(Disclaimer: I considered not posting this because it is a very sensitive subject, but I also felt it needed to be posted as a way to help getting people who do "believe" in this to finally admit they are wrong)
The Holocaust was the most horrendous acts of mass murder in human history. It killed six million European Jews, and maybe just as many people in other ethnic groups and religions as well. Despite all of the imagines of this horror that has been burned into our minds through photos, videos, testimony from survivors, the soldiers rescued them, and even members of the SS, there are still a group of people who don't believe, or at least they claim they don't believe, the Holocaust happened.
Of all the conspiracy theories there are, Holocaust denial is one of the most disgusting and bigoted conspiracy theories in the world. This conspiracy theory is so offensive, it is illegal to promote in 17 countries, including Germany, and people have gone to prison because they promoted it in those countries.
Not only is Holocaust denial apparently anti-semitic at it's core, it's actually believed by many people who study bigotry, that even people who claim the Holocaust didn't happen, don't even believe it themselves, and that the only reason they deny the Holocaust is to "justify" their own anti-semitic beliefs.
The other "curious" thing about Holocaust denial is, is that it only seems to focus on the Jewish population, and doesn't focus at all on the other groups that were murdered in the Holocaust. This is further evidence that Holocaust denial is purely anti-semitic.
Many historians and scholars consider Holocaust denial so flawed, so biased, and so bigoted, that they refuse to debate Holocaust deniers at all because they don't want to give them a false sense legitimacy.
I'm not sure if this is the most embarrassing conspiracy theory there is, but it's definitely the most disgusting.
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Embarrassing Conspiracy Theories: 9/11 Controlled Demolition
One of the most prominent conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks is that many conspiracy theorists believe that the World Trade Center towers came down as a result of explosives that were place in the building months in advanced. They base this belief on the comments and advocacy of a few engineers and demolition experts who believe that the buildings collapsed in a controlled demolition.
The major problem with this is that conspiracy theorists assume that a jumbo jet, nearly full of jet fuel, couldn't cause enough damage to cause the buildings to collapse. They reason they believe this is because they believe these 9/11 truth engineers when they say that the steel structures of the building should not have been damaged enough in the crashes to cause them to collapse, and that the heat caused by the burning jet fuel could not have been hot enough. The problem with this theory is that it assumes that the combination of the two should not have been able to bring down the towers because neither one on their own could have brought down the towers, and what tends to not be taken into consideration by many conspiracy theorists is while one of the two might not have been enough to bring down the towers, the combination of both was enough to bring down the towers.
Also, if you watch the videos of the collapses of the towers, it clearly shows that the beginnings of the collapses began at the impact areas. If there were any explosives on those floors, they would have gone off very shortly after the impacts, if not right at the time of impact.
Another problem with this theory is, is that it assumes that enough explosives that could have brought the towers down could have been hidden in the in the buildings for several months without being found by any of the maintenance workers, or the bomb squads and bomb sniffing dogs, who began routinely searching the building after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Also, it would have been very difficult to sneak explosives into the building in the first place, as someone probably would have seen the people bringing in the explosives in the first place.
Another false assumption about this theory is, is that the towers collapsed at free fall speeds. They didn't collapse at free fall speeds. They actually collapsed for several seconds longer then what they would have if they really did collapse at free fall speeds. The posters of these videos that allegedly are claimed to shows the tower collapsing at free fall speeds either don't know what free fall speeds are, or alter the speeds of the videos to make it appear the towers were collapsing faster then they really were.
One of the biggest false assumptions is that there was explosive residue found on the wreckage at the sites. This isn't true at all, and has been independently verified.
I speculate that the reason why so many people in the 9/11 Truth movement believe that the towers were brought down by explosive is, because it would help justify their beliefs that the government was involved.
The major problem with this is that conspiracy theorists assume that a jumbo jet, nearly full of jet fuel, couldn't cause enough damage to cause the buildings to collapse. They reason they believe this is because they believe these 9/11 truth engineers when they say that the steel structures of the building should not have been damaged enough in the crashes to cause them to collapse, and that the heat caused by the burning jet fuel could not have been hot enough. The problem with this theory is that it assumes that the combination of the two should not have been able to bring down the towers because neither one on their own could have brought down the towers, and what tends to not be taken into consideration by many conspiracy theorists is while one of the two might not have been enough to bring down the towers, the combination of both was enough to bring down the towers.
Also, if you watch the videos of the collapses of the towers, it clearly shows that the beginnings of the collapses began at the impact areas. If there were any explosives on those floors, they would have gone off very shortly after the impacts, if not right at the time of impact.
Another problem with this theory is, is that it assumes that enough explosives that could have brought the towers down could have been hidden in the in the buildings for several months without being found by any of the maintenance workers, or the bomb squads and bomb sniffing dogs, who began routinely searching the building after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Also, it would have been very difficult to sneak explosives into the building in the first place, as someone probably would have seen the people bringing in the explosives in the first place.
Another false assumption about this theory is, is that the towers collapsed at free fall speeds. They didn't collapse at free fall speeds. They actually collapsed for several seconds longer then what they would have if they really did collapse at free fall speeds. The posters of these videos that allegedly are claimed to shows the tower collapsing at free fall speeds either don't know what free fall speeds are, or alter the speeds of the videos to make it appear the towers were collapsing faster then they really were.
One of the biggest false assumptions is that there was explosive residue found on the wreckage at the sites. This isn't true at all, and has been independently verified.
I speculate that the reason why so many people in the 9/11 Truth movement believe that the towers were brought down by explosive is, because it would help justify their beliefs that the government was involved.
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Embarrassing Conspiracy Theories: Moon Landing Hoax
Ever since 1969 when Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin walked on the Moon there has been this huge conspiracy theory that neither they, nor anyone else ever went to the Moon.
This belief exists despite the fact that there is plenty of third party evidence that claims that we did indeed land on the Moon, and that none of the 400,000 people who worked on the Apollo project, including the 12 men that actually walked on the Moon itself, have ever said that the Moon landings were faked. This includes Edgar Mitchell, the sixth person to walk on the Moon, who believes the the US government is covering up the existence of aliens. If anybody in the whole group would have admitted that the Moon landings were faked, it would be him.
Oh and lets not forget the over 900 pounds of rocks, dirt, and dust, collected from the Moon, and the huge amount of money we spent getting there. Also, if you have a powerful enough telescope, you can actually see the landing sites.
So why do people still believe we didn't land on the Moon?
Beside the belief that we weren't technologically advance enough back then to get to the Moon, it is believed that the reason we went to the Moon, or in the mind of a conspiracy theorist, that the US government would want people to believe we went to the Moon, was purely for political reasons, and that the reason why we might have faked the Moon landings is that the government didn't want to risk failure of an actual Moon landing and have it being used as a propaganda tool of the Soviet Union.
While it is true that the main reason we went to the Moon was to beat the Soviet Union in the Space Race, it isn't the only reason, otherwise NASA would have probably just landed only one person on the Moon, and not have brought back any rocks or dirt.
Also, why would we fake something like that? If the Soviet Union had found out it was faked, and had proof that it was faked, wouldn't they use it against us as propaganda?
The answer to that is that they would have, and the reason why they never claimed we didn't land on the Moon is because there is no proof that the Moon landings were faked.
Now when you hear this, there can only be one of two conclusions you can make: either it was so well covered up that even the KGB couldn't find any information that the landings were faked, or, we really did go to the Moon.
The fact is, is that there is no proof at all that we didn't go to the Moon, and that there is an overwhelming amount of proof that we did go to the Moon, and that no one is covering anything up at all.
This belief exists despite the fact that there is plenty of third party evidence that claims that we did indeed land on the Moon, and that none of the 400,000 people who worked on the Apollo project, including the 12 men that actually walked on the Moon itself, have ever said that the Moon landings were faked. This includes Edgar Mitchell, the sixth person to walk on the Moon, who believes the the US government is covering up the existence of aliens. If anybody in the whole group would have admitted that the Moon landings were faked, it would be him.
Oh and lets not forget the over 900 pounds of rocks, dirt, and dust, collected from the Moon, and the huge amount of money we spent getting there. Also, if you have a powerful enough telescope, you can actually see the landing sites.
So why do people still believe we didn't land on the Moon?
Beside the belief that we weren't technologically advance enough back then to get to the Moon, it is believed that the reason we went to the Moon, or in the mind of a conspiracy theorist, that the US government would want people to believe we went to the Moon, was purely for political reasons, and that the reason why we might have faked the Moon landings is that the government didn't want to risk failure of an actual Moon landing and have it being used as a propaganda tool of the Soviet Union.
While it is true that the main reason we went to the Moon was to beat the Soviet Union in the Space Race, it isn't the only reason, otherwise NASA would have probably just landed only one person on the Moon, and not have brought back any rocks or dirt.
Also, why would we fake something like that? If the Soviet Union had found out it was faked, and had proof that it was faked, wouldn't they use it against us as propaganda?
The answer to that is that they would have, and the reason why they never claimed we didn't land on the Moon is because there is no proof that the Moon landings were faked.
Now when you hear this, there can only be one of two conclusions you can make: either it was so well covered up that even the KGB couldn't find any information that the landings were faked, or, we really did go to the Moon.
The fact is, is that there is no proof at all that we didn't go to the Moon, and that there is an overwhelming amount of proof that we did go to the Moon, and that no one is covering anything up at all.
Friday, May 25, 2012
Embarrassing Conspiracy Theories: Debunker Bloggers = Dis-information Agent
There are a lot of blogs that are dedicated to conspiracy theories, both promoting and debunking them. Typically, those writing blogs debunking conspiracy theories claim that those promoting conspiracy theories are very misinformed individuals who do not know, or do not bother to learn, or refuse to accept the facts. Those writing blogs promoting conspiracy theories claim that those debunking conspiracy theories are dis-information agents...
Besides the fact that these people have no real proof of the conspiracy theories that they promote (although they believe that they do), they also have no proof that the bloggers that debunk these conspiracy theories are dis-information agents as well. The only thing that they can typically cite as "proof" is the blog postings itself, because in some conspiracy theorists mindsets, there are not many people who do not believe them, and thus, the only people who would "logically" take the time to write a blog that dis-credits their theories must be a paid dis-information agent, instead of a person who dis-likes conspiracy theories, has some time on their hands, and are willing to do some research to debunk this stuff.
This almost sounds like back when I was in grade school, and during gym, would sometimes play games. Many times I would be on the losing team, but I would declare to anyone that would listen to me that we won, because I would assume that the other team was cheating. I had no reason to believe the other team was cheating, other then the fact that the team I was on had lost, because my childish and immature mind would not let me comprehend or accept the fact that I, and the people I was teamed with, sucked.
This is basically the same line of "logic" that conspiracy theorists use when it comes to people who debunk conspiracy theories: The skeptic who is debunking a conspiracy theory, backs up their claims with facts, and logic, and the conspiracy theorist can't beat those facts, or more likely doesn't believe those facts are real in the first place, and assumes they must be a dis-information agent, because, what else can they be.
One of the biggest problems with this line of "logic" is, that it in a way, it assumes that people can't think for themselves, and can not possibly come up with a different conclusion, unless that conclusion was made up. Skeptics know on the other hand that this isn't true at all, and that people are entirely capable of coming up with their own conclusions, otherwise there would not be a need for skeptics and debunkers at all.
Not only do skeptics and debunkers not fear accusations of being a dis-information agent, they laugh at it, and mock it, because not only does such an accusation from a conspiracy theorist make that conspiracy theorist sound like a paranoid nutcase, it also makes them sound like a hypocritical fascist, who only thinks that the only valid opinion there is, are those that they share.
Besides the fact that these people have no real proof of the conspiracy theories that they promote (although they believe that they do), they also have no proof that the bloggers that debunk these conspiracy theories are dis-information agents as well. The only thing that they can typically cite as "proof" is the blog postings itself, because in some conspiracy theorists mindsets, there are not many people who do not believe them, and thus, the only people who would "logically" take the time to write a blog that dis-credits their theories must be a paid dis-information agent, instead of a person who dis-likes conspiracy theories, has some time on their hands, and are willing to do some research to debunk this stuff.
This almost sounds like back when I was in grade school, and during gym, would sometimes play games. Many times I would be on the losing team, but I would declare to anyone that would listen to me that we won, because I would assume that the other team was cheating. I had no reason to believe the other team was cheating, other then the fact that the team I was on had lost, because my childish and immature mind would not let me comprehend or accept the fact that I, and the people I was teamed with, sucked.
This is basically the same line of "logic" that conspiracy theorists use when it comes to people who debunk conspiracy theories: The skeptic who is debunking a conspiracy theory, backs up their claims with facts, and logic, and the conspiracy theorist can't beat those facts, or more likely doesn't believe those facts are real in the first place, and assumes they must be a dis-information agent, because, what else can they be.
One of the biggest problems with this line of "logic" is, that it in a way, it assumes that people can't think for themselves, and can not possibly come up with a different conclusion, unless that conclusion was made up. Skeptics know on the other hand that this isn't true at all, and that people are entirely capable of coming up with their own conclusions, otherwise there would not be a need for skeptics and debunkers at all.
Not only do skeptics and debunkers not fear accusations of being a dis-information agent, they laugh at it, and mock it, because not only does such an accusation from a conspiracy theorist make that conspiracy theorist sound like a paranoid nutcase, it also makes them sound like a hypocritical fascist, who only thinks that the only valid opinion there is, are those that they share.
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Embarrassing Conspiracy Theories: No Planes hit the World Trade Center
There are probably more then a dozen or so conspiracy theories involving the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, and I admit, I think every one of those theories are ridiculous and false. But, there is one conspiracy theory that is so ridiculous that most 9/11 conspiracy theorists don't talk about.
This is the theory that no planes hit the World Trade Center towers.
It is considered the craziest of all the 9/11 conspiracy theories, and talk about it has been banned from many conspiracy theorist websites. Some people who advocate these theories are even accused of being dis-information agent, and have even been threaten with violence.
There are actually two different versions this theory.
The first one is that what we all saw on TV were not planes, but computer generated images, and that every video that showed the planes hitting the towers are fakes.
Besides the fact that this claim sounds insane, it would also have to mean that every eye witness to the attack, including people who were standing in the street, and people who were actually in the buildings themselves and watched the planes hit, are lying...
In other words, it might be technologically possible, but humanly speaking, it's impossible. There is simply no way you could get the tens of thousands of people to lie about this.
The other type of no plane theory is one that claims that a hologram is what was seen hitting the towers, not a plane.
This theory would have to ignore the statements given by many of the survivors who were in the towers when the planes hit, that they actually saw the planes go into the sides of the building. This is not even mentioning the fact that we didn't have the technology to do such a thing back then, because we don't have the technology to do it now.
Advocates of both of these theories tend to base their claims on the belief that no plane wreckage was recovered, and that no bodies of the passengers that were on the planes were found either. Both of these claims are false. There was in fact plane wreckage recovered, and there were remains of the passengers found at the sites as well.
Advocates of these theories also claim that what actually hit the towers was a missile, although there are some that claim that lasers brought the towers down, which again, is not technologically possible now, much less ten years.
A missile would not have caused the type of damage caused to the towers. A missile would have created a large, round hole, and not the large, plane shaped hole that, lets say, a large plane flying into the side of a building would cause if you flew a large plane into the side of a building, which is the shape of the holes that were made when those two planes flew straight into those two buildings. Also, missiles travel at super sonic speeds, and those two planes were traveling well under super sonic speeds.
Sounds crazy, right?
Well, it is. In fact many leading advocates of this theory are actually believed to be mentally ill.
This conspiracy theory really is embarrassing to conspiracy theorists, because it really does make them look (more) crazy.
This is the theory that no planes hit the World Trade Center towers.
It is considered the craziest of all the 9/11 conspiracy theories, and talk about it has been banned from many conspiracy theorist websites. Some people who advocate these theories are even accused of being dis-information agent, and have even been threaten with violence.
There are actually two different versions this theory.
The first one is that what we all saw on TV were not planes, but computer generated images, and that every video that showed the planes hitting the towers are fakes.
Besides the fact that this claim sounds insane, it would also have to mean that every eye witness to the attack, including people who were standing in the street, and people who were actually in the buildings themselves and watched the planes hit, are lying...
In other words, it might be technologically possible, but humanly speaking, it's impossible. There is simply no way you could get the tens of thousands of people to lie about this.
The other type of no plane theory is one that claims that a hologram is what was seen hitting the towers, not a plane.
This theory would have to ignore the statements given by many of the survivors who were in the towers when the planes hit, that they actually saw the planes go into the sides of the building. This is not even mentioning the fact that we didn't have the technology to do such a thing back then, because we don't have the technology to do it now.
Advocates of both of these theories tend to base their claims on the belief that no plane wreckage was recovered, and that no bodies of the passengers that were on the planes were found either. Both of these claims are false. There was in fact plane wreckage recovered, and there were remains of the passengers found at the sites as well.
Advocates of these theories also claim that what actually hit the towers was a missile, although there are some that claim that lasers brought the towers down, which again, is not technologically possible now, much less ten years.
A missile would not have caused the type of damage caused to the towers. A missile would have created a large, round hole, and not the large, plane shaped hole that, lets say, a large plane flying into the side of a building would cause if you flew a large plane into the side of a building, which is the shape of the holes that were made when those two planes flew straight into those two buildings. Also, missiles travel at super sonic speeds, and those two planes were traveling well under super sonic speeds.
Sounds crazy, right?
Well, it is. In fact many leading advocates of this theory are actually believed to be mentally ill.
This conspiracy theory really is embarrassing to conspiracy theorists, because it really does make them look (more) crazy.
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Embarrassing Conspiracy Theories: Birthers
The birther conspiracy theory was once one of the biggest conspiracy theories in America.
If you don't know what I'm talking about, this conspiracy theory is based upon the belief that President Obama wasn't born in the United States, and therefore can not legally be the president of the United States.
Besides the fact that this conspiracy theory is baseless in it's "facts", and was debunked from the beginning, it still exists, although not as many people believe in it now, because of the fact that President Obama released his long form birth certificate in 2011.
Those that still believe this conspiracy theory not only still believe that he wasn't born in the United States, but that all the documents that prove he was born here are fakes.
Most birthers base their claims that President Obama was born in Kenya because of a Kenyan birth certificate that said that the president was born in Kenya. That birth certificate is actually fake, and the person who created it, actually admitted it was fake.
Another reason birthers still claim the the president wasn't born in the United States because of a recorded phone conversation between Barack Obama's step-grandmother, Sarah Obama, and an Anabaptist bishop, Ron McRae, in which she allegedly said that her grandson was born in Kenya. This is in fact false. She never said he was born in Kenya, and in fact said he was born in the United States.
So why the hell are there still people whom still believe that President Obama wasn't born in this country?
There may be a very simple answer to this: Those people are most likely racists who hate the fact that the president is black.
I am more then certain that if the president was white, and didn't have such a foreign sounding name, no one would even question if they were an American citizen.
Birther theories are considered so ridiculous, and has been debunked so completely, that even FoxNews, which of the three major cable news networks, is the most critical of the president, no longer even has birthers come on and talk about why they believe Obama wasn't born in this country. And the other networks tend to ignore birthers completely.
Not only is this conspiracy theory embarrassing to conservatives and Republicans, because most birthers are conservatives and Republicans, it should embarrassing to conspiracy theorist in general, because it makes them look like a bunch of racists and idiots.
If you don't know what I'm talking about, this conspiracy theory is based upon the belief that President Obama wasn't born in the United States, and therefore can not legally be the president of the United States.
Besides the fact that this conspiracy theory is baseless in it's "facts", and was debunked from the beginning, it still exists, although not as many people believe in it now, because of the fact that President Obama released his long form birth certificate in 2011.
Those that still believe this conspiracy theory not only still believe that he wasn't born in the United States, but that all the documents that prove he was born here are fakes.
Most birthers base their claims that President Obama was born in Kenya because of a Kenyan birth certificate that said that the president was born in Kenya. That birth certificate is actually fake, and the person who created it, actually admitted it was fake.
Another reason birthers still claim the the president wasn't born in the United States because of a recorded phone conversation between Barack Obama's step-grandmother, Sarah Obama, and an Anabaptist bishop, Ron McRae, in which she allegedly said that her grandson was born in Kenya. This is in fact false. She never said he was born in Kenya, and in fact said he was born in the United States.
So why the hell are there still people whom still believe that President Obama wasn't born in this country?
There may be a very simple answer to this: Those people are most likely racists who hate the fact that the president is black.
I am more then certain that if the president was white, and didn't have such a foreign sounding name, no one would even question if they were an American citizen.
Birther theories are considered so ridiculous, and has been debunked so completely, that even FoxNews, which of the three major cable news networks, is the most critical of the president, no longer even has birthers come on and talk about why they believe Obama wasn't born in this country. And the other networks tend to ignore birthers completely.
Not only is this conspiracy theory embarrassing to conservatives and Republicans, because most birthers are conservatives and Republicans, it should embarrassing to conspiracy theorist in general, because it makes them look like a bunch of racists and idiots.
Monday, May 21, 2012
Anger Management Issues + Superiority Complex = Conspiracy Theorist?
(Note: not all people who have anger management issues, or a superiority complex, or a combination of both, are conspiracy theorists, nor do all people that believe in conspiracy theories are people with anger management issues, or superiority complexes. This is just from my observations of the way conspiracy theorists act, especially towards people whom don't believe in their conspiracy theories.)
From my observations of conspiracy theorists, many of them seem to have two common factors:
First, is that they seem to be very, very sure of their theories,
And second, they become very, very angry when you tell them you don't believe, and sometimes even become irate when you present evidence that contradicts their beliefs.
It just seems to me that many conspiracy theorists have this combination of both being easy to piss off, and being very self righteous, and that those who disagree with them are always wrong, and/or less intelligent then they are.
For people whom have anger management issues, when things don't go their way, they will easily and quickly become hostile, and often times either not to accept responsibly for their own actions, or has misguided blame, and blames others for something that isn't that person's fault.
For people with a superiority complex, they often times have a negative view of those around them, and are either not concerned with the opinions of others, and believes that unless you share their own opinions, or beliefs, then your opinions and beliefs (or facts) are inferior, and irrelevant. They may also deep down inside actually feel inferior, and feel they have to assert their believed superiority over others.
Many conspiracy theorists I have come across appear to contain these traits. I have observed that they tend to go into long rants, in which they blame certain people (usually the rich and politicians) for all the bad things in the world (including imaginary bad things) and in their lives. When they're confronted by a person whom doesn't believe them, and even gives them actual facts that disprove their theories, they will continue to basically say the same thing over and over again, and often in a more hostile fashion, and either claim that the facts presented to them by a skeptic are either irrelevant, fake, or ignore the facts completely.
Some conspiracy theorists will make semi-threatening statements as well. They will tell the person they are arguing with that they are either a sheep, or that they are an actual dis-information agent, and that soon that "their time will come." This is basically a conspiracy theorist's way of telling a skeptic that at some point in time that they are going to end up being killed in some kind of revolution that they believe is coming, and is also a way to try to intimidate people into believing that, what in their minds is the truth, or silence them, because it just angers them to the point of rage that people don't believe them.
On their own, having anger problems, or having a self inflated ego, is not good.
Combining the two just might led a person to believe all sorts of crazy stuff.
From my observations of conspiracy theorists, many of them seem to have two common factors:
First, is that they seem to be very, very sure of their theories,
And second, they become very, very angry when you tell them you don't believe, and sometimes even become irate when you present evidence that contradicts their beliefs.
It just seems to me that many conspiracy theorists have this combination of both being easy to piss off, and being very self righteous, and that those who disagree with them are always wrong, and/or less intelligent then they are.
For people whom have anger management issues, when things don't go their way, they will easily and quickly become hostile, and often times either not to accept responsibly for their own actions, or has misguided blame, and blames others for something that isn't that person's fault.
For people with a superiority complex, they often times have a negative view of those around them, and are either not concerned with the opinions of others, and believes that unless you share their own opinions, or beliefs, then your opinions and beliefs (or facts) are inferior, and irrelevant. They may also deep down inside actually feel inferior, and feel they have to assert their believed superiority over others.
Many conspiracy theorists I have come across appear to contain these traits. I have observed that they tend to go into long rants, in which they blame certain people (usually the rich and politicians) for all the bad things in the world (including imaginary bad things) and in their lives. When they're confronted by a person whom doesn't believe them, and even gives them actual facts that disprove their theories, they will continue to basically say the same thing over and over again, and often in a more hostile fashion, and either claim that the facts presented to them by a skeptic are either irrelevant, fake, or ignore the facts completely.
Some conspiracy theorists will make semi-threatening statements as well. They will tell the person they are arguing with that they are either a sheep, or that they are an actual dis-information agent, and that soon that "their time will come." This is basically a conspiracy theorist's way of telling a skeptic that at some point in time that they are going to end up being killed in some kind of revolution that they believe is coming, and is also a way to try to intimidate people into believing that, what in their minds is the truth, or silence them, because it just angers them to the point of rage that people don't believe them.
On their own, having anger problems, or having a self inflated ego, is not good.
Combining the two just might led a person to believe all sorts of crazy stuff.
Sunday, May 20, 2012
Pseudo... Television
Ten years ago if you watched The Learning Channel, you could actually learn something from that television channel. Ten years ago if you watched the History Channel, you would actual see some real history lessons on that channel. Now if you get something useful and thought expanding from either channel, you've caught them on a special day.
It seems like so many channels that once presented actual stuff that's worth learning about, is now presenting mostly pseudo-science and conspiracy theories.
Where once crap like this mostly only showed on SyFy, is now quickly taking over networks who's original purpose was to show real science, and real history.
Now it seems that all these channels show either "reality" shows, or shows containing fringe science that a legit scientist would not touch with a ten foot poll.
Every one of these science networks is guilty of this, from shows about psychics, ghost hunting, UFOs, conspiracy theories, cryptozoology, the Apocalypse, pseudo-history, ancient aliens, and the list just goes on and on and on...
And The History Channel is the worst offender of them all, because just about everything I listed above, is on it's main line-up, or shown in re-runs.
In fact, finding a show on that channel with real history on it is about as rare as finding music on MTV (or what's called music, since many people don't consider it to be music).
I blame us, the people for this, since these networks give us what we want instead of what we need, and what we need is to expand our minds in the right direction.
Yes, I know that history and science are boring to some people, but I've always felt that real history and real science, once you've started to really learn the stuff, is allot more interesting then the fake stuff that's pedaled as being real.
It seems like so many channels that once presented actual stuff that's worth learning about, is now presenting mostly pseudo-science and conspiracy theories.
Where once crap like this mostly only showed on SyFy, is now quickly taking over networks who's original purpose was to show real science, and real history.
Now it seems that all these channels show either "reality" shows, or shows containing fringe science that a legit scientist would not touch with a ten foot poll.
Every one of these science networks is guilty of this, from shows about psychics, ghost hunting, UFOs, conspiracy theories, cryptozoology, the Apocalypse, pseudo-history, ancient aliens, and the list just goes on and on and on...
And The History Channel is the worst offender of them all, because just about everything I listed above, is on it's main line-up, or shown in re-runs.
In fact, finding a show on that channel with real history on it is about as rare as finding music on MTV (or what's called music, since many people don't consider it to be music).
I blame us, the people for this, since these networks give us what we want instead of what we need, and what we need is to expand our minds in the right direction.
Yes, I know that history and science are boring to some people, but I've always felt that real history and real science, once you've started to really learn the stuff, is allot more interesting then the fake stuff that's pedaled as being real.
Saturday, May 19, 2012
How to handle a Conspiracy Theorist
How do you handle a conspiracy theorist?
If you know someone (friend, family member) who is a conspiracy theorist, sometimes it's just best to let continue to believe in the conspiracy theories they believe and not argue with them about it, because even reasonable people can become very upset and angry if you tell them that what they believe isn't real.
Most people who believe in conspiracy theories usually only believe in one or two, and in most cases, these beliefs do not affect their lives at all, and usually they won't bring the subject up at all unless someone else brings up the subject first.
Most of the time their most hostile arguments are actually on the internet in some message board forum, or the comments section of a news article or a blog. This is all that this is of course, just talk. Once they have vented, they'll just go back to their normal, everyday lives.
But what if their lives aren't considered normal?
What if they live in isolation due to their paranoia? Or have a total lack of, or even have no respect for the laws or law enforcement what so ever? Or engage in unproven, dis-proven, unhealthy, or even dangerous medical practices?
If this does occur then it might be time to get involved.
Many people might believe that isolating them is the answer, but really this might just led them to becoming more paranoid and more convinced of their beliefs.
The best thing to do is to keep communication with them as much as possible, and to give little hints that what they believe is wrong.
If you believe that they are suffering from mental illness, it's best to, in the kindest and gentlest way possible, suggest to them that they seek mental health treatment.
If they are definitely mentally ill, and they are talking about committing acts of violence, then you need to contact the local authorities and have that person committed, because, as it has been shown in the past, people whom very seriously believe in conspiracy theories, and are seriously mentally ill, can commit huge acts of violence.
Fact is, is that you can not just leave a person who seriously believes in conspiracy theories alone. As tempting as it might to stay away from them, if they truly need help, isolating them won't help them at all.
Many people might believe that isolating them is the answer, but really this might just led them to becoming more paranoid and more convinced of their beliefs.
The best thing to do is to keep communication with them as much as possible, and to give little hints that what they believe is wrong.
If you believe that they are suffering from mental illness, it's best to, in the kindest and gentlest way possible, suggest to them that they seek mental health treatment.
If they are definitely mentally ill, and they are talking about committing acts of violence, then you need to contact the local authorities and have that person committed, because, as it has been shown in the past, people whom very seriously believe in conspiracy theories, and are seriously mentally ill, can commit huge acts of violence.
Fact is, is that you can not just leave a person who seriously believes in conspiracy theories alone. As tempting as it might to stay away from them, if they truly need help, isolating them won't help them at all.
Jenny McCarthy Posing for Playboy... Not Good
It was recently announced that Jenny
McCarthy would be posing for Playboy again, and quite frankly, I
don't like it at all.
It's not that I don't think that Jenny
isn't a beautiful woman. In fact I think she is one of the most
beautiful women in the world.
The reason I don't like it that Jenny
is posing for Playboy again is the fact that she is one of spokes
people against vaccines.
Jenny's son is autistic, and she firmly
believes that he became that way because of vaccines.
Despite the fact that the enormous
amount of research shows that genetics, not vaccines, are the most
likely cause of autism, there are still millions of people whom still
believe otherwise.
These people base their beliefs on
numerous fraud research articles that most major medical journals
will not publish due to a lack of creditable research. Most famous of
these is the article that started it all: The article that was
written by Andrew Wakefield and published in the British Medical
Journal.
The article was controversial from the
start, and in 2010 was removed from the BMJ for fraud.
He is also no longer allowed to
practice medicine in the United Kingdom.
Despite this, Wakefield still claims
his research is truthful, and that there is a conspiracy by public
health officials and pharmaceutical companies to discredit his work,
and that they paid bloggers to post rumors about him over the
internet and inflate the reports about the death from measles.
Jenny McCarthy is one of Wakefield's
biggest supporters, and continues to preach the anti-vaccine cause. A
cause that has been linked to the deaths of thousands of people,
mostly children.
It angers me that Playboy is giving her
another pictorial, despite the fact that her ignorance and
irresponsibility has led to so many deaths. I don't suggest that
people boycott Playboy, but I do think that people should mail
Playboy letters stating how disappointed they are that Jenny is
getting another pictorial, and that they should rip out and mail back
the pictorial to Playboy in protest as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)