Study reveals conspiracy theorists the most sane of all

[Taco]

When you live in a society based on fraud everything becomes a conspiracy.

Conspiracy Theorists Are Sane
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/07/12 ... ovt-dupes/

[C.J.]

Quoting The Tick: "I'm going sane in a crazy world."

[starchild5]

http://www.naturalnews.com/047168_consp ... ganda.html

Scientific study reveals conspiracy theorists the most sane of all

(NaturalNews) If you're a conspiracy theorist, then you're crazy, right? That's been the common belief for years, but recent studies prove that just the opposite is true.

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 most recent study was published in July 2013 by psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent in the UK. Entitled "'What about Building 7?' A Social Psychological Study of Online Discussion of 9/11 Conspiracy Theories," the study compared "conspiracist," or pro-conspiracy theory, and "conventionalist," or anti-conspiracy, comments on news websites.

The researchers noted that they were surprised to find that it is now more conventional to leave so-called conspiracist comments than conventional ones.

"Of the 2174 comments collected, 1459 were coded as conspiracist and 715 as conventionalist," the researchers wrote.

'The research showed that people who favored the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile'

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.

Perhaps becoming frustrated that their alleged mainstream viewpoints are no longer considered as such by the majority, those who are anti-conspiracy commenters often showed anger and disgust in their posts.

"The research... showed that people who favoured the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile when trying to persuade their rivals," said the study.

Also, it seems that those who do not believe in the conspiracies were not just hostile but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well. The researchers said that, according to the anti-conspiracy holders, their own theory of 9/11 -- one which says 19 Muslims, none of whom could fly commercial airliners with any proficiency, pulled off an amazing surprise attack under the direction of a man on dialysis (Osama bin Laden) who was living in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan -- is unwaveringly true.

Meanwhile, "conspiracists," on the hand, did not have to pretend to have a theory that completely explained the events of 9/11. "For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account," the researchers said.

As reported by Veterans Today:

In short, the new study by Wood and Douglas suggests that the negative stereotype of the conspiracy theorist -- a hostile fanatic wedded to the truth of his own fringe theory -- accurately describes the people who defend the official account of 9/11, not those who dispute it.

A conspiracy theory about a conspiracy theory

The study also found that conspiracy believers discuss historical context, like viewing the JFK assassination as a precedent for 9/11, more than the antis. It also found that conspiracy believers do not like to be labeled as such.

These and other findings are contained in a new book, Conspiracy Theory in America, by political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith, which was published last year by the University of Texas Press. He explained why people don't like to be labeled as "conspiracy theorists."

"The CIA's campaign to popularize the term 'conspiracy theory' and make conspiracy belief a target of ridicule and hostility must be credited, unfortunately, with being one of the most successful propaganda initiatives of all time," he said.

He further noted that, essentially, those who use the term as an insult are doing so as the result of a well-documented, undisputed and historically accurate conspiracy by the CIA to cover up the JFK assassination.

Or not.

You be the judge.

Sources:

http://www.veteranstoday.com

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

http://conspiracypsychology.com

[Winston]

Yes conspiracy theorists tend to be more intellectual and freethinking than average conformists. However, it's a double edged sword. A lot of them who follow conspiracy media such as Alex Jones, tend to be addicted to paranoia, which is not healthy. No addiction is healthy, and addiction to paranoia is no exception.

An obsession with conspiracies and paranoia is also unproductive, since these are things you cannot change. Better to focus on things you can change and control, such as your lifestyle or location.

Also, if you listen to Alex Jones, you can tell that he exaggerates a lot. For example, he makes it sound like if you fly on a plane in the US, then the TSA agents will feel your crotch and private parts. I've never experienced that. When I fly in the US, TSA agents do not feel up my body. They just tell you to walk into that body scanner. Alex Jones is probably taking a few isolated extreme examples and making it sound like the norm. That's a typical fallacy.

So a lot of the conspiracy stuff is exaggerated and jumping to conclusions based on speculation or extreme examples.

They also pass around fake quotes that have no source. For example, they quote President Franklin Roosevelt as saying, "In politics, nothing happens by chance. If it happens, you can bet it was planned." There is no verifiable source for this quote by FDR. Yet the conspiracy movement passes it around anyway and assume it is a real quote by FDR. They simply believe whatever they are told by other conspiracy sites.

Some conspiracy people are also contrarians who simply enjoy taking the "alternative" view of everything on every issue, which they do instinctually like a reflex action. They look for conspiracies under every rock, and are BIASED toward an alternative explanation for every little thing, even if it has zero evidence to back it up. They believe every conspiracy theory they hear without evidence.

An example of this is Illuminati researcher Michael Tsarion. He believes that every little fact in history is a lie. He even says that William Shakespeare did not write the plays attributed to him. There is no evidence for that theory, but he believes it anyway, simply because it challenges the orthodox view of Shakespeare. That's his only reason. Thus he has a bias for believing an alternative story for everything.

Conspiracy theorists also tend to be one-sided, and do not have balanced views. For example, their view of government and law is 100 percent negative. Some, such as Stefan Molyneux and Mark Passio, believe that authority and law are 100 percent unnecessary and that anarchy is the natural state of humankind.

That is totally baseless and nonsensical. Any historian can tell you that anarchy has never been sustainable and has only been a transition stage from one regime to another. (e.g. the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution)

They never give the government credit for anything. Their hatred for government and authority is too extreme and one-sided, even if it has some validity. Here are some examples where government deserves credit:

- Seat belt laws have helped saved lives in car accidents. All statistics prove this. Isn't that a good thing?
- The government passes laws to protect animals from being hunted down to extinction, like the Buffalo and Bison were in the 1800's when they were almost hunted down to extinction.
- The government protects nature and national parks by creating the National Park system. Without it, great National Parks like Yosemite and Yellowstone would be exploited and plundered for profit. Olympic National Park would be desecrated by logging companies. Nature brings us closer to God and divinity. The government has helped keep it that way. (See the 12 hour historical documentary "The National Parks: America's Best Idea" by Ken Burns and Steve Ives)
- In the 1860's, no company wanted to take the risk of building the Transcontinental Railroad. So the US government had to subsidize the project, in order to connect the whole country for commerce and transportation. Without the government's help, the Transcontinental Railroad would never have been built.
- Without laws, some asshole could hit you on the road and then speed away, doing a hit and run. And drunk drivers could drink and drive freely. Is that a good thing?

A balanced person who sees both sides will give government credit for the above. But conspiracy theorists usually never do, nor do they acknowledge any of the above.

The anarchists assume that masses of humans are wise and capable of self-governance. History has shown that that's not true. It's a false assumption. Society has too many assholes, low lifes and sociopaths for lawless anarchy to work.

So yes, many conspiracy theories are true. Power has always corrupted and corruption has always existed in government, so of course there are real conspiracies. But not all conspiracy theories are true, nor are all of them false. Extremes are never accurate. Some conspiracy theories are plausible and supported by evidence and logic, but others aren't.

But becoming addicted and obsessed with conspiracies and paranoia, is not healthy or productive, especially since these are things you can't change. Better to focus on things you can change and control, such as your life and location.

[Taco]

Conspiracy theorists also tend to be one-sided, and do not have balanced views. For example, their view of government and law is 100 percent negative. They never give the government credit for anything.

If we didn't have a government everything would be free. A concept few people can grasp.


If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years there'd be a shortage of sand. ― Milton Friedman

The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away. Ronald Reagan (1911 - 2004)

Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure. - Robert LeFevre

Unfortunately, most of our Citizens refuse to comprehend that we now have a Gangster Government! - Errol Phillips, 2013

The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out - George Carlin

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. - Thomas Jefferson

A good politician is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar - H. L. Mencken 1880-1956

Life, liberty and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it is the fact that life, liberty and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place. - Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850)

[starchild5]

Yes conspiracy theorists tend to be more intellectual and freethinking than average conformists. However, it's a double edged sword. A lot of them who follow conspiracy media such as Alex Jones, tend to be addicted to paranoia, which is not healthy. No addiction is healthy, and addiction to paranoia is no exception.

An obsession with conspiracies and paranoia is also unproductive, since these are things you cannot change. Better to focus on things you can change and control, such as your lifestyle or location.

Also, if you listen to Alex Jones, you can tell that he exaggerates a lot. For example, he makes it sound like if you fly on a plane in the US, then the TSA agents will feel your crotch and private parts. I've never experienced that. When I fly in the US, TSA agents do not feel up my body. They just tell you to walk into that body scanner. Alex Jones is probably taking a few isolated extreme examples and making it sound like the norm. That's a typical fallacy.

So a lot of the conspiracy stuff is exaggerated and jumping to conclusions based on speculation or extreme examples.

They also pass around fake quotes that have no source. For example, they quote President Franklin Roosevelt as saying, "In politics, nothing happens by chance. If it happens, you can bet it was planned." There is no verifiable source for this quote by FDR. Yet the conspiracy movement passes it around anyway and assume it is a real quote by FDR. They simply believe whatever they are told by other conspiracy sites.

Some conspiracy people are also contrarians who simply enjoy taking the "alternative" view of everything on every issue, which they do instinctually like a reflex action. They look for conspiracies under every rock, and are BIASED toward an alternative explanation for every little thing, even if it has zero evidence to back it up. They believe every conspiracy theory they hear without evidence.

An example of this is Illuminati researcher Michael Tsarion. He believes that every little fact in history is a lie. He even says that William Shakespeare did not write the plays attributed to him. There is no evidence for that theory, but he believes it anyway, simply because it challenges the orthodox view of Shakespeare. That's his only reason. Thus he has a bias for believing an alternative story for everything.

Conspiracy theorists also tend to be one-sided, and do not have balanced views. For example, their view of government and law is 100 percent negative. Some, such as Stefan Molyneux and Mark Passio, believe that authority and law are 100 percent unnecessary and that anarchy is the natural state of humankind.

That is totally baseless and nonsensical. Any historian can tell you that anarchy has never been sustainable and has only been a transition stage from one regime to another. (e.g. the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution)

They never give the government credit for anything. Their hatred for government and authority is too extreme and one-sided, even if it has some validity. Here are some examples where government deserves credit:

- Seat belt laws have helped saved lives in car accidents. All statistics prove this. Isn't that a good thing?
- The government passes laws to protect animals from being hunted down to extinction, like the Buffalo and Bison were in the 1800's when they were almost hunted down to extinction.
- The government protects nature and national parks by creating the National Park system. Without it, great National Parks like Yosemite and Yellowstone would be exploited and plundered for profit. Olympic National Park would be desecrated by logging companies. Nature brings us closer to God and divinity. The government has helped keep it that way. (See the 12 hour historical documentary "The National Parks: America's Best Idea" by Ken Burns and Steve Ives)
- In the 1860's, no company wanted to take the risk of building the Transcontinental Railroad. So the US government had to subsidize the project, in order to connect the whole country for commerce and transportation. Without the government's help, the Transcontinental Railroad would never have been built.
- Without laws, some asshole could hit you on the road and then speed away, doing a hit and run. And drunk drivers could drink and drive freely. Is that a good thing?

A balanced person who sees both sides will give government credit for the above. But conspiracy theorists usually never do, nor do they acknowledge any of the above.

The anarchists assume that masses of humans are wise and capable of self-governance. History has shown that that's not true. It's a false assumption. Society has too many assholes, low lifes and sociopaths for lawless anarchy to work.

So yes, many conspiracy theories are true. Power has always corrupted and corruption has always existed in government, so of course there are real conspiracies. But not all conspiracy theories are true, nor are all of them false. Extremes are never accurate. Some conspiracy theories are plausible and supported by evidence and logic, but others aren't.

But becoming addicted and obsessed with conspiracies and paranoia, is not healthy or productive, especially since these are things you can't change. Better to focus on things you can change and control, such as your life and location.

Those who are real "conspiracy theorist", who go deep end to everything know that Alex Jones is an Implant, a controlled opposition, an agent to discredit the movement itself. He is not a "conspiracy theorist" ..He is just a plain dis-info agent, trying to discredit the "conspiracy theorist".

The government, elites, CIA etc etc fear the "Conspiracy Theorist" the most, as they do everything possible to discredit the movement.

Micheal Tsarian, Jordon Maxwell, Kerry Cassidy, Richard Hogland etc etc are all Infiltrators, mere actors.

The elites are not stupid to give us a tool that would PROVE their Evil. They would always ask for proof of their crime, when they very well know, they have suppressed every technology that could be used to prove their crime.

The real "conspiracy theorist" operates out of Feelings, They are operating on a higher vibration...They have a bigger bull shit detector, they are much older, experienced souls. They don' t need proof, which is a recent invention of the elites to know everything..

For genuine people....Its the HEART. The feelings of heart never lies...It always finds its target.

If it was just BS. Why would the elites invest so many men, time and money to discredit useless "conspiracy theorist" who does not have any proof but operate out of mere feelings? If it was that useless why would the evil be so bothered by "conspiracy theorist" who does not operate on facts, proof as they claim in most of the circumstances they get involved in?

The real "Conspiracy Theorist" already know that evil is not stupid enough to give us tools to expose itself.

It's not in the mind. A real "Conspiracy Theorist" follows his Heart not facts and proof, which we know can be manipulated and distorted. He knows what kind of evil he is dealing with, so he never takes any chances relaying on proof and facts of earth, which are themselves controlled by the evil.

You can never become a "Conspiracy Theorist". You are born a "Conspiracy Theorist"

"Conspiracy Theorist" itself is a code word to encompass a much larger issue that the elite face. The souls who are coming to planet earth to disrupt their status quo. Its not about facts and proof alone, because the elites have taken care of that, its about the change in Vibration these "Conspiracy Theorist" brings in when they are born on earth. Their souls when it comes in touch with others, activates the DNAs of others and make them evolve as well.

All the experiences that Winston wrote about America was never before written in such a manner. He exposed the lies of America. Being a Non-American, I did not knew the extent of darkness in America and American people, which he exposed from the mesh of lies the elites covered it with Media and Hollywood.

The facts like America has the highest mental issues, prison population comes later. He felt it before the facts. It's the feeling that made him write first not the facts. Its the feeling aka experiences he had with American women, that made his write differently, Its the feeling of soulless vibe in America that made him write. There is no proof and fact that - America is a soulless, empty place _ but people who has soul, are authentic feels it.

-----------------------

We would not be needing any government, if they do not suppress and kill scientists who were about to discover things that would change the course for humanity. If they allowed UFO technology for humanity, we don't need any government, we could just fly across the planet of our choice and live there happily.

If it ain't a conspiracy, that for over 100 years plus, we still are running on internal combustion engine on oil thats making trillions of dollars for the elite when there are free energy tech available. We don't need seat belts, if they give us Flying Saucers. The entire road system, vehicle is not kill proof, even with seat belts, people die all the time.

Government is making itself seem like they are needed by way of controlling the flow of money, economics, trade, military, sham elections, problem-reaction-solution.

There is this Darkness that does the evil but blames his sins on humanity and calls it Karma. The low life's, psycopaths in humanity would vanish in a day, if this darkness is terminated. The entire world is become psychopathic slowly, its converting even the good guys into bad ones...Perfect example is the Member here GHOST..He was once a good guy by his own words, after his experience in the Philippines...He admits he will be a bad guy now.

The problem is this darkness which people feel as Murphy Law makes himself look like powerless...ohh, with few protest, knowledge, anarchy, fighting against the government, creating your own system, money and law will make the world a better place...NO. Those who think like that Stefan Molyneux and Mark Passio have no clue whatsoever, what they are dealing with here. They don't know the True Evil, The True Power, of this THING. Its way way beyond whatever they are proposing as a solution.

The names you have taken are not "conspiracy theorist" at all. Most are infiltrators, some are trying to be "Conspiracy Theorist".

Most have completely missed the plot. I consider a guy a true "Conspiracy Theorist" Who believes in Aliens, UFOs and takes it from there...Will never wait for the government to prove it..Most of all..He must have a basic understanding of Murphy Law and then takes it from there to other spaces of knowledge Not to the Inner space trying to prove Illuminati exists..

It shouldn't take a real "Conspiracy Theorist" more than 5 minutes to know about freemasons, illuminati, 911 was an Inside job, JFK assassination, fake moon landing etc. That's it.

-----------------

Winston. I believe you are being misled by Infiltrators claiming to be "Conspiracy Theorist" and trying to make real "Conspiracy Theorist" in a bad light. I'm a hardcore crazy ""Conspiracy Theorist", I'm not paranoid at all, I have a healthy lifestyle I like to engage in many activities, enjoy nature, likes to go out, meet people, date, travel, has a decent sex life, loves good food, I believe, I have a good balanced healthy life even living in a third world country. I'm very positive and look forward to achieving many goals that I have set for myself. I like to help others. I'm non-judgmental. I work hard for a living.

Infact, In my experience People who don't claim to be "Conspiracy Theorist" are most unhealthy, has bad lifestyle choices, has depression, BP, diabetes, children suffering from some form of diseases, abnormalities on account of taking vaccinations.

Why would you on earth eat at McDonalds, Take Vaccinations, Drink Fluoridated Water, Watch TV...They never listen and then suffer the consequences. Worse, Their Children too.

See, I'm not claiming I'm perfect, however, I'm not also as that bad, in unhealthy life and minds as the CIA social control mechanism have the world believe.

[Winston]

Conspiracy theorists also tend to be one-sided, and do not have balanced views. For example, their view of government and law is 100 percent negative. They never give the government credit for anything.

If we didn't have a government everything would be free. A concept few people can grasp.


If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years there'd be a shortage of sand. ― Milton Friedman

This quote isn't true. The federal government is in charge of White Sands National Park, NM via the National Park System. Yet there is still plenty of white sand there, enough to go sledding on. I was just there last spring.

You didn't address any of the points I made above. Without any law or government, any guy could do a hit and run on you and get away with it. People and logging industries could plunder all the forests of trees for profit. They could desecrate Yosemite National Park. They could steal all the petrified wood in Painted Desert, AZ. They could steal all the Indian artifacts in Mesa Verde, Colorado, like some did before, and get away with it. Hunters could kill off the rest of the buffalo and bison and make them extinct, like they almost did in the 1800's. Who would stop them?

See what I mean?

Anarchists are delusional angry hippies. They have ZERO experience in running a country or even an organization, so they know NOTHING about running a society. Thus they are talking out of their ass and don't know jack shit. They are just a bunch of arrogant self-righteous delusional hippies with irrational ideas that don't work in the real world. And their opinions are UNQUALIFIED too. They have no management skills, leadership skills or organizational skills. History also shows that anarchy doesn't work and never has. It's not a stable system at all.

[Winston]

Also Taco:

Under anarchy, I could go to your house and rape your wife or steal your things. Then, if you went after me in revenge, if I managed to gun you down, then I'd win and that would be the end of it. Is that the kind of justice that you want? There'd be nothing but gang warfare or clan warfare under such a system.

Even the founding fathers of America did not believe in anarchy. They were intellectuals who knew that such a system could not work, and neither could democracy. That's why they proposed a Republic (rule of law) with a small government whose role it was to protect basic rights and liberties. And that's what we had during the 1800's, when government was much smaller than the monster size it is today.

The only way some Anarchy might work is if everyone lived in harmony with the earth and each other, like Native Americans did. But even they had their tribal laws and customs. So there can't be zero laws and rules. There has to be at least some, even if it's minimal. So 100 percent Anarchy can't work, but yeah, laws and rules can be reduced to a minimum if everyone lived in harmony with nature and others.

[Taco]

The only way some Anarchy might work is if everyone lived in harmony with the earth and each other, like Native Americans did. But even they had their tribal laws and customs. So there can't be zero laws and rules.

I'm not suggesting we live in a country without laws. Native Americans lived for thousands of years just fine without a government using the tribal chief system where everything is shared among the tribe members. So what do we need a government for? The truth is all out hard working senators and congressmen retire from office with millions because they're exempt from insider trading laws. Why do you think their so eager to run for office? They make off like bandits which is why they don't give a shit happens to country or its citizens.