Conspiracies are real. Theories can be traps

Scientists studying the cosmos often speculate about hypothetical forces that might explain peculiar data or results.

- Ross Douthat

For instance, some astronomers have suggested that our solar system has an extra planet, way beyond the demoted Pluto, whose effects explain certain other celestial movements. And modern cosmology assumes a vast invisible substance, so-called dark matter, whose hypothesised existence makes sense out of gravitational effects that would be otherwise mysterious.

Conspiracy theories, lately so influential in American debates, can be understood as the political equivalent of dark-matter theories. They emerge in situations where some movement or action seems unlikely or bizarre — unless you can posit some unseen element in the story, some hidden force exerting influence. “Something is missing from the data” is not just a researcher's reaction to a scientific mystery. It’s also a citizen's response to developments that don’t seem to quite make sense.

Sometimes this response and the theorising it generates are misguided, like a crackpot scientist who invents an extra universe when a tiny tweak of his results would make the issue go away. But sometimes there is something unseen in the story, and the mistake isn’t to theorise about it; it’s to lock on too quickly to a single theory, often for ideological reasons, when other solutions might work just as well.