I think we can all agree that a conspiracy theorist is not simply someone who speculates about the unknown, or intellectually understands that what they have is a "feeling" rather than an actual, viable theory. A conspiracy theorist is precisely the person who isn't rational, and instead delusional, and often egomaniacal. How many times have you seen a CT act as if the "real" answer is so obvious to him that others must be stupid or corrupt to not see it?
What is wrong with being a Conspiracy Theorist?
- Thread starter Jan Ardena
- Start date
I think we can all agree that a conspiracy theorist is not simply someone who speculates about the unknown, or intellectually understands that what they have is a "feeling" rather than an actual, viable theory. A conspiracy theorist is precisely the person who isn't rational, and instead delusional, and often egomaniacal. How many times have you seen a CT act as if the "real" answer is so obvious to him that others must be stupid or corrupt to not see it?
Here is a hot to trot conspiracy theory currently emmerging...
Basically:
USA Government attempts to cover up the significant possibility of a Melt down at Fukushima to protect it's vested interests in it's own nuclear industry. Also to cover up the possibility of massive planetary damage casued by a possible melt down.
The article:
http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2012/10/16/ground-fukushima-unit-4-sinking-structure-verge-complete-collapse/
Basically:
USA Government attempts to cover up the significant possibility of a Melt down at Fukushima to protect it's vested interests in it's own nuclear industry. Also to cover up the possibility of massive planetary damage casued by a possible melt down.
The article:
the article in question:
http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2012/10/16/ground-fukushima-unit-4-sinking-structure-verge-complete-collapse/
Ask A Better Question:
Question:
What is the difference between a Conspiracy Theory and a Scientific Theory?
Answer:
None. Both have to be supported by solid facts before they can be accepted as being the most likely and truthful answer.
"Conspiracy Theory/Theorist" is a derogatory term applied by the corporate-owned mainstream mobster media to label anyone who calls their fake reports into question. Slime-bag "comedians" like Bill Mahr do a very similar thing. It is a way to shut off debate by using a simple emotional control over the weak-minded masses.
The method that these scum bags use is very similar to racists attacking a person because of the color of their skin. No matter how much a person with a different skin color protests & tries to explain that they are no different than everyone else, the mindless crowds will listen to the chastising of the biggest blow-hard in the room and call them the N**** Word.
If you follow the herd, you will eventually be carried by the herd over a cliff. Think about it.
http://www.sciforums.com/images/smilies/leaf.gif__Free The Weed
Question:
What is the difference between a Conspiracy Theory and a Scientific Theory?
Answer:
None. Both have to be supported by solid facts before they can be accepted as being the most likely and truthful answer.
"Conspiracy Theory/Theorist" is a derogatory term applied by the corporate-owned mainstream mobster media to label anyone who calls their fake reports into question. Slime-bag "comedians" like Bill Mahr do a very similar thing. It is a way to shut off debate by using a simple emotional control over the weak-minded masses.
The method that these scum bags use is very similar to racists attacking a person because of the color of their skin. No matter how much a person with a different skin color protests & tries to explain that they are no different than everyone else, the mindless crowds will listen to the chastising of the biggest blow-hard in the room and call them the N**** Word.
If you follow the herd, you will eventually be carried by the herd over a cliff. Think about it.
http://www.sciforums.com/images/smilies/leaf.gif__Free The Weed
True. After all, Chernobyl exploded and released even more radiation into the air - and everyone in the world died.
(What? You don't think everyone died? You must be swallowing the government/media coverup!)
Since there was a reccent response:
No. While the term "conspiracy theory" doesn't have an inherently derogatory meaning, it is used in a derogatory way to refer to theories that are not scientific. Moreover, since a "conspiracy" is an event, it shouldn't need to be a theory. It either happened or it didn't. So it is better related to scientific data than scientific theory. Ie, Watergate actually happened. It was a real event. A real conspiracy. There's no "conspiracy theory" about it because it is known to be real.
Hi Russ,
I tend to think that is in the actual hiding of scientific data that leads to the opinion that a conspiracy is taking place.
for an abstract example:
Abstract conspiracy theory:
"That global warming therefore climate change is caused by the overall warming of the planet from with in, by causes yet to be determined leads those that know [ governments] to falsely yet with credibility blame human activity for climate change to avoid world wide panic"
"When a searcher attempts to seek out data to confirm or refute the idea that the planet as a whole is gaining in temperature and meets a fire wall of obfuscation and "seemingly" deliberate misleading information, that the person seeking the info starts to believe there MAY be a conspiracy to hide crucial data from the worlds general population. [even with good intention]
and say for example, when confronted with tectonic plate activity figures that indicate significant rises in magnitude and frequency of earthquakes the conspiracy theorist is "justified" even if incorrectly so.
The example of Watergate:
The data needed to confirm Nixon's innocence was missing. Hence someone developed a conspiracy theory that Nixon was hiding something which turned out to be found to be true and valid.
Watergate started out as a conspiracy theory no doubt based on a a suspicion due to data gained and data that was missing.
IMO
ahh if only those spent fuel rods were the same rating as Chernobyl had stored... we wouldn't have a problem. but I "believe" that the highly enriched and refined fuel rods are considerably more potent than those used in Chernobyl. [ by many orders of magnitude]
Just a thought in passing: While the words "conspiracy" and "theory" are a bit of grammatical/factual blunder when combined - much as you said - the thing is that the term has come into frequent usage for so long that pretty much everyone knows exactly what it means when they hear/see it. Keep in mind that languages evolve all the time and common usage leads to acceptance. Such is the case in this instance. So, like it or not, we're stuck with it now.
Better said than how I put it, so let me expand along those lines:
A mash-up of the two root words produces a result that it cumbersome at best, but since definitions are arrived at via consensus, most people understand the actual intended definition of the term: a non-scientific alternate explanation for a historical event.
Conspiracy theory lives in the holes in data, whether real or imagined. That's what makes it inherently unscientific. Data is fabricated to fill gaps in the data to point to the theory. And most fail because what the conspiracy theorist thinks is a hole in which the conspiracy theory would fit, it isn't a hole, just a misunderstanding of the data or worse a lie.
A conspiracy theory usually involves a conspiracy because of the need for a coverup to explain the lack of evidence or contradicting evidence, but conspiracies are not necessarily required, if the accepted/historical data is thin enough on its own.
A mash-up of the two root words produces a result that it cumbersome at best, but since definitions are arrived at via consensus, most people understand the actual intended definition of the term: a non-scientific alternate explanation for a historical event.
Conspiracy theory lives in the holes in data, whether real or imagined. That's what makes it inherently unscientific. Data is fabricated to fill gaps in the data to point to the theory. And most fail because what the conspiracy theorist thinks is a hole in which the conspiracy theory would fit, it isn't a hole, just a misunderstanding of the data or worse a lie.
A conspiracy theory usually involves a conspiracy because of the need for a coverup to explain the lack of evidence or contradicting evidence, but conspiracies are not necessarily required, if the accepted/historical data is thin enough on its own.
Very well said, excellent!
We're aware, of course, that conspiracies do exist. From a local city board member doing shady deals with contractors all the way to the White House and members of congress. But things that people can imagine have no bounds. Outlandish stuff like the government holding secret alien technology, etc.
Seems to me there are generally two classes of people who buy into this nonsense: those with a poor education and overlapping with the second group who lead such mundane lives that they'll believe almost anything to add some excitement to their boring existence. And, of course, many people seem to thrive on scandals anyway - as evidenced by the popularity of all the tabloids and thousands of crackpot sites on the Web.
river
Cover up of what, exactly? They felt a need to cover up the fact that there has never been a single credible piece of evidence that UFOs(as you mean it)have ever visited Earth? That's the very definition of a Conspiracy Theory(belief in a conspiracy DESPITE the fact that it has no factual support). There are conspiracies, no doubt. The Nixon Watergate breakin and coverup was a conspiracy, the President resigned because of the facts that exposed that conspiracy(not because someone had a theory). The Moon Landings Were Faked conspiracy, on the other hand, is nutjobbery, the facts just don't support it no matter how much the Conspiracists want it to be true. Same for 911 Truthers, Birthers, Their Coming to Get Our Guns freaks, the whole Glen Beck lexicon, Breitbart Inc., Micheal Moore(often, not always)...
The problem comes when the Conspiracists believe so many things that just ain't so that they become incapable of seeing the real thing, or they have already lost so much credibility with their ravings about nonsense that no one will believe anything they say, even if it is true. And with all the noise about the ridiculous CTs fogging up the media any real conspiracy gets lost or discounted(or is actively camouflaged by the hubbub, dismissed as just another "Conspiracy Theory"). To paraphrase the Bible, there will always be conspiracies and rumors of conspiracies. Wisdom is the ability to discriminate between what is factual and what is imagination. Conspiracy Theorists lack that wisdom(often they have been actively misinformed by the media), the name is more a comment on that lack of discernment, rather than a blanket dismissing of the existence of conspiracies. Conspiracy Theorists are more interested in promoting the theory rather than finding the truth, they might actually succeed in exposing a conspiracy by that method, but it will be completely accidental and they will have no way of knowing when they were right(a stopped clock is right twice a day, but how will you know when that will be?). All inquiries start with the facts, and it is the facts that indicate a conspiracy, not the other way round.
Grumpy
Cover up of what, exactly? They felt a need to cover up the fact that there has never been a single credible piece of evidence that UFOs(as you mean it)have ever visited Earth? That's the very definition of a Conspiracy Theory(belief in a conspiracy DESPITE the fact that it has no factual support). There are conspiracies, no doubt. The Nixon Watergate breakin and coverup was a conspiracy, the President resigned because of the facts that exposed that conspiracy(not because someone had a theory). The Moon Landings Were Faked conspiracy, on the other hand, is nutjobbery, the facts just don't support it no matter how much the Conspiracists want it to be true. Same for 911 Truthers, Birthers, Their Coming to Get Our Guns freaks, the whole Glen Beck lexicon, Breitbart Inc., Micheal Moore(often, not always)...
The problem comes when the Conspiracists believe so many things that just ain't so that they become incapable of seeing the real thing, or they have already lost so much credibility with their ravings about nonsense that no one will believe anything they say, even if it is true. And with all the noise about the ridiculous CTs fogging up the media any real conspiracy gets lost or discounted(or is actively camouflaged by the hubbub, dismissed as just another "Conspiracy Theory"). To paraphrase the Bible, there will always be conspiracies and rumors of conspiracies. Wisdom is the ability to discriminate between what is factual and what is imagination. Conspiracy Theorists lack that wisdom(often they have been actively misinformed by the media), the name is more a comment on that lack of discernment, rather than a blanket dismissing of the existence of conspiracies. Conspiracy Theorists are more interested in promoting the theory rather than finding the truth, they might actually succeed in exposing a conspiracy by that method, but it will be completely accidental and they will have no way of knowing when they were right(a stopped clock is right twice a day, but how will you know when that will be?). All inquiries start with the facts, and it is the facts that indicate a conspiracy, not the other way round.
Grumpy
there is nothing wrong with being a "conspiracy theorist", it's the degree you take it to is what counts.
i consider it a necessary first step in keeping things legit.
river
Cover up of what, exactly? They felt a need to cover up the fact that there has never been a single credible piece of evidence that UFOs(as you mean it)have ever visited Earth? That's the very definition of a Conspiracy Theory(belief in a conspiracy DESPITE the fact that it has no factual support). There are conspiracies, no doubt. The Nixon Watergate breakin and coverup was a conspiracy, the President resigned because of the facts that exposed that conspiracy(not because someone had a theory). The Moon Landings Were Faked conspiracy, on the other hand, is nutjobbery, the facts just don't support it no matter how much the Conspiracists want it to be true. Same for 911 Truthers, Birthers, Their Coming to Get Our Guns freaks, the whole Glen Beck lexicon, Breitbart Inc., Micheal Moore(often, not always)...
The problem comes when the Conspiracists believe so many things that just ain't so that they become incapable of seeing the real thing, or they have already lost so much credibility with their ravings about nonsense that no one will believe anything they say, even if it is true. And with all the noise about the ridiculous CTs fogging up the media any real conspiracy gets lost or discounted(or is actively camouflaged by the hubbub, dismissed as just another "Conspiracy Theory"). To paraphrase the Bible, there will always be conspiracies and rumors of conspiracies. Wisdom is the ability to discriminate between what is factual and what is imagination. Conspiracy Theorists lack that wisdom(often they have been actively misinformed by the media), the name is more a comment on that lack of discernment, rather than a blanket dismissing of the existence of conspiracies. Conspiracy Theorists are more interested in promoting the theory rather than finding the truth, they might actually succeed in exposing a conspiracy by that method, but it will be completely accidental and they will have no way of knowing when they were right(a stopped clock is right twice a day, but how will you know when that will be?). All inquiries start with the facts, and it is the facts that indicate a conspiracy, not the other way round.
Grumpy
There is proof of the cover up by the government of UFOs if your willing to be curious enough to read about the goings on back in the fifties and to now
Richard M. Dolans book is good because he presents the facts , no theories , he leaves that up to you , it is an important read
The reason that the cover up started in the first place , was because they didn't know the origin of these craft , were they Russian for instance
And they had NO ability to stop this activity , hence a national security problem to say the least
Further this was and is a world wide problem , not just US problem
Pilots and military pilots as well as radar has observed this objects and clocked them at enormous speeds , from a thousand to eighteen thousand miles per hour , which is from .29 to 5 miles per second , blink of an eye acceleration
There is a conspiracy and it is backed with facts
river
Cover up of what? There has never been evidence of visits by aliens to Earth, period.
No, there are no facts supporting the contention that aliens have ever visited Earth. The physics involved make such visits unlikely, ever, anywhere. The secrecy and actions of the USAF at Tenopah and the atomic bomb effort were not about hiding UFOs and LGM. When such facts come to be found in the real world(as opposed to the World of Woo)you will know because every newspaper, news show and channel will be talking about nothing else for days and weeks.
Grumpy
Cover up of what? There has never been evidence of visits by aliens to Earth, period.
No, there are no facts supporting the contention that aliens have ever visited Earth. The physics involved make such visits unlikely, ever, anywhere. The secrecy and actions of the USAF at Tenopah and the atomic bomb effort were not about hiding UFOs and LGM. When such facts come to be found in the real world(as opposed to the World of Woo)you will know because every newspaper, news show and channel will be talking about nothing else for days and weeks.
Grumpy
Was this man a conspiracy theorist?
[video=youtube;xhZk8ronces]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces[/video]
and apparently according to some the next President to even allude to secret society issues was brought down by an exposed sexual misconduct in the oval office... namely Bill Clinton and M. Lewinski...
and one notes the potential for a massive scandal evolving right now in the Vatican....hmmm... conspiracy theory for sure...
[video=youtube;xhZk8ronces]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces[/video]
and apparently according to some the next President to even allude to secret society issues was brought down by an exposed sexual misconduct in the oval office... namely Bill Clinton and M. Lewinski...
and one notes the potential for a massive scandal evolving right now in the Vatican....hmmm... conspiracy theory for sure...
Quantum Quack
Conspiracies exist, and when evidence of their existence is real then those who have theories about them are not what "Conspiracy Theorist" has come to mean.
Again, if it is evidence that leads to the conspiracy, the conspiracy theory can be legit, but when the theory is born of no evidence, false evidence or manufactured evidence and clung to despite contrary evidence, it is likely a conspiracy theory. Again, Nixon did conspire to break the law, and the evidence is what painted that picture, but the Twin Towers WERE brought down by the attacks with planes(that's what the evidence says), but the Truthers are STILL clinging to their beliefs despite no supporting evidence.
There is a difference.
Grumpy
Conspiracies exist, and when evidence of their existence is real then those who have theories about them are not what "Conspiracy Theorist" has come to mean.
Again, if it is evidence that leads to the conspiracy, the conspiracy theory can be legit, but when the theory is born of no evidence, false evidence or manufactured evidence and clung to despite contrary evidence, it is likely a conspiracy theory. Again, Nixon did conspire to break the law, and the evidence is what painted that picture, but the Twin Towers WERE brought down by the attacks with planes(that's what the evidence says), but the Truthers are STILL clinging to their beliefs despite no supporting evidence.
There is a difference.
Grumpy