5 ms·

Good example of people being unwilling to consider the facts. Minor nitpick: I'd like us to get away from using "conspiracy theorist" as an always-negative ter

by calebm 7y ago

Good example of people being unwilling to consider the facts. Minor nitpick: I'd like us to get away from using "conspiracy theorist" as an always-negative term. The truth is, many conspiracy theories have turned out true (people do, after all, conspire in secret to do evil). Additionally, there are conspiracy theorists who are reasonable and who have changed their opinions when corrected.

ben509 7y ago
Yeah, every prosecutor who indicts someone on conspiracy charges is a conspiracy theorist, by the plain meaning of it. What crosses the line into "truther" territory is generally a fantastically organized coverup as explanation for a lack of corroborating evidence.
- jakeogh 7y ago
  It's possible to condition people to actively avoid something. Shock, labels and association with unrelated (often false) information are pretty effective. http://s3.amazonaws.com/nasathermalimages/public/video/pretext.mov http://s3.amazonaws.com/nasathermalimages/public/video/prete...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
mehrdadn 7y ago
> The truth is, many conspiracy theories have turned out true (people do, after all, conspire in secret to do evil). How frequently do theories that are widely labeled as "conspiracy theories" turn out to be true?
- calebm 7y ago
  Here's a few to get you started: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea-Spray https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea-Spray, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_LAC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_LAC
  - evgen 7y ago
    You have a list of secret tests run on the public in the 50s (and one operation that was rejected and never run) but a surprising lack of proof that there were any 'conspiracy theories' regarding these events prior to the public release of the information about them. Could you please reference the documented theories proposed by people of this era or soon after regarding the conspiracy? If not then all you have are examples of secret programs that would not pass a modern review board and nothing that suggests modern conspiracy theories are anything more than the ravings of people with rather obvious mental illnesses.
    - ryacko 7y ago
      Actually anyone who would have ordered any of those violated the Nuremberg principles.
    - sterkekoffie 7y ago
      How precise does the conspiracy theory have to be for you to consider it verifiable? I'm sure if you took a cursory glance at some more eccentric publications from the time, you'd find people saying things like "the CIA is experimenting with mind control technology," "military planes are spraying U.S. cities with toxic materials," and "the Department of Defense uses false flag attacks to manipulate public sentiment."
velosol 7y ago
> Good example of people being unwilling to consider the facts. Exactly! It's clear that the CIA found the frozen corpse before the expedition and extracted the bacteria to put into the ticks in the first place. [edit]/s[/edit] I do somewhat appreciate the explanation the person used as it showed conviction versus moving the goalposts when confronted with new evidence; something that most nutty conspiracy theorists seem to do. "Conspiracy enthusiast" perhaps?
_bxg1 7y ago
In my experience, the differentiator is the underlying emotion. Facts aren't as clear-cut as we like to think. You can't simply say you'll follow the facts; a certain amount of reasonableness is also required for combining those facts, which is a fuzzy and uncomfortable concept. Conspiracy theories usually can't be disproven (almost nothing can, when you get down to it). They usually aren't completely fictional, lacking any shred of possible evidence. Their hallmark trait is the fact that they aren't driven by an even-handed search for truth, but by fear, anger, and paranoia. We like to think that truth-seeking is immune to these emotions, but it really isn't. Emotion keeps theories going even when they're wildly unreasonable, because they're still impossible to totally disprove.

by calebm 7y ago

ben509 7y ago

Yeah, every prosecutor who indicts someone on conspiracy charges is a conspiracy theorist, by the plain meaning of it. What crosses the line into "truther" territory is generally a fantastically organized coverup as explanation for a lack of corroborating evidence.

jakeogh 7y ago
It's possible to condition people to actively avoid something. Shock, labels and association with unrelated (often false) information are pretty effective. http://s3.amazonaws.com/nasathermalimages/public/video/pretext.mov http://s3.amazonaws.com/nasathermalimages/public/video/prete...

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

mehrdadn 7y ago

> The truth is, many conspiracy theories have turned out true (people do, after all, conspire in secret to do evil). How frequently do theories that are widely labeled as "conspiracy theories" turn out to be true?

calebm 7y ago
Here's a few to get you started: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea-Spray https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea-Spray, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_LAC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_LAC
- evgen 7y ago
  You have a list of secret tests run on the public in the 50s (and one operation that was rejected and never run) but a surprising lack of proof that there were any 'conspiracy theories' regarding these events prior to the public release of the information about them. Could you please reference the documented theories proposed by people of this era or soon after regarding the conspiracy? If not then all you have are examples of secret programs that would not pass a modern review board and nothing that suggests modern conspiracy theories are anything more than the ravings of people with rather obvious mental illnesses.
  - ryacko 7y ago
    Actually anyone who would have ordered any of those violated the Nuremberg principles.
  - sterkekoffie 7y ago
    How precise does the conspiracy theory have to be for you to consider it verifiable? I'm sure if you took a cursory glance at some more eccentric publications from the time, you'd find people saying things like "the CIA is experimenting with mind control technology," "military planes are spraying U.S. cities with toxic materials," and "the Department of Defense uses false flag attacks to manipulate public sentiment."

velosol 7y ago

> Good example of people being unwilling to consider the facts. Exactly! It's clear that the CIA found the frozen corpse before the expedition and extracted the bacteria to put into the ticks in the first place. [edit]/s[/edit] I do somewhat appreciate the explanation the person used as it showed conviction versus moving the goalposts when confronted with new evidence; something that most nutty conspiracy theorists seem to do. "Conspiracy enthusiast" perhaps?

_bxg1 7y ago

In my experience, the differentiator is the underlying emotion. Facts aren't as clear-cut as we like to think. You can't simply say you'll follow the facts; a certain amount of reasonableness is also required for combining those facts, which is a fuzzy and uncomfortable concept. Conspiracy theories usually can't be disproven (almost nothing can, when you get down to it). They usually aren't completely fictional, lacking any shred of possible evidence. Their hallmark trait is the fact that they aren't driven by an even-handed search for truth, but by fear, anger, and paranoia. We like to think that truth-seeking is immune to these emotions, but it really isn't. Emotion keeps theories going even when they're wildly unreasonable, because they're still impossible to totally disprove.