The polar vortex agenda

Dear readers,

Before I get to today's post, I want to point out something that you probably have already noticed -- a new feature in the upper right-hand corner of Skeptophilia labeled "Donate."  If you're a regular reader -- or even if you're not, and just want to support the effort and time it takes to bring posts to you six days a week that leave you thinking or laughing or both -- then consider making a donation!  You can contribute securely through PayPal, and your (much appreciated) donation will help assure that we will be able to continue to provide you with skeptical content for a long time to come.

And now, back to our regularly scheduled programming.

cheers,

Gordon

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

Rush Limbaugh is kind of predictable.  All you have to do is watch the weather map. If we have any sort of anomalous weather, you can guarantee that a day or two later he will be drawing on his skills as a climatologist to inform his loyal listeners that whatever it is had nothing to do with global warming.  It's just like clockwork, sort of like intestinal gas after a meal at Taco Bell.

This time, though, he's gone a step farther.  The piece of the polar vortex that has been spinning its way across the northern United States, causing widespread damage, thousands of school closings, and wind chills in some places lower than -50 Fahrenheit, is not real, Limbaugh says.  It's all a hoax.  And guess who is perpetrating this hoax?  You'll never guess.

The liberals.  Told you you'd never guess.

Here's what he had to say in Monday's Rush Limbaugh Show:

Do you know what the polar vortex is? Have you ever heard of it? Well, they just created it for this week...  Now, in their attempt, the left, the media, everybody, to come up with a way to make this sound like it's something new and completely unprecedented, they've come up with this phrase called the "polar vortex."  If you've been watching television, they've created a graphic, all the networks have, and it basically consists of a view of the planet if you are right above the North Pole. They put this big purple blob, or blue blob, or red blob, depending on the network you're looking at, over the entire North Pole, and they call that the polar vortex. It actually sounds like a crappy science fiction movie to me, but anyway, that's what they're calling it.

We are having a record-breaking cold snap in many parts of the country.  And right on schedule the media have to come up with a way to make it sound like it’s completely unprecedented.  Because they’ve got to find a way to attach this to the global warming agenda, and they have.  It’s called the ‘polar vortex.’  The dreaded polar vortex.”

Liberals are in the middle of a hoax, they’re perpetrating a hoax, but they’re relying on their total dominance of the media to lie to you each and every day about climate change and global warming.  So they created the polar vortex, and the polar vortex, something’s happened, and that cold air which normally stays is in the North Pole, something’s happening, something deeply mysterious and perhaps tragic is happening.

Whatever it is that keeps the polar vortex vortexed in the Arctic Circle is vanishing, and that cold air is coming to us. Normally it stays up there. But now it's down here. How did it get here? That's the deepening mystery. That is the crisis. That is what is man-made. Man is destroying the invisible boundaries that keeps that air up there. How did it get cold in previous winters? Well, it got cold in previous winters, but, see, as far as most people are concerned, this is as cold as it's ever been in their lives. Well, but, Snerdley, I'm just telling you their technique. Forget truth. The truth and the Democrat Party, the truth and the American left never intersect.

My point is you have a lot of people who are believing that this is as cold as it’s ever been.  You might think that flies in the face of global warming.  Ah, ah, ah, ah.  Global warming’s not climate change, and we, folks, are causing all of this, you must understand.  The hoax continues.

So, let's analyze this, shall we?

First of all, let's look at his first contention, which is that the "polar vortex" was just invented by liberals last week to scare everyone, for reasons unknown.  Strange, then, that the term was first used 150 years ago to describe the Arctic air circulation (Littell's Living Age, #495, 12 November 1853, p. 490), and has been standard terminology in climate science ever since.  All you have to be able to do is to use Wikipedia -- something that apparently is outside of Mr. Limbaugh's rather limited skill set -- to find out that the reduced ice coverage in the Arctic Ocean, coupled with weakening of the polar air circulation, has been known for years to cause "meanders" in the jet stream that sometimes cause whirling blobs of cold air to break loose from the main polar vortex -- just like what happened this week.

But let's consider other sources.  They had a lot to say about the phenomenon this week over at ClimateCentral.org, where in an article on this week's weather we read:

The forecast high temperature in Fairbanks, Alaska, on Monday was in the 20s Fahrenheit — warmer than many locations in Georgia and Alabama. That fits in with the so-called “Arctic Paradox” or “Warm Arctic, Cold Continents” pattern that researchers first identified several years ago. Such patterns bring comparatively mild conditions to the Arctic while places far to the south are thrown into a deep freeze...  The warmth in the Arctic made headlines in early December when the temperature hit 39°F in Prudhoe Bay, north of the Arctic Circle. That was the highest December temperature on record there since at least 1968, according to the National Weather Service.

Even more interesting was what Rick Grow, writing for The Washington Post, had to say:

Large atmospheric waves move upward from the troposphere — where most weather occurs — into the stratosphere, which is the layer of air above the troposphere. These waves, which are called Rossby waves, transport energy and momentum from the troposphere to the stratosphere. This energy and momentum transfer generates a circulation in the stratosphere, which features sinking air in the polar latitudes and rising air in the lowest latitudes. As air sinks, it warms. If the stratospheric air warms rapidly in the Arctic, it will throw the circulation off balance. This can cause a major disruption to the polar vortex, stretching it and — sometimes — splitting it apart.

What is unusual about this week's event is that instead of just spawning a minor meander, nearly the entire polar vortex came unhinged and started drifting south -- which you can see on the following map, showing that while Chicago was in the deep freeze, northern Labrador was experiencing far warmer than normal conditions:

 

What I find interesting about this is that when we set record high temperatures -- like we did two weeks ago in the Northeast, when in my usually chilly home town we shattered all previous records for that day with a balmy 67 Fahrenheit -- the climate change deniers point out that as everyone knows, there's a difference between weather and climate.  That was just a single day's high, nothing to be concerned about.  But when we have cold weather, you have bloviating windbags like Mr. Limbaugh ranting about how the icy conditions show that global warming is a hoax.

Sorry, dude, you can't have it both ways.  If you can't use single weather events to support climate change, you can't use single weather events to deny it, either.  But the problem is that then, you're forced to look at trends -- which means that you'd have to be honest and admit that the global average temperature is increasing steadily.  Which is the last thing that Limbaugh and his cadre want to do.

So who is it, exactly, that seems to have no intersection between their agenda and the truth?

As I've said before: to reject the basic tenets of climate change, you have to ignore mountains of hard data from the last fifty years, coupled with the predictions of climate models developed by some of the best climatologists in the world.  Because they have no particular difficulty coming to consensus; well over 90% of climate scientists not only believe that the Earth is warming, they believe that the warm-up is due to human activity, especially the burning of fossil fuels.

The problem is, more people listen to fools like Rush Limbaugh than listen to the scientists, which is exactly what people like him want.  Dumb folks down.  Science is hard, and often confusing; here, let me tell you what to think.  The people who are trying to get you to change your ways are just liars and hoaxers with a secret agenda to destroy the U. S. of A.  It's okay, you can still drive your Hummer around with a clear conscience.

And outside, the wind is still howling, and the weather is becoming more and more unpredictable.  Today, as I write this, it's -4 F.   By Saturday, it's predicted to be 48 F and raining.  In upstate New York, in mid-January.

Liberal agenda, my ass.

Tweets from time travelers

So, you know how I said yesterday that science has an advantage over woo-woo beliefs, because the woo-woos never seem to see when an idea is so phenomenally silly that it deserves to be rejected out of hand?  And that therefore, we should be listening to the scientists, not the woo-woos?

I take it back.

This near-instantaneous retraction has come about because of a paper published by Michigan Technological University astrophysicists Robert Nemiroff and Teresa Wilson entitled "Searching the Internet for Evidence of Time Travelers."  Nemiroff and Wilson note that time travel into the future is possible (in fact, that's kind of what we're doing right now); they also make the less obvious point that the rate at which you travel into the future can differ from another person's, because of the Special Theory of Relativity.  Time travel into the past is, they say, "more controversial," although there are some features of the General Theory of Relativity that may allow it.

[Image from Dr. Who courtesy of the Wikimedia Commons]

It is, of course, the latter possibility that is of the most interest.  It's been riffed on in countless novels, short stories, and movies -- I even played around with the notion myself, in my novel Lock & Key.  Rips in the space-time continuum account for at least a hundred plots on Star Trek alone.

But as a reality?  I'm kind of doubtful.  And so far, I've got nothing against what Nemiroff and Wilson have written.  But wait till you hear how they tried to detect time travelers:

Time travel has captured the public imagination for much of the past century, but little has been done to actually search for time travelers. Here, three implementations of Internet searches for time travelers are described, all seeking a prescient mention of information not previously available. The first search covered prescient content placed on the Internet, highlighted by a comprehensive search for specific terms in tweets on Twitter. The second search examined prescient inquiries submitted to a search engine, highlighted by a comprehensive search for specific search terms submitted to a popular astronomy web site. The third search involved a request for a direct Internet communication, either by email or tweet, pre-dating to the time of the inquiry.

Yup.  They were trying to find some place that a time traveler slipped up, and tweeted something last August like "On January 7, 2014, people in the northern part of the USA should plan on dressing warmly.  #fuckingcold"

Specifically, they looked for mentions of Pope Francis prior to his election, and Comet ISON prior to its discovery.  Not surprisingly, Nemiroff and Wilson stated in the conclusion of their paper, "No time travelers were discovered."

My question is how, if these people from the future are smart enough to come back here, they would also simultaneously be dumb enough to get onto Twitter and post something that gave away the game.  I'd think they'd be pretty careful about that, wouldn't  you?  Not only would it reveal their identities as time travelers, it could also potentially change what for them is the past, and you know that would create some sort of temporal paradox that would monumentally screw up everything, and we don't even have Geordi LaForge around to fix things.

Nemiroff was interviewed by Raw Story about his research, and the interviewer actually asked him why he thought that a time traveler would use Twitter at all.  "Twitter is an echo of what’s going on in society," he replied, "so I’d ask you, 'Why do you think a traveler wouldn’t use Twitter?'  Besides, it wouldn’t have to be the traveler himself who used Twitter.  Someone could have overheard him say something prescient, and put that on Twitter in a way that would be magnified through conversation."

He then went on to relate the old joke about the guy who was searching for his lost car keys under a streetlight, and a cop comes along to help him.  After a fruitless search, the cop asks, "Are you sure you lost your car keys here?"  And the guy says, "No, I lost them over there."  The cop says, in some annoyance, "Then why are you looking for them here?"  And the guy says, "Because there's better light over here."

Nemiroff says that his search on Twitter is like the guy searching under the streetlight; "You have to go where the information is."  To which I respond: I don't think you understood the joke.  The whole reason that it's funny is because the keys weren't there.  Also, very possibly, because the guy looking for the car keys was a wingnut.  This is definitely not the kind of joke that you would use in support of what you're doing.

Nemiroff, though, isn't discouraged.  "We didn’t prove that time travelers aren’t here," he said, "only that we couldn’t find them."

Now, don't get me wrong, I have nothing with a couple of scientists having a little lighthearted fun, once in a while.  But Nemiroff and Wilson might want to prepare themselves for a nomination for the 2014 IgNobel Prizes, awarded to the strangest, silliest research published each year.

So despite Nemiroff's and Wilson's best efforts, they ended up like Monty Python's "Camel Spotters;" they spotted nearly one time traveler.  Just about what I'd expect, given their experimental protocol.  So I should wrap up this post and go and get another cup of coffee, especially considering that because of the Great February 2014 Coffee Bean Shortage, I'll soon be...

Oops.

Hank the Bigfoot, and the minimum standard for evidence

One of the charges that gets leveled at skeptics is that we're not just questioning the evidence, we've already decided beforehand what we believe -- that is, that we're as blind to actual evidence as the people we're criticizing.  I've gotten that comment from people of a variety of different beliefs -- from the religious, from ghost hunters, from alien aficionados, from conspiracy theorists.  But always, it's the same:

"You're not really a skeptic.  You selectively ignore evidence that doesn't fit your beliefs.  If you'd just open your eyes, you'd see that you're so certain that you wouldn't accept hard evidence if it came up and bit you right on the ass."

To which I say: okay, I acknowledge that we all have our biases.  But at least people who subscribe to the scientific method have something going for them that most of the aforementioned so-and-sos don't; we have a decision-making protocol for deciding what actually counts as evidence.  Evidence has to meet the minimum standard of (1) supporting whatever the contention is, and (2) not supporting some other contention even better.

So while we might have our own biases, we're not as likely to fall for them as you might think.  When hoaxes and bad research happen -- as they do, sometimes -- the perpetrators almost always get caught out eventually.

Because if science is good at one thing, it's self-correction.  The majority of bad research never gets read, because the vetting process (replication and peer review) winnows out most of it before it gets very far along.  It's only the odd exception that slips through, and even those usually get caught in short order once published (forcing the public embarrassment of a retraction, such as the mess surrounding the Andrew Wakefield paper that alleged a connection between vaccination and autism).

Now, contrast that to what happens in other areas of study.  Just in the last two days, for example, we have three news stories, which I will present in increasing order of craziness, in the field of cryptozoology.  And nowhere that I've seen has anyone, even the more-or-less reputable cryptozoologists who would like to see the subject become a legitimate area of study, yell at these people, "Will you please stop making shit up?  Because you're embarrassing yourselves and everyone else in the field."

And apparently they've never even heard of the word "retraction."

Let's start with our friend Rick Dyer, who has appeared in Skeptophilia several times before for his outlandish claims of having seen Bigfoot, photographed Bigfoot, videotaped Bigfoot, found footprints of Bigfoot, found hair from Bigfoot, and slow-danced with Bigfoot.  Okay, I made the last one up, but that's not so far, plausibility-wise, from what he's now claiming:

That he has shot a Bigfoot, and is soon going to be touring the country with the body.

Oh, yes, and the Bigfoot's name was "Hank:"

My first thought, upon seeing this, was "Dear god, no!  He killed Glóin the Dwarf!"

But no, Dyer is saying that this time, really and truly cross his heart and hope to die, he has a real Bigfoot.  Which he will show us, really soon.  Promise.

Which at least isn't as silly as the latest entry from the category of Yet Another Bigfoot Video that appeared over at Unexplained Mysteries a couple of days ago.  You can see the whole video here, which shows what appears to be either some poorly-executed CGI or else a video clip of a guy in a costume filmed using the "AutoBlur" function.  Here's a still:

Isn't it funny how, in these days of digital imaging, when an average cellphone can take better photographs than a $300 camera could twenty years ago, we still can't get a clear shot of these freakin' things?

But even that isn't as ridiculous as the claim by Kirk Sigurdson over at Cryptomundo that the reason we can't get close to Bigfoots is because they use infrasound like a "sound cannon" to make researchers sick:

(S)asquatch researchers have been grumbling about side-effects associated with ultra low frequency “blasting” for well over a decade… and for good reason: infrasound exposure can be quite uncomfortable, particularly when it is purposefully directed at a human target.

It can also be deadly. Perhaps this is why the subject of squatch-generated infrasound is an up-and-coming topic of great interest in bigfoot circles these days, along with the fact that cutting-edge human technology is catching up with the natural abilities of whales, dolphins, elephants, rhinos… and, yes, bigfoots...

When a bigfooter is exposed to infrasound—even though he (or she) cannot audibly hear the sound—its effects can certainly be felt.

Panic, anxiety, nausea, irregular heart rate, elevated heart rate, and the activation of “flight response” in the reptilian complex of the human target’s brain are only a few examples of observed side-effects.

So there you have it.  The Bigfoots are scaring us away with their infrasound blasting.  Maybe that's also what makes the photographs and video footage so blurry.

In any case.  I try to be patient with all of this stuff, I really do, and I make every effort to keep an open mind.  But every time I see one of these completely spurious claims trumpeted as real (and nearly every post in the "comments" section in full support, with any doubters getting shot down instantaneously as credulous fools who are unwilling to think outside science's "box"), I just throw my hands in the air in disgust.  I mean, really, people.  If you want to convince folks -- and by that I mean the ones who aren't already convinced, i.e. the people who would like to have a little in the way of hard evidence before they ink themselves into the "believers" column -- then do a bit of self-policing.  Establish some standard of veracity.  I know there are a few places that do a pretty good job in this regard -- the Society for Psychical Research and Centre for Fortean Zoology being two good examples.  But for cryin' in the sink, those are two sites amongst thousands.

So until you folks figure out a way to rein in the hoaxers and wackos, don't come complaining that the skeptics are viewing y'all with a wry eye.  Because we actually have an established protocol for what constitutes evidential support.  It's you people who refuse to use it.

Happy New Year!

Starting today, I'm taking a brief vacation from writing on Skeptophilia.  So I'll just take this opportunity to wish you a fun New Year's Eve (along with an exhortation not to drink and drive), and a hope that you have a lovely 2014.

I also want to take this opportunity to thank you.  I truly value all of my readers -- even the ones who disagree with me.  This blog recently passed three quarters of a million lifetime hits, a number that I find very nearly incomprehensible.  But your feedback, support, and suggestions for topics are what keep me writing, and for that I thank all of you.

My next scheduled post will be on Monday, January 6, 2014.

Until then, there are a few things you can do to keep your appetite for critical thinking sated.  First, you can buy my book, if you haven't already done so.  It has the creative title Skeptophilia, is a bargain at only $3.99, and is a collection of 120 of my essays on science, skepticism, critical thinking, and woo-woo-ism.  You can get it for Kindle (here) or Nook (here).   If you do decide to buy it, many thanks -- and please leave a review.

This is also a chance for you to check out some other skeptical blogs and webpages, so here are a few of my favorites:

James Randi Educational Foundation
Pharyngula
Doubtful News
SkepChick
The Skeptic's Dictionary
The Call of Troythulu
The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Science and Reason
Friendly Atheist
Quackwatch
Bad Archaeology
Bad Astronomy
Skeptic subreddit
Science, Reason, and Critical Thinking

If you, too, would like to take a break from thinking about all of the crazy things people believe, there's always fiction to be read.  Mine.  Yes, this is a moment of shameless self-promotion.  Besides the books linked on the sidebar, there are over a dozen other titles to choose from, which you can peruse on my Amazon author's page.  You will note that almost all of them have to do with the paranormal, an irony that my wife thinks is amusing.  Me, I just think that this is why they're filed under the heading "Fiction."  But you should still read them, because they're awesome.

If I do say so myself.

That should be enough to keep you occupied while I'm gone, don't you think?  I encourage you to continue sending me topics -- I'll be ready to sit down and write again when I get back from vacation, and would love to have some ideas of what you'd like me to write about.  Until then, keep hoisting the banner of logic!

Look before you leap

A friend and fellow Skeptophile sent a story to my attention on Facebook that seems fitting for the last Skeptophilia post of 2013.  It combines all of the essential elements: a claim that is so ridiculous that it clearly started as a hoax; a bunch of people (including folks in the media) who know so little science that they seem to have taken it seriously; a prediction that will have gullible individuals worldwide making complete fools of themselves next Saturday; and a Facebook back-and-forth that resulted in cheerful contributions from several loyal readers of this blog who were eager to get in on the fun of ripping the whole silly story to shreds.

The (recent) origin of the claim seems to have been this story in News Hound, entitled, "January 4, 2014 - Planetary Alignment Decreases Gravity - Float For Five Minutes!"  Here's what they're claiming:

It has been revealed by the British astronomer Patrick Moore that, on the morning of January 4th 2014,  an extraordinary astronomical event will occur. At exactly 9:47 am, the planet Pluto will pass directly behind Jupiter, in relation to the Earth. This rare alignment will mean that the combined gravitational force of the two planets would exert a stronger tidal pull, temporarily counteracting the Earth’s own gravity and making people weigh less. Moore calls this the Jovian-Plutonian Gravitational Effect.

And here we run into our first five problems with this claim:

First, 9:47 in which time zone?  You can see how that would make a difference.  I'm assuming that it's 9:47 Greenwich Mean Time, which would certainly be the most logical interpretation, but it'd have been nice if they'd specified.

Second, even if we do assume that it's 9:47 GMT, then only the point on the Earth that is angled away from the Sun, and thus toward Jupiter and Pluto, would experience the effect, given that the Earth is spherical.  The other side of the Earth would actually experience the opposite -- an additional pull of gravity (the Earth's plus Jupiter's plus Pluto's), and people in those regions would feel heavier and fall faster.  People elsewhere on the Earth would experience this as a sideward pull, and would thus be more likely to trip over curbs and fall down.

Third, why would it only last for five minutes?  In terms of apparent angular velocity, neither Jupiter nor Pluto is moving that fast.  You'd think we'd at least have a few weeks' worth of floating about the place until everything drifts out of alignment.

Fourth, we have a problem with magnitudes, here.  Jupiter is a big planet, yes, but at closest approach it is still very far away.  We had a whole kerfuffle over "planetary alignments" amongst the astrology crowd a couple of years ago, which prompted me to calculate the gravitational pull of Jupiter on the Earth, and I came out with one ten-millionth of a Newton, a force a hundred million times smaller than the force the Earth itself is exerting.  So there's no way that the pull of Jupiter will have any significant affect on your hang time, and Pluto would have even less.

Fifth, "British astronomer Patrick Moore" was indeed an authoritative figure in the world of astronomy, and for many years hosted BBC's popular show The Sky at Night.  The problem is, he's been dead for two years, so he's not revealing much of anything at the moment.

Patrick Moore and fellow astronomer Dr. Fiona Vincent [photograph courtesy of the Wikimedia Commons]

But all of this isn't stopping the author of the story on News Hound, who goes on to tell us:

Moore told scientists that they could experience the phenomenon by jumping in the air at the precise moment the alignment occurred. If they do so, he promised, they would experience a strange floating sensation.

Astronomers have long been aware that there would be an alignment of the planets on that date, when Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto would be on the same side of the Sun, within an arc 95 degrees wide. But now the effect could be expected as the gravitational effect of the other planets on the Earth’s crust is maximum even at their closest approach.

If you think you will be able to float around your house then you will be mistaken. BUT if you jump in the air at 9:47AM local time on January 4th 2014, it should take you about 3 seconds to land back on your feet instead of the usual 0.2 seconds.

We are then told to join in on Twitter, using the hashtag #ZeroGDay, which I definitely encourage all of you to do.

Okay, so here's the real scoop -- a discovery for which I thank my friend and loyal reader David Craig, who did some stellar research work on this whole ridiculous story.

Apparently, like so many crazy claims, this one does have a germ of truth to it.  Patrick Moore was a smart, clever, and exceptionally funny man, and on April 1, 1976, he played an April Fool's Day prank on his listeners by claiming that at -- guess when? -- precisely 9:47, Jupiter and Pluto would be in alignment, and if they jumped into the air, they'd feel weightless.  When the clock hit 9:47, Moore said, "Jump now!" -- and the telephone switchboard lit up with calls from listeners who said they'd felt the effect.  (In fact, one listener was furious because he said he'd jumped so high that he'd hit his head on the ceiling.)

So this story is apparently just the whole thing going around again, because, after all, if a practical joke works once, it can always be reused, right?   Evidently Patrick Moore thinks so.  He wasn't content with pranking people while he was alive, he's continuing to do it two years after his death.  Which he'd probably be pretty pleased about, and, honestly, is what I'll do if I have the opportunity.

Of course, I couldn't end this piece without some information on where the relevant planets actually are.  If you'll take a look at the Planetary Orbit Map from Lunaf.com, you'll see that the Earth, Jupiter, and Pluto are very far from alignment -- Earth and Jupiter are more-or-less in alignment, but Pluto is clear on the other side of the Sun.

So I encourage you to participate on Twitter in #ZeroGDay, but don't bother jumping up and down unless you are doing so for another reason, in which case you should have at it.

And this seems like a fitting place to end.  I am taking a brief vacation for the remainder of the week, so this will be my last post of 2013.  I will be back at it on Monday, January 6, 2014, however, so keep those suggestions and comments coming.  I wish you all a lovely New Year's Day, and that 2014 is everything you hope for!

Blond aliens, etheric bodies, and sentient spaceships

In the past few posts, we've dealt with issues like Siri predicting the Apocalypse, Noah's Ark has been found but the government is hiding it from us, elves are blocking a highway project in Iceland, and Catholic leaders determining that angels don't have wings.  Today, we look at an even more pressing issue:

Are tall blond aliens invading Australia?

The question comes up because of a post on the amazingly wacky site Pararational called, and I am not making this title up, "Albino Extraterrestrials in Australia."  In it, we hear about an encounter between a man in an undisclosed location in Australia and some aliens who were, to say the least, peculiar:

A few nights ago I was standing on my balcony at around 2:30 to 3 in the morning.  I usually go out there around that time each night just to look at the stars for a few minutes before going to bed.  That night however, out over the neighbourhood on a foresty mountain just a couple blocks away, I saw this light in the trees.  It was a very bright white sort of pulsing glow, not bright in that it was blinding but bright in that it seemed to light the trees like daylight but pulsing really slowly...  after a couple of minutes or so a glowing white ball looking thing started to slowly rise above the trees. it was very bright but not blinding like the sun or anything...

I got in my car and drove around the block down to where the forest starts and I got out and walked into the forest.  I couldn’t hear anything but I could see the general direction which the light was coming from.

I followed it until another of those balls came into view. I was probably about 30m away when I could suddenly see silhouettes walking around past the ball up ahead. I tried to get closer but I couldn’t will myself to move. A really kind sounding voice from behind me said “do not be afraid” and then suddenly I was able to move again which caused me to fall face first into the ground.

I rolled over and standing over me was a very tall man with long white blond hair and very pale skin wearing what looked like a white onesey, all fluffy looking...  He leaned over and helped me up and that’s when I noticed something really freaky. on either side of his neck was a small but long slit that moved when he breathed.  It kinda looked like gills on a fish but it was just one slit on each side. this man helped me up off the ground and lead me over to where this floating ball was.

So, let's see... thus far, we've got a tall albino alien, with gills, wearing what amounts to fluffy footed pajamas.  It couldn't get any weirder, right?

…around this ball were several smallish people wearing black hooded robes and holding long metal rods, sort of like a staff or walking stick. They sort of reminded me of grim reapers with a walking stick instead of a scythe.

The man was calming yet he looked really freaky, especially the gill things he had. The hooded people never showed their faces which was pretty scary looking. Made me think it was some sort of satanic cult or something but the tall man was able to paralyze me without touching me at all and I don’t know how he did that.

And the tall albino in pajamas was surrounded by midgets dressed up like the Grim Reaper.  Got it.

After receiving this report, the people over at Pararational decided to do what any sane individual would do, on reading a story like this; they immediately tried to figure out which race of aliens these assorted weirdos represent:

So the question now is what exactly what race of extraterrestrials did this man encounter in Australia?  What race was this alien, and what is up with the shorter minions?   Sounds reminiscent of the Grey Aliens and their taller and shorter members...  (A) “Very tall man with long white blond hair and very pale skin.”  This sounds very much like some descriptions of the Annunaki.  Are they back to check up on us?

If you're curious, the dude on the right is what the Mesopotamians meant by "Annunaki."  No gills, no long blond hair, and no (thank heaven) footed pajamas.  [image courtesy of George Lazenby and the Wikimedia Commons]

Which leads us to another story, this time from UFO Digest, called "Zeta Craft and Their Propulsion System," which tells us about contact with aliens called the "Zeta Race" that has resulted in a guy named Paul Hamden finding out all about their super-advanced technology.  We are told, in the opening paragraphs, that the authors are going to give us details about Zeta science and technology, but when you read further, you find out that the details aren't very... detailed:

The Zetas are physical beings who live in physical environments, but they also have the ability to extend their activities to a non-physical, energetic environment where different laws of nature apply.  The energetic realm holds templates, also known as etheric bodies, that define the properties of associated forms in the physical universe.  In these non-physical realms, consciousness has the ability to create with thoughts...

Our craft are of a nature that are able to support our biological framework.  These craft are living entities...  The craft behaves like a single-celled organism so that it is without doors or windows. 

I'm with you, so far.  I've never seen a cell with windows.  But do go on:

They (the craft) are grown from what was initially a hybrid framework designed by our best technical and scientific beings, so this explains why we have craft who can also "self-heal". The craft are generic, genetically modified structures. Not all craft have individual operators, but as there are certain parts of our DNA replicated, there is one standard craft for beings to use. There are specific craft for specific beings. These beings are utilized to move in different dimensional aspects of the non-physicality of this physical universe. 

Okay, non-physicality of the physical universe means... um... that some things are physical, and then other things aren't?  How can you have a non-physical thing?  I thought the word "thing," by definition, meant "physical."

This statement says that the craft are designed to respond to operators with Zeta DNA. There is a standard craft that can be used by any Zeta because the craft responds to certain segments of DNA shared by all Zetas. There are also specific craft that respond to unique sequences of DNA possessed by particular Zetas. The latter craft and operators are used to move to and from non-physical dimensions of the universe. 

So the spaceship recognizes your DNA, and then just makes the ship go where your DNA tells it to?

The Zeta adds that the craft, like all living things, needs sustenance or a source of energy to survive. He says, “There is a basic life force woven into the fabric of the universe. This energetic form, waveform, feeds and nourishes these cellular craft.” For the Zeta, the basic life force of the universe is the energy of consciousness. Everything that is and can be experienced is constructed from this fundamental substrate.

I... um...  "life force of the fabric of the universe..."  But...

The process of wave shifting involves interaction with the field that 'is and always is'; that is, the energy of source consciousness. So the craft's intention to move invokes the creative process at a particular level of this consciousness field to relocate its etheric body in the matrix. 

DANGER!  DANGER!  Sensors indicate that bullshit readings are reaching maximum allowable limits!  Shield breach imminent!

*Engaging warp drive*

Whew.  That was close.

Anyway.  I'm thinking that what we have, here, is just two cases of rampant hallucinogen use.  There's no reason to believe that there are Zetas, or Annunaki, or midgets in Grim Reaper suits, or tall pajama-clad gilled albino aliens hanging around the Earth.  And I think now I'm going to wrap this up, and then relocate my etheric body to the kitchen, where I can gain some sustenance from the life force of a second cup of coffee.

Dogma vs. science vs. history

I don't, for the most part, frequent religious blogs and websites.  As I've mentioned before, the majority of religious writers are starting from a stance so completely opposite from mine that there is barely any common ground on which even to have a productive argument.  So I generally only address religious issues when they either stray into the realm of science (as with the conflict over evolution), or when they begin to intrude on social or political realms (such as Dana Perino's claim earlier this year that atheists should leave the United States).  Otherwise, the religious folks can entertain themselves all they like about the meaning of scripture and the nature of god, and I'll happily entertain myself with the equally reality-based discussions about Bigfoot and aliens.

But just a couple of days ago, Catholic blogger Stacy Trascanos came out with a claim that is so bizarre that I felt like I had to respond to it.  In her piece entitled, "Without Dogma, Science is Lost," Trascanos makes the rather mindboggling claim that not only does science owe its origins to religion, science needs religion today -- as a fact-checker:

People also wrongly assume that dogma restricts science too much.  On the contrary, divine revelation nurtured and guarded a realistic outlook in Old Testament cultures, in early Christianity, and in the Middle Ages.  This Trinitarian and Incarnational worldview was, and still is, different from any pantheism or other monotheism, and it provided the “cultural womb” needed to nurture the “birth” of science...

To do science well, a working knowledge of Catholic dogma is necessary.  To know what directly contradicts the dogmas of revealed religion and to make such distinctions guides the scientist.  The accomplishments of the medieval Catholic scholars demonstrate this abundantly. You’ve heard the axiom, “Truth cannot contradict truth.” The Scientific Revolution is evidence of it...  (S)cience needs to be guided by faith, and that the Catholic Church has a legitimate right and authority to veto scientific conclusions that directly contradict her dogma.  This is not about the Church being against science, but about the Church being a guardian of truth.

I probably wouldn't have been as shocked as I was by all of this if I hadn't read Trascanos's bio at the bottom of the page, in which she says she has a Ph.D. in chemistry.  So these aren't the rantings of someone who has never studied science; Trascanos herself is a trained scientist, who gave up a career as a research chemist to pursue an M.A. in theology.

But a deeper problem with all of this is that she's simply factually incorrect.  Rationalism, and the scientific method it gave birth to, started with people like Anaxagoras and Democritus and Thales, long before Christianity began.  The idea that we could find out about the laws of nature by studying lowly matter was profoundly repulsive to early church fathers, who by and large took the mystical approach -- also, interestingly, launched prior to Christianity, by people like Pythagoras -- that the road to knowledge came from simply thinking, not experimentation.  (The desperation of medieval astronomers to make planetary orbits conform to perfect circles and the "five Platonic solids" comes largely from this approach.)

And as far as Christianity's acceptance of, and nurturing of, science, you only have to look at the story of Hypatia to realize what a crock that is.  Hypatia was a philosopher, teacher, mathematician, and astronomer in 4th century Egypt, who ran afoul of Bishop Cyril of Alexandria for her "ungodly teachings."  On his orders, she was kidnapped on the way home from the Library of Alexandria, and was cut to pieces with sharpened roof tiles.  Her body was burned.

Cyril went on to be canonized.

The problem, of course, is one we've encountered before; science and religion approach knowledge two completely incompatible ways.  Science bases its understanding on evidence; if new evidence arises, the understanding must change.  Religion, by and large (although there are some exceptions), bases its knowledge on revelation and inward reflection, not to mention authority.  Change in scientific understand can occur at lightning speed; change in religious understanding is slow, and frequently met with much resistance from adherents.  As Trascanos said, "...divine revelation nurtured and guarded a realistic outlook in Old Testament cultures, in early Christianity, and in the Middle Ages."  I would argue that because of this, self-correction seldom occurs in religion, because any alteration in belief is much more likely to be looked upon by the powers-that-be as an error of faith.

But the bottom line is, Trascanos is right about one thing; if science and religion come into conflict, there is no reconciliation possible.  You have to choose one or the other, because their decision-making protocols are inherently incompatible.  Trascanos, despite her scientific training, has chosen religion -- a decision I find frankly baffling, given the fact that science's track record in uncovering the truth is pretty unbeatable.

Still, I'm left with feeling like I still don't quite get how an obviously well-educated person as Trascanos can make claims that are so clearly counterfactual.  The thesis she so passionately defends is contradicted not only by history, but by science itself -- given the number of unscientific stances that were once considered "revealed truth" by the church, and which have since been abandoned.  (The whole heliocentric/geocentric argument is so well-known as to be a cliché; but check out this article, which attributes much of Galileo's troubles with the Vatican as coming from his stance on the existence of atoms [they exist] and his explanation of why things float in water [low density].) 

But all other considerations aside, we're back to the condition of agree-to-disagree.  However Trascanos wants to try to reconcile science with religion, she has arrived at the appropriate conclusion of falling on one side of the fence or the other.  It's just that she's chosen a different side than I have (actually, I tend to think that the other side of the fence doesn't exist, but that's an argument for a different day).  And now, I really will leave behind the shaky ground of religion and philosophy, and return to my happy place, populated by Bigfoot and aliens.

To each his own, I suppose.