
Why We Should Listen to Flat Earth Believers (Even Though They're Totally Wrong) - ColinWright
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2018/05/why-we-should-listen-to-flat-earth-believers-even-though-theyre-completely-wrong/
======
JackCh
I have my own loony belief with little supporting evidence. My loony belief is
that the overwhelming majority of "Flat Earthers" are joking, pulling your
chain, and refuse to admit it because keeping a straight face is part of the
joke for them.

Their motivations are varied. Some of them do it to make some sort of
epistemological point, others do it because arguing for something that isn't
true requires a form of creativity they find rewarding. Others do it because
they like to get people riled up (it's amazing how easily _some_ people can
get riled up over other people being wrong about the shape of the earth, even
when the reality that the flat earther isn't being sincere is staring them
right in the face). Others still probably have other motivations. Probably
only a very small portion of them actually believe what they say.

~~~
naasking
> My loony belief is that the overwhelming majority of "Flat Earthers" are
> joking, pulling your chain, and refuse to admit it because keeping a
> straight face is part of the joke for them.

I'd almost lend some credence to that, if some of them weren't building their
own rockets and launching themselves into the air to try to prove flat earth:
[https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a19587128/sel...](https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a19587128/self-
taught-rocket-scientist-blasts-off/)

~~~
JackCh
Do you honestly believe that man is sincere? Do you really think that he
thought his rocket would prove anything, other than his machoism? I think he's
a stunt man, in the vein of Evel Knievel (or at least aspires to be thought
such a man.) Pretending to be a flat earther was just an easy way for him to
get media attention for his stunt, and even get some internet funding. Did the
internet flat earthers who gave him money for the stunt hand over that money
with a sincere belief they were investing in a robust debunking of the "ball
earth theory"? Or did many if not most of them give the guy money because they
thought the stunt was neat/funny/awesome?

Flat earthers know damn well that hot air balloons exist. Even if you're in
the camp of thinking flat earthers are dumb morons with IQs too low to tie
their own shoelaces, it should still be apparent to all of them that hot air
balloons are cheaper and safer than hydrogen peroxide rockets. But a balloon
ride isn't much of a stunt, a rocket ride is.

What I found most disconcerting about that story was the number of comments
throughout the internet expressing regret that Hughes survived. Saying that
"Darwin failed", wishing he'd have died for the crime of being wrong about the
shape of the earth. Some joking no doubt, but others saying it with enough
vitriol to persuade me.

------
simonbarker87
The thing I find most infuriating speaking to anyone who believes in a
conspiracy theory is that no rational argument can win them round because
their arguments are rarely rational or based on concrete evidence. Antivaccers
are particularly difficult because they simply have no faith in science or
doctors and believe that any evidence is fabricated.

Has anyone found effective methods to counter the above traits? While not
engaging is usually the best option it is sad and concerning when it is a
family member so I don’t feel like ignoring it is the best approach.

~~~
JackCh
> _" Has anyone found effective methods to counter the above traits?"_

In the case of anti-vaxxers (most of whom are probably sincere,) when you
become upset or even infuriated with them it cements their beliefs. They
interpret your anger as evidence of their position being right. Therefore if
you want to change their minds, the first thing you must master is your own
emotions. Hiding your anger isn't enough, because people always leak
information about their emotional state. You need to find a new frame of mind
that allows you to have discussions with people who are wrong without becoming
upset. I know this is difficult with antivaxxers since their beliefs put
children in harms way, but it's necessary.

~~~
JustSomeNobody
But, how in the world does one train himself in such a way?

~~~
JackCh
I'm sure there are many ways. Self discipline, meditation, practice, or
cannabis.

------
dahart
> But it was also just as striking how many people whose journey into
> believing the Earth is flat included traumatic events or personal crises.
> This, perhaps, is why it is so important for us to listen to and talk to
> Flat Earthers

That is certainly plausible, but there was almost no real evidence presented
here. It seems like the author is jumping to conclusions. As far as we know,
two of the three speakers covered in this story happened to mention the
existence of non-specific personal issues in passing. How many people don’t
have any personal issues?

It could be that some people do need help. And it could also be incredibly
insulting and patronizing to just assume that people with beliefs different
than ours are in need of mental help, as opposed to simply having strange
beliefs. After all, religion still exists despite a lack of evidence. Treating
religious people as stuck in a dark “rabbit hole” is at best ostracizing.

> Landucci points out that if we take the Spanish initials for the United
> Nations, ‘ONU’, and read it backwards, we get ‘Uno’ – which is Spanish for
> ‘One’. This, he explains, is proof that the UN is a tool of the One World
> Order.

For the entire article, I couldn’t stop thinking of the Illuminati Confirmed
videos on YouTube.

~~~
everdev
> it could also be incredibly insulting and patronizing to just assume that
> people with beliefs different than ours are in need of mental help

I agree with this in principle, but at what point do we have no other choice?
Witches? Lizard people? Alien abductions?

~~~
dahart
> I agree with this in principle, but at what point do we have no other
> choice? Witches? Lizard people? Alien abductions?

I guess what I’m suggesting is that “listening” to crazy theories because you
feel sorry for people under the assumption that they’re unstable or have
trauma in their past is much worse than either 1) ignoring them, or 2)
engaging in their debate on their terms (i.e. taking them seriously).

If it looks crazy, then just ignore it, but don’t assume it’s because the
person is crazy or has mental problems. They might, just don’t assume.

The other half of my point is that literally _everyone_ has crazy theories
that aren’t supported by evidence. Religion covers half the world, but even
scientists have bizarre beliefs, and all humans are subject to cognitive
mistakes, and we are physiologically wired to hang on to our beliefs even when
they’re wrong. I personally know a bunch of people with PhDs who stick to
ideas that are wrong, like my doctor friend who doesn’t “believe” in counting
calories for weight loss. I’m sure I have one or two myself, and I don’t know
what they are.

We need to recognize that you and I and all of us also have wacky beliefs and
we wouldn’t want to be labeled as mental. Assuming that something is wrong
with someone because of their beliefs is a deliberate form of “othering”.

*edit:

One way I like to think about this is like so:

Make a list of all the thing you know that you’ve actually verified yourself.
We know the earth is round, but have you actually proven it to yourself? I
haven’t. I “know” that space exists because of other people’s stories, I’ve
never been there myself. Pretty much everything I “know” about computers and
politics and religion and psychology, and everything else, is things I’ve
heard or read that other people verified, not me. The list of things I know
100% for a fact because I proved it myself is a very short list.

------
marsrover
I like to entertain all ideas (I even gave the Finland conspiracy a chance) no
matter how crazy they sound.

You never really know, especially if you have never even look.

When the day comes that there isn't a person around that will challenge their
thoughts with something they find crazy, it will be a dark day.

Edit: after reading the article I see that my comment is not related.

~~~
SubiculumCode
It's fine and even fun to entertain a different counter idea, but that is not
what these flat earthers and the like do. I know a man that subscribes to
these kinds of ideas, although not flat eartherism, and it is definitely seems
to stem from a need to find an alternative order to the world because the
existing order and/or understanding provides little comfort, hope, and
meaning, because they are driven by a need to be special and smarter . These
ppl are often also frequently 'inventors' of 'free energy' motors, using
mmethods they will say are 'obvious once you think about it but for some
reason no one has'. In fact these ppl can be very clever and ingenuous, but
have certain mental illnes (depression) and lack education, but perhaps the
everyday flat earther prostlesthized on youtube are driven mostly by ignorance
and poverty in a hard life needing something, anything, to not be as it seems.

~~~
csydas
I would agree with this, as my interactions largely share the same results.

It's not about being right so much as not being wrong. It's a position of
arrogance and insolence that is being argued from, not really one of true
educational purpose. It's dishonest discourse for the purpose of self-
gratification, just like any other poster online looking just for kicks and
giggles. There may be an honest belief behind flat-earthers and other such
conspiracy theorists, but just observe the similarities between any bargain-
bin message board troll and a flat-earth conspiracy theorist and it's easy to
see the other motivations that drive the conspiracy theorists.

The big thing with conspiracy theories is that everything is evidence of the
theory, whether it seems good or bad for the theory. You find indisputable
proof that it's wrong, and the truth is twisted to be another conspiracy in
and of itself which proves the legitimacy of the original theory. There is
some inconclusive data that is the result of a long term study, and that is
proof of the theory because the theory can be neatly fitted to the available
evidence, barring any scrutiny.

It becomes a game of constant mental bouts, bringing in hoards of evidence
against often unprepared targets, and truly the only real winning strategy is
not to play. The entire point is to surprise and assault an unsuspecting
person who is not prepared with the same amount of curated arguments and
prepared answer cards.

If you've ever caught the sales side of a major organization, you'll know that
they often produce "battle cards" for competing products. These battle cards
are often built with three points; Attack, Defend, Avoid. Attack tells you how
to best attack the competition and their weakest points that can be overcome.
Defend tells you how to shore up your own product's weak points, and Avoid
tells you want points to absolutely dodge at any cost and how to use the point
as a pivot to something better (in order to ignore the difficult point). I see
this 100% repeated in conspiracy theory image spam, and you can see the same
thing with the message board trolls and how they prep for engaging people. The
strategy isn't about arguments based on merit or reason, but instead creating
a compelling narrative for an audience to follow.

And that's the real target here. Flat-earther conspiracy theorists and other
such conspiracy theorists aren't looking to have a discourse and convince any
specific person with an opposing view-point. They're looking to put on the
greatest show possible to attract the largest audience, and maybe get a few
converts along the way. You don't need to be hostile towards conspiracy
theorists, but the idea of hearing them out and entertaining their thoughts
beyond just a very limited and controlled dialogue is a bad idea, since the
theory doesn't expand far beyond just having an alternative theory that bucks
the current consensus. So sure, pay attention, and be polite, but also there's
a need to be firm, because a lot of this is attention seeking behavior looking
for a platform and for credulity, not for a discussion. The idea that they
will dive deeper into more outrageous positions and theories is a bit silly,
as they would do that anyways; as within any subculture, the desire to be "the
most ____" will always drive participants to up the ante and act out in bigger
and bigger ways. Whether or not one listens to them is irrelevant.

------
mrfusion
I’ve got a flat earth family member and I thought it would be easy to go out
to the beach and get a photo of a ship appearing over the horizon to disprove
them.

But it just won’t seem to work out. They seem to get smaller and smaller and
too small to see if the botttom is disappearing first. I’m going to have to
try it with a telescope. It’s kind making me question my own beliefs.

Also they made me watch some of those YouTube videos about the eclipse going
in the wrong direction. I still haven’t been able to explain that. :-(

I guess my point is don’t expect an easy debate if you engage them. Some of
this stuff just isn’t as easy as you’d expect.

~~~
naasking
> Also they made me watch some of those YouTube videos about the eclipse going
> in the wrong direction.

You mean a video that's flipped or running backwards? Why would you question
your whole worldview before questioning the reliability of the alleged
evidence?

~~~
mrfusion
I just mean the moon moves from east to west in the sky but the eclipse went
from west to east.

There are lots of videos and article with explanations but none of them
clicked for me.

~~~
sunw
Here's a clean explanation from NASA's eclipse site
([https://eclipse2017.nasa.gov/why-do-eclipse-tracks-move-
east...](https://eclipse2017.nasa.gov/why-do-eclipse-tracks-move-eastward-
even-though-earth-rotates-west-east)).

The moon actually moves much faster than the Earth spins -- it just seems to
move westward to humans on the ground because it's so far away from Earth
(takes 28 days to go around Earth). During a solar eclipse though, we see the
effect of its true blisteringly fast orbital speed.

"Because the Moon moves to the east in its orbit at about 3,400 km/hour. Earth
rotates to the east at 1,670 km/hr at the equator, so the lunar shadow moves
to the east at 3,400 – 1,670 = 1,730 km/hr near the equator. You cannot keep
up with the shadow of the eclipse unless you traveled at Mach 1.5."

~~~
mrfusion
So why would the moon rise in the east and set in the West? That’s the part
I’m confused by.

~~~
kazinator
In the eclipse situation, the actual speed of the Moon matters, not the fact
that its orbit is so long that it orbits the Earth about once a month.

The _apparent relative motion with respect to the Sun_ is what matters. Of
course, both bodies are rising in the East and setting in the West. But at the
moment of the eclipse, the Moon is a little slower.

~~~
naasking
There's got to be an animation of this out there. Something like this, but I
feel it can be done better:
[https://youtu.be/jnphuI7hyeM](https://youtu.be/jnphuI7hyeM)

------
ourmandave
I find it easy to be dismissive of Flat Earthers and Moon Landing Deniers as
they tend to be Mostly Harmless.

I worry about the guy who fired shots into a pizza restaurant with an AR-15
because he believed it was a front for a child sex ring.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory)

Or when some random clown from Texas, who campaigned on disbanding the Dept of
Energy, now runs it.

 _Now_ you have my attention.

------
RobertRoberts
Science is hard. I watched a few minutes of a Youtube video from a "professor"
at a university that believes the earth is flat, and he "sounded" very
scientific. But despite the fact that I know the earth is round, beyond the
boat-over-the-horizon experiment I would have a hard time actually
demonstrating this fact to someone.

On the other hand, I have quite a few disagreements with the established
health industry. I cured a hole in my tooth in college in the late 90s on my
own. I am still called a quack and a liar despite my wife knowing about this,
and just this past year real scientific proof (and even medical products)
coming out confirming it's true.

But in the mean time, until it's widely accepted, I will be called a liar
and/or quack/delusional. And this is has nothing to do with trauma, but simply
ignorance, and a lack of interest in testing. (conspiracy would say that
dentists don't want people healing their own teeth)

~~~
ryanwaggoner
_I cured a hole in my tooth in college in the late 90s on my own. I am still
called a quack and a liar despite my wife knowing about this, and just this
past year real scientific proof (and even medical products) coming out
confirming it 's true._

My teeth have always been terrible, would you mind sharing a link or two to
the research?

~~~
RobertRoberts
> _My teeth have always been terrible, would you mind sharing a link or two to
> the research?_

Edit: I had to redo this comment because I mis-read your comment. Here's the
story including comments.[0]

[0]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16432024](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16432024)

~~~
ryanwaggoner
I appreciate that, but your story is a lot less valuable than the modern
research you mentioned that would hopefully provide some data and some kind of
mechanism. Otherwise yours is just another one of millions of “secret and
super simple cure!” anecdotes that abound on the internet. Taken together, one
almost wonders if anyone suffered from anything before the advent of the evil
modern medicine and science :)

~~~
RobertRoberts
> _...anecdotes that abound on the internet_

Yep, I have never once claimed my comments to be anything more than what I
experienced. Feel free to try things out if you want, or ignore it.

~~~
ryanwaggoner
Sorry, but that’s just not true:

 _and just this past year real scientific proof (and even medical products)
coming out confirming it 's true._

Your story is interesting, but it’s a lot more compelling since you claim it’s
backed by scientific proof, so any kind of link or reference would be
appreciated.

~~~
RobertRoberts
> _Sorry, but that’s just not true..._

I think it's completely valid to state my experience is anecdotal (which it
is, I didn't take pictures or document anything) and let the scientists make
the proof for or against.

It really sucks to have any sort of health problem, and I don't mean to imply
I have some special knowledge about this and am just messing with you. I
linked the proof I've recently come across in the other comments around this
one. (I can do it again, but it seems redundant) I think this stuff is
becoming common enough knowledge that you can find proof from a simple Google
search.

An oft repeated idea seems to be improving diet. (bad food can wreck teeth all
on it's own, so I think we would all agree that food plays a part in dental
health)

------
insickness
While I don't believe it, I'm glad that flat earth theory exists. It's a
fantastic caricature of scientific theory that seems to exist simply to shine
a light on the fact that any theory has a nonzero chance of being true, albeit
in the most ridiculous of realities.

------
ComodoHacker
Had anyone tried to crowdfund and buy some flat-earther a ticket to orbit?
Maybe a TV company could fund it and make a reality show?

------
specialist
From the article:

 _" Looking back at my weekend with Flat Earthers, it is striking how many
people who doubt the global model of the Earth also subscribe to all manner of
other beliefs, from Biblical literalism to occultist paranoia, from anti-
vaccination to quack cancer cues, from antisemitism to Aryanism. But it was
also just as striking how many people whose journey into believing the Earth
is flat included traumatic events or personal crises.

This, perhaps, is why it is so important for us to listen to and talk to Flat
Earthers, and to approach them as much with understanding as ridicule: if they
can see no light in mainstream society, their rabbit hole may only get deeper
and darker."_

This is one of the most humane, compassionate worldviews I've read in a while.

I really want to be more like Michael Marshall (the author), but I just don't
know how.

Maybe I do, and just need to do it more. Last year I got involved with
protecting wolves from one rogue rancher. During the public hearing, things
got very heated. I found myself empathizing with the ranchers more than the
enviros, two of whom acted very embarrassingly. One rancher (who was actually
an ally of the enviros but still being attacked) had to leave the room, so I
went out to check on him.

I guess I'm still trying to figure out how we're supposed to engage with
people we strongly disagree with.

~~~
monktastic1
Fwiw, meditation has been an amazing tool for me here.

------
mping
If you ever want to explain what its like to fix bugs in a new language, just
point them to this article; you basically guess how things work until you are
proven otherwise, no matter how incredible and without proof the explanation
my be.

------
rhapsodic
TL;DR:

    
    
      > Looking back at my weekend with Flat Earthers, it is striking how many
      > people who doubt the global model of the Earth also subscribe to all
      > manner of other beliefs, from Biblical literalism to occultist paranoia,
      > from anti-vaccination to quack cancer cues, from antisemitism to Aryanism.
      > But it was also  just as striking how many people whose journey into
      > believing the Earth is flat included traumatic events or personal crises.
      >  
      > This, perhaps, is why it is so important for us to listen to and talk
      > to Flat Earthers, and to approach them as much with understanding as
      > ridicule: if they can see no light in mainstream society, their rabbit
      > hole may only get deeper and darker.

~~~
flavmartins
A great summary.

Trauma is real. Our society doesn't place enough emphasis in recognizing
mental health issues other than depression. There are many other events that
cause trauma and people deal with it in many different ways.

This is why you no matter the number of facts you present in online
discussions will ever dissuade these individuals from their positions.

------
lighttower
I have young kids and spend a lot of time in playgrounds. When I push the
swing a flat earth believer approaches me to tell me about _chemtrails_ ,
_flat earth_ and how __vaccines cause autism __. He brought pamphlets about
vaccines a few times. Always citing some Harvard Prof who supports his
theories and refers me to YouTube. He has a little girl that he pushes on the
swing and talks to everyone he can about vaccines. That 's a really damaging.
I just want to politely stop this conversation, though I enjoyed the flat
earth stuff. His talking to new moms about vaccines is potentially damaging.

