I know a few nutcases that believe in all of these but there are far more ; notably flat earth and the moon landing are missing for instance. But many more.
> Is “flat earth” not in the same camp as “the birds aren’t real”? I.e. never ever accept any possible hint that it’s satire, but it is satire
It probably started that way. But I've met people who seriously believe it. Combination of preferring a force that has its hands on the reins, even if in the shadows, to the anarchic reality human civilisation exists in, and longing for a sense of belonging, with the exercise of actually believing the ridiculous almost serving as a pledge of loyalty.
There is a Netflix documentary on it. They're real, they're having real conventions and everything. They sometimes even try to prove the earth is flat, but fail every time, which somehow does nothing to their convictions.
I know people who believe and try to convert others. Also they get aggressive when you find it nonsense. They believe that the govs of the world band together to patrol the ice wall, that education hides the real shape of our world, that all nasa materials are fake and made of deceive us etc. And flat earthers are well known to believe all other conspiracy theories as well and usually fit them in their flat view easily by making up theories that make no sense but spread like wildfire.
The real conspiracy is how the media was unable to discuss either critically, leading skeptics to become belivers that something, sinister or benign, was going on.
"Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That tramples curiosity."
Either you are doing that, or you are larping as a foolish conspiracy theorist because it's rather meta to do in this context, which is against the rules concerning trolling/flamebait.
Either way, please don't, it's rather hard to steelman a position that is so far removed from reality.
There are more than enough subreddits for either purpose, but hn should not be subjected to this.
You are correct, after having read a couple of other comments in here which endorsed similar conspiracy theories, I was primed to read the previous comment as of the poster also believed them. This is probably not even the case, it was just an addition of more theories to the list.
Re-reading my comment, it was also unnecessarily snarky, which is against the hn guidelines as well. So I am a hypocrite anyway, and would be even if the comment I replied to had actually endorsed those conspiracy theories in contradiction with the guidelines.
I'm not sure about the best practice in this case, do I delete my previous comment, or let it stand as a monument to my shame?
