[This was previosly posted on Cutting Through the Fog as a response to the Share Your Story thread.]
For me, becoming a truther wasn’t the product of a single transparent psyop or moment of epiphany. It basically came down to realizing over time that more and more of what I had been taught in my life was a lie, until I accepted that most of what I had been told was deliberately inverted. I’m pretty young, so it becomes a story of my life viewed through the lens of exposing one lie at a time.
I was always skeptical from childhood – I stopped believing in Santa at four because I found it scientifically implausible that one man could fly around the whole world in one night and deliver presents to every child on Earth. I was also very cynical (although I know now I wasn’t nearly cynical enough…) I remember being upset when as a teenager the news of the Forex scandal broke, and being slightly aghast when no one in my family seemed to care that trillions were being stolen.
In university I discovered The Red Pill and the Manosphere, which I approached with caution because of its reputation for being misogynistic and downright evil. Ultimately most of the ideas made sense, and appreciated that there was a community that was attempting to systematize knowledge of gender relations. I took what I thought was valuable (which did indeed help significantly with the opposite sex) while leaving anything I considered manipulative and unethical. That was the first time that I realized that a large chunk of my worldview had been composed of deliberate lies intent on warping the heterosexual relationship and turning men into mere provisioners of overpriced ‘romantic’ commodities.
Two years after that Jordan Peterson became famous practically over night, and I was quite drawn to his philosophy. Although I now realize he is an agent (something I figured out before finding Miles’ work) in terms of real impacts on my life I only have positive things to say. Starting from childhood I have seen many therapists for recurrent depression (I no longer do), but I found Peterson was the only one who was helpful in any significant way, simply through video lectures. He also got me into reading classics and philosophy, whereas before my main fare had been fantasy series like the Wheel of Time. I admired that he was ostensibly struggling against the obvious sophistry of modern Leftism, and I recall thinking that he was the first person whom I had ever idolized (again, I no longer do).
Eventually, through a chain of YouTube recommendations following from Peterson, I found the alt-right ecosystem through J.F. Gariepy. That was basically my introduction to the alt-media, and I quickly discovered Austrian economics, race differences, the Jewish Question, and 9/11 truth. I watched Ryan Dawson’s 9/11 documentary War by Deception, and once I realized that something like that could be a false flag I knew that nothing I had learned about history, or anything else, was trustworthy. All I knew about 9/11 truth beforehand was the meme “jet fuel can’t melt steel beams”, sometimes suffixed by “, man”, but all it would have taken was an intelligent account of the events of the day including the collapse of Building 7, and Jane Standley’s fatal gaffe.
This was two and a half years ago, and I was finishing my undergraduate degree in summer school, so naturally I did the bare minimum in my (easy, psychology,) courses and spent upwards of 8 hours a day reading and watching documentaries and interviews. I read the Culture of Critique and learned about the drug trade, oil politics, and the Holocaust. After only about two months I found Miles’ work through a google search on connections between Elon Musk and the CIA. It was reprinted on another site which I can no longer locate, but I knew to always go to the original source. Upon reading the list of best articles I was astounded by all of the claims, but I could tell that he was a genius and I figured if only half of them were true it would still be worth reading.
The claims I found most difficult to reconcile were the non-existence of nuclear weapons and serial killers. That required the most reorganization of my previous understanding (how can I explain Hiroshima & Nagasaki, North Korea, the Rosenbergs, Pollard, Vanunu, etc?) It took a while for the evidence to accrue before I could accept that. I still don’t understand how the bombing of Dresden could have been faked [after: it was likely exaggerated and given a falsified mythology].
Miles was the first person I had read to suggest that vaccines or fluoride were bad, so as I was catching up on his vast corpus I looked into those topics as well. I found I still had many holes in my understanding of specific topics so I spent several more months wading through controlled opposition sources to find what I needed to know about various things. There were a number of shocks, but the last one, before I was entirely desensitized, was that dinosaurs are likely a fabrication. I still find that difficult, given I don’t have a theory to replace it with, other than to say paleontology is constructing a fantasy universe on top of very little real data.
So that’s how I came around intellectually. There is still the question of what you do after such an apocalypse, but that is a different post entirely. I tried telling my family, of course, with the result that they don’t really take me seriously, and refuse to speak with me about anything of substance. I had hoped that the obvious contradictions in the coronahoax would wake them up, but so far no dice. Becoming a truther has shown me how fragile, and in some cases transient, human relationships are.
One commentor replied to me suggesting that the Acámbaro figures were evidence that dinosaurs are in fact real, and were contemporaneous with humans. I replied, explaining my perspective on dinosaurs:
In a world of so many hoaxes, what strong evidence do we have that the Acambaro figures are authentic? Even if they were from the time period that is alleged, there are many figures that do not match any known dinosaur morphology, as well as dinosaurs that did not exist in the geographic range where the figures were found. Why are the figures considered strong enough evidence to posit the coexistence of dinosaurs and humans when a simpler explanation is that they are evidence of an active imagination in whoever molded them? It’s like claiming a Hieronymus Bosch painting is evidence that humans live contemporaneously with anthropomorphic birds.
Since fossil findings labeled as dinosaurs are mostly partial skeletons, dated using radiometric or stratigraphic dating, I think the most likely explanation is that paleontologists found a few bone fragments, perhaps correctly dated and perhaps not, and came up with the most sensational story possible to explain them. Piltdown man would be an example of this, Nebraska man another. Perhaps there were reptilian megafauna 100 million years ago, perhaps not. Without a complete reexamination of the evidence by independent parties, I doubt it is possible to know.
Note that I am not an evolution denier, neither macro nor micro. I think there is sufficient evidence beyond the fossil record to make evolution the most parsimonious and predictive explanation. However, looking at the history of dinosaur research, I find much of it was likely fabricated to bolster the nascent theory of evolution. This would have been done both as an attack on the Church, and as a means of acquiring fame and fortune. Dinosaurs were unknown before 1800 and were first classified by Richard Owen (who was disliked by his contemporaries and called “a most deceitful and odious man” by historians) in the 1840’s. Then, in the much-publicized Bone Wars from 1872 to 1892 two competing paleontologists allegedly discovered 136 new species of dinosaur, including many of the most famous, like stegosaurus and triceratops. The ‘scientists’ had the usual provenance, Othniel Charles Marsh being the nephew of banker George Peabody, and Edward Drinker Cope being a wealthy Quaker who married his cousin.
It is difficult to know where the fakery ends. I am relatively sure that mastodons, smilodons (sabre-tooth cats), and basilosaurids (ancient whales) are real. I am also relatively sure that triceratops and stegosaurus are fake. I am not sure about pterodons, plesiosaurs and mosasaurs. If anyone knows of any work addressing this kind of fraud from a secular, scientific perspective, I would be interested to read it.