I think you're confusing those who believe in lizard-people with those that might question the government version of certain events. This is the purpose of the term consipracy theory/theorist, to group together anyone who believes in, or merely just questions, a certain accepted event or idea. It really is a great term, as it's something that negates any other possible outcome.
What really should be considered here is the fact that proof requires a scientific setting. One cannot prove anything that occurs outside of a controlled setting, simply because it's not repeatable. Theories, both those set in reality and those that exist outside it, will forever be subject to this fact, and therefore be very questionable to (ie, not accepted by) the masses.
What really should be considered here is the fact that proof requires a scientific setting. One cannot prove anything that occurs outside of a controlled setting, simply because it's not repeatable. Theories, both those set in reality and those that exist outside it, will forever be subject to this fact, and therefore be very questionable to (ie, not accepted by) the masses.