6 ms·

> I'm not a conspiracy theorist As told in my Middle Eastern history class, "it's reasonable to be a conspiracy theorist when you've been the subject of countl

by jakear 4y ago

> I'm not a conspiracy theorist As told in my Middle Eastern history class, "it's reasonable to be a conspiracy theorist when you've been the subject of countless governments conspiring against you and/or your people -- in fact it would be unreasonable not to be one". Iranians who claimed the US Government had orchestrated their elections were dismissed as conspiracy theorists, then 47 years later the US said "oh yeah, we totally did that". Americans who claimed the US Government had lied to them about mask effectiveness, vaccine effectiveness, vaccine safety, lockdown durations, COVID severity, dangers of remote schooling, etc. were dismissed as conspiracy theorists, then 2 years later the US said "oh yeah, we totally did that". Be a conspiracy theorist. To be anything else is to burry your head in the sand.

Nursie 4y ago
I love how conspiracy-theorists self-congratulate on things that totally haven’t happened. There’s been no “oh yeah we totally did that” about vaccine safety, lockdowns, covid severity or much else, yet here you are claiming to have been right all along in some nebulous way. It’s very funny to watch.
- Karsteski 4y ago
  I feel like you completely ignored the point of the person you replied to...
  - Nursie 4y ago
    The point seemed to be “conspiracy theorists are proven right in the end, it’s the only rational approach”, but then it claimed as evidence a bunch of stuff that hasn’t actually come true. Conspiracy theorists are not driven by facts or evidence, as a community they have a scatter-gun approach, and then retcon in “see, we were right all along” by claiming a tiny portion of their collective predictions came true, neatly forgetting the rest that didn’t. Often even those they do claim have come to pass have not, and rely on a misinterpretation or exaggeration. It’s quite funny to watch, a combination of survivorship bias, confirmation bias, wishful thinking and at times downright disingenuousness.
- jakear 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - Nursie 4y ago
    You’re doing exactly what I said, exaggerating and twisting to claim victories where there are none. That Fauci email says that masks are primarily to prevent infected people from spreading disease, and a lot of crappy masks are unlikely to do much but prevent some droplets. This was before a lot of the studies were in that showed there was some effect. People can be wrong early on, this is expected. Later on when the pandemic was really ripping through populations it was all a numbers game, to try to reduce spread by percentage. A lot of people seemed to miss that, and would say stupid things like ‘masks aren’t 100% effective” or “they don’t even protect you! They protect other people”, as if that was smart or meaningful. > Remember "vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don’t get sick"? Nope, I’m not American, and it appears neither does your source, because the link that should take you to the original claim goes to some other story. > vaccine safety Yeah so you have nothing there either. Anything can affect women’s menstrual cycles. Aircraft travel, dietary changes, stress, all sorts. It's not really surprising and it's not necessarily serious. > Two weeks to flatten the curve Was too little too late and a symptom of fucked up, broken American politics. > remember when it was faux pas to suggest COVID was "just another cold"? It’s still a really stupid thing to say, sorry bub, excess deaths should show you just how dumb. > dangers of remote schooling It’s not exactly surprising that remote schooling is less effective. However saying “dangers of remote schooling” is unnecessarily hyperbolic, and this is a great example of “throwing enough shit at the wall to see if something sticks” So like I said, you’re claiming a bunch of things that no, the powers that be have not “admitted” to being true, and the rest of the world has not, actually, come to understand, and some things that were just bleeding obvious (remote schooling is less good, we should only rely on it when there are reasons to do so. Like, I don’t know, a pandemic that’s killed about 7 million people worldwide.)
    - notacoward 4y ago
      > saying “dangers of remote schooling” is unnecessarily hyperbolic Also this: teen suicides went down for the first time in ages during the pandemic, and has rebounded since. https://www.nber.org/papers/w30795 https://www.nber.org/papers/w30795 Remote-only schooling might have been negative overall, especially for the younger ones, but it's more nuanced than all good vs. all bad. There are better and worse ways to run in-person schooling. There are better and worse ways to run remote schooling. There are positive and negative effects beyond the schools themselves. There are financial and other demands on parents to consider. There are even climate-change considerations. "Dangers of remote schooling" is a shibboleth, not an argument. P.S. Thank you @Nursie for taking the time to go point by point. Much appreciated.
notacoward 4y ago
> Be a conspiracy theorist. To be anything else is to burry your head in the sand. That's dangerously wrong. Yes, if you have some rational reason to believe that a conspiracy is the best explanation for a particular thing, even if others don't see it, then go nuts. That's healthy and good IMO. Even laudable. However, "conspiracy theorist" as an ongoing identity or habit is not healthy either for your own reputation or for the well being of those affected by unfounded accusations. Occam's Razor is not burying one's head in the sand.
- jakear 4y ago
  Sure, don't jump to "the government is conspiring against us" at first pass, but also don't dismiss otherwise reasonable arguments on the grounds "there's no way the government isn't acting as a force of Platonic Good, what are you some sort of conspiracy theorist?"

by jakear 4y ago

Nursie 4y ago

I love how conspiracy-theorists self-congratulate on things that totally haven’t happened. There’s been no “oh yeah we totally did that” about vaccine safety, lockdowns, covid severity or much else, yet here you are claiming to have been right all along in some nebulous way. It’s very funny to watch.

Karsteski 4y ago
I feel like you completely ignored the point of the person you replied to...
- Nursie 4y ago
  The point seemed to be “conspiracy theorists are proven right in the end, it’s the only rational approach”, but then it claimed as evidence a bunch of stuff that hasn’t actually come true. Conspiracy theorists are not driven by facts or evidence, as a community they have a scatter-gun approach, and then retcon in “see, we were right all along” by claiming a tiny portion of their collective predictions came true, neatly forgetting the rest that didn’t. Often even those they do claim have come to pass have not, and rely on a misinterpretation or exaggeration. It’s quite funny to watch, a combination of survivorship bias, confirmation bias, wishful thinking and at times downright disingenuousness.
jakear 4y ago
[flagged]
- Nursie 4y ago
  You’re doing exactly what I said, exaggerating and twisting to claim victories where there are none. That Fauci email says that masks are primarily to prevent infected people from spreading disease, and a lot of crappy masks are unlikely to do much but prevent some droplets. This was before a lot of the studies were in that showed there was some effect. People can be wrong early on, this is expected. Later on when the pandemic was really ripping through populations it was all a numbers game, to try to reduce spread by percentage. A lot of people seemed to miss that, and would say stupid things like ‘masks aren’t 100% effective” or “they don’t even protect you! They protect other people”, as if that was smart or meaningful. > Remember "vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don’t get sick"? Nope, I’m not American, and it appears neither does your source, because the link that should take you to the original claim goes to some other story. > vaccine safety Yeah so you have nothing there either. Anything can affect women’s menstrual cycles. Aircraft travel, dietary changes, stress, all sorts. It's not really surprising and it's not necessarily serious. > Two weeks to flatten the curve Was too little too late and a symptom of fucked up, broken American politics. > remember when it was faux pas to suggest COVID was "just another cold"? It’s still a really stupid thing to say, sorry bub, excess deaths should show you just how dumb. > dangers of remote schooling It’s not exactly surprising that remote schooling is less effective. However saying “dangers of remote schooling” is unnecessarily hyperbolic, and this is a great example of “throwing enough shit at the wall to see if something sticks” So like I said, you’re claiming a bunch of things that no, the powers that be have not “admitted” to being true, and the rest of the world has not, actually, come to understand, and some things that were just bleeding obvious (remote schooling is less good, we should only rely on it when there are reasons to do so. Like, I don’t know, a pandemic that’s killed about 7 million people worldwide.)
  - notacoward 4y ago
    > saying “dangers of remote schooling” is unnecessarily hyperbolic Also this: teen suicides went down for the first time in ages during the pandemic, and has rebounded since. https://www.nber.org/papers/w30795 https://www.nber.org/papers/w30795 Remote-only schooling might have been negative overall, especially for the younger ones, but it's more nuanced than all good vs. all bad. There are better and worse ways to run in-person schooling. There are better and worse ways to run remote schooling. There are positive and negative effects beyond the schools themselves. There are financial and other demands on parents to consider. There are even climate-change considerations. "Dangers of remote schooling" is a shibboleth, not an argument. P.S. Thank you @Nursie for taking the time to go point by point. Much appreciated.

notacoward 4y ago

> Be a conspiracy theorist. To be anything else is to burry your head in the sand. That's dangerously wrong. Yes, if you have some rational reason to believe that a conspiracy is the best explanation for a particular thing, even if others don't see it, then go nuts. That's healthy and good IMO. Even laudable. However, "conspiracy theorist" as an ongoing identity or habit is not healthy either for your own reputation or for the well being of those affected by unfounded accusations. Occam's Razor is not burying one's head in the sand.

jakear 4y ago
Sure, don't jump to "the government is conspiring against us" at first pass, but also don't dismiss otherwise reasonable arguments on the grounds "there's no way the government isn't acting as a force of Platonic Good, what are you some sort of conspiracy theorist?"