qwerasdf

I think that's the point. People who are skeptical about one thing aren't necessarily skeptical about another. You don't have to believe in lizard people to question something else. Some people doubt the Moon landing, and some may not doubt the landing happened but are skeptical about some of the footage. They aren't - and shouldn't be - grouped into the same category.

And the government IS involved in a secret plan to do something unlawful. That's not a theory - that's a fact. Extraordinary rendition, enhanced interrogation, privacy invasion... These are all things that are real, not theories. And they were kept secret from the public that that government is supposed to represent.

But all of this is just my opinion, printed in reply to yours. Your comment certainly has merit. The reality is that the general public now has an idea of what a 'conspiracy theorist' is and believes. It makes it very difficult to mention the Snowden stories with friends and acquaintances, because some people now automatically think you believe in lizard people.

This is a new site and a new subverse, and there is a good opportunity here for the new community to shake off the conspiracy flack. This (again, just my opinion) should be a place where skeptics can discuss anything they're skeptical about. Let's shed this defensive dark-basement approach and just have intelligent discussion about things that just don't seem right.

Some

Very concise! Better to hear it from these guys opposed to faceless baseless YouTube bloggers who are primarily motivated by ad revenue.

old_soul

They have a lot of talent in what they do. They explore wild stuff, yet they always express the skeptic point of view. Very entertaining series.

qwerasdf

It was a great message, and it was well delivered. I haven't seen any of their other stuff, but I wanted to reply to your comment because of a word you used - but I'll get back to that in a sec.

I have one minor criticism about the video. I think it was unintentional, but it's worth mentioning. Their initial message about using a single term to group all types of "conspiracy theorists" together is right on point. But at the end of their video they ask their viewers to suggest an alternate name under which to group everyone. They accidentally go back on the same point I thought they were trying to make. To people here who likely already 'get' the message and are mainly appreciating their delivery of it, the ending is of little consequence and is easily overlooked. But if they're hoping to influence viewers' opinions with this video, they may want to consider that their call at the end (at least IMO) detracts from the message.

And now I'm going to do the same thing, because the word that you used - the word that we could easily use to replace 'conspiracy theorist' - is skeptic.

EDIT - FWIW, I just created a new sub called /v/skeptical . You are all welcome there. Please post whatever you want, and we as a skeptical community will all share our thoughts (ideally) in a positive, respectful, constructive way.