Who is More Often Right On Controversial Topics, the Majority or a Minority?

24 Feb 2016
Users 5
11 Sep 2016
TE reply 0 reply 0


Proofs - PRO To Topic
Test Statements for Probability Testing
Refutations - CON To Topic
Proofs - PRO to Topic
Refutations - CON to Topic
Test Statements for Probability Testing

Related Topics

Our cognitions are Evolved to maximize Darwinian fitness, not factuality
Gustav LeBon The Crowd (1895)
The majority is always wrong when it comes to high-performance because they think inside the box
Top 10 list of scientific retractions in 2018
OPCW refutation of whistleblowers reports
Full rebuttal by whistleblowers of OPCW report
All the professional managers and scouts in baseball before 2002 were radically misvaluing players
Editor asks 41 submitted papers for raw data. 40 of the papers withdraw.
The minority often hold their belief because rationality demands it. Other reasons are less likely because opposing the majority is costly.
This is evidently true even of credentialed experts. Medicine provides an example where propaganda wins the crowd.
The chemical weapons attacks in Syria were actually perpetrated by the rebels we were backing and were false flags
CIA director William Casey said ""We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false"
Evidence for fake news and fake facts and censorship of true facts
The great majority of people assume without foundation that when a majority confronts a minority, the majority is much more likely right
The Majority Do Not Think It Through, But Trust the Majority. Circular. Conflicting Forces Influence Crowds More than Rationality.
The Majority is Often Wrong, Even When They Are Credentialed and Widely Admired
There has been incredible Progress in Quality and Length of Life, Surely Humanity is Getting Something Right
Even so we would be much better off but for crowd confusion on controversial topics. Progress we all agree on is being held back.
Probably, but that doesn't refute the statement.
If we all agreed, wouldn't the majority be right?
pro incoming statement to root node
con incoming statement to root node
Apparently, Pi=4 For Motion
Possibly Explainable By Skidding As It Makes the Turn
second con incoming statement
pro outgoing reply to root node
con outgoing reply to root node
This is a very valid point
Almost everything except select sciences is fake
NASA's NEOWISE project appears to be fraudulent
US government's accusations against Russia are all demonstrable lies
The placebo effect is fake
The scientific literature on vaccines says pretty much the opposite of what the media and government agencies say it says
NOAA's historical temperatures are fake
In some areas of academia spoof papers get published
Cargo cult science is common as pointed out by Richard P Feynman because in many areas 'scientists' and other 'experts' ignore all evidence contradicting their pet theory
21 out of 23 Harvard graduates confidently gave the wrong answer when asked why winter is colder
Only about half of the most famous experiments in psychology can be replicated
Much of the Internet is fake
experts who should know say much of the medical literature is fake
57 bizarre fake news reports about Russia gate that were retracted or debunked
Japan government admits that half the economic statistics they publish are fake news
Politically correct implies factually incorrect
Fake white hate crimes against blacks have become a thing
The majority form decisions based on their own self-interests and idealogy.
They could never get away with a deception on this scale
This is a fundamental misconception
CIA director William Casey said ''We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false'

It is fitter for a caste  such as pharmaceutical directors, or doctors, to maximize profit than maximize truth.  We are evolved to consciously believe what is fitter,   rather than the truth,  so that we can lie more effectively.  Why would you assume truth is our objective? 

“The inferior reasoning of crowds is based, just as is the reasoning of a high order, on the association of ideas, but between the ideas associated by crowds there are only apparent bonds of analogy or succession. The mode of reasoning of crowds resembles that of the Esquimaux who, knowing from experience that ice, a transparent body, melts in the mouth, concludes that glass, also a transparent body, should also melt in the mouth…
The characteristics of the reasoning of crowds are the association of dissimilar things possessing a merely apparent connection between each other, and the immediate generalization of particular cases. It is arguments of this kind that are always presented to crowds by those who know how to manage them. They are the only arguments by which crowds are to be influenced. A chain of logical argumentation is totally incomprehensible to crowds…



All innovation takes place outside the box, hence when it comes to high-performance, the majority is always wrong. this is explicated in a very amusing Ted talk here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNGFep6rncY

This is meant as further evidence, not as a self-contained proof. I had no idea there was so much fraud in the scientific literature until recently. 







Back in the 1970s,  Bill James started self-publishing  his baseball abstract,  which drew a wide audience,  and offered statistical arguments that professional managers and scouts in major league baseball, in spite of all the money involved,  were radically misvaluing players  and strategies. For example they were paying no attention to walks, which clearly are important in run production, and were paying attention to likely irrelevant questions like how pretty the player's girlfriend was.  James' books,  in spite of their wide fan following and clearly evidence-based rational arguments,  had essentially no impact on professional baseball strategy until Billy Beane  employed them to take the wildly underfunded Oakland Athletics to the World Series. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneyball  

The next year the highly funded Boston Red Sox hired Bill James as a strategist, and it is now generally acknowledged that he was right.  the statistics he developed,  and later extensions of them,  are  general quoted today and used to judge baseball players.

If all the professionals in baseball could be so misguided for 30 years after  publication of rational arguments showing they were wrong,  imagine how misguided many other business decisions must be. 


Editor asks 41 submitted papers for raw data.  40 of the papers withdraw. 



While the majority holds their belief because the others do, the minority needs a good reason. Going with the majority is not only easy and intuitive, but also one frequently faces social stigma or worse for taking the minority side. In cases where the majority side coincides with some financial reward, such as funding, one may also forfeit this reward in taking the minority position. 

Before you even go to look at the arguments for and against, the more opprobium heaped on dissenters from the conventional wisdom, the more they must either be rationally correct, or directly on someone's payroll. In my experience, the direct payroll more often captures the majority side, leaving the minority to stand up for rationality. 

For example, if you don't want to vaccinate your children, in most states it's hard to send them to school. Also other parents who know about it will disinvite them from birthday parties.  Also your mother-in-law is likely to be frantic.  If you're a scientist who wants to speak out against the climate change consensus or GMO's, you can look around and see other examples who lost funding in that way. 


This is evidently true even of credentialed experts. For example, few Doctors have ever read the scientific literature pertinent to vaccines, and according to a CDC expert they get about 1/2 a day of training on vaccines in medical school, so they are as subject to group think and interest group capture as anyone else. In the words of Le Bon, they are a "Caste".

“The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.”  – Arnold Seymour Relman (1923-2014), Harvard Professor of Medicine and Former Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal http://www.commercialalert.org/relmanangell.pdf   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12561803   

 Only at most 40% of medical practice is supported by science according to all the surveys of which I'm aware cf the following:

John S Garrow  BMJ. 2007 Nov 10; 335(7627): 951.doi:10.1136/bmj.39388.393970.1F PMCID: PMC2071976 What to do about CAM?: How much of orthodox medicine is evidence based? http://www.dcscience.net/garrow-evidence-bmj.pdf  

http://www.fas.org/ota/reports/7805.pdf   Assessing the Efficacy and Safety of Medical Technologies, Office of Technology Assessment, Congress of the United States (1978)

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=101041    Jeannette Ezzo, Barker Bausell, Daniel E. Moerman, Brian Berman and Victoria Hadhazy (2001). REVIEWING THE REVIEWS . International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 17, pp 457-466.

 http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/x/index.html   BMJ Clinical Evidence  

 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-larry-dossey/the-mythology-of-science_b_412475.html   Larry Dossey, Deepak Chopra, Rustum Roy, The Mythology Of Science-Based Medicine

S. A. Greenberg, "How citation distortions create unfounded authority: analysis of a citation network", BMJ 2009;339:b2680 http://www.bmj.com/content/339/bmj.b2680  

 Syria never had any motivation in the slightest to use chemical weapons which would only bring US into the war against them.  False flag attacks  backed by the US I have been going on for at least six years now. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2320223/UN-accuses-Syrian-rebels-carrying-sarin-gas-attacks-blamed-Assads-troops.html

The latest leaked document confirms they're still going on:


 and another leaked email confirms the official story was baloney: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7718627/Sexed-dossier-furore-alleged-poison-gas-attack-Assad.html

New WikiLeaks show 20 UN inspectors dissent  from US picture. https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/new-wikileaks-bombshell-20-inspectors-dissent-syria-chemical-attack-narrative

Here's another clear hoax, child simply reading from a script on CNN: https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/the-bana-alabed-psy-op-proves-the-west-is-saturated-in-war-propaganda-74c66df02990

These are war crimes being committed by the US deep state.


CIA director William Casey said "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false".



For anybody still doesn't realize the news is fake, ABC just admitted they used two-year-old gun range video as a pretend Kurdish " slaughter” https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/abc-news-busted-using-gun-range-footage-report-turkish-slaughter-kurdish-civilians 


Here's an example where the New York Times printed a fake story, Trump called them on it, they then doubled down claiming they had a tape supporting their account, the media double down supporting them, but the tape does not support their account. You can hear it for yourself at this link: http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/28/media-double-down-after-new-york-times-gets-busted-peddling-fake-news/?fbclid=IwAR11tWkucCWKcEWsIfpsVJOBf93gg_Pz0l3u7uvs25Mt6TKybXXsIEacu-A#.Wwwds_s3qPt.facebook

The news has been fake for a long time. Thomas Jefferson talked about the problem. 

:It's not just America. Here's an example discussing fictitious stories about Assange by the Guardian: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-06/guardians-reputation-tatters-after-forger-revealed-have-co-authored-assange-smear  The top reporter at der Spiegel just resigned after admitting he had made up at least 14 stories out of whole cloth. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-19/spiegel-journalist-who-faked-stories-committed-journalistic-fraud-grand-scale .  In 2016 a top  German journalist quit saying the news was all fake, "we are all paid by the CIA". https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-28/top-german-journalist-admits-mainstream-media-completely-fake-we-all-lie-cia ;;

Here's a discussion from back in 2016 of 25 fake stories: https://ivn.us/2016/11/21/25-fake-news-stories-mainstream-media/

Here's a collection of times where the media in lockstep ran with obvious fake stories about trump when they were negative, and ignored facts favoring him. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-02-17/montage-mainstream-media-spreading-fake-smollett-maga-country-news


But while the media often prints fabricated stories, probably the more important way in which they lie is by ignoring important stories they don't like. Here's the discussion of the media ignoring the Obama administration shutting down an investigation into Hezbollah money laundering.  https://nypost.com/2017/12/21/a-deafening-media-silence-on-the-obama-hezbollah-scandal/?fbclid=IwAR33WWTsdDk0ndbMQgFh8mFlowxJLF9oZTWZIDrtr0oKymsejNU6HkndmIY 

Here's a discussion (from a somewhat left-wing perspective) of 10 major stories of the media refused to cover: https://www.boulderweekly.com/news/censored-ten-big-stories-the-news-media-ignored/

The media just gave blaring front page coverage around the world to a mosque shooting in New Zealand, but they completely ignore the fact that last year more than 4000 Christians were murdered in faith related killings. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-18/why-does-mainstream-media-purposely-ignore-mass-killings-christians-across-globe


Here's a discussion  (from a somewhat right-wing perspective) of 12 entirely disjoint stories in 2017 that the media refused to cover:  https://www.dailywire.com/news/25183/12-major-stories-2017-media-buried-forgot-or-ryan-saavedra 

One of the stories listed there in that last link was the Las Vegas shooting. But the story got considerably worse when in 2018 the  Nevada Supreme Court forced the police to publish the 911 calls and the officers cameras video and it became completely clear the authorities were lying about what transpired, and nobody in the media covered it at all With the exception of Laura Loomer who was shortly thereafter banned for life by twitter. https://www.lauraloomer.us/blog/exclusive-new-vegas-shooting-sergeant-statement-challenges-lvmpd-single-shooter-narrative?fbclid=IwAR30DKmKPUMKcGmvhXspgaFnIJy_z60R1c2jcVztcD-OLTFT9EjOg_NnmBk 

 My personal favorite was the complete media whitewash of the senior CDC scientist whistleblower who  testified that he and fellow CDC researchers found data showing a huge increase in autism among black children who had MMR before three years old and the CDC's response was to cover it up. He testified that they called a meeting to shred the data, and he kept the data, and he supplied it to the Congress. He had emails between him and the head of CDC confirming his testimony. The media completely whitewashed it. The media gets a huge fraction of their advertising revenue from big Pharma and apparently has no interest in crossing them.

Also amusing that FBI and CIA sources told the Washington Post that they didn't believe  a key claim in  the Steele dossier but the Washington Post withheld that bit of information. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-16/fbi-cia-told-wapo-they-doubted-key-allegation-steele-dossier 

 This censorship is not just American either. Today's story, big protests in Sweden are ignored completely by Swedish mainstream media. https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/12/it-is-time-to-bring-out-our-inner-vikings-swedes-start-protesting-against-mass-migration-in-front-of-parliament/


 it's obvious by now that there is a  near unanimous action by many major corporations including tech companies such as Facebook, twitter, Google,  PayPal, etc. to shut down alternative viewpoints to that of the left. Here for example is Twitter suspending Alex Jones for past violations three days after testifying to Congress that he had no past violations of their terms of service. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-07/twitter-exposes-its-politically-motivated-censorship-policy-banning-alex-jones-0?fbclid=IwAR3LczwDzIHFL8mLaZvqmnsOtRrzto-K3aADvAFEFqYiU_AO-_ycBaKp144

Here's Twitter admitting that they shadow banned  tweet by the cofounder of the Federalist Society containing testimony of Lisa page to the U.S. Congress. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-18/twitter-admits-shadowbanning-lisa-page-tweet-federalist-co-founder-keep-people-safe


Here's hidden video of Twitter employees discussing shadow banning conservatives: https://www.projectveritas.com/video/hidden-camera-twitter-engineers-to-ban-a-way-of-talking-through-shadow-banning/

Here's a whistleblower giving internal documents from Facebook showing complex programs written specifically to censor right. https://twitter.com/Project_Veritas/status/1100766671520841728

 here's a recent report by the Wall Street Journal: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/how-google-interferes-its-search-algorithms-and-changes-your-results-bombshell-wsj-report

Conservatives or people opposed to the deep state often report their followers start vanishing overnight or people can't reach them or the views on their videos strangely go down. Here is  Sharyl Attkinson remarketing that her video about a court date to sue the deep state for hacking her computer dropped from 20,000 views to 2000 views in a day: https://twitter.com/SharylAttkisson/status/1073769768883232769 ;;;;;;;;;;

95% of suspended prominent users on Twitter were trump supporters. https://quillette.com/2019/02/12/it-isnt-your-imagination-twitter-treats-conservatives-more-harshly-than-liberals/

 Part of the reason for this may be, as is shown by leaked documents, that Soros hired media matters to lobby for such a collusive restraint on free speech. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-26/soros-role-social-media-censorship-exposed-leaked-document?fbclid=IwAR3D5fWTS7Fm11YihHfpEPfr9UIRjeJDW029i2wYmUBvvM8sIs_JETx6654

 They aren't doing this because they think rational argument is on their side, And it is costing them lots of money since they are losing much of their audience and many of their free content providers and in PayPal's case for example simple fees from popular websites.https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-26/soros-role-social-media-censorship-exposed-leaked-document?fbclid=IwAR3D5fWTS7Fm11YihHfpEPfr9UIRjeJDW029i2wYmUBvvM8sIs_JETx6654

Here's internal documents from Facebook published by the New York Times showing how political bias is affecting censorship by the company. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-29/facebook-engineers-stunning-admission-we-tear-down-posters-welcoming-trump?fbclid=IwAR2eU4K4BFtmstxqDrSZu9wDq18JREFIEjg0FG7YVBkb77MGl-GguVLm4C8

Here is Facebook purging hundreds of  Conservative accounts with millions of followers. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-11/facebook-purges-over-800-accounts-millions-followers-including-conservative-meme?fbclid=IwAR2uRog0ep9QE2eeu71BEfi20lQfy6QaWxVNcLNqNzL96cp2BShrJoXidyQ

Here is Google telling you that the top five  "American inventors" and 10 of the top 12 are black. The Wright brothers don't make their top 50 list. https://www.unz.com/isteve/great-moments-in-google-american-inventors/?fbclid=IwAR07hBbsYZ-7zqYGNhSae8J_-wKsaztbsQo0B3820Kxqr7ER2iKd_g4PsM8

Here's Google internal documents showing they discussed warping search rankings based on an ideology: https://dailycaller.com/2018/11/29/google-censorship-conservative-media/

Here's Google internal documents showing they have ideological blacklist and whitelist for YouTube rankings in search. The lists were and edited although CEO Pinchar  testified under oath to Congress that they never hand manipulated search results. https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/01/16/google-youtube-search-blacklist-smoking-gun/ ;;;;;;

 here's Google warping auto complete: http://www.unz.com/isteve/google-is-micro-gaslighting-again/



Here's evidence that the official line  on the Skripal case in which the British government accused Russia of using neurotoxins to poison a couple within Britain is fictional. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-05/russias-alleged-skripal-assassins-caught-breaking-laws-physics?fbclid=IwAR1WyvgHFFwBegGODq70c1AU9SVcVzvldgjtl3KuwrVy6obxbWvhsr7iyac




Most people assume implicitly that when a majority is on one side and a minority on the other, the majority is right, especially when it is a credentialled majority.

This assumption is without foundation and circular.

Since they are all mostly espousing the view because everybody else is, the fact that a view is held by a majority provides no actual evidence it is correct. It's circular reasoning. You might think the crowd would be biased to correct views, but on the other hand they are also subject to propaganda by interested parties, and to positive reinforcement and conflict of interest. A crowd of experts is particularly likely to face diverging calls for rationality and the higher profit alternative decision, and who will argue a priori that rationality is more likely to win out in a complex system like a crowd? Positive reinforcement can work purely unconsciously. The situation is still worse for complex subjects like vaccination or climate science where understanding truth requires following long complicated processes of reasoning.  As Le Bon pointed out in 1895, Crowds are incapable of following logical chains of reasoning.


For controversial topics, the majority is at least as often wrong as right when confronted with a minority view, even or perhaps especially when the large majority including most highly educated people thinks skeptics are idiots.


   There has been incredible progress in quality and length of life, surely humanity is getting something right

Technology, and the benefits of the marketplace have advanced humankind greatly at least in material terms.
Medicine appears to be an excellent example. How can we have crowdthink?
But it seems likely from the vaccine diagrams here that vaccines are highly iatrogenic and from other evidence that fluoride in the water is iatrogenic and that chemotherapy is iatrogenic and etc. The evidence that vaccines contributed significantly to the decline of diseases, when examined, also looks shaky.  See http://truthsift.com/search_view?topic=The-Evidence-Is-Weak-That-Vaccines-Have-Saved-More-Lives-than-They-Have-Cost--&id=520 , but unvaccinated and vaccinated diseases both declined, and have both made comebacks together in different times and locations such as 1990's former soviet union and 2015 UK, so common causes seem likely. Nutrition and Sanitation come to mind. Not only that, but surveys by the BMJ and the Cochrane and the Office of Technology, US Congress, show that less than 40% of medical practice is backed by science.

But then this suggests it is quite plausible we would be even much healthier if, for example, vaccines had never been invented.  This is offered as an example to prove that the fact of Progress does not imply crowd sense.

I expect there are lots of things we all agree on, without even thinking about the subject, because its so non-contentious.
But that doesn't make the claim that there has been a lot of progress inconsistent with the claim the majority are often wrong. If you view the body of The topic statement, you will see it explicitly discusses the case when there is contention.

If we all agreed on the thing that was correct, wouldn't the majority be correct in that case? 

remajkadad asdsad
this is negative.

That the majority is often wrong should be established by a careful examination of a number of cases, and TruthSift is providing that. The vaccine graphs are a good example.

However, I've just seen something that blew my mind, so I'm posting it here as an independent proof, hoping somebody out there will debunk this one.
The most entertaining conspiracy theorist out there is Miles W. Mathis, who has written up alternative interpretations of a large number of historical events, and also done some alternative science. If there was one claim of Mathis you were going to single out as particularly bizarre, it might have been his claim that pi = 4 for circular motion. I never even bothered to read his papers on it, its so bizarre (the usual way popular delusions are maintained is people refusing to look at the contradictory evidence raised by debunkers.) However, his associate has now posted a Youtube video of a simple table top experiment that seems to demonstrate conclusively he is right. 2 balls are prepared rolling at the same speed down tubes. One tube is bent into a circle. In the time the ball goes around the circle, the other ball is seen to go a distance 4D, not 3.1415D. Its very elegant, and quite contradictory to what I was taught in physics class.


When the ball makes the turn onto the circular section, its rotational axis has to change from horizontal to something nearer vertical. It has been suggested that this process causes skidding, and thus slowing of the ball. To rule this out, it is essential that they measure the speed of the ball on a straightaway after it makes the turn.

They have agreed to do so (see comments on Youtube vid), but we haven't seen the results yet.

asd sadsa dsadsada
ad sad sadsad asd asdsa
ad sad sadsadasdsadsa
asd sad sad sad sa dsada

The news is mostly fake. The climate data is fake. Vaccines are a fraud. Economics is largely fake, supporting certain interests. Most events where there are prominent conspiracy theories, one of them is right. (There are often many competing ones partly due to efforts to obscure the situation.)



The claims about Magnitsky are lies. He wasn't a whistleblower, and he wasn't beaten to death in jail. ( In addition a documentary telling what actually happened was banned in the US and Europe. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-06/martin-armstrong-why-has-magnitsky-film-been-banned-usa-europe?fbclid=IwAR0JmaC9_p1XGBr471LrvAT4VZNCkC4Ep-Ao6_IYibGLU4b7bVKKz-p-Elk )

 Russia didn't steal Crimea. The US promoted a fascist coup against the democratically elected government in the Ukraine and Crimea refused to go along. One result: the newly installed US government promptly quadrupled the national debt and cut the GDP by 40%.

 Russia didn't fix the US election.

 All of this is demonstrable and demonstrated (with further links) at https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-24/zuesse-all-us-govt-accusations-against-russias-govt-are-lies

Here is video of Pinchai, Google's CEO, testifying under oath to Congress that "the full extent"  of Russia  involvement in the 2016 election with Google  Was spending $4700: https://sputniknews.com/us/201812111070598758-full-extent-russian-meddling-4700-google/ ;(by contrast according to the New York Times a Democrat paid $100,000 to conduct a false flag smearing the Republican Senate candidate in Alabama for having (faked) Russian support. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-20/democrats-orchestrated-elaborate-false-flag-operation-posing-russian-bots-during .)

Here is Putin saying he knows very well who wants to rule the world and it's not Russia. Russia spends $47 billion a year on defense compared to the US spending $700 billion a year. Russia's population is 1/4 that of Europe and less than half that of the US. https://www.rt.com/news/447063-putin-russia-us-rule-world/

It's also clear that MH – 17 was shot down by the Ukrainians not the Russians as is detailed with extensive evidence and links here: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-01/mh17-turnabout-ukraines-guilt-now-proven



The placebo effect is a sham. At best it occurs only for self-reported symptoms like pain and then only when there is a continuous gradation like one through 10. The original paper on which it is based,  which has been cited thousands of times, was based on a review of 15 other studies, and misrepresented them. Sure some patients got better given a placebo, but some got worse and it ignored this.  Patients often get better on their own without a placebo, except sometimes they get worse. It was either a fraud, or cognitive bias. Doctors like the idea of the placebo effect because it gives them license to do randomized control trials without worrying about ethical issues involving the patient's given placebos and thus not treated. They also like it because they have treated patients with placebos for hundreds of years, when they didn't have anything useful to give the patient so the patient would be upset that the doctor charged the money without doing anything. This is all discussed clearly here: https://medium.com/the-mission/the-placebo-effect-is-a-lie-61a26df35aae

 here is a  Scientific American discussion of a modern study that found no benefit to the placebo effect: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/study-finds-placebo-effec/


The scientific literature on vaccines says pretty much the opposite of what the media and government agencies say it says. This is an interesting case because it is so verifiable: all you have to do is read the scientific literature or looked at the relevant truthsift diagrams. See the following diagrams for verification:





Incidentally while a lot of the fake vaccine boosting   you see may be simply delusional, much of it is based on corrupt practices as documented here: https://www.infowars.com/report-gov-pronouncements-of-vaccine-safety-based-on-corrupt-practices/?fbclid=IwAR3K_-xt8MrcdKLrnmWXPBJCcciluuj5ajnnoXWxbWO8I0w7J_AgxpNB4Bg


NOAA is revising historical temperatures downward and modern temperatures upward to make it seem like there is warming. https://truthsift.com/search_view?topic=&id=502&nid1=5211&nid2=6756&fs=0

 they also put their temperature stations and ridiculous spots which nobody sensible would think would give an accurate reading of the temperature. https://truthsift.com/search_view?topic=&id=502&nid1=5211&nid2=6464&fs=0

The first independent audit of the main temperature data founded riddled with errors favoring the global warming hypothesis. For example various temperatures are 25°C higher than plausible. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/11/bombshell-audit-of-global-warming-data-finds-it-riddled-with-errors/

Similar shenanigans are going on in Australia: https://www.dailywire.com/news/19211/global-warming-hoax-exposed-australia-weather-john-nolte

 and Italy (see attached photo of temperature station enrollment report where it is not only surrounded by tarmac but regularly jet washed).

 Hundred years ago Antarctic explorers were disembarking from their ice  breakers: hundreds of miles further south than modern icebreakers can reach today. The first verified Overland trip to the North Pole is not till 1968 because many dozens of previous expeditions dog sleds had to turn back after hitting open water. These historical facts seem harder to fake than NOAAs temperature record.

Tony Heller gives a 50 minute talk where he walks through historical temperature data including photographs of newspaper articles as well as scientific publications and the official data and shows beyond reasonable doubt that they are fudging it by increasing current temperatures and decreasing historical temperatures. The US was much warmer in the 1930s and now they have erased that. Also explains that some of how they are doing it is explicitly making updated for temperature stations based on nearby stations in urban heat islands that are warmer. https://t.co/cwITSOz31H



Deliberately spoof papers were published.

Richard P Feynman told us that cargo cult science is common because in many fields people ignore the contrary results only paying attention to results that support their pet theory.  According to Feynman, "science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." http://www-oc.chemie.uni-regensburg.de/diaz/img_diaz/feynman_what-is-science_68.pdf

 He discusses more examples here: http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm

In World War II South Sea Islanders watching planes land and disgorge cargo wanted to have planes come and disgorge cargo for them. As a form of sympathetic magic, they built replicas of landing strips which were detailed and complete down to wooden replicas of radios in the control shack. This is the cargo cult. According to Feynman, cargo cults science is similarly a detailed replica of science, including degrees and publications and prestigious faculty positions, that is missing the key ingredient so that it is all wrong. The key ingredient is the scientific integrity to prominently discuss and rebut the arguments against your position instead of simply ignoring them as is often done.

Truthsift is designed to prevent cargo cults science by not considering any thing tentatively established if there is an argument against it that has not yet been rebutted.



21 out of 23 Harvard graduates, alumni, and faculty confidently gave the wrong answer when asked why winter is colder than summer in spite of the fact that this is covered in every grade school education. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6&v=TrXaQu_qGeo

 At the link you can watch them responding.


Only about half of the most famous experiments in psychology can be replicated. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/psychologys-replication-crisis-real/576223/?utm_term=2018-11-19T20%3A27%3A34&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_source=facebook&utm_content=edit-promo&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR1FMKYGEo-TyO9_sIi6-s3_0m1ro7Vf5sXXmqsx_frgz6IHeyaxzL_JqPE


Much of the Internet is fake. The metrics measuring traffic are largely fake. Many of the users/followers are actually Chinese click farms. the businesses are fake sometimes. The content is fake sometimes. http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/how-much-of-the-internet-is-fake.html

Ex –Reddit CEO gives further confirmation the metrics are fake. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-27/everything-fake-ex-reddit-ceo-confirms-internet-traffic-metrics-are-bullshit


Experts who should know, including the former chief editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and the current chief editor of lancet say  half the medical literature is fake, twisted by interests of the pharmaceutical  industry. http://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/fake-science-08-06-2017

 everybody who has seriously looked into the issue, including the Office of Technology Assessment U.S. Congress, the international Journal of technology assessment in healthcare https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-journal-of-technology-assessment-in-health-care/article/reviewing-the-reviews/94DE0DB91B94417C6D715E9F31DF8E32

 and the BMJ http://www.dcscience.net/garrow-evidence-bmj.pdf says the big majority of medical practice is not evidence-based.


The media keeps on making up bizarre allegations about Russiagate that then are debunked and mostly retracted. Here is a list of 57: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-20/definitive-list-usuk-media-russiagate-fake-stories




Politically correct assertions are not factually correct or we would simply describe them as "correct".  The whole point of the statement being considered "politically correct" is that by agreeing with it you join the coalition that is politically correct. This wouldn't signal your adherence to the authority of the group if it was simply correct because then everybody would do it. If it's blatantly and obviously factually false on the other hand and you say it is true in the plain contradiction of what can be seen, then your motive obviously is to signal that you are part of the group. Coalition building is much more important in the evolutionary psychology, as a force for passing on your genes, then simply being factually correct. https://www.edge.org/conversation/john_tooby-coalitional-instincts 


Many if not most beliefs widely held by the public are the result of deliberate propaganda campaigns. These propaganda campaigns are not motivated by spreading the truth but generally by somebody's financial interest.

 Don't take my word for it. Read  Propaganda by Edward Bernays https://www.amazon.com/Propaganda-Edward-Bernays-ebook/dp/B0097D76MG

 Bernays is called the father of Madison Avenue and credited with inventing "making the world safe for democracy" in the propaganda campaign for World War I (they are still making the world safe for democracy hundred years later), inventing the diamond engagement ring, bacon and eggs, fluoridated water (his clients what to avoid liability for fluoride runoff so he convinced everybody fluoride was beneficial), The panel of doctors, and increasing cigarette sales 40% in one year by parading a few models up and down seventh Avenue smoking "torches of freedom" and convincing women to take up smoking, and many other things. He was also credited as a major inspiration by Goebbels. Goebbels is considered to have been extremely effective at convincing Germany to follow Hitler. Both of them were very open about how effective their propaganda was.


Fake white hate crimes against Blacks,  POC,  gays, and  Jews have become fairly common.  Most recent as I write Are allegedly Jesse Smollet  and the Covington MAGA kid.  Fake rape accusations like the Rolling Stone rape hoax and  allegedly mattress girl And allegedly Supreme Court justice Kavanaugh as well.  Once police get involved these things are usually debunked fairly rapidly but a lot of people are confused for a while and many of them are so disappointed that it was a hoax that they seem reluctant to accept it even when strong proof is provided.  Here is a survey of some: https://www.takimag.com/article/fake-noose/

Here is a descriptive list of a bunch of: https://aussiesta.wordpress.com/2017/12/16/on-the-use-of-racism-as-propaganda/

Here is a list of more  hate hoaxes since Trump elected: https://dailycaller.com/2019/02/18/hoax-hate-crimes-list/

Here is an article about researchers who have compiled lists of several hundred hate hoaxes. https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/02/22/jussie-smollett-empire-attack-fired-cut-video-chicago-fox-column/2950146002/

Here Steve Sailer  analyzes 21 reports in the New York Times of hate crimes and finds that at least the majority are probably hoaxes or mistakes: https://www.takimag.com/article/the-21-club/


 Here is a discussion that the Smoillet instance was an attempt by the MSM to create a race war in America and that was only saved by the media that the tech companies are trying to censor: https://www.infowars.com/the-independent-media-just-saved-america-from-a-bloody-race-war-that-the-mainstream-media-was-trying-to-start/

Smolllet   reportedtly told police and a TV interviewer  that he thought the event occurred under a surveillance camera, which unfortunately was actually pointing the opposite direction from what he thought. It's not hard to imagine that if it was pointing in the right direction, and the media played the video incessantly, that there could have been as much damage in Chicago as there was previously in Ferguson.

There are so few actual hate crimes by whites that the New York Times in its desperation for the great White defendant has mentioned Emmett Till  roughly 6 dozen times a year lately. Emmett till was murdered in 1955.

It is not necessary that the majority always behaves in a rational manner and in a way that is for the overall. "Mob mentality" points to the circumstances when the majority gets carried away by its own convictions.

They could never get away with a deception on this scale.

This is a fundamental misconception. 

One of the world's great liars told us how it's done: 

"All this was inspired by the principle—which is quite true within itself—that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.

It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying."

— Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X[1]

The bigger the lie, the easier it is to get away with, because people simply refuse to look at the evidence it's a lie.

Look for example at vaccines where the evidence could hardly be clearer. It's all published in the scientific literature for anybody to read, and it's not controversial there. There are subjects like autism and aluminum where the evidence is absolutely one-sided and the pro vaccine side have absolutely no emprical scientific papers to cite. But they just claim they have them, never actually citing them, and 98% of the population believes them. There are numerous credentialed and/or insider whistleblowers, but the media whitewashes or ignores them. https://truthsift.com/graph/Does-the-preponderance-of-the-evidence-indicate-vaccine-aluminum-causes-autism/732/1/-1/-1/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0 And this is a case where people have personal experience: more than half the young children today have chronic illnesses even according to CDC. And it's also a case, where this published scientific evidence Is absolutely determinative. It defines the evidence and it's all one-sided, but in spite of all that, the lie still prevails because almost everybody doesn't look at the evidence, exactly as Hitler said.

It's also worth noting that whistleblowers are unimportant. There were numerous 9/11 whistleblowers. Media doesn't cover them and nobody cares. And claims that projects are too big for the governmen to cover-up, are also clearly false. They just compartmentalized knowledge, on a need to know basis. Los Alamos had hundreds of thousands of employees, but almost none of them knew what was  going on. Bletchley Park had 9000 employees, but again almost none of them knew what was going on.

The government can get away with anything, and routinely does, which is one of reasons why so much is fake.


CIA director William Casey said "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false".