A characteristic of conspiracy denialists
When a professor teaches something and you don't follow everything, you will first attribute it to your own lack of understanding, and questions are posed with curiosity. The conspiracy denialist will ask questions when you present them with critical information, but they will do it in a manner of shooting down the validity of your claims so that they can avoid the issue of cognitive dissonance. They'll pat themselves on the back over having rejected anything that intrudes on their naive view of the world. I just realized that this is totally off. Why don't they show the same curiosity about conspiracies?
