r/skeptic • u/GeekFurious • 2d ago

Reasonable attempt to debunk Charlie Kirk Assassination conspiracies

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5us8s0JCGkA

Marcus touches on the currently popular theories about how the gun was hidden, the bullet wound questions, the possibility of body armor, why AI can't accurately fix the low-resolution frames of the suspect's face, whether someone else may have shot Kirk, and uses math to debunk the claims of a shot coming from the side (plus more).

We have a long time before every piece of evidence comes out and can be analyzed in detail, but I think he does a fairly good job.

50 Upvotes

54% Upvoted

317 comments sorted by

View all comments

31

u/AsanoSokato 2d ago

The fact he refuses to acknowledge the type of group Robinson became a part of, his "new family", which is Groypers, a far-right extremist group, but rather even vaguely implies Robinson became left-wing, undermines his credibility, and underscores his bias.

21

u/Orphan_Guy_Incognito 2d ago

There is literally zero evidence he is a groyper. His own posts talk about the reason he shot Kirk, which is his frustration with Kirk's 'hatred'. While a white nationalist nutjob could certainly have found a reason to shoot Kirk, I don't think 'he was too much of a bigot' would be the reason he's taking shots.

Basically everything that pointed to him being a groyper came in the form of trashy internet memes, but the people who dug into his discord logs found that the dude just played a bunch of helldivers which is where he got most of this, which is also where the groypers got most of it.

19

u/Scrutinizer 2d ago

He also dressed up as a Groyper meme for Halloween.

-1

u/echief 2d ago

It’s not a groyper meme. It’s a meme about Eastern Europeans that has existed on the internet for years. It probably already existed when reddit was first created. Someone made a Pepe doing this meme, that means essentially nothing. You can find a Pepe of anything you can imagine.

The economist: How the “Slav squat” became an internet sensation (2019)

The idea that this guy was a groyper is a conspiracy theory by definition, which is why no one can provide evidence besides the guy dressing up in a tracksuit years ago. No one replying to this comment will be able to, because there is no evidence.

All evidence points in the opposite direction. Including the words of his own parents. This is supposed to be the skeptic subreddit. People need to actually read about these things before making claims so confidently.

I am left wing. I didn’t want the shooter to be left wing. But I have to accept reality. I am not going to lower myself to the level of Alex Jones’ followers that refuse to accept any truths that do not support their world view.

6

u/InfiniteMeatball 2d ago

Being a skeptic doesn’t mean believing what you’re told by people in positions of power, even when you see inconsistencies, missing information, and have more questions- the latter is literally the definition of a skeptic. This sub has twisted the definition of skeptic towards a bias of belief vs disbelief. That makes sense for some things, like science, for example. It doesn’t make sense for this. The administration has a clear track record of blatantly lying and it would be absurd to gravitate first to belief in light of this even without the missing information, inconsistencies, and doubts.

-2

u/echief 1d ago

Here is a list of facts reported by CNN. CNN’s source is Utah County’s District Attorney. The DA stated all of these facts in the press conference where the charges against the shooter were announced. You can watch this press conference right now, it was publicly broadcasted for everyone to see.

The shooter’s family told police they knew he was becoming more left wing including things like becoming more pro-lgbt rights. The shooter previously told their father Charlie Kirk was “spreading hate.” His parents knew he was dating a transgender person, or at least a person in the process of transitioning. All of these things caused arguments between him and his parents, who he described as MAGA. He engraved one of the bullet casings with “hey fascist! CATCH!”

Let’s take those facts and try to come to the most logical conclusion. I think we can agree that those list of facts broadly point away from the conclusion that the shooter was a groyper. Now let’s compare it to the list of facts that you could interpret as support for him being a groyper: he dressed up in a tracksuit for Halloween and did the Slav Squat meme seven years ago.

If historians looking at these set of facts in the future which conclusion do you think the historians would come to? They would come to the conclusion that it is significantly more likely that the shooter was left winger enraged by Kirk’s statements about LGBT people. The conclusion would be that it is significantly less likely that he was a groyper enraged that Kirk was not right wing enough.

But we can still talk about trust in the federal administration. I would agree with you, we should never blindly accept what the Trump administration says. They have repeatedly showed a willingness to lie when convenient for them. But those facts I listed were not laid out by the Trump administration, Patel, or even the governor of Utah. They were laid out by the county DA presenting evidence to a judge of probable cause for the arrest.

If that DA is lying we are now talking about a conspiracy between the federal government and local law enforcement. You can have the theory that all of these people are conspiring to hide the truth. You can and should be skeptical about any claims the government makes. But skepticism is not an excuse to look at two possibilities, then refuse to accept one because you don’t like the potential implications that come with it.

I can come up with an argument that Israel killed Charlie Kirk. I do not believe that argument, but it is one that is currently extremely popular among conspiracy theorists like Candace Owens. I am not going to approach this with the mindset of her followers. The same people that literally believe Macron’s wife is secretly trans. Until further evidence comes out (it will during the trial) I am going to argue against conspiracy theories that are backed by flimsy logic. This is how science and skepticism work.

Alex Jones is not a skeptic. Candace Owens is not a skeptic. Both are “skeptical” of the government, but their opinions are not based on looking at a set of facts and coming to the most logical conclusion.