What to do about the conspiracy theory problem?

[RoarEmotion]

Sorry to hurt your feelings as I jumped in on others comments in this thread.Having said that be careful when you denounce others. Saying better not do it puts you again in that zealotry category. So have this thread to yourself and I will get back to the footy stuff.Enjoy.

Debate on climate change thread. All opinions get posted there.

Your premise is that denying climate change isn’t a conspiracy theory but something still up for discussion like when we all thought the sun revolved around the earth and anyone who didn’t was the conspiracy theorist.

So if you can not take offence that most people would put you in the conspiracy camp because of the way it is framed here then try and make some points based in scientific fact on the climate change thread.

I think what is relevant is why you have formed that set of beliefs. That speaks to the crux of this thread and if you can get to that in particular it would be of use here without getting into the specific climate debate.

For me I definitely rely heavily on the experts but I’m also an engineer and see the rate of change in co2 levels being orders of magnitude different to any other changes other than when major climatic disruption took place (Eg volcano / asteroid) - so I see a pattern of rapid change = massive climate impact and to expect otherwise is delusional IMO. So in terms or seeking patterns as is discussed here that is how it is framed for me.

I’m always open to being wrong and seeing some other evidence would be great. I also think climate change is difficult for all of us to context because our lifetime is an inconsequential blink of time compared to how this has happened historically. So while 50 years is over half our life it is kind of meaningless when other changes took place over Millenia. This makes it ripe for its really cold in Melbourne right now so climate change is bs. Day framing instead of 10000 year framing.

So I think another key item of belief is that people look for anything That supports their belief and ignore stuff that doesn’t.

 

[RoarEmotion]

Interesting this thread got started here and this shows up in my twitter.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1603343572291686400

The penetration of the three conspiracies here is mind boggling to me.

 

[Baloo]

Interesting this thread got started here and this shows up in my twitter.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1603343572291686400

The penetration of the three conspiracies here is mind boggling to me.

Scary *smile*. But then you remember that 50% of the population are of below average intelligence, it makes it easier to believe the bottom 10% are just unable to think critically or logically about these conspiracies.

Edit: In saying that, some of the cookers I've come across were quite intelligent and smart in their fields, but susceptible to conspiracy theories.

 

[Brodders17]

Scary *smile*. But then you remember that 50% of the population are of below average intelligence, it makes it easier to believe the bottom 10% are just unable to think critically or logically about these conspiracies.

Edit: In saying that, some of the cookers I've come across were quite intelligent and smart in their fields, but susceptible to conspiracy theories.

I dont think it is necessarily the "bottom 10%", it is often people who want to think they are smart, or very smart, but have no other way to show it, other than spouting nonsense while claiming they know better.

 

[Baloo]

I dont think it is necessarily the "bottom 10%", it is often people who want to think they are smart, or very smart, but have no other way to show it, other than spouting nonsense while claiming they know better.

During COVID there were a lot who had fallen into the interweb rabbit hole and by the time they started to realise they might be wrong, were too invested and proud to admit it, so they doubled down.

 

[tommystigers]

My 2c

So, let's consider why a person might perpetuate a complete nonsense as fact:

Lack of intelligence, unable to apply thought.
Ignorance, laziness.
Uneducated.
Mental health concerns, consequences of substance abuse etc.
Narcissism, control of others, manipulation, et al.
Power, personal gain.
Money.
Nurture, environment, early life experience, education, helicoptered.
Nature, mentally wired in an abnormal way.
Fame, infamy, desire to be accepted.
Superiority complex, egocentric.

And many others.

This is why combative measures to defeat the dangerous ideas that may lead to harm of others are extremely difficult to formulate.
Censorship in the modern era is all but impossible - unless we want to live under a North Korean system that effectively means no ability to speak.
Who controls the narrative? The government, a non-partisan group ( is that actually a real thing), an elected body? Someone has to make that decision, but it already comes with some sort of bias. Many legislations step way over the line in order to keep a small minority in check at the expense of the majority.

At what stage does freedom of thought and expression impinge upon the ability to live without fear? When a persons thoughts turn to action? Likely too late by then.

Complex.

 

[Sintiger]

Interesting this thread got started here and this shows up in my twitter.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1603343572291686400

The penetration of the three conspiracies here is mind boggling to me.

The one that got quoted to me was that "an eruption on Mt Etna produced 10,000 times more CO2 than mankind has during our whole time on earth."
This has been quoted multiple times over the years since 2016 as fact

 

[AngryAnt]

Still the best off-season debate/rage posting in PRE's history.

The best Jerry...the best!!!

 

[RoarEmotion]

The one that got quoted to me was that "an eruption on Mt Etna produced 10,000 times more CO2 than mankind has during our whole time on earth."
This has been quoted multiple times over the years since 2016 as fact

It’s just doesn’t make sense on any level. Decades of drilling dinosaur juice out of the ground that was made over millions of years over the entire globe and burning it vs 1 eruption.

Oil being produced is effectively invisible though and a number on a piece of paper. You see a volcano.

 

[DavidSSS]

you are quick to label.As I said in my previous email I will go back to the footy talk sections and leave you to pontificate and wallow in your own self importance.A club that only allows speech that one wants to hear.

You really refuse to get it don't you?

Ok, I don't care what particular theories/hypotheses you choose to believe or not believe (they are for threads on those topics) but:
1) do you perceive there to be more outlandish or crackpot ideas, ones which you would characterise as possibly being conspiracy theories, in circulation or wider circulation these days?
2) If yes, why do you think this is the case?

This is the topic of this thread, not the specifics of any particular theory or hypothesis.

When reflecting on conspiracy theories it is interesting to note that a pile of now-declassified documents have been released on the Kennedy Assassination. Now that is a good example from a previous era. Clearly a lot of conspiracy theories abound about Kennedy's shooting, even films were made. But, it was more of a background issue after the initial hoopla died down and while there was speculation about links to various organisations, there was no accompanying grand conspiracy of the sort we see with the Q-Anon people. There are accusations about maybe CIA involvement or some other organisations to perpetrate the deed, but not the sort of whole of government or elite factions running devious schemes controlling people, media, government, lobby groups etc. The sort of stuff Q-Anon and similar come up with is on a much larger and much more complete scale than simply killing the President of the USA. The conspiracy theories today talk of whole of society control, not of isolated, but significant and important, events being perpetrated.

The question is not just the prevalence of conspiracy theories, but their scope.

DS

 

[MD Jazz]

The question is not just the prevalence of conspiracy theories, but their scope.

DS

It's the scope that always gets me.

And the theories always rely on many many many people being in on the conspiracy. It's human nature to not keep secrets, to blab. The amount of people required to be involved and also keep quiet in some large consiparcies (JFK assassination, 9/11, alien existence) make them almost automatically unbelievable. People love to talk, to divulge secrets. Keeping everyone involved quiet forever is more unbelievable than the actual storylines of these theories themselves.

 

[larabee]

Back to the topic of why people believe in conspiracy theories. Here's a classic example of a coalition MP defending the cookers, this week of all weeks.

Dutton shed a tear yesterday for the Qld cops who were killed. I hope he takes Rennick to task and banishes him from the party. But he won't. The coalition, desperate for votes, are playing to the cookers for their votes.

When the media and some factions of the government are allowing, and pushing the conspiracy theory, those who are susceptible to conspiracies will succumb.

View attachment 17669

Dutton would just use “freedom of speech” as an excuse not to censure this guy.
But a brown woman makes a comment about Anzac Day, and the rabid right start frothing at the mouth and drive her out of the country.

Conservative governments have a lot to answer for in enabling these conspiracy theorists, and signalling to them that their views are valid.

A few years ago the conservative government were banging on about “balance” in the media (ie: the ABC). It seemed that balance meant that for every, say, climate scientist that went on Q&A they had to have some climate change denier. So the nut job was getting equal time as the scientist.
However to be truly balanced, they should have had 19 climate scientists for that one denier.
Spokespeople for these loony conspiracies are given equal time on mainstream media when they should be relegated to that kooky story slot after the weather.

 

[Baloo]

My favorite conspiracy theory is that Neil Armstrong didn't go to the moon, but a movie studio somewhere in the US.

 

[TigerForce]

My favorite conspiracy theory is that Neil Armstrong didn't go to the moon, but a movie studio somewhere in the US.

Red Rock Canyon State Park (California)

 

[gold1]

You really refuse to get it don't you?

Ok, I don't care what particular theories/hypotheses you choose to believe or not believe (they are for threads on those topics) but:
1) do you perceive there to be more outlandish or crackpot ideas, ones which you would characterise as possibly being conspiracy theories, in circulation or wider circulation these days?
2) If yes, why do you think this is the case?

This is the topic of this thread, not the specifics of any particular theory or hypothesis.

When reflecting on conspiracy theories it is interesting to note that a pile of now-declassified documents have been released on the Kennedy Assassination. Now that is a good example from a previous era. Clearly a lot of conspiracy theories abound about Kennedy's shooting, even films were made. But, it was more of a background issue after the initial hoopla died down and while there was speculation about links to various organisations, there was no accompanying grand conspiracy of the sort we see with the Q-Anon people. There are accusations about maybe CIA involvement or some other organisations to perpetrate the deed, but not the sort of whole of government or elite factions running devious schemes controlling people, media, government, lobby groups etc. The sort of stuff Q-Anon and similar come up with is on a much larger and much more complete scale than simply killing the President of the USA. The conspiracy theories today talk of whole of society control, not of isolated, but significant and important, events being perpetrated.

The question is not just the prevalence of conspiracy theories, but their scope.

DS

It is not about refusing to get it that is the problem. It is the immediacy you and some others here label people. As I said previously I was responding to a later comment in this thread,not necessarily related to the opening post.Clearly attracted a hornets nest.Before I go and crawl under a rock away from this thread you did ask a couple of questions.
1. Outlandish or crackpot ideas? Would be dangerous to label all and sundry as conspiracy theories.There have been plenty of so called crackpot ideas that have turned out to be true or useful for that matter.Dare to question these ideas like you and others here should allow you ideas /insights to be questioned.Also those that clearly feel threatened here and choose to belittle (tiny mind retort by one silly person on this thread) others that are not towing the line go knock yourselves out.

re 2: I actually do not know.All I wish to add is anyone should be allowed to speak their mind in a non violent way and should allow anyone to speak their mind back in a non violent way.Using the football analogy we have competing supporters sitting side by side without incident most of the time.However when things go violent it changes the ball game.

And to finish: a Question for you.Is corruption in your scope range of conspiracy theorydem?

 

[Baloo]

There have been plenty of so called crackpot ideas that have turned out to be true or useful for that matter.

Got any examples of these?

 

[RoarEmotion]

Got any examples of these?

Women voting?

Cigarettes aren’t good for you.

Germs spread disease.

Plenty of anti establishment stuff that turns out to be good. Gold makes some good points. I get it that some people have lost patience with climate change denial but we can all maintain civility especially if it is given. Not directed at anyone in particular but I do find some of the put downs distasteful.

And for thet we lost the chance to understand what drives the belief - we have a bunch here who think climate change is real and someone who doesn’t / potentially isn’t convinced that it is. Isn’t the insight now to be curious and understand why given that’s what the thread was about.

So @gold1 what are the sources of information / thinking etc that drives why you think what you do?

 

[Baloo]

Women voting?

Cigarettes aren’t good for you.

Germs spread disease.

Are these examples of conspiracy theories?

 

[gold1]

Women voting?

Cigarettes aren’t good for you.

Germs spread disease.

Plenty of anti establishment stuff that turns out to be good. Gold makes some good points. I get it that some people have lost patience with climate change denial but we can all maintain civility especially if it is given. Not directed at anyone in particular but I do find some of the put downs distasteful.

And for thet we lost the chance to understand what drives the belief - we have a bunch here who think climate change is real and someone who doesn’t / potentially isn’t convinced that it is. Isn’t the insight now to be curious and understand why given that’s what the thread was about.

So @gold1 what are the sources of information / thinking etc that drives why you think what you do?

what drives my way of thinking? In short I dare to question.I do not automatically accept a theory/idea or what may be written in the paper!I assume you are referring to the climate change speak in my first post on this thread? That actually could have been about any topic but I responded to that post where it was more about climate change than conspiracy theories.
Even so I will try and answer your question and use the climate change debate as the subject.

I call climate change a climate CYCLE. Severe weather events have been recorded since Cooks arrival.Possibly before. I love a Sunburnt Country was not written as a fairytale! Time and time again we here of severe weather events like the flooding in Adelaide-being the highest for 70 years.One example of it happening before.The current so called triple La nina event we are experiencing,surprise surprise has happened before and the same areas today were affected in the fifties.The bad NSW fires?Were they as bad as the 1994 fires that started in August,surrounded three quarters of Sydney and was not extinguished till Feb the following year? The Lara bushfires.Ash Wednesday,Black Saturday. and so on.I think you get the drift.

IMO one thing that humankind can do for this planet is to outlaw any logging in the Amazon,the lungs of Earth.Worldwide planting of billions of trees would do far more to tackle Co2 levels than what is being proposed.

A simple example is here in Geelong.It was decided to plant trees on an old tip site near the CBD about 3 years ago,I have never seen such a short term growth spurt like this.It is now a forest thick and healthy. The council was worried that the unused tip was going to explode from the emissions before they took the step to plant the trees.

Enough now.As I said will get back to the footy threads.Safer there..........

 

[Baloo]

@gold1 you must have missed my questions. What examples of the "There have been plenty of so called crackpot ideas that have turned out to be true or useful for that matter." can you provide?