How Doing Research can Lead Both In and Out of the Rabbit Hole

Jason

Senior Member
One odd thing about CTers is that they spout "facts" which are wrong, like: "Huge difference between contrails and chemtrails". They are just SURE they have research on their side. It's sort of an automatic insult to tell them their "facts" are wrong. No way around that.
I'm going to be completely honest with you folks for a second and I'm opening up here so please go easy on me. A few years back I was one of the CTer's that you guys all speak so highly of, as if our intelligence and social skills are retarded making us incapable of change or understanding the facts at hand. That isn't the case, and I'm a prime example of this.

My story started 3yrs ago when my oldest daughter came home from school one day asking me questions about the end of the world, and whether or not any of it was true. So naturally like any father would do, I told her it was ridiculous and to pay no mind to any of that scare mongering. Well it turns out her friends were into this stuff, now mind you she was 15 at the time and in high school. A few days later she would ask me about Nibiru or planet x, and that was followed by the Mayan bs. It seemed like every time she came home from school she brought home a new world ending story. So like any good father I decided to go on the net to research this crap so that I could come back to Trish with solid and conclusive evidence for the contrary.

Well thats where the story of my run in with CTers starts. To my ignorance, I've never researched using the internet before unless I was looking up something to buy, or to watch videos my wife probably wouldn't want me watch. So I had no idea about the predators out there who were spewing this garbage.

I began to research Nibiru, Planet X, UFO's, ancient aliens, and the Mayan calendar, and instead of walking away with a wealth of knowledge to discuss with my daughter, I spent the entire night up biting my finger nails, smoking cigarettes in utter despair. I was freaked out to say the least. Now mind you, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I'm by no means the dullest tool. But I was duped. I made the mistake of watching youtube videos of Nibiru and Planet x, I saw Nibiru pass by the Antarctic Science lab, and I was a full blown believer. In conjunction with watching the Ancient Aliens special on the H2 channel, my life was full of all this garbage. I obviously was lying to my daughter by telling her it was all nonsense and there was nothing to worry about, but the whole time I'm full of anxiety and thinking about my kids and wife dying at the end of 2012.

I really believed in all of this crap, but the whole time I believed I was also a closet believer. Meaning no one in my life, friends or family knew I was going through this. I guess somewhere inside of me was telling me it was utter horse shit, otherwise I wouldn't have been embarrassed to discuss this. Finally, I had enough, and this was a good 6 months later probably. I started typing the word "debunk" in front of all the things was worried about. Which brought me to several forums. Some that spewed the nonsense, and others that debunked it. Initially, I was one of those hard heads trying to gather the facts and not listening to reason while doing so. I had scientist from NASA'a "ask a scientist" page, Bill Hudson, and others helping me through my struggles, and suddenly a light turned on inside my head, and I started helping others with similar issues and it was dignifying.

So I wouldn't give up on all CTer's out there, at least the ones who don't profit from it. There are plenty of open minded individuals waiting to learn the truth. I'm a walking example of it. So take it easy on the CTer's and realize not all of them are closed minded and willfully stupid. Its affected even the most intelligent of people, so keep that in mind all.
 

Jason

Senior Member
This is a key point. It takes time, and it take understanding of what the person is thinking (and feeling). And if you can't understand it, then just be polite and respectful.
I couldn't agree more. When I was going through my struggles it was often guys like Bill Hudson [of 2012hoax.org], who were gentle, non confrontational, and had the ability to listen subjectively that got through to me. Time and time again I watched people in front of my very eyes change their attitude and beliefs toward CT's. The approach is key and respecting others beliefs regardless of how silly or insignificant they might seem is vital. And good old persistance, you can't give up on someone because honestly they come to these sites because they want believe differently in most cases. They just need a shove in the right direction.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

deirdre

Senior Member.
I began to research Nibiru, Planet X, UFO's, ancient aliens, and the Mayan calendar, and instead of walking away with a wealth of knowledge to discuss with my daughter, I spent the entire night up biting my finger nails, smoking cigaretts in utter despair.
I'm not commenting here on your experience directly, but it brings up a (psychological) point.

I think it's pretty well documented, the phenomenon of fear being contagious. From an evolutionary standpoint it makes total sense.

I've had two experiences.. now I do NOT believe in ghosts at all. in fact because ghosts are 'fun' I am aware of all the debunk stuff. But twice (once a dilapidated old house, and once in my own house ), I got a 'bit' freaked out because my friends were completely freaked. The whole time I was telling them about imagination and rational explanations, and as I started to 'feel' 'scared' I'm telling myself 'what the hell'. : )

so fear being contagious really is a real thing even if you have all the facts and believe them. In fact my friends do believe the facts of what 'causes' ghosts too, but they still are always going to believe ghosts exists. I don't even try to change their minds about it, I just talk them through it situationally.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
This is a key point. It takes time, and it take understanding of what the person is thinking (and feeling). And if you can't understand it, then just be polite and respectful.

Well, two things:

1)I'm not sure it's necessary to 'understand' why they think or feel what they think or feel.

2) Many times I DO understand that, but what difference does that make?

Either way, if you tell them they are wrong, you are already being somewhat impolite and disrespectful. That is not to say there is not a difference in HOW you tell them they are wrong, but for the most part they automatically consider it an "attack" even when you politely point out an error or falsehood in their thinking.
 

Jason

Senior Member
Either way, if you tell them they are wrong, you are already being somewhat impolite and disrespectful. That is not to say there is not a difference in HOW you tell them they are wrong, but for the most part they automatically consider it an "attack" even when you politely point out an error or falsehood in their thinking.
It's not so much they consider it an attack rather its OMG everything you're telling me goes against everything I believe to be so. When people question your beliefs, or point to facts that your beliefs are wrong, most automatically go on the defensive. You also have to keep in mind that these "people" aren't the greatest at deciphering "facts" from "fiction", since their beliefs stem from missinformed "facts" that they believe to be true. If someone really believes in their facts, its hard to unravel those beliefs and thats what takes time. For me it took a good 6 months, and still to this day I question things or I find myself at the edge of the rabbit hole. Maybe certain personalities are more susceptable to believing in fiction, or maybe they didn't learn the right way to approach CT's. Who knows, no one does because it affects all walks of life. But patience and persistance is the key to helping many people who believe in this stuff. I also often wonder if proponents of these CT's actually believe in the CT's they are spewing to the public, or if they enjoy scaremongering or using the internet as a popularity contest or for revenue. No one truly knows who someone is by the words they type on the screen....
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Well, two things:

1)I'm not sure it's necessary to 'understand' why they think or feel what they think or feel.

2) Many times I DO understand that, but what difference does that make?

Either way, if you tell them they are wrong, you are already being somewhat impolite and disrespectful. That is not to say there is not a difference in HOW you tell them they are wrong, but for the most part they automatically consider it an "attack" even when you politely point out an error or falsehood in their thinking.

It's not understanding WHY they feel, it's WHAT they feel.

Like if someone feels suspicious or fearful of you, then that should change the way you interact with them. You need to get around that fear before you can communicate. I've had people be scared of talking to me because they think I'm a government agent, and they think they are putting their family in danger if they start arguing with government agents. In that case it becomes important to reduce that fear and suspicion.

and regarding pointing out their errors - if you can tell they are feeling irrationally confident in their abilities, then it's best not to point out their error, but politely move towards a shared understanding with a bit of light (fact based) socratic dialog - asking them questions to flesh out exactly where the base misunderstanding is.

Figure out where they are standing, and attempt to establish common ground.
 

Jason

Senior Member
I'm not commenting here on your experience directly, but it brings up a 9psychological) point.

I think it's pretty well documented, the phenomenon of fear being contagious. From an evolutionary standpoint it makes total sense.

I've had two experiences.. now I do NOT believe in ghosts at all. in fact because ghosts are 'fun' I am aware of all the debunk stuff. But twice (once a dilapidated old house, and once in my own house ), I got a 'bit' freaked out because my friends were completely freaked. The whole time I was telling them about imagination and rational explanations, and as I started to 'feel' 'scared' I'm telling myself 'what the hell'. : )

so fear being contagious really is a real thing even if you have all the facts and believe them. In fact my friends do believe the facts of what 'causes' ghosts too, but they still are always going to believe ghosts exists. I don't even try to change their minds about it, I just talk them through it situationally.
And this brings up a great point I want to make. Is someone a CTer if they believe in ghost or if they believe in aliens? If there isn't a conspiracy involved like government cover up, shouldn't people who believe in ghost or aliens be considered something else...
 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.
And this brings up a great point I want to make. Is some a CTer if they believe in ghost or if they believe in aliens? If there isn't a conspiracy involved like government cover up, shouldn't people who believe in ghost or aliens be considered something else...
yea I don't think ghosts are a conspiracy (or even aliens or angels) but its a common knowledge thing re: fear and belief. so I went with ghosts. ; )
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
There are lots of sources of bunk, or potentially erroneous beliefs. Conspiracy theories, the supernatural, pseudoscience, alternative medicine, UFOs, alternative history, and more. There's no good general term for this.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
It's not understanding WHY they feel, it's WHAT they feel.

Like if someone feels suspicious or fearful of you, then that should change the way you interact with them. You need to get around that fear before you can communicate. I've had people be scared of talking to me because they think I'm a government agent, and they think they are putting their family in danger if they start arguing with government agents. In that case it becomes important to reduce that fear and suspicion.

and regarding pointing out their errors - if you can tell they are feeling irrationally confident in their abilities, then it's best not to point out their error, but politely move towards a shared understanding with a bit of light (fact based) socratic dialog - asking them questions to flesh out exactly where the base misunderstanding is.

Figure out where they are standing, and attempt to establish common ground.

That's quite a bit of analysis to do on random people on the internet before trying to reason with them. I guess I think if you understand WHY somebody is feeling something, that that presupposes you understand WHAT they are feeling. I ask them questions to make clear what they think and why they think it all the time. Many times they just don't answer. I get: "If you can't see it, I can't help you" or "It's not my job to do your research for you"? :rolleyes:

We have all had that experience, I suppose. There is just no reasoning with a lot of CTers, no matter what you do.
 

Jason

Senior Member
We have all had that experience, I suppose. There is just no reasoning with a lot of CTers, no matter what you do.
And its that predisposition you have toward them that probably shines through in your opinions and comments with them when discussing a topic. If you've already made up your mind that there is no reasoning with them. Then your writing style and the way you translate your thoughts onto the page will inevitably come across in a way that might seem insulting or condescending. I've experienced a great deal of participants like that throughout my struggles. It's easy to assume someone's "judgement" based on how they respond to you, and it goes both ways. But why do you suspect someone comes on a forum like this to begin with. Do you suppose they come on here to argue or to learn? If you think they come on here to argue, then your mind is already made up. I prefer to think people come here for help. Not dire help, but help in understanding the facts, or how to interpret the facts. All they know is their side of the story, so in most cases they use that to engage a skeptic or someone that could help them. I believe most people question everything, anyway. I mean its who we are. So naturally the same reasoning that got them into believing a CT, could hopefully get them to unravel the CT.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
And its that predisposition you have toward them that probably shines through in your opinions and comments with them when discussing a topic. If you've already made up your mind that there is no reasoning with them. Then your writing style and the way you translate your thoughts onto the page will inevitably come across in a way that might seem insulting or condescending. I've experienced a great deal of participants like that throughout my struggles. It's easy to assume someone's "judgement" based on how they respond to you, and it goes both ways. But why do you suspect someone comes on a forum like this to begin with. Do you suppose they come on here to argue or to learn? If you think they come on here to argue, then your mind is already made up. I prefer to think people come here for help. Not dire help, but help in understanding the facts, or how to interpret the facts. All they know is their side of the story, so in most cases they use that to engage a skeptic or someone that could help them. I believe most people question everything, anyway. I mean its who we are. So naturally the same reasoning that got them into believing a CT, could hopefully get them to unravel the CT.
except like everything, making broad generalizations (and Ham DID modify by saying "a lot of"/not all) doesn't work. some people come to learn, some people come to argue. some people are just trolls or scammers out to make a buck. some people are just unsure. I don't have a lot of experience with CTs but from what I have observed so far, people like you that actually speak up and text (I think most people like you, or me if I believed something, stay quiet) are the minority.
edit *like you or me, meaning open to discourse and new ideas
 

Jason

Senior Member
except like everything, making broad generalizations (and Ham DID modify by saying "a lot of"/not all) doesn't work. some people come to learn, some people come to argue. some people are just trolls or scammers out to make a buck. some people are just unsure. I don't have a lot of experience with CTs but from what I have observed so far, people like you that actually speak up and text (I think most people like you, or me if I believed something, stay quiet) are the minority.
edit *like you or me, meaning open to discourse and new ideas
Your right D, and just to clarify. I think HAM is great and on point most of the time. I probably shouldn't have used his words as an example, but they were indicative to the point I was trying to make.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
Your right D, and just to clarify. I think HAM is great and on point most of the time. I probably shouldn't have used his words as an example, but they were indicative to the point I was trying to make.
its a good and valid point. theres also differences in the TYPE of conspiracy or bunk people believe in. (as far as approaching friends and family with the 'underlying cause' treatment)
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Amin Note - I've moved the "Out of the Rabbit Hole" forum out of the hole it was in (a sub-forum under MetaDebunking) to make the stories therein more easily findable to the casual browser
 

Jason

Senior Member
Research has its ups and downs. For me it proved to be my downfall in the begining because I didn't know how to research material on the net. I also think computer savy people take this for granted, and assume everyone should know the reliable sites from the not so reliable sites. It's important to keep this in mind when discussing a site with someone looking for clarification because the CT sites often promote the fact that all debunkers do is ridicule without looking at the "evidence". So if someone comes to a debunking forum looking for help and the first thing they are met with is ridicule towards their beliefs or the site they got it from, it just reinforces what they were told by the CTers. Often unreliable sites mask their intentions with graphics, cherry picked quotes and videos from government officials or scientist. You get so entranced in what they are saying, and at the time it all begins to make perfect sense. Now you've officially started your way down the rabbit hole. Once in the hole, the likes of Alex Jones becomes your savior. The man with reason who sees through the veil of lies that's been pulled over our eyes. The "one" who can decipher the world around us. Its sad, it really is but I've seen it happen, experienced it myself, and hear of other's who have experienced the same thing. Maybe not Alex Jones, but some other proponent of CT's who caught their eye and he/she can do no wrong.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
I don't see Metabunk men ridiculing people looking for answers or genuine conversation or info.

Not sure how I feel about this thread being pulled out of context. Now it looks like I'm picking on ya @Jason with my first comments :confused:
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I don't see Metabunk men ridiculing people looking for answers or genuine conversation or info.

Not sure how I feel about this thread being pulled out of context. Now it looks like I'm picking on ya @Jason with my first comments :confused:

"Metabunk Men" :) Seems a tad exclusive. But yes, ridiculing people is greatly frowned upon here. Anything beyond good-natured ribbing (of people who will get the joke) is generally not helpful.

And your first comment was just about how fear can be contagious? Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
 

Jason

Senior Member
I don't see Metabunk men ridiculing people looking for answers or genuine conversation or info
You're not, and it's perfectly within context. Metabunk isn't the norm as you and Mick pointed out. Without question this is the most genuine and polite forum I've ever had the priveledge of being apart of. My opinions weren't directed towards Metabunk, they were directed towards CT sites and forums that promote "bunk"....
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I started typing the word "debunk" in front of all the things was worried about.

This is a really useful thing to do when looking for a more well-rounded discussion of the issues. It's a helpful tip you can give anyone. You don't even have to argue that the "debunked" pages are the right pages - just explain that it's a way of getting a broader view, so they can make a more informed decision.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Is 'debunk' actually a useful word to find critical analysis of claims? ie, is its use as a positive term widespread enough (apart from it's use here obviously), and not just used as a negative insult by people offended that you don't believe them?
'snopes' or 'hoax' is also a good search term.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Is 'debunk' actually a useful word to find critical analysis of claims? ie, is its use as a positive term widespread enough (apart from it's use here obviously), and not just used as a negative insult by people offended that you don't believe them?
'snopes' or 'hoax' is also a good search term.

Yes, I think "debunk" IS a good word. It's very specific, and it's even used by the Conspiracy Theorists themselves. Example:
http://www.infowars.com/was-the-woolwich-attack-a-hoax-debunked/

It's often misunderstood, but I think on balance it's the best word to use.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
I've tried to search with 'explained' sometimes.
Because it's not always straight-up bunk, sometimes it just needs proper contextual explanation.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
I've been surprised lately how often I'm seeing the term 'debunked' in MSM. Maybe it was always there and I just never noticed before.
 

cosmic

Senior Member.
Deja vu!^ ;)

I'd also peeked earlier at Google trends and did a news archive search out of curiosity. Even if MSM usage is increasing (however you want to define MSM), a significant amount of the stories/headlines are incorrectly using the term to push agendas (usually political) or present erroneous fluff and dubious information.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Deja vu!^ ;)

I'd also peeked earlier at Google trends and did a news archive search out of curiosity. Even if MSM usage is increasing (however you want to define MSM), a significant amount of the stories/headlines are incorrectly using the term to push agendas (usually political) or present erroneous fluff and dubious information.

Yes, it's a bit of double edge sword. Like the term "climate change skeptic" being used for climate change deniers. However the intended meaning is still generally clear - and if the pro-bunk side want to use the term, then that mean's it's okay to be a debunker.
 

Jason

Senior Member
[
Is 'debunk' actually a useful word to find critical analysis of claims? ie, is its use as a positive term widespread enough (apart from it's use here obviously), and not just used as a negative insult by people offended that you don't believe them?
'snopes' or 'hoax' is also a good search term.
Pete, the word "debunk" in front of a CT can give you plenty of information. Often sites like this will pop up, 2012hoax.org, or the plethora of other sites. Not too mention the abundance of material there is. The CT's I was mostly involved in dealt with the "end of the world" in 2012. Granted there was a great deal of bunk on the net supporting all of these CT's, but once you typed the word debunk in front of them you would get the opposing view (the right view). Even youtbue has a ton of "debunking videos" for Nibiru, Planet X, sister sun, or twin sun, Mayan Calendar, and there is even a 45 minute video debunking "Ancient Aliens", not to mention an abundance of stuff debunking 9/11 CT's. For a beginner this is a great way to get started. But for someone such as yourself, or Mick and Dee, you guys would want a get your information from the source. Research the information on your own without having to read; "how to debunk" material. So I understand your point of view.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
[

Pete, the word "debunk" in front of a CT can give you plenty of information. Often sites like this will pop up, 2012hoax.org, or the plethora of other sites. Not too mention the abundance of material there is. The CT's I was mostly involved in dealt with the "end of the world" in 2012. Granted there was a great deal of bunk on the net supporting all of these CT's, but once you typed the word debunk in front of them you would get the opposing view (the right view). Even youtbue has a ton of "debunking videos" for Nibiru, Planet X, sister sun, or twin sun, Mayan Calendar, and there is even a 45 minute video debunking "Ancient Aliens", not to mention an abundance of stuff debunking 9/11 CT's. For a beginner this is a great way to get started. But for someone such as yourself, or Mick and Dee, you guys would want a get your information from the source. Research the information on your own without having to read; "how to debunk" material. So I understand your point of view.
when CTs take over a topic, unfortunately it isn't that easy always to find 'source information' without the 'debunk' or 'explain' tags. or if you already have a general idea of where the source material would be. like if you don't know a contrail is a cloud you wouldn't go looking for weather stuff. and gov. sources are tough only cause there are so MANY of them and they are all interconnected in weird ways. So debunks are the easiest place to start and then you can go verify their information.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
But for someone such as yourself, or Mick and Dee, you guys would want a get your information from the source. Research the information on your own without having to read; "how to debunk" material.
Well a proper debunk should include its references, so that's not really my issue. I'm usually happy with the 'for dummies' version, but often with a search for 'debunk' you get 'debunking the debunkers' type pages and outrage at debunking shills (though that's mainly 9-11), so I was wondering if the term is used as often in the context we want. But that's probably me just noticing the negative reactions to 'debunk' more.
I see that it does appear to be the case it's being used widely in the positive sense.

I wonder if Mick has actually managed to re-establish the term a bit?
There does appear to be a very small 'renaissance' of critical thinking and science appreciation recently, most likely in part to dissatisfaction with millennial prophecy failings, and now along with the negative aspects of the anti-vaccination and anti-GMO movements.
 

Jason

Senior Member
I wonder if Mick has actually managed to re-establish the term a bit?
There does appear to be a very small 'renaissance' of critical thinking and science appreciation recently, most likely in part to dissatisfaction with millennial prophecy failings, and now along with the negative aspects of the anti-vaccination and anti-GMO movements.
Well said Pete, and I think there was a transition in appreciation toward debunkers leading up to and after the end of 2012. I think NASA and other forums were in part responsible for that. Obviously, they fell victim at times to the "government shill" phrase for injecting their opinions on the "world ending scenarios", but in the end they were in part responsible for the "renaissance" of science appreciation, as you put it. The world not coming to an end also gave debunkers what they needed to "finally" be right in the eyes of conspirators. People had an awakening and either quickly discarded the notion of CT's, or moved onto gov CT's, GMO ct's, and anti vac CT's. Debunking forums I was involved with that dealt with 2012 had thousands of guest coming on every day leading up to 12-21-12 (I even remember the site crashing a few times), but I would say within a month of the world not ending we saw the numbers drop to the low 100's. We can see evidence of this transition in Mick's graph above. We can see an increase in the word "debunk" being used up until 2012, and then a slight regression after 2012. I think all CT's have their commonalities, but when faced with a clock that's going to stop on a specific time at a specific date, it adds an entirely different set of emotions into the mix. For example; Believing in CT's about vaccinations vs a planet that's going to possibly pass by earth or crash into us. You can see there are definately a different set of emotions that could be involved with the latter. Thinking your going to die, and then discovering your not going to die is quite a roller coaster ride, especially if it involves loved ones as well..
 
Last edited:

Efftup

Senior Member.
I can see how this happens with the CT thing. most people really don;t have time to do proper research. So if they see something that sounds convincing (and most well set up fear mongering CT sites are great at the lawyers arguments) then it is very easy to be sucked in unless you happen to have enough knowledge of a subject to immediately spot an obvious flaw.
It does also seem to come down to your political worldview as well as to how trusting you are of mainstream sources. It is only really if you have and spend some time to really dig down that you find a lot of stuff you see on the internet doesn't stack up. Some people are too lazy and others simply don;t have the time, or don't care enough to really search.

I recently found an article being reposted on FB that was about those evil disgusting Chinese eating human body parts, accompanied with a picture of a foot all wrapped up for sale.

If they actually engaged their brain and even bothered to look closely at the picture, never mind it being an obvious fake, the label was in German and it was priced in euros, so clearly nothing to do with those actually rather nice Chinese people . As no-one is going to believe the Germans (even if they are the bastards that bombed me granny :Quote from Auf Wiedersehn pet) would eat body parts they might look a little closer to discover it was an art exhibit.
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
I think it's pretty well documented, the phenomenon of fear being contagious.
I think most - if not all - of us have had the experience of being attracted to watching accidents. For example, it takes a conscious effort not to slow down and gawp if there is a car crash on the opposite freeway track.

Also, think of the countless accident and catastrophy videos accumulated on today's video platforms.

My point is that everyone is drawn - in varying degrees - to the 'dark side' subconsciously when starting research from a truly open, unbiased position.

It takes a willful decision and most likely a learning process to adopt a critical point of view, a shield against the attraction of fear.

In a nutshell: being skeptical is not natural. Annother reason to give CT believers some leeway.
 
Last edited:

Jason

Senior Member
My point is that everyone is drawn - in varying degrees - to the 'dark side' subconsciously when starting research from a truly open, unbiased position.
So anyone is capable of falling for or being duped into believing a CT "subconsciously" if they didn't approach in unbiased. Meaning if they somewhat believed it already and decided to research the material on sites that promote the bunk, they could fall down the rabbit hole very easily. But someone with the right approach, knowledge, and an understanding of how to identify bunk wouldn't. And for the inexperienced, if your biased does that mean you will be looking in the wrong place to begin with. Do most people try to reinforce what they believe, or do they look for reasons to doubt what they believe?
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
From what I've seen CT is at least partially about feeling special- as if you have found out a secret thing that most people don't know about.
 

Jason

Senior Member
From what I've seen CT is at least partially about feeling special- as if you have found out a secret thing that most people don't know about.
I would have to disagree with you on that. Perhaps with secret societies or gov CT's, but how does someone feel special if they fear the government is going to put everyone in a Homeland coffin, or use vaccines to mind control the public, or an impending asteroid that's going to wipe out the world. I think special is the wrong word, but I know what you mean Ham. Maybe prophetic is a better word depending on the CT, or what. But I don't think people feel special, I certainly didn't. Quite the contrary I felt doomed..
 

Efftup

Senior Member.
No, I think Hama is right, for a lot of people, it IS about feeling special, feeling that they are part of some bigger crusading fight against the stuff that is hidden, that THEY don;t want you to know about but yet they have obtained this secret hidden knowledge.
This is a great draw for many people in different ways. Just like when Aleister Crowley said he discovered the secret ancient magick of wise old egyptian mages, if he said he just made it up, no-one would have followed him.
Look on all those adverts that pop up on websites about the secret fad diet that Doctors don't want you to know about, see how famous person shed the pounds with this secret regime!! for only $50, we show YOU how to get the body of your dreams!! etc.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Jay Reynolds What is Carnicom Doing here? Health and Quackery 17
JFDee Research: Consequences of Travel Shutdown for Contrail Coverage Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Mick West TFTRH #13: Professor David Keith – Geoengineering Research and the Chemtrails Conspiracy Theory Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 2
Mick West Key Temperatures in 9/11 Research 9/11 15
Mick West Paper: How paranoid are conspiracy believers? Practical Debunking 21
Mick West Argentina's Committee for Aerospace Phenomenae Research (CEFAe) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Marin B Claim: Academic research groups increasingly beholden to interests of corporate publishing groups Science and Pseudoscience 19
skephu Interesting articles about contrail research Contrails and Chemtrails 8
keefe ARM Climate Research Facility Contrails and Chemtrails 17
Graham2001 Debunked: FVX Research [Fake Web Site] Conspiracy Theories 1
MikeC Warning over aerosol climate fix from Vienna Contrails and Chemtrails 0
Thor Odinson GMO Independent Research Health and Quackery 7
Quantumbeliever Claim: CDC covers up research linking MMR vaccine to autism Conspiracy Theories 13
KC-10FE Identified: Wing with Three Gold Nozzles [D-ADLR Gulfstream G550 - German Research Plane ] Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 6
Leifer New supplement campaign, "Whole Body Research" Health and Quackery 35
Tybalt ‪98.7% Proven Meditation Techniqu‬e - scientific research? Science and Pseudoscience 6
Mick West Why don't Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth Fund Research? 9/11 450
moderateGOP Debunking Global Research TV Conspiracy Theories 64
TomC chemtrails research kickstarter Contrails and Chemtrails 6
MyMatesBrainwashed Research can only prove that something exists Conspiracy Theories 0
Critical Thinker Interesting research on 'thought control'.... how long before CTer's freak out? General Discussion 0
Boston peer reviewed research on aluminum content of rainwater required Contrails and Chemtrails 79
Cairenn Global Research People Debunked 1
F4Jock Why Don't CT Believers Do Their Own Research? General Discussion 22
Mick West Debunked: OverpopulationIsAMyth.com (Overpopulation is a Myth, Population Research Institute) Conspiracy Theories 14
Pete Tar Internet research. How to do it effectively? Practical Debunking 47
Mick West Iron Microspheres and Lead in Slag Wool? (Mineral Wool) 9/11 1
Dan Wilson Debunked: Infowars product damages sperm Health and Quackery 2
M Bornong Can Belief in Chemtrails and/or other Conspiracy Theories Lead to Violence? Contrails and Chemtrails 4
Balance Home remedies lead to animal cruelty charges Health and Quackery 3
Dan Wilson Debunked: Terrifying Facts About Makeup Health and Quackery 1
Mick West Debunked: Irrefutable proof we are all being sprayed with poison [Lead in Avgas] Contrails and Chemtrails 13
AluminumTheory Psychological Factors That Lead Me Into the Rabbit Hole Escaping The Rabbit Hole 44
Pete Tar Claim - The Earth is venting deadly and explosive gases which will lead to extinction Science and Pseudoscience 15
Related Articles


































Related Articles

Top