The Coronavirus Conspiracies
Debating alternative thinkers
This section is dedicated to highlighting the various debates I've had with alternative-thinkers.
The purpose of this isn't to ridicule anyone, or dunk on people who don't understand what they're talking about, but more to highlight the consistency in the conspiracy mentality. These people use the same tactics, the same logical fallacies, and follow the same three-phase structure of confident, defensive, and the forced stalemat I write about on this site.
Emanual commented on an Uber post for "no mask no ride". He doesn't think the virus exists, says masks wouldn't work if it did exist, and exhibits no understanding of what he's talking. More people enter the conversation, but they all stop replying once I make it easily visible at why they're not following the best evidence.
Ma comments on the same Uber post, but makes a very strange argument. How far gone he was combined with the evident language barrier, I decided not to engage further.
This one was a very testing debate. Paul was arguing that the science and evidence does not support wearing masks. He came equipped with a website assembled by an anti-vaxx chiroprachtor who openly admitted to not being a scientist.
Three people in total argued against masks. Get ready for lots of laughing rections the bad arguments
A real name? This one comes from a fitness personality. Her page is public so there's no reason to conceal the name. Honestly, I didn't comment very well at all. Using your learned understanding brain over the stupid monkey brain is hard - I still struggle with it sometimes.
She echoed the hydroxychloraquine conspiracy video from the demon sperm lady that Trump retweeted. She looked at this site, listened to my "narrated by" section, commented, then blocked me. Nice.
This one's not even a debate, but I couldn't help but notice the angry reaction. I couldn't resist making a meme out of this one.
A nice quick one. She makes a claim, doesn't back it up, and doesn't cite a source.
This demonstrates the mentality of an alternative-thinker.
Matthew thinks masks don't work. He claims to have read scientific papers, but then immediately reveals he hasn't.
When provided with evidence to the contrary, he doesn't respond.
A nice quick one. He makes a claim, doesn't back it up, and doesn't cite a source. He exites the conversation before it began, and refused to comment further.
However, this also resulted in a positive exchange at the bottom. This thread is for Neofytos.
I'm unsure whether he is legit a pigeon or mislead, but the quick in-and-out with an immediate "do some research" makes me lean towards pigeon. No explanation would be good enough for this person - he is hard set in the Gates x Fauci x Democrats conspiracy.
This is another example of reasoning a belief over providing actual evidence. It all boils down to proving an opinion, instead of forming an opinion from evidence.
This lady shared a website that looks very convincing. It's a sleak and well-designed website. It happens to be rated as low accuracy pseudoscience by Media bias fact check. I picked apart the references in the article and later investigated the author. It's a poor attempt at a scientific article written by someone out to prove a point.
Dean thought he was representing statistics and data faithfully but in actual fact was wildly butchering his own sources and not properly reading them. When confronted by his mishandling of statistics, he attempted to bunnyhop onto a talking-point on worldwide fatalities. He then stopped responding.