• AP Magazine

    An alternative way to explore and explain the mysteries of our world. "Published since 1985, online since 2001."

  • 1
Archaeotrek—Alternate Perceptions Magazine, January 2017

Fefiphobia: Skeptics’ Irrational Fear of Giants—Part 2

by: Dr. Greg Little

Note: Part 1 was in the last issue of AP Magazine.

One of the primary goals of skeptics is to forward their beliefs about what they call “rational thinking.” For example, some skeptics argue that telling children fairy tale stories is wrong because it fosters irrational beliefs. Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, the Easter bunny, giants, and religious ideas are all irrational and simply wrong to them. So wrong that they want people to stop telling such tales to children. Also wrong is the idea of a mythological afterlife and all of the religious groups who believe in it. To skeptics, the idea of giants seemingly supports the Bible—so it has to be denied in every way possible. Skeptics will bring up “false” newspaper articles telling of supposed 20-foot tall giants and use these articles to ridicule the fact that many 7-foot tall skeletons were actually found. It is a ploy.

Skeptics are well organized and have a special team of Wikipedia Administrators devoted to making sure that anything they deem to be “irrational” is either deleted from Wikipedia or ridiculed through the use of terms such as “claimed,” “self-professed,” “alleged,” or similar terms. Perhaps more importantly, most of the Wiki-guerrilla skeptics are not even qualified in the fields in which they edit (actually they “pontificate”). Paradoxically, these same skeptics ridicule those they deem to be irrational as “unqualified.” There is a Wiki page and Facebook page devoted to Guerrilla Skeptics. In brief, they have managed to “sanitize” Wikipedia to suit their purpose. And Wikipedia allows it—making it an unreliable source for information.

Skeptics typically don’t like creationism or religion of any kind and live in their own type of “fairy tale” world. They are often bullies on the internet, usually hiding behind anonymous names and monikers like “666” and “.” Yes, just “.”, maybe this person’s name is “dot” or “period.” It actually reveals a lot. Personally I fully subscribe to evolution, but I prefer to allow people the freedom to decide for themselves. Should creationism be taught in public schools? I don’t think so. Parents, religious organizations, and perhaps religious schools should be allowed to do so if they wish. Most adult skeptics grew up with Santa Claus and the tooth fairy, but that didn’t stop them from adapting skeptical views. So why won’t they allow others the same freedom?

The reasons are complicated but understandable. Skepticism is intimately tied to a particular political leaning. If you follow the blatherings of any individual skeptic for a period of time, eventually all of his political views will be expressed as factually-based. They can’t help but issue their political feelings. For example, during this past election cycle (and continuing on today) skeptics did everything they could to “educate” the public about the evils of Trump and any other Republican and Bible-believer they could bash. Now I am NOT a Republican, but professionally I keep my political views to myself. Nor do I issue my political views in articles about archaeology, psychology, or any other academic area of interest. It’s not professional. I learned long, long ago that when you mix politics and religion with professional or academic pursuits, you have entered the realm of your beliefs—not facts. I think it’s important for professionals to separate what they see as real science from their beliefs. And it just seems silly and illogical to mix politics with carbon date disputes, skepticism about skeletal size, and ancient history. I really can’t see what the possibilities about Atlantis might have to do with Trump or Clinton, can you? Understand however that there is a background agenda at work, motivated and energized by what Carl Jung would call ego “inflation.” Skeptics are certain that they are the holders of truth. Their “truth” might start with science and what is broadly accepted at any given time, but with ego “inflation” they come to believe that everything they believe and feel is scientific truth and fact. They become convinced that you are too stupid to discern truth, so they want to control what passes for truth, sometimes cited under the aura of “scientific fact.” But it’s only their “truth.” The real bottom line is that skeptics will use whatever they can grab to make you believe that they are both smarter and better than everyone else. They want to control all messages and want to take the freedom you have to look at the world and judge for yourself. In essence, they say that those of you who watch television for entertainment are stupid. You can’t discern scientific fact from fantasy. So anything on television that doesn’t fit their ideas of truth has to be removed. Or so they say.

One result from the skeptic’s control is that a lot of the real history of the ancient world is kept a mystery. And that’s a real shame. There are many of us who would donate to archaeology if they weren’t seemingly just intent on finding only what supports their current beliefs. So what we have instead is that many archaeologists rant about shows like “Ancient Aliens.” Most people see Ancient Aliens as entertainment—that’s what it is. Is any of the stuff it shows true? Sure. But certainly some is just entertaining speculation. For many people shows like “Ancient Aliens” and the “Curse of Oak Island” are the only ways they get exposed to the ancient world and the marvels that have been uncovered. There are a lot of possibilities in the world of the unknown. Most people can see that the theme of ancient aliens goes way, way too far, yet skeptics would have you believe that everything that is an “alternative” to their accepted beliefs is irrational and somehow destructive. I believe that people can decide for themselves. The public can also choose to buy 300-page books by archaeologists for $80 if they wish. And no one is stopping skeptics and archaeologists from joining hands and starting their own cable network. Quit complaining and do it.

One brief story I’ll relate is that back a year ago, Andrew Collins visited us during his birthday. It was on a Friday and a lot of people showed up to meet him. Ancient Aliens was also on, and Andrew related that it was the first time he’d seen so many of the shows. A couple attorneys (friends) showed up. One of them was a state criminal prosecutor and the other in private criminal practice. Both of them watched Ancient Aliens regularly and found it entertaining and thought-provoking. They didn’t believe everything on the show but liked seeing the many sites shown. What’s it all mean? First, they know it’s just entertainment. Second, they know that it’s filled with rampant speculation. Finally, they like seeing the archaeology sites. I believe that people need to have the freedom to choose for themselves what they want to believe. One thing I’ve learned over 67 years is that people change over the course of their life. People need the freedom to learn, grow, and change. Hopefully for the better, but we all know that isn’t always the outcome.

A Message To All “Alternative” Researchers

The best way for the alternate community to deal with the Wikipedia mess is to avoid it altogether. Get your pages on Wikipedia deleted. Don’t reference Wikipedia, but do use its “Commons” photos to your advantage. Don’t allow your photos to be used on Wikipedia or quotes from your written material to be used there. There are alternatives to Wikipedia. In brief, Wikipedia is all about ego. Whatever website you have, pay to have it moved up on search engines. Link to other sites with similar content. Use twitter to promote your material and RSS feeds from sites that share your ideals. One last note here. Wikipedia will eventually cease to exist. How can I say this with such certainty? Everything eventually fades away, either through becoming obsolete, or merging, or just ceasing due to lack of funds. It was a good idea gone bad.

Last, here is a simple opinion. No matter how hard you try, and no matter what you do, you cannot get acceptance and recognition in the community of skeptics. If you are an alternative writer—or a member of the fringe as the skeptics will refer to you—nothing you do will get you access to the mainstream. Trying to do so is a mistake and the motive about trying goes back to ego and inflation.

The Skeptic’s World

There have been a lot of negative articles issued about skeptics and their organizations, and these articles tend to get buried when you try to find them. The skeptical organizations are devoted to making skeptics look as good as possible and those they loathe as bad as possible. In the future, you’ll see papers that analyze some of the charges made against skeptics. But for the moment, if you are interested in reviewing some of the articles others have put out, click on the links below. They describe the skeptics’ world in ways I can’t. Some of the articles I agree with, some I don’t. And there are others I just don’t know enough about to comment. Perhaps the main thing to keep in mind with this is how angry people have become with skeptics’ attacks.













Saturday, April 13, 2024