(September 16, 2017 at 2:24 am)Astonished Wrote: Wouldn't you think they could get some scientists to back this up? Wouldn't it be more profitable to convince way, way more people into following them by having some actual scientific legitimacy to the claim?[...]
No. When you're running a scam, you want to attract the right kind of gullible morons. People who pay attention to science and such - even if initially convinced - would most likely quickly change their minds, when presented with the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. You don't want to waste your time on those. You want to appeal to the uneducated, the superstitious and the generally dim people, because - if you're successful enough - they will pay your bills for the rest of your life, even when everyone else realizes you're a fraud.
That's why scam emails are usually ridden with spelling mistakes and bad grammar - if you know how to spell, you're probably too smart to fall into the fairly unsophisticated trap. And that's also how the p*ssy-grabbing a**-clown became the president of US - he didn't bother with science and facts, he didn't try to convince the educated, or appease the liberals. He only addressed the dim-wits, the simpletons and the c*nts, correctly predicting, that there are enough of those in the country to secure his presidency.
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw
