Coronavirus conspiracy theories don’t stop at Bill Gates and 5G

"We're spinning out of control bro. I would NEVER trust a man who wears sweaters over shirts everyday."...

Tighten your tinfoil hat.

Ever since the coronavirus was discovered, misinformation has spread as quickly as the deadly disease.

Wack-a-doo theories are causing people to destroy cellular towers and risk infection by joining protests. One Ohio man called the pandemic a “political ploy” and railed against stay-at-home orders, only to contract the disease and die. Cooped-up Americans are spending too much time online falling for pseudoscience and conspiratorial speculation when it comes to COVID-19.

Some bad actors are even trying to make a buck off the conjecture, peddling bogus cures such as black cat “paste” or $4,000 COVID “treatment packs.” As yet, there is no cure for the coronavirus.

But while there are a lot of unknowns about the highly contagious virus, like whether it can be contracted twice, here are the Top 5 theories you can just go ahead and rule out.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/30/2020 02:33PM by NuNativs.

A few years back, I listened to an NPR broadcast that was titled:

In Politics(or Life), Sometimes The Facts Don't Matter

Quote

New research suggests that misinformed people rarely change their minds when presented with the facts — and often become even more attached to their beliefs. The finding raises questions about a key principle of a strong democracy: that a well-informed electorate is best.

[www.npr.org]

Even when presented with the facts about the virus, the deaths, these guys will be even more attached to their belief that there is no virus and that is a Bill Gates conspiracy. I have stopped answering them. It is a huge waste of time

Quote
RawPracticalist
A few years back, I listened to an NPR broadcast that was titled:

In Politics(or Life), Sometimes The Facts Don't Matter

Quote

New research suggests that misinformed people rarely change their minds when presented with the facts — and often become even more attached to their beliefs. The finding raises questions about a key principle of a strong democracy: that a well-informed electorate is best.

[www.npr.org]

Even when presented with the facts about the virus, the deaths, these guys will be even more attached to their belief that there is no virus and that is a Bill Gates conspiracy. I have stopped answering them. It is a huge waste of time

Only applies to other people apparently
Not you

Ah the conceit

It's very strong in humans

People LOVE the virus
I've listed the "facts about the virus " below

<<<New research suggests that misinformed people rarely change their minds when presented with the facts>>>

“Only the wisest and the stupidest of men never change.” -Confucius

“Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.” -Mark Twain

Do you believe in Viruses and the Contagion Myth?

If you do, congratulations, you are on the side of the majority and if you don't pause and reflect, than you are also among the stupidest of men.

[www.rawfoodsupport.com]
Common Sense VS Conventional Wisdom

Let me rephrase it
John Rose, fresh and company will NOT CHANGE THEIR MIND when presented with the facts.

These guys do not still believe more than 50 years later that there was a moon landing.

The moon landing has even more scientific evidence that the coronavirus.

These guys feed on conspiracy, every argument with facts gets attacked with more posts on the conspiracy.


LET'S NOT WASTE OUR TIME.

I AM DONE.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/04/2020 02:11PM by RawPracticalist.

Quote
RawPracticalist
Let me rephrase it
John Rose, fresh and company will NOT CHANGE THEIR MIND when presented with the facts.

These guys do not still believe more than 50 years later that there was a moon landing.

The moon landing has even more scientific evidence that the coronavirus.

These guys feed on conspiracy, every argument with facts gets attacked with more posts on the conspiracy.


LET'S NOT WASTE OUR TIME.

I AM DONE.

TRUTH unfortunately...

Moon landing???

You're funny

Does the fact I believe in moon landing destroy your stupid argument?

Keep talking about facts but don't present any

“The medical profession (is) a conspiracy to hide its own shortcomings. No doubt the same may be said of all professions. They are all conspiracies against the laity... Until there is a practicable alternative to blind trust in the doctor, the truth about the doctor is so terrible that we dare not face it.” -George Bernard Shaw, "The Doctor's Dilemma," 1906

[www.naturalnews.com]
The gullible mind explained
Thursday, May 05, 2011
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger - Controlled Opposition
Editor of NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) In light of the string of the blatant falsehoods being announced by the U.S. government these days (FDA, DHS, White House, etc.) it's interesting that so many people still believe whatever they are told by "official" sources. It brings up the question of the functioning of their brains: How could a person swallow official information so gullibly and so completely without even asking commonsense questions about the reliability or factual basis of that information?

These people, it turns out, are operating from what I called The Gullible Mind. It is a psychological processing malfunction that filters out information based on its source rather than its integrity. People who operate from The Gullible Mind tend to have misplaced trust in governments, institutions, mainstream news networks, doctors, scientists or anyone who wears the garb of apparent authority.

Whereas a normal, intelligent person would raise commonsense questions about information they receive from all sources, the Gullible Mind wholly accepts virtually any information from sources that occupy the role of apparent authority in society.

Governments never lie
But how does this work inside their heads? It's an interesting process. Gullible Mind people do believe it is possible for a government (or institution) to lie; but they believe that governments, institutions and doctors choose NOT to lie even when it would serve their own self interests to do so.

Follow this carefully, because this is the fascinating part. These Gullible Mind people effectively believe that even though a government official could lie about something, they would never actually do so. And why wouldn't they? Because, ultimately, the Gullible Mind crowd believes that governments, institutions and mainstream media outlets operate from a sort of honor code. So even if it were in the interests of our own government to lie to us, it would never happen because that would violate this imaginary honor code.

Where does this honor code exist? Where is it written down? Nowhere, of course. It is imaginary. But to The Gullible Mind, it seems real. Interestingly, even though this "honor code" only exists in the imagination of The Gullible Mind person, they project this honor code onto sources of authority, imagining that they abide by it.

Extreme gullibility
This is how The Gullible Mind person believes that network news always reports the truth. The news networks have a sense of "honor," they believe, and this sense of honor requires them to always report the truth and never manipulate the news for any nefarious purposes. So news networks never "shape" the news and they only report what is factually true without any consideration whatsoever of politics or advertiser profits.

This view of the world is, of course, laughably naive. And yet it is the core belief system of at least half the population -- the Gullible Mind half that believes everything it is told by its own government, media or authority figures.

Interestingly, the Gullible Mind is also inwardly gullible because it does not recognize its own gullibility. Instead, it believes it is operating as a Rational Mind. This false Rational Mind believes it functions as a critical filter of incoming information, but even this is self deception. In truth, this false Rational Mind is on "auto filter" so that it filters out any information that conflicts with the information it is receiving from official sources.

This is the key to understanding the Gullible Mind -- it isn't the quality of the information itself that matters; it is the confirmation of the story from official sources that "makes it real" in the Gullible Mind.

The Easter Bunny killed Bin Laden!
For example, let's say a Gullible Mind person comes across an announcement that says the Easter Bunny has killed Osama Bin Laden. The report claims that colored eggs were found near Bin Laden's body, and there was evidence of feathers being left at the scene, which proves the Easter Bunny was there.

Now, an intelligent, rational mind would have a lot of questions about this. For starters, rabbits don't have feathers. And the Easter Bunny is a piece of fiction, too. On top of that, how could the Easter Bunny kill Osama Bin Laden? An intelligent person would, upon reviewing the holes in the story, be forced to conclude the story is fiction. The only logical conclusion from that is that the government is lying to them.

A Gullible Mind person, however, would not ask whether rabbits have feathers, or whether the Easter Bunny is capable of conducting a military raid. Instead, the Gullible Mind person would first look to other confirming news sources in order to determine the reliability of the story. They would turn on the TV or surf the internet, looking for the news to be repeated through "official" sources.

Once they found CNN, or Fox News, or some other "official" source reporting that the Easter Bunny killed Osama Bin Laden, then that news report would instantly become "real" in their minds. Suddenly it has shifted from their mental processing queue to the "absolutely truth" part of their brain, and from that point forward, no one can question that reality in their heads.

Don't bother arguing with a Gullible Mind - they are immune to facts
At this point, their rational mind is completely shut off on the topic. No accumulation of facts can, at that point, rattle their "reality." For example, a person who believes the government's story of 9/11 has already embraced the Easter Bunny version of terrorists flying airplanes into the World Trade Center towers. So how did this act cause the WTC 7 building to collapse in a demolition-style free-fall a few hours later, when WTC 7 was never struck by airplanes? How can a steel and concrete building suddenly and magically collapse in perfect structural synchronicity merely from being on fire?

The answers don't matter to The Gullible Mind, you see. There is no room for facts inside their heads, because all the space has been taken up with what is essentially a cult-like belief in institutions of authority.

We saw this in the Heaven's Gate cult in California a few years back. The leader of that cult, a man named Applegate, positioned himself as the one and only source of authoritative information among the cult followers. So HE became the authoritative source whose information was wholly accepted without questioning or skepticism of any kind. At that point, he was able to quite easily convince his followers that an alien race was going to land a UFO on the far side of a comet, and that if they killed themselves, they would be transported onto the alien ship (or something like that).

The belief in such a story may seem silly... until you realize that the governments of the world use the exact same cult-like tactics to get their own "followers" to believe everything they say, without question. So if President Obama announced that an alien race was going to land a mother ship on the White House lawn, and that people who voted for him would have their consciousness transferred to an immortal alien body, the remarkable truth is that millions of people would believe that. Perhaps tens of millions. They would even worship him as an interstellar saint.

Remember Orson Welles' radio program that announced aliens had invaded the Earth and were destroying our cities? ( [en.wikipedia.org]... ) Huge numbers of people believed it was really happening... and not because it made any sense, but because the information came from the source they trusted. To those people, the alien invasion was just as real back then as Bin Laden's official death is to government followers today.

Throughout history, many conspiracy theories have turned out to be true
Government lying, of course, has been going on for as long as governments have existed. Not all conspiracies theories are true, of course, but so many of them turn out to be true that the idea of "not believing" in conspiracies makes no rational sense.

To not believe in conspiracies means you don't believe two people have ever sat down and plotted to take advantage of others in some unethical and deceptive way. Well gee, that describes virtually every board meeting of every large corporation in the world! Conspiracies are not just commonplace; they're practically synonymous with modern-day capitalism! Even right now, Apple is being accused of a conspiracy to keep employee wages artificially low: [www.appleinsider.com]...

I wonder: Do the Gullible Mind people also not believe in that conspiracy theory? Are all conspiracy theories automatically tossed out merely because of the word "conspiracy?"

For those who don't know their history, here's a list of 33 conspiracy theories that turned out to be true: [www.newworldorderreport.com]...

The Manhattan Project, of course, was a secret government conspiracy. The Tuskegee Syphilis experiments on African Americans was a secret medical conspiracy. Operation Northwoods was a conspiracy plot to create support for a war on Castro by staging terrorism events in U.S. cities.

These are all historical facts. They are indisputable. But to The Gullible Mind, none of this history exists. What's real is only what they are being told right now by the White House. When George Bush occupied the White House, the daily fibs were things like, "The Iraqis want us to occupy their land with military personnel because we are setting them free!" Oh yeah, that's a bit of twisted logic, for sure. But it's no different from Obama's version of the war fairytales, which includes such gems as, "We're only dropping humanitarian bombs on Libya." Or, "It's not actually war. It's only kinetic military action."

But you see, it makes no difference whether anything they say is actually true... at least not to The Gullible Mind, which believes there is no such thing as a conspiracy theory. There is no such thing as a nefarious government, either. Heck, when Columbus landed in the New World, his entire crew shared food and wine with the Native American Indians, we're told. There was no raping, no murder, no genocide. That's why we continue to celebrate Columbus Day every year! Because the Gullible Mind wants a reason to get off work for a day, even if it requires a complete revision of actual historical facts.

The most popular issues of Gullible Mind people
Vaccines are good for you - Vaccines are "safe and effective" merely because doctors and the CDC say they are, not because of any reliable scientific evidence.

The economy is in great shape - Gullible Mind people are easily influenced to stop thinking about the $14 trillion national debt that's growing by the day and simply go along with whatever economic fictions are being woven in Washington.

Governments and corporations are looking out for your best interests - The drug companies only want to find cures and make everybody healthy. The government is here to help. We should all stop asking questions and just do what we're told.

Nothing will ever run out - There's no such thing as Peak Oil. Our world can continue its throwaway economy without end, they believe. We'll never run out of gas, water, soil or natural resources. Keep using stuff up and throwing it all away!

Food additives are good for you - Otherwise, the FDA wouldn't have approved them, would they?

There's no such thing as a cure for cancer - The ultimate pessimists, the Gullible Mind crowd believes cancer has never been cured! And if a cancer cure did exist, we would know about it by now, right? (Because our scientists already know everything that's worth knowing, you see...)

There are no other non-terrestrial civilizations or beings in our universe - Amazingly, we are the only intelligent forms of life that have ever existed, they believe. Any talk of non-Earth intelligence is just a bunch of "fringe" nonsense. There was never any life on Mars, either.

Herbs and plants have no medicinal value - That's right, only conventional medicine can "treat" you, because that's what the doctors say. Herbs and plants have zero biological value beyond their calories alone, they insist.

... and on it goes, one delusion after another. A Gullible Mind, it seems, will believe almost anything if it comes from a "trusted" source. But that same Gullible Mind will discount straight-up facts if they don't come from those same trusted sources.

How to stop being a Gullible Mind
Interestingly, most of the people who are intelligent, skeptical thinkers today used to be Gullible Mind people at one time or another. There was a point where they simply "awakened" and began to consciously question the world around them.

Intelligent, informed skeptics are the people asking questions like:

• Why do twenty different mainstream news sources all report the exact same news, using the exact same words, on the exact same day? ( [www.naturalnews.com]... ) If they were all investigating and writing their own news, wouldn't their news be different?

• Why did Wall Street get a multi-trillion-dollar bailout from Washington while the American people are still required to pay taxes that involve sending money to Washington? If Washington can just magically create a trillion dollars overnight, why do we pay taxes, then?

• Why does the USDA now actively conspire with GMO seed companies to keep approving genetically modified seeds even without any scientific evidence of their long-term safety?

• If mercury is one of the most toxic substances known to modern science, why is it still being deliberately placed into the mouths of children in the form of "silver" fillings? And why are they called "silver" when they actually contain more mercury than silver?

• Where does the fluoride used to fluoridate the public water supplies really come from? (http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=42652...) And if fluoride is so good for people, then why is it so hazardous to handle, and why is it considered a hazardous chemical by the EPA?

• What really happened on 9/11? How did WTC 7 collapse if it was never hit by any airplanes? Why did they sweep away the rubble before a proper forensic analysis could be performed?

• Are vaccines really safe? Where's the study comparing vaccinated children with non-vaccinated children? Why won't the vaccine industry allow such studies to be conducted?

• Why does the cancer industry seem a lot more interested in treating cancer and recruiting cancer patients than actually curing cancer and ending the epidemic? Why does the industry refuse to talk about cancer-causing chemicals or the anti-cancer effects of vitamin D?

• Why are toxic food additives still allowed in the food supply? What's the real story on aspartame and the FDA? Why did the FDA oppress stevia for so many decades?

• Why is the medical police state now using guns to force parents to medicate their children? In what kind of medical system is it necessary to use the threat of violence to force compliance?

• Why did Clinton bomb the Sudan in the middle of the Monica Lewinsky crisis? Why did Obama suddenly announce the death of Bin Laden in the middle of his "birther" crisis?

• Why do we still have the DEA's "War on Drugs," especially since there is ample evidence that the war is a total failure that only increases the prison population while actually enriching the drug gangs with higher street prices?

• Why is the TSA still reaching down our pants at the airports if Bin Laden is now dead? Wasn't he the whole reason we created the TSA and hired on those 60,000 security agents in the first place? (http://www.naturalnews.com/032267_B...)

An intelligent, skeptical thinker would ask these questions (and many more) as a natural course of basic human curiosity. But a Gullible Mind, attacks the questioner for even daring to ask such questions.

Who are some of the awakened people?
That's why the Gullible Mind is more than merely gullible: It is a cowardly mind. It is afraid to ask questions on its own, and it simultaneously attacks those who have the courage to stand up and actually ask those questions (like Jesse Ventura).

Most members of the conventional press are, of course, cowardly minds. They almost universally buy the corporate spin (or the White House spin) and never ask any tough questions anymore. Some of the REAL heroes -- the people who are asking intelligent questions about our world -- include:

Alex Jones - Controlled Opposition
Jeff Rense
Charlotte Gerson
Jonathan Landsman
David Icke - Controlled Opposition
Jesse Ventura
Gerald Celente
Ron Paul
Robert Scott Bell
Dr. Andrew Wakefield
Suzanne Somers
Dr. James Forsythe
George Noorey

Do you see a pattern here? Each one of these individuals has been marginalized or viciously attacked and slandered simply because they chose to ask intelligent questions about the world around them. Now, I don't agree with every single thing said by each one of these people, but I admire each of them for having the courage to ask the questions that need to be asked if we are to move forward as a society (and civilization).

These kind of people represent the complete opposite of The Gullible Mind. They are, instead, the "true skeptics" of the world. The reason they are viciously attacked is because our world is so steeped in deceit and conspiracy that only Gullible Minds are tolerated. Those who question the status quo are not merely annoying to the powers that be, but actually dangerous because the most dangerous activity in which you can engage today is helping others awaken to what's really happening around them.

It is that "awakening" that is so utterly despised by the web of corporations, governments and media lackeys that they will do everything in their power to prevent any sort of awakening from taking place at all. The functioning of the Matrix, after all, depends on people believing in the illusion.

And it is so much easier to govern, of course, if people just believe whatever you tell them. Gullible Minds make great voters and willing slaves. But lousy company.
[www.naturalnews.com]

Remember, Controlled Opposition will tell you 100 facts that are true just to get you to believe the one lie that is crucial to them.

Yes, what does 'moon landing' have to do with the Coronavirus? Oh, that's right - it's the Conspiracy Theory strategy. If someone doesn't agree with your view on an issue, especially it's the 'Official Story', just brand them as a Conspiracy Theorist, and all their credibility is automatically destroyed. Nice try, RawPracticalist.

And just because someone believes in one so-called (by whom?) 'conspiracy theory' does not mean they are a "Conspiracy Theorist" and that every position they hold on every Controversial/Divisive issue is automatically Wrong by virtue of their being a 'Nutjob'.

[www.infowars.com]
Study: Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostile
presstv.ir
July 13, 2013

Recent studies by psychologists and social scientists in the US and UK suggest that contrary to mainstream media stereotypes, those labeled “conspiracy theorists” appear to be saner than those who accept the official versions of contested events.

The most recent study was published on July 8th by psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent (UK). Entitled “What about Building 7? A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories,” the study compared “conspiracist” (pro-conspiracy theory) and “conventionalist” (anti-conspiracy) comments at news websites.

The authors were surprised to discover that it is now more conventional to leave so-called conspiracist comments than conventionalist ones: “Of the 2174 comments collected, 1459 were coded as conspiracist and 715 as conventionalist.” In other words, among people who comment on news articles, those who disbelieve government accounts of such events as 9/11 and the JFK assassination outnumber believers by more than two to one. That means it is the pro-conspiracy commenters who are expressing what is now the conventional wisdom, while the anti-conspiracy commenters are becoming a small, beleaguered minority.

Perhaps because their supposedly mainstream views no longer represent the majority, the anti-conspiracy commenters often displayed anger and hostility: “The research… showed that people who favoured the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile when trying to persuade their rivals.”

Additionally, 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. The so-called conspiracists, on the other hand, did not pretend to have a theory that completely explained the events of 9/11: “For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account.”

In short, the new study by Wood and Douglas suggests that the negative stereotype of the conspiracy theorist – a hostile fanatic wedded to the truth of his own fringe theory – accurately describes the people who defend the official account of 9/11, not those who dispute it.

Additionally, the study found that so-called conspiracists discuss historical context (such as viewing the JFK assassination as a precedent for 9/11) more than anti-conspiracists. It also found that the so-called conspiracists do not like to be called “conspiracists” or “conspiracy theorists.”

Both of these findings are amplified in the new book Conspiracy Theory in America by political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith, published earlier this year by the University of Texas Press. Professor deHaven-Smith explains why people don’t like being called “conspiracy theorists”: The term was invented and put into wide circulation by the CIA to smear and defame people questioning the JFK assassination! “The CIA’s campaign to popularize the term ‘conspiracy theory’ and make conspiracy belief a target of ridicule and hostility must be credited, unfortunately, with being one of the most successful propaganda initiatives of all time.”

In other words, people who use the terms “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorist” as an insult are doing so as the result of a well-documented, undisputed, historically-real conspiracy by the CIA to cover up the JFK assassination. That campaign, by the way, was completely illegal, and the CIA officers involved were criminals; the CIA is barred from all domestic activities, yet routinely breaks the law to conduct domestic operations ranging from propaganda to assassinations.

DeHaven-Smith also explains why those who doubt official explanations of high crimes are eager to discuss historical context. He points out that a very large number of conspiracy claims have turned out to be true, and that there appear to be strong relationships between many as-yet-unsolved “state crimes against democracy.” An obvious example is the link between the JFK and RFK assassinations, which both paved the way for presidencies that continued the Vietnam War. According to DeHaven-Smith, we should always discuss the “Kennedy assassinations” in the plural, because the two killings appear to have been aspects of the same larger crime.

Psychologist Laurie Manwell of the University of Guelph agrees that the CIA-designed “conspiracy theory” label impedes cognitive function. She points out, in an article published in American Behavioral Scientist (2010), that anti-conspiracy people are unable to think clearly about such apparent state crimes against democracy as 9/11 due to their inability to process information that conflicts with pre-existing belief.

In the same issue of ABS, University of Buffalo professor Steven Hoffman adds that anti-conspiracy people are typically prey to strong “confirmation bias” – that is, they seek out information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs, while using irrational mechanisms (such as the “conspiracy theory” label) to avoid conflicting information.

The extreme irrationality of those who attack “conspiracy theories” has been ably exposed by Communications professors Ginna Husting and Martin Orr of Boise State University. In a 2007 peer-reviewed article entitled “Dangerous Machinery: ‘Conspiracy Theorist’ as a Transpersonal Strategy of Exclusion,” they wrote:

“If I call you a conspiracy theorist, it matters little whether you have actually claimed that a conspiracy exists or whether you have simply raised an issue that I would rather avoid… By labeling you, I strategically exclude you from the sphere where public speech, debate, and conflict occur.”

But now, thanks to the internet, people who doubt official stories are no longer excluded from public conversation; the CIA’s 44-year-old campaign to stifle debate using the “conspiracy theory” smear is nearly worn-out. In academic studies, as in comments on news articles, pro-conspiracy voices are now more numerous – and more rational – than anti-conspiracy ones.

No wonder the anti-conspiracy people are sounding more and more like a bunch of hostile, paranoid cranks.

Related Articles
• CBS Propaganda Placement: Conspiracy Theorists Are Anti-American, Domestic Terrorists
• Is it crazy to doubt the government?
• Why Conspiracy Theorists Are Being Rebranded As Domestic Terrorists
• The Propaganda Battlefield: Militants Abroad, Conspiracy Theorists At Home
• Financial Illiteracy of Those Who Mock Conspiracy Theorists
[www.infowars.com]



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/04/2020 04:41PM by John Rose.

That is brilliant above

Yes, thanks John! That explains a lot in trying to understand the Conspiracy Theory concept. Especially the origins - with the CIA, of course. It would have been interesting if like 20% of America had been 'woke' during the orchestrated 911 event, like we are now during the Plandemic event.