The internet seems to run on conspiracy theories. There are so many of them around that you probably have a favorite one of your own. Half of Americans believe at least one medical conspiracy theory, like the FDA, is secretly hiding a cure for cancer. Maybe yours is about who shot JFK. Or if the moon landing was faked. Heck, maybe you think the Earth is secretly flat and the governments of the entire planet have been conspiring to dupe us into thinking it’s round for generations for some reason. 

Out of context, the term conspiracy theory is often used disparagingly. You think of people who believe in conspiracy theories as on the fringe of society, or somehow paranoid and unstable. But numerous conspiracies appeal to people across the board. They don’t adhere to one political ideology. And the fact that some conspiracies are true, like Iran-Contra, bolsters the belief in all the other conspiracies that have not been proven.

Whatever the case, there’s a conspiracy theory for almost everything you can think of and twice as many for stuff you never thought of. But where do these theories come from and how do they gain popularity? Maybe that’s a conspiracy too. Let’s find out. 

How Conspiracy Theories Start

Because so many conspiracy theories take root online these days it offers a unique ability for researchers to discover how these things form and spread. Research has shown that conspiracy theories tend to form very quickly when they’re based around false information, as opposed to genuine conspiracies which take much longer to break down and discover.

While a real conspiracy has many working parts, you can remove any of the elements and the story still makes sense. That’s because it’s a real thing and it really happened. All the ways the conspiracy connects still make sense even if you don’t include this part of that part. However, with a false conspiracy theory, if you remove elements, the entire narrative falls apart because it was never true and doesn’t make sense to begin with.

A good example of how a conspiracy is born is the DMSO conspiracy. This chemical is a waste product of paper production. Manufacturers wondered if it had a purpose and a scientist testing it determined it could be a sort of miracle cure. 

The FDA didn’t want to approve it because this was the 1960s and it happened just after the thalidomide crisis. Drug testing was a relatively new idea, and they were not keen to approve a new drug without proof it was safe and effective. So the FDA would not approve DMSO, which had not been thoroughly tested, and in the media, the story was that the government had banned this miracle cure. Thus, a medical conspiracy is born. 

Conspiracies tend to take root most easily during times of upheaval, confusion, and unrest. In studying over a century of articles and letters in newspapers, researchers found more conspiratorial language and ideas at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, a time with new technology and new ideas being spread around, and then again as the Cold War took off. In that burst of conspiratorial thinking, people were focused heavily on Communism-related conspiracies. 

While it seems like the US is more inclined to conspiracy, that may just be a result of the prevalence of US media and control of social media spaces. Evidence also shows conspiracy theories are widespread in all cultures, making it a solid and reliable aspect of the human experience in general. 

Why We Believe Them

One of the largest studies ever on who believes in conspiracy theories came up with three tendencies that most believers have. They perceived threats and danger. They rely on their intuition and also express “odd” beliefs and experiences, and finally, they tend to be antagonistic and feel superior to others. We’ll dive into all of that. 

Conspiracy theories often give easy answers to complex questions. Even if the conspiracy is not technically “easy,” it may seem vastly complex. But it can boil down to “the government” or “Big Pharma” or some other nefarious cause behind an issue. That simplicity offers security to many people. They feel better now that they “know” why something happened. It also can offer a sense of belonging because the believer is now a part of this inner circle, the truth holders. That’s a comforting thing. 

Tim Wise, a critical race theorist, defined conspiracy theories as being for people who don’t understand how societal systems work. They take an individualist look at society and expect everything to be reduced to good people and bad people and not large, complex systems. It’s easy for these people to reduce a thing to an evildoer instead of historical and complicated traditions and systems that allow for things to happen a certain way. 

Wise also argues a conspiracy gives comfort in the face of things over which we have no control. This is backed up by additional research suggesting that belief in a conspiracy affords the believer a sense of control that they now know something valuable and unique. 

Research has shown that people who do poorly on critical thinking tests, in particular those related to evaluating arguments, are more likely to believe conspiracy theories. Ironically, when you call a story online out as fake or a conspiracy, that label is actually more likely to get people to read and believe other stories that have not been tagged even if it’s the same false info. 

The American Psychological Association identified a number of personality traits and motivators that can make someone more prone to believe. People who believe strongly in their own intuition may be more inclined to be swayed by a conspiracy theory, as are those who feel a strong sense of antagonism or superiority to others. 

Conspiracies allow people, who are by no means unintelligent, to make sense of things that don’t make immediate sense. They need to understand in order to feel safe, and a conspiracy theory can offer that because it gives an easier answer than something that may not be easy at all. 

While safety is a cushy-feeling motivation, the need to feel superior is also a big factor. People want to feel that they, or the community they identify with, is better. Those who strongly believe are often insecure, paranoid, egocentric, emotionally volatile, and suspicious. 

Conspiracy theories start to take hold of people when they’re young. Obviously, older people are just as inclined to spread a conspiracy around, but if you’re wondering when people start believing in conspiracy theories it seems to be around the age of 14. As teens get older their willingness to believe in conspiracies increases with their age. This trend diminishes somewhat into adulthood and reaches a plateau where it no longer increases.

Oldest Conspiracy Theories

The modern world is full of conspiracy theories. There have been conspiracy theories around COVID-19, Donald Trump’s presidency, Jeffrey Epstein, every war that America has been involved in,9/11, and so on. 

You could, of course, go back in time and find conspiracies about whether Tupac Shakur is still alive, whether Elvis is still alive, if Hitler’s brain is in a jar, if Walt Disney froze his head, and so much more. But where did it all begin?

If there’s a first conspiracy theory you’re not likely to ever find it. The first instance of that specific term in writing was from a column in the New York Times in 1863 discussing European affairs in the US. Another dates back to 1870 in The Journal of Mental Science. These are not where the idea comes from, of course. These are just the first times anyone labeled anything as such.

In reality, we can find conspiracies that date back to the Medieval period. Anti-Judaism conspiracies from that period said that Jewish people had conspired with the devil to take back the Holy Land. King Phillip of France in 1307 produced a conspiracy theory to banish the Templars by accusing them of Satan worship and sexual deviancy. It worked, too, and he had them all arrested within a night. 

In the 1800s, American newspapers were rife with conspiracy theories about politics, religion, and more. The Illuminati, the Europeans, witches, and more were being blamed for all manner of social ills. 

In an online world conspiracy theories may seem more prevalent, but they really aren’t as far as anyone can tell. There’s not a lot of research that has been done to try to compare modern conspiracies to ancient ones, but there is enough to suggest that conspiracies have always been a way of life.

The Spread of Conspiracy Theories

There’s more than one reason for someone to spread a conspiracy theory. It’s possible that the person sharing the information genuinely believes what they’re saying. Your uncle Gary may really believe the Earth is flat, and that NASA has been keeping you in the dark. But there’s a second, more nefarious reason as well.

Some conspiracy theories are hatched, and spread, with full knowledge that they are complete lies. The purpose is to sow discord, paranoia, mistrust, and chaos. There are organizations that employ people solely to be trolls on the internet, to share specific hashtags, and stories, and ideas meant to overwhelm and undermine confidence in governments and institutions. They work tirelessly to spread conspiracies, misinformation, and outright lies.

The purpose for spreading these lies is twofold. One, maybe someone truly believes them and has a change of heart. Conspiracy theories do work to bolster people’s opinions even in the face of evidence to the contrary. A 2022 poll found that 29% of Americans believed Joe Biden won the 2020 election due to fraud. That’s a large number that could have a serious impact.

The other reason for the widespread dissemination of conspiracy theories is to overwhelm and undermine. If social media is flooded with conflicting information all the time, the truth will always be watered down. 

In one study related to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated conspiracies, the authors noted that people who feel a national narcissism which is defined as feeling one’s ingroup, in this case, their nation, is exceptional compared to all others and deserves special recognition, spread conspiracies more readily. 

For a national narcissist, COVID-19 showed the weakness of their nation – and it could be any nation affected by the pandemic. It showed a lack of preparedness and an inability to overcome a challenge. That bred conspiracies blaming other countries, poor government systems, politicians, and healthcare workers. Someone had to be the scapegoat. And these conspiracies spread very fast because it was a time of confusion so everyone, national narcissist or not, wanted an explanation and someone to blame. It allows people to defend their sacred national image, and it’s easy because it supports what they want to believe already, whether it’s true or not.

Online communities allow these theories to breed and spread rapidly and intensely. The information shared reinforces the beliefs of those involved so it’s often never questioned. This is likely something we have all experienced online – you are attracted to online forums and communities that deal with your interests and it’s more enjoyable and affirming to see things shared that support what you already believe and feel to be true. 

The theories born on one forum are picked up and shared on another and another as like-minded individuals want to inform those who they share interests with while also challenging those they feel oppose them. They gain legitimacy when high-profile members of the media, online influencers, and even politicians share them. 

In the modern world, social media has allowed for unprecedented spread of misinformation and conspiracy. These theories can be weaponized, intentionally or otherwise, to harm people like when an armed man who fell for the Pizzagate conspiracy that said a non-existent basement below a pizza restaurant was a place where politicians were worshiping Satan and sacrificing children opened fire on the restaurant.

There’s also a lot of money to be made in spreading conspiracies. In September 2024 a number of high-profile right-wing YouTubers were found to have been getting paid large sums of money to spread conspiracy theories and misinformation on behalf of Russia. These influences had millions of followers each making the spread of the conspiracies incredibly fast and wide. 

Fighting Conspiracy Theories

The consensus seems to be that conspiracy theories are on the rise and are potentially becoming more dangerous. Trying to directly talk someone out of believing a conspiracy theory, even if you have evidence to support your point, rarely works.

There are methods to combat conspiracy theories, but they do take time. One thing is to focus on what people “actually” believe. Conspiracies offer comfort, safety, and explanations for most people. Because a believer likely talks to people and visits forums that bolster these beliefs, they’re inclined to think more people believe the conspiracy than actually do. Learning how few people believe a thing, and how many believe the truth, can help bring people back to reality. 

Generally, to get someone away from conspiracy requires receptiveness, patience, and a willingness to not be defensive. That’s why it will probably never work with a stranger on Twitter, but it can be done.

Sometimes referred to as the other Hollywood, the worlds of adult entertainment and mainstream Hollywood have always been clearly divided. You may occasionally get a Ron Jeremy or Sasha Grey who can transition into a semblance of a mainstream acting career, but often they will not be household names. At most, some will transition into the world of the B-Movies or cult classics (such as stars like Traci Lords). But there are a few rarities who started in adult entertainment and managed to transition into a successful career in the mainstream. The following 10 celebrities are among those select few.

Related: Top 10 Titillating Facts About Pornography

10 Larry Hankin

Odds are, the name Larry Hankin may not ring a bell. Acting since the late ’60s, Larry Hankin has over 100 acting credits to his name. With featured roles on shows such as Breaking Bad and memorable guest-starring roles on shows such as Seinfeld and Friends. In fact, he is the only actor besides Brian Cranston to have a role on Malcolm in the Middle, Seinfeld, and Breaking Bad. He also has a lucrative film career, sharing the screen with acting legends like Clint Eastwood and roles in smash comedy successes, including Billy Madison.

Yet, one of his earliest roles was a non-sex role in the 1977 pornographic film China de Sade. Directed by noted adult film director Charles Webb, the film follows a Chinese spy played by Linda Wong as she becomes involved with a den of sadists. Hankin appears in the film as an agent (credited under the name Lance Hunt). Unfortunately, there is not much info available about the film to explain how he wound up in it. However, he is not the only future mainstream actor to appear in a non-sex role in a golden age adult film.^[1]

9 James Hong

James Hong has managed to accumulate an impressive legacy with over 400 acting roles. Well known as both an actor and voice actor, there is no shortage of well-known characters. Arguably best known as the lead villain Lo Pan in John Carpenter’s Big Trouble in Little China and a memorable guest role on programs such as Seinfeld (an odd recurring theme thus far). To younger audiences, he may be best known for his voice work in Jackie Chan Adventures and Kung Fu Panda.

Among his hundreds of credits is a non-sex role in the 1974 adult film China Girl (credited as Y.C. Chan). Besides sharing the screen with golden age starlet Annette Haven, not much is known about his involvement with the film. He also happened to appear in an unrelated 1987 film entitled—ironically—China Girl. Even more curious is that he wasn’t a struggling actor by this point as he had already been active for 20 years. In the same year, he appeared in the critically acclaimed classic Chinatown (granted, it was as a butler).^[2]

8 Simon Rex

While not a household name, Simon Rex has nonetheless proven himself as a capable comedic actor. Anyone from the ’90s might remember him as an MTV VJ. He’s mainly remembered nowadays for his work on shows like What I Like About You and in films such as the Scary Movie franchise. He has even gained a more recent following on internet platforms such as Vine.

Yet before all that, before he even planned on being in entertainment, he was just a young man with responsibilities. At 18, while working as a busboy and helping take care of his girlfriend and her child, he found himself in need of cash for rent. His girlfriend, already working in the adult business, set up a few shoots for him. These adult flicks, all solo masturbation videos, credited him under the name Sebastian (a name bestowed upon him by the director). Since then, he has managed to establish a decent acting career, with those three videos being his only entries into the adult business (outside of their uses in compilations).^[3]

7 Sibel Kekilli

Premiering in 2011, Game of Thrones was a cultural phenomenon, turning several of its stars into household names. Sibel Kekilli played the character, Shae for 20 episodes across the first four seasons. While she may not have been a central cast member, she was among the more prominent recurring characters. Given Game of Thrones’ penchant for sex and nudity, it should come as no surprise that they cast a few adult entertainers.

The difference between Sibel Kekilli and the others, though, is that she had long put her pornographic career behind her. Active for only about six months between 2001 and 2002, she starred in only a few adult films before being discovered by a casting director in a mall. This led to her casting as one of the leads in the German drama film Head-On. Sadly, the attention the film brought her led to her being outed for her past, causing her parents to cut off contact with her. Luckily, a series of successful roles led to her continued success as an actress before finally being cast in Game of Thrones.^[4]

6 Wes Craven

Hailed as a Master of Horror, Wes Craven made a splash within the film industry with his controversial success, Last House on the Left. From there, he built a reputation as a horror director with successful franchises like Nightmare on Elm Street and Scream. Craven even branched out of horror to direct the musical drama Music of the Heart (nabbing Meryl Streep another Oscar nomination). This, however, is not his only directorial effort to deviate from the horror genre, as before he was an established horror name, he tried his hand at another genre.

Per his own words, he left his studies to work within the adult film industry. He directed several films under different pseudonyms, sometimes even appearing in non-sex roles. His earliest credited role in the International Adult Film Database is the 1972 film It Happened In Hollywood (the same year as his film debut). Between his first film and the follow-up, The Hills Have Eyes, he is credited for two other adult films, directing one in 1975 under the name Abe Snake. His involvement within the adult industry would explain the appearance of prolific pornographic director and actor Fred J. Lincoln within his film debut as one of the lead villains. He also isn’t the only future prolific director who got his start in the adult industry.^[5]

5 Francis Ford Coppola

Francis Ford Coppola is one of his generation’s most respected and influential directors, creating classics such as The Godfather films and Apocalypse Now. With several Academy and Golden Globe awards, you may be hard-pressed to remember a time when he wasn’t a household name. Yet, in the early 1960s, he was a struggling artist with only 10 dollars. Having no other choice, he took a stab at directing skin flicks.

Raising $3,000, he wrote and directed the short film The Peeper featuring Playboy playmate Marli Renfro. Finding distributors was a difficult task, and he was asked to combine his short film with another Marli Renfro nudie western film titled The Wide Open Spaces, creating a new softcore comedy out of the two titled Tonight For Sure. This led to him helming another cut and paste job on what would become a 3D skin flick entitled The Bellboy and the Playgirls. Like his first one, he edited an existing film with new footage to create a new movie. Coppola himself has never been ashamed of the works, admitting that it was the only way he could make a film at the time.^[6].

4 Shel Silverstein

For any kid growing up since at least the ‘70s, odds are you instantly recognize the name Shel Silverstein. Whether it’s his book The Giving Tree or any of his collections of poems, his work is a staple of many childhoods. For being such a renowned children’s entertainer, some may find it weird to learn exactly where he first achieved success.

His cartoons once graced the pages of Playboy. However, he wasn’t simply an occasional artist; he became one of the leading cartoonists for the magazine in 1957. They sent him around the world to document what he saw in a segment titled “Shel Silverstein Visits.” Despite their comedic nature, the cartoons touched on very adult subjects. More intriguing is that they featured illustrations of Silverstein himself engaged in NSFW activities such as bathtub orgies or haggling with sex workers. His signature style and humor are still apparent from these illustrations, but they are a far cry from the more kid-friendly work he would become more well known for.^[7]

3 Cameron Diaz

Modeling since the age of 16, Cameron Diaz first became known to audiences for her leading role in the 1994 hit The Mask. Several notable films followed, including the box office success Charlie’s Angels. But before her film debut, at the age of 19, she participated in a topless S&M leather lingerie photo and video shoot. While the story behind the shoot is obvious (she was simply a model with no aspirations of an acting career at the time), the story after her fame is far more notorious.

In 2003, the photographer, John Rutter, approached her and demanded 3.5 million dollars to prevent their release, or he would sell to other prospective buyers. Not wanting to give in to the blackmail, she instead ended up suing him. Despite her attempts at preventing their release, they wound up being distributed on a Russian website with the title “She’s No Angel” (attempting to capitalize on her success with Charlie’s Angels). Despite his pleas of innocence on the publication, Rutter was sentenced to more than three years in jail for attempted grand theft, forgery, and perjury.^[8]

2 Jackie Chan

Jackie Chan likely needs no introductions. Whether you knew him from his Hong Kong films or discovered him through his American work, you know who he is. Chan is a man of many titles such as actor, martial artist, stunt man, singer, and various other roles. But early in his career, he could add pornographic actor to it—sort of.

You see, in 1975, Jackie Chan was still just an uncredited extra/stuntman in the Hong Kong film industry. As such, he had no choice but to star in the Hong Kong sex comedy film All in the Family. While the film itself would be seen as softcore at most, Chan himself views it as pornographic. It features one of his only sex scenes and is notably way more risque of a role than those he would come to be known for. Luckily for Chan, he would achieve box office success by 1978 with the release of Drunken Master, and the rest is history.^[9]

1 Sylvester Stallone

Sylvester Stallone may be in one of the most well-known celebrity adult films to have ever existed, which is only fitting as he is one of the biggest stars to have ever lived. He quickly established himself as a leading man and star, bursting onto the scene with the critically acclaimed classic Rocky. Despite his meteoric success after Rocky, there was a time when Stallone was simply a young man in need of money. After being evicted from his apartment, he wound up homeless and sleeping in a bus station.

During this time, Stallone came upon a casting notice for the softcore film The Party at Kitty and Stud’s. Feeling that his only other option would be to rob someone, he chose to take the $200 pay for two days of work instead. While the film would have probably just wound up a forgotten softcore movie of its era, his unexpected success caused the filmmakers to try and capitalize on his newfound fame. Offering him the chance to buy the rights to the film, Stallone refused, saying that he wouldn’t purchase the film for two bucks. Instead, retitling the film The Italian Stallion, the filmmakers attempted to present the film as being more hardcore than it was, even inserting new hardcore sex scenes.

From starring in a softcore film to getting an Oscar nomination in only a few years (and becoming the only actor to star in a number 1 box office film across five decades), Stallone has come far from where he started. Also worth noting is his small role in an erotic off-Broadway play entitled Score, where he played the small part of a telephone repairman, a role which he sadly did not reprise for the 1974 film version.^[10]

One of the great things about the internet is the way it opens up debate. Now we don’t just read a news story, we actively get involved below the line—broadcasting our opinion to millions. At its best, this sort of ‘below the line’ activity can throw up more interesting points than the article itself. At its worst… well, you only have to look at stories on any of these topics to see how opinions can polarize. For instance, good luck finding a rational debate on:

One of humanity’s most-enduring questions is: ‘is there a God?’ For millennia, people have fought and killed each other over the issue and wasted a ton of ink justifying their opinions. So you’d think by now we’d have learned to debate the question sensibly. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth.

The trouble is, both sides (atheists and believers) have their minority of fundamentalists who will do their level-best to ‘win’ the argument by being as condescending as possible. Atheists accuse their religious counterparts of ‘believing in sky fairies’ and compare religious upbringing to child abuse; while the religious faction simply resort to attacking the concept of science.

The weird thing is, most of us have probably met plenty of atheists and believers and never encountered a single lunatic. From personal experience, I know my Christian and atheist friends largely respect each other’s opinions and never try to ‘convert’ others to their side. In fact, watching a debate between these guys would likely be genuinely informative—so why is it only the diehards who ever make it onto message boards?

Around the world, there are dozens of ‘contested’ territories: Northern Ireland, Kashmir, the Falklands, Gibraltar and the Western Sahara, to name a few. Many of them have long, turbulent histories, periodically spill over into violence and one of them (Kashmir) nearly triggered a nuclear war. So why is it only the disputed Israeli/Palestinian border that whips up such emotion?

Let’s be clear here: I’m not saying there’s nothing to get worked up about. The situation is undoubtedly tense, not-helped by such things as rocket attacks on Israel, Israeli airstrikes, the seizure of Palestinian land and the violently anti-Semitic propaganda prevalent in the region. If you have to deal with it on a daily basis it’s only natural you’d form a strong opinion. But what’s puzzling is how the entire internet has chosen this specific land-dispute to jump onto—and invested it with such emotion that rational argument becomes impossible.

Tax is more-or-less a fact of life: none of us want to pay it, most of us don’t like what it gets spent on, but most of us use some of the stuff it buys—so we begrudgingly pay up. If we think about it much beyond that, it’s probably because we’ve either heard about some company refusing to pay a single cent; or some dumb government introducing a ridiculously unfair rate. But mention taxation on a message board and watch the lunatics come crawling out the woodwork.

Now, to be fair, I’ve voiced some strong opinions on tax on these very pages. So feel free to call me a hypocrite. But I’ve never argued for a one hundred percent tax rate or literally equated taxation with slavery—which is what you’ll hear on any forum devoted to the topic. Like everything else on this list, it seems to be only the extremists who leave comments on these articles: the beret-wearing Che Guevara wanabees and Ayn Rand worshippers.

As much as people like to get their hackles up at the thought of atheists and Christians or that chunk that comes out their paycheck each month, nothing compares to the vitriol evoked by feminism. Simply put: a good deal of the population seem to see the term as an invite to either spew violent misogyny or get into an oppression competition. And that’s before we even get onto the various strands of feminism that spend more time attacking each other than the patriarchy.

Now, if we’re being honest, there are some forms of feminism that really do suck. Equally, a lot of serious articles about ‘men’s issues’ often get shouted down under sarcastic calls of ‘lolz what about teh menz?’ But the sheer hatred feminism seems to stir up is way out of proportion to any of this. After all, the basic concept is something we should all be able to get behind. For example: do you think everyone deserves equal pay for equal work, the freedom to make their own life choices and to live without the threat of violence, no matter what type of genitals they have? Then congratulations: you’re a feminist.

There are two types of circumcision: male and female. Female circumcision is better known by its more-truthful name ‘female genital mutilation’ (fgm) and everyone pretty-much agrees it’s a really bad thing. Male circumcision, on the other hand, is an absolute powder keg.

That last link, by the way, goes to a representative article on the subject—if you have time, follow it and check the comments. That’s how most discussions about circumcision look: a whole mass of people screaming child abuse, threatening to call the police and comparing the practice to witch burning. To clarify: I’m not trying to take sides here. If you have a particular bugbear about this issue, that’s your opinion and I’ll respect that. But for the life of me, I can’t see why this particular issue might drive people into a howling frenzy. Yet venture below the line on any article mentioning it, and that’s exactly what you’ll see.

Sticking the word ‘Islam’ in an article is like lobbing a hand grenade into a hornet’s nest. Simply put: a lot of people have some very strong opinions on the subject—and they’re not afraid to let you know it. Unlike some of the entries here, the reason is pretty clear: a decade of news stories linking radical Islam to bomb attacks, assassinations and violent riots have left most of us in no doubt that we need to tackle religious extremism.

But debates on Islam rarely focus on ‘extremism’. For whatever reason, a vocal minority of our online community have gotten used to speaking about it as a monolithic entity: as if there’s no difference between, say, a moderate Indonesian leading a regular life and a Sudanese extremist. What’s weird is how this rarely applies to any other religion. Can you imagine someone seriously being unable to differentiate between Oprah and Fred Phelps because they’re both Christian; or between Jerry Seinfeld and a member of Israel’s Ultra-Orthodox community? Well, apparently that’s how some people view 1.6bn of their fellow human beings.

If there’s one thing the internet loves, it’s freedom of speech. We’re kinda libertarians in that respect: there’s little more likely to invoke the wrath of Anonymous than a serious attempt to curtail our right to it. However, it’s often taken as read that this freedom extends to anything and everything; and not everyone agrees.

See, although freedom of speech may be enshrined in American law—to the extent that even scum like Westboro Baptist Church are constitutionally protected—the same logic does not apply elsewhere. In Germany, for example, it’s a criminal offense to display a Nazi flag and you WILL do time for it. In France, denying the holocaust can get you a prison sentence. The online clash usually comes when American ideology crashes up against European—with neither side willing to accept their system isn’t ‘best’. So let’s be honest here: free speech may be an idea worth fighting for, but just because parts of Europe have taken a different route on certain subjects does not make them any less ‘free’. Minor restrictions do not automatically make an Orwellian dystopia—any less than total freedom automatically results in the anarchic Wild West.

Most scientists wish the public would get excited about their chosen field. Mention awe-inspiring concepts like string theory, Hawking radiation or gravitons to the man on the street and he’ll probably go out of his way to avoid you. For climate scientists, however, it’s a case of ‘be careful what you wish for’.

Thanks to decades of programs, books and blogs written on the subject, just about everyone now considers themselves an expert. And part of that expertise apparently involves shouting down the other side—bizarrely enough, for the exact same reason. Those who don’t believe in it see a vast conspiracy by scientists, liberals and other boogeymen to put us all in FEMA prison camps, while those who do see a vast conspiracy involving the Koch Brothers and big oil to manipulate the ‘sheeple’ into believing otherwise. It’s a perfect storm of paranoia centered around an issue most of us aren’t qualified to understand—and, every time someone brings it up, the sparks are sure to fly.

As you may have noticed, I’ve tried to maintain a largely neutral tone on most of these. That won’t happen here. For whatever reason, despite the mountains of evidence and eyewitness testimony proving otherwise; there are still people out there who honestly believe the holocaust was either exaggerated or simply didn’t happen. And their brand of mental sickness is virulent enough to infect the comments section of any article that cares to mention it.

There are a few things in the world that mark you out as a bad person; and denying the holocaust is one of them. It’s not just the extent of human suffering that occurred in moral blackholes like Auschwitz and Treblinka; or the sheer hatred required to send millions of Jews, gays, Poles and disabled people to certain death. It’s all that plus the stubborn refusal to learn from history—to pretend genocide never happened. And trust me, if there’s one mistake we never want to repeat from history, it’s this one.

Here it is: the most-divisive issue you will ever encounter. With feelings running so high on both sides, it’s impossible to take any sort of stance on abortion without seeing the entire comment section explode in your face—so I’m remaining one hundred percent neutral on this one.

You’re probably aware of the basic arguments. Pro-lifers believe with the utmost intensity that killing a fetus is as bad as killing a child. Pro-choice supporters believe with an identical passion that criminalizing abortion is State intrusion into women’s bodies, and completely incompatible with a free society. Politicians meanwhile try to search for a middle ground—a point where termination remains acceptable and a point where it unequivocally isn’t. But this is one argument that’s never going away: so long as there’s a human race it will continue to rage—and nowhere is this more apparent than on the internet. Now, I’m not going to make any value judgement on this, and I appreciate that people have strong feelings about it. But wouldn’t it be great if both sides could debate this and other issues—just once—without resorting to hysterical name-calling? I guess we’ll find out in the comments.