SciencePunk Challenge: who is described below?

*buzz*

Anti-vax advocates?

Taking on my cynic's hat I have to bet some kook said that about your everyday biologist... probably on evolution.

I was about to say climate change deniers, but then I saw Markus Saers' comment. I think he nailed it.

A better question might be is there any group of pseudo-scientists to which that quote doesn't apply.

Antivaccinationists.

It's a good description of the method actually used by fake historians--Barton and the America-is-a-Christian-Nation crowd, Ogburn and the rest of the Oxford-wrote-Shakespeare bunch, virtually every the-Bible-is-history loon. But I'm thinking maybe Markus Saers had it. Except, could it be--is it some AGW denialist about climate scientists?

My guess would have to be: Stupid people.

Archaeologists?

Politicians.

It sounds like a description of the parents of "vaccine damaged" children to me.

Or maybe the hokey physicians who convinced them that it was MMR what done it.

That sounds like all cranks and denialists to me.

I cheated using Google.

I'm not going to give it away though - I'll just say that no-one here has got it right yet.

sounds a lot like what I read out of Answers in Genesis or Discovery Institute...

I'm going to go and guess Ken Ham.

(No I didn't use google.)

Sort of describes IDiots to me.

I like the search results for "reverse scientific method" -- it gets more wide-ranging results than just the specific quote here.

That is a fair thumbnail description of the methods of virtually every denialist, fighter against science and truth, conspiracy theorist,political and economic and philosophical ideologue that has ever lived.

It could apply equally well to any , or all, creationist, Bilbergers, evangelical snake handlers, HAARP theorists, white supremacists, 9/11 truthers, anti-Obama birthers, the Chicago school of economics, anti-vaxers, chemtrail believers, NWO fear mongers, Dick Cheney, CFR conspiracy theorists, global warming denialists and propagandists, supporters of the "electric windmill car", Nazi moon base aficionados, UFO worshipers, over-unity motor engineers, gun nuts, Tesla sycophants, believers in "The Secret", wannabe Atlantians, rapture fanatics, UN blamers, homeopaths, wiccan mumblers, those who fear the reptilian takeover, Rush Limbaugh, DDT apologists, Kennedy assassination fantasists, wingnut militia, crystal wavers, reiki practitioners, and most of the bloody GOP core constituency.

Could you be a bit more specific?

That is a fair thumbnail description of the methods of virtually every denialist, fighter against science and truth, conspiracy theorist,political and economic and philosophical ideologue that has ever lived.

I think we can wrap it up there. That's the true beauty of this quote - it was written with one group in mind but can apply to almost any of the myriad pseudoscientists, as Art has demonstrated.

The original quotation belongs to MIT engineering professor Thomas W. Eagar talking about the hypothesis that the WTC towers we destroyed by controlled demolition.

I was going to do a full length post on similarities between 9/11 Truthers and the anti-vax lobby, but this seemed to be a quicker and more interesting way to do it!

Ha! A full post eh?

How about a whole blog?

I didn't mean to ruin your fun by flippantly swinging for the fences armed with just a gut-level understanding when a gentlemanly bunt, more consistent with my modest level of understanding, was called for.

I thought that there are commonalities between the methods of all these folks but I would love to see your more considered, and certainly better researched and grounded, insights.

A detailed and logical disassembly of the methods they have in common would help solidify the idea and specify the mechanisms they use. Please don't be put off by my outburst.

This is also exactly what pseudo-scientists and cranks say about real scientists they disagree with - e.g. climatologists, evolutionary biologists, cosmologists and medical researchers.

I think the best fit is creationists.

If we're being TRULY honest with ourselves, we are all prone to this. It is very difficult for anyone, scientists included, to accept data that don't match the conclusion they are operating under. We may claim, and genuinely wish, that it weren't so, but 'tis human nature. Just look back at the cosmologists that decried the big bang when the evidence pointed to it.

Wait, is it Fox News?

As remarked by others, it could apply very well to large numbers of different groups, but creationists were my first thought.

IMO the common thread within all the groups who use such tactics is that they aren't seeking an objective truth or coherent story or time line in a detached and even-handed way.

Instead their their arguments and efforts are almost always negative and focused on discrediting an existing story line. There is no larger alternative story line offered and the doubters are often openly unsure as to what might have happened. But they are dead-sure that the explanation that has attracted their ire, usually the 'official' version, is a lie and any claim that it is true is part of a disinformation campaign and a wider conspiracy.

Case in point are the 9/11 Truthers who aren't sure, often not very much concerned, with what really happened. There is little agreement between the various factions of Truthers as to what happened. Everything from teams of demolition experts rigging the buildings to collapse, missiles, directed energy weapons and 'nuclear shaped-charges' are all deemed more likely than the official explanation. Despite these differences, which cause no open conflicts, the one thing they all agree on is that the official story is wrong.

The underlying method runs generally along these lines:
1) Select an event. A big one is good but you can get extra points for debunking the common view of more mundane or historic events because this reinforces the idea that the world is full of dark forces, shadow plays and nothing is as simple as it appears.

2)Systematically reject, denigrate, belittle and vilify the most likely and most commonly accepted version of, and around, this event.

3)Collect and cherry pick facts, factoids, opinions, pieces of facts and popular misconceptions, mythology and lies. Assemble them into arguments that "prove" that the accepted, official, story is wrong and "cannot" be true.

4) As much as possible weave in dog whistles and inside references to existing conspiracy, pseudoscience, mythology and stories of media manipulation and covert action into every plot line.

5) If anyone points out any falsehood, inconsistencies or holes in the alternative explanation or supports the most likely explanation attack them personally and accuse them of being dupes of state control and part of the coverup and disinformation campaign.

6) Wash, rinse, repeat.

Extra points are awarded for connecting more existing conspiracy plot lines, and 'debunking' any historic event as wrong. The more settled and accepted the historic event you can cast into uncertainty the more points you score.

Keep in mind that the goal is not to write, explain or understand history. The goal is not to expand the existing body of knowledge or understanding. The goal is to cast all events, explanations, understanding and knowledge, present and historic, into uncertainty. It is an exercise in nihilism where the only objective fact, and acceptable world view, is that there are no objective facts.

Where president Lincoln was a light-skinned black man, or a reptilian plant, or a benevolent alien from Orion, or an android. Where the only unacceptable story line is the 'official' story and respected history.

I'm not sure it can be creationists. Wouldn't they be trying to deny what happened rather than explain it?

Could be MMR-Autismologists, climate change sceptics, could be many quack medicine types and also many conspiracy theorists. Anything where there is an outcome that indisputably happened and an attempt to make a causal link to something that did or was believed to have caused it.

Curiosity got the better of me - I cracked and looked it up. I am a weak-willed specimen of humanity. Don't worry, I won't spoil it for you.