European Journal of Social Psychology: Conpiracy Theory Not the Same as Paranoia
- Thread starter newworldafro
- Start date
Feeling triggered? 
Sounds like y'all really need friends.
WE'RE NOT PARANOID, WE'RE FEARLESSLY FIGHTING THE GLOBALISTS WHO ARE TRYING TO TAKE OVER OUR MINDS WITH FLUORIDE IN THE WATER AND CHEMTRAILS IN THE AIR :infocrazy:
I'M NOT AFRAID OF HILLARY'S DEMONIC SPIRIT COOKING AND OBAMA BEING A SECRET MUSLIM:infocrazy:
WHY AM I SO BRAVE WELL LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT THIS NEW ULTRA-DISTILLED IODINE FROM THE EARTH'S CORE GUARANTEED TO INCREASE YOUR LIBIDO :infocrazy:
I'M NOT AFRAID OF HILLARY'S DEMONIC SPIRIT COOKING AND OBAMA BEING A SECRET MUSLIM:infocrazy:
WHY AM I SO BRAVE WELL LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT THIS NEW ULTRA-DISTILLED IODINE FROM THE EARTH'S CORE GUARANTEED TO INCREASE YOUR LIBIDO :infocrazy:
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Take your quips out on the European Journal of Social Psychology.
Take their peer reviewed opinion or leave it.
Take their peer reviewed opinion or leave it.
Take your quips out on the European Journal of Social Psychology.
Take their peer reviewed opinion or leave it.
I really don't have any problems with the journal's conclusion. (I doubt anyone else looking at this thread does, either.)
I have a problem with using it as some sort of justification for irrational worldviews that aren't based in reason and evidence.
Or ones that only selectively quote peer-reviewed sources when it suits them (Example, the OP.
)Also, I don't think anyone here is arguing that conspiracy theories are inherently untrue. There are several conspiracy theories that are very true, even though there was little evidence in the past (COINTELPRO, MK Ultra, JFK sleeping with MM, etc.)
What makes them true or untrue is solid evidence; the same as anything else.:kanyebp:
Lastly, allow me to state the most obvious point:
You can be completely devoid of paranoia and still have a batsh*t insane worldview. :stephena1:
Just because you aren't paranoid doesn't mean you aren't crazy.:panthersafe:
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
I really don't have any problems with the journal's conclusion. (I doubt anyone else looking at this thread does, either.)
I have a problem with using it as some sort of justification for irrational worldviews that aren't based in reason and evidence.
Or ones that only selectively quote peer-reviewed sources when it suits them (Example, the OP.
Also, I don't think anyone here is arguing that conspiracy theories are inherently untrue. There are several conspiracy theories that are very true, even though there was little evidence in the past (COINTELPRO, MK Ultra, JFK sleeping with MM, etc.)
What makes them true or untrue is solid evidence; the same as anything else.:kanyebp:
Lastly, allow me to state the most obvious point:
You can be completely devoid of paranoia and still have a batsh*t insane worldview. :stephena1:
Just because you aren't paranoid doesn't mean you aren't crazy.:panthersafe:
Says the individual that believes a conspiracy theory with ZERO evidence that says Trump colluded with Russia...somehow....to hack DNC servers and voting machines and social media to overtake the 2016 Presidential Election.
You believe a fairy tale with no evidence.....yet come on this thread and think we forgot.....
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
You forgot the one about memes on Facebook by Russians that helped steal an election for Trump. lol
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
I think you might need to look up what Strawmen means. lolSo many strawmen in this thread
A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man."
Both of you misrepresented my views:
Kindly f*ck off. :cambybp:
...And have a nice day. :stephena1:
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
I wasn't refuting any argument you made just making a joke at your expense.
And take your own advice. lol
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Nah nah nah
you ran into your own trap....don't try to squirm your way out of your own wordsmithing.The general article is about conspiracy theories.....which you basically denounced.
Then I presented a specific example of a conspiracy theory that you have been a thorough zealot for the past 18 months ...... and suddenly you trying to backpedal from your own words.
You're a full blown unapologetic conspiracy theorist @The Black Panther .... embrace it
To many receipts of you embracing this Russian/Trump Collusion Conspiracy Theory...like a boss.
Paranoid Much?
