Denialism Blog

Denialism Blog

  • One month of denialism

    We’ve been on for one month now. It was a pretty good start. We got about 110k pageviews, about 54k visitors, 100 entries and 1050 comments on those entries. We’ve gone through what makes a denialist argument, what makes a crank, 3 major categories of denialists (there are many more) and almost a whole deck of denialist cards – only the high cards are left.

    If you like the job we’re doing, let us know. If there is something you want more of, we’d be happy to hear about it. As always, if you’re just joining us and you want to read what we’re all about, our “about” page summarizes the major posts to get you caught up to speed.

  • LOL Creationists III

    Ok, here is my final thread on LOL creationists (see the previous entries). Anti-evolution brings us some entries, this is my favorite (below the fold – it’s a tad dirty).

    (more…)

  • Cranks are rarely bothered by other cranks

    It’s in the nature of cranks and denialists not to really object to other forms of crankery, as long as the other crank or denialist is also sowing doubt about the same scientific theory. This fits in with proof 295,232 that intelligent design isn’t a science. Witness an IDer who really loves the Creation Museum. O’Leary even likes their idea that chameleons change color to “talk” to each other in the Garden of Eden:

    And, if you are not a frothing Darwinist, it is not always clear who is right:

    Nature here is not “red in tooth and claw,” as Tennyson asserted. In fact at first it seems almost as genteel as Eden’s dinosaurs. We learn that chameleons, for example, change colors not because that serves as a survival mechanism, but “to ‘talk’ to other chameleons, to show off their mood, and to adjust to heat and light.”

    The creationists could well be right about the chameleons. Darwinian theory needs the colour change to be a survival mechanism and interprets just about everything in that light. The chameleon itself may not have any such need. If you think that everything about life forms exists in some relation to a survival mechanism, you have spent too much time among Darwinists.

    Can you believe it? An IDer who is more than happy to entertain this batty theory that chameleon’s camouflage has nothing to do with survival, instead it’s some pre-lapsarian lizard Morse code. Never mind that if they believe in science at all they should reject the findings of the museum as psuedoscientific garbage. Never mind that ID is trying to represent itself as a science, and as such should reject young-earth creationism as a rejection of not just biology, but archeology, geology and physics (and many other fields of science I’m sure).

    As long as the Creation Museum keeps misinforming people about the theory this crank hates, it’s OK by her. After all, who needs intellectual consistency? Certainly not the crank.
    i-83ab5b4a35951df7262eefe13cb933f2-crank.gif

  • Denialists' Deck of Cards: Two Jacks, "Regulation Won't Work" and "We Won't Comply"

    i-36fc86b662c028ae90167c2b58025554-jd.jpg Two related arguments–the denialist will say that the regulation won’t work. And they won’t help in finding a way to come to a reasonable solution.

    Finally, continuing in the teenager theme, the denialist will argue that they won’t comply, even if directed to by law. Rule of law be damned!

    		 i-530902a0bb38d8b51b639c16342a82d3-js.jpg

  • Thimerosal goes on trial

    Slate has coverage of the impending trial against vaccine makers over the inclusion of thimerosal – a mercury containing preservative agent – in childhood vaccines.

    Luckily, the writers at Slate have done their homework. They present a laundry-list of denialist tactics from the anti-vax crackpots.

    (more…)

  • A scientific study of overvalued ideas

    Corpus Callosum points us to a review in science entitled Childhood Origins of Adult Resistance to Science (Chris at mixing memory also has coverage of the article). This is a perfect study to emphasize a critical aspect of denialism and crankery, that is, the central role the overvalued idea plays in the evolution of a crank.

    Denialism, in a nutshell, is the rhetorical strategy used to protect an overvalued idea from things like facts and data. The denialist or crank is trying desperately to hold on to a concept that is important to their self-identity or ego, and is in conflict with well-established scientific observations. Examples of overvalued ideas and the denialists that hold them include racial superiority for holocaust denialists, biblical literalism for young earth creationists, or having a scientific basis for deities in the case of intelligent design creationists. Sometimes the central truth being protected is more ephemeral or based on egotism or guilt or fear. Global warming denialists I believe are mostly fearful of economic consequences or lifestyle changes that may be forced by broad acknowledgment of the threat of some aspects of climate change (those who aren’t being paid to shill that is). People who insist autism is caused by mercury/vaccines are emotionally invested in finding someone to blame for their children’s illness or are harboring a fundamental distrust of medicine (often complaining of some terrible experience with doctors).

    But how do people latch onto these overvalued ideas in the first place? Why do people develop these and refuse to relinquish them? This paper provides insights into some sources of anti-scientific ideas, but sadly isn’t comprehensive. The ones it does cover though (I’d say creationism and Deepak-Chopra kinds of woo) are absolutely hysterical to read about.

    For instance, I couldn’t help laughing as I read this paragraph:
    (more…)

  • Denialists' Deck of Cards: The Jack of Hearts, "We've Always Done This"

    i-7ee428063b132794a7e44f562ca4f2e6-jh.jpg The fifth hand brings increasing petulance. One common tactic at this point is to admit to the behavior in question, and like a teenager, say “we’ll we’ve always done this,” and therefore we should be able to continue to do so.

  • Go to Pharyngula right now

    His coverage of the creation museum is a must-see.

  • Happy Birthday to Rachel Carson

    Today would be her 100th, and it presents us an opportunity to do two things. First, we salute a major influence in the birth of environmentalism in the United States and the world. Second, we want to use the opportunity to defend Carson from the specious attacks on her by the purveyors of the DDT ban myth.

    (more…)

  • Badscience takes on the WiFi paranoia from BBC

    And kicks its ass.

    What is up with the British and their fear of “radiation”? People complain about poor science comprehension here in the US, but it is by no means an isolated phenomenon. The fact someone was able to put a documentary on BBC suggesting that radiofrequencies of WiFi had any chance of affecting human health is pretty pathetic. And the fearmongering and anti-scientific conduct of the documentary is clearly pretty shameful.

    Between this and the Independent’s coverage of the environment, I think they’re trying to bring down environmentalism from the inside.