MySpace


Matt Kirshen



Last Updated: 11/18/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Status: In a Relationship
Country: UK
Signup Date: 5/18/2006

Who Gives Kudos:


Monday, August 03, 2009 
I've recently found myself involved in various arguments with conspiracy theorists. These are notoriously difficult to win, or even politely leave, since you are bound by your foolish reliance on facts and reason, whereas they have the undeniably powerful weapon of having a loud voice and having had one thing occur to them once.


My old tactic for dealing with this was to attempt to rationalise:


♦ If they were to do that, that would mean a HUGE number of people sworn to secrecy. If just one of them out of thousands were to talk, it would fail.

♦ It's financially absurd: it would cost them far more to do it than they'd make by it;

♦ Why would the government do this in secret when they openly admit to far worse things?

etc.

But none of these arguments work, when you're faced with someone who responds to every point with, "That's what they WANT you to believe!"


I hit a new low, trying and failing to point out the flaw in a Canadian friend of a friend's argument that the governments are controlling you through chemicals in the air, but if you want to avoid it.... "Always breathe out more than you breathe in". No matter how much it was explained that this was impossible - you'd deflate for starters - he was having none of it. "No way, man. You can do it with yoga."

So no more. No more rational argument, facts or reasons. My new tactic is to fight conspiracy theories with even crazier counter-conspiracy theories of my own. I invite you to join me.

I'm starting with one that has had arguably one of the most directly damaging effects on the health of real people:


Conspiracy: Drugs companies are pushing dangerous vaccines on people to make money even though they know it causes autism/fevers/duck-like symptoms.


This was one of the favourites of our Canadian friend, and one that comes up time and time again - interestingly, with different diseases, vaccines and side-effects depending on where in the world you are and when it happened.

It's all very well showing carefully researched scientific documents proving they are relatively safe* and pointing out that these theories have resulted in certain illnesses making huge come-backs. No one likes facts. Facts are duller than hedgehogs, statistically the dullest animal (fact).


My new argument:


Counter conspiracy: The companies know this is a myth, but the second everyone has the vaccine, the disease becomes extinct. This is the last thing they want. No one makes any money from smallpox any more. What if Measles, TB, Whooping Cough etc all went the same way? At the moment they get money from the vaccines AND from treating the disease. The second the illness is wiped out, that's their profits through the floor.

The people behind the anti-vaccine message ARE the drugs companies themselves. If they keep uptake at about 60%, leaving 40% carrying and perpetuating the diseases, they can carry on selling them forever. Better still, the MMR scare makes parents buy three separate vaccines rather than the cheaper 3 in 1. Bonus! If you want to really stop the evil big-pharm, then buy their products and tell everyone to do the same. It's the last thing they want.


Ok, it may technically be a lie, but as far as conspiracies go, at this one may save lives rather than cost them. Plus there's little more fun than being able to out-crazy a crazy.

Spread the word. And I invite you to add a counter-conspiracy theory of your own.


*I say relatively safe - this is another point that gets missed, and one I shall no longer bother trying to argue. Of course some people have bad reactions to vaccines as they do with any medicine (autism isn't one of them). The test isn't whether they're 100% safe but how much safer they are than none at all. Everyone has heard some story about how this guy totally had a car crash, and he got thrown clear of the wreckage but if he had his seatbelt on he would have died. Yes - but that's one case out of millions, as opposed to the thousands who are saved by wearing it. In relative terms, not wearing the belt is stupid.
Jade ♥
Jade Kulick

 

How bout this...

1. The drug company pays Dane Cook to be a royal douche bag that makes 10% of people suicidal and prescribed anti-depressants. 40% are "laughing" which causes asthma, a lucrative illness full of “necessary” medicines...while the other 50% join in the "fun" by drinking, causing liver damage which leads to hospital time which costs muchodolleros. And Octomom sucks.

Or.

2. Old people are suggested to get flu shots. Well, that kills them and the population decreases. The goal isn’t to make money, it’s to kill everyone starting with the elderly. Old people are easy targets because they are old and nobody cares about them. This would make life-expectancy shorter, and the leaders of drug companies who know the shots are killing them would live longer and be famous. Dude, it’s a popularity/ego trip.

I had coffee.

Sorry, Dane Cook.



Btdubs, I like how you spell favourites. ;)

 

 

 


 
Posted by Jade ♥ on Tuesday, August 04, 2009 - 1:27 AM
[Reply to this
Jade ♥
Jade Kulick

 
Why the fuck is the font so big?
 
Posted by Jade ♥ on Tuesday, August 04, 2009 - 1:27 AM
[Reply to this
Lily

 
I like your thinking... the only problem is that there are some conspiracy theorists out there that already actually believe your counterpoint as a fact. I've heard people say they don't donate money to causes like curing cancer or AIDS because of that very reason. Sometimes there's no reasoning with the crazies of the world
 
Posted by Lily on Wednesday, August 05, 2009 - 1:22 AM
[Reply to this
Phil Johnson - Life Extractor
Phil Johnson

 
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm working on that "breathing out more than in" thing.  Just for fun.

 
Posted by Phil Johnson - Life Extractor on Wednesday, August 05, 2009 - 5:08 AM
[Reply to this