The Fine Line Between Speculation and Conspiracy

It's just been reported that the Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 had been flying for at least four more hours after its radar had disappeared. According to the Wall Street Journal, it is now believed the pilot or perhaps another figure of authority on the plane had diverted it to an undisclosed location after turning off transponders. The journal also reports that investigators were actively pursuing the notion that the plane was diverted 'with the intention of using it for another purpose'.

Of course, this reporting seems to suggest that the plane was hijacked in a possible act of terrorism. Families and friends called their loved ones and the phones continued to ring, suggesting the phones hadn't been destroyed yet. Earlier this week, it was reported that several passengers of Iranian descent had been flying on fraudulent passports, paying for their one-way ticket in cash - which served to fuel the rumours about the plane being used in a terrorism plot, as the same was done in 9/11. It was later reported that these men were asylum seekers.

Other conspiracy theories claim that the plane was town apart by an explosion, the pilot had attempted suicide or intercepted by UFOs. Some have also suggested it was transported to another world via wormhole.

Yeah, I don't get it either.

There are a number of media outlets, including CNN most notably, who are covering the disappearance for hours on end. Experts are all giving their two cents into what possibly happened. CNN has also received a spike in ratings due to their excessive coverage.

But this got me thinking - we don't know what happened to the plane yet. There is a chance the passengers might be still alive. So what good is all this speculation when the story hasn't really changed for days? I wonder how the passenger's families are taking all this information, when much of it is likely to be false as nothing is really known yet.

I'm not suggesting it shouldn't be reported on - not at all. But until media outlets can grasp onto some cold hard evidence about what really happened - I'm wondering if the excessive reporting on a stagnant story is more of a hindrance than a help.

Seven World Trade Center - Controlled Demolition or Uncontrollable Fire

I understand this following post (and the previous as well) might be a sensitive topic for some, so please use your discretion when viewing the videos.

I am, naturally, one of the first to completely denounce and reject many of the conspiracy theories surrounding the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. While I do believe that the American bureaucracy in pre-9/11 society did fail to follow up on some staggering evidence that something was going on, I think the claim that 9/11 was an inside job is absurd. 

It's impossible to go through all the reasons why, so as usual, I will focus on a few. First of all, the 'truthers' love to harp on about how there were bombs planted in the buildings themselves, prior to the plane actually hitting the towers. This video, cleverly set to 'Imagine', tugs at the heartstrings in an attempt to convince viewers. What they fail to take into account is that those planes had tanks full of burning jet fuel, which was in all likelihood leaking down elevator shafts - combine this with the fact that the sheer pressure of the upper floors collapsing on top of themselves would have blown out the windows - giving the appearance of an explosion.

Another theory, that 7 World Trade Center collapsed due to controlled demolition is also used to support their claim that 9/11 was orchestrated by the American government. In this video, you'll note that the narrator tells us that the Bush administration wants everyone to believe that the tower collapsed because of the fire… but in their attempt to convince you of why their version of events is true, they leave out some important key facts.

Heavy debris from buildings 1 and 2 damaged the south face of the building, resulting in fires that were burning all day - fires that burned unabated, due to the fact that the sprinkler system had to be manually initiated and was not, resulting in incredibly low water pressure. Very few firefighters were in this building as well. The collapse itself occurred when a critical internal column buckled and triggered a sort of domino effect of structural failure throughout the building.

Dear 9/11 truthers: this isn't rocket science.

History Repeating Itself & A Conspiracy Come True

When I was in high school, we went to Washington D.C for our end of year trip. While most of my classmates seemed more interested in the Smithsonian Institution and the national Mall, it was a walk through the Holocaust museum that changed my life and subsequently shaped my university studies.

The museum had on display thousands of pounds of hair shaved from the heads of prisoner's who had been sent to Germany and Poland's concentration camps. Another display held thousands of suitcases with names and address written with white chalk under the pre tense that the owners would one day see their belongings again. A last encasement held thousands of shoes - I'll never forget a tiny pair of fashionable little red slippers.

Despite all the overwhelming evidence that we know exists of the Holocaust, the mere thought of mass genocide was so entirely unfathomable that during the Second World War, the Holocaust was thought to be a Jewish conspiracy. No one believed that death could become so industrialized and manufactured 

This sort of leads me to bring up the situation in North Korea - the death camps it houses and the atrocities committed onto its detainees are not unlike Auschwitz or Birkenau. It's no conspiracy, and yet  it seems to fall on deaf ears in North America. Yes, North Korea does have WMDs pointed to the South, and no, they might not have the oil reserves to spur the United States into action… but how can we say 'never again' when it's happening right now and we are doing nothing about it?

A Victim of Drunk Driving and a High-Speed Chase, or a Target of British Monarchy

This just in: the in-laws of a former soldier whose estranged wife claims that he had been instrumental in the 'murder' of Princess Diana speaks to reporters about the British military's role in her death. Known only as 'Soldier N', he claims that the Special Air Service (SIS) had arranged Diana's death and subsequent cover up.

Other theories, propagated in part by Dodi Fayed's father, Mohamed Al-Fayed, claim that Diana was murdered because the British monarchy would not accept a Muslim as the step-father to the future King of England. He went further to claim that Diana had been pregnant by Dodi at the time of her death - and this, again, had to be 'dealt' with. However, Hasnat Kahn, a heart-surgeon Diana had a relationship with previously, stated that his relationship with the princess had never been opposed by the royal family, and in fact, they had received Prince Charles' blessings to wed.

Here's the takeaway - when it comes to what happened that night - the driver of the Mercedes Benz had been drinking and the autopsy revealed his blood-alcohol level was three times the legal limit in France. Diana had not been wearing a seatbelt - and the paparazzi had been pursuing the car. Until there is some cold-hard evidence that the Royal family or the military had been involved, unfortunately this was  more a tragic car accident than international conspiracy.

Even the Sharks are Spies

Egyptian security boats search for sharks after the first attack on a
German tourist in December 2010.

Tourism in Egypt took a plunder in 2010 when a series of shark attacks were reported off the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, severely injuring four and killing one tourist. In response, the resort was closed and dozens of sharks were captured and killed.

The governor of South Sinai, backed by numerous Egyptian television broadcasts, insisted that the shark attacks were linked to an Israeli conspiracy to harm Egyptian tourism. These were no ordinary sharks - but remote-controlled Israeli spies. Fuelling this theory was the fact that some sharks were found with GPS devices attached to them.

 It's rather evident that this theory was propagated by nothing but anti-Semitism. As someone who has studied international relations in university, I'm well aware that conspiracy theories about Israel and the Jews are relatively commonplace in the Middle East.

There's actually a pretty simple explanation for the shark attacks. During the Islamic Festival of Eid al-Adha, dozens of sheep carcasses had been illegally dumped into the Red Sea, luring the sharks to the shore. Additionally, Egypt's issue with over-fishing by the Red Sea also contributed to the depletion of natural prey in the area. Those GPSs that were apparently controlling the sharks? Planted by marine biologists to study shark behaviour.

And, as the cherry on-top of the cake, guests of the resort had been feeding the reef fish and the sharks.

Remote-controlled Israeli spies? Nice try.

The Truth on the Moon - Vol. 1

It was one of the greatest technological advancements of the 20th century, and one of the most iconic feats of all time; the 1969 Apollo Moon Landing.

Along those lines, few conspiracy theories have received the amount of attention and television specials as the lunar landings.

Dwindling in popularity but still hanging by a thread, people like filmmaker Bart Sibrel have asserted that the American government was so threatened by Soviet advancement amidst the height of the Cold War, that officials fabricated the landing in a Hollywood studio. Quite a bit of photographic 'evidence' is used to back their claim - so much that it is impossible to tackle in just one blog post.

A favourite seems to be the famous, image of the American flag fluttering in the wind… like it's totally not bothered by the fact there's actually no air on the moon, and thus, no wind. Pretty damning evidence for some.

In actuality, the flagpole was intentionally designed outward, precisely so it wouldn't turn into a shapeless wad of fabric. The extension piece became stuck and the flag wrinkled because it had been folded - giving it the appearance of moving. Take a look at these shots of Buzz Aldrin. In the first, he is looking at the flag, and he begins to turn towards the camera in the second. The flag remains completely stationary.

Why did the Titanic sink?

Nearly two years ago, 'Titanic' was brought to the forefront of media coverage as April 2012 marked the 100th anniversary of the ship's sinking. With it, came the slew of Titanic-related documentaries, books, and interviews with conspiracy theorists presenting their latest explanations of why the Titanic sank.

Tim Malton has, for one reason or another, devoted his life towards discovering why the 'world's unsinkable ship' went down. Malton talks about a rare phenomenon known as the mirage effect, which you can find in greater detail by clicking the link. 

Malton claimed this optimal allusion created a fake horizon, effectively shielding the iceberg from view until it was too late. Unusually high-pressure weather also factored in significantly as well, Malton claims. This article in the National Geographic claims that the the moon was closer to the Earth that night than it had been in 1400 years, creating a strong gravitational pull and high tides that brought the group of icebergs straight into Titanic's path.

Great. Only, Titanic's wireless operators were given at least seven warnings of ice ahead. Warnings that were ignored, even by the ship's captain. The Californian was stuck amongst the ice and advised the Titanic to change its route. This warning was heard, but not heeded.

It was going too fast, it did not heed ice warnings, and the ship hit an iceburg. In this case, the simplest explanation makes the most sense.