I've posted about this before, but I really am beginning to worry about the number of conspiracy theories out there, especially among the younger generation. Last year a popular magazine here published an article questioning the veracity of the moon landing, for example. Two years ago, a UN Peacekeeper came to speak to about 200 local high school students about peacekeeping, but mostly spent his time explaining that 9/11 was a hoax.
I regularly hear people my age and younger (the under 30 crowd) say that they don't think that man really walked on the moon, they believe George Bush planned 9/11, they don't that the Holocaust ever happened, they think the US allowed Pearl Harbor to happen as an excuse to enter the war, and that basically any historical event, particularly with regard to American history and Jewish history, is possibly a half-truth or completely fabricated (one teenager recently told me that Germany "supposedly" sunk the Lusitania, but he doubts it).
I think this is the result of internet culture, but the more I see of it, the more bothered by it I become. When a person doubts even primary sources and eye witnesses, believing that there is some overall, unseen conspiracy behind all world events, it really takes away the relevence of historical study. After all, if some great mind is fabricating everything toward some evil Zionist/American plot, why would anyone want to waste their time learning history, the Zionist/American tool of propaganda?
My questions are: 1- Have any of you observed a similar tendency to doubt everything, particularly with regard to Jewish and American history, or is it something that for some reason is just particularly strong in Mexico?
2- If you encounter a person who believes in a conspiracy theory, how do you respond? My response usually ranges from saying nothing, to doing my best to avoid any discussion that will lead to me having to listen to such a theory (harder than it might sound!), to chuckling and saying, "Well, that's one theory," and then giving the standard historical view. However, sometimes I think that while those strategies work well in terms of keeping me out of arguments, it hurts me to hear such things and basically to do nothing about it. However, I really don't know what to do. I don't want to argue. I'm not even sure I could win such an argument - even arguments with insane white supremecists are not always as easy to "win" as one might think. But when I really don't say anything, I feel terrible. What do you do?
Posts: 2241 | Location: In between | Registered: 06-03-02
My own experiences and a recent post by sid make me think it is better to say nothing. You will never win an argument with or change the mind of a zealot.
If forced into speaking with the person, ask open-ended questions. Could you tell me more about that? How did you first learn about it? When you asked NASA to confirm the information, what did they say?
Any attempt to prove a zealot wrong will make him or her less tolerable. A lot is invested in the position. A zealot will have to think s/he change his or her own mind.*
If pressed further: Would you get into an argument with me if I tell you I believe in the Holocaust? (Yes, I would). Then I'd better not tell you that!
*I really miss the day when one could say "him" and be done with it!
Posts: 7655 | Location: in the backwoods of North Carolina | Registered: 06-07-02
If a person truly believes in conspiracy theories, it's best to just stop talking to them about it. What they believes is just as important to them as the non-believer. There's always a chance that some of it could be true. We are told a lot of things without actual proof so I believe there'll be a lot more of what one will call a conspiracy, when someone else will see it a total different way. It depends on the source of how we hear and learn things.
There's nothing wrong with people believing that things are not always what they seem to be. People have just gotten wiser and are not ready to believe everything that's fed to them.
Is there any actual proof that man walked on the moon?
Posts: 6628 | Location: Land of Lincoln, USA | Registered: 07-04-02
Is there any actual proof that man walked on the moon?
Is there an alternative conspiracy explanation? Is it just as plausible and just as falsifiable as the claim made? Isn't there a difference between skepticism and ignorance ?
Actually Frank, it could go either way, they could have or could not have, walked on the moon. I can't say for sure because I wasn't there but I've heard it both ways many times. I believe they walked on something but maybe not the moon. Anyway, one can't help what they believe. Some people believe what Bush say. I don't.
I think skepticism and ignorance is practically the same thing in things that we are unsure about.
Posts: 6628 | Location: Land of Lincoln, USA | Registered: 07-04-02
Is there any actual proof that man walked on the moon?
Several decades ago there was a film (the name of which escapes me) which folowed the premise, except it was a trip to Mars. At the last second before liftoff, the crew was removed from the capsule and told it had been determined that the mission was impossible. Not wanting to lose face, NASA sends them off to some desert location where a studio with a Mars landscape has been set up. They broadcast the "landing" and "Mars walk" back to Earth and the populace is appropriately impressed. Problem is, the astronauts know it's a fake. So they must be disposed of. The idea is to say they died on their way back to Earth. One guy escapes and shows up at his own "memorial service." I think Richard Crenna played the NASA villain, but I'm to lazy to look it up.
Point is, conspiracy theories flourish at a time of great societal cynicism, when even institutions previously admired are suspected.
Elliott Gould .... Robert Caulfield James Brolin .... Col. Charles Brubaker Brenda Vaccaro .... Kay Brubaker Sam Waterston .... Lt. Col. Peter Willis O.J. Simpson .... Cmdr. John Walker Hal Holbrook .... Dr. James Kelloway Karen Black .... Judy Drinkwater Telly Savalas .... Albain
This is the movie you are thinking of, JR.
Posts: 16773 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Yes, there is evidence that people were on the moon. The conspiracy theory is not plausible - it would have involved building a movie set that contained a vacuum, for example, which would have been a technical feat more difficult than the moon landings themselves.
I think one of the appeals of conspiracy theories is that they are relatively easy to learn - usually from just one source, like a web-page or one TV show - and not filled with boring technical detail; just "technicians made..." and "they have a device that...".
Conspiracies theories tend to suggest a purpose to everything, and conscious planning behind anything that happens. People like to think there's a point to every event - it's almost a religious impulse.
Real history tends to take a little more research and imagination. There are often conflicting views of what went on and why. Real life is messy and often pointless, full of accidents and unintended side-effects.
Conspiracy theories also give a false sense of being one of those 'in the know', I guess - not one of the common rabble.
I must say, some conspiracy theories are intriguing. For example, how did a Boeing 757, with a wingspan of 144 fett, make a hole just sixty feet wide in the Pentagon and leave no debris? An interesting question.
Originally posted by Fourbrick2: I must say, some conspiracy theories are intriguing. For example, how did a Boeing 757, with a wingspan of 144 fett, make a hole just sixty feet wide in the Pentagon and leave no debris? An interesting question.
Remember the planes were fully laden with fuel -- that was a key feature of the terrorists' plan. I recall from the live coverage of the WTC attacks (shudder!) what appeared to be liquid aluminum trickling down the sides of the buildings prior to their collapse -- presumed to be what was left of the aircraft.
Posts: 1917 | Location: U.S. | Registered: 06-03-02
9/11 generated a number of conspiracy theories, one of which that the Federal Government was involved. One bit of "evidence" proposed was that the temperature of the the blaze in the Twin Towers was not high enough to cause them to collapse. PBS did a great documentary in which it was shown that the bolts holding the girders in place melted under the heat; when they went, the buldings went. As I have said before, all of this is the result of a cynicism which had its roots in the JFK assassination, moved on to RFK and MLK, Watergate, and a whole host of other events.
Another factor inthe WTC collapse was that the impact is thought to have jarred the fireproofing insulation from the steel beams, hastening their softening and collapse in the intense fire.
Posts: 1917 | Location: U.S. | Registered: 06-03-02
Considering the structural system used, it's amazing the buildings stood as long as they did.
Drywall core and non-asbestos fireproofing sprayed on long span open web steel joists. The exterior shell of the building provided a lot of the stability and we all saw what happened to that.
Honi - there is a special on the National Geographic channel about the Moon Landing and the myth that it never happened. I think a lot of people have spent a good deal of time answering the issues that the conspiracy theorists have.
Posts: 3041 | Location: USA | Registered: 06-04-02
I would like to see the sources for the "evidence" on that site, Fourbrick. For example, these two:
(2) The tape of interviews of air traffic controllers on-duty on 9/11 was intentionally destroyed by crushing the cassette by hand, cutting the tape into little pieces, and then dropping the pieces in different trash cans around the building
(3) Investigators for the Congressional Joint Inquiry discovered that an FBI informant had hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House
Just because a website says something happened doesn't mean it is true.
Posts: 2241 | Location: In between | Registered: 06-03-02
