HOW TO ARGUE WITH A CONSPIRACY THEORIST

hugankis wrote:

why dont you try explaining how a "fire" caused building 7 to collapse symmetrically into its own footprint; that is, exactly like a planned demolition?

Why don't you try explaining why someone who wanted to blow up a building to make it look like a terrorist attack would demolish it symmetrically as if it was planned?

Don't bother trying to argue with them. They are just contrarians who get a high off of believing they are so much smarter and more informed than the "dumb, cattle-like population". They just like to build up their ego. They call other people stupid for believing the media, when they just as easily buy into their stupid underground media. They are just as controlled and filled with fake ideas. These are the same silly punks in high school who didn't want to buy into the "popular" kids, so they would do their "own thing". But they were in fact just like everyone else who was doing their "own thing."

True, some things that they argue have validity. But it should be obvious that they are stupid, because they usually try to argue anything that is common belief. In reality, not everything can be wrong. So they are just a bunch of contrarians who need an ego trip to make their poor, pessimistic lives seem more fulfilling. Oh, conspiracy theorists, you still won't get to sit at the popular kid lunch table.

It's a conspiracy theorist conspiracy to try to make everything seem like a conspiracy. Why haven't you wise conspiracy theorists cracked that conspiracy yet?

Yep* wrote:

hugankis wrote:

why dont you try explaining how a "fire" caused building 7 to collapse symmetrically into its own footprint; that is, exactly like a planned demolition?

Why don't you try explaining why someone who wanted to blow up a building to make it look like a terrorist attack would demolish it symmetrically as if it was planned?

And how do the conspiracy theorists explain how the conspirators who they think blew up the buildings got Bin Laden to take credit for it?

Don't. You'd be better off arguing with a kitchen table.

You could really study up on the facts and find out don't know what they are talking about (because ultimately their arguments are an appeal to ignorance), but in the end even if you try to refute them it will be meaningless to them because they won't trust your sources--after all they disagree with them.

Have you been talking to my parents again?

I have lived in America for over 25 years, but i'm not american. What i've always found funny was how easily the people here are led to take sides and believe one thing and not the other with or without facts. Democrat/Republican, Black/White, Liberal/Conservative, Gay/Straight, etc. So many people argue for a side instead of truth or simple right and wrong.

I've watched programs on tv where the translator speaking for the program said the complete opposite of what the person speaking actually said.(I speak more than one language)

I've seen the news(media)describe and give details of whats going on my home country in a completely fabricated light than what's really going on. Which would obviously push whatever idea they want, to be embraced.

So forgive me I come off as a conspiracy theorist. Which is what most people would call me if I explained the scenerio's i've actually seen and not just been fed.

As for 9/11 it's one of those situations where you don't really need anyone to feed you much to draw a conclusion. I don't neccessarily think it's wrong for anyone to question the official story. If you really think about it there is plenty to question. I understand the frustration of those against conspiracies, but simple opposition doesn't mean something should be labeled a conspiracy. Should we call america's view of Iran, North Korea, Venezuala, etc a conspiracy? Why do we believe these views without the label of conspiracy? What proof do we have other than what we're told?

Listen, I don't think it's wrong to QUESTION. I think that's our duty. But to assume that every question we ask is answered with the result we DON'T want is a fallacy.

Whatever country you're from, I'm sure you've seen some shit. But for the media to be completely fabricated would take coordination beyond anyone's ability. So if it's happening, it's not because of a conspiracy, it's because of a misunderstanding. It's Dr. Strangelove, Big Lebowski, etc. A strange happening that makes people freak out and run in all directions.

Anyway, you have all these examples and don't even allude to a single one of them. Translators saying the opposite of what they're supposed to? Come on. The media part, I understand, but it's not with intention. What a strange way of looking at things!

in a bind wrote:

if you believe one conspiracy, you subscribe to them all. It's not fact-based anymore. It's all political.

So if I believe in some real conspiracies like the Iran-Contra deal, the CIA attempts to kill Castro, etc., that means they are all true?

I think this thread is a conspiracy

in a bind wrote:

Listen, I don't think it's wrong to QUESTION. I think that's our duty. But to assume that every question we ask is answered with the result we DON'T want is a fallacy.

Whatever country you're from, I'm sure you've seen some shit. But for the media to be completely fabricated would take coordination beyond anyone's ability. So if it's happening, it's not because of a conspiracy, it's because of a misunderstanding. It's Dr. Strangelove, Big Lebowski, etc. A strange happening that makes people freak out and run in all directions.

Anyway, you have all these examples and don't even allude to a single one of them. Translators saying the opposite of what they're supposed to? Come on. The media part, I understand, but it's not with intention. What a strange way of looking at things!

Once again, a "conspiracy theorist" talking BUT, the belief of CENTRAL MEDIA, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, whatever. All are controlled by a few very wealthy people. They play differently into peoples views (FOX is conservative for instance, thats not a conspiracy either) to get you to believe that you are getting two sides to a story and therefore can draw a conclusion from that.

A simple example, Venezuela. A few years ago when the Venezuelan president came before the UN, I was in class with a very conservative professor who was IRRATE after Chavez called Bush the devil (I laughed a little). The media plastered this all over. Before this incident there was also a "revolution" in Venezuela. The media made into that Chavez was corrupt and the people were revolting. However if you remember the shots that were taken, there were only a few places that seemed to be hostile. AND there were some people on the side of the street just going about their lives. What happened (theory) is that our government wasn't happy with Chavez and his attempts to make oil a more profitable market for the Venezuelan people, so we paid people to revolt. Sounds funny and unrealistic but if you think about it, its not. How much would it cost to make a starving man look like hes revolting?

Theres a book called "Economic Hitman" and it states the same thing I just stated with a dozen more examples of how the media and government are all tied together by powerful elite groups. I suggest you read the book and make your own judgments about it.

Wait, let me get this right, "CENTRAL MEDIA, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, whatever" is "play[ing] differently into peoples views (FOX is conservative for instance, thats not a conspiracy either) to get you to believe that you are getting two sides to a story and therefore can draw a conclusion from that." But your precious "Economic Hitman" doesn't? Yeah, we get it, you're so much smarter than us. The stuff you get your info from is so much more informed. Congratulations.....on not having a life. Grow up.

"Surprise: There are smart creationists"

There are smart creationists?

A government that has screwed up everything since the Nixon administration is somehow so adept as to plan a cover-up so effectively that only a small minority of hurricane Katrina victims believe the theories of compounding bullshti created in which to explain why they didn't get passed up on the bad things happening to them.

in a bind wrote:

Listen, I don't think it's wrong to QUESTION. I think that's our duty. But to assume that every question we ask is answered with the result we DON'T want is a fallacy.

Whatever country you're from, I'm sure you've seen some shit. But for the media to be completely fabricated would take coordination beyond anyone's ability. So if it's happening, it's not because of a conspiracy, it's because of a misunderstanding. It's Dr. Strangelove, Big Lebowski, etc. A strange happening that makes people freak out and run in all directions.

Anyway, you have all these examples and don't even allude to a single one of them. Translators saying the opposite of what they're supposed to? Come on. The media part, I understand, but it's not with intention. What a strange way of looking at things!

That's not what i'm saying at all. I don't have a problem with an answer I don't want, never have. I'm not out to assume everything is a conspiracy. Most things are exactly as they seem. The example I used about the mistranslation wasn't about intentional deception. It was simply that they don't always tell the truth. Whether on purpose or on accident.

The very fact that you assume that there CAN'T be coordination beyond what you believe people are able is where some of these arguments begin. People have gotten fired from jobs for far less than mistranslations. And it's not been a single occurance.

Do you think it would be a mistake if for example the media "mistranslated" what the Iranian president said about Isreal and wanting to wipe them off the map? Or has that been an ongoing mistranslation for all these years since he never actually said that? Or is that effort too coordinated. Can you imagine Iran having the grapes to try and wipe ISREAL off the map! Why not ask Dakota Fanning to go take on Fedor Emelianenko. That's pretty much what it would look like.

Denying SOME of the things going today and in the past is no better than SOME people pretending racism no longer exist. Sure there are some minorities who go overboard and assume the victim role(conspiracy theoris). There are however plenty of examples where someone has seen or been directly involved in situations where racism is alive and well.

Can you imagine the comments I would have recieved had I come here and said that Kenteris and Thanou faked their motorcycle accident in an effort to avoid drug tests? THAT sounds like a conspiracy right?

Where are you getting your information from?

Ooops, obviously you don't know how the AIDS virus was created yet - do you?

derrrrrrr wrote:

If you want to see some real conspiracy theorists, head on over to the H1N1 vaccine threads. Some real nutjobs coming out of the woodworks. We're about 1 step away from them claiming AIDS was made by the government to kill blacks/gays.

I see this thread is getting a little old now, but it's contents have been of use to me so I think I'll contribute something back.

How to argue with a conspiracy theorist.

The answer (IMO) is not to argue with them, but state your position on the subject, and your reasons. Once you have done so, if they continue to press their point then they want you to believe what they do. I don't like it when people tell me what to believe, I consider it insulting. I make up my own mind. At this point I would politely explain that and also say that I had no problem discussing it but I had made up my mind about this subject, and their argument was unconvincing.

If you argue with them using the "facts" you play into their hands, as I'm sure any good conspiracy theorist would have atleast 1 conspiracy - oriented interpretation for each "fact" up their sleeves.

Facts aren't really good for arguing with anyway, because nomatter how trusted your source is, the truth is that they are always something that someone else tells you, and therefore subject to error.

If I were to attempt an argument with one such person (using building 7 as an example), it would probably go something like:

[CT]: building 7 collapsed symmetrically, i think it was deliberate, there must be a conspiracy

(crude I know, but words to that effect ^^ )

[you]: Are you convinced of this?

[CT]: Well just look at the "facts", courtesy of my source

[you]: So the official story doesn't answer your questions satisfactorily?

[CT]: its all lies, a building on fire doesn't collapse symmetrically according to this source that I trust more than the media

[you]: I don't think that is the case. Just because you have a question that isn't answered by the information provided to you via media agents who are not experts in the field does not indicate that it was all made up to make you believe something.

You can believe what you will, but I choose not to.

In order to stay on the high ground you just won, don't get drawn back into the argument. I've managed to pull this kind of thing a couple of times but the other party usually refuses to admit defeat, or ignores. all the same it seems to work.

I think that most people on both sides of this argument are out to make someone else believe what they do, for whatever reasons. Belief itself equates to faith without question... and so I would never say "I believe" to anything unless I was totally and utterly convinced.

I don't think you need to pick a side for everything. If some vaguely conspiracy oriented person started saying things like "did you know that 9/11 was a government job etc etc etc" that doesn't mean you need to deny or affirm. I stick in the middle for most of these things and when questioned about that, I tell them why.

My reasons are that 99 times out of 100, I WAS NOT THERE. I cannot draw on my own experiences and observations, and only third party media of mainstream or underground allignment.

When I am subject to this kind of stuff I usually remain quiet. Most of it also has no bearing on me so sometimes I say I don't care.

The point is, I'm not naiive enough to think that everything is as the official media story says, nor am I naiive enough to think that everything is not as the official media story says.

You don't need to have an opinion on everything.

Because no conspiracies ever take place and the government, big business, and the media always tells us 100% of the truth?

Interesting to note that Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth now has over 1000 professional signatories.

Very interesting.