c/conspiracy-debates

I spent years arguing about the moon landing online and missed the real point

I was in a forum thread about the Apollo missions, typing my 50th reply about flag shadows and light sources. Then this guy from Florida just asked, 'Why do you care so much about proving them wrong?' I stopped typing. I realized I wasn't debating to find truth, I was just trying to win arguments. My whole focus was on picking apart details instead of understanding why people believe what they do. Has anyone else had that kind of shift in how they approach these talks?

2 comments

juliahall•2d ago

Pro tip: Double-check your dates before arguing about historical conspiracies

In my experience, I once cited the wrong year for an event during a 9/11 debate. It made my whole argument look silly and the other side jumped on it. What's your go-to method for keeping dates straight in heated discussions?

3 comments

-1

troygreen•2d ago

Thinking back on those cafe arguments about big foot proof

Me and my buddies used to sit for hours picking apart grainy photos and wild stories. It felt like silly fun then, but now I see folks getting mad over the same stuff on screens. Do you ever wish these debates stayed more chill like before?

2 comments

susan_nguyen•7d ago

Vent: My film club won't even consider the official sources on that director's cut.

They're so caught up in wild theories. We need to base our talks on what's actually out there, not just guesses.

3 comments

the_logan•7d ago

Update: Seeing more talk about grocery store loyalty cards tracking purchases

People are debating if those cards are just for discounts or if they collect data on what we buy. It's got me thinking about privacy every time I shop.

3 comments