2 ms·
I'm not talking about the exact inverse point, I'm just suggesting that their lines around "what is" or "what isn't" a conspiracy theory are so loose as to like
by jrm4 4y ago
I'm not talking about the exact inverse point, I'm just suggesting that their lines around "what is" or "what isn't" a conspiracy theory are so loose as to likely be useless.
- parineum 4y agoEven if that is your point, you still chose one of maybe 3 conspiracies that I'd judge to not really fit. I guess it just so happens that you've chosen to highlight a bad example of a conspiracy from the left side and a good example from the right side in an effort to dispute a study that shows both are similarly susceptible. Ironically, you're comment is useless due to the conspiracies you've chosen to highlight. There are plenty of left/right examples that _are_ completely valid. Just ignore the ones you don't think are legitimate and I think you'll still have plenty on the left and the right.
- jrm4 4y agoI meant the opposite. I think between both imprecise definitions of left and right and even MORE imprecise definitions of "conspiracy theory," this study is completely useless.