When Al-Qaeda themselves claimed responsibility, even with overwhelming evidence aside? Why were so many people still reluctant, I was researching about this stuff and was shocked to see people who I respect a lot believe in this

  • Dr_Satan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Some would call them “independent thinkers”

    What’s more admirable, to conform and be right or to think independently and be wrong?

    • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think the weaponization of ignorance is a more nuanced subject than a binary choice.

      There is no merit in pushing significantly disproven ‘theories’ like flat earthism.

      • Dr_Satan@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        No doubt. But dang, when they call themself right because they quote the most popular authority, I feel a strong impulse to play it wrong.

        I mean, I’d push flat-eartherism just to highlight the absurdity of the popular epistemology. But that’s generally a pearls-before-swine situation.

        • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Funny you mention that, there is a Flat Earth society that was started as a joke with members just arguing for fun.

          They were mostly all replaced by true believers by the late 90s, I got to watch it happen.

          And it plays out the same way in so many ‘ironic stupidity’ forums.

          • Dr_Satan@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            The true believers have more zip than the careful contemplators, unfortunately.

            • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              This is a flaw in human nature that needs to be resolved before we move forward as a species.

              It is no longer a survival benefit to follow loud, angry people.

              • Dr_Satan@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                I dunno man. The ugly sciencey guy is a hard sell. There’s gotta be a third option.

                Smiling grandfather in nice suit? Sexy fascist lady? Furry?

                It’s all theater anyway. The mob does not respond to reason.

                • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  I think Bill Nye gives us the best template: A kind of sciency guy with a background in media production.

                  The mob doesn’t respond to reason but it loves to be entertained, which is why we need more science communicators.

                  We need a Bob Ross for STEM.

                  • Dr_Satan@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    Or we could just do what’s proven to work.

                    One lie-spewing puppet for the people who like vanilla. Another for those who prefer chocolate. Maybe a third for those strawberry-loving weirdos.

                    We want to keep them (the oblivious masses) marching in the right direction. That’s all. Truth is utterly beside the point.