I am no psychologist but my understanding is this.

The professionals state that those who present a pro conspiracy argument are more rational in their arguments and hence their state of mind than those who take the anti conspiracy argument.

A scroll up this thread is a good example of this.

keep looking, you'll see it...

keep the dream alive... someday, a CT'er might get one right...

they present a pro 'truther' argument,, not a pro 'conspiracist' argument


truthers are only one type of conspiracist

some conspiracies are logical and others aren't,,,,to just take one that happens to be logical as an assessment of all conspiracists doesn't seem professional or accurate to me,,,,

it's been explained to them before, they won't understand it anymore now than they did then...

I think there is a conspiracy to get CTers.

Funny you should say that...I'm developing a theory about the irrational conventionalist zealots conspiring in a desperate attempt (pathetically by use of trite logical fallacies, evasions & misdirections) to somehow try to discredit the more intelligent skeptical minds of the more normal CT types.

from

mingle2.com/topic/show/319751

Considering the incidence of schizophrenia, that would possibly account for perhaps one person in the sample of the study done revealing the mental state of conventionalists & conspiracists. However, even in the case of the irrational and nearly violent conventionalists, no paranoid schizophrenia was noted to explain the attitude of either group.

Quite obviously, given the rarity of actual schizophrenia, it does not come close to explaining the attitude of either group of the study, and in fact, it is quite possible, there wasn't even one schizophrenic in the approximately 2100 strong sample studied.

However, given the absurdity of the beliefs of the conventionalists, with examples such as:

"it turned out that the anti-conspiracy people were not only hostile, but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well. According to them, their own theory of 9/11 - a conspiracy theory holding that 19 Arabs, none of whom could fly planes with any proficiency, pulled off the crime of the century under the direction of a guy on dialysis in a cave in Afghanistan - was indisputably true."

it becomes reasonable to suppose that approximately one third of the population, holding such improbable beliefs, could probably go far in explaining things such as the approximately one third of the population being sufficiently gullible/delusional as to make television advertising profitable for the sponsors, particularly on MSM news shows, as it is now well known by the general population (in light of the plummeting ratings) that only blithering and faithful idiots bother to watch them at all. presumably they are given drool buckets so as to prevent making a mess on the living room floor.

http://www.who.int/mental_health/management/schizophrenia/en/

lol.. want me to post some of the more "sane" CT theories?...


http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/07/alert-tomarow-nevada-governor-candidate-warns-of-coming-false-flag-at-scout-meet-like-boston-bombing-2711326.html

http://beforeitsnews.com/space/2013/07/man-captures-nibiru-in-front-of-the-sun-2462920.html

http://beforeitsnews.com/obama-birthplace-controversy/2013/07/alex-jones-unloads-obamas-forged-birth-certificate-created-on-microsoft-word-3-aliases-2463586.html

http://beforeitsnews.com/paranormal/2013/07/ufo-attacks-earth-5000-years-ago-documented-2454268.html


all these intelligent, sane people are just one site...

Let's try to catalog these listed items so i can fit them into my theory.

Item one is one man's opinion. Whether or not he is delusional is hard to say owing to a lack of supportive evidence for his hypothesis. Considering that nothing is really impossible, we have to consider the "Chicken Little" hypothesis, wherein Chicken Little's "prophesy" serves to prevent the sky from falling by making people aware of the Sky's possible intention to fall. This of course identifies Chicken Little as an overly paranoid CT'er to the public at large (which may in fact be the case), but the possibility must be considered that Chicken Little only considered that the sky intentionally falling was only a possibility, but even that possibility, however small, was too horrific to imagine, and so, by willingly making himself a "prophet" of doom who would be laughed at later, he may have "exposed" the sky's plan to fall to the extent that the sky could not now fall without taking full blame for doing so intentionally. The sky, not being an idiot, may have been forced to abort it's planned fall. At any rate, we don't know the circumstances or the reality of the situation, so we can't categorically say the man was out of his mind, or that his CT did not have some valid basis. We can only assess for ourselves what may or may not have been the case, thus only a conventionalist idiot or propagandist would vilify or ridicule him.

Item 2 is only a bit of hype to make the youtube vid more popular, or to find out what he was seeing, as obviously what he saw was an annular solar eclipse. This puts it into the "Man bites Dog" news category, as "dog bites man" as we all know, is hardly news. Item 2, doesn't even fall into the category of a conspiracy theory and must therefore be rejected as one. Only a conventionalist idiot or anti-CT propagandist would vilify or ridicule the promoter of the story as a CT.

Item 3 required no verification as Alex Jones is a well-known idiot & money-loving, fear-promoting shill for the ruling elite. If it is a conspiracy theory of his, one can be almost certain that it is a legitimate conspiracy, but that Alex is using misdirection/disinformation to create provably false hypotheses to discredit the worthwhile theories regerding the conspiracy. Since the theory is being promoted by AJ, it is almost a foregone conclusion that the theory as expressed is a false one. Only a conventionalist idiot or anti-CT propagandist would cite an AJ presentation of a CT as representative of the CT mindset. Quite obviously, any rational CT'er wouldn't fall for such BS.

Item 4 isn't even a CT, but merely some blogger's speculation. It therefore can't qualify as a CT. Only a conventionalist idiot or anti-CT propagandist would vilify or ridicule the promoter of the story as a CT.

This compels me to ask which one you are...a conventionalist idiot, or an anti-CT propagandist? Is there a third possibility I haven't considered? If so, please let me know what it is, as I'd not want to confine your answer to a fallacious false dichotomy.

no, i'll just let you call me some more names first, which is about the norm for the CT'ers... when your done with that, i'll tell you about the third option that escapes you at the moment...

Your allegation escapes me completely. When did I call you a name, and what did i call you?

...
\
you can't read your own typing?

how many times did you use the word "Idiot"?

just because these don't fit into what you call a CT, they are indeed CT's... don't think that just because they don't fit into your the related article that you decide what is a ct or not, just because your to busy trying to be right... i have no problem with CT'ers, but i have a problem with some because they are insane, like the 9-11 truthers that think Israel did it, or energy beams that turns metal into dust, or the aliens did it, bush and cheney did it, the anuki or reptilians did it, who is a reptilian, blah, blah, blah... these idiots make all ct'ers look stupid...

I would refer back to the original post that discusses the events of 911 and stay on that topic. We all know all the different peoples in this world some insane that come up with the oddest things......

Lets face it this is not the america we expected or were taught to expect when in grade school. 300 million of us are under observation at all times yet they could not stop the Boston tragedy...... so whats the point of spending billions if not trillions on this and then have our politicians focus on food stamps for the poor that probably cost this country pennies compared to what we spend on surveillance.

911 was the day the America I expected to live in died. So lets take a good hard honest look at it. That is what a sane person would do.

One has to ask themselves this.

Why did Bush and Cheney both refuse to go under oath to the 911 commission?

thats the point i was trying to make... there are some CT'ers that are sane, and have some very good points to 9-11, while others are just completely bat-chit crazy... when I'm disrespecting the 9-11 truthers, I'm talking about the bat-chit crazy ones, mostly...

I agree some are way out there and some of those are possible "sockpuppets" put out there to cloud the topic.

What I cant stand is if someone raises the serious questions of 911 they are called a CT'r.

Two months ago if anyone had said seriously the government is recording every Email and text damn near all over the world they would have been labeled a crazy CT'r.

I don't want to be hard on you, and I wish you wouldn't be so hard on yourself. At no time did I call you an idiot and I gave you the option to justify your post with a third alternative of your own choosing. I have to ask though; If you aren't an idiot why did you call yourself one?

I wish you wouldn't be so hard on yourself. I don't think you're an idiot at all, though I do suspect you of being an amateur ant-CT propagandist.

Very Interesting...

Now now...We all "know" this, but now that you're on the bench, you'd better stop making such claims and grant all these ba$tards their right to a presumption of innocence.