Steerpike
VIP Member
- Dec 17, 2007
- 1,847
- 182
- 83
The most common fallback position for conspiracy theorist to take is that the rest of us just haven't educated ourselves or we'd know what they know.
That's nonsense in my case, because I like conspiracy theories. I think they're fun. I've read all of the moon landing conspiracy theories, the 9/11 conspiracy theories, the Alex Jones web sites, and god knows how many other theories. I even have a copy of Alex Jones' movie ENDGAME. So it's not a matter of not having heard the theories and seen the "evidence."
But you've got to have enough sense to sort through the evidence and claims and see what makes sense and what doesn't. There is a lot of mythology behind the 9/11 conspiracy theory claims, but as much as conspiracy theorists want you to read their sources and respond to them, they usually won't do the same in return. For example, if you post the White Paper from Implosion World that debunks the idea of a controlled demolition, conspiracy theorists either fall silent or fall back on tired mantras like "corporate media" and "puppet" or whatever. No substantive rebuttal at all.
We can see if the conspiracy theorists here are any different. Here's the White Paper:
http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf
Conspiracy theories thrive on what is perceived as a lack of explanation from other sources...but instead of jumping to reasonable conclusions, they jump to the most outlandish ones.
If my garage was damaged six feet above the ground, and I told my neighbor who came over to ask about it, that a guy in a Ford Taurus backed into it, he might well see that my explanation for what happened is missing something. How does he proceed from there?
If he's not a conspiracy theorist, he might think I'm lying about it because I'm after the insurance money, or maybe I did something stupid when I was drunk and don't want to tell him about it. Or if he didn't think I was a liar he might assume there was something strapped to the roof of the Taurus and that hit my garage, since the car couldn't cause the damage at that height.
But if my neighbor was a conspiracy theorist, the fact that my explanation didn't jive would be taken as proof that the Illuminati had hidden gold in the walls of my garage long ago and were now trying to get access to it to further their schemes.
Worse yet, if I showed my neighbor a video I took of the Taurus backing into it with something strapped to the hood, he'd say it was faked and I was covering for the Illuminati.
With conspiracy theorists, any perceived inconsistency in information right at the outset of an event, or any missing information, is adopted immediately as proof of the conspiracy, and once a certain stance is adopted, no later evidence can dissuade the conspiracy theorists.
That's why the white paper I posted above won't even cause a conspiracy theorist to bat an eye. Facts and reason aren't important. The only thing important is furtherance of the conspiracy. And the only way a conspiracy theorist can continue to delude himself into adhering to the theory is by convincing himself that he knows something that others don't know, and he is smarter than they are. That's why most of what you get out of conspiracy theorists here and elsewhere are lame comments like "you're controlled by the media" or "you're a puppet," etc. At the end of the day, that's all they've got left.
That's nonsense in my case, because I like conspiracy theories. I think they're fun. I've read all of the moon landing conspiracy theories, the 9/11 conspiracy theories, the Alex Jones web sites, and god knows how many other theories. I even have a copy of Alex Jones' movie ENDGAME. So it's not a matter of not having heard the theories and seen the "evidence."
But you've got to have enough sense to sort through the evidence and claims and see what makes sense and what doesn't. There is a lot of mythology behind the 9/11 conspiracy theory claims, but as much as conspiracy theorists want you to read their sources and respond to them, they usually won't do the same in return. For example, if you post the White Paper from Implosion World that debunks the idea of a controlled demolition, conspiracy theorists either fall silent or fall back on tired mantras like "corporate media" and "puppet" or whatever. No substantive rebuttal at all.
We can see if the conspiracy theorists here are any different. Here's the White Paper:
http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf
Conspiracy theories thrive on what is perceived as a lack of explanation from other sources...but instead of jumping to reasonable conclusions, they jump to the most outlandish ones.
If my garage was damaged six feet above the ground, and I told my neighbor who came over to ask about it, that a guy in a Ford Taurus backed into it, he might well see that my explanation for what happened is missing something. How does he proceed from there?
If he's not a conspiracy theorist, he might think I'm lying about it because I'm after the insurance money, or maybe I did something stupid when I was drunk and don't want to tell him about it. Or if he didn't think I was a liar he might assume there was something strapped to the roof of the Taurus and that hit my garage, since the car couldn't cause the damage at that height.
But if my neighbor was a conspiracy theorist, the fact that my explanation didn't jive would be taken as proof that the Illuminati had hidden gold in the walls of my garage long ago and were now trying to get access to it to further their schemes.
Worse yet, if I showed my neighbor a video I took of the Taurus backing into it with something strapped to the hood, he'd say it was faked and I was covering for the Illuminati.
With conspiracy theorists, any perceived inconsistency in information right at the outset of an event, or any missing information, is adopted immediately as proof of the conspiracy, and once a certain stance is adopted, no later evidence can dissuade the conspiracy theorists.
That's why the white paper I posted above won't even cause a conspiracy theorist to bat an eye. Facts and reason aren't important. The only thing important is furtherance of the conspiracy. And the only way a conspiracy theorist can continue to delude himself into adhering to the theory is by convincing himself that he knows something that others don't know, and he is smarter than they are. That's why most of what you get out of conspiracy theorists here and elsewhere are lame comments like "you're controlled by the media" or "you're a puppet," etc. At the end of the day, that's all they've got left.
