[_Nat_]

Apparently the parent-commenter believes that the article is propaganda meant to discredit conspiracy-theory.

Regarding:

> I'm also missing a list of all those so called conspiracy theories which turned out to be true.

They probably meant to suggest that the article is obviously unbalanced as it's consistently critical of conspiracy-theories, without offering a list of counter-examples of conspiracy-theories that turned out to be true.

[Pearse]

That makes sense, thank you.