How to Tell When Someone Is Lying - podcast episode cover

How to Tell When Someone Is Lying

May 12, 202637 min
--:--
--:--
Download Metacast podcast app
Listen to this episode in Metacast mobile app
Don't just listen to podcasts. Learn from them with transcripts, summaries, and chapters for every episode. Skim, search, and bookmark insights. Learn more

Episode description

From ancient Chinese lie detection methods involving a mouthful of rice, to the clever ways toddlers and birds stretch the truth, to the surprisingly honest way that Charles Ponzi got his start in business, Will and Mango have a whole lot to say about lying (honestly!).

EXCLUSIVE NordVPN Deal ➼ https://nordvpn.com/ptg Try it risk-free now with a 30-day money-back guarantee!

This episode originally aired on January 25, 2025.

Got a question or idea for the show? Call our hotline at (302) 405-5925 or email higeniuses@gmail.com.

Follow us on Instagram @parttimegenius and Bluesky @parttimegenius.bsky.social!

Photo by Eleonora Francesca Grotto via Unsplash. Thanks, Eleonora!

Learn more about your ad choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Transcript

Speaker 1

You're listening to Part Time Genius, the production of Kaleidoscope and iHeartRadio.

Speaker 2

Guess what, Mango?

Speaker 1

What's that will?

Speaker 2

So I came across this study, and you know I love a good study, Mango, But this was from researchers at the University of Wisconsin Lacrosse, and you know I love University of Wisconsin Lacrosse. And this is a pretty weird one. So here's what they did. They asked six hundred and thirty two people to document every single lie they told over the course of three months.

Speaker 1

That is incredible.

Speaker 2

So what they find out, well, among other things, they discovered that the number one reason people lied was to avoid others. Oh, I mean that kind of makes sense to me, Yeah, it does. And the second most common reason people lied was for jokes or pranks, which also makes.

Speaker 1

Sense, like the time you told me the CEO of Vegemite was a huge fan of the show and wanted to send us a lifetime supply of vegemite.

Speaker 2

That is, that's a good example of a lie, yep.

Speaker 1

But from what you're describing, these are fairly like harmless lies, right, So is a lesson that lying isn't necessarily so bad.

Speaker 2

I do like that that's your conclusion. I mean, the lesson isn't quite that simple. Like, It's a highly complex form of social interaction that can serve many different purposes, and so lies can range from lighthearted and funny to of course malicious to downright dangerous, depending on the intention behind them and the cultural context too. So people have been trying to understand lying for thousands of years, and it definitely merits more research or at least a podcast episode, I'd say.

Speaker 1

So, will I do have something to confess?

Speaker 2

Okay, I'm nervous.

Speaker 1

I read that University of Wisconsin the study last week, and I just pretended I didn't know about it, so this show would sound better.

Speaker 2

Oh man, well, you know what I actually was lying too, because I knew that you had read the University of Wisconsin study and I pretended that I didn't. So it's just like this to an interesting start. But actually it's the perfect way to kick off an episode about lying. There is a whole lot to talk about, and I guarantee from this point forward we will be one hundred percent truthful.

Speaker 3

So let's dive in.

Speaker 2

Hey there, podcast listeners, welcome to part time genius. I'm Will Pearson, and as always, I'm joined by my good friend Mangesh hot ticketter and over there in the booth waving a red hot poker, that's our pal and producer Dylan fig and he's actually waving it pretty aggressively. I'm not really sure what he's doing, but it looks a little bit dangerous. If I'm being honest, I.

Speaker 1

Am glad that he's wearing oven mits at least, But believe it or not, I think I know what he's trying to demonstrate it. So, okay. Back in the Middle eight lying was considered a terrible sin, and people, specifically Christian people, believe that the only way to know if someone was lying was by testing them with a trial by ordeal. So, in other words, the accused was put through a physical challenge, and, according to the logic at the time, if they were honest, God would prevent them

from getting hurt. Now, one of the ordeals was touching the person's tongue to a red hot poker. Obviously, this resulted in a lot of burnt tongues, which was seen as proof of dishonesty.

Speaker 2

Yikes. All right, well, thank you Dylan for that terrifying visual. It is not common that we see Dylan looking terrifying as one of the nicest humans on the planet. But good job there, Dylan. All right, So Mengo, it sounds like people took lying very seriously back then.

Speaker 1

They definitely did so. Other trials by ordeal included walking over burning coals and being forced to swallow poison. And if you're thinking, wow, that seems kind of extreme, this actually all traces back to Saint Augustine. He wrote a famous treatise on lying called Online and Augustine argued that lying is like a disease. It supposedly like destroys your

integrity and puts you in direct opposition to God. He's also the guy who came up with the idea that if you always tell the truth, God will actually swoop in to protect you from the harm. But medieval Europe didn't invent the idea of testing for truth. They just kind of took it to this new, more brutal level.

In ancient China, accused liars had to chew a mouthful of dry rice while someone recited the accusations against them, and then they'd spit the rice out, and if it seemed too dry when they spit it out because of their dry mouth from nervousness. Then that was considered proof that they had lied.

Speaker 2

What a weird way to like test if somebody's lying.

Speaker 1

Yeah, these early lie detectors were very, very ineffective, but I guess it shows that concern about lying is practically universal. Wait, so can I tell you how excited I am to have Nord VPN sponsoring our little show part time genius. You know when I get excited, I make lists, and I'm going to tell you why NORD is so great in listical form. First off, VPNs make the Internet a safer,

cozier place. VPN stand for Virtual Private network. Basically, they hide your IP address and protect your online identity and data, which is especially good for people like me who use the free Internet on trains or planes or wherever. And this is basically like an invisibility cloak that keeps you out of sight from hackers, which is incredible. It is also why I'm going to use this discount code seriously to get my mom a subscription right after this ad

read two. It is great for sports fans. If you listen to the show, you know that Will and I met as college freshmen and we went to Duke and also I secretly watch as many college basketball games as my wife and family will allow me to. Please don't remind me how the season ended for us, but that isn't it. I also love watching soccer and tennis. But when I travel, for like when I went to India this winter, I got blocked out of all my games.

It was the total worst, except because NordVPN let's you change your location, you can actually access all those games from anywhere. It is magic and three. One NordVPN subscription can be used on up to ten devices, which is incredible. I mean, I don't want to do the math for you, but whether you use ten cell phones or you have like nine desktop computers and one laptop or six iPads, three phones and one personal computer, there are a lot

of ways to stretch this deal. I mean, I'm joking, but also I have like a million devices, so the idea of spreading this across ten devices is pretty amazing. It is premium cybersecurity for the price of a cup of coffee every month. Anyway, if you love our show and you want to support a show and you need a VPN, this is absolutely the deal for you to get the best discount off your VPN plan, go to nord vpn dot com slash ptg. That's NordVPN dot com

slash ptg. Our link will also give you four extra months on the two year plan and there is no risk no risk with nords thirty day money back guarantee. That is NordVPN dot com slash ptg. Or you can find the link in the podcast episode description. So if you want to not get HACKEDTCH lots of sports and

do it on multiple devices, nordvpns for you. There's actually this ancient Hindu text, the yard Javeda, and it dates back to one thousand BCE and it has tips for royalty who are worried that their servants are undercover mercenaries lying about their allegiance. So it says, quote, a person who intends to poison food may be recognized. He does not answer questions, or they are evasive answers. He speaks nonsense, rubs the great toe along the ground and shivers. His

face is discolored. He rubs the roots of his hair with his fingers, and he tries by every means to leave the house.

Speaker 2

It kind of feels like they would not be very good mercenaries if they're doing all that stuff.

Speaker 1

I know. But this gets to something really interesting, which is that throughout history people have believed that observing someone's nonverbal behaviors, like their cues of things like fidgeting or rubbing their nose, that's an easy way to tell if they're lying. So you don't really need the hot pokers or the vials of poison, I guess.

Speaker 2

And that's basically the idea behind lie detectors looking for those sorts of clues.

Speaker 1

Right, yeah, So modern light detectors or polygraphs were invented in the early nineteen hundreds, but some of the technology they use was developed in the eighteen hundreds, and all they really do is measure changes in certain vital signs, including things like blood pressure, breathing, perspiration. And although they're still used by law enforcement and government agencies, they're widely

considered a pseudoscience. And that's because the physiological changes they measure it can be triggered by lots of things like not just the stress of lying.

Speaker 2

Well you think about it, like the fear of being arrested, or stressed from being interrogated.

Speaker 1

Right. In fact, the ACLU has opposed the use of polygraph machines for decades, saying they don't work and they're a violation of people's privacy rights. And remember, the machine itself doesn't offer any conclusions. It just kind of records this data for people. But this is the part I didn't realize. It's that a human polygraph examiner actually has to interpret that data to decide what it means, Like is that a normal spike in sweating because the room

is hot, or does it indicate a lie? Which means the results of a polygraph test can actually be tainted by human bias, I.

Speaker 2

Mean, like crazy bias. It does feel like it's just so weird that in the twenty first century we're still using what seems like the same light detection concepts ancient people, that we just exchanged the dry rice for some sort of fancy machine. I guess, yeah, pretty much. All right, Well, you know, regardless of what goes on physically, telling a lot does require a whole bunch of complicated brain activity. Like first you have to come up with the lie

and mentally detach yourself from the truth. Then you have to choose your words and behaviors carefully. Is to sell the lie and avoid suspicion. And that requires understanding what your audience knows now and then making guesses about what they might discover later. Then you have to process the response to the initial lie and spin out mora lies is you need to back yourself up. The scientific term for all of this is called cognitive load.

Speaker 1

That is so funny, like it feels like lying comes so naturally at this point and you need to write, but like it sounds exhausting when you put it that way. So does this mean like there's a specific area of the brain that controls our ability to lie?

Speaker 2

You know, Actually it's the opposite of this, because there's this heavy cognitive load. Lying involves multiple areas of the brain really working together. So these are areas responsible for critical stuff like self awareness and social cognition. And one thing that really fast sates me is the fact that lyne can actually change our memories. That's because memories aren't set in stone, and so the way we remember something can be distorted over time, and if a lie is

repeated often enough the truth is then suppressed. It can actually distort our memory of an event.

Speaker 1

It also explains a lot about history and also like collective memories.

Speaker 2

Right, it really does.

Speaker 1

Yeah.

Speaker 2

I mean you might be wondering how and when do we develop the ability to lie? And it turns out there's a whole body of research about little kids and lying, and we're going to chat more about all of that right after a quick break.

Speaker 1

Okay, Well, so I know you've done a ton of research about kids' brains and how they developed the ability to lie. But first I have to ask, like, did you tell lies when you were a kid or you know, can you remember what your kids first lies were? You know?

Speaker 2

I I know that I did. I don't remember a whole lot of things specifically, but I remember that my lies that I would tell were usually just like ridiculous stories like coming in from playing outside or something and then just making up some absurd story that probably deep down I felt like my parents knew that I was lying, but I'd still go for it anyway. But how about you?

Speaker 1

Uh? Yeah, I remember like being four and telling my mom that I went to see Superman at the movie theater and like pretending to fly around like it, but I'd actually seen Return of the Jedi, And when she found out, she was upset not be excited. See Superman just because she thought this like innocent kid could never lie to her, you know.

Speaker 2

Ah, yeah, that's a heartbreaking moment for mom.

Speaker 1

Ruby actually had an amazing first lie that I remember. Like Ruby was also about four at this time, and Henriett had a birthday party at his school and so Ruby was like, oh, yeah, we had hake at my school too. I was like, oh, was there a birthday party? And we was like no, no, no birthday party. And I said, oh yeah, then then why was that cake? And we was like, uh the classroom anniversary. It was like a classroom niverse and like can I can I

text your teachers to find out about this classroomnniversary? And we was like no, no, no, they don't.

Speaker 2

Like the text.

Speaker 1

And so I said, you know, oh so, uh so did you sing the traditional classroom anniversary song? And we was like yeah, and I said, oh would you sing it? And Ruby, without like skipping a be goes, it's a classroom manniversary. It's a classroom manniversary. We do it in the big building.

Speaker 2

Oh yeah, I heard that one. That's that is a classic. That's pretty amazing. Ruby.

Speaker 1

So anyway, I think it's time to get to the science. So let's let's get to it.

Speaker 2

I don't know, I feel like it's time for more songs, so let's do more of that, all right. Well, the general consensus is that kids start lying when they're about two or three years old, and usually they do it when they've done something that they know they shouldn't do, but you know, their brains aren't sophisticated enough to take that extra step of thinking, like will the person I'm

talking to actually believe what I'm saying? And so you get situations like a toddler standing there covered in paint and you say, did you open the paint? And they, of course deny it.

Speaker 1

So at what age does this start to change?

Speaker 2

Usually around four they start to take the listener's perspective into account, and there's something psychologists called the theory of mind, which is the ability to reason about other people's mental states and then act accordingly. So the kid realizes that you can see the paint and you'll be wondering how that paint got there, and so they might say something like, you know, my brother did it, which is a nice try, of course, but maybe the brothers been upstairs all day.

Speaker 1

So they're close to getting this lie right, but there's still some holes in the story.

Speaker 2

Yeah, usually there are. It actually just is this side note reminds me of our good friend Adam that talked about a high school experience when he was sitting next to a girl that he had a crush on and he sneezed into his hands. She looks over at him. He clearly has snot all in his hands, and he just looks at her and he says, it wasn't me.

Speaker 1

Do you remember this story, Yes, it's pretty great.

Speaker 2

I just thought that was such a great response. Anyway, So things really start to change around seven or eight, and that's when they can account for a wider range of facts and contexts like in the lie. So maybe they say, you know, my brother did it, and you say, but he's in his room, And then a slightly older kid has the capacity to react with something like he came down for a snack and he was playing with the paint, but then he went back upstairs, you know, just taking it to another level.

Speaker 1

Really, it is wild to think of little kids like almost like new versions of AI, Like they just keep getting told better at lying.

Speaker 2

Yeah, yeah, it's a good way to think about it like that. That training over time, and it's even more whild to realize that this is something parents have known about for a long time. Actually, Charles Darwin wrote about toddler liars after doing some observational research to his own kids. This was, of course, back in the eighteen forties. So what happened is one day he caught his two and a half year old son coming out of the dining room with something very obviously wrapped up in a pinafore.

And this is, you know, a dress like garment. And Darwin says, hey, buddy, what do you got there? And the kids like nothing, go away, and so Darwin checks and it turns out he'd stolen a.

Speaker 1

Pickle, the old pickle and a pinafore.

Speaker 2

Bit yeah, you know, the whole bit there. But the point is there's ample evidence that very young children have the executive functions needed for lying. More complicated skills like memory and inhibition control. They develop a little bit later, and that makes their lies more elaborate and believable. And what researchers have found is that kids with strong cognitive abilities actually make better liars. So in a weird way, lying as a sign of reaching important developmental milestones.

Speaker 1

I like the idea of grade school is giving out stickers for lying. You know, so the only thing cuter than a toddler telling whoppers is an animal who's trying to trick you.

Speaker 2

So were you suggesting that animals also lie?

Speaker 1

It kind of depends on what you mean by lie. So usually when we say someone is lying, we mean they're knowingly making a false statement with the intent to deceive. Right, So, animals can't talk, obviously, so they don't make statements the way we do. But if you expand this definition to include behaviors, then you know animals do engage in deceptive behavior all the time. So if you think about possums

when they're threatened, they pretend to be dead. I also read about this bird called the forktailed drongo, which is native to the Kalahari Desert in Africa, and when it sees a predator like an eagle over ahead, it lets out a squeaky alarm call. Now, other desert animals, including meerkats, have learned to hide when they hear this alarm as well,

But sometimes the drongo plays a trick. If it sees a mere cat holding food it wants, maybe like a nice juicy lizard, it starts squeaking the alarm, and the mere cat drops the food and runs for cover, and then the drongo swoops in and takes the meal.

Speaker 2

Wow. I mean that definitely sounds like the bird equivalent of making a fault statement with the intent to deceive, don't you think?

Speaker 1

Yeah? So Weirdly, it's the last part that people actually disagree about whether or not there's intent. So clearly, the drongo knows that if it makes the alarm call, the mere cat will run, and the possum knows that if it lies really still, its predator may walk away. But some scientists actually call this functional deception, not intentional deception, and they argue that the intent depends on something you

mentioned a few minutes ago, the theory of mind. And it's just not clear that animals have the ability to think about what other creatures know or believe.

Speaker 2

So I guess, in other words, the drongo isn't thinking if I yell, the dumb meer cat will believe there's an eagle. It just thinks when I yell, the mere cat runs.

Speaker 1

Yeah, pretty much. But there have been some stuff that suggest animals, particularly great apes, may have a theory of mind, and in one experiment, researchers gave an ape eye trackers so they could tell where it was looking. And then, and I swear I'm not making this up, an assistant in an ape costume ran into the cage area puts an object under one of the two boxes on the floor. A researcher pretends to watch this happen and then leaves

the room. And then when this assistant in ape costume is there alone, he puts the object under the other box for a moment, and then he picks it up and runs away. So when the researcher comes back and reaches for the boxes, the ape looks at him and then stared at the first box as if he knew the researcher was expecting the object to be there, which means, like, you know, the ape is picking up on all these cues and is more aware of others' behaviors. And actually there's video of this on YouTube.

Speaker 2

Oh man, I've got to see this. It's such a fascinating idea. And I also love the idea that like a guy with several PhDs having to run around and then a costume pretending to be an ape. So this is definitely something I'm going to watch all right, So to switch gears here, Mango, I want to tell you about lying and culture clashes. So you mentioned earlier that lying means knowingly making a false statement with the intention

to deceive. That's a good definition, but some types of deception aren't so clear cut, and the context really does matter. So omitting information or being purposely ambiguous, those can be types of lies. Even accurate information can be used in misleading ways. And the way we interpret these nuances and the way we assess other people's honesty, it really comes down to the norms that we've learned from our culture.

Speaker 1

You know, this is a great quote by Montaigne that Mary actually pointed me too, and it goes, quote the reverse of truth has one hundred thousand forms, And it sounds like that, right, Like there's so many ways lie in just like one way to simply tell the truth. But can you give me some examples of what you're thinking about here?

Speaker 2

Yeah, for sure. But by the way, Mary, great quo. That's pretty awesome. All right. So, according to research, highly individualistic cultures like the United States, they see lies very differently than more collective as cultures like many in Asia. So, for example, an American business manager might consider it dishonest to withhold negative feedback from an employee, even if it's harsh.

But a Japanese manager might not see it that way at all, because they're considering potential harm to an employee and to their relationship. So for them, that's part of being a trustworthy person. So maybe they downplay the bad review or delivered an indirect fashion. But if you imagine an American employee getting vague feedback might make them think, what are they hiding from me?

Speaker 1

Yeah, and I guess in both scenarios, people are they're trying to do the right thing, and there's no right, there's no actually intent to deceive.

Speaker 2

There No, that's exactly right. I mean this extends to speech patterns too, So most Native English speakers in the United States consider clear direct language to be a sign of honesty, and we're a little more suspicious of verbal meandering or someone using a lot of euphemisms. But that's just how some cultures communicate. Meanwhile, they might interpret our bluntness as bad manners. And you know, of course, then

there's body language. So in the US, holding eye contact is usually considered proof that someone's being honest, but in other parts of the world that can actually be seen as rude or aggressive.

Speaker 1

Yeah, well this is a podcast, so so you all can't see my eyes, but I'm going to use the straightforward American approach to honest communication. Right now, it is time for an ad break so we can make money and keep the show going. That's how honest I'm being. But we'll be back soon.

Speaker 2

Welcome back to Part Time Genius, where we're learning the truth about lies. All right, so, Mango, what have you got for us next?

Speaker 1

So far, we've mostly been talking about lies at a personal level, but lying isn't just about how we relate to one another. It can also have legal consequences, including what we call fraud. So under US law, fraud can be a civil or a criminal matter, depending on the situation, and in civil cases is defined as a misrepresentation of fact, either intentional or negligent, and that causes injury or harm

to another person. Criminal fraud usually falls into specific categories that have their own definition, So you think about things like financial fraud or insurance fraud, or even something like forgery. Right, And although none of this is new, technology has caused the scale of criminal fraud to explode in recent years. So just to give you a sense, from twenty eighteen to twenty twenty two, the US federal government lost between two hundred and thirty three billion and five hundred and

twenty one billion dollars each year to fraud. And that doesn't even count money lost at the state level. And that's billion with a B like that is daggering. Yeah, And if you thought those numbers were big. According to the World Economic Forum, cybercrime, which often involves fraud, obviously will cost the world ten point five trillion this year alone. But even more than the economic impact, there are personal costs.

So you think about identity theft is one of the most common types of cyber fraud, and in a survey by the Identity Theft Resource Center, sixty percent of ID theft victims found themselves struggling to cover their bills in the aftermath of the incident, and sixteen percent reported feeling suicidal. It's really a serious problem.

Speaker 2

That is wild, all right. So when you say technology is driving all this, what exactly mean by that?

Speaker 1

So some of it's the obvious stuff, like we do our banking online, we give out our email addresses, like candy. We share personal information on social media and a lot of us aren't great about checking privacy settings or changing our passwords, so fraudsters have plenty of material to work with, and they also have more points of entry to our lives and our finance is now, but the World Economic Forum reports that the biggest problem right now is generative AI.

So criminals are using AI language tools to crank out phishing emails that seem really authentic. They're using AI image generators to create deep fakes of people's faces that let them pass identity verification checks. According to a recent FBI warning, They're even using AI voice cloning to create deceptive audio clips that quote impersonate a close relative in a crisis situation, asking for immediate financial assistance or demanding a ransom.

Speaker 2

So, I mean, this is obviously just terrifying, and I'm wondering, though, before I throw my phone out the window, is there anything I can do about this?

Speaker 1

So, from a tech standpoint, there's been a lot of interest in digital identity wallets like that would combine biometrics, ID documents, personal information to create a secure log in that you can use multiple places. Proponents say it's like being asked to show your physical driver's license, so much safer than easily hacked password. But civil liberties groups the one that this could mean sacrificing privacy.

Speaker 2

I thought you were just going to say something like change your passwords. I was kind of hoping that was where you were going with it.

Speaker 1

I mean, you could do that too, You should do that, actually, But the FBI has another tip that is so low tech, it's kind of brilliant, and it's just create a secret passphrase with your family and close friends. So if you ever get a call that sounds like me asking you to wire ten thousand dollars, you can ask for the phrase to confirm it's me.

Speaker 2

Woh, okay, that's a good idea, all right. With all of this raises another question, and that's what makes someone lie or commit fraud, Like, we all know it's wrong, so why does it keep happening? So Dan Arielli is a professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke, and he's done a lot of research about this kind of thing. So he pointed out that our entire legal system operates on the theory of cost benefit analysis, Like if you

know there's a serious penalty for being dishonest. You'll decide if it's worth it or not, and you won't do it if you decide that it isn't. And the problem here is that it's just not how lying works in real life, and that's because humans have the ability to rationalize dishonesty. So Arielli did this experiment with a vending machine. He set the price mechanism to zero sense, but put labels on the snack saying that each item costs seventy

five cents. He also taped a sign to the machine that read, quote, if there's something wrong with this machine, please call this number, and then he put his own cell phone number.

Speaker 1

That's clever. So what happened when people use the machine.

Speaker 2

Well, they'd put their money in and the machine would dispense multiple snacks and return all of their cash, and not a single person called to report the malfunction, although Arielli noted that nobody took more than four bags of

free candy either. So his theory is that people were rationalizing their decision based on previous vending machine experiences, like we've all had that situation where you put your money in and it doesn't give you a snack, or as he puts it, people were just kind of sorting out the vending karma in the world, I guess.

Speaker 1

I mean, that's pretty fascinating. Although obviously there's a big difference between taking candy and committing identity theft.

Speaker 2

Yeah, of course, but understanding the ways criminals make sense of what they're doing could help stop fraud before it even starts. So, for example, a Reli found that people would behave more honestly if they spend time reflecting on their personal morals or their ethics. So he tested this by asking one group of people to list ten books they read in high school and another group to recall

the Ten Commandments. Then he gave both groups reward based tests that included opportunities to cheat, and he found that people who thought about books engaged in widespread cheating, while the Ten Commandments group did not cheat at all. So this is a reminder, don't read kids, you know what I mean. And so what's really interesting is that he repeated the test with people who identified as atheists. Because they didn't know the Ten Commandments. He just had them

swear on a Bible. After doing that, they still didn't cheat.

Speaker 1

That is incredible. So well, we're almost at the end of the episode, tell me the truth. Did you prepare anything for the fact? Off?

Speaker 2

I sure did, Mango, Let's get to it.

Speaker 1

If there's one man whose name has become synonymous with dishonesty, it is Charles Ponzi, and we've all heard his name, but I thought we'd get into these stories. So Ponzi was born in northern Italy in eighteen eighty two, and apparently his family had at one time been pretty well off, but by the time he came along, they had lost their fortune. He tried going to university in Rome, but dropped out and decided to take his chances in America Now.

Ponzi later claimed that he had set sail with two hundred dollars in savings, most of which he lost on the ship crossing the Atlantic because he got swindled by a card sharp Once in the US, though, he bounced around a series of jobs in low level crimes. But in nineteen twenty he launched the scheme that made him famous. Basically, there was this thing called an international reply coupon, which was like a voucher many countries accepted in exchange for

local postage stamps. Ponzi realized that he could buy cheap IRCs in Italy and exchange them for more expensive stance in the US. As he put it in his memoir, quote, the racket fell into my lap like a ripe apple. It looked good, luscious. I examined it for flaws, found none, and I had to bite. I wouldn't have been human if I didn't. And just to be clear, that part of the scheme was not illegal. It's just simple arbitrage,

which happens in the stock market all the time. The problem was when he started tricking thousands of people into investing in his operation, claiming they'd earn a fifty percent return in ninety days. Now, every time an investor gave money, he used it to pay off earlier investors. So people thought they were getting huge returns and thought it was all real. And in the first eight months of nineteen twenty, Ponzi actually made fifteen million dollars, which is about two

hundred and thirty five million dollars in today's money. I had no idea how much money he'd made.

Speaker 2

That's huge.

Speaker 1

It all came crashing down that August when Boston Post Reporters launched an investigation that ended in eighty six counts of mail fraud and a lengthy prison sentence.

Speaker 2

All right, well, speaking of elaborate and profitable lies, the FTC reports that in twenty twenty two, almost seventy thousand people were the victims of romance scammers. Now, this is a type of fraud that often begins on dating apps. This is where someone lies about who they are, usually in order to get you to send them money. And it's an extra malicious form of cat fishing. Now, one of the trickiest things for a catfisher to explain is

why they can't meet up in person. So, according to the FTC, they'll often build a fake identity around a job that keeps them far away. And among romance scammers, the most popular lie is quote I'm stationed on a military base in another country. But another one that comes up a lot is I'm an offshore oil rig worker.

Speaker 1

I mean, I think what's funny about that is it's going to make online dating so hard for actual oil rig workers.

Speaker 2

Like every sure I didn't think about that. I feel so bad for the rig workers just trying to get dates.

Speaker 1

Anyway, I was curious where the word lie comes from, and it turns out the term white lie is older than I expected. The first known use occurred on April tenth, fifteen sixty seven, when an English landowner named Ralph Adderley wrote a letter to a friend describing his brother in law by saying, quote, I do assure you he is unsuspected of any untruth or other notable crime except a white lie, which is taken for a small fault in these parts.

Speaker 2

And it's definitely sort of a compliment I think. But all right, well, for our final fact, here's the story of a lie that was anything but harmless because it almost threw off decades of archaeological research. So it was back in nineteen twelve you have this amateur fossil hunter named Charles Dawson. He wrote to the British paleontologist Sir Arthur Smith Woodward, and he was claiming he'd unearthed parts of a human skull in Piltdown. This was a village

near his home in Sussex. So Woodward helped expand the excavation and eventually he and Dawson dug up parts of a mandible, pieces of a skull, and multiple teeth there. And so intriguingly, some of these teeth appeared to be larger than a human's but smaller than an apes, and so it was pointing to the possibility of an ancient

ancestor some five hundred thousand years old. Now, the British scientific community was understandably excited about the evidence of a creature dubbed the Piltdown Man, in part because a few years earlier an ancient pre human jawbone had been discovered

in Germany. Now, in the run up to World War One, tensions between Germany and the UK were running high, and so the Piltdown Man was proof of England's importance and the fossil record until nineteen fifty three, when new dating techniques showed that his bones weren't all the same age, and what's more, they were a mix of human and eight bones. So this was proof of the deception, but

the question was who did it so. Finally, in two thousand and nine, a paleoanthropologist named Isabelle de Grute used DNA analysis and CT scanning to get an even closer look at the Piltdowns samples. Here's what she found. She found that all the teeth came from one orangutan and that the bones had been coated in a sort of putty to make them appear uniform and heavy. Even so, she concluded that given the consistency of the cover up,

it was the work of one person, Charles Dawson. As an amateur who dabbled in geology, archaeology and anthropology, he would have known exactly what a real prehistoric find should look like, and he had access to samples and to tools, and as it turned out, he had perpetuated other smaller frauds that were all an attempt to gain recognition by the British scientific community.

Speaker 1

That's so weird, you know. I'd heard of Tilton men, but I'd never realized that they'd figured out that Dawson was behind it. And I guess he did end up getting some recognition, but none the way he wanted. Yeah, you know, if I'm being honest, which I am obviously, I think he deserved Today's trophy for explaining how kids become such expert liars. I think that bit of the story was my favorit today.

Speaker 2

Thank you. It is fun, too fun to think about.

Speaker 1

Well that does it for this episode. If you like our show, remember to rate and review us on the Apple Store. Actually, I cannot help. But look at our reviews and we've been sitting at seventeen ninety nine, seven and ninety nine reviews, just hovering there for the last few weeks and it hasn't gone up to eighteen hundred and so someone out there help us out, help my

OCD out and get it to an even number. Also, if you want to keep up with us on the socials, remember you can find us up part Time Genius on the gram. Anyway, we'll be back soon with another new episode, but in the meantime from Gabe, Mary, Dylan, Will and myself, thank you so much for listening. Part Time Genius is a production of Kaleidoscope and iHeartRadio. This show is hosted by Will Pearson and me Mongaysh Heatique and research by

our goodpal Mary Philip Sandy. Today's episode was engineered and produced by the wonderful Dylan Fagan with support from Tyler Klang. The show is executive produced for iHeart by Katrina Norvell and Ali Perry, with social media support from Sasha Gay, trustee Dara Potts and Viny Shorey. For more podcasts from Kaleidoscope and iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app Apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.

Transcript source: Provided by creator in RSS feed: download file
For the best experience, listen in Metacast app for iOS or Android