slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

By Lee McIntyre

While watching the House impeachment hearings, I realized my two decades of research into why people ignore, reject or deny science had a political parallel.

From anti-evolutionists to anti-v*****e advocates, known as “anti-v**xers,” c*****e c****e deniers to Flat Earthers, science deniers all follow a common pattern of faulty reasoning that allows them to reject what they don’t want to believe – and accept what they favor – based on a misunderstanding of how science deals with evidence.

As I’ve been watching the hearings, I’ve noticed that a number of characteristics of this type of reasoning are now being embraced by President Donald Trump and his congressional supporters.

There are five common tactics used by science deniers. In 1998, brothers Mark and Chris Hoofnagle (a lawyer and a physiologist) wrote an early blog post about science denialism. That was followed by further work by econometrician Pascal Diethelm and public health scholar Martin McKee and cognitive scientists John Cook and Stephan Lewandowsky. All identified the following factors as characteristic acts of science deniers:

Believing in conspiracy theories;
Relying on cherry-picked evidence;
Relying on f**e experts (and dismissal of actual experts);
Committing logical errors;
Setting impossible standards for what science should be able to deliver.

These elements are present when those who deny the Earth is round or who believe v*****es cause autism insist that there is a governmental cover-up of the real evidence on their topics. They can be seen when Ted Cruz tries to discredit c*****e c****e with talk about the anomalous world w*****r p*****n in 1998 due to El Niño. And they’re evident when intelligent design theorists complain that evolution by natural se******n still has not been proven.

Trump and his defenders in Congress echo this pattern. Even though Trump has firsthand knowledge of some of the facts under dispute – whereas his supporters may not – all seem to have bought in fully to the idea that the actual political situation is not the one pictured in the mainstream consensus of facts and evidence, but instead is based on an alternative reality.

Here are the five ways Trump and his allies use the same strategies as science deniers:

Conspiracy theories: During his questioning of Ambassador Bill Taylor and other witnesses at the impeachment hearings, Republican counsel Steve Castor repeatedly pursued a debunked conspiracy theory involving an alleged plot in which the Ukrainian government – and not the Russians – interfered with the 2016 p**********l e******n because they were out to get the president.

Cherry-picking: Gordon Sondland, U.S. ambassador to the European Union, testified before the House Intelligence Committee that President Trump told him, “I want nothing from Ukraine. I want no quid pro quo.” Trump and his supporters focused on this statement as evidence of his innocence, despite the fact that in other testimony by Sondland that day, he said, “Mr. Giuliani’s requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky…Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the president of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the president.”

Discrediting experts: President Trump has repeatedly – and falsely – claimed that State Department and CIA employees such as Bill Taylor, George Kent, Fiona Hill, Alexander Vindman and others who have testified in the impeachment hearings are “Never Trumpers,” a term for Republicans who do not support Trump – and who therefore have no credibility. His supporters have latched onto this tactic. GOP Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri said on Sept. 20, after the whistleblower complaint was made public: “It looks to me like another deep-state attack.”

Illogical reasoning: Trump supporters have claimed that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky never complained that he felt pressured by Trump to do the investigations into the Bidens that Trump sought. Trump himself has described the July 25 conversation he had with Zelensky in which he asked for the investigations as “perfect.” But news reports have shown that Zelensky did in fact feel pressured, and analysts have pointed out that Zelensky would risk losing crucial U.S. support were he to anger Trump by saying that he felt pressured.

Double standard for opponents: Trump claimed that written testimony from the whistleblower was unacceptable, despite the fact that he himself had only given written testimony in the Mueller investigation. Some of his supporters seem to agree and have tried to compel the whistleblower’s in-person testimony.

What might be behind the similarities between Trump defenders and science deniers? Perhaps, like science denial, all fact denial is basically the same. All ideology supports the reflex to believe what you want to believe. Scholars have studied the role of identity in shaping belief and concluded that sometimes even empirical beliefs can be tribal, reflecting what the other people on your team want you to believe. Adherence to a belief is not always based on evidence. The danger, of course, is that even as new facts come in, people won’t change their minds. This is the direct opposite of good empirical reasoning.

It is the hallmark of science that beliefs should be based on evidence, and that people should be willing to change their beliefs based on new evidence. This means that people should be able to specify in advance what evidence, if it existed, would be sufficient to get them to change their minds.

But are Trump and his congressional supporters doing that?

Like science deniers, no amount of evidence seems sufficient to change their partisan beliefs that the phone call with Zelensky was proper and that Trump “did nothing wrong.”

Even when the facts are overwhelming, congressional Republicans seem, like science deniers, willing to contort their beliefs and torture their logic, to stick to the party line because that is who they are.

As Senator Lindsey Graham recently put it, “I don’t care what anybody else says about the phone call … The phone call, I’ve made up my own mind, is fine.”

In science, such behavior means that one is eventually read out of the profession – you’re not fired, your tenure isn’t revoked, but you’re no longer taken seriously anymore.

In politics, it is not yet clear what the consequences might be.

Carol Kelly

K

I’m not as brilliant as you, but it is very clear what the consequences of this impeachment lead to. I judge a person by his or her attitude and love of country and character. Trump has proven his love of country and his character. He is not guilty of what Nadler and Schiff and Pelosi are charging. He is guilty of one thing as it concerns our government and that is quite simply...he beat Hilary and led America down the right path. If we’d had the wall, we wouldn’t have spent billions on housing and feeding a million i******s and we wouldn’t have towns in America controlled by Mexican drug cartels. It’s creeping up on us. When the drug cartels reach Michigan and
Minnesota, maybe OUR Muslims will take care of them. Trump is NOT guilty of an impeachable offense, but this Committee led by Schiff and Nadler have Kept the House from taking care of real business.

Weasel Loc: In the Great State Of Indiana!!

Nadler has a Hatred for Mr. Trump that goes all the way back to 1989 in New York. He has h**ed the Trump Family his entire life.
He is to Biased to be in the same State with Mr. Trump. Let alone having an opinion on Impeachment.

Airforceone

(Perception is not reality) everybody is entitled to there opinions but not entitled to there own Facts

Hug

Airforceone

Trump has proven love of his country—-WTF are you talking about he has discredited and denigrated anybody and everybody in this country that disagrees with him. He has shown his love of Putin while discredit all 17 Intel agencies. ( NEVET FORGET TRUMP QUOTE I BELIEVE PUTIN)

You judge the Character of this man how about 2 divorces c***ting on his wife with a porno star 5 weeks after the birth of his son. Then watch his personnel attorney lose his license to practice law get sentenced to 3 1/2 years in jail for Lying and paying the hush money with Trumps name on the checks. (SOME F’ing character)

The remainder of you post is simply BS written by a child

Hug

I don't buy Lee McIntyre. He is just one of those lofty scholars that wonders around in the weeds.

woodguru

In the first place how is it you judge a person's love of the country? Fly a f**g because Trump represents the country, pound your chest and say you are a patriot and prove it by supporting our president?

First of all I disagree that trump has proved any love of country, everything he has done has been about and for himself. Every time he makes a foreign policy move it mysteriously seems to be very favorable to Putin and often to the detriment of this country's best national security interests.

If you would stop listening to the i***tic GOP irrelevant defenses for trump, and listen to what was involved in regards to the mechanics of what took place in order for trump to withhold military aid, how many OMB and state department people were objecting to the illegality of it, and the sheer raw subversions that took place, you would know that this was a pure abuse of power. The reasons trump withheld aid is irrelevant, as the real reason was because Putin did not want anti tank weapons in Ukrainian hands as he was preparing to attack the eastern regions.

Airforceone

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

From Mark Twain...

"Patriotism is usually the refuge of the scoundrel. He is the man who talks the loudest."
- Education and Citizenship speech, 5/14/1908

"Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about."
- More Maxims of Mark Twain, Johnson, 1927

President Trump epitomizes the kind of patriot of whom Mark Twain was speaking.

TexaCan Loc: Homeward Bound!

The consequences of his first 4 years is another 4 years.........guaranteed by the pure hatred and actions of the Democrats and Anti Trumps!

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

I can't wait for the next Democrat to live in the White House, and watch Republicans reverse course on their "hands off" attitude towards the President. There will be multiple cases of whiplash.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

That was already exhibited in their shock & dismay over the rules they wrote for their GOP majority in the 2015 B******i hearings and investigations being used by the now democratic majority in this Fall's house intelligence & judicial hearings dealing with impeachment.

vernon

Your just wrong.Trump has done more for the working people the last 5 presidents combined. I don't go around calling people patriot but when I hear people like gu and kev and air I dam sure feel they are t*****rs and Ive told them.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

As you're a solid guy, Vernon, I've never doubted your sincerity... even when/while in disagreement.