Need help debunking my friend

[08lightning]

Hi there JREFers

I need some help/advice regarding a friend of mine who holds many CT beliefs.

This person has recently been increasingly involved and vocal about the full set of CT's, NWO, 911, JFK etc. (particular emphasis on 911)

Unfortunately i feel if i dont help this person, then no one will/can. Having done my best to provide rational argument and evidence (through email correspondence), This person seems outright unwilling to accept it.

About me: skeptic, rational, logical, IQ in the 98th percentile, communication skills of a stone (hence the needing help part)

Help wanted: I'd like to understand more of the medical/psychological perpective regarding CT belief, as it doesnt seem evidence alone is persuasive enough for this person.

Also appreciate any advice from people with experience in my position or the reverse.

perhaps there's someone even willing to view/guide my future correspondence with this person?

trying not to discuss details in public if possible, all emails welcome at 08lightning@live.co.uk (thats zero, eight btw)

thankyou for reading!

[Klimax]

I think following thread could offer some usefull insight:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=118389

(When quoting my post,don't forget to disable link or software will not let you. /happened to me as well)

[MysteryMammal]

Help wanted: I'd like to understand more of the medical/psychological perpective regarding CT belief, as it doesnt seem evidence alone is persuasive enough for this person.


I have ideas regarding the psychology of CT belief, but they are hardly scholarly. Having had a CT-er (troofer/NWO) roommate, and having read various CT forums (and been unwillingly subjected to Alex Jones by said roommate) I have come to the conclusion that many people who believe in CT's seem to be engaging in scapegoating behaviour.

Often these people feel they have no say in many aspects of their lives. They feel they have very little control. One thing often spoken of by them is how the government doesn't listen to the people. They do listen. It's just that one person's opinion usually won't outweigh the general sentiment of the majority. It's called a republic, and one of the drawbacks is none of us get to be dictator... not even me.

When a person feels they have very little control over various life situations they will usually try to ascertain why that is. There's usually some snake oil salesman trying to sell you a feel-good (for you, at least) reason why your life sucks. NWO/Jews/Illuminati/Reptillians/Satan are very attractive scapegoats. If your life sucks, would you rather it suck because of something you did, or because some bogey-man is out to get you? With CT's, your life can suck and you can still maintain the illusion that you are perfect and do no wrong.

You'll also notice about CT-ers that they usually have no end goal. Suppose they could prove that Reptillian Illuminati Satanists used a time machine to steal Judy Garland's ruby slipper from the museum in Grand Rapids, MN (or whatever theory you want to substitute.) What then? Usually this question is answered by vague statements like "People will wake up and see all of the lies, and life will become magically delicious and bunnies and unicorns shall prance about." Once the "truth" is revealed, things will just instantly become made of awesome and you'll be able to eat candy all of the time without getting sick or fat. The world will be a better place, and all they have to do is "expose the truth."

To make your life better would you rather have to work hard, do tedious things that you have no enjoyment of, sacrifice things you want, etc. Or would you rather just have to post on some forums about the "troof", and hang out with your friends in chatrooms talking about how "da man" got you down? Chatrooms are way more fun than college level math courses.

[NWO Sentryman]

On JFK there is the Mcadams Website: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Building 7 (run by the almighty Gravy)

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/

There is also Popular Mechanics http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

Nist
http://wtc.nist.gov/

And here.

[~enigma~]

Grand Rapids, MN
Minnesota's imitation of Grand Rapids Michigan is a very sincere form of flattery.

[TobiasTheViking]

Help wanted: I'd like to understand more of the medical/psychological perpective regarding CT belief, as it doesnt seem evidence alone is persuasive enough for this person.

I highly recommend the book Denying History by Michael Shermer and Alex Grobman
http://www.amazon.com/Denying-History-Holocaust-Never-Happened/dp/0520216121

When i bought it i hoped it was a general book, but it is rather specific on holocaust denial. With that said, they use holocaust denial as the test study/case to explain the mentality, and psychology, behind why the holocaust deniers believe what they believe.

I really liked the book, and it should give you a fairly clear image of why your friends believes as he does. And also why it might be extremely hard to get him to not believe as he does.

Sincerely
A Barstard Commie

[Brainster]

Hi there JREFers

I need some help/advice regarding a friend of mine who holds many CT beliefs.

This person has recently been increasingly involved and vocal about the full set of CT's, NWO, 911, JFK etc. (particular emphasis on 911).

What I would suggest is finding out what he's really bugged about. You'll find that most "Truthers" will say that they're upset about 9-11, but when you dig deeper, you find out that it's the Patriot Act, or the Iraq/Afghanistan wars.

Ask him what he sees happening if the "Truth" about 9-11 were revealed to the general public, and you'll get his wish list. Try and focus him on activism to achieve those goals without 9-11 Troof. It's my opinion that the Troofers are trying to short-circuit the process; it's a form of hand-waving.

Don't expect that debunking the individual stuff he brings up will work; it seldom does.

[08lightning]

Just wanted to say thanks for the replies so far,

i appreciate the time and effort

[CurtC]

My advice is that when you talk to him, DON'T have the attitude that you're there to debunk him. Listen to what he says, ask him if he could convince you with the same evidence that convinced him. Be sure to tell him to start with the most convincing evidence, so maybe you can minimize the amount of goalpost-shifting.

[jakesteele]

Cognitive Closure can refer to:

* Cognitive closure (psychology), a term describing the human desire to eliminate ambiguity and arrive at definite conclusions (sometimes irrationally).

Everybody needs answers to form their own cognitive closure. Any answer, even a bad or scary answer, is better than no answer.

Below are some pretty decent links about the psychology of a CT type person. I suggest studying about the underlying causes and reasons as a way to better understand him and help you take the best approach possible. But remember, 'look in the mirror' when you do this and you will see a lot of him in yourself.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/200809/think-or-not-think


http://www.answers.com/topic/conspiracy-theory

http://www.world-mysteries.com/newgw/gw_rmd1.htm

http://layscience.net/?q=node/142

[Caustic Logic]

Call it like it is and see how he responds. If his beliefs are true they can withstand scrutiny and reason, and he needs to subject them to those forces. Here, for example. If he's unwilling to do this, he needs to know he's being anti-rational and religionistical and is bound for a quickening slide downward. Just lay out the choices and let him decide, and then go from there.

[jhunter1163]

Minnesota's imitation of Grand Rapids Michigan is a very sincere form of flattery.

http://grandrapids.govoffice.com/

I'm not so sure.

[riptowtan]

The JFK assassination was clearly a conspiracy. There are a lot of documentaries and sites that claim to "debunk" it, but that doesn't mean they've actually done so. Read Assassination science, and then read a "debunking" book of choice. The JFK debunkers try to debunk the JFK movie, not realizing that it was just a movie, and that the experts on the matter even disagree with it. (David Mantik, Jim Fetzer). I'm still not sure what exactly happened on 9/11 but I am skeptical of the government's claims. NIST works for the government, and Popular Mechanics had a confirmation bias going into their investigation. They haven't debunked every claim, just selected ones, built a straw man and knocked it down. The moon hoax conspiracy and Holocaust denial have been thoroughly refuted in my opinion. It seems like everyone on this site insists that government conspiracies cannot exist, and works off of that to conduct their research. For those who regard 9/11 conspiracies are utterly ridiculous, I suggest you look into the JFK case with an open mind. True skeptics question even the "skeptics" on the topic and see whether their claims hold up to the believers.

[Alt+F4]

The JFK assassination was clearly a conspiracy. There are a lot of documentaries and sites that claim to "debunk" it, but that doesn't mean they've actually done so. Read Assassination science, and then read a "debunking" book of choice. The JFK debunkers try to debunk the JFK movie, not realizing that it was just a movie, and that the experts on the matter even disagree with it. (David Mantik, Jim Fetzer). I'm still not sure what exactly happened on 9/11 but I am skeptical of the government's claims. NIST works for the government, and Popular Mechanics had a confirmation bias going into their investigation. They haven't debunked every claim, just selected ones, built a straw man and knocked it down. The moon hoax conspiracy and Holocaust denial have been thoroughly refuted in my opinion. It seems like everyone on this site insists that government conspiracies cannot exist, and works off of that to conduct their research. For those who regard 9/11 conspiracies are utterly ridiculous, I suggest you look into the JFK case with an open mind. True skeptics question even the "skeptics" on the topic and see whether their claims hold up to the believers.

Hey 08lightning, this guy is your buddy, right?

[Arus808]

please there is no conspiracy on the JFK assassination. the debunking sites have proven that EACH claim by idiot consipiracists are nothing more than their GROSS misunderstanding and ignorance

[riptowtan]

http://www.assassinationresearch.com

This site has tons of information on the case if anyone here wants to know what really happened. The debunking sites pick and choose the parts the conspiracy theorists got wrong, and leave out all the good evidence. The argument from addition and subtraction, in Assassination Science, makes it clear that there were at least 5 bullets recovered at the crime scene. More than 3 shots means at least 3 shooters from 3 different directions.

[SpitfireIX]

http://www.assassinationresearch.com

This site has tons of information on the case if anyone here wants to know what really happened. The debunking sites pick and choose the parts the conspiracy theorists got wrong, and leave out all the good evidence.

Garbage. There is no "good" evidence, merely misinformation.

The argument from addition and subtraction, in Assassination Science, makes it clear that there were at least 5 bullets recovered at the crime scene. More than 3 shots means at least 3 shooters from 3 different directions.


Fetzer's "argument (http://books.google.com/books?id=2r74lnKPIKwC&pg=PA352&lpg=PA352&dq=%22argument+from+addition+and+subtraction%22+as sassination+science&source=bl&ots=Ot0yQR9K2j&sig=d9lEFV3sXM3ZbCzmXeo-BmhtMiI&hl=en&ei=VAhcSpDhAYSI8gTOsb3TDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1)":

1 & 2. One fragment (the nose) weighed 41.5 grains, and the other (the base) weighed 20.6 grains. The original bullet weighed approximately 161 grains. (1) http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/firearms_hsca.htm

3. Could have been caused by 1 or 2, or another large fragment of the third shot. (1)

4. The detective in question testified that it wasn't a bullet, and the pictures in question don't show anything that bears more than a vague resemblance to a bullet. (1) http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/slug.htm

5. Which shot caused Tague's minor wound has never been established with complete certainty, but it was most likely the first shot, which missed. (2)

6. Was actually for two small fragments (2) http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/autopsy3.txt

7. The Single Bullet (3)

8. Total weight less than 1 grain; the Single Bullet was missing 1-2 grains of lead (3) http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/firearms_hsca.htm

3 <> 8

Fail.

[Malkuth]

religionistical

Never fails to amaze me the lengths some folks here will go to in order to sound inte-muh-lectual, they even totally make up really long, important sounding, nonsensical words.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Religionistical

Word not found in the Dictionary and Encyclopedia.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religionistical

No results found for religionistical

Not having a go at you specifically, Caustic, but I've seen more than a few examples of this here and elsewhere.

Unfortunately i feel if i dont help this person, then no one will/can. Having done my best to provide rational argument and evidence (through email correspondence), This person seems outright unwilling to accept it.

Help wanted: I'd like to understand more of the medical/psychological perpective regarding CT belief, as it doesnt seem evidence alone is persuasive enough for this person.

The whole idea of treating a tendency to take seriously some elements of conspiracy theory as a form of mental illness is abhorrent and reprehensible. When you really look at all the arguments for alternate theories of historical and modern events, there really is more than enough to convince the rational person that not everything in the world is the way the history books and nightly news programs would have us Believe it is, and that's what the majority of most people's idea of what the world is like really is, a belief system instilled within them based on what they are told by authory figures since infancy. We KNOW there are lies in some history books, we KNOW that mass media only reports facts with the ideological slant of it's owners. We know these things now, but somehow we don't realise that the same thing applied to when we and our parents were children.

The only way most people have to confirm what they are taught in school or what they hear on the news is to refer to another information source like it, all of which are owned and controlled by the very same small group of people that many conspiracy theories point to as being the ones who promulgate the majority of large scale disinformation.

Regarding the 911 ct's evidence specifically, isn't it interesting that the only supposed 'official' evidence of events that day taken seriously is that produced by the very same people and agencies most ct's point the finger at as being at least partially responsible? That in itself is not proof, of course, but it is suggestive of the degree to which the majority of people will accede their opinions to authoritarian proclamation, simply because few of us have the resources or expertise to really investigate these things ourselves.

I know most people here won't agree with my point of view, some will even scoff and make rude, derailing jests. I don't make any wild claims about actual knowledge of the "troof" of that event, but I'm quite certain that the public in general has little notion of the truth of it. I'm quite certain that much of what most people think of as 'truther ideas' do not match the things most people who doubt the accuracy of certain elements of recorded history believe.

Most of the things anti-ct'ers say about ct's and those who take some of them seriously is overblown rhetoric purposely designed to ridicule. Many of the most vocal and vicious anti-ct'ers here and elsewhere are active members of groups that are pointed to by ct'ers as being "in on it".

Listen to them long enough and you too will almost magically lose any interest whatsoever in actually researching conspiracy theory or alternate history.

I was once a Believer in the popularly taught versions of historical and modern events, and I'll tell you how I came to doubt my once firmly held and fondly cherished Belief in "The Way It Is" by recounting the similar experience of one of my closest friends.

He was a staunch anti-ct'er, convinced that his world view was correct as supported by a good education and the fact that almost everyone around him agreed with his point of view. A mutual aquaintance persuaded him to watch some documentary films and read some books not found in your average school library or shown in high school history class, and ever since he has come to realise that there is more to world events both ancient and modern than most people know.

So, speaking as a person who once was in your position and now occupies somewhat of the reverse, I would suggest that you propose to your friend that he compile a list of the most compelling evidence he has found to backup his ideas, and that you actually attempt to study it instead of simply refute it. I would suggest that you take some time to research whatever he puts on his list, watch some videos he might suggest, read some books and make an effort to understand how he came to his conclusions. I suggest you will probably find that both you and he are somewhat misinformed on a number of things.

Look into it enough, you may just find yourself coming to agree with some parts of his point of view, as several new friends of mine have done in recent years after doing what I just suggested.

I think it's great that you want to help your friend to come to greater understanding of the world around him, but don't try to convert him or force him into consensus reality "rightthink" like many here would have you do. Go at him with the usual furious barrage of popularly accepted debunking "facts" and accusations of a form of mental illness and all you will do is alienate a friend.

The famous and enigmatic "They" would like nothing better than for you to stop communicating and exchanging ideas with those whom you disagree with over petty things, all the better to divide and conquer us all.

[LightinDarkness]

OP: Please note Malkuth is one of the more fantastical CTs on this site, and his distaste for reason, logic, and critical thinking is what you are likely to experience if you try to talk sense into your friend. I don't even know what hes saying because hes on my ignore list, but the CT responses are so typical I can respond without even having to remove him from ignore.

Conspiracy theorists adopt their mindset because they fail to grasp the complicated realities of the world. It is much harder to understand the world as it really is compared to simplifying it into a easy to understand world where everything is the result of machinations from evil organizations intent on world domination. Its a classic "rage against the machine" response to reality. Its not about the truth, its about showing how anti-establishment you are.

All of the research in the world will never sway Malkuth, because he has the desperate, almost primal need to Believe and the need to feel special. To Believe that he has a insight on what is "really" going on, to Believe that he has a special insight that the sheeple do not. Its all about possessing the magical, mystical CTer knowledge about how the world "really works." No amount of evidence will ever bring him back to reality, because CTers are not about evidence - if they were, they would never fall for it.

In response to some of the other posts - conspiracy theory thinking is often a sign of paranoid schizophrenia and other mental illness. That doesn't mean all CTs all paranoid schizophrenics, but it is dishonest and deflection to act like there is no connection between the two (which is what CTers usually do).

[Malkuth]

Heh, I told you there'd be people who'd be insulting and try to derail. Light is one of those "in the club" dudes who have a vested interest in shooting down any interest you might have in researching these things for yourself and keeping people chained into the status quo. He'd likely cream in his pants if you just said "yeh you're right" and promised not to take any interest in these matters in the future.

Do yourself a favor and don't just throw the whole topic in the woo basket just because a few people on here poke fun at it and try to make you think anyone who takes it seriously is crazy. Show your friend that you really are his friend and at least try to understand where he's coming from. You'll likely find that some of what he thinks is not simply "rage against the machine" blah blah and all the weird overblown stuff that Light et al. use as strawmen.

[LightinDarkness]

Denial: A state of being for CTers.

[Bobert]

08lightning,
Sorry to hear that you have a CT friend.
Best wishes.

[Stacy Head]

Hi there JREFers

I need some help/advice regarding a friend of mine who holds many CT beliefs.

This person has recently been increasingly involved and vocal about the full set of CT's, NWO, 911, JFK etc. (particular emphasis on 911)

Unfortunately i feel if i dont help this person, then no one will/can. Having done my best to provide rational argument and evidence (through email correspondence), This person seems outright unwilling to accept it.

About me: skeptic, rational, logical, IQ in the 98th percentile, communication skills of a stone (hence the needing help part)

Help wanted: I'd like to understand more of the medical/psychological perpective regarding CT belief, as it doesnt seem evidence alone is persuasive enough for this person.

Also appreciate any advice from people with experience in my position or the reverse.

perhaps there's someone even willing to view/guide my future correspondence with this person?

thankyou for reading!

In the medical field, there are a variety of ways to deal with people who will not listen to an opposing position.
1) call 911 and ask for the personnel in white coats on the 6th floor
2) make up new conspiracies to confuse them, "Did you know a voodoo woman in Sedona killed Michael Jackson? She was the same one who staged the terrosist attacks, you remember her.."
3) tell your friend you are going to lunch but must stop by the hospital to see a friend, upon entering scream "my friend just said the fbi is following us and the government tapped our phones" that will lead to a quick shot of Thorazine
4) find a new friend

Always here to help,
Stacy

[riptowtan]

Here are 16 smoking guns that support a conspiracy regarding JFK. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/lofiversion/index.php/t762.html.

[ufology]

If he's in deep with the "Government did it to itself" conspiracy, then you need to back him out slow. To do this you propose another conspircay theory that may be possible but that is exactly ooposite to the "Evil Government" hypothesis. It goes this way. The government knew from previous attacks on the Trade Center that it was a major target. They also had evidence that their intent was to "topple the tower sideways to cause a Hiroshima like effect". These are facts not theories. So ( here's the conspiracy part ), the CT people in cooperation with the WTC people created a secret backup plan, not to hurt people, but to protect them from the "Hiroshima like effect", by covertly planting demolition explosives at key structural points so that in the event of another attack ( that they knew was coming sooner or later ), if they needed to fall back on a contingency plan, they could bring the buildings down in a controlled fashion and save a lot of destruction. Naturally the plan would need to be secret in order to work. It explains the strange workment in the towers over long periods of time and the apparent self-implosion. Naturally the plan would have to remain secret after the attack because the WTC may not be the only building with such a failsafe plan.

I'm not saying the above is true, but it can make an anti-government conspiracy theorist think ... it is just as plausible and it doesn't make our own people look like the bad guys. In reality, anti-government conspiracy theorist don't want our government to be the bad guys. IF you give them a graceful out, they'll often take it.

Then you go on to explain that the anti-government propoganda is actually funded by the Islamo-facists that claimed responsibility for the attack ( and their rich sympathizers ). Once you have him seeing that it wasn't our own Government that pulled off the attack, and have shown him who the real bad guys are, then you can work on getting him to accept that the theory I outlined to you is just a theory. There is no proof. Then conceed a little ( allow him to save some face ) by admitting that there are some striking resemblances to controlled demolitions ( which there are ), but that if there was any "conspiracy" on our part there, it was to save lives, not destroy them.

This may get him turned around ... at least looking at it from a perspective that is different and that we are still the good guys ( well sort of ) ... that gets murky to when you start watching guys like Chomsky.

j.r.

[little grey rabbit]

Hi there JREFers

I need some help/advice regarding a friend of mine who holds many CT beliefs.

This person has recently been increasingly involved and vocal about the full set of CT's, NWO, 911, JFK etc. (particular emphasis on 911)

Unfortunately i feel if i dont help this person, then no one will/can. Having done my best to provide rational argument and evidence (through email correspondence), This person seems outright unwilling to accept it.

About me: skeptic, rational, logical, IQ in the 98th percentile, communication skills of a stone (hence the needing help part)

Help wanted: I'd like to understand more of the medical/psychological perpective regarding CT belief, as it doesnt seem evidence alone is persuasive enough for this person.

Also appreciate any advice from people with experience in my position or the reverse.

perhaps there's someone even willing to view/guide my future correspondence with this person?

trying not to discuss details in public if possible, all emails welcome at 08lightning@live.co.uk (thats zero, eight btw)

thankyou for reading!

Hi, my IQ is in the 99th percentile of the British and American populations (I refuse to entertain the possibility that there are 3.5 million poms and yanks who are more intelligent than me) and the question that springs to my mind is why is it so disturbing to you that your friend holds different views from you?

Perhaps if you were in the 99th percentile you would have learnt to be more tolerant of others.

[Travis]

In my experience it is bad form to talk about how supposedly intelligent one is in any debate.

[Mashuna]

In my experience it is bad form to talk about how supposedly intelligent one is in any debate.

Or in this case, really funny.

[BobHaulk]

http://www.assassinationresearch.com

This site has tons of information on the case if anyone here wants to know what really happened. The debunking sites pick and choose the parts the conspiracy theorists got wrong, and leave out all the good evidence. The argument from addition and subtraction, in Assassination Science, makes it clear that there were at least 5 bullets recovered at the crime scene. More than 3 shots means at least 3 shooters from 3 different directions.

the real truth about jfk is that oswald, the driver, jackie and zapruder all had a shot at him, each of them unaware of the other. Or maybe it was Oliver Stone preparing the way for a future film which would net him 10's of millions of dollars. Where was Stone on that day? i can't say for certain but it looks mighty strange when you consider that he had a tardis made for him by the BBC and can travel back in time any time he wants. There is also the possibility that it wasn't kennedy in the car and it was really Jack Nicholas the golfer. That may explain his suddenly loss of form in the 1964 usa open allowing Tiger Woods to win his third major in a row even though he had a black eye sustained in his famous world heavy weight boxing triumph over Casius Clay, a man who can't explain his whereabouts on that day either. However i don't think Clay was responsible because, as everybody knows, he has no hands and his boxing gloves are permanently attached to the ends of his arms like cartoon head from british drug dealing comedy tv show Ideal and would struggle to hold the gun and fire the 3 shots in the 8 seconds. I'm sure mythbusters tried firing the gun wearing boxing gloves just to see and couldn't hit a barn door from 10 paces.
You're right when you look at the evidence it all gets a bit murky.

[jargon buster]

all the shooters were just a cover for Joe de Maggio to hit a baseball from the grassy knoll and smash Kennedy's head wide open for shagging his ex-misses Marylyn.

[Johny2x4]

But what about the CTs who say they don´t want to be "special" and are merely trying to "spread the word"?

[Dave Rogers]

In reality, anti-government conspiracy theorist don't want our government to be the bad guys. IF you give them a graceful out, they'll often take it.

I think that assessment is utterly wrong. If conspiracy theorists honestly didn't want to believe the government were the bad guys, they'd be able to look at the evidence that shows beyond reasonable doubt that they aren't, when they aren't. The problem, often, is that coinspiracy theorists have a black-and-white view of morality, in which every organisation is either good or evil, only the evil ones do evil things, and the evil ones do only evil things. It then only takes one evil act to peg the moral compass with respect to an organisation, and by implication all the enemies of that organisation are seen to be good. In the case of 9/11, for example, a lot of truthers simply cannot conceive of a US government that could invade Iraq on the basis of untrustworthy and incorrect intelligence, and yet not be responsible for 9/11; so, having concluded from the first piece of information that the US government is evil, they then conclude that the enemies of the US are good, and so cannot have carried out the 9/11 attacks. And so on for all the major conspiracy theories. They start from a conclusion, and reason backwards. Until their proponents can reach the level of understanding that allows them to appreciate that actions, not actors, are the proper subject of moral judgement, they'll never change the conclusion.

Dave

[Grassy Knowlington]

Hi, my IQ is in the 99th percentile of the British and American populations (I refuse to entertain the possibility that there are 3.5 million poms and yanks who are more intelligent than me) and the question that springs to my mind is why is it so disturbing to you that your friend holds different views from you?

Perhaps if you were in the 99th percentile you would have learnt to be more tolerant of others.

In all my 50+ years of experience I have never known intelligence to equate with tolerance (or morality). But, heigh-ho, I'm not 99th percentile material so what do I know?

[Sceptic-PK]

Hi, my IQ is in the 99th percentile of the British and American populations (I refuse to entertain the possibility that there are 3.5 million poms and yanks who are more intelligent than me) and the question that springs to my mind is why is it so disturbing to you that your friend holds different views from you?

Perhaps if you were in the 99th percentile you would have learnt to be more tolerant of others.

Evidence that it's not enough to have a lot of horsepower, you also need to know how to use it.

[uk_dave]

But, heigh-ho, I'm not 99th percentile material so what do I know?

A ******** more than LGR I'll wager.

[Alferd_Packer]

Hi, my IQ is in the 99th percentile of the British and American populations

Ha!

I'm 100th!!!!!

I'm the smartest man in the world.

[carlitos]

101st.

[Hans]

I think he did the math wrong I believe he means "1%"