3 ms·

I can honestly say that there isn't one popular conspiracy theory out there that I believe in. BUT... being a programmer we are taught to look at all the angles

by jspash 9y ago

I can honestly say that there isn't one popular conspiracy theory out there that I believe in. BUT... being a programmer we are taught to look at all the angles. All possibilities. Debugging is a series of discounting any and all theories as to the cause of the bug - starting from the most obvious, of course. So why are believers of conspiracies not allowed the same leeway? Haven't quite a few conspiracies ended up being true? Bilderberg, MK Ultra etc. Take the infamous "car allergic to ice cream" story https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13347852 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13347852 It sounds preposterous in a somewhat tin-foil hat kind of way. But if the engineer hadn't followed up on it with an open mind, it the problem wouldn't have gotten solved so quickly.

vanderZwan 9y ago
The "car allergic to ice cream" is a little bit different than a conspiracy theory though, since the flavour of ice-cream wasn't the real cause. The conspiracy theory version of that would be more like the man denying that the cause was vapour lock, and continuing to insist that the problem was the flavour. A conspiracy theorist dismisses the alternative, correct explanation for the crazy one.
empath75 9y ago
The car allergic to ice cream story is an example of disproving a ridiculous theory, not confirming it. A conspiracy theory is someone who holds to a belief that their car is allergic to ice cream despite the fact that someone explained in detail that it's impossible and there must be some other explanation.
mikeash 9y ago
The problem with conspiracy theorists isn't that they consider forbidden ideas. It's that they dismiss better ones. For example, the idea that the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile on 9/11 is worth brief consideration. But when you dig into it, there's no support, while there's plenty of support for the airliner. To use your debugging analogy, it's like speculating that the bug happens because this particular variable holds 2 when it's supposed to hold 1. Then you check and it actually holds 1. But instead of moving on to the next idea, you decide that the CIA modified your debugger to lie about the value and proceed under the assumption that it really is 2.
- corpMaverick 9y ago
  But they never commit to a single theory. They seem to move freely between multiple theories even if they contradict each other. The CIA killed JFK and/or the Russians killed JFK.
- splintercell 9y ago
  > For example, the idea that the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile on 9/11 is worth brief consideration. But when you dig into it, there's no support, while there's plenty of support for the airliner. The way I convinced my buddy to get out of that 9/11 conspiracy mode was to ask him questions about the shitty conspiracy theories he thinks US govt comes up with. For instance: * Why claim that it was an airplane which hit Pentagon, when they can claim that terrorists got hold of a rocket launcher, or a cruise missile. Since they claim that it was a CIA agent who launched the missile, then it would be even better to claim that there is a 20th terrorist who is hiding among us, and thereby getting more advantage of what they did by claiming conspiracy (i.e. to create an environment of panic in public). * After I told about the ridiculousness of the 'conspiracy theory' like the point above, they would talk about Hitler's quote "bigger the lie, the more they'd believe it". When I tried to do more research on it, it turns out that there is no documented proof of Hitler claiming bigger unbelievable lies. In fact that quote was used by Hitler to claim the grand Jewish communist conspiracy theory of blaming Germany for the loss of WW1, which he had no proof for. Other than that, that's it. * Since the purpose of govt officials who conspired is the same as the purpose of 'alleged terrorists', i.e. to create widespread fear and panic (just for a different end goal), literally everything govt did, can be attributed to the terrorists. The terrorists performed the demolition, they destroyed WTC7 after stealing gold, etc etc. This way govt ends up with having an even more foolproof conspiracy. In fact, if the conspiracy theorist questions that by making terrorists do that many things, it would make things more ridiculous, then you can point them to "bigger the lie, more they'd believe it" statement. * Finally I asked my buddy, "Imagine if I was the person behind the attacks, I was one of the terrorists, how could I convince you that I did it, what proof can I provide you that I did it". Thankfully, my buddy hadn't lost all touch with reality, so he didn't really blame me for being a govt plant. He didn't really respond to me, but as far as I know that was the last time he advocated the conspiracy theories to anyone. And now we laugh at other conspiracy theorists.
agapon 9y ago
Right. So, do the believers of conspiracies actually examining their favorite conspiracies or do they just, well, believe them? Maybe there are different designations for those who explore the theories and those who just stick to them.

by jspash 9y ago

vanderZwan 9y ago

The "car allergic to ice cream" is a little bit different than a conspiracy theory though, since the flavour of ice-cream wasn't the real cause. The conspiracy theory version of that would be more like the man denying that the cause was vapour lock, and continuing to insist that the problem was the flavour. A conspiracy theorist dismisses the alternative, correct explanation for the crazy one.

empath75 9y ago

The car allergic to ice cream story is an example of disproving a ridiculous theory, not confirming it. A conspiracy theory is someone who holds to a belief that their car is allergic to ice cream despite the fact that someone explained in detail that it's impossible and there must be some other explanation.

mikeash 9y ago

The problem with conspiracy theorists isn't that they consider forbidden ideas. It's that they dismiss better ones. For example, the idea that the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile on 9/11 is worth brief consideration. But when you dig into it, there's no support, while there's plenty of support for the airliner. To use your debugging analogy, it's like speculating that the bug happens because this particular variable holds 2 when it's supposed to hold 1. Then you check and it actually holds 1. But instead of moving on to the next idea, you decide that the CIA modified your debugger to lie about the value and proceed under the assumption that it really is 2.

corpMaverick 9y ago
But they never commit to a single theory. They seem to move freely between multiple theories even if they contradict each other. The CIA killed JFK and/or the Russians killed JFK.
splintercell 9y ago
> For example, the idea that the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile on 9/11 is worth brief consideration. But when you dig into it, there's no support, while there's plenty of support for the airliner. The way I convinced my buddy to get out of that 9/11 conspiracy mode was to ask him questions about the shitty conspiracy theories he thinks US govt comes up with. For instance: * Why claim that it was an airplane which hit Pentagon, when they can claim that terrorists got hold of a rocket launcher, or a cruise missile. Since they claim that it was a CIA agent who launched the missile, then it would be even better to claim that there is a 20th terrorist who is hiding among us, and thereby getting more advantage of what they did by claiming conspiracy (i.e. to create an environment of panic in public). * After I told about the ridiculousness of the 'conspiracy theory' like the point above, they would talk about Hitler's quote "bigger the lie, the more they'd believe it". When I tried to do more research on it, it turns out that there is no documented proof of Hitler claiming bigger unbelievable lies. In fact that quote was used by Hitler to claim the grand Jewish communist conspiracy theory of blaming Germany for the loss of WW1, which he had no proof for. Other than that, that's it. * Since the purpose of govt officials who conspired is the same as the purpose of 'alleged terrorists', i.e. to create widespread fear and panic (just for a different end goal), literally everything govt did, can be attributed to the terrorists. The terrorists performed the demolition, they destroyed WTC7 after stealing gold, etc etc. This way govt ends up with having an even more foolproof conspiracy. In fact, if the conspiracy theorist questions that by making terrorists do that many things, it would make things more ridiculous, then you can point them to "bigger the lie, more they'd believe it" statement. * Finally I asked my buddy, "Imagine if I was the person behind the attacks, I was one of the terrorists, how could I convince you that I did it, what proof can I provide you that I did it". Thankfully, my buddy hadn't lost all touch with reality, so he didn't really blame me for being a govt plant. He didn't really respond to me, but as far as I know that was the last time he advocated the conspiracy theories to anyone. And now we laugh at other conspiracy theorists.

agapon 9y ago

Right. So, do the believers of conspiracies actually examining their favorite conspiracies or do they just, well, believe them? Maybe there are different designations for those who explore the theories and those who just stick to them.