The Have WMDs and the Have Not WMDs

Scott Hardie | August 8, 2006
I find this story mildly amusing: Poll finds half of Americans believe Hussein had WMDs. Not the headline; that's just sad. It's the bald, prominent bias on full display in the article that tickles me. After establishing that 50% of the country believes something, the writer adopts an attitude that it should be obvious they're wrong. I'm all about presenting the facts without a hint of doubt, but since when is it so astounding that 50% of the country is misinformed about a confusing subject, and since when does that make them prefer to be "independent of reality"? Hell, evolution is scientifically proven fact, but 54% of the country thinks human beings did not evolve from earlier species (link), and I wouldn't expect to see an article on those poll numbers proclaiming that the experts are "flabbergasted" about how there could be such a gap, or that the 50% are living "independent of reality."

Kris Weberg | August 12, 2006
Are people misinformed about confusing subjects, or does about half the population simply choose to avoid the intense cognitive effort of sorting through confusing facts in favor of the less time-consuming and more emotionally satisfying option of nuance-free self-certainty?

As drugs go, that faith which is without context or reflection is surely the most addictive and the most socially destructive.

Jackie Mason | August 13, 2006
[hidden by request]

Amy Austin | August 13, 2006
I think there's definitely a lot of anger, denial, and anger *and* denial going on in our country.

Scott Hardie | August 14, 2006
I don't know what you're talking about.

Amy Austin | August 14, 2006
Hmm... shouldn't that read: I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT!!! ;-p

Lori Lancaster | August 14, 2006
[hidden by request]

Amy Austin | August 14, 2006
Heheh.

Aaron Shurtleff | August 14, 2006
OK, I'll bite (I usually do!).

So, if the facts are confusing (as previously stated), and 50% or so, people believe one way over the other, why does either half have to be living outside of reality? How does anyone know whether people are being willfully ignorant, or if they've reviewed the facts, and they firmly believe their side? I know there are quite a few people who think the "search for WMDs" was a farce, and that there was plenty of time for Iraq to hide stuff. I know quite a few people who think the idea that all of this could be hidden is absurd. I don't think either side is being ignorant: they just choose to believe some facts and not others, or make implications that aren't there. That doesn't mean people are being stupid or ignorant, they might just be wrong in their conclusions, and that shouldn'e be the brain buster everyone makes it out to be! It's OK to be wrong!!!

And, personally, I don't know what Hussein and Iraq were capable of covering up or not covering up. I'm pretty sure we'll never know for certain. All we KNOW is that UN couldn't find them. How much "warning" did people have to hide things? I don't know. All I know is what I read, and what I've seen has been pretty contradictory. I think the possibility exists that there MIGHT have been WMDs in Iraq at the time, but they were hidden away/gotten rid of fast. I understand that that means I'm living in denial or I am stupid/ignorant/naive. Fine. I can live with that. But I'm not going to close my mind just because the UN inspectors came up blank.

Jackie Mason | August 15, 2006
[hidden by request]