Yes, we should focus on the facts and that is why I still like this forum but then again just because the facts of an event that happened seem to support any theory doesn't mean that is what happened all the time. Sometimes people are very selective about what they record. Governments and news people also.
Hey Gary, whether you call someone
conspiracy theorist or
conspiranoid they can both be accurate descriptions of individuals in no derogatory or condescending sense. But it's just like with the word
negro, from the beginning it was an accepted word, but eventually became so emotionally loaded from verbal misuse that it was deemed offensive. It was used as a derogatory term and was perceived as such. But still it may only refer to what is today known as a
black person. The emotional aspects can be very subjective depending on the one delivering it, and the one receiving it.
Now I don't understand why you rather want to be called a
conspiranoid, because the word really emphasize the strong emotional bias by the individual sharing such mindset. Let me explain.
First of all, the word
theory can have different meanings. In a scientific sense it means a strong hypothesis backed up by evidence. But the more common use refers to
theory as in
speculation, ie. hypotheses made without required evidence.
- If we assume the first definition, conspiracy theorist means someone who deals with constructing conspiracies based on proper methods and accurate information. Because conspiracies do happen, and some people do conspire.
- If we assume the second definition however, conspiracy theorist means someone who doesn't really care about strong evidence. They rather rely on "what if" notions, but the reasons why such notions exist doesn't really tell in this case.
- Conspiranoid explains to us that the very reason this person believes there is a conspiracy is because this person is paranoid. Paranoid means extreme irrational distrust of others, often government or secret societies.
And now we are venturing into psychological disorders.
But it's really easy to understand why paranoid people often think in terms of conspiracies. They start out from the irrational distrust, and selectively pick and choose whatever information they can find as long as it sustains the sense of being in control, even if it means accepting living under a conspiracy. Because fear is tied to our survival instinct, and a perceived threat often require an increased sense of control to decrease anxiety. Conspiranoids cannot allow themselves to stop distrusting, because in the conspiranoid mindset you treat everything with suspicion. Sometimes even the things that supports their accepted notion. What if this information I accept is just all part of
their game from the very beginning? Conspiranoids perceive it a great risk to abandon the ideas that gives them a sense of control, because what it they were right?
Conspiranoids think like this: Government is evil, therefore "chemtrails" must exist. And then they start to stitch together pieces of information that creates what is known as a
clustering illusion where random (or unrelated) samples of information gives the illusion of coherency. As long as you never scrutinize things in details (which believers in "chemtrails" almost never do) they will live under the illusion that there is a conspiracy going on. This increases fear and anxiety, which requires more sense of control, and the more they dwell the more they convince themselves. And so on. Emotional feedback loop for you.
If we go back to the first definition of
conspiracy theorist, with that definition we would rather get something like this: Do we have information that supports that government is doing "chemtrail" programs? No. This means government is not evil, at least not when it comes to things such as this. The reason why you seldom see these type of conspiracy theorist is that most of them quickly realize how ridiculous many conspiracy theories are.
But if you belong to the other two definitions, and for whatever reason accept vague claims such as that the
Space Preservation Act document is evidence for "chemtrails", or that
Monsanto invented aluminium resistant seeds because they are in on the "chemtrail" conspiracy, then of course you will find it easier to accept "chemtrails" as a real conspiracy.
In the end, it all comes to your sceptical ability and your intellectual assets. The more you know and the better you are at logic the easier you will spot bad claims. It's that simple.