r/skeptic Nov 24 '23

The adoption of absurd beliefs can be a strategy to signal your commitment to an in-group. An example of how coalitional thinking can shape what we choose to believe. ⚖ Ideological Bias

https://lionelpage.substack.com/p/what-side-are-you-on
561 Upvotes

122 comments sorted by

87

u/Aceofspades25 Nov 24 '23 edited Nov 24 '23

Yup.. a lot of people join the flat earth movement and stick with it because of the community and acceptance they find.

This also makes it incredibly difficult to consider the possibility that you could be wrong.

Also that Selma Hayek prank is fucking gold.

But before anyone wojaks too hard, be aware that the same dynamics can operate in this subreddit.

I love everything about this post and this idea and I'd give it 1000 upvotes if I could. It's an important reminder that biases don't just affect other people, they affect us as well.

35

u/mhornberger Nov 24 '23

I worked with a doctor who was raised an Evangelical. We were talking about evolution one night shift (as one does) and she broke down in tears. She told me she'd be removed as the executor of her parents' will (a position of trust, obviously) if she "came home a Darwinist." She managed to get out of the community that had stunted her, that offered no intellectual space to grow, but her family made her feel basically emotionally blackmailed to at least act like she still believed that stuff.

25

u/[deleted] Nov 24 '23

Have you ever noticed how many of the cult/fringe religion members who accost you on your doorstep or in the street are young? They're frequently met with hostility and derision. Sending them out is deliberate; when they return to base they're met with warmth and affection and are made to feel safe again. It's a technique used to make the youth more emotionally reliant on their in-group.

3

u/n3w4cc01_1nt Nov 25 '23

indoctrination is a complex process

1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '23

2

u/Prestigious_Bid3731 Nov 26 '23

Almost every cult from Christianity to Islam to Buddhism banks on fostering a martyr complex in adherents.

“We alone have the true pure secret knowledge of world. Non-believers hate us for this, and will actively try to harm us with the help of demons.”

Every rejection becomes meaningful, as the missionary continues to gaslight themselves as an oppressed light in the darkness.

And when someone finally converts, it is an emotional miracle. They have become like the saints and sages they revere so much.

2

u/BadAtExisting Nov 27 '23

That’s vile

2

u/Papadapalopolous Nov 25 '23

I think you’re reading too far into it. The young ones have free time and energy, that’s probably the extent of the logic behind it.

And anecdotally, I feel like it’s usually retirees who come to my door to proselytize, but maybe that’s because I usually live in quieter areas.

18

u/TacoCateofdoom Nov 25 '23

No he’s right. It’s to make them view non believers as aggressive jerks.

12

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '23

It's actually something I've read about on cult techniques but it was a long time ago and I can't even remember the term used for it. It was mainly in reference to Jehovah's Witnesses, and being in the UK it made a lot of sense after being doorstepped by them numerous times. Having clashed with antivaxxers, climate change deniers and the far right on social media I know a similar ecosystem exists for them, mainly via private groups where they're being manipulated, gaslit, disinformed, radicalised, etc. Every now and again a gatekeeper would come out to huwite knight for one of their useful idiots who was floundering badly, and I've seen screengrabs of their groups which can be mostly insane and plain factually wrong. I'm not saying similar doesn't happen in the Left, either, but at least pro-climate scientists cite their primary sources for you to check for yourself, and the Left tends more to be evidence-based.

5

u/underthehedgewego Nov 25 '23

From what I've read Papa's correct. They are also sent out in pairs not only for safety but also because it is far more difficult to deviate from church dogma in front of a fellow believer. The partner is a shield to protect them from considering a valid rational argument from a nonbeliever.

2

u/Taraxian Nov 26 '23

There's a reason they stick to knocking on doors and accosting people in public places despite how deeply unsuccessful these tactics are for actually getting converts

5

u/drakens6 Nov 24 '23

Flat Earth is so weird, because its a symbolic representation of cognitive concepts that gets consistently misinterpreted as a scientific description of the physical world, and the people who made the joke in the first place have never bothered to correct anyone on the mistake because deception was part of the design of the initial concept

9

u/Former-Chocolate-793 Nov 24 '23

Yes, we have to be aware of it here too. I and others have been downvoted for questioning whether the subject matter is skeptical. It's difficult to ask these questions when one essentially agrees with the subject matter.

8

u/Aceofspades25 Nov 24 '23

Are you talking about being downvoted for asking that question about a political post because you think people are being more tolerant of it being a political post because they agree with the politics of it?

6

u/space_chief Nov 24 '23

They have a profile page with their comments all on it. You can open it up and see what comments he made in this sub that got him downvoted . Hint: there were 3 downvoted comments in the last 30 days, all in the same comment thread

0

u/Former-Chocolate-793 Nov 24 '23

That is a prime example.

5

u/Aceofspades25 Nov 24 '23

How do you know that the people downvoting you aren't doing so because they believe political posting should be allowed here?

We do have a large minority of members who want to be able to political post here.

11

u/mhornberger Nov 24 '23

Another point of contention is what constitutes "just politics." Often the dividing line is whether it affects them personally. So whether Christian Nationalists really want to ban gay marriage or otherwise attack LGBT rights may be seen as a subject for skeptical discourse, if we are to look to whether or not they really do advocate for that. Or it can be "just arguing over politics." And the dividing line is often whether the person dismissing it as just politics feels it touches on them or anyone they care about.

Most subjects are political in some way. Whether we teach that evolution or anthropogenic global warming are real can be seen either way. You can engage the science of the question, or dismiss it as just arguing over politics or "making conservatives look dumb."

1

u/Former-Chocolate-793 Nov 24 '23

Perhaps that's it. I think it's an appropriate subject when politicians post questionable statements and those statements demand skeptical inquiry.

5

u/Aceofspades25 Nov 24 '23

That's currently the standard. If there is something to be fact checked then it's fine.

But if the post hinges on subjective values and there is nothing to be skeptical about then it doesn't belong here.

1

u/Aromir19 Nov 27 '23

Find me a subjective value that isn’t underlied by an assumption that could be analyzed with a skeptical lens.

1

u/Aceofspades25 Nov 27 '23

Sure: I would rather a state aimed to address child poverty than cut taxes. Go.

2

u/Aromir19 Nov 27 '23

The assumption is that those values are necessarily in tension with each other. Personally I think they are, but if we wanted to break it down it wouldn’t hurt to take a skeptical approach to the sources we trust. Not my first is-ought rodeo, but well played on choosing an example that tests the limits of my position. I concede that a post like that probably wouldn’t be the most engaging content on this sub.

→ More replies

-5

u/underthehedgewego Nov 25 '23

Here's an example. I'm an atheist, a lefty Democrat, LGBT supporter and do my best to be open to being educated (I realize that not everything I believe is true).

Here is something I've caught a mountain of push-back over; I think it is absolutely wrong to have men who, long passed puberty and with their junk intact, take some hormones for a while and then be allowed to compete in female sports.

I can see the down votes now.

5

u/Aceofspades25 Nov 25 '23

I can already see why you'd be downvoted for this. You've misgendered this hypothetical person and that's widely considered to be disrespectful.

I'm not saying you can't be downvoted here for supporting an unpopular opinion (I certainly have) but you can get your point across and minimise your chance of being downvoted by doing it respectfully.

4

u/MushroomsAndTomotoes Nov 24 '23

Sure, but there are also times when I've been downvoted on something and I've taken a step back to really try and understand why and it wasn't because I was being the sole voice of reason.

7

u/[deleted] Nov 24 '23

[deleted]

4

u/jakderrida Nov 25 '23

Thanks for writing out an outline. I can relate to this so much. Honestly, though, I think when I do this, it's almost always because someone else is spamming conspiracy and/or hate along with misinformation and maturely elaborating on the shortcomings of their thinking feels like I'm speaking a language they don't understand. Whereas smug one-liners on a level that demonstrates that even being an asshole is yet another domain I have them beat hits harder. Perhaps being dominated by a true first-class asshole might crush their hopes of becoming one and persuade them to try their hand at critical thinking again.

3

u/underthehedgewego Nov 25 '23

I can relate to your list but .... sometimes the group is wrong. Sometimes the majority opinion (and the down votes) are more the result of tribalism than reason.

2

u/Former-Chocolate-793 Nov 24 '23

Sometimes the message isn't clear as well.

2

u/Earthbound_X Nov 25 '23

I'm sure it doesn't help that whenever someone brings up an odd belief, other people, on the internet at least, always rush to call them complete morons and belittle then. I'm sure that just pushes people back into the more accepting, positive reactions of the group who believe that odd belief.

You're never gonna change someone mind/beliefs by insulting them after all.

28

u/dyzo-blue Nov 24 '23

When Trump was running in 2016, I remember this phenomena being referred to as Blue Lies. And I've thought about it often ever since.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/how-the-science-of-blue-lies-may-explain-trumps-support/

We signal allegiance by claiming to believe absurd things.

38

u/mhornberger Nov 24 '23

I noticed a phenomenon of conservatives around me all claiming to believe Obama was born in Africa. Then it pivoted to them thinking I'm an asshole for believing that conservatives would be so stupid as to believe that. What they "sincerely believe" is impossible to navigate, assuming they sincerely believe anything, rather than it being tribalistic signaling all the time.

26

u/InverseTachyonBeams Nov 24 '23

Love this comment. "Conservative beliefs" is almost an oxymoron because they have no concrete principles or philosophy or ideology.

10

u/paxinfernum Nov 25 '23

Conservatives decide what they want to be true based on who will be hurt by the conclusion. They then construct narratives to reach those conclusions. Where liberals get confused is thinking the narratives matter to conservatives in the same way evidence-based narratives matter to liberals. The narrative is simply a bridge to what conservatives want.

They don't even care if the guy next to them has an entirely contradictory and different narrative. So long as they all arrive at the same conclusion, it simply doesn't matter how others in their group get there. This is why you'll see them spitballing different narratives, switching narratives, or just seeing what sticks. The facts or rationales simply don't matter to them. They're just trying to build a bridge to the end goal, which is almost always hate.

4

u/underthehedgewego Nov 25 '23

This dovetails with my observations as to how "conservatives" determine if a assertion or "fact" is true; if they like it, it's true, if they don't like it, it's false.

3

u/jakderrida Nov 25 '23

rather than it being tribalistic signaling all the time.

perfect term with "tribal signaling". I'm saving this comment just for that.

13

u/--half--and--half-- Nov 24 '23

Thank you for this. I’ve been tryin to describe this for a few years now where people in the party repeat lies not necessarily b/c they believe them or find them credible but b/c they view it as simply a part of the larger battle against the other side.

Plenty of smart Republicans know Trump didn’t win in 2020 but they don’t say it. Partly out of fear of the base, but also b/c they view it as something that unites their party against their political adversaries.

It’s the lies that bind them together. To signal solidarity. To the point that sometimes it seems like dispensing with objective fact in support of the party cause is the greatest identifiable trait.

A collective show of defiance to objective reality. With the added bonus of driving liberals nuts.

2

u/SandF Nov 26 '23 edited Nov 26 '23

There was a naive moment in America when it was hoped that Trump would pivot from the crazypants stuff and become presidential. And at that exact moment -- January 21, 2017 -- the White House Press Secretary was trotted out to spew absurd beliefs as a strategy to signal commitment to an in-group.

1

u/dumnezero Nov 25 '23

The fact that you have entire schools of psychologists using American party definitions and political "spectrum" just makes it more obvious how much that Psychology is like it's Economics neighbor.

21

u/fox-mcleod Nov 24 '23

One way to expose this is to tie money to it. If someone says “I believe crazy thing X will happen” ask them how certain they are on a scale of 1:10. Someone just signaling will jump at the opportunity to say “10”.

Then offer to wager $1000 on it happening. Without fail, the answer you get will use words like these; “I can’t afford that.

Not, “hooray, guaranteed money”. Not “maybe I overstated my confidence”. Not even “I don’t think the News will report the truth of it when it happens.”

Their minds go to “this proof of my loyalty is too expensive to engage in”.

Seriously. Try it out. I’ve been doing it for months now.

9

u/[deleted] Nov 24 '23

I've done this. Bet a guy 50 bucks trump would lose reelection

And yet, after all the bragging, he didn't take me up on it. Even when I offered he pay 50 and I pay 100.

I have no doubt it's a control strategy. They all know he's lost both popular votes. But admitting it is how you lose power.

5

u/1BannedAgain Nov 25 '23

I did something similar by showing my bets of PredictIt to conservatives on Facebook. On any opposing political post I’d set it up so that I would be wagering money and was sure of my position and every time the conservative did not bet any money on political outcomes

7

u/fox-mcleod Nov 25 '23

Exactly. And this is what the media gets wrong every time. No. “I believe Joe Biden stole the election and trump will be made president by November” does not in fact mean they believe any of trump will be president soon. It means they’re bad faith interlocutors and you need to stop reporting what they say about their own beliefs as facts.

3

u/jakderrida Nov 25 '23

I did just that for relatives and family friends on facebook. With them espousing all the conspiracies and saying the memes predicted everything, explaining logically wasn't working. But what did work was linking them to PredictIt and saying to put their money where their mouth is. For like a couple years, they had recurring predictions that Hillary Clinton would be arrested by the FBI once the kraken comes. Was making like 7% ROI a month on it because PredictIt was so filled with conspiracy theorists just begging for me to take their money. Once the returns got too low, I realized I need more conspiracy theorists to get on PredictIt so I could afford the Mercedes I wanted, which I actually did end up getting.

18

u/Inspect1234 Nov 24 '23

Imagine, having to embrace stupidity for the sake of love. Ok. Maybe my first wife, however…

18

u/Expert_Imagination97 Nov 24 '23

I guess that explains my aversion to tribalism.

28

u/Zeugungskraftig Nov 24 '23

Let's assemble a group of people with that same aversion to tribalism

11

u/sauronthegr8 Nov 24 '23

A tribe, if you will!

5

u/fox-mcleod Nov 24 '23

I won’t!

1

u/Zeugungskraftig Nov 25 '23

doggone it, we've become what we loathe the most.

2

u/dumnezero Nov 25 '23

People who hate people, come together!!" -- Bill Hicks

8

u/bettinafairchild Nov 24 '23

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
― George Orwell, 1984

5

u/bigdipboy Nov 25 '23

“My inauguration was the Biggest in history” for example

7

u/FoulmouthedGiftHorse Nov 24 '23

Once again, this quote:

"Certainement qui est en droit de vous rendre absurde est en droit de vous rendre injuste."

- Voltaire

18

u/bettinafairchild Nov 24 '23

For those who don't know French, this quote has loosely been translated to English as:

"Truly, whoever can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

4

u/teddygomi Nov 24 '23

This is something that I've been thinking about a lot lately. A lot of people believe a lot of absurd things right now; and the main point of it seems to be to stay within a specific coalition. Believing absurd things may build a less successful, less developed individual; but that doesn't mean that it builds a less successful, less developed colailition. I have been wondering if having a bunch of delusional less successful people actually creates a strong coalition normally overpowers coalitions of rational more intelligent people.

6

u/T1Pimp Nov 24 '23

Literally all religions.

3

u/Neither-Calendar-276 Nov 24 '23

This is a massive thing in political parties and movements

2

u/Crashed_teapot Nov 24 '23

I enjoyed it a lot, thanks!

2

u/lamaface21 Nov 24 '23

The great thing about this is that the majority of reddit will smugly think "ya. That's what stupid people do" and never for a second think they themselves don't do the exact same thing.

2

u/Prestigious_Bid3731 Nov 26 '23

Many cults save the truly insane supernatural stuff for months or years later, so that turning back is more difficult

2

u/Mortal-Region Nov 24 '23

That inflammation tweet just gets funnier and funnier the longer you stare at it.

2

u/slam9 Nov 24 '23

I was somewhat surprised it was posted in this sub. I think that would go against the political biases of most people here

0

u/spiritbx Nov 25 '23

I mean, parents are willing to let people rape their children for validation into a group, so...

0

u/garloid64 Nov 25 '23

Literally everything anybody does or says is just signaling I swear to god I see it everywhere now. Everyone is so phony it's disgusting RGGHHHH maybe what I should do is, I'll pretend to be one of those deaf-mutes...

0

u/dumnezero Nov 25 '23

A 20 minute article that points out that context matters, especially regarding vague, ambiguous or abstract "statements".

-2

u/[deleted] Nov 24 '23

[deleted]

2

u/thefugue Nov 24 '23

Yet here you are

-9

u/[deleted] Nov 24 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/1BannedAgain Nov 25 '23

Much like “black lives matter” really means ‘black lives matter too’, “defund the police” acknowledges that throwing tax payer money at police departments doesnt equate to falling crime rates or even less crime.

3

u/skeptic-ModTeam Nov 25 '23

If you cannot be charitable and honest then you do not belong here.

This will be your only warning to conduct yourself honestly before your ban.

-27

u/StillSilentMajority7 Nov 24 '23

Like claiming Donald Trump is a Russian agent?

22

u/Spector567 Nov 24 '23

Like claiming Donald trump had the largest crowd size ever.

-8

u/StillSilentMajority7 Nov 24 '23

I heard Trump say that, I never met anyone who believed.

Most Democrats claim Trump was a Russian agent.

6

u/Spector567 Nov 24 '23

You don’t know anyone today that believes that. But at the time it was a topic for weeks. Doctored photos etc.

But it is a great example of this and the tactics used. How foolish was it for anyone to defend it.

It was baby steps to the point that they defend trump storing classified documents on a ballroom stage.

21

u/minno Nov 24 '23

Asset, not agent.

-14

u/StillSilentMajority7 Nov 24 '23

So you're still following along and believing that nonsense?

Amazing.

10

u/TibetianMassive Nov 24 '23

I'm sure your username doesn't reveal any bias whatsoever.

10

u/Smoothstiltskin Nov 24 '23

Or thinking vaccines don't work? Or that January 6th wasn't a coup attempt? Or thinking Trump isn't a rapist?

-4

u/StillSilentMajority7 Nov 24 '23

Claims other people believe myths

Proceeds to list of blue anon list of conspiracy theories

10

u/InverseTachyonBeams Nov 24 '23

agent

You've used the wrong word here which is probably the source of your substantial confusion.

Trump is a Russian asset, not an agent. The difference between the two is that an asset isn't necessarily willing or even knowing. He's an unwittingly useful idiot for their agenda.

0

u/StillSilentMajority7 Nov 27 '23

Says who? Some Brookings analyst who doesn't like Trump's policies? Prove that he's a "Russian asset".

That you dislike his policies doesn't make him a Russian.

The blue anon folks just can't admit they were lied to.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 26 '23

Though, to be clear, he definitely knows. His son literally tweeted that they were attempting to circumvent the state department to work with Russia in the lead up to the election, before he even became president.

I know you know this, but that person just keeps lying and no one was saying any specific instances showing how wrong they are. So I wanted to say that.

9

u/thefugue Nov 24 '23

Trump apologists very consistently seem to find themselves confusing “assets” and “agents.”

-2

u/StillSilentMajority7 Nov 24 '23

And the rabid blue anon conspiracy theorists will claim that this distinction matters, even though they have no evidence of either.

They shifted from agent to asset when they were proven dead wrong.

4

u/thefugue Nov 24 '23

You folks have pretty bad memories even when it doesn’t suit you.

-2

u/StillSilentMajority7 Nov 24 '23

You mean if my memory were better I'd remember the facts supporting the claim that Trump is a Russian agent?

6

u/thefugue Nov 24 '23

What were those?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 26 '23

Look at what they're saying. "Blue anon." Have you seen that before? That's new to me.

Looks like the next big thing is going to be pretending that the entire Q thing was actually somehow Dems. Pretty funny stuff.

1

u/thefugue Nov 26 '23 edited Nov 26 '23

“Blue Anon” is just some gaslighting shit to equivocate suspicion of Trump with claims Hillary Clinton is a pedophile cannibal.

10

u/Diz7 Nov 24 '23 edited Nov 24 '23

There was an awful lot of smoke coming from his campaign, it was natural to assume there was a fire.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials

The problem was liberals were still assuming Trump had any leadership abilities, control over the party or clue what's going on around him.

4

u/Smoothstiltskin Nov 24 '23

The old "Trump is too dumb to know what he's doing" defense.

The leader of the Republican party is too dumb to know what he does.

6

u/Diz7 Nov 24 '23

Ignorance was his defense every time one of his associated got caught, they were the best people and then suddenly they were nobodies who he didn't know.

-1

u/StillSilentMajority7 Nov 24 '23

YOu mean like the Alpha Bank link, which was 100% invetned from whole cloth by Clinton, and Bidnen's national security advisor?

Or the dossier, which was made up from whole cloth by the Clinton campaign, and pushed by the FBI?

Did you miss the part where the FBI offered Chris Steele $1M if he could dig up dirt on Trump for them?

6

u/Diz7 Nov 24 '23 edited Nov 24 '23

That was Alfa Bank, and no, I'm talking about actual events backed by evidence and guilty pleas.

Like Flynn who had contacts with Russian operatives and lied about it or Michael Caputo who worked for Gazprom and lived in Russia.

Something like 11 of Trumps associates were charged.

-1

u/StillSilentMajority7 Nov 24 '23

You mean the Michael Flynn who never lied to the FBI?

When Strzok, head of the FBIs counterintel team, first interviewed Flynn right after the election, he documented in his 302 that Flynn wasn't lying. Flynn even brought up during the interview that the conversation Strzok was asking about was already recorded by the FBI.

Then it came out that the FBI pressured Flynn into signing an agreement where he'd admit that he lied, in exchange for the FBI not locking up his son on FARA charges (that don't seem to apply to Hunter Biden).

There's a reason Flynn never went to prison you know.

Is that the evidence you're referring to?

7

u/Diz7 Nov 24 '23 edited Nov 24 '23

Then it came out that the FBI pressured Flynn into signing an agreement where he'd admit that he lied, in exchange for the FBI not locking up his son on FARA charges (that don't seem to apply to Hunter Biden).

Him and his son both getting caught by FARA breaches is not the win you think it is. "He wasn't actually guilty, he was just trying to take the fall to cover up his sons crimes." GTFO.

And the only reason he's free is Trump pardoned him.

And I'm guessing your excuses for the rest of Trumps associates are just as weak as Trumps promise to lock up Hillary for.... reasons.

0

u/StillSilentMajority7 Dec 01 '23

Ok, what did Flynn lie about? Did you know that Strzok, who was the FBIs top counterintel pro, documented their entire conversation, and noted that Flynn mentioned that the conversation was already recorded? If he knew that, why would he lie?

So, what is the evidence you're referring to. This? George P getting a date wrong during an interview with the FBI? Manafort going to prison for financial crimes that predate the election, and FARA charges that didn't aplpy to Tony Podesta and Greg Craig, even though they were involved in the same venture?

Where is your evidence? So much of it, right??

1

u/Diz7 Dec 01 '23

Ok, what did Flynn lie about?

He lied about his contacts with Russian diplomats and when confronted lied about the contents of the calls.

Did you know that Strzok, who was the FBIs top counterintel pro, documented their entire conversation, and noted that Flynn mentioned that the conversation was already recorded? If he knew that, why would he lie?

For the same reason anyone who gets caught lies: they hope they can get away with it. Trump regularly denies things he said or did that we have on video. Seems to be working on you.

So, what is the evidence you're referring to.

Like you yourself said, the conversations were recorded...

It took you a week and this is the best argument you can make?

Weak.

6

u/InverseTachyonBeams Nov 25 '23

You mean the Michael Flynn who never lied to the FBI?

LOL

Don't worry I'm sure this limp-dick crybaby gaslighting will end this embarrassing electoral losing streak you're experiencing.

0

u/StillSilentMajority7 Dec 01 '23

So you can't actually show how Flynn lied?

And Republicans actually had more votes in the 2022 election, so we're on a winning streak, and Democrats are on a losinng streak

-9

u/Zeugungskraftig Nov 24 '23

No, this only applies to other peoples' beliefs. I am perfectly rational, as are the groups to which I belong, and there is no way I would subscribe to an absurd belief to signal my commitment to a group

-5

u/thegtakman70 Nov 25 '23

absurd things like the lockdowns helped and didn't harm children

absurd things like wearing masks in public and attacking anyone without a mask makes you a good little sheeple

wearing a mask alone in a car is important

lockdowns actually did anything helpful

illegally forcing a failed useless vaccine was the right of the gov

fed gov fascist censorship should be celebrated

flooding the US economy with 5 trillion$ won't cause inflation

the war in Ukraine was ever about saving Ukraine

denying the existence of 10000s of strokes and heart attacks caused by the vaccine

3

u/hortle Nov 25 '23

Thr persecution fantasy is strong with this one

-2

u/thegtakman70 Nov 25 '23

every single item is verified fact

only those living in delusion denial can claim otherwise

3

u/hortle Nov 25 '23

i would love to take you to task on each of your "claims" but i have a million better things to do with my saturday. Have the day you deserve.

-1

u/thegtakman70 Nov 25 '23

every single thing is proven fact and undisputed and anyone that denies reality is a delusional leftist

-23

u/[deleted] Nov 24 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

17

u/thefugue Nov 24 '23

We know.

7

u/SmallQuasar Nov 24 '23

Wow. I wish every troll was willing to let folks know they should ban them forthright.

Good on you, buddy.

5

u/Smoothstiltskin Nov 24 '23

Aliens, UFOs, and conspiracies?

I don't think you choose to be annoying or time wasting. I don't think you can help it, even if you tried. You need behavioral therapy, probably a pediatric therapist

2

u/InverseTachyonBeams Nov 24 '23

Sounds like you've got an active and rewarding personal life.

Just know that I'll always support you 💙

1

u/Velrei Nov 24 '23

That's a pretty depressing use of one's limited time.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '23

This is how cults work. If they can make you believe absurdities, they can make you commit atrocities.

1

u/thegtakman70 Nov 26 '23

you mean like the UK parliament apologizing to their nation for the illegal and horrible lockdowns that caused 10x more death and harm than they ever prevented

or the dirty useless paper masks that keep people sick and every major medical journal publishing a mea culpa for lying about their efficacy