(I'm going to try not to quote members directly here for T&C reasons, if a quote looks like it is from you don't take offense but feel free to chip
This thread may seem a bit simple.
But let's not overlook the groundwork.
Never be afraid to question the agenda of the day.
I've seen a few theories shot down recently with some pretty simple debating techniques that are effective. I often keep telling myself/going over
the following points in order to keep me confident in my assertions:
"You are relying on Youtube and the internet to do your investigation, therefore your research is rubbish bunk!"
This is a good one, because 99% of information on the internet is bunk! However, not all of it is, look at some of the enlightening TED talks etc. Be
strong in your ability to figure out what is bunk and what is hunk, because after all - almost all information is available online now, where else
would you go?
It's about the researcher's ability not the sources they trawl through.
Stay strong and carry on using Youtube as ONE of your libraries.
"To believe that you must be uneducated/stupid/naive!"
At best this will make the conspiracy theorist feel a bit small - We can handle that though can't we? However...
Those 'lurkers' who read and do not post (there's millions of them) - they are influenced easily. Especially if the member has high credence, the
readers will often believe that one is naive for believing such incredulous tosh!
"Conspiracy theorists are lunatics"
An obvious one this one. A label that has been openly pushed by leaders and authors to make us less confident in the public domain. But we need to ask
WHY this label has been emphasised so much.
Let's take a look at where I think this comes from. Liberals in the UK are the ones more likely to believe CT. However there are a few bestsellers
about written from a loaded point of view that when read leads the reader to believe they are taking the intellectual high ground above the 'lunatic
Take Jon Ronson's book about extremists, from the off it's written as a "Can you believe people believe this sh*t?" but presented as an unbiased
approach to extremism/conspiracies.
Jon Ronson, Wil Self, Theroux, they all take this position and easily manipulate the less aware into thinking that they are taking the intellectual
high ground by poo-pooing conspiracy theories.
That's the problem with liberals, they're too eager to please and therefore too easy to lead.
I'm no expert but here's a great list the tricksters use Fallacies/Arguing