Conspiracy theorists... are they all just a bit thick?
Discussion
Raccaccoonie said:
RemarkLima said:
So, what you're saying is that it's OK to laugh at, and call thick, people with a mental illness?
The low intelligence link has been shown quite a few times.
Analytic thinking reduces belief in conspiracy theories
https://westminsterresearch.westminster.ac.uk/item...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scienti...
''A new scientific study has found that those who are receptive to pseudo-profound, intellectual-sounding 'bulls***' are less intelligent, less reflective, and more likely to be believe in conspiracy theories, the paranormal and alternative medicine.''
This is the issue, they become tunnel visioned on whatever CT and will not analyse anything that could invalidate these thoughts, therefore becoming a self fulfilling prophecy as they only focus on stories that validate their thoughts and dismiss everything else.
Are you an expert in the field? Or just asking questions? Or maybe doing your own research on the subject?
BlackWidow13 said:
RemarkLima said:
Oh look, the cod psychologist are at it again!
So, what you're saying is that it's OK to laugh at, and call thick, people with a mental illness?
Which would sir prefer: being laughed at, or being committed to a mental institution? So, what you're saying is that it's OK to laugh at, and call thick, people with a mental illness?
Take yer pick.
HTH
Raccaccoonie said:
RemarkLima said:
So, what you're saying is that it's OK to laugh at, and call thick, people with a mental illness?
The low intelligence link has been shown quite a few times.
Analytic thinking reduces belief in conspiracy theories
https://westminsterresearch.westminster.ac.uk/item...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scienti...
''A new scientific study has found that those who are receptive to pseudo-profound, intellectual-sounding 'bulls***' are less intelligent, less reflective, and more likely to be believe in conspiracy theories, the paranormal and alternative medicine.''
This is the issue, they become tunnel visioned on whatever CT and will not analyse anything that could invalidate these thoughts, therefore becoming a self fulfilling prophecy as they only focus on stories that validate their thoughts and dismiss everything else.
Raccaccoonie said:
RemarkLima said:
So, what you're saying is that it's OK to laugh at, and call thick, people with a mental illness?
The low intelligence link has been shown quite a few times.
Analytic thinking reduces belief in conspiracy theories
https://westminsterresearch.westminster.ac.uk/item...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scienti...
''A new scientific study has found that those who are receptive to pseudo-profound, intellectual-sounding 'bulls***' are less intelligent, less reflective, and more likely to be believe in conspiracy theories, the paranormal and alternative medicine.''
This is the issue, they become tunnel visioned on whatever CT and will not analyse anything that could invalidate these thoughts, therefore becoming a self fulfilling prophecy as they only focus on stories that validate their thoughts and dismiss everything else.
On the COVID thread Djokovic having to abide by the same laws as everyone else is about “power and control”. He is “being made an example of” because he didn’t “take the experimental medicine”.
Only on PH can a multi-millionaire sports star having to abide by the same laws as everyone else be twisted into a conspiracy theory!
Only on PH can a multi-millionaire sports star having to abide by the same laws as everyone else be twisted into a conspiracy theory!
I was as reading that there will be soon more plastic in the sea than fish, I do think that whilst the world argues on climate change, the sea gets destroyed, plastics destroy everything, enter all blood and food chains, and we die out as soon as we became ''alive''. Crazy world we live in really.
I am voting 'yet' going off the replies to https://twitter.com/JacquiDeevoy1/status/163716344... !
Blown2CV said:
no one is saying it is faultless, but it's about least risk and maximising likelihood of getting to the truth. If peer review fraud was detected then surely that means the system works.... Just because peer review fraud could happen does not mean that all peer reviewing is fraudulent. Most 'peers' are not in collusion. The most dodgy part of science is where companies fund studies in order to build 'evidence' for the conclusion they would like. The point is that doing everything in the open is better. Allowing anyone to see what you've done, how you've done it, and try to replicate it is intended to weed out bias, errors, improve upon what is done. Just because a person/scientist was detected doing something dodgy doesn't mean the whole universe of science is nonsense... clearly you can see that? When the alternative is no checks and balances, no culture of properly testing evidence and methods, no openness whatsoever, and those that shout loudest get the most attention?
Yes, I agree with all of that.Like any system, there is potential for abuse, and it is a good thing that there is transparency etc. I wasn't saying it meant none of it was reliable, just that even something that is peer-reviewed might not be correct. Sometimes it takes years for the retraction to happen.
And I also agree the biggest problem is paid for papers. We need a paper to show x, here's some funding, please go and produce something. That clearly does happen.
I was in no way saying it was all nonsense, just that like any other industry, corruption does happen.
robscot said:
I am voting 'yet' going off the replies to https://twitter.com/JacquiDeevoy1/status/163716344... !
Comical and yet disturbing. People on there calling Hungerford and Dunblane false flag events.
I can safely say that she’s nuts.
The majority of the others seem of limited intelligence.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff