Bay Area Skeptics Information Sheet - 1989 09

Magazine Overview

Title: BASIS
Issue: Vol. 8, No. 9
Date: September 1989
Publisher: Bay Area Skeptics
Editor: Kent Harker

This issue of the Bay Area Skeptics' newsletter, BASIS, features several articles focusing on skepticism, pseudoscience, and the debunking of paranormal claims. The main article details a legal case involving an Australian psychic, while other pieces critique a scientist's misrepresentation of physics and highlight the media efforts of skeptics.

Down-Under Psychic Sinks

This article, written by Mark Plummer, details the downfall of Australian psychic John Fitzsimons. Plummer, formerly the head of the Australian Skeptics, recounts how Bob Steiner, founder of the Bay Area Skeptics, conducted a hoax in 1984 by posing as a psychic named "Steve Terbot." Steiner attracted media attention and invited Fitzsimons to a meeting. When Steiner revealed the hoax on Australian National TV, he critically singled out Fitzsimons.

About a year later, four of Fitzsimons' followers approached the Australian Skeptics. They reported that Fitzsimons' reaction to the TV exposé had caused them to question his claims. These followers had been led by Fitzsimons to believe they would become psychic mediums and healers and that the world would be destroyed by a nuclear holocaust in 1984. One follower, Judith Kelly, lost about 45 pounds on a water diet prescribed by Fitzsimons, leading to hospitalization for malnutrition. Two others, Reinhart and Stratemeyer, nearly had their marriage break up due to Fitzsimons' counseling.

Plummer referred the disillusioned followers to an attorney. Three of them, including Judith Kelly and the Stratemeyers, sued Fitzsimons for fraud, seeking $A69,588 (approximately $55,000) for damages, medical expenses, loss of earnings, and repayment of loans and course fees.

During the trial, Judith Kelly testified that Fitzsimons prescribed a water diet that caused her to lose significant weight but resulted in crippling malnutrition, hallucinations, vomiting, and double vision. She was hospitalized and spent weeks convalescing. She also described a "rock treatment" involving a 35kg quartz boulder and the use of crystals as lasers. Fitzsimons had told her she would become a psychic healer and trance medium.

Kelly's attorney, Felicity Hampel, stated that Kelly had sold her house to pay for Fitzsimons' courses, spending $A13,676, and also sought $A8,042 for medical expenses and lost wages. Kelly testified that she and three other followers rented a house together to prepare for a predicted world catastrophe and that she believed she could influence world events, including those involving leaders like Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan. She also stated that Fitzsimons hit disciples if they gave wrong answers and used personal information to isolate them from friends and family. She was required to list up to twenty sins nightly.

Fitzsimons' attorney, Barry Fox, argued that his followers were adults who should have realized his representations were not being fulfilled. He noted that people continued to attend his classes over a long period despite this.

Fitzsimons, who took over leadership of "The Circle" in January 1980 and had been fascinated with spiritualism since 1978, denied his business was a sham. He admitted to operating a spiritual group called "Aspects" while an undischarged bankrupt. He also acknowledged taking out a mortgage in October 1984, despite predicting a catastrophe. He stated he believed he could be guided by invisible forces. He denied telling students that psychic healing would cure physical ills or that he was conning people.

The judge found Fitzsimons had fraudulently misrepresented his abilities and ordered him to pay $A62,000 ($50,000) to the three plaintiffs. Fitzsimons stated he would continue teaching but with more caution and would use legal contracts.

Critique of Dr. Robert Gange's Radio Program

This section critiques a program aired on "Family Radio" by Dr. Robert Gange, a scientist with advanced degrees. The author, who listened with anticipation, was concerned by Gange's presentation and wrote a rebuttal letter. Gange posed the question, "Can God make a rock bigger than He can lift?" and claimed to explore it from a scientific viewpoint.

The author argues that Gange obfuscated the question by making false and misleading comparisons with scientific principles, leading listeners to believe that scientific ideas are as counter-intuitive and absurd as theistic ones. Gange's misuse of the wave/particle nature of light was highlighted as a blatant example. The author explains that while light exhibits both wave and particle properties, these cannot be observed simultaneously, a concept known as the Principle of Complementarity, which is not a paradox.

The article emphasizes that science is based on formal symbolic logic and empiricism. It states that Gange misrepresented the dual nature of light, implying it was not understood by science and was paradoxical. The author asserts that Gange's approach aimed to legitimize theistic absurdities by drawing parallels with scientific concepts.

The core of the critique lies in the violation of the Law of Contradiction, a fundamental axiom of logic. The author argues that the question of God's omnipotence (being able to do anything) inherently leads to a contradiction if God is also subject to logical laws. The article suggests that religion and science should be maintained separately to avoid "bad religion and bad science."

The Firing Line

This section reports on the Bay Area Skeptics' (BAS) recent media activities. BAS has been actively presenting rebuttals to paranormal claims, leading to increased media attention. Major AM radio stations KCBS and KGO now regularly invite BAS to confront paranormal protagonists.

One notable event was a debate on KCBS' "Nightline" between BAS board member Dr. Shawn Carlson and psychic Pat MacEnerney, which lasted one and a half hours and was described as a "stunning triumph for rationality."

Bob Steiner appeared on both the Jim Eason and Michael Krasny shows on KGO radio. Steiner used magic stunts to entertain and engage the hosts and audience, encouraging them to find alternative explanations for alleged paranormal phenomena. His approach is to educate through entertainment.

A significant event was a 1.5-hour internationally broadcast TV show hosted by Bill Bixby, titled "Exploring Psychic Powers," featuring CSICOP's James "The Amazing" Randi and his $100,000 psychic challenge. This presentation was considered a major blow to paranormalists.

The article also recounts several failed tests of paranormal abilities: a Chicago astrologer's inability to match people to astrological signs, a San Francisco psychic's poor performance on a Zener card test, an L.A. aura analyst's inaccurate reading, a Kentucky dowser's failure to locate water, and a psychometrist from St. Louis's inability to match key chains to watches. San Jose psychic "Sly" Brown refused to be formally tested.

Uri Geller's appearance on the same show as Randi is noted, with the observation that Geller did not submit to any testing. A viewer-audience ESP test conducted during a show is described as potentially dangerous, where 42% of callers chose the wavy lines card, which was the preselected target card. The design of this test is criticized for its potential to create a biased choice due to geometric factors.

Degrees of Folly: Part VI

This is the sixth part of an article by William Bennetta, continuing the discussion on "creation-science." The previous parts detailed an "assessment" of the ICR Graduate School (ICRGS), an arm of the Institute for Creation Research, by the Private Postsecondary Education Division (PPED) of the California State Department of Education in August 1988. The ICRGS promotes the religious pseudoscience called "creation-science."

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the exposure of fraud within the psychic and spiritualist communities, the critical examination of claims that blur the lines between science and religion or pseudoscience, and the proactive role of skeptical organizations like the Bay Area Skeptics in educating the public and engaging with the media. The editorial stance is clearly one of promoting critical thinking, scientific literacy, and a rational approach to extraordinary claims, actively debunking what is perceived as pseudoscience, fraud, and illogical reasoning.

This document is an excerpt from the September 1989 issue of "BASIS", the monthly publication of Bay Area Skeptics. It critically examines the Institute for Creation Research's (ICR) interactions with the Department of Education regarding its degree programs and curriculum.

The ICR's Agreement with the Department

The article details a complex situation involving a committee initially appointed by a PPED officer, Roy W. Steeves, to assess the ICR. This committee, which included individuals linked to the ICR, produced a report that the author describes as "false, misleading," and which promoted the ICR's scientific claims. Despite initial refusal by Department chief Bill Honig, the Department later negotiated an agreement with the ICR on March 3rd. This agreement stipulated that the ICR would revise its curriculum, purging "ICRG's interpretations" from courses counting towards degrees, and conform its teaching to that of accredited schools.

Two legitimate committee members, James Woodhead and Stuart Hurlbert, sent separate reports to Honig, revealing the truth about the ICR. Conversely, Steeves endorsed the ICR and urged Honig to grant approval.

Questioning the ICR's Intentions

The author raises significant doubts about the ICR's true intentions regarding the curriculum revision. Shortly after the agreement, on March 8th, the ICRGS dean, Kenneth Cumming, sent a brochure to a prospective student that described the ICRGS's purpose as "Education, research, and publication in scientific and Biblical creationism." This proclamation, along with the brochure stating program approval by the State of California without mentioning the ongoing Department review, suggests the ICR may have intended to continue its existing practices.

Further evidence against the ICR's commitment to revision is implied by the June-July-August issue of their quarterly devotional booklet, "Days of Praise." The back cover described the ICR as a "UNIQUE complex of evangelistic, missionary and educational ministries," listing the "ICR Graduate School of Creationist Science" as one of its ministries. The author speculates that the ICR intended to "continue doing business as usual."

The Department's Response and the New Committee

The article describes the Department's initial evasiveness and misleading statements following a previous "fiasco" in August of the prior year. However, by early June, the Department resumed responding to inquiries. A form-letter signed by Shirley A. Thornton, on behalf of Bill Honig, stated that the previous committee's decision was to "deny reapproval" and that the ICR was undergoing corrective measures to be verified by a new assessment committee in August. This indicated a shift in the Department's stance.

The new committee, tasked with ensuring impartiality and expertise, was being formed with extra diligence. The author notes that the Department saw the importance of careful selection for this committee.

Members of the New Committee

The members of the new committee, who had just finished their visit to the ICR on August 7-10, are detailed. They include:

• Christopher J. Wills: A geneticist from the University of California at San Diego.
• Richard E. Dickerson: Chief of the Molecular Biology Institute at UCLA.
• Everett C. Olson: A vertebrate paleontologist from UCLA.
• Lawrence S. Lerner: A physicist and historian of science from California State University at Long Beach. Lerner had previously served on a state panel that drafted California's new "Science Framework" and had written articles on creationism.
• Leroy E. Eimers: From Cedarville College, a Bible school in Ohio. Eimers was selected by the ICR as part of the agreement. The author notes that Eimers and his college department were not listed in prominent scientific directories.

At least two of the Californian members, Dickerson and Lerner, had prior experience with creationism and its challenges to science education.

Management of the Committee

The committee is managed by Jeanne Bird, a PPED staff consultant and assistant director, who joined the PPED in the spring. Bird, who has no degree in science or law, was cordial but reticent about her background and experience in managing degree-granting institution assessments.

Sidebar: Meet Professor John

A sidebar introduces D. James Kennedy, a fundamentalist preacher who produces religious programs. It focuses on an interview with John Morris, son of ICR president Henry Morris, on Kennedy's radio show "Truths That Transform." John Morris, who holds positions at the ICR including "full professor of geology," discussed his "geological specialties," such as the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs, and his search for Noah's ark.

During the interview, Morris linked evolution to the New Age movement and Marxism. He claimed there was no evidence for organic evolution, that scientific law showed it couldn't occur, and that evolutionists were abandoning naturalism for a concept where nature is alive and thinking, which he equated to the essence of the New Age and Eastern mysticism. He also asserted that "doctrinaire evolutionists are also doctrinaire atheists."

The author expresses surprise at these claims, noting he had not encountered scientific laws disproving organic evolution or scientists flocking to the New Age movement. He hopes Morris presented these ideas to the new visiting committee.

Call for Volunteers

The publication announces that Bay Area Skeptics (BAS) has doubled its subscribers and needs help. Yves Barbero, who is coordinating meetings and liaising with CSICOP for a potential 1991 convention in San Francisco, needs to give up his newsletter folding and stapling duties. The organization requires a distribution committee and a publicist. A volunteer coordinating committee meeting is scheduled for September 13th.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this excerpt are the integrity of scientific education, the challenges posed by creationist organizations like the ICR, and the role of government bodies in overseeing educational institutions. The publication, "BASIS" by Bay Area Skeptics, clearly adopts a skeptical stance, critically examining the claims and actions of the ICR and questioning the thoroughness and impartiality of the Department of Education's review processes. The author's tone is critical and investigative, aiming to expose what he perceives as misleading practices and unsubstantiated scientific assertions by the ICR.