Clearly modeling his strategy after the anti-vaccination campaigns, Stephen explains how to cobble up your own homemade controversy on just about any subject. All you have to do is ignore all the evidence and invent a non-existent danger, and people will believe anything you say.
Search
Profile
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
I reserve the right to publicly post, with full identifying information about the source, any email sent to me that contains threats of violence.
Random Quote
To YOU I'm an atheist; to God, I'm the Loyal Opposition.
[Woody Allen]
Recent Posts
- Our illness is their profit
- Friday Cephalopod: NUMBERLESS HOSTS!
- Dear Jezebel
- There Will Be Blood?
- Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- Friday Cephalopod: Feasibility trial successful
- Making excuses
- More bad science in the literature
- An open letter to the Indiana legislature
- One Carnival of Evolution, coming right up
A Taste of Pharyngula
Recent Comments
- David Marjanović on Our illness is their profit
- David Marjanović on Our illness is their profit
- David Marjanović on Dear Jezebel
- David Marjanović on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- The Tim Channel on Our illness is their profit
- 'Tis Himself, OM on More bad science in the literature
- mackhitch on Our illness is their profit
- Nerd of Redhead, OM on More bad science in the literature
- David Marjanović on More bad science in the literature
- bpruitt570 on Our illness is their profit
Archives
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
Blogroll
Other Information
« But now how will we spot the dangerous South Carolina drivers? | Main | What's the opposite of education? »
More articles by PZ Myers can be found on Freethoughtblogs at the new Pharyngula!
As if they need help with this
Category: Skepticism
Posted on: November 13, 2009 7:54 AM, by PZ Myers
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/124651
Leave a comment
HTML commands: <i>italic</i>, <b>bold</b>, <a href="url">link</a>, <blockquote>quote</blockquote>
Comments
Posted by: JBlilie | November 13, 2009 8:00 AM
In the great traditon of PT Barnum ...
Posted by: Kobra | November 13, 2009 8:02 AM
The CO2 in our sodas are the cause of cancer!!!11oneon
Yeah, too easy. Not worth the effort.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | November 13, 2009 8:21 AM
WIRELESS INTERNET IS CAUSING AUTISM
PROVE ME WRONG TECHNO-SHILLS!
Posted by: Brian
|
November 13, 2009 8:28 AM
Oooh, I like that one. Maybe the woo-bags will stop hanging out in my favorite coffeeshops so much and I'll be able to get a seat for a change.
Posted by: Julius | November 13, 2009 8:32 AM
Constructing a controversy you say? This is a pretty good effort: http://badscience.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11970
Posted by: Stuart | November 13, 2009 8:54 AM
Oh my, thanks for that link.....who would have thought child safety seats could be so potentially dangerous?
Posted by: Sastra
|
November 13, 2009 9:08 AM
He forgot one of the most important elements: heartfelt personal anecdotes which blithely assume the connection to the purported cause. Here's something terrible that happened to someone who's an ordinary person, just like you, and it happened because science is wrong -- again. Not only did it totally miss confirming spiritual realities, but now it will screw you over.
That's usually going to be the lead-off to the entire manufactured controversy. We humans instinctively prefer stories to statistics, and tend to accept testimonies as long as they sound sincere. After all, people can be trusted to know what their own experience has shown them, right? It's just a matter of picking which people to believe.
Stephen could also add in stories about the Brave Maverick Doctors, or Brave Maverick Scientists, or Brave Maverick Mommies, who have stumbled on the Truth, and none of the fancy-shmancy, elitist, so-called 'experts' will even listen to them, because they're so cutting edge, and they challenge the Establishment. David and Goliath! Fight the Man!
Posted by: freelunch | November 13, 2009 9:31 AM
I even have statistical proof: there are a greater proportion of Aspies using wireless internet than the general population. QED.
Posted by: Torrie | November 13, 2009 10:18 AM
sorry, i don't agree. there are many vaccines that are unnecessary. and the ingredients are stupid, too: http://www.informedchoice.info/cocktail.html
Posted by: Janine The Ineffable, OM | November 13, 2009 10:20 AM
Paging Orac! Paging Orac!
Posted by: Loc | November 13, 2009 10:32 AM
Here we go again...
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | November 13, 2009 10:53 AM
That's because you don't know what you're talking about. You should get out less and read more.
Posted by: tsig0
|
November 13, 2009 11:03 AM
I see no one here is aware of that silent but everpresent danger, Gravity. Gravity kills a disproportionate number of our most vulnerable, the very young and the very old. My grand mother was carryiny my one year old son when she slipped and fell down 19 flights of stairs shrieking all the way, warn't nothing left but bloody rags. Big Grav has it's own commercials "I'm fallen and I can't get up" pushing unnedeed products. We have been brainwashed to think we need it by an unholy conspiracy between Big Education, Big Gravity and Big Government.
So join our movement. Our slogan is "lighten up"
The Verbal Serpent
Posted by: Sastra
|
November 13, 2009 11:07 AM
Torrie #9 wrote:
The website you cite is considered to be one of the examples of 'manufactured scientific controversies' which is described by the essay PZ linked to. So it will obviously take more to make your case than simply explaining that yes, these websites exist. We know that. If the information they give you is wrong, there can be as many of them as you want, and they won't add up to either being right, or being a legitimate "side" in a real debate.
Be careful of being flattered by people who are eager to tell you inside information that the scientists don't want you to know, but which you are smart enough to figure out is real and true -- even though you yourself don't have the scientific background to evaluate the claims in context. When a lay person disagrees with the acknowledged experts, it's often because they're buying into a story, and want to play a role.
Posted by: Dawn | November 13, 2009 11:38 AM
@ Torrie: goodness, how old is that site? Thimerosal hasn't been in most of those vaccines since 2001 except in very minute amounts. And synergistic effects? Oh really. Orac really needs to see this one!
I LOVE the disclaimer on the bottom of the page...ambulance chasing anyone?
"Disclaimer / Investigate: The intent of this website is to raise awareness about the controversial aspects of vaccination. Many vaccines still contain thimerosal (49.6% ethylmercury by weight.) While mercury is a highly toxic element second only to radioactive plutonium, when combined with other ingredients, specifically aluminum and formaldehyde, the synergistic effects increase 10,000-fold. Individuals who suffer from chronic mercury exposure will have a unique expression of symptoms. This presentation is not to be construed as medical or legal advice: locate and confer with a trusted physician and lawyer."
Posted by: Steve in Dublin | November 13, 2009 12:16 PM
@Julius #5
Car analogies are always the best! I'm gonna bookmark that one...
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | November 13, 2009 12:19 PM
Whether you agree or not, you're wrong.
Posted by: Irene Delse | November 13, 2009 12:22 PM
And don't miss the follow-up post: "How To Monetize Scientific Controversy"!
Posted by: Kraid
|
November 13, 2009 1:38 PM
Signed in on the first try... today's my lucky day!
I'm surprised that site didn't mention heavy reliance on meaningless correlations.
"I used to eat ketchup on everything, then I got cancer! Then I stopped eating ketchup (chemotherapy upset my stomach, you see), and the cancer went away! Ketchup causes cancer! A ketchup-free cleanse diet cures cancer!"
I just watched The Beautiful Truth recently (dear gawd), so this kind of nonsense was fresh in mind. It works well with the health-related woo, but it's more difficult to apply to creationism claptrap.
Posted by: Kevin Anthoney
|
November 13, 2009 2:08 PM
They don't believe any old thing. They'll only belive stuff that's to their advantage. For example, if you don't want to have to deal with a screaming kid, anti-vax is a boon. On the other hand, if you have to actually do something to resolve the issue, as with Global Warming, they don't want to know.
Posted by: Die Anyway
|
November 13, 2009 2:29 PM
@19 - Ketchup causes cancer!
Damn. I'm sorry to hear that. I really like ketchup. Does catsup cause cancer too? Because I could switch... if I have too.
And how about mustard? I hear there's going to be a mustard shortage and you should go to the store now and stock up (but only if it doesn't cause cancer).
Eat well, stay fit, Die Anyway
Posted by: catgirl | November 13, 2009 2:41 PM
Why haven't we banned dihydrogen monoxide yet?
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
November 13, 2009 3:05 PM
Reverend,
You don't even know the half of it.
Posted by: chgo_liz | November 13, 2009 3:07 PM
Darn, catgirl @ #22 beat me to it.
Posted by: stptrck75 | November 13, 2009 3:30 PM
This rhetorical tactic reminds me of the most recent South Park episode. http://www.southparkstudios.com/
When given the job of making the morning announcements over the PA system, Cartman quickly begins to channel Glenn Beck.
Hilarity ensues...
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | November 13, 2009 3:34 PM
Ha!
Yeah I knew about the wi-fi conspiracy theorists. They make me chuckle.
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
November 13, 2009 4:55 PM
They* always say that something is better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick. But have they tested this hypothesis? How many tests have been made about how good or bad (possibly on a scale of 1 to 10) pokes in eyes with sharp sticks are? Give us the base measurements and then we can decide how to rate something compared to a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.
*”They” being “them.”
Posted by: cag
|
November 13, 2009 5:55 PM
Catgirl #22, we can't. Have you no sympathy for the homeopaths? Where is your xtian spirit? What would they dilute their water with???
Posted by: mothra | November 13, 2009 7:21 PM
@22 They'll get to banning dihydrogen monoxide in a dipole moment.
Difference between Maverick and Rogue:
Rogue scientist trampled by Cape buffalo while studying elephant behavior.
Maverick scientist accidentally tranked while acting as human shield to prevent re-location of wild horses from Wyoming.
Posted by: Armand K.
|
November 14, 2009 12:48 AM
Cool! Scientific Controversy for DummiesTM.
Somebody could use those ideas and argue that condoms contribute to increasing/spreading AIDS. For instance torturing some statistics, looking for some failure studies from 30 years ago and using Mystical Math.
Oh! Wait! Too late for that. The Catholic Comintern in Vatican City already did it.
Posted by: DavrosFromSkaro | November 14, 2009 3:47 AM
Why won't anyone form the pro-dihydrogen monoxide community come forward to debate this in a public forum?
We only want to teach to controversy - where's the harm in that?
Posted by: homework helper | November 14, 2009 6:01 AM
Thanks for sharing the link. Our judgment also depends upon the relationship and position of the people involved. We by nature believe more in stories rather than in facts because knowing facts demands involvement.
Posted by: Ron Sullivan | November 14, 2009 1:37 PM
... even though you yourself don't have the scientific background to evaluate the claims in context. When a lay person disagrees with the acknowledged experts, ...
To expand a bit on Sastra's point: The thing that snaps my elastic is that you don't have to be an expert with years of training to learn the basics. It's not mysterious, or some sort of priesthood open only to a few. Knowledge is the most democratic thing there is. Learning how to judge and how to learn—If you didn't get that in school, there's nothing to stop you from getting it now.
It does take some effort and humility. But anyone can do it. Anyone.
Posted by: Olorin | November 15, 2009 11:15 PM
Psychologists have a name for this phenomenon. Thay call it a "moral panic."
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | November 15, 2009 11:24 PM
I'm stealing that :-D