Why Do Conspiracies Have so Much Appeal?

[ProfWag]

[Paradox]

Why is there such a strong correlation between self proclaimed "skeptics" or "critical thinkers" and atheism, orthodox medicine, physicalism and opposing just about any type of conspiracy theory? I could reverse this question here. Actually the greatest scientists and inventors in history were criticised by the same orthodox status quo that exists today in the form of most self proclaimed "modern skeptics" who are really nothing more then obscurers trying to protect the status quo.

First of all not all of us psi supporters think in the way descibed in the OP. I'm a person that looks at many sides of an issue before coming to a conclusion. I do believe conspiracies are common, especially when it comes to corruption in our own government (mine being the U.S anyway) as Ron Paul so brilliantly points out. No I don't believe in every conspiracy theory hurled at me and I actually ridicule around 90% of them. I do believe some hold water like the JFK assassination and yes I've investigated this issue very thoroughly. I believe alien life is very likely outside of our own solar system but I don't believe there are UFO's inside of Area 51. These strange sightings by many who believe they are seeing UFO's are probally some very high tech aircraft the government has kept secret from us. I still believe it's possible that UFO's could visit earth but know I do not blindly believe everything I'm told. A true skeptic looks at both sides of a topic/issue before coming to a conclusion rather then assuming they know everything because it doesn't fit into their belief system. There is a such thing as a fundamentalist belief system as well as a fundamentalist disbelief system as well.

I don't put labels on myself. I investigate and then make a conclusion. If I'm still not sure after investigating something I don't assume I know the answer so I leave the issue at hand open for further investigation at a later date when time allows me to. In many cases of reading about reincarnation cases the Occam's Razor seems to go with side of reincarnation rather than the physicalists conclusions.

[Arouet]

[derrida]

[Paradox]

Conspiracies have been occuring throughout history. Does this mean we should accept every conspiracy theory thrown our way? No. Should we be open minded enough to believe a conspiracy could or has happened? Yes. Apparantely the U.S founding fathers felt the same way. Many conspiracy theories do unfairly attack people's reputations and go too far. Look at all of the Obama or Prince Henry antichrist garbage out there. Some people want to believe in certain conspiracy theories especially when they support a certain political agenda. Others however at least can look at an issue or two and say, hey hold on here a second, this just doesn't match with what I've been told. It was very interesting to watch how Vincent Bugliosi ducked Jesse Ventura's tough questions on the JFK assassination. 'Anticonspiracy' theorists can hold a robotic type of blind faith to believing everything they're told by the authorities or government as well. Fair is fair. Let's investigate before coming to conclusions or at least keep an open mind here and avoid mixing apples with oranges. I find there is usually a correlation between alot of propaganda and certain philosophies regardless of which side of the fence people are on. I try to avoid labels. There are way too many conspiracy theories out there for me to count and it is usually pretty easy to tell which ones are ridiculous or which ones deserve further investigation. I reject the majority of conspiracy theories myself. No I'm not holding my breath waiting for 12/21/2012 or wanting to hang W Bush for planning the 911 attacks though in general I didn't care the the guy.

Just because I think everyone is out to get me it doesn't mean they aren't My favorite Einstein quote "condemnation without investigation is the height of ignornace".

[really?]

[Paradox]

Michael Shermer is one of the most religious individuals I've ever seen. His religion of 'obscurantism' and fundamentalist belief of anything considered orthodox is even greater than the most fiery 'brimstone and fire' hell preaching Evangelist. I think Shermer is just as narrow minded as Kent Hovind. This article by Shermer http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-s ... 96812.html clearly is off the wall (this is just one of them). I've been researching the JFK assassination for over 10 years now and it's so obvious the reverend Shermer has not done his research. There are so many holes in his arguments on the JFK assassination I wouldn't know where to start in tearing apart his many articles on this issue to shreds.

I'm not familiar with Randi believe it or not and I only actually first even heard of him and his paranormal challenge less than 2 years ago so there is not too much I can say about James Randi. I'm much more familiar with Shermer however and I don't see how too many 'pseudosceptics' (new term to me) could be too much worse than him. Shermer goes too far here with this one. I've noticed that many sceptics will claim there is usually a strong correlation between conspiracy theories and belief in the paranormal. I also (again I'm saying this) there seems to be a very strong correlation between self'-described 'sceptics' or 'rationalists' and blind faith in authority and the orthodox viewpoint. I would like to see Michael Shermer debate Jesse Ventura on the JFK assassination. I see 'blind faith' from people like Shermer and like minded individuals.

I call out many self-described conservatives who blindly seem to agree with every viewpoint on the Republican plate. I call out many self-described liberals who seem to blindly agree with every viewpoint on the Democratic plate. I also see the same things when it comes to philosophies as well. Many religionists already have their minds made up regardless of what evidence is given to them. I see this blind faith with many conspiracy theorists who've never seemed to find a conspiracy they didn't fall in love with. Shermer has proven to me time and time again this blind faith also exists in his camp as well. I guess true free thinkers really are in short supply these days.

[Arouet]

[ProfWag]

[Arouet]

Bingo! He may be right. He may be wrong. But what he's not doing in that blog post is just "blindly" accepting anything. That was a weird article to attack Shermer for anyway since its pretty light on serious content. Steven Novella did a complementary blog post which goes into much more detail! http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=2620 His explanation of the head shot is pretty interesting.

Anti-skeptics like to throw this around a lot: "Blind faith". They portray it as if the skeptics are writing lengthy articles where all they are saying is: the government says this, and I agree with it because its from the government. Even a cursory read of skeptic literature puts the lie to this portrayal.

[Paradox]

I'll admit that wasn't the best article to debate Shermer on about the JFK assassination (my fault) but I was trying to make a much bigger point here. It shows how Michael Shermer is really an establishment defender and not a true sceptic. I'm yet to see one time where Shermer has criticised anything concerning authority. If I'm wrong on this show me something and I'll take back my remarks about Shermer being an establishment defender. I think a true sceptic should be sceptical of everything whether it is' the story given to us by the government/authorities or not. This is the point I'm trying to make. I have read some other articles by Shermer on several topics and it is pretty obvious to me he has an agenda and it is definitely not that of a truth seeker. Looking at his disrespectful comments towards anything paranormal related does give me a negative opinion of him (Shermer).

[Arouet]

[Arouet]

[ProfWag]

Outstanding points Arouet. This whole Shermer not challenging the establishment is simply ridiculous. Why do they want him to? I can't think of any reason other than they want someone like Shermer to give silly ideas some support. Arouet's point about atheism and the establishments is spot on.

[really?]

I second what Arouet said.