It may if you want your explanation to be correct though. And technically, a grand conspiracy is subjective, and a bit of a false dichotomy. See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
The complexity of the problem is such that it is extremely difficult to not make a cognitive error during contemplation, even leaving aside the famous unreliability of the multiple systems this cognition sits on top of.
Think of how hard it can sometimes be to debug a system for which you have the literal source code for, which sits on a highly trustworthy base. Now consider reality, for which you have no source code, but you do know (at least during certain mental states, but not necessarily all) that it is chock full of bugs, indeterminate behaviors, etc.
Here you are not distinguishing between your perception of (or, rhetorical misinterpretation of) the ideas within my words, and the actual ideas themselves (as you also do with the events of that day). I wonder which one it is (maybe a little of both?).
The complexity of the problem is such that it is extremely difficult to not make a cognitive error during contemplation, even leaving aside the famous unreliability of the multiple systems this cognition sits on top of.
Think of how hard it can sometimes be to debug a system for which you have the literal source code for, which sits on a highly trustworthy base. Now consider reality, for which you have no source code, but you do know (at least during certain mental states, but not necessarily all) that it is chock full of bugs, indeterminate behaviors, etc.