Where would the truth movement be without debunkers?

[alexi_drago]

All through the movements history there have been all sorts of crazy claims, some so crazy that even the truth movement itself has managed to debunk them although with the risk that individuals could be excluded from whatever group they belong for speaking out against the craziness this hasn't happened often.
It would appear that it's sites such as this that are guiding the truth movement and filtering out the nonsense they come up with by proving/disproving what can leaving behind the sludge that either can't be proven one way or the other or is just beyond their willingness or ability to comprehend.
Without this filtering what sort of state would the truth movement be in?

[twinstead]

We may indeed be the Yang to the truther's Yin, I'm afraid.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

They wouldn't survive without us.

We're the fly in their ointment! :D

[Thunder]

without active debunkers, 9-11 truth would simply be faced by people just find them too annoying to pay attention to, or simply don't care anymore.

[T.A.M.]

If you want to find out what happens to the truthers without debunkers, turn off the computer, and go out into the world and search for them...you'll see what I mean.

While you are out there pick up some hen's teeth, and a haystack needle.

TAM:)

[Northern_warrior]

without active debunkers, 9-11 truth would simply be faced by people just find them too annoying to pay attention to, or simply don't care anymore.
I agree ...god bless you people

[cornsail]

When I originally looked into truther claims all I needed was 20 minutes on wikipedia to determine that they were ********. Bin Laden's video was not faked by any reasonable judgment and other claims were obvious outright lies. So debunkers are not really necessary in my opinion, but they still do more good than harm.

As for debunkers helping filter out the nonsense, I'm not sure I see too much of that. There are still no-planers, no pentagon planers, etc. Generally each group hates each other and consider the others "disinfo". If anything debunkers have made truthers more hateful, paranoid and divided which hurts their credibility.

[Brainster]

The hoopla over the Chandler, Arizona 9-11 Conference in February 2007 being hosted by a Holocaust Denier pretty effectively ended these big conventions that the Troofers were putting on pretty regularly until then. I don't think they've had another gathering along those lines in the USA since. Indeed, the Blunder Down Under is the first real effort in awhile.

And I have no doubt that my highlighting Nico Haupt's points about the cult infiltration of NY 9-11 Truth (by Urantia and Lyndon LaRouche disciples) helped cause the crackup of the NY Truther group into the Les Jamieson and Luke Rudkowski factions.

[Brainache]

If you want to find out what happens to the truthers without debunkers, turn off the computer, and go out into the world and search for them...you'll see what I mean.

While you are out there pick up some hen's teeth, and a haystack needle.

TAM:)

Don't forget the rocking-horse poo!

[Brainache]

The hoopla over the Chandler, Arizona 9-11 Conference in February 2007 being hosted by a Holocaust Denier pretty effectively ended these big conventions that the Troofers were putting on pretty regularly until then. I don't think they've had another gathering along those lines in the USA since. Indeed, the Blunder Down Under is the first real effort in awhile.

And I have no doubt that my highlighting Nico Haupt's points about the cult infiltration of NY 9-11 Truth (by Urantia and Lyndon LaRouche disciples) helped cause the crackup of the NY Truther group into the Les Jamieson and Luke Rudkowski factions.

Screw Loose Change has made its fair share of converts away from the Truth Sheep flock.

[Dave Rogers]

It would appear that it's sites such as this that are guiding the truth movement and filtering out the nonsense they come up with by proving/disproving what can leaving behind the sludge that either can't be proven one way or the other or is just beyond their willingness or ability to comprehend.
Without this filtering what sort of state would the truth movement be in?

I'm not convinced that any such filtering is in fact taking place. I'm not aware of any theory, no matter how outlandish or downright stupid, that has actually been entirely abandoned by the truth movement. We know that conapiracy theorists' thought processes are ill-suited to filtering out bad theories themselves; I think the same though processes make them immune to filtering by others, because they are simply incapable of accepting the rational arguments by which these theories are shown to be absurd. What I think is more important is the role debunkers play in filtering out their absurdities from what is transmitted to others. In Briatin, probably the strongest view of the 9/11 truth movement in the general population has been formed by the Conspiracy Files documentaries, and after filtering the message boils down to "A bunch of nutters think the US government carried out 9/11, but they're wrong about everything".

I think debunker sites are responsible for both the impotence and the survival of the truth movement. Impotence, because they provide the sources for anyone with a serious interest and an open mind to find out the truth, rather than the carefully selected half-truths the truth movement prefers; and survival, because arguing with debunkers is now the only real motivation for the remaining rump of the movement.

Dave

[MikeW]

I'm not convinced that any such filtering is in fact taking place.
Agreed. In my experience most truthers are unable or unwilling to admit to any significant errors, & this is even less likely if it's a point brought up by a "debunker".

If there is any filtering then it becomes a longer term thing, I think, so for instance we don't hear much about hijackers "still alive" or "not on the manifest" any more. They're not actually admitted as bogus, but truthers know what the counter arguments are, know they can't address them and so generally don't bring up the topics now. I expect the hope is they'll be able to fade away without the truthers ever having to admit they were wrong.

[Travis]

Yet we continue to see new Truthers constantly bringing us new ideas and "evidence" as if seeking some sort of strange approval from us. I think they do earnestly want us on their side even if they'd never admit it.

[T.A.M.]

What new truthers? 95% of new JREF truthers are HI or PDoh sock puppets

TAM:)

[Scott Sommers]

I haven't found quoting JREF arguments to be very effective against real sheep. I have found a lot of stuff here that's useful with the "there's so much noise, I figured there had to be something to it" crowd. They seem very shocked when I show them videos of Dylan slagging victims of firemen or the no-planer sites. I am not entirely convinced that this group wouldn't have come to their senses without me.

[TheBigKahuna]

I haven't found quoting JREF arguments to be very effective against real sheep. I have found a lot of stuff here that's useful with the "there's so much noise, I figured there had to be something to it" crowd. They seem very shocked when I show them videos of Dylan slagging victims of firemen or the no-planer sites. I am not entirely convinced that this group wouldn't have come to their senses without me.

Yeah, but they are thankful for you speeding up the process even they don't say it. As for the die hards, it's just too much fun to yank their chains.

[Drudgewire]

Don't forget the rocking-horse poo!


Unicorn poop makes better giant beanstalk fertilizer. http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/eng101.gif

[TheDaver]

I think the Truth movement is mostly self-destructive and self-defeating. If it wasn’t for debunkers, the Truth movement might be a little bigger, a lot nuttier and still have absolutely zero accomplishments to its name.

[Howie Felterbush]

A guy I work with is prone to believing 9/11 theories. The other day I had a talk with him about some of his ideas (the insurance thing, "controlled demolition" etc.) and I think I got him sorted out. But, afterward I said something along the lines of "Don't worry, you're not really crazy until you start seeing reptilians!"

You guessed it, he hit YouTube and now he's on about reptilians. I'm not sure if he really believes, but he's not ready to state with 100% certainty that they don't exist.

Did I do a bad thing here? Replacing a truther with a reptilian guy? Did I actually hurt our cause?

[McHrozni]

I think the Truth movement is mostly self-destructive and self-defeating. If it wasn’t for debunkers, the Truth movement might be a little bigger, a lot nuttier and still have absolutely zero accomplishments to its name.

I must say I disagree on some counts. Assuming the twoof wouldn't get any significant opposition, they likely woulnd't develop the most nutty theories simply because they wouldn't have to. Their slightly less nutty ideas of bombs in the buildings would do the trick for most of them.

I do agree the movment would be bigger, probably notably so however, and that their accomplishments would be approximately zero - perhaps with slightly more media coverage, perhaps not even that.

McHrozni

[Howie Felterbush]

By the way, I'd like to thank Gravy for his 9/11 debunking site. (Now I need a reptilian debunking site.)

[Dave Rogers]

Did I do a bad thing here? Replacing a truther with a reptilian guy? Did I actually hurt our cause?

Point him to http://www.fmotl.com/ if he's bugging you. By the time he's served a few months for contempt of court he may be a little more reasonable.

Dave

[Oliver]

I think the Truth movement is mostly self-destructive and self-defeating. If it wasn’t for debunkers, the Truth movement might be a little bigger, a lot nuttier and still have absolutely zero accomplishments to its name.


I'm a little bit more skeptical about that. Without the debunkers work, the Woo might have gotten out of control, maybe in an even worse way than the Kennedy assassinations did concerning the believe that some "Molochs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moloch)" were involved. :boxedin:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination

This conclusion was initially met with support among the American public, but polls conducted from 1966 show as many as 80% of the American public hold beliefs contrary to these findings.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination#cite_note-0)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination#cite_note-1)

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I think the Truthers should atleast learn from our good old pal, Private SNAFU:

lVrqde5gdaI&feature=related

[Jono]

I've always wondered about one thing in particular; why do "movements" (and denominations there-of) like so appear as quickly and often as they do in the US?

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I've always wondered about one thing in particular; why do "movements" (and denominations there-of) like so appear as quickly and often as they do in the US?

Because there's no law that governs against hatred, except racial hatred!

[Jono]

Because there's no law that governs against hatred, except racial hatred!

Dont think there's one in Sweden on racial hatred. Actually there is a law regulating, what is called, "hateful enticement against a folk-group", roughly translated. In practice it means that people can say what they want but if they go "too" public or "too" far with it, they might get fined. It's often an issue where to draw the lines between hate, criticism and persistent prejudices.

Anyway, beyond racial issues, while there are conspiracy theorists all around the globe, it does seem there's a tendency in the US for those to turn into Movements et al.

If I had to guess, from my experience on american forums (which wouldn't be a notably encompassive platform, not necessarily), a lot of american people have a higher degree of suspicion and anti-government sentiments making them more ready to believe their government to be capable of basically anything. And in a culture that has the largest commercialism in the world, I guess starting a commercial branch together with others based on controversy comes easier?

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Dont think there's one in Sweden on racial hatred. Actually there is a law regulating, what is called, "hateful enticement against a folk-group", roughly translated. In practice it means that people can say what they want but if they go "too" public or "too" far with it, they might get fined. It's often an issue where to draw the lines between hate, criticism and persistent prejudices.

Anyway, beyond racial issues, while there are conspiracy theorists all around the globe, it does seem there's a tendency in the US for those to turn into Movements et al.

If I had to guess, from my experience on american forums (which wouldn't be a notably encompassive platform, not necessarily), a lot of american people have a higher degree of suspicion and anti-government sentiments making them more ready to believe their government to be capable of basically anything. And in a culture that has the largest commercialism in the world, I guess starting a commercial branch together with others based on controversy comes easier?

Well ever since JFK got assassinated alot of rumors still circulate. Truthers picked up that & added it to their theories. Truthers do have alot of movements, not nessesarily about 9/11, but other conspiracies as well.

[Jono]

Well ever since JFK got assassinated alot of rumors still circulate. Truthers picked up that & added it to their theories. Truthers do have alot of movements, not nessesarily about 9/11, but other conspiracies as well.

Yes all sorts of conspiratorial waters are scooped up, it's a bit similar to a person collecting different stamps, only for the CT'er it's having a large enough collection of different theories. Having seen people like Alex Jones and his ilk, I'm almost forced to consider these are people with addictive personalities and somewhat compulsary disorders where there literaly is a conspiracy round every corner.