#86 | Conspiracy!

“I was chasing my dreams but I tripped over my reality and busted my head on the truth!” — Donald Duck

“The reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is they think 'conspiracy' means everybody's on the same program. That's not how it works. Everybody's got a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebody's wife.” — James Lee Burke,

---

From time to time, conspiracy theories come up in conversation. When they do I groan a bit. "Here we go…". I know I will say something that will make the person I'm talking to uncomfortable.

But conspiracies serve a purpose; they challenge our assumptions. They can be good; for example, having severe doubts about Joseph Stalin was probably a conspiracy at some point in Russia. The apparently mad minority can change the world. Still, the funny thing about conspiracies is they are so taboo. Among believers, they signal madness, someone not having their shit together, or misunderstanding the facts. 

Well, what even are facts? (Says the lunatic). Facts are information the majority agree with. But the majority is often wrong: 66% of people don't understand compound interest. As I write this, 80% of my fellow train passengers are going to Cream Fields Festival and glugging cheap rosé—indeed a poor choice. In Switzerland, the majority doesn't bother to vote. 

"People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis, you can't trust people Jez." says Super Hanz from Peep Show. He's right. If people just like you and me enjoy Coldplay, who can we trust? 

The other day a friend was telling me about neurodivergence. This is when 'someone's brain processes, learns, and/or behaves differently from what is considered "typical."' People with autism, ADHD and dyslexia are neurodivergent. I'm in the last — dyslexic — camp, as are some of my closest friends: they are weird. The term 'neurodivergent' intends to take the "bad" out of some differences like dyslexia. It takes the sting from the bee. And neurodivergent people put the pieces of puzzles together in different ways, coming to uncommon conclusions.

Neurodivergence or delusion, I didn't think we landed on the moon in 1969. Years ago, Mont and I watched the film First Man, about the first moon landing. After the Soviet Union launched Sputnik 1 in 1957, the space race began. The US won the race, spitting Apollo 11 to the moon. 

I left the cinema full of popcorn and conspiracy. It's farfetched: NASA had (allegedly) bolted together what appeared to be low-tech washing machines, ignited some cardboard boosters, navigated a sealed tube 300,000 miles through a barren vacuum to the moon, and landed delicately. On arrival, Buzz et al. went for a wander and returned home to bunting and bubbles.

Of course, today we have the technology to do this—but back in 1969? Or even '72? Nah. Plus it’s been half a century since touch down; would we not have once more dusted off the mission plans and re-enacted man's most splendid achievement, if only for entertainment, if it was indeed achievable. I thought we'd have visited since if it were possible and not requiring some extravagant set-up. So since seeing this film in 2018, I've told many people about the hoax. In doing so, I’ve been eyeballed like a loony. I never did much more research than this, knowing that, unless I eat dairy, my gut instinct is pretty good. 

The other thing about conspiracies is that it's good to stop believing them when you're presented with evidence that exposes a better story. I'm certainly not alone in doubting: 6-20% of Americans, 25% of Britons, and 28% of Russians believe that the crewed landings were faked. But, for the first time, when writing this, I did some reading, and the internet (which we can trust, no?) is overwhelmingly against the conspiracy. Shock! The best summary I've seen is here: http://www.badastronomy.com So now I'm doubting my doubts, and I'm less likely to bring this up in the pub. 

What conspiracies do you believe? Don't be ashamed.

---

My week in books

Exponential by Azeem Azhar. Azeem looks at how the exponential growth in technologies (like computer processing power, container shipping or app availability) is changing the fabric of our societies. It's excellent and hovers around the political consequences of having state-sized businesses (which I particularly enjoyed). Here are some exponential facts:

"By the 1960s, the price had fallen to $8 or so per transistor. By 1972, the year of my birth, the average cost of a transistor had fallen to 15 cents, and the semiconductor industry was churning out between 100 billion and 1 trillion transistors a year. By 2014, humanity produced 250 billion billion transistors annually: 25 times the number of stars in the Milky Way. Each second, the world's 'fabs' – the specialised factories that turn out transistors – spewed out 8 trillion transistors. The cost of a transistor had dropped to a few billionths of a dollar."

---

Live well,

Hector