Creativity, distraction, and impatience

Occasionally I'm clever. Problem is it's mostly spontaneous, short, and rarely useful. If I set out to do something clever or be clever I'm pretty much doomed to failure. But occasionally I stumble upon it.

A few years back (at least five) there was a post on the IGN Boards Vestibule (shudder) to post something completely nonsensical. I posted the following, which I wrote on the spot:

The earth really is flat, carried on the back of an octupus (of average size). The sun, which is also flat, actually revolves around the earth, flipping over at a rate of 1 googol per second. The moon (which, strangely enough, is round) is actually attached to the octupus by a giant string, and the octopus is using it as a yo-yo, but extremely slowly. The other planets are mostly illusions projected by the octopus' older psychic brother, "sid" (not capitalized). The exception is Pluto which is, ironically, the home of Goofy, but, also ironically, this Goofy cannot talk. The planet, however, speaks in a thick, southern drawl.

Short, sweet, and arguably clever. I certainly thought so at the time, and elements of it capture my attention now. But what bugs me more is that I can rarely repeat anything of even this level, much less the exceptionally better writings that I'd love to create. Creativity astounds me, fascinates me, and earns my deepest respect. People who are creative fill me with awe, and I enjoy just basking in their existence. But inevitably I'm also left to some degree of jealousy, or at least envy.

I think my problem may simply be that I'm easily distracted and relatively impatient. I'm a perfectionist, and the catch with us is that if we can't do something perfectly, we tend not to bother at all. When I start attempting to be creative and find myself not producing something up to my standards immediately, I walk away from it. What I completely ignore is that real authors, artists, etc. take weeks, months, or years to perfect their works, and I can only presume they all start with rough works that can't possibly be up to their own standards. The problem is that knowing this doesn't seem to help me. It doesn't seem to put me on the right path. And worst of all, it doesn't give me the idea with which to start. Perhaps that's all I need is the kernel from which to work and I'll have what I need.

Mmm... popcorn...

How open is your mind?

I hear a lot of talk about open-mindedness. People pride themselves quite often on just how open their minds are, as though this is a great mental accomplishment and places their thought processes above those of the lesser minds who would close themselves off to the great possibilities of this universe. There are so many incredible possibilities out there that the poor, close-minded person can't grasp or even accept as possibilities, and they're left out of all the fun in which their open-minded friends and family get to participate. Such a sad life is that of the close-minded person.

But let's examine for a moment what it really means to be open or close-minded, and the realities of each. I'm going to provide you with a simple thought experiment to see just how close-minded you are:

Sitting on my coffee table is a shoebox. Quite ordinary and plain, stripped of the price tags and such once adorning it, with the logo of some store brand shoe company. I point to the box and inform you that there is, in fact, a small rhinoceros in the box.

You're snickering. Why? Don't you have an open mind? Anything is possible, and who are you to decide that there can't be a small rhinoceros in that shoebox? The universe is full of possibilities. Don't you owe it to yourself to be open to this one and not miss out?

That's better. I see you've come to your senses and remembered how open your mind is. Now that that's corrected, why don't you open the box and take a look at the rhinoceros. They're really quite adorable at such a miniature scale.

What's that? The box is empty? Oh, dear. Well, give it a minute and then open it up again. I'm sure it will be there this time, and it really is just too cute to miss out on.

What do you mean "that's ridiculous?" Keep an open mind. Just because it wasn't there a moment ago is no evidence that it won't be there now. Remember: anything is possible.

I see your hesitation, but clearly you realize your dedication to open-mindedness must be preserved, and you open the box again only to find it empty.

How strange. I assure you it must be there. Why don't you give it a few more minutes and then open it up again?

What? You refuse? You say there's clearly no small rhinoceros in that shoebox and there's never going to be? Tsk, tsk. You're so close-minded.

There's a progression between leaving your mind open to possibilities and finally closing it and moving it on. Somewhere between the two you have to cross a line where you decide that continuing to stay open to a possibility is simply irrational and absurd. For different people this line exists in different places. Some might have drawn that line with my first suggestion of a small rhino in a shoebox, rendering internally all the reasons this defies logic and reason, and refusing to so much as open the box. Another person might simply have taken the extra step of realizing there's no harm in opening the box beyond being laughed at if I were merely playing a joke on them. Some even more rational people might run through the possible ways in which I might be using wordplay or omitting facts, suspecting I mean a toy rhino, or a drawing of a rhino, and opening the box to see such an object.

However I daresay that nearly all rational people, whether or not they pride themselves on open-mindedness, would close their minds to the rhino-in-the-box scenario upon opening it and confirming the lack of said rhino. It takes a very... special person to remain so dedicated to their open-mindedness that they would ignore this clear resolution to the question and continue down my path of assertions that it will reappear at any moment. And even the most extreme example I give in my scenario still gives up at some point and determines the rhino is a no-show, no matter how adorable I assure you it is.

Now the other end of the scale that I mentioned has a person refusing to so much as open the box. I would tend to agree that such a person would fit the definition of "close-minded" relatively well, as well as fuddy-duddy and a bore, as well as someone I'm rather confident I've never met. But the next step, the person who's willing to open the box under the assumption that there's a trick to be played, or a circumstance that he or she had not considered, seems to me quite open-minded indeed. This person recognizes the absurdity of the claim, but also recognizes their lack of clear knowledge of all of the circumstances surrounding the situation and is willing to entertain the possibility that their assumption, no matter how well-founded it is, could be wrong. Once the box is opened and their initial assumption is confirmed, though, they move on and waste no more time on the subject.

The point I'm trying to make here is that along the scale from closed-to-open minds, the people being accused of being close-minded are rarely actually so, while the people who pride themselves on being open-minded are never as open-minded as they claim to be. There's always a line that will change one from the other if you just search hard enough for it.

When it comes to scientific endeavors, the so-called close-minded use these exact same tactics. They'll take a claim and test it. Oh, sure, the tests for most absurd claims are far, far more complex than merely peeking into a box, but the base principle is the same. They take the claim and they pass it through all the possible tests. Depending on the complexity or importance of the test, there may be far more interest, far more rigorous tests, and far more people involved. But the idea remains the same that it's carefully tested. Sometimes these close-minded scientists get a surprise and find that there's something to this that they might not initially have assumed was there. Other times the tests continually disprove the claim.

But this is where the so-called open minds step in and cry foul. This is where claims are made that those damned close-minded scientists merely don't want to see the truth. They're ignoring the possibilities that are out there and are just covering their ears and humming, while the enlightened folks with their open minds can see what's really going on. And no amount of scientific testing, research, facts, figures, statistics, and proof will change the mind of that open-minded person. That's right, the open-minded will not be moved, because they know the truth, and their wide-open minds will not be changed no matter what you close-minded researchers learned about the subject. Huh... strange how similar being incredibly open-minded is to being extremely close-minded when viewed from the other side, isn't it?

There's a phrase, recently popular thanks to Tim Minchin (although he'll readily admit it's not his): "If you open your mind too much your brain will fall out." It's funny, and while not literally true, it says a lot that comes close. When one opens their minds to all possibilities, and leaves it as wide open as possible, never narrowing the opening, never closing it for certain ideas that have played out their feasibility, never recognizing when something absurd has been sufficiently disproven, one loses all abilities to settle on any of reality. One loses the ability to look at something and recognize when it's real, when it's true, when it's solid, when it can be believed, trusted, accepted, and relied upon. Everything becomes possible, and anything can be true and untrue, and you can't settle down and move on. You get stuck and can no longer see the forest for the trees, the trees for the forest, or whether or not such things really exist.

Open-mindedness is wonderful, and it's something that those of us who have been accused of not having it actually cherish. The ability and willingness to look at any possibility, examine it with as little bias as possible, test it, and reach a conclusion based on logic, reason, research, and the work of others gives us the ability to not only open our minds, but expand them with an endless array of facts and truths that turn us on to all of the very real possibilities of this world. But we must never close our minds off to the possibility that reality is just that, and some things aren't possible, some things don't happen, any dream we have isn't the same as reality, and believing something against all evidence doesn't make us open-minded, but close-minded to the only reality we have, and the endless possibilities it provides us if we just focus on them and stop blurring them with fantasy.

IIG 10th Anniversary Party recap

Saturday night was the party and awards ceremony celebrating the Independent Investigations Group's 10th anniversary.

The party consisted of food, drinks, cake, chatter, wonderful special guests, and awards. Some of the guests included well-known heavyweights like Michael Shermer and Brian Dunning, as well as friend/colleague/lord Brian Dalton (Mr. Deity), and esteemed experts such as Carol Tavris, Harriet Hall and Eugenie Scott. This list were all presented with awards from the IIG for their achievements in promoting science, skepticism, and critical thinking.

Also awarded that evening for their achievements and assistance within the IIG were fellow members Wendy Hughes, Dave Richards, and Ross Blocher. Wendy and Dave each have brought to the IIG some of its biggest and most valuable investigations throughout its history, and Ross has pulled excessive all-nighters in redesigning the group's web site, designing brochures and business cards, and more.

Also awarded were staff from the productions of Eureka and The Mentalist. While both could be said to play a little loose with factual science (especially the former), BOTH shows promote science and critical thinking heavily as forces for good, progress, and solving problems. They cast these topics in a positive light and help the viewers see just what we can accomplish when we focus on these topics. These two shows received the IIG's special new SurlyRamics trophy designed by Amy Roth of Skepchick, which was truly beautiful and unique to our group.

The ceremony went smoothly and kept the attention of the crowd of over 100 people, many of whom were visiting the CFI or an IIG event for the first time, and all of whom seemed to leave with an extremely positive impression of our group and what we can achieve with little more than dedication and volunteer efforts.

I think it's clear that after this weekend the IIG can expect to continue to steadily climb in its influence on critical thinking and skepticism. We're branching out with affiliates across the country, and our own group has major efforts underway including our in-depth Power Balance investigation plans, The Odds Must Be Crazy web site, further efforts into the California Board of Registered Nurses reform, and much more that we're not yet ready to talk about.

TAM8 left me with a lot of pride for the IIG's place in the grand scheme and the respect we garnered from the community, but Saturday's ceremony cemented it. Our impact cannot be questioned, and our support and success are all but assured if we keep up this pace.

Thanks to anyone who showed up to the event, as well as those who watched live on Ustream, where the event can still be viewed. Your interest and enthusiasm meant the world to us.

Here's to another great year!

NOTE: This was written via the WordPress app on my Android phone. As such it's tricky to verify spelling and create appropriate links right now. When I have time to edit from a computer I'll review it and correct these issues.

EDIT: I've now gone ahead and made my adjustments including links and spelling verifications. Should be in better shape now.

http://www.skeptic.com/

Words

I haven't posted anything for a while. This was, ironically, worth breaking my silence for:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0HfwkArpvU

Dishonest, ignorant, or does it matter?

I just watched a great video by potholer54 on the "controversial" (among people who don't know wtf they're talking about) subject of carbon dating and just had to post it here:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APEpwkXatbY

It leads me to question these unfortunately common tactics of creationists to explain their ideological viewpoints. In this case the never-failing-to-amuse Kent Hovind manages to quote-mine papers, skew findings to achieve his desired explanation, ignore already well-known limitations of the technology within the scientific community to show what's already been found and worked around, and ignore direct warnings from scientists over the fact that the results he'd get were KNOWN to not be of what he was trying to find. And yet he goes right ahead anyway and does all of this to "prove" that carbon dating doesn't work when it's clearly only HE that isn't working properly.

Now most assume this guy is just plain dishonest. And given his history of and imprisonment over tax evasion, it's a fair assumption. But it's not definitely the case. It's also entirely possible that this guy is a complete idiot. Yes, yes, he's a "doctor," and he speaks in a way that suggests some level of intelligence, but those aren't proof either. And then there's the old cognitive dissonance issue where he believes his viewpoint so strongly that he'll do anything to back it up, justifying the dishonesty to the point where he doesn't even realize he's being dishonest. I think it's likely the first problem or the last, the first placing the blame entirely on Hovind, the last putting more of the blame on the overall concept that's poisoned his mind so deeply against reality.

At the end of the day, believe what you will, but don't fucking lie about it to me or impressionable people. Stick to facts, stick to proof, stick to reliable evidence, stick to reality, or STFU. You're not helping yourself or anyone else by spreading arguments that are provably wrong, and especially arguments that were already proven wrong to you BEFORE you used them. Adjust, learn, adapt, and evolve your arguments as you learn. I know it runs contradictory to your view that the world is nothing but cold stone facts written in an ancient book, but the truth is our survival depends on adaptation, and you know it. Why else would you have renamed "creation" to "intelligent design?" You know your tactics have to change if they're going to have any shot at success, and this tactic of continuing to use arguments that were disproven is one of them. Move on. And if you run out of such arguments, maybe it's time to reconsider your position. You know, the way rational people do.

Sprint and the Samsung Moment

So I picked up Sprint's Samsung Moment back in December because it was time to move to a modern phone OS. I've been a Windows Mobile user since before it was called Windows Mobile (Pocket PC 2002 was my first version), and had several Windows Mobile phone I liked overall and knew well. But I also knew their limitations, performance, and base functionality were not going to be compatible with the general way smartphones were meant to be used. While I won't buy an iPhone, I'm not clueless about the advantages, and while I could defend Windows Mobile's reasons for the way it did things until I was blue in the face, there were other matters that were hard to ignore.

So I made the decision to move to Android. I'm a Sprint user, and overall I've been very happy with Sprint. They've had their moments, and I've considered leaving on occasion, but they've always made good on their issues and their rates are good. So that narrowed my selection down to only two Android phones. There was just the HTC Hero and the Samsung Moment; no Droid, no Nexus One. And since I'm pretty hard set on having a QWERTY keyboard (or at least was at the time), and the Moment has an 800Mhz processor instead of the more common 600Mhz, I decided to go that route.

Both phones were “crippled” (exaggerating, I know) with Android 1.5. Not that it's a bad version, but we had phones with 2.0 and some hitting with 2.1 already, not to mention many on 1.6, and yet these two still had a version that even Google was not supporting in half their app releases. That said, Sprint promised an upgrade to 2.1 in the first half of 2010, so I made the jump.

In general the phone was fantastic overall. While it had issues to overcome, its Market apps allowed me to plug in and tie in functions and features that resolved nearly all complaints, and performance was mostly fantastic, although randomly as bad as my Windows Mobile phone at times. Still, it changed the way I used my phone in general and made me pretty happy. Battery life was dreadful, though, forcing me to buy an extra battery, since NOBODY makes accessories for the Moment. It also had an annoying habit of randomly dropping my connection overall, sometimes during a call, but usually while doing nothing. It would pick it back up shortly after, but it would kill anything I was streaming or browsing.

Eventually leaks of 2.1 for the Moment hit, which I ran and was instantly enamored with. Pretty much every remaining complaint I had was resolved and performance went way up. Minor nagging issues remained, though, like GPS would almost never lock on, and stability was iffy.

Now Sprint caught a lot of flack for how much they delayed the 2.1 update. I won't give them that crap myself. The reality is I can't imagine how difficult it is to build and ship a stable, functional update to an OS like this. And while they did keep delaying it, in the end Sprint did release the update in the first half of 2010 as promised, and overall it's great.

But there are a few rather serious catches, and they have me concerned. For one, GPS is still awful. Randomly it will fail to find my location, or take five-plus minutes to do so, or even force me to fully power-cycle the phone before I can get a lock. And then once it does work, it's extremely flakey. I can be driving along the freeway and suddenly be informed that I'm on a side-street near the freeway and be given directions to get back on the freeway I'm already on. This isn't terrible on long stretches, but if I'm already near my destination, or on streets, it can completely break my ability to follow the directions. Wasn't like this on 1.5.

Another bigger issue is what's being referred to online as data lockup. Randomly, but usually when the phone's connection is being pushed by large downloads (such as Market updates) or streaming music/video, the data connection will completely lock up. I'll get the up-arrow on the EVDO symbol locked on, no Internet will work, and then eventually the whole EVDO symbol will disappear and the phone will be without Internet until I pull the battery (shutting down isn't enough) and then reboot the phone. And then it could be as soon as five minutes after I start it up again before it happens again.

The thing is, no matter how happy I am with Sprint overall, I know their patterns, and I wouldn't be surprised to see these issues go completely ignored. In fact, I suspect this may be the last official update we receive for this phone before Sprint moves their focus to the upcoming Moment 2. And that seems unreasonable to me. Perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe we can expect another patch. But after how crazy it was to get this one, I can't imagine them putting that much more effort into a phone that's about to be EOLed (end-of-lifed). Which leaves those of us who sunk $200 into this phone SOL until we can afford to sink another $200+ into their next phone once we qualify for an upgrade on this one, and who knows how we'll be treated then?

This is one place where I have to begrudgingly give Apple some credit for the iPhone. By being the only manufacturer, and by having only one (albeit crappy) provider, they have a lot more control and accountability for issues like this. I'd like to see Google make some efforts to improve matters like that. Even so, I can also imagine this would be less of a problem if it were an HTC phone. They have a better track record when it comes to this sort of thing, and I expect we'd get better support.

We'll see what happens going forward, and I'm hoping Sprint steps up and manages to do right by their users on issues like this. And I hope Google does a little more to improve the upgrade process for their hardware developers so there's less random disparity. Meanwhile I have my eye on the HTC EVO 4G. It doesn't have a keyboard, but it's going to be a current-gen phone with HTC's weight behind it. Unfortunately I'm not up for an upgrade again until December, so unless Sprint resolves these Moment issues, I'm going to be stuck with them until then. Prove me wrong, Sprint, please.

Quantity or quality?

I don't post often enough for my taste or to build up a real readership. This is partially because I rarely have time to put the mental effort into this writing, not to mention formatting and coding, that I feel is necessary.

But im wondering if maybe I'm better off not worrying about all that and should just make use of the various tools at my disposal for writing short, quick, pointed posts. TweetDeck now supports WordPress, I have a WordPress app for Android, Windows Live Writer is so accessible, and WordPress's own Quick Post feature is nice and simple. I have few excuses for not posting my random musings as they come to mind, even if they're not link-heavy or full of videos and images. Better than not posting at all.

So let's see f I can stick to it. Worth a try, no?

Flamebaiting as a marketing strategy?

So today I made the mistake of using the #atheism hashtag on Twitter. It wasn't really a mistake, I did it purposefully, and was aware that it brands me exactly as I'm comfortable being branded. What I didn't expect was the troll I got in response.

He doesn't fit the classic description of a troll or flamebaiter per se, or at least not MY definition. He's a calm enough guy who's simply making the same old tired, illogical, badly-presented arguments. In particular he's claiming that atheism is, in fact, a religion, and that he has proof of this, a list of 5 gods that atheists believe in, and that we need to stop saying we don't have belief or that we lack belief.

Where it gets interesting, though, is that he mainly avoids making the arguments themselves, only referencing the fact that he has them. Why? Because he has a convenient eBook available for sale on his website that has all those answers! And it retails for only $4.99, which is actually quite reasonable. $4.99 is almost inexpensive enough to be worth me buying just to read his arguments which I'll likely immediately recognize from decades of others making the exact same tired arguments, along with nonsensical ramblings full of logical fallacies. Then I'd have the ammunition with which to refute his claims directly and show him how flawed they are, assuming he's capable of following an intelligent argument.

And right there is where I realized this guy's hidden brilliance. Regardless of whether he believes his claims (I have no reason to doubt that he does), and regardless of whether I and many more knowledgeable folks can rip said claims to shreds, is irrelevant. Why? Because the moment he's successfully baited us into wanting to read his evidence to dispute his inanity he's made $4.99 off us (minus fees, of course). At that point we could prove he's one of the worst authors on the planet and has no skills whatsoever in philosophy or theology, and he'll still have proven that what he lacks in those fields he makes up for in marketing strategy. Much like Brian Dunning once pointed out, sure you can make a better hamburger than McDonald's, but you can't make a better business. It's not about the product, it's about the selling of said product. And this guy deserves some credit for that. I can make a better argument than he can, but at the end of the day, which of us has made $4.99 off the other?

I've purposefully avoided linking to the person in question, but if you're interested in checking out what he has to say, look to my Twitter feed. While I personally don't wish to financially support his flawed arguments or deceptive practices, I won't prevent you from doing so. He is pretty clever, and perhaps some may feel he deserves a few bucks for that. So be it. Now, should he wish to send me a FREE copy of the eBook and prove this wasn't his strategy and he really does want open and honest discussion of the subject, I'd be happy to review it here. But I'm not paying for the privilege of arguing with him. I'm not that big of a masochist.

EDIT 5/18/10: I realize I'm doing nobody justice by not providing some link to this guy's chatter, especially since he's apparently still at it, even if he left me alone when it was clear I wasn't buying (his book or his BS). So check out his Twitter feed to see what he's up to.

Fuck the Motherfucker (sorry)

This song is full of profanity, and it's likely to piss off a lot of people, potentially including people I know and love dearly. I apologize to them in advance, but I do not, can not, and will not apologize for the content or meaning of the song which I, instead, support with every inch of my being. It's full of profanity (hence my title), and so is my follow-up. Easily offended? Leave now.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHRDfut2Vx0

Tim Minchin's one of my favorite musicians and comedians. He's funny and honest (which tend to go hand in hand) and has no problem calling an idiot an idiot, and we need more of that. In this case he doesn't hold back one bit, and I thank him for that.

I don't respect this authority figure just because a bunch of other supposed authority figures got together and voted that he was the guy who should be the leader of their church. I know as a non-Catholic I can't possibly understand what it's like, and how important he is, and how infallible he's supposed to be. He's a motherfucker who covered up for and protected child-fuckers. Children were RAPED by men who they and their parents TRUSTED, who they were supposed to trust more than anyone else by the very design of the motherfucking organization, and this trust was violated. And then, when the motherfuckers who violated their trust and bodies were called out on it, even bigger motherfuckers like the current Pope (then a a Cardinal) protected them from prosecution and hid their motherfucking crimes.

So no, I don't understand your church, and I don't understand why you feel the need to protect this man when you'd be crying for blood if a cop or a judge or the mayor either fucked your kid or covered up for someone who did. I'm sorry I don't understand it and I'm sorry I never, ever fucking will. There is no damn bloody excuse for this no matter who this man thinks he is, has been told he is, or has been divinely inspired to be that allows for this.

And in the off chance that I'm fucking wrong, and he is divine, and this is all part of the plan, well you know what? Fuck the motherfucking plan, too. Yes, I'm an atheist, and contrary to what people who can't comprehend atheism believe, no that doesn't mean I hate your god, or that I'm angry at him. It means I simply do not believe he exists. None of your evidence has managed to convince me so far. But just for a moment suppose you managed to do the trick. You managed to find the evidence, display the miracles, push the boundaries and prove to me that, holy shit, it's all true. If the religion you reveal to me to be reality happens to be one in which motherfuckers like this are RIGHT and JUST in their actions, and your god condones this evil prick's actions, you'll only have managed to convince me of your first opinion. Because that's a god I could hate, loathe, revile, detest, and vow my life against. That's a sick, twisted deity, and one that doesn't fit your descriptions of a loving, just god. At that point I'd be more interested in taking my chances with the devil.

Ignorant Clown Posse

So these videos have been flooding the skeptical community lately, but the latest parody from SNL brought it to the forefront for me again and I thought it was time to post these videos for myself. They're both just too good, in very different ways, not to pass along.

First off, we have this, er, gem from ICP. Comments to immediately follow...

Courtesy of Skepchick

Okay, so let's get the obvious out of the way first: holy fucking shit are these guys dumb. Listen, I have nothing against ICP. I also have nothing for ICP. I'm not sure I've ever heard their music before, but I know they have a huge, fanatical following, and I can only guess this is due to some level of talent. Heck, they seem to be able to put together a mildly catchy beat and rhyme words in this song, so I'll give them that.

What they're apparently incapable of is any level of truly intelligent thought. In this case they've decided to take all the majesty of the universe (and kudos to them for appreciating it) and boil it all down to magic. They go through a long list of random (and sometimes truly peculiar) elements of our world, and ascribe them to magic and miracles, as opposed to crediting them to everything we know they actually are. They also throw in UFOs, which is even more random, what with the lack of compelling evidence for their existence and all. Then again, they seem to have no interest in or respect for evidence.

See, according to Violent J and Shaggy 2 Dope, see they don't want to talk to a scientist (it's unclear if this is only on the subject of how magnets work, or on everything), because "y'all motherfuckers be lyin', and gettin' [him] pissed." Apparently their definition of "lying" includes telling the truth based on cold, hard facts and evidence. Magic and miracles to them are the only truth, and anyone who bothers to explain it is clearly a "motherfucker" and is just trying to confuse their feeble minds. How deeply, deeply sad.

I strongly suggest you check out Rebecca Watson's beautiful shredding of this video by theorizing a world in which one of these two Clowns isn't a clueless dipshit and actually answers the other one's questions intelligently. It's hilarious and easy to understand, and manages to prove how badly people like these two "musicians" have been screwed by education in this country.

Now the new video that touched off my desire to blog about this one is SNL's completely brilliant parody. Yes, yes, SNL's been hit-or-miss over recent years, and I won't argue that. But occasionally they hit the nail right on the head, as they did here:

Courtesy of Skepchick (which includes the YouTube version for those outside the US, for as long as it stays up

The sad part is, the parody is not THAT much stupider than the actual video. Almost any of what went into SNL's version could have been slipped into the original unnoticed. Their definitions of magic and miracles had THAT low of a threshold, that I wouldn't have been surprised if clocks landed on their list.

Anyway, as funny as this all is, and damn is it funny, it's just another wake-up call that if two people like this can manage to escape education on the simplest levels of science, our country needs a lot of help. Schools need to promote science at a much higher level than they are now, and the scientific METHOD most of all, so our future voters and leaders understand that science isn't just a collection of opinions, but a technique for finding truth. As long as it's believed to be an ideology, which it most certainly is NOT, it's too easy for fools like this to consider it an optional opinion and dismiss it. And when they've got as many followers as they do, they influence a lot of minds to believe the same clueless garbage. Looks like it's time to get to work, folks.

Oh, and for those viewing the auto-repost of this on Facebook, click the View Original Post link at the bottom of the Note to see this on my actual blog, with the embedded videos intact. Facebook doesn't display them.

EDIT: Further courtesy of Skepchick, and specifically the comments, we have these gems:

• Apparently even MTV knows more about science than ICP.


• Cracked proves once again to be an invaluable source of humorous skeptical content


• And lastly, FuckingMagnets.com

Free Willy--wait, that's not right...

I've seen this image before, but it popped up in my RSS reader again today, and I just had to share it.



It's a sad and scary truth...

(image courtesy of Crooked Timber)

EDIT: Luke from LukeSurl.com has commented below and come forward as the source of this great image. Check it out on its original page, along with his other great work, here.

"Still Alive" - Children's Chorus Cover

All right, so I'm a geek. This is well known, and nothing I hide. Still, there are moments my geekdom sinks (or soars?) to new levels. This is one of them. Below you'll find a video I literally teared up over, and no it's nothing remotely sad. I'm just a big frakkin' geek, and hearing a kids' chorus beautifully cover the incredible Jonathan Coulton end-credit song to Portal (one of the few games I not only beat, but have replayed after doing so) was a bit too much for me.

So sit back and enjoy. If you're not a geek or haven't played the game, you may not get this, but it's still funny listening to these kids performing the lyrics, and much funnier if you understand them. It's one of the most wittily-written games ever, and the song plays so well into it.

Rationality - Now in hip-hop form

There's really not much I can say to do this video justice that isn't done by the video itself. Well-produced, fantastic animation, and good, clear messages. Glad to see the skeptical community is growing to encompass ALL forms, including people who can produce music like this:

The skeptical, rational, freethinking movement is growing at a ridiculous pace, and is unstoppable. The differences being made every day are more and more powerful and real, and the frauds out to make a dime on the unwitting public's lack of knowledge are having to work harder than ever to skate past us. We're on the case, and we're not resting anymore. If you make your living off of lies and deception, you'd better start watching your back, because I can assure you, we've got you in our sights.

Mr. Deity and the Host (plus me again!)

All right, new episode of Mr. Deity is up, and I'm in it again! Woohoo, go me, living the dream, etc. Check it out (and stick around for the begging segment at the end):

Another good episode, and I loved the PZ references. Definitely some good, subtle stuff in there, and as usual plenty of ad-libbing (the Dagon reference was something I was especially proud of).

Anyway, the season's nearly wrapped up, then there'll be a small hiatus and for the first time ever, a Mr. Deity DVD release of the entire third season! Hopefully there'll be a bunch of bonus content like outtakes (we have, on some very, very rare occasions, botched a line, or done something else mildly unplanned) and extended scenes to make it extra worth it, but just having it without the GoDaddy ads is enough for me. That and maybe no begging, although I find the begging bits nearly as funny (and, admittedly, occasionally funnier) than the episodes themselves, so hopefully they'll be on the DVDs in one form or another.

Btw, if you were at all confused by the beginning, you may want to check out this Super Bowl commercial after the break to clear things up a bit:

[[MORE]]

>

Until next time...

Regen Traynor Paranormal Challenge - Results

So yesterday I attended my first meeting at IIG (Independent Investigations Group) West, which is a division of the Center for Inquiry West. Before yesterday I hadn't quite realized the history of the CFI. It encompasses several sub-organizations, the original of which was CSI (The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, formerly CSICOP), which was co-founded by Carl Sagan and Isaac Asimov. I got quite the chill when I realized the history of the place I was in at that moment. Exciting stuff. It also houses the Steve Allen Theatre where they put on some fascinating products I hope to attend in the future.

Anyway, the meeting itself was interesting enough, although mainly just your standard committee meeting of sorts, discussing ongoing and upcoming investigations and events. It's not the sexiest stuff, but as a skeptic it was interesting to see the process that goes into planning the investigations that we later only hear the results of. They've pulled a lot of great stunts for the sake of education, like the fake continuing education course for the CBRN (California Board of Registered Nurses) that they were licensed for containing such things as Chinese shéyou (literally translates to "snake-oil"), anthropomancy (fortune-telling via human entrails), and canupiary flexibility (canupiary exists in no language anywhere in the world). Their point was that after years of trying to point out the flaws in the CBRN's system and getting no response, they decided to prove via a stunt how poor their standards are. There's a lot of tricks they pull like this, and finding out how much work and planning go into them is fascinating.

One thing that did stand out was the attendance and subsequent joining of our group by Anita Ikonen, who was the previous paranormal challenger at the IIG, being tested on her ability to see inside the human body by having her figure out which of 12 people, facing away from her, was missing a kidney. She claims to have since realized her history of woo (such as her reliance on Breatharianism, the belief that we get all the sustaining nutrients we need from the air, making water and food unnecessary) was misfounded, and her new pursuit of degrees in physics and chemistry have given her a better perspective on science and the way the world really works. While some expressed skepticism (no joke intended) at this change of heart, when it comes to humans striving to improve themselves I try to keep the most open mind of all, and I wish her the best of luck.

I also had the good fortune of meeting Mark Edward, a world-renowned magician, mentalist, and reformed psychic who now fights on the side of good and honesty. He's appeared on Penn & Teller: Bullshit! at least once (pilot episode), and is great at proving the tricks and trades of mediums, psychics, palm-readers, etc. by giving the exact same types of readings they do, with the same results, and then explaining how he did it. He's one of the best forms of proof we have that the amazing revelations people believe they've been provided by these charlatans can be easily repeated by someone who makes no such claim to have those abilities, using good old-fashioned trickery and deceit. He was there to lend his expert oversight of the test and hopefully to catch any parlor tricks being pulled by the challenger, although as you'll see later that was probably unneeded.

Mark wasn't the only exciting person I met there, although the others are less of a celebrity to the average person. Derek Bartholomaus is a well-known skeptic and creator of the deeply valuable Jenny McCarthy Body Count, and has been interviewed on various podcasts. He's another person I've definitely known of, and although I've conversed with him on Twitter and Facebook, this was the first time I got to meet him and hang out with him. As well, I met SurlyAmy of the incomparable SkepChick blog which is hugely valuable within the skepticism circles. She and I share a birthday, and it was agreed that this makes us both awesome. While that claim may have little substantiating evidence beyond mere coincidence of birth, I'm quite comfortable that the results are accurate without requiring further investigation. I also met several people from the CFI who I later realized were already familiar to me from having appeared on Penn & Teller: Bullshit!, such as Jim Underdown who also appears in the pilot.

One truly amazing thing about this group of people is how comfortable they are with one another as well as newcomers such as myself. I was instantly welcomed, with people introducing themselves to me, asking me questions about myself, and carrying on in-depth conversations with me as though I had been a member of the group for years. It was an instant and trusting connection, and something I feel honored to be a part of. These are truly good, honest, caring people who want nothing more than to help cut the bullshit out of the world and make some progress in letting people focus their health and resources on reality.

Anyway, after a nice lunch at Bamboo House (a very good Thai place within walking distance), we returned to where the test circumstances had been prepared. The challenger, Regen, had come in from Seattle via bus the day before with a buddy of his. His previous scheduled challenge had to be delayed as he was in jail at the time. I made a conscious effort not let this prejudice my opinion of him. People make mistakes, and it doesn't always reflect them overall, not to mention it should have no bearing on whether they have supernatural powers.

Speaking of which, Regen's claim (or at least the aspect of the claim being tested yesterday) was that he could project images telepathically to another person (hence the buddy) through walls. So the test was pretty simple. Deck of cards, shuffled, and displayed to him one by one while his buddy in another room, visible to him via a CCTV, "received" each card and noted it, with each card being numbered and documented on the other side. Afterwards the results would be compared and if he got 7 out of 52 matched (somewhere in the 13,600:1 odds range), they'd consider the preliminary test passed and move on to the final test with stricter standards at a later, and far more publicized date. Logical enough.

My first sign that something wasn't quite right was when Regen walked into the room. His limbs were all over the place, he was muttering to himself, and as he sat down in his chair he reached up and yanked off his shirt. I initially suspected he may have been mentally challenged in some way, but it quickly became apparent that he was merely drunk and/or high. He later confirmed on more than one occasion throughout and after the test that he was drunk. So much for taking this seriously.

Thing is, though, he did seem to take it quite seriously. Throughout the test, despite occasionally forgetting the card he was just looking at, saying the card out loud (against the rules), forgetting how to spell "spades," talking in general, and occasionally forgetting whether he was supposed to be sending or receiving the card, he would get quite upset at the fact that his buddy didn't appear to be moving on-screen. He expressed concern that we might have frozen the feed and were cheating in some way. While a rule had been clearly set in place that there could be no form of communication between the two of them in either direction, Jim (the person officiating the test in a sense) did go ahead and radio back to have his friend raise three fingers or give another signal occasionally. Regen seemed pleased with this result each time before paranoia set back in.

Eventually the test concluded, his friend was brought out, and the results were tallied in front of everyone. First the actual cards that had been drawn were put up on the board. Everyone in the audience had also been given score sheets so we could play along. Some, such as myself, tried to also receive his signals, but those signals seemed to come in the form of me thinking about cards and randomly picking them, and carefully re-reviewing my list and making sure I didn't repeat any. Near the end of filling out my sheet I noticed I had left out 10s completely and had to shoehorn them in the remaining slots. Others, such as Mark Edward himself, went ahead and predicted the entire thing ahead of time. Although they asked us officially at the end what our results were, we were pretty much calling out our hits as we went along. I actually had one match, as did several other audience members, and even Mark Edward. Apparently the odds of that are 1.75:1.

Next they pulled out his friend's sheet and put those results up on the board. Although the results were clearly posted, Regen gave his own audible play-by-play of the results as he read his sheet, trying to claim hits when one half of the card (suit or number) was a match, or commenting on how drunk he must have been when he made his notes as what he wrote made no sense ("on that one I just wrote 'okay.' I don't know why."). I decided for the heck of it to track my results against his friend's, just in case Regen really had been transmitting results, just the wrong ones. Sure enough, I matched TWO of his buddy's results, which must mean... something... ... ? Yeah.

Anyway, the long and the short of it is that Regen has no telepathic transmission abilities, or his buddy sucks at receiving them, or he should have laid off the sauce, as they got a perfect 0 out of 52. Not a single card matched. So yes, even I and Mark Edward and several audience members managed to do slightly better by guessing. When confronted with this, the guys mostly just laughed it off, blaming it on being drunk (calling themselves Cheech and Chong, although initially reversing the ethnicities before catching their error), referring to it as "just a game," and taking it as no big deal. An interesting juxtaposition from his earlier concern over everything being done properly. Either way, he and his friend seemed to have a good time and said as much, and it was definitely entertaining for the rest of us, although not necessarily in the ways we expected.

btw, one person suggested that his friend learn to count cards so he could be a bit more convincing. I'd have to agree, as reviewing the results showed a lot of obvious patterns. He passed on two three, and used 10 5s and 11 3s in his results, and almost no face cards. Definite signs of the human mind's attempt at random guessing. As well, when asked if they had practiced at all under the test conditions they had agreed upon ahead of time, and per the recommendation of the center, they admitted they had not. I wasn't surprised as I had learned earlier that this answer could pretty much be predicted with almost flawless accuracy in all challenges. Over-confidence can be a killer.

You can find the full video of the event here, although it did run a couple of hours. That said, if you're into drunk guys getting confused while telepathically transmitting playing cards, I think it may be the only show in town. Enjoy!

Skeptical challenges - I want to believe!

So tomorrow I'll be attending my very first skeptical challenge, held at IIG West in Hollywood. If you don't know what a skeptical challenge is, read on for a basic explanation.

The most well-known challenge is the Million-Dollar Challenge by the James Randi Educational Foundation. The principle is simply that if someone with paranormal abilities can prove themselves to the judges of the challenge, they win a million dollars. The IIG challenge I'll be witnessing tomorrow is for "only" $50,000, which would certainly pay off my debt and give me more money each month to spend on enjoying myself, so you can see the appeal in applying.

Thing is, though, not that many people apply. Certainly not the big fish, like the television psychics, or the people who push their books and videos and such in infomercials and online, or hold live events. People like John Edwards, or Sylvia Browne, or Uri Gellar are all held in such high regard by their believers, and claim without a shadow of a doubt that they're the real deal, really knowing things they shouldn't be able to know, talking to the dead, telekinetically affecting the world around them, etc., and yet they all avoid these challenges. When asked, they'll make up excuses such as, "I don't need the money" (bet you a charity could use a donation in your name if you're really that rich), "I know what I can do and my followers know what I can do, so I don't need to prove it to anyone else" (imagine how many MORE followers you'd have to pay for your services if you did prove it), or "the challenge is rigged to prevent a person from winning because all the skeptics really want to do is disprove your abilities." And THAT's the sticking point I want to discuss in this post.

This isn't an uncommon belief, and I suppose I can see where it's coming from. It's hard to believe anyone would actually want to fork over a million dollars, and when the people doing so have spent their entire careers consistently disproving supernatural phenomena, it's easy to assume that's all they do, that's their focus and goal. But it's actually not entirely true. Yes, one of our main angles as skeptics is to help prevent the public from being hurt by hucksters, scam artists, thieves, and charlatans who are out to take their money in exchange for false promises. We expose lies in alternative medicine to prevent people from avoiding REAL medicine that could actually solve their problems. We expose people who will do anything to separate you from your money and give you nothing in return. But that's not all we do, and it's not the entire purpose of the challenges.

See, deep down inside, many skeptics WANT to believe. I know, this seems contrary to everything I've said above as well as our image, but bear with me for a minute here. Skeptics are people just like everyone else, with interests and hobbies and fascinations, one of which happens to be an intent focus on scientific exploration of the world, and making decisions based upon that. But something that goes alongside a love of science is that most of us tend to be geeks to some degree or another (the cool, lovable modern geeks, that is). And as geeks, we tend to have certain specific interests, although they're slowly becoming more mainstream. Things like speculative fiction (science fiction and fantasy), horror, magic, comic books, and science are all part of the stereotype. And the stereotype has some truth to it. No, this doesn't fit each and every individual in the group, but each of these concepts is much more popular among the geek segment, and likely among the skeptical circles. So what's my point?

Having grown up with these concepts and loves, us geeks spent much of our lives, and probably still do, fantasizing about a world where these things were all real. We've dreamed, we've written stories, we've wished and hoped that some of these things might actually exist out there. Sure many of us have grown jaded as we've gotten older and accepted that they don't, but that doesn't stop us from wanting them to. And every last one of us would be excited beyond belief to discover that just one of these loves was actually true.

Sci-fi geeks would kill to find out that quantum mechanics allows for technology beyond our dreams that defies the laws of physics. Fantasy dwellers would love to find out that mythological creatures really do exist and are hiding in the world among us. Horror aficionados disappointed by the lack of dark corners in our world to be freaked out by would go ga-ga to learn that ghosts and hauntings are real. Magic nuts would trip out if a magician came about who did tricks that had no grounding in sleight of hand, but really were beyond a normal person's abilities. Comic book-lovers would kill to find out superheroes really exist among us, with crazy abilities that they have to hide from the world. And scientists dream of discovering new principles beyond the current rules of science that could open up entire fields to explore and research, also opening up research funds, Nobel prizes, and the like.

See, all of these types of people would love to find out that our world encompasses these very things we geek out over in a very real sense. And if there's even a slim chance they could exist, we want to find them. And THAT's another place these challenges come into play, as a tool to find the unknown.

Currently our world is full of the liars I mentioned earlier, and they ruin our chance of finding anyone who might really, truly have something to show us that fits the bill of an amazing discovery. They distract us with their tricks and hoaxes, and take up valuable time that could be spent researching the real deal, if it so happens to exist. So if we just opened up a center of sorts to look at anyone who claimed they had special abilities, we'd get pretty much only people wasting our time. But the challenge acts as a filter. We're willing to put up the money if you're willing to meet the rules to PROVE you can do what you say you can do. The liars and cheats look at this, read the rules, and realize there's no way they're getting that money, and they walk away. This leaves only the people who actually BELIEVE they can do what they say they can do. And this is a much, much smaller group, making it a lot easier to weed through them to possibly find something promising.

Another question asked is why would we WANT to give up the money? Even if they had the abilities, and assuming we genuinely DO want to find those abilities, isn't it still in our best interest to cover it up so as not to have to shell out a large amount of money? Who's got $50,000/$1,000,000 to just give away? Well, there's a simple answer to this one, too: Those dollar figures are PEANUTS compared to the money that could be made promoting someone who passed the challenge. If you found the first person truly proven to have supernatural abilities, can't you imagine all the ways in which you could make a fortune off of it? There'd be tours, talk shows, book deals, television appearances, advertising, and more. Not to mention likely awards (Nobel being one of many possibilities), positions involved in further testing of the ability and the scientific research that would go into it, etc. There would be far more money, fame, notoriety and excitement to be had from awarding the prize than ever to continuously turn it down.

Now I'm not going to lie and tell you there isn't a certain expectation that the people participating in the challenge are going to fail. Let's face it, nobody's ever passed, we have a pretty darn good understanding of the laws that govern our world, and the pattern's pretty firmly fixed. Nobody's surprised when someone fails because the reality is that's exactly what's expected. But my point here is to explain that despite that expectation, despite that assumption that there is nothing supernatural in this world and nobody's going to win that prize, that doesn't stop us from wanting it to happen. As skeptics we're not immune to excitement, and it's not our goal to pee in people's cornflakes. We just value honesty and reality more than lies and cons and self-delusion. But like everyone else, we root for the underdog, and we all hope to be involved in an incredible discovery that changes the world. And that's one of the opportunities these challenges provide, and it's one I'm going to try to keep in mind tomorrow. Regardless of what I expect to happen, I WANT the person being tested to truly be someone special, and it would be a hell of an experience to get to tell my grandkids about in the off-chance it happens. So I'll go in tomorrow as open-minded as I always am and root for the underdog, all while carefully paying attention to reality and preventing myself being fooled. Either way, I'm sure I'll have a lot of fun.

Mr. Deity and... me again!

That's right, folks, Timmy's back! And check out what a headache he's got on his hands...

This one was a doozy to film, because the dialog was so tight and the timing had to be so perfect that we had a lot to focus on. Plus I had worked late the night before, and Jimbo and Brian had spent the day filming another episode first, so none of us was as well-prepared as we would have liked. But that never stops a Mr. Deity, and better yet, some of the funniest things that come out of our mouths are born from sheer delirium.

As well, I was deeply honored to learn (and confirm upon reflection) that I am officially the first recurring character in Mr. Deity history (obviously not counting the four principle players). It means so very much to me to have been so openly and warmly accepted into this group and brought on-board such an amazing project. To go from a rabid fan (thankfully the doctors got that taken care of) to a recurring role as the head of R&D for the entire universe is a literal dream come true. I couldn't be happier to be involved in something so clever, witty, original, and meaningful.

Well, enough blubbering. The next episode is one I managed to operate cameras and sound for, and it's damn funny, despite me not appearing in it. Look forward to it in a couple of weeks. And word is I may appear in at least one more episode this season. Stay Tubed...

Why atheists care about religion

I don't believe in God. That's no secret. If you've read my blog or had a conversation with me on the topic, you're aware of this. I work hard to be respectful of the people I know and love and their right to believe what they wish, and I avoid arguments with them simply because I like to maintain the relationships I have with them. But that doesn't keep me quiet everywhere, and that doesn't stop me from caring.

But why DO I care? After all, if I don't believe, then what does it matter? Why do I as an atheist, or all atheists, seem to spend so much time talking about something we don't believe in? Religious people seem to find this concept silly, and on the surface I can see why. I don't put a title on my lack of belief in fairies, nor do I write blog posts about it, have heated discussions online, join activist groups, attend conferences, or read books about it. And since I respect each individual's right to those beliefs, what does it matter?

I've wanted to answer this question for quite some time, honestly, and get into the nitty-gritty of it. But today, my Twitter friend @natheist favorited a new (well, maybe just new to me, I didn't check the date) video by the AWESOME @gogreen18 (who is awesome, to clarify, for being brilliant and well-spoken, all while happening to prove the stereotype that gorgeous women can't be either is complete bull) that just so happens to say everything I wanted to say better, more compactly, and with prettier eyes. Take a look:

That's it, in a nutshell. That's why I care, why it all matters. Historically, and currently, religion tends to impact my life and those of the people I love more than most other forces, and it's my opinion, and that of a consistently growing number of people, that it does so negatively. Now perhaps you're one of those who believes in a god or spirituality in some more generalized or personal sense, and one who doesn't buy into this organized religion thing. Then perhaps you're one of the people who doesn't directly harm me. But when you believe your holy text overrides my rights as someone who hasn't bought into it, you impact my life. And that's when I have to start doing something about it.

[[MORE]]

Now Laci's video was prepared in response to the following video by imrational which covers some of the same issues, as well as some others. I thought it only fair to include his video which started this chain. It does a good job of clarifying further some of the issues that we, as atheists, face in a so-called Christian nation, led by people who now claim to be persecuted for being Christian, with no sense of irony over how much unreasonable control they've held for so long.

And there you have it. Two people who managed to do the hard work for me, all with better audio/visual skills, and one of which who's much more pleasant to look at than my ugly mug.

Questions? Comments? Bring 'em.

Mr. Deity and... me!

All right, finally getting around to posting this on my own blog since it went up yesterday. The latest episode of Mr. Deity is up, and it features yours truly. Check it out:

As the head of R&D for the entire universe, I think you can understand why I've been too busy to blog much.

Anyway, hope you enjoyed it, and look forward to more coming soon. We're filming another one later this week!