Aiman Hakim Bin Abdul Rahim PDF

ELC590
TEMPLATE: PREPARATION OUTLINE

PERSUASIVE SPEECH
Student’s Name : Aiman Hakim bin Abdul Rahim

Matric Number : 2019704853
Faculty / Group : BA246 3B
Lecturer’s Name : Rasyiqah Batrisya binti MD Zolkapli
Speech Title : Flat Earth Movement (FEM) Ban

Organisational Pattern: Monroe’s Motivated Sequence
Visual Aid : Power point slides
General Purpose : To persuade
Specific Purpose :To persuade my audience to combat pareidolia milieu by the Flat Earth
Movement.
Central Idea : Misinformation by the FEM to protect next generation researcher from being
led astray by pseudo-scientific approach.
Introduction
(Monroe’s Motivated Sequence → Attention)

I. Attention getter
A. Misinformation and conspiracy theories are far from new, but social media has allowed
anyone and everyone to share and amplify them.
II. Reveal topic

A. Modern flat Earth societies are organizations that promote pseudoscientific belief that
the Earth is flat while denying the Earth’s sphericity contrary to over two millennia of
scientific consensus.
B. Thus, we should ban the misinformation by the FEM to protect next generation
researcher from being pervade by pseudo-scientific consensuses before its dogma
poses risk which deteriorate stakeholders’ opportunity for empirical results such as
students preparing a thesis on thermonuclear in the field of astrophysics.
III. Establish credibility: My name is Aiman Hakim bin Abdul Rahim, an astrophysicist at
NASA.
IV. Preview body/ state central idea: The misinformation acknowledgement by the Flat Earth
Movement poses threats and therefore, we must take proper measures or suffer academia
policy reform as a repercussion.
(Transition: Lets clarify the risks posed by FEM if we void its pseudoscience approach.)
Updated: 3 September 2018 Created by ELC590 Resource Team

Body
(Monroe’s Motivated Sequence → Need)
I. Main idea 1 : YouTube have been the main media platforms that contributes to the FEM
which attracts vast new audience through its selective exposure algorithm in
recommending to knowledge deficit hypothesis themed Flat Earth videos.
A. Subpoint 1
1. Sub-subpoint 1
a. Participants from the first International Flat Earth Conference in
Raleigh, North California states that “the had only come to believe
the earth was flat after watching videos about it on YouTube”
(Landrum, 2019).
b. Biased information processing is one the effects of the selective
exposure algorithm system used by online platform with main
purpose to market advertisement.
B. Subpoint 2
1. Sub-subpoint 2
a. Such algorithm is not capable to filter misinformation online because
it cannot make heuristic options to fact check videos.
b. Thus, creating a social milieu that sustain pareidolia that
strengthens ignorance within people with high conspiracy mentality.
2. Sub-subpoint2
a. Even Kyrie Irving a professional NBA star states he regrets
mentioning the earth is flat during a Road Trippin’ podcast which
result him to lose credibility from due to public criticism on his view.
b. From his story, during his academia world from grade school, his
irate science teacher has indoctrinated his class with flat earth
pareidolia (NewStraitsTimes, 2018).
C. Sub-point 3
1. Sub-subpoint 3
a. Do we want to accept that our children are being taught in flat earth
milieu from incompetent educators in school?
b. Do we want politician to approve the FEM which go against credible
consensus which jeopardize our safety in technology?
(Transition: How do we filter the waves of information which creates this pseudoscience milieu? A.
Fortunately, for legislators to formulate the ban on FEM milieu, we should help to the
cause in combating pseudo-science with principles in mind)
(Monroe’s Motivated Sequence → Satisfaction)

A. Main point 2 : Critical thinking is the key in keeping FEM at bay from stating false facts
and producing empirical results.
B. Subpoint 1
2. Sub-subpoint1
a. Encourage people acquire critical thinking skills in aiding their
reasoning to analyze scientific hypothesis.
b. In a journal article by Media Psychology states that high conspiracy
mentality strongly predicted the perceiving the arguments made by
the video clips as strong and being more open to researching the flat
Earth views. Interestingly, science intelligence interrupted the
influence of conspiracy mentality on views of the argument strength.
(Landrum, 2019)

c. This shows science intelligence provides protection against
accepting the conpsirational narrative that the earth is not as
scientist and astronauts say.
(Transition: As we legislate in banning through FEM pareidolia dogma, what will get from the effort?)
(Monroe’s Motivated Sequence → Visualisation) ethos

II. Main point 3 : Regulated and constant fact check flat earth movement content with critical
scientific objectivity which challenge the mind of researchers.
A. Subpoint 1
1. Sub-subpoint1
a. The legislated ban will facilitate knowledge deficit hypothesis ending
FEM academia paradigm.
b. Science intelligence can act to inoculate against at least some forms
of pseudoscience and science-based misinformation (Landrum,
2019).
B. Subpoint 2
1. Sub-subpoint 2
a. Selective exposure algorithm produced by online source will filtered
out misinformation through machine learning.
b. The algorithm will be ethical in carrying out advertisement by not
recommend bias Flat Earth videos.
Conclusion
(Monroe’s Motivated Sequence → Action)

Finally, as we combat the pareidolia narrative by the FEM being spreading, the dissemination of
FEM dogma will be diminished through legislated ban which make institutions retain credibility by
improving ethics through information technology. An astrophysicist named Neil deGrasse
encourage us to fight back people who are claiming false evidence by using instruments of science
behind their cause that inherent destructive ulterior motive.
References
Landrum, A. R. (2019, September 29). Differential susceptibility to misleading flat earth arguments on
youtube. Retrieved from tanfonline.com:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15213269.2019.1669461
Nasser, T. (2019, July 4). IS THE EARTH REALLY FLAT ACCORDING TO THE QURAN? WIKI-
ISLAM REFUTED. Retrieved from Rational Religion: https://rationalreligion.co.uk/is-the-
earth-really-flat-according-to-the-quran-wiki-islam-refuted
NewStraitsTimes. (2018, October 2). Irving regrets ever calling Earth 'flat'. Retrieved from
NewStraitsTimes: https://www.nst.com.my/sports/others/2018/10/416938/irving-regrets-ever-
calling-earth-flat
Simanek, D. E. (2006). Retrieved from lockhaven.edu:
https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/flat/flateart.htm
THE CONVERSATION. (2020, March 9). How Technology can combat the rising tide of fake
science. Retrieved from TTHE CONVERSATION : https://theconversation.com/how-
technology-can-combat-the-rising-tide-of-fake-science-132158

Media Psychology
ISSN: 1521-3269 (Print) 1532-785X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hmep20
Differential susceptibility to misleading flat earth

arguments on youtube
Asheley R. Landrum, Alex Olshansky & Othello Richards
To cite this article: Asheley R. Landrum, Alex Olshansky & Othello Richards (2019):
Differential susceptibility to misleading flat earth arguments on youtube, Media Psychology, DOI:
10.1080/15213269.2019.1669461
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2019.1669461
© 2019 The Author(s). Published with

license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
View supplementary material
Published online: 29 Sep 2019.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 7234
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=hmep20
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY
https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2019.1669461
Differential susceptibility to misleading flat earth

arguments on youtube
Asheley R. Landrum , Alex Olshansky , and Othello Richards
College of Media & Communication, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA
ABSTRACT
YouTube has been influential in propagating Flat Earth Ideology,
but not everyone is equally susceptible to the effects of watching
these videos. In an experiment with a participant pool restricted
to regular YouTube users, we found that lower science intelli-
gence and higher conspiracy mentality increase individuals’ sus-
ceptibility to flat Earth arguments on YouTube. In fact, these two
dispositional variables interact: whereas people with lower con-
spiracy mentality do not find the arguments compelling at any
level of science intelligence, among those with higher conspiracy
mentality, perception of argument strength decreases as science
intelligence increases. Moreover, perceptions of argument
strength varied on the thrust of the clip’s argument (science-,
conspiracy-, or religious-based), with the religious appeal being
perceived as weaker and inspiring more counterarguing than the
science clip. We discuss implications for both the knowledge
deficit hypothesis and for the differential susceptibility to media
effects model.
YouTube has been monumental in the flat Earth movement – at least according
to the movement’s leaders and evidence from in-depth interviews with the Flat
Earth community. For example, the vast majority of the interviewees from the
first International Flat Earth Conference1 in Raleigh, North Carolina, said that
they had only come to believe the Earth was flat after watching videos about it on
YouTube (Landrum & Olshansky, 2019a; Olshansky, 2018). Importantly, inter-
viewees explained their conversion process: While watching videos about other
conspiracies, such as those about 9/11, YouTube recommended Flat Earth
videos such as “Flat Earth Clues” by Mark Sargent and “200 Proofs the Earth
is Not a Spinning Ball” by Eric Dubay. Interviewees described first ignoring the
recommended videos and then deciding to watch and debunk them. After
watching the videos and “doing their own research,” they came to accept the
premise that we do not live on a “spinning ball.”2 Though these videos are
unlikely to sway the majority of individuals in the United States and abroad,
CONTACT Asheley R. Landrum, PhD A.Landrum@ttu.edu College of Media & Communication Texas Tech
University, 3003 15th St., Box 43082, Lubbock, TX 79409
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/hmep.
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed on the publisher’s website.
© 2019 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction
in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
2 A. R. LANDRUM ET AL.
there are clearly some who were convinced and some who still will be. The flat
Earth phenomenon is symptomatic of a broad and growing distrust in institu-
tions and authorities, but it also has contributed to the instigation of discussions
about misinformation on YouTube and how to address it. Moreover, by under-
standing what can convince whom of this extreme view and how, we can better
understand the acceptance of less extreme examples of misinformation about
science propagated on social media, such as that related to vaccines and/or
climate change. The purpose of this study is to examine who is susceptible to
which types of appeals in flat Earth YouTube videos, guided by the Differential
Susceptibility to Media Effects model (i.e., DSMM).
YouTube
YouTube is both a search engine and video-sharing website that allows users to
upload their own videos and engage with videos shared by others (YouTube,
2019a). As of August 2018, YouTube ranks as the second-most popular website
in the U.S. and the world, ahead of Facebook.com and behind Google.com (which
owns the video-sharing platform; Alexa.com, 2019). A YouTube-commissioned
study reports that adults 18 and older “spend more time watching YouTube than
any television network”; and more adults under age 50 watch YouTube during
peak television watching time (i.e., “prime time,” between 8pm and 11pm Eastern
in the U.S.) than the top ten prime-time shows combined (YouTube, 2016).
Though a large number of YouTube content creators upload content that is
helpful, accurate, or at least not obviously problematic, there are also countless
channels that present what YouTube calls “borderline” content. Borderline
content is that which does not technically violate YouTube community guide-
lines (e.g., infringing on copyright, displaying explicit or pornographic images,
or promoting violence against individuals or groups, YouTube, 2019b), but
nonetheless could misinform users in potentially harmful ways (e.g., promoting
phony miracle cures; YouTube, 2019c).
YouTube aids in selective exposure

Individuals are biased in how they search, attend to, evaluate, and incorporate
new information into their existing knowledge, often privileging and prioritizing
information that aligns with their pre-existing views and values (e.g., Akin &
Landrum, 2017; Cappella, Kim, & Albarracin, 2015; Kunda, 1990; Stroud, 2008;
Taber & Lodge, 2006). YouTube, like many other internet and social media
platforms, aids in selective exposure. First, individuals who are searching for
information, consciously or subconsciously, that aligns with their pre-existing
views will find it on the vast platform. Second, YouTube employs an algorithm
that determines what viewers see (Covington, Adams, & Sargin, 2016). This
personalized recommendation system is composed of two neural networks, one
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 3
that first winnows down the massive body of YouTube content to a few hundred
videos (i.e., “candidate generation”) and then one that ranks those videos based
on predicted user engagement from each audience member’s history of activity
(i.e., “ranking”; Covington et al., 2016; YouTube, 2019a).
Knowledge deficit hypothesis

Understanding biased information processing, like selective exposure, has
contributed to understanding gaps between what scientists know and what
publics believe, a key issue in science communication research (Akin &
Landrum, 2017). Historically, members of the scientific community assumed
that public reluctance to readily accept established science is due to low
science knowledge (Bauer, Allum, & Miller, 2007). This “knowledge deficit
hypothesis” is based on the public deficit model (or information deficit
model), which posits that a unidirectional flow of more scientific information
to the public will translate into a greater public understanding of science and
then to increased public acceptance and support (see Suldovsky, 2016).
Although there is an obvious role for knowledge in public understanding
and acceptance of science, the knowledge deficit hypothesis is over-simplistic.
Interpretation of scientific information, even when communicated clearly, is
conditional on people’s values, beliefs, and worldviews (e.g., Brossard,
Scheufele, Kim, & Lewenstein, 2009; Landrum, Hallman, & Jamieson, 2019;
Landrum, Hilgard, Lull, Akin, & Jamieson, 2018; Nisbet & Scheufele, 2009;
Yeo, Xenos, Brossard, & Scheufele, 2015). After all, people often engage in
motivated reasoning, dismissing otherwise credible scientific evidence that
does not cohere with their preexisting views (Kunda, 1990). In certain cases,
greater science knowledge – or “science intelligence” – can increase the
probability of rejecting scientific results, suggesting people may use their
science intelligence to more artfully motivate their own viewpoints instead
of aligning with scientific consensus (e.g., Kahan et al., 2012).
Differential susceptibility to media effects

The DSMM, or Differential Susceptibility to Media Effects Model, compiles and
extends key concepts of earlier media-effects theories to explain how and why
certain individuals are susceptible to certain types of media under certain condi-
tions (Valkenburg & Peter, 2013). Four components form the DSMM: media use,
individual susceptibility variables, response states, and media effects; and four
propositions describe the relationships between these components (see Table 1).
These propositions guide the hypotheses for this study, for which we operationa-
lized the media effect as the degree of openness to researching flat Earth views that
results from watching flat Earth YouTube videos. We expand on each of these
components and their relevance to the current study below.
Table 1. The four components and four propositions of the differential susceptibility to media
effects model (Valkenburg & Peter, 2013).
Components
Media Use Individual Susceptibility Response States Media Effects
● Dispositional ● Cognitive
● Developmental ● Emotional
● Social ● Excitative
Propositions
Proposition 1 Media effects are conditional on dispositional, developmental, and social susceptibility
variables.
Proposition 2 Media effects are indirect, and cognitive, emotional, and/or excitative response states
mediate media use and its effects.
Proposition 3 Dispositional, developmental, and social susceptibility variables affect individuals’ response
states by operating as both predictors of media use and as moderators of its effects.
Proposition 4 Media effects are transactional and, in turn, influence the other components in the model.
Media use
In the context of the DSMM, media use encompasses a variety of factors such as
exposure to content, selection of media outlets, and frequency and duration of
media use. Individual susceptibility variables predict media use. For example,
political ideology and party affiliation influence which cable networks people
choose to watch (e.g., Stroud, 2008). In the current study, however, we experi-
mentally manipulated to which of four video clips participants were exposed, and
we examine the interactions between the experimental manipulation (video clip)
and the individual susceptibility variables on participants’ response states and
resulting media effects.
Individual susceptibility variables

Here, we focus on dispositional susceptibility variables, which can include a wide
array of demographics (e.g., gender, race), personality traits, attitudes, moods,
and/or cognitions. Valkenburg and Peter (2013) provide examples from the
literature of the moderating effects of dispositional variables on response states.
For example, Cacioppo and colleagues find that individuals’ need for cognition
moderates cognitive response states such as responsiveness to argument quality
and number of thoughts generated (Cacioppo, Petty, Feinstein, & Jarvis, 1996).
Several dispositional variables may predict susceptibility to flat Earth videos,
including lower science intelligence, conspiracy mentality, and religiosity.
Science intelligence
We operationalize science intelligence as a combination of analytic thinking,
quantitative reasoning, and knowledge of scientific facts (e.g., Kahan, 2017), and
this measure positively correlates with other proxies for knowledge (e.g., educa-
tion level) and thinking styles (e.g., actively openminded thinking, Kahan, 2017).
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 5
Moreover, science intelligence predicts acceptance of a variety of scientific

issues – though, this acceptance is sometimes conditional on other dispositions,
such as political ideology and religiosity (e.g., Kahan, 2017; Kahan, Landrum,
Carpenter, Helft, & Jamieson, 2017). Additionally, this operationalization pre-
dicts acceptance of viral deception (or “fake news”) as likely to be true (Landrum
& Olshansky, 2019b).
Similar measures of analytic thinking and knowledge have also been linked to
the rejection of science and acceptance of pseudoscience, fake news, and con-
spiracies. Pennycook and Rand (2019a), for example, found that lower scores on
two versions of the cognitive reflection task (which is included in Kahan’s 2017
measure of science intelligence) predicted less ability to discern between true and
false news. Bronstein, Pennycook, Bear, Rand, and Cannon (2018) generalized
this non-analytic or intuitive cognitive style to delusion-prone individuals based
on research that associated this type of cognition with belief in conspiracies (e.g.,
Barron et al., 2018; Swami, Voracek, Stieger, Tran, & Furnham, 2014), para-
normal activity (Pennycook, Cheyne, Seli, Koehler, & Fugelsang, 2012), and
“pseudo-profound bullshit” (Pennycook, Cheyne, Barr, Koehler, & Fugelsang,
2015; Pennycook & Rand, 2019b). Similarly, the authors found that delusion-
prone individuals, along with dogmatic individuals or religious fundamentalists,
engaged in less analytic thinking and less open-mindedness (Campitelli &
Labollita, 2010) and were more likely to assume that “fake news” headlines
were true (Bronstein et al., 2018). Together, this work supports the proposition
that individuals with reduced science intelligence are generally more vulnerable
to other inaccurate and/or implausible information, such as conspiracies and
rejection of science (Lewandowsky, Oberauer, & Gignac, 2013), which is con-
sistent with the knowledge deficit hypothesis.
Thus, we hypothesize that lower science intelligence will predict susceptibility
to flat Earth arguments on YouTube. Moreover, science intelligence may interact
with the other dispositions (i.e., conspiracy mentality and religiosity) to influence
susceptibility.
Conspiracy mentality
Conspiracies can be involved in the rejection of science in two, non-mutually
exclusive ways: as a method of motivated reasoning (i.e., conspiracy theorizing)
and as a disposition (i.e., conspiracy mentality, see Landrum & Olshansky, 2019b).
This study focuses on the latter. Conspiracy mentality involves high levels of
distrust in institutions, as well as feelings of political powerlessness and cynicism
(Einstein & Glick, 2015; Hofstadter, 1965; Imhoff & Bruder, 2014; Jolley &
Douglas, 2014). Prior research has shown associations between various measure-
ments of conspiracy mentality and personality traits such as delusion (Dagnall,
Drinkwater, Parker, Denovan, & Parton, 2015), paranoia (Bruder, Haffke, Neave,
Nouripanah, & Imhoff, 2013; Grzesiak-Feldman & Ejsmont, 2008; Holm, 2009),
and schizotypy (Darwin, Neave, & Holmes, 2011). Belief in the paranormal
(Darwin et al., 2011), a tendency for cognitive fallacies (Brotherton & French,
2014), and openness to experience have also been associated with holding con-
spiracy beliefs. Conspiracy mentality, which is sometimes referred to as conspiracy
ideation, is often measured using questions about a range of common conspiracy
theories (e.g., “The assassination of John F. Kennedy was not committed by the
lone gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, but was rather a detailed, organized conspiracy
to kill the President”; Swami, Chamorrow-Premuzic, & Furnham, 2010; Swami
et al., 2011) or general conspiracies (e.g., “Certain world leading political figures
who died untimely deaths were in fact ‘taken out’ by government operatives”,
Brotherton, French, & Pickering, 2013; cf., Bruder et al., 2013; Stojanov &
Halberstadt, 2019) in which participants are asked about agreement or to rate
each item’s likelihood of being true.
In addition to its associations with personality traits, conspiracy mentality has
also been shown to predict rejection of well-established scientific facts, such as
climate change (e.g., Lewandowsky, Gignac, & Oberauer, 2013; Lewandowsky
et al., 2013; Uscinski & Olivella, 2017). And, recent work found that conspiracy
mentality was the strongest predictor of believing viral deception about a variety of
science-related topics over and above science literacy, political affiliation, and
religiosity (Landrum & Olshansky, 2019b).
Thus, we hypothesize that greater conspiracy mentality will predict suscept-
ibility to flat Earth arguments on YouTube.
Religiosity
Recent studies focused on the flat Earth community (Landrum & Olshansky,
2019a; Olshansky, 2018) and popular press articles (Dryer, 2018; Ross, 2018)
have surmised that those who hold flat Earth views are often higher in religios-
ity – that is, the strength of one’s religious conviction, regardless of specific
denomination. Indeed, religiosity has a history of involvement in science denial,
most famously with regard to human evolution (e.g., Weisberg, Landrum, Metz,
& Weisberg, 2018). Religiosity also recently has been linked to vaccine refusal
(e.g., McKee & Bohannon, 2016) as has spirituality (e.g., Browne, Thomson,
Rockoff, & Pennycook, 2015).
Thus, we hypothesize that stronger religiosity will predict susceptibility to
flat Earth arguments on YouTube.
Response states
Besides the individual susceptibility variables, another component to the DSMM is
the response state elicited by media use (see Proposition 2 in Table 1). Interviewees
from the Flat Earth conferences reported responding skeptically to initial exposure
to flat Earth videos on YouTube, and only after spending time researching flat
Earth perspectives on the web did they eventually decide that they, too, believe that
the Earth is flat (Landrum & Olshansky, 2019a). This, albeit self-reported,
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 7
description of the conversion process, which was echoed by the majority of the
individuals interviewed, suggests they may have taken a System 2 (Kahneman,
2011) or central route approach to processing the persuasive messages.
The Elaboration Likelihood Model (i.e., the ELM) describes two distinct routes
to persuasion: (1) a central route, in which attitude change is a result of a thoughtful
systematic, or mindful, approach, or (2) a peripheral route, in which attitude
change is a result of use of heuristics or mental shortcuts that save cognitive effort
(Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). One factor that might lead a person to centrally process
information is having the motivation to do so. The flat Earthers interviewed
expressed this motivation when describing their initial desire to debunk the claims.
A second key factor is an individual’s ability to process a message, which can be
influenced by an individual’s knowledge and by external environmental distrac-
tions. Indeed, we can question whether a few, some, or most of the potential
viewers have the requisite science knowledge to evaluate the claims made in the
videos. For example, many of the flat Earthers we interviewed expressed naïve
theories (see McCloskey, 1983; see also intuitive theories, Shtulman, 2017) of
relevant physical scientific concepts (e.g., gravity, motion) that likely influenced
their abilities to evaluate the claims made in the videos (Landrum & Olshansky,
2019a). They are not alone in this; even science teachers can hold misconceptions
about physical principles (e.g., Burgoon, Heddle, & Duran, 2011; Kikas, 2004), so it
is not merely a matter of holding naïve theories that leads to accepting a flat Earth.
By considering cognitive (and other) response states as mediators of media effects,
the DSMM incorporates essential components of the ELM.
To test potential central route processing in the context of DSMM, we
focused on cognitive response states using two methods of assessment from
prior literature: participants’ evaluations of the video clips’ argument
strength (e.g., Landrum et al., 2019; Zhao, Strasser, Cappella, Lerman, &
Fishbein, 2011) and the extent to which participants counterargued with the
content in the videos (Boukes, Boomgaarden, Moorman, & De Vreese, 2015).
Hypotheses
Our hypotheses were guided by the DSMM model. Proposition 1 and 3 both
address the influence of the differential susceptibility variables on the cogni-
tive response states and media effects. From these propositions, we hypothe-
size the following.
Hypothesis 1a-c. Openness to researching flat Earth views – the media effect – is
conditional on individuals’ dispositions, namely (H1a) science intelligence, (H1b)
conspiracy mentality, and (H1c) religiosity.
Specifically, we anticipate that people with increased conspiracy mentality

and/or increased religiosity will be more open to researching flat Earth views,
whereas people with greater science intelligence will be less open to doing so.
Hypothesis 2a-c. (H2a) Science intelligence, (H2b) conspiracy mentality, and (H2c)
religiosity will moderate the relationship between the video clip watched and the
cognitive response state.
First, we anticipate that perceptions of argument strength will increase and

counterarguing will decrease with increasing conspiracy mentality and/or reli-
giosity, whereas perceptions of argument strength will decrease and counter-
arguing will increase with increasing science intelligence. Second, it is also
possible that the dispositions will interact with the different appeals to predict
perceived argument strength and counterargument. For instance, people who are
more religious may counterargue less after watching the religious appeal than
after watching the conspiracy or science appeal. Similarly, people with greater
conspiracy mentality who saw the conspiracy appeal may report greater percep-
tions of argument strength than those who saw the religious or science appeals.
There are also reasons to expect that one or more of the dispositions will
moderate the relationship between cognitive response state and openness to
researching flat Earth views, although this role of dispositional variables is
not specifically predicted by the DSMM. Thus, we hypothesize the following.
Hypothesis 3a-c. (H3a) Science intelligence, (H3b) conspiracy mentality, and/or
(H3c) religiosity will moderate the relationship between cognitive response state
and openness to researching flat Earth views.
For instance, even if people find the arguments to be somewhat strong (or if
they cannot generate counterarguments), their lower conspiracy mentality or
greater science intelligence may act as buffers against increased openness to
researching flat Earth views that would otherwise arise from their cognitive
response states.
Proposition 2 of the DSMM emphasizes that media effects may result from an
indirect relationship of media use through cognitive response state. Therefore,
we hypothesize the following.
Hypothesis 4. Cognitive response states (e.g., H4a. perceptions of argument
strength and H4b. counterarguing) will mediate the relationship between video
clip watched and the resulting degree of openness to researching flat Earth views.
Moreover, consistent with Proposition 3 and Hypotheses 2 and 3, this

indirect effect may be moderated by the individual susceptibility variables.
Method
Participants
Participants were 402 regular YouTube users recruited using TurkPrime,
a service associated with Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Of these participants,
57% were female, and the sample’s race/ethnicity breakdown included 76%
White, 11% Black/African American, 7% Hispanic/Latinx, 6% Asian, and 2%
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 9
Other. Moreover, participants ranged in age: 6% were at least 60 years of age,

12% were in their 50s, 20% were in their 40s, 34% were in their 30s, and 28%
were under 30 (but at least 18). Highest level of education attained also varied:
11% of participants reported finishing only high school, 38% completed some
college, 35% graduated college, and 16% reported attending graduate school.
Most of the sample (73%) reported using YouTube daily, whereas 26% reported
using it at least weekly, and 1% reported using it at least monthly. Participants
were awarded 2 dollars after completing the survey.
Study design and procedures

Participants were told that the research study examines uncommon views shared
via YouTube. The study contained four sections. In the first section, participants
watched a short (25 to 30 seconds long) video clip and answered questions about
that clip. Participants were randomly assigned to view one of four clips (i.e., the
condition), which differed in which (misinformative) arguments were presented
about the Earth’s shape. In the second and third sections of the survey, participants
answered questions about their views and what they know about science, respec-
tively. Lastly, in the fourth section, participants answered standard demographic
questions. Following the demographic questions, we provided a “fact check” that
explained why the argument the participant saw in the video was misinformative3.
For more information on the study design and procedures, please see the supple-
mentary materials.
Stimulus materials
Participants were randomly assigned to one of three4 experimental conditions that
varied based on the type of flat Earth argument presented (scientific5, conspirator-
ial, or religious) or a fourth condition that served as a control. The experimental
clips (which each ranged from 25 to 30 seconds) were cut from a widely-shared
YouTube video entitled “200 Proofs the Earth is Not a Spinning Ball” created by
Eric Dubay, one of the leaders in the modern flat Earth movement. Dubay’s name
was not used in the experiment; he was referred to as “the narrator.” Participants
were introduced to the clip with the following: “In the video, ‘200 proofs the Earth
is Flat’ the narrator makes the following argument,” and a transcription of the
video and the watchable video clip followed. See Figure 1.
Participants in the “science” condition saw a clip that argued that an experiment
conducted by Jean-Baptist Biot and Francois Arago proved the Earth was flat:
“In a 19th-century French experiment by M. M. Biot and Arago, a powerful lamp
with good reflectors was placed on the summit of Desierto las Palmas in Spain and
able to be seen all the way from Camprey on the Island of Ibiza. Since the elevation
of the two points were identical and the distance between covered nearly 100 miles, if
Figure 1. shows the conspiracy video item as the participants saw it in the survey. The
transcription of the video was provided above the video clip in quotations. Participants had to
press play to start the video.
Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, the light should have been more
than 6600 feet, a mile and a quarter, below the line of sight.”
Participants in the “conspiracy” condition (depicted in Figure 1) saw a clip

that argued that the images of the Earth provided by NASA are counterfeit:
“Professional photo analysts have dissected several NASA images of the ball-Earth
and found undeniable proof of computer editing. For example, images of the Earth
allegedly taken from the moon have proven to be copied and pasted in as evidence by
rectangular cuts found in the black background of the Earth by adjusting brightness
and contrast levels. If they were truly on the moon and Earth were truly a ball, there
would be no need to fake such pictures.”
Participants in the “religious” condition saw a clip that argued that many
religious texts support a flat Earth model:
“The Bible, Koran, Strimam Bablicam[sic], and many other holy books describe and
purport the existence of a geocentric stationary flat Earth. For example, 1st
Chronicles 16:30 and Psalm 96:10 both read he has fixed the Earth firm, immovable.
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 11
And Psalm 93:1 says, “ … the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.” The
Bible also repeatedly affirms that the Earth is outstretched as a plane with the
outstretched heavens everywhere above, not all around, giving a scriptural proof
the Earth is not a spinning ball.”
In the control video, participants saw a short clip of a man explaining what
needs to be done to fix a bathtub faucet. The purpose of the control condi-
tion was to (a) ensure that watching the flat Earth clips did not influence the
dispositional factors (i.e., that science intelligence, conspiracy mentality, and
religiosity did not vary based on watching a flat Earth video clip compared to
the control clip) and to (b) determine whether there were overall effects of
watching flat Earth video clips on openness to researching flat Earth views
compared to the control condition.
Measures
Media effects – openness to researching flat earth views
Presumably, the creators of flat Earth YouTube videos desire to increase
viewers’ openness to the viewpoint. Worth highlighting, the slogan of the
conference was not “The Earth is Flat,” but “Research Flat Earth,” emphasiz-
ing the Do-It-Yourself culture of the movement. We thus conceptualized
media effects for this study as the openness to researching flat Earth views
resulting from watching the video clips. To this end, we asked participants to
what extent they agree with six statements focused on self-reported planned
behavior (e.g., I plan to watch more YouTube videos to learn more about flat
Earth views; I plan to watch more YouTube videos to learn more about why
scientists say the Earth is round; I plan to conduct my own experiments to
determine the shape of the Earth) and one statement expressing doubt in the
globe (i.e., I find myself questioning the shape of the Earth). We evaluated
these items’ fit as a scale using item response theory (a graded response
model for ordinal polytomous data; Samejima, 1969); and we examined their
internal consistency (α = 0.88, 95% CI [0.80, 0.92]). For more information,
see the supplementary materials.
Response state – argument strength and counterarguing

We used two measurements of cognitive response: perceptions of argu-
ment strength (e.g., Landrum et al., 2019; Zhao et al., 2011) and counter-
arguing (Boukes et al., 2015).
Argument strength
To measure argument strength, we reminded participants of the argument made
in the video clip and asked how (1) believable, (2) convincing, and (3) strong
they found the argument to be. To answer these questions, participants used
a slider scale that ranged from 0 to 1006, with higher numbers reflecting greater
argument strength. These three items formed a scale with strong internal
consistency (α = 0.94, 95% CI [0.93, 0.95]). On average, participants rated the
arguments as weak, or having low argument strength (M = 13.93 of 100,
SD = 20.28, Median = 4.67).
Counterarguing
The second measurement of cognitive response was the extent to which partici-
pants counterargued with the claims. We mostly followed the method outlined by
Boukes et al. (2015), in which participants were asked to write down their thoughts
after watching the video clip, and the thoughts were coded as agreeing or disagree-
ing with the critical message from the video. In one block, we asked participants to
provide any reasons (up to 5) why they think the argument made in the video is
false and, in another block, any reasons (up to 5) why they think the argument
made in the video might be true. The order of the presentation of the two blocks
was randomized between subjects. Participants were given five text boxes for each
question and asked to use one line per reason. Two coders read through the
reasons provided to ensure that the reasons in the “False” boxes disagreed with
the critical message made in the video and the reasons in the “True” boxes agreed
with the messages. For instance, one participant wrote in the true boxes that “there
is no reason for the argument to be true”; thus, this response was not counted as
a reason it is true. Coders did not evaluate the responses based on whether the
provided reasons were sound. We calculated intercoder reliability using Cohen’s
Kappa, (“False”: agreement = 98.2%, κ = 0.96; “True”: agreement = 99.2%,
κ = 0.88). Disagreements between the coders were resolved by discussion with
a third coder. Then, reasons-it-is-true were subtracted from reasons-it-is-false to
create a counterarguing score (M = 1.89, Median = 2, SD = 1.52).
Dispositions
We hypothesized that science intelligence, conspiracy mentality, and religi-
osity would influence cognitive response states and media effects.
Science intelligence
To measure science intelligence, we used a shortened version of the Ordinary
Science Intelligence scale (Kahan, 2017). Our shortened version of the scale
consisted of 9 items that were selected based on the items’ difficulty and
discriminatory power from a previous item response theory analysis using
a nationally-representative sample. The items were coded like a science quiz:
correct answers were coded as 1, and incorrect items (including no response)
were coded as 0. On average, participants in this sample answered about 5.5
questions out of 9 correctly (61% correct, Median = 5 questions, SD = 2.24
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 13
questions). As with prior work, the scale was evaluated and scored using item
response theory (a 2PL model). Then, the scores were centered so that the
mean was 0 (SD = .80; range = − 1.93 to 1.34). Scores did not vary based on
condition, F(5, 398) = 1.85, p = .137, η2= .014.
Conspiracy mentality
To measure conspiracy mentality, we used the 5-item general conspiracy mentality
questionnaire by Bruder et al. (2013). Items consisted of general conspiracy
statements, such as “Events which superficially seem to lack a connection are
often the result of secret activities.” Participants were asked to rate each item on
a 4-point scale, where response options were “definitely false” (1), “probably false”
(2), “probably true” (3), and “definitely true” (4). On average, participants rated the
items between probably true and probably false (M = 2.82, Median = 2.8,
SD = 0.51). As with the other scales, we analyzed this one using item response
theory (this time, a graded response model) and examined the items internal
consistency (α = 0.75, 95% CI [0.71, 0.78]). We found an unexpected significant
difference between conditions in conspiracy mentality scores, F(5, 493) = 2.87,
p = .014, η2= .031. Follow-up tests with Tukey correction show a statistically-
significant difference exists only between the science clip condition and the control
clip condition, with the control condition (M = 2.92, SD = 0.47) having a slightly
higher average conspiracy mentality score than the science clip condition
(M = 2.70, SD = 0.54, p = .030, d = 0.43). Though it is possible that seeing the
science clip somehow decreased the group’s average conspiracy mentality relative
to the control condition, the lack of differences between any of the other clip pairs
and lack of theoretical reason for the difference leads us to believe this is likely due
to chance. Importantly, conspiracy mentality did not differ between the three
experimental conditions which are compared in later analyses.
Religiosity
To measure religiosity, we asked three questions: (1) how much guidance does
your faith, religion, or spirituality provide in your day-to-day life, (2) how often do
you pray, and (3) whether the Bible should be interpreted literally (see Landrum &
Olshansky, 2019b; Weisberg et al., 2018). The wording for the first two questions
come from Pew Research Center. For the third question, we asked participants to
what extent they agreed or disagreed with the following statement:
“Religious scripture, such as the Bible, should be taken literally. For example, the
tale in which Jonah is swallowed by a giant fish (or whale) and is spit back onto the
shore three days later actually happened and is not simply a fictional moral tale.”
We used item response theory (GRM model) to evaluate and score the measure.
Then, the scores were centered and scaled so that the mean was 0 (SD = 1;
range = − 1.13 to 1.91). There were no significant differences between conditions
in religiosity, F(3, 398) = 1.21, p = .307, η2= .009. More information about the
properties of this scale is available in the supplementary materials.
Results
This study aimed to identify which dispositions predict susceptibility to the
different flat Earth arguments. To do this, we begin by conducting a series of
regression analyses before testing two moderated mediation models. For
more detailed results, please see the supplementary materials. Additional
information can be found on our osf.io page at: https://osf.io/j8rgv/
Cognitive response states and media effects are conditional on

dispositions
Our first hypothesis was that participants’ cognitive response states and their
openness to researching flat Earth resulting from watching the clips are
influenced by their science intelligence, conspiracy mentality, and religiosity.
Our second hypothesis was that these dispositional factors would interact
with the different appeals in the videos (our condition manipulation) to
influence the cognitive states elicited and participants’ resulting openness
to researching flat Earth. Our third hypothesis was that the dispositional
factors would interact with cognitive response states to influence openness to
researching flat Earth.
To test these hypotheses, we used GLM analyses predicting cognitive response
states (see Table 2) and openness to researching flat Earth (see Table 3). Note
that we include the two cognitive response state variables as predictors for
openness to researching flat Earth views and examine interactions between the
dispositional variables and the cognitive response state variables (H3).
Cognitive response state 1: argument strength

Perceptions of argument strength increased with increases in conspiracy men-
tality (b = 9.43, p < .001) and decreases in science intelligence (b = − 6.26,
p = .001). Moreover, we found an interaction effect between science intelligence
and conspiracy mentality: the effect of science intelligence on reducing percep-
tions of argument strength is stronger among those with higher conspiracy
mentality than among those with lower conspiracy mentality (b = −11.99,
p < .001; see Figure 2).
Though there was not a significant main effect of condition when accounting
for other factors in the model (F = 1.33, p = .267, type III sums of squares), a one-
way ANOVA finds differences between the clips, F(2, 296) = 3.47, p = .033,
η2= .023. Follow-up tests with Tukey correction suggest that the science clip
(M = 17.66, SD = 20.79) generally was perceived as providing a stronger
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 15
Table 2. Results from the GLM models for predicting perceptions of argument strength and
predicting counterarguing. Statistical significance is based on Type III analyses (accounting for all
model factors). Reported coefficients (b) are based on hierarchical regression, first accounting for
the main effects, second accounting for the main effects and the two-way interactions, and third
accounting for all effects including the three-way interaction.
Argument Strength Counterarguing
b F values ηp2
b F values ηp2
Video Clip (ref = Science) 1.33 .01 0.29 .00
Science vs. Conspiracy −6.98 0.47
Science vs. Religious −8.56 0.81
τ
Conspiracy Mentality 9.43 19.16*** .06 −0.32 3.15 .01
Religiosity 1.27 2.53 .01 −0.18 0.00 .00
Science Literacy −6.26 11.48*** .04 0.10 0.45 .00
Clip X Conspiracy Mentality 1.75 .01 0.05 .00
Science vs. Conspiracy 2.46 −0.04
Science vs. Religious −6.19 −0.22
Clip X Religiosity 0.90 .01 0.05 .00
Science vs. Religious 3.29 0.06
τ
Clip X Science Literacy 2.30 .02 2.58 .02
Science vs. Conspiracy 2.23 0.30
Science vs. Religious 1.14 0.07
Conspiracy Mentality X Science Literacy −11.99 18.03*** .06 0.19 0.65 .00
Conspiracy Mentality X Religiosity −3.25 2.27 .01 −0.07 0.09 .00
Religiosity X Science Literacy −0.59 0.23 .00 −0.04 0.05 .00
Clip X Conspiracy Mentality X Science Literacy 2.42τ .02 2.37τ .02
Science vs. Religious 12.86 −1.09
τ
p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Table 3. Results from the GLM model predicting openness to researching flat Earth views.
Statistical significance and effect size (ηp2) are based on Type III analyses (accounting for all
model factors). Reported coefficients (b) are based on hierarchical regression, first accounting for
the main effects and then accounting for the main effects and the two-way interactions.
DV: Openness to Researching Flat Earth b Sum Sq df F values Pr(>F) ηp2
Video Clip (ref = Science) 5.81 2 5.16** .006 .04
science vs. conspiracy 0.08
science vs. religious 0.12
Conspiracy Mentality 0.16 1.64 1 2.92 .089 .01
Science Intelligence −0.13 0.00 1 0.00 .957 .00
Argument Strength 0.03 2.54 1 4.51* .034 .02
Counterargument 0.09 1.32 1 2.34 .127 .01
Religiosity 0.04 0.28 1 0.50 .478 .00
Clip X Conspiracy Mentality 6.34 2 5.64** .004 .04
science vs. religious 0.44
Clip X Science Intelligence 0.33 2 0.29 .747 .00
science vs. religious −0.02
Conspiracy Mentality X Science Intelligence 0.1 0.34 1 0.60 .438 .00
Argument Strength X Conspiracy Mentality 0 0.22 1 0.39 .535 .00
Argument Strength X Science Intelligence −0.01 7.61 1 13.54*** <.001 .05
Counterargument X Science Intelligence −0.14 4.71 1 8.37** .004 .03
Counterargument X Conspiracy Mentality −0.07 0.63 1 1.12 .292 .00
τ
p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
3 Hig
hC
on
Predicted Argument Strength sp
ira
cy
Me
(Centered and Scaled)
2 nta
lity
(to
p2
5%
1 )
0
Low Conspiracy Mentality (bottom 25%)
2 1 0 1
Science
Science Literacy
Intelligence
Figure 2. Interaction effect between science intelligence and conspiracy mentality on perceived
argument strength. The effect of science intelligence on reducing perceptions of argument strength
is strongest among those with higher conspiracy mentality. Although conspiracy mentality was
a continuous variable in the analysis reported, we grouped the variable into quartiles and graphed
the highest and lowest quartile for the purpose of the visualization.
argument than the religious clip (M = 10.09, SD = 18.67, p = .025, d = 0.38), but
not compared to the conspiracy clip (M = 14.23, SD = 20.83, p = .453, d = 0.17).
The religious and conspiracy clips also do not differ significantly from one
another (p = .308, d = 0.21).
Cognitive response state 2: counterarguing

Participants were also asked to provide, if applicable, up to 5 reasons why the
argument presented in the video clip was true and up to 5 reasons why the
argument was false. Counterarguing was operationalized as the number of offered
reasons why the argument would be false subtracting the number of offered
reasons why it would be true.
When predicting counterarguing, we did not find any significant effects
(though there were some marginal ones, see Table 2). Similar to argument
strength, however, a one-way ANOVA (F(2, 297) = 7.30, p < .001, η2= .047)
with follow-up Tukey tests suggests that participants who watched the science
clip provided fewer counterarguments (M = 1.52, SD = 1.4) than those who
watched the religious clip (M = 2.28, SD = 1.43, p = .001, d = 0.58). There were no
significant differences in counterarguing between participants who watched the
religious clip and those who watched the conspiracy clip (M = 1.86, SD = 1.4,
p = .106, d = 0.28), nor between those who watched the science clip and those
who watched the conspiracy clip (p = .248, d = 0.26).
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 17
Media effect: openness to researching flat earth views

When predicting openness to researching flat Earth views, a one-way ANOVA
(including the control condition) showed no main effect of video clip, F(1,
400) = 0.76, p = .197, η2= .006. However, we did find a significant effect of video
clip after controlling for the other model variables (excluding the control
condition7, but including argument strength and counterarguing as well as the
dispositional variables), F(2, 283) = 5.16, p = .006, ηp2= .04.
More importantly, however, we found conditional effects, including an inter-
action between video clip and conspiracy mentality. Specifically, those with lower
conspiracy mentality were more open to researching flat Earth after watching the
science clip, whereas those with higher conspiracy mentality were more open to
researching flat Earth views after watching the conspiracy clip (see Figure 3).
Both of our cognitive response state variables also predicted openness to
researching flat Earth views, and they both interacted with science intelligence
(see Table 3). The relationship between the cognitive response states and openness
to researching flat Earth views was stronger among those with lower science
intelligence than those with higher science intelligence (see Table 3 and Figure 4).
Cognitive response states act as mediators

Our fourth hypothesis was that the cognitive response states, (H4a) argument
strength and (H4b) counterarguing, mediate the relationship between the clip
watched (condition) and openness to researching flat Earth views. We have
Clip by Conspiracy Mentality
5
Low Conspiracy Mentality High Conspiracy Mentality
Openness to Researching
Bottom 25% Top 25%

4
Flat Earth Views
Science Conspiracy Religious

Clip Clip Clip
Figure 3. Conditional effect of video clip by conspiracy mentality on openness to researching flat Earth.
Those with lower conspiracy mentality were more open to researching flat Earth after watching the
science clip, whereas those with higher conspiracy mentality were more open to researching flat Earth
after watching the conspiracy clip. Although conspiracy mentality was a continuous variable in the
analysis reported, we grouped the variable into quartiles and graphed the highest and lowest quartile
for the purpose of this visualization. The black bars represent the mean openness to researching flat
Earth, and the white boxes represent Bayesian highest density intervals (confidence intervals).
Low Med High

Low Science Intelligence Medium Science Intelligence High Science Intelligence
5
Researching Flat Earth Views Argument Strength
Counterargument
Predicted Openness to
2.5 0.0 2.5 2.5 0.0 2.5 2.5 0.0 2.5

Response State Score
Figure 4. The relationship between the cognitive response states and openness to researching flat
Earth was stronger among those with lower science literacy than those with higher science literacy.
Although science literacy was a continuous variable in the analysis reported, we grouped the variable
into bottom 25%, middle 50%, and top 25% and graphed these for the purpose of this visualization.
preliminary evidence for this effect from the regressions used to test the first
three hypotheses. For hypothesis 4, then, we used path modeling to test for
relative indirect effects and relative conditional indirect effects.
We also estimated whether science literacy and conspiracy mentality moder-
ate the effects of the cognitive response states on openness to researching flat
Earth. From our regression analyses, we found that science literacy, in particular,
appears to moderate the effect of both argument strength and counterargument
when predicting openness to researching flat Earth (see Table 3). As religiosity
was not significant in the earlier regressions, we included it as a covariate instead
of as an additional moderator in the path model. Furthermore, we ran separate
models for each of the mediators instead of including them as parallel or serial
mediators. The models used correspond to PROCESS model 76 (Hayes, 2018).
We coded our experimental manipulation using indicator coding, with the
conspiracy condition as the reference category. See Figures 5 and 6. The full
results from the path analysis are available in the supplementary materials. Here,
we provide a brief summary and a description of the overall and relative
conditional direct and indirect effects (see Table 4).
Argument strength as the mediator

The first model included argument strength as a mediator with science intelli-
gence and conspiracy mentality as moderators and religiosity as a covariate.
Direct effects
The results revealed a relative direct effect between the science clip (versus the
conspiracy clip, X1) and openness to researching flat Earth (b = 1.92, p = .003), and
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 19
Figure 5. Paths tested for Hypothesis 2. Note that separate models were tested for each of the
response state variables. In addition, the conditions were coded using Indicator coding.
this relationship was conditional on conspiracy mentality (b = − 0.72, p = .002).

There was not a significant relative direct effect between the religious clip (versus
the conspiracy clip, X2) and openness to researching flat Earth (b = 0.93, p = .160).
However, the test of highest order unconditional interaction between X (video
clip) and conspiracy mentality on openness to researching flat Earth views was
significant, F(2, 286) = 5.13, p = .007).
Conspiracy mentality (b = 15.29, p < .001) and science intelligence (b = −5.97,
p = .017) both predicted argument strength, which, in turn, predicted openness
to researching flat Earth (b = 0.03, p = .023). Moreover, the relationship between
argument strength and openness to researching flat Earth was conditional on
science intelligence (b = − 0.01, p = .007). As expected, this is consistent with our
GLM analysis.
Indirect effects
What this analysis adds to our earlier regression analyses is an estimation of
relative conditional indirect effects (see Table 4). We found significant relative,
conditional indirect effect of the science clip (vs. the conspiracy clip) through
argument strength when conspiracy mentality is low (e.g., 16th percentile) and
a b
c d
Figure 6. Significant direct effects from the path analysis in PROCESS. The top two squares (a and b)
reflect the analysis where argument strength serves as the mediator and the bottom two squares (c
and d) reflect the analysis where counterargument serves as the mediator. The two squares on the
left (a and c) reflect the analyses comparing the science and conspiracy appeals. The two squares on
the right (b and d) reflect the analyses comparing the religious and conspiracy appeals. Statistically
significant paths are depicted with solid lines. Marginally-significant paths are depicted with dashed
lines. Non-significant paths are not shown.
when science intelligence is low (b = 0.35, 95% CI[0.02, 0.75]), moderate

(b = 0.26, 95% CI[0.06, 0.51]), and high (b = 0.19, 95% CI[0.02, 0.45]). We
also found significant relative, conditional indirect effects of the science clip (vs.
the conspiracy clip) through argument strength when conspiracy mentality is
moderate (50th percentile) and when science intelligence is both moderate
(b = 0.16, 95% CI[0.04, 0.29]) and high (b = 0.11, 95% CI[0.01, 0.24]). The
indirect effects were not found for those higher in conspiracy mentality (e.g.,
84th percentile). Moreover, the indirect effects were not found when comparing
the religious clip to the conspiracy clip.
Counterargument as the mediator

The second model included counterarguing as the mediator with science
intelligence and conspiracy mentality as moderators and religiosity as a
covariate. As expected given the results of the previous model, we found a
relative direct effect between the science clip (versus the conspiracy clip, X1)
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 21
Table 4. Relative conditional indirect effects of the experimental manipulation (video clip
watched) on openness to researching flat earth views. Statistical significance was determined
using 95% confidence intervals obtained from 5000 bootstrapped samples; asterisks indicate
significant effects (where the confidence intervals do not cross 0). Values of the moderators
(conspiracy mentality and science literacy) are at the 16th (low), 50th (med), and 84th (high)
percentiles.
Argument Strength Counterarguing
Conspiracy Science
Mentality Intelligence Effect LLCI ULCI Effect LLCI ULCI
Science vs. Conspiracy Low Low 0.344* 0.005 0.754 −0.008 −0.172 0.166
Low Med 0.258* 0.064 0.511 −0.007 −0.072 0.063
Low High 0.194* 0.020 0.446 −0.006 −0.061 0.043
Med Low 0.215 −0.079 0.513 0.025 −0.070 0.157
Med Med 0.156* 0.040 0.285 0.014 −0.016 0.058
Med High 0.113* 0.011 0.244 0.007 −0.031 0.056
High Low 0.138 −0.174 0.496 0.052 −0.036 0.213
High Med 0.098 −0.059 0.291 0.030 −0.030 0.118
High High 0.068 −0.060 0.238 0.014 −0.076 0.111
Religion vs. Conspiracy Low Low 0.173 −0.171 0.636 0.001 −0.082 0.085
Low Med 0.115 −0.036 0.352 0.007 −0.055 0.071
Low High 0.078 −0.031 0.256 0.012 −0.069 0.105
Med Low −0.023 −0.276 0.249 −0.004 −0.066 0.043
Med Med −0.031 −0.134 0.075 −0.013 −0.057 0.015
Med High −0.030 −0.142 0.069 −0.018 −0.097 0.052
High Low −0.137 −0.408 0.123 −0.005 −0.106 0.072
High Med −0.111 −0.278 0.025 −0.029 −0.131 0.026
High High −0.085 −0.275 0.040 −0.045 −0.201 0.053
and openness to researching flat Earth (b = 2.64, p < .001), and this relation-
ship was conditional on conspiracy mentality (b = − 0.94, p < .001). There
was also a relative direct effect between the religious clip (versus the con-
spiracy clip, X2) and openness to researching flat Earth (b = 1.58, p = .042),
and the relationship was conditional on conspiracy mentality (b = −0.54,
p = .044).
Unlike the previous model, however, conspiracy mentality (b = − 0.34, p = .304)
and science intelligence (b = −0.10, p = .605) did not significantly predict the
cognitive response state (here counterarguing); and, counterarguing did not sig-
nificantly predict openness to researching flat Earth (b = 0.26, p = .209).
Unsurprising, then, there were no significant relative conditional indirect effects.
Discussion
Who is susceptible to which types of arguments presented in flat Earth videos?
Perhaps unsurprising, our sample of regular YouTube users generally found the
arguments presented in the flat Earth video clips to be weak. We asked participants
to rate the arguments’ strength on several dimensions using a scale from 1 to 100,
and the ratings were strongly skewed positive (floor effect) with an average near 14
and a median rating of 4.67. Similarly, participants were not particularly open to
researching flat Earth views. Like our argument strength index, our index of
openness to researching flat Earth views was positively skewed with an average
near 1.98 (of 6) and a median score of 1.86. Given this, our findings may be more
appropriately interpreted as who was least resistant rather than who was most
susceptible.
Importantly, these were single exposures to Flat Earth videos. Many of the flat-
Earthers we spoke to described dismissing the videos after their initial exposure to
them. Therefore, our findings may not necessarily imply that these videos are
broadly unconvincing. Rather, multiple exposures to a variety of different videos
and/or a motivated attempt to “debunk” the videos may lessen one’s defenses.
Effects of the different appeals

Although participants were not particularly swayed by the arguments, we did
find differences between the different video clips, which used different appeals.
The religious appeal, in particular, which described flat Earth as being consistent
with multiple religious texts, was seen as weaker than the science argument and
inspired more counterarguing than the science argument. This finding supports
the views of individuals in the scientific community that see religious claims as
being untestable and religion as being unable to “demonstrate the truth of its
ideas in a straightforward way, whereas science can” (Haught, 1995, p. 10). This
view would help to explain why study participants gave less weight to the
religious appeal than the science one. Moreover, if religious claims are empiri-
cally untestable (Haught, 1995), then such appeals lend themselves to more
criticism and refutation, as was seen by a myriad of comments survey respon-
dents provided as counterarguments (i.e., “the bible was written by people before
science could show cause of sphere”).
This finding is also consistent with recent, related research examining
people’s views about evolution and climate change, which found that people
tend to prefer scientific to religious explanations for phenomena, though
their preferences are contingent on their religiosity (Metz, Weisberg, &
Weisberg, 2018). Our finding was surprising in this context, however, given
that one oft-cited reason for accepting the flat Earth model (from Flat
Earthers, themselves) is that it fits with their literal interpretations of the
Bible. It is possible that this is a result of the population from which we
sampled. MTurk is known for having a large number of atheists and agnos-
tics relative to the general population (e.g., Burnham, Le, & Piedmont, 2018,
see also Lewis, Djupe, Mockabee, & Wu, 2015). Therefore, we may be seeing
more push back to religious arguments than would be seen in the national
population. Future research should examine the persuasiveness of this claim
among more religious individuals, especially since members of the flat Earth
community reportedly see this group as potential targets for conversion.
We also found interesting interaction effects between the appeal (science,
conspiracy, religious) and individuals’ conspiracy mentality on their openness
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 23
to researching flat Earth views (see Figure 3). It was expected and unsurprising
that, compared with people who are lower in conspiracy mentality, people with
higher conspiracy mentality would be more open to researching flat Earth after
having seen the YouTube clips. It is also unsurprising that the greatest differences
between those of low and high conspiracy mentality were found among those
who saw the video that appealed to conspiracy views. What is surprising, and
a bit unsettling, is how the difference between those with higher and lower
conspiracy mentality seemed to disappear for those who saw the video that
appealed to science (that is, it mentioned experimentation and measurement).
We should be careful not to draw strong conclusions about the effects of
different categories of appeals, such as science, religion, and conspiracy, as
we only tested one version of each. Future research that aims to specifically
look at the influence of different appeals ought to consider using stimulus
sampling and possibly fabricating flat Earth videos that vary only on the
specific appeal (e.g., science, religion, conspiracy) to control for exogenous
variables.
Effects of individual dispositions

As expected, conspiracy mentality strongly predicted perceiving the argu-
ments made by the video clips as strong and being more open to research-
ing flat Earth views. Interestingly, though, science intelligence interrupted
the influence of conspiracy mentality on views of argument strength.
Whereas those who are low in conspiracy mentality saw the arguments as
weak regardless of their science intelligence, people who were high in
conspiracy mentality saw the arguments as weak only when they scored
higher in science intelligence.
This is counter to what was expected from previous literature investigating the
influence of motivated reasoning and the knowledge deficit hypothesis.
Traditionally, increased knowledge leads to increased acceptance of science con-
ditional on views and values that are relevant to that topic, such as political ideology
and religious beliefs. Take global warming as an example. For politically liberal
individuals, whose worldviews are not at odds with proposed climate change
mitigation policies, increased science knowledge leads to increased acceptance
that global warming is a real phenomenon that is caused by humans (e.g.,
Kahan, 2017). For politically conservative individuals, whose political worldviews
are in conflict with many of the proposed climate change mitigation policies,
increased knowledge does not mean increased acceptance. In fact, increased
knowledge means increased likelihood of rejection (e.g., Kahan, 2017; Kahan
et al., 2012). Researchers have surmised that people use their knowledge and
reasoning abilities, not to align with the position of the scientific community, but
to more effectively counterargue and more strongly advocate for their preexisting
views.
Implications for the knowledge deficit hypothesis

This study finds support for the knowledge deficit hypothesis in which
likelihood of accepting the Earth is flat decreases as science intelligence
increases. Whereas political ideology serves as the values filter through
which information about global climate change is interpreted, conspiracy
mentality serves in this role for the issue of flat Earth. If flat Earth was like
climate change denial, we would expect that increased knowledge would lead
to increased acceptance of the globe (or increased rejection of the flat Earth),
but only for those with low conspiracy mentality. Indeed, for global climate
change, researchers find that the likelihood of accepting that the phenomena
is real and is human-caused increases with science intelligence, but only for
political liberals whose views are not at odds with recommended climate
change mitigation policies. In this case, science intelligence bolsters their
belief. For flat Earth, however, we find that science intelligence protects
against openness to researching flat Earth for those who are high in con-
spiracy mentality – that is, for those whose worldview is consistent with core
features of the flat Earth message.
Most people acknowledge that the Earth is a globe (technically, an
oblate spheroid; Choi, 2007); thus, those who are low in conspiracy
mentality have no reason to question this model. For those with higher
conspiracy mentality, science intelligence provides protection against
accepting the conspiratorial narrative that the Earth is not as scientists
(and astronauts) say. Again, this differs from the influence of knowledge
in climate change beliefs because knowledge is influencing those who,
because of their conspiracy views, are expected to be motivated to accept
the flat Earth.
Finding support for the knowledge deficit is not completely misaligned
with the literature. Recent work finds that knowledge predicts acceptance of
human evolution for people with low, average, and high religiosity (Weisberg
et al., 2018). Although the degree to which knowledge predicts acceptance is
conditional on religiosity, the relationship between knowledge and accep-
tance remains a positive one.
Implications for the DSMM model

As stated earlier, we grounded our study in the DSMM model. One limitation to
our current study is that we conceptualized media use as the type of argument
participants witnessed, and we experimentally manipulated this variable. The
missing relationship between media use and the cognitive response state does
not insinuate that the path does not exist, but simply that there were not
significant differences between the different video clips in how they related to
these response states. In fact, there is necessarily a relationship – participants
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 25
cannot evaluate the strength of an argument of a video clip they do not know
exists. Future studies should consider alternative ways to measure media use, such
as “time watched,” that can be collapsed across experimental conditions when
differences between those conditions do not occur.
It is also a recognizable limitation of our current study that we had to
restrict the number of differential susceptibility and response state vari-
ables we measured. We focused on factors relevant to cognitions (e.g.,
science intelligence, conspiracy mentality, argument strength, and coun-
terarguing), but it is highly likely that other categories of variables also are
relevant to understanding differential susceptibility to flat Earth videos.
Indeed, future work ought to examine some of the emotional and excita-
tive response states that can be elicited and how such states mediate the
potential relationship between watching these videos and being open to
researching flat Earth views.
Despite these limitations, we were able to test the DSMM model in a
specific context that yielded interesting results. Based on these results, a
small update could be considered for the DSMM. In the current version of
the model, the role of the differential susceptibility variables as moderators
is only explicitly hypothesized to influence the relationship between media
use and response state. However, we propose that it is also possible that
certain differential susceptibility variables could moderate the relationship
between the response state and the media effect. In this study, for instance,
we found that science intelligence interacted with both argument strength
and counterarguing to influence openness to researching flat Earth.
Conclusion
Flat Earth is not entangled with politics the way disagreement surrounding
climate change is, and its discussion allows for people to recognize the
problems of misinformation dissemination on social media and consider
workable solutions without polarizing stakeholders. This position was well
articulated by Hannalore Gerling-Dunsmore, an astrophysicist who was
interviewed for the documentary, “Behind the Curve.” She says, “What
flat Earthers can offer is a way to have 99% of people say, ‘Well that’s
ridiculous. Imagine believing that!’ And then to turn it around and say,
‘How are you a flat Earther?’”
Although flat Earth YouTube videos may not convince the majority of the
people who watch them, it is clear that some people are more open than others to
these ideas. Importantly, this study shows that science intelligence can act to
inoculate against at least some forms of pseudoscience and science-based mis-
information. For individuals to find the relevant scientific knowledge, however,
scientists and science communicators ought to engage these communities where
they are and use platforms like YouTube to communicate science.
Notes
1. It is also noteworthy that all of the speakers at the conference have their own YouTube
channels.
2. This same process of conversion was articulated to BBC reporters examining the flat
Earth phenomenon (Silva, 2019).
3. This fact check was not displayed to participants in the control condition.
4. We had an additional experimental condition that we added as a pilot/exploratory
condition. This condition had two possible videos displayed to participants and only 50
people saw each video. Because this condition was a pilot, it is excluded from this study.
However, information about it is available in the online supplementary materials.
5. We use “scientific” to describe the clip that referred to experimentation and measure-
ment, and we do not mean to suggest that the clip includes legitimate scientific
evidence that the Earth is flat. Indeed, the narrator misrepresents the purpose and
the findings of the experiments he describes in his video.
6. The slider scale allowed for participants to choose a number with up to two decimal
points to approximate a continuous scale.
7. The control condition was excluded because participants in the control condition did
not answer the argument strength or counterarguing questions as they did not see the
flat Earth videos.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
ORCID
Asheley R. Landrum http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3074-804X
Alex Olshansky http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9387-9098
Othello Richards http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8202-8610
References
Akin, H., & Landrum, A. R. (2017). Heuristics, biases, values and other challenges to communicating
science. In K. H. Jamieson’s, D. M. Kahan’s, & D. A. Scheufele’s (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of
the science of science communication. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190497620.013.48
Alexa.com. (2019, February 3). YouTube.com traffic statistics. Retrieved from https://www.
alexa.com/siteinfo/youtube.com
Barron, D., Furnham, A., Weis, L., Morgan, K. D., Towell, T., & Swami, V. (2018). The
relationship between schizotypal facets and conspiracist beliefs via cognitive processes.
Psychiatry Research, 259, 15–20. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2017.10.001
Bauer, M. W., Allum, N., & Miller, S. (2007). What can we learn from 25 years of PUS survey
research? Liberating and expanding the agenda. Public Understanding of Science, 16(1),
79–95. doi:10.1177/0963662506071287
Boukes, M., Boomgaarden, H. G., Moorman, M., & De Vreese, C. H. (2015). At odds: Laughing and
thinking? The appreciation, processing, and persuasiveness of political satire. Journal of
Communication, 65(5), 721–744. doi:10.1111/jcom.12173
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 27
Bronstein, M. V., Pennycook, G., Bear, A., Rand, D. G., & Cannon, T. D. (2018). Belief in fake news is
associated with delusionality, dogmatism, religious fundamentalism, and reduced analytic
thinking. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2018.09.005
Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Kim, E., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2009). Religiosity as a perceptual
filter: Examining processes of opinion formation about nanotechnology. Public
Understanding of Science, 18(5), 546–558. doi:10.1177/0963662507087304
Brotherton, R., & French, C. C. (2014). Belief in conspiracies and susceptibility to the
conjunction fallacy. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 238–248. doi:10.1002/acp.2995
Brotherton, R., French, C. C., & Pickering, A. D. (2013). Measuring belief in conspiracy theories: The
generic conspiracist beliefs scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 279. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00279
Browne, M., Thomson, P., Rockoff, M. J., & Pennycook, G. (2015). Going against the herd:
Psychological and cultural factors underlying the ‘vaccination confidence gap’. PLOS One,
10(9), e0132562. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0132562
Bruder, M., Haffke, P., Neave, N., Nouripanah, N., & Imhoff, R. (2013). Measuring individual
differences in generic beliefs in conspiracy theories across cultures: Conspiracy mentality
questionnaire. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 225. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00225
Burgoon, J. N., Heddle, M. L., & Duran, E. (2011). Re-examining the similarities between
teacher and student conceptions about physical science. Journal of Science Teacher
Education, 22(2), 101–114. doi:10.1007/s10972-010-9196-x
Burnham, M., Le, Y., & Piedmont, R. (2018). Who is MTurk? Personal characteristics and
sample consistency of these online workers*. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 21,
934–944. doi:10.1080/13674676.2018.1486394
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences
in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition.
Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197–253. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.197
Campitelli, G., & Labollita, M. (2010). Correlations of cognitive reflection with judgments
and choices. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(3), 182–191. Retrieved from https://www.
sas.upenn.edu/~baron/journal/10/91230/jdm91230.pdf
Cappella, J. N., Kim, H. S., & Albarracin, D. (2015). Selection and transmission processes for
information in the emerging media environment: Psychological motives and message
characteristics. Media Psychology, 18, 396–424. doi:10.1080/15213269.2014.941112
Choi, C. Q. (2007). Strange but true: Earth is not round. Scientific American. Retrieved from:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-is-not-round/
Covington, P., Adams, J., & Sargin, E. (2016). Deep neural networks for YouTube recommendations.
Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, New York, NY, ACM.
Retrieved from https://ai.google/research/pubs/pub45530
Dagnall, N., Drinkwater, K., Parker, A., Denovan, A., & Parton, M. (2015). Conspiracy theory and
cognitive style: A worldview. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 206. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00206
Darwin, H., Neave, N., & Holmes, J. (2011). Belief in conspiracy theories. The role of
paranormal belief, paranoid ideation and schizotypy. Personality and Individual
Differences, 50(8), 1289–1293. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.02.027
Dryer, H. T. (2018, May 2). I watched an entire Flat Earth convention for my research—Here’s what
I learnt. The Conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/i-watched-an-entire-flat-
earth-convention-for-my-research-heres-what-i-learnt-95887
Einstein, K. L., & Glick, D. M. (2015). Do I think BLS data are BS? The consequences of
conspiracy theories. Political Behavior, 37(3), 679–701. doi:10.1007/s11109-014-9287-z
Grzesiak-Feldman, M., & Ejsmont, A. (2008). Paranoia and conspiracy thinking of Jews,
Arabs, Germans, and Russians in a Polish sample. Psychological Reports, 102(3), 884–886.
doi:10.2466/pr0.102.3.884-886
Haught, J. F. (1995). Science and religion: From conflict to conversation. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional processes analysis:

A regression based approach (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Hofstadter, R. (1965). What happened to the antitrust movement?. The Paranoid Style in
American Politics and Other Essays (pp. 188–237). New York: Knopf.
Holm, N. (2009). Conspiracy theorizing surveillance: Considering modalities of paranoia and
conspiracy in surveillance studies. Surveillance & Society, 7(1), 36–48. doi:10.24908/ss.v7i1.3306
Imhoff, R., & Bruder, M. (2014). Speaking (un-) truth to power: Conspiracy mentality as a general-
ised political attitude. European Journal of Personality, 28(1), 25–43. doi:10.1002/per.1930
Jolley, D., & Douglas, K. M. (2014). The social consequences of conspiracism: Exposure to
conspiracy theories decreases intentions to engage in politics and to reduce one’s carbon
footprint. British Journal of Psychology, 105(1), 35–56. doi:10.1111/bjop.12018
Kahan, D. M. (2017). ‘Ordinary science intelligence’: A science-comprehension measure for
study of risk and science communication, with notes on evolution and climate change.
Journal of Risk Research, 20(8), 995–1016. doi:10.1080/13669877.2016.1148067
Kahan, D. M., Landrum, A. R., Carpenter, K., Helft, L., & Jamieson, K. H. (2017). Science
curiosity and political information processing. Advances in Political Psychology, 38(supple-
ment 1), 179–199. doi:10.1111/pops.12396
Kahan, D. M., Peters, E., Wittlin, M., Slovic, P., Ouellette, L. L., Braman, D., & Mandel, G.
(2012). The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate
change risks. Nature Climate Change, 2, 732–735. doi:10.1038/nclimate1547
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kikas, E. (2004). Teachers’ conceptions and misconceptions concerning three natural phe-
nomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 432–448. doi:10.1002/tea.20012
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498.
doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480
Landrum, A. R., Hallman, W. K., & Jamieson, K. H. (2019). Examining the impact of expert
voices: Communicating the scientific consensus on genetically-modified organisms.
Environmental Communication, 13(1), 51–70. doi:10.1080/17524032.2018.1502201
Landrum, A. R., Hilgard, J., Lull, R. B., Akin, H., & Jamieson, K. H. (2018). Open and transparent
research practices and public perceptions of the trustworthiness of agricultural biotechnology
organizations. Journal of Science Communication, 17(02), A04. doi:10.22323/2.17020204
Landrum, A. R., & Olshansky, A. (2019a). 2017 flat earth conference interviews. doi:10.17605/
OSF.IO/CW7RE
Landrum, A. R., & Olshansky, A. (2019b). The role of conspiracy mentality in denial of
science and susceptibility to viral deception about science. Politics and the Life Sciences,
1–17. Manuscript in press. doi:10.1017/pls.2019.9
Lewandowsky, S., Gignac, G. E., & Oberauer, K. (2013). The role of conspiracist ideation and
worldviews in predicting rejection of science. PLOS One, 10(8), e75637. doi:10.1371/journal.
pone.0075637
Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K., & Gignac, G. E. (2013). NASA faked the moon landing—
Therefore, (climate) science is a hoax: An anatomy of the motivated rejection of science.
Psychological Science, 24(5), 622–633. doi:10.1177/0956797612457686
Lewis, A. R., Djupe, P. A., Mockabee, S. T., & Wu, J. S. (2015). The (Non) religion of mechanical turk
workers. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 54(2), 419–428. doi:10.1111/jssr.12184
McCloskey, M. (1983). Naïve theories of motion. In D. Genter & A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental
models (pp. 299–324). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
McKee, C., & Bohannon, K. (2016). Exploring the reasons behind parental refusal of vaccines. The
Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 21(2), 104–109. doi:10.5863/1551-6776-
21.2.104
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY 29
Metz, S. E., Weisberg, D. S., & Weisberg, M. (2018). Non-scientific criteria for belief sustain
counter-scientific beliefs. Cognitive Science, 42, 1477–1503. doi:10.1111/cogs.12584
Nisbet, M. C., & Scheufele, D. A. (2009). What’s next for science communication? Promising
directions and lingering distractions. American Journal of Botany, 96(10), 1767–1778.
doi:10.3732/ajb.0900041
Olshansky, A. (2018). Conspiracy theorizing and religious motivated reasoning: Why the Earth
‘Must’ be flat (Master’s Thesis). Retrieved from https://ttu-ir.tdl.org/handle/2346/82666
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Barr, N., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2015). On the
reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit. Judgment and Decision Making, 10
(6), 549–563. Retrieved from http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.html
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Seli, P., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2012). Analytic
cognitive style predicts religious and paranormal belief. Cognition, 123(3), 335–346.
doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.03.003
Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2019a). Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is
better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition, 188, 39–50.
doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2018.06.011
Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2019b). Who falls for fake news? The roles of bullshit receptivity,
overclaiming, familiarity, and analytic thinking. Journal of Personality. doi:10.1111/jopy.12476
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In
Communication and persuasion. Springer Series in Social Psychology. New York, NY:
Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1_1
Ross, E. (22 February 2018). The science of conspiracies: Where flat earth meets pizzagate.
Axios. Retrieved from https://www.axios.com/fake-news-conspiracy-theories-science-
pizzagate-flat-earth-d24e1e9e-764e-48af-8f23-c61636dba3c2.html
Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores.
Psychometrika Monograph Supplement, 34(4, pt. 2), 100.
Shtulman, A. (2017). Science Blind: Why our intuitive theories about the world are so often
wrong. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Silva, M. (13 July 2019). Is Youtube to blame for the rise of flat Earth? BBC Trending.
Retrieved from https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csyvn1
Stojanov, A., & Halberstadt, J. (2019). The conspiracy mentality scale: Distinguishing between
irrational and rational suspicion. Social Psychology, 50, 215–232. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000381
Stroud, N. J. (2008). Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of
selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30(3), 341–366. doi:10.1007/s11109-007-9050-9
Suldovsky, B. (2016). In science communication, why does the idea of the public deficit
always return? Exploring key influences. Public Understanding of Science, 25(4), 415–426.
doi:10.1177/0963662516629750
Swami, V., Chamorrow-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2010). Unanswered questions:
A preliminary investigation of personality and individual difference predictors of 9/11
conspiracist beliefs. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 749–761. doi:10.1002/acp.1583
Swami, V., Coles, R., Stieger, S., Pietschnig, J., Furnham, A., Rehim, S., & Voracek, M. (2011).
Conspiracist ideation in Britain and Austria: Evidence of a monological belief system and
associations between individual psychological differences and real-world and fictitious conspi-
racy theories. British Journal of Psychology, 102(3), 443–463. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.2010.02004.
x
Swami, V., Voracek, M., Stieger, S., Tran, U. S., & Furnham, A. (2014). Analytic thinking reduces
belief in conspiracy theories. Cognition, 133(3), 572–585. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2014.08.006
Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs.
American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755–769. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x
Uscinski, J. E., & Olivella, S. (2017). The conditional effect of conspiracy thinking on attitudes
toward climate change. Research & Politics, 4(4), 1–9. doi:10.1177/2053168017743105
Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2013). The differential susceptibility to media effects model.
Journal of Communication, 63, 221–244. doi:10.1111/jcom.12024
Weisberg, D. S., Landrum, A. R., Metz, S. E., & Weisberg, M. (2018). No missing link:
Knowledge predicts acceptance of evolution in the United States. Bioscience, 68(3),
212–222. doi:10.1093/biosci/biy115
Yeo, S. K., Xenos, M. A., Brossard, D., & Scheufele, D. A. (2015). Selecting our own science:
How communication contexts and individual traits shape information seeking. The
ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 658(1), 172–191.
doi:10.1177/0002716214557782
YouTube. (2016). Citation of Google-commissioned Nielsen study, U.S, 2016. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/intl/en/yt/advertise/
YouTube. (2019a). Creators academy lesson: Search and discovery on YouTube. Retrieved
from https://creatoracademy.youtube.com/page/lesson/discovery#strategies-zippy-link-7
YouTube. (2019b). Community guidelines. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/yt/
about/policies/#community-guidelines
YouTube. (2019c, January 25). Continuing our work to improve recommendations on
YouTube. YouTube Official Blog. Retrieved from https://youtube.googleblog.com/2019/
01/continuing-our-work-to-improve.html
Zhao, X., Strasser, A. A., Cappella, J. N., Lerman, C., & Fishbein, M. (2011). A measure of
perceived argument strength: Reliability and validity in health communication contexts.
Communication Methods and Measures, 5(1), 48–75. doi:10.1080/19312458.2010.547822
6/3/2020 Is the Earth Really Flat According to the Quran? Wiki-Islam Refuted | Rational Religion
TRENDING: Big Bang Cosmology in the Quran: A Response to Atheist ...

    SEARCH 
ABOUT  VIDEOS TOPIC INDEX BELIEFS  CONVERT STORIES 
ABOUT
RATIONA
IS THE EARTH REALLY FLAT L
ACCORDING TO THE RELIGIO
N
QURAN? WIKI-ISLAM
REFUTED Ahmadi
Posted by Tahir Nasser | 4 Jul 2019 | Blog | 22 Muslims
 |  taking on the
big questions
with a light
touch.
Commentary
on religion,
atheism,
science and
society.
An o cial
website of the
Ahmadiyya
Muslim
Community UK
INTRODUCTION
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of
cookies. Got it FOLLOW
https://rationalreligion.co.uk/is-the-earth-really-flat-according-to-the-quran-wiki-islam-refuted 1/33
It seems common these days for people with US

no understanding of Islam or indeed science,
to ponti cate about both simultaneously. 
Nowhere is this better seen than the
Islamophobic website “WikiIslam” devoted, it
FACEBO
seems, to the most absurd allegations against
OK
the Quran, the religion of Islam, and the
person of the Prophet Muhammad, on whom 
be peace.
YOUTUB
E
A recent one in their arsenal is their allegation
that the Quran represents the world as being
“ at”. The Quran is a religious text that claims 
to be word-for-word revealed from the All-

TWITTER
Knowing God, so if the Quran did state quite
clearly that the world was at, then that would

indeed be a serious problem for Muslims.
INSTAGR
That is not the case, however. In fact, as we AM
shall soon see, the very verses used to allege
that the Quran presents a at-earth worldview
in reality are extraordinary prophecies, SUBSCRI
detailing an astounding geological feature of
BE
the earth that remained unknown until the
20th century. The failure of this allegation
reminds me of the following statement of the
Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Subscrib
Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas: e To Our
Newslett
“I have seen people who make objections er
against Islam and I have collected these Don't miss out
objections; and I say this truly that the point on our latest
material!
on which those who are unfamiliar with these
matters have raised an objection, is precisely
the point where a treasure of wisdom, truth
and deep knowledge is buried and the person
NAME
who objects has nothing but foolishness and
Cookies helpblindness.
us deliverWith
our their objections
services. they
By using prove
our services, you agree to EMAIL
our use of
that they are narrow-minded and possess an
cookies. Got it
unprincipled nature, otherwise they would SUBSCRIBE

not have raised objections against what is, in !
fact, a mine of deep and true knowledge. It is
for this reason that I advise you to pursue
your search for the truth with gentleness and
POPULAR
patience.“
POSTS
WIKI-ISLAM AND FLAT Th

EARTH CLAIMS e
Wiki-Islam claims that the Quran presents the Se
world as at on account of the following words arc
used in the following verses: h
for God in the Age
of Science
Firash/Farashna 4K Total Shares
“Who made the earth a bed [ rash] for you, Co

and the heaven a roof, and caused water to ul
come down from the clouds and therewith d
brought forth fruits for your sustenance. An
Set not up, therefore, equals to Allah, while y
Theory of How Life
you know.” [2:23]
Began “Disprove
God”?
“And the earth We have spread out
3K Total Shares
[farashna], and how excellently do We
prepare things!” [51:49] I’m
a
Do
Madadna
cto
r,
“And the earth have We spread out
and I Think I Work
[madadna], and set therein rm mountains
in Hell
and caused everything to grow therein in 2K Total Shares
proper proportion.” [15:20]
Ne
“And the earth — We have spread it out w
[madadna-ha], and placed therein rm sci
mountains; and We have made to grow en
therein every kind of beautiful species.” ti
c research proves
[50:8]
true 1400 year-old
Qur’anic claim on
Mahd cookies. Got it
mountains &
“He, Who has made the earth for you a earthquakes
2K Total Shares
cradle [mahd], and has made pathways, for
you therein, that you may follow the right
Is
way” [43:11]
th
e
“It is He Who has made the earth for you a
Ea
cradle [mahd], and has caused pathways
rth
for you to run through it; and Who sends Really Flat
down rain from the sky, and thereby We According to the
bring forth various kinds of vegetation.” Quran? Wiki-Islam
[20:54] Refuted
Bisaat
TWEETS
“And Allah has made the earth for you a
wide expanse [bisaat]” [71:20]
Tweets by
@RRanswers
Dahaa
Rational
Religion
“And the earth, along with it, He spread Retweeted
forth [dahaa].” [79:31] Marcus Ó'C

@MoreOrtho
youtube
The authors of WikiIslam allege that because
om/watc
the Quran uses such terms as “bed” or “cradle”
?
and such words as “spread out”, the Quran is
v=VIgHs
painting a picture for us of a land-mass in
m…
which the earth was rolled out like a carpet or
Interesti
a rug for humans to sleep on, like a bed.
g
There is, however, another interpretation to Embed View on
these verses which ts perfectly reasonably

with the verses too.
REFUTATION OF
WIKIISLAM
IS THE EARTH SPREAD-OUT?
cookies. Got it
In 1912 a geophysicist and meteorologist by

the name of Alfred Wegener, looking at the
shape of the continents and how they t
together, developed the theory of “contintental
drift”. This is the idea that all continents were
once one land mass, and slowly drifted apart
to their present-day positions. His view at the
time was dismissed and regarded as
outlandish. Sadly, he died in 1930, before the
evidence supporting his view came to light.
In 1953, one of the largest structures on the

planet was discovered by two geologists –
Marie Tharp and Bruce Heezen: the mid-
Atlantic ridge. The mid-Atlantic is the largest
mountain range in the world, running a huge
course on the sea oor of the Atlantic ocean.
These mountain ranges are volcanic,
continually emitting magma. The signi cance
of this was not realised until, in 1962, Admiral
Harry Hess published a groundbreaking paper
in the History of Ocean Basins in which he
demonstrated, through his sonar analysis of
the ocean oor, that the further laterally you
moved from the mid-ocean volcanoes (such as
the mid-Atlantic ridge), the older the land
became. Interestingly however, he found that
the land closest to the volcanoes, was younger.
He surmised from this that new molten
magma was bubbling up from the volcanoes,
setting on the sea oor surface and pushing the
land laterally. This he termed “sea oor
spreading”.
cookies. Got it
GIF: How Sea oor Spreading occurs
The process, he realised, veri ed the theory of

“continental drift”. It was one of the greatest
geological discoveries of history. The original
landmass from which all the continents broke
apart was termed “Pangaea”, Greek for “All
Land”.
IS THE QURAN REFERRING

TO SEA-FLOOR SPREADING?
From the above discovery, we now know that
the Earth was, quite literally “spread out”. That
the Quran uses that term speci cally should be
cause for anyone with sense to pause, and
think. The term “sea oor spreading,” don’t
forget, was not coined by Muslims.
But how can we know for sure that the verse is

talking particularly about sea oor spreading
that occurs at the bottom of the ocean? Isn’t it
more likely that the verse is simply describing a
“ at-Earth” idea? No – and here’s why.
The mid-ocean ridges are formed at the edges

of two tectonic plates. As the plates move away
Cookies help
fromus deliver
each ourthe
other, services.
moltenBy using our
magma fromservices, you agree to our use of
cookies. up,Got
under the Earth’s crust bubbles it given
being
an opportunity to burst out under high

pressure. The consequence is the formation of
a mountain. This is important to understand;
the process itself of plate tectonic movement
enables magma upwelling, which in turn forms
an underwater mountain range. The mountain
range is formed by the very act of sea oor
spreading.
To understand the signi cance of this, let’s

look at the words the Quran uses for the term
“mountain”. There are two words the Quran
uses for the term “mountains” – Jibaal and
Rawaasiya. In our article on whether
mountains decrease the e ects of earthquakes
(they do!) we showed through analysis of the
roots of each word, that they refer to two
di erent types of mountains: mountains on
land (Jibaal) and undersea mountains known
as “seamounts” in Geology (Rawaasiya).
How do we know this? As we explained in our

previous article, in Arabic, the root of a word
determines its context of use and associated
meanings. The word Rawaasiya is from the
Arabic triliteral root r-s-w. This root gives the
following meanings:
1. Something stationary or xed like a ship

anchored to sea- oor
2. To make the lowest part of a ship reach the

bottom of the water, and therefore make the
ship remain stationary
3. To e ect harmony, accommodation or

adjustments between things
4. Tous
Cookies help mention
deliveraour
partservices.
of a tradition or aour
By using story
services, you agree to our use of
cookies. Got it
5. Beads on a string or a bracelet made from

tortoise shells
6. A port for anchoring ships
7. To swim with someone
These root associations of the word Rawaasiya

signify that it refers to such mountains as lie at
the bottom of the ocean. This is clear from the
Arabic. Moreover, the word jibaal is never
conjoined with the Earth spreading out.
It is therefore highly signi cant that the Quran

directly links the process of the Earth
“spreading out” to the formation of
underwater mountains, in the following verses:
“And the earth have We spread out

[madadna], and set therein rm mountains
[Rawaasiya] and caused everything to grow
therein in proper proportion.” [15:20]
“And the earth — We have spread it out

[madadna-ha], and placed therein rm
mountains [Rawaasiya]; and We have made
to grow therein every kind of beautiful
pair.” [50:8]
The Quran therefore is speaking speci cally

about the spreading of the ocean oor. Clearly,
the setting of underwater mountains on the
Earth bears no relationship to the spreading of
the Earth “like a carpet”, as Wiki-Islam would
have us believe. Far from it. In fact, wonder
upon wonder is heaped in these verses. As we
continue reading, we nd the following words:
“…and caused everything to grow therein in
proper proportion” and “…and We have made to
Cookies help
growus deliver
therein ourkind
every services. By using
of beautiful ourWhat
pair”. services, you agree to our use of
cookies.
relationship does the ocean Got and
spreading it the
subsequent formation of mountain ridges

have to do with the creation of diverse, well
proportioned, beautiful pairs, or species?
One explanation has come to light only

recently, as more and more scientists believe
that the perfect conditions for the origin of life
are found in undersea hydrothermal vents, at
these very mountain ridges. Thus, the process
of sea oor spreading that creates these
hydrothermal vents may be essential to the
origin of life itself. Signi cantly, the Quran
alludes to this, since it speci cally mentions
that “therein” i.e.: in the mountains
themselves, did every beautiful species come
forth, i.e.: the origin of life.
How could a 7th century illiterate Arab

merchant have known this?
SUBDUCTION AND
RECYCLING
The Earth’s crust isn’t just continuously added
to from the mid-ocean ridges. If it was, the
undersea mountain ranges would become
taller and sea-levels around the world would
rise until all land would be submerged. The
Earth’s crust is also consumed in other places,
to produce a continuous “conveyer-belt” e ect
of production and destruction.
cookies. Got it
How production and consumption of the Earth’s

crust takes place
through “ridge push” and “slab pull”
The process of consumption of the Earth’s

crust occurs at ocean ridges. These are deep
trenches in the ocean where the lithosphere of
one tectonic plate slides or “subducts” under
another plate, resulting in the recycling of the
Earth’s crust.
It may reasonably be asked that if the Quran

genuinely refers to sea oor spreading, then
does it refer to the destruction of the Earth’s
crust which is an equally important and
fundamental part of the story? That would
weigh in favour of the interpretation that the
“spreading” of the earth refers to the process
of sea oor spreading. The answer is yes:
“Do they not see that We are visiting the

land, reducing it from its outlying borders?
And Allah judges; there is none to reverse
His judgement. And He is swift at
reckoning.” [13:42]
It is common in the Quran for God to draw the

Cookies help
attention
us deliver
of the
our
reader
services.
to physical
By using
processes
our services, you agree to our use of
and use them as analogies
cookies.
for spiritual
Got ittruths.
In this verse, God describes how He is literally

destroying land at its “outlying borders”. This is
the meaning of God “visiting the land”; the
same phrase of God destroying something by
literally visiting it is referred to in 2:211.
Further, the implication is that this refers to a
literal process, since the reader is literally
asked to “see” this process occurring.
In fact, the Quran doesn’t just leave the matter

there. It also gives the mechanism by which the
Earth’s crust is recycled. This is re ected in the
strange choice of words used by the Quran
with respect to this spreading process. One of
the words used is madad from the Arabic root ‫م‬
‫ د د‬which literally means “to pull” or “stretch
something by pulling”.
As new crust forms at mid-ocean ridges, it

produces a force termed “ridge-push” and as
the lithosphere of one tectonic plate subducts
into the mantle, it produces another force
called “slab-pull”. These two forces combined
account for the process of sea oor spreading:
new crust pushes old crust away, and old crust
pulls new crust along. There has been
disagreement over as to which of these two
forces is most responsible for sea oor
spreading. The scienti c consensus now is that
“slab-pull” is the more powerful force (70-80%)
and that “ridge-push” accounts for less (20-
30%). Just as the Quran mentions, the
“spreading” of the Earth is through a pulling
action.
DEFINITIVE EVIDENCE OF
PLANETARY MODEL IN THE
QURAN
cookies. Got it
Though the above quite adequately

demonstrates a magni cent Quranic prophecy,
and at the same time refutes the notion that
the “spreading” mentioned in the Quran
visualises a at-earth system, it is does not in
itself provide evidence that the Quranic view of
Earth is planetary.
For this, we must turn to a di erent verse of

the Quran. There is no point in reinventing the
wheel, and as such, I will simply quote the
remarkable and beautiful elucidation of the
Fourth Khalifa of the Ahmadiyya Muslim
community, Hazrat Mirza Tahir Ahmadrh, to
explain the de nitive evidence of a planetary
model in the Quran:
Now we turn to another aspect of the

description of the cosmos which relates to
the motion of the heavenly bodies. The most
striking feature of this description relates to
the way the motion of the earth is described
without glaringly contradicting the popular
view prevailing in that age. All the scholars
and sages of that time were unanimous in
their belief that the earth is stationary while
other heavenly bodies like the sun and the
moon are constantly revolving around it. In
view of this, the motion of the earth as
described by the Quran may not be apparent
to the casual reader, but to a careful student
the message is loud and clear. If the Quran
had described the earth as stationary and the
heavenly bodies as revolving around it, then
although the people of that time might have
been satis ed with this description, the
people of the later ages would have treated
that statement as a proof of the ignorance of
Cookies helpthe
us Quran’s author.
deliver our Such a
services. Bystatement,
using our they
would emphasize, could not haveGot
cookies. beenit made
by an All-Knowing, Supreme Being.
Rather than literally comparing the motion of

the earth to that of other heavenly bodies,
the Quran makes the following statement:
‫ﺻ ۡﻧ َﻊ ﱣ ِ اﻟﱠذ ِۡۤی‬ ُ ؕ‫ب‬ ِ ‫ﺳﺣَﺎ‬ ‫َﺎﻣ َدةً ﱠو ﮨِ َﯽ ﺗ َ ُﻣ ﱡر َﻣ ﱠر اﻟ ﱠ‬ َ ‫َو ﺗ َ َری ۡاﻟ ِﺟﺑَﺎ َل ﺗ َ ۡﺣ‬
ِ ‫ﺳﺑُ َﮩﺎ ﺟ‬
َ‫ا َ ۡﺗﻘَنَ ُﮐ ﱠل ﺷ َۡﯽءٍ ؕ اِﻧﱠ ٗہ َﺧﺑِ ۡﯾ ۢ ٌر ﺑِ َﻣﺎ ﺗ َ ۡﻔﻌَﻠُ ۡون‬
“The mountains that you see, you think they

are stationary while they are constantly
oating like the oating of clouds. Such is the
work of Allah Who made everything rm and
strong. ” [27:89]
If the mountains are declared to be in

constant motion, then the only logical
inference to be drawn from this would be that
the earth is also rotating along with them.
But thanks to the masterly language of the
Quran this observation went unnoticed. They
had the impression, shared with the rest of
mankind, that the earth was stationary and it
was this false impression that was not
obtrusively challenged. If they had read with
care the end of the same verse they would
have been left with no room for any
misunderstanding. It ends with a lasting
tribute to the creative faculty of God, Who
has created all things with such rmness that
they cannot be dislodged. Anything which
cannot be dislodged can never be catapulted
out of the earth, to y alone, leaving the
earth behind.
…The Holy Quran exquisitely succeeds in

making this revelation in a manner that the
prevalent knowledge of that time is not too
loudly challenged. It is likely that the people
may have believed verse 89 of Surah Al-Naml,
referred to a future event associated with
cookies. Got it
Doomsday. But as has been demonstrated,

this misinterpretation would be absolutely
unacceptable for the following reasons:
The verse clearly speaks in the present tense

and not in the future tense. The letter ( ‫) ﱠو‬
vaow used here can literally be translated as
‘while’ instead of ‘and’, so the meaning could
be, ‘you think the mountains are stationary,
while they are moving’. To refer this part of
the statement to the future is impermissible.
If they, the mountains, were to y in the

future then how could man, even if he were
perched at a safe distance on another planet,
believe them to be stationary despite
watching them ying in space? Hence such a
translation is out of the question. Also, to
translate this verse to indicate that though
humans today consider the mountains to be
stationary, they are not so because in future
they will y, would be evidently wrong. If the
mountains are stationary today the humans
would certainly see them to be stationary. It
is not a question of their thinking them to be
stationary. The Quran would have said ‘You
know them to be stationary and so they are
but in future they will no longer be so’. This is
not what the Quran says at all.
At the end of the same verse, a tribute to the

rmness of God’s creation is the last clinching
proof that the mountains, despite ying, are
rmly entrenched.
It is noteworthy that the early commentaries

maintain silence on the true meaning of this
verse which suggests that it was too di cult
for them to interpret.
cookies. Got it
This is a remarkable and profound proof of the

existence of God. But only for those who
would make use of their reason.
“And no soul can believe except by the

permission of Allah. And He makes His
wrath descend on those who will not use
their reason.” [10:101]
ABSURDITIES AD-INFINITUM
There are other verses, besides those given at
the beginning of this article, using which
WikiIslam argues that the Quran presents a at
Earth. They are however so absurd that they
don’t really require much refutation. Simple
common sense will do, so they won’t be dealt
with in any signi cant depth.
The Sun And The Muddy

Spring
The rst argument is that the Quran describes
the journey of Dhul Qarnain (Cyrus the Great)
Westwards, stopping at a point where the sun
sets into a body of water, muddy in nature.
This is the Black Sea, containing muddy springs
(hence named “Black”) and sitting at the
Western extent of Cyrus’ empire. WikiIslam
authors argue that because the Quran
describes the sun as setting into the sea, it
means the sun literally enters into the water.
The point is so absurd it needs no refutation.
Oh alright then, here’s one for you:
cookies. Got it
Does the Quran Say the Sun

Sets in a Muddy Spring?
How what is supposed to be a scientific mistake
in the Quran is in fact a great scientific truth.
Rational Religion 1
Fasting In The Polar Regions

The second argument is that because
Ramadan is really long at the Polar regions
(despite the fact that the Prophet of Islam gave
advice on how to manage religious obligations
when days are long) the Quran must have
envisaged a at earth. Why this logically
follows is beyond me. The existence of lengthy
days at the polar regions do not a ect more
than 1% of the world’s population, and so is
irrelevant; fasting in normal daylight times
would still be considered a valid practice.
The Ends Of The Earth

The third argument is that the Quran describes
how a time will come when God will level the
Cookies help us deliversuch
“mountains” our that
services. By using our
no depression or services, you agree to our use of
cookies. Got it
elevation will be seen in the Earth. From this,

the authors have argued that the Quran is
speaking of a time when man will be able to
see to the end of the Earth. Except that the
Quran nowhere states that. It simply states
that when the mountains are crushed and
scattered, there will be no elevation or
depression in the Earth. In reality the prophetic
words relate to the great and mighty powers,
“mountains” standing guratively in the Quran
for mighty powers or leaders. After all, the
verse begins “They ask thee concerning the
mountains…”; nobody asked the Prophet of
Islam about physical mountains, but about the
hurdles faced by the Muslim community, in the
form of great nations, such as the Byzantine
and the Persian empires, which were indeed,
humbled, crushed and scattered by the
Muslims.
Easts And Wests

The Quran describes the Earth as having “two
Easts and two Wests”. This can in fact be
understood as relating to a globe in which East
is the West of West, and West is the East of
East. Early Muslims however believed this
related to the two extreme points on the
horizon where the sun rose and set from and
to, during the height of Summer and the depth
of Winter. Again, this need not necessitate a
at Earth. It just shows a di erent
understanding of the verse.
Sky Above Us
Because the Quran describes the heavens as a
canopy with many layers or like a building with
many
Cookies help oors, apparently
us deliver thatBy
our services. necessitates a at you agree to our use of
using our services,
Earth. Who knew? Not to burst theirGot
cookies. bubble,
it
but the atmosphere of Earth actually is

composed of multiple layers. Some number
the layers as four, others as seven, above the
layer in which we exist (the Troposphere),
which is precisely what the Quran states:
“And We have created above you seven

layered heavens (lying one above the
other), and We are never neglectful of the
creation.” [23:18]
Extraordinarily, the Quran describes them as

being layered, i.e. lying “one above the other”
which is exactly the case. God ends the verse
by referring to His concern to protect and
provide for His creatures. It is an established
fact that without the atmospheric layers, the
Earth would be inhospitable for life, since it
blocks harmful rays from the sun, traps heat,
and contains oxygen.
The various layers of the Earth’s atmosphere,

Cookies help us deliver
precisely in lineour
withservices. By using
the Quranic our services, you agree to our use of
declaration.
cookies. Got it
Courtesy of “Kids Fun Science”
Beliefs Of Early Muslims

Finally, Wiki-Islam refers to the beliefs of the
early Muslims, some of whom seemed to
believe in a at Earth. This is an irrelevance
and carries no weight. The Quran is a book for
all times to come. That some Muslims of the
past believed in a at Earth is not an argument
that carries any weight.
CONCLUSION
One question remains, and it is applicable to
all verses of the Quran on scienti c topics. Why
didn’t the Quran just explicitly describe the
Earth as a globe rotating around the Earth?
Because had it done so, it would run the risk of
being rejected by the people of the 7th century
on the basis of an irrelevant scienti c fact that
bears no relation to the purpose for which the
Quran was sent – spiritual development. It is a
hallmark of its beauty that when it refers to
scienti c phenomena, it does so in a manner
that does not fall foul of incorrect or primitive
beliefs on the nature of Earth and the universe,
while yet containing essential truths
discernible in more scienti cally enlightened,
future ages. The matter of the spreading of the
Earth, cited earlier, is one such example.
How could an illiterate merchant of the 7th

century provide mankind with a book
containing such essential truths on the major
discoveries of various elds of study? The
matter of the earth being “spread out” is made
so frequently in the Quran that to the
Cookies help us delivereye,
undiscerning our itservices. By usingWhy
seems bizarre. ourso
cookies. Got it
much emphasis on the idea of the Earth being

“spread” and what does that even mean? Only
in light of sea oor spreading and the
fundamental importance that played in the
formation of undersea mountains, and indeed,
the beginning of life, does the importance of
the Earth’s “spreading” come to light.
Big Bang Does the Quran First Contact:

Cosmology in Say the Sun How the Quran
the Quran: A Sets in a Muddy Predicted Alien
Response to Spring? Life 1400 Years
Atheist Ago
Objections
Subscribe To
Our
Newsletter
At Rational Religion, we
don't do spam.
We just send you

carefully researched,
thoughtful content.
Don't miss out.
EMAIL SUBSCRIBE!
cookies. Got it
SHARE: 
RATE:
 PREVIOUS NEXT 
Is Interest the Opiate of the Why Atheism’s ‘God of The

Masses? Gaps’ Argument is a Bad
One
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Tahir Nasser
Tahir Nasser is a writer,
moonlighting as a medical doctor.
He is the co-founder of Rational
Religion. He also serves as the
science editor for the Review of
Religions (one of the oldest
English-language magazines on
comparative religions), writes for
national and online media, and is a
speaker on University lecture
circuits on issues relating to
Muslim youth and Islam in the
modern world. He writes regularly
for the Hu ngton Post, Patheos
and has been published also in the
Guardian. Tahir enjoys writing
ction and has recently published
his rst novel, The Day They All
Died Young, which you can read
about here: www.tahirnasser.com
RELATED POSTS cookies. Got it
It’s Our Why The

Shocki Media the Resurr
ng Is Algeria ection
How Fuellin n Retold
Much g Govern for
Tomm Terrori ment Christi
y sm & It is an
Robins Has Targeti Sceptic
on Got To ng s
Holds Stop Peacef June 29, 2017
in August 18, 2017
ul
Comm Ahmad
on i
With Muslim
Extrem s
ist October 7, 2017
Muslim
s
June 21, 2017
22 COMMENTS
Shak on July 20, 2019 at 9:43 am

Great read there, taught me a thing or two!
REPLY
Rational Religion on July 20, 2019 at 9:48 am
Thank you!
cookies. Got it
REPLY
Ali on November 7, 2019 at 11:25 pm

So enlightening. It’s strange why the blessed ones
are actually the most negligent .
REPLY
Ayse on December 11, 2019 at 9:21 am
Hi there.
You said: Moreover, the word jibaal is never
conjoined with the Earth spreading out.
However, please take a look at chapter 79, verses

30, 31, 32 (in the commonly used Quran). Verse
32 uses “wal-jibala” and not rawasiyya, when
verse 30 talks about the earth being spread out.
REPLY
Tahir on December 11, 2019 at 12:41 pm
Hi there Ayse. Thanks for the reply. The

verses you have referred to are as follows:
And the earth, along with it, He spread

forth.
He produced therefrom its water and its
pasture,
And the mountains, He made them rm.
(79:31-33)
It would seem to me that the earth and its

spreading is mentioned separately from
the mountains that have been made rm.
After all, they are in separate verses. By
cookies. Got it
saying that the spreading of the earth is
say g t at t e sp ead g o t e ea t s
not conjoined with the mention of Jibaal,
what was not meant is that they cannot
occur in the same passage, but that
whenever spreading out is mentioned
along with mountains immediately along
side it, in the same verse, then you see the
word rawaasiyaa is used. The word “And”
in verse 33, signi es that this is another
example that is being given, separate to
what has preceded it.
Hope that makes sense.
REPLY
hayy bin yaqzan on December 13, 2019 at 2:18 am

Assalam u Alakium
Brothers and sisters in Islam I ask that you
consider for a moment that indeed the earth is
at and the the words of the Qur’an are justi ed
and true without any doubt. I will give you three
proofs for you to begin your own inquisition into
this matter. First, please check the Gravitational
constant G’s value. If you can replicate the
experiment on your own then well and good, but
by Allah you will not be able to get this value ever
in real life. Secondly, the Michael and Morley
experiment proved without doubt that the earth
is stationary, so how is it easier for you to believe
in the abstractions of Einstein’s theories of time
dialation and space shrinking, then your own
eyes. And Thirdly, look at the sun and the moon
with your own eyes. is it millions of miles away or
is it just above the clouds. You can see their light
break through the clouds at opposing angles, as if
by a pyramid, and then remember Ibrahim AS
when he realized neither Sun or the Moon are
cookies. Got it
gods So why would the whole world conspire to
gods. So why would the whole world conspire to
falsify the words of Allah and why are our top
scholars bending backwards to capitulate to so
called “Science”. They are more eager to nd ways
to bend the words of the Qur’an to the falsehood
of the dajjal. We Muslims are in the sorry state we
are today because we put this so called “Science”
above the Qur’an. I was once like you brothers,
but now I praise my Lord because he has awoken
me to the falsehood of the Jesuit priests, secret
worshippers of the sun, the son. Forsake the
myths of the taghoot and embrace the the words
of Allah. Do your own research, but rst begin by
questioning the science, and not the Qur’an.
REPLY
Rational Religion on December 17, 2019 at 7:50

pm
Thank you for your concern but we’re

good.
REPLY
Peter Vercauteren on January 3, 2020 at 1:36

pm
I think that you should inform yourself

some more about the Michaelson and
Morley experiment, which was one of the
scienti c experiments that became famous
because it failed completely. Einstein later
explained very well why it failed.
REPLY
Shuaib
Cookies help us deliver on May 8, 2020 at 5:58 pm
our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of
cookies.
Assalamualaikum Got it
brother,
I started reciting quran during lockdown

[this time with intention to understand, not
merely reading it]
and subhan Allah I don’t know I suddenly
started doubting each and everything
NASA says.
Previously, I used to think that Quran isn’t

a science book to explain each stu that
goes in the world. But Alhamdulillah the
way I used to perceive the things has been

completely changed.
To understand the verses of the Quran

more clearly I started watching videos of
great scholars like zakir naik but most of
them just bend the words to MATCH the
modern science.
Eventually I founded this page after

googling a little and I am happy to nd
your comment. To nd someone with the
same intellect.
I would be glad to have a discussion with
you.
Do reply me brother.
Assalamualaikum.
REPLY
Peter Vercauteren on January 3, 2020 at 1:33 pm

Nice try, but not very convincing, because the
Quran itself contradicts your answer in 15:19,
where it not 9nly says that the Earth is “spread
out” (like a carpet) but also that mountains are
cookies. Got it
immobile. If they were indeed immobile, there
ob e. t ey e e deed ob e, t e e
couldn’t be any continental drift. Moreover, we all
know very well that mountains grow, move,
crumble, erode and disappear forever.
REPLY
jamal on February 15, 2020 at 2:40 am
the verse you’re referring to mentions that

the mountains are rm not immobile but
the word ‘ rm’ doesn’t necessarily mean
immobile therefore the point of

continental drift still stands.
REPLY
Zafar Bhatti on May 21, 2020 at 8:43 am

Growing up reading the Holy Quran from a
young age, it was very obvious that either
the Earth is spinning according to the Holy
Quran or there is continental drift.
As in one verse it says the Mountains are
moving like clouds and in the other it says
the Mountains are rmly rooted in the
Earth – both things can only be true if
either the Earth is spinning on its axis or
there is continental drift.
Given that Continental drift to human
beings hundreds of years ago would be
impossible to imagine, the rst conclusion
Muslim scientists should have drawn was
that the Earth was spinning on its axis
based on a literal reading of the Holy
Quran. It puzzles me that such great minds
were unable to come to the conclusion
that a 13 or 14 year old child was close to
coming to – the only reason I can think of
cookies. Got it
for this is that the Muslim Scientists and
for this is that the Muslim Scientists and
thinkers of the East were so enamoured
with the works of Aristotle which limited
their imagintive thinking and were not
employing the Holy Quran in their
scienti c thought processes – whereas in
the West the Muslim Scientists started
breaking vehemently away from Aristotle..
REPLY
Cent_rino on January 24, 2020 at 11:39 pm

Observation is the key here. It will con rm the
words and will con rm the truth. My prayers are
with you all!
REPLY
Felix on April 4, 2020 at 1:38 pm
Great article! But I don’t think that the seven

heavens mean layers of the atmosphere, because
in verse 41: 13 it says that the lowest heaven is
adorned with lamps:
“So He completed them into seven heavens in
two days, and He revealed to each heaven its
function. And We adorned the lowest heaven with
lamps for light and for protection. That is the
decree of the Mighty, the All-Knowing.”
If lamps mean either planets or stars, I think the
lowest heaven either means the solar system
(with the planets re ecting sunlight as the lamps)
or a cluster of stars.
I think “heaven” in these verses means something
like “space” or “everything that is outside the
earth”.
If deliver
Cookies help us seven heavens means
our services. Byliterally
using ourseven it could
refer to di erent levels of structures
cookies. Got it of the
universe, with the solar system being the rst

heaven, a star cluster the second, the galaxy the
third, a cluster of galaxies the fourth etc.
But I also heard the explanation that “seven” is
used to mean “many” or an endless repetition in
the arabic language, in the same way “thousands”
is used in English to mean “many”. So if it just
means “many” it could simply refer to the billions
of star systems in the universe. I think this is the
most likely explanation for the seven heavens
and the seven earths, that it means “many star
systems and star clusters with many earth-like

planets”.
There is also a verse about shooting stars being
missiles against devils. Maybe “devils” in that
verse means devil-like people, maybe there were
evil people back then that were scared of
shooting stars for some reason, but that is just
my theory.
Here Hazoor also says that heavens means star
systems and earths means planets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=FKOmYxmvTXk&
REPLY
Rational Religion on May 2, 2020 at 10:00 pm
A very valid point. Thank you brother Felix.
REPLY
maria on April 14, 2020 at 8:04 pm

great artical!!!!!!!!!!!
REPLY
cookies. Got it
Jason on May 3 2020 at 12:20 am
Jason on May 3, 2020 at 12:20 am
When you were talking about “Sky above us” you
said it was referring to the layers of our
atmosphere. If that’s the case you need to explain
how the quran claims the stars are in the lowest
heaven (The troposphere). Based on your logic
stars would be found in the troposphere which
we know isn’t accurate. I know being apologetic
and defending a book written by 700AD desert
dwellers could be challenging so try again.
REPLY
Waseem ALtaf on May 17, 2020 at 5:24 am
He wont answer man, but here I will tell
you, this seven heavens being troposphere
and all is BS, They are only trying to t
Quran into how science interprets the
universe`. But I am a Muslim okay and I
believe in what Quran contains every word
of it and if Quran says earth is at that
means it it, even if NASA says whatever or
shows me whatever pictures, let me tell
you I will reject all their evidence just
because I believe the Quran is from Allah
and I don’t need any validation for that. SO
when Allah says earth is a bed spread out,
it is an expanse I feel that is so true and I
feel that is what earth means, not a
spinning ball.
REPLY
Waseem ALtaf on May 17, 2020 at 5:19 am
OMG this is a parody of sort, Why didn’t Allah

mention earth is round because people will not
understand that in that time? Many people don’t
believe
Cookies help us delivernow
ourbecause
services.there are ants
By using and birds
our services, you agree to our use of
talking to people incookies.
Quran, soGot
doesn’t
it that mean
by your applied logic, Allah shouldn’t have

mentioned such stories either.
Allah never says earth is round and infact there is

a statement which states Earth is xed in one
place, and here we have science telling us Earth is
rotating and revolving, lets assume science says
earth is at, so then you will surely interpret
those verses as earth being at, be sincere and
tell me you won’t? If you sincere answer this
question.
REPLY
Rational Religion on May 20, 2020 at 11:46 am
The Quran does not talk about talking

ants. It talks about a tribe of humans called
the Namlites, ie: they were named after
ants. The birds referred to are not literal
birds but highly spiritual people, though a
few other interpretations are possible,
none of which include talking birds. Please
read the following commentary for the
next few pages linked:
https://www.alislam.org/quran/view/?
page=2396&region=E54
REPLY
Waseem ALtaf on May 21, 2020 at 9:13

am
Huh so you are a follower of some

other religion not the Islam that is
from Allah? Because in our Islam,
Prophet Suleiman indeed knew the
cookies. Got it
languages of animals, He was
granted the kingdom of Jinn. So

what are Jinn, another tribe with at
noses?
It is unbelievable that you people

think everything has to be in
accordance to the views of modern
scienti c establishments. You
indeed have no faith and you are
the hypocrites,
I bear witness that I do not

associate any partners with Allah
and I do not mock his book, neither
do I measure or compare it with
science in order for me to believe in
it. I believe in Allah and the Last Day,
even if everything in the Quran
contradicts with the modern man
says about this universe. I still
believe in Allah I do not need Quran
to suit the views of disbelievers. Oh
Allah I disassociate myself from
those who try to change the
meaning of your Book and I
disassociate myself from every
ungrateful hypocrite who only lives
to please his people around him.
And there is it I take my leave from

the people who have furthur gone
Astray…
REPLY
Mohanad M on May 21, 2020 at

10:19 pm
cookies. Got it
Thank you You and (hayy bin
Thank you. You and (hayy bin
yaqzan) seems to be only
ones with common sense
here.
REPLY
LEAVE A REPLY
Your email address will not be published. Required elds are
marked *
COMMENT
NAME * EMAIL * WEBSITE
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
POST COMMENT
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your

comment data is processed.
Designed by Elegant Themes | Powered by WordPress    
cookies. Got it
6/13/2020 Irving regrets ever calling Earth 'flat'
Saturday, 13 June 2020, 2:48pm
   
FOOTBALL BADMINTON TENNIS CYCLING GOLF MMA MOTOR SPORTS CRICKET OTHERS
Irving regrets ever calling Earth ' at' MOST POPULAR
By Reuters - October 2, 2018 @ 10:30am LATEST MOST READ RECOMMENDED
46m Laos free of Covid-19
50m Lawyer remanded to assist CBT probe
56m New domestic cases in Beijing raise fears of

new virus wave
1h Taman Negara hotelier sets up FB page

featuring local 'new norm' travel deals
1h Could democracy and dictatorship be alike

ah?
TRENDING
WORLD an hour ago
New domestic cases in Beijing raise

fears of new virus wave
(File pix) Kyrie Irving #11 of the Boston Celtics reacts during their game against the
Charlotte Hornets during the preseason game at Dean Smith Center on September 28, NATION 2 hours ago
2018 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Lance King/Getty Images/AFP Photo Taman Negara hotelier sets up FB page
featuring local 'new norm' travel deals
A year and a half after rattling the NBA world and beyond by saying he had
no doubt that the Earth was at, Boston Celtics star point guard Kyrie WORLD 4 hours ago
Irving says he regrets ever bringing up the topic. Zara to close 1,200 retail stores
worldwide
“I’m sorry about all that,” Irving said Monday, speaking at the Forbes Under
30 Summit in Boston. He said he often hears from irate science teachers
NATION 21 hours ago
who tell him, “You know, I gotta reteach my whole curriculum!”
Con rmed, KL 'house call' barber
positive for Covid-19
On NBA All-Star weekend in February 2017, Irving, then with the Cleveland
Cavaliers, was a guest on a podcast along with teammates Richard
Jefferson and Channing Frye, and he didn’t mince words about the shape NATION Jan 16, 2018 @ 1:35pm
of the world. Are you a retired teacher? RM13.5
million in unclaimed fund contributions
“This is not even a conspiracy. The Earth is at. The Earth is at. The await
Earth is at,” Irving said adamantly. “All these things that particular
groups, I won’t even pinpoint one group, that they almost offer up this
STORIES FROM SAYS
education. ... They lie to us. ...
Jun 11, 2020 @ 12:50pm
“If you really think about it from a landscape of the way we travel, the way Meet 4 Malaysian Artists Who Were All
we move, and the fact that – can you really think of us rotating around the Nominated For The World's Biggest
Comic Book Award
sun and all planets aligned, rotating in speci c dates, being perpendicular
with what’s going on with these planets?” he said that day. Jun 9, 2020 @ 6:05pm
A Japanese Restaurant In PJ Is Giving

Jefferson that when Irving made the comment, he used his ngers to put Away 1,000 Free Burnt Cheesecakes
word “planets” in air quotations. For Father's Day
20 hours ago
His message on Monday seemed to be that he didn’t realize how much
his comments would resonate. Here Are The Do's And Don'ts Of
Wearing A Fabric Face Mask According
To The WHO
“At the time, you’re like innocent in it, but you realize the effect of the
power of voice. Even if you believe in that, just don’t come out and say 20 hours ago
that stuff – it’s for intimate conversations. ... At the time, I just didn’t Barber Who Tested Positive For COVID-
realize the effect ... I’m sorry about all that.” 19 Had Provided House Calls To 21
Clients During MCO
https://www.nst.com.my/sports/others/2018/10/416938/irving-regrets-ever-calling-earth-flat 1/2
6/13/2020 Irving regrets ever calling Earth 'flat'
Clients During MCO
Irving stopped short of saying what he believes now, round vs. at, but
21 hours ago
said, “At the time, I was huge into conspiracies. Everybody’s been there.
8 Delicious Treats To Get For Your Dad
Everybody’s been there like, ‘Whoa! What’s going on with our world?!” -- This Father's Day
Reuters
RELATED ARTICLES
OTHERS Jan 1, 2018 @ 11:36am NATION Nov 6, 2018 @ 1:02pm

Celtics hold off Nets for 30th win Explosion from recrackers
of season causes damage to ats
BUSINESS Jan 6, 2016 @ 10:00am LIFESTYLE Jan 19, 2017 @ 8:00am

Ringgit at against greenback in Hong Kong "mini" ats boom as
early trade govt fails to rein in record-high
prices
GET MOBILE APP
NEWS BUSINESS LIFE & TIMES SPORTS WORLD OPINION GALLERY NSTTV
Crime & Courts Business Times Sunday Vibes Football World Columnists Photos EDUCATION
Exclusive Property Bots Badminton Region Letters Infographics VOUCHER
Govt / Public Policy Cars Bikes Trucks Heal Tennis Leader
Nation Flair Cycling
Politics Jom! Golf
Groove MMA
MotorSport
Cricket
Others
2020 © New Straits Times, New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd. A part of Media Prima Group.
Subscribe Disclaimer Personal Data Protection Act Contact Us
https://www.nst.com.my/sports/others/2018/10/416938/irving-regrets-ever-calling-earth-flat 2/2
6/13/2020 How technology can combat the rising tide of fake science
$30 a month means quality information can reach more

people.
Donate
Academic rigour, journalistic flair
A crop circle in Switzerland. Jabberocky/Wikimedia Commons
How technology can combat the rising tide of fake science

March 9, 2020 11.22pm AEDT
Science gets a lot of respect these days. Unfortunately, it’s also getting a lot of Author
competition from misinformation. Seven in 10 Americans think the benefits from
science outweigh the harms, and nine in 10 think science and technology will create
more opportunities for future generations. Scientists have made dramatic progress in
understanding the universe and the mechanisms of biology, and advances in Chris Impey
computation benefit all fields of science. University Distinguished Professor of
Astronomy, University of Arizona
On the other hand, Americans are surrounded by a rising tide of misinformation and
fake science. Take climate change. Scientists are in almost complete agreement that
people are the primary cause of global warming. Yet polls show that a third of the
public disagrees with this conclusion.
https://theconversation.com/how-technology-can-combat-the-rising-tide-of-fake-science-132158 1/6
However, the consequences of fake science are no laughing matter. In matters of health and climate
change, misinformation can be a matter of life and death. Over a 90-day period spanning December,
January and February, people liked, shared and commented on posts from sites containing false or
misleading information about COVID-19 142 times more than they did information from the Centers
for Disease Control and the World Health Organization.
Combating fake science is an urgent priority. In a world that’s increasingly dependent on science and
technology, civic society can only function when the electorate is well informed.
Educators must roll up their sleeves and do a better job of teaching critical thinking to young people.
However, the problem goes beyond the classroom. The internet is the first source of science
information for 80% of people ages 18 to 24.
One study found that a majority of a random sample of 200 YouTube videos on climate change denied
that humans were responsible or claimed that it was a conspiracy. The videos peddling conspiracy
theories got the most views. Another study found that a quarter of all tweets on climate were
generated by bots and they preferentially amplified messages from climate change deniers.
Technology to the rescue?
The recent success of machine learning and AI in detecting fake news points the way to detecting fake
science online. The key is neural net technology. Neural nets are loosely modeled on the human brain.
They consist of many interconnected computer processors that identify meaningful patterns in data
like words and images. Neural nets already permeate everyday life, particularly in natural language
processing systems like Amazon’s Alexa and Google’s language translation capability.
At the University of Arizona, we have trained neural nets on handpicked popular articles about
climate change and biological evolution, and the neural nets are 90% successful in distinguishing
wheat from chaff. With a quick scan of a site, our neural net can tell if its content is scientifically
sound or climate-denial junk. After more refinement and testing we hope to have neural nets that can
work across all domains of science.
Neural net technology under development at the University of Arizona will flag science websites with a color code indicating
their reliability (left). A smartphone app version will gamify the process of declaring science articles real or fake (right).
Chris Impey, CC BY-ND
The goal is a web browser extension that would detect when the user is looking at science content and
deduce whether or not it’s real or fake. If it’s misinformation, the tool will suggest a reliable web site
on that topic. My colleagues and I also plan to gamify the interface with a smart phone app that will
let people compete with their friends and relatives to detect fake science. Data from the best of these
participants will be used to help train the neural net.
Sniffing out fake science should be easier than sniffing out fake news in general, because subjective
opinion plays a minimal role in legitimate science, which is characterized by evidence, logic and
verification. Experts can readily distinguish legitimate science from conspiracy theories and
arguments motivated by ideology, which means machine learning systems can be trained to, as well.
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” These words of Daniel Patrick
Moynihan, advisor to four presidents, could be the mantra for those trying to keep science from being
drowned by misinformation.
[You’re smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation’s authors and editors. You can
read us daily by subscribing to our newsletter.]
Climate change Artificial intelligence Education Bigfoot Climate change denial Superstition Pseudoscience

Aliens Evidence ghosts Magical Thinking Neural networks Flat Earth Scientific literacy Haunted house
In my 30 years of studying and promoting scientific literacy, I’ve found that college educated adults
have large holes in their basic science knowledge and they’re disconcertingly susceptible to
superstition and beliefs that aren’t based on any evidence. One way to counter this is to make it easier
for people to detect pseudoscience online. To this end, my lab at the University of Arizona has
developed an artificial intelligence-based pseudoscience detector that we plan to freely release as a
web browser extension and smart phone app.
Americans’ predilection for fake science
Americans are prone to superstition and paranormal beliefs. An annual survey done by sociologists at
Chapman University finds that more than half believe in spirits and the existence of ancient
civilizations like Atlantis, and more than a third think that aliens have visited the Earth in the past or
are visiting now. Over 75% hold multiple paranormal beliefs. The survey shows that these numbers
have increased in recent years.
Paranormal beliefs
A survey of 1,190 American adults in 2018 found a wide range of paranormal
beliefs and superstitions.
Places can be haunted by spirits 57.7%
Ancient, advanced civilizations,

56.9%
such as Atlantis, once existed
Aliens have visited Earth in our
41.4%
ancient past
Aliens have come to Earth in
35.1%
modern times
Some people can move objects with
26.2%
their minds
Bigfoot is a real creature 20.7%
Fortune tellers and psychics can

17.2%
foresee the future
Chart: The Conversation, CC-BY-ND

• Source: The Chapman University Survey of American Fears, Earl Babbie Research Center
Widespread belief in astrology is a pet peeve of my colleagues in astronomy. It’s long had a foothold in
the popular culture through horoscopes in newspapers and magazines but currently it’s booming.
Belief is strong even among the most educated. My surveys of college undergraduates show that three-
quarters of them think that astrology is very or “sort of” scientific and only half of science majors
recognize it as not at all scientific.
Allan Mazur, a sociologist at Syracuse University, has delved into the nature of irrational belief
systems, their cultural roots, and their political impact. Conspiracy theories are, by definition,
resistant to evidence or data that might prove them false. Some are at least amusing. Adherents of the
flat Earth theory turn back the clock on two millennia of scientific progress. Interest in this bizarre
idea has surged in the past five years, spurred by social media influencers and the echo chamber
nature of web sites like Reddit. As with climate change denial, many come to this belief through
YouTube videos.
Fake news Natural Language Processing Paranormal beliefs Evidence-based COVID-19 Before you go...
This year, your
support matters now more than ever. No matter how challenging the issues of
2020 – from bushﬁres, climate change, or COVID-19 – our approach is always
simple. We pair experts with journalists to produce content that’s easy to read and
free to access. But we can’t do this work without your support. Please make a
donation today.
Donate Now
Misha Ketchell
Editor
You might also like

Hearing ghost voices relies on pseudoscience and fallibility of human perception
The thinking error at the root of science denial
The ancient Greeks had alternative facts too – they were just more chill about it
From border security to climate change, national emergency declarations raise hard
questions about presidential power
6/13/2020 The Flat Earth.
The Flat Earth

by Donald E. Simanek
Early Ideas About the Shape of the Earth.
The ancients had many novel ideas about

the shape of the earth. The Babylonians
thought the earth was hollow, to provide
space for their underworld. The Egyptians
thought the earth a square, (with four
corners) with mountains at the edge
supporting the vault of the sky.
Aristotle argued for a spherical earth, for

these reasons:
1. The gradual disappearance of ships

over the horizon, the tops of the sails
disappearing last.
2. The shape of the curved shadow of
the earth on the moon during Egyptian cosmogony.
eclipses.
3. The variation of the sun's elevation with latitude. (This was the basis of Eratosthenes'
measurement.)
4. The variation of a star's elevation with latitude. The fact that one sees new stars as one moves
north or south on the earth's surface.
5. Matter tends to form into drops or globs, and the earth, in forming from chaotic matter, did the
same.
6. Proof by elephants: When one travels west from Greece, one finds elephants (African). When
one travels east one finds elephants (Asian). Not realizing that these elephants are different
kinds, he thought that one was traveling to the same lands by going in opposite directions.
The last two are obviously (to us) irrelevant, but the others represent valid arguments based on
observations of nature.
https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/flat/flateart.htm 1/17
Flat earth. [George Gamow] Round earth. [George Gamow]
The early Christian Church accepted Aristotle's spherical earth. But a few malcontents within the
Church pointed out that the Bible speaks of 'the four corners' of the earth. In the 5th century CE the
monk Cosmas Indicopleustes, in his Christian Topography, described a square earth with a heavenly
vault, much like the Egyptian model. Tertulian also was a flat-earther.
Science writer Robert J. Schadewald gave me permission to quote the following paragraphs in which
he summarizes the Biblical evidence which flat-earthers use to justify their position. He wrote this to
a geocentrist fundamentalist who was arguing that the Bible supports a fixed, non-moving earth, with
the all the rest of the universe moving around us at about one revolution per day. Bob, of course
agreed that the Bible does support that view, but wonders why this particular fundamentalist did not
also accept the idea that the earth is flat, since that has basis in the Bible also.
...The Bible is, from Genesis to Revelation, a flat-earth book. ...While the Bible nowhere
states categorically that the earth is flat, numerous Old Testament verses clearly show that
the ancient Hebrews were flat-earthers. This comes through more clearly in modern
translations such as the New English Bible, but it's clear enough in the King James
Version. The Genesis creation story says the earth is covered by a vault (firmament) and
that the celestial bodies move inside the vault. (See Genesis 1:6-8 and 1:17. Note that, even
in KJV, while there are waters "above" the firmament, the celestial bodies are "in" it.) This
makes no sense unless one assumes that the earth is essentially flat.
That the Hebrews considered the sun and moon to be small bodies near to the earth is clear
from Joshua 10:12, which gives specific localities [geographic] in which they stood still.
Isaiah 40:22 says that "God sits throned on the vaulted roof of earth, whose inhabitants are
like grasshoppers." In the book of Job, Eliphaz the Temanite says God "walks to and fro on
the vault of heaven.'' (Job 22:14. The KJV translators copped out on the last two verses,
but in both cases the implications are clear.)
That the earth was considered essentially flat is clear from Daniel, who said, "I saw a tree
of great height at the centre of the earth; the tree grew and became strong, reaching with its
top to the sky and visible to the earth's farthest bounds." (Daniel 4:10-11) Only on a flat
earth could one see a tree reaching the sky (dome?) from "the earth's farthest bounds."
The New Testament also implies a flat earth. For instance, Matthew 4:8 says that "The
devil took him [Jesus] to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the
world in their glory." From a sufficiently high mountain, one could see all of the kingdoms
of the world"but only if the earth were flat. The same applies to Revelation 1:7, which says
that at the second coming, "Every eye shall see him." Finally, Revelation 7:1 refers to "the
four corners of the earth," and corners are not generally associated with spheres.
Actually, if you want a good picture of the hebrew conception of the earth, look in a
Jewish encyclopedia under "cosmography." You might also want to read the so-called
"Ethiopic" Book of Enoch, written perhaps 150 B.C. While not canonical, it's paraphrased
or quoted a couple of times in the New Testament, so it was highly regarded in those days.
Its flat earth implications are even stronger.
The Biblical cosmos model derives from Egyptian sources, which had a flat earth covered by a
rounded sky vault supported at the four corners of the earth by high mountains. The 'waters above and
the waters below' in the book of Genesis refer to the Babylonian notion that the waters were divided,
and some remained above the sky vault. The vault was like a leaky roof and some of that water falls
down as rain.
Astonishingly, some present-day 'biblical creationists' now argue that this water above the sky was the
source of the flood in the time of Noah. They realize that if the waters did cover the earth to the
highest mountain tops, there just isn't any source of that much water in the earth or in the atmosphere!
So it must have come from somewhere else, they argue, in their pathetic attempt to make creationism
appear 'scientific'.
The Round Earth.
Eratosthenes (c 276 to 195 BCE) was

probably the first to accurately measure the
size of the Earth. He knew that at summer
solstice the sun was directly overhead in
Syene (now Aswan, Egypt). On that day,
vertical sticks or poles cast no shadows,
and sunlight fills the bottom of wells. The
town of Alexandria is directly north of
Syene (on the same meridian), and on that
same day vertical poles do cast shadows,
because the sun is then 7.2° from the
zenith. Eratosthenes assumed this to be due
to the earth's curvature.
Knowing the distance between these cities

to be 5000 stadia (from land surveys), he
calculated the earth's circumference to be
250,000 stadia. [1 stadium was 1/8 of a Eratosthenes measures the earth.
Roman mile, or 220 yards in modern
measure.] That's a circumference of a little over 24,662 miles, which is nearly the modern value of
24,900 miles. This value was considered too large by most of Eratosthenes' contemporaries, who
preferred the smaller value worked out later by Poseidonius (18,000 miles). The latter value was
accepted by Ptolemy (and Columbus, much later).
Note that Eratosthenes made the assumption that the sun was far enough away from the earth that the
incoming solar rays are parallel.
Popular histories give the impression that Columbus had to contend with flat earth believers who
warned that he'd sail right off the edge of the earth. It is even said that he set out to prove the earth
was round. That's myth.
Geometry of Eratosthenes' measurement of the earth.
Most educated persons in Columbus' day accepted a round earth. But there was difference of opinion
about the earth's size. Columbus made the mistake of relying on Ptolemey's value for the size of the
earth, which was much too small. Columbus therefore underestimated the length of the proposed
voyage. (He wanted to reach the Orient, but America got in the way.)
There were even some who accepted a round earth, but misunderstood gravity. They thought that if
you went too far you'd roll off. In fact, they had to postulate some sort of mountainous wall around
the known world to keep the oceans from spilling off.
Revival of Flat Earth Theories.
Bob Shadewald, who researced the flat earth idea to a greater extent than I have, tells me that the flat
earth idea was revived in the 18th century by the followers of a eccentric English sectarian and tailor,
Lodowick Muggleton. I have been unable to independently confirm this. Origins of eccentric ideas are
usually difficult to pin down. In any case, from the 18th century to the present day the flat earth belief
is bound up with religious fundamentalism.
By 1800, Zetetic societies were flourishing in England. 'Zetetic' means 'seeker' or 'skeptic'. The flat-
earthers took this name to symbolize their skepticism toward orthodox scientific views of the shape of
the earth.
However, their skepticism was limited to science. Then, and now, the flat idea goes along with
religious fundamentalism, and a literal interpretation of the Bible. I have yet to hear of a flat earther
who is not also a Biblical literalist.
Samuel Birley Rowbotham (1816-1884), a 19th century religious fundamentalist, headed an Owenite
colony, and promoted the flat earth philosophy. He's a shadowy figure for historians. He had a
reputation of cynical dishonesty, and some think he didn't really believe what he promoted. He was an
itinerant lecurer, and wrote under several pseudonyms: Tryon, S. Goulden, Parallax, and Dr. Birley.
His major work was Earth Not a Globe written in 1849.
Rowbotham concocted the fiendishly clever idea of light refraction in curved paths to 'save the
hypothesis' of the flat earth, to account for what he called the 'optical illusions' of sunrise and sunset.
Rowbotham is the first flat-earther to give the size of the sun: 32 miles in diameter, a figure accepted
by flat-earthers today. However, he gave the distance to the sun as 700 miles, a figure hard to
reconcile with his value for its diameter.
John Hampden (1819-1891) vigorously promoted the flat earth idea in England. He founded the
Truth-Seeker's Oracle and Scriptural Science Review in 1876. In 1870 Hampden made a bet with
naturalist Alfred Wallace on the outcome of a test of the flatness of water in the Old Bedford Canal.
Both sides claimed the test confirmed their view, and flat-earthers to this day assert that "water
surfaces have been proved to be flat."
Hampden was known for his piety, and his abusive language. Feeling he had been wronged in the
Bedford experiment, he buried Wallace in a blizzard of vitriolic pamphlets and letters to the editor. He
even resorted to abusing by letter, as this letter to Mrs. Wallace shows.
Madam
If your infernal thief of a husband is brought home some day on a hurdle, with every bone
in his head smashed to a pulp, you will know the reason. Do you tell him from me he is a
lying infernal thief, and as sure as his name is Wallace he never dies in his bed.
You must be a miserable wretch to be obliged to live with a convicted felon. Do not think
or let him think I have done with him.
John Hampden
Hampden thought the sun only 600 miles away, and 32 miles in diameter. These numbers derived
from Rowotham, and added nothing new to flat earth theory.
After Rowbotham's death in 1884 his followers carried on the crusade. The Universal Zetetic Society
(UZS) was founded in 1890, publishing a journal titled The Earth Not a Globe Review which had
1000 subscribers. The UZS remained active well into the early 20th century, but slowly declined after
World War I.
Other flat-earthers were active at this time. William Carpenter emigrated to Baltimore and wrote One
Hundred Proofs that the Earth is not a Globe in 1885. Lady Blount, wife of Sir Walter de Sodrington
Blount, promoted flat earth ideas. She founded and edited a journal Earth from 1900 to 1904.
Scotsman John Alexander Dowie (1847-1907) studied at Edinburgh University, then established a
pastorate near Sydney Australia, and included flat earth dogma in his theology.
A digression on measurements.
In the last decades of the 19th century diverse models of the earth and heavens were actively
promoted. Isaac Newton Vail proposed an annular theory to account for the formation of the earth and
planets, but assumed a convex earth. The Gillespian theory put the earth and sun in fixed positions,
allowing the earth to rotate. A "conic" theory modeled the shape of the earth as something like a cone,
its base being the North polar region, and its apex at the South pole. There was even a small
publication titled The Square World promoting an earth shaped as an inverted soup bowl, the
Northern hemisphere being about as we know it, but with the Southern Hemisphere flaring out to a
larger rim. It's a mystery why the author describes it as "square", but it has something to do with the
Biblical reference to "the four corners of the earth".
The New Bedford canal experiment inspired others to measure the flatness of water surfaces.
Alexander Gleason, a civil engineer from Buffalo, NY, tested the flatness of the surface of lake Erie.
He published Is the Bible from Heaven (1890) and Is the Earth a Globe? (1893).
But not everyone who measured water's flatness got the same result. In 1896 Ulysses G. Morrow
made such a test on the Old Illinois Drainage Canal, He found the water surface concave upwards.
Morrow considered this "the most unmistakable evidence of the water's non-convexity." But he wasn't
surprised, for he was already leaning to the view of Cyrus Reed Teed that the earth was hollow, and
we lived on its inside surface, with the entire universe also inside.
Morrow made similar sightings in 1896 from the shore of Lake Michigan at the World's Fair Grounds.
Seven other sightings were made from Roby, Illinois in 1896, with similar results. These experiments
of both flat and hollow-earth advocates were easily dismissed by critics as simply due to atmospheric
refraction. Morrow sought a more convincing method for measuring water surfaces, one that would
not use light. In 1897 he did the famous Naples experiment in Florida, measuring a nearly 4 mile N-S
water surface using a method that did not depend on light. He concluded that the earth was concave,
with a radius of a bit over 4000 miles.
During the last decades of the 19th century the flat-earthers and hollow earthers paid close attention to
each other's experiments, read their opponent's publications, and even corresponded, through the
letters sections of their newsletters.
The earth was flat in Zion.
In 1888 Scotsman John Alexander Dowie (1847-1907) brought these ideas to America, where he
founded the Christian Catholic Church in Chicago. Dowie was a faith healer, and the journal Leaves
of Healing was the official publication of the church. The church grew rapidly, and Dowie realized his
dream of founding a christian community in 1901, the Zion community located on the Lake Michigan
shore, 40 miles north of Chicago.
Alexander Dowie
Alexander Dowie.
drawing by Champe.
As the community grew and prospered, Dowie moved away from the simple life he had earlier
advocated. He resided in a 25 room mansion, and designed for himself magnificent ecclesiastical
robes, modeled after those worn by Aaron, the High priest, described in Leviticus. Community
members thought he was putting on too much 'style' and his wife was criticized as too extravagant. In
1906, after suffering a stroke, Dowie was forced to resign his position.
Dowie is rebuked.
Wilbur Glenn Voliva (1870-1942) took over

leadership of the Church, which became the
Christian Catholic Apostolic Church in Zion.
Voliva kept tight control on his 6000 followers,

which made up the community. The church schools
taught the flat earth doctrine. His 100,000 watt radio
station broadcast his diatribes against round earth
astronomy, and the evils of evolution.
In its early years, Zion was a one-religion

community. A Scottish lace industry and a bakery
were established. Zion brand fig bar cookies and
White Dove chocolates originated there.
In the town of Zion a strict code of morality was

imposed, by law, on all persons who set foot inside
city limits. Irving Wallace, in his book The Square

Pegs, tells of his childhood memories of Zion.
There it was unlawful for women to wear short
dresses, high heels, bathing suits or lipstick. Ham,
bacon, oysters, liquor and tobacco were banned, as
were drugstores, medical buildings and movie
theaters. A ten o'clock curfew was rigidly enforced.
You could be arrested for whistling on Sunday.
These laws were enforced by Voliva's police force,
called the Praetorian Guard, whose helmets carried
the word 'PATIENCE' and whose sleeves bore
images of doves. Policemen wore Bibles and clubs
on their belts.
Irving Wallace interviewed Voliva in 1932. Voliva

declared that the Bible was his entire scientific
library. Astronomers were 'ignorant fools'. The sun,
he said, was only three thousand miles away, and
only thirty-two miles in diameter. When asked why
he thought the sun so near the earth, he said, "God
made the sun to light the earth, and therefore must
have placed it close to the task it was designed to
do. What would you think of a man who built a
Wilbur Glenn Voliva.
house in Zion and put a lamp to light it in Kenosha,
Wisconsin?"
The Zion communal industries were mostly ruined in the depression. Rival churches made special
efforts to send missionaries to Zion to break Voliva's religious monopoly. His political control of the
town of Zion was finally broken as well. Voliva died in 1942, and Zion now has pork, lipstick,
pharmacies and physicians, and you can safely whistle on Sunday.
Voliva's flat earth map. Modern Mechanics and Invention, October, 1931.
The church's power declined in the 40s and 50s, partly due to financial scandals. But the church itself
still exists, a pale shadow of its former glory.
The White Dove, symbol of Patience. Seal of Zion.
Zion today.
I visited Zion in the summer of 1992. It's a small lake shore community of middle class homes and
pleasant parks and beaches. One immediately recognizes the town's history and heritage in the street
signs, for the north-south streets are named for people and places from the Bible: Gideon, Jethro,
Galilee, Gilead, Gilboa, Gabriel, Ezra, Ezekiel, Enoch. When I was there the police cars still carried
the town seal, an emblem of the Zion church. A lawsuit had been brought against the town because of
this inappropriate use of a religious symbol. Several residents and church members I talked to were
very indignant about this attempt to separate church and state.
The original Zion church, a wooden structure, burned in 1937, and has been replaced by a church with
modern architectural design. Also gone is the Elijah Hospice, built in 1901. It was considered to be
the largest wood frame building in the world, with 350 rooms, dining rooms and parlors. It became
the Zion retirement hotel and nursing home. Despite efforts to save it as a historical site, it was torn
down in the late 1980s and replaced with a modern brick hospital. Zion now has over one hundred
churches of an astonishing variety, including many one-of-a-kind churches. There's even a nuclear
power plant adjoining city limits.
Shiloh House, a 25 room mansion built as the residence of John Alexander Dowie. The roof tiles have a
zig-zag pattern in yellow green and brown, symbolizing the power of God. [Photo by Donald Simanek.]
Shiloh House, the home of Alexander Dowie and later of Wilbur Voliva, still stands. It may be visited
only on weekends, when the local historical society gives public tours.
The flat earth in the late 20th

century.
Back in England, in 1956, Samuel

Shenton, a sign painter and a Fellow of the
Royal Astronomical Society and the Royal
Geographic Society, revived the UZS,
changing its name to The International
Flat Earth Society.
A brochure from the IFS forthrightly states

its position.
The International Flat Earth Sociey

has been established to prove by
sound reasoning and factual evidence
that the present accepted theory that
the Earth is a globe spinning on its
axis every 24 hours and at the same
time describing an orbit round the
Sun at a speed of 66,000 m.p.h, is
contrary to all experience and to
sound common-sense.
In ancient times the Earh was

regarded as plane, and this is
expressed in all literature up to a few
hundred of years ago. The theory has
fallen into disfavour, owing mainly to
the dogmatism of modern science and
popular education in schools, which
leads to prejudice in favour of the
globular theory from the start.
It is always a pity to allow false

theories to pass unchallenged, and it
is hoped that the Flat Earth Society
will do much to undo the harm that
has been caused. Remember that the
truth of the plane figure of the Earth
can be shown by irrefutable evidence,
and anyone who is interested in
becoming a member is asked to
contact the President or the
Organising Secretary. In future it is
hoped to hold regular meetings of the
Society.
December 20th, 1956.
The society received quite a bit of publicity

when Shenton was shown photos of the
'round' earth taken from space. At first he
wasn't impressed, saying "It's easy to see
how such a picture could fool the untrained
eye." [Indeed, a "bug-eye" wide-angle Flat Earth Society brochure.
camera lens can produce a similar effect.]
Later, some reports said he admitted that
the Flat Earth Society might have to "reassess its position." But, after a brief period of uncertainty, he
concluded that the space photos and the entire space program was faked by scientists desperately
trying to save face by concealing the true nature of the shape of the earth.
Shenton died in March 1971. His wife helped choose a successor. The most enthusiastic potential
leader within the organization seemed to be Charles K. Johnson of Lancaster, California.
Samuel Shenton, illustrating earth's flatness.
So Johnson became president of the Flat Earth Society in 1971 and 'inherited' a large portion of
Shenton's valuable library of books on flat earth history. Johnson put out a newspaper called The
International Flat Earth News. Its masthead declares its purpose: 'Restoring the World to Sanity.'
Johnson used Biblical authority to assert that the

earth is a flat disk with the North pole at the center
and a wall of ice in the Antarctic regions,
surrounding the whole perimeter of the earth disk. In
his universe the sun and moon were about 32 miles in
diameter and only 3000 miles away. They, too are flat
disks. The stars are a mere 4000 miles away.
Where did Johnson get these figures? You won't find

the calculations in his newspaper. They may have
originated with Carpenter and Robotham in England,
and are accepted without question as authoritative by
flat-earthers today.
Rethinking Eratosthenes.
One can reconstruct the origin of these numbers by

doing a little geometry, starting from a flat earth
hypothesis. Remember the experiment of
Eratosthenes, who measured the angular elevation of
the sun at two latitudes in Egypt? He assumed that
Charles Johnson.
the sun was effectively infinitely far away (or at least
so far compared to the earth's size that the actual
distance didn't matter). Then he calculated the diameter of the earth using a second assumption: that
the earth was spherical.
But suppose you abandon Eratosthenes' two assumptions, and adopt instead the assumption that the
earth is flat. Then, triangulation from the same data gives the distance to the sun: 3000 miles! See how
a simple change of assumptions can drastically alter the entire cosmos? However, the round earth was
more than an arbitary assumption for Eratosthenes, for he and his contemporaries, had other very
good reasons for knowing the earth was round. [Textbooks sometimes mislead by suggesting that his
experiment was designed to prove the earth was a sphere. It was not, it was only intended to measure
the size of the sphere.]
Distance of sun from a flat earth, using Eratosthenes' method.
Finally, the angular size of the sun is 0.5°. Using this fact with a distance to the sun of 3000 miles,
gives the sun's diameter: 32 miles. It therefore appears that the flat-earther's figures are based on sun
elevation data at just two particular latitudes, perhaps even Eratosthenes' values. I speculate that flat
earthers may have picked these out of some book, and when the calculation was finished, they looked
no further. For if they had done the calculation with a variety of latitudes, including large latitude
differences, conflicting results would have been obtained.
The left diagram below shows that for two towns having latitudes within about 30° of each other,
reasonably consistent results are obtained. But when larger baselines are used, the triangulation gives
a much smaller distance to the sun. For a 70° latitude difference the distance to the sun comes out less
than half that for a 10° difference.
Still, one could save the hypothesis

by assuming that light refracts in a
peculiar way. Modern flat-earthers
do indeed assume that refraction is
at work. They attribute the
disappearance of the ships over the
horizon to a refraction effect, and
even point out that with some
atmospheric conditions, ships,
icebergs, and distant mountains
have been observed to rise above
the horizon, and even turn upside
down!
How light refracts near the earth.

The diagram at the right shows how Left: conventional physics. Right: flat-earther's physics.
this works. The angle that the rays
strike the earth's surface is correct, matching the left diagram.
To complete their path from the sun to the earth the rays must curve to strike the earth at the correct
(observed) angle. The curvature of the rays for latitude differences of less than 50° hardly shows on
the diagram. Of course this result can be obtained in various ways. The curvature could be confined to
the region near the earth, even within the atmosphere. The diagram shows circular arcs, but other
shapes might be used as well.
Lame answers to other objections to the flat earth idea.
And what about airliners going around the earth?

What about earth satellites? They are merely
traveling in loop orbits. What makes them do this?
Johnson doesn't say. Flat-earthers shun any form of
gravitational force. They consider gravity to be a
mystical or occult idea. Things fall, they say, simply
because they are heavy—no other explanation is
needed.
What about the moon flights and the pictures from

space showing a round earth? Johnson wasn't about
to be taken in by such nonsense. It's all a hoax, he
proclaimed, an elaborate movie production written by
Arthur C. Clarke, filmed on Hollywood sound stages
and the Mohave desert. "Neil Armstrong stepped on a
paper moon," Johnson asserted.
How airplanes and earth satellites
Johnson says his mission is to restore sanity to the orbit around a flat earth.
world. He was proud that the United Nations accepts
his idea, for they put a map of his flat earth on their flag. He rejected mystical forces like gravity,
accepting the Aristotelian notion that things fall naturally downward—no explanation is needed. Who
could be perverse enough to deny one's senses by doubting it?
Johnson also cited the testimony of his wife Marjory, who came from Australia. "She's sworn out an
affidavit that she never hung by her feet in Australia. She sailed a ship over here, and she did not get
on it upside down and she did not sail straight up. She sailed right straight across the ocean. We
consider that a very important proof that the world is flat," Johnson says.
Johnson claimed his flat earth society had 1600 members

worldwide, but admits some haven't kept up their dues. The
society was always struggling financially. There were
probably less than 100 hard core members.
By now you may be thinking that this is an elaborate joke.

Not so. Read a few issues of his newspaper, and you will see
that he is deadly serious. He put out the newspaper at a
financial loss, and lived with his wife in isolation and
poverty at the edge of the Mohave desert. He was quite
sincere, and indignant at those who would make a joke of
the flat earth idea.
A rival theory. United Nations Flag.

A flat world order.
Johnson was infuriated at any mention of the Canadian, Leo
Ferrari, head of an organization simply called The Flat Earth Society. Ferrari taught in the philosophy
department of St. Thomas University. I'll give you a few gems from his promotional brochure:
We believe in terra firma, and the more firmer the less terror.
All science, like all philosophy and all religion is ultimately metaphorical and...reality is
essentially mystical and poetical.
Our aim is to restore man's faith in Common Sense... Seeing is believing. ...Man has been
blinded by metaphysics, brainwashed by popular fallacies and bullied into denying the evidence
of his very own eyes!
The cover of his brochure says "We're on the level." He once said, in an interview, that he had
traveled to the edge of the earth, which he defines as the edge of what he can see: Fogo Island, off the
coast of Newfoundland. There he gazed over the edge into the 'abysmal chasm'. "It was a horror," he
said. "I managed to grasp a stone for support." He carried that stone back with him, which he calls
'The Sacred Stone'.
I do not know to what extent Ferrari's efforts

were parody. But since the internet has made it
so easy for people to reach a worldwide
audience, several websites of flat earth
organizations have appeard, almost certainly
intended as satire.
Postscripts
March 2006.
Much has changed since I wrote the above

account. Bob Shadewald brought me up to date,
by supplying the following information. In late
September 1995, the Johnsons' home caught fire.
Charles managed to pull Marjory, by then a
semi-invalid on supplemental oxygen, to safety,
but everything else in the house was destroyed—
their personal possessions, the Flat Earth Society
library and archives, the membership list,
everything. Having no fire insurance, the
Johnsons were unable to rebuild. A dilapidated
old house trailer, bought as a storage shed,
survived the fire, and they took refuge there. A
few months later, Marjory fell and broke a hip.
She survived hip replacement surgery but never
recovered her strength. On May 16, 1996, she
died.
Charles Johnson immersed himself in rebuilding

the membership roster. Publication of the Flat
Earth News, in hiatus since 1994, was to resume Flyer of The Flat Earth Society.
Leo Ferrari, Canada.
with the December 1996 issue. But I have no
confirmation that it did.
Charles Johnson died in 2001. I hear rumors that some efforts have been made to find a new leader to
revive the organization, but I've seen no evidence that it has happened.
June 2015.
Eric Dubay seems to have revived the International Flat Earth Research Society. His website recycles
the classic arguments for an unmoving flat earth, and "refutes" arguments for a spherical, rotating
earth. He rejects gravity, and is clearly of the opinion that the round earth is a vast conspiracy to
delude everyone, promoted by Freemasons and NASA. He gives no convincing answer to the
question "Why would anyone go to that much trouble to promote any particular view of the cosmos?"
He admits he has no understanding of the mathematical arguments of conventional physics. He relies
instead on "common sense" analogies. Read his ebooks, web postings, and watch his videos as fine
exaples of "arguments from ignorance."
I still would like to see a debate between hollow earthers and flat earthers on the subject of the shape
of the earth. It would, I think, demonstrate how alike they are in the methods they use to support their
belief, and how they can use misinterpreted data and flawed arguments to arrive at mutually
contradictory conclusions.
Sources:
Cohen, Daniel. "Is the earth flat or hollow?" Science Digest, Nov. 1972, p. 62-66.
Cook, Philip. John Alexander Dowie's Theocracy. Zion Historical Society publication, Series 2.
1970. (pamphlet)
Darms, Rev. Anton. Life and Work of John Alexander Dowie. (pamphlet)
Davenport, Walter. "They call me a Flathead". Collier's, May 11, 1927.
DeFord, Charles S. A reparation: universal gravitation a universal fake. Fairfield, Wash., Ye
Galleon Press [1992] 62 p. illus., port. QB283.D44 1992 Reprint of the 3d ed. (New York,
Fortean Society, 1931), with a new introduction by Robert J. Schadewald.
Fiske, John. A Century of Science and Other Essays. Houghton, Mifflin, 1899. XIV. "Some
Cranks and their Crotchets." This essay also appears in Atlantic Monthly, March 1899, p. 292-
310. It discusses, among other things, the history of flat and hollow earth theories.
Flat Earth News. International Flat Earth Research Society.
Gardner, Martin. "Flat and hollow." In his Fads and fallacies in the name of science. [Rev. and
expanded ed.] New York, Dover Publications [1957] p. 16–27. Q173.G35 1957. Includes Voliva
and the Christian Apostolic Church in Zion, Ill.
Garwood, Christine. Flat Earth, The History of an Infamous Idea. Macmillian, 2007.
Gates, David, with Jennifer Smith. "Keeping the Flat-Earth Faith." Newsweek, July 2, 1984.
Gleason, Alex. Is the Bible from heaven? Is the earth a globe? 2d ed., rev. and enl. Buffalo,
N.Y., Buffalo Electrotype and Engraving Co. [1893] xix, 402 p. illus., map, col. plates, portraits.
QB638.G56
Kneitel, Tom. "WCBD, The 'Flat Earth' Radio Station". Popular Communications, June 1986.
Johnson, William J. "Flat Earth Society." SR (date?)
Leaves of Healing. (periodical, 1888- )
Moore, Patrick. "Better and flatter earths." In his Can you speak Venusian? A guide to the
independent thinkers. [Newton Abbot, David & Charles, 1972] p. 16–29. illus. QB52.M66 1972.
Pfarr, Jerry. "Utopia was 40 miles north of Chicago." Chicago News-Sun, Sat/Sun, July 15016,
1989, sec. 1.
Reinders, Robert C. "Training for a Prophet: The West Coast Missions of John Alexander
Dowie, 1888-1890." The Pacific Historian, Spring 1986. XXX, 1, p. 3.
[Rowbotham, Samuel B.] Zetetic astronomy. Earth not a globe. An experimental inquiry into the
true figure of the earth, proving it a plane, without orbital or axial motion, and the only known
material world; its true position in the universe, comparatively recent formation, present
chemical condition, and approaching destruction by fire, &c., &c. By "Parallax" [pseud.] The
illus. by George Davey. 3d ed., rev. and enl. London, Day, 1881. 430 p. illus. CaBViP; CtY; ICJ
Schadewald, Robert. "He knew Earth is round, but his proof fell flat." Smithsonian, April 1978.
p. 101-113. An account of the 1870 'Old Bedford Canal' challenge in which naturalist Alfred
Russel Wallace and flat-earther John Hampden measured the flatness of the water surface.
Schadewald, Robert. "The Flat-out Truth: Earth Orbits? Moon Landings? A fraud! Says This
Prophet. Science Digest, July 1980, p. 58-63. Web copy.
Schadewald, Robert. "Is the World in Curious Shape?" (Asimov's science fiction magazine?)
Schadewald, Robert. "Some Like it Flat." In Fringes of Reason by Ted Schultz, ed. New York:
Harmony Books, 1989, 86-88.
Taylor, Jabez. Wilbur Glenn Voliva. Zion Historical Society, Continuing History of Zion, 1901-
1961, Series 7. (pamphlet, no date)
Taylor, Jabez. A Visit to Zion's Historical Shiloh House. Zion Historical Society, Shiloh House.
(pamphlet, no date)
Wacker, Grant. "Marching to Zion." A/G Heritage. Part 1, Summer? 1986. Part 2. Fall, 1986.
Wallace, Irving. The Square Pegs. Alfred A. Knopf, 1957. Chapter 1. In Defense of the Square
Peg.
Williams, Marjorie I. "From Realism to Reality: the Followers of Dr. John Alexander Dowie."
M.A. Thesis, Rosary College, July 1963.
[Winship, Thomas] Zetetic cosmogony; or, Conclusive evidence that the world is not a rotating-
revolving-globe, but a stationary plane circle. By Rectangle [pseud.] 2d ed., enl. Durban, Natal,
T. L. Cullingworth, 1899. 192 p. QB638.W77 First published in 1897 (46 p. QB638.W769).
Disclaimer.
This document is a work in progress. Consider it a first or rough draft. Later versions will have more
specific references and footnotes.
Additional reading.
Is the earth a spinning, round ball? by Donald Simanek. The evidence is abundant for anyone to
observe.
The Flat Earth Bible by Robert J. Schadewald.
The Flat-out Truth: Earth Orbits? Moon Landings? A Fraud! Says This Prophet by Robert J.
Schadewald. A profile of Charles Johnson.
The Scriptural Basis for a Geocentric Cosmology by Glenn Elert.
The Flat Earth and its Advocates: A List of References, Library of Congress.
Hollow Earth Bibliography (plus Flat Earth too!) by Michael Rogero Brown.
This document ©2006 by Donald E. Simanek. Revised in

2016. Input and suggestions are welcome. Please use the
address to the right when responding, and please indicate the specific document of interest.
Return to Myths and Mysteries of Science.

Check out an alternative theory, The Hollow Earth.
Return to Donald Simanek's front page.

Aiman Hakim Bin Abdul Rahim PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aiman Hakim Bin Abdul Rahim PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ELC590

TEMPLATE: PREPARATION OUTLINE

Student’s Name : Aiman Hakim bin Abdul Rahim

Speech Title : Flat Earth Movement (FEM) Ban

(Monroe’s Motivated Sequence → Attention)

II. Reveal topic

Updated: 3 September 2018 Created by ELC590 Resource Team

(Monroe’s Motivated Sequence → Need)

(Monroe’s Motivated Sequence → Satisfaction)

Updated: 3 September 2018 Created by ELC590 Resource Team

(Monroe’s Motivated Sequence → Visualisation) ethos

(Monroe’s Motivated Sequence → Action)

Updated: 3 September 2018 Created by ELC590 Resource Team

ISSN: 1521-3269 (Print) 1532-785X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hmep20

Differential susceptibility to misleading flat earth

Asheley R. Landrum, Alex Olshansky & Othello Richards

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2019.1669461

© 2019 The Author(s). Published with

View supplementary material

Published online: 29 Sep 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 7234

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Differential susceptibility to misleading flat earth

YouTube aids in selective exposure

Knowledge deficit hypothesis

Differential susceptibility to media effects

Individual susceptibility variables

Moreover, science intelligence predicts acceptance of a variety of scientific

Specifically, we anticipate that people with increased conspiracy mentality

First, we anticipate that perceptions of argument strength will increase and

Moreover, consistent with Proposition 3 and Hypotheses 2 and 3, this

Other. Moreover, participants ranged in age: 6% were at least 60 years of age,

Study design and procedures

Participants in the “conspiracy” condition (depicted in Figure 1) saw a clip

Response state – argument strength and counterarguing

Cognitive response states and media effects are conditional on

Cognitive response state 1: argument strength

Cognitive response state 2: counterarguing

Media effect: openness to researching flat earth views

Cognitive response states act as mediators

Clip by Conspiracy Mentality

Bottom 25% Top 25%

Science Conspiracy Religious

Low Med High

2.5 0.0 2.5 2.5 0.0 2.5 2.5 0.0 2.5

Argument strength as the mediator

this relationship was conditional on conspiracy mentality (b = − 0.72, p = .002).

when science intelligence is low (b = 0.35, 95% CI[0.02, 0.75]), moderate

Counterargument as the mediator

Effects of the different appeals

Effects of individual dispositions

Implications for the knowledge deficit hypothesis

Implications for the DSMM model

Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional processes analysis:

TRENDING: Big Bang Cosmology in the Quran: A Response to Atheist ...

ABOUT  VIDEOS TOPIC INDEX BELIEFS  CONVERT STORIES 

It seems common these days for people with US

to be word-for-word revealed from the All-

unprincipled nature, otherwise they would SUBSCRIBE

WIKI-ISLAM AND FLAT Th