"One could spend all his energy confronting skeptics. That same energy is much better spent investigating the subject. Why waste time on people who have never bothered to learn the basic facts? It's their problem!" ~ J. Allen Hynek

Saturday, July 10, 2010

From America.gov: "Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation"

Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation, from America.gov. It's deeply, darkly, insidious and yet it's also comedic in a "You don't really buy into this?" kind of way.
Conspiracy theories exist in the realm of myth, where imaginations run wild, fears trump facts, and evidence is ignored. As a superpower, the United States is often cast as a villain in these dramas.
You can check out the "truth" about such things as: 9/11, Health, Military, Latin America, Outer Space. Not much space is given to any of these topics, just a paragraph or two that tells you, everything is all right, you see, people just naturally don't understand and are anxious:

in the 20th century, aliens in “flying saucers“ became a focus of fears and anxiety, ... We project onto imaginary aliens some of our deepest fears ... we could be victimized, enslaved or exterminated by a technologically superior civilization. .. imaginary aliens represent the ultimate unknowable, feared “other.”
Interesting how they've chosen to frame UFOs, aliens and humanity in a fear based context.

Thursday, July 8, 2010

JREF Message Board: Glitch After All

As I thought; all is back up now.

JREF Message Board: A Glitch Or A Ban?

Hmmm, since last night, I have been unable to read any of the sections on the James Randi Educational Forum (JREF) message boards. Clicking on the link to "enter forum" takes me to . . . a blank page. As of this posting, it is still happening.

I found this over there, which has been up since 2006:

href="http://www.randi.org/forum/">The JREF is subject to much "spamming" from the homeopathic community, strange mystics, and others. As a result, we have had to limit access to this message board. Create new subjects for discussion, if you wish. Thanks for your interest and participation! -Randi


Everyone is able to read the forum topics. However, in order to post, you will need to register. Simply click on the "register" link and follow the instructions. An administrator will review all registrants for authorization. Be sure to read the rules of conduct when registering.
With "click here to enter forum"  links above and below.

But clicking on those links just takes me to a blank page.

So we'll have to wait and see if this is just a glitch, they're doing maintenance or what.

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Skeptopia Blog "Why I'll Never Return to JREF Forum..."

Found this on the Skeptopia blog. Make no mistake, this is a skeptic blogger all the way, she just has some interesting things to say about a specific issue involving female skeptics and bordellos. That got your attention, didn't it?

Monday, July 5, 2010

Comment on Journey Into Woo Land

 I see over on the JREF Mr. Lancaster posted about my blog here. He's states he tried to leave a comment but couldn't, don't know why it didn't work. He posted on the JREF what he would have left here, and since I'm a kindly kind of dame, I'm posting it on Snarly Skepticism:
Regan:


Hello, Robert Lancaster here again.


First, there are no plans for any "forthcoming book on evil mediums." I have been encouraged - on the JREF forum and elsewhere - to write a book on the experiences I've had while writing my "Stop" sites. And - who knows - perhaps some day I will. But I currently have no plans to do so, so for you to state that what I do is "to sell a forthcoming book" is simply incorrect.
I said "that was me, not him" didn't I? Why yes I did:
"...which seems to be, aside from the pathological journey itself -- to sell a forthcoming book on evil mediums. Okay, he didn't say that, I did."
Is what I do "pathological, obsessive, authoritarian, arrogant, fanatical and zealous"?
Why yes, yes it is. Didn't I also say that like a ga-zillion times?  Goodness.


I'll cop to charges of being zealous. there's no denying that. And even my own wife - my greatest supporter in my "Stop" endeavors - has called me "obsessed" on the subject.


But couldn't all of these descriptions also apply to someone who maintains a website about "snarly skepticism" and keeps an "unofficial watch" on the JREF?

Ah, but see, I have plenty of other interests that keep me busy as well, ... but it's clear that Mr. Lancaster and others on the ol' JREF are faaaaaarrrrr more industrious in their zeal than I could ever hope to be.
It's painfully easy to use those words to describe someone who disagrees with you on something evidently important to you. I notice you do not argue with anything I say about Browne, but instead make light of it. Why is that?
Maybe because I find the whole thing hysterical and not worth the "let's play with the woo" game you like to play. It's not about Browne, or JVP, or any of the other mediums or woos on your list - - it's about the uber-skeptoid mind set.

Journey Into Woo Land

Well, Lancaster left a comment here on the previous post, explaining defending his actions. One point I'll update; I said JVP coming to Oregon was too much for him to bear, which, is still clearly the case, but that's not what got him going after JVP. According to his comments, he went after JVP as he does the other psychics, mediums, etc. he goes after -- which seems to be, aside from the pathological journey itself -- to sell a forthcoming book on evil mediums. Okay, he didn't say that, I did. He has several "Stop so and so" sites in the making, this is his thing, and JVP is one among many.

The point is, dahlings, that anytime a skeptic goes into woo territory the skeptics deny anything pathological, obsessive, authoritarian, arrogant, fanatical, zealous, . . . I will acknowledge that Lancaster seemed to have presented himself openly and honestly in his journeys into woo-land, stating to the woo his intentions. . . that aside, good golly great mother goddess, the entire thing reeks of crazy. Anytime you have several threads devoted to the minutia of woo-world, get up .com websites with tabloid banners screaming STOP whatever, and hyperbolic writings on why woo is harmful, then yes Virginia, there is an "uber" skeptoid label to be bestowed.

All that work, all that energy, all those words, wasted on someone's personal obsession, while all around us the world is going to hell. Which is more tragic, that, or JVP?

Sunday, July 4, 2010

JREF Bashes JVP

R.S. Lancaster, a popular uber-skeptoid on the JREF, started the "Stop Sylvia Browne" movement some time ago. That was some project on Lancaster's part; lots of threads and posts about the neccessity of stopping Browne for the good of humanity; he even started a website devoted to his hatred of Browne: StopSylviaBrowne.com

For whatever reason, boredom, greener skeptic pastures, who knows, Lancaster has now put his energies into stopping medium James Van Praagh.

What started this all was the news that JVP was to appear in Grants Pass, Oregon on June 25th.  I was startled to find that such a rabid skeptoid lives not far from me! Apparently Lancaster lives around the Salem area and can't tolerate a woo visiting his state spreading that woo that he do.

Lancaster writes letters and joins the JVP message forum, back and forths ensue, you know, the usual non-productive fanatic skeptic in your face routine. What's scary about all this isn't the expected skeptoid response to a medium, or even a few attempts at engaging the woo of the day in "debate," and so on. No, it's not that, it's the incredible depth of the ... what do we call this? Obsession, certainly, stalking? Harassing? Investigation? Whatever it all is, it's very intense. It's creepy and pathological.

There are several separate threads, or "chapters" devoted to Lancaster's attacks on JVP. I think this is all of them but there might be others, but in any case, you get the idea:
StopJVP - RSL in JVPLand - All Chapters?
StopJVP - RSL in JVPLand - Chapter 2: Q&A
StopJVP - RSL In JVPLand - Chapter 6: Grant's Pass?
StopJVP - RSL In JVPLand - Chapter 7b: Pink Panther Answer?
StopJVP: RSL in JVPLand - Chapter 5: The Two Jameses
StopJVP - RSL in JVPLand - Chapter 8: Epilogue 

In the last thread ("Chapter 8: Epilogue") Lancaster comments how, after spending weeks on pro JVP message boards, exchanging emails and posts with JVP, he's ready to wrap up. Part of this summation includes the StopJamesVanPraagh website:
"I know that when I open StopJamesVanPraagh.com it will upset many of them, and that saddens me - but not enough to keep me from going ahead with it. 

In a delisicious moment of irony, of kettle calling pot black, of point! zoom! right over your head!, of sigh, this just sums it all up doesn't it, Lancaster posts, on the JREF:
One of them [poster on JVP message forum] posted in one of my threads "I can't help but notice that you show such PRIDE when you use the word "skeptic."

I guess that I do. It's an odd concept to them, since, more often than not, the word "skeptic" to them has meant "insufferable know-it-all jerk." I'd like to think that I showed some of them that "skeptic" can sometimes mean something else, but perhaps, with my "Pink Panther" question, I just confirmed their earlier definition!


Friday, July 2, 2010

John Cleese: The Scientists

I love this! I'm a huge John Cleese as well as Monty Python fan, so it was great to find this posted on UFO Mystic, thanks to Greg Bishop. Go there to read what Greg says about this: All You Need to Know.

Thursday, July 1, 2010

JREF Bigfoot Threads: Easy Handy Dandy Link

Here's a handy link that takes you right to the JREF's list of Bigfoot threads. There are pages of links; I stopped counting after 70 threads. There are waaaaaaay over 70 threads. About a creature that, according to I'd say 98% of posters there, don't believe exists.

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

Bigfoot threads still going strong

I haven't been updating the Bigfoot Thread Watch over on the JREF; last time I think it was close to forty something seperate threads about Bigfoot. Just randomly, I counted twelve different threads on Bigfoot, -- some new, and some older that have been included in the previous counts here.

As I've remarked many times, for a being they don't believe exists, they spend a lot of time discussing it, from a wide variety of angles.

Related post: Bigfoot Fever: Bigfoot and the Skeptibunkers, Trickster's Realm for BoA

On a later post, I'll discuss my favorite BF threads over there.

Friday, June 25, 2010

Uber-skeptoid with way too much time on his hands gets libx warning

This painfully verbose skeptoid at the JREF complains about ill treatment from his local library. He's been warned that if he continues to do what he does while at the library, his membership will be revoked.

So what's he doing? Going in, and cheerfully rearranging books. He knows, you see, where they belong. Not just any book, randomly moved to elsewhere at his whim. But books on ghosts, UFOs, Bigfoot, and the like-- moved out of the non-fiction section (or science, etc.) to the fiction section. He knows better, those silly librarians, with their degrees and training and all, don't.

(I have to say though that something about the post smacked of a put on... shrug.)

Such a helpful chap (and you'll see, when you visit the thread on JREF, why I'm talking like a character out of My Fair Lady) just trying to make things right. And all he gets for it are stern warnings from, alas, librarians who should be on his side.

Other JREFers join in, with comments of support, and their own tales of woe about this very same problem. Private bookstore, or library, they make their displeasure known. Why, sometimes, as one poster shared, bookstores take him up on his advice, and they do move UFO books to the fiction section! (Shame on wimpy ass bookstore!)

I tell you, if some full of himself smug skepti-bunkie came into my bookstore and told me what he thinks about UFO books or ghost books, etc. being moved to the fiction section, I'd be mildly polite (business you know, to a point) and utterly ignore the twit.

Not that I own a bookstore. But one of my dreams is to own a groovy little UFO bookstore on the coast. Then again, if I did, I can't see a skeptoid coming in there in the first place.

Saturday, May 22, 2010

George Hansen Returns to Paratopia!

An excellent interview (once again) with the very excellent George Hansen on Paratopia. As host Jeremy Vaeni says, this is not your usual Hansen interview!

Paratopia as we know it is counting down; sad to say. But exciting to see what new form it will take.

Monday, May 17, 2010

Skeptoid Chatter on the JREF: McMinnville UFO Fest

I was surprised to find that the skeptibunkies at the JREF have created a thread devoted to the McMinnville UFO Fest.

Among the expected and usual, is this comment from “kittynh” (who likes to play UFO researcher; explore the history, if you have the inclination) on Travis Walton:
TRAVIS WALTON is still raking in money on the UFO thing?
Yeah, he and all other UFO researchers and witnesses are rolling in the dough, as we all know. That’s how we can afford our secret underground tin foil encased villa in the Mediterranean.

“Gord in Toronto” reassures that:
The UFO folks are "Mostly harmless"* and it's not likely that you'll be inducted into any cult.
Of course there were a few members who posted this infamous link to the Trent UFO sighting (of which the McMinnville UFO conference/fest is in homage to) that rabid skeptoid Robert Sheaffer “debunks” the Trent case. Sheaffer is not only among the most loathsome of skeptics, he’s a raging misogynist.

As I posted on UFOMystic a week or so ago, (A Ha! I Knew It; Skeptics Infiltrate McMinnville UFO Fest) the skeptics do intentionally infiltrate the McMinnville UFO conference, as no doubt they do all over the country at various UFO conferences. I hadn’t heard any skeptic questions asked during the Q&A this time, but I did leave while they were still taking questions at all three presentations. So it’s possible I missed something skeptoid wise. I know in years past they asked ponderous, pedantic and generally stupid questions, though entertaining.

Besides the skeptics not being overt this year, I also missed the religious zealots who like to sing and shout at UFO conference attendees. Maybe they were there and I missed them or maybe they decided to cool it this year; don’t know.

Related stuff:
McMinnville, Oregon UFO: Festivals and Hoaxes


Cross posted at Oregon L.O.W.F.I.

Sunday, May 9, 2010

Queen Regina Appearing Nightly in Vegas!

Don't know what was swimming around my subconscious last night, but I had the following dream and this is the perfect blog to share it. . .

The dream takes place in one of my many recurring dream-scapes; this one is my shabby, rather sad, dilapidated beach town setting. I work for a school, of sorts. It's more like a group of instructors -- of which I am one -- and we contract out to schools to teach everything from academics to arts, dance, sports, etc and also tutor. These classes take place at any time; before regular, "real" school or after, in the summer, and so on.

We're having a meeting inside a small conference room, at night. It's a little dim in here and shabby, like everything else in this town. In our hands is the sandstone colored paper with the agenda on it. I see listed all kinds of classes: painting, math, basketball, ... and, psychic. I think, "Psychic, that's weird, oh, they must mean physics of course, which is also a little weird, kind of advanced for us, but oh well ... "

Our supervisor is assigning the classes to everyone; "Joe, you'll do art, Cheri, you're doing the basketball camp, ..." and then, "Regan, you're doing the psychic class." What??!! I say I don't know how to teach a class and she tells me some things: one, tough, its how it's done around here as I well know, you take what you're assigned, and if I want a job, I'll take  it. And two, I'll do fine, don't worry about it. Most of all, three, I'm not exactly teaching the class, I'm performing. As a psychic.

"In fact," she tells me. "Get ready, and buy something glitzy and bright and theatrical, because we're going to Vegas in a couple of weeks to teach."

That strikes me as odd; what kind of school travels to Las Vegas to teach? But I'm also kind of excited. This could be fun. Now I'm worried about the clothing part; I don't have the money to buy something la-dee-dah. But I'm good at finding things in Goodwills and the like. I end up finding a great multi-colored sequined belt that I wear with a black top and pants.

But before we get to Vegas, I do some "shows" on the beach. As it always appears in my beach town dream-set, there's a concrete or stucco wall, painted white, about four feet high, that runs along the sand between the houses and small buildings and the beach. The wall is crumbly and chunks of the stucco have fallen off, the paint is peeling...

I'm up on the sand. It's dusk. The audience sits in chairs on the wet sand, their backs to the sea. I have a member from the audience up with me, in a chair. Also with me is a new instructor, I'm teaching him the psychic ropes.

I whisper instructions and comments to this teacher; a young man, as I go along. the audience member is a man in his early forties, maybe. His name is something like Alan Landis, or Landley. I start off calling him "Mr. Landley" but after a bit, call him Alan. Then I ask him: "Is it all right if I call you Alan?" He nods. He's in a half trance like state.

I tell the instructor that this is part of the "game," -- using the "victim's" last name out of respect first, then when he feels comfortable, use his first name, to make both him and the audience feel cozy and like we're all one big family just having fun. I say other things to the instructor as I go along, bits of advice, explanations on what I'm doing. I make a joke to the audience, then say to the instructor: "Keep the audience in on it, in on the "joke" that's between you and them, at the "victim's" expense, who isn't aware of everything. Another thing I tell him is: "Keep the patter, keep going with confidence, and be quick."

I give my predictions and my insights, tell Mr. Landley what I see. The thing is, none of this is a lie, none of this is a hoax, or a deceit. It's all true. I tell this to the instructor: "It has to look like this is just a fun unreal game for the truth to get to people. We can't come out and be serious. Make it look easy, fun, and of no account as far as any useful meaning. The thing is, it's all utterly, completely really meaningful. As hell."

As I go along, and have the audience eating out of my hand, and Mr. Landley open and vulnerable to me, I give my more serious insights. I tell him things only he would know, and this astounds everyone. While I, we, are all having fun, it slowly dawns on most everyone out there this is real stuff.

Now I'm in Vegas. I've gotten really good at this stuff. I'm still a little nervous; not for the psychic part, but more mundane matters. I'm having anxiety over being out of my comfort zone, in a new town, and on my own. Where's the bus, where's the rest of my co-workers? I'm out in the boondocks of Vegas. Certainly not on the strip, but in some weird little dinky "theater" with about five people in the audience. I'm billed as Queen Regina. I do my thing. Even though it's in the middle of nowhere, and I'm a bit lost, and there's only less than a dozen people interested at all, it's good. I'm having fun, in my high heels and multi-colored sequined belt. Word is getting around about me; in a good way. Despite the carnival aspect of all this (after all, I really do come from circus folk) it turns out I am a very good psychic.

Saturday, April 3, 2010

Santa Poll on JREF

I've been noticing a lot of Christmas buzz lately, and it's not even summer, let alone the Fall, let alone winter, let alone December. On Facebook for example, all the little Christmas apps are up and being sent back and forth; I've received dozens of "gifts" for my tree, invitations to join so and so under the mistletoe, etc. Over on the biggest and best of the skeptoid message boards, the JREF, is a new poll: ">"Is Santa real in your household?" Oy. Most say no, a few say yes. To be expected. A little scary, some of the posts, on what they've chosen to tell their kids. One said she didn't want to get into a thing with her relative over having to do "tooth fairy duty" -- sigh. By the way, don't you think the vintage Santa looks like Amazing Randi?

Article: Ten Phenomena That the Scientific Community Can't Explain

Ten Phenomena That the Scientific Community Can't Explain contains probably the usual and expected items. Among the categories: UFOs. Science can't explain them, and no one else can either.
In popular culture, the concept of UFO is usually taken to mean a spaceship flown by aliens.
I'm not so sure it's fair to put it all on "popular culture" while ignoring the fact that the pathological mega skeptic crowd has latched onto the false idea that UFOs translates to little green men from space. By using this tactic -- "Everyone knows that when someone (anyone but them that is) talks about UFOs, they mean aliens" -- the discussion ensures that authentic investigation into UFOs never happens. (thanks to Lesley at The Debris Field for link.)

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Tarot! Is! A! Game! Not! Fortune! Telling!


I'm not sure what great revelation J. Neill Furr at Game of Tarot thinks he’s uncovering... his big thing is that Tarot cards were “invented” for game playing, not “fortune telling.” As one headline on his site screamingly insists: “Think you know Tarot Cards? Think again... they were invented for card games not fortune telling!” On another page is the headline: “The Chances are that you have been lied to!”Contrary to popular myth, tarot cards were invented for card games, not fortune telling.

Tarot isn’t “fortune telling” not in the simplistic way he clearly means, but we’ll move on. The assumption, one of them, is that people who read cards are unaware of this astounding revelation. As usual, the skeptoid universe is shown to be one of either/or, black vs. white, dichotomous mindsets that consider most things to be of sinister and dishonest intent.

Furr goes on, and on, and on some more, about all that. But what I find intriguing is his obsession, which isn't at all an unfamiliar trait among the skeptoid, but always a curious one. Furr has a nice website, chock full of information about the Tarot as merely, only, and truly just a game. But he doesn’t stop there, no, he wants to enlist the help of skepti bunkies everywhere:
This web site exists to promote these games to the English speaking world and to a large extent my methods will be that of a sceptic. After all, the two greatest obstacles to my goal are the myths of tarot’s origins and its perceived use as a tool for fortune tellers. I believe that sceptics should take special note of tarot’s history and games and so some of my efforts on this site will be directed at them. I shall also try to enlist your help in this project, as I cannot hope to achieve my goals alone
He also has a little video clip that implores skeptics to help with his mission: “to be a resource for all -- both to take up the fight and to enjoy!” (You have to love the fact Furr sees a fight where none is intended... that’s one of the things I love about skeptoids. They’re so, well, damn contentious.)

There’s also stuff you can buy, promos to help spread the word about Tarot; the real Tarot as game that is, not Tarot as “fortune telling,”  and pdf downloads, graphics to print out, links, a whole universe of resources to help the skeptic get the message out about Tarot as a game, not fortune telling, damnit!

He’s very specific about all this, and his purpose;for example, none of his stuff available for download can be used if:
3. The text may not be used to promote anything other than the games of tarot and the associated web sites. If your web site promotes tarot games.

4. The text may not be used in the in association with or in the context of the promotion of occultism, religion, or any form of divination.

Monday, March 29, 2010

It's Nice To Be Mentioned

It's always nice to be mentioned, even when that mention comes from uber-skeptoids, and even when that mention has nothing much to do with anything.

A skeptic blog called Miss Rants begins a recent post thusly:
Go Read this blog; then immediately return to my blog to hear commentary: Snarly Skepticism…(and Unofficial JREF Watch).
This is a blog devoted to attacking people who are sceptical of paranormal activity (of course, you already know that because you went and read the blog. Trés bien fait!)
Well, thanks for the plug! But, while the given of the actual purpose of this blog goes over her head, as it does all "skeptics," ("attacking people who are skeptical . . .") there's no there there, as Gertrude Stein once said. Miss Rants just continues on about the silliness of woo, without addressing anything specific on this blog. But I'm not quibbling; her interest and link just goes to show "they" have stopped by to take a look around.

Ironically, Miss Rants is a Christian, and sees nothing odd about the fact she doesn't believe any of that woo stuff, but does believe that Jesus rules. Bigfoot is silly:
Reason and science tell me that there is not a breeding population of giant apes living outside of Seattle;

(I always love it when the skeptics assume BF is just a giant ape, to be fair, so do a lot of Bigfoot researchers. . .)

But Jesus is real:
Of course, they also tell me that a Jewish carpenter from Nazareth who lived on the outer-edge of the Roman Empire 2,000 years ago was not the omnipotent ruler of the universe. That I can expect the former but reject the later is a sign of my own intellectual laziness perhaps. Even more so then, I appreciate the sceptical. I cannot help but think that blessed are those who do not believe what they do not see.

At least she acknowledges the "intellectual laziness" but I would argue it isn't lazy at all.  While I don't believe in any Christian type construct of Jesus/God, or the Bible as literal truth divinely inspired or dictated by said God, and so on, I am not an atheist by any means, (not even a secular humanist since they bash woo just as much as any old skeptibunkie)  and have faith in all kinds of things, including, for lack of a better term, a spiritual system. 

I have direct experience of some things, and no, I'm not going to debate anyone -- certainly not skeptoids, I mean, have you been reading this blog? -- about the validity of those direct experiences. Interpretations of those experiences are one thing; manipulated to fit into one's personal cultural/religous/soceital framework, blah blah, though I will not dignify any of those with entertaining suggestions I'm mentally ill or have a brain tumor.  UFOs are not something to believe in, any more than you believe in a toaster. (And for Pete's sake do not say "we know what a toaster looks like, but we don't know what a UFO looks like!") (Actually we know what UFOs look like; they look like triangles, and cylinders, orbs, spheres, stars, diamond shapes, cigars, ... we have thousands of pictures of them all over the world.) For that matter, Bigfoot isn't something to believe in; I don't pray to a Bigfoot carving in my room or go to Bigfoot church.  I have what I suppose you could call "faith" aliens exist, based on personal experience and evidence, but I don't KNOW for a fact. And either do you.

Well, seems I went off on a little rant/tangent of my own there. Anyway, thanks for stopping by!

Monday, March 22, 2010

JREF Bigfoot Thread Watch

This topic almost deserves a blog of its own.

Anyway, in the "What was that again, cognitive dissonance, irony calling" statement of the day, comes this comment from a BF thread over there titled 'Calling All Skeptics! Help Kitakaze End PGF Controversy - Pitch to Discovery Channel' certainly a long winded title. Thread starts off with the somberly serious self-congratulatory and yet endearingly naive plan to make a BF documentary that will forever silence BF believers and gratify skeptics. Then the thread devolves into fights amongst the debunkers themselves, namely William Parcher. But anyway, on the issue of why so many damn BF threads about something that doesn't exist by people who don't think it exists, this statement by "Blackdog":
I think people are wasting their time in the woods chasing BF but I don't think it's a waste of time to discuss it.

I love it. Just a delicious example of debunkers and their evil ways of moving goal posts, contradicting themselves, general dishonesty, and utterly oblivious to their own surreal exhibitions of humor.

So; going out and actually doing physical research and investigation in hopes of finding physical evidence, proof even, hopefully vs. staying at home and typing on your computer endless non-productive arguments about how something you don't believe exists, doesn't' t exist.

Sounds rational to me!

Sunday, March 21, 2010

James Randi: "How To Say It"

I cannot abide the agendas of the JREF and all its cult followers, James Randi's philosophies, and all  the rest of the uber skeptic, pathological debunker lies, tactics, behaviors, manifestos, shilling, and well, you know. The usual. There's nothing good I can say.

But, I do have to say I support Randi's decision to make public the fact he is gay. Here's what he has to say about that: How To Say It.

New Inductee Into Snarly Skepticism Owl Award: James McGaha

I've inducted a new member into the  Snarly Skepticism Owl Award section: James McGaha. Mcgaha quotes we just love:
  • "are you qualified to look at the stars at night?"
  • "pilots are not trained observers ... they're trianed to be pilots"
  • "UFOs are a myth and a magical belief system . . ."
Congratulations Joe! 


Monday, February 15, 2010

SetiQuest and "Strange Bedfellows"

This is an oldie but goodie (August 2008) from Greg Taylor (The Daily Grail, Darklore journals, etc.) on the disconcerting liaison between SETI and (then, now CSI) CSICOP. SETI and CSICOP - Strange Bedfellows. I was prompted to post this because of Greg's current post on The Daily Grail about Dr. Jill "The Moon! The Moon!" Tarter and her creation "SetiQuest."

Monster Quest's Mothman Episode; Coleman Review

I saw it; have been looking forward to this episode ever since a producer from the show contacted me several months ago in preparing for the program. I think I put her off; for I went into an esoteric direction (a la Andrew Colvin, who, I noticed, the show did not mention) and she nervously-laughingly said she didn’t want the government following her, dismissing anything to do with all that. I didn’t think much of the program, even though Nick Redfern was on, which was great. But overall, didn’t think much of it and Coleman makes a good point: where was the historical background? However, of all the things that annoyed me the most was the inclusion of uber-skeptic (“I’m not a scientist, I have an English Lit degree, but I play one on TV” Joe Nickell) who smirked non-stop while gleefully cutting out plywood Mothman figures to test the accuracy of witnesses. This man has an intriguing fixation with owls; for, after all, not only are owls the explanation for Mothman sightings, owls are the explanation for the Flatwoods creature, and the Kelly Hopkinsville entities, says Nickell.

Here’s Coleman’s review on his blog Cryptomundo.

Thursday, December 31, 2009

Cryptomundo's Top Ten Worst Bigfoot Stories of 2009

Loren Coleman at Cryptomundo brings us Top Ten Worst Bigfoot Stories of 2009

What's my favorite worst story? Not sure I have one, they all make me sad; but then again, as I always rant about the UFO arena, Trickster games are to be expected, and that's true for crypto world as it is for any other estoeric/paranormal/Fortean realm.

I suppose my favorite worst is number 7 on the list:  "Teen Created Nutmeg State’s Bigfoot Hoax" about what police found after investigating a woman's report to police she had seen a Bigfoot:
Police threw out a dragnet, and said they searched and found a 16-year-old male subject dressed in a gorilla-like costume. The teenager told officers he was standing at the intersection of Unquowa and Sturges roads, waving at passing cars while friends watched.
I'm always amazed at people who think it's funny to put on a Bigfoot type costume and run around highways and the woods...there are so many trigger happy people out there who shoot at anything that moves that has fur. And if they think it's a Bigfoot, many people wouldn't hesitate to kill themselves one. 

As Coleman himself says in the post, "Thank goodness we get to start all over again in 2010."  

Reposted on my blog Frame 352: The Stranger Side of Sasquatch

Chopra vs. Shermer!

Lesley at Debunklicans has posts and links to the Deepak Chopra - Michael Shermer fight. Interesting insight into Shermer; as Lesley points out, he used to be a "Christian Fundie." Read more here.

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Prescott on Skeptics and John Edward

Michael Prescott has a very enjoyable piece on his blog about the pathological skeptic and medium John Edward in Bird Droppings.

Thursday, October 8, 2009

UFO Media Matters: New Rules

From UFO Media Matters, "New Rules" -- I love it. Thanks to Lesley at Debris Field for the link.


Check out my published content!

Friday, August 28, 2009

A great quote from Lesley Gunter (The Debris Field, Gray Matters, etc.):
Owls always get blamed for fortean/alien stuff, they are the weather balloons of the paranormal creature world.

So, to paraphrase slightly: "Owls; the weather balloons of the paranormal!"

Monday, August 24, 2009

When Skeptics Go Oh So Baaaaaaaad. . . Tyson on UFOs

Usually pleasant enough uber-skeptic Neil DeGrasse Tyson on UFOs, at the Amazing Meeting in Las Vegas, NV. This is so bad, because it's so damn wrong. Surely, surely (I know, don't call me Shirley) he knows better. After all, he's intelligent, right? Right? Thanks to The Daily Grail for the item.

Okay, can't help myself, but I'm going to respond to this. First, for your viewing pleasure. Or, not:


On second thought, you know what? I can't go on. You either get it or you don't.

Source: The Daily Grail: When Skeptics Fail

Monday, August 10, 2009

Sunday, August 9, 2009

Cool Beans: Links to Moi on the JREF

A Trickster's Realm column I wrote awhile back on the JREF threads on Bigfoot, as well as this blog, got the notice of one of the more snarly skeptics over there.

Friday, August 7, 2009

Pathological Pelicanist Alert: "Action Skeptics"

Following one of the many links offered on the SCEPCOP site (see post below) I found the "Action Skeptics" blog. One of the most telling, as well as annoying, tactics/personality traits of the pseudo skeptic is their attitude. Far from a true skeptic view of things, they're on the attack. Action Skeptics, for example, have as their sub title: "annoying stupid people, one woo at a time."

Check out my published content!

Anti Pathological Skeptoid Site: SCEPCOP

SCEPCOP. a lot of interesting stuff on there. He goes after New Age "we create our own reality" stuff as well, even though he writes that he is a New Age kind of guy. I like that; I'm New Agey my own self but some of the stuff swirling around it does get to be like anything else; ego driven, self important, empty feel good on the surface b.s. But that's a given. I do believe we help to create our own reality by the way, but so much of that belief is so trivialized and misunderstood. . .anyway, that's another story. Check out SCEPCOP, there is a lot of material there to explore.

Sunday, August 2, 2009

JREF Thread: Monster Quest Killed Bigfoot!

Here's a brand new Bigfoot thread on the James Randi "Educational" message board: The History Channel and MonsterQuest Murdered Bigfoot. (This thread makes, oh I don't know, stopped counting, something like the 45th separate thread about Bigfoot on a forum that doesn't believe Bigfoot exists?) The OP writes that he once accepted the possibility BF could exist:
I use to enjoy believing in the possibility that oddities such as Bigfoot could exist. I would use the same arguments Squatchologists used by citing the coelacanth and lowland gorilla to justify this belief.

But since, in his opinion, MonsterQuest and The History Channel have exploited the topic instead of being Really Very Scientific and All, his dreams are shattered. It's kind of cute in a bittersweet way when uber-skeptics no longer have pixie dust in their eyes.

None of that bothers me but the posts from the uber skeptics who believe it is their mission to contact TV programmers and urge them to rid the world of woo annoy me, as this poster comments:
I have sent nasty notes to both History and Discovery about their programming. Infuriating in that they are quite capable of fielding good, solid stuff that lives up to the name of the network, and also the silliest woo imaginable.

"Nasty notes?" Well no wonder.

It does all get down to entertainment and the whims of producers, whether it's a skeptic show, a woo show, or what. As much as I like UFO Hunters, I realize it isn't ultimately up to the show's hosts, it's up to the ones behind the cameras. It's true with all shows on television.

That's beside the point really. Look, if you don't like Woo TV, don't watch it.

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Woo TV: Humanoids and Black Balloons


Recently Monster Quest aired an episode about humanoid and "monster" bird sightings, mainly in Mexico and California.(Terror in the Skies.) It was an all right episode; though why they threw in that poor dead skinless,diminutive creature is a mystery. The connection between teeny monkey-like critter and large flying creatures is a very thin one.

Sometimes Monster Quest thinks it's a good idea to bring on a skeptic, and this episode had debunker "skeptic" Joe Nickell. He of the Owl Theory. (Nickell is famous for his explaining away Mothman, Flatwoods and the Hopskinville entities as misidentification of "owls.")

Nickell was not introduced as a skeptic, but as a "paranormal researcher" (or investigator, forget which. Either way...) While technically it's a true enough label, since after all, Nickell does "investigate" these things, it's also disingenuous. Anyone who is a member of CSI and writes for Skeptic Magazine is a skeptic, almost always a debunker, but not a paranormal researcher. He doesn't get to appropriate the term.

Monster Ques
t showed video of the weird gliding humanoid figures seen in Mexico and Santa Monica, California. Nickell decides to try out ways these things could be hoaxed, or, mistaken... so he gets himself lots of black balloons, and says, paraphrasing here, that "a celebration goes on, balloons get released, and people see things." My first thought, unless I'm missing something cultural, is what kind of "celebration" is it if there are black balloons?

He lets the balloons go, not a close match. Too spread out. He tightens the bunch of balloons; a bit better, but, still not good enough. He then tightens the balloons, getting them together in a few bunches, binding them tightly in black plastic, like giant Hefty bags. He releases that, and it bobs weirdly, slowly, heavily. . . Pretty close, Nickell decides. Mystery solved.

Another attempt to solve the mystery: analysis of footage in Mexico, and deciding that, based on the high boulders in the area, the thing was on a guide wire and the gliding humanoid was a gondola bringing something from the mines to somewhere else.

Okay, but it wasn't made at all clear if there were active mines, and if gondalas were used. Where was it going? Was there something at the end of this wire nearby that it went to? No idea. And how does this explain the sighting of a similar object in Santa Monica California?

So we didn't find out anything, except some people like to party with black balloons.

Here's a clip from the Monster Quest episode:

And here's a YouTube link (embedding disallowed) that shows a similar thing:"jet powered trash cans."
Now, that one is very interesting. No date given for this, but it seems like it's at least twenty years old. It's possible these "humanoids" are an improved version of the "flying trash can." The fact that the flying humanoids were seen in the same region; Northern Mexico and Los Angeles, is telling. Very possibly the government is testing some kind of drone/surveillance thing, maybe to do with the borders, who knows.

That doesn't answer the question of what happened to the police officer, who was very upset by the whole experience. Could a staged UFO event -- mind control -- be part of the flying trash can humanoid scenario? That's possible as well.

None of these ideas occurred to skeptic Nickell or others. There were either "true believers" or debunkers. Meanwhile, our skies are full of weird things, affecting us in very weird ways.





Check out my published content!

Monday, July 27, 2009

It's a Bigfoot Thread About Bigfoot Threads!

And down the rabbit hole we go; just as I was commenting that the James Randi message boards are still discussing Bigfoot in oh so many ways, I find this thread: Why the Continued Interest in Bigfoot on This Forum?" It's a Bigfoot thread about all the Bigfoot threads! To make it easy for us; the forum provides this link with all the threads on Bigfoot in one easy to access place.

From the Daily Grail: Carl Sagan: "Depth Perception"

Daily Grail editor and writer Greg Taylor has a good post, with video clip of Sagan, on Sagan's explanation of other dimensions and a demonstration of "flatland." Depth Perception.
Taylor comments, in referring to Edwin Abbott's 1884 book Flatland:
Flatland, in my opinion, offers a very good reason why investigation of anomalies is a valid exercise. Certainly, it demands the use of rigorous and honest scientific research; but also it requires an open mind and the willingness to speculate wildly at times.

Also included: quotes from Michio Kaku.

Bigfoot Threads From the Uber - Skeptics

Still here, nothing has ticked me off lately as far as the skeptoid crowd goes, well, except for the given they will be who they will be. Just noticed however that the James Randi message forum is still at it; several new threads about Bigfoot, and older ones still active. I stopped counting long ago, but the last time I kept track, there were close to forty different threads about Bigfoot. As I've noted before, for something that the debunkers don't believe exists, they certainly go on about it.

Thursday, July 23, 2009

Bigfoot Threads on the James Randi Message Boards

Well, they're still at it at the JREF message boards; link after link after link after. . . about Bigfoot. I stopped counting long ago, there were so many and a girl has other things to do after all! But I think the count a few months ago, when I stopped keeping track, was close to forty separate threads about Bigfoot. For something they are so damn sure doesn't exist, they sure do go on about it!

So, just finished lurking over there and saw the first three threads in the "general skepticism and paranormal" section are about Bigfoot. The next three aren't, then the seventh one is back to Bigfoot again. Next two aren't, then another BF thread. On the first page alone, with 30 threads, eight are about Bigfoot. I don't think any other subject has generated so many different threads; maybe UFOs and psychics would be the next two categories.

Saturday, May 23, 2009

Keep UFO Hunters on Air

Lesley posted this on Women Of Esoterica, and I'm passing it along. Please sign the petition and keep UFO Hunters on the air!

Bill has just finished filming for Season 3 and I don't know if there will be a Season 4. Maybe you -- plus some pals -- can write to the network and let them know you would like to see more episodes:


or you can sign a petition:


Either way, it can't hurt, and it just might help!

Keeping hope alive!

Thanks!

nb


Check out my published content!

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Revisiting a Classic: The Goblin Universe, and A Word About Sceptics


Revisiting the classic book The Goblin Universe, by Ted Holiday, and an introduction by Colin Wilson. This book is one of those musts for anyone interested in Fortean phenomena.

In the introduction, Wilson refers to Professor James Hyslop, who had this to say about skeptics:
I regard the existence of discarnate spirits as scientifically proved, and I no longer refer to the sceptic as having any right to speak on the subject. Any man who does not accept the existence of discarnate spirits and the proof of it is either ignorant or a moral coward. I give him short shrift, and do not propose to argue with him on the supposition that he knows nothing about the subject.

And, as Wilson writes in the same introduction:
The real problem, I would suggest, is not lack of evidence, but lack of an overall theory to explain the evidence.




Check out my published content!McMinnville, Oregon UFO here

Sunday, April 19, 2009

Insidious Round About Book Banning: Where is the JREF?


In a weirdly under reported story . . .

seems a law was passed in January: The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, which makes it illegal to sell vintage children's books. Vintage being anything printed before 1985. The reason for this is the lead content in printer's ink; fears about harm to children (supposedly) was the cause for the law. I fear that there's far more than some concern over children's health at work here, and I've been writing about it over at Octopus Confessional, American Chronicle, Vintage UFO, and Women of Esoterica.

This isn't a conspiracy, this is fact, and now and then an item about this pops up in print, for example, in my local paper today. The item was from the Washington Post, and appeared in today's paper -- April 19 -- but when I went to look up the article on-line, found that it was from March. Among all the other strangeness concerning this story, why is a three week old item published, instead of newer, more relavant articles about this story?

All over the U.S., booksellers, libraries, etc. are ridding their shelves of books, either putting them in storage or sadly, burning the books. Book sellers found a loophole; supposedly it's okay to sell the books if it's made clear they are collectibles, and are sold to adults who are collectors of vintage children's literature.

So I wondered what the skekptoids at the JREF had to say about this. I rarely look at the other sections on the forum; sticking to the "General Skepticism and the Paranormal" category. Curious, I explored the "History, literature and the arts," section, then the Social Issues and Current Events section, and didn't find any thread on this topic. That's not to say there isn't one, just that I didn't find one. They're too busy discussing ways to manipulate your poor deluded friends and loved ones into coming over to the skeptoid side.

Pink RayGun, a skeptic blog, did post about this, and even alluded to feelings twinges of conspiracies just below the surface.

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Skepti Manipulators, and Proud of It!

One of the scarier things I've read over at JREF, as well as ironic, is The Skeptical Manipulation, by Brian Govatos for the SWIFT newsletter. The piece is scary for its cult like adherence to the skeptoid doctrine that skeptics must, in the name of right thinking, "manipulate" until the skeptibunkie way is the way for all. Ironic, for uber-skeptics never, ever, recognize that this very perception, this way of seeing the world, is the same as any other form of fundamentalism, of a zealotry so strong it's frightening. It's also kind of amusing; I mean, I just never can get over the fact they're so damn serious about this stuff!

Govatos begins by telling us we all like it when others come around to our way of thinking. When others also like the brands, products, foods, movies, books and so on that we like, we are pleased. We try to get the other person to become a Mac person. But here's where we part ways; while what Govatos says is true to a point, it's a matter of degree. Sure, I like it when someone realizes that Macs are better than PCs, or musicals aren't stupid, but I really don't care. I'm too old to care. I have other things to do than worry about whether or not my friends or family use a PC or not, can get into Samurai films, or what have you. I'm certainly not going to waste my time trying to convince anyone; I say my piece, and go about my way.

He then jumps from that idea to one of manipulation -- we all manipulate, he tells us, and that's okay. I agree we all manipulate, and we all know some are excellent at manipulation, but not everyone is a manipulator, not consciously anyway, and not everyone is out to intentionally manipulate others. I'm not. Hell no. Like I said, I'm too old for such stupid games, and have other things to do. I put myself out there, "Here it is!" and you can like it or not.

It's this innate belief of the skeptoid mind set -- that everyone is out to manipulate -- that boggles my mind. What's more, Govatos is proud of the fact he manipulates, and in this article, tells you how to manipulate the poor deluded souls in your life to get them to think rationally.

I think of my own family; some are extremely, almost fundamentally religious and I don't understand it, don't much like it, but I'm not going to argue about it. In fact, I tried that a few times, and didn't like it one bit. I figure it's their business, and as long as nothing crazy is going on, like living on a compound and marrying off children to perverts, it's not my business.

Govatos is proud to be a manipulator, and wants you to be proud to be one too:
Iʼve been fairly successful at this conversion business, you should know. How? Itʼs simple; I employ manipulation. Does that sound dirty? It shouldn't; we manipulate each other all day, every day, and we certainly donʼt make any apologies for doing so. Sometimes it's as simple as letting a friend drive my car. In the driverʼs seat, they can easily have their own "A-Ha!" experience. Maybe they utterly hated my brand of car yesterday, but if they can feel it and experience it for themselves, and recognize that it's better; game over.


The difference is, I don't see things like this as a "game," and I don't give a damn if my friend likes Hondas or not. And letting someone drive my car isn't "manipulating" them anyway; it's letting them drive the car and they can decide for themselves. If they still don't like driving a Honda after they've driven my car, what, am I supposed to make them drive more Hondas til they cry uncle?

In a deliciously ironic moment Govatos writes:
"Skeptical manipulation is an interesting notion because all it really means to do is manipulate people to think for themselves."

Sure, unless of course one entertains or believes any of the so-called kook stuff the skeptic finds so anethemic to their world of rationality.

So how do you manipulate the deluded? Govatos suggests you be "nice" for the IYF (in your face) tactics don't really seem to work; a dawning realization by many skeptoids these days. In fact, Govatos urges, be sympathetic:
I need you to do something that is going to feel absolutely yucky: Sympathize.


In other words, lie. After you've gained the trust of said relative, loved one or friend by being sympathetic, the harassment begins. Don't give up til they've seen the light of rationality. Bombard them with tracts, literature, links, information from Skeptoid World. Using astrology as an example, Govatos writes:
Fun though it may be, donʼt poke fun at the sucker for being part of this crime. Crime? Astrology?! Yes, crime. The crime against his life, the crime of making delusional decisions that affect his future. Heʼs been misled and misinformed. Continue finding ways to open the crack a little wider, so more light can shine on this topic. Donʼt give up on him until he has had his "A-HA!" moment in the driverʼs seat.

And while Govator uses astrology as an example, he says it could be anything at all; the technique is the same.

This is where it gets a little scary:
You should feel obligated to manipulate the bejesus out of those you care about in order to save them from harming themselves in any way. Does this sound a little like religious militance? Maybe a little, but Iʼm confident you can smell the difference. Iʼm not asking you to proselytize, Iʼm only asking that you help when you can.

Fanatics never think they're the ones to blame; they're the saved ones, saving others, don't you know. Govatos asks if we can "smell the difference" -- no, I can't.

If someone, after sharing their opinions and beliefs with me, didn't get the message that "thank you very much, but no thanks" and refuses to respect me, respect my home, my right to think and believe what I want, and continues to harass me -- no matter how nicely or "sympathetically" -- they're a creepy, thuggish bozo. Not someone I would want to know, not someone I would trust.

Seems like the one of the latest memes from Skeptoid World is "be nice, but don't let up -- ever."

Skeptoid Tactics: The Blogsquatcher on "Skeptify-ing"

Blogsquatcher has a good post on skeptoid techniques. This is something I've been commenting about for years. Sooooo many little techniques they use, including of course, the fact they use techniques. Their response to having been called out is to say something disingenuous like "Oh, well, if you mean by "technique" you mean critical thinking and logic, then, why, yes, we do have a "technique" if you will." Bleh.

I love Blogsquatcher's title: Skeptify me: Skeptics and their skepticky ways. In his piece, Blogsquatcher outlines tools the skeptibunkie uses when, er, "debating." For example, he writes:
Skeptics will use terms to name and devalue the position of their adversaries, to marginalize and ridicule them. I think of this as "naming and shaming," because once the position is named, you find yourself ashamed to be in that number.

Skeptoids call those who accept the reality, or even the possiblity, of such things like Bigfoot, as "believers" of course, as Blogsquatcher points out. Also Bigfooters, woos, you name it. Blogsquatcher says, of the term "believers" that it's wrong because, for most who've experienced the unusual, be it Bigfoot or UFOs, there is no "belief" involved:
...they like to call us "believers," implying that our acceptance of the fact that people see and experience bigfoot is an expression of faith, like religious faith. We believe in things unseen. The problem with that, of course, is that many believers have seen. It's what made them believers in the first place.

I don't believe in Bigfoot, Mothman, UFOs, aliens from space or ghosts. I don't pray to them. I don't expect them to save me, heal me, or anything else. I'm not sure that what we call "aliens" are literal ETs, for example. But I believe they exist, because I've either seen them, or, I consider the evidence strong enough to support their existence. All the while however, I realize I could be wrong. Although there's not a strong dichotomy there; right vs. wrong in the sense of real vs. unreal. There's a lot more in between, and that is what the skeptoids cannot, do not, and will not consider, let alone "believe."

Another tool is the "hoax" tool. Blogsquatcher comments on the technique the skeptoid uses to dismiss all UFO, Bigfoot and other paranormal, anomalous events. Since they can be hoaxed, and have been hoaxed, there are no UFOs, Bigfoot, etc. Seriously, does anyone think that kind of thinking on the skeptoid's part is logical and rational?

There is much, much more and I highly recommend his article. Since Blogsquatcher is a Bigfoot blog, his focus is on the skekptiod's tools in relation to Bigfoot, but what he says can be applied to any anomalous, Fortean context.

Shermer's Gorilla Suit Man



(also posted at my blog The Orange Orb.)

Michael Shermer, uber-skeptoid and professional debunker, did an experiment at the recent 2009 Science, Technology and Research Symposium in Charleston to show that Mothman (which he admits to knowing nothing about), Bigfoot (to which he says he does) and other paranormal/Fortean/esoteric/anomalous phenomena are figments of over-active imaginations, but more than that,illustrations of why we lie:
We already know that people lie; that happens all the time. ... The more interesting question is why do people fall for it," he said.

In other words, people who speak of witnessing UFOs or other strange events, are lying.

Sure, people lie about their experiences. They elaborate, embroider, exaggerate and outright lie. They hoax and they pull pranks. They're delusional and mentally ill, they're alcoholics and drug abusers. Some people. And for some people in that category, they present to the world tales of UFOs, strange creatures, aliens and visits to Venus.

Those aside, thousands upon thousands more people without that baggage -- and even with some of that baggage, does not automatically exclude the experience of such phenomena or cause it -- have encounters with the weird that cannot be explained by tired exercises into so-called rationality. Such as Shermer's. (Warning: ad hom ahead. "Smirking Shermer" as I like to call him. Come on, the man smirks for crying out loud. He's so taken with himself.)

Shermer instructs an audience to watch a video of basket ball players, watching for:
the number of times six young people passing basketballs, three of them in white shirts and three in black shirts. He asked the crowd to count how many times the three in white shirts passed the basketball to each other.

Afterward, Shermer had the crowd call out answers. Then he played the video again, telling everyone just to relax and not worry about counting passes this time. And to the amazement of many, about halfway through a person in a monkey suit walked from out-of-frame into the middle of the scene, paused, gave a friendly wave and then promptly walked off screen.


This proves, says Shermer, that people see what they want to see. Er, that means we don't want to see a man in a gorilla suit at the Lakers game?

What it says to me is this: when something weird and unexpected happens, especially in the midst of a mundane event, like a basketball game, we don't notice it. Which then means , that the weird, the unexpected, like say, a Mothman or a Bigfoot, even a UFO, goes right by us. It literally can be in front of our noses and we won't deal with the strangeness. In fact, when something highly unusual is going on, and the one or two people who do happen to be aware of it point it out to others, most people refuse to even look to see for themselves.

Shermer had his own out of body experience. Under laboratory conditions, don't you know. Which proves that no such thing as astral projection and OOBEs occur, since it can be recreated in the laboratory:
Shermer said he once had an out-of-body experience successfully recreated under laboratory conditions. It had nothing to do with his consciousness actually leaving his body.

This is another standard, and very tired meme of the uber-skeptic: that because something paranormal/anomalous can be recreated in the lab, it doesn't exist. Rather, it doesn't exist paranormally; of course it exists, they just recreated it! (The same is said of hoaxes, as the recent hoaxed UFO lights showed: to the skeptoid, UFO hoaxes "proves" that UFOs don't exist.)

Why do we insist upon "believing weird things" as Shermer so often phrases this conundrum of human existence? It has to do with evolution:
As for the reason people believe strange things, Shermer said it is rooted in humanity's evolutionary history and its psychological drive to connect invisible causes to the events around them. That movement in the grass may be the wind or it could be a predator.

Or fairies! It's fairies!

If we think of the movement in the grass as a predator, we're good ... Shermer concludes that if we think the worst: "better safe than sorry" then we believe that forces control the things we can't explain. Like a lion in the grass? Huh?

Shermer's presentation didn't prove a thing, but of course, the choir he preaches to think otherwise.

Soure: Science vs. ESP: Skeptic Ponders UFOs, Mothman

Saturday, April 11, 2009

Tonight: Bill Nye on Coast to Coast

I know, I thought this was bizarre also but it's true; Bill Nye "the Science Guy" is on Coast to Coast right now. Oy.

Friday, April 3, 2009

The Skeptoid's Meme: "The Great UFO Hoax"

Article in Newsweek: The Great UFO Hoax. We know we're in trouble right away with the opening sentence:
If you prefer to keep a little magic in your life—by which I mean believing in the possibility of UFOs...


SIGH. One does not "believe" in UFOs, any more than one "believes" in a car, or a toaster. And do not respond with "We know what cars and toasters look like." Begley can't even get close to the serious consideration of the UFO phenomena; she uses the word "possibility." The point here however is the use of the meme that it's UFOs that are in question. UFOs are not in question. They exist. They've been filmed, photographed, and witnessed by millions of people all over the world. What they are is the question, not that they are. As long as the so-called skeptic insists on framing the UFO phenomena in this way, any authentic dialogue will never happen.

All right. Moving on. Begley continues with the story about two young skeptoids in training who hoaxed a UFO sighting. What Begley and the two young men ignore is the fact that, the lights they sent up in the night sky appeared as something unknown to any witnesses, and therefore, it's a UFO. And in fact, as Kevin Randle points out in his piece on his blog , A Different Perspective, witnesses described exactly what they saw:
The second witness was presented by the news media by way of his 911 call to the police, said, "I walked out of my house, it’s like these parachutes with these, uh, or balloons with these five lights flying over right now."

Seems to me that he hit the nail right on the head. No media types there to attempt to create the mystery for their broadcast. Just a witness seeing the five lights in the sky and suggesting balloons.

The local police, who offered a statement to KDTV said that the best guess was a prank with road side flares attached to helium balloons. Seems to me that the police nailed that as well.



Of course the hoaxers repeated the skeptoid meme that UFO researchers are out to make a quick buck. What ever are they thinking? For every show like a UFO Hunters, which, presumably, everyone makes some money from (and why shouldn't they?) there are thousands of UFO researchers who make very little, if any, money from their UFO interests. Even if they've written books, speak, appear on television, etc. very few make money, certainly not enough to count as a liveable income.

By the way, do Joe Nickell, Michael Shermer, James Oberg, McGaha, Bill Nye, and Randi make money from their skeptibunkie endeavours?

Okay, so the lights were a hoax. And this proves what? It serves as a reminder to be as careful as one can in field investigation; mindful advice for any researcher. It also proves that there are those more concerned with creating distractions from real investigation, research and exploration. For every hoax, there are thousands of non-hoaxes, with no answers. Easier to pull stunts like this within a smug self congratulatory attitude, instead of a brave and honest look into what's going on up there. The hoax, on the surface, may seem to be nothing more than a heads up to everyone to think critically and calm down. However, what really happens when these stunts are performed by the chronically skeptoid minded is that the UFO question has been solved. The meme has already been released: hoax UFO, therefore, all UFOs are hoaxes, duh. The desire and the honest investigation into all things UFO, from sightings to lights in the sky to abductions, will never be pursued because it's all just flares and fishing line; why bother? There's no there, there...and we can go about our business, while ignoring the crazy, shape-shifting, weird objects in teh sky right above our heads.

Most of all, it is the shameful and lazy idea prevalent in the skeptibunkie culture that hoaxes like this "proves' that there are no UFOs. In a reverse way, their efforts and insistence that what they do promotes "critical thinking" does nothing of the kind. For what kind of logic is it that says: "Since there are hoaxed UFO events, there are no UFOs." The mistake here isn't that some UFOs turn out to be IFOs (Identified Flying Objects) or objects with mundane explanations, or that people sometimes make assumptions (ET) and so on. It's the idea that all of UFO research is pointless. In their own words, the two hoaxers wrote:
Does this bring into question the validity of every other UFO case? We believe it does.
No, no it doesn't.

As Greg Bishop wrote on his blog UFO Mystic:
The data would suggest that the skeptics are correct, but the debate has been framed in the wrong context. Fundie skeptics nearly always lump all UFO cases together, as if anything unknown in the sky is representative of all cases throughout history, especially from the 20th century to the present. To this mindset, the lack of hard evidence for one is enough to throw the rest of the UFO reports out with the bathwater. This is a classic CSICOP ploy: Find the easiest case to debunk, and frame it as representative of all issues associated with it. at least by their definition. Believers, for the most part, ignore normal explanations because it detracts from their case for unidentifieds, and the “only answer,” which has to be extraterrestrials.


Hoaxes like this do not solve or answer a thing. They don't put UFO research to shame. They are distractions, time wasters; as well as reminders to be ever cautious, not a bad thing. But any smug feeling on the part of the "skekptic" that this hoax, or any hoax, somehow showed up UFO research in a bad way is misguided at best.

Monday, March 30, 2009

From The Daily Grail: "Misdirected Search for God in the Brain"

Good post from The Daily Grail on scientists who insist we're hard wired to believe in God, god, gods, .... that's all a matter of wiring, brain stuff, biological destiny, that we "want to" see ghosts, aliens, God, etc.
This "positing" of supernatural beings, and variations on the theme (e.g. 'people want to believe that something is in control of life, and so posit a supernatural being to cool their anxiety') seem like instances of trying to be too intellectual, and ignoring an obvious fact: that people *see* and *talk to* supernatural beings. They have since the beginning of recorded history, and probably before. We can argue as to whether they are creations of the mind, or objectively real (or on the spectrum between), but there is no 'positing' required. Perhaps for left-brained researchers who don't have the ability to interact with the 'other', but not for a large amount of people.

JREF Watch: "Skeptical Activism"

Skeptical activism, and a pdf you can download for free with tips on how to be actively skeptical in your community! Not content with being skeptical, this thread encourages the skeptoid to get out there and work it, baby!

Friday, March 27, 2009

From Blogsquatcher: "Belief and Skepticism Amongst Those Who Believe Crazy Things

Blogsquatcher has an excellent post on the limits those who investigate fringe topics put on other fringe topics. Example:
I'm often amused at how insular the various "fringe science" and esoteric categories are. UFO people laugh at bigfoot people, who laugh back, while both laugh at ghost hunters, who are laughing all the way to the bank. It gets a little ridiculous when you think about it. A bioacoustician, Elizabeth von Muggenthaler, once said, speaking of a Vermont lake monster,

This just doesn't belong in the same category as crop circles or a Sasquatch sighting. It needs to be treated as real. You don't want to minimize the scientific importance of this.


The inspiration for his post came from the comments some Bigfoot people; researchers, etc. made upon hearing his podcast with a "paranormal" Bigfoot researcher. And these are from "believers" -- we expect the knee jerk reactions from the skeptoids, but when it comes from within esoterica...

Lastly, he makes a very good point about listening. Just listening, without judgement, just, listening to the story, the experience, as is. It's a lot harder than it sounds, and for some, it's impossible.

Friday, March 20, 2009

Woo TV: UFO Hunters and the New Guy


Sadly, UFO Hunters has decided to replace Dr. Ted with a skeptoid. The good guys -- Bill Birnes, publisher of UFO Magazine, (yes, full disclosure, I do write a column for them) and Pat Uskert, both looked they just ate rancid prunes when trying their best to put up with this clown, but Kevin Cook, the skeptoid, came off as a smug, know it all, smarmy ass.

As usual with skeptoids and UFOs, Cook made all kinds of assumptions and weird interpretations; Pat says he has a theory UFOs are attracted to areas with certain types of mineral deposits, including gold; Cook makes the leap that Pat "believes ET is coming for the gold." Cook acted like this was a way out kook theory, where, anyone who's studied UFOs in any way knows that there are several researchers who consider this a possibility; and that includes some skeptics.


And for God's sake!!!! Please stop asking "Do you believe in UFOs?" and saying things like "It could be a real UFO." A UFO is something you cannot identify, and that makes it a "real" UFO. It makes it a UFO. Oy, don't get me started. But Kevin Cook made these goofs many times during the episode. Which happened to be a great episode despite Cook's interference; the triangle UFO enigma, including some daylight sighting footage was great.

Which brings us to: Cook's response to that. He views the footage, claims it could be anything. Well, very true. Still, while it could be anything, it's also a fact we don't know what that anything is. Er, um, hey Mr. Skepti-pants, that makes it a UFO. (this after film analysis proved it was an object and not just three lights in the sky ; flares, helicopters, or owls.) Cook is not convinced (it's not clear what he thinks he should be convinced of) things are UFOs, and that's that. But Cook has front loaded (did I just say "front loaded?" And is that a compound word, or two words?) I'm A Skeptic Dammit! act with the beliefs that:
UFOs mean aliens from outer space
There are "real" UFOs, and there are "not real UFOs" (not to be confused with IFOs)
Whenever someone talks about UFOs they're a true believer kook-head
Triangles and other UFOs make noise
and so on . . .

So when a witness to an extremely low flying triangle said the object (UFO) did not make any noise at all, that only proved to Cook the story was "suspect." Why? Because the UFO didn't make any noise! Kevin, dahling, if you've done the research into UFOs and in particular the triangle UFOs, you would have known that witnesses the world over have reported that the lack of sound, of noise, of buzzing, or motors, or gear grinding, or rumbles, or any noise at all is heard. Occasionally a low level humming has been heard, but that's about it. I myself saw a triangle and there was no noise. No sound. No nothing. As huge as it was, as low as it was, as right above our goddamn heads it was --- no sound. We wouldn't have even known it was there if we hadn't been intentionally looking up at the night sky.

It seems the producers of UFO Hunters have accepted the misguided idea that throwing a skeptic in with the mix is good television. That's a ridiculous idea; like the "happy talk" idea every news producer in this country operates under. Grinning preening talking heads spouting off about empty headed inane trivia while just two minutes ago reporting on the daily horrors. But I digress.

Here's hoping UFO Hunters gets rid of the new skeptoid, or that at least things improve. Maybe Cook will get a clue. I'm certainly not going to give up watching the program. Let's hope Cook gets off his snarky little horse and stops with the smirking , and shows us he's actually done some research about UFOs.

Sunday, February 8, 2009

More BS FRom CSI on Big Sur by Robert Hastings



Excellent item up at the UFO Magazine blog from Robert Hastings: More BS from CSI on Big Sur. In this piece Hastings quotes from Terry Hansen, author of the Missing Times:News Media Complicity in the UFO Cover-up:

Hansen also notes, "...CSICOP [now CSI] members typically publish their thoughts on UFOs and other 'paranormal' phenomena via Prometheus Books, a closely related publishing house that also offers a surprising number of volumes on such topics as child-adult sexuality, prostitution, sadomasochism, and pornography. It would be interesting to know which titles sell better; those devoted to debunking UFOs and paranormal research, or those about sex. Perhaps it's worth pointing out at this point that cross-subsidizing unprofitable activities with profitable ones has been a hallmark of many covert intelligence operations."

The long-time and still-current Executive Editor of Skeptical Inquirer, Kendrick Frazier, worked for more than two decades as a PR Specialist at Sandia National Laboratories-although one will have to look high and low to find references to that employment in his magazine and even in his self-published online biography. Sandia Labs is one of the U.S. government's most important nuclear weapons labs.

As I commented at the UFO Magazine blog, this isn't one bit surprising, in fact, I'm always astonished at the responses of those, including some within the UFO field, who find this news, or worse, as some sort of over-reaction.



For more on this subject, see George P. Hansen (I don't think there's any relation) in his The Trickster and the Paranormal and CSICOP: An Overview

Friday, February 6, 2009

Stan Friedman: Debunkers At It Again


Frank Warren at UFO Chronicles hosts an article by Stanton Friedman: Debunkers At It Again. An excellent factual article by Friedman (we would expect nothing less) where he takes the Skeptical Inquirer's resident debunkers apart. In the article the usual pathological skeptics (McGaha, Nye, Nickels, etc.) simply lie. Opinions are one thing, intentionally misrepresenting the facts and data is another. It’s called lying. Even though I understand that the Trickster is doing its thing and is an innate part of paranormal phenomena, and even though I understand the debunkers and the disinformation artists are supposed to do exactly what they're doing, there are days where I just can't abide their antics. Thankfully we have people like Friedman who still say it like it is when it comes to these clowns.

As Friedman points out, many of these debunkers, though not all of them, have backgrounds in non-science fields. Stage magic, literature, etc. Having a science background does not make one credible, or, not, in regards to UFOs and the esoteric. However, it does become a major issue when one presents oneself as somehow immersed in a vague, ever shifting idea about “science” in order to dissemble UFOlogy and related phenomena.

Saturday, January 24, 2009

"Rand-Aid"

Those smug blowhards Penn and Teller appeared on Name That Lyric; donating their winnings to charity. Their charity of choice was the JREF. As Greg writes on The Daily Grail, with all the real crap going on in the world (you know, poverty, disease, things like that) these two bombastic twits decide to give their money to the JREF. Read about it here.

Thursday, January 1, 2009

"Debunklicans"

Lesley, who runs The Debris Field, Beyond the Dial, etc. and is a Blog Queen, has a brand new blog: Debunklicans. I love it!

Sunday, December 28, 2008

This will drive you insane, but if you can handle it and be all Zen like, it is interesting. James Mcgaha uber-pathological skeptoid supreme, on the Larry King Show, doing the usual anti-UFO thing.

Monday, December 22, 2008

JREF Thread: Debating Santa


The uber-skeptic curmudgeons are discussing Santa. I don't do Christmas as Christmas, being as how I'm not a Christian. But the lights, the spirit of the season, goes back pre-Christianity anyway, so I'm good. As far as Santa goes, he's not Christian either. Telling kids about Santa isn't going to warp their little pre-skeptibunny minds.

There's one skeptic over there who posts that he told his daughter, when she was two, --- when she was two! -- there was no Santa. Christ, I'm Jewish for crying out loud and wouldn't do that! Someone else says it's "lying" and why lie to your kids? Oy. And so on.

Some of the posters are teachers, which is a bit scary. I've worked with students in many different capacities, for over twenty years. It's interesting as hell to listen to kids talk amongst themselves about Santa, Christmas, God, Jesus, ghosts, . . . when they ask me if it's true, I redirect them. I stay neutral. I don't inject my opinions and beliefs onto them. (7th and 8th graders, depending on the context, sometimes.) I

To be fair not all the skeptoids agree with this view; point is, someone just had to get up a thread about it. It's like it's genetic or something.

Raising your kids to be an uber-consumer like many Americans; bad. Ignoring those in need, now or at any time of the year, bad. Santa and elves and colored lights? Small gifts given in the spirit of love? Not bad at all.

I "believed" in Santa (mixed household) and I don't remember when I realized he wasn't real. It didn't make me mistrust adults or throw me into an existential abyss of gloom.

Saturday, December 20, 2008

Dean Radin: Intentional Chocolate And The Will To Disbelieve


Dean Radin, on his blog Entangled Minds, writes about a negative article in the L.A. Times about "intentional chocolate" a study Radin was involved with. In that study, Radin found that chocolate that was positively focused on by "experienced meditators" had a beneficial effect. Among other things, Radin asks why it is that some are so intent on disbelieving, even when data doesn't support the disbelieve? Instead of looking at the data, the Times writer does what many an uber-skeptoid does; simply trivialize such data and the people doing the studies as unimportant. And if they can't believe such a thing is possible because it can't be figured out how, and why, it doesn't exist. Even though it does. (for example, psychic or precognitive events: you can't see what hasn't happened yet is the assumption, so therefore you're: lying, fooled yourself, cherry picking, a victim of confirmation bias, and so on.)