6 ms·

I'm "quick to anger" when quackery is involved, but I don't think this is correct. Often the conspiracy people think they're well informed. And they are, but on

I'm "quick to anger" when quackery is involved, but I don't think this is correct. Often the conspiracy people think they're well informed. And they are, but only informed by misinformation.

ecpottinger 6y ago
No. I have to agree with the person who says they want a quick and easy solution. I am in a totally different area where I think people are mistaken, but if I suggest let's do the math or let's do some experiments to see the results the excuses start thick and thin. The fact is these people are too busy doing "magical thinking" when they know they are smarter than the average person and know something that the general "sheep" do not know. But the one thing they refuse to do is test their beliefs in such a manner that if they are wrong that they will be proved wrong. When they do show effort it is more do only the things that can prove them right, failure is not an option for them.
- well_that_sucks 6y ago
  So you're saying that conspiracy theorists don't obsessively research? That's kinda their thing.. I would definitely say that they think they're well informed
  - baddox 6y ago
    “Research” is much easier when there’s no accountability mechanism for the claims you’re encountering. People may spend a lot of time watching YouTube videos, but that’s closer to binging a TV show than actually researching treatments.
    - well_that_sucks 6y ago
      you're missing the point altogether. i said "they think they're well informed". read it again please
      - baddox 6y ago
        You said they obsessively research. I said that what the might call “research” is not really the way other people use the term.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - ficklepickle 6y ago
    They "research" for anything that will support their belief, while discounting or ignoring anything that disproves it. This can be seen very clearly on that flat earther documentary. When experiment results don't show what they want, they ignore them or explain them away and are off to find the next experiment that will "prove" their theory. There is no result that can cause them to question their theory.
  - staticassertion 6y ago
    The power of propaganda is that it's easily digestible. Spending 8 hours reading propaganda requires far less effort than the 1 hour to read something informative or challenging.
- zackees 6y ago
  A number of very effective and non patentable treatments exist. Many of these cancers release a substance called Negalese which cleaves the vitamin d binding protein responsible for forming gcMAF, which activates macrophages in the presence of cancer and other diseases. Dr. Bradstreet popularized the treatment of administering gcMAF purified from blood and administering it to those afflicted with cancer. The results were startling and tens thousands were treated successfully and reversed their cancer. These people have testified on video to their recovery. However this came to an end when Dr. Bradstreets clinics were raided and shutdown. Three days later Dr. Bradstreet would be found floating in a river with fatal gunshot wound to the chest. It was declared a suicide. The Wallstreet Journal would run an article calling him a quack despite the mountain of patient testimony who had been successfully treated. Another treatment is called vitamin B17, found in particular high concentrations in bitter apricot seeds. This substance has a cyanide component that only unlocks within cancer cells due to the presence of the enzyme Beta-glucosidase. Jason Vale was a cancer patient and arm wrestling champion who discovered that apricot seeds would shrink his tumors. He did this three times (cancer kept on coming back). He then promoted the anti cancer effects until the FDA raided his house and ended up throwing him jail arguing that since he claimed apricot seeds were treating cancer, the apricot seeds were actually classified as drugs. The wikipedia articles about these substances have been scrubbed by the poisoning corruption of big pharma which has billions at stake if the public wakes up to the fact that many cancers can be treated without the use of chemo therapy. Additional the FDA itself did a story on the B17 substance in the 1970s and committed a horrific act of scientific misconduct which saw the results of the cancer study inverted and drew protests from the research who declared the FDA had committed fraud against the public. Despite this the synthetic version of B17 called laetrile was banned by the FDA. However it’s still legal in mexico and very well tolerated. Today however you will see wikipedia article declare that B17 is dangerous and will cause cyanide poisoning, which is contradicted by the many people take high doses of this drug every day across the world without issue. Another treatment is a dog dewormer called fenbendazole. Despite its efficacy on cancer, no one can get it in the USA for this purpose, they must get it for their pet and take it themselves. The BBC and the MSM won’t talk about these three major alternative treatments that have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. Also, as the Google Whistleblower I exposed the YouTube blacklist that included as terms “cancer cures”, which was used as input to for Google’s bit twiddled search re-ranking system. You can find this disclosure to the public at website: www.zachvorhies.com And look for the blacklist section on the front page. The scale of corruption is mind boggling. Shame on the BBC for running such garbage propaganda in favor of big pharma.
- mistermann 6y ago
  I will disagree with everyone. The "fact" is that none of you know what other people are thinking. It certainly seems like you do, but that is an illusion. Inferring the beliefs of others from a tiny amount of (questionable) data is yet another kind of magical thinking. To start to get a more accurate estimate of what other people (conspiracy theorists in this case) are actually thinking requires one to exert the necessary effort in particular actions, the end result hopefully being the ability to more accurately glean what they are thinking from the words they actually write. But it seems no one is willing to put in that effort, perhaps because they want a quick and easy solution. > When they do show effort it is more do only the things that can prove them right, failure is not an option for them. Indeed. Such is the nature of the human mind, as well as networked collections of them. This very thread, like many others, is chock full of similar thinking, but the nature of the mind seems to render people unable to realize it.
untog 6y ago
They think they're well informed... by YouTube videos. They won't read a book. (broadly speaking, obviously, I'm sure some will)
Kye 6y ago
I'm fond of the phrase "confirmation shopping." People can do a lot of "research" and consider themselves very well-informed, but they don't know how to discern good information from bad. At least on that topic.

I'm "quick to anger" when quackery is involved, but I don't think this is correct. Often the conspiracy people think they're well informed. And they are, but only informed by misinformation.

ecpottinger 6y ago

No. I have to agree with the person who says they want a quick and easy solution. I am in a totally different area where I think people are mistaken, but if I suggest let's do the math or let's do some experiments to see the results the excuses start thick and thin. The fact is these people are too busy doing "magical thinking" when they know they are smarter than the average person and know something that the general "sheep" do not know. But the one thing they refuse to do is test their beliefs in such a manner that if they are wrong that they will be proved wrong. When they do show effort it is more do only the things that can prove them right, failure is not an option for them.

well_that_sucks 6y ago
So you're saying that conspiracy theorists don't obsessively research? That's kinda their thing.. I would definitely say that they think they're well informed
- baddox 6y ago
  “Research” is much easier when there’s no accountability mechanism for the claims you’re encountering. People may spend a lot of time watching YouTube videos, but that’s closer to binging a TV show than actually researching treatments.
  - well_that_sucks 6y ago
    you're missing the point altogether. i said "they think they're well informed". read it again please
    - baddox 6y ago
      You said they obsessively research. I said that what the might call “research” is not really the way other people use the term.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ficklepickle 6y ago
  They "research" for anything that will support their belief, while discounting or ignoring anything that disproves it. This can be seen very clearly on that flat earther documentary. When experiment results don't show what they want, they ignore them or explain them away and are off to find the next experiment that will "prove" their theory. There is no result that can cause them to question their theory.
- staticassertion 6y ago
  The power of propaganda is that it's easily digestible. Spending 8 hours reading propaganda requires far less effort than the 1 hour to read something informative or challenging.
zackees 6y ago
A number of very effective and non patentable treatments exist. Many of these cancers release a substance called Negalese which cleaves the vitamin d binding protein responsible for forming gcMAF, which activates macrophages in the presence of cancer and other diseases. Dr. Bradstreet popularized the treatment of administering gcMAF purified from blood and administering it to those afflicted with cancer. The results were startling and tens thousands were treated successfully and reversed their cancer. These people have testified on video to their recovery. However this came to an end when Dr. Bradstreets clinics were raided and shutdown. Three days later Dr. Bradstreet would be found floating in a river with fatal gunshot wound to the chest. It was declared a suicide. The Wallstreet Journal would run an article calling him a quack despite the mountain of patient testimony who had been successfully treated. Another treatment is called vitamin B17, found in particular high concentrations in bitter apricot seeds. This substance has a cyanide component that only unlocks within cancer cells due to the presence of the enzyme Beta-glucosidase. Jason Vale was a cancer patient and arm wrestling champion who discovered that apricot seeds would shrink his tumors. He did this three times (cancer kept on coming back). He then promoted the anti cancer effects until the FDA raided his house and ended up throwing him jail arguing that since he claimed apricot seeds were treating cancer, the apricot seeds were actually classified as drugs. The wikipedia articles about these substances have been scrubbed by the poisoning corruption of big pharma which has billions at stake if the public wakes up to the fact that many cancers can be treated without the use of chemo therapy. Additional the FDA itself did a story on the B17 substance in the 1970s and committed a horrific act of scientific misconduct which saw the results of the cancer study inverted and drew protests from the research who declared the FDA had committed fraud against the public. Despite this the synthetic version of B17 called laetrile was banned by the FDA. However it’s still legal in mexico and very well tolerated. Today however you will see wikipedia article declare that B17 is dangerous and will cause cyanide poisoning, which is contradicted by the many people take high doses of this drug every day across the world without issue. Another treatment is a dog dewormer called fenbendazole. Despite its efficacy on cancer, no one can get it in the USA for this purpose, they must get it for their pet and take it themselves. The BBC and the MSM won’t talk about these three major alternative treatments that have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. Also, as the Google Whistleblower I exposed the YouTube blacklist that included as terms “cancer cures”, which was used as input to for Google’s bit twiddled search re-ranking system. You can find this disclosure to the public at website: www.zachvorhies.com And look for the blacklist section on the front page. The scale of corruption is mind boggling. Shame on the BBC for running such garbage propaganda in favor of big pharma.
mistermann 6y ago
I will disagree with everyone. The "fact" is that none of you know what other people are thinking. It certainly seems like you do, but that is an illusion. Inferring the beliefs of others from a tiny amount of (questionable) data is yet another kind of magical thinking. To start to get a more accurate estimate of what other people (conspiracy theorists in this case) are actually thinking requires one to exert the necessary effort in particular actions, the end result hopefully being the ability to more accurately glean what they are thinking from the words they actually write. But it seems no one is willing to put in that effort, perhaps because they want a quick and easy solution. > When they do show effort it is more do only the things that can prove them right, failure is not an option for them. Indeed. Such is the nature of the human mind, as well as networked collections of them. This very thread, like many others, is chock full of similar thinking, but the nature of the mind seems to render people unable to realize it.

untog 6y ago

They think they're well informed... by YouTube videos. They won't read a book. (broadly speaking, obviously, I'm sure some will)

Kye 6y ago

I'm fond of the phrase "confirmation shopping." People can do a lot of "research" and consider themselves very well-informed, but they don't know how to discern good information from bad. At least on that topic.