Now, I think my favorite spoon-bending session will always be the regulars done by the Sydney Skeptics In The Pub (led by Richard Saunders), but it’s still kind of cool to see a record set:
‘The Science of Spoon Bending’ is featured here:
and if you missed out Teller’s discussion whilst all the spoons were handed out - it’s here!
Remember Sharon Begley on TAM6, particularly Penn’s comments? Penn has responded in the LA Times:
Every year, in Vegas, the James Randi Educational Foundation gathers together for a conference as many like-thinking participants as you can get from people who question whenever people think alike. There are smart, famous and groovy speakers such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Trey Parker and Matt Stone. There’s lots of real science stuff with real scientists questioning things that a lot of people take for granted, like ESP, UFOs, faith healing and creationism. It’s a party.
Well, there’s another take on TAM conferences - ‘It’s a party’. Right.
…During our loose Q&A period this year, someone asked us about global warming, or climate change, or however they’re branding it now. Teller and I were both silent on stage for a bit too long, and then I said I didn’t know.
I elaborated on “I don’t know” quite a bit. I said that Al Gore was so annoying (that’s scientifically provable, right?) that I really wanted to doubt anything he was hyping, but I just didn’t know. I also emphasized that really smart friends, who knew a lot more than me, were convinced of global warming. I ended my long-winded rambling (I most often have a silent partner) very clearly with “I don’t know.” I did that because … I don’t know. Teller chimed in with something about Gore’s selling of “indulgences” being BS, and then said he didn’t know either. Penn & Teller don’t know jack about global warming … next question.
As I previously mentioned, there was some video footage was taken of the speech, which I’m certain will be available in longer format via DVD for sale, if you want to check exactly what was said. There’s a variety of accounts online about the conference (I particuarly liked the detail overall in The Lippard Blog and forwarded it to a few friends who were there).
The next day, I heard that one of the non-famous, non-groovy, non-scientist speakers had used me as an example of someone who let his emotions make him believe things that are wrong.
Er, because that’s what really matters… famous, groovy people being center stage?
To be fair (and it’s always important to be fair when one is being mean-spirited, sanctimonious and self-righteous), “I don’t know” can be a very bad answer when it is disingenuous. You can’t answer “I don’t know if that happened” about the Holocaust.
But the climate of the whole world is more complicated. I’m not a scientist, and I haven’t spent my life studying weather. I’m trying to learn what I can, and while I’m working on it, isn’t it OK to say “I don’t know”?
I mean, at least in front of a bunch of friendly skeptics
Look, I’m certain that there’s people shrugging and going ‘Okay, so what? Watch the final footage when it comes out, see for ourselves exactly what he said. In the end, it’s just his opinion. The popularity of Penn doesn’t mean we can’t question him nor be silenced for daring to criticise , him or any other “famous, groovy, scientist or not” person in skepticism or anywhere else - QED.’
So, I’m just going to link to a wonderful blog entry by Daniel Loxton for the Rational Inquirer Blog, in memorial to Barry Beyerstein, who passed away almost exactly a year ago. It in itself is a fitting tribute to the man.
Though, I must admit, the part about ‘skepticism not being a theatre in a culture war‘ particularly struck me after all of this…
Get reading elsewhere - the 90th Skeptics Circle is out at the ever-wonderful Millennium Project!
Thanks to all submitters and readers to this PodBlack Cat hosted edition of Scientiae!
I chose the theme of ‘A Voice In the Crowd’ due to my job this year: research assistant for some qualitative research on engagement and retention in high schools. For the past few weeks, I’ve been travelling around the very big state that I live in, listening to teachers, administrators and students on why extending the leaving age for teenagers has ramifications for communities and various stakeholders. Just the beginning of the journey too!
Quite often the topic of the Science classroom comes up as an example of a ‘typical class’ in our discussions - matters of teacher quality, the environment of the classroom, the importance of peer-tutoring and fellow pupils in the learning process and… being heard. Having a say. Knowing that one is listened to. It echoes across all of the schools we go to and isn’t restricted by age or gender. We need to speak out and be respected for our right to do so.
…I even have a nifty portable recorder for making transcripts after. Squeeeeee!
Therefore I hope this edition of the Scientiae is a good example of qualitative research for our readers, too. Be willing to bend an ear, let alone ‘walk around in another’s shoes’, for a different perspective.
Woman Scientist starts the way I always tend to - with questions! Her response on ‘A Voice In The Crowd‘ brings up the contradiction of what seems to be just a ‘tiny hurdle’ when wanting to speak and yet:
I am beginning to understand that I struggle with verbal communication, even with the people closest to me, even about completely minor things. This is something I really need to deal with sooner rather than later, mostly for the sake of my own sanity.
This is echoed by another blogger, Jane B of Now, What Was I Doing, who mentions how the issue touches off anxieties and recollections of past-times and even quite youthful experiences as a girl:
…about being ignored, about being belittled and told to shut up, and reminded me that they are still present in my current work place (see last post about concerns about meeting outcomes actually being followed up).
Despite this,
…having NO voice is not as simple as being invisible but can involve being defenseless and all too visible. But on the other hand it has made me recall the joys of being a voice in a crowd where the energy of exploring ideas and sharing in their development is emotionally satisfying and scientifically productive, and reminded me of the pleasures of helping my students develop their own voices by resting mine.
Such perspectives of actual ‘voicelessness’ is also seen at Life v 3.0!
The loss of physical voice, however temporary, immediately curtails your ability to interact with your environment. It tragically constricts your ability to control what happens or even how it happens, when you cannot articulate something as simple as, “I need a glass of water.”
The entry on ‘Not Having a Voice: The Physical and the Metaphorical‘ thus takes the inspiration of a nasty throat condition and makes it a fascinating journey on a ‘metaphorical’ loss of voice. How we can see throughout culture, people, environment and community that preventing discourse is a death knell for progress. A detailed tale told whilst in a situation of physical incapacitation… do get well soon!
Mad Chemist Chick on the other hand - has a tale of gradually losing the power they once so proudly wielded as a ’self-assured, confident girl’, an over-achiever, outspoken and proud of their mind. ‘Diagnosis: Chronic Career Laryngitis‘:
But at the time, I did what I thought best to preserve my sanity and my will to finish grad school (which was fading quickly). I slowly isolated myself thinking that was the best way to deal with nightmarish existence I found myself living day-to-day in the lab. I did not go into my adviser’s office unless I absolutely had to. I did not go and strike up a conversation with just anyone in the lab. I had a select few fellow lab rats I hung out with during the day because with the others, I felt I had to be guarded as they were unapologetic cut-throats.
You have to check out the chemistry-lab speak for a start - and how some absolutely horrific inappropriate for-any-lab-anywhere-any-time speech results. The loss may be great, and the journey back is long - but well worth it when you can recognise your boldness again. Inspirational.
‘Know Thine Enemy’ warns Thus Spake Zuska! And bloody well hold onto your hats as she lets rip on
listeners with unearned privilege!
Cranky, irritable misogynistic Rethuglicans hear me as a shrill, whiny, petulant, hairy-legged, man-hating, castrating feminazi. Yes, Gerard Harbison, you can think of that as an homage to you! You are a cranky irritable misogynistic Rethuglican! Among other things. (Warning: Harbison’s political views may cause you to blow chunks. If you are in range of his shoes, though, go right ahead.)
Yes, funny, firey and with an important message - “we need to know how to argue better with those people who are able to be persuaded, and more effectively detoxify the poisonous rhetoric that the Harbisons of the word must spew.”
Gah, nothing quite beats the long-memory of a Best-Friend-Since-The-First-Grade ( or ‘BFSFG’)… nor the satisfaction of making them wear a bridesmaid dress! But the sharing between friends gets Amanda of A Lady Scientist started, with her entry on ‘Anti-Attention’:
I’ve gotten quite good at figuring out how to be heard without establishing an actual voice. There’s a lot of pressure with establishing a “voice.” A “voice” has a persona of its own.
The situation sets a scenario for one’s ‘voice’ and funnily enough, it’s the age-old listening skills of the ‘BFSFG’ which help recognise the adaptations one makes - and how a rhythm within the realm of Science will take time too. Hopefully not too long!
Journeys of an Academic takes us for some ‘Singing in the Shower‘ - and yes, it is an original take on the topic, so join in the chorus!
I am realizing that it is important to warm up my voice before being heard in some arena where it matters. My journey epitomizes that not all who wander are lost because I have done a fair share of wandering. As such, I have been away from the serious academic establishment for just enough time to lose some of my academic confidence.
Getting back into the arena certainly takes training - but also some consideration about one’s development of skills over time, to ease gently back into it all. An important lesson and a great blog entry by ‘Academic’, who’s cat must have developed the same ‘I’m Interested!’ look as mine when I’m dictating…
How’s this for down to earth? Brigindo of Dirt and Rocks blog makes the distinction of the ‘writer’s voice’ as
distinct from her speaking voice, and how this has had more benefits than detriments overall. This all just makes Brigindo someone to listen to and respect for their more careful choice of words:
Only just recently have I realized that I’ve developed a research voice — a distinctive style to what and how I inquire. My research voice asks particular questions, can see specific patterns, and has its own interpretive slant. I’ve fallen in love with my research.
Ah, love. Don’t you love it when opportunity knocks too? Kate’s Casebook sings it loud and proud and about how empowering it is when you ‘Can’t Wait To Be A Grown-Up‘ and be recognised for your skills:
I suppose that’s why when I received an invitation to write at a science site about issues in my specialty, I could not resist the offer even though I could come up with too many reasons to decline it. I literally felt like I was given a megaphone, and all of a sudden, I am part of the grow-ups science community, and I wanted the opportunity!
So keep an eye on that new venture in the future, for more joy in science by Doc-In-Training! One of the best things that I’ve discovered about this theme is that you find out about the multi-talented contributors. How many of you knew about the musical skills of Hannah from Young Stellar Objects? Upon the advent of auditioning for a musical, she reflects upon how stagefright is no longer an issue, for a variety of reasons:
Becoming a parent has something to do with it, too. Having children means stepping out of your comfort zone in a lot of ways. It’s given me a broader perspective in life. As I think of ways to enrich my children’s lives, it’s made me realize that my life deserves some enrichment as well.
‘Stage Presence’ indeed! Break a leg, Hannah!
An entry about the voices of others! ‘A Somewhat Old, But Capacious Handbag‘ takes to the streets and talks about ‘Cycling in Traffic: It’s a Bit Like Being Female‘:
If you ask for more fundamental changes, you’re clearly a bitter inadequate whiner who wants to stop everyone else from getting anywhere or having any fun.
But they keep on trucking. Er, biking. Look, just stay out from under Miss Prism’s wheels, because the system is tough enough as it is!
Pat of Fairer Science, a well-known contributor to Scientiae, makes a stand for the voice to be heard, as there are certainly a great need for listeners! The entry surprised a laugh out of me and ‘Being Heard’ makes a strong statement about the implications one gets if you respect the person behind the blog:
That long ago event (it was so long ago that I told people they should call collect) made it very clear to me that I’m not willing to do the work unless someone, or hopefully many “someones”, hear what I am saying.
Some of the best advice I’ve seen yet is given by Candid Engineer In Academia (well, with a blog name like that, what would you expect?). ‘Big Mouth And A Wagging Tongue‘ starts with a wonderful memory of a parent’s song and then gives something memorable in how to get that tune heard in academia. A thought-provoking and in parts hilarious ‘top five reasons why a solo singer likes her big mouth‘ - which quite frankly comes across as entirely reasonable considering some of the cacophony that surrounds us sometimes…
And there we have it! A wonderful lucky thirteen for your listening … er, reading pleasure!
I’ll naturally spend the rest of my night hoping the links are right, I didn’t zip someone to the spam-folder instead of to the Scientiae Folder by mistake… but most likely I’ll be sitting back with some recent podcasting glory by Skepticality (Swoopy is one of my favourite podcasters to listen to) and something fruit-based with gelato on top.
Don’t forget that if you’re interested in contributing (or even hosting) - the Scientiae Site is here and the next round will feature loud and proud in August!
Now, a friend of mine, Liz, is featured briefly in the first of a vodcast series on the recent TAM6, by Soccergirl
Incorporated! Looking gorgeous as always, but made me scream out loud with her ‘look at me, I’m a circus freak!’ arm trick!
She sounds more suave than freaky on her own gaming podcast, which you should check out here - Natural 20!
But it’s the summation of Penn Jillette’s comment that gets to me too. And more in a non-good freaky-way. Sheesh.
I’ve already said something about ‘yet another fanboy Q&A by P&T at these things…’, but it’s the first time I have actual evidence as to what he said about public schools. In front of an audience that contain teachers, because the timing of TAM6 was moved to ‘appeal to them’. Interesting.
It’s not on YouTube, but the site is here and the video is here. 06.28.08 SG #286 The Amazing Meeting, Part 1
Download the show here:
From Pink Tentacle’s “Rice paddy art in Yamagata”:
In the Yamagata prefecture town of Yonezawa, an image of 16th-17th century samurai Naoe Kanetsugu has appeared in a field near the Onogawa hot spring. The samurai, whose image is based on a portrait housed at the nearby Uesugi Museum, appears along with a pair of fireflies and the kanji characters for “Love” and “Tenchijin,” the name of an NHK drama about Naoe Kanetsugu that will air next year. The rice will be harvested in October.
This year marks the third time that crop art has been grown in Yonezawa.
I wonder if I could grow a crop that advertised ‘The One’… hmm. I have had students who used an overgrown patch of lawn on the school yard to create a giant smiley-face via traditional stalk-folding techniques - inspired primarily by a National Geographic documentary that I’ve now discovered is online:
By the way, check out Richard’s ’skeptical look’ on the offical site:
Richard Saunders has more than 10 years experience researching claims of the paranormal in his role as past President, current Vice President and Life Member of Australian Skeptics.He is known internationally not only as a sceptic but also as a children’s author having written and co-written more than 28 children’s books, many of those on origami.
He is a regular on the international lecture circuit, and in June 2008, is an invited speaker at TAM6 (The Amazing Meeting 6) the world’s largest sceptic convention in Las Vegas, along with guests such as The Myth Busters, Penn & Teller and James Randi. In August he will attend Dragon*Con, the world’s largest Sci-Fi and Fantasy convention in Atlanta, also as an invited speaker.
He first appeared on Australian television in 1988 to promote his books and has been featured on such children’s shows as Wombat on Channel Seven. He appears regularly as a sceptical commentator on Today Tonight, Sunrise, Radio 2GB, 2UE and ABC702. Richard has worked as a television and film extra, appearing in the background of programs such as All Saints, Home and Away and the new feature film Australia.
Here’s the article - and here’s some key quotes. The One will be on Australia’s Channel 7 on Tuesday July 8th, at 7.30pm.
Check out the promo, now on YouTube:
and - JOIN THE RICHARD SAUNDERS FACEBOOK FAN PAGE! 
“[A skeptic is] a person who says, ‘Well, I can’t make up my mind for or against until I see really good evidence.‘”
“I keep by eye out for cold-reading techniques [non-psychic methods for guessing information]. In terms of finding lost thinks, I ask whether any person off the street would have the same chance of finding it.“
“[Do you hope the show changes your mind?] Yes, because if it happens it’s incredible news for science. That would be exciting!“
So, yes, I’m travelling again. And I’m about four hours away from home by the time this pops up for your education and edification - perhaps you might consider using these in your classes? Or perhaps you’ll just get a laugh from it. I’ll be too busy doing qualitative research to notice, so go for it.
Later this year I’ll be doing some presentations here and there (in fact, one is coming up for Perth Atheists on July 7th! Apparently I’m billed as ‘amazing’ and that has me rather petrified… be gentle with me, people!). I’m going to try to come up with relevant, practical material that will be of interest to the atheists, because one of the issues that I’ve had with presentations at skeptic conferences is that the ’same material’ comes up again and again. Whilst atheism and skepticism have some overlapping elements, I’ll be more about atheism than being a skeptic.
‘Getting a laugh about those mistaken messages heard in backwards played music’ is a common one that crops up when I do hear skeptics speak though - my earlier post on the matter was in fact written in December 2006!
Research into what makes things ‘subliminal‘ is naturally ongoing; the notion of manipulating our senses by design is just too alluring to ignore, especially in advertising. I did notice this recent investigation on national flags helping to moderate political attitudes, but backwards messages don’t influence behaviour when featured in rock music, nor are they consciously or unconsciously understood.
If there was a top ten of backmasked songs, then naturally “Stairway to Heaven” by Led Zeppelin would be the first - it’s been used in all three presentations I’ve seen, including Michael Shermer’s and Richard Wiseman’s lectures. Yet I don’t like using that one in my classes.
I’ve found that using that particular example poses some problems with my students, who sometimes consider it to be confirming the phenomenon of ‘hidden messages’ or ’satanic lyrics’ rather than paying attention to the garble that’s produced before the ‘alternative’ backwards lyrics are shown. After all, that’s the argument made by people who claim that there are messages within ‘evil rock music’.
Therefore, as I mentioned in that blog entry, whilst I’d tend to use either this video ‘Songs of Praise’ by the great Adam Buxton, or this ‘Buffalaxed’ video of ‘Benny Lava’, to discuss how we allow ourselves to be fooled - I have recently found myself another favourite by Buffalax, which demonstrates auditory illusions based upon how we respond to the subtitles.
Enjoy ‘Tunak Tunak Tun’, but NOT an English translation. Especially the bit about the Ferengi… and Yoda in the sawdust.
I’m travelling! Expect two pre-written posts and DON’T forget that the Skeptics of Carlos and Scientae Blog Carnivals are coming up very soon… get some entries in!
***************
Homologus Legs threw down the gauntlet - and then out of the blue, I got another hit in the face by And Say We Did Blog! No wonder I love these people, they treat me as I should be treated. Go read their blogs first, or else.
Back again? Here’s my response to the Atheist Thirteen! Maybe they’ll smack me about again…
Q1. How would you define “atheism”?
Quite simply, the lack of a belief in a deity of any sort, defined or not.
Q2. Was your upbringing religious? If so, what tradition?
I had a very mixed-up upbringing. Probably the most prominent was a few years of Anglican church-attendance. It mostly depended on the tempers of the dominant members of the family, resulting in a lot of mixed-messages. For me, religion just didn’t speak to me at all, although there did seem to be some good things such as community-spirit and charity involved, which I do support. But I’ve always been fascinated about how people view faith.
When asked about my education and work, I usually point out that I was educated at a Catholic University, gained “Accreditation A” (registered to work in Catholic schools as having done the required theology units); have taught at Catholic, Anglican, Muslim and Methodist schools… and it was most likely observing the actions of fellow students at university that turned me towards atheism fully. But I can understand that there’s many reasons why someone would be religious and how there’s a range of influences it can have on society, from good to bad.
Q3. How would you describe “Intelligent Design”, using only one word?
Anti-education, if one may use a hyphen! I say this due to the history behind creationism getting into schools.
Q4. What scientific endeavour really excites you?
The never-ending search to find out about how the mind works. Although I’m a behaviourist, I find the ongoing research fascinating.
Q5. If you could change one thing about the “atheist community”, what would it be and why?
Honestly, I think you’d have to change ‘humanity’ first! Just have a look at the conflict that’s happening over on various atheist forum boards and chat rooms! Nothing new there, quite frankly, in terms of conflict and debate over what is the right way to be, who has right of say, what is fair… I wouldn’t ask more of atheists than I would ask of any person in terms of trying to get along with each other. Community is a tough thing to get together, full stop!
Q6. If your child came up to you and said “I’m joining the clergy”, what would be your first response?
First, I’d hope that the ‘child’ was around late teen years before they say that. But in general, any child of mine would have been exposed to many different religions and beliefs as possible, in order to give them a well-rounded education. So I think I’d probably have to go “Fine, if that’s your reasoned and considered choice, but which one?”
Q7. What’s your favourite theistic argument, and how do you usually refute it?
That atheism is a matter of faith too.
It’s an empty objection. If everything is a matter of faith, it’s a trivial fact. To make it non-trivial, you’d have to show that the beliefs of atheists require at least as much faith as those of religious believers. That’s something that can’t be shown, as the atheist position is based on evidence and arguments to best explanation. The atheist believes in what she has good reason to believe in and doesn’t believe in supernatural entities that there are few reasons to believe in, none of them particularly strong (or at least to me). If atheism is a faith position, then the amount of faith required is non-existent.
Q8. What’s your most “controversial” (as far as general attitudes amongst other atheists goes) viewpoint?
That we can learn from and respect people from many different religious backgrounds and that we can get along on some levels if we try. I get some funny reactions from lots of different people to that.
Q9. Of the “Four Horsemen” (Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens and Harris) who is your favourite, and why?
Probably Dawkins, because I met him and we had a good chat about his tie. It was at The Amazing Meeting 3, at the dinner that was held as a special event. Dreadfully biased response, that! I did meet Hitchens, but didn’t chat; have never met Dennett or Harris, but would like to interview them.
Q10. If you could convince just one theistic person to abandon their beliefs, who would it be?
Tough question. I don’t think I really have the right to make someone do that, but it would be interesting if the Pope did. I’d like to know how I did it though!
Apparently I now have to choose three others to give this challenge a go, if they so wish! I choose Pikachu. No, sorry, that should be - Skepbitch, Infinite Future (hey Paul!) and Skelliot’s Blog (hopefully he will return, soon!)
********************************************
Illustration of Mr Goaty thanks to ‘Coffee-Stained News Weblog’ - and yes, you should go see what else they found about ‘Objective Ministries’…
So, whilst all the rah-rah rubbish about the ‘women to men’ ratio of The Amazing Meeting turned out to be a complete and utter non-issue (hey, just like I’ve said all along! What a surprise!!) - one of the female presenters did have something to say about the show. In particular, what she noticed about Penn and Teller. Some interesting reading here, from Newsweek’s Lab Notes - Sharon Begley on ‘Penn & Teller And Believing In Dumb Things’:
My small contribution was a talk arguing that skeptics should not count on the press to enlist in their debunking crusade, something that also extends to the fight between evolution and creationism. So as not to bore you with the whole 30-minute speech, let me just say that my basic argument was that people believe weird things because of emotion, something no number of magazine and newspaper stories on the solidity of the science behind evolution (or the lack of evidence for homeopathy, psychic phenomena et al, as I also discussed in a column last year), is going to change. Add to that the public’s antipathy toward the press, and there’s no way the press can help the skeptics’ cause.
I’ll write more about the meeting eventually, but for now I can’t get something out of my mind. Penn and Teller did a Q & A with the audience the day before Teller alone spilled the beans on spoon bending, and one question yielded a surprising answer. Someone asked Penn whether he still believed that man-made climate change is bunk, as he has said more than once. Penn’s basic answer was: I loathe everything about Al Gore, so since Gore has been crusading against climate change it must be garbage.
Now, Penn & Teller’s terrific “Bull****,” now beginning its sixth season on Showtime, has debunked psychics such as John Edward, feng shui, acupuncture and other forms of pseudoscience and the paranormal. But here was Penn, a great friend to the skeptic community, basically saying, don’t bother me with scientific evidence, I’m going to make up my mind about global warming based on my disdain for Al Gore. (Both Penn and Teller are well-known libertarians and supporters of the libertarian Cato Institute, which has been one of the leaders in spreading doubt about global warming.) Which just goes to show, not even the most hard-nosed empiricists and skeptics are immune from the power of emotion to make us believe stupid things.
Ah, I adore E, my regular commentator under many guises. And deliverer of LolCat goodness!
Anyway, after E sent me an article today on
superstitious beliefs amongst politicians, I countered with the blog entry I wrote a while back on the issue - Political Punditry On McCain’s Magical Thinking:
The notion of ‘magical thinking‘ has its roots in the work of educational theorist Piaget, involving a lack of understanding of physical and biological phenomena (Morris, Taplin, & Gelman, 2000; Piaget, 1929/1951). Usually as you get older, this somewhat decreases. But these things have a habit of sticking around - humans seek patterns, make meaning and will tend towards comfort zones. A few astute commentators have remembered the influence on Ronald Reagan’s Presidency by astrologist Joan Quigley.
…Are they just using those phrases as just figures of speech rather than somehow admitting that there’s a rabbit’s foot in their pockets? One thing we can say about why people will tend towards superstition, regardless of their political ambitions: discriminative stimulus and partial reinforcement - people will do what works for them because it’s happened before or viewed it happen to others they’ve seen succeed or fail.
But never fear! E, with lighting-fast bicycle skills, swerved around with this little NY Times article, that has another view on the matter, involving source amnesia influencing how we view politically-based rumors of weird things:
False beliefs are everywhere. Eighteen percent of Americans think the sun revolves around the earth, one poll has found. Thus it seems slightly less egregious that, according to another poll, 10 percent of us think that Senator Barack Obama, a Christian, is instead a Muslim. The Obama campaign has created a Web site to dispel misinformation. But this effort may be more difficult than it seems, thanks to the quirky way in which our brains store memories — and mislead us along the way.
…This phenomenon, known as source amnesia, can also lead people to forget whether a statement is true. Even when a lie is presented with a disclaimer, people often later remember it as true.
With time, this misremembering only gets worse. A false statement from a non-credible source that is at first not believed can gain credibility during the months it takes to reprocess memories from short-term hippocampal storage to longer-term cortical storage. As the source is forgotten, the message and its implications gain strength. This could explain why, during the 2004 presidential campaign, it took some weeks for the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign against Senator John Kerry to have an effect on his standing in the polls.
Even if they do not understand the neuroscience behind source amnesia, campaign strategists can exploit it to spread misinformation. They know that if their message is initially memorable, its impression will persist long after it is debunked. In repeating a falsehood, someone may back it up with an opening line like “I think I read somewhere” or even with a reference to a specific source.
I can say this though - it is apparently true that Terry Pratchett hasn’t found God… or his car keys.
Which reminds me, I did notice something about the authors of the article - Sam Wang, an associate professor of molecular biology and neuroscience at Princeton, and Sandra Aamodt, a former editor in chief of Nature Neuroscience, are the authors of “Welcome to Your Brain: Why You Lose Your Car Keys but Never Forget How to Drive and Other Puzzles of Everyday Life.” There’s another one for the reading list!
No, didn’t get both of them talking to each other - but there’s two links you should be checking out!
First - Dr Karen ‘Skepbitch’ Stollznow is going to be on the APSR Paranormal Talk Radio Show! Apparently she’s “the skeptic” on Monday’s Into the Light show. Keep an eye out and check it out!
Secondly, thanks to the usual crowd on Facebook who pass vids around like a packet of peanuts, you might have heard that Richard Wiseman beat Richard Saunders’ mass spoon bending record at TAM6? And that Teller introduced the event? Well, I was sad that Saunders wasn’t the one to lead the ‘how to’, but there’s a kind of wobbly video of Teller, uh, telling how it’s done!
And here you go!
I’ve kept this little comedy fake-news story in my emails for a while and it has a certain significance… sadly, I’m having trouble finding the original source on the internet? Honestly, I thought it was from the Onion… AH HA! It is the Onion! Thanks A! It’s called “Nation Sickened By The Sight Of Happy Young Couple!”
So, in recognition of my relating to all the love that makes everyone else go ‘huh’ - and also because the daughter of a friend of mine is having a birthday this Sunday - I thought I’d post it! Happy birthday K!
BOSTON, MA—Though sharply divided on the war on terror and domestic controversies such as abortion, drugs, and gay marriage, Massachusettians are in almost unanimous agreement over one issue: that Boston, MA couple Dave Petrun and Julie DeSimone are totally sickening.
“It’s like they think they’re the first couple to ever fall in love in the history of space and time,” said Boston resident Allison Clark, one of hundred of thousands of people who say they want to shoot themselves in the face after observing the tender relationship between Petrun, and DeSimone, evolve over the last four months.
According to an WCVB-TV News–Boston Herald poll released today, a significant majority of Massachusettians believe the couple’s persistent displays of affection, which include almost constant hand-holding, mutual giggling, and insufferably coy little kisses, were “freakin’ ridiculous.” An overwhelming eight out of 10 polled said they wished the couple would die, preferably in a fiery automobile accident.
“If I have to see [Petrun] fiddle with [DeSimone's] fingers as they stroll around window shopping, without a care in the world, I swear to God I’m going to punch something,” said Malden, MA resident Sam Weber, whose reaction has been echoed by a broad cross-section of the Commonwealth apparently weary of the couple’s brazen public displays.
“These two need to face reality, and stop living in this disgusting fantasy world of theirs.”
…Yesterday, support lines across the state were flooded with calls complaining of moderate or intense nausea after DeSimone refused, and then eventually accepted, Petrun’s hooded sweatshirt during an evening walk.
Online anti-canoodling blogs, such as the popular davejuliebarf.typepad.com, are buzzing with rumors that Petrun and DeSimone broke into a brief, spontaneous slow dance near The Frog Pond last week. “Apparently the dude smiles when he sees her name on caller ID, too,” blogger Jessie Fox said. “If they love each other so goddamn much, why don’t they just get married and live happily ever after?”
In recent weeks, elected officials in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island passed largely symbolic “Get A Room” ordinances designed to encourage people like Petrun and DeSimone to make their affectionate displays more private. Conversely, Portland, ME banned Petrun and DeSimone from getting a room within its city limits.
While Petrun and DeSimone’s behavior does not qualify as a nuisance under any current statutes, the Boston and Cambridge city councils unanimously passed a joint proclamation encouraging the pair to tone it down.
Read the proclamation in part: “Whereas Dave and Julie are embarking on their first serious relationship, and whereas the odds of it lasting are slim to none, and whereas their ability to make seamless conversation, to instinctively know what the other is thinking, and to relate the story of how the two met when they were randomly seated next to one another on airplane has made nearly hundred of thousands of people want to gag, therefore, our cities hereby strongly urge Dave and Julie to really consider breaking up immediately.”
Unavailable for comment, Petrun and DeSimone are reportedly making plans to go backpacking across America during their six-month anniversary in November, prompting fears that their demonstrativeness could escalate national tensions.
Gah, things are moving so fast for me here, with research, research, research. For a significant part of next week, I’ll be travelling, again. Part of the life I live now!
It may be getting close to the time that I have to start cutting back on posting and begin coordinating for the rest of the year. It’s going to involve writing, researching (as if you haven’t noticed!), lecturing and just more travelling! Although I thought I could be fair to every element, it will probably benefit everything more if I choose to refine and focus.
What makes this hilarious for me is that I was recently offered a ‘dream job’ and politely (although very, very, very flattered to be considered) turned it down in favour of my research. I think that there’s passionate, intelligent and keen teachers who should jump for the chance I got - and rather them than me, who’d be dreaming of stats about UFO beliefs during the quiet times in class!
Of course, this will mean that blog carnivals - Skeptics of Carlos! and the upcoming Scientiae Carnival, get those entries in! - are naturally going to be a focus of mine. Encouraging networking is still a big goal and helps build more information on what really works. Oh, as well as keeping up posts on my research! Best of all, I can work on my site a little more! Uh, lot more. Okay, might actually put it together… ahem.
So, although I did this yesterday, post a link to someone else’s fine website - here I am doing it again. Science After Sunclipse takes some elements from earlier blog entries and interviews I’ve posted and many other inspirations, in order to write a very powerful essay in reflection of recent events regarding science communication online via blogs. It seems that others are also starting to question about ‘what next’ and seriously considering where our energies should be directed. More importantly, who has the experience, qualifications and understanding of what we really face - quantifying what challenges and opportunities there are rather than tilting at windmills:
“Nobody is acting as the central regulator of online science writing, though some would like to try. The interactions and evolutions we see are the result of the incentives at work, playing themselves out. If we want to change the way science blogging happens, or if we want our loose community to start generating something new, central decrees are no good: we have to make our desiderata the natural products of volunteer enthusiasm. Furthermore, science blogs are not a central authority for anybody else, so if we want to change their behavior, we have to find ways to put new “motivator units” in place.”
Oh, if you’re an educator, either primary / secondary / tertiary and getting skepticism into classrooms, you should be signing up to the new Google group called ‘Critical Teaching‘ - this group arose out of discussions between teachers at The Amazing Meeting 6 in Las Vegas, and aims to develop a network and dialogue between educators who wish to learn more about encouraging good critical thinking skills amongst their students.
From Slashdot:
“A recent headline at Entertainment Weekly suggests that the ‘100 Best Reads’ of the last 25 years do not include a single science book (not even a popular science book). In response, cosmologist Sean Carroll at Cosmic Variance has given an interesting analysis of EW’s disappointing list, and Soul Physics is calling for suggestions on the Greatest Physics Books of the Last 25 Years. For all the great literature that science has produced in the last 25 years, EW’s list seems to represent a major shortcoming in the field: it still isn’t diffusing into popular culture.”
This intrigues me, since quite a few of my investigations encourages reading non-fiction, particularly science-related books for the teenage years. It’s tough to collate a short-list of popular science books that I enjoy, but here are a few that immediately come to mind that I’ve suggested in the past to young people.
Usually when there’s a debate in class as to whether science books (or even just non-fiction books) are fun or interesting to read. In fact, I suggested some of the following to a mother of a high-schooler today, because for his English studies he has to analyze episodes of ‘House’ and needed some additional intertextual links.
So whilst I’m leaving off ‘obvious’ ones like Carl Sagan, Michael Shermer, Richard Dawkins and James Randi that skeptics automatically reach for - here’s what I’d call ‘best reads for science that should help encourage an interest in the genre‘:
Oliver Sacks - The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat and Other Clinical Tales and Uncle Tungsten: Memories of a Chemical Boyhood
Jennifer Ouellette - The Physics of the Buffyverse and Black Bodies and Quantum Cats: Tales of Pure Genius and Mad Science
Douglas Adams and Mark Carwardine - Last Chance to See
Mary Roach - Spook : Science Tackles the Afterlife (I will admit, I love Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex but I think I’d hesitate recommending it to teenagers! I’d probably discuss it with the school librarian first and they’d probably pop it into the Senior Reading section. If they don’t take it for themselves first.)
Natalie Angier - The Canon: A Whirligig Tour of the Beautiful Basics of Science
Richard Wiseman - Quirkology: How We Discover the Big Truths in Small Things
Maryanne Wolf - Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain (AND if you haven’t checked out the interview on Proust and the Squid by Dr Ginger Campbell of the Brain Science Podcast, get a move on!! This inspired me to drive to three bookstores to track down a copy!)
Lynne Kelly - The Skeptic’s Guide to the Paranormal
Jared M. Diamond - Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies
My most recent reads and fast becoming faves (that I’ll pop up reviews for when I’m next travelling) -
Neil Shubin - Your Inner Fish: A Journey into the 3.5-Billion-Year History of the Human Body
Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst - Trick or Treatment? : Alternative Medicine on Trial
And yes, there happens to be women writers who, without question, are on my list of recommendations. They’re writers, full stop. If you’re after more books, there’s always my booklist in the link for Skeptic Readings, which includes books for children, teens and adults.
Feel free to add your own suggestions in the comments!
What are you doing reading this entry? Seriously, click on over! The event you’ve all been waiting for has
happened!
Robert ‘Stop Sylvia Browne’ Lancaster has gone to Sylvia’s show when visiting Las Vegas!
1. We saw the show.
2. I spoke with Browne.
3. I was escorted off the premises by Excalibur security.
A brief excerpt:
A light came up on the stage, and Browne sat in the chair center stage. The show was billed as “Astounding Insights and Live Readings,” so I guess this first part was the Astounding Insights.
She started off by saying that it was 4:01, and that the show was supposed to have started at 4:00. She said “Don’t you hate it when people say they will start at a certain time, and they don’t?” She said she would have to have a talk with the tech people about this. If she was joking, she didn’t look like it. My wife later told me that Browne had been standing in the stage wings for a minute or so prior to being announced. Since Browne goes nowhere (other than on stage) without her wheelchair, due to what she says is a hip injury, perhaps she was not kidding, but was indeed angry at having to stand for that minute.”
The News Page for Stop Sylvia Browne is here, updated as new issues arise. If you haven’t before, check out the story for yourself!
I don’t know if you sometimes check out the Australian Skeptic website, but one of the features is the
‘Bent Spoon Award’.
I’ve written about the Awards before - here’s an entry from 2005:
Nominee: Medibank Private
Nominated by: Malcolm Cluett
Date: 22/07/2005
I would like to nominate Medibank Private for the Bent Spoon award.
There is an Medibank Private advertisement that is being screened on TV and in the cinema. It shows an ambulance speeding through city traffic, to the aid of some individual lying on a grassy hill, perhaps stricken with a heart attack. The lights are flashing and the siren wailing.
When the ambulance arrives on the scene, the back doors open to reveal not medics on white coats, but rather a Chinese acupuncturist and an Indian mystic. The interior of the ambulance is suitably decorated.
Yes, apparently if you call emergency services, having a bunch of acupuncturists turn up will help you in a life-threatening condition… what the??!?!
I’m watching an old episode of ‘House’ (Season Two, Episode Fifteen) on Channel Ten - around 9.20pm, that advertisement comes on the screen. Three or so years since it was last screened.
The last time I saw it, I was in a movie theatre, and it was blaring on the big screen as part of the usual before-feature cinema advertising. My partner and I went out the very next day and changed health providers, on the basis of that advert.
Guess the advert will now have the honor of being entered into the Bent Spoon Awards for another year. Don’t forget that you can also complain to the Advertising Standards Bureau if you find an advert particularly offensive or misleading. I’m looking into this too.
… and no, the irony that the particular episode of House featured someone getting poisoned by an ‘alternative medicine treatment’ for arthritis via gold sodium thiomalate didn’t escape me…
I don’t know if you sometimes check out the Australian Skeptic website, but one of the features is the ‘Bent Spoon Award’.
I’ve written about the Awards before - here’s an entry from 2005:
Nominee: Medibank Private
Nominated by: Malcolm Cluett
Date: 22/07/2005
I would like to nominate Medibank Private for the Bent Spoon award.
There is an Medibank Private advertisement that is being screened on TV and in the cinema. It shows an ambulance speeding through city traffic, to the aid of some individual lying on a grassy hill, perhaps stricken with a heart attack. The lights are flashing and the siren wailing.
When the ambulance arrives on the scene, the back doors open to reveal not medics on white coats, but rather a Chinese acupuncturist and an Indian mystic. The interior of the ambulance is suitably decorated.
Yes, apparently if you call emergency services, having a bunch of acupuncturists turn up will help you in a life-threatening condition… what the??!?!
I’m watching an old episode of ‘House’ (Season Two, Episode Fifteen) on Channel Ten - around 9.20pm, that advertisement comes on the screen. Three or so years since it was last screened.
The last time I saw it, I was in a movie theatre, and it was blaring on the big screen as part of the usual before-feature cinema advertising. My partner and I went out the very next day and changed health providers, on the basis of that advert.
Guess the advert will now have the honor of being entered into the Bent Spoon Awards for another year. Don’t forget that you can also complain to the Advertising Standards Bureau if you find an advert particularly offensive or misleading. I’m looking into this too.
… and no, the irony that the particular episode of House featured someone getting poisoned by an ‘alternative medicine treatment’ for arthritis via gold sodium thiomalate didn’t escape me…
Sorry - after a day of doing qualitative research with teenagers, I just have NO energy left! I promise there’ll be something more substantial tomorrow - until then, go read the carnival I blogged earlier.
Just spent three hours chatting with Richard Saunders and Rachael about TAM6 and our future traveling plans. At some point, we were all so tired that we ended up watching comedy like this - so enjoy!
