Conspiracy theorists aren't real. My theory is that they are a fabrication meant to make us disprove anything that goes against the mainstream narrative.
In reality, the truth is always somewhere in the middle.
In reality, the truth is always somewhere in the middle.
I've always held that lizard people control some of the government, and that the moon landing was fake but obviously shot on location.
Stanley Kubrick is nothing if not a true auteur. Also probably eats mice whole.
Few people tell their stories with full fidelity anyway, we gloss over our mistakes and make everything better and less banal by instinct.
This is a dumb take in the context of outlandish conspiracy theories.
A lot of conspiracy theorists think they’re in the middle. They identify some crazies in their group but still hang out with them and use their presence to justify their own, still extreme, opinions as the moderate view.
Calling it a "dumb take" however is more likely to invite fighting rather than discussion.
Is there any historical evidence that the conspiracy theorists were ever half-right (or right at all)? To be sure, there have been conspiracies in the past but our inability to keep a secret seems to have always trumped attempts to conceal (but IANAH, I am not a historian).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_balance
You should not assume views have merit by default.
But subliminal messaging is considered a conspiracy theory. Maybe it's not as obvious as messages played backwards, but if it's not happening already, there are definitely people working on it. The UK Government has a "nudge unit". I suppose arguably it's not a conspiracy theory any more because we all just assume it goes on.
Are the vaccine conspiracies really that outlandish, in a world where the US government once intentionally infected black people with syphilis and let them die in the Tuskegee syphilis study? (I'm triple vaxxed, just pointing it out.)
At one point before Snowden, the whole NSA thing was considered a conspiracy theory by many.
World governments have done some really crazy things in the past and kept it secret for a long time. Why do we assume now is any different?
They didn’t infect them afaik. They didn’t treat them in order to study the progression. Only slightly less monstrous.
But yea, most of the vaccine conspiracies are outlandish. Like the number 666 being in some patent number means it’s the end times, etc.
Clearly the vaccine conspiracy theories are mostly nuts, but I think what GP poster was getting at is that the truth is often somewhere in the middle. Yeah there are no microchips from Bill Gates in there, but.. I don't know.. will we end up finding that a bunch of safety data was fudged to get a vaccine out quickly? Maybe. That happens anyway, so it wouldn't surprise me that much. Certainly in the UK, some of the data was technically correct but presented to the public in a misleading way.
Point is, I'm sure our governments are up to all sorts of shady stuff, just as they always have been, and in the future we'll find out that some of the conspiracy theories were not completely incorrect. The fact that they have done so much shady stuff in the past is what drives many of these conspiracy theories.
And back to the original point, does it really seem that outlandish that CIA psyops might be intentionally seeding these groups with nutty beliefs because they were getting uncomfortably close to something actually true? We'll find out in 50 years, I suppose, if we're still alive...
Not that outlandish but my own experience has shown that people can come up with crazy all on their own. Time will reveal, or it won’t.
Believing the vaccine has microchips in it is bottom percentile stupidity.
What is the theory you’re wondering about?
Call me a conspiracy theorist if you wish, but I am not so sure these people actually exist. Except of course the occasional nut case that goes out yelling on the streets and you would simply ignore IRL.
But my question still stands, if not the microchip thing, what is a conspiracy theory about the vaccines that has merit worth considering given 5 minutes of critical thinking and research? None, as far as I’m aware.
Like a klein bottle but also not.
There are some real nut cases out there, like the whole "Q" thing. But I think that the true believers and the most fervently vocal ones are a fairly small minority and the rest look at it the same way as Santa and the Easter bunny.
Ha ha, as an atheist, I chuckled at where you stopped. After unraveling the Santa Conspiracy as a child I began to question all of our other "cultural lore".
Like the Easter Bunny.
[1] https://googlethatforyou.com/?q=are%20sources%20important
[2] https://poop.is/elementaryly-rapid
[3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCIS_(TV_series)
[4] https://poop.is/raggedly-anguished
[5] https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/m...