Conspiracy theorists... are they all just a bit thick?
Discussion
I’ve had some belters off my brother in law
I also get the moon landings were faked as well
Even the earth is flat.
But the mortgages were all getting paid off
The night he told me.
The circumstances were very amusing.
I drove past him on a side road and pulled up for a chat.
He was leaning in my car telling me this and that
And looking round as if he was being watched.
I honestly thought I was blocking the road so every time he looked round I looked in the mirror thinking a car was coming.
Only there wasn’t.
I couldn’t stop smirking any longer and said start looking for naked women on the internet instead of that rubbish
My father in laws been telling me for months.
I said he’s winding you up.
I also get the moon landings were faked as well
Even the earth is flat.
But the mortgages were all getting paid off
The night he told me.
The circumstances were very amusing.
I drove past him on a side road and pulled up for a chat.
He was leaning in my car telling me this and that
And looking round as if he was being watched.
I honestly thought I was blocking the road so every time he looked round I looked in the mirror thinking a car was coming.
Only there wasn’t.
I couldn’t stop smirking any longer and said start looking for naked women on the internet instead of that rubbish
My father in laws been telling me for months.
I said he’s winding you up.
Shuvi McTupya said:
paulguitar said:
No need for that at all. You could simply acknowledge your mistake?
Are you really such a Biden shill that want to be arguing about him/trump on loads of different threads? get a life.
I'm out.
paulguitar said:
El stovey said:
Do people actually think trump might have won the election still?
Over 70% of Republicans believe the election was rigged. It's truly staggering.I think there will be a Trump book, the occasional rant but other than that he’ll be silent. Stressing about debt and prosecution.
Shuvi McTupya said:
paulguitar said:
Not at all. Just wanted to correct your misunderstanding of the situation, or hoping you would do so yourself. I'd do the same if it was a thread about music or cars, and would be happy to have any of my own mistakes relayed to me.
yawn..give it a rest.
Back on the conspiracy topic, a pretty funny example from this very website within the last 30 minutes:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
There are a couple of contributors there (one in particular) who are fully-fledged, tinfoil hat wearers.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
There are a couple of contributors there (one in particular) who are fully-fledged, tinfoil hat wearers.
paulguitar said:
Back on the conspiracy topic, a pretty funny example from this very website within the last 30 minutes:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
There are a couple of contributors there (one in particular) who are fully-fledged, tinfoil hat wearers.
Mad. Quite mad.https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
There are a couple of contributors there (one in particular) who are fully-fledged, tinfoil hat wearers.
The biggest thing for me about conspiracy theorists is that they put all their effort in trying to convince you that you are wrong, but no effort in actually trying to achieve something out of their 'realisation'.
So the only difference between 'beleivers' and 'non-believers' is that the 'non-believers' acknowledge that some conspiracy theories may be true and carry on instead of winding themselves up about it.
So the only difference between 'beleivers' and 'non-believers' is that the 'non-believers' acknowledge that some conspiracy theories may be true and carry on instead of winding themselves up about it.
AW111 said:
paulguitar said:
Back on the conspiracy topic, a pretty funny example from this very website within the last 30 minutes:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
There are a couple of contributors there (one in particular) who are fully-fledged, tinfoil hat wearers.
Mad. Quite mad.https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
There are a couple of contributors there (one in particular) who are fully-fledged, tinfoil hat wearers.
paulguitar said:
The reliable ones go into detail about the information/sources they've used. So you can effectively decide for yourself whether you think it adds up.
Ok Paul.Who decides who the reliable ones are?
My point was..somebody runs the fact checking service. Somebody finances it. Do they do it out of the goodness of their hearts? to make money? for political reasons?
If it is to make money, then then they will have to appease advertisers/share holders/financers etc and can never be considered to be completely neutral. They may have a right wing bias, a left wing bias, or some other kind of bias. But they will never be neutral and will use sources they agree with. Unless you think they have non partisan teams of investigators that they send out to fact check everything?
Autopilot said:
AW111 said:
paulguitar said:
Back on the conspiracy topic, a pretty funny example from this very website within the last 30 minutes:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
There are a couple of contributors there (one in particular) who are fully-fledged, tinfoil hat wearers.
Mad. Quite mad.https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
There are a couple of contributors there (one in particular) who are fully-fledged, tinfoil hat wearers.
Shuvi McTupya said:
Ok Paul.
Who decides who the reliable ones are?
My point was..somebody runs the fact checking service. Somebody finances it. Do they do it out of the goodness of their hearts? to make money? for political reasons?
If it is to make money, then then they will have to appease advertisers/share holders/financers etc and can never be considered to be completely neutral. They may have a right wing bias, a left wing bias, or some other kind of bias. But they will never be neutral and will use sources they agree with. Unless you think they have non partisan teams of investigators that they send out to fact check everything?
I think your concerns and questions are fair enough, but I've been fine with the fact-checking I've done for the reason I pointed out, IE, you can further check from the sources provided and make up your own mind. You can, of course, also fact-check with several different fact-checkers, which is something I always tend to do.Who decides who the reliable ones are?
My point was..somebody runs the fact checking service. Somebody finances it. Do they do it out of the goodness of their hearts? to make money? for political reasons?
If it is to make money, then then they will have to appease advertisers/share holders/financers etc and can never be considered to be completely neutral. They may have a right wing bias, a left wing bias, or some other kind of bias. But they will never be neutral and will use sources they agree with. Unless you think they have non partisan teams of investigators that they send out to fact check everything?
The well-known fact-checking websites make the point that they are accused of equal bias by lefties and righties so that tends to indicate that they are probably mostly getting it right!
Shuvi McTupya said:
Who decides who the reliable ones are?
This is the clever bit. You get to decide yourself! Yes, that's right: each and every one of us can decide who we trust and who we don't!And, if you want people to think that you're reliable, you can make yourself look so. By, as said, doing research, showing your sources, cross-referencing, and all of that kind of thing. Referring to data, providing links to actual facts. It's not rocket science.
Or you can double-down, repeat stories and allegations with no provenance, or even just provide links to YouTube videos with no corroboration. Which, in turn, gives everybody else an equally sound footing on which to judge your reliability.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff