BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: autolycus
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 12:35 PM

Can I come at this from the other end, i.e. not evidence or otherwise of conspiracies; but evidence or otherwise for cover-ups or withholding of evidence or the relaying of a self-evidently incomplete picture.

There must be any number of books and articles offering evidence of any of those. And writing those books require banks of researchers to discover what's been hidden, buried etc. We posters can't have our own research team.

So, I could quote Greg Palast (in "The Best Democracy Money can Buy") saying he had in front of him 2 CDs of voters' names, voters who had been purged from the Florida voting rolls. Something to do with criminality, tho' over 90% of them were innocent.

At some point, CBS's office was contacted about the story. CBS called back to say the story didn't stand up. They were asked what they'd done to check. "We rang Jeb Bush's office."


Does quoting any sources with that sort of stuff help with the argument? We'll see.


One more ex.

Astronomy arose out of astrology. And Isaac Newton was an astrologer, amongst other things. Two of Melvyn Bragg's BBC In Our Time learned discussions were about the history of astronomy and about Newton. In the two 40-minute progs., not a word about astrology. Unless you already knew, how would you know there was anything missing. And that's also a question in general.

And many of the occult works of the great scientists incl. Newton, have simply not been translated from the latin.

As I asked once before, how do you know when you're ill-informed? (I include myself). Those would be 'unknown unknowns' - things you don't know you don't know.


   Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 04:13 PM

I wonder if the Lakota Nation will develop Weapons of Mass Destruction!

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Amos
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 04:16 PM

There are not any absolute ways to know when you are being fed partial data, or even false data, if it is skillfully done. There are certain intuiitive alarms that go off when you are fed bad data, but you have to keep a sharp eye out for them. And you have to be very good and finding out more data, figuring out ways to test data, and learning what false data smells like.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: autolycus
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 04:23 PM

Surely the most interesting of all, and hardest (impossible to know about?) of all, is omission of data, editing out, never getting on the dial in the first place, censoring, never referring to ever (so how would we know?) - all of which I alluded to above.


Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Amos
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 04:24 PM

So you did. But it is possible to develop a sense for when data has been left out and be demanding about finding it out.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Ron Davies
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 11:08 PM

Rig-

Fine. So there's both a group seeking to give California, New Mexico, etc. back to Mexico,and another group which has "officially" seceded from the US, in another part of the country.

So the question becomes: why should we take either group seriously, anymore than the Branch Davidians or any number of survivalist groups? My contention would be that if you do take either of the groups you've cited seriously, you do in fact buy the conspiracy theory that group represents.

And again, just why do you--or anybody else--take such groups as anything but fodder for the National Enquirer and like media--and now cheap entertainment for those of us who read about them on Mudcat?

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: autolycus
Date: 03 Jan 08 - 01:39 AM

A
I dunno.

If someone has heard the 2 Bragg progs I mentioned, just for example, I can't understand how they'd sense that the astrological bit had not been included, if they were learning about the hist. of astrology and about Newton for the first time.


Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 Jan 08 - 07:23 AM

"So the question becomes: why should we take either group seriously, anymore than the Branch Davidians or any number of survivalist groups?"

                   Timothy McVay took the Branch Davidians seriously and errected a big hole in the middle of Oklahma City where the federal building used to stand.


                   But the group that call itself La Voz de Aztlan is different because it is part of a network with many splinter groups. There is a student group called MEChA, who have chapters in many major universities in the US. Some of the chapters distance them selves from the more radical LVdA, but some chapters do not. The one time LT. Governor of California, Cruz Bustamonte, was a member of one chapter, and there are other people in positions of authority, who are members.
                   You can go online and find the MEChA chapters. Some seem benign, some don't. There was a push a few years ago for individual chapters to clean up their web pages, so as to not look so militant.
                   Moving a little farther away from LVdA, there is La Raza. They seem completely normal on the surface, and they are often quoted in news stories as a Latino advocacy group. But when one looks into it, one often finds that an individual La Raza supporter will often be a product of MEChA, and will have ties back to La Voz de Astlan and other more militant groups.

                   I can remember a time when nobody took wakked-out-weirdos like Pat Robertson, Jim Jones, and Doctor James Dobson seriously, but look what's happened.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jan 08 - 09:57 PM

Rig--

Finally I have an answer as to at least one Mudcatter who believes in various unlikely conspiracies--you do.

Not that it's a big surprise--from somebody who believes religion causes all the evil in the world.

Come on now, let's think about this a little. Do you really think Timothy McVey needed the Branch Davidians for any inspiration? Look, he's a wacko.


And you really think we should be quaking in our shoes at Russell Means (I believe that's the man) and his group?   And La Raza? Since when is that a threat to our way of life? Only in your mind--and of course the fertile imagination of giant intellects like Mr. Tancredo.

Before you go drawing parallels between these groups and Hitler, for instance--and warning us we must nip them in the bud-- consider the difference between post-WW I Germany and now, as far as receptiveness in the general population to radical groups. In fact there's a much greater possibility that Hispanic immigrant groups--legal or not-- will face more discrimination--nativism is definitely on the rise-- than that any part of the US will be given back to Mexico.

You need to wipe the foam from around your mouth and start looking for actual evidence that either of the groups you have cited has any substantial clout--even among Indians or Hispanics, respectively.

And if you do find such evidence, be sure to let us know.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 Jan 08 - 11:01 PM

Ron - My reaction to your most recent post is--what kinds of mushrooms have you been putting in your soup?


                      Timothy McVay (I guess it's really spelled McVeigh) did what he did, by his own admission for the sole purpose of avenging the Branch Dividians. As far as I can see, there was nothing else out there to motivate him.

                      I don't recall any reference to Russell Means, and had to look him up to even find out who he even was (is?). And I don't see anyone out there drawing a parellel to Hitler.

                      If you don't think these groups have any clout, why do you think all of the Democratic candidates are tripping all over themselves for the purpose of cultivating the Latino vote?

                      You continue to ask for evidence. Evidence is provided, and you change the subject. All you have to do is to visit the La Vos de Aztlan website and they'll be happy to show you what they are thinking. Look at a few of the MEChA websites as well--most are pretty tame, but a few of them show their true colors.

                        When you've had a chance to review the evidence, come back and let us know what you think.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: autolycus
Date: 04 Jan 08 - 12:00 PM

About non-evidence of info thereby givingrise to conspiracy theories, there are crudely two places where the evidence can be missing from.

The obvious one is in the public arena. Have you not heard the phrase used,"That (event) went unreported in the West"? If it's not reported, how are you going to know about it?

And I re-refer to my example from Melvyn Bragg's programmes.

The less-obvious place where info can go missing is in your head. If there is stuff not in your head (whether it's out there or not), the natural need is to make a complete picture from the info you do have (a 'gestalt' or pattern). The place where there is info (including theory) missing, is just the place where things like conspiracy fits; precisely in order to make the pattern, aka making sense of what you do know.

   Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 Jan 08 - 01:37 PM

auto - I would agree. When news organizations condense the news by leaving things out, or not reporting, they leave a lot of room for conspiracy theories to originate and develop.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: autolycus
Date: 04 Jan 08 - 02:46 PM

And those in the UK who listen to the r4 Today prog in the mornings, will have got another insight in how what gets broadcast can vary.

That was because ober the hols, the BBC handed the editing of the prog. to various non-BBC, non-jounalistic groups.

One group were police from Wales; amother was a group of scientists.

Suddenly, the agenda of the Today changed.

And the hosts said things like,'our guest editors asked us to look at.........' Thus you get to see that agendas are set, that there is selection of material and of interviwees.

We should NEVER forget that all tv and radio and newspaper and magazine outlets cannot report everything (so they select; so what's left out?); don't want to report everything; AND HAVE EDITORS, who CHOOSE what to report and how to report it.

    Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Amos
Date: 04 Jan 08 - 03:09 PM

Ivor:

That is exactly the point I was tryuing to make; when you get skilled at data analysis, you notice when your head-map is disjoint with the territory it maps, and develop an instinct for sniffing out where the disconnects are by acquiring the missing data or identfiying the false or distorted data you are using to build your map with.

But this is a skill or discipline that requires education.

Unfortunately very few teach it, so most folks acquire it from the School of Hardy Knocks.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 Jan 08 - 03:15 PM

More unfortunate than that, a lot of folks don't acquire it at all, which is probably why it's become so much easier to sell the public a bill of goods like WMD in Iraq and etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: autolycus
Date: 04 Jan 08 - 04:09 PM

Amos

Yes, i had already got what you were saying.

I was adding another strand, namely "unknown unknowns" - stuff that people don't know they don't know, and where the kind of analyses you are rightly describing won't work.

What you're talking about will work in some situations and not others; that's my point.

And people can get to recognise disconnects as you say. Ir's what happens next that often matters.

many, instead of investigating further, researching further (no time, insufficient interest,et cetera), decide how to fill the gaps out of their assumptions, their common sense, their previous vast experience, their existing belief system.

And reach any number and type of weird and wonderful theories and beliefs. Which they, very simply, know are true.

Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Ron Davies
Date: 04 Jan 08 - 11:12 PM

Rig--

Nice try--you certainly are a master of the deft smear.

Look, there is a huge difference between the legal Hispanic vote--the vote of the fastest growing ethnic group in the US--and crackpot groups seeking to return parts of the US to Mexico. Democrats would be fools to not appeal to Hispanic voters--and, as I've said in my thread of the same title--"Tancredo": Democrats' Best Friend" -- the Republicans are in fact classic idiots for chasing Tancredo's fool's gold. The smart ones--and even some of the dull ones, like Bush--realize this.

I'm not surprised you can't see it. There's none so blind as....

And you have a vested interest in refusing to see the difference.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 11:56 AM

Ron - All of this name calling and finger pointing doesn't seem to be moving the ball down the field.

                         Maybe if we stood back and looked at the big picture. It's not just people from South and Central America migrating to the US, in Europe there are people migrating from Africa, Eastern Europe, and Asia. None of that would cause those of us who are concerned about environmental issues a great deal of heart burn if the populations in the places the people are coming from were going down.
                        Those populations are not going down, and that's the problem.

                        I would agree that Tom Tancredo is against illegal immigration for all of the wrong reasons, but he's against it, so it becomes a "lesser of two evils" kind of thing. And to me, it's a no-brainer--his evil is much less threatening than the evil of wall-to-wall people.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Amos
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 01:10 PM

One reason for the vulnerability to conspiracy theories is the world-view of the over-burdened mind. When too many difficult connections, overwhelming situations, or heavy losses or threats of losses stack up, an individual will stop being able to spot individual connections, particular people and objects, and will start a process of non-rational generalizing. This can be relatively harmless in small doses ("I hate pople who yell...") but it can very quickly head South into complete neurosis and a fear of large, vague generalities -- a fear grounded in individual unconfrontable connections, made nounless by undissipated pain.

As a result we get people whose thinking moves along blocks of generalized lumps representing the things and people of life very inaccurately, and the thinking based on this mode is itself very inaccurate. "All womenz is nuts", "All French poeple are communists", "men are peegs", "ragheads are psychotic killers", and so on.

When a person is depressed into this kind of irrationality, any generalization that will make it easier to avoid looking at the actual connections and incidents serves as a port in a storm of discomfort.

A similar kind of nuttiness can be instilled by exposing an individual to negative generalizations as data, even if he is in good enough shape to think more clearly than that. This is why a person can sometimes get a great relief and boost in his general outlook just by unplugging his TV set and ignoring newspapers for ten days. It removes sources of unthinking negative generalizations and he starts to get connected with reality in a specific and confrontable way again.

It's a wise person who takes a minute to pin down the particular transactions or connections or incidents he is using to make general conclusions from.

A
Big-Mouthed Guru Par Excellence
...(sigh)
(I can't help it, it's the way I was drawn!)

A

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 02:04 PM

Rig--

I told you exactly why there is a huge difference between the legal Hispanic vote and the crackpots allegedly dreaming about returning part of the US to Mexico.

Now do you understand or not?

And if you do understand, you should also be able to recognize that anybody who takes seriously the idea of any group with any clout pushing to return any part of the US to Mexico has bought into that conspiracy theory--with absolutely no evidence. Just publication of the idea says nothing about how widespread support--among any group--including Hispanics---there is for such a move.

And if you think there is such support, we need to see the evidence.

Otherwise, it seems likely you are simply scare-mongering. Unsurprisingly.

Just as, for instance, there is very little support among secularists for "stamping out" religion. Radical solutions to problems often find little favor.

And if you do not respond directly to my question above, it will be obvious you want to drop the topic you yourself brought up--since you realize it's a loser. But I can tell you I will not drop it til I get a straight answer out of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 02:11 PM

Ron - I thought you started this thread, but however it got going, I'll just conclude with this: according to recent research it seems that approximately 25% of the legal Latino citizens in the country now agree with Tancredo on illegal immigration.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 02:26 PM

1) "...recent research..."--somehow, not convincing. We need exact wording of the survey question, for instance, and your exact source.

2) You were the one who brought up the supposed push to return parts of the US to Mexico. Now do you believe this idea has extensive support among any group--including Hispanics--yes or no?

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: autolycus
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 02:51 PM

Amos - agreed.

btw, do you get the feeling on this thread of living in a parallel universe?   Or even of being ignored? :-)

Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 02:57 PM

What can I say?--I agree completely with what Amos is saying--and what you're saying also Autolycus, insofar as I understand it.

Rig is giving sterling examples of conspiracy theories--and that he believes them--and I'm trying to find out why, since he's an intelligent, articulate guy--therefore you'd think would not be taken in by such stuff.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: autolycus
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 03:38 PM

Fair enough, Ron, and I do see we haven't been ignored (I think I should have said I ignored your discussion- I was so into the one with Amos)

I THEREFORE WISH in a non-shouting way, to apologise for accusing you of what I was doing.

(Note to self;more clarity when posting please)

I think we just have to keep our nerve and maintain our balance in the face of the wacky theories out there and the sensible-seeming people who subscribe to some of them; not to mention keeping a beady eye out for possible conspiracies.



Sites like this can be a way of helping in the process with the provision of accurate information and clarity of expression




One thing about which I don't know if anything can be done is when Mudcatters will nor read/face this, that or the other argument or set of facts.

(The lack of a God-like adjudicator is a major drawback - despite the offers of some 'catters to take up posts like that)

Cos I've noticed that if someone makes a brilliant argument, or comes up with knockdown info, their opponents simply disappear.

I rarely read, "Wow, I was wrong; you've convinced me."

And I still remember that phrase I came across a few times last year where people have changed their mind (on UK radio,e.g.). They have explained their previous erroneous view by saying,

"I didn't allow myself to............(know/hear/understand/listen)"

How you deal with that defeats me so far.


Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Amos
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 04:28 PM

I often disallow myself to hear what someone is saying in a post, but only after I have carefully, thoughtfully, and analytically reached the conclusion they were a flaming wanker or a blame eedjit, before I erect any blind spots. So at least I have a quality-assurance process... ;>)



A

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 05:22 PM

A Gallup poll in June, for instance, found that 32% of Latinos believe immigration levels should be decreased, and three in 10 believe that the government should not make it easier for undocumented immigrants to become citizens.

Mexican American Robert Vasquez, 55, a Republican county commissioner in Canyon County, Idaho, wants his county declared a disaster area because he says undocumented workers are straining the county budget, primarily through costs to the county health system. He wants the county to sue employers who hire illegal immigrants.


Latinos divided on immigration issue
Updated: April 10, 2006 06:17 AM PDT
News 4 Special Report: Defending the Border

Contrary to scenes of hundreds of thousands of united Latinos marching across the country in support of immigration reform, a sizable number of the ethnic group opposes the marches and strongly objects to illegal immigration.

But their voices have largely been muffled by the massive protests, which will continue Monday as tens of thousands of demonstrators are expected to take to the streets of Tucson, Phoenix and other cities nationwide.

They are voicing their support of a Senate bill that would give an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants living in the country a chance for U.S. citizenship.

"That's the objective of the marches -- to give the impression that all Latinos are for allowing the illegals to become citizens," said Phoenix resident Lionel De La Rosa. "Well, I'm not."

The 71-year-old Texas native and Vietnam veteran said he favors punitive measures more in line with the immigration bill passed by the U.S. House in December that would have made it a felony to be in the United States illegally.

"I'm for that 100 percent," he said. "As far as my Latino friends are concerned, they all agree on this."

A 2005 survey by the Pew Hispanic Center found that Latinos in general have favorable attitudes toward immigrants and immigration.

But when it comes to illegal immigration, significant numbers have negative views of illegal immigrants.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: autolycus
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 05:33 PM

Rigin - what's your point with that last post?

Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jan 08 - 06:25 PM

I was trying to help Ron chill out.

               After stating a number of Latinos didn't like illegal immigration either, he demanded I provide sources. Now that he has sources, I was hoping his blood pressure would come down.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Jan 08 - 02:51 PM

No problem with blood pressure, Rig. Sorry if a request for evidence gets you hot and bothered.

I note a few problems with your "evidence".

1) One survey is from April 2006--over 1 1/2 years ago. Not good enough--we need more recent evidence--especially since your friend and mine, Mr. Tancredo, has been busily alienating Hispanics ever since that survey.

2) Though asked for the exact wording of the survey, you somehow forgot to include it.

3) You've also forgotten to actually answer my question--which was, to help you: what is your evidence that there is widespread support in the US Hispanic community for the idea of returning parts of the US to Mexico?--which was, you perhaps recall, the scare headline you cited---the reason we should be concerned about La Raza.


You still have not provided any evidence that this idea is anything more than a conspiracy theory--which you believe.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Donuel
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 10:20 AM

Today all the cable news channels spent an hour reporting a report from somebody who claimed that an Iran boat TAUNTED a US military ship in INTERNATIONAL WATERS by saying "we are coming at you. You wil explode in a couple minutes"

Of course nothing happened but HOW DARE IRAN TEASE OUR NAVY !

Now if there is a second incident where shots are fired or there is a loss of US life, one could argue that Iran started it.

Is there any conspiracy at work here or is it a case of a real nasty taunting by an Iranian sailor?

I dunno. But to get more cable news coverage than a blonde bimbo in rehab, is a lot of attention for an alleged 5 second marine radio communication.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: autolycus
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 01:00 PM

Here for something more authoritative

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/2/hi/middle_east/7175325.stm


   Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Donuel
Date: 07 Jan 08 - 01:48 PM

Other than the Daily Show we need a TV show called Conspiracy theory week. It opens with the theme song 'there coming to take me away he he'

Maybe the Onion will get a cable TV slot.

Subject: RE: BS: Conspiracy Theories' Popularity
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 14 May 10 - 10:07 AM

See this cartoon entitled The Flake Equation. Replace "alien sighting" with "evidence to support a conspiracy theory" and you have a pretty good explanation for what is going on.

"The Flake Equation" is a satirical take on the Drake equation.