3 ms·
I think the main point is those people do not trust anybody and look at facts-at-face-value only. And in many cases mainstream communication looks iffy with mis
by mantas 1y ago
I think the main point is those people do not trust anybody and look at facts-at-face-value only. And in many cases mainstream communication looks iffy with missing bits of information. Either because some information is classified or some officials feel that less information is better for whatever reason. While iffy sources go extra mile to present their stuff in a very detailed way.
- sorcerer-mar 1y agoThis seems generous in my view. COVID conspiracists who I talk to tend to be completely devoid of knowledge of basic, basic facts, and totally ignorant of the contents of actual primary sources. They are not curious enough to actually look at the primary sources, probably because it's tedious, but they love spending hours reading other idiots' interpretations of those sources.
- soco 1y agoThat's because RandomDude8914327 doesn't bother with facts, they'll just build imaginary arguments to fit together nicely, thus generating something stable and logical and convincing- just devoid of reality.
- mantas 1y agoIt depends where you draw the line who is COVID conspiracists. Is it only the batshit crazy people. Or is it people who e.g. stuck to lab-origin theory too?
- sorcerer-mar 1y agoI'm mostly referring to people who are in the vague, totally incoherent area of "COVID was a hoax/conspiracy to control people/inject vaccines" ballpark. High-confidence lab leak people are very often conspiracists, while "lab leak is possible (even >50% probable)" are usually not.
- const_cast 1y agoI don't think this is even close to true. Most of my family are Trumpers, anti-vax, and covid-deniers. They will believe any asshat with a microphone and access to Spotify with next to zero thought. They explicitly DO NOT believe any reliable source. Their level of belief is inverse to how reliable the source is. If a rando with no background in anything says it, it's reliable. If a random doctor says it, it could be reliable but probably not. If multiple doctors say it, then it's definitely not true. It's manifested at this point into full science denial. I have one family member who won't take their high blood pressure medicine anymore because they think it's causing the hypertension. Sigh...