It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: OrionsGem
Oh but I did. If you can point out an instance where in the study they mentioned conspiracy theorists being more sane than conventionalists I would like to see it. There's a very good chance that I missed it, it was a rather dry read.
I erased it because for a brief moment I thought that the source wasn't Natural News and didn't want to derail the thread or be rude.
For anyone wondering, I linked to the original article and said that I had a hard time trusting anything from Natural News, but that when I had time I would read the study (paraphrased).
Thats the same thing as a story about the ebola outbreak being presented in the national enquirer, and thinking that Ebola was a giant hoax, simply because it was printed in that newspaper.
originally posted by: OrionsGem
Researchers — psychologists and social scientists, mostly — in the U.S. and United Kingdom say data indicate that, contrary to those mainstream media stereotypes, “conspiracy theorists” appear to be more sane than people who accept official versions of controversial and contested events.
The insane person has lost contact with the world; he has withdrawn into himself; he cannot experience reality, either physical or human reality as it is, but only as formed and determined by his own inner processes.
You've got to wonder though; when there is a sense of community among people that call themselves truth seekers, isn't it possible that there is just another degree of groupthink involved?
originally posted by: NiZZiM
a reply to: OrionsGem
I think it's common knowledge for us that we know we are not what they make us out to be, but just people that challenge the status quo and want to understand all the facts. So we dig and dig and dig more, then we understand and compare ideas that make sense. Everyone else just takes it at face value.
There is a history of the world of which most people are unaware. It is encapsulated in the phrase, “History is written by the victors.” What about those who lost? Their stories are lost in the tales of the winners. They are notes in the margin. They are “Other”. Often, little is known about them beyond the slanders and libels their successful enemies levelled at them. History doesn’t record their voices. Often, they left no written documents, or at least none that survived the destruction wrought by their enemies. This lost history doesn’t concern wars between great nations or famous battles involving powerful kings or the most skilled generals. Instead, it is a struggle of the powerless against the powerful, of minorities against majorities, outsiders versus insiders, oppressed against the oppressors, have-nots against haves, those with nothing against those with everything, the margins of society versus the establishment. In the vast majority of cases, the establishment is triumphant. Often, the minorities - the heretics, the rebels, the revolutionaries, the members of the resistance, the freedom fighters, those leading alternative lives, the anti-establishment, those who won’t bow to tyrants - are destroyed and exterminated. They are usually labelled mad, evil and dangerous and their terrible fate is held up as a warning to those who might follow the same path. “Do not be like them or you will suffer the same consequences,” is the message.
originally posted by: CallYourBluff
Yup, seems right to me. The term conspiracy theorist has been stigmatized for the sole purpose of stopping folk asking questions and thinking for themselves. Makes you wonder why there has been such a smear campaign against those who believe in alien visitation now doesn't it.
originally posted by: rickymouse
What a bummer. Now they are saying that I am sane? I don't want to be considered normal, that is so boring.
Our recently published Frontiers study on online communication, “What about Building 7?” A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories, has been the subject of some chatter on the Internet – but not quite in the way I had hoped. A story by Kevin Barrett on PressTV.ir has interpreted the study as showing that conspiracists are “more sane” than conventionalists, and, given that this is an appealing headline for long-suffering conspiracists, has been copy-pasted around the Internet in a highly uncritical fashion.
You and I know the study doesn't say anything close to what the article from NN says it does but good luck with getting people to read that for themselves.