New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane
- Thread starter darkbeaver
- Start date
In the name of science, some sacrifice must be made...
It's not like he was a human or anything....
This is just a big cover-up! Everyone knows that conspiracy theorists aren't crazy. They're retarded.
Now it's starting to make much more sense.... They should be wearing the tin-foil over the hockey helmet instead of believing that the foil replaces it
So, sanity is now defined by simply belonging to a group that has the majority in opinion? Do I really need to point out the obvious flaw? If the majority of people think the Earth is flat, would that make those who think it is not insane? Illogical.
I'd also love to know how they rationalize a study population that could be so homogeneous. According to their methodology, one either believe all of the conspiracy theory, or believes all of the official explanations based on whether a single comment supports one explanation or the other. That is dubious. In other words someone could believe most of the official report, and post one comment that takes exception with some detail, and that would have been coded as a conspiracist.
I'd also love to know how they rationalize a study population that could be so homogeneous. According to their methodology, one either believe all of the conspiracy theory, or believes all of the official explanations based on whether a single comment supports one explanation or the other. That is dubious. In other words someone could believe most of the official report, and post one comment that takes exception with some detail, and that would have been coded as a conspiracist.
Last edited:
yeah noticed that too, we are becoming such a black/white, left right society no wonder there is little balance in many many things these days.
In the absence of being able to prove something, but pointing to some anomalous reason like secret gubmint bodies and black helicopters, then the 'conspiracy' has no merit
Maybe it was a conspiracy to develop the homogeneous population in the first place
You can find the article here, with all it's dodgy methodology:
Frontiers | “What about building 7?” A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories | Frontiers in Personality Science and Individual Differences
Interestingly, it was the conspiracist coded comments that were less likely to provide support for their own position. While the conventionalists were more hostile, the conspiracists were more likely to be derogatory of alternative explanations.
Well, an absence of evidence still doesn't mean that the conspiracy can't be true. It's just unlikely. However, the conspiracists were far more sure of themselves as being correct, despite providing less evidence. The fact that non-9/11 conspiracy belief is highly correlated to belief in the 9/11 conspiracy shouldn't be surprising either.
No two people think the same way or have the same opinions on any given subject. Everybody has had different life experiences that colour how they perceive reality and truth. If everybody is different, unique, then there is no such thing as normal or sane. By definition, everybody is insane, so who is drawing lines in the sand to say who is and who isn't? It is illogical to think you are sane and that there are groups of people who think alike.
Having said that, those who accept the official story are sheeple. PLLLTTTZZZ!!!!
Having said that, those who accept the official story are sheeple. PLLLTTTZZZ!!!!
Being right doesn't mean you are sane, either. Right and wrong are only relative to your way of thinking. I think it is one of those "judge not" things we were warned about.
Can't buy that. Some things are true and some things aren't, people who believe things that aren't true are wrong.
to a degree, but somethings are just more right than others in the grand scheme of things, and people who are more highly evolved have a better or clearer understanding of more right than someone less evolved.
wisdom leans toward truth