I like this statement from the article,

"The study, still unpublished, shows that conspiracy believers displayed a greater propensity than nonbelievers to jump to conclusions based on limited evidence."

Really, no evidence?

Well, what about all the people who believed Saddam was producing and stockpiling WMD circa 2002, 2003, like Cheney, Hannity and Limbaugh? Should their beliefs be labeled a "conspiracy theory"? Yes!

Nevertheless, check out the comments at the usnews.com site. They are running strongly in our favor.

You are one of our greatest warriors exposing this circus of propaganda. And you did just what I hoped: mention psychiatrists and psychologists who disagree with Swami and Bower, slapping their "you guys are all nuts" cigars from their faces. This labeling shit just doesn't do the job anymore.

There is probably a psychological term for the phenomenon exhibited by the psychologists in denial above. Yes, there is "denial," but there is also, in many cases, a self-protective mechanism going on. A psychologist, or many other deniers as well, doesn't himself or herself wish to be diagnosed as a freak or a crazy, so they approach this in a clinical and faux-analytical fashion (faux because the analysis is oversimplified and nonrepresentative of the scope and reality of the skeptics' mindsets). This is socially safe. It will avoid ridicule. Be subtly smug. Put the people you are observing in a box, so to speak. Use a stance of condescension. Then analyze.

Other times the psychologists are displaying plain ignorance, but in many cases it is specifically the combination of ignorance plus the fear-of-ridicule at a subconscious level and pulsing around their ego.

skeptics way outnumber slavish adherents to the official fantasy- this was my comment:

"taking a cynical stance toward politics, mistrusting authority, endorsing democratic practices, feeling generally suspicious toward others and displaying an inquisitive, imaginative outlook."

These are all positive traits, other than "feeling generally suspicious toward others", which I don't- and I don't buy the official explanations, as even the Commissioners have criticized the process, which was frustrated by false statements by NORAD officials and failure to by the White House, CIA, FBI, DOD, etc. to produce documents. Like the US govt is trustworthy??? These shrinks need their heads checked, and to research A People's History of the United States. A supermajority does NOT trust the US govt, which under Dems and Reps consistently serves the interests of a corrupt corporate elite class at the expense of the public interest. And a supermajority knows that the official BS about JFK's death is BS, too.

Complete 9/11 Timeline
http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/000000...

http://911reports.com

I am going to have to say that I do agree with some of what's being said here, because of the number of times that I've seen truther friends fail to check their references. They remind me of people who parrot the government, who fail to check their references. It seems pandemic. Everybody just accepts what they want most so much more easily than anything else.

But, compared to the way two people interact with each other, side-by-side, is worth millions compared to the actual value of this article.

When it is a stranger, and shaky, and so concerned that the sky is falling on his/her head, or any paranoid or violent aspect of the behavior, or whether or not the two people who meet in person feel comfortable and relaxed with each other - that is real value. People make their own minds up on matters - this article seems to me like it would be fluffy reading to reasonable people.

Coop Assembly

it was Columnist Robert Novak who gave "conspiracy theories" a jump start by saying his sources said 9-11 was an inside job two days after the event. "Security experts and airline officials agree privately that the simultaneous hijacking of four jetliners was an "inside job," probably indicating complicity beyond malfeasance." Will they deem Novak out of his mind? He practically started it all, didn't he? I think the psychologists are out of their minds. I guess that makes me a prime candidate for the loony bin, and who knows that in this day and age, that might be the safest place to be.

"Conspiracy theories" will always be with us as long as people speculate on what is really going on in an era of incredible opacity in government. Many of those theories will undoubtedly prove to be correct, just as they have in the past.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/science/2009/05/26/the-inner-worlds-of-co...

The Martha Mitchell Effect

The Martha Mitchell effect is a process by which a belief is mistakenly diagnosed as a delusion by a psychiatrist. This is named after Martha Beall Mitchell (the wife of John Mitchell, the Attorney-General in the Nixon administration) who alleged that illegal activity was taking place in the White House. At the time her claims were thought to be signs of mental illness, and only after the Watergate scandal broke was she proved right (and hence sane).

Origin

Psychologist Brendan Maher named the effect after Martha Beall

Mitchell.[2] Mrs. Mitchell was the wife of John Mitchell, Attorney-

General in the Nixon administration. When she alleged that White House

officials were engaged in illegal activities, her claims were

attributed to mental illness. Ultimately, however, the relevant facts

of the Watergate scandal vindicated her and hence attracted to her the

title of 'Cassandra of Watergate'.

Read a book.

Buy a clue.