This is a really vague post. How is anyone supposed to respond to this?

Ok sorry I kinda see what you're getting at. Asking what created a mindset of inability to accept a truth other than a contrary point of view? Probably the feeling if being lied to or manipulated causes them to feel they are being told a lie anytime they hear an "official" story.

The opposite isn't a skeptic. The opposite is the average blissfully(read: drugged up, exhausted, malnourished and numb because of it) unaware worker who is happy to work hard because they think they get something out of it.

The attitude is essentially that of someone who has lost the mental masturbation satisfaction they used to get arguing against religion, and they seek that know-it-all satisfaction now through arguing against other beliefs. (which is all bullshit because it's all about arguing against others' views vs defending their own views. Much easier to attack a theory than to create one of your own)

Check rationalwiki.

I think 'refusing to look at the overwhelming evidence' is a rather uncharitable view of skeptics, in the same vein that tin-foil nutter is of you...

Regarding evidence, though, it must be said that it's all too common for conspiracy theorists to summarize their claimed evidence in hour-long youtube videos full of stock footage and dramatic music, which makes it very hard to take seriously & to analyze. If that were changed to more manageable formats, I imagine you would get considerably more straightforward replies.

Youtube is hardly the only platform available, nor is video the only means by which one can convey information. Yeah, there's plenty of entertainment videos on there, including from skeptics - but when you need concrete scientific material, you hit the books, or detailed and cited websites and magazines.

If the conspiracy videos actually linked to websites which had their claims and citations in writing (and links) that would be a huge step up. Most of the more organized conspiracy theorists would presumably have the script already, so it wouldn't be a big deal to grab some free service and host it there.

I have a few books from people I disagree with, but the prices tend to be steep & I think a lot of alternative media types are just bilking money out of people and I don't much care to contribute to that. That said, I do have a wide variety of e-books, and I could feasibly get my hand on some conspiracy tomes by alternative means.

Do you have any recommendations that aren't too dense and esoteric?

Idk man. Why do care?

Cognitive dissonance

They don't concern themselves with things outside of their interest and are unwilling to examine or question the world around them as long as their desires are being meet. Selfish they are.

This will answer most of your questions.

I consider myself a conspiracy theorist, but im truly skeptical about 95% of conspiracies posted on here. the reason why is the content. look at jade helm and shemitah and other recent posts to conspiracy websites that all turned out to be rubbish. yes, I know the govt lies to us, but posting misleading information is just as bad.

I think the issue is that yeah - some conspiracies are real. Sometimes, people are dicks who do things in secret behind your back. But a lot of people here have their conspiracy detector set up way higher than that, and they get a lot of Type 1 errors - false positives.

yeah I think you hit the nail on the head there. and it gets worse when you don't believe that the earth is flat and the people who do just want to call you a sheep or tell you to wake up. it makes you more cynical toward the community and even more skeptical of all conspiracy theories.

I'll take a stab at this. I imagine you would classify me as a hardcore skeptic, as I do not believe most theories proposed here.

Hanlon's razor is an adage I often keep in mind when dealing with conspiracy theories, or even most news stories. It goes something like 'Do not attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.' I think a lot of conspiracy theories fall victim to this, transforming into an anti-authoritarian tract that fuels more extensive, and overly complicated, 'true evil' narratives.

Let's be clear from the start - I don't believe governments are infallible - far from it. I think they fuck up quite often, but I believe that's because they're made of people, who often abuse the letter of the law at the expense of the spirit because they are human beings, who can be assholes. However, I don't believe that governments go around being arbitrarily evil because of vague groups of weird spiritual people at the top, or because of the ever-maligned Jews, or because of space aliens. I think that the system itself, as it is composed of many normal people, does a fine job of explaining the eccentricities. People are flawed - that doesn't go away if you add a lot of them together.

9/11 is probably the most notable conspiracy theory around here, and has been for a while - my view on that, leaving aside what others might think, is that the government fucked up and didn't take their intel seriously enough, allowing the attack to happen under their watch - a disgrace. Then, in an attempt to save face, officials used that as a excuse upon which to hang their plans to invade Iraq. I think adding propositions like faking the attack itself with thermite or energy weapons gives the government entirely too much credit, especially considering the less than stellar middle-eastern results. That's where it'll stay, until I see convincing data which contradicts such a rather barebones explanation which relies more on common human failings like incompetence or sloth rather than widespread murderous malice & deceit.

Of course, I have my criticisms of surveillance culture, and I can probably reach some semblance of a consensus on that with you (although I think malicious intent has less to do with it than some of you might) but I don't think that's the kind of thing you're talking about in the OP. If you wish to hear my view on certain specific theories, I can certainly oblige. Hope that helps you!

Oof, it's a few hours long Youtube video. I think I just made a prophecy by posting about those in another response to you just a minute or two ago! I hope you won't mind if I save the link and try to get to it later - it's a bit of a big one, and it's only Part 1!

Re: why I'm here: I mostly respond to space-related conspiracies, as they're a bit of a pet interest of mine, and I pitch in on GMOs occasionally because I've done a bit of work with those. I don't really contribute much, but I am interested in conspiracy culture (or however you'd describe it) and am working on a novel which has as its premise that a variety of space related conspiracy theories are completely true - most of them drawn from the Ancient Aliens crowd.

One of the main characters is a conspiracy theorist, so you could call it research! Although tbh it's more accurate to say that's the case because I hang around here rather than the other way around. Chicken or Egg?

Man, this could be edited down to five minutes.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'skeptic'. Do you mean the people who post to Conspiritard or TopMinds? Because, I don't consider them skeptics.

I'm a skeptic. I know full well how often we are lied to by the oligarchy, so I disbelieve what they say as a default position until sufficiently convinced.

The term 'skeptic' is one of those oft-hijacked one, much like 'scientist'. Since being 'skeptical' is considered a good thing along the same lines that 'scientific' is seen as good, everyone wants to be called that.

See, I don't exactly think it's true that that's what people who accept the govt. story as automatically true are called. There's nothing skeptical about them.

Maybe you shouldn't assign them so much power.

I don't think that people who generally accept the conventional explanation are necessarily unskeptical. Plenty of conventional explanations for things are perfectly rational and evidenced; the conspiracy narrative does not automatically gain credence just because it disagrees.

Look at things without any opinion otherwise you'll never look at reality. Look at things without any philosophy, without any prejudice, without any dogma, creed or scripture. Just look, without arrogance and see the cause of ignorance it overstands.

What's a "skeptard"?

Are those common?

In this sub?

Interesting. Can't say I've ever encountered what you're describing. Do they not exist on reddit?

Ohhhh I see what you're saying now! I guess I'm just used to hanging around scientists and whatnot, so I take a lot of conclusions as a given.

Only for a laugh or two.

...are you serious?

Because she's already be debunked. Just look up "Judy Wood debunked". Most of her claims are based on little to no evidence, so they don't even need debunking anyway.

I was under the impression that she was just disinformation at this point. Does anyone take her seriously?

So people think an invisible weapon used had enough power to cause a building to collapse...yet didn't raise temperatures beyond what was already occurring? And debris was ejected at an angle and velocity consistent with natural collapse. Use your head.

This will answer most of your questions.