“Truth? You can't handle the truth!”

[The Legendary Shark]

An interesting video, and p-hacking has been a problem (according to some of the experts I've heard discussing various papers), and I have also heard of the non-replication problem. It doesn't mean that everything's wrong, of course, just that some discernment is needed.

However, if I was to indulge in the kind of arguments favoured by others of this parish, I'd simply say that this video can't be trusted because Veritasium: A Story of YouTube Propaganda, and ignore everything it has to say.

[Tjm86]

Now here is where I'm starting to get interested.  Is there a point of intersection between conspiracy theories (9/11, gulf-war syndrome, moon landings, global conspiracy movements, judeo-globalist conspiracies, illuminati movements, ...) and the challenges people face in their everyday lives?

I almost feel like perhaps there needs to be some sort of scale (the bacofoil scale?).  This reflects someone's ability to accept ideas that should be classified as 'bat-shit crazy' or 'reasonably-rational'.

At the end of the day we need to accept that scientific theory is based in empirical evidence but subject to revision as the evidence provides disconfirming evidence.  So it is constantly subject to revision.

The real problem right now is that people are basing their ideas on subjective rather than empirical evidence.  Then they are holding onto those theories on the basis of disconfirming evidence rather than revising them.

Unfortunately social media in particular has become an echo chamber that reinforces the validity of extreme ideas.  So the sorts of things that would once have been fringe are now being embraced by ordinary people.

As Terry Pratchett said: "The truth is out there but the lies are in your head!"

[JayzusB.Christ]

My quick tuppence'orth about conspiracy theorists, having dated one, been good mates with another (who has grown out of it, fortunately), and, when it came to a few niche topics, been one myself.  For me, it's very often these people who can't handle the truth.  Seeing illusory patterns of human action where there are none, or at least ones of a far smaller scale, is part of our genetic make-up and has helped us survive (known as apophenia, as I've recently learned, rather than its subcategory pareidolia). The rustle in the leaves is probably just the wind, but if you're alone in the prehistoric jungle, you're better off believing it's someone with a spear and legging it.

It's also very often less scary than the reality - sometimes we fuck up on a global scale and it spirals out of control, and we don't know how to reign it in.  Or sometimes terrible things just happen and humanity just isn't organised enough to either cause them or solve them. It's easier to imagine global warming, for example, as something that occurs of its own accord, rather than embrace the awful notion that we accidentally caused it and now we don't know what to do about it. Or, even worse, we do know, but the world isn't organised enough to take the necessary action.  Diana was sacrificed?  The older you get the more you realise that sometimes people have car accidents and just fucking die. When the Blair government did try to peddle the flimsy idea of Saddam having WMDs, it didn't take much of anyone's 'own research' to see it was probably a heap of shite.


Not sure where all that came from, sorry.  Actually the only reason I came here now was to enquire as to what people think will happen to Russell Brand now.  I presume he'll be going to court at some point now the accusations are out in the open, but I haven't seen anything about it yet. 

[Jim_Campbell]

when it came to a few niche topics, been one myself.

I've found myself in the very weird position of sounding like a conspiracy theorist myself, of late... which is why I've abandoned a couple of social media platforms.

As a Corbyn supporter*, I've found myself on the side of an argument that's seen the wholesale re-writing of reality by (and I hesitate to use this term) the mainstream media. I try to comfort myself by knowing that there is actual, proper evidence that shows I'm not delusional (ie: the Forde Report, the leaked, and then blocked, submission to the EHRC) but, even so, I often feel like I'm just a fringe loon howling at the moon.

It's not a feeling I enjoy, and is why I've more or less abandoned politics in this country.


*Not an uncritical one, I should stress — I literally only supported him for the Labour leadership in 2015 because the alternatives were fucking awful.**

**And who are now in senior positions in Starmer's version of the Labour Party... make of that what you will.

[Dandontdare]

Three conspiracy theorists walk into a bar. You're not telling me that's a coincidence

[Funt Solo]

Three conspiracy theorists walk into a bar. You're not telling me that's a coincidence

Yes, but what's going on in the cellar?

[Funt Solo]

...Being a chip shop owner is no disadvantage to having an understanding of your knackered Vintage Thing...

...the peer review is just a label - but it is a significant one. It's also not 100% reliable...

Both of these points are correct. But, with the danger of sounding like a broken record, that's where good old Occam and his famous/infamous Razor come in handy. At all times, when trying to figure stuff out, I need a useful tool like Occam's Razor because the alternative is too much ground work.

I think of it like a Choose Your Own Adventure book. Taking the example of that William Hurt-backed, documentary-style video piece you linked to. My options are:

A. Watch it and consider it on its merits. This takes time, which is a precious commodity. I may also find myself needing to fact check a lot of the propositions contained within it. More time.

B. Consider the scales of information that already exists and that I have already imbibed - with regard to 9/11 and the causes thereof. In other words, I invoke Occam's Razor and come to the conclusion that I already know what caused the towers to collapse, and that (in all probability) the mass of available information is correct and that the other stuff is just conspiracy theory fictionalization. This takes less time.

I do realize that you don't like my opting for B, and that you would never opt for B. But, and I think this is crucial: we are very different people. From my perspective, you enjoy fanfic of real events, and I don't. From your perspective (I imagine), you are trying to get to the truth, and I'm being too narrow-minded.

What is clear: I'm never going to change you and you're never going to change me. We are set in our respective ways. Trying to change each other is sometimes painful and leads to conflict. So, we're both a bit silly to have tried - especially repetitively. Oops! (Unless we're getting some need fulfilled beyond that, of course.)

[The Legendary Shark]

...Corbyn...

You've probably already seen it, but Declassified's long form interview, Jeremy Corbyn on the establishment campaign to stop him becoming Prime Minister is quite interesting.

[Funt Solo]

Being a chip shop owner is no disadvantage to having an understanding of your knackered Vintage Thing, and neither is it an advantage.

Yeah, politicians know dick about science.

I am noticing a dichotomy between these two statements that suggests a rather bigoted view of politicians - who are, after all, just people with a job title. Like the fabled "chip shop owner" who has an imaginary sideline in "knackered Vintage Things".

Margaret Thatcher [I know - boo, hiss etc.]: BSc, "a food research scientist at J Lyons".

Science being a rather broad term - it turns out that lots of politicians know rather a lot about science.

(Neal Dunn is currently a serving representative in the US House, and also a Doctor of Urology - so he literally knows science about dicks!)

[The Legendary Shark]

A good post, Funt, thank you.

Simply for reasons of discussion and debate, and not to try and change you, I must, of course, take issue - if only for the practice.

Let us take Occam's razor to your core claim; that you already know enough to be sure of your interpretation of the events of 9/11. Occam's razor is about paring down all elements to the bone, including assumptions. The assumption that all relevant facts are known is just that, an assumption. Occam would demand you cut that out because you can't be sure. Occam would demand you watch Peace, War, and 9/11 simply to expose yourself to things you don't know and replace assumptions with certainties.

And yes, it is a lot of work. Work you have to do yourself. Original sources are still available, and a lot of investigation has been done. Don't rely on "fact checkers," though. Like Wikipedia, they might be a good start but, also like Wikipedia, should not be used as a primary source but more of a jumping-off point.

I'm pushing this because, in my not so humble opinion, it's important. You may question my strategies and style, my choice of words and even my sanity - but please don't question my motivations (in general, I mean, I'm being poetic here, not flinging accusations). I'm no genius or student of deep geopolitics, but I ain't dumb, neither. I know that the global system is fundamentally broken and failing the vast majority of the inhabitants of this planet, human and otherwise. 9/11 exposes significant aspects of this breaking failure. It's important.

I understand why you opted for B. I favoured the same option for many years. All the way up to 2007. Then I was challenged to consider option A, and here we are, having this conversation (which I'm enjoying much more than our usual slanging-matches, by the way).

I'm not going to challenge you, but I will try one last time to convince you. Watch Peace, War, and 9/11. It'll take you, what, an hour and a half? Less if you up the playback speed a bit. You may find it's just a collection of deluded idiots spouting made-up facts to support wild allegations, thus reinforcing your own worldview. It may show you something you've never seen, play you something you've never heard, ask a question you've never thought of, present an interpretation you've never considered, thus informing your own worldview. I think it's important, and that's the only motivation I have. Please God I'm wrong to even consider this shit and see the world this way - but if I'm right, you need to take a look.

[Funt Solo]

...your core claim; that you already know enough to be sure of your interpretation of the events of 9/11.

Ah no - I never said I was "sure". I said "in all probability". Very different things.

Occam's razor is about paring down all elements to the bone, including assumptions.

So, adding a new video would be adding elements. And - worse - adding elements that are full of assumptions.

Occam would demand...

You cannot speak for Occam. I think, again, we have a fundamental difference of opinion here - you are interpreting it in an unusual way - from my perspective.

And yes, it is a lot of work. Work you have to do yourself.

No - I rely on experts to do that work for me. I do not need to understand soap in order to use soap.

please don't question my motivations ... I ain't dumb

I didn't, and didn't suggest that.

the global system is fundamentally broken and failing the vast majority of the inhabitants of this planet, human and otherwise

Well, humans (in general) are getting on far better than they used to. Yes, the planet (& other species) are being affected by us - but then you have said in the past that human-induced climate change isn't real - so it's difficult to take you seriously on this point.

Watch Peace, War, and 9/11 ... you need to take a look.

No, I will not, and no, I do not. For reasons given previously, which still make abundant sense to me, and which (obviously, from my perspective) you have failed to undermine, shift or adjust in any sense.

[The Legendary Shark]

As you wish.

Though I'll never stop trying.

[JayzusB.Christ]

I was working outside a leisure centre yesterday and a storm started up. A man near me started telling me that these floods were clearly caused by nuclear missiles being tested in the Arctic.  You know, and I quote, 'with this Russia thing and all'.

The city of 'Bayern Munich' was hit very badly, apparently.

EDIT: And suddenly it hits me that he must have been thinking of Burning Man.

The same day and place, I was fittingly painting a commissioned mural of Greta Thunberg with a sign reading 'You're never too small to make a difference', when another man took exception.  I thought it was a bit weird that he took it personally, but later found he had complained to the people who commissioned it that it was a double negative and was grammatically incorrect.  I'm also an English grammar teacher. It isn't.

[Funt Solo]

The same day and place, I was fittingly painting a commissioned mural of Greta Thunberg with a sign reading 'You're never too small to make a difference', when another man took exception.  I thought it was a bit weird that he took it personally, but later found he had complained to the people who commissioned it that it was a double negative and was grammatically incorrect.  I'm also an English grammar teacher. It isn't.

Yeah, it really isn't not, aye? People have to really stretch to come up with reasons sometimes. Let's assume he just doesn't like Greta Thunberg, and all her pointing out the bloody obvious.

Climate change is a funny one - because the real conspiracy is that the fossil fuel companies have spun yarns for years about it not being something we can control - because they're a vested interest. Somehow, they've convinced loads of folk (TFH Brigaders) that there's a cabal of scientists who are all trying to bum us out for no reason whatsoever. Why do full-on conspiracy theorists not like *actual* conspiracies?*

I've heard worse, though - tons of folk just go straight for the jugular with Greta and point at her disabilities (as if that somehow counters her logic). Goebbels would be proud.**


*I have a theory that they dislike solutions, and far prefer mysteries.
**Just getting in my Godwin's Bingo for the week.

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.