57 votes

New Studies: 'Conspiracy Theorists' SANE; Government Dupes CRAZY, HOSTILE

New Studies: 'Conspiracy Theorists' SANE; Government Dupes CRAZY, HOSTILE

Recent studies by psychologists and social scientists in the US and UK suggest that contrary to mainstream media stereotypes, those labeled “conspiracy theorists” appear to be saner than those who accept the official versions of contested events.

The most recent study was published on July 8th by psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent (UK). Entitled “What about Building 7? A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories,” the study compared “conspiracist” (pro-conspiracy theory) and “conventionalist” (anti-conspiracy) comments at news websites.

Read more: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/07/12/313399/conspiracy-th...

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Mainstream media is the

Mainstream media is the cover-up machine for government lies. MSM is the #1 enemy of the American people.

Lazy, Uncritical Thinkers Dislike Conspiracy Theories

Why are conspiracy theories, e.g. UFOs, derided in the first place by governments and the controlled media?

I contend that conspiracy theories are NOT primarily derided by the mass media and governments because of their lack of substantiation, but rather because conspiracy theories PROVOKE thought on controversial issues. Why would the mass media or a government want a critical thinking populace? Independent thinkers won't necessarily follow a nefarious agenda.

Notice that uncritical thinkers like most voters, a trait loved by government and the mass media, will either accept a controversial issue without further investigation as either true or reject it outright. These same uncritical thinkers will likely vote for candidates with either a D or R next to the candidate's name as well. Conspiracy theories help to provoke critical thought and debate so be wary of ANYONE deriding conspiracy theories, especially people like Glen Beck who mocked Debra Medina over a rather innocent remark regarding 9/11. Now, you can understand the mentality of Beck's uncritical supporters and why America is in a political and social mess.

Terrible "study". It's

Terrible "study". It's ridiculous to try to draw any conclusion from youtube comments regarding either side's intelligence. Terrible premise/concept from the start, bad methodology, Iranian state TV reporting's as bad as any corporate outlet here...the same but opposite - "we get the results we ask for"....yes I know its origin is british, doesn't mean a thing. I'm not even disputing the results, they may be right but they weren't reached by honest means.

Cyril's picture

Let's not forget that by the greatness of German engineering

Let's not forget that by the greatness of German engineering, it's absolutely not surprising that Mercedes cars can blow up spectacularly (expulsing their engines yards away) as they're crashing in the middle of the street with close to zero traffic...


The fact that the driver (known to have the decades-long driving style of a grandma) is a famous investigative journalist working on stuff getting hotter and hotter for the current affairs of U.S. government agencies and their officials?

... Oh, that?! That's purely coincidental. Of course. Why you ask?

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

there are paid bloggers

there are paid bloggers towing the line and they always come off as obviously being paid so the study is kind of off

how do they get paid?

by check? auto deposit?

do they get paid per post? per hour? a salary?

totally curious

Some get paid

via Mechanical Turk:


most likely...

I know for a fact establishment RNC shills

Get paid by check, paid by the RNC.

That paid for some of the anti-Ron Paul posts last go round.

Can't speak for the DNC or USG, but the RNC does for certain.

Only speculating, but I'm sure that some lobby groups also have shill departments.

Hell, when you are lobbying for billions, what's a boiler room full of shills cost a month? Pennies on the dollar.

Cyril's picture

Afraid your taxes & mine may very well be the primary funding

I don't know about the payment modalities, but anyhow I'm afraid your taxes and mine may very well be the primary funding source on this topic just as for others:


"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

So it is the MSM that is proven insane, and Ron Paul and...

his 'wacko bird' followers (not to mention his son, Rand) are the sane ones? Who would have guessed that?

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15


now I shall pinch me off a trayvon and rest

No news on cable TV news

No news on cable TV news today, just Court TV on all channels. Weekend news is always crap anyway caus it's just filled with human interest storys to distract from any real news.

There's A Wee Problem...

The study does not make any apparent adjustment for whether people who are conspiracists are more likely to comment than conventionalists.

This matters because unless such a consideration is made, the conclusion that conspiracy believers,by majority of comments, are now the mainstream is not a valid conclusion.

If conspiracists tend to be more involved in commentary (generally) than conventionalists, then you would expect to see a majority of comments by conspiracists.

So, while I find the study and conclusions enlightening, I do not necessarily agree that they can say conspiracists are now the mainstream.

And maybe there is more to the study instrument and analysis that they did not summarize that would show they made this adjustment and still arrive at the same claim.

Not dissing the study, just offering a cautionary note.

that wasn't the point of the study

The point was the character profile of the persons vs how they are portrayed in classics terms.

The ratio was just ancillary info that was interesting considering how the media claims the conspiracy crowd as "fringe"

Tools of war are not always obvious. The worst weapon is an idea planted in the mind of man. Prejudices can kill, suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has an everlasting fallout all of its own.

There Are Some...

...folks who would walk away from the article thinking that conspiracy theorists are a new majority now, because of how they present that part of the summary. It doesn't hurt to flag it for people.


This was my wakeup revelation

This was my wakeup revelation for the day. MSM news reporters appear to be completely crazy and insane. I was thinking about how this craziness relates to Michael Hastings and what happened to him. His car went up in flames Baghdad style. If the US government is now blatantly killing people on American soil these days, I want to know about it.

To turn a blind eye to this kind of stuff including what the DHS has been doing, indicates serious mental retardation.

According to the article....

..I'm a conspiracy theorist, SO CHECK OUT THIS CONSPIRACY!!!!!!


Why do you suppose this building didn't collapse?

The fires appear much hotter and more widespread.


Don't Know..

Maybe the diesel generators were set in different positions. Maybe the combination of the fire and the damage from the collapsing buildings, only 350 feet away from building 7, caused the collapse. Maybe the position of the fire was different in this video than building 7. Maybe the position of the critical temperatures were not near the critical points of failure. Maybe this building was designed differently. Maybe it's hard to see exactly what's happening in your video because it's dark.

Like I said, I don't know. I won't jump to a conclusion.

fireant's picture

Totally different design and construction.

Concrete encased steel vs spray-on insulation for starters. Box frame vs large span design as well.
Find us a large span "tube type" designed building with fires ignited on many floors at once and which had severe damage from 40 ton slabs of steel raining down on it, and you'll have a valid comparison. It is a fact many steel structures have collapsed due only to fire.

Undo what Wilson did

okay I'll bite

"It is a fact many steel structures have collapsed due only to fire."

Care to provide some evidence for this claim?

fireant's picture

McCormick Place for one.

5WTC for another:

Further documented in this video (start at 2:50):
Do some research and you will find plenty more steel structural failures due only to fire.

Undo what Wilson did

This is a picture of Mccormick place

Hardly a comparable example. First of all only the roof of the building collapsed. Secondly the building is more like a warehouse than a high rise skyscraper Here is a picture. This is the most similar example you could find?

Mccormick Place

And WTC 5? That building didn't even collapse. Here is a picture:

fireant's picture

We were not talking about a building collapsing.

I stated steel structures can and do collapse due to fire alone. The extent of collapse will vary due to too many factors to list. It is a fact steel will weaken and collapse due only to fire.
If you had watched the video I posted, 5WTC had a central portion collapse due only to fire. The picture alone shows a column which collapsed due only to fire.

Undo what Wilson did

All you've shown are partial collapses of dissimilar structures

Can you find a single example of a complete collapse of a similar high rise steel structure where the entire building falls suddenly nearly straight down during a fire?

fireant's picture

And we haven't even talked about the damage.

Do you understand the building was leaning and bulging, and the girders were creaking (moving) prior to the fires having any effect? Do you know what happens to the bolted and welded joints when a steel structure stresses due to twisting and leaning, even a small amount? The fires merely accelerated inevitable collapse. Had it stood, it would have to have been pulled, for it was shot. FDNY, several sources, declared it would collapse early in the day. They even abandoned rescue of their brothers around 6 because of it. They don't do that lightly.

Undo what Wilson did

fireant's picture

It doesn't matter!

Are you saying there isn't a first time for anything?
The fact is steel weakens and collapses due to fire. It was the unique design of 7 which made it different. YOU find me a large span structure totally involved. Do you even know what "large span" means? WTC was the first of it's kind.

Undo what Wilson did

What matters is that asymmetrical fires and damage...

...are not likely to produce a near symmetrical building collapse at freefall speed.

fireant's picture

You may consider falling over in two directions "symmetrical"

or close to symmetrical, but I don't. It is a fact it split in two and fell in two directions. And if you wish to fool yourself by saying it collapsed at freefall, when it was only a small portion of total collapse that approached that speed, that's your business, but it won't fool those of us who have actually studied the collapse with an open mind.
As I have shown, the perimeter walls shifted prior to and during descent, which means the underpinnings were not suddenly removed. It is evidence that the lower perimeter walls buckled, or folded. Once they broke (and the debris evidence supports their breaking, not being cut), there would be no or little resistance for the part of the walls above the break.

Undo what Wilson did