Printable View
I found several interesting pieces of the interview in youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW4mdAGOg-g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obzR-UsoOSM
And here the full interview, probably to be taken down soon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzqGko1yZts
(I didn't see -still- the whole one)
Well, these 3 hours have brightened a lot of the "still grey areas" in my own understanding of the whole thing...Quote:
Originally Posted by Eduardo-
definitely not a waste of anyones time.
Olaf
OK, thanks for the info Olaf.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmidt
I think I'll watch it later.
yeah. very good video. thx for sharing.
everybody should watch it.
edit:
some of what he says I already knew, but never this concentrated and well formulated and described.
he's a very intelligent person, humble and very knowledgeable.
3h is a lot, but I actually could listen the whole thing and it was interesting, even if the last 30 minutes I started to get tired, since theres a lot of information to digest.
he is not like dr david martin, that is a showman as well, and it makes it easy to just put him as a conspiracy theorist.
but Robert W. Malone seems legit, undeniable his long career and his achievements.
I encourage everyone to watch this youtube, even if you believe blindly your government, you should dare to challenge that, at least to feel you are satisfied with your choice and faith in Biden and Co.
its just 3h, and if you feel this was all garbage, at least you will feel good about your choice and you can continue your life.
but if your faith trembled, maybe this can help you find another perspective and belief, and hopefully make you a bit wiser.
It worth watching the 3 hours.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eduardo-
Yes!Quote:
Originally Posted by baka
This Robert Malone?
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/...keptic/619734/
Robert Malone—a medical doctor and an infectious-disease researcher—recently suggested that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines might actually make COVID-19 infections worse. He chuckled as he imagined Anthony Fauci announcing that the vaccination campaign was all a big mistake (“Oh darn, I was wrong!”) and would need to be abandoned. When he floated that nightmare scenario during a recent podcast interview with Steve Bannon, both men seemed almost delighted at the prospect of public-health officials and pharmaceutical companies getting their comeuppance. “This is a catastrophe,” Bannon declared, beaming at his guest. “You’re hearing it from an individual who invented the mRNA [vaccine] and has dedicated his life to vaccines. He’s the opposite of an anti-vaxxer.”
just watch the youtube, it will answer all the questions u have.
at least you get the answer from the man himself instead from other sources.
but: u do exactly what u want. I dont give a crap what u do with your life. its not my responsibility to help you.
I do this to myself, as I wouldn't like to be ignorant and nobody helped me. so I write for anyone out there that is seeking for clarity and understanding. if thats not you. I don't care at all.
What he was referring to, was a quite recent study from Danish-Scientists about the Omikron-Variant,Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
which showed "a negative effectiveness" for vaccinated people (contracting infection from Omikron).
In the longer interview (which you apparently dismissed outright), he even explains -
what might be behind such "negative effectiveness".
It's when your immune-system was trained "too much, too narrow" by the current vaccines -
answering to Omikron with a surge of "wrong, non-matching antibodies"...
(whereas the immune-system in the unvacced or natural-immune was acting "much less confused",
giving a "better matching answer" earlier).
Olaf
Dismissing these blogs that go against the mainstream scientific community is my first inclination:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._Malone
Quote:
Malone received criticism for propagating COVID-19 misinformation, including making unsupported claims about the toxicity of spike proteins generated by some COVID-19 vaccines;[2][17][4][29] using interviews on mass media to popularize medication with ivermectin;[30] and tweeting a study by others questioning vaccine safety that was later retracted.[2] He said that LinkedIn temporarily suspended his account over a post stating that the Chairman of the Thomson Reuters Foundation was also a board member at Pfizer, and other posts questioning the efficacy of some COVID-19 vaccines.[31][32] Malone has also claimed that the Pfizer–BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines could worsen COVID-19 infections.[1]
I feel justified questioning that blog...Quote:
With another researcher, Malone successfully proposed to the publishers of Frontiers in Pharmacology a special issue featuring early observational studies on existing medication used in the treatment of COVID-19, for which they recruited other guest editors, contributors, and reviewers. The journal rejected two of the papers selected: one on famotidine co-authored by Malone and another submitted by physician Pierre Kory on the use of ivermectin.[28] The publisher rejected the ivermectin paper due to what it stated were "a series of strong, unsupported claims" which they determined did "not offer an objective nor balanced scientific contribution."[28] Malone and most other guest editors resigned in protest in April 2021, and the special issue has been pulled from the journal's website.[28]
Wikipedia?!
OK, I mean reject him but...Wikipedia?!
(I haven't done a pro or con research so this is a neutral post but he invented MR.Nay if I am not mistaken)
It is a constant work in progress and open to malicious behavior. I believe it has a reliable rating of around 80% though. I'll take it over the majority of the blogs other posters here put up. I definitely trust what was posted about Malone. You can cross check that. Did you try that before you attacked the source I used? Maybe on Twitter? Oh no - he is banned from there :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by sapator
The "wall of noise" defense. Hours of videos of one person stating their opinion.
I've encountered those before. If you make enough points, anybody who tries to refute them all will inevitably miss a few and also lose their audience. That doesn't make them wrong, it just makes them hopeless.
In the end, it appears to be a difference in view. Some of you seem to believe that the world is driven by an awesomely powerful, possibly sinister, possibly malevolent force with a purpose, which is either control, or money, or some such. It seems like you might be expecting that this malevolent force is making your life or your situation worse. To that end, you expect that everything that doesn't say that is therefore either part of the plot or at least an unwitting pawn of the plot. Unfortunately, that leaves you only youtube videos with unreliable sources on which to base your suspicions. If a paper that supports the position isn't published, it's because of the plot, not because it is badly written, logically flawed, or otherwise problematic. Still, it comes back to a certain desperation. If your world was sunny and all was right with your life, would you feel that there is this malevolent force? If so, you'd have to believe that the force is powerful, malevolent...and utterly ineffectual and futile. That seems difficult.
A different interpretation is that every fine cat deserves a fine rat. You don't have the Marvel superheroes attending school board meetings, conducting petitions for some kind of poverty measure, speaking at rallies, or fundraising for the local girl scouts. Perhaps one of the movies did have things like that, such as Spider Man doing some public meet and greet, but those scenes aren't fundamental to the plot. They are just there to show some aspect of the character. In reality, the struggles in life are kind of tawdry. Even the things we see quite clearly, such as operators in a programming language, turn out to be controversial. Other people have different views on the subject...EVERY subject. So, we end up struggling over every little thing. We are the fine cat, but the rat...is mediocre, mundane, and often meaningless. So, a big thing, such as a global pandemic, is the fine rat that we've all been waiting for....it's just that it's SO disappointing. If all you can do is get a vaccine, wear a mask, and trivial things like that....where's the nobility?
The bulk of the information says one thing. It could all be wrong, but it seldom is. A few pieces have been wrong...ish, but they were then changed. If you doubt the bulk of the information, go look for the underlying studies on which it is based. Many of the stories (at least in print) do cite their sources at least well enough to be tracked down, if not directly. However, beware of YouTube experts. They have something to sell, and you are the market. They may be right, they may be wrong, but they all have something to sell. And don't be thinking that COVID is the fine rat. It isn't, it's just another mediocre one.
I don't really use Wiki often. First and foremost on something I know, the Greek etymology research, there are misleading and kid like explanations there. But there was a good article about PacMan I've read.
Shaggy that was a good post, I enjoyed it.
I can't believe that someone like you, Shaggy, say a nonsense like this. I though you were more intelligent.
No the post is very good, it can swing both ways, hope I understand this right....
Else, yes Shaggy, get lost! :p
Quote:
Shaggy that was an a good post, I enjoyed it.
Personally I liked the post. The last two comments show how we all see things differently. I'm making no other statement but that.Quote:
I can't believe that someone like you, Shaggy, say a nonsense like this. I though you were more intelligent.
Yep.
I does not mean that if you don't agree you cannot appreciate a good post. That was a good post and his duality in there (at least that's how I can interpret it) and makes you think beyond.So kudos.
Tssk - please look at the "history-of-wiki-changes", to see at work -Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
the exact processes Malone describes in the 3h-interview.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php...action=history
There's hundreds of changes of that article in the last few days.
What blog?Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
It's an interview which was published on a wellknown YT-podcast -
and then taken down by YT.
The guy is genuine and the real deal - just voicing his doubts about a few things.
He's also not profiting in any way by "blowing the whistle" on a few inside infos.
What he risks instead is (further) defamation - as well as pollution+disregard of his life-time-accomplishments.
Here's a citation of a former colleague of him, which is quite telling:
Stan Gromkowski, a cellular immunologist who did work on mRNA vaccines in the early 1990s
and views Malone as an underappreciated pioneer, put it this way:
"He’s f...ing up his chances for a Nobel Prize."
I don't know how your brain works, but a citation like that - only makes me respect the guy more
(for speaking out, despite these potential consequences).
Olaf
Again it seems this view of "I'm highly intelligent" shows up. How else could you make such a statement unless your intelligence is superior enough to judge other peoples intelligence..Quote:
Originally Posted by Eduardo-
Which would be tolerable if it wasn't coupled with "the masses are morons".
Believing only us SMART PEOPLE can see the truth.
I don't see what the problem with Shaggy's post is. It's actually one of the more intelligent posts I've seen in a while.
the youtube is removed
but u can still watch it here: https://www.bitchute.com/video/1djruZNs6ROZ/
https://thepostmillennial.com/youtub...e-from-youtube
Instead of focusing on Wikipedia why don't you focus on looking him up and checking out the criticisms. Both pros and cons. And tell me what you came up with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmidt
its not his job to convince you.
if you don't want, just skip it and go on with your life.
What Shaggy is speaking of is something akin to confirmation bias, the tendency of people to seek out information that confirms their pre-conceived notions. It's a weakness that inhabits the vast majority of any group of people.
We would have to define "smart" for that case.Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
I don't believe that people with high IQ, for example able to do complex mental mathematical operations are "smarter" than other "normal" people with common sense that apply it in other things.
I believe that intelligence has many areas, or that there are different kind of intelligences.
So, yes, I think that many "normal" people are more intelligent in key areas (or important areas of life) that some other prominent people in some fields, that are highly intelligent but not for everything.
I'm talking more about being able to make good choices, than being able to solve complex abstract problems.
And related to that and what you stated in the text I'm quoting, I thing that seeing the truth is something intelligent, it is a choice, a smart one.
At the end everything becomes a matter of will. What you want, what you are seeking for.
Of course two years of lockdowns and the media insufflating fear in almost all channels, not being able to see our beloved ones, also seeing the damage to economy and people dying (if you are sensitive) played a role in paying more attention and trying to figure what is happening.
Otherwise we would just stayed "living la vida loca", and the "bad guys" would be there but who cares.
If you need the subtitles, I have them:Quote:
Originally Posted by baka
Attachment 183511
If you (anyone) want the video file, I also have it (it is around 400 MB), i can see where to upload it.
If we replace "preconceived notions" with the simpler term "opinion",Quote:
Originally Posted by Niya
then it goes without saying, that these personal opinions don't come out thin-air.
Personal opinions (for me) are a process:
- they are (and need to be) initiated and formed in the first place (by some "base-information")
- but that part has to be immediately followed by constant re-evaluation!
It's people who stick with that "singular version of opinion-initiation" (usually the spoon-fed one, from "official channels"),
the people who fail in applying the above mentioned latter part,
who are in parts responsible for all the weird things we've encountered in the last months.
Olaf
I think he should back up his claims...Quote:
Originally Posted by baka
It's surprising how easily this happens. What's even more surprising is how we find a way to justify ignoring the other information, no matter how overwhelmingQuote:
Originally Posted by Niya
He does so in the interview, you fear to listen to.Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
Olaf
He is saying that it is your job to do a critical investigation, and I think he already did (for him).Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
Or are you asking him to go to find any valid or not argument that anybody has risen about Dr. Malone and explain to you why they are wrong (or not)?
Of course these kind of things are not for lazy people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by baka
I didn't get that from the post. I thought it leaned more towards people believing in massive conspiracy plots by "people in power". And preferring those to factual information:Quote:
Originally Posted by Niya
He wraps up saying:Quote:
Some of you seem to believe that the world is driven by an awesomely powerful, possibly sinister, possibly malevolent force with a purpose, which is either control, or money, or some such. It seems like you might be expecting that this malevolent force is making your life or your situation worse. To that end, you expect that everything that doesn't say that is therefore either part of the plot or at least an unwitting pawn of the plot.
Now maybe I have what he meant completely wrong. I didn't see it as people seeking out bias, but rather, being unduly influenced by it.Quote:
The bulk of the information says one thing. It could all be wrong, but it seldom is. A few pieces have been wrong...ish, but they were then changed. If you doubt the bulk of the information, go look for the underlying studies on which it is based. Many of the stories (at least in print) do cite their sources at least well enough to be tracked down, if not directly. However, beware of YouTube experts. They have something to sell, and you are the market. They may be right, they may be wrong, but they all have something to sell. And don't be thinking that COVID is the fine rat. It isn't, it's just another mediocre one.
Says someone, who's trusting *only* the official channels -Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
and doesn't even look at additional informations, which might contradict the official versions.
It's not really wholesome, when you only accept "half the info available to you". ;)
Olaf
I'm talking about the OP. I can back up my claims from multiple sources. Your defense is more like me to blindly accept the interview and not question the source.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmidt
TysonLPrice.
we could have a good discussion "after" you watched the video.
so we have the same material in hand.
if you dismiss the entire video, and instead base your arguments from wiki or some blog or whatever, it means we are not in the same page.
is this about "I want the upper hand" so I'm ahead of you strategy? for what purpose? I don't care.
I thought the most important thing is the search for truth, and to do that we need to listen to all sides.
this person, is not a nobody, he is x1000 above our level of understanding virus, vaccines, immune system etc.
he give a good speech of all kinds of things, how it works, his history in all this, about the vaccines, the virus etc.
he is pro-vaccine, that his life work, he was part of the team that created mRNA vaccine and he is part of many organizations and teams working with this stuff.
so, you could just listen to him for 3 hours just for that knowledge, from a scientist point of view.
if you dismiss it, I would think, why? why is it that hard to listen to that guy? are you scared?
and if so, why? I mean, Im not scared of anything. I can listen to anybody. I mean, I can listen to any person, even Fauci. no problem. and its not that everything he says is BS. a lot of truth, a lot of good, but theres also inconsistency and that we understand if you check facts, what he say in different dates and what kind of projects he has been up to.
but, to dismiss a person without even giving him a chance, that tells theres a paranoia here. you are scared to death.
What a crap statement. You have no idea where or how I get my information. All you know is my opinions don't follow your narrative. So you justify your narrative by saying "who's trusting *only* the official channels "Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmidt
Thanks for proving my point. lol
That is a fine example of gleaning out of a post what you want to prove a point :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Schmidt
You did exactly what you are accusing me of.
Regardless, we can all trust Wikipedia :p
I would advice against a prove of document war. We all know how "well" it ended before.
I actually contribute monetarily yearly to them. I'd bet you can also take a standard set of encyclopedias and find similar errors. Wikipedia lists it sources. I don't see any credits at the end of these blogs. I also admit I'm on a bit of a "high horse" here. I'm guilty of focusing on what proves my points too.Quote:
Originally Posted by sapator
Ye, I'm kidding.
But from things that I know of, as I've said, compering the Wiki is very poor to say the least, maybe some articles are better. Also I haven't consider what Olaf said, if it changes the sources again and again on Malone then that can't be very good.
So you're saying, that you've watched the 3h-interview already?Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
No? ... Thanks for proving my point.
Olaf
That's honest (and humble). I respect when someone acknowledge his own limits.Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
Not everybody does.
We all have limits. Nobody is omniscient here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
It's that part in blue that likens the mentality to confirmation bias. It's not exactly confirmation bias but it is a kind of cognitive bias nonetheless. Basically this bias is about dismissing anything that that doesn't confirm your world view as some kind of malevolent plot to hide the truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
I seriously cannot follow most of the sentences in your recent postings.Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
What "point" exactly did you make?
Do you mean the *current* state of the Malone-page on Wikipedia?
I thought I pointed out already, that this page is in constant flux over the last few days
(primarily *after* he gave that interview - and the "fact-checker-bots" were trying to
mess the wiki-page up - against constant re-corrections).
Again, he was considered one of the potential Noble-Price-candidates
(in a research-field that's OnTopic in this forum-thread - the man has patents under his name for RNA-research).
Exactly why you do not want to listen to such a man, escapes me.
Olaf
I haven't said anything about that video. What point does that prove? But if that makes you feel justified in your claims about me. Then, your welcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmidt
Confirmation bias can apply when something is false.
When something is true, it is confirmation data (like happens in science).
So, the key point point is whether Malone is lying or telling the truth.
All he is saying makes sense, all the pieces come well together.
What he is saying explains what we can observe that is happening, and BTW, there is no "official" explanation that can explain that (I mean, all the mismatches in the information we can get).
Besides, I don't see any motive that he could have to invent something like that.
And do not forget also, that he is an industry insider, not someone that is talking about Area 51 from a basement with a tin foil hat on his head.
if you don't want to eat the spinach soup you don't need to. you can eat your micro-pizza.
not sure why you make a big deal about it.
its a free world and you decide who you want to be.
nobody is telling you that you need to change or believe in other things.
its quite tiring. just tell "I don't want" and go on with your life.
stop trying to justify yourself.
And what about his video being removed from Youtube?
Anyone has a advocacy for that?
I would like to read it.
rumors is that its Joe Rogan that reported it, to have it exclusively in Spotify?
Might be.Quote:
Originally Posted by baka
So, there is an philosophical issue here.
Some people seem to believe that every opinion is equally valid, because as we all all human, and fallible, all opinions and points of view are valid the same.
In that view, there is no truths, facts or falsehoods, it is just something that is built in the mind of each one, and that's it.
I believe that there is an objective reality, that we as subjective beings connect better or worse to it, but that there are truths and facts out there.
Our ability or inability is to be able (or unable) to connect to those truth and facts, that won't change based on what we believe or don't believe.
What we believe or disbelieve do not affect the truths or facts, that only affects us, for being "better connected to reality" or worse.
OK...I'll give it a shot. He is banned from Twitter and suspended from Facebook for misinformation that can be threating to public safety. To me that is enough to dig deeper than the video posted here but you seem to think that is my responsibility...not the people making the posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmidt
If you dig even deeper, which I have mentioned several times but again you think that is my responsibility, you will find numerous discreditations for his recent activity. He is NOT who you think he is and you focus on me instead of just proving, and shutting me up, that I am wrong.
To give just a single (small) example of what was discussed in the interview:
Uttar-Pradesh (with a population of 235Mio, the largest state in India).
It roughly equals the population of Great-Britain, France, Spain and Germany combined.
Very serious situation there (in April/May 2021), because of "not enough vaccines" (only 5% vaccinated)...
Solution: Distribution of millions of "cheap, special packages", with simple instructions, following a pre-established "procedure".
Effect: Near immediate - the surging curve came down - and according to Malone, "it's flat-lining ever since"
(with regards to covid-death-counts).
But check it out yourself:
https://coronalevel.com/India/Uttar_Pradesh/
Now, please compare that curve with the ones in (nearly fully vaccinated) European countries -
where no "flat-lining" was observable over the last months...
Did you ever hear about that in "official media-channels"?
I guess not - because inconvenient questions might be raised, what exactly was in "these packages".
Furthermore, if you *dare* raise these questions (especially when you're a Scientist or a Doctor),
you'll be silenced, risk your job and reputation.
That's the point he's primarily addressing in the interview (with several examples) -
what happend to the right to express "informed concern" (asking such interesting questions)?
Olaf
what you fail to see is:
if theres a real threat here, theres an entity that try to shut down anyone and anything that is against their agenda it would mean that they are trying everything they can to discredit him.
its like you believe we are living in a beautiful world, with benevolent leaders, with strong families that only have nature and life as their best interest, and big pharma that only want to save life even if they don't get profit from it. and investors that only want to create a peaceful and clean and perfect world.
now you are playing exactly what they try to do, and you are spitting this guy on his face, because the "leaders" manipulated you to think like that.
if this is the truth. this doctor is like you say, a horrible person that is lying. I wonder. why?
- he want to profit from it. (unlikely, a person in his position will not benefit if he is discredited, a scientist needs to have good reviews or they shut him down)
- he's like a 15 years girl that seek attention (well, he is 62 years old, wife, grandchildren, his own farm, and the result of him talking like that is that people hate him)
- he want you dead (well, he seems to want doctors to use medicines,that cdc dismissed, and seems to care about children and people that gets side effects from covid (not only vaccine))
even so, listening to him, 3h, I don't hear anything that could benefit him.
he is walking against powerful people and its a loosing game right now for him. lawsuits dropping down.
but, sure, he is lying, his resume is just fake. his all life is just a joke. not sure why Joe Rogan invited him. but Joe is also fake, a trash of a human, we dont need that.
better we listen to Biden and Fauci. those two are beautiful people.
He voiced his "informed concerns" (stating a few inconvenient facts) which resulted in his Twitter-ban.Quote:
Originally Posted by TysonLPrice
Nothing more.
If you don't recognize the degree of censorship that's going on currently, it cannot be helped.
Olaf
So let's recapitulate.
He is Banned from Twitter.
Suspender from Facebook.
Wiki bash him.
So that is enough evidence that he does not know was he is talking about.
I need a Xanax.
It inhabits ALL of us. It isn't specific to politics, religion, or programming languages. I've said it before and hope to say it again: The only thing the human brain is REALLY good at is pattern recognition. We come up with shortcuts in thinking based on some pattern that we've created from our past experiences. These are essential to our survival. They are also frequently wrong, sometimes in small ways, other times in large ways. The question is how to effectively check your models.Quote:
Originally Posted by Niya
One thing we see quite often on this forum is a person asking a question that is clearly based on the fact that they came to understand something one way, and it wasn't really correct (for example, when "1" looks like a number, but is actually a string). It's not so much a matter of telling that person how to do it right as correcting a mistaken mental model of the problem. When we have problems that we can't solve, it is often because our mental models are equally incorrect. Breakthroughs happen when we jump from the guidance of one mental model and construct a new, hopefully more accurate, mental model. Therefore, a mental model is a rut. Sometimes it is a proper and useful rut (all models are wrong, some models are useful...I forget who said that), other times it isn't.
I was going to go off on a rambling anecdote about a time that I misunderstood the behavior of fish populations in a swamp because, by chance, I had never visited the swamp during a few weeks in July, though I had been there every other month of the year for several years by that point.
However, I'll skip over that. The purpose for the post that got people riled was that I was trying to understand not just where you are coming from, but where I am coming from. I'm a pretty optimistic person who is about the least discriminated against category of people in all of history (tall, white, male, hetero, highly educated, fairly well off, no medical issues, etc.). That's all very fortunate, but it creates a distorted world view. Skewed optimistic and rosy, to be sure, but clearly distorted. I've also hung out in legislatures listening to debates, running errands for officials in the legislature, and hobnobbing with some of the people accused of being part of the vast conspiracy. From that I learned that they are just people. They aren't smarter than lots of the people on here (as a group, we would probably test in the upper end of the human spectrum in that regard. There was a thread about that several years back and I have no reason to doubt it, since programming is a fairly intellectual pursuit). They also have all the relationship issues, outside interests, common colds, and other distractions that knock us all off our games at times. For that reason, I don't believe that any group is even capable of creating a vast conspiracy.
I also have seen that a bunch of near random events can conspire to look like there's some causality when none exists. Therefore, I look at the vast majority of news that is saying the same thing, I read a variety of scientific journals, and scientific based periodicals. The periodicals and journals support the statements made by the broader media, and they add the pieces that I didn't know (I couldn't understand how the mRNA managed to survive long enough to be transcribed into spike proteins, but now I know, well enough). Therefore, I believe that they can make mistakes, but that what they are saying does appear to be a reasonable simplification of what the scientific studies are saying, and thus I have no reason to doubt any of that.
So what is it that convinces people that there must be some conspiracy? You sure don't have the same optimistic, even rosy, outlook that I have. You don't have the experience of rolling quarters down the halls of power (when nobody is there, rolling a US quarter on a marble floor in a marble hallways results in a SERIOUSLY interesting sound) that I have. In fact, you seem to come from a darker, pessimistic, point of view where things are 'out to get you'. In some countries, that is totally understandable. Greece...well, Sapator should be optimistic, but he has plenty of past history to fuel any suspicions of his government. Eduardo, as well, has plenty of reason to doubt. The Economist has covered the twists and turns in Argentina with what could be charitably described as optimistic dismay (they keep hoping for the best and always falling short).
I feel that I have a significant amount of control over how my life turns out, even though the biggest events in my life were all dictated by others. Still, those big events have always turned out quite nicely, and those who caused them have always been people I've really liked and who have liked me. If that isn't your experience, perhaps you have reason to believe in a malevolent other.
That's what the post was about: What would prompt you to believe in a sinister conspiracy? I was speculating that it was your life experience that created the mental model where such a conspiracy is even plausible. After that, confirmation bias is enough to do the rest. We all have that in common.