How do you react to conspiracy nuts?

[Deity Dude]

One of my favorite quotes:

"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you."

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
Finally, the term conspiracy theory is really a poor one or at least an extremely general one. A conspiracy is when 2 or more people plan something. If you post here that the food in my refrigerator is a result of my wife and I going shopping, you are a conspiracy theorist. A much better term would be government skeptic.

To conspire is more than just two people planning something. It also requires deliberate secrecy from others and an unlawful (or unfair if you will) motive/action.

To be a conspiracy theory you'd have to suggest, for example, that you stole the food and that you have food in there that no-one knows about.

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by Dauphin


To conspire is more than just two people planning something. It also requires deliberate secrecy from others and an unlawful (or unfair if you will) motive/action.

To be a conspiracy theory you'd have to suggest, for example, that you stole the food and that you have food in there that no-one knows about.

Well I guess it depends on which definition you use.

1. to agree together, esp. secretly, to do something wrong, evil, or illegal: They conspired to kill the king.

2. to act or work together toward the same result or goal.

3. to plot (something wrong, evil, or illegal).

4. to plan or plot secretly.

1) allows for illegal, wrong or evil activity but does not require it.

2) is the definition I am most familiar with, but I will admit that in recent times many people assume some sort of wrongdoing so 1) which allows for it but does not require it has probably become more popular.

3) mentions, but does not require, wrongdoing or illegal activity.

4) does not mention wrong or illegal just secretive.

It's similiar to UFO. Everyone equates UFO with alien spacecraft when it really means unidentified flying object.

[Theben]

Kick 'em in the nuts.

[Straybow]

Sometimes try to reason with them. Sometimes ignore them. Sometimes laugh at them, but that laughter is always tinged with the sadness of their delusion.

[C0ckney]

Originally posted by BeBro
Asking critical questions about politics/the guvmint/whatever is pretty much normal (and even needed in an open society). However the classical conspiracy stuff is more than a healthy bit of skepticism. Most of the time you see a rejection of any "official" version followed by the presentation of an alternative "truth". Of course, heaven forbids that one applies the entire criticism/skepticism thing to that as well. That is when conspiracy stuff moves from normal criticism to irrational "I want to believe" nonsense.

i find that conspiracy theorists argue in a rather similar way to creationalists. they pick little holes in the 'official' version and then based on that, substitute their own version of events (without troubling themselves by backing up what they say) and don't for a moment consider how ridiculous what they're suggesting sounds.

[Julian Delphiki]

Ask them to tell more, take notes and provide Hollywood with endless stream of scripts.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by DaShi


What could you do to this guy that life already hasn't?

[OzzyKP]

Btw, speaking of crazy conspiracy nuts, I got a call from a guy a while ago who said the CIA was shooting lasers at his liver. So a friend of mine called him up pretending to be a CIA agent:

http://www.snipeme.com/radio.php?sr=6

http://www.snipeme.com/radio.php?sr=7

Speaking of which.... I think I'll start a new thread for it.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
2) is the definition I am most familiar with, but I will admit that in recent times many people assume some sort of wrongdoing so 1) which allows for it but does not require it has probably become more popular.

I would never use conspire to mean definition 2. *shrug*

[Ecthy]

Deity Dude is quite to the point here. Asking questions is the way to go, what many bashers of conspiracy theories forget.

These are of course ridiculous anyway.

And Winston, that remark about voting Democrat was quite a distortion of reality

[Slade Wilson]

Originally posted by rmsharpe

Physics disproves the second gunman theory; the trajectory and positioning of Oswald and the bullets has been tested and proven to be true.

Do you have some sources\book names handy to reference on this? I was just discussing this with a friend and i all i could back this (kind of) statement up with was that i had seen a special on history channel on the topic. Something specifically relating to the physics of the shots would be great.

[Provost Harrison]

I go into anaphalactic shock and swell up to eight times my normal size, ie, I look like I did about this time last year

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by rmsharpe

There's no investigation on a conspiracy because no such investigation is necessary; U.S. intelligence agencies dropped the ball and some nutball Saudis crashed planes into our buildings. I know it's hard to believe, but that's exactly what happened.

No investigation is necessary. What a joke. If a homeless person gets murdered they investigate it. But I guess this isn't important enough.

BTW I know you hate "conspiracy theories" but, did it ever occur to you that the official story is a "conspiracy theory"

Again I am not saying Bush did it, all I am saying is a well-funded, unbiased, thorough investigation would have been nice.

Originally posted by rmsharpe

Physics disproves the second gunman theory; the trajectory and positioning of Oswald and the bullets has been tested and proven to be true.

Yeah I saw that special too. I have also seen countless specials and read countless articles and books that "prove" just the opposite. So I guess it all depends on who's "proof" you want to believe. It is a well known fact that the Warren Commission omitted and changed evidence. That always makes me suspicious. As far as I am concerned it is an open question


]

[Slade Wilson]

well-funded, unbiased

Cant have it both ways

IMO an investigation would be pointless since no matter what it revealed people would continue pushing whatever agenda they had before the investigation. It would just be another evidence weapon.

Yeah I saw that special too. I have also seen countless specials and read countless articles and books that "prove" just the opposite. So I guess it all depends on who's "proof" you want to believe. It is a well known fact that the Warren Commission omitted and changed evidence. That always makes me suspicious. As far as I am concerned it is an open question

IIRC he doesnt have this kind of evidence relating to gun physics. I plan to overwhelm him in the moment with temporarily irrefutable evidence

...That makes me wonder why in this 'information age' we have less truth than ever before. Just points of view, not truth