Facts

Pollution. When you hear that word what do you think of? Perhaps dangerous gases are being emitted into our atmosphere. Garbage floating around the ocean. Sick animals due to toxic food. But there's another pollutant lurking in our society. An invisible one that we encounter every single day. Information. It's in our phones, televisions, text chains, and email threads. It's packed into devices we wear on our wrists and in the checkout lines at the grocery store.

In our modern society, escaping the barrage of information is impossible. But are we equipped to handle it? In a 2024 letter published in Nature Human Behavior, scientists argued that we should treat this information overload like environmental pollution. It may not affect our drinking water, but it affects our brains at every turn.

The brain is the most complex organ in the body. But the brain can only process a certain amount of information. When we exceed that peak level, it can almost feel like our brain is filled to the brink and totally frozen, incapable of performing its most basic duties that help us get through our days.

When we reach that point of paralysis, we can't process and act on the information we consume. If this is feeling familiar, you're not alone. According to the Real Time Statistics Project, as of January 2023, there were nearly 2 billion websites on the internet. 175 million tweets were sent every day, and 30 billion pieces of content were shared monthly on Facebook. How was it possible to not get distracted by all that information?

Of course, technology is useful. We can look up healthy recipes or determine if a headache is just a headache or something more problematic. But because of modern technology, we're all slaves to the amount of information we can consume. The American Psychological Association defines information overload as the state when the intensity of information exceeds an individual's processing capacity, leading to anxiety, poor decision-making, and other undesirable consequences.

A Maryland high school athletic director faces criminal charges for allegedly using artificial intelligence to mimic the voice of Pikesville High School Principal Eric Eiswert, misleading people into believing Eiswert made racist and antisemitic comments. Baltimore County Police Chief Robert McCullough said, "We now have conclusive evidence that the recording was not authentic. It's been determined the recording was generated through the use of artificial intelligence technology.”

After an investigation by the Baltimore County Police Department, Dazhon Darien was arrested on charges of stalking, theft, disruption of school operations, and retaliation against a witness.

While celebrities have been on guard against the use of AI for unauthorized use of likeness, this particular target is notable for his ordinariness. Hany Farid is a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who specializes in digital forensics and helped analyze the recording. “What's so particularly poignant here is that this is a Baltimore school principal. This is not Taylor Swift. It's not Elon Musk. It's just some guy trying to get through his day.”

According to police, Darien's alleged scheme began as retaliation against Eiswert over “work performance challenges.” Investigators reported that Eiswert began investigating for the potential mishandling of nearly $2,000 in school funds, and had reprimanded Darien for firing a coach without approval. Darien’s contract was up for renewal next semester, but Eiswert implied that the renewal might not happen.

In January 2024, detectives discovered the AI-generated voice recording, which had spread on social media. The recording caused significant disruptions, leading to Eiswert's temporary removal from the school and triggering hate-filled messages and numerous calls to the school.

Darien was eventually arrested at Baltimore/Washington International Airport while attempting to board a flight to Houston. He was stopped for packing a gun in his bags, and officers discovered a warrant for his arrest.

Still, the result continued to leave Professor Farid unsettled. “What is going to be the consequence of this?” Farid emphasized the need for regulatory action. “I don't understand at what point we're going to wake up as a country and say, like, ‘Why are we allowing this? Where are our regulators?’”

Possible Preaching Angle:

This is a good example that deception is on the rise (“evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.” 2 Tim. 3:13). We should be discerning about the information we choose to believe and pass on to others (whether secular or religious).

Separating fact from fiction is getting harder. Manipulating images—and creating increasingly convincing deepfakes—is getting easier. As what’s real becomes less clear, authenticity is “something we’re thinking about, writing about, aspiring to and judging more than ever.” This is why Merriam-Webster’s word of the year is “authentic,” the company announced in November of 2023.

Editor Peter Sokolowski said, “Can we trust whether a student wrote this paper? Can we trust whether a politician made this statement? We don’t always trust what we see anymore. We sometimes don’t believe our own eyes or our own ears. We are now recognizing that authenticity is a performance itself.”

According to the announcement from Merriam-Webster, “authentic” is a “high-volume lookup” most years but saw a “substantial increase” in 2023. The dictionary has several definitions for the word, including “not false or imitation,” “true to one’s own personality, spirit, or character” and “worthy of acceptance or belief as conforming to or based on fact,” among others.

Sokolowski said, “We see in 2023 a kind of crisis of authenticity. What we realize is that when we question authenticity, we value it even more.”

Other words that saw spikes this year include “deepfake,” “dystopian,” “doppelgänger,” and “deadname,” per Merriam-Webster. This year’s theme of searching for truth seems fitting following last year’s focus on manipulation. The 2022 word of the year was “gaslighting,” a term that originated from a 1938 play by Patrick Hamilton. In the play, a woman complains that the gas lights in her house are dimming while her husband tries to convince her that it’s all in her head.

Possible Preaching Angle:

As technology’s ability to manipulate reality improves, people are searching for the truth. Only the Word of God contains the absolute truth “your word is truth” (John 17:17), as revealed by Jesus, who is “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6).

The moment we’ve all breathlessly waited for is finally here: Dictionaries are announcing their words of the year. In December, the US’s most esteemed lexicon, Merriam-Webster, revealed its choice: “authentic.”

In its announcement, the dictionary said the word had seen a big jump in searches this year, thanks to discussions “about AI, celebrity culture, identity, and social media.” The concept of authenticity sits at the intersection of what’s been on our collective minds.

Large language models like ChatGPT and image generators like Dall-E have left us uncertain about what’s genuine, from student essays to the pope’s fashion choices. When it comes to the news, online mis- and disinformation, along with armies of bots, have us operating under different sets of facts.

Sure enough, other leading dictionaries’ words of the year are remarkably similar. Cambridge chose “hallucinate,” focusing its announcement on generative AI: “It’s capable of producing false information – hallucinations – and presenting this information as fact.” Collins didn’t beat around the bush: its word of the year is “AI.”

In a polarized world, the dictionaries’ solidarity suggests there’s something we can all agree on: robots are terrifying. AI is an obsession that seems to cross generations. Whether you’re a boomer or Gen Z, OpenAI feels like a sign of change far beyond NFTs, the metaverse, and all the other fads we were told would transform humanity.

Social media feeds have become carefully curated extensions of ourselves—like little aspirational art projects. As Merriam-Webster points out, authenticity itself has become a performance. In other words, we’re getting very good at pretending to be real.

Past generations of Americans viewed God as the basis of truth and morality. Not anymore. A new study shows that most Americans reject any absolute boundaries regarding their morality, with 58% of adults surveyed believing instead that moral truth is up to the individual to decide.

According to findings from pollster Dr. George Barna, belief in absolute moral truth rooted in God’s Word is rapidly eroding among all American adults. This is regardless if they are churched or unchurched, within every political segment, and within every age group. Even among those who do identify God as the source of truth, there is substantial rejection of any absolute standard of morality in American culture.

Perhaps most stunning, this latest research shows a rejection of God’s truth and absolute moral standards by American Christians, those seen as most likely to hold traditional standards of morality. Evangelicals, defined as believing the Bible to be the true, reliable Word of God, are just as likely to reject absolute moral truth (46%). And only a minority of born-again Christians—43%—still embrace absolute truth.

The study found that the pull of secularism is especially strong among younger Americans, with those under age 30 much less likely to select God as the basis of truth (31%), and more likely to say that moral standards are decided by the individual (60%).

As Jeff Meyers writes in his new book, Truth Changes Everything, “We live in a world where we cannot go a single day without hearing that truths are based on how we see things rather than on what exists to be seen. Truth is not ‘out there’ to be found; it is ‘in here’ to be narrated.”

You can read the full study from Arizona Christian University here.

Possible Preaching Angle:

A biblical worldview rests firmly on the idea that Truth can be known. It says that Truth isn't constructed by our experiences and feelings. Rather, a biblical worldview says that Truth exists. It is a person. It is Jesus (John 14:6).

A clip from a Pursuit of Wonder video illustrates how man's ideas of what is true often turns out to be completely false.

In Peru in the middle of the 1400s, there was what is believed to be the largest known child sacrifice in the world, with about 140 children and more than 200 animals killed. The reason: attempting to appease the gods in response to unusually bad weather.

In Europe in the 17th century, just a few hundred years ago, it was widely believed that the earth was the center of the universe and everything else revolved around it. When the now famous astronomer Galileo Galilei published a work that showed that the sun was the center of the universe, and the earth revolved around the sun, the Roman inquisition banned his work and found Galileo guilty of heresy.

In the late 19th century, little more than a hundred years ago, doctors used what are now Schedule 1 drugs to treat common cold symptoms in children. Also, around this time, doctors believed it was foolish to wash their hands before delivering babies or during other medical procedures. Only eighty years ago, it was believed that cigarettes posed no health dangers.

And the list goes on. This Earth is not merely a cemetery of people that once were, but also a cemetery of ideas and beliefs once held to be true but are no longer.

You can watch the video here (2 mins 15 sec - 3 min 57 sec).

After doing an analysis of seven high-profile cases where people died as a result of use of force by police, Washington Post reporters Ashley Parker and Justine McDaniel found a disturbing pattern. They say they found that police consistently gave initial statements that were “misleading, incomplete or wrong, with the first accounts consistently in conflict with the full set of facts once they finally emerged.”

Philip Stinson teaches criminal justice at Bowling Green State University, and says trends like these are not merely coincidental. He said, “The police own the narrative in every interaction they have with the public, because they write up the reports. Sometimes the reports are written to justify the actions the officers have taken, and sometimes to cover up what actually happened.”

In their analysis, Parker and McDaniel found that police accounts “regularly described the victims in terms assuming they were guilty of a crime; and the initial police version frequently used clinical language that seemed to obscure their own role in the incidents.”

According to Lauren Bonds, executive director of the National Police Accountability Project, police often achieve this by employing deliberate use of the passive voice. She said, “When we use passive language in our own lives, usually we’re trying to create some distance from what happened, [as in] it’s ‘the milk fell’ instead of ‘I spilled the milk.’”

According to Stinson, restoring trust with the public will require greater accountability by police departments. “It’s very damaging to the police department because it does damage to their reputation when they put out these press releases and it turns out they’re false.”

Possible Preaching Angle:

Effective leadership requires integrity and truth telling; when those in authority lie, obscure, or exaggerate the truth to protect themselves, they erode their credibility and trustworthiness.

Physicist Sabine Hossenfelder is a research fellow at the Franklin Institute for Advanced Studies in Germany. Her YouTube channel has over 550,000 subscribers. She admits she cringes when scientists like the late Stephen Hawking, and many others, make numerous unsubstantiated pronouncements like “there is no possibility of a creator.” She is uncomfortable with “overconfident proclamations” like widely held beliefs on the origin of the universe, the existence of other universes, and other unverifiable beliefs.

Hossenfelder wants scientists to be:

… mindful of the limits of their discipline. Sometimes the only scientific answer we can give is “We don't know.” It therefore seems likely to me that, in our ongoing process of knowledge discovery, religion and science will continue to co-exist for a very long time. That's because science itself is limited, and where science ends, we seek other modes of explanation.

(Some) of these limits stem from the specific math we currently use (which, for example, requires initial conditions or indeterministic jumps), and they may be overcome as physics advances further. But some limits seem insurmountable to me. Eventually, I think, we will have to accept some facts about our universe without scientific explanation, if only because the scientific method can't justify itself. We may observe that the scientific method works, conclude that it's to our advantage to continue using it, but still never know why it works.

A team of archaeologists with the Archaeological Studies Institute believes it has found a tablet dating back to 1400 BC. Institute Director, Scott Stripling, says the tablet pre-dates the commonly held belief about when the Bible was written by as much as 800 years. If true, this would dispel the theory that the Bible was written around 600 years after the occurrence of some of the first events it describes. This means that the events were written as a firsthand account rather than after the fact.

Stripling continued, “Some scholars believe in something called the ‘documentary hypothesis,’ which states that the Bible was composed hundreds of years apart in different sections, and then later redacted. The tablet is a problem for that theory and the idea that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch. ... This type of writing is more characteristic of the very beginning of the Late Bronze Era II horizon around 1400 B.C. For those who want to push the Exodus date way off into the future, this is really problematic for them.”

Houston Baptist University Professor, Craig Evans, said; “This tablet contains the oldest text that we know of so far. It also correlates with two passages in the book of Deuteronomy where it talks about going up on Mount Ebal, building an altar and cursing the enemies of Yahweh in Israel … The skepticism that nobody could write Hebrew that far back—is just an unwarranted skepticism."

The tablet has major religious and historical implications. If the peer review of Stripling’s discovery confirms his claims, it could dispel the liberal idea that the Old Testament was written in 600 BC.

Six students overdosed on fentanyl during a Florida spring break trip, and several were hospitalized, including two on ventilators in critical condition. The students were football players at the Military Academy at West Point, and afterward the story was covered and passed around several major news outlets. Several stories included anecdotes alleging that some of the students who overdosed did so after attempting mouth-to-mouth resuscitation on their fallen colleagues. But those appear to be exaggerated, according to Simon Taxel.

Taxel, a certified paramedic, addressed the Wilton Manors overdose story specifically. “Illicit fentanyl is extremely dangerous, but the hyperbole and misinformation that has become associated with it are also incredibly harmful. The published statements that two of the victims absorbed enough fentanyl to overdose while performing CPR and mouth to mouth resuscitation are dubious and scientifically extremely unlikely.”

Taxel followed up, “Reporting like this has the potential to cause substantial harm. They increase the fear among both community members and professional rescuers. This fear and anxiety can cause both lay rescuers and first responders to hesitate and potentially delay lifesaving intervention. They also cause the erroneous use of resources like the deployment of hazardous materials teams to scenes where there is suspected fentanyl, when standard precautions like wearing exam gloves and hand washing are more than sufficient to protect everyone.”

Possible Preaching Angle:

There's no need to exaggerate the truth in order to warn people of danger. Discernment and facts should be the backbone of our decision-making process.

When a protester at a press conference in Boston stood up to make his voice known, he intended to attack the credibility of Boston mayor Michelle Wu.

The unidentified man wearing sunglasses and a mask asked city officials to probe all criminal cases involving Annie Dookhan, a former chemist who pleaded guilty years prior to evidence tampering and falsifying drug results. Dookhan’s involvement has the potential to taint thousands of drug cases over the years.

The protester said, “You’re a political puppet … Why don’t you look into it, Mayor Wu? Look into that — you’ll find the truth, Mayor Wu.”

Unfortunately, the woman at the platform was not Mayor Wu, but Beth Huang, executive director of Massachusetts Voter Table, a voting-rights advocacy group. “If only being a 5’4″ Asian woman imbued in me the powers of being mayor of Boston,” Huang wrote on Twitter the following day.

Possible Preaching Angle:

When people make careless accusations without having all the facts, they can cause great damage and even discredit the cause for which they stand.

Google has published its most searched-for terms of 2021:

For the UK, the five most frequently asked “When” questions were:

1. When will lockdown end?

2. When will I get the vaccine?

3. When does Love Island finish?

4. When does lockdown start?

5. When does Love Island start?

For the US, the five most frequently asked “How to Be” questions were:

1) How to be eligible for stimulus check

2) How to be more attractive

3) How to be happy alone

4) How to be a baddie

5) How to be a good boyfriend

Possible Preaching Angle:

“Therefore, since you have been raised with Christ, strive for the things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things” (Col. 3:1-2).

There was no archaeological evidence for the existence of the biblical King David. That is, until 1993, when surveyor Gila Cook noticed a basalt stone inscription by an Aramaic-speaking king celebrating a military victory over “the House of David.”

To date, archaeological evidence has confirmed the historical existence of about 50 Old Testament figures, most of them kings. Archaeologists have also found records of a few other names, such as Balaam, which may or may not be the biblical prophet of the same name.

Biblical people named in the archaeological record:

Foreign kings: 26

Israelite kings: 8

Judean kings: 6

Israelite priests: 3

Israelite scribes: 1

Possible Preaching Angle:

Once again, archaeology confirms that the Bible record is true and accurate and it has a historical framework. “All your words are true” (Ps. 119:160).

Historian, philosopher, and author Richard Reevesis is a senior fellow at the think tank Brookings Institution. He is concerned that most people can’t distinguish between truth and truthfulness. An error and a lie are not the same. He gives the example of the COVID-19 pandemic:

When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, we all wanted instant, accurate advice on what to do and what not to do. But the virus was novel. Scientists were scrambling to figure out what it was, how it spread, and how to defeat it. The honest answer to many of our most urgent questions was: “We don’t know yet.” The most important question for citizens is not whether public health advice is always right. It’s whether public health officials are consistently trying to get it right and communicating … “the full painful truth,” honestly and clearly. Trust is built on truthfulness rather than truth.

We don’t like the deliberate lie but acknowledge someone may be making an honest mistake. Truth is empirical, but truthfulness is ethical. Truth is the end product; truthfulness a vital element in its production. ... But the real problem is a loss of virtue, specifically the virtue of truthfulness.

No word on his religious beliefs, but Reevesis has a patron saint for his views:

Our patron saint in this effort could be Nathanael. He appears in the Gospel of John and has a good claim to be the patron saint of truthfulness. When told about Jesus, he scoffed: “‘Can anything good come out of Nazareth?’” But Christ, knowing he had said this, exclaimed: ‘Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!’’ Christ was clearly not applauding Nathanael for the truth of his statement, but for his willingness to speak his mind – for his truthfulness.

The exponential explosion of information in the "informa­tion age" is mind-boggling. Consider a sampling of the numbers.

In 2019, a single minute on the Internet saw the transmission of 188 million emails, 18.1 million texts, and 4.5 million videos viewed on YouTube. (In) 2020, there will be 40 times more bytes of data on the Internet than there are stars in the observable universe. Some esti­mates suggest that by 2025,463 exabytes of data will be created each day online--the equivalent of 212,765,957 DVDs per day.

What even is an exabyte? Well, consider this: five exabytes is equivalent to all words ever spoken by humans since the dawn of time. In 2025, that amount of data will be created every 15 minutes.

Here's the craziest thing: It's all in our pockets, just a few clicks away. Our phones are now encyclopedias. Libraries. Universities. Universes. But as convenient as it is to have such access—answers to any question we might have—the glut of information online is also overwhelming. And it is not making us wise.

Possible Preaching Angle:

Just as too much food makes a body sick, too much information makes the soul sick. Information gluttony is a real problem in the age of Google—its symptoms are widespread and concerning. As Paul writes in 2 Timothy “always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth (2 Tim. 3:7).

Business consultant Morgan Housel claims that the best arguments seldom win the day; it’s the best story that changes minds and hearts. Housel writes:

A truth that applies to many fields, which can frustrate some as much as it energizes others, is that the person who tells the most compelling story wins. Not who has the best idea, or the right answer ...

[For example], the Civil War is probably the most well-documented period in American history. There are thousands of books analyzing every conceivable angle, chronicling every possible detail. But in 1990 Ken Burns’ Civil War documentary became an instant phenomenon, with 39 million viewers and winning 40 major film awards. As many Americans watched Ken Burns’ Civil War in 1990 as watched the Super Bowl that year. And all he did – not to minimize it, because it’s such a feat – is take 130-year-old existing information and wove it into a (very) good story.

It's the same for writer Bill Bryson. His books fly off the shelves, which I understand drives the little-known academics who uncovered the things he writes about crazy. His latest work is basically an anatomy textbook. It has no new information, no discoveries. But it’s so well written – he tells such a good story – that it became an instant bestseller.

This drives you crazy if you assume the world is swayed by facts and objectivity – if you assume the best idea wins … The novelist Richard Powers summarized it this way: “The best arguments in the world won’t change a single person’s mind. The only thing that can do that is a good story.”

Wrongly applied, science itself can become a religion, and the scientific method a Bible. In But What If We're Wrong?, Chuck Klosterman addresses the possibility that the greatest certainties might one day be disproven. At one point, he sites previous "certainties" about dinosaurs as an example. They were once known to be cold-blooded like reptiles. But now it is a “fact” that they were warm-blooded like birds. Such reversals are a regular occurrence as the scientific community refines what is known. Klosterman explains how these changes affect how we feel about the new certainties:

Yet these kinds of continual reversals don’t impact the way we think about paleontology. Such a reversal doesn’t impact the way we think about anything. If any scientific concept changes five times in five decades, the perception is that we’re simply refining what we thought we knew before, and every iteration is just a “more correct” depiction of what was previously considered “totally correct.” In essence, we anchor our sense of objective reality in science itself—its laws and methods and sagacity … But what if we’re really wrong, about something really big?

Klosterman concludes by addressing the possibility that some of today’s scientific ideas might be proven false. How would it change the view of the universe? He said, “Philosophically, as a species, we are committed to this. In the same way that religion defined cultural existence in the pre-Copernican age, the edge of science defines the existence we occupy today.” But what if he's wrong?

Two Clemson University researchers have extensively studied the phenomenon of foreign political disinformation campaigns via social media. To combat this growing problem, they decided to launch their own campaign.

Called Spot the Troll, it invites users to take a short quiz and see if they can identify which social media accounts are authentic and which ones were fabricated. The goal is to teach people the “markers of inauthenticity” in online social media profiles. The title reflects this aim; the term “troll” is internet jargon for any person who intentionally creates a stir by posting erroneous, hateful, or provocative content.

This practice has become weaponized by foreign intelligence agencies. Pioneered by Russia, these “troll farms” have proliferated in places like Iran and China, among those who specialize in sowing political discord. Linvill says, “They push ideologies in two extreme directions, making it harder and harder for us to make compromises.” He is concerned in part because the problem has become home-grown. “It's not just state actors. It's also Americans doing it to ourselves.”

Possible Preaching Angles:

In an age of rampant disinformation, we must be especially vigilant regarding the things we share on social media. Our knee-jerk tendencies of sharing anything that validates our biases will get us into trouble if and when our statements are revealed to be based on falsehoods.

A media provocateur known for spreading outlandish lies recently reported that his friend’s home was raided by the FBI. The seriousness of his claim, combined with photos and video footage, merited interest from local investigative journalists. But in an effort to publish quickly, they failed to discern an essential detail--the raid was staged.

When contacted by a Washington Post reporter, Jacob Wohl gave corroborating details about the supposed raid on his friend, conservative lobbyist Jack Burkman. What he left out was that the men creating the commotion outside Burkman’s residence were actors, hired under the guise of a TV pilot.

The story triggered more investigation from Post metro editor Mike Semel when he noticed there was no other confirmation from FBI or other law enforcement sources. This resulted in a mea culpa from the Post, in the form of a statement:

The Post earlier today published an erroneous story about a purported FBI raid on the home of conservative operative Jack Burkman. The FBI has since said that the raid did not take place. Our story was published because we failed to obtain appropriate confirmation.

When given the opportunity to retract, Burkman doubled down on his story, warning the Post thusly: “You have to remember in journalism you have to be careful—I’m not saying you did this—creating your own reality and ensnaring yourself in those realities.”

Possible Preaching Angle:

Those who are motivated to spread the truth shouldn’t need to use lies to prove their point. Deception is inevitably revealed as fraudulent and discredits the work of anyone who uses it.