LogFAQs > #962668680

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

I probably went along with something you said for the sake of argument.

It was pretty explicitly "other people know about this? Maybe they heard about it from Full Throttle." I believe my response was "do you really think anyone outside of GameFAQs knows who Duckbear is?", to which you replied with "I don't even know who Duckbear is." My rough sense is that that particular example happened 1-2 months ago, but my sense of time is pretty wonky these days, so I expect that's off.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

To the contrary, I expect the vast majority of people have never heard of a qanon.

What is your basis for expecting that? Furthermore, what bearing do the experiences of the vast majority of people have on something's existence or validity? The vast majority of people have never heard of Rocket: Robot on Wheels for the N64, but that was a great game that doesn't stop existing just because it was obscure.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

They may think I'm wrong, but they didn't say I was wrong.

Subtext, yo.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

You're not actually paying attention, are you?

Post #42 - not unprecedented for him to do something unique with the story he posts.

He interjects opinions, not usually information. Occasionally he will create new semantic content, but that's usually because he's so bad at writing that his efforts to paraphrase result in accidentally saying something new/different. It is quite unprecedented for him to fabricate an entire pseudo-organization out of whole cloth.

Moreover, even if he had synthesized this information himself, that's a belief you could very easily verify by looking up the Dailymail article he pulled this topic from:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10503641/QAnon-follower-45-murdered-wife-29-thought-sex-trafficking-CIA-asset.html

Oh look, Dailymail talked about Qanon all on their own in discussing this incident. I guess that means your baseless assumption was incorrect. Who knew?

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

Or, as I also already posited, it looped back around. Full Throttle posted details about a Daily Mail article and made fun of someone by making up a conspiracy theory they bought into. While someone browses the topic another person looking over their shoulder reads some of it without knowing the context of who Full Throttle is. That person comments directly to a similar news article. Now the news media buy into the conspiracy theory.

Speaking of insane conspiracy theories...

If you genuinely believe that sequence of events is plausible despite everybody telling you you're wrong (since implicit speech seems to be failing, I'll spell it out for you: There is absolutely no reason for anyone to believe that Duckbear made up Qanon), you can do the research to substantiate it yourself. Go to the GameFAQs log site, sift through all topics by Full Throttle and mrduckbear (they are one and the same) to find his earliest mention of Qanon, then find the Dailymail article that corresponds to that topic. I guarantee the article will predate the topic, debunking your theory in its entirety. If it does not, then and only then will I accept the possibility that your belief has any basis in reality. Until then, you should not act like it does any more than you should act like gravity is a repulsive force.

What you have done is come up with an assumption that lines up with your extremely limited personal experience (that is, "I haven't seen anyone but duckbear post about Qanon, so it's probably something he made up") and decided you're comfortable with that and don't want to think about the matter any further. You have not substantiated that belief. You have not put any actual consideration into that belief. You have responded to people challenging that belief by saying nothing more than "It could still be true so I'm not going to change my mind." That's not how logic and empirical reasoning work. That's not a functional, healthy way to live your life and develop beliefs. So stop it.