Conspiracy Theories Tier List Maker | Rank the Most Famous Theories From S to F

You loaded a blank tier list, looked at a row of theories, and stopped on the first one. Does the moon landing go in S because you think it’s the most believable, or because it’s the most fun to argue about? Is S even the top here, or is that backwards for this topic?

The first time I ranked these, I spent 10 minutes stuck on 9/11 before placing a single card. I couldn’t tell what the ranking was supposed to measure.

That’s the part no one explains. So here’s the conspiracy theories tier list maker, pre-loaded so you’re not starting from an empty grid, and the one thing you need before you start: what the tiers mean for this topic, which theories to rank, and how to judge them.

Make Your Conspiracy Theories Tier List

The tier list maker below comes loaded with the most commonly ranked theories. Drag a theory into a row, rename or recolor any tier, add your own, and save or share when you’re done. No account, no sign-up.

If you’d rather understand the scale before you drag anything, keep reading. It takes about 90 seconds and it removes the one decision that stalls most people.

What the Tiers Mean for Conspiracy Theories

In most tier lists, S means best and F means worst. Conspiracy theories get ranked on a different axis, and there are three common ones. Pick one before you start, and apply it to every theory.

Believability is the most common serious version. S is the theory you think is most likely true. F is the one you think is fully debunked. A, B, and C are the gradient in between: probable, plausible, and unlikely. This is the axis the well-known community rankings use, and it’s the one this guide assumes unless you change it.

Entertainment or iconic value ranks by how fun, strange, or culturally memorable a theory is, regardless of whether it’s true. Under this axis, “Birds Aren’t Real” can sit in S purely for being a great bit, and a dry government-cover-up theory might land in C.

Threat to society ranks by real-world harm: how much damage the theory causes when people act on it. A public-health hoax that changes behavior scores high here even if it’s easy to disprove.

Here’s the believability scale in one place:

The one rule that keeps a list honest: keep S rare. If a third of your theories land in S, the top tier stops meaning anything. Most theories are B or C. That’s normal.

The Conspiracy Theories You Can Rank

If you land on a blank template and hit a theory name you don’t recognize, you’re stuck. Here are the ones that show up most often, grouped by type, with one plain line each so you can rank without a second tab open.

Government and Cover-Up

MKULTRA: the CIA’s real program of experiments on mind control and interrogation, using drugs including LSD, run from the 1950s into the 1970s. Documented and declassified.

COINTELPRO: the FBI’s covert program to surveil and disrupt domestic political groups in the 1950s through 1970s. Also documented through released records.

Deep State: the claim that unelected officials, not elected leaders, set the real direction of government. More interpretation than single event, which makes it hard to prove or disprove.

Area 51 and JFK: a secret Air Force test site (real, and long used for classified aircraft) and the 1963 assassination of President Kennedy (the official finding is a lone gunman; specific details are still argued in public).

Health and Science

Chemtrails: the claim that visible aircraft trails are chemical or biological agents sprayed on purpose. The trails are condensation. The spraying claim has no supporting evidence.

5G and COVID: the claim that 5G networks cause or spread COVID-19. There is no mechanism and no evidence; the two are unrelated.

Vaccines and autism: the claim of a causal link, which traces back to a retracted 1998 paper. Large studies have found no link.

COVID origin: where SARS-CoV-2 came from. Natural spillover and a lab-related origin are both still discussed by scientists, which puts this one in genuinely open territory.

Historical and Assassination

Moon landing hoax: the claim that the 1969 Apollo landings were staged. The landings happened; independent evidence includes reflectors left on the surface still used today.

9/11 theories: claims of foul play or foreknowledge around the 2001 attacks, ranging from mild to extreme.

Epstein: the documented crimes are real and led to convictions. Specific broader claims vary widely in how much evidence backs them.

Cryptid and Paranormal

Bigfoot, Mothman, Loch Ness: long-running creature sightings with no confirmed physical proof.

Reptilians: the claim that shape-shifting reptilian beings secretly rule humanity. Worth knowing that this one overlaps with older antisemitic tropes, which matters if you plan to share your list.

Modern and Internet-Era

Flat Earth: the claim that the Earth is flat. Contradicted by direct evidence going back centuries.

Mandela Effect: shared false memories of events or details, like a misremembered logo or quote. Real as a memory phenomenon, not as proof of alternate timelines.

Birds Aren’t Real: a satire movement claiming birds are government drones. Its own creators say it’s a parody. It ranks well on the entertainment axis and belongs in F on believability.

How to Rank a Conspiracy Theory

Once you’ve picked an axis, four questions settle almost every placement.

1. What’s the evidence? Documented records and released files push a theory up. Anonymous claims and screenshots push it down.
2. Has it been tested? A theory that survived real scrutiny beats one that collapses on the first check.
3. Is it internally consistent? The more people and coordination a theory needs to stay secret, the less likely it holds.
4. What’s the counter-explanation? If a plain answer already covers the facts, the theory drops.

Run those four in order and most cards place themselves. Save your judgment calls for the genuinely open ones, where reasonable people still disagree.

Example, ranking MKULTRA on the believability axis. Evidence: declassified CIA files exist. Tested: it survived congressional hearings in 1975 and the records held up. Consistent: the program was real and admitted. Counter-explanation: none, the agency confirmed it. All four point the same way, so it lands in S.

Now the same four on Flat Earth. Evidence: none that holds. Tested: contradicted by direct measurement. Consistent: it requires nearly everyone to be lying or fooled. Counter-explanation: a round Earth already explains every observation. All four point down, so it lands in F. Most cards resolve this cleanly. The B and C rows are where the interesting arguments live.

Confirmed True, Debunked, or Still Unresolved

Ranking gets easier when you know which theories moved out of “theory” entirely. Some were proven through released records. Some are contradicted by hard evidence. A few are still open. This table covers the most commonly ranked ones.

Sources for the confirmed and debunked entries are a matter of public record. The Wikipedia List of conspiracy theories article is a well-cited starting point, and the declassified programs have detailed entries for MKULTRA and the Tuskegee syphilis study if you want to check a claim before you place it.

Ranking Sensitive Theories

Some of these touch real tragedies or edge into hateful territory. A theory tied to a mass-casualty event, or one built on an antisemitic trope like the Reptilian claim, can feel wrong to put on a playful grid at all.

You decide what goes in. Every tier can be renamed, recolored, or removed, and any theory can be left off entirely. If you’re building a list to share, you can cut the entries you don’t want your name attached to, or add a tier labeled “won’t rank” and move them there.

Placing a theory tied to a real attack, I felt the difference fast. By believability it was fine. For fun it was not. The axis you pick decides what you’re saying about each card, so if an entry only works as a joke and the subject isn’t one, leave it out.

Share Your Ranking

When your list is done, you can save it as an image, copy a share link, or embed it. None of that needs an account.

If you’re ranking with other people, this format holds up well in a group: put the list on a shared screen, hand people the theories one at a time, and argue each placement out loud. Half the value is the disagreement.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is S tier good or bad on a conspiracy theory tier list? It depends on your axis. On the most common one, believability, S means you think the theory is most likely true and F means you think it’s false. On an entertainment axis, S just means most iconic. Decide which before you start.

What does F tier mean here? On the believability axis, F is for theories you consider debunked or clearly false, like Flat Earth. On other axes it just means the bottom rank.

Which conspiracy theories turned out to be true? Several documented ones, including MKULTRA, COINTELPRO, and the Tuskegee syphilis study, moved from rumor to confirmed through released government records.

What’s the most believable conspiracy theory? There’s no single answer, which is the point of ranking. Theories backed by declassified records tend to land highest for most people.

Do I need an account to make one? No. You can rank, edit, save, and share without signing up.

Can I add my own theories? Yes. Add, rename, recolor, and reorder any tier or entry.

The Bottom Line

Ranking conspiracy theories is easy once you fix the one decision that stalls everyone: what the tiers measure. Pick an axis (believability is the most common), keep S rare, use the four ranking questions for the close calls, and lean on the confirmed-versus-debunked table when you want a gut check. Leave out anything you’d rather not attach your name to.

Your conspiracy theories tier list is ready to build above. Pick your axis, start with the theory you feel most sure about, and place the rest from there.

About this page: this is an independent guide and tool from tier-list-maker.com. Factual statuses in the tables above reflect public records and mainstream reporting as of July 17, 2026. Theories are described for ranking purposes; describing a theory here is not an endorsement of it. Last updated July 17, 2026.