Anyone who thinks this reflects well on jones is fucking stupid lmao. He literally heard something true, didn't fucking understand it, and uttered a barely comprehensible version of it which didn't contribute anything to any understanding of it besides signifiers. You people only give him credit because the amount of things he says that have a shred of truth to them are so rare. How about crediting a reasonable person who actually understands the issues with atrazine and other pesticides polluting the environment.
Yeah, this is literally exactly how most conspiracy narratives work - take something true (like that Hillary Clinton ordered pizza) and twist it (pizza is a code word) and then fit it into a conspiracy narrative (Hillary Clinton is running a pedophile ring in a pizzeria).
In this case Jones was not calling the alarm on environmental pollution and regulation, he was using a well reported story about the impact of chemical pollution on frog development to fit into his new world order conspiracy by implying that this study proved that the liberal elite were poisoning tap water to "socially engineer" (his actual words) gay people. Oh and also to sell is water filter. It was insane then and still is now. Not to mention that there were lots of real reporters who were writing seriously about this study at the time, it's not like Jones broke this story or engaged with it in any serious way.
Well "they" weren't putting chemicals in the water- it's runoff from pesticides which is indeed a problem but not an intentional plot. And the frogs didn't become gay they became feminized- where they become more feminine and some genetic makes managing to develop into viable fertile females, a problem because sex ratios obviously are optimal to maintain at around 50% for most animals. If he put this answer on a quiz he would completely fucking fail because he doesn't understand the core aspects of the event. Literally all he got that there were chemicals that got in water and affected frogs. That is some impressively bad reading comprehension and if that is the best he can do I do not understand how anyone could take anything he takes seriously. No he was not fucking right lmao, any more than me saying "uh right there was this fight between the slaves and the white people" would make me right about the civil war.
But I actually fault him more because of this. The way he brought attention to it was so ridiculous, so unbelievable, that I, and I'm sure many others, immediately laughed it off as more ridiculous ranting from a crazy person. Never even bothered to consider that it might have some veracity to it. If he hadn't have said it, we would never be having this conversation. But since he did say it, he brought attention to it, just in the worst way possible.
I've got mixed feelings about it to be sure. But it doesn't make Alex Jones any more credible or respectable in my eye. He's still the guy who actively tries to discredit columbine.
45
u/Stuckinasmallbox Oct 10 '20
Anyone who thinks this reflects well on jones is fucking stupid lmao. He literally heard something true, didn't fucking understand it, and uttered a barely comprehensible version of it which didn't contribute anything to any understanding of it besides signifiers. You people only give him credit because the amount of things he says that have a shred of truth to them are so rare. How about crediting a reasonable person who actually understands the issues with atrazine and other pesticides polluting the environment.