Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time

by Michael Shermer

  This may sound like hope springing eternal, but Tipler claims that it "is a logical consequence of my own area of research in global general relativity." And though he thinks that part of the problem is that his colleagues "are trained to detest religion so ferociously that even the suggestion that there might be some truth to the statements of religion is an outrage," Tipler says "the only reason the bigger names in the field of global general relativity, like Roger Penrose and Stephen Hawking, have not come to the same conclusion is that they draw back when they realize the outlandish consequences of the equations." Although Penrose and Hawking may retreat in deep understanding, in a revealing comment Tipler explained that most simply will not get it because "the essence of the Omega Point Theory is global general relativity. You have to be trained to think of the universe in the largest possible scale and to automatically view the cosmos in its temporal entirety—you envision the mathematical structure of the future as well as the past. That means you have got to be a global relativist. And there are only three out there better than I am, and only two that are my peers" (1995).

  A prominent astronomer I spoke with said that Tipler must have needed money to have written such a ridiculous book. But anyone who talks with Tipler about his book for any length of time quickly realizes that he is not in it for the money or fame. He is deadly serious about his arguments and was fully prepared to take the heat he knew he would get. Frank Tipler is a man who, in my opinion, cares deeply for humanity and its future. His book is dedicated to the grandparents of his wife, "the great-grandparents of my children," who were killed in the Holocaust but "who died in the hope of the Universal Resurrection, and whose hope, as I shall show in this book, will be fulfilled near the End of Time." Here is a deeper motivation. Perhaps Tipler never really abandoned his Baptist, fundamentalist upbringing after all. Through hard work, honest living, and, now, good science, immortality is ours. But we will have to wait. In the meantime, how can we restructure the social, political, economic, and moral systems of society to ensure that we survive long enough to resurrect ourselves? The Dr. Pangloss of his time, Frank Tipler, will venture an answer in his next book, tentatively titled The Physics of Morality.

  I enjoyed reading Tipler's book. On any number of subjects—space exploration, nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, quantum mechanics, relativity—he writes with clarity and confidence. But I found six problems, the first four of which could be applied to any number of controversial claims. These problems do not prove that Tipler's theory, or any other theory, is wrong. They just alert us to exercise skepticism. Although Tipler may very well be right, the burden of proof is on him to provide empirical data rather than relying almost exclusively on clever, logical reasoning.

  1. The Hope Springs Eternal Problem. On the first page of The Physics of Immortality, Tipler claims that his Omega Point Theory is a "testable physical theory for an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God who will one day in the far future resurrect every single one of us to live in an abode which is in all essentials the Judeo-Christian Heaven" and that "if any reader has lost a loved one, or is afraid of death, modern physics says: 'Be comforted, you and they shall live again.'" So, everything we always believed to be true based on faith turns out to be true based on physics. What are the chances? Not good, I am afraid. And, after 305 pages of concise and cogent argumentation, Tipler finally admits, "The Omega Point Theory is a viable scientific theory of the future of the physical universe, but the only evidence in its favor at the moment is theoretical beauty." Beauty by itself does not make a theory right or wrong, but when a theory fulfills our deepest wishes we should be especially cautious about rushing to embrace it. When a theory seems to match our eternal hopes, chances are that it is wrong.

  2. The Faith in Science Problem. When confronting a limitation in one's scientific theory, it is not enough to argue that someday science will solve it just because science has solved so many other problems in the past. Tipler states that to colonize our galaxy and eventually all galaxies, we will have to be able to accelerate spacecraft to near the speed of light. How are we going to do this? No problem. Science will find a way. Tipler spends twenty pages chronicling all the amazing advances in computers, spacecraft, and spacecraft speeds, and in his "Appendix for Scientists" he explains precisely how a relativistic antimatter rocket could be built. All of this is relevant and fascinating but in no way proves that because it could happen it will happen. Science does have its limitations, and the history of science is replete with failures, wrong turns, and blind alleys. Just because science has been enormously successful in the past does not mean that it can or will solve all problems in the future. And can we really predict what beings in the far future are going to do based on what we think (and hope) they will do?

  3. The If-Then Argument Problem. Tipler's theory runs something like this: if the density parameter is greater than 1 and thus the universe is closed and will collapse; if the Bekenstein bound is correct; if the Higgs boson is 220 ± 20 GeV; if humans do not cause their own extinction before developing the technology to permanently leave the planet; if humans leave the planet; if humans develop the technology to travel interstellar distances at the required speeds; if humans find other habitable planets; if humans develop the technology to slow down the collapse of the universe; if humans do not encounter forms of life hostile to their goals; if humans build a computer that approaches omniscience and omnipotence at the end of time; if Omega/God wants to resurrect all previous lives; if. . . ; then his theory is right. The problem is obvious: if any one of these steps fails, the entire argument collapses. What if the density parameter is less than 1 and the universe expands forever (as some evidence indicates it will)? What if we nuke or pollute ourselves into oblivion? What if we allocate resources to problems on Earth instead of to space exploration? What if we encounter advanced aliens who intend to colonize the galaxy and Earth, thus dooming us to slavery or extinction?

  No matter how rational, an if-then argument without empirical data to support each step in the argument is more philosophy (or protoscience or science fiction) than it is science. Tipler has created an extremely rational argument for God and immortality. Each step follows from the previous step. But so many of the steps might be wrong that the theory is essentially speculative. In addition, his clever switch of the temporal frame of reference to the far future contains a logical flaw. He first assumes the existence of God and immortality toward the end of time (his Omega Point boundary conditions—what he previously called the Final Anthropic Principle) and then works backward to derive what he has already assumed to be true. Tipler claims this is how all general relativists work (i.e., when they analyze black holes). Even if true, I suspect that most general relativists withhold confidence in their assumptions until there is empirical data to support them, and I have seen no other theories by general relativists which attempt to encompass God, immortality, heaven, and hell. Tipler has made a few testable predictions, but he is a long, long way from proving our immortality, and the end of the universe is, well, a long, long time away.

  4. The Problem of Analogies. In The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels Between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism (1975), physicist Fritjof Capra claims that these "parallels" are not accidental. Instead, he argues, there is a single underlying reality that both ancient Eastern philosophers and modern Western physicists have discovered. Although the language of description is different, Capra can see that both groups are really talking about the same thing. (See Gary Zukav's The Dancing Wu Li Masters for a similar analysis.) Really? Or is it more likely that the human mind orders the universe in only so many ways and that there are bound to be vague similarities between ancient myths and modern theories, especially if one wants to find them.

  Tipler has one-upped Capra. He is not just finding similarities between ancient Judeo-Christian doctrines and modern physics and cosmology, he is redefining both to make them fit together: "Every single term in the theory—for example, 'omnip
resent,' 'omniscient,' 'omnipotent,' 'resurrection (spiritual) body,' 'Heaven'—will be introduced as pure physics concepts" (1994, p. 1). With each, the reader finds Tipler straining to make the term fit his physics, or vice versa. In starting with God and immortality and reasoning backward, Tipler is not so much discovering these connections between physics and religion as he is creating them. He claims this is both good physics and good theology. I claim that without empirical evidence it is good philosophy and good speculative science fiction. Just because two ideas from separate realms seem to resemble each other does not mean that a meaningful connection between the two exists.

  5. The Problem of Memory and Identity. Tipler argues that Omega/God, toward the end of the universe, will reconstruct everyone who ever lived or ever could have lived in a super-virtual reality that will include their memories. The first problem is that if memory is a product of neuronal connections and our flawed and ever-changing reconstruction of these neuronal connections, how will Omega/God reconstruct something that does not really exist? There is a vast difference between every memory that could be reconstructed and an individual's actual set of memory patterns, the vast majority of which are lost to time. The controversy over false memory syndrome is a case in point. We have very little understanding of how memory works, much less how to reconstruct it. Memories cannot be reconstructed in the sense of playing back a videotape. The event occurs. A selective impression of the event is made on the brain through the senses. Then the individual rehearses the memory and in the process changes it a bit, depending on emotions, previous memories, subsequent events and memories, and so on. This process recurs thousands of times over the years, to the point where we must ask whether we have memories or just memories of memories of memories.

  We have another problem, too. If Omega/God resurrects me with all of my memories, which memories will they be? The memories I had at a particular point in my lifetime? Then, that won't be all of me. All the memories I had at every point in my life? That won't be me either. Thus, whatever would be resurrected by Omega/God, it cannot possibly be me, with my very own memories. And if a Michael Shermer is resurrected, and he does not have my memories, who will he be? For that matter, who am I? These problems of memory and identity must be worked through before we can even begin to speculate well about resurrecting an actual person.

  6. The Problem of History and the Lost Past. A human being may be only a computer consisting of DNA and neuronal memories, but a human life, that is, the history of a human, is much more than DNA and neuronal memories. It is a product of all a person's interactions with other lives and life histories, plus the environment, itself a product of countless interactions as a function of countless conjunctures of events in a complex matrix with so many variables that it is inconceivable that even Tipler's computer, which can store 10 to the power of 10 to the power of 123 bits (a 1 followed by 10123 zeros), could represent it. (This figure depends on the Bekenstein bound being real, which cosmologist Kip Thorne says is highly questionable.) Even if it had the computational power to reconstruct all the innumerable historical necessities—climate, geography, population immigrations and emigrations, wars, political revolutions, economic cycles, recessions and depressions, social trends, religious revolutions, paradigm shifts, ideological revolutions, and the like—how does Omega/God recapture all the individual conjunctures, all the interactions between the contingencies and necessities of history?

  Tipler's answer is that quantum mechanics tells us there can be only a finite number of these memories, events, and historical conjunctures, and because the computers of the far future will have unlimited computing power, they will be able to resurrect every possible variation of you at all given times in your life. But, on page 158, Tipler confesses to a significant problem with an aspect of this answer: "I should warn the reader that I have ignored the problem of opacity and the problem of loss of coherence of the light. Until these are taken into account, I cannot say exactly how much information can in fact be extracted from the past." The problem of the irrecoverable past is serious, since history is a conjuncture of events compelling a certain course of action by constraining prior events. History often turns on tiny contingencies, very few of which we know about. Given the sensitive dependence on initial conditions—the butterfly effect—how does Omega/God resurrect all the butterflies?

  This perception of history derails Drs. Tipler and Pangloss, as Voltaire noted at the end of Candide:

  Pangloss sometimes said to Candide: "All events are linked up in this best of all possible worlds; for, if you had not been expelled from the noble castle by hard kicks in your backside for love of Mademoiselle Cunegonde, if you had not been clapped into the Inquisition, if you had not wandered about America on foot, if you had not stuck your sword in the Baron, if you had not lost all your sheep from the land of Eldorado, you would not be eating candied citrons and pistachios here......Tis well said," replied Candide, "but we must cultivate our gardens." (1985, p. 328)

  Namely, whatever the sequence of contingencies and necessities in our lives and in history, the outcome would have seemed equally inevitable. But in Candide's response is another kernel of truth. We can never know all of the contingencies and necessities guiding history at any given point in time, let alone the initial conditions of any historical sequence, and from this methodological weakness comes philosophical strength. Human freedom—cultivating our gardens—may be found not only in our inability to process all the data of the past and present but also in our ignorance of the initial conditions and conjunctures of events that shape our actions. We are free in our ignorance, free in the knowledge that most of the causes that determine us are lost to the past. . . forever. It is in this knowledge, rather than in the physics of immortality and resurrection by supercomputers, that hope springs eternal.

  17

  Why Do People Believe Weird Things?

  On the evening of Thursday, May 16, 1996,1 walked across burning coals barefoot for an episode of the PBS show. Bill Nye "The Science Guy" The producers of this splendid science education series geared toward children wanted to do a segment on pseudoscience and the paranormal, and they thought a scientific explanation for firewalking would make for dramatic television. Since Bill Nye is my daughter's hero, I agreed to host the firewalk. Bernard Leikind, a plasma physicist and one of the world's leading experts on firewalking, got the fire going, spread out the coals, and strolled across, sans shoes, socks, or blisters. As I made my way to the edge of the coals, Leikind reminded me that the temperature in the middle of the raked-out path was about 800°F, I tried to focus on his assurance that this was not a matter of the power of positive thinking but of physics. When you bake a cake in an oven, by way of analogy, the air, the cake, and the metal pan are all at 400°F, but only the pan will burn your skin. Hot coals, even at 800°F, are like cake—they do not conduct heat very quickly—so as long as I strode across the bed without delay I should be safe. My naked toes, inches away from the glowing red coals, were skeptical. This was no cakewalk, they told my brain. It wasn't, but six feet and three seconds later, they were none the worse for wear. My confidence in science was restored, right down to my toes.

  Firewalking. What a weird thing to do. I have filing cabinets and bookshelves filled with the records of such weird things. But what constitutes a weird thing? I have no formal definition. Weird things are like pornography—difficult to define but obvious when you see them. Each claim, case, or person must be examined individually. One person's weird thing might be another's cherished belief. Who's to say?

  Well, one criteria—the criteria of choice for me and millions of others—is science. What, we ask, is the scientific evidence for a claim? Infomercial megastar Tony Robbins, the self-help guru who got his start in the early 1980s by holding weekend seminars climaxing in a firewalk, queries his audience: "What would happen if you were to discover a way to achieve any goal you desire now?" If you can walk on hot coals, says Robbins, you can accomplish anything. Can Tony Robb
ins really walk barefoot over hot coals without burning his feet? Sure he can. So can I. So can you. But you and I can do it without meditating, chanting, or paying hundreds of dollars for a seminar because firewalking has nothing to do with mental power. Belief that it does is what I would call a weird thing.

  Firewalkers, psychics, UFOlogists, alien abductees, cryonicists, immortalists, Objectivists, creationists, Holocaust deniers, extreme Afro-centrists, racial theorists, and cosmologists who believe science proves God—we have met a lot of people who believe a lot of weird things. And I can assure you after two decades of tracking such people and beliefs that I have only scratched the surface in this book. What are we to make of these?

  • Whole Life Expo workshops on such topics as "Electromagnetic Ghostbusting," "Megabrain: New Tools for Mind Expansion," "The Revolutionary Energy Machine," and "Lazaris," the 35,000-year-old guru channeled by Jach Pursel.

  • The Brain/Mind Expansion Intensive Dome "designed by John-David for a broad range of brain/mind expansion applications, including brain damage re-education." The dome comes complete with a "comprehensive sound training and Certification Training, stereo decks, amplifiers, switchers, cables and the Brain/Mind Matrix Mixer (pat. pending). Soundproofing materials and consulting also included." The price? Only $65,000.

  • A bulk-mailing card instructing you to rub a purple spot on the card with your index finger and then to "press your finger firmly in the ball below and roll it from left to right. You are now ready to call THE COSMIC CONNECTION!" The connection is a 900 number, of course, costing only $3.95 per minute. "An experienced psychic will enlighten you on all matters PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE!"