Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
But they'll have an answer to this. The "why" always has something to do with "it's how they maintain power". Some version of that. As for the who, you can choose between:
|
Yeah, the "why" always has an answer. I think it's generally the first answer a conspiracy theorist comes up with and it generally hooks people in - it provides an answer that laypeople can comprehend and understand.
Never mind how G.W. Bush was able to orchestrate and cover up a massive false flag operation to look like an act of terrorism, it's easy to see why he would do it!
Meanwhile, the "why" discounts other "why" answers that lay people do not know about - like the entire history of Afghanistan and the Taliban.
In other circumstances, lay people can't live with an answer they are uncomfortable with. "The election was rigged" or that exposes the unexplained or randomness of our world (COVID)
The "how" is hole in any argument. But any argument with a bone fide conspiracy theorist is generally futile because:
(1) rationality is likely not their to begin with;
(2) despite our general knowledge of certain events or topics, we will never have enough knowledge of the subject to effectively argue with someone who has spent hours reading false or misleading information.
How can i prove to a flat earther that the earth is round? I don't know any experiments that would effectively prove such a result, or the math to explain it. I can take that person up into a plane and show them the horizon, but i guarantee they have some (false) explanation that refutes said evidence.