SkepticBlog is a collaboration among some of the most recognized names in promoting science, critical thinking, and skepticism. It also features the cast and producers of The Skeptologists, a pilot skeptical reality show.
Climate science has turned from an obscure and forgotten discipline to the center of a raging world-wide controversy – something I don’t think climate scientists were prepared for. It has also become the third rail of skepticism – don’t touch it unless you want to get burned.
The reason for this is probably obvious – skeptics are divided politically (this is an oversimplification but largely true) between liberals and libertarians, both of which seem to have strong and opposite opinions on the topic of global warming. As a result I have been simultaneously criticized for being too soft and too hard on global warming dissidents. I hope this means that I am striking an objective balance – but then, of course, I get criticized for striking a “false balance.” I have been told that I am losing my skeptical street cred, and that I have faith in global warming as a secular religion. Many people also seem to think they can divine my political persuasion from my opinions on global warming, but then proceed to make very incorrect assumptions on that score.
There has also been intense fighting on what to call global warming dissidents – the term I have settled on as the most accurate and neutral. Part of the problem is that dissidents come in a broad range of opinions. At one end of the spectrum there are what can only be described as deniers – those who engage in all the tactics of denialism against any notion of climate change. At the other end are those who accept the core scientific consensus of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), but are skeptical of some of the dire predictions and proposed fixes. And there is every permutation in between – defying easy categorization or labeling. So I use “dissidents” as a neutral catch-all.
How sad that yet another medium has been given press approval. I could write a post on a different medium or phony psychic every week and never run out of material. This week’s entry into the never-ending cycle of mediums I predicted would be coming (see my post “ESP Boot Camp” of 23 Feb. 2009) is Rebecca Rosen. I will hopefully not catch all the flack I caught two weeks ago when the Internet press release I quoted from was taken down, making the points I tried to make un-verifiable. This time, you can read all about Mrs. Rosen here: Continue reading…
Don’t think for a minute that I didn’t know it would be controversial. When I recorded this week’s Skeptoid episode Did Jewish Slaves Build the Pyramids, I knew it was going to upset Christians who hold that belief dear. I wasn’t disappointed, as you can tell from the comments.
As you may or may not know, the Bible doesn’t even contain the word pyramid, at least not an online King James Version that I searched. This is quite interesting. All the evidence points to Herodotus of Halicarnassus as the originator of the tale of Jewish slaves laboring under Egyptian whips to build the pyramids [In fact Herodotus only mentions the number of workers on the pyramids, he did not identify them as either Jews or slaves. - BD]. However, the Book of Exodus was nearly exactly the same time as Herodotus wrote this in his book The Histories (about 450 BCE), and it seems strange that these two contemporaneous accounts would match up so well on all details except the one that should appeal most to storytellers: the pyramids. Continue reading…
Oh, this is wonderful to hear: The Lancet — a leading UK professional medical research journal — is retracting the paper published by Andrew Wakefield back in 1998 that linked vaccines with autism.
The paper has been found to be multiply and fatally flawed, with Wakefield and his work being thoroughly discredited. As the Lancet editorial itself states:
Following the judgment of the UK General Medical Council’s Fitness to Practise Panel on Jan 28, 2010, it has become clear that several elements of the 1998 paper by Wakefield et al. are incorrect, contrary to the findings of an earlier investigation. In particular, the claims in the original paper that children were “consecutively referred” and that investigations were “approved” by the local ethics committee have been proven to be false. Therefore we fully retract this paper from the published record.
I am an avid listener to podcasts. I can attribute my enlightenment that I was a Skeptic from the early days of listening to Penn Jillette’s radio show rebroadcast on my iPod.
Now, as I spend my day making videos, working on pitch materials for The Skeptologists and also making breakaway bottles for SMASHProps, I have a lot of time available to listen to many great podcasts. Most are skeptically themed and feature several of the authors that contribute regularly to this blog.
One podcast that I listen to regularly is the Tech Stuff Podcast, from the folks over at HowStuffWorks.com. Chris Pollette and Jonathan Strickland regularly take on topics related to technology from how fiber optics work to the best Easter eggs found in video games. When I scrolled through my menu of choices for my evening listening, last night, I saw that the latest offering from tech stuff was labeled “Ghost Hunting Technology.” I have to admit that I almost skipped it! My fear was that I’d listen to this podcast and have to stop listening to their future shows because of something that they said and I would have lost all “faith” in their ability to report on topics related to, well, anything! Continue reading…
Cryptozoology is my first love. As a child, I spent endless hours planning the cryptozoological expeditions I thought I would one day lead. Even today, as a “professional skeptic,” I carry a torch for monsters and hidden beasts.
Which is how I came to frequent the popular cryptozoology blog site Cryptomundo. Presided over by the prolific Loren Colemen, Cryptomundo is updated constantly, and always a source of fantastic claims and speculations.
Screen capture from Cryptomundo.com
I get on quite well with Loren, who is one of the more skeptical and responsible pro-cryptozoology writers. (He has, for example, critiqued the “Jacko” story from sasquatch pre-history, writing, “in reality Jacko may have more to do with local rumors brought to the level of a news story that eventually evolved into a modern fable.”)
Before long, I found myself contributing regular comments on Cryptomundo posts. I knew something about the subject matter, and joined Ben Radford and one or two other “resident” skeptics at the blog site. I even contributed a guest post at one point. I love these mysteries, so it was pleasant to talk about them with others who found them interesting.
On a regular basis I am sent links to YouTube to review the latest UFO video footage. Most often it is by a fellow skeptic who just wants to share the latest crappy evidence being offered by the UFO community. Sometimes the links are sent by readers who are perplexed and are looking for an explanation, and occasionally they are sent by UFO believers as a challenge.
The YouTube UFO phenomenon (or “YouFOs” – yes, I just coined that) is a good way for budding skeptics to practice their skilz. This is purely armchair skepticism, unless you want to do some actual investigation, which can be fun too. But armchair skepticism has its place – it is an exercise in logic and plausibility. Someone is presenting you with evidence and you analyze it critically. You may not have the time or resources to do investigative journalism, or to replicate experiments. But asking good critical questions is an essential part of science, and since the burden of proof is on those making the claim it seems reasonable that they should be able to answer our questions.
So it seems Bonnie Vent is more than a little bent out of shape about her claim to be able to talk to the deceased Michael Jackson. The real question is not one of legality of freedom of speech as far as I’m concerned. (See Steve Novella’s follow-up blog written in response to Vent’s threat to sue myself, Steve, the Skepticblog, and the Skeptics Society if we did not remove my opinion of her claims). It’s more about taking a stand against blatant exploitation of a deceased individual; namely, Michael Jackson. Continue reading…
Like any good audience member, I’ve always been impressed by magician David Blaine’s 2008 world record feat of holding his breath underwater for 17 minutes. I’d never given it much more thought than the observation that a young, healthy guy can probably achieve any given world record if he dedicates enough resources to the effort, and Blaine certainly appeared to have done so.
I received a forwarded email from the University of Pittsburgh’s Critical Care Medicine Group email list:
Absolutely enthralling video of David Blaine explaining how he held his breath for 17 minutes! Interesting the assistance he received from the medical fraternity, including trying liquid ventilation with perflurocarbons.
At some level, I understand the motivations of people who promote "alternative medicine". They may very well be altrustic, seeing what they perceive as a massive failing of so-called Western medicine, and feeling strongly that they know how to fix the situation, if only people would seek alternatives. I know that when I feel strongly enough about an issue, I feel morally obligated to speak up.
The problem is that for a lot of this so-called alternative medicine, there is no evidence it works, and in fact evidence it doesn’t work. Worse, a lot of its biggest purveyors actively try to denigrate real medicine, the stuff that, y’know, works, in an attempt to bolster their alt-med claims. And you have to be a little suspicious when they hawk their wares on their sites, too. Continue reading…
