THE COMMITTEE FOR THE SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION OF CLAIMS OF THE PARANORMAL AT THE CENTER FOR INQUIRY-INTERNATIONA1 (ADJACENT TO THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO) • AN INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION Paul Kurtz, Chairman; professor emeritus of philosophy, State University of New York at Buffalo Barry Karr, Executive Director Joe Nickell, Research Fellow Massimo Polidoro, Research Fellow Richard Wiseman, Research Fellow Lee Nisbet, Special Projects Director FELLOWS James E. Alcock,' psychologist, York Univ., Susan Haack, Cooper Senior Scholar in Arts Loren Pankratz, psychologist. Oregon Health Toronto and Sciences, prof, of philosophy. University Sciences Univ. Jerry Andrus, magician and inventor, Albany, of Miami John Paulos, mathematician. Temple Univ. Oregon C. E. M. Hansel, psychologist, Univ. of Wales Steven Pinker, cognitive scientist, MIT Marcia Angell, M.D., former editor-in-chief, Al Hibbs, scientist, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Massimo Polidoro, science writer, author, New England Journal of Medicine Douglas Hofstadter, professor of human under­ executive director CICAP, Italy Robert A. Baker, psychologist, Univ. of standing and cognitive science, Indiana Univ. Kentucky Gerald Holton, Mallinckrodt Professor of Milton Rosenberg, psychologist. Univ. of Chicago Stephen Barrett M.D., psychiatrist, author, Physics and professor of history of science. consumer advocate, Allentown, Pa. Harvard Univ. Wallace Sampson, M.D., clinical professor of Barry Beyerstein,* biopsychologist, Simon Ray Hyman,* psychologist. Univ. of Oregon medicine, Stanford Univ.. editor, Scientific Fraser Univ., Vancouver, B.C., Canada Leon Jaroff, sciences editor emeritus. Time Review of Alternative Medicine Irving Biederman, psychologist, Univ. of Sergei Kapitza, former editor, Russian edition. Amardeo Sarma, engineer, head of dept. Southern California Scientific American at T-Nova Deutsche Telekom, executive Susan Blackmore, psychologist, Univ. of the Philip J. Klass,* aerospace writer, engineer director, GWUP, Germany. West of England, Bristol Edwin C. Krupp, astronomer, director, Griffith Evry Schatzman, former president. French Henri Broch, physicist. Univ. of Nice, France Observatory Physics Association Jan Harold Brunvand, folklorist, professor Paul Kurtz,* chairman, CSICOP Eugenie Scott physical anthropologist, execu­ emeritus of English, Univ. of Utah Lawrence Kusche, science writer tive director, National Center for Science Vern Bullough, professor of history, California Leon Lederman. emeritus director, Fermilab; Education State Univ. at Northridge Nobel laureate in physics Thomas A. Sebeok, anthropologist, Mario Bunge, philosopher, McGill University Scott Lilienfeld, psychologist, Emory Univ. linguist, Indiana Univ. John R. Cole, anthropologist, editor, National Lin Zixin, former editor. Science and Robert Sheaffer, science writer Center for Science Education Technology Daily (China) Elie A. Shneour, biochemist, author, Frederick Crews, literary and cultural critic. Jere Lipps, Museum of Paleontology, Univ. of professor emeritus of English, Univ. of director, Biosystems Research Institute, California. Berkeley California. Berkeley La Jolla. Calif. Elizabeth Loftus, professor of psychology. Dick Smith, film producer, publisher, Terrey F. H. C. Crick, biophysicist, Salk Inst, for Univ. of Washington Biological Studies. La Jolla, Calif; Nobel Prize Hills, N.S.W., Australia Paul MacCready, scientist/engineer, Robert Steiner, magician, author, laureate AeroVironment. Inc., Monrovia, Calif. El Cerrito, Calif. Richard Dawkins, zoologist. Oxford Univ. John Maddox, editor emeritus of Nature Cornelis de Jager, professor of astrophysics. David Marks, psychologist City University, London. Jill Cornell Tarter, astronomer, SETI Institute, Univ. of Utrecht, the Netherlands Walter C. McCrone, microscopist McCrone Mountain View, Calif. Paul Edwards, philosopher, editor. Carol Tavris, psychologist and author, Los Encyclopedia of Philosophy Research Institute Mario Mendez-Acosta, journalist and Angeles, Calif. Kenneth Feder, professor of anthropology, David Thomas, physicist and mathematician, Central Connecticut State Univ. science writer, Mexico City, Mexico Antony Flew, philosopher, Reading Univ., U.K. Marvin Minsky, professor of media arts and Peralta, New Mexico Andrew Fraknoi, astronomer. Foothill College, sciences, M IT. Stephen Toulmin, professor of philosophy, Los Altos Hills. Calif. David Morrison, space scientist, NASA Ames Univ. of Southern California Kendrick Frazier,* science writer, editor, Research Center Neil deGrasse Tyson, astrophysicist and direc­ SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Richard A. Muller, professor of physics. Univ. tor, Hayden Planetarium, New York City Yves Galifret, vice-president. Affiliated of Calif., Berkeley Marilyn vos Savant Parade magazine con­ Organizations: France H. Narasimhaiah, physicist, president, tributing editor and CBS News correspondent Martin Gardner,* author, critic Bangalore Science Forum, India Steven Weinberg, professor of physics and Murray Gell-Mann, professor of physics, Santa Dorothy Nelkin, sociologist, New York Univ. astronomy, Univ. of Texas at Austin; Nobel Fe Institute; Nobel Prize laureate Joe Nickell,* senior research fellow. CSICOP Prize laureate Thomas Gilovich, psychologist, Cornell Univ. Lee Nisbet* philosopher, Medaille College Richard Wiseman, psychologist. University of Henry Gordon, magician, columnist. Toronto Bill Nye, science educator and television host. Hertfordshire Stephen Jay Gould, Museum of Comparatve Nye Labs Marvin Zelen, statistician. Harvard Univ. Zoology, Harvard Univ. James E. Oberg, science writer Saul Green, PhD, biochemist, president of ZOL Irmgard Oepen, professor of medicine * Member, CSICOP Executive Council Consultants, New York, NY (retired), Marburg, Germany (Affiliations given for identification only.)

Visit the CSICOP Web site at http://www.csicop.org

The SKOTICAl INQUIRE* (ISSN 0194-6730) is published bimonthly by the Committee for the Articles, reports, reviews, and letters published in oSe SKtPTiCAl INQUIRE* represent the Scientific Investigation of Oaims of the Paranormal. 1310 Sweet Home Rd., Amherst. NY views and work of individual authors. Their publication does not necessarily constitute an 14228. Primed in U.SA Periodicals postage paid at BunSub. NY. Subscription prices: one year endorsement by CSICOP or its members unless so stated. (six issues). $35; two years, $58; three years, 581; single issue. S4.95. Canadian and foreign orders: Copyright ©2001 by the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Payment in U.S. funds drawn on a U.S. bank muse accompany orders; please JU*1 USS10 per year Paranormal. All rights reserved. The SKEPTICAL INQUIRE* is available on 16mm microfilm. tot shipping Canadian and foreign customers arc encouraged to use Visa or MasterCard. 35mm microfilm, and 105mm microfiche from University Microfilms International and is Inquiries from the media and the public about the work of the Committee should be made indexed in the Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature. to Paul Kurtz, Chairman. CSICOP. Box 703. Amherst. NY 14226-0703- TcL 716-636-1425. Subscriptions and changes of address should be addressed to: SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. Box FAX; 716-636-1733. 703. Amherst. NY 14226-0703. Or call toll-free 1-800-634-1610 (outside U.S. call 716-636- Manuscripts, letters, books for review, and editorial inquiries should be addressed to 1425). Old address as well as new arc necessary for change of subscriber's address, with six Kendrick Frazier. Editor. SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. 944 Deer Drive NE. Albuquerque. weeks advance notice. SKEPTICAL INQUIRER subscribers may not speak on behalf of CSICOP NM 87122. FAX 505-828-2080. For Guide for Authors, see page 64 in the September / or the SKEPTICAL INQUIRE*. October 2000 issue, or send a fax request to the Editor. It is also available on the Web at Postmaster: Send changes of address to SKEPTICAL Iw^UIRE*. Box 703. Amherst. NY http://www.csiccip.org/si/guidc- for-authors.html. 14226-0703- Skeptical Inquirer

September/October 2001 • VOL 25, NO. 5 SPECIAL ISSUE SCIENCE AND RELIGION 2001 21 Introduction Introductory Thoughts KENDRICK FRAZIER

ARTICLES 24 Holy Wars An Astrophysicist Ponders the God Question NEIL deGRASSE TYSON COLUMNS 28 The Dangerous Quest for Cooperation Between Science EDITOR'S NOTE 4 and Religion NEWS AND COMMENT Mars 'Face' Dwindles in New Spacecraft Images/ Facing Facts and JACOB PANDIAN Saving Face / Skeptical Commentary Wins Pulitzer Prize / Pediatric Chiropractic Found to be Mostly 'Quackery' in News Investigation 34 Design Yes, Intelligent No / UFO Believers Sighted in Nation's Capital! / India's Monkey Man and the Politics of Mass Hysteria / Aztec UFO 2001 Symposium A Critique of Intelligent Design Theory Short on Skepticism / Paul Kurtz Receives Norton Medal / and Neocreationism Evolution Project to Air in 7 Programs on PBS 5 MASSIMO PIGLIUCCI NOTES OF A FRINGE-WATCHER 40 A Way of Life for Agnostics? Multiverses and Blackberries JAMES LOVELOCK MARTIN GARDNER 14 INVESTIGATIVE FILES 43 Science, Religion, Scandals and Follies of the 'Holy Shroud' and the Galileo Affair JOE NICKELL 17 TIMOTHY MOY NEW BOOKS 76 46 The God of Falling Bodies ARTICLES OF NOTE 76 Galileo, Newton, Bentley, and Leibniz SCIENCE BEST SELLERS 77 Chat on the Internet FORUM VICTOR J. STENGER Another Skeptical Inquiry 50 The Relationship Between RALPH ESTLING .79 Paranormal Beliefs and LETTERS 81 Religious Beliefs GLENN G. SPARKS BOOK REVIEWS 57 Science and Religion in an Why God Won't Go Away Impersonal Universe By Andrew Newberg and Eugene d'Aquili MATT YOUNG ANDREW THOMAS FYFE .71 READINGS IN SCIENCE AND RELIGION 61 Arthur C. Clarke's 'Credo' A Biologist Looks at Religion By Victor B. Scheffer ARTHUR C. CLARKE KENDRICK FRAZIER 72 64 A Designer Universe? Trie Case fur Faith: A Journalise Investigates the Toughest STEVEN WEINBERG Objectitms to Christianity 69 An Evolutionary-Genetic Wager By Lee Strobel BARRY FAGIN 73 JOHN C. AVISE The Triple Helix 70 Previous Articles on Science and Religion By Richard Lewontin in SKEPTICAL INQUIRER RICHARD EMERY 74 EDITOR'S NOTE Skeptical Inquirer THI MAGAZINI FOt SCIENCE AND IEASON Science and Religion 2001: EDITOR Kendrick Frazier Controversies and Concerns EDITORIAL BOARD James E. Alcock Barry Beyerstein his is a special, expanded issue on "Science and Religion 2001." It follows on Thomas Casten Tthe first such special issue two years ago, "Science and Religion: Conflict or Martin Gardner Conciliation?" We published that first one, in July/August 1999, with a certain Ray Hyman Lawrence Jones trepidation. Some expected we'd be heavily criticized for devoting so much space Philip J. Klass to a subject that may seem just barely on the edge of, or even just beyond, science's Paul Kurtz empirical reach. But the reaction, somewhat to our surprise, was highly positive, Joe Nickell Lee Nisbet and the success of that issue has led to this second one, now in yout hands. Amardeo Sarma It is clear that, among thoughtful people involved in science and in scientific Bela Scheiber Eugenie Scott approaches to controversies about pseudoscience, fringe-science, and the paranor­ CONSULTING EDITORS mal, there is deep interest in the issues of science and religion. My brief introduc­ Robert A. Baker tion on page 21 attempts to establish an appropriate tone for these considerations Susan J. Blackmore John R. Cole and provide some preliminary perspective. Kenneth L. Feder Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, director of the Hayden Planetarium, leads off C. E. M. Hansel E. C. Krupp the Articles section with "Holy Wars: An Astrophysicist Ponders die God Question." Scott O. Lilienfeld In contrast to some scientists, he argues diat there is no common ground between sci­ David F. Marks ence and religion, and he begins with a simple pragmatic argument: "I have yet to see James E. Oberg Robert Sheaffer a successful prediction about the physical world that was inferred or extrapolated from David E. Thomas the content of any religious document.* Richard Wiseman In this year of 2001, we are especially pleased to have Arthur C. Clarke, of 2001 MANAGING EDITOR Benjamin Radford fame, lead off the Readings in Science and Religion section with a forthright state­ ART DIRECTOR ment of his "Credo." This is the essay that I mentioned so favorably in my review of Lisa A. Hutter Sir Arthurs lively compilation. Greetings, Carbon-Based Bipeds!'(SI, May/June 2000). PRODUCTION That is followed by other distinguished contributors: Nobel laureate physicist Paul Loynes Jason Mussachio Steven Weinberg, in "A Designer Universe?"—his insightful take on the question CARTOONIST of whether the universe shows signs of having been designed; and geneticist John Rob Pudim C. Avise on an evolutionary-genetic view of Pascal's famous theistic wager about WEB PAGE DESIGNER Patrick Fitzgerald the existence of God. Back to the Articles section. Anthropology professor Jacob Pandian, in "The PUBUSHER'S REPRESENTATIVE Barry Karr Dangerous Quest for Cooperation Between Science and Religion," argues the CORPORATE COUNSEL point of his tide and provides historical perspective. Independent scientist/inven­ Brenton N. VerPloeg tor James Lovelock of Gaia fame suggests "A Way of Life for Agnostics." Ecologist BUSINESS MANAGER and evolutionary biologist Massimo Pigliucci, in "Design Yes, Intelligent No," Sandra Lesniak FISCAL OFFICER gives an up-to-date critique of intelligent design theory and neocreationism. In Paul Paulin "The God of Falling Bodies" physicist Victor J. Stenger imagines a series of CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER Internet exchanges among Galileo, Newton, Leibniz, and theologian Richard Arthur Urrows Bentley. Science historian Timothy Moy, in "Science, Religion, and the Galileo DEVELOPMENT OFFICER James Kimberly Affair," shows that Galileo's trouble widi the church was a far more complex mat­ CHIEF DATA OFFICER ter than the simple conflict of science and religion usually portrayed. Physicist Michael Cione Matt Young considers whether you can apply skeptical empiricism to religious STAFF belief and offers his own alternative to theism. Patricia Beauchamp Jodi Chapman Finally, communications professor Glenn G. Sparks presents new data from a Allison Cossitt random sample survey that finds no substantial correspondence between paranor­ Michelle Keiper Jennifer Miller mal belief and religious belief. Matthew Nisbet Our authors reflect a variety of viewpoints, but they all strongly respect open- Heidi Sander Ranjit Sandhu minded inquiry, unfettered curiosity, and the use of logic, evidence, and reason— Anthony Santa Lucia all marking a clear commitment to science and the scientific attitude. The John Sullivan science/religion controversy can only benefit from that. Vance Vigrass PUBLIC RELATIONS DIRECTOR Kevin Christopher INQUIRY MEDIA PRODUCTIONS Thomas Flynn DIRECTOR OF LIBRARIES Timothy S. Binga

The SKEPTICAL INQUIRER is the official journal of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal. an international organization.

4 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER NEWS AND COMMENT

Mars 'Face' Dwindles in New Spacecraft Images

KENDRICK FRAZIER Orbiter Camera managed to get the best-ever image of the The famous (notorious) "Face on Mars" Face. "We had to roll the has lost face again. spacecraft 25 degrees to center New images of the "Face"—by far the Face in the field of view," the highest resolution ever—taken by Garvin said. "Malin's team the Mars Global Surveyor Spacecraft captured an extraordinary show the face for what it really is, says photo using the camera's NASA, "a mesa." absolute maximum resolu­ The image was taken on April 8, tion." Each pixel in the 2001 2001—a clear cloudless day on the images spans 1.56 meters, Cydonia region of Mars—and issued by compared to 43 meters to NASA on May 24. pixel for the best photos taken "It's not easy to target Cydonia," said by the Viking orbiter in 1976, Jim Garvin, chief scientist for NASA's the Discovery photos. High-resolution Image of the "Face on Mars" taken by Mars Global Mars Exploration Program. "In fact, it's Some of the features that Surveyor's Mars Orbiter Camera April 8, 2001, and issued by NASA on hard work. . . . We just don't pass over had looked a bit like a face are May 24. Both images courtesy NASA/JPL/Malin Space Science Systems. the Face very often." still slightly discernible, but in general the die picture actually shows die Martian Nevertheless Michael Malin and his area doesn't look much like a face in die equivalent of a butte or mesa—landforms team in charge of the spacecrafts Mars new high-resolution images. NASA says common around the American West. "It

Facing Facts and Saving Face

With each new generation of NASA photographs, the so-called Face on Mars, popularized most prominently by Richard C. Hoagland (sec SKEPTICAL INQUIRER November/December 2000 and May/June 2001), is becoming less and less recog­ nizable as such. NASA's latest image, obtained on April 8, 2001 (see photo above), had even An Bell (during his nation­ wide radio program on the night of May 25) suggesting to Hoagland that it might be time to admit defeat. But Hoagland replied that even if this latest NASA photo "had shown nothing—that [the "Face") was just a hole—I would not have been fazed in the slightest, because you can't undo the mathematical matrix in which this thing is embedded" (a reference to his "tetrahedral geometry" linking the Face to additional artificial structures within the surrounding landscape). NASA's new three-dimensional elevation map, based upon laser altimctry data also obtained in April (see photo on page 6), reveals the Martian landform to be absent both the vertical contours of a face/head and the organs (eyes, nose, mouth) that some have imagined to be present. Unlike overhead photographs, altimetry readings are not subject to the illusions created by quirks of light and shadow. (For more about NASA's newest findings, see http://scicnce.nasa.gov/ headlines/y2001 /ast24may_ 1 .htm.) A curious addendum: During the same Art Bell show, Hoagland and Bell both referred to my May/June SI Follow- up column (expanding upon my original article and clarifying a few points) as a "retraction" in which, according to Bell, I had gone "out of (myl way to say [Hoagland] shouldn't be ridiculed." Bell even pretended to read a nonexistent passage in which I allegedly wrote, "The idea, therefore, that Richard C. Hoagland should be ridiculed for stating that the new [i.e., 1998 light-reversed] Face on Mars photo shows an eastern-side lion head, is ridiculous." And Hoagland played along: "The most amazing thing is Gary Posner's reaction. I mean, the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER can never be con­ sidered a prejudiced source in favor of our model, right? For him to say that I shouldn't be ridiculed for proposing this, I believe, and the reason they did the retraction, is they had an inside track from the political side—not the NASA side, but the political side—that there is a Face on Mars, it does have dual [humanoid-lion] imagery, and we're going to go there [with a manned mission] and find out what it means." —Gary P. Posner

Gary Posner is founder of the Tampa Bay Skeptics.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 5 NEWS AND COMMENT

prosecutions of alleged sex-rings that occurred in places such as Wenatchee, Washington, and Dade County, Florida. The freedom of Violet Amirault (Gerald's mother) was short-lived, but others had to find jobs and deal with residual legal problems on long-depleted finances. Grant Snowden required an attorney to get his name removed from a list of sex offenders. Carol and Mark Doggett fought to have their children returned. Cheryl Amirault (Gerald's sis­ ter) made a deal with prosecutors for her 3-D perspective view of the Face on Mars landform produced from the April 8. 2001. Mars Orbital Camera image and release, and so must endure the indigni­ all the available laser altimeter elevation measurements by Mars Global Surveyor's MOLA laser altimeter. ties of probation while forbidden to reminds me most of Middle Butte in the NASA says. "3-D elevation maps reveal speak with television reporters. They all Snake River Plain of Idaho," Garvin said. the formation from any angle, unaltered must face the fact that no one will be The Mars Global Surveyor science by lights and shadow. There are no eyes, held accountable for their prosecutions, team also has used a laser altimeter, no nose, and no mouth." or for tenaciously fighting against their called MOLA, aboard the spacecraft to The latest MGS images are so releases (even when the technique used take hundreds of altitude measurements detailed that Garvin, an avid climber, to build the cases against them—the of the mesa-like features around has detailed a route he would take leading and often coercive questioning Cydonia, including the Face. It is similar in climbing up the 800-foot forma­ of children—was discredited). to other mesas, said Garvin. "It's not tion. NASA even issued his prospective exotic in any way." trail map. Another column cited by the Pulitzer The laser altimetry data are probably board details the case of New York City doctor Patrick Griffin. A patient accused even more compelling than the optical Kendrick Frazier is editor of the him of oral sodomy after he refused to images in showing the Face is natural. SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. testify in a lawsuit filed against die patient's landlord that her medical con­ Skeptical Commentary 1996 for Distinguished Commentary "for dition was caused by her landlord's her columns effectively challenging key wtongdoing. The last cited column tells Wins Pulitzer Prize cases of alleged child abuse." For "her the story of David Schaer, and the lack journalistic achievements and. . . her of due process he received from Brandeis The Pulitzer Prize board awarded the writing on false sexual abuse charges" the University when he was accused of sex­ 2001 Pulitzer Prize for Distinguished National Association of Criminal Defense ual misconduct. Commentary to Dorothy Rabinowitz of Lawyers awarded her its 1997 Champion Rabinowitz is the author of New the Wall Street Journal" (ot her articles on of Justice Award. Rabinowitz was also Lives: Survivors of the Holocaust Living American society and culture." Notable nominated for the Pulitzer Prize in in America and co-author, with Yedida among the ten articles cited by the board Criticism in 1995 and 1998 for her tele­ Nielsen, of Home Life: A Story of were five articles challenging questionable vision critiques, and in 1993 the Old Age. Her prize-winning work allegations of sexual abuse. (Four of die American Society of Newspaper Editors can be read at the Pulitzer Web site: cited articles commented on the 2000 awarded her a Distinguished Writing www.pulitzer.org/ycar/2001 /commen U.S. presidential election and die remain­ Award for Commentary. tary, and her continuing work can ing article discussed Rudolph Giulianis Of the five skeptical columns cited by be read at: www.opinionjournal.com/ recommending a pardon for Michael the Pulitzer board, two dealt exclusively medialog and on the editorial and tele­ Milken.) A jury of seven journalists nom­ with the Fells Acres day-care prosecution vision pages of the Wall Street Journal inated Rabinowitz among four finalists, of Maiden, Massachusetts, for which —Douglas E. Hill from which the Pulitzer Prize board chose Gerald Amirault was imprisoned. her as die winner. Amirault remains imprisoned at press Douglas E. Hill, e-mail at dehill Rabinowitz has long used her Wall time, diough clemency has been recom­ @uci.edu, is a graduate student in logic Street Journal editorial page column to mended. One dealt with the diffi­ and philosophy of science. University of criticize dubious sex-abuse prosecutions cult aftermath of those who have California, Irvine, and president of and champion die falsely accused. She been released after long struggles to Students for Science and Skepticism at prove dieir innocence in the dubious was previously nominated for a Pulitzer in L/C Irvine, http://spirit.dos.ufi.edu/sss.

6 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER NEWS AND COMMENT

Pediatric Chiropractic many as half the chiropractors in UFO Believers Sighted Canada may be using illegal tools for Found to be Mostly diagnosis; chiropractors often employ in Nation's Capital! 'Quackery' in News scare tactics on parents of young chil­ A group of people who believe in UFOs Investigation dren to build their practices; and more held a news conference in Washington than 70 percent of Toronto-area chiro­ May 9 that established beyond the Judy Matthews is an active eleven-year- practors contacted in a random phone shadow of a doubt—that reached levels old girl who plays baseball and soccer. survey claim to be able to treat ear infec­ of credibility so high as to constitute She is apparendy happy and healthy. At tions with chiropractic adjustments. actual proof—that there really do exist least her mother thought so, until she Some chiropractors were found to claim people who believe in UFOs. took her daughter to a chiropractor in they could treat attention-deficit disor­ This was the big day for the Dis­ the Toronto area. der, hyperactivity, asthma, learning dis­ closure Project, an attempt to incite the Then she discovered Judy suffer­ abilities, and even autism. government to admit that unidentified ed from osteoarthritis, mild scoliosis More damning, die journalists could flying objects are piloted by creatures (curvature of the spine), pronounced find no evidence that subluxations even from another world. The organizer, asymmetry, and multiple subluxa­ exist or that die treatments cured the prob­ Steven Greer, a Charlottesville emer­ tions that could lead to serious health lems said to be caused by subluxations. gency room physician, announced that problems. The cost of chiroprac­ The cost to Canadian taxpayers this was a moment of historic, indeed tic therapy to deal with these through medical insurance plans and planetary, significance: "This is the end problems, she was told, would be user fees for pediatric chiroprac­ of the childhood of the human race. It is approximately $5,000. tic was estimated at $40 million time for us to become mature adults However, Judy's mother did not (Canadian) a year (much of which among the cosmic civilizations that are panic and pull out her checkbook. In is covered by government-funded out there." fact, she was not alarmed at all, unlike medicare in Canada). He arranged an impressive venue, the most parents upon hearing such news. Not all chiropractors were found main ballroom of the National Press For she had taken her daughter to wanting. The articles noted that not all Club. Upward of a hundred people were five chiropractors as part of an under­ chiropractors treat infants and children there, along with more than a dozen TV cover investigation. Judy Matthews (a and that some restrict their practices to cameras. At a long table up front sat pseudonym to protect the youngster's musculoskeletal problems. twenty witnesses, most of them gray- identity) was further examined by In recognition of their work, haired men who'd served in the military. Dr. John Wedge, chief of surgery Benedetti and MacPhail received on As they took turns at the micro­ for Toronto's famed Hospital for March 28 the Ontario Skeptics' first phone, it quickly became apparent that Sick Children, and found to be a Award for Critical Media Reporting, this was a rather old-fashioned event—a "perfectly healthy girl" who needed "exemplifying the skeptical ideals of return to the fundamentals of UFOlogy, no immediate or ongoing treatment. open-minded investigation, critical the discussion of aerial anomalies. At Yet four out of five chiropractors thinking, and alerting the public to the one point a witness flashed two black- in the Toronto area had found dangers of pseudoscience." and-white photos of a saucer-shaped "serious" problems with Judy's spine— The Ontario Skeptics also wrote the craft. The tales were set, for the most specifically subluxations that needed Ontario minister of health and other part, in the 1940s through the 1960s; chiropractic treatment. government officials to demand an there was no talk of alien abductions, or investigation of pediatric chiropractic Judy's experience with chiropractors an alien-human hybridization program, and to "put an end to the tragic waste of was part of the research undertaken by or the implantation of alien fetuses, or taxpayers' dollars which are urgently a team of journalists, headed by vet­ any of those extremely intimate close needed for established treatments for eran reporters Paul Benedetti and encounters that have dominated the actual medical conditions." The govern­ Wayne MacPhail, to investigate pedi­ UFO mythology in recent years. ment has not responded. atric chiropractic. Their investigation, These guys were from the hardware The investigative series can be found which concluded that most chiroprac­ wing of the movement. They'd seen online at www.canoe.ca/PedChiro/ tic treatment of infants and children is things in the sky diey couldn't explain and home.html. "quackery," was reported in a week- that suggested, to their minds, extraterres­ long series in Canada's Sun Media —Eric McMillan trial visitors. They'd seen objects. Lights. newspapers and on the Canoe.ca news Radar blips moving at extraordinary Web site in March. Eric McMillan is chair of the Ontario speed. What they didn't see, in almost Among their findings were that as Skeptics. every case, were any actual aliens.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 7 NEWS AND COMMENT

Only one witness, Clifford Stone, a "Such things do exist. Please believe pare it to the history of life on Earth. retired Army sergeant, told of having me," said retired Air Force Lt. Col. Now we hear that all the scientists need directly seen aliens. He'd seen them both Charles L. Brown, who once analyzed to do is start poking around in govern­ dead and alive at the scenes of crashed UFO sightings and saw, just two years ment freezers. saucers. Asked if he could describe their ago, "two inexplicable objects." When the news conference was over, appearance, he said, "I could, but it Graham Bethune, a retired Navy rational observers were faced with two would probably take a whole lot of pilot, told of seeing a glow near Iceland scenarios: time." He did stipulate that there are tJiat turned into a circle of lights with a • Intelligent creatures have piloted fifty-seven alien species, including three dome. This was 1951. He's ready to tes­ spaceships across trillions of miles to types of "grays." Many aliens are tify under oath. visit our planet. They have the ability to humanoid, and, indeed, are indistin­ Robert Salas, a retired Air Force cap­ elude detection by scientific investiga­ guishable from members of our own tain, said a "bright, glowing red object" tors and mainstream news organiza­ species. Some can touch an object in a hovered outside the gate of a nuclear tions, but have also been seen by thou­ dark room and tell its color. weapons site in Montana in 1967. The sands of people. There were a few other unverified weapons suddenly went into a "no go" Secret forces within our government bombshells. One speaker claimed that condition. Did die aliens disable them? have masterfully covered up the alien George Bush the elder, when director of The UFO narrative has innumerable presence for half a century, although the Central Intelligence Agency, refused subplots, some of which emerged yester­ sometimes the cover-up is imperfect, to give newly inaugurated President day. There are people who believe that which is why, at Safeway, you can buy Carter the top-secret files on UFOs. the Bush administration wants to build Chef Boy-ar-dee Flying Saucers and Greer, meanwhile, assured the audience a missile defense shield as part of its Aliens canned pasta. that the military has already developed covert war with the aliens. There is a People like Steven Greer, the crusad­ spacecraft that can travel faster than the rumor that the oil industry wants to ing emergency room physician, have seen speed of light. suppress knowledge of a secret, stunning through the lies and are going to help us The Disclosure Project is part of a energy source that can be harvested enter the era of cosmic brotherhood. long—and so far unsuccessful—effort from die quantum soup all around us. If • Some people believe in things that to incite congressional hearings on the we know the truth about the aliens, our aren't true. UFO issue. Greer says he has conducted energy crisis will be solved. "It will cause Your call. interviews with 400 people with inti­ such vast and profound changes on this mate knowledge of the alien phenome­ planet that there is nothing to equal it in Note: To get the story of the news conference directly from the organizers, go to www.disdo- non and the government "coverup." human history," Greer said. sureproject.org. For a scientific approach to the Many, he claimed, are afraid to come Who's running this cover-up? Greer question of extraterrestrial intelligence, try forward without congressional immu­ said that's a complex matter. He said www.seti.org. nity. "We know lethal force has been there are compartmentalized elements —Joel Achenbach used to keep this secret," he said. of a secret government operation in There was nothing presented at the multiple intelligence and defense agen­ Joel Achenbach is a staff writer for the news conference that could be consid­ cies and throughout corporate America. Washington Post, where this column orig­ ered forensic evidence. Instead, the The bad guys are everywhere. inally appeared. He is also author of a skep­ audience heard what is known as the We live in a world of lies. tical book on the topic, Captured by Argument from Authority. The evidence (Are you sure the Apollo astronauts Aliens, reviewed by David Morrison in the on the table was essentially in the form really went to the moon, and not just to March/April 2000 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. of resume's. The witnesses vouched for a Hollywood back lot?) © 2001 The Washington Post Company. their credibility and said they'd like to Scientists who work on "exobiology" Reprinted by permission. tell their stories to Congress. Maybe endure the stigma of being experts in a that's not as impressive as someone com­ field with no known subject matter. India's Monkey Man ing forward with an actual alien tenta­ They'd be thrilled beyond words to find cle, but you have to start somewhere. a tiny fragment of alien life. They'd like and the Politics of If nothing else, this was an interesting to know if extraterrestrial life is carbon- Mass Hysteria glimpse of the corrosive side effects of based, if it uses oxygen in its metabo' government secrecy. The witnesses have lism, if it stores genetic information in A mysterious creature dubbed the been burdened by suspicion for decades. die form of the DNA molecule. They'd Monkey Man allegedly attacked people Some said they were told by superiors to like to know the evolutionary history of in the Indian capital of New Delhi dur­ stay silent about what they'd seen. an alien biosphere, so they could com' ing May 2001—this intruder apparendy

8 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER NEWS AND COMMENT a combination of Superman and The Monkey Man was blamed for spreading rumors. The police said they Batman as it is reported to have extraor­ hundreds of attacks. The city's Joint received more than 260 hoax calls dinary physical agility (like Hying Irom Commissioner of Police, Suresh Roy, told since this bizarre incident had begun one rooftop to another) and prefers the media, "We have already narrowed first in nearby Ghaziabad and then darkness to light. Its ambushes were down our suspicion on the people in New Delhi. Those caught in the most noticeable in and around the con­ involved in the mischief. We should be act of spreading rumors were threaten­ gested colonies of lower middle class able to end this soon." However, reports ed with heavy fines and six months people in East Delhi, where panic of Monkey Man attacks in New Delhi of imprisonment. spread like wildfire. Innocent people became less frequent after a few weeks of India's Monkey Man syndrome were either harassed or arrested and mass hysteria, although hoax telephone clearly demonstrates the palpable dan­ newspersons were beaten up. People calls continued almost unabated. New gers of mass hysteria, how people tend even organized night patrols and began Delhi's Joint Police Commissioner said to believe whatever they arc made to to invoke Hanuman or Bajrangbali— that the situation was inching back to believe or, even worse, what they would die Hindu Monkey Cod of Prowess—to normal, and his force would keep strict actually prefer to believe. This is danger­ save them from the Monkey Man! vigil over any rumor-mongering detri­ ous mob mentality and cannot be Several handsome rewards were mental to public interest. allowed to spread by rational and offered for information leading to the Tales of violent nocturnal attacks had responsible individuals. India has also arrest of the Monkey Man. The All spread through a city known for its witnessed similar incidents in the recent India Sadbhavna Sangathan (AISS) had affinity for urbane culture and informa­ past—an identical intruder called the offered around $760; the police offered tion technology when this official stric­ Stoneman had allegedly killed street a similar amount. The AISS—which ture was finally announced, and many people many years ago in Calcutta. This aims to promote peace and harmony— people claimed to have been injured by was later exposed in the press as a cover- said the public has a civic obligation to this nightmarish intruder. Officials later up operation by none other than a cer­ help apprehend this mysterious half- conceded that the problem was entirely tain section of the police force! We have man-haif-animal. concocted by mischief makers fueling to constantly remind ourselves of the Routine police operations had mass hysteria. Forensic officers had been virtues of citizens' vigil and conscious ground to a standstill since the begin­ investigating alleged incidents, along community policing underpinned by an ning of this baseless panic as there were with volunteers and counselors, explain­ enlightened sense of collective responsi­ hundreds of crank calls, false alarms, ing to the panic-stricken people that the bility and well-being. and incidents of simple mischief. An Monkey Man was not real. —Prasenjit Maiti inebriated person called the local police The number of attacks attributed to station, claiming that the Monkey Man the Monkey Man began to decrease as Prasenjit Maiti is in the Department of had stolen his mobile telephone! Other a result. Several arrests were made for Political Science, Burdwan University, people faked injuries to attract media making bogus claims about the attacks India. coverage, while even educated and sup­ though others still claimed that they posedly responsible professionals like had been terrorized. Residents of Delhi doctors and lawyers had joined in the had even claimed that the Monkey Aztec UFO 2001 charade. The police, at an early stage in Man had killed two persons and Symposium Short their investigation, had even concluded injured scores of others. on Skepticism that these creatures of the night were Police brought in medical experts to actually remote-controlled robots being examine the injuries allegedly caused The fourth annual Aztec UFO maneuvered by Pakistan's Inter-Services by the Monkey Man. Joint Police Symposium, UFO 2001, was held Intelligence! Commissioner Roy said on-the-spot March 22-23 in Aztec, New Mexico. I Delhi police, moreover, were confi­ examinations would help people "over­ was one of the invited speakers, along dent after a while that they were close to come the delusion." In many cases with UFO enthusiasts Stanton solving the Monkey Man mystery. They wounds supposed to have been Friedman, Peter Gersten, Ted Loman, said they had narrowed down their area recently sustained were actually two to Dennis Balthazar, and Peter Davenport. of investigation and were confident of three days old! Most of the presenters discussed aspects making early arrests. They also claimed Academics and counselors were also of UFOlogy quite unrelated to the that the attacks were being made not by involved in police efforts to fight the alleged 1948 crash of an alien saucer a mysterious animal but by human mis­ widespread panic. Reports of Monkey (said to be exactly 99.99 feet in diame­ creants dressed in crash helmets, leather Man attacks declined after New Delhi ter, and including sixteen alien bodies) jackets, and dark glasses. police arrested a dozen people for near Aztec. For example, Friedman

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 9

THE PROJECT IS LAUNCHED. No longer a dream, reality has begun for our permanent Center for Inquiry - West. After a five-year search we have purchased a building at 4773 Hollywood Boulevard, in the heart of Hollywood. This ultimate Rallying Point for skeptics will house CFI-West's regional pro­ grams as well as Center for Inquiry's™ new national Media Center. This development has enormous importance for supporters of critical thinking everywhere, especially readers of Skeptical Inquirer.

And now it's up to our readers and friends. Only you can help us fulfill this bold potential. Purchasing the building took $1.6 million, which we must pay back over three years. Renovation will require another $500,000 - creating a 99-seat auditorium, library, exhibit area, media production center, and offices. We're even looking into solar panels so we can generate our own electricity! An additional $495,000 will equip the Media Center and fund its first three years of operation. Finally we must add millions more to endowment, so the new Center will always be fiscally stable.

All told, we need $5.85 million, of which less than $2 million has already been raised. It's the great­ est challenge skeptics and secular humanists have faced since our community gave more than $5 mil­ lion to build and endow the Center for Inquiry - International in Amherst, N.Y., from 1991-1995. MAJOR GIVING OPPORTUNITIES STILL AVAILABLE! A major goal demands major gifts. While gifts in any amount are welcome, we urgently need five-, six-, and even seven-figure gifts now, early in the campaign, when they can do the most to slash interest costs and spur additional contributions. Fortunately, larger gifts can be made as pledges payable over three years. Attractive opportunities exist to name various parts of the new building for oneself or a loved one:

MEMORIAL ITEM: COMMITMENT: MONTHLY* Name CFI-W: your choice $1,000,000 $27,778 Entrance Hall Atrium 500,000 13,889 Meeting Room 275,000 [Already taken!] Bookstore 150,000 4,167 Display Area 150,000 4,167 Library 75,000 [Already taken!] Reception area and lobby 100,000 2,778 Cafe 50,000 1,389 Stage 50,000 1,389 Reading room 25,000 [Already taken!]

Each donor is guaranteed two identical plaques: one for the donor's home or work­ place and the other for permanent display at CFI-West. •Pledge payments are billed quarterly in the interest of economy.

The new CFI-West and its National Media Center will make skepticism and critical thinking more central than ever to national and worldwide debates. Make your com­ mitment today! Send your most generous gift to the address below. For more infor­ mation, especially for confidential assistance in structuring a major gift, return the postcard in this magazine or contact us directly.

All gifts to the Center for Inquiry™ are tax-deductible as provided by law. Free brochure available. Southern California residents and visitors: Building tours avail­ able. Call 805-969-4828.

CENTER FOR INQUIRY - WEST Regional Headquarters and National Media Center A joint project of the Center for Inquiry™, the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal, and the Council for Secular Humanism, each a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt educational corporation P.O. Box 741 • Amherst NY 14226-0741 • (716)636-4869 ext. 311 • FAX 716-636-1733 NEWS AND COMMENT spent most of his time on his favorite of negativism," borrowing the old line into a lengthy military "reprogram- case, the Roswell Incident, while Peter from Spiro Agnew. Likewise, when I ming" as the Roswell mythology devel­ Davenport talked mostly about the mentioned the testimony of weather oped and solidified. "Phoenix Lights" sightings of 1997, and officer Irving Newton during my talk, When Friedman was interviewed two the bright meteor photographed by Friedman dismissed this by loudly snick­ years ago for Albuquerque television sta­ s.mili.i National Laboratories in 1999. ering "Newton lied." (Newton testified tion KOAT-TV Channel 7, he stated I have spoken at the Aztec UFO sym­ that Major Marcel, the central figure of quite firmly that there was no UFO posia on two previous occasions (see Roswell, tried to convince him that the recovered at Aztec in 1948. However, "The Aztec UFO Symposium: How the crumpled radar target fragments shown at this year's symposium, Friedman Saucer Story Started As a Con Game," in the famous photographs with General changed his tune, declaring that he David E. Thomas, SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Ramey really did have alien writing, thus wasn't sure about the Aztec UFO, that 22[5]:12-13). For the 2001 meeting, I demonstrating that the radar target there wasn't enough information, and presented the audience witft new details debris in the photographs was indeed the that he wouldn't be surprised if there was that have turned up, such as an image Roswell "debris," and not just material a crash there; he thought the possibility from the October 14, 1952, Denver Post brought in by the Air Force to cover up more likely than not. that blared the headline "Saucer Scientist the "real UFO.") Likewise, other presenters chose to in $50,000 Fraud," and showed the con I told the people of Aztec that their ignore the evidence I presented support­ man responsible for the "UFO," Silas UFO was just a con game, but I also ing the con-game explanation in favor of Newton, talking with the author of the assured them that they had no reason to the 99.99-foot saucer story. Reporter Aztec UFO book, Frank Scully. I also dis­ be jealous of Roswell's UFO, which was Debra Mayeux of The Farmington Daily cussed the Roswell case, and how it was simply a physics experiment launched Times wrote in the March 25, 2001, edi­ most likely a misidentified balloon exper­ by New York University researchers (see tion that "[Dave] Thomas's argument iment launched from Alamogordo. "The Roswell Incident and Project against die Aztec crash is a dozen news­ UFO author/speaker Stanton Fried­ Mogul," David E. Thomas, SKEPTICAL paper articles documenting a connec­ man gave his standard spiel, "Flying INQUIRER 19[4]: 15-18). In my talk, I tion between Scully and Denver oil pro­ Saucers are Real." He is certainly an mentioned the interview that rancher moter Silas Newton, who was charged effective salesman for Roswell. Friedman Mac Brazel gave to the Roswell paper with fraud in the 1950s for trying to sell is extremely good at all the psychologi­ published on July 9, 1947. It is here that pieces of a flying saucer. Newton had cal tricks of the trade useful for making Brazel said he first found the "debris" spun the tale that three saucers had one's arguments seem logical and com­ stuff on June 14, 1947. After the sym­ crashed in 1948, and one of those was pelling. Part of Friedman's pitch is to posium, Friedman and others told me I the Aztec saucer, Thomas said. However, criticize die skeptics for the four tricks needed to do my homework, and that those who believe in UFOs say that he claims they always employ to cast "everybody" knows that that Brazel arti­ Thomas's evidence is nothing. Top doubt on UFOs: cle was written after the government "re- secret military documents received 1. What the public doesn't know, we programmed" him, and therefore can­ through the Freedom of Information are not going to tell them. not be trusted. (Except that part where Act prove that the Aztec UFO must 2. Don't bother us with the facts, our Brazel says "It was not a weather bal­ have been the real thing, they point out. minds are made up. loon" can be trusted?) No, I was wrong One of these men is Ted Loman, the 3. If we can't attack the data, we will to cite that real news story, Friedman host of an Arizona television show on attack the people; it is much easier. said, and instead should rely on second- UFOs. Loman, who did some investi­ 4. Do one's research by proclama­ and third-hand reports that place gating of his own, said that Scully's story tion, rather than investigation. It is Brazel's discovery of the debris weeks pans out. The crash was caused by radar, much easier and most people won't after June 14, 1947. and Loman has documents that prove know the difference. UFO investigator Karl Pflock (who microwave radar stations existed in this It's ironic that Friedman's list applies doesn't think Roswell was anything area in 1948 " very well to most UFO promoters, other than a Mogul balloon train) told Move over, Roswell. It looks like including Friedman himself. For exam­ me later that Brazel wasn't held incom­ your kid brother, Aztec, is here to stay. ple, regarding the third point, he accused municado by the army, but rather by an —David E. Thomas skeptics (whom he labeled "noisy nega- over-eager radio station manager, Walt tivists") of trying to discredit people Whitmore, who had Brazel stay Dave Thomas is a physicist, president of (witnesses) instead of tackling the data, overnight at his house so as to obtain the New Mexicans for Science and Reason, yet in almost the same breatJi, dismissed exclusive interview for his radio station. SKEPTICAL INQUIRER consulting editor, skeptic Phil Klass as a "nattering nabob The "detention" by Whitmore evolved and a newly elected CSICOP Fellow.

12 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER NEWS AND COMMENT

Paul Kurtz Receives books, sixty book chapters, and 650 Evolution Project to Air articles or reviews. Among his Norton Medal, most influential writings is his in 7 Programs on PBS University's Highest book The Transcendental Temptation Award (Prometheus 1986), a seminal work on the subject of secular human­ ism. Kurtz's observations on the paranormal—translated into many languages—have generated lively debates, and he is a highly sought guest lecturer in the United States and abroad. The Norton Medal is presented annually in recognition of a person who, in Norton's words, "performed some great thing which is identified with Buffalo ... a great civic or politi­ cal act, a great book, a great work of Charles Darwin kept his theory of evolution a secret for twenty-one years. O 2001 WGBH Educational Foundation art, a great scientific achievement, or and Clear Blue Sky Productions. Inc. any other thing which, in itself is truly great or ennobling, and which dignifies The Evolution Project, a multimedia the performer and Buffalo in the eyes initiative, kicks off with an eight-hour of the world." television series that will air on PBS Kurtz received his Ph.D. from September 24-27 (check local listings). Columbia University in 1952. In addition Produced by WGBH Boston and Clear to writing The Transcendental Temptation, Blue Sky Productions, the program will Kurtz is the author or editor of Skepticism explore this simple yet remarkable the­ CSICOP founding chairman Paul & Humanism: The New Paradigm ory that ranks as one of the greatest Kurtz, professor emeritus of philosophy (Transaction, 2001), Skeptical Odysseys breakthroughs in rJie annals of science. at the State University of New York at (2001), Embracing the Power of In addition to the broadcast series. Buffalo, received the university's highest Humanism (Rowman & Littlefield, The Evolution Project offers a wide award—the Chancellor Charles P. 2000), Humanist Manifesto 2000 range of multimedia resources for high Norton Medal—May 13. (1999), The Courage to Become school biology teachers and students. University President William Greiner (Praeger/Greenwood 1997), Toward a Visit the preview Web site at and University Council Chairman New Enlightenment: The Philosophy of www.pbs.org/evolution for more infor­ Jeremy Jacobs presented the medal to Paul Kurtz (Transaction 1994), The New mation and to order a free teachers Kurtz as part of the University at Buffalo's Skepticism (Prometheus 1992), The guide (available in September). 155th commencement ceremonies. Transcendental Temptation (Prometheus The seven different broadcasts in Kurtz is the founder and chairman of 1986), and Philosophical Essays in the series are: Program 1: Darwin's both the Council for Secular Humanism Pragmatic Naturalism (Prometheus 1991). Dangerous Idea (two hour premiere); and the Committee for the Scientific Kurtz makes frequent appearances Program 2: Great Transformations; Investigation of Claims of the on national TV and radio programs, Program 3: Extinction!; Program Paranormal. The citation recognizes including Larry King Live, MSNBC 4: The Evolutionary Arms Race; Kurtz as "a world-renowned philoso­ Investigates, Nightline, Nightwatch, Program 5: Why Sex?; Program 6: The pher" and "an authority in the fields of CBS World of Religion, National Public Mind's Big Bang; and Program secular humanism and rational inquiry." Radio, ABC News, CBS News, NBC 7: What About God? In 1969, he founded Prometheus News, CNN News. BBC Radio. The entire seven-part, eight-hour tele­ Books, one of the world's foremost Associated Press Radio, and All Things vision scries as well as single videos and a publishers in such areas as philosophy, Considered special curriculum kit for educators will be science, and critical thinking. A fellow —Kevin Christopher available from WGBH Boston Video. To of the American Association for the place an order, for more information, or to Advancement of Science, he is the Kevin Christopher is Public Relations request a free catalogue, call WGBH author or editor of more than thirty Director far CSICOP. Boston Video at 1 -800-949-8670. •

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 13 NOTES OF A FRINGE-WATCHER MARTIN GARDNER

MuItiverses and Blackberries

There be nothing so absurd but that future. Everything that can happen at there. "When you come to a fork in the some philosopher [or cosmologist? each juncture happens. Time is no road," Yogi Berra once said, "take it." —M.G.] has said it. longer linear. It is a rapidly branching It is true that the MWI, in this real­ tree. Obviously the number of separate ist form, avoids some of the paradoxes of —Cicero universes increases at a prodigious rate. QM. The so-called "measurement prob­ he American philosopher If all these countless billions of paral­ lem," for example, is no longer a prob­ Charles Sanders Peirce some­ lel universes are taken as no more than lem because whenever a measurement Twhere remarked that unfortu­ abstract mathematical entities—worlds occurs, there is no "collapse of the wave nately universes are not as plentiful as that could have formed but didn't— function" (or rotation of the state vector blackberries. One of the most astonish­ then the only "real" world is the one we in a different terminology). All possible ing of recent trends in science is that are in. In this interpretation of the MWI outcomes take place. Schrodinger's many top physicists and cosmologists the theory becomes litde more than a notorious cat is never in a mixed state of now defend the wild notion that not new and whimsical language for talking alive and dead. It lives in one universe, only are universes as common as black­ about QM. It has the same mathemati­ dies in another. But what a fantastic berries, but even more common. Indeed, cal formalism, makes the same predic­ price is paid for these seeming simplici­ there may be an infinity of them! tions. This is how Hawking and many ties! It is hard to imagine a more radical It all began seriously with an others who favor the MWI interpret it. violation of Occam's razor, the law of approach to quantum mechanics (QM) They prefer it because they believe it is a parsimony which urges scientists to keep called "The Many Worlds Inter­ language that simplifies QM talk, and entities to a minimum. pretation" (MWI). In this view, widely also sidesteps many of its paradoxes. The MWI was first put forth by defended by such eminent physicists as There is, however, a more bizarre way Hugh Everett III in a Princeton doctoral Murray Gell-Mann, Stephen Hawking, to interpret the MWI. Those holding thesis written for John Wheeler in 1956. and Steven Weinberg, at every instant what I call the realist view actually It was soon taken up and elaborated by when a quantum measurement is made believe that the endlessly sprouting new Bryce DeWitt. For several years John that has more than one possible out­ universes are "out there," in some sort of Wheeler defended his student's theory, come, the number specified by what is vast super-space-time, just as "real" as but finally decided it was "on the wrong called the Schrodinger equation, the the universe we know! Of course at track," no more than a bizarre language universe splits into two or more uni­ every instant a split occurs each of us for QM and one that carried "too much verses, each corresponding to a possible becomes one or more close duplicates, metaphysical baggage." However, recent each traveling a new universe. We have polls show that about half of all QM Martin Gardners latest book, Martin no awareness of this happening because experts now favor the theory, though it Gardner's Favorite Poetic Parodies, is to the many universes are not causally con­ is seldom clear whether they think be published in October by Prometheus. nected. We simply travel along the end­ the other worlds are physically real The most recent collection of his less branches of time's monstrous tree in or just abstractions such as numbers SKEPTICAL INQUIRER columns (and other a series of universes, never aware that and triangles. Apparently both Everett material) is Did Adam and Even Have billions upon billions of our replicas are and DeWitt took the realist approach. Navels? (W.W. Norton. 2000). springing into existence somewhere out Roger Penrose is among many famous

14 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER physicists who find the MWI appalling. universes is impossible, it is hard to subjectively," he writes (p. 53), "diat I The late Irish physicist John S. Bell imagine why a particle would bother to am distinguished among die copies as called the MWl "grotesque" and just jump from one universe to another just the 'tangible' one, because I can directly plain "silly." Most working physicists to produce interference. perceive myself and not the others, but I simply ignore the theory as nonsense. Deutsch believes that the results of cal­ must come to terms with the fact that all In an article on "Quantum Mech­ culating simultaneously in parallel worlds the others feci the same about them­ anics and Reality" (in Physics Today, can somehow be brought back here to selves. Many of those Davids are at this September 1970), DeWitt wrote with coalesce. Critics argue that QM para­ moment writing these very words. Some vast understatement about his first reac­ doxes, as well as quantum computers, are are putting it better. Others have gone tion to Everett's thesis: "I still recall for a cup of tea." And he is puzzled by vividly the shock I experienced on first the fact that so few physicists are as encountering die multiworld concept. enthralled as he about the MWI! The idea of 10 slightly imperfect Theoretical and experimental work copies of oneself all constantly splitting on quantum computers is now a com­ into further copies, which ultimately plex, controversial, rapidly growing field become unrecognizable, is not easy to with Deutsch as its pioneer and leading reconcile with common sense. This is dieoretician. You can keep up with this schizophrenia with a vengeance!" research by clicking on Oxford's Centre In the MWl, most of its defenders for Quantum Computation's Web site agree, there is no room for free will. www.Qubic.org. The multiverse, the univetse of all uni­ The MWI should not be confused verses, develops strictly along deter- with a more recent concept of a multi­ minist lines, always obeying the deter- verse proposed by Andrei Linde, a ministically evolving Schrodinger Russian physicist now at Stanford equation. This equation is a monstrous University, as well as by a few other cos- wave function which never collapses mologists such as England's Martin Rees. unless it is observed and collapsed by This multiverse is essentially a response an intelligence outside the multiverse, to the anthropic argument tiiat there namely God. must be a Creator because our universe In recent years David Deutsch, a has so many basic physical constants so quantum physicist at Oxford University, finely tuned that, if any one deviated by has become the top booster of the MWl a tiny fraction, stars and planets could in its realist form. He believes that quan­ not form—let alone life appear on a tum computers, using atoms or photons planet. The implication is that such fine and operating in parallel with comput­ tuning implies an intelligent tuner. ers in nearby parallel worlds, can be tril­ Linde's multiverse goes like this. Every lions of times faster than today's com­ now and dicn, whatevct that means, a puters. He is convinced that many quantum fluctuation precipitates a Big famous QM paradoxes, such as the dou­ Bang. A universe with its own space-time ble slit experiment and a similar one springs into existence widi randomly involving two half-silvered mirrors, are selected values for its constants. In most best explained by assuming an interac­ of diese universes diose values will not tion with twin panicles in a parallel permit the formation of stars and lite. world almost identical with our own. David Deutsch They simply drift aimlessly down their For example, in the double slit experi­ rivers of time. However, in a very small ment, when both slits are open, our par­ just as easily explained by conventional set of universes the constants will be just ticle goes through one slit while its twin theory or by such rivals as the pilot wave right to allow creatures like you and me from die other world goes through the theory of David Bohm. In any case, to evolve. We are here not because of any other slit to produce die interference Deutsch's 1997 book The Fabric of overhead intelligent planning but simply pattern on the screen. Reality: The Science of Parallel Universes— because we happen by chance to be one Deutsch calls our particle the "tangi­ and Its Implications is die most vigorous of the universes properly tuned to allow ble" one. and the particle coming from defense yet of a realistic MWl. life to get started. the other world a "shadow" particle. Of Deutsch is fully aware that the MWI We come now to a third kind of mul­ course in the adjacent universe our par­ forces him to accept die reality of end­ tiverse, by far the wildest of the three. It ticle is the shadow of their tangible par­ less copies of himself out there in the has been set forth not by a scientist ticle. Because communication between infinity of other worlds. "I may feel but by a peculiar philosopher, now at

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 15 Princeton Univetsity, named David Lewis. of the Quantum Cats. Jorge Luis Borges somewhere, everything must be true." In his best-known book, The Plurality of played with the dieme in his story "The • • • Worlds (Oxford, 1986), and other writ­ Garden of Forking Paths." There is a "And there are an infinite number of ings, Lewis seriously maintains that every quotation from this tale at die front of universes, of course, in which we logically possible universe—that is, one The Many Worlds Interpretation of don't exist at all—that is, no creatures similar to us exist at all. In which the human race doesn't exist at all. There are an infinite number of universes, What a fantastic price is paid for for instance, in which flowers are the predominant form of life—or in these seeming simplicities! It is hard to imagine a which no form of life has ever devel­ oped or will develop. more radical violation of Occam's razor, "And infinite universes in which the states of existence are such that we the law of parsimony which urges scientists to would have no words or thoughts to keep entities to a minimum. describe them or to imagine them." I have here looked at only the three most important versions of a multiverse. with no logical contradictions such as Quantum Mechanics (1973), a standard There are others, less well known, such square circles—is somewhere out there. reference by DeWitt and Neill Graham. as Penn State's Lee Smolin's universes The notion of logical possible worlds, by For other examples of multiverses in sci­ die way, goes back to Leibniz's Theodicy. ence fiction and fantasy see the entry on which breed and evolve in a manner He speculated that God considered all "Parallel Worlds" in The Encyclopedia of similar to Darwinian theory. For a good logically possible worlds, men created the Science Fiction (1995) by John Clute and look at all the multiverses now being one He deemed best for His purposes. Peter Nichols. proposed, see British philosopher John Leslie's excellent book Universes (1989). Both the MWI and Lewis's possible Fredric Brown, in What Mad worlds allow time travel into the past. Universe (1950), described Lewis's mul­ I find it hard to believe that so many You need never encounter the paradox tiverse this way: academics take Lewis's possible worlds of killing yourself, yet you are still alive, seriously. As poet Armand T Ringer has There are, then, an infinite number of because as soon as you enter your past put it in a clerihew: coexistent universes. the universe splits into a new one in "They include this one and the David Lewis which you and your duplicate coexist. one you came from. They are equally Is a philosopher who is real, and equally true. But do you Most of Lewis's worlds do not con­ Crazy enough to insist conceive what an infinity of universes tain any replicas of you, but if they do That all logically possible worlds means, Keith Winton?" they can be as weird as you please. You actually exist. "Well—yes and no." can't, of course, simultaneously have five "It means that, out of infinity, all Alex Oliver, reviewing Lewis's Papers fingers on each hand and seven on each conceivable universes exist. hand because that would be logically "There is, for instance, a universe in Metaphysics and Epistemology, in The contradictory. But you could have a hun­ in which this exact scene is being London Times Literary Supplement dred fingers, and a dozen arms, or seven repeated except that you—or the (January 7, 2000), closes by calling equivalent of you—are wearing heads. Any world you can think of with­ Lewis "the leading metaphysician at the brown shoes instead of black ones. start of this century, head and beard out contradiction is real. Can pigs fly? "There are an infinite number of Certainly. There is nothing contradic­ permutations of that variation, such above his contemporaries." tory about pigs with wings. In an infin­ as one in which you have a slight The stark trudi is that there is not die ity of possible worlds there are lands of scratch on your left forefinger and slightest shred of reliable evidence that one in which you have purple horns Oz, Greek gods on Mount Olympus, diere is any universe other rJian die one and—" anything you can imagine. Every novel is we are in. No multiverse theory has so far "But are they all me?" a possible world. Somewhere millions of Mekky said, "No, none of them is provided a prediction diat can be tested. Ahabs are chasing whales. Somewhere you—any more than the Keith In my layman's opinion diey are all frivo­ millions of Huckleberry Finns are float­ Winton in this universe is you. I lous fantasies. As far as we can tell, uni­ should not have used that pronoun. ing down rivers. Every kind of universe verses are not as plentiful as even two exists if it is logically consistent. They are separate individual entities. As the Keith Winton here is; in this blackberries. Surely die conjecture diat there is just one universe and its Creator is David Lewis's mad multiverse was particular variation, there is a wide physical difference—no resemblance, infinitely simpler and easier to believe anticipated by hordes of science-fiction in fact." writers long before the MWI of QM than that there are countless billions upon came from Everett's brain. More recent * « • billions of worlds, constandy increasing in examples include Larry Nivens's 1969 number and created by nobody. I can Keith said thoughtfully, "If there are only marvel at the low state to which story "All the Myriad Ways" and infinite universes, then all possible Frederick Pohl's 1986 novel The Coming combinations must exist. Then, today's philosophy of science has fallen. •

16 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER INVESTIGATIVE FILES JOE NICKELL

Scandals and Follies of the 'Holy Shroud'

he Shroud of Turin continues to face and head. In contrast, die Shroud of Scandal at Lirey be the subject of media presenta­ Turin represents a single, draped doth (laid The cloth now known as the Shroud of Ttions treating it as so mysterious under and dien over the "body") without Turin first appeared about 1355 at a lit­ as to imply a supernatural origin. One any trace of the burial spices. tle church in Lirey, in north central recent study (Binga 2001) found only Of the many earlier purported France. Its owner, a soldier of fortune ten credible skeptical books on the topic shrouds of Christ, which were typically named Geoffrey de Charney, claimed it versus over 400 promoting the cloth as about half the length of the Turin cloth, as the authentic shroud of Christ, the authentic, or potentially authentic, although he was never to explain how he burial cloth of Jesus—including most acquired such a fabulous possession. recently a revisionist tome, The According to a later bishop's report, Resurrection of the Shroud (Antonacci written by Pierre D'Arcis to the Avignon 2000). Yet since the cloth appeared in pope, Clement VII, in 1389, the the middle of die fourteenth century it shroud was being used as part of a faith- has been at the center of scandal, healing scam: exposes, and controversy—a dubious The case. Holy Father, stands thus. legacy for what is purported to be the Some time since in this diocese of most holy relic in Christendom. Troyes the dean of a certain colle­ giate church, to wit, that of Lirey, Faked Shrouds falsely and deceitfully, being con­ sumed with the passion of avarice, There have been numerous "true" shrouds and not from any motive of devo­ of Jesus—along with vials of his modicr's tion but only of gain, procured for breast milk, hay from the manger in his church a certain cloth cunningly painted, upon which by a clever which he was born, and coundess relics of sleight of hand was depicted the his crucifixion—but the Turin cloth twofold image of one man, that is to uniquely bears the apparent imprints of a say, the back and the front, he falsely crucified man. Unfortunately die cloth is Image on the Turin Shroud. declaring and pretending that this was the actual shroud in which our incompatible with New Testament Savior Jesus Christ was enfolded in accounts of Jesus' burial. John's gospel one was the subject of a reported sev- the tomb, and upon which the (19:38-42, 20:5-7) specifically states that endi-century dispute on the island of whole likeness of the Savior had re­ the body was "wound" with "linen Iona between Christians and Jews, both mained thus impressed together with the wounds which He bore. .. . clodies" and a large quantity of burial of whom claimed it. As adjudicator, an And further to attract the multitude spices (myrrh and aloes). Still another Arab ruler placed the alleged relic in a so that money might cunningly be cloth (called "the napkin") covered his fire from which it levitated, unscathed, wrung from them, pretended mira­ and fell at the feet of die Christians—or cles were worked, certain men being so says a pious tale. In medieval Europe hired to represent themselves as Joe Nickell is author of many books on the healed at the moment of the exhibi­ alone, there were "at least forty-three tion of the shroud. paranormal, including Inquest on the True Shrouds'" (Humber 1978, 78). Shroud of Turin.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 17 recumbent figure, and the physique is so could not say how old the DNA was or evidence. Whereas he reported finding unnaturally elongated (similar to figures that it came from blood. As he explained, numerous types of pollen from Palestine in Gothic art!) that one pro-shroud "Everyone who has ever touched the and other areas, STURP's tape-lifted sam­ pathologist concluded Jesus must have shroud or cried over the shroud has left a ples, taken at the same time, showed few suffered from Marfan's syndrome potential DNA signal there." Tryon pollen. Micropaleontologist Steven D. (Nickell 1989)! resigned from the new shroud project due Schafersman was probably the first to pub­ STURP lacked experts in an and to what he disparaged as "zealotry in sci­ licly suggest Frei might be guilty of decep­ forensic chemistry—with one exception: ence" (Van Biema 1998, 61). tion. He explained how unlikely it was, famed microanalyst Walter C. McCrone. given the evidence of the shroud's exclu­ sively European history, that thirty-three Examining diirty-two tape-lifted samples Pollen Fraud? different Middle Eastern pollens could from the shroud, McCrone identified the McCrone would later refute another have reached the cloth, particularly only "blood" as tempera paint containing red bit of pro-shroud propaganda: the pollen from Palestine, Istanbul, and the ocher and vermilion along with traces of claim of a Swiss criminologist, Max Anatolian steppe. With such selectivity, rose madder—pigments used by medieval Frei-Sulzer, that he had found certain Schafersman stated, ".these would artists to depict blood. He also discovered pollen grains on the cloth that "could that on the image—but not the back­ ground—were significant amounts of the McCrone would later refute another bit of red ocher pigment. He first thought this pro-shroud propaganda: the claim of a Swiss was applied as a dry powder but later con­ cluded it was a component of dilute paint criminologist. Max Frei-Sulzer, that he had found applied in the medieval grisaille (mono­ certain pollen grains on the cloth that "could only chromatic) technique (McCrone 1996; cf. Nickell 1998). For his efforts McCrone have originated from plants that grew exclusively was held to a secrecy agreement, while in Palestine at the time of Christ." statements were made to the press that there was no evidence of artistry. He was, only have originated from plants that be miraculous winds indeed." In an he says, "drummed out" of STURP grew exclusively in Palestine at the time article in SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Schafers­ STURP representatives paid a surprise of Christ." Earlier Frei had also claimed man (1982) called for an investigation of Frei's work. visit to McCrone's lab to confiscate his to have discovered pollens on the cloth samples, then gave them to two late addi­ that were characteristic of Istanbul (for­ When Frei's tape samples became tions to STURP, John Heller and Alan merly Constantinople) and the area of available after his death, McCrone was asked to authenticate them. This he was Adler, neither of whom was a forensic ancient Edessa—seeming to confirm a readily able to do, he told me, "since it serologist or a pigment expert. The pair "theory" of the shroud's missing early was easy to find red ocher on linen fibers soon proclaimed they had "identified the history. Wilson (1979) conjectured much the same as I had seen them on my presence of blood." However, at the 1983 that the shroud was the fourth-century samples." But there were few pollen conference of die prestigious International Image of Edessa, a legendary "miracu­ other than on a single tape which bore lous" imprint of Jesus' face made as a Association for Identification, forensic "dozens" in one small area. This indi­ analyst John F. Fischer explained how gift to King Abgar. Wilson's notion was cated that the tape had subsequendy results similar to theirs could be obtained that the shroud had been folded so that been "contaminated," probably deliber­ from tempera paint. only the face showed and that it had ately, McCrone concluded, by having A more recent claim concerns thus been disguised for centuries. Actu­ been pulled back and the pollen surrep­ reported evidence of human DNA in a ally, had the cloth been kept in a frame titiously introduced. shroud "blood" sample, although the for such a long period there would have Archbishop of Turin and die Vatican been an age-yellowed, rectangular area McCrone added (1993): refused to authenticate the samples or around the face. Nevertheless Frei's One further point with respect to Max accept any research carried out on them. alleged pollen evidence gave new sup­ which I haven't mentioned anywhere, anytime to anybody is based on a state­ University of Texas researcher Leoncio port to Wilson's ideas. ment made by his counterpart in Basel Garza-Valdez, in his The DNA of God? I say alleged evidence since Frei had as head of the Police Crime Laboratory (1999, 41), claims it was possible "to credibility problems. Before his death in there that Max had been several times found guilty and was censured by the clone the sample and amplify it," proving 1983 his reputation suffered when, rep­ Police hierarchy in Switzerland for. it was "ancient" blood "from a human resenting himself as a handwriting shall we say, overendiusiastic interpre­ being or high primate," while Ian expert, he pronounced the infamous tation of his evidence. His Basel coun­ terpart had been on the investigating Wilsons The Blood and the Shroud (1998. "Hitler diaries" genuine; diey were soon committee and expressed surprise in a 91) asserted it was "human blood." exposed as forgeries. letter to me thai Max was able to con­ Actually rhe scientist at the DNA lab, In the meantime an even more serious tinue in his position as Head of rhe Police Crime Lab in Zurich. Victor Tryon, told Time magazine that he question had arisen about Frei's pollen

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 1» C-14 Falsehoods ing areas in shroud photos that were subse- merely an example of the logical fallacy The pollen "evidence" became especially quendy enhanced. The work was done by called arguing from ignorance. important to believers following the a retired geriatric psychiatrist, Alan Worse, some have engaged in pseudo- devastating results of radiocarbon dating Whanger, and his wife Mary, former mis­ science and even, apparently, outright tests in 1988. Three laboratories (at sionaries who have taken up image analysis scientific fraud, while others have shame­ Oxford, Zurich, and the University of as a hobby. They were later assisted by an fully mistreated the honest scientists who Arizona) used accelerator mass spec­ Israeli botanist who looked at their photos reported unpopular findings. We should trometry (AMS) to date samples of the of "flower" images (many of them "wilted" again recall the words of Canon Ulysse linen. The results, formally published by and odierwise distorted) and exclaimed, Chevalier, the Catholic scholar who twenty-one authors in Nature (Damon "Those are the flowers of Jerusalem!" brought to light the documentary et al. 1989), were in close agreement Apparently no one has thought to see if evidence of the shroud's medieval origin. and were given added credibility by the some might match the flowers of France or As he lamented, "The history of the use of control samples of known dates. Italy or even to try to prove that the imag­ shroud constitutes a protracted violation The resulting age span was circa A.D. es are indeed floral (given the relative of the two virtues so often commended by 1260-1390—consistent with the time scarcity of pollen grains on the cloth). our holy books: justice and truth." of the reported forgers confession. The visualized "flower and plant References Shroud enthusiasts were devastated, images" join other perceived shapes but dicy soon rallied, beginning a cam­ seen—Rorschach-like—in the shroud's Amonacci. Mark. 2000. The Resurrection of tire mottled image and off-image areas. These Shroud: New Scientific. Medical and Archeolog- paign to discredit the radiocarbon find­ ical Evidence. New York: M. Evans and Co. ings. Someone put out a false story that include "Roman coins" over the eyes, Binga, Timothy. 2001. Report in progress from die AMS tests were done on one of the head and arm "phylacteries" (small the Director of the Center for Inquiry Librar- patches from the 1532 fire, thus suppos­ Jewish prayer boxes), an "amulet," and ies, June 19. such crucifixion-associated items (cf. Damon, P. E.. et al. 1989. Radiocarbon dating of edly yielding a late date. A Russian scien­ the Shroud of Turin. Nature 337:611-615 tist, Dmitrii Kuznetsov, claimed to have John, ch. 19) as "a large nail," a "ham­ (February 16). established experimentally that heat from mer," "sponge on a reed," "Roman D'Arcis, Pierre. 1389. Memorandum to the thrusting spear," "pliers," "two scourges," Avignon Pope, Clement VII; translated from a fire (like that of 1532) could alter the Latin by Rev. Herbert Thurston, reprinted in radiocarbon date. But others could not "two brush brooms," "two small nails," Wilson 1979,266-272. replicate his alleged results and it turned "large spoon or trowel in a box," "a loose Garza-Valdez, Leoncio A. 1993. Biogenic Varnish coil of rope," a "cloak" with "belt," a "tu­ and the Shroud of Turin. Cited in Garza-valdez out that his physics calculations had been 1999,37. plagiarized—complete with an error nic," a pair of "sandals," and other hilari­ . 1999. The DNA of God? New York: (Wilson 1998, 219-223). (Kuznetsov ous imaginings including "Roman Doubleday. dice"—all discovered by the Whangers Gove, Harry E. 1996. Relic, Icon, or Hoax? Carbon was also exposed in SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Dating the Turin Shroud Philadelphia: Insti­ for bogus research in a study criticizing (1998) and their botanist friend. tute of Physics Publishing. evolution [Larhammar 1995].) They and others have also reported Humber, Thomas. 1978. The Sacred Shroud New A more persistent challenge to the finding ancient Latin and Greek words, York: Pocket Books. Larhammar, Dan. 1995. Severe flaws in scientific radiocarbon testing was hurled by such as "Jesus" and "Nazareth." Even study criticizing evolution. SKEPTICAL INQUIR­ Garza-Valdez (1993). He claimed to have Ian Wilson (1998, 242) felt compelled ER 19(2):30-3I. obtained samples of the "miraculous to state: "While there can be absolutely McCrone, Walter C. 1993. Letters to Joe Nickell. no doubting the sincerity of those who June 11 and 30. clodi" that bore a microbial coating, con­ . 1996. Judgement Day for the Turin tamination that could have altered the ra­ make these claims, the great danger of "Shroud. "Chicago: Microscope Publications. diocarbon date. However that notion was such arguments is that researchers may Nickell, Joe. 1998. Inquest on the Shroud of Turin: 'see' merely what their minds trick them latest Scientific Findings. Amherst, N.Y.: effectively disproved by physicist Thomas Prometheus Books. (Except as otherwise J. Pickett (1996). He performed a simple into thinking is there." noted, information is taken from this source.) calculation which showed that, for the . 1989- Unshrouding a Mystery: Science, Conclusion Pseudosciencc, and the Cloth of Turin. shroud to have been altered by thirteen SKEPTICAL INQUIRER 13(3):296-299. centuries (i.e., from Jesus' first-century We see that "Shroud science"—like "cre­ Pickett, Thomas J. 1996. Can contamination save death to the radiocarbon date of ation science" and other pseudosciences die Shroud of Turin? Skeptical Briefs, June. Schafersman, Steven D. 1982. Science, the public 1325±65 years), there would have to be in the service of dogma—begins with and the Shroud of Turin. SKEPTICAL INQUIRER twice as much contamination, by weight, the desired answer and works backward 6(3):37-56. as the cloth itself! to the evidence. Although they are Whanger, Mary, and Alan Whanger. 1998. The bereft of any viable hypothesis for the Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery. Shroud of Rorschach Franklin, Tenn.: Providence House. image formation, sindonologists are Wilcox, Robert K. 1977. Shroud New York: Following die suspicious pollen evidence quick to dismiss the profound, corrobo­ Macmillan. were claims that plant images had been rative evidence for artistry. Instead, they Wilson, Ian. 1979. The Shroud of Turin, rev. cd. identified on the cloth. These were suggest that the "mystery" of the shroud Garden City, N.Y.: Image Books. . 1998. The Blood and the Shroud New allegedly discerned from "smudgy" appear­ implies a miracle, but of course that is York: The Free Press. •

20 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Science and Religion 2001: Introductory Thoughts

KENDRICK FRAZIER

f all the "borderland" areas involving science, the and most powerfully explanatory concepts in the history ol interface between science and religion remains one science. They do so in part because they mistakenly fear that O of the most intriguing and troubling. Scientists, evolution somehow undermines human values and dignity: scholars, and laymen continue to ponder the personal and Most of us may sec that they are wrong about that, but at public issues revolving around science and religion. Nearly least we can see why they are so motivated. everyone somehow strives to come to terms both intellectu­ Creationism and its latest spiffed-up manifestation, the ally and emotionally with the array of rich issues involving "Intelligent Design" (ID) movement, have almost nothing to personal belief on the one hand and commitment to science do with real science and real scientific controversies and and reason on die other. Everyone resolves these issues and everything to do with belief-laden personal and religious pol- conflicts in a different way. The spectrum is broad. The issues irics. But their promoters use scientific language and pretend complex. they are presenting politicians, school board members, and At either end of the spectrum, to be sure, beholders have the media valid alternative scientific views. All the while they clarity. Evangelical and fundamentalist believers see a black- denigrate every value that science holds dear. These values and-white world. They know the truth. All who do not see include unmitigated curiosity, a love of learning, a question­ it their way are responsible for the world's ills and therefore ing attitude, an abhorrence of ideology and dogma, a com­ must be fought with every trick and tactic imaginable. mitment to open-minded inquiry, and an honest ackimv.l Atheists are equally certain of the correctness of their non- edgment that all knowledge is tentative and open to revision' belief, and everyone else is deluded or at least a bit foolish. (a subtle strength opponents portray and exploit as .1 serious Most people are somewhere in between. Most people weakness). Another essential value is a determination ro let accommodate a complex system of multilevel, multidimen­ balanced assessments of facts and evidence guide policy judg­ sional, semi-compartmentalized beliefs and values. ments rather than using predetermined ideological views to I hat is true of many scientists and scientifically oriented decide which facts and evidence may be allowed to enter. people as well-—-although those involved in science probably I was able to see creationist tactics at work first-hand ear­ do tend to have (ewer adherents to blind belief and more who lier this year when leading ID proponent Phillip Johnson did value and appreciate open-minded inquiry. a whirlwind speaking tour in New Mexico, where I live and Many of the issues are private and personal. In the work. Johnson is a UC Berkeley law professor, and as critics abstract, what you and I believe (or don't) are each our own predicted before his appearances, he showed that he's business and no one else's. Some of the issues are intellectual. clever at using rhetoric and tactics honed in the legal an Eminent theologians, great philosophers, Nobel laureate argue a pretended case against evolution. He distorted, trivi­ entists have considered them in depth and shared their alized, and mischaracterized modern evolutionary science to insights at length. But others have profound effects on the a degree I found shameful. He presented a comic-book-like world—on society, on education, on public policy (and, caricature of evolution that would be laughable if it were not unfortunately in some cultures where the conflicts have often so reprehensible. He bashed an entire broad field ol vital gone to extremes, on lire and limb). science, and he was doing so not as an expert in biology or The most troublesome example in the United States even in science but as a nonscientist author and ideologue. (which befuddles those elsewhere) is creationism. But if you think this is clearly an instance where scientifi­ Creationists and their sympathizers would expunge from our cally trained people arc able to see through his tcchniqu, schools even any mention of evolution—the central unifying idea of the biological sciences and one of the most beautiful Kendrick Frazier L< editor of the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. controversy that would call attention to Johnsons realize the intellectual emptiness of the ID appearance. It decided to lay low and hope all would Uiment, you will be surprised. For I heard pass. Management did require the Christians in the him at one of the nations foremost national sci­ Workforce Group to add a disclaimer to its official entific and engineering laboratories, a huge multi- lab's Web page. The disclaimer said the talk's location program government-funded laboratory that is in the lab's main auditorium did not imply any labo­ advancing the frontiers of advanced technology daily, ratory or government agency "endorsement or and the overwhelming sentiment of the audience of approval of any of the concepts or ideas expressed." nearly 400 people there—virtually all scientists and (This disclaimer was not presented at the talk, how­ engineers—was on his side. They ate it up. They ever.) In the meantime, a quickly arranged talk by a laughed at his frequent jabs at "materialistic" science, pro-evolution scientist who some scientists had fe as if their own engineering research was not based on invited to counter the Johnson talk was canceled by the same science. It was astonishing in a way. In management, on the grounds that that talk didn't another sense I was not surprised at all. have any official sanction—but mainly to avoid overt A glimpse at some of the behind-the-scenes side controversy. Johnson's appearances at other, more issues surrounding his appearance shows just how public forums in the area got the public attention, complex and difficult the science and religion issue and so the lay-low strategy, in a way, worked. But can be. His invitation to speak did not come from the modern biology got roundly bashed at a national lab­ national lab itself. The lab's upper management was oratory, without refutation. i not even aware of his planned appearance until alerted This example is just a microcosm of how a few weeks before his talk. He was invited by the lab's religiously motivated critics of evolution are making Christians in the Workforce Networking Group, and inroads in scientific and intellectual arenas. But it most of the attendees were members of the group. The wouldn't have happened without a strongly sympa­ group had been officially sanctioned by the laboratory thetic potential audience. The example shows that, in only as a result of legal action it pressed against the lab the United States at least, scientifically trained people ... for such recognition. The groups official status thus themselves come from a broad spectrum of religious- comes under the mandated equal employment backgrounds, including fundamentalism, and quick i opportunity/affirmative action (EEO/AA) part of generalizations are doomed to failure. If antievolution S the lab's administrative operations, not anything to can be welcomed uncritically in a scientific setting, its i do with science. Furthermore, the group, despite acceptance is far easier among other parts of society. its name, does not represent mainstream Leaders in politics (local to national), education, busi­ Christians at all, but a fundamentalist, ness, and media are no less diverse and no less vulner­ evangelical wing. It requires a belief able to distorted arguments against science, if the asser­ statement to join—-ironic, tions fit preconceived viewpoints and well-formed given its EEO/AA home. mental templates. Once the lab's The creationist cause continues to be pressed at all | management became levels. In Kansas, where vigilant scientists and educa­ aware of Johnson's tors finally were able to overthrow a creationist imminent appearance, takeover of the Kansas State Board of Education, P it found itself in a diffl- word comes that creationist politicians and support­ ' cult position. Management ers are already gearing up to re-take control. At the I didn't like having a person national level, a comprehensive U.S. Senate educa­ I known for antiscience views tion bill debated for six weeks had attached to it at speak at the lab, but it did not the last minute a two-sentence amendment drafted by ' want to be accused of > ship and it did want to create a amendment encour­ ages teaching the "controversy" sur­ rounding biological evolu­ tion. Its creationist origins are crystal clear: con­ troversies surrounding no other areas of science are sin­ gled out. Amidst a flurry of other amendments, the Senate voted 91-8 in favor of the provision on the way to The same is true this time. And this time, as approving the entire education bill by the same margin. before, no consensus should be expected. Scientists Again, a seemingly small inroad, but. . . . and science-minded skeptics are located at many Well, the creationist anti-evolution movement may be points along the spectrum or views. 1 hope the articles among the most pernicious manifestations of conflict work as a prism to expand our perception of each between science and religion—or perhaps in this case of those viewpoints, bringing greater clarity between good science and bad religion—but related issues, and some greatet appreciation of distinctions. controversies, and concerns are rampant. They always have We hope you enjoy the articles. We been, and probably always will be. We're all human, and invite you to share your own insights with science and religion, despite their vast differences, are both us, and we promise to make room in very human enterprises. future issues for at least selected samples This special expanded issue of the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER is of your reactions. devoted almost entirely to this turbulent interface between science and religion. It can be considered a continuation of our first special issue on the subject, "Science and Religion: Science and Religion: Some Conflict or Conciliation?", Vol. 23 No. 4, July/August 1999. (These comments of mine are a continuation as well of my Similarities, Great Differences more detailed introduction to that issue; all the points I Science and religion both address deep questions made there still pertain.) That issue provoked more positive about the world and our place in it. Both arise in reaction than any other in our history. part from curiosity and awe about the world. So to One reason I think it was so successful is that fot the most some degree consilience may be possible, but only by clearly recognizing the great differences between part it combined a forthright defense of science's highest val­ science and religion. Science (and reason) must not ues (in fact a whole bunch of such defenses) with a counseled yield any of its own ground. Science is based fore­ respect for deeply held personal views. It forthrightly dealt most on evidence, not authority or revelation. In sci­ with all conflicts, without personalizing issues in a way that ence, nothing is taken on faith, while in religion, offended sincere believers who also respect science. This is a faith is at the heart of belief. In science all knowl­ edge is tentative, continually subject to revision difficult line to hew, but it can be done. At the same time, it when better explanations and evidence (always presented a broad spectrum or views, all expressing legitimate aggressively sought) are acquired; religion asserts scientific viewpoints, on issues of science and religion. Each the presence of unchanging and unchallengeable author could argue points in whatever style and voice was eternal truths. Science proposes explanations about desired, and that variety too seemed appreciated. the natural world and then puts those hypotheses to repeated tests using experiments, observations, and a creative and diverse array of other methods and strategies. Many religions discourage skepticism or critical examination of cherished precepts. This commitment to test the validity of ideas and claims separates science from religion.

—Kendrick Frazier From "Conflicting or Complementary? Some Introductory Thoughts About Boundaries," first SI sci­ ence and religion issue, July/August 1999

SKEPTICAL INQUIRE Holy Wars An Astrophysicist Ponders the God Question

A virtual sub-industry has blossomed to encourage harmony between science and religion, but there is virtually no common ground. When people have used religious documents to make detailed predictions about the physical world they have been famously wrong. Science, in contrast, works. NEIL deGRASSE TYSON

t nearly every public lecture that I give on the uni­ verse, I try to reserve adequate time at the end for A questions. The succession of subjects is predictable. First, the questions relate directly to die lecture. They next migrate to sexy astrophysical subjects such as black holes, quasars, and die Big Bang. If I have enough time left over to answer all questions, and if the talk is in America, die subject eventually reaches God. Typical questions include "Do scien­ tists believe in God?" "Do you believe in God?" and "Do your studies in astrophysics make you more or less religious?" Publishers have come to learn that there is a lot of money in God, especially when the author is a scientist and when the book tide includes a direct juxtaposition of scientific and

24 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER religious themes. Successful books include Robert Jastrow's Let there be no doubt diat as they are currently pracriced, God and the Astronomers, Leon M. Lederman's The God there is no common ground between science and religion. As Particle, Frank J.Tipler's The Physics of Immortality: Modern was thoroughly documented in the nineteenth century tome Cosmology, God, and the Resurrection of the Dead and Paul A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Daviess two works God and the New Physics and The Mind Christendom, by the historian and onetime president of of God. Each author is either an accomplished physicist or Cornell University Andrew D. White, history reveals a long astronomer and, while the books are not strictly religious, and combative relationship between religion and science, they encourage the reader to bring God into conversations depending on who was in control of society at the time. The about astrophysics. Even Stephen Jay Gould, a Darwinian claims of science rely on experimental verification, while the pitbull and devout agnostic, has joined the title-parade claims of religions rely on faith. These approaches are irrec­ with his work Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the oncilable approaches to knowing, which ensures an eternity Fullness of Life. The financial success of these published of debate wherever and whenever the two camps meet. Just as works indicates that you get bonus dollars from the in hostage negotiations, it's probably best to keep both sides American public if you are a scientist who openly talks talking to each other. The schism did not come about for about God. After the publication of The Physics of want of earlier attempts to bring the two sides together. Great Immortality, which suggested whether the law of physics scientific minds, from Claudius Ptolemy of the second could allow you and your soul to exist long after you are century to Isaac Newton of the seventeenth, invested their gone from this world, Tipler's book-tour included many formidable intellects in attempts to deduce the nature of the well-paid lectures to Protestant religious groups. This lucra­ universe from the statements and philosophies contained in tive sub-industry has further blossomed in recent years due religious writings. Indeed, by the time of his death, Newton to efforts made by the wealthy founder of the Templeton investment fund. Sir John Templeton, to find harmony and Neil deGrasse Tyson, an astrophysicist, is the Frederick P. Rose consilience between science and religion. In addition to Director of New York City's Hayden Planetarium and a visiting sponsoring workshops and conferences on the subject, research scientist at Princeton University His recently published Templeton seeks out (among other recipients) widely pub­ memoir is titled The Sky Is Not the Limit: Adventures of an lished religion-friendly scientists to receive an annual award Urban Astrophysicist. This article was adapted from an essay whose cash value exceeds that of the Nobel Prize. that first appeared in Natural History magazine.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 25 had penned more words about God and religion than about not Earth; and Venus went through phases, just like the the laws of physics, all in a futile attempt to use the Biblical Moon. For his radical discoveries, which shook Christendom, chronology to understand and predict events in the natural Galileo was put on trial, found guilty of heresy, and sentenced world. Had any of these efforts succeeded, science and to house arrest. This was mild punishment when one consid­ religion today might be largely indistinguishable. ers what happened to the monk Giordano Bruno. A few The argument is simple. I have yet to see a successful predic­ decades earlier Bruno had been found guilty of heresy, and tion about die physical world that was inferred or extrapolated then burned at the stake, for suggesting that Earth may not be from the content of any religious document. Indeed, I can make the only place in the universe that harbors life. an even stronger statement. Whenever people have used I do not mean to imply that competent scientists, soundly following the scientific method, have not also been famously wrong. They have. I have yet to see a successful prediction about the Most scientific claims made on the frontier physical world that was inferred or extrapolated will ultimately be disproved, due primarily to bad or incomplete data. But this scien­ from the content of any religious document. tific method, which allows for expeditions down intellectual dead ends, also promotes religious documents to make detailed predictions about the ideas, models, and predictive theories that can be spectacu­ physical world tfiey have been famously wrong. By a prediction, larly correct. No other enterprise in the history of human I mean a precise statement about the untested behavior of thought has been as successful at decoding the ways and objects or phenomena in the natural world, that gets logged means of the universe. before the event takes place. When your model predicts some­ Science is occasionally accused of being a closed-minded or thing only after it has happened then you have instead made a stubborn enterprise. Often people make such accusations "postdiction." Postdictions are the backbone of most creation when they see scientists swiftly discount astrology, the para­ myths and, of course, die "Just So" stories of Rudyard Kipling, normal, Sasquatch sightings, and other areas of human inter­ where explanations of everyday phenomena explain what is est that routinely fail double-blind tests ot that possess a already known. In die business of science, however, a dozen dearth of reliable evidence. But this same level of skepticism is postdictions are barely worth a single successful prediction. also being applied to ordinary scientific claims in the profes­ Topping the list of predictions are the perennial claims sional research journals. The standards are the same. Look about when the world will end, none of which have yet proved what happened when the Utah chemists B. Stanley Pons and true. But other claims and predictions have actually stalled or Martin Fleischmann claimed in a press conference to create reversed the progress of science. We find a leading example in "cold" nuclear fusion on their laboratory table. Scientists acted the trial of Galileo (which gets my vote for the trial of the swiftly and skeptically. Within days of the announcement it millennium) where he showed die universe to be fundamen­ was clear that no one could replicate the cold fusion results tally different from the dominant views of die Catholic that Pons and Fleischmann claimed for their experiment. Church. In all fairness to the Inquisition, however, an Earth- Their work was summarily dismissed. Similar plot-lines centered universe made a lot of sense observationally, With a unfold almost daily (minus the press conferences) for nearly full complement of epicycles to explain the peculiar motions every new scientific claim. The ones that make headlines tend of the planets against the background stars, the time-honored. to be the ones that could affect the economy. Earth-centered model had conflicted with no known observa­ With scientists exhibiting such strong levels of skepticism, tions. This remained true long after Copernicus introduced his some people may be surprised to learn that scientists heap Sun-centered model of the universe a century earlier. The their largest rewards and praises upon those who do discover Earth-centric model was also aligned with the teachings of the flaws in established paradigms. These same rewards also go to Catholic Church and prevailing interpretations of die Bible, those who create new ways to understand the universe. Nearly wherein Earth is unambiguously created before the Sun and all famous scientists, pick your favorite one, have been so the Moon as described in the first several verses of Genesis. If praised in dieir own lifetimes. This path to success in one's you were created first, then you must be in the center of all professional career is antithetical to almost every other human motion. Where else could you be? Furthetmore, the Sun and establishment—especially to religion. Moon diemselves were also presumed to be smooth orbs. Why None of this is to say that the world does not contain reli­ would a perfect, omniscient deity create anything else? gious scientists. In a recent survey of religious beliefs among All diis changed, of course, widi the invention of the math and science professionals, 65 percent of die mathemati­ telescope and Galileo's observations of the heavens. The new cians (the highest rate) declared themselves to be religious, as optical device revealed aspects of the cosmos diat strongly did 22 percent of the physicists and astronomers (the lowest conflicted widi people's conceptions of an Earth-centered, rate). The national average among all scientists was around 40 blemish-free, divine universe: The Moon's surface was bumpy percent and has remained largely unchanged over the past cen­ and rocky; die Sun's surface had spots that moved across its tury. For reference, 90 percent of the American public claims surface; Jupiter had moons of its own that orbited Jupiter and to be religious (among the highest in Western society), so

26 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER either nonreligious people are drawn to science or studying sci­ figure out how or why a deterministic universe could require ence makes you less religious. the probabilistic formalisms of quantum mechanics, he But what of those scientists who are religious? One thing is mused, "It is hard to sneak a look at God's cards. But that he for certain, successful researchers do not get their science from would choose to play dice with the world...is something that their religious beliefs. On the other hand, the methods of sci­ I cannot believe for a single moment." When an experimental ence have little or nothing to contribute to ethics, inspiration, result was shown to Einstein that, if correct, would have dis­ morals, beauty, love, hate, or aesthetics. These are vital ele­ proved his new theory of gravity Einstein commented, "The ments of civilized life, and are central to the concerns of nearly Lord is subtle, but malicious he is not." The Danish physicist every religion. What it all means is that for many scientists Niels Bohr, a contemporary of Einstein, heard one too many there is no conflict of interest. of Einstein's God-remarks and declared that Einstein should When scientists do talk about God, they typically invoke him stop telling God what to do! at die boundaries of knowledge where we should be most humble and where our sense I, like Ptolemy, am humbled in the presence of of wonder is greatest. Examples of this abound. During an era when planetary our clockwork universe. When I am on the cosmic motions were on the frontier of natural phi­ frontier, and I touch the laws of physics with my losophy, Ptolemy couldn't help feeling a reli­ gious sense of majesty when he wrote, "When pen, or when I look upon the endless sky from I trace at my pleasure the windings to and fro an observatory on a mountaintop, I well up of the heavenly bodies, 1 no longer touch die earth with my feet. I stand in the presence of with an admiration for its splendor. Zeus himself and take my fill of ambrosia." Note that Ptolemy was not weepy about die fact that the element Today, you hear the occasional astrophysicist (maybe one in a mercury is liquid at room temperature, or that a dropped rock hundred) invoke God when asked where did all our laws of falls straight to die ground. While he could not have fully under­ physics come from, or what was around before the Big Bang. As stood these phenomena either, they were not seen at die time to we have come to anticipate, these questions comprise the mod­ be on the frontiers of science. ern frontier of cosmic discovery and, at the moment, they tran­ In the thirteenth century, Alfonso the Wise (Alfonso X), scend the answers our available data and theories can supply. the King of Spain who also happened to be an accomplished Some promising ideas, such as inflationary cosmology and string academician, was frustrated by the complexity of Ptolemy's theory, already exist. These could ultimately give to the answers epicycles. Being less humble than Ptolemy, Alfonso is widely to those questions, thereby pushing back our boundary of awe. credited with having mused, "Had I been around at the cre­ My personal views are entirely pragmatic, and partly res­ ation, I would have given some useful hints for the better onate with those of Galileo who, during his trial, is credited ordering of the universe." with saying, "The Bible tells you how to go to heaven, not how In his 1687 masterpiece The Mathematical Principles of the heavens go." Galileo further noted, in a 1615 letter to the Natural Philosophy, Isaac Newton lamented that his new equa­ Grand Duchess of Tuscany, "In my mind God wrote two tions of gravity, which describe the force of attraction between books. The first book is the Bible, where humans can find the pairs of objects, might nor maintain a stable system of orbits answers to their questions on values and morals. The second for multiple planets. Under this instability, planets would book of God is the book of nature, which allows humans to either crash into the Sun or get ejected from the solar system use observation and experiment to answer our own questions altogether. Worried about the long-term fate of Earth and about the universe." other planets, Newton invoked the hand of God as a possible I simply go with what works. And what works is the healthy restoring force to maintain a long-lived solar system. Over a skepticism embodied in scientific method. Believe me, if the century later, the French mathematician Pierre Simon de Bible had ever been shown to be a rich source of scientific Laplace invented a mathematical approach to gravity, pub­ answers and understanding, we would be mining it daily for lished in his four-volume treatise Celestial Mechanics, which cosmic discovery. Yet my vocabulary of scientific inspiration extended the applicability of Newton's equations to complex strongly overlaps with that of religious enthusiasts. I, like systems of planets such as ours. Laplace showed that our solar Ptolemy, am humbled in the presence of our clockwork uni­ system was stable and did not require the hand of a deity after verse. When I am on the cosmic frontier, and I touch the laws all. When queried by Napoleon Bonaparte on the absence of of physics with my pen, or when I look upon the endless sky any reference to an "author of the universe" in his book, from an observatory on a mountaintop, 1 well up with an admi­ Laplace replied, "I have no need of that hypothesis." ration for its splendor. But I do so knowing and accepting that In full agreement with King Alfonso's frustrations with the if I propose a God beyond that horizon, one who graces our universe, Albert Einstein noted in a letter to a colleague, "If valley of collective ignorance, the day will come when our God created the world, his primary- worry was certainly not to sphere of knowledge will have grown so large that I will have make its understanding easy for us." When Einstein could not no need of that hypothesis.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Septembet/Octobei 2001 27 The Dangerous Quest for Cooperation Between Science and Religion

Religion is a subcategory of supernaturalism that was formulated during the medieval period with the spurious and dangerous quest to link supernaturalism with scientific knowledge, and this quest has continued. JACOB PANDIAN

ecently, misleading articles have appeared in newspapers and news maga­ Rzines claiming that religion and science are cooperating to explore the nature of reality. Gregg Easterbrook (1999) noted that "Signs of renewed interest in science and reli­ gion are numerous. The topic has recently been a top-selling cover for both Newsweek and U.S. News and World Report. Universities such as Princeton and Cambridge, which in the 1960s didn't even offer courses in the relationship between science and

28 September/October 2001 SKEP

jtid religion, have established chairs for its study." ing that opens the door to organizations such as the Templeton Easterbrook points to the central role of the John Foundation, and to arguments that science and religion should Templeton Foundation in encouraging the cooperation cooperate in understanding the nature of the universe. between science and religion. The Foundation publishes Progress in Theology magazine but more importantly awards Religio, Religion, and Supernaturalism millions of dollars to people who reflect their philosophy of Supernaturalism (i.e., beliefs and practices associated with cooperation. supernatural beings and supernatural power) is a cultural uni­ The 2001 Templeton prize, $1 million, was announced versal. Religion, however, is not a cultural universal; it is a sub­ March 9. It went to the Rev. Arthur Peacocke, a British bio­ set of supernaturalism that developed during the medieval chemist and Anglican priest who has written widely about God period of the Christian tradition to represent Christian super­ and science. The Templeton Award recipient for 2000 was naturalism as scientific truth. During this period, the Freeman J. Dyson, an emeritus professor of physics at the Roman/Latin concept of reiigio changed its meaning and sig­ Institute of Advanced Study in Princeton. As reported by Larry nificance from ritual activities to doctrinal statements about Stammer (2000), Dyson was "baffled" at receiving the award the nature of the world and humankind. because the Templeton prize is awarded for "Progress in Religion" An excellent discussion of why and how the Roman/Latin and not for progress in science. Dyson claimed that he was "not concept of reiigio was transformed by the church fathers into a theologian" and "not a saint." In his reflections on science and religion (attributing different characteristics to reiigio) is offered religion, Dyson noted that "The universe has a mind of its own. in William Cantwell Smith's very important book on the Wc know mind plays a big role in our own lives. It's likely, in fact, that mind has a big role in rhe way the whole universe functions. If you like, you call it God. It all makes sense." Before that, $ 1.2 million was awarded to Ian G. Barbour, a retired professor from Carleton College. At Carleton he was pro­ fessor of physics, professor of religion, and Bean Professor of Science, Technology and Society. His book Religion and Science (1997) is described by its publisher (Harper San Francisco) as "a definitive contemporary discussion of die many issues surround­ ing our understanding of God and religious truth and experience in our scientific age." Earlier recipients of the Templeton Award include the Protestant Christian evangelist Billy Graham, the Catholic Christian nun Mother Teresa, the campus crusader William Bright, and the Russian novelist Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Ian Barbour, according to Gregg Easterbrook, "promptly announced he would give $1 million of his award to die Berkeley, California, Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences, an affiliate of Berkeley's Graduate Theological Union, and an otganization whose own 1981 founding and rising importance are indicators of the science-and-religion trend." Ralph Estling, in an essay called "Templeton and AAAS" in the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER (2000), pointed out that the American Association for the Advancement of Science has "a problem": This association, which "has been promoting a study known as the 'Program of Dialogue on Science, Ethics and Religion,'" received for four years cash contributions of over one million dollars from the Templeton Foundation. As many board members of AAAS are also associated with the Templeton Foundation, Estling is right in raising questions about "conflict of interest," and he advises the AAAS "to get the hell out from under the John Templeton Foundation." I suggest that the problem is a much larger one than the Templeton Foundation's attempt to influence the scope of sci­ ence through monetary awards to scientific organizations and scientists. The more serious problem stems from our profound misunderstanding of why and how die concept of religion was developed by the church fathers of the early medieval period out of the Roman/Latin concept of reiigio. It is this misunderstand­

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 29 subject of religion, The Meaning and End of Religion (1991). to the pan-human analytic activity that generates accurate The concept of religion was developed in the Christian tradi­ models to approximate, explain, and use nature. tion to represent Christian truths as opposed to the untruths of Is there conflict or cooperation between Christian religion and "pagan" traditions of die Greeks and Romans and die satanic or science? Yes. Some cultural traditions, including the Christian tra­ demonic distortions diat, from the Christian dieory of religion, dition, have attempted to merge supernaturalism and science. prevailed in non-Christian traditions. Religion is die product of such an attempt, and die debate on The concept of religion diat had become the theoretical cooperation between religion and science is a renewed attempt to framework for explaining Greco-Roman and non-Western subordinate science to supernaturalism. The first special issue of traditions as false was also opposed to and contrasted with the die SKEPTICAL INQUIRER devoted to science and religion (Frazier supernaturalism of the non-Christians in general. Christian 1999) failed to note the fact mat religion was a conceptual frame­ supernaturalism was conceptualized within the framework of work, a cultural category, which die church fathers of die religion as the scientific truth about the world and medieval period developed to link science and supernaturalism humankind. Christianity established an epistemological link epistemologically in order to proclaim Christianity as die true between science and supernaturalism by conceptualizing reli- explanation of the wotld and humankind. Many respected scientists appear to be unaware of this epistemological link. The concept of religion was developed Stephen Jay Gould (1999a) notes that in the Christian tradition to represent "Science and religion should be equal, mutually respecting partners, each the Christian truths as opposed to the untruths master of its own domain and with each of "pagan" traditions of the Greeks and domain vital to human life in a different way." In his book Rocks of Ages: Science and Romans and the satanic or demonic distortions Religion in the Fullness of Life (1999b), that, from the Christian theory of religion, Gould writes: "I do not see how science and religion could be unified, or even syn­ prevailed in non-Christian traditions. thesized, under any common scheme of explanation or analysis; but I also do not gion as the framework to explain natural phenomena and to understand why the two entetprises should experience con­ explain the nature of the relationship between God and flict. Science tries to document the factual character of the humankind. In such a view, the religious framework of natural world, and to develop theories that coordinate and Christianity was aligned with scientific naturalism, and non- explain these facts. Religion, on the other hand, operates in Christian supernaturalism was aligned with superstition. the equally important, but utterly different, realm of human For over fifteen hundred years we have been using the term purposes, meanings and values—subjects that the factual religion widiout fully realizing its origin and development. domain of science might illuminate, but never resolve." Scholars have used die term to identify and discuss die supernat­ We can agree with Gould's assessment of the relationship (or uralism of both non-Christian and Christian traditions. But the lack of relationship) between science and religion only if the while ancient civilizations such as die Greeks, Romans, Chinese, term supernaturalism is substituted for the term religion. I am and Hindus had elaborate beliefs and activities diat we associate surprised and puzzled diat Gould, who has delved into histori­ widi supernaturalism, the)' did not have "religion," i.e., a formu­ cal issues in many of his essays, failed to make note of the rea­ lation diat combines scientific knowledge and supernaturalism. sons why and how the framework of religion developed. Thus labels such as Greek religion, Roman religion, Chinese reli­ Arising in the Roman cultural tradition, the Latin term reli­ gion, Hindu religion, and so on are erroneous. It would be more gio had multiple meanings such as "die acquisition and posses­ appropriate to discard the use of die term religion and instead sion of supernatural power" and "die performance of rituals fot attempt to define and discuss Christian supernaturalism, just as supernatural beings." Religio referred to activities that dealt we describe and discuss other supernaturalisms. with supernatural powers and beings, and not with a concep­ Is there conflict or cooperation between supernaturalism tual model of die world. Religio was not linked or contrasted and science? No. Supernaturalism belongs to the pan-human with science in die pre-Christian traditions of the West, but the myth-making activity that generates models of personal/cul­ medieval Christian church fathers such as Saint Augustine used tural coherence and integration through the formulations of religio to signify the true knowledge about the nature of the supernatural beings and supetnatural power. Science belongs world and humankind. The church, with its hierarchical priest­ hood, became the custodian of this true knowledge embodied Jacob Pandian is professor of anthropology at California State in religion, combining supernaturalism and science. University, Fullerton. He can be reached at the Department of Anthropology, California State University, Fullerton, California Attempts to Integrate Religion Into Science 92834-6846; telephone number 714-278-3294; or e-mail at Contemporary efforts to represent science and religion as jpandian GPfullerton. edu. two ways of searching for true knowledge are essentially a

30 Sepiember/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER continuation and revitalization of the medieval notion of reli­ life forms prevailed for a long time in academia. We now have gion. We are inundated with statements such as "evolution is departments of religion or religious studies in academia that con­ God's way of organizing the natural world," "evolution is God's tinue die same intellectual tradition. What occurs today is a way of creating human self-awareness," "scientific discoveries much more sophisticated and nuanced attempt to discredit the reveal God's design," and "science is God's gift to humankind." foundations of science dirough spurious platitudes such as "reli­ There are scientists who intentionally or unintentionally con­ gion and science must respect each odier," "religion and science fuse die separation of supernaturalism and science by confusing must cooperate to seek the basis of reality," "religion and science their personal supernaturalism and their objects of inquiry and, have a common ground," and "religion and science must seek in turn, lend scientific legitimacy to religion. together to better the conditions of human life." These state­ The American scientist Dr. Richard Sneed, in an interview ments contain expressions that have universal appeal: "respect for on CNN (1999), advocated human cloning with comments each other," "cooperation," and "looking for a common ground for discourse and the search for the betterment of human condi­ such as the following: God created humans in God's image; God would not have given the intelligence to clone unless God wanted cloning; and God can serve as a vehicle to prevent cloning was a way of getting close to God. Peter Gosselin (2000) reported that Francis free inquiry and critical thinking in areas that Collins, who runs the Human Genome are prohibited in the name of God, whose Research Institute, is a "rare combination of premier scientist and devout Christian. prohibition is verified only by the custodians [Collins] professes belief in a God that is of God and those who accept the beyond the reach of science. He says die pursuit of the genetic code is not, as some custodial claims made in the name of God. worry, an attempt by humans to play God, but only humans' way of admiring God's handiwork. 'God is tions" are laudable goals of all human beings. But by linking not threatened by all this' he said in a television interview. 'I supernaturalism and science epistemologically, a distorted view think God thinks it's wonderful that we puny creatures are of science is created, which could lead to die rejection of the sci­ going about the business of trying to understand how our entific method because it discredits God's design or plan. instruction book works, because it's a very elegant instruction The scholars of the Enlightenment who did so much to book indeed.'" affirm the scientific method and liberate scientific research from God can be and is used to justify and legitimize any custom supernaturalism failed to recognize that religion was a medieval or activity, including science. God can also serve as a vehicle to Christian invention that was developed to oppose what the prevent free inquiry and critical thinking in areas that are pro­ Church claimed to be pagan, magical, and demonic supernatu­ hibited in the name of God, whose prohibition is verified only ralism. Many scholastic treatises on God and die world were by the custodians of God and those who accept the custodial viewed by Enlightenment thinkers as facilitating the scientific claims made in the name of God. Over a hundred years ago, understanding of the world—for example, formulations con­ the theologian/biblical scholar/anthropologist William Robert­ cerning a rational God and the rationality of the world, with son Smith unsuccessfully defended himself as a scientist who humans endowed with reason to discover the rationality of the had the moral dury to explore the cultural foundations of world. Enlightenment thinkers for the most part supported the Christianity. He was tried for heresy by the Free Church of ethnocentric assumption that religion was superior and more Scotland and defrocked. His defense was that if God did not advanced than primitive supernaturalism and diat the West had want scientific research on discovering the origins of customs, progressed and advanced along the evolutionary ladder because God would not have endowed humans with rationality; he of the applications of rationality to discover the laws of nature argued that die non-use of rationality in the furtherance of sci­ and create rational institutions. The Enlightenment, which did ence was fundamentally a non-Christian attitude. Smith's so much to revive the Greek ideals of science, was caught in the inquisitors did not accept his defense because in their view the Christian theological assertions about the nature of religion and Bible was die revealed truth about the nature of the world and supernaturalism. When the exponents of the Enlightenment humans, and humans could not fathom the mind of God. attacked primitive irrationality as standing in the way of The intellectual history of die past five hundred years has progress, the focus was on non-Western peoples and cultures been one of religion attempting to preempt and/or incorporate who, in the view of these scholars, embodied supernaturalism. scientific discoveries as religious truths. Church-affiliated or sec­ The anthropological discourse on humankind was (and is) tarian universities were built to produce and disseminate reli­ equally caught in the Christian theological assertions about the gious truths as they were supported by science. If and when sci­ nature of religion and supernaturalism. Nineteenth-century entific discoveries could not be formulated and presented as reli­ sociologists and anthropologists postulated that magic, witch­ gious truths, there were inquisitorial persecutions of scientists craft, and divination constituted beliefs and practices that who were identified as heretics or as adieists. The teaching of preceded religion and monotheism, and that monotheism and "natural theology" and its opposition to the Darwinian model of religion manifested themselves only in the higher stages of

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 31 and hear thought-provoking talks critiquing (or, in some cases, defending):

• Near-Death Experiences • The Medical Effects of Prayer at a Distance • Intelligent Design: Creation/Evolution and Darwinism • New Cosmologies and Religion • Spiritualism and Science • The Existence of Souls

We'll also feature meetings of local groups; a concurrent ses­ sion on Science, Religion, and African Americans; and a ses­ sion on Science and Islam. We'll have the pleasure of enter­ tainment and education at the hands of nationally known physicist and showman David G. Willey, and—

Imagine getting to hear all these superb speakers in one meeting:

• Jim Alcock • Hector Avalos • Michael Behe • Susan Blackmore • Patricia Churchland • Jerome W. Elbert • Antony Flew • Owen Gingerich • Adolf Grunbaum « Ray Hyman • Karl Jansen • Paul Kurtz • Raymond Moody • Joe Nickel! • Steven Pinker • Massimo Pigliucci • Gary Posner • Gary E. Schwartz • Eugenie Scott • Quentin Smith • Wole Soyinka • Vic Stenger • Matt Young

•The registration fee will be only $79 for students who are currently enrolled in classes (copy of current student identification required). Be Part of the First Make plans now to be in Atlanta, at the Atlanta Airport CENTER FOR INQUIRY Marriott (just $89 a room per night, single or double, with free airport shuttle service, free parking, and first class ser­ INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE! vice), on Friday through Sunday, November 9-11.

You're invited to what may just be the finest conference you've ever had a chance to attend—the Center Center for Inquiry's first International Conference. For only $149* _for. CSICOP (we're holding the line on costs), you can come to Atlanta Inquiry THI COMMIIIII 101 IHI SCIIHTIMC IHVIITIOATIOM

To register, complete the form below and send with your payment to The Center for Inquiry. ATTN: November Conference. P. O. Box 741. Amherst NY 14226- 0741, or call credit card charges (Visa, MasterCard or American Express) to 1-800-458-1366. Please note: You must reserve your sleeping room(s) directly with the hotel. Call 404-766-7900 and ask for the Center for Inquiry conference rate. Note: Room rate is only guaranteed until October 8. 2001 REGISTRATION FORM

YES! Register person(s) for the Center for Inquiry Conference, "Science and Religion: Are They Compatible?"

NAME DAYTIME PHONE E-MAIL

ADDRESS CITY STATE _ ZIP

Number Item Price Each Total Price

Adult Conference Registration (per person—does not include meals) $149 Student Conference Registration (per person—does not include meals) $79 enclose photocopy of current student ID for each student registration requested

Friday Luncheon World-class speaker to be announced $25 Saturday Luncheon World-class speaker to be announced $25

Saturday Banquet With David G.Willey "mod scientist" exfroi>aoan2a and international Awards Ceremony $35

TOTAL: $_ PAYMENT: I enclose check MO payable to Center for Inquiry or Charge to my J MasterCard GVisa Card Number Expiration: Signature: feNH

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 33 Design Yes, Intelligent No A Critique of Intelligent Design Theory and Neocreationism

The claims by Behe, Dembski, and other "intelligent design" creationists that science should be opened to supernatural explanations and that these should be allowed in academic as well as public school curricula are unfounded and based on a misunderstanding of both design in nature and of what the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution is all about.

MASSIMO PIGLIUCCI

new brand of creationism has appeared on the scene in the last few years. The so-called neocreationists Alargely do not believe in a young Earth or in a too literal interpretation of the Bible. While still mostly pro­ pelled by a religious agenda and financed by mainly Christian sources such as the Templeton Foundation and the Discovery Institute, the intellectual challenge posed by neocreationism is sophisticated enough to require detailed consideration (see Edis 2001; Roche 2001). Among the chief exponents of Intelligent Design (ID) theory, as this new brand of creationism is called, is William Dembski, a mathematical philosopher and author of The Design Inference (1998a). In that book he attempts to show

34 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER that there must be an intelligent designer behind natural phe­ ural explanation because selection is definitely nonrandom, nomena such as evolution and die very origin of die universe and therefore has "creative" (albeit nonconscious) power. (see Pigliucci 2000 for a detailed critique). Dembki's (1998b) Creationists usually do not understand this point and think argument is that modern science ever since Francis Bacon has that selection can only eliminate the less fit; but Darwin's pow­ illicitly dropped two of Aristotle's famous four types of causes erful insight was that selection is also a cumulative process— from consideration altogether, diereby unnecessarily restrict­ analogous to a ratchet—which can build things over time, as ing its own explanatory power. Science is dius incomplete, and long as die intermediate steps are also advantageous. intelligent design theory will rectify this sorry state of affairs, Darwin made it possible to put all four Aristotelian causes if only close-minded evolutionists would allow Dembski and back into science. For example, if we were to ask what are die company to do the job. causes of a tiger's teeth widiin a Darwinian framework, we would answer in die following manner. The material cause is Aristotle's Four Causes in Science provided by the biological materials diat make up the teedi; Aristotle identified material causes, what something is made the formal cause is the genetic and developmental machinery of; formal causes, die structure of the thing or phenomenon; that distinguishes a tiger's teeth from any odier kind of bio­ efficient causes, die immediate activity producing a phenome­ logical structure; the efficient cause is natural selection pro­ non or object; and final causes, die purpose of whatever object moting some genetic variants of die tiger's ancestor over dicir we are investigating. For example, let's say we want to investi­ competitors; and the final cause is provided by die fact that gate the "causes" of the Brooklyn Bridge. Its material cause having teeth structured in a certain way makes it easier for a would be encompassed by a description of the physical mate­ tiger to procure its prey and therefore to survive and repro­ rials that went into its construction. The formal cause is the duce—the only "goals" of every living being. fact that it is a bridge across a stretch of water, and not either a random assembly of pieces or another kind of orderly structure Natural selection, combined with the basic (such as a skyscraper). The efficient causes process of mutation, makes design possible in were the blueprints drawn by engineers and the labor of men and machines that actually nature without recourse to a supernatural assembled the physical materials and put explanation because selection is definitely them into place. The final cause of die Brooklyn Bridge was the necessity for peo­ nonrandom, and therefore has "creative" ple to walk and ride between two land- (albeit nonconscious) power. masses without getting wet. Dembski maintains that Bacon and his followers did away with both formal and final causes (the so-called teleonomic causes, because diey answer the question of why something is) in order to free sci­ ence from philosophical speculation and ground it firmly into empirically verifiable statements. That may be so, but things certainly changed with the work of Charles Darwin (1859). Darwin was addressing a complex scientific question in an unprecedented fashion: he recog­ nized that living organisms are clearly designed in order to survive and reproduce in the world they inhabit; yet, as a scientist, he worked within the framework ot naturalistic explanations of such design. Darwin found the answer in his well-known theory of natural selection. Natural selection, com­ bined with the basic process of mutation, makes design possible in nature without recourse to a supernat­

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 35 Therefore, design is very much a part of modern science, at isms are concerned. He rejected chance and randomness (as least whenever there is a need to explain an apparently do modern biologists) but did not invoke an intelligent designed structure (such as a living organism). All four designer in its place, contra Dembski. We had to wait until Aristotelian causes are fully reinstated within the realm of Darwin for a further advance on Aristotle's conception of the scientific investigation, and science is not maimed by the final cause of living organisms and for modern molecular disregard of some of the causes acting in the world. What then biology to achieve an understanding of their formal cause. is left of the argument of Dembski and of other proponents of ID? They, like William Paley (1831) well before them, make Irreducible Complexity the mistake of confusing natural design and intelligent design There are two additional arguments proposed by ID theo­ by rejecting the possibility of die former and concluding diat rists to demonstrate intelligent design in the universe: the any design must by definition be intelligent. con-cept of "irreducible complexity" and the "complexity- specification" criterion. Irreducible com­ plexity is a term introduced in this context by molecular biologist Michael Behe in Aristotle identified final causes with formal his book Darwin's Black Box (1996). The idea is that the difference between a nat­ causes as far as living organisms are concerned. ural phenomenon and an intelligent He rejected chance and randomness designer is that a designed object is planned in advance, with forethought. (as do modern biologists) but did not invoke While an intelligent agent is not con­ an intelligent designer in its place, strained by a step-by-step evolutionary contra Dembski. process, an evolutionary process is the only way nature itself can proceed given that it has no planning capacity (this may be referred to as incremental complexity). One is left with the lingering feeling that Dembski is Irreducible complexity then arises whenever all the parts of being disingenuous about ancient philosophy. It is quite a structure have to be present and functional simultaneously clear, for example, that Aristotle himself never meant his for it to work, indicating—according to Behe—that the teleonomic causes to imply intelligent design in nature structure was designed and could not possibly have been (Cohen 2000). His mentor, Plato (in Timaeus), had already gradually built by natural selection. concluded that the designer of the universe could not be an Behe's example of an irreducibly complex object is a mouse­ omnipotent god, but at most what he called a Demiurge, a trap. If you take away any of the minimal elements that make lesser god who evidently messes around with the universe the trap work it will lose its function; on the other hand, there with mixed results. Aristotle believed that the scope of god is no way to assemble a mousetrap gradually from a natural was even more limited, essentially to the role of prime mover phenomenon, because it won't work until the last piece is of the universe, with no additional direct interaction with his assembled. Forethought, and therefore intelligent design, is creation (i.e., he was one of the first deists). In Physics, where necessary. Of course it is. After all, mousetraps as purchased in he discusses the four causes, Aristotle treats nature itself as a hardware stores are indeed human products; we know that die)' craftsman, but clearly devoid of forethought and intelligence. are intelligendy designed. But what of biological structures? A tiger develops into a tiger because it is in its nature to do Behe claims that, while evolution can explain a lot of the visi­ so, and this nature is due to some physical essence given to it ble diversity among living organisms, it is not enough when we by its father (we would call it DNA) which starts the process come to the molecular level. The cell and several of its funda­ out. Aristotle makes clear this rejection of god as a final cause mental components and biochemical pathways are, according (Cohen 2000) when he says that causes are not external to to him, irreducibly complex. the organism (such as a designer would be) but internal to it The problem with this statement is diat it is contradict­ (as modern developmental biology clearly shows). In other ed by the available literature on comparative studies in micro­ words, the final cause of a living being is not a plan, inten­ biology and molecular biology, which Behe conveniendy tion, or purpose, but simply intrinsic in the developmental ignores (Miller 1996). For example, geneticists are continu­ changes of that organism. Which means that Aristotle iden­ ously showing that biochemical pathways are partly redun­ tified final causes with formal causes as far as living organ- dant. Redundancy is a common feature of living organisms where different genes are involved in the same or in partially Massimo Pigliucci is associate professor of ecology and evolution­ overlapping functions. While this may seem a waste, mathe­ ary biology at the University of Tennessee, KnoxvilU, 77V37996- matical models show that evolution by natural selection has to 1100, and author o/"Tales of the Rational: Skeptical Essays produce molecular redundancy because when a new function About Nature and Science. His essays can be found at is necessary it cannot be carried out by a gene diat is already httpJIfp. bio. utk. edulskeptic. doing something else, without compromising die original

36 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER function. On the other hand, if the gene gets duplicated (by physics, for example the rotation of Earth around the Sun. mutation), one copy is freed from immediate constraints and Random phenomena are exemplified by the tossing of a coin. can slowly diverge in structure from the original, eventually Design enters any time that two criteria are satisfied: taking over new functions. This process leads to the formation complexity and specification (Dembski 1998b). of gene "families," groups of genes clearly originated from a There are several problems with this neat scenario. First of single ancestral DNA sequence, and that now are diversified all, leaving aside design for a moment, the remaining choices and perform a variety of functions (e.g., the globins, which are not limited to regularity and randomness. Chaos and com­ vary from proteins allowing muscle contraction to those plexity theory have established the existence of self-organizing involved in the exchange of oxygen and car­ bon dioxide in the blood). As a result of redundancy, mutations can knock down There are several cases in which biologists do individual components of biochemical not know enough about the fundamental pathways without compromising the overall function—contrary to the expectations of constituents of the cell to be able to hypothesize irreducible complexity. or demonstrate their gradual evolution. But this is (Notice that creationists, never ones to loose a bit, have also tried to claim that rather an argument from ignorance, not positive redundancy is yet another evidence of intel­ evidence of irreducible complexity. ligent design, because an engineer would produce backup systems to minimize phenomena (Kauffman 1993; Shanks and Joplin 1999), situa­ catastrophic failures should the primary components stop tions in which order spontaneously appears as an emergent functioning. While very clever, this argument once again property of complex interactions among the parts of a system. ignores the biology: the majority of duplicated genes end up as And this class of phenomena, far from being only a figment of pseudogenes, literally pieces of molecular junk that are even­ mathematical imagination as Behe maintains, are real. For tually lost forever to any biological utility [Max 1986].) example, certain meteorological phenomena such as tornados To be sure, there are several cases in which biologists do not are neither regular nor random but are the result of self- know enough about the fundamental constituents of the cell organizing processes. to be able to hypothesize or demonstrate their gradual But let us go back to complexity-specification and take a evolution. But this is rather an argument from ignorance, not closer look at these two fundamental criteria, allegedly capable positive evidence of irreducible complexity. William Paley of establishing intelligent agency in nature. Following one of advanced exactly the same argument to claim that it is impos­ Dembski's examples, if SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial sible to explain the appearance of the eye by natural means. Intelligence) researchers received a very short signal that may Yet, today biologists know of several examples of intermediate be interpreted as encoding the first three prime numbers, they forms of the eye, and there is evidence that this structure would probably not rush to publish their findings. This is evolved several times independently during the history of life because even though such signal could be construed as due on Earth (Gehring and Ikeo 1999). The answer to the to some kind of intelligence, it is so short that its occurrence classical creationist question, "What good is half an eye?" is can just as easily be explained by chance. Given the choice, a "Much better than no eye at all"! sensible scientist would follow Ockham's razor and conclude However, Behe does have a point concerning irreducible that the signal does not constitute enough evidence for complexity. It is true that some structures simply cannot be extraterrestrial intelligence. However, also according to explained by slow and cumulative processes of natural selec­ Dembski, if the signal were long enough to encode all the tion. From his mousetrap to Paley's watch to the Brooklyn prime numbers between 2 and 101, the SETI people would Bridge, irreducible complexity is indeed associated with intel­ open the champagne and celebrate all night. Why? Because ligent design. The problem for ID theory is that there is no such signal would be both too complex to be explained by evidence so far of irreducible complexity in living organisms. chance and would be specifiable, meaning that it is not just a random sequence of numbers, it is an intelligible message. The Complexity-Specification Criterion The specification criterion needs to be added because William Dembski uses an approach similar to Behe to back up complexity by itself is a necessary but not sufficient condition creationist claims, in that he also wants to demonstrate that for design (Roche 2001). To see this, imagine that the SETI intelligent design is necessary to explain the complexity of staff receives a long but random sequence of signals. That nature. His proposal, however, is both more general and more sequence would be very complex, meaning that it would take deeply flawed. In his book The Design Inference (Dembski a lot of information to actually archive or repeat the sequence 1998a) he claims that there are three essential types of phe­ (you have to know where all the 0s and Is are), but it would nomena in nature: "regular," random, and designed (which he not be specifiable because the sequence would be meaningless. assumes to be intelligent). A regular phenomenon would be a Dembski is absolutely correct that plenty of human activi­ simple repetition explainable by the fundamental laws of ties, such as SETI, investigations into plagiarism, or encryption,

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 37 depend on the ability to detect intelligent agency. Where he is idea that they were created by an omnipotent and omnibenev- wrong is in assuming only one kind of design. For him design olent creator, who surely would not be limited by laws of equals intelligence and, even though he admitted that such an physics that He Himself made up from scratch. intelligence may be an advanced extraterrestrial civilization, his preference is for a god, possibly of the Christian variety. The Four Fundamental Types of Design and How The problem is that natural selection, a natural process, to Recognize Them also fulfills the complexity-specification criterion, thereby Given these considerations, 1 would like to propose a system demonstrating that it is possible to have unintelligent design that includes both Behe's and Dembski's suggestions, while at in nature. Living organisms are indeed complex. They are also the same time showing why they are both wrong in conclud­ specifiable, meaning that they are not random assemblages of ing that we have evidence for intelligent design in the universe. organic compounds, but are clearly formed in a way that Figure 1 summarizes my proposal. Essentially, I think there are enhances their chances of surviving and reproducing in a four possible kinds of design in nature which, together with changing and complex environment. What, then, distin­ Dembski's categories of "regular" and random phenomena, guishes organisms from the Brooklyn Bridge? Both meet and the addition of chaotic and self-organizing phenomena, Dembski's complexity-specification criterion, but only the truly exhaust all possibilities known to us. Science recognizes bridge is irreducibly complex. This has important implications regular, random, and self-organizing phenomena, as well as the for design. first two types of design described in figure 1. The other two In response to some of his critics, Dembski (2000) claimed types of design are possible in principle, but I contend that that intelligent design does not mean optimal design. The there is neither empirical evidence nor logical reason to believe criticism of suboptimal design has often been advanced by that they actually occur. evolutionists who ask why The first kind of design is God would do such a non-intelligent-natural, and it sloppy job with creation is exemplified by natural that even a mere human selection within Earth's bios­ engineer can easily deter­ phere (and possibly else­ mine where the flaws are. where in the universe). The For example, why is results of this design, such as it that human beings Non-intelligent, Intelligent, all living organisms on natural supernatural, have hemorrhoids, varicose perfect Earth, are not irreducibly veins, backaches, and foot • not irreducibly complex, meaning that they complex Intelligent, Intelligent, »irreducibly complex • has hallmarks of • optimal aches? If you assume historical process natural supernatural, can be that we were "intelligent­ • not optimal sloppy e.g.. omnipotent A produced by incremental, • irreducibly complex omnibenevolent god eg., natural • not optimal ly" designed, the answer selection • irreducibly complex continuous (though not nec­ • not optimal must be that the designer e.g.. humans. essarily gradual) changes extraterrestrial eg. minor god, was rather incompetent— intelligences' evil god over time. These objects can something that would be clearly attributed to nat­ ^ Clarke's law <$ hardly please a creationist. ural processes also because of Instead, evolutionary the­ two other reasons: they are Figure li The four possible kinds of design in nature and how to distinguish them. ory has a single answer to never optimal (in an engi­ all these questions: humans evolved bipedalism (walking with neering sense) and they are clearly the result of historical processes. an erect posture) only very recently, and natural selection has For example, they are full of junk, nonutilized or underutilized not yet fully adapted our body to the new condition (Olshansky parts, and they resemble similar objects occurring simultaneously et al. 2001). Our closest primate relatives, chimps, gorillas, and or previously in time (see, for example, the fossil record). Notice the like, are better adapted to their way of life, and therefore are that some scientists and philosophers of science feel uncomfort­ less "imperfect" than ourselves! able in considering this "design" because they equate the term Dembski is of course correct in saying that intelligent with intelligence. But I do not see any reason to embrace such design does not mean optimal design. As much as the limitation. If something is shaped over time—by whatever Brooklyn Bridge is a marvel of engineering, it is not perfect, means—such that it fulfills a certain function, then it is designed meaning that it had to be constructed within the constraints and the question is simply of how such design happened to mate­ and limitations of the available materials and technology, and rialize. The teeth of a tiger are clearly designed to efficiently cut it still is subject to natural laws and decay. The bridges vul­ into the flesh of its prey and therefore to promote survival and nerability to high winds and earthquakes, and its inadequacy reproduction of tigers bearing such teeth. to bear a volume of traffic for which it was not built can be The second type of design is intelligent-natural These arti­ seen as similar to the back pain caused by our recent evolu­ facts are usually irreducibly complex, such as a watch designed tionary history. However, the imperfection of living organ­ by a human. They are also not optimal, meaning that they isms, already pointed out by Darwin, does do away with the clearly compromise between solutions to different problems

38 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER (trade-offs) and they are subject to the constraints of physical Therefore, Behe's, Dembski's, and other creationists' (e.g., laws, available materials, expertise of the designer, etc. Johnson 1997) claims that science should be opened to super­ Humans may not be the only ones to generate these objects, as natural explanations and that these should be allowed in acad­ the artifacts of any extraterrestrial civilization would fall into emic as well as public school curricula are unfounded and the same broad category. based on a misunderstanding of bodi design in nature and of The third kind of design, which is difficult, if not impossi­ what the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution (Mayr and ble, to distinguish from the second, is what I term intelligent- Provine 1980) is all about. supernatural-sloppy. Objects created in this way are essentially indistinguishable from Why is it that human beings have hemorrhoids, human or ET artifacts, except that they would be die result of what the Greeks varicose veins, backaches, and foot aches? called a Demiurge, a minor god with lim­ If you assume that we were "intelligently" ited powers. Alternatively, they could be due to an evil omnipotent god that just designed, the answer must be that the designer amuses himself with suboptimal products. was rather incompetent—something that The reason intelligent-supernatural-sloppy design is not distinguishable from some would hardly please a creationist. instances (but by all means not all) of intel­ ligent-natural design is Arthur C. Clarke's famous third law: Acknowledgments from the point of view of a technologically less advanced civi­ I would like to thank Melissa Brenneman, Will Provine, and Niall lization, the technology of a very advanced civilization is essen­ Shanks for insightful comments on earlier versions of this article, as tially indistinguishable from magic (such as the monolith in well as Michael Behe, William Dembski, Ken Miller, and Barry his 2001: A Space Odyssey). I would be very interested if some­ Palevitz for indulging in correspondence and discussions wiih me over these matters. one could suggest a way around Clarke's law. Finally, we have intelligent-supernatural-perfect design, References which is the result of the activity of an omnipotent and omnibenevolent god. These artifacts would be both irrc- Behe. M.J. 1996. Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. ducibly complex and optimal. They would not be con­ New York. N.Y.: Free Press. Cohen, S.M. 2000. The four causes. Accessed on 5/16/00 at www. faculty. strained by either trade-offs or physical laws (after all, God washington.edu/smcohen. created the laws themselves). While this is the kind of god Darwin, C. [1859] 1910. The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection: many Christian fundamentalists believe in (though some do Or. the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life. New York. N.Y.: A.L. Burt. away with the omnibenevolent part), it's quite clear from the Dembski, WA 1998a. The Design Inference. Cambridge. UK: Cambridge existence of human evil as well as of natural catastrophes and University Press. diseases, that such god does not exist. Dembski recognizes . 1998b. Reinstating design widiin science. Rhetoric & Public Affairs 1:505-518. this difficulty and, as 1 pointed out above, admits that his . 2000. Intelligent design is not optimal design. Accessed on 2/3/00 at intelligent design could even be due to a very advanced www.meta-list.org. extraterrestrial civilization, and not to a supernatural entity Edis. T. 2001. Darwin in mind: Intelligent Design meets artificial intelligence. SKEPTICAI. INQUIRER 25(2): 35-39. at all (Dembski 2000). Gehring, W.J., and K. Ikeo. 1999. Pax 6. mastering eye morphogenesis and eye evolution. Trends in Genetics 15:371—377. Conclusions Johnson. P. 1997. Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds. Downers Grove, Illinois: IntcrVarsity Press. In summary, it seems to me that the major arguments of Kauffman, S.A. 1993. The Origins of Order. New York, N.Y.: Oxford Intelligent Design theorists arc neither new nor compelling: University Press. Max, E.E. 1986. Plagiarized errors and molecular genetics: Another argument 1) It is simply not true that science docs not address all in die evolution-creation controversy. Creation/Evolution 9:34—46. Aristotelian causes, whenever design needs to be explained; Mayr, E., and W.B. Provine. 1980. The Evolutionary Synthesis: Perspectives on 2) While irreducible complexity is indeed a valid criterion the Unification of Biology. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Miller, K.R. 1996. The biochemical challenge to evolution. Accessed on to distinguish between intelligent and non-intelligent 10/30/99 at biomcd.brown.cdu/faculty/M/Miller. design, these are not the only two possibilities, and living Olshansky. S.J., A.C. Bruce, and R.N. Butler. 2001. If humans were built to organisms are not irreducibly complex (e.g., see Shanks and last. Scientific American March, pp. 50—55. Paley. W. 1831. Natural Theology: Or. Evidences of the Existence and Attributes Joplin 1999); 3) The complexity-specification criterion is of the Deity, Collected from the Appearances of Nature. Boston. Mass: actually met by natural selection, and cannot therefore pro­ Gould. Kendall, and Lincoln,. vide a way to distinguish intelligent from non-intelligent Pigliucci. M. 2000. Chance, necessity, and the new holy war against science. A review of WA Dembski's The Design Inference. BioScience 50( I): pp. design; 4) If supernatural design exists at all (but where is 79-81. January. the evidence or compelling logic?), this is certainly not of Roche. D. 2001. A bit confused: creationism and information theory. the kind that most religionists would likely subscribe to, SKEPTICAL INQUIRER 25(2):40-42. Shanks. N.. and K.H. Joplin. 1999. Redundant complexity: A critical and it is indistinguishable from the technology of a very analysis of intelligent design in biochemistry. Philosophy of Science advanced civilization. 66:268-282. U

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 39 A Way of Life for Agnostics??

T.H. Huxley's intention to have science replace religion as the authoritative source of information about life and the cosmos has succeeded beyond his expectations. Unfortunately more has been discredited than he may have intended. To help fill the resulting ethical vacuum, the author proposes a worldview for agnostics based on science and with Earth as an object for reverence.

JAMES LOVELOCK

he naming of things is important. Our deepest thoughts are unconscious, and we need metaphors and Tsimiles to translate them into something that we, as well as the rest of humankind, can understand. This is espe­ cially true of the broad subject, Gaia theory, which is the pseu­ donym for Earth System Science. Many scientists seem to dis­ like Gaia as a name; prominent among them is the eminent evolutionary biologist John Maynard Smith. He made clear when he said of Gaia, "What an awful name to call a theory," that it was the name, the metaphor, more than the science that caused his disapproval. He was, like most scientists, well aware of the power of metaphor. William Hamilton's metaphors of selfish and spiteful genes have served wonderfully, in

40 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Richard Dawkins's hands, to make evolutionary science com­ ity. When Havel was awarded the Freedom Medal of die prehensible, but let us never forget that the powerful metaphor United States he took as the tide of his acceptance speech, "We of Gaia was the gift of a great novelist. I would remind those are not here for ourselves alone." He reminded us that science who criticize the name Gaia that they are doing battle with had replaced religion as the source of knowledge but that mod­ William Golding, who first coined it. We should not lightly ern science offers no moral guidance. He went on to say that turn aside from the name Gaia because of pedantic objection. recent holistic science did offer something to fill this moral Biologists now accept Gaia as a theory that they can try to falsify so why do they con­ Gaia is a theory of science and is therefore tinue to object to the name itself? Surely, it cannot be metaphor envy. I think that it is always provisional and evolving, it is never something deeper, a rejection by reduction­ dogmatic or certain and could even be wrong. ist scientists of anything that smells of holism, anything that implies that the Provisional it may be but being of the palpable whole may be more than the sum of its Earth, it is something tangible to love and fear parts. I see the battle between Gaia and the selfish gene as part of an outdated and and think we understand. pointless war between holists and reduc­ tionists. In a sensible world, we need them both. void. He cited the anthropic principle as explaining why we The philosopher Mary Midgley reminded us that Gaia has are here, and Gaia as something to which wc could be influence well beyond science. She said, "The reason why the accountable. If we could revere our planet with the same notion of this enclosing whole concerns us is that it corrects a respect and love that we gave in the past to God, it would ben­ large and disastrous blind spot in our contemporary world efit us as well as Earth. Perhaps those who have faith might see view. It reminds us that we are not separate, independent this is God's will also. autonomous entities. Since the Enlightenment, the deepest I do not think that President Havel was proposing an alter­ moral efforts of our culture have gone to establishing our free­ native Earth-based religion. I take his suggestion as offering dom as individuals. The campaign has produced great results something quite different. I think he offered a way of life for but like all moral campaigns it is one sided and has serious agnostics. Gaia is a theory of science and is therefore always costs when the wider context is forgotten." provisional and evolving, it is never dogmatic or certain and One of these costs is our alienation from the physical could even be wrong. Provisional it may be but being of the world. She went on to say, "We have carefully excluded every­ palpable Earth, it is something tangible to love and fear and thing non-human from our value system and reduced that think we understand. We can put our trust—even faith—in system to terms of individual self interest. We are mystified— Gaia but this is different from the cold certainty of purposeless as surely no other set of people would be—about how to atheism or an unwavering belief in God's purpose. recognize the claims of the larger whole that surrounds Science is not excluded from Mary Midgley's vision of our us—the material world of which we are a part. Our moral a alienation from the material world. We now know enough nd physical vocabulary, carefully tailored to the social about living organisms and the Earth System to see that we contract, leaves no language in which to recognize the cannot explain them by reductionist science alone. The deep­ environmental crisis." est error of modern biology is the entrenched belief that Strangely, a statesman led me to think similar thoughts. organisms interact only with other organisms and merely That noble and brave man, Vaclav Havel, stirred me to see that adapt to their material environment. This is as wrong as science could evolve from its self-imposed reductionist impris­ believing that the people of a village interact with their onment. His courage against adversity gave his words author­ neighbors but merely adapt to the material conditions of

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Seplember/October 2001 41 their cottages. In real life, both organisms and people change The second rule, the need to take care of the environ­ their environment as well as adapting to it. What matters are ment, brings to mind a sermon on the abominable transgres­ the consequences: if the change is for the better then those sion of terraforming—the technological conversion of who made it will prosper; if it is for the worse then the another planet into a habitat for humans. What is so bad changers risk extinction. Reductionist science grew from the about terraforming is its objective to make a second home for clockwork logic of Descartes. It can only partially explain us while we are destroying our own planet by the greedy mis­ application of science and technology. It is madness to think of converting with bull­ We have inherited a planet of exquisite beauty. dozers and agribusiness the desert planet Mars into some pale semblance of Earth It is the gift of four billion years of evolution. when we should be improving our way of We need to regain our ancient feeling for living with Earth. Earth as an organism and revere it again. The second rule also warns of the conse­ quences of unbridled humanism. Early in the history of civilization, we realized that overreaching self-worship turns self-esteem anything alive. Living things also use the circular logic of sys­ into narcissism. It has taken almost until now to recognize that tems, now more fashionably known as complexity theory, the exclusive love for our tribe or nation turns patriotism into where cause and effect are indistinguishable and where there xenophobic nationalism. We are just glimpsing the possibility is the miracle of emergence. that the worship of humankind can also become a bleak philos­ President Havel's thoughts led me to think about the ethic ophy, which excludes all other living things, our partners in that comes from Gaia theory; it would be one with two strong life upon Earth. rules. The first rule states that stability and resilience in ecosys­ We have inherited a planet of exquisite beauty. It is the gift tems and on Earth requires the presence of firm bounds or con­ of four billion years of evolution. We need to regain our straints. The second rule states that those who live well with ancient feeling for Earth as an organism and revere it again. their environment favor the selection of their progeny. Imagine Gaia has been the guardian of life for all of its existence; we sermons based on these rules. Consider first the guiding hand reject her care at our peril. We can use technology to buy us of constraint. I can see the nods of approval. Peoples own expe­ time while we reform but we remain accountable for the dam­ rience of the need for a firm hand in the evolution of their fam­ age we do. The longer we take the larger the bill. If you put ilies and in society concurs with the evolutionary experience trust in Gaia, it can be a commitment as strong and as joyful of Earth itself. as that of a good marriage—one where the partners put their trust in one another. The fact that they are mortal makes that James Lovelock is an independent scientist and inventor and is per­ trust even more precious. haps best known as the progenitor of the Gaia Theory. He is a Fellow Let us as scientists look more closely at the ethical and of the Royal Society and an honorary Fellow of Green College, philosophical aspects of Gaia. I have put before you the propo­ Oxford. His most recent book is Homage to Gaia: The Life of an sition that, in addition to being a theory in science, Gaia offers Independent Scientist, to be published in September by Oxford a worldview for agnostics. This would require an interactive University Press. Address: Coombe Mill, St. Giles on the Heath, trust, not blind faith, and a trust that accepts that, like us, Gaia Launceston, Cornwall PL 15 9RY, U.K. E-mail: [email protected]. has a finite life span and is provisional.

You can make a lasting impact on the future of skepticism...

when you provide for the Skeptical Inquirer in your will. CSICOP and the Skeptical Inquirer changed the terms of discussion in fields ranging from pseudoscience and the paranor­ mal to science and educational policy. You can take an enduring step to preserve their vitality when you provide for the Skeptical Inquirer in your will. Your bequest to CSICOP, Inc., will help to provide for the future of skepticism as it helps to keep the Skeptical Inquirer finan­ cially secure. Depending on your tax situation, a charitable bequest to CSICOP may have little impart on the net size of your estate—or may even result in a greater amount being available to your beneficiaries. We would be happy to work with you and your attorney in the development of a will or estate plan that meets your wishes. A variety of arrangements are possible, including: gifts of a fixed amount or a percentage of your estate; living trusts or gift annuities, which provide you with a lifetime income; or a contingent bequest that provides for the Skeptical Inquirer only if your primary beneficiaries do not survive you. For more information, contact Barry Karr, Executive Director of CSICOP, at (716) 636-1425. All inquiries are held in the strictest confidence.

42 Sepiember/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Science, Religion, and the Galileo Affair

Galileo's trouble with the Church has become a popular archetype for the historical relationship between science and religion. But this classic story of conflict between science and religion is far more complex than most people realize.

TIMOTHY MOY

ver the past few decades, historians of science have been re-examining the "Galileo Affair"—Galileo's Otrial by the Roman Catholic Church in 1633. While scholars have (naturally) been unable to come to a consensus on why Galileo was tried by the Inquisition, almost all historians agree that it was not primarily because Galileo believed in Copernican heliocentrism. The facts of the case are not in dispute. In 1616, Galileo went to Rome to defend his recent writings and public state­ ments promoting heliocentrism after some of his critics had charged that Galileo was promoting a poorly substantiated belief that was contrary to Scripture. By this point, many— perhaps most—Church officials had already concluded that

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Seplembef/October 2001 Copernicus's system was the most accurate and useful way of 1632. It is a wittily written treatise, crafted as a dialogue between predicting astronomical positions (which was particularly diree characters: Simplicio (die geocentric Aristotelian), Salviati important to the Church because of its use in calendar (the heliocentric Copernican), and Sagredo (an intelligent and reform), but the question of whether the system was an accu­ well-informed neutral observer to die debate). In the Dialogue, rate depiction of reality remained open. First of all, no one had Salviati systematically destroys all of Simplicio's arguments, and yet come up with a convincing proof that Earth really flew concludes with Galileo's new, killer proof diat Earth orbits the around the Sun at great speed, as Copernicus's proposal Sun. Sagredo ultimately concludes that the brilliant Salviati (a required. And second, there were some Biblical passages that transparent stand-in for Galileo himself) is correct, Aristotle is seemed to suggest that Earth was stationary at the center of the wrong, and everyone retires for wine and snacks. universe. This was an unusually touchy subject at the time. However, there was one problem: Galileo's new proof made no sense; it was a cockamamie argument When you read his writings, you get the about how the motion of the tides proves that Earth orbits the Sun, and it just doesn't distinct impression that Galileo believed that work. When push came to shove (and it expertise in astronomy and mathematics gave did), Galileo simply did not know how to prove that Earth truly moved. Galileo had him (and all scientists) a special authority to therefore crossed the line set out sixteen make theological pronouncements and years earlier—he had promoted an idea contrary to Scripture without providing inform Rome how to run the Church. convincing proof of its truthfulness. (In order to protect himself, Galileo had added since the Church was in the midst of crisis stemming from the a preface that claimed that his treatment of heliocentrism was Protestant Reformation and was particularly concerned about purely hypothetical, but even a casual reading of the Dialogue arguments over who had authority to interpret Scripture. makes clear that this was hogwash; the book was a manifesto During his 1616 visit, Galileo received the support of some for heliocentrism, plain and simple.) Galileo's critics back in powerful liberal theologians, particularly Cardinals Roberto Rome instantly seized on the weaknesses of his arguments by Bellarmine and Maffeo Barberini, who argued that, if charging that Galileo had committed serious offenses: Copernicus's system was someday proved true, then the disobeying a papal injunction and promoting teachings con­ Church would have to re-interpret those Biblical passages that trary to Scripture. (Important to note: Galileo was never seemed to contradict it. However, they also supported the charged with nor tried for heresy, as is commonly believed. compromise that Galileo eventually agreed to: Until such Heresy was a far more serious offense and carried a much definitive proof was forthcoming, Galileo should discuss helio- stifFer penalty, if you know what I mean.) centrism only hypothetically, and nor promote it as a true In 1633, Galileo was called back to Rome to answer these description of the heavens. charges. His trial was a see-saw battle that turned on all man­ ner of technical points in church law, theology, and mathe­ A Problem of Evidence matics, and nearly ended in the equivalent of a hung jury. In Flash forward to 1624. By this point, Galileo had become con­ the ensuing plea bargain, Galileo admitted that he had gone a vinced that he had precisely the proof he was looking for. Even bit too far in promoting heliocentrism as truth without suffi­ better, his old ally, Maffeo Barberini, had by then become Pope cient proof and promised not to do it again; all sides then pre­ Urban VIII. In 1624, Galileo went back to Rome and had six pared to conclude the face-saving compromise. Then, almost separate audiences with the new Pope during which he assured at the last moment (and for reasons that are still quite myste­ the pontiff that he had worked out a definitive proof of Earth's rious), the Inquisition overruled the plea bargain and handed motion. Urban, intrigued by the prospect of such a demon­ down a verdict and sentence that was unexpectedly harsh: stration, yet concerned about how the Church would handle Galileo was found guilty of a "vehement suspicion of heresy" the theological consequences, gave Galileo the green light to (which was not nearly as bad as heresy itself but still worse write about heliocentrism, but still with the understanding that than disobedience and teachings contrary to Scripture) and he would not describe it as truth (rather than simply a useful forced to abjure and recant his belief in heliocentrism. Galileo hypothesis) unless he could really prove it. signed a recantation in June of 1633. (I should also point out Convinced that he had die required proof in hand, and feel­ that Galileo was never imprisoned in a dungeon or tortured ing diat he had die Pope's personal blessing to make his case, during the inquest, as is also sometimes believed. By all Galileo published his Dialogue on the Two Chief World Systems in accounts, his surroundings were quite enviable.) After the trial, Galileo returned to his villa outside Florence, Timothy Moy is a professor of the history of science at the where he technically spent the last decade of his life under a very University of New Mexico. He can be reached at: History comfortable house arrest and under injunction not to write any­ Department, 1104 Mesa Vista Hall, University of New Mexico, thing further on physics. Just to show how strictly his sentence Albuquerque, NM 87131; e-mail at [email protected]. was carried out, during his remaining years Galileo often stayed

44 Septembet/Ociobet 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER at die palaces of nobles and patrons in Tuscany, and openly dis­ against Protestantism; in panicular, Galileo believed that science obeyed die gag rule by writing his Discourse on Two New Sciences, had to replace dieology as die Church's principal mode of in which he essentially invented kinematics and materials science understanding, and that accepting Copernicus was a good first (diough it's true that Galileo's criminal record meant that the step. Third, he felt diat he could have die greatest impact in book could not be published in Italy; it was published in the shaping new doctrine at precisely die moment when die Church Netherlands in 1638). On a purely technical level, the Discourse was feeling weak and on die defensive. And finally, he felt that was actually Galileo's greatest contribution to modern science. he, Galileo Galilei, had die audiority and brilliance to transform He died in 1642, die year of Isaac Newton's birth. Catholicism in this way. When you read his writings, you get the distinct impression diat Galileo believed that expertise in astron­ Galileo's Punishment omy and mathematics gave him (and all scientists) a special So much for die facts. But why did the Church come down so authority to make theological pronouncements and inform hard on Galileo? Some scholars Rome how to run die Church. argue that Galileo simply had ter­ Frankly, I find it no surprise that rible luck, since he happened to be the Inquisition dropped die ham­ pushing his arguments at the mer on him. worst possible political moment. Unfortunately, Galileo's trouble In the early seventeenth century, with the Church later became a the Catholic Church was desper­ popular archetype for die historical ately trying to fight off an insur­ relationship between science and rection widiin Christendom (the religion. Nothing could be further Protestant Reformation). Many from die truth. For most of the within the Church hierarchy were medieval and Renaissance periods, not particularly fond of liberaliz­ and even stretching into die eigh- ing Catholic doctrine while it was teendi century Enlightenment, the under assault, and Galileo may primary supporter of research and have ended up as a collateral casu­ teaching in die sciences was the alty of a much larger war. Roman Catholic Church. In fact, Other historians argue diat an one historian of science, John enormous amount of die fault was Heilbron, has recently published a Galileo's. He was, widiout a doubt, book entitled The Sun in the a voracious social and political Church diat documents how die climber, and his political maneu- Church, in die aftermath of die verings in die Italian Renaissance Galileo affair, continued to pro­ court system over his career had mote research into evidence for garnered him many powerful ene­ heliocentrism, even to die point of mies. With his (erroneous) proof of Portrait of Galileo by Justus Sustermans painted in 1636. turning entire cathedrals into giant Copernicanism, Galileo apparently pin-hole cameras to measure the hoped to climb die pyramid to the most prestigious court of all: apparent diameter of the solar disk at various times of die year. the Vatican itself (he wanted to become official madiemati- By a mathematical quirk, Copernicus's system would actually cian/astronomer for die Pope). He took a gamble on his proof, produce slighdy different variations in die Sun's apparent diam­ lost, and suffered die consequences. eter than the old Ptolemaic-Aristotelian system; the experiments Still other scholars suggest that Galileo's downfall resulted run by die Church in die 1650s and 1660s produced measure­ from a personal railing out he had widi die Pope. There is ments that clearly supported Copernicus. some documentation to support the conclusion that Urban So, even this classic story of conflict between science and VIII felt personally betrayed by Galileo's false proof, and was religion is far more complex than most people realize. For me, irritated to boot that Galileo had put the Pope's words from one of the greatest culprits in the tale is something that still one of their private conversations into the mouth of Simplicio plagues us: a confusion of boundaries between these two ways (the simpleton) at the end of the Dialogue. of understanding die world, and the false belief that expertise Personally, I suspect diat Galileo got into so much trouble for in one grants an authority to speak in die other. a variety of reasons. First, he diought heliocentrism was true and became an evangelist for die idea; sadly, diere is good reason to Further Reading believe that Copernican heliocentrism was already succeeding Mario Biagioli. Galileo. Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of within Church hierarchy and would have become an accepted Absolutism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1993). element of doctrine on its own if Galileo had not forced die Owen Gingerich. "The Galileo Affair," Scientific American 247, no. 2 (1982): 132-143. issue. Second, he felt diat the Church needed to reform its entire Giorgio de Santillana. The Crime of Galileo (Chicago: University of Chicago intellectual structure in order to modernize and protect itself Press. 1955). U

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 45 The God of Falling Bodies Galileo, Newton, Bentley, and Leibniz Chat on the Internet

Here's what might transpire if Galileo were a modern-day experimentalist engaged in an e-mail dialogue on science and religion with two famous scientific colleagues and a theologian.

VICTOR J. STENGER

n order to explore some of the thinking processes involved in the current dialogue between science and Ireligion, I have imagined the following fable. The char­ acters in my fable are modern-day versions of Galileo, Newton, and Leibniz. Also included is a lesser known his­ torical figure, theologian Richard Bentley, with whom Newton corresponded. Galileo is pictured as a modern-day experimental physicist, performing increasingly precise experiments with falling bodies at the Leaning Tower of Pisa. I imagine him rapidly communicating his results by e-mail to Newton in Cambridge, who is contemporaneously devel­ oping his laws of motion and gravity. Of course, Galileo preceded the other characters by two generations, so this

46 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER interchange is obviously not historical. Furthermore, although covers something new. He drops a crumpled-up piece of paper, both men were brilliant theorists and experimentalists, I am along with a rock. Releasing them at the same time from the going to impose a modern division of labor and have Galileo same height, the paper hits the ground after the rock. A sheet be strictly an experimentalist and Newton a theorist. Galileo of paper, and then a feadier, take even longer. will have the best modern equipment at his disposal, and I will When Bentley sees this result he excitedly types: imagine each as if he thought like a scientist of today, not one "See, Isaac, your theory is incomplete. God is acting to of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. hold up the paper and the feather. This explains how birds and Bentley is pictured discussing Galileos experimental results angels fly! God wills it." and their theological implications with Newton and Galileo Galileo, who has been quiet so far except for supplying the over the Internet. I show Newton doing his best to explain the data, butts in: data by means of natural laws and, like typical modern theo­ "I've never seen any angels, even with my telescope. But birds retical physicists (that is, diose who do not attempt to write must fly by taking advantage of the upward force of the air, as popular books), not fretting too much about theology. While de Vinci has suggested." the historical Newton branched off into theology and alchemy, Newton does not take long to respond: "In the original this was later in life. In my scenario he is still a typical (for experiments, Galileo was dropping heavy objects—cannon- today) young researcher, impatient with philosophizing and balls. So I neglected the effect of air resistance, which I guessed eager to get on with his work with minimum distraction. would be small in that case. In general, however, the air is Bentley seeks the God of the Gaps, looking for places where expected to exert an upward force that subtracts from the Newton's theories seem to leave room for the Creator to downward force of gravity, and this will be important for impose his will. He exhibits the general misunderstanding and lighter objects. This resistive force resulting distrust of scientific method diat typifies the modern depends on the velocity at which intellectual, who is intelligent but lacks scientific training and, the body falls. I have modeled it as worse, has little comprehension of scientific method. Galileo proportional to the square of the expresses religious skepticism more openly than he could in his day, but would have no trouble getting away with today. Finally, Leibniz joins the discussion near the end. He repre­ sents the new crop of science-theists who, unlike Bentley, know their science and mathematics but still think they see God's hand in physics and cosmology. j In his initial, crude experiments, Galileo mea­ sures the times, t, that it takes cannonballs of var­ ious weights to drop from balconies in the tower at different heights h. He makes a graph of h vs. / and shows that the data fit a parabolic curve, h = ki1 , with k a constant equal to 4.9 when h is measured in meters and I in seconds. When Newton sees these results he e-mails Bentley and Galileo: ^^ "Dear Friends: This is exacdy what is predicted by my laws of motion and gravity. My second law of motion is F = ma, where F is the force on a body, m is its mass, and a is its acceleration. Putting it together with my law of gravity gives a = g, where g = 9.8 meters per second squared is the accelera­ tion due to gravity, independent of the mass m. Using the methods of calculus, which I invented despite the claims of that upstart Leibniz, I then get h= kt: where k = g/2 = 4.9." Bentley finds Newton's explanation difficult to under­ stand: "Isaac, as usual I do not have a clue what you are talking about :). It all seems rather magical to me. Why should this 'calculus' of yours, with all those strange symbols, have anything to do with reality?" Newton responds, "Richard, I don't know why, but it seems to. I frame no hypotheses. I just calcu­ late and compare my calculations with the data." In the meantime, Galileo continues his experi­ ments with objects other than cannonballs and dis­

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 47 velocity and determined an air resistance coefficient from the ments. The Fin F = ma represents the sum of the forces on data, which varies from object to object. Using some more cal­ a body. The term I added for air resistance in retrospect culus, I have obtained a fairly reasonable fit to Galileo's data, should have been included all along. Similarly, the a in F = as you can see by the attached graphs." ma must include the acceleration of Earth. Putting in the Bentley is not too impressed: "That looks like a pretty ad correct acceleration we again get what Galileo measures. hoc procedure to me. And so complicated! Only two people in What happens in the present case is that, because it is farther the world can make such a calculation, Newton and Leibniz. from the center of Earth, the body at its point of release has Are we to rely on the authority of just the two of you? I prefer a greater eastward component of velocity than a point on the to rely on die authority of scriptures and the Church fathers. ground and so it drifts to the east relative to that point. And They provide a much simpler explanation that even the hum­ here is a falsifiable prediction! If Galileo does experiments blest peasant can understand, namely that God directs die with cannon balls shot straight up in the air, they will drift motion of all tilings, from falling leafs to flying birds." to the west." Galileo is a bit annoyed: "I think I can manage this calcu­ Back in Italy, Galileo is presented with a huge grant from lus too. After all, I am a professor of mathematics! But, more Cosimo de Medici, from which he purchases lasers and a important, where in the God theory can you obtain die highly accurate atomic clock. Repeating his experiments, he detailed, quantitative results Isaac has here? He can make all finds that, even after corrections for air resistance and Earth's kind of predictions about falling bodies and projectiles. Even rotation, the g in Newton's equations is not a constant but the Biblical prophets could not do that." depends on the height of the tower balcony from which "They were men of peace, not interested in bombs and can- objects are dropped. nonballs," Bentley reverently but irrelevantly replies. Once again, Bentley goads Newton: "This surely proves that Things only get worse when Galileo reports another strange your theory is, at best, an approximation and so cannot be anomaly. His falling bodies do not hit the ground at a point related in any important way to 'ultimate reality.' Each time our directly below the release point, as marked precisely by a friend Galileo makes a better experiment, you have to modify plumb bob, but slightly off to the east. He is careful to show your equations to make them agree with his data. What are you that this is not an effect of winds. going to do now about this non-constant value of g?" "Aha," Bentley cries, when the data appear on the Web. "Well, if you could follow the maths you would see that "Here is more evidence for God's action. The Creator is blow­ this, too, is in my equations. When I conceived the law of ing the objects off to the east." gravity I realized it applies to objects far from Earth, such as "Why would he do that?" Galileo questions. the Moon, as well as apples and leaves falling from trees. The "This is just one of those mysteries we were not meant to Moon, in a sense, is falling toward Earth like an apple; but, understand," Bentley answers. because of its speed in orbit, it falls around Earth without Newton scratches his head but soon realizes what is hap­ ever hitting it. From estimates of the Moon's distance and the pening. "My previous calculations assumed that Earth is not time it takes to go around Earth, one month, I was able to accelerating. In fact, the rotation about its axis constitutes an infer that the force of gravity, and thus the acceleration of a acceleration. When I properly add this term to my equations, falling body, will decrease as the square of its distance to the I get exactly what Galileo observes." center of Earth. In fact, my law of gravity reads F" GmMlf "More ad hoc fixes and fudge factors," Bentley retorts as the force between two bodies of masses m and M whose scathingly. "And look at those equations now. How compli­ centers of gravity are separated by a distance r, where G is a cated can they get? What purpose are you serving with all these constant determined from the data. esoteric symbols? It looks to me like you are starting a new "The resulting acceleration on a body of mass m toward cult, and you know what the Church diinks of cults!" Earth is then g = GM/r' where M is the mass of Earth and r is "Christianity was once a cult," Galileo sourly answers. the distance to die center. The variation with r is normally Newton tries to cool things off. "Bentley, it is too bad you unmeasurable near Earth's surface, since die difference between have not been able to follow my mathematics. (Damn these r and the radius of Earth R is small. So we are justified in lousy schools.) If you could do the maths, you would see that neglecting it for most practical purposes. However, Galileo was my equations already contained the solutions to all the prob­ able to detect the variation with his lasers and atomic clock." lems raised by Galileo's increasingly more precise measure- "If I can't read your equations, neither can the great major­ ity of the human race," Bentley responds. "How are you ever Victor J. Stenger is emeritus professor of physics and astronomy at going to convince diem?" the University of Hawaii and Visiting Fellow in Philosophy at the Newton sighs. "Okay, let me try to explain the significance University of Colorado. His latest hook is Timeless Reality: of what I have done in words, which are unfortunately more Symmetry, Simplicity, and Multiple Universes (Prometheus imprecise than the maths. I have provided techniques that Books, 2000). His previous books include Not By Design, enable a sufficiently trained person to make quantitative Physics and Psychics, and The Unconscious Quantum. He can calculations of precise measurements that agree with all die be reached at [email protected]. His home page is at data. These equations also enable that person to make predic­ www. spot. Colorado, edu/- vstenger/. tions about the motions of bodies that can be later tested by

48 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER

• experiments. I hope Galileo and others will carry out these Newton has not said much for a while and now speaks up: tests of my theories. My good friend Edmund Halley has just "Actually, now that you have distracted me from my research informed me that my equations predict that the recent comet and dragged me into a theological discussion, I must admit will return again in seventy-five years. Unfortunately we will that my theory does not account for everything. Remember I not be here to see if this prediction comes true. Even if some said that my law of gravity does not give the value of G. I have of these predictions fail, this could simply mean that I have to get that from the data. Also, recall that the Moon is like a once again made too many simplifying assumptions in my falling object. My equations will tell you that the Moon's orbit calculation, as I did when originally neglecting air friction or around Earth is elliptical, but they do not give the orientation Earth's rotation. The comet prediction should be an accurate of the axes of the ellipse." one, however, since neither Halley nor I can think of any fac­ "Ah, better yet!" Bentley exclaims. "We arc back exactly to the tors that may mess it up. God of the Bible. He creates the universe with its matter and "Bentley, you have continually derided the fact that I did light. He commands this matter and light to obey certain natural not anticipate some of Galileos measurements before they laws, which you scientists are now beginning to discover. But the were made. But rather than taking this as a point against the Creator sees to it that the laws do not preordain all that happens. validity of my theories, you should regard it as a point for!" Humans then have the free will to act, from which we get evil Bentley blinks. "Come again?" despite God's innate goodness. All this freedom, however, can "The fact that even [, the inventor of the dieories, did not lead to things getting out of hand. So, God acts whenever neces­ realize all their implications indicates, rather strongly I think, that sary to keep the universe and mankind moving on track toward they indeed have something to do with reality. In fact, you might the ultimate realization of his divine plan." say diat I was not the inventor of the dieories but rather their dis­ Just then an e-mail comes in from Leibniz in Germany: coverer. They were out mere in nature waiting for someone bril­ "I just happened to get wind of this discussion while surf­ liant like me to come along to find them. Let me contrast my ing the Web. I have looked at Newton's equations on his Web theories with yours, dear Bentley, that God has done it all. You page and can confirm that they fit Galileo's data. In fact, I did claim your theory is simpler, and so more preferable, more likely invent calculus independently and used my own methods to be correct than my complicated calculus equations. which I think are superior, especially in terms of notation." "But is it simpler? I have been able to classify a wide range Newton: "Balderdash!" of phenomena, on Earth and in the heavens, with a few "In any case," Leibniz continues, "I have to go along with assumptions that are very simple in their own right. The com­ Bentley that God's purpose is evident in all that is being plications you worry about are only in the manipulations, uncovered here. Let's take Newton's constant G in his theory of gravity. He admits that his theory does not give its value, which admittedly require some inborn talent comparable to that it must be determined by experiment. I am sure that playing a musical instrument well." Bentley will agree that it must be set by God." Galileo then jumps in with a thought: "Perhaps, someday, Bentley responds, "Indubitably." humans will possess machines that will do these calculations "But I have more," Leibniz types. "I think I can prove that for them. Then all they will have to do is put in the initial posi­ God has set this value of G very precisely for the divine pur­ tions and velocities, and predict the future motion of all bod­ pose of making human life possible. Newton's equations, ies. If Lucretius is correct—that everything is made up of which I truly do admire despite their lamentable notation, atoms—then everything will be predictable." have allowed me to calculate, with my own better methods, Suddenly, Bentley breaks out into a broad grin and excit­ the effect that different values of G would have on the orbit of edly types: "Even if you are correct, and everything that hap­ Earth. Earth might have been farther from the Sun and too pens in the universe can ultimately be predicted by some huge cold for life, or closer to the Sun and too hot." machine, the hand of the Creator was still involved. You have Newton replies, "Yes, yes. This is just the r'/"P = a constant law just written down some esoteric equations, but you have not discovered observationally by Kepler which I have already proven told me where those equations come from. I think it is all from my theory. Note that if G were different we could have die pretty obvious. They came from God!" same orbital radius ras now with just a different orbital period T." "Why did they have to come from anything?" Galileo "I agree," says Leibniz. "But widi all die values of rand Gto interjects. chose from, how unlikely it is that a random selection would "Everything comes from something." have given just the right values we need for our existence? "And God, where did he come from?" Suppose we had a world in which a year was not 365 days. I "Well, God is the exception. As Aristotle said, the first shudder to think of what this would do to the seasons. I would cause uncaused." wager that human life would again be impossible. As far as I can "Why can't that exception be the universe itself?" see, only the exact value of G, and the specific values of rand T Bentley does not answer, since he has become troubled by we have, would allow for human life. God has obviously chosen another thought: "I don't think I like this idea after all. What these numbers carefully and created this as the best of all possi­ happens to free will?" ble worids." "I will leave it to you theologians to figure that one out," "Or, the worst," Galileo replies. "It could all be just one, Galileo responds. big accident." D

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 49 The Relationship Between Paranormal Beliefs and Religious Beliefs

A random sample survey fails to find substantial correspondence between paranormal belief and religious belief. In addition to some methodological differences between this study and one reported earlier by Erich Goode that could account for some of their difference in results, there may be good conceptual reasons to expect that these two belief domains are not closely related.

GLENN G. SPARKS

ast research indicates that the easy assumption that religious belief and paranormal belief are closely asso­ Pciated may be unwarranted. For example, Williams, Taylor, and Hintze (1989) found little relationship between traditional religious beliefs and belief in the paranormal. More recently, Tobacyk and Wilkinson (1990) found that religious belief was actually inversely related with magical thinking. In the January/February 2000 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER, Erich Goode (2000) suggested that his new exploratory study on the relationship between religious tra­ ditionalism and paranormal beliefs challenged the tradi­ tional finding that beliefs in these two domains were uncor­ rected or even inversely correlated. He presented data from

50 September/Oclobet 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER a convenience sample of 484 students that revealed some sta­ the points that I made in my letter, my intent in this article is tistically significant relationships between individual paranor­ not to revisit that exchange. Instead, 1 want to try in some mal belief items and other items taken as indicators for tradi­ small measure to take up the challenge that Goode outlines in tional religious beliefs. Although Goode did not report the the last sentences of his response letter in that issue. He wrote, precise extent of the statistical overlap between the religious "Still, I look forward to the findings of other researchers who and paranormal beliefs, his data suggested that some signifi­ wish to investigate same relationship. Perhaps Attanasio, cant overlap was certainly present. Aberson, Stewart, Sparks, or Argall [the letter writers] are will­ In the May/June 2000 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER, several read­ ing to step forward and take up the challenge." ers, myself included, reacted to Goode's study by pointing out As regular readers of SKEPTICAL INQUIRER might recall, I a number of things that would seem to dictate caution in eval­ have been conducting a program of research that investigates uating his conclusion that these two belief domains overlap the relationship between exposure to media messages and belief more than most researchers suspect. While I stand by each of in the paranormal (see Sparks in the July/August 1998

Agree Undecided Disagree Daily horoscopes that appear in the newspapers DO NOT provide accurate information about a person's life. 81.5% 9.5% 9.0%** Some people are able to levitate or lift objects just by thinking. 18.5% 14.0% 67.5% 1 do NOT believe that there is any such thing as haunted houses. 37.5% 21.0% 41.5%** 1 believe that sometimes 1 can tell what another person is thinking through ESP or extrasensory perception. 32.5% 7.0% 60.0% No one can really tell about other people's lives just from looking at the lines on the palms of their hands. 68.5% 14.5% 16.5%** Some people have the power of astral-projection, that is, they can willingly leave their body for short periods of time to travel to another part of the universe and then return. 7.5% 16.0% 76.0% 1 do NOT believe that anyone really has psychic powers. 41.0% 15.0% 44.0%** 1 believe that some people have a special gift to heal other people simply by touching them. 22.5% 16% 61.5% Some people claim that they have had dreams about future events that actually come true, but 1 believe that these cases are simply coincidence. 43.0% 15.0% 42.0%** 1 believe that some people have actually seen flying saucers that come from outer space. 34.0% 23.0% 42.5% No one can bend metal just by thinking about it. 72.5% 13.0% 14.0%** Astrology, or the use of horoscopes, has been proven to be valid for finding out the best ways in which people should act in their daily lives. 7.0% 18.5% 73.5% 1 don't think ESP or extrasensory perception is possible. 39.0% 19.5% 41.0%** 1 believe that some people have actually seen ghosts. 45.5% 16.5% 37.0% 1 DO NOT believe that astral-projection is possible. 64.0% 17.5% 17.0%** Some people can really tell the future about another person's life just by reading the palm of their hand. 8.0% 15.0% 75.5% 1 DO NOT believe that there has ever been a case where another human being has been captured by a space alien. 58.0% 22.5% 18.5%** Some people have a special gift that enables them to see things in the future that have not yet happened. 44.0% 16.0% 39.0% Anyone who claims that he/she can heal other people just by touching them is either lying or badly mistaken. 57.5% 16.5% 25.0%** There are some people who have a special ability to help the police solve crimes because they can psychically receive information just by touching objects that belong to the crime victims. 35.5% 19.0% 45.0%

••Disagreement with these items indicates belief in the paranormal. The 95% confidence interval for a sample of 200 respondents is ± 6.9%.

Table 1. Percentages of respondents indicating agreement disagreement, or uncertainty about paranormal beliefs.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 51 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER). AS part of that research program, I con­ TV viewing habits as well as the extent to which they believed ducted a random sample survey of 200 respondents in a in ten different paranormal phenomena (astrology, psychokine­ Midwestern city (Sparks and Miller 2001). In that survey, taken sis, ghosts, ESP, palmistry, astral-projection, healing, general over the telephone, we asked adult respondents to indicate dieir psychic power, psychic prophecy, and UFOs/space aliens).

Disagree Agree

Horoscopes DO NOT contain accurate information. Low Religious Belief 9% 91% High Religious Belief 10% 90% Some people can levitate. Low Religious Belief 84% 16% High Religious Belief 73% 27% I do NOT believe in haunted houses. Low Religious Belief 47% 53% High Religious Belief 53% 47% I believe that sometimes I have ESP. Low Religious Belief 62% 38% High Religious Belief 62% 38% No one can read another's life from their palms. Low Religious Belief 20% 80% High Religious Belief 19% 81% Some people have the power of astral-projection. Low Religious Belief 92% 8% High Religious Belief 90% 10% I do NOT believe that anyone really has psychic powers. Low Religious Belief 47% 53% High Religious Belief 52% 48% I believe that some people have a special gift to heal. Low Religious Belief 88% 12% (p<-001) High Religious Belief 59% 41% People having prophetic dreams is just coincidence. Low Religious Belief 31% 69% (p < .004) High Religious Belief 57% 43% I believe that some people have actually seen flying saucers. Low Religious Belief 67% 33% High Religious Belief 58% 42% No one can bend metal just by thinking about it. Low Religious Belief 6% 94% (p<03) High Religious Belief 20% 80% Astrology is valid for finding out best ways to act daily. Low Religious Belief 93% 7% High Religious Belief 95% 5% I don't think ESP or extrasensory perception is possible. Low Religious Belief 48% 52% High Religious Belief 49% 51% I believe that some people have actually seen ghosts. Low Religious Belief 50% 50% High Religious Belief 50% 50% I DO NOT believe that astral-projection is possible. Low Religious Belief 21% 79% High Religious Belief 25% 75% Some people can tell the future by reading palms. Low Religious Belief 96% 4% High Religious Belief 89% 11% I DO NOT believe humans have been captured by aliens. Low Religious Belief 29% 71% High Religious Belief 24% 76% Some people can see the future. Low Religious Belief 60% 40% (p<-10) High Religious Belief 44% 56% People who claim to heal are lying or mistaken. Low Religious Belief 20% 80% (fx.03) High Religious Belief 39% 61% Some people can solve crimes with psychic ability. Low Religious Belief 60% 40% High Religious Belief 57% 43%

Significance tests refer to the chi-square test which tests for the probability (2-sided) that differences in the cell distributions of the table deviate from what would be expected by chance alone. The "undecided" category was eliminated due to the fact that frequent low cell counts in this category violated the assumptions of the chi-square computation. The complete wording for the belief items appears in Table 1. Wording is summarized for this table.

**************

Table 2. Percentages of respondents indicating agreement and disagreement with paranormal beliefs as a function of religious belief intensity.

52 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Because of my interest in the relationship between paranormal who answered on the bottom half of the scale (1-5) were beliefs and traditional religious beliefs, the survey also included compared to those who answered at the top end of the scale a few items pertaining to religious belief. Until now, I have not (8-10). This division is not perfectly symmetrical with published any of the data from the questions about religious beliefs, but I thought that the challenge offered by Goode provided an excellent opportunity. The overall pattern of these findings suggests The Survey that the religious and non-religious respondents In 1997, Will Miller and I directed a class of believe and disbelieve in the paranormal in advanced undergraduate students, who con­ ducted 200 telephone interviews by selecting roughly the same proportions. phone numbers randomly from the pages of the phone directory in a medium-sized city in the Midwest. The final sample consisted of 102 females and 92 males (with six respondents of undeter­ respect to the rating scale since the sample was skewed in the mined sex). Respondents had to be at least eighteen years old in direction of low religious intensity. More people indicated order to participate in the interview. The median age of the sam­ intense religious belief than did not. Nevertheless, for the ple was thirty-four. In addition to questions about exposure to purposes of the tables, this scheme permitted a comparison different media, respondents indicated whedier they agreed, dis­ between very intense religious believers (n = 99) and those agreed, or were uncertain about twenty different paranormal who were considerably less intense (n = 58). belief M.IKIIKin-. These uciiii, .iii.iIJ; vviiii die percentages of As table 2 shows, for sixteen of the twenty paranormal respondents who expressed agreement, disagreement, or uncer­ belief items, there was no significant difference (p < .05) tainty about the beliefs are displayed in table 1. between those who indicated intense religious beliefs and In addition to the other items on the survey, we asked those who indicated low intensity religious beliefs. The only respondents about their religious beliefs and ptactice with two items endorsed significantly more by intensely religious people specific questions. First, we asked them to indicate the inten­ were items pertaining to healing, prophetic dreaming, and sity of their religious beliefs on a scale from one (not at all reli­ bending metal just by thinking. It seems perfectly plausible gious) to ten (extremely religious). Second, to get a more that intensely religious people would be more likely to believe behavioral indication of religious commitment, we asked in healing and prophetic dreaming because numerous exam­ respondents to indicate if they typically attended a religious ples of both phenomena are recorded in the Bible. As for service on a weekly basis. Responses were coded simply "yes" bending metal by thinking, even though religious respondents or "no." In regression equations that we reported in the origi­ indicated more belief than the less religious respondents, they nal paper (see Sparks and Miller 2001), viewing of paranormal still indicated disbelief in the phenomenon by an 80 percent TV programs was significantly related to paranormal beliefs to 20 percent margin. Overall, the results of the contingency even after controlling for age, sex, income, education, atten­ table analyses are sttiking only insofar as intensely religious dance at a weekly religious service, and intensity of religious respondents appear to believe and disbelieve in the paranormal belief. These last two variables that dealt with religious belief in roughly the same proportions as respondents who indicated were not significant predictors of belief in the paranormal. low levels of religious intensity. It is important to note that the main focus of our survey was I also constructed similar tables according to whether respon­ not to measure religious beliefs among the respondents. The dents indicated that they typically attended a weekly religious questions we asked were very general ones. Nevertheless, it service ("no" = 106; "yes" = 91). Table 3 displays the results of seems to be a reasonable assumption that respondents who these analyses. The only significant differences between those reported that they were intensely religious or attended a reli­ who attended a weekly religious service and those who did not gious service at least once per week would also be more likely to were on the item about belief in ghosts and the item about the endorse traditional religious belief items. Consequendy, while it validity of astrology. On both items, those who attended a is readily apparent that the data gathered here are not the most weekly religious service were less inclined to believe in the para­ desirable kind of data to bring to bear on the question, the data normal than those who did not attend such a service. The over­ certainly seem pertinent for making some small contribution. all pattern of these findings suggests, once again, that the reli­ To examine the pattern of the relationships between the gious and non-religious respondents believe and disbelieve in two religious belief items and the paranormal belief items for the paranormal in roughly the same proportions. this report, I constructed a series of contingency tables for each paranormal belief item. Table 2 reports the results of the Glenn G Sparks is a professor in the Department of analysis for the measure of religious intensity. To obtain a Communication at Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906. comparison between those respondents who varied in their He conducts research on media effects and has published several response to the "intensity of religious belief" question, those studies on the impact of media messages on paranormal beliefs.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 53 Discussion are not specifically endorsed or treated in any detail in the It might be argued that the reason for the strong similarities writings associated widi die different "revealed truths" revered between die subgroups in the analyses presented in tables 2 by the adherents of different religious traditions. As a conse­ and 3 has to do with the very general nature of the indicators quence, some religious believers may view such paranormal of religious belief. In Goode's article, paranormal beliefs were phenomena to be outside of the conceptual framework of dieir related to very specific religious belief items. As Goode was belief system and, dius, be just as inclined to reject them as any careful to point out, he was interested in a particular type of skeptic who embraces an atheistic or agnostic stance. Therefore, religious believers of diis ilk may find common ground with skeptics in Many traditional religions call upon the would-be rejecting many paranormal claims, despite the fact that their rejection is based on a dif­ believer to exercise "faith" in believing ferent kind of warrant. in things that are utterly beyond scientific scrutiny. Second, many traditional religions call upon the would-be believer to exercise For example, the central belief of Christians that "faith" in believing in tilings that are utterly Jesus Christ died for one's sins is essentially beyond scientific scrutiny. For example, the central belief of Christians diat Jesus Christ unfalsifiable as a scientific proposition. died for one's sins is essentially unfalsifiable as a scientific proposition (assuming that it belief associated with religious fundamentalism (but see my is agreed that someone named Jesus Christ lived and died). letter in the May/June 2000 issue on this point). The data pre­ This quality of religious belief—subscribing to propositions sented here are more relevant to the hypothesis that religious that are ultimately untestable by recourse to scientific belief in general is strongly associated with belief in the para­ method—is something that appears to be celebrated and even normal. Certainly, this general version of the hypothesis would treasured within the context of different religious belief sys­ appear to be unsupported by the findings of die survey. In tems. That is, the very explicit teaching of many religions is future studies, I plan to investigate the relationship between that one is called to demonstrate faith in these sorts of propo­ more specific religious beliefs and belief in the paranormal. sitions even though they are formulated in ways that render There are several reasons why one might not expect there to them untestable using the scientific method. In contrast to be close convergence between religious beliefs and paranormal these sorts of untestable religious propositions, many of the beliefs. First, many traditional paranormal beliefs (e.g., ESP, traditional paranormal beliefs have rather clear empirical refer­ alien abductions, astral-projection, palm-reading, astrology) ents. Claims of ESP, astrology, spoon-bending, water-divining, remote-viewing, etc., are all amenable to empirical test. They are falsifiable claims. Indeed, many scientists have conducted well-designed tests of these and other claims and have failed to find any supporting evidence. It may be that some religious believ­ ers who are accustomed to hold­ ing beliefs by "faith" are quite comfortable rejecting many of the sensational paranormal claims that appear to crumble so easily by recourse to data. This analysis would once again lead to the expecta­ tion that religious belief should not be a par­ ticularly powerful predictor of belief in many paranormal claims. Before concluding my initial response to Goode's challenge, I call attention to the General Social Survey from the National Opinion Research Center that is maintained online for researchers to explore and use for various *"~ purposes. Upon exploring this data set, I used the archive of over 35,000 respondents

54 Seplember/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER between 1972 and 1996.1 According to die results of one analy­ with someone who had died (r = -.03), or remote viewing (r - sis that I conducted with this data, belief in the Bible as the .00). The tendency to report a paranormal experience is not the actual word of God was completely uncorrelated widi die ten­ same as expressing belief in the paranormal, but those who dency to report experiences with ESP (r= .01), being in touch report experiences would almost certainly report strong belief in

Disagree Agree

Horoscopes DO NOT contain accurate information. Don't Attend 9% 91% Attend 11% 89% Some people can levitate. Don't Attend 78% 22% Attend 78% 22% 1 do NOT believe in haunted houses. Don't Attend 56% 44% Attend 48% 52% 1 believe that sometimes 1 have ESP. Don't Attend 65% 35% Attend 65% 35% No one can read another's life from their palms. Don't Attend 19% 81% Attend 20% 80% Some people have the power of astral-projection. Don't Attend 92% 8% Attend 91% 9% 1 do NOT believe that anyone really has psychic powers. Don't Attend 53% 47% Attend 51% 49% 1 believe that some people have a special gift to heal. Don't Attend 77% 23% Attend 67% 33% People having prophetic dreams is just coincidence. Don't Attend 48% 52% Attend 51% 49% 1 believe that some people have actually seen flying saucers. Don't Attend 52% 48% Attend 62% 38% No one can bend metal just by thinking about it. Don't Attend 16% 84% Attend 15% 85% Astrology is valid for finding out best ways to act daily. Don't Attend 88% 12% (p<-05) Attend 96% 4% 1 don't think ESP or extrasensory perception is possible. Don't Attend 52% 48% Attend 49% 51% 1 believe that some people have actually seen ghosts. Don't Attend 39% 61% (P<.04) Attend 54% 46% 1 DO NOT believe that astral-projection is possible. Don't Attend 21% 79% Attend 22% 78% Some people can tell the future by reading palms. Don't Attend 92% 8% Attend 90% 10% 1 DO NOT believe humans have been captured by aliens. Don't Attend 28% 72% Attend 19% 82% Some people can see the future. Don't Attend 50% 50% Attend 44% 56% People who claim to heal are lying or mistaken. Don't Attend 29% 71% Attend 32% 68% Some people can solve crimes with psychic ability. Don't Attend 50% 50% Attend 63% 37%

Significance tests refer to the chi-square test which tests for the probability (2-si ded) that differences in the cell distributions of the table deviate from what would be expected by chance alone. The "undecided' category was eliminated due to the fact that fre- quent low cell counts in this category violated the assumptions of the chi-square computation. The complete wording for the belief items appears in Table 1. Wording is summarized for this table.

**************

Table 3. Percentages of respondents indicating agreement and disagreement with paranormal beliefs as a function of weekly attendance at a religious service.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 55 the existence of that which they had supposedly encountered References directly. Thus, I regard these results as ones that cause additional Goode. E. 2000. Two paranormalisms or two and halt?: An empirical explo­ problems for the thesis that religious belief and belief in the ration. SKEPTICAL INQUIRER 24(1): 29-35. Johnston. J., H.P. dc Groot, and N.P. Spanos. 1995. The structure of para­ paranormal are associated to any close degree. normal belief: A factor-analytic investigation. Imagination, Cognition & In the final analysis, I suspect that researchers will discover Personality 14(2): 165-174. that religious beliefs and paranormal beliefs represent concep­ Sparks, G.G. 1998. Paranormal depictions in the media: How do they affect what people believe? SKEPTICAL INQUIRER 22(4): 35-39. tual domains that arc considerably more complicated than our Sparks, G.G., and W Miller. 2001. Investigating the relationship between current understanding acknowledges. Consistent with this idea, exposure to television programs that depict paranormal phenomena and recent results from the work of Johnston, deGroot, and Spanos beliefs in the paranormal. Communication Monographs 68(1): 98-113. Tobacyk, J.J., and L.V. Wilkinson. 1990. Magical thinking and paranormal (1995) suggest that the structure of paranormal belief is multi­ beliefs, journal of Social Behavior & Personality 5(4): 255-264. dimensional and that many of the dimensions do not include Williams, R.N., C.B. Taylor, and W.J. Hintze. 1989. The influence of reli­ beliefs associated with religion. 1 am grateful for Goode's chal­ gious orientation on belief in science, religion, and the paranormal. Journal of Psychology & Theology 17(4): 352-259. lenge to other researchers to examine the relationship between these two domains more rigorously than we have done in the Note past. The data I have presented here constitute only a very mod­ 1. 1 am indebted to Chcri Sparks for suggesting this data set and running est beginning toward meeting the challenge. I hope more analyses relevant to this paper. The data analysis was carried out with the Survey Documentation and Analysis package (SDA) from the University of California, research and analysis on this topic will be forthcoming, from my Berkeley. For funhcr information, sec the following Web site: http://csa. own studies as well as those of other researchers. berkelev.edu:7502/. D

A Comment on 'The Relationship Between Paranormal Beliefs and Religious Beliefs' Response to Glenn Sparks

We invited Erich Goode to submit a brief com­ My speculation is that the key to the multifac- ment in response to Glenn Sparks's article. Here it eted relationship between paranormalism and is.—EDITOR religious belief is that two separate dimensions are contending with or contradicting one I would like to thank Glenn Sparks for his inter­ another. The first is traditionalism, a dimension esting contribution to the ongoing dialogue on on which religionists rank high and paranormal- the relationship between paranormalism and ists rank low. (Public opinion polls consistently religious beliefs. I feel that the overlap between demonstrate that paranormalists rank high in these two realms (or the lack thereof) should "liberalism" and religionists rank high in "con­ receive a great deal more attention than it has, servatism.") Herein lies the explanation for any and Sparks has taken a step to remedy that defi­ negative relationship between our variables ciency. His analysis is sound and valid, and, in that might prevail. And the second is belief in general, I agree with his conclusions. But Sparks's non-material causality, a dimension on which test of the relationship is very nearly completely both rank high. One or the other dimension irrelevant to my hypothesis. As he himself indi­ could be relevant, depending on the context. cates, he did not test the proposition I explored, Hence, the complex and seemingly contradictory but a very different one. I focused specifically on relationship. In my humble opinion, my specula­ religious beliefs that have a paranormal compo­ tion is worth further exploration. nent—creationism, angels, and the devil as phys­ Detailed statistical tests were included in the ically real, heaven and hell as actual, material original manuscript of my paper, but were omit­ places, etc. I did not examine overall religiosity or ted because of space limitations. attendance at religious services. And as any social researcher knows, two variables that correlate Erich Goode with one another do not necessarily correlate Department of Criminology and Criminal consistently with a third variable. Justice I agree with Sparks that both paranormalism College of Behavioral and Social Sciences and religious belief are "multidimensional" phe­ University of Maryland nomena, a point I stressed in my original article. College Park, MD 20742-8235

56 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Science and Religion in an Impersonal Universe

Can you apply a skeptical empiricism to religious beliefi? The author answers yes, and religion comes up short. In place of theism he offers what Einstein called a cosmic religious feeling.

MATT YOUNG

If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. —Albert Einstein

used to have a colleague I shall call Robin. He is a bright guy and a good scientist, and I think highly of him. He Iis also a member of a small Baptist sect and a biblical lit- eralist. Once, Robin owed me a favor, so I said, in essence, "Sit down. I would like to know why you hold your religious belief without evidence or, if you have evidence, what that evidence is." We talked for the better part of an hour. Robin told anec­ dotes, talked about reports of "miracles" from all over the

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 57 world, and spoke of his inner conviction, his inner feelings. I must not be casual, however; observation must be supple­ asked why he thought the religion of his parents was right and mented with reason and care, or else you fall into related traps all others were (therefore) wrong. 1 asked if he would be a of believing what is agreeable to you and of relying on selec­ Koranic literalist if he had been born in Islamabad instead of tively chosen anecdotes or vague and unprovable hypotheses as Cleveland. He called this my "accident of birth" argument, but supporting evidence. had no real answer to it. The hypotheses of religion must be treated the same way as Early on, I asked whether his belief was allegorical, that is, any other hypotheses: They must be examined critically and an approximation to the truth, or simply his way of getting at tested. That is, we must ask—we have an intellectual obliga­ God and no better or worse than someone else's. Was his belief tion to ask—are the hypotheses supported by the available evi­ a hypothesis that he would employ as long as it worked, or was dence? In my book, No Sense of Obligation, I have tried to it absolutely true? show that they are not. I will give an all too brief summary of No, he answered, it is absolutely true. my conclusions here. At the end of the hour, he said, as best I can recall, "Look, what you said earlier, about being a hypothesis. [Pause.] I guess Hypotheses and Evidence it is sort of a hypothesis." Saying so made him feel threatened. I have dismissed what I called "popular" beliefs such as the You could see it in his body language, hear it in his voice, see belief in signs or miracles on several grounds. First, most pre­ it in his eyes. So I quickly stopped the conversation. sumed miracles can be explained or accounted for without The discussion with Robin kicked off what has become a invoking divine intervention. Storms and other natural disas­ four- or five-year investigation into religion and the basis for ters are just those: natural disasters and not acts of God. We religious beliefs. Specifically, I set out to demonstrate, first, may therefore reject the arguments of those who give God that empiricism is the only way to establish reliable knowledge credit for all that is good and ignore all that is bad; they are about the physical world and, further, to show why it is appro­ using evidence selectively in order to bolster a belief that they priate to examine the claims of religion empirically. Accord­ must intend to hold onto come hell or high water. ingly, I applied a scientific approach to claims made by reli­ Similarly, we cannot accept the kind of wishful thinking gious believers and apologists. Whether or not the universe has that there must be a God because otherwise there would be no a purposeful creator, after all, is a matter of fact. It is therefore purpose to our existence, no fixed values, no universal code of inappropriate for people who generally support their beliefs morality. You cannot arbitrarily hypothesize, for example, a with evidence to believe without evidence in God. What, then, universal code of morality and then use the presumed exis­ is the evidence? tence of that code to "prove" that there must be a God. This My investigation brought me from science and philosophy hypothesis is not obviously true and requires evidence to sup­ of science to religion and philosophy, Biblical criticism, evolu­ port it. Basing one unsupported hypothesis on another, tion and cosmology, mathematical physics, and the science of equally unsupported hypothesis is not progress. the brain. I do not have first-hand knowledge of many of these Even though Bible codes are tantalizing because they fields, so I have gone to the literature for my information. appear statistically significant in a way that anecdotes do not, Except for a handful of books and articles on physics and one we cannot accept them as signs from God, particularly in light statistics paper, every one is accessible to the diligent layper­ of the strong circumstantial case that the Bible was compiled son; tftat is, anyone could read the same material as I read and from a multiplicity of sources (which are often at odds with draw his or her own conclusion. I present mine here. one another). In addition, it now appears that the input data Contrary to postmodernist assertion, there is objective real­ used to "uncover" the Bible codes may have been adjusted to ity or, if you prefer, objective truth that exists independently of achieve a desired result. the observer and the belief system of the observer. I argue fur­ In the Western world, a great many people nevertheless ther that the only way to get at that truth—more precisely, the think that the Bible is the literal word of God. The myriad only way to approximate it, as a map approximates a conti­ errors and inconsistencies in the Hebrew Bible and in the nent—is through empirical observation. That observation Gospels ought to deliver a death blow to that belief: At most, the Bible is the word of God as interpreted and distorted by Matt Young is adjunct professor at the Colorado School of Mines, generations of oral tradition and then by later redaction. The retired physicist with the National Institute of Standards and Book of Jonah is so obviously a fiction that I am astonished any Technology, Fellow of the Optical Society of America, and winner time I hear someone argue for its literal truth. The Gospels are of the Department of Commerce Gold and Silver Medals for his not contemporaneous accounts of the life of Jesus, and they are work in optical communications. He is the author of Optics and unsupported by external evidence. Each successive account Lasers and The Technical Writer's Handbook. This article is may be no more than an embellishment of the preceding adapted from his book No Sense of Obligation: Science and account; only the first account is even roughly accurate, and Religion in an Impersonal Universe, available as an e-book or in there is no independent evidence for supernaturalism. As hardcopy from 1st Books Library, www.lstbooks.com/bookuiew/ important as the Bible is, it is not the literal word of God. 5559, or from online or heal bookstores. Copyright ©2001 by Let us make a distinction between evil (that is, the deliberate Matt Young. All rights reserved. infliction of harm on one human by another) and misfortune.

58 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Both are a problem for rJiose who believe in a benevolent God. entity could not have been contingent, since its existence is Evil, oddly, is less of a problem: You can argue that evil is an based on no past events. The Argument from Contingency pre­ unfortunate but necessary side effect of our having been granted sumes that objects or events are contingent, rather than deter­ free will, but it is hard to justify debilitating diseases by the same ministic. It further presumes that the entity that created the uni­ argument. The Bible gives no answers to the problems of evil verse was purposeful. Neither presumption is obviously true, and misfortune. Specifically, the most commonly cited theodicy, and die Argument from Contingency fails for much the same the Book of Job, offers little or no help. The comforters mosdy reason diat the Argument from First Cause fails: It assumes blame die victim, assuming that he has done something wrong, even though readers of die book know mat he is a righteous man. God himself never once claims to be just: only The Bible gives no answers to the problems of powerful. He seems to be saying, "Might makes right," a sentiment diat our society evil and misfortune. Specifically, the most has long abandoned as moral justification. commonly cited theodicy, the Book of Job, offers We can, however, find a potential source little or no help. God himself never once of evil in biology. When we sec analogies to evil in the animal kingdom, we arc properly claims to be just: only powerful. reluctant to classify them as evil. In our minds, only humans can perpetrate evil. 1 conclude, therefore, that evil does not exist except insofar as widiout evidence that the creation was initiated by a being. we define it. It needs little or no explaining unless we hypoth­ The Argument from Design sees both design and purpose esize a benevolent God. Indeed, the God hypothesis hinders in nature and presumes therefore that the entire universe was our understanding of evil rather than helping it. designed for a purpose. As a general argument, it is weak, but a couple of modern variations are more compelling. One such Philosophical Arguments and Evidence variation, which I call the Argument from Evolution, is firmly I have therefore found wanting almost all the arguments of the grounded in the fact that complexity increases almost inex­ laity and the clergy alike. How well do philosophers fare? Not orably as (geological) time progresses. The haphazard nature of well. Their proof texts are not as old as those of the scriptural evolution, especially the periodic mass extinctions, however, literalists, but they seem as dated, and, except for a few philo­ argues strongly against the claim that the universe was created sophically minded scientists, philosophers of religion seem as with intelligent beings or anydiing else as its ultimate goal. A unwilling to incorporate the discoveries of modern science related argument, the Anthropic Principle, argues that the uni­ into their worldviews as are the Biblical literalists. verse is so "hospitable" to life that it must have been designed The Ontological Argument of Saint Anselm asks you to with life in mind. The AntJiropic Principle seems to me to be imagine a "greatest possible being" and goes on to argue that completely circular and impossible to take seriously. such a being must be real because existence in reality is Anodier design argument, which I call the Argument from "greater" than existence in imagination. The argument makes Mathematical Physics, depends on whether you think there is no sense to me. It is based on the unsound premise that any order at die deepest levels of reality. Even so, there is no a priori valid logical argument must necessarily apply to the physical reason to ascribe such order to a purposeful creator, and the world. Neither does it define greatness, so you cannot evaluate Argument from Mathematical Physics fails: The universe need its comparison between greatness in reality and greatness in not have been created by a mathematician just because we can imagination. Finally, it is a wild extrapolation from the finite describe it by mathematics. to the infinite, and it is not testable. The Argument from Religious Experience presumes that, The Argument from First Cause argues rliat every event has if people tell you that they have had certain experiences, a cause. It assumes that the universe cannot be infinitely old, then those people should be believed. I was frankly surprised so there must have been a first cause, which Thomas Aquinas that professional philosophers take this argument seriously. identified with his pre-existing notion of God. The Argument There is not one shred of evidence, credible or otherwise, from First Cause fares slightly better than the Ontological that mystical or religious experiences are objectively real and Argument, but only because of the empirically supported not hallucinations or other well understood mental phe­ claim that the universe has a finite age. If it has a finite age, nomena. That is, although the mystical experiences seem then it probably had an ultimate cause. There is, however, no real, no one has ever devised a test that can be used to evidence that the ultimate cause was purposeful, so the distinguish them from well known and well understood Argument from First Cause ultimately fails as well. artifacts such as hallucinations and dreams. In addition, the The Argument from Contingency considers that all objects religious experiences that people report are strikingly at are contingent, diat is, diat objects exist only as a result of a variance with one another and highly dependent on the series of past events that did not need to have happened. Some cultures of the reporters, which strongly suggests that they event or entity, however, created the universe, and that event or are mental phenomena.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 59 Belief, Knowledge, and Feelings Some people find this argument very threatening. It might I conclude that the evidence in favor of a purposeful creator, imply that mind is an epiphenomenon, that is, the result of let alone a benevolent God, is so weak as to be virtually non­ physiological processes in our brains and bodies, and nothing existent. Indeed, it is so weak that we are justified in arguing that more. That there is no purpose to our existence. That one day the God hypothesis has been falsified. There is almost certainly there will be no more humans, no Earth, no universe as we no purposeful creator and certainly no benevolent God. know it. To me, however, these are plain physical facts with no What then do I believe in? moral or ethical content. The fact that we do not have immor­ Believe is a strong word. 1 do not think that the universe had tal souls does not justify unethical behavior. We might like the a purposeful creator. I am almost certain that God does not world to be otherwise, but it is not. intervene in our affairs, that there is no absolute code of The Cosmic Religious Feeling morality, and so on. I probably believe these things as firmly as all but the most rigid literalists believe the very opposite. I dif­ What then can I propose in place of theism? First, the knowl­ fer from the literalists, however, in my admission that I could edge that the universe is intelligible. As a scientist, I see or be wrong and in my continuing search for the evidence, either read about phenomena that must seem like miracles to way. In short, I try to believe what I have to believe, not what I laypersons and certainly seemed like miracles to the ancients. want to believe. The ancients postulated a god or gods to explain the natural I am nearly convinced that the universe is completely order. Today, however, we find the universe understandable deterministic. Even if it is not, the wavefunction of a com­ in terms of physical laws and have no need to invoke super­ plicated quantum system such as a brain evolves with almost natural powers. In place of theism, I propose what Einstein perfect predictability. Far more of our personalities may be called a cosmic religious feeling, an "unbounded admiration determined by the physiology of our brains than is generally for the structure ol the world so far as our science can reveal recognized. Indeed, my statement that the universe is it." The awe and humility Einstein felt in the presence of the deterministic compels me to hypothesize that all our actions "magnificent structure" of nature were a genuinely religious and thoughts are determined once and for all by the laws of feeling, but it was firmly grounded in reality and required no nature. In this sense we have no free will: Free will is an supernatural God. approximation that we make because we can do nothing else; Second, without a literal belief in a god who dictates it is a concept that we developed because we seem to be free moral codes or guides us along our paths through the uni­ and have a great many choices open to us. But I doubt that we verse, I propose the idea that we are grownups, on our own are free in the strictest sense of the term. and responsible for ourselves, not children for whom some­ one else is responsible. Finally, I offer, to those who want it, a religious humanism that is human-centered, not God- centered. In this view, our lives have meaning, but it is meaning that we and our communities give them, not meaning that is derived from a super­ natural source. We have to act as if we had free will, because we can do nothing else. But we and our communities have to develop our own ethics. There are no moral imperatives and no universal code of morality, no automatic rewards for good deeds, no automatic punishment for bad deeds, no God looking over our shoulders. All we can do is strive to improve ourselves and our world, and we are completely on our own. Far from despairing, however, I consider hopeful the facts that medicine and sanitation have improved our health and longevity; science and technology have given us shorter working weeks, more abundant food and resources, and more leisure; and our political sys­ tems have given us more freedom and dignity. The power to improve the system further and to extend our good fortune to the rest of die world is in us and our own rational thinking, not in God. To put it in theological terms, we must seek our salvation in diis world, because diere is no other.

60 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER READINGS IN SCIENCE AND RELIGION

Arthur C. Clarke's 'Credo'

People have debated the problems of existence for thousands of years—and that is precisely why we should be skeptical of the answers. One of the great lessons of modern science is that millennia are only moments. It is not likely that ultimate questions will be settled in such short periods of time.

ARTHUR C. CLARKE

or thousands of years the subtlest minds of the human species have been focused on the great questions of life Fand death, of time and space—and of man's place in the universe. The answers have been encapsulated in the holy books of countless religions and whole libraries of phi­ losophy, folklore, and myth. Can our age contribute anything both new and true to these ancient debates? I believe so. We have been lucky enough to live at a time when knowledge that once seemed forever beyond reach can be found in elementary school- books. Our generation has seen the far side of the Moon, and close-ups of all the major bodies circling the Sun. We have opened the Pandora's box of the atomic nucleus. And

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 61 perhaps most marvelous of all, we have uncovered the secret of life slightest evidence for life—much less intelligence—beyond this Earth itself, in the endless twining and untwining of the DNA spiral. This does not surprise or disappoint me in the least. Our technology must is perhaps the greatest discovery in the whole history of science, yet still be laughably primitive; we may well be like jungle savages listen­ even now it is barely thirty years old. ing for throbbing of tom-toms, while the ethet around them carries There are those who claim not to be impressed by such achieve­ more words per second than they could utter in a lifetime. ments, arguing that science deals with unimportant questions that The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the can be solved, while religion is concerned with important ones that hijacking of morality by religion. However valuable—even neces­ can't. The logical positivists would maintain that this is nonsense; if a sary—that may have been in enforcing good behavior on primitive problem can't be solved, at least in principle, it doesn't really exist. In peoples, their association is now counterproductive. Yet at the very other words, there's no such animal as metaphysics. moment when they should be decoupled, sanctimonious nitwits are Without knowing it, I became a logical posttivist at about the age calling for a return to morals based on superstition. of ten. Every Sunday, 1 was supposed to make the two-mile walk to the Having disposed of religion (at least until next Wednesday), let us local Church of England—it was a long time before I discovered there consider something really imporrant: God—aka Allah/Brahma/ was any other variety—to attend a service for the village youth. To Jehovah, etc. ad infinitum. In The Songs of Distant Earth, I distin­ encourage us to sit through the sermons, we were rewarded with stamps guished between two aspects of this hypothetical entity, calling them illustrating scenes from the Bible. When we had filled an album with Alpha and Omega to defuse emotional reactions. these, we were entitled to an "outing"—i.e., a bus trip to some exotic Alpha might be identified with the jealous God of the Old and remote part of Somerset, perhaps as far as twenty miles away. I Testament, who watches over all creatures ("His eye is on the spar­ stuck with it for a few weeks, then decided—to quote Churchill's row") and rewards good and evil in some vaguely described afterlife. famous memorandum on the necessity of ending sentences with a Even today, belief in Alpha is fading fast; I suggested that early in the proposition—"This is nonsense up with which I will not put." next millennium the rise of "statistical theology" would prove that Haifa century of travel, reading, and contact with other faiths has there is no supernatural intervention in human affairs. Nor does the endorsed that early insight. "problem of evil" exist; it is an inevitable consequence of the bell- Now I myself am not completely innocent, according to one of shaped curve of normal distribution. the last letters I received from the great biologist J.B.S. Haldane. Unfortunately, most people do not understand even the basic ele­ Shorrly before he died (going not gently but heroically into the good ments of statistics and probability, which is why astrologers and adver­ night with a witty poem entitled "Cancer Can Be Fun") he wrote: "1 tising agencies flourish. If you want to start an interesting fight, say in would like to see you awarded a prize for theology, as you are one of a loud voice at your next cocktail party, "Fifty percent of Americans (or the very few living persons who has written anything original about whatever) are mentally subnormal." Then watch all those annoyed by God. You have in fact, written several mutually incompatible this mathematical tautology instantly pigeonhole themselves. things. . . . If you had stuck to one theological hypothesis you might I also, rather mischievously, demolished Alpha by invoking the be a serious public danger." ghost of Kurt Godel, whose nototious "incompleteness of knowl­ I am only sorry that J.B.S. never had a chance to criticize my later edge" theorem quite obviously rules out the existence of an omni­ (doubtless yet more incompatible) speculations, developed in the scient being. However, this is an area where logic gets you nowhere. novels The Fountains of Paradise and The Songs of Distant Earth. He Belief—or disbelief—in Alpha appears to be irrevocably programmed would, I am sure, have enjoyed this specimen from Fountains: into most people at an early age. A man I admire, who has held the highest medical position in the There can be no such subject as comparative religion as long as we United States, recently declared. "There are no atheists at the bedside study only the religions or man. ... If we find that religion occurs exclusively among intelligent analogs of apes, dolphins, elephants, of a dying child." It is a compassionate statement, nobly expressed, dogs, etc., but not among extraterrestrial computers, termites, fish, with which every humane person must sympathize. But, with all turtles, or social amoebae, we may have to draw some painiul conclu­ respect, it is simply untrue. sions. . . . Perhaps both love and religion can arise only among mam­ Nor have I ever felt a need for Alpha on the several occasions when mals, and for much the same reasons. This is also suggested by a study I thought I was about to die (in each case, at a depth of embarrassingly of their pathologies; anyone who doubts the connection between reli­ few fathoms). Cerrainly the notion of appealing for divine help never gious fanaticism and perversion should take a long, hard look at the entered my mind; I was much too busy thinking, "How do I get out of Malleus Maleficarum or Huxley's The Devils of Loudun. this ridiculous situation?" Bur I am quite serious about the profound philosophical impor­ Omega—the Creator of Everything—is a much more interesting tance of the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence (SETI); this may character than Alpha, and not so easily dismissed. Although irre­ be its supreme justification. The fact that we have not yet found the deemable agnostics may smile at lidward Young's "The undevout astronomer is mad," no intelligent persons can contemplate the night sky without a sense of awe. The mind-boggling vista of exploding Arthur C Clarke is the author of such best-selling books as 2001: A supernovae and hurtling galaxies does seem to require a certain amount Space Odyssey, Childhood's End, and Rendezvous with Rama. This of explaining: to answer the question "Why is the universe here?" with essay is taken from his book Greetings, Carbon-Based Bipeds! Collected the retort "Where else would it be?" is somehow not very satisfying. Essays 1934-1998 (St. Martins Press). Copyright © 1999 by Arthur C. Although—the logical positivists would be pleased—it may be all the Clarke. It appeared originally in Living Philosophies, Clifton Fadiman, answer that is needed, because the question itself may not make sense. ed. (Doubleday, 1991). Published by permission of the author and the Let me offer an analogy, suggested by a conversation I once had Scovil, Chichak, and Galen Literary Agency. with C.S. Lewis. We science fiction authors are always picking each

62 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER others brain, and Lewis asked me what the horizon would look like The Pontifical Academy of Science—which I have been honored (ignoring atmospheric absorption) on a really enormous planet—one to address—has now firmly stated: "Masses of evidence render the not thousands, but millions, of kilometers in radius. application of the concept of evolution to man and the other primates Any inhabitants would be convinced that they were living on a per- beyond serious dispute." fectly flat plane and might fight holy wars over the rival doctrines (a) die I began this essay by saying that men have debated the prob­ world goes on forever and even (b) you'll fall off when you reach the edge. lems of existence for thousands of years—and that is precisely why But to us, there is no problem. We have watched the globe of the Earth I am skeptical about most of the answers. One of the great lessons floating on our television screens and have no difficulty in understanding of modern science is that millennia are only moments. It is not why both fladander cults are wrong. If they likely that ultimate questions will be set­ ever got around to making spaceships, their tled in such short periods of time, or that religious disputations would be ended. we will really know much about the uni­ So it is very, very risky to maintain that, verse while we are still crawling around in as the old B-grade movies loved to intone, the playpen of the Solar System. "There is some knowledge not meant for So let us recognize that there is much Man." I am fond of quoting a monumental concerning which we must reserve judgment, gaffe made by Auguste Comte, who told the and refuse to take seriously all dogmas and astronomers in no uncertain terms just what revelations whose acceptance demands faith. they could ever expect to know about other They have been proved wrong countless worlds—"We may determine their forms, times in the past; they will be proved wrong their distances, their bulk, their motions— again in the ages to come. but we can never know anything of their And worse than wrong. Who can for­ chemical or mineralogical structure; and, get Jacob Bronowski, in his superb televi­ much less, that of organized beings living on sion series. The Ascent of Man, standing their surface." among the ashes of his relatives at the Within a century of Comte's death, Auschwitz crematorium and reminding thanks to the invention of the spectroscope, us: "This is now men behave when they much of astronomy had become astrochem- believe they have absolute knowledge." istry—a science he had roundly declared This is how they are still behaving—in impossible. I wonder what he would have Ireland, in Lebanon, in Iran—and at this said about space exploration, had anyone very moment, alas, in my own Sri Lanka. Arthur C. Clarke been rash enough to suggest such an absurdity Yet, if absolute knowledge is unattainable, to him. someday most of the great truths may be established—if not widi absolute certainty, then beyond all reasonable So it may be rJiat questions which now seem almost beyond con­ doubt. Do not be impatient; diere is plenty of dme. jecture may one day be conclusively settled. The limits of space, the beginning and ending of time, the origin of matter and energy, may How much time, we are only now beginning to appreciate. In a have no mysteries to our remote descendants. And many of the ques­ famous essay, "Time Without End," Freeman Dyson speculated that tions we ask of the universe may turn out to be completely meaning­ a high-technology cosmic intelligence might even be able to make less—as certain theories on die frontiers of modern physics tantaliz- itself, quite literally, immortal. ingly suggest. So let me end with the final chapter, "The Long Twilight," from I felt this very strongly when I was privileged to make a television my Profiles of the Future: An Inquiry into the Limits of the Possible. program, modestly entided "God, the Universe and Everything Else" Whether Freeman Dyson's vision (some would say nightmare) of eter­ with Newton's successor Dr. Stephen Hawking. If you have not read A nity is true or not, one thing seems certain. Our galaxy is now in the Brief History of Time, please rectify the omission—and read the bits brief springtime of its life—a springtime made glorious by such bril­ about "imaginary time.'' Thank you; that saves me a lot of hand wav­ liant blue-white stars as Vega and Sirius, and, on a more humble scale, ing, trying to explain how our own views of past and future may be as our own Sun. Not until all these have flamed through their incandes­ naive as die flatlanders' ideas about the geometry of their giant planet. cent youth, in a few fleeting billions of years, will the real history of The extraordinary success of Dr. Hawking's book is one of the best the universe begin. pieces of news from die popular science—indeed, educational—front It will be a history illuminated only by the reds and infrarcds of for many years. I have been appalled by the way in which die United dully glowing stars that would be almost invisible to our eyes; yet the States (and much of the world. East and West) appears to be sinking somber hues of that all-but-eternal universe may be full of color and beauty to whatever strange beings have adapted to it. They will know into cultural barbarism, harangued by the fundamentalist ay.uoll.ilis of that before them lie, not the millions of years in which we measure die airwaves, its bookstores, and newsstands poisoned with mind-ror- eras of geology, nor the billions of years which span die past lives of ring rubbish about astrology, UFOs, reincarnation, ESP, spoon-bend­ the stars, but years to be counted literally in trillions. ing, and especially "creationism." This last—which implies that the They will have time enough, in those endless aeons, to attempt all marvelous and inspiring story of evolution, so clearly recorded in the things, and to gather all knowledge. They will be like gods, because no geological strata, is all a cosmic practical joke—helps me to understand gods imagined by our minds have ever possessed the powers they will die revulsion that a devout Muslim must feel toward The Satanic Verses. command. But for all dial, they may envy us, basking in the bright If diere is indeed such a diing as blasphemy, it is here afterglow of Creation; for we knew the universe when it was young. LJ

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 63 A Designer Universe ?I

If we were to see the hand of a designer anywhere, it would be in the fundamental principles, the laws of nature. But, contrary to some assertions, they appear to be utterly impersonal and without any special role for life. Physics may nevertheless be in a better position to give a partly satisfying explanation of the world than religion can ever be.

STEVEN WEINBERG

have been asked to comment on whether the universe shows signs of having been designed.1 I don't see how it's Ipossible to talk about this without having at least some vague idea of what a designer would be like. Any possible universe could be explained as the work of some sort of designer. Even a universe that is completely chaotic, without any laws or regularities at all, could be supposed to have been designed by an idiot. The question that seems to me to be worth answering, and perhaps not impossible to answer, is whether the universe shows signs of having been designed by a deity more or less like those of traditional monotheistic religions—not neces­ sarily a figure from the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, but at

64 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER least some sort of personality, some intelligence, who created the uni­ There do not seem to be any exceptions to this natural order, any verse and has some special concern with life, in particular with miracles. I have the impression dial these days most dicologians arc human life. I expect that this is not die idea of a designer held by embarrassed by talk of miracles, but die great monotheistic faiths are many here. You may tell me dial you arc thinking of something much founded on miracle stories—the burning bush, the empty tomb, an more abstract, some cosmic spirit of order and harmony, as Einstein angel dictating die Koran to Mohammed!—and some of diesc faiths did. You are certainly free to think that way, but then I don't know teach that miracles continue at the present day. The evidence for all why you use words like "designer" or "God," except perhaps as a form diesc miracles seems to me to be considerably weaker dian die evi­ of protective coloration. dence for cold fusion, and I don't believe in cold fusion. Above all, It used to be obvious diat die world was designed by some sort of today we understand diat even human beings are the result of natural intelligence. What else could account for fire and rain and lightning selection acting over millions of years of breeding and eating. and earthquakes? Above all, die wonderful abilities of living things I'd guess diat if we were to see die hand of die designer anywhere, seemed to point to a creator who had a special interest in life. Today it would be in die fundamental principles, the final laws of nature, die we understand most of these things in terms of physical forces acting book of rules diat govern all natural phenomena. We don't know die under impersonal laws. We don't yet know die most fundamental final laws yet, but as far as we have been able to see, diey arc utterly laws, and we can't work out all die consequences of die laws we do impersonal and quite without any special role for life. There is no life know. The human mind remains extraordinarily difficult to under­ force. As Richard Feynman has said, when you look at the universe stand, but so is die weather. We can't predict whether it will rain one and understand its laws, "die dieory that it is all arranged as a stage for mondi from today, but we do know the rules that govern the rain, God to watch man's struggle for good and evil seems inadequate." even though we can't always calculate dieir consequences. I see noth­ True, when quantum mechanics was new, some physicists thought ing about the human mind any more dian about die weadier that that it put humans back into die picture, because die principles of stands out as beyond the hope of understanding as a consequence of quantum mechanics tell us how to calculate the probabilities of vari­ impersonal laws acting over billions of years. ous results diat might be found by a human observer. But, starting

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 65 with the work of Hugh Everett forty years ago. the tendency of physi­ Now, it doesn't settle the matter for me to say that we cannot cists who think deeply about these things has been to reformulate see the hand of a designer in what we know about the fundamental quantum mechanics in an entirely objective way, with observers principles of science. It might be that, although these principles do not treated just like everything else. I don't know if this program has been refer explicitly to life, much less human life, they arc nevertheless completely successful yet, but I think it will be. craftily designed to bring it about. I have to admit that, even when physicists will have gone as far as Some physicists have argued that certain constants of nature have they can go, when we have a final theory, we will not have a com­ values that seem to have been mysteriously fine-tuned to just the pletely satisfying picture of the world, because we will still be left with values that allow for the possibility of life, in a way that could only be the question "why?" Why this theory, rather than some other theory? explained by the intervention of a designer with some special concern For example, why is the world described by quantum mechanics? for life. I am not impressed with these supposed instances of fine- Quantum mechanics is the one part of our present physics that is tuning. For instance, one of the most frequently quoted examples of likely to survive intact in any future theory, but there is nothing log­ fine-tuning has to do with a property of the nucleus of the carbon ically inevitable about quantum mechanics; I can imagine a universe atom. The matter left over from the first few minutes of the universe governed by Newtonian mechanics instead. So there seems to be an was almost entirely hydrogen and helium, with virtually none of the irreducible mystery that science will not eliminate. heavier elements like carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen that seem to be But religious theories of design have the same problem. Either you necessary for life. The heavy elements that we find on Earth were mean something definite by a God, a designer, or you don't. If you built up hundreds of millions of years later in a first generation of don't, then what are we talking about? If you do mean something def­ stars, and then spewed out into the interstellar gas out of which our inite by "God" or "design," if for instance you believe in a God who is solar system eventually formed. jealous, or loving, or intelligent, or whimsical, then you still must con­ The first step in the sequence of nuclear reactions that created the front the question "why?" A religion may assert that the universe is heavy elements in early stars is usually the formation of a carbon governed by that sort of God, rather than some other sort of God, and nucleus out of three helium nuclei. There is a negligible chance of it may offer evidence for this belief, but it cannot explain why this producing a carbon nucleus in its normal state (the state of lowest should be so. energy) in collisions of three helium nuclei, but it would be possible In this respect, it seems to me that physics is in a better position to produce appreciable amounts of carbon in stars if the carbon to give us a partly satisfying explanation of the world than religion nucleus could exist in a radioactive state with an energy roughly 7 can ever be, because although physicists won't be able to explain why million electron volts (McV) above the energy of the normal state, the laws of nature arc what they are and not something completely matching the energy of three helium nuclei, but (for reasons I'll come different, at least wc may be able to explain why they are not slightly to presently) not more than 7.7 McV above the normal state. different. For instance, no one has been able to think of a logically This radioactive state of a carbon nucleus could be easily formed consistent alternative to quantum mechanics that is only slightly dif­ in stars from three helium nuclei. After that, there would be no prob­ ferent. Once you start trying to make small changes in quantum lem in producing ordinary carbon; the carbon nucleus in its radioac­ mechanics, you get into theories with negative probabilities or other tive state would spontaneously emit light and turn into carbon in its logical absurdities. When you combine quantum mechanics with rel­ normal nonradioactive state, the state found on Earth. The critical ativity you increase its logical fragility. You find that unless you point in producing carbon is the existence of a radioactive state that arrange the theory in just the right way you get nonsense, like effects can be produced in collisions of three helium nuclei. preceding causes, or infinite probabilities. Religious theories, on the In fact, the carbon nucleus is known experimentally to have just other hand, seem to be infinitely flexible, with nothing to prevent the such a radioactive state, with an energy 7.65 MeV above the normal invention of deities of any conceivable sort. state. At first sight this may seem like a prerry close call; the energy of this radioactive state of carbon misses being too high to allow the for­ mation of carbon (and hence of us) by only 0.05 MeV, which is less Steven Weinberg is professor of physics and holds the Josey Regental than one percent of 7.65 MeV. It may appear that the constants of Chair of Science at the University of Texas at Austin. His research nature on which the properties of all nuclei depend have been care­ has spanned a broad range of topics in quantum field theory, ele­ fully fine-tuned to make life possible. mentary particle physics, and cosmology, and he has been honored l.ooked at more closely, the fine-tuning of the constants of nature with numerous awards, including the Nobel Prize in Physics and here does not seem so fine. Wc have to consider the reason why the the National Medal of Science. His books include the prize- formation of carbon in stars requires the existence of a radioactive state winning The First Three Minutes, Gravitation and of carbon with an energy not more than 7.7 MeV above the energy of the normal state. The reason is that the carbon nuclei in this state Cosmology, The Discovery of Subatomic Particles, and most arc actually formed in a two-step process: first, two helium nuclei recently Dreams of a Final Theory. He is a CSICOP Fellow. This combine to form the unstable nucleus of a beryllium isotope, beryl­ article was first published in The New York Review of Books, lium 8, which occasionally, before it falls apart, captures another October 21, 1999. and has been reprinted7/;The Best American helium nucleus, forming a carbon nucleus in its radioactive state, Science Writing 2000, ed by J. Gleick (HarperCollins, New which then decays into normal carbon. The total energy of the beryl­ York, 2000) and in The Best American Essays 2000, ed. by A lium 8 nucleus and a helium nucleus at rest is 7.4 MeV above the Lightman (Houghton Miflin, Boston, 2000). It will also appear energy of the normal state of die carbon nucleus; so if the energy of the radioactive state of carbon were more than 7.7 MeV it could only in Facing Up, a collection of the authors essays, to be published be formed in a collision of a helium nucleus and a beryllium 8 nucleus in the fall of 2001 by Harvard University Press.

66 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER if the energy of motion of these two nuclei were at least 0.3 MeV—an be little more than mystical mumbo jumbo. On the other hand, if energy which is extremely unlikely at the temperatures found in stars. there really is a large number of worlds in which some constants take Thus the crucial thing that affects the production of carbon in stars different values, then the anthropic explanation of why in our world is not the 7.65 MeV energy of the radioactive state of carbon above its dicy take values favorable for life is just common sense, like explain­ normal state, but the 0.25 MeV energy of the radioactive state, an ing why we live on Earth rather than Mercury or Pluto. The actual unstable composite of a beryllium 8 nucleus and a helium nucleus, value of the cosmological constant, recendy measured by observations above the energy of those nuclei at rest.-' This energy misses being too of the motion of distant supernovas, is about what you would expect high for the production of carbon by a fractional amount of 0.05 from this sort of argument: it is just about small enough so that it McV/0.25 MeV, or 20 percent, which is not such a close call after all. does not interfere much with the formation of galaxies. But we don't This conclusion about the lessons to be learned from carbon syn­ yet know enough about physics to tell whether there are different thesis is somewhat controversial. In any case, there is one constant whose value does seem remarkably well adjusted in our favor. It is the I'd guess that if we were to see the energy density of empty space, also known as the cosmological constant. It could have any value, hand of the designer anywhere, it would but from first principles one would guess that this constant should be very large, and could be posi­ be in the fundamental principles, the final tive or negative. If large and positive, the cosmo­ laws of nature, the book of rules that govern logical constant would act as a repulsive force that increases with distance, a force that would pre­ all natural phenomena. We don't know the vent marter from clumping together in the early universe, the process that was the first step in final laws yet, but as far as we have been forming galaxies and stars and planets and peo­ able to see, they are utterly impersonal ple. If large and negative the cosmological con­ stant would act as an attractive force increasing and quite without any special role for life. with distance, a force that would almost immedi­ ately reverse the expansion of the universe and cause it to recollapsc, leaving no time for the evolution of life. In fact, astronomical obser­ parts of the universe in which what are usually called the constants of vations show that the cosmological constant is quite small, very much physics really do take different values. This is not a hopeless question; smaller than would have been guessed from first principles. we will be able to answer it when we know more about the quantum theory of gravitation than we do now. It is still too early to tell whether there is some fundamental prin­ It would be evidence for a benevolent designer if life were better ciple that can explain why the cosmological constant must be this than could be expected on other grounds. To judge this, we should small. But even if there is no such principle, recent developments in keep in mind rJiat a certain capacity for pleasure would readily have cosmology offer the possibility of an explanation of why the measured evolved through natural selection, as an incentive to animals who need values of the cosmological constant and other physical constants are to eat and breed in order to pass on their genes. It may not be likely favorable for the appearance of intelligent life. According to die that natural selection on any one planet would produce animals who 1 "chaotic inflation" theories of Andre Linde and others, the expanding are fortunate enough to have the leisure and the ability to do science cloud of billions of galaxies that we call the Big Bang may be just one and think abstractly, but our sample of what is produced by evolution fragment of a much larger universe in which Big Bangs go off all the is very biased, by the fact that it is only in these fortunate cases that time, each one with different values for the fundamental constants. there is anyone thinking about cosmic design. Astronomers call this a In any such picture, in which the universe contains many parts selection effect. with different values for what we call the constants of nature, there The universe is very large, and perhaps infinite, so it should be would be no difficulty in understanding why these constants take val­ no surprise that, among the enormous number of planets that may ues favorable to intelligent life. There would be a vast number of Big support only unintelligent life and die still vaster number that can­ Bangs in which die constants of nature take values unfavorable for not support life at all, there is some tiny fraction on which there are life, and many fewer where life is possible. You don't have to invoke a living beings who are capable of thinking about the universe, as we benevolent designer to explain why we arc in one of the parts of the are doing here. A journalist who has been assigned to interview lot­ universe where life is possible: in all the other parts of the universe tery winners may come to feel that some special providence has there is no one to raise the question.' If any theory of this general type been at work on their behalf, but he should keep in mind the much turns out to be correct, then to conclude that the constants of nature larger number of lottery players whom he is not interviewing have been fine-tuned by a benevolent designer would be like saying, because they haven't won anything. Thus, to judge whether our lives "Isn't it wonderful that God put us here on Earth, where there's water show evidence for a benevolent designer, we have not only to ask and air and the surface gravity and temperature are so comfortable, whether life is better than would be expected in any case from what rather than some horrid place, like Mercury or Pluto?" Where else in the solar system other than on Earth could we have evolved? we know about natural selection, but we need also to take into account the bias introduced by the fact that it is we who arc think­ Reasoning like this is called "anthropic." Sometimes it just ing about the problem. amounts to an assertion that the laws of nature are what they arc so This is a question that you all will have to answer for yourselves. that we can exist, without further explanation. This seems to me to Being a physicist is no help with questions like this, so I have to speak

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 67 from my own experience. My life has been remarkably happy, perhaps It is certainly true that the campaign against slavery and the slave in the upper 99.99 percentile of human happiness, but even so, I have trade was greatly strengthened by devout Christians, including the seen a mother die painfully of cancer, a father's personality destroyed by Evangelical layman William Wilberforce in England and the Alzheimer's disease, and scores of second and third cousins murdered in Unitarian minister William Ellery Channing in America. But the Holocaust. Signs of a benevolent designer are pretty well hidden. Christianity, like other great world religions, lived comfortably with The prevalence of evil and misery has always bothered those who slavery for many centuries, and slavery was endorsed in the New believe in a benevolent and omnipotent God. Sometimes God is Testament. So what was different for anti-slavery Christians like excused by pointing to the need for free will. Milton gives God this Wilberforce and Channing? There had been no discovery of new sacred scriptures, and neither Wilberforce nor Channing claimed to argument in Paradise Lost. have received any supernatural revelations. Rather, the eighteenth 1 formed them free, and free they must remain century had seen a widespread increase in rationality and humani- Till they enthral themselves: I else must change tarianism that led others—for instance, Adam Smith, Jeremy Their nature, and revoke the high decree Bentham, and Richard Brinsley Sheridan—also to oppose slavery, Unchangeable, eternal, which ordained on grounds having nothing to do with religion. Lord Mansfield, the Their freedom; the)' themselves ordained their fall. author of the decision in Somersett's Case, which ended slavery in It seems a bit unfair to my relatives to be murdered in order to England (though not its colonics), was no more than convention­ provide an opportunity for free will for Germans, but even putting ally religious, and his decision did not mention religious arguments. that aside, how does free will account for cancer? Is it an opportunity Although Wilberforce was the instigator of the campaign against of free will for tumors? the slave trade in the 1790s, this movement had essential support 1 don't need to argue here that the evil in the world proves that from many in Parliament like Fox and Pitt, who were not known the universe is not designed, but only that there arc no signs of for their piety. As far as I can tell, the moral tone of religion bene­ benevolence that might have shown the hand of a designer. But in fited more from the spirit of the times than the spirit of the times fact the perception that God cannot be benevolent is very old. Plays benefited from religion. by Aeschylus and Euripides make a quite explicit statement that the gods are selfish and cruel, though they expect better behavior from Where religion did make a difference, it was more in support of humans. God in the Old Testament tells us to bash the heads of slavery than in opposition to it. Arguments from scripture were used infidels and demands of us that we be willing to sacrifice our chil­ in Parliament to defend the slave trade. Frederick Douglass told in dren's lives at his orders, and the God of traditional Christianity and his Narrative how his condition as a slave became worse when his Islam damns us for eternity if we do not worship him in the right master underwent a religious conversion that allowed him to justify manner. Is this a nice way to behave? I know, I know, we are not slavery as the punishment of the children of Ham. Mark Twain supposed to judge God according to human standards, but you see described his mother as a genuinely good person, whose soft heart the problem here: If we are not yet convinced of his existence, and pitied even Satan, but who had no doubt about the legitimacy of are looking for signs of his benevolence, then what other standards slavery, because in years of living in antebellum Missouri she had can we use? never heard any sermon opposing slavery, but only countless ser­ mons preaching that slavery was God's will. With or without reli­ The issues that I have been asked to address here will seem to gion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil: but many to be terribly old-fashioned. The "argument from design" made for good people to do evil—that takes religion. by the English theologian William Paley is not on most peoples' minds these days. The prestige of religion seems today to derive from In an e-mail message from the American Association for the what people take to be its moral influence, ratber than from what Advancement of Science I learned that the aim of this conference is they may think has been its success in accounting for what we see in to have a constructive dialogue between science and religion. I am all nature. Conversely, I have to admit that, although I really don't in favor of a dialogue between science and religion, but not a con­ believe in a cosmic designer, the reason that I am taking the trouble structive dialogue. One of the great achievements of science has been, to argue about it is that I think that on balance the moral influence if not to make it impossible for intelligent people to be religious, then of religion has been awful. at least to make it possible for them not to be religious. We should not retreat from this accomplishment. This is much too big a question to be settled here. On one side, I could point out endless examples of the harm done by religious enthusiasm, through a long history of pogroms, crusades, and Notes jihads. In our own century it was a Muslim zealot who killed Sadat, 1. This .inair is based on a oik given in April 1999 at the Conference on Cosmic a Jewish zealot who killed Rabin, and a Hindu zealot who killed Design of ihc American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington. D.C 2. This was pointed out in a 1989 paper by M. Livio. D. Hollowell, A. Weiss, and Gandhi. No one would say that Hitler was a Christian zealot, but J.W. Truran ("The anthropic significance of the existence of an excited sure of "C," it is hard to imagine Nazism taking the form it did without the Nttmt, Vol. 340. No. 6231, July 27. 1989). They did the calculation quoted here of the foundation provided by centuries of Christian anti-Semitism. On 7.7 McV maximum energy of the radioactive state of carbon, above which little carbon the other side, many admirers of religion would set countless is formed in stats. examples of the good done by religion. For instance, in his recent 3. The same conclusion may be reached in a more subtle way when quantum mechanics is applied to the whole universe. Through a reimerpretalion of earlier work by book Imagined Worlds, the distinguished physicist Freeman Dyson Stephen Hawking. Sidney (Coleman has shown how quantum mechanical effects can lead has emphasized the role of religious belief in the suppression of to a split of the history of die universe (more precisely, in what is called the wave ftinc- slavery. I'd like to comment briefly on this point, not to try to tion of the universe) into a huge number of separate possibilities, each one correspond­ prove anything with one example but just to illustrate what I think ing to a different set of fundamental constants. See Sidney Coleman, "Black Holes as Red I Icuings. Topological fluctuation* and the lou of quantum coherence." Sutlcmr Phjtia, about the moral influence of religion. Vol. B307(l988).p.867. D

68 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER An Evolutionary-Genetic Wager

JOHN C. AVISE or morality are involved. Natural selection is merely an amoral force, as inevitable and uncaring as gravity. "It is incomprehensible that God should exist, and it is In the tradition of Pascal, perhaps a new wager can incomprehensible that He should not exist." So wrote be posed. If mortal life is all that exists for individuals, Blaise Pascal in 1660. Pascal was a scientist and we lose nothing by seeking to make that life as mean­ philosopher best remembered for his theistic "wager." ingful and rewarding as possible. But if eternal life To atheists and agnostics, he posed the following exists, we have lost nothing by seeking a fulfilling exis­ argument: If God does not exist, a person loses noth­ tence here on Earth. Thus, one might wager on the rich­ ing by believing in Him; but if God does exist, belief in ness of life here and now. him can bring eternal life. Thus, one should wager Like Pascal's original bet, this evolutionary-genetic that God exists. wager involves some questionable assumptions. It At least two questionable steps of logic underlie assumes that nothing is to be lost by a mistaken belief Pascal's wager. First, if God exists, Pascal assumed that in the absence of a god or of an eternal existence for only a belief in Him can bring eternal salvation. However, the individual's soul. Many religions posit that only by what logical or ethical rationale would God require through complete faith can final redemption be human affirmation or damn nonbelievers? Pascal's rea­ attained. A far less severe philosophy holds that no soning merely suggests that a smart theological bet deity would damn a soul for a lack of faith on matters should be placed on any god that promises more, unresolved to an open and reasonable, yet finite, because if correct, a person thereby wins a greater pay­ human mind. Furthermore, some philosophers claim off. Second, Pascal's wager assumes that nothing is lost that, as a justification for ethical behavior, absolute by mistaken belief in God. Given the empirical history of faith is essential to society, regardless of its reality. man's inhumanity to man, often in the name of a god, A second assumption of the evolutionary-genetic this assumption too is impugnable. As Pascal noted, wager is that humans can choose to focus on the "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when enhancement of meaning in immediate life, rather than they do it from religious conviction." in the hereafter. Findings from the biological and social What the evolutionary-genetic sciences point to sciences are ambivalent on this issue. Theism is a coping most clearly is the important influence of genes over device from which many people derive great comfort many human affairs that were thought to be under and fulfillment. the purview of supernatural deities. The genes Unfortunately, history documents that the pursuit exercise these powers not in a vacuum, but rather in of individual agendas, when coupled with the human intimate collaboration with physical and social envi­ tendency to invent personal justifications for moral ronmental conditions to which we are exposed during authority, has promoted innumerable religious wars our development. The genetic gods and their protein and persecutions. In any conciliation of faith and sci­ angels interact elaborately with one another, and ence, the deeper challenge is to incorporate science's with environmental factors ranging from intra­ objective understandings of nature into broader cellular to macro-ecological. Many environmental philosophical frameworks and responsible modes of conditions themselves, notably human cultures, action that may help us find satisfying lives. reflect extended influences of the genes in this and prior human generations. The outcome is an individ­ John C. Avise is a Distinguished Research Professor of ual person, unique from all others who have come Genetics at the University of Georgia and the author before or ever will follow. of several books, including Molecular Markers, Natural Yet, the genetic gods have evolved according to History and Evolution, Phylogeography, and Cap­ understandable, mechanistic biological processes such tivating Life. Reprinted by permission of the publishers as mutation and DNA repair, recombination, from The Genetic Gods: Evolution and Belief in Human Mendelian transmission, and Darwinian selection. Only Affairs by John C. Avise. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard natural selection comes close to omnipotence, but University Press, Copyright C1998 by the President and even here no intelligence, foresight, ultimate purpose. Fellows of Harvard College. •

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 69 Previous Articles on Science and Religion in SKEPTICAL INQUIRER

Here are some previous articles, reviews, and columns on science and religion published over the years in the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. This is taken from the "Religion " subject heading of the new 25-year SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Complete Online Index. The numbers at the end of each entry are, in order: vol­ ume number (issue number) page numbers. Our first Science & Religion special issue was volume 23, number 4: 23(4).

Age of Spiritual Machines, The. By Ray Kurzweil. 10(4)382-383 Rev. by Rudolph Muska 24(4)56 Religion Writer's View of the New Age, A. Richard J. Ancient Tales and Space-Age Myths of Creationist Brenneman 13(4)416-417 Evangelism. Tom Mclver 10(3)258-276 Religious Belief Among Scientists Stable for Eighty Celebrating Creation. Chet Raymo 23(4)21-23 Years. Thomas C. Genoni, Jr. 21(5)12 Evolution and Christianity. William G. Keehn 10(1)91 Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness Fringe Medicine. David Gerr 10(4)376-377 of Life. By Stephen Jay Gould. Rev. by Mark W. From the Anthropic Principle to the Supernatural. Durm and Massimo Pigliucci 23(6)53-56 David A. Shotwell 22(6)61-62 'Science and Religion Movement,' The. Eugenie C. Fundamental Dangers. Daniel Cohen 5(3)80 Scott 23(4)29-31 Fundamentalists and Cults. Tony Pasquarello Science and the Versus of Religion. Barry A. Palevitz 5(2)72-73 23(4)32-36 Fundamentalists and Cults. Maryann Roth 5(2)73 Science Educators Rebut Creationist-friendly Wall Fundamentalists and Cults. Taras Wolansky Street Journal Column. Kendrick Frazier 24(6)8 5(2)73-74 Sectarianism. Roy Wallis, ed. Rev. by Marcello Truzzi Give Me That Old-Time Religion. Richard Noll. 1(1)82 15(4)412-15 Should Skeptical Inquiry Be Applied to Religion? God's Own Scientists: Creationists in a Secular World Paul Kurtz 23(4)24-28 by Christopher P. Tourney. Rev. by Robert A. Baker SI and Religion. Jeffrey V Governale 10(2)190 21(6)52-54 SI and Religion. Russell Straw 10(2)190 Introduction: Conflicting or Complementary? Some Skeptics and True Believers. By Chet Raymo. Rev. by Introductory Thoughts About Boundaries. Wolf Roder 23(4)66-67 Kendrick Frazier 23(4)18-20 Sleeping with Extra-Terrestrials: The Rise of Irresponsible Speculation and Sctentism? John E. Irrationalism and Perils of Piety. By Wendy Chappell, Jr. 24(6)60 Kaminer. Rev. by Jim Sullivan 24(6)52 Let Our Children Go! Ted Patrick. Rev. by Roy Wallis Some Earlier Discussions of Science and Religion in 1(2)67-71 SI. No Author 23(4)52 Marriage of Sense and Soul, The. By Ken Wilber. Supernatural Power and Cultural Evolution. Rev. by Jeff Minerd 24(1)53-54 Anthony Layng 24(6)44-47 Martin Gardner Replies. Martin Gardner 10(1)91-92 Superstitions: Old and New. W.S. Bainbridge and R. 'Miracle' Priest Suspended. Joe Nickell 21(5)15 Stark 4(4)18-31 New Religious Consciousness, The. C.Y. Glock and Templeton and the AAAS. Ralph Estling 24(4)59-60 R.N. Bellah. Rev. by Rosa Willy 1(2)92 Three More Little Adventures on the Voodoo Non-Overlapping Magisteria. Stephen Jay Gould Science Front. Robert L. Park 24(6)7 23(4)55-61 Two Mind-Sets. Steve Allen 23(4)47-49 'Prophet for Profit' Describes New Cult Leader Whence Religious Belief? Steven Pinker 23(4)53-54, O'Brien. Joe Nickell 24(6)8-9 80 Ralph Estling Responds. 24(6)60-61 William Sims Bainbridge and Rodney Stark Reply. Random Notes on the Psi Scene. Kendrick Frazier W.S. Bainbridge and R. Stark 5(2)74-75 7(3)10-11 You Can't Have It Both Ways: Irreconcilable Religion and Investigations. John F. Davis Differences? Richard Dawkins 23(4)62-64

79 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER BOOK REVIEWS

Brain Biology and Belief

ANDREW THOMAS FYFE

Why God Won't Go Away. Andrew Newberg, M.D., and Eugene d'Aquili, M.D., Ph.D. Ballantine Books, New York, N.Y. 2001. ISBN 0-345-44033-1. 320 pp. Hardcover $24.95.

n the early 1990s Gallup polls frame of blood flow patterns" at the tion area is responsible for creating the showed that over half of American transcendent peak of mystical experi­ borders of die self, while "the right ori­ Iadults have had "a moment of sud­ ence. What was found in these scans entation area is associated with generat­ den religious awakening or insight." For was an expected increase in the activity ing the . .. physical space in which that these people one can image how this of the prefrontal cortex, home to the self can exist." experience could quickly become the In fact, people with severe damage to true pillar of their faith. Whatever this area of the brain have great diffi­ Thomas Aquinas may have done to try culty maneuvering in physical space— to prove God's existence in his Summa often bumping into chairs or falling to Theologica 800 years ago is unimportant the floor instead of successfully lying to the real, undeniable experience over down on a bed. But what the SPECT half of Americans have felt in their life­ scans show is not a shutdown of the times. A simple commoner can attain OAA; instead during spiritual events it that "oneness" with the universe and that becomes deprived of the "incoming flow great surge of both fear and overwhelm­ of sensory information" it needs to be ing joy by just closing his eyes and clear­ able to find any boundaries between ing his mind. Skeptics may show what­ itself and existence. Put simply, the ever logical and empirical evidence they mind has "no choice but to perceive that wish for and against the spiritual realm, the self is endless and intimately inter­ but eventually they must account for woven with everyone and everything." diat feeling of infinite harmony attrib­ Newberg and d'Aquili describe the uted to meditation and prayer. Thanks different levels of spiritual events leading to the latest in twenty-first century tech­ up to the culminary, and rare, "Absolute nology, that is exactly what Dr. Andrew Unity Being" (AUB) state. They describe Newberg and the late Eugene d'Aquili two paths of meditation that religions have attempted to do in dieir new book. have used over time to .main this AUB. Why God Won't Go Away. attention span; but also, and more inter­ Newberg and d'Aquili connect the origin The most compelling aspect of the estingly, there was a decrease in activity of religion and myth to the ability of the book is experiments using a "SPECT of the "orientation association area" brain to reach diis state. In turn, they also camera" (the acronym stands for single (OAA). The "primary job of the OAA is propose that die origin of this very "abil­ photon emission computed tomogra­ to orient the individual in physical ity" lies in our ancient ancestors' dread of phy) to take, as the title of the book's space," and to accomplish this it must death and need for safety. first chapter puts it, "a photograph of also generate a clear "distinction Those are the positives. God." Newberg and d'Aquili, working between the individual and everything The most dismaying aspect of Why with eight Tibetan meditators and sev­ else, to son out the you from the infinite eral Franciscan nuns, were able to use not-you that makes up the rest of the Andrew Thomas Fyfe is a skeptic serving the SPECT to gain an "accurate freeze- universe." Specifically, die left orienta­ in the U.S. Army at Ft. Bragg, N.C.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 71 BOOK REVIEWS

God Won't Go Away is the authors' con­ on to tell us that their work "could sup­ away from church and creed. He switched clusions from their own research. They port the argument that religious experi­ to what he calls "natural religion." regularly interject personal speculation, ence is only imagined neurologically, In this slim, thoughtful volume he and this greatly harms the work, at times that God is physically 'all in your ponders, as do so many other scientifi­ teetering to the point or scientific irre­ mind'," but then try to draw the oppo­ cally oriented people, why religion is "so sponsibility. They try to draw connec­ site conclusion later in the book with no vital to millions of thinking persons," tions between their research and the evidence why. Newberg and d'Aquili even while its supernatural base is "so existence of "a primary reality that runs repearedly state that they have proven highly improbable." deeper than material ... a state of pure that this meditative state is not a delu­ Scheffer's approach is gentle and being that encompasses the lesser reali­ sion, but I am inclined to believe this is thoughtful. He acknowledges that sci­ ties," whatever that means. The irony their attempt to soften the book so not entists like him have no special creden­ lies in how Newberg and d'Aquili often to drive away religious readers and their tials for writing about religion, but his point to the flaws in their own conclu­ wallets. Otherwise, Newberg and extended essay is nevertheless infused sions, but then fail to correct them. Just d'Aquili's ability to hold these contradic­ with a wildlife biologist's appreciation as often as they tell us that they believe tory ideas would be a true testament to and awe of nature. He considers life an "we saw evidence of a neurological the brain's ability to overcome reality electrochemical system, self-contained, process that has evolved to allow us and rationality. self-sustaining, multiplying and evolv­ humans to transcend material exis­ Overall, Why God Won't Go Away is ing by natural selection. He sees simi­ tence," they state (rather contradicto­ an important work in our understand­ larities throughout the animal world, rily) that dieir "neurological model . . . ing of the religious experience. This is a ranging from the largest whale to the does not explain whether absolute being field of study everyone should try and pygmy shrew—a 90-million-times dif­ is nothing more than a brain state or, as gain a basic understanding of, and this ference in scale, "yet both have similar mystics claim, the essence of what is book, even with its occasional elements tissues and organs and both (I presume) most fundamentally real." of pseudoscience, is a good start. 1 sug­ nurse their young with tenderness." A reader is left with the question, If gest everyone read this book for the Our human feeling of sympathy with their research cannot determine if this landmark experiments and research it others in pain has roots in the behavior transcendent and nonmaterial world relates, but then I also recommend you of social wild animals; care-giving for exists, then why do they at other times draw your own conclusions from those an injured companion is common, for draw the conclusion from their very experiments and not take the authors' example, among bottlenose dolphins. research that it does exist? They even go opinions too seriously. And while he sees no evidence of pur­ pose in life anywhere outside imagina­ tion, he nevertheless sees the human A BIOLOGIST A Gentle Scientist enterprise itself as full of purpose. LOOKS AT In brief chapters, Scheffer considers RELIGION Ponders Religious Belief the origins of religion, its strength today, KENDRICK FRAZIER the strength of nonbelief, and belief in prayer and immortality. "Science and A Biologist Looks at Religion. Victor B. Scheffer. Bamboo Religion" is treated in a concise six-page H5 Press, Seattle, 2001. (Distributed by the author, 1750 chapter. He gives the statistics showing 152nd Ave. NE, #214, Bellevue, WA 98007.) that belief among scientists in a personal ISBN 0-9676634-0-7. 88 pp. Softcover, $12. god has not significandy changed over the past eighty years (41.8 percent in ore than three decades ago, am proud to own both), and along the 1916, 39.3 percent in 1996), although zoologist Victor B. Scheffer way there were ten other books, most among "greater" scientists, members of Mwrote The Year of The Whale, dealing with outdoor values and biology. the National Academy of Sciences (as which won the Burroughs Medal for the Now in his ninety-fourth year, polled in 1998), disbelief is greater— best book in the field of natural history Scheffer turns his philosophical and almost total. He briefly sketches the in 1969 and helped spark the marine literary attention to religion. In the clos­ beliefs of five selected scientists includ­ mammal conservation movement of the ing years of his life, Scheffer says, he is try­ ing two believers, two nonbelievers, and 1970s. The Year of the Seal followed (I ing to make sense of religion— one uncommitted. particularly its Christian forms in In a balanced chapter on die bright Kendrick Frazier is editor of the America. Scheffer grew up a Presbyterian, and dark sides of religion, he sees both. SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. but the pull of natural science drew him "The bright side of organized religion

72 Seplember/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER BOOK REVIEWS

displays love expressed through pity, from religious doctrine," in elementary individual using methods designed to kindness, charity, compassion, sympathy, schools. He agrees with Carl Sagan's separate truth from falsity. We would care-giving, friendship, peacemaking, view that there is true spirituality in our expect such a person to be prepared to generosity, and goodwill." The dark side reverence and awe for nature. accept any conclusion derived from is intolerance. "The dark side of religion Scheffer concludes with a brief per­ those methods, and the assumptions displays hate expressed through die cal­ sonal credo. "I am an agnostic. ... I do made before starting die process to be culated use of power to suppress freedom believe that giving credit to a god-figure independent of the conclusions drawn. of thought and to impose by force the is far too easy: the cosmos deserves But from the very first page, it's clear beliefs of one group on another." respect; it deserves truly thoughtful this not what the author is about. In other brief chapters he considers speculation as to its being." The social Instead, Strobel begins from a perspec­ the challenges to religion in an ailing gifts of church can be valuable, but he tive of evangelical Christianity. He society, the future of religion, and the finds its sacraments and contracts for "investigates" it by posing hard ques­ greening of religion (a growing environ­ salvation un needed. tions about Christianity and traditional mental ethic). He predicts hopefully "One holds fast to Russell's dictum theism to "experts," and seeing if some that in the future the most greatly that a good world needs knowledge, set of plausible answers to them exist. admired persons "will be those who kindliness, and courage. One remem­ This is not an investigation in die sense believe in, and work for, the triumph of bers the unceasing human need for tint most of us understand it. gentleness and reason." His heroes from love—'the organizing power of the uni­ Clearly, Strobel asks the right ques­ his own time in this regard include verse.' One cultivates the habit of opti­ tions. Chapter titles include "Since evil Eleanor Roosevelt, Archibald MacLeish, mism. And one reserves the right to exists, a loving God cannot," "It's offen­ Joseph Wood Krutch, E.B. White, and challenge all who, hiding in the cloak of sive to claim Jesus is the only way to Rachel Carson. He calls for the teaching religion, show disrespect for the worth God," "God isn't worthy of worship if of moral values, "clearly dissociated and die dignity of human life." he kills innocent children," and so forth. The "experts" he interviews, of course, are all evangelical Christians. Space pro­ Defending the Faith hibits a detailed discussion of the BARRY FAGIN answers they provide. 1 think it safe to say, however, that while they are unsatis­ The Case for Faith: A Journalist Investigates the Toughest fying to skeptics, neither are they out­ Objections to Christianity. By Lee Strobel. Zondervan side the realm of possibility. Publishing, New York, 1998. ISBN 0310209307. 304 pp. But not outside the realm of possibility Paperback, SI2.99. is very different from true, or even likely. LEE STROBEL Throughout the book, Strobel wants readers to equate not incompatible with reason or evidence to shown conclusively s a skeptic who works along­ though perhaps not for the reasons by reason or evidence. Strobel, along widi side evangelical Christians on a their authors hope. most evangelical Christians interested in regular basis, I'm often asked Subtitled "A Journalist Investigates these issues, uses words from the vocab­ A ulary of science very differently from to read material not normally of inter­ the Toughest Objections to Chris­ est to SKEPTICAL INQUIRER readers. The tianity," the book is written by the for­ how scientists use them. At the very Case For Faith, by Lee Strobel, is an mer legal editor of the Chicago Tribune, least, bodi skeptics and believers owe it exception. Books like this are impor­ by his own admission a former atheist to the rest of the world to make that dis­ tant for skeptics to pay attention to, and now devout Christian. The book is tinction clear. a painful read for skeptics, not so much Since the belief system Strobel Barry Fagin is professor of computer sci­ because of its prose or because we might espouses can explain everything, it is not ence at the U.S. Air Force Academy He is find its conclusions difficult to accept, incompatible with anything, and there­ a member of the Rocky Mountain but because of its dramatically different fore the book is uninteresting on a Skeptics, a Senior Fellow in Technology use of words and concepts from what we purely logical level. Policy at the Independence Institute, and are accustomed to. Why, then, is it important? Because writes occasional columns on science and For example, when a skeptic reads of its intended audience and the way it critical thinking for Colorado newspa­ that an investigation is to be performed chooses to reach them. pers. Fagin is a member of Temple by a journalist, the standard use of diose Throughout The Case For Faith, Shalom in Colorado Springs. terms suggests an impartial search by an Strobel uses the rhetoric of journalism.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 73 BOOK REVIEWS

evidence, investigation, and analysis to skeptics, the book's primary purpose is gists who are ".. . devoted to explana­ make a case. Why? Conventional the­ to convert us to Christianity. Arc we tions of die way in which a reductionist ology has long argued that faith is now a sufficiently important audience to approach to the study of living organ­ beyond reason, and therefore unaf­ write for? Once again, Strobel thinks so. isms can lead us to formulate incom­ fected by it. Why must a different case That the author believed his jour­ plete answers to questions about biology be made now? nalistic credentials to be of interest to or to miss the essential features of bio­ Why is it so important to the author prospective readers, that he chose the logical processes or to ask the wrong and his publisher that reason be used rhetoric of reason, logic, and inves­ questions in the first place." to support their faith? Perhaps their tigative reporting to tell his story, and More than naked reductionism, decision reflects a growing recogni­ that he made a great deal of the acad­ Lewontin believes, is needed to explain tion among fundamentalist Christians emic credentials of his experts is evi­ life and how it evolves—something more of the importance of science, reason, dence that fundamentalist Christians than codes written on DNA or their tran­ and rationality. recognize how influential critical scriptions onto microchips must emerge For believers, this book is reassurance thinking and the scientific method are to offer us epistemological relief: "If we that they need not set aside their rational today. At a time when skeptics are had the complete DNA sequence of an faculties to practice their faith. Are there often discouraged at the gullibility of organism and unlimited computational a significant number of Christians who the media and the poor level of science power, we could not compute the organ­ feel that way? Strobel thinks so. The education of the average citizen, books ism because the organism does not com­ book also can help evangelicals respond like The Case For Faith serve to remind pute itself from its genes." to rationalist attacks. Do Christians us that the other side sees things a lit­ Lewontin, in his concise attack, encounter many such attacks today? tle differently. For skeptics, that's truly makes clear that the war between holism Strobel thinks so. For non-Christian good news. and reductionism in science is not over. He believes geneticists and their molecu­ lar explanations of life have ".. . pauper­ Is Biological Life More ized, temporarily it is to be hoped, an entire field of study." Money and respect than Coded Molecules? are the main reasons why Harvard and RICHARD EMERY Oxford continue to lob their literary ordnance at each other. Lewontin sides The Triple Helix. By Richard Lewontin. Harvard University with his wounded colleague, Gould, Press, Cambridge/London, 2000. ISBN 0-674-00159-1. noted punctuator of evolution and 136 pp. Hardback, $22.95. authority on the Cambrian explosion (when the body plans of animals were established rather suddenly about half a billion years ago). Dawkins, with he war of books continues to His new book. The Triple Helix, is a his body-snatching genes and mind- rage in the north Atlantic over jab at molecular biology and genetics, snatching memcs, is bothering these an old question: What exactly is and a conspicuous swipe at Richard T Harvard laureates again. biological life? Harvard and Oxford are Dawkins, the Oxford agitator for selfish Here, precisely, is where biology is fighting at the front. genes and extended phenotypes. coming to terms with itself. Both sides Richard Lewontin, Harvard's emi­ Dawkins, in his contrary books, asks of this epic drama are concerned with nent Agassiz Research Professor in instead why humans and chimpanzees the validity of emergent properties, like Comparative Biology, is not pleased look so much alike. The base reduction- gravity, governed by physical laws. with those too preoccupied with the ism he uses offends Lewontin. Besides, Molecular biologists can show with operations of genes. "No developmental it was Dawkins, in his Unweaving the astonishing clarity how genes manifesdy biologist asks why human beings and Rainbow (1998, reviewed in SKEPTICAL build, operate, repair, reproduce, and chimpanzees look so different, except to INQUIRER, March/April 1999), who pre­ even kill living organisms. Indeed say die obvious: that they have different viously kicked the academic pants of genetic dogma defines die new emer­ genes." Lewontin thinks diere's much Harvard's biologist Stephen Jay Gould. gent property, and old-timers like more to life than that. Now it's Lewontin's turn to kick back for Gould's sake, and Harvard's, too. Lewontin are not so impressed. Richard Emery teaches biology at Olympic Lewontin abstains from mentioning He sees a different sort of emergent College in Bremerton, Washington. He either his colleague or his adversary, but property—a "dialectic." He uses interest­ can be reached at [email protected]. he is out to make a case against biolo­ ing examples in both plant and animal

74 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER BOOK REVIEWS

kingdoms to show that biological things the genetic dictionary (the exact code), do appear to happen apart from genes: or the Central Dogma (that coded infor­ environmental influences on corn yield, mation on DNA must always flow morphological changes in tropical vines, through RNA to make a protein, and different eye sizes in fruit flies, skeletal never in die opposite direction). traits in dinosaurs. All of these lead him Early in The Triple Helix, Lewontin to understand life as a recursively "dialec­ cautions us on the pitfalls of metaphor. tic" phenomenon in nature. The third We must use language to describe lan- lliiiics "If we had the complete DNA sequence of an organism and unlimited computational power, we could not compute the organism because the organism does not compute itself from its genes." In an effort fo promote science and skepticism among all generations, the Committee for the Scientific Investigation strand of "the triple helix" is taken to guage, unfortunately, and he is disdainful of Claims of the Paranormal mean "... a dialectic between organisms of that: "Just as die metaphor of develop­ (CSICOP). is pleased to and their environments, each forming ment implies a rigid internal predetermi­ announce the launch of the other." As such, Lewontin believes nation of the organism by its genes, so the Young Skeptics Program. that holistically correct biologists should the language used to describe the bio­ The Web-based program is geared towards students, chemistry of the genes themselves implies focus on "... a dialectic of method and parents and educators. an internal self-sufficiency ... and die problematic in science." CSICORorg/youngskeptics Lewontin complains about the metaphor of the Holy Grail seems tedium of mechanical reductionism entirely apt since it too was said to be self- where "[t]he problem of how to parse renewing—although only on Good The goals of the Young the world into appropriate bits and Friday" (his words). Skeptics Program are: pieces is a consequence of the analytic In this context, Dawkins might ask: »To promote science and skepticism within an focets of society and among tradition that modern science has inher­ If you are disdainful of false metaphors, all generations. ited from die seventeenth century." This why do you so often refer to genes as » To provide multiple outlets tot young people to learn and involve themselves distinguished biologist feels a natural "blueprints" of proteins? That, of in science, skepticism, and critical need to refute reductionism because life course, is a false metaphor: blueprints Inquiry. seems so much more complex. look something like the objects they » To work with parents, teachers and students in an effort to promote If the chemists have all the answers, define, genes look nothing like the pro­ learning, defend and advance science rJien what's a biologist to do? teins they express. education, and encourage critical thinking in al oreas of Me. A reader might also ask why Lewontin concludes: "Progress in > to help young people make sense of Lewontin does not place his own biology depends not on revolutionary the world by developing the tools and new conceptualizations, but on the cre­ gathering the Information to navigate hypothesis more squarely on the table. through the nonsense effectively. He offers no parameters for measuring ation of new methodologies that make « To nurture curiosity, wonder, and the the "dialectic." Instead, he drags out questions answerable in practice in a imagination while sharing In the fascination of realty and the vague promises of what he calls the world of finite resources." Dawkins excitement our universe has to offer. "Three C's": catastrophe theory (an should be feeling dispatched. > To explore extraordinary claims and ocean wave breaking), chaos theory (a Many fine biologists, in their forma­ Investigate unexplained phenomena. whle enksying ourselves In the process. hurricane forming), and complexity the­ tive years, were told by arrogant • To Inspfre future generations to prouaTy ory (undiscovered laws of complex sys­ chemists that if they could actually do carry the torch of science and reason science they would do it in chemistry. and keep the Home burning bright for tems). Lewontin can only hope, how­ years to come. ever, because none of these theories has And now these molecular bullies are yet revealed a single emergent property taking over, reducing biology to "bits For more information please to match the power of a geneticist's and pieces," teaching biologists what contact Program Director Hardy-Weinberg equation (the statistical they couldn't learn on their own. This Amanda Chesworth at distribution of alleles), homeobox genes may be why Lewontin feels the need to [email protected] (an organism's developmental software). call their bluff. D

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 75 NEW BOOKS

Listing does not preclude future review. Little Green Men, Meowing Nuns, and flying saucer at Roswell dissolves, and a Head-Hunting Panics: A Study of Mass quite different picture comes into focus" The Borderlands of Science: Where Sense Psychogenic Illness and Social Delusion. writes Pflock after thirteen chapters of Meets Nonsense. Michael Shermer. Oxford Robert E. Bartholomew. McFarland & Co., analysis. "No saucer wreckage. No bodies. University Press, London, New York, 2001. Inc. Publishers, Box 611, Jefferson, NC No missing nurses. Instead there is revealed ISBN 0-19-514326-4. 360 pp. Hardcover, 28640. 2001. ISBN 0-7864-0997-5. 292 pp. the story of a highly classified, very sensi­ $25. A book about the fuzzy borderlands of Softcover, $29.95. Foreword by Erich Goode. tive U.S. Army Air Force research- science, exploring the boundary problem A scries of case studies of mass hysteria and and-development project, how it almost between orthodoxy and heresy in science in delusions. Bartholomew begins with a concise was compromised by a combination of general, and between normal science and history of mass hysteria atid social delusions. complacency, chance, and hubris, and what nonscience, revolutionary science, radical Sections then deal with mass hysteria in military authorities did to forestall such a science, pseudoscience, protoscience, and closed settings (schools and work), mass hys­ security breach." nonsense in particular. Divided into three teria in communities (mad gassers, the parts: Borderlands Theories ("theories of Pokemon TV show sickness, die medieval Skepticism and Humanism: The New everything," cloning, racial differences), dancing sickness), collective delusions (penis Paradigm. Paul Kurtz. Transaction Borderlands People (Wallace, Darwin, vanishing panics; imaginary air raids on Publishers, Rutgers-The State University, Freud, Sagan). and Borderlands History. Canada: the phantom sniper of Esher. 35 Berrue Circle. Piscataway. NJ 08854- Shermer begins by offering a Boundary England; ghost rockets; the Roswell crashed- 8042. 2001. ISBN 0-7658-0051-9. 306 pp. Detection Kit, ten useful questions to ask in UFO myth; the Martian invasion panic), and Hardcover, $39.95. A spirited defense of the determining the validity of a claim. major issues and future directions. values of reason, skepticism, science, and Throughout, he casts a strong critical intelli­ humanism in an increasingly complex world gence on all manner of interesting topics and Roswell: Inconvenient Facts and the Will where, to take just one point, science has issues along the fuzzy borderlands. to Believe. Karl T. Pflock. Prometheus become so specialized that few people can Books, 59 John Glenn Drive, Amherst, NY draw on its broader intellectual and cultural implications. Kurtz has devoted his life to Final Stance: The Strange Friendship 14228-2197. 2001. ISBN 1-57392-894-1. using the methods of skeptical inquiry in all Between Houdini and Conan Doyle. 331 pp. Hardcover, $25. In his foreword fields of human interest—including reli­ Massimo Polidoro. Prometheus Books, 59 Jerry Pournelle calls this a "courageous and gion—while likewise being committed to John Glenn Drive, Amherst, NY 14228-2197. important" book, and in many respects it the secular humanist paradigm. He also has 2001. ISBN 1-57392-896-8. 275 pp. is. Pflock is a rare breed, a pro-UFOIogist been involved in creating alternative institu­ Hardcover, $25. The story of an unusual who is an anti-Roswellean, the result of his tions to carry forth and sustain those ideas. friendship between escape artist Harry own eight years of research into the Roswell Skeptics may find especially valuable Part Houdini and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the cre­ story and his gradual conversion from One of this collection of papers, "Skeptics of ator of Sherlock Holmes. Houdini was an wanting to bust open the truth about the World Unite!" It deals with anrisciencc ardent skeptic about spiritualism and often Roswell to discovering that he was not as paradigms, skeptical inquiry, skepticism and publicly exposed fraudulent mediums; Conan objective as he had believed. Pflock is a for­ the paranormal, the escape to oblivion, fears Doyle was a true believer who became con­ mer Defense Department and intelligence of the apocalypse, scientific tests of astrol­ vinced that the dead communicated with the official, and this is a meticulously ogy, the "Mars Effect," a defense of scientific living. One chapter deals with the Scientific researched look at Roswell. Pflock con­ medicine. Can the sciences be unified? American committee established in 1923, with cludes that Roswell was indeed stimulated Should skeptical inquiry be applied to Houdini as a member, to investigate specific by the debris from a constant-level balloon religion? And, Why do people believe or claims of mediums; Conan Doyle considered project in 1947 that had both civilian (New disbelieve? This is a companion volume it a "farce." Based on original correspondence, York University researchers led by professor to Toward a New Enlightenment: The photographs, and his own extensive research, Charles B. Moore) and secret military Philosophy of Paul Kurtz, from the same Polidoro reconstructs this unusual friendship aspects. "On close and careful examination, publisher. between a believer and a skeptic. the seemingly impressive case for a crashed

ARTICLES OF NOTE

Bailar, John C "The Powerful Placebo and Wizard of Oz who "was powerful because odi- debate surrounding creationism or evolution in the Wizard of Oz." The New England Journal ers thought he was powerful—until they our school curriculum is stronger dian ever. of Medicine, 344(21): 1630-32, May 24, 2001. found that the curtain hid a very ordinary Blumner suggests, "Creationism is back under In an editorial regarding Hrobjartsson and man." He wonders if the placebo is powerful a new, politically astute guise" from our "born- Gotzsches's study of the placebo effect (below), because we have yet to look behind die curtain. again president and Religious right Attorney Bailar—a doctor at the University of General" to die credentialed Intelligent Design Chicago—claims the findings impressive, but Blumner, Robyn. "New Form of theorists. Religion has nothing to fear from the conclusions too sweeping. As he writes, "I Creationism Shouldn't Be in School Cur­ evolution, for science is neither "anti-religious" would not want to prescribe or receive a riculum.*' St. Petersburg Times, May 20, 2001, nor "atheistic." Religious leaders should in fact placebo without some reason rJiat was far more www.sptimes.com/news/052001 /perspective/n fear a government that includes spiritual beliefs specific than weak evidence of some general ew form of creationi.shtm 1. With me famous in school curricula, beliefs that "may or may 'placebo effect.'" He compares diis effect to the Scopes Trial seventy-five years behind us, die not comport with doctrine," says Blumner.

76 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER ARTICLES OF NOTE

Hrobjartsson, Asbjorn, and Peter C. Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Kepler (1571-1630), Kepler College of Gotzsche. "Is die Placebo Powerless? An Paranormal, who question "whether a scien­ Astrological Arts and Sciences is the only Analysis of Clinical Trials Comparing tific evaluation of the efficacy of prayer is even college in the Western Hemisphere that Placebo widi No Treatment." The New theoretically feasible." The results of this issues higher education accredited B.A. and England journal of Medicine, 344(21): study will be published in early 2002. M.A. degrees in astrology. Located in 1594-1602, May 24, 2001. To evaluate Washington State, the program consists of whether placebos help patients with diseases, Scott, Eugenie C. "Fatally Flawed an eleven-week online course, and one week the authors conducted a systematic review of Iconoclasm." Science, 292:2257-2258, June of on-campus training. Says Silber, the chan­ clinical trials where patients were given cither 22, 2001. Another well-informed critical cellor of Boston University, "It is inexcusable a placebo or no treatment. Litde evidence was review of Jonathan Wells's evolution-bashing for the government to certify teachers of found to prove that placebos had powerful Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? "Wells pre­ nonsense as competent or to authorize . . . clinical effects. The authors conclude that sents a systematically misleading view of evo­ the granting of degrees in nonsense." outside a clinical setting, they see no justifica­ lution," says anthropologist Scott. "Individual tion for the use of placebos, but that "they had sentences in Icons arc usually technically cor­ Koenig, Robert. "Creationism Takes Root possible small benefits in studies with contin­ rect, but they arc artfully strung together to Where Europe and Asia Meet." Science, uous subjective outcomes and for the treat­ take the reader off the padi of real evolution­ 292:1286-87, May 18, 2001. In a country ment of pain." ary biology and into a thicket of misunder­ where one of the strongest anti-evolution standing." Scon blasts Wells's "incomplete and movements outside of North America (the incorrect" discussion about peppered moths Murphy, Cullen. "Innocent Bystander: Thy BAV—roughly translated: "Science Research and his failure to cite the abundance of human Will Be Done." The Atlantic Monthly, April Foundation) resides, Aykut Kence and Isik fossils over the last 5 million years. Scon con­ 2001, pp. 18, 20. Herbert Benson, M.D., Bokesoy, two Turkish scientists, have literally cludes that the book "has high potential to dedicated their lives to teaching evolution. author of the 1975 book The Relaxation mislead the nonscientific public, and scientists Response, "has mounted a new controversial Three years ago, Kence formed the should be prepared to respond." Evolution Group, which educates the public scientific effort to determine ... whether on the "scientific basis of evolutionary the­ intercessory prayer 'works.'" Benson is the ory." Kence says, "I won't let them silence president of the Mind/Body Medical Institute Silber, John. "Silliness Under Seattle me. If knowledgeable people keep quiet, it and an associate professor at Harvard Medical Stars." Boston Herald Wednesday, May 16, only helps those who spread nonsense." School. His studies are being met with skepti­ 2001, www.bostonherald.com/news/colum- cism by both the Council for Secular nists/silber05162001.htm. Named after Humanism and the Committee for the astronomer and optical scientist, Johannes —-Jodi Chapman LJ

Top Ten Best Sellers in New York

The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Moon Lander. How We Developed Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest the Apollo Lunar Module (Smithsonian for the Ultimate Theory History of Aviation and Spaceflight Series) Brian Greene Thomas J. Kelly Vintage Books Smithsonian Institution Press

Telecosm: How Infinite Bandwidth The Triumph of Evolution Will Revolutionize Our World and the Failure of Creationism George Gilder Niles Eldredge Free Press W.H. Freeman & Co.

The Selfish Gene The Mythical Man-Month: Richard Dawkins 8 Essays on Software Engineering Oxford University Press (Trade) Frederick P., Brooks. Jr. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. Genome; The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters Robin Williams Design Workshop Matt Ridley Robin Williams, John Tollett HarperCollins Peachpit Press

Practical Algebra: A Self-Teaching The Ape and the Sushi Master: Cultural Guide 2nd Edition Reflections of a Primatologist Peter H. Selby, et al. 10 F.B.M. De Waal, Frans De Waal John Wiley & Sons Basic Books

By arrangement with Amazon.com, July 2001.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 77 Biomagnetic pseudoscience and nonsense claims, SabadelU FILL IN THE GAPS IN YOUR Catching up with eighteenth century science in the evalua­ tion of therapeutic touch. Ball and Alexander I Paranormal depictions in the media: How do they affect what people believe?. Sparks / Planting a seed of doubt Shneour / Essiac: The not-so-remarkable cancer remedy. McCufcheon / Near- Skeptical Inquirer COLLECTION Earth objects: Monsters of Doom?. Gardner. • 15% discount on orders of $100 or more • MAY/JUNE 1998 (vol. 22, no. 3): Special Section: The Aliens Files, Abduction by aliens or sleep paralysis?, • $6.25 a copy. Vols. 1-18 ($5.00 Vols. 19-22). To order, use reply card insert • Blackmore I Before Roswell: The meaning behind July/August 2001 (vol. 25. no. 4): Confronting veterinary NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1999 (vol. 23. no. 6): The the crashed-UFO myth, Bartholomew I Case closed: medical nonsense, Imrie / Junk science and the law, Universe and Carl Sagan, Davidson I The millennium Reflections on the 1997 Air Force Roswell report. Codes / Chevreul's report on the mysterious oscillations thought contagion, lynch / Debunking the Gildenberg and Thomas I Gray Barker: My friend, of the hand-held pendulum. Spitz and Marcuard I debunkers: A response to astrology. Kelly I The the myth-maker, Sherwood I A skeptic living in Roswell, Churchill I Zero-point energy and Harold CSICOP 25th Anniversary section: A quarter-century of physics behind four amazing demonstrations, Willey I Puthoff. Gardner. skeptical inquiry, Paul Kurtz I Thoughts on science and Another lunar effect put to rest. Sweet / Special Report: Blooming shroud claims, Nickell I The star of skepticism in the twenty-first century, Kendrick Frazier I Bethlehem. Gardner. MARCH/APRIL 1998 (vol. 22, no. 2): Special Report: Proper criticism, Ray Hyman I The lighter side of skepti­ The price of bad memories, Loftus I Science, delusion, cism. Pudim IA skeptical look at Karl Popper, Gardner. SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 1999 (vi I. 23, no. 5): Special and the appetite for wonder. Dawkins I A mind at MAY/JUNE 2001 (vol. 25, no. 3): The shrinking filedrawer. Report: Flash! Fox news reports aliens may have built play: An interview with Martin Gardner. Frazier I Stokes / The Pokemon Panic of 1997, Radford I The the pyramids. Carrier I Where do we come from?. Houdini and Conan Doyle: The story of a strange Antinous Prophecies, Pickover I Common Pigliucci I Profits and prophecy. Wise I friendship. Polidoro I Spontaneous human combus­ myths of children's behavior, Fiorello I Projective measures of personality and tion: Thoughts of a forensic biologist, SenecJce / Did Bertrand Russell and critical receptive- psychopathology: How well do they Adam and Eve have navels?. Gardner. work?, Lilienfeld I What every skeptic ness. Hare I CSICOP 25th Anniversary sec­ JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1998 (vol. 22, no. 1): Testing new tion: From the editor's seat: 25 years of ought to know about subliminal persua­ sion. Epley, Savitsky, and Kachelski I claims of dermo-optical perception, Benski and CRSSA science and skepticism, Kendrick Frazier I Scientists I Magnetic water and fuel treatment Powell I Science vs. pseudoscience, nonscience. Carlos Castaneda and New Age anthro­ pology. Gardner. Dowsing the Rollrights, Hancock I Anomalous gold, and nonsense, James Alcock I CSICOP Brower I Open minds and the argument from ignorance, timeline / Primal scream: A persistent JULY/AUGUST 1999 (vol. 23. no. 4): Special Adler I 200% probability and beyond: The compelling New Age therapy. Gardner. Issue: Science and Religion, Conflict or nature of extraordinary claims in the absence of alterna­ MARCH/APRIL 2001 (vol. 25, no. 2): Conciliation? Celebrating creation, Raymo tive explanations, McDonald I Psychic exploitation, Darwin In mind. Edit I A bit confused, I Should skeptical inquiry be applied to Wiseman and Greening I Is cannibalism a myth?, Gardner. Roche / What can the paranormal teach religion?, Kurtz I The 'Science and NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1997 (vol. 21, no. 6): The Mars us about consciousness?. Blackmore Religion' movement. Scoff / Science and effect in retrospect. Nienhuys I Hidden messages and Spontaneous human confabulati the versus of religion, Palevitz I Science vs. the Bible code. Thomas I Science, scientism, and anti- Nienhuys I Italy's version of H* religion. Pazameta I Anthropic design. science in the age of preposterism. Haack I The Stenger/Scientific skepticism. CSICOP. and Houdini, Nisbet / A psychological cas Elemental Man: An interview with Glenn T. Seaborg / the local groups. Novella and Bloomberg I of 'demon' and 'alien' visitation. R. Men in Black and Contact Night and day. Summer I healing and Elizabeth Targ, Gardner. Two mind-sets, Allen I God is dead, after the weather and sports, Reiss / Whence religious belief? Pinker I Non-over­ Intelligent design and Phillip Johnson. Gardner. SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 1997 (vol. 21. no. 5): Special Issue: JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2001 (vol. 25. no. 1): Special lapping magisteria. Gould I You can't have it both ways: Irreconcilable differences?, Dawkirts I The concerns of sci­ Alternative Medicine in a Scientific World. Park, Section: Issues In Alternative Medicine: Medicine wars, ence, Mayr I The religious views of Stephen Gould and Beyerstein. Sampson, Green. Goodenough, McCuttheon Seidman I Herbal medicines and dietary supplements, Charles Darwin, Gardner. I The Numerology of Dr. Rashad Khalifa, Gardner. Allen I Psychoactive herbal medications, Spinella I JULY/AUGUST 1997 (vol. 21. no. 4): Special Report: Chiropractic Homola I Damaged goods? Science and MAY/JUNE 1999 (vol. 23, no. 3): Special Section: Urban Heaven's Gate. Kurtz. Gardner. Nickell I What really child sexual abuse, Hagen / Special Report: Science legends. The snuff film. Sfme / Bitter harvest: The happened at Roswell, Korff I Amazing free-energy indicators 2000 / Facilitated communication. Gardner. organ-snatching urban legends. Radford I Bigfoot's claims of Dennis Lee, Krieg I Chiropractic: Science, NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2000 (vol. 24, no. 6): The face screen test, Daegling and Schmitt I Tracking Bigfoot behind the Face on Mars. Posner I The new paranat- on the Internet, Zuefle I Statement analysis. Shearer I antiscience, pseudoscience Keating I Secrets of a ural paradigm, Kurtz I Francis Bacon and the true NAGPRA. science, and the demon-haunted world. Russian psychic Polidoro. ends of skepticism. Friedberg I Worlds in collision: Clark I Urine therapy, Gardner. MAY/JUNE 1997 (vol. 21, Where reality meets the paranormal. Radford I Why TO. 3): Is the sky falling?, Morrison I Collective del isions: A skeptic's guide, bad beliefs don't die, Lester I Supernatural power MARCH/APRIL 1999 (vol 23. no. 2): Special Report: The ten-percent myth, Radford I Superstition and the regres­ Sartho/omew / Scientific r lasoning and achievement and cultural evolution, layng / The brutality of Dr. in a high school English (ourse. Krai I Skepticism and Bettelheim. Gardner. sion effect Kruger. Savitsky, and Gilovich I Psychology of the seance, Wiseman I Dowsing and archaeology, van politics, Fagin I Courtney Brown's 'Cosmic Voyage' into SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2000 (vol. 24. no. 5): Voodoo Leusen I Hidden messages in DNA?. Larhammar and preposterism, Gardner. science and the belief gene. Park I Rogerian Nursing Chatzidimitriou I The real Chief Seattle MARCH/APRIL 1997 (vol. 21, no. 2): The Theory, Raskin I Sun sign columns. Dean and Mather I was not a spiritual ecologist. Abruzzi I darkened cosmos: A tribute to Carl Sagan Joint pain and weather. Quick I The psychic staring effect. Marks and Co/we'/ / / Hate-Bopp comet madness plus An Acupressure, zone therapy, and reflexol­ Management of positive and negative responses in a astronomer's personal statement on spiritualist medium consultation. Greasley I The laws ogy, Gardner. UFOs. Hale I Biases of everyday judg­ of nature: A skeptic's guide. Pazameta I Special Report: On ear cones and candles. Kaushall and JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1999 (vol. 23. no. ment Gilovich I The end of science?. Kaushalll little Red Riding Hood. Gardner. 1): Special Report: Armageddon and the Sc/iic* / The Boo* of Predictions: 15 years prophets of doomsday. Fears of the later, Tuerkheimer and Vyse I Farrakhan. JULY/AUGUST 2000 (vol. 24. no. 4): Thought Field apocalypse. Kurtz I The Bible and the Cabala. Baha'i, and 19, Gardner. Therapy: Can we really tap our problems away?, prophets of doom. Larue I Science and JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1997 (vol. 21. no. 1): Gaudiano and Herbert I Absolute skepticism equals pseudoscience in Russia. Kapitza I The X-Files meets the skeptics: Chris Carter dogmatism, Bunge I Did a close encounter of the third Testing dowsing: The failure of the takes questions / The significance of the kind occur on a Japanese beach in 1803?, Tanaka I Munich experiments. Enright I A falli- millennium. Loevinger I Quantum quack- Rethinking the dancing mania. Bartholomew / Has sci­ bilist among the cynics, Haack I The en/. Stenger / The mysterious placebo. ence education become an enemy of scientific ratio­ Dodes / Bias and Error in children's books. nality?. Ede I Krakatene: Explosive pseudoscience from internet: A world brain?, Gardner. Wiseman and Jeffreys I Jean Houston: the Czech Academy of science. Slanina I David Bohm NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1998 (vol. 22, no. and Krishnamurti. Gardner. 6): Gaps in the fossil record: A case study. Guru of human potential. Gardner. Thomas I The Martian Panic sixty years later NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1996 (vol. 20. no. 6): A strat­ MAY/JUNE 2000 (vol. 24. no. 3): Special Report: The Bartholomew I The perils of post-hockery. Ruscio / May egy for saving science. Lederman I That's entertain new bogus MJ-12 documents. Klass I Mass delusions the force be with you, Krauss I The Mead-Freeman con­ mentl TV's UFO coverup, Klass I Scientific consensus and hysterias of the past millennium. Bartholomew troversy: A fresh look: Much ado about nothing The and expert testimony. Moore I The Dogon people and Goode I Doomsday fears at RHIC. Guiterrez I Save 'Fateful Hoaxing' of Margaret Mead. Cdte I Margaret revisited, Ortiz de Montellano I Cosmic menagerie. our science: The struggle for rationality at a French Mead. Derek Freeman, and the issue of evolution. Tyson / Physicist Alan Sokal's hilarious hoax. Gardner. university, Sroch / Paraneuroscience?. Kirkland I Shankman I Second World Skeptics Congress: Science SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 1996 (vol. 20. no. 5): Shades of Bohm's guided wave theory. Gardner. and reason, foibles and fallacies, and doomsdays / meaning: Science fiction as a new metric Stewart / The MARCH/APRIL 2000 (vol. 24. no. 2): Rtsky business: Science and the unknowable. Gardner. first World Skeptics Congress / Traditional medicine and pseudoscience in China, part 2. Beyerstein and Sampson Vividness, availability, and the media paradox, Ruscio I SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 1998 (vol. 22. no. 5): Special Physics and the paranormal, 't Hooft / Efficacy of I Conspiracy theories and paranoia. Harrington I Isaac Section: What are the chances?. Coincidences: Remarkable Newton. Gardner prayer. Tessman and Tessman I Can we tell if someone ot random?. Martin I Numerology: Coma* th« revolution. is staring at us?, Baker / Assessing the quality of med­ Dudley /Calculated risks. Cole /How to study weird things, JULY/AUGUST 1996 (vol. 20. no. 4): Traditional medicine ical Web sites. Levi I The demon-haunted sentence, Trocco / Why would people nor believe weird things?. and pseudoscience in China. Beyerstein and Sampson I Byrne and Normand I Mad messiahs. Gardner. Anderson I Starkle. starkle. little twink, Hayes / Of planets CSICOP at twenty. Kurtz I Maria's near-death experience. JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2000 (vol. 24. no 1): Special and cognitions: The use of deductive inference in the nat­ Ebbern. Mulligan, and Beyerstein I Alternative hearth Report: The ten outstanding skeptics of the twentieth ural sciences and psychology. Schlinger Jr. I Whaf s going education and pseudocredentialing, Raso I Pentagon century / Two paranocmalisms or two and a half ?. Goode on at Temple University?. Gardner. grant funds alternative health study. Se/oy and Scheiber I Anna Eva Fay. Polidoro I The pseudoscience of oxygen JULY/AUGUST 1998 (vol. 22, no. *Y. Special Report Mars I Thomas Edison. Paranormalist Gardner. therapy. Allen I Confessions of a (former) graphologist. Global Surveyor photographs 'Face on Mars', Morrison I For a complete listing of our bade issues, call 800-634- Tripician I The Second Coming of Jesus, Gardner. Magnetic tfierapy: Plausible attraction. Livingston I 1610. or see http://www.csicop.org/si/ba

Another Skeptical Inquiry

RALPH ESTLING

This Utter was forwarded to me by proved himself to me empirically and ourselves, which some of us appear to SKEPTICAL INQUIRER'S editor: is merciful, just, and loving. I am think are worse breaches of etiquette than going to pray for Mr. Estling. I won­ attacks on our gods. der if he will sense either of our To the Editor (Letters): deities interceding in his life. You are quite right that there can be Several months ago I canceled my sub­ no absolute proof on whether gods exist Sincerely yours, scription to the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. I or whether there is any spiritual essence [Susan E. Macinryre] did so because of the plethora of opin­ in or beyond the physical universe. But ionated articles insulting people who Dear Ms. Macinryre, as I'm sure you know, negatives are believe in a personal god finally irri­ tated me more than the remaining arti­ impossible to disprove in logic. It would cles informed me. A true skeptic, I A copy of your letter has been forwarded seem therefore that under these circum­ propose, should realize that there is not to me by SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. stances the burden of proof lies with the now nor ever will there be any proof I am sorry if my article, "Templeton proposer of the hypothesis, with the of whether or not God exists. They and rJie AAAS," caused you, or anyone, person who holds the existence of super­ should at best leave it alone and at least not present their own "religion" as distress as this was not my intent. My natural beings, forces, and events are though it were commonly accepted. intent was to provoke thought, includ­ true and factual. Too many of us remain Regardless, my issues kept arriving and ing my own. I am aware that thought uncontaminatcd by events. were mainly given away or trashed. can be painful, especially when it leads Because of a temporary lack of other I have no religion of any kind, includ­ reading materials, however, I did read us in directions towards which we ing atheism. It is my belief, subject to revi­ the majority of the July/August 2000 would rather not go. I am also aware sion or total dismissal should this be war­ issue. I was actually enjoying the mag­ that smugness, arrogance, and intellec­ ranted, that gods do not exist and that if azine and learning some useful infor­ tually bullying, whether by believers or they did, their primary concern would mation until I read Ralph Estling's "Forum" concerning "Templeton and nonbelievers, is not the way to enlight­ not be with my welfare, whether physical, the AAAS." As one of those he called enment and understanding. moral, or spiritual. I do not know what "contented cows," I felt a metaphorical I believe that most of us are free to credentials I or anyone else might offer in slap in die face and my enjoyment was believe whatever we like about the gods. order to substantiate our beliefs, or lack of suddenly negated. I looked immedi­ them, except an honest attempt to deal ately for Mr. Estling's credentials so as Where we are not free is to insist that to understand why his opinions would others take us and our beliefs seriously. with diese important matters. Of course be given space in the SKEPTICAL But 1 also believe that those among us these attempts can never be fully accurate INQUIRER and alas could find none. who pride themselves on their intellect, and may indeed be totally in error. If one Who is he? rationality, and academic accomplish­ is honest with oneself this conclusion is unavoidable and should lead to a certain ments, such as professional scientists and I would like also to suggest tli.it sense of humility, rather than intellectual Mr. Estling betrayed himself in his certain philosophers, are not free to or spiritual arrogance. article. He does indeed believe in a believe whatever they like, not if they are personal god, if not intellectually, honest with themselves and wish others certainly emotionally. His bitterness I am sorry that even before reading is evident. His god is mean-spirited, to regard diem with respect for their my article you chose to cancel your sub­ inflicting disease for the sole purpose integrity. Perhaps this is why you feel chat scription to SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. A pub­ of torturing mankind and waiting articles in SKEPTICAL INQUIRER, and else­ lication with such a tide cannot honestly like a "butcher carefully grinding his where, are insulting when they question limit itself, draw careful boundaries ax" to kill (or eat?) his true believers. This same god was described by Jim the need for a personal god. Personal around its inquiries into areas where no Ring (see the last letter under gods are, above all else, personal, and "Critiquing Prayer Studies" p. 64 many of us are quick to associate attacks Our occasional essayist Ralph Estling same issue). The God I believe in has on these supernatural beings as attacks on writes from Ilminster, Somerset, England.

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Sepiember/Octobei 2001 79 FORUM

one can be irritated or offended, nor its merry, and not so merry, way in any tant than your deep concern and kind­ where skepticism must of necessity be case. What emotion I possess in these ness in regard to that wellbeing. I am curtailed so as never to cause pain to matters is limited to persons who loudly seventy and in mediocre health. It is not some. More to the point, I believe we do profess their rationality while refusing to beyond the realm of possibility that I ourselves a great disservice by not accord­ live in accordance with its dictates. might be meeting that God in the not- ing those whose opinions and outlooks I am glad that the God in whom you too-distant future. If I do, it will come as we do not share full opportunity to assail believe is merciful, just, and loving. I a surprise, but I've been surprised before. us with their views, for it is likely that we would be equally glad if some people pro­ No doubt He would have a number of shall learn far more from our intellectual fessing belief in such a God would adhere questions to put to me. I know that I opponents than from those with whom to these qualities that they attribute to would have a number of questions to put we are in complete accord. Him, for whether such a being exists or to Him. But one question I am sure He Let me assure you that I have no emo­ not, this would be a happier place if we all will not put is: Why didn't you believe in tional belief in personal gods nor am I, imitated Him in these ways. Me? For one thing. He will know. For like certain existentialists, angry with I am sincere in my thanking you for another, He will regard it as irrelevant to them for not existing. I am neither bitter your prayers on my behalf. Whether the matter in hand. nor entirely pleased with the nature of those prayers have a material effect on Sincerely yours, reality, and I am sure that reality will go my wellbeing strikes me as less impor­ Ralph Estling •

International Scientific Congress Science, Antiscience, and the Paranormal October 3-7, 2001 • Moscow, Russia

~2 The Russian Academy of Sciences ^j The Russian Humanist Society • The Committee for the Scientific Q The Philosophy Department of the Investigation of Claims of the Moscow State University Paranormal (CSICOP)

GENERAL AGENDA THURSDAY, OCTOBER 4 - Concurrent Sessions 1. The Social Value and Status of Science • The Social Value and Status of Contemporary Science • Science and Antiscience: The New Lines of Confrontation 2. Science and Antiscience: • Paranormal Beliefs: the Growing Threat to Reason and The New Lines of Confrontation Human Dignify • Roundtable 3. Paranormal Beliefs: • Science. Education, and Religion The Threat to Science and Human Dignity 4. Science, Education, and Religion FRIDAY, OCTOBER 5 Closing Plenary Sessions • The Religious Situation in Russia Today WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 3 - Opening Plenary Session • Roswell. UFOs. and Space-Age Antiscience • Why Is Antiscience Dangerous? • Astronomy and Astrology: The Unexpected Reversal • Science and the New Skepticism In the Confrontation • The Incompatibility of Science and Religion • The New Atheist Movement in Russia • Science and Humanism: The Life-Affirmation Tandem • Organized Humanism versus Charlatanism • The Appeal of the Paranormal and the Psychology of Belief • The Expansion of Irrationalism in Russia CONTACT: Fax (095) 939 2208, e-mail [email protected] • The Sources of Pseudoscience in Biology and Medicine The conference will be held at the • Parapsychology: Science. Antiscience. Pseudoscience. or Non-Science? New Building of the Russian Academy of Sciences. • Organized Pseudoscience as a Form of the 117334 Moscow, Leninskii prospekt, 32a. Disintegration of Society Special accommodation rates for conference attendees • The Age of Scientific Misinformation: The Sources of Mass-Media Bias are available from the Hotel Orlyonok, Leninskii prospect. • Parapsychology under Russian-Market Conditions

80 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Clinical Parapsychology chological supporters on its Scientific deluding as to publish only positive results? Advisory Board, including Marilyn Schlitz, In the physical sciences statistical meta­ Thrives Under Mind-Body the Research Director of the parapsychologi- analysis is unnecessary. Research Guise cally-oriented Institute for Noetic Sciences. Several decades after Einstein published Schlitz was a collaborator with Russell Targ his work on relativity, a collection of papers James Alcock's declaration of the demise of on the original "remote viewing" research. was published called 100 Authors Against parapsychology in his May/June 2000 SI Schlitz also has a NCCAM research grant to Einstein which sought to show by sheer article on CSICOP's history ("Science vs. study direct "brain-to-brain" communica­ number of contrary opinions that Einstein Pseudoscience .. .") seems to be grossly pre­ tion. Her co-researcher, Leanna Standish, is must be wrong. A reviewer said, "One mature. He bemoans the "withering" of the Director of Research of Bastyr paper, if it were correct, would suffice to parapsychology; he even seems genuinely University, a naturopathic "university" that is refute Einstein." a NCCAM research center. concerned that the ranks of "bright, creative, In my opinion, statistical meta-analysis and respectable scholars" of parapsychology CSICOP's response to this serious entry should be cast out of the toolbox of science. have been declining. He claims that of parapsychology into medicine has been James C. Wilcox "respectable" parapsychologists and the skep­ inadequate, to say the least. While SKEPTICAL tics of CSICOP share a common commit­ INQUIRER has had several good articles about Palos Verdes Estates, California ment to the scientific method. other aspects of alternative medicine, until One can only scratch one's head over why Martin Gardner's March/April 2001 column Professor Alcock would admire so-called on Elisabeth Targ, the parapsychological Antinous Prophecies "scientific" parapsychologists who for research breakthrough in alternative medi­ decades have refused to accept that dieir "sci­ cine had gone completely unnoticed by CSI­ 1 was amused by the Antinous Prophecies, ence" is a chimera and who consistently con­ COP and SI. coined by Clifford Pickover (SI, May/June tort their own and others' findings in order If ever there were "claims of die paranor­ 2001). They quite rightly put in light the to keep open a window of "hope" for evi­ mal" that needed to be investigated, surely fact that any prophecy can always be inter­ dence of a psychic dimension. paranormal health research ought to be at preted and more or less adapted to any spe­ I, for one, share no such admiration for the top of the list. If we wait until paranor­ cific case. these mischief makers. Indeed, has Professor mal healing is covered by Medicare, But Nostradamus's case is much more Alcock not noticed that parapsychology is Medicaid, and private health insurance, it interesting and complex. In his troubled now achieving perhaps its greatest level of will be too late. CSICOP should be assign­ period, under constant threat, Nostra­ success ever, not in the "formal" parapsy­ ing its top investigators right now to blow damus was indeed a true historian who chology labs, but rather in alternative medi­ the lid off this debacle at the National described events of his time. The events cine under the guise of clinical mind-body Institutes of Health. happened of course before he wrote about them, but he disguised them in a sort of "research"? Then, perhaps, it will be time to cele­ coded French. This has been demonstrated The most glaring example of this brate. unparalleled success is the $2 million in by French authors who happen to know research and grant monies given last year E. Patrick Curry Nostradamus well—and to read French, by NIH's National Center for Consumer Health Advocate even coded French. Complementary and Alternative Medicine Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Knowing that the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER is (NCCAM) to para-psychiatrist Elisabeth addressed mainly towards an American pub­ Targ for two multiyear research studies: lic, it would be nevertheless wise— one on "distant healing" for AIDS patients Value of Negative Results and humanist!—to give the reader broader and the other for "distant healing" for can­ ideas than those dominated by this cer tumors. Targ, the daughter of "remote Douglas M. Stokes ("The Shrinking File "Americanotropy." I am often quite disap­ viewing's" Russell Targ, has done two prior Drawer," May/June 2001) has convinced pointed by this, even in the best Ameri­ studies showing strong positive results for me that the statistical meta-analysis used in can publications. As a member of the "distant healing." When Targ completes parapsychological research is flawed, as he Free Inquiry panel of consultants, I am sad­ her two NCCAM studies—with their no claims. However, I go beyond his conclu­ dened by many Americans' ignorance of doubt "positive" results—those studies will sion that "the foundation [of statistical French literature. stand as the gold standard for "distant heal­ meta-analysis] may be less solid than it References ing" and "intercessory prayer" research, in appears." It is impossible to decide just other words as proof of the validity of med­ what statistics should be used to estimate Pecker, J.-C. 1984. Des lyonnes en grimoirr dans ical psychokinesis. the size of the file drawer. Hairnne. Le Dfbai-GaUimard, mars. Prevost, Roger. 1999. Nostradamus, le Mythe el la Her official grant proposal to NCCAM For example, in die physical sciences a realue: un historien au temps des astrologues. Robert LafFont, Paris. contains numerous shabby citations from negative result can be just as worthy of pub­ die parapsychological literature. These cita­ lication as a positive one. Consider the Prof. Jean-Claude Pecker tions were accepted as proper science by the experiment of Michelson and Morley, who College de France NIH grant reviewers. Therefore, as far as set out to measure the velocity of Earth Paris, France United States government health science is with respect to Newton's absolute space and concerned, the parapsychological venture is got the most famous null result in the his­ tory of science. Should wc really assume alive, well, and extraordinarily credible. Clifford Pickover's "Antinous Prophecies" is that all parapsychologists are so self- Indeed NCCAM has at least three parapsy­ very interesting and certainly valid in

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 81 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

demonstrating how readers can infuse fanciful "game" of applying them to historical events. Myths of Child Behavior meaning into more or less disconnected phrase Here's my entry. sequences, once the suggestion has been made I think that Quatrain 8 can best be inter­ Catherine A. Fiorello's article "Common that such interpretations are possible. preted as a description of the evacuation of Myths of Children's Behavior" (May/June But while it applies to twentieth- Dunkirk during WWII. "Lightning comes 2001) contains several questionable claims. A century "interpreters," it has very little rel­ near the peninsula and one will swim" refers child who is failing at schoolwork is probably evance to the historical Nostradamus. to Hitler's blitzkreig, or "lightning war" one who lacks motivation, ability, or both. If Nostradamus did not work in a semi- pushing the British forces into the sea at he does regard with horror the possibility of aleatory, stream-of-consciousness mode of Dunkirk. "There is ruin, Lester, but ail is not being held back a grade, that might supply an writing. His verse is written in very strict lost." He is speaking to the British here, as incentive to start working in order to do bet­ adherence to contemporary French poetry, "Lester" is a phonetic spelling of Leicester. ter. But if the problem is lack of ability, it will in vers commun. His subject matter is not All was not lost, because the British success­ not be remedied by promoting him until he random. Most of his quatrains contain a fully evacuated most of their men. leaves with a credential that signifies nothing single subject, which may often center on "From the steel and silica brim/ Blood except that he has attended school for the historical incidents of identifiable past or and water, but not at cost." Blood and water required number of years. It is not really a current events. When I say most, it is refers to the human resources, the soldiers kindness to promote his "self-esteem" by pre­ because details of court gossip or small­ tending that he is doing well; disillusionment themselves. They fled from their machines, town histories have often been lost over the will come later and is likely to be traumatic. but not at cost of their lives. They were res­ past five hundred and fifty years and con­ (The same goes in the case of athletic ability cued, while the steel and silica, or mechani­ nections are not always clear. The wretched or the lack of it.) English translations that are currently cal resources, were left behind. available are of no help. That's how I "interpret" this quatrain, Concerning the effects of reward versus anyway, and I doubt that any better inter­ punishment, Fiorello appears to ignore the What Nostradamus did to encourage a pretation is possible. I could be wrong; fact that children differ widely in tempera­ "prophetic" reading of his verses was to human ingenuity has few bounds. ment and personality. Even if many respond devise a very clever, complex apparatus of better to praise than threats, there is a hard Steve Vanden-Eykel multivalcnce. He fractured grammar to cre­ core of intractables who do not, and we may New Westminster, B.C. ate double or triple meanings; he developed suspect that research purporting to prove the Canada enigmas to give his readers the satisfaction of contrary is driven by ideology rather than interpreting them; he used a vocabulary of empiricism. homonyms and antonyms to create multiple I will not dispute the claim that there is a possible meanings. . . . But he did not write Clifford Pickovcr's article, "The Antinous condition, hyperactivity, for which treatment nonsense in the fashion of "Antinous." He Prophecies: A Nostradamoid Project," hits (including drug treatment) may be appropri­ was a most accomplished charlatan who the mark. It would be interesting to apply his ate. But our society has been propagandized carefully constructed verses that would ink blot technique to psychic mediums, ESP, so effectively that almost any kind of unde­ appeal to his market, to whom the verses etc. To correct a minor error, Antinous was sirable behavior is labeled as a "disorder" were much more open than to us. not so youthful at the age of 240! requiring medical diagnosis and intervention. How did Nostradamus get his verses? Mr. Mark G. Kuzyk This provides prestige and financial rewards Pickover says that he obtained them from a Department of Physics for the practitioners who run the system, but "glass flask of steaming liquid." I don't find Washington State University it has not been demonstrated that their activ­ this anywhere. Nostradamus himself gives Pullman, Washington ities benefit anyone else. two situations, one a magical ceremony of Roman origin, the other, sitting on his roof Clifford Pickover replies: David A. Shotwell watching stars. Actually, I think he wrote Alpine, Texas them seated at his desk or table, with a good Along with Shakespeare and the Bible, map and a few reference books.... Nostradamus's poems have been in continuous Information about this aspect of print ever since their first publication cen­ Regarding candy causing children to be Nostradamus may be found in rational turies ago. The very first editions of his hyper, I feel that I have observed that in my studies of Nostradamus: my book. prophecies are lost, and today we must depend three-year-old granddaughter. However, I Prophecies and Enigmas of Nostradamus and upon the accuracy and honesty of people who am aware of some of the literature on the the late Prof. Pierre Brind Amour's transcribed the original prophecies. subject supporting the author's view. Nostradamus Astropile and Les Premieres cen­ Nostradamus wrote most of his rhymed qua­ Therefore, I have looked for another turies ou propheties. trains in French, and he obscured the qua­ explanation. Though not based on scientific trains with metaphors and by changing proper studies, I suggests that there is something names by swapping, adding, or removing let­ Everett F. Bleiler other than sugar that is causing the problem. ters. Many say that he wanted to be obscure so "Libcrtc" E LeVert" That is chocolate. Chocolate contains theo- the Church wouldn't condemn him. Skeptics Interlaken, New York bromin, a substance that is chemically simi­ suggest that he also used vague symbols so that lar to caffeine and has a similar effect on the quatrains would be interpreted to fit humans. It seems reasonable to me that numerous situations. I give many more details chocolate, not sugar, is the culprit. I'm sure the article on the Antinous on Nostradamus's life in my book Dreaming Regarding item five on punishment, it Prophecies will produce a flood of responses The Future. from skeptics eager to try their hand at the seems that we should take our clue from

82 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

basic biology. If we do something damaging therapy (May/June 2001). He refers to Janov repressed feelings by recreating the trauma. to ourselves, such as place our hand in a fire, divorcing "his first wife, Vivien France. . .." This was not primal therapy either licensed we get hurt and learn not to do that. Vivien was Janov's first wife; France is his or unlicensed by Janov. Indeed Gardner does Also, if wc do something beneficial, such second. Unfortunately this minor slip is not use the word "primal" to describe as eat, we experience pleasure and we repeat symptomatic of grosser errors. Candace's therapy. This appears to be an that. Therefore, it would seem that reward Since in therapy there can be bad practice attempt to smear Janov's work by associa­ for acceptable behavior and punishment for based on good theory, it is important to dis­ tion. Gardner also simply refuses to believe unacceptable behavior would be the most tinguish between theory and practice. that bruises can reappear on the body of successful approach. Regarding theory, Janov holds that events too someone reliving a traumatic event that traumatic to be felt to the full as they happen caused bruising. In this case the event was a John F.. Hendrix cause problems; the unfelt negative emotions difficult birth; but the claim can be tested Fort Collins, Colorado act themselves out in and through the person. with therapy on rape victims. Is Gardner say­ Often the person will repress memories of the ing he is incapable of revising his opinions events—but not always: those rape victims no matter what the evidence? Catherine Fiorello replies: who change their personality know very well Dr. Janov has certainly made some over- that "he ruined my life" and can be restored grandiose and immodest statements about Both writers fall into the same fallacy—basing by reliving die event over and over until the his work. But these cannot be used to dis­ their objections on feelings or personal experience milch latent feelings have been fell in full. credit the whole enterprise. rather than empirical evidence. My statements So the issue is not repressed memory on retention were based on a rather large body of (which Gardner has attacked before) but Anthony J.M. Garrett, Ph.D. empirical research indicating that it is not effec­ repressed feeling. It is hardly surprising that Cambridge, U.K. tive, not just a call to promote children to save people who were nearly strangled by their their "self esteem" as Mr. Shotwell implies. In a umbilical cord at birth (for example) do not brief overview, I could not go into detail about remember it, as people do not have sponta­ the alternatives to retention that do show effi­ Although I usually find myself in agree­ neous memories of any event from their cacy; suffice it to say here that lam not advocat­ ment with Martin Gardner, his attack on babyhood. But awareness that one is close to ing social promotion without interventions. Arthur Janov and primal therapy was filled a terrifying death is more traumatic even with errors ranging from the trivial to the Both Mr. Shotwell and Mr. Hendrix take than rape. How do false memory adherents egregious. As a card-carrying skeptic who exception to my statement that punishment is less explain that memory and feeling are often has lectured to both New York and effective than reward Again, this is based on a evoked together in therapy? False memories Philadelphia area skeptical organizations body of research, not solely my opinion. might be induced, but false feelings? on the subject of psychology—and a vet­ Punishment can work in the short-term suppres­ eran of primal therapy myself—I believe I sion of an unwanted behavior, but can also lead Regarding practice, Janov docs not con­ to avoidance of the person or situation leading to duct "the so-called 'primal scream' tech­ am in a good position to respond. punishment and to adverse emotional reactions. nique" (p. 17), which involves screaming in Gardner's identification of primal ther­ Positive approaches (teaching what we want t/re an attempt to access the memory/feeling. apy with New Age mysticism is wholly mis­ person to do through modeling and direct This is a very poor technique since it aims taken. The only connection between primal instruction, praising the behavior we want, and to access trauma from symptom when cau­ therapy and the New Age is that they both eliciting natural rein forcers for the behavior we sation runs the other way. Janov calls his came along at the same time. The mete fact want) don't have these side effects and in addi­ techniques simply "primal therapy." He that Janov dismisses all other therapies as tion teach the behavior we want to see rather guards those techniques closely, but it is "obsolete and invalid" in one of his books than just suppressing what we don't want to see. clear from his recent Why You Get Sick, automatically disqualifies him as a New When some sort of punishment is necessary, how­ How You Get Well that they include drugs Ager, since the latter freely incorporate ever, we do recommend the sort of natural feed­ administered in a controlled fashion to aid every theory into their philosophy, rejecting back that Mr. Hendrix suggests. access to the memories/emotions. The only the scientific method as the test of resulting therapy permanently lowers such truth. Janov's commitment to the scientific Mr. Hendrix does point out another possi­ objective indicators of inner stress as rest­ point of view should be clear to anyone ble reason for the perceived link between sugar ing heart rate, blood pressure, and levels of who ever read him, and is exemplified by and behavior. The research with which I am natural depressants synthesized by the the fact that he submitted his latest work to familiar boked only at sugar itself (where par­ body. How would Gardner explain these Prometheus Books. ents would say the child was hyperactive but observations? Incidentally there can be no Gardner misrepresents what Mark where double-blind observers would not), but legitimate objection by mental health pro­ Pendergrast wrote about Janov in Victims of it is certainly plausible that theobromine fessionals to Janov's use of drugs, since Memory. Pendergrast quotes Janov as an and/or caffeine might be responsible for some of drugs are the principal tool of mainstream authority, estimating from Janov's writings the hyperactivity that is reported. A good sug­ psychiatry. There, however, they are used that only about one percent of adults were gestion for extending the research base'. merely to control symptoms and the patient must take them indefinitely. Janov ever sexually molested as children. On the uses them only temporarily as part of a per­ basis of my own observations while a manent cure. patient in Janov's now-closed New York Janov's Primal Therapy institute, I would concur with that figure, which is in sharp contrast with those given Gardner cites the death of Candace by such experts as Diana Russell, who I am sorry to see the usually excellent Martin Newmaker in a mistaken and dangerous claims that it is as high as 25 percent (boys Gardner attacking Arthur Janov's primal form of therapy that attempts to access

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 2001 83 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

and girls combined). Janov's assumption petition. Prometheus Books is to be congrat­ issue, and that it all becomes an issue of opin­ that sexual abuse of children is relatively ulated for having the courage to publish him. ion, without any objective, demonstrable facts. rare would put him in the same camp as most skeptics. One should keep in mind, Richard Morrock George Farago however, that one percent of the adult pop­ Bayside, New York Wayne, New Jersey ulation of the United States is more than two million people. Although Paul Kurtz is among the more eru­ James V. Scotti's News & Comment article In contrast to other "recovered mem­ dite men of our times, he nonetheless concerning the Fox hoax was gtcat. I do ory" therapists (who see parental sexual deserves a light rap on the knuckles for his remember watching the whole original drama abuse in literally every case they treat) or lame response to an incisive complaint orthodox Freudians (who think children unfold. Walter Cronkite did the narration for regarding Kurtz's Prometheus Books pub­ really want to abused), Janov always CBS. He interviewed an elderly gentleman, lishing a tome of quackery titled The Biology focused on the subtle hurts parents asking the man what he thought about the of Love by primal screamer Dr. Arthur Janov. inflicted on their children. This docs not moon landing. The elderly gentleman was represent any bias on his part, but rather The complaint urged Kurtz to withdraw incredulous, telling Mr. Cronkite, "I do not the results from patients' sessions. As I saw, the book post haste in view of outrageous believe it, we are not up there." the big problems were neglect, excessive claims such as Janov's report that a photo­ I saw the Fox show. As Frank Zappa said: scolding, desertion, divorce, incessant graph of a screaming patient re-experiencing his birth showed fingerprints of the deliver­ They ain't getting any smarter out there guilt-tripping, overprotection, preference We have 10 come to terms with stupidity ing obstetrician (who by the way apparently of one child to another, children being left And learn to deal with it" at school at too early an age, and occasion­ forget to wear his latex gloves). ally violence. The reason these rather com­ Kurtz responded, we're informed, that Your magazine is great, keep up the excel­ monplace events were traumatic was that "we sometimes err," but then suggested that lent work. the children were prohibited from express­ it would be suppression to drop Quackov's Rudy Ottaviani ing their anguish at the time; they held it book of astounding science. [email protected] in, and that added up to neurosis in adult I shudder to think of what next may be life. Primal therapy gave them a safe place published out of a fear of suppression. to let it out. . . . Perhaps a hard-science volume reporting the appearance of Baby Jesus' footprints on a Evolution in Kansas When Janov claims that everything church window? stems from birth trauma, I can hear his crit­ Worse, what do I now tell my daughter, While I am heartened by the decision of the ics arguing. Wrong. Birth trauma by itself whom I advised just last week to browse Kansas school board to return the teaching would cause few problems, unless it was through Prometheus offerings to discover of evolution (News & Comment, May/June extremely severe, because of what Janov learned answers to just such pscudoscience? 2001), I am extremely puzzled that there calls the gating system, which locks early were still three school board members that trauma up in the deepest parts of the brain. Karl Wickstrom voted against the measure. It seems to me Birth trauma usually causes difficulties Stuart, Florida that some Kansas school board members when it is compounded by later traumas. At have some evolving to do. the primal institute in New York, birth pri- mals were rare, but they were dramatic Paul Waisnor when they did occur. Janov's tendency to Fox TV Moon-Landing Carol Stream, Illinois focus on birth is mostly to compensate for Program its neglect by other therapies. Also, since births typically take place in hospitals, it Your "News & Comment" article, "Fox Special Dr. Zaius on Mars? should be easier to reform harmful natal Questions Moon Landing But Not Its Own practices than to change the way parents Credulity," (May/June 2001) correctly points I have been looking at the latest pictures you raise their children in the privacy of their out all the flawed points made in Fox's moon have of the "Face" on Mars and 1 have come own homes. landing hoax exposl. I'd also like to point out to a startling discovery. It is the face of Dr. that light reflects from Earth onto the moon's Is there any evidence that adult brains Zaius of Planet of the Apes. So that's where all surface, causing partial illumination of areas in harbor birth memories? Plenty, although the "missing links" went! Oh my gosh! shadows. As a high school science teacher, I had many in the skeptics movement might not to field a barrage of questions from my students accept it. There are already two scholarly Linda Marois (and fellow teachers!) regarding this show, journals devoted to the psychological effects [email protected] which I hadn't seen. While I used this as an of birth traumas, one in Europe and one in opportunity to remind srudents about previous the United States. Gardner should have discussions we'd had regarding critical think­ spent some time listening to former ing, some were very adamant that the program Whafs Irrational? patients in primal therapy who resolved var­ showed that there is an appreciable chance tfrat ious problems after recovering their birth die Apollo landings may have been a hoax. It's not clear whether Paul Hilfinger (Letter to memories. . . . the Editor, May/June 2001, p. 72) claims We are only beginning to understand the Programs like this do help muddy me that my explanations for paranormal beliefs workings of the mind, and as it happens, waters, and even worse, [Ho add to die growing are irrational or that the reasons why paranor­ Arthur Janov is light-years ahead of die com­ feeling out mere that there arc two sides to every mal beliefs are so strongly and widely held.

84 September/October 2001 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER LETTERS TO THE EDITOR which 1 discuss in my book, Paranormal Reaction to First While our nation's broadly religious social Beliefs, reviewed (SI, January/February 2001, milieu may explain the excitement about pp. 60-61) by Jeffrey Victor, are themselves 'Science and Religion' Stephen Jay Gould's capitulary (and in "irrational." 1 didn't set out to do this in my Issue Continues our opinion ludicrous) theory of "non- book, but I suggest that every one of the rea­ overlapping magisteria" of science and sons I mention can be operationalized and religion, rear of repercussions must not stifle systematically tested widi empirical evidence. free inquiry. Richard Dawkins's brief article, Professor Hilfinger, irrationality anyone? "You can't have it both ways" deflates Gould's theory and emphasizes that religion should Erich Goode not be granted special immunity from scien­ Silver Spring, Maryland tific investigation. Freedom to investigate ghosts but not holy ghosts is no freedom at all. During a recent lecture at our medical center Chiropractic Reform entitled, "the Power of Prayer in Healing" at least a dozen scientifically testable claims were As director of Victims of Chiropractic, with made. Must we turn a blind eye to the absur­ sixteen years of research in the field, 1 salute dity of these claims for fear of offending the SI for printing retired chiropractor Sam proselytizers who tout them? The SKEPTICAL Homola's excellent article (January/ INQUIRER has done a wonderful job of February 2001). Homola and I are friends debunking myths about Bigfoot and alien and quackbusting colleagues, and he has abductions. Most of our patients no longer been one of my most valuable mentors. believe these childish stories. In contrast, the When I speak to any group, I always empha­ majority of our patients still believe that size the difference between a reformist chiro­ prayer can cure cancer, that holy miracles can practor and all the rest. Reformists have the eradicate disease, that supernatural spirits visit character and courage to reject "traditional their hospital rooms, and a host of other chiropractic pseudoscience and gobblcdy- religious myths. Many of these claims are gook." They acknowledge their limitations. Even two years after its publication, the indeed scientifically testable. Most impor- SKEPTICAL INQUIRER'S first special issue on science tandy, unlike Bigfoot stories, religious beliefs I especially enjoyed physicist Mohammad and religion, July/August 1999, continues to actually have profound effects on the health Ghaffari's letter (May/June 2001) from stimulate reader reaction. This letter arrived July and lives of countless millions all over the Tucson, Arizona. Mr. Ghaffari got an intro­ 8, 2001. It was preceded by a brief note from the world. Paul Kurtz and Kendrick Frazier will duction, as did I some years ago, into the pre­ autlmrs. They said they had started it long ago, go down in history as heroes in the battle for posterous world of Applied Kinesiology, a but "could not find the inspiration to complete it intellectual freedom. It is our hope that their practice that ranks right along with astrology until we read your article, 'From the Editor's legacies will not be tarnished by an inconsis­ and homeopathy as worthy contributors to Seat: 25 Yean of Science and Skepticism' tent stand on the conflict between science and the dumbing-down of society. [May/June 2001J. Your moving comments about religion, an issue of fundamental importance Readers would do well to look again at the history of the StCEPTlCM. INQUIRER, particu­to all mankind. chiropractic professor Joseph C. Keating's larly about what you termed to be the journal's July/August 1997 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER arti­ 'core unifying values' inspired us to submit this cle "Chiropractic: Science and Antisciencc letter. " 1 liope our publishing their letter in this, Bruce L. Flamm and Pseudoscience Side by Side." Prof. our second issue devoted specifically to issues of Janice R. Goings Keating talks about some areas that are of science and religion, will alleviate some of the Riverside, California particular concern to chiropractic critics such concerns they express.—Kendrick Frazier, Editor as the penchant of chiropractors for market­ ing slogans like "Chiropractic Works!" He mentions the low college entrance require­ In our opinion the special issue, "Science and ments compared to other health care profes­ Religion" was not only the most interesting The letters column is a forum for sions. He says that many of the chiropractic issue of the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER ever pub­ views on matters raised in previ­ schools are "magnets for magical and mystical lished, it was one of the most remarkable ous issues. Letters should be no thinkers" and "Moreover, since the largest issues of any journal ever published. How sad more than 225 words. Due to the volume of letters not all can be chiropractic colleges tend to have the it is that this special issue was apparendy only strongest commitments to dogma, fuzzy published. Address letters to an aberration. In his article, "Should skeptical Letters to the Editor, SKEPTICAL thinkers are likely to fill the chiropractic inquiry be applied to religion?" CSICOP INQUIRER. Send by mail to 944 Deer ranks for decades to come." This is more than founder Paul Kurtz concludes that neither Dr. NE. Albuquerque. NM 87122; a little disconcerting when we consider that CSICOP nor the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER should by fax to 505-828-2080; or by most chiropractors want to be considered pri­ in any way, except tangentially, deal with reli­ e-mail to letters©csicop.org (in­ mary care physicians, on an equal level with gious issues. In the introductory essay entitled, clude name and address). medical doctors. "Conflicting or complementary? Some thoughts about boundaries" SKEPTICAL Don Paulin INQUIRER Editor Kendrick Frazier seems to Victims of Chiropractic agree and warns that 90 percent of the popu­ Huntington Beach, California lation of the U.S. is self-described as religious.

SKEP AL INQUIRER September/October 2001 85 Rebecca Long. President. Tel.: 770-493-6857; Providence St., Albany. NY 12203 US. United States e-mail: arlongehcrc.org. 2277 Winding Woods NORTH CAROLINA. Triad Area Skeptics Club Dr., Tucker, GA 30084 US. (TASQ North Carolina. Eric Carlson. President. ALABAMA. Alabama Skeptics, Alabama. Emory IOWA. Central Iowa Skeptics (CIS) Central Iowa, Tel.: 336-758-4994; e-mail: ecarlsonewfu.edu. Kimbrough. Tel.: 205-759-2624. 3550 Water­ Rob Beeston. Tel.: 515-285-0622; e-mail: Physics Department. Wake Forest University, melon Road. Apt. 28A, Northport. AL 35476 US. webguyedangerousideas.net. 5602 SW 2nd St. Winston-Salem. NC 27109 US. www.wfu.edu/- Skeptics-Freethought Forum of Alabama Des Moines. IA 50315 US. www.dangerous ecarlson/tasc/index.html. Richard G. Davis. Tel. 256-751-4447; e-mail ideas.net. OHIO. Central Ohioans for Rational Inquiry RR6ama66ehotmail.com. ILLINOIS. Rational Examination Association of (CORI) Central Ohio. Charlie Hazlett. President. ARIZONA. Tucson Skeptics Inc. Tucson, AZ. James Lincoln Land (REALL) Illinois. David Tel.: 614-878-2742; e-mail: charlieehazlett.net. McGaha. E-mail: JMCGAHA©PimaCCPima.EDU. Bloomberg. Chairman. Tel.: 217-726-5354; PO Box 282069. Columbus OH 43228 US. South 5100 N. Sabino Foothills Dr., Tucson. AZ 85715 US. e-mail: chairmanereall.org. PO Box 20302, Shore Skeptics (SSS) Cleveland and counties. Phoenix Skeptics. Phoenix. AZ. Michael Stack- Springfield. IL 62708 US. www.reall.org. Jim Kutz. Tel.: 440 942-5543; e-mail: jimkutz pole. P.O. Box 60333. Phoenix. AZ 85082 US. KENTUCKY. Kentucky Assn. of Science eearthlink.net. PO Box 5083. Cleveland. OH CALIFORNIA. Sacramento Organization for Educators and Skeptics (KASES) Kentucky. 44101 US. www.southshoreskeptics.org/. Rational Thinking (SORT) Sacramento, CA. Prof. Robert Baker, 3495 Castleton Way, North Association for Rational Thought (ART) Ray Spangenburg. co-founder. Tel.: 916-978- Lexington, KY 40502 US. Contact Fred Bach at Cincinnati. Roy Auerbach. president. Tel: 513- 0321; e-mail: kitray6quiknet.com. PO Box e-mail: fwbachevisto.com. 731-2774. e-mail: raaecinci.rr.com. PO Box 2147. Carmichael. CA 95609-2147 US. 12896, Cincinnati, OH 45212 US. www.cincinnati LOUISIANA. Baton Rouge Proponents of skeptics.org. www.quiknet.com/-kitray/index1 .html. Bay Rational Inquiry and Scientific Methods Area Skeptics (BAS) San Francisco—Bay Area. (BR-PRISM) Louisiana. Marge Schroth. Tel.: 225- OREGON. Oregonians for Rationality (04R) Tully McCarroll. Chair. Tel.: 415 927-1548; e- 766-4747. 425 Carriage Way, Baton Rouge, LA Oregon. Dave Chapman. President. Tel.: 503 mail: tullyannepacbell.net. PO Box 2443 70808 US. 292-2146; e-mail: dchapmaneiccom.com. 7555 Castro Valley. CA 94546-0443 US. www. MICHIGAN. Great Lakes Skeptics (GLS) SE Spring Valley Rd. NW, Salem. OR 97304 US. BASkeptics.org. Sacramento Skeptics Michigan. Lorna J. Simmons. Contact person. www.o4r.org. Society. Sacramento. Terry Sandbek, Presi­ Tel.: 734-525-5731; e-mail: Skeptic3ieaol.com. dent. Tel.: 916-489-1774; e-mail: tsandbeke PENNSYLVANIA. Paranormal Investigating 31710 Cowan Road, Apt. 103. Westland. Ml ispchannel.com. 4300 Auburn Blvd. Ste 206 Committee of Pittsburgh (PICP) Pittsburgh 48185-2366 US. Tri-Cities Skeptics, Michigan. Sacramento. CA 95841 US. http://my.isp PA. Richard Busch, Chairman. Tel.: 412-366- Gary Barker. Tel.: 517-799-4502; e-mail: bark- channel.com/-tsandbek/Skeptics/skeptics.htm. 1000; e-mail: mindfuietelerama.com. 8209 erqesvol.org. 3596 Butternut St.. Saginaw, Ml San Diego Association for Rational Inquiry Thompson Run Rd.. Pittsburgh, PA 15237 US. 48604 US. (SDARI) San Diego. CA, county. Keith Taylor, Philadelphia Association for Critical President. Tel.: 619-220-1045; e-mail: krtay- MINNESOTA. St. Kloud Extraordinary Claim Thinking (PhACT). much of Pennsylvania. Eric lorxyzeaol.com. 945 4th Ave. San Diego. CA Psychic Teaching Investigating Community Krieg, President. Tel,: 215-885-2089; e-mail: 92101 US. http7/members.tripod.com/sdari- (SKEPTIC) St. Cloud, Minnesota. Jerry Mertens. ericephact.org. PO Box 1131. North Wales, PA web/home.himl. Tel.: 320-255-2138; e-mail: gmertensestcloud 19454 US. www.phact.org/phact. state.edu. Jerry Mertens. Psychology Depart­ TENNESEE. Rationalists of East Tennessee. East COLORADO. Rocky Mountain Skeptics (RMS) ment 720 4th Ave. S. St. Cloud State University. Tennessee. Carl Ledenbecker. Tel.: 865-982- Colo.. Wyo.. Utah. Mont. Bela Scheiber, Pres­ St. Cloud, MN 56301 US. Minnesota Skeptics. 8687; e-mail: Aletalleaol.com. 2123 Stony- ident. Tel.: 303-444-7537; e-mail: rmscentral Minnesota. Robert McCoy. 549 Turnpike Rd.. brook Rd., Louisville. TN 37777 US. emindspring.com. PO Box 7277. Boulder. CO Golden Valley. MN 55416 US. TEXAS. North Texas Skeptics NTS Dallas/Ft 80306 US. http://bcn.boulder.co.us/community MISSOURI. Gateway Skeptics. Missouri, Steve Worth area. John Blanton, Secretary. Tel.: 972- tons. Best. 6943 Amherst Ave., University City, MO 306-3187; e-mail: skepticentskeptics.org. PO CONNECTICUT. New England Skeptical Society 63130 US. Kansas City Committee for Box 111794, Carrollton. TX 75011-1794 US. (NESS) New England. Steven Novella MD. Skeptical Inquiry, Missouri. Verle Muhrer. www.ntskeptics.org. President. Tel.; 203-281-6277; e-mail: boarde United Labor Bldg., 6301 Rockhill Road, Suite VIRGINIA. Science & Reason. Hampton Rds.. theness.com. PO Box 18S526. Hamden, CT 412 Kansas City, MO 64131 US. Virginia. Lawrence Weinstein, Old Dominion 06518-5526 US. www.theness.com. NEW MEXICO. New Mexicans for Science and Univ.-Physics Dept., Norfolk. VA 23529 US. D.C.'MARYLAND. National Capital Area Reason (NMSR) New Mexico. David E. Thomas, WASHINGTON. Society for Sensible Explan­ Skeptics NCAS. Maryland. DC. Virginia. D.W. President. Tel.: 505-869-9250; e-mail: dete ations. Western Washington. Tad Cook. Secre­ -Chip" Denman. Tel.: 301-587-3827. 8006 rt66.com. PO Box 1017, Peralta. NM 87042 US. tary. E-mail: tadeaa.net. PO Box 45792. Seattle, Valley Street. Silver Spring. MD 20910 US. www.nmsr.org. WA 98145-0792 US. www.seattlesketpics.org. www.ncas.org. NEW YORK. New York Area Skeptics (NYASk) FLORIDA. Tampa Bay Skeptics (TBS) Tampa Bay. metropolitan NY area. Ted W. Debiak. The organizations listed above have aims similar to Florida. Gary Posner, Executive Director. Tel.: President. Tel.: 516-735-8739; e-mail: infoe those of CSICOP but are independent and 813-584-0603; e-mail: tbskepeaol.com. 5319 nyask.com. 57 South Windhorst Ave.. autonomous. Representatives of these organiza­ Archstone Dr. #102, Tampa, FL 33634 US. Bethpage. NY 11714-4931 US.www.nyask.com. tions cannot speak on behalf of the CSICOP. Please http://members.aol.com/tbskep. Inquiring Skeptics of Upper New York send updates to Bela Scheiber, PO Box 4482, GEORGIA. Georgia Skeptics (GS) Georgia. (ISUNY) Upper New York. Michael Sofka. 8 Boulder. CO 80306.

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL CONSULTANTS

George Agogino, Dept of Anthropology, Eastern New Laurie Godfrey, anthropologist University of Massachusetts John W. Patterson, professor of materials science and Mexico University Gerald Goldin. mathematician. Rutgers University. New engineering. Iowa State University Gary Bauslaugh, educational consultant Center for Jersey James Pomerantz, Provost and professor of cognitive and Curriculum, Transfer and Technology, Victoria, B.C, Donald Goldsmith, astronomer: president Interstellar linguistic sciences, 8rown Univ. Canada Media Gary P. Posner, M.D.. Tampa, Fla. Richard E. Berendzen. astronomer. Washington. D.C Alan Hale, astronomer. Southwest Institute for Space Daisie Radner, professor of philosophy, SUNY. Buffalo Martin Bridgstock. lecturer, School of Science. Griffith Research. Alamogordo. New Mexico Michael Radner, professor of philosophy, McMaster University. Brisbane. Australia Clyde F. Herreid. professor of biology. SUNY, Buffalo University, Hamilton. Ontario, Canada Richard Busch. magidarvmentalist Pittsburgh. Penn. Terence M. Hines, professor of psychology, Pace Robert H. Romer, professor of physics. Amherst College Shawn Carlson. Society for Amateur Scientists. East University, Pleasantville, N.Y. Milton A Rothman. physicist Philadelphia, Penn. Greenwich. CT Michael Hutchinson, author; Sumai IBQUREII represen­ Karl Sabbagh, lournalist, Richmond. Surrey. England Roger B. Culver, professor of astronomy. Colorado State tative. Europe Robert J. Samp, assistant professor of education and Univ. Philip A Minna, assoc. professor of astronomy. Univ. of medkine. University of Wisconsin-Madison Felix Ares de Bias, professor of computer science. Virginia Steven D. Schafersman. asst professor of geology. University of Basque. San Sebastian. Spain William Jarvis. professor of health promotion and public Miami Univ, Ohio Michael R. Dennett writer, investigator. Federal Way. health. Lorna Linda University. School of Public Health Bela Scheiber, • systems analyst Boulder. Colo. Washington I. W. Kelly, professor of psychology. University of Chris Scott statistician. London, England Sid Deutsch. consultant. Sarasota. Fla. Saskatchewan Stuart D. Scott Jr.. associate professor of anthropology, J. Dommanget, astronomer. Royale Observatory. Brussels. Richard H. Lange. MD. Mohawk Valley Physician Health SUNY. Buffalo Belgium Plan. Schenectady. N.Y. Erwin M. Segal, professor of psychology. SUNY. Buffalo Mahum J. Duker, assistant professor of pathology. Temple Gerald A Larue, professor of biblical history and archae­ Carta Selby, anthropologist/archaeologist University ology, University of So. California Steven N. Shore, associate professor and chair. Dept of Barbara Eisenstadt psychologist educator, clinician. East William M. London, consumer advocate. Fort Lee. New Physics and Astronomy. Indiana Univ. South Bend Grwnhush. H Y lersey Wadaw Szybalski. professor. McArdle Laboratory. William Evans, professor of communication, Georgia Rebecca Long, nuclear engineer, president of Georgia University of Wisconsin-Madison State University Council Against Hearth Fraud. Atlanta. 6a. Ernest H. laves, psychoanalyst Cambridge. Mass. John F. Fischer, forensic analyst Orlando. Fla. Thomas R. McDonough, lecturer in engineering, Caltech. Sarah G. Thomason, professor of linguistics. University of Robert E. Funk, anthropologist New York State Museum and SETI Coordinator of the Planetary Society Pittsburgh a Science Service James E. McGaha. Major. USAF; pilot Tim Trachet journalist and science writer, honorary chair­ Eileen GambrilL professor of social welfare. University of Joel A Moskowitz. director of medical psychiatry. man of SKEPP. Belgium. California at Berkeley Calabasas Mental Health Services. Los Angeles. Syhrio Garattini. director. Mano Negri Pharmacology Jan Willem Nienhuys, mathematician. Univ. of •Member. CSICOP Executive Council Institute. Milan. Italy Eindhoven, the Netherlands "Associate Member, CSICOP Executive Council THE COMMITTEE FOR THE SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION OF CLAIMS OF THE PARANORMAL AT THE CENTER FOR INQUIRYHNTERNATIONAL (ADJACENT TO THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO) AN INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION Network of Affiliated Organizations International ARGENTINA. CAIRP. Enrique Marquez. D rector. E- CHINA. China Association for Science and Tech­ the Investigation of the Anomalous mail: deschaveQcvlci.com.ar Jose Marti 35 - "C" nology, China. Shen Zhenyu Research Center. Phenomena (KCIAP) Kazakhstan. Dr. Sergey Buenos Aires (1406). Argentina, www.cairp.org. P.O. Box 8113. Beijing China. Hong Kong Efimov, Scientific Secretary. E-mail: efime AUSTRALIA. Canberra Skeptics. Canberra Skeptics, Hong Kong. Brad Collins, P.O. Box afi.south-capital.kz. Astrophysical Institute Australia Peter Barrett. President. PO Box 555. 1010, Shatin Central Post Office, bhatin Nl Cnina. Kamenskoye Piato Aima-Ala, 480020 Republic Civic Square ACT 2608 Australia. Australian COSTA RICA. Iniciativa para la Promocion del of Kazakhstan. Committee for the Scien­ Skeptics Inc.. Australia. Barry Williams. Pensamiento Critico (IPPEC) San Jose. Victor tific Expertise of Claims of the Paranormal Executive Officer. Tel. 61-2-9417-207'; e-mail: Quiros V. Tel.: 506 275 43 52; e-mail: victorcr (CSECOP). skepticsekasm.com.au. PO Box 268, Roseville 6racsa.co.cr. A.P. 1513-1002 Paseo de los KOREA. Korea PseudoScience Awareness NSW 2069 Australia, www.skeptics.com.au Estudiantes San Jose. Costa Rica httpV/webs. (KOPSA) Korea. Dr. Gun-ll Kang, Director. Tel.: Australian Skeptics—Hunter Region demasiado.com/via. 82-2-393-2734; e-mail: KOPSAecholian.net. Newcastle/Hunter Valley Dr. Colin Keay. CZECHOSLOVAKIA. Sisyfos-Czech Skeptics 187-11 Bukahyun-dong. Sudaemun-ku. Seoul President. Tel.. 61-2-49689666; e-mail: Club Czech Republic. Ms. Ing. Olga Kracikova. 120-190 Korea www.kopsa.or.kr. bolideehunterlink.net au. PO Box 166. Waratah Secretary. Tel.: 420-2-24826691; e-mail: MALTA. Society for Investigating the NSW 2298. Australia Darwin Skeptics. olgakracikovaeemail.cz. Hastalska 27 Praha 1 Credibility of Extraordinary Claims (SICEC) Northern Territory, Australia. Simon Potter. 110 00 Czech Republic, www.fi.muni.cz/sisyfos/ Malta. Vanni Pule. Chairman. Tel.: 356-381994, Secretary. Tel.: 61 8-8932-7552; e-mail: dwnskep- (in Oech) e-mail: pulevanevol.net.mt. P.O. Box 31, tic6ais.net.au. PO Box 809, Sanderson NT 0812 DENMARK. Skeptica: Association of Hamrun, Malta. Australia. Gold Coast Skeptics. Queensland. Independent Danish Skeptics. Denmark. MEXICO. Mexican Association for Skeptical Re­ Australia. Lilian Derrick. Secretary. Tel.: 61-7- Willy Wegner. Tel.: 45-75-64-84-02; e-mail: search (SOMIE) Mexico. Mario Mendez-Acosta. 5593-1882; e-mail: Imderricketelstra.easymail. skepticaeskeptica.dk. Vibevej 7 A DK 8700 Apartado Postal 19-546 D.F. 03900 Mexico. com.au. PO Box 8348. GCMC Bundall QLD 4217 Horsens. Denmark, www.skeptica.dk. NETHERLANDS. Stichting Skepsis. Netherlands. Australia. Queensland Skeptics Assoc Inc. ECUADOR. Pablo Cevallos Estarellas Apartado 09 Rob Nanninga, Secretary. Tel.: 31-50-3129893; (Qskeptics) Queensland. Bob Bruce, President. 01-5603 Guayaquil, Ecuador. e-mail: skepsisewxs.nl. Westerkade 20 9718 AS Tel.: 61-7-3255-0499; e-mail: qskeptic8uq.net.au. ESTONIA Horisont. Indrek Rohtmets. EE 0102 Groningen, Netherlands, www.skepsisnl. PO Box 6454. Fairview Gardens QLD 4103 Tallinn, Narva mnt. 5. NEW ZEALAND. New Zealand Skeptics. New Australia South Australia Skeptics (SAS) Zealand. Vicki Hyde. Chair. Tel.: 64-3-384-5136; South Australia Mr. Laurie Eddie. Secretary. Tel.' FINLAND. SKEPSIS, Finland. Jukka Hakkinen. PO e-mail: Vicki6spis.co.nz. PO Box 29-492. Christ- 61-8-8272-5881; e-mail: allangetxc.net.au. PO Box 483. Helsinki 00101 Finland. church, New Zealand, www.skeptics.org.nz. Box 377. Rundle Mall SA 5000 Australia. FRANCE. AFIS, AFIS France. 14 rue de I'Ecole Australian Skeptics in Tasmania Inc.. Polytechnique F-75005 Paris, France Cercle NIGERIA. Nigerian Skeptics Society, Nigeria Leo Tasmania, Australia. Fred Thornett. Secretary. Zetetique. France. Paul-Eric 8lanrue. 12 rue; Igwe. Convenor. E-mail: dpceskannet.com.ng. Tel.: 61-3-6234-1458; e-mail: fredthornett6hot- David Deitz. F-57000 Metz, France Comite PO Box 25269, Mapo Ibadan Oyo State, Nigeria. mail.com. PO Box 582, North Hobart. TAS 7000 Francais pour I'Etude des Phenomenes NORWAY. SKEPSIS. Norway St. Olavsgt. 27 N-0166 Australia. Australian Skeptics—Victorian Paranormaux. France. Merlin Gerin. RGE/A2 F- Oslo. Norway. Branch Victoria. Grant Stevenson, President. Tel.: 38050 Grenoble Cedex. France. Michel Rouze. PERU. Comite de Investigaciones de lo Para­ 61-3-9531-9905; e-mail: contact©skeptics.com.au. 147 rue de Rennes F-75006 Paris, France. normal lo Seudocientifico y lo Irracional GPO Box 5166AA. Melbourne VIC 3001 Australia. Laboratoire de Zetetique (laboratory). CIPSI-PERU. Lima. Peru. Manuel Abraham www.skeptics.com.au WA Skeptics. Western Professeur Henri Broch. Tel.: 33-0492076312; e- Paz-y-Mino. Tel.: 51-14-810712. e-mail: cip- Australia. Dr. John Happs. President. Tel.: 61-8- mail: brocheunice.fr. Universite de Nice-Sophia siperueyahoo.com. El Corregidor 318 Rimac, 9448-8458; e-mail: wa.skepticseaustraliamail. Antipolis Faculte des Sciences F-06108 Nice Lima 25 Peru, www.geocities.com/cipsiperu. com. PO Box 899, Morley, WA 6062 Australia. Cedex 2 France, www.unice.fr/zetetique/. POLAND. Polish Skeptics. Poland Adam GERMANY. Gesellschaft zur wissenschaft Pietrasiewicz. E-mail: redaktor6iname.com. BELGIUM. Comito Beige Pour ^Investigation lichen Unterrsuchung von Parawissen- www.biuletynsceptyczny.z-pl. Scientifique des Phenomenes Reputes schaften (GWUP) Germany. Amardeo Sarma, PORTUGAL. Associacao Cepticos de Portugal Pananormaux Comite Para. Belgium. J. Chairman. Tel.: 49-6154-695023. E-mail: (CEPO) Portugal. Ludwig Krippahl E-mail: Dommanget. President of the Committee. E- infoegwup.org. Arheilger Weg 11 D-64380 cepoeinteracesso.pt. Apartado 334 2676-901 mail: omer.nyseoma.be. Observatoire Royal Rossdorf, Germany, www.gwup.org. European Odivelas, Portugal, http://cepo.interacesso.pt. Belgique 3, ave. Circulaire B 1180. Brussels. Council of Skeptical Organizations (ECSO) RUSSIA. Dr. Valerii A. Kuvakin. Tel.. 95-718-2178; Belgium, www.comitepara.be. Studiekring Europe. Dr. Martin Mahner. Tel.: 49-6154- e-mail: V.KUVAKIN6MTU-NET.RU. Vorob'evy voor Krrtische Evaluatie van Pseudoweten- 695023; e-mail: infoeecso.org. Arheilger Weg Gory, Moscow State University. Phil. Dept. schap en Paranormale beweringen (SKEPP) 11 64380 Rossdorf, Germany, www.ecso.org/. Moscow 119899 Russia, http://log.philos.msu. Belgium. Prof. Dr. W. Bet*. Tel.. 32-2-477-43-11; HUNGARY. Tenyeket Tisztelk Tarsasaga TTT ru/rhs/index/htm. e-mail: skeppeskepp.be Laarbeeklaan. 103 Hungary. Prof. Gyula Bencze. Tel.: 36-1-392 2728; SLOVAK REPUBLIC (SACT). Slovak Repuslic. Igor B-1090 Brussels. Belgium wwwskepp.be e-mail: gbenczeermki.kfki.hu. c/o Termeaet Kapisinsky Pavla Horova. 10 Bratislava 841 07 BRAZIL. OPCAO RACIONAL, Brazil. Luis Fernando Vilaga. PO Box 246 H-1444 Budapest 8 Hungary. Slovak Republic. Gutman. Tel.: 55-21-548-2476; e-mail: fernan- INDIA. Maharashtra Andhashraddha Nir- SOUTH AFRICA. Marian Laserson. P.O. Box 46212, dogutmanehotmail.com. Rua Santa Clara. 431 moolan Samiti (MANS) states of Maharashtra Orange Grove 2119 South Africa SOCRATES. Bloco 5. Apt. 803, Copacabana-Rio de Janeiro & Goa. Dr. Narendra Dabholkar. Executive South Africa. Cape Skeptics, Cape Town. Dr 22041-010 Brazil, www.opcaoracionalcom.br. President. Tel.: 91-2162-32333; e-mail: ndab- Leon Retief. Tel.: 27-21-9131434; e-mail: BULGARIA. Bulgarian Skeptics. Bulgaria. Dr. holkarehotmail.com. 155, Sadashiv Peth Satara leonreiafrica.com. 5N Agapanthus Avenue. Vladimir Daskalov. E-mail: egosheveeinet.bg. 415001 India, www.antisuperstition.com. Welgedacht Bellville 7530 South Africa. Krakra 22 BG-1504 Sofia. Bulgaria. Indian Rationalist Association, India. Sanal SPAIN. El Investigador Esceptico, Spain Felix CANADA. Alberta Skeptics. Alberta. Greg Hart. Edamaruku. E-mail: edamarukueyahoo.com. Ares de Bias Gamez/Ares/Martinez. P.O. Box 904, Chairman. Tel : 403-215-1440; e-mail: hartg 779, Pocket 5. Mayur Vihar 1. New Delhi 110 091 Donostia-San Sebastian 20080 Spain ARP- ehumaneffort.com. PO Box 5571. Station 'A', India. Dravidar Kazhagam, southern India. K. Sociedad para el Avance del Pensamiento Calgary. Alberta T2H 1X9 Canada www.home- Veeramani. Secretary General. Tel.: 9144- Critico ARP-SAPC Spain. Sergio Lopez. stead.com/. Alberta Skeptics. British 5386555; e-mail: periyarevsnl.com. Periyar Borgortoz. Tel.: 34-933-010220; e-mail: arpOarp- Columbia Skeptics. BC and Alberta. Lee Thidal. 50. E.F.K. Sampath Road Vepery. Chennai sapc.org. Apartado de Correos. 310 Moller. Tel. 604-929-6299; e-mail: leemoller Tamil Nadu 600 007 India. www.Periyar.org E 08860 Castelldefels. Spain, www.arp-sapc.org. 8home.com 1188 Beaufort Road. N. Indian CSICOP. India. B. Premanand. Convenor Tel.: 091-0422-872423; e-mail: dayamini6md4 SWEDEN. Swedish Skeptics. Sweden Dan Vancouver. BC V7G 1R7 Canada. Ontario Larhammar. professor chairperson Tel.: 46-18- Skeptics. Ontario. Canada. Eric McMillan. vsnl.net.in. 11/7 Chettipalayam Road Podanur Tamilnadu 641 023 India. 4714173; e-mail: vetfolkephysto.se. Medical Chair. Tel.: 416-425-2451; e-mail: eric«we-com- Pharmacology BMC. Box 593. Uppsala 751 24 pute.com. P.O. Box 53003. 10 Royal Orchard ITALY. Comitato Italiano per il Contralto delle Sweden, www.physto.se/-vetfolk/index.html. Blvd.. Thornhill. ON L3T 7R9 Canada. Affermazioni sul Paranormale (CICAP) Italy TAIWAN. Taiwan Skeptics. Taiwan. Tim Holmes. www.astro.yorku.ca/-mmdr/oskeptics.html. Massimo Polidoro, Executive Director. Tel.: 39- PO Box 195, Tanzu. Taiwan Perspective. Toronto Skeptical Inquirers (TSI) Toronto. 049-686870; e-mail: polidoroecicap.org. PO UKRAINE. Oleg Bakhtiarov 3-B Khmelnitskogo St, Henry Gordon. President. Tel.: 905-771-1615; e Box 1117 35100 Padova. Italy, www.cicap.org. mail: henry_gordonehotmail.com. 343 Clark Kiev 252001 Ukraine. Ave.. W.. Suite 1009. Thornhill. ON L4J 7K5 JAPAN. Japan Anti-Pseudoscience Activities Net­ UNITED KINGDOM. The Skeptic Magazine. United Canada Ottawa Skeptics, Ottawa, Ontario work (JAPAN) Japan. Ryutarou Minakami. chair­ Kingdom Toby Howard. E-mail: toby6cs.man Greg Singer. E-mail: skeptkeottawa com PO person. E-mail: skeptkee-mail ne.|p. c/o Ohta ac.uk P.O. Box 475 Manchester M60 2TH Box 1237, Station B. Ottawa. Ontario K1P 5R3 Publishing Company, Epcot Bid. IF. 22. Arakkho. United Kingdom. Canada.www.admissions.carleton.ca/-addalby/ Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 160-8571 Japan. Japan VENEZUELA. La Asociacion Racional y Esceptica de cats/skeptic.html Sceptiques du Quebec. Skeptics, Japan. Dr. Jun Jugaku E-mail: Venezuela (A.R.E.V.). Guido David Nunez Quebec. Alan Bonnier. Tel.: 514-990-8099. C.P. jugakujnecc.nao.ac.jp. Japan Skeptics, Business Mujica. 10th Street. 13th av. corner, Mini centro 202. Succ. Beaubien Montreal, Quebec H2G 3C9 Center for Academic Societies, Japan 5-16-9 Honk- comercial Oasis, Valera, Trujillo state, Canada, www.sceptiques.qc.ca. omagome. Bunkyo-ku Tokyo 113-8622 Japan Venezuela. Web site: www.geocities.com/escep KAZAKHSTAN. Kazakhstan Commission for ticosvenezuela. Center for Inquiry International "... to promote and defend reason, science, and freedom of inquiry in all areas of human endeavor."

Ghostly Reflections in the Pleiades NASA's Hubble Space Telescope has caught the eerie, wispy tendrils of a CENTER FOR INQUIRY- dark interstellar cloud being destroyed by the passage of one of the INTERNATIONAL brightest stars in the Pleiades star cluster. Like a flashlight beam shining P.O. Box 703 off the wall of a cave, the star is reflecting light off the surface of pitch Amherst, NY 14226 black clouds of cold gas laced with dust. Thescfare called reflection nebu­ Tel.: (716) 636-1425 lae. This famous cluster is easily visible \njSte&0i\na sky during the win­ CENTER FOR INQUIRY—MIDWEST ter months as a small grouping of bright blW? stars, named after the United Labor Building "Seven Sisters" of Greek mythology. 6301 Rockhill Rd., Suite 412, Credit: NASA and The Hubble Heritage Team (STSd/AURA) Kansas City, MO 64131 Tel.: (816) 822-9840

CENTER FOR INQUIRY—WEST 5519 Grosvenor Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90066 Tel.: (310) 306-2847

CENTER FOR INQUIRY—MOSCOW Professor Valerii A. Kuvakin 119899 Russia, Moscow, Vorobevy Gory, Moscow State University, Philosophy Department

CENTER FOR INQUIRY—EUROPE Dr. Martin Mahner Arheilger Weg 11 D-64380 Rossdorf, Germany Tel.: +49 6154 695023

THE COMMITTEE FOR THE SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION OF CLAIMS OF THE PARANORMAL The Committee is a nonprofit scientific and educational organization. The SKEPTICAL INQUIRER is its official journal. The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the science and scientific inquiry, critical thinking, science education, and Paranormal encourages the critical investigation of paranormal and the use of reason in examining important issues. fringe-science claims from a responsible, scientific point of view and disseminates factual information about the results of such inquiries to ^HfPrvtlPil 1 Illflllll'Pl* the scientific community, the media, and the public. It also promotes kJIYL IJlIv'Cll 111UU11 CI