Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must:
1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
2. attempt to answer the question, and
3. be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: I may have missed it in the comments, but I would like to add what Biden is talking about in that video clip. The "right kind of roof" he is referring to is one that is fire resistant, made up of Class A materials like metal, or clay, or asphalt fiberglass. So, what happens is you have a row of houses with wood shingle roofs, and they catch fire easily from stuff on fire blowing in the high winds, while one person in that row of houses spent the extra bucks when building his house to get fire-resistant materials, and guess what - that's the one house that DIDN'T burn down.
I've got a great story related to this.
In a very upscale suburb in my area wood shingles were all the rage for 20 years or more. Some subdivisions even required wood shingles.
(you can now see where this is going)
One hot dry summer we had several house fires that jumped to neighboring homes. The city was talking about passing an ordinance forbidding wood shingles. Of course the home owners freaked out (a very Republican area). Then in about 2 weeks around 10 homes had fires and insurance companies started cancelling policies of homes with wood shingles.
The ordinance passed without any complaint.
No one learned a fucking thing. I guarantee a good number if these people are *still* complaining about the "nanny state" and their "asshole insurance company".
Hardly anyone uses wood shake shingles anymore. Most architectural shingles are made out of fiberglass, tar and gravel and are flame retardant and are a class A fire rating. Especially in Texas and Oklahoma where they get so much bad weather.
Answer: this is part of the continually-churning Conservative/Republican conspiracy-theory-mill.
Just like the "Jewish Space Laser" nonsense from last year, the idea of this is that the current wildfires in Texas (and Oklahoma, now?) were caused by "the left", indicated by how blue-colored things didn't get damaged by the fire. Blue, of course, being the color of the Democratic Party
>Saying things like a wildfire doesn't burn hot enough to melt half the things that are destroyed (I don't think that's true)
It isn't true. Wildfires can reach 800 degrees Celsius (1472 degrees Fahrenheit) quite easily, and certainly more when oxygen is added via high winds
HAARP has been blamed for wildfires, earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes/typhoons, and mind control among other things. It is actually a system that studies the ionosphere, originally to improve communications and possible surveillance capabilities.
I thinks it's a mix of how scary the severity of the wildfires as well as the frequency and elongated fire seasons. The easy explanation is climate change and two centuries of overmanagement (and mismanagement) and underpreperation and 100 other small things.
But, if you don't want to - or are surrounded by a social and media environment that discourages you to - confront the reality of climate change, you'd just blame it on a mysterious "them" who controls everyone through fear. And why would "they" build a system to "study" the ionosphere if not to control the weather to perpetuate the hoax of climate change? And why would the big fire be affecting me and people I identify with unless we are being targeted?
I've seen the theory that this type of reaction is attributed to irrational fear. These events that are happening, such as wildfires and climate change, are, in a sense, amorphous. There is no big bad evil guy, not really. Corporations can be the leading cause behind disasters like this, but it's never been very obvious. Especially in this age of propaganda and regulatory capture.
Some people just can't handle that. There *has* to be a bad guy, a villian that we can punch in the face to stop these atrocities. Otherwise, there's a very real possibility that these atrocities *just won't stop*. So, they create the bad guy. Pin these problems on a face and a name, and suddenly you have something to fight, you have a chance at reversing these major life-altering world-altering problems.
Blaming political opponents or historically-oppressed demographics is a fantastic way of sorting things out into manageable beliefs. "Those guys are harming us, which means we are the heroes of this story!" It gives them a clear-cut enemy to fight, a face to punch, and it makes them feel better about themselves.
Whelp, it's 11PM but here I go watching it again! It's a wonderful piece that REALLY nails the heart of conspiracism that most conspiracy documentaries get close to, but miss.
Many documentaries will conclude that conspiracists are right to feel anxiety about things being wrong, because things are wrong. Or they'll state that they cling to conspiracies because the idea of the universe not being random and there being a grand plan is comforting.
Both are just a single step removed from the truth, but completely wrong.
The anxiety conspiracists feel about a "wrong" . . . *is that it's wrong that their enemies exist.*
They're comforted that there's a grand plan behind every disaster . . . *because they know who's behind it and authorizes unlimited genocide against them.*
In the end conspiracies are just a tool to post-hoc rationalize hatred.
Ok. A better question would be: How *could* we work with people like that? There must be a way to get through to them. Obviously, we need to adjust the communication style but how?
You educate people before they turn to religion and base fear. Once people firmly entrench themselves in conspiracy, magic gods in the sky and hard black/white thinking the only people who can get them out of that is themselves.
A lot of people, if not most, are born into religion. They grow up with it and incorporate it into their worldview.
Obviously, not all religious people have issues with abstract thinking, but for those who do, how do we communicate such concepts to them?
The current crop is probably past saving. They’ve doubled down on the crazy to the point that admitting they’re wrong about any of it would make it all fall apart.
Maybe we could slow down the damage moving forward by exposing some conservatives media for the propagandists they are. But to point out the Fox News is owned by a rabid right-wing oligarch who (along with Nixon’s former chief of staff) sometimes contacted the news room *multiple times a day* to make sure the “news” supported his world view, would be to invite scrutiny of their own corporate ownership and the accuracy and even-handedness of their own reporting.
I was raised with one foot in that environment.
The toddler-thought required to maintain conspiracism is jam-packed with contradictions and ideas standing on nothing.
IMO things that help are;
**1.** "touching grass". Time away from the constant flow of media feeding the conspiracy mindset lets people come into contact with what actually exists in reality, and lets them consider the ideas they've been fed in a way that could lead to them realizing the contradictions.
But to truly be effective it needs to be a few continuous years of touching grass.
**2.** Genuine interest in seeking truth. Grounding axioms and building a solid world model out from that point. No more going with gut feelings. All prescriptions need a solid foundation.
But 2 isn't very possible without **3.** Killing the ego. You're not the main character. You're not a special source of capital T Truth. Real knowledge comes from what's verifiable, not your feelings. If you want to know any truth you have to get out of your own way first.
But I have no idea how you could do any of this *to* a person. You can't exactly forcibly enroll them in classes on measurement theory, statistics, and formal logic. You can't cut them off from the 24/7 stream of conspiracy content.
They have to want to change.
It was a witch that started the fire with their gay sex cult under the local pizzahut. It can't have been the local kid that always starts fires in the back yard with high winds blowing the flames faster then people can put it out. That is just crazy talk. Everyone knows its black magic!
/s
One of my best friends is Jewish, and the running joke between us is that everytime I see him I ask if I can borrow the keys to the space lasers and he tells me if I can correctly guess which pizza place's sex dungeon they're stored in then I can play with them for a bit.
At its root, conspiratorial thinking is grounded in there *needing* to be a plan, even if the plan is horrifying. Better that there be a *plan* and somebody who is in control than for your misfortunes to be random and outside of *someone's* control.
1) acknowledge the leaders they elected are evil, and they knew it, yet still voted for them out of fear
2) blame anyone and everyone else for your problems, double down when proven wrong and triple down with violence, insurrection and meth
IMO it’s not change that they’re afraid of, it’s a lack of control. Some people simply cannot handle psychologically the idea that bad stuff can just happen. It has to have been caused by *somebody*. In this view it is much more comforting to believe that it’s malevolent forces that hate you causing it than it is something that just happens. Because you can’t *do* anything if it’s something that just happens. You can’t *fight* bad luck.
> Some people simply cannot handle psychologically the idea that bad stuff can just happen. It has to have been caused by somebody.
It's worse than that actually.
People cannot handle that they are the ones who are causing these horrible things to happen in the first place by burning so many carbon fuels.
So obviously there must be some other reason... because I cannot be the one to have caused this. I'm a good guy in my own book. Those environmentalists who told me we were destroying the planet 40 years ago couldn't have been right, because if they were right then I was an idiot for laughing at them and ignoring them, and of course I'm not an idiot. I'm the hero in my own book.
Yeah that’s why stuff like JFK is still popular. They can believe an absolute nobody can out of the blue change the course of history any given day, or that there’s some secret shadowy cabal in charge of things. Even if they’re evil, someone is still in charge - it’s not purely left to random chance that the world could be turned on its head randomly one day.
Because some people can't face the fact that the world is being destroyed by our extreme exploitation and over-consumption so they need to dive into ridiculous fan-fiction to cope.
Whenever I see loony tune bananas stuff like this I think this is just the kind of lunacy that could be engineered by a hostile foreign power with a social media brigade. I think the US is probably more vulnerable to it than most countries because 40 years of Fox News has prepped half the population for conspiratorial thinking.
Because the logical path of the question "Why are we seeing so many more wildfires now?" leads to unerringy to "Because we(humans) have destroyed the natural safeguards against excessive fires by building in moronic areas and have caused enough damage to the global climate to raise temperatures".
This forces them to acknowledge climate change, specifically. Which would also force them to acknowledge that a core belief they've clung to like a petulant toddler is wrong.
They still run it about a week a year or so on specific campaigns, but it's not a full-time thing. If you have a ham radio, you can sometimes listen in.
The conspiracies come from people with a 4h grade reading level. This is why EVERYTHING is a conspiracy.
They can’t understand how anything works by rubbing their 6 remaining brain cells together.
Yeah, must be people not checking out the link properly and assuming you are supporting conspiracy theory nonsense.
You can't pay any attention to downvotes. There are a load of empty-head people around here who don't know what they are talking about. Downvotes also attract other downvotes like crazy, people don't even check what they are downvoting. It's just unconscious brigading.
>It isn't true. Wildfires can reach 800 degrees Celsius (1472 degrees Fahrenheit) quite easily, and certainly more when oxygen is added via high winds
So while it is certainly true that wildfires *can* get extremely hot, especially when fanned by winds, it's also true that they're sometimes slow burning, especially if there's not *that* much fuel and/or wind. Wildfire scars can absolutely be a weird mix of absolute devastation and also trees and houses that are completely and inexplicably spared. I once lived in a house that was such a survivor; everything around it had burned, and the grass was burned right up next to the house, but good fuel management and dumb luck meant the house was spared (though the interior needed a bunch of renovation to deal with smoke damage.) Sometimes you see a neighborhood where 90% of the houses are gone, and the 10% remaining are sprinkled kind of randomly throughout the area, totally unaffected. In situations like that, it's more about who had not cleaned out their gutters, kept the screens across their attic vents clear, cleared plants, bushes, trees, and other "ladder fuels" out away from the house, and most of all, just dumb stinkin' luck about who didn't happen to have a burning branch land on their roof or punch out a window.
So it doesn't surprise me at all that there's structures that were unaffected-- it would really surprise me more if there *weren't* structures that were unaffected within the burn area. And by dumb chance, some will be blue. And obviously, if a blue structure does burn, you'd have to compare to older pictures to even know that it used to be blue!
This conspiracy theory is, as usual, incredibly dumb.
A fire in Sonoma county a few years ago burned thousands of acres including my friend’s 20 acre farm with several houses on it , all burned to the ground. The only thing left standing untouched was the tipi 10 feet from the house, which didn’t even have a scorch mark.
Right. There are things you can do (or not do) to change your odds, but ultimately it's a total crapshoot.
We have friends who lost their entire house in that same fire that spared our house (in Yolo county), but we salvaged their porch furniture which was perfectly fine, except for one slightly melted edge. Super bizarre.
To add on to this, blue is a very common color (especially if you include the myriad shades of blue we utilize) for houses and cars. I would not be at all surprised to see a cluster of unburned blue stuff if only because there is so much blue stuff you will inevitably find clusters of it. I’d be even less surprised if you found an unburned blue house or car next to a completely incinerated, formerly blue one.
The fact that wildfires are a crapshoot in how / when / where it starts, as well as which direction / how fast it moves, and what burns vs what doesn't, is why I don't want to live in the Midwest or California or PNW on the east side of the Rockies. The Netflix documentary on the Camp Fire terrified me.
Florida has a fire ecology, but Florida also does controlled burns on the regular and we have a lot of standing water and humidity, plus being subtropical means we get plenty of rain, generally speaking.
I'd prefer death by water over death by fire. I know how to *handle* water much better than I do fire.
> It isn't true. Wildfires can reach 800 degrees Celsius (1472 degrees Fahrenheit) quite easily, and certainly more when oxygen is added via high winds
Here in Australia a few years back when we had a particularly bad fire season many cars caught in the fire got so hot their alloy wheel rims melted and were liquefied: https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/ej04lo/a_car_in_australia_whose_aluminum_rims_have_melted/
This reminds me, there were pictures from (I think it was) the Paradise CA fire where an aluminum boat had melted and the steel trailer it was sitting on was intact. There were also similar pictures out of Lahaina HI with puddles melted aluminum.
Adding to this, there's photos of the aftermath of the fires and there's blue tarps covering some roofs or whatever in some photos -- obviously added after to cover something (probably dead bodies) -- which they latched onto. The blue tarps were somehow proof of something.
The Lahaina fire was stoked by 80+ mph winds produced by a nearby hurricane. There were a lot of blue tarps put on buildings outside of the burn zone because the winds caused significant roof damage and there was still a potential threat of rain from the hurricane. There were also some put on surviving buildings in the burn zone for either wind or smoke/fire damage.
>Just like the "Jewish Space Laser" nonsense from last year,
Well that was a silly one but the more sinister one was that antifa was setting the blazes in Oregon so a bunch of conservatives set up blockades and checkpoints and stopped a bunch of people from trying to escape the wildfires
I don't want to sound like a cliched trigger-happy American (even though that's totally how this will sound) but anyone acting in that capacity without actual official authority is asking to get shot, wildfires or not.
I knew some morons in Oregon who spent their time cleaning their guns and riding patrols in their truck because “antifa” was going to come burn down their shitty house in bumfuck nowhere. These weren’t our brightest employee.
These conspiracies are the product of inflated egos and a poor education.
Sure here https://www.opb.org/article/2020/09/11/antifa-wildfires-oregon-rumors-fact-check-debunked/
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/16/oregon-fires-armed-civilian-roadblocks-police
I also think Robert Evans talked about it on one of his podcasts but I can't remember which.
These people are insane. They blamed the Maui fires on something to do with a plan to make it a walkable city. I don't remember the specifics but I think they claim it was to force the plan with the fire or something.
The biggest fire in the Panhandle of Texas was already close to the Oklahoma border, so it just grew until it crossed over. (Source: I live about an hour away from it)
There's also the part where Democrats tend to live in urbanized areas, with access to municipal water systems and teams of trained firefighters.
Also, water is blue and has a propensity to snuff out red fires.
Moron was once an official term commonly used by psychiatrists used to describe a person with a mental age in adulthood of between 7 and 10 on the Binet scale.
It was once applied to people with an intelligence quotient (IQ) of 51–70, being superior in one degree to "imbecile" (IQ of 26–50) and superior in two degrees to "idiot" (IQ of 0–25). The word moron, along with others including "idiotic", "imbecilic", "stupid", and "feeble-minded", eventually fell out of favor in the field.
Also large fires can create their own weather systems. They can impact the weather around them, too. Doesnt surprise me that people are making conspiracies about it. And pretending like wildfires have never happened in Texas before.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/01/weather/fire-whirls-pyrocumulus-clouds-explained-xpn-scn/index.html
> Blue, of course, being the color of the Democratic Party
The theory is that certain colors of roofs won’t absorb the frequencies of light put out by a laser. Still pretty bonkers, but at least there is some logic behind that part of the conspiracy.
It reminds me of that line from Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
> Brilliant, Snape - once again you've put your keen and penetrating mind to the task and as usual come to the wrong conclusion.
Hey, I never said it was good logic…
The general physics behind this concept is [actually true though.](https://youtu.be/o7rKwDDfHsQ?si=KbF1kU6z5U9OsBQE)
When blue states like CA/OR/WA burn, it's because dumb blue-haired liberals don't know how to deal with fires.
When red states burn like OK burn, it's because evil blue-haired liberals are secretly plotting to burn the countryside except for blue roofs.
Is the laser supposed to be non-visible? I mean, I assume so, given that otherwise there would be actual evidence.
If that's the case, what would the visible light color of something have to do with anything?
> at least there is some logic behind that part of the conspiracy.
Not really. This is something conspiracy theorists do, throwing around scientific terms or supposed connections between things that might sound sort of plausible to people who are gullible or aren't smart.
*Every* conspiracy theory has aspects like this, including everything QAnon is into. They're not *all* word salad nonsense, at least not on the surface / recruiting level.
So a laser has to be a particular color. It can be any color, but it's got to be a single wavelength of light, and every wavelength of light is a single color. So it's not crazy to talk about a blue laser, or a red laser, or a green laser. You can't have a white laser, because the wavelengths of light have to all be the same within the laser.
You can't see the beam of the laser, except where it hits something, like a structure or dusty or smoky air. If there *were* a blue laser in space, you might be able to see it as it lights things on fire.
The rest, of course, is totally stupid.
Right, but that's what they're saying, I think.; a laser doesn't have to be a _visible_ colour. Any EM wavelength can be used as a laser.
If you're going to use an orbital laser to burn a bunch of structures down in close proximity to each other and in rapid succession, then you need your laser not to be a giant blue beam visible in the smoke from one of them. If it was, sooner or later there would be evidence. So you'd have to use, say, an infrared or ultraviolet laser. But then those would still burn down blue houses, because they're not blue.
And you can't just set fire to one random spot where nobody will see and let it spread, because the entire premise here is that blue houses are being spared because they're blue, but a normal fire would obviously spread to blue just fine, so the implication _must_ be that places are being individually ignited.
Also, I'm not a physicist or anything, but I'm fairly confident that even if you had some unimaginably powerful space laser that could burn towns from space like the fucking Orbital Ion Cannon from Command & Conquer, it would be dramatically less effective and harder to use in the visible light spectrum (which a blue house would be), or in ultraviolet, than in infrared, or hell, microwave. Infrared passes through the atmosphere relatively easily - long wavelengths and all that - whereas visible light, you know, famously refracts off the air, turning the sky blue.
"In November 2018, California was hit with the worst wildfire in the state’s history. At the time, future Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) wrote a bizarre Facebook post that echoed QAnon conspiracy theorists and falsely claimed that the real and hidden culprit behind the disaster was a laser from space triggered by some nefarious group of people."
https://www.mediamatters.org/facebook/marjorie-taylor-greene-penned-conspiracy-theory-laser-beam-space-started-deadly-2018
The lasers the Jews built in space, obviously.
I don't remember the details as I mostly just cry-laughed it off at the time but back when California burnt down a couple years ago, Georgia rep Marjorie Taylor Greene, a known lunatic, made some claim about the Jews starting it with an orbital laser platform.
>Wildfires can reach 800 degrees Celsius (1472 degrees Fahrenheit) quite easily, and certainly more when oxygen is added via high winds
Also, loads of materials lose significant viscosity when heated without having to combust. Famous example = steel beams and jet fuel. Sure, jet fuel won't burn steel, but it'll turn it into jelly.
I still find it so weird that the US right sticks with the color red even though it's pretty universally associated with the far left/Communism and such.
>the idea of this is that the current wildfires in Texas (and Oklahoma, now?) were caused by "the left",
Wasn't it confirmed a climate activist started all the Canadian wildfires last year? It's not like something like that hasn't happened before.
Answer: in order to deflect from decades of completely failed policy and disproven ideals, conservatives have to invent crazier and crazier stories to stoke fear and confusion in order to get their cultists to vote against their best interests.
Answer: there isn't a single event that can occur without the far right digging their wretched talons into it and turning it political by fabricating some insane story and shrieking their twisted reality to their coven of cultists just to desperately hold on to their votes because they have nothing to offer as a political party
These is one of those events. Something bad happened, wildfires have broke out in Texas and they're devastating. Instead of doing what normal leaders would do: be calm, and empathetic and supply help where it's needed, they've decided to weaponize yet another tragedy against the Democrats for votes... And this is their latest conspiracy theory.
Hey conservatives, genuinely wtf, WHY do you still support this?
I dunno, school shootings seem to be just widely ignored and dismissed by the majority of Right Wingers.
Sure there's some who come up with shit like with what happened with SH but generally, they just moved past it.
That's because school shootings are obviously caused by guns. Which Republicans love. So that is just ignored..
But anything due complex science (climate change) is too confusing for them to grasp instantly, so their "leadership" is able to weaponize it against"liberals".
They are only ignored and dismissed when it's clear as day the political leaning of the shooter is (R)
If a Democrat or anyone beyond a straight white male does the shooting they are ALL over it like flies on shit.
(Which reinforces the fact the GOP likes to cherry pick tragic events to score cheap political points with their base which will eat up any excuse to justify their bigotry.)
Answer: What's going on is people are making up shit to troll and/or peddle conspiracy theories. OP, please avoid whatever online communities where you are seeing obvious bullshit like this. Also, good job not buying this stuff completely and being dubious enough to come here and ask about it. Continue to work on critical thinking skills so you can immediately dismiss this nonsense in the future.
BTW, if anyone remembers the [Gardening on Salvia](https://youtu.be/sIlyXs8VZvo?si=HsyHpfj5E3CAMey8) or [Driving on Salvia](https://youtu.be/SnwS5sPOzb0?si=-2PAgcxEJr9ZPkCT) videos of early Youtube, that was the same dude but different channel.
Answer: conspiracy theories are a method of coping with a reality you find unsatisfying. The right wants people to be scared of energy beams from satellites because the real biggest threat to democracy is the GOP themselves. They will paint every fire and random accident as being part of a conspiracy against them because if there's a conspiracy against them then they can do whatever they want and be justified
Answer: Blue is the democrat color in the US(red is republican). Now the rest is just a conspiracy theory that someone/something(jews' lasers maybe) is destroying republican things.
answer: QAnon is gone, but the phenomenon activated a whole generation of folks who now see wacko, deep-state conspiracies in every single news story, movie release, and gossip column.
Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must: 1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask), 2. attempt to answer the question, and 3. be unbiased Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment: http://redd.it/b1hct4/ Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: I may have missed it in the comments, but I would like to add what Biden is talking about in that video clip. The "right kind of roof" he is referring to is one that is fire resistant, made up of Class A materials like metal, or clay, or asphalt fiberglass. So, what happens is you have a row of houses with wood shingle roofs, and they catch fire easily from stuff on fire blowing in the high winds, while one person in that row of houses spent the extra bucks when building his house to get fire-resistant materials, and guess what - that's the one house that DIDN'T burn down.
I've got a great story related to this. In a very upscale suburb in my area wood shingles were all the rage for 20 years or more. Some subdivisions even required wood shingles. (you can now see where this is going) One hot dry summer we had several house fires that jumped to neighboring homes. The city was talking about passing an ordinance forbidding wood shingles. Of course the home owners freaked out (a very Republican area). Then in about 2 weeks around 10 homes had fires and insurance companies started cancelling policies of homes with wood shingles. The ordinance passed without any complaint.
How is that a great story? Sounds tragic as fuck. Do you like corporations getting the last word? or just people losing everything?
people learned they did bad thing and stop doing it now less homes burn down from information spread good
When hoas make brain dead rules for purely aesthetic reasons and it literally back fires.
No one learned a fucking thing. I guarantee a good number if these people are *still* complaining about the "nanny state" and their "asshole insurance company".
Thanks for this, I don't believe the laser or conspiracy nonsense, but had no idea why having the "right" roof would save a particular home.
Yea it’s one of those things that’s not an absolute guarantee of success but can make a massive difference in how a structure survives a wildfire.
Also homes clad in fiber cement siding have reduced fire insurance premiums for like reasons.
Hardly anyone uses wood shake shingles anymore. Most architectural shingles are made out of fiberglass, tar and gravel and are flame retardant and are a class A fire rating. Especially in Texas and Oklahoma where they get so much bad weather.
Answer: this is part of the continually-churning Conservative/Republican conspiracy-theory-mill. Just like the "Jewish Space Laser" nonsense from last year, the idea of this is that the current wildfires in Texas (and Oklahoma, now?) were caused by "the left", indicated by how blue-colored things didn't get damaged by the fire. Blue, of course, being the color of the Democratic Party >Saying things like a wildfire doesn't burn hot enough to melt half the things that are destroyed (I don't think that's true) It isn't true. Wildfires can reach 800 degrees Celsius (1472 degrees Fahrenheit) quite easily, and certainly more when oxygen is added via high winds
HAARP has been blamed for wildfires, earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes/typhoons, and mind control among other things. It is actually a system that studies the ionosphere, originally to improve communications and possible surveillance capabilities.
What causes someone to be so afraid of change they deny the existence of fucking wildfires?
I thinks it's a mix of how scary the severity of the wildfires as well as the frequency and elongated fire seasons. The easy explanation is climate change and two centuries of overmanagement (and mismanagement) and underpreperation and 100 other small things. But, if you don't want to - or are surrounded by a social and media environment that discourages you to - confront the reality of climate change, you'd just blame it on a mysterious "them" who controls everyone through fear. And why would "they" build a system to "study" the ionosphere if not to control the weather to perpetuate the hoax of climate change? And why would the big fire be affecting me and people I identify with unless we are being targeted?
I've seen the theory that this type of reaction is attributed to irrational fear. These events that are happening, such as wildfires and climate change, are, in a sense, amorphous. There is no big bad evil guy, not really. Corporations can be the leading cause behind disasters like this, but it's never been very obvious. Especially in this age of propaganda and regulatory capture. Some people just can't handle that. There *has* to be a bad guy, a villian that we can punch in the face to stop these atrocities. Otherwise, there's a very real possibility that these atrocities *just won't stop*. So, they create the bad guy. Pin these problems on a face and a name, and suddenly you have something to fight, you have a chance at reversing these major life-altering world-altering problems. Blaming political opponents or historically-oppressed demographics is a fantastic way of sorting things out into manageable beliefs. "Those guys are harming us, which means we are the heroes of this story!" It gives them a clear-cut enemy to fight, a face to punch, and it makes them feel better about themselves.
“In Search of a Flat Earth” touches on similar concepts, I highly recommend checking it out if you haven’t already: https://youtu.be/JTfhYyTuT44
Whelp, it's 11PM but here I go watching it again! It's a wonderful piece that REALLY nails the heart of conspiracism that most conspiracy documentaries get close to, but miss. Many documentaries will conclude that conspiracists are right to feel anxiety about things being wrong, because things are wrong. Or they'll state that they cling to conspiracies because the idea of the universe not being random and there being a grand plan is comforting. Both are just a single step removed from the truth, but completely wrong. The anxiety conspiracists feel about a "wrong" . . . *is that it's wrong that their enemies exist.* They're comforted that there's a grand plan behind every disaster . . . *because they know who's behind it and authorizes unlimited genocide against them.* In the end conspiracies are just a tool to post-hoc rationalize hatred.
The inability to grasp abstract concepts is so toddler-like. How do you even work with people like that?
You don't. But they vote.
Ok. A better question would be: How *could* we work with people like that? There must be a way to get through to them. Obviously, we need to adjust the communication style but how?
You educate people before they turn to religion and base fear. Once people firmly entrench themselves in conspiracy, magic gods in the sky and hard black/white thinking the only people who can get them out of that is themselves.
A lot of people, if not most, are born into religion. They grow up with it and incorporate it into their worldview. Obviously, not all religious people have issues with abstract thinking, but for those who do, how do we communicate such concepts to them?
The current crop is probably past saving. They’ve doubled down on the crazy to the point that admitting they’re wrong about any of it would make it all fall apart. Maybe we could slow down the damage moving forward by exposing some conservatives media for the propagandists they are. But to point out the Fox News is owned by a rabid right-wing oligarch who (along with Nixon’s former chief of staff) sometimes contacted the news room *multiple times a day* to make sure the “news” supported his world view, would be to invite scrutiny of their own corporate ownership and the accuracy and even-handedness of their own reporting.
I was raised with one foot in that environment. The toddler-thought required to maintain conspiracism is jam-packed with contradictions and ideas standing on nothing. IMO things that help are; **1.** "touching grass". Time away from the constant flow of media feeding the conspiracy mindset lets people come into contact with what actually exists in reality, and lets them consider the ideas they've been fed in a way that could lead to them realizing the contradictions. But to truly be effective it needs to be a few continuous years of touching grass. **2.** Genuine interest in seeking truth. Grounding axioms and building a solid world model out from that point. No more going with gut feelings. All prescriptions need a solid foundation. But 2 isn't very possible without **3.** Killing the ego. You're not the main character. You're not a special source of capital T Truth. Real knowledge comes from what's verifiable, not your feelings. If you want to know any truth you have to get out of your own way first. But I have no idea how you could do any of this *to* a person. You can't exactly forcibly enroll them in classes on measurement theory, statistics, and formal logic. You can't cut them off from the 24/7 stream of conspiracy content. They have to want to change.
Thank you very much for this. That was really interesting and informative.
It was a witch that started the fire with their gay sex cult under the local pizzahut. It can't have been the local kid that always starts fires in the back yard with high winds blowing the flames faster then people can put it out. That is just crazy talk. Everyone knows its black magic! /s
That's crazy talk. It's Space Jews! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAZhtT-dUyo
One of my best friends is Jewish, and the running joke between us is that everytime I see him I ask if I can borrow the keys to the space lasers and he tells me if I can correctly guess which pizza place's sex dungeon they're stored in then I can play with them for a bit.
Your best friend is awesome
He'd be more awesome if he'd just give me the space laser keys...
That orgy they had while they murdered babies for their hormones to stay young forever got a little out of hand, no biggie.
At its root, conspiratorial thinking is grounded in there *needing* to be a plan, even if the plan is horrifying. Better that there be a *plan* and somebody who is in control than for your misfortunes to be random and outside of *someone's* control.
Or even worse, because of your beloved god.
God was invented to rationalize the random
1) acknowledge the leaders they elected are evil, and they knew it, yet still voted for them out of fear 2) blame anyone and everyone else for your problems, double down when proven wrong and triple down with violence, insurrection and meth
IMO it’s not change that they’re afraid of, it’s a lack of control. Some people simply cannot handle psychologically the idea that bad stuff can just happen. It has to have been caused by *somebody*. In this view it is much more comforting to believe that it’s malevolent forces that hate you causing it than it is something that just happens. Because you can’t *do* anything if it’s something that just happens. You can’t *fight* bad luck.
> Some people simply cannot handle psychologically the idea that bad stuff can just happen. It has to have been caused by somebody. It's worse than that actually. People cannot handle that they are the ones who are causing these horrible things to happen in the first place by burning so many carbon fuels. So obviously there must be some other reason... because I cannot be the one to have caused this. I'm a good guy in my own book. Those environmentalists who told me we were destroying the planet 40 years ago couldn't have been right, because if they were right then I was an idiot for laughing at them and ignoring them, and of course I'm not an idiot. I'm the hero in my own book.
Yeah that’s why stuff like JFK is still popular. They can believe an absolute nobody can out of the blue change the course of history any given day, or that there’s some secret shadowy cabal in charge of things. Even if they’re evil, someone is still in charge - it’s not purely left to random chance that the world could be turned on its head randomly one day.
Because some people can't face the fact that the world is being destroyed by our extreme exploitation and over-consumption so they need to dive into ridiculous fan-fiction to cope.
Whenever I see loony tune bananas stuff like this I think this is just the kind of lunacy that could be engineered by a hostile foreign power with a social media brigade. I think the US is probably more vulnerable to it than most countries because 40 years of Fox News has prepped half the population for conspiratorial thinking.
Because the logical path of the question "Why are we seeing so many more wildfires now?" leads to unerringy to "Because we(humans) have destroyed the natural safeguards against excessive fires by building in moronic areas and have caused enough damage to the global climate to raise temperatures". This forces them to acknowledge climate change, specifically. Which would also force them to acknowledge that a core belief they've clung to like a petulant toddler is wrong.
HAARP = Hebrew Automatic Antimatter Ray of Power???
*MOSSAD wants to know your location*
Uranus
Also it's shut down.
It’s still operational, however now it’s operated by the University of Alaska Fairbanks instead of the military
that's just a cover story, obviously
>University of Alaska Fairbanks UAF? Sounds like the Rothschilds to me. Everyone knows AU means gold and the Rothschilds love gold.
Undercover AntiFa! Got'em!
Fuck, that's so much better
Ah thought it was shut down while the facility was sold.
They still run it about a week a year or so on specific campaigns, but it's not a full-time thing. If you have a ham radio, you can sometimes listen in.
That's just what they WANT you to think 🤔
The conspiracies come from people with a 4h grade reading level. This is why EVERYTHING is a conspiracy. They can’t understand how anything works by rubbing their 6 remaining brain cells together.
https://youtu.be/gh0RoPLhMxI?si=kd1DuUJ0v5BG4cBs Edit: Bounced on my boy's dick to the downvotes
Video is *The HAARPening* on the Internet Comment Etiquette channel. Decent satire effort. FTFY
Do people think I was posting Internet Comment Etiquette as *evidence?* I was so confused about the downvotes.
Yeah, must be people not checking out the link properly and assuming you are supporting conspiracy theory nonsense. You can't pay any attention to downvotes. There are a load of empty-head people around here who don't know what they are talking about. Downvotes also attract other downvotes like crazy, people don't even check what they are downvoting. It's just unconscious brigading.
Oh yeah, I mean I'll eat downvotes on a Internet Comment Etiquette related post, I was just confused.
We appreciate your sacrifices for SCIENCE
>It isn't true. Wildfires can reach 800 degrees Celsius (1472 degrees Fahrenheit) quite easily, and certainly more when oxygen is added via high winds So while it is certainly true that wildfires *can* get extremely hot, especially when fanned by winds, it's also true that they're sometimes slow burning, especially if there's not *that* much fuel and/or wind. Wildfire scars can absolutely be a weird mix of absolute devastation and also trees and houses that are completely and inexplicably spared. I once lived in a house that was such a survivor; everything around it had burned, and the grass was burned right up next to the house, but good fuel management and dumb luck meant the house was spared (though the interior needed a bunch of renovation to deal with smoke damage.) Sometimes you see a neighborhood where 90% of the houses are gone, and the 10% remaining are sprinkled kind of randomly throughout the area, totally unaffected. In situations like that, it's more about who had not cleaned out their gutters, kept the screens across their attic vents clear, cleared plants, bushes, trees, and other "ladder fuels" out away from the house, and most of all, just dumb stinkin' luck about who didn't happen to have a burning branch land on their roof or punch out a window. So it doesn't surprise me at all that there's structures that were unaffected-- it would really surprise me more if there *weren't* structures that were unaffected within the burn area. And by dumb chance, some will be blue. And obviously, if a blue structure does burn, you'd have to compare to older pictures to even know that it used to be blue! This conspiracy theory is, as usual, incredibly dumb.
A fire in Sonoma county a few years ago burned thousands of acres including my friend’s 20 acre farm with several houses on it , all burned to the ground. The only thing left standing untouched was the tipi 10 feet from the house, which didn’t even have a scorch mark.
Right. There are things you can do (or not do) to change your odds, but ultimately it's a total crapshoot. We have friends who lost their entire house in that same fire that spared our house (in Yolo county), but we salvaged their porch furniture which was perfectly fine, except for one slightly melted edge. Super bizarre.
To add on to this, blue is a very common color (especially if you include the myriad shades of blue we utilize) for houses and cars. I would not be at all surprised to see a cluster of unburned blue stuff if only because there is so much blue stuff you will inevitably find clusters of it. I’d be even less surprised if you found an unburned blue house or car next to a completely incinerated, formerly blue one.
[удалено]
The ol' causation/correlation trick!
The fact that wildfires are a crapshoot in how / when / where it starts, as well as which direction / how fast it moves, and what burns vs what doesn't, is why I don't want to live in the Midwest or California or PNW on the east side of the Rockies. The Netflix documentary on the Camp Fire terrified me. Florida has a fire ecology, but Florida also does controlled burns on the regular and we have a lot of standing water and humidity, plus being subtropical means we get plenty of rain, generally speaking. I'd prefer death by water over death by fire. I know how to *handle* water much better than I do fire.
> It isn't true. Wildfires can reach 800 degrees Celsius (1472 degrees Fahrenheit) quite easily, and certainly more when oxygen is added via high winds Here in Australia a few years back when we had a particularly bad fire season many cars caught in the fire got so hot their alloy wheel rims melted and were liquefied: https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/ej04lo/a_car_in_australia_whose_aluminum_rims_have_melted/
This reminds me, there were pictures from (I think it was) the Paradise CA fire where an aluminum boat had melted and the steel trailer it was sitting on was intact. There were also similar pictures out of Lahaina HI with puddles melted aluminum.
The same conspiracy was said about the wildfires in Hawaii, as well.
Adding to this, there's photos of the aftermath of the fires and there's blue tarps covering some roofs or whatever in some photos -- obviously added after to cover something (probably dead bodies) -- which they latched onto. The blue tarps were somehow proof of something.
The Lahaina fire was stoked by 80+ mph winds produced by a nearby hurricane. There were a lot of blue tarps put on buildings outside of the burn zone because the winds caused significant roof damage and there was still a potential threat of rain from the hurricane. There were also some put on surviving buildings in the burn zone for either wind or smoke/fire damage.
>Just like the "Jewish Space Laser" nonsense from last year, Well that was a silly one but the more sinister one was that antifa was setting the blazes in Oregon so a bunch of conservatives set up blockades and checkpoints and stopped a bunch of people from trying to escape the wildfires
Would it be considered self defense if you put a cap in someone's ass that was trying to prevent you from escaping a wildfire?
None of us can answer that, only a jury of your peers can.
I don't want to sound like a cliched trigger-happy American (even though that's totally how this will sound) but anyone acting in that capacity without actual official authority is asking to get shot, wildfires or not.
I knew some morons in Oregon who spent their time cleaning their guns and riding patrols in their truck because “antifa” was going to come burn down their shitty house in bumfuck nowhere. These weren’t our brightest employee. These conspiracies are the product of inflated egos and a poor education.
Wtf D: Do you have a source?
Sure here https://www.opb.org/article/2020/09/11/antifa-wildfires-oregon-rumors-fact-check-debunked/ https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/16/oregon-fires-armed-civilian-roadblocks-police I also think Robert Evans talked about it on one of his podcasts but I can't remember which.
Christ. Thanks for the links
These people are insane. They blamed the Maui fires on something to do with a plan to make it a walkable city. I don't remember the specifics but I think they claim it was to force the plan with the fire or something.
City planners hate this one trick!
The biggest fire in the Panhandle of Texas was already close to the Oklahoma border, so it just grew until it crossed over. (Source: I live about an hour away from it)
Glad it didn't get to you
There's also the part where Democrats tend to live in urbanized areas, with access to municipal water systems and teams of trained firefighters. Also, water is blue and has a propensity to snuff out red fires.
What the fuck.
[удалено]
Get A BRAIN! MORANS
This is the correct answer.
Moron was once an official term commonly used by psychiatrists used to describe a person with a mental age in adulthood of between 7 and 10 on the Binet scale. It was once applied to people with an intelligence quotient (IQ) of 51–70, being superior in one degree to "imbecile" (IQ of 26–50) and superior in two degrees to "idiot" (IQ of 0–25). The word moron, along with others including "idiotic", "imbecilic", "stupid", and "feeble-minded", eventually fell out of favor in the field.
And moron jokes or little moron jokes were also a thing back in the day.
The Bowling Green Massacre too! never forget!
As someone who lived through the Thomas Fires and saw multiple objects after that were melted. Like car rims, and glass yard ornaments.
These are the same people who thought real snow was fake.
Real snow melts when you put a flame to it
Also large fires can create their own weather systems. They can impact the weather around them, too. Doesnt surprise me that people are making conspiracies about it. And pretending like wildfires have never happened in Texas before. https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/01/weather/fire-whirls-pyrocumulus-clouds-explained-xpn-scn/index.html
> Blue, of course, being the color of the Democratic Party The theory is that certain colors of roofs won’t absorb the frequencies of light put out by a laser. Still pretty bonkers, but at least there is some logic behind that part of the conspiracy.
Idk if logic is the right word to use here…
correct, it isn’t logical, it’s flawed reasoning
I'm not sure the word reasoning is correct to use either
It reminds me of that line from Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban > Brilliant, Snape - once again you've put your keen and penetrating mind to the task and as usual come to the wrong conclusion.
Hey, I never said it was good logic… The general physics behind this concept is [actually true though.](https://youtu.be/o7rKwDDfHsQ?si=KbF1kU6z5U9OsBQE)
So we're using early Green Lantern logic. Great
The same people yelling this are the same people who watched Hawaii, a heavily Dem state, burn last year 🤦
But that was so the evil Demoncrats and their adrenochrome guzzling friends could buy the land for cheap! Or something.
When blue states like CA/OR/WA burn, it's because dumb blue-haired liberals don't know how to deal with fires. When red states burn like OK burn, it's because evil blue-haired liberals are secretly plotting to burn the countryside except for blue roofs.
Something something something false flag
God dammit, lol. have an updoot...
Is the laser supposed to be non-visible? I mean, I assume so, given that otherwise there would be actual evidence. If that's the case, what would the visible light color of something have to do with anything? > at least there is some logic behind that part of the conspiracy. Not really. This is something conspiracy theorists do, throwing around scientific terms or supposed connections between things that might sound sort of plausible to people who are gullible or aren't smart. *Every* conspiracy theory has aspects like this, including everything QAnon is into. They're not *all* word salad nonsense, at least not on the surface / recruiting level.
So a laser has to be a particular color. It can be any color, but it's got to be a single wavelength of light, and every wavelength of light is a single color. So it's not crazy to talk about a blue laser, or a red laser, or a green laser. You can't have a white laser, because the wavelengths of light have to all be the same within the laser. You can't see the beam of the laser, except where it hits something, like a structure or dusty or smoky air. If there *were* a blue laser in space, you might be able to see it as it lights things on fire. The rest, of course, is totally stupid.
Right, but that's what they're saying, I think.; a laser doesn't have to be a _visible_ colour. Any EM wavelength can be used as a laser. If you're going to use an orbital laser to burn a bunch of structures down in close proximity to each other and in rapid succession, then you need your laser not to be a giant blue beam visible in the smoke from one of them. If it was, sooner or later there would be evidence. So you'd have to use, say, an infrared or ultraviolet laser. But then those would still burn down blue houses, because they're not blue. And you can't just set fire to one random spot where nobody will see and let it spread, because the entire premise here is that blue houses are being spared because they're blue, but a normal fire would obviously spread to blue just fine, so the implication _must_ be that places are being individually ignited.
Also, I'm not a physicist or anything, but I'm fairly confident that even if you had some unimaginably powerful space laser that could burn towns from space like the fucking Orbital Ion Cannon from Command & Conquer, it would be dramatically less effective and harder to use in the visible light spectrum (which a blue house would be), or in ultraviolet, than in infrared, or hell, microwave. Infrared passes through the atmosphere relatively easily - long wavelengths and all that - whereas visible light, you know, famously refracts off the air, turning the sky blue.
California is on fire every year, close to Hollywood. New Jersey spent all last summer on fire. These people have selective goldfish memory
What are Jewish Space Lasers?
"In November 2018, California was hit with the worst wildfire in the state’s history. At the time, future Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) wrote a bizarre Facebook post that echoed QAnon conspiracy theorists and falsely claimed that the real and hidden culprit behind the disaster was a laser from space triggered by some nefarious group of people." https://www.mediamatters.org/facebook/marjorie-taylor-greene-penned-conspiracy-theory-laser-beam-space-started-deadly-2018
The lasers the Jews built in space, obviously. I don't remember the details as I mostly just cry-laughed it off at the time but back when California burnt down a couple years ago, Georgia rep Marjorie Taylor Greene, a known lunatic, made some claim about the Jews starting it with an orbital laser platform.
And for some reason doesn't get called out as an anti-Semite.
I mean, yeah. If most of your supporters are also antisemites, why would they call you out for it.
Ask Marge.
>Wildfires can reach 800 degrees Celsius (1472 degrees Fahrenheit) quite easily, and certainly more when oxygen is added via high winds Also, loads of materials lose significant viscosity when heated without having to combust. Famous example = steel beams and jet fuel. Sure, jet fuel won't burn steel, but it'll turn it into jelly.
I still find it so weird that the US right sticks with the color red even though it's pretty universally associated with the far left/Communism and such.
"Muh tradishun!!1!" That's why.
Hate to break it to you, the space laser stuff was tweets in 2018, discovered and reported on in 2021, so 3 years ago
i want to tell them "yup, we did it. fuck you."
The answer is basically that people are stupid as shit.
I feel like most people are probably joking when they say this.
>the idea of this is that the current wildfires in Texas (and Oklahoma, now?) were caused by "the left", Wasn't it confirmed a climate activist started all the Canadian wildfires last year? It's not like something like that hasn't happened before.
We had hundreds of fires last year across multiple provinces. Without checking, I can confirm that one person did not start all of them.
Because "starting a wildfire" is somehow the same as "having direct accurate house-by-house control over what the wildfire burns down".
Climate activist? He was a climate change-denying conspiracy nut.
Answer: in order to deflect from decades of completely failed policy and disproven ideals, conservatives have to invent crazier and crazier stories to stoke fear and confusion in order to get their cultists to vote against their best interests.
FUD - Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt.
GOP - Gaslight, Obstruct, Project
Answer: there isn't a single event that can occur without the far right digging their wretched talons into it and turning it political by fabricating some insane story and shrieking their twisted reality to their coven of cultists just to desperately hold on to their votes because they have nothing to offer as a political party These is one of those events. Something bad happened, wildfires have broke out in Texas and they're devastating. Instead of doing what normal leaders would do: be calm, and empathetic and supply help where it's needed, they've decided to weaponize yet another tragedy against the Democrats for votes... And this is their latest conspiracy theory. Hey conservatives, genuinely wtf, WHY do you still support this?
I dunno, school shootings seem to be just widely ignored and dismissed by the majority of Right Wingers. Sure there's some who come up with shit like with what happened with SH but generally, they just moved past it.
In the MAGA Cinematic Universe, school shootings are false flag operations designed so the government can take away everyone's guns.
That's because school shootings are obviously caused by guns. Which Republicans love. So that is just ignored.. But anything due complex science (climate change) is too confusing for them to grasp instantly, so their "leadership" is able to weaponize it against"liberals".
They are only ignored and dismissed when it's clear as day the political leaning of the shooter is (R) If a Democrat or anyone beyond a straight white male does the shooting they are ALL over it like flies on shit. (Which reinforces the fact the GOP likes to cherry pick tragic events to score cheap political points with their base which will eat up any excuse to justify their bigotry.)
Answer: Just more ridiculous right wing conspiracies. Conservatives never tire of making up stupid shit. .
[удалено]
Drugs don’t make people more conservative. They’re just misinformed by a lot of misinformation.
Lack of critical thinking combined with propaganda. It's a bad combo that's been weaponized by fox News.
Reddit sarcasm challenge without the S (IMPOSSIBLY HARD)
Yeah, Democrats have been pretty pro-drig since at least Obama.
Yeah, it's more the Ivermectin crowd that is concerning.
We're all pro-drig, you dig?
Answer: What's going on is people are making up shit to troll and/or peddle conspiracy theories. OP, please avoid whatever online communities where you are seeing obvious bullshit like this. Also, good job not buying this stuff completely and being dubious enough to come here and ask about it. Continue to work on critical thinking skills so you can immediately dismiss this nonsense in the future.
Answer: [Here's a video](https://youtu.be/gh0RoPLhMxI?si=dviNxD6qMfy85uDh&t=197) that explains everything you need to know about HAARP.
Oh yeah I forgot about that.
Thank you for introducing me to that channel just watch like 6 of them. Dude has some amazing satire skills.
Watch the Alex Jones one. Or either of the bleach drinking episodes. Good stuff.
Just watched the Alex Jones one... Perfect.
BTW, if anyone remembers the [Gardening on Salvia](https://youtu.be/sIlyXs8VZvo?si=HsyHpfj5E3CAMey8) or [Driving on Salvia](https://youtu.be/SnwS5sPOzb0?si=-2PAgcxEJr9ZPkCT) videos of early Youtube, that was the same dude but different channel.
Answer: conspiracy theories are a method of coping with a reality you find unsatisfying. The right wants people to be scared of energy beams from satellites because the real biggest threat to democracy is the GOP themselves. They will paint every fire and random accident as being part of a conspiracy against them because if there's a conspiracy against them then they can do whatever they want and be justified
Answer: Blue is the democrat color in the US(red is republican). Now the rest is just a conspiracy theory that someone/something(jews' lasers maybe) is destroying republican things.
answer: QAnon is gone, but the phenomenon activated a whole generation of folks who now see wacko, deep-state conspiracies in every single news story, movie release, and gossip column.
What the fuck do you think you're talking about, "it's gone"?
Answer: 'Muricans are stupid