Science has never known more, yet pseudoscience keeps gaining ground. Astrology, homeopathy, creationism and vaccine rejectionism all make scientific-sounding claims that don’t hold up to the scientific method. University of Arizona astronomer Chris Impey set out to measure how far one branch of that family has spread, as reported by Chivumnovu Ogbonda for Meer. (Read about specific pseudoscience branches here.) He mined two centuries of Google Books data and two decades of Google Trends searches for a report in CAPjournal, “The truth is out there”: Tracking the rise of pseudoscience.
The stakes go beyond horoscopes. Astrology might seem harmless, Impey notes, “but in the health arena, misinformation and anti-scientific mindsets are dangerous and can be fatal.”
His astronomy data tell a lopsided story. Use of the word “astronomy” in books peaked in 1964 and has since fallen 40%, while “astrology” has tripled since a low in 1916. In 2004, U.S. searches for astrology were twice as common as searches for astronomy. By early 2022, they were five times as common, and horoscope searches outnumbered astronomy 15 to one.
Real discoveries haven’t slowed the spread of pseudoscience. The many Earth-like exoplanets being discovered make intelligent alien life statistically likely, yet UFO sightings hit an all-time peak of 1,050 in April 2020, after the Pentagon released three Navy videos. Book references to angels and ghosts have more than quadrupled in 40 years. Since 2004, web searches for both have tripled relative to searches for science.
Part of the explanation is where people now get their information. The share of people turning to unvetted corners of the internet rather than reputable sources jumped from 9% in 2001 to 57% in 2018. “Educators and science communicators must operate in a world where they are not the gatekeepers of information,” Impey writes.
Related on the SLP
He calls book mentions and searches “imperfect proxies for interest and belief,” but sees a broader shift: “The rise in pseudoscience tracked in this paper has been accompanied by a more general decline in rationality in language.”
