Georgia Skeptics - Vol 06 No 01

Magazine Overview

This issue of the "ELECTRONIC NEWSLETTER OF THE GEORGIA SKEPTICS," Volume 6, Number 1, dated January/February 1993, features a critical examination of psychic predictions for 1992 and a report on the 1992 CSICOP conference. The newsletter is published by the Georgia Skeptics, a non-profit group affiliated with CSICOP (Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal), dedicated to promoting critical thinking and scientific inquiry.

Psychic Predictions Found Loafing for 1992

Authored by Anson Kennedy of Georgia Skeptics, this article analyzes the predictive success of a local psychic named Marilyn, who received prominent press in early January 1992. The author establishes criteria for judging predictions: they must be specific, unusual, and verifiable. Marilyn's predictions, published in the free weekly "Creative Loafing," ranged from the mundane to the cataclysmic, but were often vague or easily forgotten.

The article details Marilyn's predictions for the 1992 presidential election, noting her miss on the Democratic vice-presidential candidate and the election outcome (predicting Bush would win, while Clinton won). She also failed to predict the rise of third-party candidate Ross Perot. Her predictions for Mayor Maynard Jackson regarding protests around Memorial Day were also deemed a miss, as she predicted riots would be avoided, contrary to the events following the Rodney King verdict. Predictions for Jane Fonda and Ted Turner were too general or placed in the future. Governor Zell Miller's prediction of playing himself in a movie was false. Political predictions for local figures like Ben Jones and Wyche Fowler were also inaccurate, and she missed the historic senatorial run-off election won by Paul Coverdell and the redistricting that benefited Newt Gingrich.

In sports, Marilyn predicted the Braves would come in third and win the World Series in 1993, but they finished second in 1992. Her prediction for the Falcons winning their division in 1992 was also incorrect. Other sports predictions for 1993, such as Georgia Tech and UGA meeting in the Final Four and the Hawks' NBA chances, were too far in the future or too vague to assess.

Economic predictions for Atlanta were vague, mentioning the communications and film industries converging, but failing to specifically mention Ted Turner's Cartoon Network. Predictions about the homeless gaining support were too general to be meaningful. An AIDS vaccine prediction for 1995 remains to be seen.

Regarding the former Soviet Union, Marilyn predicted a period of unrest, hunger, and poverty, which was general. A more specific prediction was that the czar would return within three years, with two years remaining to verify. Her predictions for local personalities were also largely inaccurate.

In total, Marilyn made 113 predictions for "Creative Loafing." Of these, 89 were considered too vague. Of the 30 specific predictions, 16 were mundane and 14 were unusual. Marilyn had six hits (37.5%) on the mundane predictions, which is less than expected by chance. For the 14 specific, unusual predictions, she had no hits (0%). The article concludes that based on her 0% success rate for specific and unusual predictions, there is little evidence of psychic ability. The article also notes that no psychic accurately predicted major events of 1992, such as the presidential election, Hurricane Andrew, the L.A. riots, or the events in Somalia and Yugoslavia.

Anson Kennedy is identified as the Secretary of the Georgia Skeptics and Chairman of the UFO Subcommittee, and is an electrical engineer.

Report on the 1992 CSICOP Conference

By Jim Lippard of Phoenix Skeptics, this report covers the annual conference of CSICOP, titled "Fairness, Fraud, and Feminism: Culture Confronts Science," held near the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport from October 16-18, 1992. The conference featured five panel sessions on multicultural approaches to science, gender issues in science and pseudoscience, fraud in science, crashed saucers, and the paranormal in China.

Opening Remarks and Skepticism

CSICOP chairman Paul Kurtz opened the conference, discussing various meanings of "skepticism," distinguishing between "total negative skepticism" and "mitigated skepticism," and introducing "the new skepticism" which emphasizes inquiry. He noted that the conference was addressing issues beyond direct pseudoscience and the paranormal, a topic debated by the CSICOP Executive Council.

Multicultural Approaches to Science

Moderated by Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education, this panel explored how culture influences science. Speakers included Diana Marinez, who argued for the importance of multicultural education in science to make it relevant to students from diverse backgrounds and address the paucity of minorities in scientific fields. She suggested using examples from Mayan math, American Indian nutrition, and Diego Rivera murals. Joseph Dunbar discussed "Myths of Melanin," debunking claims of "melanin scholars" about special abilities derived from melanin. Bernard Ortiz de Montellano critiqued the "African-American Baseline Essays," published by the Portland school district, which claimed Egypt as the source of civilization and promoted pseudoscientific ideas about ancient Egyptians.

Unofficial Session on Faith Healing

Ole Anthony, a critic of televangelists, spoke about legal tactics used by Robert Tilton against him and his group's efforts to get FCC rules changed to require verifiability of claims made by living persons on broadcasts. Anthony's organization, the Trinity Foundation, Inc., aims to recapture the "First-Century Christian experience" and has been involved in documentaries critical of New Age philosophy.

Gender Issues in Science and Pseudoscience

Moderated by James Alcock, this session examined the role of women in spiritualism and their underrepresentation at CSICOP conferences. Carol Tavris discussed gender biases in science, distinguishing between "women as problem" and "women as solution" views, and critiqued studies that assume male-centric norms. She highlighted that gender is not a fixed category and people act differently in various contexts. Susan Blackmore explored reasons for the low female attendance at CSICOP, rejecting explanations related to general science underrepresentation or paranormal belief, and favoring the idea that the kind of science CSICOP engages in is not attractive to women. She contrasted "masculine" and "feminine" science as defined by feminist philosopher Sandra Harding.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The newsletter consistently promotes a skeptical, evidence-based approach to evaluating claims, particularly those related to the paranormal and pseudoscience. The Georgia Skeptics, aligned with CSICOP, emphasize critical thinking, scientific methodology, and the importance of verifiable evidence. The issue highlights the lack of predictive accuracy in psychics and critiques pseudoscientific theories and biased approaches in scientific discourse. The editorial stance is clearly in favor of rational inquiry and against unsubstantiated claims, as demonstrated by the detailed analysis of psychic predictions and the critical reporting on the CSICOP conference discussions.

This issue of *Skeptical Inquirer*, Volume 16, Number 2, published in Winter 1992, delves into various topics at the intersection of science, skepticism, and the paranormal. The magazine features critical analyses of parapsychology, the concept of 'viruses of the mind,' scientific fraud, and prominent UFO crash claims.

Parapsychology and the 'Psi Hypothesis'

The issue opens with a discussion of Susan Blackmore's critique of parapsychology. In 1982, at the 100th anniversary conference of the Society for Psychical Research, Blackmore argued that parapsychology had made no progress in a century. She highlighted issues such as findings disappearing with better methods, a lack of prospective experimental design, and the absence of repeatable experiments. Blackmore proposed conducting psychical research without the 'psi hypothesis,' suggesting that since the question 'Does psi exist?' had not yielded success, researchers should focus on seriously understanding experiences and considering that psi is only one possible explanation.

Blackmore also discussed the debate between Ray Hyman and Charles Honorton regarding the Ganzfeld database of parapsychology experiments, as well as Helmut Schmidt's psychokinesis studies and meta-analyses of random number generator experiments. Honorton responded to Hyman's criticisms by developing an automated Ganzfeld experiment, reporting his results in the *Journal of Parapsychology* in June 1990. Blackmore questioned the response from CSICOP and the lack of a meta-analysis panel. She noted that Italian skeptics invited known skeptics and parapsychologists to discuss the future of parapsychology, but the skeptics repeated old arguments and largely ignored Honorton's recent work, exhibiting the same failings Blackmore had criticized parapsychologists for in 1982. Blackmore concluded that the dichotomy of 'psi or not' puts pressure on both sides, and the solution is to abandon antipathy towards negative evidence and avoid taking sides.

Steven Goldberg, chair of the sociology department at the City College of New York, disagreed with Tavris, stating that many discussions were about politics and social life rather than science itself, and that bias is only relevant when it leads to error. Goldberg argued that scientific results on sex differences are statistical, and a small mean difference can be significant at the extremes. He noted that studies finding no sex differences do not cancel out those that do. Goldberg shared his experience in 1971, where he found anthropological literature did not support the idea that all sex differences are environmental; instead, he found that males are stereotypically aggressive and females nurturing in all societies. He asserted that hierarchies are dominated by males and that social attitudes are not the crucial determinant of dominance, appealing to hormonal sex differences as evidence of biological differences. He claimed feminists often refute straw men by ignoring hormone studies. Goldberg concluded that socialization cannot explain male dominance, as it begs the question of why males are socialized to be dominant. He emphasized that societies attempt to fit with observed sex characteristics, leading men to do heavy lifting. Goldberg stated he was not arguing that males *should* dominate, but only that they *do*, and that one cannot derive 'ought' from 'is.'

Keynote Address: 'Viruses of the Mind'

Richard Dawkins, Oxford zoologist, delivered a keynote address on 'memes.' He explained that children are programmed by evolution to absorb culture and language, but this can lead to gullibility, making them 'easy prey.' He compared DNA and computer viruses, describing both as 'copy me' programs. Dawkins extended this analogy to minds, suggesting that information is exchanged through language and other means, and humans have a readiness to replicate and obey ideas. He cited religion, crazes, and the wearing of baseball caps reversed as examples. Dawkins posed the question of what it would feel like to have one's mind infected by a 'mental parasite' or 'mind virus.' He described an effective mental virus as one that coexists with others, disguises itself, and compels deep inner conviction without evidence, making a virtue of lacking evidence and enjoying mystery. He gave the example of Catholic transsubstantiation. Dawkins also mentioned symptoms like eagerness to be deceived by religious leaders. He addressed whether science itself is a virus, answering negatively, distinguishing between good programs that spread because they perform a function and viruses that spread simply because they are good at spreading. He concluded that 'Religion... is an infectious disease of the mind.' In the Q&A, Robert Sheaffer suggested religions have useful characteristics like controlling envy and providing rules, to which Dawkins conceded, 'you may be right.'

Scientific Fraud

A panel on fraud in science, moderated by Ray Hyman, addressed issues of misconduct. Elie Shneour recommended policies such as listing only those who have done work as authors, subjecting papers to peer review, and euthanizing journals that publish bad papers. Paul Friedman, professor of radiology, discussed policies for dealing with research misconduct following the John Darsee affair. He noted that deliberate fraud is not common but has increased proportionally to the number of scientists. Senator John Dingell brought scientific fraud into the public arena, a shift from past practices of quiet buyouts or firings. Friedman viewed the appropriateness of these past practices as an open question. He also noted that while younger researchers may worry about their careers, older researchers are aware of issues. Millikan's oil drop experiments were cited as an example where an experimenter selected data. Systematic misrepresentation in journals and the reporting of promising results for grant applications were also mentioned.

Friedman stated that peer review at the journal or grant application level is not capable of screening out fraud, as honesty is assumed. However, peer review within the same lab might catch fraud. Other self-correcting methods like replication can fail if the original work was mistaken or fraudulent. Friedman expressed concern about the Office of Scientific Integrity potentially harming science with fraud accusations, while institutions tend to handle investigations quietly to protect reputations.

Walter Stewart of the National Institutes of Health discussed the case of MIT researcher Thereza Imanishi-Kari, who fabricated data in a paper with Nobel laureate David Baltimore. Margot O'Toole discovered the fraud and brought it to attention, but faced isolation and ridicule. The paper was eventually published in *Nature* after being rejected by *Cell* and *Science*. Senate hearings took place in 1988, and Baltimore continued to defend TIK. O'Toole was unable to find a job for years.

Stewart also described the case of Heidi Weissman, whose work was plagiarized by Leonard Freeman. Weissman lost her job while Freeman was promoted. Weissman sued for her work's rights and won, but has been blacklisted. Friedman noted Weissman had complained about not being promoted and had a reputation for being difficult, and took legal action before the university finished its investigation. Stewart countered that the lawsuit was not a reason to avoid criticizing clear plagiarism, and noted that few scientists had publicly criticized Freeman.

Crashed Saucer Claims

A session on crashed saucer claims was moderated by UFO skeptic Philip Klass. Three famous cases were examined: Roswell, New Mexico; Bentwaters/Woodbridge, England; and Kecksburg, Pennsylvania.

James McGaha discussed the Bentwaters/Woodbridge incident (December 1980). He attributed the sightings to a reentering satellite (Cosmos 740), a fireball, and police lights. He explained that reports of intermittent equipment were due to line-of-sight radios and unreliable 'light-alls,' and that holes in the ground looked like rabbit diggings. McGaha's explanations were reportedly omitted from the TV show *Unsolved Mysteries*.

Robert Young reported on the 1965 Kecksburg, Pennsylvania, alleged UFO crash. He examined 91 eyewitness reports, explaining them by the Ontario fireball event. Young criticized *Sightings* and *Unsolved Mysteries* for focusing on unreliable accounts, such as those from five witnesses whose claims did not stand up under scrutiny. He noted that 46 people signed a statement sent to *Unsolved Mysteries* stating there was no crash or recovery, which the show failed to mention.

Donald R. Schmitt presented evidence for the Roswell incident (July 8, 1947), focusing on wire transmissions and an official press release. He eliminated various explanations for debris found, such as V2 launches or Japanese balloon bombs. Schmitt claimed that military records of 30 personnel he spoke with could not be found, and cited witnesses who reported alien bodies and a nurse who died in a plane crash. He concluded there was a coverup, citing six deathbed statements, including one from a general, stating it was 'no goddamn weather balloon.'

Phil Klass agreed there was a major saucer crash coverup but disagreed on who was covering it up. He presented a letter from Lt. Gen. Nathan Twining stating 'a lack of physical evidence in the shape of crash-recovered exhibits' months after Roswell, suggesting either Twining was lying, uninformed, or there was no crashed saucer.

CSICOP Video and Conference Activities

The new CSICOP video, 'Beyond Belief,' addressing astrology, firewalking, and the Gulf Breeze UFO, was premiered. Optional trips included visits to Dinosaur Valley State Park to see dinosaur tracks claimed as evidence of human coexistence with dinosaurs, and Dealey Plaza, the site of JFK's assassination, where conspiracy theorists hawk their theories.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue consistently promotes a skeptical and critical examination of extraordinary claims, whether in parapsychology, UFOlogy, or the interpretation of scientific findings. The editorial stance emphasizes rigorous methodology, evidence-based reasoning, and the debunking of pseudoscience and unsubstantiated claims. The discussions on scientific fraud highlight the importance of integrity and transparency in scientific research, while the critique of parapsychology and UFO incidents underscores the need for critical evaluation of evidence and methodology. The 'viruses of the mind' concept by Dawkins offers a framework for understanding the spread of non-rational beliefs. The overall tone is one of advocating for scientific literacy and critical thinking.

This document is a collection of references and a book review from the Winter 1991-92 issue of *Creation/Evolution*, Volume 11, Number 2 (issue XXIX). The content primarily focuses on skeptical analysis of various phenomena, including creationism, UFOs, and psychic experiences.

References and Citations

The initial part of the document lists several numbered references, indicating that the original text likely discussed or critiqued various claims and publications. These references point to articles and books that address topics such as:

• Creationism and its relation to evolutionary theory (References 1, 2, 3, 12).
• The interpretation of data and the need for caution (Reference 4).
• Criticism of pseudoscientific claims, specifically those made by Hunter H. Adams regarding ancient Egyptians and the telescope, citing works by Peter Tompkins and Peter Kolosimo (Reference 5).
• Non-paranormal explanations for out-of-body and near-death experiences, with citations to Susan Blackmore's articles in *Skeptical Inquirer* (Reference 6).
• The concept of a 'holistic detective' and its relation to evidence, referencing Douglas Adams' *Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency* (Reference 7).
• Summaries and analyses of specific cases, such as the 'Science Mob' and the Stewart article in *Nature* concerning fraud (Reference 8).
• The Woodbridge UFO Incident, Psychic Vibrations, and the Suffolk 'UFO' Lights, with references to *Skeptical Inquirer* (Reference 9).
• The Kecksburg Incident and claims of crashed saucers, also cited in *Skeptical Inquirer* (References 10, 11).
• The debunking of the Paluxy River footprints (Reference 12).

Jim Lippard is identified as the editor of *The Arizona Skeptic* and is pursuing a doctorate in Philosophy at the University of Arizona. The article is noted as being reprinted with permission from *The Arizona Skeptic*.

Book Review: Angels and Aliens: UFOs and the Mythic Imagination

The main body of the document is a book review by Anson Kennedy of Keith Thompson's *Angels and Aliens: UFOs and the Mythic Imagination*.

Book Summary and Themes

Thompson's book is described as a history of the modern UFO phenomenon, presented through the lens of mythology, particularly drawing on the ideas of Joseph Campbell. It is characterized as neither a 'debunker's' nor a 'believer's' book, but rather an exploration of UFOs as a developing modern myth.

The review highlights key points from Thompson's narrative:

• The Kenneth Arnold Sighting (1947): The origin of the 'flying saucer' concept, noting how public perception quickly shaped the description of the objects.
• The '50s Craze: How the UFO craze was revitalized by 'contactees' like George Adamski and the introduction of 'Men in Black' (MIB), which added a fantastic element.
• The '60s Shift: A move from 'hard' reports (objects in the sky) to 'soft' elements like alien abductions, influenced by the New Age movement.
• The 'Trickster' Element: Thompson likens the variable and elusive nature of UFOs to the Trickster archetype from mythology, suggesting UFOs are 'interdimensional' and can shift form.
• Skeptical Counterparts: The role of skeptics like Donald Menzel and Philip J. Klass in offering mundane explanations.
• Mythic Interpretation: Thompson's use of Carl Jung's and Paul Radin's work to interpret UFO phenomena as manifestations of the collective unconscious.
• Comparison to Near-Death Experiences: Parallels drawn between UFO encounters and near-death experiences, as discussed in Kenneth Ring's *The Omega Project*.
• The 'Abductee' as Amphibian: An analogy of fish living in water being captured and returning to relate their experience, suggesting abductees are like amphibians taking steps toward enhanced awareness.

Critical Analysis

Anson Kennedy, the reviewer, finds Thompson's book offers an interesting history and perspective, particularly in its mythic retelling of the UFO story. However, Kennedy is critical of Thompson's speculative conclusions in the final chapter, which suggest humans may share in the 'realm' of alien occupants and are evolving toward 'contact.' Kennedy deems this speculation unwarranted and based on a desire to find something real in UFOs.

Kennedy questions whether the book fulfills its dustjacket's promise and advises skeptics to read it, suggesting that Thompson's speculation itself might represent a new manifestation of the phenomenon.

Anson Kennedy is identified as the Secretary of the Georgia Skeptics and Chairman of the UFO Subcommittee, and is an electrical engineer.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue, as represented by this excerpt, strongly aligns with a skeptical viewpoint. It critically examines claims related to creationism and UFO phenomena, emphasizing the importance of evidence-based reasoning and debunking pseudoscientific assertions. The review of Keith Thompson's book, while acknowledging its interesting mythological approach, ultimately critiques its speculative conclusions, reinforcing a preference for rational explanations over unsubstantiated theories. The frequent citations to *Skeptical Inquirer* underscore the publication's commitment to promoting critical thinking and scientific inquiry in the face of extraordinary claims.