2002-1-skeptikko

Magazine Overview

This issue of Skeptikko, number 52, dated March 28, 2002, is a Finnish publication from Skepsis Ry, the Finnish Society for Skeptical Inquiry. The cover features a headline about 'Varpumiehet' (likely a specific group or activity) being tested in Jyväskylä, and also notes that Skepsis is celebrating its 15th anniversary.

Editorial: "Kiivaita tunteita 15-vuotiaan Skepsiken keskustelupalstalla" (Passionate feelings on Skepsis's discussion forum at 15 years)

The editorial, written by Risto K. Järvinen, addresses the lively and sometimes contentious discussions on Skepsis's internet forum. While the forum has increased membership and engagement, it also faces challenges with inappropriate messages and accusations of censorship. The editorial highlights that some individuals have become irritated by the strong opinions expressed by skeptics, leading to resignations from the association.

Criticism directed at Skepsis suggests that the organization is not solely focused on debunking pseudoscience but also takes clear political stances, for example, being perceived as uncritically supportive of genetic engineering and having an overly positive view of science and technology ('science-believers'). Specific criticisms mention Skepsis taking negative stances on organic farming, nature conservation, and renewable bioenergy, while being unequivocally positive about nuclear power. These attitudes are described as 'twisted' and 'offensive,' particularly in relation to women's studies.

Another point of contention is Skepsis's perceived focus on Steiner education methods without critically examining religious education in basic schools or other religious phenomena. The editorial clarifies that the opinions expressed on the forum do not represent the official stance of Skepsis or its members. Skepsis provides the forum as a platform for discussion, and its primary aim is to promote objective and unbiased scientific research into paranormal claims, foster a network of interested individuals, publish relevant articles and books, organize meetings, and conduct educational activities. Skepsis maintains a politically, ideologically, and religiously neutral position, stating that issues like organic farming, environmental protection, and nuclear power fall outside its scope. The organization also defers to the Finnish Freethinkers' Association for matters related to religion.

Table of Contents (SISÄLTÖ)

The issue includes a variety of articles:

• "Kaaos ja kirjallisuus: metafora vai metodologinen harhapolku?" (Chaos and Literature: Metaphor or Methodological Misstep?) by Merja Polvinen.
• "Varpu taipui näyttävästi - aina kun koehenkilöt tiesivät maassa olevan jotain mitä pitäisi havaita..." (The twig bent strikingly - always when the test subjects knew there was something to be found in the ground...) by Vesa Kolhinen.
• "15 vuotta kriittisyyttä" (15 years of criticality) by Risto K. Järvinen.
• "Puheenjohtajan palsta" (Chairman's column) by Jukka Häkkinen.
• "Kynttilä korvassa" (Candle in the ear) by Veikko Näntö and Pertti Laine.
• "Kummallisia kuvioita Ajasto-kalenterissa" (Strange patterns in the Ajasto calendar) by Mari Hanski.
• "Kuinka minusta tuli Skeptikko" (How I became a Skeptic) by Risto Selin.
• "Ote Selinin kirjasta 'Ihmeellinen maailma': Väriterapia" (Excerpt from Selin's book 'The Wonderful World': Color Therapy).
• "Kaivattu hakuteos skeptikoille" (A long-awaited reference work for skeptics) by Kalevi Kuitunen.
• "Mitä sanottavaa sosiologilla on paranormaaleista ilmiöistä?" (What does a sociologist have to say about paranormal phenomena?) by Heikki Ervasti.
• "Kannattaako oravaa ampua tykillä." (Is it worth shooting a squirrel with a cannon?) by Matias Päätalo.

The issue also lists the publisher (Skepsis Ry), editor-in-chief (Risto K. Järvinen), editorial address, contact information, layout artist (Risto K. Järvinen), printer (Nykypaino), and ISSN.

A note clarifies that all published articles represent the authors' personal opinions and not necessarily the official stance of the editorial team, Skepsis, or ECSO (European Council of Skeptical Organisations), of which Skepsis ry is a member.

The cover photo depicts Jukka Häkkinen and Matias Aunola (Jyväskylä contact person) checking a test site for a 'varpumies' (twig-witcher or dowser) searching for an object.

Article: "Kaaos ja kirjallisuus: metafora vai metodologinen harhapolku?" (Chaos and Literature: Metaphor or Methodological Misstep?) by Merja Polvinen

This article delves into the ongoing debate between natural sciences and humanities, particularly concerning the application of scientific concepts in literary studies. Merja Polvinen, writing from a humanities perspective, discusses Alan Sokal's hoax and its implications for the perceived differences between scientific and humanistic disciplines. Polvinen argues that while Sokal's critique highlighted the misuse of scientific terms in some humanities circles, there remains significant potential for fruitful interdisciplinary dialogue.

The article examines how chaos theory, a mathematical model describing complex dynamic systems, has been adopted by literary scholars. While popular science books like James Gleick's "Chaos" popularized the theory, its application in literary analysis has been met with mixed success. Polvinen notes that many literary interpretations have misused or misunderstood the precise meanings of terms like 'chaos' (which does not mean complete disorder in mathematics) and 'non-linearity.'

Examples are given of scholars like David Porush, who used chaos theory to argue that literature might be a better model for understanding reality than natural science, and Richard Nemesvari, who applied chaos theory to analyze Emily Brontë's "Wuthering Heights." However, Polvinen points out a fundamental issue: literary scholars often lack the mathematical rigor to apply chaos theory directly. Instead, it is frequently used as a metaphor or a conceptual framework to explore ideas like complexity, unpredictability, and emergent properties within literary works.

Polvinen discusses the limitations of applying scientific theories to literary analysis, noting that scientific equations typically deal with a limited number of variables, whereas literary analysis requires accounting for a vast array of reader interpretations and connotations. Despite these challenges, Polvinen suggests that the 'what if' questions posed by chaos theory can be valuable for literary scholars, prompting new ways of thinking about narrative meaning and textual interpretation.

The article also touches upon the broader debate about postmodernism and its influence on academic thought. Polvinen critiques postmodernism's emphasis on linguistic relativity and social constructivism, arguing that it can lead to a relativism that undermines the pursuit of objective knowledge. She contrasts this with a more 'rational' approach to science and interpretation, advocated by scholars like Christopher Norris and Raymond Tallis, who emphasize the human capacity for learning and understanding reality beyond purely social or linguistic frameworks.

Polvinen concludes by advocating for a continued dialogue between the humanities and natural sciences, emphasizing the need for mutual respect and understanding of each discipline's methodologies and strengths. She suggests that while the humanities may not be able to directly engage with the mathematical intricacies of scientific theories, they can contribute by analyzing science and technology as cultural phenomena, exploring their impact on literature and society, and examining the discourse surrounding scientific ideas.

Article: "Mitä sanottavaa sosiologilla on paranormaaleista ilmiöistä?" (What does a sociologist have to say about paranormal phenomena?) by Heikki Ervasti

This article explores the sociological perspective on paranormal phenomena. Heikki Ervasti discusses how sociology views belief in the paranormal not as a matter of objective truth or falsity, but as a social and cultural phenomenon. Sociologists are interested in why people believe in the paranormal, how these beliefs are maintained and spread within communities, and what social functions they serve.

Ervasti likely examines concepts such as collective belief, social influence, and the role of institutions in shaping perceptions of reality. The sociological approach would focus on the social construction of paranormal beliefs, the ways in which they are integrated into worldviews, and their impact on social behavior and group identity. The article might also touch upon how societal changes, such as increased access to information or shifts in cultural values, can influence the prevalence and nature of paranormal beliefs.

Article: "Kannattaako oravaa ampua tykillä." (Is it worth shooting a squirrel with a cannon?) by Matias Päätalo

This article, with its provocative title, likely addresses the issue of using excessive or inappropriate methods to solve problems, perhaps in the context of skepticism or scientific inquiry. The phrase "shooting a squirrel with a cannon" implies a disproportionate or overly aggressive approach. Matias Päätalo might be discussing the dangers of overreaction, the importance of proportionality in response, or the potential for such extreme measures to cause more harm than good.

In the context of Skeptikko, this could relate to how skeptics should approach pseudoscientific claims. Should they employ overwhelming force (like a 'cannon') to debunk even minor claims, or is a more measured and targeted approach (like a 'rifle') more effective? The article might explore the effectiveness of different skeptical strategies and the potential pitfalls of employing overly aggressive or sensationalist tactics.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue of Skeptikko revolve around the critical examination of claims, the demarcation between science and pseudoscience, and the methodologies employed in both scientific and humanistic inquiry. There is a clear emphasis on rational thinking, evidence-based reasoning, and the importance of clear definitions and rigorous analysis.

The editorial stance, as articulated in the main editorial and reflected in the articles, is one of promoting critical thinking and skepticism. While acknowledging the complexities and sometimes heated nature of debates, the magazine advocates for an open yet rigorous approach to understanding phenomena. It champions the scientific method and critical evaluation of evidence, while also engaging with broader cultural and philosophical discussions about knowledge, reality, and the role of different disciplines. The magazine aims to foster an informed public discourse by providing a platform for reasoned debate and the dissemination of skeptical perspectives.

This issue of Skeptikko, dated 1/2002, focuses on critical examination of phenomena often presented as extraordinary. The cover story, "Valloittavat Verkostot" (Conquering Networks), satirizes the world of network marketing, while other articles delve into scientific testing of dowsing abilities and reflect on the 15-year history of Skepsis ry, the Finnish Skeptics Society.

Network Marketing: A Satirical Look

The article "Valloittavat Verkostot" adopts a highly sarcastic tone to critique network marketing. It portrays a world where participants are promised wealth, beauty, and happiness through the sale of dubious products, ranging from slimming drugs to 'natural' cleaning agents that also claim to cure asthma and allergies. The author mocks the idea of 'natural' products and the supposed scientific testing behind them, humorously suggesting that even a washing machine's bearings might be improved by the detergent. The concept of a pyramid scheme is illustrated with the example of selling paper machines, where a simple network of five people selling to five others each could theoretically result in every Finn owning a paper machine within ten 'merchant levels.' The piece concludes by suggesting that this network could conquer the world, leading to days of joy as the 'happy clatter' of paper machines fills the air.

Testing Dowsing Abilities

Two articles detail controlled experiments conducted by Skepsis ry to test the claims of dowsers. The first experiment, conducted in September 2001 in Jyväskylä, involved a dowser who claimed to detect metal, plastic, and wooden objects in the ground. The test was designed as a double-blind experiment, where neither the subject nor the testers knew the location of the hidden objects. The results were disappointing for the dowser, with a success rate of 17 out of 30 correct detections, falling short of the agreed-upon 80% threshold. The article notes that the dowser's rod tended to 'lean' towards indicating an object, suggesting a bias.

The second experiment, in November 2001, focused on a dowser who claimed to be able to 'ground' water veins by placing a copper rod over them, supposedly to counteract radiation. The dowser's ability to detect changes in the rod's position was tested. Again, the experiment was conducted under controlled conditions. The results were similarly unsuccessful, with the dowser correctly identifying the rod's position only 9 out of 20 times, well below the 80% success rate. The article concludes that in both experiments, when the subjects were unaware of the target, their performance was no better than chance, providing no evidence for the claimed abilities.

Skepsis ry's 15-Year Journey

Several articles reflect on the 15th anniversary of Skepsis ry, founded in 1987. Former chairmen S. Albert Kivinen, Nils Mustelin, and Ilpo V. Salmi, along with current chairman Jukka Häkkinen, share their experiences and perspectives on the organization's past, present, and future.

S. Albert Kivinen recounts the early days, noting that while the initial goal of actively researching paranormal phenomena proved difficult to sustain on a hobby basis, Skepsis evolved into an organization that disseminates information about such research and other matters requiring critical attention. He highlights the role of the secretary and treasurer, Matti Virtanen, and mentions his own proposal for the 'Huuhaa' award and the organization of an international conference on paranormal phenomena in 1989, which attracted notable figures like James Randi and Susan Blackmore.

Nils Mustelin discusses Skepsis's media breakthrough during the 1989 seminar and the significance of the Huuhaa award, which has become an important tradition. He also mentions the Skepsis challenge, offering a monetary reward for demonstrating a paranormal phenomenon under controlled conditions, a challenge that has never been claimed. Mustelin fondly recalls James Randi's visits to Finland and his contributions to Skepsis's early work. He also notes the establishment of Skepsis's scientific advisory board and the organization's acceptance into the Federation of Finnish Learned Societies.

Ilpo V. Salmi, who served as chairman from 1995-1998, discusses his efforts to increase membership and the challenges of running an organization with limited funding, relying on volunteer work. He mentions the importance of grants and how they have enabled Skepsis to undertake projects like publishing books. Salmi also touches upon the public perception of skeptics, noting that they are often seen as simply disbelievers, whereas Skepsis aims to be 'open-mindedly critical,' demanding good evidence for extraordinary claims.

Jukka Häkkinen, the current chairman, praises the organization's stable financial and reputational standing. He highlights three key developments during his tenure: the improved accessibility of Skepsis through its website, the increased activity in local chapters (particularly in Jyväskylä and Turku), and the professionalization of Skepsis's media relations. He notes the establishment of a 'media group' composed of experts ready to respond to media inquiries and issue press releases. Häkkinen concludes that despite some doubts, Skepsis remains active and influential.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critical examination of pseudoscientific claims, particularly network marketing and dowsing, and the reflection on the role and history of Skepsis ry in promoting scientific literacy and critical thinking in Finland. The editorial stance is clearly skeptical, employing satire and reporting on controlled experiments to debunk unsubstantiated claims. The magazine emphasizes the importance of evidence-based reasoning and distinguishes itself from mere disbelief, positioning skeptics as critical investigators who require robust proof for extraordinary assertions. The issue also highlights Skepsis ry's commitment to educating the public and engaging with the media to counter misinformation.

This issue of Skeptikko, dated 1/2002, features a critical examination of alternative health practices and the establishment of a new media group within the organization. The main cover headline announces "Mediaryhmä aloittamassa toimintansa" (Media group starting its operations), signaling a new initiative to bolster Skepsis' public outreach.

Articles and Features

Ear Candling: A Critical Examination

The lead article, "Kynttilä korvassa" (Candle in the Ear), thoroughly debunks the practice of ear candling. It begins by introducing the procedure, its purported origins among Hopi Indians, and the various unsubstantiated claims made by its proponents, such as removing earwax, improving hearing, and even treating conditions like tinnitus and sinus infections. The article cites claims that the process involves an 'imbuing effect' and that vapors can penetrate the eardrum to reach the inner ear and sinuses.

However, the authors, Veikko Näntö and Pertti Laine, systematically dismantle these claims using scientific evidence and medical knowledge. They state that there are no open passages from the outer ear canal to the sinuses or other parts of the head, and the eardrum is not permeable to air. The article highlights that the residue found inside the burned candle is not earwax but melted candle material, a fact confirmed by scientific analysis. Studies, such as those by Seely et al. (1996), found no reduction in earwax after treatment and identified candle wax components in the residue.

The article also addresses the health risks associated with ear candling, including burns from hot wax, damage to the ear canal, and potential infections. It notes that while some proponents claim the practice is a form of ancient tradition, contemporary Hopi Indians deny any knowledge of it. The article points out that the marketing of ear candles often uses medical claims, yet they are not regulated as medical devices in many countries, leading to interventions by authorities in Canada and the USA.

Skepsis' New Media Group

The establishment of a "media group" by Skepsis is announced, inspired by the CSICOP's "Council for Media Integrity." The primary goal is to enhance Skepsis' public relations and information dissemination. This group will compile a list of experts whose contact information will be available via a private link on the Skepsis website, allowing journalists to submit questions to relevant specialists. The group also plans to issue press releases and create an archive of articles from the Skeptikko magazine on the Skepsis website.

Interview with Risto Selin

In the "How I Became a Skeptic" series, Risto Selin, co-author of the book "Ihmeellinen maailma" (The Wonderful World), is interviewed. Selin shares his background, growing up in a non-religious but church-familiar family, his early interest in Eastern philosophy and astrology, and how a misinterpretation of a horoscope led him to question such beliefs. He recounts experiencing phenomena he later identified as sleep paralysis, rather than mystical encounters. He also discusses his journey into psychology and his appreciation for the scientific method's democratic approach to knowledge.

Critical Review of the Ajasto Calendar

Mari Hanski reviews the Ajasto calendar's self-help sections, particularly the "Time Management for Life Management" supplement. She finds the diagrams and concepts presented, such as "minute strategy" and "amulets," to be pseudoscientific and confusing. Hanski criticizes the calendar's use of vague, unscientific language, such as "energies vibrating at a high frequency" and "universal language," and questions the basis of its claims about life management and personal development. She highlights the lack of clear explanations and the reliance on unverified concepts.

Other Notes

The issue also includes a reminder for members to pay their membership fees to support the organization's activities and the publication of Skeptikko. A spring outing to the Helinä Rautavaara Ethnographic Museum is announced.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue strongly emphasizes a critical and evidence-based approach to claims, particularly in the realm of alternative health. The detailed debunking of ear candling highlights Skeptikko's commitment to scientific scrutiny and public education against pseudoscience. The establishment of the media group indicates a proactive stance in communicating skeptical viewpoints and countering misinformation. The review of the Ajasto calendar further reinforces the magazine's critical stance towards self-help and pseudoscientific concepts presented as factual. The overall editorial stance is one of promoting critical thinking, scientific literacy, and skepticism towards unsubstantiated claims.

This issue of Skeptikko, dated 1/2002, features a prominent interview with psychologist Risto Selin, conducted by Risto K. Järvinen. The magazine also includes several articles critically examining paranormal beliefs, ufology, anthroposophy, and color therapy.

Interview with Risto Selin

Risto Selin, a psychology student and skeptic, discusses his intellectual journey. He initially studied philosophy but found that empirical sciences were better equipped to answer complex questions. He was inspired by psychologist Marjaana Lindeman to explore evolutionary psychology, a field that seeks to integrate psychology with biology. Selin joined Skepsis after a discussion with a creationist and became a board member in 1997. He co-edited a book titled 'Paholaisen asianajajan paluu' (The Devil's Advocate Returns) with Ilpo V. Salmi and Marketta Ollikainen. Selin emphasizes his commitment to scientific rigor, stating that while he doesn't believe in the omnipotence of science, he advocates for critical thinking. He notes that his book 'Ihmeellinen maailma' (The Wonderful World) evolved over time, and his skeptical stance softened. He reflects on unusual experiences, like sleep paralysis, and how they can be misinterpreted, acknowledging that if he had lived in a different interpretive framework, he might have believed in alien visitations.

Selin highlights that empirical sciences pose as many ingenious questions as philosophy, and researchers can answer them. He contrasts his approach with that of James Randi and Ray Hyman, preferring to be a writer who explains skepticism rather than confronting individuals directly. His goal is to spread critical thinking, allowing individuals to decide what to believe, while authorities should prevent harm. He is also working on completing his master's thesis.

Book Review: 'Ihmeellinen maailma' by Risto Selin

This section reviews Risto Selin's book 'Ihmeellinen maailma: Skeptikon tietosanakirja' (The Wonderful World: A Skeptic's Encyclopedia). The reviewer, Kalevi Kuitunen, praises the book as a much-needed alphabetical reference work for skeptics, noting that Skepsis has been active for 15 years. While acknowledging Selin's effort, Kuitunen points out that some entries might feel superficial or hastily handled, especially in areas where Selin is less familiar. The reviewer notes that Selin's work covers topics like philosophy of science, pseudomedicine, psychology, and psychiatry, though perhaps not as extensively as they might deserve. Kuitunen highlights the book's useful entries on recent phenomena like brain hemisphere differences, Feng Shui, Heaven's Gate, the 10% myth, Project Alfa, the Sokals affair, therapeutic touch, UFO abductions, and color therapy. The book also includes a list of Huuhaa awards and questions for creationists. However, Kuitunen criticizes the book for not always prioritizing the significance of phenomena, with some entries being brief while others, like Atlantis and biorhythms, are more extensive. The review also points out the omission of certain key figures and works in the bibliography, such as Paul Kurtz's 'A sceptic's handbook of parapsychology' and works by Ian Wilson. Kuitunen suggests that the book could benefit from including more literature from the opposing side to provide a more balanced perspective. Despite these criticisms, Kuitunen concludes that the book is a valuable overview, especially for its coverage of phenomena not easily found elsewhere.

Analysis of Paranormal Beliefs by Erich Goode

Heikki Ervasti reviews Erich Goode's book 'Paranormal Beliefs: A Sociological Introduction'. The review notes that the book examines the rise of paranormal beliefs globally, including beliefs in spirits, witchcraft, pseudomedicine, astrology, and more. Goode distinguishes between pseudoscientific claims, which lack scientific basis, and paranormalism, which relies on supernatural arguments. The review states that Goode's work is a valuable introduction for those unfamiliar with scientific philosophy and sociology. The book categorizes paranormal beliefs based on their origin, such as individual creations, religious traditions, or folklore. Goode also analyzes the societal connections of paranormal beliefs, noting their prevalence among women and less educated populations, and their influence on politics, particularly through conspiracy theories and creationism. Ervasti suggests that while Goode's approach is valuable, it might be too narrow by focusing solely on the sociological aspects and leaving the evaluation of paranormal claims to natural scientists. The review also touches on Goode's critique of the perceived arrogance of some skeptics.

Discussion on Ufology and Esko Valtaoja's Book

This section discusses Esko Valtaoja's book 'Kotona maailmankaikkeudessa' (At Home in the Universe), which is praised for its vivid and insightful writing style. The reviewer, Matias Päätalo, notes that while the book may not offer much new information to physicists and astronomers, it provides ample food for thought. Valtaoja's approach is described as that of a landscape painter, visualizing the universe from his inner world. The reviewer highlights Valtaoja's exploration of the origins of life and the universe, drawing parallels with Stephen Hawking and Raimo Keskinen. However, Päätalo criticizes Valtaoja's communication style, suggesting that his metaphorical language might be inaccessible to the average reader. The review also addresses Valtaoja's views on ufology, where he is accused of 'shooting a squirrel with a cannon' by broadly categorizing UFO phenomena. The reviewer argues that Valtaoja's definition of 'UFO' is vague and that he fails to distinguish between serious ufological research and the sensationalist claims of some UFO enthusiasts. The article criticizes the inclusion of George Adamski's work and the omission of critical ufological research. It is argued that UFOs are worthy of scientific investigation, but that the focus should be on empirical evidence rather than preconceived theories. The review concludes by commending Valtaoja's discussion of the SETI project, where he is seen at his best, making complex topics accessible to the reader.

Clarifications on Anthroposophy

This section addresses feedback received regarding a previous article on anthroposophy. The author clarifies that anthroposophy is an occult and unscientific doctrine. The article defends the criticism of Rudolf Steiner, whom one reader, Juhani Salo, described as a "multi-talented genius." Salo's comment is seen as an exception, as most anthroposophists tend to deny or downplay the literal interpretation of Steiner's teachings. The author notes the general reluctance of anthroposophists to engage in public debate or answer critical questions, citing the closure of a Steiner school discussion forum. The article also points out that prominent figures associated with anthroposophy, like Yrjö Mäenpää and Pentti Aaltonen, have distanced themselves from the movement or claimed limited knowledge of its doctrines. The author acknowledges that the previous article did not sufficiently address the criticism of anthroposophy from a religious perspective, as requested by a reader named Tapio Kangasniemi.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue of Skeptikko revolve around critical thinking, scientific inquiry, and the debunking of pseudoscientific claims. The magazine consistently adopts a skeptical stance, encouraging readers to question extraordinary claims and to rely on evidence-based reasoning. The editorial stance is clearly in favor of scientific methodology and rationalism, as evidenced by the critical reviews of paranormal beliefs, ufology, and anthroposophy. The magazine aims to educate its readers about the importance of critical evaluation in understanding the world around them.

Title: Skeptikko
Issue: 1/2002
Date: January 2002
Publisher: Skepsis ry

This issue of Skeptikko, a Finnish skeptical magazine, features a range of articles that critically examine pseudoscientific claims, health myths, and historical anecdotes. The magazine aims to promote scientific thinking and debunk paranormal phenomena.

Articles and Content

Anthroposophy and Christianity: A Critical Look

Heikki Ervasti's commentary addresses criticisms leveled against his previous article, particularly from Kangasniemi. Ervasti clarifies that his selection of sources was based on the argument's needs, not a bias against Christian writers. He defends the works of Osmo Tiililä and Paavo Hiltunen as valuable introductions to anthroposophy. Ervasti acknowledges that his article did not delve deeply into the tensions between anthroposophy and Christianity, a relationship he describes as far from straightforward, with core anthroposophical tenets like reincarnation and the nature of Jesus contradicting Christian teachings. He expresses surprise at the lack of extensive Christian criticism and notes that critics are often labeled as zealots or atheists. Ervasti also touches upon other themes not covered in his article, such as the historical and ideological connections of anthroposophy to occultism and national socialism, as well as the movement's political ties and Rudolf Steiner's alleged mental health issues and substance use.

Gauss's Posthumous Thoughts on Mars

Nils Mustelin's article, titled "Gauss's posthumous thoughts too?", questions whether claims about historical figures' ideas are accurately attributed and timed. It addresses a supposed Nostradamus-like hoax involving a prediction of recent terror attacks. The article then shifts to mathematician Karl Friedrich Gauss, clarifying that his suggestion to communicate with Martians by creating large geometric patterns of forests was made during his lifetime (around 1802 or 1820), not posthumously. Mustelin contrasts this with other historical proposals for Martian communication, such as Joseph von Littrow's idea of using fire to draw patterns in the Sahara and Edvard Neovius's detailed plan for a 22,500-arc lamp "optical establishment" in 1875.

Common Colds: Myth vs. Science

Jouko Kortelainen, a licensed dentist, writes about the common misconception that colds are caused by exposure to cold and wet weather. He explains that these are viral infections and that the perceived link to cold weather is likely due to people spending more time indoors during colder seasons, increasing transmission rates. Kortelainen also notes that the feeling of being cold and shivery during a fever can contribute to this misconception.

Correction Regarding Mars Communication Proposal

S. Albert Kivinen writes in to correct an error in a previous Skeptikko issue. He clarifies that the proposal to communicate with Mars by creating geometric patterns was made by General E.E. Neovius in his 1875 book "Vår tids största uppgift" (Our Time's Greatest Task), not by Gauss in 1877 as previously stated. Kivinen recommends Raimo Lehti's essay collection "Leijonan häntä" for interesting historical and scientific material.

Blood Type Diet Theory

Minna Suhonen reviews "Syö oikein oman tyyppisi mukaan" (Eat Right According to Your Type) by Peter J. D'Adamo and Catherine Whitney. The book promotes a theory that individual diets and exercise regimens should be based on blood type (O, A, B, AB), linking each type to ancestral diets and lifestyles. The review outlines the general recommendations for each blood type, noting the theory's popularity.

Ear Candling: Ineffective and Dangerous

Minna Suhonen also contributes a piece titled "Critical comments didn't get through," discussing her experience submitting a critical letter about ear candling to Kotivinkki magazine, which was not published. Instead, the magazine published positive testimonials. Suhonen reiterates her critical stance, stating that ear candling lacks scientific evidence for its effectiveness and is potentially dangerous due to the risk of hot wax causing burns or blockages in the ear canal.

Skepsis ry: Organization Information

The magazine includes several pages detailing Skepsis ry, the Finnish skeptical organization founded in 1987. It outlines the organization's purpose: to promote objective scientific research into paranormal claims, maintain a network of interested individuals, publish articles and bibliographies, and engage in public education. The pages also list contact information for the organization, its board members, regional contacts, and its scientific advisory board. Information on joining Skepsis ry and subscribing to the Skeptikko magazine is also provided.

The Skepsis Challenge

An announcement details a challenge offering 10,000 euros to anyone who can produce a paranormal phenomenon under controlled conditions. Hannu Karttunen and Iiro Seppänen have pledged 2,500 euros each towards the prize. The challenge also includes an option for a humanoid to claim the prize by providing DNA samples.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

Skeptikko consistently adopts a critical and evidence-based approach to claims of the paranormal and pseudoscientific theories. The magazine's editorial stance is to promote scientific literacy, debunk misinformation, and encourage critical thinking. Recurring themes include the examination of anthroposophy, health myths, historical scientific claims, and the promotion of skepticism as a tool for evaluating extraordinary assertions. The publication serves as a platform for reasoned debate and the dissemination of scientific perspectives on topics often shrouded in mystery or pseudoscience.