# data[].attributes.body
By: Lauren Kageyama, Ashley Showers & Maria Tsafantakis

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #2 - Pseudoscience Watchlist: Deliberately creates mystery

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #2 - Pseudoscience Watchlist: Deliberately creates mystery

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

The pseudoscience watchlist topic deliberately creates mystery can be defined by explaining concepts, ideas, or phenomena in a way that makes it seem like there's some secret knowledge or mysterious forces involved, even if there's no scientific evidence for it. This approach is designed to grab people's attention and keep them interested by piquing their curiosity and leaving them with unanswered questions. Which often involves an element of mystical or spiritual forces, appeals to our love of mystery and our need for excitement, and believers claim even they cannot explain it.

Connection:

The attached article delves into cryptozoology, particularly exploring the phenomenon of "Bigfoot." Despite lacking scientific evidence, this subject remains a prime example of pseudoscience, prompting an ongoing sense of curiosity and wonder. People are drawn to the idea that there may be undiscovered creatures living among us, but this also highlights the barriers to critical thinking, as many assume the legend of Bigfoot based on anecdotes rather than demonstrable validity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sixty years ago this fall, Bigfoot first stepped into the public consciousness. "Giant footprints puzzle residents," a headline in the Humboldt Times announced. The small Northern California newspaper reported that a road construction crew had discovered humanlike footprints that were a massive 16 inches long. The paper was the first to give the mysterious animal that made the prints its memorable moniker-"Bigfoot"-and the creature has been stomping through the American imagination ever since.

Today, the legendary beast seems to be everywhere: You will find Bigfoot looking awfully cute this year in two children's films: The Son of Bigfoot and Smallfoot. Animal Planet recently aired the finale of its popular series "Finding Bigfoot," which lasted 11 seasons despite never making good on the promise of its title. And the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization lists at least one report from every state, except Hawaii, over the past two decades. The most recent sighting, in June 2018, was by a woman in Florida who reported a creature that looked like "a large pile of soggy grass." Other evidence in the database includes supposed Bigfoot scat, nests and noises. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, it may not make a sound-but it seems someone will report that a Bigfoot knocked it over.

"Interest in the existence of the creature is at an all-time high," the paleontologist Darren Naish has observed, even though "there's nothing even close to compelling as goes the evidence."

Of course, Bigfoot is not the first fabled hominid to roam North America. Sasquatches long populated the mythologies of American Indian tribes in the Pacific Northwest, but those 1958 footprints transformed the myth into a media sensation. The tracks were planted near Bluff Creek in Northern California by a man named Ray Wallace-but his prank was not revealed until his death in 2002, when his children said it had all been "just a joke."

By that point, more important evidence had entered the Bigfoot file. In 1967, Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin filmed a few seconds of a hairy creature walking on two legs by the same Bluff Creek-the most famous and contested piece of Bigfoot "evidence" to this day. That the Patterson-Gimlin film was created in the same place that Wallace had staged his hoax is just one reason to doubt its authenticity. Skeptics say the animal was a man in costume, while believers argue that the creature's movements and body proportions cannot possibly have been human. The debate has been raging for half a century, which raises a question of its own. "How is it that the evidence has not gotten any better despite the exponential increase in the quantity and quality of cameras?" asks Benjamin Radford, a research fellow with the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry.

Still the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence either. Wild animals don't exactly mug for photos, and the planet's ever-shrinking forests still regularly unpack surprises, such as the saola, an untamed cousin of the cow that was discovered by scientists in Vietnam in 1992. But the saola did not have legions of amateurs hunting it with cameras. With or without hard evidence, many people clearly want to believe in Bigfoot. Which suggests we are dealing more with human imagination than human evolution.

Naish has written that Bigfoot is the modern American "manifestation of a human-wide cultural concept, not a zoological reality." It has much in common with the Australian yowie and the Himalayan yeti: an upright posture, shaggy hair and, of course, large feet. As so-called wild men, they hold a crude mirror up to our own species: What might Homo sapiens be like if civilization had not removed it from nature?

Fact or Folklore
Can you tell the real animals from the fake ones? Hover over each animal to reveal if it is fact or folklore. (Illustration by Iris Gottlieb) Illustrations by Iris Gottlieb
***********

Some people see these cryptohominids as symbols of pure freedom, living by instinct and foiling every effort to pin them down. To search for Bigfoot in the forest is to taste that freedom. On the trail, you become extra-attuned to nature: the smell of scat, the sounds of breaking branches, the curious impressions in the dirt. As long as there are wild places in America, Bigfoot remains a possibility that, to its most ardent proponents, cannot be disproved.

The hunt for Bigfoot emulates an earlier mode of discovery, when new knowledge was not the product of advanced degrees and expensive machinery but rather curiosity, bravery, patience and survival. In the 19th century, the American landscape revealed its majesties to ordinary settlers pushing westward into territory unmapped by Europeans. To track Bigfoot today is to channel that frontier spirit (as well as to appropriate Native American traditions).

Bigfoot also embodies other less romantic but no less enduring American traits, like gullibility and a hunger for attention. "There are so many fake videos," says Loren Coleman, the founder of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine. The problem has grown worse with social media, where viral hoaxes, like drone footage of a supposed Bigfoot in a clearing in Idaho, can rack up millions of views. Coleman, for his part, believes there is evidence for Bigfoot's existence, but he and his like-minded peers find it difficult to focus attention on this material amid the growing number of obvious shams. "Technology has ruined the old cryptozoology," Coleman says.

His complaint echoes concerns in more mainstream American life, where technologies that promised to build consensus have, in fact, made the truth more difficult than ever to discern. On the internet, Bigfoot has found a habitat much more hospitable than North American forests. It turns out that Bigfoot does not need to exist in order to live forever.

The Iceman Cameth
The amazing story of the infamous frozen "missing link" from Minnesota-and the dogged scientist hot on its trail.

Get the latest History stories in your inbox?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Do So Many People Still Want to Believe in Bigfoot?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The appeal of the mythical, wild man holds strong

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #3 - Pseudoscience Watchlist: Often appeals to emotion

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #3 - Pseudoscience Watchlist: Often appeals to emotion

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

Often appealing to emotions seeks to instill strong emotions in us, such as fear, hope, or empathy, to persuade us to believe or act. It's like telling a story that touches your emotions but isn't always supported by real science. This emotional technique attracts our attention and trust even without sufficient scientific proof. This usually includes personal anecdotes, vulnerable people, emotional connections and emotion trumps rational thoughts.

Connection:

The image I’ve attached displays a psychic reading. Readings by psychics typically rely on vulnerable people, personal anecdotes and emotional appeals, giving people the ability to communicate with loved ones who have passed away or learn about their future. What a psychic might “claim” could offer comfort and closure even when the reading isn’t backed by evidence. Those who find themselves having a reading should always recognize biases and remain skeptical of their claims.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #4 - Pseudoscience Watchlist: Use of scientific-sounding language that is meaningless

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #4 - Pseudoscience Watchlist: Use of scientific-sounding language that is meaningless

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

Scientific-sounding meaningless language can be defined as when you use complicated, technical, or specialized words and phrases that sound scientific but don't have any real scientific meaning or truth. It offers the illusion of legitimacy, even while the concepts are ultimately flawed. This often includes mystical energy, healing modalities, biocosmic energy and a psychotronic amplification system.

Connection:

The article I've attached discusses quantum mysticism. Quantum mysticism is a pseudoscience that frequently uses scientific-sounding terminology to give the impression of legitimacy. This approach mixes spiritual and paranormal aspects with quantum physics vocabulary. It argues that quantum principles like entanglement and uncertainty provide a foundation for understanding the "law of attraction." However, posing as a scientific field often creates a considerable barrier to critical thinking.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Theory

The Law of Attraction is a powerful force that works across all fields of human endeavor. It works because of the same principle that applies to atoms - like attracts like. Similarly, the energy of our thoughts is attracted to the energies of objects that share the same energy. Therefore, our thoughts relating to our goals attract things that are similar to those thoughts.

The Universe is made up of particles, each of which is constantly moving. Even what seems to be 'dead' is made up of particles that are vibrating at high levels that cannot be perceived by the naked eye. Everything in our universe is made up of subatomic particles and the movement of these particles makes up energy. These particles interact with one another in an infinite way, which explains how our thoughts influence our reality. Interestingly, both the Law of Attraction and quantum physics theory work along similar lines.

Unlike other types of pseudoscience, the Law of Attraction is a scientific reality that can be explained by quantum physics. Though many scientists dismiss the concept as pseudoscience, it has been proven to be true. The law of attraction has long fascinated people, but quantum physics is the science behind it. By understanding how energy works, we can better understand how to manifest things in our lives.

The Law of Attraction states that our thoughts are what create our reality. This is true for both positive and negative thoughts. Positive thoughts attract positive experiences, while negative ones attract negative ones.

Application

Quantum physics explains how our world is made of many tiny atoms that exchange energy and become matter. These particles are charged and can influence one another in infinite ways. Their inter-relationships explain the power of our thoughts and actions. In many ways, the law of attraction works on the same principles.

Essentially, the law of attraction states that like attracts like. Using this principle, we can attract almost anything to ourselves. This can include a new house or car, a career position, or even a peaceful mind. The good news is that applying it is a completely harmless effort.

Quantum physics explains the laws of attraction by describing the behavior of ultra-small particles in space. Its theory makes predictions about objects and locations, but it is impossible to be 100% sure. The concept is supported by a vast body of scientific research on the theory.

Quantum physics is a form of science that explains the way the universe works. Scientists have observed how our thoughts can affect the physical world. Under a stronger microscope, they can observe atoms, protons, neutrons, quarks, and electrons. They also see waves, which represent the possibilities of the universe.

Criticism

Despite its popularity, the law of attraction and quantum physics are largely viewed as unproven theories. While the theory behind the law of attraction is inspiring, it also seems too general and often misses important external factors. Some critics believe that the theory is just a fantasy or pseudoscience, with no scientific merit.

Critics also argue that quantum mechanics is based on a false understanding of the nature of reality. In the ordinary world, influence and action can only be experienced after they travel a certain distance. In the quantum world, however, influence and action can occur over arbitrary distances.

Quantum physics and the law of attraction have similar foundations. The idea of quantum physics is that the world is made up of countless atoms, each of which is charged with energy. Because they are interchangeable, each atom has the ability to influence the other, which is one of the main theories behind quantum physics. This idea of infinite change is also true of the law of attraction.

Quantum physics has also moved science into the center of ancient spiritual teachings. It attempts to observe matter at its smallest level, using the Higgs boson as the "God particle." It has also made possible to imagine matter as slowed down energy.

Moreover, quantum chromodynamics presents greater mathematical challenges than quantum electrodynamics. The complexities of the theory make it difficult to do rigorous calculations of the properties of individual hadrons. However, numerical calculations using the largest computers seem to support its validity.

Falsifiability

Falsifiability is an important consideration for scientists. Theories that cannot be tested are unreliable and undermine public confidence in science. For example, Einstein's general relativity, which predicts the expansion of the universe, is incompatible with observations of the real world. Furthermore, the theory makes predictions about things that are untestable by definition, such as the existence of black holes and the behavior of particles inside them.

Falsifiability is the ability to make false inferences based on a situation or person. A dark-skinned man is Asian, but this does not mean that all Asians are dark-skinned. This is the same with the law of attraction. People use success stories to apply the theory to other situations and make conclusions that do not hold true.

Although the laws of attraction are based on the principles of quantum physics, they lack a scientific foundation. Many theories are based on hypothetical explanations and do not have scientific support. Therefore, it is impossible to draw a definitive relationship between the thought process and the results. Furthermore, the theories often neglect possible deterring factors and differences in circumstances. The most obvious problem with this theory is that it draws conclusions based on a hypothetical study of human nature and a few cases, which may be coincidences.

The law of attraction is based on the idea that electrons are "charged" with energy and react to our expectations. As a result, they are subject to the laws of attraction. The law of attraction states that "like attracts like" and this means that our thoughts will attract like-minded people.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Law of Attraction and Quantum Physics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore the role of consciousness in shaping reality and learn how to harness this knowledge to manifest your desires.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #5 - Pseudoscience Watchlist: Convinces by faith and belief (despite evidence)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #5 - Pseudoscience Watchlist: Convinces by faith and belief (despite evidence)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

Pseudoscience frequently persuades people by appealing to faith and belief. Convinces by faith and belief (despite evidence) is based on the belief and trust in specific ideas or practices, even without concrete evidence to support them. Sometimes, people hold on to certain beliefs very firmly because they have a deep emotional or cultural connection to them. This can make them believe in these things without questioning them critically or considering scientific evidence. Which typically includes the presence of spiritual beings, faith is not based on scientific evidence, evidence is wrong, and science cannot explain mystical connections

Connection:

The article attached discusses the flat earth theory. The flat Earth theory is a belief relying on faith and conviction despite the overwhelming scientific evidence that demonstrates the Earth is not flat. Those who believe in this theory hold their convictions based on a profound sense of faith rather than relying on credible evidence or the scientific method. They argue that the substantial evidence supporting the roundness of the Earth is part of a conspiracy aimed at concealing the "truth." This highlights significant barriers to critical thinking, as believers in this claim often refuse to critically evaluate sources, recognize biases, or apply skepticism to assess the validity of their claims. Instead, they maintain their faith-based belief system, dismissing science that debunks the flat Earth theory.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Taken from the July 2020 issue of Physics World.

Physicists will find it shocking, but there are plenty of people around the world who genuinely believe the Earth is flat. Rachel Brazil explores why such views are increasingly taking hold and how the physics community should best respond

(Courtesy: Claus Lunau/Science Photo Library)

In 2017 the US rapper B.o.B (real name Bobby Ray Simmons Jr) started a crowd-funding campaign to launch a satellite. The rapper, a vocal proponent of "flat-Earth theory", wanted to seek evidence that our planet is a disc, not a globe. His aim was to raise $200,000 (later upped to $1m) on the GoFundMe website, with the aim of sending one or more craft into space to help him "find the curve" - the term that "flat-Earthers" use to describe the edge of our supposed disc-shaped planet.

The rapper's quest may seem like a joke or publicity stunt. Indeed, there's currently no evidence that B.o.B raised much money or got anywhere near his goal. However, in the last few years there has been an alarming rise in the number of people who, like B.o.B, believe in flat-Earth theories. There's now an annual flat-Earth conference in the US - the most recent of which was attended by more than 600 people - while YouTube is full of videos purporting to provide evidence that the Earth is flat.

Physicists may mock the notion of a flat Earth, but the idea is gaining traction, particularly among people susceptible to other conspiracy theories. "They actually really do believe it," says Lee McIntyre, a philosopher from Boston University and an expert in the phenomenon of science denial, whose books include Respecting Truth: Wilful Ignorance in the Internet Age (Routledge, 2015). McIntyre knows first-hand how sincerely flat-Earthers hold their views: he attended the 2018 Flat Earth International Conference in Denver, Colorado.

Asheley Landrum, a psychologist from Texas Tech University who was also at the Denver meeting, agrees that flat-Earthers are genuine, and not goofing around. "If they were [trolling], they are very good actors," she says. "We talked to more than 90 members of the flat-Earth community and they're all very sincere in their beliefs". Lectures at the Denver event included "Talking to your family and friends about flat Earth", "NASA and other space lies" and "14+ ways the Bible says flat Earth".

Flat-Earth ideas are based on basic scientific misunderstandings that can be easily refuted. For most people, even those who have no physics background, the evidence for a spherical Earth is obvious. So we need to ask ourselves why these ideas still persist in the 21st century and, perhaps more importantly for the physics community: how exactly should we respond?

A circular history

The idea that the Earth is a sphere was all but settled by ancient Greek philosophers such as Aristotle (384-322 BC), who obtained empirical evidence after travelling to Egypt and seeing new constellations of stars. Eratosthenes, in the third century BC, became the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth. Islamic scholars made further advanced measurements from about the 9th century AD onwards, while European navigators circled the Earth in the 16th century. Images from space were final proof, if any were needed.

Today's flat-Earth believers are not, though, the first to doubt what seems unquestionable. The notion of a flat Earth initially resurfaced in the 1800s as a backlash to scientific progress, especially among those who wished to return to biblical literalism. Perhaps the most famous proponent was the British writer Samuel Rowbotham (1816-1884). He proposed the Earth is a flat immovable disc, centred at the North Pole, with Antarctica replaced by an ice wall at the disc's outer boundary.

The International Flat Earth Research Society, which was set up in 1956 by Samuel Shenton, a signwriter living in Dover, UK, was regarded by many people as merely a symbol of British eccentricity - amusing and of little consequence. But in the early 2000s, with the Internet now a well-established vehicle for off-beat views, the idea began to bubble up again, mostly in the US. Discussions sprouted in online forums, the Flat Earth Society was relaunched in October 2009 and the annual flat-Earth conference began in earnest.

As with any fringe movement there are disagreements and several different flat-Earth models exist to choose from. Some models propose that the Earth's edges are surrounded by a wall of ice holding in the oceans. Others suggest our flat planet and its atmosphere are encased in a huge, hemispherical snow globe from which nothing can fall off the edges. To account for night and day, most flat-Earthers think the Sun moves in circles around the North Pole, with its light acting like a spotlight. The most recent "US model", for example, suggests that the Sun and Moon are 50 km in diameter and circle the disc-shaped Earth at a height of 5500 km, with the stars above this on a rotating dome. Many flat-Earthers also reject gravity, with the "UK model" suggesting that the disc is itself accelerating up at 9.8 m/s ² to give the illusion of gravity.

Physicists will scoff at these ideas, but the worrying thing is that they are spreading rapidly and gaining proponents outside America too. "While they may not be as many [in Europe], they are as loud as their colleagues in the US," says Jan Slegr, a physicist from the University of Hradec Králové in the Czech Republic, who in 2018 co-authored a paper outlining ways for teachers and others to confront outlandish flat-Earth ideas with physics ().

Such efforts are important. Alarming polling data by the firm Datafolha, for example, indicate that 7% of the Brazilian population - some 11 million people - believe that the Earth is flat. This shocking number has been attributed to a resurgent evangelical Christian church, but there are also signs that religious fundamentalism is spreading these ideas in Islamic countries too. In 2017 the website Jeune-Afrique reported that a geology student in Tunisia was intending to submit a PhD defending her work on a flat-Earth model.

Conspiracy mentality

It would be easy to dismiss flat-Earthers as simply being misguided due to a lack of education. While there are indications that those susceptible to such views have low levels of scientific literacy, Landrum at Texas Tech says that flat-Earthers aren't necessarily people who don't believe in science. "It's not really an education thing," she says. "It really is about distrusting authorities and institutions. [It] seems to be based on both a conspiracy mentality and a deeply held belief that looks a lot like religiosity but isn't necessarily specifically tied to a religion".

Landrum thinks this conspiracy mentality is linked to science denial and a susceptibility to believing deceptive claims on social media (Politics and the Life Sciences 38 193). No longer the domain of a "foil-hat-wearing fringe", she believes those with a conspiracy mentality have lost the ability to judge when to trust and when to be a sceptic. Their lack of trust in authority includes not just scientists but scientific bodies such as NASA, all of whom (they think) are part of a massive conspiracy to prevent the flat-Earth truth being revealed. "[They] view the world through this really dark filter where [they] assume that all authorities and institutions and corporations are just there to exploit you."

McIntyre adds that the flat-Earthers he interacted with each believed a selection of conspiracy theories, including that governments control the weather and that chem-trails from aeroplanes consist of chemical or biological agents. "The only one I found that they all believed," he says, "was that we hadn't gone to the Moon. If you offer them back evidence, like the view of the Earth from the Moon, they say it's fake." Indeed, many flat-Earthers are more invested in the idea of a conspiracy than in providing a workable model of a flat Earth.

Nikk Effingham, a philosopher at the University of Birmingham in the UK who has met flat-Earthers at a London meet-up, says that we often don't recognize the extent to which confidence in authority shapes our beliefs. "When we try and prove something like the Earth being round, because it's a belief that we are so sure of, we under-play the justified role of authority in that," he says. Most people are therefore comfortable accepting the world is a globe, even if they can't immediately recount the scientific evidence.

Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don't want to believe
Lee McIntyre, Boston University

But that's not the case for those mired in a conspiracy mentality. What's also clear is that the rise in flat-Earth beliefs has been fuelled by the Internet and YouTube videos in particular. "Almost everybody that we spoke to said that either they were directly exposed to flat Earth on YouTube or they were exposed to it via a family member who was exposed to it on YouTube," says Landrum. Flat-Earth videos often present numerous arguments in rapid succession with what Landrum dubs "an illusion of fluency".

Key to the videos' success has also been the algorithms that serve them up to viewers of other conspiracy-related content. "The algorithms facilitate the normalizing of conspiracies and the feeling of a consensus within your community," explains Landrum. "Flat Earth is just another example of that." In 2019 YouTube did acknowledge the problem and said it would be tweaking its algorithm to reduce its recommendations of conspiracy-theory videos. But the fact remains that the videos are still on its platform.

Proving the Earth isn't flat

It was McIntyre's work on science denial that led him to the 2018 flat-Earth conference in Denver, where delegates spent time discussing the "evidence" and finer details of their theory as well as the supposed conspiracy that flat-Earthers believe is shielding their ideas from the wider public. "I thought that if I could understand how to push back against flat-Earthers, I could use the same techniques to fight back against climate-change deniers and anti-vaxxers," he says. After all, their ideas are all generally based on fallacies and misunderstanding of science. "Some of the flat-Earthers know enough physics to throw around the vocabulary, but they don't actually understand enough physics to be compelled by the truth."

But even without the visual confirmation of pictures taken from space, many of the arguments used by flat-Earth proponents can be easily dismissed with trigonometry or basic physical laws. A good place to start is with a Foucault's pendulum, the device named after the French physicist Léon Foucault, who in 1851 famously hung a heavy 28 kg brass bob from a 67 m chain in the Panthéon in Paris. Such a pendulum, which can swing in any plane, changes direction during the course of a day, yielding direct evidence of the Earth's rotation. (Though as Slegr points out, that hasn't stopped some flat-Earthers claiming that all Foucault pendulums are fraudulent and that museums use magnetic coils to turn the plane of the pendulum's rotation to make the Earth seem to rotate.)

Another phenomenon that proves the Earth is a spinning globe is the Coriolis force, which acts perpendicular to the direction of motion of a spinning mass. This force leads to cylones swirling clockwise in the southern hemisphere and counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere; through the direction of winds, it also impacts ocean currents. Long-range military snipers even have to make allowance for deflections caused by the Coriolis effect. Indeed, as Slegr points out, getting physics students to explain the evidence for a spherical spinning Earth is a great critical-thinking exercise.

But that deep critical thinking is what's often missing among flat-Earthers. Consider photos of distant skylines, which are often wheeled out as "proof" that the Earth is flat. In his interactions with flat-Earth theorists, McIntyre was commonly shown a picture of Chicago, taken from Lake Michigan, in which the city's skyscrapers are clearly visible despite being viewed from a distance of 100 km out. "Given the curvature of the Earth, you shouldn't [in principle] be able to see the skyline of the city from that far out," he says.

The reason the buildings are visible, as McIntyre knows, lies in the fact that air directly above the water's surface is colder than the air higher up. This inverse temperature gradient means that light rays refract toward the colder, denser air, allowing an image of the reflected skyline, formed on the water below the horizon, to appear almost hovering above the horizon (figure 1). This notion can easily be verified by taking a photo even further away, where the "superior mirage" will disappear.

1 Why distant skyscrapers are visible despite the curvature of the Earth

This photo was taken from Mount Baldy in Indiana Dunes National Park on the south-east coast of Lake Michigan, roughly 60 km across the water from the city of Chicago, which lies on the opposite bank. At that distance, Chicago's skyline should not be visible as the curvature of the Earth takes it beyond the horizon. The fact that the buildings are visible is in fact simply a mirage. Mirages are usually created when a cold, dense layer of air sits above a layer of warmer, less dense air, for example when the Sun beats down on a black road on a hot summer's day. The warm ground heats the bottom few centimetres of air, refracting sunlight up to your eyes to create an "inferior mirage". But if a layer of warm air sits above your line of sight, with a cool layer beneath, you get a "superior mirage". Light bends down towards the denser air, but because our eyes assume the light has travelled in a straight line, the object appears higher than it is. The effect also explains why a far-off ship can be seen even though it might have dipped below the horizon. It can even make distant boats appear to float in the air.

But, as McIntyre found, this type of reasoning is unlikely to convince flat-Earthers. "They seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don't want to believe." One of their key experimental tools is a Nikon P900 camera with a ×83 optical zoom, in which flat-Earthers place an almost religious faith. Able to capture details not visible to the naked eye, they hope to use it to show that objects don't disappear over the horizon but come back into view when examined at high enough resolution.

McIntyre described his frustrations with flat-Earthers in a paper last year in the American Journal of Physics (87 694), in which he challenged physicists to come up with simple, straightforward answers to refute the "evidence" for a flat Earth that could be understood by a general audience. Someone who rose to the bait was retired physicist Bruce Sherwood, who realized that "just citing the scientific facts is not going to convince anybody". Instead, given that flat-Earthers place so much emphasis on naked-eye observations, he and colleague Derek Roff decided to create a navigable 3D computer simulation of a flat Earth to see how well it could replicate what we see.

Based on the US version of the flat-Earth model, it allows anyone to virtually roam a flat world. "Walking round in it, there were many things that show tremendous discrepancies," says Sherwood. One of the major problems is the size and brightness of the Sun. In the flat-Earth model this varies by more than a factor of two from sunrise to midday, something we obviously do not see. The night sky also differs. In the northern hemisphere we see constellations rising in the east and arcing across the sky but in the flat-Earth model they would just circle at a constant height. "What [Sherwood] has created is something that's much harder for [flat-Earth proponents] to laugh off, because it takes their own views seriously, [and] traces out the consequences," says McIntyre. "I think that on this basis, other physicists can go out and help to push."

Dangerous liaisons

From McIntyre's perspective, flat-Earth conspiracies are a danger and need confronting. "Maybe 10 or 20 years ago, I would have said, just laugh at them, how much traction are they going to get? I no longer feel that way." If these ideas are not challenged, he fears that as with supporters of "intelligent design", proponents of a flat Earth will start running for US school boards, looking to push their ideas into the US education system. "The sort of reasoning that they use is infectious and if you don't push back against them, it just gets worse and they're able to recruit new members," he warns.

But Effingham, who has also interacted with flat-Earthers on Facebook, wonders if physics is the place to start combating these conspiracy-based ideas. "I'm not saying that the perfect formula doesn't have some kind of physics argument in it, but just turning on a YouTube video of physics lectures is not going to do it." Instead, Effingham has tried to get flat-Earthers to understand that, by watching YouTube videos, they too are slavishly following an authority - not a scientific authority, but the authority of whoever is proposing the conspiracy theories they subscribe to.

Effingham also tries to point out their inconsistencies. "Every position they took required a different view of the conspiracy, and required the conspiracy to be bigger or smaller, and it was impossible to get a consistent conspiracy going that explained everything." McIntyre, for example, recalls asking one flat-Earther why planes flying over Antarctica from, say, Chile to New Zealand don't have to refuel, which they'd have to if the continent were (as they believe) an ice wall tens of thousands of kilometres long. He was simply told that planes can fly on one tank of fuel and refuelling planes could just be a giant hoax to stop us realizing that the Earth is flat.

Landrum agrees the underlying problem is one of trust rather than physics. "We really should figure out as a scientific community, and as a society as a whole, how we can start building back trust in our organizations and institutions." And she feels we need to do this face-to-face. "I don't mean go yell at them on Twitter - that's not engaging." It's also vital, she says, for scientists not to patronize flat-Earthers but to take questions seriously. That may seem like an excruciatingly painful process, but a necessary one, for people to gain trust in science as an institution again.

A level of sustained personal engagement can change minds. "It does work to push back against science deniers," argues McIntyre, pointing to current NASA boss Jim Bridenstine. He was appointed by Donald Trump in 2018 and was known to have disputed climate change. "[But] once [he] became head of NASA, within a matter of two months or so, he changed his mind on climate change, and publicly said, 'I was wrong'," says McIntyre. The difference was that the evidence was presented to him by scientists he had grown to trust.

Oddly, Landrum says that many flat-Earthers may distrust scientists, but they are not against the scientific method. "The majority of them put a lot of faith, for lack of a better word, in science. There's a lot of curiosity and a lot of scepticism and a lot of the really good qualities that make scientists." But while the spirit of experimentation may be there, flat-Earthers are not always prepared to change their minds when their experiments fail. And that's why McIntrye hopes some physicists might go with him to future flat-Earth conferences.

"I think that physicists need to be more involved," he says. "There's really no excuse for us to just sit back and laugh at them. Because while we're laughing, they are recruiting people to believe these crazy things."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fighting flat-Earth theory - Physics World

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Rachel Brazil explores ways in which the physics community can best combat unscientific thinking, such as the belief the Earth is flat

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #12 - Reasons for Belief (Emotional Connections)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #12 - Reasons for Belief (Emotional Connections)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

Emotional Connections can be defined as what our emotions make us believe. When our emotions are in control it is hard to see the truth through it, which can make us act, think, and believe in a certain way.

Connection:

Psychic Medium (pseudoscience) John Edwards does a reading on random people in the audience. Through emotional connection, these people believe what he's saying is true. To debunk this is done by he asks open-ended questions to the audience that would relate to a tragedy. Then, these people would be intrigued to believe what he is saying as he has "connected with a passed relative". Although these people are just believing this as their emotions are blurring reason and obscuring rational thoughts making them believe what he has to say is true. Through class connections, we have learned a lot about Psychic mediums. This also is something that isn't scientifically proven and not a reputable source though some people do believe that these individuals can connect to the dead or spirits to lead you through guidance of the unknown.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Psychic Medium John Edward Surprise Reading For Kelly Clarkson Show Audience | Original

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #13 - Reasons for Belief (Patternicity)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #13 - Reasons for Belief (Patternicity)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

Patternicity is defined as seeing patterns through things meaninglessly without reason as to why we see them.

Connection:

The image displayed above is a tree in the forest. We can see a face on the tree (two eyes and a mouth) through reasons of belief (patternicity). Although it's just a tree with holes, we see this because we naturally discern meaningful patterns in meaningful and meaningless visual noise. This phenomenon highlights the barriers to critical thinking, as it reminds us that our perceptions can sometimes override actual scientific evidence, and we find ourselves attributing meaning where it might not truly exist, emphasizing the importance of skepticism and the need to evaluate evidence.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #11 - Reasons for Belief (Agenticity)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #11 - Reasons for Belief (Agenticity)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

Agenticity can be defined as something that we can't see or prove exists, though we choose to believe that this spirit or God for example can lead us in the right direction.

Connection:

"However when He, the Spirit of Truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth; for He shall not speak from Himself, but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak; and He will show you things to come." John 16:13 This verse from the Bible can be connected to agenticity to define the claim it is the belief that this invisible being will guide you in the right direction. Without physical evidence, many people believe that God will guide you and other believers through life and God will set you on your assigned pathway to success in life. Not only God but there are many things discussed in class that can be related to this belief like aliens, angels, ghosts, spirits, UFOs, conspiracies, paranormal and more. This is all considered Pseudoscience as there is no scientific evident that God exists nor does beliving in God lead you in the correct direction.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By submitting your email address, you understand that you will receive email communications from Bible Gateway, a division of The Zondervan Corporation, 3900 Sparks Drive SE, Grand Rapids, MI 49546 USA, including commercial communications and messages from partners of Bible Gateway. You may unsubscribe from Bible Gateway's emails at any time.

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

A logical fallacy known as an appeal to authority occurs when the foundation of an argument is not the validity of the argument itself, but rather the endorsement or support of a specific person or authority figure. In this illusion, the use of an authoritative person to support a claim or assertion is common, even when the authority's knowledge of or connection to the subject at issue is in doubt.

Connection:

This article is a clear representation of appeal to authority, in this article, we have Kim Kardashian promoting her waist trainers. At first, it starts off with Kim posting in her waist trainers, then it gradually shows her sisters wearing them as well. It is best to use critical thinking and skepticism while reading this article, in order to not be fooled. The Kardashians have undergone major plastic surgery, and their small waists are not natural. People believe that because these celebrities are wearing waist trainers they should too, they have young and impressionable fan bases so they know people will follow whatever they do. However, if we really debunk waist trainers then we would know that they cause lots of damage to your organs seeing as they shift and make your vessels stretch out.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kim Kardashian’s Waist Training Secret Out

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Trick to Being Shaped Like a CelebrityKim Kardashian made headlines last week on Instagram by endorsing waist training with an image of herself in shapewear! And she isn’t the only celebrity to rave about how much shapers can transform your body, which is why some news outlets are suddenly…

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

All Natural as a red flag can be defined as something stating it is 'all natural' regardless of ingredients or makeup. Many people use this as a marketing tactic to show its product is safe as it is 'all natural' making consumers blind to whatever is really inside.

Connection:

To define the claim All Natural you need to dig a little bit deeper into what 'all natural' really means. Products that claim to be this can be highly dangerous because, as soon as someone sees natural, organic, green, and clean they purchase things without a thought. This article attached takes us through why these are really just marketing scams. Many media influencers will promote "all-natural" brands which could also tie in appeal to authority red flags, as someone believes what this person is claiming and the bottle also says "all-natural" it must be the best! However, to debunk this, Skepticism questions everything. From reading this article we all need to do. Skepticism is, they must have proof to believe. Skepticism must be the starting point for all extraordinary claims. (Claims are false until proven fact). By saying this next time you read all-natural and correlate that to being healthy remember this.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Word "Natural" Is A Scam. Here's Why. - The Candidly

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
by Marissa Pomerance "Clean." "Organic." "Green." AKA, words marketing teams use to signal that their product is "healthy." But there is one in particular- the mother of all these intentionally murky words- that's designed to make us feel as though we're making good choices, while also havin

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

The information, perceptions, and lessons passed down through the ages from prehistoric peoples and cultures are collectively referred to as Ancient Wisdom. It offers timeless advice on a variety of life topics, such as philosophy, spirituality, ethics, and practical knowledge. It is historically based. This body of knowledge gives ageless guidance and viewpoints for managing the difficulties of the human condition.

Connection: We can see this article relates to Ancient Wisdom when we read the word “traditional”. In this article it states that it may be “ancient” but its practices are anything but outdated. For years, new anecdotes about traditional Chinese medicine have risen. People have their preferences on healthcare and newer doctors in medicine like to try and debunk “traditional medicine” because they like to take on a holistic perspective, although it never quite works because it’s proven to be very beneficial. In my opinion, this is a reputable source; not only does their website have real information confirmed by healthcare professionals but it also dives into the nitty gritty of how Traditional Chinese Medicine is being done and how it has “stood the test of time and been relied on for years”.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Traditional Chinese Medicine - Tap into the Benefits of Ancient Wisdom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Chinese Medicine. Long before modern-day hospitals, carefully concocted medications, and mainstream medical practices, humans have faced

# data[].attributes.body
Definition: A red herring is a logical fallacy in which unrelated or false material is presented in an argument or conversation in an effort to distract the audience or redirect attention away from the main topic at hand. It gives off a false impression, making it difficult to address the real issue at hand.

Connection: This is an article about Donald Trump and his “art” of Red Herring. If there is ever a suspicion of Red Herring we must always use critical thinking while carefully listening to what an individual has to say. In this article it was said “In response to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, Trump has long maintained there was "no collusion" between the Kremlin and his campaign for the presidency in 2016. But, in an attempt to throw the public off the scent, lead attorney Rudy Giuliani has gone one step further, contending that “collusion” wouldn't be illegal in any case, claiming that “collusion” is not explicitly cited in U.S. legal code.” We can clearly see how Trump is using Red Herring to throw off the public. Based on this article and others like it, evaluating the evidence here is easy. He is very well known for Red Herring and I would say this is a reputable source based on the many examples given. This website and many others like it show proof of Trump's tactics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lorin R. Robinson: Donald Trump and The Art of the Red Herring

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Beware the seemingly harmless - albeit smelly - red herring. When deployed by Trump, view it as a pitiful and irrelevant distraction. Like the hound on "Mythbusters," do not let

# data[].attributes.headline
Post 9 - Red flag: Confusion of Correlation with Causation

# data[].attributes.subject
Post 9 - Red flag: Confusion of Correlation with Causation

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:

When a cause-and-effect relationship is incorrectly assumed based on a statistical association between two variables, it is known as confusing correlation with causation. As other circumstances or coincidences may be at work, just because two things are connected does not necessarily suggest that one of them is the cause of the other.

Connection:

Anecdotes can contribute to the confusion between correlation and causation. People cannot consider the need for skepticism and critical thinking when determining causation when they only consider personal experiences or singular incidents. Anecdotes about taking a vitamin supplement and feeling better, for instance, can lead someone to believe that the supplement was the reason for their recovery. Before conclusively attributing causation to the supplement based only on a single anecdotal experience, critical thinking and skepticism would lead people to take other factors and possible placebo effects into account.