By contrast science’s acceptance was objectively linked with the perception of agreement among the scientists.
Rejection of scientific propositions repeatedly implicates conspiracist ideation even without insufficient empirical evidence. Lewandowsky et al. analyzed the response of climate blogosphere to LOG12 publication and followed the hypotheses surfacing in response to LOG12. The multi-phased search involved sampling of LOG12-related Internet activity and deriving six criteria to permit hypotheses’ classification pertaining to potentially conspiracist LOG12. Use of established criteria showed how many hypotheses reflected counterfactual thinking and conspiratorial material. Conspiracist ideation possibly has a role in the rejection of science.
To explore the relative importance of projecting alternative explanations in contrast to rejecting conventional explanations for events, Wood and Douglas studied conspiracist and conventionalist comments on news websites. They found conspiracist commentators having greater tendency to argue against opposing interpretation and lesser tendency to argue for their own interpretation or to put forth an account explicitly whereas conventionalist commenters demonstrated the reverse trend. Research led to identification of a range of differences between conspiracists and