This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

The Flouridation of water is a communist plot and other tales of the crazy side of the internet

edited April 2010 in Flamewars
GjL9g3s6Fro

So in all seriousness, I'm arguing with a friend about many different crackpot theories (he has recently opened his mind to so much his mind apparently fell out) so I'm stuck arguing with him over whether Fluoride in the water is evil to RFID's in vaccines and whether the UFO's built the pyramids, being that this guy is a freshmen in college leads me to believe he's at that critical point where if he is not challenged to have a rational mind he will soon be a unkempt conspiracy theorist that people avoid at parties. I've been beating him and his co-conspirators on his facebook page with logic and reason but it's starting to take too much time and research. So I'm coming here for a bit of research help, does anyone have any great studies on the efficiency of Fluoridation in the water. The net is well riddled with anti-fluoridation material with only a few government websites doing comprehensive studies...

I know some of you have a policy of not engaging in crackpot theories but I also know nearly everyone in their intellectual development goes through a phase like this..... (be it Occult, Aliens, Psyhic powers, vampire boyfriends :-p) So anyway help me out so I can get some work done at work and not get fired rebutting crackpot theories!
«13456710

Comments

  • Uh duh, didn't you know water is poison?
  • You could try wikipedia.
    I have been :-p, but I don't have the time to go through all the referenced sources ^_^ The best one I found so far is http://nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/publications/synopses/Eh41_Flouridation_PART_A.pdf
  • edited April 2010
    Well, if these sort of plots are so easily discovered by non-experts with basic "Research", then clearly, that disproves the conspiracy theory, because anyone with the competence required to pull these plots off would leave no such easily discovered traces. "Oh, but they like to gloat and hide clues and evidence in plain sight to show off how smart they are" is the usual response, and of course, again, any group who acted in such a fashion is clearly not competent enough to pull off any plot of the magnitude they describe, or else they wouldn't leave clues or gloat, or at the very least, they'd save the arrogance and gloating for AFTER the plot was completed.

    That aside, I'll join on. It's always a laugh.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • Also I guess my real question is what do you think is the best way to show someone that they are descending into crazy?
  • edited April 2010
    Nice that's exactly what I was looking for :-p

    Hmmm, I'm starting to think that mind altering drugs are involved in this case....
    Post edited by Cremlian on
  • edited April 2010
    The key to get people to stop believing in government conspiracy theories goes something like this.

    1) Examine the conspiracy, figure out just how difficult it would be for the government to pull it off. How many secrets they would have to keep. How many people would have to keep their mouths shut. How smart, ingenious, and efficient the government would have to be for it to be true.

    2) Examine how absolutely stupid an inefficient the government is at almost every level. They can't even manage a post office. They can't even get an electronic voting machine that works. They can't deal with a natural disaster like a hurricane.

    3) 1+2 = 3. A government that can't deal with hanging chads, and where congresspeople and supreme court justices don't even understand what e-mail is, can not in any conceivable way engage in a huge flouride conspiracy.

    4) Also occam's razor.

    Sadly, this strategy is only good against government conspiracies, and has to be altered to work on something like the Illuminati or aliens. Luckily, most conspiracies are government conspiracies.

    Also, I have a question. It seems like most conspiracy nuts are in the US, and have conspiracies about the US government specifically. I imagine there must be conspiracy nuts in other countries with theories about their own governments. Or do they have theories about the US government? I want to hear about some international nut jobs.
    Post edited by Apreche on
  • Also I guess my real question is what do you think is the best way to show someone that they are descending into crazy?
    A swift kick in the nuts.
  • Also I guess my real question is what do you think is the best way to show someone that they are descending into crazy?
    Other than teaching them critical thinking and walking them through basic critical thinking on some of their crazy theories, I don't think there is much you can do that would be in any way effective. Ridicule will only teach the person to keep it to themselves, not change their thinking processes and opinions.
  • Also I guess my real question is what do you think is the best way to show someone that they are descending into crazy?
    There is nothing you can do. It's like a rocket launched haphazardly at space. It's either going to burn itself and fall back to earth, or it's going to reach escape velocity and you'll never see it again.
  • Ridicule will only teach the person to keep it to themselves, not change their thinking processes and opinions.
    But that, much like a quarantine zone of facemask, at least limits the spread of the meme. If society at large ridiculed idiotic ideas and did not ever allow them to stand without due criticism, the "infected" would be less able to infect other brains with their laughable memes.
  • The key to get people to stop believing in government conspiracy theories goes something like this.
    I've used this before, and it always falls to the, "that's what they want you to think," response. >_>
  • I've used this before, and it always falls to the, "that's what they want you to think," response. >_>
    Yea I usually end the conversation there, oddly this conversation with these guys has not been reduced to that level.
  • edited April 2010
    The key to get people to stop believing in government conspiracy theories goes something like this.
    I've used this before, and it always falls to the, "that's what they want you to think," response. >_>
    Oh dear, an ad hominem fallacy.
    I guess you should try to explain the concept that just because they want you to think it doesn't mean it's false, but it's easier to give up.
    Post edited by lackofcheese on
  • edited April 2010
    I imagine there must be conspiracy nuts in other countries with theories about their own governments. Or do they have theories about the US government? I want to hear about some international nut jobs.
    I can answer this - One of my housemate's friends is an utter, utter fucking nutbar, Absolutely barking at the fucking moon mental. Not just "Government did 9/11 and the Rothschilds are evil" kinda crazy, but that, plus shit like the absolute belief that the London olympics are actually a plot to bring as many people as possible to london so that when it's the epicenter of a massive slaughter to bring about the new world order, as many people as possible will be killed, They pyramids were built by using "Ancient secrets that the government doesn't want you to know" which amount to "I don't know exactly how they did it, but they must have floated blocks in place, because it's impossible to build that sort of thing without modern equipment, and all belief and evidence otherwise is manufactured by the Templars."

    At one point, I described a vast theory to him, and he was saying "Yeah man! that's it! you totally get it, This is amazing, I'm amazed you uncovered that plot on your own, most people have to be shown the truth!"

    Of course, what I described to him was an extended summary of the plots to Assassin's Creed 1 and 2.

    I even mentioned an a middle eastern Assasin called Altair, an Italian called Etzio, Leonardo da Vinci, the whole deal - and it turns out that 99% of it was what he already believed.

    Wierdly enough, he also notes that it's not right(Read, it's not the fashion anymore, since conspiracy theorists became the butt of a lot of jokes) to call them conspiracy theories, because conspiracy theories are "Misdirection and lies that THEY put out there to throw you off the REAL truth!"

    But yes, to stop Rambling and answer your question, Scott - What I can tell, they do Believe in the conspiracy theories about the US government, and all of that nonsense, however, they generally also include plots from their own governments, and more international, far reaching plots, many of them based in or involved with the USA, as apparently, according to them, that's the easiest place for them to conduct their operations, because that's the country that they have the most control over.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • Also I guess my real question is what do you think is the best way to show someone that they are descending into crazy?
    Convince them to stop drinking liquids entirely:
    -Boiling won't do the trick and ice melts into your soda.
    -Starbucks employees all worship the Mother Hydra symbolized as a "mermaid".
    -Don't wash dishes or do laundry because the residual chemical WILL seep into their system.

    After a few week, I see this problem hospitalizing itself.
  • edited April 2010
    I have to point out that sometimes to government does do awful crap to people. Nowhere near what conspiracy nuts would like to believe, but I would like to point out the fact that they did some horrible experiments involving LSD, and lethal doses of radiation on the unsuspecting civilians, so I'm not particularly inclined to think that they have our best intentions in mind.

    That being said most of this stuff is crazy nonsense that doesn't have anything to do with anything. My motto is test everything, believe nothing. If I can't verify it personally, then it's is belief based on the appeal to authority fallacy. I can't know that someone else isn't just making up a bunch of numbers to fit their theories, it's been known to happen, scientists are people too. Therefore it comes down to a practical viewpoint. The practical thing is to accept what works to a limited degree, seeing as I don't have the time to actually test these things myself.

    For the water fluoridation thing, I guess the way to actually see is to use non-fluoridated water exclusively for a month, record how you feel etc on a regular basis then go back to the fluoridated water and again record health, etc. then compare the results. Otherwise you are just believing what others tell you, and if you really care about it affecting you on a daily basis, then there is no room for belief.

    If you wanted to go really hardcore, then you could routinely inject mice with doses of fluoride and compare them to a control group and monitor the health of the two. But I doubt that peta would be so happy about something like that, and it doesn't seem like a step most people are willing to take.
    Post edited by Sova on

  • For the water fluoridation thing, I guess the way to actually see is to use non-fluoridated water exclusively for a month, record how you feel etc on a regular basis then go back to the fluoridated water and again record health, etc. then compare the results. Otherwise you are just believing what others tell you, and if you really care about it affecting you on a daily basis, then there is no room for belief.
    That's not even remotely close to being scientific enough to count for anything.
  • edited April 2010
    Sigh, Check this out. More of what this guy is saying that I have to refute.....

    “As far as evolution, there is cold hard scientifically discovered evidence that in perfect cycles of time, spanning thousands of years, all of the life on the planet went through a sudden and beneficial "evolution" completely changing the DNA of all life on the planet. These "just happen" to be connected with apocalyptic catastrophes, each in turn from water (great flood), earth (quakes), fire (volcanoes), and air (atmosphere). All these events are scientifically documented. It just fits. Now the spirit evolution is coming up. Our dna is also linked to us spiritually. A study was done where tongue scrapings were taken from a volunteer and shipped to a lab across the country, him on one coast, his dna on the other. Using atomic clocks, they had him record every moment of his life for a week or so where he felt stress. At THE EXACT SAME TIMES, his dna sample would undergo the same emotional states. Then theres phantom dna, which proves that our entire "life code", so to speak, is literally formed in photons, or light. We are beings of light. Beings of love.”

    The pyramids all over the world have baffled modern scientists and construction workers for years. They all unanimously agree that they would NEVER be ably to construct even one pyramid even given 20 years. EVERY SCIENTIST who ever took a look at them. It is just too precise. There are marble and granite rooms inside Egypts pyramid. Egypt, as well as Maya, has an intricate cyclical astrological calendar accurately predicting many past and future events, both ending in 2012. With Nazca, first off, do you have any idea how old the lines are? Many thousands of years ago. With any knowledge of weather patterns and erosion, those lines would be thought to have disappeared long long ago. Yet there they remain to this day. Also, take a look at the mountain tops, some are missing! Where is all those tons of dirt? No where in sight. Then there is Puma Punku in Tiahuanaco. The stones are so hard and so straight that they locked together perfectly. Not to mention they would have had to move the rocks all at least 10 miles. To cut the stones so perfectly straight, they could only have used a laser. No edge could possibly cut that perfectly. And then they did this all without any writing system. No way could they do that without written plans. Tying it all together, we have all over the entire world, we are surrounded by ridiculously over sized stone structures that all look similar, have similar pictures, similar qualities both qualitative and quantitative, all from the same time period, with countless individual cultures who were all physically separated by immense distances. Tell me how to disprove that. In fact, take anything here and disprove it. Just try.
    If you can't, then............."


    (I've already worked the different non-crazy theories on how the pyramids were created, I'm working on my evolution answer currently)... I love the claim "EVERY SCIENTIST" :-p
    Post edited by Cremlian on
  • edited April 2010
    If you wanted to go really hardcore, then you could routinely inject mice with doses of fluoride and compare them to a control group and monitor the health of the two. But I doubt that peta would be so happy about something like that, and it doesn't seem like a step most people are willing to take.
    There are already studies like that out there.
    If I can't verify it personally, then it's is belief based on the appeal to authority fallacy.
    This is not necessarily true. It's only a fallacy if you fall back to a single source that is claimed to be authoritative. It is not fallacious to base your opinion on a number of different studies conducted by different people.

    It is fallacious to draw a broad conclusion based exclusively on limited personal experience. Controlled scientific studies (yes, plural) are the only way we have to really draw these sorts of conclusions. The whole "I tried it and didn't like it" is so uncontrolled it's laughable. At minimum, you need to conduct it in a single-blind fashion, and preferably one in which you were unaware that you were being studied.

    EDIT:
    Sigh, Check this out. More of what this guy is saying that I have to refute.....
    You don't have to refute anything. He's nuts. Plain and simple. He didn't make a single valid or supported claim; thus, you just dismiss his arguments until he can actually cite things.

    Ask him to provide you with studies. If he says, "Science is just part of the conspiracy," punch him in the dick and never speak to him again.

    EDIT 2:

    I re-read his ramblings. The guy is a lost cause. This isn't "open-minded liberal college kid" any more. He's seriously deficient.
    Post edited by TheWhaleShark on
  • "Science is just part of the conspiracy,
    See he hasn't said that yet, which is why I've still engaged.
  • edited April 2010
    I re-read his ramblings. The guy is a lost cause. This isn't "open-minded liberal college kid" any more. He's seriously deficient.
    I don't know, I've known people to go into this mindset in late High School early college and come out of it. I just want to make sure that happens. (mainly because I know I took a dive into the occult and conspiracy for a bit in mid high school years, especially when your looking to make life more "interesting") Though I'm confident it's probably that he's smoking a lot of pot.

    Also, I've talked to him a good deal before he left for his first year of college and he was going down the rational skeptical route laid out by his parents, it was unnerving to see the last few months he slid into pseudoscience.
    Post edited by Cremlian on
  • edited April 2010
    The Kid's massive lunatic rant.
    image
    Post edited by Churba on
  • Though I'm confident it's probably that he's smoking a lot of pot.
    Pot smoker conspiracy theories are usually less specific and well-reasoned than that. They tend more towards the vague generalizations: "Dude, they're totally watching us. Through, like, the TV. And microchips. Man, I am so fucking high right now."

    I mean, it's one thing to have a few conspiracy theories. Believing in aliens? We're suffused with that stuff. JFK? How many movies have been made about that? But fucking phantom DNA? Where the fuck do you come up with that? You either have to be doing some serious hallucinogenics, or you have to be batshit crazy. Maybe both.

    His general tone is one that indicates he is completely convinced of the rightness of his views. There really won't be any arguing with him. He'll just throw a barrage of questions at you. Like I said, just ask for scientifically valid studies. Let me know how he responds to that.
  • edited April 2010
    You could just reply with a [citation needed].
    His general tone is one that indicates he is completely convinced of the rightness of his views
    Or he's an expert Troll who is playing you like Johny plays the fiddle.
    Post edited by George Patches on
  • if your interested and I could post some of the other weird crap he and his friend have been saying.
  • if your interested and I could post some of the other weird crap he and his friend have been saying.
    Yes, Please.
  • if your interested and I could post some of the other weird crap he and his friend have been saying.
    Oh man. I want to read, but I don't want to read.
  • edited April 2010
    I didn't really want to write an entire page on this whole thing, but epistemology is something that fascinates me. I'm more of the mindset that if a experiment is repeatable and you really care about it, then invest and try to repeat it and compare your results.

    The problem I'm concerned about is really that people blindly accept things from authority without properly understanding what the hell is being said. That is they can't discern a crackpot in a lab coat from a real scientist. Therefore, if the experiment is repeatable and the results are valid, then your results should match theirs. The other issue is the problem of the subjective objective viewpoints. We experience things on a subjective level, so sometimes in order to convince someone you have to get them to experience what you are talking about first hand. Objectivity is great until you run into the issue of repeated experience working against you.

    Of course at that point there is a good chance of insanity, but if it's insanity that yields results and it isn't bothering or hurting anyone else then what does it really matter. If someone feels better because they believe the water they are drinking is fluoridated, then regardless of whether it is or isn't they are feeling better. If experience is fooling us, then on a practical level people will always default to that.

    I know the stuff I wrote up there wasn't scientifically valid, but it might get that person to just shut up, so it was more of a marketing tactic against their stupidity than an experiment. It would take me a little while to actually come up with all of the proper criteria for an actually valid experiment.

    The basic philosophy remains the same though, test, don't believe. Rather than trying to convince people that you are right or wrong, present them with a means to gather data themselves and show you actual recorded evidence. At very least if they go down the slippery slope to prove their point, they may end up doing some real science eventually. At least that's what I'd like to believe.
    Post edited by Sova on
Sign In or Register to comment.