There’s no reasonable way for a single person to point out every single flaw in a conspiratorial website. The whole article is a gish-gallop; so much misinformation that even if I disproved 90% of the primary points, people would still latch on to the 10% that I hadn’t had time to disprove, and say, see?, they were right! (That’s assuming that they even accept counterclaims as being sufficient in the first place.)
Paying attention to your sources and not using bad ones is one of the first, most basic principles of media literacy. Failing to adhere to this basic principle is precisely how you get Q-anon.
Not a credible source.
When you can’t disprove the content, attack the source.
There’s no reasonable way for a single person to point out every single flaw in a conspiratorial website. The whole article is a gish-gallop; so much misinformation that even if I disproved 90% of the primary points, people would still latch on to the 10% that I hadn’t had time to disprove, and say, see?, they were right! (That’s assuming that they even accept counterclaims as being sufficient in the first place.)
Paying attention to your sources and not using bad ones is one of the first, most basic principles of media literacy. Failing to adhere to this basic principle is precisely how you get Q-anon.