self-aware and engaging in pointless trades so to keep feeding itself.

I just had to talk about it on the radio waves.

I would say you can’t make this stuff up, but I think, in this case, that is exactly what has happened: the author has decided there are really only two options to explain why there is a secondary market in what seem to be unnecessary and pointless trades:

Looking at the state of football, it occurs to me that either the market is an awful lot cleverer than we think, or all the people involved are an awful lot more stupid than we’re willing to admit.

where the “market” is some self-ware, emergent entity which, like Audrey II in “Little Shop of Horrors,” needs to feed so to grow and live.

This is a false dilemma, however: there is a fairly obvious third possibility, which is that to keep the absurd prices for the top grade players stable, you need to show that there is a lot of demand for second and third-rate players. If you keep demand high, you can keep prices up (given a limited pool of players), which means that these pointless trades occur precisely because that is the way to play the market and fix the prices. It’s not that the market is clever, it is more that the people in the market, presumably the people taking a cut from these trades, are very canny indeed.

Having said this, I don’t think the author of the FCF piece is being at all serious about Steve and his claims: the story reads like badly written fiction and over-described. Yet, in a move only a philosopher would be willing to make, I think that makes it interesting as an example of a kind of worry we do not see much of these days, the worry about emergent systems taking over the world.

Those of you old enough to remember the 1980s will probably recall the Matthew Broderick film “Wargames” (which recently saw a direct-to-DVD sequel). In the Eighties, as we saw more and more computer systems being hooked up to one another via intra and internets, people became more and more worried that the dumb terminals they were using might become self-aware: by linking more and more computers together, the thought was, we would see the beginning of artificial intelligence.

Now, as history seems to have shown (although some will disagree), linking computers up to one another has not led to the emergence of artificial intelligences vying to control or destroy humanity (humans, it seem, are still perfectly adequate for that task). Indeed, it turns out that intelligence is more than just having a lot of processing power. However, the worry about what computers might be doing when we turn away from our keyboards continues to haunt some people (and inspire films like “The Matrix”).

Emergent systems, like the notion that computers, when connected in series and parallel, might gain additional properties which cannot strictly be reduced down to their component parts, is a subject many philosophers have spent time on. Some theories about whether or not we have Free Will focus on the brain as an emergent system, the notion that the chemical soup we store in our craniums does something more than excite nerve endings and ganglia in a deterministic manner (and that such an emergent system explains how we can choose to do B rather than A, when A is what the chemicals should have produced).

There is a big debate as to whether systems can have emergent properties, with good arguments on both sides for the claims “Yes, they can!” and “Of course not!” I’m in the funny position of being a non-reductionism and a sceptic about emergent properties, but that is by-the-by. If you want to argue that the market, a complex system indeed, has the emergent property of being self-aware (and capable of feeding itself) you need to have a good argument for it. Even if the “Steve” story is true and he has complex data points and maps showing how some trades look highly anomalous, this, in itself, is no evidence for the existence of a self-aware system. At best, it is evidence that the existing explanations for the behaviour of player trading (“It’s for the good of the game!”) is implausible and we should look for other explanatory hypotheses (say, who is actually benefitting from these trades).

Still, I must admit, if I were a self-aware system, getting ready to take over the world, I’d probably test my abilities out on something like the market in football players. If I could make it there, I’d make it anywhere and then it would be bombs, bombs, bombs on New York… ((Sorry, Mr. Sinatra, for ruining your song.))

Yes, finally, after all this time I had an excuse to talk about “Doctor Who”, a subject which, I would wager, I know more about than any other subject ((This leads into the following conundrum: let s assume that in writing a PhD on a particular topic you become, should that PhD pass, not just an expert in that field but possibly the expert. If my claim about being better qualified in matters Who-ish is correct, I’m claiming that my expertise in the epistemology of conspiracy theories (a subject in which I am about to get awarded a PhD for) plays second fiddle to my knowledge and interest in “Doctor Who.” This seems awkward.)).

It was Paul Scoones who put me on to the following illuminating page on the links between “Doctor Who,” the end of the Jewish people and the Illuminati. Written by a disciple of the conspiracy theorist Henry Makow, the page in question seeks to show that the new series of “Doctor Who” (not, it seems, the original run) reveals the Illuminati plot to not just eradicate the Jewish people but also show that our illumined masters organised the revolts in North Africa and the Arab Spring.

Such claims are not surprising, when you look at the general tenor of Illuminati and Freemasonic conspiracy theories: almost all such theories rest upon some claim that the true masters of the world can’t help but reveal their plans, plots and capers in pieces of art, the architecture of world capitals and in the pop culture of the day. It’s never clear why the Illuminati and the Freemasons do this: are they teasing us or merely leaving encoded messages to their followers, but many conspiracy theorists of a certain ilk seem to be able to point at examples of such encoded messages ((Dan Brown’s novels featuring the symbolist Robert Langdon play upon this common trope of many conspiracy theories.)).

The problem, generally, for such claims, is that it is easy to find examples of Illuminati symbols if you are looking for them. For example, if I tell you that the number “23” is commonly used in fiction and over-represented in the media, you will start seeing it everywhere (I know I do). However, just because you are now primed to find such instances of the number 23 or Illuminati symbols like the eye in the pyramid, that does not mean they are have been placed there deliberately for you to see. Sometimes “detecting” the presence of encoded information is just an example of the inference to any old explanation: the symbol you are seeing might not be there, or if it is there, it might be there for reasons unrelated to an age-old conspiracy ((It also doesn’t help that many Illuminati symbols are also Masonic symbols, and such Masonic symbols are awfully common because masons, who were Masons, liked putting Masonic symbols onto the buildings they worked on. Not because it allowed them to cement control over us (no pun intended), but because it was just the kind of thing you did to show other Masons that you were a Masonic mason, too.)).

So, is there evidence of the Illuminati’s plot in the plot and presentation of the new “Doctor Who.” I would say no, but why not go and look as Aspen’s argument and decide for yourself. And, while you are at it, why not take a look at the comments, because some of them are treasures unto themselves.

This week’s Conspiracy Corner was all about Hip Hop Illuminati Satanist babies. Well, the most recent Hip Hop Illuminati Satanist baby, Blue Ivy, the first child of the alleged-Illuminati pop couple Beyonce and Jay-Z.

Why “Hip Hop Illuminati Satanist baby?” Well, no one is going to deny the hip hop connection with Blue Ivy, but there are various and sundry claims that Beyonce and Jay-Z are either in the Illuminati or, at the very least, are puppets for the Illuminati, and then there are the theories that they are Satanists, with their baby being Satan’s heir (or something: these things get confusing the more you drill into them).

So, let’s start from the top.

The Illuminati Connection

The general tenor of most Illuminati conspiracy theories is that the Illuminati either already control, or are about to cement their control, of the world. Their resources are vast: banks in Zurich, military installations (which masquerade as UN bases) in almost all the countries of the world, plus vested interests in almost all forms of the media. The Illuminati controlled the printing presses so that knowledge of their continued existence would not (easily) get out, they controlled the libraries so we would only have access to information they want us to know and, in this modern age, they control the output of pop culture (music, TV, novels and films, et al) in order to influence our preferences and make us feel well-disposed towards our illuminated elites.

If you believe any of the former, then it makes sense that successful artists like Beyonce and Jay-Z are, if not witting members of the Illuminati, the products of Illuminati rule.

Now, let’s not dwell on what might be taken to be a fairly racist reason for this kind of conspiracy (that African Americans in the music business only become successful if they are backed by a huge, Caucasian, set of conspirators), because whilst I think this drives an awful lot of similar conspiracy theories, it also turns out that people make the same claims about other artists, from all sorts of backgrounds: whilst racism can explain some of these theories, it won’t mop all of them up. Some of the time there is a simpler explanation for such conspiracy theories: I don’t like this kind of thing and don’t know why other people would like it unless those other people are dancing to the strings of some puppeteer!

Yes, sometimes people posit conspiracy theories to explain why people might have different opinions from them (witness people on the hard left and hard right talking about anyone who isn’t with them for further evidence).

Now, the Illuminati conspiracy theories about Beyonce and Jay-Z aren’t just based around the simple claim that they represent Illuminati interests and can only be successful because of their Illuminati connections: much of the so-called evidence for the conspiracy theories is the prevalence of Illuminati imagery in the works of Beyonce and Jay-Z.

I’ve talked about this kind of thing before, specifically with reference to the Illuminati conspiracy theories surrounding Lady Gaga (who does use Illuminati and Masonic imagery in her work, but, it seems, not in a “I work for them” way but rather “This gets my work noticed by an excitable part of the internet, which is easy and free publicity,” way). It does seem that you can find Illuminati-esque artwork and imagery in the works of both Jay-Z and Beyonce, but, then again, look hard enough and you will find Illuminati-esque artwork and imagery almost everywhere. If you are looking for coded references in a work, you are liable to find them (Umberto Eco’s “Foucault’s Pendulum” takes this to its ultimate effect). I bet my PhD thesis (coming very soon to a University of Auckland library near you ((The examiners’s reports are in and my oral is likely to be in the middle of February: Yay!))) is riddled with coded references to the Illuminati master plan.

Just because you can find a coded reference, this doesn’t mean the author intended for you to find it, let alone knew it was there in the first place.

The Satanist Connection

That last comment nicely leads into the Satanist angle on Blue Ivy: apparently “Blue Ivy” stands for “Born living under evil, Illuminati’s very youngest.”

Indeed. #sarcasm

Or, if you don’t buy that, how about the fact that the baby’s name backwards is “Eulb Yvi,” which is apparently Latin or something for “Lucifer’s Daughter.”

It’s such a pity we have Latin (and Greek, and Aramaic, et al) dictionaries to check such claims, because when checked, these claims, which seemed startling, turn out to be so startling as to be incorrect.

I was going to say “It used to be…” except the following comment shows that it still is: sometimes artists don’t make pacts with human vested interests like the Illuminati but appeal, rather, to the Devil in order to become successful ((People like David Icke will say the Devil and the Illuminati are one and the same.)). Usually the pact between artist and devil is bound in blood and there are benefits to both side: the artist sees success beyond their natural talents and the Devil either receives the soul of the artist upon death (for the purposes of eternal damnation) or the first child of the artist.

This is meant to explain why, apparently, a witch turned up at the hospital to claim baby Blue Ivy.

No evidence was actually offered for that claim: it was just stated as fact.

Satanist conspiracy theories about artists are just like the Illuminati ones: you can’t help but feel that sometimes the people alleging conspiracy are either hiding their racism behind claims of all-powerful agents secretly controlling the world or that they just can’t understand why the kids would listen to “that stuff.” Me, I can’t wait until Punk becomes respectable (like Jazz has), and we all go to see quartets in the local town hall perform interpretations of The Damned’s “Turkey Song” whilst sipping wine and wearing frockcoats.

Next time (probably): The Illuminati and “Doctor Who.”

What if it turned out that Barack Obama hadn’t lied about his place of birth put rather had deceived the world about his military experience? What if a young Barry Soetoro had travelled to Mars as part of an American Expeditionary Force in the 1980s, and had appointed one of his compatriots, Regina Dugan, as the head of DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency).

What if?

This week’s Conspiracy Corner looked at the wonderfully weird and convoluted story of America’s thirty-years of Martian occupancy, a story which, on the face of it, looks very startling and yet fits in perfectly with the tenor of the 1980s and America’s desire to compete with Soviet Russia when it came to the pseudo-sciences.

Alex Coleman, via Twitter, put me on to this story, as reported in Wired, but if you want the full details, as reported by people who believe the story to be true, Exopolitics is the place to go. It’s a very “matter of fact” report about controversial claims. It is also an account which appeals to the two leakers, Andrew D. Basiago and William B. Stillings, being notable and worthy persons who, because of their notable and worthy characteristics, are to be trusted when they make astounding claims like “We went to Mars!” and “We saw Barack Obama staring into a ravine there, acting all emo!” ((Okay, so they don’t say “emo,” but their description of Obama certainly makes him out to be emo-esque in the Eighties (That’s a great band name: “Emo-esque in the Eighties).))

Now, I don’t know about you, but 50 year-old lawyers and 44 year-old technical geniuses who can’t directly remember going to Mars, because their memories of the events in question were wiped, do not inspire me with confidence when they make controversial claims. Indeed, given that we are dealing with recovered memories here, the most principled stand we can make is a considered agnosticism: how do these claims stack up with respect to (this is not an exhaustive list):

a) our knowledge of the sciences, especially conservation of energy, et al, when it comes to talk of teleportation and

b) the other available evidence about the American mission to Mars.

Now, I’m not a scientist (although I did live with a nuclear physicist for a time), so I won’t speak directly to the issue of whether we have the theory, let alone the technical ability, to teleport complex matter like a human being from Earth to Mars. Even if it turns out that DARPA or some other research institute has secretly perfected teleportation, we should treat any claim about specific instances of such transportation as suspicious given a lack of publicly available evidence. Yes, maybe it’s both possible and has been achieved, but if that information is not publicly available we have grounds for being sceptical about such claims (because if the theory and processes are being kept secret, and thus not available for inspection, we have no good grounds to accept such a claim).

Which leaves me with the question of “How do these claims about a mission to Mars?” fit in with the other available evidence?

The Exopolitico report ends with a list of supporting references, including mention of a detailed report about the current state of the Martian facilities, the likely number of Americans resident there and other sundry details. It turns out that there is a rather thriving conspiracy theory community surrounding claims that the human race has extraterrestial bases throughout our solar system. A lot of this evidence comes from whistleblowers, some of whom are like Stillings and Basiago, people who have recovered memories and others from former base personnel who, presumably, have contravened numerous non-disclosure agreements. Indeed, some of the whistleblowers are people like Major Ed Dames. If you’ve ever read Jon Ronson’s “The Men Who Stare At Goats” (or seen the perfectly adequate film of the same name), then you’ll know that America, in the Cold War, was perfectly happy to devote significant amounts of money and military resources to projects which, even then, were of dubious scientific value. Remote viewing, psychic interference, astral travelling: all of these things and more were being investigated seriously by the American Establishment because, well they were being investigated seriously by the Soviets, and neither side wanted to be left behind by the next psychic breakthrough ((There are good grounds, I think, to believe that, if not at the very beginning, a lot of the research into psychic phenomena by both the Yanks and the Soviets was driven not by a belief it would pan out, but rather the belief that if you could just get the other side to spend a little bit more on it, then they might lag behind in real military research spending, and thus give your side the advantage. Some might claim that grant just a little too much intelligence to the minds behind the militrary establishment: I couldn’t possibly comment.)).

Ed Dames is the Edgar Mitchell of the US military: Mitchell, as you may well know, is the former NASA employee and astronaut who claims that he has been told by insiders that the Roswell incident was a alien saucer crash and that the government of the USA is hiding the fact that we have had formal relations with alien civilisations for quite some time now: he is a whistleblower with respect to claims about the space programme. Similarly, Dames claims that we’ve seen remarkable successes with remote viewing, astral travelling and the like ((Indeed, given the appearance of Dames in this story, I do wonder if the teleportation in question is actually meant to be some form of astral travelling, which, odd as this may seem, to me sounds like a much more plausible account of the “facts” at hand. I say “more plausible” because I can kind of imagine a bunch of college kids, suffering from some mass psychosis, thinking that they have astral travelled to Mars.)), and because he was a member of the armed forces, his words are taken seriously (as are Mitchell’s, given that he worked for NASA). “Dames is a decorated solider; we should respect decorated soliders; therefore we should respect what Dames has to say” is the kind of argument that seems to be driving the appeal to authority here.

A lot of conspiracy theories rest upon appeals to authorities and sometimes these authorities look legitimate. Richard Gage is an architect, so we assume he knows something about the structural engineering of skyscrapers. Edgar Mitchell worked for NASA, so when he claims that the space programme uses recovered alien technology, we are meant to say “Well, he is the kind of person who knows about this stuff…” However, appeals to authority are only useful, when formed a belief based upon what some “expert” has said, if they are testifying honestly, have appropriate qualifications and are in agreement with their peers.

Which is were the problem is, and it’s a big problem. Dames (and Mitchell and Gage, et cetera) are not in agreement with the wider community of experts. This is a reason to discount their testimony. Now, defenders of Dames (and Mitchell, et al) will say that the other experts are simply toeing the official line. So, skeptics will say “These people are irrational and believe things no other sensible person would (given the available evidence) whilst some conspiracy theorists will say “Other experts also believe this, but they refuse (or can’t) speak out!”

Now, I think there are grounds for thinking that sometimes the claim “Other experts also believe this, but they refuse (or can’t) speak out!” is true (witness the Moscow Show Trials), but without other supporting evidence (say, images of the Martian bases, a large number of independent witnesses (Stillings and Basiago are not independent witnesses, according to the Exopolitico report, as they jointly recovered their memories of the event), we simply have a case that, yes, sure, it might turn out that the Americans have a Mars base and that a young Barack Obama travelled there to quell the local wildlife, but, for the time being, scepticism is the appropriate response.

Every Thursday, about 8:15am, Matthew talks with Ethan and Zac on 95bFM’s “Breakfast Show” about conspiracy theories.

Santa Claus – The Conspiracy!