Interview: Darryl Cunningham on How to Fake a Moon Landing

Is hydro-fracking safe? Is climate change real? Did the moon landing actually happen? How about evolution: fact or fiction? Author-illustrator Darryl Cunningham looks at these and other hot-button science topics and presents a fact-based, visual assessment of current thinking and research on eight different issues everybody’s arguing about.

How did you choose which falsehoods you wanted to tackle in How to Fake a Moonlanding?

I listen to a lot of podcasts, especially when I'm working and many of these podcasts are science related. I noticed that on the more skeptical podcasts, like the Skeptics' Guide to the Universe or The Pod Delusion, a small number of subjects kept coming up time after time: homeopathy, climate change, evolution, and others. These appeared to be the hot-button issues. They were self-selecting. I just picked the most controversial issues. The subjects that were the most misunderstood by the general public and which needed most explanation.

Does it seem to you that humans today are more anti-science than they have been in the past? What accounts for the change in perceptions toward science?
No, I don't think so. Superstition has always been with us. Before science appeared on the scene, superstition was the only way people could make sense of the world and find their place in it. Science has done a pretty good job of revealing the true nature of the universe to us. No other system has delivered the goods like science has. Good science is testable and its results are reproducible. I don't see people all around the world turning their backs on science in enormous numbers. There are areas of contention, and my book tackles a few of those issues, but we're far from falling into a new superstitious dark age. 

With the history of scientific research and discovery and the widespread access and availability of information that the internet provides, are we, as a whole, as informed about science as we should be? That is, does the internet hinder us as much as help us, given how scientific-denial is so easy to spread through the Web?
The internet probably hinders the progress of knowledge as much as it helps. I've no way of knowing for sure. In historical terms the internet is a recent invention, and as such, it's perhaps too early to say what the long term effect will be. But the invention of the printing press posed the same challenges and that worked out well for humanity. So I remain hopeful.
 

How to Fake a Moon Landing

Is there a fallacy or myth that most irritates you? Does one chapter of the book stand out more than the others as one you are particularly passionate about?
Climate change. Because denial of this subject may prove incredibly dangerous for us all. The influence of big money in spreading doubt about this proven area of science has been particularly poisonous. And yes, this does make me angry, because the big energy companies and right wing political organisations who spread this disinformation know perfectly well that climate change is real and is caused by human action. The parallel with tobacco companies and their denial that smoking causes cancer is striking.

This book was published last year in Europe, so there’s been plenty of time for reaction from all sides. What’s that been like?
Originally I placed early versions of the chapters online and the response I got from doing so was amazing. There was intense discussion both for and against each subject. I got hundreds of notes and tens of thousands of visits to my blog. In certain cases readers, who specialised in those areas, would point out where I'd got facts wrong and I was able to make the required corrections before publication. The world of the printed book, is of course, not as instant as the internet, so the response has been fairly quiet. But the second edition is due in the UK soon, a French edition has been published, and a Korean edition is due. Momentum in terms of response is starting to slowly build and gather pace. My first book, Psychiatric Tales, generated a lot of email from readers. How to Fake a Moon Landing hasn't so much, but PT was so personal, I wouldn't expect the same kind of response.
 
Are you planning a follow-up? Are there more anti-science myths that you would like to debunk?
I feel I'm done with this subject, at least for a few years. My next book will tackle a completely different subject: politics and economics. I'm doing a book that will look at different aspects of the financial crisis.
 
Were you yourself unsure about any of the topics you cover? Did doing research for the book change your mind about any particular beliefs?

I found the climate change chapter painful, because at that time I was less than sure of its validity. Research convinced me of its truth. Chiropractic I found to be something of a revelation. I knew nothing about the subject and thought it was a genuine medical treatment. The more I researched the subject, the more horrified I became. Not only is chiropractic not a science-based discipline, but it's potentially dangerous. Here's a health tip: Don't let any chiropractic therapist manipulate your neck.

-- John Hogan