Skip to main content

Conspiracy theories are so unbelievable that you can easily make up a more believable one yourself. Here's how.

Disclosure: This is a thought experiment for the purposes of showing how easy it is to make up a conspiracy theory. I do not advocate the dissemination of conspiracy theories and other baseless speculations.

Do some of the conspiracy theories out there seem so far-fetched that you are ROTFL when you hear of them? Yet some people actually do seem to believe them. Many conspiracy theories are made up. In other words they are fiction. At best, they are theories and not fact, otherwise that particular conspiracy theory wouldn't be a conspiracy theory, it would be fact. At worse, they are the deliberate peddling of lies.

So I decided to demonstrate that creating a conspiracy theory is so easy that anyone can do it. There are no special skills, talents, or level of intelligence required. There is nothing special about making up a conspiracy theory. Let's have a go.

Step 1: Identify the least believable conspiracy theory you have heard of

This step is easy and should take you less than a minute. The good news for you here is that conspiracy theories set the bar is so low in terms of believability, that you should have no problem finding a not-very-believable conspiracy theory that exists. 

It doesn't matter how many or how few other people happen to believe in it; it just has to sound ridiculously unbelievable to you.

Step 2: Make up your own conspiracy theory that is more believable than the one in step 1

By this, I mean that you need not actually believe your own conspiracy theory. Likewise it does not need to hold up to journalistic scrutiny or fact-based evidence (the one in step 1 likely doesn't). Yours also does not need to sound believable to anyone else, it just has to sound more believable to you personally than the one in step 1. 

So you're trying to create something that, even though you don't believe it, sounds like it makes marginally more sense than the one in step 1. In case you can't think of anything at this moment, don't worry - there are conspiracy theory generators online you can use. Try the conspiracy theory generator at Chaotic Shiny or the conspiracy theory generator at Generator Fun.

Step 3. Done

At this point, using either your own brain or technology tools that are available online to anyone, you have managed to come up with one or more conspiracy theories that sounds more believable to you than the least believable one you have heard of. Yes, it is really that easy. 

As you can see, there are an almost infinite number of conspiracy theories you can generate, creating variations upon variations of them. They would be pure fiction, but they are easy to create.

So if it's that easy, why do people actually believe some of the existing conspiracy theories?

Now we come to an intersection of technology and a bunch of other fields, none of which I am expert in. It's not just the supply end of conspiracy theories that we need to look at, it's the demand end too.

In other words, given how easy we saw it was to just make stuff up, why does anyone ever believe an existing conspiracy theory in the absence of hard journalistic-level evidence? Why is their reaction to believe it in the absence of a journalistic level of evidence?

This, by the way, is the same question as "Why do people buy tabloid newspapers when they likely know that much of it could be libel or slander?" 

The dissemination of lies would quickly die out if there was no demand. Yet there is clearly demand.

I think that the answer is, there are people out there who value fake answers to questions more than they value the truth. 

To paint it with a finer brush, there are people who, when observing a complex situation, would prefer to believe a made-up theory than to wait for evidence. They are impatient to close the question, and would rather have it closed with a straight-out lie, as opposed to leaving the question open and waiting for evidence.

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

How to center images horizontally using Grav

I've been playing around a bit with Grav. I was posing the question to myself: for the relatively simple use-cases I'm dealing with, could it possibly work for my purposes as an alternative to ProcessWire?  The problem I was initially dismayed to find that Grav uses Markdown as its editor, which does not offer native support for horizontal centering of anything (text or images). However, Grav offers some tweaks that help make it easier to do specific things you might commonly want to do. I tried writing a sample article, and I found that one of the hardest things to do was to center an image horizontally. And horizontal centering of images is something I would typically do in most of the articles I would write. So the lack of easy horizontal centering is a highly significant drawback IMHO (most people do want to center images in an article!) However, this issue is made up for by other things in Grav: the relative speed, ease and flexibility of custom theming and built-in suppor
Read more

Life using the Linux operating system exclusively for the last few years

Above: my Linux desktop layout. Back in 2017, I switched my operating system entirely to Linux. In case anyone is wondering, here is what I experienced over the last few years. Others I interact with have no idea I'm on Linux. For example, if someone emails me an MS Word document that I need to complete, I simply open it with LibreOffice (an open-source word processing program that is pre-installed on most Linux systems), edit the document as needed - which is very easy since the same sorts of functionalities are available in LibreOffice - and then I can save it in MS Word format and email it back. Likewise, if I'm on a Zoom call, everything works just the way it does on PC and Mac. Zoom makes their application available for Linux too, I downloaded it and let it self-install, and it works exactly the same way as it does on other operating systems. I can point-and-click my way to whatever I need to do on Linux; no special knowledge required. If you want to dig deeper into script
Read more

Correct usage of unwind-protect and with-open-file in Lisp

Learning to use unwind-protect in Lisp typically crops up very early on when you're first learning the language. In fact, anything to do with I/O is going to be something you'll need to know early on. Yet unfortunately, I find that unwind-protect is not explained sufficiently well for a beginner to understand not just how to use it correctly, but why and when . Grappling with this myself, I found that hands-down the best explanation came from this YouTube video from Baggers: Luckily, in the case of file handlers, LISP already assumes you'll want to open a file with unwind-protect, so it provides the with-open-file macro for this exact purpose. It closes the file handler for you with a built-in unwind-protect. This is an advantage over manually opening and closing your file handlers, because if your program opens the file but never gets to the part with the close command (for example due to a run-time error in between those stages), the built-in unwind-protect make
Read more

About Me

My photo
Vera
I'm a wife and mother. I don't have any formal computer science qualifications, or any religious qualifications. I have a PhD in biochemistry. This photo is of me, but is confusing for AI.