When is some concept Real, a Conspiracy or Fantasy?

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Whenshould a Conspiracy be debunked?

Real or Conspiracy.jpg

Mick,

You suggested I try this again so here it is . . . an attempt to define when a concept becomes a conspiracy . . . what is the criteria . . .

I suggest it is a combination of at least three factors . . .

1) A concept's popularity
2) A concept's persistence or durability
3) The ratio of fact base evidence versus speculation that supports the belief in the concept​
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Are these true conspiracies?? what makes them conspiracies??




The greatest Conspiracies . . . History's greatest conspiracy theories
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pict...n-history.html



1) 11 September 2001 WTC Attack . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septemb...iracy_theories
2) The assassination of John F Kennedy . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F....iracy_theories
3) A flying saucer crashed at Roswell in 1947 . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roswell_UFO_Incident
4) Nasa faked the moon landings. . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_la...iracy_theories
5) The Illuminati and the New World Order . . .http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Wor...piracy_theory)
6) The Jesus conspiracy - novel (The Da Vinci Code) . . .http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Da_vinci_code
7) Diana, Princess of Wales, was murdered . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_o...iracy_theories
8) Elvis Presley faked his own death . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Presley_phenomenon
9) Operation Northwoods - A genuine conspiracy involving a plan by the Joint Chiefs of Staff . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
10) MK-ULTRA - The code name for a covert mind-control and chemical interrogation research program . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKULTRA
11) North American Union . . .http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Union
12) Shakespeare was somebody else . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakesp...rship_question
13) The disappearance of Shergar (race horse) On February 8, 1983 . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shergar
14) Paul is dead - “Paul is dead” replaced by a look-alike and sound-
alike. McCartney’s death . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_is_dead
15) The July 7, 2005 Tube bombings (London) . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_...ondon_bombings
16) The Moscow apartment bombings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings
17) Black or unmarked helicopters http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_helicopters
18) Harold Wilson (British Labor Party Leader)
was a Soviet agent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Wilson
19) The Protocols of the Elders of Zion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pro...Elders_of_Zion
20) The peak oil conspiracy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Simmons
21) Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_H...owledge_debate
22) The Philadelphia Experiment - the US Navy destroyer Eldridge was
rendered invisible http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Phi...hia_Experiment
23) Pan Am Flight 103 - Lockerbie in southern Scotland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_103
24) Fluoridation - Fluoride is commonly added to drinking water http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_f...on_controversy
25) The 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami http://freeinternetpress.com/story.php?sid=2633
26) Plastic coffins and concentration camps - Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/FEMA_concentration_camps
27) HAARP - Alaska, is the Pentagon's High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Fr...search_Program
28) The Aids virus was created in a laboratory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_or...ific_consensus
29) Global warming is a hoax http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_...spiracy_theory
30) Chemtrails. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtra...spiracy_theory




Additional information found below. . . .


1) September 11, 2001 - Thanks to the power of the web and live broadcasts on television, the conspiracy theories surrounding the events of 9/11 - when terrorists attacked the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon in Washington - have surpassed those of Roswell and JFK in traction. Despite repeated claims by al-Qaeda that it planned, organised and orchestrated the attacks, several official and unofficial investigations into the collapse of the Twin Towers which concluded that structural failure was responsible and footage of the events themselves, the conspiracy theories continue to grow in strength.


2) The assassination of John F Kennedy - The 35th President of the United States was shot on Friday, November 22, 1963, in Dallas, Texas at 12.30pm . He was fatally wounded by gunshots while riding with his wife - Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy - in a motorcade. The ten-month investigation of the Warren Commission of 1963 to 1964, the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) of 1976 to 1979, and other government investigations concluded that the President had been assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald - who was himself shot dead by Jack Ruby while in police custody.


3) A flying saucer crashed at Roswell in 1947 - The event that kick-started more than a half century of conspiracy theories surrounding unidentified flying objects (UFOs). Something did crash at Roswell, New Mexico, sometime before July 7, 1947


4) Nasa faked the moon landings - People who think that the Apollo moon landings were not all that they seemed at the time believe that Nasa faked some or all of the landings.


5) The Illuminati and the New World Order - A conspiracy in which powerful and secretive groups (the Illuminati, the Bilderberg Group and other shadowy cabals) are plotting to rule mankind with a single world government.


6) The Jesus conspiracy - The theory that launched a blockbusting novel (The Da Vinci Code), a film of the same name and a plagiarism battle in the courts (with the authors of the Holy Blood and holy grail).


7) Diana, Princess of Wales, was murdered - Why won't this one go away? Despite an official inquiry that found no evidence of a plot by MI6 or any other entity to murder the princess and Dodi Fayed in 1997, fevered speculation continues.


8) Elvis Presley faked his own death - What can we say? A persistent belief is that "the King" did not die in 1977. Many fans persist in claiming he is still alive, that he went into hiding for various reasons. This claim is allegedly backed up by thousands of so-called sightings.


9) Operation Northwoods - A genuine conspiracy involving a plan by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to launch a fake Cuban terror campaign on American soil to persuade the US public to support an invasion against Castro. The plan involved bombings and the simultaneous hijacking and blowing up of American airliners.


10) MK-ULTRA - The code name for a covert mind-control and chemical interrogation research programme, run by the Office of Scientific Intelligence. The programme began in the early 1950s, continuing at least through the late 1960s, using US citizens as test subjects. Project MK-ULTRA was brought first to wide public attention in 1975 by Congress and by the Rockefeller Commission. Investigative efforts were hampered by the fact that CIA Director Richard Helms ordered all MK-ULTRA files destroyed in 1973. . . .


11) North American Union - The North American Union (NAU) is a theoretical regional union of Canada, Mexico and the United States similar in structure to the European Union, sometimes including a common currency called the amero. Theorists who believe that the three countries are planning for this believe that it is part of a global conspiracy to set up something called the New World Order (NWO). Officials from all three nations have repeatedly denied that there are plans to create a NAU . . .


12) Shakespeare was somebody else - Who really was the English language's greatest writer? Among the numerous alternative candidates that have been proposed Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe, . . .


13) The disappearance of Shergar - On February 8, 1983, a group of men wearing balaclavas and armed with guns turned up at the Ballymany Stud Farm in Co Kildare, Ireland and took a hostage – Jim Fitzgerald, the stud's head groom. "We've come for Shergar," they said. "We want £2m for him." Shergar was arguably the greatest racehorse to have ever lived. But 25 years after he was kidnapped from Ballymany the mystery of exactly what happened to him after he was snatched that night still lingers.


14) Paul is dead - “Paul is dead” is an urban legend alleging that Paul McCartney died in a car crash 1966 and was replaced by a look-alike and sound-alike. "Evidence" for McCartney’s death consists of “clues” found among the Beatles’ many recordings.


15) The July 7, 2005 Tube bombings - One of the supposed mysteries surrounding the 7/7 attacks is this image, used by several news outlets, of the bombers entering Luton station on their way to London at around 7.20am on July 7. Theorists claim this image is fake . . .


16) The Moscow apartment bombings - Former GRU officer Aleksey Galkin and former FSB officer the late Alexander Litvinenko (who was killed with Polonium-210 in London in November 2006) and other whistle-blowers from the Russian government and security services have asserted that the 1999 Russian apartment bombings were operations perpetrated by the FSB . .


17) Black or unmarked helicopters - The concept became popular in the American militia movement, and in associated political circles, in the 1990s as an alleged symbol and warning sign of a military takeover of part or all of the United States.


18) Harold Wilson was a Soviet agent - Soviet defector Anatoliy Golitsyn is thought to have claimed that Wilson was a KGB spy. He further claimed that Hugh Gaitskell was assassinated by the KGB so that he could be replaced as Labour leader by Harold Wilson. Furthermore, former MI5 officer Peter Wright claimed in his memoirs - Spycatcher - that he had been told that Wilson was a Soviet agent. MI5 repeatedly investigated Wilson over the course of several years . . .


19) The Protocols of the Elders of Zion - Despite being utterly discredited for at least 100 years, belief in this document has proved remarkably resilient on the internet. The text takes the form of an instruction manual to a new member of the "elders," describing how they will run the world through control of the media and finance, and replace the traditional social order . . .


20) The peak oil conspiracy - Peak oil (a theory in itself) is the supposed peak of oil production during and after which demand for oil outstrips supply sending prices through the roof.


21) Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen - Theorists believe that President Franklin Roosevelt provoked the Japanese attack on the US naval base in Hawaii in December 1941, knew about it in advance and covered up his failure to warn his fleet commanders. He apparently needed the attack to provoke Hitler into declaring war on the US . . .


22) The Philadelphia Experiment - Popularised by the Charles Berlitz novel of the same name, conspiracy theorists believe that during an experiment at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard in October 1943, the US Navy destroyer Eldridge was rendered invisible.


23) Pan Am Flight 103 - Pan Am Flight 103 was Pan American's third daily scheduled transatlantic flight from Heathrow to New York John F. Kennedy International Airport. On December 21, 1988, the aircraft flying this route - a Boeing 747 - was destroyed by a bomb, killing all 259 people on board and 11 people on the ground. The remains landed around Lockerbie in southern Scotland. A popular theory for which no evidence has been produced suggests that the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had set up a protected drug route from Europe to the United States - allegedly called Operation Corea - which allowed Syrian drug dealers to ship heroin to the US using Pan Am flights.


24) Fluoridation - Fluoride is commonly added to drinking water as a way to reduce tooth decay. However, there has been some evidence that there could be some harmful side effects from fluoride and conspiracy theorists believe that this information is known


25) The 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami - A popular theory in the Muslim world is that the tsunami could have been caused by an Indian nuclear experiment in which Israeli and American nuclear experts participated.


26) Plastic coffins and concentration camps - Just outside Atlanta, Georgia, beside a major road are approximately 500,000 plastic coffins. Stacked neatly and in full view, the coffins are allegedly owned by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema).


27) HAARP - More than 200 miles east of Anchorage, Alaska, is the Pentagon's High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program


28. The Aids virus was created in a laboratory - Based on the theories of Dr William Campbell Douglass, many believe that that HIV was genetically engineered in 1974 by the World Health Organisation.


29) Global warming is a hoax - Some climate change doubters believe that man-made global warming is a conspiracy designed to soften up the world's population to higher taxation . . .


30) Chemtrails - Chemtrail conspiracy theorists believe that some contrails, which consist of ice crystals or water vapor condensed behind aircraft, actually result from chemicals or biological agents being deliberately sprayed at high altitude for some undisclosed purpose.


The greatest Conspiracies . . . History's greatest conspiracy theories
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pict...n-history.html

Content from External Source
 

MikeC

Closed Account
I think you miss the point - a conspiracy is real if "it happened" - whether or not there is factual evidence to support it. There is no reason at all that a conspiracy cannot exist with only speculation around it.

"Metabunk land" has nothing to do with that - it is all about looking at claims that are made as if they were factual, and examining the basis of those claims.

If you speculate and acknowledge that speculation is all you are doing then you are not actually introducing bunk at all. If you claim to have evidence supporting your speculation then the evidence can be examined.
 

Mat

Member
Conspiracy Deniers are deluded, demonstrably and utterly.

I think it takes great skill to track the middle path between being a conspiracy denier and a conspiracy theorist. I know I often have slipped from the path - in both directions. I am sure I will again.

Just thoughts:)
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Conspiracy Deniers are deluded, demonstrably and utterly.

I think it takes great skill to track the middle path between being a conspiracy denier and a conspiracy theorist. I know I often have slipped from the path - in both directions. I am sure I will again.

Just thoughts:)

Who are these "conspiracy deniers"?

George - your question seems to be an attempt to provide a new definition for "conspiracy". Why not use "conspiracy theory", or some other term that does not already have a well established meaning.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Who are these "conspiracy deniers"?

George - your question seems to be an attempt to provide a new definition for "conspiracy". Why not use "conspiracy theory", or some other term that does not already have a well established meaning.
That is what I thought I was doing; however, a discussion of what is the accepted definition of conspiracy by this Forum may be helpful . . . then we can discuss which concepts above fit the definition of a conspiracy and if it is the smaller subset a Conspiracy Theory. . .
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I think you miss the point - a conspiracy is real if "it happened" - whether or not there is factual evidence to support it. There is no reason at all that a conspiracy cannot exist with only speculation around it.

"Metabunk land" has nothing to do with that - it is all about looking at claims that are made as if they were factual, and examining the basis of those claims.

If you speculate and acknowledge that speculation is all you are doing then you are not actually introducing bunk at all. If you claim to have evidence supporting your speculation then the evidence can be examined.
I think people often do not distinguish between speculation and facts or hold a different understanding of what is a fact . . . this often the basis for a debate . . .
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Main Entry: conspiracy theory
Content from External Source

Function: noun
Date: 1909
: a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators
conspiracy theorist noun
http://i.word.com/idictionary/conspiracy theory
Content from External Source

 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
So what's lacking from this definition? I don't get what the point of this thread is.

Obviously conspiracies exist.
IMO there is difference between when you (meaning this Forum) calls something a conspiracy theory and when others do . . . at what ratio of Facts versus Speculation does a belief become a conspiracy . . .??? Most concepts will include some speculation on the data available for example . . .
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Why is the choice between conspiracy and fantasy. Why not simply ask how much evidence a theory has?

I'm really not getting your point.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Why is the choice between conspiracy and fantasy. Why not simply ask how much evidence a theory has?

I'm really not getting your point.
That is fine . . . I was just trying to establish a starting point . . .

Let's use Nothwoods as an example do you consider this as a conspiracy, a conspiracy theory or just historical fact??
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
That is fine . . . I was just trying to establish a starting point . . .

Let's use Nothwoods as an example do you consider this as a conspiracy, a conspiracy theory or just historical fact??

It is historical fact. It's arguably a conspiracy, as people discussed it in secret. It's arguably not a conspiracy theory, but then again I'm sure there's some speculation.

This is pointless. Just arguing of the meaning of words. If you can't tell if a word fits or not, then use different words. If you don't like labels, then explain why you think a label is misleading, and don't use it.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
It is historical fact. It's arguably a conspiracy, as people discussed it in secret. It's arguably not a conspiracy theory, but then again I'm sure there's some speculation.

This is pointless. Just arguing of the meaning of words. If you can't tell if a word fits or not, then use different words. If you don't like labels, then explain why you think a label is misleading, and don't use it.
I disagree, words and their meanings are important in any debate . . . if we have misconceptions between us on a meaning we are talking past each other . . .

So how do you decide if a conspiracy or conspiracy theory is believable and should therefore not be debunked???
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I disagree, words and their meanings are important in any debate . . . if we have misconceptions between us on a meaning we are talking past each other . . .

So how do you decide if a conspiracy or conspiracy theory is believable and should therefore not be debunked???

By examining and weighing the evidence.

Words are important. But if a word is a poor choice for communication you are not going to change that. Just use another word.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
I think people often do not distinguish between speculation and facts or hold a different understanding of what is a fact . . . this often the basis for a debate . . .

Indeed - that is where debunking can come into the situation - but it does not actually affect whether any given conspiracy does/did actually exist or not.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Indeed - that is where debunking can come into the situation - but it does not actually affect whether any given conspiracy does/did actually exist or not.
How do you decide whether or not to debunk a conspiracy/conspiracy theory??
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Mick,

Can you change the Title of the Threaf to . . . When should a Conspiracy be Debunked?
 

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
Ok...I'm no genius or expert in anything....but the word "debate" is wrong. Debates are for HS and college students. They don't have any horse in the race...they are just given a topic and which side to argue. Pro or con, no difference to them.

As to the Northwoods question....there are many military scenarios brought up from think tanks or tactical discussion groups that never see the light of day or if they do they are rejected out of hand. That's the entire job of these groups....to just think way outside the box. There's a word for these types of meetings and it is completely escaping me. Well...it was a race day (beer day). Anyway...this was not a conspiracy...it was done with official sanction....it was never implemented...it was rejected by those in charge. Was is secret...yes.

There are many things that are not general public knowledge...believe me...24 yrs in the military (mostly as a crypto tech) taught me theres a lot of stuff out there that no one knows about. Do they have nefarious purposes.....mostly no, from my experience.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Ok...I'm no genius or expert in anything....but the word "debate" is wrong. Debates are for HS and college students. They don't have any horse in the race...they are just given a topic and which side to argue. Pro or con, no difference to them.

As to the Northwoods question....there are many military scenarios brought up from think tanks or tactical discussion groups that never see the light of day or if they do they are rejected out of hand. That's the entire job of these groups....to just think way outside the box. There's a word for these types of meetings and it is completely escaping me. Well...it was a race day (beer day). Anyway...this was not a conspiracy...it was done with official sanction....it was never implemented...it was rejected by those in charge. Was is secret...yes.

There are many things that are not general public knowledge...believe me...24 yrs in the military (mostly as a crypto tech) taught me theres a lot of stuff out there that no one knows about. Do they have nefarious purposes.....mostly no, from my experience.

I have thirty years of military experience and was involved in significant briefings at the Assistant or Under Secretary of Defense level . . . yes unusual and hypothetical scenarios sometimes are discussed; however, this one was illegal, unethical and treasonous . . . something which should have never seen the light of day especially as an official paper brief to the Joint Chiefs of Staff . . . It is shocking and one wonders the motives of the presenters or of the person or persons asking for such a paper . . .



Regarding (debate) . . . another word is fine . . . what about presenting alternate explanations for beliefs you don't agree with . . .
. . .
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Using false flags as an excuse for war - as a causus belli - has only become illegal and distastefull in the public eye since WW2. For over 2000 years of recorded human history before then it was an absolutely standard part of "politics".

That the US should have considered it in the context of 1960's is hardly surprising.

And since NONE of the ideas and concepts made is past the "ideas" stage the whole idea of caling it a conspiracy is somewhat moot anyway - nothing was actually ever taken to a stage where it could have happened, and it was rejected by the President outright.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Using false flags as an excuse for war - as a causus belli - has only become illegal and distastefull in the public eye since WW2. For over 2000 years of recorded human history before then it was an absolutely standard part of "politics".

That the US should have considered it in the context of 1960's is hardly surprising.

And since NONE of the ideas and concepts made is past the "ideas" stage the whole idea of caling it a conspiracy is somewhat moot anyway - nothing was actually ever taken to a stage where it could have happened, and it was rejected by the President outright.
I take offense to it and would have in the 1960s as well . . . IMO there is no justification for it in my military . . . sorry to disagree with you . . . as far as it being a conspiracy or not . . . I guess it is up to ones definition of conspiracy . . . I can see it both ways . . .
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Like I said - since the end of WW2, and me saying it should not be a surprise has nothing at all to do with a value judgment - just that it should not be a surprise!!
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Like I said - since the end of WW2, and me saying it should not be a surprise has nothing at all to do with a value judgment - just that it should not be a surprise!!
If you are not surprised at the false flag proposal . . . is not the proposal itself a true definition of a proposed conspiracy?
 

Mat

Member
Yeah, but who are they? Seems a bit like a straw man.

Seems.. a bit... ?

What would be the argument that it was a straw man for?

Are you saying that there are no people who believe in no conspiracies?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Seems.. a bit... ?

What would be the argument that it was a straw man for?

Are you saying that there are no people who believe in no conspiracies?

Yes, that's what I'm saying. But maybe you'd like to provide the definition of "conspiracy" that you are using. Perhaps with an example of the most innocuous conspiracy that you consider a conspiracy under your personal definition.

See if you were saying "there are no people who believe in no conspiracies like LHO not acting alone, or higher", then maybe you'd have a point. But what if your baseline is "Cheney helped Haliburton"? Or "Oliver North sold arms to Iran"? OR do you only consider it a conspiracy if there's no conclusive evidence that it exists?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
as far as it being a conspiracy or not . . . I guess it is up to ones definition of conspiracy . . . I can see it both ways . . .

See that's the problem. Even in the dictionary "conspiracy" has more that one meaning. So "is it a conspiracy" will have multiple valid answers depending on who you talk to, and the context of your conversation.

Really you should just be talking about if a particular thing happened or not, and the details of what exactly happened and why. Whether it meets some vague definition or not is not helpful to figuring out what is going on in the world.
 

Mat

Member
But maybe you'd like to provide the definition of "conspiracy" that you are using.

People in power secretly using that power to achieve ends that those they have power over would find objectionable were they aware.

Perhaps with an example of the most innocuous conspiracy that you consider a conspiracy under your personal definition.

Tuskegee.
Paperclip.
 

Mat

Member
Well, since Tuskegee and Paperclip happened, how can there be any people who don't believe in any conspiracies?

My point is that most conspiracy deniers, those who roll along thinking the world is as it is, would initially deny such conspiracies happened. It would cause a rift in their world view that is uncomfortable, as it does for me and you (I hope). But we are not de-facto conspiracy deniers.

Unfortunately, I think, the same cognitive dissonance that would generates this discomfort in my grandmother if I forced her to watch youtube videos for a week is also found in the smartest of so called "skeptics".

I think cognitive dissonance is a large part of what drives their pseudoskepticism, though of course they would deny it.

Note: conspiracy theorists often claim differently. They claim that what drives pseudoskepticism is not the ever embedding cognitive dissoance but being a shill or other such insider. This attitude does them no favours.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Well, since Tuskegee and Paperclip happened, how can there be any people who don't believe in any conspiracies?
1) I think you might . . . like the people who deny the mass extermination of the Jews by the Nazis . . . of course they think the people promoting the holocaust are part of a conspiracy . . . LoL !!

2) I think the criteria for confronting a concept/conspiracy are the following:

a. The concept/conspiracy has reached a significant level of popularity
b. People recognize the name of the concept/conspiracy and recognize a generalized definition
c. There is significant disagreement regarding the fact base or error in the logic of the concept's adherents/promoters
d. Promotion of the concept/conspiracy has generated an economic advantage to promoters
e. Some damage may result if the concept/conspiracy is not challenged
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Well, since Tuskegee and Paperclip happened, how can there be any people who don't believe in any conspiracies?
People believe they happened . . . however, the degree of influence of the paper clip individuals and their Nazi Philosophy is greatly debated as it relates to influencing NASA, MK-Ultra, the CIA, advanced aircraft development just to name a few . . .
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I have been trying to figure out how this Forum decides which Conspiracy/Conspiracy Theory/Concept to debate/discuss/debunk . . . . . . I think I have come up with a short list . . . see below . . . please add any you think I missed . . .

I think the criteria for confronting a concept/conspiracy are the following once a threshold has been reached:

a. The concept/conspiracy has reached a significant level of popularity
b. People recognize the name of the concept/conspiracy and recognize a generalized definition
c. There is significant disagreement regarding the fact base or error in the logic of the concept's adherents/promoters
d. Promotion of the concept/conspiracy has generated an economic advantage to promoters
e. Some damage may result if the concept/conspiracy is not challenged
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I debunk things if I see a mistake in them that's not been clearly addressed. I really don't consider the issues on your list. I usually end up addressing topics that I've got some interest in, or are tangentially related. Often I build upon the debunking efforts of others, but try to make it more accessible.

The key consideration though is if there's some bunk there. i.e. if there's a mistake or a lie - like "contrails always quickly dissipate".
 

Mat

Member
I have been trying to figure out how this Forum decides which Conspiracy/Conspiracy Theory/Concept to debate/discuss/debunk . . . . . . I think I have come up with a short list . . . see below . . . please add any you think I missed . . .

I think the criteria for confronting a concept/conspiracy are the following once a threshold has been reached:

a. The concept/conspiracy has reached a significant level of popularity
b. People recognize the name of the concept/conspiracy and recognize a generalized definition
c. There is significant disagreement regarding the fact base or error in the logic of the concept's adherents/promoters
d. Promotion of the concept/conspiracy has generated an economic advantage to promoters
e. Some damage may result if the concept/conspiracy is not challenged

I like them in principle apart from d which seems utterly without rational requirement.
 
Top