"Crackpot" versus "Conspiracy"

The problem with the priminence of anti-academic conspiracy theory in the public domain is not restricted to archaeology. Karl Feagans draws attention to a similar discussion in other sciences, for example Angela Collier at UCI, makes a fascinating point about "crackpot physics" vs "conspiracy physics".

"Crackpot versus conspiracy physicist."

The slide distinguishes between two types of fringe science figures:

Crackpots

• Crackpots are convinced they have solved a specific physics problem.
• Crackpots seek "help" from physicists to get their ideas accepted by the physics community.
• Crackpots work alone and recognizes other  crackpots  are crackpots

          Conspiracy Physicists  

• Conspiracy Physicists think physicists are liars.

• Conspiracy Physicists look for physics adjacent, expelled or "underdogs".
• Conspiracy Physicists form groups, create celebrities, and formulate conspiracy theories about physicists. They do not make physics 'theories.

• He comments:

"There are definitely some points in this that I recognize in crackpot/conspiracy archaeology. I know crackpot archaeologists that look at others in pseudoarchaeology as crackpots. But I think pseudoarchaeologists tend to both make theories and consider real archaeologists as liars" ( Carl Feagans cfeagans.bsky.social [@cfeagans] Apr 28, 2026 10:56 PM).

See Dr Collier's video here for some more perspicaceous and applicable observations:

.

Posted on YouTube by Angela Collier Aug 5, 2022

.

So much of this relates to pseudoarchaeology.