Conspiracy theories often originate from social groups and are promoted by those who feel highly identified with their pseudoscientific community. These theories have led to highly visible behavior, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, where conspiracy theorists exploited the provisional nature of scientific consensus and the realities of how science is conducted. This book examines pseudoscience from various perspectives, including case studies, analysis, and personal accounts.
Conspiration theories can have real damage if they affect matters of health and disease. They often incorporate elements from pseudoscience, such as employing scientific terms or referring to data, research, sources, and more. Researchers have shown that artificial intelligence (AI) could be a valuable tool in the fight against conspiracy theories.
The COVID-19 infodemic has included conspiracy theories about the origins of the virus, which can have severe effects on public health or environmental policies. Epistemically suspect beliefs, such as endorsement of conspiracy theories or pseudoscientific claims, are widespread even among highly educated individuals. More general conspiracist thinking and worldviews also contribute to science rejection, such as climate change, vaccination, and other topics.
It is easy to dismiss conspiracy theories as unhinged beliefs held by a small number of paranoid idiots, but this underestimates them. A nationwide US survey found that around 10% of respondents agreed with conspiracy claims that the Earth is flat, NASA faked the Moon landings, or COVID-19. Understanding the psychology of a conspiracy theorist is crucial in recognizing and combating these harmful beliefs.
📹 Why we are all attracted to conspiracy theories
Recently,QAnon, Covid-19and5Gtheories have gained traction and criticism while less controversial conspiracies like thefaked …
📹 Why You Can Never Argue with Conspiracy Theorists | Argument Clinic | WIRED
Alex Jones is not the only guy making a career out of conspiracy theories. They are everywhere on the internet and here’s why …
It is an energy puzzle. The brain consumes the biggest part of energy of the whole body. It seeks efficiency in order to not waste energy. It is easier or it takes less energy to hold on to an idea/vision you have than to replace it with a new one or a correction. So the brain fights this overwriting of a previous idea: energy (survival for the brain) is more important than truth in this way. That makes it very difficult to change your mind about something. That is the reason why people are holding on to information they heard first, even if it was a lie or if we know better by know.
In September 2016, The Guardian reported that there had been a huge “spike” in hate-crimes against Eastern Europeans in Britain since the Brexit vote, and highlighted the death of Arkadiusz Jóźwik, who died in a late-night fight in Harlow, Essex, which they called a “suspected hate-crime”. They repeated these allegations in a series of articles. But when the case eventually came to court, the verdict was that Jóźwik’s death was the result of a drunken brawl, not a “hate crime attack”. The source of the figures about a so-called “spike in hate-crime” was just a single police statement taking figures from a website called True Vision where anonymous reports can be made without proof. Many complaints are of a petty nature e.g. verbal disagreement. The police noted that over a four-day period, the previous figure of 54 had risen to 85. So 31 allegations made without proof were reported as a national “spike” in hate-crime.
Notable employees Paris Lees and Jane Francesca Fae, two of The Guardian’s transgender journalists, both have unusual backgrounds. Lees has served prison time for the crime of violent assault, while Fae, whose previous name was John Ozimek, campaigned for ten years for the legalisation of extreme and hard-core pornography. He is currently suspended from the UK Labour Party for repeatedly inciting violent attacks on women.
👉 Nguyện cho tất cả chúng sinh được an vui hạnh phúc, hay tạo hạnh lành. 👉 Nguyện cho tất cả chúng sinh được thoát ly mọi đau khổ phiền não, ngưng tạo điều ác. 👉 Nguyện cho tất cả chúng sinh đều có tâm hoan hỷ, không oán ghét lẫn nhau. 👉 Nguyện cho tất cả chúng sinh đều có tâm bình đẳng, không thương người này ghét người kia…
WOR It makes a difference when an example is mentioned to corroborate a concept which is here the importance of associating Philosophy with Universal Values. After using W0RDS for decades, an evolution, for better or for worse, is tangible.When intending to use this system the first time on a personal mode all I had to do was purchase a Compaq disk and the programming could be easily achieved off line: this was followed by a capacity to use this mean of expression for years to follow! Things are very different today and difficulties have been faced to do the same thing with no other option but to do it on line: this goes further now with a repeated request, pop ups requiring to get connected. The directions towards expanding from personal to global interfere in comparison with an unchallenged usage of what was taking place previously. Slowly but surely, our individuality is being challenged rather than being promoted. Science can get used to try to match the detailing of Universal Values demonstrate by DNA science: the will to take over detailing is not associated by the kind of balance we find in nature, but by a will associated with technological dominance. It has become a major challenge to face this issue with awareness before letting go of principles sustaining and promoting non-scientific Humanities.
Today in 2018, the Guardian is regarded as a far-left liberal paper, as well as being pro-abortion on demand, anti-Bush and anti-American, pro-Obama and critical of Tony Blair’s support for the war in Iraq (and of New Labour in general). The newspaper’s reputation as a platform for liberal and left-wing opinions has led to the use of the epithets “Guardian reader” and “Guardianista” for people holding such views, or as a negative stereotype of such people as middle class, and politically correct.
In May 2019, the newspaper announced it would use the terms “climate emergency, crisis or breakdown” rather than “climate change,” and that it would describe “climate skeptics” as “climate deniers.” It has also adopted extreme pro-abortion language, including using the terms “anti-abortion” and “pro-choice” rather than “pro-life” and “pro-abortion,” and it has banned the term “Heartbeat Bill.”
I’m not. I LIKE some stuff that I hear. But I KNOW that it is bunkum! I LOOK UP everything that I find very interesting and SEE what is said by those who actually KNOW! I’ve been disappointed a few times, but came out smarter! When ANY non-expert in ANY field says something, EVEN if it might be something that I like, I LOOK IT UP! In the CORRECT places!
The dark-haired chick with that screechy whining voice was fingernails on a blackboard. I think it is called misophonia. I am sure the producer conspired for us in this article to fast-forward past here torturous noise. I had to do some yoga to untwist my intestines. Smart and pretty – but subtitles with a music overlay would be better.