Welcome to this deep dive.
Okay.
Where we're gonna be exploring something
a little bit out there.
We're gonna be looking at how people
are connecting natural disasters.
Right.
With social issues.
Oh, interesting.
And you might be surprised to hear
that this isn't a new thing at all.
Really?
Yeah, it's been going on for a long time.
People have been attributing things like hurricanes
and earthquakes to like divine retribution
or moral failings in society.
Like as a punishment.
Exactly.
So we're gonna be taking a look
at some specific examples.
Okay.
Starting with an article from Psychology Today.
Okay.
That was published back in 2018.
Right.
And it delves into this televangelist, Pat Robertson.
Oh, yeah.
And his claims that hurricanes are somehow linked
to LGBTQ acceptance.
Wow.
And then to bring things a little closer to home.
Okay.
We're also gonna be looking at some news articles
from November 2024.
Reporting on statements made by Tucker Carlson,
who suggests a link between the frequency of hurricanes
and the practice of abortion.
Wow, so this is like a pattern
across like different social issues.
Exactly.
Interesting.
And I think it's especially interesting to think about this
in the context of the 2024 election.
Yeah.
You know, with all of the political tension
and all the rhetoric swirling around.
So we're gonna examine these claims themselves.
All right.
We're gonna look at what evidence, if any, supports them.
And then really like what the impact
of this kind of messaging might be,
particularly in the society that's already pretty divided.
Yeah, that's a good point.
So let's start by going back to 2018.
Okay.
I was reading about Pat Robertson.
Yeah.
And this wasn't the first time that he claimed to have
some kind of influence over hurricanes through prayer.
He's actually known for pronouncements
about creating a shield of protection.
Oh, wow.
Against these major storms.
There's even a record of him saying that he did this.
Wow.
Hurricane Esther back in 1961.
Okay.
And again, for Hurricane Florence in 2018.
So this is like a recurring theme for him.
It really is.
And what I think is fascinating here is that,
Robertson has a history of connecting natural disasters
to like divine punishment for actions
that he views as morally wrong.
For example, he suggested that Hurricane Andrew in 1992
was God's judgment against homosexuality.
Okay.
He's even implied that the 9-11 attacks
were a form of divine retribution.
So he's really drawing these connections.
Yeah, he is.
He's also seen events and like a moral cause.
Absolutely.
Wow.
And the Psychology Today article highlighted research.
Okay.
That specifically looked into this idea
that there's a connection between LGBTQ acceptance
and the intensity of hurricanes.
Okay.
A researcher named Aidan Bissell-Siders conducted a study
where he actually crunched the numbers
and compared data on hurricane damage
with levels of LGBTQ acceptance in different areas.
So he was really trying to see if there was a correlation
there.
He was.
Okay.
What did the study find?
Yeah, what did it find?
Well, it turns out there's absolutely no correlation
Really?
Between gay marriage and storm damage.
Wow.
In fact, Isell-Siders analyzed data from 2005 to 2015.
Okay.
And found that states with higher rates of gay marriage.
Interesting.
Actually experienced less hurricane damage on average.
Huh.
Okay, so less damage.
Yeah.
Interesting.
Which directly contradicts Robertson's claims.
It does, yeah.
And it actually points to a very human phenomenon.
Okay.
Known as teleological thinking.
Teleological thinking.
Have you ever noticed how we humans try to find a reason
for everything?
Oh yeah, all the time.
It's like our brains are wired to see patterns and purpose,
even in random events.
Right, we try to make sense of things
even when there's not necessarily a reason.
Yeah.
So what is teleological thinking then?
Well, teleological thinking is a type of cognitive bias.
Okay.
Where we seek meaning and purpose
in random events like natural disasters.
When something bad happens like a hurricane.
Yeah.
It's comforting to believe that there's a reason for it.
Right.
Even if that reason is based on prejudice.
Right.
Or a lack of understanding about the natural world.
Or just a need to blame something.
Right, it's like we're trying to make sense of chaos
by assigning blame.
I see, so we simplify things to understand them.
Yeah.
God.
And this can actually make people more susceptible
to believing.
Well really?
Conspiracy theories.
It's easier to accept a simple albeit flawed explanation
than to grapple with the complexity of scientific evidence.
Yeah.
Or accept that sometimes things happen
for no discernible reason.
It's much easier to just point the finger at something
than have an answer.
Yeah.
Okay.
So you're saying that this tendency
to search for meaning, even where there isn't any,
might be part of what's fueling these claims
that hurricanes are caused by certain social groups
or behaviors?
Right, because it gives people a sense of control.
Exactly.
If we just stop doing this, then the hurricane won't happen.
Yeah.
Okay.
And you see this pattern repeating in other areas too.
Really?
Like where?
Think about historical events like the Black Death.
Oh wow, yeah.
People in the 14th century couldn't
grasp the scientific explanation of a plague.
Right, they didn't have the knowledge.
They didn't.
Yeah.
So they blamed it on various groups,
including Jews and foreigners, because it
offered a sense of control and understanding
in a terrifying and confusing situation.
It makes sense to want to explain it somehow.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
So while it might be comforting to believe
that we can control or prevent natural disasters
through certain actions, the reality is far more complex.
It is.
Yeah.
These things are complicated.
There's a lot of factors that go into it.
There are.
And attributing these events to specific groups or behaviors
is a way of oversimplifying a complex issue
and often serves to reinforce existing prejudices
and anxieties within society.
Right.
It's kind of a dangerous way of thinking.
It can be.
Yeah.
So now let's fast forward to 2024.
OK.
Right on the eve of the presidential election.
All right.
We see Tucker Carlson making a statement on Steve Bannon's
podcast, where he links the rise in hurricanes
to wait for it.
This is going to be good.
Abortion.
He actually said, and I quote, it's probably abortion,
actually.
Wow.
He really said that.
He did.
OK.
And then he went on to compare abortion to human sacrifice.
So we're seeing a similar kind of moral judgment
being placed on an issue.
Exactly.
OK.
And this is where it gets really interesting and concerning
because Carlson's claims completely disregard
the established scientific link between climate change
and the increasing intensity and frequency of hurricanes.
So we're talking about actual science here.
We are.
OK.
There's a wealth of research demonstrating
how rising global temperatures are contributing
to more powerful storms.
But Carlson seems to be dismissing this entirely.
So he's choosing to ignore the science.
He is.
Wow.
And the scientific community definitely pushed back
against his claims.
They did.
In fact, the Daily Mail article we have here
includes quotes from atmospheric scientists
who didn't mince words.
OK.
They called Carlson's statements blatant lies.
Wow.
And emphasized that his claims are not
in line with science in any way.
So they're very clearly stating that this is not
scientifically accurate.
Yeah.
OK.
They stress that attributing hurricane patterns
to anything other than established
meteorological mechanisms, especially climate change,
is incredibly irresponsible.
So they're really calling him out on this.
They are.
Yeah.
And what's particularly interesting here
is that Carlson's strategy echoes
the same kind of teleological thinking.
Oh, OK.
We discussed earlier.
Right.
He's essentially offering a simplified explanation
for a complex phenomenon that taps
into preexisting anxieties and beliefs.
So it's kind of like a way of manipulating people's fears.
It is.
By linking hurricanes to abortion,
he's tapping into deeply held moral convictions.
Right.
And using them to promote a specific agenda.
It's a very calculated approach.
Yeah.
It's almost as if he's saying that if we
want to prevent these devastating storms,
we need to change our behavior.
Right.
And by framing abortion as a kind of human sacrifice,
that's angering nature.
He's invoking this very primal fear of divine retribution.
Right.
Going back to the idea of punishment.
Exactly.
Yeah.
Which, as we've discussed, has been a recurring theme
throughout history.
It has.
It's a very powerful narrative.
Yeah.
Exactly.
It creates a narrative where certain actions are perceived
as upsetting in natural order.
Leading to consequences like hurricanes.
Interesting.
This type of rhetoric can be very powerful.
It can.
Because it simplifies complex issues.
Right.
And offers a sense of control.
Yeah.
And the face of uncertainty and fear.
We want to believe that we have some agency.
We do.
In these situations.
Yeah.
It's a very compelling narrative.
Yeah.
Especially for people who are already predisposed to believe.
Right.
That certain social or moral behaviors
are inherently wrong or dangerous.
Yeah.
But as we've seen, these claims lack any scientific basis.
Right.
And often serve to deflect attention away
from the real issues at play.
Yeah.
Like climate change in this case.
Exactly.
It's a distraction tactic.
It is.
That prevents us from having meaningful discussion.
Yeah.
About how to address these challenges
in a productive and evidence based way.
Right.
It's taking us further away from a solution.
It is.
Yeah.
And this leads us to a crucial question.
What are the potential consequences
of spreading this kind of misinformation?
Yeah.
That's a good question.
Particularly when it's amplified by someone with a platform
as large as Tucker Carlson's.
Like what kind of impact can that have on society?
Exactly.
Yeah.
That's what we're going to dig into next.
OK.
I'm interested to hear this.
We'll examine the potential impact of these narratives
and explore why they resonate with certain segments
of the population.
OK.
Sounds good.
I think it's important to understand
that misinformation like this doesn't exist in a vacuum.
Right.
It thrives in environments where people are already
feeling anxious and uncertain.
And when you combine that with a figure like Carlson
who has a significant following and a talent for tapping
into those emotions, while you have a potent recipe
for spreading potentially harmful ideas.
So it's not just about the claims themselves.
Right.
It's about the context in which they're being made.
Yeah.
And the potential impact they have on people.
Beliefs and actions.
Yeah.
We've seen throughout history that when people are faced
with fear and uncertainty, they're
more likely to grasp onto simple explanations.
Right.
Even if those explanations are based on prejudice
or misinformation.
Yeah.
Like we were saying before with that.
Exactly.
The geological thinking.
Yeah.
And when those explanations are repeated and amplified
by influential figures, it can lead to real world consequences.
And in this case, we're talking about the potential
to derail efforts to address climate change.
Exactly.
Which is a very real and pressing threat.
Precisely if people believe that hurricanes are caused
by something other than climate change,
they're less likely to support policies or make
lifestyle changes.
Yeah.
Aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Right.
It creates a false sense of security
and undermines the urgency of taking action
to address the root causes of climate change.
It's like we're being distracted from the real problem
by these scapegoats.
Instead of focusing on solutions to climate change,
we're arguing about whether or not abortion
is causing hurricanes.
And it's not just about distracting from solutions.
Right.
It's also about creating division within society.
When you blame natural disasters on specific groups
or behaviors, you're essentially pitting people
against each other.
You're creating an us versus them mentality.
Exactly.
Where one group is seen as responsible for the suffering
of another.
Exactly.
And this can lead to increased prejudice discrimination
and even violence against those groups.
Wow.
We've seen this happen time and again throughout history.
Yeah, like we're.
Think about the Salem witch trials
or the persecution of Jews during the Black Death.
These are extreme examples, of course.
Right.
But they illustrate how dangerous it
can be to scapegoat specific groups for events
that they have no control over.
So even though these claims might seem outlandish
to some people, they can have a real impact on how we perceive
and interact with each other, especially in a society that's
already polarized.
Absolutely.
That's why it's so crucial to be aware of these narratives
and to be able to recognize them for what they are,
attempts to simplify complex issues,
exploit people's fears, and promote a specific agenda.
We've talked a lot about Pat Robertson and Tucker Carlson.
Yeah.
But it's important to remember that they're not the only ones
making these kinds of claims.
Right.
This type of rhetoric is becoming increasingly common.
It is.
Especially among certain conservative talk show
hosts and media outlets.
It's a pattern that's been gaining momentum in recent years,
fueled in part by social media, and the rise of echo chambers
where people are only exposed to information that
confirms their existing beliefs.
So what can we do about it?
That's a good question.
How can we combat this spread of misinformation
and prevent it from having a negative impact on our society?
Well, it's not an easy answer.
Yeah.
But I think it starts with education and critical thinking.
We need to help people develop the skills
to evaluate information critically
and to be able to distinguish between credible sources
and those that are spreading misinformation.
We also need to be more aware of our own biases.
Absolutely.
And how they might be influencing
our perceptions of the world.
It's important to be open to considering
different perspectives and to be willing to change our minds
when presented with new evidence.
And it's crucial to have open and honest conversations
with people who hold different views.
We may not always agree, but we need
to be able to engage in respectful dialogue
and to try to understand where the other person is coming from.
It's about fostering a culture of critical thinking, empathy,
and a willingness to engage with complex issues
in a nuanced way.
And it's about holding those who spread misinformation
accountable for their words and actions.
So as we approach this 2024 election and beyond,
we need to be vigilant about these kinds of narratives
and to actively work to counter them
with reason and compassion.
Exactly.
It's about recognizing that words have power
and that the stories we tell ourselves about the world
can have a profound impact on our reality.
That's a good point.
And it's about choosing to create a world where
truth, empathy, and understanding prevail over fear,
division, and misinformation.
OK, so we've covered a lot of ground today.
We have.
But I think it's important to recap the key points we've
discussed.
OK.
We started by looking at the claims made by Pat Robertson,
who's been linking hurricanes to LGBTQ acceptance for decades.
Then we explored how Tucker Carlson, just days
before the 2024 election, suggested
that abortion is causing the increase in hurricane frequency
and intensity.
Right.
And we discussed how both of these claims
are not only unfounded, but they actually
distract from the real issue at hand, climate change.
Exactly.
We also talked about how this type of rhetoric exploits
people's fears and anxieties, reinforcing existing prejudices
and creating divisions within society.
So what does this all mean for you, the listener?
Yeah, that's a great question.
How can you apply what we've discussed to your own life
and your interactions with the world around you?
That's a great question.
And it's one that each of us needs to answer for ourselves.
But here are a few things to consider as we wrap up.
OK.
As we kind of bring this deep dive to a close,
I'm wondering what stood out to you the most.
Well, I think for me, it's just the blatant disregard
for scientific evidence.
Right.
You know, it's like.
It's like we're choosing to ignore what we know.
Yeah, and it's like we're going back to like, you know,
the dark ages.
Yeah, it's like we're regressing in a way.
We are.
But I also think it's the way these narratives just tap
into our deepest fears and anxieties.
For sure.
It's like they're playing on our emotions.
They are.
Rather than appealing to our logic.
Exactly.
Yeah.
And I think that's what makes them so dangerous.
Yeah, it's easy to dismiss these claims as like fringe theories.
Right.
But we've seen how they can gain traction
and influence public discourse.
Especially when they're amplified by influential figures
with large platforms.
Exactly.
You know, if you're constantly hearing that hurricanes are
caused by abortion or LGBTQ acceptance,
it can start to shape your perception of those issues.
It can.
Even if you don't consciously realize it.
Yeah, you might start to see those groups as a threat.
Right.
As somehow responsible for the devastation caused
by these natural disasters.
Exactly.
And that can lead to increased prejudice discrimination.
Even violence against those groups.
It's really scary.
It is.
It's creating this climate of fear and division.
Yeah.
Which is exactly what those spreading this misinformation
are often hoping to achieve.
It's like a tactic.
It is.
It's a way to divide us.
Mm, yeah.
So how do we break this cycle?
Well, that's the million dollar question, isn't it?
It is.
How do we combat this spread of misinformation?
Right.
And promote a more informed and compassionate understanding
of the world.
Well, I think it starts with us.
Yeah.
So listeners, we have the power to be
critical consumers of information.
We don't have to just accept everything we hear or read
at face value.
Question your sources.
Exactly.
Look for evidence.
Consider different perspectives.
Don't be afraid to engage in respectful dialogue
with people who hold different views.
That's a good point.
You know, you might be surprised at what you learn.
You might.
And you might even be able to change someone's mind.
It's also important to support organizations.
Right.
That are working to combat misinformation
and promote media literacy.
OK.
There are many great resources out there
that can help you develop the skills to identify and debunk
false claims.
So it's really about empowering ourselves with knowledge.
Knowledge is power.
Exactly.
The more informed you are, the better equipped
you'll be to resist the allure of these harmful narratives.
And to make decisions that are based on facts, reason,
and empathy.
And perhaps most importantly, be kind.
Oh, that's a good point.
Remember that behind every claim, every belief
there's a human being, even if you disagree with someone,
try to understand where they're coming from.
Engage with them in a respectful and compassionate way.
That's a great point to end on.
It is.
We can't let these divisive narratives tear us apart.
We need to find ways to connect with each other,
to build bridges of understanding,
and to work together to create a world where truth
and compassion prevail.
I love that.
So thank you for joining us on this deep dive.
Yeah.
Thanks for listening, everyone.
We hope it's going to be useful food for thought.
For sure.
And inspired you to continue exploring
these complex issues.
Absolutely.