• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Say it Ain't So! Sandy Coincidences Mounting...

Maybe if you weren't so quick to jump on other people and tell them to "do their research!" even when you're completely wrong, then refuse to admit to it or apologize for it? Nah, that couldn't be it, could it?;)
Nope. I "jest" love coincidences and stirring up the pot every now or then...
 
Maybe if you weren't so quick to jump on other people and tell them to "do their research!" even when you're completely wrong, then refuse to admit to it or apologize for it? Nah, that couldn't be it, could it?;)

In asmuch as I do like the things you dig up chris (I've mentioned many times I joined this forum because of your presence and I mean that in a respectful way) and I do enjoy mulling these things over, and enjoy reading what people are thinking regardless of the truth, I'm with muadib on this one. You can be pretty quick to dismiss people with the above statement who may not necessarily come to the same conclusion as least as far as your own work. hell I was one and it just came in an innocent question. Believe me , especially when it comes to coincidences I'm much closer to your line of thought than I would be angelo's and maybe even muadib...damned their reasonable logic

But at the same time I do see your original point , I do enjoy reading these things because It does matter what people are thinking...even those very much removed from a event...you'll notice that newspapers, both online and print usually carry two pages worth, usually immediately after an event and before all the facts are in, thus they aren't informed opinions but uninformed opinions and speculation can create great upheaval, just look at what happened in the engineered Rwanda civil war/ massacre a decade and a half ago.
 
Just for clarifications sake, my point wasn't about this thread but the Richard Sauder thread where I said I heard him on a radio show talking about reptilians. Chris proceeded to tell me that I was wrong and to do my research, in a rather rude and abrupt manner. I then posted several instances of Sauder doing exactly that, at which point he didn't apologize or admit just how wrong he was. It takes a big man to admit when they're wrong, apparently Chris is above these common courtesies that us mere mortals employ in the course of our communications. Whatever, it's not that important, I just felt I should clarify in case anyone was confused.
 
Just for clarifications sake, my point wasn't about this thread but the Richard Sauder thread where I said I heard him on a radio show talking about reptilians. Chris proceeded to tell me that I was wrong and to do my research, then I posted several instances of Sauder doing exactly that, at which point he didn't apologize or admit just how wrong he was. It takes a big man to admit when they're wrong, apparently Chris is above these common courtesies that us mere mortals employ in the course of our communications. Whatever, it's not that important, I just felt I should clarify in case anyone was confused.
Yeah, my bad, I missed that one--see the Sauder thread for my mea culpa. FWIW: For many years Sauder scoffed at the suggestion that reptilians existed and were responsible for underground tunnel systems, etc here on Earth. His view of the underground base scenario was extremely well-researched and very conservative. He always made a point of sticking "to what he could demonstrate" as opposed to offering up conjecture and a lot of what-ifing. He refused to publicly discuss "reptilians" as part of the underground base subject. So, it seems another one dives into the dust and gets swallowed by the Project Camelot Kool-aid brigade, oh well. :( I guess he REALLY wants to sell more books or he snapped or something, or maybe the ayuayasca told him something that he's misinterpreted, misconstrued or confabulated...
 
Yeah, I missed that one-=-see the other thread. For many years Sauder scoffed at the suggestion that reptilians existed and were responsible for underground tunnel systems, etc here on Earth. His view of the underground base scenario was conservative and he made a point of sticking "to what he could demonstrate" as opposed to offering up conjecture and a lot of what-ifing. Another one bites the dust and gets swallowed by the Project Camelot Kool-aid brigade, oh well. :( I guess he REALLY wants to sell more books or something, or the ayuayasca told him something he's has misinterpreted or misconstrued...

Like I said in the other thread, thanks and it's not as if it's a giant error on your part, there's no way you could monitor every single thing someone else says 100% of the time. It was more the tone of the post that bothered me than the actual accusation but I accept the apology and won't mention it again.
 
Can we connect Kevin Bacon to any of this? C'mon... these connections are beyond silly.

Can we connect Kevin Bacon to any of this? C'mon... these connections are beyond silly.

Yup... I think from now on, when Christopher comes up with these coincidences (that no doubt are proof of SOMETHING!) I'll dig a little deeper, and see what other strange coincidences could be found.

For example... Did you know that the Dayton accords that put a stop to the civil war in Yugoslavia were also signed on a dec. 14th? Coincidence? Could the Serbs be involved? Also, to make things even stranger, it was EXACTLY nine years after an assassination attempt on Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf. We all know how close the Pakistani and US government work together. It's also six years ago that the US launched spy satellite US193. Hmmmm.... Six and Nine.... We all know how "they" love numbers. Could I be on to something here?

Your turn Christopher! Lets try and keep digging and see what other dirt we can come up with!
 
I'm surprised no-one mentioned this little gem from Dark Knight Rises (unless I missed it):

sandy-hook-batman-dark-knight-rises-01.jpg
 
I'm surprised no-one mentioned this little gem from Dark Knight Rises (unless I missed it):

sandy-hook-batman-dark-knight-rises-01.jpg

You missed it, in fact, you missed the entire thread where we learned that every one of the conspiracies suggested were found to have been manufactured or based on incorrect assumptions. The Sandy Hook part in the Batman movie has nothing to do with anything and makes perfect sense when you consider that in the Nolan universe, Gotham is near New York which is next to New Jersey and there is a place called Sandy Hook in New Jersey. So it has nothing at all to do with any conspiracy.

The title of this thread is appropriate, coincidences, and that's all they are and nothing more. Secretbannana did a good job digging up some more dumb coincidences, lets tie those into the tragedy and exploit it to advance our idiotic conspiracy agenda like the morons in the links in the original post.
 
in fact, you missed the entire thread where we learned that every one of the conspiracies suggested were found to have been manufactured or based on incorrect assumptions.

Oh, I didn't miss that at all - I was just pointing out the thing that I've found to have been brought up the most elsewhere in discussions on this matter that comes with a certain entertainment value - it certainly made me chuckle, even though I personally have zero belief in any of the stated conspiracy theories related to this issue.
 
the creepiest part about the SH tragedy is the coroner, there is something very very wrong with that man.
 
And thats dealt with earlier in the show with the acid test, the final candidate was chosen as being most likely to go under and respond.



But the end result then is he was programed to kill stephen fry, and did so when the preset trigger factors were presented, ie polka dot dress and certain ringtone.

Not recalling he did it, until Brown took the block down after the fact.


I've participated in university experiments on hypnosis and I learned this:
  • You still remember even when told not to remember. You just act like you don't.
  • You can't just tell someone to do things against their nature. You have to fool them into thinking what they are doing doesn't violate their nature.
  • The mental state required to maintain a hypnotic suggestion is very short lived. You would need constant reinforcement to create and maintain something like a "Manturian candidate" if you could even create one using hypnosis.
Anyway just offering my two cents.
 
Just so we can put this offensive conspiracy nonsense to bed, I'd like to present this article from Salon.com tackling and debunking many conspiracy theories surrounding the Sandy Hook shooting. What a surprise that there's nothing to any of them...

Thanks to Burnt State for posting this another thread, I thought it would be good to post it up here as well.

Your comprehensive answer to every Sandy Hook conspiracy theory

Every conspiratorial allegation about the tragic Newtown shootings, answered

By Alex Seitz-Wald
Topics: sandy hook truthers, Sandy Hook Elementary Shooting, Conspiracy theorists, Newtown school shooting, Editor's Picks, Politics News
(Credit: Chimpinski via Shutterstock/Salon)
While it’s often best not to engage with conspiracy theorists on their own turf, as you can probably never convince them, it’s worth setting the record straight on all the myths and phony evidence surrounding the Sandy Hook massacre.
We’ve rounded up every major piece of evidence we could find that leads theorists to say the “official narrative” of events “doesn’t add up” and provided the facts that show why these questions can be easily explained. We’ve ignored the empty accusations with no evidence to support them (it was the Jews!) and focused only on the theories that try to present actual empirical or circumstantial evidence.
Let us know if we missed any and we’ll add to it as more myths emerge. In no particular order, here is your comprehensive guide to disproving the Sandy Hook Truthers:
Why aren’t the adults sadder?They aren’t behaving the way human beings would act,” as conspiracy theorist Jay Weidner told fellow conspiracy theorist Jeff Rense on his radio show. Theorists have zeroed in on Robbie Parker, who they say wasn’t grieving hard enough for his slain 6-year-old daughter, Emilie. In one widely circulated clip, Parker laughs before stepping up to the microphone, and apparently someone says “read from the card” (as in cue card) before Parker breathes heavily in anticipation of beginning a press conference. “This is what actors do to get into character,” one popular YouTube video states. Rense and Weidner also take issue with the mourning of the school nurse, the family of slain teacher Victoria Soto, and others. “ALL ACTORS??? NO TEARS,” wonders the author of SandyHookHoax.com on a page featuring videos with numerous interviews from the shooting.
Answer: People mourn in many different ways, sometimes all at once. As a recent Scientific American article on gref noted, “oscillation between sadness and mirth repeated itself in study after study … Time and again, a grief-stricken person’s expression would change from dejection to laughter and back.” George Bonanno, a psychologist at Columbia University who studies grief, even developed a way to determine if this mourner’s laughter was genuine or merely a facade to hide grief — he determined that they “exhibited the real thing.” Scientists think this is part of our internal resilience mechanisms kicking in, because constant grief is simply too much for a person to handle.​
What about Emilie? One of the most common myths circulated on message boards and in YouTube videos is that Emilie Parker is actually alive. The “proof” is a photo purportedly showing her with President Obama when he visited the school after the shooting. Conspiracists know it’s Emilie because she’s wearing the same dress as the one Emilie wore in a family portrait taken before the shooting (an alternative theory is that the girl in the photo with Obama is her “double”). Other websites take issue with the family portrait, alleging it was Photoshopped for some reason, pointing to the fact that the Emilie is making a “devil’s horns” sign with her hands and “making the devil’s horn hand sign isn’t easy. Try it yourself. Imagine getting a 3- and 4-year-old do it.”
Answer: The girl on Obama’s lap is Emilie’s little sister. It’s amazing that we have to say this, but sometimes younger siblings wear clothes passed down to them from older siblings, and sometimes siblings look alike because they are siblings. And there’s no evidence or even motive given for why the portrait would be Photoshopped. Making a “devil’s horn” gesture is actually incredibly easy. Try it yourself.​
Why do they all look the same? Numerous websites juxtapose pictures of people from Newtown against pictures of similar looking people from Aurora, Colo., and assert they are the same actors.
Answer: Not all women with brown hair are the same person.​
But what about the rifle? Alleged shooter Adam Lanza used a Bushmaster AR-15 assault rifle as his primary weapon, but conspiracist have seized on footage of police removing a long gun from the trunk of Lanza’s car. “This reveals the ‘Big Lie’ of the mainstream media … the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle was left in Lanza’s car,” conspiracy website NaturalNews states in a story picked up by Alex Jones’ InfoWars this week.
Answer: Actually, the gun shown being removed from Lanza’s car was a shotgun he never used. Lanza brought three guns inside the school — the AR-15 and two handguns — all of which were found inside the school.​
How come the memorial pages were created before the shooting? One of the most cited pieces of “hard evidence” in the hoax theory is that memorial pages for the victims were allegedly created before the shooting even took place. Theorists point to Google results giving dates before the shooting for various pages.
Answer: Actually, this is a very common glitch for constricted-date Google searches. The results are imprecise and can often display incorrect dates on the search page, even when the date on the actual page is correct when you click through to it. For instance, here’s a Fox News story on the Sandy Hook shooting that Google says is from Oct. 1, 1983 — how come Fox News didn’t stop the shooting if it had 30 years advance notice???​
What about the car? Early on, theorists latched on to the notion that the black Honda Accord driven by Lanza was not actually owned by his mother, as police say, but by a man named Chris Rodia, who was mentioned on a police scanner at the time of the shooting. One theory is that Rodia may have been an additional shooter. An even more advanced theory is that Rodia may have been taking advantage of mentally ill people like Lanza and using drugs to make them do his bidding.
Answer: This one was debunked by the theorists themselves just a few days after the shooting. Blogger Joe Quinn obtained the police audio, which definitively debunking the myth. (Rodia appeared on the scanner because he was getting pulled over in a traffic stop miles away, but his license plate doesn’t match Lanza’s car). “This was a huge blow, because lots of people were making big leaps on this … but we now have to look elsewhere,” another amateur investigator said on YouTube.​
What about the man in the woods? Central to proving any conspiracy theory is finding co-conspirators, which in this case means multiple shooters. Theorists have seized on helicopter footage of a man getting chased by police through the woods behind the school as evidence there was more than one shooter. Who is this man?
Answer: It was Chris Manfredonia, the father of a 6-year-old who attends the school. He was on his way to the school to make gingerbread houses with first-graders when he heard gunfire and smelled sulfur, so he ran.​
But there was another man in the woods (maybe): Eyewitnesses saw a second man in the woods wearing camouflage pants and a dark jacket, and said that he may have been armed. Must be a second shooter.
Answer: Actually, he was, according to the Newtown Bee, “an off-duty tactical squad police officer from another town” who heard the gunfire.​
What about the third man at the firehouse? Children fleeing the school said they saw a man pinned down on the ground in handcuffs outside the firehouse. Could this be a second or third shooter?
Answer: No, like Manfredonia, this man was briefly detained by police in the hectic aftermath, but quickly released when it was determined he was just a passerby, Connecticut State Police spokesperson Lt. Paul Vance, who was on the scene, confirmed to Salon. “Were there other people detained? The answer is yes. In the height of battle, until you’ve determined who, what, when, where and why of everyone in existence … that’s not unusual,” Vance said.​
Then why did some eyewitnesses report multiple shooters? Theorizers have parsed conflicting media reports and interviews with eyewitnesses saying they saw multiple shooters. How could they be wrong?
Answer: In the stress and confusion of a situation like a mass shooting, misreporting is not just common, but the rule. And there’s a reason eyewitnesses are viewed so skeptically in criminal court cases: They often get things wrong. The Supreme Court has called eyewitness testimony “notoriously unreliable” while the Innocence Project says ”eyewitness misidentification is the single greatest cause of wrongful convictions.” Yet theorists would have you believe that a small handful of media interviews with people on the scene trumps all the other interviews with people there and police and media reports.​
What about that Gene Rosen guy? Theorists have fixated on Rosen’s account of that day and harassed him for it. Rosen sheltered six children during the shooting, but theorists have alternately claimed that Rosen’s accounts are suspiciously too consistent in various interviews he gave, or suspiciously inconsistent. Other people claim Rosen was an actor, because they claim he is a member of the Screen Actors Guild. And what happened to the bus driver? Why did Rosen sit with the kids for hours? Why didn’t he take them to the firehouse down the street where authorities were staging?
Answer: Rosen did invite the bus driver inside and she helped him contact their parents. An early AP report erroneously reported that he sat with the kids for hours, but he told us that the children were only inside his house for about 35 minutes. He did call their parents. Four parents came right away and Rosen took the remaining two to the fire station. Rosen is not a member of SAG (that’s a different Gene Rosen, who is seven years younger).​
But how was the dead principal quoted? Theorists seized on a quote on the shooting in the Newtown Bee from a Sandy Hook principal Dawn Hochsprung, who died in the shooting. How could she have been quoted if she “died”?
Answer: The Bee quickly posted a retraction and an apology: “An early online report from the scene at the December 14 shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School quoted a woman who identified herself to our reporter as the principal of the school. The woman was not the school’s principal, Dawn Hochsprung, who was killed in the Friday morning attack.” Things are confusing in the aftermath.​
What about the LIBOR connection? Early theories posited that the fathers of both Lanza and alleged Aurora shooter James Holmes were set to testify before the Senate on the (real) LIBOR banking scandal. Could bankers have been involved in the shooting to discredit the supposedly explosive testimony set to be given by these two men?
Answer: This one falls apart in just about every way and the hardcore theorists abandoned it weeks ago as a bogus. Ben Swann, the Ohio TV reporter who thinks there were probably multiple shooters at Sandy Hook, investigated and determined there was “no evidence” to support any of the assumptions in the LIBOR theory. TPM also looked into it and found it to be “100% false.” There are no LIBOR hearings scheduled, neither man was selected as a witness, and neither man is in much of a position to deliver an explosive testimony on the scandal anyway.​
Vance said he was disgusted by the conspiracy theories. ”There’s no hoax. I was there. I stepped over the dead children. That’s no hoax. And it’s offensive to me as an investigator, and it’s offensive to the families who lost their babies to have people come up with silliness like this. Whatever their reasoning is, whatever their rationale is, it’s just terribly offensive,” Vance added.
 
this guy seems normal until he starts answering questions. watch the whole thing, he is goofy as hell.
 
Since we are on the subject of *spooky music looms ominously* conspiracies, don't forgot to tune into this week's Paracast episode for the king of Parapolitics/Conspiracy Steamshovel Press' Kenn Thomas. Can't wait to see the thread it generates!
 

Are you serious? The guy laughs too much and has strange answers. Considering the gravity of the situation, I would think that a most sombre expression and speech is only fitting. When I watched it I just thought no wonder this guys practices this side of medicine. He is no doubt a loner and has a terrible bedside manner. I'm not saying all pathologists are weird etc but most people study medicine to work and heal the living. A medical examiner is indeed an important and difficult job - it's just that it probably suits some personalities than others. You rang?
 
Back
Top