Ever encounter a conspiracy theorist on the internet? Most of us have, especially if you're a skeptic like myself who has their own blog about debunking. At that point they tend to come to you.
While there are a lot of things about conspiracy theorist on the internet that I've noticed they tend to do, I've narrowed it down to five main things.
So here are five things I've noticed about conspiracy theorist on the internet:
5. They love using quotes.
Be it in their signature line on an internet forum, or in their timeline on their Facebook page, conspiracy theorists love posting quotes on the internet. Usually these quotes are allegedly from some musician, or politician, or philosopher, or just some famous person whom they think would share their beliefs. Sometimes these quotes are accompanied with a picture of the person who allegedly said it.
The problem with this is that (and this is true anytime someone quotes someone) is that the quotes can be taken out of context, the quote can be mis-quoted, or it could be something that person never said at all.
There is of course one truth about these quotes: they do absolutely nothing to back up what ever conspiracy theory they are claiming to believe in.
4. They love collages.
Go to any conspiracy theorist group on Facebook or conspiracy theorist forum and you'll usually find some collages of photo-shopped pictures along with conspiracy theory claims within the collage.
These collages are often times confusing at the least, and more times than not, disturbing looking.
Many conspiracy theorists might think these collages helps get whatever point they have across, but the reality is that they are really a turn off for normal minded people and makes them all look like a bunch of wackos.
3. They don't have a sense of humor.
Conspiracy theorists (at least on the internet) take things way to seriously, and when someone makes a joke or a sarcastic remake, they tend to go ballistic, either because they don't think you should be joking about the subject at hand, or they think you're being serious.
They also can't tell when someone (or some website) is being sarcastic either. An example of this would be Skeptic Project. On the front page of the website it says "Your #1 COINTELPRO cognitive infiltration source." To most people they are clearly being sarcastic. But apparently some people in the Infowars forums thought they were actually admitting to being a COINTELPRO website.
2. They are extremely rude.
Ever try having a conversation over the internet with a conspiracy theorist about some conspiracy they believe, and you tell them that you don't believe in it, or that it isn't true, then you have most likely been on the receiving end of one of the most logical faulty and volatile rants that you will probably ever encounter.
While this behavior is nothing unexpected (be it unwelcomed) from a conspiracy theorist on the interenet, what is unexpected is that some of them make threats (which can get them in trouble), try to take down other peoples' internet pages if they don't like what is on there, troll internet pages and spam them with their conspiracy theories, and harass people who disagree with them.
1. They think everyone whom disagrees with them is a disinformation agent.
Anyone who has a blog dedicated to skepticism and debunking, or gets into an argument with a conspiracy theorist on the internet in which you present evidence debunking whatever claims they are making, will eventually get called a disinformation agent (or a sheeple at the very least).
Because conspiracy theorists so badly believe that what they believe is real, they actually can not believe that someone would honestly not believe them, so anyone who says otherwise must be a disinformation agent, thus they can disregard whatever information is posted that contradicts what they believe to be true.
Of course being called a disinformation agent really means nothing to skeptics. Some of us even consider it a kind of badge of honor.
Showing posts with label COINTELPRO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label COINTELPRO. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Watergate and Iran-Contra: Two conspiracies that help disprove conspiracies theories
Watergate and Iran-Contra. They were perhaps two of the biggest
conspiracies to come out of the later half of the 20th century, and
because they are so well known many conspiracy theorists often times
cite these two proven conspiracies in an attempt to prove that the
government conspiracy theories that they believe in are real, or at
the very least show that the government is capable of covering up a
conspiracy.
While Watergate and Iran-Contra are in fact two very good examples that shows that high ranking officials in the government are capable of criminal conspiracies, the reality is that it does not prove that the government is capable of covering up a conspiracy so well that no one knows about and/or no one can find any evidence that actually proves that the conspiracy is real. If anything, it proves the exact opposite, because of:
1. These two conspiracies have been proven in courts of law.
2. People went to prison because of their involvement in these conspiracies, and one presidency ended, while another was tarnished (in fact 70 people were convicted as a result of the Watergate scandal).
3. These two conspiracies involved a lot less people then many of the unproven and/or disproved (and much larger) government conspiracy theories that are being floated around, and still got found out.
4. The evidence of these conspiracies were exposed by people who were apart of the conspiracy, or worked for the government and managed to get a hold of documents proving the existence of these conspiracies.
Now there are some real and proven conspiracies that are often also cited by conspiracy theorists that are a little bit better examples to cite in terms of government cover-ups, such as MKULTRA and COINTELPRO, but even then these two conspiracies got exposed, and they involved a lot more people then then Watergate and Iran-Contra. Plus, these conspiracies were all exposed before the age of the internet, and back then you actually had to investigate claims rather then go to some website that may or may not have accurate information.
If anything I would say that Watergate and Iran-Contra are two of the worst examples that conspiracy theorists can use in an attempt to prove that the government can cover something up.
Unlike with MKULTRA and COINTELPRO, Watergate and Iran-Contra got exposed relativity quickly, and people did go prison as a result of their involvement. The fact that people did go to prison in both of those cases actually proves that no one in the government is above the law and/or has absolute power.
Even MKULTRA and COINTELPRO are not very good examples either, as both not only were exposed, but both were actually shut down by the government after they were exposed and there was a public outcry over these two programs.
In my opinion using proven conspiracies are really bad examples of trying to prove that the really big government conspiracy theories exist, and the reason for that is that it actually shows that the government is not as good at covering up stuff as many conspiracy theorists believe the government is capable of, and that even with a small amount of people involved, a conspiracy can still be exposed, even without the internet.
While Watergate and Iran-Contra are in fact two very good examples that shows that high ranking officials in the government are capable of criminal conspiracies, the reality is that it does not prove that the government is capable of covering up a conspiracy so well that no one knows about and/or no one can find any evidence that actually proves that the conspiracy is real. If anything, it proves the exact opposite, because of:
1. These two conspiracies have been proven in courts of law.
2. People went to prison because of their involvement in these conspiracies, and one presidency ended, while another was tarnished (in fact 70 people were convicted as a result of the Watergate scandal).
3. These two conspiracies involved a lot less people then many of the unproven and/or disproved (and much larger) government conspiracy theories that are being floated around, and still got found out.
4. The evidence of these conspiracies were exposed by people who were apart of the conspiracy, or worked for the government and managed to get a hold of documents proving the existence of these conspiracies.
Now there are some real and proven conspiracies that are often also cited by conspiracy theorists that are a little bit better examples to cite in terms of government cover-ups, such as MKULTRA and COINTELPRO, but even then these two conspiracies got exposed, and they involved a lot more people then then Watergate and Iran-Contra. Plus, these conspiracies were all exposed before the age of the internet, and back then you actually had to investigate claims rather then go to some website that may or may not have accurate information.
If anything I would say that Watergate and Iran-Contra are two of the worst examples that conspiracy theorists can use in an attempt to prove that the government can cover something up.
Unlike with MKULTRA and COINTELPRO, Watergate and Iran-Contra got exposed relativity quickly, and people did go prison as a result of their involvement. The fact that people did go to prison in both of those cases actually proves that no one in the government is above the law and/or has absolute power.
Even MKULTRA and COINTELPRO are not very good examples either, as both not only were exposed, but both were actually shut down by the government after they were exposed and there was a public outcry over these two programs.
In my opinion using proven conspiracies are really bad examples of trying to prove that the really big government conspiracy theories exist, and the reason for that is that it actually shows that the government is not as good at covering up stuff as many conspiracy theorists believe the government is capable of, and that even with a small amount of people involved, a conspiracy can still be exposed, even without the internet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)