"So, how does this hoax work, anyway?"

[Hektor]

I want to take some time here to review some of the literature in the field of hoaxes, lying and group consensus.

Good idea. I probably should have included more "theory" in the OP. I'll add a link to your post. There's a lot of relevant literature in a number of fields.

A classic text would be Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Kuhn was a philosopher of science. The old quip "science advances one funeral at a time" captures the main idea. The ideal of science is steady progress based on dispassionate consideration of evidence. In practice, it seems there's a lot of friction due to big egos and other human factors. Major changes/advances require "paradigm shifts" which are difficult for people to accept. Kuhn was specifically interested in hard science, but the same principles apply even more strongly to more politically charged topics.

In psychology, there is a large literature on cognitive biases and related concepts.

• Motivated reasoning
• Confirmation bias
• Belief perseverance
• Cognitive dissonance
• Overconfidence effect

Social psychology considers is more focused on group interaction.

Pluralistic ignorance - where an individual privately disbelieves something but publicly goes along with something because they assume (falsely) that everyone else believes

Sociological models of belief, as we would expect, focus on group dynamics. ...

Kuhn, who was Jewish was also influenced by Ludwik Fleck in his thinking. Fleck developed the idea of thought collectives. Meaning that there are social networks in academia that entertain similar thoughts or belief systems. This can also lead to fallacious reasoning. Ludwig Fleck was a concentration camp inmate who also researched on Typhus and its prevention inside the concentration camps.

The idea is however as old as the scientific method itself. Francis Bacon did already point to "idols of the mind" in his Novum Organon. They dictate the reasoning of those affected and lead to wrong conclusions all the time. It's always funny, when folks that claim to be enlightened, emancipated and rational fall for those idols and biases. And you can't win with them. They always find "reasons" for why they are right on a subject. I mean Holocaust Revisionists get those types of rhetorical devices posing as arguments thrown their way all the time. "Where did they go, if they weren't gassed?". "Do all witnesses lie?" - "Are you saying there is a grand conspiracy that decided to lie about concentration camps?".

Quite elaborate work all to sail around the evidence that should be there, if the Holocaust Narrative was true.

[Archie]

This story is well-known, but the details of it are pretty interesting. The TLDR is that Holmes managed to raise billions of dollars for her blood testing startup by pretending to have breakthrough proprietary tech that she didn't have. The pitch was that Theranos had found a way to do hundreds of blood tests from just a drop of blood. She got money from Silicon Valley and used the hype to cut deals with Walgreens and Safeway. She then used those deals to raise more money. She recruited many notable people to serve on the board.

In July 2011, Holmes was introduced to former U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz, who joined the Theranos board of directors that month.[134] Over the next three years, Shultz helped to introduce almost all the outside directors on the "all-star board", which included William Perry (former U.S. Secretary of Defense), Henry Kissinger (former U.S. Secretary of State), Sam Nunn (former U.S. Senator), Bill Frist (former U.S. Senator, senate majority leader and heart-transplant surgeon), Gary Roughead (Admiral, USN, retired), Jim Mattis (General, USMC), Richard Kovacevich (former Wells Fargo Chairman and CEO) and Riley P. Bechtel (chairman of the board and former CEO at Bechtel Group).[134][135][136]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theranos

In retrospect, it seems incredible that so many people fell for this. This particular scam was doomed from the beginning since you can only get by for so long by promising things without actually having a product. And in medical services where you have agreements to deliver actual blood tests, it's going to become apparent if you can't do what you say. It still went on for much longer than it ever should have.

A few lessons stand out to me.

-If people like a particular narrative and want to believe, they will. In this case, they wanted to believe in Holmes as the first female superstar CEO in Silicon Valley. The "female Steve Jobs." They wanted to believe she had really revolutionized medicine.
-Some lies are so brazen that it is hard for people to accept that they could be lies. It was hard for the Walgreens execs to believe that a company that seemed so credible could be an outright fraud.
-Quite a few people were onto Theranos or had suspicions, but they could get anywhere. The company used legal threats and NDAs to keep former employees quiet. This is something people don't seem to understand. They think things just fall apart the second anybody comes forward, but that's not how things work. Often people come forward and get crushed and nothing else happens.

https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/ ... y-startup/

[Wahrheitssucher]

•••

[Eye of Zyclone]

A common talking point among anti-revisionists is to say that large hoaxes and mass delusions are essentially impossible. I've always felt like this was a lousy argument since humans strike me as being highly vulnerable to this, especially in group contexts where pressure to conform is often strong. This thread is to be a repository of examples that illustrate various aspects of how false beliefs take hold, especially among prestigious institutions, and how these falsehoods (sometimes) get reluctantly corrected.

The persistence of false paradigms in academia is caused by the homophilous bias (most academics favor those from the same school of thought as themselves at every level of academic evaluation; in other words, non-conformity is a bad career plan for anyone who wants to work in academic research for a living).


https://postimg.cc/phCxJV0K

Google's AI:

paradigm

A paradigm is a standard model, perspective, or set of ideas that shapes how a group or individual understands and interprets the world.

Theoretical Framework: A shared set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that define how a discipline or field operates (e.g., Newtonian physics).

Paradigm Shift: A major change in how a subject is understood, happening when old ideas fail and a new framework replaces them (such as moving from an Earth-centered to a Sun-centered solar system).

Etymology: The word comes from the Greek word paradeigma, meaning "pattern" or "to show side by side".

What is a Paradigm?

A paradigm is essentially a mental program embedded in your subconscious mind. It controls your habits, behaviors, and decisions, driving nearly every aspect of your daily life.

How Are Paradigms Formed?

You didn’t consciously create your paradigm. Instead, genetic and environmental conditioning shaped it. From the beliefs passed down by your parents to the experiences you absorbed as a child, your subconscious mind stored these influences without resistance.

Repeated exposure to ideas allowed them to take root, forming the mental framework that governs your life today.

https://proctorgallagherinstitute.com/w ... digms-101/

[Wahrheitssucher]

.

[Eye of Zyclone]

I want to take some time here to review some of the literature in the field of hoaxes, lying and group consensus. Unless where otherwise noted, all emphasis added is mine. The overwhelming findings are that:

- Bad ideas spread like wildfires
- Repetition > Truth
- Consensus overrides critical thinking
- Emotive language and perceived injustice fuels the spread of hoaxes

- Previous exposures to a fake news make it more believable (familiarity = plausibility). This is the illusory truth effect.


https://postimg.cc/ppcH1yNc














https://postimg.cc/YvkSvJxx


https://postimg.cc/3kV452hs




https://postimg.cc/pmsYSKVb






https://i.postimg.cc/t9NQZkY9/Holocaust ... ndists.jpg






(JTA = The Jewish Telegraphic Agency)



From the founder of political Zionism:

[Wahrheitssucher]

.
The ‘6 million joo genocide mostly by mass-gassing’ hoax works by constantly keeping it in the public mind with presentations that appeal to the emotions not to the intellect.

Here is a HolyH University website page showing the recent articles by a high-priest of the quasi-religious belief-system (including his preferred pronouns)



- It uses the usual Pavlovian trigger-words: ‘survivors’, Nazties.

- It brings the mythology more up-to-date with trendy, current concerns: wimen’s suffering, sexual assault.

- It now also caters to the modern day self-identity issues of ‘ashkenazi jooze’ by concentrating on “resistance”, “revolt” and courageous “uprising” rather than on the original imagery of meek, weak, passive, compliant, suffering ‘victims’.

This is quite a change from the original ‘hoax’ narrative.
It demonstrates it isn’t a genuine historiography but is an evolving, quasi-religious industry of mercenary-driven, self-centred promotion.

Recall the alleged Babi Yarr type of ‘exterminaishuns’!
For the numbers of alleged victims in those alleged ‘holocaust-by-bullets’ scenarios to have been accurate, the jooish ‘victims’ would have had to have been as obedient and well-drilled as soldiers on parade.

To shoot that many people, in those alleged short amounts of time, in the alleged remote locations, would have required the ‘victims’ to:
- obediently get on trucks when instructed to,
- obediently stay in trucks during transportation,
- obediently get off trucks when ordered to,
- submissively get undressed,
- meekly wait their turn without movement or resistance,
- march quickly as directed to the exeeqooshun spot,
- organise and position themselves suitably for the firing squads to be effective,
- then collectively die without any attempts of self-preservation AT ALL!

Some of these descriptions of alleged holyH holocaust mass-executions-by-shooting required the victims to:
a.) passively watch their neighbours, friends and family be killed in front of them, then
b.) themselves obediently lay down in pits upon those previously shot ‘victims’!
The US Holocaust Memorial Museum even has coined its own German term for this allegation of meekly accepting your own murder-en-masse. They calls it ‘Sardinenpackung’ (= sardine packing).
It alleges victims meekly and obediently lay themselves down in mass grave to be shot, while others meekly watched, before also obediently following directions to climb into the pit, lie on top of the recently killed bodies and allow themselves to also be shot.



This is claimed to have happened at the alleged ‘Rumbula massacre’ near Riga, Latvia, and also at Trawniki during ‘Operation Harvest Festival’ in November 1943.

But now that holyH holocaust promotion of ‘jooish victims’ being models of obedient passivity is no longer welcome by modern-day ashkenazis nor is promoted.

As the Gibb articles show, NOW the emphasis is on “resistance”, “uprising”, “revolts” and “women’s strength”.

[Eye of Zyclone]

.
The ‘6 million joo genocide mostly by mass-gassing’ hoax works by constantly keeping it in the public mind with presentations that appeal to the emotions not to the intellect.

Wow! You've just erased and copy-pasted the same post twice so that your own comment appears at the bottom of this page!?!
One the most childish things I have ever seen so far, in my whole life...

[Archie]

A fun video that demonstrates how commonly cited facts may have no foundation. The example chosen is a claim that the human body contains about 100,000 km of blood vessels, if laid end to end. This claim was/is found in numerous books, often without any citation or with a citation to a secondary source. It turns out to be a very old and dubious estimate.



This circular citation problem is sometimes called the Woozle effect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woozle_effect

ETA: the oft-repeated claim that Zabecki was a stationmaster is a good example of this.