When I was nine I saw a leprechaun!
I’m not kidding. I was in the back seat of our car driving up the hill from the hotel my dad managed, back in Bermuda. I’d ridden up that hill, in that seat, hundreds of times. I knew every rock and clump of grass by heart.
Anyway, there he sat, up against a familiar rock: little green pants, little green vest, little green top hat, small little bone-white pipe. Captain Ahab beard – white, no moustache. I screamed like we had just run over Lassie.
Stop the car!
What is it?
Stop the car! Stop the car!
Dad stopped the car, and I nearly broke Mom’s nose on the dashboard as I flew out of the back seat and ran for the rock.
Gone! The little bastard had ducked into one of his tunnels. This didn’t surprise me much: it’s tough enough to actually see a leprechaun, but to catch one – that was the real bitch. And by the way, I wasn’t interested in Learning About His Little Customs or Making a Wee Friend for Life by letting him go. I wanted his pot of gold so I could buy a dolphin to go snorkeling with.
My parents had to restrain me with ropes to get me to leave. The second I got home, I got on my bike and dashed directly back to the spot. I searched there every day for weeks. I never saw him again. If you had told me that having just seen Finian’s Rainbow the week before might have influenced my nine-year-old imagination, I would have said, Yeah, okay, but I SAW him! And I did see him. I saw him with my own two eyes.
Fast forward six long, dry, magic-free years. Miami, 1975. It’s Friday night and I’m on the roof of the Southern Cross Observatory at the Museum of Science and Space Transit Planetarium. I’ve just been made, as far as I know, the World’s Youngest Planetarium Console Operator, an honor so monumental in the Great Halls of Geekdom as to ensure that I would not get a date for at least three years.
So there I was, trying to convince a group of about twenty people that the image of Saturn they were looking at was not a slide taped to the eyepiece, when all of a sudden, someone screams: My God! Look! UFO’s!
And sure enough, there they were: A V-shaped formation of dully glowing ovals flying pretty much right for us! People were screaming, crying, hugging each other. One of our Junior Birdmen ran for the phones to scramble the interceptors. And they kept coming: no running lights, no sound at all, just weird, slowly moving grey ovals.
I had waited for this moment since I saw the leprechaun six years before. I grabbed the binoculars, and--.
Dammit!
What?! Are they charging their Death Rays?
Nah. They’re just birds.
How could they be birds? But they were. They were geese, with dark necks and wings, but white bellies. These white oval bellies were reflecting the city lights, but if you looked carefully as they got closer, even without the binoculars, you could see the long necks and thin, flapping wings.
It was a flock of geese.
And then something happened that I will never forget: that crowd wasn’t relieved; they weren’t even disappointed. They were angry. They were angry at me. Not dogs and pitchforks and torches angry, but they were surly enough to burn the moment into my young brain.
I had taken away their magic.
There’s a strange cloud that’s settled over our modern society. It’s a pervasive sort of bland contempt for an ingenious collection of lenses and mirrors that can reveal a giant ball of hydrogen, helium, methane and ammonia, billions of miles away, surrounded by untold millions of ice fragments in delicate orbit, yet one which will ascribe to the most banal unknown, a life-changing, quit-your-insurance-job-and-live-in-a-tree status.
For our entire history, right up until a hundred years ago, the idea of flying carpets and magic lanterns held people’s imaginations in thrall. Now that we have everyday miracles like jet aircraft and electric lights, all some people want is to return to a time when the belief in magic was common, but the everyday blessings of magic – telephones, computers, antibiotics – didn’t exist. Back in the anti-nuclear 80’s lots of folks drove around with SPLIT WOOD NOT ATOMS bumper stickers, and I often asked myself, how much wood have these people actually split? I’ve done an hour in my 20’s and I thought I was going to die.
It’s sad, frankly – at least to people like me. I find it terribly, tragically sad that the more successful and comfortable we become, the more people pine for a time when none of these everyday miracles existed. Outdoor bathrooms on January nights and miserable coal stoves that need to be tended hourly just to heat a pathetic half-gallon of tepid water need to be experienced to be believed – and not just in a 24 hour adventure, but continuously. Death, hunger, cold, disease, infant mortality – we have fought them tooth and nail for millennia, for what? Apparently in order to so insulate people that they can long for “ancient wisdom,” return to the “holistic tribal remedies” of the past, and hold up the most primitive and achingly poor cultures on earth as being the sole repository of “authenticity,” while scorning every advance that they take completely for granted.
Magical thinking is everywhere today, and it is growing. It threatens the foundations of reason, individualism, science and objectivity that have delivered this success so well and for so long. It is dangerous. If we are to continue to thrive and progress, then we need to sharpen some sticks and drive a stake through the heart of this monster, and right quick.
I’ll use the term Magical Thinking as a pretty big umbrella to cover a whole host of creeping intellectual chicanery: superstition, wishful thinking, pseudoscience, unsubstantiated claims, assertion, mysticism and anti-science.
Like so many of our other destructive tendencies, this whole mess really started in the latter part of the 1960’s. It’s a sad comment to make, because we were the first nation founded after the Enlightenment, and reason and clarity thunder so triumphantly throughout the Constitution that, in the immortal words of P.J. O’Rourke, the operating manual for an unruly nation of 300 million people is about one-quarter the length of the one for a Toyota Camry.
Of course, superstition and magical thinking have been with us since the dawn of time, but up until very recently, we Americans have prided ourselves on our scientific bent, our Yankee ingenuity – which is nothing less than applying common sense, reason, and hard work to find new ways to solve age-old problems. For most of our history, our public schools were the envy of the world. The very idea that a whole nation could educate their entire population was so radical that scholars from around the world flocked to the United States in the nineteenth century to see such a bold miracle for themselves.
Even before the late 1950’s, when Sputnik lit a fire under science and technical education, US public schools performed magnificently. Now I’m not a professional educator, but I suspect this might have had something to do with the fact that we were more interested in teaching history, science, writing, literature and math than we were about raising self-esteem, discussing birth control and indoctrinating political and environmental beliefs. There were specialized people who taught these things way back then, and they were called “parents.” The only “soft science” taught in those days was “citizenship,” a class that sounds so dated and quaint today that we can only lament how far we have fallen. The idea that we would teach people how the system works, rather than telling them what to think about it, has long gone. And we continue to pay the price for it.
Anyway, some time in the late 1960’s, Sauron gets the Ring and along comes the Hippie movement. Their entire philosophy was summed up succinctly in a slogan from the times: if it feels good, do it.
As a life philosophy, it simplistic and childlike. It is also extremely subtle and pervasive, and as a personal philosophy it has enormous seductive power. It frees you from the constraints of discipline, study, responsibility and ethics, not to mention relieving you of the burden of making choices based on evidence, reason, logic or fact.
Now those Hippies are college professors, and post-modernism is their Graille.
You know the drill: No objective reality. All truth is relative. You can believe whatever you want, when you want. You can be descended from Atlantean Priests! You can have Mental Powers to move objects, read the future, and speak to dead people! Even better, you can save six billion trillion tons of silicon, nickel and iron in the third orbit around the sun –- a sphere that has endured 5 billion years of asteroid impacts, volcanoes, ice ages, and having its core knocked out and into orbit -- by holding up a piece of wood with some lettered cardboard on one end and by marching down the street chanting two-line political philosophies!
What’s not to like!
Let’s go kill some vampires…
Because it is so susceptible to fact and logic, the very best way to fight magical thinking is to simply grant the premise and look at the consequences. This is a silver-tipped, hardened oak stake dipped in garlic paste made from holy water when it comes to demolishing some of these ideas.
Let's start with those geese bellies…
UFOs, proponents tell us, are physical vehicles from other solar systems carrying large-eyed, small bodied beings who are so technologically and spiritually advanced that they can wing through the light years at will, carry objects aloft on beams of light, move through walls, dispense advice for cultural survival and administer anal probes.
The constancy of the speed of light as a natural speed limit has been so thoroughly and completely tested and vindicated, that these aliens must have learned to harness the power of entire galaxies to bore wormholes through spacetime, which would be necessary to have these infinitely fast, staggeringly maneuverable, gravity-defying, super-hardened space-metal saucers in the skies over our planet.
Sweet!
Well, turns out that in 1946 one of these antigravity, faster than light, space-metal disks…uh…ran into a hill. The ultra-classified alien voice data recorder yielded a single sound: zzrrzzrrrD’oh!rrzzzrr!)
Yes, in 1946 one of these ultra-advanced beings was arguing with the little podlings in the back seat, took his eye off the Iludium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator, and then came the Earth-Shattering Ka-Boom! right outside of Roswell, New Mexico.
They – The Government – recovered a few strips of crumpled aluminum. UFOlogists point to the picture of the Air Force officer holding up a couple of Jiffy-Pop fragments as “hard evidence” – but as for me, I’d like my anti-gravity, faster-than-light intergalactic hyper-dimensional space-metal saucer to produce something more than one-fifth the wreckage you’d expect from a Cessna 150 hitting the ground at 40 mph flown by some teenager experimenting with The Weed.
Apparently, Area 51 has at least one, if not several of these accident-prone vehicles. They are being ‘reverse-engineered’ by the CIA and other Black organizations.
I have on a cheap digital wristwatch. Don’t ask why. Now presumably these masters of gravity, wormholes and anal probes are far, far ahead of us in science and technology – hundreds, or more likely thousands of years more advanced. But let’s take my cheapo, simple, everyday wristwatch back to a watchmaker of only 100 years ago – the finest Swiss watchmaker of 1903. What could he reasonably expect to reverse engineer?
Upon opening the back, he would find – what? No gears, no jeweled movements. No springs or hands. Completely silent, not a hint of ticking. The case – what is that? Not wood, not metal – more of that smooth, curved stuff. And what about that tiny green square wafer with the strange markings on it? Forget about making one that worked for himself – what the hell is that? What does it do? And the numerals – just a piece of clear plastic – only he has no idea what plastic is, let alone the liquid crystal matrix.
He pushes a button. The thing beeps. Where the hell did that come from! There are no visible bellows or acoustic horns to make such a sound. And the accuracy! And – my god! It lights up in the dark! No gas lines, no wicks, no flame of any kind!
Even the nylon strap and Velcro would be completely beyond him.
If the smartest man on earth of 100 years ago would be baffled and driven to madness by a $15 dollar watch, how are we expected to believe that NASA is reverse engineering a faster than light, anti-gravity Spaceship? The ancient Egyptians would have a far easier time reverse-engineering the Space Shuttle.
Why is it that every certified, approved, authorized and official UFO photo has been revealed by experts – or the perpetrators – to be a hoax? That can’t be good. What does it say for the credulity of these people when you can see video reporting of three UFO’s flying in rigid formation at night: a bright white light in the middle, and a red light on one side and a green one on the other? Startling footage shows a string of lights over Phoenix one evening, and thousands call the police reporting the alien armada. Looking at the video, it’s clear that these are either a string of parachute flares or a sinister invasion battlefleet of slowly descending anti-gravity flying disks populated by super-intelligent alien creatures from another solar system. The military response was a deafening yawn. The news media, on the other hand, rushed to welcome our new Insect Overlords and began rounding up humans to work in their underground sugar caves.
But why bother with questions like this? If it feels good to believe that we are being watched over by advanced beings, then none of this will stop you.
More likely, you believe that you are nothing more than an impotent, faceless cog in a vast conspiracy of silence and oppression, a victim of government cover-ups and hidden agendas, of dark metallic disks under canvas in subterranean hangars. If that’s what makes you feel better about your failures and frustrations, then, hey – asking questions like this won’t even slow you down.
But realize this: if your worldview requires all sorts of secret kingdoms, unknowable motives, and unseen forces moving behind the veil of normal human experience, then you have taken yourself from the realm of a free citizen responsible for his own destiny and that of his nation, to a frightened caveman quivering in fear of distant Thunder Gods: immobilized, helpless and in a state of abject surrender. You have thrown away the hard work of millions and millions of your fellow human beings who have worked and studied their entire lives to raise you from those very depths.
Shame on you.
There is a lake in Scotland inhabited by a giant, long-necked creature, a plesiosaur that we thought went extinct fifty million years before man came down from the trees. This gigantic, air-breathing reptile inhabits the cold, dark, murky depths of Loch Ness.
Got it. Granting the premise…
What have we got? Some stories from eyewitnesses. Like the one by the British naturalist who took the most famous picture of the Monster, the famed “surgeon photo.” You’ve all seen it.
Only the son of the photographer has admitted that this single most compelling piece of evidence was a fake. He made a recreation of the model – it’s about the size of a large rubber ducky (and if you look at the picture again, you realize just how small and out of scale it looks relative to the waves).
Divers and automated remote cameras have scoured the Loch. There’s a picture of a fin – only the picture has been enhanced, rotated, and ‘dodged’ – the original shows an unremarkable -- and tiny -- bit of debris on the bottom. No sign of Nessie. What is much more damaging is that there is no sign of much of anything – especially fish. This ten-ton ancient dinosaur presumably does not order out for pizza. What the hell does it eat?
And this is most damning: plesiosaurs were air-breathing. Why is it that the best evidence for the Loch Ness Monster is a distant, grainy video of an ‘unexplained’ wake, shot in the far distance. This creature has to come up for air several times an hour. If we grant that there is a breeding population of aquatic dinosaurs surviving in Loch Ness, they should be sticking their heads out of the water like a giant whack-a-mole game, 24/7. If air-breathing dinosaurs really inhabited these lakes in Europe, and Africa and the US, then the best evidence would be the body hauled ashore by a shotgun-toting British Marine after Nessie ate a busload of tourists in full view of the world press.
Think about it. What if there really is an air-breathing dinosaur in this lake. How many HDTV recordings would there be in a single day. Fifty? A hundred?
Divers did find many sunken logs on the bottom of these peaty, dismal waters. Some of these will, on occasion, float to the surface as the gases from their decay increases their buoyancy. From a distance, they look like a dark, humped shape breaking the water. They eventually sink again.
So which is more likely? A log floats loose, maybe a boat wake propagates across a glassy lake for ten or twenty minutes? Or that a ten ton air-breathing dinosaur the size of a city bus, extinct for 50 million years, escapes detection in a fish-free lake scoured by dozens of cameras every day for the past fifty years?
But people swear they saw it! Same with the UFO’s. many of these people are lying -- convincingly lying, as they did with Nessie's "surgeon photo." Some of them, though, are undoubtedly telling the truth. Like I said, I saw a Leprechaun when I was nine. Saw him clearly enough to stop the car. Saw him clearly enough to go back looking for him every day, for weeks, until my parents took such pity on me they put a few leprechaun dolls around the house in the middle of the night and swore up and down they had nothing to do with it – just so that I could find something.
I saw it. That doesn’t mean it was there.
The immediate, knee-jerk reaction to such hard-headed looks at magical events is to state that rationalists are shuffling grey automatons gloomily dissecting flowers and bunnies through thick lenses and tightly-pursed lips, relentlessly crushing wonder and awe.
What a bunch of crap.
I don’t have a problem with UFO’s, Bermuda Triangles, Sea Monsters, Ghosts, Crystals, Crop Circles and Atlantis because I think they are silly. Silly Things, like the Ministry of Silly Walks, are a prime ingredient of sanity.
I object to these things not because they are silly, but because they are lazy. They are just, in the final analysis, so incredibly boring, mundane and unimaginative, compared to the real wonders, the authentic magic. Look! A Leprechaun! It's like a man! Only smaller than most men you normally see!
We ooh and ahh at some circles stamped out in a wheat field, but completely ignore pillars of gas and dust so beautiful and so enormous that if you drove fast enough to cross the US in a second, your great–grandchildren would grow old before they reached the end of it. We, a species that can make things from individual atoms, who can decode the history of every living thing on earth, draw maps of the world of a billion years ago, take pictures of the far side of Neptune’s moons, puzzle out virtual particles in a bubbling quantum soup, look into space and time back to the first .0000000000000001 second of the Big Bang and who can conceive of and live their lives by concepts such as honor and justice and freedom, can find enough REAL magic, enough authentic, verifiable wonders to keep us busy for as long as we live. Yet this species stands in line to buy books about a face on Mars and how to keep razor blades sharp by storing them in a pyramid made from popsicle sticks.
We are failing our children if we let a two-dollar piece of particle board obscure the view of the redwood forest just beyond it. Give me half an hour in an observatory with anyone and I will introduce them to wonders they will think about for the rest of their lives.
They are more challenging than flying saucers, sea serpents, or wee people with their pots of gold. To understand them enough to be floored by their magnificence requires a little patience, a little imagination. It does, in fact, require some work.
But these wonders have one powerful advantage. They have the advantage of being real.
We all have people who have influenced our thinking – more, for in a very real sense they have made us into who we are. For me, one of the pillars of who I have become was the late Dr. Carl Sagan.
Sagan was not only a great writer, he was a scientist of the first order. When I first read The Dragons of Eden I could see, at last, some basis for why we act the way we do. And Broca’s Brain is nothing less than a brilliant tour de force of how to weigh evidence and build a worldview based upon what is real. It is refined genius of the highest degree.
One of Carl’s last works was The Demon-Haunted World. If you have any interest at all in learning how to tell what is real and what isn’t then this book is indispensable. Carl Sagan fought a lifelong battle to teach people how to think critically, how to challenge assumptions, and how to marry the wonder and awe of an open mind with the tough, disciplined skepticism needed to stop your brains from falling out. In one chapter, called The Dragon in My Garage, he gives an example so eloquent I have to quote it in full here before we go on to slay bigger monsters:
‘A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage.'
Suppose I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you’d want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!
‘Show me,’ you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, some empty paint cans, an old tricycle – but no dragon.
‘Where’s the dragon?’ you ask.
‘Oh, she’s right here,’ I reply, waving vaguely. ‘I neglected to mention that she’s an invisible dragon.’
You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon’s footprints.
‘Good idea,’ I say, ‘but this dragon floats in the air.’
Then you’ll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.
‘Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless.’
You’ll spray paint the dragon to make her visible.
‘Good idea, except she’s an incorporeal dragon and the paint won’t stick.’
And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won’t work.
Now, what’s the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire, and no dragon at all? If there’s no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring our sense of wonder. What I’m asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.
[Emphasis mine -- BW]
When a person wants to believe something, no amount of skeptical questioning, logical contradictions or contrary evidence will move them. Couple that with the example of the dragon – the constant moving of the goalposts of proof and verification, and you have the basis for modern magical thinking. And if UFO’s, Loch Ness Monsters and Bermuda Triangles can draw so many believers, how many more can we recruit with more nuanced sleight of hand?
Look around. In the months leading up to the Iraq war, how many people were saying we should hold out and let diplomacy work to remove Saddam? Had diplomacy worked in the previous 12 years? No. Had anything changed since then? It had not. So how will it work this time? Magic! That’s how.
And so to believe that diplomacy, and not force, would remove Saddam from power was a case of deeply magical thinking. Plus, you get to come out against killing people! That feels good! Let’s do it!
If you claim that capitalism is evil, and that a better society can be built from common ownership of everything, administered by a benevolent state – well, this is identical to saying that you have a dragon in your garage. Now I’m an open-minded fellow. Let’s take a look at your claim. Haven’t they tried this before, in Russia. Wasn’t it a disaster? They didn’t do it right. Okay. What’s different this time?
Hello?
But see, sharing is nice. Being nice feels good! It’s a twofer! Everybody works together. Everybody gets along. The community cow is sick at 3:30 in the morning in February in Minnesota, and all the communal farmers fight each other to be the first out of bed to attend to the livestock that no one owns and no one is responsible for! Could work! Mnnnnn…sharing…
There are still many people who cling to the magical notion that George W. Bush did not legally win the Presidency. Challenge their contention with evidence and watch them move the goalpost:
Bush stole the election. No, he had the majority of electoral votes. Yeah, but Gore won the popular vote. The President is not elected by popular votes. He’s elected by electoral votes. The electoral college is outdated. Well, maybe it is and maybe it isn’t, but you don’t get to change the rules after you lost the game. Gore really won Florida. Not according to three recounts he didn’t. The recounts don’t matter because the Supreme Court selected him. The Supreme Court only told the Florida Court to play by the rules. Bush stole the election because I say so! Ahhh. At last. Now we get down to brass tacks.
People believe that adapting the Kyoto treaty will save the earth. If you only do one thing today that will raise your self-esteem and promote diversity, then saving the planet and all of its species cannot be oversold. If you think building the perfect society feels good, just wait till you get a taste for saving an entire planet and everything on it! What a rush that is!
Think of the arrogance of that statement, the sheer magic involved in a belief such as that. The earth will be here for five billion more years regardless of what you or I do. What are these people really saying? The Earth’s environment has been far hotter, and far colder, than it is today. Which environment are we to save? Human industry may -- in fact, likely does -- have some impact on global temperatures. How significant is this relative to massive factors like solar output? We don’t know. The one thing we do know, with certainty, is that the more technologically advanced and wealthy the society, the cleaner all of its industries become. Want a clean planet? Fill it with rich people.
Even the proponents of Kyoto admit that if fully ratified, it would only delay their own worst-case model’s warming by two or three years over the next century. And all we have to do is wreck the world’s economy. Then we can all go back to that magical time when a few million humans lived in villages and drank herbal teas and sang songs around the campfire and poet-kings ruled lands without warfare and sacred crystals kept everybody healthy just as they did in Atlantis.
Now, ask any professional magician how they pull off their illusions and every last one will tell you it’s all about misdirection. Sadly, those boring, insensitive, dead-white-male laws of physics don’t allow for quarters to disappear into thin air. So to make someone believe that precisely this has happened, we need to physically make that coin go someplace where it is not expected. And the way to do that is to make everyone look somewhere else for a moment.
Humans have retained several reflexes, and for good reason too – they keep us alive. All of today’s animals are reflexively attracted to fast motion in their field of vision. There were undoubtedly many animals that did not have this brain wiring, and these extinct animals are known by the scientific name, breakfast. Whether you’re a two-ounce tree shrew or a one-ton wildebeest, if something moves fast in the bushes, it would behoove you to give it your undivided attention.
This is hard-wired, and there’s not a damn thing we can do about it. So watch a magician carefully next time he makes a coin disappear. You’ll see one hand move quickly – and that is the hand you will watch. Coin’s in the other hand.
Misdirection.
Now to show you how this works in the real world, I need to tell you a story about a real man named Robert Wayne Jernigan. I guarantee you this story will make you very angry, but this is the kind of world we live in today.
Robert Wayne Jernigan is now 28 years old. People who knew him said he was quiet, somewhat stand-offish. He was not widely liked in high school.
Four years ago, a witness reported seeing Jernigan enter a building in a remote suburb of Dallas with an axe. Four people were found dead at the scene, including a nine year old girl. No charges were filed. Less than two days later, Jernigan turned up again, this time at the scene of a suspicious fire in a day care center. Miraculously, no one was injured. But it was just a matter of time.
During the next several weeks, it is possible to place Jernigan at the scene of no less than thirteen suspicious fires. Eleven people died. Eyewitnesses were unshakable in their determination that Jernigan had been on the scene. And yet the police did nothing.
Jernigan had long been fascinated with fire. A search of his apartment revealed fireman-related magazines, posters and memorabilia. Despite the deaths of fifteen people, despite repeated eyewitness accounts and photographic evidence placing Jernigan at these fires, no criminal charges were ever filed against Robert Wayne Jernigan. He remains a free man to this day.
And rightfully so. Because Robert Wayne Jernigan is an ordinary fireman for the Dallas Fire Department.* He is not a serial arsonist at all.
Now re-read the previous paragraphs and tell me where I lied.
Everything I told you was factually true. But the spin, the context, the misdirection… The press always reports serial killers with all three names – Robert Wayne Jernigan sounds a hell of a lot more ominous than Bobby Jernigan. Quiet, stand-offish, not widely liked – instant psychopath, if you read the papers. Entered the building with an axe – oooh! That ought to get the blood boiling. That the people had died from smoke inhalation I decided was irrelevant to the story…
And so on. And so on.
This is how you lie by telling the truth. You tell the big lie by carefully selecting only the small, isolated truths, linking them in such a way that they advance the bigger lie by painting a picture inside the viewer’s head. The Ascended High Master of this Dark Art is Noam Chomsky.
I have long admired Noam Chomsky. It must be absolutely intoxicating to be able to write so free of any ethical constraints. Chomsky flitters and darts through the vast expanse of human experience, unerringly searching out those few, isolated data points that run contrary to the unimaginably vast ocean of facts crashing ashore in the opposite direction.
Here’s a Noam Chomsky moment for those of you without enough duct tape to wrap around your heads to keep your brains from exploding while you actually read his works:
Let’s say we stand overlooking the ocean along Pacific Coast Highway. From high atop the cliffs, we look down to the waves and the sand below. I ask you what color the beach is. You reply, reasonably enough, that it is sandy white. And you are exactly right.
However, there are people who cannot see the beach for themselves because they are not standing with us on this very spot. This is where Noam earns his liberal sainthood. Noam takes a small pail to the beach and sits down in the sand.
If you’ve ever run sand through your fingers, you know that for all of the thousands upon thousands of white or clear grains, there are a few dark ones here and there, falling through your fingers. With a jewelers loupe and an EXCEEDINGLY fine pair of tweezers, you carefully and methodically pluck all of the dark grains you can find – and only the dark grains – and carefully place them, one by one, into your trusty bucket.
It will take you a long time – it has taken Chomsky decades – to fill this bucket, but with enough sand and enough time, you will eventually do so. And then, when you do, you can make a career touring colleges through the world, giving speeches about the ebony-black beaches of Malibu, and you can pour your black sand onto the lectern and state, without fear of contradiction, that this sand was taken from those very beaches.
And what you say will be accurate, it will be factually based, and you will be lying like the most pernicious son of a bitch that ever lived.
Why do so many people take this hocus-pocus at face value? Because, like any audience at a Magic show, they want to believe.
Do this long enough, and you will become an Icon –- no more hours spent sorting sand for you! No sir! And finally, after a few decades as Icon, you may manufacture whatever data you need to make your case, and not one of your followers will call you on it.
Shortly after 9/11, and somewhat before the “Taliban forces did finally succumb, after astonishing endurance” St. Noam thundered that America’s “Silent Genocide” in Afghanistan would kill – pick a number, any number -- somewhere between 3 to 4 million civilians. At one point, he intimated that up to 10 million could die.
The real number was around 500.
Being Noam Chomsky means you get a pass for being wrong not by a factor of ten to one, or even a hundred to one. In Afghanistan, Chomsky was wrong by a factor of 20,000 to one. Being that wrong on a regular basis means going for a $2.99 Happy meal at McDonald’s and paying $59,800 for it. It means frugally walking out of a Nothing Over 99 Cents! store with the seven most expensive items, having just put $138,600 on your credit card. That’s how wrong Noam Chomsky is.
Misdirection. Unsubstantiated allegations. Undocumented assertions. Counting a few scattered hits and ignoring millions of misses. You can prove anything in this manner, if your audience is a willing accomplice and refuses to challenge you.
Michael Moore used exactly this technique to make people believe that America is a land of terrified, racist murderers who are armed to the teeth solely because of their fear of black people. For this he was given an Academy Award, and Bowling for Columbine has been called “the best documentary film ever made.”
I told you this story would make you angry.
I saw Bowling for Columbine in a small art house in Santa Monica, attended by what I think was a small knot of NPR movie club pass holders. This is like watching Triumph of the Will in Nuremburg stadium seated between Goebbels and Himmler. You know before the lights go down that they’re gonna love it.
We’re used to the willing suspension of disbelief when the lights go down. This agreement between the audience and the filmmaker, the magician, is what allows us to watch a kid get bitten by a ‘radioactive spider’ and believe that this will give him the power to climb the side of a skyscraper and shoot webs from his wrists. This is good magic. This is what art is all about.
It takes a particularly badly-made and clumsy film to become so unbelievable that you find yourself muttering, Oh, come on! at the screen, and Bowling for Columbine is nothing like that badly made. It is a lie so carefully and meticulously crafted that you find yourself sitting there in the dark thinking, I have to admit, he’s got a point there.
It’s only later, when the magic is over and you’re walking to your car, only when the narrative flow has released you to swim to the shore of reason, that some people begin to ask some questions. Let me take a few examples from the movie to show you how this lie is constructed on a brick-by-brick basis.
Moore’s thesis – near as I can follow it – is that America commits vastly more handgun murders than the rest of the world. Well, there’s no disputing that. You would think Moore would make the point that it’s because we have such easy access to handguns. He does not. He claims that there are plenty of guns in Canada, but they don’t have our murder rate. The movie’s premise is that we kill people with guns because we Americans are terrified all the time, and the one thing we are most terrified of is Black people. But cross 10 feet over the border into Canada and that terror instantly -- you might say magically -- disappears.
Hope I didn’t wreck the movie for you.
The title comes from Moore’s assertion that Harris and Klebold, the Columbine murderers, were so immune to violence that they went bowling in the morning before they shot up the school. It is a chilling thought. Didn’t happen. But that shouldn’t get in the way of a chilling thought, especially when it’s your opening thesis.
The opening scene features Michael Moore in the North Country Bank & Trust in Traverse City, Michigan, which was running a promotion saying that for every account opened, they would give away not a toaster or a walkman, but a gun. We see Moore filling out the paperwork to open a new account. This done, the teller hands him a rifle. Moore exits the bank, thrusts the rifle into the air like some well-fed Sandinista, and over the freeze-frame says “maybe it’s not such a good idea to give people a gun…in a bank!” Oh, how the NPR film club tittered at that line!
This isn’t just misdirection. This is, pure and simple, a goddam lie. The bank did offer this promotion, and when Moore heard about it, he found out that when you open the new account, they give you a certificate. You then have to go to a gun shop to pick up the gun.
This wasn’t damning enough. So Moore convinced the poor, decent, gullible people who ran that bank that it would be much better publicity for them if they could hand him the gun right there in the bank. Uh, well, um…okay. If it will help you with your movie. But the bank did not hand out guns on the premises. Moore created this scene to advance his premise. It’s a funny scene. It is most emphatically not a documentary scene.
Moving on.
Not wanting to appear one-sided, Moore interviews a few randomly selected gun owners. And who could be a more random handgun owner than John Nichols, brother of Terry Nichols, co-conspirator of Oklahoma City lunatic Timothy McVeigh?
In the interview, John Nichols seems on the verge of total emotional collapse. He makes off-color comments and has a spooky, lithium-deficient smirk that appears at awkward and inappropriate times. After a few moments, this completely random and therefore totally typical American gun owner takes Moore into the back room to ‘show him something.’ He does not allow the camera to enter. A subtitle tells us that John Nichols has put a gun barrel in his mouth. We can hear Michael Moore gently begging him to stop, to put the gun down. Not only a fair man, but gentle, too. When it comes to misdirection, Master Moore has the strongest kung-fu.
Littleton, Colorado is a nice, safe, upper-middle class neighborhood. It’s the kind of place you’d want to raise your kids. It is also home to a Lockheed plant, and Moore goes on the make the assertion that this ‘climate of death’ from these ‘weapons of mass destruction’ is responsible for the Columbine killing spree. Presumably the school shooters in other communities had to settle for magazines and websites of missiles to work up their Death Culture madness.
This would be a stretch – a real stretch – if the ‘entire community’ was indeed wrapped up in ‘America’s Defense Industry Culture of Death.’ But the Lockheed plant in Littleton, the one using ominous missiles as a backdrop for an interview in the film, builds launch vehicles for communications satellites – you know, the ones used by HBO to broadcast Bowling for Columbine across the nation. This little detail was left out of the movie. Keep your eye on the flick of the wrist; pay no attention to the slow palming of the coin.
One of the most widely-quoted sequences, one that drew squeals and applause for the Santa Monica Art House Crowd, was a cartoon series showing Moore’s history of the United States. Terrified white people in England get on a ship, sail to the New World, meet dark, friendly, all-around swell dark-skinned people, and kill them all out of paralyzing, abject fear. Slaves are imported to maintain an excuse for us to stay armed. The black people are then summarily killed to the last man. And so on, with the screaming, yelping, frozen-with-fear white people shooting everything in sight.
Oh, how true. When the box office attendant, who was black, handed me back my change a little too quickly for comfort, I had to drop him with 23 rounds from my trusty 9mm. The snack bar attendant – a mulatto if ever there was one – asked me if I wanted butter on my popcorn in a really threatening way, so it was a shotgun blast to the head for him. And the usher, who was Mexican, took a hostile step towards me as he opened the theater door. Not being completely dark-skinned, I decided it was safe to just stab him in the eyes with my ballpoint pen.
This is what he wants you to believe. His European audience, generally salivating at the chance to hear an American describe his country as a bunch of idiotic, murdering, terrified racists, howls with approval.
Moore then recounts the story of a 6 year old boy who went to school with a handgun and murdered a little girl. We meet his mother, a young African-American woman, in the courtroom, crying and terrified, handcuffed, orange jumpsuit, the whole nine yards. This woman, says Moore, was forced by welfare cuts by those evil bastard Republicans, to leave her child with relatives, get up before dawn, and ride a bus, for hours, so that she could go to a shopping mall and serve biscuits to rich white people.
Moore rides the bus in the pre-dawn hours. It’s depressing. I was watching this, and I thought to myself, you know, maybe we have gone too far.
But when I got to the car, I realized, hey, wait a second. I’ve had to get up in the predawn hours and take a bus to go to work. Millions of people do this every day in America. It’s society’s fault that this woman has to get up and take a bus to work? And the relatives she left her kids with? It was a crack house. Guns and drugs were everywhere. And the fact that she is a black woman standing handcuffed in a courtroom has precisely nothing to do with this. It is much more likely that this would have happened to an equally unskilled white mother.
And furthermore, if you had a six year old child, and you absolutely had to leave him in a place like that, would your kid take a gun to school and shoot someone? Or do you think that maybe, perhaps, just possibly, this tragedy had more to do with this individual’s parenting skills than the fact that she has to take a bus to go to work in the morning? Is this an indictment of a heartless society, or an insult to the millions and millions and millions of Americans, black and white, rich and poor, who get up every morning and go to work without their children murdering a classmate during the course of the day?
Bowling for Columbine is not a documentary. It is propaganda, created in many cases from whole cloth, and in others by selective interviewing, biased editing and false assumptions. Much of it is, in fact, downright lies. That it was awarded an Oscar only reveals that the Academy Awards have suffered as much ethical rot as the Nobel Peace Prize, in that it was awarded by faceless voters who wanted nothing more than to take a swipe at the Bush administration.
As for his assertion that Americans kill because they are nothing but terrified white people, a quick look at the murder statistics will show any dispassionate reader that this is, in fact, nearly the exact opposite of the truth. Black-on-Black violence is many, many times greater than White-on-Black violence
Michael Moore claims to be the Conscience of America and the Champion of the Common Man. As my friend James Lileks points out, he is neither.
If Michael Moore was only interested in saving innocent lives, he would have done better to have tackled a subject that kills many hundreds of times the number taken by handguns, namely, obesity-related diseases. Is that a cheap shot? It is. It is a factually-based cheap shot, which is more than can be said about Bowling for Columbine.
We find ourselves living in a time when people grow increasingly unwilling or unable to determine fact from assertion. In a society ruled by the people, this is a fatal condition. Where magical claims go unchallenged, where feeling good about something is the measure of its truth, public policy plummets into the same disconnect from reality that has doomed entire civilizations.
As always, we face a choice: we can live our lives by fantasy ideologies and wait for the train wreck called reality, or we can learn not what to think, but how to think. How to test and compare the barrage of information and statements we receive on a daily basis.
Howard Zinn has a theory of American History. Victor Davis Hanson has another. Which one is right? How do we know?
A few nights ago, during one of my regular visits to the main sensor screen at USS Clueless, I read something that absolutely bored a hole in my brain. You always have to pay attention when you read Steven Den Beste, but this was something else again. I could feel the veins in my temples throbbing like I was a Talosian trying to keep Captain Pike from seeing that the top of the mountain had been blown off. My hands and feet went cold, then numb, as the blood rushed to my head. I staggered into the kitchen, ripped open a five-pound bag of sugar, and washed it down with Hershey’s syrup: brain needs more glucose! Brain must have more glucose!
Steven was talking about how people think – no, more than that. He was talking about what thought is. He talked about thought as a series of heuristics.
I liked the American Heritage Dictionary entry best: Relating to or using a problem-solving technique in which the most appropriate solution of several found by alternative methods is selected at successive stages of a program for use in the next step of the program.
Now remember, I’m fresh from the Krell Mind Machine myself, but as I understand it, what we know and what we believe are a series of heuristics, which basically means we use models – little index cards – when we deal with problems. A simple heuristic might be touching a red-hot stove burns. We don’t have to keep touching the stove every time to find this out. All we have to do is touch it once – I remember doing it and so do you – and now we emphatically know red hot burners bad.
This is a simple heuristic, and a damn good one. But as Steven points out, a heuristic doesn’t have to be true all the time – just enough of the time for it to be a useful mental shortcut.
Now I’ll be the first to admit that the right-wing raving lunatics meet the left-wing barking moonbats somewhere off the map where There Be Dragons. So how useful is a complex heuristic like Democrats can’t be trusted with national security?
Hot stove burns is right pretty much every time: it is an effective heuristic, certainly useful, but pretty damn narrow and limited. That is, its predictive power is good, but the things it accurately predicts are pretty limited. Democrats can’t be trusted with national security is far more complex, open to infinitely more variables and exceptions, and therefore will be less accurate. It will be proven wrong more often. Roosevelt and Truman were Democrats, and they could hardly be improved upon.
But if you think about how you think, you may realize that everything we see in the world is colored by our enormous pyramid of ever-more-complex heuristics, our personalized set of index cards on how the world works.
When we have discussions, like this one, what we are essentially doing is trading cards; I’ll try to give you a Democrats can’t be trusted with national security, but you may respond with Republicans don’t care about anything beyond their own wallet.
We nod when we read or hear something new that makes sense to us, but that’s only because, while new, it is a conclusion that makes sense based on the heuristics we already hold. It is a new assumption based upon less complex assumptions, based on still less complex assumptions, all the way down.
Big fleas have little fleas
Upon their backs to bite ‘em
And little fleas have lesser fleas
And so ad infinitum
(and these small fleas
of course, in turn
have larger fleas to go on
and larger still, and larger still,
and larger still, and so on)
Now…
Post-modernists will look at this and come to the conclusion that because we all have these internal clichés, all truth is relative, there is no objective reality, and a nineteen-year-old English Lit student knows the true meaning of Hamlet better than Shakespeare does.
Here, in my experience, is a very reliable heuristic: All Post-modernists are idiots. Of course, your mileage may vary.
As usual, they have gotten it exactly wrong. It is true that no one can re-learn every lesson they have learned throughout their entire lives every day. To build on knowledge, to grow smarter, to become educated, is to add layers based on the existing foundations.
Science works because each layer is inspected – by science itself – and checked for accuracy. Entire theories, entire skyscrapers of ideas, have been demolished because new experiments proved that a single, simple piece of foundation data was in error. As new experiments provide new information – repeatedly, reliably, independently and in the expected quantities – these then become the steel and concrete with which we build newer, taller and stronger theories, stronger heuristics.
And the end result is cell phones, antibiotics, MRI scanners, 747s, weather satellites and the internet.
This process is the exact opposite of magical thinking. It is disciplined. It is rigorous. It is determined to follow the evidence that reality provides when we question it through experiment. It does not have a destination in mind – it follows the path wherever it may lead. Its results are not always comforting, which means it requires courage to walk that path.
And wherever it has been applied, the results have been absolutely magical. Miraculous. Astonishing. Awe-inspiring.
It is also a way of thinking that we Americans formerly tried to apply to politics with pride. Show me. I'm listening. We abandon it at our mortal peril.
Because of this rational, disciplined, skeptical, hopeful and ultimately joyous way of looking at the world, we have been able to behold wonders that no poor human imagination could begin to predict. It is the mirror-image of seeing the world as the drab, lifeless, mechanical thing that mystics accuse rationalists of. Rather, it is driven by the elation that we can do difficult things well, see layers upon layers of the infinitely large or infinitesimally small being peeled back, generation after generation, to reveal an entirely new stage and cast of wonders and miracles. Big fleas have little fleas…and so, ad infinitum.
If someone chooses to run their lives through the horoscope printed next to the comics, that is their business. They certainly have the freedom to do so. But when magical ideologies are put forward as political positions of equal weight and value, as a chart to sail the ship of state, when assertion carries the same weight as proof, we will surely lose our way. And then we will have nothing left to save us but all the luck we can wring from whatever leprechauns we can get our hands on.
*I made up Robert Wayne Jernigan only because I do not have, at hand, a real fireman with real stories to tell. If I had, I could have sold the story even better by adding the real-world details such an interview would have provided. The more data points I have to choose from, the better I can build the lie.
Welcome to the Eject! Eject! Eject! commenter community. Please read and understand the following:
1. This is not a public square. This is a dinner party on personal property. Good conversation is not only tolerated but celebrated here. But the host understands the difference between dissent and disrespect, even if you do not. Louts will be ignored until the bouncers can show them the door.
2. This is a voluntary online community. Your posting of any material, whether in comments or otherwise, grants to William A. Whittle, Aurora Aerospace, Inc. and their affiliates, a perpetual, royalty-free, non-exclusive, worldwide license to use, sublicense, reproduce or incorporate into other material all or any portion of the material posted, for commercial or other use.
3. If a comment does find its way into a main page essay, print, or other media, every effort will be made to credit the individual making the comment. So chose your screen name accordingly, SLNTFRT33@yahoo.com!
Now let's see some distributed intelligence and basic human decency! Don't make me come down there every five minutes!
Comments
Lovely job Bill
Posted by: Tex | May 18, 2003 8:25 PM
Another outstanding piece of work. Many thanks.
Posted by: C. Williams | May 18, 2003 8:36 PM
Geez, Bill. How can you be so cold and cruel? The very *idea* of applying logic and reason to real life. "Magic", indeed... ;-p
Posted by: Al Superczynski | May 18, 2003 8:38 PM
This is simply amazing. Thank you; I've felt many of the things you say here, but I could never quite put my finger on it and conceptualize it.
Posted by: Ray | May 18, 2003 8:45 PM
Too short. Seriously.
Posted by: Kim du Toit | May 18, 2003 8:50 PM
Forgive the Socratic Chorus, but....
Outstanding - as always.
Jeff
Posted by: Orion | May 18, 2003 8:55 PM
When I was 6 years old Santa came to my house. I heard the bells. I even saw the reindeer tracks on the top of our dew covered car. Did you know that reindeer don't have ordinary hoof prints like other deer? No, reindeer, Santa's reindeer, have very special, soft hoof prints--very similar to cat paw prints.
I heeeeeeeeeeard those bells.
Posted by: Mrs. du Toit | May 18, 2003 8:55 PM
Another winner Bill, god how the hell you pull this off every single time.
Keep the comments open, many of us like purusing them despite the assholes.
Posted by: Brian | May 18, 2003 8:56 PM
Nice piece. Loved the way you slid Chomsky into it too. Disney pulled back from Moore's Bush project. Seems enough folks CAN see through the hypocrisy of his magic sleight of hand. The top two 'must haves' on my Xmas list. Whittles upcoming book and Vodka Pundit's cookbook for bachelors.
Posted by: Nolts | May 18, 2003 9:13 PM
Fantastic Bill. I wish I had your gift for expression. Just flawless logic stated with flair and class. Please email me at the above address there is something I would like to ask you.
Patrick
Posted by: Patrick | May 18, 2003 9:19 PM
Thank you. A wonderful essay that points out the difference between facts and truth.
I've used the analogy before, but it fits in well here. Moore's view of looking at the world and the U.S. is the same as being someone with a vested interest in the Ptolemaic universe description when a stray Galileo starts proving your worldview no longer rings true.
The more complicated the descriptions, regardless whether or not they describe what happens in the real world, the better. But if you remove one brick from the epicycle faux-description of the universe, the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. Which, of course, points out that those people promoting something else (the sun at the center of the universe? no way dude!) are suspect for their insistence that reality is described differently. Style is so much more important than substance!
Posted by: chrees | May 18, 2003 9:54 PM
I feel kind of guilty that you couldn't put this essay in your book, like you wanted to. It really is an exceptionally strong bit of work. Incredibly focused, and makes its point with a sledgehammer. Two examples of urban myths, then the knowledge we all possessed of the Marxist bent to most of our universities, then the showdown between Whittle and Moore. Needless to say, I was never in doubt to who would win it. I even knew that you'd be fair to his SKILLS as a storyteller- even if he is a lying demagogue, as Lileks and countless others have pointed out. I just didn't know you'd do it in the most damning fashion, that would force even the dumbest communist to carefully consider their folly.
Simply put, I had this one printed: a liberty I have never taken with any of your essays. I then intend to give it a few reachable leftists. I wonder what they'd think? I'm about to find out... I'll keep you posted. :)
Posted by: trevalyan | May 18, 2003 9:56 PM
Wonderful! I'm sure Rachel will be especially delighted.
Posted by: Jay Solo | May 18, 2003 9:59 PM
How DARE you throw logic into an argument? Heh.
Brilliant, as always, Bill. I noted that Kim thinks this was too short. Don't tell me you edited yourself for Monkeyface.
You WILL let me know if/when these are published, right? Your brand of calm, gentle and RATIONALITY should be required reading for every American.
Thank you so much!
Posted by: margi | May 18, 2003 10:00 PM
Terrific, as always.
One nit: When you mention we can be descended from "Atlantean Priests" if we wish, you spelt it "Altantean" (flipping the "T" & "L") --- no biggie, but I had to pause to process it.
Best,
-Andrew
Posted by: Andrew | May 18, 2003 10:06 PM
If I ever have kids, they are reading all of these essays. When does your collection come out?
Posted by: Eric Sivula | May 18, 2003 10:10 PM
Bill this is another great piece of writing.
I think what was written should be scared with people who liked that evil movie by Michael Moore. Yet, I doubt they would understand what you wrote.
As long as we have people like you, logic will never be lost.
Posted by: Mike | May 18, 2003 10:10 PM
Bill,
Very good article. I am an Australian software developer in Melbourne (I work for a Kansas-based US corporation, hence the non-au e-mail address).
Please tell me what you think of the following idea. It came about when my teenage son researched the death penalty in the US last year for a high-school assignment.
I appears that, if you withdraw African-Americans entirely from murder statistics (both perpetrator and victim) the US murder statistics (per 100,000) look just like Britain, Australia and Canada (ie, about half the US rate).
Is it hopeless racist bigotry ? Or just wrong ?
Robert Blair :)
Posted by: Robert Blair | May 18, 2003 10:18 PM
The constancy of the speed of light as a natural speed limit has been so thoroughly and completely tested and vindicated that these aliens must have learned to harness the power of entire galaxies to bore wormholes through spacetime...
I'm not sure about how the aliens make the transit, but I think you need to look a little more deeply into the question of the constancy of the speed of light.
It may, indeed, be a hard and fast limit, but that has not, in fact, been "thoroughly and completely tested". There are respected physicists who think there is a flaw in General Relativity that has the potential to make C a variable. Testing continues...
(Mind, it may not be variable enough to do us any good in the star travel arena, but we won't know for a while yet.)
Posted by: Gary Utter | May 18, 2003 10:23 PM
In your fireman example you say "thirteen suspicious fires". By using the word "suspicious" the example implies a pattern of criminal intent. If all these fires were indeed "suspicious", thereby implying serial arson or other such criminal action then there is nothing wrong with an article supplying a theory about possible suspects: in this day and age I would not be surprised if there is someday a serial arsonist who also happens to be a fireman.
We're all these "fires" (all 13!!) truly fictitious-uh I mean..ahem...suspicious?
(The axe thing kinda flew out of left field to me, I admit)
Other than that I do like your examination of misdirection.
Posted by: Tim | May 18, 2003 10:24 PM
I'd heard and read some of the details of Moore's deceptions before, but it was quite illuminating to have the tale of magic and misdirection laid out in preparation for it. Marvelous, well done.
Thanks for the commentary on Carl Sagan too; I used to love his Cosmos show, and the related book, but turned away when he partook of political invective and insult... perhaps I lost a valuable source of information and thoughtful provocation in the process.
Posted by: Rich Jordan | May 18, 2003 10:32 PM
Tim: alas, serial arsonists do crop up from time to time in volunteer fire departments. Within the past few years, a volunteer and son of a local fire chief was arrested for a string of arsons in my area.
Posted by: Chris | May 18, 2003 11:15 PM
Andrew -- spelling fixed. I was channeling Ramtha and he told me to spell it the way we did in The Old Language. But I changed it back for our primitive 21st century brains.
Mr. Blair -- I have heard similiar reports. I know knothing about them or the methodology, and so I don't feel qualified to comment. I do know that the issue of violence is a cultural, not a racial one, and so much of it lies in the individual human heart. If the statistics are true, all that tells us is that there are neighborhoods where there are lots of bad guys walking around, and you put anybody of any race into an environment like that and you will grow more criminals. Since that sounded pretty PC, let me add this: we need to go in and retake these neighborhoods. Those are American citizens getting gunned down in there, and none of us should have to live with that kind of fear and horror, regardless of race. Even in the very worst neighborhoods, the percentage that does the shooting and killing is a vanishingly small percentage of the honest and hard-working people who have been made prisoners in their own homes.
Gary -- know of any articles on this subject you can steer me to? Light actually slows down in a denser medium; this is why water bends light. I am unaware of light ever traveling faster than 186,282 miles per second in a hard vacuum. (Although I do have an old sci-fi theory I wrote saying if we could only percolate the quantum bubbles and make specetime less dense...)
Tim -- for the sake of the example, the presence of a serial arsonist doesn't affect the spin that Jernigan was completely innocent. That was the lie I set out to tell with provable facts.
Rich -- I hesitated to mention it because of the debt I will always owe the man, but yes, the second half of The Demon Haunted World is a very political, very silly mess. Carl Sagan was, alas, a classic limosine liberal. No matter. He taught me how to think and challenge authority -- even his. I can apply his "Balony Detector" to his political comments and make up my own mind. All is forgiven. The man was a treasure.
As for the rest of you: thanks. Welcome home.
Posted by: Bill Whittle | May 18, 2003 11:16 PM
As contextual information, as usual I drool in fannish delight. Especially since Michael Moore and anti-scientific "ancient wisdom" (and alternative medicine, and creation science, and, and...) make my little logic-wired brain implode.
And now for the exceedingly minor quibble: environmentalism ain't about saving the Earth. You are quite correct in that the planet can take care of itself. Not infrequently, geologically speaking, it eliminates fifty to ninety percent of all life in the process. Environmentalism is a purely selfish goal: save our own butts and our quality of life while we're at it. Naturally that doesn't sound nearly as warm and fuzzy as "save the planet", and it doesn't fit well into a soundbite, so it doesn't wind up on signs and book titles, but it's accurate.
That said, fuck the goddamn Kyoto Protocol. I am a biologist and I've spent many an hour in the classroom or buried in a book on this stuff; I am well aware of the issues of global warming and other ills. In brief, I am well-educated enough both to recognize that environmentalism and conservationism are important if we care to preserve our current pleasant lifestyle, and to be driven to drink by 95% of the people who share this goal. If history has taught us anything, it's that you can't accomplish jack shit by attempting to alter human nature- we ain't going backward even if that IS the best way. (It isn't. We were causing mass extinctions and widespread desertification back when we were Noble Savages.) Economically speaking, a clean environment is a luxury good bought by a fat economy, and especially a strong technology industry.
Posted by: LabRat | May 18, 2003 11:30 PM
Mr. Whittle:
Well done. Thank you.
Posted by: apotheosis | May 18, 2003 11:34 PM
Bill, some parts of your essay reminded me of part of one of Robert Heinlein's essays, "The Happy Days Ahead" (in Expanded Universe), in particular, the part where he talks about "The Age of Unreason." Of course, your essay covers slightly different ground, but there's some overlap there, I think. Excellent work, as usual. I've posted a pointer to Electric Minds, along with my usual statement of "Go read this NOW."
I was going to say, if you wanted to use the name of a real firefighter, I'm sure my wife would have let you use her uncle's name: William Lee Jensen, who worked for the Glendale Fire Department for many years. Trouble is, he wouldn't have fit your "psychopath" narrative; he is a very-well-liked and very nice guy, and was even back in high school, she tells me. (His firefighting career was brought to an end by the 1996 Malibu-Calabasas brush fire, in which he was caught in a firestorm and burned over 70% of his body. He survived, but it was VERY touch-and-go for awhile, and if he hadn't had an iron constitution, and been in one of the finest burn centers in the country, I doubt he'd have made it. His story is mentioned on the Web site of the organization he helped found, http://www.firefightersquest.org.)
Posted by: Erbo | May 18, 2003 11:54 PM
Thank you for this article. Your "fireman" story immediately brought to mind a particular article which a misguided friend forwarded to me recently in all seriousness. It made me very angry at the time, and although I certainly had no problem explaining to my friend why the article was wrong (it's factually incorrect in many places and on many levels), I couldn't quite explain why it made me angry.
The article was:
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0316-08.htm
I now understand that what made me angry was being on the receiving end of "the big lie", and knowing it all the while.
I have no idea if "Bowling for Columbine" has this article beat for dishonesty, but I am in no mood to spend my money to find out.
Posted by: jms | May 19, 2003 12:09 AM
Dear Erbo -- thanks for the use of your, uh, uncle-in-law. I'm sure he's a terrific guy. I am also sure that if I had ten minutes with him talking about his high-school life, I could pull a few quotes out of context, clips some details and string them together to move him from a fun rascal adored by everyone into a domineering martinent who ruled the halls with fear.
Posted by: Bill Whittle | May 19, 2003 12:27 AM
Thanks, Bill.
I wonder whether the Moore-debunkers will ever get their major-media day in court. If Bowling for Columbine had been a $20-million box-office, Oscar-winning, right-wing documentary, wouldn't 60 Minutes have attacked it with a chainsaw?
Moore seems to have gotten away with it.
Posted by: bob | May 19, 2003 12:52 AM
Wotcha!
As usual superlative stuff :)
When you go to print will it be available in the UK :) ?
Posted by: Huw (WiE) | May 19, 2003 12:59 AM
Spellbinding! Magical!
Oh, and ... "That is was awarded an Oscar only reveals..."
might better read
"That it was awarded an Oscar..."
Moore! Moore! (scuzi, Signori...)
Posted by: Eye Opener | May 19, 2003 1:20 AM
Bill:
The ones who really should be ticked off are those who were also nominated and lost to Moore's piece of fictional clap-trap.
Instead of standing meekly behind that Blivet while he ruined the decorum of the occasion, they should be fighting to have his film decertified for fraud. If plagarism is fraud, so are staged or altered incidents in a propaganda film that is not a true documentary.
They should all be pissed-off and demanding a recount, 'cause they were done in by that phony.
Posted by: Howard E. Morseburg | May 19, 2003 1:30 AM
Thanks Eye. Fixed.
Posted by: Bill Whittle | May 19, 2003 1:31 AM
Great work, as always!
Posted by: Liz L | May 19, 2003 2:04 AM
Fucking brilliant essay Bill. Just fucking wonderful. Moore is a stupid fat bastard.
Posted by: Jean-Marc | May 19, 2003 2:16 AM
Yet another piece of great writing, Mr Whittle. Congratulations.
This article reminded me of Asimov's "Fight against the forces of Darkness", and I am surprised you'd rather mention Sagan than him (You sound like you have read enough of both). Then again, my only experience of Sagan is reading "Contact", which I find (IMHO) has poor sci fi and unconvincing "science-vs-religion" debates.
I like this article particularly because it rationalises, it appeals to the mind, not to the heart. You're very good when you are rhetorical about getting mushy at old battlefields, it makes a great preaching to the choir. But if your goal is "converting liberals", I find it much better to stick to cold rational argumentations. Then again, I am a bit of a geek.
The point of your article misses me, as I haven't seen, nor will see Moore's film (I have better things to do, like reading american blogs to see for myself how things are around there). But the yearning for "magic" and the rejection of the real world is much older than the sixties. It actually began with the romantics, with the first benefits of industrialisation. Guess what, as soon as life started to become a tad more bearable we started to miss the middle ages. We're still shedding the excess ideological luggage from that age in many other ways too.
And about a documentary being neutral, well, as I see it no piece of argumentation, short of a scientific article, is ever neutral and the best shot you can get is saying "Well, look here, I am thus and this is my agenda and now that you know it and how my judgement could be skewed I am now going to try to be as little skewed as possible". This is the anglosaxon press tradition at its finest.
As an endword, I'd like to thank you for your website, which has been very useful. I am a spaniard and have always wanted to know more about the continental ideology divide. This site (and others like den beste's) have made me see things with different eyes. Now I can say I understand more about the United States. And about Europe.
It is not that you people are conservatives and we are liberals (in the american definitions of the words), but ideological borders are drawn in completely different places. We could read the same sentence and understand completely different things, and have totally different reactions. So more than like seeing things from the other side of the wall, reading you has been like learning a new language.
Posted by: Javier Gil | May 19, 2003 2:19 AM
Great essay. Been reading your site for about a month now and have truly enjoyed every single essay. Had to link to your site because it is so great. Keep up the good work.
Posted by: homicidalManiak | May 19, 2003 2:20 AM
Once again you have done a superb job. The ability to comprehend, analyze, and interpret information without resorting to assumptions or mythology to fill in the gaps is becoming a lost art. I'm bombarded by material (the pace has picked up with the popularity of e-mail) from friends who send me urban legends, rumors, partisan screeds, etc. without any commentary of their own or any indication that they fully understood what they were forwarding (they may not have even read it at all). Why is it that so few even bother to check their sources? Most bogus media have glaringly inaccurate or misleading features that should cause red flags to pop up in the minds of those who are alert. Some will claim that they lack the time to do their homework, or don't have my research skills and training; from my point of view, the bottom line is and will always be that ONE SHOULD NEVER BE TOO BUSY TO GIVE AN HONEST REPORT!
Posted by: Bloodthirsty Warmonger | May 19, 2003 3:07 AM
Bill,
I check back every day hoping to see a new essay. Thanks for all the time you put into writing them. :)
Posted by: Mason | May 19, 2003 4:16 AM
This essay kind of reminds me of the show "Penn & Teller: Bullshit". They spend each show using (gasp!) science, logic, and facts to debunk modern myths. Psychics, UFOs, near death experiences, eco-scares, second-hand smoke, all kinds of stuff. It's a great show, and funny as hell because they don't use the same restraint that Bill does when dealing with lying manipulative scumbags.
Posted by: MacBeth | May 19, 2003 5:03 AM
Wow. This was the best read I have had in months. Thanks. I'm passing the link to all my friends.
Posted by: ErnieB | May 19, 2003 5:28 AM
Excellent points all.
I especially liked the comparison of magical belief to irrational belief and reference to Sagan's importance (no matter his liberal and sometimes preachly tone) in developing a new generation of critical thinkers.
Anyone who liked this might also enjoy sci-fi author David Brin's essays on Star Wars and Lord of the Rings where he Fisks their Romantisized views.
The essays are available online at www.davidbrin.com.
Posted by: Jessica | May 19, 2003 6:15 AM
Very enjoyable read Mr. Whittle. Its always good to hear a balanced view from the Muggles.
Moore really seems to have hit the jackpot with his film though, now doesn't he? His newfound global success, enormous clout, and gigantic wallet obviously rankle with those of you who’ve been angrily trying and failing at the “Greed is good, screw the hippie tree-lovers” thing for years.
For the sake of argument: as far as misdirection and trickery goes, how about these - WMD in Iraq, direct links between Bin Laden and Hussein, the concept of a clean war, a precision bomb, an axis of evil, a free press, restoring law and order in Baghdad (not to mention getting gasoline back in the pumps) and the systematic demonizing of the UN, France, Russia, China and Germany. Clearly Republicans are magicians too!
There’s still a little work to be done on the old “turn the economy around” trick though, unfortunately.
As far as old Mike is concerned, none of HIS deception involves killing people and, for your information, making successful films is just the beginning of his magical talents – I have it on good authority he also can make a family pack of Twinkies disappear in the blink of an eye.
Posted by: Harry Potter | May 19, 2003 6:17 AM
Another fantastic essay, Mr Whittle. Kepp 'em comming. When is the book out, by the way?
Posted by: Ed | May 19, 2003 6:18 AM
Bill;
Hope you don't mind; I'm going send a bunch of SF-writer wannabes to this essay.
Posted by: Mark Alger | May 19, 2003 6:23 AM
Good essay. Faith in something is wonderful, but probably not the best way to run a government.
Posted by: Steve | May 19, 2003 6:26 AM
Excellent,but "*silicone*, nickel and iron," as in "Journey to the Implants of the Earth"? And in "the cleaner all of it's industries become," that should be "its"
Posted by: Chris | May 19, 2003 6:29 AM
Bill,
As always, a very well-written essay that makes you think. I love reading your work... I only have one problem with it - it's too damn short!
Seriously. "Magic" should have gone on a bit more, I think!
Thank you Bill.
Steve
Posted by: Steve | May 19, 2003 6:34 AM
Bill,
I don't have a link handy. I was involved in a long LONG discussion on this on GEnie (back before it imploded) and there were a number of interesting links posted, but accessing those is rather difficult these days.
I'll take a look around (including peering through my archives) and see if I can come up with something current.
Posted by: Gary Utter | May 19, 2003 6:45 AM
Great essay, as usual, but the one question I have is why didn't you include Moore's butchering of Heston's several NRA speeches in your laundry list of errors in "Bowling"? To me, the way Moore edits these speeches and totally lies beyond all comprehension is the worst peice of moviemaking I've even seen.
Posted by: Johnny Ginter | May 19, 2003 7:03 AM
Bravo Mr. Whittle; overall an excellent essay. In particular I'd like to thank you for the rational deconstruction of our favorite irrational target, Mr. Moore. You provided more details into how Moore wanted to "prove" his thesis (and what that thesis was) than any other debunker I've read. Most of them attack his examples and ignore the thesis, and I was having a problem understanding why anyone (even lefties) would buy into his stagecraft. Since I will only see that movie if I can arrange to not pay for it--sorry, I can't bring myself to support him in any way--I thank you for putting to rest the only remaining curiosity I had about the film.
Posted by: Steve Gigl | May 19, 2003 7:32 AM
Bill:
Another incredible essay (envy, envy, envy,...)
You want to see another example of sleight of hand and misdirection? Do you have the RealMedia player? Go look at this: rtsp://rnd31sea.activate.net/am/content/video/hi/20030516-053817r508.rm (cut and paste it.)
I understand that CNN caught so much flak over it that they'll be issuing a retraction tonight (5/19) between 5 and 7 PM, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Posted by: Kevin Baker | May 19, 2003 7:35 AM
Good essay, Bill. You expressed something I've felt for years and years but never managed to articulate nearly as well.
And thanks to Howard E. Morseburg- 'Blivet' is the best nickname for Moore that I've ever seen.
Posted by: rosignol | May 19, 2003 7:46 AM
Very good article, the one thing I would query is that when you described your rampage against coloured people, you're talking about your own personal feelings and generalising from a sample size of 1.
There was a study a year or so ago that sent out thousands of job applications, some with white sounding names, some with black, all with the same levels of education/experience. The number of responses the black names got was far lower than the white names. (I believe it was around 50%).
Sadly racism does exist in the US (and elsewhere) and while it's nowhere near as widespread as it used to be, it's still far too widespread.
Other than that, very good (although as Jessica points out the conservatives are just as guilty as the liberals).
Posted by: Andrew Ducker | May 19, 2003 7:47 AM
Darnit, just realised that the name goes underneath - the post is by "Harry Potter" not Jessica.
Posted by: Andrew Ducker | May 19, 2003 7:48 AM
Love the work in the essay. I actually had thought about trying to find the show and see it only to find the only location showing it is in Pasadena. My feeling is, if I'm going to go to Pasadena, it will be for something better than to see some of this idiot's work,like letting my daughter visit an old friend who lives there.
I only wish we could deconstruct all the copies of Moore's schlockumentary. Then we would have definitely benefitted in Arts in America.
Sapper Mike
Posted by: Sapper Mike | May 19, 2003 8:10 AM
Its silicon, the element, not silicone, the boob-enhancing man-made element, that makes up large amounts of the earth's crust and so forth.
Posted by: Tim | May 19, 2003 8:12 AM
Um -- Andrew Ducker, the "rampage against coloured people" (no racism in you, eh? Mr. Whittle did not use that expression) was satire. Go to the back of the class.
And to Bill: the Planetarium, eh? Tell me you weren't responsible for the Pink Floyd laser shows. ;)
Posted by: Andrea Harris | May 19, 2003 8:12 AM
And another thing, you make a common (flawed) analogy to dispel the Aleins visited Earth and maybe crashed their spaceship into a ranch in New Mexico theory.
Taking a digital watch back 100 years and asking a Swiss watchmaker to reverse engineer it would be pointless.
However since his time we have a very far reaching understanding of Physics (which started early LAST century), materials, chemicals, radiation, astrophyisics and more.
There are some gaps like grand unified field theory bringing Einstein's universe together with Quantum Phyisics, but hey we solved Fermat's last theorm for pete's sake! We are no Swiss watch makers as in your analogy.
Are we as advanced as what may have been aliens crashing? No. However I assume even Aliens have to follow ALL rules of physics and even silly things like gravity, inertia and so forth when a machine of their breaks down or gets jammed up by say hitting a fast moving object.
Would a spacecraft be indestructable AND capable of generating tremendous energies required for FTL travel (by any means)? Probably not. The Space Shuttle was designed to survive tremendous forces and temperatures and yet a small bit of foam hitting the ceramic tiles on the underside of the left wing caused a breach that ultimately destroyed the craft on reentry. So was the Space Shuttle underengineered or was it a fluke of circumstances that caused the accident?
All I am saying is that we understand a lot about the Universe, but we don't know how much we still don't know.
Things I have experienced lead me to believe conciousness exists above our reality in some way and can persist beyond "death" of a phyisical body. Quantum Phyisics is fiding more and more that this in fact true. What other elements of legend and myth will also turn out to be true (in some form)?
Reality is simply that, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.
Posted by: Tim | May 19, 2003 8:25 AM
Another fine one, Bill.
You'll be in my 'Best of the Web" links at the Blog of Xanadu (http://blog.garageofxanadu.com)again.
J
Posted by: J. Fielek | May 19, 2003 8:31 AM
Lord of the Rings: Return of the King
My choice for Best Documentary in 2004.
Posted by: Rip Rowan | May 19, 2003 8:34 AM
The problem with Moore is not that he believes in magic. I don't think he does. I don't think he believes in anything and he thinks it's really cool that he can say anything he wants and the stupid masses will make him a millionaire. He's just a hypocrite and liar and nihilist.
As for "Harry Potter" - speaking of magic! - if he doesn't think magical thinking kills people, I refer him to Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Saddam and every other mystical dictator in history.
Posted by: Robert Speirs | May 19, 2003 8:41 AM
You forgot to mention that the Pyramids were built by Aliens and that the Aztecs were able to communicate with them and other such groundbreaking discoveries explained to us by crackpo... er geniuses of our time.
Most people I've talked about Bowling for Columbine said something along the lines "That guy is self-righteous ego-inflatting windbag"
All in all another fine essay from Bill Whittle
Posted by: Miha Samsa | May 19, 2003 8:43 AM
And another thing. I saw the Phoenix lights, the first time.
Yes it had happened several years before the "parachute flares" event. Last time I check flares on parachutes eventually come to earth, they do not fly in formation OVER a city and then OVER a mountain.
The ridiculous parachute flares theory is about as absurd as the government's recent claim that the Roswell incident involved a flight test dummy (which weren't even USED at the time of the Roswell incident) instead of the weather balloon pieces theory (yeah weather balloons often crash into hillsides with a debris field scattered over several hundred yards. Right).
I saw a V-formation of red lights. No birds flapping their wings, no flashing wingtip lights of any aircraft. Just a V-formation of red lights moving south and then west over South Mountain. This was also at dusk, the Sun had gone down but it was still very much light out.
Later that night a TV news report showed a few single-engine aircraft flying in formation, with tons of flashing lights that looked NOTHING like what I saw. Yeah that was really waht I saw, dumbasse news people.
Ugh. I hate disbelievers who think I couldn't POSSIBLY have seen what I did because hey YOU are the faunt of all human knowledge and YOU can't think of a way to travel faster than light (FTL) which means there are no aliens or ghosts or leprechauns. Just people with overactive imaginations. Right. Sure.
The next time a dead relative calls my name I will reply back "You couldn't possibly be real, its all in my imagination. People smarter than me SAY SO!"
Posted by: Tim | May 19, 2003 8:44 AM