Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A new Bigfoot documentary helps explain our conspiracy-minded era

msn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 119 posts

Re: A new Bigfoot documentary helps explain our conspiracy-minded era

#81

Post by mukmuk »

darkwater wrote: post #58
mukmuk wrote: post #48

Somewhat relatedly, there is a pretty plausible theory that some “find the Yeti” expeditions were in fact cover for operations by my country’s intelligence services to sabotage China. See e.g., https://topsecretumbra.substack.com/p/the-secret-history-of-... (Btw the general idea that there are animals that we don’t know about is not remotely far-fetched. A new possum genus was discovered like a month ago.)

> (Btw the general idea that there are animals that we don’t know about is not remotely far-fetched. A new possum genus was discovered like a month ago.) I might be totally mistaken but I think most of the times when a new "species" is found is either a) some different genus which a non trained eye would not be able to distinguish from an existing one, or b) some species that lives only in a very difficult to reach p…

the word general in italics was intended to read as “in contrast to this”...

Re: A new Bigfoot documentary helps explain our conspiracy-minded era

#82

Post by stevenhuang »

Animats wrote: post #52
zdw wrote: post #26

Given that a large portion of the population has a HD or higher quality camera in their pocket most of the time these days, most cryptid style conspiracies seem pretty well debunked at this point.

Mandatory XKCD.[1] [1] https://xkcd.com/1235/

If the phenomenon is itself intelligent..

Re: A new Bigfoot documentary helps explain our conspiracy-minded era

#83

Post by technothrasher »

IAmBroom wrote: post #67
mukmuk wrote: post #48

Somewhat relatedly, there is a pretty plausible theory that some “find the Yeti” expeditions were in fact cover for operations by my country’s intelligence services to sabotage China. See e.g., https://topsecretumbra.substack.com/p/the-secret-history-of-... (Btw the general idea that there are animals that we don’t know about is not remotely far-fetched. A new possum genus was discovered like a month ago.)

Finding a variant type of possum is not at all the same as Nessie surfacing in front of humans for the first time in a century, or a bipedal ape on a decades-long walking tour, unseen.

> Nessie surfacing in front of humans for the first time in a century

Wait, are you implying that Nessie used to surface in front of humans?

Re: A new Bigfoot documentary helps explain our conspiracy-minded era

#84

Post by technothrasher »

vintermann wrote: post #51
gdulli wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say that Epstein is a vindication of conspiracy theories, at least not the "Bigfoot" type. Epstein was already in trouble with the law for trafficking over 20 years ago. The pedophilia in the Catholic church was known decades before that. It's shameful that these stories didn't get more attention sooner, but the general veracity of them wasn't in question. The prototypical pedophilia conspiracy theory we d…

"Bigfoot" isn't inherently a conspiracy theory. If you say that bigfoot exists, you're wrong, but not necessarily a conspiracy theorist. To be a conspiracy theorist, you also have to posit a grand conspiracy to conceal the existence of bigfoot. If you posit a conspiracy that only involves a few people who could plausibly coordinate to conceal the truth, that's also not a grand conspiracy, and we don't call people con…

> If you say that bigfoot exists, you're wrong

That not a philosophically supportable statement. "There's insufficient evidence to warrant belief in your claim" is more realistic.

Re: A new Bigfoot documentary helps explain our conspiracy-minded era

#85

Post by vintermann »

technothrasher wrote: post #84
vintermann wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Bigfoot" isn't inherently a conspiracy theory. If you say that bigfoot exists, you're wrong, but not necessarily a conspiracy theorist. To be a conspiracy theorist, you also have to posit a grand conspiracy to conceal the existence of bigfoot. If you posit a conspiracy that only involves a few people who could plausibly coordinate to conceal the truth, that's also not a grand conspiracy, and we don't call people con…

> If you say that bigfoot exists, you're wrong That not a philosophically supportable statement. "There's insufficient evidence to warrant belief in your claim" is more realistic.

It wasn't meant to be philosophical, it was meant to be practical. As a practical matter, you're wrong if you say that Bigfoot exists, or that the sun won't rise tomorrow.

Re: A new Bigfoot documentary helps explain our conspiracy-minded era

#86

Post by vintermann »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #59
vintermann wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Bigfoot" isn't inherently a conspiracy theory. If you say that bigfoot exists, you're wrong, but not necessarily a conspiracy theorist. To be a conspiracy theorist, you also have to posit a grand conspiracy to conceal the existence of bigfoot. If you posit a conspiracy that only involves a few people who could plausibly coordinate to conceal the truth, that's also not a grand conspiracy, and we don't call people con…

> If you posit a conspiracy that only involves a few people who could plausibly coordinate to conceal the truth, that's also not a grand conspiracy, and we don't call people conspiracy theorist for believing in regular, everyday criminal conspiracies. No, but we did call people conspiracy theorists for believing the thing Snowden subsequently showed to be real.

Not me, I didn't. That conspiracy was certainly pretty big, but there was also a ton of smaller leaks as you'd expect on a real conspiracy of that size, so you certainly wouldn't be called nuts for assuming NSA were spying on a lot they weren't supposed to.

Security state loyalists were not nearly as influential in online discourse back then, as they are now. Probably astroturfing, AI and algorithmic amplification plays a part in that.

Re: A new Bigfoot documentary helps explain our conspiracy-minded era

#87

Post by GJim »

n4r9 wrote: post #54
gdulli wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say that Epstein is a vindication of conspiracy theories, at least not the "Bigfoot" type. Epstein was already in trouble with the law for trafficking over 20 years ago. The pedophilia in the Catholic church was known decades before that. It's shameful that these stories didn't get more attention sooner, but the general veracity of them wasn't in question. The prototypical pedophilia conspiracy theory we d…

I think if 20 years ago you claimed that there was a global sex trafficking ring that procured young girls for elites, politicians, celebrities, and royalty, you'd be laughed off as a David Icke level conspiracist. These days it just seems obvious that that was going on.

Hard disagree!

Such things have existed for millennia. What's more surprising is that people claim to be surprised.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtesan

Re: A new Bigfoot documentary helps explain our conspiracy-minded era

#89

Post by garte »

Supermancho wrote: post #29

The documentary does not, in fact, help explain the conspiracy zeitgeist. Human nature has been reason enough through modern history. This MSN "article" seems oddly out of place on HN.

> This MSN "article" seems oddly out of place on HN.

Maybe there's something sinister going on: I suspect the shoe sole industry what with these huge foots and all. It'd make sense since Covid people are walking less. Maybe the sole industry caused the lab leak?

I'm just asking questions.

Re: A new Bigfoot documentary helps explain our conspiracy-minded era

#90

Post by georgeecollins »

graemep wrote: post #60
gdulli wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say that Epstein is a vindication of conspiracy theories, at least not the "Bigfoot" type. Epstein was already in trouble with the law for trafficking over 20 years ago. The pedophilia in the Catholic church was known decades before that. It's shameful that these stories didn't get more attention sooner, but the general veracity of them wasn't in question. The prototypical pedophilia conspiracy theory we d…

> The pedophilia in the Catholic church was known decades before that. Except the proportion of paedophile priests is about the same as the proportion of paedophiles in the general population. There are more paedophiles in schools and social services than in religious organisations - and there have even been more convictions of teachers and social workers, at least tin the UK. The reason you think of the Catholic Chu…

I believe you but is there a source that you can refer me to? I guess I just believed abuse was more common in the Catholic church but your post made me realize my impression had no facts behind it.
Post reply on HN