� · 75 YEARS OF THE BOMB · VACCINE HISTORY· RAISING T'- IE DEAD?

, ...A. a
.sl<:.�ptic.com

. .
; ... - . !

.•. •
EDITORIAL/ ADVISORY BOARD CONTENTS
Arthur Benjamin
Professor of Mathematics, COLUMN 25 The Testimony
Harvey Mudd College, Magician
of Witnesses:
Roger Bingham
Science Author & Tefev1s10n Essayist
4 The SkepDoc Raising the Dead
New Rumpelstiltskin? How Continuous Change, Discrete Events,
Napoleon Chagnon Gwyneth Paltrow Spins Straw into Gold and the Nature of Reality
Professor of Anthropology. UC. Santa Barbara
BY HARRIET HALL, M.D. BY TIM CALLAHAN
K.C. Cole
Science Wnter, Los Angeles Times
64 Authors & Contributors 41 Do Diversity Training
Richard Dawkins
Ementus Professor, Un1vers1/y of Oxford Programs Work?
Creating a Culture of Inclusion through
Jared Diamond
Professor of Geography & COVER ARTICLES: Scientific Reasoning
Environmental Ilea/th Sciences, UCLA
QANON & CONSPIRACY BY MONA SUE WEISSMARK

Clayton J. Drees THEORlES

Professor of History, Virgmia Wesleyan College 44 Unpacking Political Life in
Mark Edward 28 Conspiracy Theories America
Professional Magician & Mentalist
Why We Can't Unsee Patterns- The Skeptics Society's Social and
Gregory Forbes Real or Imagined-Once We See Them Political Attitudes Study
Professor of 810/ogy, BY MARSHALL MCCREADY, ANONDAH
Grand Rapids Commu1uty College BY ROBERT D. KIRVEL
SAIDE, AND KEVIN MCCAFFREE
John Gribbin
Astrophysicist & Science Wnter 34 QAnon in
48 How Do You Get People
William Jarvis Conspiratorial Context
Pres,c/ent, National Council Against Health BY MICHAEL SHERMER to Care About Truth in
Fraucf. Professor, Loma Linda Umvers1ty
Politics?
Lawrence M. Krauss
Theoretical Physicist,
36 QAnon is Just a Warmed BY GLEB TSIPURSKY

Arizona State University Over Witch Panic; and It's

Also Very Dangerous 54 Are Laws of Nature
Christal Koch
Professor of Cognll1ve & Behav10ra/ 810/ogy BY DANIEL LOXTON Discovered or Invented?
Ca/lforn1a fns/1/ute of· Technology BY SIMA DIMITRIJEV
William Mccomas
Director. pro1ect to advance Science Education
Un1vers1ty of Arkansas
100TH J SSU E SPECIAL REVIEWS
Bill Nye
Executive Director, The Planetary Society
20 The Art of the Skeptic 57 Cynically Skeptical
Leonard Mlodinow Finding Your Niche
Phys1c1st, Caltech A review of Cynical Theories: How
if You Love Both Science and Art Activist Scholarship Made Everything
Richard Olson BY PAT LINSE, WITH ADDITIONAL
Professor of History of Science, Harvey
About Race, Gender and Identity by
ILLUSTRATIONS BY DANIEL LOXTON
Mudd College, Claremont Graduate Schoof Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay.
REVIEWED BY GABRIEL ANDRADE
Donald Prothero
Professor of Geology, Cal Poly, Pomona

Nancy Segal
ARTICLES 59 The Gods of the West
Professor of Psychology, CSU. Fullerton A review of Return of the Strong Gods:
Eugenie Scott
7 Fat Man and Little Boy Nationalism, Populism, and the Future
(RetireclJ Executive D,rector. On the 75th Anniversary of Nuclear of the West by R.R. Reno.
Nat1onaf Center for Science Education
Weapons, a Moral Case for Their Use in REVIEWED BY GEORGE MICHAEL
Julia Sweeney Ending WWII and the Deterrence of
Wflter, Actor, Comedian
Great Power Wars since, and a Call to
Frank Sulloway Eventually Eliminate Them JUNIOR SKEPTIC
Research Scholar, MIT
BY MICHAEL SHERMER
Carol Tavris
65 The Honest Truth
Social Psyc/10/0{;1st IAuthor About Vaccines
16 The Rise and Fall of Charles BY DANIEL LOXTON
Stuart Vyse
Behav10raf Scientist, Author Willson Peale's Philadelphia
Museum Cover illustration by Pat Linse.
BY LEE ALAN DUGATKIN Original reference photo by Azret Ayubov.

volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 3

 COLUMN
The SkepDoc
New Rumpelstiltskin? How Gwyneth Paltrow
Spins Straw into Gold
BY HARRIET HALL, M.D.
THE PHENOMENAL SUCCESS OF GWYNETH
Paltrow's company Goop truly boggles
the mind. She has put a new spin on
nonsense and made gullibility and ig­
norance profitable. Is she a 21st century
Rumpelstiltskin?
In the fairy tale, Rumpelstiltskin had
the knack of spinning straw into gold. He
was a fictional character, but Gwyneth
Paltrow is very real, and her Goop empire
has spun her own brand of"wellness"
straw into financial gold. But the analogy
with Rumpelstiltskin is imperfect. Straw
is a real, material substance with many
uses; Goop is all about lifestyle and well­
ness. What Paltrow is selling is more of a
mishmash of nebulous, immaterial ideas.
Much of it is imaginary, and the claims
for her products are not based on reality.
The appeal is bard for a skeptic and scien­
tist like me to understand.
The name Goop with its negative
overtone is also puzzling. Why didn't Pal­
trow choose a more pleasant-sounding
name? When I learned the explanation, I
was disappointed. Apparently, someone
told her that all big internet companies
had two O's in their title, so she just
added her initials on either side of the
O's: ergo, Goop. If her name bad been
Dominique Monis (Doom) or Penelope
Perkins (Poop), Or Felicia Larkin (Fool)
would she have applied the same metric?
It must have been a good marketing deci­
sion because Goop quickly grew into a
$250 million corporation.
Gwyneth Paltrow's Godmother
The Goop phenomenon is not un­
precedented. A recent article in Smith­
sonian magazine tells the story of a
19th century forerunner, an American
woman the author dubbed "the spiri-
4 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
tual godmother of Gwyneth Paltrow"
(https://bit.ly/3foT8gV).
A century before today's celebrity
health gurus, this American business­
woman made a fortune marketing her­
self. Born Maude Mayberg in 1852, she
called herself Mada.me Yale. A former
homemaker with a talent for personal
branding, she gave public presentations
to preach her "Religion of Beauty:' She
sold a variety of lotions and potions that
she claimed had turned her from a sal­
low, fat, exhausted woman into the styl­
ish beauty that stood before them today.
I T malLers not from wh nl source the
Lroublc may arise. one bottle will
show a dec ided improve ment. 311d in
mosl cases n half dozen bottles will insure
n cure. But Indies nre ndvised lo conLinue
until at least one dozen bottle s have been
lnken.
11 g r
r!ui�:���
1 g 1 0
f� Gl) v� !:
�v\\J b� f0���� f�� 1 �-
unnecessary to quote the various form s o r
re m alc weakness. Fruilcura has a dis·
Linet aclion on the femal e svstem. o n d
reaches every weak po int, gi\lin g in!.lnn·
laneous rPlief and effecting o cure in C\'cry
instance.
DIRi!;CTTONS
Tnke one teaspoonful or Fruitcum three Limes
doily after meals. GrcoL care should be tnkcn in
the diet. Eve?)• womon should decide for herself
what agrees or what disngrccs with her stomnch.
Price of FRUITCUHA Sl.98 per bottle: 3 for $5. .>0
MME. M. YALE.
BEAUTY and COMPLEXION SPECIALIST
A label from a bottle of Madame Yale's
Fruitcura. The art has been recreated
for clarity from a low resolution photo.
'
Mada.me Yale, like Paltrow, was sell­
ing beauty, leading customers to believe
they could look like her if they used her
products. Both made claims of attaining
biochemical purity. One Goop product
claims to increase cell turnover and
detoxify pores. Mada.me Yale sold a blood
tonic that would "drive impurities from
tl1e system as the rain drives the debris
along the gutters."
Madame Yale's most advertised
product was Fruitcura, an elixir that she
had come upon during a dark period
when"my cheeks were sunken, eyes hol­
low and vacant in expression, and my
complexion was to all appearances hope­
lessly ruined. My suffering was almost
unbearable:· Fruitcura brought her from
"a life of despair into an existence of sun­
shine and renewed sensations of youth."
She said that helping her sisters in mis­
ery was a sacred purpose.
The pursuit of beauty might be dis­
paraged as vanity; but then, as today, pur­
suing wellness was considered not only
morally acceptable but laudable.
The FDA sued Madame Yale for
misbranding, seized her products, and
condemned them and her as frauds. She
was fined $500 and barred from selling a
third of her most popular products. Was
she a wellness visionary ahead of her
time, or a scam artist? She was both.
What is Goop?
So what, exactly, is Goop all about? It
calls itself a lifestyle and wellness com­
pany. "We operate from a place of cu­
riosity and nonjudgment, and we start
hard conversations, crack open taboos,
and look for connection and resonance
everywhere we can find it," the com­
pany advertises, and "we believe that
people can take what serves them and
leave what doesn't."
That explains why scientists and
skeptics object to Goop. No judgment,
no looking at evidence, no asking what
is effective, no prioritizing reality over
fantasy; just "looking for connection
and resonance." And people are encour­
aged to take what they imagine "serves"
them (makes them feel good?) rather
than asking what is true.
An Empire is Born
Goop started as a newsletter and quickly
developed into a vast enterprise with a
website, an online shop, a print maga­
zine, a podcast, a boutique, and a docu­
mentary series on Netflix. The company
is now worth a quarter of a billion dollars.
It even held a one-day wellness sum­
mit, which quickly sold out despite charg­
ing $500-$1500 per ticket. It featured a
flavored oxygen bar, aura readings, an IV
drip bar, wellness activations, a Workout
Shop, a Clean Beauty Apothecary shop,
bee pollen smoothies, kale ice cream, an
elaborate swag bag, a free worry bracelet
for each attendee, and panels where Pal­
trow herself chatted with girlfriends about
leech facials and with psychotherapists
about the importance of allowing yourself
to be imperfect. People magazine covered
the conference 1 documenting "the crazi­
est things we witnessed" and noting that
99% of the attendees were female.
Products Sold on Goop
Goop first became notorious for selling
jade eggs to insert into the vagina to
"improve your sex life, balance your
menstrual cycles, and intensify your
feminine energy." After the claims got
them reported for deceptive advertising,
the company was sued and agreed to pay
$145,000, issued refunds to customers,
and deleted all such health claims for
the jade egg from its advertising.2 That
little stumble didn't hurt the company
as they could easily afford to pay the
penalty, bad publicity is good for busi­
ness, and despite Health magazine ad­
vising women "don't put one in your
vagina:· they're still selling jade eggs.
It's fascinating to peruse the hun­
dreds of products sold in Goop's online
shop. For instance, "G.Tox Detoxifying
Superpowder" is a mixture of detoxifying
Goop Wellness
nutrients and botanical extracts to help Products
neutralize dietary and environmental
toxins for healthy, vibrant skin. Price:
$60 for a month's supply.
Among categories under the "Shop"
$66.
tab, you can choose Aromatherapy or JADE
EGG
Cosmic Health. Or you can see what Pal­ Harness the
trow chooses in the "GP Picks" category. power of
Among those are a "This Smells like My energy work,
crystal healing,
Vagina" candle for $75, a Goop University and a Kegel­
sweatshilt for $195, acupressure rings like physical
practice. $27 PSYCHIC
($55), a handblown carafe ($1320 ), a Keep it in VAMPIRE REPELLENT
or on a An energy-refreshing scent
powder to make 20 servings of saffron space that with a tendenc
latte ($64), an amethyst crystal-infused is sacred
to you or
water bottle to help you tap into your has good
own intuition ($84), a set of 49 "Inner vibes
Compass Cards" to guide your intuition
($55), a Travel Meditation Kit ($119), a
Firewood Tote ($499), a yoga mat ($128),
a bamboo toothbrush ($8), and all kinds
of supplements, detox products, ques­
tionable wellness books such as The
Longevity Diet and Hero Foods, over­
priced clothing with pictures of Paltrow
wearing them to make them look more
attractive, and much more. The products
are mainly aimed at women, but they
don't neglect men ("G.Tox Himalayan
Salt Scalp Scrub Shampoo" for $42).
The candle that "Smells like My $68 ROSE
QUARTZ
Vagina" started out as a joke and was CRYSTAL
sold for $75, and, unbelievably, it (and
quickly sold out and was then offered t ... polished
steel)
ico. � "�"
on eBay for $250. �
STRAW.
Said to
An article on their website tells you radiate a
$34. OIL PULLING KIT
"How to have fulfilling phone sex:• Maybe (Lip balm/Oil/bamboo
heart­
opening,
that came in handy for singles during the spoon) Refresh the breath
calming
and remove excess oral
COVID-19 social isolation. buildup by swishing
vibe.
flavored coconut oil
around your mouth for
The Goop Lab 5 to 20 minutes.
The six episodes of the Netflix series
Goop Lab are a showcase in human gulli­
bility. Paltrow and other Goop executives
listen to nonsense and try out implausi­
ble things for themselves. Considering
Paltrow's enthusiastic recommendations
for vaginal steaming and jade vaginal
eggs, it is hilarious to hear her admit that
she didn't know what a vagina was: she
didn't know what "vulva" meant and she
always thought "vagina" meant the whole
$46. GLORIA STEINEM TEA SET. Three flavors (2.8
thing. She thanks her informant for the oz. each) Chosen to evoke feelings of determina­
anatomy lesson! tion, drive, and can-do-it energy.
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 5
 Episode 1 sent staffers to a retreat
in Jamaica to take psychedelic mush­
rooms, which are legal there. We see
them giggling uncontrollably, breaking
down in tears, and afterwards we hear
them say how they felt the experience
was healing. Magic mushroom therapy
remains very controversial. It produces
hallucinations and is sometimes per­
ceived as life-altering; but it commonly
causes vomiting, diarrhea, cramps, and
muscle weakness, and can even cause
psychosis. Researchers at Johns Hop­
kins reported a high incidence of "bad
trips", with nearly 11 percent of users
reporting that they put themselves or
others at risk for physical harm. 3
In episode 2, "Cold Comfort;· the
extreme athlete Wim Hof teaches partic­
ipants to tolerate sitting naked in the
snow and plunging into frigid water.
(Well, not completely naked; they did
wear skimpy swimsuits.) He says the
breathing method he teaches will raise
the body's pH. Well, duh! But that's not a
good thing. Hyperventilation produces
respiratory alkalosis, one of the four
basic categories of disruption of acid­
base homeostasis. It is an abnormal con­
dition that causes lightheadedness,
tingling, and muscle spasms in the hands
and feet. In the episode, one participant
reports those symptoms and says it feels
just like her panic attacks, but without
the emotion. If continued long enough,
hyperventilation can make you pass out.
Because of that possibility, Wim Hof
rightly cautions against using his method
when driving or diving. After passing
out, normal pH balance is quickly re-es­
tablished by the body's normal compen­
satory mechanisms.
Episode 3 covers female sexuality,
telling women they need permission to
experience sexual pleasure and need to
be taught how to have orgasms. Isn't
that demeaning and sexist? It features
a roomful of naked women and photos
showing the variations in appearance of
the normal vulva, so that might appeal
to some prurient viewers.
Episode 4 is about anti-aging claims.
A blood test of"biological age" is applied
to Paltrow and staff members before and
after they go on a short trial of a diet tl1at
6 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
is supposed to have anti-aging effects.
Sure enough, five days of a low-calorie
vegan diet and other brief interventions
are followed by slight decreases in the
blood test results. But there is no accurate
test of "biological age," and it really
doesn't have any scientific meaning. An
online quiz said my biological age was 59;
I'm 74 and some days I feel like 94.
In episode 5, energy healers work on
staff members. A chiropractor touches a
patient and then "moves the energy
around" with his hands three feet away
from the patient's body, which he claims
is where the energy can be felt most
strongly. Staff members cooperate by
writhing around, groaning, and reporting
how they feel. It's all imagination: there is
no such thing as a human energy field,
and tests have shown that practitioners
are fooling themselves. The chiropractor
tries to explain the scientific basis of how
it works but only succeeds in making a
fool of himself and demonstrating his ig­
norance of quantum physics.
Episode 6 is all about intuition. It
claims everyone is intuitive and can
communicate with the dead. It features
a medium and a parapsychologist: that
probably says all you need to know. The
medium did a cold reading on a staff
member that was inadvertently hilari­
ous and self-refuting. Every suggestion
from her cold reading was emphatically
rejected by the staffer and then another
staffer spoke up to say the medium had
obviously been in contact with her re­
cently deceased grandmother! "That
happens sometimes," the medium ex­
plained. Sure it does.
Jonathan Jarry, of McGill Universi­
tiy's Office for Science and Society in
Montreal, Canada, criticized the series
for its "coronation of personal experi­
ence;' for suggesting that the subjective
experiences of a few select individuals
can mean more than the results of ran­
domized, controlled clinical trials.4
Criticism
Critical reactions by scientists and doctors
were quick and devastating. Goop-bashing
became a popular sport. Goop-bashing
with logic and evidence may not accom­
plish much, but it is fun and may influ-
ence those whose minds have not already
been irretrievably Gooped up.
When Goop praised coffee enemas
as a good way to "supercharge your an­
nual goop detox;' Edzard Ernst dubbed it
"a triumph of ignorance over science."
Gwyneth Paltrow was ridiculed for
recommending vaginal steaming, which
involves squatting over a basin of hot
water and herbs for 30 minutes or so. She
thinks it can relieve menstrual cramps,
cleanse the vagina and uterus, boost fertil­
ity, and even relieve headaches. Gyn ecolo­
gists quickly protested, saying that it had
no health benefits and was dangerous, po­
l
tentialy causing bw·ns and infections.
Goop claims to empower women,
but gynecologist Jen GUilter pointed out
that "Giving people incorrect informa­
tion is the opposite of empowerment."
Paltrow thinks the criticism in the
media is unfair, saying it is just oppor­
tunistic clickbait.5 She insists Goop is not
giving health advice. Maybe not techni­
cally, but it is advertised as a "wellness"
site, and what is wellness if not a synonym
for health? Each episode of "The Goop
Lab" is preceded by a disclaimer that it is
for entertainment and information only.
It would more properly read "for disinfor­
mation and indulgence of fantasies only."
Queen Midas?
After careful consideration, I think Pal­
trow would be better compared to King
Midas than to Rumpelstiltskin: everything
she touches turns to gold. King Midas died
of starvation; but so far, criticism and law­
suits haven't managed to affect her goopy
endeavors. The FDA stopped her "spiritual
godmother" Madame Yale, but nothing
seems able to touch Paltrow.
Michael Shermer's book explained
Why People Believe Weird Things, but the
prodigious success of Goop still baffles
me. I guess it shouldn't; after all, there are
plenty of people who still believe vaccines
cause autism and that the earth is £lat. El
REFERENCES
1. https://bit.ly/2Ugeqip
2. https://bitly/373zs9n)
3. https://bit.ly/2XEQWWx)
4. https://bit.ly/3gYKa5p).
5. https://bit.ly/2AFcXLR).

Fat Man and Little Boy
On the 75th Anniversary of Nuclear Weapons, a Moral Case
for Their Use in Ending WWII and the Deterrence of Great
Power Wars Since, and a Call to Eventually Eliminate Them
THREE QUARTERS OF A CENTURY AGO THIS SUMMER,
on July 16, August 6, August 9, and September 2,
nuclear weapons altered our civilization forever. On
July 16, in New Mexico, the Trinity plutonium
bomb detonated with the energy equivalent of 22
kilotons (22,000 metric tons) of TNT, sending a
mushroom cloud 39,000 feet into the atmosphere,
left a crater 76 meters wide filled with radioactive
glass called trinitite (melted quartz grained sand),
and could be heard as far away as El Paso, Texas. On
August 6, the Little Boy gun-type uranium-235
bomb exploded with an energy equivalent of 16-18
kilotons of TNT, flattening 69 percent of Hiroshi­
ma's buildings and killing an estimated 80,000 peo­
ple and injuring another 70,000. On August 9, the
Fat Man plutonium implosion-type bomb with the
energy equivalence of 19-23 kilotons of TNT was
dropped and leveled around 44 percent of Nagasaki,
killing an estimated 35,000 to 40,000 people and
severely wounding another 60,000. 1
As documented in the memo below dated Au­
gust 10, 1945, if the Japanese had not surrendered, the
head of the Manhattan Project, Major General Leslie
On July 16, the Trinity plutonium bomb detonated with the energy equivalent of 22 kilotons (22,000 metric
tons) of TNT. This is the explosion at 16 milliseconds.
ARTICLE
BY MICHAEL SHERMER
R. Groves, had another Fat Man-type plutonium im­
plosion bomb ready to go after August 24 that would
have likely killed another 50,000 to 100,000 people. 2
And had the Japanese military hardliners had their
way to continue the war into the fall, Groves had
three more bombs readied for September and another
three for October. So President Harry Truman was
not exaggerating when he threatened Japan with "a
rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never
been seen on this Earth." Truman did agonize about
dropping more nukes on Japan, troubled as he was by
the thought of more innocents and non-combatants
being killed, and he wrestled away from the military
the authority to do so (note Groves' handwritten ad­
dendum to his memo that "It is not to be released on
Japan without express authority from the President"
Ever since U.S. presidents have had sole authority to
use nuclear weapons). This was unnecessary, how­
ever, as on August 15 Emperor Hirohito, against rhe
wishes of some of Japan's military leaders, announced
on the radio that Japan would capitulate. On Septem­
ber 2, they signed the surrender documents in Tokyo
Bay, ending the Second World War. 3
volume 25 number 4 20 20 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 7
 Hiroshima: The aftermath of Little Boy. https://bit.ly/3gqEglH
On August 6, the Little Boy gun-type uranium-235
bomb exploded with an energy equivalent of 16-18
kilotons of TNT, flattening 69 percent of Hiroshima's
buildings and killing an estimated 80,000 people
and injuring another 70,000. https://bit.ly/ 3Igv7X1

On August 9, the Fat Man plutonium implosion-type

bomb with the energy equivalence of 19-23 kilotons
of TNT leveled around 44 percent of Nagasaki, killing
an estimated 35,000 to 40,000 people and severely
wounding another 60,000. https://bit.ly/2D3dSHu Before and aftermath of Nagasaki bombing. https://bit.ly/2EwP4rC

8 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020


On this 75th anniversary of the summer of the
bomb I want to make the case that their use was nec­
essary to end the war, that their continued existence
has acted as a deterrence against another Great Power
war, but that we must eliminate them entirely for the
long-term existence of our civilization, and possibly
our species.
* * * The nexti bomb of the implosion typo ha.cl been
Since 1945 a cadre of critics have proffered the claim
that atomic bombs were unnecessary to bring about
the end of World War II (or, at least, the Fat Man Na­
gasaki bomb was superfluous), and thus this act was
immoral, illegal, or even a crime against humanity.
Robert Oppenheimer and other physicists like Leo
Szilard who worked on the Manhattan Project ex­
pressed reservations. "The physicists have known sin;'
Oppenheimer opined. He went to Truman and con­
fessed "Mr. President. I feel I have blood on my
hands," to which the President recalled "I told him the
blood was on my hands-to let me worry about that:'
Truman promptly dismissed Oppenheimer and told
Secretary of State Dean Acheson "I don't want to see
that son-of-a-bitch in this office ever again." 4
In 1946 the Federal Council of Churches issued a
statement declaring, "As American Christians, we are
deeply penitent for the irresponsible use already made
of the atomic bomb. We are agreed that, whatever be
one's judgment of the war in principle, the surprise
bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are morally in­
defensible."5 In 1967, the linguist and leftist politico
Noam Chomsky called the two bombings "the most
unspeakable crimes in histmy." 6
More recently, in an otherwise deeply insightful
history of genocide titled Worse Than War, tl1e histo­
rian Daniel Goldhagen opens his analysis by calling
U.S. President Harry Truman "a mass murderer" be­
cause in ordering the use of atomic weapons he "chose
to snuff out the lives of approximately 300,000 men,
women and children." Goldhagen opines that "it is
hard to understand how any right-thinking person
could fail to call slaughtering unthreatening Japanese
mass murder:' 7 In morally equating Harry Truman
with Adolf Hitler, JosephSta.Jin, Mao Zedong, and Pol
Pot, Goldhagen allows himself to be constrained by
the categorical thinking that prevents one from dis­
cerning the different kinds, levels, and motives of
genocide (although he does this for other mass
killings). If one defines "genocide" broadly enough, as
when Goldhagen equates it with "mass murder"
(without ever defining what, exactly, that means) then
nearly every act of killing large numbers of people
DtCLASSIFllD - _
1
WAR DEPARTMENT
u»t°..''"'g�d.,
. .. . (t§'19 •1
WASHINGTON 81 _'i.[ NAR:i, oa,,.�:Z.'l.
10 August 1945.
Chief of Stu.ff,
?.filt.i0Rii.JiDU�1 1'0:
:;cheduled to be retLdy for del ivery on the taq;et on the first
good weather after 24 kl.gust 1945. lle have gained 4 days in
ma nufaoturu and expect to ship from New Mexico on 12 or 13
August the final compononts. Providing there are no unfore­
soen difficul tics in ma nufacture, in transportation to the
theatre or 111,fter arrival in the theatre. tho bomb should be
ready fC'lr tlolivory on the first suit11.ble woather after 17 or
18 August.
Had the Japanese military hardliners had their way to continue the war into
the fall, Groves had three more bombs readied for September and another
three for October. Here he instructs his Chief of Staff that the next bomb will
be ready to drop after August 24. Emperor Hirohito capitulated on August 15,
thereby saving millions of lives of his citizens.
could be considered genocidal because there are only
two categories-mass murder and non-mass murder.
The virtue of continuous thinking allows us to
distinguish the differences between types of mass
killings (some scholars define genocide as one-sided
killing by armed people of unarmed people), their
context (during a state war, civil war, ethnic cleans­
ing), motivations (termination of hostilities or exter­
mination of a people), and quantities (hundreds to
millions) along a sliding scale. In 1946, the Polish ju­
rist Raphael Lemkin created the term genocide and
defined it as "a conspiracy to exterminate national, re­
ligious or racial groups."8 That same year the U.N.
General Assembly defined genocide as "a denial of tl1e
right of existence of entire human groups."9 More re­
cently, in 1994 the highly respected philosopher
Steven Katz defined genocide as "the actualization of
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 9
 the intent, however successfully carried out, to murder in its totality any na­
tional, ethnic, racial, religious, political, social, gender or economic group." 10
By these definitions, the dropping of Fat Man and Little Boy were not acts
of genocide, and the difference between Truman and the others is in the context
and the motivation of the act, apparent in the subtitle of Goldhagen's book:
"Genocide, Eliminationism, and the Ongoing Assault on Humanity." In their
genocidal actions against targeted people, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot had as
their objective the total elimination of a group. The killing would only stop
when every last pursued person was exterminated (or if the perpetrators were
stopped or defeated). Truman's goal in dropping the bombs was to end the war
with Japan (which it did), not to eliminate the Japanese people (which it didn't).
That the U.S. provided considerable financial, personnel, and material support
to help rebuild Japan into a world economic power puts the lie to the elimina­
tionist accusation.11
More broadly, if we ground morality in the survival and flourishing of sen­
tient beings, 12 by that measure, then not only did Fat Man and Little Boy end
the war and stop the killing, they saved lives, very probably millions of lives,
both Japanese and American. My father, Richard Shermer, was possibly one

(Top left) (A)

The author's
father, Richard
Shermer, in
1945, serving
aboard the USS
Wren (B), a Navy
destroyer de­
ployed to protect
aircraft carriers
from suicidal
Kamikaze pilots
while their planes
bombarded
the Japanese
homeland in
preparation for
the invasion that
never came,
thanks to Fat Man
and Little Boy.
https://bit.ly/31i
C QHdq

......
Photos C, D, E, and F were taken by Richard Shermer on board the USS
Wren. (Above) E and F: the Wren pictured fore and aft. C: the aircraft car­
rier USS Lexington, which the Wren protected. D: arriving in Tokyo Bay in
late August, 1945 in preparation for the surrender ceremony on Septem­
ber 2, marking the end of the Second World War.

10 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020

 such survivor. During the Second World War he
served aboard the USS Wren (DD-568), a Fletcher­
class destroyer assigned to escort aircraft carriers and
other large capital ships to protect them from Japan­
ese submarines and especially to shoot down
Kamikaze planes on what was called antiaircraft
radar picket watch. His ship was so attacked several
times but sustained no major damage. The Wren, in
fact, was part of the larger fleet that was working its
way toward Japan, protecting the carriers whose
planes were bombarding theJapanese homeland in
preparation for the planned invasion. My father told
me that everyone onboard dreaded that day because
they had heard of the horrific carnage resulting from
the invasion of just two tiny islands held by the
Japanese-IwoJima and Okinawa-and if that was
any indication of what was to come with a full-scale
invasion, the contemplation of it was almost too
much to bear.13
During the invasion of lwoJima there were ap­
proximately 26,000 American casualties that included
6,821 dead in the 36-day battle. How fiercely did the
Japanese defend that little volcanic rock 700 miles
fromJapan? Of the 22,060Japanese soldiers assigned
to fight to the bitter end, only 216 survived.14 The sub­
sequent battle for Okinawa, only 340 miles from the
Japanese mainland, was fought even more ferociously,
resulting in a staggering body count of 240,931 dead,
including 77,166 Japanese soldiers, 14,009 American
soldiers, plus an additional 149,193 Japanese civilians
living on the island who either died fighting or com­
mitted suicide rather than let themselves be cap­
tured.15 With an estimated 2.3 million Japanese
soldiers and 28 millionJapanese civilian militia pre­
pared to defend their island nation to the death,16 it
was clear to all what an invasion of the Japanese main­
land would entail.
It is from these cold hard facts that Truman's advi­
sors estimated that between 250,000 and one million
American lives would be lost in an invasion ofJapan,
nicknamed Operation Doivnfall. 17 General Douglas
MacArthur estimated that there could be a 22:1 ratio
of Japanese to American deaths, which translates to a
minimum death toll of 5.5 million Japanese. 18 By com­
parison-cold though it may sound-the body count
from both atomic bombs-about 200,000-300,000
total (Hiroshima: 90,000-166,000 deaths, Nagasaki:
60,000-80,000 deaths19 )-was a bargain.
In any case, if Truman hadn't ordered the bombs
dropped, General Curtis LeMay and his fleet ofB-29
bombers would have continued pummeling Tokyo and
other Japanese cities into rubble. When asked to pre­
dict when the war would end based on his bombing
Mass bombing of Tokyo. On the night of March 9-10, 1945, 279 B-29s
dropped 1,665 tons of bombs on Tokyo, leveling 15.8 square miles of the
city, killing 88,000 people, injuring another 41,000, and leaving another mil­
lion homeless. This is the result. https://bit.ly/2Ywc510
program, LeMay said September 1, because that was
when there would be nothing left ofJapan to bomb.
And the death toll from conventional bombing would
have been just as high as that produced by the two
atomic bombs, if not higher, given the fact that previ­
ous mass bombing raids had produced Hiroshima-level
death rates, plus the likelihood that more than just two
cities would have been destroyed before the Japanese
surrendered. Compare, for example, LittleBoy's energy
equivalent of 16,000-19,000 tons of TNT to the U.S.
Strategic Bombing Survey estimate that this was the
equivalent of 220B-29s carrying 1,200 tons of incendi­
ary bombs, 400 tons of high-explosive bombs, and 500
tons of anti-personnel fragmentation bombs, with an
equivalent number of casualties.ZO In fact, on the night
of March 9-10, 1945, 279 B-29s dropped 1,665 tons of
bombs on Tokyo, leveling 15.8 square miles of the city,
killing 88,ooo people, injuring another 41,000, and
leaving another million homeless.21
These facts also help refute the claim that the
alternative scenario of dropping an atomic bomb on
an uninhabited island to demonstrate its destructive
force would have worked to convince theJapanese to
surrender. Given that they refused to capitulate even
after numerous cities were obliterated by conventional
bombs and Hiroshima was erased from the map by an
atomic bomb it seems unlikely this more benign strat­
egy would have worked.22
On balance, then, dropping the atomic bombs
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 11
 was the least destructive of the options on the table.
Although we wouldn't want to call it a moral act, it
was in the context of the time the least immoral act by
the criteria of lives saved. That said, we should also
recognize that the several hundred thousand killed is
still a colossal loss of life, and the fact that the invisible
killer of radiation continued its effects long after the
bombings should dissuade us from ever using such
weapons again. Along that sliding scale of evil, in the
context of one of the worst wars in human hist01y that
included the singularly destructive Holocaust of six
million murdered, it was not, pace Chomsky, the most
unspeakable crime in history-not even close-but it
was an event in the annals of humanity never to be for­
gotten and, hopefully, never to be repeated.
* * * President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair
When I was an undergraduate at Pepperdine Univer­
sity in 1974, the father of the hydrogen bomb-Ed­
ward Teller-spoke at our campus when he was
awarded an honorary doctorate. His message was
that deterrence works, even though at the time I re­
member thinking-like so many politicos were say­
ing-"yeah, but a single slipup is all it takes." Popular
films such as Fail Safe and Dr. Strangelove reinforced
the point. But the blunder never came (and the
close-calls were kept secret for decades). In the game
theoretic strategy of Mutual Assured Destruction
(MAD), deterrence works because neither side has
anything to gain by initiating a first strike against the
other nation as long as the retaliatory capability of
both is such that a first strike would most likely lead
to the utter annihilation of both countries (along
with much of the rest of the world). "It's not mad!"
proclaimed Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNa­
mara. "Mutual Assured Destruction is the foundation
of deterrence. Nuclear weapons have no military util­
ity whatsoever, excepting only to deter one's oppo­
nent from their use. Which means you should never,
never, never initiate their use against a nuclear­
equipped opponent. If you do, it's suicide."23
The logic of deterrence was first articulated in
1946 by the American military strategist Bernard
Brodie in his appropriately titled book The Absolute
Weapon, in which he noted the break in history that
atomic weapons brought with their development:
"Thus far the chief purpose of om military establish­
ment has been to win wars. From now on, its chief
purpose must be to avert them. It can have almost no
other purpose."24 As Dr. Strangelove explained in
Stanley Kubrick's classic Cold War film: "Deterrence is
the art of producing in the mind of the enemy the fear
12 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
to attack." Said enemy, of course, must know that you
have at the ready such destructive devices, and that is
why "The whole point of a doomsday machine is lost if
you keep it a secret/"25
Dr. Strangelove was a black comedy that parodied
MAD by showing what can happen when things go
terribly wrong, in this case when General Jack D. Rip­
per becomes unhinged at the thought of "Communist
infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist
subversion, and the international Communist conspir­
acy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily flu­
ids" and orders a nuclear first strike against the Soviet
Union. Given this unfortunate incident and knowing
that the Russkis know about it and will therefore retal­
iate, General "Buck"Turgidson pleads with the presi­
dent to go all out and launch a full first strike. "Mr.
mussed, but I do say no more than ten to twenty mil­
lion killed, tops, uh, depending on the breaks."26
This isn't far off real projected casual ties (Kubrick
was a student of Cold War strategy), as in 1957 Strate­
gic Air Command (SAC) estimated that between 360
and 525 million casualties would be inflicted in the
first week of a nuclear exchange with the Soviet
block. 27 In 1968 former Secretary of Defense Robert
McNamara gave these figures for MAD to work: "In
the case of the Soviet Union, I would judge that a ca­
pability on our part to destroy, say, one-fifth to one­
fourth of their population and one-half of her
industrial capacity would serve as an effective deter­
rent" (with a population of the time of about 128 mil­
lion, this translates to 25-32 million dead).28 A 1979
report from the Office of Technology Assessment for
the U. S. Congress, entitled The Effects of Nuclear War,
estimated that 155 to 165 million Americans would die
in an all-out Soviet first strike (unless people made use
of existing shelters near tl1eir homes, reducing fatali­
ties to 110-120 million). The population of the U. S. at
the time was 225 million, so the estimated percent
that would be killed ranged from 49 percent to 73 per­
cent. Staggering.
Deterrence has worked so far-no nuclear
weapon has been detonated in a conflict of any kind in
75 years-but it would be foolish to think of deter­
rence as a permanent solution.29 As long ago as 1795,
in an essay titled Perpetual Peace, Immanuel Kant
worked out what such deten-ence ultimately leads to:
''A war, therefore, which might cause the destruction
of both parties at once . . . would permit the conclusion
of a perpetual peace only upon the vast burial-ground
of the human species."30 (Kant's book title can1e from
an innkeeper's sign featuring a cemetery-not the type
of perpetual peace most of us strive for.) Deterrence
acts as only a temporary solution to the
Hobbesian temptation to strike first (also
called the security dilemma in which a na­ Progress in Peace
tion arming in defense triggers other na­ The Decline in Global Nuclear Stockpiles
tions to also arm in defense), allowing both
Leviathans to go about their business in rela­
80,000�-------------------------
tive peace, settling for small proxy wars,
which themselves have been in decline for
decades. 31

* * *
70,0001------------------
In the long mn we need to work toward a Global peak
inventory in 1986
world free of nuclear weapons. The risk of at 70,000
accidents or a deranged Dr. Strangelove-type
character triggering a nuclear exchange is
too high for a MAD deterrence strategy to
be a permanent solution to the security
dilemma it was invented to solve. Authors
such as Richard Rhodes in his nuclear tetral­
ogy (The Making of the Atomic Bomb, Darlz
50,000
Sun, Arsenals of Folly, and The Twilight of the
Bombs32 ), and Eric Schlosser in Command <I)

and Control, 33 leave readers with vertigo C:

�
knowing how many close calls there have co
I
I\
\
I \
been. To name but a few: the jettisoning of a ro
I \
I I
40,000
Mark IV atomic bomb in British Columbia u
Q) I \
I \
I \
:::,
in 1950; the crash of a B-52 carrying two C:
d States / \
Mark 39 nuclear bombs in North Carolina; in 1967 / \
the Cuban Missile Crisis; the Able Archer 83 31,255 / \l
Exercise in Western Europe that the Soviets '
/

30,000 i--------�1--\------..''----- LI ____...,____

:
misread as the buildup to a nuclear strike l

against them; the Titan II Missile explosion \

\
\
in Damascus, Arkansas, that narrowly \ f,
\ I\
avoided eradicating the entire city off the \ I \
'-.! ',
map; and Stanislav Petrov's decision not to ',,
\

trigger a retaliatory strike against the U.S.

\
based on reports from the Soviet early warn­ \
\

ing satellite system of incoming ballistic

missiles-it is not for nothing that Petrov is \
\
\

known as "the man who saved the world."34

\

-·· -----1,�
Thus, in the long run we must get to I
I
Nuclear Zero, but in the short run there are I

so many hurdJes that few think we are any­

where near such a lofty goal. ln two episodes
of my Science Salon podcast, Fred Kaplan,
the national security journalist and author of
several books on nuclear weapons, and
William J. Perry, Secretary of Defense under
President Clinton and a staunch advocate The decline in the total number of nuclear warheads to around 16,000 from
for eliminating nuclear weapons, both told the peak of around 70,000 in 1986. From The Moral Arc by Michael Shermer.
me that they did not think this could hap­ New York, 2015. Henry Holt, 66.
pen any time soon, even while their books

volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 13

 outline how it could be done. 35 In The Moral Arc I sum­
marized tl1e consensus among experts on ilie most im­
portant steps to take to reduce the risk of nuclear
weapons and to work toward a world free of iliem, in­
cluding: (1) enact a "no first use" policy; (2) take all
weapons off of "launch on warning"; (3) increase ilie
warning and decision times for launching a retaliatory
strike; (4) remove from ilie President ilie sole auilior­
ity to la1mch nuclear weapons; (5) uphold non-prolif­
eration agreements; (6) widen the taboo from using
nuclear weapons to owning iliem; (7) economic inter­
dependence; (8) expand democratic governance; (9)
reduce spending on nuclear weapons; and (10) con­
tinue the disarmament of existing nuclear weapons.
To that end, it is encouraging to see ilie decline in tl1e
total number of nuclear warheads to around 16,000
from the peak of around 70,000 in 1986, as visualized
in ilie figure above.36
I should mention iliat some security scholars,
along wiili many political ilieorists and leaders, iliink
that the path to peace is more deterrence through
more and better nuclear weapons. President Trump,
for example, insists on renovating our aged nuclear
weapons systems to ilie tune of $1.2 trillion between
2017 and 2046,37 an upgrade program he inherited
from President Obama. And despite winning the
Nobel Peace Prize for working toward nuclear nonpro­
liferation, Obama neverilieless backed off from initiat­
ing a "no first use" policy under pressure from our
NATO allies, who were worried iliat Russian saber rat­
tling and border expansion might be encouraged if an
escalation from conventional to nuclear weapons was
no longer on ilie defense table. 38
Similarly, the late political scientist Kenneth
Waltz iliought iliat allowing Iran to go nuclear would
bring stability to ilie Middle East because "in no oilier
region of ilie world does a lone, unchecked nuclear
state exist. It is Israel's nuclear arsenal, not Iran's desire
for one, iliat has contributed most to ilie current crisis.
Power, after all, begs to be balanced."39 Except for
when it doesn't, as in the post-1991 period after the
collapse of the Soviet Union and the unipolar domi­
nance of the United States. No other medium-size
power rose to fill tl1e vacuum, no rising power started
wars of conquest to consolidate more power, and ilie
only oilier candidate, China, has remained war-free for
almost four decades. And given Iran's outlier status in
ilie international system and ilieir avowed promise to
"wipe off ilie map" Israel, anyone who would join a
Fair-Play-for-Nuclear-Iran-Committee has lost ilieir
moral compass.
This all just shows how difficult it is going to be to
get to a world witl1out nukes.Neverilieless, we have to
14 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
try. One more statistic is sobering in iliis regard, as
noted by ilie anti-nuclear scientist and activist David
Barash: The U.S. has a triad of nuclear weapons of
land (missiles), air (bombers), and sea (submarines).
A single Trident sub carries 20 nuclear-tipped missiles,
each one of which has eight independently targetable
warheads of about 465 kilotons, or about 30 times ilie
destructive power of Little Boy. So one sub packs 20 x
8 x 30 = 4,800 Hiroshimas. We have 18 Trident sub­
marines, so iliat is ilie equivalent of 86,400 Hiroshi­
mas! 40 In ilie words of President Obama during a
briefing about our nuclear capability: "Let's stipulate
iliat tlus is all insane."41
The use of nuclear weapons for boili ending wars
and deterring iliem is a 2oili century phenomenon
tl1at can be phased out for the new century. As ilie po­
litical scientist Christopher Fettweis notes in his book
Dangerous Times?, despite the popularity of such intu­
itive notions as the "balance of power"-based on a
small number of non-generalizable cases from ilie past
that are in any case no longer applicable to ilie pres­
ent-so-called "clashes of civilization" like the world
wars of the 20th century are extremely unlikely to
happen in the highly interdependent world of the 21st
century. In fact, Fettweis shows, never in history has
such a high percentage of the world's population lived
in peace, conflicts of all forms have been steadily drop­
ping since ilie early 1990s, and even terrorism can
bring states togeilier in international cooperation to
combat a common enemy.42
The abolition of nuclear weapons is an exceptionally
complex and difficult puzzle iliat has been studied ex­
tensively by scholars and scientists for over half a cen­
tmy. The many problems and permutations of getting
from here to iliere are legion, and iliere is no single
sure-fire pailiway to zero, but it is a soluble problem,
and humans are nothing if not innovative problem
solvers.43 I do not believe that ilie deterrence trap is
one from which we can never extricate ourselves, and
the remaining tlrreats should direct us to work toward
Nuclear Zero sooner rather ilian later. In ilie mean­
time, minimum is ilie best we can hope for given ilie
complexities of international relations, but given
enough time, as Shakespeare poetically observed ...
Time's glory is to calm contending kings,
To unmask falsehood and bring truth to light,
To stamp the seal of time in aged things,
To wake the mom and sentinel the night, .. .
To slay the tiger that doth live by slaughter, . . .
To cheer the ploughman with increased crops,
And waste huge stones with little water-drops." 44 El
 REFERENCES
1. Rhodes, Richard. 1986. The Making
of the Atomic Bomb. New York: Simon
& Schuster.
2. The Atomic Bomb and the End of
World War II, A Collection of Primary
Sources. National Security Archive
Electronic Briefing Book No. 162.
George Washington University. https://
bit.ly/2WMuDNM See also: "The Third
Shot." https://bit.ly/39eCTuW
3. DeNooyer, Rushmore. 2015. The
Bomb. PBS documentary. https://to
.pbs.org/3f2yyfw
4. Bird, Kai and Martin J. Sherwin.
2007. American Prometheus: The Tri-
umph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppen-
heimer. New York: Knopf, 332.
5. Quoted in: Marty, Martin E. 1996. Mod-
em American Religion, Vol 3: Under
God, Indivisible, 1941-1960. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 117.
6. Chomsky, Noam. 1967. "The Respon-
sibility of Intellectuals." The New York
Review of Books, 8 (3).
7. Goldhagen, Daniel Jonah. 2009.
Worse Than War: Genocide, Elimina-
tionism, and the Ongoing Assault on
Humanity. New York: PublicAffairs, 1, 6.
8. Lemkin, Raphael. 1946. "Genocide."
American Scholar, 15(2), 227-230.
9. United Nations General Assembly Res-
olution 96(1): "The Crime of Geno-
cide."
10. Katz, Steven T. 1994. The Holocaust
in Historical Perspective, Vol. 1. New
York: Oxford University Press.
11. Kugler, Tadeusz, Kyung Kook Kang,
Jacek Kugler, Marina Arbetman-Rabi-
nowitz, and John Thomas. 2013. "De-
mographic and Economic
Consequences of Conflict." lnterna-
tional Studies Quarterly, March,
57(1), 1-12.
12. Shermer, Michael. 2015. The Moral
Arc: How Science and Reason Lead
Humanity to Truth, Justice, and Free-
dom. New York: Henry Holt, 11.
13. In 2002 I attended the reunion of the
Wren crew in my father's stead and
confirmed his memories.
14. Toland, John. 1970. The Rising Sun:
The Decline and Fall of the Japanese
Empire 1936-1945. New York: Ran-
dom House, 731.
15. "The Cornerstone of Peace-Number
of Names Inscribed." Kyushu-Okinawa
Summit 2000: Okinawa GB Summit
Host Preparation Council, 2000. See
also: Pike, John. 2010. "Battle of Oki-
nawa." Globalsecurity.org; Manches-
ter, William. 1987. "The Bloodiest
Battle of All.· The New York Times,
June 14.
16. Giangreco, Dennis M. 2009. Hell to
Pay: Operation Downfall and the lnva-
sion of Japan 1945-1947. Annapolis,
MD: Naval Institute Press, 121-124.
17. Giangreco, Dennis M. 1998. "Tran-
script of 'Operation Downfall [U.S. In-
vasion of Japan]: US Plans and
Japanese Counter-Measures. Beyond
Bushido: Recent Work in Japanese
Military History. https://bit.ly/2ZY -
CLwu See also: Maddox, Robert
James. 1995. "The Biggest Decision:
Why We Had to Drop the Atomic
Bomb." American Heritage, 46(3).
18. Skates, John Ray. 2000. The Invasion
of Japan: Alternative to the Bomb.
University of South Carolina Press, 79.
19. Putnam, Frank W. 1998. "The Atomic
Bomb Casualty Commission in Retro-
spect." Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, May 12,
95(10), 5426-5431.
20. D'Olier, Franklin (Ed.) 1946. United
States Strategic Bombing Survey,
Summary Report (Pacific War). Wash-
ington DC: United States Government
Printing Office. https://bit.ly/32TsOSL
21. Rhodes, Richard. 1984. The Making
of the Atomic Bomb. New York: Simon
& Schuster, 599.
22. Ibid.
23. Quoted in: Cold War: MAD 1960-
1972. 1998. BBC Two Documentary.
Transcript: https://bit.ly/2EimnyA.
Film: https://bit.ly/2WVLsFX
24. Brodie, Bernard. 1946. The Absolute
Weapon: Atomic Power and World
Order. New York: Harcour t Brace, 79.
25. Kubrick, Stanley. 1964. Dr.
Strange/ave or: How I Learned to Stop
Worrying and Love the Bomb. Colum-
bia Pictures. http://youtu.be/2yfXgu
37iyl
26. Ibid.
27. Brown, Anthony Cave (Ed.). 1978.
DROPSHOT: The American Plan for
World War Ill Against Russia in 1957.
New York: Dial Press; Richelson, Jef-
frey. 1986. "Population Targeting and
US Strategic Doctrine." In Desmond
Ball and Jeffrey Richelson (Eds.).
Strategic Nuclear Targeting. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press, 234-249.
28. McNamara, Robert S. 1969. "Report
Before the Senate Armed Services
Committee on the Fiscal year 1969-70
Defense Program, and 1969 Defense
Budget, January 22, 1969." Washington,
DC: Government Printing Office, 11.
29. For a scholarly analysis of and an al-
ternative view to deterrence see: Ku-
gler, Jacek. 1984. "Terror Without
Deterrence: Reassessing the Role of
Nuclear Weapons." Journal of Conflict
Resolution, 28(3), September, 470-
506.
30. Kant, Immanuel. 1795. "Perpetual
Peace: A Philosophical Sketch." In
Perpetual Peace and Other Essays. In-
dianapolis: Hackett, I, 6.
31. Pinker, Steven. 2011. The Better An-
volume 25 number 4 2020
gels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has
Declined. New York: Penguin.
32. Rhodes, Richard. 2010. Twilight of
the Bombs: Recent Challenges, New
Dangers, and the Prospects of a
World Without Nuclear Weapons. New
York: Knopf.
33. Schlosser, Eric. 2013. Command and
Control: Nuclear Weapons, the Dam-
ascus Accident, and the Illusion of
Safety. New York: Penguin.
34 . See the documentary film of that title.
Trailer: https://bit.ly/2CVRuPJ
35. Science Salon archives:
https://www.skeptic.com/science-
salon/ The episodes with Fred Kaplan
and William J. Perry were based on
their new books: Kaplan, Fred. 2020.
The Bomb: Presidents, Generals, and
the Secret History of Nuclear War.
New York: Simon & Schuster; Perry,
William J. and Tom Z. Collina. 2020.
The Button: The New Nuclear Arms
Race and Presidential Power from Tru-
man to Trump. BenBella Books.
36. For a striking visual demonstration of
every one of the 2,053 nuclear
weapon explosions between 1945
and 1998 by the Japanese artist lsao
Hashimoto, starting with the Trinity
test in New Mexico, where in the
world they happened and whom they
were sponsored by, see: https://bit.ly
/2020120
37. 2018. U.S. Nuclear Modernization
Programs Report. Arms Control Asso-
ciation. August. https://bit.ly/3fQvOyk
38. The Nobel Prize committee's statement
on President Obama's award:
https://bit.ly/2WLWr4K Sonne, Paul,
Gordon Lubold, and Carol E. Lee.
2016. "'No First Use' Nuclear Policy
Proposal Assailed by U.S. Cabinet Offi-
cials, Allies." Wall Street Journal, Au-
gust 12. https://on.wsj.com/3hsKGYR
39. Waltz, Kenneth N. 2012. "Why Iran
Should Get the Bomb: Nuclear Balanc-
ing Would Mean Stability." Foreign Af-
fairs, July/August.
40. Barash, David. 2018. "Deterrence
and its Discontents.· Skeptic, Vol. 23,
No. 2, https://bit.ly/2EikKkt
41. Quoted in Kaplan, op cit., 244.
42. Fettweis, Christopher. 2010. Danger-
ous Times? The International Politics
of Great Power Peace. Georgetown
University Press.
43. Lipton, Judith and David Barash.
2019. Strength Through Peace: How
Demilitarization Led to Peace and
Happiness in Costa Rica, and What
the Rest of the World Can Learn From
a Tiny, Tropical Nation. Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
44. Shakespeare, William. 1594. The
Rape of Lucrece. Available in full at:
https://bit.ly/2ByB5k4
WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 15
The Rise and Fall of
Charles Willson Peale's
Philadelphia Museum
BY LEE ALAN DUGATKIN

The first major museum in the United States-an Enlightenment temple of sorts in Philadelphia-was a gem ofthe
new republic. Some six decades after it opened, it was gobbled up by a showman. It need not have ended tl1at way.

16 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020

WHEN CHARLES WILLSON PEALE'S PHILADELPHIA
Museum opened its doors in July of 1786, it was the
first true museum in the United States. It began as
an extension to the Peale home in Philadelphia and
a few years later it moved to its new home in Philo­
sophical Hall, catty-corner to was was then the
State Capitol. But Philosophical Hall could not hold
the thousands of items pouring into the museum
every year, so the museum moved to the second
floor of the State House-Independence Hall-just
above the spot where the Declaration of Independ­
ence was signed and one floor below where (what
we now call) the Liberty Bell rang each d ay.
By the early 1800s Peale's Museum housed
100,000 plus natural history, ethnographic, miner­
alogical, and mechanical items, often exhibited
under exquisite portraits of Washington, Franklin,
Paine, Lafayette, the Marquis de Chastellux, and
more, many painted by Peale himself. As the mu­
seum grew it brought into its orbit almost every
scientific, political, and celebrity persona (from Jef­
ferson and Humboldt to Lewis and Clark) of the
day. Peale thought such a place should ultimately
become a national museum.
Peale had been trained as a saddler but he had
an early penchant for painting. Powerful people in
Maryland were impressed enough with his talents
to send him to study under the legendary painter
Benjamin West in London.After two years Peale set
sail back to the colonies, with a growing reputation
as a highly skilled artist. His brush was in high de­
mand. He met Martha Washington in 1771, and not
long after that, he convinced her that Colonel
Washington should sit for him.
In August 1780, Peale moved his family to a
home at 62 Lombard Street in Philadelphia. Two
years later he added on a dedicated portrait
gallery: a 66-foot extension, with skylights that
had screens that were adjusted to manipulate
mood and setting. On November 14 of that year,
the Pennsylvania Packet announced the opening
of Peale's portrait gallery.
Sometime in May 1784 Colonel Nathaniel
Ramsay, Peale's brother-in-law, visited the Peale
home and was transfixed by a box of very large
bones sitting on a table. Those bones were from a
creature then dubbed the mammoth or incognitum
(today we know they were mastodon bones, but like
Peale, I will use the term "mammoth"). Peale was
sketching them as part of a commission, and Ram­
say said he "thought them so interesting...he would
have gone 20 miles to behold such a collection ...
doubtless there are many men like myself who
would prefer seeing such articles of curiosity than
any paintings whatever." 1 Those bones were not
Charles's, but other such bones could be acquired,
as could natural history specimens of all sorts. Pair­
ing art with natural history set Peale's mind racing.
Two years later, readers of the July 7, 1786, edition of
Pennsylvania Packet newspaper read:
Mr. Peale, ever desirous to please and entertain the
public, will make part of his house a repository for
natural curiosities. The public he hopes will thereby
be gratified in the sight of many of the wonderful
works of nature which are now closeted and but sel­
dom seen.
Peale imagined an Enlightenment temple, a
place to "bring into one view a world in miniature:•
He saw it as a collaborative effort, using newspa­
pers to constantly encourage his fellow citizens to
contribute what they could. His natural history call
to arms yielded immediate results. Two of the first
to contribute were Benjamin Franklin, who sent
the body of an angora cat that he received from
Madame Helvetius when he had left Paris, and
George Washington, who contributed the body of a
just-deceased golden pheasant from the aviary of
Louis XVI tl1at the general had received as a gift
from the Marquis de Lafayette.
Soon Peale, through his own collecting endeav­
ors, as well as those of the public, began to amass
not only a vast collection of zoological and botanical
material, but also anthropological material, miner­
als, manufactures, crafts, inventions, coins, and
antiquities. Lectures and live experiments in chem­
istry and electricity, often accompanied by music at
the museum, were added on as well. There was also
a small menagerie behind the museum with red
doves, eagles, baboons, mongooses, hyenas, and
more for the interested museum visitor.Annual at­
tendance in the early years is estimated to have
been between 3,500 to 12,000. Even at the lower
end of that estimate, in a Philadelphia of 54,000, the
museum was making its mark.
The museum had many missions, but for Peale
the overarching one was for it "to be beneficial,
curious or entertaining to tire citizens of the new
world." 2 It would also come to be Peale's primary
source of income. Tickets were set at 25 cents, on
par with admission to the theatre, a concert, or the
circus. The idea that he should profit from the mu­
seum was a sensitive point, and Peale tended to jus­
tify profits as a by-product of the greater good. "I
have always declared (the museum] was designed
for benefit of America;' he wrote. "Have I not been
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 17
 persevering more for the public good than for my
own emolument?" Such a public good, he was cer­
tain, "ought to become a national concern, since it
is a national good ... (for) the ve1y sinews of govern­
ment are made strong by a diffused knowledge of
this science.'' 3
Soon Peale was writing President Washington
that he hoped that one day the musewn would come
under congressional "patronage." Peale was much
less cryptic in a broadside he posted called My De­
sign in Forming this Museum, in which he informed
readers of his hope that "in the end it (the museum)
might become the basis of a great national magazine
of those subjects in nature." He had every intention
of tapping into their nationalism, adding that it was
his "earnest desire that the public of the country
should possess them, rather than they should be
transferred to any foreign nation or people:'
Many overseas travelers, naturalists among
them, came to Peale's Philadelphia Museum
when they visited in the temporaiy capital of the
United States. Foreign institutions too, including
the Swedish Academy, were quite interested in
exchange programs with the museum. Peale at­
tempted to leverage this interest so as transform
his museum into a national one. In a newspaper
article that he addressed to the governor and
both the Pennsylvania Senate and House on this
matter, writing in the third person, he let it be
known "that a large portion of his life has been
devoted to the establishment of a Grand National
museum ...yet he contemplates the great incom­
petency of an individual to give that degree of
perfection to a grand deposit of the works of na­
ture and art, which can alone flow from national
encouragement. " 4 That petition was tabled in
both the State Senate and State House, then
eventually read and dropped.
The next appeal to turn the museum into a na­
tional one came on the heels of Peale's most fa­
mous exhibit. In 1801, he and his staff undertook
the first organized paleontological expedition in
upstate New York to find a full mammoth skeleton
for the museum. In marl pits near Newburgh, New
York, they found one. They reconstrncted the
matnmoth skeleton and put it into the museum. It
caused a nation-wide stir.
It was the perfect time to renew the call for
federal support for the museum. The mammoth
was creating waves, and Peale's good friend and
natural history savant, Thomas Jefferson, was sit­
ting in the Executive Mansion. In 1802, Peale
wrote President Jefferson of his never-ending
18 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
dreams to create a museum that would diffuse "a
knowledge of the wonderful and various beauties
of Nature, more [so] than any other school yet
imagined." What he had created was a step in
that direction, but a federally supported expan­
sion was needed, such that "in the end (his)
labors would be crowned in a national establish­
ment of my museum." Was the President, Peale
inquired, interested?5
Jefferson was sympathetic: "I very much wish
it could be made public property;' he wrote Peale.
That said, the President continued, "I must not suf­
fer my partiality to it to excite false expectations in
you ...one of the great questions which has divided
political opinion in this country is whether Con­
gress [is] authorized by the constitution to apply
the public money to any but the purposes specially
enumerated in the Constitution...(and) those who
hold them to the enumeration, have always denied
that Congress has any power to establish a National
Academy." Disappointed, Peale accepted Jefferson's
decision, or at least said as much.
In 1806, an idea was circulating in Washing­
ton that might help turn the Peale museum into a
national institution. Joel Bai·low, soon to be am­
bassador to France, published a pamphlet enti­
tled Prospectus of a National University. "I have
heard of a proposal by Mr. Joel Bai·low to form a
National Institute at Washington;' Peale wrote
President Jefferson. "I have not seen the pam­
phlet, and therefore don't know whether my mu­
seum might not be embraced amongst the first of
its establishments." The point quickly became
moot when the bill died in the Senate. 6
Peale officially retired and handed control of
the museum, with its 100,000 plus items, to his
son Rubens in 1810. In 1814, Charles's son Rem­
brandt opened a spin-off Peale museum in Balti­
more. The three-story-tall brick museum sat at 225
North Holliday Street, half a mile from the tip of
the Patapsco River and was the first building in the
United States designed from scratch to be a mu­
seum. It was stocked largely with duplicate items
that Rubens and Charles had sent from the
Philadelphia Musewn, along with portraits that
Rembrandt had painted or acquired.
Charles continued to wield power from
Belfield, his estate near downtown Philadelphia,
and he concocted another plan to make his
Philadelphia Museum a national one. He wrote
Jefferson, now comfortably ensconced at Monti­
cello, that he was also considering "making an
offer of the Museum to Congress ... (because) the
 (portrait) collection of Revolutionary characters
must have esteemed value with the Government
of the United States." 7 During a three-month­
long trip Peale took to Washington in 1818/19, he
lobbied members of Congress on the idea of mov­
ing the Philadelphia Museum to Washington and
making it a national institution. But Peale real­
ized this attempt too would not yield fruit, writ­
ing in his diary, "From what little conversation I
have had with a few members, I believe I shall
not find the members of Congress disposed to
purchase it."
That would be Charles Willson Peale's last bat­
tle in one of the few wars he lost. In 1827, he died
and was buried at St. Peter's Episcopal Church. By
the time of his death his son Rubens had grown
weary of running the Philadelphia Museum and his
brother Titian was now at the helm there. Rubens
briefly took over the Baltimore museum from Rem­
brandt before handing that off to his nephew, Ed­
mund Peale, and then moving to New York City to
open a third Peale museum there. When Titian
eventually left the Philadelphia Museum, Edmund
took over. None of them, at any of the Peale muse­
ums, made a concerted effort to attain the national
(or even state) institution status toward which
Charles had devoted so much effort.
Despite Rubens, Titian and eventually Ed­
mund's efforts, the Philadelphia Museum had been
on a downslide since Charles's death. The museum
had moved from the State House, first to the
Philadelphia Arcade, and then over to Ninth and
Sansom Street. By the mid 1840s, attendance and
revenues had dropped precipitously, and the num­
ber of new items flowing into the Philadelphia Mu­
seum had all but dried up. "Dime store" museums,
as well as the endless other attractions in Philadel­
phia, were too great a lure for a public that was be­
ginning to crave instant satisfaction.
P.T. Barnum smelt Peale blood. In 1842, he
had opened his American Museum in New York
City, all too close to Rubens' New York Peale mu-
seum. Thousands visited the American Museum
each week. Rubens could not compete and sold
the museum in 1842; later that year, Barnum
bought its contents. Edmund, who in addition to
being in charge in Philadelphia, also still held
that role at the Baltimore Peale museum, saw
there was just no money to be made in Balti­
more, and like uncle Rubens, in late 1845 he sold
the contents of that museum to Barnum.
In the spring of 1849, Barnum opened a
branch museum of his own in Philadelphia, just a
few blocks from Peale's Philadelphia Museum.
Soon he wrote his partner Moses Kimball that
"he'd kill the other shop in no time." He did. The
Philadelphia Museum's last advertisement ran on
August 27, 1849, and soon thereafter the United
States Bank held a public auction of the contents
of the museum, where Barnum bought it all, not­
ing in his receipt book that it cost him a mere
"five or six thousand dollars on joint account of
Moses Kimball and myself."
Eventually, some of Kimball's share of this
material made its way to the Peabody Museum of
Anthropology and the Museum of Comparative
Zoology at Harvard, where it resides today. Exactly
where all the items Barnum took is not known,
but many, perhaps most, likely were sent to his
American Museum in New York or down the
street to Barnum's Philadelphia museum. Both es­
tablishments suffered devastating fires over the
next few decades, and it is assumed that much of
the Peale material perished in those blazes.
As we consider difficult decisions today about
government support for contemporary Enlighten­
ment institutions, we might do well to look back to
the earliest days of our republic and contemplate
what happened, and didn't happen, with Charles
Willson Peale's Philadelphia Museum. D
Lee Dugatkin's newest book is Behind the Crimson
Curtain: The Rise and Fall of Peale's Museum (2020,
Butler Books)

REFERENCES
1. Miller, L. (ed.) 2000. The Se­
lected Papers of Charles Will­
son Peale and His Family,
Volume 5: 113.
2. Dunlap's Daily Advertiser, Janu­
ary 13, 1792.
3. "I have always declared," C. W.
Peale to the American Philosoph­
ical Society, March 7, 1797;
·ought to become a national
concern," C. W. Peale, Introduc­
tion to a Course of Lectures,
APS: American Philosophical So­
ciety, Peale-Sellers Family Collec­
tion, 1686-1963, Mss. BP31,
Philadelphia.
4. C. W. Peale, "Memorial to the
Pennsylvania Legislature," Daily
Advertiser, December 26, 1795;
for more on Massachusetts, see
C. W. Peale to Representatives of
the State of Massachusetts in
Congress, December 14, 1795.
5. C. W. Peale to Jefferson, Janu­
ar y 12, 1802.
6. C. W. Peale to Jefferson, August
4, 1806 and Jefferson to C. W.
Peale, December 21, 1806.
7. C. W. Peale to Jefferson, Janu­
ar y 15, 1818.

volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 19

SPECIAL 100TH
ISSUE FEATURE
The Art of the Skeptic
Finding Your Niche if You Love Both Science and Art
BY PAT LINSE, WITH TWO ADDITIONAL PAGES OF ILLUSTRATIONS BY
I'VE NEVER BEEN MUCH OF A JOINER, BUT WHEN I DISCOVERED
the skeptical movement in 1984, after reading and absolutely
loving an article in the L.A. Times that explained the physics
behind firewalking, I decided to get involved.
At the time I was working as an illustrator doing movie
posters, and my broad ad agency background made me a one-stop
shop for a skeptics group needing flyers, advertising, or a newslet­
ter (in the pre-internet era). I made skeptic-specific samples of
art and flyers and volunteered for local and national groups. I got
a few assignments but the truth is, it's hard to even give graphic
arts expertise away. People respond to good art and design when
they see it, but they are rarely motivated to seek it out.
By the time I met with Michael Shermer in late 1991 to talk
about creating SKEPTIC I had 7 years of bottled up enthusiasm
ready to dedicate to the project. He had a Ph.D. in the History of
Science, he'd authored a few books, and he was running a non­
profit bicycle racing organization and publishing a magazine for
its members. So between the two of us we had the expertise.
SKEPTIC was an all volunteer orgaruzation especially in its
early years. We drummed up resources where we could. One of
our biggest savings came from the desktop computer revolution.
It was similar to today's digital cameras and software that allow
almost anyone to produce a video and post it on the Internet. In
roughly a decade the cost of desigrring and typesetting a page for a
publication, which had formerly taken the coordinated effort of
many specialists (designer, layout artist, type spec, type house,
half-tones, and paste-up artist), had gone from hundreds of dollars
to zero when performed by a single volunteer on a computer.
In 2002 Daniel Loxton began donating artwork over the
Internet. At the time I was writing and illustrating JR. SKEPTIC
and looking for help. I had stacks of manuscripts but nothing
suitable: too pedantic, too patronizing, too precious-everyone
thinks they can write for young people but it's not that easy.
But I noticed from Loxton's cheerfully entertaining emails
that he could write, so I asked him to give it a shot. His response
stunned me. He produced a polished press-ready product: metic­
ulously researched, beautifully written, and fully designed and il­
lustrated. I had found the Holy Grail of non-profit employees: the
do-it-all creative individual. I later learned that his early efforts to
get involved in skepticism had gotten the same tepid response as
mine had-he had already produced a JR SKEPTIC style prototype
and unsuccessfully tried to get other skeptic groups interested.
So the lesson to be learned for those who truly want to get
involved is create a professional product and be persistent.
20 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
JR SKEPTIC CREATOR DANIEL LOXTON
Graphic Arts Tips for Skeptic Groups
• Buy art expertise wholesale, not retail if you can.
Retail art: the ad agency-suitable for a large organization.
Pick one that has clients with similar needs to yours. An
agency specializing in beer or real estate clients may skew
your projects in those directions. Meet the person you will be
dealing with and ask questions about the samples they show
you to find out if they can communicate art ideas without
using a lot of jargon or hiding behind design snobbery.
Wholesale art: the do-it-all individual. T he Internet provides
opportunities for these efficient self-starter types to hone
their creative skills without having to land a job that per­
fectly fits their interests. Try them out as volunteers, and if
you have a job opening you wiII have a pool to draw from.
• How trendy should your art be? For skeptical topics I lean to­
ward somewhat conservative or realistic art styles because
the articles themselves can be difficult to understand.
One doesn't need to add more mystery with overly ab­
stract art. (By contrast when designing for the fashion or
the music industry, it's all about emotion, implication,
and innuendo, so almost anything goes.) Also, art can
actually clarify a complex article. For example, say an
author has four points to make. Four small illustrations
representing each point may be the way to go.
• Logos, branding, and names: pick the niclmame. Pick the name
that is short, sweet, and most of all memorable. Never
pick a name or logo that needs an explanation so that peo­
ple will understand how clever it is. Don't try to find the
perfect word-there is not a word in existence that doesn't
carry some baggage (for example, the word "skeptic").
This is why large companies make up names for products,
and then spend millions creating a reputation for the new
term. If you make something up, make sure it's both easy
to pronounce and to remember.
• Avoid giving art assignments to someone's love interest. When I
worked in the music industry, nothing terrified the art
department more than the news that the musician's boy­
or girlfriend was going to be involved creating the image
for the packaging. Art for your organization is not a
throw away assignment for someone in the office who
feels underappreciated. Your graphic look serves a "dress
for success" function, creating a favorable impression,
inspiring confidence in your product, and last but cer­
tainly not least, providing enjoyment. El
IT'S ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO DO A PORTRAIT HONORING A SKEPTICAL ACTIVIST Top left to right:
• 2OO9-Norman Jay Levitt, mathematician, known for his relentless defense of science, especially against
academic postmodernists. Ink and stipple on paper. • 2OO3-William of Ockham, from an article on the
use and misuse of Ockham's razor. I converted a Medieval pen sketch to a Hans Holbein style drawing. Pencil,
photocopy. • 1995-philosopher David Hume's essay Of Miracles laid the foundation for the skeptical
axiom "Extraordinary claims require extraordinar y evidence." Drafting pen. • 2O14-Puzzle and math
wizard Martin Gardener, authored many Scientific American columns on those topics, and was one of the
founders of the U.S. skeptical movement. Pencil and felt tip pen. • 1989-A drafting pen ink sketch of
Paul Kurtz for a Pasadena, CA, lecture. He helped found the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of
Claims of the Paranormal, CSICOP (now CSI), and other Skeptical/Humanist related organizations.
 THERE IS MORE TO BE DONE THAN JUST THE COVER ART
Artists should not underestimate the importance of illustrations, gra phs,
and diagrams that illuminate points made by an author. A drawing can sim­
plify an overly complex photo and highlight the important parts. Or a photo that is
too blurry, bleached out, or dark can be saved by making it into a drawing.
ILLUSTRATIONS FOR CLARITY
From top left: 2002-From a series of
drawings showing how psychic surgery
sleight of hand is performed; 2013-An
altruistic rat opens the door for a friend
trapped in a plastic tube; 2012-Shirley
Mason, the patient A. K.A. "Sybil" who in­
spired the multiple personality myth. A
drawing reveals elaborate details of her
hairdo and blouse not visible in the photo;
This simple drawing receives the MOST REQUESTS 1994-An Olmec monumental stone
FOR PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE from authors head from an article on pseudohistoric
writing about medical history, scientific protocol, and ideas about who discovered America;
critical thinking. 2013-Fourth grader Emily Rosa's 2006-A Solutrean flint point used as
ingeniously simple protocol for testing Therapeutic evidence in a "who discovered the New
Touch. Can the TT practitioner feel the "force field" of World" hypothesis; 2016-A mysterious
the tester if the hovering hand is shielded from view? supposed alien skull (light area) is shown
to be a water rounded remnant of a wild
goat's broken skull.

V\ \
�,
I '

:-,'I

,,
'( 0-

BUYING STOCK ART As a rule I don't use a stock

image as is, not just because another publication may
use the same one, but because I enjoy making them
into something new that better fits my purpose. 2020
-Four photos are combined for an article on race.

MOST CONTROVERSIAL This stylized cover illustra­

tion received more accolades...and more complaints
than any other cover. Critics thought the drawing style
was either sophisticated-"the best cover [we'd]
ever done," or they suggested we "find someone who
can draw"-and then volunteered themselves.
1999-From an article on fraud and whistleblowing
in science. Pencil and Photoshop.

22 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020

 2003-From an article on whether dou­
ble-blind testing is necessary for the
'hard" sciences. These Double Blind
Lab Specs were inspired by a phone
call I took from a man enthusiastically
touting magnets as a cure-all.
When I asked if his treatment

ll, l,� �
had been subject to a
double-blind study he

-
..:
/;:'..- assured me that when
he tested it, everyone
V
,r:__ ,-
·, in his lab had been
wearing blindfolds!
Ink and collage.

2016-From an article on
resilience to abuse. Photoshop.

'i
j

2005-From an article on how false memories can be generated. George 1999-From an article
W Bush first heard about 9/11 in front of a group of school children when addressing cell phone
an aide whispered the news into his ear. But repeatedly viewing news radiation fears that
footage of the attacks in the weeks following 9/11 led him to showed exactly how
misremember that he saw it happen live on TV. Pencil. much radiation energy it
takes to break down the
chemical bonds in cells.
Scratchboard.

Nolice:
You Are Now l
eovmg
·
, �ANDYlAND
I,.Ji:1

t HITLER'S MOUSTACHE BRUSH

2007-From an article on superstition and sym­
;I I BLAMEW®OO
2004-From an article by a journalist who formerly pathetic magic. What could be a more potent 1999-Sigmund Freud. From a column on fad
supported alternative medicine. Pen and pencil. charm than Hitler's own moustache brush! psychological cures. Photoshop and collage.

volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 23

Depicting the "Opposition" My first instruction to an illustrator as art director of SKEPTIC magazine is "Please do not do a snake oil salesman.· Not only is
it a terrible cliche, it is rarely an accurate representation of the individual who holds the beliefs we may be criticizing. Many supporters of non-scientific
ideas are quite sincere.
Above left to right • 2013--Conservative spokesperson Ben Stein appeared in a documentary that claimed academics conspire to "expel" those who support
intelligent design. We suggest more education, not less. Drafting pen. • 2013-Walter Mercado-flamboyant Puerto Rican astrologer. Felt tip pen, pencil
and Photoshop. • 2004-The brilliant science fiction and gothic horror storyteller H.P. Lovecraft originated the idea that in the distant past, space aliens
descended to earth and were mistaken for gods. Swiss author Erich von Diiniken picked up this idea and popularized it as nonfiction. Pencil and Photoshop.

Bottom, left to right • 1994-Wilhelm Reich "discovered" Orgone Energy which he promoted as a cure-all for everything from a lagging libido to drought.
He sported an unusual hair style which he believed served as a kind of antenna to direct the orgone. Drafting pen. • 2009-A psychic demonstrates a
manipulative questioning technique used to draw information from a client without them realizing it. Pencil on vellum paper. • 2015 Aleksandr Dugin, mystical
high priest of Russian fascism, also known as "Putin's Rasputin," who wants to bring about the end of the world. Pencil, white paint and ink on vellum paper.
ac Asimov. Six different photo rence for the portrait-one wit
olor pencil on canvas-textured i 2018 Mother Nature. For an
sed as a reference for the Godd encil and Photoshop. • 1999-
nt Wilson Observatory. The int pie dome actually was filled wit
cial issue about the co-discover eory Alfred Russel Wallace. Th
. .
By Daniel Loxton: Clockwise from
upper left. • 2010-This fairy may be
my all time favorite JUNIOR SKEPTIC illus­
tration. It combines location photogra­
phy, model photography, CGI, digital
painting, and a dress I made by hand
from real leaves. • 2003-Roswell
crash scene combines CG elements
with photos of my sheep I took during
an earlier career as a shepherd. •
2014-Plasticine Carl Sagan, just for
fun. • 2019-As a lifelong geek, it was
a bit of a dream come true to make
this D&D style red dragon! • 2014-
Flat Earth digital painting.

volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM

By Daniel Loxton: Clockwise from upper left. • 2003-This Abominable Snowman
image features a puppet I sculpted, painted, and covered with faux hair. • 2002-The
Cadborosaurus was my very first JUNIOR SKEPTIC coverl It features a hand-sculpted
and painted physical model composited into location photography. • 2009- End of
the World Rumors: Surely every illustrator longs for an excuse to blow up a planet.
CGI with digital painting. • 2020-An angry honey bear container hears that sugar
syrup was substituted for honey in 1800s food fraud scams. Digital painting and
studio photography. • 2016-Digital painting of an American mastodon.

SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020


The Testimony
of Witnesses:
Raising the Dead
ONE OF THE COMMON ARGUMENTS INVOKED TO
support assertions of supernatural events is that of
the testimony of several witnesses. It is commonly
put forth as, "Look, here are all these people who wit­
nessed this event. Are you saying they were all hallu­
cinating or all deceived? It's far more likely that the
multiple attestation of these many witnesses indi­
cates they were [or are) telling the truth." Testimoni­
als at first seem to be stunning evidences, but, upon
examination, they prove to be illusory.
Consider this argument when it's applied to the
resun-ection of Jesus. Differing accounts of the Resur­
rection are given in the four canonical gospels and in a
passage from the Pauline epistle 1 Corinthians. They
differ one from another enough that Christian apolo­
gists can reasonably claim that they are the reports of
separate witnesses. So, aren't the separate testimonies
of these five witnesses strong evidence for the historic­
ity of the Resurrection? At first, this would seem to be a
good argument. There are, however, rational objections
to accepting the validity of these testimonies. First of
all, these "witnesses" weren't ...witnesses, that is. It is
widely accepted among scholars of different leanings
that Paul's epistles (those genuinely from his hand) an­
tedate the gospels. They are widely believed to have
been written between CE 50 and 60. Of the fo ur
canonical gospels, the Gospel of John is definitively
considered to have been the latest. The Jesus of John's
gospel is far more divine than the Jesus of the other
three. Consider John's opening verses (Jm:1-3, 14):
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God and the Word was God. He was with God in
the beginning. Through him all things were made;
without him nothing was made that has been made ....
The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. We have
seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who
came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
In John, Jesus is the divine logos (spoken word),
synonymous with God the creator. Jesus is far more di-
ARTICLE
BY TIM CALLAHAN
vine in John's gospel than in any of the other three.
Since it is unlikely that the earliest gospel would have
portrayed Jesus as synonymous with God and then
that succeeding gospels portrayed him as more human
and less divine, it is highly unlikely that John was any­
dung otl1er than the last of the four gospels to be writ­
ten. The Jesus of Mark is by far the most human and
the least divine. There is no Nativity story in Mark, as
there are in Matthew and Luke. Rather, Jesus first ap­
pears in Mark as a young man who goes to John the
Baptist to be baptized, i.e., symbolically cleansed of his
sins by being immersed in the River Jordan. Then, as
he is rising from the waters, he has an entirely subjec­
tive epiphany that he is the Son of God (Mk. 1:10, n):
Just as Jesus was coming up out of the water,
he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit
descending on him like a dove. And a voice
came from heaven: "You are my Son, whom I
love; with you I am well pleased."
The clear implication of these verses is that Jesus
had no idea he was the Son of God until that moment.
The Gospel of Mark contains a prophecy of ilie de­
struction of the Jerusalem temple (Mk. 13:1, 2) as part
of what is variously called the Olivet Discow-se or the
"Little Apocalypse. " This event actually took place in
the year CE 70, when the Romans, having crushed the
Jewish revolt, flattened Jerusalem, leaving nothing
standing but one section of wall connecting two tow­
ers. Their destruction was so complete that, had they
not left these two towers and ilie connecting wall be­
tween them, nobody would have iliought that a city
had once been there. Thus, ilie prediction in the open­
ing verses of Mark 13 could only be eiilier divinely in­
spired prophecy, written before the fact, or history
written after ilie fact framed as a prophecy. If the de­
struction of the temple is divinely inspired prophecy,
we would logically expect the rest of the gospel to be
divinely inspired as well. However, at tl1e end of Mark 8
and the beginning of Mark 9 Jesus says (Mk. 8:38-9:1):
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 25
 "If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this
adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will
be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father's
glory with the holy angels." And he said to them,
"Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not
taste death before they see the kingdom of God com­
ing with power."
That some of those standing there would see what
appears to be the Second Coming-and since that
has yet to take place-it would seem to make this a
false prophecy, not divinely inspired. This, in turn,
would mean that the "prediction" of the destruction
of the temple was written after the fact, and that
the Gospel of Mark had to have been written after
CE 70 by someone who had never met Jesus or wit­
nessed the Resurrection.
Christian apologists rationalize this by saying
that the "kingdom of God coming with power," re­
ferred to in Mk. 9:1 was, in fact, a reference to the
miracle of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit suppos­
edly descended on Jesus' disciples, giving them the
miraculous power to speak in other languages. How­
ever, these same apologists also claim that when
reading parallel passages, accounts of the same words
or deeds in different gospels, the believer is to take
the most detailed version as the most authoritative.
In the case of this prophecy the most detailed parallel
is to be found in Matthew (Mt. 16:27, 28):
For the Son of man shall come in the glory of
his Father with his angels; and then he shall re­
quite every man according to his works. Verily
I say unto you, There be some standing here,
which shall not taste of death, till they see the
Son of man coming in his kingdom.
The Son of man coming in the glory of the Fa­
ther with his holy angels, then requiting every man
for his works cannot be a reference to Pentecost, but
only to the Second Coming and the Last Judgment,
which obviously didn't take place in the generation of
those hearing Jesus. Therefore the prophecy in Mark
also referred to the Second Coming and was likewise
false. So, the "prophecy" of the destruction of the
temple in Mark was actually written after the fact,
meaning Mark was written after CE 70, and its au­
thor did not witness any portion of the life of Jesus.
Yet another problem with the five testimonies of
the Resurrection (the four gospels and 1 Corinthians)
is that they disagree in ways that cannot be recon­
ciled. Christian apologists argue that the differences
in the Resurrection accounts merely reflect the sub­
jectivity of different witnesses and that, as a whole
they all agree. An example of different witnesses
26 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
seeing things slightly differently from one another
would be two witnesses who saw a woman fleeing
the scene of a crime. If one witness says the woman
was wearing a red blouse and the other says the
woman was wearing a violet blouse, the difference in
their testimonies is minor and they can easily be rec­
onciled. However, if the second witness says it was a
man fleeing the scene wearing a white shirt, the two
testimonies cannot be reconciled
Thus, I would ask any Christian apologist the fol­
lowing questions: Did the risen Christ appear to no­
body, leaving only the empty tomb as evidence of his
resurrection as the Gospel of Mark has it (Mk. 16:1-8),
or did he appear to over 500 people at one time, as 1
Corinthians claims (1 Cor. 15:6)? Did he direct his dis­
ciples to meet him in Galilee and did he meet them
there to give them the Great Commission (i.e., to make
believers of all the world), as the Gospel of Matthew as­
serts (Mt. 28:7-10, 16-20), or did he meet them in
Jerusalem, as Luke says (Lk 2:36-51) and expressly tell
them not to leave Jerusalem (Acts 1:4)? Did he first ap­
pear to Mary Magdalene, as the Gospel of John says
(Jn.20:11-17), to two disciples on the road to Emmaus
as Luke has it (Lk. 24:15), or to Cephas (Peter) as 1
Corinthians asserts (1 Cor. 15:5)? Each one of these
paired examples directly contradicts the other. They
can't be reconciled, nor are they minor differences in
varying memories the equivalent of clothing colors.
Along with the Resurrection, the four gospels
contain stories of Jesus raising the dead on three occa­
sions. These are the raising of the son of the widow of
Nain (Lk. p1-17), the raising of Lazarus (Jn. 11:1-45),
and the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Mk. 5:21-24,
35-43; Mt. 9:18, 23-26; Lk. 8:40-42, 49-56). Were
we to exclude the raising of the son of the widow of
Nain and that of Lazarus, since each of these events is
only recorded in a single gospel, we would still have
the raising of the daughter of Jairus seemingly attested
to by three witnesses (Mark, Matthew and Luke).
Leaving aside for the moment that all of the gospels
were written by non-witnesses over 40 years after the
traditional date of the death of Jesus (approximately
CE 30 ), the degree to which common material was
shared between these three gospels is such that the
likelihood is that the raising of the daughter of Jairus
was originally only recorded by one author (Mark) and
repeated by two others (Matthew and Luke). Hence
the seemingly robust testimony of three witnesses
evaporates under scrutiny.
Of course, any testimony from ancient times
suffers from the possibility that its record has been
corrupted over two millennia, particularly since
these ancient documents have come down to us by
 transmission rather than
preservation. They have
been copied and recopied
multiple times, allowing
considerable opportunity
for the accumulation of
errors or even for deliber­
ate alteration. This is not
the case for a 20th cen­
tury testimony of a
miraculous resurrection
from the dead by a mod­
ern holy man. This event
was alleged to have oc­
curred on Christmas Day
1971, when the Hindu
guru Sathya Sai Baba
raised Walter Cowan
Hindu guru Sri Sathya Sai Baba
from the dead (see
"When Sri Sathya Sai Resurrected Walter Cowan
on Christmas Day 1971", https://bit.ly/3kC7Uo6).
On December 25, 1971, after a conference in
Madras, India, an elderly follower of Sai Baba's, Wal­
ter Cowan, became seriously ill and died in the arms
of his wife Elsie. He was taken to a private hospital,
the Lady Wellington Nursing Home, and there pro­
nounced dead. Elsie was too distraught to accom­
pany her husband's body to the hospital and went to
see Sathya Sai Baba. He told her he would visit her
husband's body. When Elsie finally went to the hos­
pital at 10:00 a.m. the next day with a friend, she
was told that Sai Baba had visited and left. Then, to
her utter amazement and joy, Elsie found her hus­
band Walter alive, having been resurrected by Sai
Baba. Dr. John Hislop had been called in to assist
Mrs. Cowan. Hislop wrote down a full report of what
Elsie Cowan related concerning her husband's death
and resurrection. He recorded that he had asked
Judge Damodar Rao to interview the doctor (unfor­
tunately not named) who had attended Walter
Cowan and that the doctor had told the judge that
Cowan was indeed dead on arrival at the hospital.
This would seem at the outset to be a well-docu­
mented miraculous resurrection of a 111an from the
dead. However, the story begins to unravel upon ex­
amination. First of all, the story is second hand. It was
Dr. Hislop's account of Elsie Cowan's account of her
husband's death and resurrection. Another problem,
as noted by Brian Steel in his 2009 article debunking
the supposed reswTection ("Sathya Sai Baba, Elsie and are almost always colored by bias and are often
Walter Cowan and John Hislop. A Discredited 1971
Resurrection Claim," https://bit.ly/33Nsvl7), is that
Elsie Cowan, Dr. Hislop, and Judge Damador Rao were
all devotees of Sai Baba
and thus motivated to
promote the power of
their guru. As Steel notes,
even more damning is the
actual report from the
now named doctor at­
tending Walter Cowan:
Part of Dr. B. Krishna
Rau's letter to Premanand
(13-7-1988) adds medical
detail: "Mr. Walter Cowan
was admitted with con­
gestive cardiac failure and
in a very bad condition.
He had NOT at any time
died in the medical termi­
nology. During his stay in
the hospital, Sri Sathya
Sai Baba visited him when he was critically ill.
So there was no death, hence no resurrection,
therefore no miracle to explain.
Interestingly enough, along with skeptics,
evangelical Christians are also a good source of ma­
terial debunking the alleged miracles of Sai Baba
(see Gretchen Passantino's 2002 article on "Sai
Baba" in Christian Research Journal, Vol. 24, No. 3,
https://bit.ly/2RIQl2f). This debunking of a rival reli­
gion's miracles would appear to be an example of spe­
cial pleading-Hindu claims of raising the dead are
met with rigorous skepticism, while biblical claims
that Jesus raised the dead are to be accepted on the
basis of faith-but in fact it's a good example of skep­
tical reasoning when religious bias is removed.
For those who would test the validity of extraordi­
nary claims it is appropriate to apply the well-known
skeptical dictum ECREE-Extraordinary Claims Re­
quire Extraordinaiy Evidence-most famously voiced
by late Carl Sagan but first articulated by David Hume
in his 1748 An Enquiry Concerning Human Under­
standing.
In our reasonings concerning matters of fact,
there are all imaginable degrees of assurance,
from the highest certainty to the lowest
species of moral evidence. A wise man, there­
fore, proportions his belief to the evidence.
Testimonies-eyewitness or second/third hand­
based on memories clouded by individual subjectiv­
ity. As such, they are, in and of themselves, virtually
useless as evidence. El
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 27
 ARTICLE
Conspiracy Theories
Why We Can't Unsee Patterns-Real or Imagined­
Once We See Them
BY ROBERT D. KIRVEL
Introduction
EFFECTIVE CONSPIRACY THEORIES TY1'1CALLY CAPTURE
and hold attention through audacious, often sinis­
ter, allegations rooted in emotion rather than an an­
alytical or documented chain of cause and effect.
Research on factors associated with conspiracy be­
liefs, including proposed political and psychological
motives, has accelerated in the past decade, and the
principal findings are revealing. However, largely
ignored in the literature-although addressed in
SKEPnc's recent cover story on conspiracies (Vol.
25, No. 1, 20201 )-are some underlying considera­
tions that might provide a foundation for human
predispositions toward conspiracism, as reflected in
the universality of conspiracy theories across cul­
tures and throughout recorded history.
Three additional foundations to conspiratorial
belief that I would like to explore here are: (1) the
mathematical Ramsey theory, which shows how
order (the perception of organization) must invari­
ably appear from apparent disorder; (2) the neuro­
physiology of signal and pattern recognition under­
lying the ways vertebrates are "tuned" to detect
information that is biologically or evolutionarily
adaptive for survival; and (3) a human predisposi­
tion to derive and superimpose emotionally mean­
ingful interpretations on sensory input and then to
adjust behavior accordingly.
Given the broadly documented, emotional
quality of conspiracy beliefs, together with addi­
tional psychological mechanisms suggested by
other investigators, such as biased assimilation and
motivated reasoning, conspiracism appears to be a
predictable outcome in individuals who may lack or
reject more analytic and cognitive tools to arrive at
rational explanations for events.
Secret Plots
Conspiracy theories are notions or purported explana­
tions, often with negative connotations, about some
event that feature a secret, insidious, or fiendish plot
as a central feature.2 The goal of the alleged cabal is
often to deceive and manipulate people or to usurp
28 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
political or economic power. Machiavelli advised in
The Prince against advancing conspiracy theories be­
cause real conspiracies often fail to achieve desired
ends. Modern research points to more troublesome
effects, including the sowing of social discord, vio­
lence, and public mistmst while undermining con­
structive discourse on important issues. Even unlikely
conspiracy theories can have adverse effects on peo­
ple's lives, health, and safety.3
Actual conspiracies, such as bribery or collu­
sion among team players to lose a championship
game, insider trading or schemes to cheat regulatory
standards, and plots to rob a bank, involve real
events with a documented chain of cause and effect.
In contrast, conspiracy theories offer allegations that
are often social in origin and outcome, rooted in
emotion, diabolical in tone, intuitive rather than an­
alytical, and that may or may not be true.
Despite their adverse consequences, conspiracy
beliefs are not limited to fringe groups, and their
prevalence cannot be blamed on the internet or so­
cial media. Instead, they are pervasive across cultures
and throughout recorded history, and they can crop
up almost anywhere. Among the more enduring in
Western culture are notions about John F. Kennedy's
assassination at the hands of a massive cabal involv­
ing the CIA, Russians, Cubans, and the Mafia; NASA
moon landings being staged by the government;
UFOs and aliens landing on Earth; secret societies
controlling nearly everything; and 9/11 as an inside
job. A 2016 survey by researchers at Chapman Uni­
versity" found the following percentages of Ameri­
cans surveyed who agree or strongly agree that "the
government is concealing what they know about. .. "
The 9/11 attacks ................................54.3%
The JFK assassination .......................49.6%
Alien encounters ..............................42.6%
Global warming ...............................42.1%
Plans for a one world government.. ..32.9%
Obama's birth certificate .................. 30.1%
Death of Antonin Scalia ...................27.8%
The Moon landing ............................24.2%

It's no exaggeration to suggest almost every
major historical event has generated a conspiracy
theory. Indeed, enthusiastic conspiracists have oc­
cupied high places in society and politics, including
the White House.
Although some conspiracy ideas can be credi­
ble-or correct in questioning ethics, politics, or soci­
ety in general, or useful in holding authorities
accountable-intentionally mistaken or absurd theo­
ries (e.g., QAnon and the satanic pedophile ring that
President Trump is allegedly combatting) can be
harmful to individuals or culture as a whole, often by
confusing facts and fiction or fueling hatred. Why are
crazy or manipulative conspiracy theories so preva­
lent? Is it true that certain psychological characteris­
tics cause some people with a so-caJJed "conspiracy
mindset" to believe them more than others? Scientific
studies addressing these questions have mushroomed
in the last decade. Other insights on possible origins of
conspiracy theories lie in some relatively under-appre­
ciated ideas related to mathematics, biology, and how
beliefs are shaped by human emotion and anxiety.
Do the Math First
Ramsey theory is a branch of mathematics focused on
how a degree of order or regularity must appear un­
avoidably from apparent disorder. 5 Developed by
C
Q)
.s::
'"
0
0
§
£
C
0
-;,
�
t,
Frank Plumpton Ramsey in the 1920s and expanded
considerably by Paul Erdos thereafter,6 the core idea
of Ramsey theory is that random elements faJJ into
specific arrangements. Given enough elements-and
it doesn't take many-an interesting pattern is guar­
anteed to emerge. A surprising example of Ramsey
theory centers on people gathering at a party. In any
group of at least six people selected at random, the
gathering will invariably include three mutual friends
or three mutual nonfriends. According to another
mathematician, T. S. Motzkin, in writing about Ram­
sey theory, complete disorder is impossible. 7
If total disorder can't happen, perhaps it's logi­
cal and helpful for us to seek or impose order-or
more to the point, purpose or meaning-on the ap­
parent disorder of phenomena we encounter. Could
the tendency to perceive underlying design be a bi­
ological predisposition (or in evolutionary terms, an
adaptive process) with a foundation in mathemat­
ics, given the reality that patterns are everywhere,
and it might be useful for us to perceive them?
After combined appendix and tonsil surgeries at
the age of eight, I remember staring at the acoustic
ceiling tiles above my hospital bed during a boring
week of recovery. The white tiles had tiny, random
holes scattered on the exposed surface, and I found
myself picking out images in the distributed holes,
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 29
 much the same way people see features or figures in "tuned" to detect highly specific, oriented structures
groups of stars on a clear night. Once I identified an and contours, not unlike edge detection in amphib·
image, such as a human face or horse, I couldn't ians.14 Another important finding was tl1at restricting
make myself not see the pattern on the ceiling. Even visual information from reaching tl1e visual brain dur­
at the age of eight, I wondered why, and was it just ing a critical period early in ilie life of a kitten alters
me who saw recognizable images where none ex• electrical activity of the brain's visual cortex. Such
isted? Was there a name for it? There is. losses in processing information are virtually nonexist·
ent in adults who experience visual deprivation for
Connect the Dots one reason or another later in life, so once present,
A tendency to detect order in apparent disorder is pattern detection is durable. 15
true not only of humans, but nonhuman animals as All of this is to say that humans and other ani·
well. One term used to describe this phenomenon is mals, from amphibians to felines and primates, have
pareidolia, or the tendency to incorrectly perceive pat· evolved over eons to pick out contours and patterns,
terns where none exist, such as shapes in clouds, ran• including edge detection and other types of informa·
dom sounds as words or phrases, or faces in water tion, that help individuals survive in a complex world.
stains.8 Another term is patternicity, or the tendency Some of ilie time, there really is a signal in the noise,
to find meaningful patterns in both meaningful and and it might be well to sense and perceive it to deter·
meaningless noise. Patternicity, developed by Michael mine if there is any useful information to be gained
Shermer, expands on pa.reidolia inasmuch as many ap· and exploited. Maybe the reason we are inclined to
parently meaningless patterns turn out to be real, just detect patterns-at a basic biological level at least­
as some conspiracy theories are true, as are many sci· has to do wiili how the brain itself works. Because our
entific tl1eories first thought to represent random eyes and brains are tuned to perceive features and can
anomalies, such as anthropogenic global warming.9 hardly avoid seeing them, we might have the begin•
Two key tools of science, in fact-Signal Detection ning of an explanation for why conspiracy theories
Theory and its counterpart Statistical Detection The· are so prevalent. We are biologically "tuned" to see
ory-are grounded in the necessity of establishing cri• features, however functional or fictional. The signal
teria for detecting signals in noise, such as the well might be useful to us because it represents a pre·
established p values of 0.05 and 0.01 for determining dictable pattern, just as it can be useful for survival to
"statistical significance." 10 recognize ilie absence of cause and effect.
The brains of humans and many other animals It isn't just edges or sudden movements humans
have been shown to be superbly organized to detect are engineered to pick out as signals in a seemingly
specific signals and patterns. Since the late 1950s, random world that is decidedly not random at all.
scientists have demonstrated how a frog's retina is Human brains are so specialized for detecting facial
specifically organized to detect distinct features in the features that a specific area called the fusiform gyrus
world, including sharp edges, curved edges, moving (located in the occipitotemporal lobe) is dedicated
edges, and movements produced by dimming light, solely to face recognition, wiili both sides of the brain
akin to shadows.11 None of this is surprising, given a equally involved in the task. Different circuits center
frog's typical lack of eye and head movement as it sits on familiar versus unfamiliar faces, but otl1er brain
still on a rock or lily pad, especially when we consider areas, including the prefrontal cortex in humans, also
that a frog's survival depends on escaping enemies and respond to faces and interact strongly with emotional
snatching bugs from the air. After all, both predators parts of tl1e brain, including ilie amygdala. Single neu·
and flying frog food feature dark, moving edges as they rons are thought to respond selectively to faces of
pass across a frog's visual field. specific individuals, and the chemical neuropeptide,
Cats are notorious for how they see and respond oxytocin, plays an important role in facilitating face
to the world, including good night vision and a fond· and emotion recognition, of obvious impo1tance in so•
ness for pouncing on laser pointers or other darting cial interactions. More recent studies, however, show
targets. Two neuroscientists, David Hubel and Torsten the rate individual face-recognizing cells fire corre·
Wiesel, worked for more than 20 years on visual ex• sponds to separate facial features along an axis, and
periments using cats and then primates as models for different combinations of firing along the axis can ere•
human vision. 12• 13 They eventually won the Nobel ate an image of every possible face with remarkable
Prize for their efforts to demonstrate that neurons lo• precision. 16 We might think of the brain as a highly
cated at tl1e last stop of the visual pathway; namely, complex xylophone or keyboard, with individual keys
cells of the visual cortex in cats and monkeys, are representing the feature-recognizing brain cells, and

30 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020

 faces as complex chords played on the instrument.
Of course, conspiracy theories are about much
more than detecting such features as edges and mo­
tion. However, decoding how the brain works to
perform fundamental tasks can tell us something im­
portant about how we not only recognize stimuli but
also process information. Frogs don't simply see an
edge on an otherwise blank canvas, they attribute
meaning to the input and behave accordingly. If an
edge features sharp contours and moves rapidly, a frog
might well conclude it's an insect and tongue-snatch it
for lunch. If a moving edge signifies a large predator,
such as a swooping bird of prey, a frog might jump to
escape. As humans, we don't simply sense a face: we
recognize an individual as husband or wife and attrib­
ute meaning and intention to facial expressions. A
smile signifies we can joke; a frown cautions against
responding flippantly.
It's fair to say our brains are designed to pick out
signals with meaning or possible intention from ap­
parent noise, and neurons in the temporal lobe per­
form the tasks unrelentingly even when we are
unaware it's happening. When the perception of
meaning or connections is mistaken, it's called
apophenia, of which pareidolia (the incorrect percep­
tion of visual objects, such as a horse on ceiling tiles)
is a subcategory. Add human emotions, such as fear,
and factors like threat and personal beliefs to the way
we perceive objects or events in the world, and we
have the principal elements of conspiratorial thinking
along with the possibility of erroneous attribution. In
regulating human responses, the brain is designed to
oversee detection and recognition, but emotions
imbue perceptions with color and meaning, and emo­
tions are notoriously unreliable when it comes to im­
partial judgment.
People are more inclined to buy into a conspiracy
idea when they feel threat, anxiety, powerlessness,
or uncertainty owing to distressing social events.
Moreover, according to the social psychologist Dr. Jan­
Willem van Prooijen, believing one conspiracy theory
doesn't reduce the experience of threat but does the
opposite, stimulating additional conspiracy theorizing
in a sort of positive feedback loop. 17 Once a person
sees meaningful patterns in dots on the ceiling, the
images do not go away. After we see the face of the
man in the moon, it's difficult to unsee it.
Once we believe in a given conspiracy theory, it's
tempting to see conspiracies operating elsewhere. In
fact, the best predictor of belief in one conspiracy the­
ory is belief in another. Given the partisanship, anxi­
ety, and distrust associated with politics in America
and elsewhere, plus a disruptive pandemic, some have
lamented we are currently experiencing a Golden Age
of conspiracy theories. 17 Such claims have been made
for decades. Political scientists Joseph Uscinski and
Joseph Parent searched through 100 years of over
100,000 letters to the editor featuring conspiracy
scares published in The New York Times. Their analysis
generated three pages worth of conspirators, from
Adolf Hitler and the African National Congress to the
World Health Organization and Zionist villagers, cata­
logued into seven types: Left, Right, Communist, Cap­
italist, Government, Media, and Other. (This last type
includes Freemasons, and even scientists and the
AMA). Letter writers in the 1890s, for example, were
afraid that Mormons had rigged elections for Republi­
cans and that Canada and England were conspiring to
reclaim U.S. territory. In the early 1900s, cmTespon­
dents were worried about the role of financial inter­
ests in undermining democracy. And so it went
throughout the 20th century, dispelling the mytl1 that
conspiracism is a recent phenomenon. The common
theme running throughout these newspaper letters
was power. People writing to The New York Times edi­
tors expressed their concern that someone or some­
thing was engaged in getting or using illegitimate
power to manipulate others, which is not always a
false conspiracy theory.19
Who Believes or Doesn't Believe
Although it seems obvious that conspiracy theory
beliefs are exacerbated by political partisanship, ac­
cording to recent investigations there is no simple cor­
relation between left (liberal) or right (conservative)
thinking and tendencies to believe or disbelieve in con­
spiracy theories. Rather, according to Adam Enders
and Steven Smallpage, researchers studying relations
between conspiracy theories and politics, we all live on
a continuum of conspiratorial thinking witl1 respect to
acceptance or rejection.20 Our beliefs are often formed
for good reason, given the way the brain works in look­
ing for connections and the survival benefits of being
suspicious or cautious, especially when we feel threat­
ened. Almost all behavior is strategic to some extent,
and conspiracy theorizing appears to represent a strat­
egy for responding to threat even if some or all of tl1e
underlying details are bunk. Michael Shermer calls
this constructive conspiracism, where enough conspir­
acy theories are tJue that it pays to err on tl1e side of as­
suming most conspiracy ilieories are real even though
many are not (false positives). 21
As a rule, advocates of conspiracy theories are
as inclined as anyone else to appear rational and
open-minded, at least on the surface. In a system­
atic review of 96 studies on conspiracy beliefs
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 31
 (including 93 studies published since 2007), a vari­
ety of human predictors were assessed. 22 Among
the personality factors that had been previously
suggested by some psychologists as predictors of
conspiracy beliefs were low agreeableness and
high openness to experience, but neither these nor
other personality factors, such as neuroticism,
could be verified in the survey as significantly man­
ifest in people who believe in conspiracy theories.
When rational explanations fail in times of un­
certainty, however, so do logic and reason in favor of
sensationalism, at least for some people. But who is
more likely to buy into conspiratorial thinking when
experiencing anxiety? Instead of looking at personal­
ity traits as predictors, a University of Chicago re­
searcher, Eric Oliver, assessed different styles of
thinking. According to Oliver, people fall on a spec­
trum of thinking from magical or intuitive at one end
to rational at the other. An intuitionist tends to think
in terms of unobservable or magical forces, relying
more on emotions and gut feelings or religious be­
liefs, and then making judgmental shortcuts while
rejecting what's observable to explain an event. A ra­
tionalist tends to favor logic, deduction, and facts,
while relying on analytical thinking and transparency.
Oliver notes that most people (about 60%) are some­
where in the middle, with intuitionists outnumbering
rationalists about 2 to 1 in the remaining 40% of peo­
ple.23 If the percentage estimates are fairly accurate,
then a large segment of the human population, which
includes a relatively large number of intuitionists, is
susceptible to conspiracy beliefs, and some people
might both believe and partly disbelieve. On average,
though, a fortune teller or an evangelical is more
likely to buy into conspiracy theories than a physicist
or statistician.
Beyond underlying personality, psychological
motives, and styles of thinking, other researchers
have suggested possible demographic factors linked
to beliefs in conspiracy theories. They include low
education, low income, being male, and being a
member of some minority or an "outsider." Con­
founding variables and other complications place
these demographic ideas into the category of sug­
gestions requiring more study. 24
What's Wrong with Believing,
and Why Do People Believe?
What is the problem with being keen on conspiracy
theories? According to another comprehensive re­
view of interdisciplinary literature, 25 conspiracy
theories do more harm than good. Historically,
such ideas are associated with prejudice ("us" ver-
32 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
sus "them" thinking), genocide, witch hunts, radi­
calization, extremism, gun ownership, terrorism,
and a rejection of mainstream medicine and sci­
ence (for eample, negative attitudes toward safe
sex, vaccines, and human-caused climate change.)
If conspiracy theories are potentially damaging
and sometimes even contradict each other (as in the
case of those who believe the conspiracy theory that
Princess Diana was murdered but also tend to believe
tl1e conspiracy theory that she faked her death) why
do some people persist in embracing and propagating
them? In certain cases, official or authoritative expla­
nations for events are inadequate or contrived to
meet political or other objectives, and people know it.
There a.re also professional opinion makers-includ­
ing well-known personalities on social media, radio,
and television-who make a living by stoking the
flames of conspiracism (e.g., Alex Jones), and they can
be effective at their jobs.
Beyond external factors, do internal psychologi­
cal mechanisms dispose individuals to believe conspir­
acy theories? Five mechanisms have been suggested: 26
1. A desire to discover meaning to counter uncer-
tainty and preserve beliefs. Such information
processing is a higher-level (more complex) ex­
ample of perceiving patterns in seeming ran­
domness, which we know our brains are
specialized to do well. Of course, in a hunt for
meaning, it's possible to go off the tracks.
2. Biased assimilation-similar to confirmation
bias-which refers to a tendency to incorpo­
rate information that confirms what we al­
ready believe is true, especially when lacking
cognitive tools or other skills to arrive at expla­
nations by more rational means.
3. Powerlessness, low status, lack of control, and
compensation for failures. Demonizing others
can be powerfully reinforcing, especially for
those who harbor prejudice or antagonism
against certain segments of society. Even if an
object of scorn is unspecified, it is convenient
to blame others for individual failings as part
of a self-healing strategy. After all, if such elu­
sive entities as the Illuminati, the Deep State,
powerful corporations, shape-shifting lizards,
or plant people control everything, then per­
sonal failures-financial or otherwise-are
hardly our own fault but, rather, the pre­
dictable outcome of a rigged system.
4. Narcissism and maintenance of a positive self­
image. Those who endorse conspiracy theories
may feel a need to be perceived as personally
 unique by possessing rare and important infor­
mation unknown to other people.
5. Defensiveness and a desire to strengthen group
identity by suggesting antagonists are conspir­
ing against the group, especially if the ingroup
is undervalued or threatened by an outgroup.
Looking Away
Once seen, we can't easily unsee the man in the
moon any more than a frog can ignore a darting in­
sect or we can force our brains to disacknowledge
the face of someone we know. Effective conspiracy
theories capture attention through audacious
claims, sometimes mixing outrageous notions with
clever interpretations. They are perverse in flaunt­
ing convention, bolstering egos while reinforcing
the worst expectations, or explaining what other­
wise seems inexplicable by suggesting something
shocking and sinister about what we may already
suspect is true. When an idea is as entertaining and
infuriating, titillating and extreme, reinforcing and
loathsome, laughable and egregious, personally ele­
vating and socially destructive as a popular conspir­
acy theory, chances are good that our interest will
be piqued. The irony is that conspiracy theories
thrive on the assumption proponents know there is
the official story, a reported story, and the underly­
ing truth, while what is offered up as conspiratorial
truth to well-meaning truth seekers might well be
anything but the truth. Nevertheless, like a high­
way accident or train wreck, it's difficult to ignore
or look away from a good conspiracy theory. El

REFERENCES
1. Shermer, Michael. 2020. "Why
People Believe Conspiracy The·
ories." Skeptic, Vol. 25, No. 1.
https:j /bit.ly/2HLz7iR
2. Pauly, Marc. "Conspiracy Theo-
ries," The Internet Encyclope-
dia of Philosophy. https://bit.ly
/34bSMQE
3. van Prooijen, J. W. and Dou-
glas, K. M. 2018. "Belief in
Conspiracy Theories: Basic
Principles of an Emerging Re-
search Domain," European
Journal of Social Psychology
48(7), 897-908. https://bit.ly
/2Sh4I3I
4. Chapman University. 2016.
"What Aren't They Telling Us?"
Chapman University Survey of
American Fears. Oct. 11. https:
//bit.ly/2HPABcO
5. Weisstein, Eric W. 2020. "Ram-
sey Theory." From Math World-
A Wolfram Web Resource.
https://bit.ly/2GsOHB4
6. Hoffman, Paul. 1998. The Man
Who Loved Only Numbers: The
Story of Paul Erdos and the
Search for Mathematical Truth.
New York: Hyperion, 5-57.
7. Soifer, Alexander (Ed.). 2011.
Ramsey Theory: Yesterday,
Today, and Tomorrow. New
York: Springer.
8. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Pareidolia
9. Shermer, Michael. 2011. The
Believing Brain. New York:
Henry Holt.
10. For a brief history of the signal-
detection problem in the context
of the replication crisis in sci-
ence, see: Ritchie, Stuart. 2020.
Science Fictions: How Fraud,
Bias, Negligence, and Hype Un-
dermine the Search for Truth.
New York: Metropolitan Books.
11. Ingle, David. 1973. "Two Visual
Systems in the Frog," Science,
Vol. 181, Issue 4104, 1053-
1055.
12. Hubel, David H. and Wiesel,
Torsten N. 1959. "Receptive
Fields of Single Neurons in the
Cat's Striate Cortex," Journal of
Physiology, Vol. 148, 574-591.
13. Hubel, David H. and Wiesel,
Torsten N. 1963. "Receptive
Cells in Striate Cortex of Very
Young, Visually Inexperienced
Kittens," Journal of Neurophysi-
ology, Vol. 26, 994-1002.
14. Koch, Christof. 2004. The
Quest for Consciousness: A
Neurobiological Approach. New
York: Roberts and Co.
15. Kandel, Eric. 2018. The Disor-
dered Mind: What Unusual Brains
Tell Us About Ourselves. New
York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
16. Bate, Sarah. 2012. Face
Recognition and Its Disorders.
New York: Palgrave.
17. Van Prooijen, Jan-Willem. 2020.
"An Existential Threat Model of
Conspiracy Theories." Euro-
pean Psychologist, 25, 16-25.
https://bit.ly/33n5eOG
18. Stanton, Zack. 2020. "You're
Living in the Golden Age of Con-
spiracy Theories." Politico, June
17. https://politi.co/33mgydG
19. Uscinski, Joseph E. and Parent,
Joseph M. 2014. American
Conspiracy Theories. New York:
Oxford University Press.
20. Enders, Adam M. and Small-
page, Steven M. 2019. "Who
Are Conspiracy Theorists? A
Comprehensive Approach to Ex-
plaining Conspiracy Beliefs."
Social Science Quar terly, Vol.
100, No. 6, October.
https://bit.ly/33mnHuw
21. Shermer, Michael. 2019. Con-
spiracies and Conspiracy Theo-
ries: What We Should and
Shouldn't Believe-and Why.
Audible Original. https://amzn
to/2Sm2gDa
22. Goreis, Andreas and Voracek,
Martin. 2019. "A Systematic
Review and Meta-Analysis of
Psychological Research on Con-
spiracy Beliefs," Frontiers in
Psychology 11. https://bit.ly/
33IpAHG
23. Oliver, Eric and Wood, Thomas
J. 2014. "Conspiracy Theories
and the Paranoid Style(s) of
Mass Opinion." American Jour-
nal of Political Science, Vol.
58, No. 4, 952-966. See also:
Oliver, Eric. 2020. "The Sci-
ence of Conspiracy Theories
and Political Polarization." Big
Brains podcast.
https://bit.ly/3cTzvav
24. Uscinski, Joseph E. (Ed.) 2018.
Conspiracy Theories and the
People Who Believe Them. Ox-
ford University Press.
25. Douglas, K. M, Uscinski, J. E.,
Sutton, R. M. et al. 2019. "Un-
derstanding Conspiracy Theo-
ries," Advances in Political
Psychology 40(1).
https://bit.ly/3I75qY8
26. Ibid.

volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 33

 ARTICLE

QAnon in Context
BY MICHAEL SHERMER

THE CONSPIRACY THEORY QANON-WHICH HOLDS THAT A SECRET
Satanic cult of pedophiles led by politicians and celebrities
such as Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton, Lady Gaga, and even
Tom Hanks has infiltrated the U.S. government, and is being
countered by President Donald Trump-has emerged over
the past couple of years as the most popular since the 9/11
Truther and the Obama Birther movement. Let's put this
conspiracy theory in context.
First, what type of conspiracy theory is QAnon? In my
Audible/Great Courses course on Conspiracies and Conspir­
acy Theories I reviewed several classificatory systems con­
spiracy researchers have compiled, including Medicine,
Religion, Science and Technology, Suspicious Deaths, and
most notably Government (false flag operations, Pearl Har­
bor, 9/11, FEMA prison camps, Sandy Hook, the Philadelphia
Experiment, and the Clintons) and Secret Organizations (the
Bilderberg Group, the Council on Foreign Relations, the
Freemasons, the Illuminati, the International Monetary
Fund, the Trilateral Commission, and the Zionist Occupation
Government). QAnon and the corresponding "deep state"
conspiracy theory is firmly embedded in these last two types
of conspiracy theories.
In his 2013 book The United States ofParanoia, journalist
Jesse Walker has identified four types of conspiracy theories:
• The "Enemy Outside"refers to theories based on figu res alleged to be
scheming against a community from without.
• The "Enemy Within"finds the conspirators lurking inside the nation,
who are indistinguishable from ordinary citizens.
• The "Enemy Above" involves powerful people manipulating events
for their own gain.
• The "Enemy Be/ow"features the lower classes working to overturn
the social order.
In his 2003 book A Culture of Conspiracy, political sci­
entist Michael Barkun classifies conspiracy theories into
three types:
• Event conspiracy theories, such as the JFK assassination, 9/J 1,
Sandy Hook.
• Systemic conspiracy theories, such as those involving social con­
trol, political power, and even world domination.
• Superconspiracy theories, such as those involving a single individ­
ual or force that controls everything, from a politician to an
alien force to Satan himself.
In these classificatory schemes QAnon is an "enemy
within" and a combination of systemic and superconspiracy
theory. A clue as to why people believe QAnon may be found
in Barkun's threefold model of explanation:
-First, conspiracy theories claim to explain what normal historical
and political analysis cannot. They try to make sense of a
world that is otherwise nonsensical.
-Second, they explain the world in a relatively simple way, almost
Manichean in dividing the world into good and evil, with con­
spirators representing the dark side of humanity.
-Third, conspiracy theories are a type of secret knowledge that is
either unknown or underappreciated by others; the conspir­
acist is in on the secret while the unwashed masses continue
about Lheir lives either brainwashed or simply ignorant of the
cabalistic forces operating around them.
The simplicity of most conspiracy theories is what makes
them appealing. It's hard to wrap our minds around the matrix of
causal variables that contribute to the making of historical, polit­
ical, and economic events. Indeed, social scientists have devel­
oped sophisticated statistical techniques and computer models
to tease apart the many variables that shape any human behavior
or social phenomenon. Conspiracy theories allow people to cut
through all that complexity and to identify a clear villain.
In his 2015 book Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Con­
spiracy Theories, psychologist Rob Brotherton makes a similar
point. "Things seem a whole lot simpler in the world according
to conspiracy theories;' he writes. "The prototypical conspiracy
theory ... assumes nothing is as it seems; it portrays the conspira­
tors as preternaturally competent; and as unusually evil."
To the classificatory schemes of Jesse Walker and Michael
Barkun I would add another distinction: the one between Para­
noid Conspiracy Theories involving ultra-secret entities for which
there is little to no evidence and are largely driven by paranoia,
and Realistic Conspfracy Theories involving normal political insti­
tutions and corporate entities conspiring to manipulate the sys­
tem to gain an unfair, immoral, and sometimes illegal advantage.
Paranoid Conspiracy Theories include aliens, evil forces,
world-domination schemes, or cabals so numerous and plots so
complicated that they could never be pulled off. Examples in­
clude the Bildebergers, Rockefellers, or Rothchilds running the
world's economies, the Illl111linati determining political elections
and power relations, and even 9/11 as an inside job, all which
would require hundreds or even thousands of operatives work­
ing in perfect harmony and complete secrecy. QAnon is unques­
tionably a conspiracy theory for paranoids.
Realistic Conspiracy Theories include government agencies
and corporate entities engaged in power consolidation, personal

34 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020

profiteering, tax-cheating schemes, regulation-dodging activities,
and any number of shenanigans that we see routinely on the
nightly news. Watergate is an example from government, Volks­
wagen cheating emission regulations is an example from indus­
try, Wells Fargo opening fake bank accounts is an example from
business, and the usual insider trading and tax-avoidance plots are
examples from finance. These are true conspiracy theories, and
QAnon does not fit into them and has no chance of being true.
Realistic conspiracy theories often involve power, or the
lack of it. In his 1985 book The Liberty Lobby and the American
Right, the historian Frank Mintz popularized the term "conspir­
acism" to describe the beliefs of people without power who are
prone to view history as being primarily driven by people with
power. As he wrote:
Conspiracism serves the needs of diverse political and social groups
in America and elsewhere. It identifies elites, blames them for eco­
nomic and social catastrophes, and assumes that things will be bet­
ter once popular action can remove them from positions of power.
The role of power as a central element in the strncture of
conspiracy theories was affirmed by the political scientists
Joseph Uscinski and Joseph Parent. Performing an analysis of
over 100,000 letters sent to the New York Times over the course
of 121 years, they coded the content for conspiracy related
themes. Their analysis generated three pages worth of conspira­
tors, from Adolf Hitler and the African National Congress to the
World Health Organization and Zionist villagers, catalogued
into seven types: Left, Right, Communist, Capitalist, Govern­
ment, Media, and Other. (This last type includes Freemasons,
and even scientists and the AMA!).
Letter writers in the 1890s, for example, were afraid that
Mormons had rigged elections for Republicans and that Canada
and England were conspiring to reclaim U.S. territmy. In the
early 1900s correspondents were worried about the role of fi­
nancial interests in undermining democracy. And so on
throughout the 20 th century, dispelling the myth that conspir­
acism is a recent phenomenon.
The common theme running throughout these letters was
power. People writing to the New York Times editors expressed
their concern that someone or something was engaged in getting
or using illegitimate power to manipulate others, which as we
shall see later in the course is not always a false conspiracy theory.
With power comes fear-the fear that someone has more
power than the conspiracists. In 2016, my colleagues at Chapman
University conducted a study on what Americans fear the most.
The research team led by Christopher Bader found that 54.3% of
Americans believe that the government is concealing what they
know about the 9/11 attacks. And it's not just 9/11. Here are some
events and topics, along with the percentage of people who think
the government is hiding what they know about each:
-The JFK assassination: 4 9.6%
-Alien encounters: 4 2.6%
-Global warming: 4 2.1%
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM
-Plans for a one world government: 3 2.9%
-Obama's birth certificate: 30.2%
-The origin of the AIDS virus: 30.2%
-The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia: 27.8%
-And 24.2% of Americans believe the government is concealing
what it knows about the moon landing.
Emblematic of just how strong conspiratorial thinking can
be, once you put people into a conspiracy mindset they will even
believe in a made up conspiracy. To wit, Bader and his colleagues
threw into the mix "tl1e North Dakota Crash:' Remarkably, they
found that a third of Americans think that the government is
concealing information about this non-existent event.
The implications are clear: believing in conspiracies
makes one fearful. Bader and his colleagues also found a cor­
relation between the number of conspiracy beliefs a person
holds and that person's distrust of others. They assessed this
by two measures: (1) fear that their significant other is cheat­
ing, and (2) fear that others are talking about them.
-For those with no conspiracy beliefs, these two fears were held by
6.6% and 4.4% respectively;
-for those who believe 1-3 conspiracies the percentages of these
fears were 7.4% and 6.6%,
-for those holding 4-7 conspiracy beliefs the numbers were 11%
and 6%,
-and those who believe in 8-10 conspiracies distrusted their
spouse and others at 17.6% and 1 1.3%.
Perhaps most disturbingly for real world consequences,
Bader and his colleagues found that the more conspiracies peo­
ple believe in the more likely they are to buy a gun. Specifically:
-7.1% of people with no conspiracy beliefs bought a gun out of
fear, compared to .. .
-10% holding 1- 3 conspiracies
-15.7% for those holding 4-7 conspiracies, and ...
-17.4% believing in 8-10 conspiracies.
In studying the people most likely to believe in conspiracies,
the Chapman researchers concluded that conspiracy theorists:
Tend to be more pessimistic about the near future, more fear­
ful of government, less trusting of other people in their lives
and more likely to engage in actions due to their fears, such as
purchasing a gun.
In fact, QAnon began in 2016 with the"Qonspiracy theory"
of"Pizzagate." Promulgators of this theory asserted-without
any evidence and beyond belief-that Hillary Clinton was di­
recting a pedophilia ring out of a pizza parlor. As absurd as this
sounds, the Pizza.gate conspiracy theory led a young man to
shoot up a restaurant with an AR-15-style rifle, claiming he in­
tended to break up the perceived cabal of perverts. It was fortu­
nate no one was hurt in the incident, but it revealed the power
of conspiratorial paranoia. El
35
 ARTICLE
QAnon Is Just a
Warmed Over Witch
Panic-and It's Also
Very Dangerous
BY DANIEL LOXTON
As 2020 NEARS ITS END AND THE Covrn-19 PANDEMIC
continues, a rapidly growing far right conspiracy the­
ory increasingly dominates headlines. QAnon is a
crowd-sourced online mythology inspired by cryptic
anonymous internet posts appearing since 2017 from
an unknown figure (or group) known as "Q" or "Q
Clearance Patriot:' It is an expanded successor to the
debunked 2016 "Pizzagate" conspiracy theory, which
claimed that Hillary Clinton and other prominent
Democrats operated a child sex trafficking ring under
a Washington, DC pizzeria called Comet Ping Pong.
QAnon is also rooted in much older mythologies
about sinister secret societies of Satan worshippers,
witches, or Jews.
QAnon believers hold that our modern world is
secretly ruled by a "cabal" or "deep state" of cartoon­
ishly wicked evildoers hidden in plain sight. "Every
President after Reagan was one of these deep state
criminals;' believers claim.1 Indeed, most "famous
politicians, actors, singers, CEOs, and celebrities" are
supposedly part of the cabal. For example, entertainers
Beyonce Knowles-Carter, Lady Gaga, and Tom Hanks
are all thought to be prominent members. The Oba­
mas and Clintons are supposedly sinister cabal leaders.
These criminals aren't merely bad, greedy, or
ruthless. They're said to be deliberately, totally, breath­
takingly evil. They worship Satan and may be in league
witl1 supernatural demons. They systematically abuse,
torture, and murder children. They're pedophiles.
They maintain their youth through intoxicating injec­
tions of blood drained from children ritually mur­
dered at the moment of maximum terror. The cabal
also eats babies.
To maintain power, the cabal controls all main­
stream news media and engineers every ill that
36 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
plagues modern society. As one seductive introduc­
tory video2 asks curious viewers,
Have you ever wondered why we go to war? Or why
you never seem to be able to get out of debt? Why
there is poverty, division, and crime? What if I told
you there was a reason for it all? What if I told you it
was done on purpose?
The idea that Satanists rule tlle world is a story
of Lovecraftian horror in which the normal world is
an illusion and a much darker true world lies just be­
yond the veil. And yet, QAnon believers are more ex­
cited than scared. People who "take the red pill" or
"wake up" to the claimed conspiracy are offered a
simple explanation for all of the world's problems.
They're also offered a reassuring prediction for a bet­
ter future: "What if I told you that those who were
corrupting tlle world, poisoning our food, and ignit­
ing conflict were themselves about to be permanently
eradicated from tlle Earth?"
According to QAnon mythology, an apocalyptic
event called "The Storm" will soon cleanse the world
and usher in a utopia. The unlikely savior in this story
of revelation and renewal is none other than Presi­
dent Donald J. Trump. "Good patriots in the U.S. mili­
tary" supposedly "asked Trump to run for President so
they could take back control of America" from the Sa­
tanic overlords. This righteous struggle is the true
purpose of the Trump administration. "The world is
currently experiencing a dramatic covert war of Bibli­
cal proportions-literally the fight for Earth-be­
tween the forces of good and evil," believers claim.
Clues about the progress of this clandestine war are
to be found in "Q drop" posts by the anonymous Q,
and in Trump's more cryptic statements and typos.
 Critical news stories about Trump are Satanic lies.
When asked about QAnon, Trump dissembled,
describing QAnon believers as "people that love our
country" and "like me very much, which I appreci­
ate." When asked during a pre-election televised town
hall interview to denounce the claim that "Democrats
are a Satanic pedophile ring, and that you are the sav­
iour;' Trump refused to do so. When exasperated
moderator Savannah Guthrie pressed Trump to admit
that his political opponents
aren't devil-worshipping child
molesters, Trump insisted, "I
don't know that, and neither
do you know that." 3
With Trump's tacit en­
couragement, the QAnon
community eagerly looks for­
ward to a moment called the
"Great Awakening;' when the
good patriots will reveal all
and Trump will seal his victory
with mass a..1Tests of high gov­
ernment officials. Hillary
Clinton and all of the other al­
leged Satanists will be "se­
verely punished." As one
QAnon YouTube personality
gushed: 'Tm excited. I'm
happy! ... Once you know the
information you are not in
fear; you're, like, empowered!
You are excited. You can't wait for justice to go down,
you can't wait for the kids to be saved, you can't wait
for the bad guys to be put in jail."4
The Power of QAnon
The anonymous Q purports to be a highly placed U.S.
intelligence officer sharing classified inside informa­
tion. Q's posts provide fragmented source material
about "pedo networks;' "child abductions for satanic
rituals" and the supposed battle against the "powers
of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of
evil in the heavenly realms." However, the style of
these posts is generally opaque, vague, and posed in
the form of insinuating questions. Dubbed "bread
crumbs;' they require creative, collaborative interpre­
tation by the QAnon community, allowing enthusiasts
to fill in the blanks for themselves.
The result is a viral, organic, crowd-sourced ide­
ology that can stretch to accommodate a broad diver­
sity of conspiratorial views. It is also flexible enough
to allow believers to dismiss Q's failed predictions and
shifting claims. (For example, Q's earliest posts in Oc-
tober of 2017 predicted the imminent arrest of Hillary
Clinton, which did not occur.)
QAnon has emerged as a grand unified conspir­
acy theory. QAnon is broadly compatible with what­
ever conspiracy beliefs one happens to hold regarding
vaccines, Covid-19, fake news, Jews, vampirism, a
New World Order, the Vatican, deep state conspira­
tors, "false flag" hoaxes, white nationalism, immi­
grants, or practically anything else. QAnon acts as a
kind of glue that promotes
and binds together seem­
ingly unrelated conspiracy
theories. When people ap­
proach social media with
.•,
curiosity regarding one con­
spiracy claim (that vaccines
cause autism, for example),
those platforms' recommen­
dation algorithms often pro­
mote QAnon content that
entices viewers into further
conspiracy beliefs.
This flexibility allows
QAnon to appeal to secular
people as well as fundamen­
talist "spiritual warriors." It
is able to attract people we
would normally expect to re­
ject far-right positions. For
example, some people in the
"wellness" community find
that their doubts about vaccines and mainstream
medicine harmonize with QAnon's rejection of main­
stream media and public health. In QAnon's bizarre
melting pot, New Age hippies support a Republican
president, adopt radical libertarian objections to pan­
demic safety measures, and help to inflame the pas­
sions of far right "militia" members and white
nationalists.
Dangerous Beliefs
As I write this, the United States is confronting
multiple serious and mutually compounding crises:
a ferociously divided electorate; an unprecedented
presidential election; mass protests against racial
injustice; a severe economic recession; widespread
unemployment; a pandemic that has already
claimed 223,000 American lives; and the escalating
threat of white nationalist domestic terrorism on
the right and Antifa-fueled violent protests on the
left. These crises created QAnon. In return, QAnon
makes these crises worse.
The pandemic has thrown jet fuel on the QAnon
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 37
 fire, bringing in countless new believers. Those believ­
ers tend to interpret Covid-19 as somehow serving
the agenda of the Satanic elite. Q suggests that the
pandemic is part of a plot to steal the election from
Trump by promoting the use of mail-in ballots. Other
members of the community object to Covid-19 safety
measures such as masks. For example, one woman
who previously made headlines with her QAnon claim
that actor Tom Hanks "purchased me from my father
for sex as a dissociated mind control doll" has more re­
cently claimed "masks are mind control" and "man­
dating masks is Satanic." She argues in a YouTube
video that masks are part of a "gigantic Satanic ritual
initiation" intended for "evil and control, period." 5
QAnon claims are incitements to violence. They
have already triggered isolated violent incidents, in­
cluding an armed standoff at the Hoover dam and at
least one murder. QAnon members anticipate further
violence and civil unrest during the overthrow of the
supposed cabal. For this reason, the FBI has warned
that QAnon and other "anti-government, identity
based, and fringe political conspiracy theories" will
"very likely motivate some domestic extremists . . . to
commit criminal and sometimes violent activity."
Further, QAnon encourages the targeting of spe­
cific people accused of membership in the cabal.
"These targets are then subjected to harassment cam­
paigns and threats by supporters of the theory;' warns
the FBI, "and become vulnerable to violence or other
dangerous acts:·
Especially worrisome is the possibility of QAnon­
motivated violence during or following the 2020 U.S.
presidential election. People radicalized into the belief
that public figures are servants of Satan naturally pose
a threat-especially when egged on by the President
himself. When the perceived enemy is considered ele­
mentally evil, and the future of the world is thought to
be at stake, the most extreme measures may appear
reasonable to committed believers.
In recent months, this rising threat has moti­
vated social media companies to take unusual steps to
combat QAnon. Facebook has armounced an evolving
series of "measures designed to disrupt the ability of
QAnon and Militarized Social Movements to operate
and organize on our platform;' including the removal
of "over 1,500 Pages and Groups for QAnon contain­
ing discussions of potential violence." Facebook later
expanded its restrictions on the conspiracy group,
announcing, "we will remove any Facebook Pages,
Groups and Instagram accounts representing QAnon,
even if they contain no violent content." Twitter and
YouTube have recently taken similar steps.
However, QAnon has been growing since 2017.
38 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
Much of the damage is already done. Polls suggest that
around 23 rnillion Americans hold a "very favorable" or
"somewhat favorable" view of QAnon. Larger percent­
ages are prepared to accept individual QAnon claims.
For example, 18 percent of respondents in one survey
agreed that it is "probably or definitely true" that
Trump is secretly preparing for a "mass arrest of gov­
ernment officials and celebrities." Although some of
these respondents heard this "mass arrests" claim for
the first time from the survey itself, this finding sug­
gests that almost 60 million Americans could become
receptive to this essentially fascist QAnon claim.6
Recycled Antisemitism
QAnon's extremist claims are certainly outlandish,
but this does not make them original. QAnon largely
repackages older conspiracy beliefs dating back
decades and even centuries.
For example, the belief that scheming elite pup­
pet masters control the banks and the media merely
rehashes tired but dangerous antisemitic tropes. The
scenario envisioned by QAnon echoes the infamous
early 20th century antisemitic hoax, The Protocols
o f the Elders of Zion. That malicious document pur­
ported to record a secret Jewish plan to take over the
world and oppress gentiles. The Jewish elite would
achieve "absolute despotism" over all nations by con­
trolling the banks and the press. Although discredited
as a plagiarized forgery in 1921, the Protocols hoax
went on to influence Adolf Hitler and his Nazi
regime. Hitler claimed the Protocols were authentic,
and said they revealed the true "nature and activity of
the Jewish people and . . . their ultimate final aims."
Given this blood-soaked history, it is noteworthy that
QAnon claims prominent Jewish Americans such as
George Soros are secret despotic rulers of the Earth.
Conceptually, QAnon's antisemitic roots extend
back much further to the medieval "blood libel" that
Jews ritually murdered and ate Christian children.
These wildly dangerous false allegations had terrible
and predictable real-world consequences: sporadic
massacres of European Jews.
Satanic Panic
QAnon also rehashes debunked old claims of Satanic
Ritual Abuse cults, which were based in turn upon
Renaissance era claims about sinister secret covens of
witches. QAnon's imagined Satanic cabal is essen­
tially identical to the network of highly placed Sa­
tanists imagined during the Satanic Panic of the
198os-especially in their shared claims of systematic
ritual abuse of children.
The Satanic Panic was ignited by a bizarre memoir
called Michelle Remembers. Published in 1980, it tells
the supposedly true (but later discredited) story of a
girl ritually tortured for months by a Satanic cult. The
story emerged during intense therapy sessions in
which the adult Michelle was pressured to "recover"
increasingly outlandish "memories" of her supposed
childhood ordeal-false memories that did not previ­
ously exist.
The book's claims were not true, but they were
horrifying. Michelle allegedly endured ritualized hu­
miliation and sexual abuse. In one passage, a woman
wearing a "black cape with a hood" dipped a colored
stick into a "silver goblet and inserted" the stick "in
Michelle's rectum:' The woman shoved other sticks
"everywhere I had an opening!" Several scenes fea­
ture dead, murdered, or dismembered children and
infants. In the book's grisly, absurd climax, Satan him­
self appears as a character. He recites bad poetry and
accepts tribute from the cult, including offerings of
dead infants "in a pile at his feet. " 7
This lurid tale proved much more influential than
it deserved. It created a "script" for countless later
claims of Satanic abuse of children. Many misguided
therapists pressured their own patients to "recover"
stories like Michelle's. These copycat stories were then
repeated in books, workshops, and TV interviews,
reenforcing the moral panic's standard narrative tem­
plate: hidden legions of Satanists are secretly abusing
thousands of children. Books warned of the "ever
growing web being spun by those who desire to lead
your children into satanism:' Ensnared youngsters
could suffer "all manner of sexual perversions;• "sexual
orgies which involved children and animals,"8 and
even human sacrifice and cannibalization of infants.
None of these Satanic abuse stories was true.
Years of investigations by journalists and law enforce­
ment failed to uncover even one single genuine case.
Nevertheless, the resulting international panic led to
numerous false accusations against individuals, some
of whom were tried and wrongly convicted for imagi­
nary crimes against children.
Covens of Witches
In retrospect, Michelle Remembers was clearly in­
spired by fantastical horror movie depictions of Devil
worshipers. Those films were inspired in turn by cen­
turies-old folklore.
It was widely believed in Renaissance times that
society was plagued by hidden covens of witches who
worshipped Satan and conspired against Christians.
The witches were supposed to be utterly, unspeakably
evil. "So heinous are the crimes of witches that they
even exceed the sins and the fall of the bad Angels;•
said the infamous witch hunting manual Malleus
Maleficarum ("Hammer of Witches"). The manual
claimed that witches "are in the habit of devouring
and eating infant children." For example, one man al­
legedly "missed his child from its cradle, and finding
a congress of women in the night-time, swore that he
saw them kill his child and drink its blood and devour
it." The witches were also "taught by the devil to con­
fect from the limbs of such children an unguent
which is very useful for their spells:·
The threat of pure evil justified even tl1e most ex­
treme measures to protect society. Suspected witches
were brutally tortured until tl1ey told the expected
stories that interrogators wanted to hear. When they
inevitably did so, tliey were burned to death. Their ex­
torted false "confessions" appeared to confirm the be­
liefs of the witch hunters,and justified further attacks
on innocent people-usually the most vulnerable,
such as destitute women and the mentally ill. Many
thousands of innocent people were murdered in the
name of this conspiracy theory.
QAnon Will Not "Save" Children
President Trump has claimed that QA.non believers
"are very much against pedophilia. They fight it very
hard." QA.non does indeed rally under a banner to
"save the children!" However, both Trump and
QA.non are mistaken. QA.non isn't doing anything at
all to fight pedophiles. They're railing against imagi­
nary witches.
One of the tragedies of the Satanic Panic of the
1980s was that it created confusion and diverted at­
tention and law enforcement resources away from
the genuine social evil of child sexual abuse. The peo­
ple locked up for Satanic sexual abuse were innocent.
People guilty of actual sexual abuse all too often went
unpunished.
In an effort to protect children, moral campaign­
ers in the 1980s led crusades against supposedly Sa­
tanic music, role-playing games, Disney movies, and
young adult fiction. Their pamphlets and seminars
taught law enforcement officers to look for imaginary
signs of imaginary abuse by imaginary cults. Sup­
posed signs of Satanic cult activity included every­
thing from teenaged boredom to the hippie "peace"
symbol.9 Activists and counsellors accomplished
nothing for children with their bad advice about non­
existent tlireats. They did nothing to bring criminals
to justice. Instead, they sent police on wild goose
chases, left children in the hands of misguided,
overzealous investigators, and ruined the lives of in­
nocent people who were falsely accused.
Likewise, QA.nan's baseless accusations against
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 39
 Democrats and celebrities will not help children.
Like the moral crusaders of the Satanic Panic, QAnon
imagines that perpetrators of both genders conspire
in a vast national network, abduct children, and
gather in groups to commit abuse for ritual purposes.
In reality, child molesters are most often lone males
who are known to their victims and motivated by
pathological sexual desires.
Instead of saving children, QAnon's incitements
to violence put children and adults in danger. On De­
cember 4, 2016, an armed gunman walked into the
Comet Ping Pong pizza parlor intending to rescue chil­
dren from Hillary Clinton's alleged child sex traffick­
ing ring located in the basement ...of a building that
does not have a basement. Despite internet rumors,
the only children in the pizzeria were customers.
Those kids were placed in jeopardy when the would­
be rescuer fired three shots from an AR-15 rifle.
Thankfully, no one was hurt. (The man swTendered to
police.He was later sentenced to four years in prison.)
The threat of QAnon-motivated domestic ter­
rorism diverts law enforcement resources from
real problems. Every minute cops spend watching
QAnon is a minute not spent investigating other
crimes-including abuse against children.
Conclusion
QAnon's conspiracy claims are not based in fact. The
anonymous Q poster could be anyone from an over­
seas "troll farm " to a teenaged prankster. Q's claims are
frequently meaningless or factually wrong. There was
never any good reason to believe this absurd story.
However, some people do believe it, to tl1eir own
detriment and ours. Intense fringe beliefs tend to harm
believers by isolating them from friends and loved
ones. In this case, the content of their beliefs also
threatens society at large. It is dangerous when groups
are radicalized to perceive their adversaries as irre-
deemably evil. What wouldn't one do to stop people
who eat babies? As one former QAnon member re­
cently told CNN, it "still bothers me to this day, how
willing and happy and joyfully I would have reacted to
something that I would normally want no part in;' such
as cheering for the extralegal arrest of Hillary Clinton.
"This is how you get good people to do bad things." 10
Eliminating QAnon's threat to society would take
more than watchful cops and social media bans. It
would require QAnon supporters to change their
minds about a cherished belief and a community
they've invested in heavily. Admitting serious error is
an extraordinarily difficult and courageous thing for
anyone to do. Generous, respectful, personal outreach
can sometimes help; shaming will not. Believers need
support if they are to have any hope of transitioning
away from their misguided movement. "It has to start
witl1 empathy and understanding;' the former QAnon
member told CNN. QAnon believers are highly insu­
lated from contrary information by their beliefs that
news media are untrustworthy and nonbelievers are
blind to tl1e truth. True communication can only take
place when barriers to communication are removed
through compassion.
That's easier said than done. However, there's ur­
gent reason to try. Conspiracy theories thrive most
dangerously during times of uncertainty and societal
stress-such as during a pandemic. During the me­
dieval Black Death, conspiracy theorists claimed that
Jews were secretly causing the plague by poisoning
wells. As a result, mob violence erupted across Eu­
rope. Hundreds of Jewish communities were wiped
out; many thousands of men, women, and children
were burned to death.
Another pandemic rages today. As millions suffer
and mourn and political divides deepen into chasms,
one simple truth can help make us safer: we are in
this thing together. El

REFERENCES
1. "Q - The Plan To Save The
World." YouTube, March 20,
2019. https://bit.ly/3olxxVH
(accessed October 18, 2020.)
2. Ibid.
3. "Trump refuses to denounce
QAnon conspiracies." CNN Poli-
tics, October 16, 2020.
https://cnn.it/3mj8hxx (ac-
cessed October 18, 2020.)
4. Kim Cohen. "Why I'm Not Scared
& You SHOULDN'T Be Either!
THE GREAT AWAKENING! (5 Lev-
els To Q.)" YouTube, April 9,
2020. https://bit.ly/2Tn21al
(accessed October 18, 2020.)
5. Sarah Ashcraft. "Masks are
Mind Control." YouTube, July 17,
2020. https://bit.ly/3dRWYJQ
(accessed October 18, 2020.)
6. Brian Schaffner. "QAnon and
Conspiracy Beliefs." Institute for
Strategic Dialogue, October 5,
2020. https:/ /bit.ly/3kFvdqB
7. Michelle Smith and Lawrence
Pazder. Michelle Remembers.
(New York: Congdon & Lattes,
1980.) pp, 23, 216.
8. Pat Pulling with Kathy Cawthon.
The Devil's Web: Who Is Stalking
Your Children for Satan? (Milton
Keynes, England: Word Publish•
ing, 1990.) pp. 1, 67.
9. Gnyland Hurst and Robert
Marsh. Satanic Cult Awareness.
(Self published pamphlet, date
unknown, acquired by NCJRS Jan
27, 1993.)
10. Bronte Lord and Richa Naik. "He
went down the QAnon rabbit hole
for almost two years. Here's how
he got out." CNN Business, Oc-
tober 18, 2020. https://cnn.it/
3okuMUR (accessed October
18, 2020.)

40 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020

 ARTICLE

Do Diversity Training
Programs Work?
Creating a Culture of Inclusion through
Scientific Reasoning
BY MONA SUE WEISSMARK

WITH THE RlSE OF THE BLACK LIVES MATTER (BLM) gether face-to-face with adult children of Nazis, as
movement in 2020, government agencies, corpora­ well as the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of
tions, and universities and colleges began scram­ African American slaves and slave holders, I docu­
bling to show their support by instituting diversity mented the results in my 2004 book Justice Matters
and racial sensitivity training programs, not dissimi­ ( made into a documentary in 2006) and more re­
lar to what Starbucks did in 2018 when they closed cently in my 2020 book The Science ofDiversity.
8,000 stores to put 175,000 employees through an The preponderance of diversity trainings begin
"anti-bias" training program in response to the with the assumption that we need to eliminate bias
media frenzy after two African American men were and prejudice by purging our "wrong" beliefs, such
arrested while waiting for a business meeting to as those related to historical injustices, power dif­
begin there. ferentials, race and gender differences, and so forth.
Underlying such programs is the belief in the The contentiousness of this methodology has taken
value of diversity and inclusion, and many organiza­ center stage in both the private and political arenas.
tions have taken steps to implement diversity President Trump recently ordered the heads of fed­
training programs that subtly insist on ideological eral agencies to cease and desist from offering
conformity and often silence open discussions. Nei­ such trainings, noting that they "engender divi­
ther measure is inclusive. The seemingly noble in­ sion and resentment within the Federal work­
tention of encouraging inclusion is often subverted force." By contrast, universities and corporations
by agenda-driven trainings that leave little space for are actively ramping up their diversity and racial
different perspectives or sensitivity programs.
nuanced conversations. A review of the re­
This approach contradicts search on diversity and
the very essence of the racial sensitivity programs
values they are trying to shows that thousands of
promote. diversity intervention pro­
Most diversity and grams over 50 years have
racial sensitivity training been ineffectual in remov­
programs are not up to the ing bias and prejudice
task of developing truly in­ from people. Telling
clusive environments be­ people that they are bi­
cause they do not foster ased and need to attend
psychological safety among a mandatory antibias
their participants. I learned training, or a racial sensi­
this the hard way at Har­ tivity program can acti­
vard where, as a clinical vate bias rather than
and social psychologist, I stamp it out. If people
brought adult children of feel forced to accept an
Holocaust survivors to- authority's agenda, they

volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 41

 may do the opposite to assert their autonomy.
In order to comprehend the complexities of
our biases, it is necessary to understand their bio­
logical, neurological and psychological underpin­
nings. Commanding people to get rid of biases that
are deeply rooted in their personal memories and
histories is akin to asking them to shed their very
legacies and identities.
Moreover, telling people to get rid of their bi­
ases is apt to fail when there are strong feelings on
both sides of a historically sensitive issue. Evidence
for this phenomenon was apparent in the multiple
studies I conducted at Harvard on the aforemen­
tioned children of Holocaust survivors and children
of Nazis, along with the great-grandchildren of en­
slaved African Americans with the descendants of
slave owners. Both sets reported that they felt they
had inherited a legacy that consumed large parts of
their lives and identities.
The facilitated conversations between these polar­
ized groups revealed similar threads of feelings and as­
sociations to the past that run through their lives. They
also revealed an important difference in that most chil­
dren of Nazis reported their parents told them stories
about the war, whereas children of survivors reported
their parents told them stories about the Holocaust.
The daughter of a survivor put it like this:
I didn't even know there was a war until I was a
teenager. I didn't even know fifty million people
were killed during the war. I thought just six million
Jews were killed. The stories I heard were always
about taking the Jews to concentration camps. For
my whole childhood I think I thought it was only the
Jews who were killed. That it was just Nazis killing
Jews. It wasn't until some history class that I realized
this was a major war. But you know, still I think the
Jews had it the worse, they suffered the most because
every Jew was a victim like someone said.1
The daughter of a Nazi officer put it like this:
I didn't know about the concentration camps until I
was in my teens. First I heard about the Party. Then
I heard stories about the war, about bombs falling or
about not having food. I would hear that my father
was an officer in the army, and I remember seeing
pictures of him in uniform. And I remember his
black shiny boots. And I saw a picture of him on a
horse. At first I remember feeling proud to find out
my father was an officer in the army.2
By providing an environment in which both sides
could openly express their experiences, these two his­
l
toricaly opposed groups were able to understand that
42 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
there was a sense of double victimhood. Without such
an environment, this phenomenon would have pre­
vented these conversations from the progress that led
to common threads of understanding.
In a time of pandemic and racial reckoning,
and with our civil discourse at a standstill, conver­
sations on polarizing topics have an urgency as
never before. Many people are walking on eggshells
wondering what to say and how to say it, or worse,
some people don't feel safe to share their viewpoint
out of fear of reprisal.
This reflects the discomfort many have with
the current widespread cancel culture. "It no longer
feels safe to have conversations with people who
have a different viewpoint" they say. Diversity and
racial sensitivity programs aimed at exposing and
curing biases and prejudices are unlikely to succeed
at creating a culture of inclusion where everyone
feels heard, and where nuanced meaningful conver­
sations take place. Given these constraints, it is nat­
ural to ask, "Is there anything we can do? Are there
any solutions we can live with?"
The quick answer is "yes." The solution requires
a fair process of facilitated conversations in which
people learn how to reason together scientifically
about difficult questions, even when in stark dis­
agreement. Over the years, thousands of students
have joined me to reason scientifically about some of
the most important polarizing questions we face as a
society and in our everyday lives, including questions
on racial justice, slavery, police racial bias, white
privilege, immigration, BLM, and reparations.
People do not always think of scientific reason­
ing as a path to understanding in emotionally
charged conflicts. However, the nature of scientific
reasoning causes one to pause, reflect, look to data
for insight, and reach scientific consensus.
When I was teaching the Psychology of Diver­
sity course at Harvard recently, one of my students
expressed the view that racism has long been the
cause of rampant police brutality. In response, an­
other student suggested that police brutality, re­
gardless of race, may be a more pressing issue and
noted a recent news article supporting the same.
We can imagine how an exchange beginning in
this manner might unravel into an emotional de­
bate and end in a deadlock. Especially in our cur­
rent politically polarized environment, we can also
see how little progress would be made had another
student expressed the view that police brutality was
not an issue at all. However, as a facilitator of the
conversation, I encouraged them to ask "What do
the data say about the relation between race and
police brutality? Which other factors contribute to
the nexus between the two?"
The class was then tasked with finding peer-re­
viewed scientific journal articles on the issue that
have conflicting findings. When people are encour­
aged to seek out information in support of both
sides, they are encouraged to seek out information
without an agenda. This allowed us to problem
solve together by asking, "Why do these studies
come to opposite conclusions? What data collec­
tion and analytic methods were used? What other
factors could play a role in the discrepancy?"
From there, the conversation was able to open
up and move fatwa.rd. We could then ask more dif­
ficult questions such as, "What effect does taking
race out of the conversation on police brutality
have on a person who has experienced racism?
What effect does placing race as the central cause
of police brutality have on a person who has experi­
enced such brutality without race being a factor?"
Scientific reasoning does not take emotion out of
the conversation. Instead, it allows us to pause and re­
flect on what effect our emotions have on the progres­
sion of our dialogue. This is what tends to go missing in
conversations about polarizing diversity topics, but it is
also what I have found to be imperative to include. It is
the only way to recognize our blind spots and trans­
form them into facilitators rather than obstacles.
This is the method used in science and prob­
lem-solving education. It is dialectic between per­
sons holding different hypotheses about a topic but
wishing to understand one another and test their
views. One does not judge the other for their view.
One does not try to win a debate. One does not
expect the other to change or think differently.
Rather, the expectation is that one will learn to rea­
son scientifically about the topic.
Many great scientists, including Nobel Prize
winners Marie Curie, Albert Einstein, and Richard
Feynman, have stressed that scientific reasoning is
the key to developing peoples' moral and intellectual
strengths, and that this would lead to a better society.
According to Feynman, the scientific worldview is a
habit of mind, and once acquired one cannot retreat
from it. I would underscore, as Feynman did, that
scientific reasoning contains within itself a system of
logic and standards of evidence that can be used for
building a culture of inclusion. This method has the
potential to create an environment where everyone
feels safe to express a hypothetical viewpoint and
open to understanding that more than one view can
be hypothetically true at once.
Scientific reasoning does not rely on armchair
theorizing, political conviction, or personal opin­
ion, but instead on methods of empirical research
independently available to anyone as a means of
opening the world to scrutiny. All opinions are
viewed as hypotheses to be tested, rather than as
appeals to emotion. When conversations on polar­
izing topics get bogged down by passionate opin­
ions, scientific reasoning lifts us up so we can
consider the alternative hypothesis.
It is a universal fact that diversity is a feature of
nature. This is tme of individuals, families, social
classes, religious groups, ethnic groups, and nations.
There will always be diverse polarized views with
which people passionately identify. Scientific reason­
ing is a fair two-sided method for evaluating polarized
views, fake news, misinformation, and disinformation.
Embracing scientific reasoning and using logic
and standards of evidence can bolster American ed­
ucation and heal our riven society. While agenda­
driven diversity training programs are divisive, the
scientific reasoning method is connective. Agenda­
driven diversity training programs try to resolve dif­
ferences by methods of shame and pressure that
seek to win and control the debate and by cherry­
picking evidence in support of an idea, action, or
theory, typically with the aim of persuading others
to share one's "right" view.
By contrast, the scientific reasoning method dis­
solves differences by asking people to consider all the
data, ask each other questions about what the data
mean, and reach a consensus about what is and is not
agreed on. They then have a foundation on which to
collaborate and explore how to test the questions about
the points on which they disagree. The process of sci­
entific reasoning is based on finding out what is true,
and not, "What can I prove and convince you of?"
Scientifically reasoning together shifts the dy­
namics of the culture from one of divisiveness to
one of connectedness, thereby making it possible to
have a truly inclusive culture that includes different
perspectives. That is why it is so vital. El
In appreciation of my current Harvard teaching fellows and re­
search assistants Labrita Andrews, Brian Chin, Marcelle Giovan­
netti, Bushra Hassan, Jeanette Lieb, and Marcelo Soares who help
run and continually improve the Harvard Psychology of Diversity
course and The Science of Diversity research projects. Their effort
is critical to the successes we have teaching the course and run­
ning the projects. Copyright © 2020 Mona Sue Weissmark All
Rights Reserved
REFERENCES
1. Weissmark, M., 2020. The Science of Diversity. Ox­
ford University Press, p. 219.
2. Ibid., 219-220.
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 43
 ARTICLE
Unpacking Political
Life in America
The Skeptics Society's Social and Political Attitudes Study
BY MARSHALL MCCREADY, ANONDAH SAIDE, AND KEVIN MCCAFFREE
FOR NEARLY 30 YEARS, THE SKEPTICS SOCIETY HAS
been dedicated to promoting science, reason, and ra­
tionality. Its members have endeavored to debunk
conspiracy theories, contest pseudoscience, and
share the best available scientific research. The Skep­
tics Society is always striving to find new avenues for
discussing and promoting science. The latest project,
the Skeptic Research Center 1 (SRC), is an effort to
directly engage readers with the process of survey
data collection and analysis. As researchers associ­
ated with this newly established center, we are
pleased to present the results of our initial reports.2
The findings of our first collaboration, called the
Social & Political Attitudes Study(SPAS), were released
across 10 separate reports from July 2020 through Sep­
tember 2020. The study was conducted by members of
the Worldview Foundations Research Team, composed
of sociologist Kevin McCaffree, psychologist Anonda.h
Saide, and graduate student Marshall McCready. The
survey was drawn from a nationally representative sam­
ple of adults in the United States in October 2019. Sur­
vey respondents were asked about their political views,
feelings towards those with opposing perspectives,
opinions about the role of language in constructing
reality, and more. All reports are freely accessible on
the SPAS page3 of the Skeptic Research Center website.
Our first ten reports included the following titles:
• Viewpoint Diversity and Political Bias (#10)
• Political Disagreement and Emotional Closeness (#9)
• Political Orientation and Political Attitudes (#8)
• Political Orientation and Information Sources (#7)
• Political Orientation and Decision-Making (#6)
· Political Affiliation and Attitudes about Language (#5)
• Attitudes on Inequality and Political Affiliation (#4)
• A Paradox of Tolerance? (#3)
• Political Affiliation and Political Intolerance (#2)
• Division in the Democratic Party ( #1)
We will briefly review five of the themes that
emerged in our reports below, and we encourage every-
44 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
one to check out the reports themselves and email re­
search@skeptic.com with comments or questions. We
welcome your own interpretation of the data.
Theme 1: Prevailing Political Disagreements
Unsurprisingly, relative to liberals, moderates and
conservatives were less likely to agree that the United
States government should open its borders to all im­
migrants in need.4 Almost tlrree quarters of liberals
endorsed this position compared to a little over a
third of moderates, and 15.5% of conservatives. On
the question of whether "abortion should always be a
women's choice;· 85% of liberals agreed it should,
61% of moderates, and 38% of conservatives (see Fig­
ure 1). Climate change was also, predictably, a point
of disagreement: only 40% of conservatives affirmed
that human actions are increasing global tempera­
tures compared to 74% of moderates, and 89% of lib­
erals. These hot button issues continue to serve as
litmus tests dividing most conservatives from most
liberals.
Theme 2: Support for Science
In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic and the
run-up to the 2020 election, we have seen all kinds
of contradictory and pseudoscientific claims circu­
lating in the news and on social media. People may
often use the latest scientific paper as a political
cudgel against their ideological opponents, but the
very attempt to do so belies an assumption that sci­
ence is (or ought to be) authoritative in our social
and political conversations.
Our study results showed that liberals, moder­
ates, and conservatives all agreed that they base their
political opinions on scientific evidence and reason
(see Figure 2).5 Liberals were, on average, a bit more
likely to report premising their political opinions on sci­
ence, compared to moderates or conservatives. How­
ever, an important caveat to keep in mind is that we
surveyed peoples' self-reported reliance on scientific
 evidence (versus emotion) in political judgements, so
Figure 1. Agreement with the statement. "Abortion should
we should be cautious about making any inferences
always be a woman's choice."
about how people actually form their political opinions
100 ..
in their daily life. Also, these data were collected last
October, and views may have changed due to science's
80 ..
politicization during the pandemic.
Another finding from the study was that people
across the political spectrum suppmted the dissemina­
tion of scientific research, even if it contained contro­
■
40 ..

versial findings.6 In our smvey, we set up a thought 49.5% Agree

experiment for respondents. The scenario involved a 20 ..
0 Neither
hypothetical study analyzing the effects of teaching 20% D Disagree
0 ..
both liberal and conservative perspectives in univer­ Liberal Moderate Conservative
sity classrooms. Specifically, respondents were told
that researchers examined whether or not presenting
diverse political points of view increased or decreased Figure 2. Agreement w ith the statement that, "My political
violence against ethnic minority groups on campus. opinions are based on scientific evidence and reason."
We then asked participants how important they
thought it would be for the results to be shared with
the public. Liberals, moderates, and conservatives all ..,C

□.
Cl/ 2
reported that they believed the results should be Cl/

shared, regardless of whether it increased or decreased Cl/

.... .___I __,I .

°'
.,:
violence. Compared to the other two groups though,
0 .....
liberals were more likely to emphasize the importance
of sharing the results with the public if those results
indicated violence against minorities increased, but
this difference between groups was small.
■ Liberal
0Moderate
0 Conservative
·3
Theme 3: Disunity Among Democrats
Our study also found some evidence of disunity
within the Democratic Party. In response to the
question, "If you had to choose, which political Figure 3. How Democrats, Republicans, and those with no
political party affiliation identify themselves.
group do you think is most different/opposed to
your own political views, currently?" Democrats 100··
were statistically as likely to select the Democratic 11% 15%
Party as they were to pick the Republican Party. 7 In 80 ..

other words, there was a 50/50 chance a randomly

selected Democrat would report disagreeing more 60 ..
71%
with his or her own party than the Republican
Party. This degree of party division was only charac­
teristic of the Democratic Party; Republicans were
20 ..
■ Liberal
considerably more unified in their opposition to 0 Moderate
Democrats. Responses to the survey items on politi­ 0 ..•..
D Conservative
cal orientation (i.e., how conservative or liberal a Democratic Republican No Political
Party Party Party
person is) supply further evidence of disagreement
among Democrats. Almost half of Democrats re­
ported being moderate or conservative, while only Theme 4: Bipartisan Political Tolerance
about a third of Republicans reported being moder­ In contrast to the sensationalistic depictions of political
ate or liberal (see Figure 3). 8 This means Democ­ tribalism one gleans from mainstream cable news cov­
rats were less likely to self-identify as liberal than erage and social media feeds, the results of our
were Republicans to self-identify as conservative, study revealed a reassming degree of partisan toler­
another indication the Republican Party is compa­ ance.9 Respondents were asked whether they would be
rably more unified. irritated if a member of an oppositional political group

volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 45

 most intolerant group.11 Other demographic charac­
Figure 4. How irritated would you be if a member of the opposite teristics such as education, age and income did not
political group was your neighbor, co-worker, local elected offi­ predict tolerance/intolerance. Tolerance/intolerance
cial or someone dating a member of your family?
was also correlated with political attitudes in interest­
5 ..... .
ing ways. Those in the most politically intolerant group
� 4.5
were more likely to agree that: (a) the U.S. government
:r: should provide financial assistance to foreign coun­
4 ·
uies, (b) the U.S. government should open its borders
(lJ 3.5
to immigrants in need, and (c) political conflict poses a
major threat to society. Perhaps counterintuitively, the
2.5
most and least tolerant groups both largely agreed that
the U.S. government should do more to help female
Republican and ethnic minority American citizens.
_, 1.5

Theme 5: Consensus that Speech can Harm

Political Party Affiliation The results of our survey additionally uncovered a con­
sensus among political groups about the role of lan­
guage.u On average, Democrats, Republicans and those
Figure 5. Attitudes towards language and political affiliation.
who are politically unaffiliated, all slightly agreed with
2
+ Democratic Party the statements, "Reality is determined by the words we
en
(lJ

1.s .
+ No party in particular use;• and "People should say and believe whatever they
<( Republican Party want, even if otl1ers think it is harmful." All three
groups also agreed that people can cause "severe physi­
cal harm" with the words they use. The only notable
0.5
disagreement among political groups in their responses
t 1
0 , ....... , ......................................................... , ... , ..... . to questions about language arose over whether or not
using someone's preferred pronouns leads to physical
·0.5
harm against LGBTQ people. The average differences
·1 were still quite small, with Democrats in slight agree­
(lJ
ment, political unaffiliates in slight disagreement, and
� ·1.S .
� Republicans in only slightly stronger disagreement
0 ·2 ....... . than political unaffiliates (see Figure 5).
Reality is People can People should Not using These results appear to fly in the face of multiple
determined by cause severe say and someone's
the words physical harm believe whatever preferred pronouns political stereotypes echoed frequently in the media:
we use with the they want, even if leads to physical
words they use others think harm against the consensus about the ability of words to cause phys­
it is hurtful LGBTQ people ical harm raises the possibility that the free speech de­
bate is more about the risks of regulation than the
was dating a member of their family, was their neigh­ possible harmfulness of language. If those in favor of
bor, co-work�r, or local elected official. Their answers regulating speech have been trying to persuade free
to all four questions were then averaged into a single speech supporters by illustrating how words can hurt,
composite tolerance score. On average, both Democ­ they may want to rethink their strategy in light of this
rats and Republicans indicated low levels of political in­ evidence.
tolerance (see Figure 4). Moreover, researchers found
no significant relationship between respondents' emo­ Implications of the Social and Political
tional closeness to their family and friends and the de­ Attitudes Study (SPAS)
gree of political disagreement in their social circles.10 In our view, the results of the Social and Political Atti­
Despite all the sociopolitical turmoil on cable news and tudes Study are on the whole encouraging. The find­
social media, most people in our survey reported feel­ ings regarding support for disseminating scientific
ing close to those with whom they disagree politically. research and relying on science as a basis for political
There were additional interesting results. The opinion suggest most Americans believe in the value
only significant demographic difference between the of empirical evid�nce, even if they may not have the
most politically tolerant group and the least tolerant skills to evaluate it. While what people say they want
was gender, with males more likely to fall within the on a survey and how they actually behave can certainly

46 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020

differ, the fact that respondents reported an abstract
appreciation of science is reason for optimism.
The results of the political tolerance measures are
also cause for optimism. Those of opposing political
and partisan orientations get along better and agree
more than political elites suggest. While the country is
no doubt more effectively polarized than in previous
decades,13 the SPAS indicates the existing tension in
the country does not necessarily match that portrayed
on social media.
This is timely news. Talking politics with friends
and family of different political persuasions may be es­
pecially important right now. Fewer interactions with
people holding different perspectives combined with
increased Twitter scrolling and news conswnption
cannot be conducive to keeping an open mind or
reaching rational conclusions. The insignificant rela­
tion in the SPAS data between emotional closeness
and political disagreement indicates that we can still
have contentious discussions with those close to us.
It is not all harmonious, however. The relation­
ship between Democrats and Republicans may be bet­
ter off than expected, but the one between Democrats
and Democrats might be in more jeopardy. According
to our data, the Democratic Party is more divided than
the Republican Party, and this could make it more
difficult for Democrats to mobilize voters in the 2.020
election. On the other hand, Trump may be so dis­
liked that high Democratic Party unity isn't necessary
for them to win the election. Our next study will delve
deeper into these important questions.
Forthcoming Skeptic Research Center (SRC)
Studies
The SRC is excited to continue collecting and ana­
lyzing new data. In fact, multiple studies are al­
ready underway.
Our next project is titled the Civil Unrest and
Presidential Election Study (CUPES). Using data col­
lected in September and October of 2020, this study
examines political and social attitudes about timely is­
sues including the George Floyd protests, alleged police
brutality, the Coronavirus pandemic, and the 2.020
presidential election. Additionally, a new survey assess­
ing peoples' endorsement of various conspiracy theo­
ries and paranormal beliefs is in development for early
2.021. We are tentatively calling it the Paranormal and
Conspirato1jal Ideation Study (PCIS). Results from past
and current research, as well as updates about forth­
coming studies, are all available on the SRC website.14
Get Involved
If you wish to help the Skeptics Society in our efforts
to prnmote rational conversation by providing the
public with new public opinion data, tl1ere are three
ways you can get involved.
First, you can help fund our research through
monetary contributions.15 Conducting research is ex­
pensive and any donation you can make goes a long
way. Second, you can share your feedback about exist­
ing research like the SPAS by filling out our short
form.16 Third, you can submit ideas for future studies,
opinion editorials, and/or videos. Submit your ideas
via email to: research@skeptic.com. We welcome sug­
gestions, constrnctive criticisms and anyt11ing else
that can help us improve the work we do.
Your contributions, whether concrete or abstract,
are essential. Science is fundamentally a collaborative
endeavor, a fact which bears upon the meaning of
"skeptic." Skepticism entails questioning claims and
subjecting them to scientific and logical scmtiny, but
no one person has all the tools, skills, or time to per­
form complete investigations of the vast majority of
the important claims echoing around us every day. In­
deed, most people do not have the resources for a sin­
gle such analysis. This is where we hope the Skeptic
Research Center can provide value: rigorous and
transparent research on topical issues, motivated by
the goal of improving the quality and carefulness of
some of our most important conversations. El
REFERENCES
1. https://www.skeptic.com/research-center/
2. The SRC is a collaboration with researchers across
scientific disciplines, to create substantive and
easy-to-read reports drawn from proprietary polling
and survey data. The mission of the SRC is to em­
power you with a data-driven understanding of the
beliefs and behaviors characterizing American cul­
ture. What makes this endeavor special is that we
are explicitly focusing on researching issues you
care about: science literacy, health and medicine,
cults and conspiracy theories, changing political
worldviews, religion, secularism, and morality.
3. https://www.skeptic.com/research-center/social-
political-attitudes-study /
4. Report# SPAS-008
5. Report# SPAS-006
6. Report# SPAS-010
7. Report # SPAS-001
8. Report# SPAS-008
9. Report# SPAS-002
10. Report# SPAS-009
11. Report # SPAS-003
12. Report# SPAS-005
13. Iyengar, S., Lelkes, Y., Levendusky, M., Malhotra, N.,
and Westwood, S. J. (2019). The origins and conse­
quences of affective polarization in the United States.
Annual Review of Political Science, 22, 129-146.
14. https://www.skeptic.com/research-center/
15. https://www.skeptic.com/get_involved/donate/
16. https://forms.gle/VuDaPGXZ7M23jZ6J6
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 47
 ARTICLE
How Do You Get
People to Care About
Truth in Politics?
BY GLEB TSIPURSKY
Do YOU FEEL ANGRY AND DISGUSTED WHEN POLITICIANS
lie, even those whose policies and ideology you oth­
erwise support? Do you intuitively recognize the
danger of lies in politics? Do you ever wonder why
many of your fellow citizens give such politicians a
pass, ignoring their deceit?
I hope that, as a fellow skeptic, you answered
yes to these questions: I know I do. Some people
care about the truth first and foremost, regardless
of their personal values-liberal, conservative, or
centrist. However, unfortunately, those passionate
about the truth tend to be outliers, as illustrated by
Jonathan Haidt, in his 2012 The Righteous Mind:
Why Good People Are Divided By Politics and Reli­
gion, in which he describes extensive research that
shows what values are most prized by mainstream
liberals, such as justice, fairness, and equality, and
the values emphasized by conservatives, including
purity, safety, and security. 1 Truth is not among the
top values for either group.
This helps explain why so many people do not
intuitively recognize the harm done by deception to
democratic institutions, whether in the U.S. or
around the globe. Unlike the skeptical ideal, most
people put their ideological beliefs first, and then
interpret reality through these lenses, as described
in Michael Shermer's The Believing Brain. 2 More·
over, those people resonate more with appeals to
emotions rather than facts, as shown by research
such as that described in the edited volume by Nico
Frijda, Antony Manstead, and Sacha Bern on Emo­
tions and Beliefs: How Feelings Influence Thoughts. 3
How do we communicate convincingly the dan­
gers of post-truth political tactics to people who do
not have a visceral concern about truth in politics?
Just wagging a finger and calling out such lies, as
many intellectuals and public commentators have
done in the past and are currently doing, clearly has
48 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
not worked. We tend to overestimate the extent to
which other people share our opinions and predispo·
sitions, a typical thinking error that behavioral scien·
tists term the false consensus eHect, well described
in a 1987 review article by Gary Marks and Norman
Miller.4 However strange it may seem to readers of
this article or those intellectuals and public commen•
tators, few people do not see an inherent problem
when politicians they support lie to gain political
credibility.
While it is necessary to highlight political de­
ceptions, it is not sufficient for the people who do
not have an intuitive aversion to lies. Instead, we
need to demonstrate clearly why such lies are harm­
ful to the long-term interests of our country and itsr
political institutions. We need to show people why
they should care-deeply and viscerally-about
truth in politics, for the sake of their own political
and personal goals.
One Way to Tell the Truth, Many Ways to Lie
Before talking about the importance of truth, we
need to start with definitions. By "telling the truth,"
I mean conveying an accurate portrayal of the rele·
vant features of reality that any reasonable person
might want to know about the topic. Implicitly, this
definition includes not intending to misinform. It's
pretty simple.
Now let's ground that statement with some ex­
amples of what not telling the truth looks like. Say
you decide to purchase a used car and the salesman
introduces himself as Truthful Tom. You point to a
car and ask him to tell you about it. What scenarios
might result?
Scenario 1: Tom answers: "Oh, it's a great car. Let's
sign the deal now." Most of us will suspect his
vagueness does not sound very truthful. He
 didn't list the relevant features of the car that
he may expect any reasonable customer to
want to know. But the description "great" is
such a generality it can hardly be pinned down
as a lie. Maybe Tom truthfully means, "great
for me if I can sell it to you at this price"?
Scenario 2: Tom answers: "This is a car for true pa­
triots. I can tell you love your country, so this is
the right car for you. Let's sign the deal now."
In this scenario, Tom is deceptively appealing
to emotions through flattery, and again is not
describing what is relevant to you, the buyer.
This particular kind of flattery is called a glit­
tering generality, an emotionally appealing
phrase that is so closely associated with highly
valued concepts and beliefs that it carries con­
viction without supporting information or rea­
son. The appeal to love of country, and desire
for peace, freedom, glory, and honor so dazzles
and affirms your beliefs you fail to notice the
lack of other salient information.
Scenario 3: Tom gives you the relevant details any
reasonable customer might want to know about
the car and answers your questions. He tells you
accurately that the car was serviced regularly.
However, he did not know and thus failed to
mention that the car had a problem with the
transmission. That's a relevant problem and a rel­
evant piece of information. Normally, we would
say is Tom simply wrong, not lying. But in this
scenario, Tom had previously instructed the
showroom's mechanic not to tell him if there
were any engine problems. When she tried to
tell him, he would cut her off or walk out of the
room, arguing that such information would only
hamper his job of selling cars. So Truthful Tom is
not simply wrong, he is willfully ignorant.
Scenario 4: Tom knows about the problem with the
transmission and does not tell you about it.
Tom committed what is known as a lie by
omission, meaning deliberately withholding
relevant information and thus deceiving you.
Scenario 5: Tom was told about the transmission
problem but rather conveniently he forgets
about it. So he doesn't mention it to you, even
though he had the information and should
have told you. In this case, Tom engaged in
confabulation, making false statements due to
incorrect memories about the past without a
deliberate intent to deceive.
Scenario 6: Tom knows about the transmission
problem, but rather than admitting it, He
distorts the truth through exaggeration ( or

volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 49

 hyperbole), telling you that everyone who
owned this car was happy with it (when in re­
ality, some owners were happy, and some were
not). By overemphasizing the degree of cus­
tomer satisfaction, Tom thinks he's not lying,
just exaggerating, and indeed not all exaggera­
tion is meant to deceive. But in this case, de­
ceptive h yperbole is clearly his purpose.
Scenario 7 Tom tells you about the faulty transmis­
sion but uses jargon that he knows only car
specialists would recognize. He is deceiving
you through obfuscation. He's not actually
lying, but deliberately making the information
unclear and confusing to you.
Scenario 8: You directly ask whether there is a
problem with the transmission and Tom tells
you it's just fine. Truthful Tom is directly lying.
We call this a blatant lie. Experienced liars
have one specific trick to make blatant lies
more convincing-they use vivid details to
make their fiction seem real. Tom might elabo­
rate on his lie by saying, "In fact, I was with
Olga the mechanic when was she was inspect­
ing the vehicle, and I recall her telling me,
"'
'Tommy, this transmission is in great shape!
Scena.rio 9: Tom lies to you about the transmission,
but in the service center documentation you
find Olga's inspection report that declares the
transmission is faulty. You confront Tom. He
responds that the service center people are dis­
honest and always lie. "That Olga, she's makes
mistakes like this all the time. Frankly, I think
management are going to fire her later this
week." Tom asks you to trust only him as the
source of all truth about the car. This is the
type of behavior characteristic of post-truth car
salespeople. In extreme forms this is known as
gaslighting, meaning manipulating someone
into questioning their own sanity through
denying the truth of reality. Comedian Richard
Pryor immortalized gaslighting in the story of
his wife catching him with another woman.
He denies his blatant infidelity, asking his wife
(echoing Chico Marx), "Who you gonna be­
lieve, me or your lying eyes?"
These nine scenarios help reveal that there is a
spectrum of truth and lies, with some tactics such
as blatant lies and gaslighting farther from the
truth, and some, like vagueness or obfuscation
being more accurate, but still deceptive. This spec­
trum helps explain why fact-checkers typically have
a scale of evaluating claims.
50 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
Another important element to consider in
whether we label something as a deception, or sim­
ply a wrong statement, is the question of intent.
Dictionaries define lying as being intentionally mis­
leading. Someone can fail to tell the truth and be
wrong yet not be lying. However, it can be hard to
determine intent. Imagine you bought the car from
Tom and found out later that it had a faulty trans­
mission. How do we know what Tom knew and did
not know? How do we know whether he was will­
fully ignorant, lying by omission, blatantly lying, or
just plain mistaken? It's not easy in a one-time en­
counter.
We need to be especially careful and suspicious
when politicians make ostentatious, yet verifiable,
statements favorable to their reputation and/or
their political interests. We need to create a norm
demanding politicians back up such claims with
credible evidence that would convince a reasonable
person of any political persuasion. If we ask for
such evidence and they fail to provide it, we can
safely dismiss their statements as wrong, until
proven otherwise. If they do not provide evidence,
but continue to insist that they are right, then we
should condemn them as being intentionally mis­
leading-the dictionary definition of lying. If some­
one lies repeatedly, and keeps doubling down on
their deception, then we can shift our baseline per­
ception to consider that person a systematic liar
who may even be engaged in gaslighting, which is
worse because it involves extensive psychological
manipulation intended to make the victims doubt
reality and accept an alternative version forced on
them by the perpetrator.
If we can better categorize a politician's level
of deceptiveness (from generally truthful to blatant
liar and gaslighter) we can more easily tune our
ears to the appropriate level of skepticism. This is
one aspect of probabilistic thinking, where we as­
sign probabilities to our understanding of reality,
and change our estimates based on new evidence
we acquire. For instance, a politician who lies re­
peatedly can be safely labeled a habitual liar. When
there is clear prior evidence of their lack of credi­
bility, we can probabilistically dismiss any self-fa­
vorable statements by these people as lies unless
they provide verifiable evidence up front.
Finally, an evaluation of the truth must con­
sider what constitutes credible evidence. While we
often deal with clear-cut situations, such as the
nine scenarios with Truthful Tom described above,
in other cases we have to deal with more complex
situations of incomplete information coming from
multiple sources, each with its own biases. To help
orient us toward the truth, we can rely on credible
fact-checking organizations and/or on the scientific
consensus.
The Dangers of Deception for
Democratic Decision-making
To help convince people to care about deception in
politics, you need to demonstrate to them the dan­
ger of falsehoods in politics when making decisions
in the political sphere. To make a wise decision, we
need to know the relevant facts on the ground. For
instance, to decide what car to buy from Truthful
Tom, any reasonable customer would want accu­
rate information about the price, the car's current
condition and history, and any warranties. To make
a decision about any political policy, a reasonable
citizen requires the facts about the impact of that
policy on our society, with a list of costs and bene­
fits in material and human terms. But politicians
can be motivated to ignore or distort information
based on their ideology.
Ideologically-informed Deception.
Here are two well-known, real examples of ideo­
logically-informed deception: 1. Pro-Brexit politi­
cians claimed in 2016 that leaving the EU would
"give the National Health Service the £350 million
the EU takes every week." This obfuscation was
admitted to be false by those leaders after UK
voted to leave the EU, though it lingered on in so­
cial media. 2. The Trump administration's claimed
in early 2019 that "there's a growing humanitarian
and security crisis at our southern border," a crisis
that could only be resolved by building a multibil­
lion-dollar border wall. There were too many lies
to count during the ensuing government shut­
down, but the U.S. border authority's own data on
illegal border crossing apprehensions showed a
marked decline of illegal immigration from fiscal
year 2000 (more than 1.6 million apprehensions)
to 2018 (overall apprehensions below 400,000).
The average southern border patrol agent appre­
hended 14 single adult migrants during all of 2018
("U.S. Border Patrol Monthly Apprehensions (FY
2000 -FY 2018"), from www.cpb.gov). To exag­
gerate this situation as an immigration crisis was
something between deceptive hyperbole and a
blatant lie. To frame it as a humanitarian crisis
(appealing to our sense of compassion) was a glit­
tering generality. To persist in the face of the bor­
der authority's facts was willful ignorance at best,
and gaslighting at worst.
Deception and Corruption.
Corruption, a natural bedfellow of political decep­
tion, is another negative outcome of post-truth pol­
itics. In a post-truth political situation, politicians
win office by competing for who tells the best lie. If
voters don't mind or don't notice the lies, politi­
cians have no incentive to represent the actual con­
cerns of the citizenry once elected, including
concerns for how tax dollars are spent or for gov­
ernment dealings with business. Failing to con­
demn political deception thus leads to a scenario
where politicians can take bribes right and left for
giving favorable contracts to businesses and thereby
divert our tax dollars into their pockets. After all,
without the truth about the influence of money in
politics, citizens cannot evaluate who is corrupt.
They thus cannot use their votes to address the
biggest fear of U.S. citizens. According to the 2016
Chapman University Survey of American Fears, cor­
ruption rests at the top with 60.6%, above terrorist
attacks at 41% and even above not having enough
money for the future at 39.9%.
Let's consider how corruption and deception
play out in a hypothetical example. Greedy Gary
has been a senator for 12 years and is running for
re-election. Serving on the Senate Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources, he has been cutting
undercover deals right and left with energy busi­
nesses. For instance, Gary enabled a solar power
company to get a huge tax credit of 7 million dollars
in exchange for opening a plant in his state and
transferring $500,000 to a Cayman Islands bank
account under his wife's name. He ensured that
his friend won a federal contract to build an oil
pipeline in his state, despite his friend's bid being
far from the cheapest; next year, his friend bought
him a $100,000 yacht for his birthday, despite not
having given Gary birthday presents previously.
When the newspapers got wind of Greedy
Gary's activities and published stories about them,
Gary denied the allegations with blatant lies. While
newspapers presented the objective facts, Gary
went for emotions. He claimed the deals were "real
winners" for the state (vagueness), that he worked
hard every day to provide jobs for the people of his
state, because the people's welfare was all he cared
about (lying by omission about his payoff). He in­
stead accused the papers of trying to ruin the liveli­
hood of those workers who now worked in the solar
power plant and on the oil pipeline (gaslighting).
He cherry-picked stories of previously unemployed
mothers who got jobs and could support their fami­
lies thanks to his deals. His winning campaign ad
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 51
 featured a mother and her crying girl ripping apart
a newspaper whose headline blasted Greedy Gary.
Given our recent turn toward post-truth poli­
tics, we can expect more and more Greedy Carys at
all levels of our political system. Even worse, other
politicians may look at the successes of Greedy
Gary and conclude they might as well adopt his
strategies of lying and accepting bribes, because
they work and he gets reelected anyway.
Deception and Authoritarianism.
Most dangerous of all, post-truth politics paves the
path for authoritarianism. Just as successful appeals
to emotions over facts can destroy checks and bal­
ances on political corruption, if politicians can win
by lying, they can use lies to gain power and hold it
indefinitely.
Here's another hyp othetical example: Power­
hungry Patty has been elected U.S. President four
years ago, and is running for re-election. Her origi­
nal election was mired in controversy. A couple of
weeks prior to the election, when polls showed
Patty losing, she called the election rigged, and riled
up her supporters for demonstrations leading up to
the election. Patty ended up winning the election
through a slim victory in the Electoral College,
while losing the popular vote by nearly 2 million
votes. She blamed her loss on millions of illegal
votes cast for her opponent, and launched an inves­
tigation into voter fraud, which didn't turn up any
evidence of fraud, but received wide press coverage.
Most of her supporters ended up believing that
Patty indeed won the popular vote, but that the ju­
dicial system was rigged against her.
Patty also appointed an Attorney General,
Legal Larry, well-known for aggressive voter sup­
pression tactics. Along with Patty, Larry promoted
the myth of widespread voter fraud in U.S. elec­
tions, especially in Patty's election to the Presi­
dency. This myth is common in U.S. politics despite
having no evidence behind it. In fact, extensive evi­
dence from many studies of U.S. elections shows
minimal voter fraud, as seen in a thorough meta­
analysis in a report from the Brennan Center for
Justice at the New York University School of Law.5
Patty, Larry, and other members of Patty's post-truth
administration ignored the reality for the sake of
promoting their political agenda. When newspapers
and experts, along with members of Patty's own
party, called out Patty for her lies about the elec­
tion, Patty ignored or denounced them. Many of
Patty's supporters who did not care about the truth
trusted Patty.
52 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
Would you be surprised to learn that when
Patty lost her re-election, she did not concede? In­
stead, she claimed her opponent actually won due
to massive voter fraud, with millions of illegal bal­
lots swinging the election. Although no evidence
existed for such fraud, Patty had Larry launch a
thorough investigation of the ballots. Larry's con­
trol of the Department of Justice enabled him to
trump up some initial fake evidence of voter fraud.
Although newspapers and experts questioned this
evidence, Patty used it to press her case. Moreover,
Patty's supporters believed her, and launched large
demonstrations to support her power. With her
control of the administrative and judicial re­
sources associated with the Presidency, and the
rallies of her supporters, Patty pressed the Elec­
toral College to vote for her instead of her oppo­
nent. In four more years, Patty used the same
tactics to transfer power to her chosen successor,
Patty Jr.
While many non-American readers of this arti­
cle might easily recognize this scenario as a common
one for how democracies transform into authoritar­
ian states, it may be hard for my fellow Americans to
do so, as we lack the experience of authoritarianism
in our country. After all, we never had a dictator take
power here. An authoritarian regime in the U.S.
would be what is called a black swan event, a highly
unlikely but very impactful event that radically trans­
forms our society. Examples of black swans include
the 2008 fiscal crisis, the September 11th terrorist at­
tacks, the bombing of Pearl Harbor, and of course the
Covid-19 pandemic.
Fortunately, we can prepare for black swan
events by addressing the issues in advance and com­
paring our situation to other historical and contem­
porary contexts. While the word "post-truth" is a
recent invention, appeals to emotions over objec­
tive facts leading to an authoritarian takeover have
a long history in democracies, as Michael Signer de­
scribes in his 2009 book, Demagogue. 6 A "dema­
gogue" is a dictator who initially rises to power with
support from the public. The term originated in an­
cient Greece, when democratic city-states such as
Athens occasionally witnessed the rise of political
figures who appealed to emotions over facts and
manipulated the masses at the expense of the well­
being of the city as a whole. The demagogue Cleon,
for example, was depicted by historical accounts as
charismatic, eloquent, and skilled at appealing to
the masses, presenting an image of himself as
rough and unpolished, despite being an aristo­
crat. He pursued military actions that harmed
Athens (according to the historical consensus) by
exaggerating the military resources of Athens, and
minimizing strength of its rival, Sparta.
More recent examples of demagogues who
came to power though democratic elections, largely
by misleading voters, include Benito Mussolini in
Italy, Adolf Hitler in Germany, and Hugo Chavez in
Venezuela. A number of contemporary authoritar­
ian leaders who rose to dominance through post­
truth tactics include Recep Tayyip Erdogan in
Turkey, Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe, Viktor Orban
in Hungary, Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, Vladimir
Putin in Russia, and Silvio Berlusconi in Italy.
The U.S. has its own examples of people widely
deemed demagogues by historians, such as the Re­
publican Senator Joe McCarthy and the Democratic
Senator Huey Long. They gained significant power,
though not the presidency, through a combination
of emotional appeals and lies, and the U.S. suffered
much harm because of their deceptions. However,
because they never became authoritarian rulers (al­
though McCarthy came dangerously close), Ameri­
cans find it hard to imagine the U.S. transitioning
to authoritarian rule. To counteract this compla­
cency, we have to keep these examples in mind.
Then we can turn the black swan (authoritarianism
can never happen in the U.S.) into a grey swan (it
almost happened with McCarthy, and has happened
recently in other democracies). This will motivate
us to fight to preserve our political system from the
corrosive effects of "alternative facts"-revealed in
this article as a whole spectrum of deceptions.
To demonstrate the effectiveness of arousing
concern about truth in politics, I went on conserva­
tive radio shows with hosts such as Scott Sloan,
Dwight Lilly, and Larry Stevenson, all Republican
activists. I chose Republicans, as Trump is our first
post-truth President and he is a Republican, making
it more challenging to communicate with Republi­
cans who would intuitively be disinclined to criticize
their own party. The reasoning I used in my conver­
sations appealed to what the hosts and their listeners
cared about-poor decisions, corruption, and author­
itarianism. We had very productive conversations
during which we agreed on the dangers of post-truth
politics and the importance of not taking any claims
at face value, instead demanding credible evidence.
In my post-show, informal discussion with him, Lilly
said that our conversation really made him think,
and, he told me, "that's a dangerous thing."
Given that these hosts have a wide following
among Republicans, the approach I outlined seems
quite promising for getting them to care emotion­
ally about fighting post-truth politics. The key is to
determine what the people you seek to influence do
care about, and show them how "alternative facts"
will, in the end, destroy what they value. Doing so
will enable us to form an alliance across the politi­
cal spectrum to fight for truth in politics, in letter
and spirit, for the sake of preserving our democracy
and preventing us from sliding down into corrup­
tion and authoritarianism.
That's what the Pro-Truth movement is about,
centered around the Pro-Truth Pledge (ProTruth­
Pledge.org). It's up to everyone who cares about the
truth in politics-hopefully you, dear reader-to
sign the pledge online as a sign of their public com­
mitment to truthfulness, and then encourage their
elected representatives to do so. So join myself,
Michael Shermer, and many thousands of your
fellow skeptics in signing the pledge at ProTruth­
Pledge.org. To learn more about the Pro-Truth
movement itself and all the ways that you can make
our politicial system more honest, read my new
book, Pro Truth: A Practical Plan for Putting Truth
Back into Politics (Changemakers Books, 2020 ).7 El
Adapted from: Dr. Gleb Tsipursky and Tim Ward,
Pro Truth: A Practical Plan for Putting TI11th Back
into Politics (Changemakers Books, 2020).

REFERENCES
1. Haidt, Jonathan. 2012. The
Righteous Mind: Why Good
People Are Divided by Politics
and Religion. New York: Vin­
tage.
2. Shermer, Michael. 2011. The
Believing Brain: From Ghosts
and Gods to Politics and Con­
spiracies-How We Construct
Beliefs and Reinforce Them as
Truths. New York: Times Books.
3. Nico H. Frijda, Antony S. R.
Manstead, Sacha Bern {eds.).
2000. Emotions and Beliefs:
How Feelings Influence
Thoughts. Cambridge University
Press.
4. Marks, Gary, and Norman
Miller. 1987. "Ten years of re­
search on the false-consensus
effect: An empirical and theo­
retical review." Psychological
Bulletin, 102.1: 72.
5. Levitt, Justin. 2007. "The Truth
About Voter Fraud." Brennan
Center for Justice at the New
York University School of Law,
November 9.
6. Signer, Michael. 2009. Dema­
gogue: The Fight to Save
Democracy from Its Worst Ene­
mies. New York: Macmillan.
7. Tsipursky, Gleb and Tim Ward.
2020. Pro Truth: A Practical
Plan for Putting Truth Back into
Politics. Changemakers Books.

volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 53

 ARTICLE
Are Laws of Nature
Discovered or Invented?
Continuous Change, Discrete Events, and the Nature of Reality
BY SIMA DIMITRIJEV
SCIENCE IS BASED ON THE IDEA THAT EFFECTS HAVE
causes, and scientists use the mathematics of contin­
uous change, called calculus, to formulate laws in
disciplines ranging from fundamental physics to eco­
nomics. With the absolute continuity and precision of
calculus, we form causal Links between the past and
the future, an attribution that makes the laws of
physics deterministic and predictable. In this article I
argue that these abstract models are different from
real processes, which consist of events that are not
only discrete but also exhibit a degree of unpredictable
randomness. People who are unaware of this differ­
ence trust the calculus-based laws and adopt overgen­
eralized interpretations of real-life observations and
data. I show why calculus-based equations should be
seen as idealized models of real processes, invented by
humans, rather than autonomous laws of nature that
humans merely discovered. Free from the shackles of
these equations, we can see that a random event can
happen without an imminent cause.
What Came First?
What causes the first cancer cell? What initiates an un­
expected car breakdown? Where do new ideas origi­
nate? All cause-and-effect chains in our lives originate
from either an initial event or from fundamental
processes that unfold according to the laws of physics.
The continuous flow of electrical energy, either in
the case of brain signals or in the simpler example of
household electricity, is a suitable process by whitch to
explore this fundamental question. Taking the simpler
case of household electricity, assume that the power
meter in a house shows energy consumption of 24
kilowatt-hours from the noon of one day to the noon
of the next day. To obtain the average rate of energy
consumption, we divide the consumed 24 kilowatt­
hours by the relevant time interval of 24 hours. The
obvious result of one kilowatt is the average power
consumption, whlch is just another term for the aver­
age rate of energy consumption.
54 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
The concept of average power is not as precise as
the actual power at a specific point of time. For exam­
ple, power consumptions at 6:oo pm and 11:00 pm
could have been very different from the average
value-much higher during dinner preparation at 6
and much lower when almost everyone is gone to bed
at 11. To express a more precise rate of energy change,
we should measure the energy conswnption over a
much shorter interval of time and divide it by that
time span. For example, if the energy consumption
between 6:oo pm and 6:03 pm is 0.1 kilowatt-hours,
the average power consumption over this inte1val of
three minutes is two kilowatts. Although more pre­
cise, this average number is not showing_any power
fluctuations within the period of three minutes,
which are very likely and can be significant if the
oven was turning on and off.
What, then, is the shortest possible time inter­
val that would provide the most precise definition
of power consumption at a specific point of time?
Infinitesimal is Absolutely Precise
but Inaccurate
Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz introduced the
abstract concept of an infinitely small increment of
time, labeled dt. The con-esponding energy consump­
tion, labeled dE, is also infinitely small. However, the
ratio dE!dt is finite and represents the most precise
definition of power consumption. With the infinitely
small dt, there can be no sudden and unpredictable
power fluctuations between 6 pm and the subsequent
point in time that is inseparably close to 6 pm. There­
fore, the ratio dE!dt implements the concept of an ab­
solutely continuous process of power consumption.
The concept of infinitely small changes, such as
dE and dt, has a name-infinitesimal. The mathe­
matical name for the ratio dE!dt is the first deriva­
tive of energy with respect to time. Mathematical
equations that involve derivatives are called differen­
tial equations. Newton and Leibniz created the area
of mathematics known as differential calculus, as well
as the inverse operation of integral calculus.1• 2
The impact of calculus on our society has been
enormous. People used it to model processes from the
fundamental physics to economics. Examples of these
models include Schrodinger's equation in quantum
mechanics, Einstein's field equations, Maxwell's equa­
tions of electrodyn amics, Newton's laws in mechanics,
the predator-prey equations in biology, and the Solow­
Swan model of economics.
In our power-consumption example, calculus en­
ables the most precise definition of power consumption
at a specific point in time. However the big question
then becomes about the accuracy of this precision.
The key problem with the precision of calculus is
that the processes in nature consist of discrete units
and discrete events. For example, textbooks describe
light as continuous waves, but the processes of light
emission and light absorption consist of discrete
events because only indivisible photons can be emit­
ted and absorbed. In the example of electrical energy,
the indivisible units are the electrons. For the case of
110-volt electricity, the average energy delivered by a
single electron to the house in our example is no elec­
tron-volts. Here, the electron-volt is another physical
unit of energy; we can convert 110 electron-volts into
kilowatt-hours, but it is more convenient to use elec­
tron-volts when we deal with energy transfers by elec­
t.ronic processes. On average, 110 electron-volts is the
smallest packet of energy that can be delivered, be­
cause there are no fractions of electrons to deliver this
packet of energy in smaller portions. This means that
the smallest packet of delivered energy in reality is
larger than the infinitely small dE. Therefore, the ab­
solutely precise infinitesimal is inaccurate.
The infinitely small time interval dt is also inac­
curate. For the case of one-kilowatt power, the average
time between two deliveries of energy by individual
electrons is extremely short but still longer than the
infinitely small dt.
A Rigorous Analogy with Foxes and Rabbits
Just as photons and electrons are indivisible units, and
the rates of their absorption and emission are discon­
tinuous, so are the rates of rise and decline of fox and
rabbit populations in the common predator-prey ex­
ample. Assuming that a fox eats a rabbit and then an
hour elapses before another rabbit is eaten, the rate of
rabbit decline is one per hour. If the subsequent rab­
bit-eating event occurs after half an hour, the rate
becomes two per hour. The continuous rate in the dif­
ferential predator-prey equations can match the aver­
age rate of rabbit decline, which is 1.33 rabbits per
hour in this example. But this average is a mathemati­
cal abstraction that cannot predict the time that it will
take before a fox eats another rabbit.
Average values are also used to model processes
involving fundamental particles, such as electrons
and photons. Yet again the average values cannot pre­
dict the occurrences of individual events. For exam­
ple, if the size of the energy packets delivered by
individual electrons is kept at 110 electron-volts while
the power is reduced to 1.76 nanowatts, the average
time between subsequent deliveries of energy packets
becomes 10 nanoseconds. This is a measurable time
interval and actual measurements show that the elec­
trons do not deliver the energy packets at 10-nanosec­
ond intervals. For example, measurements may show
the following times between the actual arrivals of in­
dividual electrons, in units of nanoseconds: 7.2, 21-3,
9.3, 6.8, 11.2, 4.2, and so on. These are significant fluc­
tuations around the average value of 10 nanoseconds,
which are not due to imperfections of time measure­
ments but genuine ontological (the nature of reality)
fluctuations.3 In electronics, these fluctuations are
known as shot noise; they were first observed and de­
scribed by Walter Schottky in 1918. 4
Randomness and Uncertainty
These examples are consistent with the following an­
swer to the fundamental chicken-and-egg question:
Not only do events come first in eme1gent cha.ins of
events and processes, but the fundamental events also
occur with a degree of randomness.
The smallest possible degree of randomness cor­
responds to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in
quantum mechanics. According to the energy-time
form of this principle, the product between the uncer­
tainty in time and the uncertainty in energy cannot be
smaller than Planck's constant.5• 6•7 As a consequence,
neither the time interval between two quantum events
nor the related energy exchange can approach the in­
finitesimal values dt and dE. If they did, the uncertain­
ties of these variables would also approach infinitely
small values, violating the uncertainty principle.
Therefore, the uncertainty principle is consistent with
the concept of fundamental events, which are sepa­
rated by finite and random time intervals.8
At this point, it seems necessary to clarify the rela­
tionship between the concept of fundamental events
and Schrodinger's equation-the most used mathemat­
ical formulation of quantum mechanics. Schrodinger's
equation is a differential equation and, consequently, it
is a mathematical formulation of fundamentally con­
tinuous and deterministic processes, which is inconsis­
tent with the concept of random events. The common
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 55
 view that Schrodinger's equation is experimentally
proven leads to the view that these fundamentally con­
tinuous and deterministic processes are real. However,
this is an overgeneralized interpretation because
it ignores the difference between the continuity of
Schrodinger's equation and the discreteness of counted
photons or electrons in real experiments. We use
Schrodinger's equation to calculate probabilities of
events, and it is this probability that we compare to ex­
perimental data. The dependent variable in this cliffer­
ential equation, called wave function, is an abstract
concept-humans clid not discover it, they invented it.
Consequently, we have to use the inverse integral cal­
culus to convert the continuous wave function into
probabilities of discrete events in reality.
Without this conversion from the abstract conti­
nuity to discreteness of events, there is no link be­
tween the wave function and experimental data. In
essence, this is Max Born's statistical interpretation of
quantum mechanics. Quantum physicists have to use
Born's transformation of the wave function to be able
to compare their models to the random events from
experiments. Nonetheless, a large majority of them
continue to believe that the wave function is real and,
consequently, prefer some of the non-statistical inter­
pretations of the wave function.9 They do it even as
they admit that all these interpretations are truly
bizan-e. However, for a smart skeptic, bizane prefer­
ences of a large majority are not relevant for the truth.
Are Processes Reversible?
A paradoxical feature of all differential equations is
that they are not only deterministic but also re­
versible. Even the greatest thinkers overgeneralize the
reversibility of continuous equations. An example is
Stephen Hawking's view in his last book, BriefAn­
swers to the Big Questions, 10 published shortly after
his death. Hawking saw traveling back in time as "a
very serious question" and the reason was that Ein­
stein's calculus-based equations of general relativity
"can permit time travel." Acknowledging that "one has
to be careful not to be labelled a crank;' he expressed
his concern that "if one made a research grant applica­
tion to work on time travel it would be dismissed im­
mediately." Paradoxically, that would indeed happen
even though governments are paying universities to
teach the laws of physics in accordance with Hawk­
ing's way of thinking.
These paradoxes coexist only with the belief in
the reality of calculus and, consequently, the belief in
fundamentally continuous processes. In contrast to
the concept of process continuity, the defining feature
of events is that they are clearly distinguishable and
countable units. For example, neuron-firing events are
distinguishable because the neurons reach their rest
condition before firing again-in other words, there is
an eventless interval between two consecutive firing
events. The time gap between consecutive events sets
the arrow of time from the preceding to the subse­
quent event. With the set arrow of time, events are
fundamentally irreversible and so are the processes
that consist of these events.
The Key Takeaways
It must be at once both comforting and disconcerting
to let randomness taint the belief in established order.
Either way, it helps to be extremely skeptical about the
deterministic laws of science. These "laws" do provide
useful models of an averaged behavior, but there will
be unpredictable events in the future. Many of these
events will be disregarded as noise, but some will have
a massive impact. Your thinking is not determined by
some eternal laws of physics and-with the awareness
that the past does not determine everything in the fu­
ture-thinking is your tool for dealing with and even
benefiting from the unexpected events. Ill

REFERENCES
1. Boyer, C. 8. 1959. The History of
the Calc ulus and its C onceptual
Development. New York: Dover.
2. Boyer, C. 8. and Merzbach, U.
C. 1991. A History of Mathe-
matics, 2nd Ed. New York: Wiley.
3. Dimitrijev, S. 2011. Princ iples
of Semic onductor Devices, 2nd
Ed. New York: Oxford University
Press.
4. Schottky, W. 1918. "Uber spon-
tane Stromschwankungen in
verschiedenen Elektrizitatsleit-
ern" Annalen der Physik, vol.
57, pp. 541 567.
5. Heisenberg, W. 1927. "Ober den
anschaulichen lnhalt der quanten-
theoretischen Kinematik und
Mechanik" Zeitsc hrift fur Physik,
vol. 43, pp. 172-198.
6. Heisenberg, W. 1949. The
Physical Princ iples of the Quan-
tum The ory . New York: Dover.
7. Feynman, R., Leighton, R.,
Sands, M. 2011. The Feynman
Lectures on Physics, The Ne w
Millennium Edition, vol. Ill:
Quantum Mec hanics. New
York: Basic Books.
8. Dimitrijev, S. 2009. "lrre-
versible event-based model for
thermal emission of electrons
from isolated traps" Journal of
Applied Physics, vol. 105, pp.
103706-1 103706-4.
9. Gribbin, J. 1984. In Searc h of
Sc hrodinger's Cat: Quantum
Physics and Reality. New York:
Bantam.
10. Hawking, S. 2018. Brief An-
swers to the Big Questi ons,
New York: Bantam.

56 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020


Cynlcally Skeptical
A review of Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship
Made Everything About Race, Gender and Identity by Helen
Pluckrose and James Lindsay.
REVIEWED BY GABRIEL ANDRADE
THE MURDER OF GEORGE FLOYD IN 2020
sparked mass protests across the United
States. Some of these protests are under­
standable, inasmuch as police brutality
is real. But establishing that the police
killings of blacks is racially motivated is
much harder to prove, inasmuch as each
one has a back story of encounters be­
tween police and blacks that start off
routine and escalate into violence. To
many protesters, this seemed to matter
very little. In fact, it wasn't long before it
became apparent that many protests­
particularly those that erupted in vio­
lence and morphed into riots-were not
really about police brutality. As statues of
Confederate officers and even Columbus
began to be toppled, it became clear that
these acts were symbolic of larger issues
involving long simmering racial tensions.
Whenever such sudden unrest be­
gins, conspiracy theorists typically
look for culprits who allegedly agitate
crowds, all with the evil purpose of self­
benefit. This time, George Soros was the
target of such conspiracy mongering.
Needless to say, this is delusional. But, it
is not inaccurate to conclude that, in­
deed, the current wave of protests was a
long time in the making. No, a Jewish
billionaire is not behind it. But, some
particularly pernicious ideas have played
a major influence in the current chaos.
These ideas have been around for quite
some time in academia. Some call it
"woke ideology," but the academic term
for it is "Critical Theory."
In their new book, Helen Pluckrose
and James Lindsay do a fine job in dis­
secting these ideas. They call them "Cyn­
ical Theories" because, ultimately, their
defenders (postmodernist scholars such
as Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Ed­
ward Said, Judith Butler, and others)
care little about truth. In their world­
view, facts do not matter and objectivity
is a farce. What does matter? Power.
Who has it. Who doesn't. And how to get
it. As Pluckrose and Lindsay explain:
"they interpret the world through a lens
that detects power dynamics in every in­
teraction, utterance, and cultural arti­
fact-even when they aren't obvious or
real. This is a worldview that centers on
social and cultural grievances and aims
to make everything into a zero-sum po­
litical struggle revolving around identity
markers like race, sex, gender, sexuality,
and many others" (p.11).
When you have a hammer, every­
thing looks like a nail. If you are obsessed
with detecting patterns of oppression,
you will eventually find them in nearly
all relationships. And, much like Don
Quixote tilting at windmills to liberate
imaginary victims, armed with critical
theories you will tirelessly focus on injus­
tices-both real and imagined-that can
only be remedied by burning the system
to the ground.
Cynical Theories is a fascinating re­
view of how these modern-day liberators
find and fight windmills in all spheres of
life. For example, Pluckrose and Lindsay
examine the work of renowned Indian
postcolonialist guru Gayatri Spivak. One
of her key concepts is "epistemic vio­
lence," or the "injury done to the colo­
nized when their knowledge and status
as knowers is marginalized by dominant
discourses" (p.79).
Colonialism did great damage, and
Pluckrose and Lindsay are not in the
business of defending brutal events such
as the Amritsar massacre in April 1919
when Acting Brigadier General Reginald
Dyer ordered his troops to fire on a
crowd of unarmed Indian citizens,
volume 25 number 4 2020
REVIEWS
CYJ./1.CA.l
-6Rffi6At THEORIES
A.
C7Y
Ilaw Atti1 ol Sd1tllauhip .\lad, f.N'�rthm,i
affllt RMr, Wttdn. alfd MffJl/fJ'
,,;,,..I Nlty •O,,s ,;/ano:s t.·,ryJo.4-
HELEN PLUCKROSE
& JAMES LINDSAY
Durham: Pitchstone.
2020. 352 pp. $27 .95
ISBN-13 : 978-1634312028
killing 379 people and injuring over 1200
others. But surely this is different from
the alleged "violence" done when, say, a
British colonial administrator told an In­
dian person that a giant turtle does not
support Earth in space (thereby commit­
ting "epistemic violence" toward these
marginalized knowers)? A scientific
model of astronomy is better called "sci­
ence" or "the quest for truth;' but schol­
ars such as Spivak twist definitions to
claim that, somehow, bringing scientific
literacy to the world is akin to imprison­
ing Gandhi for picking up grains of salt.
As Pluckrose and Lindsay explain,
these theorists regard "reason and sci­
ence themselves as just one way of
knowing and .. . [it is frequently] oppres­
sive" (p. 84). In tl1is strange new move­
ment, "rigor and completeness come
not from good methodology, skepticism
and evidence, but from identity-based
standpoints and multiple ways of know­
ing" (p 88). In other words, someone
can legitimately defend homeopathy,
acupuncture, crystal gazing, and so on,
as long as it conforms to her own self­
identity. In this worldview, facts do not
matter, only identity does. Can it get
more cynical than this?
The "everything-looks-like-a-nail" to
the hammer of critical theories is most
apparent when it comes to race. One
very popular author, Robin DiAngelo
(her book White Fragility, has been rid­
ing the New York Times bestseller list for
months after the George Floyd killing),
insists that the question is not "did
racism take place?" but rather, "how did
WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 57
 REVIEWS
racism manifest in that situation?" The
assumption being made is that all human
interactions are in some measure racist.
Pluckrose and Lindsay are by no means
in denial about the racism that still exists
in society, but they are baffled by the way
critical race theorists interpret every­
thing as some sort of racist conspiracy to
hold down people of color. For example,
according to theorist Derrick Bell, deseg­
regation in the United States was not in­
troduced as a way to help black people
solve the problem of better integrating
into American society at large, but
rather, to further the interests of white
people while suppressing black radical­
ism dming the Cold War.
In fact, scholars of Critical Race
Theory believe the system is so hope­
lessly racist that, as Pluckrose and
Lindsay note, "(these] theorists fre­
quently advocate Black Nationalism
and segregation over universal human
rights and cooperation" (p. 135). These
theorists' cynicism eventually turns
them into mirror images of the Alt
Right, who also scold any talk of uni­
versalism and are likewise content with
segregating people by skin color.
Ultimately, many of the offensive
tropes that old-fashioned racists ut­
tered in regards to people of color in
previous times are now being levelled
against white people by enthusiasts of
Critical Race Theory. Essentialism was
a fundamental aspect of racist dis­
course, but now, in the name of anti­
racism, it is resurfacing. As Pluckrose
and Lindsay describe it, "we are told
that white people are inherently racist.
We are told that racism is "prejudice
plus power," therefore, only white peo­
ple can be racist. We are informed that
only people of color can talk about
racism, that white people need to just
listen, and that they don't have the
'racial stamina' to engage it" (p. 141).
Will this obsession with race actu­
ally help overcome racism? Pluckrose
and Lindsay doubt it. After all, if Critical
Race Theory ends up resembling the Alt
Right so much, what good can come out
of it? As the authors persuasively argue,
"the core problems with Critical Race
Theory are that it puts social significance
58 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
back into racial categories and inflames
racism... [and] is profoundly aggressive"
(p. 156). Furthermore, "interpreting
everything as racist and saying so almost
constantly is unlikely to produce the de­
sired results in white people.. . It could
even undermine antiracist activism by
creating skepticism and indignation and
thus producing reluctance to cooperate
with wortl1while initiatives to overcome
racism" (p. 157).
Pluckrose and Lindsay are definitely
onto something. I have personally at­
tended so-called "diversity training" ses­
sions. Many of the folks that I have met
at tl1ese sessions are not particularly big­
oted. But, the first thing they hear from
course facilitators is that, being melanin
challenged, they are by default racists. By
the end of the session, they are fed up
with all the name-calling, and come out
resenting the ethnic minorities in whose
name they are harassed.
These cynical theories are danger­
ous and counterproductive in other
realms as well. Consider obesity. The
United States (and the industrialized
world at large) has an obesity problem,
witl1 dire implications for conditions
such as diabetes and heart disease. Yet,
the influx of Critical theory has eventu­
ally led to the idea that obesity is not
detrimental to health.The medical es­
tablishment, so the argument goes, is
"fatphobic." Once again, the issue is de­
fined by power. Any discourse targeting
obesity as a health issue is perceived as
oppression of a particular group of peo­
ple; in this case, fat people. So now, fat
activists have their own academic jour­
nal, Fat Studies, fully dedicated to evalu­
ating how discourse on obesity is akin to
racism, homophobia, transphobia, and
imperialism. Pluckrose and Lindsay have
to remind readers that "there is strong
evidence tl1at obesity is a result of consis­
tently consuming more calories than are
needed and carries significant health
risks" (p. 205). But, remember, in this
particular intellectual fashion, facts don't
matter; only identity does. Indeed, in
this new movement, fat identity is so im­
portant, that refusing to lose weight is
perceived as a heroic act of resistance
against assimilation.
The dismissal of facts is likewise
present in other areas where Critical
Theory is applied. Consider gender.
Pluckrose and Lindsay are quick to
admit that many ideas of gender are so­
cially constructed. But, not all. Biology
does not explain all gender roles, but at
the same time, there are some firm bio­
logical differences between men and
women, and there is strong empirical
evidence supporting this claim. Yet, so­
called "Queer Theory" and more recent
forms of feminism are in denial of
these facts. As Pluckrose and Lindsay
describe it, in such movements, "there
can be absolutely no quarter given to
any discourse-even matters of scien­
tific fact-that could be interpreted as
promoting or legitimizing biological es­
sentialism .... There are biologists and
psychologists advancing knowledge of
how the sexes differ (or do not differ)
biologically and psychologically on av­
erage, how sexuality works, and why
some people are gay, lesbian, bisexual,
or transgender-but their work is not
welcome in Queer Theory" (p.109).
So, how do we climb out of iliis rab­
bit hole in which facts do not matter,
identity reigns supreme, and oppression
is perceived everywhere? The authors
offer some valuable guidelines. They pro­
pose a "liberalism without identity poli­
tics." By this, they mean an approach that
focuses on dignity instead of victimhood.
Instead of focusing so much on policing
of language and verbal microaggressions,
Pluckrose and Lindsay propose focusing
on facts and the "Correspondence Theory
of Truth-that a statement is true if it ac­
cmately describes reality" (p. 285). In­
stead of focusing so much on particular
identities, we ought to seek universal val­
ues; racism can be overcome, not by ob­
sessing over racial categories but, rather,
by building a liberal order in which "no
individual or group is supposed to get
special treatment" (p. 286). And, most
important, they propose to use the scien­
tific method to seek truth, wherever it
leads. In their words, "we deny the worth
of any scholarship that dismisses the pos­
sibility of objective knowledge or the im­
portance of consistent principles and
contend that that is ideological bias,
rather than scholarship" (p. 324).
The United States (and the West­
ern world at large) is in need of much
soul-searching after the death of
George Floyd. This is a golden opportu­
nity to reclaim the liberal values pro­
posed by Pluckrose and Lindsay, and
uphold claims to the extent that they
are supported by evidence, very much
The Gods of the West
A review of Return of the Strong Gods: Nationalism,
Populism, and the Future of the West by R.R. Reno
REVIEWED BY GEORGE MICHAEL
FOR DECADES, AMERICANS HAVE
lamented about national decline. As
stagflation gripped the economy in
1979, President Jimmy Carter stated
that "all the legislation in the world
can't fix what's wrong with America.
W hat is lacking is confidence and a
sense of community." W hat came to be
known as the great malaise speech was
used as fodder by Ronald Reagan who
exulted in 1984 that "it's morning again
in America." A renewed sense of patri­
otism emerged during the Reagan era,
but it nevertheless seemed superficial
and fleeting. Even the triumph of the
United States in the Cold War was anti­
climactic, as the country adjusted to
the new realities of the global market.
Structural changes occasioned painful
dislocations, as manufacturing jobs,
and later even white-collar jobs, were
lost in America as the country opened
up more and more to free trade.
Candidate Donald Trump capital­
ized on this angst in 2016, when he
vowed if elected he would "Make
America Great Again." Indeed, the na­
tion's economic performance was im­
pressive during the first three years of
his administration. Still, many Ameri­
cans felt that the growing prosperity
notwithstanding, something was just
not right or had been lost. The urban
protests that ensued after the much-
in the tradition of Enlightenment hu­
manism and scientific skepticism. And,
even if particular claims are dubious
(such as "racism no longer exists" or
"homosexuality is a mental disorder"),
thes only effective way to discredit such
ideas is by refuting them in debate.
Michael Shermer's recent book, Give­
ing the Devil His Due, is a good com-
publicized death of George Floyd seems
to confirm that something is deeply
broken not only in the United States,
but the entire Western world. W hat is
the source of this civilizational pes­
simism?
In Return of the Strong Gods: Na­
tionalism, Populism, and the Future of
the West, R.R. Reno, who serves on the
board of the Edmund Burke Founda­
tion and the editor of First Things, ar­
gues that many of the maladies that
afflict our civilization are rooted in a
worldview that has ossified over the
past several decades. Perhaps the nu­
merous problems that bedevil our soci­
ety today-including opioid addiction,
alcoholism, divorce, broken families,
suicide, morbid obesity, loneliness, and
the popularity of online porn-are not
isolated phenomena but stem from
something more fundamental.
Reno's book begins with him re­
counting a letter he received from a
27-year old friend in Australia who ex­
pressed his hope to someday "live to
see the end of the twentieth century."
In many ways, 1999 did not feel much
different than 2019, for the guiding
ethos remained the same. The so-called
postwar consensus, which commenced
after 1945, combined moral freedom
with cultural and economic deregula­
tion. These features were seen as the
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM
plement to Pluck.rose and Lindsay's
book. Freedom of speech ought to reign
supreme, even if it comes at the ex­
pense of offending particular groups. In
the dynamic discussion of ideas (re­
gardless of how outrageous they may
be), truth is more likely to prevail. And
alas, cynical theories are unlikely to lib­
erate you; truth shall set you free. El
Regnery Gateway, Washington.
DC, 2019, 208 pp. $28.99.
ISBN-13 : 978--1621578000
natural extension of an anti-authoritar­
ian imperative that crystallized during
World War II. According to Reno, the
violence that convulsed the West from
1914 to 1945, spurred an American-led
response that was "anti-fascist, anti-to­
talitarian, anti-colonialist, anti-imperi­
alist, and anti-racist." As he explains, it
is these "anti" imperatives that define
the essence of the postwar era. Nor did
the collapse of the Soviet bloc in 1989-
1991 bring the postwar consensus to a
close; instead, victory in the Cold War
actually intensified these anti impera­
tives, elevating them to unassailable
verities.
Reno identifies Karl Popper's 1945
Tl1e Open Society and its Enemies as
the fow1dational treatise of the postwar
consensus. According to Popper's epis­
temology, all theories are tentative and
falsifiable and can never be regarded as
absolute truths. Strong truths are tanta­
mount to strong gods and thus must be
rejected inasmuch as they threaten lib­
eral norms. Popper, a highly influential
philosopher of science, averred that
59
 REVIEWS
people had a choice: to live in a "closed
society" characterized by authority and
the subordination of individual inter­
ests, or an "open society" that would lib­
erate people from nefarious collectivist
impulses. The logic undergirding this
intellectual edifice was straightforward:
Never again. Either an open society or
Auschwitz. Essentially, the new dispen­
sation would prevent the return of
Adolf Hitler. According to Popper, total­
itarianism was imbedded in the DNA of
Western philosophy. In order to follow
through with this anti imperative, we
must banish the old gods of the closed
society and create a truly open one.
This theme would be reinforced by
the Frankfurt School. It was composed
mainly of Jewish refugee scholars from
Hitler's Europe who had settled at the
University of California. In 1950 they
published The Authoritarian Personal­
ity, which was written under the direc­
tion of Theodore Adorno and published
by the American Jewish Committee.
Basic to its thesis was the psychoana­
lytic idea that disturbed parent-child
relations involving the suppression of
human sexuality was the principal fac­
tor leading to authoritarianism. The
Frankfurt School warned that although
fascism was soundly defeated in World
War II, vigilance could not be relaxed
because many potential fascists with a
propensity for anti-democratic thought
remained both in Europe and America.
The anti-authoritarian orientation
pervaded economic thought as well.
The so-called Austrian School of Eco­
nomics posited that a strong govern­
ment was not necessary for a func­
tional economy. Instead, markets were
inherently self-organizing as classical
laissez-faire economists had argued
since Adam Smith released his Wealth
of Nations in 1776. The Austrian School
would expand and refine this theme.
Arguably, its most persuasive propo­
nent was Friedrich Hayek, whose 1944
book The Road to Serfdom attacked
both Hitler's National Socialism and
Stalin's Soviet Communism as two
sides of the collectivist coin. To Hayek,
the market mechanism was intrinsi­
cally anti-totalitarian. A market-based
60 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
social order would block the road to
serfdom. Not unlike Popper, Hayek
treated metaphysical qualities, such
as social bonds and moral truths, as
threats to the individual whose inter­
ests, he argued, should always come
first. In their stead, he proffered a
metaphysical minimalism that saw
virtue in smallness.
Hayek's work had an abiding influ­
ence on the Nobel laureate economist
and expert of monetary policy, Milton
Friedman. Not unlike Hayek, Friedman
sought to build a culture in which au­
thoritative norms would be banished
from public life. His 1962 Capitalism
and Freedom advocated a minimalist,
night watchman state that would allow
the invisible hand of the free market to
run economic affairs. Free markets,
rather than central planning would en­
sure the greatest prosperity. As he saw
it, the market served as a vast system of
checks and balances even more effec­
tive and reliable than the U.S. Constitu­
tion. The major thrust of his theory­
whose proponents came to be known
as the Chicago School-was to restrict
government as much as possible and
unleash the anarchism of the market.
Friedman saw collectivism as tanta­
mount to slavery.
Despite the recommendations of
the Austrian and Chicago schools, in
the first few decades after the war na­
tional governments in the West contin­
ued to favor Keynesian policies with
its emphasis on state direction in eco­
nomic affairs. After all, such planning
was believed to have contributed to the
period of prosperity and high commu­
nity cohesion that characterized the
1950s. But with that growing affluence
came conformity that many people
found stultifying. A number of books
published during that period, including
David Riseman's 1950 The Lonely
Crowd, William Whyte's 1956 The Or­
ganizational Man, and Sloan Wilson's
1955 The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit,
lamented the deep anxiety felt by a sti­
fling conventionality. The dominant
liberal establishment interpreted per­
sonal and social problems as patholo­
gies stemming from the closed society,
with its repressive norms, the uncriti­
cal acceptance of social mores, and a
middle-class culture that disapproved
of the unconventional. And of course, it
was believed that these outworn senti­
ments contributed to racism, sexism,
and anti-Semitism.
To be sure, collectivism and con­
formity had some salutary effects. As
Eric Fromm noted in his 1941 study of
the origins of Nazism, Escape from
Freedom, the closed and tribal society
is psychologically soothing and reassur­
ing. In that same vein, the historian
Arthur Schlesinger Jr. observed in his
influential 1949 book The Vital Center:
The Politics of Freedom, that modern
capitalism and technology released
people from their traditional bonds,
and as a consequence left them vulner­
able to the blandishments of authoritar­
ian leaders who promised to restore
national purpose and social solidarity
based on a collectivist form of social
order. For that reason, it was necessary
to always be on guard against creeping
authoritarianism that could arise from
any crisis.
According to the postwar consen­
sus, any form of transcendence or the
recognition that there is something
higher than the individual was believed
to be implicitly totalitarian. The only
way to avert this trap was to adopt a
two fold pattern of weakening or going
small, with a value-free, fact-based no­
tion of truth while satisfying the larger
needs of the human heart with an am­
biguous rhetoric of meaning.
The postwar consensus gained fur­
ther traction in the 1960s. As Reno sees
it, those young people who went to
Woodstock were not rebelling against
their parents in any fundamental sense;
rather, they chided them for not mov­
ing fast enough along the road to the
open society, for the 1960s were in fun­
damental continuity with the 1950s.
Another important theorist of the
postwar consensus, the Algerian-born
French author Jacques Derrida, laid the
foundation for the fusion of economic
and cultural deregulation. Best known
as the pioneer of deconstructionism­
a philosophy that seeks to question
 traditional assumptions about certainty,
identity, and truth-he turned the his­
torical contingency of the postwar con­
sensus into a timeless, anti-metaphysical
truth. He sought to dismantle claims of
knowledge in the Western tradition and
in their place move philosophy toward a
disenchanted world in which it was
not possible to know anything perma­
nent, universal, or transcendent. As
Reno argues, Derrida's hermeneutics
inadvertently undercut the intellectual
credibility of Marxism and actually
strengthened the rising hegemony of
neo-liberalism, that is, a market-based
form of laissez-faire economics com­
bined witha social progressivism
which began to gain popularity among
the leadership class in the West during
the 1980s.
The anti-authoritarian imperative
was picked up and applied to other
areas of human affairs. In the realm of
theology, Reno cites the influence of
the "theologians of openness." For ex­
ample, the German Jesuit priest Karl
Rahner formulated a theory of "anony­
mous Christianity." To that end, Rahner
invoked the Gospel of Luke, which re­
lates a colloquy on Mount Calvary be­
tween Jesus and a penitent thief who is
crucified beside him. After the thief
pleads with Christ to remember him
when he enters Heaven, Jesus replies,
"Amen I say to you, today you will be
with me in paradise." As Reno explains,
this passage was taken by Christian tra­
dition to mean that a pious soul who
had not heard the Gospel nor pro­
claimed an explicit faith in Christ and
received a baptism could still be saved,
so in that sense being hidden or
"anonymous." Raimer expanded this
notion to suggest that a social con­
science and philanthropic disposition
could be taken as signs of a desire for
God, thus allowing believers to regard
well-meaning progressives as quasi­
Christian allies. Although a touching
and heartwarming parable from scrip­
ture, congruent with the Zeitgeist of the
postwar consensus, it idealized the
minimization and weakening of faith.
Even conservatives seemed to
bend the knee to the new dispensation.
For example, although William F. Buck­ sensus invoke the legacy of Auschwitz,
ley criticized the climate of skepticism maintaining that the West has a funda­
at his Ivy League university that under­ mental obligation in historic terms to
mined religious faith and discredited welcome newcomers. To that end, im­
deference to the transcendent in his migration spawns more diversity,
1951 God and Man at Yale, he neverthe­ which can serve as a firewall to a resur­
less evinced a strong loyalty to the gent racism and fascism.
open society and agreed with much of A former Trotskyite-turned-con­
Hayek's insights. For Buckley, much servative, James Burnham lamented
like Hayek, freedom was paramount. the declining civilizational self-confi­
Furthermore, pluralism was a solvent dence of the Occident in his 1964 Sui­
that would tend to disperse, rather than cide of the West: An Essay on the
concentrate, thus reinforcing the open Meaning and Destiny of Liberalism. At
society. Instead of challenging the foun­ the time of its publication, anti-colo­
dations of the liberal postwar consen­ nial liberation movements found solace
sus, Reno maintains that Buckley was in Marxism, which endeared them to
seeking to gain a seat at the table for the Soviet bloc. Communism seemed
conservatives. Be that as it may, his to be on the right side of history, which
critics castigated Buckley because he made it attractive to many people, in­
defended too many truth-claims. cluding the New Left in the West. As
Republican politicians pushed the the decade of the 1960s continued,
postwar consensus as well. Emblem­ Marxism was increasingly combined
atic was President George H.W. Bush's with a nascent Third-Worldism. But as
September 23, 1991 "new world order" Reno points out, Communism was an
address before the United Nations ideology conceived and nurtured in the
General Assembly in which he en­ West that actually spread its civiliza­
thused about a world "of open borders, tional influence in the developing
open trade, and, most importantly, world. As he points out, Mao's revolu­
open minds." Despite all the lofty rhet­ tion dismantled China's traditional
oric about the dynamism of the global Confucian culture, thus paving the way
economy, the movement of capital for Westernization. Likewise, Bolshe­
from the United States to Asia sug­ vism did more to Westernize Russia
gests that corporate leaders see Asian than Peter the Great could have ever
workers as better partners for the fu­ dreamt. Communism provided a dis­
ture than middle class Americans. As tinctly Western ideology used by Third
the economic prosperity of the middle World revolutionaries who sought to
class has declined, so has political soli­ overthrow ancient monarchies, tribal
darity. To be sure, globalization has systems, and the remaining colonial ad­
worked out nicely for the well-edu­ ministrative elites. As Reno points out,
cated and the coastal elite. But many 25 years after Burnham's obituary of
moderately talented Americans see no the West, it was the communist East
functional role in the global economy that had died. Still, Reno finds that
for them. Burnham's analysis of civilizational de­
Inasmuch as open borders are em­ cline remains a useful guide to the tone
blematic of the open society, it is no co­ and tenor of contemporary liberalism
incidence that immigration-both legal in the West.
and illegal-has skyrocketed in the According to Reno, Popper and
West. This has exposed middle class Hayek's anti-totalitarian agenda ad­
workers to increased wage competition vanced in two ways as the postwar era
and disrupted settled patterns of cul­ unfolded. The first, by way of critique,
tural transmission. These migration culminated in the ideology of multicul­
flows continue despite the fact that vot­ turalism. The second was by way of re­
ers in the West have told their leaders duction by reducing human affairs to
that they do not want more immi­ material interests and biological
grants. Defenders of the postwar con- processes. Critique and reduction
volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 61
 REVIEWS
became the therapies of disenchantment
required by the postwar consensus.
As should be evident, academe is
where the postwar consensus flour­
ished most. At war's end in 1945, Har­
vard University's report-General
Education in a Free Society-defended
the Western canon as useful way to en­
courage free inquiry. But decades later,
Harvard's 2007 Final Report of the Task
Force on General Education stressed
that the aim of liberal education to"un­
settle presumptions, to defamiliarize
the familiar to reveal what is going on
beneath and behind appearances to dis­
orient young people." The report cham­
pioned multiculturalism, which for the
liberal education establishment is seen
as the next logical stage in an ongoing
effort to build the open society. Over
the years, the rhetoric of diversity
gained prominence in large part be­
cause it evoked openness and expressed
the ideals of the postwar consensus. In
the current parlance, one could say that
multiculturalism has been weaponized
to dismantle the Western tradition, for
the latter alone, as Reno maintains, has
a hold on our spiritual and political
imagination. The anti-Western bent of
multiculturalism deprives many of
their cultural inheritance. Concomitant
with the ascendance of multiculturalism
has been the rise of identity politics.
Inasmuch as the postwar consensus
militates against a strong civic identity,
individuals fall back on micro-identi­
ties such as race, ethnicity, gender, and
sexual orientation.
As Richard Weaver once told us,
"ideas have consequences." For Popper
and Hayek, the anti-totalitarian imper­
ative required sidelining strong convic­
tions that arouse powerful loyalties.
But as Reno laments, this anti impera­
tive, which crystallized as a result of
the crusade against fascist and later
communist totalitarianism, metasta­
sized into something far from benign.
It has deprived people of the"solidarity
born of shared loves and loyalties, the
solidarity any normal human being
seeks." Openness, weakness, and disen­
chantment were seen as good qualities
insofar as they diminished any vestiges
62 SKEPTIC MAGAZINE volume 25 number 4 2020
of the authoritarian impulse, or as through"blood" and "sacrifice" and by
Reno puts it, to prevent the return of doing so, transgressed a postwar Euro­
the strong gods. Moreover, the postwar pean taboo which abhors too much af­
consensus later transmogrified into the fection being shown to notions of
tyranny of political correctness which "blood and soil."
can be seen as the logical result of this But it borders on absurdity to sug­
intellectual and ideological orientation gest that the broad masses in Western
that was cemented by the close of countries are gathering together and
World War II. Reno characterized these marching in lockstep singing the Horst
anti imperatives as"flesh-eating dog­ Wessel Lied (a Nazi song eulogizing an
mas masquerading as the fulfillment of alleged hero in their rise to power);
the anti-dogmatic spirit." rather, Western societies are dissolv­
In an open culture people's lives ing, as loneliness, alienation, and
become more disordered and less atomization plague much of the popu­
functional. As Reno explains, the lation. Marriage is collapsing among
postwar consensus has led to a situa­ middle-class Americans. The opioid
tion in which the few have contempt epidemic has spread throughout the
for the many. The leadership class country. Declining social capital, dys­
derides and dismisses the subjects functional communities, disintegrating
whom it leads. Reno cites, for exam­ families, and a nihilistic culture of lim­
ple, Hillary Clinton's dismissal of itless self-definition are now the main­
Trump supporters in the 2016 presi­ stays of contemporary society. Because
dential election campaign as a"basket of the preoccupation with attacking
of deplorables." Meanwhile, the main­ any form of communal solidarity, the
stream media and popular culture most important issues of our time go
champion sexual minorities, multicul­ unaddressed.
tural settings, and other "de-center­ By the "return of the strong gods"
ing" stories and images. Reno does not mean "Thor and the
The growing wave of populism other residents of the Old Norse Val­
both in Europe and the United States halla"; rather, he defines the strong
threatens the postwar consensus. That gods as those of objects that earn men's
is why, according to Reno, the leader­ love and devotion. In other words,
ship class is so stridently opposed to those things that are the sources of the
the new populist revolt, as they see the passions and loyalties that unite soci­
open society as the only legitimate eties. These strong gods can occasion­
basis for economic and political ally take the form of charismatic
arrangement. Plugged into the global leaders or ideologies. And at times,
economy, they ignore middle class stag­ they can be destructive. For example,
nation and decline. Despite widespread nationalism that exalts"the people"
anomie and alienation among the gen­ could possibly run roughshod over the
eral population, the leadership class, rights of minorities or those deemed as
academia, and the mainstream media outsiders. For his part, Reno concedes
are near hysterical about the return of that the postwar consensus developed
authoritarianism. The 2016 election of for good reasons, as totalitarianism in
the nationalist-populist candidate Don­ its various forms took a tremendous
ald Trump only re-invigorated the human toll during the 20th century.
sense of vigilance deemed necessary to But Reno implores, "(w]e must stop
turn what was claimed to be a rising acting as if it were 1945," for"( w]e need
tide of resurrected fascism. The main­ to face the challenges of the twenty­
stream media were horrified when first century, not the twentieth." The
Trump exclaimed at a speech in War­ hyper vigilance of the anti imperative of
saw in 201T "Let us all fight like the the postwar era considers any failure to
Poles-for family, for freedom, for denounce fascism as a dereliction of duty
country, and for God." He commented to defend the West against its own per­
how Poland had sanctified its nation versions. Taken to its logical conclusion,
 Reno maintains that this ideology can be just as
dangerous and destructive as the authoritarian­
ism that it superseded. As he sees it, the most
serious threat we face today is not a resurgence
of fascism, but a decline in solidarity and a
breakdown of trust between the leaders and
the led.
Reno believes that our leadership class is way
out of balance. An oligarchical and unaccountable
elite poses a far more serious threat in his mind to
the future of liberal democracy than the return of
any Hitler. It is their Manichean outlook that
Reno posits that "blinds our leadership class to
the realities of the twenty-first century, poisoning
our politics with an all-or-nothing moralism that
is self-serving as it is destructive." This hyper
moralistic sense of mission-"either us or
Hitler!"-ultimately prevents society from deal­
ing with the real and most pressing issues of the
day. Reno warns it is the rich and powerful, not
the populists, who will shipwreck our nations.
Reno asks a fundamental question: What is
the role of the nation in the twenty-first century?
He calls for a renewed sense of American nation­
alism, not based on a biological inheritance, but a
sense of shared culture and civic duties. He finds
that nation is the logical choice for our ideological
and communal passions. As he explains, the con­
cept of "we" infuses political solidarity with sa­
cred significance, for the strong god of the nation
draws us out of our "little worlds." It is necessary
to have a shared notion of the common good in
order to formulate the "we" that is the essence of
public life. For the West to survive, Reno asserts
that its citizens must recover the sense of "we"
that unites them. Rather than more diversity, we
need a home, which will require a return of the
strong gods.
The major events that have bedeviled us so
far in 2020-COVID-19, economic uncertainty,
political and social polarization, and urban un­
rest-suggest that the fabric of the West is more
fragile than many of us previously thought. Exam­
ining what he sees as the root cause of some of
the most pressing issues of the day, Reno's book
is worth reading. His thesis could have been ex­
tended to many more facets of life in the contem­
porary West, including gender relations, film,
music, literature, art, etc., but by keeping it con­
cise, he gets to the essence of what is perhaps the
most serious challenge facing our civilization and
possibly the defining struggle of our era: keeping
our societies together, not through some form of
progressive tyranny, but rather, by building a ro­
bust civil society. El

volume 25 number 4 2020 WWW.SKEPTIC.COM 63

PUBLISHER AND
EDITOR IN CHIEF
Pat Linse
Co-PUBLISHER
Michael Shermer
EDITOR AND WRITER
Daniel Loxton

''Vaccines" are medicines we take when we're healthy to pre­

vent us From getting sick later. Nobody loves getting their shots.
CONTRIBUTORS: But vaccines protect you, your Family, and your community.
Pat Linse
is the creator of
Vaccines have helped us control many serious diseases. Right
and Editor in Chief now, scientists are racing to develop a saFe, eFFective vaccine to
of JUNIOR SKEPTIC. make us immune to Covid-19. However, some people claim that a
She wrote many of Covid vaccine might not be saFe, or even that it might be some sort
the early issues.
oF trick to control us. Others say vaccines are more dangerous than
Daniel Loxton doctors admit. What is the truth� Are vaccines saFe or risky� Or
is the Editor of might the truth be something in between�
JUNIOR SKEPTIC,
and writes and
illustrates most is·
sues. Daniel is the
let'6 Find out/
author of Evo/u·
tion: How We and
All Living Things
Came to Be.

We're going to learn how vaccines were dis­
covered, how they work, and how they save
lives. We'll bust scary myths and conspiracy
theories about vaccines. And, we'll explore the
darker side of vaccine history-because no mat­
ter how safe something is, things can still go
wrong.
Let's start at the beginning. Imagine for a
moment what life was like thousands of years
ago, before there were any vac­
cines. Contagious diseases
were everywhere. If you lived
in ancient times, your life
might be threatened by deadly
disease epidemics eve1y few
This Issue's Cover years. Your family might survive
features a school· one plague, only to sicken and die
boy receiving a in the next. Almost eve1yone car­
measles shot in ried the sadness of losing loved
Atlanta, Georgia in
ones to contagious diseases.
1962. (Courtesy of
the CDC.) Worse, ancient people didn't
know why plagues kept happen­
ing. Nobody knew that germs
existed. They guessed instead that the gods
must be angry. They imagined that plagues
were sent to punish humanity.
How helpless and scared people must have
felt! How could anyone defend themselves
from the wrath of the gods? And yet, people
discovered some ways to do that. For example,
they could stay away from sick people. That's
what leaders in ancient Sumeria recommended
during plagues.
The ancients also noticed something that
held the key to defeating infectious disease.
During one plague in ancient Greece, people
noticed the "disease did not attack the same
person twice, at least not fatally." Those
who got sick and then recovered were im­
mune! Centuries later, that insight led to
one of the most important discoveries
of all time: a way to make people im­
mune to diseases!
 � -- - -
', MAN 5UFF£RING
FROM 5MAl.l.POX.
---- ---�-
- -- ----

Smallpox was one of the deadliest and most devastating came contagious. Worse, about one out of fifty died.
diseases ever known to humanity. From ancient times until Nevertheless, these crazy experiments actually worked!
the 20th century, smallpox epidemics killed countless Yes, it was dangerous. However, it turned out
millions. People lived in helpless terror of that those infected through a scratch on
smallpox. The disease made people in- r-.Mffl!li1��"J
their arm were much more likely to survive
credibly sick and covered their bodies than those who caught smallpox natu-
with horrifying blisters. Those who re- rally! Accidental infections were about
covered carried terrible scars for life. 15 times deadlier than getting the
Some also lost their eyesight. They scratch.
were the lucky ones! Up to 3° percent t:-..1::�""!"-.�
"Inoculation" is the word for this
of smallpox victims died.
practice of deliberately putting full
Several hundred years ago, people strength infectious germs into
]
in China and India knew there was at someone's body to create immu-
least one benefit from catching small- / nity. People who were inoculated
pox: survivors became immune. This () ( against smallpox usually had mild
gave them a wonderful, terrible, danger- !:> ·'
,'-----:; 0 symptoms. Most important, those
ous idea: what if they gave themselves ·
,0' ,, _
0 0 � -, ·. 0() 0_t,/ /
who recovered were fully immune

?
smallpox on purpose? Could they make to smallpox for the rest of their
0 _
themselves immune? -� lives, just as they would be 1f
�
,,/
In medieval China, people took small they recovered from an acciden-
amounts of pus from the blisters of small- /✓ ta! infection.
pox victims and blew it up healthy people's ,_..__,_____/ /.. Smallpox inoculation worked.

I
noses. In India, they scratched material from , '-" �-
- - - - - --
No one knew why at the time, but it
smallpox blisters into the skin on people's arms. SMAl.l.POX. 51-!0WN IN /
did. This risky but lifesaving discovery
What happened when people were deliberately I
, JAPANE.5£ ME.DICAl. 1
MANUAL FROM TH£ : slowly spread to other lands in the
infected with smallpox in this way? Well, they i 17005 · Middle East and Africa.
got sick, of course! They were infected with - -- -- -� -- - �'
smallpox! They showed symptoms of the disease and be-

•

America's first experiment with inoculation took place dur­
ing a smallpox epidemic that raged through Boston in 1721
and 1722. Americans first learned about inoculation from an
African slave who taught the technique to his White owner.
The American colonies needed a lot of workers. To
meet that need, people were kidnapped from
Africa, then sold into slavery and forced to
work in America. At the time, many
White Americans approved of slavery,
even though we recognize it today as
one of history 's biggest crimes.
In 1706, no one thought it was
weird when a Boston preacher
received an African man as a gift
from members of his church.
The preacher, Cotton Mather,
was a smart, complicated man
with some terrible mistaken
ideas and also some good ones.
For example, his writings about
the supposed threat of imagined
witches led to the horrors of the
infamous Salem witch trials. Nu­
merous innocent people were falsely
convicted of witchcraft and executed.
However, Mather was also very interested
in scientific progress. He wrote America's
first popular science book.
Mather was perfectly happy to "own" a human being. He
put his slave to work as a household servant. However,
Mather seems to have behaved fairly decently toward the
man he renamed "Onesimus." Mather taught his slave to
read and write, and later allowed him to marry and earn his
own money. Eventually Mather released his slave to "enjoy
and employ his whole time for his own purposes, and as he
pleases."
The two men didn't always get along (not surprisingly),
but Mather found Onesimus interesting to talk to. As it hap­
pened, one of their conversations wound up making history.
Mather recalled asking "Onesimus, who is a pretty intelli­
gent fellow, whether he ever had the smaJlpox; he answered,
both, Yes, and No; and then told me, that he had undergone
an operation, which had given him something of the small­
pox, and would forever preserve him from it."
Onesimus described the scratch-in-the-arm inoculation
technique invented centuries earlier in India. He showed his
scar to Mather, and explained that the process was common
in the region of Africa where he was born. In his homeland,
"whoever had the courage to use" the dangerous technique
•
"was forever free from the fear of the contagion."
This sure caught Mather's attention! Smallpox was as
dreaded in America as it was in Europe. Was it possible that
an African slave knew more about fighting smallpox than the
best White doctors? Mather then "met with a considerable
number of these Africans," who all agreed that inoculation
was a "common practice" and a "constant success."
Epidemic Emergency
Five years later, Boston was struck by a severe
smallpox epidemic. It would soon infect
more than half the town.
Mather remembered what he
learned from Onesimus. Mather had
heard that descriptions of inocula­
tion had also started to reach Eu­
rope from Africa. He wondered,
"how many lives might be saved
by it, if it were practiced" dur­
ing the Boston outbreak?
Mather wrote to Boston's
doctors about the technique. He
urged them to "warily " test it in
case it could help fight the dis­
ease. "Gentlemen, my request is,
that you would meet for a consul­
tation upon this occasion, and to de­
liberate upon it," Mather asked.
This request set off a firestorm of con­
troversy. The doctors were not impressed
with what sounded like a crackpot idea that a
"credulous vain preacher" heard from a slave. To begin
with, Mather was suggesting that doctors respond to a deadly
disease epidemic by infecting more people on purpose. That
sounded insane! It also seemed morally wrong. "I reckoned it
a sin against society," said one leading critic. This "novel and
dubious practice" was also totally untested by science. The
doctO\S were also offended by the notion that African folk
medicine knew more than they did.
Daring Experiment
Not every doctor thought inoculation sounded crazy. One
doctor named Boylston believed it would work. To find out,
he first inoculated his own son and servants. He then began
inoculating patients in the community.
Other doctors, town leaders, and members of the public
were furious about Boylston's seemingly reckless experiments.
Boylston complained that the "rage of the people against"
inoculation was "so violent, that I was put into a very great
fright." Mather got his own share of the town's fury. He
marveled at the "strange possession of the people on this
occasion. They rave, rail, they blaspheme; they talk not only
like idiots but also like frantics."
 Mather's critics hurled more than insults. One night
around three in the morning, "some unknown hands" threw
a bomb into Mather's house! Thankfully, the bomb did not
explode. The lit fuse fell out when it landed. A note was
found attached to the bomb: "Cotton Mather, you dog, damn
you! I'll inoculate you with this, with a pox to you."
Despite everything, it eventually turned out that Ones­
imus, Mather, and Boylston were right. In some ways, so
were their critics.
l
Boylston inoculated 286 patients. Two percent of them
died. Of the 5,989 Bostonians who caught smallpox by acci­
dent, 14 percent died. In fact, eight per-
cent of the town's total population died.
Boylston complained that the controversy
kept "hundreds, if not thousands, from
coming into the practice of inoculation,
which might have saved many valuable
lives." (We can estimate that inoculating
the whole town might have saved more
than 600 people. )
Inoculation's fiercest medical opponent
eventually agreed that smallpox received
through inoculation "is not so fatal and
the symptoms frequently more mild, than
in the accidental contagion." He agreed
inoculation could be useful, but warned it
was very dangerous.
CORONAVIRU5 BONDING
He was right about that. After all, inoc­ WITH A LIVING cal.
ulation killed one out of 50 patients! This is
why it was such a hard decision decades later when General
George Washington ordered his commanders to "inoculate
your men as fast as they are enlisted" during the American
War of Independence.
Why It Worked
To understand why inoculation worked-and why it was
so risky-we need some scientific knowledge nobody had in
Cotton Mather's day.
Let's talk about germs. Today we know that two types of
germs cause most contagious diseases: bacteria and viruses.
Bacteria are microscopic living things. Some kinds of bacteria
can thrive and multiply inside human bodies, making their
hosts sick.
Viruses are even smaller and simpler than bacteria.
Viruses are so simple they don't really even count as "alive."
They're just microscopic bundles of genetic instructions
(DNA or RNA). Viruses can't do anything by themselves.
They can't move, think, or even reproduce. They just sit there
like tiny little bricks.
That is, unless a virus touches the surface of a living cell it
evolved to attack. Then the genetic instructions carried by
the virus slip inside the cell and trick the cell into making
copies of the virus. Those virus copies go out and infect
more cells, which make more copies. Multiplying viruses
make us sick when they attack more and more of our cells.
Smallpox was caused by one virus; Covid-19 is caused
by another. Both spread the same way. Smallpox victims
coughed out droplets loaded with particles of smallpox
virus. If someone else inhaled those droplets, the virus
could invade their lungs and spread throughout their body.
Now, I'm happy to tell you, human bodies are far from
helpless. We've evolved an amazing immune system to
defend against germs. We need it because there are germs in
every breath of air, every bite of food, and
every surface we touch. Our immune
system stops most of those germs before
they cause any trouble.
W hen we do get sick, it's a bit like a
race: can our bodies kill invading germs
faster than those germs can multiply? If
yes, we get better; if not, we get sicker.
Our immune system is very quick to fight
germs it has encountered before. Old
enemies get attacked on sight. However,
it isn't as quick to attack new germs.
W hen a new germ gets into our bodies
for the first time, it only has to get past
our weaker first lines of defense. It takes
..
time for our immune system to react to
the threat, sound the alarm, and make
antibodies to attack the new germ.
This gives unfamiliar new germs a head start. An aggressive
virus like smallpox could infect cells throughout a victim's
body before their immune system could mount a counterat­
tack-and the counterattack had to be ferocious to beat the
widespread virus. Victims' bodies became battlegrounds.
Almost a third of patients died. Those who recovered be­
came immune because their immune systems could now
recognize smallpox.
Inoculation also infected people with the full strength small­
pox vinis. The virus invaded cells; the immune system
fought back. Recovered patients became immune. The only
difference between inoculation and natural infection was
where the virus entered the body.
Smallpox evolved to invade lungs, not arms. It could infect
skin, but introducing the virus through the skin slowed it
down. This gave patients' immune systems time to catch up.
Most inoculated people-98 percent-were able to fight off
the virus before it could make them sick enough to die.
Others weren't so lucky. Inoculation saved many lives at
the price of taking a few. That's a high price to pay. Human­
ity needed to find a safer way to fight smallpox and other
diseases.
•

For seven decades after the Boston experiments, inoculation
remained humanity's best medicine against smallpox. It was
also extremely hazardous. Finally, in 1798, a doctor named
Edward Jenner announced a safer new way to fight the
dreaded disease. He found his solution on farms in the Eng­
lish countryside.
Jenner was puzzled when he noticed that smallpox inocu­
lation didn't always work on farmers and milkmaids. When
he scratched their arms and introduced smallpox germs,
they didn't get sick. In fact, nothing happened at all. They
appeared to already be immune to smallpox, even though
they'd never had smallpox before. How was that possible?
Jenner learned that farm workers were sometimes in­
fected with an illness they caught from their cows. "Cow­
pox" made people sick and produced a small number of
blisters, but it wasn't deadly. Jenner wondered if recovering
from cowpox made people immune to smallpox? To find
out, Jenner tried smallpox inoculation on several people
who previously had cases of cowpox. None of them became
infected with smallpox.
Then he tried inoculating people with material from cow­
pox blisters. Those people caught very mild cases of cowpox
with "slight symptoms." When they recovered, Jenner tried
inoculating them with smallpox. Nothing happened. They
were immune!
Jenner concluded that cowpox inoculation "leaves the
•
constitution in a state of perfect security from the infection
of the smallpox." Even better, no one died from it. Jenner
very sensibly asked if cowpox inoculation should replace
smallpox inoculation?
At first doctors and scientists doubted Jenner's results, but
they soon realized he was right: cowpox inoculation made
people immune to smallpox, and it was much safer than
smallpox inoculation. The new technique was named "vacci­
nation," from the Latin word for "cow." The practice of vacci­
nation quickly spread across England and Europe and over to
the United States.
Birth of the Anti-Vaccination Movement
There are people today who are fiercely opposed to vac­
cines. We'll learn more about them later in our story, but
opposition to vaccines isn't a new thing. In fact, the anti­
vaccine movement began almost the second Jenner's vaccine
was discovered.
A ferocious debate broke out between doctors who pro­
moted the safer new vaccination technique, and those who
insisted "known, certain, and long-experienced smallpox in­
oculation" was better. This was such an important public
health matter that both sides quickly became furious with the
other. As one 1806 book noted, "both those who approve, and
those who disapprove of vaccination, have accused each
other of murdering their patients."
Some people objected to the very idea of vaccination. They
said it was disgusting and unnatural to put material from
 "t ',;-,,--·•;;;;.aw
·-:, '·' .:. - ---'/
:-v:,�.;.:��'? -�-
� ,-;➔�
' :_�
' .

diseased animals, "filthy in their very nature," into human
bodies. People worried that cowpox would make them less
human. Some claimed vaccination could turn a healthy child
into an "idiotic ape, a hideous foul-skinned cripple: a diseased
burlesque on mankind." People even feared that cowpox vac­
cination would literally tum them into cows. Quack doctors
claimed vaccination made kids look like cows, and even made
them moo and grow horns!
Anti-vaccine doctors warned of countless supposedly
"dreadful effects of Cow-pox inoculation." They blamed vacci­
nation for almost any ailment their patients might have. Itchy
skin? Sores of any kind? These symptoms must be "the effects
of the diseases of brute beasts incorporated into the human
constitution" through vaccines. Others said vaccination
caused brain damage or created entirely new diseases.
These wild claims left the public badly confused. Were they
keeping their children safe by vaccinating, or putting their
children in danger? The answer become clearer with time. As
more people got vaccinated, smallpox deaths started to drop.
According to modern vaccine expert and medical doctor Paul
Offit, "between 1810 and 1820 Jenner's vaccine halved the
number of deaths from smallpox." People got used to vaccines.
Opposition died down.
Health authorities were thrilled. Vaccination was a very
powerful tool to protect people. The government of England
wanted to make every kid safe from smallpox. They passed
laws during the 1850s and 1860s that required everyone to
vaccinate their children. The laws included penalties for
Vaccinating everyone was a great idea. There was just one
problem: people get mad when they feel bossed around!
People hated "compulsory" (forced) vaccination. The anti­
vaccination movement came roaring back, bigger and angrier
than ever. New groups such as The Anti-Vaccination Society
raged against "the cruel, despotic tyranny of forcing cowpox
misery on the innocent babes of the poor-a gross violation
of religion, morality, law, and humanity." Up to 100,000
people joined one massive protest rally against vaccines. The
anti-vaccination movement soon spread across the sea to
North America as well.
Strangely, one of England's greatest scientists joined the
anti-vaccination movement. Alfred Russel Wallace was a co­
discoverer (with Charles Darwin) of evolution by natural se­
lection. He was also a big supporter of bogus ghost
photographs and false claims about vaccines. According to
Wallace, "vaccination is a gigantic delusion" which "has
never saved a single human life." Wallace claimed vaccination
"has been the cause of so much disease, so many deaths,
such a vast amount of utterly needless and altogether unde­
served suffering" that it was a "crime against liberty, against
health, and against humanity . . . ." Wallace believed that
everyone would soon consider vaccination "one of the
foulest blots on the civilization of the nineteenth century."
He was badly mistaken about aJl of that. Instead, vaccina­
tion would later rescue humanity from smallpox once and
for all-and go on to protect us against numerous other terri­
ble and deadly diseases.

•
parents who refused to cooperate.

During the late 19th and 20th centuries, medical scientists
raced to develop vaccines against numerous killer viruses
and bacteria. Vaccines were desperately needed. As Paul
Offit explains,
In the early 1900s ...Americans could expect that every
year diphtheria would kill twelve thousand people,
mostly young children; rubella (German measles) would
cause as many as twenty thousand babies to be born
blind, deaf, or mentally disabled; polio would perma­
nently paralyze fifteen thousand children and kill one
thousand; and mumps would be a common cause of
deafness.
Before the whooping cough (or pertussis) vaccine, Offit
adds, "about three hundred thousand cases of whooping
· cough caused seven thousand [American) deaths every year,
almost all in young children." Whooping cough is a horrible
sickness. Children sometimes cough so hard they break ribs
or suffer brain damage! "Before the vaccine;' Offit goes on,
"measles infected as many as four million American chil­
dren, causing a hundred thousand to be hospitalized and five
hundred to die every year."
There were frequent epidemics. In 1916, for example, a
polio epidemic broke out in New York City. This strain of
polio killed up to a quarter of everyone infected. Over two
thousand people died in the city alone. Thousands more died
as the disease spread to other states.
Vaccine Victories-and Risks Along the Way
Today, all those diseases and others have been controlled
or even eliminated by vaccines that prevent infection. This is
one of the humanity's greatest success stories. Most people in
rich countries barely remember diseases that used to inflict
millions with terror, sickness, and death. The most spectacu­
lar success is smallpox vaccination. Jenner's discovery
empowered us to completely eradicate this ancient enemy.
Thanks to vaccines, smallpox is extinct in the wild! Humanity
no longer suffers from this horrifying disease.
Those victories didn't come easily. There were setbacks
and even disasters along the way. To understand vaccines­
and to learn which vaccine risks are real and which are
imagined-we will need to look at the hard lessons that
scientists learned on their quest to conquer deadly
diseases.
Modern vaccines are incredibly safe . . . because medical
scientists have learned from a century of mistakes and
accidents. Vaccines used to be riskier than they are now.
The first and most obvious risk from the earliest inocula­
tion treatments was that full strength disease germs make
people sick. That's why the medieval smallpox inoculation
technique was so hazardous. Even Jenner's vaccine used full
strength cowpox virus. It had more side effects than modern
vaccines.
To make safer vaccines, scientists had to find ways to make
germs weaker. For example, they discovered ways to kill
the germs with heat or chemicals before injecting them. Our
iinmune system could still learn to recognize the dead germs,
but dead germs can't cause infections. (Strictly we should say
viruses are "deactivated " because they're not exactly alive to
begin with.)
Contaminated Vaccines
Another very serious early risk was that vaccines could be
contaminated with other kinds of germs. During an American
smallpox epidemic in 1898-1904, for example, governments
in some cities and states made laws that people had to get
vaccinated. However, there were no laws that vaccines had to
be safe or effective. Anyone could make and sell vaccines! No
one checked to see if they did a good job.
Smallpox vaccines were made from blisters on cows. The
vaccines were often contaminated with bacteria that lived in
the cows' filthy stables. In one heartbreaking 1901 case,
dozens of American children died from tetanus bacteria lurk­
ing inside their vaccines. After this tragedy, the United States
government decided to write laws that required vaccines to be
made safely.
However, accidents can happen even when people are
careful and responsible. In 1928, doctors were very relieved to
finally have a vaccine against diphtheria (a disease that could
literally choke children to death). Sadly, one Australian doctor
caused an accidental tragedy when he vaccinated his young
patients. The vaccine was made properly, but it came in a
large vial with doses for numerous people. At some point, a
deadly kind of bacteria got inside his bottle of vaccine and
started multiplying. Twelve children died from his contami­
nated vaccine.
This horrible accident exposed another serious vaccine
risk. Health officials realized they needed a way to keep bacteria
from growing inside bottles of vaccine. They soon settled on a
preservative called "thimerosal." It seemed like a great choice.
Thimerosal killed bacteria without damaging the vaccine. It
was considered safe for people. From the 1930s until the late
1990s, thimerosal was successfully used to make vaccines
safer. Then a new controversy erupted, which we'll learn
about later in our story.
Hitchhiking Viruses
Vaccines are made from germs.* If you want to make a vac­
cine against a virus, you need to grow a lot of that virus. The
problem is, viruses can only reproduce inside living cells.
Smallpox vaccine was originally grown inside living cows.
Modern flu vaccines are typically grown inside eggs. (That's a
risk for people with egg allergies.)
• SOME. NE.WE.R VACCINE.$ ARE. MADE. \
USING GE.NE.TICALLY E.NGINE.E.RE.D \
PROTEINS THAT REPLICATE. THE.
SURFACE. OF A VIRUS. THE.SE. DO NOT
CONTAIN ACTUAL GE.RMS.
 In the late 1950s, polio virus for vaccines was grown inside
living monkeys. Monkeys were first infected with polio and
QI
then killed. Polio virus was filtered from their kidneys. Every­
1'I
one thought this was safe until one government scientist de­
cided to double check. She injected hamsters with polio virus
,...
;:;
jij
samples taken from monkey kidneys. A whopping 70 percent
of the hamsters developed tumors. It turned out that the sam­
ples also included a mon­
key virus called SV 40
which causes cancer in
hamsters. In 2013, the
U.S. Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention
estimated "10-30 mil­
lion Americans could
have received an SV 40
contaminated dose of
vaccine." No one knows
for sure whether SV 40
is harmful to humans.
Modern vaccines do
not have this risk. Sci­
entists changed how
vaccines were made as
soon as they learned about the monkey virus. Vaccine viruses
are typically now grown in a laboratory using clean, safe cell
cultures grown from human tissue.
Deadly Mistakes
Improving knowledge led to safer, more effective vaccines
against more and more diseases. But safe vaccines still have to
be made properly.
In the early 1950s, polio was the disease that Americans
feared most. Polio mostly attacks children. The virus is easily
transmitted. Most infected people don't even realize they have
it. However, severe cases cause paralysis, deformed limbs, and
death. Every year, thousands of kids were paralyzed and con­
fined in "iron lung" machines just to keep them breathing.
When a successful polio vaccine was finally announced,
the whole country burst into celebration. Church bells rang.
People wept for joy. It was front page news across the nation.
"Science has enriched mankind with one of its finest gifts,"
proclaimed The New York Times.
The new vaccine had been carefully tested on nearly two
million volunteers. It worked great. Side effects were rare.
People joyfully lined up to take it immediately.
Two weeks later, something horrible happened. Yes, the
vaccine was safe.. . if it was made con-ectly. It used "dead" (de­
activated) polio virus. This could not infect anyone. However,
several companies had permission to make the vaccine-and
one of those companies messed up. Badly. Their batches of
the vaccine were accidentally contaminated with infectious
"live" polio virus!
It was a disaster. The contaminated vaccine gave 70,000
children polio. Two hundred kids were permanently para­
lyzed. Ten died.
All batches of the vaccine were quickly recalled while sci­
entists fixed the problem. Those responsible for the accident
were punished. Stricter new safety laws were written to
make sure such an accident could never happen again.
Despite this
tragedy, polio vaccines
have proven so effec­
tive that the disease
has now been com­
pletely eradicated
from most of the
planet. Today, only a
handful of cases turn
up each year in remote
places. World health
authorities are hopeful
that vaccination will
soon make polio ex­
tinct everywhere, once
and for all.
Side Effects
Like any medicine, vaccines can cause side effects. Vac­
cines must be thoroughly tested to find out what those might
be. Experimental vaccines are first tested on a small number
of volunteers in case they have severe or common side ef­
fects. If the first trials seem safe, the vaccine is then tested
on larger numbers of people. Vaccines must be tested on
very large numbers to find any rare side effects. Only when
they're proven safe do vaccines get permission for public use.
Doctors then keep track of any health problems patients
might have soon after receiving a vaccine, just in case those
health problem could be connected to the vaccine. Most
regular childhood vaccines have been in use for many years.
Their possible side effects are very well known.
The most common side effects include low fever and sore­
ness at the injection site. Allergic reactions are one of the
most dangerous risks of modern vaccines. Some people are
severely allergic to ingredients in certain vaccines (such as
eggs or glycerin). To manage this risk, doctors ask patients
about allergies. They may ask patients to wait after their
shots in case they have any unexpected reaction.
To remain in use, vaccines must be safer than the risk of
not vaccinating. Side effects must be mild or extremely rare.
When the risks from diseases change, health authorities
change the list of recommended vaccines. For example,
Americans no longer receive smallpox vaccine because
smallpox is extinct. Similarly, the United States switched to a
less effective but safer polio vaccine in 1998. It was safe to
•
make this change because polio had become rare.
 diphtheria). The result was a whooping cough epidemic. A
hundred thousand British kids caught a truly terrible pre­
ventable illness which can itself cause brain damage! Thou­
Modern vaccines are extremely safe. Most people should get sands wound up in the hospital. It's been estimated that
all of their recommended doses at the recommended times. about 600 kids died.
This protects us, and also protects people who cannot take
Even after that epidemic, media continued to spread the
certain vaccines (such as babies, organ transplant patients,
rumor around the world. In 1983, a TV program called DPT:
and people with severe allergies to vaccine ingredients).
Vaccine Roulette shocked American audiences with images of
Unfortunately, anti-vaccine rumors continue to scare brain damaged children. The show claimed the whooping
people. You may know someone who feels uneasy about cough vaccine caused "damage to a devastating degree."
vaccination. Some even feel strongly opposed to vaccines. Parents freaked out. Families sued the companies that made
There has been an anti-vaccine movement for more than whooping cough vaccine. Judges ordered the companies to
200 years. Strangely, that movement has rarely complained pay billions of dollars.
about the small but real risks of vaccines. Instead, they've
To stay in business, companies had to charge 35 times
usually scared people about imagined risks (such as smallpox
more for the vaccine-an increase from twelve cents per dose
vaccine turning children into cows).
in 1982 to $4.29 three years later. They still lost money. Two
Rumors about vaccine dangers often come from misun­ of the three American companies that made the vaccine
derstandings. In one gruesomely exaggerated example in stopped. Then in 1986, the last remaining company said they
1972, an anti-vaccine pamphlet claimed that one polio vac­ too would stop making the DPT vaccine! Companies that
cine was made from the blood of babies. "YOUR CHILD'S made other vaccines also started getting out of the business.
NEXT IMMUNIZATION SHOT MAY BE CANNIBALIZED
The U.S. Federal government had to step in to save vac­
FROM A SLAUGHTERED BABY," the pamphlet warned.
cines from disappearing. The vaccine program protects the
This wasn't true, of course. The vaccine was made using
whole nation, so the nation would also pay for any harm
human cells grown in a lab. The activist who wrote the
caused by vaccines. From now on, any American injured by
pamphlet later admitted he was wrong. He apologized to the
any vaccine could apply to a new national "vaccine court" for
scientist who created the vaccine. However, the damage was
compensation.
already done. The pamphlet's claims were repeated for years
in church bulletins and newspapers. The whooping cough vaccine actually did have a lot of side
effects. It was an early, crude vaccine that was later replaced
Other frightening vaccine rumors were based on coinci­
by a safer version. Nevertheless, the evidence from several
dences. Developmental problems such as autism sometimes
large studies showed that whooping cough vaccine did not
appear in children around the same time that kids receive
cause permanent brain injuries. For example, one study in
childhood vaccines. If a child develops a condition after taking
England compared 134,700 kids who received whooping
a vaccine, parents may suspect that the shot caused the con­
cough vaccine to 133,500 who didn't. The study found "no
dition. They may join anti-vaccine activists who share their
convincing evidence" that the rumors were true.
suspicions. Those groups spread scary rumors in newspaper
stories, television, and the internet.
Measles, Mercury, and Autism
Rumors and Panic In 1998, another British doctor named Andrew Wakefield
started a worldwide panic about a totally different vaccine.
It's helpful to know that similar anti-vaccine accusations
He published a paper and held a press conference claiming
have been made against different vaccines at different times.
that the measles vaccine harmed children's brains, causing
In 1973, for example, a doctor in England claimed that the
autism. Wakefield told reporters, "I cannot support the
whooping cough (pertussis) vaccine caused brain damage.
continued use" of the MMR vaccine that protects against
As Paul Offit explains, this claim is now known to be "utterly
measles, mumps, and rubella. Measles is a serious illness that
incorrect." However, people believed it.
used to infect four million American kids every year, killing
The brain damage claims caused a media frenzy. News 500 and putting a hundred thousand in the hospital.
media love stories that seem both surprising and important.
We now know for a scientific fact that the measles vaccine
"Whooping Cough Vaccine Risks Concealed, Say Victims'
does not cause autism. Wakefield's "research" was completely
Parents," one headline claimed. "Boy's Brain Damaged in
bogus. His paper was later retracted as a fraud. Wakefield
Vaccine Experiment," said another. Headlines even claimed
even lost his license to practice medicine.
that the whooping cough vaccine should be abandoned.
However, Wakefield's false claims made headlines around
People stopped vaccinating their kids. Many British doc­
the world. "Doctors Link Autism to MMR Vaccination;' an­
tors stopped recommending the DPT vaccine (which pro­
nounced one London paper's front page headline. This idea
tects against three diseases: whooping cough, tetanus, and
took hold in the public imagination, inspiring two decades of
furious anti-vaccine activism, hearings in Congress, and
countless books and news stories about the supposed "dan­
gers" of vaccines. Parents were confused and alarmed. Noth­
ing's scarier for parents than thinking their decisions could
harm their kids. Parents of autistic children were heartbroken
-and angry!
Then something else made the whole mess worse. U.S.
government agencies were busy checking their safety stan­
dards regarding mercury (a highly toxic metal). Doctors at
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) knew that the
thimerosal preservative in some vaccines contained tiny
amounts of a relatively safe form of mercury. Thimerosal had
been used safely in vaccines for several decades. But govern­
ment doctors suddenly realized that kids got a lot more vac­
cines than they used to. Could those shots possibly add up to
an unsafe level of mercury exposure? Doctors were shocked
to realize they simply didn't know.
"There was no safety data" about that, recalled one of the
experts involved, because it had never even occurred to any­
one to study! After all, everything seemed fine. But was it?
Big problems would be obvious after so
many years of use. Still, doctors worried:
what if thimerosal had subtle health ef­
fects no one had noticed? Further re­
search was needed.
Health officials decided to tell the
public exactly what was happening. They
reassured everyone that there was "no data
NOCOVID
or evidence of any harm" from
thimerosal. Nevertheless, out of an
abundance of caution, they decided
"thimerosal-containing vaccines
VACCINE
should be removed as soon as possi­
ble." The public did not react well to
this news. If there was no danger,
why were they removing
thimerosal? Or if there was some
danger, why were authorities saying there
was no evidence of harm?
The anti-vaccine movement became pow­
erful and popular in the years that followed.
Wakefield's claims were discredited, but he
remained a hero to anti-vaccine activists. His
claims about the measles vaccine blended with unrelated
claims about thimerosal. Even after thimerosal was removed
from vaccines, conspiracy theories falsely claimed "there are
no safe vaccines!" According to one prominent anti-vaccine
activist, the "childhood vaccination program endured by
American families is . ..the single greatest threat this country
has ever faced." (That's saying a lot in a country that endured
a Civil War and two World Wars!)
None of these claims were true. Unfortunately, media
helped to spread misinformation. For example, one study of
news stories from 2002 about the MMR vaccine revealed
that 70 percent of stories mentioned a supposed link to
autism. Only 11 percent mentioned the vaccine's actual
safety record. Years of widespread anti-vaccine misinforma­
tion scared parents. Many stopped vaccinating their kids. In­
evitably, falling vaccination rates led to a series of outbreaks
of diseases such as measles and whooping cough.
The vaccine panic was unnecessary and tragic. Scientists
around the world have repeatedly tested the thimerosal
and MMR claims, and always find the same thing: vaccines
definitely do not cause autism. Numerous studies have
compared hundreds of thousands of vaccinated and unvacci­
nated kids. Both groups had the same rates of autism. This
finding was predictable from the beginning. After all, as one
anti-vaccine author admitted, "Some children with autism
were never exposed to thimerosal, and the vast majority of
people who received mercury in vaccines show no evidence
of harm whatsoever."
Conspiracy Theories and Covid-19
Vaccines seem especially vulnerable to conspiracy
theories. New conspiracy claims pop up all the time. In
2003, for example, vaccine workers were trying to eliminate
polio from Nigeria. Then a religious leader claimed the polio
vaccine was a plot to infect people with AIDS and make
women unable to have babies. People became scared to take
the vaccine. Several teams of vaccine workers were mur-
dered. Then a polio epidemic spread
from Nigeria to twenty other coun­
tries. Five thousand people were
paralyzed-and all because of a
false rumor.
Today, there are dangerous
conspiracy rumors about the experi­
mental Covid vaccines that scien­
tists are racing to develop and test.
For example, some people claim
Covid vaccines are a plot to implant
people with tracking chips. That's
silly. (Smart phones and social
media already know almost everything about us.)
Many teams of scientists are working on possible
Covid vaccines because we need a vaccine to help
stop this deadly pandemic. Don't be distracted by fake mmors.
Do learn from the complicated history of vaccines. As one or
more Covid vaccines become available, we'll need medical
experts to tell us: How effective is it? How well is has it been
tested? How long does it last? And, what are the side effects?
Vaccines are amazing, but never perfect. We may find that
the first Covid vaccine is soon replaced by a better one.
Scientists will continue to make vaccines safer and more
effective to better protect us all.
•
SELECTED JR SKEPTIC ARTICLES ARE
NOW AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD
FREE DOWNLOAD:
PLAGUED BV NON5EN5E Plagued by Nonsense:
_,I Pandemics Throughout History:
How Mistakes, Fakes, & Missing
PANOEMIC5 THRCJUqff(JUT Hl5TCJR'f:
Facts Make Epidemics Worse
HCJW Ml5TAKE5, FAKE5, ANO M/55/Nq FACT5 Plagues of Ancient Athens & Rome;
MAKE EPIOEMIC5 WCJR5E Bubonic Plagues; Fighting Small pox &
Spanish Flu in the U.S.; Fighting Diseases
Today; Covid Mistakes & Misinformation.

FREE DOWNLOAD:
An Easy Guide to
Baloney Detection
Includes Sagan's Ten Tools for
Detecting Baloney and Shermer's
Baloney Detection Questions
adapted for younger readers.

FREE DOWNLOAD:
C,.edf Jl.meciccuz Great American
Skeptics
r _CJ/cp[/C,f Stories about Johnny Carson, Ben
Franklin, Mark Twain and Harry
Houdini-written by Canadians!

skeptic.com/buyjuniorskeptic

DOWNLOAD THESE SELECTED ISSUES OF

JUNIOR SKEPTIC AS PDFs FOR ONLY $1.99 EACH!
#70: Quest for the Truth About Dungeons #36: The Cottingley Fairies
& Dragons #33: The Art of Cold Reading
#69: Secrets of the Ouija Board #31: Crystal Skulls
#67: Perpetual Motion #13: Bad Medicine
#66: The Incredible Claims of Pet Psychics #11: The Moon Landing "Hoax"
#63: Chemtrails #10:Atlantis
#58: Haunted Houses #9: Pyramids
#ST Flying Saucer "Space Brothers" from #8: How Darwin Discovered the History of Life
Venus!? #T James Randi Fakes Psychic Powers on TV
#55: Journey Inside the Fantastical #6: Origins of Halloween
Hollow Earth II #5: Urban Legends
#54: Journey Inside the Fantastical Hollow #4: Fortunetelling
Earth I #3: Are Aliens Among Us?
#49: The Ping-Pong Planets of Dr. Velikovsky How to Fake UFO Photos
#48: Mermaids #2: Bigfoot, the Magic of Crystals, Testing a
#47: Alien Invaders! Magic Golf Ball Finding Device
#43: The Mighty Moa! #1: Fourth Grade Emily Rosa
#3T Top 10 Busted Myths v. Therapeutic Touch

skeptic.com/buyjuniorskeptic
 NON PROFIT
U.S. POSTAGE

PAID
MADISON, WI
PERMIT NO. 2223

cambridge.org/shermer a! CAMBRIDG
• UNIVERSITY PRES