4 Reasons why we believe in Conspiracy theories

Did NASA really land on the moon?

Did the government cover-up involvement in the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks?

Is Elvis still alive and kicking? What about Michael Jackson?

Was John F. Kennedy assassinated at the hands of multiple shooters?

Do the Freemasons control the United States?

A small but fervent group of people believe there was more than included in historical record about the aforementioned events. Conspiracies, they call them. And every generation has its own.

Some of them turn about to be true, after all: Pearl Harbor was a Japanese conspiracy and Nixon’s Watergate break-in was a coverup.

But with so few that turn out to be true, why do people believe in conspiracies?

HERE is the link to the Rest of the story.

And one final note:
so, NOW we know who was on the grassy knoll and shot JFK LOL It was JFK himself !!!

Picture of 4 Reasons why we believe in Conspiracy theories
sort by: active | newest | oldest
1-10 of 18Next »
=SMART=8 years ago
I cant say that the theories are true or false, because they are theories. Some parts make sense, others seem exaggerated. What I can say though is the official explanation for many of these events seems patchy at best and sometimes completely ridiculous. This doesn't automatically mean the conspiracy is correct either though.
Goodhart (author)  =SMART=8 years ago
In science, a theory is an explanation that generally is accepted to be true. It is a hypothesis which is an educated guess, based on observation.
Goodhart (author)  Goodhart8 years ago
Of course, conspiracy theories then, are simply NOT scientific theories by any stretch of the imagination.
when people say conspiracy "theories", they mean theories as a view or a way of understanding the situation, I agree they aren't scientifically proven whatsoever.
Drop the word "proven." That's irrelevant to what Goodhart is saying. A "scientific theory", regardless of whether it is "true", "false", "proven" or "disproven" has certain philosophical properties.

One of those properties that a proper "scientific" theory can be disproven -- that is, a well formulated theory makes specific predictions for observations that have not yet been done. If those predictions are wrong, the theory may be disproven.

Goodhart's point about these wacky conspiracy ideas is that they are not theories in that sense. They are, by their very formulation, impossible (in the minds of the believers) to disprove. Anyone who tries, or who claims to have contrary evidence, is ipso facto part of the very conspiracy.

Conspiracy ideas are the pre-eminent examples of both confirmation bias and circular logic.
If you had all the facts and all the information you could prove/disprove conspiracy theories, but because we don't always know what happened we cant do that. I would encourage people to try and disprove either the theories or the official explanation, that way people think and don't just regurgitate what they are fed through the news. Any what right have you to call conspiracy theories "wacky" ? You don't know what happened any more than they do, these people have just chosen to formulate their own opinion.
Goodhart (author)  =SMART=8 years ago
Besides, wacky means taking the long way around most of the time, when the simplest solution is most likely correct: Ockham's Razor.
Goodhart (author)  =SMART=8 years ago
I will agree that we should not accept things at face value, especially conspiracy laden half baked ideas (since they are, by nature, unprovable and undisprovable as it were).

Questioning is not saying that some sequence of events had to be THIS way however. But that is how the conspiracy advocates behave.
Great minds think alike !
1-10 of 18Next »