(Of course, I'm just a happy amateur in all this, so I'm more than happy to be corrected)

By less cognitively demanding, I mean in terms of eg. not needing to learn a scientific discipline — not that these theories are necessary easy to keep track off

Yeh, I think that's right. An important difference would be that conspiracy theories are typically less cognitively demanding. I would think there could be a secondary emotion effect. Any reduction is uncertainty is likely to reduce anxiety and secondary emotional responses.

I don't know that the claim requires a strict analogy, only that belief systems perform a similar functional role. Of course, I can see the objection that religious systems aren't reducible to beliefs.

I think this still works tbh. The comfort is epistemic, it soothes intolerance of uncertainty. That doesn't have to be the kind of comfort that is emotionally soothing.

Aren't conspiracy theories often put forward as alternatives to committed religious belief?

Look like enormous COVID tests

Santa brings the gift of death

Going to interrupt my reading shortly as the boy wants to watch Zardoz together

I also got bought a copy of Ulysses for Christmas, but I feel like The New Sun is going to occupy me for a while

Is this more than believed them in the past? I really don't think so. Maybe it's more talked about or more people in power believe them, but I'd imagine sheer numbers have been pretty stable.

Can't wait to find out what acetylcholinesterase inhibitor the President is prescribed

I guess it uses stereotypes of indigenous people, but the Na'vi aren't indigenous people. I'm quite able to say these are both true. I simply don't think it reduces to a white saviour narrative. I don't think that's what we see happening on screen.

My argument isn't that my reading is more valid or equal to James Cameron's, it's that I think he is wrong. I know he made the film, but that doesn't mean he understands it.