linuxmafia.com 2016/linuxmafia.com.tar/linuxmafia.com/pub/skeptic/newsletters/reall-news/reall210.txt.gz/reall210.txt

Text File | 1994-10-22 | 27KB | 619 lines

****************************************************************

               The REALL News

****************************************************************

The official newsletter of the Rational Examination Association
              of Lincoln Land

Volume 2, Number 10                                 October 1994

----------------------------------------------------------------
Electronic Version

If you like what you see, please help us continue by sending
in a subscription.  See the end of newsletter for details.
----------------------------------------------------------------

In This Issue:

From the Editor -- Bob Ladendorf
From the Chairman -- David Bloomberg
What It Means to be a Rational Skeptic -- Joe Voelkering
The New Fall Season -- David Bloomberg
REALLity Check -- David Bloomberg
Organizations of Interest to Skeptics

----------------------------------------------------------------

Purpose:
The Rational Examination Association of Lincoln Land (REALL)
is a non-profit educational and scientific organization.  It is
dedicated to the development of rational thinking and the application
of the scientific method toward claims of the paranormal and fringe-
science phenomena.

REALL shall conduct research, convene meetings, publish a newsletter,
and disseminate information to its members and the general public.
Its primary geographic region of coverage is central Illinois.

REALL subscribes to the premise that the scientific method is the
most reliable and self-correcting system for obtaining knowledge
about the world and universe.  REALL not not reject paranormal claims
on a priori grounds, but rather is committed to objective, though
critical, inquiry.

_The REALL News_ is its official newsletter.

Membership information is provided elsewhere in this newsletter.

Board of Directors:  Chairman, David Bloomberg; Assistant Chairman,
Prof. Ron Larkin; Secretary-Treasurer, Kevin Brown; Newsletter
Editor, Bob Ladendorf; At-Large Members, Prof. Steve Egger, Wally
Hartshorn, and Frank Mazo.

Editorial Board:  Bob Ladendorf (Newsletter Editor), David Bloomberg
(electronic version editor), (one vacancy).

REALL
P.O. Box 20302
Springfield, IL 62708

Unless stated otherwise, permission is granted to other skeptic
organizations to reprint articles from _The REALL News_ as long
as proper credit is given.  REALL also requests that you send
copies of your newsletters that reprint our articles to the
above address.

The views expressed in these articles are the views of the individual
authors and do not necessarily represent the views of REALL.

----------------------------------------------------------------

                         From the Editor
                        -- Bob Ladendorf

   One of the great things about skeptics is their
willingness to share information with other like-minded
individuals and organizations that advances critical
thinking in a world full of irrationality. Many of REALL's
articles have been reprinted in other newsletters or
publications, and we occasionally reprint others.

   This month, we feature an article from the North Texas
Skeptics newsletter (called _The Skeptic_) that reminds us
what does and does not constitute skepticism. (Thanks also
to the NTS for providing us with some skeptical thoughts
from scientists and others.)

   We also feature Chairman Bloomberg's regular column on
media criticism (and occasional praise!) called "REALLity
Check" and a special column on the prospects for the Fall TV
season.

   As we approach the end of the year, we anticipate making
a few changes in the newsletter while retaining its monthly
informative articles about rational thinking. If you have
any further comments or suggestions, please send them to me
at REALL's address listed elsewhere on this page, or send us
e-mail at the following addresses:

   Bob Ladendorf__ [e-mail]

   David Bloomberg_
[e-mail]

   We always like to hear from you!

                    /s/ Bob Ladendorf

                  ==============================

             From the Chairman
            -- David Bloomberg

   We had a great meeting last month, and I want to thank
Robert McGrath. There were a lot of new people there,
including one who may come back and speak to us at a later
date. We did some pretty good publicity for this meeting,
including a short article in the _State Journal-Register_
and an interview on WMAY news. Also, I've been spreading
around flyers at the library and Sangamon State University
to catch the attention of those who might be interested in
REALL but just don't know about us yet. If any of you have
other ideas on how to get REALL more exposure, let me know.
Also don't forget that you can give three issues of The
REALL News to a friend for only $3! You know your friends
better than we do, and we've already gained several new
members this way.
   Coming up, we have a lunch meeting on Sunday, October
16th, at 1 p.m., at Shakey's Pizza & Buffet. We often seem
to go off on tangents (often because so many things seem
linked), so there is no set topic. If you'd like to join us
for lunch (sorry, separate checks) and some great
conversation (no charge!), or even if you just have a
question you've been dying to ask, come meet us for pizza!
   And when you come to the meeting, don't forget to bring
your book orders. We are only 2-3 books away from a full
order. Remember that members get 20% off all orders, and pay
only a buck for shipping. Order now, because once we get
this one out, I have no way of knowing when the next one
will go.

                    /s/ David Bloomberg

        ==============================

                     Rational Skepticism
        by Joe Voelkering of the North Texas Skeptics

   Rational skeptics routinely question claims to truth.
They demand 1) explicit definitions; 2) consistent logic,
and 3) convincing evidence before accepting them as being
valid beyond a _reasonable_ doubt. (Those claims are not
regarded as valid beyond _all possible_ doubt, however,
since future discoveries may dictate a reevaluation.)
   The philosophy is an essential part of objective
scientific inquiry or _any other_ search for an extremely
reliable level of knowledge. (Virtually _all_ progress has
been guided by those willing to question, to reevaluate and
to continuously seek more valid answers.)
   It is not limited to scientific disciplines, per se.
It's a _methodology_ for acquiring knowledge. (While it is
essentially the same as the "scientific method" which was
derived from rational skepticism, that methodology can be
applied to many subjects.)
   Rational skepticism tends to produce highly reliable
results. It also promotes flexible decisions and value-
weighted opinions since freedom from certainty is _the_
element that enables us to make value-type judgments.
(Credulity, on the other hand, produces dogmatic-type
decisions and opinions, unreliable results and is
potentially very dangerous.)
   Skepticism cannot endanger _real_ truth. If a contention
is valid, even the most demanding questioning should only
produce additional confirmation. If it's wrong, we gain an
opportunity to discover the _correct_ answer. (Either way,
we come out ahead; sincere questions should be welcomed, not
avoided.)

               What Rational Skeptics Are Not

   There are a number of misconceptions about skeptics. The
most common ones seem to be that they are:
   *Indecisive -- Skeptics are simply realistic. They're
aware that their decisions and opinions are typically based
on the best available information and they proceed
accordingly. (In the flying business, that's called "having
a strong sense for self-preservation.")
   *Cynical, hyper-critical or "negative" _ Actually,
skeptics tend to be very open-minded. No ideas are rejected
"out of hand."
   (Objective questioning is _not_ "criticism" _ and
criticism should _not_ be confused with critical thinking.)
   *Atheists -- There is no (known) objective test for a
Deity, so rational skeptics concede that there's a finite
possibility _either_ way. (They may have opinions as to the
probabilities, however, which can, likewise, be either way.)
   *Advocates of the the paranormal, "fringe" science, etc.
Skeptics spend a fair amount of time evaluating such claims,
but that's simply because there are so many of them.
Uncritical acceptance of them can be hazardous, so a very
critical, but fair, evaluation seems to be dictated.
Interest in evaluating a subject does not imply [that] one
is, in any way, an advocate of it.

[Jan Voelkering is President of the North Texas Skeptics
(NTS). This edited article, which appeared in NTS's The
Skeptic (July 1994), is reprinted with permission of NTS,
P.O. Box 111794, Carrollton, Texas, 75011-1794.]

        ==============================

"I believe that much `knowledge' is indeed merely `memory,'
and that this is why so many misconceptions persist for such
a long time . . . . Because so many people are so thoroughly
schooled in the common misconceptions, however, only the
most brilliantly skeptical of them will ever discover a
mistake. And event then, it will likely be denied for
generations to come."
                                   -- Marilyn vos Savant

"A skeptic is one who is willing to question any claim to
truth, asking for clarity in definition, consistency in
logic, and adequacy of evidence. The use of skepticism is
thus an essential part of objective scientific inquiry and
the search for reliable knowledge."

                                   -- Paul Kurtz

"Science . . . looks skeptically at all claims to knowledge,
old and new. It teaches not blind obedience to those in
authority but to vigorous debate, and in many respects
that's the secret of its success."

                                   -- Carl Sagan

"An optimist thinks the glass is half full; a pessimist
thinks it is half empty; a rational skeptic wonders if it is
simply double the required capacity.

Evaluate the other possibilities."
                                   -- Jan von Glieker

        ==============================

                     The New Fall Season
                   A REALLity Check Extra
                     by David Bloomberg

   This Fall's new TV season has already brought us a large
share of items which may be of interest to REALL members.
From talk shows to cop shows, paranormal and fringe science
issues have hit the small screen.
   In July's "REALLity Check," I mentioned an article by
researchers Vicki Abt and Mel Seesholtz, indicating that
talk shows overemphasize the deviant.
   Oprah Winfrey decided to take on the researchers in a
two-part season opener (9/12 and 9/13). While she did admit
that she went too far on occasion, it was apparent that she
disagreed with the researchers in general, as did most of
the audience. As an example of "going too far," she showed a
part of her show on "womb regression."  Essentially, people
are "hypnotically regressed" back to their birth, and use
what supposedly happened there as an excuse for their
actions as adults. Some of us just might point to this as
yet another example of false memory syndrome, since there is
absolutely no scientific evidence of which I am aware
indicating that we could have memories from when we were in
the womb. But there was this guy, rolling around the floor,
supposedly reliving his c-section birth, and complaining
that he was ready to be born "normally" when the doctor took
him out and accidentally cut his knee. He blames this for
his current inability to finish anything he started.
   I agree with Oprah on this one: She did go too far. Or,
at least, she should have had skeptics on to present the
scientific evidence. But then, I'd say that about almost any
of the talk shows.
   Speaking of talk shows, another piece of bad news for
skeptics is that there are two new pro-paranormal shows
coming to television with the new Fall season. One, _The
Other Side_, is a daytime talk show on NBC, hosted by a
therapist/minister/comic (interesting combination).  While
other talk shows have, of course, hit on these topics, this
one will specialize in it. _TV Guide_ describes it as "a New
Age talk show with an otherworldly twist."
   The other is a late-night syndicated show, _The
Extraordinary_, which talks about the paranormal experiences
of celebrities and "regular" people. The producers have
assured _TV Guide_ that all stories are "legitimate and
documented." Forgive me, but considering some of the
previous shows which have assured us of similar things, I
remain a bit skeptical.
   As if these weren't bad enough, the horrible _Sightings_
program has been reincarnated as a made-for-syndication
program (airing in Springfield on NBC at midnight on
Saturdays). The really depressing thing is that I've already
heard information leading me to believe that they have not
changed their "research" methods any from when they were
originally a FOX show a couple years ago. Also, _Encounters_
is back as an early replacement show. They've added a
subtitle, "The Hidden Truth." Well, with that addition, I'm
sure it will be so much more scientific than before.
   As far as the shows which acknowledge that they are
fiction, two had season premieres dealing with fringe
science issues. _Picket Fences_, dealt with the issue of
creationism in public schools. While they dealt with the
legal issues accurately, the same could not be said for the
scientific ones. The judge, generally portrayed as the most
intelligent person in town, made a speech at the end which
might as well have come from the mouth of a creationist
parroter. He said things like "they still haven't found the
missing link" and "there are no transitional fossils." I
wish they would have taken a little more time to look into
this one, or made it clearer that the judge did not know
what he was talking about here.
   On a brighter note, _Law and Order_, premiered with an
episode about a woman selling an "alternative" cure for
breast cancer. I thought they handled both sides of the
issue quite well, with most of the major points made by both
those for and against alternative medicine being made in a
respectable manner. I was also quite happy with the outcome,
in which that woman was convicted of manslaughter for
portraying her concoction as a "cure" and therefore turning
a woman away from traditional treatment. Yeah, I know, it's
fiction, but it's still nice to see that at least some
people are realizing that alternative medicine can, in fact,
be downright dangerous.
   As far as _Sightings_, _Unsolved Mysteries_,
_Encounters_, and the various other copycats, well, what can
we say? We can only do our best to educate people so they
don't simply swallow the nonsense there without critical
thought.

        ==============================

                       REALLity Check
                     by David Bloomberg

                   The Future of Politics

   I'd like to start this month's column with an unpaid
political message. Normally, I try to stay away from such
things, but this just needs saying.
   Ellen Schanzle-Haskins is running for state senator here
in the Springfield area. She recently sent out an invitation
for a fundraiser on October 6. The front of that invitation
is shown on this page. [Electronic version note:  see below]
The inside is bordered by astrological symbols and says that
"Noted Parapsychologist Greta Alexander" is the main attraction
at this fundraiser. (She's not just a "psychic" now, but a
"noted parapsychologist.") Note that it never says that Alexander
is the one who made the supposed prediction on the front.
Instead, it implies it, but leaves Alexander an "out" if
Schanzle-Haskins loses.
   Now, I won't say anything here about Mrs. Schanzle-
Haskins' politics, but I most certainly will make a
statement about her judgment. Basically: Is this the kind of
person we really want as our representative? I look for
rational, thinking people, and I certainly don't see that in
this candidate. Instead, she is promoting herself as a
supporter of pseudoscience and is trying to get other people
with similar views to vote for and support her. This is
somebody I would consider an opponent of critical thinking,
and my prediction is that she won't be seeing my vote next
month.

==============================================================
                A PREDICTION
  **                                                      **
 ****            HAS BEEN MADE                    ****
  **                                                      **
                THAT

            ELLEN SCHANZLE-HASKINS

               WILL BE

                OUR NEXT STATE SENATOR

==============================================================

[If you got the hardcopy version of this newsletter, you'd have
seen an actual copy of the front of the invitation.  This is the
best we can do with ASCII.  Where the *'s are, there are astrological
symbols for the sun (left) and moon (right).  If you want to join
and get any future graphics, see the form at the end of this file.]


             See No Evil

   If you were squeamish about last month's story of witch
burnings, you'll probably want to skip to the next section
of this article right now. It seems that, almost as if to
prove to us that such things don't just happen in other
countries, we had a similar occurrence here in the U.S.
   Two women were found guilty last month of pummeling
their sister and gouging out her eyes, possibly with their
own fingernails, in order to remove the evil they thought
possessed her.
   The three sisters told police, according to a _Chicago
Tribune_ article (9/22), that they were fleeing demons. They
had been told that they were under demonic attack, so they
and their five children left home. During their two-day
flight from the devil, they left their children with
strangers in Marshall, Texas, tried to drive into traffic
and off bridges, had their rental car fail due to a bad
starter (they thought it was cursed), hitchhiked to Dallas,
and shouted, prayed, and begged for help for about seven
hours. Then they pushed garlic into the one sister's eyes
and began pummeling her, apparently also gouging out her
eyeballs.
   All three sisters claim they cannot remember how the one
lost her eyes, but she does not think her sisters did it.
The court disagreed. The two convicted sisters were
sentenced to 10 years of probation.
   I guess it could have been worse; they could have doused
her with gasoline, and burned the devil out of her.

                        Causes of FMS

   _Newsweek_ (9/26) had a nice article about how the brain
forms false memories. It mentioned two new books coming out,
and links false memories to the "recovered" memories of
childhood sexual abuse, satanism, and UFO abductions.
   The article explains that memories are stored in
separate parts, and that if the linking gets lost for
whatever reason, parts of dreams, actual events, books,
movies, etc. can all get pieced together into what seems to
be a real past experience. Suggestion and hypnosis are two
of the factors which can play a role in causing the mixing
of such memories. Such techniques can cause the formation of
"memories" rather than recalling them.
   Two new books are mentioned in the article, _Making
Monsters: False Memories, Psychotherapy, and Sexual
Hysteria_, by Richard Ofshe and Ethan Watters, and _The Myth
of Repressed Memory_, by Elizabeth Loftus (winner of
CSICOP's In Praise of Reason Award this year). Ofshe and
Watters present information indicating that strong emotions
(such as witnessing a parent murdered) create strong
memories, rather than creating a wall around it.
   One psychiatrist opposed to FMS is quoted in the article
as saying "we have no way of judging independently [reports
of] childhood experiences." The article points out that
while this may be ok to say in a therapy situation, it is
certainly not ok when these "memories" are sending people to
jail. I would add that the psychiatrist is simply wrong in
some cases. Sometimes it is, indeed, possible to judge
whether or not the childhood "memories" are true, such as
when the memories involve supposed harm, like stab wounds,
done to the person making the claims (as are often contained
in satanic accusation). We should never simply assume it's
impossible to independently judge a claim.

                    Plants are People Too

   Malcolm Wilkins, a British botany professor, claims that
plants have feelings and even cry out for help. Well, they
make inaudible crackling noises when they want water,
anyway, according to a _Chicago Tribune_ editorial (9/20).
The editorial asks the important question: "How he knows
they make noises that are inaudible is another matter."
   They were being funny, but it does pose a good question.
Even if he has detected such noises in plants that need
water, what makes him think they are motivated by any kind
of "feeling"? Dead wood cracks as it dries, too; does that
mean even dead wood has feelings? Also, what evolutionary
purpose would this serve, if it were motivated by feelings?
In the wild, either it rains or it doesn't. Crackling
certainly wouldn't help them get water sooner. And even now,
he says it's inaudible, so why do they bother?
   In space, nobody can hear you scream. I guess the same
is true here on Earth, if you're a plant.

                     Supplemental Battle

   In the last days of this Congressional session, it looks
like they actually passed a decent law (it was bound to
happen sooner or later). This legislation will require
manufacturers of vitamins, minerals, herbal products, and
amino acids to follow strict rules on health claims for a
four-year period.
   This bill (President Clinton is expected to sign it but
hasn't as of this writing) sets the first safety standard
for such dietary supplements. First and foremost, they must
not pose a "significant or unreasonable risk" of injury when
they are used as directed. Also, they have to show the FDA
proof that they are safe 75 days before they go on the
market. In addition, the supplements must comply with rules
restricting the kinds of health claims they can make. The
current FDA standards (which are, surprisingly, not applied
to such supplements), require significant scientific
agreement on the benefits of a product before it can make a
claim. Manufacturers claim those rules are too restrictive.
   This bill creates a presidential commission to study the
issue and decide how to handle such health claims. I don't
really see what's at issue -- if you want to make a claim,
you should have to prove the claim true, otherwise it's
fraud at the very least. But then, I'm not an elected
representative, so I must be missing something of great
importance. Maybe I wasn't lobbied enough. Oh, did I mention
the $2.5 million the industry spent to fight the original
version of the bill?

        ==============================

         Organizations of Interest to Skeptics

Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the
   Paranormal (CSICOP)
P.O. Box 703
Buffalo, NY  14226-9973
Ph.:  [phone]

False Memory Syndrome Foundation
3401 Market St., Suite 130
Philadelphia, PA  19104
Ph.:  [phone]

National Center for Science Education (NCSE)
P.O. Box 9477
Berkeley, CA  94709-0744
Ph.:  [phone]

National Council Against Health Fraud
P.O. Box 1276
Loma Linda, CA  92354
Ph.:  [phone]

St. Louis Association for Teaching and Education (SLATE)
P.O. Box 462
O'Fallon, IL  62269-0462

Skeptics Society
2761 N. Marengo Ave.
Altadena, CA  91001
Ph.:  [phone]

        ==============================

              A Nod to Our Patrons

REALL would like to thank our patron members.  Through their extra
generosity, REALL is able to continue to grow as a force for critical
thinking in Central Illinois.  Patron members are those giving $50
or more.  To become a patron of REALL, please see the membership
form below.  Patron members are:

David Bloomberg, Springfield    John Lockard, Jr., Urbana
David Brown, Danville           Robert Smet, Ph.D., Springfield
Alan Burge, D.D.S., Morton      Edward Staehlin, Park Forest
Wally Hartshorn, Springfield    Ranse Traxler, O'Fallon
Bob Ladendorf, Springfield

           ==============================

            Letters to the Editor

    We at REALL encourage letters to the editor about any article
or topic covered in The REALL News.  We want to make this a forum
for _all_ our members.  (Letters may be edited if too long.  Name,
address and phone number must be included with the letter.)

----------------------------------------------------------------

         Predictions for Future Issues

** Looking into the _Sun_ -- and other tabloids
** Cancer Clusters
** Bovine Growth Hormone
** Anti-Oxidants

----------------------------------------------------------------

            Skeptics Online

If you have a computer and a modem, you owe it to yourself to
participate in the skeptic message areas on the computer BBS
networks.  Here in Springfield, call The Temples of Syrinx at
[phone].  David Bloomberg operates this BBS, which carries
the FidoNet SKEPTIC, EVOLUTION, UFO, and FMS conferences,
internationally distributed message areas for discussing topics
of interest to skeptics.  He is also carrying ParaNet conferences,
all dedicated to UFO and paranormal topics.  You can also find a
wide variety of skeptic, scientific, UFO, FMS, evolution/creation,
and urban legend text files.

         The Temples of Syrinx -- [phone]
----------------------------------------------------------------

             MEMBERSHIP FORM

Regular membership includes _The REALL News_ and all of the benefits
of membership.  A subscription to _The REALL News_, without membership,
is available.  Full-time students can join at the discounted rate.
A patron membership includes all of the benefits of a regular membership,
plus a listing in _The REALL News_ and our eternal gratitude (where
"eternal" is defined as "one year").

Name: _________________________________________________________

Address: ______________________________________________________

City, State, ZIP: _____________________________________________

Phone: ________________________________________________________

Interests: ____________________________________________________

        ___      Regular Membership ($20/Year)
        ___      Student Membership ($15/Year)
        ___      Family Membership ($30/Year)
        ___      Patron Membership ($50 or more/Year)
        ___      Subscription Only ($12/Year)
        ___      Trial or Gift Subscription ($3 for 3 issues)

Bring to a meeting or mail to:  REALL,
                P.O. Box 20302
                Springfield, IL 62708