Forums / Discussion / General

170,989 total conversations in 5,481 threads

+ New Thread


Being manipulated by logical conspiracy theorists I thought were accurate

Last posted Mar 16, 2014 at 11:18AM EDT. Added Feb 26, 2014 at 04:39AM EST
15 posts from 8 users

Here’s an interesting story of mine, I was a loyal supporter to RT (RussiaToday)
and StormCloudsGathering.
I thought they were using logic and a descent amount of evidence to express there reports but after finding two videos in response to Stomcloudsgathering

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWhyBU2zlqs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTrlrTrkqJA

I was shocked about how manipulated i was, particularly the second video thats disputing the Boston Bombings as a false flag which I thought was the most obvious false flag operation you could think of. Due to my concern that I was being manipulated, i looked up RT on Google and went to the Wikipedia page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)

I scrolled down to the criticisms section and I found out how much I’ve been manipulated by that media outlet, I thought I could trust SCG and RT because I thought they were being logical, open minded and uses evidence to support there reports, turns out I was wrong and my world views were shattered since that’s where I get most of my opinions from.

To any conspiracy theorist or believers out there I’m just warning you that conspiracy theorists (or just anyone that efficiently expressing there opinion) out there can manipulate people into becoming there follower and that’s why I’m warning you to stay strictly open minded, always research both sides, don’t let one side dominate the other without a good like at the other side (like criticism.) of the conspiracy be more of a conspiracy analyzer then a theorist, I thought I was considered a conspiracy analyzer when I was judging there videos before my realization so be careful. Be open minded, be willing to accept defeat if a conspiracy you believed in or disputed is debunked or proven, I still want to look into conspiracies, they interest me but for now on I ant believing in any side.

Properly my only conspiracy YouTube channel I will look into is All Time Conspiracies, since he doesn’t shove down (“believe in my shit” like attitude) to the viewers and instead let us decide what is bullshit or not. (although he does use Alex Jones as a source, which I don’t like, in a very few of his videos).

Last edited Feb 26, 2014 at 04:58AM EST
Feb 26, 2014 at 04:39AM EST
Quote

I wish there were more people that would be come more of conspiracy analyzers/judgers then simply believers or just people that don’t believe in any conspiracies but interested in learning about them (like some Atheists doing religion as a subject because they are interested in it despite not believing in it).

Feb 26, 2014 at 05:01AM EST
Quote

As long as you have a middle man in your media reports, there is always going to be some degree of slanting of the news, but it is up to you the viewer to do your own cross-referencing. Media corporations often have financial support to support larger coverage areas, but this often comes at the price of having to align their news to coincide with the views of their supporters. This is why I’m disgusted by the amount of people that will refuse to get their news from anywhere but a single news source. Even more disgusting is the fact that where I’m from, Fox News is the primary source of people. *extreme facepalm*

I don’t even like to watch The Weather Channel anymore because they often have biased and inaccurate information as well. They are a good cross-referencing source, but not a good reliable source for important information.

Last edited Feb 26, 2014 at 05:35AM EST
Feb 26, 2014 at 05:35AM EST
Quote

Yeah, you definitely need to get news from multiple sources.
A source that may be biased in favor of your beliefs will certainly tell you what you want to hear,
but not what you ought to hear. It’s just too one-sided.

Feb 26, 2014 at 06:33AM EST
Quote

This makes me think back to various articles I read in NewScientist and other places (quick example here) about conspiracy theorists and the psychology behind how they operate.

Basically conspiracy theorists are not interested in the truth and free thinking. They never are and never were. They are only interested in controversy and fear in perceived enemies and pursuing their perceived evil. Paranoia comes into play very often, if not downright sadism

They might think they are promoting free thinking, and to be fair, they probably are. But deep down psychologically, their interests are far more selfish.

If the motive is paranoia, the conspiracy theorist creates claims in order to dismiss difficult truth that he/she doesn’t want to face. The moon landing conspiracy or the flat-earth conspiracy is evidence of the lengths that people will go to flag any reason in their mind to disbelieve, regardless of what the actual evidence may be. And this is because of irrational fear of reality

If the motive is malice, then the thrilling prospect of chaos and creating more uproar appeals to them more than any good intention. They may not even realize that either. They have a hateful agenda against something and just want to dig up dirt to try and vindicate their grief.

I remember the Syria videos you showed me trying to pull that stunt with a little “lets start a revolution in america” quip at the end. That told me that the makers were really just using the Syria incident to create more distraught and chaos back at home

In all cases, people get emotional highs from the self-righteous concept that they may be uncovering a great alarming evil. An evil which they revealed it all on their own with their own investigative power (naive of how poor people are at investigating short of actual professionals). From the theorists point of view, they think they are heroes for blowing the whistle on massive cover-ups. It appeals to their own hubris. They’ll pull stunt that on any target just to give themselves that sense of self-righteousness. You know how much people love thinking “IM SO SMART. IM SO WISE. THAT I DOUBT THIS CUZ IT MAKES ME SOUND SMARK AND EDGY. THIS IS FAEK BECAUSE OF THIS ONE THING THAT DOESNT MATCH UP WITH WHAT I THINK IT SHOULD. I TOTALLY KNOW SOMETHING ALL YOU SHEEPLE DIDNT. NO WAY EXPERTS EVER BOTHERED TO LOOK INTO THIS. IM SO UNIQUE AND FREE THINKING. IM SMATTER THAN YOUUUUU

I believe conspiracy theorists always have agendas shadier than any target. If not for appealing to hubris then it’s always been about fame and fortune. The theorists who created the moon landing hoax and the 9/11 inside job theory both did it for fame, and even got a fortune for it too. Other times it’s for distracting people from real problems towards their own means. They could be schizophrenic or they are just plain stupid and don’t understand the facts so they suspect they are being lied to. Some even do it for fun. Like they are writing a good thriller novel, only they apply it to real life. If trolling is fun, then hoaxing is too.

Whether or not I believe them must always come down to the evidence. I choose to think for myself what that evidence shows. And I’ll take it from numerous sources, especially the experts in the field. Never just one person, let alone a youtube account

You can trust something reported similarly by numerous organisations. You cant trust something reported by one youtuber. Listening to one persons doubt doesn’t make you informed.

Now granted, I don’t dismiss every single conspiracy I hear. One example of a conspiracy I did suspect was the framing of Julian Assange. But that’s because its not a great stretch of probability knowing the UK governments reputation, nor does it have so much stacking against it. Plus if the facts do say he’s guilty or not then I’ll believe it. I’ve nothing to gain from calling BS

But I was one of the first people to stand up and say the Moon landing was totally real against all the hoaxers because I could see how how utterly bullshit the hoax was when you look at the real implications. I love how Cracked summarized it:

Last edited Feb 26, 2014 at 06:58AM EST
Feb 26, 2014 at 06:35AM EST
Quote

This brings me to my last point. Whenever you hear conspiracies, it always pays to think: whats more probable? The elaborate expensive sophisticated cover up for a hidden shady ulterior motive or the simple reality that humans just suck at what they do

One of my life philosophies is “never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence”

Is that troll posting bait because he’s trying to trick you into flaming him for his own sadistic amusement? A conspiracy theorist would say yes

But a reasonable person says no and uses the simpler explanation: he’s just an idiot who didn’t know what he’s talking about.

This extends to governments. Did the US government carefully orchestrate 9/11 exactly towards a plan to obtain more oil?

Or are governments simply run by human beings who are as incompetent as everyone else and they simply fucked up when it came to responding to the 9/11 threat, then fucked up again when deciding if Iraq was target.

Since this is the same government that ruled pizza as a vegetable, I’d say the latter is far more probable than any ridiculously convoluted scheme that not even the Joker would consider. In fact the former gives the government too much credit that they could actually manage such a heist without fucking that up too.

Besides the US gets all their oil from the west coast. They could have easily invaded Iraq with the WMD excuse without blowing up a world trade center. And war is a shitty way of getting oil when international trade is so much cheaper and more effective

Last edited Feb 26, 2014 at 07:01AM EST
Feb 26, 2014 at 06:47AM EST
Quote

Blue Screen (of Death) wrote:

This brings me to my last point. Whenever you hear conspiracies, it always pays to think: whats more probable? The elaborate expensive sophisticated cover up for a hidden shady ulterior motive or the simple reality that humans just suck at what they do

One of my life philosophies is “never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence”

Is that troll posting bait because he’s trying to trick you into flaming him for his own sadistic amusement? A conspiracy theorist would say yes

But a reasonable person says no and uses the simpler explanation: he’s just an idiot who didn’t know what he’s talking about.

This extends to governments. Did the US government carefully orchestrate 9/11 exactly towards a plan to obtain more oil?

Or are governments simply run by human beings who are as incompetent as everyone else and they simply fucked up when it came to responding to the 9/11 threat, then fucked up again when deciding if Iraq was target.

Since this is the same government that ruled pizza as a vegetable, I’d say the latter is far more probable than any ridiculously convoluted scheme that not even the Joker would consider. In fact the former gives the government too much credit that they could actually manage such a heist without fucking that up too.

Besides the US gets all their oil from the west coast. They could have easily invaded Iraq with the WMD excuse without blowing up a world trade center. And war is a shitty way of getting oil when international trade is so much cheaper and more effective

Well actually, the things behind the pizza being a veggie thing was that the government ruled that tomato sauce was a veggie.

I always thought Iraq was a political target, since the warlord of Iraq had become a possible or at least hostile threat since Kuwait, and that the war on all terror could be won through civilizing the government so they could deal with the problem first hand without constant bombings or invasions in a place as hostile as the Middle East.

Then again, I might be shitposting stuff I know little about, but I am kind of interested where you get West Coast oil, cause I know vaguely with import shit tons of oil from the Arabs.

Feb 26, 2014 at 07:59AM EST
Quote

@Blue Screen (of Death), Man you must be a true expert on this stuff, thanks for the insight.

Feb 26, 2014 at 03:02PM EST
Quote

I think I’m willing to check out SCG videos again, however I’m not going to believe in any of the videos so easily, I won’t believe in them but I will keep in mind the possibility of his topics, sometimes I’ll share some of his videos in particular KYM topics (like the ukraine crisis) to listen to other people’s interpretation of his views on the topic to form my own worldviews, though I’ll stay open minded.

Mar 16, 2014 at 06:12AM EDT
Quote

Blue Screen (of Death) wrote:

This makes me think back to various articles I read in NewScientist and other places (quick example here) about conspiracy theorists and the psychology behind how they operate.

Basically conspiracy theorists are not interested in the truth and free thinking. They never are and never were. They are only interested in controversy and fear in perceived enemies and pursuing their perceived evil. Paranoia comes into play very often, if not downright sadism

They might think they are promoting free thinking, and to be fair, they probably are. But deep down psychologically, their interests are far more selfish.

If the motive is paranoia, the conspiracy theorist creates claims in order to dismiss difficult truth that he/she doesn’t want to face. The moon landing conspiracy or the flat-earth conspiracy is evidence of the lengths that people will go to flag any reason in their mind to disbelieve, regardless of what the actual evidence may be. And this is because of irrational fear of reality

If the motive is malice, then the thrilling prospect of chaos and creating more uproar appeals to them more than any good intention. They may not even realize that either. They have a hateful agenda against something and just want to dig up dirt to try and vindicate their grief.

I remember the Syria videos you showed me trying to pull that stunt with a little “lets start a revolution in america” quip at the end. That told me that the makers were really just using the Syria incident to create more distraught and chaos back at home

In all cases, people get emotional highs from the self-righteous concept that they may be uncovering a great alarming evil. An evil which they revealed it all on their own with their own investigative power (naive of how poor people are at investigating short of actual professionals). From the theorists point of view, they think they are heroes for blowing the whistle on massive cover-ups. It appeals to their own hubris. They’ll pull stunt that on any target just to give themselves that sense of self-righteousness. You know how much people love thinking “IM SO SMART. IM SO WISE. THAT I DOUBT THIS CUZ IT MAKES ME SOUND SMARK AND EDGY. THIS IS FAEK BECAUSE OF THIS ONE THING THAT DOESNT MATCH UP WITH WHAT I THINK IT SHOULD. I TOTALLY KNOW SOMETHING ALL YOU SHEEPLE DIDNT. NO WAY EXPERTS EVER BOTHERED TO LOOK INTO THIS. IM SO UNIQUE AND FREE THINKING. IM SMATTER THAN YOUUUUU

I believe conspiracy theorists always have agendas shadier than any target. If not for appealing to hubris then it’s always been about fame and fortune. The theorists who created the moon landing hoax and the 9/11 inside job theory both did it for fame, and even got a fortune for it too. Other times it’s for distracting people from real problems towards their own means. They could be schizophrenic or they are just plain stupid and don’t understand the facts so they suspect they are being lied to. Some even do it for fun. Like they are writing a good thriller novel, only they apply it to real life. If trolling is fun, then hoaxing is too.

Whether or not I believe them must always come down to the evidence. I choose to think for myself what that evidence shows. And I’ll take it from numerous sources, especially the experts in the field. Never just one person, let alone a youtube account

You can trust something reported similarly by numerous organisations. You cant trust something reported by one youtuber. Listening to one persons doubt doesn’t make you informed.

Now granted, I don’t dismiss every single conspiracy I hear. One example of a conspiracy I did suspect was the framing of Julian Assange. But that’s because its not a great stretch of probability knowing the UK governments reputation, nor does it have so much stacking against it. Plus if the facts do say he’s guilty or not then I’ll believe it. I’ve nothing to gain from calling BS

But I was one of the first people to stand up and say the Moon landing was totally real against all the hoaxers because I could see how how utterly bullshit the hoax was when you look at the real implications. I love how Cracked summarized it:

Ah the moon landing hoax. It was fun debating the hoaxers a few days back on some random Facebook page. I just love how those idiots try to tell me the moon landing is a hoax and tried to present their evidence while me and some other dudes easily countered EVERY SINGLE ARGUMENT they make. Oh God-Emperor, that was fun.

Mar 16, 2014 at 07:36AM EDT
Quote

Dreadnought Davian Thule wrote:

Ah the moon landing hoax. It was fun debating the hoaxers a few days back on some random Facebook page. I just love how those idiots try to tell me the moon landing is a hoax and tried to present their evidence while me and some other dudes easily countered EVERY SINGLE ARGUMENT they make. Oh God-Emperor, that was fun.

I know a better one. There’s a guy who said the Moon is not real. Yeah he said that and came up with that stupid idea the moon is a deception and there was no word in english language until 1066 (there was just not in old english hence it was created after 1066 ‘coz this was the year when german barbarians conquered the british islands, and the old english was not really existed b4, there was just not in this format.), and the historans are lying and he don’t speak about that one the Greeks are had a godess for the moon. And even the romans and egyptians had one, respectively.

Last edited Mar 16, 2014 at 08:01AM EDT
Mar 16, 2014 at 07:58AM EDT
Quote

Doctor "KreagerStein" Kori wrote:

I know a better one. There’s a guy who said the Moon is not real. Yeah he said that and came up with that stupid idea the moon is a deception and there was no word in english language until 1066 (there was just not in old english hence it was created after 1066 ‘coz this was the year when german barbarians conquered the british islands, and the old english was not really existed b4, there was just not in this format.), and the historans are lying and he don’t speak about that one the Greeks are had a godess for the moon. And even the romans and egyptians had one, respectively.

Seriously? This claim has got to be more hilarious and ridiculous than some other guy who says that the International Space Station is fake. What the hell is wrong with people these days?

Mar 16, 2014 at 08:40AM EDT
Quote
Skeletor-sm

This thread is closed to new posts.

Old threads normally auto-close after 30 days of inactivity.

Why don't you start a new thread instead?

Hi! You must login or signup first!