SKEPTICAL EYEVol. 12, No. 2

2000

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

• encourages critical and scientific thinking • serves as an information resource on extraordinaryclaims • provides extraordinary evidence that skeptics are cool

National Capital Area

continued on page 18

by Helen E. Hester-Ossa

letters2

prez sez3

A Weekend atthe DC MUFON

Symposium(Part 2)

4

media notes9

AlternativeEngineering—A Postmodern

Parable10

AmericanLunacies

12

16th & 17thCentury

Parodies ofAstrologers

15

Science FairJudging

17

the write stuff:NCCAM Focuses

on SolidScientific

Investigation19

Would You TrustThis Woman?

Ghostbusting 101 - Part 3

Yeah, you probably would. Any-one would, but especiallysomeone who is looking for apsychic to give them hopeabout a loved one, a dream, a

goal, or their life.Kari Coleman is a beautiful woman with a

beautiful smile who radiates sincerity. She’salso a very good actress. And smart—she’sgot to be smart to hang out with magic’s badboys, Penn & Teller, and help them with someof their scams. Actually, she WAS one oftheir scams, a tarot reading psychic by thename of, you’ve got it, Kari Coleman.

Kari began her adventure as a psychic ad-visor at Caesar’s Magic Empire in Las Vegas,in a “Spurina” costume (purple flowing gownwith built-in bosom of gravity-defying propor-tions, a black Cleopatra-meets-Las Vegas wig,and heavy theatrical makeup). She had pre-pared thoroughly for her role by researchingand reading up on tarot cards; talking to skep-tic Ray Hyman, a psychologist and expert atthe cold reading school of palm reading; andwatching a tape provided by Skepticmagazine’s Michael Shermer of James VanPraagh, a psychic medium claiming to talk todead people.

Kari was nervous. After all, she was afraud, wasn’t she? Surprisingly enough, usinga set of canned lines she had memorized andher own insight into human nature, she was

Last October, in the spirit of Hallow-een, the National Capital Area Skepticssponsored “Ghostbusting 101,” a full-dayprogram that examined investigations ofthe spirit realm, from the 19th century topresent day. The sessions offered di-verse viewpoints on attempts to apply sci-ence and technology in the assessmentof age-old traditions and beliefs.

Kari Coleman, who posed as a psy-chic for a segment of Penn & Teller’s SinCity Spectacular television show, dis-cussed her personal experiences and themethods she used in giving readings.She is an actress whose skeptical writ-ings have been published by the JamesRandi Educational Foundation in Swift,particularly (Vol. 2, No. 3&4), “My Psy-chic Adventure.”

This article is the final installment inthe “Ghostbusting 101” series.

photo by Helen Hester-Ossa

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○2

lettersGhosthunter article could have hadmore critical slantby Mike Jawer

In a May 2000 email that Paul Jaffe, president ofNCAS received, Mike Jawer stated:

I was amazed by the writeup of JoeHolbert in the last Skeptical Eye. I would havethought his presentation would have beenwritten up with a more critical slant. By the

same token, he was thoughtful and even hu-morous and that seems to have stood him ingood stead.

Condon Report inquiryWe were recently approached by someonewanting to use images from the Condon reportfor a documentary. See email fragment below:

On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 INDIGOFILMS999@aol.com wrote:

“ ... we are interested in using some ofthese images in an upcoming documentary forThe History Channel. Is it possible to obtainusage of these photographs? Please contactme and let me know.”

NCAS Reply:The copyright is owned by the University

of Colorado, and the copy of the report thatwe used is in the University’s library. Theywere very cooperative with our effort, andI’m fairly sure they would be equally coopera-tive with yours. At the time we did ourproject, the contact person was MilagrosCarabello, secretary to the Board of Regents.Her e-mail address from that time (1998-99):

milagros.caraballo@colorado.edu

“If you would like to receive the Shadow of a Doubt monthly calendarvia email or participate in the ncas-share online forum, please send anemail to ncas@ncas.org indicating your interest.”

National Capital Area Skeptical Eye (ISSN 1063-2077)is published by the National Capital Area Skeptics,PO Box 8428 , Silver Spring, MD 20907.

Copyright © 2000 National Capital Area Skeptics. Signedarticles are the opinions of the authors. Opinions ex-pressed herein do not necessarily reflect the position ofthe editors, the Board of Directors, or the National Capi-tal Area Skeptics.

24-hour phone number: 301-587-3827e-mail: ncas@ncas.orgSkeptical Eye input: s_eye@ncas.orgInternet: http://www.ncas.orgNCAS discussion group: ncas-share@ncas.org

NCAS Board of DirectorsPaul Jaffe, presidentGary Stone, vice presidentMarv Zelkowitz, secretaryGrace Denman, treasurerChip Denman, spokesman

Barry BlyveisJonathan BoswellHerb M. FederhenJim GiglioStephen GoodsonRita Malone

Editor/DesignerHelen Hester-OssaGuest EditorVirginia Vitucci

recycled paper

Eugene OssaMary Susan PastelScott SnellJamy Ian SwissWalter Rowe

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 3

prez sez

phot

o by

H. H

este

r-O

ssa

Dear Skeptical Eye reader,

Welcome to our new members whojoined as a result of our recentmembership drive! I’m confident

you will find NCAS a cause worthy of yoursupport. Your membership and tax deductibledonations help support our programs andprojects, including our public lecture series,media feedback, online document library, edu-cational programs, and other activities. NCASalso offers the opportunity to volunteer andget involved in the promotion of critical think-ing and the battle against pseudoscience.

You can now support NCAS when youshop online! Sign up with one or both of thesites below, then simply shop at any of anumber of major online stores, including Ama-zon, Barnes & Noble, CDnow, Buy.com,Priceline and literally hundreds of others. For-ward the purchase confirmation email that thevendor sends you to the site you’ve signed upwith and the vendor makes a donation toNCAS, from 3% up to 40%. NCAS has al-ready received several sizable checks frommembers’ purchases. The URLs are http://www.igive.com/skeptics and http://www.consumersaints.com/

Recently, NCAS reviewed and com-mented on the draft of the five-year strategicplan of the National Center for Complemen-tary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), for-

merly NIH’s Office of Alternative Medicine.Board member Jim Giglio headed the effort,with support and feedback from other mem-bers. NCCAM recently came under the direc-tion of Stephen E. Straus, M.D. Dr. Straus’professional credentials are impressive, includ-ing many awards and commendations in thefield of clinical research. We hope that underhis direction, NCCAM will determine if“complementary and alternative medicine pro-cedures and products do what they purport todo”.

See NCAS’ comments letter in this issueof the Eye. The specific change recommenda-tions can be found at http://www.ncas.org/.Reading NCCAM’s strategic plan at http://nccam.nih.gov/nccam/strategic/ is recom-mended for context.

NCAS has received coupons for $8.00 offadmission to Six Flags America for our mem-bers. These coupons will be available at up-coming programs, or you can contact medirectly at pjaffe@mindless.com or703-329-0270. I welcome any comments,suggestions, or ideas you may have.

Yours truly,

Paul Jaffe (pjaffe@mindless.com)President, National Capital Area Skeptics

Your membershipand tax deductibledonations helpsupport ourprograms andprojects, includingour public lectureseries, mediafeedback, onlinedocument library,educationalprograms, and otheractivities. NCASalso offers theopportunity tovolunteer and getinvolved in thepromotion of criticalthinking and thebattle againstpseudoscience.

September 16, 2000October 14, 2000*November 11, 2000*December 16, 2000

NCAS Meetings for2000-2001

January 20, 2001February 17, 2001March 17, 2001April 21, 2001

May 19, 2001June 16, 2001

*October and November are the secondSaturday of the month.

This year’s NCAS meetings will be held at the Bethesda Public Library, 7400 Arlington Road,Bethesda, Maryland, on the following dates:

Shop online, support NCAS!

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○4

The Saturday (July 3) evening session ofthe 1999 Mutual UFO Network(MUFON) Symposium began with

Budd Hopkins and his recounting of “A 1961Car Levitation UFO Abduction Case.”

Hopkins is a painter and sculptor who be-came interested in UFOs when he witnessedone in 1964. In 1975 he began investigatingUFO reports himself. By the early 1980s, hewas the best-known proponent of the claimthat many people are victims of abduction byextraterrestrials. Hopkins believes that manyof the victims do not realize that they have

been abducted, or at least are not aware of theotherworldly aspect of what they have experi-enced. One of the most useful clues for identi-fying such cases, Hopkins suggests, is the“missing time” that some abductees report,sometimes in conjunction with a UFO sight-ing. A victim may glance at his or her wrist-watch and be surprised to see that the time ismuch later than expected. They may be unableto account for some significant stretch of timeor cannot recall parts of a journey.

Hopkins sometimes hypnotizes the claim-ant to obtain further information about the in-cident. Some cases that initially seem mildlypeculiar become spectacular after hypnosis.Details emerge of encounters with alien beingsthat conduct what are interpreted as medicalexams on the victims, sometimes involvingextraction of sperm or ova. They also de-scribe meeting “alien/human hybrids,” pre-sumably created from the extracted sex cellsof abductees. Hopkins attributes the fragmen-tary or submerged quality of the victims’memories of their experiences to some un-known alien technology that is used to eraserecollections of the incident.

However, some UFO investigators areconcerned that Hopkins’ use of hypnosis issomewhat reckless. Critics allege that he asks“leading questions” of the abduction victimswhile they are under hypnosis. Also, manyhypnosis experts are leery of testimony givenwhile in the trance-like state, arguing that it isoften a mixture comprising unknown propor-tions of reality and confabulation. Hopkinsclaims to guard against unintentional sugges-tions to the hypnotized, and notes that manyabduction victims do not require hypnosis toremember their experiences.

Hopkins is the author of three—soon tobe four—books dealing with the alleged ab-duction phenomenon. His presentation fo-cused on a tale he investigated while preparinghis first book, entitled Missing Time: A Docu-mented Study of UFO Abductions, for its1981 release. “Solid as this case appeared,” hesaid, “some of its details were so strange that,erring on the side of caution, I decided not toinclude it in the book.”

Speaking to the MUFON audience,Hopkins gamely battled to be heard above achorus singing Baptist hymns in the neighbor-ing meeting room. His efforts provided himwith the grist for a few witty remarks thatsprinkled the early parts of his presentation,recounting a 1980 guest appearance he madeon a New York City radio station’s call-in pro-gram. On the show, he was expounding onhis hypothesis that “missing time” could be asign of an unremembered UFO abduction.One of the callers, (given the pseudonym“Sean McIntyre” by Hopkins) phoned the sta-tion to describe his own “missing time” story.Hopkins was intrigued enough to arrange ameeting with the caller.

Meeting with Hopkins in early 1981,McIntyre related his story in detail. In April of1961, as a recently commissioned second lieu-tenant in the Army, he drove from his home inNew Jersey to a new assignment in Fort Jack-son, South Carolina. (Note that the date pre-cedes the famous Betty and Barney Hillabduction case, considered to be prototypical,by several months, although McIntyre did not

A Weekend at the WashingtonMUFON Symposium (Part 2)by Scott Snell

Scott Snell is acharter member ofNCAS and serveson its board ofdirectors. Hereceived hisBachelor ofScience degree inphysics from theUniversity ofMaryland. He isemployed as aflight softwareengineer byComputer SciencesCorporation atNASA’s GoddardSpace FlightCenter, tending theonboard computersof several Earth-orbitingastronomicalsatellites. ➨➨➨➨➨

Hopkins sometimes hypnotizes theclaimant to obtain further informationabout the incident. Some cases thatinitially seem mildly peculiar becomespectacular after hypnosis.

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 5

come forward with his tale for 20 years.)With about a hundred miles to go, he noticedthat his fuel gauge showed only a quarter-tankof gas remaining. Most gas stations closed atdusk back then, and it was late enough atnight that he decided to stay at a motel in thenext town, somewhere along Route 301 inNorth Carolina.

But before he reached the next town, heencountered a man standing in the middle ofthe road, signaling him to stop his car. Whenhe pulled up to the blue-uniformed figure, ap-parently a police officer, he was told to take adetour along a narrow lane that the manpointed out to him. McIntyre said he was tiredand probably not thinking very clearly as hecomplied with the request. The lane turned outto be a two-rut path. He also realized, withsome shock, that the mysterious man had ad-dressed him by his rank, even though he(McIntyre) was dressed in civilian clothes.

At that moment, his engine died, and hisheadlights and radio went out. The car keptmoving. Hopkins, relating the story, said,“When I asked [McIntyre] in what direction[the car was moving], he answered, ‘For-ward, and up.’” (This comment got a heartylaugh from the symposium audience. But is it“nit picking” for me to wonder why Hopkinswould’ve asked that question? Did he merelyrearrange his account of the exchange withMcIntyre to make it more entertaining to theaudience? If not, it seems a peculiar questionto ask of someone who says that his “car keptmoving” after its engine died. Why not as-sume it had kept rolling in the direction it wasgoing when powered, especially whenMcIntyre apparently had not suggested other-wise? Perhaps this was an example of a “lead-ing question” that some claim Hopkins posesto alleged abductees.)

The car ascended quickly enough thatMcIntyre never had a chance to jump fromthe car before it was too high for him tosafely reach the ground. He began to pray.

His next memory was of awakening in amotel room. Morning sunlight was visiblethrough the curtains. Still dressed in theclothes he wore during his car incident, he ranto the front desk of the motel to find out

where he was and what time it was. To hisrelief, the motel turned out to be near FortJackson, and it was the morning of the day hewas supposed to report there for duty.

Venturing into the parking lot, he foundhis car. It seemed undamaged, and his luggagewas in the trunk. The fuel gauge was still atthe quarter-tank level. The odometer readingwas about the value he’d remembered it beingthe night before. But somehow it hadn’tchanged after he and the car had traveledroughly 100 miles.

When he arrived at Fort Jackson, he be-gan to wonder if perhaps the Army was re-sponsible for what had happened to him.Hopkins described to the MUFON audiencewhat was going through McIntyre’s mind atthe time: “The whole experience must havebeen some sort of test by the Army, perhapsto see if he would breach security by discuss-ing his experience. He may have beendrugged, and the car transported by flatbedtruck. But he realized the theory made littlesense, and said nothing about it to anyone atFort Jackson. He didn’t even discuss the inci-dent itself until he told his wife several monthslater. By then he had dismissed the idea thatthe Army was involved, but had no otherguesses as to what could have happened.”

McIntyre agreed to undergo hypnosisby a psychologist colleague of Hopkins.At that time, Hopkins was still under-going a “seven-year apprenticeship”in hypnosis techniques.

Under hypnosis,McIntyre described whathe believed happenedafter his car began to

MUFON2 continued from previous page

continued on page 6

At that moment, his engine died, and hisheadlights and radio went out. The carkept moving. Hopkins, relating the story,said, “When I asked [McIntyre] in whatdirection [the car was moving], heanswered, ‘Forward, and up.’”

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○6

levitate. He and his vehicle were drawn into abright light above him. Suddenly he was on atable, unable to move. He was surprised thathe was sexually aroused, felt something overhis groin, and then dampness there, as if hehad “wet himself.” These comments had sur-prised and embarrassed Hopkins, and neitherhe nor his colleague followed up on themwhile questioning McIntyre.

Later hypnosis sessions brought out de-tails of his examiners. They were small graycreatures, each with “a head shaped like aparking meter.” (The analogy impressedHopkins and suggested to him that McIntyrehad a genuine experience.) McIntyre spoke ofhis strange helplessness on the table, notingthat “I was the giant in that room, but I wasthe baby.” McIntyre tried to focus his will andfought for mastery of his muscles by thinkingof patriotic images like the American flag andAbraham Lincoln, but could not overcome hisparalysis. (Again, the emotional depth andcolor of McIntyre’s description seemed com-pelling to Hopkins.)

McIntyre’s account resumed with himbeing returned to his car, but accompanied byone of the beings. They drove together alongthe highway. (Presumably they didn’t drivevery far, because the odometer reading alleg-edly didn’t change very much, but Hopkinsdidn’t comment on this.) They pulled into themotel parking lot and the alien led him by thehand into the motel lobby to register.

There the part of the story obtained underhypnosis

ended.Hopkinsinterviewed

McIntyre’swife, who con-

firmed that herhusband had told

her the original (pre-

hypnosis) tale several months after it had al-legedly occurred. But Hopkins let the investi-gation drop there. The incident had happenedtoo long ago, and too much was hard forHopkins to believe (although he foundMcIntyre credible). The levitating car, the dis-tance traveled, and the induced ejaculationwere all too “far out” for him to accept then.

Now Hopkins regretted not digging deeperinto the story. In retrospect, he wished he hadfound McIntyre’s friends, relatives, and mili-tary colleagues to find out what they hadheard about the incident over the years. Hewould have tried to find the motel and anyrecords of McIntyre’s visit that night. And hishypnosis sessions would have been muchmore probing. As I listened to Hopkins’ re-grets, I wondered if the investigations hewished he had conducted would really havebeen sufficient to answer the core question:Did this incident actually occur as described?

One element of McIntyre’s story thatHopkins found most significant in retrospectwas the induced ejaculation. ApparentlyBarney Hill, describing his own (famous) 1961abduction incident, stated that the aliens hadcollected his semen. Hopkins said this detailwas not publicized, and noted that this wasfortunate, because when McIntyre and theseother subsequent similar cases came up, theskeptics couldn’t say that the abductees hadmerely read the Hill account. Hopkins rea-soned that anyone reporting the same thingwas probably telling the truth.

But is Hopkins mistaken? I found relevantexcerpts of Hill’s hypnosis sessions on pages121 and 127 of John G. Fuller’s The Inter-rupted Journey, 1966 edition, which containsthe primary account of the Hills’ abductionstory. Hill claimed that his groin “felt cold”and that he felt a cup was placed over it. Animaginative reader might extrapolate from thisthat a semen or urine sample had been col-lected. But more pertinent is author Fuller’sown foreword to the 1980 edition, which con-tains the following passage (see http://www-public.tu-bs.de:8080/~y0001095/Fuller.0a):“In one instance, [Hill] had reported that hefelt the humanoids placing an instrument overhis genitals, ostensibly to draw semen out.” A ➨➨➨➨➨

MUFON2 continued from page 5

Later hypnosis sessions brought outdetails of his examiners. They weresmall gray creatures, each with “a headshaped like a parking meter.”

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 7

British press published this edition, so it maynot have been available to McIntyre. However,it was released in the same year as McIntyre’sinitial contact with Hopkins, and Fuller’s mat-ter-of-fact conveyance of the semen-collec-tion detail suggests that the book’s forewordwas not the first place that it had been de-scribed.

Hopkins’ critical thinking skills might begauged from these excerpts of his presenta-tion as published in the MUFON symposiumproceedings: “Was the policeman, who or-dered him to detour, ‘real’—an alien or co-opted human—or was he only some sort ofquasi-hallucination imposed on the younglieutenant’s mind? It is worth noting that, sofar in my experience, screen memories [clearbut generally trivial memories that blanketmore significant yet troubling experiences]always turn out to be relatively prosaic imagesthat conceal or transform images of aliens andtheir craft. Thus, a six-car pileup turns out tobe a landed UFO, and a four-foot-tall owl, aUFO occupant. . . . What McIntyre saw wasprobably a UFO occupant rather than an im-posed, bodiless hallucination.” Also, “The ideaof an alien technology of willed invisibility [al-lowing the alien to lead McIntyre into the mo-tel lobby, presumably without the desk clerkwitnessing anything unusual] was simply un-acceptable to me twenty years ago, thoughsubsequent investigations and new data haveforced me to change my mind.” Hopkins isprobably referring especially to incidents de-scribed in his book, Witnessed: The True Storyof the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions,1996. However, critics have noted seriousproblems with the case. See, for example,http://www.csicop.org/si/9703/hopkins.html.

Equally disconcerting are other passagesin his published remarks at the symposium. Hedescribes another alleged abduction incident inwhich a woman “went on to present [toHopkins] a few more questionable recollec-tions about the communication she had withthe [aliens] and the information they had givenher. Subsequent years of experience validatedsomething I merely sensed at the time:abductees’ recollections of an elaborate ex-change of information with UFO occupants

are almost always an unreliablemix of deliberate alien de-ception and human wish-ful thinking.”Unfortunately, hismethods for differ-entiating betweenreality and “alien deception” or “wishful think-ing” appear to consist mostly of comparinganecdotal elements with those of otherabductee stories and focusing on aspects hebelieves were not widely available in UFO-related literature at that time. He seems to be-lieve that those particular details are thensufficiently established enough for him to ac-cept.

Hopkins concluded his talk on theMcIntyre incident by stating that his earlierrejection of it showed that the skeptics arewrong about UFOlogists like him. That actu-ally he and his colleagues were overly conser-vative in their evaluation of UFO abductioncases and it has taken decades for him andother investigators to finally come around to

accepting the more bizarre aspects of the phe-nomenon. But actually most skeptical observ-ers of UFOlogy see this trend from a differentperspective: that “. . . the willingness to be-lieve on the part of the UFO movement hassteadily grown with each passing year, andtoday the mainstream of UFOlogy has ex-panded its credulity . . .” (Robert Sheaffer,The UFO Verdict, 1980 p. 5)

Hopkins finished his allotted time by ram-bling a bit from topic to topic. He cited a simi-lar tale of a man and his fiancèe who weredriving on the New Jersey Turnpike, withtheir toll ticket and exact toll ready on thedashboard. They felt nauseous and disori-ented, then realized that they were no longer

MUFON2 continued from previous page

“. . . abductees’ recollections of anelaborate exchange of information withUFO occupants are almost always anunreliable mix of deliberate aliendeception and human wishful thinking.”

continued on page 8

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○8

on the Turnpike, yet the money and toll ticketwere still in their car. Hypnosis seems toshow that they were levitated in the car andabducted by aliens, then returned to the roadsomewhere beyond the Turnpike tollbooths.

Hopkins recently came upon a quote in abook he read that he found relevant: “No mat-ter what, I can’t really look back after allthese years and really believe that this actuallyhappened.” “This man was not an abductee,”Hopkins said. “He was a survivor ofAuschwitz.” Hopkins took care to say he real-ized that Holocaust and alien abduction experi-ences are not comparable, but he stated thatthey share one element. “They are both unbe-lievable. People cannot really accept the idea,easily, [that] the Holocaust happened. It’s un-believable, just as people can’t accept the UFOreality. It’s unbelievable for a different set ofreasons. The man who was there [atAuschwitz], like an abductee, would be saying‘I can’t believe it.’”

Hopkins contrasted the Holocaust survi-vor with a friend of his who is a Holocaustresearcher. “He has this mass of data aboutthe Holocaust, he’s inundated with it, andthere’s no way he would ever say, ‘I can’tbelieve it really happened.’” Hopkins said,“Again, I’m not making an analogy between

the content of the [Holocaust and UFO] expe-riences, but I know what he [the Holocaustresearcher] is going through. He can’t reject itand disbelieve it even for a second. He’s toosteeped in it. I can’t reject or disbelieve the

abduction phenomena thatI’ve been hearing aboutfrom so many different

people. . . . I feel sadnessthat I no longer have the

luxury of disbelief.”

“The large majority of mainstream scien-tists have a ‘rock-hard’ belief system: it [alienabduction] cannot happen. They are the ‘truebelievers’ [for rejecting its reality]. But theyknow nothing about it,” Hopkins said. Heclaims that physicists are “setting the rules” soother scientists (for instance, zoologists) as-sume that the physicists must be right andgive the subject no further thought.

Hopkins spoke of a recent guest appear-ance he’d made on a Canadian TV talk show.He shared the stage with an astronomer whorepresented a skeptical perspective. He saidthat the astronomer made the usual argumentsagainst the likelihood of aliens visiting Earth:“‘. . . it’s too hard to get here from there[across interstellar distances]; [aliens]wouldn’t look like that’. . . et cetera. So Iasked him about [several famous UFO cases,including the Travis Walton abduction inci-dent].” Hopkins apparently believes the Waltoncase is genuine, despite the substantial evi-dence presented by investigator Philip Klass inhis books UFOs: The Public Deceived andUFO Abductions: A Dangerous Game that itwas a hoax.

Hopkins asked the astronomer what hehad read about UFOs, and his reply ledHopkins to conclude that the answer was“Nothing.” “So what are you doing on thisprogram?” Hopkins inquired. Hopkins told theMUFON audience, “I felt like ClarenceDarrow must’ve felt when cross-examiningWilliam Jennings Bryan at the Scopes trial.This skeptic had no more accurate informa-tion about the UFO phenomenon than Bryandid about evolution.” Hopkins noted that Bryanresisted evolution for religious reasons, andsuggested that the skeptical astronomer simi-larly couldn’t accept the truth about UFOs for“quasi-religious” reasons.

After his talk, I had a chance to speakwith Hopkins briefly. I said, “Do you think thealiens know about you and your work?” “Ithink so,” Hopkins replied. I asked, “What doyou believe they think of what you do?”Hopkins smiled and said, “I think they prob-ably see me as ‘cleaning up’ after them.” Ithen asked, “So the aliens know that you’vebeaten their ‘amnesia device’ through your

MUFON2 continued from page 7

I can’t reject or disbelieve theabduction phenomena that I’ve beenhearing about from so many differentpeople. . . . I feel sadness that I nolonger have the luxury of disbelief.

➨➨➨➨➨

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 9

use of hypnosis . . . and yet they continue touse it. Doesn’t that strike you as strange?”The next moment could have been in one ofthe MasterCard television commercials broad-cast recently. (“Admission to MUFON Sym-posium: $65. Copy of published symposiumproceedings: $20. Budd Hopkins’ facial ex-pression: Priceless.”) His quizzical expressionlasted a moment until an acquaintance of hisgreeted him.

About 10 years ago, Hopkins founded agroup named the Intruders Foundation (“IF,”at http://www.intrudersfoundation.org),which provides support for abductees and in-vestigates the alleged abduction phenomenon.I had the opportunity to chat with a youngfellow (probably in his early twenties) whowas working at the IF table at the symposium.He said that Hopkins guards against askingleading questions by phrasing them against his

own expectations, such as, for example,“What colorwas his [thealien’s]

hair?” Thatway, the hyp-

notized personhas to resist the sug-

gestion that the alien has anyhair at all (which they are typically reported tolack). I asked how Hopkins can guard against

his own identity (and the books he has pub-lished) being the ultimate “contaminant.” Afterall, someone seeking Hopkins knows full wellwhat Hopkins believes. The man replied, “Hisown superb disarming manner keeps theabductee from focusing on UFOs and aliensbefore undergoing hypnosis.”

Hopkins’ thinking processes seemedmuddled. For instance, the IF sells T-shirtsbearing a favorite saying of his: “An extraordi-nary phenomenon requires an extraordinaryinvestigation.” It’s a strange twist on CarlSagan’s famous “extraordinary claims requireextraordinary evidence” line, because it’s notclear that the “extraordinary phenomenon”actually exists. So the quote essentially means“Extraordinary claims require extraordinaryinvestigations.” Using this criterion, would aclaim that Santa Claus exists merit the costsof an extraordinary investigation?

More to come in Part 3.

“I felt like Clarence Darrow must’ve feltwhen cross-examining William JenningsBryan at the Scopes trial. This skeptichad no more accurate information aboutthe UFO phenomenon than Bryan didabout evolution.”

MUFON2 continued from previous page

medianotes

Folklore and Skeptics NCAS memberStephanie A. Hall’s article “Folkloreand the Rise of Moderation among Or-

ganized Skeptics” is available online in the e-journal New Directions in Folklore ImpromptuJournal Issue 4: March 2000 at: http://www.temple.edu/isllc/newfolk/skeptics.html

Skepchik and NCAS member SheilaGibson, chairchick of the New EnglandSkeptics Society (NESS), now has a

regular column called “For Entertainment Pur-poses Only” in Michael Shermer’s Skepticmagazine.

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○10

A new phenomenon is sweeping thecountry, gaining the attention of both consum-ers and manufacturers alike. Increasingly dis-enchanted with the cold metallic world ofmodern technology, people are looking closelyat more natural alternatives. Collectively calledAlternative Engineering (“Alt Eng”), a host ofnew and old methods are gaining scientificand journalistic respectability.

Alec Waterstone is one such self-styledalternative engineer. He has no degree or for-mal training in engineering, which, he ex-plains, is an advantage: “My thinking is notlimited by mathematics, logic, or any stodgyold mechanistic paradigm. I do not have topay homage to the likes of Newton or otherWestern male pedagogues. My complete lackof training frees me to consider unique andinnovative solutions to engineering problems,unfettered by the annoying constraints of “re-ality.”

Energy-Based BridgesAlec’s latest project is a design for a

1,200-foot non-suspension bridge. He claimsthe bridge will be able to span this distancewithout pylons or overhead suspension, andwill be supported only by the ancient art ofFeng Shui. “This wisdom, which is thousandsof years old, is the art of channeling energythrough design and form. This energy can beused to support a 1,200-foot bridge, or evenlarger structures.” City planners are intriguedby these designs, because such bridges willcost less than half as much as conventionallydesigned bridges.

Alec is also quick to point out that ancientChinese documents reveal absolutely no ac-counts of collapsing suspension bridges. Histechnique’s safety record is, he argues, unpar-alleled. “How else would it have survived allthese years if it didn’t work?

Anthony Trellis, a professor of engineer-ing at State-of-the Art University, claims thatAlec’s designs run contrary to basic principles

of physics and materials science. An exasper-ated Trellis commented, “A bridge based uponWaterstone’s designs simply could not stand.It would be unsafe in the extreme.”

But Alec is not perturbed by such criti-cism. “Of course professor Trellis does notlike my designs, because they challenge hisprecious status quo and turn his worldupside-down. But the protectionism of the oldguard is starting to crumble, like one of theirobsolete buildings,” he retorted at a recentsymposium for progressive thinkers whoagreed that those who fail to jump on thebandwagon will be left behind. His talk to astanding-room-only crowd also accused theAmerican Society of Civil Engineers, the steelindustry, and other “vested interests” of tryingto suppress his views.

Skeptics have suggested that before wespend millions of taxpayer dollars on suchprojects, and subject American motorists tothe unknown risks of driving over aWaterstone bridge, Waterstone’s basic prin-ciples should at least be tested to see whetherthey work. This is especially true since hisdesigns seem to run contrary to conventionalwisdom. But Waterstone responds:

I’m too busy designing bridges to jumpthrough some skeptic’s hoops. They willnever be satisfied, anyway. The Ameri-can motorists should be free to decidefor themselves if they wish to drive overone of my bridges. I respect their intelli-gence and ability to make smart decisionsfor themselves. They don’t need to betold by some bureaucrat, or professor inan ivory tower, which bridges are safeand which are not.

Professor Trellis and other naysayers ar-gue that individuals should not have to be sci-entists or engineers in order to drive safelyover our bridges. Regulations are not designedto limit freedom, but to provide a basic levelof safety and protection for the public. Thisattitude, however, is increasingly being dis-missed as overly paternalistic and protective.

Alternative Engineering—A Postmodern Parableby Steven Novella, M.D.

➨➨➨➨➨

Note: The people named in this story are fictitious, butthe dangers of applied pseudoscience are real.

This articleoriginallyappeared in theNew EnglandJournal ofSkepticism, apublication of theNew EnglandSkeptical Societyhttp://www.theness.com/and is reprintedwith thepermission of Dr.Novella The text isavailable fromhttp://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelated Topics/alteng.html

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 11

Intuitive CarsCivil engineers are not the only ones

gravitating toward the ancient wisdom ofpre-technological societies. The auto industryis also catching on. Natural Designs is a newcar company based in Kansas. Its presidentand CEO, Andy Wily, received a degree in en-gineering from Harvard 20 years ago, but wasfired from his subsequent teaching positionafter excessive drug use nearly destroyed hislife. Now he has returned with a new com-pany and a new philosophy that many con-sumers find appealing.

“I am advocating a mixture of the best ofmodern scientific engineering with theantiscientific and superstitious ideas of earliertimes,” explains Wily. “I call this approachIntegrative Engineering.”

What has this new approach created?Natural Design’s newest model sedan, theMillennium 2000, does not use air bags, oreven seatbelts. “Seatbelts are dangerous, andair bags are kid-killers,” complains Wily. Sohe has come up with something better. Theinterior of the Millennium 2000 is coated witha patented psychoactive material, called Natu-ral Safe. “All a driver or passenger has to do isthink safe thoughts, and this miraculous mate-rial will do the rest. In a crash, the materialwill gently repel any safe thinking person inthe vehicle, leaving them free from injury,”Wily asserts.

When skeptics point to deaths or disabilityfor Millennium 2000 passengers, Wily repliesthat the passengers clearly weren’t thinking as“safely” as they should have been. “Besides,”he adds, “the Millennium 2000 only goes 50miles per hour on a good day with a happywind behind it. If the motorists who werekilled had been driving something developedby the International Automaker’s Cartel like aFord or Chevy, they’d have been travellingmuch faster with an even greater chance ofdeath. When Ford quits murdering thousandsof people a year on our highways, then theircomplaints about us will look like somethingbesides protecting market share. In fact, wehave a study right here that shows that if ev-eryone quit driving tomorrow, the death ratewould go down in America! Until we can con-

vince the American people of the millionskilled needlessly by modern ‘automotive sci-ence’, Natural Safe remains the safestchoice.”

Many consumers are convinced. Not tobe outdone, GM and Ford both have startedputting Natural Safe coatings in their cars.Amy Zinger, of Arkansas, survived a 40 mphhead-on collision in one such vehicle. “I waswearing my seatbelt, and the air bag did de-ploy, but I know it was the Natural Safe thatsaved my life,” she asserted recently. “Be-sides,” she points out, “If it didn’t work, theywouldn’t be allowed to sell it.” Motivated bysuch testimonials, more and more consumersare insisting on only buying cars treated withNatural Safe.

One problem faced by Natural Designs,however, is that outdated safety regulations,such as those requiring seatbelts, do not ac-count for these new integrative designs. Re-cently, however, this has all changed. SenatorHackem, from Natural Design’s home state ofIowa, has pushed through legislation that willexempt manufacturers that use Alternative orIntegrative principles from regulations de-signed to protect consumers. This was hailedas a great step forward.

Still, hard-headed skeptics will not goaway. “All I’m asking for is a simple crashtest” exclaimed noted skeptic, PerryDeAngelis. “If the stuff really works, heck,I’ll buy it.” Skeptics have been increasinglycalling for such tests, arguing that testingshould take place before implementation, espe-cially when human lives are at stake.

But Wily explains why such tests won’twork. “Crash dummies are not people. Thepsychoactive material will therefore not re-spond to them. The fact is, these innovativedesigns cannot be subjected to the same test-ing and principles as traditional engineering.

continued on page 6

alternative engineering continued from previous page

DeAngelis points to recent studies whichseem to indicate that drivers of Wily’scars are twice as likely to die in a crashas are drivers of conventional vehicles.

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○12

But consumers who drive our cars feel safer.How can you argue with that.”

Still, DeAngelis points to recent studieswhich seem to indicate that drivers of Wily’scars are twice as likely to die in a crash as aredrivers of conventional vehicles. But Wilymerely scoffs, “What are you going to believe,numbers on a piece of paper, or people?”

Political AchievementDespite the skeptics, Alternative Engineer-

ing seems here to stay. Wily has just beennamed chairman of the new Integrative Engi-neering Department at Zones University,where he hopes to train the next generation ofengineers in his philosophy. Meanwhile, Sena-tor Hackem has pushed through Congress abill to create Center for Alternative Engineer-ing. This new office will divert money beingwasted on maintaining this country’s infra-

structure and use it to study and promote al-ternative principles in engineering.

Finally, in what is characterized as a land-mark coup in the making, the Canadian Col-lege of Rainbow-Coloured IntegrativeEngineering—after spending more than 100years as a scientific pariah—is finalizing nego-tiations to become part prestigious Dork Uni-versity. Despite howls of dismay from Dork’smath and science faculty and several Nobellaureates, Dork’s Senate has pushed onwardwith its plans for affiliation. The $25 milliondollars that the Integrative Engineers havepromised to give the University has not, ac-cording to Dork’s President, influenced thedeal.

The president characterized critics of In-tegrative Engineering as “crybabies” who es-pouse “long disproven misinformation” aboutAlternative Engineering.

alternative engineering continued from page 11

“Is there anyone here who can claim tohave seen a UFO? Is there anybody herewho believes in ghosts? Out of body ex-

periences? Is there anybody here who belongsto a cult?” So began the panel discussion“American Lunacies: Exploring the Beyond” atthe Sixth Annual Virginia Festival of the Book.

American Lunaciesby Paul Jaffe

Held in scenic Charlottesville, Virginia thisyear’s festival took place on a sunny weekendat the end of March. Authors from all aroundthe country came to host talks and participatein panel discussions to promote reading andliteracy. “American Lunacies” and selectedother panel discussions were filmed to beshown on CSPAN-2’s “Book TV”.

The opening questions were posed to theaudience by the moderator, Avery Chenoweth,who has written for Harpers, People, and theNew York Times Magazine. The other panel-ists were Michael Shermer, Jodi Dean, AlexHeard, and Joel Achenbach. Stephen Greer ofthe Center for the Study of ExtraterrestrialIntelligence (CSETI) was not on the panel orlisted in the program, but had been on a pre-liminary list of panelists. Judging from the fewhands that were raised in the audience in re-sponse to the opening questions, most ofthose in attendance were decidedly skeptics.

The first question to the panel set thetheme for the discussions: “Are things getting ➨➨➨➨➨

Michael Shermer . . . asked, “‘What do youthink of crop circles?’ and the responsewas, ‘Aliens made them’. So I asked themto picture the government inquiry back onVega or wherever that would take place:‘We’ve spent enormous amounts ofmoney to master interstellar travel andfind this planet, and best we could do isleave graffiti?!’ Without missing a beat thiswoman responded ‘They don’t use moneyon Vega’. ”

Dr. Novella is anAssistant Professorof Neurology atYale UniversitySchool of Medicineand an AssociateEditor of theScientific Reviewof AlternativeMedicine.

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 13

interesting is not that people believe weirdstuff – people have always believed weirdstuff – but why everybody else cares. I thinkthe reason people care is because we’re fasci-nated with those folks who are willing todoubt mainstream reality, and the reasonwe’re fascinated by those folks who are will-ing to doubt mainstream reality is becausemost of us DO. Things are so complicatednow. Technology makes things complicatedand raises the stakes.”

Heard commented that many people whoare drawn to pseudoscience are people whodon’t have the money or intellect to pursue aformal education. There is a strong element ofdisenchfranchisement among them. “They’rereacting against the way current reality is … alot these people think they are scientists;they’re not, they’re crackpots. They’re tryingto invent perpetual motion machines or pre-pare for the landing of their space brothers.”

“It amazes me that so many people takeall the things in our daily lives that have beenpossible through science for granted, and thengo off and say that science is narrow-minded,” Achenbach lamented. “Science hasrepeatedly given us these mind-boggling mod-els of reality ranging from the expanding uni-verse, the existence of dinosaurs, tectonicdrift … it is the combined effort of thousandsof men and women over a long period of timetrying to find the reality behind the world aswe perceive it.”

Chenoweth asked Shermer, “So then doesit become simply a matter of faith overproof?”

“They are two separate things. Trying toprove the tenets of faith leaves you a step be-

worse, that is, are people believing more weirdthings than just a few decades ago?”

Alex Heard, the executive editor of thepopular technology and cyberculture magazineWired, and also the author of ApocalypsePretty Soon responded frankly “I don’t reallyhave any data with which to make a determi-nation. I think that the millennial activity gar-nered a lot of media attention, but these kindsof things have always been with us.”

Washington Post journalist JoelAchenbach, author of the column “WhyThings Are” and the book Captured by Aliens,felt “There’s been a big change since the1960s. UFO’s used to be very much of a‘hardware issue’. People saw things in the sky– lights and such. More recently, people havedirect, deeply personal experiences. Somepeople even think they are aliens! If I were towake up one morning and find several littlebald-headed creatures with three fingers eachchewing on my foot, I still wouldn’t believe inaliens. But I don’t try to convert people be-cause I know how personal the belief is tothem.”

Skeptic magazine publisher and author of“How We Believe” Michael Shermer cited anencounter he had prior to a TV talk show withsome astrologers. “I asked, ‘What do youthink of crop circles?’ and the response was,‘Aliens made them’. So I asked them to pic-ture the government inquiry back on Vega orwherever that would take place: ‘We’ve spentenormous amounts of money to master inter-stellar travel and find this planet, and best wecould do is leave graffiti?!’ Without missing abeat this woman responded ‘They don’t usemoney on Vega’. I don’t make this stuff up!”Shermer went on to mention some troublingstatistics about the percentage of the popula-tion that believes in psychic powers andUFOs, but figured “that hopefully, living in theage of science, we’ve made some progresssince the 1500s.”

Jodi Dean, a professor of political scienceand author of Aliens in America: ConspiracyCultures From Outerspace to Cyberspace, re-sponded “The biggest change since the 60s ismedia and technology. A lot of stories thatpreviously had only been known to small sub-groups are now known to everybody. What’s

american lunacies continued from previous page

“It amazes me that so many people takeall the things in our daily lives that havebeen possible through science forgranted, and then go off and say thatscience is narrow-minded,” Achenbachlamented.

continued on page 14

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○14

hind science, which is ever-changing. You’realways trying to make things fit in retrospect.”

Dean added, “I think there are manythings in science that we think we’re certainof that we’re actually not. Health experts andscientists disagree about salt, diets, how madcow disease is transmitted … it’s important toremember that what seems to be a clear-cutset of facts is not clear-cut at all.

“People who defend science against pseu-doscience say ‘Science has amazing ideas –it’s not just common sense,’ then they turnaround and say ‘Those UFO people don’thave common sense – they’ve got amazing,wild ideas.’ I start to worry that no matterhow it’s sliced, the people who are doing wildstuff always end up getting trashed.”

Achenbach discussed the “wild idea” thatCarl Sagan once entertained: that Mars’ moonPhobos might be a hollow object constructedby an intelligent civilization. “Sagan is sort ofthe hero of my book because he entertainsthese wild ideas, but he has the ability to pullback at the last minute and say, ‘But what dowe really know?’ He was willing to go to hisdeathbed knowing that he hadn’t found proofof extraterrestrial life. It takes a lot of courageto say ‘I don’t know’.”

Shermer recounted the time he had been“abducted by aliens” late one night on a lonelyrural highway in Nebraska. During the RaceAcross America transcontinental bike race, asleep-deprived road-weary Shermer waspicked up by the motor home that his supportcrew used to follow him. In his exhaustedstate, having been awake for more than 80hours and having biked over 1200 miles, hismind connected his experience with a sciencefiction story from his youth and he felt asthough he had been abducted. Shermer used

his story to illustrate that often times theremay be a more prosaic explanation for unusualaccounts. “I think we can actually say insome instances whether things are true or not.In any case, you certainly act as if they aretrue or not. We make those decisions, even ifintellectually we qualify it be saying ‘maybe’or ‘perhaps’. Behaviorally, no one’s an agnos-tic. When you wake up Sunday morning,you’re either going to church or you’rewatching football. For me, the decision is thataliens are not here. I could conceivablychange my mind, but I’d really need to seeone of those ‘probe’ instruments I keep hear-ing about.”

Dean countered with, “A lot of abducteeswould like the kind of certainty of reality thatMichael describes … the hero of my book,Budd Hopkins, an abduction researcher, has asaying. He says he is more skeptical than CarlSagan because he is willing to question every-day reality. Abductees don’t believe anythingfor sure. They’re not 100% convinced of theexistence of UFOs, aliens, or anything. Allthey know is that they’ve experienced some-thing they absolutely can’t explain or under-stand and they’re not getting much support.In their willingness to question everyday real-ity, they go a lot further than some so-calledskeptics.”

Heard commented on how it can be diffi-cult for alleged abductees to objectively exam-ine their own experiences and beliefs. “It’s nota choice. They can’t step aside and look atthemselves as a specimen. They say, ‘It’s nota belief. It’s the truth.’ Most of them pursuethese beliefs without hurting anyone – thereare major exceptions to that. What I like in askeptic, like Shermer here who operates like Ithink they should, is he reads their materialand says, ‘I disagree with all of this, here aremy counterarguments.’ There’s a strain inskepticism though that goes farther than that,almost puritanically, saying ‘it is bad by defini-tion that anybody believes these things, wehave to do something beyond providingcounterarguments.’ I defend people’s right tohave goofball ideas.”

Speaking about the tension betweenorthodoxy and change in science, Shermerquoted, “’You want to be open-minded ➨➨➨➨➨

american lunacies continued from page 13

Shermer recounted the time he had been“abducted by aliens” late one night on alonely rural highway in Nebraska. Duringthe Race Across America transcontinentalbike race, a sleep-deprived road-wearyShermer was picked up by the motor homethat his support crew used to follow him.

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 15

enough to accept new ideas, but not so open-minded that your brains fall out.’ I don’t wantto be a grumpy old skeptic that misses out onthe great new discovery of the 21st century.But so much of what I encounter is just utterbunk, that it seems to pay to be conservative.There’s only so much time and money to runaround exploring and testing these claims.”

Chenoweth asked, “To what extentare these beliefs a function of class or in-come? Are they spread around the world?Why haven’t aliens landed in New Delhi?”

“It does seem that there are entirecountries where aliens do not visit for somereason,” commented Achenbach. “But itdoesn’t seem as if it’s ‘smart people don’tbelieve, dumb people do.’”

Heard added “Most of the people inmy book and many well-educated people whoare knowledgeable about physics and spacetravel just seem to take it a little bit further.‘Maybe the aliens are using element 115.’What is element 115? We don’t know. Mostof these people use all the tools of modern life,they use the Internet, and they love technology.”

Delving deeper, Achenbach continued“My impression is that the people in the UFO

american lunacies continued from previous page

world try very hard to prove their point byamassing evidence that validates their point.They are less willing than a typical scientist toreally grapple with evidence that may invali-date their point. In sitting in on one of theseabduction groups, I learned the number onerule was ‘You will not invalidate the experi-ences of others.’ That’s the opposite of howscience works, where scientists are sort of‘trigger-happy invalidators’.”

Bolstering Achenbach’s point, Deanpointed out “We’re in a therapeutic culture, atalk show culture. My original scholarshipwas in feminist work, and in a lot of feministgroups you’re supposed to respect otherpeople’s experiences, listen and approach thediscussion with a caring attitude. It could bethe case that there’s an unfortunate clashwhen this caring discussion style becomes thebasis for a scientific, factual claim.”

“We have agreement!” blurtedShermer, and the audience laughed.

For more information about next year’sVirginia Festival of the Book, please visit:http://www.vabook.org/

“Thys is bycause of the Eclyps of the Mone“Some shal supe theyr potage for lack of a spon“In the somer tyme shalbe suche an heat“The people would fare well, if they could get meat.”

Sixteenth & Seventeenth CenturyParodies of Astrologers

by Richard Dengrove

Something like these words are found inthe earliest English parody of astrological al-manacs, A Mery Pronosticacion (1544), ayear before the first known serious one by anEnglishman, although 52 years after the firstforeign almanacs arrived. I say something likethese words because the last line is missingfrom the original and I have replaced it with

the last line of a similar poem in the 1623 ANew and Merry Prognostication.

If you have trouble reading this, and other16th and 17th Century works, read them clos-est to the way you would pronounce them.Also, ‘u’ is often used in place of ‘v ’, andvice versa; and ‘i’ in place of ‘j’, ‘U’ and ‘j’being new letters at the time.

continued on page 16

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○16

The full title of The Owles Almanacke in-cludes Calculated as well for the meridianmirth of London, as any other part of GreatBritaine. Found in an Iuy-bush written in oldCharacters, and now published in English bythe painefull labours of Mr. IocundaryMerrie-braines. London, 1618. In finding thisalmanac in an ivy bush in old characters, theOwle poked fun at the prophecies the com-mon folk believed.

Fouleweather’s title includes Wherein ifthere be found one lye, the Author will loosehis credit for euer.

Smel-Knave’s title includes the predictionwherein both man and woman shall find theyrnaturall inclination, and accidentall andnecessarie mischiefes.

Smel-Knave apparently tired of ridiculinglower grade almanacs and the uneducated, andaimed instead at scholars. He takes in vain thenames of famous thinkers and astrologers,and makes up one, Rabbi Salomon and hisNullatenus, Latin for “in no way” or “by nomeans.”

Often these parodies were more satires onsociety in general than of astrologers. AdamEvesdropper had this to say about a “hotteconiunction.”

“They [wealthy widdowes] shall hauemany gallant suiters, that will carie all theirLands vpon their backes, and yet sweare theyhaue grounds, Backsides, & yards when theyhaue no amore Ground tha the Kings highway.”

Poor Robin (1664), was more popularthan most serious astrological almanacs. Itstitle page indicates it was: “Calculated for theMeridian of Saffron Walden where the Pole iselevated fifty-two degrees and six minutesabove the Horizon.”

Poor Robin’s prognostications include:“If Mars and Venus happen to be in con-

junction this year, you may chance to hear ofsome wenches being gotten with child aboutthe season of the year icleaped Haytime.”

With the waning of belief in astrology, themore popular astrologers were lampooned.William Lilly appears in several parodies, aswell as John Partridge. In 1675 The Character ➨➨➨➨➨

In the 16th and 17th centuries, parodyastrological almanacs were a popular genre.However, they were not anti-astrology; beliefin it was too ingrained. They were anti-as-trologer; against pretenders to that sublime art.

Parody almanacs such as the GermanLasstafels existed in Europe by 1480. In 1533,Francois Rabelais published his own, thePantagrueline Prognostication, in which hesays the summer shall be warm with occa-sional sea breezes; and he advises his readersnot to sell their furs during the winter. Also,he announces that the Governor and Lord ofthe Ascendant for the year will be God andthat none of the planets will have independentinfluence.

In England, the first parodies were of‘lower-grade’ almanacs, such as ErraPater.There was more than a dollop of classsnobbery in this. In one allegory of the period,Superstition’s only Bible is Erra Pater.

Some early parodies were by FfrauncisFayre Weather (1591), Adam Fouleweather(1591), Adam Evesdropper (1604), andSimon Smel-knave (1591). 1591 was a goodyear for that sort of thing.

Adam Fouleweather said of Summer: “Through the influence of Cancer, bottle

Ale shall be in great authoritie, and wheatshall doe knightes seruice vnto malt.”

Smel-knave said of farming:“They that are borne,Under Iupiter I knowe:May perhaps catch corne,If they have lande to Sowe.”Other early parodies included the Raven’s

Almanacke (1608), The Owles Almanacke(1618), the Iacke Dawes Prognostication(1623). Adam Evesdropper’s was PlatoesCap.

parodies continued from page 15

In England, the first targets of theseparodies were ‘lower-grade’ almanacs,such as Erra Pater.There was more thana dollop of class snobbery in this.

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 17

parodies continued from previous page

of a Quack Astrologer was published. Thispredated Jonathan Swift’s 1708 IsaacBickerstaff, where he called Partridge aquack.

These anti-astrologer parodies later influ-enced anti-astrology almanacs like BenjaminFranklin’s Poor Richard’s Almanack.

“[When Mars and Venus in Conjunction lie]“Then, Maids, whate’er is ask’d of youdeny.”

BIBLIOGRAPHYAllen, Don Cameron. The Star-Crossed

Renaissance: the Quarrel about Astrology andIts Influence in England. Durham, NC: Duke,1941, Chapter V, “Elizabethan and JacobeanSatires on the Almanack and Prognostication,”pp. 190-246.

Thompson, C.J.S. The Mystery and Ro-mance of Astrology. Barnes & Noble, 1993,p266-69. First published in the 1920s, con-tains material on Poor Robin.

Richard Dengroveis the librarian forthe Food andNutrition Service,Department ofAgriculture. He liveswith his wife, Heidi,in Alexandria,Virginia. Hisambition is to writea history of occultmagic one of thesedays.

Fairfax County Regional Science andEngineering Fair—March 25, 2000Certificate and book:TA6 Marisa Albanese and Harmony Walczuk—Word of Life AcademySubliminal Messages

Prince Georges County Science Fair,April 8, 2000Certificate and book:J0311 Alyse Hollomon—St. Peter’s SchoolEMFs: A Shock to Life

44th Annual Montgomery AreaScience Fair, April 2, 2000Certificate and book:JL113 Emily Kopilow—Sligo Middle School

Overnight Fame: Is It Possible to DistortSource Memory

SL1114 David Sanderson —Thomas S.Wootton HighNative American Medicine: Fact or Fiction

SL1503 Mary Murphy and Carla Smith—Montgomery Blair High SchoolESP: Is It Real?

Certificate:SL1505 Emily Prevo and Aynesleh Sinclair—Montgomery Blair High SchoolSelf-Fulfilling Psychology

SL302 Kenneth Carrick—Montgomery BlairHigh SchoolDo Magnets Affect the Growth of Plants?

NCAS sponsors educational programs and other activities. RecentlyNCAS member Walter F. Rowe judged the Fairfax [Virginia] AreaScience Fair on March 25, 2000 and the PG County [Maryland]Science Fair on April 8, 2000; and members Mike Epstein and WalterRowe judged the Montgomery Area [Maryland] Science Fair on April2, 2000.

NCAS Members JudgeArea Science Fairs

Walter F. Rowe

Mike Epstein

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○18

surprisingly accurate in her readings. It didn’thurt that the people she was “reading” cooper-ated fully and gave plenty of indicators, bothverbally and with their body language, that shewas on the right track in her readings. It alsodidn’t hurt that she made general, flatteringstatements that anyone could interpret as per-taining to themselves. She even guessed thatone woman was a nurse, and that a man sur-rounded by wife and friends was thinkingabout changing jobs. Still, there was alwaysthe fallback that she was seeing pictures thatdidn’t mean anything to her, but might meansomething to them.

By the end of the evening, Kari was emo-tionally drained and feeling guilty. She tried toend her sessions by telling the people they hadresponsibility for their own lives, that theymade the magic happen for themselves but,somehow, she still ended up feeling like a fraud.

Then it was time to tape Penn & Teller’sshow. Under the guise of a booksigning, Kariposed as a tarot-reading psychic, completewith a published book in her own name, post-ers, and camera crew. She used the standardparagraph she had worked up and then startedfishing. “I’m getting an M” she said to oneman, who responded that his mother, whomhe had cared for, had died. Almost everyone

has a mom, so “M” is a pretty good bet. Andso it went.

After each session, Kari turned off thecameras and confessed her deception to her“victims.” She tried to turn the experience intoa positive one, explaining that she wasn’t psy-chic, but that in talking to the people, shecould tell, just from human experience, thatthey were loving caring people. She apolo-gized for deceiving them, sometimes moved totears by their understanding and kindness. Forthe most part, her clients felt they came awaywith a good experience, despite Kari’s decep-tion. Kari felt like a monster.

As Kari stated in her article in Swift,“What you cannot know until you’ve done itis that when you are reading someone, theytrust you. They open themselves up to you,and you tell them nice things about them-selves. Sometimes they offer up very personalhopes and dreams. This happened severaltimes today. I then had to face them and tellthem I’d lied. It was the hardest thing I’veever done.”

Kari cares. Deeply. What about other“psychics” who don’t?

would you trust this woman continued from page 1

Kari Coleman is an actress living in L.A. Her filmcredits include Multiplicity, Sour Grapes, and T-Rex, an I-max 3-D movie. Televisionappearances include JAG, Seinfeld, Mad AboutYou, Home Improvement, and other sitcoms.She has been known to eat fire with Penn &Teller in Las Vegas.

By the end of the evening, Kari wasemotionally drained and feeling guilty.

“What you cannot know until you’ve doneit is that when you are reading someone,they trust you. They open themselves upto you . . . I then had to face them and tellthem I’d lied. It was the hardest thing I’veever done.”

Skeptical Eye Vol. 12, No. 2 2000 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 19

the writestuff

skeptical correspondence

NCCAM Focuses on Solid ScientificInvestigationNCAS president Paul Jaffe signed the followingletter to Stephen E. Strauss, M.D., Director,National Center for Complementary andAlternative Medicine

Dear Dr. Strauss:National Capital Area Skeptics is a local,

independent, nonprofit educational and scien-

tific organization that promotes critical think-ing and scientific understanding, with a focuson paranormal and fringe-science claims. Re-cently, NCAS officers and board membersbecame aware of certain statements you havemade concerning the future policy and pro-grammatic direction of NCCAM. We wereespecially favorably impressed by the two be-low, as they indicate that under your direction

In the spirit of encouraging skeptical activism, from time to time we will use this column to acknowledge NCAS memberswho have let us know about skeptical correspondence they have sent (letters to newspaper editors, televisionproducers, etc.) or other actions they have taken proactively or in response to various articles, programs, events, etc. of

concern to skeptics. So please send us a copy of the text or even just a mention of your skeptical correspondence. Send hard copy to theNCAS mailing address. Copies of email can be sent to NCAS officers at ncas@ncas.org. OR, if you already participate inthe NCAS interactive email exchange, NCAS-SHARE, then consider sending copies or references to ncas-share@ncas.org to share with others. When you write, be sure to encourage good skepticism when you see it, as well as positively expressing your concernsabout uncritical thinking or disregard for established science. Please do not put overt cc’s to NCAS in your original lettersor emails to others (send us a bcc).

Check the mailing label for your membership date . . .you’ll find a renewal form above

Yes, I want to: ______ join NCAS. ______ renew my membership.

Name________________________________________________________________________

Street_______________________________________________________________________

City___________________________________________State_______Zip________________

Phone______________________ e-mail_________________________________________

**Students: List institution attending_____________________________________________

Make checks payable toNCAS and mail to:

NCASPO Box 8428Silver Spring, MD 20907

Don’t be mystified.

Single $20 $35 $85 $200

Double* $30 $50 $100 $250Full-time student** $10 — —

*(2 members at same mailing address)

Membership Options

1 year 2 years Lifetime5 years

continued on page 20

National Capital Area SkepticsPO Box 8428Silver Spring, MD 20910

e-mail: ncas@ncas.orgs_eye@ncas.org (newsletter business)Internet: http://www.ncas.org

or call our24-hour phone number: 301-587-3827

We’d like to hear from you.

Nonprofit OrganizationU.S. Postage

PAIDMerrifield, VAPermit No. 895

What would YOU like to see inthe Skeptical Eye? Write us at

NCCAM will make solid scientific investiga-tion the central focus of its activities:

“NCCAM’s mission, in its simplest terms,is to assure our citizens, through the use ofexcellent science, that CAM procedures andproducts do what they purport to do.”

“I believe well-designed and well-executedclinical research must be the essential factor inNCCAM’s search for scientific truth. My pro-fessional life has been dedicated to pursuingexcellence in clinical research, and it is thatconcern and that training that I hope will be thehallmarks of my time as director of the Center.”

Members of the board also noted that theNCCAM draft Strategic Plan is available forpublic examination and review, and suggestedthat NCAS might usefully comment. Accord-ingly, a subcommittee of the NCAS board wasdirected to prepare a commentary on theNCCAM draft, which is incorporated in thisletter. We note NCCAM’s commendable ef-fort, as reflected in the draft strategic plan, toemphasize rigorous scientific evaluation of alter-native health care practices in its programs.

Our attached com-ments are intended to en-sure that this focus onrigorous research is empha-sized clearly, consistentlyand concisely throughout the document. Wehope that you and your staff find this com-mentary useful in developing the final versionof the NCCAM Strategic Plan.

For your convenience, we have also sub-mitted this letter in electronic form to theNCCAM web page, utilizing the on-line com-ment form provided for the Draft Strategic Plan.

We request that NCAS be made a party ofrecord for comments on the NCCAM Strate-gic Plan and its revisions, and that you addNCAS to your announcement list for anyother NCCAM requests for public comment.

If there is a need for clarification or am-plification of any of these suggestions, pleasefeel free to contact NCAS by telephone at301-587-3827, or by e-mail toncas@ncas.org. I can also be contacted per-sonally at 703-329-0270.

the write stuff continued from page 19

The text ofNCAS’s specificsuggestions isavailable at http://www.ncas.org/.ReadingNCCAM’sstrategic plan athttp://nccam.nih.gov/nccam/strategic/is recommendedfor context.