Want to Protect the Conspiracy Theorist Community? Start (Loudly) Denying Ignorance and Lunacy.

a reply to: and14263

While conspiracy's are part of the site it isn't just for conspiracy's.

We have

Breaking news
Political forum
Current events forum
Mysterious subjects forum
Science and technology forum
General off topic forums
Entertainment forums
Computer and internet forums.

ATS is many things not just a conspiracy forum. If it was just conspiracy's we wouldn't have the membership we have now....nor me If I'm honest.

originally posted by: gosseyn
The problem I think, at least for me, is that we have entered some kind of dystopia era. When I watch MSM, I just can't believe what they say, because its almost always biased and/or incomplete when it is not just plain lies, and I think what you describe here in the conscious or unconscious will of 'people like us' to counterbalance the dominant mode of thinking. It may lead to paranoia, and I admit that myself I am sometimes guilty of being paranoid.

On the other hand Scientific Study Reveals Conspiracy Theorists The Most Sane Of All!

First, you should know it's not normal if you seriously believe most things on MSM are biased or plain lies. It does indeed happen, but it's not a generality, and there are certainly many competent journalists left doing their job right.

One of the most common mistake made here and everywhere on the net is generalization. Some news are biased. But it shouldn't prevent you from still reading the info relayed by the MSM and then doing some cross-checking yourself.



On that note, have you cross-checked the study you quote?

Because first, it's posted by a site called "http://themindunleashed.org/" so it is biased too. Secondly what the study really reveals is this:

So, among people who comment on news articles, those who discount official government accounts of events like the 9/11 attacks and the assassination of John F. Kennedy outnumber believers by more than two-to-one. That means the pro-conspiracy commenters are those who are now expressing what is considered conventional wisdom, while the anti-conspiracy commenters represent a small, beleaguered minority that is often scoffed at and shunned.

So that the "conspiracy" view is more popular. That the site considers that "more popular" = "more sane" is a personal opinion and I hope you can see it for what it is really

a reply to: boymonkey74

You're right!

So I would assume it is ok for people to post conspiracies in the conspiracies area. These conspiracies can then be debunked or validated. Outsiders can read through the threads and make their own mind up.

If I tell people about ATS they know me and know I would approach with a critical mind. I would also tell them about threads in a way that allows them to approach the topic knowing what to expect.

But we are humans who need guidance aren't we. We need to be told what to believe, what to post, what to hide from outsiders, what to let other people see, how to have A GOOD IMAGE.

Why does the site need an image seen as acceptable by the mainstream? Clicks. Simple.

As I said, place is going tits and you lot are letting it happen. Good luck. See you on Above Top Facecrock in a few years.

originally posted by: and14263
Why does the site need an image seen as acceptable by the mainstream? Clicks. Simple.

Allow me but this is BS. There is another very popular alternate/CT board where there is almost 0 moderation and where the respectability and image is the least of the concern. The result? Tons more clicks and traffic because the debate just get so heated and people spend their time with ad hominem instead of discussing the topic.


So sorry, you are wrong. I'm pretty sure the mods here want the site to remain civil and critical because it's how they are themselves. And it's a good thing.

a reply to: and14263

The thing is many threads become just opinion and out right lies to further OP's agendas.
If the mods just let threads run their course you would see slander suits and arrests made on the members from the UK.
ATS is a cut above all the other websites because it does moderate threads which are lies and just false.
You want a site without mods and BSC threads goto GLP.

originally posted by: JUhrman





it shouldn't prevent you from still reading the info relayed by the MSM and then doing some cross-checking yourself.

How do you know that this is not what I am doing ? Because this is exactly what I am doing. And if you look at my posts history, you will see that I am not the crazy type who jump at every opportunity to scream 'false flag' and such.

But look, you forced me to justify myself and a tiny part of me said "you are being ridiculed, you should justify yourself and fall in line otherwise you will not be considered normal". Were you aware of that when you posted ? Was it conscious or unconscious ?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Excellent sentiments, and top threading burdman30ott6!

One of the things which I have found very useful about this site, is that it has allowed me to keep my mind sharp, by presenting me with opportunities to match my wits against thorny problems, and excise the truth of a matter from the tangled entrails of current affairs.

Applying the scalpel of thought to the events you refer to in your OP, assuming a certain level of sharpness, should lead one to understand that these suggestions of "false flag" status being applied to the events, are based on NO evidence what so ever, if only because it is far to early to know ANYTHING of note about the scenario. Further to that, there is a habit amongst some to be THE FIRST to say false flag, almost an "Inb4" mentality, more familiar to those who frequent less reputable sites.

My attitude to this, is that this is not bloody 4chan, and such nonsense is utterly unacceptable. Further to that, the CT community gets an awful lot of flack for things that it ought not. We are responsible however, for any flack we get as a community that we do deserve, and ill thought out, baseless nonsense is one of the things that attracts this negative attention.

While I am absolutely of the opinion that it is necessary that we be free to explore matters in detail and with awareness that things are not always as they seem, I believe that the freedom to do so comes with a responsibility to do so with logic, compassion, empathy, and respect. We cannot blithely shout false flag every time something happens which threatens the freedom of the press, or the freedom of the citizens as a result of police powers being expanded.

What we can do, is point out that regardless of the risk to public safety, liberty is too important to give away in favour of security, no matter the threat to life presented by terrorists, so false flag or not, we know that erosion of liberty, anywhere in the "free world" is a product of government, not a product of the people and not as a product of terror. What we can do, is look into matters with both eyes wide open, and CONSIDER possibilities, and when we find a reason WHICH BARES WEIGHT to suggest fouler play than is generally known, THEN, AND ONLY THEN should any suggestion be made.

We are responsible for how our community appears to the outside world, and in matters such as these, we must learn patience and diligence, if that appearance is to be respected rather than ridiculed.

a reply to: gosseyn


I'm sorry if you felt like I was saying you are crazy or not watching the news. What I said was in response to this you posted:

originally posted by: gosseyn
When I watch MSM, I just can't believe what they say, because its almost always biased and/or incomplete when it is not just plain lies

It's not normal to believe news are almost always biased/incomplete or lies. It's a generalization.


Also it's ironic to post a biased news to support your view just after that

I understand where the Op is coming from on this but have to ask were the line would be drawn.

Hefficide raised a reasonable point regarding the disscuision of recent tragic events but that is something of a seperate issue in my mind.

If the aim is to bring an air of respectability to conspiracy theorists I do not see how this could be achieved in the mainstream.

It is also a matter of personal perspective, what about all the threads about rocks on mars? As far as outsiders opinions on me I would be far happier discussing the posibility that the goverments of the world are creating situations and events to further secret agendas than the existence of aliens, ghosts and many of the other "conspiracies" that are often discussed here without any real evidence.

originally posted by: JUhrman


It's not normal to believe news are almost always biased/incomplete or lies. It's a generalization.

You have the right to have an opinion about my opinion.

originally posted by: JUhrman

originally posted by: and14263
Why does the site need an image seen as acceptable by the mainstream? Clicks. Simple.

Allow me but this is BS. There is another very popular alternate/CT board where there is almost 0 moderation and where the respectability and image is the least of the concern. The result? Tons more clicks and traffic because the debate just get so heated and people spend their time with ad hominem instead of discussing the topic.


So sorry, you are wrong. I'm pretty sure the mods here want the site to remain civil and critical because it's how they are themselves. And it's a good thing.

There's LOADS of moderation here.

Image is everything - remember the SO thread of why the site lost its advertising revenue?

Stopping threads regarding false flags does not improve civility and people can be critical on these threads to express sensible ideas.

Call what you want BS but don't call BS with BS.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: and14263

You want a site without mods and BSC threads goto GLP.

Probably the most sensible thing I've read here all day.

The saddest thing here is the loss of the site motto, only whispered occasionally by those who really understand that it's about attitude, not advertising.

(see signature)

a reply to: and14263

nevermind.

originally posted by: and14263
There's LOADS of moderation here.

It's a matter of personal taste but I consider it to be good moderation. I find it very poor in taste when people talk about false flag operation minutes after an event is reported.

It's done out of habit, emotion and paranoia, not out of critical analysis (because there's too few info to do so).

It shouldn't be encouraged. If you value more the freedom of speech than the truth, you can still join GLP as said previously. There you can really see what totally uncontrolled "freedom of speech" is about. It's about people reacting out of emotion instead of reason, and it often leads to them showing their most ugly side for all to see.


It's a very complex subject and I will certainly not say censorship is desirable, but if I have to compare this board with others, I have to admit the censorship here is done intelligently and with nothing but a desire for truth and mutual respect in mind.

So glad we have great mods...to reign me in .

They know I can snap and say something I may later regret.
Cheers dudes.

originally posted by: JUhrman

originally posted by: and14263
There's LOADS of moderation here.

... I find it very poor in taste when people talk about false flag operation minutes after an event is reported.

I thought that was what the conspiracy section of this site was all about?

Discuss the things the mainstream will not.

Poor taste? Well that's down to opinion isn't it.

a reply to: and14263

Exactly. That's why I started explicitly stating it's a matter of personal taste, opinion.


When the murder of people is just reported, decency would like people to respect their memory until more is known about the circumstances. If people can't even wait a few hours before yelling false flag, sorry but they do not belong in a place where the motto is "deny ignorance".

Denying ignorance doesn't mean always acting like everyone else is a "sheeple" and the media are always lying.

Denying ignorance is about finding the information available, studying it, and only THEN, debating it. The people who claim false flag immediately neither look for information, nor study it, nor debate it.

As I said, they often cry wolf out of habit. It's not even an opinion. It's a reflex from a mind obsessed with conspiracies and it certainly not how you deny ignorance.

a reply to: JUhrman

Is not the discussion of a current tragic event in itself in poor taste.

Other than saying OMG this is tragic what else is there to say that would be in good taste.

I personally find it sickening when people start talking about vengance and retribution but that seems to be acceptable to most people.

a reply to: JUhrman

You have expressed your sentiments concisely, effectively, and without any room for leverage being applied to your position by unscrupulous supporters of fallacy. Not only do I applaud your candour, I agree with your sentiments in their entirety!