Why People Believe Strange Things.

Just thought this would be worth posting as it refers to many ATS topics and forums.

It is short, only 15min long and is one of the TED lecture series featuring Sceptic Magazines Michael Shermer.
.

Cognitive Bias gets a mention and Shermer links this to a topic that ATS see lots of posts on, Mars anomalies.

Anyway, enjoy.

reply to post by atlasastro


Hi, will watch the video link in a mo...but your new avatar caught my eye!! Isnt that a certain "commanders" art work???

Goes very well with your thread ...yes why do people believe such strange things !!

MG

[edit on 31-1-2010 by Mr Green]

JUST WHAT IS STRANGE?

Consider...there is a German University who have a letter which was written by a German officer to a family member in the First World War with amazing contents. What he wrote was as follows...

During the German advance through Picardy in the Summer of 1914, his unit came across a man dressed in strange clothes made of a strange fibre. The man claimed to have come from the future and offered to help them. He claimed the following:-

- That the war would not be over by Christmas 1914, but go on for 5 years.
- At the end of the war, germany would lose disasterously and the Kaiser would fall.
- A few years after losing the war, Germans wuold have huge amounts of money, so much that they would be just chucking it unwanted out of windows.
- After this Germans would then have a time of no money and people would starve.
- Then a new leader would arise who would say that he would lead Germany back to victory.

At this point, the Officer asked if he would restore the Kaiser.

- He said that people might believe that, but that the leader would not do so.
- Then, twenty or so years after losing the current war, this leader would lead Germany into a second war, even bigger than the first. Initially, he would achieve great success, but, after 6 years, Germany would lose again but way worse that the first time and that after that, her enemies would literally tear Germany apart.

The man offered to help Germany, if the officer could put him n contact with his superiors and help Germany win the war as he claimed ot know in advance every move that the allies would make.

The German officer concluded that the man was obviously a nutter to have such strange beliefs.

So, they shot him on the spot.

Excellent find.

Understanding why we believe some of the things we do gives us a window into our own biases and helps us to balance our own reaction to external observations.

Then our beliefs can be based more on evidence and less on an emotional "rightness" or feeling of "resonance."


Extremely handy in these days and times...

Its because they want a reality that doesnt exist.

Take that away from them and i garantee they will kill themselves and the whole world to spite humanity. Theres nothing you can do.................... the only thing i can think of is to let them believe what they want and make sure they pull the trigger far away from you.

reply to post by Mr Green


Hi MG,
....yes my Avatar. I lost my other avatar for some strange reason and this one was in my album. It was alot brighter and more colorful than m last one so I thought I would use it , and I guess it is strange what some people will believe when you consider the origins of my Avatar.

Great to see you about MG, thanks for dropping by and I hope you are well my friend.

reply to post by aristocrat2


Any legitimate source to back that claim up? How do you know your tale is true?

reply to post by aristocrat2


Yes, what is Strange? Something being strange and someone believing an explanation for something that is strange. I think these are interesting questions that your post raise.

Well, I would say that the circumstances are strange, but that it was not strange to here that the man from the future was shot as that is not strange behavior.

In fact, that would be normal behavior to lash out at an unknown in fear, especially at a time of war.

Maybe it was John Titor . Cool story with an important message. The soldier should not have dismissed the "strangeness" with a bullet, but investigated it like a proper sceptic would have.


Cool post, thanks.

reply to post by Wertdagf



That is a pretty harsh assessment. I think people do like to believe incredible things, but I doubt the vast majority would conclude that life is just not worth living if these beliefs were explained in another way.

Perhaps we are wired that way. A vast percentage of the population is prone to fantastical thinking. Maybe we are made that way?

In a way I think it is cool that people believe that incredible and mysterious things happen, I guess it means we are looking all the time for these things. But we need to be skeptical too, so as to find a balance.

OBAMA TELLS AMERICA - ...

In his own defense, Obama is quoted to having said that it was mere political posturing, and apparently not an advocation of satan serving.

[edit on 31-1-2010 by stoneysauce]

[edit on 31-1-2010 by stoneysauce]

[edit on 31-1-2010 by stoneysauce]

[edit on 31-1-2010 by stoneysauce]

reply to post by stoneysauce


Thank you for providing an example of the Cognitive Bias pointed out in the video.

This is a perfect example of the suggested meaning that preface such reversed media. Thanks.

Originally posted by atlasastro
Just thought this would be worth posting as it refers to many ATS topics and forums.

Considering the weight of personal testimony carries here (since hard evidence is rather scarce in conspiracy circles), convincing members of the importance of objectivity and having effective methodologies for removing bias tends to be a lost effort in my experience. It may be more fruitful to try merely to impart why skeptics and social institutions put so much importance on such factors.

Cognitive Bias gets a mention and Shermer links this to a topic that ATS see lots of posts on, Mars anomalies.

Pareidolia, it's called. IIRC, it happens because the ventral fusiform cortex process for facial and object recognition occur in about the same region at about the same time. Normally, on a well defined (actual) face, activity peaked at about 130ms. However, the longer it takes for the brain to identify a false face pattern out of noise, the more likely the face will be to overlap object/shape recognition at 165ms ~ 170ms after stimulation. If the form is vague enough, this can cause a disconcerting effect where you both see the object for what it really is as well as seeing the face. Earlier activation of more well defined face patterns stick out as perceived faces more boldly.

PubMed: Early activation of face-specific cortex by face-like objects.

This is also been shown to occur in our primate relatives. Though there are various different types of pareidolia depending on the sensory stimuli. Hearing voices in static/background noise is another form. An unconscious bias (such as confirmation bias) can skew pattern recognition and associations by not only suggesting "expected" results you'll be looking for - but can actually make you see them - or miss otherwise obvious flaws.

For example, remember the meme about being able to fold a $20 bill to display the 9/11 attacks? They didn't. They showed features of the White House out of proper context to display what the originator of the folding trick wanted to display - an arrangement of noise which prompted the participant to look for a certain pattern. Some people I've met have actually considered that as proof of foreknowledge by the government, I have to ask... how popular was the meme prior to 9/11? Why can you do the same trick with a $10, and a 1950 series $20 bill? The technology to build the WTC wasn't even around when the bill's general design was created, let alone architectural design drafts.

Coincidentally, in the days and months following the attacks, many people experienced the sensation of being drawn to or seeing the numbers "911" consistently popping out at them. Those in the drug culture experience a similar effect with the numbers "420". People who have lost loved ones often have that happen with the numbers designating the time of death. They're not hidden messages, they're confirmation bias.

Here's a few more videos from TED which may help support your OP point. Most of them deal with illusions, and expose how flawed our perceptions, memories of events, and experiences really are.





The Innocence Project: A group dedicated to overturning unjust convictions, many of which were the fault of cognitive bias leading to missing evidence and an over-reliance on eyewitness testimony. Since the availability of DNA evidence, almost 250 exonerations have been granted - many to death row inmates. In over a hundred cases, DNA evidence has lead to the conviction of the actual perpetrator of the crime.

Scientific American: If You Want to See a Specter Badly Enough, Will You? Among the various examples and tests contrasted, is a mention of a paper published in the journal of Perceptual and Motor Skills by Michael Persinger (of the "God Helmet" fame). It was one of the cases which lead him to suggest that religious and supernatural experiences are the result of EMF interference. A young girl who was born with brain trauma was reporting sensations of a baby sitting on her shoulder and regular visits from the Holy Spirit. Upon investigation, he removed her electronic clock that sat close to her head on the nightstand. Removing the clock removed the ghostly visitations. Turns out, that particular clock was either of poor design or had a manufacturing error which caused it to emit EM pulses in a range known to trigger epileptic seizures in some mice and people, and it's effects likely exacerbated by her pre-existing condition.

National Post: On Memory: Eyewitness errors are costly.

American Psychology-Law Society. A rather good resource site on news, research papers, and ethical concerns in matters where psychology and the law intertwine.

[edit on 31-1-2010 by Lasheic]

reply to post by atlasastro


I can see how Mr.Shermer arrives at many of his conclusions in the video. The examples were ridiculous. I'm not a physicist but is there not proof that some quantum particles spontaneously appear in a vacuum? How do we explain this? I'm sure we have lots of good theories now. But at the time, if some eccentric scientist proposed that these particles just appear from no where, wouldn't that qualify as one of "Those outrageous Things" that people believe?

I still think there are examples, in science, of things we don't fully understand and we successfully use our cognitive biases to help get us in the ball park of new understanding. Its the "what if" factor.

Wasn't penicillin discovered by accident?

"It was a fortuitous accident: in his laboratory in the basement of St. Mary's Hospital in London (now part of Imperial College), Fleming noticed a petri dish containing Staphylococcus plate culture he had mistakenly left open, which was contaminated by blue-green mould, which had formed a visible growth. There was a halo of inhibited bacterial growth around the mould. Fleming concluded that the mould was releasing a substance that was repressing the growth and lysing the bacteria. He grew a pure culture and discovered that it was a Penicillium mould, now known to be Penicillium notatum."

It was an insatiable curiosity that lead Flemming to pursue the strange result that happened by accident. Would the hard nosed Shermers of the world have just said "Damn it who left the lid off this sample"' and thrown it out?

I don't know for sure but I still leave room for the human instinct and sense of wonder and curiosity.

Skeptics like Shermer seem way to quick to dismiss anything that doesn't comfortably fit into their little world of understanding. Just my 2 cents.

Originally posted by sparrowstail
reply to post by atlasastro

I can see how Mr.Shermer arrives at many of his conclusions in the video. The examples were ridiculous.

Yes the examples are ridiculous, but people believe certain things regarding them, which was the point.

I'm not a physicist but is there not proof that some quantum particles spontaneously appear in a vacuum? How do we explain this? I'm sure we have lots of good theories now. But at the time, if some eccentric scientist proposed that these particles just appear from no where, wouldn't that qualify as one of "Those outrageous Things" that people believe?

No. Because Science actually tests the "theory'. That is how it works. Like the example you mention, Particles are thought to react with a Higgs field so as to suddenly appear in the vacuum, which is why the LHC was built. So science does not just accept a theory to explain phenomena, it investigates it.

I still think there are examples, in science, of things we don't fully understand and we successfully use our cognitive biases to help get us in the ball park of new understanding. Its the "what if" factor.

Yes there are. But in the examples in the OP, there is no what if in the explanations concerning what people believe, They are beliefs. Like crop circles, UFO, familiar religious visions on a toasted cheese sandwich.

Wasn't penicillin discovered by accident?

Yes, but it was not based on a belief. It was from a process, Fleming investigated what he thought was a spoiled experiment only to discover mold spores growing in the bacteria he was studying.

It was an insatiable curiosity that lead Flemming to pursue the strange result that happened by accident. Would the hard nosed Shermers of the world have just said "Damn it who left the lid off this sample"' and thrown it out?

Maybe, maybe not. But the thing you are missing is that Shermer investigates the examples in the Video. You seem to be under the impression that the "Shermers" of the world just dismiss the subjects like a spoiled experiment. They don't. Which is why Shermer uses the examples he uses in the Video, because the examples all have explanations YET people believe strange things.

I don't know for sure but I still leave room for the human instinct and sense of wonder and curiosity.

Where in the Video does Shermer rule that out?

Skeptics like Shermer seem way to quick to dismiss anything that doesn't comfortably fit into their little world of understanding. Just my 2 cents.

The only one I see dismissing someone and something quickly, is you.

Thank you for the reply.

[edit on 31/1/10 by atlasastro]

reply to post by Lasheic


Thank you for the reply, and the links.

You provide some great examples and insight into some of the influences that surround the formation of certain beliefs in relation to phenomena and topics that are popular here.

Thanks again.

reply to post by sparrowstail

Skeptics like Shermer seem way to quick to dismiss anything that doesn't comfortably fit into their little world of understanding.

It's a perceptual difference. It's been my experience that skeptics aren't just skeptics about the stuff ATSers talk about. Skeptics are skeptical of everything, even their own beliefs far more than you would give them credit for. They want their preconception and understandings challenged. That's how you learn. That there is no evidence to warrant that modification or rejection of previous understandings merely means there is no evidence to warrant such action. We don't know anything about anything, although the probability of being right about evolution, atomic theory, germ theory, etc are extremely high at this point.

The thing is, you can't prove a negative... or at least, it is so obtusely inefficient that were we to take such paths to discovery - we'd still be trying to figure out fire... a discovery which likely predates the human species. So much so that some researchers have suggested that cooking our food is what shaped our anatomy. However, you can falsify a positive claim rather easily. Falsification doesn't stamp an idea wrong for perpetuity - but it merely refines the idea or sets it on the back burner until new evidence emerges which better explains our observations and is more resilient to falsification.

Many of our scientific discoveries have been accidental, true. I would almost suggest that most of them are accidental. We go looking for something, and find something else - as Robert Ballard says. That's the thrill of discovery... that's what fuels the "Eureka!" moments. And this falsification process is the very backbone of modern science. For example, evolution has been through the gauntlet of the falsification process for 150 years now, and it's still going strong. The weaknesses and areas of poor explanation have been tried, and where they were found wanting, they have forced the theory of evolution to accept modification from Darwin's original theory to a more accurate one. For example: Horizontal Gene Transfer, the discovery of DNA and subsequent sequencing of the Genome, the discovery of genetic drift. One area which is still in contention is Darwin's suggestion that our evolution has shaped our psychology and behaviors, and it's only been in recent years that the idea has gained traction... and it may upset the current psychological paradigms, just as cognitive science upset behavioral science. Behaviorist Psychology is still rather important, mind you, but we know it's limitations and applications better now.

Despite billions of unique perceptions, there is only one apparent reality we exist in... and everything must conform to it. Our ideas are as varied as our perceptions, and even moreso. Yet this conformity to reality ensured by the processes of falsification has honed our ideas and concepts to working models capable of producing high-performance technology which conforms to ALL fields of science... not just specific fields. Biology cannot only conform to what we know of as biology.. but to physics, cosmology, chemistry, etc. Physics cannot only conform to what we know of physics, but must also fit with what we know about genetics, chemistry, etc. When I criticize the idea that Sumerians had knowledge of Pluto because that well famous hieroglyph... I'm not doing so out of experience with Sumerian culture, but more from an understanding of human perception, psychology, and astronomy.

That's a concordance only falsification, only skepticism, can establish. If you think the skeptics on ATS can be harsh, then you should see how it is in the academic arena. It's like comparing a pillow fight to a blood sport. It is a gauntlet by which ideas are tested by the fires of vicious debate and ruled by a tyranny of evidence.

"Magic" is real, if you consider that magic is merely natural phenomena for which we cannot explain. Once we explain it, harness it... Does that make it any less magical? And were the supernatural and magical to exist in our reality, they would only be supernatural and magical until the point by which they are explained comprehensively and by which conforms to the available evidence.

I don't know for sure but I still leave room for the human instinct and sense of wonder and curiosity.

Our heuristic brains can be important tools for innovation and discovery, but common knowledge and instinct are poor substitutes for evidence and reason. The scientific method, logic, reason...we are not born with these skills... they have to be learned and applied and utilized generously... But they can not replace or over-ride the functionality of the way the brain works. They are refinements, acting as error correction processes in addition to our heuristic minds - but not in replacement of.

It reminds me of a story by Murray Gell-Mann at one of his TED talks...

Well, here's an example from my own experience. It's fairly dramatic, actually, to have this happen. Three or four of us, in 1957, put forward a partially complete theory of one of these forces, this weak force. And it was in disagreement with seven -- seven, count them, seven experiments. Experiments were all wrong. And we published before knowing that, because we figured it was so beautiful, it's gotta be right! The experiments had to be wrong, and they were. Now our friend over there, Albert Einstein, used to pay very little attention when people said, "You know, there's a man with an experiment that seems to disagree with special relativity. DC Miller. What about that?" And he would say, "Aw, that'll go away." (Laughter). Now, why does stuff like that work? That's the question.

Inspiration? Wonderment? Curiosity? Being a skeptic doesn't amputate these features... it stokes them ever brighter, because it has provided explanations for what we observe in our universe far, far, beyond the limits of human imagination.

The Universe is not just queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose.



We may still search for El Dorado in desperate belief and desire, but skepticism has brought to light evidence which suggests that Uranus and Neptune may be covered in oceans of liquid diamond.

When the pressure is lowered to 11 million times greater than Earth's sea level and the temperature drops to about 50,000 degrees, chunks of diamond start to appear. Scientists discovered something they didn't expect, after the pressure kept dropping the temperature of the diamond remained the same, with more chunks of diamond forming. The chunks of diamond did not sink but floated on top of the liquid diamond, creating diamond icebergs. These ultrahigh temperatures and ultrahigh pressures are found in huge gas giant planets like Neptune and Uranus.

How is that not awe inspiring and beautiful?

Originally posted by atlasastro
Originally posted by sparrowstail
reply to post by atlasastro

 

No. Because Science actually tests the "theory'. That is how it works. Like the example you mention, Particles are thought to react with a Higgs field so as to suddenly appear in the vacuum, which is why the LHC was built. So science does not just accept a theory to explain phenomena, it investigates it.

Yes they test theories according to the scientific rules and understanding they have to date. Our understanding of physics is far from complete, so much so that there is more to learn than what we think we know and if there are things skeptics don't want to accept like credible ufo cases or the field of ufology, they give them all the "slide" by demonstrating ridiculous examples and painting broad strokes. All I'm saying is that history has proven that rules of understanding are constantly changing. So emerging hypothesis WILL and do seem outrageous until they are proven without a doubt.

Yes there are. But in the examples in the OP, there is no what if in the explanations concerning what people believe, They are beliefs. Like crop circles, UFO, familiar religious visions on a toasted cheese sandwich.

Come on, ufology, and to a lesser degree some cases of crop circle anomalies have much more credibility than toast, and sprinkler/palm tree effects. Its like Bill Nye who paints broad stroked and never did any honest research or talked to the people in the know, the very people whose government salaries were based on the very field of research that he and many other skeptics dismiss.

You seem to be under the impression that the "Shermers" of the world just dismiss the subjects like a spoiled experiment. They don't. Which is why Shermer uses the examples he uses in the Video, because the examples all have explanations YET people believe strange things.

He is, and they are when they dismisses an entire field. I think Shermer believes strange things too, that is despite some good credible cases in some of the fields he dismisses he still holds true and paints broad strokes. In my opinion seems a little arrogant and ignorant. Some ufo cases/hypothesis deserve more attention than he is willing to give.

The only one I see dismissing someone and something quickly, is you.

I don't dismiss anything, this is my point. I agree he makes great cases for the things he demonstrates, I just think there are some things that don't immediately fit into the debunked basket. Because the majority of ufo cases are bunk it doesn't mean they all are. This is why I have a gray basket as well as a black and white one.





[edit on 31-1-2010 by sparrowstail]

I couldn't get past the antenna trick. Let's talk about strange things people believe. How about the great water walking wine maker who turned one fish into two fish, a red fish, a blue fish. Or the ass who parted a sea for all to cross and no one got stuck in the mud. Burning talking bushes, it goes on and on. Could I get on a stage and fleece a bunch of rubes out of there cash? Who knows, I wouldn't even try. But the belief that this is all there is. And this is as good as it get's is stupid. Don't make an ass like this rich for nothing.

people believe strange things because life is strange and we cant define it and we dont know what is it

I'm all for healthy scepticism and the regular weighing up of why we believe a thing, although most people.. sceptics included.. do not ask that question of themselves yet expect everyone else to. Now remember I am not saying all sceptics are like this, just the many I have seen in places like this one.

What I am not for is the band-aid approach of most sceptics, as shown well by Shermer when saying that more than likely all ufo's are fake, etc. This does not or cannot include the well documented sightings, contacts and communications by quality observers within our governments, of which there are many.

The silly prank at the start with that ridiculous single rod was always bound to be rubbish. While on the subject of dousing rods have you ever seen an old water douser working? I have in order to find water so a bore could be drilled. The man we employed was with us only half an hour and showed exactly where to drill, gave us a full description of depth to drill and quality of water. He was out by 3 feet on depth but spot on for location and water quality.... how does a sceptic see this I wonder?

Wertda.. the video is about to be filmed showing how two rods can be used to discern the human energy field and other things.... no sleight of hand, photoshopping or editing will be done.

I am happy for sceptics to have their beliefs, yet sceptics are not happy for me to have mine! Instead they must in a sense generalise away everything to fit into their world view, as Shermer did at the start of the video.

I am all for scientific investigation because it is a great tool for humanity to learn more about their physical world. But, it is still too young to have developed far enough yet in order to quantify anything not in the physical realms... despite the fact that it will claim those realms do not exist. I ask, in its infancy how could it possibly know when it hasn't the ability to investigate properly as yet?

My hope is that science does have a breakthrough soon that allows good research into the non-physical realms. Although it may not wish to since many are of the belief based on their own research of the mind that they know everything there is to know already... proof will be in the replies to my post by those who have already done the hit and run in other threads.

Why is it that I can be happy for another person to have their beliefs and yet Sceptics must force their views upon me? What is their motivation? And why do so many always do so using the "superiority" or "elitism" of their chosen fields and ego? I have found over the years the system is a closed circle that is self supporting.. highly educated, eltitist, uncompromising, based on study that lays claim to knowing all there is to know about a subject and refusing to so much as consider anything else being possible, and requiring peer-revue..the self-supporting aspect and links to proofs.

See ya's