Home        Back        Log in

An example of the unscientific nature of conspiracy theories by Jay Knott (06/10/11)       ⇌ (September 11th. 2001)       

Here is a classic piece of conspiracy theory, snipped from a discussion among Pacifica Forum regulars. It's about how the Federal organisation 'FEMA' is part of a world wide conspiracy to put people in 'camps' in the USA. During the Hurricane Katrina crisis of 2005, FEMA couldn't organise its way out of a paper bag. So how is it the new KGB? No problem - according to the argument below, its incompetence at helping people is a reflection of its competence at keeping them 'under control'.

Like most conspiracy theories, this is a clear illustration of the idea that pseudo-scientific ideas are 'unfalsifiable' - whatever the evidence, their proponents claim it illustrates the truth of their theory.

The quote below is typical. People who believe in '9/11 truth', and various other examples of wishful thinking, seize on anything which seems to add to the evidence for their theories, and don't even try to adduce counter-examples. Real science is about trying to find evidence against your hypothesis, not for it.

It amazes me that people who don't understand, or haven't even heard of Karl Popper's "The Logic of Scientific Discovery" (PDF) and its refinement of the scientific method, should continue shouting 'gatekeeper' and 'holohoax' at people who do, like they have a fucking clue about anything.



> Those militia groups were right, even as early as 1994, tho I thought

> the camps were built a bit later. We saw FEMA's incompetence during

> that hurricane and the New Orleans debacle. FEMA exists not to help

> the citizenry in crises but to keep the "citizens" under control during

> crises.

Home        Back        Log in