Flat Earth Rising

[ksinger]

...or, The True Power of Bulletproof Motivated Reasoning to Make You Beat Your Head Bloody in Frustration.

From one of my favorite skeptical writers, Steven Novella.

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/flat-earth-rising/#more-9908

"Interest in the notion that the earth is flat has been increasing in recent years.
( https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=Flat Earth )
I have to say, as much of a jaded skeptic as I am, this level of self-deception is still amazing to me. It truly demonstrates that there is no practical limit to the power of motivated reasoning or the absurdity of conclusions which it can defend."

 

[vintagelover229]

Its funny that you should post about this. There are quiet a few very well educated people who believe that the earth is, well-not flat per say-I believe the term is geo spherical. I haven't done a ton of research but there are some very interesting arguments out there for it. In fact, it hasn't been all that long in the scheme of things that we have been taught that the earth is round.

There is some really interesting notes on wiki that I have read though before and the were and are quite a few 'modern flat earthers' out there.

One that popped out at me was this:
In Brockport, New York, in 1887, M.C. Flanders argued the case of a flat Earth for three nights against two scientific gentlemen defending sphericity. Five townsmen chosen as judges voted unanimously for a flat Earth at the end. The case was reported in the Brockport Democrat.


I understand that was still some time ago, but the people who believe in this theory do a lot of research into it and don't draw the conclusion by sheer stupidity or as he says 'self deception' what do they have to gain from believing this over the more modern theory? And considering that many of our greatest scientific and mathematical achievements were from time periods from the 1800's and before-I can't imagine that they were total idiots sitting on the judgement board and the 2 people debating it likely weren't either.

Personally it doesn't affect me one way or another if the earth is one over the other. But if it IS true that concerns me that if we could be deceived on that great of a level, and are being taught a bold faced lie, that is something that I would want to know. The question would be why would they want to lie about something like that if it is true as was believed for so long? There are many responses to this as well.

I for one like to explore all sorts of interesting 'other side of the fence' sorts of things. Truth is we won't ever really know. You can say you know bc you've seen pictures from NASA, etc but if those were doctored or altered again, we wouldn't know it.

At the end of the day I am far more concerned about things that impact my daily life, like the amount of water we have left (blue gold), the chemicals we use in everything and how it is impacting our hormones and our bodies and our enviroment to spend too much time on the conspiracy of a flat earth. But it IS interesting to note that not everyone believes it. In fact the bible and Koran both speak of an earth that is flat I do believe. Don't quote me on it, but not too many people are going to talk about something that makes them sound crazy when it's been accepted as a fact that the earth is round about believing otherwise.

I haven't had time to read this at all, but this came up on a quick search that wasn't related to a conspiracy site directly or from a flat earth site either. I haven't had time to dive into it, and probably won't for some time but maybe one of you guys have time to read when your bored to see what both sides of the fence is all about.

http://www.ethicalatheist.com/docs/flat_earth_myth_ch5.html

Looks like the intro is a time line starting from 5000 BCE to present.

 

[siamese3]

While I think it is just a natural component of the human condition to engage in a certain amount of self-deception, the current state of affairs is certainly alarming. Fact, science, logic, intelligence, higher learning all under attack. SAD!

 

[telephone89]

Ugh. Shaq recently admitted he believes this.
I spent a whole day down the rabbit hole of flat earth/fake moon conspiracies a while back. At the time it seemed mad how people could believe this kind of stuff (or not believe in science?).

 

[ksinger]

...the people who believe in this theory do a lot of research into it and don't draw the conclusion by sheer stupidity or as he says 'self deception' what do they have to gain from believing this over the more modern theory? And considering that many of our greatest scientific and mathematical achievements were from time periods from the 1800's and before-I can't imagine that they were total idiots sitting on the judgement board and the 2 people debating it likely weren't either.

I for one like to explore all sorts of interesting 'other side of the fence' sorts of things. Truth is we won't ever really know. You can say you know bc you've seen pictures from NASA, etc but if those were doctored or altered again, we wouldn't know it.

In fact the bible and Koran both speak of an earth that is flat I do believe. Don't quote me on it, but not too many people are going to talk about something that makes them sound crazy when it's been accepted as a fact that the earth is round about believing otherwise.

...to read when your bored to see what both sides of the fence is all about.

http://www.ethicalatheist.com/docs/flat_earth_myth_ch5.html

I posted it because I check in at the Neurologica Blog from time to time and saw it and found it both entertaining AND disturbing. Not even a tempest in a teacup, really, but I confess I was a bit surprised to know there were still flat earthers out there. I thought they were extinct past about 1980 or so. I suppose it was to be expected though, considering the current levels of science denial and outright ignorance in our society.

That said, there is no "both sides of the fence" on this issue. There is only massive, willful ignorance of both science and history, a core assumption that just about every single other human on the planet is a liar, and motivated reasoning, and addiction to conspiracy woo.

As the author concludes:

"The notion of a flat earth is patently absurd and collapse even under the slightest scrutiny. It is fun, and can be informative, to deconstruct even a nonsensical scientific claim in detail.

But more interesting is the psychological phenomenon at work here. It is fascinating that people have the ability to twist logic and evidence to such a degree that they can maintain a belief that is at direct and obvious odds with reality. That is the real story here."

 

[Missy]

Sadly doesn't surprise me (too much). I started a thread a while back having to do with statistics of how many people still don't believe in evolution. Here's the latest statistics I could find regarding this issue. Scary? Sad? Or just the way people refuse to believe science over religion. The 2 aren't always at odds with each other though often they are. I don't even try to make sense of it anymore as we live in an upside down world as it is with you know who in charge of the USA among other things. So it's lucky the world is not flat because with the way things are now we would all surely literally fall on our face if it t was flat lol. Surreal world that we exist in these days.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/10/darwin-day/



And the thread. Not rereading it but probably it makes sense to share here.
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/evolution-vs-creationism-what-do-you-believe.220038/


And in that thread info about people believing he earth is flat.

U.S. Lags World in Grasp of Genetics and Acceptance of Evolution

A comparison of peoples' views in 34 countries finds that the United States ranks near the bottom when it comes to public acceptance of evolution. Only Turkey ranked lower.

Among the factors contributing to America's low score are poor understanding of biology, especially genetics, the politicization of science and the literal interpretation of the Bible by a small but vocal group of American Christians, the researchers say.

“American Protestantism is more fundamentalist than anybody except perhaps the Islamic fundamentalist, which is why Turkey and we are so close,” said study co-author Jon Miller of Michigan State University.


The researchers combined data from public surveys on evolution collected from 32 European countries, the United States and Japan between 1985 and 2005. Adults in each country were asked whether they thought the statement “Human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals,” was true, false, or if they were unsure.

The study found that over the past 20 years:

The percentage of U.S. adults who accept evolution declined from 45 to 40 percent.
The percentage overtly rejecting evolution declined from 48 to 39 percent, however.
And the percentage of adults who were unsure increased, from 7 to 21 percent.
Of the other countries surveyed, only Turkey ranked lower, with about 25 percent of the population accepting evolution and 75 percent rejecting it. In Iceland, Denmark, Sweden and France, 80 percent or more of adults accepted evolution; in Japan, 78 percent of adults did.

The findings are detailed in the Aug. 11 issue of the journal Science.

Religion belief and evolution

The researchers also compared 10 independent variables—including religious belief, political ideology and understanding of concepts from genetics, or “genetic literacy”—between adults in America and nine European countries to determine whether these factors could predict attitudes toward evolution.

The analysis found that Americans with fundamentalist religious beliefs—defined as belief in substantial divine control and frequent prayer—were more likely to reject evolution than Europeans with similar beliefs. The researchers attribute the discrepancy to differences in how American Christian fundamentalist and other forms of Christianity interpret the Bible.

While American fundamentalists tend to interpret the Bible literally and to view Genesis as a true and accurate account of creation, mainstream Protestants in both the United States and Europe instead treat Genesis as metaphorical, the researchers say.

“Whether it’s the Bible or the Koran, there are some people who think it’s everything you need to know,” Miller said. “Other people say these are very interesting metaphorical stories in that they give us guidance, but they’re not science books.”

This latter view is also shared by the Catholic Church.

Politics and the Flat Earth

Politics is also contributing to America's widespread confusion about evolution, the researchers say. Major political parties in the United States are more willing to make opposition to evolution a prominent part of their campaigns to garner conservative votes—something that does not happen in Europe or Japan.

Miller says that it makes about as much sense for politicians to oppose evolution in their campaigns as it is for them to advocate that the Earth is flat and promise to pass legislation saying so if elected to office.

"You can pass any law you want but it won't change the shape of the Earth," Miller told LiveScience.



Paul Meyers, a biologist at the University of Minnesota who was not involved in the study, says that what politicians should be doing is saying, 'We ought to defer these questions to qualified authorities and we should have committees of scientists and engineers who we will approach for the right answers."

The researchers also single out the poor grasp of biological concepts, especially genetics, by American adults as an important contributor to the country's low confidence in evolution.

“The more you understand about genetics, the more you understand about the unity of life and the relationship humans have to other forms of life,” Miller said.

The current study also analyzed the results from a 10-country survey in which adults were tested with 10 true or false statements about basic concepts from genetics. One of the statements was "All plants and animals have DNA." Americans had a median score of 4. (The correct answer is "yes.")

Science alone is not enough

But the problem is more than one of education—it goes deeper, and is a function of our country's culture and history, said study co-author Eugenie Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education in California.

“The rejection of evolution is not something that will be solved by throwing science at it,” Scott said in a telephone interview.

Myers expressed a similar sentiment. About the recent trial in Dover, Pennsylvania which ruled against intelligent design, Myers said "it was a great victory for our side and it’s done a lot to help ensure that we keep religion out of the classroom for a while longer, but it doesn’t address the root causes. The creationists are still creationists—they're not going to change because of a court decision."

Scott says one thing that will help is to have Catholics and mainstream Protestants speak up about their theologies' acceptance of evolution.

"There needs to be more addressing of creationism from these more moderate theological perspectives," Scott said. “The professional clergy and theologians whom I know tend to be very reluctant to engage in that type of ‘my theology versus your theology’ discussion, but it matters because it’s having a negative effect on American scientific literacy."

The latest packaging of creationism is intelligent design, or ID, a conjecture which claims that certain features of the natural world are so complex that they could only be the work of a Supreme Being. ID proponents say they do not deny that evolution is true, only that scientists should not rule out the possibility of supernatural intervention.

But scientists do not share doubts over evolution. They argue it is one of the most well tested theories around, supported by countless tests done in many different scientific fields. Scott says promoting uncertainty about evolution is just as bad as denying it outright and that ID and traditional creationism both spread the same message.

“Both are saying that evolution is bad science, that evolution is weak and inadequate science, and that it can’t do the job so therefore God did it,” she said.



Bruce Chapman, the president of the Discovery Institute, the primary backer of ID, has a different view of the study.

"A better explanation for the high percentage of doubters of Darwinism in America may be that this country's citizens are famously independent and are not given to being rolled by an ideological elite in any field," Chapman said. "In particular, the growing doubts about Darwinism undoubtedly reflect growing doubts among scientists about Darwinian theory. Over 640 have now signed a public dissent and the number keeps growing."

Nick Matzke of the National Center for Science Education in California points out, however, that most of the scientists Chapman refers to do not do research in the field of evolution.

"If you look at the list, you can't find anybody who's really a significant contributor to the field or anyone who's done recognizable work on evolution," Matzke said.

Scott says the news is not all bad. The number of American adults unsure about the validity of evolution has increased in recent years, from 7 to 21 percent, but growth in this demographic comes at the expense of the other two groups. The percentage of Americans accepting evolution has declined, but so has the percentage of those who overtly reject it.

"I was very surprised to see that. To me that means the glass is half full,” Scott said. “That 21 percent we can educate."

 

[ksinger]

Thanks Missy.

It's funny that your post mentions Dover.

You know, I had some time on my hands in late 2005 and early 2006. I read the Dover decision, all 139 pages of it. Later I read some sources describing the backstory and some of the transcripts of various people's testimony. Believe it or not, it was a fascinating read, all of it. I actually started reading it again just this last week, because it seems ever more relevant to today. The ignorance of science on display in that case, was pretty epic. And the real ram-my-religion-down-your-throat power plays were on full display also. Such as this, directly from the case:

" In the midst of this panoply, there arose the astonishing story of an evolution mural that was taken from a classroom and destroyed in 2002 by Larry Reeser, the

107

Case 4:04-cv-02688-JEJ Document 342 Filed 12/20/2005 Page 108 of 139

head of buildings and grounds for the DASD. At the June 2004 meeting, Spahr asked Buckingham where he had received a picture of the evolution mural that had been torn down and incinerated. Jen Miller testified that Buckingham responded: “I gleefully watched it burn.” (12:118 (J. Miller)). Buckingham disliked the mural because he thought it advocated the theory of evolution, particularly common ancestry. (26:120 (Baksa)). Burning the evolutionary mural apparently was insufficient for Buckingham, however. Instead, he demanded that the teachers agree that there would never again be a mural depicting evolution in any of the classrooms and in exchange, Buckingham would agree to support the purchase of the biology textbook in need by the students. (36:56-57 (Baksa) (emphasis added)). "

Yeah. That's how these things really work.