We live in an era where information is more accessible than ever before. Paradoxically, this hasn’t made us wiser—it’s made us more vulnerable to misinformation. Pseudoscience, once confined to the fringes, now floods our social media feeds, seeps into our political discourse, and influences public health decisions.
With the rise of conspiracy theories and alternative “facts,” distinguishing between science and pseudoscience has never been more critical. While some may view pseudoscience as harmless curiosity, the reality is far more troubling: belief in pseudoscience erodes trust in expertise, fuels paranoia, and can even lead to real-world harm. Just look around you now, you can already see its effects.
Today, we take a closer look at what pseudoscience is, why people turn to it, and how we can combat its growing influence.
A matter of principle
If you’re reading this, chances are you have an appreciation for science. Maybe you have a background in it, or maybe you’re just the kind of person who values truth and knowledge. Either way, you probably share a few core principles with other scientifically minded people:
- Facts over opinion. This doesn’t mean we’re always right, but we try to shape our opinions based on evidence rather than the other way around.
- A critical mindset. We double-check sources, question information, and remain open to correction when new evidence emerges.
- Trust in proven expertise. We understand that expertise isn’t infallible, but it’s the best tool we have. Decades of study and research cannot be replaced by a YouTube video or a Facebook post.
Now help yourself to some of this tasty text:
Now, contrast this with the mindset behind some of today’s most popular pseudoscientific beliefs:
- Climate change is a Chinese hoax designed to steal jobs. If it were truly happening, how could I hold this ball of snow up in Congress?
- As we all know, vaccines cause autism — because mercury. It doesn’t matter what the studies find.
- To round it all up (pun intended), the Earth is flat. There’s simply no other explanation to fit what so many of us have observed. Spherical planets orbiting around the Sun?! Go away with that mumbo-jumbo; that’s what the Government wants you to think, man!
Do you see a difference? At first glance, these beliefs might seem so absurd that it’s tempting to dismiss them entirely. But to an increasing number of people, these claims represent enlightenment. They’re a irrational belief, but an irrational belief shared by millions. So much so that pseudoscience is starting to shape the world.
Why People Believe in Pseudoscience
Pseudoscience provides something that real science often doesn’t: comfort.
<!– Tag ID: zmescience_300x250_InContent_3
–>
Science is often perceived as cold and indifferent. It seems strange to many people, and it doesn’t always tell us things we want to hear. Science tells us we should cut down on our consumption and be more careful with the environment. Pseudoscience tells you to drill baby drill. Pseudoscience, in essence, tells people what they want to hear.
- It offers certainty in an uncertain world. (“Big Pharma is hiding the cure for cancer, but I know the truth.”)
- It gives people someone to blame. (“The government is covering up free energy technology.”)
- It provides a sense of belonging. (“We are the enlightened ones who see through the lies.”)
A study published in The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories found that belief in pseudoscience often stems from a lack of control. When people feel powerless—economically, politically, or socially—they are more likely to turn to conspiracy theories as a way of making sense of the world.
And once someone goes down that rabbit hole, it’s hard to climb back out.
What even is pseudoscience?
The line between science and pseudoscience is not as clear as many people envision it. Oftentimes, pseudoscience stems from something that is incomplete or unclear. But real science self-regulates. Whenever we realize some piece of science is actually wrong, it’s through better science. That’s because science is a process — namely, the process via which we obtain that information.
It’s a set of methods, of checks and balances, that we apply when verifying theories. Sticking to these rules is the best way that we know of to tease out relevant data from our own biases and preconceptions. Simply put, science is a process of reaching the truth through the best available methods we have.
Pseudoscience, on the other hand, doesn’t change.
Pseudoscience only aims to mimic science without actually doing the research. Pseudoscience sounds genuine but doesn’t follow the set of accepted scientific standards, most notably the scientific method, falsifiability of claims, and the Mertonian norms. It’s part of non-science and it’s not the same as bad science — an error made while trying to follow the scientific method, but otherwise in good faith.
It often relies on weak reasoning, selective use of evidence (cherry-picking), and logical fallacies to create the illusion of credibility. Instead of following the scientific method—where hypotheses are tested, challenged, and refined based on evidence—pseudoscience starts with a predetermined conclusion and works backward to find “evidence” that supports it, while ignoring or dismissing anything that contradicts it.
For example, astrology presents itself as a science by using precise terminology, mathematical calculations, and complex charts. However, it lacks any empirical foundation, controlled experiments, or falsifiable predictions—the core principles of real science. Astrologers highlight vague predictions that seem accurate while ignoring the countless times their forecasts fail. Despite this, astrology continues to masquerade as a legitimate scientific field, appealing to those who seek certainty and meaning in an unpredictable world.
Image via Wikimedia.
Attacks on science are attacks on society
We don’t write about science just because it’s fascinating—though it is. We write about it because science is the most powerful tool we have for understanding the world, solving problems, and making life better for everyone. And right now, that tool is under attack like never before.
Misinformation spreads faster than truth. Social media algorithms prioritize engagement over accuracy, amplifying pseudoscience and conspiracy theories to millions. Public trust in experts, researchers, and institutions is eroding. We’re seeing the consequences play out in real time—climate change denial delaying urgent action, vaccine misinformation fueling the resurgence of preventable diseases, and bogus medical treatments putting lives at risk. In an age where falsehoods are louder than facts, science journalism isn’t just important—it’s essential.
We’re fortunate. We were born into societies that gave us access to education, libraries, universities, and the internet—resources that shaped who we are today. But knowledge shouldn’t be a privilege; it should be a right. And with that right comes responsibility: the responsibility to seek truth, challenge misinformation, and help others do the same.
It’s easy to dismiss believers in pseudoscience as ignorant or gullible. We mock flat-earthers, anti-vaxxers, and climate change deniers for rejecting basic facts. But this is not helpful to anyone. Many of these people are perfectly capable of critical thinking. They aren’t stupid. They aren’t even necessarily against science. What they lack isn’t intelligence—it’s trust. They distrust institutions, experts, and mainstream sources of information. And in that void of trust, pseudoscience thrives.
This isn’t just about debunking bad science. It’s about restoring trust in real science. It’s about making knowledge accessible, understandable, and engaging. It’s about ensuring that, in a world overflowing with misinformation, people still have a beacon of truth to guide them.
That’s why we write this. And that’s why this matters—now more than ever.
What then?
Image credits U.S. Air Force Civil Engineer Center.
The Mistrust Spiral: How Pseudoscience Undermines Reality
Pseudoscience creates a vicious cycle of mistrust. Once someone buys into a single false belief—say, that vaccines cause autism—they are primed to believe others. If doctors are hiding the truth about vaccines, then maybe climate scientists are also lying. If climate change is a hoax, maybe the government faked the moon landing too. One false belief leads to another, and soon, the entire foundation of knowledge crumbles.
Karen Douglas, a Professor of Social Psychology at the University of Kent who specializes in social psychology and belief in conspiracy theories, told me that the lack of trust is a core aspect of pseudoscience.
“Whether this is generalized mistrust or not, however, is an open question,” she told me. “As far as I can see, flat earth believers tend to mistrust scientists/NASA etc. and argue that they are providing false information.”
“It’s not clear whether these people also mistrust other sources such as their friends, neighbours, the police, and other institutions.”
In other words, conspiracy theories don’t just stem from mistrust—they also create it. The more people consume pseudoscience, the deeper their skepticism grows, feeding paranoia and reinforcing the idea that “the experts” can’t be trusted.
This isn’t just a fringe problem. It seeps into politics, public health, and education, influencing real-world decisions with serious consequences. The resurgence of measles outbreaks, the rejection of renewable energy policies, and even violent attacks on scientific institutions all stem, in part, from this crisis of trust.
From Skepticism to Paranoia
Pseudoscience requires some impressive leaps of mental dissonance and cherry picking. Most importantly, it requires you to only look at certain bits of data, lest the whole theory falls apart (such as the ‘snowball in Congress‘ move, a classic and one of my personal favorites). It wants you to trust some sources of information and not others — based not on how rigorous they are, but on what you want to hear.
It instills in those exposed to it the mindset that destroys confidence in researchers and, by extension, all other professionals. It breeds skepticism bordering on paranoia and fosters distrust in others while definitely making you right because, hey — everyone who says otherwise is probably part of the conspiracy.
It’s a very slippery slope.
“Trust always appears as one of the strongest predictors of conspiracy theories, but conspiracy theories also make people more mistrustful,” Douglas explained. “That is, when people are experimentally exposed to conspiracy theories […] they become more mistrustful of the relevant institutions.”
“Another very strong predictor of conspiracy theories is paranoia.”
“It is also the case that conspiracy believers tend to believe in paranormal phenomena (e.g., life after death, extrasensory perception), and that they tend to be superstitious (e.g., believing in good luck charms). These are correlational relationships, so the higher the conspiracy belief, the higher the paranormal or superstitious belief (i.e., it’s not a one-one relationship and we cannot tell which one causes the other).”
A deluge of bad information
There’s something to be said about how modern society (and social media algorithms) change how we spread information.
Writing for The Conversation,
“The weekend in no small part revolved around discussing and debating science, with lots of time spent running, planning, and reporting on the latest set of flat earth experiments and models,” he recounts. “Indeed, as one presenter noted early on, flat earthers try to ‘look for multiple, verifiable evidence’ and advised attendees to ‘always do your own research and accept you might be wrong’.”
“While flat earthers seem to trust and support scientific methods, what they don’t trust is scientists, and the established relationships between ‘power’ and ‘knowledge’.”
“The level of discussion however often did not revolve around the models on offer, but on broader issues of attitudes towards existing structures of knowledge, and the institutions that supported and presented these models.”
Dyer argues that this recoiling from anything perceived as ‘mainstream’ starts from the way freedom of thought is twisted and bent in recent times. It’s laughably easy for anyone, anywhere, to create and share any type of content with virtually no moderation. For the first time in our history, people can pick what narrative they want to believe. People for whom the official explanation will never satisfy simply because it is ‘the official’ one will lap up any alternative, no matter how hollow, because they want to believe.
Image credits Alan Cleaver / Flickr.
People are more likely to believe pseudoscience when it aligns with their values
Many people embrace pseudoscience not despite the facts, but because it reinforces their existing values, identities, and worldviews.
We live in an era of deep social and political polarization. Topics like climate change, energy policy, public health, and misinformation have become more than just scientific debates—they’ve turned into ideological battlegrounds. In these fights, science isn’t always the winning side. Instead, beliefs become tribal markers, and people choose the “truth” that best aligns with their personal values and social identity.
Take climate change denial, for example. Many who reject mainstream climate science don’t necessarily doubt data or methodology—they reject what acknowledging climate change implies. If climate change is real, that means governments may need to regulate businesses, restrict fossil fuels, or promote sustainability policies that contradict free-market principles. For someone who values economic freedom and distrusts government intervention, accepting climate science can feel like betraying their core beliefs.
This pattern repeats across many areas of pseudoscience:
- Anti-vaccine beliefs are often rooted in personal autonomy and distrust of medical authority rather than an actual misunderstanding of immunology.
- Flat Earth theory isn’t just about the shape of the planet—it’s about rejecting the credibility of institutions like NASA, the government, and mainstream academia.
- Alternative medicine movements thrive because they empower individuals to “take control” of their health, even if the treatments have no scientific basis.
This is, of course, used by populist politicians. Politicians that mnow what their base wants to hear and have no moral problems in flat out lying to their voters.
“At the same time as scientific claims to knowledge and power are being undermined, some power structures are decoupling themselves from scientific knowledge, moving towards a kind of populist politics that are increasingly sceptical of knowledge,” Dyer writes.
“[…] This can also be seen in more subtle and insidious form in the way in which Brexit, for example, was campaigned for in terms of gut feelings and emotions rather than expert statistics and predictions. Science is increasingly facing problems with its ability to communicate ideas publicly, a problem that politicians, and flat earthers, are able to circumvent with moves towards populism.”
Conspiracy belief is “strongly related to lack of sociopolitical control or lack of psychological empowerment,” and such belief “is heightened when people feel unable to control outcomes and is reduced when their sense of control is affirmed”, the researcher explains. Finally, subscribing to a pseudoscientific trend is a way of satisfying our “desire to belong and to maintain a positive image of the self and the in-group,” helping us “valorize the self and the in-group by allowing blame for negative outcomes to be attributed to others.”
Image credits Mark Dixon / Wikimedia.
We can all play a role; and we should
Misinformation thrives because it spreads easily, appeals to emotions, and reinforces preexisting beliefs. But that doesn’t mean we’re powerless against it. Combating pseudoscience isn’t just the job of scientists, educators, or fact-checkers—it’s something we can all take part in. Here’s how you can help.
Prof. Douglas says pseudoscience is a refuge for some people; the safe place in our minds where we retreat to feel right, to hold our beliefs inviolate, to feel justified, to make our hardships mean something without facing our own faults.
For me, it’s a sign that something, somewhere, isn’t working right. When people weave stories to insulate them from society, that society has failed them. Regardless of the cause, however, it’s never been more important to tackle pseudoscience. We can all play a role in this, and we should invest the time and effort into it; otherwise, our society will continue to degrade.
Here are some simple things we can all do to fight the spread of pseudoscience:
1. Think Before You Share
In the age of social media, misinformation spreads faster than truth. A misleading headline, a viral conspiracy, or an out-of-context statistic can reach millions before anyone fact-checks it. Before you share something, ask yourself:
✔ Is this from a reliable source? Look for evidence-based reporting from established, fact-checked outlets.
✔ Does this claim sound too extreme or shocking? If something seems designed to provoke outrage or fear, it might be manipulation.
✔ Can I verify this elsewhere? If only sketchy websites or social media influencers are reporting on something, be skeptical.
A single careless share can amplify misinformation. A moment of fact-checking can stop it in its tracks.
2. Learn How to Spot Pseudoscience
Pseudoscience often sounds scientific—but lacks the key traits of real science. Here’s how to recognize it:
🚨 Cherry-picked data: Only showing evidence that supports the claim while ignoring contradicting facts.
🚨 Lack of falsifiability: No way to prove the claim wrong (e.g., “Big Pharma is suppressing the cure!”—if no evidence can disprove it, it’s not real science).
🚨 Reliance on anecdotes: Personal stories (“I cured my cancer with herbs!”) instead of controlled studies and reproducible results.
🚨 Conspiracy-driven narratives: Framing experts, researchers, or institutions as part of a secret agenda.
🚨 Science-y but vague jargon: Using technical words without clear definitions or testable theories.
If a claim avoids peer review, dismisses experts as “in on it,” or pushes an emotional agenda over data, be suspicious.
3. Engage, Don’t Attack
If someone in your life believes in pseudoscience, ridiculing them won’t help. In fact, mockery often pushes people deeper into their beliefs. Instead, engage with curiosity and respect.
🔹 Ask questions. Instead of saying, “That’s ridiculous,” try, “What convinced you of that?” or “How do you know that’s true?” This encourages critical thinking.
🔹 Find common ground. Many pseudoscience believers genuinely want the truth. Acknowledge that we all have a shared goal of understanding the world.
🔹 Introduce facts gradually. Instead of dumping studies and statistics, start small. Correct one misconception at a time.
🔹 Use storytelling. People remember stories more than raw data. Share real examples of how science has helped in ways that matter to them.
Changing minds takes time. The goal isn’t to “win” an argument—it’s to plant the seed of doubt that might grow into curiosity and critical thinking.
4. Support Science Communication & Education
One of the biggest reasons pseudoscience flourishes is a lack of accessible, engaging science communication. If people don’t understand science, they won’t trust it. Here’s how you can help:
📚 Encourage science literacy. Support organizations that promote science education in schools and communities.
🎙 Follow & share credible science communicators. Help amplify researchers, educators, and journalists who break down complex topics in understandable ways.
💡 Advocate for evidence-based policies. Whether it’s climate action, public health, or education, demand policies rooted in science, not ideology.
The more we make real science accessible and relatable, the less power pseudoscience has.
Let’s face it, we’re in a pretty dangerous spot.
We’re facing real, significant climate change. We’re seeing the reemergence of diseases that our vaccines had almost wiped out. We’re trying to go to Mars while some people still insist the Earth is flat. We can’t afford to waste time and energy being divided on topics that are clear-cut. We can’t afford to doubt the experts and put those that make us feel good in power. We can launch world-ending nukes with a button — we can’t risk having people not listen to basic scientific fact, or judging life through a twisted lens.
Pseudoscience doesn’t work. It’s appealing, intriguing, sometimes even exciting. But it’s rotten. It is, at its core, based on false information. It is a lie.
We can do better.
