I'm not talking about the exact inverse point, I'm just suggesting that their lines around "what is" or "what isn't" a conspiracy theory are so loose as to likely be useless.

Even if that is your point, you still chose one of maybe 3 conspiracies that I'd judge to not really fit.

I guess it just so happens that you've chosen to highlight a bad example of a conspiracy from the left side and a good example from the right side in an effort to dispute a study that shows both are similarly susceptible.

Ironically, you're comment is useless due to the conspiracies you've chosen to highlight. There are plenty of left/right examples that _are_ completely valid. Just ignore the ones you don't think are legitimate and I think you'll still have plenty on the left and the right.

I meant the opposite. I think between both imprecise definitions of left and right and even MORE imprecise definitions of "conspiracy theory," this study is completely useless.