Segment #1. News Items: Sad Monkeys, The Gospel of Judas, Polar Ice Caps, More Quackery
Segment #2. Your E-mails: Skeptical toolbox, Gene
Multiplication
Segment #3. Interview with Marilyn Mandala Schlitz, Ph.D.
Segment #1. News Items
News Item #1 – Sad
Monkeys
http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2006/04/sad_monkeys_placeholder.php
News Item #2 – The
Gospel of Judas
http://www.world-science.net/othernews/060406_codexfrm.htm
News Item #3 – Polar
Ice Caps follow up
http://www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/qthinice.asp
http://www.livescience.com/forcesofnature/041222_permafrost.html
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=32821
- cryosat 2
launches in March 2009
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/09/020902072155.htm
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/ice_sheets.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/060308211836.htm
- most recent NASA data
News Item #4 – Two
studies to foil the quacks
Mercury Amalgam no associated
with pediatric problems
No benefit from
spinal surgery with fetal cell implants from Chinese clinic
Segment #2. Your E-mails
E-mail #1 – Skeptical Toolbox
Greetings!
I love the show. This show is a fantastic resource for someone like me. While I
have the skeptical mindset, I do not have the tools to deconstruct some of the
paranormal things that I hear about. This show helps to give me the ability to
take bunk theories apart.
Recently I was in a discussion about 9/11 and I use the term that you
introduced me to, "anomaly hunting." It helped me convince some
people that the 9/11 conspiracy is really far fetched.
I'd like to suggest a segment to your show. I would love it if you took time
out of every show to describe a tool in the "skeptic toolbox." You
could talk about a part of the scientific method, a logical fallacy with
examples, or points of view that will help the listener become a better
skeptic.
Keep up the great work!
Cecil
E-mail #2 - Scientific Legitimacy
I just wanted to let you all know how much I love your
show. I absolutely LOVE it. We just recently discovered your podcast and are now furiously downloading all of your
archived casts. I must say (and this may sound odd), but your podcast actually has given me an amazing sense of
comfort. Being a skeptic often results in a feeling of isolation from the
general public, and this is particularly true in the case of religious
beliefs. In the rare cases I have revealed my atheist beliefs to others;
it has generated anger and fear. I read a survey recently that revealed that
when given the choice, the average person would rather have a lesbian as
president than an atheist. Atheists seem to be at the top of
So I keep my blanket of like-minded friends around me, all the while knowing
that the majority of the world around us is very different. This way of
thinking that seems to have separated me from most of the people around me has
now given me a connection, through your podcast, to
complete strangers miles and miles away. That little blanket of like-minded
people is much bigger than I thought, and I am greatly comforted by that.
You all have a great dynamic together and your enthusiasm for and love of
science is just terrific. Each of you has a unique way of looking at the
issues, and all have such a great sense of humor about it – some more acrid
than others! You are constantly reminding me of how absolutely incredibly
wonderful this planet, this universe is and how much there is to learn. I need
more than one life time to soak it all up!
I know this is a labor of love for all of you and that it takes a great deal of
time that you could be devoting to other equally rewarding parts of your lives.
I am so glad you all have chosen to do this. Thank you!
Kim
drizzlypeas@yahoo.com
PS - Where can I find Evan's cartoon Arnie's World??
Finally...My Question: In my line of work I am constantly confronted with
scientists who essentially "prostitute" themselves and the truth out
to the highest bidder. I would really enjoy hearing your perspectives on that.
Superficially, they often appear to be true to the scientific method and are
even considering the same raw data as other studies. However, their use of that
data, and the statistical analyses performed can of course dramatically impact
the final outcome – the answer. Given this, how does the average person really
evaluate the legitimacy of medical claims, environmental issues, health studies
on constituents in food, pesticides etc.? One could make the effort to
determine who the study was funded by - but how?
Sorry for my rambling. Thanks again to all of you!!
E-mail #3 - Can you tell me what is gene multiplication?
akshaya
Segment #3. Interview with Marilyn Mandala Schlitz, Ph.D.
http://www.marilynschlitz.com/Home.php
Dr. Schlitz currently serves as Vice President for Research
and Education at the
Excellent summary of the Ganzfeld experiments: http://skepdic.com/ganzfeld.html
Segment #4. Science or
Fiction
Each week our host will come up with three science news items or facts, two genuine, one fictitious. He will challenge our panel of skeptics to sniff out the fake – and you can play along.
Item#1: New study by
Item #2: Eating more olive oil and fish and less meat and dairy was associated with a significantly lower risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease.
Item #3: New study shows that fetuses are capable of feeling pain.
Answer:
Item #1: Science - http://www.nature.com/news/2006/060417/full/060417-1.html
Item #2: Science – http://www.nature.com/news/2006/060417/full/060417-2.html
Item #3: Fiction –
see below
Item#3
There is good evidence that fetuses cannot feel pain, says an expert in this week's BMJ.
Proposals to tell women seeking abortions that their unborn child will feel pain, or to provide pain relief during abortions, are therefore scientifically unsound and may put women at unnecessary risk, argues Stuart Derbyshire, a senior psychologist at the University of Birmingham.
He examined the neurological and psychological evidence to support a concept of fetal pain.
Although still immature, the neural circuitry necessary for processing pain can be considered complete by 26 weeks' gestation, he explains. However, pain experience requires not only development of the brain but also development of the mind to accommodate the subjectivity of pain.
Development of the mind only occurs outside the womb, through the actions of the infant and interactions with primary caregivers.
So, not only is the biological development to support pain experience ongoing, but the environment after birth, so necessary to the development of pain experience, is also yet to occur, he says. As such, fetuses cannot experience pain.
The absence of pain in the fetus does not resolve the morality of abortion, but does argue against legal and clinical efforts to prevent such pain during an abortion, he adds.
Proposals currently being considered in the
"Avoiding a discussion of fetal pain with women requesting abortions is not misguided paternalism but a sound policy based on good evidence that fetuses cannot experience pain," he concludes.