4 ms·

This whole fear of being labeled a "conspiracy nut" for exploring less trodden paths needs to end. Calling people conspiracy nuts for looking behind curtains t

This whole fear of being labeled a "conspiracy nut" for exploring less trodden paths needs to end. Calling people conspiracy nuts for looking behind curtains they shouldn't was a good tactic by various entities to cover up secrets and misdeeds, but it has spilled over into the non political arena and poisoned everything. Humans don't have a full understanding of everything, and in fact it's quite the opposite, in that we don't understand almost everything. Almost all paths are untrodden. It's fine to look where others haven't and come up with your own theories and ideas, as long as you retain a healthy skepticism and back things up with data as much as you can. Science and exploration should not use fear of social reprisal as a guide.

daddylongstroke 3y ago
Pretty sad that you have to state the obvious ey? Amazed daily by the closed-mindedness on HN.
CyberDildonics 3y ago
This whole fear of being labeled a "conspiracy nut" for exploring less trodden paths needs to end People get called conspiracy nuts when they make big claims with no real evidence. That is the opposite of 'science and exploration'. The difference is always evidence. Go on a conspiracy site and ask for hard evidence of anything and they will get very upset.
ryandrake 3y ago
I’m torn about this now. I used to cautiously support the practice of double checking your doc, but not wholeheartedly because of all the various quacks: essential oil moms, natural/spiritual healers, psychics, supplement sellers, crystal therapists, “old school” (pre-COVID) antivaxers and so on, muddying the water. Until COVID came around and unearthed the absolute hoards of dO yOuR oWn ReSeArCh imbeciles. Now the sensible practice of getting a second opinion and exploring other options/doctors has been mixed up with the kooks: extreme politics and actual conspiracy theories, to the point where it’s hard to take any of it seriously. When someone now says they don’t trust doctors, you have to dig deeper to understand if it’s someone genuinely seeking out other options, or if it’s one of Those People who’ve gone off the deep end.
- daddylongstroke 3y ago
  Completely agree: couldn't believe the amount of conspiracy theorist doctors that pushed untested "vaccines" to a whole cohort of people which were at 0% effective risk from COVID.
- felipeerias 3y ago
  The pandemic revealed the degree to which any respectable field can harbour extremely dangerous kookery without realising it. For example, Western health authorities used to be absolutely certain that viruses could not be airborne (outside of very specific medical procedures), even though they did not have any good reason or evidence to back that up: it was just an old idea that happened to fit in with their priors, so generations of experts kept parroting it until horror unfolded.
wredue 3y ago
The earth is not 6000 years old God didn’t do it Gravity is the curvature of spacetime Things are not attracted to the planet through static electricity Covid is real Vaccines work Rich mother fuckers do NOT have our best interests at heart Intelligent aliens have not visited earth People are called conspiracy nuts for being conspiracy nuts. Not for “taking less trodden paths”. Getting real tired of the HNs new “wahh wahh, we’re such major victims for believing stupid shit and being called out on it!” And just trying to paint it as “less trodden paths”.
- goatlover 3y ago
  Add to that list, some version of the lab leak theory is plausible, but there was an attempt to make it sound like a conspiracy theory.
- colordrops 3y ago
  You are arguing with a straw man. Nothing in my post suggested support for any of those things. That's why I included the terms skepticism and data.
  - wredue 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - lannisterstark 3y ago
      Not OP, but if you have nothing to contribute but vitriol, maybe do not comment, and move on.
      - wredue 3y ago
        I have nothing but vitriol to comment towards people that perform copy pastas of anti-science, anti-intellectual, conspiracy theorist propaganda. Similarly, I will certainly and absolutely NOT stop calling out conspiracy theorist propaganda just because conspiracy nuts don’t like it. If you don’t like being called out for posting conspiracy propaganda, don’t post it, and don’t defend it.
lowkey 3y ago
I don’t think it is possible to end the derogatory use of the term conspiracy theorist universally, but I do have some hope that we can put a stop to it’s use as an ad hominem here on Hacker News. It is never used in the spirit of promoting insightful discussion. Instead it is used to shut down a line of inquiry in its tracks. It’s like calling someone an anti-semite. It is used as a soft form of censorship, to disqualify the mere idea of engaging in the specifics of an argument. If someone dismisses a comment by implying it is a conspiracy instead of offering a substantive rebuttal of why the comment is mistaken, it reduces the quality of the entire community. I think we can do better, but more people need to call out this bad behavior.
- tremon 3y ago
  What you're suggesting leads to an offense/defense asymmetry. Spouting a conspiracy theory usually takes very little effort from the poster, they're either intimately familiar with it already or they just copy-paste the talking points from somewhere else (or both). Expecting others to write a deep rebuttal every time takes a lot of time, it basically amounts to a DDOS attack. I reserve the right to dismiss low-quality posts with a low-quality answer. And yes, that's a judgement call. There is no way around that.

daddylongstroke 3y ago

Pretty sad that you have to state the obvious ey? Amazed daily by the closed-mindedness on HN.

CyberDildonics 3y ago

This whole fear of being labeled a "conspiracy nut" for exploring less trodden paths needs to end People get called conspiracy nuts when they make big claims with no real evidence. That is the opposite of 'science and exploration'. The difference is always evidence. Go on a conspiracy site and ask for hard evidence of anything and they will get very upset.

ryandrake 3y ago

I’m torn about this now. I used to cautiously support the practice of double checking your doc, but not wholeheartedly because of all the various quacks: essential oil moms, natural/spiritual healers, psychics, supplement sellers, crystal therapists, “old school” (pre-COVID) antivaxers and so on, muddying the water. Until COVID came around and unearthed the absolute hoards of dO yOuR oWn ReSeArCh imbeciles. Now the sensible practice of getting a second opinion and exploring other options/doctors has been mixed up with the kooks: extreme politics and actual conspiracy theories, to the point where it’s hard to take any of it seriously. When someone now says they don’t trust doctors, you have to dig deeper to understand if it’s someone genuinely seeking out other options, or if it’s one of Those People who’ve gone off the deep end.

daddylongstroke 3y ago
Completely agree: couldn't believe the amount of conspiracy theorist doctors that pushed untested "vaccines" to a whole cohort of people which were at 0% effective risk from COVID.
felipeerias 3y ago
The pandemic revealed the degree to which any respectable field can harbour extremely dangerous kookery without realising it. For example, Western health authorities used to be absolutely certain that viruses could not be airborne (outside of very specific medical procedures), even though they did not have any good reason or evidence to back that up: it was just an old idea that happened to fit in with their priors, so generations of experts kept parroting it until horror unfolded.

wredue 3y ago

The earth is not 6000 years old God didn’t do it Gravity is the curvature of spacetime Things are not attracted to the planet through static electricity Covid is real Vaccines work Rich mother fuckers do NOT have our best interests at heart Intelligent aliens have not visited earth People are called conspiracy nuts for being conspiracy nuts. Not for “taking less trodden paths”. Getting real tired of the HNs new “wahh wahh, we’re such major victims for believing stupid shit and being called out on it!” And just trying to paint it as “less trodden paths”.

goatlover 3y ago
Add to that list, some version of the lab leak theory is plausible, but there was an attempt to make it sound like a conspiracy theory.
colordrops 3y ago
You are arguing with a straw man. Nothing in my post suggested support for any of those things. That's why I included the terms skepticism and data.
- wredue 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - lannisterstark 3y ago
    Not OP, but if you have nothing to contribute but vitriol, maybe do not comment, and move on.
    - wredue 3y ago
      I have nothing but vitriol to comment towards people that perform copy pastas of anti-science, anti-intellectual, conspiracy theorist propaganda. Similarly, I will certainly and absolutely NOT stop calling out conspiracy theorist propaganda just because conspiracy nuts don’t like it. If you don’t like being called out for posting conspiracy propaganda, don’t post it, and don’t defend it.

lowkey 3y ago

I don’t think it is possible to end the derogatory use of the term conspiracy theorist universally, but I do have some hope that we can put a stop to it’s use as an ad hominem here on Hacker News. It is never used in the spirit of promoting insightful discussion. Instead it is used to shut down a line of inquiry in its tracks. It’s like calling someone an anti-semite. It is used as a soft form of censorship, to disqualify the mere idea of engaging in the specifics of an argument. If someone dismisses a comment by implying it is a conspiracy instead of offering a substantive rebuttal of why the comment is mistaken, it reduces the quality of the entire community. I think we can do better, but more people need to call out this bad behavior.

tremon 3y ago
What you're suggesting leads to an offense/defense asymmetry. Spouting a conspiracy theory usually takes very little effort from the poster, they're either intimately familiar with it already or they just copy-paste the talking points from somewhere else (or both). Expecting others to write a deep rebuttal every time takes a lot of time, it basically amounts to a DDOS attack. I reserve the right to dismiss low-quality posts with a low-quality answer. And yes, that's a judgement call. There is no way around that.