Tag Archives: conspiracy

Anti-science stupidity

Leave a reply

I was scrolling TikTok yesterday and I came across a live stream that was run by a flat earther talking about the firmament. I stopped to watch for a bit with a voyeuristic, macabre eye… the same way people slow down on a highway to take a better look at a car accident. It was painful to listen to. It baffles me to think that there has actually been an increase in the size of the flat earth community since 2015, as shared in a BBC report. This report puts the blame on the YouTube algorithm that focused more on engagement than on factual information.

I’ve already shared a fair bit about the flat earth conspiracy including “Flat earth and flight times”, “Not even wrong”, and “Understanding QAnon”, but I came across this next video today and it reminded me of just how long ago humans had already figured out that the earth was a globe.

Over 2,200 years ago Eratosthenes did some calculations based on simple observations, and was able to not just determine the earth was round, but he was also able to calculate its circumference. Carl Sagan shares the story of Eratosthenes’ discovery in this video:

We can split atoms, view the planets in our solar system and beyond, and even see photos of the earth from space, yet because we can’t see the curve of the earth from our own vantage point people are convinced it is flat. They will negate and dismiss overwhelming evidence while conspiratorially justifying impossible coverups to ‘fool the masses’, (with no logical/apparent reason to really do so). ‘They’ are keeping the truth from us. ‘They’ faked the moon landing. ‘They’ want us to believe that the earth is round. ‘They’ are afraid of us knowing the truth.

Imagine believing that every pilot, NASA employee, physicist, and for that matter scientist, is lying to you. Imagine disregarding 100’s, or rather 1,000’s of years of knowledge and following unscientific morons producing YouTube videos that just feed you validating evidence. Imagine being that stupid.

Yes, I called them stupid. The irony is that no one that is a flat earther will read this, and if they did, they would consider me stupid. Personally I’d rather be a stupid guy learning about the globe from Eratosthenes and Carl Sagan than a stupid guy learning about a flat earth from YouTuber Mark Sargent, who himself probably no longer believes, but is too greedy to give up his lucrative YouTube channel.

I hope the phrase “You can’t fix stupid,” is wrong, but in all honesty, the growth of flat earth believers makes me think this statement very true.

The cult of conspiracy

Leave a reply

I read this quote in Tim Ferriss’ 5-Bullet Friday email newsletter:

“I sometimes wonder whether conspiracy theories are an attempt to re-enchant the world in a distorted way. It’s like religion knocking on the door and trying to come back in a strange and distorted form. A sense of mystery beyond our own understanding of the world. If you ever talk to conspiracy theorists, that’s the sense you get from them. A sort of almost romantic sense of awe that there is this dark mysterious thing that a rational thing could never penetrate.” ~ Adam Curtis

Having a dad who was constantly making connections across seemingly unrelated topics, all for which he found resounding ‘evidence’ of conspiracies, this quote resonated with me. With an inclination towards conspiracy came a blind willingness to accept wild, unreliable sources of any information or claims that supported the conspiratorial narrative. Crazy, unsubstantiated theories were treated as fact.

Whenever I brought up counter arguments, and shared anything to suggest inaccuracies in a conspiracy I would get the same retort: “Who is fact checking the fact checkers, David?” Then Dad would send me an article, I’d click a link to some ‘fact’ that it mentions and it would lead to a warning page that I was going to a known Russian propaganda website. In all my years on the internet, I’d never been redirected to a page like this, except from the ‘reliable’ sources my dad followed.

“Dad, did you know the source of this information is a Russian propaganda website?”

“Even bad sources get the information right sometimes David.” This from a scientist, a man dedicated to research and detailed documentation. But the grasp of the conspiracy came from deep within, like a core faith, a religious grip that broke common sense,

“A sort of almost romantic sense of awe that there is this dark mysterious thing that a rational thing could never penetrate.”

It’s not about rational thought, nor common sense. It’s a new, distorted form of religion. Faith does not require reason, it does not follow logic. But it holds on to people and steers them in directions they are unaware that they are going. 100 pieces of counter-evidence can go blindly by, and then a crumb of evidence in support will be enough to fuel the conspiracy and shield it against the next 100 counterpoints.

Conspiracies are mysterious, even romantic. The people who follow them bear witness, they see the light, they are the believers, the keepers of the faith, the chosen ones. Logic and reason do not alter the faith of the devout… and so the cult of conspiracy continues.

The enemy of knowledge

“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” ~ Stephen Hawking

The illusion of knowledge is more ignorant that just being ignorant. This idea is more relevant today than any time in history. Examples:

1. Every religion starts with the premise that their religion shares true knowledge and all the other religions share illusions. So every devout religious person loves their own illusions, or at the very least believes anyone of a different faith lives in an illusion of ignorance.

2. Anyone who believes in a flat earth, or thinks no one ever landed on the moon lives in an illusion of knowledge. They perceive themselves as more knowledgeable than scientists, experts, and even general employees in the flight and space industry.

3. AI is already generating incredibly persuasive deep fakes and while we used to use a discerning eye to catch a lie, soon we will need to be more discerning to catch the truth. The illusion of knowledge will be more rampant than actual, factual knowledge.

We are moving from an era of knowledge seekers to an era of illusions and ignorance.

The truth is out there… it’s just a lot harder to find, and even harder to defend.

Reasons and reasoning

This is a humorous ‘contrived platitude’ that I shared on Facebook 8 years ago. It came up as a memory and I wanted to share it again:

Things definitely do not always happen for a reason, but we are reason makers and sometimes we seek meaning where there is none. Belief systems are designed around the justification of reasons, around faith as opposed to evidence. So are things like tarot card readings, conspiracy theories, superstitious habits, and lucky charms and rituals. Truth is bent, patterns are found where there are no patterns, and narratives are created to justify and satisfy, and even ‘prove’ that coincidences are actually consequences and that reasons are founded in good reasoning.

Sometimes these fabricated reasons help us. “Everything happens for a reason” can help soften an unexpected tragedy… help us find meaning in a meaningless loss of health, life, or limb. We can muster strength and purpose in times of hardship. But other times it’s nothing more than ignorance. People follow doctrines and justify their beliefs even when they are harmful to others. This is somehow done in the name of love. “We are looking out for what’s best for you, for us, for our community”… A fabricated reason. A justification. A delusion.

There is a big difference between finding a reason and good reasoning. That doesn’t mean that seeking out a reason for something is necessarily bad, it just means that sometimes the reasons you think are important or useful may not be so. It’s easy for us to rationalize anything to fit our belief system, but if that’s what we are doing we really aren’t being rational… we are rationalizing not reasoning. There is a difference between making sense of the world and making things up to make sense of the world; a deference between making up reasons and using good reasoning skills. True wisdom is knowing the difference.

Faulty pattern detection

Think about all the superstitions people have. Dating back as far as we have written records we have stories of people sacrificing animals, and even people, for Gods to ensure bountiful crops, or safe journeys, or successes in battle. When these things didn’t work it was for other reasons, and when things went as they should it was evidence that these rituals did indeed work.

But we need not look back thousands of years. We can look at modern day sports rituals, and lucky charms including religious paraphernalia, that people believe bring them luck. Fortunately over millennia things like sacrifices have fallen out of favour, but many rituals of luck and good blessings continue. Often with the person doing the ritual, or having the charm, believing that these things make a difference in their luck or success. Why? Because it ‘worked’ once? Twice?

In the grand scheme of things this doesn’t harm people, and I’m not against the idea that positive thinking can take you further than more negative thoughts. If a lucky charm helps you feel lucky, that is likely a far better state to be in than feeling unlucky.

Where this goes awry is in conspiracy theories. I know this first hand from watching my father go down some dark rabbit holes of doom and gloom. He saw connections that were at best coincidences. He found patterns where there were none. He searched for, and found, meaning in unrelated or tangent events that simply had no connection or no meaningful connections worth being put together.

Russia not supplying oil to Europe was the first step in a complete global collapse. Minor earthquakes off of Haida Gwaii were proof that the west coast around Vancouver was going to have a massive earthquake in a matter of days. Nuclear war, economic collapse, aliens, cabals, polar shifts, you name an end-of-the-world calamity and my dad saw the evidence that it was “coming down the pike”. I just searched that very phrase in my email and found a 2012 message from my dad,

“…What is coming down the pike will be a massive off the scale event and will impact the Pacific tectonic plate – I am referring to the entire Pacific Rim’s 40,000 km circumference. You may consider this to be more of ‘the sky is falling’ alarmist warning, but I have an ominous feeling it is imminent…”

He gave up on sending those emails to me a few years later, not because the ‘evidence’ wasn’t there, but because I wasn’t taking his warnings seriously enough.

In many ways my dad was brilliant, but he had faulty pattern detection that took over where logic usually prevails. But this doesn’t just happen to my dad. Maybe because of him I’m more attuned to this, but there has been a significant growth in delusional pattern detection in the past 5-10 years. It shows up in many places. I’ve written a few times about Flat Earthers as an example. I struggle to comprehend how this is a more popular belief in 2023 that it was in 1998, 25 years ago!

Have people gotten dumber? Maybe. Or maybe it isn’t just an intelligence thing. Maybe it’s faulty pattern detection combined with easy to access misinformation. Maybe there is something inherent in the human brain that seeks out patterns, that doesn’t know how to survive in a world without real threats, so we just pattern detect and find them anyway.

Back in the caveman days we needed to know the difference between the sound of predators versus the sound of prey when we heard the bushes rustling. It was a matter of life and death. Now we don’t need this skill. So maybe this pattern detection error is due to a lack of real threats and the need to seek these threats out to survive. Maybe.

The question is, how do we pivot? How do we move people away from false pattern detection, and still maintain enough scepticism to notice when there really is a harmful pattern to be concerned about? If you see that pattern, please share it, because I just see it getting worse from here.

Lateral Thinking

Like I mentioned yesterday, my dad passed away leaving hundreds of boxes to sort through. Today I found a few with memorabilia and one specific one I was looking for with a diesel fuel formula he invented. Most of the other boxes were files with copies of patents and research my dad collected. Although, there were also quite a few boxes with some strange topics he also ventured into.

As a self taught generalist, my dad was always taking ideas and combining them, and he wasn’t afraid to delve as deep into ‘wu wu’ science as he did into ‘legitimate’ research. He had a knack for seeing connections where others didn’t.

So it was no surprise when I found these periodic tables where he was identifying the elements that were prime, double prime, and Fibonacci numbers, and looking at their isotopes.

This is the kind of thing my dad did. He would think laterally and make unusual connections that would be completely missed by anyone else… and the reason they would miss it is because there isn’t a logical connection.

My dad developed a CRO/REDOX process to chemically extract platinum and other precious metals from catalytic converters and recyclable computer components. He actually got a test lab built and proved the technology, while scientists at the Ontario Research and Technology Foundation (ORTECH, now ORF-RE) said it couldn’t be done, and even after it was proven said, ‘This shouldn’t work’.

But like many things, my dad had a different angle, and in this case a different perspective on the chemistry behind the process. And when he built the prototype, he made it modular so that he could expand it rather than rebuild it. For many reasons, including terrible timing with a stock market crash, this project never got off the ground.

The ideas that my father combined allowed him to be extremely creative and innovative. He was brilliant in the connections he made. Yet that same ability was also a disability. My father was also an end-of-the-world prepper, and followed a lot of conspiracy theories.

The same lateral thinking that made his scientific mind so brilliant also created lateral (read more as sideways) connections to far out conspiracies that kept the ideas alive long after others had moved on. Among his boxes and boxes of printed patents and research are other boxes with articles that I would describe more as delusional rather than just ‘fake news’. In fact these articles date back as far as 2004, long before the term fake news existed.

I think the internet broke my dad. He was a doomsdayer since the 80’s. After we watched World War III, a miniseries that aired on NBC on January 31, 1982, he turned the TV off and had a heart-to-heart with his kids. He basically told us that WWIII was inevitable in our lifetime. I remember getting upset not just that the world was going to end, because at 15 I believed everything my dad said, but also that my younger sisters were crying as he broke this ‘news’ to us. Why did they need to know this at those ages?

It got really bad with Y2K, that’s when he started ‘prepping’, storing food and collecting thousands and thousands of dollars worth of supplies. Supplies we now need to get rid of for pennies on the dollars spent. But what really made it worse after that was the internet. Dad found all kinds of websites that he considered reliable, some of which where known Russian propaganda sites, but that didn’t phase my dad who believed all kinds of conspiracies about big media. Now I’m not saying that big media is fully trustworthy, but I’d put more weight on them than on Russian propaganda websites.

So lateral thinking was both a blessing and a curse for my dad. Making incredibly insightful scientific connections made him a brilliant scientist and inventor. And making incredibly dubious doomsday connections made him a paranoid prepper, who always believed ‘the shit is going to hit the fan’ at any moment.

There is a fine line between brilliance and madness.

Slight of mind

About 15 years ago I played around with card and slight of hand magic. I’d practice while watching TV, and I’d watch ‘how to’ videos to improve. I gave it up only because I found I needed constant practice or I got rusty. It felt like too much work to do really well. But for a short time I could pull of some really cool magic tricks. One of my friend’s kids only knew me as Magic Dave.

One of the most important parts of a good magic trick is the build-up, or the backstory. Suggesting that what you are about to do is mysterious is a lot different than saying ‘I’m about to trick you”. Another key aspect is actually pulling the trick off in a smooth way that doesn’t leave room to question how it was done. Story, mystery, then evidence. And when the story is good, people want to believe.

People want to believe. That’s why conspiracy theories pull so many people in. It’s not because they are dumb, it’s because they want to believe and so they are looking for clues that fit the story. One of the best ways to pull off a magic trick is to promise that you are going to reveal how it’s done, but then still leave some mystery on the table.

Conspiracy theories promise to show you behind the curtain, or under the table. Then they ask the mysterious question, “Why are they hiding this from us?” And the ‘they‘ that are mentioned are the government, or the military, or scientists. This becomes the thing to question. And that’s the slight of mind trick. It’s not the (usually bad) evidence they are sharing that should be questioned, what should be questioned is why are they hiding this from us?

Faith in the story becomes more important than facts, because facts can be falsified or manipulated by ‘them‘. They have the money and the resources to pull the wool over your eyes. They want to keep you in the dark. They can’t be trusted.

What’s never considered is how many people would have to be lying. If you tell two people a secret it’s no longer a secret. For example, it’s one thing to say that NASA is lying about the the moon landing. But to believe that every single person in NASA, and every astronaut that has been in space, and that every person working on ground control are choosing to keep that a secret is to believe the impossible. To follow one misguided person making false statements and saying, this is the only person brave enough to tell the truth’ is to be pulled in by mystery and intrigue, but not by reality. Because in reality the ‘they‘ that are keeping things secret are just far too numerous to keep anything a secret.

Watch my hands. See the coin disappear into thin air. It’s only possible because you believe, or because matter isn’t what it seems to be, or because I can move the coin back in time or… [insert reasons explained as evidence here]. Follow the story, the mystery, and the evidence is more believable. It doesn’t matter that I misdirected you, it only matters that the story is compelling and that you are left with questions.

As an aside, learning what I did ruined the magic of magic for me. I see magic tricks that baffle people and I make several immediate assumptions about how it’s done, and I no longer marvel at the trick anymore. This makes me question the pushers of conspiracy theories, do they really believe or do they just like performing these slight of mind tricks and fooling people?

Not even wrong

“Not even wrong” is a phrase often used to describe pseudoscience or bad science. It describes an argument or explanation that purports to be scientific but uses faulty reasoning or speculative premises, which can be neither affirmed nor denied and thus cannot be discussed rigorously and scientifically… The phrase is generally attributed to the theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli, who was known for his colorful objections to incorrect or careless thinking. (Wikipedia)

I love this term. A great example of where this applies is to flat earthers.

Another is deniers of the moon landing.

These ‘believers’ have to deny volumes of evidence. They have to believe that so many people are conspiring to lie, across political party lines, and across international borders… with the sole purpose of keeping a massive secret that doesn’t benefit anyone to keep.

What surprises me is the willingness of bright people to engage in debate with these pseudoscientists and crackpots. The reality is that these are such bad ideas that they do not deserve to be put on equal footing with good ideas.

Why argue with someone who is so intellectually dishonest that they aren’t even wrong?

Website domains matter

I think in an era of fake news and deepfakes, we are going to see a resurgence and refocus on web page branding. When you can’t even trust a video, much less a news article, the source of your information will become even more important.

I was on Twitter recently, after the tragic earthquake in Turkey and Syria, when I came across a video of what was claimed to be a nuclear reactor explosion in Turkey. The hashtags suggested that it was a video from the recent crisis, but with a little digging I discovered that it was an explosion many years ago and nowhere near Turkey as was suggested. The video had tens of thousands of views, likes, and retweets. I didn’t take the video at face value, but many others did. I reported the tweet, but doubt that it was removed before it was shared many more times.

Although I wasn’t fooled this time, I have been fooled before and I will be fooled again. That said, part of my ‘bullshit detector’ is paying attention to the source. Recently I saw a hard-to-believe article online by a major news station… except that the page was designed to look like the major news station but had a completely different web address. The article was fake. What drew my attention to it being fake was that it seemed more like an advertisement than a news article. Otherwise I probably would have been fooled. As soon as I was suspicious, the first thing I did was ask myself if this really was the news organization I thought it was? I went into my browser history and looked for the website this morning to take a screenshot of the article, and I found this:

The website is down… which is good, but again I wonder how many people it fooled? It was a website surprisingly high up in a google search just a few days ago, and so I clicked thinking it would be legitimate.

When looking for information from controversial people or topics, it’s going to get harder and harder to know if the source of the information is reliable. One sure fire way to be certain is to look at the website. In some cases even if the source is legitimate, you might still have to question the accuracy of the source, and use a tool like MEDIA BIAS/FACT Check to see what kind of bias the site tends to hold. But you will build a repertoire of reliable sites and go to them first.

More and more the web domain will be the ultimate litmus test that will help you determine if a claim or a quote (delivered in written, audio, or even video format) is legitimate. Because fake news and deepfakes will become more convincing, more authentic looking, and more prevalent… and that trend has already started.

Not so knowledgeable

An interesting study: Knowledge overconfidence is associated with anti-consensus views on controversial scientific issues

“Recently, evidence has emerged, suggesting a potentially important revision to models of the relationship between knowledge and anti-science attitudes: Those with the most extreme anti-consensus views may be the least likely to apprehend the gaps in their knowledge…

Those with the most strongly held anti-consensus views may be not only the least knowledgeable but also the most overconfident about how much they know.”

This TikTok does a good summary: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMNWgdpB1/

“Results from five studies show that the people who disagree most with the scientific consensus know less about the relevant issues, but they think they know more. These results suggest that this phenomenon is fairly general, although the relationships were weaker for some more polarized issues, particularly climate change. It is important to note that we document larger mismatches between subjective and objective knowledge among participants who are more opposed to the scientific consensus. Thus, although broadly consistent with the Dunning-Kruger effect and other research on knowledge miscalibration, our findings represent a pattern of relationships that goes beyond overconfidence among the least knowledgeable. However, the data are correlational, and the normal caveats apply.

This explains some of the anti-consensus views I’ve seen being expressed, but certainly not all. I know some very smart people who would probably do well on these kinds of tests, and yet buy into some very suspect but opinion affirming ‘information’. It doesn’t matter if this information can easily be proven wrong, because even though much of their base knowledge is good, their anti-consensus views are rigid. If the consensus view doesn’t fit, it’s perceived as propaganda, misinformation, or just plain wrong.

The biggest area where this is evident is with conspiracy theories. There is so much common knowledge that needs to be wrong for most conspiracies to be true. There are so many people that would need to be complacent and ‘in on the secret’ that it couldn’t possible remain secret. Yet even very intelligent people can be fooled. I think there is a simple litmus test that most people who believe in a conspiracy theory can self administer to determine if they should check their own bias:

How many conspiracy theories do I believe in?

If the answer is one, then you really might be working on specific information that makes consensus views very suspect. Maybe you’ve done your research and have come to some concerning perspective that should rightly be anti-consensus. But if the answer is two or more, you probably aren’t as knowledgeable as you think.