WHY PEOPLE REJECT CONSPIRACY THEORIES

by eddie Wed Jun 24, 2015 9:52 pm

Before I post this article and subsequent link up, I'll tell you this: there are just as many articles that say people who believe in conspiracies are nut jobs.
I've always stated that if you find an article that says A is B, you'll always find one that says B is A.
Anyway, this article says it all for me (and for the record, I don't believe every conspiracy story out there )

by eddie Wed Jun 24, 2015 9:53 pm

By
Saman Mohammadi

The mocking of conspiracy theories in the American press and Western media is based on the simplistic argument that reason is on the side of the government and officialdom, not on the fringe of society and civilization.

Anti-conspiracy proponents ludicrously claim that conspiracy theorists are prey to paranoia and irrational thinking without explaining their own faulty reasoning. They put a huge emphasis on labels and none on facts. But they’re not unique. Apparently, name-calling is enough to win a court case in a 21st century American courtroom.

Let’s set aside the mockery and look at the real picture. In the court of world public opinion, 9/11 truth has already won.

The truth is that 9/11 “conspiracy theorists” [read truth-tellers] are not the irrational party in the debate about what happened on 9/11, for the facts of history are on their side and no one with an honest intellect can say otherwise.

Since most people are not persuaded by facts but by fear, they blindly reject the truth about 9/11 and accuse the truth-tellers of being irrational, conspiratorial, and paranoid.

In addition to fear, there are four other reasons why people reject conspiracy theories in a wholesale manner, especially the fact-based claims made by the global 9/11 truth and justice movement. Below I’ve stated each reason in bold and briefly elaborated on them.

1. Fear. There are many dimensions to how fear blocks people from discovering, accepting, and telling the truth about 9/11.

The first dimension is cosmic. The official story about the most important socio-political event in modern history has been burned into the heart of American culture and Western civilization. America’s image of itself is wrapped up with the 9/11 fairy tale. For many, the fear of challenging the authenticity of the story is related to the fear of shaking up the cosmological scenery within one’s own mind that has been constructed by political leaders and the television.

The second dimension is social. People have a basic fear; they don’t want to be associated with those “crazy conspiracy theorists and their paranoid views.” They want to stay within the safety of the tribe, and disowning the most sacred myths of one’s tribe goes beyond treachery; it is interpreted as spiritual suicide.

The third dimension is the most obvious one: the fear of death. The government is watching what you say, and read, and it knows what you think and believe. Most people naturally don’t want to stick the bullseye on their chest and yell out in the crowd, “I don’t belong to you because I reject your lies and fables, now come and get me, punks.”

2. Ignorance. Due to the systemic blackout of the evidence showing that the official 9/11 story is a lie, people just don’t know. Not only are they ignorant of the facts underlining the case of the global 9/11 truth and justice movement, but they are ignorant that there is even a media blackout.

Of course, the excuse of ignorance is harder to defend in the era of the Internet and new media. A lot of people who reject conspiracy theories are just too lazy to sit down and do the research for themselves.

3. A False Sense of Superiority And A False Sense of Knowledge.The smugness of 9/11 truth deniers is hard to stomach. They actually look down on new information and new knowledge, which is strange to me. I value learning and am always open to new ideas and new ways of seeing the world.

When I came across ‘9/11: The Road to Tyranny’ by Alex Jones in February 2004 I was floored. I remember watching the hanging of Saddam on CNN a few months earlier and thinking, “Wow, this Iraq War turned out to be alright, at least the Iraqi people got to see justice served.” But the discovery that the 9/11 story was an invented fable turned my goodwill towards the American government to absolute rage.

It was easy for me to rethink the purpose of the war on terror upon seeing the real facts about 9/11 laid out for the first time because I’m not an American so I don’t have any emotional stake in what the American government does. Americans are in a much more spiritually difficult place. The sin of 9/11 must be a heavy burden to carry for such a morally minded country and people.

This article is not about judging anyone or any country, but an attempt to understand why people react differently to the same information. Why do some people think they know how the world works and refuse to accept the validity of new worldviews, while others hunger for such awesome discoveries? I know how ignorant I am of the world, of history, and of mankind, so I’m comfortable with letting go of worldviews if the facts don’t fit.

4. Collective Brainwashing. The brainwashing of America, Israel, the West, and the world since the false flag September 11 events is definitely one of the biggest reasons why people reject alternative interpretations of 9/11 and the war on terror. The nations of the world are living inside the big lie offered by the grand decoder of reality, who goes by the political name of the United States government. The spiritual name for this false decoder of reality is Satan, otherwise known as the accuser.

People live, breathe, and eat the 9/11 lie. It is a live virus that is inside their bodily organs and their digestive systems. A teaspoon of reason is not enough to treat the spiritual patient.

http://www.infowars.com/why-people-reject-conspiracy-theories/

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 9:54 pm

Link?

by eddie Wed Jun 24, 2015 9:56 pm

Sorry it's there

Just have to post long articles up bit by bit due to iPad being stupid

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 9:57 pm

So there is no psychological evidence behind his claims then Eddie?
Just an opinion?

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:07 pm

I quite like conspiracy theories. Of course, one has to look at them properly to see if there's any logic behind them.

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:11 pm

I like conspiracy theories , some add up some are quite loony..

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:12 pm

I am happy to associate with conspiracy theorists, so that makes no sense. He is just claiming a reverse fear strategy which makes little sense. Many rational people believe in conspiracy theories. It does not mean they are right. Some are nut balls, but many are rational intelligent people. Again it is looking at things objectively.

So lets look at some of his points.
He claims I fear for not believing the 9/11 conspiracy.
What is there for me to fear?
If I am wrong on this, my life is not going to change. I would simply be wrong and a number of people would have committed one of the worst crimes in history. There is no social fear, as people who believe and do not believe can and are friends. So that makes very little sense.

Fear of death?
Nope.

I got to the end and sighed.

Collective Brainwashing. The brainwashing of America, Israel, the West, and the world since the false flag September 11 events is definitely one of the biggest reasons why people reject alternative interpretations of 9/11 and the war on terror. The nations of the world are living inside the big lie offered by the grand decoder of reality, who goes by the political name of the United States government. The spiritual name for this false decoder of reality is Satan, otherwise known as the accuser.

Sorry, but when it crosses into the bounds of religion, well I just shake my head in bewilderment.
This is like many Muslims a person who takes the view of America or people running America as the "Great Satan". He says he is not judging but he is in a poor way, that Satan is among us. I do not do religious babble Eddie.

by eddie Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:13 pm

Cuchulain wrote:So there is no psychological evidence behind his claims then Eddie?
Just an opinion?

Do you base every single thing you think, upon whether a psychologist has said so or not?
Yes it's an opinion. Some peoples opinions are right and some other people's opinions are right too.

That's why they're opinions?

That's mine.

By the way? Psychologists and scientists get things wrong!
That's why they even disagree with each other!!! cheers

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:17 pm

eddie wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:So there is no psychological evidence behind his claims then Eddie?
Just an opinion?

Do you base every single thing you think, upon whether a psychologist has said so or not?
Yes it's an opinion. Some peoples opinions are right and some other people's opinions are right too.

That's why they're opinions?

That's mine.

By the way? Psychologists and scientists get things wrong!
That's why they even disagree with each other!!!

Yes they do get things wrong Eddie and that is what is great about science where it can disprove a theory tested. You cannot say the same for the conspiracy theory, as they will not allow themselves to be wrong. I can be wrong, but for you to be wrong means recognizing that you are which as seen does not happen with the vast majority of conspiracy theorists. Science tests and constantly test.

Sorry but when he went on about Satan, I just sighed Eddie.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:22 pm

This is Alex Jones:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9RBXlE86Ng

Really, do I have to say more?

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:24 pm

it's down once again to what you chose to believe, you get people and sheeple, you get some that spend time in both categories...

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:28 pm

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:it's down once again to what you chose to believe, you get people and sheeple, you get some that spend time in both categories...

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:32 pm

I like conspiracy theories but i don't take them all in i find them interesting .

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:33 pm

Vicar of Dibley wrote:I like conspiracy theories but i don't take them all in i find them interesting .

it's good to think outside the box sometimes ..x

by eddie Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:43 pm

Cuchulain wrote:
eddie wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:So there is no psychological evidence behind his claims then Eddie?
Just an opinion?

Do you base every single thing you think, upon whether a psychologist has said so or not?
Yes it's an opinion. Some peoples opinions are right and some other people's opinions are right too.

That's why they're opinions?

That's mine.

By the way? Psychologists and scientists get things wrong!
That's why they even disagree with each other!!!

Yes they do get things wrong Eddie and that is what is great about science where it can disprove a theory tested. You cannot say the same for the conspiracy theory, as they will not allow themselves to be wrong. I can be wrong, but for you to be wrong means recognizing that you are which as seen does not happen with the vast majority of conspiracy theorists. Science tests and constantly test.

Sorry but when he went on about Satan, I just sighed Eddie.

Yes the satan remark was stupid lol

by eddie Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:45 pm

I don't believe in satan and all that mumbo jumbo (though I may be proven wrong - we will,never know!)

But a lot of what he said makes sense regarding some people.

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:48 pm

eddie wrote:I don't believe in satan and all that mumbo jumbo (though I may be proven wrong - we will,never know!)

But a lot of what he said makes sense regarding some people.

It was many of his points Eddie that made no sense as stated in my other post.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:01 pm

Logical reasons for treating conspiracy theories with skepticism:

A conspiracy theory is a proposed explanation that 1) requires a high degree of ill intent to 2) carry out a highly coordinated operation involving hundreds or thousands of people who 3) cannot tell anyone about it.

1) Most people aren't capable of killing hundreds, thousands, millions or billions of people (depending on the conspiracy theory) in order to achieve their goals

2) Because of point 1, the ability of anyone who is willing to slaughter lots of people to get enough allies in order to do so becomes quite dubious

3) Most people find it nearly impossible to keep anything interesting they were involved in completely to themselves -- much less their involvement in a huge plot to kill lots of people to meet some nefarious aim.

That's not to say that all such claims should be dismissed without investigating them, but it shows why successful conspiracies should be exceedingly rare.

I think people who believe in conspiracy theories are, for the most part, hypocrites -- they ask you to be skeptical about the official narrative around something like 9/11 or the moon landing, but they don't seem to use the same skepticism when considering the claims of conspiracy theorists.

I think a lot of conspiracy theorists have a knee-jerk bias against authority and expertise, perhaps out of an inferiority complex ("Oh, he thinks he can tell me what to believe just because he's the President/a network news anchor/an expert in engineering!").

Life is usually not an adventure, but by embracing conspiracy theories, conspiracy theorists can feel that they're part of an exciting drama, and even more, that they have special knowledge that sets them apart from all the "sheep."

by eddie Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:01 pm

Cuchulain wrote:
eddie wrote:I don't believe in satan and all that mumbo jumbo (though I may be proven wrong - we will,never know!)

But a lot of what he said makes sense regarding some people.

It was many of his points Eddie that made no sense as stated in my other post.

Perhaps you don't think they applied to you?
You posted an opinion of someone who said that conspiracy theorists were all loons (or words to that extent)...
i don't think that applied to me.

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:05 pm

To make my point here Eddie.
Imagine I changed some wordings in his post here:

1. Fear. There are many dimensions to how fear blocks people from discovering, accepting, and telling the truth about Islam and Muhammad.

The first dimension is cosmic. The official story about the most important socio-political event in Islamic history has been burned into the heart of Muslim culture and Islamic civilization. Muslims image of itself is wrapped up with the Muhammad fairy tale. For many, the fear of challenging the authenticity of the story is related to the fear of shaking up the cosmological scenery within one’s own mind that has been constructed by political leaders and the television.

The second dimension is social. People have a basic fear; they don’t want to be associated with those “crazy conspiracy theorists and their paranoid views.” They want to stay within the safety of the tribe, and disowning the most sacred myths of one’s tribe goes beyond treachery; it is interpreted as spiritual suicide.

The third dimension is the most obvious one: the fear of death. The Islamic government is watching what you say, and read, and it knows what you think and believe. Most people naturally don’t want to stick the bullseye on their chest and yell out in the crowd, “I don’t belong to you because I reject your lies and fables, now come and get me, punks.”

2. Ignorance. Due to the systemic blackout of the evidence showing that the historicity of the Quran is a lie, people just don’t know. Not only are they ignorant of the facts underlining the case of the early scholars, but they are ignorant that there is even a media blackout.

Of course, the excuse of ignorance is harder to defend in the era of the Internet and new media. A lot of people who reject questioning the historicity of the Quran are just too lazy to sit down and do the research for themselves.

3. A False Sense of Superiority And A False Sense of Knowledge.The smugness of Muslims is hard to stomach. They actually look down on new information and new knowledge on the historicity of the Quran, which is strange to me. I value learning and am always open to new ideas and new ways of seeing the history of Islam.

Do you think Eddie if I applied his own logic to the history of Muhammad and the Quran if he is indeed a Muslim, he would share these same views he once wrote? Or would he make a complete U-Turn on his own methodology?

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:08 pm

eddie wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:

It was many of his points Eddie that made no sense as stated in my other post.

Perhaps you don't think they applied to you?
You posted an opinion of someone who said that conspiracy theorists were all loons (or words to that extent)...
i don't think that applied to me.

That is debates getting heated and the problem is it works both ways, I get called ignorant and have been for claiming I do not look at these views. I have look at many of these views and it works both ways. The biggest thing that just does not add up in all of the claims, is the far fetched scenario to make this event happen when you loo at the many claims for 9/11. In one of the videos there is a funny scene which goes into this which I think many people do not grasp. When you really thin about this and if someone did plot to commit 9/11 themselves it just makes very little sense.

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:10 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:Logical reasons for treating conspiracy theories with skepticism:

A conspiracy theory is a proposed explanation that 1) requires a high degree of ill intent to 2) carry out a highly coordinated operation involving hundreds or thousands of people who 3) cannot tell anyone about it.

1) Most people aren't capable of killing hundreds, thousands, millions or billions of people (depending on the conspiracy theory) in order to achieve their goals

2) Because of point 1, the ability of anyone who is willing to slaughter lots of people to get enough allies in order to do so becomes quite dubious

3) Most people find it nearly impossible to keep anything interesting they were involved in completely to themselves -- much less their involvement in a huge plot to kill lots of people to meet some nefarious aim.

That's not to say that all such claims should be dismissed without investigating them, but it shows why successful conspiracies should be exceedingly rare.

I think people who believe in conspiracy theories are, for the most part, hypocrites -- they ask you to be skeptical about the official narrative around something like 9/11 or the moon landing, but they don't seem to use the same skepticism when considering the claims of conspiracy theorists.

I think a lot of conspiracy theorists have a knee-jerk bias against authority and expertise, perhaps out of an inferiority complex ("Oh, he thinks he can tell me what to believe just because he's the President/a network news anchor/an expert in engineering!").

Life is usually not an adventure, but by embracing conspiracy theories, conspiracy theorists can feel that they're part of an exciting drama, and even more, that they have special knowledge that sets them apart from all the "sheep."

Excellent points Ben

by eddie Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:10 pm

I have no idea didge. It's supposition.
We are now discussing the person writing it and my intention was more about the fact I agreed with some of what he said (minus the satan bit).

See I think therein lies the difference with you (and some others possibly) and I in these debates;

You will believe someone because of WHO they are.
I will believe someone if I agree with WHAT they say (and possibly disagree with something else they say)

That's the big difference; there's no right or wrong, just a difference I guess.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:15 pm

eddie wrote:I have no idea didge. It's supposition.
We are now discussing the person writing it and my intention was more about the fact I agreed with some of what he said (minus the satan bit).

See I think therein lies the difference with you (and some others possibly) and I in these debates;

You will believe someone because of WHO they are.
I will believe someone if I agree with WHAT they say (and possibly disagree with something else they say)

That's the big difference; there's no right or wrong, just a difference I guess.

I actually don't think that anybody should be believed simply because of who they are, though if they have a reputation for knowing their stuff, they deserve to be taken more seriously.

I don't see how anybody, however, could take a look at that raving lunatic in the video I posted and not have a high degree of skepticism toward any claim he makes. It's obvious he's not right in the head.

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:17 pm

eddie wrote:I have no idea didge. It's supposition.
We are now discussing the person writing it and my intention was more about the fact I agreed with some of what he said (minus the satan bit).

See I think therein lies the difference with you (and some others possibly) and I in these debates;

You will believe someone because of WHO they are.
I will believe someone if I agree with WHAT they say (and possibly disagree with something else they say)

That's the big difference; there's no right or wrong, just a difference I guess.

Eddie that is so wrong about me.
Again because of my studies in history I have to objectively look at the works and if there is a tendency of bias in the writer. Credibility is important, but even within such works facts can be found that corroborate to other factors. It is about attempting to work out fact from fiction and in history new evidence comes up all the time. Hence why history is such a fascinating subject. New evidence can totally change the aspect of an event or character. The problem with 9/11 conspiracy Theorists is they are their own worst enemies. If they did say like I would that my earlier view on a historical person was misplaced by this new evidence, then they would stand more credible, but the reality is they do not. They are dogmatic, they just quietly move on from one claim or still dogmatically stick to the original belief even if evidence points this to be invalid. I can agree with you because your views can be right, others times I do not agree with you and it does not matter who you are after even knowing many years.

by eddie Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:19 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:I have no idea didge. It's supposition.
We are now discussing the person writing it and my intention was more about the fact I agreed with some of what he said (minus the satan bit).

See I think therein lies the difference with you (and some others possibly) and I in these debates;

You will believe someone because of WHO they are.
I will believe someone if I agree with WHAT they say (and possibly disagree with something else they say)

That's the big difference; there's no right or wrong, just a difference I guess.

I actually don't think that anybody should be believed simply because of who they are, though if they have a reputation for knowing their stuff, they deserve to be taken more seriously.

I don't see how anybody, however, could take a look at that raving lunatic in the video I posted and not have a high degree of skepticism toward any claim he makes. It's obvious he's not right in the head.

Sometimes people can come across as looney and still have valid points.
Some historical nut jobs have been very clever people.

Imagine if Hitler had used his unique way of thinking and his charm, for the good?

Edit:
When I say "unique" I'm in no way saying what he did was good!!!!!
I hope you know what I mean!!

by Guest Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:30 pm

eddie wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:

I actually don't think that anybody should be believed simply because of who they are, though if they have a reputation for knowing their stuff, they deserve to be taken more seriously.

I don't see how anybody, however, could take a look at that raving lunatic in the video I posted and not have a high degree of skepticism toward any claim he makes. It's obvious he's not right in the head.

Sometimes people can come across as looney and still have valid points.
Some historical nut jobs have been very clever people.

Imagine if Hitler had used his unique way of thinking and his charm, for the good?

Edit:
When I say "unique" I'm in no way saying what he did was good!!!!!
I hope you know what I mean!!

Unique is appropriate to use in the case of Hitler, as he did have huge charisma. You only have to see those countless people devoted to him. Many were spell bound by him talking in speeches. So it is an interesting hypothesis to wonder if and how his life had been different without the first world war, the Versailles treaty and depression in Germany. Myself, I think he looked to blame others for things that went wrong in his life and someone like that is always on a downward path to self-destruction. Interesting to ponder, though I feel he would have done wrongs in some criminal capacity.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:31 pm

I do. One of my favorite descriptions for assholes at work is that they're "like Hitler -- but without all the charm." Smile

by eddie Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:38 am

Well that's what I'm saŷing.
I'd rather go by what someone says rather than who they are.

I mean, let's take Hitler. He is obviously infamous for his horrendous crimes and the fact he was an evil bastard. But say he was passionate about the plight of disabled children? Say we don't know how much time and energy he devoted to this cause because he was so busy being famous for killing Jews?
Would we say "Pfff! What he says about disabled children is irrelant because he's a nut job!"

That's my point (I think).
I prefer to take on a viewpoint I agree with, despite whether someone is a "professor" or a "psychologist"

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:49 am

eddie wrote:Well that's what I'm saŷing.
I'd rather go by what someone says rather than who they are.

I mean, let's take Hitler. He is obviously infamous for his horrendous crimes and the fact he was an evil bastard. But say he was passionate about the plight of disabled children? Say we don't know how much time and energy he devoted to this cause because he was so busy being famous for killing Jews?
Would we say "Pfff! What he says about disabled children is irrelant because he's a nut job!"

That's my point (I think).
I prefer to take on a viewpoint I agree with, despite whether someone is a "professor" or a "psychologist"

Well he had many disabled killed Eddie
People have argued that he loved animals and he was vegitarian, but he had no problem killing his own dog and Eva Braunsd (his eventual wife) dogs.
He was basically without care for the loss of any life, which can be seen how he did not care at the end if he took the German people with him.
So if Hitler said immigration is bad i would certainly have to take into condsideration other views that person may have. As it could well effect their view point on immigration. If for example I know also the person holds hateful racist view points, do you think that would be important or not important to what is said on immigration?

by Eilzel Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:54 am

It's a shame such a promising thread title ended up being just another 9/11 conspiracy defense Wink

Why do people reject them?

Truth is the people who usually peddle them are never just happy with 1 conspiracy that may have something to it (9/11 is one of the more well presented theories for sure). They tend to embrace and argue for most or all conspiracies out there.

So as well as being convinced 9/11 was an inside job, many would also argue that Armstrong never walked on the moon in 1969, Diana was killed by the Royals, the Illuminati is real and we really are all being controlled by shapeshifting lizard people (Icke's craziest fairy tale). It shows a tendency toward these mysterious fantasies that causes a detachment from reality and fall into the trap of saying one set of arguments is always equally as valid as another (they aren't, not always).

To take this website as an example (and I've no shame in naming names), our resident conspiracy theorists (with the exception of you Eds), hardly have the best reputation on all matters:

HF- makes links between homosexuality and paedophilia and is a Biblical fundamentalists. Accepts conspiracy theories wholeheartedly.

tommymonk- has argued fiercely about the lies of both 9/11 AND the moon landings. Also insists there is a gay agenda in schools and talks about the 'EUSSR' dictatorship.

Hardly people who we ought to take as bastions of 'sense' and good arguments imo. Yet they LOVE the conspiracies don't they...

Eds you are for me an exception. I don't know why you believe the stories these wackos present (I'm talk about Icke and the rest now, not TM or HF haha). But that's your thing, I get you are very anti-establishment and anti-officialdom.

Perhaps if the people most vocal in forwarding these theories (like Icke and his lizardmen or the guy in the video above) were a little less absurd then people might listen- funny how it isn't the reputable scientists who ever come out with this stuff though isn't it Cool

by Eilzel Thu Jun 25, 2015 11:55 am

eddie wrote:Well that's what I'm saŷing.
I'd rather go by what someone says rather than who they are.

I mean, let's take Hitler. He is obviously infamous for his horrendous crimes and the fact he was an evil bastard. But say he was passionate about the plight of disabled children? Say we don't know how much time and energy he devoted to this cause because he was so busy being famous for killing Jews?
Would we say "Pfff! What he says about disabled children is irrelant because he's a nut job!"

That's my point (I think).
I prefer to take on a viewpoint I agree with, despite whether someone is a "professor" or a "psychologist"

That is both a gift and a curse Eds. I've said something along the lines of this before- but I imagine you would defend Satan if he was in the process of claiming vaccines were killing children Laughing

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:07 pm

i do not link pedophilia and homosexuality as such but gay peadoes do exist...

by eddie Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:31 pm

Eilzel wrote:
eddie wrote:Well that's what I'm saŷing.
I'd rather go by what someone says rather than who they are.

I mean, let's take Hitler. He is obviously infamous for his horrendous crimes and the fact he was an evil bastard. But say he was passionate about the plight of disabled children? Say we don't know how much time and energy he devoted to this cause because he was so busy being famous for killing Jews?
Would we say "Pfff! What he says about disabled children is irrelant because he's a nut job!"

That's my point (I think).
I prefer to take on a viewpoint I agree with, despite whether someone is a "professor" or a "psychologist"

That is both a gift and a curse Eds. I've said something along the lines of this before- but I imagine you would defend Satan if he was in the process of claiming vaccines were killing children

I might

by eddie Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:33 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:Logical reasons for treating conspiracy theories with skepticism:

A conspiracy theory is a proposed explanation that 1) requires a high degree of ill intent to 2) carry out a highly coordinated operation involving hundreds or thousands of people who 3) cannot tell anyone about it.

1) Most people aren't capable of killing hundreds, thousands, millions or billions of people (depending on the conspiracy theory) in order to achieve their goals

2) Because of point 1, the ability of anyone who is willing to slaughter lots of people to get enough allies in order to do so becomes quite dubious

3) Most people find it nearly impossible to keep anything interesting they were involved in completely to themselves -- much less their involvement in a huge plot to kill lots of people to meet some nefarious aim.

That's not to say that all such claims should be dismissed without investigating them, but it shows why successful conspiracies should be exceedingly rare.

I think people who believe in conspiracy theories are, for the most part, hypocrites -- they ask you to be skeptical about the official narrative around something like 9/11 or the moon landing, but they don't seem to use the same skepticism when considering the claims of conspiracy theorists.

I think a lot of conspiracy theorists have a knee-jerk bias against authority and expertise, perhaps out of an inferiority complex ("Oh, he thinks he can tell me what to believe just because he's the President/a network news anchor/an expert in engineering!").

Life is usually not an adventure, but by embracing conspiracy theories, conspiracy theorists can feel that they're part of an exciting drama, and even more, that they have special knowledge that sets them apart from all the "sheep."

Erm yes. That's why point three is what starts the rumours Ben!
People start to talk.

Watch sassy video on the 9/11

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 pm

eddie wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:Logical reasons for treating conspiracy theories with skepticism:

A conspiracy theory is a proposed explanation that 1) requires a high degree of ill intent to 2) carry out a highly coordinated operation involving hundreds or thousands of people who 3) cannot tell anyone about it.

1) Most people aren't capable of killing hundreds, thousands, millions or billions of people (depending on the conspiracy theory) in order to achieve their goals

2) Because of point 1, the ability of anyone who is willing to slaughter lots of people to get enough allies in order to do so becomes quite dubious

3) Most people find it nearly impossible to keep anything interesting they were involved in completely to themselves -- much less their involvement in a huge plot to kill lots of people to meet some nefarious aim.

That's not to say that all such claims should be dismissed without investigating them, but it shows why successful conspiracies should be exceedingly rare.

I think people who believe in conspiracy theories are, for the most part, hypocrites -- they ask you to be skeptical about the official narrative around something like 9/11 or the moon landing, but they don't seem to use the same skepticism when considering the claims of conspiracy theorists.

I think a lot of conspiracy theorists have a knee-jerk bias against authority and expertise, perhaps out of an inferiority complex ("Oh, he thinks he can tell me what to believe just because he's the President/a network news anchor/an expert in engineering!").

Life is usually not an adventure, but by embracing conspiracy theories, conspiracy theorists can feel that they're part of an exciting drama, and even more, that they have special knowledge that sets them apart from all the "sheep."

Erm yes. That's why point three is what starts the rumours Ben!
People start to talk.

Watch sassy video on the 9/11

They do talk alot of rumours and beliefs they invent themselves Eddie and people buy into it. So yes that is how it starts, people believe someone convincing and what did we talk about in someone who was convincing?
Hitler
He was very convincing, not only to Germans but those who fell prey to fear.
They feared an imaginary threat.
The Jews.
They were an easy target.
People start to talk.
They are then convinced they are the problem to everything.
The loss of the First World War is not rightly placed to blame solely on the imperialistic ambitions of the German Elite, but on the Jews. Who are seen through a conspiracy at the time and promoted of trying to take over the world through Communism.

How strange does this all sound familiar you may ask Eddie.

Like I say, all it takes is some people who are convincing.
Hitler was convincing as seen.
You are convinced by people who cannot even prove the vast amount of claims they make.
Once you are convinced then everything else falls into place. It does not matter if any evidence proves things you believe are wrong. That one individual has made sense of everything. To you they are right. So you ignore contradictions and evidence and take them at their word.
The terrorism is real Eddie, it happens daily, it does not need convincing to see that happen.
It also works the other way not to scapegoat Muslims as well because of this real event and events that Muslims terrorist do near daily. 9/11 was committed by Al-Qaeda, you just want to believe otherwise for reasons unknown to me.

Learn from history Eddie, you do not need to watch a video for that, but to read a book.
Its called the rise of Nazism

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:11 pm

hmm do you think lee harvey oswald shot Kennnedy?

do you think marilyn monroe died by an over dose?

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:12 pm

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:hmm do you think lee harvey oswald shot Kennnedy?

do you think marilyn monroe died by an over dose?

They are both dead.
Is your life unable to function not knowing how they died?

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:14 pm

Cuchulain wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:hmm do you think lee harvey oswald shot Kennnedy?

do you think marilyn monroe died by an over dose?

They are both dead.
Is your life unable to function not knowing how they died?

wow so do you not want to bother knowing anything else in the universe?

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:14 pm

Cuchulain wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:hmm do you think lee harvey oswald shot Kennnedy?

do you think marilyn monroe died by an over dose?

They are both dead.

Is your life unable to function not knowing how they died?

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:19 pm

Cuchulain wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:hmm do you think lee harvey oswald shot Kennnedy?

do you think marilyn monroe died by an over dose?

They are both dead.
Is your life unable to function not knowing how they died?

I will ask again one last time HF.

They are both dead.
Is your life unable to function not knowing how they died?

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:22 pm

I will answer your question.
I can function and get on with my life not even caring to know how they died. It has no bearing on my life.
I sad they died, that is it.
I do not need to now. If I find out, will it change me?
No

Goodnight

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:24 pm

Cuchulain wrote:I will answer your question.
I can function and get on with my life not even caring to know how they died. It has no bearing on my life.
I sad they died, that is it.
I do not need to now. If I find out, will it change me?
No

Goodnight

you think it has no bearing on your life but you may discover it has great bearing on your life..

evolution has no bearing on anyone's life so should we just leave it alone... Smile

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:27 pm

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:I will answer your question.
I can function and get on with my life not even caring to know how they died. It has no bearing on my life.
I sad they died, that is it.
I do not need to now. If I find out, will it change me?
No

Goodnight

you think it has no bearing on your life but you may discover it has great bearing on your life..

evolution has no bearing on anyone's life so should we just leave it alone...

It would have zero bearing on my life.
My life already functions without not knowing daily.
Why you fail to grasp you do not need to know.
If you did need to know, your life clearly would be unable to function.
So maybe you cannot function then in life without knowing.

Think about that.
Right really have to go.

Laughing

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:34 pm

Cuchulain wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

you think it has no bearing on your life but you may discover it has great bearing on your life..

evolution has no bearing on anyone's life so should we just leave it alone...

It would have zero bearing on my life.
My life already functions without not knowing daily.
Why you fail to grasp you do not need to know.
If you did need to know, your life clearly would be unable to function.
So maybe you cannot function then in life without knowing.

Think about that.
Right really have to go.

so by that should evolution be stopped, forget teaching it, what about history should we stop teaching that, ancient cultures should we ignore them...

you make no sense at all... Smile

by Ben Reilly Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:45 pm

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:I will answer your question.
I can function and get on with my life not even caring to know how they died. It has no bearing on my life.
I sad they died, that is it.
I do not need to now. If I find out, will it change me?
No

Goodnight

you think it has no bearing on your life but you may discover it has great bearing on your life..

evolution has no bearing on anyone's life so should we just leave it alone...

Evolution has a bearing on every single living person and thing. The people working hard every day to provide you and I with food, and to create live-saving medications, must constantly deal with the facts of evolution.

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:51 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

you think it has no bearing on your life but you may discover it has great bearing on your life..

evolution has no bearing on anyone's life so should we just leave it alone...

Evolution has a bearing on every single living person and thing. The people working hard every day to provide you and I with food, and to create live-saving medications, must constantly deal with the facts of evolution.

I don't think it does, that's my opinion... evolution is wrong any premise it stands on will be equally wrong..

should we forget history, ancient cultures..

by Ben Reilly Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:53 pm

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

you think it has no bearing on your life but you may discover it has great bearing on your life..

evolution has no bearing on anyone's life so should we just leave it alone...

Evolution has a bearing on every single living person and thing. The people working hard every day to provide you and I with food, and to create live-saving medications, must constantly deal with the facts of evolution.

I don't think it does, that's my opinion... evolution is wrong any premise it stands on will be equally wrong..

should we forget history, ancient cultures..

Your opinion is wrong, not evolution. There's proof of evolution, which in turn proves you wrong.

by Guest Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:57 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

I don't think it does, that's my opinion... evolution is wrong any premise it stands on will be equally wrong..

should we forget history, ancient cultures..

Your opinion is wrong, not evolution. There's proof of evolution, which in turn proves you wrong.

evolution is never seen, there is no proof, it stands on a house of cards, mainly because no one like the possible alternative...

again should we stop teaching history at schools, or ancient cultures...??

by Sponsored content