Morrigan
16th March 2009, 09:13 PM
Hah, I know it doesn't make sense. But on another forum I occasionally visit/moderate was recently posted a thread about the so-called moon landing hoaxes. Thankfully, most posters responded derisively and a few pointed out links to refutations, but then some inane comments crept back, some a bit subtle, others not so much... For example (highlight mine),
i think the moon landing hoax is one of those ones they make up to give conspiracy theorists a bad name
it's just so ridiculous that EVERYONE considers you a moron if you believe it
At first it didn't register - he seemed to be saying, after all, that moon landing hoax believers are morons. Fair enough. Yet in this gem is actually a CT in and of itself: the moon landing hoax theories themselves were made up in a conspiracy to discredit the CTists!. :newlol
Another one:
Even the very term 'conspiracy theory' attempts to denounce any credibility that the subject might have. There's a lot out there that gets thrown under that umbrella even if it has official documents and such stating its authenticity. The way the media portrays such things doesn't help either, it's like a complete double-think situation for the public sometimes.
So now it's a CT against CTs, even down to the terminology and the "way the media handles it". Sigh. And the worst one yet...
those point by point disproofs are so lame. they are juss condescending and one sided and dumb. imo.
...No comment necessary.
Which brings me to a post I wanted to nominate for so succintly, yet brilliantly, highlighting the foolishness of CTs and the inherently whiny CT mindset -- but sadly, no such feature on our forum. Perhaps I should suggest it to the board owners. :P
When did conspiracy theorists ever NOT have a bad name? If the term "conspiracy theory" immediately seems like it's trying to imply zero-credibility ************, that's because the mindset required for conspiratorial thinking in the first place IS inherently dumb and delusional. If anything, the term is overly generous - "theory" implies a well-constructed set of arguments, but those who support the existence of these "conspiracies" are ALWAYS crackpots with an agenda and a laughably jumbled mess of contradictions as "evidence".
I mean, I distrust governments and powerful organizations probably much more than most people, but the knee-jerk attribution of large-scale organized malicious intent to any real or imagined "inconsistency" is gratuitously idiotic, and if people find it "condescending" and "BOO HOO THE MAINSTREAM STIGMATIZES MY DUMB THINKING AS DUMB" when their ridiculous arguments get shot down, then it's *********** awesome that they get offended.
:)
i think the moon landing hoax is one of those ones they make up to give conspiracy theorists a bad name
it's just so ridiculous that EVERYONE considers you a moron if you believe it
At first it didn't register - he seemed to be saying, after all, that moon landing hoax believers are morons. Fair enough. Yet in this gem is actually a CT in and of itself: the moon landing hoax theories themselves were made up in a conspiracy to discredit the CTists!. :newlol
Another one:
Even the very term 'conspiracy theory' attempts to denounce any credibility that the subject might have. There's a lot out there that gets thrown under that umbrella even if it has official documents and such stating its authenticity. The way the media portrays such things doesn't help either, it's like a complete double-think situation for the public sometimes.
So now it's a CT against CTs, even down to the terminology and the "way the media handles it". Sigh. And the worst one yet...
those point by point disproofs are so lame. they are juss condescending and one sided and dumb. imo.
...No comment necessary.
Which brings me to a post I wanted to nominate for so succintly, yet brilliantly, highlighting the foolishness of CTs and the inherently whiny CT mindset -- but sadly, no such feature on our forum. Perhaps I should suggest it to the board owners. :P
When did conspiracy theorists ever NOT have a bad name? If the term "conspiracy theory" immediately seems like it's trying to imply zero-credibility ************, that's because the mindset required for conspiratorial thinking in the first place IS inherently dumb and delusional. If anything, the term is overly generous - "theory" implies a well-constructed set of arguments, but those who support the existence of these "conspiracies" are ALWAYS crackpots with an agenda and a laughably jumbled mess of contradictions as "evidence".
I mean, I distrust governments and powerful organizations probably much more than most people, but the knee-jerk attribution of large-scale organized malicious intent to any real or imagined "inconsistency" is gratuitously idiotic, and if people find it "condescending" and "BOO HOO THE MAINSTREAM STIGMATIZES MY DUMB THINKING AS DUMB" when their ridiculous arguments get shot down, then it's *********** awesome that they get offended.
:)