ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags conspiracy theorists

Reply
Old 25th September 2018, 06:27 PM   #1
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,325
Who believes in conspiracies? Research offers theory

Who believes in conspiracies? Research offers a theory

Originally Posted by Phys Org
The Apollo moon landing was staged. The CIA killed JFK. 9/11 was a plot by the U.S. government to justify a war in the Middle East. President Barack Obama was not a natural born citizen. The massacre at Sandy Hook elementary school was staged as a pretense for increased gun control. The "deep state" is trying to destroy Donald Trump's presidency.

Conspiracy theories have been cooked up throughout history, but they are increasingly visible lately, likely due in part to the president of the United States routinely embracing or creating them.

Given that any particular conspiracy theory is unlikely to be the subject of mainstream consensus, what draws people to them?

New research by Josh Hart, associate professor of psychology at Union College New York, suggests that people with certain personality traits and cognitive styles are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories. The research was recently published in the Journal of Individual Differences.

"These people tend to be more suspicious, untrusting, eccentric, needing to feel special, with a tendency to regard the world as an inherently dangerous place," Hart said. "They are also more likely to detect meaningful patterns where they might not exist. People who are reluctant to believe in conspiracy theories tend to have the opposite qualities."

Hart and his student, Molly Graether '17, surveyed more than 1,200 American adults. Participants were asked a series of questions related to their personality traits, partisan bent and demographic background. They were also asked whether they agreed with generic conspiratorial statements, such as: "The power held by heads of state is second to that of small unknown groups who really control world politics," and "Groups of scientists manipulate, fabricate or suppress evidence in order to deceive the public."...

https://phys.org/news/2018-09-believ...es-theory.html
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 01:32 AM   #2
threadworm
Graduate Poster
 
threadworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,551
Quote:
Groups of scientists manipulate, fabricate or suppress evidence in order to deceive the public
Presumably those same scientists are producing reports like this to discredit battle hardened keyboard warriors searching for the twoof?
__________________
Facts are simple and facts are straight, facts are lazy and facts are late, facts don't come with points of view, facts don't do what I want them to.

**************************

Apollo Hoax Debunked
threadworm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 07:51 AM   #3
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,375
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Who believes in conspiracies? Research offers a theory




https://phys.org/news/2018-09-believ...es-theory.html
I believe that too many people Watched programs like the X-Files(one of my favorites) and believed the premise of the show.
But if you look at large conspiracies, the ability to keep the conspiracy hidden falls exponentially.
Remember that two people and a blue dress couldn't keep a secret.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 09:04 AM   #4
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
 
blutoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,634
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Who believes in conspiracies? Research offers a theory




https://phys.org/news/2018-09-believ...es-theory.html
One concern I had with this was the premise in this question, "Given that any particular conspiracy theory is unlikely to be the subject of mainstream consensus, what draws people to them?"

Actually, a lot of conspiracy theories are pretty much mainstream. I expect surveys will show a broad belief that JFK was assassinated by the CIA. I think international surveys show that the belief the Apollo missions were faked represent a majority. Don't most Americans beliege Obama is or at least probably is Kenyan born?

Secondly, they're repeating well known information about a correlation, but assuming a direction of causality.

I don't think there's evidence for a personality 'type' that leads to believing conspiracy theories. I think they're simply absorbed with culture. The direction of causality is reversed. If you've grown up taught that there's a secret cabal bent on destroying your life, you become cynical and paranoid.
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett
blutoski is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 12:24 PM   #5
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 17,005
I'd wager that number does jump even higher if you define it very vaguely and broadly. I mean if we take it to "Powerful people are doing things behind the scenes for their own benefit" you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who isn't a conspiracy theorist.

If we're going to look at the popular Ur examples of conspiracy theories:

- JFK was not killed by a lone gun men but by multiple assailants involved in a plot hatched at the high government level.
- The Apollo moon landings were faked.
- The United States Government has proof / strong evidence of alien life visiting Earth but is deliberately withholding that information from the public.
- President Bush had a hand in planning the 9/11 Attacks
- President Bush knew the 9/11 attacks were going to happen but intentionally choose not the stop them.
- President Roosevelt had prior warning of Pearl Harbor and intentionally choose not to it.
- President Obama is not a valid US Citizen and/or was not born in the US.
- The United States Government has handed over its sovereignty to a multi-national organization of some kind.
- The is a secret group that is operating independently the governments of the world that is actually in charge.
- The United States Government uses electrical or chemical means to pacify or mentally alter the population.
- The government and/or companies have cures for diseases they are deliberately withholding to make money off of sick people.
- Holocaust denial

I'd accept that a very high number of Americans believe (or profess to believe) at least one of those.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 01:16 PM   #6
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 7,423
I strongly believe in Local Conspiracies.

Like the cabal that keeps eating my chocolate.
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 02:15 PM   #7
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
 
blutoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,634
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
JFK was not killed by a lone gun men but by multiple assailants involved in a plot hatched at the high government level.
I often get screwed when I answer affirmatively to the question: "Do you believe the JFK assassination was a conspiracy?"

My answer is yes, because Oswald told his wife, which categorizes the crime as a conspiracy.

This has led to a lot of confusion about my position on the topic.
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett
blutoski is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 02:18 PM   #8
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
 
blutoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,634
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I'd wager that number does jump even higher if you define it very vaguely and broadly. I mean if we take it to "Powerful people are doing things behind the scenes for their own benefit" you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who isn't a conspiracy theorist.
This is the thing.

I happened to notice that they included the belief that Trump was involved with Russian efforts to influence the election as an example of a conspiracy theory. Evidence-wise, not sure if that ranks in the same 'you have to be schizotypal to believe this ****' category with 'the queen is a lizard' stuff.
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett
blutoski is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 02:23 PM   #9
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 4,810
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
Actually, a lot of conspiracy theories are pretty much mainstream. I expect surveys will show a broad belief that JFK was assassinated by the CIA.
Your expectation is incorrect. Last survey I saw said that about 13% of those polled thought the CIA was involved. The largest group - about 30% - said Oswald did it. The remainder was split among the mob, the KGB, anti or pro-Castro Cubans, etc., in quantities below 13% each.

This after being exposed to conspiracy theories for 50 years with nary a word published from the other side.

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 02:39 PM   #10
Sherman Bay
Master Poster
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 2,179
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
I strongly believe in Local Conspiracies.

Like the cabal that keeps eating my chocolate.
Is that the same cabal that steals socks from my laundry?
Sherman Bay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 02:41 PM   #11
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,069
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
This is the thing.

I happened to notice that they included the belief that Trump was involved with Russian efforts to influence the election as an example of a conspiracy theory. Evidence-wise, not sure if that ranks in the same 'you have to be schizotypal to believe this ****' category with 'the queen is a lizard' stuff.
I noticed that, too. I thought it was kind of a poorly thought out article overall.

Not all conspiracy theories are equal, and different conspiracy theories appeal to wildly different demographics.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 02:41 PM   #12
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 7,423
Originally Posted by Sherman Bay View Post
Is that the same cabal that steals socks from my laundry?
that's what they want you to think.
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 05:21 PM   #13
Venom
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,137
I have a homemade scale that rates the likelihood of a conspiracy theory being true from a 10, bat**** insane, to 1, likely true.

I'm sure most conspiracy theorists simply have an 'I believe it' and 'I don't believe it' bin.
Venom is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 05:32 PM   #14
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,069
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
I have a homemade scale that rates the likelihood of a conspiracy theory being true from a 10, bat**** insane, to 1, likely true.

I'm sure most conspiracy theorists simply have an 'I believe it' and 'I don't believe it' bin.
No, I think they're like the rest of us, but the stuff they rate as "likely to be true" happens to be the stuff we rate as batcrap insane, as well as having a
"totally believe in it" bin.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 05:57 PM   #15
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 17,005
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
I have a homemade scale that rates the likelihood of a conspiracy theory being true from a 10, bat**** insane, to 1, likely true.

I'm sure most conspiracy theorists simply have an 'I believe it' and 'I don't believe it' bin.
Yeah but this can be problematic.

I have an... let's say acquaintance that is a good person, not stupid per se, and doesn't lack critical thinking skills but when it comes to conspiracy theories she always, always, believes the "light" version of it.

She doesn't think Bush caused 9/11, but she thinks he deliberately (not as an intelligence failure) let it happen. She doesn't think we faked the Moon landings, but she does think we reshoot the footage (she's convinced film wouldn't survive solar radiation). She believes in that "A Secret Service Agent accidentally shot Kennedy while trying to return fire on Oswald's position" theory that made the rounds a few years back.

It's like she's... hedging her bets or something. It's odd.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2018, 11:19 PM   #16
Venom
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,137
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Yeah but this can be problematic.

I have an... let's say acquaintance that is a good person, not stupid per se, and doesn't lack critical thinking skills but when it comes to conspiracy theories she always, always, believes the "light" version of it.

She doesn't think Bush caused 9/11, but she thinks he deliberately (not as an intelligence failure) let it happen. She doesn't think we faked the Moon landings, but she does think we reshoot the footage (she's convinced film wouldn't survive solar radiation). She believes in that "A Secret Service Agent accidentally shot Kennedy while trying to return fire on Oswald's position" theory that made the rounds a few years back.

It's like she's... hedging her bets or something. It's odd.
That retreat from radical conspiracism as I like to call it is just amusing. It reveals how desperate they are to hang onto some vestige of the full tinfoil narrative as they keep one foot out the door.

And those LIHOP and complicity theories can complicate things, but I generally try to examine them on their own terms and not as a monolithic CT.
No planers of the holographic type get a big fat 10 on my scale, while those who allege only that the crash sites in Shanksville and the Pentagon were staged get an 8 or 9--"highly/extremely unlikely"
Venom is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2018, 01:17 AM   #17
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,835
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
I'm sure most conspiracy theorists simply have an 'I believe it' and 'I don't believe it' bin.
And they've mixed the labels up.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 11:34 AM   #18
arayder
Graduate Poster
 
arayder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,757
I think there are conspiracies.

But they are, IMHO, most often people improperly exerting influence on governments and businesses for their own private benefit. Because the influence is improper (like vote buying or blackmail) the matter is kept quiet. The conspiracy ends up looking mysterious when in fact it's motivation was ordinary greed or lust for power.

Last edited by arayder; 30th September 2018 at 11:36 AM.
arayder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 12:06 PM   #19
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,610
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
"These people tend to be more suspicious, untrusting, eccentric, needing to feel special, with a tendency to regard the world as an inherently dangerous place," Hart said. "They are also more likely to detect meaningful patterns where they might not exist. People who are reluctant to believe in conspiracy theories tend to have the opposite qualities."
I think the highlighted is especially important. Coupled with distrust of authority, that is.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:56 PM   #20
Venom
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,137
Historiography and the scientific method should be placed up front and center in all high school history and science courses, imo, and it should be drilled into them until they dream of it. Most young people, at least in the U.S., seem to know a couple facts about American history, Lincoln 16th prez, or that H2O is water, some who paid attention in civics can recall the three branches of the govt, but it appears most people don't know how to think, which makes them easy targets for propaganda and conspiracy theories.

Last edited by Venom; 30th September 2018 at 02:57 PM.
Venom is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2018, 01:42 AM   #21
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,648
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
Historiography and the scientific method should be placed up front and center in all high school history and science courses, imo, and it should be drilled into them until they dream of it. Most young people, at least in the U.S., seem to know a couple facts about American history, Lincoln 16th prez, or that H2O is water, some who paid attention in civics can recall the three branches of the govt, but it appears most people don't know how to think, which makes them easy targets for propaganda and conspiracy theories.
Not necessarily. Remember this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi3erdgVVTw
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2018, 11:03 PM   #22
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,787
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
I often get screwed when I answer affirmatively to the question: "Do you believe the JFK assassination was a conspiracy?"

My answer is yes, because Oswald told his wife, which categorizes the crime as a conspiracy.

This has led to a lot of confusion about my position on the topic.
I have that problem with questions too. I might not consider Oswald and his wife conspiracists, but this question from the OP quote:
Quote:
"Groups of scientists manipulate, fabricate or suppress evidence in order to deceive the public."
I'd have to answer yes on that. Typically it's not a 'group' of scientists, but sometimes it is like the ones that are merchants of doubt.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2018, 11:06 PM   #23
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,787
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
This is the thing.

I happened to notice that they included the belief that Trump was involved with Russian efforts to influence the election as an example of a conspiracy theory. Evidence-wise, not sure if that ranks in the same 'you have to be schizotypal to believe this ****' category with 'the queen is a lizard' stuff.
Not only that, there's a lot of evidence building that it was true.

With that question, they would be getting left/right political bias corrupting the data as well.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 09:17 AM   #24
lingdatang2
New Blood
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 15
I believe my low IQ has contributed significantly to the problem.
lingdatang2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 11:33 AM   #25
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 4,810
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
I often get screwed when I answer affirmatively to the question: "Do you believe the JFK assassination was a conspiracy?"

My answer is yes, because Oswald told his wife, which categorizes the crime as a conspiracy.

This has led to a lot of confusion about my position on the topic.
Your answer should be no, because Oswald never told his wife prior to the assassination that he was going to kill JFK.

After his attempt to kill General Walker on April 10th, 1963, she had found his letter to her (it started, "If I am arrested...") and confronted him with it. He admitted he had tried that nightto kill Walker (a right-winger whose political positions included get Castro out of Cuba). Oswald compared Walker to Hitler, echoing one of the extreme left-wing periodicals he subscribed to, and said many lives would be saved if someone had killed Hitler early on.

Marina said that nonetheless, it wasn't for him to decide who lives and dies and she made him promise he would never do that again. She said she would call the police if he ever did, and kept the letter as proof (she hid it someplace where she knew her husband would never look -- in a cookbook).

On the night before the assassination, Lee visited his wife (they were living apart) and implored her to get back together with him. He said he would be a better husband and said he would buy her anything she wanted if they got back together. "A washing machine would be nice," Marina said, as she was tired of washing the baby's diapers by hand. Oswald agreed, he'd buy her the washing machine.

"No thanks," Marina replied, "you should buy something for yourself".

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/oswald_m1.htm

The next morning Oswald took his rifle to the Depository and shot the President.

Marina didn't know anything about it. It wasn't until she heard on television that the President was shot and the shots came from the building that Lee worked in that she suspected her husband.

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto

Last edited by HSienzant; 4th March 2019 at 11:48 AM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 11:43 AM   #26
ahhell
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,195
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
This is the thing.

I happened to notice that they included the belief that Trump was involved with Russian efforts to influence the election as an example of a conspiracy theory. Evidence-wise, not sure if that ranks in the same 'you have to be schizotypal to believe this ****' category with 'the queen is a lizard' stuff.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Not only that, there's a lot of evidence building that it was true.

With that question, they would be getting left/right political bias corrupting the data as well.
I am unconvinced. As to whether this counts as a conspiracy theory, I think its the level of certainty that shifts it to conspiracy theory.

Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
Your expectation is incorrect. Last survey I saw said that about 13% of those polled thought the CIA was involved. The largest group - about 30% - said Oswald did it. The remainder was split among the mob, the KGB, anti or pro-Castro Cubans, etc., in quantities below 13% each.

This after being exposed to conspiracy theories for 50 years with nary a word published from the other side.

Hank
You could still argue that belief in a conspiracy to kill JFK is mainstream, even if folks don't agree on what the conspiracy was.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 12:51 PM   #27
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,705
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
You could still argue that belief in a conspiracy to kill JFK is mainstream, even if folks don't agree on what the conspiracy was.
Just because something is "mainstream" doesn't make it right or true.

For over a century the mainstream belief was that African-Americans were intellectually inferior to white Americans, and that belief led to much evil based on this mainstream justification.

The accurate argument is that the "mainstream" is ignorant about the assassination's facts, and evidence. Not everyone has the time to read the entire 26 volumes of the Warren Commission, or even walk through the facts from the events of that day, but the problem is that the popular default starting position is that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK, and this intellectually handicaps the mainstream right out of the gate. Every November national and local TV news will run an "On This Day in History" and almost every time the piece about the assassination will end with a mention that a percentage of Americans believe in a conspiracy, and this is sloppy journalism. Worse, it reinforces a lie.

Where does this end? At what point does a foolish idea become mainstream? 30%? 40%? 60%? In 2013 a Huffington Post pole revealed 45% of Americans believe in ghosts. I'm a ghost hunter, does this mean I can retire my number and pick up my trophy?...Hell no, I can testify in any court of law that there is zero scientific evidence that ghosts are real, at least in the way society believes...and yet 45% will tell you they're a thing.

And here's the problem, in 2017 the number of Americans believing in ghosts is now 57%...over half. Do you understand the problem with "mainstream" beliefs? If this number goes over 65% you will start to see warning signs on buildings stating that "This location may contain ghosts or spirits of the undead. Caution is advised." There will be SUCCESSFUL lawsuits over someone traumatized by a ghost, and the inn keeper/resort/office building/apartment owner/etc didn't warn them in advance. Those lawsuits will be successful because 65% gives a lawyer a functional, sympathetic jury pool to draw from.

I used to be one of those morons who believed in a conspiracy to kill JFK, and it was a core belief for almost 30 years. If I come off a little heated on this subject it's because I'm a convert to rational, evidence-based thinking. But I am still very angry because I was a willing fool who ate the lies of CTists.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 12:55 PM   #28
ahhell
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,195
Saying that something is "mainstream" is in no way an endorsement, merely a fairly subjective statement regarding popularity or commonality of such beliefs.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 04:44 PM   #29
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,705
Which is why skeptics need to step it up.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 04:52 PM   #30
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,965
I would much rather be like the conspiracy theorists described in the article than the kind of people who deny the possibility of any secret conspiracy on the part of a Western government, and who take pride in their intuition rather than their ability to entertain a thought. On the internet, when I attempt to argue some basic evidence for any given western government conspiracy on the internet, I'm often met with somebody with severe Dunning-Kruger syndrome, covering their ignorance with insults and jokes no matter how obvious. Can we get an article psychoanalyzing those people?

For another example, I once saw a video in which a popular Youtuber smugly said out loud that truthers are stupid because "they can't handle the idea that eleven terrorists caused so much destruction". For anybody who didn't catch that, there were officially nineteen hijackers involved in the destruction, not eleven.

Last edited by MicahJava; 4th March 2019 at 04:56 PM.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 05:15 PM   #31
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 4,810
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
Actually, a lot of conspiracy theories are pretty much mainstream. I expect surveys will show a broad belief that JFK was assassinated by the CIA].
Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
Your expectation is incorrect. Last survey I saw said that about 13% of those polled thought the CIA was involved. The largest group - about 30% - said Oswald did it. The remainder was split among the mob, the KGB, anti or pro-Castro Cubans, etc., in quantities below 13% each.

This after being exposed to conspiracy theories for 50 years with nary a word published from the other side.

Hank

Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
You could still argue that belief in a conspiracy to kill JFK is mainstream, even if folks don't agree on what the conspiracy was.
You're moving the goal posts. Note the original claim that I responded to. Moving the goalposts is a logical fallacy.

13% is not sufficiently mainstream for my tastes. Nor is it a broad belief. It rivals the percentage of those who think Elvis is still alive.

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto

Last edited by HSienzant; 4th March 2019 at 05:32 PM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 05:27 PM   #32
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 4,810
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I would much rather be like the conspiracy theorists described in the article than the kind of people who deny the possibility of any secret conspiracy on the part of a Western government
What people do that?



Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
...and who take pride in their intuition rather than their ability to entertain a thought.
Okay, you're already reduced to denigrating your opponents (I count myself among them). I have gone to the evidence on literally hundreds of issues you've raised concerning the JFK assassination, and shown you have no argument. And I was moved after a recent series of posts by you where you jumped from issue to issue and never responded to any of the evidence or points made to write this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=2737

If anyone is rely on intuition, it's you.



Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
On the internet, when I attempt to argue some basic evidence for any given western government conspiracy on the internet, I'm often met with somebody with severe Dunning-Kruger syndrome
Back to the insults. What a great case you're building. But unfortunately for you, it's not the case you think you are building.



Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
...covering their ignorance with insults and jokes no matter how obvious.
Again, entirely dismissive of the points made by every poster I've seen try to debate you on the JFK boards.



Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Can we get an article psychoanalyzing those people?
It's called normality.



Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
For another example, I once saw a video in which a popular Youtuber smugly said out loud that truthers are stupid because "they can't handle the idea that eleven terrorists caused so much destruction". For anybody who didn't catch that, there were officially nineteen hijackers involved in the destruction, not eleven.
Wow. You exposed the coverup! Hilarious.

Perhaps they were thinking of Flight 11. Or 9/11. Doesn't matter. You think you scored some major points here. The sad truth is you didn't. Somebody misspeaking isn't evidence of anything but somebody misspeaking. It's clear you think it's something more than that.

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto

Last edited by HSienzant; 4th March 2019 at 05:36 PM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 05:57 PM   #33
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,965
Hank, when I don't respond to one of your posts, it's usually because I believe that anybody with the ability to read and grasp what I've already posted could refute you themselves. You are actually the opposite of the strangers I'm talking about; I believe that you have a firmer grasp of the case then you try to pretend when you try to "win" an internet argument. Remember the time when you took Connally's quote describing the time between the last two shots and presented it as him describing the space between the first two shots? That's just an example off the top of my head.

I was more talking about other strangers on the internet who have zero experience in arguing this stuff. Like if I posted something about JFK and then somebody responded to my post by calling me a retard with no elaboration, and then resorting to more insults and jokes when I request some elaboration from them. It's like they take pride in their ignorance, and realize it, but feel justified because their faith in western government has given them enough confidence to act that way instead of having an adult conversation.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 06:44 PM   #34
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,705
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I would much rather be like the conspiracy theorists described in the article than the kind of people who deny the possibility of any secret conspiracy on the part of a Western government,...
Nobody on this board has ever blindly dismissed documented evidence of conspiratorial wrong-doings by western government. Nobody.

Quote:
and who take pride in their intuition rather than their ability to entertain a thought.
You have yet to demonstrate the ability of entertaining an original idea.

Quote:
On the internet, when I attempt to argue some basic evidence for any given western government conspiracy on the internet, I'm often met with somebody with severe Dunning-Kruger syndrome, covering their ignorance with insults and jokes no matter how obvious. Can we get an article psychoanalyzing those people?
..said the poster-child for Dunning-Kruger Syndrome. Why the western governments, BTW? Why does the Soviet Union/Russian Federation, China, and North Korea get a pass?

Even if there was an article on "those people" you'd never read it.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 07:25 PM   #35
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 4,810
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Hank, when I don't respond to one of your posts, it's usually because I believe that anybody with the ability to read and grasp what I've already posted could refute you themselves.
Try actually refuting it then. It should be easy, according to you. But when you get mum on the original subject you brought up and change the subject to something else, it doesn't mean you've won the previous point, despite your pretense above that you did. You need to actually refute the point to make a point.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
You are actually the opposite of the strangers I'm talking about; I believe that you have a firmer grasp of the case then you try to pretend when you try to "win" an internet argument.
All I'm doing is constantly pointing out the evidence that conflicts with your conspiratorial allegations. You typically either double down and repeat your allegation without refuting the evidence presented, or ignore the rebuttal points entirely and change the subject.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Remember the time when you took Connally's quote describing the time between the last two shots and presented it as him describing the space between the first two shots? That's just an example off the top of my head.
No, I don't remember that. You're either mis-remembering or you misinterpreted my comment. Connally was never specific on whether the first two shots were bunched or the last two. I don't recall ever saying otherwise. If you can find a quote where he says otherwise, I'll concede the point. But I'm not looking for your interpretation of some remark he made. Your interpretations aren't evidence.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I was more talking about other strangers on the internet who have zero experience in arguing this stuff. Like if I posted something about JFK and then somebody responded to my post by calling me a retard with no elaboration, and then resorting to more insults and jokes when I request some elaboration from them.
That doesn't happen here.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
It's like they take pride in their ignorance...
Except it may not be ignorance. I am a pretty knowledgeable person about the JFK assassination. I think you will agree with that. I know the vast bulk of the conspiracy arguments and I know the evidence that refutes those arguments. If, perchance, I got tired of rebutting CT claims by citing the actual evidence (it typically doesn't have much effect on staunch CT believers, like yourself, for the most part) and simply said some random CT was an idiot for believing some wackjob CT theory (like the driver shot JFK), would that make me ignorant on the subject matter all of a sudden?


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
...and realize it, but feel justified because their faith in western government has given them enough confidence to act that way instead of having an adult conversation.
Maybe they are just more well-read on the subject than you. Have you ever even considered that you might be the one who is wrong?

It appears not.

As I've pointed out to you before, I was you 40 years ago. Then I started reading the primary documentation and stopped getting it filtered through a conspiracy lens of CT authors who I assumed were telling the truth. And then I researched it and realized they were spinning it to sell books.

When I pointed out some of the documented falsehoods in Mark's Lane's RUSH TO JUDGMENT, you ignored it all, and called it 'boring'.

Based on how you post, you're not looking for an adult conversation. For example, no attempt at a rebuttal of my posts about Lane, just a dismissal as, of all things, 'boring'.

Hank
__________________
I have never ”refused” to provide evidence. I provide evidence if requested to do so in a specific and relevant manner.

Hanks ”method” [of requesting evidence] is not going to [get me to] provide any evidence since it has a completely different purpose. To create the the illusion of me not providing evidence when requested to do so.
- Manifesto

Last edited by HSienzant; 4th March 2019 at 07:26 PM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2019, 02:00 AM   #36
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,648
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I would much rather be like the conspiracy theorists described in the article than the kind of people who deny the possibility of any secret conspiracy on the part of a Western government, and who take pride in their intuition rather than their ability to entertain a thought. On the internet, when I attempt to argue some basic evidence for any given western government conspiracy on the internet, I'm often met with somebody with severe Dunning-Kruger syndrome, covering their ignorance with insults and jokes no matter how obvious. Can we get an article psychoanalyzing those people?

For another example, I once saw a video in which a popular Youtuber smugly said out loud that truthers are stupid because "they can't handle the idea that eleven terrorists caused so much destruction". For anybody who didn't catch that, there were officially nineteen hijackers involved in the destruction, not eleven.
If you have any examples of forum members doing this, do please post them here. I created this thread for this specific purpose, because I was so tired of this fantasy nonsense.
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2019, 05:01 AM   #37
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,375
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Hank, when I don't respond to one of your posts, it's usually because I believe that anybody with the ability to read and grasp what I've already posted could refute you themselves. You are actually the opposite of the strangers I'm talking about; I believe that you have a firmer grasp of the case then you try to pretend when you try to "win" an internet argument. Remember the time when you took Connally's quote describing the time between the last two shots and presented it as him describing the space between the first two shots? That's just an example off the top of my head.

I was more talking about other strangers on the internet who have zero experience in arguing this stuff. Like if I posted something about JFK and then somebody responded to my post by calling me a retard with no elaboration, and then resorting to more insults and jokes when I request some elaboration from them. It's like they take pride in their ignorance, and realize it, but feel justified because their faith in western government has given them enough confidence to act that way instead of having an adult conversation.
While you may not use offensive language in your posts, many of them contain caustic and snide innuendos.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2019, 07:15 AM   #38
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,163
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
While you may not use offensive language in your posts, many of them contain caustic and snide innuendos.
To be fair, that describes a lot of posters here, notably including many of our enthusiastic debunkers.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2019, 07:32 AM   #39
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,375
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
To be fair, that describes a lot of posters here, notably including many of our enthusiastic debunkers.
Did I imply that most people don't display that behavior? MJ is accusing others of ad hominem language, I'm just indicating he does the same. So why does he post this?
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2019, 09:25 AM   #40
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,835
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I was more talking about other strangers on the internet who have zero experience in arguing this stuff. Like if I posted something about JFK and then somebody responded to my post by calling me a retard with no elaboration, and then resorting to more insults and jokes when I request some elaboration from them. It's like they take pride in their ignorance[...]
I wonder whether there's anyone here who actually acts that way.

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Let me guess, "hurr durr jet effect". Boring.
... ah.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:47 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.