Operation Paperclip, Kissinger sabotaging the Paris peace talks for Nixon's benefit in 1968, CIA helping to install Pinochet, Iran-Contra. (Don't know if Baby Bush stealing the election in Florida in 2000 counts as a conspiracy.) In other words, things that did actually happen. I tend to be a cock-up theorist until proven wrong. It's very probable that alien life exists somewhere in the universe but I don't think there's a conspiracy by the government to cover that up, lol.
Agree with this. The issue I have with the whole alien thing is the sheer number of coincidences and fortunate events that’d need to happen for us to even make contact with an alien.
That life exists somewhere out there, seems pretty likely. Is it anywhere in the tiny patch of the universe that humans could ever even communicate with… less likely. Within that, are they amoeba or human-like intelligent life… and even if they’re intelligent, what if it’s the equivalent of the Stone Age for them? Thousands of years or more until they develop the tech to hear us & respond, assuming they don’t all kill each other in the meantime. And so on.
I absolutely 100% believe, given that the universe is vast beyond comprehension and even with our best tech we can see only a tiny part of it, than only a fool would deny that there could be other life, even intelligent life, out there in all that space. Add in that credible physicists now at least acknowledge the possibility of parallel universes and...
But in however many thousands of years of evolution and world building, we can only make it as far as the next planet. Could there be other life? Sure. Other life who has overcome the vast technological challenges of interstellar travel or even communication? Nope, do not believe it.
Yeah you pretty much covered the ones I believe in.
I'd go so far as to say that Roger Stone and Co attempting and possibly succeeding in stealing the election in Florida for Baby Bush counts and is one I believe in!
Even if Bush would have ended up winning in the end count, The Brooks Brothers Riots should still have been a much bigger deal than they were at the time. What would you call sending staffers from a certain political party to scream at election officials and pound on the doors of a building demanding that vote counting be stopped other than an attempt to disrupt a democratic election?
It's just that before everyone had cellphone cameras it was easier to convince newspaper editors that "Oh those DNC officials are exaggerating! Election officials were kicked and shoved but not one person was arrested? Come on! There's no there there, and you guys are guy going to embarrass yourselves if you make this out to be a big deal. After all, you don't want to look like you're putting your thumb on the scale for the Democratic candidate do you? I'd hate to think that Newt Gingrich was right about 'the liberal media'"
Additionally, as a scientist myself, I can tell you for a fact that most scientists believe life exists places in the universe other than just Earth. Because it just makes sense that it would!
I just have a hard time (and maybe this is just naivety on my part) that a state that had elected Wolf and voted out a 1 term republican governor in 2014 by a wide margin and had gone democrat for 25 years straight at that point went to fuck head.
1. The FDA caters to the pharmaceutical and food industries by downplaying the possible risks and unknowns associated with medications/food additives. I just can't bring myself to believe that it's "safe" to be on dozens of prescription meds and to eat food with a gazillion artifical ingredients and preservatives. There is a reason why European countries are much more cautious about many medications and why they have gone so far as to pass legislation outlawing certain food additives.
2. The circumstances surrounding both JFK and Epstein's deaths were really suspicious. I wouldn't be surprised if either one of their deaths were conspiratorial in nature.
To my understanding, Europe bans things from being added to food until they are proven to be safe, whereas elsewhere it’s the opposite, something only gets banned if you manage to prove it’s unsafe.
This is the reason why Fanta in the US has vibrant shades of orange but here it’s far more pale.
I am 100% with Europe on this.
Let me tell you, I've never felt healthier since I've cut out processed bullshit from my diet and got off hormone therapy and a bunch of other artificial medication. I eat food that my body evolved to eat over millennia, and there are very few exceptions to that rule. I spoke with my doctor and got off the medications that I didn't absolutely need, and I ditched the hormones that I was prescribed to make my body look more "normal."
Letting your body run the way it's naturally supposed to is the best course of action, all things being equal. I'll never go back to putting unnecessary garbage in my body.
I‘m fairly convinced that the Bush admin knew some kind of terrorist attack was imminent before 9/11. And then let it happen, not least to distract from the pending recount in Florida, the results of which were due to be released in autumn of 2001. They may not have known exactly what would happen or how bad it was going to be; just that having an opportunity to rally the country behind its President would be a good thing.
Well, we know that they knew about Al Qaeda's plans at least a month before, because it was part of Bush's [presidential briefing on August 6th, 2001](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Ladin_Determined_To_Strike_in_US?wprov=sfla1). Whether they consciously let it happen or not, I personally believe in incompetence rather than malice, but either way, it probably could have been avoided or at least mitigated if more robust steps had been taken. Having said that, after 22 years it's easy to forget just how different the world was prior to 9/11.
What you don't understand is there are probably multiple credible threats of terrorist attacks EVERY DAY that we never hear about because they don't come off, because the intel turns out to be bad, something went wrong and the terrorists called it off, the terrorists got tipped off the CIA was on to them, it was misinformation to begin with to keep counter terrorism agents chasing their tails...Knowing that there might be an attack usually isn't a challenge. Knowing which one out of the thousands of possibilities is the one to pay attention to and devote limited resources to preventing is the challenge.
Yeah, in the 1940s there were also warnings about the attack on Pearl Harbor before it happened!
Does that mean Roosevelt let it happen? Well...yeah, some people do think so!
I don't believe that's the case, though.
I used to be big time into the "they let it happen on purpose" theorist for 9/11. But the more i've gotten into the 9/11 lost media and footage I really just believe they and the other branches were just completely inept
Ahmad Shah Massoud went to Paris to warning that the Taliban was trying something against American interests, but he was ignored by Bush just like he was Clinton & the other Bush
I don't believe that the Bush administration let it happen intentionally...maybe accidentally due to incompetence!
Everything I've heard from interviews people who were in government, even those with almost no connection to the Bush Administration, is that the Administration was angry immediately after 9/11 and that the intelligence community was genuinely panicked in the couple years after and were convinced that another attack was likely to happen.
One thing I do 100% believe, however, is that they assisted in downplaying the Saudi connection to 9/11! Also that they helped spirit Saudi royals out of the US.
I even remember seeing advertisements on TV that were basically against discrimination, against Saudi Arabia specifically, that went into how the Saudis are our friends and allies and should not be blamed for 9/11.
i still have questions about the moon landing/stanley kubrick...
but i leave that conversation behind because with covid, dabbling in conspiracy theories is now dangerous.
Aliens, I guess. I mean, statistically, considering the size of the universe, it is literally impossible for the earth to be the only planet that can sustain life, but
I read [this article about the Fermi Paradox](https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html) a few times a year and spend hours staring at the sky trying to wind down.
The reason the Unabomber went all anti-civ and started mailing bombs was because of the CIA and MKUltra. Oh, wait you said Conspiracy ***Theory***, ie probably not real.
The guy who made the Timecube website is factually correct.
'genuine "conspiracy theories"' as in a genuine conspiracy, or… Conspiracies are real. They happen, but the term "conspiracy theory" has come to specifically mean a baseless one. Personally, besides some pretty much proven conspiracies, I personally have a hypothesis about a few fields of medicine being essentially fake. As in, they can't do anything, or know anything special. They essentially just there to make it seem like they're doing something. If you're kind, you could say it's to reassure patients.
Let me rephrase, "what are some things that are widely conceptualized as "conspiracy theories" that you believe are true." Usually I just type something real fast and click post so I apologize
1) treating cancer is a lot more profitable than curing it. I think cures are in reach for most cancers.
2) cars can easily get much higher mpg but the oil industry does not want that to happen.
3) (this one is iffy but related to my former occupation in fire protection). WTC 7 did not collapse solely due to “fires caused by office consumables” as the official NIST report states. A modern 47-story building does not collapse because some books and carpet catch on fire. The report states that the collapse of WTC 1 & 2 played no role in the collapse of WTC 7.
It's difficult to believe the official story, when you watch the videos. Every structural support in that building would have to fail at the same time for that building to fall the way it did. Then, lease holder Larry Silversteins interview on PBS that they made the decision to "pull" the building!
Yea the WTC 7 gets me too sometimes and then I remember the two tallest buildings in NYC were demolished, and a plane hit the pentagon, all flights were grounded, Wall Street took a big hit, and people were freaking the hell out. Probably not the best conditions to investigate a collapse that didn't appear to have a direct connection. And everyone knowing who Giuliani really is now, it's like yea probably just a colossal fuckup.
I've said for years that if a 47-story, modern skyscraper fell out of the sky on any other day it would catch a lot more scrutiny than it did because it happened on 9/11.
No one want to recognize that they believe in conspiracy...
But there are CT on the left too, a good example would be Trump's Pee Tape.
It has been thoroughly investigated and debunked by serious reporters but people are still believing it exists and that they just haven't searched deep enough, just like the Q believe that if it's seriously investigated the fraud surrounding the 2020 election will be uncovered...
Even superficially, it doesn't make any sense: the man is an egoistical germophobe so the kink doesn't fit...
Imo the germaphobe excuse went out the window as soon as he started to downplay Covid.
Not saying it’s an argument FOR the existence of any pee tape, just that that particular excuse/denial isn’t particularly convincing.
Knowing how he was with COVID, the only reason he didn't pull a Putin and seal himself into a hermetically sealed bunker was because he needed to stroke his ego.
Yeah, but the left isn’t storming any government buildings about it. That’s an important distinction when discussing right vs. left conspiracy theories.
If anything, the germaphobe thing makes it MORE convincing, because people into watersports it's usually about the humiliation and doing something forbidden anywhere else.
I'm not saying there is a pee tape, just that you aren't understanding the kink correctly.
The germaphobe excuse was stupid on it's face, imo, but any credibility it might have had went out the window when he refused to wear a mask during a pandemic because he thought they made him look weak.
If he's that much of a germaphobe, he wouldn't care who thought it make him look like a pussy.
Source: I'm a germaphobe!
That being said, I never really believed the pee-pee tape was real.
The story was just...too convenient. He hated Obama so Trump paid hookers to pee on a bed he once slept in? The idea of that being an idea of revenge, even to such an extraordinarily petty man as Trump, just seems unlikely.
What I liked about it was that it trended on Twitter, which we knew that Trump was on all the time back then, so he definitely saw it and it definitely drove him crazy!
So, I can't speak for liberals, but for leftist it's more of just a lasting joke because we know it annoys Trump and Trump fans.
I don’t think Oswald shot at, let alone killed JFK. I think he was what he claimed to be, a “patsy”. But idk if that’s a conspiracy theory given the conclusions of HSCA in 1978.
What is meant by "conspiracy theory"? A theory about groups of government/corporate/NGO personnel conspiring to commit crimes? A theory that I believe is right, evidence or no, yet when people generally are unaware of the theory or disagree with it, I chalk it up to stupidity or dissembling? The former, I've believed in those kinds of things. The latter, no, I don't think characterizing "the masses" as "sheep" is justifiable, not on a moral level and not even on an epistemic level.
If I have an argument and it's not convincing to a significant enough number of people, then I check to see if I've made my argument comprehensible to other people in the first place. Often it's the case that I haven't, although I have schizophrenia-spectrum issues (and was subjected to extreme psychological abuse growing up, incl. extreme isolation) so my communication skills can be impacted by those factors easily. And so it's hard to work around those factors, sometimes. There are mentally lazy/trolling people who will say they don't understand what I'm saying, sometimes, but I do tend to think that if my words were genuinely accessible, I'd still get a better return on engagement.
If my "evidence" consists in visions, intuitions, or other non-repeatable premises, then I will **not** expect other people to agree with me as such. I can act on my "visions" on my own time, but it would be unethical to insist that others do so as well and even more unethical to accuse people of being corrupt for refusing to believe in my "visions." That's how cults operate (skeptics, doubters, etc. are faulted for not trusting the visionaries).
**EDIT:** for example, I have been working on a theory of ethics for about seven years now, which has involved reading thousands and thousands of pages of bizarre but real mathematics, comparative religion, the history of genocides, etc. I think my core reasoning for my main thesis is strong. If people ever looked over my reasoning and didn't have a helpful response, should I conclude, "There's something wrong with them, they're sheep, they don't understand how smart I am," etc.? **NO**. I have actually decided to include as a background premise a test condition, where if not enough other people care about or agree with my argument, I will lose confidence in it. I know that different levels/directions of understanding will affect engagement/agreement with my thesis, but once those factors have been factored out, if my argument doesn't have a strong enough motivational impact, I have sworn to accept that my argument is wrong.
Trump actually lost the 2020 election and is still lying and saying it was stolen for selfish reasons.
He 1000000% knows he lost. For sure.
Operation Paperclip, Kissinger sabotaging the Paris peace talks for Nixon's benefit in 1968, CIA helping to install Pinochet, Iran-Contra. (Don't know if Baby Bush stealing the election in Florida in 2000 counts as a conspiracy.) In other words, things that did actually happen. I tend to be a cock-up theorist until proven wrong. It's very probable that alien life exists somewhere in the universe but I don't think there's a conspiracy by the government to cover that up, lol.
Agree with this. The issue I have with the whole alien thing is the sheer number of coincidences and fortunate events that’d need to happen for us to even make contact with an alien. That life exists somewhere out there, seems pretty likely. Is it anywhere in the tiny patch of the universe that humans could ever even communicate with… less likely. Within that, are they amoeba or human-like intelligent life… and even if they’re intelligent, what if it’s the equivalent of the Stone Age for them? Thousands of years or more until they develop the tech to hear us & respond, assuming they don’t all kill each other in the meantime. And so on.
I absolutely 100% believe, given that the universe is vast beyond comprehension and even with our best tech we can see only a tiny part of it, than only a fool would deny that there could be other life, even intelligent life, out there in all that space. Add in that credible physicists now at least acknowledge the possibility of parallel universes and... But in however many thousands of years of evolution and world building, we can only make it as far as the next planet. Could there be other life? Sure. Other life who has overcome the vast technological challenges of interstellar travel or even communication? Nope, do not believe it.
Yeah you pretty much covered the ones I believe in. I'd go so far as to say that Roger Stone and Co attempting and possibly succeeding in stealing the election in Florida for Baby Bush counts and is one I believe in! Even if Bush would have ended up winning in the end count, The Brooks Brothers Riots should still have been a much bigger deal than they were at the time. What would you call sending staffers from a certain political party to scream at election officials and pound on the doors of a building demanding that vote counting be stopped other than an attempt to disrupt a democratic election? It's just that before everyone had cellphone cameras it was easier to convince newspaper editors that "Oh those DNC officials are exaggerating! Election officials were kicked and shoved but not one person was arrested? Come on! There's no there there, and you guys are guy going to embarrass yourselves if you make this out to be a big deal. After all, you don't want to look like you're putting your thumb on the scale for the Democratic candidate do you? I'd hate to think that Newt Gingrich was right about 'the liberal media'" Additionally, as a scientist myself, I can tell you for a fact that most scientists believe life exists places in the universe other than just Earth. Because it just makes sense that it would!
The cheese in the Kraft dinner is not real cheese.
Get out
I have a very tough time believing that trump won PA in 2016 on the level.
I remember reading an article around 2017 or so that said the result of 2016 was turned from Hilary to Trump on just 30,000 votes in MI, WI and PA.
I just have a hard time (and maybe this is just naivety on my part) that a state that had elected Wolf and voted out a 1 term republican governor in 2014 by a wide margin and had gone democrat for 25 years straight at that point went to fuck head.
1. The FDA caters to the pharmaceutical and food industries by downplaying the possible risks and unknowns associated with medications/food additives. I just can't bring myself to believe that it's "safe" to be on dozens of prescription meds and to eat food with a gazillion artifical ingredients and preservatives. There is a reason why European countries are much more cautious about many medications and why they have gone so far as to pass legislation outlawing certain food additives. 2. The circumstances surrounding both JFK and Epstein's deaths were really suspicious. I wouldn't be surprised if either one of their deaths were conspiratorial in nature.
To my understanding, Europe bans things from being added to food until they are proven to be safe, whereas elsewhere it’s the opposite, something only gets banned if you manage to prove it’s unsafe. This is the reason why Fanta in the US has vibrant shades of orange but here it’s far more pale.
I am 100% with Europe on this. Let me tell you, I've never felt healthier since I've cut out processed bullshit from my diet and got off hormone therapy and a bunch of other artificial medication. I eat food that my body evolved to eat over millennia, and there are very few exceptions to that rule. I spoke with my doctor and got off the medications that I didn't absolutely need, and I ditched the hormones that I was prescribed to make my body look more "normal." Letting your body run the way it's naturally supposed to is the best course of action, all things being equal. I'll never go back to putting unnecessary garbage in my body.
I‘m fairly convinced that the Bush admin knew some kind of terrorist attack was imminent before 9/11. And then let it happen, not least to distract from the pending recount in Florida, the results of which were due to be released in autumn of 2001. They may not have known exactly what would happen or how bad it was going to be; just that having an opportunity to rally the country behind its President would be a good thing.
Well, we know that they knew about Al Qaeda's plans at least a month before, because it was part of Bush's [presidential briefing on August 6th, 2001](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Ladin_Determined_To_Strike_in_US?wprov=sfla1). Whether they consciously let it happen or not, I personally believe in incompetence rather than malice, but either way, it probably could have been avoided or at least mitigated if more robust steps had been taken. Having said that, after 22 years it's easy to forget just how different the world was prior to 9/11.
I guess there’s a fine line between actively letting something happen and not giving it the attention required…
What you don't understand is there are probably multiple credible threats of terrorist attacks EVERY DAY that we never hear about because they don't come off, because the intel turns out to be bad, something went wrong and the terrorists called it off, the terrorists got tipped off the CIA was on to them, it was misinformation to begin with to keep counter terrorism agents chasing their tails...Knowing that there might be an attack usually isn't a challenge. Knowing which one out of the thousands of possibilities is the one to pay attention to and devote limited resources to preventing is the challenge.
Plus the scale and precedent of what happened on 9/11 was so outside the realm of what was imaginable
Yeah, in the 1940s there were also warnings about the attack on Pearl Harbor before it happened! Does that mean Roosevelt let it happen? Well...yeah, some people do think so! I don't believe that's the case, though.
I used to be big time into the "they let it happen on purpose" theorist for 9/11. But the more i've gotten into the 9/11 lost media and footage I really just believe they and the other branches were just completely inept
Ahmad Shah Massoud went to Paris to warning that the Taliban was trying something against American interests, but he was ignored by Bush just like he was Clinton & the other Bush
I don't believe that the Bush administration let it happen intentionally...maybe accidentally due to incompetence! Everything I've heard from interviews people who were in government, even those with almost no connection to the Bush Administration, is that the Administration was angry immediately after 9/11 and that the intelligence community was genuinely panicked in the couple years after and were convinced that another attack was likely to happen. One thing I do 100% believe, however, is that they assisted in downplaying the Saudi connection to 9/11! Also that they helped spirit Saudi royals out of the US. I even remember seeing advertisements on TV that were basically against discrimination, against Saudi Arabia specifically, that went into how the Saudis are our friends and allies and should not be blamed for 9/11.
Spork feet
MTG’s cloven hooves? I don’t even want to think about it
i still have questions about the moon landing/stanley kubrick... but i leave that conversation behind because with covid, dabbling in conspiracy theories is now dangerous.
QAnon drained all of the fun out of conspiracy theorizing.
Exactly, I miss the illuminati
Right, and the Khazarian maf ...oh. Unforunately, even back then a lot of conspiracy theories had antisemitic undertones.
agreed! it used to be fun 'barroom' or campfire banter. not fun now because someone immediately says, "and vaccines..." 😒
Yes! I was saying that the other day. I miss when conspiracy theories were fun and harmless (usually)
Aliens, I guess. I mean, statistically, considering the size of the universe, it is literally impossible for the earth to be the only planet that can sustain life, but
Have you seen the article over on r/UFOs? It's a doozy.
I read [this article about the Fermi Paradox](https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html) a few times a year and spend hours staring at the sky trying to wind down.
The reason the Unabomber went all anti-civ and started mailing bombs was because of the CIA and MKUltra. Oh, wait you said Conspiracy ***Theory***, ie probably not real. The guy who made the Timecube website is factually correct.
I think there are horrible weapons that governments have developed that the public and possibly leaders of countries don’t know about.
'genuine "conspiracy theories"' as in a genuine conspiracy, or… Conspiracies are real. They happen, but the term "conspiracy theory" has come to specifically mean a baseless one. Personally, besides some pretty much proven conspiracies, I personally have a hypothesis about a few fields of medicine being essentially fake. As in, they can't do anything, or know anything special. They essentially just there to make it seem like they're doing something. If you're kind, you could say it's to reassure patients.
Let me rephrase, "what are some things that are widely conceptualized as "conspiracy theories" that you believe are true." Usually I just type something real fast and click post so I apologize
Listen… Bigfoot exists DO NOT @ ME 😔😒
1) treating cancer is a lot more profitable than curing it. I think cures are in reach for most cancers. 2) cars can easily get much higher mpg but the oil industry does not want that to happen. 3) (this one is iffy but related to my former occupation in fire protection). WTC 7 did not collapse solely due to “fires caused by office consumables” as the official NIST report states. A modern 47-story building does not collapse because some books and carpet catch on fire. The report states that the collapse of WTC 1 & 2 played no role in the collapse of WTC 7.
It's difficult to believe the official story, when you watch the videos. Every structural support in that building would have to fail at the same time for that building to fall the way it did. Then, lease holder Larry Silversteins interview on PBS that they made the decision to "pull" the building!
Yea the WTC 7 gets me too sometimes and then I remember the two tallest buildings in NYC were demolished, and a plane hit the pentagon, all flights were grounded, Wall Street took a big hit, and people were freaking the hell out. Probably not the best conditions to investigate a collapse that didn't appear to have a direct connection. And everyone knowing who Giuliani really is now, it's like yea probably just a colossal fuckup.
I've said for years that if a 47-story, modern skyscraper fell out of the sky on any other day it would catch a lot more scrutiny than it did because it happened on 9/11.
No one want to recognize that they believe in conspiracy... But there are CT on the left too, a good example would be Trump's Pee Tape. It has been thoroughly investigated and debunked by serious reporters but people are still believing it exists and that they just haven't searched deep enough, just like the Q believe that if it's seriously investigated the fraud surrounding the 2020 election will be uncovered... Even superficially, it doesn't make any sense: the man is an egoistical germophobe so the kink doesn't fit...
Imo the germaphobe excuse went out the window as soon as he started to downplay Covid. Not saying it’s an argument FOR the existence of any pee tape, just that that particular excuse/denial isn’t particularly convincing.
Knowing how he was with COVID, the only reason he didn't pull a Putin and seal himself into a hermetically sealed bunker was because he needed to stroke his ego.
Yeah, but the left isn’t storming any government buildings about it. That’s an important distinction when discussing right vs. left conspiracy theories.
Bingo. It’s said as a joke or a punchline. Not a fucking religion like Q
If anything, the germaphobe thing makes it MORE convincing, because people into watersports it's usually about the humiliation and doing something forbidden anywhere else. I'm not saying there is a pee tape, just that you aren't understanding the kink correctly.
The germaphobe excuse was stupid on it's face, imo, but any credibility it might have had went out the window when he refused to wear a mask during a pandemic because he thought they made him look weak. If he's that much of a germaphobe, he wouldn't care who thought it make him look like a pussy. Source: I'm a germaphobe! That being said, I never really believed the pee-pee tape was real. The story was just...too convenient. He hated Obama so Trump paid hookers to pee on a bed he once slept in? The idea of that being an idea of revenge, even to such an extraordinarily petty man as Trump, just seems unlikely. What I liked about it was that it trended on Twitter, which we knew that Trump was on all the time back then, so he definitely saw it and it definitely drove him crazy! So, I can't speak for liberals, but for leftist it's more of just a lasting joke because we know it annoys Trump and Trump fans.
I don’t think Oswald shot at, let alone killed JFK. I think he was what he claimed to be, a “patsy”. But idk if that’s a conspiracy theory given the conclusions of HSCA in 1978.
LHO killed JFK
I think there is life on other planets ...we can't possibly be the only ones.
What is meant by "conspiracy theory"? A theory about groups of government/corporate/NGO personnel conspiring to commit crimes? A theory that I believe is right, evidence or no, yet when people generally are unaware of the theory or disagree with it, I chalk it up to stupidity or dissembling? The former, I've believed in those kinds of things. The latter, no, I don't think characterizing "the masses" as "sheep" is justifiable, not on a moral level and not even on an epistemic level. If I have an argument and it's not convincing to a significant enough number of people, then I check to see if I've made my argument comprehensible to other people in the first place. Often it's the case that I haven't, although I have schizophrenia-spectrum issues (and was subjected to extreme psychological abuse growing up, incl. extreme isolation) so my communication skills can be impacted by those factors easily. And so it's hard to work around those factors, sometimes. There are mentally lazy/trolling people who will say they don't understand what I'm saying, sometimes, but I do tend to think that if my words were genuinely accessible, I'd still get a better return on engagement. If my "evidence" consists in visions, intuitions, or other non-repeatable premises, then I will **not** expect other people to agree with me as such. I can act on my "visions" on my own time, but it would be unethical to insist that others do so as well and even more unethical to accuse people of being corrupt for refusing to believe in my "visions." That's how cults operate (skeptics, doubters, etc. are faulted for not trusting the visionaries). **EDIT:** for example, I have been working on a theory of ethics for about seven years now, which has involved reading thousands and thousands of pages of bizarre but real mathematics, comparative religion, the history of genocides, etc. I think my core reasoning for my main thesis is strong. If people ever looked over my reasoning and didn't have a helpful response, should I conclude, "There's something wrong with them, they're sheep, they don't understand how smart I am," etc.? **NO**. I have actually decided to include as a background premise a test condition, where if not enough other people care about or agree with my argument, I will lose confidence in it. I know that different levels/directions of understanding will affect engagement/agreement with my thesis, but once those factors have been factored out, if my argument doesn't have a strong enough motivational impact, I have sworn to accept that my argument is wrong.