Conspiratorial Thinking

What the research says about people who believe hurricanes are man made

“Say whatever the f*** you want, that hurricane was man made,” the woman spit into the camera. She is dressed in a white tank top, her blonde hair pulled hastily back. She looks to be in her early 50s.

The comments under the video online are full of, “Amen, sister” and, “Finally, someone said it.”

Dozens of videos are made in response, with creepy music set behind pictures users deem suspicious, including a building in Africa that supposedly shows where hurricanes are made, weather maps that depict vortex shapes, and videos of downed trees with text that say “this was no natural storm.”

Let’s get the high school science out of the way: the first law of thermodynamics teaches us that energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only change forms. An average hurricane, not a particularly strong one like Hurricane Helene, produces 1.5 trillion watts of power. That is the equivalent of a 10 megaton nuclear bomb exploding every 20 minutes. (By contrast, the nuclear bombs the United States dropped on Japan had a combined power of .4% of a 10-megaton bomb.) 

Because we cannot create energy, the energy for a hurricane has to be transformed from another source. There is no human technology that exists that can transform 1.5 trillion watts of power from one energy source to another and unleash it in the form of a weather system. Not even close.

And it's not rational or reasonable to think so.

But here’s the thing: belief in conspiracy theories, the idea that a secret group is controlling something with the intent to harm a person or society, doesn’t require rationality or reasonability. In fact, the opposite.

Conspiratorial thinking is strongly related to delusion-proneness, which is defined by a propensity to engage in intuitive and irrational thinking, rather than thinking based in reason. Researchers who have studied more than 158,000 people in multiple countries say that people who are likely to engage in this “the government is creating hurricanes to rig the election” thinking are likely to eschew complex and effortful thinking in favor of effortless thinking.

This explains why it seems to be so difficult to talk people out of conspiratorial belief systems: they often lack an ability or desire to engage in effortful thinking, which abandoning their currently held beliefs would require. 

People who engage in knee-jerk explanations for the world also tend to be more dogmatic and close-minded, according to researchers, making them less likely to engage with new and better information, even if they were willing to exert themselves with effortful thinking.

Studies show that people who believe in conspiracy theories are more likely to believe that the world is inherently dangerous and that they have little control over their surroundings and circumstances. They are also more prone to cynicism, anxiety, poor self-esteem, narcissism, personality disorders, and depression. 

You’re going to think I am making this up, but this is an actual psychological research term. People who have strong beliefs in conspiracy theories tend to score more highly on something researchers call “bullsh*t receptivity.” (Yes, you can find reputable studies on this exact concept.) 

Bullsh*t receptivity is how quickly and easily someone is likely to believe something they like the sound of, but for which there is weak evidence. (For example: Haitian migrants eating people’s pets in Springfield, OH.) People who believe misinformation on the internet tend to score more highly in bullsh*t receptivity than others.

Another persistent reason people tend to be drawn to conspiratorial thinking is that they have lower senses of self esteem, and believing in conspiracies helps them have a positive image of themselves. Researchers say, “By endorsing a conspiracy theory that places the blame on others (often members of another group), people can retain a sense of superiority, both at the individual and group levels… ascribing blame to an outgroup for societal ills may reinforce notions that one’s ingroup is blameless and superior. Thus, conspiracy theories should be particularly compelling to those with a fragile sense of self and/or those who perceive outgroup threat.” 

There is something that feels good in our minds when we are in possession of a secret truth that others are failing to see or that you believe they are blinded to. It strengthens a sense of community, which humans are biologically driven to have. 

Think about a time when you have gotten a particularly juicy piece of gossip and how exciting it is to be able to call up a friend and say, “You are NOT going to believe this.” In that moment, we are in possession of a secret truth, and we feel bonded to the person we share it with. It fires up the neurotransmitters in our brain, making us even more susceptible to it in the future. 

I was recently at an event when someone whispered to me, “I just have to say… I used to be an avid conspiracy theorist. And you used to make me really mad by countering many of the narratives I believed in. I was just a really sad and angry person. But I am glad I put in the work, and the way I engage with the world now is much more positive and healthy. I feel like I actually can make a difference.”

And isn’t that honestly what we all need? We want to feel like what we do matters. Like who we are matters. That we can affect positive change in our communities. 

Imagine then, two different scenarios: one in which the hurricane lady in the white tank top is hit with a barrage of insults making fun of her appearance, the way she speaks, how dumb she is for having so much bullsh*t receptivity and how little effort she is willing to expend in critically thinking about basic high school science.

What is the likely outcome of that experience? Is she going to say, “Wow, I guess I am really dumb, paranoid, depressed, cynical, and full of anxiety. I need to shape up and use my brain differently.”

Obviously not, right? She is more likely to believe that there is a secret group of people at work in the world to unleash hurricanes on southern states, because of how they behave. They have now reinforced her previously held ideas.

In the second scenario, the hurricane lady is treated as capable and willing to have an open mind. She isn’t mocked for her hair or her clothing choices, but is instead invited into a big tent in which people are allowed to change their minds without being shamed.

Now, I can’t promise the second scenario will work quickly or will even work on everyone, but there is a far greater chance that people who are treated with dignity and respect will come around to the truth.

Shame is not a motivator of positive change. It’s time to build a bigger tent, because if we want something to change, we have to change what we’re doing.