Placeholder Content Image

Princess Kate's post-surgery pic ignites even wilder conspiracy theories

<p>In a recent revelation that has the internet buzzing, Kensington Palace released a brand new photo of the Princess of Wales alongside her adorable brood, but it seems like the royal family might be playing with more than just thrones and crowns.</p> <p>The picture, meant to express gratitude to the public for their support during Catherine's recovery from abdominal surgery, quickly became a subject of speculation, leaving royal enthusiasts scratching their heads and raising eyebrows faster than you can say "corgi".</p> <p>The image, which features Catherine sitting and embracing her children – Prince Louis, Prince George and Princess Charlotte – in the scenic backdrop of Windsor, seems like a wholesome Mother's Day tribute at first glance. However, upon closer inspection, the cracks in this picture-perfect façade begin to show.</p> <p>Social media erupted with theories faster than a racehorse at Ascot. Some eagle-eyed observers speculated that the photo might have been the handiwork of artificial intelligence, citing suspiciously green grass and leaves in the dead of winter, a rarity even in England where the weather is as unpredictable as a teenage royal's romantic interests.</p> <p>"AI is that you?" asked one astute commentator on Instagram, voicing the suspicions of many.</p> <blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/C4U_IqTNaqU/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"> </div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;"> <div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: 8px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: auto;"> <div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"> </div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/C4U_IqTNaqU/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by The Prince and Princess of Wales (@princeandprincessofwales)</a></p> </div> </blockquote> <p>"Ummmmm, this photo looks doctored…" wrote another astute reader. "Catherine’s right hand around Louis is entirely blurry but the left hand around Charlotte, at the same distance to the camera, is not, and either is Louis’ jumper around the hand blurry. Also Charlotte’s dress, which is clothing her torso behind her arm, impedes on the sleeve at the wrist… the cardigan sleeve shows the dress in front of it, when it should only be behind. And Louis’ middle finger must be awfully long to be entirely wrapped around the next finger without being able to see the finger nail… it’s also blurry. I’m a keen photographer, and those are not true elements of a photo as taken."</p> <p>But wait, there's more! The absence of Catherine's wedding ring did not escape the notice of keen observers, prompting questions about the state of her marriage. "WHERE'S YOUR RING??!" demanded one fan, while another pondered, "no ring, tree in full bloom in winter, jeans after major abdominal surgery, face shape completely different from car photo."</p> <p>And if that wasn't enough to fuel the royal gossip mill, Prince Louis's peculiar finger-crossing gesture sent conspiracy theorists into overdrive. Is he sending secret messages? Or is it just further evidence that we're all living in a simulation run by an eccentric royal fan with a knack for Photoshop?</p> <p><span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;">Additionally, a subtle misalignment in Princess Charlotte's hand compared to her jumper sleeve raised clear suspicions of digital manipulation. As the speculation grew louder, four of the world's largest photo agencies – The Associated Press, AFP, Getty Images and Reuters – issued a "mandatory kill notice", on the image, effectively retracting it from circulation.</span></p> <p>The reasons cited varied slightly among the agencies, with mentions of "editorial issues" and inconsistencies in the photograph's details. The decision to retract the photo wasn't taken lightly; it's a standard protocol for picture agencies to withdraw images that have been significantly altered.</p> <p>The reaction on social media was swift, with royal watchers and media personalities dissecting the image for clues. Chris Ship, ITV News's royal editor, shared close-up sections of the photo, highlighting apparent discrepancies in Charlotte's sleeve, Prince Louis's jumper, and the background behind him. His commentary underscored the seriousness of the situation, questioning Kensington Palace – the source of the photo – about the authenticity of the image.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">I’ve never been much of a conspiracy theorist but if <a href="https://twitter.com/AP?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AP</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/AFP?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AFP</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/Reuters?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Reuters</a> &amp; other picture agencies are concerned enough to remove it and ask clients to delete it, there are serious questions for Kensington Palace - which was the source of the photo.<br />These appears to be the issues 👇 <a href="https://t.co/ifcSB9mUzu">https://t.co/ifcSB9mUzu</a> <a href="https://t.co/bH5gN9fJtJ">pic.twitter.com/bH5gN9fJtJ</a></p> <p>— Chris Ship (@chrisshipitv) <a href="https://twitter.com/chrisshipitv/status/1766947758529822803?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 10, 2024</a></p></blockquote> <p>Amidst the fervent speculation, Kensington Palace remained silent, neither confirming nor denying the allegations of photo manipulation. The lack of clarity has only fuelled the fire, leading to further conjecture about the intentions behind the controversial image.</p> <p>In a world where every pixel is scrutinised and every detail dissected, the royal family's attempt at a heartwarming family photo has turned into a comedic saga worthy of a Shakespearean farce.</p> <p>As the internet continues to buzz with speculation, one thing is for certain: when it comes to the royals, truth is often stranger than fiction. Or in this case, more digitally manipulated than reality TV.</p> <p><em>Image: Instagram</em></p>

Caring

Placeholder Content Image

Palace responds to bizarre conspiracy theories about Kate's whereabouts

<p>Kensington Palace has spoken out after a wave of unhinged conspiracy theories flooded social media to speculate on Kate Middleton's whereabouts. </p> <p>It's been several days since "Where is Kate Middleton?" first started trending worldwide on social media, as concerned royal fans were quick to notice the Princess of Wales hasn't been seen in public since Christmas Day. </p> <p>The 42-year-old royal underwent a “planned abdominal surgery” in January, and while Kensington Palace said at the time that she would be out of action until “at least Easter”, social media users have continued to share their <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/health/caring/kate-middleton-s-disappearance-sparks-bizarre-conspiracy-theories" target="_blank" rel="noopener">bizarre theories</a> about where she is.</p> <p>Now, as the insane theories have gained massive traction, Kensington Palace has shared a statement to advise royal fans that the Princess is simply recovering after her operation. </p> <p>The Palace reiterated their original statement, writing,  “We were very clear from the outset that the Princess of Wales was out until after Easter and Kensington Palace would only be providing updates when something was significant.”</p> <p>"That guidance stands."</p> <p>The Palace also added that Kate is well on the road to recovery as she is "doing well", and with all things going to plan with her health, she can be expected to be seen in public after Easter, as they originally made clear. </p> <p>Prince William has also spoken about his wife's recovery journey, as he met with 94-year-old Holocaust survivor Renee Salt during an emotional meeting at a synagogue in London. </p> <p>"I'm sure that if your wife would've been well, she would've been here," Salt told Prince William, before offering her "best wishes" to the Princess. </p> <p>While holding her hand, Prince William said Salt's words were "very sweet" and promised to pass on her regards to his wife.</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images </em></p>

Caring

Placeholder Content Image

Kate Middleton's "disappearance" sparks bizarre conspiracy theories

<p dir="ltr">Social media is alight with wild conspiracy theories about Kate Middleton's whereabouts, after many royal fans noticed it has been several weeks since she has been seen. </p> <p dir="ltr">The last time the Princess of Wales was photographed was on Christmas Day as she attended a morning church service with her family in tow. </p> <p dir="ltr">Now, six weeks after Kate was <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/health/caring/two-senior-royals-undergo-surgery" target="_blank" rel="noopener">admitted to hospital</a> for a “planned abdominal surgery”, concerned royal fans have speculated about the state of her health, despite Kensington Palace saying they would only be providing updates when there is "significant new information to share." </p> <p dir="ltr">After the Princess was released from hospital, the Palace went on to say that she would be recovering at home and would not be returning to official royal duties until “after Easter”. </p> <p dir="ltr">However, when Prince William cancelled a royal engagement earlier this week due to a “personal matter”, many were quick to assume he was tending to his wife and her poor health. </p> <p dir="ltr">Social media users were quick to jump on this theory, only fuelling the fire of the “Where’s Kate?” question by adding in their own unhinged theories about why she has gone unseen for all of 2024 so far.</p> <p dir="ltr">Speculation on X, formerly Twitter, ranged from serious concern for Kate's wellbeing to hilarious theories, with one user writing, "I have fallen down the ‘Where is Kate Middleton’ rabbit hole and I need someone to come take me out immediately. It’s wild down here."</p> <p dir="ltr">Most were lighthearted in their claims, with one popular conspiracy being that Kate was in hiding to grow out a bad haircut, while others shared that she is simply seeking solace in a hidden corner of the Palace away from her three kids. </p> <p dir="ltr">With “Where is Kate Middleton” in the number one trending spot on X, others adding their own equally hilarious and insane theories.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">My favorite Kate Middleton theory so far is that she got bangs and is waiting for them to grow out 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭</p> <p>— Taylor 🌻 (@itsmet_19) <a href="https://twitter.com/itsmet_19/status/1762651824840958230?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 28, 2024</a></p></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">The Kate Middleton reveal on Masked Singer is going to make all of us look silly.</p> <p>— Catherine Tinker (@catherinetinker) <a href="https://twitter.com/catherinetinker/status/1762639775406731413?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 28, 2024</a></p></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Of all the "Where is Kate Middleton?" conspiracy theories, "she's Banksy" is my favorite</p> <p>— Cooper Lawrence (@CooperLawrence) <a href="https://twitter.com/CooperLawrence/status/1762674163309748417?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 28, 2024</a></p></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">My three kids are roughly the same age as Kate Middleton’s so I can say pretty confidently that she is hiding in the bathroom pretending to pee for a really long time.</p> <p>— Kristen Mulrooney (@missmulrooney) <a href="https://twitter.com/missmulrooney/status/1762840727069831673?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 28, 2024</a></p></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Kate Middleton’s disappearance can only mean one thing.. she’s gonna show up on Celebrity Big Brother in a few days and gag us all</p> <p>— Mustafa Farooq (@MustafaFar67649) <a href="https://twitter.com/MustafaFar67649/status/1762647448194052498?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 28, 2024</a></p></blockquote> <p dir="ltr">Some believe that Kate’s operation was actually plastic surgery that has been “botched” and explains her hiding away, while others claimed she is actually elusive street artist Banksy, and is away working on a new piece, or is hauled up in a studio somewhere recording her debut album.</p> <p dir="ltr">Others shared their thoughts on who could find the Princess, with social media users nominating fictional <em>Law &amp; Order: SVU</em> detective Olivia Benson for the job, while others put forward Jo Frost, also known as Super Nanny, and others believe Detectives Mulder and Scully from<em> The X Files</em> could crack the conspiracy. </p> <p dir="ltr">Despite all the theories, one X user summed up the conspiracy perfectly, writing,”The Kate Middleton drama is hard because I don't care about the royal family or conspiracy theories, however, I do care about being in everyone's business.”</p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

Caring

Placeholder Content Image

Out of the rabbit hole: new research shows people can change their minds about conspiracy theories

<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/matt-williams-666794">Matt Williams</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/massey-university-806">Massey University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/john-kerr-1073102">John Kerr</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-otago-1304">University of Otago</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mathew-marques-14884">Mathew Marques</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/la-trobe-university-842">La Trobe University</a></em></p> <p>Many people <a href="https://theconversation.com/was-phar-lap-killed-by-gangsters-new-research-shows-which-conspiracies-people-believe-in-and-why-158610">believe at least one</a> conspiracy theory. And that isn’t necessarily a bad thing – conspiracies <em>do</em> happen.</p> <p>To take just one example, the CIA really did engage in <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/13/cia-mind-control-1266649">illegal experiments</a> in the 1950s to identify drugs and procedures that might produce confessions from captured spies.</p> <p>However, many conspiracy theories are not supported by evidence, yet still attract believers.</p> <p>For example, in a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12746">previous study</a>, we found about 7% of New Zealanders and Australians agreed with the theory that <a href="https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/learn/sensing-our-planet/on-the-trail-of-contrails">visible trails behind aircraft</a> are “chemtrails” of chemical agents sprayed as part of a secret government program. That’s despite the theory being <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/8/084011">roundly rejected</a> by the scientific community.</p> <p>The fact that conspiracy theories attract believers despite a lack of credible evidence remains a puzzle for researchers in psychology and other academic disciplines.</p> <p>Indeed, there has been a great deal of research on conspiracy theories published in the past few years. We now know more about how many people believe them, as well as the psychological and political factors that <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-25617-0">correlate with that belief</a>.</p> <p>But we know much less about how often people change their minds. Do they do so frequently, or do they to stick tenaciously to their beliefs, regardless of what evidence they come across?</p> <h2>From 9/11 to COVID</h2> <p>We set out to answer this question using a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-51653-z">longitudinal survey</a>. We recruited 498 Australians and New Zealanders (using the <a href="http://prolific.com">Prolific</a> website, which recruits people to take part in paid research).</p> <p>Each month from March to September 2021, we presented our sample group with a survey, including ten conspiracy theories, and asked them how much they agreed with each one.</p> <p>All of these theories related to claims about events that are either ongoing, or occurred this millennium: the September 11 attacks, the rollout of 5G telecommunications technology, and COVID-19, among others.</p> <p>While there were definitely some believers in our sample, most participants disagreed with each of the theories.</p> <p>The most popular theory was that “pharmaceutical companies (‘Big Pharma’) have suppressed a cure for cancer to protect their profits”. Some 18% of the sample group agreed when first asked.</p> <p>The least popular was the theory that “COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ contain microchips to monitor and control people”. Only 2% agreed.</p> <h2>Conspiracy beliefs probably aren’t increasing</h2> <p>Despite contemporary concerns about a “<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7320252/">pandemic of misinformation</a>” or “<a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30461-X/fulltext">infodemic</a>”, we found no evidence that individual beliefs in conspiracy theories increased on average over time.</p> <p>This was despite our data collection happening during the tumultuous second year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Lockdowns were still happening occasionally in both <a href="https://www.timeout.com/melbourne/things-to-do/a-timeline-of-covid-19-in-australia-two-years-on">Australia</a> and <a href="https://covid19.govt.nz/about-our-covid-19-response/history-of-the-covid-19-alert-system/">New Zealand</a>, and anti-government sentiment was building.</p> <p>While we only tracked participants for six months, <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0270429">other studies</a> over much longer time frames have also found little evidence that beliefs in conspiracy theories are increasing over time.</p> <hr /> <p><iframe class="flourish-embed-iframe" style="width: 100%; height: 600px;" title="Interactive or visual content" src="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/16665395/embed" width="100%" height="400" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-forms allow-scripts allow-downloads allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe></p> <div style="width: 100%!; margin-top: 4px!important; text-align: right!important;"><a class="flourish-credit" href="https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/16665395/?utm_source=embed&amp;utm_campaign=visualisation/16665395" target="_top"><img src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/made_with_flourish.svg" alt="Made with Flourish" /></a></div> <hr /> <p>Finally, we found that beliefs (or non-beliefs) in conspiracy theories were stable – but not completely fixed. For any given theory, the vast majority of participants were “consistent sceptics” – not agreeing with the theory at any point.</p> <p>There were also some “consistent believers” who agreed at every point in the survey they responded to. For most theories, this was the second-largest group.</p> <p>Yet for every conspiracy theory, there was also a small proportion of converts. They disagreed with the theory at the start of the study, but agreed with it by the end. There was also a small proportion of “apostates” who agreed with the theory at the start, but disagreed by the end.</p> <p>Nevertheless, the percentages of converts and apostates tended to balance each other pretty closely, leaving the percentage of believers fairly stable over time.</p> <h2>Inside the ‘rabbit hole’</h2> <p>This relative stability is interesting, because <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2564659">one criticism</a> of conspiracy theories is that they may not be “<a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/criterion-of-falsifiability">falsifiable</a>”: what seems like evidence against a conspiracy theory can just be written off by believers as part of the cover up.</p> <p>Yet people clearly <em>do</em> sometimes decide to reject conspiracy theories they previously believed.</p> <p>Our findings bring into question the popular notion of the “rabbit hole” – that people rapidly develop beliefs in a succession of conspiracy theories, much as Alice tumbles down into Wonderland in Lewis Carroll’s <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/11">famous story</a>.</p> <p>While it’s possible this does happen for a small number of people, our results suggest it isn’t a typical experience.</p> <p>For most, the <a href="https://www.latrobe.edu.au/news/articles/2023/opinion/how-to-talk-to-someone-about-conspiracy-theories">journey into</a> conspiracy theory belief might involve a more gradual slope – a bit like a <a href="https://zslpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1985.tb05649.x">real rabbit burrow</a>, from which one can also emerge.</p> <hr /> <p><em>Mathew Ling (<a href="https://www.neaminational.org.au/">Neami National</a>), Stephen Hill (Massey University) and Edward Clarke (Philipps-Universität Marburg) contributed to the research referred to in this article.</em><!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222507/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <hr /> <p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/matt-williams-666794">Matt Williams</a>, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/massey-university-806">Massey University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/john-kerr-1073102">John Kerr</a>, Senior Research Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-otago-1304">University of Otago</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mathew-marques-14884">Mathew Marques</a>, Senior Lecturer in Social Psychology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/la-trobe-university-842">La Trobe University</a></em></p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/out-of-the-rabbit-hole-new-research-shows-people-can-change-their-minds-about-conspiracy-theories-222507">original article</a>.</em></p>

Mind

Placeholder Content Image

Covid’s origin found

<p dir="ltr">Amid accusations of it being made in a lab or purposefully made more infectious and fracturing faith in science, scientists say they have finally determined the origin of COVID-19.</p> <p dir="ltr">A team of scientists who have been investigating the virus’ origin have published their findings in two separate articles in <em>Science </em>(available to read <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp8715" target="_blank" rel="noopener">here</a> and <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp8337" target="_blank" rel="noopener">here</a>) and said they are at the end of their search.</p> <p dir="ltr">COVID-19 almost-certainly jumped from animals to humans in Wuhan’s Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, with the researchers even pinpointing the most likely section of the market where it occurred.</p> <p dir="ltr">“The siren has definitely sounded on the lab leak theory,” Professor Edward Holmes, a world-leading expert on virus evolution and co-author of both papers, told the <em>Sydney Morning Herald</em>.</p> <p dir="ltr">“In terms of what we can reasonably do, with the available science and the science we’ll get in the foreseeable future, I think we’re at the end of the road frankly. There’s not a lot more to mine.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Professor Dwyer, the director of public health pathology in NSW and a member of the World Health Organisation (WHO) team who travelled to Wuhan to investigate Covid’s origins, agrees with the findings.</p> <p dir="ltr">“That’s what we thought originally back when we did the first report,” he said.</p> <p><span id="docs-internal-guid-de65d200-7fff-e4d3-3c8b-fb40bc3f2502"></span></p> <p dir="ltr">“This is yet another brick added to the wall of information around zoonotic infection.”</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">Analysis of spatial distributions of early <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/COVID19?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#COVID19</a> cases and environmental samples from the Huanan market point to the market as the epicenter of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SARSCoV2?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SARSCoV2</a> emergence, from activities associated with wildlife trade. <a href="https://t.co/tykjmEOGxW">https://t.co/tykjmEOGxW</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/MichaelWorobey?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MichaelWorobey</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/K_G_Andersen?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@K_G_Andersen</a> <a href="https://t.co/THYDkLualC">pic.twitter.com/THYDkLualC</a></p> <p>— Science Magazine (@ScienceMagazine) <a href="https://twitter.com/ScienceMagazine/status/1551931253179514880?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 26, 2022</a></p></blockquote> <p dir="ltr">Using Chinese and WHO data, as well as public online maps, photos, business registries, and official reports, the scientists reconstructed a map of the market, including human cases and Covid-postive environmental samples from late 2019.</p> <p dir="ltr">The market wildlife section was found to have COVID-19 all over it, with eight of the earliest human cases working nearby.</p> <p dir="ltr">A stall where COVID-19 was found on a metal cage, a machine used to remove hair and feathers from animals, two carts used for moving animal cages, and a nearby water drain, was also visited by Professor Holmes on a trip to Wuhan in 2014 - where he snapped a photo of caged racoon dogs stacked on top of caged birds.</p> <p dir="ltr">“We can’t prove it is this exact stall but the data is very suggestive,” he said.</p> <p dir="ltr">Racoon dogs, along with badgers, hares, rats and foxes are among several species of animals that Covid moves easily among, all of which were being sold in the market in 2019.</p> <p dir="ltr"><span id="docs-internal-guid-fad47587-7fff-0e06-efe8-1cddecca3178"></span></p> <p dir="ltr">The racoon dogs supplied to the market came from farms in western Hubei, the <em>Science </em>papers note, which is an area known for extensive networks of caves filled with Rhinolophus bats that carry coronaviruses similar to the one that causes COVID-19.</p> <p dir="ltr"><img src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/2022/08/wuhan-racoon-dogs.jpg" alt="" width="601" height="533" /></p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Professor Edward Holmes photographed racoon dogs being sold in the Huanan Wildlife Market in 2014. Image: Edward Holmes</em></p> <p dir="ltr">“Raccoon dogs are a suspect,” Professor Holmes added.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I think, strongly, there are a whole bunch of animals out there who have viruses like this that we have not sampled yet.”</p> <p dir="ltr">In their second paper, the team even determined the two viral lineages that were detected a week apart in December 2019, and which one was the most likely one to have been transmitted from animals to humans.</p> <p dir="ltr">Using computers to simulate the most likely sequence of events that would produce the two strains, which differ by two small changes in their genetic codes, they found it exceedingly unlikely that the virus would jump into humans and then split into two strains.</p> <p dir="ltr">Instead, they found that it would be far more likely that multiple strains of Covid had already been circulating in animals, with two strains separately jumping to humans.</p> <p dir="ltr">As for the theory that Covid originated in a lab, you would expect it to be introduced into humans just once - rather than as two distinct lineages - with samples taken from the Huanan market also containing both strains.</p> <p dir="ltr">“That, I think, is pretty good evidence,” Professor Dwyer said.</p> <p dir="ltr">Though supporters of the lab leak theory argue that the market is a perfect super-spreader site, introduced by scientists from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the scientists found that it isn’t the perfect spreader site that people may think it is.</p> <p dir="ltr">The scientists found that 155 cases in December 2019 were strongly clustered in the suburbs around the market, but that it is a small and rather obscure shopping spot and was among the least-visited of 430 identified possible super-spreader sites in Wuhan.</p> <p dir="ltr">“It’s like going to Coles in Bendigo on a wet Wednesday afternoon. It’s not a thriving mass of humanity,” Professor Holmes said.</p> <p dir="ltr">No-one has proved COVID-19 - or even a twin strain - has been at the Wuhan Institute of Virology either, with no epidemiological evidence showing the virus spreading near the institute.</p> <p dir="ltr">“There’s no emails. There’s no evidence in any of the science. There’s absolutely nothing,” Professor Holmes said.</p> <p dir="ltr">On top of that, Covid wasn’t detected in any of the tens of thousands of blood donations in Wuhan between September and December 2019, nor in thousands of samples taken from patients hospitalised with flu-like symptoms between October and December.</p> <p dir="ltr">“What are the odds that two lineages escape from the lab and both make their way into the market and both cause superspreader events?” Professor Holmes said.</p> <p dir="ltr"><span id="docs-internal-guid-d9a32911-7fff-345d-3948-858a5f899ba8"></span></p> <p dir="ltr">“It’s ridiculous. There is no way that can happen.”</p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Image: Getty Images</em></p>

Body

Placeholder Content Image

Stuff-up or conspiracy? Whistleblowers claim Facebook deliberately let important non-news pages go down in news blackout

<p>On Friday, the Wall Street Journal published information from Facebook whistleblowers, alleging Facebook (which is owned by Meta) deliberately caused havoc in Australia last year <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-deliberately-caused-havoc-in-australia-to-influence-new-law-whistleblowers-say-11651768302">to influence the News Media Bargaining Code</a> before it was passed as law.</p> <p>During Facebook’s news blackout in February 2021, thousands of non-news pages were also blocked – including important emergency, health, charity and government pages.</p> <p>Meta has continued to argue the takedown of not-for-profit and government pages was a technical error. It remains to be seen whether the whistleblower revelations will lead to Facebook being taken to court.</p> <p><strong>The effects of Facebook’s “error”</strong></p> <p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-a-world-first-australia-plans-to-force-facebook-and-google-to-pay-for-news-but-abc-and-sbs-miss-out-143740">News Media Bargaining Code</a> was first published in July 2020, with a goal to have Facebook and Google pay Australian news publishers for the content they provide to the platforms.</p> <p>It was passed by the House of Representatives (Australia’s lower house) on February 17 2021. That same day, Facebook retaliated by issuing a <a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2021/02/changes-to-sharing-and-viewing-news-on-facebook-in-australia/">statement</a> saying it would remove access to news media business pages on its platform – a threat it had first made in August 2020.</p> <p>It was arguably a reasonable threat of capital strike by a foreign direct investor, in respect to new regulation it regarded as “harmful” – and which it believed fundamentally “misunderstands the relationship between [its] platform and publishers who use it to share news content”.</p> <p>However, the range of pages blocked was extensive.</p> <p>Facebook has a label called the “News Page Index” which can be applied to its pages. News media pages, such as those of the ABC and SBS, are included in the index. All Australian pages on this index were taken down during Facebook’s news blackout.</p> <p>But Facebook also blocked access to other pages, such as the page of the satirical website <a href="https://www.betootaadvocate.com">The Betoota Advocate</a>. The broadness of Facebook’s approach was also evidenced by the blocking of its own corporate page.</p> <p>The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/feb/18/time-to-reactivate-myspace-the-day-australia-woke-up-to-a-facebook-news-blackout">most major harm</a>, however, came from blocks to not-for-profit pages, including cancer charities, the Bureau of Meteorology and a variety of state health department pages – at a time when they were delivering crucial information about COVID-19 and vaccines.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Whistleblowers emerge</strong></p> <p>The whistleblower material published by the Wall Street Journal, which was also filed to the US Department of Justice and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), includes several email chains that show Facebook decided to implement its blocking threat through a broad strategy.</p> <p>The argument for its broad approach was based on an anti-avoidance clause in the News Media Bargaining Code. The effect of the clause was to ensure Facebook didn’t attempt to avoid the rules of the code by simply substituting Australian news with international news for Australian users. In other words, it would have to be all or nothing.</p> <p>As a consequence, Facebook did not use its News Page Index. It instead classified a domain as “news” if “60% [or] more of a domain’s content shared on Facebook is classified as news”. One product manager wrote:</p> <blockquote> <p>Hey everyone – the [proposed Australian law] we are responding to is extremely broad, so guidance from the policy and legal team has been to be over-inclusive and refine as we get more information.</p> </blockquote> <p>The blocking approach was algorithmic and based on these rules. There were some exceptions, that included not blocking “.gov” – but no such exclusion for “.gov.au”. The effect of this was the taking down of many charity and government pages.</p> <p>The whistleblower material makes it clear a number of Facebook employees offered solutions to the perceived overreach. This included one employee proposal that Facebook should “proactively find all the affected pages and restore them”. However, the documents show these calls were ignored.</p> <p>According to the Wall Street Journal:</p> <blockquote> <p>The whistleblower documents show Facebook did attempt to exclude government and education pages. But people familiar with Facebook’s response said some of these lists malfunctioned at rollout, while other whitelists didn’t cover enough pages to avoid widespread improper blocking.</p> </blockquote> <p><strong>Amendments following the blackout</strong></p> <p>Following Facebook’s news blackout, there were last-minute amendments to the draft legislation before it was passed through the Senate.</p> <p>The main change was that the News Media Bargaining Code would only apply to Facebook if deals were not struck with a range of key news businesses (which so far has not included SBS or <a href="https://twitter.com/ConversationEDU/status/1440562209206128653?s=20&amp;t=FsviAWBLX7mKumr80Qiwzg">The Conversation</a>).</p> <p>It’s not clear whether the amendment was as a result of Facebook’s actions, or if it would have been introduced in the Senate anyway. In either case, Facebook said it was “<a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2021/02/changes-to-sharing-and-viewing-news-on-facebook-in-australia/">satisfied</a>” with the outcome, and ended its news blackout.</p> <p><strong>Facebook denies the accusations</strong></p> <p>The definitions of “core news content” and “news source” in the News Media Bargaining Code were reasonably narrow. So Facebook’s decision to block pages so broadly seems problematic – especially from the perspective of reputational risk.</p> <p>But as soon as that risk crystallised, Facebook denied intent to cause any harm. A Meta spokesperson said the removal of non-news pages was a “mistake” and “any suggestion to the contrary is categorically and obviously false”. Referring to the whistleblower documents, the spokesperson said:</p> <blockquote> <p>The documents in question clearly show that we intended to exempt Australian government pages from restrictions in an effort to minimise the impact of this misguided and harmful legislation. When we were unable to do so as intended due to a technical error, we apologised and worked to correct it.</p> </blockquote> <p><strong>Possible legal action</strong></p> <p>In the immediate aftermath of Facebook’s broad news takedown, former ACCC chair Allan Fels <a href="https://www.news.com.au/technology/online/social/facebook-could-face-lawsuits-for-unconscionable-conduct-over-nonnews-wipe-out/news-story/b312cef33b8e2261e8b5743f9bf87ca6">suggested</a> there could be a series of class actions against Facebook.</p> <p>His basis was that Facebook’s action was unconscionable under the <a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/caca2010265/toc-sch2.html">Australian Consumer Law</a>. We have not seen these actions taken.</p> <p>It’s not clear whether the whistleblower material changes the likelihood of legal action against Facebook. If legal action is taken, it’s more likely to be a civil case taken by an organisation that has been harmed, rather than a criminal case.</p> <p>On the other hand, one reading of the material is Facebook did indeed overreach out of caution, and then reduced the scope of its blocking over a short period.</p> <p>Facebook suffered reputational harm as a result of its actions and apologised. However, if it engaged in similar actions in other countries, the balance between its actions being a stuff up, versus conspiracy, changes.</p> <p>The Wall Street Journal described Facebook’s approach as an “overly broad and sloppy process”. Such a process isn’t good practice, but done once, it’s unlikely to be criminal. On the other hand, repeating it would create a completely different set of potential liabilities and causes of action.</p> <hr /> <p><em>Disclosure: Facebook has refused to negotiate a deal with The Conversation under the News Media Bargaining Code. In response, The Conversation has called for Facebook to be “designated” by the Treasurer under the Code. This means Facebook would be forced to pay for content published by The Conversation on its platform.</em><!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/182673/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rob-nicholls-91073" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Rob Nicholls</a>, Associate professor in regulation and governance, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414" target="_blank" rel="noopener">UNSW Sydney</a></em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/stuff-up-or-conspiracy-whistleblowers-claim-facebook-deliberately-let-important-non-news-pages-go-down-in-news-blackout-182673" target="_blank" rel="noopener">original article</a>.</em></p> <p><em>Image: Getty Images</em></p>

Technology

Placeholder Content Image

Man who threatened to kill Jacinda Ardern causes stir in court

<p dir="ltr">A man who threatened to kill New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern made claims he had been “kidnapped” by police and illegally detained during an outburst in court.</p> <p dir="ltr">Richard Trevor Sivell was arrested at a rural property in Te Puke, in the Western Bay of Plenty on the North Island, which is owned by the Ministry of Education.</p> <p dir="ltr">He claimed he owned the property through “allodial title”, an archaic law meaning that the property had no owner.</p> <p><span id="docs-internal-guid-6b8bee9d-7fff-7c87-37f0-e54c94043c08"></span></p> <p dir="ltr">His arrest was filmed by his supporters and shared online and later re-shared by anti-conspiracy theorist groups on social media.</p> <p><iframe style="overflow: hidden; border: initial none initial;" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?height=315&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FDebunkingConspiraciesAotearoa%2Fvideos%2F381405037137867%2F&show_text=true&width=560&t=0" width="560" height="430" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p> <p dir="ltr">He was later charged with three offences, including intentionally obstructing a police officer during the arrest, failing to comply with police, and threatening to kill.</p> <p dir="ltr">The details of the threatening to kill charge have been suppressed and cannot be reported, per the <em><a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/court-outburst-richard-sivell-charged-with-threatening-to-kill-pm-forced-by-police-into-dock/JFTRYCT6MOCWOC5FGRQDAZH5Y4/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">NZ Herald</a></em>. </p> <p dir="ltr">Mr Sivell went on to appear before the Tauranga District Court on Monday, where he repeatedly chose to stand in the public gallery and refused to enter the dock when instructed by Judge Thomas Ingram.</p> <p dir="ltr">Prior to his appearance in the courtroom, Mr Sivell arrived with a Bible and a one-page document which he called a “counterclaim”, as reported by <em><a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/300557520/man-who-threatened-to-kill-pm-dragged-into-dock-by-police-after-refusal-to-move?fbclid=IwAR2-VkhHDyZXBR1xATPr33YsTvYHoBQcFcS6QGMvfMtTaizRX0na0GmrYOg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Stuff</a></em>.</p> <p dir="ltr">After presenting the document to the court office, he sat in the courtroom, maskless, and asked to be referred to by his first name rather than his last name by the judge.</p> <p dir="ltr">When he still refused to go beyond the public gallery, two police officers and a court security officer forcibly moved him to the dock - a distance of about 10 metres - and even carried him by the arms and legs at one stage. After continuing to resist the officers, Mr Sivell was pinned to the ground and handcuffed, at which point he accused the officers of assaulting him.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I’m a man of peace, stop assaulting me, I haven’t done anything, I haven’t broken the law. You guys are traumatising me again,” he said.</p> <p dir="ltr">When he was in the dock, Judge Ingram asked if he wanted a few minutes to catch his breath.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I appreciate this is not a lot of fun for you,” the judge said. “You certainly will be somewhat traumatised … by what’s occurred.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Mr Sivell then asked if the judge had received “the data”, to which Judge Ingram replied, “I’ve seen a piece of paper from you, yes.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“Without receiving the data we can’t proceed, your honour,” Mr Sivell replied.</p> <p dir="ltr">Judge Ingram said: "You can parrot that as much as you want Mr Sivell, but I'm going to proceed with the matter on the basis that the law of the land applies to you as it applies to everybody else."</p> <p dir="ltr">After refusing to acknowledge the judge's questions, the case was adjourned for half an hour. </p> <p dir="ltr">When he reappeared, he continued to refuse to speak, even when asked whether he wanted legal representation.</p> <p dir="ltr">"I'm a man of peace, I'm here under duress. I've been assaulted and kidnapped," Mr Sivell said.</p> <p dir="ltr">The case was then adjourned for two weeks, and Mr Sivell was remanded on bail on the condition that he made no contact with Ms Ardern or used a device capable of connecting to the internet.</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Threats appeared on Telegram</strong></p> <p dir="ltr">Mr Sivell tracked the arrival of police through a series of posts on Telegram - the encrypted messaging app which has become home to conspiracy theorists and Nazi sympathisers.</p> <p dir="ltr">According to the <em><a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/police-stand-off-with-richard-sivell-who-allegedly-made-death-threats-against-prime-minister-jacinda-ardern/VUJLWAJCY3LWQZBMMIE3ANMBG4/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">NZHerald</a></em>, Mr Sivell used the same account to post what could be considered as threats to kill Ms Ardern and several journalists.</p> <p dir="ltr">“They are going to die. We are not going to allow them to share this world with us anymore,” Mr Sivell said in an audio message posted to the Counterspin channel on Telegram. “Same as Jacinda. She is going to die. Execute these motherf***ers. I look forward to hearing their necks snap.”</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Fake journalists and accusations of communism</strong></p> <p dir="ltr">Outside the court, Mr Sivell was met by his supporters, as well as members of the public posing as journalists.</p> <p dir="ltr">One of the 'journalists' interviewed Mr Sivell, who said New Zealand was becoming a "communist police state" and accused Ms Ardern of being a communist.</p> <p dir="ltr">He said those responsible for the vaccination program, which he described as a "bioweapon", should be held accountable under "Nuremberg law".</p> <p dir="ltr"><span id="docs-internal-guid-84b0bc66-7fff-ac97-d899-173ef54700fd"></span></p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Image: Getty Images</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

China doubles down on bizarre Russia conspiracy theory

<p>China has doubled down on a bizarre conspiracy that is believed to be part of an elaborate ploy to justify Russia's invasion of Ukraine. </p> <p>Earlier this week, a senior Chinese official accused the United States of running a series of biolabs in Russia, claiming the situation was “dangerous” and that the “safety” of the alleged labs were at risk.</p> <p>“Under the current circumstances, for the sake of the health and safety of people in Ukraine, the surrounding region and the whole world, we call on all relevant parties to ensure the safety of these laboratories,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian during a recent press conference.</p> <p>“In particular, the US, as the party with the best knowledge of these laboratories, should release relevant details as soon as possible, including what viruses are stored and what research has been conducted."</p> <p>“What is the real intention of the US? What exactly did it do?”</p> <p>Mr Zhao went on to claim that America's biological military activities in Ukraine were just the "tip of the iceberg", following a series of Russian reports that claim over 30 biolabs were in operation in Ukraine at the request of a US government agency. </p> <p>However, the bizarre conspiracy theory seems to have originated from Russia back in April 2020.</p> <p>At the time, the US embassy in Ukraine was forced to denounce the wild rumours, slamming them as “Russian disinformation regarding the strong US-Ukrainian partnership to reduce biological threats”.</p> <p>“The US Department of Defence’s Biological Threat Reduction Program works with the Ukrainian government to consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern in Ukrainian government facilities, while allowing for peaceful research and vaccine development,” the statement reads.</p> <p>“We also work with our Ukrainian partners to ensure Ukraine can detect and report outbreaks caused by dangerous pathogens before they pose security or stability threats."</p> <p>“Our joint efforts help to ensure that dangerous pathogens do not fall into the wrong hands.”</p> <p>The misinformation about the alleged biolabs has become so widespread that Britain's Defence Ministry has also weighed in. </p> <p>“Since the end of February there has been a notable intensification of Russian accusations that Ukraine is developing nuclear or biological weapons,” the ministry said in a tweet yesterday.</p> <p>“These narratives are long standing but are currently likely being amplified as part of a retrospective justification for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.”</p> <p>While the US confirmed it was working with Ukraine, they went on to say the were fearful of any biological research material getting into the wrong hands. </p> <p>“Ukraine has biological research facilities, which in fact we are now quite concerned Russian troops, Russian forces, may be seeking to gain control of,” senior State Department official Victoria Nuland said during a recent hearing, according to AFP.</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

News

Placeholder Content Image

Feeling paranoid? You might be more susceptible to conspiracy theories

<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">A </span><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.scimex.org/newsfeed/paranoid-people-may-be-more-susceptible-to-believing-conspiracy-theories" target="_blank"><span style="font-weight: 400;">new study</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> suggests that people who are paranoid are more likely to believe conspiracy theories than those who are not paranoid.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">UK scientists surveyed 1000 people in an online survey to determine whether there was a relationship between </span><a href="https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/conditionsandtreatments/paranoia"><span style="font-weight: 400;">paranoia</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> - the irrational and persistent feeling that people are ‘out to get you’ - and different components of conspiracy theories.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The main survey tested participants’ agreement with conspiracies that affected them or wider society, as well as whether the events the theories referred to were incidental or intentional.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">For instance, participants were asked to score how much they agreed or disagreed with statements surrounding vaccination. These included theories describing intentional events that affected the individual - e.g. “Some of the vaccines I have received have been designed to be harmful to me, but I was unaware of this at the time” - and some describing events that affected society that were incidental - e.g. “Vaccines given to the public have unintended harmful side effects and the public are unaware of this”.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">After analysing their results, the researchers found that people who were more paranoid were more likely to believe theories that affected them as individuals, as well as those that described events that were intentional.</span></p> <p><img style="width: 500px; height:281.25px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7847128/antivax1.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/1ea59529e70a4056af956bcb4ad8ce34" /></p> <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">The study found that paranoid people were more likely to endorse beliefs, such as anti-vaccination beliefs, than those who are not. Image: Getty Images</span></em></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Counter to their initial predictions, the team found people were more likely to believe theories they thought people similar to them would also believe, whether they were paranoid or not.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">As for the overall group of participants, they found people were more likely to believe theories that suggested the event or harm it referred to was accidental, rather than intentional. People were also more likely to believe theories that affected the whole of society rather than just themselves.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“Overall, we show that the believability of conspiracy theories may depend on the level of intentional harm implied, and who is specified as the target of the harm described,” the scientists wrote.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">They argue that these results could also impact our understanding of belief revision - the process by which we change our beliefs after receiving new information.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Particularly, they suggest that paranoia may affect a person’s ability to update their beliefs in conspiracies, and the features of different theories may have a role to play too.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Their findings were published in the journal </span><em><a rel="noopener" href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.211555" target="_blank"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Royal Society Open Science</span></a></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">.</span></p> <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">Image: Getty Images</span></em></p>

Mind

Placeholder Content Image

The conspiracy to keep Charles and Camilla apart

<p>It was one of the last century’s most iconic “remember-where-you-were-when” moments: On July 29, 1981, Prince Charles wed Lady Diana Spencer in a fairy tale wedding watched by 750 million people, according to the BBC. It was, as Diana later said, the worst day of her life.</p> <p>“I can’t marry him,” she told her sisters during a pre-wedding lunch. But she did. Of course, we all know the ending to that story. The unhappy, scandal-wrought marriage ended in divorce in 1996, but not before Prince Charles’s enduring love for Camilla Parker Bowles had become common knowledge.</p> <p>In 2005, Prince Charles finally wed Camilla, and by all accounts, they’re as happy together as Diana, who died in that tragic car crash in 1997, always suspected they’d be. Today, with Prince Charles as the next in line for the throne, the question most often asked about Prince Charles and his second wife is whether she will ever be queen? But Charles and Camilla’s love, which has endured since they first began dating in 1972, begs another question …</p> <p>Why didn’t Charles marry Camilla back then?<br />The question was tackled in Sally Bedell Smith’s biography, Prince Charles: The Passions and Paradoxes of an Improbable Life. According to Bedell Smith, right from the start, Charles adored the then-Camilla Shand, who’s close in age to Charles (Diana was 13 years younger) and has always treated him as an equal rather than as someone she idolised. However, the royal family wasn’t interested in having Camilla as its princess. For one thing, she was perceived as an “experienced” woman, which was a nonstarter for the royal family back then in terms of their notion of a suitable spouse for Prince Charles. For another, she wasn’t perceived as “aristocratic” enough to be a princess, according to a report by the Daily Mail on another biography of Prince Charles.</p> <p>“Lovely for you two to have a fling, but this absolutely cannot end in marriage,” Prince Charles’s great uncle, Lord Mountbatten, advised him, according to the UK’s Express. Soon after, Charles was called away on naval business overseas (convenient, eh?), and used the time to put distance between himself and Camilla. Camilla soothed herself by reconnecting with her former beau, Andrew Parker Bowles. And that’s precisely where Bedell Smith theorises that a scheme was hatched to get Camilla married off to Andrew.</p> <p>The forcing of Andrew’s “hand”<br />It’s rumoured that Camilla’s father planted a fake Camilla-Andrew engagement notice in The Times, apparently forcing Andrew’s hand. Literally. Prince Charles returned home to news of Camilla and Andrew’s engagement. According to Bedell Smith, in the absence of the fake engagement announcement that led to Andrew’s actual proposal to Camilla, Charles might have married Camilla, despite his family’s objections.</p> <p>Instead, Camilla married Andrew Parker Bowles in 1973, and Charles went on to date a number of “suitable” women until he met Diana Spencer in 1980. But all the while, Camilla remained in his heart, and occasionally in his plans, as Charles, himself admitted. By the end of 1995, the Parker Bowles couple was divorced, the Prince and Princess were on their way to a divorce, and Diana had famously told television interviewer Martin Bashir that “there were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded.”</p> <p>The happy ending for the Prince and the Duchess of Cornwall<br />Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles got their long-awaited happy ending in 2005 when they married in a civil ceremony, which his mother, the Queen, did not attend (although she did turn up at the reception). Camilla was given the title, “Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cornwall.” Today, they’re still happily married.</p> <p class="p1"><em>Written by Lauren Cahn. This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.readersdigest.co.nz/culture/the-conspiracy-to-keep-charles-and-camilla-apart"><span class="s1">Reader’s Digest</span></a>. For more of what you love from the world’s best-loved magazine, <a href="http://readersdigest.co.nz/subscribe"><span class="s1">here’s our best subscription offer</span></a>.</em></p>

Relationships

Placeholder Content Image

Famous hoaxes that (almost) fooled everyone

<p>In today’s technology-saturated Internet age, fake news and misinformation are everywhere. But these are by no means new concepts! People have always had the tendency to dupe and be duped, as these major hoaxes, which occurred as recently as 2017 and as long ago as 1726, prove. Some were meticulously planned in hopes of striking it rich. A few were accidental consequences of otherwise harmless actions. Many were perpetrated to be funny or malicious, and still others were done to prove a point. No matter the reason, here are 11 hoaxes that hoodwinked the world. For some more recent scams, here are some of the most outlandish things the Internet told us that just weren’t true.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>War of the Worlds</strong></p> <p>Orson Welles didn’t mean to mastermind one of the greatest hoaxes in history. Mass hysteria was simply a by-product of a high-quality radio play in an era where world war loomed, the space race was in its early stages, and most people got news and entertainment from their receivers. According to History.com, the October 30, 1938, broadcast began at 8pm with an introduction presenting the Mercury Theatre’s update of H.G. Wells’ science fiction novel The War of the Worlds, but unfortunately, many people were listening to a popular ventriloquist on another station until 8.12 and therefore missed the disclaimer. Welles take on Wells’ Martian invasion tale started with a weather report and a concert live from the Hotel Park Plaza before news alerts about explosions on Mars, a meteor crashing into a New Jersey farm, and eventually aliens with tentacles, heat rays, and poisonous gas broke in. Terrified announcers were then saying cylinders had landed in Chicago and St. Louis, 7000 National Guardsmen had been wiped out, and that people were fleeing.</p> <p> </p> <p>Only the panic part turned out to be real as potentially a million listeners thought Earth was under attack. People crowded the highways, armed themselves, begged police for gas masks, requested their power be shut off so the aliens wouldn’t see them, and were treated for shock at hospitals. A woman ran into an Indianapolis church during evening service to proclaim, “New York has been destroyed. It’s the end of the world. Prepare to die!” When CBS got wind of hysteria IRL, Welles went on the air as himself to remind listeners that it was fiction. The FCC investigation found no wrongdoing but networks agreed to be more cautious regarding programming going forward. The attention scored Welles a Hollywood contract, which enabled him to write, direct, and star in his 1941 masterpiece Citizen Kane.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>The Shed at Dulwich</strong></p> <p>For just six short months in 2017, The Shed at Dulwich, where patrons ordered entrees by mood, became the highest-ranked restaurant in London on TripAdvisor and the hardest reservation in town to get. Calls and emails poured in begging to be squeezed in for birthday dinners, romantic dates, and media coverage. All were ignored or told to call back as they were booked solid for more than half a year. Except that was a lie. The reason they couldn’t score a table was actually because the business was bogus. It was an experiment in algorithm manipulation and buzz creation by freelance writer Oobah Butler, who had been paid in the past by owners to review their restaurants positively without ever stepping foot inside on the site. To turn the South London garden shed he resides in into a fake fine dining experience, he bought a burner phone and a domain, created a website with soft-focus pictures of delicious-looking dishes made with ingredients you wouldn’t want to eat (paint, bleach tablets, shaving cream, the heel of his foot), and drummed up interest by providing minimum details, making it an appointment-only establishment, lying about it being full, and soliciting friends to write glowing reviews. According to The Washington Post, people contacted him looking for work and companies sent him free samples of their food products. He opened The Shed for one night and served canned soup—and some diners still asked to come again. Butler outed himself in an article and video for Vice a month after hitting the top spot and TripAdvisor removed the listing.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>The Cardiff Giant</strong></p> <p>This gentle giant remains one of 19th-century America’s most legendary hoaxes. Gideon Emmons and Henry Nichols unearthed a ten-foot petrified “man” on October 16, 1869, while digging a well on the New York farm owned by William Newell. Word spread about the discovery and Newell put up a tent and started charging a quarter (and then 50¢ as business boomed) to take a peek at the ground Goliath. Hundreds of curious onlookers and amateur archaeologists made the pilgrimage, many believing it was an ancestor of the Onondaga people and some claiming it was proof of the giants mentioned in The Bible—even after most professionals like Yale palaeontologist Othniel C. Marsh said it a fake. The “mummy” was eventually sold to a group of businessmen who sent him on tour. Greatest showman PT Barnum offered to buy it for $50,000, and when they declined to sell, he made a plaster knockoff and arranged for it to be shown in a New York City museum. By December, Binghamton cigar salesman George Hull admitted this was a stone-cold swindle. He’d commissioned a German stone cutter in Chicago to carve it out of a block of gypsum he’d bought in Iowa before he and his cousin Newell buried the 1356-kilogram statue. While it was a get-rich-quick scheme, Hull, an atheist, was also trying to prove a point about what he considered silly religious stories and how science could disprove most of them. Even after the hoax was revealed, the Cardiff Giant still made appearances and money. According to Archaeology.org, he showed up at the 1901 Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo and was sold in 1947 to the Farmers’ Museum in Cooperstown, where he’s on display today.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Michael Jordan is dead</strong></p> <p>In February 2015, an article published on the Cronica MX website said that former Chicago Bull Michael Jordan had gone to that big basketball court in the sky after suffering a heart attack while he slept. It even quoted his wife, Yvette Prieto. They also posted a video clip designed to resemble a breaking news segment on YouTube with footage of a tearful ESPN reporter Rich Eisen saying goodbye. According to Snopes.com, the footage was real but recycled from a NFL Game Day episode from a month earlier when Eisen had learned that his long time co-worker and friend Stuart Scott had lost his battle with cancer. It recirculates every once in a while, always trying to lure fans to click through to a spammy site or to provide their personal information. The same story was used again in 2017, this time by a site called Viral Mugshot, according to Inquisitr.com. Despite it containing the same spelling and grammar errors, it went viral on social media until debunking sites and news agencies reported it as fake news. And Jordan isn’t the only celebrity targeted by pranksters and hackers. If you believed everything you read on stars’ sites, fake Twitter accounts, or items reported by newspapers erroneously, many of your favourites would have been gone long before their time, including: former President Barack Obama (assassinated while campaigning in an Iowa restaurant), Will Ferrell (died in a 2006 paragliding accident), Nick Jonas (heart attack after a lap dance in a Dallas strip club), and, of course, Justin Bieber (suicide twice, nightclub shooting, and an overdose).</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Piltdown Man</strong></p> <p>Since Charles Darwin released his evolution theories in 1859, scientists have been on the lookout for proof of the missing link—a phase between full ape and full man—and in 1912, Englishman Charles Dawson announced he’d found it in a gravel pit in Piltdown. He used the fossils to build a skull model with a human-sized brain and an ape-like jaw and England declared itself the real birthplace of modern humanity. But other scientists immediately took issue, mostly because it didn’t match other fossils found around the world including the Australopithecines one dug up in South Africa. In 1915, Dawson doubled down and claimed he retrieved a second similar fossil, which was enough evidence for many average Joes. The hoax was not revealed until 1953 when British scientists used new technology to date the Piltdown pair. They deduced that the remains were only 500 years old, not the 1 million years old needed to be the link. They also took a bite out of his claim by discovering that the jaw was from an orangutan whose teeth had been filed to resemble human wear patterns and that the bones had been stained to match each other. Most people involved were dead by the 1950s so the prank plotter was never identified. One whodunit theory, according to the BBC: The doer was none other than Sherlock Holmes author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. He lived near the pit and was a member of Dawson’s archaeological society. The motive was revenge for being constantly mocked by scientists for his belief in spiritualism.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>The Cock Lane ghost</strong></p> <p>Even royals can fall prey to paranormal pranks, according to The Daily Mail. In 1762, Prince Edward, Duke of York and Albany, visited a home on Cock Lane in London that was said to be haunted by Scratching Fanny, a woman who had died of smallpox in the rented house after her loan shark lover William Kent had lent their landlord money with a high interest rate. Kent took the landlord Richard Parsons to court over the loan and won. Strange noises that sounded like a cat scratching a chair were reported at the property around this time, and Parsons and his daughter Elizabeth, who the noises actually emanated from, claimed the ghost was Fanny. To prove it, they held séances regularly, which were written up in the newspaper and drew religious leaders, the prince, the mayor, and so many other onlookers that the street became impassable. At the time, people widely believed that a person would return from the great beyond to warn the living or seek revenge, so they quickly accepted that it was Fanny communicating via a system of knocks that Parsons and a preacher developed. During one such communing, the “ghost” accused Kent of poisoning her and requested he be hanged. To clear his name, Kent and two doctors who had tended to Fanny on her deathbed attended a séance, and again Fanny declared he was her killer. But during a later gathering, Dr Samuel Johnson witnessed Elizabeth creeping from the bed where she was during encounters to pick up a piece of wood that she used to knock. She’d usually hidden the branch in her clothes. Parsons was trying to frame Kent after losing the case, but it was he who ended up behind bars for two years. (His wife also got a year in prison.)</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>The Hurricane Harvey freeway shark</strong></p> <p>Between social media sites and the 24-hour news cycle, it is impossible not to be bombarded with insane photos of daring rescues and heartbreaking destruction following any natural disaster these days. Hurricane Harvey hitting Houston in 2017 was no exception, with one image in particular proving you can’t always believe what you see. Twitter user @Jeggit posted a startling shot of a shark swimming in the floodwater that filled a Houston highway. It appeared to have been taken from the driver’s seat of a stalled car. It was retweeted almost 84,000 times and liked by 141,733 users fairly quickly. According to the Hollywood Reporter, Fox News host Jesse Watters was also fooled by the photo, even mentioning it during his show The Five. He later apologised for the mix-up on his Twitter account once Politifact tracked the doctored photo back to 2011. It appears to have first been circulated after Hurricane Irene struck Puerto Rico and posted on imgur.com. In 2012, social media users posted it saying it was taken in New Jersey during Sandy. It is believed that whoever created this fishy photo took the shark from an image that ran in Africa Geographic in 2005.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Hitler’s fake diaries</strong></p> <p>In 1979, Der Stern Magazine reporter Gerd Heidemann met with Nazi memorabilia collector Fritz Stiefel, who claimed to have a diary penned by Adolf Hitler. Stiefel said it’d been recovered from a 1945 crash of a plane transporting Hitler’s personal effects. (Records indicated the crash was real and that a chest was also recovered likely containing other journals.) After a couple of handwriting experts authenticated the script, more volumes turned up through Konrad Fischer, who’d procured them from an East German General who was planning to smuggle them out of Germany in pianos, according to the UnMuseum.org. Heidemann convinced his outlet to pony up 9.9 million marks (almost US$4 million) for 60 diaries. The magazine knew it could make their money back and then some from reprints. In April 1983, Stern broke the story and then Newsweek and London’s Sunday Times ran excerpts.</p> <p> </p> <p>Historians immediately balked, as Hitler loathed writing and there had been no indication from those close to him that he’d kept notes. Also, the content sparked skepticism as they portrayed Hitler as having little knowledge of concentration camps and wanting to deport, not exterminate, Jews. After many experts questioned the handwriting, the West German Federal Archives ran more tests. They concluded that the paper, ink, and glue were manufactured after the war had ended and Hitler had died. Heidemann, who always maintained he wasn’t in on it but had inflated the asking price and skimmed money off the top, was fired. Fischer turned out to be Konrad Kujau, a criminal specialising in forgery. He faked memorabilia first and worked his way up to whole documents and paintings. (In fact, a quarter of the works that were featured in the 1983 book Adolf Hitler: The Unknown Artist were done by Kujau.) Both Kujau and Heidemann were sentenced to almost five years in prison. Most of the money was never retrieved. While Heidemann was a pariah after serving, The Guardian reports that Kujau made regular appearances on talk shows and became a minor celebrity.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Mary Toft’s bunny babies</strong></p> <p>In 18th-century Europe, people paid good money to see weird stuff, particularly human deformities and unexplained phenomena. It gave poor Surrey servant Mary Toft a particularly gross idea in England in 1726, according to HowStuffWorks.com. She went into “labour” and her neighbour and mother-in-law “delivered” a liverless cat. After other animal bits were retrieved from her nether region, they rang local obstetrician John Howard. Over the next month, he “delivered” a rabbit’s head, a hog’s bladder, the legs of a cat, and nine dead baby bunnies. (Womb-ship Down happened in the course of one day, according to the University of Glasgow Library’s special collections.) She became the talk of the town and many paid to witness the bizarre births, including a Swiss anatomist and the Prince of Wales’ secretary. But her foetal fame didn’t last long. A German surgeon proved a rabbit could not have developed inside Toft because he found corn and hay in its dung. Someone was then caught smuggling a rabbit into her room. The jig was up and Toft confessed she’d been inserting animal parts into her vagina after suffering a miscarriage.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Balloon Boy</strong></p> <p>On October 15, 2009, the nation could not take its eyes off the non-stop news coverage of a homemade silver helium-filled balloon that looked like a UFO floating around the Colorado skies. After releasing it from Fort Collins, Richard and Mayumi Heene called emergency services to report that their six-year-old son Falcon was trapped aboard. National Guard helicopters and local police followed the blimp, which topped out at 7,000 feet, for 90 minutes and 80 kilometres until it landed 24 kilometres from the Denver airport. Falcon was not inside, but as some had seen something fall from the balloon, a land search ensued. That too turned up nothing. Several hours later he came out from hiding in the attic at home. When interviewed on air by Wolf Blitzer, the kid slipped and said his father had told him they were doing it to get a reality show. The first responders didn’t like their time or money wasted and the Heenes were arrested for the hoax. According to CNN, the Larimer County Sheriff’s Department tallied the cost to be at least US$47,000. In addition, the FAA imposed an US$11,000 fine because airport traffic was delayed because the balloon had flown and landed close to it. The case’s judge decided it was “clearly a planned event done for the purpose of making money” and that it was “exploitation of the children, exploitation of the media, exploitation of the emotions of the people.” Both parents were sentenced to jail, four years probation, and more than 100 hours of community service and agreed to pay restitution of US$36,016. On the five-year anniversary, USA Today found the family living in Florida and the sons had started a heavy metal band. One of their CDs has a song called “Balloon Boy No Hoax.”</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Russian royal or insane Polish factory worker?</strong></p> <p>The 1918 grisly basement execution of Tsar Nicholas II, Tsarina Alexandra, and their five children aged 13 to 22 in the dead of night by bullet and bayonets by Bolshevik revolutionaries is hardly the stuff of fairy tales. Which is likely why so many people wanted to desperately believe the rumours that the youngest daughter, Anastasia Romanov, had escaped. The mystery and hope were fuelled by the fact that no bodies had been found. Women popped up all over the world claiming to be her, the most believable of which was Anna Anderson, according to Refinery29. She had tried to kill herself by jumping off a Berlin bridge two years later and landed in an asylum for two years. She was the right age, had scars on her body, and a Russian accent. Some relatives and former Romanov friends and servants confirmed her identity while others denounced it. The murders had become common knowledge and Soviet counterintelligence did nothing to quell survival rumours. Her tale inspired multiple books, tabloid fodder, an Ingrid Bergman classic, an animated film, a stage musical, and an Amazon Prime TV series.</p> <p> </p> <p>After leaving the hospital, Anderson bounced around Europe, staying with distant relatives and wealthy supporters, but she was usually uncooperative, even malicious, when people tried to prove or disprove her identity. She also knew things the late royal would have known, which is how the son of a doctor who was killed with the family became her most ardent defender. Together they hired an attorney to try to get legal recognition of her title and access to the Tsar’s estate. The case lasted 32 years, the longest in German history, and ended without any conclusions. During the investigation, her detractors posited that she was Franziska Schanzkowska, a Polish worker who disappeared after being declared insane after being injured in a factory explosion shortly before the incident at the bridge. Anderson died in 1984. Seven years later, five skeletons were found in a forest near the town where the family was executed and DNA testing identified them as Romanovs. With two bodies still missing, people argued she had been telling the truth all along. But that did not last long, as they tested their DNA against an intestinal sample from a prior Anderson surgery. No match. In 2007, the final two bodies were found at a different gravesite.</p> <p> </p> <p><em>Written by Carrie Bell. This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.readersdigest.co.nz/culture/famous-hoaxes-that-almost-fooled-everyone">Reader’s Digest</a>. For more of what you love from the world’s best-loved magazine, <a rel="noopener" href="http://readersdigest.co.nz/subscribe" target="_blank" class="c-link" data-stringify-link="http://readersdigest.com.au/subscribe" data-sk="tooltip_parent">here’s our best subscription offer</a>.</em></p>

Mind

Placeholder Content Image

The craziest conspiracy theories about the royal family

<p>Former BBC presenter David Icke has revealed himself as a conspiracy theorist, and one of his kookiest theories has to do with the royal family. Icke and others claim the royal family of the United Kingdom and all other countries are part of the Illuminati, and all of them earned their power because their human ancestor mated with reptilian aliens. He claims the theory explains why royal families are obsessed with keeping their bloodlines “clean” with other royals, and insists he’s talked to people who have seen people in power change into reptiles and back again.</p> <p><strong>Charles and Diana had a secret daughter</strong></p> <p>Diana admitted she had to visit a gynaecologist before marrying Prince Charles to make sure she could bear children, but some people took that fact and ran. The Globe ran an article in 2014 claiming that during the examination, the doctor took some of Diana’s eggs and used in vitro fertilisation to combine it with Charles’ sperm. Without permission, one doctor snuck one of the embryos for his wife to carry, and the “royal baby Sarah” was born just after the royal wedding in 1981 – even before William – and the royal family kept it hush-hush. Strangely close similarities between Diana and her supposed daughter (right down to eyeliner colour), not to mention Sarah’s conspicuous silence, has led people to believe the photos of her are computer-generated images the Globe made based on photos of the late princess. It seems the publication based the story on a novel by Nancy Ryan, which had a similar storyline about the couple’s fictional long-lost daughter, Olivia.</p> <p><strong>The royal family killed Princess Diana</strong></p> <p>Leading up to her death, Princess Diana did seem to have some eerie premonitions. After she and Charles divorced and before he remarried, Diana wrote a letter that she felt in danger because someone was “planning ‘an accident’ in my car, brake failure and serious head injury in order to make the path clear for Charles to marry.” Despite Diana’s suspicions, though, evidence has consistently pointed to her driver’s drinking as the cause of the accident.</p> <p><strong>Princess Diana was pregnant with another baby</strong></p> <p>Clearing Charles for remarriage isn’t the only motivation conspiracy theorists claim for the royal family wanting to off Diana. Egyptian businessman Mohamed al-Fayed, father of Diana’s boyfriend, spread rumours that Diana was pregnant with his son’s child and that Prince Philip couldn’t stand the fact that his grandson would have an Egyptian Muslim as a stepfather. But post-mortem examinations didn’t find any evidence that Diana was pregnant.</p> <p><strong>Kate Middleton used a surrogate</strong></p> <p>After Kate Middleton gave birth to Charlotte, rumours flew that she’d never actually carried the baby. Some claimed her belly didn’t seem big enough for a post-baby bump, while others said, “there is no special maternal look in her eyes.” Neither signs seem at all convincing.</p> <p><strong>Queen Elizabeth I was a man</strong></p> <p>In the 16th century, King Henry VIII sent his young daughter, Elizabeth Tudor, to a small village to avoid the plague. Supposedly, she died while there, and her governess was terrified to tell the king (known for killing off his wives) that they’d failed to keep his daughter safe. Instead of fessing up, they tried to find a girl her age to take his place, but the small village didn’t have anyone suitable. Instead, they asked a farm boy named Neville to be the decoy. The plan worked, and the child swap explains why the Virgin Queen never married, according to conspiracy theorists. Sounds outlandish, but the theory had one famous supporter: <em>Dracula</em> author Bram Stoker, who popularised the idea in his “nonfiction” book <em>Famous Imposters</em>.</p> <p><strong>Prince Harry isn’t Prince Charles’s son</strong></p> <p>What royal family is complete without rumours of illegitimate children? For years, people have suspected that Prince Harry is actually the son of James Hewitt, who had an affair with Princess Diana. Though some say the affair didn’t start until after Harry was born, playwright Jon Conway claims Hewitt admitted it started 18 months before his birth. Conway even wrote a play about the fatherhood question that premiered in 2014.</p> <p><strong>Princess Margaret had a love child</strong></p> <p>A man named Robert Brown spent £100,000 trying to prove he was the child of Princess Margaret (Queen Elizabeth II’s late sister) and her former flame Group Captain Peter Townsend. Brown claimed Margaret had given birth to him in January 1955 but kept the pregnancy a secret using body doubles, then sent the baby to Kenya to be raised by high-society parents. As an adult, he even won a lawsuit allowing him to see his supposed mum’s will, but it didn’t reveal the adoption like he’d hoped.</p> <p><strong>Prince Charles is a vampire</strong></p> <p>Prince Charles really is related to Vlad the Impaler, the 15th-century ruler who might have inspired the story of Dracula and even has a house in Transylvania. Of course, despite the headlines claiming Charles is Dracula’s heir, the vampire never really existed.</p> <p><strong>Prince Charles will never be King</strong></p> <p>He’s the least favourite royal, and rumours abound that he’ll never be King, but don’t count the Prince of Wales out of donning the crown when his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, passes on. According to Royal Household’s official website, successions are governed by Parliamentary acts (the latest from just 2013!), and one must be: Protestant; descended from Princess Sophia (Electress of Hanover and granddaughter of James I); in communion with the Church of England (and swear to preserve it and that of Scotland); eldest in line. Prince Charles meets all these requirements, and the royal website goes so far as to identify the next in line!</p> <p><strong>Prince Charles will be denied the crown anyway</strong></p> <p>The rumours may be persistent, but Parliament won’t deny the throne to a “next-in-line” unless the heir is found guilty of “misgovernance.” There are no allegations against Prince Charles. He’s also a stickler for maintaining the best possible public image.</p> <p><strong>Duchess Camilla is Catholic</strong></p> <p>Camilla has been Prince Charles’s wife since 2005. Prior to that, she had been married to Andrew Parker Bowles, who was Catholic, and their children were raised as Catholics. She, however, is not Catholic, and her marriage to the Prince was made official in the Anglican church. But none of this even matters because the Succession to the Crown Act of 2013 overturned any previous law by which a next-in-line would be disqualified for having married a Roman Catholic. So, Prince Charles’s claim to the throne would stand regardless of Camilla’s religious affiliation.</p> <p><strong>Duchess Camilla will never be Queen</strong></p> <p>The vast majority of Britain doesn’t want Camilla as their queen. The naysayers may have been relieved when Prince Charles announced on his website that Camilla would be known as “HRH The Princess Consort.” However: The announcement is gone from the Prince’s website, and commentator on the royals, Richard Fitzwilliams, told Express.co.uk that it is the Prince’s intention to make Camilla his Queen. While some continue to insist this will never happen, the final decision must come from Charles within one day of Queen Elizabeth II’s passing.</p> <p><strong>Meghan Markle is a political ploy</strong></p> <p>One theory that once made the rounds is that the marriage of Meghan Markle to Prince Harry is a political gambit that will allow the United Kingdom to reabsorb the United States. Because Prince Harry’s kids will be Americans as well as Brits, one could grow up to be president and king. “They want America back, and this is how they’ll do it,” according to a viral tweet reported on by TIME. Well, Harry and Meghan’s recent stepping down as senior royals has certainly put the kybosh on that plan.</p> <p><strong>The Queen is just a figurehead</strong></p> <p>Apologies to all the conspiracy theorists who insist that the British monarchy is powerless: The Queen (for starters) has a full set of powers, as well as rights and duties. For example, she can declare war. She can suspend or summon Parliament. She can override an act of Parliament. She can even overrule the election of a Prime Minister.</p> <p><strong>Prince Charles is the son of a foreign con artist</strong></p> <p>You can blame Netflix for this one. In the series <em>The Crown</em>, the husband of Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Philip, is portrayed as a foreign outsider who weaseled his way inside the palace walls. However, Prince Philip and Queen Elizabeth are not only distantly related to each other, but Prince Philip’s mother was even born at Windsor Castle.</p> <p><strong>The Queen doesn't pay taxes</strong></p> <p>It’s true that the Crown, itself, enjoys tax-exempt status, but the Queen must pay income taxes on her private income, as well as income from the Privy Purse – it refers to income that mostly comes from the Duchy of Lancaster.</p> <p><strong>The British Royal Family never worked a day in their lives</strong></p> <p>Actually, they’re pretty busy: The British royal family has duties that keep them very busy, such as attending thousands of engagements a year while leading charities, working in art galleries, and even making films. You probably know that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge (William and Kate) are college grads, but did you know the Queen is a trained mechanic? And Prince Charles is a filmmaker? And his sister, Princess Anne, attended 640 engagements in 2016 (more than any other royal) and also competed in the Olympics as an equestrian? Learn more about all the jobs the royal family has held throughout the years.</p> <p>Written by Lauren Cahn and Marissa Laliberte. This article first appeared in <a href="https://www.readersdigest.com.au/culture/the-craziest-conspiracy-theories-about-the-royal-family?pages=2">Reader’s Digest.</a> For more of what you love from the world’s best-loved magazine, here’s our <a href="https://readersdigest.innovations.co.nz/c/readersdigestemailsubscribe?utm_source=over60&amp;utm_medium=articles&amp;utm_campaign=RDSUB&amp;keycode=WRN93V">best subscription offer.</a></p> <p><img style="width: 100px !important; height: 100px !important;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7820640/1.png" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/f30947086c8e47b89cb076eb5bb9b3e2" /></p>

Family & Pets

Placeholder Content Image

Hiding in plain sight: Bizarre $10 note conspiracy theory

<p>A cohort of Australian conspiracy theorists has claimed they found “proof” of an organised coronavirus conspiracy on the $10 note.</p> <p>Some “COVID-19 truthers” said the sign of a global conspiracy is featured on the Australian $10 banknote in the form of a gold reflective illustration.</p> <p>“The new $10 Australian note complete with corona virus symbols. You can’t make this up!” one Facebook post read.</p> <p>The coronavirus conspiracy movement, which has led to small protests in Sydney and Melbourne in recent weeks, reportedly believe the pandemic is an orchestrated effort by billionaires and governments to force vaccinations on the general population.</p> <p><img style="width: 500px; height: 281.25px; display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7836144/embed.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/867ee92f4dd04f68bdf656e11078bd70" /></p> <p>The Reserve Bank said the $10 note feature is an illustrated version of Bramble Wattle.</p> <p>“Tilt the banknote to see a rolling colour effect, which is visible on both sides of the banknote,” the Reserve Bank said on its website.</p> <p>“The feature appears on each denomination of the Next Generation Banknotes series, with a different type of wattle depicted in the design on each banknote. In this instance, the design framing the feature is a designer’s interpretation of Bramble Wattle.”</p> <p>Katie Attwell from the University of Western Australia said conspiracies receive “worrying” level of traction because of the uncertainty the general public is facing.</p> <p>“The general public is uncertain, afraid, and experiencing cognitive impairment from the strain of it all,” Attwell wrote on <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-anti-vaxxers-arent-a-huge-threat-yet-how-do-we-keep-it-that-way-138531">The Conversation</a></em>.</p> <p>“Governments overseas, most notably the US government, have failed dismally in responding efficiently to COVID-19. This has the potential to devastate citizens’ trust.</p> <p>“In this volatile cocktail, the distinction between what is ‘bats**t crazy’ and what is worryingly plausible starts to break down.”</p> <p>In a <a href="https://10daily.com.au/news/a200519xdyqc/one-in-eight-australians-believes-bill-gates-is-responsible-for-coronavirus-and-wow-20200519">recent survey of 1,073 Australians</a>, one in eight said they believe Microsoft founder Bill Gates is somehow responsible for the coronavirus and the 5G wireless network is spreading the disease.</p> <p>“For those who reject these premises, it’s hard to understand how conspiracists sustain this alternative reality. But for those with long histories of rejecting government and expert authority, it’s completely conceivable,” Attwell said.</p> <p>“Many of those who reject vaccines, or strenuously object to COVID-19 health measures, are influenced by interconnected social groups with clear identities.”</p> <p>Attwell said it might be best to “quietly ignore” lockdown protesters to stop the spread of misinformation, “like a parent walking away from their child’s supermarket tantrum”.</p> <p>“When we walk away from a child having a tantrum in a supermarket, we are also saving them from themselves – even if they can’t appreciate it.”</p>

Money & Banking

Placeholder Content Image

New research shows conspiracy theorists actively seek out their online communities

<p>Why do people believe conspiracy theories? Is it because of who they are, what they’ve encountered, or a combination of both?</p> <p>The answer is important. Belief in conspiracy theories helps <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-science-for-climate-change-only-feeds-the-denial-how-do-you-beat-that-52813">fuel climate change denial</a>, anti-vaccination stances, <a href="https://theconversation.com/conspiracy-theories-fuel-prejudice-towards-minority-groups-113508">racism</a>, and distrust of the media and science.</p> <p>In a <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0225098">paper published today</a>, we shed light on the online world of conspiracy theorists, by studying a large set of user comments.</p> <p>Our key findings are that people who eventually engage with conspiracy forums differ from those who don’t in both where and what they post. The patterns of difference suggest they actively seek out sympathetic communities, rather than passively stumbling into problematic beliefs.</p> <p>We looked at eight years of comments posted on the popular website <a href="https://reddit.com">Reddit</a>, a platform hosting millions of individual forums called subreddits.</p> <p>Our aim was to find out the main differences between users who post in r/conspiracy (a subreddit dedicated to conspiracy theories) and other Reddit users.</p> <p>Using a technique called <a href="https://towardsdatascience.com/sentiment-analysis-concept-analysis-and-applications-6c94d6f58c17">sentiment analysis</a> we examined what users said, and where they said it, during the months before their first post in r/conspiracy.</p> <p>We compared these posts to those of other users who started posting on Reddit at the same time, and in the same subreddits, but without going on to post in r/conspiracy.</p> <p>We then constructed a network of the subreddits through which r/conspiracy posters travelled. In doing so, we were able to discover how and why they reached their destination.</p> <p><strong>Seeking the like-minded</strong></p> <p>Our research suggests there is evidence for the “self-selection” of conspiracy theorists. This means users appear to be seeking communities of people who share their views.</p> <p>Users followed clear pathways to eventually reach r/conspiracy.</p> <p>For example, these users were over-represented in subreddits focused on politics, drugs and internet culture, and engaged with such topics more often than their matched pairs.</p> <p>We were also surprised by the diversity of pathways taken to get to r/conspiracy. The users were not as concentrated on one side of the political spectrum as people might expect. Nor did we find more anxiety in their posts, compared with other users.</p> <p>Our <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00189/full">previous research</a> also indicated online conspiracy theorists are more <a href="http://theconversation.com/online-conspiracy-theorists-are-more-diverse-and-ordinary-than-most-assume-92022">diverse and ordinary</a> than most people assume.</p> <p><strong>Where do the beliefs come from?</strong></p> <p>To dig deeper, we examined the interactions between where and what r/conspiracy users posted.</p> <p>In political subreddits, the language used by them and their matched pairs was quite similar. However, in Reddit’s very popular general-purpose subreddits, the linguistic differences between the two groups were striking.</p> <p>So far, psychologists, sociologists, and philosophers have struggled to find anything distinct about conspiracy believers or their environments.</p> <p>Social media can play a role in spreading conspiracy theories, but it mostly entrenches beliefs among those who already have them. Thus it can be challenging to measure and understand how conspiracy beliefs arise.</p> <p>Traditional survey and interview approaches don’t always give reliable responses. This is because conspiracy theorists often frame their life in narratives of <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00861/full">conversation and awakening</a>, which can obscure the more complex origins of their beliefs.</p> <p>Furthermore, as philosopher David Coady <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-defence-of-conspiracy-theories-and-why-the-term-is-a-misnomer-101678">pointed out</a>, some conspiracy theories turn out to be true. Insiders do sometimes uncover evidence of malfeasance and cover-ups, as <a href="https://theconversation.com/from-richard-boyle-and-witness-k-to-media-raids-its-time-whistleblowers-had-better-protection-121555">recent debates over the need for whistleblower protections in Australia</a> reflect.</p> <p><strong>Echo chambers worsen the problem</strong></p> <p>Research about online radicalisation from philosophy has focused on the passive effects of technologies such as <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-american-philosophical-association/article/technological-seduction-and-selfradicalization/47CADB240E6141F9C6160C40BC9A6ECF">recommended algorithms</a> and their role in creating <a href="https://aeon.co/essays/why-its-as-hard-to-escape-an-echo-chamber-as-it-is-to-flee-a-cult">online echo chambers</a>.</p> <p>Our research instead suggests individuals seem to have a more active role in finding like-minded communities, before their interactions in such communities reinforce their beliefs.</p> <p>These “person-situation interactions” are clearly important and under-theorised.</p> <p>As the psychologist David C. Funder <a href="https://www.guilford.com/books/Handbook-of-Personality/John-Robins-Pervin/9781609180591/contents">puts it</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><em>Individuals do not just passively find themselves in the situations of their lives; they often actively seek and choose them. Thus, while a certain kind of bar may tend to generate a situation that creates fights around closing time, only a certain kind of person will choose to go to that kind of bar in the first place.</em></p> </blockquote> <p>We suspect a similar process leads users to conspiracy forums.</p> <p><strong>A complex web of interactions</strong></p> <p>Our data indicates that conspiracy beliefs, like most beliefs, are not adopted in a vacuum. They are actively mulled over, discussed, and sought out by agents in a social (and increasingly online) world.</p> <p>And when forums like <a href="https://theconversation.com/8chans-demise-is-a-win-against-hate-but-could-drive-extremists-to-the-dark-web-121521">8chan and Stormfront are pushed offline</a>, users often look for other ways to communicate.</p> <p>These complex interactions are growing in number, and technology can amplify their effects.</p> <p>YouTube radicalisation, for example, is likely driven by interactions between algorithms and <a href="https://theconversation.com/dont-just-blame-youtubes-algorithms-for-radicalisation-humans-also-play-a-part-125494">self-selected communities</a>.</p> <p>When it comes to conspiracy beliefs, more work needs to be done to understand the interplay between a person’s social environment and their information seeking behaviour.</p> <p>And this becomes even more pressing as we learn more about the risks that come with conspiracy theorising.</p> <p><span><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/colin-klein-253131"><em>Colin Klein</em></a><em>, Associate Professor of Philosophy, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/adam-dunn-2853">Adam Dunn</a>, Associate professor, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-clutton-446664">Peter Clutton</a>, Graduate Student in Philosophy, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a></em></span></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/dont-just-blame-echo-chambers-conspiracy-theorists-actively-seek-out-their-online-communities-127119">original article</a>.</em></p>

Technology

Placeholder Content Image

Fashion conspiracy: Does Prince Harry only own one pair of shoes?

<p>The Duke of Sussex has had a busy few months in the spotlight since the birth of his first son, Archie.</p> <p>However, it seems not even a swarm of cameras could pick up this odd fashion choice by Prince Harry that has seemed to be a constant for the royal for the last few months.</p> <p>Royal fans noticed something strange about the Duke of Sussex when a beautiful photograph of him and his family at the christening of first son Archie’s baptism was shared.</p> <p>It wasn’t just the adorable photo of Archie that kept fans on their toes, or the beautiful smile that graced Harry's wife Duchess Meghan that got people talking – it was a pair of suede brown brogues that was spotted on the Duke’s feet.</p> <p>On Twitter, fans pointed out Prince Harry had been wearing the same particular pair of shoes for the past few months.</p> <p>“Prince Harry’s offhand manner of dressing for his son and heir’s first official outing. Is this the exact same suit and suede shoes he wore when he showed the world his son?” one eagle-eyed fan wrote.</p> <p>Another tweet read: “Prince Harry is wearing exactly the same suit, brown desert boots, white shirt as he wore to present Archie.”</p> <p>“On an unrelated note, could the Duchess of Sussex do something about how sloppy her husband Prince Harry looks?” a snarky comment read.</p> <p>“Start with burning those ugly a** worn out brown shoes.”</p> <p>It appears Prince Harry has been wearing the same brown pair of shoes for a while now – dating back to October 2018 when he visited Sussex with his wife.</p> <p>The Duke was also spotted in the shoes when he and Duchess Meghan touched down in Casablanca airport in February.</p> <p>A few days later, the royal member was sporting the brogues again while the couple visited Rabat in Morocco.</p> <p>The royal has proven a pair of shoes can take you a long way.</p> <p>Scroll through the gallery above to see the number of times Prince Harry has been spotted sporting his favourite brown pair of shoes.</p>

News

Placeholder Content Image

12 crazy conspiracy theories that actually turned out to be true

<p>Laughing at conspiracy theories is good fun - at least until they turn out to be true.</p> <p>Take the conspiracy surrounding the "Project Sunshine," for example.</p> <p>In the wake of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the U.S. government commenced a major study to measure the effects of nuclear fallout on the human body.</p> <p><strong>1. The horror of 'Project Sunshine'</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> The government was stealing dead bodies to do radioactive testing.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> The government was stealing parts of dead bodies. Because they needed young tissue, they recruited a worldwide network of agents to find recently deceased babies and children, and then take samples and even limbs - each collected without notification or permission of the more than 1,500 grieving families.</p> <p><strong>2. Bad booze</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> During Prohibition, the government poisoned alcohol to keep people from drinking.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> Manufacturers of industrial alcohol had been mixing their product with dangerous chemicals for years prior to Prohibition.</p> <p>But between 1926 and 1933, the federal government pushed manufacturers to use stronger poisons to discourage bootleggers from turning the alcohol into moonshine.</p> <p>That didn't stop the bootleggers or their customers, and by the end of Prohibition, more than 10,000 Americans had been killed by tainted booze.</p> <p><strong>3. The first lady who ran the country</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> A stroke rendered President Woodrow Wilson incapable of governing, and his wife surreptitiously stepped in.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> Wilson did suffer a debilitating stroke towards the end of his presidency - but the government felt it was in the country's best interest to keep things quiet.</p> <p>The public didn't learn about the stroke for months, during which time his wife, Edith Wilson, was making most executive decisions.</p> <p>Despite Mrs. Wilson claiming that she acted only as a "steward," historians who have analysed the Wilson term in office confirm that for well over a year, Mrs. Wilson was effectively president.</p> <p><strong>4. Government mind control</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> The CIA was testing LSD and other hallucinogenic drugs on Americans in a top-secret experiment on behaviour modification.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> The program was known as MK-ULTRA, and it was real.</p> <p>The CIA started by using volunteers - the novelist Ken Kesey was one notable subject.</p> <p>But the program heads soon began dosing people without their knowledge; MK-ULTRA left many victims permanently mentally disabled.</p> <p><strong>5. The Dalai Lama's impressive salary</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> The Dalai Lama is a CIA agent.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> Perhaps the reason the Dalai Lama is smiling in all those photos has something to do with the six-figure salary he pulled down from the U.S. government during the 1960s.</p> <p>According to declassified intelligence documents, he earned $180,000 in connection with the CIA's funding of the Tibetan Resistance to the tune of $1.7 million per year.</p> <p>The idea was to disrupt and hamper China's infrastructure.</p> <p><strong>6. John Lennon was under government surveillance</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> The FBI was spying on former Beatle John Lennon.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> They most certainly were. Like many counter-culture heroes, Lennon was considered a threat: "Anti-war songs, like "Give Peace a Chance" didn't exactly endear former Beatle John Lennon to the Nixon administration," NPR reported in 2010.</p> <p>"In 1971, the FBI put Lennon under surveillance, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service tried to deport him a year later."</p> <p><strong>7. The government is spying on you</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> With the advances in technology, the government is using its vast resources to track citizens.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> In 2016, government agencies sent 49,868 requests for user data to Facebook, 27,850 to Google, and 9,076 to Apple, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (the EFF), a major non-profit organisation that defends civil liberties in the digital world and advises the public on matters of internet privacy.</p> <p><strong>8. Fake battle, real war</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> The Gulf of Tonkin incident on August 2, 1964, was faked to provoke American support for the Vietnam War.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> By the time news reached American ears, the facts surrounding the North Vietnamese attack on the American Naval ship Maddox were already fuzzy.</p> <p>Declassified intelligence documents have since revealed that the Maddox had provided support for South Vietnamese attacks on a nearby island and that the North Vietnamese were responding in kind, according to the U.S. Naval Institute.</p> <p>The event "opened the floodgates for direct American military involvement in Vietnam."</p> <p><strong>9. Big Tobacco knew that cigarettes caused cancer</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> For decades, tobacco companies buried evidence that smoking is deadly.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> At the beginning of the 1950s, research was showing an indisputable statistical link between smoking and lung cancer, but it wasn't until the late 1990s that Philip Morris even admitted that smoking could cause cancer.</p> <p><strong>10. There is alien evidence in the American Southwest</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> E.T. is buried in the desert of New Mexico.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> This one is real: The Atari video game E.T., the Extra-Terrestrial failed so miserably that the company buried unsold cartridges in a desert landfill. (Wait, what did you think we meant? Real aliens? In New Mexico? Not yet, anyway.)</p> <p><strong>11. Canada tried to develop 'gaydar'</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> The Canada government was so paranoid about homosexuality that it developed a "gaydar" machine.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> It really happened: In the 1960s, the government hired a university professor to develop a way to detect homosexuality in federal employees.</p> <p>He came up with a machine that measured pupil dilation in response to same-sex-erotic imagery; the Canadian government used it to exclude or fire more than 400 men from civil service, the military, and the Mounties.</p> <p><strong>12. The Illuminati and the U.S. government</strong></p> <p><strong>Conspiracy:</strong> A secret society that rules the world - the Illuminati - and the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) are in cahoots.</p> <p><strong>The truth:</strong> We're here to tell you that a link does, in fact, exist.</p> <p>Of course, that "link" is actually a hyperlink (i.e., an electronic link between two Internet sites).</p> <p>If you type Illuminati backwards - Itanimulli - into a web browser, you will land on the NSA website.</p> <p>Click this link if you dare: <a href="http://www.itanimulli.com/">Itanimulli.com</a></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><em>Written by Lauren Cahn. Republished with permission of <a href="http://www.readersdigest.com.au/true-stories-lifestyle/12-crazy-conspiracy-theories-actually-turned-out-be-true?items_per_page=All">Reader's Digest</a>.<img width="70" height="71" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7820158/1-rd-logo.jpg" alt="1-RD-LOGO" style="float: right;"/></em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Where is Melania Trump? US First Lady responds to conspiracy theories about her absence

<p>US First Lady Melania Trump hasn’t been seen in public for nearly three weeks and speculation about her lengthy absence was mounting online.</p> <p>To shut down the theories about her whereabouts, Melania has confirmed that she is indeed still at the White House.</p> <p>She tweeted: “I see the media is working overtime speculating where I am &amp; what I'm doing. Rest assured, I'm here at the @WhiteHouse w my family, feeling great, &amp; working hard on behalf of children &amp; the American people!”</p> <p>Melania’s last public appearance was 21 days ago on May 10, when she joined her husband to welcome three Americans who had been detained in North Korea back to the US.</p> <p>On May 14, she underwent kidney surgery at Walter Reed National Military medical centre.</p> <p>She remained at the medical centre for the remainder of the week to recover and her communications director, Stephanie Grisham, said “there were no complications”.</p> <p>On Wednesday, Grisham told Business Insider that the First Lady “is doing great” despite her long absence from the public eye.</p> <p>However, official statements did not stop the stream of conspiracy theories about her absence, suggesting that she may have undergone a more serious medical procedure or fled back to New York after her surgery.</p> <p>Grisham told Politico that the White House “deals with conspiracy theories all the time” and reiterated that “she was hospitalised for almost a week and is now home recovering”.</p> <p>At the end of June, Melania will attend a summer picnic for members of Congress and their families. </p>

News