Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true."A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
Specifically?
Did you not address this part on purpose?That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true."A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts.
You asked about "conspiracy theory" not "conspiracy" you idiot.That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true."A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
Yes. As it is subjective. Much like the core term in question. Therefore, redundant.Did you not address this part on purpose?That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true."A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts.
Only if you wish it to be subjective and redundant. Typically it's the conspiracy theories that are subjective therefore redundant.Yes. As it is subjective. Much like the core term in question. Therefore, redundant.Did you not address this part on purpose?That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true."A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts.
No it doesn't. Conspiracies exist, obviously. But to fit as a "conspiracy theory," as the term is generally used, it is "generally....carried out by government or other powerful actors." That doesn't mean "only." And note that not all conspiracies that are carried out by governments etc are conspiracy theories. The Tobacco Industry's efforts and conspiracy against anti-smoking claims, and the Reagan Administration Iran-Contra affair, are not conspiracy theories as they both were warranted accusations.That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true."A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
Real NewsSpecifically?
I dont think you read the description accurately. Its not the fruit cake that is in the government or position of power. Its the people involved in said suspected conspiracy.The OP can speak for himself as to what he himself believes to be conspiracy theory.
But some example of conspiracy theory as I see the phenomenon:
1. Those who believe the moon landing was faked or that the Holocaust never happened. Such conspiracy theorists rarely include anybody in government or in any kind of power role.
2. Those who believe 911 or a cover up of what actually happened was a government conspiracy intended to convince us that it was an Islamic terrorist action. Such people are rarely if ever involved with government or are in positions of power.
3. Those who believe there were multiple gunmen involved in the JFK assassination. Again such people are rarely if ever involved with government or are in positions of power.
4. Those who believe that climate scientists deliberately falsify or alter evidence so that they can push a doctrine of dangerous or deadly climate change that must be proactively addressed by government. Such people are often not in government or other positions of power.
etc.
None of these fit the definition as provided in Post #2.
Some people's DNA simply does not allow for them to distinguish between conspiracy theories and conspiracy facts. Look at all the events in our world that were once painted as conspiracy theories, that today are known to be true.Anything a given mod wants it to be based upon their personal bias.
Like what?Some people's DNA simply does not allow for them to distinguish between conspiracy theories and conspiracy facts. Look at all the events in our world that were once painted as conspiracy theories, that today are known to be true.Anything a given mod wants it to be based upon their personal bias.
Such as? Suspicion and accusation of a conspiracy is not the same thing as a "conspiracy theory."Some people's DNA simply does not allow for them to distinguish between conspiracy theories and conspiracy facts. Look at all the events in our world that were once painted as conspiracy theories, that today are known to be true.Anything a given mod wants it to be based upon their personal bias.
I have no illusions about what the government is capable of doing. I looked up Operation Northwoods. It was something that was proposed but never carried out. I 'm asking what conspiracy theory has ever been proven to be true?There is a really neat thing called google. Type something like "conspiracy theories proven true" and see what you get.Like what?
Or, try "Operation Northwoods." Especially if you believe that "our government" would never plan to harm Americans.