MarkB
Legend
And, of course, two people looking out of windows in two different places might get different results. The one in an overcast area will see a different colour than the one on a clear day.Of course it helps if you can get to a window.
And, of course, two people looking out of windows in two different places might get different results. The one in an overcast area will see a different colour than the one on a clear day.Of course it helps if you can get to a window.
And then there’s partly cloudy ambiguity. “Well, it looks kinda blue-gray.”And, of course, two people looking out of windows in two different places might get different results. The one in an overcast area will see a different colour than the one on a clear day.
Can't see the sky for the clouds. All too often the case here in England.And then there's the debate about confusing one thing (sky) with a feature of that thing (clouds).
Really, the conspiracy stuff has been bubbling up for about a decade now. Remember when we had conspiracies about the US president's nationality? People actually believe that. How many investigations of Hillary Clinton that turn up nothing and we still get sizable numbers of "Lock Her Up" and "I just don't trust her" even today. Anti-vaxxing that is based on science that has been long debunked.
Thing is, it doesn't matter how much proof you bring to the table. It doesn't matter how rational your arguments are. People are predisposed to believing stuff and poking holes in that is like trying to stick pins in concrete.
We've had decades of the erosion of public trust in science, expertise has been treated as clueless elitism. And this has been going on since the 80's. It's not really surprising, in hindsight, to see how much of an impact this has had.
Remember when we had conspiracies about the US president's nationality? People actually believe that.
this is pretty much a viral infection of the mind.Some do, and others don't.
You cannot awaken someone who is not asleep - a great many knew full well that it was false, but repeated the narrative because it served their purposes. Repeating that narrative means that most normal folks feel the need to dispute the facts. But the person knows it is a lie, so the facts were not relevant, making it largely invulnerable armor.
You cannot reason a person out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - the people who did believe that, despite evidence, are holding that position because it resonates with their fears or preferred worldview. You cannot address their position without approaching the emotional underpinnings. And you generally cannot do that with a stranger.