Different Project of mine

I haven't posted an entry in several months.  Recently I started doing some speedruns and have included a link to my youtube channel where they can be found
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqlKOiCzaUc8VAW-WAnCjKQ

Top secret government programs

   I am sure that some of you like to make jokes about the government secretly doing experiments on unknowing citizens or that doctors have  the cure for cancer but wont give it to the citizens because they can withhold it and make much more cash on chemotherapy and radiation or even that Norway does not exist. What if I told you that one of these theories has actual proof behind it and it actually is confirmed to be true?  I am talking of MK-ULTRA a secret CIA program that has done some awful things.

It is said that the program was commissioned back in the early 1950's making it a product of red scares back during the Cold War.  Official documents are hard to come by since the CIA went through great lengths to get rid of them.  What is known about the program however is that the CIA was attempting to gain brainwashing techniques and better methods of torture.  Much of what is known comes from a hearing in the late 1970's.  The CIA was authorized to use LSD on unsuspecting citizens to utilize its potential in chemical and biological warfare.  They were trying to find ways of brainwashing and make it easier to interrogate people.  No medical personnel administered the drugs and some were terminal cancer patients.  Two deaths are reported because some of the tests they conducted were lethal. One researcher had his drink spiked and needed medical attention and when he went to get treatment he conveniently seemed to fall to his death This is what we know from a de-classified secret program they did in the 1950's.  The records are mostly lost or stolen but we know that the CIA is not being held accountable.  Easy google searches can find articles of victims releasing statements about their involvement.

I firmly believe research and secret programs are being done on citizens like in MK-ULTRA.  The CIA did these terrible things and then released the info about the program.  If this is what they chose to release and declassify then what ever they are really working on is worse than anything we could imagine.  Several of the shuttle missions that NASA sent to space in the early days of the program were classified for the military or Department of Defense.  The government is working on something for sure and it is impossible to know for sure.  MK-ULTRA proves that the government will sacrifice its own citizens in order to potentially legally experiment on them.

Melissa. "One of the Most Shocking CIA Programs of All Time: Project MKUltra." Today I Found Out. 2013. Accessed April 18, 2016. http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/09/one-shocking-cia-programs-time-project-mkultra/.

Adam Sandler

Albert Einstein, Steven Hawking, Neil degoewguiweh Tyson all geniuses and great men.  All have made contributions to science.  One man though is among them but in an unassuming way.  I, of course, am talking of the "great" and "funny" "comedian" Adam Sandler.

Adam Sandler is a comedian who got his fame started in Saturday Night Live back in the 1990's.  He was good and had a lot of potential and to his credit he has made some quality movies like Happy Gilmore and uhhhhh Happy Gilmore and that third one umm Happy Gilmore.   Adam Sandler has not made a quality movie in years.  This is one of those times where I don't need to prove he sucks at comedy because it is a common knowledge as gravity is real but I feel the need to anyway.

Let's take one of his more recent movies Jack and Jill.  Dear lord almighty this is on my top five list of movies that make me want to die due to the cringe.  3cringy 5me.  If you have not seen the movie do not see it.  Adam Sandler plays both characters a pair of twins: Jack and Jill.  Jill is constantly anoying Jack who at the end comes to like her again.  The resolution all has to work out in the end.

There is so much product placement in this movie.  The plot is Adam Sandler is trying to get Al Pachino to do a Dunkin Donuts commercial.  Very exciting stuff.  You cant forget the pepto bismol everywhere.  THIS MOVIE IS SO GOOD HAHAHAHAAHAHHAAHAHAHA JOKES.  In all seriousness though the jokes do not even get me to blow air through my nose, it just makes me groan.  Al Pachino falls in love with Jill because that makes sense. COMEDY IS SO GOOD

'scuse me got carried away with the comedy that this movie brings.  So I made a graph of all the movies that Adam Sandler has made to illustrate my point his movies suck.  The way this graph works is that I averaged out the movies he was in from 1998 to 2015.  He had to star in them or be in the top ten billed cast on IMDB.  Shorts do not count.  To give him the edge for the rotten tomatoes score I took the highest movie for that year while averaging out everything else.

Users on IMDB consistently rated his movies around a 6.4/10.  Other interesting things include that his worst movie got a 0% on rotten tomatoes with the second worst being 3%.  The movie pixels has a very fancy and hyped up page on imdb and hid the metacritc score from plain view and it took me a minute to find it on the page.  Now what does this data all show?  At best when you average his scores his movies are all meh with a few great ones like in 2002 and a few terrible ones.  What is really interesting about this data is that users consistently think his movies are meh while critics will call them either a hit or a miss.  Now Adam Sandler was really good in Saturday Night Live back in the 1990's.  I really enjoy the stuff he did there.  I know he has talent and I know he can do better. I would like to point out that this Adam Sandler thing is my opinion to an extent and if you like his movies then I am not telling you to not like his movies.  Just do not go and tell me they are masterpieces of film or they are groundbreaking because they are not.  If you like him fine by me.

Why is he consistently in bad movies if he has this talent? There are two options here.  The first is way more entertaining but regardless he is making bad movies on purpose.  Option one: his comedy is not in the movie.  Think for a minute, if you are someone who does not like Adam Sandler then you likely think his movies are a joke.  Someone suggests the newest Adam Sandler movie and you burst out laughing making fun of him and the movie, but not the jokes in the movie.  This school of thought thinks that he is making bad movies in an attempt to develop new comedy.  He has become the comedy and has won.  He has made people laugh not through the jokes in the movies but in the movies themselves.  He has already won.

The more likely reason that I personally believe is actually happening is he is in it for the cash. Adam Sandler is a millionaire at this point.  With movies like Jack and Jill he could just walk in and get the studio on board.  His movies are crap but they still net millions in profit and he is pocketing this cash. Why would he put in the effort when he knows that no matter what he will rake in millions? Here is a spoiler: he wouldn't.  Adam Sandler can do better and he knows it, but he would much rather put no effort in and make a huge profit.  Movie studios know this too and are willing to go with it.  The Ridiculous 6 was a movie that Adam Sandler co-wrote last year and starred in.  It has 0% on rotten tomatoes and was published on Netflix.  Netflix was pushing it into as many categories as they could and tried to get it in the trending tab as much as possible.  They new it was crap and tried to get as much as they could out of it.

Whether or not you like Adam Sandler is your business, but regardless he does not make great movies and this is on purpose.  Sandler could do better but honestly what he is doing is working for him so he might at well keep spitting out mediocrity.

Lang, Nico. "With 'The Ridiculous 6,' Netflix Gave Adam Sandler a Little Too Much Creative Freedom." The Daily Dot. December 12, 2015. Accessed March 28, 2016. http://www.dailydot.com/entertainment/adam-sandler-ridiculous-6-review/.

Ted Cruz is the zodiac killer

Ted Cruz is a presidential candidate right now who is one of the front runners of the Republican party alongside Donald Trump and let me just say it is really interesting to watch politics this election.  Not because politics are particularly interesting but just watching the Republicans freaking out about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton trying to beat Bernie desperately.  It will be very interesting to see what happens with the Republican nominees and if Trump will still run as an independent.  If you go on the internet frequently you have probably heard of Ted Cruz and how he is the Zodiac Killer.  If not you are in for a wild ride so buckle your seat belts boys and girls, sit back and enjoy the ride.

So The Zodiac Killer was a serial killer said to be responsible for at least 5 murders in Northern California from 1969 to 1974.  He was known for his letters to police departments and news papers claiming responsibility for his murders and taunting police for not being able to catch him.  He was never caught.  So what does Ted Cruz have to do with this you might be asking?  Either absolutely nothing or he is the killer, LET US ANALYZE THE FACTS.
1. Ted Cruz and the Zodiac killer have been seen in the same room together.  That sounds suspicious.  How could they be in the same room together if Ted Cruz is not the killer?
2. Ted Cruz has not denied being the Zodiac Killer.  If he is not the killer then why has he not denied being it?
3. Ted Cruz is not a person.  If you do not believe you have obviously never seen a picture of this "guy".  He's so creepy it is not even funny.  Every picture of him that I see is him makes him look like an alien trying to look like a normal human and fit in.  He is always so uncomfortable in photos.You have classics like this,

Good job America this man has a good shot and the Republican nomination.

Then you have absolute gems like this:

Ted Cruz wins the award for most uncomfortable man of the year.\

Honorable mention bad photos go to these two:

Swiggity Swooty hes coming for that booty.                                 #deep

Okay so obviously he is not capable of acting normal.  That does not make him the Zodiac Killer though, except that it does.

One of these men is Ted Cruz and I cannot tell which is which.  Really weird.  The side by side with a drawing of the zodiac killer is showing Ted Cruz to be the Zodiac Killer.  Oh and Ted is Canadian which just means he can't be trusted because let's face it Canadians are shifty.

Okay so as sad as it makes me to say it there is a massive hole in this entire thing.  Ted Cruz released his birth certificate and he was born two years after the first Zodiac killing happened.  So there is no way Ted Cruz could have been the Zodiac Killer.  Still a fun theory though since it is so random.  I mean unless time travel gets invented Ted Cruz cant be the killer.

"Ted Cruz." Bio.com. Accessed March 17, 2016. http://www.biography.com/people/ted-cruz.

Yglesias, Matthew. "Ted Cruz's Secret Life as the Zodiac Killer, Explained." Vox. March 08, 2016. Accessed March 17, 2016. http://www.vox.com/2016/3/8/11179492/ted-cruz-zodiac-killer.

Unless you could not tell this was written as a satire.  I had read people making jokes about it and decided to take a shot at it myself and I like how it turned out.  Two more posts coming later this month.

Was Neil Armstrong a satanist? you wont believe the answer

No, no he wasn't, even if he was that doesn't mean anything significant.  I just saved you a lot of trouble reading me grasping at straws trying to prove that he was.  I found that tittle from a clickbait generator here  Yes this is a blog about conspiracy theories but sometimes it just is too much ridiculousness. There is so much clickabity stuff online and it is really hard to find credible sites that just want add revenue *cough cough buzzfeed* . Last month I did a post on ridiculous theories and I spent more time venting than I did discussing ridiculous theories.  I am going to change that with this month's ridiculous theories thread.

THE EVIDENCE IS THERE (explicit language warning)

This guy is why we can't have nice things.  It is videos like this that make it hard to find credible Illuminati videos.  This is so clearly a satire and meant to be comedy so of course it has close to half a million views.  I wont lie I do find it funny.  The guy in the video just makes outlandish claims and rambles for 2 minutes.  He is poking fun at conspiracy theorists and while it is entertaining I am trying to base my claims on facts.  I could definitely grasp at straws better than this guy.  So I will prove right now that George Bush was in on 9/11 based on this guys reasoning.

Lets look at the facts here, George W Bush was president when the country was amBUSHed.  Ambush has the word BUSH in it.  That is pretty interesting.  Look at the attack from a completely different angle and of course George Bush was in on it.  George w Bush has 11 letters in it.  The attack was on 9/11. Pretty interesting isn't it.  9/11 was an inside job.  No doubt about it

See what I mean? I did not provide facts and just made crappy claims to make it seem right.  Yeah that guy was satire but other people will do the same thing and it makes my work that much harder.  9/11 being an inside job is a very interesting theory but the internet has taken hold of it and you cannot find anything other than MLG montage parodies and comic sans.  If not that it is a video with a clickbait tittle talking about how their video has indisputable proof of it being an inside job.

Do not waste your 3 minutes watching this video.  This video like others is taking a certain thing that happened on 9/11 and saying it is proof that 9/11 was an inside job.  This "proof" is that the George Washington Bridge had explosives under it the same day 9/11 happened and it is very suspicious that it was not talked about.  First off the Washington bridge is about a half hour drive from ground zero so I don't see how it is even relevant

So with that it is not surprising it was never covered in the news.  It might just be me but I think planes crashing into buildings killing many people is a much bigger deal than just explosives just being under a bridge.  It is not surprising to me that it was not covered in the news.  9/11 was a much bigger deal and news outlets wanted to report on what was big.

This once again has turned into me ranting about 9/11 conspiracies so I will wrap this up here.

We live in a parallel universe

Many of us as kids have read the popular children's book series the Berentsein Bears.  It is a great children's series with many books and they teach valuable lessons.  Seems nice right? What could possibly be wrong with an innocent book series?  I enjoyed them when I was little and had several of their books.  If you have not heard of this conspiracy you might be thinking that it the author is secretly promoting Nazi propaganda or he is a socialist trying to brainwash America's kids.  If I had proof of that it would make things way more interesting.  I assure you this will make up for that though.  There's something wrong with what I typed so far.  Have you figured it out?  I spelled Barenstain bears wrong.

The "a" in stain is not a typo that is how it is supposed to be spelled.   If you are anything like me or a lot of conspiracy theorists this confused you once you actually read it with the a.  So many people remember it as Berenstein when they were younger.  I can say for a fact I thought it was spelled with an e for years.  When I first read it I dug up the old books to confirm how it was spelled.

What does this mean though? Well honestly by itself it is just a bunch of people who did not know any better.  Taking it by face value is not as fun as the conspiracy.  The conspiracy itself is impossible to prove beyond so many people who remember it with an e.  Some believe that because so many people remember it with an e it is proof that timelines have split and we are living in an alternate timeline where the only difference is that Berenstain has an a in it.  It is very difficult to prove this right but I have searched to see how this could be true.



Well although a lot of people remember the a that does not mean anything.  The word is pronounced Berenstein with both the a and the e.  Additionally these books are meant for a young audience who will not pay much attention to the tittles of books.  It is very likely that the people who remember the e just made assumptions about the spelling based on what they heard.  It is fun to imagine there are shenanigans at work here but this is a theory about multiple timelines and I cannot prove this or disprove it.  I could go down both roads and make a claim for both side.  You cannot disprove it or prove it unless you do not believe in multiple parallel universes.

Personally I think a lot of people just assumed that it was with the e because it is how it pronounced.  The publishers of the books maintain that it has always been spelled with the a not the e.  It is an interesting theory anyway.  It is very difficult to know the truth due the the parallel universe part of it.

Lamoureux, Mack. "The Berenst(E)ain Bears Conspiracy Theory That Has Convinced the Internet There Are Parallel Universes | VICE | United States." VICE. August 10, 2015. Accessed March 02, 2016. http://www.vice.com/read/the-berensteain-bears-conspiracy-theory-that-has-convinced-the-internet-there-are-parallel-universes.

Smith, Russell. "Berenstain Bears Debate Is a Case of Schrodinger's Nostalgia." The Globe and Mail. August 14, 2015. Accessed March 02, 2016. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/berenstain-bears-debate-is-a-case-of-schrodingers-nostalgia/article25972071/.

Negative Numbers Don't Exist

So this is something that I made up as a joke to make a couple of friends mad and they could never prove this wrong.  Their only defense has been negative numbers exist because they do.  I'm not saying they do not exist but no one has proven this wrong.  It's Dwight's law of Numbers. I want discussion on this, the only responses I have gotten are really bad excuses that they exist just because they do.

This is a bit of a stretch and I was always bad at proofing so lets don some tinfoil hats.  Negative numbers can be represented as positive values.  You never add a negative, you are just subtracting positives.  you can take the square root of a positive but you cannot take the square root of a negative number.  i is represented as the square root of -1.  i is not real.  On number lines and graphs there are negative values but in terms of distance that line is just moving left a positive amount, not right a negative amount.

Let me guess what you are thinking here: "This guy is an idiot".  All I really wanted was people to just think about it and question things but it never happens.  Negative values do not exist in nature.  We invented them to make math easier.  When you are in debt you do not have negative dollars, You owe positive dollars.  At the same time though humans invented math and I could argue positive values do not exist but  will not do that.

When it all boils down negative numbers are used in math and are an abstract concept.  They cannot be found in nature as something that could be represented as a positive.  All I am saying is they are an abstract concept in math that is not real practically.  I invite discussion and want someone to prove me wrong but I want proof and do not want people to just make claims about them existing.

Stevie Wonder is not blind?

I am currently working on a couple of bigger theories involving the Baranstain Bears, and the Titanic so be looking for those.  In the meantime though I will do one on a rather interesting small one revolving around musician Stevie Wonder.  If you do not know who Stevie Wonder is shame on you and get out from under the rock you are clearly living under and listen to his music.  He is a very talented musician who has the claim to fame that he is blind.  This means of course there will be conspiracies that he is not blind. A short trip to Wikipedia shows that he was born blind due to being premature and his retinas detached.

I do not wish to give up hope on there being a juicy conspiracy just yet so put on your tin foil hats and get ready for this:

*As a side note this video does several instant replays and is not necessary to watch the whole thing to get what it is talking about.

If Stevie wonder was blind then how could he grab the mic?  Well to burst your bubble lots of ways.  Seeing as it is a microphone that fell Stevie probably heard Paul bump into it and went to catch it.  Just because he is blind does not mean he is ignorant to what is happening, unlike McCartney who should be looking where he's going and should stop bumping into things.  This performance would have been practiced and Stevie Wonder likely knew that McCartney was going to run by during that part of the song.  If McCartney was clumsy enough to bump into the mic as he ran to the piano for the actual performance he probably did it during rehearsal at least once or twice.  Stevie Wonder probably expected it to happen which could be why he went for the mic.  Although it is an interesting video I think that him not being blind is grasping at straws.  The real blind person here is McCartney, he should look where he is going.

RAINBOWS IN OUR WATER SUPPLY

So as I am sure you are aware blog on conspiracy theories.  I make it my goal to research everything about the theories and post sources to any facts I give.  I try to only do research into theories that I think could actually have ground behind them.  This gives me difficulty because there are some very crazy conspiracy theories with either little ground or nothing behind them.  It is also very difficult to determine if some conspiracy theories are indeed serious and not satire or making things up for entertainment.  I want to do something on the Illuminati but it is nearly impossible to determine if people are serious or not.  Search Illuminati or 9/11 conspiracies on YouTube and you get these great results: http://imgur.com/GFQJA9u.

I mean seriously at least half of this is click bait or obvious satire.  If it is not click-bait it is an MLG montage parody.  Maybe all the click bait is just the Illuminati trying to cover something up. I doubt they would go through all that trouble though.  Anyway due to sifting through the satire I end up working on a few posts at a time and end up posting all of them at once.  I will get better spacing out posts.


Then you have the conspiracies that make no sense.  In my research I have found several conspiracies that are just completely ridiculous. Most of these are too ridiculous or too short to warrant a full post or I think have the potential to be satire.  Others are just grasping at straws.  I still want to feature some of them so from time to time I will be posting mini posts discussing a few short ones at a time while taking more time on bigger conspiracies.

Now that I have sufficiently beaten around the bush let us get to the main event:

RAINBOWS IN OUR WATER SUPPLY

Now this was a video I stumbled across randomly about two weeks ago.  Summarizing it in text does not do it justice.  It is two minutes long just watch it and continue reading once you have seen it.

I honestly cannot make sense in this.  I have watched this video ten times in an effort to figure out if this is satire or if this lady genuinely thinks rainbows are not natural.  At this point I could argue for either side.  Now as of writing this I think it is legir and for a few reasons.  This lady is saying that rainbows are the visible spectrum and not natural if in water like in the video.  People learn about rainbows in 5th grade earth science, and they are very much a natural think and I find it hard to believe that she would not know this.  Yet people as a whole are not known for being smart because of this gem of a video:

If you did not watch the video the lady is arguing that going 80 MPH does not mean you travel 80 miles in an hour.

Could the lady really think rainbows are in the water supply?   Well our journey now takes us to the credits of the video.  Bellow are from the ending where she is trying to get us to rise up against the government.

This is just a little too much in my eye.  If this was not in the credits I would have stuck by that she was serious.  Thirst is spelled wrong and the video never mentioned anything about energy.  This makes me feel it could be satire but at the same time it is very amateurishly made.  I feel someone making satire would have put more thought into making sure there were not background sounds or there were not spelling mistakes.  I am leaning more towards this is real as of writing this post and it was not an easy decision.  Every time I watch the video I change direction but in the end it just feels too real to me.  After it is all said and done though, I do not think anyone is here to say that rainbows cannot be natural.

Do Apple products slow down?

I'm sure most of you have owned or had an experience with at least one Apple product.  If you have not heard of Apple or are not familiar with them, Apple is a technology company that deals in smart phones, computers, and tablets.

If you have had an Apple product this might have happened to you:  You have the newest iPhone and it is running great.  It is quick and you are not having many problems with it, but then Apple announces their newest iPhone, let's say iPhone 7c.  With it comes a complete overhaul of the operating system like from ios 6 to ios 7 seen bellow.

This new operating system is available on your phone and it looks exciting.  You download this new firmware update and suddenly your phone seems to be slower.
This case has happened to so many people that they believe that Apple is making their new ios bad for their older phones on purpose to get them to buy their new products.  Most of this is accepted fact. The conspiracy lies with whether or not Apple is slowing phones down on purpose to get people to buy their products.

Those who do not believe in the conspiracy are generally the Apple fans who will be buying the new phones regardless.  There are two big schools of thought that the opposition of this conspiracy hold.

1. it is illegal to do this on purpose
2. The new software's are optimized for the new phones and not meant for their older phones

Slowing down Apple phones on purpose put them at a legal risk I do not think anyone would disagree with that.  When Apple releases new phones they typically have the next great ios to end all ios.  This great new ios is designed for the new phone with its features in mind yet they still make it available for its more recent models.  Side by side comparisons show that older phones with the new ios are very slowed down.  Some have seen it difficult just to check their email.  While Apple may not be slowing down their phones on purpose they are most definitely aware that this happens to their phones.  They would have to do testing on their old phones to figure out whether or not they would be able to support the new ios.  They also would need to modify it so it would be compatible.  If they were worried about their older phones slowing down then they would just not release the ios for their older phones.  This is why there is no way Apple is ignorant to phones slowing down with new software.

CONFIRMED

http://blackbag.gawker.com/does-apple-ruin-your-iphone-on-purpose-the-conspiracy-1690649898
http://www.theweek.co.uk/59708/does-apple-slow-old-iphones-when-a-new-model-comes-out