Most of us are suspicious enough of what we hear to ignore most of it. When the other side needs to get more money from us, they first verbalize a lie. Then, they support it with pictures. The “Hockey Stick” is a perfect example. We see lots of busy lines, and an authoritative black line moving amidst them, which we assume is the average change. That black line is important. It leads us to making the assumption that it is some central point that has been far below the flat, black line above it. Then, we see it rising above the flat line, and there is important-looking red color illuminating the moving line as it goes above the average. “Hmmm”, we say, just as we are meant to, “Maybe this is something of concern.”
The very process of looking at the chart engages our mental processes. Because we enjoy analyzing so much, when we start to analyze, other thoughts are pushed out of consideration. We only think about what’s in front of us.
After we have analyzed the chart, and come to the conclusion its makers desired, we are “at home” with it. It has become a part of our mind. We believe it. We feel that we have learned something. We feel enlightened.
When someone says, “That chart is a fraud.”, we are more skeptical of him than of the lie that we have embraced. And, depending on how thoroughly we believed the chart, we may be angry. If our salaries depend on believing what’s in the chart, as do many at NASA and other organizations, we will fight against those who question its validity.
When someone proves that the chart is a fraud, the agency responsible may admit to “some inadvertent errors”, and will quickly go on to more charts that will support the lie. Since the number of people telling new lies has vastly better funding, new charts will fairly spew into the public eye.
As one may see, the actual truth is exactly opposite from the alarmist “hockey stick” in the preceding chart.
