Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

YouTube announces it will no longer recommend conspiracy videos

Options
12357…21

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    King Mob wrote: »
    It depends. If they are still promoting the idea that corona virus can be cured by staring at the sun or drinking bleach, then they should at the very least not be allowed to monetise their videos on that subject.
    Also their videos should not be promoted with the same weight as medical doctors and actual experts

    I don't believe they should be prevented or barred from making videos though. If Youtube bans them, they can host their own videos else where.


    Could you please go back and explain why you found Nal's example of staring at the sun so alarmist and nonsense compared to the real example of drinking bleach?

    I'm asking you if somebody is discussing conspiracy theories without encouraging nonsensical behaviour or selling harmful products, should they be allowed to have their say. I think that was reasonably clear.

    The Nal hadn't qualified their original statement with the bleach drinking post when I said what they said was alarmist.

    I stated that saying staring at the sun was alarmist in relation to people sharing opinions that deviate from the "norm". I hadn't discussed people who want to encourage people to drink bleach.

    For the record if you encourage people to drink bleach you deserve whatever punishment you receive, preferably criminal charges. Can we move on from this narrative and actually discuss the point at hand?

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #123
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    nullzero wrote: »
    I'm asking you if somebody is discussing conspiracy theories without encouraging nonsensical behaviour or selling harmful products, should they be allowed to have their say. I think that was reasonably clear.
    Yup. And I answered that directly.
    I don't believe they should be prevented or barred from making videos though.
    nullzero wrote: »
    The Nal hadn't qualified their original statement with the bleach drinking post when I said what they said was alarmist.

    I stated that saying staring at the sun was alarmist in relation to people sharing opinions that deviate from the "norm". I hadn't discussed people who want to encourage people to drink bleach.

    For the record if you encourage people to drink bleach you deserve whatever punishment you receive, preferably criminal charges. Can we move on from this narrative and actually discuss the point at hand?
    The point at hand though is that there are conspiracy theorists who do promote nonsensical and harmful behavior both for profit and because they genuinely believe.

    At what point do claims become acceptably sensible for you?
    For example, I think it's nonsense to claim that 5G is related to Coronavirus.

    Do you think that this conspiracy theory has some validity?
    If so, what distinguishes it from invalid things like the idea that MMS can treat the coronavirus?


  • Options
    #124
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yup. And I answered that directly.




    The point at hand though is that there are conspiracy theorists who do promote nonsensical and harmful behavior both for profit and because they genuinely believe.

    At what point do claims become acceptably sensible for you?
    For example, I think it's nonsense to claim that 5G is related to Coronavirus.

    Do you think that this conspiracy theory has some validity?
    If so, what distinguishes it from invalid things like the idea that MMS can treat the coronavirus?

    I haven't argued about the validity of anything. That is pretty clear of you have read my posts.

    My issue is with the idea that people need to be insulated from ideas that aren't part of the "norm". Is the silencing of the people who discuss these topics eventually going to lead to others being silenced for other reasons. I believe people can judge things based on their merit and don't require to be insulated from even the wackiest theories. Sensible or not most people can make judgements on these theories by themselves.

    As for specific items you have chosen to bring up, I haven't got an opinion on them and I'm not interested in being dragged off on a tangent as is your want, nor am I obliged to.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #125
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    nullzero wrote: »
    I haven't argued about the validity of anything. That is pretty clear of you have read my posts.
    But you have declared that the alternative idea that MMS can treat coronavirus is nonsense...
    nullzero wrote: »
    Is the silencing of the people who discuss these topics eventually going to lead to others being silenced for other reasons.
    But this is exactly the same hyperbolic claim you were accusing others of a few posts ago...
    nullzero wrote: »
    I believe people can judge things based on their merit and don't require to be insulated from even the wackiest theories. Sensible or not most people can make judgements on these theories by themselves.
    .
    And yet we have people drinking bleach to cure illnesses.
    We have people claiming mass shootings are faked...
    We have people saying the holocaust didn't happen...
    We have people saying the Earth is flat...

    If people can make their own judgments whether something is nonsense or not, why do some people believe things that are clearly nonsense?

    Do you think that there aren't people willing to take advantage of these credulous believers?


  • Options
    #126
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    King Mob wrote: »
    But you have declared that the alternative idea that MMS can treat coronavirus is nonsense...


    But this is exactly the same hyperbolic claim you were accusing others of a few posts ago...


    And yet we have people drinking bleach to cure illnesses.
    We have people claiming mass shootings are faked...
    We have people saying the holocaust didn't happen...
    We have people saying the Earth is flat...

    If people can make their own judgments whether something is nonsense or not, why do some people believe things that are clearly nonsense?

    Do you think that there aren't people willing to take advantage of these credulous believers?

    I believe people have the right to self determination. That means they are free to do things that are sensible or not. Whether or not that keeps you up at night is a problem for you to work on.

    Glazers Out!



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    nullzero wrote: »
    I believe people have the right to self determination. That means they are free to do things that are sensible or not. Whether or not that keeps you up at night is a problem for you to work on.

    Kingmob gaslighting again. It a tactic he uses often. Most people don't spot it though, it's his posting style!


  • Options
    #128
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Kingmob gaslighting again. It a tactic he uses often. Most people don't spot it though, it's his posting style!

    I'm familiar with his shtick. He wants you to only engage on his terms. I never brought up any of the topics relating to bleach etc but I had countless posts on the topic.
    Another poster was proven to be demonstrably wrong in stating that islamophobic attacks in India were caused by posts on social media sites when most of that hatred is being spread by word of mouth and posters as those people are too poor to have Internet access. Never let facts get in the way of a good pull on the old heart strings.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #129
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,775 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    20 phone masts have been targeted in arson attacks over the weekend, this is why social media companies, like Youtube, are forced to take action


  • Options
    #130
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    20 phone masts have been targeted in arson attacks over the weekend, this is why social media companies, like Youtube, are forced to take action

    Still has nothing to do with what's going on in India.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #131
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,775 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    nullzero wrote: »
    Still has nothing to do with what's going on in India.

    Of course it does. Certain conspiracy theories can have harmful effects. Muslims are being attacked in India over fake information, likewise cell towers in the UK.

    It directly counters the sentiment that conspiracy theories are just "fun and harmless".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Of course it does. Certain conspiracy theories can have harmful effects. Muslims are being attacked in India over fake information, likewise cell towers in the UK.

    It directly counters the sentiment that conspiracy theories are just "fun and harmless".

    Nonsense. You are ignoring the fact that Internet based companies have no influence over what's happening in India because it isn't happening online. That is a fact. A fact you have consistently ignored. You must enjoy ignoring facts.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #133
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,775 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    nullzero wrote: »
    Nonsense. You are ignoring the fact that Internet based companies have no influence over what's happening in India because it isn't happening online. That is a fact. A fact you have consistently ignored. You must enjoy ignoring facts.

    Perhaps reread my post above carefully.

    Certain conspiracy theories can be harmful, no matter how they are spread. If they are spread via social media, then it's unsurprising those private platforms take mitigating action.

    I don't think you are disagreeing with what I've written there.


  • Options
    #134
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Perhaps reread my post above carefully.

    Certain conspiracy theories can be harmful, no matter how they are spread. If they are spread via social media, then it's unsurprising those private platforms take mitigating action.

    I don't think you are disagreeing with what I've written there.

    Re read your own posts carefully. Earlier you were saying one thing now it's something else.

    "Both are related to fake online theories linked to Coronavirus being spread on social media platforms". That is what you said earlier, attributing islamophobic attacks in India to being spread online.

    The situation in India can only be tentatively described as a conspiracy theory as it is really just an old prejudice finding a new expression.
    It has no means of being spread by social media as the infrastructure in those communities for that to happen doesn't exist.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #135
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,775 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    nullzero wrote: »

    "Both are related to fake online theories linked to Coronavirus being spread on social media platforms". That is what you said earlier, attributing islamophobic attacks in India to being spread online.

    They are being spread via social media, as well as traditional media

    https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/coronavirus-india-tiktok-whatsapp-videos-being-used-to-mislead-people-on-coronavirus-say-police-2205317
    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/04/tablighi-jamaat-india-muslims-coronavirus.html
    https://time.com/5815264/coronavirus-india-islamophobia-coronajihad/

    Again, you seem to agree with my points


  • Options
    #136
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    They are being spread via social media, as well as traditional media

    https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/coronavirus-india-tiktok-whatsapp-videos-being-used-to-mislead-people-on-coronavirus-say-police-2205317
    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/04/tablighi-jamaat-india-muslims-coronavirus.html
    https://time.com/5815264/coronavirus-india-islamophobia-coronajihad/

    Again, you seem to agree with my points

    Can we agree that social media is in reality not the driving force behind this disgusting behaviour but rather an offshoot of the main drivers of this situation?

    In point of fact media of any type has little bearing on anything in situations like this which are born of ignorance and lack of education and generally tend to spread amongst the lower ranks of a deeply divided society, which India truly is sadly.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #137
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    nullzero wrote: »
    Re read your own posts carefully. Earlier you were saying one thing now it's something else.

    "Both are related to fake online theories linked to Coronavirus being spread on social media platforms". That is what you said earlier, attributing islamophobic attacks in India to being spread online.

    The situation in India can only be tentatively described as a conspiracy theory as it is really just an old prejudice finding a new expression.
    It has no means of being spread by social media as the infrastructure in those communities for that to happen doesn't exist.

    Reminds me of when the US army showed pictures of 9/11 to Afghan tribal leaders. They looked bewildered and had no clue this all happened. Yet supposedly this grand conspiracy began in their country. We forget internet access is largely non existent in very poorest of countries. 



  • Options
    #138
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Reminds me of when the US army showed pictures of 9/11 to Afghan tribal leaders. They looked bewildered and had no clue this all happened. Yet supposedly this grand conspiracy began in their country. We forget internet access is largely non existent in very poorest of countries. 


    That's quite an eye opener. Something I'd never considered.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #139
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    nullzero wrote: »
    I believe people have the right to self determination. That means they are free to do things that are sensible or not. Whether or not that keeps you up at night is a problem for you to work on.
    Kinda dodging all of the points I made...

    The problem I see there is that not all people are as sensible as you give them credit for. A large amount of people believe things that are obviously false. This isn't through their own fault.


  • Options
    #140
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »
    Reminds me of when the US army showed pictures of 9/11 to Afghan tribal leaders. They looked bewildered and had no clue this all happened. Yet supposedly this grand conspiracy began in their country. We forget internet access is largely non existent in very poorest of countries. 


    Because the Saudi billionaires you claim to be behind it couldn’t pony up for some broadband.


  • Options
    #141
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    King Mob wrote: »
    Kinda dodging all of the points I made...

    The problem I see there is that not all people are as sensible as you give them credit for. A large amount of people believe things that are obviously false. This isn't through their own fault.

    Here's the thing, you didn't make any points and in no particular order, you rambled on about how people deny different things have happened, and then you blathered on about people drinking bleach again, you also bemoaned people's ability to make poor decisions and you were unhappy for some reason that I had agreed with you on something because you obviously felt that made me a hypocrite in some sense and therefore giving you an in onto the moral high ground of which you feel so entitled to inhabit.

    If people are going to make money out of gullible people then surely you should be protesting every time a collection plate gets passed around a church on a Sunday morning, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you lack the conviction to carry out such an action.

    Here's another thing, a lot of people do believe things that are obviously false, just like your belief that you actually made a worthwhile point in your previous post when in fact you were indulging in some sort of stream of consciousness in a vain attempt to win an argument that had gotten away from you about two pages ago.

    Glazers Out!



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    nullzero wrote: »
    Here's the thing, you didn't make any points and in no particular order, you rambled on about how people deny different things have happened, and then you blathered on about people drinking bleach again, you also bemoaned people's ability to make poor decisions .
    .
    I made my point pretty clearly.
    You are saying that people are able to judge the difference between reality and nonsense pretty easily.
    But many people believe things that are very clearly nonsense, for example the idea the Holocaust didn't happen or the Earth is flat etc etc.
    If all people are able to judge between reality and nonsense, then people wouldn't believe these and other nonsensical things.

    So why, in your opinion, do people believe things that are nonsense?

    In my opinion it is not because of any fault or failing of the people themselves.

    QUOTE=nullzero;113161737]
    If people are going to make money out of gullible people then surely you should be protesting every time a collection plate gets passed around a church on a Sunday morning, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you lack the conviction to carry out such an action.
    go.[/QUOTE]
    Lol. Why would I do this and how does it effect anything if I didn't?
    This is a very silly point.


  • Options
    #143
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    King Mob wrote: »
    I made my point pretty clearly.
    You are saying that people are able to judge the difference between reality and nonsense pretty easily.
    But many people believe things that are very clearly nonsense, for example the idea the Holocaust didn't happen or the Earth is flat etc etc.
    If all people are able to judge between reality and nonsense, then people wouldn't believe these and other nonsensical things.

    So why, in your opinion, do people believe things that are nonsense?

    In my opinion it is not because of any fault or failing of the people themselves.

    QUOTE=nullzero;113161737]
    If people are going to make money out of gullible people then surely you should be protesting every time a collection plate gets passed around a church on a Sunday morning, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you lack the conviction to carry out such an action.
    go.

    Your "point" was just you sounding off on any number of topics at once. It was neither clear nor concise. Perhaps our perception just differs on this but I feel that if you look at what you wrote objectively you may well see how I perceived it the way I did.

    You want me to explain why I feel people believe things that are nonsense? Do I really need to explain this to you? I would assume you are intelligent enough to work this out for yourself.

    Well to put it in as simple terms as possible, people believe in nonsense because they can. They are free to determine what they believe, we can qualify a lot of nonsensical beliefs by citing environmental factors like the values of people's social group etc but ultimately humans can self determine, sadly a lot of humans cannot see this to be the case and live their lives as slaves to superstitious nonsense when all along they've had the freedom to choose another path without realising it.

    To my sensibilities, people should be given a blank slate at the beginning of their lives to choose their own values and beliefs, but alas society isn't structured that way and we move forward as a species at a slower rate because of ties to outdated ideas, although it is also a double edged sword as so many positive things are passed down through generations.

    My whole argument here revolves around self determination and a person's right to choose what they believe or don't believe and the freedom to express things within reason, which with the exception of a few charlatans and snake oil salesmen encompasses most of what get categorised as "conspiracy theories".

    Where we differ is that you seem to feel that people need to be directed in what they get exposed to because they are not competent enough to self determine because of the limitations of the weakest minds in society. I cannot support that idea as it is too restrictive to allow for the type of freedom people deserve.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #144
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    nullzero wrote: »
    Well to put it in as simple terms as possible, people believe in nonsense because they can.
    You have misunderstood my question.
    Why do some people when presented with ideas that are clearly wrong choose to believe them?

    Your claims don't really apply to the conspiracy theories that I pointed to as these are all theories that are not accepted as the norm and none of them are driven by superstition. These people are given the option of reality and nonsense, yet they choose the nonsense idea.
    What do you think leads them to their choice?

    If most people can tell the difference between reality and nonsense, why do some people fail to identify something as nonsense?
    nullzero wrote: »
    My whole argument here revolves around self determination and a person's right to choose what they believe or don't believe and the freedom to express things within reason, which with the exception of a few charlatans and snake oil salesmen encompasses most of what get categorised as "conspiracy theories".
    Ok, so for example, if a person wishes to express the conspiracy theory that the holocaust didn't happen and that it was all a hoax perpetrated by the Jews, then this person should be allowed to do so as they wish and wherever they wish?
    nullzero wrote: »
    Where we differ is that you seem to feel that people need to be directed in what they get exposed to because they are not competent enough to self determine because of the limitations of the weakest minds in society. I cannot support that idea as it is too restrictive to allow for the type of freedom people deserve.
    That's not my position nor have I stated anything of the sort.


  • Options
    #145
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    King Mob wrote: »
    You have misunderstood my question.
    Why do some people when presented with ideas that are clearly wrong choose to believe them?

    Your claims don't really apply to the conspiracy theories that I pointed to as these are all theories that are not accepted as the norm and none of them are driven by superstition. These people are given the option of reality and nonsense, yet they choose the nonsense idea.
    What do you think leads them to their choice?

    If most people can tell the difference between reality and nonsense, why do some people fail to identify something as nonsense?


    Ok, so for example, if a person wishes to express the conspiracy theory that the holocaust didn't happen and that it was all a hoax perpetrated by the Jews, then this person should be allowed to do so as they wish and wherever they wish?


    That's not my position nor have I stated anything of the sort.

    I'm sorry but I have not misunderstood your question. In fact I have answered it eloquently.
    If that answer didn't allow room for you to direct the discussion in a manner that suits you then I'm afraid that is your problem.
    I never stated that conspiracy theories are based in superstition for instance, but somehow you have misinterpreted what I said into that context. How you accomplished that is a mystery to me.

    I'm not here to discuss holocaust denial, so I'm not sure why you keep raising that issue (twice so far) as it has nothing to do with what I have said at any point. The eagerness some people have to equate all "alternative" thought with holocaust denial is indicative of the type of heart string pulling narrative you wish to impose on anybody who defends freedom of thought or expression, as if all freedom of thought and expression can be linked to some sort of anti-semitic holocaust denial nonsensical thought process. This is in point of fact an extremely lazy way to argue a point, it is a tired hackneyed approach to debate and is quite a shameful tactic to employ.

    If you wish to address what I have said and debate on a level playing field instead of trying to constantly raise the spectre of holocaust denial and bleach drinking et al I will happily talk to you. As things stand you are attempting to move the discussion into a sphere that suits you as where we have been up to now has been outside of your comfort zone. I'm afraid I will not be rail roaded. Try playing the ball and not the man going forward please otherwise you are debating in bad faith.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #146
    Lantus
    Registered Users Posts: 3,027 ✭✭✭Lantus


    Education is the only real solution. A large corporate trying to censor content won't improve anyone's ability to rationalise any piece of information. The only cure to stupid is knowledge and learning.


  • Options
    #147
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    nullzero wrote: »
    I'm sorry but I have not misunderstood your question. In fact I have answered it eloquently.
    No you have not.

    "people believe in nonsense because they can." Does not really address the question I am asking you.
    nullzero wrote: »
    I'm not here to discuss holocaust denial, so I'm not sure why you keep raising that issue (twice so far) as it has nothing to do with what I have said at any point.
    I'm bringing it up as a real example of alternative thought that most people would agree is nonsense and agree is somewhat extreme. However it is also one that does not inherently cause harm or endangers people like the alternative thoughts about MMS and other medical topics.
    nullzero wrote: »
    The eagerness some people have to equate all "alternative" thought with holocaust denial is indicative of the type of heart string pulling narrative you wish to impose on anybody who defends freedom of thought or expression, as if all freedom of thought and expression can be linked to some sort of anti-semitic holocaust denial nonsensical thought process. This is in point of fact an extremely lazy way to argue a point, it is a tired hackneyed approach to debate and is quite a shameful tactic to employ.
    I have not done this.

    Holocaust denial is one type of "alternative" thought.

    What makes holocaust denial an unacceptable type of "alternative" thought? What makes it different to the types you find acceptable?


  • Options
    #148
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,360 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    King Mob wrote: »
    No you have not.

    "people believe in nonsense because they can." Does not really address the question I am asking you.


    I'm bringing it up as a real example of alternative thought that most people would agree is nonsense and agree is somewhat extreme. However it is also one that does not inherently cause harm or endangers people like the alternative thoughts about MMS and other medical topics.


    I have not done this.

    Holocaust denial is one type of "alternative" thought.

    What makes holocaust denial an unacceptable type of "alternative" thought? What makes it different to the types you find acceptable?

    The holocaust happened. People who deny that typically have an axe to grind with Jewish people. Therefore their opinions do not deserve to be taken seriously. They do however have the right to express them.

    You knew exactly what you were doing when raising that particular topic, even if you deny it, it is clear for anyone to see who reads your posts. You used an emotive topic to make my stance look unreasonable, which quite frankly is pathetic.

    Holocaust denial should be allowed to be expressed and reasonable people will recognise it for what it is and discredit it.

    As for people selling snake oil, I also feel that people are inherently intelligent enough to discern when somebody is a charlatan.

    Overall, whatever nonsense is being peddled people will generally be capable of identifying it as it comes at them which nullifies the need to ban everything to "protect" people.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #149
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,775 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    nullzero wrote: »
    The holocaust happened. People who deny that typically have an axe to grind with Jewish people.

    Cheerful_spring is not going to like this view


  • Options
    #150
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    nullzero wrote: »
    The holocaust happened. People who deny that typically have an axe to grind with Jewish people. Therefore their opinions do not deserve to be taken seriously. They do however have the right to express them.

    ...

    Overall, whatever nonsense is being peddled people will generally be capable of identifying it as it comes at them which nullifies the need to ban everything to "protect" people.
    Ok. So we can agree with holocaust denial is nonsense.

    But when people come across this theory, some people do not identify it as nonsense. They believe that it has merit and that it is true.

    You seem to be suggesting that this is solely because they have racist attitudes towards Jewish people.
    To me, that seems a bit reductionist.

    How about the alternative thought that the the world is flat? Why do people come to believe this is true?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Cheerful_spring is not going to like this view

    I have an axe to grind with Jews? I have no problem with Jews and can you find posts Where I claimed; I hated them.


Advertisement