You asked a question about a conspiracy theory, and then followed it up with a disclaimer that you don’t necessarily believe in the conspiracy theory. I pointed out that this is typical conspiracy theorist behavior.
Yes and the implication was clear. What you said in the context of the thread was clearly meant to be dismissive. The obvious implication was that anyone who mentions a conspiracy theory is a kook. I’m just taking the logic one step further. It follows from that, that none of the theories ever turn out to be real. Because only idiots ever believe them.
Oh? Then tell me, what’s your actual argument? What was the intended implication of the comment you made? Truly curious.
You asked a question about a conspiracy theory, and then followed it up with a disclaimer that you don’t necessarily believe in the conspiracy theory. I pointed out that this is typical conspiracy theorist behavior.
Yes and the implication was clear. What you said in the context of the thread was clearly meant to be dismissive. The obvious implication was that anyone who mentions a conspiracy theory is a kook. I’m just taking the logic one step further. It follows from that, that none of the theories ever turn out to be real. Because only idiots ever believe them.
Don’t patronize me. We both know what you meant.
I could be convinced of a conspiracy if you gave me some good evidence. Questions aren’t evidence, though.