Scams

Lobotomies are interesting operations. The surgery involves the prefrontal cortex being disconnected from the rest of the brain. Patients who've had a lobotomy are no less intelligent than they were before but they are unable to determine significance properly.

When lobotomies were done originally, the prefrontal lobe of the cortex was actually removed. Later, when the operation was refined, it was discovered that mere severing of the connection between the thalamus and the prefrontal lobe was enough to cause the same result. The thalamus is one of the oldest sections of the brain. It is in the archaecortex, something we have in common with lizards. The mechanism that determines the use of our great intelligence operates in service of the oldest and most primitive section of the brain. Intelligence is a tool and need not be used intelligently. We choose whether or not to be stupid.

The choice to be stupid shows up everywhere, from public policy to religion. Often it happens when we desire a particular outcome so much that we will change our perception of the facts to suit the desire. Religion, Amway and Nigerian Bankers are built on this.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in psuedoscience, whether it is in the service of parting a fool from his money or parting the taxpayers from theirs. Money, it seems, is often the attractive means by which our substantial intelligence is subverted.

Nobel Intent has a good article on the debunking of some psuedoscience. In this case, it is the whole cause-of-autism debate that's now been around a few years. I find this one particularly noisome since it preys not just on greed and gullibility but also on legitimate parental concerns for their children.

Recall for the moment the mercury link with autism-- a linkage thoroughly debunked some time back. (See here.) Now, the same sort of folks are linking WiFi to autism. (See here.) The fact of the debunking is not so surprising. Science tends to be self-regulating in the long term. That's the beauty of it. The sad part is the way it needed to be debunked. If you read the original article you can just tell it's bogus. I won't go into why-- the Nobel intent article referenced above does a much better job. But the same impulse that drives people to give bank account numbers to Nigerian scams is at work. If it's too good to be true (or if it scares parents enough), it probably isn't true. Or at least it should take some thought to determine if it's true.

This isn't limited to parental fear or greed. Sometimes it's just poking at people's preconceptions. I had the misfortune to catch one side of a conversation a while back on the scientific conspiracy regarding global warming. This is on the same order of the medical conspiracy for vaccination. Or the biologist conspiracy against God when investigating evolution.

If you don't like what you see; make something up. If you can make a buck doing it, go for it. Somebody will unhook their prefrontal cortex and pay.