There's a feature of conspiracy theories that's rarely mentioned. Conspiracies assume widespread, covert, coordinated malice.

For all that we see badness in human nature, conspiracy theories are typically false, partly because they assume more malice than is typically widespread, covert, and coordinated for long periods of time.

That is, conspiracy theories are often false because they're overly pessimistic about human nature.

Imagine that.

So conspiracy theorists have perhaps an exaggeratedly low regard for humanity, along with an exaggeratedly high regard for their own ability to assess data without error. To strengthen the brew, throw in an excessive belief in their own intuition without the need for anything so petty as diverse evidence to fall back on.

Evidence can tell one story convincingly. Tweak it a little, introduce a new piece, and it can tell an utterly different story convincingly.

Conspiracy theorists seem never to have progressed to the level of understanding this last point. They believe their eyes when they should be asking more questions, or at least summarizing the weaknesses in their argument, the places where their data could be misleading them.

They're too impressed by their own efforts. They think simply looking into a thing makes them experts. They're easily fooled by the story that what they're reading or hearing is only known to a few, or has been actively suppressed. They love the scandal, and think the scandal will tell them everything, if only they have a few hush-hush or obscure links to brandish.