Albrecht Dürer:
Witch Riding Backwards on a Goat
(1500/02)

"…the protestors can only speculate based upon an innocent's understanding of the context."

I attended the special evening session of our County Commission, held to allow citizens who usually can’t testify at the morning meetings because they have to work. The minority that vehemently opposes our proposed data center showed up in legions, creating an overflow crowd, most of whom raised their hands when asked who came to testify. I raised my hand, too, though I was there only to represent the majority, which had mostly neglected to testify in support of the project, perhaps because they believed it was ultimately unnecessary. The Commissioners began the evening with brief prepared statements, each disclosing in their own way that they remained supportive of the data center proposal, albeit for different reasons. The first to speak explained that a past County Development Services Director had interpreted existing county zoning definitions to include data centers as a type of warehouse. This act, which was well within that incumbent’s authority, limited the commission’s ability to intervene with something like a moratorium on the presently proposed development. The other two commissioners further acknowledged the context they faced: one clarified proposed versus historical resource use and found the data center less intrusive, and the other amplified his support for the rules of regulation that would allow this proposal. “You wouldn’t want me to intervene to alter a road crew laying road bed,” he said.

With the context clearly anchored, they let the testimony begin. The anti-data center contingent was anything but consistent, except for their universal encouragement for the commissioners to suspend any effort to complete the data center for a year, “so regulations can catch up with the development.” Not one proposed a way that year could be leveraged into meaningful regulatory changes, which take time and expertise to complete. Such work also requires a fair amount of funding to bring in the professional perspectives needed to produce usable, defensible language. I doubted such an effort could be completed in only a year. As the first commissioner who spoke insisted, any regulation would apply only to future applications, not the current one under consideration.

Each citizen duly took to the microphone, many mumbling inaudibly, if passionately, almost inevitably repeating some meme-like insistence. Some complained about the water use, seemingly without even distant knowledge of how water allocation regulations work, while others wondered how their electrical bill would be affected. Each concern seemed genuine, even heartfelt, and most could have easily been dismissed if the citizen had done just a little research. It seemed each had searched instead, perhaps innocently ignorant of the difference between search and research, with search being the default way to access information on the web. It surprised me to learn that search often violates the much-vaunted scientific method. It most often employs what I’ll insist might be better labeled the SlyentificMethod, a popular way to outsmart yourself. While the scientific method seeks to disprove an assertion and builds on curated information rather than essentially accidentally encountered stuff, science’s SlyentificMethod counterpart seeks reassurance. It trolls for confirmation, typically latching onto any odd shred of evidence that seems to support their a priori premise. They, in essence, chose their conclusion before they investigated rather than as a result of their query. This result seems self-serving to anyone not as thoroughly invested in a particular perspective.

Simple errors introduced via this innocence easily metastasize into immovables. Anecdotal stories from other contexts and earlier technologies support conclusions that aren’t supported by more current experience and context. The overarching presumption that the data center developer must be crooked seemed to pervade almost every bit of testimony. People repeatedly exhorted that we’d be fools to trust these billionaires who couldn’t care less about what we needed. They were only in it for the profit. One woman even posited that the developers didn’t have any money to invest in their proposed development anyway, because their balance sheet showed billions of dollars in debt. She had apparently not yet discovered leverage. Others proposed casual violations of one or another of the laws of thermodynamics. Several suggested exactly what that commissioner had mentioned: advising experienced data center developers on how to build their roads.

The stories were often emotional to the point of heart-wrenching. People honestly believed their misbegotten conclusions, and many seemed visibly terrified. They had convinced themselves that they were on the side of righteousness, and perhaps only they and their cohorts stood between their homes and total oblivion. The misinformation was stunning and seemed to feed upon itself. The usual anti-corporate types reminded the commissioners of the evils of late-stage capitalism. Much cheering and jeering accompanied some of the speakers, much to the repeated frustration of the Commission Chair, who scowled and pounded his gavel, threatening with the Commission Chair equivalent of dad’s insistence when driving: "Don’t make me stop this car! They didn’t.

Self-fulfillment might be the most satisfying fulfillment of all, for it seems to touch precisely the right spots. It must feel stupendous to be on the side of righteousness, regardless of whether that perspective can be supported by actual evidence or underlying facts. Convince yourself if you can, or join a collection of like-minded individuals and become a movement, encouraging each other’s beliefs. The deep sense that you might be saving civilization infuses action. Then the means by which conclusions were drawn might seem irrelevant from the superior position of the planet’s savior, however self-appointed. MAGA employed the same method. I’ll generously conclude they were inadvertently pseudo-scientific and ultimately only self-serving. Successfully goading the County Commission into demanding a year-long moratorium wasn’t ever destined to make a single misbegotten assertion any truer. Professional planners might reasonably insist that most data center developers could negotiate the necessary permits regardless of the constraining conditions. More stringent regulations would result in the same outcome, the one none of the protestors wanted. The data center developers are well-chosen professionals. They know their own business backward, while the protestors can only speculate based on an innocent’s understanding of the context.

©2026 by David A. Schmaltz - all rights reserved

Tags: #Comeuppance, #PureSchmaltz