The Usual Retorts: Conspiracy Theorists’ Top 10 Misconceptions of Debunkers

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
That said, in my (biased) experience I've found debunkers average fewer fallacies-per-hour than CTs, so I agree that debunkers tend to be more logical thinkers than CTs.
Again, it's not useful to characterize believers as being somehow less intelligent. Some of them are very intelligent, but just wrong. And there's lot of stupid debunkers.
 

vitorino

Member
Frankly I think most debunkers don't properly understand the scientific method either. The terms 'science' and 'scientific method' are widely misapplied, overused, and misunderstood even among academics. (See http://www.math.chalmers.se/~ulfp/Review/logicscdis.pdf for a great summary of the various stances of philosophers of science, focusing on Karl Popper's ideas and their reception; (...)
That said, in my (biased) experience I've found debunkers average fewer fallacies-per-hour than CTs, so I agree that debunkers tend to be more logical thinkers than CTs.
I'm using the term freelly, as in "scientific method as a state of mind" of the debunkers, in opposition to the state of mind of the CTs.. As an explanation for the misconceptions the OP mentions. Definitely not interested in checking Karl Popper's take on this, thank you..

About the "fph", I think you're being a bit cheap to the debunker's side, but ok...
 

tadaaa

Senior Member
Again, it's not useful to characterize believers as being somehow less intelligent. Some of them are very intelligent, but just wrong. And there's lot of stupid debunkers.
"believers" in what, evolution, creationism?

I suspect that the act of "belief" works at a different (lower) level than simply measuring "intelligence" by something like the IQ test

And probably bypasses "higher" brain function ( for want of a better term)
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member
Again, it's not useful to characterize believers as being somehow less intelligent. Some of them are very intelligent, but just wrong. And there's lot of stupid debunkers.
But does poor logical thinker = less intelligence really? You can be highly intelligent yet logically weak. It's purely a tool of application. If intelligence is a measure of effectively using what you have, then maybe poor logic means less intelligence, but fallacies are a feature of everyone's thinking.
We need to get away from that association, especially here, where pointing out fallacies in logic are a regular occurrence which are not meant as slurs on anyone's intelligence.
We've had to make the same point before re: ignorance != stupid.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
But does poor logical thinker = less intelligence really? You can be highly intelligent yet logically weak. It's purely a tool of application. If intelligence is a measure of effectively using what you have, then maybe poor logic means less intelligence, but fallacies are a feature of everyone's thinking.
We need to get away from that association, especially here, where pointing out fallacies in logic are a regular occurrence which are not meant as slurs on anyone's intelligence.
We've had to make the same point before re: ignorance != stupid.
"Ignorant", "Illogical", "Stupid", "Uneducated", - while all meaning somewhat different things, are all things that can be taken as insults, and are all things that apply to large segments of the population both CT and non-CT.

Sure, point out people's fallacies, pint out their mistakes. Just don't alienate an entire group with blanket labeling.
 

tadaaa

Senior Member
I admit to having a fascination with this concept of intelligence etc

As I alluded to in another post on another thread, my elder brother is/was a chess "genius"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Hodgson

Britsh chess champion 4 or 5 times, in his prime he had an ELO rating somewhere north of 2600, that put him I the top 20 chess players in the world, he has played all the worlds greats - Kasparov, Karpov et al

I was a very very poor performer at school/academically - it was additionally "tough" to be constantly compared to a "genius"

But he is absolute cannon fodder to any daft CT out there, and as I said in that earlier post - I would not trust him to open a crisp packet
 

vitorino

Member
I admit to having a fascination with this concept of intelligence etc

As I alluded to in another post on another thread, my elder brother is/was a chess "genius"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Hodgson

Britsh chess champion 4 or 5 times, in his prime he had an ELO rating somewhere north of 2600, that put him I the top 20 chess players in the world, he has played all the worlds greats - Kasparov, Karpov et al

I was a very very poor performer at school/academically - it was additionally "tough" to be constantly compared to a "genius"

But he is absolute cannon fodder to any daft CT out there, and as I said in that earlier post - I would not trust him to open a crisp packet
It is an interesting topic..
We are a long way from the times of measuring intelligence with IQ.. We don't know how to do it now, we just say there's many kinds of it..

I suspect, like it was mentioned before, it has to do with the approach we take. Being a "chess genius" won't guarantee one will take the right approach, but it will also not invalidate it
 

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
"believers" in what, evolution, creationism?

I suspect that the act of "belief" works at a different (lower) level than simply measuring "intelligence" by something like the IQ test

And probably bypasses "higher" brain function ( for want of a better term)
There's a lot of evidence that much of what we think is ratiocination is actually just post-hoc rationalising (PHR). (This article (by famed psychologist Jonathan Haidt) discusses his work on how PHR is in invoked in moral judgments, and this non-scholarly article discusses PHR in the context of politics and religion; and I recall having read a fascinating paper that contained empirical support for the idea that much of our 'logical' thought is PHR as well but I can't find it with Google.) So in a sense, it's very accurate to say that 'belief' is 'lower-level' (ie not derived from proper ratiocination and therefore sub-logical) and is then followed by 'higher-level' thinking, aka 'reason'.

The problem with this approach is that it does not provide a clear differentiation between CTs and debunkers - ie this in itself is not less true for debunkers than it is for CTs. Which comes back to my epistemological relativism - I see no distinction between 'belief' and 'knowledge', only between superior (more useful) and inferior (less useful) epistemologies. And naturally everyone would see his/her own epistemology as 'superior'.
 
Last edited:

tadaaa

Senior Member
What is really interesting about that wiki article is that it gives his birthplace as St Asaph, Wales

That is categorically bunk - like me he was born in Hammersmith, London

Where that comes from I don't know, I believe he has a property there, but that's it

Like me (we have the same parents) Born and schooled in London
 

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
I admit to having a fascination with this concept of intelligence etc

As I alluded to in another post on another thread, my elder brother is/was a chess "genius"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Hodgson

Britsh chess champion 4 or 5 times, in his prime he had an ELO rating somewhere north of 2600, that put him I the top 20 chess players in the world, he has played all the worlds greats - Kasparov, Karpov et al

I was a very very poor performer at school/academically - it was additionally "tough" to be constantly compared to a "genius"

But he is absolute cannon fodder to any daft CT out there, and as I said in that earlier post - I would not trust him to open a crisp packet
That's quite interesting. Bobby Fischer was also really into CTs.
 

vitorino

Member
What is really interesting about that wiki article is that it gives his birthplace as St Asaph, Wales

That is categorically bunk - like me he was born in Hammersmith, London

Where that comes from I don't know, I believe he has a property there, but that's it

Like me (we have the same parents) Born and schooled in London
it's actually referenced (on the wikipedia page). Apparently it's the
Chess History & Chronology - Bill Wall
that's wrong about your brother:
"
1963.07.25 Hodgson, Julian born in St Asaph, Wales.
"

I heard wikipedia has some weird policy of referencing. Even if you are the subject you'll have to find a correct media/book reference. Your word and/or birth certificate will not matter for them, your brother is Welsh and that's it!
 

tadaaa

Senior Member
Feel free to edit his wiki entry then :)
You know what, in an idle moments a few years ago I did (The only time I have ever edited a wiki entry and seem to remember I had to give a justification - to which I think I said I was his brother) anyway within hours it was changed back!!!
 

tadaaa

Senior Member
it's actually referenced (on the wikipedia page). Apparently it's the
Chess History & Chronology - Bill Wall
that's wrong about your brother:
"
1963.07.25 Hodgson, Julian born in St Asaph, Wales.
"

I heard wikipedia has some weird policy of referencing. Even if you are the subject you'll have to find a correct media/book reference. Your word and/or birth certificate will not matter for them, your brother is Welsh and that's it!
Yes I seem to remember looking into it and seeing that reference, complete bunk

I think you are right about that reference policy - it was almost as if the re-edit was automated

He has 3 brothers and a sister - all born in London

The birth date is correct btw
 

deirdre

Moderator
Staff member
As I alluded to in another post on another thread, my elder brother is/was a chess "genius"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Hodgson
dude. there's one thing bashing on your brother. its quite another thing to name him in a public forum.

and not once have you ever alluded to him being above average intelligence in school. "chess" is a very specific and limited thing. There are plenty of slegs who rock at chess too. They just dont have the money (or interest perhaps) for the competition circuit.
 

tadaaa

Senior Member
Sure, I take your point and I didn't mean to "bash" him, belief is not a crime and his part of what makes us human

My point was to highlight the difficulty of separating belief, intelligence etc
 

Landru

Moderator
Staff member
If you're interested, I can show evidence at the Boston bombing that's very difficult to explain..............let me know if you're interested,.........I'll provide you info,..............
Since you're back please provide this evidence you have claimed to have.
 

marcus112

Member
He's back in another thread that he posted in today. I just wanted remind him of his claim.
I've returned with a question, and because I sense that you've missed me. Is it acceptable with regard to providing evidence, to cite a video that includes the exact title, the name that was used by the poster, and the length of time the video runs,.......rather then presenting a link? I'm old school and there are some things I haven't done. I would like to present evidence that supports my claim that the Bombing was not as presented,...that is, it wasn't a random nor premeditated act of terrorism, rather, an event designed to deceive for the purpose of achieving an undisclosed agenda. I'll wait for your decision regarding my query.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I've returned with a question, and because I sense that you've missed me. Is it acceptable with regard to providing evidence, to cite a video that includes the exact title, the name that was used by the poster, and the length of time the video runs,.......rather then presenting a link? I'm old school and there are some things I haven't done. I would like to present evidence that supports my claim that the Bombing was not as presented,...that is, it wasn't a random nor premeditated act of terrorism, rather, an event designed to deceive for the purpose of achieving an undisclosed agenda. I'll wait for your decision regarding my query.
No. See: https://www.metabunk.org/metabunks-no-click-policy.t5158/
 

Rory

Senior Member
You know what, in an idle moments a few years ago I did (The only time I have ever edited a wiki entry and seem to remember I had to give a justification - to which I think I said I was his brother) anyway within hours it was changed back!!!
It says London now. :)
 
Top