My relative, the conspiracy theorist

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chabambou
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Chabambou

Guest
I have an uncle who, on some occasions, brings up topics that are filled with new age conspiricies and such. For instance, he believes in the existence of UFO’s, ancient egyptian heiroglyphs in Australian caves, the New World Order, alien technology in past times etc.
Here is one of the strange stories he’s told me:
On the moon, astronauts found great light coming from beneath the surface of the moon. One of the astronauts reported this, but the replier said to look away and pretend you didn’t see anything. Apparently there is audio footage on on the net, but why waste time on something either totally misinterpretated and exaggerated or doctored altogether? :rolleyes:

He also listens to people like Michael Tsarion. I watched one of his vids about the so-called ‘black pope’, and needless to say, it was easily refutable. In fact, Catholic Answers had answered this theory in one of its Quick Questions. In addition, there were no substantial evidence in anything he said, yet somehow he gets a large crowd 🤷

So i was wondering if you all can help me refute against the stuff my uncle brings up, whether about the stuff mentioned above or absolutely anything! hehe…:o
 
I just hope that he does not listen to Giorgios Tsoukalos.
 
Chabambou said:
I have an uncle who, on some occasions, brings up topics that are filled with new age conspiricies and such. For instance, he believes in the existence of UFO’s, ancient egyptian heiroglyphs in Australian caves, the New World Order, alien technology in past times etc.
Here is one of the strange stories he’s told me:
On the moon, astronauts found great light coming from beneath the surface of the moon. One of the astronauts reported this, but the replier said to look away and pretend you didn’t see anything. Apparently there is audio footage on on the net, but why waste time on something either totally misinterpretated and exaggerated or doctored altogether? :rolleyes:

He also listens to people like Michael Tsarion. I watched one of his vids about the so-called ‘black pope’, and needless to say, it was easily refutable. In fact, Catholic Answers had answered this theory in one of its Quick Questions. In addition, there were no substantial evidence in anything he said, yet somehow he gets a large crowd 🤷

So i was wondering if you all can help me refute against the stuff my uncle brings up, whether about the stuff mentioned above or absolutely anything! hehe…:o
Click to expand...
Don’t bother. A conspiracy whacko will always find some other twist, the last of which will usually be, “You’re in on it!” LOL Pay less attention to his theories and just talk about other stuff. Does he still smoke pot?
 
TheRealJuliane said:
Don’t bother. A conspiracy whacko will always find some other twist, the last of which will usually be, “You’re in on it!” LOL Pay less attention to his theories and just talk about other stuff. Does he still smoke pot?
Click to expand...
:rotfl:

Duuuude…it’s a conspiracy, man!
 
I know exactly where you are coming from on this one. My uncle is as brilliant as he is strange. He will actually be featured in an episode of ancient aliens this coming month. But that is neither here nor there. What I do is take whatever particular new conspiracy he’s gotten into, provide enough evidence to the contrary and leave him to his own devices. They typically don’t last very long after that. Just be understanding, prayerful and above all logical in your arguments.
God luck and God bless.
 
Don’t refute him… Just enjoy him. Listen to him and enjoy the stories.

If he’s a regular conspiracy nut then buy him a copy of this published under imprimatur. War of antichrist with the Church and Christian civilization: lectures delivered in Edinburgh in October 1884. He will probably really enjoy it and it might help point him in the right direction. The 1885 printing on available on google books comes with a commendation from Pope Leo XIII )

Imprimatur granted and Papal endorsed publications talking about masons and their role in various world events/revolutions and the like. The perfect gift for confused conspiracy folks this Christmas… 👍
 
A conspiracy theorist can mean just about anything nowdays, from a person who believes the Martians have been living among us for centuries to someone who disputes a government report or something they see on the nightly news. Personally, I believe anyone that thinks 100 pct of conspiracy theories are innaccurate is as wacko as the person believes they’re always true.
 
Some people have no clue what the word conspiracy means. Some automatically assume that there’s nothing to any of these stories. I’ve been in the habit of studying strange events for most of my life and I have found evidence for some of them. I’m working on a book to show that ‘a group of people have done something and are hiding the information.’ Real conspiracies do exist, but here, and elsewhere, the quickest way to shut down the conversation is to use the word conspiracy.

For example, in my years of doing research, I have come across claims that turned out to be true. Just telling people to ignore the whacko, or just listen to his “crazy” stories for fun, ignore the research aspect altogether.

No, not all “conspiracies” are false or crazy, but it’s easier and faster to dismiss something without studying it.

Peace,
Ed
 
A problem with conspiracy theorists is you can almost never refute them. For example, how would you ever prove that aliens never visited the earth in ancient times? So the burden of proof is on the theorists, just like it would be when someone claims he made a scientific breakthrough.

You might not be able to refute his theories, but ideasinactiontv.com/tcs_daily/2006/09/we-the-sheeple-why-conspiracy-theories-persist.html helps you to understand why they persist.
 
Chabambou said:
I have an uncle who, on some occasions, brings up topics that are filled with new age conspiricies and such. For instance, he believes in the existence of UFO’s, ancient egyptian heiroglyphs in Australian caves, the New World Order, alien technology in past times etc.
Here is one of the strange stories he’s told me:
On the moon, astronauts found great light coming from beneath the surface of the moon. One of the astronauts reported this, but the replier said to look away and pretend you didn’t see anything. Apparently there is audio footage on on the net, but why waste time on something either totally misinterpretated and exaggerated or doctored altogether? :rolleyes:

He also listens to people like Michael Tsarion. I watched one of his vids about the so-called ‘black pope’, and needless to say, it was easily refutable. In fact, Catholic Answers had answered this theory in one of its Quick Questions. In addition, there were no substantial evidence in anything he said, yet somehow he gets a large crowd 🤷

So i was wondering if you all can help me refute against the stuff my uncle brings up, whether about the stuff mentioned above or absolutely anything! hehe…:o
Click to expand...
Have him check out Scientology, that way he can get a little ‘religion’ with his UFOs!!! 🙂
 
Chabambou said:
So i was wondering if you all can help me refute against the stuff my uncle brings up, whether about the stuff mentioned above or absolutely anything! hehe…:o
Click to expand...
I don’t understand why you’d want to. The National Enquirer stayed in business publishing pictures of “alien babies.” People sometimes have dull lives and active imaginations and they fill their days with this sort of thing which is really just their hobby. If he was a fly fisherman and went on and on about that, you would listen and nod politely and let it go, unless you happen to like fly fishing.

I find people like this just want to feel important for a minute by knowing something others don’t. It’s what drives gossip in another context. Listen politely and change the subject. Maybe take him fly fishing. He just needs a better hobby.
 
sedonaman said:
A problem with conspiracy theorists is you can almost never refute them. For example, how would you ever prove that aliens never visited the earth in ancient times? So the burden of proof is on the theorists, just like it would be when someone claims he made a scientific breakthrough.

You might not be able to refute his theories, but ideasinactiontv.com/tcs_daily/2006/09/we-the-sheeple-why-conspiracy-theories-persist.html helps you to understand why they persist.
Click to expand...
So-called “conspiracies” can be divided into three categories:
  1. Ancient anything. Those who make any claims about the past need to provide documented evidence and photographs that make their case. This has been done in a few cases.
  2. More recent reports of anything mysterious. Again, the same criteria apply. Again, a few strong cases have been made by credible people. Generally, people who have nothing to gain.
  3. Modern anything. Like something strange happened a few days ago.
The “why they persist answer” is nonsense. Just like on the internet, anybody can say anything is true, put up a web site, etc. If it can’t be verified by real people, real documents and photographic evidence, it’s just a joke, a rumor, or some bored guy with nothing better to do. I once read a post about my company that read like it was lifted from a newspaper. The writer had decided “why” we made a decision and presented his case. I had to go on personally and tell everyone that the story was simply not true. I pointed out that the poster was not privy to any inside information about our company. Just the other day, I took a phone call from somebody who heard we had filed for bankruptcy.

Conspiracy is usually the wrong word. Look at the supermarket tabloids, and the lies they publish. They have been successfully sued.

Anyone who bothers to take the time and do the research, can find out something, but most people don’t because they have more important things to do like watch the next episode of some fictional TV show.

So, for me, some conspiracies have occurred and have been exposed. A conspiracy is a group of people that suppress certain things that actually happened. I think a study should be done that shows that the majority of the people who cry conspiracy have nothing to back up using that word. Research is hard, dismissal is easy. My theory? Anti-conspiracy people get a kick out of calling people whackos or crazy. That is why anti-conspiracy comments persist.

So the next time anyone sees anything written or spoken that looks/sounds too unbelievable, instead of writing that person off as a nut, ask him for his evidence. If he claims that aliens visited the earth in ancient times then ask for his evidence, but that would likely take more than 5 minutes, so, why bother - watching some fictional TV show is more important.

Archaeologists make great discoveries all the time and even “amazing” finds, but that doesn’t create a lot of pleasure for most people, so, who cares?

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
So-called “conspiracies” can be divided into three categories:
  1. Ancient anything. Those who make any claims about the past need to provide documented evidence and photographs that make their case. This has been done in a few cases.
  2. More recent reports of anything mysterious. Again, the same criteria apply. Again, a few strong cases have been made by credible people. Generally, people who have nothing to gain.
  3. Modern anything. Like something strange happened a few days ago.
The “why they persist answer” is nonsense. Just like on the internet, anybody can say anything is true, put up a web site, etc. If it can’t be verified by real people, real documents and photographic evidence, it’s just a joke, a rumor, or some bored guy with nothing better to do. I once read a post about my company that read like it was lifted from a newspaper. The writer had decided “why” we made a decision and presented his case. I had to go on personally and tell everyone that the story was simply not true. I pointed out that the poster was not privy to any inside information about our company. Just the other day, I took a phone call from somebody who heard we had filed for bankruptcy.

Conspiracy is usually the wrong word. Look at the supermarket tabloids, and the lies they publish. They have been successfully sued.

Anyone who bothers to take the time and do the research, can find out something, but most people don’t because they have more important things to do like watch the next episode of some fictional TV show.

So, for me, some conspiracies have occurred and have been exposed. A conspiracy is a group of people that suppress certain things that actually happened. I think a study should be done that shows that the majority of the people who cry conspiracy have nothing to back up using that word. Research is hard, dismissal is easy. My theory? Anti-conspiracy people get a kick out of calling people whackos or crazy. That is why anti-conspiracy comments persist.

So the next time anyone sees anything written or spoken that looks/sounds too unbelievable, instead of writing that person off as a nut, ask him for his evidence. If he claims that aliens visited the earth in ancient times then ask for his evidence, but that would likely take more than 5 minutes, so, why bother - watching some fictional TV show is more important.

Archaeologists make great discoveries all the time and even “amazing” finds, but that doesn’t create a lot of pleasure for most people, so, who cares?

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Thanks for the interesting write-up. I suppose there are “anti-conspiracy people” who “get a kick out of calling people whackos or crazy,” but I think there is more to be said for Prof. Feser’s thesis because I have met more recalcitrant people than those who get a kick out of calling conspiracy theorists whackos or crazy. An example is one who passionately maintained [liberally sprinkled with cuss words] that 9/11 was a Bush conspiracy, and punctuated his statement with, “You can’t convince me there was no conspiracy,” as though the burden of proof was on the antis. You can’t deal with folks like that, so the only thing left is to dismiss them as whackos or crazy.
 
sedonaman said:
Thanks for the interesting write-up. I suppose there are “anti-conspiracy people” who “get a kick out of calling people whackos or crazy,” but I think there is more to be said for Prof. Feser’s thesis because I have met more recalcitrant people than those who get a kick out of calling conspiracy theorists whackos or crazy. An example is one who passionately maintained [liberally sprinkled with cuss words] that 9/11 was a Bush conspiracy, and punctuated his statement with, “You can’t convince me there was no conspiracy,” as though the burden of proof was on the antis. You can’t deal with folks like that, so the only thing left is to dismiss them as whackos or crazy.
Click to expand...
Of course you can deal with people like that. I’ve read a few books that provide ample reasons to disbelieve the official 9/11 story. Oh sure, airplanes crashed into buildings. I watched it on TV over and over right on the day it happened. I think the antis are, in some cases, taking the wrong approach. Unless the person saying what you quoted is standing right in front of you, looks and behaves crazy and/or threatening, then the obvious question is: Really? How do you know that?

Calling them crazy may fit some people, but not all. So yelling conspiracy every single time just stops the conversation. Don’t you think at least a few of those people should get a full hearing? But saying “conspiracy” is so much easier.

Peace,
Ed
 
Chabambou said:
I have an uncle who, on some occasions, brings up topics that are filled with new age conspiricies and such. For instance, he believes in the existence of UFO’s, ancient egyptian heiroglyphs in Australian caves, the New World Order, alien technology in past times etc.
Here is one of the strange stories he’s told me:
On the moon, astronauts found great light coming from beneath the surface of the moon. One of the astronauts reported this, but the replier said to look away and pretend you didn’t see anything. Apparently there is audio footage on on the net, but why waste time on something either totally misinterpretated and exaggerated or doctored altogether? :rolleyes:

He also listens to people like Michael Tsarion. I watched one of his vids about the so-called ‘black pope’, and needless to say, it was easily refutable. In fact, Catholic Answers had answered this theory in one of its Quick Questions. In addition, there were no substantial evidence in anything he said, yet somehow he gets a large crowd 🤷

So i was wondering if you all can help me refute against the stuff my uncle brings up, whether about the stuff mentioned above or absolutely anything! hehe…:o
Click to expand...
Is it so bad that he really suffers? If so, you might get him to agree to seek professional help. Otherwise, that might be difficult.
 
edwest2 said:
So-called “conspiracies” can be divided into three categories:
  1. Ancient anything. Those who make any claims about the past need to provide documented evidence and photographs that make their case. This has been done in a few cases.
  2. More recent reports of anything mysterious. Again, the same criteria apply. Again, a few strong cases have been made by credible people. Generally, people who have nothing to gain.
  3. Modern anything. Like something strange happened a few days ago.
The “why they persist answer” is nonsense. Just like on the internet, anybody can say anything is true, put up a web site, etc. If it can’t be verified by real people, real documents and photographic evidence, it’s just a joke, a rumor, or some bored guy with nothing better to do. I once read a post about my company that read like it was lifted from a newspaper. The writer had decided “why” we made a decision and presented his case. I had to go on personally and tell everyone that the story was simply not true. I pointed out that the poster was not privy to any inside information about our company. Just the other day, I took a phone call from somebody who heard we had filed for bankruptcy.

Conspiracy is usually the wrong word. Look at the supermarket tabloids, and the lies they publish. They have been successfully sued.

Anyone who bothers to take the time and do the research, can find out something, but most people don’t because they have more important things to do like watch the next episode of some fictional TV show.

So, for me, some conspiracies have occurred and have been exposed. A conspiracy is a group of people that suppress certain things that actually happened. I think a study should be done that shows that the majority of the people who cry conspiracy have nothing to back up using that word. Research is hard, dismissal is easy. My theory? Anti-conspiracy people get a kick out of calling people whackos or crazy. That is why anti-conspiracy comments persist.

So the next time anyone sees anything written or spoken that looks/sounds too unbelievable, instead of writing that person off as a nut, ask him for his evidence. If he claims that aliens visited the earth in ancient times then ask for his evidence, but that would likely take more than 5 minutes, so, why bother - watching some fictional TV show is more important.

Archaeologists make great discoveries all the time and even “amazing” finds, but that doesn’t create a lot of pleasure for most people, so, who cares?

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
You left out the people who exploit the conspiracy nuts. People like Alex Jones for example. I don’t think he believes half of what he puts out on the internet but he stirs people up and gets lots of $$$$ for doing it.
 
Chabambou said:
I have an uncle who, on some occasions, brings up topics that are filled with new age conspiricies and such. For instance, he believes in the existence of UFO’s, ancient egyptian heiroglyphs in Australian caves, the New World Order, alien technology in past times etc.
Here is one of the strange stories he’s told me:
On the moon, astronauts found great light coming from beneath the surface of the moon. One of the astronauts reported this, but the replier said to look away and pretend you didn’t see anything. Apparently there is audio footage on on the net, but why waste time on something either totally misinterpretated and exaggerated or doctored altogether? :rolleyes:

He also listens to people like Michael Tsarion. I watched one of his vids about the so-called ‘black pope’, and needless to say, it was easily refutable. In fact, Catholic Answers had answered this theory in one of its Quick Questions. In addition, there were no substantial evidence in anything he said, yet somehow he gets a large crowd 🤷

So i was wondering if you all can help me refute against the stuff my uncle brings up, whether about the stuff mentioned above or absolutely anything! hehe…:o
Click to expand...
As long as he believes his conspiracy theories are true he is not doing anything immoral or wrong. If he was knowingly spreading false stories then that is different. We all have eccentric relatives.
 
TheRealJuliane said:
You left out the people who exploit the conspiracy nuts. People like Alex Jones for example. I don’t think he believes half of what he puts out on the internet but he stirs people up and gets lots of $$$$ for doing it.
Click to expand...
Oh yes. The it’s all dollars fantasy. Sorry, there may be a few of those people, like Alex Jones, but there is some good information out there. I do not listen to any radio shows like that by the way. Which stills leaves the question: could some of it be true? I’ve been doing the research instead of making assumptions. And there are a few books by authors with solid, checkable references on the internet for free - put there by the author. No money. No advertising. Entirely free. But I’ll just leave this alone for now.

Peace,
Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top