I continue to be amazed at the lengths people will go to supporting their beliefs that have zero support at all.
Whether it’s intelligent design believers who can’t identify a single thing designed by their designer (not to mention the designer itself) to climate change denialists who change their complaint with every post. All to support a belief that wouldn’t have existed if they were the least bit skeptical.
Like I said in this post, there is little chance that the leaders of some of these big anti-science movements don’t know the truth. However, for them, the control and money they get from convincing other people to be ignorant is more important than the truth.
The real danger isn’t those guys. Once their money dries up, they will go away. Nothing much has been heard from Dembski or Wakefield in a fairly long time.
No, the real danger are the cult followers. The true believers who don’t have a fucking clue what’s going on and are happy in their ignorance. You can see many of them on the comments threads here.
Evidence has no meaning to these people. Reality has no meaning. These are the people who are asking “where are the human trials for GMOs”, without a single understanding of why that’s not only unethical, but illegal as well. It’s why we use model organisms. We can’t make a representative sample of humans eat nothing but corn for 2 years. That would lead to way more problems than if GMOs were actually dangerous (which they are not).
Over the years, I’ve noticed a couple of very similar traits in these types of people.
Arrogance – Many of these types are supremely arrogant. I’m not talking about the arrogance of someone who has studied a topic for decades and is considered an expert in the field. I’m talking about the supreme arrogance of someone who has no idea what is going on and no amount of logic or evidence will convince them otherwise. Many of these people are aggressive as well, resorting to threats and stalking when they feel that someone isn’t paying them the respect they think they deserve.
Inability to commit – Most, if not all, of these people will refuse to say anything that can be used against them. A very common comment is “I never said that”. Of course not. Whether through animal cunning or subconscious planning, they never say anything that can be taken at face value. And they will always try to weasel out of any comments. They will not define their terms and they will never ever support their own ideas to the level that they demand of science.
Refusal to admit to being wrong – This is a fun one. Most of the time, when shown to be utterly wrong they will do one of two things… leave or double down. I still know a guy who thinks that the wavelength of a wave is equal to the frequency. And he has fought to support his ridiculous notion to the exclusion of all else. The simplest reference shows him he’s wrong, but he cannot admit that.
No evidence – No matter what they say must happen, they can’t provide evidence for it. But they will continue to say it, even when it’s obvious that they are wrong.
Semantic games/analogies/quotes – Arguments with these types generally devolve into gaming definitions of words, quoting people (often out of context), and stupid analogies instead of actually talking about the concept. We can talk about DNA, but these guys still only want to talk about the “code” that is DNA. Because codes are made by intelligent things.
Hypocrisy – This is my absolute favorite/most annoying thing ever. They will demand details from science that are impossible, yet accept their own notions with no more evidence than a sentence that says they are right.
Yet no matter what, they will still attempt to get the last word in.
