Skeptic News

Global Consciousness Project reveals human foolishness

It's hard to know which category to place this one in -- it's a little bit ESP, a little bit fortune telling, and a whole lot of pseudoscience.

The Global Consciousness Project apparently is trying to use random number generators to detect changes in the the "global consciousness" of the population of the planet. They claim that, when a big event happens, such as the funeral of Princess Diana, the 9/11 terrorist attacks, or the December 26 tsunami, that they observe changes in the pattern of randomly generated zeros and ones.

In the original Star Wars, Obi Wan Kenobi felt a great disturbance in the Force -- these guys claim to be doing so in real life. Better yet, they claim to be doing so before the event happens. For example, they claim that the pattern of numbers generated changed before the first of the 9/11 attacks, as well as before the tsunami hit.

Anyone else suspect they know what's going on here? Various scientists claim to be baffled, so maybe I can help them out. Here's what's probably happening -- humans are being human. You see a spike in the numbers, you scan the news headlines to look for some big event. If you find something, then you can say that the spike you saw detected it. If you don't see anything, wait a bit and check again. Then when you find something, you can say that the spike you saw predicted it. From the other direction, if something big happens in the news, go back and look at your numbers. If you see a spike, bravo! If you don't, look farther back in time. Found one? It was a prediction! (Oh, and if you don't find a spike in the numbers, but instead find a trough, that's okay -- that counts, too.) Didn't find anything at the time of the event or before the event? Don't give up yet! Try looking after the event -- it probably had some sort of psychic impact on the population of the planet for some time after the fact.

Finally, if you weren't able to find a correlation before, during, or after the event, just chalk it up as "one of those things" -- no need to consider it as evidence against the truth of your theory.

The standard of evidence on this appears to be very low. For example, some of the events that their machine "detected" or "predicted" include Mark McGwire's homerun record, the finale of Survivor, and Oprah Winfrey visiting Africa. World-shaking events? Really? Hmm....

So this is the kind of research they're doing at Princeton these days, huh?

Link: RedNova News - Can This Black Box See Into the Future?.
Link: Global Consciousness Project

Universe Today - What Did Galileo See?

Galileo was born on February 15, 1564 -- 441 years ago this Tuesday. As a quick celebration, pop over to Universe Today and read What Did Galileo See? Here's an excerpt:

There can be no doubt that Galileo's early adoption of the recently invented spyglass for astronomical purposes marked a major departure toward the way we now view the world. For before Galileo's era the heavens and the Earth were not in accord. The bulk of the thinking going on previous to Galileo was scholastic in nature. Truth depended on the words of the ancients - words which carried greater weight of authority than natural law and behavior. It was the era of faith - not science - that Galileo was born into. But his observations built a bridge between Terrum et Coelum. Earth and sky became part of a single natural order. The telescope could demonstrate to anyone with an open mind that there was more to all things than could be conceived of by the great minds of the past. Nature had begun to instruct the hearts and minds of humanity...

But let us speak no more of Earth-shaking events. What did Galileo actually see in the early months of the year 1610?

Perhaps the best way to celebrate his birth would be to grab you telescope, step outside, and take a peek at the sky. (Alas, I have no telescope yet. I keep wanting to get one, but higher priorities keep getting in the way. Oh well, now that I have a son, I'll soon have an excuse to buy one -- "It's for our child's education!")

Link: Universe Today - What Did Galileo See?.

ABC News to Air UFO Program

I received an email recently from a company asking me whether I would like to post a banner ad for an upcoming ABC News special, Peter Jennings Reporting: UFOs -- Seeing Is Believing. It will air on Thursday, Feb. 24 from 8-10 p.m. ET on ABC.

On Feb. 24, "Peter Jennings Reporting: UFOs — Seeing Is Believing" takes a fresh look at the UFO phenomenon. "As a journalist," says Jennings, "I began this project with a healthy dose of skepticism and as open a mind as possible. After almost 150 interviews with scientists, investigators and with many of those who claim to have witnessed unidentified flying objects, there are important questions that have not been completely answered — and a great deal not fully explained."

That last line -- "there are important questions that have not been completely answered — and a great deal not fully explained" -- would seem to imply that this is not going to be a 100% skeptical program.

So, should I advertise a program that, it appears, will not cover the topic well? On the other hand, having skeptics watch the program would make it easier to discuss it intelligently with those who are a bit more gullible. And, of course, simply by blogging about it, I am in effect advertising it. Lastly, by participating in Google's AdSense program, I inevitably wind up advertising plenty of things that I don't agree with. (At the moment, most of the ads are about creationist and Intelligent Design web sites.)

I probably won't take them up on their offer to run a banner ad, more out of inertia (I've got a 2 month old baby to deal with) than on principle.

Link: ABC News: The UFO Phenomenon -- Seeing Is Believing.

Intelligent Math

Here's a funny bit of satire from The Rockall Times:

"I tried to answer each problem I was set by adhering to strict Trinitarian principles, but for some reason I kept getting the answers wrong. Eventually I realised: either the concept of the Trinity was flawed; or the entire basis of mathematics was invalid. Naturally I decided that the latter was the case and so I set about developing my new theory."

The new "Intelligent Math" incorporates the belief that 1 and 3 are equivalent, as implied by the concept of the Trinity. Therefore, 1 + 1 is 2... or 6... or 4. And so forth. (Via Evolving Thoughts.)

Link: American school redefines mathematical paradigm.

Human Being Recall Notice

Greg Porter emailed this Human Being Recall Notice to me and I thought it was great! Here's an excerpt:

In an unprecedented move today, the US Department of Commerce and the European Commission on Product Safety (ECPS) announced a joint recall of the human race. Citing shoddy workmanship, poor design and premature failure of the units, the recall is meant to force the manufacturer, Intelligent Design Inc., to address these complaints.

This action follows a similar, independent lawsuit by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer. When asked to comment on the joint US/EU action, he said "It is clear that this problem extends beyond US borders. All models of humanity have been plagued with numerous problems since the start. While early models were quite durable, with one example lasting 969 years, quality rapidly declined, and in many cases, units do not last for even the vaguely implied warranty of 'three score and ten years' listed in the fine print of the badly translated product manual."

Funny! I've sometimes heard claims to the effect that the perfection of the world around us is evidence of God -- and have wondered what planet these people are referring to as home! (Experiment: Ask a woman who is in the middle of delivering an 8 pound baby though a tiny little opening whether she can think of any improvements on the design of the human body.)

Link: Human Being Recall Notice.

Defender's Guide to Science and Creationism

I found this one via The Moderate Liberal. It's the Defender's Guide to Science and Creationism, which looks like it will be a very useful "quick reference" guide. The Talk.Origins Archive is very useful, but I find that it is sometimes difficult to find a quick answer to some specific question. The Defender's Guide, while not as detailed as the Talk.Origins Archive, provides much more concise answers.

Link: Defender's Guide to Science and Creationism.

Will you be attending a Darwin Day event?

Out of curiousity, how many of you will be attending a Darwin Day event this year?

My local skeptics group, the Rational Examination Association of Lincoln Land (REALL), will be hosting an event the local Pasta House Company restaurant. We'll have a buffet of food, a birthday cake, and will be playing "Creation/Evolution Jeopardy", as well as complaining about a recent presentation by a location Intelligent Design advocate. (Speaking of which, I need to finish coming up with all of the questions and answers! Or would that be answers and questions?)

So what will you be doing? Post a comment and let us know!

USATODAY.com - Shroud of Turin could date to time of Jesus, examiner says

USATODAY ran an Associated Press story which reports that the Shroud of Turin could be much older than earlier testing showed. Raymond N. Rogers, a retired chemist who was involved in testing the Shroud of Turin in 1978. says new fiber analysis indicates the cloth could be up to 3,000 years old. This new analysis was conducted in 2003, he says. He says that earlier testing was inaccurate, because the samples were poorly collected.

CSICOP's Joe Nickell has examined the latest claims of Rogers and found them very unconvincing.

Link: USATODAY.com - Shroud of Turin could date to time of Jesus, examiner says.
Link: CSICOP - Claims of Invalid “Shroud” Radiocarbon Date Cut from Whole Cloth

Meet My Little Skeptic!

So what the heck have I been doing since the Skeptic News went silent in July 2003? Well, among other things, trying to create this little guy! Everyone, please welcome Orlando Henry Noel Hartshorn!

Wow, given how many babies there are in the world, what are the odds that I would wind up getting the cutest one, eh? :-)

Orlando was born on December 10, 2004 and has been occupying nearly all of our time since then. He'll be 2 months old this Thursday, which means he gets four -- count 'em, 4! -- vaccination shots when we see the pediatrician that day. Ouch!

His skills at the moment include eating, sleeping, and diaper filling, as well as grinning and laughing when his daddy dances for him.

Saint Nate's Blog: The First Skeptics' Circle

This is a bit late, but those of you who haven't already found it might want to pop over to Saint Nate's and read the first Skeptic's Circle. "What's that?", I hear you asking. The basic idea is that several blogs each post an article about some skeptic-related topic. One of the participating blogs (in this case, Saint Nate's) then posts an article that links to all of the other articles. In short, it's sort of a distributed ezine.

Topics in this first issue include urban legends, biorythms, False Memory Syndrome, Holocaust denial, alternative medicine, and Intelligent Design, among others.

The archives will be located at Circular Reasoning, as well as the schedule for future issues.

Link: The First Skeptics' Circle.

Skeptic News Returns!

Happy Groundhog Day, everyone! And welcome to the new incarnation of Skeptic News! If you've visited us in the past, you'll see that things have obviously changed.

Skeptic News first when online back in July 1998 as a Slashdot-style news site. We did quite well, but by July 2003 I was burned out, so the site went dormant. At the time, I was thinking of writing some software that would automatically generate links to  skeptic-related articles, similar to the way Google News works. However, I just didn't have the time to write the software.

Now, a year and a half later, I'm reviving the site, this time as a blog. Please check back frequently as I get things rolling, and please leave some feedback to let me know how I'm doing.

"Discovery Phase" at American Prospect Online

Over at The American Prospect Online, Chris Mooney examines the latest wave of anti-evolution activity in Discovery Phase. He notes:

It's official. With recent news of lawsuits over the teaching of evolution in both Georgia and Pennsylvania, even Time magazine now considers the fight over Charles Darwin's theory a live issue again. The New York Times and The Washington Post have both come out against the new anti-evolutionism, while on FOX News, a braying Bill O'Reilly recently announced that "there are a lot of very brilliant scholars who believe the reason we have incomplete science on evolution is that there is a higher power involved in this." O'Reilly then proceeded to call the American Civil Liberties Union "the Taliban" for opposing the teaching of anti-evolutionist perspectives in public-school science classes.

[...]

The ID movement has its home base at a Seattle think tank called the Discovery Institute. Mindful of legal precedents, Discovery does not officially advocate bringing up ID in classrooms (as has happened in Dover, Pennsylvania, to Discovery's chagrin). Rather, the institute wants students to learn about the "controversy" over evolution -- a controversy that is supposedly scientific in nature. And in fact, just like adherents of "creation science," ID proponents have been able to cobble together a few Ph.D.s who support their cause, providing "scientific" critiques of evolutionary theory.

[...]

Time gets an F: its latest coverage failed to uncover the really juicy stuff about the ID movement, like the passage cited above. But the press will catch on eventually, as will the courts. And unless they're radically reshaped by President Bush, it seems likely that they will reject ID just as they once rejected "creation science."

Unfortunately, I'm not 100% convinced that the Supreme Court will keep ID out of the schools. They seem to be swayed much more by public opinion than we would like to think, and public opinion these days seems to be moving in the wrong direction.

I just returned from attending a talk by a local ID advocate. The title of the presentation was "Intelligent Design: A Scientific Alternative to Evolution". There were over 100 people in the audience, and the vast majority appeared to be creationists/IDers. The primary objection of the evolution supporters was that ID means religion -- an idea which didn't phase the creationists/IDers one bit (and in fact sounded good to them).

I'll talk more about this later.

Link: American Prospect Online - "Discovery Phase".