How to make sense of Conspiracy Theories - pt 1 of 9

[89DukeNukem]

CONSPIRACY

CON= LIE

SPIRACY= SPIRAL

=SPIRAL OF LIES

TRUTHIRACY IS WHAT IM ON

[CzechAvailabilitie]

Thankfully the authorities are far too incompetent to pull off too many actual conspiracies. Just look at Iran-Contra and Watergate.

[robag88]

@CzechAvailabilitie It's difficult to tell. The ones that get exposed are ... well the ones that get exposed. I'm not sure the number of ones that don't get exposed can be easily estimated by comparison.

[LifePsyop]

@CzechAvailabilitie "Thankfully the authorities are far too incompetent to pull off too many actual conspiracies. Just look at Iran-Contra and Watergate."

These alleged conspiracies were "exposed" or brought to public light, by the Media (now globally controlled by 7 corporations) And look at their effect.  The average person will point to Watergate and say "See? Real conspiracies get exposed." But is that true?

[mindarinas]

what's with creepy music in the backroud?

[robag88]

@mindarinas Just something to add a little atmos. It's a long video.

[ma049]

Arrrrrrgh, I didn't mean to say "genuine conspiracy theory" I should have said "conspiracy theory that was confirmed as genuine".

[ma049]

Ok I will have a crack.

Conspiracy Theory

A claim that the true causes of a historically significant event have been concealed from the public by a conspiracy.

Example of a genuine conspiracy theory would be the Soviet attempts to cover up the massacre of Polish officers captured by the Red Army in 1939.

Examples of conspiracy theories that I find unconvincing? how long have you got.

[robag88]

@ma049 The list can be very long for both :)

[dportela]

Hi Rob. Just wanted to let you know I'm really enjoying this series. The only suggestion I'd make is to make sure your textual elements have the appropriate contrast to their background, to aid in readability. For instance, your embossed titles with the blue glow sacrifice sharp edges around each character. And your lists during the definitions part show black text on a dark background. Crisp white (or lighter-colored) text would be much more readable in both these situations. But that's just a

[robag88]

@dportela Thanks, yeah I got lazy in places. It's such a long video to edit and I'm working on Dr Strangelove film analysis at the same time :)

[DoctorEeam]

Great stuff Rob! I just wanted to add there is more to the issue of definitions than just words like conspiracy theorist. Lately it seems that there are steady declarations that confuse "fact" and "opinion." When the opinionated make statements that say facts are opinions is where we begin to get into a lot of trouble. If u say 2+2=4, and someone argues that's your opinion. The implications of this are very disturbing just because there is so much of it.

[Nightmonkey17]

As you mention, there are a set of conspiracies throughout history than have been widely accepted as "true". These can act as a model for the judgement and analysis of all conspiracy theories. If they do not fit the criteria and protocol for the "revelation" of previously exposed conspiracies, they must be rejected or at best labelled as "unknown."

This makes people uncomfortable, because nobody likes being in a position of ignorance, but a truely scientific mind knows what it does not know.

[robag88]

@Nightmonkey17 Well put :)

[Hewpie]

I've had a fascinating experience arguing with someone about the moon landing conspiracy theory. I just started trolling (as you do...) with the idea that the moon landings must have been filmed in the earth's mantle to account for the low gravitational field, and a MLCT debunker took my arguements seriously. I found myself becoming more and more fixated with winning this arguement and, to all intents and purposes turned into a conspiracy theorist against my better intellectual judgement.

[robag88]

@Hewpie That's a strange thing to do :) I'd say you're already a conspiracy theorist like everyone else, but you just happened to take on another conspiracy belief.

[Nerudah]

why the 88 in your username?

[robag88]

@Nerudah The name robag was taken so I punched in a random double digit after it as many people do. Some people think the number 88 is always a symbol of neo-nazism (as opposed to its many other uses), but you won't find any support of racism or fascism in my work.

[Nerudah]

@robag88 Not always but most of the time. Despite the 'many' other uses, on the net almost 9 times out of 10 it are neo-nazi's who use it. I'm glad I won't find any support of racism or fascism in your work. I hope the same goes outside of it.

[robag88]

@Nerudah What makes you say it's 9 times out of 10? Do a Google search of '88' and look at the top 100 or so links, most are businesses that happen to have the number 88 in their name, but nothing to do with racism. I'd say it's more like 1 time out of 10 :)

[Nerudah]

@robag88 I was talking about usernames on the net. Sorry about the confusion. If you count the people who were born in '88 estimates are lower off course. With them included maybe we can find a compromise in a 5/10?^^

[robag88]

@Nerudah You can't do a search of usernames so what's the point in assuming a compromise? You could simply look for racist videos, find the ones using 88 in their name and then assume that most who have 88 in their names are racists, but that would be idiocy. So you go to the next best option - search on google and youtube for the number 88 - result, most instances are nothing to do with racism.

[robag88]

@Nerudah Outside of it?

[Nerudah]

@robag88 of your work..yes..

[robag88]

@Nerudah Are you an idiot? I've produced hundreds of articles and videos on all kinds of topics and when I do cover political issues I'm extremely anti fascist and anti-racist. Why would I do all that and then contradict it in the rest of my life? In hindsight I'm actually glad I put the number 88 in my username. It shows up the assumptions of people unable to cross reference information before making accusations.

[Nerudah]

@robag88 I've been a subscriber for quite some time now but I'm afraid I haven't seen any of those. It's just that lately I've come across quite a few people who used the 88 as a support for Adolf Hitler. And I had to ask. To respond to your question, I've been called many things but never an idiot.

[robag88]

@Nerudah Well, like I said if you're looking at neonazi type vids specifically you may get that impression. You may be offended at being inferred an idiot (not that I think you really are), but you were inferring me some sort of neo nazi based on nothing more than an incidental number :)

[Frikozome]

Who stands to gain from the vagueness of the definition "conspiracy theory" I wonder..!? Who's has the power?

[happosai27]

i really wonder what you think about anthony sutton and his books. his views about history are very "controversial" and well worked out. i mean he got all his stuff from archives only. no hearsay or the usual bad sources

[robag88]

@happosai27 There's a page on my site recommending his work. I've not found any evidence of poor research on his part. And a lot of it has been rediscovered by other archive researchers since.

[nusquamesse1248]

Thank you. Very well rationalized and reasonable.

[klard]

The true definition that most people have for a "conspiracy theorist" is someone who they disagree with.

[Nagneto]

The moment they mention Jewish Space Lizard, it's bullshit.

[anthonyjthorne]

Donald Rumsfeld was US Ambassador to NATO in Belgium at the height of the Gladio terrorist atrocities - killings which Italian PM Giulio Andreotti later attributed to NATO-linked stay-behind mercenaries and the CIA - and Rumsfeld later served on Team B (the Committee for the Present Danger) during the Carter admin with ex Joint Chiefs head Lyman Lemnizter, himself co-architect of the green-lighted Northwoods plan to kill US citizens in a mock Castro 'terror' attack.

[ccheng21]

@anthonyjthorne the 2 words that make any conspiracy theorist go on the defense and resort to insults:

prove it

[anthonyjthorne]

@ccheng21 Prove what? Everything I mentioned is true. Do I need to 'prove' that Rumsfeld was a NATO ambassador when I said he was?  Since you asked though, let's go through it sentence by sentence.

"Donald Rumsfeld was US Ambassador to NATO in Belgium at the height of the Gladio terrorist atrocities" -

Rumsfeld's wikipedia mentions he became ambassador in Feb 1973. Check the 'Operation Gladio' wiki and the early 70's attacks are circa the same period.

[ccheng21]

@anthonyjthorne I am not here to debate any specific conspiracy theory, rather the general principles and parts of how conspiracy theories ultimately cannot make sense because they rely on flawed logic.

You can throw out as many conspiracy theories all you like but I am not going to address them.

[theawecabinet]

@ccheng21 "..You can throw out as many conspiracy theories all you like but I am not going to address them.."

This is a very good example of how the term 'CT' can be redefined and used to justify not debating a subject which threatens one's world view, agenda or argument.

Note how the sentence automatically implies CT's are a form of 'spam'.

You can replace the words 'CT' in ccheng21's sentence with 'contradictory evidence' ... 'counter argument' ...'information I really want to ignore' ..etc

[robag88]

@theawecabinet ccheng21 has been posting attempted rebuttals on my videos going back quite a while. He/she disagrees with pretty much everything I put up, but always comes back for more. When I find a channel I don't like I ignore it ... or if it's an issue I feel strongly about then i produce an article or vid of my own on the subject and put my name and face to it.

[theawecabinet]

@robag88 Yeah, I kind of got that vibe ... but I couldn't resist pointing out what a brilliant example ccheng21 was providing in terms of how the term 'CT' is (mis)used in everyday conversations, debates, forums etc.

Ditto with my other comment I just made.

I believe there is wisdom to be found even in troll behaviour! ;)

[anthonyjthorne]

You did ask me to 'prove it', and I think I provided more than enough factual back-up. I'm not bothered if you don't address the comments I made as my original statement was thrown in out of nowhere, but be aware that not every allegation made regarding western covert policy and the activities of the security state is a 'conspiracy theory' in the pejorative sense. Governments and intelligence agencies don't necessarily promote all their activities with a press release on the nightly news.

[anthonyjthorne]

"killings which Italian PM Giulio Andreotti later attributed to NATO-linked stay-behind mercenaries and the CIA" - Andreotti revealed this to the Italian parliament on 24th October 1990 - it caused the biggest political scandal in Europe in years, sparked enquiries in several countries, was the subject of a 3 part UK BBC 'Timewatch' documentary in 1992 (all on Youtube), and is exhaustively documented in Daniele Ganser's NATO'S SECRET ARMIES. Not particularly a secret then.

[anthonyjthorne]

"and Rumsfeld later served on Team B (the Committee for the Present Danger) during the Carter admin with ex Joint Chiefs head Lyman Lemnizter" - the Team B members are well known and have been written about in numerous mainstream political histories from the left and right. Richard Pipes, Wolfowitz and Paul Nitze were other members. The committee is discussed in depth in the BBC POWER OF NIGHTMARES documentary - the Wiki entry for 'Team B' has 40 footnotes, again thoroughly documented.

[anthonyjthorne]

"Lemnizter, himself co-architect of the green-lighted Northwoods plan to kill US citizens in a mock Castro 'terror' attack" - Operation Northwoods was revealed via FOI documentation in the 90's and first discussed in James Bamford's BODY OF SECRETS. Pretty much every Cold War history written since Bamford's book makes reference to the Northwoods documents, though many differ on the import. Lemnitzer's role in the drafting of the documents is again not disputed.

[anthonyjthorne]

Amazingly enough the words 'prove it' don't particularly make my knees shake with defensive terror when everything in my original paragraph is (a.) backed up with numerous references, and (b.) already well-known to anyone that has studied US cold war history. Watch the BBC documentary on Gladio where they interview the NATO mercenaries who were originally part of it on camera. All I did was lay out already known facts. It's the implications of it that seem to make others feel 'defensive'.

[Broooose]

thats great, I just burned up 5 minutes listening to this guy read a dictionary. I'll never get that time back...

[robag88]

@Broooose Well, if your thinking really is that limited then I doubt you'd have done anything else useful with your 5 mins.

The very obvious point was to establish whether there's an official consensus on what constitutes a "conspiracy theory". Without taking that basic step the whole video would have no grounding.

[Nerudah]

@robag88 "anything else useful with your 5 mins" *slap* +1

[ccheng21]

imdbstar is already showing the trademarks of conspiracy theory lunacy.

Strawman argument: Making facts seem weak or distorting them completely deliberately difficult to defend, ie his statement of 2 planes bringing 3 buildings down.

Its not difficult to point to where the truth may lead, sure we may not ever get 100% of the truth, but its not like both sides in this are right, there's the side with proof and there's the side with less proof.

To find the loosing side, look for the fallacies.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 Lol you talk about straw man but your statement was framed using the straw man. I could wave a well respected academic "conspiracy theorist"'s name about too, but it wouldn't prove my point.

Anyway you acknowledged many debates are difficult to prove 100%, which I agree with because it's very difficult to apply science (mathematics )to psychology and art. So are you saying you can't prove your "conspiracy theorist" stereotype? Is there a statistical test you've done?

[roflmewaffles]

@ccheng21 Buddy, you've clearly lost this debate. Just quit.

[sanchopanza123]

@ccheng21 that is right everyone is wrong and you are right!! world problems are solved!! where can we buy your book? I know some people that may be right but just because they cant make some logical statement due to a defect in their brain or miscommunication . I have discarded their point completely and labeled them as "wrong" because they are not 100% right! I love logical brains :) so thanks I know. to find the losing side I should find the one with less fallacies. Awesome! I need a notepad

[ccheng21]

And with people already starting to bring up "examples" of Conspiracy Theories, the Logical Fallacies are already starting to leak through:

Strawmen Arguments, Ad Hominems, red herrings, the lot.

[imdbstar]

@ccheng21 , you would have to provide more substantiated evidence to say that all conspiracy theories are in fact nothing but BULL. to do that you can pick some famous examples of these theories and explain why they are lunatic. there is no use of repeatedly using words like strawmen arguments, ad hominems, etc without actually giving a real answer.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 Again that's you using the straw man and you've provided lots of logical fallacies yourself, but you won't say what you really mean ... which as far as I can tell is that you believe everyone should never question power institutions because to do so is crazy? Am I wrong? If I am then please prove me wrong by listing a series of issues upon which you think power institutions have engaged in conspiracy.

[ccheng21]

@robag88 actually you are wrong, What you're basically just saying, pointing to me and saying my explanations are just "equally conspiratorial" is basically fancy wording for "I know you are but what am I?"

That a presumption to the False Dichotomy fallacy, setting up the incorrect and false premise that there are only 2 sides to any argument, and devoting your time to proving one wrong, makes you right by default.

Read up on logical fallacies, and you'll see how they are used.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 You're using straw man yet again, misrepresenting my argument and then knocking down your false version, while falsely laying claim to the False Dichotomy Fallacy. Meanwhile you're avoiding my question. Do you believe that everyone should never question power institutions because to do so is crazy? If that isn't your belief then demonstrate it by stating what issues people should question power institutions on. Answer the question or I'll block you for wasting my time.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 No answer. Exactly as I expected. Blocked.

[StormingSheep]

@robag88 LOL U MAD?

[robag88]

@StormingSheep Very quick response. ccheng21 with another youtube channel? I think so.

[MrHerbicat]

In the USA crimials are often charged with a conspiracy to commit a crime as well as the actual crime. These accused are not usually powerful people, but the judicial system recognizes that the crime was planned.

[MrHerbicat]

In the Anglo-sphere government and big business/media want to make the term altogether negative; implying that those who accept the possible existence of conspiracy theories are kooks.  Their language tells their motives. Those who demand 9/11 truth are ridiculed as "Truthers" which seeks to ridicule those who care about truth rather than deny the validity. Lots of words tell. Fire Fighters fight fires what do freedom fighters fight?

Good work again! I look forward to see 4-9.

[Lomito]

what music are you using? haha its really creepy and effective.

[robag88]

@Lomito thanks. they're a few little pieces of my own

[lumpyfishful]

GREAT VIDEO

[GeneralVariety]

sometimes if I'm having a hard time trying to write an essay, I come and watch some of your videos to get me in the mood :L haha great work as always

[MrSpoon123]

i really should read through what i write befor i post >.>

[therealcellardoor]

WTC7

[GuitarHeroPhenomSux]

I thought you guys put "UK" at the end of your urls. Not "COM".

[robag88]

@GuitarHeroPhenomSux It can be either

[MrSpoon123]

P.s conspiracy theories is simply an opposing argument / idea from the "offical" explanation.

Has nothing to do with evidence or not.

in the raw sense.

[ccheng21]

@MrSpoon123 raw sense still has to have some foundation in logic or something that makes sense to you.

Conspiracies don't make sense unless you completely suspend logical thinking.

[MrSpoon123]

still to watch it all the way though (which i will very shortly).

its just very nice to have something pop up for me on subs. Tha has nothing to do with distraction , but infact promotes investigation, and investigating your own perceptions.

To be sure of our own methods we must be our own worst critics. (even tho more often then not who we percieve ourselves to be is far from what reality is)

Peace+Love

p.s any more feature length films in the pipe line ?

[robag88]

@MrSpoon123 I haven't had the time to do a final cut of Turn In Your Grave yet, much less seriously promote it or approach distributors. It's def not abandoned though. Even if I end up distributing it online myself or even posting it on here, it will be out there eventually :)

[MrSpoon123]

@robag88 as always ill be looking out for your future videos. may i assume you watched 4later or at least have been made aware of the scheduale ?

i have been harrasing channel 4 for yrs to replay 4later, either on tv or via web.

some of the short storys/animation on there were fantastic. much more pleasening them almost all feaature lengths. i have been trying to find information on such shorts but thus they avoid my detection so far.

[DragonYearJoji]

my impression: not listed below intelligent cogent

Come on Youtube - try harder

Thanks Rob looking forward to the rest :)

[slintirreg]

I just wanted to say: those newspaper in rapid succession were hard on my eyes. That aside: strong start. I look forward to the rest of it.

[entiesean]

<3 you so much rob ager. your vids are so intelligent and are such a pleasure to watch. they really make me think. please, keep doing what you're doing

[ashen078]

You always make very interesting videos, but the music is very creepy.

[morelshaman]

Very nicely structured beginning - i look forward to the remainder.

I have many conspiratorial ideas that maybe be codified into either broader well-accepted forms or exist only in my thinking. I have no power of money, can i be a conspiracy of one. I know a cabal takes multiple entities. I know a theory is a set of facts or ideas that either attempt to prove a point or are already accepted to do so, i.e. economic, evolution, gravitation, etc. vs. aliens, zog, jfk, god.

[BinaryBunyip]

Ok cool... The people that preform illegal acts & get away with it, are NOT secret. They are in positions of power & gloat about their progress. Some of them just use sly terms to confuse the majority of people. That's all they need.

Sometimes they don't lie, they just don't mention important details. Nor do they care because they own the debt. Which again is no secret to anyone who researches & experiences certain things in life.

[ccheng21]

hmmm the title is quite the contradiction.

A conspiracy theory in its very nature cannot be logically made sense out of.

Conspiracy Theories depend heavily on illogical arguments and real stretches of imagination. The steps in a Conspiracy Theory do not line up in any way that would make sense, and by their very nature, Conspiracy Theories cannot be logically analyzed because they always fall apart.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 That's a mainstream media induced assumption. Do we call scientists illogical every time they present a theory? Nope. Do we call the government tin foil hat wearing loons when they present their conspiracy theories about rogue nations and WMDs? Nope. The most dangerous conspiracy theories are those disseminated to promote war.

[ccheng21]

@robag88 actually I base my statement on pure logic, rational thinking, and evidence based reasoning.

Conspiracy theories more than often rely on the "god of the gaps" argument, filling in an unknown with simply another unknown, and usually with a strong sense of paranoia involved, is usually how conspiracy theories work, from the moon landing denials to the 9/11 "Truth" movement.

Evidence based thinking relies on, well...evidence. And when the evidence is produced, we get the truth.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 Everybody thinks their statements come from evidence based reasoning, but your definition of a conspiracy theory as being "more often" or "usually" irrational and lacking in evidence mismatches the dictionary terms of what actually constitutes a conspiracy theory. It also mismatches the legal use of the word conspiracy. When a case of "conspiracy to commit X" fails to secure a conviction the prosecution aren't put on record as conspiracy theorists for having put the case forward.

[ccheng21]

@robag88 then it is up to the Conspiracy Theorists to prove their point, based on whatever conspiracy hypothesis they are supporting.

The one making the claim has to be the one who finds evidence to support their position.

Conspiracy theories are more about attacking the official story, rather than proving their own point and this points to a false dichotomy: prove the other side wrong then you are right, by default.

But truth doesn't work that way. Proof has to support you.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 YOU are a conspiracy theorist. We all are. The official stories of WMDs in Iraq, Al Queda sleeper cells, the holocaust, communist infiltration etc are all conspiracy theories because there are elements of them that are not proven, yet are assumed by some officials and journalists as fact. You're advocating an anti free speech stereotype to shield political and corporate institutions (who are also conspiracy theorists) from scrutiny. That's undemocratic and irresponsible.

[ccheng21]

@robag88 Its interesting also, that conspiracy theorists tend to make illogical attacks, and often get EXTREMELY hostile and insulting when they find their points of view are under attack. 9/11 "Truthers" are a prime example of this.

Whereas the logical mind discards all those ad homimems and logical fallacies, and instead, resorts strictly to evidence and rational based thinking, based heavily on the scientific method and skeptical analysis.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 I disagree. Initial responses to 911 were intensely emotional at a point where the vast majority didn't even question the official story. Based upon your assumption that expression of emotion is evidence of irrationality (itself a logical fallacy) by default you must assume that belief in the official 911 story was wrong. That would make you a 911 truther.

[robag88]

@robag88 By the same token would you say that anyone who feels emotional about what happened in the holocaust has got their facts wrong?

And we both know that calling someone a "conspiracy theorist" just because they question their government is a hostile insult. Yet you claim that people who resort to insults do so because they are illogical and can't defend their views. Your use of the insulting term "conspiracy theorist" automatically puts your logic and motive in question.

[ccheng21]

@robag88 And don't forget, that logic, evidence and reason, are rarely ever found in the fields of business or politics. In Business and Politics, we all know that the truth, is completely irrelevant and Rhetoric rules the day.

Its not about the truth, its about what you can convince people to support, usually by using any logical fault and psychologically pleasing argument.

WMD's in Iraq, Al Queda sleeper cells, these are fear tactics but are hardly logical.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 Thank you. You've just expressed a conspiracy theory of your own, one which I agree with.

[ccheng21]

@robag88 heh but its not a conspiracy since there is evidence in basic logic to support it. Its an explanation of something that has plausible evidence and rational thinking to support it. Its a Logical Theory perhaps but certainly not one of a conspiratorial nature.

First aspect that you forget, is that all conspiracy theories have a strong sense of paranoia behind them. There is no paranoia behind logic.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 You believe your opinions on politics and business are completely logical, but you can't prove them beyond a shadow of a doubt. Your belief fits the paranoid and irrational "conspiracy theorist" stereotype that you're promoting. You can't even prove that "conspiracy theorists" (a made up term that has little place in reality) are universally paranoid. Nor can you prove that paranoia and logic never go together. If they did then we wouldn't have national security.

[ccheng21]

@robag88 Truth is extremely difficult to prove, yes. There are very few absolute truths beyond perhaps the field of mathematics that is 100% provable.

Scientific Theories are based on massive amounts of evidence that form, on their own, a cohesive and logical step from A to B to C etc...

There may be some "evidence" for Conspiracies, but more than often their evidence is far less concrete. They rely more on conjecture and bending of facts.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 More often than not as wrong 51% of the time or 99.5% of the time? And are you taking into account all the conspiracy theories expressed by governments, political parties, the media, court rooms and corporate boards?

[ccheng21]

@robag88 I'm taking into account when the facts don't line up, but still one group or the other is promoting it as more true.

The Government can be wrong, its not always right. The Government is not infallible, neither are corporations. But it is also vital to know, that "Truth" movements are also vulnerable to the same faults, and they are not right, out of sheer virtue of being either Anti-Government or Anti-Corporate.

I suggest following the facts and keeping a LOGICAL brain open.

[robag88]

@ccheng21 Straw man again. You're misrepresenting my argument. At no point have I claimed that conspiracy theory movements aren't vulnerable to being wrong or that being anti-corporate or anti-government is right by default.

What you're talking about is when you personally believe the facts don't line up you think it gives you the right to brand your opponent as crazy. You don't have a monopoly on logic and rationality.

[imdbstar]

@ccheng21 so you think that the 9/11 story of 2 planes bringing down 3 buildings(in fact even the 'story' of the 2 planes bringing down the 2 buildings they crashed into doesn't conform to structural mechanics) is based on pure logic, rational thinking and evidence based reasoning??

[playadominical]

@ccheng21 there is nothing contradictory about the title. a logical assessment can be done on any claim, and this is just one way that philosophers can "make sense" of a claim, theory or argument. how can you know an "argument is illogical", as you say, without trying to make sense of it to begin with? you should read some books on the subject by kitcher and godfrey-smith to get a better understanding of the philosophy of science and how it works.

[Fistwagon]

@ccheng21 So by your definition the christians actually did burn down Rome and emperor Nero was just a misunderstood fella. Atleast thats the official story. It sounds like you have an agenda against something.

[goozbaghali]

Rob you way too many Mind Fuck backgrounds. I felt dizzy just watching the video.

great vid!

[wdsa8d]

you're one of my favourite youtubers

[VikTalks]

What is the music in the video?

[robag88]

@VikTalks It's from my feature film Turn In Your Grave. I did a ton of ambient music for the film and a lot of it is going into these vids too. I just thought it would be nice to spice the sound up rather then just have an endless.

[mahender6969]

I CAN TELL THIS GOING TO BE DAME GOOD, I FEEL LIKE ALL YOUR VIDEO IS BEING LEADING TO THIS.

[hozayamz]

The first person to mention "conspiracy theory" in the course of an argument is destined to betray all the pseudo-logic of deep social programming. Uttering "Adolf Hitler" forfeits any debate spectacularly. Popularity is no argument whatsoever- Marcus Aurelius mentions this specifically. I look forward to robagg88's vids like I once did the "offerings" of Hollywood- can't wait. . .

[TaffyRaphie]

STANLEY KUBRICK FILMED THE FAKE MOON LANDING!!!!

now tell me how I'm right! :)

haha, looking forward to the rest of this

[JaziB]

Conspiracy theory: Rob Ager isn't real

[robag88]

@JaziB You must be right. I strangely find myself unable to respond :)

[TheZaius]

@JaziB Of course Rob's real.

His English accent, however...

[HankLafayette]

The intro music reminded me of the intro music for The Shining. Coming from you, I cannot think this is a coincidence. Looking forward to more.

[HoboJIm117]

What a teaser.

I'll be sure to tune in.

[thumminxy]

Really looking forward to the rest of this Rob!

[BlackopsChamp1000]

Neeeds more views and subs

[Slushyyy639]

Awsome!

[carnagex64]

Keep em coming :) Love your videos.