28 June 2011

Escape to Reality!

Cross-posted from the Winnipeg Skeptics blog.

The Humanist Association of Manitoba and the Winnipeg Skeptics were joint sponsors of an informational booth at the Red River Exhibition that ran 17–26 June 2011. Surrounded as we were by booths from the Gideons, the Winnipeg League for Life, the Church of Scientology, and folks hawking knock-off Power Balance wristbands, we called the booth "Escape to Reality".


I spent a fair portion of my free time over the last week staffing the booth (along with the indefatigable and demonstrably more dedicated Donna Harris and others), and generally had a lot of fun. We even got a shout-out from PZ, which is always appreciated. We had many enjoyable conversations with believers and skeptics of all stripes.


Donna, Laura, and I chatted at length with a few creationists, who were apparently offended that one of our signs put "Young Earth Creationism" in the same evidential category as "The Easter Bunny". When pressed, they could provide no positive evidence for their position, and seemed to forget several of their own talking points. Apparently there are no beneficial mutations, evolution cannot add information to the genome, and Darwinism predicts that species will just get stronger, smarter, and better over time, while we're clearly just getting sicker and sicker.

When I tried to explain that evolution only predicts increasing adaptation to the species' environment, I was smugly informed that I did not understand evolution. When I tried to explain precisely how mutations can add "information" in a genetic sequence, bringing up insertions, deletions, transpositions, and point mutations, I was met with blank stares. I pulled out a sheet of paper and wrote out some codons (ATG CTG TAG...), changing or crossing out letters to illustrate the replication or replacement of one or more nucleotides.

"I'm going to stop you there," one of the creationists said. "What are all those letters supposed to mean?"

Sorry, I thought, my mistake. I assumed that because you so arrogantly asserted that mutations were incapable of adding new information to a genome, you were at least passingly familiar with what "information" means in the context of genetics. I decided to cut my losses and move on.

There were times that they stumbled over their own talking points, which I found amusing. For example, they brought up Mount St. Helens several times, but couldn't seem to remember why it was so important for their case. I reminded them that Steven Austin had rock from a new lava flow at Mount St. Helens dated, and the potassium-argon dating showed the rock to be hundreds of thousands of years old—unfortunately, it is well established that Austin (either knowingly or in ignorance) used the incorrect radiometric dating methods. The various types of radiometric dating are accurate for varying (and overlapping) ranges of time. They are validated not only against each other, but also by other dating methods, such as dendrochronology, which uses tree rings.

Wait a second, it says here that God created humanity, not Darwin...

Of course, the creationists weren't the only people we met whose beliefs took a sharp right turn when confronted with reality. A young woman who seemed very interested in our booth asked me, "Do you guys believe in energy?" "Sure!" I said. "Energy is the capacity of a system to perform work." She seemed a little nonplussed by this. "No," she said. "How we're all connected by energy. It's all about science. There's this movie you should see..." "Ah!" I said. "You're talking about What the Bleep Do We Know?." And then I told her, as gently as I could, precisely what I thought of that particular quantum fantasy film.


We spent much of our time at the Ex promoting SkeptiCamp Winnipeg, which is coming up on September 17th at Aqua Books, and the MASH Film Festival, on August 14th at the Park Theatre. Both events garnered a lot of interest.

We also did a few demonstrations. I'm told that the fellow hawking "Energy Balance" bracelets ($30 rubber bands—with "ions"!) threatened to call security on Ashlyn as she calmly explained to his marks how all of his tricks could easily be faked. Hypothetically, of course. She wasn't calling him a fraud. It's all about the consumer protection, folks! (Richard Saunders explains the tricks here.)

On Thursday night, Scott and I went to get "stress tests" at the Dianetics booth run by the Church of Scientology. There, we were asked personal questions while we held tin cans connected to a volt meter. I found that if you squeezed the cans, the needle would jump, which led to some amusing shenanigans.

Pictured: Science.

There, we learned that L. Ron Hubbard had apparently been both a renowned physicist and a research psychologist. "Through his research," I was told, "he discovered that humans are spiritual beings." Fascinating! We were told that Scientologists were first responders in Haiti and Japan. "Oh," I said, "that's great! How did they help?" I was informed that these "first responders" were trained in Touch Assist, a form of energy healing.

The recruiters told Scott and I that one of the greatest boons that Dianetics has to offer is increased mental discipline and help to those who suffer from mental illness. "You know how Einstein said that you only use this much of your brain?" my recruiter said, holding her hands about an inch apart. "Well, with Dianetics..." She spread her arms wide, presumably indicating that Dianetics would allow me to meet my intellectual potential.

"So Dianetics is about mental health," I said slowly. "That's exactly right," she told me.

"Oh," I said. "Like psychiatry."

She stared at me as though I'd slapped her. Recovering quickly, she launched into a conspiracy-mongering diatribe about drug dependency and the Big Psychiatry smear campaign against the Church of Scientology. Scientologist successfully trolled. I'm such a bastard.

My favourite quotation of the night: "Dianetics is a science. It's like gravity. You can't disprove it." Fact.


A big thank-you to everyone who helped out with planning and staffing the booth, and to those who stopped by for a chat!

26 June 2011

Forgive Us Our Trespasses: Prayer in Public Schools

The Winnipeg Free Press recently ran a really good article about ongoing prayer in Manitoba's public school systems. While Canada does not have a constitutional separation of church and state, this prayer does violate provincial regulations.

Betende Hände, by Albrecht Dürer.

In supposedly secular schools across the province, teachers and principles read the Lord's Prayer to students, while irreligious pupils "are expected to stand quietly in their classrooms while their classmates recite the Lord's Prayer all around them". If parents don't want their children involved in sectarian religious exercises, they must sign forms to opt out.

Every one of these actions violates Manitoba's guidelines on religious exercises in secular public schools, says Dauphin lawyer and atheist Chris Tait.

But the province says its only recourse is to remind school divisions about guidelines -- after that, it's up to individuals to take their complaints to the Manitoba Human Rights Commission or the courts.

It was back in 1986 that Tait was suspended several times for refusing to stand during the reciting of the Lord's Prayer in his MacGregor Collegiate classroom. That led to a historic 1992 court case in which the Court of Queen's Bench struck down mandatory school prayer in Manitoba.

More than 20 Manitoba school divisions are violating the province's guidelines on religious exercises, said Tait. He filed Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act applications to school divisions and provided the results to the Free Press.

While the article itself is generally excellent, the comments section serves to deliver our daily helping of stupid, and Flora over at the Winnipeg Skeptics blog dives right in:

Kids today are worse than they used to be! This is because they took prayer out of schools! Umm, I'm pretty sure the point of this article is that prayer is still in schools even though it's not supposed to be. Most likely, you have a nostalgia bias, and remember things better than they were, and any real decline in good behaviour at school is due to other factors.

...

If you don't like it, you should go to a country that doesn't believe in God. Um no, first of all, a country cannot believe in God, only its people can. Furthermore, this particular country enforces the freedom of religious belief, INCLUDING atheism, agnosticism, and all other religions. There are very specific rules for how religion can enter public schools, and it is not allowed to be on school time. If you would prefer a country that does enforce such things, as pointed out by another commenter, I hear Iran is really nice for religious fundamentalism this type of year.

Imagine what it must feel like to be a Muslim or Jewish or Hindu or Jain or atheist child, forced to stand silently while the teacher and most of your classmates pray to a deity that in which you do not believe.

The removal of mandatory sectarian prayer is very important. Such forced religious worship is very divisive, and serves to further isolate students who belong to religious (or irreligious) minorities from their peers. Fallacious arguments from popularity or tradition aside, I see no justification for continuing the practice, and applaud Mr. Tait's efforts to see it abolished.

Religious freedom shouldn't be reserved for those in the majority.

23 June 2011

My New Bible

My new Bible arrived in the mail today!

Although I've read most or all of the book in bits and pieces throughout the years, I've never sat down and read it straight through, front to back—but that's something that I've always wanted to do.

I finally settled on the NET Bible. The full text is available online for free, but despite my technological predilections I thoroughly enjoy holding a tome in my hands as I read.

I knew that there would be copious translators' notes (the spine of the volume boasts 60,932 of them), but exactly what that meant for the text of the work was lost on me until I turned to Genesis 1.


Yes. Amid the footnotes, they managed to squeeze all of two verses onto the opening page.

This could take a while.

Also, they used the Papyrus font for all of the titles. I would have preferred Pergamena, of course. (Oooh, a parchment joke! That makes me clever!)


Update: Remember the Sin of Sodom? Although the NET Bible does translate Genesis 19:5 as "They shouted to Lot, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so we can have sex with them!'", in a footnote it makes reference to the alternate Sin of Inhospitality hypothesis advocated by W. Roth and Robert Price. I like that.

13 June 2011

Skeptical News Roundup!

There are several newsitems (major and minor) that have cropped up over the last few months that I've been meaning to blog about, but have simply slipped through the cracks. As you may have heard, I'm helping my friend Scott produce a film about nonbelievers that is scheduled to debut at the Manitoba Atheists, Skeptics, and Humanists (MASH) Film Festival on August 14th, and that's currently taking up much of the time that I usually allocate to writing. So there you go.

Courtesy of DragonArt, CC BY-NC-SA 3.0.

It's okay to be Takei.

The Takeis have been in the news quite a bit, lately. Over at Blag Hag, Jen discusses Germany's Union of Catholic Physicians, which is endorsing homeopathy as a cure for the gay. Fitting: a non-existent solution to a non-existent problem—and (as Jen points out) probably less psychologically damaging than the A Clockwork Orange-style aversion therapy that's more commonly employed to "treat" gays. But if like cures like, you and I both know that there's only one cure for gay sex, and it's gay sex.

Also making the rounds is a blog post by Nathan Heflick at Psychology Today. He talks briefly about a 1996 study that found that while both homophobic and non-homophobic heterosexual men were equally aroused by heterosexual and lesbian pornography, only the homophobes were aroused by man-on-man action. Neither the abstract nor Heflick's discussion of the study raise any real red flags, but I'm not qualified to evaluate it. I am, however, qualified to snigger.

There's been much ado over the past few months about Ontario's public Catholic schools, what with their recent decisions to "ban" rainbows, appropriate donations to an LGBT-friendly help-line for a Catholic homeless shelter, suspend students for expressing pro-choice sentiment, and generally being bigoted and disgraceful institutions. BoingBoing reminds us that the United Nations has condemned Canada's public religious schools as a human rights violation. (Full disclosure: my eleven-year-old brother attends a Catholic school in Thunder Bay, and by all accounts receives an excellent education.)

Hat tips to Anlina Sheng, Blag Hag, and BoingBoing.

Why, WHO, why?

People have been concerned for some time about cellphones and cancer. I've discussed this briefly in the past, first in my response to an awful Free Press article about "dirty electricity", and then again in my last Skeptical News Roundup.

Despite the hysteria that has gripped news organisations and Facebook users alike over the WHO's recent classification of cellphone use as a type 2B potential carcinogen, there is still no good evidence that your mobile device is poisoning your brain.

Hat tips to Skeptic North and BoingBoing.

Scott Adams almost catches up to Vox Day in the douchebag department.

I enjoy Dilbert, but I have the good sense to be a little ashamed about that, because Scott Adams is such an appalling jackass. He has a history of saying laughably stupid things, and when people call him on it, he responds by ridiculing his critics for taking what he has to say seriously. (He sort of reminds me of Insane Clown Posse in that respect.)

Anyway, it's now been revealed that—surprise, surprise—he's been going around the Internet with a pseudonym, praising Scott Adams (himself) as a "certifiable genius", and going on to claim that those who disagree with him are "too dumb to understand what he's saying".

What a douchebag.

Hat tip to Pharyngula.

Dear Oprah...

As you might imagine, I don't much care for Oprah. I cheered when Brian Dunning named her #1 on his list of celebrities who promote harmful pseudoscience. BoingBoing contributor David Ng does an excellent job of elaborating on her history of endorsing bad science.

That was why I was so delighted when I heard that Opera Software has been receiving emails intended for Oprah for years. And they responded to them!

Hat tip to BoingBoing.

And finally...

The fool, or the fool who follows him?

Also, remember when Judgement Day happened last month? Well, apparently some people were a little upset about it. For example, this woman slashed her daughters throats with a box cutter. So... there's that.

Hat tip to Pharyngula.

07 June 2011

Non-believer? We need your help!

"The Non-Believers' Beliefs – A Short Film"

If you identify as atheist, agnostic, non-theist, or non-believer of some fashion, then we want to talk to you! We are looking for non-believers that we can interview for a short film about what they do believe, and why; where do you get your morality and ethics from? What do you value?

Co-Producers Scott Carnegie and Gem Newman of the Winnipeg Skeptics are making this film which will premiere at the M.A.S.H. (Manitoba Atheists, Skeptics, and Humanists) Film Festival at the Park Theatre on August 14th.

If you are interested in being a part of this project, please contact Gem Newman (spurll@gmail.com) with your name, email address, phone number (cell preferred), and availability for the months of June and July; if you will be away on holidays please indicate the dates so that we can arrange schedules.


Addendum (15 August 2011): You can view the completed film here: The Nonbelievers' Beliefs.