Imagine applying for a job, a position you really want and feel is a good match for your skills, and during the interview process you are seated in front of a psychic. The psychic is wearing full regalia, with a turban, crystals, and mystical garb. They proceed to give you a psychic reading – a reading which will be used to decide whether or not you will be hired for your dream job.

You can substitute any number of techniques for the psychic reading – a tarot card reading, palm reading, astrological chart, or phrenological analysis. Would you feel comfortable with such techniques deciding your fate? Would you feel outraged?

That is exactly what is happening in many corporations today, particularly in France. The technique that is being used, however, is graphology. It is as legitimate as any cold-reading technique (that is, not at all) but retains a veneer of scientific legitimacy. Graphology, or handwriting analysis, is a psychic cold-reading dressed up for the corporate world.

Continue Reading »

TED is a prestigious biannual conference whose brand is, “Ideas Worth Spreading.” (TED originally stood for “Technology, Entertainment, Design,” but its scope has since expanded.) It has spawned TEDx – regional independent TED style conferences that are allowed to use the TED brand as long as they strive for the same level of quality.

Deepak Chopra apparently thinks that TED’s logo should be, “Let’s throw any crap against the wall and let the audience sort it out.” Of course that is what all self-styled gurus and purveyors of pseudoscience want, no real scientific standards so that they can present their crackpot ideas as legitimate.

This conflict of vision recently came to a head when TEDx directors (Lara Stein, TEDx Director and Emily McManus, TED.com Editor) wrote an open letter to TEDx organizers giving them guidance on how to avoid accidentally promoting bad science. The letter is an excellent primer on pseudoscience and I recommend reading it in its entirety. The letter was a response to several dubious TEDx talks and the backlash that resulted. Early in the letter they make clear its purpose and their philosophy.

“It is not your audience’s job to figure out if a speaker is offering legitimate science or not. It is your job.”

Continue Reading »

It’s always amusing to see two pseudosciences combined into one greater pseudoscience – it’s like chocolate and peanut butter. It’s not uncommon because those who would embrace one pseudoscience are likely to follow the same flawed logic and process to accept others. My colleague David Gorski has termed this effect “crank magnetism.”

Take, for example, Gian Paolo Vanoli. He has been making international headlines recently because of his claim that vaccines cause homosexuality, which he insists is a disease. The story appears to have been first picked up in English by the Huffington Post – all other reports of this story I have found cite this article as their source.

Because of the date of this article (4/1) I wanted to make sure I had another source, but the only other sources are in Italian. The story does seem to check out – here is one article: Gian Paolo Vanoli: Cricket on the urine that has been around the world. 

Continue Reading »

NECSS – The Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism, is just two weeks away, and we have an exciting update.

We have moved the SGU private recording to a new, better, and bigger venue and are expanding the seating by two to 27. Two people also canceled so we have four tickets to sell.

Two tickets will be raffled to all people who pre-register for the conference prior to midnight April 1st (this included everyone who has already registered). Two will be auctioned off on eBay here:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=151016886498

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=151016885797

The four tickets also include VIP all access to NECSS – all workshops, all events, Friday night Stimulus Response show, and the speakers dinner. Plus you will get to have a private lunch with me and George Hrab after our workshop on Friday and George will give a private performance.

And, you get to have a private lunch with the SGU cast on Saturday prior to our live show.

Go to www.necss.org to register for the event. You can follow the links above to submit your bid on eBay. If you win one of the two raffles you will be reimbursed for anything paid so far for registration.

Check out the lineup for this year – NECSS is going to be a great science and skeptical conference. I hope to meet many of my readers there. Please come up to the SGU table while I’m there to say “hi.”

Sometimes the targets of our skeptical analysis notice, and they usually are not pleased with the attention.

Last year the Acupuncture Trialists Collaboration published a meta-analysis of acupuncture trials in which they claim, “The results favoured acupuncture.” The report was widely criticized among those of use who pay attention to such things. In my analysis I focused on the conclusions that the authors drew, rather than their methods, while others also had concerns about the methods used.

The authors did not appreciate the criticism and went as far as to publish a response, in which they grossly mischaracterize their critics and manage to completely avoid the substance of our criticism.

To review, the original meta-analysis concluded:

Acupuncture is effective for the treatment of chronic pain and is therefore a reasonable referral option. Significant differences between true and sham acupuncture indicate that acupuncture is more than a placebo. However, these differences are relatively modest, suggesting that factors in addition to the specific effects of needling are important contributors to the therapeutic effects of acupuncture.

Continue Reading »

Any intervention that interacts with a large system is bound to have unintended consequences. This concept is often brought up in the context of government – laws are passed to have a certain desired effect but have unintended secondary effects, often in opposition to what was desired.

Technology also can have unforeseen results. It is conventional wisdom, for example, that the invention of the cotton gin, intended to make cotton processing more efficient, also has the consequence of making slaves in much higher demand, leading ultimately to the civil war.

Arguably one of the biggest technological creations of our generation is the internet. It has transformed the way we access information. Predictions as to its utility were all over the place, some fairly accurate in certain respects, others way off.

Continue Reading »

Headlines read: “Temporary tattoos could make electronic telepathy and telekinesis possible.” The technology is actually quite cool and interesting, but it is distressing how much of the mainstream reporting has been calculated to misinform for the sake of some cheap sensationalism. The technology is interesting enough without turning it into science fiction.

The temporary tattoos are really skin surface electrodes that can read electrical signals, such as EEG signals from the brain. They can also incorporate other sensors, like heat or light sensors. They can contain antenna to receive energy or communication, and wireless technology to communicate to devices.

The electrode circuits are also thin (100 microns), flexible, and small. Combining several features into such a small device is the real advance here, expanding the number of feasible applications of such technology.

Continue Reading »

As movements grow, internal conflict becomes inevitable. A movement dedicated to reason, thoughtful introspection, and putting logic above emotion, one would think, should be able to deal with such conflict in a constructive way. If the events of the last couple of years have taught us anything, however, it is that we are all still biased and flawed humans, despite our striving for reason.

There is, perhaps, some sign of a light at the end of the tunnel, if you bear with me for a bit more preamble.

I have not been a direct participant in the recent drama over sexism in the movement, but I have had a front row seat. It has struck me throughout that many of the people involved, steeped in critical thinking, firmly believe they are correct and are being reasonable and yet are in such heated conflict with other critical thinkers who also believe they are correct and being reasonable.

There are, it seems to me, three general sources of this conflict. One is sincere and real ideological differences. If you read the recent exchange between Harriet Hall on SBM and Will on Skepchick, and a sample of the comments to each, these differences become apparent. Where exactly to draw the line between free speech and the avoidance of offense is one recurrent theme. Still, this by itself should not be enough to cause such a rift, for our common ground dwarfs these differences.

Continue Reading »

Conflict and crisis, while uncomfortable and even painful, can be a good thing if responded to constructively. The skeptical movement is having a bit of an identity crisis, which is an excellent opportunity to closely examine what and who we are, our goals, and our differences.

This post is a continuation of my prior two recent posts on this topic. Each post led to hundreds of comments and a very active discussion of all of the issues. To spare those who are interested from having to wade through hundreds of comments, I will try to summarize where I think we are with the discussion. I do think it has resulted in a better understanding on my part of the relevant issues and opinions.

The heart of the controversy is over the scope of activist skepticism. What topics should we address, how is “skepticism” defined, and what approach should we use. The main problem is that there are as many answers to this question as there are activist skeptics. Our movement, such as it is, has mostly been a bottom-up grassroots type movement, with individuals and organizations spreading all over the map in terms of every important aspect of the identity question. This has led many to compare “organized skepticism” to herding cats.

Continue Reading »

This one is definitely a FAQ – how do I talk to someone who is a true believer in whatever? Here is the most recent version of this question I received:

I have looked through the site, and I’m pretty sure you haven’t posted anything on how to talk to a CAM believer. I work at a local (I’ll say it, natural) grocery store where many of my friends and co-workers believe strongly in detox, cleansing, herbs and special diets. This wouldn’t bother me so much but one friend in particular is using the alkaline diet to help push her cancer into remission. She is hoping to stop chemo all together, and just rely on the alkaline diet. It’s getting harder to bite my tongue.

My question is this, how do I talk to these people with out sounding like an a-hole? I feel like every time I try to have a conversation about these things I just get angrier and angrier with their lack of knowledge, and just plain ol’ distrust of medicine and science all together. What do you say to hopefully make someone listen? How do you talk to a CAM believer?

Perhaps the reason this is such a frequent question is because there really is no universal answer. The situational variables will tend to dominate – such as the relationship between you and the believer in question, the topic at hand, if there are any personal stakes involved, and your expertise and level of knowledge. There are, however, some useful rules of thumb.

Continue Reading »