Why aren't young people interested in Apollo 11?

[donotdespisethesnake]

Hopefully we aren't raising a generation of paranoid conspiracy theorists with no critical thinking ability or self awareness.

Unfortunately, it seems that young people are vulnerable to conspiracy theories:

A recent YouGov poll found that one in six British people agreed with the statement: “The moon landings were staged.” Four per cent believed the hoax theory was “definitely true”, 12% that it was “probably true”, with a further 9% registering as don’t knows. Moon hoaxism was more prevalent among the young: 21 % of 24- to 35-year-olds agreed that the moon landings were staged, compared with 13% of over-55s.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/science/articles-reports/2019/04/25/which-science-based-conspiracy-theories-do-britons

[Buriedcode]

Hopefully we aren't raising a generation of paranoid conspiracy theorists with no critical thinking ability or self awareness.

Unfortunately, it seems that young people are vulnerable to conspiracy theories:

A recent YouGov poll found that one in six British people agreed with the statement: “The moon landings were staged.” Four per cent believed the hoax theory was “definitely true”, 12% that it was “probably true”, with a further 9% registering as don’t knows. Moon hoaxism was more prevalent among the young: 21 % of 24- to 35-year-olds agreed that the moon landings were staged, compared with 13% of over-55s.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/science/articles-reports/2019/04/25/which-science-based-conspiracy-theories-do-britons

I'm pretty sure its all ages, and all levels of education.  If anything, I would say the older generation are slightly more prone to believe conspiracies, purely because the older we get, the less we remember being wrong, and the more we remember being right, which is why we all tend to get more stubborn as we age.  It also means one spends longer having a belief, and so, makes it harder to change it.

As for the moon landing specifically,  I think its probably the opposite.  Those who were alive at the time and remember it are probably less likely to believe the conspiracy, where-as later generations have second and third hand evidence to counter the crazy.  As I've mentioned a few times on threads like this - seeing those who believe in conspiracy as being separate and silly, is exactly how conspiracy theorists view those who don't believe them

[EEVblog]

My bet is the IMAX will be filled with baby boomers, except for a few from the X generation, very few from the Y generation and almost no post-millennials. I will report what I see. I may be wrong!

Yup, that's what it was. I went to the premiere of Apollo 11 at Melbourne IMAX.
It's a stones throw from RMIT and their big engineering school, didn't see a single one there.
They did recognise me on the street though, so at least they are watching Youtube engineering 

[Mr. Scram]

Looks like this is one of those false generational discussions again. There's nothing wrong with today's children. We should remind ourselves that the public interest in the Moon missions had wained almost completely when Apollo 13 came around. That's just two missions and 9 months after Apollo 11 and that apparently was enough to eliminate the excitement of a major historical achievement. In that light it's really hard to claim modern children are an exception. It's better to ask yourself what's wrong with people, rather than asking about today's children.

[EEVblog]

The number one wish was for becoming a "celebrity"

That's quite a lot easier (but still not that easy) with the advent of independent online media. But it does beg the question of how many followers/subscribers does it take to be a true celebrity. 100k? 1M?

As someone who gives talks in schools on being a Youtuber at career days, I can assure you that's all the majority seen to care about 

[Kjelt]

So actually they go about it the wrong way.
First they should seek what really interests them, give them satisfaction to do for 9 hours a day and be able to become very good at it. Then they are asked to teach others and when chance has it, become a celebrity.

[SiliconWizard]

It's not inherently "wrong".

Kids these days are exposed to thousands of videos showing them that this is a possible career path, that it looks kind of fun and doesn't entail having to deal with annoying bosses, unlike many grown-ups around them probably complaining a lot about that. Meanwhile, they are also exposed to conventional media that constantly show them how thousands of people with "regular" jobs are laid off by big companies showing no obvious signs of decline. They are also exposed to all the consequences on our environment of our modern and highly technological societies. Can you blame them for not being very excited about all this?

So this is basically "hope" in their eyes. Exactly like how sports, and then show business, was seen as the last hope for young people from disadvantaged social circles for decades.

The problem is that it's delusional. Because like in sports and show business, only a very small fraction of "Youtubers" (and similar activities) become successful enough to make a living out of it, let alone become a "celebrity". And apart from the extremely lucky ones, they will find out that it takes a lot of work and dedication - probably a lot more even than following a classic educational path and taking up an engineering job or whatever.

You're thinking with a rational mindset, but are seeing the world maybe as it was 30 or 40 years ago. Most kids are thinking emotionally.

[Mr. Scram]

Then again, a lot of the people wanting to be a doctor or pilot at an early age aren't the right material either. Having unattainable goals is part of life.

[Kjelt]

It can even be dangerous.
Since you only get many views if you show "rare" and dangerous things you get the "Jackass" kind of people doing stunts that even kills some, or you get the influencer types that have to spent soo much money to get another video out that might be interesting.
Lets say as Dave had to buy each piece of TME hi self it woukd bankrupt him 

https://nypost.com/2018/03/03/my-quest-for-instagram-stardom-left-me-in-financial-ruin/

[Mr. Scram]

It can even be dangerous.
Since you only get many views if you show "rare" and dangerous things you get the "Jackass" kind of people doing stunts that even kills some, or you get the influencer types that have to spent soo much money to get another video out that might be interesting.
Lets say as Dave had to buy each piece of TME hi self it woukd bankrupt him 

https://nypost.com/2018/03/03/my-quest-for-instagram-stardom-left-me-in-financial-ruin/

I'm sorry but that has nothing to do with social media and everything with being a good old fashioned idiot. If you borrow yourself into debt to keep up appearances you really needed the lesson you paid for.

[Kjelt]

Yes but the peer pressure and wanting to be famous makes people do crazy things and social media is a Mega enabler.

[David Hess]

Unfortunately, it seems that young people are vulnerable to conspiracy theories:

There is a problem here in that the connotation and denotation of "conspiracy" have diverged.  "Conspiracy theory" has become a term of derision but for instance was there a conspiracy to justify a war with Iraq or was it that just a conspiracy theory?  One of the results of such fiascos is a loss in trust of sources which should be authoritative.

Another example is the NSA suborning NIST to get compromised encryption standards mandated.  There was a conspiracy there also and now neither can be trusted.  Lookup the definition of conspiracy.

Tell enough lies and the truth becomes lost.  Politicians, lawyers, and managers expect us to trust them?  Ha!

[SiliconWizard]

Yes but the peer pressure and wanting to be famous makes people do crazy things and social media is a Mega enabler.

Well, peer pressure made kids/teens do pretty stupid stuff back when there was no Internet as well...

But yeah it's probably a big enabler. Then again, computers and Internet make kids stay home a lot more than what they used to, so I don't know what was riskier... kids outside all the time could do pretty wild and stupid stuff too.

Anyway, yeah some behaviors are completely new. No need to look for crazy things either. I think one of the most "lethal" behaviors that are related to social networks is the "selfie" mania. It has injured and killed many people. Not doing anything that crazy, but just not paying enough attention while they were taking a picture...

[David Hess]

Well, peer pressure made kids/teens do pretty stupid stuff back when there was no Internet as well...

Peer pressure is a real thing which has been studied even beyond more general studies like the Asch Conformity Experiments.  At one point the question came up as to whether a child's personally comes from nature or nurture.  The results were more like 20% genetics, 20% influence from the parents, and 60% from peers.

This actually makes a lot of sense.  A person's peers are their future mates, competitors, allies, and enemies.

It also explains why parents send their children to specific schools for only the social environment and why juvenile prisons cannot rehabilitate while military boot camp at least has a chance.

[james_s]

Unfortunately, it seems that young people are vulnerable to conspiracy theories:

There is a problem here in that the connotation and denotation of "conspiracy" have diverged.  "Conspiracy theory" has become a term of derision but for instance was there a conspiracy to justify a war with Iraq or was it that just a conspiracy theory?  One of the results of such fiascos is a loss in trust of sources which should be authoritative.

Another example is the NSA suborning NIST to get compromised encryption standards mandated.  There was a conspiracy there also and now neither can be trusted.  Lookup the definition of conspiracy.

Tell enough lies and the truth becomes lost.  Politicians, lawyers, and managers expect us to trust them?  Ha!

Conspiracies exist for sure, but most of them involve a small number of people. As more and more people become involved, it becomes exponentially harder to keep it under wraps. When people speak of "conspiracy theories" they are almost always referring to the impossibly convoluted and ridiculously implausible theories like the moon landing being faked and 9/11 being an inside job, that kind of bunk. They all start on the premise of the official explanation, no matter how straightforward it is, being completely and totally false and then set out in search of evidence that supports that view.

In the case of an actual conspiracy, things usually unravel pretty quickly once someone starts investigating, especially if more than 2 or 3 people are involved. A complex conspiracy involving >100 people is virtually impossible to orchestrate because at a very basic level most people do whatever is in their own best interest and most are not very good at keeping their mouth shut. Secret knowledge is a bit like a pressurized gas, it naturally wants to get out and reach equilibrium and the more potential leak points you have, the more likely it is for a leak to occur.

[David Hess]

Conspiracies exist for sure, but most of them involve a small number of people. As more and more people become involved, it becomes exponentially harder to keep it under wraps. When people speak of "conspiracy theories" they are almost always referring to the impossibly convoluted and ridiculously implausible theories like the moon landing being faked and 9/11 being an inside job, that kind of bunk. They all start on the premise of the official explanation, no matter how straightforward it is, being completely and totally false and then set out in search of evidence that supports that view.

In the case of an actual conspiracy, things usually unravel pretty quickly once someone starts investigating, especially if more than 2 or 3 people are involved. A complex conspiracy involving >100 people is virtually impossible to orchestrate because at a very basic level most people do whatever is in their own best interest and most are not very good at keeping their mouth shut. Secret knowledge is a bit like a pressurized gas, it naturally wants to get out and reach equilibrium and the more potential leak points you have, the more likely it is for a leak to occur.

There is an other kind of conspiracy which can involve lots of people.  Let's call it the Thomas Becket conspiracy.  Modern instances can be found in things like "deep state".

A relatively recent example I am familiar with is what happened with the Space Shuttle Challenger.  There was no conspiracy in the normal sense between the White House and NASA to launch Challenger in spite of any danger.  What happened was much more insidious.  There was an *expectation* on the part of NASA management that those were their orders without such orders ever being being given.  This was a fault on NASA's part but it was also a fault on the part of the White House for being oblivious.

[duak]

Peer pressure is a big, and often the biggest contributor in getting adolescents of all ages to do or not do something.  I heard about ten years ago that Florida was having remarkable success in reducing teen smoking rates.  If I remember correctly, the strategy recognized that teen smoking was an act of rebellion.  100% knew that smoking was hazardous but the act bought peer cred.  The ads emphasized things like Big Tobacco was taking advantage of you so to get back at them, don't smoke and stick it to the man.  Here's a link: https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/for-teenage-smokers-removing-the-allure-of-the-pack/

I remember a colleague saying if  we want to get people more into technology and engineering, we should have TV programs like Magnum, P. Eng.  If you don't get the joke, it's the Canadian term for Professional Engineer.  I suppose the hero or heroine could go around investigating fatigue failures, transient EMI susceptibility or zero day exploits.  They could drive a fast and expensive but safe and practical vehicle, live in an amazing house and still only charge $200 an hour plus expenses.  Why can't we have an Engineer be the crusading good guy rather than a Lawyer or Private Eye?  There could be just as much drama, excitement and even a love interest or two.

[donotdespisethesnake]

I'm pretty sure its all ages, and all levels of education.  If anything, I would say the older generation are slightly more prone to believe conspiracies, purely because the older we get, the less we remember being wrong, and the more we remember being right, which is why we all tend to get more stubborn as we age.  It also means one spends longer having a belief, and so, makes it harder to change it.

Oh well, if you are "pretty sure" then it must be true, and no evidence is required. You can just substitute you own logical reasoning, and that is enough.

Ironically, that is exactly how people end up believing conspiracy theories.

If belief in untrue theories is on the rise, it is due to the "flattening" effect of the internet. In the past, only authoritative sources were able to publish information to mass audiences. That was no guarantee of truth, but mainly the media were only used to disseminate falsehood that were convenient to the establishment, typically stories designed to persuade the public that a ware was justified, or stories justifying why the the rich should retain their wealth.

Now with platforms like youtube and the web in general, anyone can "publish" information on the same level as the establishment. That means that any wacky theories of no particular agenda are easily spread, e.g. flat Earthers, anti-vaxxing.

[Kjelt]

How on earth can you proove a conspiracy THEORY?
Is it not in the term theory itself that it can not be prooven? 

[Buriedcode]

I'm pretty sure its all ages, and all levels of education.  If anything, I would say the older generation are slightly more prone to believe conspiracies, purely because the older we get, the less we remember being wrong, and the more we remember being right, which is why we all tend to get more stubborn as we age.  It also means one spends longer having a belief, and so, makes it harder to change it.

Oh well, if you are "pretty sure" then it must be true, and no evidence is required. You can just substitute you own logical reasoning, and that is enough.

Ironically, that is exactly how people end up believing conspiracy theories.

I do not have sources, as I didn't carry out any surveys, but there are a few articles about it:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-47144738
https://news.uchicago.edu/podcasts/big-brains/science-conspiracy-theories-and-political-polarization-eric-oliver
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/talking-apes/201801/why-do-people-believe-in-conspiracy-theories
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180925075108.htm
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/science/articles-reports/2019/04/25/which-science-based-conspiracy-theories-do-britons

If belief in untrue theories is on the rise, it is due to the "flattening" effect of the internet. In the past, only authoritative sources were able to publish information to mass audiences. That was no guarantee of truth, but mainly the media were only used to disseminate falsehood that were convenient to the establishment, typically stories designed to persuade the public that a ware was justified, or stories justifying why the the rich should retain their wealth.

Now with platforms like youtube and the web in general, anyone can "publish" information on the same level as the establishment. That means that any wacky theories of no particular agenda are easily spread, e.g. flat Earthers, anti-vaxxing.

Absolutely.  Publishing media is no longer just for the experts in their field.  With so many people posting opinions, viewers can pick and choose who what views they want to hear, so are more likely to only listen to those who align with their own opinions - facts be damned.  And it isn't just conspiracy theories, look at the sheer amount of wonky dietary and health advice, especially on youtube.

My point was not that "mostly" the older generation is prone to this, just that, you you said that young people are especially prone - implying its "mostly" the young, which is isn't.  The above links seem to say it doesn't vary that much across age groups.  I have no doubt that plenty of "young" people believe something some conspiracy theory, but I think the same would be true for the older generation.

[Buriedcode]

How on earth can you proove a conspiracy THEORY?
Is it not in the term theory itself that it can not be prooven? 

Indeed, its like calling a UFO an Alien space ship - can't be unknown if you know what it is 

[tooki]

How on earth can you proove a conspiracy THEORY?
Is it not in the term theory itself that it can not be prooven? 

Indeed, its like calling a UFO an Alien space ship - can't be unknown if you know what it is 

Or how effective “alternative medicine” does not exist, since it simply becomes “medicine” once efficacy has been proved.

[wilfred]

I've just learned of a 2017 Russian movie "Salyut-7". Did it get shown in Australia. Anyone here seen it.

There's an English dubbed trailer on YT that looks pretty good. I'd prefer subtitles .

[RoGeorge]

Just seen "Salyut-7 (2017)" the other day, didn't know about it until I saw Derek (from Veritasium) mentioning the movie in a video about the bamboozling effect of second axis auto rotation for exactly half a turn.

Very good movie, much better than "Gravity" if you ask me, totally worth the time watching Salyut-7, and it was based on a real story.   

Later edit:
The Salyut-7 trailer above is in English, I hope they didn't voice dubbed the whole movie.  Hearing that English spoken with a Russian accent is horrible.  No way!  The movie should be watch with its original Russian soundtrack, there are English subtitles available.

[wilfred]

Just seen "Salyut-7 (2017)" the other day, didn't know about it until I saw Derek (from Veritasium) mentioning the movie in a video about the bamboozling effect of second axis auto rotation for exactly half a turn.

Yeah, that's where I heard about it too.