top of page

What is (and what is not) a conspiracy theory?

example of something that IS a conspiracy theory:

That there is a plot to use the overturning of traditional moral and family values to help bring in a New World Order dictatorship.


In the often banned documentary called "Sodom" by Arkady Mamontov  an as yet unproven theory is put forward that dark sinister forces, plotting to take over the world with a New World Order, are deliberately attacking the traditional moral values and family values of the world, as part of a broader shake-up of almost everything in society, so that "new things" need to replace them. I think the only reason this documentary is presently able to be viewed on YouTube is because it is not named as a video title "The documentary Sodom by Arkady Mamontov"



YouTube: ​


One other piece of supporting evidence for this conspiracy theory, proffered by Arkady Mamontov, might be argued to be the fact that banks are now starting to advertise the ambiguous concept that they "support LGBTQ+" without clarifying what aspect or aspects of the many attempts by the movement to justify or legalise they so called "support". Do they support men identifying as women winning medals in the female Olympic Games events? Trans queens reading stories to children in schools? 250 pound men with beards wearing dresses entering female toilets to "exercise their human right to change their tampons"? If the only thing they mean by this is that homosexuals should not be denied work etc they should say so. But why pick on sexual issues to advertise? I for one definitely think a bank should be non partisan and neutral. Because something is legal does not mean it is not considered a sin. Abortion, homosexuality and adultery and fornication are all considered legal in most countries of the world, but that does not mean that many religious people do not consider those things to be sins. Will banks next advertise on their bank machines their views about abortion?     

Example of something that is NOT a conspiracy theory:

That 5G may be bad for health, in either humans, animals, or both.

If positive proof was ever produced that 5G is bad for human health, it would not necessarily involve conspiracy on the part of anyone, just perhaps misassessment or a lack of relevant new science data. And saying 5G positively is bad for human health without enough evidence, does not mean the person saying it is necessarily involved in a conspiracy of some kind, simply once again misassessing the situation, maybe overcautious. In this situation the phrase "conspiracy theory" is just being used to malign people, or label people, when the more accurate phrase "unproven theory" does not "do the job properly" when the "job" in mind is to slap a stigmatising label on certain people.

The thing is 5G does have a lot of conspiracy theories about it out there. But the people who simply believe it may be bad for human health are not quoting a conspiracy theory, and should not be unjustly labelled as such.

(under conspruction)

bottom of page