When I was younger the class of people we made fun of, and frankly, thought were quite odd, believed in UFOs. They also believed in ESP (extrasensory perception), thought magic was real, faith healing, telekinesis, auras, perpetual motion machines. The list is long, and James Randi was probably involved in debunking them.
Later they gathered on the Art Bell program: machinery parts on Mars, Cupacobras, Bigfoot, modern witchcraft, Area 51, UFOs (still), holes of infinite depth, all sorts of odd things. I liked that show, because this is when I realized something important about life: some people are dangerous, not because they will hurt you, but because they will hurt themselves.
Moron is a good name for one, if you can get past the legitimate (but outdated) meaning for the mentally impaired. Dingbats, silly-willy's, crazy, nutcases, the list is equally long.
Should we cancel them? By no means! Keep them around, or let them continue, not because they can be reformed (they can't), but because they let us know from a great distance that they are dangerous and should be avoided.
There will always be people around us who are dangerous. Some will hurt us if we get close, others will just drain you. Some will lazy themselves into trouble and expect you to get them out. It's awesome when you can see them afar off and avoid them. So yes, let them carry their banners high for all to see. That's the greatness of Art Bell as an interviewer. He did something tremendous in radio: ask honest questions of his people, then let them just talk. He had no interest in being the main person talking, that was time for his guests. He is the only interviewer with a natural aptitude for listening I've ever heard. Did he accept the weirdness? Not that I ever heard. But he knew about it all. He had a good memory, and knew the relationships between the people in the field. And he didn't need to play dumb the way Alan Alda did for Nova. He was curious, and asked probing questions, and he went light on challenging any guest or caller; he wanted to know a person well by listening.
So yes, keep the oddballs about. Are they still with us? To answer we need to know what makes an wacko a wacko? Take your average flat earther. Ask them to travel to the edge with you, and then ask them how far away that edge is. They might hem and haw, but can't tell you. Why not? Because there is no evidence. This is, I think, the hallmark of wackos: belief with no evidence. They will believe what others say, but they are fundamentally dissociated from reality. Like the alchemists were. They sustain their beliefs by getting into a niche of others with the same beliefs. I'd venture a guess that they like the sociality of the niche, they find friends there, and that sustains them (particularly in the se lonely times).
But that they are not hewing close to reality is a problem. And without reality, you can go some very weird directions. Those places are what I want to avoid. I like reality. I like its permanence and reliability.
So who among us are not paying attention to reality. Flat Earthers, conspiracy theorists, certainly, but are there others, less out there but still dangerous?
What about climate alarmists? They want us to collectively spend something over 6 trillion dollars making the world climate-change-proof. That's a lot of your money they want to spend to keep the climate cold with low carbon dioxide. That means fewer plants growing, and less food. Six trillion dollars for less food. Not exactly a trade I'd make.
Last week, HSBC’s Stuart Kirk, the head of responsible investing in the bank’s asset management group, gave a talk that is rattling the investment industry. It was titled, “Why investors need not worry about climate risk,” and it rattled a lot of cages. The primary response is that he's going against the settled science and should be cancelled. He probably will be. The thing is, he backed everything he said up with reports from the climatologists. He used the climate activists data to make his point, but because he came up with a future that doesn't require activism, or indeed, any response whatever, the activist went ape. His boss moved to mollify the activists and suspended him.
Here is the talk he gave:
This guy strikes me as one with a firm grasp on reality. And he'll probably lose his job because of the clamoring crowds of morons who think he said the wrong thing. But he agreed with all the climate activists except in the consequences: he said it just doesn't matter because humanity has dealt with lots worse and gotten through it fine. Did you see the consequences in the end? Let the climate alarmists set monetary and governmental policy and the world economy takes a huge hit, when it's never taken a huge hit before. Not even the world wars caused much of a stir in the global economy. But the climate activists would.
So, keep your antenna up for the wackos. Know who they are. And avoid them.
The funny thing is, it's not the poor numbskulls who are the most dangerous. It's the rich ones. Thomas Sowell calls them the "Self Anointed." These are the haughty, the proud, the rich folks who think that their money makes them right, who can really do the damage. They are easy to avoid in casual life, but they do want your money and your vote. Here is an example of the very poor consequences of listening to them, from Sowell:
Can or should we do anything with them? No, just leave them alone:
Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed – in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical – and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack. For that reason, greater caution is called for when dealing with a stupid person than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.