Iain M. Banks once wrote that “at some point a conspiracy is so powerful and far reaching that there is no point in worrying about it even if it’s true.” If it is true, there’s nothing you can do about it. We have no shortage of conspiracy theories floating around today. From the reptilian conspiracy, the moon-landing hoax conspiracy, the 9/11 conspiracy, and so on, there are plenty.

The interesting thing about conspiracy theories is that they are very much based on a lack of critical thinking. They may be critical of the official story, they may be critical of the evidence, but they aren’t thinking critically. I think one of the aspects of critical thinking is that one lots of people who think critically come together, they rule things out, rather than consistently come up with new ideas.

Consider the difference between religious scholarship and theology. Theology fragments. Christianity got divided during the protestant reformation. The protestant reformation further divided itself to different sects. The different sects latter reform and split off again. All because someone gets a new idea, but no one can rule out the old one. This leads to some unique jokes. But the fact is that Christian theology keeps splitting, and each division goes on it’s merry way.

Professors of religious studies, however, look at the evidence and rule things out until they get closer and close to the truth. The amazing fact it that the belief of the person is irrelevant. Some may be Catholic, some Protestant, others atheists, but they agree on the facts and reconstruct history from there. What’s telling is that this doesn’t seem to disrupt their faith, and they may not argue theology with their pastor.

Articles about Conspiracy Theory conventions are interesting because they highlight how everyone goes there and talks about their own pet theory. Rarely do they argue to rule out each other’s explanation, like in science or any other academic field of study. It’s as though they will believe anything and are united in their rejection of the official story.

So long as this lack of critical thinking prevails, and the conspiracy theories diverge and separate as to who did it, why, and how, I think they lack any credibility at all. Meanwhile science converges on the truth. We don’t have it yet, but we get close and more refined all the time. Scientists will go through brief periods coming up with new hypothesis and proposing new theories, but then they get to work to try to disprove their own and other’s ideas. Only then do we move towards what is the reality of the situation.

This second part, this trimming away of bad ideas, is fundamental to critical thinking, and something that is lacking in the conspiracy theory communities.