Merged Psychology of Conspiracy Theoriests

[WSEN]

Yo yo yo what up what up guys!
I'll see what you guys have to say!

First off, I am too dumb with the science to explain everything or to debunk things nor do I have the time nor the effort to do so. Also, whenever I am confronted with conspiracy theories, my sense of certainty goes away, which makes me doubt what I know and I hate that. I am totally fine with the uncertainties of life and doubt but when it comes to things like pseudoscience/conspiracy theories/mysticism and other weird ****, it makes me feel uncomfortable as the implications of the conspiracy theory, if true, could be immense and frightening. First off, I want to ask you guys this. What do you think of the psychology of these conspiracy theorists? First I saw them as unreliable, crazy crackpots but then the more I looked into them, since I was ignorant of the facts, I thought that they would be even more careful and meticulous of their fact checking than other people because, the conspiracy theory comes after the facts, after joining things together. I used to think that the facts that they would write are completely b/s and incompetent and or made up but more often than not, it was true what they are saying. Why would they have an incentive to lie? Their research is well done in my opinion. Of course, there are websites that promote nonsense and b/s such as collective-evolution and such but as you know, there is no motivation for conspiracy theorists to lie about their facts+they are very anal with their fact checking as they have a higher threshold of reputation to hold. But when I do look at the facts, it's surprising because I would also have came to such a conclusion of the conspiracy theorists. For example, the obvious conclusion that I came across to the Malaysian Airlines case was, Aliens. If you weigh up all the facts, of course, it would seem like a plausible conclusion. This is to illustrate a point. However, I guess you could make all sorts of theories with all the facts you have given to you and you may pick and choose which facts to use of things that happened that day (9/11) and link it to your theory.


(Why are people interested in boring conspiracy theories? Most popular ones are very boring, such as moon landing or JFK. I mean, even if true or false? So what? Who cares? Wouldn't something much more grandiose and macro such as UFOs and the NWO be much more entertaining and perplexing?)

I respect the work everyone is doing here, even if you guys may/may not be doing it purely for fun.

If people could further elaborate, that'd be great.

 

[kid meatball]

Why would they have an incentive to lie?

If their research was as good as you say it is, it would turn up evidence that contradicts their bias. They gloss over that stuff, so they don't actually have to lie. Simple.

 

[Craig4]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110504080730.htm

Here is an interesting study. CTers may be pretty much people who would do the things they accuse the government of. I assume accusing people of doing reprehensible things they would do is sort of transference. They confront their own moral demons by assuming a government would do what they want to but can't.

 

[Horatius]

Why would they have an incentive to lie?

Well, some of them (Alex Jones and Richard Gage, to name two well-known ones) are professional liars. That is, they knowingly lie about CTs for personal profit. Both these guys' entire income derives from lying about CTs.

Others are just honest to god crazy. They really can't tell the the difference between truth and lies.

Others are just plain old-fashioned wrong. They think they're doing "research" and finding "facts", but they're just too stupid or too ignorant to get them right. Have you never heard the "Guy at The Bar" who is spouting off about some subject, but is clearly ignorant about the subject he's spouting off about? Knowing the difference between good evidence and bad, between good sources and bad, between good analysis and bad, are key skills that scientists, engineers, historians and other professionals spend years learning. CTists think they can pick up professional-level analytical skills from watching YouTube and listening to Alex Jones. That's just plain wrong, and symptomatic of their fundamental problem.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Your basic CTer is running an agenda, intending to damage a person or group. Anything they do is with that goal in mind. This is why you can't show them the fatal flaws in their theories, they really don't care if the facts don't add up, they just want to smear someone. The objective here is to fuel hate and fear, and whatever it takes will be done.

 

[rambaldi]

. What do you think of the psychology of these conspiracy theorists? First I saw them as unreliable, crazy crackpots

Conspiracists come in a few flavours, there are

1. Those who know they are lying, but do it anyway, for money or for political reasons

2. Those who are merely dumb, believe the lies of the first group, and parrot es them while they are too lazy to check if there is any truth to it

3. Those who need some kind of conspiracy to explain why the world in general, and their life is not what they want it to be. It's far more attractive to them to believe (and blabber about it) in some evil conspiracy than face the fact that they are actually not as smart as they think and saddled with an abbrasive Personality (that's why so many of the CTs around here seem more interested in being annoying and simply saying the same thing over and over again, than actually delivering facts)

4.those who might have some mental problems

 

[SpitfireIX]

Conspiracists come in a few flavours, there are

1. Those who know they are lying, but do it anyway, for money or for political reasons

2. Those who are merely dumb, believe the lies of the first group, and parrot es them while they are too lazy to check if there is any truth to it

3. Those who need some kind of conspiracy to explain why the world in general, and their life is not what they want it to be. It's far more attractive to them to believe (and blabber about it) in some evil conspiracy than face the fact that they are actually not as smart as they think and saddled with an abbrasive Personality (that's why so many of the CTs around here seem more interested in being annoying and simply saying the same thing over and over again, than actually delivering facts)

4.those who might have some mental problems

Succinctly summed up by the four Ps of conspiracism: Paranoia, Publicity, Politics, and Profit.

 

[sylvan8798]

Why does this sound like another one of those "I'm not really capable of getting all this stuff, and I don't really believe these CT nutcases, but doesn't this little thing they say sound like it could be real?"

 

[marplots]

Succinctly summed up by the four Ps of conspiracism: Paranoia, Publicity, Politics, and Profit.

One more: Perversity.

 

[Tomtomkent]

For some it is a need to feel safe. If you think a small group of terrorists can strike at the heart on New York or that a normal citizen can shoot many people at a school or cinema then the safety blanket is whipped away. Better to feel that only a super powerful conspiracy can be responsible. It bolsters the idea that you live somewhere safe where only simulated victims pretend to be hurt.

The rest are people falling for tricks we are all capable of: thinking that something repeated a few times is a fact (have three different people tell you Lee Oswald's photo is faked or that there were nine shots at JFK and you are more likely to accept it must be true because many people can not all be wrong), misunderstanding that human memory is flawed and we should expect conflicting reports, falling prey to logical fallacies, and so forth.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I suggest we use the term "Conspiracy Mythologists" instead of "Theorists". It give them the proper ranking.

 

[LSSBB]

I suggest we use the term "Conspiracy Mythologists" instead of "Theorists". It give them the proper ranking.

Sounds too grand. Behaviorally, "Conspiracy Junkies" is the better term.

 

[Belz...]

Your basic CTer is running an agenda

...which amounts to "government is bad, keeping me down. That's why my life sucks." in a lot of cases.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Yo yo yo what up what up guys!

'Sup yo?

I'll see what you guys have to say!

First off, I am too dumb with the science to explain everything or to debunk things nor do I have the time nor the effort to do so. Also, whenever I am confronted with conspiracy theories, my sense of certainty goes away, which makes me doubt what I know and I hate that. I am totally fine with the uncertainties of life and doubt but when it comes to things like pseudoscience/conspiracy theories/mysticism and other weird ****, it makes me feel uncomfortable as the implications of the conspiracy theory, if true, could be immense and frightening. First off, I want to ask you guys this. What do you think of the psychology of these conspiracy theorists?

Others have answered this so well in this thread, I won't bother.

First I saw them as unreliable, crazy crackpots

Go with your gut feeling, yo.

but then the more I looked into them, since I was ignorant of the facts,

CTists choose to ignore facts, depending on your ignorance of them.

I thought that they would be even more careful and meticulous of their fact checking than other people because, the conspiracy theory comes after the facts, after joining things together.

After making stuff up, yo.

I used to think that the facts that they would write are completely b/s and incompetent and or made up but more often than not, it was true what they are saying.

Actually, no. More often than not, what they say is made up b/s and/or incompetent.

Why would they have an incentive to lie?

Thus, the question of the psychology of the CTist mindset. Already well answered above.

Their research is well done in my opinion.

Can you give examples?

Of course, there are websites that promote nonsense and b/s such as collective-evolution and such but as you know, there is no motivation for conspiracy theorists to lie about their facts+

As you know, yo, there is plenty of motivation for them to lie.

they are very anal with their fact checking as they have a higher threshold of reputation to hold.

Can you give an example of one who has a positive reputation?

But when I do look at the facts, it's surprising because I would also have came to such a conclusion of the conspiracy theorists. For example, the obvious conclusion that I came across to the Malaysian Airlines case was, Aliens.

It was actually djinns. See how CTists can be wrong?

If you weigh up all the facts, of course, it would seem like a plausible conclusion. This is to illustrate a point. However, I guess you could make all sorts of theories with all the facts you have given to you and you may pick and choose which facts to use of things that happened that day (9/11) and link it to your theory.

And that's exactly what they do.

(Why are people interested in boring conspiracy theories? Most popular ones are very boring, such as moon landing or JFK. I mean, even if true or false? So what? Who cares?

One man's boredom is another man's hobby.

Wouldn't something much more grandiose and macro such as UFOs and the NWO be much more entertaining and perplexing?)

About the same really.

I respect the work everyone is doing here, even if you guys may/may not be doing it purely for fun.

We have different and various motivations for exposing the lunacy and lying.

If people could further elaborate, that'd be great.

Yo're welcome.

 

[Horatius]

Why does this sound like another one of those "I'm not really capable of getting all this stuff, and I don't really believe these CT nutcases, but doesn't this little thing they say sound like it could be real?"

Just say, "The Mark of Woo". It's much easier.

 

[Brainster]

First off, I want to ask you guys this. What do you think of the psychology of these conspiracy theorists?

There are really two kinds of conspiracy theorists:

1. The early adopters, or Day One CTists. These people generally have an existing overarching conspiracy theory and so can quickly integrate any new event into their worldview. The obvious example here is Alex Jones and his New World Order bugaboo. These people are responsible for much of the early "research" that goes into backwards-assembling the "proof" of the conspiracy.

2. The converts. These people are not drawn into the CT by the event itself, but by something that is perceived (rightly or wrongly) to have occurred as a result of the event. The two classic cases in this regard are the assassination of JFK, which was perceived (incorrectly IMHO) to have led to the escalation of the US's part in the Vietnam War, and 9-11, which was perceived (correctly) to have led to the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars. These people are seduced by the hope of short-circuiting the arguments for and against the resulting outcomes. You didn't have to argue whether Vietnam was a just war or not if you believed the CIA (or Johnson) had Kennedy killed in order to accomplish their goal of escalating the war in Vietnam. Ditto with Iraq and Afghanistan; if the Bush administration did 9-11, then nothing else they did as a result has any legitimacy at all.

First I saw them as unreliable, crazy crackpots but then the more I looked into them, since I was ignorant of the facts,

Your first instinct was right, and your problem is that you were ignorant of the facts. CTists can dazzle people with their apparent depth of knowledge.

I thought that they would be even more careful and meticulous of their fact checking than other people because, the conspiracy theory comes after the facts, after joining things together. I used to think that the facts that they would write are completely b/s and incompetent and or made up but more often than not, it was true what they are saying. Why would they have an incentive to lie? Their research is well done in my opinion. Of course, there are websites that promote nonsense and b/s such as collective-evolution and such but as you know, there is no motivation for conspiracy theorists to lie about their facts+they are very anal with their fact checking as they have a higher threshold of reputation to hold. But when I do look at the facts, it's surprising because I would also have came to such a conclusion of the conspiracy theorists.

This is 100% wrong. In fact CTists play very fast and loose with the facts. Indeed, one has to be willing to ignore obvious problems with their interpretations in order to believe their facts are not erroneous. Two classics from the 9-11 Truthers:

1. The flight manifests from the hijacked planes don't include the hijackers. Two obvious problems with this. First, the Truthers link to lists of the victims aboard the planes. By definition, the hijackers are not victims, but perpetrators. Second, does it really make sense that the airlines would release flight manifests that didn't include the hijackers, and nobody would notice except the conspiracy theorists?

2. The FBI's most wanted poster for Osama Bin Laden didn't mention his involvement in 9-11. First, the FBI had plenty of reason to want Osama prior to 9-11; his involvement in the bombings of the African embassies and the USS Cole. were more than adequate. And again, nobody noticed this except the conspiracy theorists?

For example, the obvious conclusion that I came across to the Malaysian Airlines case was, Aliens.

Good lord.

If you weigh up all the facts, of course, it would seem like a plausible conclusion. This is to illustrate a point.

You use that word, plausible. I do not think it means what you think it does.

 

[SpitfireIX]

2. The FBI's most wanted poster for Osama Bin Laden didn't mention his involvement in 9-11. First, the FBI had plenty of reason to want Osama prior to 9-11; his involvement in the bombings of the African embassies and the USS Cole. were more than adequate. And again, nobody noticed this except the conspiracy theorists?

I mentioned this in a thread several years ago, but it bears repeating here. In August of 2001, I joked to a friend, "Well, I've figured out how we can solve all of our money problems. All we have to do is capture Osama bin Laden. The US government has a $5 million reward out for him." A month later I had occasion to rue the day I'd said that.

 

[dudalb]

What is interesting to me is the way that conspiracy theories are very popular with some specific demographic groups. High School and College Kids seem to particularly prone to buy into the theories.

 

[Brainster]

What is interesting to me is the way that conspiracy theories are very popular with some specific demographic groups. High School and College Kids seem to particularly prone to buy into the theories.

It's seductive, because you become an elite; one of the few who is in the know. I remember Luke Rudkowski claiming on Alex Jones that he was teaching his professors, not the other way around.

 

[carlitos]

Some conspiracy theorists are successfully trolling the JREF forum for lulz.