The 5 Steps of Conspiracy Thinking

[ref]

Inspired by this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=130827), I wrote this article about conspiracy thinking. These views are mine only. I have quoted some of you anonymously, and edited the comments a little teeny bit (mostly selective cut and paste of long comments). If somebody has an issue with being quoted here, or feels misrepresented, contact me and I will remove all requested parts.

Here is the article. Because all these things get buried pretty quickly, I have once again also stored the article here: http://911guide.googlepages.com/conspiracythinking


This article discusses the depths of conspiracy beliefs. Included are 5 steps towards deeper conspiracy thinking, warning signs to consider, and other related material. I have also included relevant quotes from people writing to JREF conspiracy theory subforum. These comments are anonymous, but it doesn’t affect the message and purpose in any way.


The 5 Steps

I have identified five steps towards more and more conspiratorial thinking. It starts with encountering a single claim, and ends with dedicating your life to promoting your theories. With each step the belief and dedication become deeper and with each step getting out of the cycle gets harder.


Step 1 – Evaluation of a claim, plausible or not plausible

When one encounters a new claim, the first thing to do is to evaluate the plausibility of the claim. One might be exposed to something totally new, which sounds very convincing. If the person presenting this claim is highly educated, this might add credibility in ones mind and develop a thought that he might have something.

Things that affect the conclusion:

-Former experience with conspiracy theories (does one recognise what is a conspiracy theory, and know how to critically approach the kind of claims conspiracy theorists make)
-Knowledge of the subject matter (engineer, firefighter)
-Earlier tendency towards conspiracy thinking (already believing in the likes of JFK conspiracy/moon landing fakings)
-Hatred of Bush, his administration or anti-Americanism in general (consciously or unconciously wanting the conspiracy theories to be true, which leads to a less critical approach towards the theories and strengthens the reasons to dislike)

"I had always enjoyed being skeptical pretty much anything, and as an angst ridden teen, (twenty something actually) government conspiracy's fascinated me, by believing them I felt as if I was smarter than people who believed the official story, and telling people made me feel superior (like Dec 2001, saying the government was behind the attack was a pretty wild thing, and did atcaully make you controversial). I used to read Rense all the time (I considered it the REAL news, and all the MSM stuff was just BS). At that time I would have been 20. So it wasn't really facts that made me a truther, just wanting the be superior. Then I just accepted it and didn’t' follow it for years, I just assumed the government was lying. I was totally anti-American, I was of the opinion that the US was the Evil Empire, and everything they did was evil etc. The anti American sentiment coupled with attaching an inflated sense self worth to 'truther' theories (i.e.: I'm so much smarter than these sheeple) is what I think allows the movement so called to continue in the face of monumental evidence to the contrary; albeit in a feeble state."

"I actually tilted towards "truther" for a time, swayed by the LIHOP-lite/incompetence stance of "Fahrenheit 9/11". But I was never really spurred into action by any of it. It was fairly easy at the time for an anti-Bush type such as myself to believe that the warning bells that were there (the 8/6/01 PDB, the tip about Muslims at flight schools, the James Woods tip, et cetera) could go unexplored and 9/11 happened because partisan hacks were just sitting on their duffs. That actually seemed plausible."

"I also hate Bush. It was very very easy for me to believe that Bush would be involved in such a scheme of murder and deceit. But then I realized, that no matter how much I hate Bush, it is not right for me..or anyone else..to blaim him for deaths that the evidence just doesn't convict him of. Yet..I will admit....that a part of me still does hopes and prays, that someday, some evidence does come out making it clear that Bush had some hand in either making it happen, or allowing it to take place."

"It stemmed, I believe, from the ferocious resentment I was harbouring towards Bush and Blair for the pack of lies and manipulation they pushed our way to justify the wars in the Middle East. I'll stress here that this was not "anti-American" feeling. As a Brit and a natural Labour voter I cannot adequately express my hatred for Tony Blair. I'll put GWB in exactly the same class. Then, watching a couple of "Truth" videos that were being discussed on an unrelated forum. This cracked the damn, so to speak. Yes, thought I, those #######'s are well capable of that. I must admit that finally seeing the collapse of WTC7 was shocking."

"I wish I had never heard of trutherism which is only motivated by hatred of America."



Step 2 – Looking for more evidence - Critical point!

Believing that this conspiracy could indeed be possible. Looking for more evidence.

Things affecting the conclusion:

Availability and approachability of conspiracy debunking material. There has been and still is an overwhelming amount of easily digestible conspiracy material. The outcome will be one of the following.

Either:
Finding evicence supporting both a conspiracy and a non-conspiracy viewpoints. Evaluating the evidence critically and coming to a non-conspiracy conclusion.
Or:
Finding more and more evidence supporting the conspiracy conclusion. Less and less criticism towards various claims.

"Much investigoogling led (naturally) to finding countless "sources" and I was steaming so much that the ol' brain wasn't in a fit state to realize they were merely recycling the same bilge."

"I didn't realize that my statements were contradictory: I admitted that 19 people had hijacked the planes, but I wasn't quite sure about the Pentagon and the Shanksville planes."


Step 3 – Believing in a conspiracy

Believing there indeed was a conspiracy. Reinforcing this belief by finding more and more supporting evidence. Less and less openness to opposing viewpoints. After this point Step 4 is getting very close.


Step 4 – Promoting the conspiracy theory

Spreading the word. Telling friends. Wanting to share the information you have just uncovered. Participation in discussion forums, maybe attending events, handing out material. Thinking the opposition is plain wrong. Believing there must to be some kind of a conspiracy, no matter what evidence is put forward. Enthusianism rises. Feeling of importance. Thinking to have discovered something nobody else sees or understands. More and more dedication. Usually not admitting any mistakes.

A person at this stage may appear willing to change his/her mind if certain important points are solved, but in reality changing sides at this point is quite rare (but fortunately still possible).

"I felt like I had discovered something HUGE!! Something that made me part of history. I felt like...a revolutionary. Like someone who could help change the world. And then..I woke up to the boring truth.
But, until the evidence proves it, I am no truther. "



Step 5 – Conspiracy theories affecting daily life

Putting the reputations and careers on the line, maybe losing jobs or relationships. Almost no way of turning back. Everything is invested in the conspiracy. Denial of all opposing viewpoints.

Many of the current leading figures of the truth movement are currently at this stage.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/13639494a82980e0f5.jpg

Warning Signs

There are many warning signs indicating that your critical thinking may be in danger. Consider the following. If any of these sings are found, one has to seriously reconsider their position.

-The experts on your side seem to be plain wrong on many details, but you still support other parts of their research, because these parts of their work support your views.
-Thinking you are now able to see through the entire plot, wondering why almost nobody else can.
-Being overly enthusiastic about the subject.
-Refusing to critically go through what the other side is presenting.
-Ignoring and forgetting unpleasant evidence.
-Thinking the perpetrators leave clues and you can solve it all in the internet.
-Thinking you have all the facts and need no further research, thinking your mind is set.
-Thinking every participant would be silent, every media controlled.
-After being thoroughly debunked in one detail, moving on to the next detail without re-considering your position.
-Not believing in the original detail that made you belive in a conspiracy, but having found other reasons along the way, that still make you believe in a conspiracy.
-Not being able to understand the details your belief is based on (example: Claiming thermite, but not knowing how it works).
-Having very strong disregard for any opposition.
-Thinking the governments are evil. Not trusting anything contradictionary to your belief, because everything is somehow related to or controlled by the government.
-Believing in events that are very unorthodox or unique only to a conspiracy theory. (examples: Weakening the structure with explosives for an hour before a controlled demolition, Thermite being used to bring down buildings)
-Avoiding answering to questions.
-Basing your beliefs on the events following the attacks (examples: They lied about the WMD’s so they must be lying about everything, They did it to justify two wars).



Criticism Without Conspiracies

Being critical of something does not automatically mean you have to believe in a conspiracy. You can be critical of the way things were handled after the events. You can be critical of the wars. You can criticize all the actions of the administration. All that, and it doesn’t require you believing in any conspiracy theory.

A common misbelief is, that all those who oppose conspiracy theorist are “Bush lovers” or “Government apologists”. An unofficial poll revealed, that only 50% of the people who actively participate in opposing the truth movement in the JREF discussion forum (so called debunkers) are from the U.S. The rest are from all around the world. Why would all these people be apologists to government not even their own? Why would they all love Bush? You don’t have to like Bush in order to accept the evidence that doesn’t support any conspiracy theories.


Things to Consider

Here are a couple of points for conspiracy believers to consider.

If the attacks were so incredible complicated and successful, why did they make the following incredible mistakes:

-They did not frame the citizens of the invaded countries.
-They did not plant WMD's where nobody was watching, but were supposedly able to carry out incredible events with everybody watching.

If you find youself getting around or ignoring these important questions without re-considering your position, that is a warning sign of self-deception.

"Nowadays looking back, the feeling is mostly embarrassment, especially as the whole business flared and died in a matter of a couple of months and I should really have had the wit to notice that I was getting much too excited, too quickly, about the whole 9/11 "truth" business. That's never a healthy sign. But it highlights very strongly (again) for me that the power of self-deception is very strong in the human race."


Another thing to consider, why does it seem that nobody listens? Why is there no greater global opposition towards the explanations of the events? Could it be that you could be wrong, after all?

And very important: Are my actions and beliefs profitable to someone? Am I giving money out? Am I buying many books with essentially the same content that is found in any conspiracy website? Why do I buy this material, if I know everything that is in them by heart?

And finally. Are my beliefs based on evidence or faith? Would I change sides, if certain issues were solved with supporting evidence? Is any proof enough? Are the issues that I want to get solved realistic?

Examples of unrealistic issues:
-Wanting videos of every hijacker boarding in order to believe they existed.
-Wanting to know exactly every single detail of every single event of the day.
-Wanting every single piece of evidence collected to be released.
-Wanting an entirely new investigation.

As long as these don’t take place, one can very easily claim that there are unanswered questions, and continue one’s conspiratorial beliefs. One must recognize which demands really are realistic.


Closing Words

You have to be very careful with material that sounds exiting, but you have no previous experience with. Because once you take the first wrong step, it is very easy to convince yourself with further evidence supporting the wrong conclusion, while all the time twisting all the evidence that doesn't.

And this can happen to anyone regardless of education, age, IQ, or any other demographic. But one can get over it, even if having once fallen for some or even all of it.

"Nowadays, I'm still learning, but I strongly fight trutherism as it has the same ways of arguing like Shoah denialism: pissing on victims' graves, pissing on psychological victims, spreading lies, and wanting to open a "debate" in order to spew their hatred of thoughts shared by a majority of people, just because it was a majority."

"Now I feel embarrassed. I will see people who I haven't seen in years, and they still think I believe that...sadly some of them do now, because of me. So now I try to educate people in Real life, and clown CTists on the Internets for lulz."

"I expressed some opinions in JREF forum and received some slaps in the face (some tactful, some not) with good plain information. But - having a good scientific background - I was able to see that at least some of the tripe I was pushing was just flat wrong. This gave pause for serious thought. Plus, here and elsewhere, I was beginning to find links to the debunking sites. Of course a lot of this could have been avoided simply by putting "9/11" +"debunk" into Google in the first place, but I suppose the desire to believe in something wacky can lead one astray."


And this applies to any conspiracy theory.

"The only conspiracy I ever believed, was the JFK one. But after finding out how the 9/11 conspiracy theories 'work' (ie, how 'proof' is found etc.) I concluded that the JFK conspiracies work the same way, and stopped believing in them after reading up on them on these boards, and also after watching a BBC documentary reconstructing how the magic bullet did in fact not traverse a magical path (had to do with the arrangement of the seats, ie. frontseat sat lower and more to the middle.) "


Let me close by quoting the excellent words of this man, whose thoughts were posted in a related discussion thread. I have translated this part from another language, so the wording may not be exact, but the meaning gets trough. Read it with thought.

"I used to believe in the truth movement. Now that I no longer believe in any of that, it's quite easy to recognize the common trends in their thinking.

In a nutshell, what takes place is an almost complete collapse of critical thinking, accompanied by extremely selective use of evidence. In the background there is a pleasing conclusion (you want it to be true for emotional or ideological reasons) and then you fit the facts to go with the predetermined conclusion.

As a natural scientist and a believer in my ability to think critically, it is still hard for me to accept that I had adopted the abovementioned features. But a cold fact is, it is surprisingly easy to do that. Especially when taking into account the huge machine, that the "truth movement" has evolved into, and how easily and convincingly the events of this kind can be fit into the most peculiar theories. The fact that there are many professors and "authorities" belonging to this group also helps lowering the standards ones of own critical thinking.

Even in scientific experiments that are performed in a laboratory there are things that cannot be explained. And this is in conditions, where all the variables are as controlled as possible. Taking into account the nature of 9/11, it would be a miracle, if there were not “oddities” or partly unexplained things. Thus, there will never be a “theory” that would explain all the minor details. We must accept the one, which can in sufficient detail explain the events by using and respecting the scientific method."






Recommended related link: http://extruther.blogspot.com/

[UNLoVedRebel]

Thank god for my friend Occam and his lucky razor.

[defaultdotxbe]

i think the msot important step in conspiracy theorizing is realizing that finding little to no evidence to support the conspiracy theory, and even finding a wealth of evidence supporting a non-conspiracy theory is exactly what youd expect to find

ergo, all evidence against the conspiracy is evidence of a coverup, and the coverup is PROOF of a conspiracy

[LightinDarkness]

I think the key in your article (which is good by the way, like the graphs) is that to ultimately be a CTer, you must WANT TO BELIEVE.

Those who believe in some diabolical cabal controlling the world do so firstly because THEY WANT TO BELIEVE that they could not be in their current socioeconomic position through their own fault, and that the only thing that could explain them being unhappy with their income and status in life is a elite cabal plotting against them and everything else. These people are the ones who fall for the Illuminati/Freemason/NWO theories.

Those who hate certain political ideologies WANT TO BELIEVE that the figure heads of that ideology are capable of horrendous and immense evil, because that verifies their own belief about that ideology. This is the source of much of the truther theories on Bush for the past 8 years, and for a good bulk of 9/11 theories.

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

Good thoughts here ref. It seems like when I was searching for 9/11 "evidence" online, I would come across no debunking information. Again, I just so happened to search "debunk Loose Change" specifically to find all these sites. It's sad to say but most of my friends don't even know what the word debunk means. There aren't many times in a normal conversation that "debunk" is really used unless you are into CT's,LOL!

[Bell]

Good thoughts here ref. It seems like when I was searching for 9/11 "evidence" online, I would come across no debunking information. Again, I just so happened to search "debunk Loose Change" specifically to find all these sites. It's sad to say but most of my friends don't even know what the word debunk means. There aren't many times in a normal conversation that "debunk" is really used unless you are into CT's,LOL!

Funny that! "Debunk Loose Change" were the first keywords I Googled after watching Loose Change. And English is not even my native language :)

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Dewunking is one thing but at least no one's stupid enough to be taken in by the selective debunking by Popular Mechanics that claims to prove 911 wasn't an inside job. That article was hilarious.


I can't wait for their next installment!!


Why 911 wasn't an inside Job part2 - Popular Mechanics

Myth 1. - The Pentagon was attacked by a gang of Mexican Desert Hamsters

We can debunk this one easily and thus prove it wasn't an inisde job

etc etc etc

[Thunder]

why are you sooo on the side of conspiracy theorists?

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Inspired by this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=130827), I wrote this article about conspiracy thinking. These views are mine only. I have quoted some of you anonymously, and edited the comments a little teeny bit (mostly selective cut and paste of long comments). If somebody has an issue with being quoted here, or feels misrepresented, contact me and I will remove all requested parts.


< snip snip snip to save us all some bandwidth >





You article says more about you than anything else. How obsessed with Conspiracy Theorists must you be to waste all that time compiling what is really an attempt at structuring some garbled obsessions spinning around your own head.

It says something when people are so fascinated and obsessed about conspiracy theorist.

There'll always be people who make claims about this and that. Why not just let them get on with it?

[dtugg]

Dewunking is one thing but at least no one's stupid enough to be taken in by the selective debunking by Popular Mechanics that claims to prove 911 wasn't an inside job. That article was hilarious.


I don't think they even claim to prove that 9/11 wasn't an inside job. They do however, debunk many of the popular 9/11 fantasies.

[defaultdotxbe]

They do however, debunk many of the popular 9/11 fantasies.
which quickly became unpopular after the article was published, leading truthers to claim they didnt debunk what "real" truthers believe

[Tin Foil Timothy]

why are you sooo on the side of conspiracy theorists?

I'm not on the side of anybody.

However when I see a bunch of obsessives trying feebly to boost their own low self esteem by discrediting anyone who believes there might be something nefarious going on within the Establishment with a variety of negative mental alments, various othercrappy armchair psychological analysis and simple childish mockery, I can't help but call it out.

What some of the vehement dewunkers here are blind to, is that the acting just as stupidly as the twoofers they delight in mocking.

It's interesting that you ask "why are you sooo on the side of conspiracy theorists?"

It's that "You are either with us or you are with them!" mentality again.

If I was in a forum full of twoofers, sooner or later one of them would chime up and say "why are you sooo on the side of the sheeple?" "why are you sooo on the side of dewunkers?"

I'm not a twoofer. As far as 911 goes I'm an agnostic. Of course I can understand from an Extremist Dewunker or an Extremist Twoofer than I am considered to be the enemy. It's the old good v. evil thing again.

Neocons v. Soviet Union. Neocons v. Islamists. Dewunkers v. Twoofers, Judao-Christianity v. Islam, Democrats v. Republicans, Jews v. non-Jews,

The list goes on and on and on. And it's such a stupid mentality. "Anyone who isn't faithful to the cause must be one the other side"


Some of us aren't interested in taking sides in these bi-partisian feuds and can actually beyond those two camps. That's why Zionists call me an Anti-Semite, Dewunkers call me a twoofer, Both Christians and Islamist's call me an infidel, Capitalists call me a communist, Communists call me a capitalist, etc,etc


Some of you people should get out of a the "Us and them" mentality. There's a bigger and brighter world that awaits you. :)

[Tin Foil Timothy]

which quickly became unpopular after the article was published, leading truthers to claim they didnt debunk what "real" truthers believe

They the most popular before the article was published. It was just a set of easy myths in order to attempt to derail the conspiracy movement.

I actually laughed out loud when I read that PM article. it was embarrassing. Although I could see it was aimed a certain demographic.

[Mashuna]

I'm not on the side of anybody.

However when I see a bunch of obsessives trying feebly to boost their own low self esteem by discrediting anyone who believes there might be something nefarious going on within the Establishment with a variety of negative mental alments, various othercrappy armchair psychological analysis and simple childish mockery, I can't help but call it out.

What some of the vehement dewunkers here are blind to, is that the acting just as stupidly as the twoofers they delight in mocking.

It's interesting that you ask "why are you sooo on the side of conspiracy theorists?"

It's that "You are either with us or you are with them!" mentality again.

If I was in a forum full of twoofers, sooner or later one of them would chime up and say "why are you sooo on the side of the sheeple?" "why are you sooo on the side of dewunkers?"

I'm not a twoofer. As far as 911 goes I'm an agnostic. Of course I can understand from an Extremist Dewunker or an Extremist Twoofer than I am considered to be the enemy. It's the old good v. evil thing again.

Neocons v. Soviet Union. Neocons v. Islamists. Dewunkers v. Twoofers, Judao-Christianity v. Islam, Democrats v. Republicans, Jews v. non-Jews,

The list goes on and on and on. And it's such a stupid mentality. "Anyone who isn't faithful to the cause must be one the other side"


Some of us aren't interested in taking sides in these bi-partisian feuds and can actually beyond those two camps. That's why Zionists call me an Anti-Semite, Dewunkers call me a twoofer, Both Christians and Islamist's call me an infidel, Capitalists call me a communist, Communists call me a capitalist, etc,etc


Some of you people should get out of a the "Us and them" mentality. There's a bigger and brighter world that awaits you. :)

So, given what you've just written, what's your purpose in posting on the conspiracy theory forums?


That's a genuine question, in case it comes off as too dismissive.

[PhantomWolf]

They the most popular before the article was published. It was just a set of easy myths in order to attempt to derail the conspiracy movement.

I actually laughed out loud when I read that PM article. it was embarrassing. Although I could see it was aimed a certain demographic.

No they were popular at the time the article was published. The embrassing thing about the PM article was that they actually had to debunk those claims because people kept making them.

[zaphod2016]

This is a great article, and I would suggest making it a "sticky" here at JREF. I have already forwarded it to a few dear friends of mine who are still stuck in "stage 4".


ergo, all evidence against the conspiracy is evidence of a coverup, and the coverup is PROOF of a conspiracy

This is an excellent, excellent point, and should be incorporated into the article itself. I see a parallel here to most cults I have studied: the "us v. them" mentality, designed to prey on the paranoia of those people who are already growing suspicious of the "Establishment"**.

i.e. You need more information? Look at MY information, not THEIR information, because THEY are lying to trick you, whereas I am an ambivalent holy man who wants only to help you.

Alex Jones uses the phrase "infowar", and I think this is an excellent term despite its unfortunate origin. Once you enter stage 4-5, the very act of research becomes an act of intellectual warfare. Why? Because at this point you have already accepted (perhaps subconsciously) that those who disagree with you are out to get you.

In the interest of being a true skeptic, I'll play devil's advocate for a moment, and remind everyone that propaganda does in fact exist, that all media and information is flawed, and that the search for truth is a never-ending battle against our own ignorance and prejudice.

But- like the article says- just because the "Establishment"** has been caught it a lie, does NOT mean that everything they have ever said is a lie. And likewise, just because some of the things Alex Jones says are true does not mean everything he says is true.

** Replace "Establishment" with whichever entity is most relevant (i.e. the "Bush Administration" or the "Department of Defense" or the "Methodist Church" or the "NWO" or whatever the case might be)

[ref]

I'll make a couple of additions in a couple of days. Many good comments have been posted in this and the other thread. But now, let's enjoy the weekend :)

[JihadJane]

i think the msot important step in conspiracy theorizing is realizing that finding little to no evidence to support the conspiracy theory, and even finding a wealth of evidence supporting a non-conspiracy theory is exactly what youd expect to find

ergo, all evidence against the conspiracy is evidence of a coverup, and the coverup is PROOF of a conspiracy

As far as 911 goes, neither side has been able to produce legally conclusive evidence proving their various theories correct.

The evidence supporting the Osama-dunnit theory is shockingly thin, backed up by a convenient lack of curiosity amongst believers about the global activities of Intelligence agencies.

OP:

If the attacks were so incredible complicated and successful, why did they make the following incredible mistakes:

-They did not frame the citizens of the invaded countries.
-They did not plant WMD's where nobody was watching, but were supposedly able to carry out incredible events with everybody watching.

Possible explanations:

We don't know how successful the attacks were nor the level of covert manipulation, which needn't have been "incredibly complicated".

Demonising brown, beardy, berobed Arabs in general was plenty enough detail for a lot of politically and geographically unsophisticated US Americans to believe that Saddam Hussein dunnit. 911-related US geostrategic ambitions cover the whole of the Middle East and Central Asia, not just two countries.


WMD's are easy to trace back to their source.

"False Flag" operations use the assets that are available and plausible (e.g. "al Qaeda").

[JoeyDonuts]

I think that a small portion of the USG actually comissioning al-Qaeda to carry out 9/11 is the most plausible CT out there. (Hold on, don't run me out of here yet...) Why? You don't have to dirty your hands rewriting physics or say ridiculous things like no plane hit the Pentagon. All you have to do is postulate that AQ's leadership was contacted and commissioned to carry out the attack.

This theory doesn't hold water either, and it's the best the TM can do. If it were perpetrated by a small cabal inside the USG, it doesn't make sense for them to commission an operation that very well could have been detected and stopped by law enforcement agencies or our own military/intelligence folks. In order for this to be plausible, you'd have to have people all over the DIA, CIA, FBI, and local law enforcement. Since that's absolutely unthinkable, ask yourself why this secret cabal inside the USG would commission mass murder without reasonable guarantee of their plot succeeding and remaining undetected? Plus, even considering this requires ignoring of other evidence that AQ initiated this plot. (History of terror attacks against U.S. targets overseas.)

Plus, this kind of operation would be something more likely initiated by the KGB/SVR. They were known to have contacts with terror organizations going all the way back to the 1960's, not to mention the whole Bekaa Valley thing.

And that's my problem with every "alternative" theory that's been presented to date. Nothing can realistically address all of the aspects of 9/11. Some of them are more plausible in certain areas, but to nothing to address others. And when you pile these theories on top of each other to hopefully address these issues, the whole thing reads like the world's worst Tom Clancy novel. Matt Tiabbi from Rolling Stone did a good job with this in his column referenced over at Gravy's site.

[abenja1]

That article was hilarious.



Just as hilarious as your anti-Semitism.... oh wait. It's not funny.

[JihadJane]

I think that a small portion of the USG actually comissioning al-Qaeda to carry out 9/11 is the most plausible CT out there. (Hold on, don't run me out of here yet...) Why? You don't have to dirty your hands rewriting physics or say ridiculous things like no plane hit the Pentagon. All you have to do is postulate that AQ's leadership was contacted and commissioned to carry out the attack.

Why would AQ's leadership need commissioning? Terrorist organisations can initiate their own operations with or without guidance. They can then, unbeknown to them, be given covert assistance along the way.


This theory doesn't hold water either, and it's the best the TM can do. If it were perpetrated by a small cabal inside the USG, it doesn't make sense for them to commission an operation that very well could have been detected and stopped by law enforcement agencies or our own military/intelligence folks. In order for this to be plausible, you'd have to have people all over the DIA, CIA, FBI, and local law enforcement.

Infiltrating just a few, well-placed people into top positions would be all that was necessary to obstruct investigations.

Since that's absolutely unthinkable,...

People with power commit criminal acts. Unthinkable crimes are the most easily covered up.

How many people's lives have the trusted former chairman of Nasdaq and his cronies callously destroyed, many of them their friends and aquaintances?

... ask yourself why this secret cabal inside the USG would commission mass murder without reasonable guarantee of their plot succeeding and remaining undetected?

One wonders why Dick Cheney is happy to admit to committing torture crimes.

If 911 was, indeed, commisioned by a secret cabal then it did succeed and its members do remain either undetected and/or untouchable.

Intelligence agencies around the world have had years of experience in running well-funded covert operations, and a major part of any successful crime is knowing how to avoid detection and/or prosecution!


Plus, even considering this requires ignoring of other evidence that AQ initiated this plot. (History of terror attacks against U.S. targets overseas.)

AQ may or may not have initiated the plot, aided or unaided. We don't know. It makes a very plausible patsy either way. Covert aid can come later.

Plus, this kind of operation would be something more likely initiated by the KGB/SVR. They were known to have contacts with terror organizations going all the way back to the 1960's, not to mention the whole Bekaa Valley thing.

The CIA also has a long history of contacts with terror organizations, including Islamic extremist ones.

[ref]

I edited the image a little bit, just to make it more coherent with the text.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/13639494f5d02ceef8.jpg

Some small text additions still to come.

[JihadJane]

I edited the image a little bit, just to make it more coherent with the text.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/13639494f5d02ceef8.jpg

Some small text additions still to come.


Perhaps a touch of pink would help.

Also, you appear to have overlooked the possibility that some conspiracy theory may be based on conspiracy fact.

[JoeyDonuts]

Also, you appear to have overlooked the possibility that some conspiracy theory may be based on conspiracy fact.

In reference to your rebuttal above, an AQ-CIA "covert assistance" scenario would make more sense to me had the targets not been inside the United States. You could argue that since the ultimate goal of this scenario is the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan in oil's name, that lives lost on 9-11 were but a drop in the bucket, a sacrifice for the greater good. I can't wrap my brain around that. Plus, we don't deal in this kind of intelligence and string-pulling the way we did in the Cold War. With advances in SIGINT and overhead imagery, U.S. intelligence gathering shifted priorities towards electronic means and relying less on HUMINT - running assets and what have you. HUMINT is an area in which the KGB has always been better than us. Our intel collection networks towards the latter end of the 70s-80s were optimal for tracking the movements of conventional armies and navies, but here nigh useless in developing real actionable intelligence about what terror groups were up to.

A great primer on this would be See No Evil by Robert Baer. See, he actually was stationed in the Middle East with the CIA - unlike Mike Ruppert who only really really wishes he was.

That said, your second statement holds a little more traction with me.

I'm sure the Nixon Watergate affair resided in the realm of "conspiracy theory" until a tidal wave of damning evidence drowned all of them.

A skeptic shouldn't automatically dismiss something simply because it runs counter to the prevailing accepted view of things. We should dismiss them after we give a thorough and fair review of their claims, and determined whether or not it is falsifiable. The only time I would automatically dismiss something is if it came from the mouth of Dr. Judy Wood. or Delmart Vreeland. or Mike Ruppert. or Fetzer. or Alex Jones.

Crap. This is going to be a long list. The reason I say I automtically dismiss these things is because they have a history of spewing everything from distortions to misleading statements to out and out fabrications and lies. If any of these folks actually had anything legitimate to bring to the table it's doubtful anyone would give them a fair shake owing to this deceptive history.

Ok. This soapbox hurts my feet. I'm done now.

And one more thing. If these Arabs are the perfect patsies, why isn't CAIR coming to the defense of Khalid Sheikh Mohamed? Why aren't prominent Muslim advocacy groups protesting his arrest, imprisonment, and subsequent trial? Was he just snatched away from his shwarma cart to fit the government's case?

Or could it be that CAIR knows he's a mass murderer and is going to get what's coming to him?

[JihadJane]

... I can't wrap my brain around that. ...

... Or could it be that CAIR knows he's a mass murderer and is going to get what's coming to him?

Thanks for your response.

I think we have different understandings of the phrase "Intelligence asset". "Al Qaeda" is a useful Intelligence asset because it allows the propaganda creation of a plausible Enemy Other (like the previous Red Menace) to justify otherwise unjustifiable, aggressive military action.

Even if "al Qaeda" received no assistance whatsoever in perpetrating the 911 crime they would still be an Intelligence asset. US foreign policy and covert assistance has been instrumental in the group's growth, but even self-sustaining, independent terrorist groups can be Intelligence assets. Fearful, terrorised populations are more accepting of the wars that rulers like to wage at the population's expense.

Mass murderers make very good Intelligence assets

[JoeyDonuts]

Uhhh...In my world (which does intersect with the ACTUAL intelligence community) an intelligence asset is something that collects intelligence. In the SIGINT world, this can be electronic gear classified as organic (operated and under command of a parent unit) or inorganic (sensors whose data can be shared among many users and disseminated through three-letter government agencies.) In the HUMINT world an asset is a person a field officer solicits to betray their own government - either defecting and telling us what information he knows, or actively collecting that information for that particular field officer.

Semantics are important here. You're using a term used by the intelligence community, which in terms of what you're implying makes it appear that our intelligence agencies are complicit in their operations. I don't need to remind you that some of these resulted in the direct targeting of U.S. Military assets in the USS Cole, Khobar Towers, etc...

I agree with you in principle that having an enemy to rally around is of particular use to a government in galvanizing popular support for its agenda - but I think referring to these groups as "intelligence assets" is highly misleading. Perhaps there is another term that would fit your implications more closely. I don't think "Scapegoat" has quite the gravity you're looking for.

I just realized my two posts aren't even close to the OP. I apologize for the derail. [end of line]

[PhantomWolf]

My main issue with the whole OBL/AQ are a CIA creation/asset is that from 1996 onwards, the CIA has been trying to kill/capture OBL and had Clinton not been so chicken about civilian causalities and let them have their head, they'd like have gotten him prior to 2001. Why would they have been going to great lengths to try and take him out, even risking the wrath of Congress, only having the President stopping them from going forward, if he was something they were wanting to use? If it was a smakescreen, what would they have done if Clinton had greenlighted their operations?

[zaphod2016]

I edited the image a little bit, just to make it more coherent with the text.

Suggestions:

1. Place the "critical point" between stages 2 and 3. Deciding to "believe" in the conspiracy is the point at which rational thought is abandoned

2. Place "danger zone" between stages 3 and 4. Once a person promotes the CT they have become part of the problem; have begun to spread misinformation

3. Place "point of no return" between stages 4 and 5. I don't think anyone has ever returned from stage 5.

4. Place a "disclaimer" on the image: the following graph refers to conspiracy theories that have been conclusively falsified; not controversial political opinions

You inspired me to create an image of my own. At what point does healthy skepticism towards government cross the line into "conspiracy theory"?

http://zaphodforpresident.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/woo-o-meter2.png

What say you? Is this image a valid addition to the thread?

[ref]

Nice image, Zap :cool:

I would avoid putting too much stuff into one image (speaking of my own image, that is). I'd leave the zones out. Everyone under the critical line is in danger zone :rolleyes: And I would like to see the day that someone from Step 5 would come back.

I also think the critical point is in place. That point is critical, because once you only start looking for confirmational information, and no contradicting information, that's where the danger lies. It's critical to know what the sources are, and how to use them.

The suggestion about a disclaimer is a good one. I'll add that one. I have also added many new sentences and paragraphs in the text (I can't edit the OP, so the additions are on my website). I'll post the change log, when I'm finished.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Nice image, Zap :cool:

I would avoid putting too much stuff into one image (speaking of my own image, that is). I'd leave the zones out. Everyone under the critical line is in danger zone :rolleyes: And I would like to see the day that someone from Step 5 would come back.

I also think the critical point is in place. That point is critical, because once you only start looking for confirmational information, and no contradicting information, that's where the danger lies. It's critical to know what the sources are, and how to use them.

The suggestion about a disclaimer is a good one. I'll add that one. I have also added many new sentences and paragraphs in the text (I can't edit the OP, so the additions are on my website). I'll post the change log, when I'm finished.

With respect it's up to you how you spend you life, but you seem a bit obsessed to me.

As long as you don't get contaminated by the CT virus whats' the problem. Or is that what you are worried about? Perhaps all this is a diversionary defence mechanism against having to actually think about the world with all the dangers that you might actually start to wonder if the theories might have some sensible rationale?

What are you really fighting for? surely their are easier ways to boost your self esteem?

:D :D

[Travis]

Emotions are very important in Conspiracy Theory thinking. For example you would think that there would be many more people supporting LIHOP than MIHOP since the former is way more probable than the later. But there aren't and LIHOP is definitely in the minority. This is because the individual isn't looking for "truth" they are looking for stimulation and the crazier an idea is the more it excites.

After all, what's more interesting: the government tricking Muslims into attacking the USA or no Muslims at all but loads of hologram planes with laser weapons?

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Just as hilarious as your anti-Semitism.... oh wait. It's not funny.

I actually think you are a racist. I also think you hate blacks based upon your history of posts here.

It's disgusting that people can have such vile views of hating people based upon the color of their skin or their ethnicity. You should be ashamed of yourself. :mad:

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Emotions are very important in Conspiracy Theory thinking. For example you would think that there would be many more people supporting LIHOP than MIHOP since the former is way more probable than the later. But there aren't and LIHOP is definitely in the minority. This is because the individual isn't looking for "truth" they are looking for stimulation and the crazier an idea is the more it excites.

After all, what's more interesting: the government tricking Muslims into attacking the USA or no Muslims at all but loads of hologram planes with laser weapons?

Travis didn't let it get him down, even though he failed the Armchair psychology course 23 times. :D:D

[Tin Foil Timothy]

My main issue with the whole OBL/AQ are a CIA creation/asset is that from 1996 onwards, the CIA has been trying to kill/capture OBL and had Clinton not been so chicken about civilian causalities and let them have their head, they'd like have gotten him prior to 2001. Why would they have been going to great lengths to try and take him out, even risking the wrath of Congress, only having the President stopping them from going forward, if he was something they were wanting to use? If it was a smakescreen, what would they have done if Clinton had greenlighted their operations?

According to both Benazir Bhutto and the Zionist Michael Ledeen OBL is dead. I dunno if he's dead or not, but he's certainly an asset to the US administration to keep his entity alive as a figure head for the "war on terror" fabrication.

Of course they would have to eb seen to eb goign after him.

btw - one of the funniest statements of this year was McCain's proclamation that he "knew where OBL was "and that he was "going to get him," but he "wasnt' going to tell us how."


John McCain was a complete joke.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Mass murderers make very good Intelligence assets

But G W Bush doesn't have much intelligence as an asset!








































Sorry, couldn't resist!!! :D:D:D

[ref]

With respect it's up to you how you spend you life, but you seem a bit obsessed to me.

As long as you don't get contaminated by the CT virus whats' the problem. Or is that what you are worried about? Perhaps all this is a diversionary defence mechanism against having to actually think about the world with all the dangers that you might actually start to wonder if the theories might have some sensible rationale?

What are you really fighting for? surely their are easier ways to boost your self esteem?

:D :D

I don't know what your problem is. If I spend a couple of hours writing about the subject I have followed for 2-3 years, is that obsessed?

I have pretty much quit all the debating a long time ago. But I think the concept itself is interesting. Am I not allowed to write about my thoughts?

You have repeated your self-esteem analysis many times. Are you sure you are looking at a right direction?

[Cuddles]

With respect it's up to you how you spend you life, but you seem a bit obsessed to me.

Says the person who obsessively posts in multiple threads solely to complain about people being obsessive.

Irony does not mean "a bit like iron".

[TheLoneBedouin]

@ref
The biggest defect in your model is that you do not define "conspiracy theory" or "conspiracy thinking".

Emotions are very important in Conspiracy Theory thinking.
Wrong.
For example you would think that there would be many more people supporting LIHOP than MIHOP since the former is way more probable than the later.
How are you determining probability? Don't tell me you are using Pomeroo's "mathematically impossible" argument (if so, please provide the math).
But there aren't and LIHOP is definitely in the minority. This is because the individual isn't looking for "truth" they are looking for stimulation and the crazier an idea is the more it excites.
Reductio ad absurdum: Then the most exciting and thus most popular theory must be that a flying unicorn crashed into the Pentagon.

After all, what's more interesting: the government tricking Muslims into attacking the USA or no Muslims at all but loads of hologram planes with laser weapons?
But much more people believe in Lihop than holograms!

[Travis]

Travis didn't let it get him down, even though he failed the Armchair psychology course 23 times. :D:D

Your explanation for MIHOP having way more believers/websites/youtube videos devoted to it is what? Are they disinfo?

How are you determining probability? Don't tell me you are using Pomeroo's "mathematically impossible" argument (if so, please provide the math).

LIHOP is at least physically possible whereas every MIHOP scenario presented to date has been physically impossible. That's what I mean by more probable.

Reductio ad absurdum: Then the most exciting and thus most popular theory must be that a flying unicorn crashed into the Pentagon.

Give it time. It took 30+ years for people to go from thinking the moon landings were hoaxed because it was supposedly impossible to get there to believing we actually did go there but discovered the place was a huge alien space station.

But much more people believe in Lihop than holograms!

How many websites are exclusively devoted to LIHOP? How many are devoted to no plane theories?

[fullflavormenthol]

25,000 on Google search of LIHOP, and 257,000 for No planes.

It seems the truth movement is completely in love with the idea of no planes as opposed to the belief that it was merely allowed to happen. So it seems that a lot people believe a completely insane theory.

[TheLoneBedouin]

LIHOP is at least physically possible whereas every MIHOP scenario presented to date has been physically impossible. That's what I mean by more probable.

Nonsense. You have not, nor is it possible to examine every MIHOP scenario.
A MIHOP scenario could even use NIST's theory of collapse, so is NIST's theory physically impossible?

Give it time. It took 30+ years for people to go from thinking the moon landings were hoaxed because it was supposedly impossible to get there to believing we actually did go there but discovered the place was a huge alien space station.

I don't understand your point. It took a while for a less popular theory to emerge- that does not support your claim that the "craziest" theories are the most popular.
(Also, I don't think these two groups are conspecific, so I again ask ref, how are you defining "conspiracy theory" and "conspiracy thinking"?).


How many websites are exclusively devoted to LIHOP? How many are devoted to no plane theories?
You're moving the goal posts (from 'holograms' to 'no planes').
While I have met several LIHOPers, I have yet to meet anyone who believes holograms had anything to do with 9/11.

25,000 on Google search of LIHOP, and 257,000 for No planes.

It seems the truth movement is completely in love with the idea of no planes as opposed to the belief that it was merely allowed to happen. So it seems that a lot people believe a completely insane theory.
It only seems so if you're incapable of critical thinking and are heavily biased in favor of the official story.
"Debunk no planes" has 463,000 results on google.
"Debunk LIHOP" has 5,850 results.
Government loyalists will always debunk the crazier theories in order to dismiss all evidence- it is a tried and true tactic of COINTELPRO.
(I should also remind you that prevalence on the internet is not at all a good indicator of the popularity of a theory. Ace Baker, for example, is known to operate many sites under many different names. If we look at sites where truthers communicate (i.e. forums) it is clear that Baker's theories are very unpopular. One wonders, therefore, why he was invited on hardfire while CIT and PFT are dismissed as "no planers", especially given the 80% (?) approval rating of the flyover theory at 911blogger).

[UNLoVedRebel]

For example you would think that there would be many more people supporting LIHOP than MIHOP since the former is way more probable than the later.

How are you determining probability? Don't tell me you are using Pomeroo's "mathematically impossible" argument (if so, please provide the math).

I can't believe how many times I have to cite this.

www.aejmc.org/_scholarship/research_use/jmcq/07sum/stempel_text.pdf

ETA: link fixed.

[TheLoneBedouin]

I can't believe how many times I have to cite this.


http://www.aejmc.org/_scholarship/re...empel_text.pdf

That page is apparently not available.

Please accept our apologies.
The page you requested, http://aejmc.org/_scholarship/re...empel_text.pdf, does not appear to be available on the AEJMC site. This may be our fault, because the AEJMC Web site underwent radical surgery during the fall-winter of 2006-2007. We apologize for any inconvenience, and we hope you will bear with us during our recovery.

We know that AEJMC members rely on the site, and we hope you will give the new Web site a chance to work its way into your heart.

Good News! All the old files -- dressed in new fall outfits -- are still here. Most have new addresses.

Old Bookmark?
If you reached this page by following a bookmark, you will have to set a new bookmark when you find the old page at its new address.

Please go to our New Home Page. Once you get to the new page, check out the drop-down menus just under today's date. They should help you to find just about anything you need to find. The Google site search may also help you find what you need.

Again, we apologize for any inconvenience, and hope you find what you need.

[calebprime]

That page is apparently not available.

8:30 est, it's working now.

and quite readable and interesting.

[abenja1]

I actually think you are a racist. I also think you hate blacks based upon your history of posts here.

It's disgusting that people can have such vile views of hating people based upon the color of their skin or their ethnicity. You should be ashamed of yourself. :mad:

TFT I know you have screws loose in your head. I mean you accuse people who disagree with your views racist, you're a bloodthirsy anti-semite, and you swallow conspiracy koolaid. I think you are the prime example of 5 steps of CT.

[fullflavormenthol]

It only seems so if you're incapable of critical thinking and are heavily biased in favor of the official story.
"Debunk no planes" has 463,000 results on google.
"Debunk LIHOP" has 5,850 results.
Government loyalists will always debunk the crazier theories in order to dismiss all evidence- it is a tried and true tactic of COINTELPRO.
(I should also remind you that prevalence on the internet is not at all a good indicator of the popularity of a theory. Ace Baker, for example, is known to operate many sites under many different names. If we look at sites where truthers communicate (i.e. forums) it is clear that Baker's theories are very unpopular. One wonders, therefore, why he was invited on hardfire while CIT and PFT are dismissed as "no planers", especially given the 80% (?) approval rating of the flyover theory at 911blogger).

Oops. Well I guess you caught me. I too am part of that massive conspiracy, yes and we (not debunkers, but sane people) are too afraid to take on the other wacky theories. Except for the fact that they get taken on....you might try the 9-11 section for that discussion.

[ParrotPirate]

I'm pretty sure the first requirement for belief in CTs is that you need to drill a rather large hole in your head.

[ref]

so I again ask ref, how are you defining "conspiracy theory" and "conspiracy thinking"?


Well, let me phrase it.

Conspiracy thinking = Support of ideas or theories that accuse a selected group of secretly committing illegal or deceptive actions. Ideas or theories which are hypothetical, speculative, unfounded, irrational, outlandish, have no supporting hard evidence and are not generally accepted. Ideas or theories which are easily falsiable and are contradicted by the huge majority of the scientific community, mathematical calculations, existing hard evidence, Occam's Razor and logic among others.

[dtugg]

Government loyalists will always debunk the crazier theories in order to dismiss all evidence- it is a tried and true tactic of COINTELPRO.

Your "theory" is one of the craziest "theories" on 9/11 (and in history). Of course, you cannot see it because you are a member of the extremely small cult.

[JihadJane]

Your "theory" is one of the craziest "theories" on 9/11 (and in history). Of course, you cannot see it because you are a member of the extremely small cult.

Would you say that the TheLoneBedouin's cult is smaller than your cult, dtugg?

[dtugg]

Would you say that the TheLoneBedouin's cult is smaller than your cult, dtugg?

I don't belong to a cult. But if by that you mean people who believe AA77 hit the Pentagon rather than really flying over it while fooling every single eyewitness into believing that it hit, my "cult" is millions of times larger.

[dudalb]

I love the way the Twoofers constanly over estimate their numbers.

[JihadJane]

I don't belong to a cult. But if by that you mean people who believe AA77 hit the Pentagon rather than really flying over it while fooling every single eyewitness into believing that it hit, my "cult" is millions of times larger.

The itsywitsy JREF 911 debunkerer team often flies in a cult formation and the tiny Pentagon fly-over cult is one of its favourite ecstasy-inducing pills.

[Brainache]

The itsywitsy JREF 911 debunkerer team often flies in a cult formation and the tiny Pentagon fly-over cult is one of its favourite ecstasy-inducing pills.

All Hail Hypno-Gravy!!!

[dtugg]

The itsywitsy JREF 911 debunkerer team often flies in a cult formation and the tiny Pentagon fly-over cult is one of its favourite ecstasy-inducing pills.

Yeah, I enjoy laughing at those idiots. So what?

[ref]

I've improved the article by adding some more precise descriptions, and a few additional quotes. I won't post any change logs (since it would only be separate sentences and quotes), but the newest version can always be viewed here (http://911guide.googlepages.com/conspiracythinking).

Happy new year, everyone!

[JihadJane]

Yeah, I enjoy laughing at those idiots. So what?

Because it's irrelevant to whether or not 911 was a "false flag" event. It's nothing more than big-up, tribal cult-bonding.

[dtugg]

Because it's irrelevant to whether or not 911 was a "false flag" event. It's nothing more than big-up, tribal cult-bonding.

Hey, I enjoy good comedy, Ranquisamo, and twoofers in general are masters at creating it. I couldn't make up the crap that they say and believe.

It's not like more "credible" theories on 9/11 haven't been discussed here and we are ignoring them to laugh at those idiots.

[Brainache]

Because it's irrelevant to whether or not 911 was a "false flag" event. It's nothing more than big-up, tribal cult-bonding.

No. It is pointing out to the people who lurk the sheer absurdity of that particular "theory".

See, you can harp on as much as you like about "false flag" events, but without any sort of evidence all you are doing is talking BS.

Then you can sneer at those who don't buy your BS by calling us a cult or whatever, but the fact remains that you have no evidence. All you have is bias and the sooner you realise that, the better your protests will become.

Please don't assume that people who disagree with you are evil. Try to understand why they disagree and then take a long hard look at what you believe and at least consider the idea that maybe, just possibly you have been misled.

[normdoering]

Wait! You can't forget to blame Devil music:
http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/12/devils-music.html

[UNLoVedRebel]

Because it's irrelevant to whether or not 911 was a "false flag" event.

It wasn't.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

I love the way the Twoofers constanly over estimate their numbers.

So do dewunkers. Outside this forum you guys are thin on the ground. You get a distorted picture all confined to the boundaries tof the dewunking club :)

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Yeah, I enjoy laughing at those idiots. So what?
Because it's irrelevant to whether or not 911 was a "false flag" event. It's nothing more than big-up, tribal cult-bonding.

That's what it's all about. These dewuinkers are boosting their low self esteem by constantly having to prove their superiority to 'truthers' by mockery and laughter.

It looks amazingly childish when viewed from the sidelines

[Bell]

That's what it's all about. These dewuinkers are boosting their low self esteem by constantly having to prove their superiority to 'truthers' by mockery and laughter.

It looks amazingly childish when viewed from the sidelines

What what???

Hypocrite must not be a truther word.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Just as hilarious as your anti-Semitism.... oh wait. It's not funny.

I actually think you are a racist. I also think you hate blacks based upon your history of posts here.

It's disgusting that people can have such vile views of hating people based upon the color of their skin or their ethnicity. You should be ashamed of yourself. :mad:


TFT I know you have screws loose in your head. I mean you accuse people who disagree with your views racist.

Yeah it's pretty kooky isn't it? :) - I knew you wouldn't have the computing power to get the point.

People call me a racist without basis everyday on this forum because I disagree with their views.

Hopefully being on the receiving end of it you can see how stupid it is.

But looking at the following, I doubt it. I predict you won't be able to comprehend anything at a higher level than low level shouts racist.

you're a bloodthirsy anti-semite, and you swallow conspiracy koolaid. I think you are the prime example of 5 steps of CT.

And then you act very immaturely by shouting 'bloodthirsy(sic) anti-semite' and accuse me of 'swallowing conspiracy kool-aid' when there's no basis for it.


'conspiracy kool-aid' = ha, I bet you through the was really cool didn't you?

[Tin Foil Timothy]

whoops

[dtugg]

That's what it's all about. These dewuinkers are boosting their low self esteem by constantly having to prove their superiority to 'truthers' by mockery and laughter.

It looks amazingly childish when viewed from the sidelines

You are a twoofer (your totally unsupported claim that Osama confession videos are fake proves that), so of course you don't like us laughing at you.

I don't need to prove that I am superior to you, I already know it. It's just that you twoofers, especially the Ranquisamo variety, keep saying such stupid crap, one cannot help but laugh at you.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

So do dewunkers. Outside this forum you guys are thin on the ground. You get a distorted picture all confined to the boundaries tof the dewunking club :)


Err... When has any debunker overestimated their numbers? At worst, they'll merely claim that the overwhelming majority of the public simply don't buy the Truth™ movement's BS.

[JoeyDonuts]

We also aren't making videos and charging for them. We're not stomping around memorial sites wearing "9-11 WAS AN AQ JOB" T-shirts. I wouldn't even say that debunking is a movement. Hell, the vast majority of the 9-11 CT crap is so ludicrous that most are able to debunk it for themselves. And why is it that some people see the world as being truthers on one side and debunkers on the other?

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes."

[240-185]

'conspiracy kool-aid' = ha, I bet you through the was really cool didn't you?

Now it is proved, conspiracists are totally uncultivated.
Look at T.A.M.'s avatar to learn what Kool-aid is.

[JihadJane]

Please don't assume that people who disagree with you are evil.

Who have I called evil?

[JoeyDonuts]

You can call me evil if it makes your categorization of the rest of the world easier.

I'd like to stay in the grey area if possible, but I'm not that sure that it exists.

[abenja1]

Yeah it's pretty kooky isn't it? :) - I knew you wouldn't have the computing power to get the point.

People call me a racist without basis everyday on this forum because I disagree with their views.

Hopefully being on the receiving end of it you can see how stupid it is.

But looking at the following, I doubt it. I predict you won't be able to comprehend anything at a higher level than low level shouts racist.



And then you act very immaturely by shouting 'bloodthirsy(sic) anti-semite' and accuse me of 'swallowing conspiracy kool-aid' when there's no basis for it.


'conspiracy kool-aid' = ha, I bet you through the was really cool didn't you?

You are a bloodthirsty anti-semite. I never seen anyone other than Magz and RP2008 go out of their way to prove the world's ills on Israel as well as holding other types of racial injustices to other standards (ie. its okay for Native Americans to lose land, but Israel should not dare touch Palestine). As well as the fact you believe the ADL gives millions of dollars to JREF. So yes, I would say you have drank way too much of conspiracy kool-aid.

[Galileo]

Inspired by this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=130827), I wrote this article about conspiracy thinking. These views are mine only. I have quoted some of you anonymously, and edited the comments a little teeny bit (mostly selective cut and paste of long comments). If somebody has an issue with being quoted here, or feels misrepresented, contact me and I will remove all requested parts.

Here is the article. Because all these things get buried pretty quickly, I have once again also stored the article here: http://911guide.googlepages.com/conspiracythinking


This article discusses the depths of conspiracy beliefs. Included are 5 steps towards deeper conspiracy thinking, warning signs to consider, and other related material. I have also included relevant quotes from people writing to JREF conspiracy theory subforum. These comments are anonymous, but it doesn’t affect the message and purpose in any way.


The 5 Steps

I have identified five steps towards more and more conspiratorial thinking. It starts with encountering a single claim, and ends with dedicating your life to promoting your theories. With each step the belief and dedication become deeper and with each step getting out of the cycle gets harder.


Step 1 – Evaluation of a claim, plausible or not plausible

When one encounters a new claim, the first thing to do is to evaluate the plausibility of the claim. One might be exposed to something totally new, which sounds very convincing. If the person presenting this claim is highly educated, this might add credibility in ones mind and develop a thought that he might have something.

Things that affect the conclusion:

-Former experience with conspiracy theories (does one recognise what is a conspiracy theory, and know how to critically approach the kind of claims conspiracy theorists make)
-Knowledge of the subject matter (engineer, firefighter)
-Earlier tendency towards conspiracy thinking (already believing in the likes of JFK conspiracy/moon landing fakings)
-Hatred of Bush, his administration or anti-Americanism in general (consciously or unconciously wanting the conspiracy theories to be true, which leads to a less critical approach towards the theories and strengthens the reasons to dislike)

"I had always enjoyed being skeptical pretty much anything, and as an angst ridden teen, (twenty something actually) government conspiracy's fascinated me, by believing them I felt as if I was smarter than people who believed the official story, and telling people made me feel superior (like Dec 2001, saying the government was behind the attack was a pretty wild thing, and did atcaully make you controversial). I used to read Rense all the time (I considered it the REAL news, and all the MSM stuff was just BS). At that time I would have been 20. So it wasn't really facts that made me a truther, just wanting the be superior. Then I just accepted it and didn’t' follow it for years, I just assumed the government was lying. I was totally anti-American, I was of the opinion that the US was the Evil Empire, and everything they did was evil etc. The anti American sentiment coupled with attaching an inflated sense self worth to 'truther' theories (i.e.: I'm so much smarter than these sheeple) is what I think allows the movement so called to continue in the face of monumental evidence to the contrary; albeit in a feeble state."

"I actually tilted towards "truther" for a time, swayed by the LIHOP-lite/incompetence stance of "Fahrenheit 9/11". But I was never really spurred into action by any of it. It was fairly easy at the time for an anti-Bush type such as myself to believe that the warning bells that were there (the 8/6/01 PDB, the tip about Muslims at flight schools, the James Woods tip, et cetera) could go unexplored and 9/11 happened because partisan hacks were just sitting on their duffs. That actually seemed plausible."

"I also hate Bush. It was very very easy for me to believe that Bush would be involved in such a scheme of murder and deceit. But then I realized, that no matter how much I hate Bush, it is not right for me..or anyone else..to blaim him for deaths that the evidence just doesn't convict him of. Yet..I will admit....that a part of me still does hopes and prays, that someday, some evidence does come out making it clear that Bush had some hand in either making it happen, or allowing it to take place."

"It stemmed, I believe, from the ferocious resentment I was harbouring towards Bush and Blair for the pack of lies and manipulation they pushed our way to justify the wars in the Middle East. I'll stress here that this was not "anti-American" feeling. As a Brit and a natural Labour voter I cannot adequately express my hatred for Tony Blair. I'll put GWB in exactly the same class. Then, watching a couple of "Truth" videos that were being discussed on an unrelated forum. This cracked the damn, so to speak. Yes, thought I, those #######'s are well capable of that. I must admit that finally seeing the collapse of WTC7 was shocking."

"I wish I had never heard of trutherism which is only motivated by hatred of America."



Step 2 – Looking for more evidence - Critical point!

Believing that this conspiracy could indeed be possible. Looking for more evidence.

Things affecting the conclusion:

Availability and approachability of conspiracy debunking material. There has been and still is an overwhelming amount of easily digestible conspiracy material. The outcome will be one of the following.

Either:
Finding evicence supporting both a conspiracy and a non-conspiracy viewpoints. Evaluating the evidence critically and coming to a non-conspiracy conclusion.
Or:
Finding more and more evidence supporting the conspiracy conclusion. Less and less criticism towards various claims.

"Much investigoogling led (naturally) to finding countless "sources" and I was steaming so much that the ol' brain wasn't in a fit state to realize they were merely recycling the same bilge."

"I didn't realize that my statements were contradictory: I admitted that 19 people had hijacked the planes, but I wasn't quite sure about the Pentagon and the Shanksville planes."


Step 3 – Believing in a conspiracy

Believing there indeed was a conspiracy. Reinforcing this belief by finding more and more supporting evidence. Less and less openness to opposing viewpoints. After this point Step 4 is getting very close.


Step 4 – Promoting the conspiracy theory

Spreading the word. Telling friends. Wanting to share the information you have just uncovered. Participation in discussion forums, maybe attending events, handing out material. Thinking the opposition is plain wrong. Believing there must to be some kind of a conspiracy, no matter what evidence is put forward. Enthusianism rises. Feeling of importance. Thinking to have discovered something nobody else sees or understands. More and more dedication. Usually not admitting any mistakes.

A person at this stage may appear willing to change his/her mind if certain important points are solved, but in reality changing sides at this point is quite rare (but fortunately still possible).

"I felt like I had discovered something HUGE!! Something that made me part of history. I felt like...a revolutionary. Like someone who could help change the world. And then..I woke up to the boring truth.
But, until the evidence proves it, I am no truther. "



Step 5 – Conspiracy theories affecting daily life

Putting the reputations and careers on the line, maybe losing jobs or relationships. Almost no way of turning back. Everything is invested in the conspiracy. Denial of all opposing viewpoints.

Many of the current leading figures of the truth movement are currently at this stage.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/13639494a82980e0f5.jpg

Warning Signs

There are many warning signs indicating that your critical thinking may be in danger. Consider the following. If any of these sings are found, one has to seriously reconsider their position.

-The experts on your side seem to be plain wrong on many details, but you still support other parts of their research, because these parts of their work support your views.
-Thinking you are now able to see through the entire plot, wondering why almost nobody else can.
-Being overly enthusiastic about the subject.
-Refusing to critically go through what the other side is presenting.
-Ignoring and forgetting unpleasant evidence.
-Thinking the perpetrators leave clues and you can solve it all in the internet.
-Thinking you have all the facts and need no further research, thinking your mind is set.
-Thinking every participant would be silent, every media controlled.
-After being thoroughly debunked in one detail, moving on to the next detail without re-considering your position.
-Not believing in the original detail that made you belive in a conspiracy, but having found other reasons along the way, that still make you believe in a conspiracy.
-Not being able to understand the details your belief is based on (example: Claiming thermite, but not knowing how it works).
-Having very strong disregard for any opposition.
-Thinking the governments are evil. Not trusting anything contradictionary to your belief, because everything is somehow related to or controlled by the government.
-Believing in events that are very unorthodox or unique only to a conspiracy theory. (examples: Weakening the structure with explosives for an hour before a controlled demolition, Thermite being used to bring down buildings)
-Avoiding answering to questions.
-Basing your beliefs on the events following the attacks (examples: They lied about the WMD’s so they must be lying about everything, They did it to justify two wars).



Criticism Without Conspiracies

Being critical of something does not automatically mean you have to believe in a conspiracy. You can be critical of the way things were handled after the events. You can be critical of the wars. You can criticize all the actions of the administration. All that, and it doesn’t require you believing in any conspiracy theory.

A common misbelief is, that all those who oppose conspiracy theorist are “Bush lovers” or “Government apologists”. An unofficial poll revealed, that only 50% of the people who actively participate in opposing the truth movement in the JREF discussion forum (so called debunkers) are from the U.S. The rest are from all around the world. Why would all these people be apologists to government not even their own? Why would they all love Bush? You don’t have to like Bush in order to accept the evidence that doesn’t support any conspiracy theories.


Things to Consider

Here are a couple of points for conspiracy believers to consider.

If the attacks were so incredible complicated and successful, why did they make the following incredible mistakes:

-They did not frame the citizens of the invaded countries.
-They did not plant WMD's where nobody was watching, but were supposedly able to carry out incredible events with everybody watching.

If you find youself getting around or ignoring these important questions without re-considering your position, that is a warning sign of self-deception.

"Nowadays looking back, the feeling is mostly embarrassment, especially as the whole business flared and died in a matter of a couple of months and I should really have had the wit to notice that I was getting much too excited, too quickly, about the whole 9/11 "truth" business. That's never a healthy sign. But it highlights very strongly (again) for me that the power of self-deception is very strong in the human race."


Another thing to consider, why does it seem that nobody listens? Why is there no greater global opposition towards the explanations of the events? Could it be that you could be wrong, after all?

And very important: Are my actions and beliefs profitable to someone? Am I giving money out? Am I buying many books with essentially the same content that is found in any conspiracy website? Why do I buy this material, if I know everything that is in them by heart?

And finally. Are my beliefs based on evidence or faith? Would I change sides, if certain issues were solved with supporting evidence? Is any proof enough? Are the issues that I want to get solved realistic?

Examples of unrealistic issues:
-Wanting videos of every hijacker boarding in order to believe they existed.
-Wanting to know exactly every single detail of every single event of the day.
-Wanting every single piece of evidence collected to be released.
-Wanting an entirely new investigation.

As long as these don’t take place, one can very easily claim that there are unanswered questions, and continue one’s conspiratorial beliefs. One must recognize which demands really are realistic.


Closing Words

You have to be very careful with material that sounds exiting, but you have no previous experience with. Because once you take the first wrong step, it is very easy to convince yourself with further evidence supporting the wrong conclusion, while all the time twisting all the evidence that doesn't.

And this can happen to anyone regardless of education, age, IQ, or any other demographic. But one can get over it, even if having once fallen for some or even all of it.

"Nowadays, I'm still learning, but I strongly fight trutherism as it has the same ways of arguing like Shoah denialism: pissing on victims' graves, pissing on psychological victims, spreading lies, and wanting to open a "debate" in order to spew their hatred of thoughts shared by a majority of people, just because it was a majority."

"Now I feel embarrassed. I will see people who I haven't seen in years, and they still think I believe that...sadly some of them do now, because of me. So now I try to educate people in Real life, and clown CTists on the Internets for lulz."

"I expressed some opinions in JREF forum and received some slaps in the face (some tactful, some not) with good plain information. But - having a good scientific background - I was able to see that at least some of the tripe I was pushing was just flat wrong. This gave pause for serious thought. Plus, here and elsewhere, I was beginning to find links to the debunking sites. Of course a lot of this could have been avoided simply by putting "9/11" +"debunk" into Google in the first place, but I suppose the desire to believe in something wacky can lead one astray."


And this applies to any conspiracy theory.

"The only conspiracy I ever believed, was the JFK one. But after finding out how the 9/11 conspiracy theories 'work' (ie, how 'proof' is found etc.) I concluded that the JFK conspiracies work the same way, and stopped believing in them after reading up on them on these boards, and also after watching a BBC documentary reconstructing how the magic bullet did in fact not traverse a magical path (had to do with the arrangement of the seats, ie. frontseat sat lower and more to the middle.) "


Let me close by quoting the excellent words of this man, whose thoughts were posted in a related discussion thread. I have translated this part from another language, so the wording may not be exact, but the meaning gets trough. Read it with thought.

"I used to believe in the truth movement. Now that I no longer believe in any of that, it's quite easy to recognize the common trends in their thinking.

In a nutshell, what takes place is an almost complete collapse of critical thinking, accompanied by extremely selective use of evidence. In the background there is a pleasing conclusion (you want it to be true for emotional or ideological reasons) and then you fit the facts to go with the predetermined conclusion.

As a natural scientist and a believer in my ability to think critically, it is still hard for me to accept that I had adopted the abovementioned features. But a cold fact is, it is surprisingly easy to do that. Especially when taking into account the huge machine, that the "truth movement" has evolved into, and how easily and convincingly the events of this kind can be fit into the most peculiar theories. The fact that there are many professors and "authorities" belonging to this group also helps lowering the standards ones of own critical thinking.

Even in scientific experiments that are performed in a laboratory there are things that cannot be explained. And this is in conditions, where all the variables are as controlled as possible. Taking into account the nature of 9/11, it would be a miracle, if there were not “oddities” or partly unexplained things. Thus, there will never be a “theory” that would explain all the minor details. We must accept the one, which can in sufficient detail explain the events by using and respecting the scientific method."






Recommended related link: http://extruther.blogspot.com/

Do not repost that which has already been moved to AAH.

[1337m4n]

So do dewunkers. Outside this forum you guys are thin on the ground. You get a distorted picture all confined to the boundaries tof the dewunking club :)

Wow are you desperate. So you have to pretend that there is some sort of "debunking club" so that you can deflect any criticism of your failed idiocy movement.

9/11 Truth: Seven years, zero evidence, zero accomplishments. Seven years of failure. It needs no debunking; it debunks itself. You know what this is? This is a hobby.

When was the last time you saw gathering of people wearing T-Shirts that said "9/11 Was NOT An Inside Job"? There is no "debunking club", there is only rational people, and people, like you, who fall for lies and stupidity without critically examining any of it.

Either quote a "debunker" overestimating the number of debunkers, or retract your dumb desperate lie.

[1337m4n]

That's what it's all about. These dewuinkers are boosting their low self esteem by constantly having to prove their superiority to 'truthers' by mockery and laughter.

It looks amazingly childish when viewed from the sidelines

Too bad you are not viewing from the sidelines. I don't know who you think you're convincing when you make up the lie that you are "agnostic". Maybe you could convince people who lack intelligence and critical thinking skills, like the 9/11 Movement of Failure and Stupidity.

Pretending you are "agnostic"; you are like an 8-year-old, with chocolate fudge all over his face and fingers, trying to convince Mommy that the fudge disappeared all by itself--now who's "childish"?. You make up lies, just like the lie about KSM's confession being forced through torture, or the lie about the KSM trial being a sham, which you have yet to prove, and won't prove, and can't prove.

Why do you continue to pretend to be "agnostic" when anyone with even half a brain can see you are full-blown, idiot Truther.

I agree that self-esteem is important. You should get some so that you don't have to keep making up lies in order to compensate.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Too bad you are not viewing from the sidelines.


It always amused me that someone who calls himself Tin Foil Timothy and who consistently seems to attack the "debunkers" claims to be neutral. I just wonder if he actually believes it...

[/OT]

[240-185]

<bool sheet>

If you think that debunkers' documentation is limited to TV as twoofers' one is limited to Google, well, you didn't understand anything, and you're not able to do it.

Geez, can't you make an interesting post?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Geez, can't you make an interesting post?


The post you replied to was originally the OP of a thread he started, which was pretty quickly moved to Abandon All Hope and closed. Let's not allow him to do the same to this thread...

[240-185]

I reported it before I started to write my post, that's why I replaced the quote :)

[abenja1]

The 5 Steps of JREF Sheeple and Archie Debunking

Step 1

Watch TV.

Step 2

Continue to watch TV and wait for claims to be repeated.

Step 3

Accept as true anything repeated frequently on TV.

Step 4

Call anything that contradicts what you've learned from TV a conspiracy theory.

Step 5

Seek out psuedo-intellectuals who give you emotional support. Repeat Step 1 above.

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/2550/sfingerzg2.jpg

The Five Steps of Conspiracy thinking:

Step 1
Accuse anyone on TV, newspapers, government, authors, police, fire personell, JREF members, etc of being COINTELPRO

Step 2
Even though media and peer-reviewed journals has already been implicated in the coverup, use evidence from mainstream sources to backup claims.

Step 3
When the realization comes that the evidence from mainstream sources doesn't actually defend the CT position, start making up evidence.

Step 4
When evidence making up is done, get discredited and lying people who were once repubtable to back it up.

Step 5
If all else fails blame the Jews. Or in truther terms Zionists.

Sound familiar Galileo?

[1337m4n]

Step 6: Get some people pretending to be "neutral" and "agnostic" to troll JREF, and make up lies without evidence, contributing absolutely nothing to any discussion except flamewars.