Characteristics of a Conspiracy Theorist

[really?]

[SydneyPSIder]

[Craig Browning]

PS those linked sites are crap and written by still more pseudosceptics to confirm their own world view. Death by self-referentialism.

Am I to understand that you buy into all the CTs out there in much the same manner our host (Winston) tends to do?

[SydneyPSIder]

[NinjaPuppy]

I liked the first article from Scientific American but I used to be a regular subscriber to that mag.

The others are your basic smear tactic crap.

[NinjaPuppy]

[NinjaPuppy]

Personally, I like the occasional CT. It beats the crap out of reading about glass ceilings in "Cosmopolitan".

[really?]

[really?]

[SydneyPSIder]

[SydneyPSIder]

Since nobody asked, this is my current favourite list of 'conspiracies' which are strongly evidence-based:

- any number of 60s political assassinations, which appear to have been the CIA's favourite method of effecting change to make things go their way at the time -- JFK, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, and various other political characters around the world. Note the CIA and MI6 interference in Iran in the 50s for instance as a precursor, interference in South America and the middle east, and so on -- it's only a conspiracy until it's been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, as in those cases. The CIA are known to fund any number of subversive or extremist groups to stir up trouble in countries where they don't like the leadership. If you have a social sciences university background, as I have, then you are aware of the framework of post-colonial and neo-colonial geopolitical arrangements and jockeying for access to valuable resources that goes on out there -- the average undereducated pseudosceptic Joe Schmo chooses not to study any of these things but feels qualified to comment and pooh-pooh anyhow.

- manned moon landing -- I came to this one late, but it is very interesting. On an analysis of the totality of the evidence and probabilities based on the technology of the day, it appears that there is no convincing or unshakeable evidence that man set foot on the moon, and substantial film and technical evidence scattered here and there that they did not, along with many probabilistic problems. A scientist on the evidence can only conclude there is a strong chance they did not. The Jarrah White series and Bart Siebrel movies are very interesting in this regard. I have been convinced by a number of pieces of footage and information, based on my own scientific and engineering training -- footage of the ascender module making impossible acceleration and deceleration adjusting turns while approaching docking like a model on a stick, evidence of construction of giant matte lunar landscapes, other footage which is just plain wrong, flapping flags in the breeze, moon rocks that are petrified wood or from the WA desert, the height you could theoretically jump, the lack of care of space suits and rovers on a potentially deadly surface, deadly radiation from space and the van Allen belts, the likely timeframe to develop the requisite technology to have 6 completely successful landings with nary a hitch (bar one) or a single death, moon landers that were too small to move in and hatches too small to pass through in a space suit, centre of gravity problems steering and landing the LEM, inconsistencies in the astronauts' stories, wrong kinds of rock weathering, vomit comet footage being passed off as mission footage, the blasé nature of astronauts who could be hit by meteors travelling at 20,000 mph or rupture a suit or module at any time if they were actually there, the triumphalist down home hick sort of language they were using, the Russian space race where Russia had many firsts, and just as importantly the very wrong psychology of the 'returned' astronauts in press conferences and in later life when approached on the deception. The mistake of Collins helping out his comrade saying 'he couldn't see any stars on the moon' when he was actually supposed to be in the orbiter in space all along, etc. There is not a single piece of evidence that proves they went that could not be faked by the technology of the time, agreement of participants for patriotic reasons, and the siphoning of large amounts of the Apollo budget to pay people off.

- Oklahoma bombing is extremely suspicious

- 9/11 is extremely suspicious -- odds of a trillion trillion to one against the official story -- many strange features, too many to list at the risk of being accused of suffering 'monomania'. a fairly full alternative achievable credible MO has been worked out.

- 7/7 and 21/7 are extremely suspicious -- odds of a trillion trillion to one against -- same MO as above. Madrid bombings also very suspicious.

- questioning the genuine benefit of many vaccines out there (vs improvements in nutrition and sanitation reducing disease) and the claimed complete lack of harm. there is ample research that shows there are problems, both anecdotal/case study and broader epidemiological studies when done independently and properly, not by vested interests. lazy pseudosceptics don't even both looking for the information, but feel qualified to challenge it on the basis of no research whatsoever, and simply echo authority statements. 'sheeple'? -- you be the judge.

- some stuff around the GFC/banks/housing I won't go into.

- Osama bin Laden death possibly faked. Interesting extrajudicial killing in another sovereign country if not.

- Lady Die, reluctantly...

That's about it. No Roswells or UFOs for me at this time, unless and until good evidence comes forward. No new age stuff, no pretending I somehow know all about 'God' and the spirit levels and the universe and where the aliens come from and illuminati and reptiles. (There are, however, very powerful elites operating who want to keep things going their way.) All good, down to earth, verifiable earthly stuff.

If you think this makes the American empire and administration look like lying, thieving jackals over many decades, then you would be right.

Much of the information has been gained from the internet, in fact the internet has been the principal tool for disseminating this kind of information to most people out there -- the newspapers and investigative journalists only turn up so much.

Now I'll sit here and wait for the MIB to appear at my door, except they will definitely be locals tracing my IP address, not from outer space. Go on, really?, send them...

[Arouet]

We can talk about it in the vaccine thread, but where do you get that doctors say there is a complete lack of harm with vaccines? There certainly can be side effects, sometimes serious in some people.

[SydneyPSIder]

[Arouet]

We'll talk about it in the vaccine thread. As for the others, frankly, conspiracy theories don't hold that much interest for me. I'll read the threads when they crop up, but for the most part I stay out of it.

[NinjaPuppy]