Anti-Science Arguments Employing the tactics of Gish Gallop and Argumentum Ad Nauseam
This page will explore two common tactics used by
anti-science activists to present their propaganda: Gish Gallop, a
‘tribute to’ the behavior of creationist Duane Gish, and Argumentum
ad nauseam.
Gish ad nauseam Gallop (GanG)
is an anti-science tactic that combines argumentum ad nauseam and
Gish Gallop. Not only is
a stream of false claims released to overwhelm any legitimate
refutations, the same claims are repeated over and over and over…
enhancing the verbal diarrhea and releasing an avalanche of claims
designed to smother any opposition by force rather than reason.
The GanG activists
not only present a litany of claims - one after another, after another,
after another....
and are never swayed or distracted from dumping the next claim into
the mess by any specific refutation of a proceeding claim.
The result is an overwhelming tsunami of claims – which can
be released quickly and which, frequently require significant time
to refute because the issues are extremely complex and can’t be
cleaned up by a simple denial. It
is far easier to make a mess than to clean it up.
Anti-science Gish Gallop and Argumentum ad nauseam arguments frequently include a third anti-science tactic, unwarranted Fear Mongering, to try and sway public opinions by using misleading/misrepresented/fabricated statements like "fluoride is toxic" completely out of context of any exposure levels. By the time a rational, informed individual has replied to a "fluoride is toxic", or fluoride lowers IQ" claim, the GanG commenter has dumped another ton of garbage into the mix.
Here’s an example of
29 specific false, out-of-context &/or misleading Gish Gallop,
fear-mongering, anti-fluoridation claims, extracted from the comments in the example
page, and packaged into a single sentence:
Fluoride, used in
roach and rat poison(1),
is a toxic waste(2),
dangerous to health(3)
(1200 studies(4) show it is ineffective for teeth(5)
and causes cancer(6),
thyroid & pineal gland damage(7), broken hips from
brittle bones(8),
lowered IQ(9) and dental fluorosis in children(10),
kidney disease(11), arthritis(12) and other
serious health problems(13)) that is banned in most
countries(14), but in some is used as an
unregulated drug (medical
treatment – look at the warning labels on fluoride toothpaste)(15)
that’s dumped into the water as
synthetic (16)
H2SiF6 (which is contaminated with lead and arsenic)(17) and everyone
is forced to drink(18)
the poisonous drug, (f-)
in their tap water without
consent(19) and with
no control over the dose(20)
– a “Big Money scheme” (21) that is
immoral(22) , should be
illegal(23) and is an ineffective
waste of money because most treated water goes directly down the
drain(26) where it
poisons fish(27), and
thousands of science/health
professionals oppose fluoridation(28) based on
modern scientific evidence
(Green, Bashash, Till, Malin, etc.) that
shows the obvious dangers to health from fluoride exposure(29).
When posting in
comment sections, Gish Gallopers usually expand each
false/misleading claim into several sentences (by adding additional
irrelevant details) and present them one at a time, sometimes
waiting for a rebuttal, but usually
ignoring any posting of facts that refute the claim.
1) Fear is an extremely strong motivator and
survival mechanism. However, fear can be hijacked by
unscrupulous individuals and employed to manipulate beliefs
and actions of others.
2) Since the
anti-science claims can appear, on the surface, logical and valid –
and are presented with great passion – these tactics can be
effectively used to sway the beliefs of well-meaning citizens who
don’t have the training and/or experience to understand the complex
scientific issues behind each of the claims.
3) It can take several pages of detailed discussion with legitimate
supporting scientific evidence to refute each of the above claims –
just stating fluoridation doesn’t lower IQ , cause cancer or harm
the environment, is probably not sufficient “evidence” to cause
people to ignore the claims.
4) If a person does not fully understand the underlying science, it
is impossible for many people to actually understand the arguments –
either those that are science-based or the anti-science opinions –
but they must trust someone.
Because most anti-science claims are very simply stated and
are carefully designed to invoke fear about the consequences of the
science-based alternative, those individuals who don’t fully
understand the underlying issues can be scammed into believing they
are doing the right, ethical thing by trusting the anti-science
propaganda.
Over a several week period in February 2020, I engaged in three comment sections with a vocal anti-fluoridation activist who frequently uses GanG tactics in any comment section that references fluoride or fluoridation. I kept replying (mostly) with specific evidence-based refutations of the opinions presented and repeated challenges to provide specific, relevant scientific evidence to prove any of the opinions that were presented. I provide This Example of the three comment sections with about 369 comments, with about 148 from the GanG practitioner.