So then he said, "You must have a Napoleon complex."
So I said, "Why? Because I'm a normal height?"
Napoleon wasn't that short!
Adam, you certainly do fit in around here.
You're the bee's knees.
Bees don't have knees!
Their legs have joints but not kneecaps.
So nice to spend my birthday with my peers.
If only...
Adam, what's wrong?
Wrong? What could be wrong
when I'm surrounded by my smartest friends
with the highest IQs?
Actually...
Emily! You did remember.
Of course, buddy. Wait'll you see my gift.
Wait a second. You said "actually."
Are you here to ruin something?
Oh, I'm not just gonna ruin something.
I'm gonna ruin... you. For your birthday,
I'm gonna show you why you're wrong
about how right you are.
No! Because I'm Emily Axford,
and this is Emily Ruins "Adam Ruins Everything."
Corrected & Synced by Bakugan
Oh, this is the best present ever.
I love it when you do this.
What are you gonna ruin? Herpetology? Wikipedia?
Not pocket squares!
- Nope. - Adam...
I'm afraid we cannot grant entry
to this... scissorbill, this lummox.
Mindsa is an exclusive club
for people who score very highly on IQ tests
and who define their entire identity
around scoring high on said test.
Checkmate.
I'm sorry, Em.
Totally, the kid genius is right.
Unless you take an IQ test,
there's no way to know
if you're smart enough to be here.
Actually, that's not true.
We think IQ tests are objective evaluations
of our mental abilities, but in reality
they are deeply biased and controversial tools
that might not predict intelligence at all.
Emily, don't embarrass yourself.
Measuring intelligence is what IQ tests are for.
Wrong again! The first IQ test
was never intended to measure intelligence.
In fact, it was invented in 1904 as a way
to assess which French kids were doing well in kindergarten.
Wine is to lunch
as cigarette is...
To recess?
Excellent!
You are now ready for the French first grade.
Huh, that's awfully specific.
Well, the inventor of the test, Alfred Binet,
said that was the point.
My test is for children.
It is not meant to apply to everyone.
But, that all changed
thanks to a man named H.H. Goddard.
I'm gonna apply this test to everyone.
Hey, everybody!
Let's all take this intelligence test!
People liked intelligence testing so much
that within a few years, IQ tests had swept the nation.
This test says I'm a regular Marie Curie.
I'm positively glowing.
Mine says I'm dumber than a dewdropper
all zozzled on a Sunday.
Well, I'll never marry you now.
And today, we use them to tell
how intelligent we are.
- End of ruin? - Nope!
The only thing IQ tests tell you
is how good you are at IQ tests.
Early tests focused almost entirely
on concepts that only rich white folks would know.
That can't be true. I'm not rich,
and I can answer these questions.
Describe everything required by a regatta.
Okay, boats, water, and...
wait, I don't know.
My God... he forgot buoys!
But that question doesn't measure my intelligence.
I've just never been exposed
to nautical athletics... or any athletics.
Exactly!
We act like these tests are objective,
but the truth is, they're actually biased
towards people with similar life experiences
to the test makers.
I do not aim to condescend, but I shall.
If the exam is so blinkered,
why is it the foremost criterion of empiricists everywhere?
Thank you, human thesaurus.
I would also like to know
why IQ tests are the scientific standard.
Great question. They aren't.
There is no such thing as a standard IQ test.
In fact, the two most popular tests,
the Stanford-Binet and the Wechsler,
measure different things
and can often give very different results.
This test says I'm a kid genius,
but this one says I'm a kid dunce.
That means I average out to...
Normal!
No! Do you hear her?
These tests are pointless! Help!
Emily, the test is just for fun.
What's the harm
in doing puzzles and getting graded?
You know, some adults miss grades.
The harm is, these puzzles have been used by racists
to discriminate against people of color.
Okay, Emily, puzzles cannot be racist.
Look at this one. You just get all
the colors on separate but equal... Oh.
Remember H.H. Goddard,
the guy who popularized the IQ test.
He used it to cherry-pick data
to justify his own racist beliefs.
Who wants to take my fun little test
that proves the white race is superior?
And it gets worse.
Goddard was a member on something called the...
No.
Please don't tell me... Yep.
In the 20th century, state governments
used low IQ scores
as an excuse to sterilize people.
Sorry, but you didn't know what a regatta was.
That means, you're dumb. Too dumb to breed.
Son of a bobwhite,
we actually sterilized people?
This can't be possible.
Sadly, Adam, it's more than possible.
It happened.
Emily, you even got me an expert!
Wow. Happy birthday.
This is Rebecca Kluchin.
She's a professor at Sacramento State,
and she's an expert
in America's tragic legacy of sterilization.
When IQ tests first originated,
people like Goddard thought they'd be a good way
to weed out recent European immigrants
who might pass as white.
IQ scores were used to conclude
that lower-class whites, people of color,
and people with disabilities
would be better off removed from the gene pool.
Wow, I did not know that.
Over 60,000 people in 32 states
were sterilized through states eugenics laws,
many because of this one test.
And we still use IQ tests in death penalty cases
to define who should live and who should die.
That's insane! It's just a stupid test!
Yeah, but when you make the mistake
of reducing intelligence down to one number,
it's easy to cast that
as proof of natural superiority.
Intelligence isn't one single quality.
It's made up of a variety of things,
like memory, learning,
mental agility, and reasoning.
- Thanks, Professor! - No problem.
Now I've got to go back to standing completely still
so no one knows this painting is alive.
Bye!
The truth is, as much as you love this club,
IQ tests might not measure intelligence.
And, they've been used as a tool
to hurt people for decades.
Wait.
Human thesaurus, where are you going?
If intelligence quotients are meaningless,
then so is Mindsa!
This cerebral fraternity is bunkum!
No! My friends!
Well, Emily, I have to congratulate you.
- That was a solid ruin. - Oh, thank you.
But you know what? I never claimed to be
the most intelligent person in the world.
I'm just a curious boy with a TV show.
A show reviewers have called,
"renewed for a second season."
Aw, too bad you've actually
gotten stuff wrong on that TV show.
And I'll tell you all about it
right after this.
Oh, that was also a solid act tease.
Shh, this is my moment.
Ah, my crew!
Thank you guys for working hard to ensure
we deliver the best, most accurate information.
Oh, good morning, Jorge!
Good morning, Adam. Adam...
how's the online girlfriend?
I don't wanna get ahead of myself,
but it's getting pretty serious.
Take it from me,
don't send any below-the-waist stuff.
You ready to shoot? I was born ready.
I live for facts.
Then prepare to die. Aah!
Emily. Adam.
You act like this is the most factual show on TV,
but the truth is...
you've gotten things wrong.
Wait, are you gonna do a correction segment?
I've always wanted to do one of those!
Well, let's see how ya like it!
Exhibit A, "Adam Ruins Forensic Science."
You claimed that DNA was
the only foolproof type of evidence.
The killer's DNA is all over this crime scene.
We'll know for certain who killed this man.
But according to new research,
DNA evidence can suffer from the same problems
as other forensic science, such as incomplete samples
and crime scene contamination.
My bad.
When German police found matching DNA
at 40 different crime scenes,
they concluded it was a serial killer
called the Phantom of Heilbronn.
Mein Gott!
40 crimes, 40 cotton swabs with the same DNA?
What a ruthless killer.
It turned out,
that matching DNA was actually from a woman
at the factory that made the cotton swabs.
This will make it clean for my nice police officers.
So, face it, DNA evidence isn't foolproof.
You're ruined.
Wow.
Thank you for bringing this up!
It's true. Since that episode aired,
we have learned that DNA evidence
is not infallible.
And even though it's still an amazing tool,
we need to use it carefully
and think about it critically. Wha...!
Hey, bud, so, all this is on-camera...
so you shouldn't be so happy about being wrong,
'cause people will think that you don't care about the facts.
Oh, I really care about the facts.
That's why I'm excited for this.
- Hit me with another one. - Okay.
Oh, this one's a doozy!
You specifically said
that air marshals stop terrorist attacks.
That just ain't true.
Between 2001 and 2008,
air marshals didn't make one arrest
related to terrorism.
Ugh, why are there never any terrorists to shoot?
I'm bored.
The few arrests they do make are drunk people
and celebrities who won't get off their phones.
A-ha! Gotcha!
And we're paying through the nose for it.
Taxpayers spent $800 million
on air marshals in 2014 alone.
And since they only make around four arrests per year,
that's about $200 million per arrest.
Air marshals are so ineffective,
one member of Congress has even called
for the program to be abolished.
Wow, yep. Sounds like
we were definitely wrong on that one.
Adam...
hey, man, be cool. This is a steady gig.
Don't go ruining your credibility
by admitting mistakes.
Oh, no, that'll just increase our credibility.
Hit me with another one, Emily!
You sure about that? Okay.
Remember that segment on electric cars?
Whew! People did not like that one.
Adam, you know I love you like a weird friend of my wife,
but you were wr-wr-wr-wrong
when you said that no one should ever buy a Tesla.
Elon Musk is a super brainiac,
and Teslas are totally saving the planet.
Tesla!
So stop taking money from "big oil,"
and a do a little something called research.
Babe, what are you doing?
Uh, looking at naked photos!
Please subscribe.
Okay, I know Tesla fans didn't love that one,
but our argument was actually more nuanced than that.
First of all, our source wasn't the oil industry,
it was scientists and environmental groups.
And their data shows that in some cases,
buying a brand-new electric car
can actually increase your carbon footprint.
But that doesn't mean that no one should ever buy one.
In fact, our expert in that episode said the opposite.
If you really want to help save the environment,
the best thing you can do is to reduce
the amount you drive, and to drive your current car
as long as possible,
provided it's reasonably efficient.
But if your car is beyond repair
and you absolutely need to buy a new one,
then go ahead, buy yourself
a nice, small electric car, perhaps even a used one.
Look, we don't hate electric cars.
Our goal was to show how even green products
affect our carbon footprints.
In this case, our facts weren't wrong.
Our point was just misunderstood.
Ah, but since it's your show,
that's on you. You should have been clearer.
I mean, the title of the video was...
Do you wonder why people got the wrong idea?
Yeah, you're right.
If that many people misread our argument,
that means we should have done
a better job explaining it.
Doing nuance on TV is hard, but that's my job,
so in the future I'll try to be better.
Okay, have you ever actually seen your own show?
Because you're supposed to be getting upset.
That's how everyone knows I'm doing a good ruin.
One minute till act break.
Ooh, lightning round!
In an "Ever Wonder Why?" segment,
you said the Empire State Building
was 12,000 feet tall.
Oh, yeah, that one was really embarrassing.
It's actually a little over 1,200 feet tall.
I guess we added a zero somehow.
In "Adam Ruins Football," you referred to a lineman
but pointed at a linebacker.
I still can't tell the difference.
Don't let him get to you, Todd.
And one time,
you showed snowflakes that have eight sides,
but they almost always have six.
Sorry, Jorge.
So there you have it, Adam.
I have proved that your show makes mistakes!
Okay, why aren't you storming off?
I mean, I'm starting to feel like
you don't like my present.
No, of course I do! Because you're right,
we have gotten a few things wrong.
But that doesn't ruin our show at all.
Look, this is our research team.
They spend every day calling experts,
combing through sources and fact-checking scripts
to ensure that the information
we present on this show is as close
to the truth as possible.
But, they're also human,
and humans sometimes make mistakes.
But this entire show is predicated
- on you being truthful and honest. - Right!
And it wouldn't be truthful to claim we're infallible.
The intellectually honest thing to do
is to be transparent about our process
and public about our mistakes.
That's why we put our sources on-screen,
and why we admit when we can do better.
The point of our show isn't to be right every time.
It's to encourage the audience
to question what they think they know
and, if we're lucky, to change a few minds.
Well, then, I guess you're ready
for the last part of my gift...
...when I show you why trying to change people's minds
actually makes things worse.
Aah!
Emily, you know my pain threshold
is very low.
Isn't there anything I can do
to change your mind about this?
Nope. And that, Conover, is your final lesson.
Your entire show is built around the idea
that if you present someone with better information,
you can change their mind.
But the surprising truth is, disproving a misconception
can actually strengthen
a person's belief in that misconception.
It's called "the backfire effect."
The more you prove someone wrong,
the more they think they're right.
That can't be true.
I change people's minds every day.
Ha! You just proved my point.
I presented you with information
that goes against your thinking
and you just dug right into your beliefs.
One study found that when people concerned
about side effects of the flu shot
were informed it was safe,
they actually became less willing to get it.
But that's so illogical! How is that possible?
Because when you try to change someone's mind,
the other person often feels...
...attacked.
Being proven wrong
actually activates the same area
of the brain as real, physical pain.
Worldstar.
Stay with me, kid.
Her right hook'll hurt ya,
but her right facts will, too.
Being proven wrong hurts so much,
it often causes a fight or flight response.
I gotta get outta here!
Nope! Aah!
You need to hear this.
Why am I reacting like this?
Normally, I love learning new things!
Simple. You're protecting your identity.
It's called identity protective cognition.
See, when a person is corrected on minor trivia,
it doesn't really have much of an effect.
Thinkin' about trying SoulCycle.
Oh, don't do it.
You know, some experts say it can be bad for you.
Huh, good to know.
But, when the truth threatens their identity,
they push back hard.
You know, some experts say
that SoulCycle can be bad for you.
That's not what my fellow warriors
at SoulCycle HQ say.
Those "experts" are in the pocket
of "big elliptical."
Okay, this is crazy.
Correcting people has to work.
It's natural, and it just feels right, you know?
Ooh, that's another one.
When a fact contradicts our belief,
we often hide behind emotional arguments
that can't be disproven... like you just did.
Whew, my arms are gettin' tired.
Yeah, but that butt's lookin' slick!
But, that's not how thinking is supposed to work.
Actually, that's exactly how thinking works.
The backfire effect happens because our emotions
are faster than logical thought.
When our beliefs are challenged,
our brains automatically respond
to the perceived attack, not the new information.
Ah, stop talking!
Just finish me already!
All this means, it's really hard
to change people's minds.
The sad truth is,
humans have a really difficult time
telling good facts from their own biased beliefs.
Oh...
I think he's down for the count.
Adam, this is Steve Lewandowsky,
a professor at the University of Bristol
and a co-author of "The Debunking Handbook,"
a guide to changing people's minds.
It's too late. My show's ruined!
Changing minds is impossible!
No, Adam, it's not impossible.
It's just that you can't rely
on giving people a set of facts
that is in conflict with their beliefs,
and then expect that to stick.
You have to do more than that.
Simply saying "You're wrong"
isn't gonna convince anyone.
By repeating your correction just once,
you may inadvertently remind them
of their misconception.
That's why it's so important
to repeat facts more than once,
over and over again.
Okay.
instead of simply saying
that something isn't true,
provide people with
an alternative narrative that is true.
You must replace
a bad explanation with a good one.
The fact is, humans just aren't that logical.
We're complex, biased, emotional creatures.
If you really want to change people's minds
and correct their mistakes,
you have to accept that.
But if you do, it can work.
Well... thanks, guys.
I learned a lot.
Now, if you'll excuse me, guys,
I need to put in some time on the speed bags.
Thanks, Professor!
Okay, Adam, time to build ya back up!
Are you ready for the positive take...
Wait... Adam?
Adam?
Adam!
Hello, we are behind the scenes
here on "Adam Ruins Everything,"
in the boxing gym to talk more
to Steve Lewandowsky,
'cause I have way more questions
about his work, and way more questions
about the backfire effect.
Do you think that we as a...
as a society can fight the backfire effect,
or do you think it's too powerful?
Well, I think we have to.
I think we have to try and do that.
How do we do it? Well...
on the technological side,
part of the problem we're having now is that
the public is fractionated
into these filter bubbles,
because everybody is getting things
on Amazon or Facebook that they like.
- Yeah. - But, it's not good for society.
They should also show me something
I might not like that much.
Yeah.
And by doing that, people with different
political views are still reading
the same book, at least.
Or at least we would understand
what each other think. Exactly.
And, similarly, you can introduce
some sort of fact-checking alert
when you're sharing things on Facebook.
In fact, Facebook has started doing that.
But won't... won't they just backfire on Facebook?
Well... And say, "Wow!
Facebook is in the pocket" of the whoever.
Well, they might, but not everybody.
- Yeah. - Again, I think some people
will be susceptible to that.
In fact, we've done the research on that,
that if people are warned
that something might be mistaken
in what they're about to read,
then they become much more careful
in how they evaluate the material.
And another thing that I love...
there's a Norwegian website
that has started giving people a quiz
on the content of an article
before they can post a comment.
And if you don't pass the quiz,
you can't comment.
I love that!
That's not censorship.
- All it does is to make sure... - Yeah.
...that the people who leave comments
actually know what they're commenting on.
And it gives people that extra two minutes
to calm down, to reflect a little more.
And, I think what that would do is to...
to improve the quality
of the comment stream dramatically.
Those are the technological solutions,
and that's just scratching the surface.
You know, we can do a hell of a lot more than that.
Well, now that we're working on the problem,
I certainly hope we can move towards a solution.
- Yes. - Everyone is worried now
that we're living in an age of misinformation
which I often think is maybe a little bit
overblown of an idea...
Do you feel that we are, or...?
Well, I have looked at the, uh,
truth ratings of presidential candidates
over the last, uh, 12 or 16 years,
And if you go to independent fact-checking websites
like PolitiFact, and you look
at the campaign scorecards for candidates
over the last three or four elections,
it is undoubtedly the case that the,
uh, level of truth has declined dramatically.
I mean, you're not an American.
- Do you think it's... - No.
Is it uniquely American, or...?
No, the United Kingdom had a similar episode
last year with the Brexit campaign
where there was a flood of...
of misinformation. The real problem there
and also with the recent election
in the U.S., I think, is not just
the flood of misinformation.
It's also that facts seem to have lost traction.
And, uh, uh...
expertise is now considered to be elitist.
Education, sometimes is considered to be elitist.
Yeah. Ugh.
Sometimes it feels as though
it's not just that people are believing the...
the bad facts, but not believing the good ones,
that everything has an equal status,
- that any piece of information... - Precisely.
- ...is as good as any other. - Precisely, yes.
I really appreciate you coming on the show.
Thank you so much for being here.
Thanks so much for having me.
- Yeah. - It's been great.
Adam, wher are going?
Away.
I don't know for how long.
I-I'm really sorry if I hurt your feelings.
It's just, you know how this show works.
You know, I prove you wrong,
and it totally sucks, and then I give you
a positive takeaway and everything's all better.
Which is why it's time to tell you that...
Being wrong is good for you?
Yeah, I know that.
Y-You do?
Of course! Finding out you're wrong
is the first step towards one day being right.
And, people actually like you more
when they see you screw up.
It's called the pratfall effect,
and it's why every character
in a romantic comedy is clumsy.
Oh, of all the luck!
Ah, there go my books...
and on Valentine's Day!
Attractive, yet approachable.
Not to mention,
admitting your mistakes builds trust.
Doctors who are honest about their errors
are actually more likely
to have more trusting patients, not fewer.
I'm so sorry I amputated the wrong arm.
Happens to all of us, Doc.
One time, I left my car lights on.
Don't worry about it.
So, yeah, I know
that being wrong is good for you.
It's what I've built my entire life around.
Oh, um... then why are you upset?
I'm not. I'm proud.
The student has become the teacher.
I don't think you need me anymore.
Of course I need you!
I mean, you teach me so much.
Well, you've taught me too.
From the truth about IQ tests,
to eyeglasses,
to my personal favorite, the female hymen!
Mm, don't say it like that.
Most importantly, Em, you've taught me
what it means to have a good friend.
Thanks, bud. You taught me that too.
But today, you also reminded me that
I still have a lot to learn.
So, I think it's time I go see
who else is out there I can learn from.
And I'm afraid that path... takes me elsewhere.
You don't fly. You ride a folding bike.
Much more efficient.
Actually, I do both.
Wait... where are you going?
Holy crow, he's really leaving.
Adam?
Hello, my Internet girlfriend!
Can I live with you?
Corrected & Synced by Bakugan