conspiracy psychology debunked

[dommyboysinjapan]

There have been several political scientists, authors, and skeptics who have formulated their own opinions as to why significant percentages of the American and international public give creedence to conspiracy theories.

I have looked around on the internet and could not find any real psychological studies that were conducted by real psychologists with a controlled sample group nor could I find any real identifiable psychosis in the DSM4TR. (the recognized medical book of psychology)that specifically deals with conspiracy theory (not just general depression or feelings of paranoia which is not the same.)

Before I changed my major in university to sociology I had planned on becoming a psychologist and had taken several psychology classes where we learned about real psychology including real psychyological studies that were conducted in controlled samples that tested different aspects of human cognition and clinical pathology. To date, the only person that I have ever seen online that refers to real psychology and real studies therein to express opinions about 9/11 is Laurie Manwell. She currently holds a Bachelor of Science in both biology and psychology. She is currently working toward her PHD in psychology and when she discusses the psychology of 9/11 she refers to real studies not speculation that is favorable to the political elite.

This is a profile of who she is along with her credentials:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/laurie-manwell/a/9a1/a91

Please take the time to listen to some real psychological studies regarding social and political behaviour:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M-U27WMMfU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5LQo8Dqe-Y&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzYcuVOkbZ8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ztH1fRLcUY&feature=related

These studies are real and well documented. I would also like to add to her list of real psychology by including the Stanley Milgram study which studied the degree to which normal people could be made to comply due to the pressure of what they considered to be an authority figure. A summary of the study can be seen here:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xb8dmu_obedience-to-authority-stanley -milg_webcam

The above experiment was initially performed by doctor Stanley Milgram in 1963. The purpose of this study was to try and find out just how thousands of co-conspirators from such an advanced and cultured country such as Germany could comply to perform such horrific actions against Jewish citizens as well as other minorities at that time during the Holocaust. In the years after the Holocaust absolutely no credible researcher has ever tried to say that the Holocaust didn't happen because 1000s of people would have had to have known about it and the German government just wouldn't do these things to their own citizens (yes many of the victims during the Holocaust were German citizens that fell into certain minority groups). Yet this is the kind of rhetoric that we are confronted with today about 9/11.

With that in mind let's go through the psychology of conspiracy that is often suggested by defenders of the mainstream conspiracy theory concerning Al Qaeda.

1)Alternative 9/11 conspiracy theorists are crazy or suffer from some sort of paranoid or delusional mindset. (It is inferred here that people who accept the 9/11 Commission report's conspiracy theory are rational and sane.)
2) People believe in a 9/11 alternative conspiracy because they can't perceive that a smaller, weaker, less important actor could inflict such damage or they cannot accept that such a large tragedy could have such a baseless motive so they invent grandiose reasons and conspirators.
3) People believe in a 9/11 alternative conspiracy because they find it more comforting to believe it was their own government than Islamic terrorists.
4) People believe in a 9/11 alternative theory as a means to promote some kind of agenda like making money on books or videos.
5) People believe in a 9/11 alternative theory as a product of political party affiliation, anti American sentiment, anti government sentiment, anti Semitic sentiment, or a disdain for the Bush administration.

In every one of these speculations that I commonly see over and over again in all kinds of debunking forums and 9/11 documentaries and books and media from History Channel, Discovery Channel, to JREF, and the debunking sites (etc.), every single one of these claims is brought forward by skeptics, authors and political scientists but there is no reference at all to any solid psychological studies. NONE! ZIP! ZILCH!

Let me EASILY debunk all 5 of the above points by saying this: If any of these "psychological theories" carry any weight whatsoever, then:

1) Why are there no psychological studies to support these theories?
2) Why is it that almost all of the top members and proponents of the 9/11 Truth Movement started out by first believing the mainstream version of 9/11? Most of them did for the first few years until they researched the evidence and then changed their minds. This applies to Dr. Steven Jones, Dr. David Ray Griffin, Jesse Ventura, and virtually all of them! If there is any merit to the above 5 speculations then one would expect they would immediately adopt their conspiratorial views for the reasons that are espoused (pathology, anti Americanism, profit, etc.)
3) The third one has actually been espoused in a number of places including the "History channel documentary: The 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Fact or Fiction." Think about how incredibly stupid this theory really is! It is more comforting to think ones own government did this than to think it was some outside terrorist group??? Are you kidding me????
4) Why has there never been any medical or psychological diagnosis of people who support 9/11 conspiracy theories if they suffer from any kind of clinical disorder? What basis does anyone have to label them as crazy in the absence of any clinical evidence whatsoever?

I think the so called 9/11 skeptic community that defends the mainstream narrative by using pseudo scientific psychology to push its propagandistic agenda only serves to discedit their own skepticism. It is crystal clear for the above four reasons that one cannot pass off the aforementioned five speculations as true psychology.

 

[Childlike Empress]

"Pseudo scientific" is still a quite benevolent term. "Horse manure" would be more fitting. With that said:

 

[beachnut]

... 2) Why is it that almost all of the top members and proponents of the 9/11 Truth Movement started out by first believing the mainstream version of 9/11? Most of them did for the first few years until they researched the evidence and then changed their minds. This applies to Dr. Steven Jones, Dr. David Ray Griffin, Jesse Ventura, and virtually all of them! If there is any merit to the above 5 speculations then one would expect they would immediately adopt their conspiratorial views for the reasons that are espoused (pathology, anti Americanism, profit, etc.) ...

They say the believed the official story, but then based on zero evidence they make up delusional lies and false information. Not sure what that is mentally, sounds lie a need to spew BS. Is there a clinical term for spreading lies, hearsay and false information like Jones DRG, and Jesse the Body do?

... 4) Why has there never been any medical or psychological diagnosis of people who support 9/11 conspiracy theories if they suffer from any kind of clinical disorder? What basis does anyone have to label them as crazy in the absence of any clinical evidence whatsoever? ...

Jones made up thermite out of thin air, that sure seems crazy. Then Jones goes on to say the US caused the earthquake in Haiti. Jones might be crazy, but who is going to commit such a personable guy, he is nice and harmless, he makes up lies about 911. Evidence free lies.

...I think the so called 9/11 skeptic community that defends the mainstream narrative ...

If you say they use facts and evidence to expose the moronic claims of 911 truth, you got it right. There is only one mental issue for 911 Truth, they lack knowledge due to ignorance. They can't understand 911 due to the mental issue of ignorance. Too simple, no PhD stuff needed.

911 truth is an anti-intellectual movement based on ignorance and zero evidence. Those who don't know physics fall for the faster than free-fall junk, those who don't understand flying fall for the amazing maneuvers too complex for pilots to do lie. What 911 truth fails to have is evidence, and falling for made up nonsense like thermite and more.

 

[NutCracker]

snip

Well then. Lay all the facts on the table, RADAR data, FDR data, CVR recordings, ATC recordings, phone calls from aircraft, video evidence, photographic evidence, documents etc, etc and show us, using sound logic, how it leads us to the conclusion that the events of 9/11 was an inside job of some kind.

You can't. The TM can't. That's why the TM is a fail: it has got zero evidence in favor of its contentions. Zilch, nada, zip, njet.

CT's are defended using logical fallacies, of which your post offers some nice specimens.

1) The Milgram experiments don't prove does not prove that such a scheme was employed to bring about the events of 9/11 as you seem to imply. "Could" does not imply "has."

2) That debunkers are armchairs psychologists and no psychology studies exist does not imply 9/11 CT-ers are right. (Non Sequitur).

3) That CT-ers changed their minds does not imply they are right. (Non Sequitur).

4) Debunkers don't dismiss 9/11 CT-es using armchair psychology. (Strawman). Debunkers dismiss 9/11 CT's on the grounds that no evidence in favour of them is provided. Debunkers point out flaws in the logic of the arguments put forward by CT proponents.

I believe you are wrong about the non existence of studies about CT's, BTW. They may be rare, but I've heard about several in the last few years. At least one is here.

 

[ProBonoShill]

There have been several political scientists, authors, and skeptics who have formulated their own opinions as to why significant percentages of the American and international public give creedence to conspiracy theories.

I have looked around on the internet and could not find any real psychological studies that were conducted by real psychologists with a controlled sample group nor could I find any real identifiable psychosis in the DSM4TR. (the recognized medical book of psychology)that specifically deals with conspiracy theory (not just general depression or feelings of paranoia which is not the same.)

Before I changed my major in university to sociology I had planned on becoming a psychologist and had taken several psychology classes where we learned about real psychology including real psychyological studies that were conducted in controlled samples that tested different aspects of human cognition and clinical pathology. To date, the only person that I have ever seen online that refers to real psychology and real studies therein to express opinions about 9/11 is Laurie Manwell. She currently holds a Bachelor of Science in both biology and psychology. She is currently working toward her PHD in psychology and when she discusses the psychology of 9/11 she refers to real studies not speculation that is favorable to the political elite.

This is a profile of who she is along with her credentials:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/laurie-manwell/a/9a1/a91

Please take the time to listen to some real psychological studies regarding social and political behaviour:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M-U27WMMfU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5LQo8Dqe-Y&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzYcuVOkbZ8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ztH1fRLcUY&feature=related

These studies are real and well documented. I would also like to add to her list of real psychology by including the Stanley Milgram study which studied the degree to which normal people could be made to comply due to the pressure of what they considered to be an authority figure. A summary of the study can be seen here:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xb8dmu_obedience-to-authority-stanley -milg_webcam

The above experiment was initially performed by doctor Stanley Milgram in 1963. The purpose of this study was to try and find out just how thousands of co-conspirators from such an advanced and cultured country such as Germany could comply to perform such horrific actions against Jewish citizens as well as other minorities at that time during the Holocaust. In the years after the Holocaust absolutely no credible researcher has ever tried to say that the Holocaust didn't happen because 1000s of people would have had to have known about it and the German government just wouldn't do these things to their own citizens (yes many of the victims during the Holocaust were German citizens that fell into certain minority groups). Yet this is the kind of rhetoric that we are confronted with today about 9/11.

With that in mind let's go through the psychology of conspiracy that is often suggested by defenders of the mainstream conspiracy theory concerning Al Qaeda.

1)Alternative 9/11 conspiracy theorists are crazy or suffer from some sort of paranoid or delusional mindset. (It is inferred here that people who accept the 9/11 Commission report's conspiracy theory are rational and sane.)
2) People believe in a 9/11 alternative conspiracy because they can't perceive that a smaller, weaker, less important actor could inflict such damage or they cannot accept that such a large tragedy could have such a baseless motive so they invent grandiose reasons and conspirators.
3) People believe in a 9/11 alternative conspiracy because they find it more comforting to believe it was their own government than Islamic terrorists.
4) People believe in a 9/11 alternative theory as a means to promote some kind of agenda like making money on books or videos.
5) People believe in a 9/11 alternative theory as a product of political party affiliation, anti American sentiment, anti government sentiment, anti Semitic sentiment, or a disdain for the Bush administration.

In every one of these speculations that I commonly see over and over again in all kinds of debunking forums and 9/11 documentaries and books and media from History Channel, Discovery Channel, to JREF, and the debunking sites (etc.), every single one of these claims is brought forward by skeptics, authors and political scientists but there is no reference at all to any solid psychological studies. NONE! ZIP! ZILCH!

Let me EASILY debunk all 5 of the above points by saying this: If any of these "psychological theories" carry any weight whatsoever, then:

1) Why are there no psychological studies to support these theories?
2) Why is it that almost all of the top members and proponents of the 9/11 Truth Movement started out by first believing the mainstream version of 9/11? Most of them did for the first few years until they researched the evidence and then changed their minds. This applies to Dr. Steven Jones, Dr. David Ray Griffin, Jesse Ventura, and virtually all of them! If there is any merit to the above 5 speculations then one would expect they would immediately adopt their conspiratorial views for the reasons that are espoused (pathology, anti Americanism, profit, etc.)
3) The third one has actually been espoused in a number of places including the "History channel documentary: The 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Fact or Fiction." Think about how incredibly stupid this theory really is! It is more comforting to think ones own government did this than to think it was some outside terrorist group??? Are you kidding me????
4) Why has there never been any medical or psychological diagnosis of people who support 9/11 conspiracy theories if they suffer from any kind of clinical disorder? What basis does anyone have to label them as crazy in the absence of any clinical evidence whatsoever?

I think the so called 9/11 skeptic community that defends the mainstream narrative by using pseudo scientific psychology to push its propagandistic agenda only serves to discedit their own skepticism. It is crystal clear for the above four reasons that one cannot pass off the aforementioned five speculations as true psychology.

Cool story bro.

Why would I care about any of that, when the proof, evidence and science all clearly indicate 19 whackjobs crashed 3 planes and killed thousands of people?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Cool story bro.

Why would I care about any of that, when the proof, evidence and science all clearly indicate 19 whackjobs crashed 3 planes and killed thousands of people?

And that's the thread, folks. Nuff sed.

 

[beachnut]

Cool story bro.

Why would I care about any of that, when the proof, evidence and science all clearly indicate 19 whackjobs crashed 3 planes and killed thousands of people?

A drive-by posting, to get 911 truth believers excited that CIT may not be insane clowns with no evidence.

 

[dommyboysinjapan]

beachnut,

They say the believed the official story, but then based on zero evidence they make up delusional lies and false information. Not sure what that is mentally, sounds lie a need to spew BS. Is there a clinical term for spreading lies, hearsay and false information like Jones DRG, and Jesse the Body do?

The point is that if they had their beliefs for years and then changed their beliefs there are other things at play than are being suggesested.

Jones made up thermite out of thin air, that sure seems crazy. Then Jones goes on to say the US caused the earthquake in Haiti. Jones might be crazy, but who is going to commit such a personable guy, he is nice and harmless, he makes up lies about 911. Evidence free lies.

Steven Jones did not make up thermite. It is a simple mix of aluminum powder and iron oxide. It has been used for welding and other things for many years. This information is easily verifiable. Jones made no such claim about Haiti. Got links?

911 truth is an anti-intellectual movement based on ignorance and zero evidence. Those who don't know physics fall for the faster than free-fall junk, those who don't understand flying fall for the amazing maneuvers too complex for pilots to do lie. What 911 truth fails to have is evidence, and falling for made up nonsense like thermite and more.

Yawn. I get it. You don't feel that 9/11 Truth has credibility. Fine. That's your opinion. Got any real psychology that can 'explain away' the tendency of Truthers to believe the things we do based on solid psychology or are you just going to continue your unsubstantiated verbal assault against the movement itself?

 

[Joey McGee]

Jibberish. We know everything we need to know about why you fell into 9/11 truth. You can wave your hands until a tornado is formed but you screwed up on the science and critical thinking. You wove a story together using pseudofacts. Many of these people happen to be insane, some people are just gullible. There are a range of reasons why someone would fall into this.

Before Steven Jones published his thermite paper, he most recent work was proving that Jesus visited the Mayans as per his Mormon religion. In his case the NWO conspiracy probably fits some whacked out version of theology he has. Who cares? It's different for every truther. This is just another vapid attempt to poke holes in ideas you don't understand.

ETA: OMFG I posted right at 9:11! This scares the crap out of me. Actually, I take it back, the coincidences are just too overwhelming. 9/11 truth is real, and Jesus probably did visit the mayans.

 

[dommyboysinjapan]

NutCracker,

CT's are defended using logical fallacies, of which your post offers some nice specimens.

There are no logical fallacies in my post; just your inability to understand the main points so I will help you out.

1) The Milgram experiments don't prove does not prove that such a scheme was employed to bring about the events of 9/11 as you seem to imply. "Could" does not imply "has."

I never implied that the Milgram experiments 'proved' 9/11. I used it as an example of real psychology the results of which implicate that regular people can be influenced to do horrible things if they are coerced by authority figures. I suggested that it could possibly explain how so many people could be complicit in a massive conspiracy to do murderous things. This was part of the conclusion and was used to give some perspective as to why the German government used propaganda to fool its own citizens and then proceded to carry out mass genocide. You accuse me of logical fallacies and then you assert things that I never said. That is dishonest.

2) That debunkers are armchairs psychologists and no psychology studies exist does not imply 9/11 CT-ers are right. (Non Sequitur).

I never said it did. so it is not a 'non sequitur.'

3) That CT-ers changed their minds does not imply they are right. (Non Sequitur).

I think you need to check the term 'non sequitur' in the dictionary because you are wrong again about it being applied here. I never said that Truthers are right because they changed their minds. What I did say is that the psycho-babble that was being attributed to them was moot because it could not account for the fact that for years they believed the nonsense that you believe now.

4) Debunkers don't dismiss 9/11 CT-es using armchair psychology. (Strawman). Debunkers dismiss 9/11 CT's on the grounds that no evidence in favour of them is provided. Debunkers point out flaws in the logic of the arguments put forward by CT proponents.

This is not a strawman arguement because regardless of the 'credible' arguements that debunkers have proposed, the fact still remains that some of them pass off their armchair psychology as real psychology. My post give examples of the manners in which they do so.

I believe you are wrong about the non existence of studies about CT's, BTW.

Let's be factually accurate shall we? I never stated that no studies existed. I clearly stated that I had looked around on the internet and was unable to find anything. In your world are these two statements synonymous?

 

[dommyboysinjapan]

ProBonoShill,

Cool story bro.

Why would I care about any of that, when the proof, evidence and science all clearly indicate 19 whackjobs crashed 3 planes and killed thousands of people?

If you 'don't care about any of that' then why respond, "bro?"

 

[Walter Ego]

Why has there never been any medical or psychological diagnosis of people who support 9/11 conspiracy theories if they suffer from any kind of clinical disorder? What basis does anyone have to label them as crazy in the absence of any clinical evidence whatsoever?

Who said truthers are suffering from diagnosable psychological disorders? Like the population at large, the majority of truthers aren't clinically "crazy," though there are of course exceptions like Sean Fitzgerald who murdered his father while in a dissociated psychotic state of mind.

Patrick Leman, professor of psychology at Royal Holloway
College, University of London, had done work on the personality traits of those inclined to believe conspiracy theories. Here's a brief video showing some of his findings.


Based on psychological questionnaires, Leman and his colleague in the video can predict which groups of students are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories. This does not mean those students are suffering from clinical disorders.

 

[dommyboysinjapan]

Joey McGee,

Jibberish. We know everything we need to know about why you fell into 9/11 truth. You can wave your hands until a tornado is formed but you screwed up on the science and critical thinking. You wove a story together using pseudofacts. Many of these people happen to be insane, some people are just gullible. There are a range of reasons why someone would fall into this.

Insane and gullible. OK got any actual facts to back that up or is it just your professional opinion as a psychiatrist?

Before Steven Jones published his thermite paper, he most recent work was proving that Jesus visited the Mayans as per his Mormon religion. In his case the NWO conspiracy probably fits some whacked out version of theology he has. Who cares? It's different for every truther. This is just another vapid attempt to poke holes in ideas you don't understand.

Alright your shameless attempt to discredit a well established physicist who graduated magna cum laude and helped to work on muon-catalyzed fusion is noted. Unfortunately it does nothing to adress any of the points I have made.

 

[332nd]

So... the Panthers won the super bowl last year?

Eta: Well this year.

 

[Joey McGee]

Joey McGee,

Insane and gullible. OK got any actual facts to back that up or is it just your professional opinion as a psychiatrist?

What you seem to be saying is "No double-blinded peer reviewed tenured randomized placebo controlled study or textbook proves twoofers are crazy so we are not!" lol

Gullible: Anyone who thinks that "Pull it" means an admission to blowing up a building is gullible. Anyone who believes there were no plane parts in Shanksville is gullible. Anyone who thinks that no planes hit the buildings is gullible. That's just a fact based on dictionary definitions, right?

There are many psychologically ill people in the truth movement. I have met them. Insane people make poorer decisions. You don't have to be insane to believe in 9/11 truth but it suurrrre helps. You missed my point, bud.

Alright your shameless attempt to discredit a well established physicist who graduated magna cum laude and helped to work on muon-catalyzed fusion is noted. Unfortunately it does nothing to adress any of the points I have made.

Shameless indeed! You just don't get my point dawg, my point is that you have no point, and you're engaging in the same kind of apology that the religious do when they are having a bad day and are mad that people think they are crazy! Same debunking applies! HA!

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I never implied that the Milgram experiments 'proved' 9/11. I used it as an example of real psychology the results of which implicate that regular people can be influenced to do horrible things if they are coerced by authority figures. I suggested that it could possibly explain how so many people could be complicit in a massive conspiracy to do murderous things. This was part of the conclusion and was used to give some perspective as to why the German government used propaganda to fool its own citizens and then proceded to carry out mass genocide. You accuse me of logical fallacies and then you assert things that I never said. That is dishonest.

It's not that you can't convince 50 out of 100 people an atrocity, or 60 out of 100, or 70, 80 or even 90 out of 100. It's that there will always be a few who don't play along. And when a proposed scheme necessarily involves tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands, the number of leakers involved will reach into the hundreds or even thousands themselves.

Maintaining the secrecy of large conspiracies is simply unsustainable.

In the case of Nazi Germany, we are well aware of what happened and why because the 9/11 twoofers are their modern descendants. The paranoia, racism, bigotry and blood-lust of the nazis are readily apparent in the rantings of 9/11 twoofers. Every shooting spree carried out by twoofers that we see in the news and every post by 9/11 twoofers threatening to have us all executed tells us this is true.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Alright your shameless attempt to discredit a well established physicist who graduated magna cum laude and helped to work on muon-catalyzed fusion is noted.

Said physicist was discredited largely due to his recent involvement in a scandal at a pay-for-play vanity publisher where he helped sneak paper into publication without even undergoing their all but non-existant review process.

 

[beachnut]

wowzer, he is back

... The point is that if they had their beliefs for years and then changed their beliefs there are other things at play than are being suggesested. ...

Yes, they are unable to figure out 911, and Jones was upset with the War, so he made up thermite, out of thin air. BTW, BIG CLUE, no thermite was found at the WTC. Let me explain, thermite leaves evidence when it burns rapidly, and burns quickly, and no products, that is no evidence was found at the WTC. Go ahead find some evidence to support the insane claim of thermite. You will not, it is all talk. Did they fool you?

... Steven Jones did not make up thermite. It is a simple mix of aluminum powder and iron oxide. It has been used for welding and other things for many years. This information is easily verifiable. Jones made no such claim about Haiti. Got links? ...

Jones made up the lie thermite was used to destroy the WTC. Jones did make the claim about the United States causing the earthquake in Haiti; do a google. I know how to make thermite, Jones lied and said it was used on 911. Jones made up the thermite scam out of thin air.

at 7:07 or so. Poor Jones, he likes paranoid conspiracy theories, like you.

... Yawn. I get it. You don't feel that 9/11 Truth has credibility. Fine. That's your opinion. Got any real psychology that can 'explain away' the tendency of Truthers to believe the things we do based on solid psychology or are you just going to continue your unsubstantiated verbal assault against the movement itself?

This is not an opinion debate, it is an event. 911 truth has no evidence, you can't help their idiotic claims with talk, and you will not find evidence to save their delusions. A fact, if you want to quibble about the failure of 911 truth and think they have something, you will still fail to produce evidence. You failed last year, you will not be able to save 911 truth from failure. But go ahead, try.
If you are able to use knowledge and sound judgment you will find 911 truth is based on hearsay, lies and fantasy. 911 truth seems to believe, like you do, hearsay is evidence. It is not.

Most who believe in 911 truth lies and claims, are lacking knowledge and the capability to understand 911 and they adopt the lies of 911 truth. This is not a disorder, it is the lack of maturity, which they can be cured by knowledge and thinking for themselves. The 911 truth pushers, like Gage, are out to make money. Jones is biased political dog who loves conspiracy theories, the crazier the better. Is this how you intend on saving 911 truth? By attacking those who understand 911, instead of presenting evidence to save 911 truth. 911 truth is back to the middle ages, flat earth, and share the exact same set of evidence as Bigfoot believers; the empty set.

It is hard to debate 911 with your empty set of evidence. You will have to attack the truth, 911 truth is evidence free.

 

[Telltale Tom]

I am a bit disappointed with your post that superficially covers an interesting topic. I hope your own research in your own topic is more comprehensive. I expect you know that much has been written about it.

My favorite theory is the first part of item 2, which I have bolded below, but i think is quite different to the second part of it. People like to feel in control of their lives and it is quite inconceivable to most ,that 19 ordinary people could have such an impact on world events. A similar conspiracy theory was woven around the Serbian assassin who started Word War 1, and that was before You-tube.

And I wouldn't call item 1 paranoia and delusional mindset, but rather a perception that the world is happening outside of their control. And if half of what is shown on TV is to be believed, which it isn't, then there are conspiracies everywhere... just look at 24. I don't know how you put that into your categories.

I think that the leaders are driven by slightly different objectives. Richard Gage was a below-average second rate architect. After 20 years in the business he had made it as far as Project Manager for a small firm, handling site work. Believe me that is no-body going no-where. And then suddenly he became important, a leader of millions if he believes what he says. Even today hundreds of people turn up to hear him speak at almost any event. He is wined and dined and every year he does a world tour to convince the millions that he is right.

What would he do without truth.? It is very difficult to go back from that, back to being one of the faceless millions. He wants to be on the world stage, where he thinks he is at the moment and he will fight for his very survival.

Even if he knows there are whopping holes in his arguments, or baseless lies as some would say, he is not going to face them. Better the face of outrage and affrontery at any claim that he manipulates the truth. As long as he can still be the leader.

I don't know much about the other leaders but I expect that everyone is motivated by something quite different.

1)Alternative 9/11 conspiracy theorists are crazy or suffer from some sort of paranoid or delusional mindset. (It is inferred here that people who accept the 9/11 Commission report's conspiracy theory are rational and sane.)
2) People believe in a 9/11 alternative conspiracy because they can't perceive that a smaller, weaker, less important actor could inflict such damage or they cannot accept that such a large tragedy could have such a baseless motive so they invent grandiose reasons and conspirators.
3) People believe in a 9/11 alternative conspiracy because they find it more comforting to believe it was their own government than Islamic terrorists.
4) People believe in a 9/11 alternative theory as a means to promote some kind of agenda like making money on books or videos.
5) People believe in a 9/11 alternative theory as a product of political party affiliation, anti American sentiment, anti government sentiment, anti Semitic sentiment, or a disdain for the Bush administration.
.

 

[WildCat]

"Pseudo scientific" is still a quite benevolent term. "Horse manure" would be more fitting. With that said:

And yet no truther has managed to get a paper published in a real science journal.

Do you see the similarities between 9/11 "truth" and young earth creation "science" yet?