Virginity Claims Despoiled... (Melon Farmers, 24th December 2010)
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Saturday, 25 December 2010
wishes
Happy Celebration-of-a-biological-impossibility, everyone!
Virginity Claims Despoiled... (Melon Farmers, 24th December 2010)
Virginity Claims Despoiled... (Melon Farmers, 24th December 2010)
Saturday, 1 May 2010
Children, sex is bad, mmm'kay?
Children 'over-exposed to sexual imagery' (BBC News, Friday, 26 February 2010)
Sorry to be a pain, but, where is the evidence?
Sexualisation is harmful? What exactly is sexualisation and why is it harmful? The dictionary defines "sexualisation" as "To make sexual in character or quality". Then what is the alternative? Let people grow up asexual? Isn't that more harmful, to survival of humanity for example?
Printing photos of topless models in British tabloids is an abject phenomenon that a few more civilised countries somehow can do without. Publishers are given a choice to print those tabloids, and we are given a choice not to buy them, but some Neanderthals among us do anyway. I think this is called freedom, you know, that trifling issue that brave men and women gave their lives for throughout the centuries.
Ah, "values", dictated by Big Brother. Was this 'expert' recruited by the Labour government by any chance?
"Ban", "block" and snitching. Yes, this is New Labour all right. If people do something that is inconsistent with your world view, just criminalise them and put them in jail if they persist.
Have a look at the web site of TV personality Dr Papadopoulos: Dr. Linda. Should I believe her cover photo is not digitally altered? If it is not, then an unlikely amount of make-up was applied. This is a good role model for young women is it?
So in countries where there are no "sexualised images", there is a much lower incidence of violence against women? Well not exactly. The reason why women in e.g. Saudi Arabia don't report rape is because it is not in their interest:
Rape victim sentenced to 200 lashes and six months in jail (The Guardian, Saturday 17 November 2007)
The last thing this government is interested in is debate. They are interested in pushing through their narrow-minded plans for social engineering. New Labour has learned to its detriment that debate and hiring critical people are bad ideas:
Profile: Professor David Nutt (BBC News, Friday, 30 October 2009)
and
Drug adviser joins exodus after ban on mephedrone (Guardian, Friday 2 April 2010)
So instead of asking for independent scientific advice, Labour now recruits malleable TV personalities to write reports with pre-determined conclusions, dressing up opinion as science.
They already know, do they? How many parents were asked?
As to porn hysteria:
We must speed up to protect children from online porn – expert (Scotsman, 30 March 2010)
Wrong: Iran, China and North Korea beat us to it.
New Labour protects us from the evil interwebs. Who protects us from New Labour?
Let us on May 6 please wipe this club of warmongers, social engineers, zealots, cheats and charlatans off the face of the earth.
(But don't mind me, I'm just 'bigoted'.)
Author Dr Linda Papadopoulos said there was a clear link between sexualised imagery and violence towards females.
Sorry to be a pain, but, where is the evidence?
"Unless sexualisation is accepted as harmful, we will miss an important opportunity…
Sexualisation is harmful? What exactly is sexualisation and why is it harmful? The dictionary defines "sexualisation" as "To make sexual in character or quality". Then what is the alternative? Let people grow up asexual? Isn't that more harmful, to survival of humanity for example?
Printing photos of topless models in British tabloids is an abject phenomenon that a few more civilised countries somehow can do without. Publishers are given a choice to print those tabloids, and we are given a choice not to buy them, but some Neanderthals among us do anyway. I think this is called freedom, you know, that trifling issue that brave men and women gave their lives for throughout the centuries.
to broaden young people's beliefs about where their values lies," said Dr Papadopoulos, a psychologist.
Ah, "values", dictated by Big Brother. Was this 'expert' recruited by the Labour government by any chance?
Other recommendations include:
* A ban on "sexualised" music videos before the TV watershed
* A ban on Jobcentres advertising positions in lap-dancing clubs and massage parlours
* Internet service providers to block access to pro-bulimia and pro-anorexia websites
* The creation of a website where parents can report any "irresponsible marketing" they believe sexualises young children.
"Ban", "block" and snitching. Yes, this is New Labour all right. If people do something that is inconsistent with your world view, just criminalise them and put them in jail if they persist.
Dr Papadopoulos said there should also be symbols to show when a published photograph had been digitally altered - such as pictures of celebrities manipulated to make them appear thinner.
Have a look at the web site of TV personality Dr Papadopoulos: Dr. Linda. Should I believe her cover photo is not digitally altered? If it is not, then an unlikely amount of make-up was applied. This is a good role model for young women is it?
Dr Papadopoulos said: "The evidence gathered in the review suggests a clear link between consumption of sexualised images, tendency to view women as objects and the acceptance of aggressive attitudes and behaviour as the norm.
So in countries where there are no "sexualised images", there is a much lower incidence of violence against women? Well not exactly. The reason why women in e.g. Saudi Arabia don't report rape is because it is not in their interest:
Rape victim sentenced to 200 lashes and six months in jail (The Guardian, Saturday 17 November 2007)
The review forms part of the Home Office's broader attempts to have a louder public debate about how to combat violence against women and girls.
The last thing this government is interested in is debate. They are interested in pushing through their narrow-minded plans for social engineering. New Labour has learned to its detriment that debate and hiring critical people are bad ideas:
Profile: Professor David Nutt (BBC News, Friday, 30 October 2009)
and
Drug adviser joins exodus after ban on mephedrone (Guardian, Friday 2 April 2010)
So instead of asking for independent scientific advice, Labour now recruits malleable TV personalities to write reports with pre-determined conclusions, dressing up opinion as science.
Home Secretary Alan Johnson said: "We know that parents are concerned about the pressures their children are under at a much younger age, which is why we have already committed to a number of the recommendations in this report.
They already know, do they? How many parents were asked?
As to porn hysteria:
We must speed up to protect children from online porn – expert (Scotsman, 30 March 2010)
"And I'm very proud that Britain is now the only country in the world to have a comprehensive internet safety strategy."
Wrong: Iran, China and North Korea beat us to it.
New Labour protects us from the evil interwebs. Who protects us from New Labour?
Let us on May 6 please wipe this club of warmongers, social engineers, zealots, cheats and charlatans off the face of the earth.
(But don't mind me, I'm just 'bigoted'.)
Thursday, 1 April 2010
Reason beats quacks (this time)
Science writer Simon Singh wins libel appeal after 'Orwellian nightmare' (Guardian, Thursday 1 April 2010)
But a grim reminder of the dark forces that are among us:
Libel laws: judging the truth (Guardian, Friday 2 April 2010)
But a grim reminder of the dark forces that are among us:
Libel laws: judging the truth (Guardian, Friday 2 April 2010)
Four Labour MPs joined Conservatives and Lib Dems to block a government change to the libel system.
Friday, 1 January 2010
next decade
As a belated Christmas present, see:
Cassini Holiday Movies Showcase Dance of Saturn's Moons
Who needs religion when there are true wonders.
See also:
Those who use and abuse the term "new atheism" ought to listen to this interview with Bertrand Russell in 1959, who sums up all the relevant arguments and counter-arguments in a nutshell. E.g.:
Irrespective of his sharp mind and exceptional eloquence, Bertrand Russell in fact only repeated existing arguments. For example, the suggestion that there is a causal relationship between belief in a god and morality was already convincingly refuted by Socrates.
So what is "new" about "new atheists"? Perhaps it is that theists feel more threatened than ever, now that they seem to be losing ground to the voices of reason, at least in the Western world. By calling their opponents "new", they demand that atheists justify their position from scratch, as if such justification hasn't been around for at least two and a half millenia. By bickering about the "tone" of the arguments set forth by "militant" or "fundamentalist" atheists, they attempt to distract attention from a lost cause on the intellectual and scientific battleground, trying to take the discourse into the realm of cowardly irrational sentiments and ad hominem attacks.
Belief in, and promotion of something that is patently false isn't morally defensible, and has never been. What may have changed over the last decade is the growing awareness that religion is a serious threat to civilisation. The Aids epidemic in Africa can be largely blamed on Christian and Muslim interference in prevention programmes. G.W. Bush's motivations for the disastrous war in Iraq were his wacky beliefs in Old Testament prophesies, and he found his ally in Tony Blair, whose deranged religious convictions were still in the closet at that time.
As to the 9/11 attacks, there is no rational basis for criticising Islamic fundamentalism without criticising Islam, and similarly, there is no rational basis for criticising Islam without also criticising Judaeo-Christian beliefs and related forms of delusion, including pseudo-science. Suppressing criticism because of the assumption that believers are such vulnerable weaklings that they would be unable to cope with rational arguments could well be regarded as a form of racism. Respect is due to people, but no respect at all is due to a mistaken belief, whether it is astrology, homoeopathy, Scientology or Islam.
At the top of the list of my hopes for humanity in the coming decade is therefore that religion will continue to lose its unwarranted air of respectability, and that some of the most serious forms of quackery will follow suit.
Some more pointers:
'The Evolution of Confusion' by Dan Dennett, AAI 2009
'Morality: From the Heavens or From Nature?' by Dr. Andy Thomson, AAI 2009
Scientology 2009…Year Of Epic Fail
Cassini Holiday Movies Showcase Dance of Saturn's Moons
Who needs religion when there are true wonders.
See also:
Those who use and abuse the term "new atheism" ought to listen to this interview with Bertrand Russell in 1959, who sums up all the relevant arguments and counter-arguments in a nutshell. E.g.:
It seems to me a fundamental dishonesty and a fundamental treachery to intellectual integrity to hold a belief because you think it is useful and not because you think it's true.
Irrespective of his sharp mind and exceptional eloquence, Bertrand Russell in fact only repeated existing arguments. For example, the suggestion that there is a causal relationship between belief in a god and morality was already convincingly refuted by Socrates.
So what is "new" about "new atheists"? Perhaps it is that theists feel more threatened than ever, now that they seem to be losing ground to the voices of reason, at least in the Western world. By calling their opponents "new", they demand that atheists justify their position from scratch, as if such justification hasn't been around for at least two and a half millenia. By bickering about the "tone" of the arguments set forth by "militant" or "fundamentalist" atheists, they attempt to distract attention from a lost cause on the intellectual and scientific battleground, trying to take the discourse into the realm of cowardly irrational sentiments and ad hominem attacks.
Belief in, and promotion of something that is patently false isn't morally defensible, and has never been. What may have changed over the last decade is the growing awareness that religion is a serious threat to civilisation. The Aids epidemic in Africa can be largely blamed on Christian and Muslim interference in prevention programmes. G.W. Bush's motivations for the disastrous war in Iraq were his wacky beliefs in Old Testament prophesies, and he found his ally in Tony Blair, whose deranged religious convictions were still in the closet at that time.
As to the 9/11 attacks, there is no rational basis for criticising Islamic fundamentalism without criticising Islam, and similarly, there is no rational basis for criticising Islam without also criticising Judaeo-Christian beliefs and related forms of delusion, including pseudo-science. Suppressing criticism because of the assumption that believers are such vulnerable weaklings that they would be unable to cope with rational arguments could well be regarded as a form of racism. Respect is due to people, but no respect at all is due to a mistaken belief, whether it is astrology, homoeopathy, Scientology or Islam.
At the top of the list of my hopes for humanity in the coming decade is therefore that religion will continue to lose its unwarranted air of respectability, and that some of the most serious forms of quackery will follow suit.
Some more pointers:
'The Evolution of Confusion' by Dan Dennett, AAI 2009
'Morality: From the Heavens or From Nature?' by Dr. Andy Thomson, AAI 2009
Scientology 2009…Year Of Epic Fail
Friday, 30 October 2009
Labour in La La Land
Chief drug adviser David Nutt sacked over cannabis stance (Guardian, Friday 30 October 2009)
Last time scientists were told to lie in order to support government policy, on penalty of dismissal, was under Ceauşescu.
Science is no longer wanted, nor critical thinking, nor common sense, nor human rights, nor common decency. But who needs all that when we have New Labour ideology.
Last time scientists were told to lie in order to support government policy, on penalty of dismissal, was under Ceauşescu.
Science is no longer wanted, nor critical thinking, nor common sense, nor human rights, nor common decency. But who needs all that when we have New Labour ideology.
Monday, 3 August 2009
Facebook criticised by Archbishop
Facebook criticised by Archbishop (BBC News, Sunday, 2 August 2009)
There are many bad things one can say about Facebook. The many bugs and browser-specific features reveal it was built by incompetent dimwits. The privacy policies, or their absence, one should be extremely wary of as well.
Nevertheless, after taking precautions, I signed up and I now find Facebook useful to keep informed about social events, where I meet people face-to-face. I concede however that other people may interact with their friend online in place of face-to-face meetings.
So does Facebook on the average lead to more face-to-face meetings, or to fewer? Well, there is this revolutionary new idea to find out things about the world. It is called scientific inquiry. One study on Facebook is for example:
Are Facebook Friends Like Face-to-Face Friends: Investigating Relations Between the Use of Social Networking Websites and Social Capital (Annual meeting of the International Communication Association, 2008)
One major disadvantage of science is that it requires effort. It is much easier to become the leader of some fruity club that worships pink unicorns, celestial teapots or whatever other garbled hogwash. And then you can say whatever you want, without obligation to offer any empirical support whatsoever. Your words will be jotted down by open-mouthed BBC News churnalists desperate to reach their quotas, and published on the front page of their website.
There are many bad things one can say about Facebook. The many bugs and browser-specific features reveal it was built by incompetent dimwits. The privacy policies, or their absence, one should be extremely wary of as well.
Nevertheless, after taking precautions, I signed up and I now find Facebook useful to keep informed about social events, where I meet people face-to-face. I concede however that other people may interact with their friend online in place of face-to-face meetings.
So does Facebook on the average lead to more face-to-face meetings, or to fewer? Well, there is this revolutionary new idea to find out things about the world. It is called scientific inquiry. One study on Facebook is for example:
Are Facebook Friends Like Face-to-Face Friends: Investigating Relations Between the Use of Social Networking Websites and Social Capital (Annual meeting of the International Communication Association, 2008)
One major disadvantage of science is that it requires effort. It is much easier to become the leader of some fruity club that worships pink unicorns, celestial teapots or whatever other garbled hogwash. And then you can say whatever you want, without obligation to offer any empirical support whatsoever. Your words will be jotted down by open-mouthed BBC News churnalists desperate to reach their quotas, and published on the front page of their website.
Tuesday, 23 June 2009
Energy saving madness
Sainsbury's brings green power to the checkout with 'kinetic plates' (Guardian, Monday 15 June 2009)
In other words, it creates energy out of nowhere. Right.
"Hey you guys, let's drive our Hummer 30 miles to Sainsbury's and pass over the kinetic road plates! To save energy!"
The system, pioneered for Sainsbury's by Peter Hughes of Highway Energy Systems, does not affect the car or fuel efficiency,
In other words, it creates energy out of nowhere. Right.
"Hey you guys, let's drive our Hummer 30 miles to Sainsbury's and pass over the kinetic road plates! To save energy!"
Saturday, 14 February 2009
Inherit the wind
Last Thursday was the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin, who contributed the single most powerful theory that shaped our understanding of who we are and where we come from. This November, it will be 150 years ago when On the Origin of Species was published. Those who still harbour religious beliefs are incorrigeable fools, and that's official now.
Before anyone objects that evolution must not be equated to atheism, it should be pointed out that the suggestion that evolution implies atheism originally stems from religious circles. If for no other reason than the spectacular acting, highly recommended is: Inherit the wind, the 1960 film related to the Scopes Monkey Trial, with Spencer Tracy and Fredric March.
Before anyone objects that evolution must not be equated to atheism, it should be pointed out that the suggestion that evolution implies atheism originally stems from religious circles. If for no other reason than the spectacular acting, highly recommended is: Inherit the wind, the 1960 film related to the Scopes Monkey Trial, with Spencer Tracy and Fredric March.
Modern Liberty
Let the convention on Modern Liberty at 28th Feb 2009 be a turning point after a decade of unbridled erosion of civil liberties by New Labour. Some of the keynote speakers are strange bedfellows, such as David Davis, whose motives in the context of the rejected 42-day detention legislation seemed to be about electoral opportunism more than anything else, and Shami Chakrabarti, who has done so much for freedom of religion at the expense of freedom of expression and freedom from religion. Let us hope that ideological differences between the various participants of the conference will be set aside in favour of effective opposition to the government's totalitarian aspirations, and its ever growing disregard for democracy, justice, common sense, scientific evidence, in short a disregard for any but their own petty-minded, deluded thoughts.
Thursday, 25 December 2008
star of wonder
My Christmas message? There's probably no God (Guardian, Tuesday 23 December 2008)
Polly Toynbee's article doesn't contain much that we didn't know before, but we need more of this as long as media such as the BBC continue to feed us theist crap like this, disguised as science reporting:
Star of wonder (BBC News, Tuesday, 23 December 2008)
Basically the same 'story' the BBC have been recycling year after year, e.g. December 24, 1998; February 23, 1999; November 28, 2003; December 22, 2005; May 8, 2006.
Polly Toynbee's article doesn't contain much that we didn't know before, but we need more of this as long as media such as the BBC continue to feed us theist crap like this, disguised as science reporting:
Star of wonder (BBC News, Tuesday, 23 December 2008)
Basically the same 'story' the BBC have been recycling year after year, e.g. December 24, 1998; February 23, 1999; November 28, 2003; December 22, 2005; May 8, 2006.
Friday, 12 December 2008
virtual reality
Gordon Brown saved the world and a fake Simpsons cartoon is child abuse. Reality has ceased to be a relevant concept. More examples:
Stone jailed for Stormont attack (BBC News, Monday, 8 December 2008)
Spending time in prison is also performance art. It now appears the judge is an art lover.
How do avatars have sex? (BBC News, Friday, 14 November 2008)
Call me old-fashioned...
As usual, last month's prize for the most warped view on reality goes to the Labour government:
£1,000 fine for wrong ID details (BBC News, Friday, 21 November 2008)
Open verdict at Menezes inquest (BBC News, Friday, 12 December 2008)
A gagged jury returns the only reasonable verdict that remains and the response by wacky Jacqui is:
So if police shoot an innocent and unarmed civilian, then feel sorry for the police. Because the police are the police, and civilians are just civilians.
The Labour government is making it rather hard to still think of policeman as an honourable profession, a feeling that I may share with many thousands of others who have been the victim of random stop and search under Section 44(2) of the Terrorism Act, such as Terence Eden.
Arrogance, megalomania and sheer stupidity among the British police force are not restricted to the Menezes killing. The following is nowhere as serious, but it is symptomatic that anyone with the slightest understanding of computer security falls on the floor laughing when they read comments from a computer 'expert' of the police force:
UK police: 'We need crime breathalysers for PCs' (Silicon.com, 11 December 2008)
Councils are using 'lie detectors' about as reliable as the ancient Roman practice of inspecting the entrails of sacrificed animals (but less bloody):
Lie detectors for benefit claims (BBC News, Thursday, 4 December 2008)
When it comes to distinguishing make-believe from reality, there is a glimmer of hope. For the first time in years, the word 'piracy' is used for what it means, rather than as a catch-all for anything that makes the music, movie and game industries lose revenues from the sale of overpriced rubbish:
US asks UN to allow pirate hunters into Somalia (Guardian, Friday 12 December 2008)
Stone jailed for Stormont attack (BBC News, Monday, 8 December 2008)
Stone had denied the charges, claiming the incident was performance art.
Spending time in prison is also performance art. It now appears the judge is an art lover.
How do avatars have sex? (BBC News, Friday, 14 November 2008)
So how do computerised characters have sex?
"First you need to buy genitals,"
Call me old-fashioned...
As usual, last month's prize for the most warped view on reality goes to the Labour government:
£1,000 fine for wrong ID details (BBC News, Friday, 21 November 2008)
the government plans to fine innocent people for inaccuracies on the government's own database
Open verdict at Menezes inquest (BBC News, Friday, 12 December 2008)
A gagged jury returns the only reasonable verdict that remains and the response by wacky Jacqui is:
What we have learnt from the accounts of the tragic events that day reminds us all of the extremely demanding circumstances under which the police work to protect us from further terrorist attack,
So if police shoot an innocent and unarmed civilian, then feel sorry for the police. Because the police are the police, and civilians are just civilians.
The Labour government is making it rather hard to still think of policeman as an honourable profession, a feeling that I may share with many thousands of others who have been the victim of random stop and search under Section 44(2) of the Terrorism Act, such as Terence Eden.
Arrogance, megalomania and sheer stupidity among the British police force are not restricted to the Menezes killing. The following is nowhere as serious, but it is symptomatic that anyone with the slightest understanding of computer security falls on the floor laughing when they read comments from a computer 'expert' of the police force:
UK police: 'We need crime breathalysers for PCs' (Silicon.com, 11 December 2008)
Councils are using 'lie detectors' about as reliable as the ancient Roman practice of inspecting the entrails of sacrificed animals (but less bloody):
Lie detectors for benefit claims (BBC News, Thursday, 4 December 2008)
When it comes to distinguishing make-believe from reality, there is a glimmer of hope. For the first time in years, the word 'piracy' is used for what it means, rather than as a catch-all for anything that makes the music, movie and game industries lose revenues from the sale of overpriced rubbish:
US asks UN to allow pirate hunters into Somalia (Guardian, Friday 12 December 2008)
Wednesday, 12 November 2008
Prince hopes to pass on charities
Prince hopes to pass on charities (BBC News, Wednesday, 12 November 2008)
That a toxic substance would obtain medicinal value when it is diluted to such an extent as if it were one pulverised grain of rice in a sphere of water the size of the solar system (including Pluto), and this repeated two billion times, this idea is not stark raving mad. I repeat: not stark raving mad. Because Prince Charles said so.
Heartily recommended viewing:
James Randi explains homeopathy
which is part of:
James Randi Lecture at Princeton 2001
Addendum
Not to be missed:
Richard Dawkins interviews Prof. Michael Baum (RichardDawkins.net, December 22, 2008)
He said he hoped one day people would realise "that some of the things I've been trying to do aren't all that mad".
That a toxic substance would obtain medicinal value when it is diluted to such an extent as if it were one pulverised grain of rice in a sphere of water the size of the solar system (including Pluto), and this repeated two billion times, this idea is not stark raving mad. I repeat: not stark raving mad. Because Prince Charles said so.
Heartily recommended viewing:
James Randi explains homeopathy
which is part of:
James Randi Lecture at Princeton 2001
Addendum
Not to be missed:
Richard Dawkins interviews Prof. Michael Baum (RichardDawkins.net, December 22, 2008)
Sunday, 2 November 2008
Out of body or all in the mind?
Out of body or all in the mind? (BBC News, Friday, 24 October 2008)
There we go again. The last article on this topic didn't include enough woo-woo yet.
For any responsible journalist with a little knowledge of science and non-science, alarm bells should start ringing at the first mention of quantum physics in a context where it has no business. But no, phrases such as:
are used to try to pull down any natural defences that BBC News readers might have against supernatural claptrap.
To the BBC's credit, they do cite Susan Blackmore, world-renowned skeptic and expert on near-death experiences. But woo-woo must prevail, so the final words are:
There we go again. The last article on this topic didn't include enough woo-woo yet.
He explained: "We know that in the sub-atomic world, smaller than atoms - things behave in really bizarre ways we don't understand, they call it quantum physics.
For any responsible journalist with a little knowledge of science and non-science, alarm bells should start ringing at the first mention of quantum physics in a context where it has no business. But no, phrases such as:
but dealing with these patients when he worked in an intensive care unit, has forced him to challenge his own scepticism.
are used to try to pull down any natural defences that BBC News readers might have against supernatural claptrap.
To the BBC's credit, they do cite Susan Blackmore, world-renowned skeptic and expert on near-death experiences. But woo-woo must prevail, so the final words are:
"When I die I'm going to go somewhere else. I'm 110% what I saw is what I saw."
Monday, 20 October 2008
Airliner had near miss with UFO
Airliner had near miss with UFO (BBC News, Monday, 20 October 2008)
As so often in these kinds of BBC News stories, it is difficult to find falsehoods, and the cited expert is an 'open-minded sceptic', whose past work on UFOs and UFOlogy has been sound and helpful. Nevertheless, the weak of mind may well take the title and some paragraphs as support of the claim that extraterrestrials are fucking with us.
The phrase "it is career suicide to have your name associated with UFOs" suggests existence of self-censorship keeping the truth from being discovered, and it may be all too tempting for believers to take the phrase "and make your mind up" and the comments form at the end of the article as supportive of a relativistic stance.
As so often in these kinds of BBC News stories, it is difficult to find falsehoods, and the cited expert is an 'open-minded sceptic', whose past work on UFOs and UFOlogy has been sound and helpful. Nevertheless, the weak of mind may well take the title and some paragraphs as support of the claim that extraterrestrials are fucking with us.
The phrase "it is career suicide to have your name associated with UFOs" suggests existence of self-censorship keeping the truth from being discovered, and it may be all too tempting for believers to take the phrase "and make your mind up" and the comments form at the end of the article as supportive of a relativistic stance.
Sunday, 19 October 2008
there's weird and there's weird
Healer methods doubted by expert (BBC News, Wednesday, 8 October 2008)
Curious. The guilt of the quack seems to depend on whether his holistic healing methods are more wacky than holistic healing methods are anyway. My understanding was that if reason goes out the window, then nothing is too weird. The legal profession apparently has a different view.
Professor Ernst, professor of complementary and alternative medicine at Exeter University, was asked about evidence from the woman about how Mr Hands had touched her.
[...]
Prof Ernst told the court that the methods she described were "not part of lymphatic drainage of the groin".
Curious. The guilt of the quack seems to depend on whether his holistic healing methods are more wacky than holistic healing methods are anyway. My understanding was that if reason goes out the window, then nothing is too weird. The legal profession apparently has a different view.
quantum cryptography
'Unbreakable' encryption unveiled (BBC News, Thursday, 9 October 2008)
Experts in the field of computer security are aware that quantum cryptography is an answer in search of a question. But let reality not spoil a good story.
Recommended reading is:
Quantum Cryptography: As Awesome As It Is Pointless by Bruce Schneier (Wired, 10.16.08)
Experts in the field of computer security are aware that quantum cryptography is an answer in search of a question. But let reality not spoil a good story.
Recommended reading is:
Quantum Cryptography: As Awesome As It Is Pointless by Bruce Schneier (Wired, 10.16.08)
afrocentrism
What does medicine owe to Africa? (BBC News, Friday, 17 October 2008)
Perhaps that is because there is no such thing as "African medicine", no more than there is an "African culture" or an "African race". Equating Ancient Egypt to Africa, and overstating cultural and scientific achievements by peoples from Africa in ancient times is known as afrocentrism, a pseudo-science especially rampant in the US, where it is now considered offensive to point out that the Egyptian kings were in general not black (the Meroitic kings were an exception). If the BBC News article was not written by an afrocentrist pur sang, you could have fooled me.
See also:
Fallacies of Afrocentrism by Grover Furr (Montclair State University)
But there is a debate to be had about why Indian and Chinese medicines which you can get on the High Street, but African medicine is still very much a taboo subject.
Perhaps that is because there is no such thing as "African medicine", no more than there is an "African culture" or an "African race". Equating Ancient Egypt to Africa, and overstating cultural and scientific achievements by peoples from Africa in ancient times is known as afrocentrism, a pseudo-science especially rampant in the US, where it is now considered offensive to point out that the Egyptian kings were in general not black (the Meroitic kings were an exception). If the BBC News article was not written by an afrocentrist pur sang, you could have fooled me.
See also:
Fallacies of Afrocentrism by Grover Furr (Montclair State University)
Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax
Why you should avoid 'mingqutnguaq' (BBC News, Saturday, 18 October 2008)
It seems BBC News has now started recycling news that must be at least 25 years old, which includes perpetuating an urban myth. The justification seems to be little more than a new video of a native Inuit blabbing about snow and ice.
The idea that Eskimo languages have many more words for snow than an average language from a culture familiar with sub-zero temperatures is known as the Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax, and dates from the beginning of the 20th century. It was debunked by anthropologist Laura Martin in the 1980s. See also:
Pullum, Geoffrey K. (1991). The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax and other
Irreverent Essays on the Study of Language. University of Chicago Press.
It seems BBC News has now started recycling news that must be at least 25 years old, which includes perpetuating an urban myth. The justification seems to be little more than a new video of a native Inuit blabbing about snow and ice.
The idea that Eskimo languages have many more words for snow than an average language from a culture familiar with sub-zero temperatures is known as the Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax, and dates from the beginning of the 20th century. It was debunked by anthropologist Laura Martin in the 1980s. See also:
Pullum, Geoffrey K. (1991). The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax and other
Irreverent Essays on the Study of Language. University of Chicago Press.
Sunday, 21 September 2008
Millionaire spooked from mansion
Millionaire spooked from mansion (BBC News, Sunday, 21 September 2008)
With many people still relying on the BBC as their main news source, no wonder democracy in the UK is under such a strain.
What's next? Horoscopes and Elvis sightings?
Addendum:
Audio slideshow: The art of mathematics
Why do people waste their time with ghost stories, woo-woo medicine, religion and all that bunk when there is science?
Paranormal experts were unable to solve the problem.WTF?!
With many people still relying on the BBC as their main news source, no wonder democracy in the UK is under such a strain.
What's next? Horoscopes and Elvis sightings?
Addendum:
Audio slideshow: The art of mathematics
Why do people waste their time with ghost stories, woo-woo medicine, religion and all that bunk when there is science?
Saturday, 20 September 2008
Sex offenders to face lie tests
Sex offenders to face lie tests (BBC News, Friday, 19 September 2008)
It won't be long until we can read in the newspapers:
Labour to replace police investigations by 16th century witch-hunting methods
Decades of experience with polygraphs used by the US federal government have established that the high number of false negatives and the high number of false positives make the method useless for any purpose whatsoever. For example, all those who were tested and later turned out to be spies had passed the test successfully, while the careers of several innocent people were ruined after they failed a lie detector test.
Polygraph examiners are the lowest of the low. With their bogus claims to possess magical powers of truth finding, they are as deceitful and fraudulent as dowsers, psychics, chiropractors, homoeopaths, and senior members of the Labour Party. Letting them have any function at all in any kind of legal process will cause immeasurable damage. Innocent people will be made to suffer because of false positives, and a misplaced sense of security in the case of false negatives will endanger potential victims.
Once more it is demonstrated that people's brains stop functioning as soon as an issue involves child abuse. No one in Britain would propose use of polygraphs in the case of mass murder, terrorism, or the treason committed by Blair and Brown over the war in Iraq. So why is it okay to apply polygraphs to sex offenders? Because with their conviction, they forfeited their human rights for all eternity? Then why not reintroduce trial by drowning? That would be the ultimate solution to keeping these freaks away from our children.
It won't be long until we can read in the newspapers:
Labour to replace police investigations by 16th century witch-hunting methods
Decades of experience with polygraphs used by the US federal government have established that the high number of false negatives and the high number of false positives make the method useless for any purpose whatsoever. For example, all those who were tested and later turned out to be spies had passed the test successfully, while the careers of several innocent people were ruined after they failed a lie detector test.
Polygraph examiners are the lowest of the low. With their bogus claims to possess magical powers of truth finding, they are as deceitful and fraudulent as dowsers, psychics, chiropractors, homoeopaths, and senior members of the Labour Party. Letting them have any function at all in any kind of legal process will cause immeasurable damage. Innocent people will be made to suffer because of false positives, and a misplaced sense of security in the case of false negatives will endanger potential victims.
Once more it is demonstrated that people's brains stop functioning as soon as an issue involves child abuse. No one in Britain would propose use of polygraphs in the case of mass murder, terrorism, or the treason committed by Blair and Brown over the war in Iraq. So why is it okay to apply polygraphs to sex offenders? Because with their conviction, they forfeited their human rights for all eternity? Then why not reintroduce trial by drowning? That would be the ultimate solution to keeping these freaks away from our children.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
