‘What’s the harm?’, Episode #4,354,223
Perhaps the most upsetting of all the topics I’ve covered over the journey is the needless death of a child as a direct result of quackery, another example of which is reported here. In this case, the mother of a 10 year old considered herself a ‘healer’, and instead of getting the kid chemotherapy for liver cancer, fed her on fruits, vegetables, herbs and and coated her stomach in El Salvadoran mud.
It is true that the child may have died in any case, but you can just image the poor thing’s agony, with probably nothing more than dandelion tea for solace.
However it is also true that she would have had a fighting chance, particularly with the potential for a transplant at some point.
The parents claimed that they ‘don’t believe in chemotherapy’. There it is again – this thing called ‘belief’. Your beliefs are irrelevant when it comes to science – you should rely on what is known. Believing that the earth is flat doesn’t make it so.
They also said they we ‘bullied’ by the doctors. Well, boo hoo. I can just imagine the frustration of their doctors as they saw this young lady go from bad to worse, and not be able to intervene. Sometimes we just need to suck up our ego, and take the best advice available on the best course of action. Are they now proud that they stood up to these bullies? I have zero sympathy for them. This is not an excusable mistake. This is sheer child abuse and finally murder- clear cut. They are no less culpable than the person who gets behind the wheel while intoxicated and kills the occupants of a car – the outcomes are entirely foreseeable.
OK, enough ranting. But chalk up another statistic to the touchy-feely, natural-remedy bullshit.
Next time someone asks ‘What’s the harm?’, THIS is the harm.
Better late than never – Australia finally gets it on homeopathy
You knew this would get me back to the typewriter, right?
Bottom line: the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council has concluded that:
“…there is no reliable evidence that homeopathy is effective for treating health conditions”
Well, better late than never in coming to the same conclusion that ordinary folk like me have years ago. This excellent article in The Conversation summarises the issue nicely.
So, will health funds stop covering this sort of nonsense and costing the rest of us more? Will the government stop funding universities who teach this quackery?
Well, here’s my tip: Fresh from reinstating knighthoods, the Liberal government will:
- disband the NHMRC as part of its response to the ‘budget disaster’
- Replace GP Superclinics with holistic medicine centres because, let’s face it, homeopathy is much more cost effective
- Increase funding to research into complementary medicine (that is, medicine that doesn’t work), and
- Make complementary extras in private health care compulsory.
After all, millions of people use homeopathy, right? And millions of people are ‘the market’. And the market is speaking, so let’s get on with it.
Someone has to stand up to these scientists, and the Libs are the ones to do it.
I now look forward to that flood of comments about how misguided I am in disbelieving homeopathy, and being sucked in by the medical industrial complex. I especially look forward to the anecdotes which people cling to to justify wasting money and avoiding actual medical care.
Shatner meets the Beatles in the Sky (with diamonds) – hilarity ensues
I’m speechless.
It’s no secret that William Shatner went on to some fairly questionable performance activities immediately post-Star Trek the original series, include some spoken-word albums, and a schlock-horror film or two.
But this takes the cake. I found it in the comments section on another blog, with the point being made that people should stick to what they are good at; or rather, that success in one field does not guarantee success in another.
To take a charitable view, this video is an homage to 60’s TV culture, done with tongue firmly planted in cheek. But the more realistic one is that Bill Shatner thought he was being arty.
You be the judge.
Primary school principals shut down religious education classes
With a headline like that, how could I resist?
I believe the appropriate response is woo-hoo!
After some years of fairly negative news on the RI in schools front, and the apparent stagnation of any efforts to expose the idiocy of spending public money on proselytising to primary school children, we have this welcome development, as reported here.
Some primary school principals are actually taking a stand, based on their own assessment of the SRI curriculum. This curriculum is being provided by Access Ministries, of which I’ve written plenty, for example, here, here and here. And it’s not just one or two – it’s hundreds apparently. The figures are that in 2011, 940 schools delivered SRI, while in 2013 it was 666 (yes, I know, the number of the beast – a coincidence? I think not). This is 40,000 fewer kids protected from wasting time on mindless drivel, and more importantly, protected from attempts to disable their clear-thinking circuitry.
Joe Kelly, principal of Cranbourne South Primary School, said:
“It is not education. It has no value whatsoever. It is rubbish – hollow and empty rhetoric … My school teachers are committed to teaching children, not indoctrinating them.”
Wow. Beautifully said Joe. I’m going to put that on a t-shirt. And nominate you for a Nobel prize of some sort.
He also went on to reveal that a lot of his colleagues feel the same way, but were not comfortable being as public about it.
Dr David Zyngier, a senior lecturer in curriculum and pedagogy at Monash University, backed up Kelly’s view of the curriculum, saying:
“I have reviewed all six booklets produced by Access Ministries, and it’s basically low order, unintelligent, busy work and rote learning. It horrified me. There’s nothing educational about it. It’s all about becoming a disciple of Jesus.”
Somewhat surprisingly, at this stage there does not seem to have been a backlash of any sort. Parents certainly aren’t in revolt. The Education Minister was quoted as having full confidence in the principals, and even the CEO of Access Ministries seems unperturbed. Those are the public positions – I’ll bet there is some heavy-duty lobbying happening behind the scenes however.
Nope, no backlash at all – although it could be a good explanation for some of the extreme weather events around the planet, as god extracts his special brand of biblical retribution. After all, what other explanation could there be?
More blood on Oprah’s hands
It seems to have been ages since this post, and this… in which the link between Oprah’s obsession with new age nonsense in ‘the Secret’ and smooth talking con artists pushing self-help solutions clearly resulted in a preventable death.
Unfortunately, it hasn’t stopped, and here another example – 3 deaths caused by some idiot pushing the really deep idea that ‘thoughts, feelings and actions need to be firing simultaneously in the same direction’. Oh what a lot of drivel. Just wish for it, and so it will be. It’s the Secret all over.
This piece of video focuses one of the deceased. It’s both heartbreaking and infuriating.
Good work again Oprah.
Unfortunately, none of your charitable works brings back the dead, or in any way makes up for facilitating con artists to find their marks.
On Gravity and Religious Symbolism
I want to set the tone of this piece. Aaargghh. There, that should do it. Now you know where I’m coming from.
As background, I sometimes find myself listening to Sunday Nights with John Cleary on ABC radio. Yes, it’s a religious program, but I generally enjoy it because the host, although clearly strongly religious, present issues of the day with a strong secular brand of analysis, and is not afraid to confront the contradictions of religion, and also to question apologists accordingly. It is on that program I first learned of Bishop John Shelby Spong, and his progressive call for ‘a fundamental rethinking of Christian belief away from theism and traditional doctrines’. A casual glance of the titles of his publications on the Wikipedia page illustrates his struggle to find any consistency between his spiritual life and reality.
In stark contrast, however, a couple of weeks ago we had one Richard Leonard as a film reviewer, and who is also a Jesuit priest. Hilarity ensued.
In conversation with John Cleary, he proceeds to review Gravity, but in a manner somewhat differently to my approach, here.
To cut to the chase, apparently the film was choc-full of religious references. And apparently (I’m going use that word a lot – so strap in) it’s not really a story of survival in space, with a sub-theme of Bullock’s grief at the loss of a child. No, it’s more a gospel highlights piece, set in space.
To be fair, it sounded like John Cleary wasn’t buying it all that much. He wanted to talk about how the visual style drove the film, and the allusions to Kubrick’s 2001. He was impressed by the minimalist story line, and the use of CGI to make aesthetic points, like the tear drifting off in zero G, describing it as a deeply emotional moment. Good points John.
But Leonard. Oh my. All I can say is, pareidolia anyone? This is definitely a ‘face on Mars’ moment.
To begin with, he obviously liked the movie, but sets up his forthcoming analysis by identifying the major theme of survival in terms of ‘choosing life’. Well, yes, that’s what happens when people try not to die. They choose life. But then he starts in on ‘inter-textuality’, harking back to his film appreciation classes in priest school, claiming that religion is a sub-plot.
Here is a selection of Mr. Leonard’s ‘faces on Mars’ views (and the odd bit of counter-apologetics):
- Apparently Deuteronomy 30:19 is ‘there loud and clear’: choose life. Again, if you don’t want to die, yes, you are choosing life. Do we really need a bible reference to explain this? In fact, without getting too deep here, Mr. Leonard should go back to bible school on this. From my reading as a layman, this was not the intention of the quote (see here). Apparently in Deuteronomy 11:26, of the Israelites it is taught that “God did not administer justice to them according t the strict letter of the law, but allowed them mercy so that they might ‘choose life'”. So far, so good. But an interpretation by latter scholars deduced from the the words ‘choose life‘ that ‘one can learn a trade to earn a livelihood‘. Somehow I don’t think this is a key theme of the film. Just sayin’.
- In one of the longest bows he draws, Clooney’s obsession with Mardi Gras stories is significant apparently because “it’s the night where you have your last big blowout before the sacrifice of Lent. The sacrifice of Lent can be in contrast to Fat Tuesday. The contrast was stark.” WTF?
- On returning to Earth, the capsule plunging into the sea is a baptismal move. Yeah, right. Here are two more interpretations: It could be a child returning to the mother’s womb, or, it could be a safe way to retrieve a metal box from orbit. Take your pick.
- When Bullock clambers onto shore, she ‘literally comes out of the mud’, which apparently is a reference to Adam who comes out of mud. Wow.
- He gets a free-kick because of the St.Christopher medallion in the Russian craft, and the Buddha in the Chinese one. The latter is meant to indicate that Bullock is embracing pain and not running from it.
- When Bullock tries to raise the Russians on the radio but can’t communicate, she asks them to pray for her because ‘no one taught her to’. This he takes to mean a deathbed conversion. I hate that. People take comfort in all sorts of fantasies – religion is just another.
- And finally, Clooney’s return to the capsule means he’s an ‘angel of life’ (and to emphasise his scholarly reading, Leonard refers to him as ‘angelos’. Yes this means angel in Greek. Impressive.) Apparently (last one, I promise) he comes back as the angel of life to help her remember the instructions because she’s given up on life. Or it could be a hallucination brought on by the depleted oxygen environment. Maybe he’s not an angel, but an inspiration. Mystifyingly, Leonard also thinks that Clooney coming back into her subconscious is also ‘deeply Freudian’. Really? Don’t see it myself.
Well, that’s it.You see what you want to see I guess.
Leonard has found extensive religious symbology in what is essential a story of survival in a hostile environment, with the focus on human ingenuity and drive to survive, which is a strong evolutionary trait.
I don’t mind Leonard being reminded of his religious symbols by the movie – that’s fine. But to subordinate human values of courage, ingenuity, mutual support, not to mention science and technology, to religious clap-trap, it’s just intellectually dishonest.
This is just a mis-guided, or desperate attempt to leverage the achievements of man to prop up an area which has in essence had no achievements for 2000 years, unless you count creative writing, cathedrals and genocide.
When the shoe was on the other foot – when Erik Von Daniken in Chariots of Fire ascribed the events in the Book of Ezekiel to alien technology, the religiati squealed like stuck pigs, refusing to have a bar of it.
Well, that’s just how I feel about this movie review.
EMF Devices – How to really build them
I’ve been thinking.
Following my previous post on the preposterous EMF devices, I decided I would think about them in a bit more detail, as they present an interesting engineering challenge. Normally I don’t advocate spending too much time on the preposterous – my main example is academic debates about religion, for example ‘What is the ontological status of God’, which sounds impressive, but just asks, ‘does god exist’. So what’s the point? How can you academically prove that God doesn’t exist. It’s like debating the existence of the Easter bunny. The best you can do is show that the proponent is inconsistent or illogical, but that never phases them anyway.
So spending any time on the EMF con is similar. The difference here is that the real work I’m supposed to be doing this afternoon is boring me shitless, so I’ve decided to pull on the engineering hat again. Ok yes, it has a propeller on it – what’s your point?
In any case, I think it’s actually useful to understand WHY such devices are SO preposterous.
So after that long justification giving myself permission to spend time on this, let’s at last talk EMF Crystals! If you haven’t read the piece on EMF crystals already, it would be useful to do so now.
The reality
Imagine you’re standing in the middle of a pond, and waves are coming at you from all directions from other people frolicking, and also leaving you as you flap around your arms. This is only a 2D example, but in reality it’s happening in 3D. And the waves are a very broad range of frequencies, all mixed together – some visible, some radio, some UV, some very low like power lines, some extremely high like mobile phones. To take two extreme examples, power lines have EM waves at 50 Hz – that is, each second in our pond we get 50 peaks and troughs. For mobile phones, it’s around 2 GigaHerz, or 2,000,0000,000 waves per second in our pond. Not only that, for digital communications like phones, the waves are chopped up into billions of little packets for transmission, and reassembled by your phone to turn into something you can hear.
What it needs to do
So, what this device is supposed to do, is to take this vast array of EM fields hitting you from all directions, adjust them, and rebroadcast them in a more ‘user friendly’ form.
Technical problems abound, but just some of them are:
- Firstly, the device is on your belt or your neck or somewhere, and would need to somehow deflect the waves from hitting your body, and suck them into the magic disk. If you think it would be messy trying to stop the waves hitting you in the pond, it would be many orders more difficult to stop EM waves hitting you.
- We need different devices and materials to capture different frequency EM. An antenna or material to capture TV signals is quite different to capturing mobile phone signals. Just look at your TV antenna. TV is just a minor band in the EM spectrum, but to capture the different frequencies efficiently, we need different lengths of material, ranging from a meter or so, down to a few centimeters for UHF channels.
- That’s just to capture the EM waves – we also need to stop them from hitting parts of our body. Ummm, not sure how they even might do that, because shielding is a big issue. Remember that we manage to receive a lot of EM inside solid structures – otherwise we moan about our phone coverage. So how we would stop phone signals in the air and from our phone from hitting our body is a decent engineering problem.
- OK, so let’s grant it the ability to do all the above, thanks perhaps to ancient Egyptian materials. So now, it needs to ‘harmonize’, ‘clean’, and rebroadcast the signals to us in a form that doesn’t screw us up, and in fact can cause us to sing all day, according to one testimony. Firstly what needs to be cleaned? Cleaning implies there is something dirty or unwanted in the signal. Well, true, there is always noise in the system which needs to be filtered out, but this isn’t the bit that’s hurting you, according to our friends selling these devices. It’s the actual signal. So how do we ‘clean’ it? So we remove some frequencies? Well, that would alter the signal, so there goes your phone reception. Do we make them smaller? Yes, you could attenuate them, but that would kill the range of your phone so as to make it useless. What about ‘harmonize’ – this means to synchronise two or more frequency so that they are in harmony – so what are we harmonizing with? You body’s ‘natural frequencies’ they would say. Well, they don’t exist, but even if they did, and even if we could, harmonizing with them would mean changing our EM signal, so there goes our phone signal again.
- And to do the cute bit in the previous step, the device would also need to keep track of all the EM it has collected, and presumably have some sort of storage while it does the cleaning and harmonizing and so forth, and then rebroadcast according to a schedule that doesn’t screw up our communications. If we did manage to screw up the timings between signals, then things like GPS – which relies on nanosecond timing – wouldn’t work. Yep, you’d need to be quite careful with this bit.
- Lastly, to rebroadcast our captured, cleaned and exquisitely scheduled range of EM signals, we need two things – antennas and power. As for capturing the signals, we need the right sized antennas to re-broadcast whatever it is we now want to substitute. So that in a ceramic disc will be challenging. Then of course we need power, and the only way I can see of building this thing is with a miniaturised Zero Point Module – which is of course fictitious.
All in all, this is a bugger of an engineering problem, which would need some major break-throughs in physics to achieve. In fact, I’ve tried to think how I would even build one of these using ANY of the technology in the world of science fiction, and it’s still tricky. Let’s try:
- Stopping the EM from hitting the body – perhaps generate a warp bubble around the body to deflect the waves; or else use the warp bubble to dip the body in and out of an alternate universe (one without EM fields) long enough to really reduce the intensity of EM received by the body. Then we just have the radiation of travelling between universes to deal with, but that’s a problem for another day.
- Collecting the desired EM – Hmmm. I suppose we could modify the above warp bubble to act as a lens in all frequencies, but modulating its fundamental frequency through the entire band, so that it acts as an antenna itself, which then just leaves the problem of getting the energy, and associated data on the composition/timing of that energy into our crystal. If we could get the crystal to resonate at the same frequency as the warp bubble, then at least the impedance could be matched, and thus facilitate a transfer of the energy. Encoding data about the content would need a decent kilobit quantum computer on the crystal – with that, we could just about process all major communications frequencies in parallel.
- Cleaning, Harmonizing, and Rebroadcasting – I think once we have our information stored and sorted in our crystal, it’s then a trivial problem to present the information to our person in a gentle form, perhaps directly injected into the cerebral cortex would remove the need for re-broadcast EM altogether. Alternatively, an artificially generated Vulcan mind-meld with the crystal would do the trick too, but I suppose we’d need to replace that Egyptian sand with Vulcan, and that’s hard to get these days.
- Powering this thing – as I mentioned above, we’d need a ZPM out of the Stargate universe, and even that would need to be miniaturised. Alternatively, a few grams of black hole would give us enough for a miniature reactor and that would also do the job, but create a couple of other problems to solve – firstly carrying the crystal would be a challenge due to the massive curvature of space-time in the crystal, and secondly we would need to stabilise the black hole so that it didn’t kill us with radiation and also didn’t suck in the known universe; that latter would be kind of counter-productive. And to stabilise it means – yes, you guessed it – another warp field.
Let’s just hope they don’t invent sub-space radio for real, because that would totally bugger up my scheme, since as we all know, warp fields are transparent to sub-space radio.
Kirk out.
EMF – OMFG!
EMF is not one of those abbreviations you commonly see in text messages, so don’t worry if you couldn’t decipher the title of this post.
It means Electromagnetic Fields, and it’s a thing.
But it’s another of those things that con artists have appropriated to separate you from your money. Yep, anything vaguely sciencey or technical is certain to baffle the rubes and have them reaching for their wallet (see one of my earlier sprays on this subject here).
The whole EMF protection industry (and there seems to be quite a decent sized one out there) plays on the fact that yes, there are EM fields out there – otherwise, no TV, radio, phones, air traffic control, TV remotes, wi-fi, bluetooth, microwave ovens, etc etc, but that they are nasty and can harm you, and therefore you need to be protected from our cruel modern world.
Before we get into the fun of looking at a couple of these hilarious sites, a couple of simple statements on EM fields.
- EM radiation can hurt you if the field intensity is high enough – for example, I wouldn’t put the cat in the microwave oven. Or stand too close to a high power phone cell antenna dish (that is, on the actual dish, not the mast).
- Nothing in our daily environment has been shown to be harmful in any way. The biggest controversy has been mobile phones, but even huge studies on their effects have been inconclusive. And by ‘inconclusive’ I don’t mean ‘well, there may or may not be a problem’, like it’s 50:50; rather, there is no significant evidence of ANY harm. There is also the issue of living close to power lines, and all the media that’s had, but again, no evidence for any physiological effect, although there are certainly some psychogenic illnesses associated with them.
- Perhaps the dominant EM issue for us is UV radiation from the sun, and we already have protection from that – ozone layers, creams, and just staying indoors.
Conspiracy theorists and nutters, start your search engines! I expect a tonne of comments telling me how blinded I am by the establishment and ‘Big Tech’, and the New World Order, which used EM fields to control the population, yada yada yada. Go for it. But you know what I’m going to say, right? Show me the evidence for your claims. Closely followed by “no, not a study from the Online University of Hicksville USA, but one from a reputable source”. You know the drill by now.
Now that you know the basics, let’s have some fun – let’s start with the nicely titled EMF Blues. This site is basically a vehicle for mom and pop McKusick to sell some ceramic doo-dads which mom has cooked up in her ceramics class. In fact they would make nice buttons or ear-rings if you’re a bit a of a hippy.
But instead, their buttons are actually ”Crystal Catalyst Resonators”. OOohh. I swoon at the technical talk. Go on, say it to me again. Crystal Catalyst Resonators. Back in a minute….
Ok, I’m back now. Yes, apparently, these devices:
..harmonize electromagnetic frequencies so they are no longer harmful to your body. This makes them powerful EMF Protection Devices AND Life Energy Enhancers. …The technology has a unique composition and structure which allows it to absorb and then rebroadcast harmful electromagnetic radiations in a cleaner form. These cleaner frequencies are beneficial to the body. Tests shows that Crystal Catalyst® Resonators increase the body’s strength and enhance whole brainwave functioning.
So, more for your money then. But surely they play havoc with mobile phone reception? They didn’t say, but I emailed them, and their response was:
The Cell Phone Tab will not interfere with cell phone reception. The Tab does not block or shield the frequencies but rather harmonizes them, therefore, the frequencies are still present and intact, and reception is not altered.
They pointed me to the relevant page, where I found I could buy the Cell Phone Tab for only $16.50. Just stick it to the back of my phone, and all will be well.
But how do they know they work? More on this later. But front and centre they have a wonderful testimonial from William in Quebec (I know, impressive, right?), who says:
I had my Crystal Catalyst® Bead muscle tested by my naturopath and he was impressed by how well it worked for so little cost. I am now buying Cell Phone Tabs and the Star 3 Hole. I now feel confident in buying more and recommending them to others.
With that sort of support, why wouldn’t you be convinced? If a naturopath is impressed, it must be the real deal. But Robyn from Kentucky really seals the deal:
Do you ever tell what these blue disks are composed of? Don’t know how, but they really do stop the icky vibes from coming out of the computer. I don’t feel them anymore. Thank you!
Icky vibes from the computer? I only get those when I read Andrew Bolt online.
The site admits that science doesn’t know how it works, but goes for the ‘argument from antiquity’ with this quote:
Egyptian Faience refers to a silicon based ceramic glaze which was produced in Egypt from 3500 B.C. until the first century A.D. The Ancient Egyptians believed Faience to be a magical substance that contained the powers of rebirth. Scarabs and talismans were thought to derive their powers from this quartz based Faience glaze.
Crystal Catalyst® Technology shares many properties of Faience. It too is a silicone based ceramic and is fired in a similar energy field as was used to produce Faience in Ancient Egypt.
Well, it’s old, it must work. But wait there’s more…you can also charge water with the device! Bullshit you say. No, really. Here’s the proof:
Charged Water is water that has been given a new structure and has more healing abilities because of it. Water can be charged by placing a Crystal Catalyst® Bead in or touching the outside of a pitcher of water. This water tastes sweeter and is more easily absorbed by the body. Plants watered with Crystal Catalyst® Water grow green and lush.
But how was this wonderful technology developed? What great lab took this from wish to reality? None other that the team at Biomagnetics Research Inc, established in 1983. Here’s the team. I’m sure there’s a PhD in there somewhere. Actually there isn’t. Ma and pa’s main qualifications are in dowsing – you know, using a stick to find things in the ground. That’s ma and pa on the right, with Billy-bob and Betty-Lou on the left.
Perhaps surprisingly, I found a ‘Testings’ page on their site – so kudos for recognising the need for it, even though it’s grammatically unsound. But what do we find? Apparently EMF meters (which are also a thing) can’t test their product! Have we heard that before? You know, the ‘your modern science can’t deal with this mystical phenomenon’ gambit. No, apparently the only way to test that their product works is with Applied Kinesiology, Kirlian Photography and Whole Brainwave Functioning.
And damn, if they didn’t actually provide proof! There’s an actual picture of ma lifting a bottle of water before and after activating the patented technology! Wow, you have to see this to believe it! But now I’m being facetious. They’ve actually also done independent testing, oh yes. Here it is:
A leading International Canadian Testing Laboratory for Clean Energy has confirmed that the resonators “are not electrical, magnetic, or radioactive, and they can not harm electrical appliances, or computer hardware or software”
Well, ok, I could have told you that and I’m not a Canadian Testing Laboratory. Any comment on whether they work??? How about this:
Doctors at the University of California at Santa Cruz used Kiniseology (muscle testing) to measure the strength of subjects before exposure to electromagnetic radiations. Subjects were then measured in an electromagnetic field using Crystal Catalyst Resonators and showed to be stronger than they were prior to the exposure.
So now we’re using a fraudulent therapy, to test a fraudulent product? Nice One. See my article on Applied Kinesiology here. Pure theatre and totally bogus. Same goes for Kirlian Photography – which is completely fake – here’s a nice discussion of it here. What else?
Farmers in Wisconsin had Dairy cows in Wisconsin were under stress from power line radiation. After placing Crystal Catalyst® Beads on their collars the cows produced more milk with increased butter fat and less bacteria.
And the cows looked cute too, with their beads and all. Actually I’m surprised those farmers had time to do this testing, what with all the aliens doing anal probing in the part of the country. Maybe the aliens relaxed the cows – that would be a far more plausible explanation.
As for the brain testing, they contend that:
Being electrical, the brain is severely affected by electronic pollution. That’s why you feel so “brain-dead” after spending hours on your computer or talking on your cell phone.
No, you feel brain-dead because you’re tired. They follow this up with some hokey charts which anyone could have knocked up. Of course, this data has been published somewhere right? And peer reviewed? Because if they’ve actually built one of these things it would turn science and physics on its head. It means we could travel to Mars without worrying about those pesky cosmic rays! No more sunburn! And if string theory is correct, these devices could be used to block gravity too! Must get me one.
And finally, visit the Testimonials page, for a real laugh, all written in the same style – here’s the first one:
Your Frequency Harmonizer Pendant makes my child less jumpy and the Crystal Catalyst Bead makes him sing all day. Thank you very much for such nice products…I’d like to buy more in the future.
Really? You want your kid to be singing all day? And why would you need to buy more? Do they wear out?
Anyway, enough fun – and they’re are not the only site – the internet is littered with them – try this one for example, which is a shambles of a site. Some of the fun facts on this site include:
Microwave ovens heat the food by radiation, which “deranges” the
molecules of food and water so our bodies have trouble recognizing
and using them.The hip area produces 80% of the body’s red blood cells. This
function is especially vulnerable to EMF damage.You shouldn’t use your cell phone in a car because the metal car
frame amplifies electromagnetic radiation and affects all passengers,
even those not using the cell phone.A cell phone’s impulses can disable the brain’s barrier that shields
the brain from poisons in the blood. And it happens after only 2 minutes
of cell phone use.
You get the idea. Gloom and doom, therefore, buy our pendant.
Same old scam. Same old pitch.
Please don’t fall for it – just have a laugh and enjoy the kooky con artists of the 21st century.
The Great Debate – like god, not so great
This via PZ Myers site Pharyngula…
Many of you who are into the discussion about religion will have picked up that many atheists refuse to debate religious types, mainly because of what has been dubbed the ‘Gish Gallop’ – named after the apologist Duane Gish, who trotted out so many points during his debates that it was impossible to refute them all in a systematic and thorough way. The same tactic is used by cranks of all sorts, especially climate change denialists and alternative medicine proponents, who boil things down to a string of simplistic one-liners, instead of examining the often complex facts (you know, a bit like Australian politics). This then gives the appearance in a live debate that they have won, because the opponent was not able to answer every point, or simply because they ‘seemed’ more knowledgeable.
Here’s a little more background on this phenomenon, which features a nice graphic on ‘debating a christian’.
There are exceptions of course – the guys at Reasonable Doubts engage in debates frequently, but in a more academic setting and format, which tends to keep the gallopers under control.
And then there are the complete mismatches – revisit the Dawkins vs Pell fiasco for a bit of fun, and this great effort by PZ Myers.
But this one will make you chuckle. Recorded just a couple of weeks ago, sociologist and secular humanist Phil Zuckerman WIPED THE FLOOR with historian David Marshall, in a debate on which side provides the greater basis for a society. Zuckerman was so well prepared in comparison to Marshall it was a very lopsided discussion. He relied on sociological studies and global observations, while Marshall seemed to trot out single anecdotes from history, and of course his own personal experience. At times, Marshall seemed to have not been listening, or was simply stumped for what to say next, and had to resort to the time-honoured tactic of asking the moderator to repeat the question in order to buy time.
It’s a bit long, but worth it hear Zuckerman’s well constructed arguments. The only negative for Zuckerman is that he tries a bit too hard to be polite and accommodating. Enjoy.
Gravity is awesome
No, I’m not referring to that gravity which is ‘just a theory’, but which is nonetheless quite a handy thing.
I’m referring to the movie, starring Sandra Bullock and George Clooney, which I saw about a week ago, but have waited a while for it to sink in. I chose the adjective ‘awesome’ deliberately – I was genuinely awe-struck, and that doesn’t happen very often.
I thought I would pass on some thoughts on the movie, but will try not to give away any spoilers.
The first thing to be said is that the subject matter of this movie once again underlines my contention that reality is way more interesting (and awesome) than the mystical/religious/paranormal/fantasy worlds which many claim to exist.
But now to the movie itself.
The production values are superb, as is the attention to detail. For once, the creators have actually listened to the boffins, and got the physics right. While it’s a feast for the eyes, it’s certainly not a romanticised or air-brushed telling of a routine mission gone wrong. Rather, it reinforces what a dangerous place space is for humans, and in particular, how many different ways space can kill you. And that’s what makes this movie edge-of-the-seat stuff from beginning to end (ok, they do give you a few minutes at the beginning to get the ‘wow-that-looks-fun’ feeling happening, but that’s it for relaxation I’m afraid).
I do have a few minor gripes however, but they are minor:
1. At one point Bullock has seven minutes to free the entangled chinese capsule, and suddenly appears on the outside, all suited up to begin the work of untangling stuff. I think it would have taken all of that seven minutes to find the suit (which belonged to a departed chinese astronaut), get into it, and make her way to the outside of the craft.
2. When Clooney (in his jet-pack) picks up Bullock, he tows her back using a long tether – which looked about 20m long, ostensibly to get her out of his jets. That’s fair enough, but the resulting dynamics of two bodies whipping around wreckage is unnecessary, and completely foreseeable. This also would have accelerated the depletion of the fuel in the jet-pack, as it fought against the inertia of the other body. And the fuel in the jet-pack turns out to be critical. Why not have Bullock hold onto Clooney front-on? (Like many other women would love to do, including Mrs. rb, given half a chance). This at least would have made them a single body, much easier to control.
3. The close proximity of the ISS and Chinese habitats to the shuttle orbit and location was handy, and necessary to support the dramatic storyline, but I think that the outcome (without giving away too much), would have been a lot worse in reality.
As I said, these are minor, and don’t really detract from an otherwise excellent film.
For those of you who watch The Movie Show with David and Margaret, I was surprised with David’s comments on the movie. He felt that that a certain scene 3/4 of the way through the movie was somehow silly and inappropriate (when you see it, you’ll know which one I mean). I’m not sure what he was on, but the scene was fine with me – not out of place at all, and completely believable, given the oxygen-starved environment at the time. Was he even paying attention?
The other fail for the Movie show was the failure to acknowledge Aussie astronaut Andy Thomas, who is credited as ‘astronaut adviser’. Given the excellent performances and realism, he has to take a lot of credit.
Overall, a great adventure, well presented.
Your homework: Read Ray Bradbury’s ‘Kaleidescope’, which tells the story of astronauts ejected from an exploding spaceship, and their various conversations as they drift toward their respective fates. Compare and contrast.
A reminder on anti-oxidant supplements – they don’t do what you think they do.
A while back I did a piece on the anti-oxidant rage, here.
I’m not sure if I’ve tuned them out, or the media has actually gone a bit quiet on anti-oxidant supplementation, but it’s worth reinforcing because we continue to see a whole lot of misinformation and misleading nonsense in the nutrition industry – you know, berries of various sorts, herbs, teas and such. I’m actually surprised there isn’t a brand of cigarettes boasting anti-oxidants.
The point of my original story is that the body is a lot more complicated than the simplistic “anti-oxidant kills free radicals” messages we are given, much like “stop the boats”. In fact, too much anti-oxidant can be harmful.
This post is just an excuse to point you to one of my favourite new online information sources, The Conversation. This is an online magazine with contributors from academia and industry, who have the luxury of being able to write in-depth about issues, rather than just give you slogans. And of course, the articles are written by people who know the material, not journalists interpreting others.
In particular, this piece : Health Check: the untrue story of antioxidants vs free radicals gives us another good potted summary of this potentially very complex issue. It is presented in a very clear and accessible way, so give it a try.
Once again, the bottom line: a balanced diet gives you as many anti-oxidants as the body needs, so don’t waste your money, or risk your health by supplementing them with special foods and concoctions.
Book Review – Religion for Atheists
Following closely on ‘Letter to a Christian Nation’ which I reviewed recently, I have just read ‘Religion for Atheists’ by Alain de Botton. An interesting juxtaposition really, with Sam Harris thumbing his nose at claims that religion has somehow enriched us, while de Botton in effect says ‘oh yeah?’.
Religion for Atheists took me by surprise. I’d heard a bit about how the author was a bit of an apologist and so on, but I wasn’t prepared for what I was about to read – a load of condescending hogwash.
And though the author maintains he is an atheist, the degree to which he bends over backwards to accommodate religion is worthy of a circus contortionist.
I’m sorry, it’s one long gush about how religion has enriched mankind, how impoverished atheist lives are, and how we would do well to borrow from the traditions of religion; though on those great religious traditions such as genocide, slavery and the inquisition he is mysteriously silent! Cherry-picking anyone? Oh well, you can only squeeze so much into a book, and there was all that gushing to fit in.
The author does accept that neither the religious nor the atheist communities will be happy with the book – the latter feeling outraged at the treatment of religion as though “it deserves to be a continuing touchstone for our yearnings”. No, that wouldn’t outrage me. What outraged me was that this book offered up religion as much more than a touchstone – a much more immodest answer to life, the universe and everything, with apologies to the real Messiah, Douglas Adams, who at least was able to prove his divinity by creating the first ever trilogy consisting of 4 books, and thereby proving his mastery of the fundamental physical principles of the universe.
The author (de Botton, not Adams) divides the book neatly for us into the lessons religion can give, namely, community, kindness, education, tenderness, pessimism, perspective, art, architecture and institutions. I’d like to write a piece on each section, but the book doesn’t deserve the wear and tear on my laptop keyboard that would entail, so I’ll resist the temptation, and focus on some highlights and themes.
Now, a philosopher I’m not, but de Botton seems to obsess about the ego throughout the book, as if it is some evil attribute of mankind which must be squashed at every opportunity. By extension, he feels that we should know our place in the universe and be humble, yada yada yada. He uses these devices liberally to underline the great gifts religion can bestow upon us.
The discussion about community goes along the lines you would expect – that religion has a lot to teach us about getting together in communities – never mind that people manage to do that just fine without religion. Surprisingly however, he does seem to advocate that breaking out of the norms of social expectations in some sort of (religiously inspired) 15th century Feast of Fools could provide a useful antidote to “the two greatest pressures of secular adult life: having to be rational and having to be faithful”. So, act like an idiot, and shag the neighbours once per year, and job done: pressures dealt with. Back to the office for more rationality and faithfulness. His suggestion has good empirical support in the world of AFL football in Australia, in which we have a tradition of Mad Monday at season’s end. That always ends well. If that’s his understanding of the pressures of modern life, then I’m afraid the whole book is based on a faulty premise.
The section on education is very wide-ranging, but the basic premise is that the content and delivery of secular education is directed at the brain and not the soul. (I do realise that he means ‘soul’ not in the religious sense, but rather that collection of ghostly and ill-defined attributes such as faith, charity, hope and love). He therefore proposes ‘sermons’ instead of ‘lectures’, to answer the key questions of life and getting on with each-other. All laudable – and in a sense I agree, which is why in previous discussions on this blog you’ll see a lot of stuff about the teaching of ethics in primary school. But to be clear, I don’t consider this position to be religious – rather, it’s a humanist one.
His discussion of tenderness is somewhat baffling I must say. The premise is illustrated by a little story of some guy down on his luck, stumbling into a church and gaining comfort from gazing at a picture of the Madonna. He feels that we should learn from religion, and perhaps create secular ‘temples of tenderness’, or other architectural spaces, in which our souls can get a great big hug to make everything ok. Really? We need buildings for that? I always thought that’s what people were for. Perhaps I’m just being naïve.
Now for pessimism. His basic premise here is that religion has always been great at insisting that we, and our relationships, are inherently flawed, and not to expect lasting happiness as a right. Perhaps I missed the aphorism “if you’re pessimistic, you’re never disappointed” in the bible. Well there are probably words to that effect in there, which demonstrates that it’s a secular concept. Written by humans, it’s a mental trick we play on ourselves as protection from disappointment – a bit like me when I started out reading this book.
I’m going to finish on perspective, because I’ve written about art and architecture briefly before here, and this book hasn’t really changed my view on it. And the last section, institutions, frankly bored me.
The section on perspective really annoyed me – it’s all about how religion helps us realise how insignificant we are, and how we should be humble (again, let’s beat that ego into submission, right?). As the author puts it:
Religion is above all a symbol of what exceeds us and an education in the advantages of recognizing our paltriness.
See what I mean about patronising? He accepts that science can also help us to feel paltry – activities such as understanding the size of the cosmos and so on. But his main point is that this feeling is somehow therapeutic, and refers as evidence to Spinoza’s view of the stars that: “It is through their contemplation that the secular are afforded the best chance of experiencing redemptive feelings of awe”. How exactly it is therapeutic or redemptive is not really addressed to my satisfaction.
He also pushes the travails of our biblical friend Job – and how instead of an explanation for his misery, he is offered a reminder that he can never understand some things, some mysteries. On this, De Botton opines:
God’s whirlwind, and the sonorous, sublime words he speaks, excite a pleasing terror in his audience, a sense of how petty are man’s disasters in comparison with the ways of eternity, leaving Job – and the rest of us, perhaps – a little readier to bow to the incomprehensible and morally obscure tragedies that every life entails”.
To use the literary term, what a load of bollocks. His message is to simply accept that you won’t be able to understand some things, and you’ll feel better. Have a cup of tea and lie down. Things will look better in the morning. He goes on to suggest that:
Science should matter to us not only because it helps us to control parts of the world, but also because it shows us things that we will never master.
No. I simply don’t accept such a defeatist and puerile position. So, at what point should we stop trying to master things? He goes further:
Thus we would do well to meditate daily, rather as the religious do on their God, on the 9.5 trillion kilometres which comprise a single light year, or perhaps the luminosity of the largest known start in our galaxy, Eta Carinae, 7,500 light years distant…… {insert more gee-whiz numbers in here…}
OMG. He seems a bit freaked by big numbers, doesn’t he? Does he really think that meditating on the fact that light travels 9.5 x 1012 km in year will bring about some change in our psyche? And surely if he’d heeded his own advice in the previous quote, we would never have understood the implications of the speed of light in the first place.
No, the gee-whiz knowledge he cites is just mundane, but nonetheless a significant accomplishment of mankind, without the necessity to be humble in the process. And rather than consoling us, or somehow encouraging us to be happy with our current state, knowledge serves to make mankind thirst for even more knowledge. And so it should.
I’ll be very interested to see how other people feel about this book, but it’s a thumbs-down from me.
A bit of wolf action
It may surprise you to hear I don’t watch many wildlife documentaries. I’ve just never gravitated to them.
However, when one is on, I do get into it. Such was the case last night, and I got a large dose of wolves, brown bears, seals and salmon in northern Alaska; the latter two in various states of disrepair, as the former two tore into them.
I’m not going to talk about it – it just reminded me of my own adventure in Denali National Park in Alaska some 3 years ago now. On the bus through the park, I got some outstanding (if I do say so myself) footage of a wolf sneaking up on some unsuspecting Dall sheep, and thought is was worth posting.
As all this unfolded, about 2 or 3 buses backed up, and our guide said this was a very rare sight (the stalking wolf, not the backed up buses).
The video starts out with the sheep just browsing on the hillside, as they do. Off to the left, a wolf is crouching, weighing up its options. Or just resting, I don’t know, I’m not an expert.
The wolf decides a front-on assault is not on because it’s still too far away. So he takes an alternate route – he comes out of the foliage, towards the road and right past our bus, to try to get a better vantage point. Again he weighs up his options, and then… well, you just have to watch what happens.
You’ll hear some commentary – most of it is our guide, me, and mrs rationalbrain who is freaking out on behalf of the Dall sheep.
Enjoy.
Chiropractic and babies – really say NO
It was only a matter of time before the statistics caught up with them.
As a followup to my article last year urging you to resist the temptation to have your neck ‘adjusted’ by chiropractor, here is a current article on the perils of such treatments. An infant’s neck was broken, and with doctors saying:
Another few millimetres and there would have been a devastating spinal cord injury and the baby would have either died or had severe neurological impairment with quadriplegia. Everybody was very nervous about this little baby.
This one is noteworthy because a. the patient is so young, and b. this is one of the few ‘adverse’ events that are publicised as a result of the child needing hospitalisation (for real medical treatment) after the ‘adjustment’. As pointed out in my earlier article, there are large number of transient effects which chiropractors don’t consider ‘adverse’, but should be cause for concern and expose patients to unnecessary risks.
The article quotes the president of the Chiropractors Association of Australia, Laurie Tassell, as saying: “chiropractic is as safe for children as it is for adults” – which is not much comfort, since in the case of spinal manipulation it’s a danger to adults too.
The real worry is that chiropractors are using this bogus treatment for more than just mechanical issues – all sorts of ailments such as colic, ear infections, asthma, reflux, constipation and so on, with absolutely no evidence of any beneficial outcomes. And don’t get me started on chiropractors replacing vaccinations with their own treatments. All this just multiplies the opportunity for needless spinal manipulations.
In this measured and thorough report by Harriet Hall on a recent systematic study into chiropractic adverse events, her conclusion was as follows:
The bottom line: chiropractic manipulations, especially neck manipulations, carry a small risk of serious consequences, a large risk of minor adverse effects; and, depending on the indication, there is little or no evidence that they are effective.
Really, stay away from these self-deluded charlatans, and especially keep your children away from them.
Climate Commission – An act of vandalism
There’s only one word for it – vandalism.
As if to reinforce his anti-intellectual approach to anything vaguely resembling science, technology or social progress, our new PM (did we really do that?) has just killed off the Climate Commission, whose mission was to sift the science and provide the government and public with up to date information.
So, not only is the new government intent on dismantling any real action on climate, they have now done the equivalent of putting their fingers in their ears and chanting ‘la la la’. No only don’t they have a clue, but they don’t want to have a clue, almost as if it might be taken as a sign of weakness to actually respond to the real world rather than defend their ideology to the death.
Morons; what else can you say about people who, on behalf of a whole nation, willfully shun facts in favour of beliefs?
Speaking of morons, the those pesky climate skeptics (sorry, I meant liars) are at it again. This time, trying the further their ends by spreading more doubt, and creating an alternative to the IPCC, called the NIPCC. The NIPCC is funded by the Heartland Institute, about which I’ve written before, for example here, here and here. Here’s an excellent article by Michael Brown of Monash University providing more background on these charlatans, as well as providing a dinner-table guide to the current status of global warming.
Happily, following the demise of the Climate Commission, there has been sufficient groundswell on this matter for Tim Flannery (formerly Chief Commissioner) to resurrect the organisation as the Climate Council, to be funded privately. Seemingly overnight, a new site was created for the purpose, and is already taking donations.
If you are at all interested in supporting this organisation, at least go there and register, watch the video, and perhaps even donate.
Technology becomes art
Here’s an interesting bit of ‘art’, which relies on a heap of technology to produce some fascinating visuals.
Watch on a big screen if you can.
Enjoy.
Book Review – Letter to a Christian Nation, Sam Harris
You know how much I love a good chat about religion, right?
Well, this book really hit the sweet spot for me. Although I’ve heard quite a bit about Sam Harris, I haven’t actually read many of his publications. But now I’m hooked.
This is a small book, written in the style of a letter from Harris to a Christian reader, which makes for an engaging style.
The thing I enjoyed most about Harris’ approach to this was his no-nonsense, reality-based challenge to all things religious. By this I mean that he didn’t sugar-coat his points – there was no accommodationist nonsense; no sparing the feelings of those who may be challenged by the discussion. It very much reads as if Harris has just come down from Mars, surveyed the landscape, and given a critique of human beings and their approach to life.
From the outset, he addresses the morality question, and here Christianity comes in for some ridicule on the basis of comparison to other religions. He uses as an example the Indian religion of Jainism, whose central message is “Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture or kill any creature or living being”. Harris says:
Imagine how different our world might be if the Bible contained this as its central precept. Christians have abused, oppressed, enslaved, insulted, tormented, tortured, and killed people in the name of God for centuries, on the basis of a theologically defensible reading of the Bible…..How then can you argue that the Bible provides the clearest statement of morality the world has ever seen?.
He also points out the circular reasoning employed by the religious, who use their own moral intuitions to ‘authenticate the wisdom of the Bible”, while then going on to claim that human beings “cannot possibly rely upon our own moral intuitions to rightly guide us in the world; rather, we must depend on the prescriptions of the Bible“.
From morality in general, Harris then moves into specific examples – such as the Catholic stance on abortion and stem cell research. Harris’ approach to this and other issues is perhaps best illustrated by a selection of quotes, which nicely sum up his approach and position.
On abortion:
Of course, the Church’s position on abortion takes no more notice of the details of biology than it does of the reality of human suffering. It has been estimated that 50% of all human conceptions end in spontaneous abortion, usually without a woman ever realising she was pregnant…There is an obvious truth here that cries out for acknowledgement: if God exists, He is the most prolific abortionist of all.
On being an atheist:
In fact, ‘atheism’ is a term that should not even exist. No on ever needs to identify himself as a ‘non-astrologer’, or a ‘non-alchemist’. We do not have words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.
On the Church’s project to review doctrine regarding the fate of un-baptised babies in limbo:
Can we even conceive of a project more intellectually forlorn than this? Just imagine what these deliberations must be like. Is there the slightest possibility that someone will present evidence indicating the eternal fate of unbaptised children after death? How can any educated person thing this anything but a hilarious, terrifying and unconscionable waste of time? When one considers the fact that this is the very institution that has produced and sheltered and elite army of child-molesters, the whole enterprise beings to exude a truly diabolical aura of misspent human energy.
On faith itself:
While believing strongly, without evidence, is considered a mark of madness or stupidity in any other area of our lives, faith in God still holds immense prestige in our society. Religion is the one area of our discourse where it is considered noble to pretend to be certain about things no human being could possible be certain about.
And the arrogance implicit in that faith:
One of the monumental ironies of religious discourse can be appreciated in the frequency with which people of faith praise themselves for the humility, while condemning scientists and other non-believers for the intellectual arrogance. There is in fact no worldview more reprehensible in its arrogance that that of a religious believer: the creator of the universe takes an interest in me, approves of me, loves me, and will reward me after my death..everyone who disagrees with me will spend an eternity in hell.
On the stark contradictions presented by religious belief:
The truth, astonishingly enough, is this: in the year 2006, a person can have sufficient intellectual and material resources to build a nuclear bomb and still believe that he will get seventy-two virgins in Paradise.
On the authors of the Bible:
…where every debate about public policy was subverted to the whims of ancient authors who wrote well, but who didn’t know enough about the nature of reality to keep their excrement out of their food.
And finally, his exasperated closing remarks to the fictitious pen-pal:
Non-believers like myself stand beside you, dumbstruck by the Muslim hordes who chant death to whole nations of the living. But we stand dumbstruck by you as well – by your denial of tangible reality, but the suffering your create in service to your religious myths, and by your attachment to an imaginary God. This letter has been an expression of that amazement – and, perhaps, of a little hope.
Overall, I’d recommend this book for an honest, clear and easy to understand exposition of the major arguments against personal and institutional religion.
Politics – just this once, I promise
I have made it a rule to not comment on politics, except of course as it affects the topics I’m discussing at the time. Regular readers will recall well-crafted adjectives such as ‘right-wing nut jobs’ etc, when talking about climate change for example.
One of the reasons for keeping politics out of things is that it is antithetical to rational thinking. It is simply not a rational process. For all the plaudits lavished on democracy good grief does it have some flaws. But as they say, it’s probably the best we’ve got, and sure beats the hell out of a feudal system for example.
But I’ve weakened. It’s not just that Australia has just elected it’s very own George W . Bush (let the gaffe-counting commence). It’s mainly that the process was so tortuous this time around. Right-wingers will say that it’s because the outgoing government was so dysfunctional for so long. There is some measure of truth to this – their leadership hijinks were just tedious. But this alone is not the reason. Indeed the Labour government got plenty of nation-building going (see, I’m even using political terms!). But for me it was the incessant prattle by both the opposition and the media that really did my head in, to use the psychologist-approved term.
That ‘prattle’ largely consisted of dumbed-down slogans, repeated ad nauseam by the opposition (Stop the boats! Axe the tax!), and then re-tweeted, so to speak, by the media. To me it’s the same phenomenon as happens with, for example, climate denialists – because the situation is actually quite complex, short, pithy slogans can penetrate and are hard to easily refute. This is why atheists tend to avoid debating theologians – the latter are armed with loads of quotes which cannot easily be refuted by another simple quote. It’s the FUD approach – sow seeds of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, and the masses will come with you. Historically the tobacco industry did this effectively for many years – using doubt as the main weapon.
So we now have our very own climate-denialist as PM, famously quoted as saying ‘climate change is crap’. Oh boy. First order of business – dismantle carbon pricing mechanisms, and replace it with so-called ‘Direct Action’, which as I understand it will consist primarily of paying off polluters to, well, not pollute as much. This position is clearly a political expedient, since of all policy positions, carbon pricing is the most consistent with right-wing, free-market approaches, while their adopted approach is socialism writ large. And to top it all off, just today we read that an MP who is an avowed climate change skeptic, Dennis Jensen, has put his hand up to be Minister for Science. He is quoted as saying “It was wrong to accept the view of the 97 per cent of climate scientists who agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely caused by human activities, because “the argument of consensus . . . is a flawed argument”. And if that doesn’t tell you enough, then he also said: “The colourful Englishman, Lord Christopher Monckton, who toured Australia to debunk the “bogus science” of global warming, was closer to the mark“, and, “Most of the stuff [Lord Monckton] says is entirely reasonable”. Again, Oh boy.
The other peculiarity about this election is the rise of the so-called micro-parties in the Senate, as a result of our archaic preference voting system. How ironic is that the people complaining about it are the politicians. Guys, you set it up! What’s even more laughable is the now new government poking fun at some of the potential new senators, basically describing them as the lunatic fringe. All I can say is Bill Heffernan and Barnaby Joyce. Pot calling kettle black.
Climate change is crap. No conscience vote on gay marriage. Catholic views on women’s reproductive rights and ‘traditional family values’. Fanning the embers of xenophobia. Copper for broadband, not fibre. Australia, all ahead full, warp factor 9 – destination, the 1950’s.
And if I hear one more word on what the people of fucking Western Sydney or fucking Queensland want or think, I’m going to scream.
Book Review: The Edge of Physics
Those of you who are non-technical should not be put off by the title of this book, which conjures images of arcane equations and theories.
It is in fact a travelogue – a writer’s journey around the globe to visit sites at which the most extreme science is being done, and in the process, explains the background of the science for the layman. The science he investigates is all about understanding our universe, from the origins of that universe, down the structure of the very small.
And very entertaining it is.
Mind you, some familiarity with the ‘big questions’ in physics won’t go astray – in fact the author provides as appendices brief synopses of the standard model of particle physics, and the standard model of cosmology (i.e. the big bang). Incredibly, he does this in just two pages each.
By assembling these stories into one book, the author places a strong focus on how big science needs to be to answer the really big questions. While theoretical physicists can sit with a pencil and paper to do their work, the experimentalists (and engineers who, of course, rule) need to get out and build stuff to test theories.
They build radio telescopes that span continents. They build optical telescopes that require immense structures to support and adjust them. They adapt cubic kilometers of clean ice at the South Pole to build a detector capable of catching fleeting particles from the edge of the known universe, in the hope of testing theories of the very origins of the universe. They deliver sensitive instruments to specific points in our solar system (Lagrange points – low energy parking spots) to probe the structure of the early universe, and they build huge underground tunnels in the shape of a ring to smash up particles and probe their constituents in an effort to determine, amongst other things, why stuff has mass.
I found this book engaging, with the stories of the author’s discoveries well told. Some parts do get a bit technical, but it’s easy to skip over those if you’re not interested, and instead focus on big picture.
Give it a try.
rationalbrain 