North Texas Skeptic - Vol 11 No 12 - 1997

Magazine Overview

Title: The Newsletter of The North Texas Skeptics
Issue: Volume 11, Number 12
Date: December 1997
Publisher: The North Texas Skeptics

This issue of The Newsletter of The North Texas Skeptics features several articles that critically examine various topics, including pseudoscience, environmental issues, and the portrayal of science in public institutions. The publication maintains a skeptical and evidence-based approach, questioning claims that lack scientific rigor.

Scientific American Does Pseudoscience

By John Blanton

This article reviews a November episode of PBS's 'Scientific American Frontiers' that discussed pseudoscience, including topics like crashed aliens, palm reading, dowsing, free energy, therapeutic touch, and graphology. The author, John Blanton, notes that the program presented a respectable overview of pseudoscience. The show featured Alan Alda and Ray Hyman, who demonstrated how easily people can be misled by practices like palm reading. The program also thoroughly critiqued dowsing, citing an instance where a dowser failed to locate a water drilling site in Vermont, resulting in a dry hole and a financial loss for the ski resort.

Another anecdote involved a dowser who claimed to find metal objects, even when covered. This test also resulted in failure, with the dowser making numerous excuses for his inability to locate the target. The article also touches upon James Randi's dissatisfaction with his exclusion from the broadcast after participating in its production, and his critique of the dowsing test's methodology, particularly the lack of a baseline demonstration.

The free energy segment highlighted Harold Puthoff, a researcher in zero-point energy. While Puthoff and others believe in an abundant supply of free energy, physicists like Steven Weinberg argue that there isn't enough to be practically extracted. The article notes that Puthoff's current research is being funded by private investors and government grants, and he is conducting tests to avoid self-deception. The author wonders if Puthoff applied the same rigor when testing Uri Geller in the past.

The segment on therapeutic touch (TT) was also examined. Practitioners claim to feel energy fields, but a science project by grade-schooler Emily Rosa demonstrated that TT practitioners could not detect an energy field when they could not see their subject, scoring worse than chance. The author concludes that the episode generally provided a sound critique of pseudoscience.

More on Plutonium Twaddle

By John Blanton

This piece offers further commentary on an op-ed by Ed Hiserodt regarding the toxicity of plutonium. While agreeing that the toxicity of plutonium is often overstated, Blanton argues that Hiserodt overstates his case and makes mistakes similar to those he criticizes. Blanton points out several issues:

1. The media's portrayal of the Cassini opponents was not critically reported.
2. Protesters overemphasized launch dangers, while the Earth fly-by poses a greater risk for plutonium release.
3. Hiserodt failed to mention that plutonium is both the 94th element and the 94th discovered, a coincidence he missed.
4. While Hiserodt correctly states that plutonium's radioactivity risk is exaggerated, he implies that radioactive substances are completely harmless, which is likely not his intent.
5. Hiserodt's implication that substances like alar, asbestos, dioxin, and PCBs are benign is a rhetorical blunder that weakens his argument.

Blanton emphasizes that true skepticism requires careful examination of all assertions.

The Third Eye

By Pat Reeder

This article, written by Pat Reeder, critiques the current media climate and the spread of what he terms "doomsday environmentalism" and "pseudoscience." Reeder begins by sarcastically addressing "evil skeptics" who are blamed for various global problems.

He criticizes the "overheated special interest group propaganda and half-baked pseudoscientific hooey" that passes for news. Reeder targets Al Gore and his campaign on global warming, suggesting that Gore has convinced President Clinton of its reality despite U.S. weather satellites recording a temperature drop over the past 20 years. Reeder likens Gore's tactics to Joseph Goebbels', using repetition to instill belief in a narrative, citing a White House conference for TV weathermen as an example.

Reeder notes that while some weather forecasters resisted the global warming narrative, general news reporters did not. He points to ABC News's consistent introduction to environmental stories, stating "With most scientists now in full agreement that global warming is a reality..." He also criticizes the cliché of "2500 scientists, including many Nobel Prize winners, have signed on to a UN report confirming the existence of global warming," calling it "total poppycock."

The article discusses the portrayal of global warming skeptics as "sneaky minions of coal and oil companies" in books like Al Gore's 'Earth In The Balance' and Ross Gelbspan's 'The Heat Is On.' Skeptics are accused of hampering efforts to save the earth by asking questions about the reality and necessity of the proposed solutions. Reeder expresses concern that skeptics are being urged to be ignored or silenced, and in some cases, accused of being paid corporate stooges.

Reeder also recounts an episode of ABC's 'Politically Incorrect' where host Bill Maher and guest Alexandra Paul engaged in a heated debate with Ben Stein about environmental issues. Maher and Paul are described as promoting "doomsday environmentalism," while Stein calmly presented facts. The exchange highlights the emotional and often fact-less nature of the environmentalist arguments, with Maher and Paul resorting to shouting and personal attacks.

Reeder mentions a New York Times article by William K. Stevens about Dr. Frederick Seitz's contention that a UN report on global warming was altered for political reasons. He also profiles climate expert Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, who has stated there is no evidence to support the global warming hypothesis and compares computer models predicting it to "trusting a ouija board."

The article then shifts to discuss a Washington Post column by James Glassman about Nathan Zohner, a 14-year-old who conducted a science project on "Dihydrogen Monoxide: The Unrecognized Killer." The petition, which claimed water was dangerous, was signed by 86 percent of his classmates, demonstrating how easily scientifically illiterate people can be manipulated.

Further segments include a brief mention of Hollywood Scientologists and their detox methods, and the sale of the Heaven's Gate mansion. The article concludes by reiterating the importance of asking tough questions and demanding answers based on real science, especially in manufactured "crisis" situations.

Anti-science at the Smithsonian

By Bob Park

This section compiles several entries from Bob Park's newsletter, 'What's New?', detailing criticisms of the Smithsonian's "Science in American Life" exhibit and related issues.

• [14 Nov 97] SCIENCE MAGAZINE: RABID BOOK REVIEW CLAIMS A VICTIM: Katherine Livingston, former book-review editor of Science, retired partly due to harsh criticism of a review of "The Flight from Science and Reason." The review, by Smithsonian curator Paul Forman, was described as a "nasty diatribe against science itself."

• [16 May 97] BOOK REVIEWING: "POSTMODERNIST ASSAILS RABID RATIONALISTS.": This entry discusses a conference on "The Flight from Science and Reason" and Paul Forman's review of its proceedings. Forman, a leader of the postmodern movement, is criticized for his "ugly antiscience exhibit, Science in American Life." The review noted his sneering account of physicists' and chemists' inability to effect change in the exhibit.

• [2 Jun 97] WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT "THE FLIGHT FROM SCIENCE AND REASON"?: This entry describes a conference exploring the embrace of irrationalism in academic disciplines. The postmodern view that science is a product of power structures and not objective truth is discussed. The author notes a lack of proposals for dealing with this issue and observes that younger social scientists in the audience seemed to disbelieve the speakers.

• [18 Nov 94] APS OBJECTS TO THE SMITHSONIAN'S "SCIENCE IN AMERICAN LIFE"!: The American Physical Society (APS) expressed "profound dismay" over the exhibit, calling it a "portrayal of science that trivializes its accomplishments and exaggerates any negative consequences."

• [17 Jun 94] "SCIENCE IN AMERICAN LIFE" — IS SCIENCE THE GOD THAT FAILED?: This entry describes the exhibit's focus on the public's changing, and worsening, view of science, rather than on scientific discovery. It highlights a warning sign at the exhibit: "Stop and Think! Is gene therapy safe?"

• [21 Oct 94] "NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR U.S. HISTORY": SCIENCE? WHAT SCIENCE?: This entry criticizes a proposed PC version of American history that omits science. A search of the document found only one reference to "science" in a list of excluded activities for women, and no mention of scientists.

• [18 Nov 94] AND NOW WE HAVE THE "NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR WORLD HISTORY.": Similar to the U.S. history standards, this entry notes that world history standards also neglect science, asking students to discuss why science has "failed to eradicate hunger, poverty and disease."

• [14 Apr 95] AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY WANTS CHANGES IN SMITHSONIAN EXHIBIT: The American Chemical Society (ACS), a funder of the exhibit, expressed dissatisfaction with its bias against science and damage to the ACS's reputation.

• [15 Mar 96] SCIENCE IN AMERICAN STRIFE: SMITHSONIAN RENEGES ON COMMITMENT.: The ACS warned other potential donors to the Smithsonian, citing the exhibit's lack of balance and the Smithsonian's failure to address criticisms after promising changes.

The Third Eye (Continued)

By Pat Reeder

This section continues Pat Reeder's column, addressing various topics including psychic claims and environmental activism.

Reeder begins by describing receiving junk e-mail from psychics, including a message from Silvia Brown, who claims to be a psychic medium. He notes the irony of receiving such solicitations given his role as a co-editor of The Skeptic and his history of critiquing psychics. He uses the examples of Princess Diana and John Denver's deaths to question the efficacy of psychic predictions, pointing out that psychics did not foresee these events, despite Diana reportedly consulting them.

He then discusses a CBS '48 Hours' segment that tested a spirit medium. The segment, which also included medical and psychiatric explanations for near-death experiences, featured a test where the medium was unable to provide accurate information to a skeptical widow. James Randi later analyzed the videotape, exposing the medium's cold reading techniques, such as eliciting information indirectly and relying on coincidence.

Reeder also recounts a 'Sixty Minutes' story about a Wisconsin woman who was convinced she had multiple personalities due to her psychiatrist's use of hypnosis and drugs. The article notes that the concept of "recovered memories" is now widely discredited.

The column then turns to the global warming convention in Kyoto. Reeder criticizes what he calls "radical environmentalists" for their disruptive protests, such as chaining themselves to gas pumps. He finds it ironic that a group traveled extensively to protest the use of private jets at an environmental conference. He also notes the "Most Incongruous Marketing Campaign" award going to the nuclear power industry for promoting "nuclear energy" at a global warming convention.

Finally, Reeder quotes Thomas Gale Moore, who represented the Hoover Institute at the Kyoto conference. Moore expressed a positive view of global warming, suggesting it would lengthen growing seasons, increase food bounty, and reduce hazards. Reeder concludes by wishing readers a happy holiday season and humorously mentioning his idea for a new Sun City in Siberia.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The dominant theme throughout this issue is skepticism towards claims lacking empirical evidence and scientific validation. The newsletter consistently critiques pseudoscience, sensationalism in media, and what it perceives as anti-science sentiments in public institutions and environmental discourse. The editorial stance is firmly rooted in critical thinking, demanding evidence, and questioning narratives that rely on emotion or propaganda rather than scientific fact. There is a clear emphasis on the importance of scientific literacy and the dangers of succumbing to unsubstantiated beliefs or politically motivated agendas.