An Analogy to Pseudoarchaeology

IntegralAnswers (X - @IntegralAnswers) " An integrally-informed and pathologically curious healthcare professional. Combatting disinfo in public health sphere. Passionate amateur photographer" has a great analogy to the way pseudoarchaeologists talk:

@IntegralAnswers · Jan 15

Layperson: “I’ve figured out how to make airplanes faster, lighter, and way more fuel-efficient. I don’t need a degree or experience—I just see what others ignore. Wanna hear it?”

Engineer: “Sure. I’ve been an aerospace engineer for 20 years. Let’s hear your breakthrough.”

Layperson: “First, scrap the wings. They’re heavy and unnecessary. Planes should just use jet engines and glide without them. Simpler and way lighter.”

Engineer: “Wings are essential for lift. Without them, a plane can’t stay in the air. It’s basic aerodynamics.”

Layperson: “Sounds like propaganda from Big Wing.”


Layperson: “And get rid of fuel tanks. Use magnets instead to pull the plane forward. Fuel is just a scam to make airlines rich.”

Engineer: “Magnets don’t create energy; they can’t replace jet fuel. Aviation fuel has the energy density necessary for sustained flight.”

Layperson: “You’re brainwashed. Think outside the box!”


Layperson: “Also, planes should have square shapes. All these curves are just aesthetic nonsense.”

Engineer: “Curves reduce drag and improve aerodynamics, making planes faster and more efficient.”

Layperson: “That’s just what the textbooks want you to believe.”


Engineer: “Have you studied aerodynamics, propulsion, or structural engineering?”

Layperson: “No, but I’ve read some blogs and watched videos. Plus, my ideas are common sense. Your fancy math overcomplicates everything.”

Engineer: “Years of research back the math. Physics doesn’t care about opinions.”

Layperson: “You’re just defending your industry. If you admitted my ideas work, you’d lose your job.”

Engineer: “My job is to make planes safer and more efficient. If your ideas worked, I’d use them.”

Layperson: “Classic gatekeeping.”


Engineer: “So, you think every aerospace engineer is lying or incompetent?”

Layperson: “Most are, yeah. They just repeat what Big Aerospace teaches them.”

Engineer: “What’s your actual evidence?”

Layperson: “I just know it makes sense.”

Layperson: “Mark my words: one day my designs will revolutionize aviation.”

Engineer: “Without evidence or testing, it’s just speculation. Planes don’t fly on intuition.”

Layperson: “You’re too close-minded to see the future.”


Parallel: Anti-vaxxers approach vaccine science the same way:

•Reject foundational knowledge.

•Claim common sense beats expertise.

•Believe in grand conspiracies.

But science, like aerodynamics, isn’t optional—it’s how reality works.

Trusting experts doesn’t mean blind faith—it means respecting evidence, experience, and hard work. If you wouldn’t trust a layperson to design a plane, why trust one to rewrite vaccine science?

The same goes for the pseudo-archaeoplogists' attack on the discipline.