The "conspiracy" part of "conspiracy theories" is that other people are deliberately and knowingly concealing the truth for their own ends.
- "The moon landing is faked" : the conspiracy is the media campaign selling this fake lunar landing
- "Princess Diana’s death was not an accident" is a royal assassination coverup
- "Dinosaurs never existed" means an anti-religious conspiracy of scientists and experts pretend Dinosaurs exist as an attempt to discredit the bible
The difference between theories and conspiracy theories is that Copernicus' opponents didn't actually secretly know that his theories were true
Responses like this muddy the waters by trying to equate the reality that understanding changes overtime with what are opinions that are largely unfounded.
There are two big differences between scientific consensus and theory building and conspiracy theories. First the scientific method tests these theories. This approach tests theories and continually responds as new information arrives. Second the theories are useful. Science’s goal is to estimate reality to the point that it is useful.
It is not a disqualifying ad hominem to say “you provide no nor respond to evidence and your theory doesn’t provide a useful testable hypothesis.”
>This is EXACTLY how scientific revolutions work and it follows that all human progress follows this model.
No, it isn't.
Scientists attempt to disprove their theories using hypothesis and observation, and adjust their models of reality based on what the evidence shows. Conspiracy theorists state their assumptions a proiri and refuse to adjust their models based on evidence to the contrary.
Scientists are the ones saying the Earth is round, conspiracy theorists are saying it's flat. These are not the same.
Of course it all hinges on what one considers a "conspiracy", but from my view the of the word, NO the conspiracy theorists have not won - the earth is not flat, the moon landing was real, aliens and reptile-man hybrids are not running the show.
