Flaws in Karl's reasoning

As we know, Karl has a rather idiosyncratic view of the world. His understanding usually falls down for one, or many, of the following reasons:

Inability to see the bigger picture

Karl is particularly quick to dismiss things without considering how they are applied. For example, he dismissed Newton's explanation of gravity with, "if we were floating around, I'd be worried about it". If a concept seems to big for Karl to understand or perceive, he will often return to his own more easily accesible opinions. When posed with Descartes theory 'I think, therefore I am', Karl dismissed the concept stating "Why has he got the time to worry about it? Am I awake or asleep? You might as well be asleep because your doing nothing else!".

Looking at everything in relation to himself

More specifically, Karl fails to consider how things may affect people other than himself - as evidenced by the quote: "MC squared (sic), I've never used it, whereas the guy who invented the video, I watch one a week."

Applying human characteristics and consciousness to everything

Karl has a tendency to anthropomorphise. The main reason he can't get his head around the Infinite monkey theorem, is that he can't get over the idea of monkeys not understanding Shakespeare. Similarly, many discussions of creatures include the line "whoever made them...". Pretty much all of Monkey News also fits this description. It would appear Karl is largly incapable of perceiving conciousness on any other level other than that of human conciousness, therefore he applies the same level of social/moral human reasoning to the actions of animals, and in many cases even insects. Interestingly, Karl has often seemed to give more praise to his imagined motivations of insects and wildlife, than to the actions of famous inspirational historical figures ie. "Rosa Parks was lazy" or "Anne Frank was a squatter with a diary". Much to the annoyance of Steve and especially Ricky, Karl will even apply humanised states of concious action to his own different body parts such as his eyes, ears, nose etc. One of Karls most common questions throughout his career with Ricky and Steve has been "Whose in charge, me or me brain?".

Valuing the interesting over the true

Karl is seldom interested in whether a fact is true or not - he tends to believe things if they interest him, if they're "a bit weird". As such he's usually skeptical of any of Ricky and Steve's facts, but completely credulous when it comes to any ghost stories off the internet.

Fear of variety

Karl has an unusual obsession with cutting down waste and variety on the planet. He is continually trying to cut down the number of animals, people, plants, shops, etc. This was most promiment in the Do We Need 'Em? feature.

Lack of thoroughness

Karl tends not to investigate his stories and facts too deeply, believing that the headline gives you all you need to know. As a result, he often misses the flaws which Ricky and Steve pick up on, and he is usually unable to answer any questions they might have.

Confirmation Bias

Karl's favorite fallacy; confirmation bias is when you try to use a single event as proof, ignoring the giant majority of time where the "idea" isn't true at all, or there is at least no reason to think such an "idea" to be true.

Embellishment

The above leads to a lot of gaps in Karl's stories, and in filling them his imagination runs wild. A lot of the more outlandish stories in the shows have come from Karl's guesswork or wishful thinking.