The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free! What do you think of Conspiracy theories?in General

Erfisflat

@wake
"Since you do not have the slightest training in science why would you try to use a paper that means entirely NOT what you apparently think it does?"

No idea what you're going on about. I just posted an article on tinfoil hats out of entertainment. What paper mean NOT what I think it does? Also, what makes you think I have no "training" in science? Was there a boot camp that i missed?

"I must admit - at first I thought that you were merely ignorant, unschooled or simply without any education. But now I see that you are the result of one of those sects that denies all normal education to their children."

It's a good thing I could care less what you or anyone here thinks about me. In your case, I'd challenge the thinking part. What do you call normal education? I mean, you openly criticize me for having a large vocabulary. I have a kid in school and I do not deny her an education. I simply offer scientific evidence against some of it, like heliocentrism, and allow them to make their own minds up. She's in 5th grade, makes As and Bs, and knows she isn't a monkey on a spinning ball, and that dinosaurs, as she was taught, is complete bullsh!t. I'm sure you've got some grands going through the indoctrination facilities. Are you mad because I challenge my kid to ask questions about what they're told?

"It is a sickness where you cannot possibly accept that the Earth is not the center of the universe. A follower of Zetetic Astronomy in which reality started in the mind of a lunatic and infected entire groups."

I mean you've called me a lunatic too, so, once again, opinions are like a$$holes... I cannot possibly accept a theory that has no evidence. That's called pseudoscience. I know these words are a bit large for you to understand...

"That it is somehow difficult for a man firing what is for all intents and purposes a fully automatic weapon down into a dense crowd to kill and injure a great many.

What? What is somewhat difficult?
Videos show only about 30 shot fired. That means he averaged two kills per bullet, and he wasn't a gun man, not counting the some 500 injured. You started talking about flat earth, then jumped to the Vegas shooting. Demonstrating you have very little knowledge of the evidence for or against either. 
 
"After all only 7,500 soldiers were killed on Hacksaw Ridge on Okinawa under full cover and with covering fire for every motion. But a dense crowd in direct sight would be bullet proof."

I don't see what this has to do with anything.

"Let me tell you just how much I admire how well your parents succeeded in twisting your mind so that you haven't the vaguest recognician of reality.

It appears yours did a fine job. Opinions. No evidence, just pure ignorant opinions. Try to construct a coherent argument next time, include some evidence and try to stay away from the fallacies, it makes you look really stupid.

https://www.geek.com/geek-cetera/the-11-most-irritating-logical-fallacies-1636224/

Caution: there are multiple words with more than 5 letters in there. Using a dictionary is advisable.

"Give them my regards if you ever venture out of their basement."

Will do.

Mike

There are “Conspiracy theories” that could make one hungry. Take Taco Bell’s illuminati commercial for example.

Erfisflat

Mike said:

There are “Conspiracy theories” that could make one hungry. Take Taco Bell’s illuminati commercial for example.

Count the sixes in taco bell's logo.

Fredsnephew

Erfisflat said:

joecavalry said:

I don't believe that conspiracy theories, or most of them are true. 

They are created with little evidence to back the claims.

The flat earth has hundreds of proofs.

The "Flat Earth" has hundreds of disproofs.
The primary one being the fact that the Earth has been visibly recorded as being spherical.

Erfisflat

Fredsnephew said:

Erfisflat said:

joecavalry said:

I don't believe that conspiracy theories, or most of them are true. 

They are created with little evidence to back the claims.

The flat earth has hundreds of proofs.

The "Flat Earth" has hundreds of disproofs.
The primary one being the fact that the Earth has been visibly recorded as being spherical.

A 200 foot gorilla has been visibly recorded kidnapping white chicks and climbing the empire state building too.

Grenache

All conspiracy theories are created by reverse vampires to distract us from the reality they are quietly feeding on us all day long.  Therefore they are bad.

Evidence

Grenache said:

All conspiracy theories are created by reverse vampires to distract us from the reality they are quietly feeding on us all day long.  Therefore they are bad.

Any comment on the conspirators? Or you don't believe that there is any conspiracy going on in the world, especially a Word Wide one, right?

Are you one of those that believes John F. Kennedy got killed by a June bug in his convertible?

LibertineStates

Conspiracy Theories have worn out their welcome a long time ago. Every single time someone is killed with a firearm in this world, these morons are the first to shout 'conspiracy', like nothing is ever real to these people. Literally everything they come across nowadays is satanic as well. Remember Obama and the fly? That was some of the most stupid bullcrap I have ever had to listen to in my life.

"A fly flew past Obama, he is now Satan. Oh my god the horror!"

And a lot of it is clearly just trying to get ad revenue by mentioning celebrities and accusing them of being a part of the Illuminati and peddling a religion through conspiracy theories. The Vigilant Christian is well known for this disgrace of a tactic. And of course, they're not above exploiting tragedies like Sandy Hook and 9/11 for some of that extra ad revenue on YouTube either.

Every time I think of conspiracy theories, I think of scam artists, idiots, and general lowlifes.

Erfisflat

Funny, when I think of conspiracy theories, I can't help but to think of all the poor imbecilic sheep that watch too much TV. Oh and admitted conspiracies like MKULTRA.

Fredsnephew

@LibertineStates ;

To much angst.

You shouldn't make unqualified judgements and statements concerning people you have never met or do not know.

There's nothing wrong with a bit of conspiracy theory, especially if it makes one stop and think and stops one jumping to inaccurate conclusions.

LibertineStates

@Fredsnephew Except we're talking about modern-day conspiracy theories, which basically amount to:

"X Celebrity made a political statement I didn't like, X Celebrity is now part of the Illuminati."

or

"You dared to disagree with me, you are now a sheep."

The @Erfisflat post pretty much proved my point about conspiracy theorists peddling religion. He couldn't resist the temptation to get defensive about his precious little religion.

Erfisflat

Definition of conspiracy:

a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.

To think that the people that believe there are conspiracies are "scam artists, idiots, and general lowlifes" is just full blown retarded and lackin% any common sense. Here are a list of admitted conspiracies.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ever-growing-list-of-admitted-false-flag-attacks/5578473

When conspiracy theorists were claiming that the government was listening and recording everyone's phone calls, everyone thought we were crazy....

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/18681-nsa-whistleblower-binney-nsa-recording-80-of-u-s-phone-calls

Then of course, there is the admitted MKULtra experiments. 

Pogue

@Erfisflat
https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/18681-nsa-whistleblower-binney-nsa-recording-80-of-u-s-phone-calls only uses Binney as a source who in turn has no other sources. So your source is not credible. 

For globalresearch.ca, "Whenever someone makes a remarkable claim and cites GlobalResearch, they are almost certainly wrong.

Do not confuse Globalresearch with globalnews.ca, which is a perfectly ordinary news site." https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch

Erfisflat

And Tim Clemente, Edward snowden, Thomas drake...

Evidence

Erfisflat said:

Funny, when I think of conspiracy theories, I can't help but to think of all the poor imbecilic sheep that watch too much TV. Oh and admitted conspiracies like MKULTRA.

How could anyone say that video was a fallacy? Are you looking at the passing letters that spell out the subliminal message, or just the final message? It's clear as day, thank you @Erfisflat

Erfisflat

Evidence said:

Erfisflat said:

Funny, when I think of conspiracy theories, I can't help but to think of all the poor imbecilic sheep that watch too much TV. Oh and admitted conspiracies like MKULTRA.

How could anyone say that video was a fallacy? Are you looking at the passing letters that spell out the subliminal message, or just the final message? It's clear as day, thank you @Erfisflat

They don't have a clue about MKULtra. blissfully ignorant. 

Pogue

Erfisflat said:

They don't have a clue about MKULtra. blissfully ignorant. 

MK-Ultra was a top-secret CIA project in which the agency conducted hundreds of clandestine experiments—sometimes on unwitting U.S. citizens—to assess the potential use of LSD and other drugs for mind control, information gathering and psychological torture. Though Project MK-Ultra lasted from 1953 until about 1973, details of the illicit program didn’t become public until 1975, during a congressional investigation into widespread illegal CIA activities within the United States and around the world. Do you think we are getting mind controlled? 

http://www.history.com/topics/history-of-mk-ultra

Erfisflat

Pogue said:

Erfisflat said:

They don't have a clue about MKULtra. blissfully ignorant. 

MK-Ultra was a top-secret CIA project in which the agency conducted hundreds of clandestine experiments—sometimes on unwitting U.S. citizens—to assess the potential use of LSD and other drugs for mind control, information gathering and psychological torture. Though Project MK-Ultra lasted from 1953 until about 1973, details of the illicit program didn’t become public until 1975, during a congressional investigation into widespread illegal CIA activities within the United States and around the world. Do you think we are getting mind controlled? 

http://www.history.com/topics/history-of-mk-ultra

nice, you can Google something! Do you think they discontinued the activities in the 70's? as Wikipedia claims? 

SilverishGoldNova

Evidence said:

Erfisflat said:

Funny, when I think of conspiracy theories, I can't help but to think of all the poor imbecilic sheep that watch too much TV. Oh and admitted conspiracies like MKULTRA.

How could anyone say that video was a fallacy? Are you looking at the passing letters that spell out the subliminal message, or just the final message? It's clear as day, thank you @Erfisflat

Because, as I have said multiple times, they flag all opposing opinions as a fallacy

Pogue

Erfisflat said:

Pogue said:

Erfisflat said:

They don't have a clue about MKULtra. blissfully ignorant. 

MK-Ultra was a top-secret CIA project in which the agency conducted hundreds of clandestine experiments—sometimes on unwitting U.S. citizens—to assess the potential use of LSD and other drugs for mind control, information gathering and psychological torture. Though Project MK-Ultra lasted from 1953 until about 1973, details of the illicit program didn’t become public until 1975, during a congressional investigation into widespread illegal CIA activities within the United States and around the world. Do you think we are getting mind controlled? 

http://www.history.com/topics/history-of-mk-ultra

nice, you can Google something! Do you think they discontinued the activities in the 70's? as Wikipedia claims? 

Nice, I did not use Wikipedia! If they wanted to control people, why was it released? They were only using psychedelic drugs.  

SilverishGoldNova

@Evidence @Erfisflat So as we can see they don't have the slightest clue about what they're talking about, I mean, the fact that they had to flag everything as a fallacy in the Fe debate was enough.

Pogue

@SilverishGoldNova
Not everything. Only the fallacies. 

SilverishGoldNova

Pogue said:

@SilverishGoldNova
Not everything. Only the fallacies. 

Oh yes, the dare disagreeing with you fallacy. How could I forget that? Please learn the meaning of words and phrases before using them in conversations, K? Ok back into the mute corner you go buddy.

Erfisflat

Pogue said:

Erfisflat said:

Pogue said:

Erfisflat said:

They don't have a clue about MKULtra. blissfully ignorant. 

MK-Ultra was a top-secret CIA project in which the agency conducted hundreds of clandestine experiments—sometimes on unwitting U.S. citizens—to assess the potential use of LSD and other drugs for mind control, information gathering and psychological torture. Though Project MK-Ultra lasted from 1953 until about 1973, details of the illicit program didn’t become public until 1975, during a congressional investigation into widespread illegal CIA activities within the United States and around the world. Do you think we are getting mind controlled? 

http://www.history.com/topics/history-of-mk-ultra

nice, you can Google something! Do you think they discontinued the activities in the 70's? as Wikipedia claims? 

Nice, I did not use Wikipedia! If they wanted to control people, why was it released? They were only using psychedelic drugs.  

I don't see how they could use psychedelic drugs through the TV. They were ordered to release the documents, but the program was mainly for mind control, so there is no "If they wanted to control people". They only admitted to using psychedelic drugs, the program is mostly involving the boob tube, as the evidence shows.

Erfisflat

Pogue said:

@SilverishGoldNova
Not everything. Only the fallacies. 

Then you'll be happy to answer @evidence question above.

Gooberry

@SilverishGoldNova

We.
repeatedly.
explained.
why.
your.
posts.
were.
fallacies.
Stop.
lying.

Erfisflat

SilverishGoldNova said:

@Evidence @Erfisflat So as we can see they don't have the slightest clue about what they're talking about, I mean, the fact that they had to flag everything as a fallacy in the Fe debate was enough.

it pisses  the globetards off when fe makes a valid point, often, when pressed about which fallacy, they turn a blind eye.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/flat-earth-debate-leads-to-fire-police-call-1.3634692

Gooberry

Erfisflat said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

@Evidence @Erfisflat So as we can see they don't have the slightest clue about what they're talking about, I mean, the fact that they had to flag everything as a fallacy in the Fe debate was enough.

it pisses  the globetards off when fe makes a valid point, often, when pressed about which fallacy, they turn a blind eye.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/flat-earth-debate-leads-to-fire-police-call-1.3634692

You have never once, at any point, asked
what fallacy you were committing when I marked a post as a fallacy, and not received a response.

stop.
lying.

Erfisflat

still got you on ignore, and I know that was ad hom.

SilverishGoldNova

Erfisflat said:

still got you on ignore, and I know that was ad hom.

Lets just, keep Goober and friends muted. Let them mark all they want. 

someone234

The aliens laugh at your inability to transcend the third dimension.

But laugh with them at myself I shall for they enjoy the ways of the human spirit and will help me in this reality from time to time.

Erfisflat

@Evidence, was thinking about a giants thing, you up for it?

http://eden-saga.com/en/mythology-giants-gargantua-archeology-giant-fossils-cyclops-giant-footsteps.html

Evidence

Erfisflat said:

@Evidence, was thinking about a giants thing, you up for it?

http://eden-saga.com/en/mythology-giants-gargantua-archeology-giant-fossils-cyclops-giant-footsteps.html

@Erfisflat
Sorry for the late response, but I was deep into researching, cross referencing, weeding, then pondering on all the new videos coming out on Giants?
You want to talk about it here, or open a new thread? This one is "what do we think of conspiracies", we should approach this on a more positive note, don't you think?
Oh, and remember when I just landed on Flat Earth, since then I have been saving videos into my "favorites", and have been going through them lately. I cant believe how many of them have been removed!?

Erfisflat

Evidence said:

Erfisflat said:

@Evidence, was thinking about a giants thing, you up for it?

http://eden-saga.com/en/mythology-giants-gargantua-archeology-giant-fossils-cyclops-giant-footsteps.html

@Erfisflat
Sorry for the late response, but I was deep into researching, cross referencing, weeding, then pondering on all the new videos coming out on Giants?
You want to talk about it here, or open a new thread? This one is "what do we think of conspiracies", we should approach this on a more positive note, don't you think?
Oh, and remember when I just landed on Flat Earth, since then I have been saving videos into my "favorites", and have been going through them lately. I cant believe how many of them have been removed!?

Yes, definitely a new thread. I'm aware of how many flat earth videos have been deleted, a lot of them offering some simple proof that I posted here, deleted only days after I posted. Do you remember Brian Mullin, the flat earth engineer? It's like he disappeared!

MayCaesar

@agsr

I think they can be fun to consider and make for a great fiction material - but they should not be called “theories”. A theory is something that aims to provide an explanation for the observable data by means of a self-consistent model; if there is no data to explain, then there is no theory.

By its own design, a conspiracy theory labels the existing explanations as unsatisfactory (why?) and substitutes it with an explanation that is impossible to support with observable data (everything is hidden by the conspirationists, hence there is no data available to test the theory). A theory that cannot be tested for consistency with the observable world is a form of logical fallacy, illustrated well by the Russell’s Teapot mental experiment, and should not be called a theory as such.

Suppose I say, “The Moon is a large Swiss cheese”, and elaborate that all scientific evidence of the contrary is fabricated. By the very design of my claim, any factual counter-argument can be met with the objection: “The data you are referring to has been fabricated”. This is consistent with my claim, but it is also a recursion, since I am essentially defending my theory by referring to itself. My claim has no attachment to the world I’m living in and, hence, is not a theory at all.

The purpose of a theory is to explain how the world around us functions. But if your evidence is based not on the data obtained from studying that world and instead on the claim itself, then how does it explain anything? It is just an abstract mental construct looped on itself, nothing more.

Sonofason

@agsr
Why are you asking this question?  Who are you working for?

In all honestly I find conspiracy theories very entertaining.
Some of them are quite intriguing.
Others I find completely annoying.  
And I suppose that some of them are very real.

That being said, I honestly don't care one way or the other about theories of conspiracy.  However, If I were to be convinced that some theory of a conspiracy were true, then I would no longer consider it a conspiracy theory, but in fact a true conspiracy.  For example, it could be said that there exists a theory suggesting that democrats are conspiring to impeach our current president.  Well, I have seen sufficient evidence to know that in fact that many democrats are conspiring to impeach our president.  I don't care much for theories, but I do care a lot about evidence and truth, because that is what motivates me.

Erfisflat

@Evidence Do you think that Adam and Eve may have been Giants?

someone234

@Erfisflat Eve is mother Earth and Adam is mankind itself. Eve was not made second, this is a lie.

Erfisflat

someone234 said:

@Erfisflat Eve is mother Earth and Adam is mankind itself. Eve was not made second, this is a lie.

Wait, so God pulled a ribcage from mother Earth and made Adam? I realize your thinking doesn't align precisely with the Bibles, but I'm very open minded, so ellaborate, if you will.

Evidence

someone234 said:

@Erfisflat Eve is mother Earth and Adam is mankind itself. Eve was not made second, this is a lie.

And they both came from a big-bang, right? Don't forget their son "gravity", the whole theory hangs on him.

Evidence

Erfisflat said:

@Evidence Do you think that Adam and Eve may have been Giants?

@Erfisflat This picture looks like it's made up of 3 different mountains, maybe photoshopped together? What do you think?

I don't know, but from I gather of Noah, if he was able to lift off the top of the Ark once they hit land, he must have been huge.
Also, from what I understand in the Bible, there is three reductions of years that man can live, from about 1,000, to 120, then now to 70 or so. So maybe it's the result of all the extra oxygen gone from the atmosphere because of the trees dying out in the flood?

Erfisflat

@evidence,  that is La Bella Durmiente in Peru. It really looks like a woman, so much that it is nicknamed "Sleeping Beauty".

Evidence

Erfisflat said:

@evidence,  that is La Bella Durmiente in Peru. It really looks like a woman, so much that it is nicknamed "Sleeping Beauty".

@Erfisflat
Wow, if they would have all run against the spin of the Globe Earth, they could have stopped it, lol. Maybe that's why the Globers are trying to deny these?
I asked  because of so many deceptions and cons that are popping up out there, I had to check. Same with my wife's islands in the Philippines, called "man/boy Island" and "woman/girl Island". She said there are more, another is called; "pregnant woman Island", .. so the mountains are speaking up pretty loudly I would say!

Mr_Bombastic

@agsr

It's conspiracy Fact! And this thread is nothing but a TRANSPARENT  attempt to discredit conspiracy theorists...err...fact finders. You should be ashamed of yourself. Oh crap! My tin hat just broke. BRB.

Erfisflat

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer

I think the guy above me meant tinfoil hat. Unless he is here in search of a heart...

Maybe @Mr_Bombastic should ask the wizard for a sense of humor?

Evidence

Erfisflat said:

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer

I think the guy above me meant tinfoil hat. Unless he is here in search of a heart...

Maybe @Mr_Bombastic should ask the wizard for a sense of humor?

@Erfisflat for them to actually believe that there are no conspiracies is funny to me!? Only we know they are not intentionally trying to be funny. Actually, the moon-landing conspiracies was a joke on us, .. a very expensive joke.

Or like the Mars Rover landing conspiracy, imagine charging every man, woman, child, infant and I bet even every aborted fetus in the entire U.S. $7 per person for a glimpse of a remote controlled truck going through our deserts without our permission? This is Mafia style robbery.

MayCaesar

There is this common misconception about critical thinking. Some people assume that critical thinking is characterized by disagreeing with the majority. Nothing could be further from the truth, however.

Critical thinking is characterized by the need to verify the argument based on the existing evidence before accepting its conclusion. For example, if someone tells me that women must wear hijabs, because Allah said so, I can reasonably ask, "Wait a minute... Why does Allah saying something oblige anyone to do anything?" Instead of just accepting the conclusion ("Women must wear hijabs"), I want to see if the presented argument supports that conclusion first, and if it does not, then I do not accept the conclusion.

On the other hand, conspiracy theorists do not act this way. Conspiracy theorists ask, "What if all the evidence is falsified and the truth is hidden from us?", then build a wild theory based on nothing but their imagination, and use that theory to answer the question with "yes". A conspiracy theory is a self-serving logical fallacy. It is not a product of critical thinking; it is a product of fallacious thinking. Further on, the person believing in a conspiracy theory uses the conclusion to justify the argument and not the other way around. That is the person already knows the conclusion and agrees with it, regardless of any evidence. This is the exact opposite of critical thinking. 

I have noticed a pattern long ago: the smarter a person thinks they are, the less smart they actually are. This is because the smarter one gets, in general, the clearer they see their intellectual flaws. Conspiracy theorists tend to believe themselves much smarter than the "sheeple", and the actual level of intelligence they demonstrate in debates tends to reflect the mentioned pattern.

Zombieguy1987

"The idea of Conspiracy Theories was created by clickbaity Youtubers, and "politicians" to gain views"- Zombieguy1987

All I have to say about them 

Erfisflat

MayCaesar said:

There is this common misconception about critical thinking. Some people assume that critical thinking is characterized by disagreeing with the majority. Nothing could be further from the truth, however.

Critical thinking is characterized by the need to verify the argument based on the existing evidence before accepting its conclusion. For example, if someone tells me that women must wear hijabs, because Allah said so, I can reasonably ask, "Wait a minute... Why does Allah saying something oblige anyone to do anything?" Instead of just accepting the conclusion ("Women must wear hijabs"), I want to see if the presented argument supports that conclusion first, and if it does not, then I do not accept the conclusion.

On the other hand, conspiracy theorists do not act this way. Conspiracy theorists ask, "What if all the evidence is falsified and the truth is hidden from us?", then build a wild theory based on nothing but their imagination, and use that theory to answer the question with "yes". A conspiracy theory is a self-serving logical fallacy. It is not a product of critical thinking; it is a product of fallacious thinking. Further on, the person believing in a conspiracy theory uses the conclusion to justify the argument and not the other way around. That is the person already knows the conclusion and agrees with it, regardless of any evidence. This is the exact opposite of critical thinking. 

I have noticed a pattern long ago: the smarter a person thinks they are, the less smart they actually are. This is because the smarter one gets, in general, the clearer they see their intellectual flaws. Conspiracy theorists tend to believe themselves much smarter than the "sheeple", and the actual level of intelligence they demonstrate in debates tends to reflect the mentioned pattern.

This must be why you haven't been back to any of our debates.

Evidence

MayCaesar said:

There is this common misconception about critical thinking. Some people assume that critical thinking is characterized by disagreeing with the majority. Nothing could be further from the truth, however.

Critical thinking is characterized by the need to verify the argument based on the existing evidence before accepting its conclusion. For example, if someone tells me that women must wear hijabs, because Allah said so, I can reasonably ask, "Wait a minute... Why does Allah saying something oblige anyone to do anything?" Instead of just accepting the conclusion ("Women must wear hijabs"), I want to see if the presented argument supports that conclusion first, and if it does not, then I do not accept the conclusion.

On the other hand, conspiracy theorists do not act this way. Conspiracy theorists ask, "What if all the evidence is falsified and the truth is hidden from us?", then build a wild theory based on nothing but their imagination, and use that theory to answer the question with "yes". A conspiracy theory is a self-serving logical fallacy. It is not a product of critical thinking; it is a product of fallacious thinking. Further on, the person believing in a conspiracy theory uses the conclusion to justify the argument and not the other way around. That is the person already knows the conclusion and agrees with it, regardless of any evidence. This is the exact opposite of critical thinking. 

I have noticed a pattern long ago: the smarter a person thinks they are, the less smart they actually are. This is because the smarter one gets, in general, the clearer they see their intellectual flaws. Conspiracy theorists tend to believe themselves much smarter than the "sheeple", and the actual level of intelligence they demonstrate in debates tends to reflect the mentioned pattern.

@MayCaesar You just explained why we need conspiracy theories; "Critical thinking". But some people assume that Conspiracy theories are characterized by disagreeing with the majority. Nothing could be further from the truth, because; conspiracy theories are characterized by critical thinking, the need to verify the argument based on the existing evidence before accepting its conclusion. For example, if someone tells us that "we landed on the moon", we can reasonably ask, "Wait a minute... Why should we believe some obviously fake film that looks like it was shot in a movie studio that claims we landed on the moon?"  Instead of just accepting the conclusion ("Yep, this film proves we landed on the moon"), We critical thinkers like @Erfisflat want to see if the presented argument supports that conclusion first, and if it does not, then we do not accept the conclusion, thus 'conspiracy theories are created'!

The sheeple can remain believing in the lies, but not us critical thinkers!

Thank you.
Flat Earthers United