New study: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy

I don't need a scientific study to tell me that people that believe official accounts and news reports are bat *snip* crazy.. and dangerous too.

What part of human history gave people the idea that institutions of authority are honest and true???

When has that EVER happened in history?

reply to post by MALBOSIA

Perhaps it's not a matter of believing official accounts. Perhaps it's a matter of applying critical thought to the evidence and coming to conclusions that differ from yours.

reply to post by Phage


It's a start.

It can be extremely subjective to define sanity and its levels so let's put its opposite in light instead with Einstein's definition of insanity, which I like:

Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results

In this instance, when you look back into history and see just how many times we have been ruled, lied upon, manipulated, etc, it's a mystery why so many people think it's all over today, especially when you consider the current state of the world. Wars, injustice, violence, corruption and propaganda are all still present in our everyday life. So what's truly changed you've got to wonder?

The reason why truthers might be saner than the contrary is because they are aware of this endless cycle of manipulation orchestred by the same elite over and over in order to maintain their control over the people.
That means they are willing to take on the fight against corruption. Breaking this insane cycle once and for all. In recent times it's now a possibility to stand united woldwide, thanks to technology.

When you keep this in mind, what about anti-conspirationist? It seems they believe that even though the world we live in today is corrupted, that it's not so bad and what could they do anyway. They are being lied everyday, and most of them know it, but they won't raise a finger and will continue to eat everything the government says. They won't understand that if we let those people rule us this way again, just like we have done so many times in the past, that history's going to repeat itselfs.

So what's this, if not the definition of insanity?
Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Phage
reply to post by MALBOSIA

 

Perhaps it's not a matter of believing official accounts. Perhaps it's a matter of applying critical thought to the evidence and coming to conclusions that differ from yours.

WHAT?? Ok. lets look at 9/11. If there was critical thought put towards the evidence then would there not have been an INVESTIGATION?? If you say there WAS an investigation then explain how the results of that investigation didn't sway an inch from the corporate media reports that came out in the first few hours after the "attack"?? Did investigators call CNN and FOX to find out what should be included in investigations results?

And by the way, I do not have an opinion other than calling BS, when someone tries to tell me a tall tail. I AM a skeptic. Those that believe what they are told by the news and COMMISSION REPORTS are the ignorant theorist mob. Try and tell them something they don't want to hear and suddenly you are a crackpot and tin foil hat loon.

Accusing others of doing exactly what they themselves are doing is got to be the most primitive form of obfuscation still active today.

reply to post by St0rD

That means they are willing to take on the fight against corruption. Breaking this insane cycle once and for all. In recent times it's now a possibility to stand united woldwide, thanks to technology.

How does yakking on the internet about conspiracies accomplish anything?

It seems they believe that even though the world we live in today is corrupted, that it's not so bad and what could they do anyway. They are being lied everyday, and most of them know it, but they won't raise a finger and will continue to eat everything the government says.

How is yakking on the internet about conspiracies doing anything. You know there are more active means of change, right? But there actually is a danger in conspiracy theorizing.

"Threats to shoot down aircraft or harming pilots are becoming more prevalent, overt and alarming," says Mike Glynn, a current airline captain and former vice-president of the Australian and International Pilots Association.

"While most can be discounted as empty threats, there remains the possibility that some unhinged individual or group may act. It is beginning to cause consternation in pilot ranks.''

www.news.com.au...

Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

That is not the definition of insanity. No matter how many time the claim is made, over and over.

reply to post by MALBOSIA

Try and tell them something they don't want to hear and suddenly you are a crackpot and tin foil hat loon.

Can we turn that around?
Try and tell them something they don't want to hear and suddenly you are a shill and a sheeple.

Phage
reply to post by MALBOSIA

 

Try and tell them something they don't want to hear and suddenly you are a crackpot and tin foil hat loon.

Can we turn that around?
Try and tell them something they don't want to hear and suddenly you are a shill and a sheeple.

edit on 2/8/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)

I think that is apples to oranges. The ones that are accused of being shills or sheeple are not presenting an idea that makes sense to them and explaining why. They are merely grabbing at straws to hold up an argument that was already made and not by them. If there is one thing I noticed about "CT'ers" is that most of them do not agree on anything except the official story is BS. That to me is a result of many individual ideas clashing together. These so called "shills" and "sheeple" are the ones that get so passionately involved in an idea that was never theirs to begin with and it is mind boggling to some. It is like arguing facts in religion between a religious person and a historian. The religious one wants to know nothing more that what is in the book. The historian wants to write a more accurate book. but how dare he...

reply to post by MALBOSIA

The ones that are accused of being shills or sheeple are not presenting an idea that makes sense to them and explaining why.

So, I guess you mean me then. I never explain my position, right? I never provide evidence that supports my position, right?

That must be why I am continually called a shill. That must be why my sig says what it does.

No. I think those who actually argue a good case are most often the ones called shills.

Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

That is not the definition of insanity. No matter how many time the claim is made, over and over.

You are correct, that alone does not define insanity.

There are more factors to take into consideration, such as if the claims are brought to a logical conclusion or not. If the claim is repeated over and over and 'is' shown to be logical, then there is clearly no reason to change any of factors in the equation, in fact it would not be logical to change any of the factors at that time. The result has been found.

BTW, I don't think you're a shill. In fact I tend to only argue/debate with or around people that I have hope for or enjoy what they have to say, so no I'm also not attacking you If you're ignored then that means I don't give a crap about what you have to say or think it holds any weight. =P

Phage
[How is yakking on the internet about conspiracies doing anything. You know there are more active means of change, right? But there actually is a danger in conspiracy theorizing.

This, coming from you that has 71 thousand posts and counting?

So...exactly why are you here on ATS then?

reply to post by burntheships

So...exactly why are you here on ATS then?

I find it interesting. Sometimes entertaining.
I like to try to separate fact from fabrication. Like the article in the OP of this thread.

Phage
reply to post by MALBOSIA

 

The ones that are accused of being shills or sheeple are not presenting an idea that makes sense to them and explaining why.

So, I guess you mean me then. I never explain my position, right? I never provide evidence that supports my position, right?

That must be why I am continually called a shill. That must be why my sig says what it does.

No. I think those who actually argue a good case are most often the ones called shills.

edit on 2/8/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Sure. If a good argument means that you can provide a link to one of ATS's "approved sources"

You and I won't ever agree, I am almost sure. And I don't think that we need to. I think a fair and transparent investigation from the proper authorities without redaction for "national security" is the only way either one of us will know the truth. Wake me up when that happens, I don't want to miss it.

I don't want to argue with you Phage, I am new here and you are a respected member from what I can tell and I hope to find your education helpful in the future. That being said lets just agree to disagree...

reply to post by Phage


You're not making any efforts to be a pleasant person to have a conversation with, right?

How does yakking on the internet about conspiracies accomplish anything?

Dude. I'm not 'yakking' about anything right now, I only responded to your last reply where you stated we needed a definition of sanity to start with, which I provided with the best of my perspective.

How is yakking on the internet about conspiracies doing anything. You know there are more active means of change, right?

Again, I was just giving my opinion on this particular subject. You don't know what I do IRL to actually try and change this world, so why even saying this? Talking about conspiracies on ATS is a hobby, just like watching TV, but do I need a world-changing reason to do so, Phage?

That is not the definition of insanity. No matter how many time the claim is made, over and over.

Well, it might not be the official definition and even in no way related to Einstein (which isn't clear) but in the end it greatly resonates with how I perceive insanity.

But there actually is a danger in conspiracy theorizing.

Haha, right. You're a funny guy man.

Isn't the exact opposite also true? Let me state:

There actually is a danger in denying conspiracy theories.

burntheships

Phage
[How is yakking on the internet about conspiracies doing anything. You know there are more active means of change, right? But there actually is a danger in conspiracy theorizing.

This, coming from you that has 71 thousand posts and counting?

So...exactly why are you here on ATS then?

to be fair he has only posted 27,000 times.... in 5 years. 15 posts a day or so.

reply to post by St0rD

You're not making any efforts to be a pleasant person to have a conversation with, right?

Not in this medium, no. Not usually.

Dude. I'm not 'yakking' about anything right now, I only responded to your last reply where you stated we needed a definition of sanity to start with, which I provided with the best of my perspective.

I understand that. I was talking about talking about conspiracies on the internet and not specifically you.

Again, I was just giving my opinion on this particular subject. You don't know what I do IRL to actually try and change this world, so why even saying this?

See above.

Haha, right. You're a funny guy man.

You think threats from conspiracy theorists against pilots and aircraft are funny?

reply to post by MALBOSIA

That being said lets just agree to disagree...

Good plan.
I won't call you a nutcase if you won't call me a shill. Actually, I don't recall ever calling anyone on ATS a nutcase but that doesn't prevent me from being called a shill on a regular basis.

Phage

I like to try to separate fact from fabrication. Like the article in the OP of this thread.

So...lets see your claiming the article is biased, and therefore it is invalid because
it cites Press T.V. as a source and the 9/11 "twisted facts"?

Yet on the other hand you cite Daniel Ellsberg as a valid investigator
Yet Ellsberg is calling The United States a Nation
of Death in its pursuit and Drone campaign of the Original Story terrorists???

Do you not see that your contradicting yourself?

You maybe need to check in for some program updates
before you lose all credibility.

Phage
reply to post by MALBOSIA

 

That being said lets just agree to disagree...

Good plan.
I won't call you a nutcase if you won't call me a shill. Actually, I don't recall ever calling anyone on ATS a nutcase but that doesn't prevent me from being called a shill on a regular basis.

edit on 2/8/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Embrace it. Personally, I think we should form a union.

Phage
reply to post by MALBOSIA

 

That being said lets just agree to disagree...

Good plan.
I won't call you a nutcase if you won't call me a shill. Actually, I don't recall ever calling anyone on ATS a nutcase but that doesn't prevent me from being called a shill on a regular basis.

edit on 2/8/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)

No I don't think I want to accuse anyone of being a shill. I feel like that plays right into the hand of depicting those who believe in conspiracies to be paranoid, and then use "paranoid" to describe their argument. You and everyone else on here is an individual and you are responsible for you own arguments. The mainstream; however, is not nearly as understanding. As far as they are concerned, ANYONE who does not believe the official account MUST believe that there was NO PLANE and it was a nothing more that a hollywood movie because; HEY, some CT'er made that claim so they ALL must believe it.

Can you at least agree with me that that is a cheap shot?

I understand that. I was talking about talking about conspiracies on the internet and not specifically you.

It's not the action of talking about conspiracies that's going to change the world. The essence of change is in the action of actually doing something towards it. Truth seeking is doing something.

I'd rather have 10 people talking about 9/11 than 10 people talking about Seahawks winning the superbowl.

You think threats from conspiracy theorists against pilots and aircraft are funny?

No. That's not what's funny.

What's funny is the fact you're wasting energy trying to convince people that conspiracy theories are dangerous. Of course it can be, there are consequences to everything. But isn't inaction towards corruption and injustice also extremlely dangerous?

What would you want people to do, really? They realize there are lies everywhere in this world and they want to do something about it.
They try to talk about it, people don't give a damn and whine.
They manifest their disagreement in the streets, same outcome.
So, maybe they should go back on the couch and watch the next Jersey's Shore episode?