I think "conspiracy denialist" has a more satisfying ring to it, and I also agree with "coincidence theorist".

However, I think conspiracy apologist is even better, because the word apologist has negative connotations anyway, but the expression "conspiracy apologist" also suggests that these individuals are supportive of a real, often criminal phenomenon (and thus complicit).

The active shilling and trolling activities we see on this subreddit could thus be referred to as conspiracy apologetics

I can dig it. Better than "useful idiots."

Idiot is too offensive. We need to enlighten all.

Got a lot of tagging to do as a new subscriber here then. Seems to be a lot of these in certain threads. I don't pretend to know what happened in any historical situation. I wasn't there, all I have are the stories I've been told. But I'm open-minded and I like hearing what are essentially theories.

What I don't like is "Oh, not this again. There's a private website that debunks everything! See, no conspiracy here!"

Yes, using RES is pretty crucial on this sub - tagging is a very effective way to track the apologists.

I like OPs term (conspiracy denialist) better.

I like it. Looks like it was first used in 2011, referring to Dan Akroyd?

Interesting find. In this context they are using the term to mean Akroyd is a "conspiracy theory promulgator", which is quite different.

To my mind a "conspiracy apologist" is somebody who knows conspiracies are real, and is excusing them or diminishing their significance, even to the point of outright denying their existence.

Yeah no one has used it in this thread's context as far as I can find.

To me it's like saying, "Conspiracies are a fact of life, you might as well just continue being sheep."

Truth Deniers

Too pretentious, implying you're right and they are wrong. Conspiracy Deniers is better.

You're in good company, creationists already call me that.

Ooohhhh like that

Or just call them what they truly are (without using expletives) "coincidence theorists". Because they think all the anomalies in the "official" interpretations of the events of that day are all "just a coincidence".

"You're a detective now, son. You're not allowed to believe in coincidence anymore."

You're supposed to kill 'em with kindness. I wouldn't call anyone who doesn't see it my way a derogatory term in any sense of the world.

Simply state, "well I'm sorry you don't see it my way, but give it some time"

The more courteous you are, the more someone may think about what you said. Its a shame, because the nature of all people is to manipulate. Its what we all do. But you don't want to manipulate people about this, because you may appear deceitful.

I agree with you. I think coining little petty terms to define people doesn't help. Stooping to the same level as the people that write off conspiracy theorists as nutjobs is counterproductive. Would it not be better to be respectful (even when you receive no respect) when discussing theories with people that disagree? Labeling people won't change their view, and it only makes us look like children. Just explain your case in an articulate manner, answer all questions to the best of your ability and leave it at that.

Labeling people won't change their view,

This is just not true. Not only does it change their views, but changes other's views towards them.

Well, if we're using that train of thought, then the labels people place on us "conspiracy theorists" will surely change our views.

It likely has, before you became aware of the programming. Before you started looking into conspiracy theories, what was your opinion of "conspiracy theorists"? Did you have a mental association between them and "tin-foil"? Once you become aware of the verbal manipulation, it loses power over you, but before you are conscious of it, it will have, sometimes subtle, effects on how you think.

In a place like reddit, if the mob decides you are a conspiracy theorist then your post will only be seen by those who dredge the comments that are below threshold.

And that's great that you're aware of this, which brings me back to my initial statements. If someone disagrees with conspiracy theorists, ganging up on them will not change their minds, it will actually have the opposite effect. We can't stoop to their level; just because they do it to us doesn't mean we should do it to them. That's childish. If we want to educate people, we can't treat them like crap and expect them to see things our way.

Oh well, just call them whatever you want and keep that state of perpetual passive aggressiveness running.

I don't know, it would be interesting to see conspiracy deniers dismissed as crazies.

"Oh yes I used to feel that way too myself before I looked into [evidence], have you heard about that?"

In all actuality, I didn't want to speak of 9/11 ever after the event. I was meeting with military personnel the day before and was to meet them on the 11th to decide if I'd join. I decided not, since I was just confused for days. I wanted to ignore it all. It took some time before I looked into it. I assumed everything was under control and that we would get to the bottom of it. It wasn't until I realized in 2006 that they hadn't really done shit that I started reading anything. I used to ignore the conspiracy talks. I wouldn't bash them, but I definitely didn't have time for them.

I honestly can't tell you at this point what persuaded me to seek more. I really think it was basically the lack of willingness from the bush admin to actually look into it and be honest.

You're supposed to kill 'em with kindness. I wouldn't call anyone who doesn't see it my way a derogatory term in any sense of the world.

Meanwhile millions of brown people die because people like them have a psychological barrier and refuse to admit that their country just might be "the bad guys".

But hey... keep being nice... and be sure to tell the families of all of the dead how polite and civil you are.

Da fuq? I think war and violence and hate rhetoric is for simple minded people. I don't know what your hate is all about, but I don't think it was warranted. I hope you learn to cope with your emotions and better the world around you.

I think war and violence and hate rhetoric is for simple minded people.

If you let people get away with their own simple-mindedness and don't show contempt and disgust for those who continue to allow these things to happen, then you are as guilty as they are of perpetuating the lies that lead to the deaths of real people.

Don't hide your weakness and unwillingness to impose a social cost on others behind a veil of civility.

While you remain civil and get no results, people die. There needs to be a social cost for those who are blinded by their own bias just as they would impose on you by calling you a "conspiracy theorist" as a pejorative to marginalize you.

But you can keep pretending that you are taking the high road... or that there is a high road at all.

Crying about being pwned doesn't solve the problem. Sure, ya need to take measures to eradicate the wicked, but you must not become what you despise.

The world has too many power mongers to topple is right away.

You can't label your enemy when your goal is to make them your ally. And I'm not talking about the wicked, I'm talking about those who aren't "conspiracy theorists"

Honestly I fucking hate labels.

Don't label labels as labels; just regard them as simplistic verbal placeholders employed by those too superficial or lazy to pay attention to actual reality.

Or i could regard them as the inception of "just another insult"

teabaggers libtards conspiratards republitards libertardians conspiracy theorists coincidence theorists

It doesn't matter how clever you make an insult, its still just an insult at the end of the day.

On a more serious note, the dark powers that carried out 911 are very likely still in place. Perhaps they are disappointed that military adventures in the mid-East have not worked out so well but they are as eager as ever to give billions of taxpayer dollars to their defense contractor friends. If you aren't worried about another 911, you aren't thinking. I have read websites that suggest a briefcase nuke is the next horror of choice.

Could you link to these sites if you still have them? Would love to read, thanks :)

I am not sure things in the middle east are not working out very well for them.

I think things are going better than expected. The neighbors are being systematically destroyed all for the creation of a greater Zion.

It would be nice to have more progress on the Iran front, but they are very valuable as a boogey man so I guess it is good either way.

You need to draw a line to convict them of crossing a line - just like we did to Iraq.

I have read websites that suggest a briefcase nuke is the next horror of choice.

That story has been going around for years. As I remember it, the Soviet Union developed and built some breifcase nukes in the 1970s. By the time the Soviet Union collapsed, most of the devices were unable to be accounted for. I remember it being mentioned in an article about the general breakdown of Russian nuclear security thanks to the economic problems of the 90s.

Mental shortcuts, they do the thinking so you don't have to.

What do you think words are? They're simply labels for things and phenomena we experience in this world, allowing us to communicate with other people. Some have become thought-terminating cliches, turning people's minds off to any real critical thought. These can be problematic, or we can understand the psychology behind them and try to "culture jam" the program they have written.

Who cares about labels, in this case it's just karma.

NLP makes labels relevant and way more threatening than they were.

I favor "reality denier". But I agree, use their weapons and techniques against them.

Right back at ya!

who blindly accepts a mainstream narrative without research or consideration.

As opposed to the ones who blindly accept what a subreddit or some random YouTuber with a few dozen subscriber tells them?

No offense, but I rarely see original research here. All I see are talking points parroted from prominent and totally random bloggers and YouTubers. A lot of times I can even track where a poster's particular beliefs are sourced from.

Psycothic is a better term to use, it refers to an abnormal condition of the mind described as involving a "loss of contact with reality".

I'm not a conspiracy theorist I'm a public information analyst.

Yeah, a theorist implies that you're putting forth your own theories and independent research and significant investigation into them like a theoretical physicist would. I don't think I've done the necessary work to earn that title.

Public information analyst... yeah, I think I've looked into enough publicly available stuff and spouted my opinion on it to call myself that. "Analyst" doesn't necessarily require that someone has to make 10+ page reports on everything, I think brief analysis can work, too, so long as you understand the material.

What does one call themselves when they're just getting started in the field, though? Or they have a passing interest in the subject? A dabbler? What sort of dabbler?

And I'm not a pervert, I'm a holistic gynecologist.

I've always used Coincidence Theorist

People who sneer about "truthers", I like to call "liars" since what's the opposite of a truther?

I like it, I also like "coincidence theorist".

I use this one regularly, works great, especially if you replace "conspiracy theorist" with conspiracy researcher :)

Coincidence theorists vs conspiracy researchers is actually pretty accurate most if the time I've found

Why would I want to insult someone for having a different point of view than me?

It's not like they punched me, in which case I might call them a jerk. What are they doing which I don't like, disagreeing with me? If I think a particular rock is blue, and they think it's red, should I call them a rock denialist? Nah. Either I'd try explaining my viewpoint, find some evidence that they can look over on their own time to maybe change their viewpoint, or find something else to do. Or (and I know this isn't a popular option) I might ask why they think the rock is red.

I use evidence denier with a hint of cognitive disonance

Treason Proponents.

Domestic Terrorists

I like "Truth Deniers" better.

I'll just stick with "assholes" thanks.

Then, they recently coined the term "denier" for those who do not accept official stories (climate change denier)

Not exactly. "9/11 denier" is not a thing, because although conspiracy theorists believe all sort of stupid shit about 9/11, they don't deny it happened. The term "denier" is applied to people who don't believe in a very real event, like climate change or the holocaust.

Keep using "Official Story" red herring too. I believe planes hit the two towers. I'm an "Official Story" shill, right?

This stupidity just subverts any relevant discussion of 9/11. Why do so many of you buy into it? Naming conventions? Wording? The folly of fools.

Actually, it is not folly. The word conspiracy is used by the teevee to ridicule theories that often turn out to be true.

if you blindy accept the mainstream narrative for sept. 11, or boston bombing then you are a conspiracy believer, or 'faither'.

do you believe 19 saudis plotted in secret to sneak attack US? 2 brothers plotted in secret to blow up a marathon? both are demonstrably false.

Yeah, a theorist implies that you're putting forth your own theories and independent research and significant investigation into them like a theoretical physicist would. I don't think I've done the necessary work to earn that title.

Public information analyst... yeah, I think I've looked into enough publicly available stuff and spouted my opinion on it to call myself that. "Analyst" doesn't necessarily require that someone has to make 10+ page reports on everything, I think brief analysis can work, too, so long as you understand the material.

What does one call themselves when they're just getting started in the field, though? Or they have a passing interest in the subject? A dabbler? What sort of dabbler?

And I'm not a pervert, I'm a holistic gynecologist.