Poorly educated, unaccomplished people are in abundance and they are the most susceptible to believing in the devil theory of history - that the world's problems are as simplistically explained as evil suits conspiring against them somewhere. There is a reason why conspiracy theories are most popular among Muslims, blacks, and lower end whites.
One would be unwise to read much more into it than that.
Then again I'm probably a shill paid by the CIA to dissuade you from the tr00th of space lizards and the Trilateral Commission ruling all and controlling all so you might want to disregard what I'm saying to you.
Yeah, only poorly educated and unaccomplished people believe conspiracy theories, like that the government has a facility that is recording everyone's phone calls, storing all my emails and dick pics. Only poorly educated and unaccomplished people would believe that someone like Edward Snowden exists. I mean even the name sounds fake. Snow-den, pffft.
I didn't say only. But it is unsurprising that conspiracists tend to be on the lower end of educational achievement as they prefer unfalsifiable explanations over more weighty methods like Occam's razor. People that have a solid background in the social sciences, for example, are going to be inclined to agree that how the world works is more complicated than a few bankers or whatever sending out orders from central control. The uneducated will not be exposed to these more sophisticated ideas though so they'll say the Rothschilds run everything or some shit.
There are exceptions. Some conspiracists are well educated. But if one is a believer that the world's troubles are down to some secret plot chances are they are not radically better educated than the typical Egyptian that believes in the veracity of the Protocols.
conspiracists tend to be on the lower end of educational achievement
Then,
Some conspiracists are well educated
So is it that a conspiracists (as you named them) are stupid until their theory is proven true? Or is it that you're having problems understanding the "theory" part of conspiracy theory?
Their theories are rarely proven true and their 'evidence' for current, specific government plots is often disclosures of top secret government black ops of the past that few if any theorized to exist before disclosure.
But the larger point is that people have to be pretty stupid to believe a lot of conspiracy theories as an explanatory model over more straightforward, facts based approaches. One's credibility is better maintained by sticking to what can reasonably be proven. Conspiracy theories set up a hall of mirrors with one dubious notion building on another; the next one more absurd than the last.
So yeah, conspiracists are usually pretty stupid. They have a bad rep for a reason.
In any event I reckon I've said my peace. I should remember where I am. Just watch out for those Rockefellers. They're putting fluoride in the water.
Yeah, your problem is that you don't understand the word theory in conspiracy theory. Here I'll try to explain it as simply as possible.
Hypothesis - This is a guess. It doesn't have anything to back it up, it's just a guess. Nothing says that it isn't true, but nothing says that it could be either.
Theory - This is a guess that has things that back it up. It has 100% true facts and evidence that shows that the theory could be true, but no one knows for 100% certainty that it actually is true. The Theory of Evolution is an example. There's tons of evidence that shows it could be true, but it's not yet at 100%. In order for something to be a theory, it has real, true evidence that shows that it could be true, but doesn't have all the evidence needed to show that it's 100% true.
Law, fact or truth - This is where something is proven to be 100% true, with no possibility that it could ever be wrong.
I don't know, that's the simplest I can explain it. But you seem to be either confusing theory with hypothesis (it's like you don't understand the difference between them), or you're having a problem with the definition of theory itself. You see theory means that there's 100% true, undeniable evidence that says the theory could be true. You seem like you want to call someone stupid if they believe a theory that has only this much evidence, but if a theory has that much evidence then the believer isn't stupid.
A theory that has tons of evidence doesn't make it true, and a theory that has little evidence doesn't make it false. You don't seem to understand this. Also you don't seem to understand that in order for something to be a theory, there is 100% true, undeniable evidence to support it. Without evidence, it wouldn't be called a theory.
And I have to say this - "People that have a solid background in the social sciences, for example, are going to be inclined to agree that " using Rockefellers, fluoride, Rothschilds, CIA, space lizards, and Trilateral Commission in your argument shows that you're trying to cover up the fact that you know you're wrong by needing to use a reductio ad absurdum (or simply put, a straw man) argument.
Actually, here I want to try to do what you're doing because you make it look fun. - Only poorly educated and unaccomplished people will believe that a trilby will stay on my head because of the theory of gravity, while people that have a solid background in the social sciences, for example, are going to be inclined to agree that it does because of more straightforward, facts based approaches. The uneducated will not be exposed to these more sophisticated ideas though.
view the rest of the comments →
Joe_McCarthy ago
Poorly educated, unaccomplished people are in abundance and they are the most susceptible to believing in the devil theory of history - that the world's problems are as simplistically explained as evil suits conspiring against them somewhere. There is a reason why conspiracy theories are most popular among Muslims, blacks, and lower end whites.
One would be unwise to read much more into it than that.
Then again I'm probably a shill paid by the CIA to dissuade you from the tr00th of space lizards and the Trilateral Commission ruling all and controlling all so you might want to disregard what I'm saying to you.
birds_sing ago
Yeah, only poorly educated and unaccomplished people believe conspiracy theories, like that the government has a facility that is recording everyone's phone calls, storing all my emails and dick pics. Only poorly educated and unaccomplished people would believe that someone like Edward Snowden exists. I mean even the name sounds fake. Snow-den, pffft.
Joe_McCarthy ago
I didn't say only. But it is unsurprising that conspiracists tend to be on the lower end of educational achievement as they prefer unfalsifiable explanations over more weighty methods like Occam's razor. People that have a solid background in the social sciences, for example, are going to be inclined to agree that how the world works is more complicated than a few bankers or whatever sending out orders from central control. The uneducated will not be exposed to these more sophisticated ideas though so they'll say the Rothschilds run everything or some shit.
There are exceptions. Some conspiracists are well educated. But if one is a believer that the world's troubles are down to some secret plot chances are they are not radically better educated than the typical Egyptian that believes in the veracity of the Protocols.
birds_sing ago
Then,
So is it that a conspiracists (as you named them) are stupid until their theory is proven true? Or is it that you're having problems understanding the "theory" part of conspiracy theory?
Joe_McCarthy ago
Their theories are rarely proven true and their 'evidence' for current, specific government plots is often disclosures of top secret government black ops of the past that few if any theorized to exist before disclosure.
But the larger point is that people have to be pretty stupid to believe a lot of conspiracy theories as an explanatory model over more straightforward, facts based approaches. One's credibility is better maintained by sticking to what can reasonably be proven. Conspiracy theories set up a hall of mirrors with one dubious notion building on another; the next one more absurd than the last.
So yeah, conspiracists are usually pretty stupid. They have a bad rep for a reason.
In any event I reckon I've said my peace. I should remember where I am. Just watch out for those Rockefellers. They're putting fluoride in the water.
birds_sing ago
Yeah, your problem is that you don't understand the word theory in conspiracy theory. Here I'll try to explain it as simply as possible.
Hypothesis - This is a guess. It doesn't have anything to back it up, it's just a guess. Nothing says that it isn't true, but nothing says that it could be either.
Theory - This is a guess that has things that back it up. It has 100% true facts and evidence that shows that the theory could be true, but no one knows for 100% certainty that it actually is true. The Theory of Evolution is an example. There's tons of evidence that shows it could be true, but it's not yet at 100%. In order for something to be a theory, it has real, true evidence that shows that it could be true, but doesn't have all the evidence needed to show that it's 100% true.
Law, fact or truth - This is where something is proven to be 100% true, with no possibility that it could ever be wrong.
I don't know, that's the simplest I can explain it. But you seem to be either confusing theory with hypothesis (it's like you don't understand the difference between them), or you're having a problem with the definition of theory itself. You see theory means that there's 100% true, undeniable evidence that says the theory could be true. You seem like you want to call someone stupid if they believe a theory that has only this much evidence, but if a theory has that much evidence then the believer isn't stupid.
A theory that has tons of evidence doesn't make it true, and a theory that has little evidence doesn't make it false. You don't seem to understand this. Also you don't seem to understand that in order for something to be a theory, there is 100% true, undeniable evidence to support it. Without evidence, it wouldn't be called a theory.
And I have to say this - "People that have a solid background in the social sciences, for example, are going to be inclined to agree that " using Rockefellers, fluoride, Rothschilds, CIA, space lizards, and Trilateral Commission in your argument shows that you're trying to cover up the fact that you know you're wrong by needing to use a reductio ad absurdum (or simply put, a straw man) argument.
Actually, here I want to try to do what you're doing because you make it look fun. - Only poorly educated and unaccomplished people will believe that a trilby will stay on my head because of the theory of gravity, while people that have a solid background in the social sciences, for example, are going to be inclined to agree that it does because of more straightforward, facts based approaches. The uneducated will not be exposed to these more sophisticated ideas though.