The idiocy of conspiracy theorists

[Longcol]

Are they all idiots? Do they have a point? Should they be ignored? Do they serve a useful purpose?

 

Evidence

 

truthlogic is very consistent in portraying the parallel universe he inhabits.

 

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=701420

[sccsux]

If you want to call me a fool P.M \YOUR PHONE NUMBER AND WE CAN MEET UP.

 

That reads remarkably like a threat:suspect:.

[Frank Sidney]

I reckon Tony's been paid by the "authorities" to start this thread..

[Rowan22]

Oddly, what you think makes you sound clever and erudite actually does the opposite.

 

 

Well after such an "erudite" refutation of what I have said I shall certainly strive to meet your lofty academic standards in future.

[Rowan22]

That reads remarkably like a threat:suspect:.

 

 

Just an observation that the sort of person who feels comfortable undermining people from his bedroom generally wouldn't do so if the conversation were to happen face to face.

[epiphany]

What's funny is that if you explain something proven such as the cointel program to some random person on the street, you'd probably get labelled a nut and cast into the same league as those with the most elaborate 9/11 conspiracy theories.

 

To say "conspiracy theorists" are idiots, in a generalised sense, is idiocy because SOME conspiracies have played a major role throughout history and the exposure of conspiracy always begins with a theory.

[Rowan22]

What's funny is that if you explain something proven such as the cointel program to some random person on the street, you'd probably get labelled a nut and cast into the same league as those with the most elaborate 9/11 conspiracy theories.

 

To say "conspiracy theorists" are idiots, in a generalised sense, is idiocy because SOME conspiracies have played a major role throughout history and the exposure of conspiracy always begins with a theory.

 

 

Good point!

[Anna B]

Conspiracy theorists are all idiots until they are proved right all along - which sometimes happens.

 

The internet, mobile phones etc have made information much more freely available and much has been uncovered that many would prefer remained hidden. They work very hard at destroying the credibility of the whistleblowers by damaging their reputation and giving out disinformation.

 

Something to bear in mind when considering the authenticity of any 'conspiracy theory.' It's always good to keep an open mind.

[epiphany]

The now mostly pejorative term "conspiracy theory" has become so laden with presumption that people often lose sight of the historic, systemic role of conspiracies in influencing our world.

 

While it is true that the more elaborate end of the conspiracy theory spectrum is partly to blame for tarnishing the notion that conspiracies do in fact occur, as evidenced through declassified documents and ongoing institutional analysis, people are often quick to discredit any criticism that merely questions the official version of events spoon fed to us by government and mainstream media sources with known self serving agendas.

 

As I said before, if you mentioned exposed conspiratorial programs such as COINTELPRO to the "man on the street", you would most likely get lumped in the same category as someone who believes absolutely that 9/11 was an inside job. Either that, or it would be presumed you must also believe that lizards rule the world.

 

These people are just as presumptuous as the "without doubt" conspiracy theorist.

 

While I am a fence sitter when it comes to many of the events conspiracy theorists postulate, due to lack of proof or adequate investigation, and I am well aware that the world is far too complex to jump to conclusions about elaborate conspiracies, I do feel that the desire for conclusion over events like 9/11, 7/7 etc. may be swinging us to the other extreme. Now there is the danger of the spectrum of critical thinking being confined to the limits set by a mass of opinion kept satiated by media and government inspired sound bites, and they simply cannot be trusted to shape mainstream opinion.

 

This is ultimately a call for healthy scepticism and a deeper level of critical thinking that people at both extremes - the blinded conspiracy theorist, the blinded government/media repeater - fail to apply over their own presumption.

 

I've certainly been on both "sides" of the debate before.

[Rowan22]

The now mostly pejorative term "conspiracy theory" has become so laden with presumption that people often lose sight of the historic, systemic role of conspiracies in influencing our world.

 

While it is true that the more elaborate end of the conspiracy theory spectrum is partly to blame for tarnishing the notion that conspiracies do in fact occur, as evidenced through declassified documents and ongoing institutional analysis, people are often quick to discredit any criticism that merely questions the official version of events spoon fed to us by government and mainstream media sources with known self serving agendas.

 

As I said before, if you mentioned exposed conspiratorial programs such as COINTELPRO to the "man on the street", you would most likely get lumped in the same category as someone who believes absolutely that 9/11 was an inside job. Either that, or it would be presumed you must also believe that lizards rule the world.

 

These people are just as presumptuous as the "without doubt" conspiracy theorist.

 

While I am a fence sitter when it comes to many of the events conspiracy theorists postulate, due to lack of proof or adequate investigation, and I am well aware that the world is far too complex to jump to conclusions about elaborate conspiracies, I do feel that the desire for conclusion over events like 9/11, 7/7 etc. may be swinging us to the other extreme. Now there is the danger of the spectrum of critical thinking being confined to the limits set by a mass of opinion kept satiated by media and government inspired sound bites, and they simply cannot be trusted to shape mainstream opinion.

 

This is ultimately a call for healthy scepticism and a deeper level of critical thinking that people at both extremes - the blinded conspiracy theorist, the blinded government/media repeater - fail to apply over their own presumption.

 

I've certainly been on both "sides" of the debate before.

 

Excellent post if I may say!