As someone who’s been writing about politics for almost a decade now, I am inundated with conspiracy theories in my inbox and my daily reading. They are simply unavoidable, as conspiracy theorists tend to be both loud and happy to share their beliefs with you at the drop of a hat. My response to most conspiracy theorists is to ignore them. Unless, of course, they’ve come up with something particularly entertaining, like David Icke’s theory that the world is controlled by shape-shifting reptilian humanoids from another dimension, or if they’re widespread enough among the general populace that they’re worth looking into and debunking, such as the JFK assassination conspiracies or the Obama birth certificate nonsense.

Other conspiracy stuff I pretty much ignore. There’s not enough time in the day, and most conspiracies are, frankly, too silly and not entertaining enough to bother with.

And yet, conspiracy does hold a fascination with me. Not conspiracies per se, but rather the persistence of them. It seems that no matter how many facts one lays at a conspiracy’s door, there are always two outlets against them: (1) the fact is simply ignored as a forgery or fabrication or (2) the conspiracy theorist ignores that his theory depends on certain facts that have been disproven, and instead digs up other, more arcane discrepancies to try and demonstrate the conspiracy. (For the latter point, see e.g. WorldNetDaily, which comes up with new “facts” about Obama’s birth certificate daily).

Of course, the primary reason for why conspiracy theories persist is simple human nature. Throughout most of history, most human beings have been disinclined to skepticism, choosing rather to believe the stories that we are told and accept as part of society. Humans believe lots of things without any available evidence, or even if there’s evidence to the contrary. To a certain extent, these things are necessary. After all, I’m pretty sure that every parent does not, in fact, have the cutest baby in the world. But that kind of emotionally driven response to a child is necessary for survival.

Other ideas, when held, become a deep part of the self. And the ideas become inseparable from our self-conception. Can you imagine, for example, Ann Coulter deciding to join the Democratic Party, or Richard Dawkins converting to Christianity? Impossible. Being outspoken advocates for a cause means that the cause becomes a part of you. Coulter could no more become a Democrat than she could cut off her arm. It wouldn’t be who she is.

I think that this idea/self merger is at the heart of why people can’t shake conspiracy theories. When you invest so much time and effort into something, it takes a healthy ego to be able to say, “Well, crap. I screwed that one up.” Most people can’t do that, though. They’re afraid that they’ll look like a fool. They’ll be afraid that they’ll feel stupid. So they can’t admit that they’re wrong.

Can you make yourself “un-see” the Face on Mars?

Another part of why conspiracy theories persist, in my assessment, is that it’s hard to shake the perception of patterns. Of course, the human knack of pattern-building is a common culprit for researchers who try to explain why conspiracy theories exist in the first place, but I think it’s also a reason for why they stick around. Once you see a pattern, it is a really tall order to now “un-see” that image. Take the famous “face on Mars” picture, for example. Once you’ve got it in your head that there’s a “face” in the picture, it takes a few minutes and a real amount of effort to not see it again. Ditto with conspiracy theories. Once you’ve got it in your head that the discrepancies in a story form a pattern, it’s really hard to not see that pattern anymore.

Now that we have a hypothesis about how conspiracy theories persist, the question is then: how do we make them stop? Well, the answer is you really can’t. Dislodging somebody’s conspiracy from their own head isn’t something that’s a possibility for most of us. However, there is a way that we can prevent conspiracies and similar nonsense from taking root in our own heads. And it’s simple. We have to think like scientists.

To think like a scientist means to take your own egotistical investment out of your ideas. It means that you have to be able to admit that you’re wrong. It means that you have to be able to view new evidence dispassionately, without a care for how it affects your previous hypotheses. It means to be devoted to the truth–no matter what.

Editor’s Note: One way to get practice in thinking like a scientist to debunk conspiracy theories is to actually try and make some up. A conspiracy theory, after all, is nothing but a hypothesis on why certain data exists and may or may not be connected. With that in mind, over the next week the authors at Heretical Ideas will be developing their own conspiracy theories–connecting news and evidence to try to prove a completely outlandish idea. The trick, of course, is to not believe anything we write in these articles.

Unless, of course, that’s what they want you to do.