Bay Area Skeptics Information Sheet - 1989 11

Magazine Overview

Title: BASIS
Issue: Vol. 8, No. 11
Date: November 1989
Publisher: Bay Area Skeptics
Editor: Kent Harker

This issue of the Bay Area Skeptics' newsletter, "BASIS," focuses on the ongoing skepticism towards paranormal claims and the challenges posed by pseudoscientific beliefs. It features a prominent "BAS CHALLENGE" offering a substantial monetary reward for demonstrable psychic abilities, critiques of New Age practices, and a discussion on the conflict between creationism and scientific evolution.

BAS CHALLENGE

The central piece of this issue is the "BAS CHALLENGE," an offer of $11,000 by the Bay Area Skeptics (BAS) for a successful demonstration of any paranormal phenomenon under properly controlled circumstances. The challenge is extended to all psychics and psychic researchers in the Bay Area, urging them to prove their claims in a laboratory setting, moving beyond anecdotal evidence and testimonials. The organization emphasizes its commitment to discovering the truth about psychic powers, whatever that truth may be. They note that James Randi has also offered significant sums, recently increased to $100,000, for similar demonstrations, and BAS will promptly report potential candidates to him. The testing protocol requires mutual satisfaction regarding fairness and unbiased arrangements, with conditions to be agreed upon in advance. The challenge is primarily open to those residing in the Bay Area for practical and economic reasons, though exceptions may be considered.

To pursue the challenge, individuals must submit a letter detailing their claim, their proposed scientific test, what they consider scientific proof (results beyond chance expectations), and agree that all proceedings are on the record and that failure to concur with test specifications will not lead to legal action. The claims themselves must be clear, understandable, specific, logical, testable, significantly accurate, and demonstrably psychic or paranormal. Examples of vague claims are provided, such as "You might have had heart trouble" or "You have to get more centered."

Critique of New Age Practices: The "System" Incident

Joseph Garber contributes an article titled "NO HARM DONE?" which details a concerning incident involving a young entrepreneur seeking funding for an "off-beat project." This entrepreneur had been undergoing physical rehabilitation for a back brace and had agreed to experiment with a goggle "system" for purported psychic benefits. During the experiment, which involved donning goggles and earphones, the individual suffered what was diagnosed as an epileptic seizure or something similar. The seizure was intense, causing physical damage, and as of April of that year, the individual had not fully recovered. Garber contrasts this with other forms of "New Age nonsense," suggesting that while often frivolous or fraudulent, they typically do not induce illness. He concludes that practitioners who actively cause illness are in a "class alone."

Editor's Corner: Critiquing "Is There a REAL Spirit World?"

The "Editor's Corner" discusses a booklet titled "Is There a REAL Spirit World?" published by the Worldwide Church of God. The editor, noting that the booklet attempts to provide evidence for its beliefs by drawing on New Age material, expresses skepticism towards channeling and "other-world communication." The booklet's chapters cover topics like channeling, communication with the dead, and spirit guides. The editor highlights that the booklet cites Dr. Thelma Moss, a UCLA parapsychologist, for an answer on channeling, and Keith Stump for a chapter on communicating with the dead. Stump's chapter is particularly scrutinized for its use of the Fox sisters as an example of mediumship without adequately addressing the controversy surrounding their claims.

The editor, through a letter to Keith Stump, questions the lack of references for alleged genuine mediums and spirit photography, pointing out that while acknowledging many frauds, Stump fails to name specific credible cases. The letter emphasizes the importance of scientific validity and the availability of significant financial rewards for demonstrated psychic powers, suggesting that genuine psychics should be eager to prove themselves. The editor also notes that the Worldwide Church of God's interest in the truth is questioned if they promote untruths from frauds or the deluded. The letter concludes by challenging Stump's use of the Fox sisters as proof, given their later confession of fraud, and offers a rebuttal space in the newsletter.

The Fox Sisters and the History of Spiritism

Further detail is provided on the Fox sisters, identified as the origin of modern spiritism in March 1848. Their house was reportedly haunted, and spirits were said to communicate through coded raps. The sisters, described as preteens, would ask questions, and a spirit would respond with raps corresponding to letters of the alphabet. The method of producing these raps was later revealed by Margaret Fox to involve slipping toe joints. Despite this, prominent investigators like Sir William Crookes were convinced of their genuineness, partly due to their young age. The sisters gained wealth and acclaim, but Margaret Fox later confessed the deception, though she later recanted. The editor questions the motive behind such a confession and recantation, suggesting it was easier to make a dishonest living. The editor criticizes Stump for using the Fox sisters as a primary example of spirit contacts, given the controversy surrounding their claims and confession.

Falsifiability and Pseudoscience: A Debate

Dr. Terence Hines, an associate professor of psychology, writes a letter to the editor, taking issue with Bob Steiner's article "The Blood Readers." Hines argues that the claim that "Big Mafioso" have blood type O is not nonfalsifiable, as Steiner suggested, but rather difficult to falsify. Hines stresses the importance of distinguishing between claims that are merely difficult to falsify and those that are truly nonfalsifiable, meaning no conceivable evidence could prove them wrong. He cites Karl R. Popper's concept of falsifiability as the criterion for scientific status.

Steiner replies, agreeing on the importance of falsifiability and clarity. He reviews Popper's concept, explaining that a theory's scientific status depends on its falsifiability. Steiner uses astrology as an example of a theory that failed the test because its interpretations and prophecies were too vague, making them irrefutable. He then addresses the "Big Mafioso" claim, analyzing the terms "Big" and "Mafiosi" using dictionary definitions. Steiner concludes that the assertion is nonfalsifiable per his interpretation and falsifiable per Hines's, and that the vagueness of the terms makes it difficult to test.

Creationism vs. Evolution in Schools

An article titled "US VS. THEM" discusses the "war" declared by scientific creationists on the classroom. It highlights the fundamentalist creationists' strategy of using courts to circumvent the scientific process. The article notes the "us-them" mentality that pits evolution against creationism, often framing evolutionists as satanic Marxists. A letter from Reverend H. James Hopkins, pastor of the Lakeshore Baptist Church in Oakland, is reprinted. Hopkins, who has moved to a more moderate theological outlook, acknowledges the accuracy of an article about creationists fighting for textbooks. He argues that while the belief of creationism is important, it is a religious statement and should not be taught as science alongside the theory of evolution. He emphasizes that science has a vital role in exploring the cosmos and that burdening scientists with interpreting religious truth is inappropriate. He urges the state Board of Education to let scientists do their work and encourages churches to focus on their own spiritual work.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue consistently promotes a skeptical viewpoint, emphasizing the importance of scientific rigor, testability, and falsifiability. The Bay Area Skeptics actively challenge paranormal claims and critique pseudoscientific beliefs, offering financial incentives for demonstrable proof. The newsletter also takes a firm stance against the inclusion of creationism in science curricula, advocating for the separation of religious belief from scientific education. The overall editorial stance is one of critical inquiry and a commitment to evidence-based reasoning, contrasting with what it perceives as the vagueness and lack of empirical support in paranormal and religious claims presented as science.

Title: BASIS
Issue: November 1989
Publisher: Bay Area Skeptics
Document Type: Magazine Issue

"Degrees of Folly: Part VIII" by William Bennetta

This section of the article continues the critique of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and its Graduate School (ICRGS) in their ongoing effort to gain reapproval from the California State Department of Education. The ICRGS is identified as an arm of the ICR, a fundamentalist ministry promoting "creation-science."

William Bennetta recounts that a committee of examiners, comprising scientists from the University of California and California State University, along with one member from a Bible college, visited the ICR in early August to assess its operations. Henry Morris and his associates, anticipating a negative assessment and potential rejection by the Department's chief, Bill Honig, held a "news conference" on August 31st. Their aim was to garner public sympathy and distribute a misleading account of their interactions with the Department, though this effort met with modest success, with news organizations largely recognizing their desperation.

As of October 13th, the examining committee's report had not yet been submitted, and no other substantive developments had occurred regarding the ICR case itself. However, the ICR men had been active, mailing new religious pamphlets in September. One pamphlet, in particular, is highlighted for its significance to those interested in the ICR case or creationism.

NOAH'S STAND-IN

This article defines creationism as a fundamentalist political movement that seeks to impose religious beliefs, centered around biblical creation stories, onto the general population through political means. The primary focus of creationists' efforts is directed against science, aiming to suppress science education, undermine public understanding of science, and censor scientific inquiry. Their ultimate objective is to abolish science and replace it with "creation-science," a pseudoscientific system designed to affirm biblical narratives and beliefs.

The article notes that while the creationists' campaign against science is prominent, the implications of creationism in other realms are often overlooked. These implications are described as strong and clear, particularly in the creationists' denigration of all religious traditions and supernatural beliefs except their own. Other beliefs are dismissed as fraudulent or as degenerate remnants of biblical truths.

As an example of this scorn, the article cites an announcement by creationists that Australian aborigines' Dreamtime stories are merely defective recollections of events from the Book of Genesis, and that the aborigines colonized Australia after Noah's flood. This claim, made in the creationist magazine "Ex Nihilo" in 1986, was later criticized by Barry Price in a booklet from the Catholic Education Office in Sydney as being "close to blasphemy."

Another example is an unsigned article from the September 1989 issue of "Back to Genesis," a monthly bulletin from the ICR. This article presents the Havasupai Indians' belief that the Grand Canyon originated from a flood caused by gods Tochapa and Hokomata. The narrative describes Tochapa's daughter, Pu-keh-eh, surviving the flood in a hollowed tree, and the subsequent formation of the Grand Canyon by rivers after the floodwaters receded. The article concludes that this story is a recognizable, albeit distorted, version of Noah's Flood, supporting the idea that all peoples descend from Noah and share a common cultural background.

The "creation-scientists" are criticized for promulgating such "absurd stuff" to support their "two-model" doctrine. This doctrine posits only two views of "origins": one from literal biblical readings and the other from natural science, which are presented as mutually exclusive. To maintain this stance, creationists must ignore, twist, or trivialize all other existing views of "origins." The article argues that if they admitted more than two views, their "two-model approach" would collapse, and their arguments for teaching biblical beliefs in science classrooms would extend to teaching religious ideas from countless other sources, which is not their desired outcome. They aim to propagate only fundamentalist beliefs.

Consequently, creationists disdain the aborigines' Dreamtime lore as an "ersatz Genesis" and portray the aborigines as unfortunate individuals who misremember biblical events. Pu-keh-eh is recast as an "ersatz Noah," her tree as an "ersatz ark," and the Havasupai as people whose faulty memories have substituted a matriarch for a nautical patriarch. Similarly, other myths are dismissed as debased versions of biblical tales, presented as false but paradoxically showing the Bible's truth.

The article concludes that creationism and "creation-science" involve the systematic denial or denigration of most of the world's religions, cultures, and cultural history, highlighting the broad social implications of creationism that need wider public awareness, especially among public school officials and teachers. Many educators are misled by media portrayals of "evolution" and wrongly believe that creationists only target science, neglecting history, social studies, and literature. This belief is deemed incorrect.

MOSES'S GENES

The September "Back to Genesis" also featured a one-page piece by John Morris, son of Henry Morris and ICR's administrative vice-president and "full professor of geology." Under the headline "Do The Difficult Questions Have Answers?", he presented ten examples, five of which are highlighted:

2. Where did God come from? The Bible states God is self-existent, a basic assumption of Christianity supported by natural facts.
3. Where did Cain get his wife? Genesis 5 states Adam and Eve had "sons and daughters," whose unions were a genetic problem later but not an issue soon after Creation.
4. Human color differences? Genetic studies show all humans have the same color, with variations in skin-coloring agents.
5. Where did the races come from? All humans descended from Noah's family; language group isolation after the Tower of Babel caused characteristics to adapt to local environments.
6. What about the dinosaurs? The Bible states land animals were created on Day Six of Creation Week, and evidence suggests humans and dinosaurs coexisted.

The author views John Morris's Q-and-A as a representative sample of the "breezy pronouncements" from the ICR and an indicator of the intellectual state of its audience. He interprets it as a declaration that the ICR men have decided against seriously salvaging their "graduate school" and have written it off.

If Bill Honig denies the school's application for reapproval, the ICR men's only recourse would likely be a lawsuit. The author speculates that they will not go to court, as John Morris's recent "performance" (publishing claims about Moses's genes and Fred Flintstone's pets) suggests he does not expect to be a credible "scientist" under adversarial questioning.

S.B.190 BECOMES LAW

State Senator Becky Morgan's bill, S.B.190, which reforms the regulation of unaccredited schools in California, was signed into law by Governor George Deukmejian on October 1st. A summary of its provisions will be included in the next installment of "Degrees of Folly."

THE BIBLE BELT BECKONS

If the ICR men are denied reapproval for their "graduate school" by Bill Honig and wish to continue offering science degrees, they may need to relocate their operations to another state. On September 8th, Donald Drake, acting vice-president of Tennessee Temple University (a Bible college in Chattanooga), confirmed interaction with the ICR regarding a potential move. Drake expressed excitement about the possibility of the ICR relocating to Tennessee, anticipating a more cooperative relationship than they experienced in California. However, he understood that the ICR men intended to "stand and fight it out in California" first.

BAS BOARD OF DIRECTORS

A list of the Bay Area Skeptics (BAS) Board of Directors is provided, including Chair Larry Loebig, Vice Chair Yves Barbero, Secretary Rick Moen, Treasurer Kent Harker, and members Shawn Carlson, Andrew Fraknoi, Mark Hodes, Lawrence Jerome, John Lattanzio, Eugenie Scott, and Norman Sperling.

"BASIS" STAFF

The staff of "BASIS" includes Kent Harker (editor), Sharon Crawford (assoc. editor), Kate Talbot (distribution), and Rick Moen (circulation).

BAS ADVISORS

A comprehensive list of BAS Advisors is presented, featuring individuals with diverse expertise, including William J. Bennetta (Scientific Consultant), Dean Edell (M.D., ABC Medical Reporter), Donald Goldsmith (Ph.D., Astronomer and Attorney), Earl Hautala (Research Chemist), Alexander Jason (Investigative Consultant), Thomas H. Jukes (Ph.D.), John E. McCosker (Ph.D., Director, Steinhart Aquarium), Diane Moser (Science writer), Richard J. Ofshe (Ph.D.), Bernard Oliver (Ph.D., NASA Ames Research Center), Kevin Padian (Ph.D.), James Randi (Magician, Author, Lecturer), Francis Rigney (M.D.), Wallace I. Sampson (M.D.), Eugenie C. Scott (Ph.D., Anthropologist), Robert Sheaffer (Technical Writer, UFO expert), Robert A. Steiner (CPA, Magician, Lecturer, Writer), Ray Spangenburg (Science writer), and Jill C. Tarter (Ph.D.).

CATASTROPHISM: TRUE OR FALSE

This section announces an upcoming event featuring Dr. David Morrison, a CSICOP fellow and head of the Space Science Division at NASA Ames Research Center. The event will address Immanuel Velikovsky's "Worlds in Collision" and related topics, exploring the appeal of such views, their current standing, new proponents, and how scientists approach cosmological questions. Dr. Morrison, author of "Cosmic Catastrophe," has an asteroid named after him and is involved in NASA missions. The event will take place at the Morrison Planetarium.

Editorial Stance and Disclaimer

An editorial note clarifies that opinions expressed in "BASIS" are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of BAS, its board, or its advisors. It also provides information on how to obtain a free sample copy of the November 1989 issue of "BASIS" and details copyright information.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around skepticism towards pseudoscientific claims, particularly those presented by creationist organizations like the ICR. The publication actively critiques the methods and arguments used by creationists, highlighting their perceived denigration of science and other belief systems. The editorial stance is clearly one of critical inquiry and the promotion of scientific understanding, as evidenced by the detailed analysis of creationist literature and the promotion of events featuring scientific experts. The issue also touches upon the definition and societal implications of terms like "mafia," demonstrating a broad interest in critical examination of concepts and phenomena.