What scares those who scream "conspiracy theorist"

did it really work? it turned the forum in a safe space for people to spout nonsense without challenge. why are you afraid of people questioning what you post?

Because they don't want to see questions about their conspiracy theories that might cause them to doubt things.

To do this, they pretend questions like "what do you believe" and "why do you believe that" are somehow unreasonable.

No it did not ..It provided a space where people could argue CT without being badgered and ridiculed by other posters.

You should look at my posts here in this forum and then ask again if I am afraid of people questioning me?

I find religion the biggest nonsense ever invented ..Should I be allowed to go on that forum and give them a piece of my mind ?

What is wrong with the CT charter below ?

• Do not demand proof for someone else's theories.
• This forum is for the discussion of Theories: they may not be readily conclusive. Instead, provide a constructive counter-argument. "eg. Lizard people exist in NYC subways!" "Actually a 2017 study found that subways were only populated by rats - [source link]."
• This forum is not for satire.
• Yes, we ironically mention lizard-men a lot in here, but this forum is for genuine discussion on topics of merit.
• Do not force conclusions.
• Theories inherently are based on some supporting evidence, but that evidence frequently can neither be proven true nor false.
• This is not a science forum or youtube channel.
• Discussions that expect users to absorb hours worth of media snips and/or scientific lecturing to follow the context of the discussion do not belong here. Discussions that surround a specific piece of media (Eg. Loose Change, a popular 9/11 conspiracy film) belong in their own threads.
• Do not regurgitate source material.
• This is NOT a facebook wall. Videos/media/links you do include in your arguments need to be supported with your own words, enough that a reader should be able to follow the conversation without viewing the media - users may be on dial-up, behind firewalls, etc. that restrict their access to streaming content.
• Address the topic, not the poster.
• Back and forth between a handful of posters that goes on for pages and ages is the precursor to a thread falling off the rails. See the pyramid chart below for what is considered acceptable guidelines.
• Respect the opinions of others.
• Trying to spend 100 odd posts convincing 1 or 2 specific users that your views are more valid than theirs is what causes the most issues. You have to accept that not all people are willing to alter their beliefs to suit you - and they have the freedom to hold those beliefs (short of soapboxing). Remember: many users read, but do not post, and may be interested in reading your opinions - so the opinion of 2 or 3 other prolific posters is rarely meaningful, and should neither be seen as a victory or a threat.

This thread is not about my beliefs other then the false disingenuous misrepresentation of said beliefs spouted by you.. I kindly point you to the relevant threads regarding my beliefs

Plus Dohnjoe making nonsensical accusations at the same time .... Ur a nice bunch

Do you find anything wrong with that charter ?

I have no issues with the changes made to the charter.

So you find the charter presented in the form I posted acceptable ?

I'm quite happy with the current forum charter. It seems reasonable to me. You just don't want people asking questions about your posts.

On the one hand your believe your opinions are valid but on the other your opinions are special and require special rules.

But this doesn't really answer my point.

I'm asking you how you tell the difference between what is valid and what isn't.

You are now claiming that you just disagree with the NIST's report. I take it that means you agree that it's not possible that the building was demolished then.

So if a conspiracy theorist suggested that the building was demolished secretly, in your opinion, is this a valid conspiracy theory or an invalid one?

What if they claimed that it was demolished by secret silent explosives? Valid or invalid?

What if they claimed that it was demolished by 3 people? Valid or invalid.

Again, not discussing the particulars of these theories, I'm asking if you view them as valid or not.

Great. Very mature for you to actually cop to a mistake. Very refreshing too.

Could you still answer the question though. Did you post that claim without actually check if it was true?

You claimed to "see the minister saying they were going to stop using it" Why did you claim this? Did you just make it up on the spot?

Do you see how this kind of thing is a bit illustrative of what conspiracy theorists do and why it's a problem?

But asking why and fact checking what you post before you post it is very important.

The question is did you actually check your sources or did you just glance at something and post it as fact is important.

People don't check things these days, they see something that sounds scary and run with it, hence all fake news crap we get via social media.

Genuine question, where did you first see the story about Moderna batch being recalled?

Was it on an proper, fact checked website from a reputable news source?

Or was it from social media?

Lol Yea. People should stop asking questions. That sounds right for a conspiracy theorist.

So since you're again avoiding questions when caught out, we have a perfect self contained example of the issues with conspiracy theorists.

You made a claim that was false. Most likely because you half remembered something, and you did nothing to verify if it was true or not.

Then when challenged on it, you still didn't do any checking, you doubled down on the untruth. You even seemed to pluck a new factoid out of the air. You claimed to have heard something from a minister. This could be something you half remembered, it could be something you just made up on the spot. I can't tell.

Then after it was made abundantly clear that your claim was false you admittedly did the mature thing and cop to it. But now, you're returning to the same dishonest tactics of ignoring and avoiding things that make you doubt your beliefs.

This exact thing seems to be happening again and again on different scales for conspiracy theorists.

Thank you for illustrating the points being made.

When you guys are actually able to address my points without running away and whinging.

Why would I change my position because dishonest people keep being dishonest and ignoring difficult questions.

Are you going to go back and address the last batch of very short questions I asked you?

It's almost like conspiracy theorists are embarrassed by the reasons they believe what they believe. Almost as if it's a shameful secret they don't want to discuss...

Well take this point here

• "Theories inherently are based on some supporting evidence, but that evidence frequently can neither be proven true nor false."

Some supporting evident being the important part, when was the last time a conspiracy theorist posted any sort of "supporting evidence"?

it also bares pointing out that no one is stopping conspiracy theorists from posting their conspiracy theories. There's claims posted here that would get justified bans from lots of places.

People asking questions does not prevent this.

People asking questions only prevents the illusion that the conspiracy theories are unquestionably true.

I've noticed my friends/colleagues during this pandemic seem to have a lot less patience/tolerance for the anti-vax types and deniers and pseudo-science. Indeed, I think that overall mood towards disinformation is being reflected on sites like Reddit, where there's been a backlash

That said, the site has a conspiracy forum which is an absolute cesspit, Holocaust denial, anti-vaxx, everything.

Not really. A best conspiracies like 9/11 only distract from actual issues.

At the same time it fosters unhealthy distrust in actual experts journalists and institutions. For example if you believe in some versions of 9/11 conspiracies you could also believe that large swathes of the engineering sector are in on the plot. And if all of them could be in on the plot maybe the entire climate science sector is also involved in a plot to fake climate change.

Believing it for one conspiracy makes it easier to believe for another.

Then on top of that we have bullshit merchants like Alex Jones who build a disprotionately influential media empire based in part on 9/11 shite.

No one is talking about banning conspiracy theories like that here.

We're just saying that people should also be free to question and challenge them.