Science and Non-science

by

It snowed yesterday so clearly there is no global warming

“It’s snowing so therefore there is no global warming” is like saying “I know a guy who smoked for years and never got cancer so clearly scientists are wrong and cigarettes aren’t bad for you.”

It’s pretty simple to disprove climate change. Submit your research to peer review and if it is conclusive, science will acknowledge it. That’s how it works.

Every time someone says to me “climate change has been proven wrong” they point me to some internet article, usually by someone who is not a climate scientist, denying what 99% of all scientists say. It’s a conclusion that isn’t peer reviewed and usually is backed by industries that want to deny climate change because they are afraid of government conservation policies.

Now, it’s good to be cynical and skeptical.  That’s what science is all about.  But when the vast majority of people whose job it is to know these things say it’s true, why should I, who have no experience in these things, not believe them? dr-evil

It always amazes me how people only deny science when it contradicts their already held political or religious views. They never seem to challenge the theory of relativity or the theory of gravity.  Evolution?  Can’t be true because God told me so.  Climate change?  Can’t be true because Fox News told me so.

Do you really think that scientists, whose livelihood relies upon being correct, would lie about this?  That there is a vast conspiracy of scientists who have made up the research from every country on earth and are working together for the purpose of … what?  What exactly is their benefit?

What possible reason would they have to make this all up?  I can’t think of anything, unless you want to believe in some sort of cliched organization of evil scientists who evilly laugh about the evil they are evilly performing solely for the purpose of being evil.

I can’t wait for them to make their demands.  “We will solve this problem for a milllllllion dollars!”

by

Bacon is good for you, says interwebs

It’s on the internet, so it has to be true!

The latest article flying around Facebook claims that scientists have found that bacon is good for you, just like eating your fruits and vegetables (but with more grease).Bacon

Of course, if you read the article a bit, you’ll notice it says no such thing. The article points to research done by Professor Michael Ristow that indicates that niacin (vitamin B3) will help you live longer.

Aha, says the interwebs. Look, there’s lots of B3 in bacon; therefore, logically, bacon must be good for you! If you eat lots of bacon, you’ll live forever!

Or at least until all the fat in bacon clogs your arteries and gives you a heart attack when you’re fifty.

Basically, this guy fed worms niacin and found that they lived a tenth longer than the control worms. (“Control Worms” would be a good name for a band.) Worms. Not humans. Professor Ristow hopes to test this on rats next, but even then — and here’s the point — he’s not feeding them bacon. The word “bacon” is not found in his study anywhere.

Yeah, I know. All you bacon-lovers out there are saying, “Why rain on our parade?” I’m not telling you to stop eating bacon if that is what you really want. I’m just pointing out that too often, we read something on the internet that we want to believe so much that we accept it without question. This is especially true in politics, where Republicans gladly seize upon every lie about Obama floating around and Democrats do the same with articles that make Republicans look bad.

Just be smart about the internet. There is no Nigerian Prince giving you money (in fact, there are no princes in Nigeria), Obama isn’t an atheist Muslim (which logically cannot exist), and bacon doesn’t help you live longer.

by

Oswald shot Kennedy — From Area 51!

It’s the 50th anniversary of the Kennedy assassination and the conspiracy theories continue.

When I was young, I loved reading about conspiracies. kennedy ufo UFOs, the Kennedy assassination, the Loch Ness Monster — they all interested me.  I was completely skeptical about the official version of the story.

As I grew, I realized what a hypocrite I was being.  I was not subjecting the conspiracy theories to the same skepticism I applied to everything else.   Because I wanted to believe in these things so bad, and because they were often easy answers to complicated issues, I was nieve and accepted things without significant proof.  (Insert your own comment about religious beliefs here.)

I’ve also learned, as a lawyer, that every incident will have various stories that contradict each other and make things seem different than what they appear.  Anything you look at in enough detail will provide things that make it ripe for conspiracy theories.

Plus there are many conspiracy books out there that are just full of lies. Exciting lies that sell books. I used to love reading books by John Keel — “The Mothman Prophecies” was one of his. His books were with all the UFO books in the library and were presented as researched factual accounts. I later learned he was laughing all the way to the bank, and had made up most of his evidence. When they finally made a film of “The Mothman Prophecies” they made no pretense of it being anything other than fiction. But for a long time when I was a kid, I was sure it was all real.

Of course, there really are secret conspiracies.  Usually they are money-related conspiracies, involving insider trading, banks conspiring to sell worthless mortgages, and bribes to get around regulations.  But, as I pointed out before, huge conspiracies of this type are really hard to hide.

If Oswald was innocent, then why did he run after the assassination? Why did he kill the cop who confronted him? It’s not as if it is impossible for him to have done the shooting …

Does that mean there wasn’t something else going on? No, because there are still too many unanswered questions, such as why Jack Ruby, who really had no stake in this, would go out of his way to shoot Oswald. Looked more like a mob silencing to me.

But these days I won’t jump to conclusions without knowing for sure. Just because something is possible doesn’t mean I should believe it.

by

The War on Water

You can’t make this stuff up. What used to be the domain of the Onion is now mainstream news.

Comedians and pundits have constantly said that if Obama supported something, the Republicans would oppose it just because it’s Obama. We’ve seen evidence of it plenty of times — the Republican health care plan was great until Obama endorsed it, and now it’s “Obamacare” and terribly evil. Republicans hate Russia and Putin, except Putin is against Obama so Putin’s a great guy now. Raising the debt ceiling was perfectly fine the many times George W. Bush did it, but when Obama wants it? And don’t get me started on who wants to go to war.

“If Obama came out in favor of drinking water, the Republicans would come out against it!” people joked.

Well, guess what.

Michelle Obama told kids it was important to hydrate and drink plenty of water. You know, the same thing doctors have been saying for years. Pretty non-controversial, one would think.

But no. The conservative crazies’ heads exploded. Rush Limbaugh railed against Big Government telling us we should drink water. Conservative newspapers and bloggers said that her suggestion that water was good for you was “faulty science.” And other critics tried their best to spin her view into something evil and corrupt that they could rail against.

Next up: Obama says oxygen is nice. Conservatives, in protest, stop breathing.

Michelle Obama and her big jugs

Michelle Obama and her big jugs

by

An atheist lives his own moral code

by Guest Blogger David Ehrhart

I had my “Atheism” tested today. I use quotations for that descriptor, because I don’t enjoy how the name of my belief system basically means “rejecting someone else’s belief system.” I should probably choose another word for it, but I’m getting ahead of myself …

Today, while driving home from work, I had a thought-provoking experience. As I found myself in the passing lane, gaining on a semi in the right lane, I suddenly beheld another car approaching incredibly fast behind the truck. As the space between my car and the semi quickly diminished, the third driver accelerated even more, dangerously cutting across in front of me to zip up and beyond the truck. He then merged back into the right lane almost immediately, but found whatever his next assuredly reckless driving stunt would have been to be blocked by traffic further up the road. As I found myself gaining on him in the passing lane, I looked over into his driver’s side window and entertained a few ideas. I thought I might give him the finger. I thought I might curse at him loudly enough that my voice would somehow magically project through my music, my passenger side window, the wind, his driver side window, and his potential music as well. I thought about doing both at the same time. I didn’t do any of that, but as I looked over at the man, who I believe was roughly my age, give or take a few years, I saw something dangling from his rear view mirror: a large, clearly visible crucifix.

Moments later my off-cutter zipped up an exit ramp and out of my view, and in his absence I found myself pondering a simple question with a potentially profound meaning: “What if he had killed us?”

I was raised as a Lutheran, attended church regularly in my youth, was baptized, confirmed, took Communion, served as the Crucifer in many a service, and even stood as the Pastor’s assistant in a few others. Yet somewhere in my college years I began to part with faith, calling myself an “Agnostic” for a few years until I became brave enough to accept the fact that I truly was what many would describe as an “Atheist.” My thinking became more scientific in nature. For more reasons than I can count, I came to “believe” that if it couldn’t be proven, I couldn’t accept it, whatever it was. Blame my psychology coursework if you will, but I have come to believe that it is easier for Man to have created God, than for God to have created Man. I in no way mean to offend others who do have faith when I say these things, because I believe that it is every human’s right to believe whatever they want to believe. But over the years, being the helping professional that I am, I have developed my own code and my own principles. It was taught to me by my professors, my supervisors, and those whom I continue to serve. The core of my belief system is to ”do no harm.”

So as I drove and pondered, I asked myself a variety of questions, trying my best to weigh the differences of my beliefs and the beliefs which were being announced by the other driver’s crucifix, assuming that the car wasn’t borrowed or stolen. If he had misjudged the distance between my car and the semi, if he hadn’t gone fast enough, if he was momentarily blinded by the afternoon sun’s reflection off of, say, anything, what might have happened differently? If we crashed and both of us died, and I was “wrong” in my Atheism, would I go to Hell? Being a Christian, would he go to Heaven? Would he need to ask his God for forgiveness before he drew his final breath to be absolved of his sin? Would he have needed to go to confession instead? Which version of Christianity would need to hold true for him to ascend? Would my good works mean nothing at the Pearly Gates, since I didn’t believe until beholding them “in person”? Would I be stuck in some kind of Purgatory or Limbo? Would the Christian God be a vengeful God and smite my spirit, or simply wave his omnipotent hand at my mortal transgressions if I apologized to Him? Would I be damned to an eternity of suffering because I refused to stop asking questions about the truth of life and the Universe? Would we blink out of existence altogether, turn into fertilizer, or reincarnate into cats?

Not being a Christian, I still live a life filled with acts that might resemble those of a Christian. I follow the majority of the Ten Commandments, without even needing to think about them, or how they are connected to the belief in a God. I spend the majority of my waking hours working with people in their darkest hours of mental instability. I volunteer to raise dogs to assist blind people in living fuller lives. I carry heavy things for weaker people and hold doors for the elderly. I speak respectfully, wait my turn, and enjoy teaching children about goodness. I love my fellow humans, and I love my world. I attempt to do the most good I can, and the least harm I can. I do these things because they are right to do, and while they may have been influenced by a Christian perspective in my upbringing, I don’t need to believe in a God to know that they are the right things to do. Plenty of other religious and other systems of thought and belief promote the same thing. We are a people who need each other. We exist because of each other. We exist for each other.

The Sixth Commandment, as I understand it, is “Thou Shalt Not Kill.” Allow me to be so bold as to broaden my interpretation of it to “Thou Shalt Not (Willfully Engage in Seriously Dangerous Behavior That Will Increase The Probability For You To) Kill (Others).” I hope it’s not too big of a stretch. What upsets me is that people too often wear or otherwise display symbols of faith, and then behave in a manner contradictory to the principles of said faith. This is one of the greatest reasons I find myself not adhering to any specific religious beliefs or doctrines, Christian or otherwise. If a “believer” isn’t required to be a living testament of their beliefs, why believe in the first place? And I’m sorry, but if asking for forgiveness from your God after you might have killed me is enough to secure your place in Heaven, only one of us is really making out on the deal.

Do no harm. It’s something I strive for daily, and something I encourage in others, and it isn’t terribly different from the aforementioned Commandment. All of us make mistakes, certainly, but I think no matter what an individual believes, he or she has the responsibility to not purposefully enter into situations in which they can seriously harm or kill another person, lest it be in the defense of their own mortality of the mortality of someone who, in that moment, is unable to defend their own life. Willful recklessness can end so many things, because it clouds other, more rational thoughts.

As I write this, I don’t find myself clinging to anger over the dangerous situation I survived. I find myself wishing for other opportunities. What would it have been like to have spoken to that man, and to have told him of the life he endangered? I could tell him about my crazy dog Jack, the patients I help, and the wedding I want to celebrate. I could have told him about something as significant as my whole family coming together soon to commit my father’s ashes to the sea, or as trivial as what I was going to make for dinner tonight (nothing exciting, it was a Bertolli frozen meal for two). I could have shared coffee with him, and even debated over our differing belief systems. I could have shown him that another’s life matters more than potentially getting to his exit ramp just a second or two earlier. I could have learned about his life, and its significance, too.

Whatever you believe, do no harm. Whether you believe in a Christian God, a Goddess, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or something else entirely, hold yourself accountable for the principles which you claim to follow. If you believe in something that condones the disregard for or outright abuse of the rights and well-being of others, well, we have a different conversation to conduct. As best as I can tell, we only have the present, and the choices we can make within it. Consider that you have an impact on the world around you, and the people within it, and while sometimes that impact is small, other times it may just be profound. Do no harm.

David Ehrhart is a Licensed Professional Counselor, a martial artist, and an otherwise quirky human. His goals are to marry his fiancé, raise a bunch of dogs, and one day write a witty bestseller for people who want to learn new ways to improve their own mental health.

(NOTE: This is a guest blog from David Ehrhart. If you would like to submit a guest blog that fits in with the theme of “Ventrella Quest,” please contact me).

by

Vegetarians and cloning

I discovered a few years ago that I am a pescatarian, which means I don’t eat meat except for fish. I had never heard the term before that, and possibly it was made up around that time.

I stopped eating meat when I was in college in the late 70s, so no matter what my mother-in-law thinks, there’s nothing she’s going to say that I haven’t already heard that will make my wife and I change.Spockha

There are two main reasons I don’t eat meat.

First: health. Every reputable doctor will tell you that the less red meat you eat, the healthier you will be. Can’t get much less than zero, right? Seriously, remember those old food pyramids? Meat was at the top because you were supposed to eat it rarely, not because you were supposed to put it on top of your salad. Worse yet, most meat these days is shot up with chemicals and additives that make people sick.

Second: as a protest against factory farms. You know those torture prisons, where the animals can’t even turn around in their pens. I don’t like the idea of my money going to support them.

I also don’t want to be hypocritical about it. I’m not one of those people who cries about cruelty to dogs and cats while munching down on a hamburger. I don’t think we should make a distinction between cute animals and non-cute animals. They all feel pain.

So I’m happy with the announcement that they’re moving closer to cloning meat. If they can do it without additives and chemicals, all the better. We’re not talking about cloning an entire animal from birth (which should be treated the same as any other animal) — this is cloning a side of bacon, absent from the pig. Kind of scary and science-fictiony, but hey, that’s the direction we’re headed.

No animal is harmed, and, like a Star Trek Food Replicator, you can have meat every once in a while without causing pain to anyone.

Even Spock would call that logical.

by

Fox: How can a Muslim write about Jesus?

Maybe you’ve heard that Fox News was shocked that a Muslim could research and write a book about Jesus.

Well, what I want to know is this: How can Bill O’Reilly have written a book about Lincoln when his ancestors came from Ireland?

I understand that Carl Sagan wrote books about the formation of the universe, even though he wasn’t around when it happened!

Shocked, I tell you. Absolutely shocked that people can write about things simply because they do the research.

(And then there’s that guy Michael A. Ventrella. He’s written a couple of novels about wizards, and he doesn’t even believe in magic!)

by

“Don’t believe everything on the internet” – Benjamin Franklin

Yesterday, a friend of mine posted another one of those silly internet things meant to make Obama look like an evil Muslim Atheist Socialist bent on destroying America. This one accused him of removing “In God We Trust” off the coins.

coin

To my friend’s credit, when I pointed out that (a) The coins were introduced in 2007 when George W. Bush was President and (b) The coins do have “In God We Trust” on them, he apologized grudgingly.

But the point of this post is not about the coins. We could discuss whether coins even should say “In God We Trust” on them at all. (For those playing at home, the correct answer is “no.”)

The point is that sometimes we are so anxious to believe something, we accept it without even checking to see if it’s true. (For the record, snopes is once again your friend.)

A few days earlier, a left wing blog posted an article which claims they have proof that the George Zimmerman rescue of some people stuck in a car after an accident was not true. The site claimed a police officer sympathetic to Zimmerman called him when the accident happened and told him to show up and pretend to be saving the people. Apparently, he arrived but had little to do with anything, and that’s why the victims of the accident haven’t come forth to thank him or anything.

Is this possible? Is it believable? Sure. It makes more sense to imagine that happening than to assume that he coincidentally just happened to be at the site of the accident only a few weeks after the verdict when he needed to redeem his image among many Americans.

But it’s reported on a site with an agenda; a site that is just as suspect as Fox News should be to everyone else.

When I see this reported on some mainstream, more respectable sites, then I’ll give it some credence, but for now, I am suspicious.

And that’s the lesson for today.

by

I don’t have to respect your views

When I criticize someone who has a religious view that, for instance, claims that marriage between anything other than a man and woman should be illegal, they sometimes come back at me and say that I am being anti-Christian and disrespectful to them.

Well, no, I am not being disrespectful to them. I am being disrespectful to their views.

Sometimes these people claim I am violating their rights by “not respecting” their views. This is ridiculous. No one has the right to not be criticized. (Let’s not veer off into a discussion about discrimination based on views — totally different topic.)

I will always respect everyone’s right to have unpopular and even stupid views. I even supported Westboro Baptist Church‘s right to spout their nonsense.

But I’m sorry — if you believe that the world is 6,000 years old and evolution is a lie, I have no respect for your beliefs. Why should I? You obviously don’t know anything about science. The fact that you believe something really, really strongly because of your religion doesn’t mean it should get treated any different from someone who believes that unicorns and fairies are playing in his backyard. Silly beliefs should be challenged no matter where they come from.

Some religions also believe that women should cover themselves from head to toe, never talk to a man, and be treated as subhuman. This is another belief that I have no respect for, and, ironically, many Christians will gladly speak out against that view too, while turning around and complaining whenever anyone challenges their own religious views.

I can distinguish these views about beliefs from views I have about people. Many have these silly beliefs but otherwise are honest, friendly, and wonderful people. After all, there are also people I disagree with politically who are some of my closest friends. I can respect them as people while not respecting their views.

No one’s views should be beyond question or criticism.

by

Snopes is your friend

We’ve all fallen for one or more internet rumor, passing it along to our friends with comments like “I can’t believe it!” … and then realizing the reason we couldn’t believe it is because it wasn’t true in the first place.logo-snopes-large

Now I admit — I’m a natural skeptic. I demand evidence. But even I can fall for some of these, especially the political ones where I’ve seen such outrageous things that it doesn’t surprise me when a politician says something extremely stupid.

Still, I try to always confirm before posting. And that’s why Snopes is such a great resource.

If you haven’t checked it out, please do. The web page is dedicated to finding out the truth. And it’s also great reading, and easy to get lost with some of the more fun ones.

Recently, I posted about the school that was teaching kids fables, using the Bible as if it was factual. At the time, Snopes could not confirm whether the test was real but said it probably was. They have since done more research and have confirmed its truth. Yes, kids are learning fairy tales in the name of science. This is one of those rare cases where the incredibly stupid thing posted on the internet which gets everyone upset actually is real.

There are huge sections debunking stupid political statements (Obama is a Muslim who swore his oath on the Quran! His birth certificate is fake! Sarah Palin posed in a bikini holding a rifle! Mitt Romney’s ancestors owned slaves and that’s why he can relate to black people!)

They also confirm stupid political statements: John McCain thinks the line between “middle class” and “rich” is $5 million dollars! Obama didn’t pay his traffic tickets from his time at Harvard until 2007! As President, George W. Bush appointed an anti-abortion advocate to be in charge of the FDA’s committee on birth control!

So please: when you read something online that seems outrageous, check with Snopes first before posting it on Facebook.

And seriously: Marty McFly goes to the future on October 21, 2015.