Von Däniken’s success came in part from his ability to start with legitimate gaps in our knowledge, ignore evidence that contradicted his own claim, and then magnify the supposed ignorance of science. He argued, for example, that Egyptologists don’t know how or why the pyramids were built. In fact, there are detailed records on this from the Egyptians themselves. But this counterevidence is immaterial as the main hypothesis grows exponentially. Much of this is driven by what’s sometimes called apophenia, the tendency to see shapes and patterns where none exist—the idea that everything is, one way or another, connected.