sign in sign up
<<
Home , Kendrick Frazier

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

The Darkened Cosmos III: , I had learned enough about T O AN ASTRONOMER Final Tributes to Carl Sagan and the scientific method to recog- nize false claims when I saw them—sadly, Unfold the heavens for us so, the rest of Hovind's audience seemed con- And we forget Orion, Andromeda, These letters conclude our series of tributes to tent to let Hovind deceive them. In a Hercules Carl Sagan. The previous appreciations ap- world with many more Carl Sagans, the Who peopled the sky, made night home; peared in our March/April and May/June room would have been empty. Take down decorations that eased issues. We thank everyone who shared their And there's the rub: Carl Sagan was strangeness thoughts and feelings.—Kendrick Frazier, dangerous to ignorance, a threat to those Like heirlooms, like a child's smudges Editor who require thoughtless acquiescence On the doorfacc of a new house upon authority alone. The bright light of And we're frightened—out of doors I drove down to see my mother for Carl Sagan is extinguished, die darkness again. Christmas on Friday, December 23, 1996. expands, and the purveyors of lies and The numbers strain your devices to I was listening to Paul Harvey on the car ignorance breathe easier. explain radio saying that Carl Sagan had died that If kind to humankind would speak; David Rice morning. It was very disturbing news. My So call on metaphor for connections to San Clemente, Calif. loss seemed very personal. what When one of my heroes dies, I'm We know by touch and feel: give once always left feeling disoriented and on my His specialty was planetary science, but his more own. Without Carl Sagan's eloquence I'm intellectual excitement encompassed all of A Milky way and grains of sand upon a now left alone witJi only my own personal the fruits of —the works of philoso- beach. vision to fend for itself. And now the ers, cognitive scientists, poets, biolo- We would have the sun a warm presence world and I have to make do without gists, chemists, mathematicians, and Caring our crops, not mindless force Sagan's easily accessible, talented, intelli- physicists. His contributions to science Working out a destiny by your laws. gent assistance against the adversary were fundamental, but more wondrous yet Yet, our other nature shown in you "Demon-Haunted World." was his devotion to bringing its insights Must reach fruition. You grow, a forbid- Advocates for reason, rational analysis, into the lives of people everywhere. His lit- den fruit, and critical and skeptical thinking arc a erary and cinematic work was poetry, for it In us; an Athena struggling to be born relatively small minority wading upstream had the power to move people deeply. This and, against the prevailing currents of human power came from the beauty of his writ- Even in knowledge, refusing to be afraid. intelligence seeking the least amount of ing, a beauty surpassed only by the effort, of traditional habits of arbitrary majesty of the vision of the universe that it Kearney Smith belief in the supernatural, as well as all the conveyed; a vision that other scientists Green Mountain, N.C. other bogus nonsense that the herd of understood but rarely cared to convey to human primates are fed and placidly con- the public. Carl Sagan cared about science I can vaguely recall a cold and snowy mid- sume. So, Carl Sagan wasn't "just" a hero; and about people. He brought the rich winter night as a teenager in the suburbs of he was a rare and precious sort of hero. splendors of twentieth-century science Toronto. Bored and with litdc to do, I put Something precious has indeed been lost, within easy access of all people. and yet Carl Sagan's life, through his on my coat and boots and walked through achievements, writings, and Cosmos, will In memory of one who inspired so die sparkling cold night air to the local con- continue to enrich die lives of future gen- many people, the following words of venience store in search of a book to read. erations. Louisa May Alcott perhaps come closest to I came across a paperback with a title capturing what this wonderful man meant and cover that caught my attention. Terry D. Lipscomb to us: Far away, there in the sunshine are Amidst a black-and-bluish, star-filled Ft. Worth, Tex. my highest aspirations. 1 may not reach galaxy stood the title: The Cosmic them, but I can look up and see their Connection. I had never heard of the book beauty, believe in them, and try to follow or the author, but it intrigued me. It was I remember, in late February of 1994, sit- where they lead." fascinating and informative for a teenager ting in a Fundamentalist Christian trying to find his place in the universe, Kalyan Raman Church's pews, listening to Kent Hovind and, as a bonus, I found a scientific basis University of Michigan calling Carl Sagan "Carl Pagan" in a desul- to frame die UFO controversy that was Flint, Mich. tory, insulting tone. I wondered why he then as much a mainstay of the popular picked Carl Sagan, out of a world full of press as it is today. The Cosmic Connection had a huge influence on my fascination true villains, to demonize. Twenty minutes I took special interest in the tributes to with science and the natural wonders of into Hovind's circus act, I left in disgust. Carl Sagan in your March/April issue. die universe. Nearly every statement of science Hovind About ten years ago I published a poem in made was flat out wrong, misstated, or a appreciation of Dr. Sagan's work. I This sense of wonder about our universe lie. In a word, he and Sagan were oppo- intended to send him a copy of the poem that Carl Sagan instilled in me was further sites. Thanks primarily to the efforts of but somehow 1 failed to do so. Here it is. elucidated by his book Cosmos, which

6 0 July/Auaust 1997 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

inspired me, almost fifteen years ago, to from die public. Most people I know I for Feyerabend and Kuhn, Schick briefly write the main body of lyrics to a song believe to be rational. But I am now realiz- runs down some of die thinking of Popper, recorded in 1986 by T o r o n t o musician Don ing just how prevalent and Hume, Duhem, and Quine on the foun- Bell. I offer it to your readers as an ode to superstition really is, especially since the dations of science. He concludes: "Thus Carl Sagan, master scientist and teacher. mass suicide at Rancho Same Fe. Your mag- we have arrived at an impasse. We can't azine provides a truly important service. establish science's superiority by viewing it CHILD OF INFINITY as an attempt to verify theories through Amit R. Indap induction, and we can't establish its superi- I found myself gazing skyward Tucson, Ariz. ority by viewing it as an attempt to falsify Sitting on die shore of this galactic sea theories through deduction. Perhaps Like a rock suspended in space Feyerabend is right that there is no way to Waves crashing in on me prove die superiority of science." Robert Sheaffer's column in the I found myself searching for answers March/April issue ("Methane Missiles and But he is setting up a straw man. Of Pinpoints of hope against a blackened sky Comet Tales") could serve as a warning to course diere is no way through pure rea- Marooned on this island people who push idiotic ideas. Reports on son. Science is a human enterprise, subject We've lost our ambition to fly the Heaven's Gate suicide indicate that the to human fallibility, and grounded in people actually believed a spaceship was empiricism. The way to demonstrate the Shine, shine, shine following Comet Hale-Bopp and killed superiority of science is remarkably sim- Oh brightest star diemselves in die hope of joining the ple: it works. Let me ride on a vision of light through inhabitants. And, in fact, that is die conclusion that die darkness A local TV station in Houston (Chan- Professor Schick himself finally pulls out That blinds these eyes nel 2, KPRC) interviewed Chuck of the hat. I'll dance, dance, dance Shramek shordy after the suicides, since it But before he gets to that, he attempts From star to star was his photo tlut may have caused die a refutation of Kuhn, writing: "If what we Let die lunar breeze fill my sails and carry cult to take this final act. I must say that if perceive is determined by the paradigm we me on Shramek still believes that Hale-Bopp was accept, then it should be impossible to Through this night under intelligent control, he certainly is perceive anything that doesn't fit our para- I found myself gazing in wonder trying to distance himself from it publicly. digm." That, I submit, is an unfair exag- He now claims that he is unsure of what I was so overwhelmed by all that geration of Kuhn's thought, which might he saw. He is also getting a lot of e-mail 1 couldn't see be corrected by substituting for Schick's about the mass suicide and is very dis- word impossible die word difficult or die One man on one planet tressed about people killing diemselves words very difficult. But to make such a Wondering how it all came to be over his photos and claims. I bet he's run- substitution would destroy Schick's argu- Then rJiere was this blinding light ning as fast as he can. ment, because he goes on: "But if it's Spreading fire all through die night impossible to perceive anything that does- By die way, neither he nor the TV sta- n't fit our paradigm, it's impossible for I was amazed by die truth that I now tion mentioned die object was just a star. faced there to be any anomalies. And if it's impossible for there to be any anomalies, The seeds of evolution in my soul Carl Perrin it's impossible for there to be any para- Stafford, Tex. I found myself one with die universe digm shifts. So if we accept Kuhn and I had made die connection with all that Feyerabend's dieory of perception, we we are must reject their history of science." I am the child of infinity Thoughts on 'The End Born from the dust of die stars of Science?' Kuhn certainly agreed that paradigm shifts were very difficult. So instead of 61985, Barry Linetsky & Don Bell. All rights Theodore Schick premises his article "The accusing Kuhn of contradiction, Schick reserved. Reprinted with permission. End of Science?" (March/April) on two might have considered die possibility that Barry L. Linetsky propositions: that "science's stock has his own strained interpretation caused the North York, Ontario fallen . . . precipitously in recent years" inconsistency he cites. Canada and diat criticisms of die philosophical As noted above, Schick finally comes foundations of science have caused that out with the obvious pragmatic defense of Comet Madness precipitous decline. (He identifies Paul science. He writes: "We are justified in Feyerabend and Thomas Kuhn as particu- believing something to be true when it I was reading die article on your Web site lar culprits). Both propositions seem provides the best explanation of die evi- by Alan Hale about die "comet madness" highly dubious on their face, but Professor dence. Science is superior to other meth- his comet has elicited among die public Schick offers no evidence, only a few opin- ods of inquiry because it usually provides (March/April SI and CSICOP Web site). I ions, in support (John Horgan, T. better explanations dian diey do." read die "hate mail* concerning die claims Theocharis, and M. Psimopoulos). Exacdy right. So why has he chosen by people dial he is "hiding something" In describing die philosophical climate such a tortuous route to such an obvious

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER July/August 1997 61 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

conclusion? It would seem that he has done and every chemical process attests to the tentative though that knowledge may be. so because he wanted a vehicle to discredit infallibility of these laws of nature. It is not only the best such system but, as critical commentators on the foundations Humans did not create these processes; far as I can make out, it is the only one. of science. But such excessive defensiveness they discovered the reality and used that The tentative nature of scientific find- is not merely unnecessary (the achieve- reality in a new way to suit their unlimited ings is entirely satisfactory in the practical ments of science need no such defense) but imagination. The reality is an objective world. Many theories probably are true; counterproductive in the long run. reality unrelated to the wishes and preju- others often remain useful for most practi- The most potentially devastating criti- dices of men and women, but by using the cal purposes, even after they have been cism of the logical foundations of the sci- appropriate methods, the reality can be refined. Refinements make theories more entific method was articulated by an exem- discovered by anyone, in any time, and in useful when a higher degree of precision is plary figure in human thought. David any place. And so we set up listening required. Once in a while, an established Hume's unanswerable critique of inductive devices to hear electronic signals, just like theory is shown to be wrong, and we have reasoning (which Schick notes) occurred the ones we produce, from deep space. We to change our thinking. know that intelligent life on an earthlike roughly two and a half centuries ago. David Hume didn't destroy science planet, 50 or 5,000 light-years away, Despite th.it critique, science has prospered with his ; he merely showed us would be able to discover the same laws of enormously. Hume's critical analysis of all that the scientific method is incapable of physics that we have. There would be forms of dogmatism was intellectually lib- proving anything. Science and scientists none there that we cannot discover, and erating, rather than destructive. While ever since have been the better for it. thinkers of his caliber are, of course, how we or they "feel" about the matter Schick thinks die ability to distinguish extremely rare in history, one needs to be will not change these laws. truth from falsity is important. I don't see careful about attacking skeptical chal- And never has diere been a substantiated that diis has any more to do with science lengers of established thought. They may incidence of the failure of these laws. The than does belief on faith. Neither has con- or may not be wrong-headed. But the seri- idea that the scientific method is not the tributed an iota to the accumulation of ous writers among them deserve respect for way to find absolute truth within a given scientific knowledge. focusing attention on fundamental context is an irrational semantic sophistry. assumptions, because such continuing Don Keith scrutiny is in the long-term interest of the James H. Yoke Waterloo, Ontario, progress of human thought. Retired President Canada Yoke Engineering, Inc. Science is not infallible—nothing Vice President human is—and should not be placed on a . . . It's easy to say that science is "just Creative Innovations pedestal where its basic assumptions must another system of thought" and therefore Unlimited, Inc. be shielded at all costs from the critical no better than any other, as if a Ferrari is Indianapolis, Ind. analysis of heretical challengers. just another car, and therefore no better than a Yugo. Do you really think that any Melvin H. Levine After quoting a litany of questionable of these guys would step into an airplane New Bedford, Mass. attacks on science and the scientific designed according to "women's ways of method, Theodore Schick Jr. offers a knowing?" Would they go to a philosophy The end of science? Science as a failed ide- rather weak defense: science is superior to professor for an appendectomy? ology? Imagine, if you can, the number of other belief systems because it is more Science is not dead, nor in danger of automobiles that run on this planet each likely to yield "justified" beliefs. dying. People need answers, real answers, day, or the electrical motors that turn Science docs not attempt to promote not self-serving guesses, and they know it. interminably every day, all day, or the beliefs and shouldn't be regarded as a belief Inevitably even the worst of these academic number of electronic devices in use every system. Anyone who believes on faith any game-players admit this, if not by their hour including your pocket computer, or of the findings of science is deceiving him- words, by their actions. We should not mis- an interplanetary space probe that travels a self. All science does is seek and son out take their petulant resentment of the precisely predicted several billion miles evidence in favor of or against its theories. respect that scientists engender for a serious and caroms off the gravitational fields of There is no trial period for a tJieory, after threat to rationality. Out here in die real two or three planets and the sun. which it can be taken as "true." It stands world, nobody takes these guys seriously. forever clothed only in supporting evi- In the design and application of every dence. The better it resists attempts to Steve Maas one of those devices, engineers sat down to refute it, die more confident we may Nonlinear do their work with the implied under- become that we can regard it as "knowl- Technologies, Inc. standing that those laws of physics were edge." But truth is unattainable; we must absolutes. Whether it was F=MA, e=IR, Long Beach, Calif. be ready to reject any theory whenever P.VI=PIVJ, PV=RT, or one of a thousand evidence is produced to the contrary. others, these formulas were understood to Theodore Schick Jr. ponders the question, be accurate descriptions of the way die Rather than a belief system, science is "Have we achieved die end of science?" world worked. Every turning motor, every better described as a system for generating Though the humble of intellect continue plane aloft, every current carrying wire. new knowledge about the natural world. to yank the carpet from beneath the dig-

6 2 July/August 1997 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

nity of progress—as they ever have—die it had been posed originally in falsifiable It seems to require very convoluted situation is hardly as apocalyptic as die terms. To be concerned diat someone thinking to propose any equivalence collapse of collective scientific inquiry. might assert diat astrology, creationism, between these diametrically opposed ways Contempt for what is perceived as arcane and Velikovsky's dieory of planetary devel- of considering die universe about us. by die hoi polloi has long been popular- opment are "scientific" in Popperian terms No field of endeavor is immune to ized in our own and odier Western cul- is much like worrying that someone who pseudoscientific influence, human nature tures by those widi a bill of goods of their manipulates die magic number 19 might being what it is, but die dogmatic use of own to proffer. Considering die number claim to be using a form of Newtonian die scientific method seems to be die best of television programs widi scientific ori- calculus. way yet devised for rooting it out and entation (despite die proliferation of pseu- It is quite true diat hypotheses are restoring progress toward a fuller under- doscience-oriented programming), I almost always posed in terms diat imply standing of reality. would consider die situation far from one or more background assumptions. It is hopeless, especially lately. too tedious to do otherwise. (At die Robin McMeeking Pinckney, Mich. If science is under attack, die antago- extreme, diese days we would have to nists are almost certainly individuals and exclude explicitly from every investigation institutions who regard themselves as the possibility that aliens in UFOs have In "The End of Science?" Theodore researchers, theorists, and philosophers— planted physical evidence and given us fic- Schick Jr. badly mischaracterizes my book hardly nonscientists by dieir chosen voca- tional memories in a deliberate effort to The End of Science. He says that my book tional distinctions. Theologians, be diey mislead us!) And, on occasion, challenging is predicated on the belief diat "science is creationists or otherwise, are hardly a background assumptions has led to new not die royal road to troth." threat, seldom even taken seriously outside insights. But falsifiability still holds up If Schick had read die book, or even of dieir own circles (die Vista, California, very well as an essential element in orderly the jacket copy, he would know that my school board being the rare exception). scientific thought. Some of us might diesis is precisely the opposite of the post- However, ;/ science is under attack, it is choose to rephrase certain of Sir Karl's for- modernist position that science cannot because the prey has elected to be given mulations, but he had it just about right. deliver real truths about nature. My argu- chase. ment is diat science is a victim of its own Oliver L. Troxel Jr. Science is by definition a discipline of extraordinary success at discovering such New York, N.Y. knowledge or study incorporating a body truths; future scientists will never either of facts or conclusions systematically disprove or surpass such towering achieve- arranged and demonstrating the operation It seems that philosophers are having a ments as the theory of evolution, DNA- of general laws. These general laws are not hard time drawing a clear distinction based genetics, quantum mechanics, gen- eral relativity, or die big bang dieory. arbitrary dogmata diat cannot be ratio- between science and pseudoscience nally established dirough research. because of the dogmatic nature of thought In a chapter called "The End of Excepting the humanities, psychology, present in both areas. Philosophy," I show die flaws in die diink- and perhaps die more abstract frontiers of I don't believe diat die distinction rests ing of the famous proto-postmodernists speculative astrophysics, few have on whedier scientists attempt to disprove Karl Popper, Thomas Kuhn, and Paul not borne fruit in their appointed purpose radier dian prove dieories, nor on whedier Feyerabend—and I do a much better job of rewarding humanity widi problem- theories in question may be regarded as of it, if I do say so myself, dian Schick solving knowledge. Ideology and dogma "scientific" or "unscientific," nor on does. are peripheral to, not elemental to, die dis- whedier dieories follow or precede obser- ciplines of science; dogmata are not vations. The simple distinction rests on John Horgan arrived at by enumerative induction, nor the role diat dieories play in science as Senior Writer arc ideologies formulated from known lab- opposed to pseudoscience. Scientific American oratory results. Likewise, hypothesis is ele- New York, N.Y. The dogma of science is to challenge mental to theory, not to dogma; there is and evaluate dieories. In pseudoscience, no room for doubt in dogma, which is a die dieory is die dogma. The scientist uses system of tenets or principles constructed Theodore Schick responds: die dieory as a stepping stone, or rung on and agreed upon without inquiry. Paul a ladder, in an attempt to achieve a closer Feyerabend amuses us by barking at his There is a view held by many that truth is understanding of truth. To the pseudosci- own shadow. . . . relative and thus that the results of scientific entist, die theory is truth, to be promoted, inquiry are not inherently superior to those defended, and exploited—to question or of any other form of inquiry In my article, I Thomas L. Munden challenge it is sacrilege. When a scientist tried to articulate and evaluate some of the points out flaws in astrological dieory, it is San Francisco, Calif. arguments that lie behind these claims. regarded as an attack on astrology. If an A number of letters offer a pragmatic jus- astrologer were to identify, in a convincing Theodore Schick Jr. is a bit hard on Karl tification of science—it works. This is not way, a fundamental flaw in, say, die big Popper. Popper does not require us to the justification I proposed For one thing, it bang dieory, this would be regarded as fur- characterize a proposition shown to be is not that easy to specify what "working" thering die work of science. untrue as a "scientific dieory" just because involves. (After all, astrology, psychic readers.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER luly/Augusi 1997 S3 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

the I Ching, etc., "work"for millions of peo- In his tribute to Sagan—in the same than entertainers as prognosticators. It's ple.) But more important, even if science issue where Nexon tried to defend the that none of us is very good. "works" in a way that other systems don't, sociologists' style—Richard Dawkins that doesn't mean that science is epistemically states that this natural teacher was "inca- Milton R Blood superior to them, because something can be pable of composing a dull sentence." Well, St. Louis, M o . pragmatically justified without being epis- if there exists something in postmod- temically justified. See, for example, Paul ernists' heavy treatises, it is, quite literally, Moser, Empirical Justification (Dordrecht: thousands upon thousands of extremely Baseball Biases D. Reidel 1985). Those who offer a prag- dull and opaque sentences. Of course, this matic justification of science have the entail- is the o ld philosophers' trick of passing off Thomas Gilovich's wonderfully thought- ment backwards: science isn't true because it obscurity as profundity. But the pathology provoking article ("Some Systematic works, it works because it's true. here is that the obscurantists got enthusi- Biases of Everyday Judgment," March/ astic readers and even some disciples after Ptolemy's geocentric theory of the universe April) evokes a one-sided event with all! As a disciple of postmodernist Michel "works"just as well as Copernicus's heliocen- which all baseball fans who are skeptics Foucault once put it, "anything this diffi- tric theory in predicting the motion of the will be familiar. A player on the field cult must be brilliant." planets. But that doesn't mean that is it just makes a magnificent defensive play to end as true as Copernicus's theory For not only is I am glad that Gardner called our the other team's inning. He then becomes that logically impossible, but Copernicus's attention to Sokal's hoax—a truly hilari- the first player to bat for his team when theory provides a better explantion of plane- ous Project Alpha on postmodernist soci- play resumes. "Isn't it amazing," the tary motion. For a discussion of what makes ologists. If angry Nexon ever dares to look announcer to whom you're listening will one explanation better than another and at this magazine again (he requested that intone, "how often the player who makes why better explanations are more likely to be his "subscription to SKEPTICAL INQUIRER a great play to end the inning becomes the true, may 1 suggest, T. Schick and L. be canceled") and reads this letter, I would very first player to bat next?" Vaughn, How to Think About Weird appreciate if he could tell me where are the No, it isn't—and, on the great majority Things (Mountain View: May field, 1995). explainers of postmodernism who can of occasions (close to eight out o f nine, I'd With respect to Horgan's book, I did not speak in plain language like my heroes hazard), he doesn't. When the player who mean to suggest that postmodernism was its Asimov, Bronowski, and Sagan? makes the great defensive stop isn't the sole theme, only that it was one of them, first player to bat next, no one notices; it which he readily admits. As to the logical Cesar Tort is, to use Gilovich's term, a non-event. cogency of his writing, suffice it to say that Houston, Tex. dicto simpliciter (unsupported statement) is Norman Ankers a logical fallacy. Honigman Miller Schwartz No One Can Predict the Future and Cohn Law Offices Detroit, Mich. Sokal's Hoax and Tuerkheimer and Vyse, in "The Book of Postmodernists' Obfuscations Predictions: Fifteen Years Later" (March/ April), restrict too severely the conclusions Islamic Numerology wisely refrained from they derive from their data. In their con- replying to the angry letters he got clusions they emphasize the unreliability Thanks to Martin Gardner for his infor- (March/April, Letters) in response to his of predictions made by psychics. Certainly mative and clever "Farrakhan, Cabala, November/December 1996 column on they should, though this conclusion is Baha'i, and 19" (March/April). There Alan Sokal's hoax article published in unlikely to surprise even the readers of the were, however, a couple of errors: Social Text. Here I will merely focus on tabloids in which psychics' predictions 1. Wallace Fard started the Nation of Daniel Nexon's claim that postmodernists appear. Islam in the 1930s, not t h e 1950s. do not talk funny; that it is only "jargon" The more telling (and warranted) con- 2. The Nation of Islam's newspaper is and that scientists too "are allowed to have clusion is: "No one is good at foretelling not the Free Call, but ihc Final Call. arcane language. the future." Even the experts in their sam- Readers interested in a summary of die This is misleading. When scientists ple, making predictions in their fields of Nation of Islam might consult Laird decide to become popularizers of their expertise and judged by lenient standards Wilcox's and my American Extremists: knowledge they can easily convey the idea (hits and partial hits), were only correct Militias, Supremacists, Klansmen, Com- (or partially correct) 35 percent of the of what science is a b o u t in a didactic crys- munists, and Others, Prometheus, 1 9 9 6. tal-dear style. Just think of the names time. Skeptics should beware of anyone , Jacob Bronowski, and Carl claiming to see the future, even if they John George Sagan. All of them were natural teachers, speak from a foundation of scientifically Professor of Politic Science secured knowledge. The likelihood of and Bronowski and Sagan even launched and Sociology unanticipated events is great even in are- major TV series introducing science for University of the general public (The Ascent of Man and nas we purport to know. Central Oklahoma Cosmos, respectively). The news isn't diat scientists are better Edmond, Okla.

6 4 luly/AugusI 1997 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Skepticism Not Welcome? controversy that stimulated my subscrip- affected by the insidious "recovered mem- tion last fall. ory" movement. Yesterday morning I received a telephone I will forward my check to the sub- Paula Tyroler call from a television producer in London. scription department in order to extend Associate Professor She was inviting me to appear on a "scien- my subscription for another year. Perhaps Laurentian University tific" program for the BBC and, in the this will fill the horrible gap left by Sudbury, Ontario, Canada United States, the Discovery Channel. The Nexon's abdication. subject, she said, would be the scientific basis for ESP and other psi phenomena. Richard B. Wolfe Tacna, Ariz. When I said 1 didn't think there was The Reisner article you took note of pre- much, she asked if I was a skeptic. When I tends to be a review of published and admitted I was, she withdrew the invita- empirical evidence into the matter of tion. Masquerading as Objective recovered7repressed memories. I used to think of die BBC a n d the Reisner's selective "findings" are typical Discovery Channel as ornaments to televi- I am disappointed, to say the least, by your of the recent backtracking by clinicians sion broadcasting—but that was quite a inclusion of an abstract of die article by A. who used to be engaged in helping clients while ago. Reisner "Repressed Memories, True and recover lost or hidden memories of child- False" in your "Articles of Note" section hood sexual abuse. Frederik Pohl (March/April). This article masquerades as To date, the Freudian theory about Palatine, 111. an objective evaluation of the "repressed repressed memories and its latter-day suc- memory" controversy. It lends support to cessors, such as dissociative memory theory, Inspiration and Insights the as-yet-unproven notions that "repres- delayed memory theory, or the recent sion" and "recovery" of traumatic memo- "betrayal trauma" theory (the selective ries of childhood sexual abuse are valid amnesia for years of incest), stand naked, That "cancel my subscription" letter in the mental mechanisms. like the emperor devoid of scientific clothes. March/April issue (Daniel H. Nexon, page 61) inspires me to write. I appreciate your laudable efforts in Adriaan J. W Mak Why would any rational person wish debunking creationism and paranormal London, Ontario, Canada to deny himself or herself the benefits claims. These myths, however, do not found in your publication? damage people's lives, they do not cause Just the letters section is fully of inspi- suicides, family breakups, and the incar- The letters column is a forum for views on the ceration of innocent people. The ration and insights. For example, the letter matters raised in previous issues. Letters should "repressed memory" myth does. By uncrit- from Mark W Tiedemann (page 59) is be no more than 250 words. Due to the volume ically including a blatant piece of pseudo- worth the price. The tributes to Carl of letters, not all can be published They should science in your "Articles of Note," you did Sagan were wonderful! be typed double-spaced Address: Letters to the a disservice to die science of psychology The article by Alan Hale was timely Editor. SKEPTICAL INQUIRER, 944 Deer Dr. and to hundreds of thousands of people NE, Albuquerque, NM 87122. and much needed. It was the Hale-Bopp

HEAT PUMPS Thus the heat energy supplied is more free-energy advocates, we use die heat from page 36 than 17 rimes die mechanical energy pump's output to drive a heat engine input. In a real heat pump, where die and a generator. The engine's hot input input mechanical energy. A heat pump mechanical energy comes from an elec- would be at 70°F and its cold output running between die freezing and boil- tric motor, die heat output would be, would be die 40°F outside air. Under ing points of water has an output of perhaps, 12 rimes die electrical input. ideal conditions, die efficiency of die 100% for a mechanical input of only If die same electrical energy were used conversion back to electricity will be 27%. Thus die h e a t energy output is 3.7 to generate heat directly, for example, in 5.7%. That is, d i e g e n e r a t o r will supply rimes the mechanical energy input, widi a convector heater, die heat energy out- exacdy as much energy as we put into 73% of die output energy coming from put would equal die electrical energy the heat pump in die first place. the cold input. input. Thus a heat pump is a much more This relationship applies whatever Using more typical figures, say 40°F efficient way of generating heat than is a temperatures we chose as input and out- for the outside air and 70°F for the convector heater. However, this only put. What you gain in die heat pump, room temperature, 94.3% of the heat means that convector heaters arc n o t the you lose in the generator. In any real supplied to die room comes from the most efficient way of heating your house, device, die energy out will be less than outside air. Only 5.7% needs to be sup- not that a heat pump is 1,200% efficient. die energy in, and die overall efficiency plied by die mechanical energy input. Suppose, as has been proposed by will, sadly, be well under unity. D

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER July/Auguil 1997 65