OJBs Web Site: Blog Page

Note: You are currently viewing my old web site. There is a new version with most of this content at OJB.NZ.
The new site is being updated, uses modern techniques, has higher quality media, and has a mobile-friendly version.
This old site will stay on-line for a while, but maybe not indefinitely. Please update your bookmarks. Thanks.

Add a Comment (Go Up to OJB's Blog Page)

An Alternative World

Entry 978, on 2009-03-31 at 19:58:21 (Rating 3, Comments)

I listen to a lot of podcasts and podcasted radio programs as well as keeping up with the general news in other forms, especially on the internet. I also read conventional newspapers a bit although not as much as I used to. I could survive without "conventional" news sources like newspapers, TV and radio quite easily, as long as I could get the news through the web, including video, and get the in-depth material from podcasts. I also use selected blogs to get an alternative perspective on the news.

I don't go out of my way to get a particular perspective on the news. In fact I deliberately subscribe to information sources which are contrary to my usual philosophy. For example, I subscribe to a podcast which supports paranormal explanations of phenomena I would usually be skeptical of, and I subscribe to a newsletter from our libertarian, right wing political party here in New Zealand.

The thing I notice is that the skeptical and scientific sources seem to agree with the general sources on the controversial topics I am interested in. For example, I never hear a podcast or news bulletin or read an article in any mainstream source which even remotely treats evolution as anything except a fact. And the same applies to global warming although I do recognise there is a bit more debate about that.

Its not just that the news sources I use have a bias towards the status quo because I see plenty of debate on subjects like American policy in the Middle East, environmental issues, and other areas of controversy. So what is really happening is that there really is no controversy in areas like evolution and global warming because they have been proven to any reasonable person's satisfaction.

The thing that I often wonder is how do unreasonable people feel about these issues? Creationists must hear constant discussion of evolution without the slightest indication that there is any doubt about its veracity. What do they do then? Maybe they just switch off or maybe they just don't listen to any information source which is likely to support evolution. Of course, that would be almost all of them!

In fact I do see a trend amongst people who believe nutty things: people like creationists, global warming deniers, for example. They all have their own "alternative world" where their pseudoscientific and illogical beliefs are discussed in the same way as factual science is discussed in the "real world". In other words they can listen to their own false material and pretend its just as relevant as the scientific and mainstream stuff I listen to.

This material often takes the form of paper and electronic newsletters from groups pushing a particular agenda, tv and radio news programs which treat their own controversial opinions as if they were true, blogs written by extreme nutters who deliberately warp the truth, and discussion amongst friends and family with the same baseless views as them.

But who's to say that I'm not equally deluded? I admit I mainly use scientific sources so aren't I getting my material from sources which are just as biased as theirs? Well no, because as I said above, I deliberately access contrary views to my own (and that can be really painful) and I also use mainstream sources (especially newspapers like the New Zealand Herald and the BBC, and radio like Radio New Zealand National).

If I suddenly noticed these mainstream sources treating creationism or global warming denial seriously I would certainly have to reconsider my conclusions on those subjects. And that's another difference. I have no emotional attachment to any particular belief. If evolution turned out to be untrue that would be fascinating because we would then have to start on a whole new theory. And if global warming turned out to be untrue I would be really happy because then we wouldn't be facing the potentially disastrous future we are now.

It would be so easy to pretend that we are god's special creation and we go to heaven when we die, and that global warming isn't true and we can just carry on the way we are, but I think its more important to face cold, hard reality than a convenient fantasy - no matter how nice that fantasy might be!

There are no comments for this entry.

You can leave comments about this entry using this form.

To add a comment: enter a name and email (both optional), type the number shown above, enter a comment, then click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.