Conspiracy theories - what to do

[lizzieoak]

I’m not sure if this is a blokey thing or if the men I know are just a bit daft. I only seem to have these conversations with men, but that may be coincidence.

A number of my male friends and relatives keep getting all excited over (really stupid) conspiracy theories. Last night, for example, I’m hanging out with a good friend and he starts going on about Facebook. About how the Chinese govt, or CIA,
or Dr Evil (I was so boggled I wasn’t taking in all the details) actually invented Facebook, and they found Zuckerberg to front it as they needed a personable young person (yes, because everyone loves us Jews). They invented it so tht we’d provide them, free of charge, with all the information they need to control us down the road; our kitten photos, pictures of the kids’ school plays, our opinions on Strictly Dancing, and our holiday party invites (I may be paraphrasing ;) )

He then said “they” have “men in suits” (not sure why he thinks suits are a sign of evil, he often wears suits) monitoring our Facebook accounts.

I pointed out that if they are watching fb, it’s going to be the accounts of suspected radicals and organized crime people, and that “they” do not have the manpower to watch all the fb accounts in the world (and “they” would die of boredom if they did). I’m not sure he saw the logic there!

I’ve had a similarly stupid conversation w my ex husband years ago when I emailed him at work to tell him our baby dd had just stood up for the first time. He said the govt (his employer) was paying people to read every single incoming and outgoing email to catch people not working, but indulging in the doings of ridiculously adorable infants.

Is this anywhere near common, or do I just know plonkers? Am I somehow driving them mad? I’ve asked my friend to stop telling me his conspiracy theories as he’s making me uncomfortable (I’ve pointed out that conspiracy theorists often end up believing in the lizard people and antsemetic tropes). He stops for a while, then starts again. Claims it’s “fun” to think about.

Is it as odd as it feels to me? Are they mad? How to stop it?

Really, so you believed that Governments where dragnetting internet data before snowden

I dunno what dragnetting means. Do I believe the Government had some way of watching me online if they wanted to? Of course.

You believe that David Kelly committed suicide, or Gareth Williams was an accidental death

See what you did there? You conflated something that is known to be true* with something that isn't.

*I don't actually know what you are talking about with the dragnetting stuff but will give the benefit of the doubt.

People with a v good education and strong analytical/critical thinking tend to check their sources, and don't rely on dodgy YouTube videos.

Not everyone with a v good education have strong analytical/critical thinking skills though, it's a very small subset who actually do and most seek out information via confirmation bias on most subjects, its visible on MN every day.

Hence why we are pushing ahead with machine learning and AI.

I have to admit I went into such a dark headspace with some of these theories for quite a while. One piece of advice which helped, both from my husband and from my therapist was them saying "Imagine all these theories are true, every single one. What do you do? How are you going to live your life on a day to day basis in positive opposition to that which you fear?" There's deeper warcrime/vengeance stuff which plays such a huge role in all of this and it's not unjustified either.

Leaning on your own understanding just makes you miserable but we do need to be aware.

I have a first class honours degree by the way...

Did anyone read the article I posted?

It's probably the closest the public have ever come to disclosure on UFO's. This is HUGE!

Furiosa

I read some of it earlier today, I was the most interesting bit was that a private individual appears to be funding this stuff.

But would you say you had a mental health problem when you were heavily into Ct?

Ime, that's not unusual...

Furiosa, it wouldn't surprise me at all . My then boyfriend, now husband, and I saw something very odd back in 1996 which we still can't explain.

Really, so you believed that Governments where dragnetting internet data before snowden?

A big element of critical thinking is assessing the evidence available to you at the current time. If new evidence later comes to light then of course you should reconsider your conclusions.

Not everyone with a v good education have strong analytical/critical thinking skills though, it's a very small subset who actually do and most seek out information via confirmation bias on most subjects, its visible on MN every day. Well said, I'll add arrogance to that as well.

Tessliketrees

Yes Mr Bigelow. They've been funding the Pentagon's program and have physical evidence apparently and the Pentagon's program have concluded UAF's are real, they are more advanced than us, could pose a threat but are not from other countries.

Could be project Blue Beam or could be soft disclosure. Either way they're saying UAF's are real. Buy your tinfoil now folks!

You might think your male friends are mannor paranoid but look into some of these theories. You'll find alot of truth.

9/11 will at least allowed by the US government if not planned and executed by them.

Aliens are real the govenments are covering it up, alot of our technology comes from aliens.

Isn't Bigelow connected to Skinwalker Ranch?

Not a fan of CTs but of podcasts on Mysteries... Though very sceptical about David Kelly and Gareth Williams which are likely to be government spook cover ups. It was also widely known that GCHQ was monitoring Internet traffic well before Snowden.

Sorry I'm an age old programmer, been in the industry for decades.

I dunno what dragnetting means. Do I believe the Government had some way of watching me online if they wanted to? Of course.

Dragnetting isn't just watching you online if they wanted to, its the mass data collection and hovering up everything you ever do online, running it through mass algorithms to decide if you should get a closer look.

That type of thinking was pure tin foil hattery by most peoples standards before the whistleblowers, brushing it off as the nothing to hide so nothing to fear argument doesn't negate the fact that it considered lunacy if someone said such a thing before snowden and multiple hacks etc.

See what you did there? You conflated something that is known to be true with something that isn't.*

Kelly is still on record of committing suicide and Williams as having an accidental death which somehow had him dead locked inside of a suitcase. But that is my point, all are under the umbrella of conspiracy theory, if you see what I mean.

Furiosa, before you get too carried away, maybe focus a little on this paragraph:

"Mr. Elizondo has now joined Mr. Puthoff and another former Defense Department official, Christopher K. Mellon, who was a deputy assistant secretary of defense for intelligence, in a new commercial venture called To the Stars Academy of Arts and Science. They are speaking publicly about their efforts as their venture aims to raise money for research into U.F.O.s." (My emphasis)

So some guys looking to raise money for their UFO venture make grandiose claims about the extent of official evidence for UFOs.

TooManyPaws

Probably but this news is amazing. We have a verifiable USG project that has concluded that UAF's are real and more advanced than us to the point that if they were hostile we are unable to defend ourselves from them. This is official and should be front page news.

The article has stated that physical evidence has been recovered .

That type of thinking was pure tin foil hattery by most peoples standards before the whistleblowers

Not to me. Maybe it's because you are a programmer and therefore know the technological limitations. Isn't this what Google have always done anyway? I mean, they watch how we behave to optimise their search engine. It's not difficult to extrapolate from that that you could also use it to zoom in on an individual who behaves a certain way.

Kelly is still on record of committing suicide and Williams as having an accidental death which somehow had him dead locked inside of a suitcase

Exactly, where as dragnetting has apparently been proven and admitted as fact.

Furoisa just finished that article. I have to agree with NotDavidTennant I'm not seeing anything huge.

NotDavidTennant

Could be a money making venture, I won't real that out but the interview given to the NYT is by the former head of the project.

You're right I am getting carried away but this is a big story. Either we're being told UAF exists or we're being led to believe they do for nefarious reasons. Either way this a break from the norm.

Also, the American public were led to believe this Pentagon project, up until now, didn't exist.

Tessliketrees

The article states that the Pentagon project has physical evidence.

The article states that the Pentagon project has physical evidence

Where?

A big element of critical thinking is assessing the evidence available to you at the current time. If new evidence later comes to light then of course you should reconsider your conclusions.

Whilst thats obviously true, a lot of the v-good education critical thinking crowd end up just shrugging shoulders and saying "well of course they do that" when presented with concrete evidence, that is not critical thinking it's just silently accepting that they was wrong whilst still trying to play the intelligent critical thinking card

Either we're being told UAF exists or we're being led to believe they do for nefarious reasons. Either way this a break from the norm.

Well we would be if this guy Luis Elizondo was speaking in an official capacity. But he is now presumably just a private citizen, and as I pointed out above he is basically shilling for money for his new venture.

saying "well of course they do that" when presented with concrete evidence

Is this about dragnetting again? Can you link some naysaying? I am surprised anybody would accuse somebody who believed that of being a CT nut.

Humps - was your question directed at me? Ah, perhaps some generational PTSD - my grandfather served in WW2 in SE Asia and then as part of occupation forces in Japan afterwards. Not really by choice. Whilst he was in Japan, he saw some really dodgy stuff re rebuilding contracts on the American side which really made him question what went on both before/during war and he became vehemently anti-American, much more so than anti-Japanese. He had severe PTSD issues which resurfaced in my childhood. We're very Irish too so used to getting called terrorists at drop of a hat when it suits powers that be.