# Truthers and conspiracy theorists
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [August 30, 2012, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174 "2012-08-30T18:54:48Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 13
### Author:  [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)
#### Post date: [December 15, 2013, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/241 "2013-12-15T17:54:57Z")
> [@psikeyhackr](#):
>
> And your “evidence” for that?
>
> psik
We’re not doing that any more. Care to answer the questions I’ve asked you?
---
### Author:  [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)
#### Post date: [December 15, 2013, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/242 "2013-12-15T18:25:55Z")
> [@MichaelEmouse](#):
>
> Coming back to the OP:
>
> I think that some CTers are definitely mentally ill in the sense of being psychotic. We should note however that it’s possible that some of them only give that impression because they are, while not crazy, axe-grinding venting bastards.
> Do you remember in high school when someone said something mean about a kid they disliked? Sometimes, it was true but often, it wasn’t. It was either a severe distortion or outright false (e.g.: “John’s a fag.” Mary’s a slut." The point of saying that wasn’t to say establish something as true, it was to express hostility and hopefully hurt that person directly or indirectly.
>
> So it may be that for many CTers, whether what they’re saying is true or false isn’t the point; The point is to say something plausible to express hostility toward an entity they dislike and hopefully hurt it.
>
> For example: A Birther may not care where Obama was born. But he knows that it’s kinda-on-its-face-plausible that he wasn’t born in the US. Therefore, going on about how Obama wasn’t born in the US enables him to express hostility toward Obama and, if it’s believed by enough people, hurt him.
>
> So, a fundamental mistake many may be making when engaging a Birther is thinking that the Birther argues that position because he thinks it’s true. He’s likely doing it because it enables him to vent about Obama. Arguing with him only gives him more opportunity to grind that particular axe.
> [@Trinopus](#):
>
> I dunno. I mostly hear that kind of criticism in the form of hyperbole, not in the form of a conspiracy fantasy. You know, “Using drones against American citizens,” or “The NSA is listening to my every phone call” or the like. Taking essentially valid points and expressing them in ways that are perhaps a bit exaggerated. As you say, “Mary’s a slut.”
>
> Conspiracy Fantasies have a kind of life of their own. “The NSA is using commercial jet aircraft to disperse cadmium into the atmosphere via chemtrails in order to control the weather and cause hurricanes and…” It goes beyond ordinary hyperbole, and enters into “system building.”
>
> The former takes something real, and demonizes it. The latter makes up something completely fictional. Not “Mary’s a slut” but “Mary sacrifices goats to Satan at midnight black masses.”
I think that is a good point, but I also think this issue is a little bit complex.
I do think that politics (and the hate some people have for a political opponent) can be an important item that feeds a CT, in the matter at hand an article in a Phoenix New Times noted that a good number of 911 Truthers come from the left of the spectrum. Then George the lesser was the president.
When the TWA800 explosion happened it took place when Clinton was in office, and as you can guess it the majority of the believers of a conspiracy came from the right side of the isle, it was no coincidence that when a “new”\* documentary released early in the year it was pumped more than the deserved comment in passing it should had in conservative sites and FOX “news”.
The Benghazi conspiracy and the climate change one that the vast majority of conservatives in the USA believe about the climate scientists “doing it for the money” follows that pattern.
\*Actually, the “new” TWA documentary was virtually all reheated baloney.
---
### Author:  [@aruvqan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aruvqan)
#### Post date: [December 15, 2013, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/243 "2013-12-15T22:10:47Z")
The 2 main CT I come into contact with [or so it seems] is the old classic US trip to the moon was a hoax, and Obama is variously muslim, Kenyan or both.
My general response to the first one is “And if it was a hoax, do you not think that the Soviet Union would have jumped all over us in the world press announcing the fraud?” Because if you stop and think about it, they would have had absolutely no reason to keep quiet about it back in 1969 and every reason to trumpet the fraudery to the skies.
My response to anything about Obama is generally “And if he is Muslim, who the fuck cares - he hasn’t done anything to overturn the constitution and change to sharia law.” And “If he was Kenyan, he doesn’t seem to have changed anything towards turning us all into Masai herdsmen, wandering around with lots of cows yet, has he?” Because to be honest, I really haven’t seen much in the way of muslim or kenyan crap going on in Washington yet …
---
### Author:  [@sciurophobic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sciurophobic)
#### Post date: [December 15, 2013, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/244 "2013-12-15T22:56:19Z")
Is there a name for the logical fallacy that conspiracy theorists make that governments lie all the time, or act secretly (which is true), so therefore no lie or secret is too large to be impossible (which does not logically follow, nor is it true)?
---
### Author:  [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/245 "2013-12-16T00:33:01Z")
**sciurophobic** : (I had to look up your name, by the way. Cool name!)
It sounds to me like an “appeal to ignorance.”
“Everything is a lie! No one can know the truth! So my opinion is right, because nobody can possibly disprove it.”
---
### Author:  [@psikeyhackr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psikeyhackr)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/246 "2013-12-16T07:01:13Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> Back to the topic of this thread: Are there any major conspiracy theories out there that you think are too ridiculous to be taken seriously?
I really don’t give a damn about any Conspiracy Theories.
It is just that Truthers get called Conspiracy Theorists.
But I won’t discuss the No Planes business at all. And since I really do not care who did 9/11 approaching it from the conspiracy direction is pointless. The government cannot change the Laws of Physics. How many hundreds of tons were involved in the JFK assassination? What is there that is massively strange to figure out about it?
9/11 is massively strange no matter who did it.
Of course it is even stranger from a sociological standpoint if proven physically impossible for the top of the north tower to destroy the rest. Because it means a lot of people claiming to understand physics should have explained that in 2002.
How could they now account for not explaining it? 9/11 will never go away.
A physical model could be done of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in 1940 but it can’t be done for the north tower? That makes so much sense. :smack:
psik
---
### Author:  [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/247 "2013-12-16T07:04:55Z")
You not understanding it doesn’t mean it can’t be understood.
---
### Author:  [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 8:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/248 "2013-12-16T08:20:14Z")
> [@psikeyhackr](#):
>
> I really don’t give a damn about any Conspiracy Theories.
>
> It is just that Truthers get called Conspiracy Theorists.
Yes. And you, as a truther, are giving us grade-A example after grade-A example of _why_ we consider truthers Conspiracy Theorists. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and _thinks_ like a duck…
You’ve given no explanation for why the official theory works beyond “the evidence is not good enough for me”. You have set incredible standards of evidence which you then waive for your own personal pet theory. You’re clearly unaware of the information we have, the methods used to determine what happened, and _why_ the major reputable organizations which have examined it have universally come to the same conclusions. You’re uneducated in civil engineering, physics, and math. You seem to ignore or shunt aside many objections to your statements. You say blatantly false things that anyone with even the slightest understanding of the available evidence can fact-check in seconds. And yet you _still think we should be convinced_.
> [@](#):
>
> 9/11 is massively strange no matter who did it.
No. It’s not. Even without direct physical models, we have very strong frameworks in place to determine what happened, how it happened, and why it happened. As I said earlier in the thread, a plane flew into each of the twin towers, causing extensive fires and stripping the insulation away from the steel columns and floors. The heat caused the floor trusses to fall, which in turn led to the supporting columns bending and snapping, as they relied on the floor trusses to remain stable. The floors pancaked down, their weight collapsing quickly, but _not at free fall speed, as you claimed earlier in the thread_. The explanation is simple, explains all available evidence, is contradicted by none, and basically fulfills everything we needed.
> [@](#):
>
> Of course it is even stranger from a sociological standpoint if proven physically impossible for the top of the north tower to destroy the rest. Because it means a lot of people claiming to understand physics should have explained that in 2002.
_If_. _If_ every scientific authority which spent time examining it was wrong. _If_ the calculations they used were wrong. _If_. But you know what? _If_ you can’t show the error, or provide an explanation that fits the evidence better, then there’s no bloody point talking about it. And I can tell you right now which “if” I find more reasonable.
> [@](#):
>
> How could they now account for not explaining it? 9/11 will never go away.
Yep. Just like the Kennedy Assassination, the Moon Landing, ancient aliens, big pharma, the illuminati… It’s never going away. Not because it has merit, but because cranks will _never give it a rest_. Bryan nailed it:
> [@Bryan Ekers](#):
>
> You not understanding it doesn’t mean it can’t be understood.
You are a conspiracy theorist. As are _all_ 9/11 “truthers”.
---
### Author:  [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 8:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/249 "2013-12-16T08:42:29Z")
Yeah, I like how statements that start with “If” are later taken as fact.
---
### Author:  [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 8:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/250 "2013-12-16T08:57:46Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#):
>
> Yeah, I like how statements that start with “If” are later taken as fact.
Another classic conspiracy theorist trope. Also: a sure sign that you’re _wrong_. Newsflash: we _did_ explain it in 2002. And again in 2006. And our explanations do not match your preconceptions, **pk**.
---
### Author:  [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 9:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/251 "2013-12-16T09:06:31Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#):
>
> Another classic conspiracy theorist trope. Also: a sure sign that you’re _wrong_. Newsflash: we _did_ explain it in 2002. And again in 2006. And our explanations do not match your preconceptions, **pk**.
Why did I write pk… I meant **PH**.
---
### Author:  [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/252 "2013-12-16T13:46:11Z")
> [@psikeyhackr](#):
>
> But I won’t discuss the No Planes business at all.
So you do have a “razor” to separate the believable (to you) from the not believable (to you). How do you define that razor? What makes one story believable but not another? Where do you draw the line and why?
---
### Author:  [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/253 "2013-12-16T13:53:28Z")
> [@psikeyhackr](#):
>
> I really don’t give a damn about any Conspiracy Theories.
The evidence (please familiarize yourself with that term) at hand proves (please familiarize yourself with that term) otherwise.
> [@](#):
>
> It is just that Truthers get called Conspiracy Theorists.
Truthers are CTs.
> [@](#):
>
> The government cannot change the Laws of Physics.
Nor can you. Again, stop pretending you know what Science is. The evidence at hand proves you haven’t a clue about any actual scientific issue.
> [@](#):
>
> How many hundreds of tons were involved in the JFK assassination?
How many tons of what? The only thing involved in the assassination of President Kennedy was a lone nutter with a rifle and ammunition.
> [@](#):
>
> 9/11 is massively strange no matter who did it.
For those who understand Science, it’s not all that strange.
> [@](#):
>
> Of course it is even stranger from a sociological standpoint if proven physically impossible for the top of the north tower to destroy the rest. Because it means a lot of people claiming to understand physics should have explained that in 2002.
Sociology isn’t Physics.
> [@](#):
>
> How could they now account for not explaining it? 9/11 will never go away.
Sadly, neither will you CTs.
---
### Author:  [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/254 "2013-12-16T14:50:56Z")
**psikeyhackr** , here’s an idea. Make a new thread about 9/11 and present your _best_ evidence that the official theory is false, and then present your _best_ evidence for whichever alternative theory you consider convincing. Because this is quite fun, despite the mods putting the kibosh on specific discussion of 9/11.
---
### Author:  [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/255 "2013-12-16T16:09:27Z")
> [@psikeyhackr](#):
>
> And since I really do not care who did 9/11 approaching it from the conspiracy direction is pointless.
Aside from the obvious that you’re spending rather an amount of effort on something you apparently don’t care about - why on earth _don’t_ you care?
It seems kinda important who did it.
---
### Author:  [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/256 "2013-12-16T16:40:23Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#):
>
> **psikeyhackr** , here’s an idea. Make a new thread about 9/11 and present your _best_ evidence that the official theory is false, and then present your _best_ evidence for whichever alternative theory you consider convincing. Because this is quite fun, despite the mods putting the kibosh on specific discussion of 9/11.
This already happened last year.
---
### Author:  [@74westy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/74westy)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/257 "2013-12-16T18:10:41Z")
> [@psikeyhackr](#):
>
> Of course it is even stranger from a sociological standpoint if proven physically impossible for the top of the north tower to destroy the rest. Because it means a lot of people claiming to understand physics should have explained that in 2002.
I wholeheartedly agree that it would be one of the strangest things I could imagine if what we saw happen in 2001 was physically impossible and the overwhelming majority of physicists and engineers knowingly lied about it. That would be so strange that I pretty much have to conclude that the hypothetical it depends on is false and what happened was not, in fact, impossible.
That is how non-conspiracy theorists reason and that is how we know that this variant of trutherism is a conspiracy theory. Only conspiracy theorists could derive absurdity from their premises and then see that very absurdity as evidence for those premises.
---
### Author:  [@74westy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/74westy)
#### Post date: [December 16, 2013, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/258 "2013-12-16T18:51:59Z")
> [@74westy](#):
>
> Only conspiracy theorists could derive absurdity from their premises and then see that very absurdity as evidence for those premises.
Sorry but I want to back off on this. psikeyhackr did point out the strangeness of the conclusion but didn’t present it as evidence of conspiracy. I was too in love with my own rhetoric and I succumbed to the siren call of strawmanry. I apologize.
---
### Author:  [@psikeyhackr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psikeyhackr)
#### Post date: [December 17, 2013, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/259 "2013-12-17T17:10:12Z")
> [@74westy](#):
>
> I wholeheartedly agree that it would be one of the strangest things I could imagine if what we saw happen in 2001 was physically impossible and the overwhelming majority of physicists and engineers knowingly lied about it.
But I didn’t say they lied about. It is the phenomenal silence that is so interesting.
Niel DeGrasse Tyson sent out a public email on 9/12/01 saying he was a witness to 9/11 and that his home was 4 blocks from Ground Zero.
Since then he has publicly complained about errors in the movie Titanic. He has publicly complained about scientific errors in the movie Gravity. What has he said about 9/11 since 9/12/01?
NOTHING!
He has not supported the official story. He has not denied the official story.
How many scientists have done the exact same thing? Been totally silent on the subject?
But if the official story was scientifically sound why shouldn’t the overwhelming majority of scientists publicly support it? What would be the problem?
psik
---
### Author:  [@psikeyhackr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psikeyhackr)
#### Post date: [December 17, 2013, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174/260 "2013-12-17T17:16:05Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#):
>
> Aside from the obvious that you’re spending rather an amount of effort on something you apparently don’t care about - why on earth _don’t_ you care?
>
> It seems kinda important who did it.
That may be what is important to you.
It is scientists NOT SOLVING a simple physics problem that is important to me.
This goes to the core of science education. 7th and 8th graders should have been pointing out peculiar things about the supposed collapses within weeks of 9/11. And engineering schools not doing experiments for 12 years.
psik
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174.md?page=12)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/truthers-and-conspiracy-theorists/633174.md?page=14)