Jovan Byford, a psychology lecturer, is cited in the article as saying:
Lack of evidence of a conspiracy, or positive proof against its existence, is taken by believers as evidence of the craftiness of those behind the plot, and their ability to dupe the public.
I like how he puts it. That sentence was taken from an article in The Conversation from July 2020 (linked from the NYT piece), which I enjoyed at the time and in which he lays out his "six rules of engagement" with conspiracy theorists:
Lack of evidence of a conspiracy, or positive proof against its existence, is taken by believers as evidence of the craftiness of those behind the plot, and their ability to dupe the public.
I like how he puts it. That sentence was taken from an article in The Conversation from July 2020 (linked from the NYT piece), which I enjoyed at the time and in which he lays out his "six rules of engagement" with conspiracy theorists:
https://theconversation.com/ive-been-talking-to-conspiracy-t...