Two Sides of the Same Coin

I'm a rather busy person, but sometimes I have deep thoughts when showering or brushing my teeth. This latest installment of Sick Of It All (the blog, not the band) comes to you from the nether regions of my brain and my impeccable hygiene.

It's been well established here before that many Skeptics are not in the habit of peering through the lens of self-reflection, perhaps because their enormous egos cast a shadow that obscures the view. Whatever the case may be, it seems to go unnoticed by them how their club has become one of the extreme ends of a varied spectrum.

A Crude Spectrum of Scientific Thought & Opinion 

Skeptics have essentially cast themselves in the role of hero and savior to the Regular People who they seem to believe, at any moment, could be sucked into the vortex of Fringey Cringey. The dimension where chemtrails criss cross the skyline of a flat earth populated by deep state illuminati lizard people that you access just by say, visiting a chiropractor or using some essential oils.

Steven Novella has described Skeptics as the "last line standing" to protect the rest of the world who are at risk of "being completely overwhelmed by quackery and nonsense."

And yet, more and more we see that they have become a caricature that is simply a mirror image of the quackery and nonsense they claim to be protecting us from. 

The Skeptics are the Conspiracy Theory Conspiracy Theorists. Take this example from prominent Skeptic voice, David Gorski.

You may recall back in 2016 when Zika virus was all over the headlines because of its link to microcephaly. Brazil had such a large increase in cases compared to elsewhere, that it seemed that there was another factor at play. Some public health professionals brought up the idea that the larvicide pyriproxifen may have had a role in increasing cases of microcephaly. 

Rather than concede that this should at least be properly investigated, which is what the scientific method calls for, Gorski, in his role as Orac wrote at Respectful Insolence of this hypothesis as a baseless conspiracy theory that was something to be mocked.

"Monsanto. It just had to be Monsanto. I will give these cranks props for figuring out a way to blame Monsanto for the microcephaly suspected to be caused by Zika virus without mentioning GMOs. Well played, Second Nexus, well-played. Not so well-played, Mr. Takei. Not so well-played in falling for this."

What did Mr. Takei share that was so horrible? An article based on a report from Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Villages. Despite Gorski's lame attempt at science cockblocking, the scientific community heard the recommendation by doctors from the Brazilian Association forCollective Health (ABRASCO) who demanded that urgent epidemiological studies be carried out to look for a causal link.

Flash forward to today, when these studies have now been conducted. One such study found a potential mechanism that could explain the increase in microcephaly case in areas where pyriproxifen was used.

A report in The Conversation by the study authors says, "...we have shown that pyriproxyfen could indeed exacerbate the already severe effects the Zika virus has on foetal brain development." And describe the possible mechanism that they show in their study, "...pyriproxyfen impairs thyroid hormone signalling in the brain, modifying crucial processes for its proper development."

Does this sound like a conspiracy theory to you?

If Gorski and friends had their way, and sometimes they do succeed in this, their debunking would be taken as the authoritative source on topics they don't wish to see researched. For the people exposed to this larvacide, we are lucky they did not succeed here. But it's doubtful they will ever admit or correct these types of blunders, they would rather just ignore the new science, and move on to another subject.

This isn't much different from how cults like QAnon operate on the other extreme end of the spectrum. "Trust the science" may as well be, "Trust the plan." I'm not suggesting that Skeptics are cult members, but they do exhibit some cult-like behavior at times. When the predictions (or debunking) doesn't bear out, they just move to a new target. 

Skeptics use a flawed version of the scientific method, as the above example illustrates. This is not any different than the pseudoscientific methodology used by flat earth proponents and others on the Fringey Cringey end of the spectrum. It doesn't matter if your conclusions end up being correct, and we have just seen that they don't always land on the right side in many cases. It is the method you use that matters. 

One might cloak themselves in talk of science, evidence and reason, but if they don't follow the scientific method, they may find themselves on the extreme end of the spectrum of scientific thought and opinion.