Since youâve raised the issue, have you never seen historical âfunny Nazi picturesâ? I assure you they exist, whether theyâre actually funny or not. A search for that phrase reveals mostly modern-style memes, but a quick search for âHitler cartoonâ gives a sample of genuine artifacts. Turn off the safe search filter if you can stomach the 
ones.
Also consider checking out classics like Chaplinâs The Great Dictator.
Well, it keeps them out of mischief, I suppose.
Oh. My. Discobot. Do you really not notice any of the stuff people get wrong?
I love the one a few months ago that basically said turn off all your devices tomorrow because theyâre finally going to zap everyone with the 5G brainwashing signal and all the jabbed people will turn into zombies and only we unjabbed people will escape but we should turn off our devices too anyway and then the next day when nothing happened, people just carried on as usual⌠and a few days later someone came up with an explanation about how âwhite hatsâ or whatever foiled the evil plan and people just filed the information away like oh yeah of course thatâs totally what happened, completely obvious.
If youâre not aware of this kind of stuff, youâre missing a lot of what goes on. If you are aware of it but still believe what your Picard meme says, youâre redefining words to mean whatever you want them to mean (again). 
I think perhaps we have to draw a distinction between people who point out, on the basis of strong evidence and explanatory power for existing observations (hence the word âtheoryâ rather than âhypothesisâ), that there are conspiracies afoot, and people who just make shit up.
Has anyone actually show the existence of RFID devices in vaccines? No. Is it even technically possible? No. Then itâs not a theory, itâs wild conjecture.
Thereâs a difference between conspiracy theorists who consistently got it right, and crackpots who think pigeons are CIA spy robots. Learn the difference.
The difference is Nazis were actually arrested and executed for crimes against humanity. Endlessly haranguing us laypersons about the crimes against humanity committed by the medical profession makes as much sense as haranguing us about the crimes against humanity committed by Nazis while they continue to roam free.
Nazis were able to commit crimes because a large fraction of âus laypersonsâ either tacitly agreed with them, vocally agreed with them, or failed to do anything about their existence.
If you donât like being mocked, then you shouldnât have gone along with it all.
Thatâs not how language works.
A: Apples are always delicious.
B: Yesterday I bit into an apple, and it was gross.
A: Thereâs a difference between apples and garbage. Learn the difference!
They were, and iirc it took quite a while for that to happen, plus the defeat of all the regimes that plausibly would have been able to prevent the arrests from occurring. If the regimes had not been defeated and therefore the arrests had not occurred, would that mean the crimes had also not occurred? 
The term âconspiracy theoristâ is a convenient term to dismiss anyone for virtually any reason.
Leftists often misuse and abuse the term by applying it to anyone who doesnât agree with them or their ideology. Itâs often over-generalized to include crackpots and the mentally insane.
How long was the Epstein child trafficking ring a conspiracy theory before it was taken seriously?
Probably right around the time Alex Jones was banned from the ZuckerCorp.
Uh ⌠yeah, it is. âConspiracy theoryâ, as long as youâre not just using it as a meaningless insult, implies that a theory is involved. âThere are microchips in the vaccines!â is not a theory, because itâs unsupported by even the slightest speck of evidence.
Should be called a âCrackpot theoryâ.
I gave you a dictionary definition (literally) a few posts ago and a True Scotsman style dialog to illustrate the point I was making. If you still donât see my point, letâs just agree to disagree and hope that the funny pictures will resume.
To Finleyâs point:
Right. There we go. Does âThe 5G towers are going to trigger your RFID implantsâ explain any observed facts? Does it have predictive power? Is it âcoherentâ? No. Itâs just bollocks.
The âconspiracy theoristsâ - and Iâm speaking here of people who looked at the data and the wider context, and then developed, discarded, and refined theories around it - were right precisely because they had homed in on an accurate âmodelâ that fully explained existing observations and therefore was accurate in predicting future outcomes.
What was the point of that?
This would have been more accurate representation of the point I was making:
A: Apples are always delicious.
B: Yesterday I bit into a lemon, and it was gross.
A: Thereâs a difference between apples and lemons. Learn the difference!
If youâre trying to imply I was using the âNo true Scotsmanâ fallacy you fail to understand that logical fallacy.
If the term conspiracy theorist is over-generalized, which it is, and I point out that a crackpot is not a conspiracy theorist, then it would be a matter of clarification rather than an example of the âNo true Scotsmanâ logical fallacy.
Sheesh.
Being a conspiracy theorist does not mean one is necessarily a crackpot or vice-versa.
Also, being a crackpot in no way prevents one from being a conspiracy theorist or vice-versa.
You know how Venn diagrams work, right?
