How many people follow multiple conspiracy theories?

Dick Holman

New Member
I've been wondering for a while about how many CTs one person would subscribe to, and whether they believe in CTs which, from a logical viewpoint, are mutually exclusive, e.g. Nibiru vs flat Earth.
I have noticed that FE and chemtrails are shared by some.

Poll under construction
 
Last edited:

Whitebeard

Senior Member.
I've found that once a person falls for one CT, others follow. ie, if 9-11 was a massive conspiracy and is 'true' therefore others, fake moon landing, holographic universe, alien lizard people, space Jews etc must also be true.

I have asked a couple of CT orientated people I know how they reconcile conflicting theories - e.g. NASA cover ups of strange things in Apollo photographs vs moon landing hoax. I tend to get the old 'I'm right, and they are wrong / shills / disinfo agents line'. But a couple of times recently I've had the Mandela Cop-Out used to brush off both sides as true due to colliding realities.
 

Marin B

Active Member
I've been wondering for a while about how many CTs one person would subscribe to, and whether they believe in CTs which, from a logical viewpoint, are mutually exclusive, e.g. Nibiru vs flat Earth.

In my limited experience (n=1), a CT believer subscribes to many (probably at least 10 - chemtrails, global hoax, new world order, aliens among us, advanced technology that the gov't has it isn't sharing, underground cities (for the NWO), vaccines for profit, 9/11, JFK, Roswell, and more). A belief that chemtrails are for countering global warming seems a bit at odds with the belief that global warming is a hoax.
 

tadaaa

Senior Member
the phenomena has been given a name "Crank Magnetism"

"The term "crank magnetism" was coined by physiologist and blogger Mark Hoofnagle on the Denialism Blog in 2007 to describe the propensity of cranks to hold multiple irrational, unsupported or ludicrous beliefs that are often unrelated to one another"

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Crank_magnetism


from Mark Hoofnagles Blog

"Back when we wrote
the Unified Theory of the Crank one of the main things we discussed related to crankery is their inability to recognize competence in others. As a result, cranks tend not to mind the crankery of others, since they see themselves as opposed to a scientific orthodoxy. Consistency be damned, they just want to see science with egg on its face so they can prove that they are being persecuted."

http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2007/06/28/crank-magnetism-1/
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
In my limited experience (n=1), a CT believer subscribes to many (probably at least 10 - chemtrails, global hoax, new world order, aliens among us, advanced technology that the gov't has it isn't sharing, underground cities (for the NWO), vaccines for profit, 9/11, JFK, Roswell, and more). A belief that chemtrails are for countering global warming seems a bit at odds with the belief that global warming is a hoax.

Dane Wigington is a curious exception in that he accept that carbon dioxide is warming the planet, so his version of the chemtrails theory is in some ways a fraction more reasonably than others. Of course then he also thinks that chemtrails are destroying the planet because the people behind them are power mad psychopaths trying to cover up global warming - which really doesn't make sense.

He's also a 9/11 believer, and has hinted at various false flag beliefs, and he's fully on board with anti-vaccine. Kind of mid-spectrum.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
Of course then he also thinks that chemtrails are destroying the planet because the people behind them are power mad psychopaths trying to cover up global warming - which really doesn't make sense.

Yeah, I never could make sense out of Dane's position on that. I think he thinks "they" are trying to stop GW, but are screwing up and causing it to increase instead.
 

Marin B

Active Member
I know it's a bit OT, but the US presidential race, mistrust in mainstream media and science, and learning in the past few years about various CTs, got me wondering if we are entering an "age of disenlightment". This prompted me to do a Google search to see if maybe I just coined a new phrase - and as always, it wasn't an original thought - 3,320 hits, and at least one of those posts (a blog entry from 2009) beats me by nearly 7 years:

The Disenlightenment
Let's step back into the far, musty reaches of our minds and pull out some high school history lessons. I want to talk about the Age of Enlightenment, or more simply, just The Enlightenment. This period was marked by a flourishing of thought and philosophy that centered on rigorous rational analysis, the scientific method, and reason. It saw increased questioning of religious orthodoxy and dogma. Immanuel Kant described it as "the freedom to use one's own intelligence."

Sadly, it seems a new age is upon us. Because it's ideology is diametrically opposed to that described above, I'm calling it the Age of DisEnlightenment. This movement is primarily evidenced by the increasing prominence of fascist ideas all over the world.

(note: by fascist I refer to the common, if incorrect, definition of ultra-authoritarian policital and religious regimes. I do not refer to the original definition which also includes a corporate economic structure).

We saw a frightening rise in fascist ideology in the US during the last Administration. A President who is a "Decider" (just do what I say cuz I said so). Removal of civil rights (warrantless wire tapping). Politicizing of the justice system (firing of US attorneys who didn't arbitrarily target Democrats). And so on. And lest you say, but Obama is here now, might I remind you that he did not overturn any of the civil rights reductions instituted by the Bush. And, we are still "at war" (or something) in Afghanistan, fighting exactly whom or what at this point? And yea though he walked through the valley of the shadow of Iraq, he has not gotten us out of that unholy mess either.

But it's not just here, and it's not just politics. All over the world, religous fascism is rearing it's ugly head. So-called Islamofascists perpetrated 9/11. Religious fundamentalists are doing their best to subvert health care reform, women's reproductive rights, science education, and global warming. The French have banned the wearing of Muslim headscarves by girls in school. Unbelievably, the Swiss have recently banned minarets. And in what is possibly the most heinous move yet, Uganda is proposing a death penalty for being gay.

Such ideologies can flourish only in an age of non-thinking. Where people do not think critically; where in fact, they are discouraged from or penalized for doing so. (Remember: science in the classroom is under attack. No science, no understanding of scientific method.....) Find a dogma, chant the mantra, wave your flag and stay the course. And don't you dare say a word out of lockstep. Dissent will not be tolerated.

Maybe it's always been there and I just never noticed it. Maybe it's just getting more news coverage these days. Or maybe it really is an increasing trend. What, then, would cause a global disenlightenment?
Content from External Source
 
Last edited:

tadaaa

Senior Member
I know it's a bit OT, but the US presidential race, mistrust in mainstream media and science, and learning in the past few years about various CTs, got me wondering if we are entering an "age of disenlightment". This prompted me to do a Google search to see if maybe I just coined a new phrase - and as always, it wasn't an original thought - 3,320 hits, and at least one of those posts (a blog entry from 2009) beats me by nearly 7 years:
]

a few years ago I coined the phrase anti-knowledge

it seemed apt when I was debating stuff online with a certain type of person that actually drew strength from their ignorance

(and I don't mean "ignorance" as a catch all pejorative term, no one should be expected to know everything after all)

but they seemed to view it as a virtue - almost as an inbuilt defence mechanism
 

Dick Holman

New Member
I've been wondering for a while about how many CTs one person would subscribe to, and whether they believe in CTs which, from a logical viewpoint, are mutually exclusive, e.g. Nibiru vs flat Earth.
I have noticed that FE and chemtrails are shared by some.

Poll under construction
 

Dick Holman

New Member
I'm having problems with the poll. I was hoping to produce output similar to this table:
https://www.metabunk.org/chemtrails-and-the-anti-vaccine-movement.t8060/#post-193865
but the polling tool, or my ignorance of how to use it correctly, is unable to provide multiple choice answers.

Thanks for the replies, especially Marin Bs Age of Disenlightenment post. It seems particularly relevant given the election of a US President who, given his remarks on vaccines, could be seen as an anti-science candidate.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
I'm having problems with the poll. I was hoping to produce output similar to this table:
https://www.metabunk.org/chemtrails-and-the-anti-vaccine-movement.t8060/#post-193865
but the polling tool, or my ignorance of how to use it correctly, is unable to provide multiple choice answers.

Thanks for the replies, especially Marin Bs Age of Disenlightenment post. It seems particularly relevant given the election of a US President who, given his remarks on vaccines, could be seen as an anti-science candidate.
you'd be better off conducting your poll on a conspiracy site anyway. A poll here you'd be better off just asking people to list the CTs they believe in so you can see which members are 'sceptics' and correlate your results accordingly.

But George made apoll with multiple answers available. https://www.metabunk.org/do-you-bel...upernatural-abilities.t584/page-3#post-111708
rr.JPG
 
Last edited:
Top