Why so many conspiracy theorists and what to do about them

[richard_smith237]

5 minutes ago, bunnydrops said:

That is a much better video than I saw way back when. I'm good with that.😊

 

In this corner of the forum, you'll also find the flat earth and anti-vax sagas - parades of passionate discussion.

 

It’s genuinely intriguing to observe how drastically human minds can diverge from reason.

 

Those threads tend to spiral - gracefully, then grotesquely into absurdity. When one party decides to deny the very existence of viruses, meaningful dialogue becomes a challenge.

 

 

At that point, we might as well debate whether reality itself is just a construct, a simulation. When ludicrousness overtakes logic, what’s left is little more than a circus of conspiracies where intellect is tossed out.

 

And now, in this very thread, we witness yet an attempt to derail a conversation - not with argument, but with petulance of individual so fragile that encountering objection seems to rattle their composure beyond repair.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[kwilco]

7 hours ago, ukrules said:

Why act at all? Who cares what someone else believes?

 

You might not realise it but many people are completely and utterly incapable of thinking for themselves, they repeat what they hear - like parrots.

Don't listen to the parrots and leave them to it.

and tht is precisely the problem when they vote

[kwilco]

Most people don't know what "critical thinking is' they dismiss it as "just arguing" when in fact it is a definite methodology and a learned skill - Critical thinking is the ability to objectively analyse and evaluate information or arguments in order to form a reasoned judgment.

Here is a link to an introduction to critical thinking - if you understand this, you will post less nonsense on forums , understand a lot more and won't get sucked in to conspiracy theories like a putz - You'll even understand why common sense isn't all that you crack it up to be!

 

 

 

 

[kwilco]

8 hours ago, Etaoin Shrdlu said:

Credible fact-checked journalism is often behind a paywall.

It sounds like your sole source of information is the internet. I think people should try to learn better research skills

[kwilco]

7 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

Yes, I fully agree and recommend to those that agree with what you wrote to read Schopenhauer’s short essay, “On Thinking for Yourself”

>  https://luctalks.substack.com/p/arthur-schopenhauer-on-thinking-for

 

 

 

Unfortunately conspiracy theorists make the mistake of  equating thinking differently with being right. (they even don't know what "thinking" involves.

[johnnybangkok]

2 hours ago, rumak said:

 

this guy is nominated for "lefties losing it"  poster boy of the month .   Should win by a landslide... but Big Bad John has yet to weigh in .   And of course Albert I'msosmart    up in Chiangrai .

hmmmm who will write the stupidest ad hominem blabber today ??

You?

[save the frogs]

11 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

At that point, we might as well debate whether reality itself is just a construct, a simulation.

what do you think of trump?

have you noticed the opinion about him range from hitler to mother theresa?

what makes you think all human beings will get a set of facts that everyone can agree to any time soon?

 

what is "reality" when people's perceptions of reality are so divergent? 

 

maybe we are living in a "simulation".

 

 

[Mike_Hunt]

1 hour ago, Lacessit said:

LOL, why would I envy you? My Thai is not as good as yours, so what? I have a great GF. If your health is good, that's genetics. I've been told my physical fitness is in the top 10% for my age group.

 

You've had a hard life. It's left you with a considerable chip on your shoulder. I don't envy either of those.

 

 

 

 

You forgot to tell us your BMI

 

 

 

[bunnydrops]

35 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

In this corner of the forum, you'll also find the flat earth and anti-vax sagas - parades of passionate discussion.

 

It’s genuinely intriguing to observe how drastically human minds can diverge from reason.

 

Those threads tend to spiral - gracefully, then grotesquely into absurdity. When one party decides to deny the very existence of viruses, meaningful dialogue becomes a challenge.

 

 

At that point, we might as well debate whether reality itself is just a construct, a simulation. When ludicrousness overtakes logic, what’s left is little more than a circus of conspiracies where intellect is tossed out.

 

And now, in this very thread, we witness yet an attempt to derail a conversation - not with argument, but with petulance of individual so fragile that encountering objection seems to rattle their composure beyond repair.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am not sure if that last line was an attack, but if it was, it was uncalled for. I never said that I did not believe man went to the moon; I only stated that at the time, I saw things that made me realize there was a "possibility" that it was fake. Doubting is a part of discovery. What if nobody doubted that the Earth was flat?

Anyway, all I was saying is that if I had seen that video back then, I would not have given the idea a second thought. What I saw was black and white and no where as clear as that.

[save the frogs]

11 hours ago, bunnydrops said:

Anyway, all I was saying is that if I had seen that video back then, I would not have given the idea a second thought.

there was no youtube back then.

it would have been much easier to trick people as there was no way to pause the video and analyze it and watch it 1000 times. 

 

[Evil Penevil]

8 hours ago, ukrules said:

Why act at all? Who cares what someone else believes?

 

You might not realise it but many people are completely and utterly incapable of thinking for themselves, they repeat what they hear - like parrots.

Don't listen to the parrots and leave them to it.

 

Antisemitism is the world's oldest and most long-lived conspiracy theory.  Blaming Jews for everything from missing children and poisoned wells to 9/11 and world wars has been a common thread in almost every country in the world.

 

The belief that Jews have undue influence and intend to "take over" the world was the most significant cause of the Holocaust and the resulting loss of six million lives.  Some conspiracy theories are harmless, but antisemitism has caused huge amounts of suffering for Jews for not just centuries but millennia.  All over the world, Jews are facing a renewed wave of hatred.  People who scoff at other conspiracy theories embrace antisemitism and use it to justify discriminatory treatment of Jews.   Individuals with mental problems also seem drawn to antisemitism.  One shocking example: 

 

 

That's why all of use, Jews and non-Jews alike, need to shoot down antisemitic conspiracy theories whenever and wherever they show up.  I get a fair amount of practice doing just that on the AN board,  even though the Mods do an admirable job in removing blatant examples.

[redwood1]

The Earth is Flat

 

This is not speculation it is a fact......

 

Why do you think they  call SeaLevel  Sea LEVEL ?   Because the sea is LEVEL as in flat.

[UWEB]

6 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Never gave the moon landing a thought till recently.  Was it faked?

Yes, totally fake. They have landed on the back side of the flat Earth.

[richard_smith237]

6 minutes ago, bunnydrops said:

I am not sure if that last line was an attack, but if it was, it was uncalled for.

 

The comment wasn’t directed at you in the slightest, but rather at those attempting to troll and derail the conversation.

 

On the contrary, you've kept this thread thoughtful and engaging.

 

6 minutes ago, bunnydrops said:

I never said that I did not believe man went to the moon; I only stated that at the time, I saw things that made me realize there was a "possibility" that it was fake. Doubting is a part of discovery.

 

Absolutely... 

 

6 minutes ago, bunnydrops said:

What if nobody doubted that the Earth was flat?

 

 

In light of the overwhelming evidence, indulging in such speculative ‘what-if’ scenarios—such as imagining a world where everyone believes the Earth is flat - is a fruitless exercise. It is no more meaningful than pondering a reality in which water is dry: a notion inherently self-defeating and devoid of reason.

 

 

6 minutes ago, bunnydrops said:

Anyway, all I was saying is that if I had seen that video back then, I would not have given the idea a second thought. What I saw was black and white and no where as clear as that.

 

This is precisely why I’ve approached your questions and comments with respect - they’ve been thoughtful inquiries, ones that many might have.

 

I’ve watched 'moon landing denier' videos myself, and they are undeniably convincing on the surface, I’ve also taken the time to watch the rebuttals, grounded in scientific evidence and facts. It quickly becomes clear that those who perpetuate these conspiracies do so with a deliberate disregard for the overwhelming proof that debunks their claims.

 

 

[richard_smith237]

5 minutes ago, redwood1 said:

The Earth is Flat

 

This is not speculation it is a fact......

 

Why do you think they  call SeaLevel  Sea LEVEL ?   Because the sea is LEVEL as in flat.

 

2 minutes ago, UWEB said:

Yes, totally fake. They have landed on the back side of the flat Earth.

 

In response to the thread, the two reasons outlined above illustrate why some individuals interpret such comments as validation - essentially providing oxygen to their belief in various conspiracies.

[cdemundo]

8 hours ago, ukrules said:

Why act at all? Who cares what someone else believes?

 

You might not realise it but many people are completely and utterly incapable of thinking for themselves, they repeat what they hear - like parrots.

Don't listen to the parrots and leave them to it.

Understand the sentiment.

Problem is that people act on their beliefs.

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

35 minutes ago, kwilco said:

It sounds like your sole source of information is the internet. I think people should try to learn better research skills

 

I used to have subscriptions to print versions of newspapers and magazines, but nowadays that same content is available on the internet much quicker and cheaper. Not only that, but the paper doesn't get soggy if the delivery man leaves it on top of the mailbox during the rainy season.

 

I don't have access to a public or university library and I don't think major public figures would take my calls if I rang them up to do research. I guess I really don't have the resources, time, or connections to do primary research. I suppose I'll just have to rely on professional journalists to do that bit.  I can sort out any bias on my own.

[Fat is a type of crazy]

33 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

what do you think of trump?

have you noticed the opinion about him range from hitler to mother theresa?

what makes you think all human beings will get a set of facts that everyone can agree to any time soon?

 

what is "reality" when people's perceptions of reality are so divergent? 

 

maybe we are living in a "simulation".

 

 

Trump's tariffs seem objectively dodgy but there can be different opinions. Trump's loss in 2020 - that he says he won - is a fact as much as this type of thing can be a fact. 

You seem like a throw out the baby with the bathwater kind of guy sometimes - nothing and no one is perfect and known - but overtime you hopefully work out a reasonable hit miss ratio. 

People say there are lots of conspiracy theories that came true but I don't observe that and the ones they cite are normally marginal at best and not as clear cut as they think it is.   

[cdemundo]

7 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Never gave the moon landing a thought till recently.  Was it faked?

Which moon landing?

There were six manned moon landings.

Not just the Armstrong landing which is the one most skeptics fixate on.

[newbee2022]

13 hours ago, kwilco said:

Why Wild Ideas Are Thriving (And How to Push Back)

Twenty years ago, flat Earth, fake moon landings, anti-vax fear, and fringe politics were laughed off. Now? They're everywhere. Why?

No more gatekeepers. Anyone can post anything, and shock spreads faster than truth.

Social media rewards outrage, not accuracy.

People have lost trust in institutions after wars, recessions, and pandemics.

Echo chambers reinforce beliefs, no matter how wild.

Simple lies beat complex truths. It's easier to blame a conspiracy than understand science.

Identity politics. Beliefs become tribal, not logical.

How to fight back?

Stay calm. Mockery fuels their fire.

Ask questions. Get people thinking, not defending.

Share sources they might trust—not just "mainstream."

Most importantly: build trust. No one listens to someone they think looks down on them.

It’s not about winning arguments. It’s about planting seeds.

Do they bother you? Accept that there is a certain percentage of ignorants. Do they hurt you?

Accept they won't listen to you, blaming you! You are the problem, not the solution.

Try to avoid them. It's more peaceful.

[cdemundo]

3 hours ago, rumak said:

 

I remember looking at one of those landing photos on "the moon"  and was a bit surprised by seeing something in the distance .  It definitely was the McDonads arches !  

 

no doubt some of the gullibles here will not understand that I am being humourous .   ( a lost art )

"I am being humourous .   ( a lost art )"

 

Clearly it is a lost art.

There is of course a distinction between attempting to be humorous and actually being humorous.

[NorthernRyland]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

They do, but only as far, and in an arc that the mass of the dust particles allows for in a vacuum in 1/6th of the earths gravity.

 

There is no 'billowing' of dust, as would be expected in an atmosphere. 

 

 

I've listened to both sides of the debate on the moon landing and both sides have good arguments. At the very least they were successful in planting seeds of doubt and since I wasn't on the shuttle myself I'll never know for certain. 

 

Same for 9/11. It really does look like a controlled demolition. It's hard to envision what happened with the pillars and how they could melt at free fall speed. Whether jet fuel can burn at that temperature is debated also. I've heard the testimony of engineers who explained how that fire would likely have happened and I've heard the counter arguments. Then the fact it was used to spark an illegal war on false pretenses was extremely suspect. As it stands it looks like 9/11 was probably a conspiracy, or least their arguments were more convincing for me personally.

 

However things like flat earth are too stupid to entertain. I tried to give them a chance and listened a little but it's just too stupid on it's face to believe.

[cdemundo]

As in a lot of "serious" threads, three points come to mind:

 

If you look at the modest intelligence of the average person you need to consider that half the people are less intelligent than that.

 

Second, is the Dunning-Kruger effect and its corollaries.

If you don't have sufficient knowledge or intelligence to understand a difficult complex idea, concept or fact, neither do you have sufficient knowledge or intelligence to know that you don't understand.

The other point about the Dunning-Kruger effect is that no one is exempt.

 

Lastly, having different ideas than everyone else doesn't necessarily make you an independent thinker.

Two reasons:

You may not be a thinker at all, your mental processes may not qualify as thoughts.

You may just be a contrarian who always disagrees and whose beliefs are just as completely determined by others as if you agreed with them.

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, rumak said:

classic lefty tactics ............ trying to call others what they are .

 

personal attacks ?   you mean pointing out your use of  stupid, moron, idiot, nut cases,etc all in ONE post of yours?     You and Lacy  are classic cases of boys trying to be men by calling names.   And then , you love to get into "debates" .    Hence i repeat :   grow up

 

end of debate . 

Can you point to a single post of yours on this thread, which is stating a verifiable fact or truth, rather than your opinion?

[cdemundo]

With respect to conspiracies most of them require secrecy of dozens, hundreds or thousands of people.

This was addressed previously.

 

Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead. Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack. 

[worgeordie]

" I want to believe " 

 

regards Worgeordie

[connda]

Is Ofcom employing freelancer outside of the UK? I could use some passive income.

[richard_smith237]

8 minutes ago, NorthernRyland said:

 

I've listened to both sides of the debate on the moon landing and both sides have good arguments. At the very least they were successful in planting seeds of doubt and since I wasn't on the shuttle myself I'll never know for certain. 

 

Same for 9/11. It really does look like a controlled demolition. It's hard to envision what happened with the pillars and how they could melt at free fall speed. Whether jet fuel can burn at that temperature is debated also. I've heard the testimony of engineers who explained how that fire would likely have happened and I've heard the counter arguments. Then the fact it was used to spark an illegal war on false pretenses was extremely suspect. As it stands it looks like 9/11 was probably a conspiracy, or least their arguments were more convincing for me personally.

 

However things like flat earth are too stupid to entertain. I tried to give them a chance and listened a little but it's just too stupid on it's face to believe.

 

I completely agree - it’s crucial to evaluate each conspiracy individually rather than lumping them all together under a broad "pro" or "anti" label. Personally, I’m firmly convinced the moon landings were real - there’s far too much scientific evidence to deny it. The "Fly Me to the Moon" movie from last year does an excellent job of satirizing the moon landing hoax narrative.

 

As for 9/11 conspiracies, I believe the scale makes it unlikely to be valid. The distrust many people have for authority figures, particularly in the US, has fuelled these theories, especially when distortions are introduced - like the claim that the steel melted at free-fall speed. The reality is that it didn’t melt; it destabilised over hours, and the collapse was occured once it reached its structural limit and the structural collapse cascaded as  pancaked down.

 

Yet these misrepresentations often weave a narrative that sounds plausible but collapses under scrutiny. Much of the so-called "evidence" - like traces of thermite or claims of planted charges - is either deeply misleading or simply non-existent outside conspiracy theorist commentary. There’s no credible, peer-reviewed support for such claims. Observations of “flashes” during the collapse have also been wildly overstated; in a structure wired with millions of volts, electrical flashes and discharges are entirely expected when it fails catastrophically. It’s not proof of sabotage.

 

The problem is, these distractions twist technical realities into something sinister for those already inclined to distrust the official narrative.

 

 

Then, of course, there’s the utterly ridiculous stuff, like flat Earth theory. It doesn’t deserve serious attention, though I’ll admit, some of the outlandish comments can be unintentionally entertaining.

 

[cdemundo]

5 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I completely agree - it’s crucial to evaluate each conspiracy individually rather than lumping them all together under a broad "pro" or "anti" label. Personally, I’m firmly convinced the moon landings were real - there’s far too much scientific evidence to deny it. The "Fly Me to the Moon" movie from last year does an excellent job of satirizing the moon landing hoax narrative.

 

As for 9/11 conspiracies, I believe the scale makes it unlikely to be valid. The distrust many people have for authority figures, particularly in the US, has fuelled these theories, especially when distortions are introduced - like the claim that the steel melted at free-fall speed. The reality is that it didn’t melt; it destabilised over hours, and the collapse was occured once it reached its structural limit and the structural collapse cascaded as  pancaked down.

 

Yet these misrepresentations often weave a narrative that sounds plausible but collapses under scrutiny. Much of the so-called "evidence" - like traces of thermite or claims of planted charges - is either deeply misleading or simply non-existent outside conspiracy theorist commentary. There’s no credible, peer-reviewed support for such claims. Observations of “flashes” during the collapse have also been wildly overstated; in a structure wired with millions of volts, electrical flashes and discharges are entirely expected when it fails catastrophically. It’s not proof of sabotage.

 

The problem is, these distractions twist technical realities into something sinister for those already inclined to distrust the official narrative.

 

 

Then, of course, there’s the utterly ridiculous stuff, like flat Earth theory. It doesn’t deserve serious attention, though I’ll admit, some of the outlandish comments can be unintentionally entertaining.

 

Don't know if it's true or just cute, but I like the story that a member of the Flat Earth Society bragged

"We have members around the globe."

[NorthernRyland]

10 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Yet these misrepresentations often weave a narrative that sounds plausible but collapses under scrutiny. Much of the so-called "evidence" - like traces of thermite or claims of planted charges - is either deeply misleading or simply non-existent outside conspiracy theorist commentary. There’s no credible, peer-reviewed support for such claims. Observations of “flashes” during the collapse have also been wildly overstated; in a structure wired with millions of volts, electrical flashes and discharges are entirely expected when it fails catastrophically. It’s not proof of sabotage.

 

 

I listened to many people go back and forth on these details and it doesn't seem clear to me at all. For every point you mentioned there is a counter point on the other side and people who swear by their expertise in the area. I could go either way as a layperson. This isn't even including building 7 btw, just the towers.

 

The problem I have is writing this off as mere "conspiracy theory" instead of debating the points because it's clearly a very complicated topic and there's merits in many of the claims.