Is It Real?

[Psi Baba]

Just though I'd post the schecule of upcoming installments of the National Geographic Channel's wonderfully skeptical Is It Real? (http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/isitreal/) series which airs Mondays at 8:00pm and 11pm Eastern time. The September 12th show is brand new, the others have aired before:

Sept 12: Police Psychics (also Sunday, Sept 18 at 6:00pm EST)
Sept 19: Spontaneous Human Combustion (also Sept 25 at 6:00 EST)
Sept 26: Monsters of the Deep (also Oct 2)
Oct 3: Crop Circles (also Oct 9)
Oct 10: Psychic Animals (also Oct 16)
Oct 17: Superhuman Powers (also Oct 23)
Oct 24: Exorcism (also Oct 30)

NGC's Naked Science (http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/nakedscience/) series is excellent as well, taking a scientific look at such topics as Telepathy, Bermuda Triangle, Atlantis, as well as various down-to-earth scientific subjects and speculative issues.

[TJ]

Sounds like they're rippng off Penn & Teller's Bullsh!t!

Oh, Wait...Network TV? They'll probably cater to the credulous and make it into some show like "In Search Of..."

[Hellbound]

TJ:

I've already seen the crop circle one, they come at it from a skeptical viewpoint. I was very impressed. At the beginning of that show, they showed all these unexplainable film clips and hinted at mysteries and such. Then, later in the show, when they had you all worked up that they were going to display this amazing evidence, they showed how these could easily be faked, and showed that the film most commonly used as proof of crop circles paranormaility was a computer generated hoax (the actual hoaxer stepped through the process used to create it).

I was very pleasantly suprised, and look forward to their other episodes.

ETA: Had several quotes in their from Mr. Randi himself, as well.

[TJ]

Originally posted by Huntsman
TJ:

I've already seen the crop circle one, they come at it from a skeptical viewpoint. I was very impressed. At the beginning of that show, they showed all these unexplainable film clips and hinted at mysteries and such. Then, later in the show, when they had you all worked up that they were going to display this amazing evidence, they showed how these could easily be faked, and showed that the film most commonly used as proof of crop circles paranormaility was a computer generated hoax (the actual hoaxer stepped through the process used to create it).

I was very pleasantly suprised, and look forward to their other episodes.

ETA: Had several quotes in their from Mr. Randi himself, as well.

Excellent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's so much more what we need instead of the drivel for entertainment's sake. Quoted Randi, eh? Well, I like it already!

Thanks for letting me know, I have enough TV to be annoyed about already!!! :D :D

[Hellbound]

Not just quoted, they had bits and pieces of an interview with him on the subject (in his JREF office, it appears). He looks rather spry for his old age...hopefully he'll be around quite a while longer. Just shows what atheistic non-beliving heathen living can do for ya :D

[TJ]

He does look good, doesn't he?

I love seeing Randi on Bullsh!t! too, though I think P&T should have spent more time with Randi on camera!

I'm COMPLETELY hooked on that show. I bought seasons 1 and 2 on DVD, and am just over halfway through Season 1. So many great gems yet to discover!

[Azrael 5]

Anyone know when/if this will air in UK?

[El_Spectre]

I just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents... I watched a number of these last night... at first I was dreading a history-channel style "ufos are real" thing, but they were properly critical.

It let the "believers" state their case, pointed out possible alternatives and investigated. Kinda refreshing, actually.

[Withnail]

Originally posted by TJ Stough
Sounds like they're rippng off Penn & Teller's Bullsh!t!

Oh, Wait...Network TV? They'll probably cater to the credulous and make it into some show like "In Search Of..."


This is not network tv in the sense of NBC, ABC, CBS, who would most certainly do a horrible job on investigation though a great job on promoting the show. The National Geographic Channel is the opposite: great shows no one will know to watch. I haven't seen a single woo supported on NGC. Although The Learning Channel is full of it. The three networks are almost as bad as watching the Sci-fi Channel.

[Psi Baba]

Most episodes are heavily laced with interview clips of Joe Nickell and Benjamin Radford (editor of The Skeptical Inquirer). These clips are actually substantial, as compared to other woo-woo topic programs where they toss in 5 seconds of Randi sounding like a grumpy curmudgeon. Even the narration, which you'd expect at best to be totally neutral, every so often takes a slightly sarcastic tone, like when one skeptic offered to be the subject of a martial arts psionic knockdown, the narrator said, "This should be good." (By the way, the skeptic stood there, and absolutely nothing happened).

[De_Bunk]

SHC is definitely weird...

Not paranormal...just weird...A lot of theories..nothing definite

That program will be interesting...

DB

[jmercer]

Originally posted by De_Bunk
SHC is definitely weird...

Not paranormal...just weird...A lot of theories..nothing definite

That program will be interesting...

DB

Here's a picture from one of the more recent cases - in fact, it's one of the most famous pictures concerning SHC (Caution - disturbing picture.):

Dr. John Irving Bently (http://paranormal.about.com/library/blclassic_shc.htm)

One of the theories about why the extremities apparently remain while the body and bones are burned to ash is the "human wick theory", which requires the burned area to be covered and human fat content to be the fuel.

Skepdic.com
A more economical and reasonable theory of how human bodies burn in rooms without having the entire room engulfed in flames is the idea of the wick effect. The ignition point of human fat is low and to get the fire going would require an external source. Once ignited, however, a "wick effect" from the body's fat would burn hot enough in certain places to destroy even bones. To prove that a human being might burn like a candle, Dr. John de Haan of the California Criminalistic Institute wrapped a dead pig in a blanket, poured a small amount of gasoline on the blanket, and ignited it. Even the bones were destroyed after five hours of continuous burning. The fat content of a pig is very similar to the fat content of a human being. The damage to the pig, according to Dr. De Haan "is exactly the same as that from supposed spontaneous human combustion." A National Geographic special on SHC showed a failed attempt to duplicate the burning pig experiment. However, it is obvious that the failure was due to leaving the door to the room open to the outside, which created a draft and led to the flames igniting everything in the room. Had the room been closed up, as are the rooms in which many of the elderly persons have died in fires attributed to SHC, it is likely that the pig would have smoldered for several hours without the rest of the room becoming engulfed in flames.

In their investigation of a number of SHC cases, Dr. Joe Nickell and Dr. John Fisher found that when the destruction of the body was minimal, the only significant fuel source was the individual's clothes, but where the destruction was considerable, additional fuel sources increased the combustion. Materials under the body help retain melted fat that flows from the body and serves to keep it burning. The reason some bodies are totally consumed except for the legs or feet probably has to do with the fact that these victims were seated when they caught fire and flames move upward.


Full Skepdic.com Article (http://skepdic.com/shc.html)

(Caution - disturbing picture.)

[JLam]

I like this show. It's different in that, unlike other programs dealing with the paranormal, this one actually gives equal time to the skeptics and the believers. The producers of this program obviously have a skeptical agenda, but the believers actually get to speak their minds. The great part of this approach is that they give these people more than enough rope to hang themselves...which they eventually do with aplomb.

Bravo to the National Geographic Channel!

[Psi Baba]

Originally posted by jlam4911
I like this show. It's different in that, unlike other programs dealing with the paranormal, this one actually gives equal time to the skeptics and the believers. The producers of this program obviously have a skeptical agenda, but the believers actually get to speak their minds. The great part of this approach is that they give these people more than enough rope to hang themselves...which they eventually do with aplomb.

Bravo to the National Geographic Channel!
That's exactly it, jlam. While it does take a skeptical angle (hooray for that!), it does not stoop to believer-bashing. Like you said, the producers of the show simply let the believers' failures speak for themselves.

On the subject of SHC, I'd be willing to bet that there is a direct correlation between the cessation of instances of SHC cases (almost none after the 1970s) and the widespread use of flame-resistant materials in the manufacture of sleepwear, bathrobes, and the like in the 60s and 70s. It's also unlikely to be a coincidence that most SHC victims were smokers who lived alone and were often elderly and/or of limited mobility (or passed out drunk). And in nearly every case where someone appeared to suddenly start burning in the presence of witnesses, an external fire source (or a chemical reaction) turns out to have been the cause (despite what proponents of SHC as a phenomenon claim).

[MoonDragn]

I am on the side of people that believe everything in the world has an explaination. Unexplained phenomenon is just stuff that have yet to be satisfactory explained. Sometimes these develop such a following that even when proof is discovered it is muddled or ignored due to so many misleading claims.

This sounds like a good show, I may have seen at least one of these episodes.

[El_Spectre]

Originally posted by MoonDragn
I am on the side of people that believe everything in the world has an explaination. Unexplained phenomenon is just stuff that have yet to be satisfactory explained. Sometimes these develop such a following that even when proof is discovered it is muddled or ignored due to so many misleading claims.

This sounds like a good show, I may have seen at least one of these episodes.

I'm with ya there... I hate it when people attribute the unexplained to "the supernatural", as though such a thing existed (or any, ANY [bleep]ing evidence for it existed). I dunno if it's fear or ego, but lots of people are just afraid to say "I don't know".

[MoonDragn]

Originally posted by El_Spectre
I'm with ya there... I hate it when people attribute the unexplained to "the supernatural", as though such a thing existed (or any, ANY [bleep]ing evidence for it existed). I dunno if it's fear or ego, but lots of people are just afraid to say "I don't know".

I think supernatural is just a label. Something that is supernatural is just something that doesn't seem natural because we have no explaination for it.

Just like someone saying UFOs don't exist... They do exist...

UFOs are unidentified flying objects. If we identified them, they wouldn't be UFOs. They exist cause someone saw something they couldn't identify.

Now if you were to say extraterrestrial aircraft doesn't exist, then thats a different story.

[El_Spectre]

Originally posted by MoonDragn
I think supernatural is just a label. Something that is supernatural is just something that doesn't seem natural because we have no explaination for it.

Just like someone saying UFOs don't exist... They do exist...

UFOs are unidentified flying objects. If we identified them, they wouldn't be UFOs. They exist cause someone saw something they couldn't identify.

Now if you were to say extraterrestrial aircraft doesn't exist, then thats a different story.

You are of course right, but what I meant is that true believers use the term to mean "things to which physics/logic doesn't apply", a class I see no reason to believe in.

Hey, there's no reason to believe alien aircraft don't exist... other planets must have an atmosphere too ;)

[MoonDragn]

Even if they didn't have an atmosphere, we have no idea if it is possible for any type of life to develop drastically different from what we recognize as life. If we really meet an alien that looks like a rock would we recognize it as an alien?

I'm not sure what people are reported seeing, many times those things are explainable but sometimes they are not. There really is no way of knowing til we have some kind of proof. Problem is, nowadays its easy to fake the proof. For example, they found these very tiny titanium alloy spirals in a river near a mountain in russia. Is it evidence of alien visit to the earth? or just some weird geological anomaly?

[Thurkon]

Originally posted by TJ Stough
Sounds like they're rippng off Penn & Teller's Bullsh!t!


Except maybe they'll do it well?

[TJ]

Originally posted by Thurkon
Except maybe they'll do it well?

:con2:

Does this mean that you don't like Penn & Teller's show?

[Psi Baba]

Originally posted by MoonDragn
I am on the side of people that believe everything in the world has an explaination. Unexplained phenomenon is just stuff that have yet to be satisfactory explained. Sometimes these develop such a following that even when proof is discovered it is muddled or ignored due to so many misleading claims.
The crux of the problem is that often it turns that the explanation is that there was really no phenomena to be explained to begin with. In other words, the short explanation for SHC is that there is no SHC. People do not spontaneously combust. They are catching on fire and burning up, albeit in a rather unusual way. But the bottom line is that there is no Spontaneous Human Combustion. It doesn't happen. The same goes for crop circles. Yes, there are crop circles. But there is no "phenomenon" that needs explaning. The circles are made by people. Another is the Bermuda Triangle. Again, there is no phenomenon to explain, because there is no Bermuda Triangle. Nothing is going on there that makes ships sink or airplanes crash more than anywhere else in the world. That's what many people have difficulty coming to grips with. People keep looking for explanations for so-called strange phenomena without ever considering whether there really even is a phenomenon in the first place.

[jmercer]

Very well said, Psi. 100% in agreement. I'll just add the observation that this is made more of an issue because many people want there to be unusual phenomena happening.

[Ashles]

Originally posted by jmercer
Very well said, Psi. 100% in agreement. I'll just add the observation that this is made more of an issue because many people want there to be unusual phenomena happening.
Absolutely. And of course once an area gets a reputation any perfectly normal plane crash/ship sinking suddenly gets given undeserved significance.
And probably gets exaggerated at the same time.

[-42-]

I've seen all of the "Is it Real?" Series.

It is excellent.

They are VERY good and skeptical while still giving ample time to the loonies to present their arguments, along with scientific rebuttals.

For example, the Crop Circle one - Mr. Randi himself has a fair bit of time in this one.

Skeptics produce some 'common sense' questions:
- Why not a crop circle a county wide - overnight - that'd be impressive and worthy of note.
- Why not make a crop circle on the white house lawn? (Randi)
- Why do they always happen, at night, with no one around.
- Why have crop circles become more complex, have aliens become smarter? (Randi)
- Why do crop circles follow patterns that are popular in the world, along a timeline. (Fractal geometry, then later more binary, and some even 'pixelated' -- Given that even "believers" acknowledge that "some" are created by humans)
- Where were the crop circles in the Middle ages? Before then? (Randi)

One of the 'Believer' Foundations presents a 'scientific' argument. The Nodes on the wheat are enlongated, curved, bigger than 'normal' wheat. One of the nodes even shows evidence of being burned or 'bursted' with - perhaps microwaves!

Scientist (grain expert) explains trampled grain simply tries to reach the sun..... and grows accordingly so the grain, laying flat, will be upright again.... As for the 'microwaved' grain node, more easily explained as slimply fast growth, as result of trama, that caused the outer shell to break. He seemed baffled the 'believer' foundation on circles didn't have a single grain expert or generalist.


They then hire people to make a crop circle in 5 hours. (Which they do)


I'd list some of the other believer things, but they're so basic. You even get the impression the scientists the show is talking to is annoyed for even having to spend time on such dumb things.

Oh, and they interview the farmers who the wheat fields belong to. Lol, guess what they think?

[-42-]

Originally posted by MoonDragn
Even if they didn't have an atmosphere, we have no idea if it is possible for any type of life to develop drastically different from what we recognize as life. If we really meet an alien that looks like a rock would we recognize it as an alien?


I believe the person was referring to an aircraft, on an alien planet, far far away.

That would be in direct response to you stating "Now if you were to say extraterrestrial aircraft doesn't exist, then thats a different story".

He was referring more to the possibility of an "extraterrestrial aircraft", pioleted by an alien, on an alien planet, for local travel on that planet, on a planet far away.

I doubt he was talking about one here on Earth. ;p


It is also very presumptious of us intelligent life would even care about us, or exploring or finding other intelligent life. Perhaps there are a few types on their planet. Perhaps they don't have 'curiousity' or 'exploration' imprinted as something that's even 'remotely interesting'.



I'm not sure what people are reported seeing, many times those things are explainable but sometimes they are not. There really is no way of knowing til we have some kind of proof. Problem is, nowadays its easy to fake the proof.

Read what you just said.

Yesterday, I looked out my window. I was amazed at what I saw - I saw a huge flying 7-UP land on my neighbors house, eat it with very large teeth, and then crap it out. After it did so, it was whole again.

If you take that as fact, it's not very explainable. A more likely explaination is I just made it up off the top of my head or I have a mental illness or halucinated.

You say also 'There is really no way of knowing till we have some kind of proof'.

How can we find 'Truth' in light of fantasies, people making stuff up off top of their head, liars, human error, fraud/hoaxes, belief,..etc...

Hmm.. Maybe we should make something up that would do that...

Science, perhaps?


We are gifted with an incredible ability of imagination. To imagine things that are not real, that perhaps can become. And to imagine things that are not real, that perhaps never will be.

[El_Spectre]

Originally posted by -42-
He was referring more to the possibility of an "extraterrestrial aircraft", pioleted by an alien, on an alien planet, for local travel on that planet, on a planet far away.

I doubt he was talking about one here on Earth. ;p


Yup :)

[MoonDragn]

Originally posted by -42-
Read what you just said.

Yesterday, I looked out my window. I was amazed at what I saw - I saw a huge flying 7-UP land on my neighbors house, eat it with very large teeth, and then crap it out. After it did so, it was whole again.

If you take that as fact, it's not very explainable. A more likely explaination is I just made it up off the top of my head or I have a mental illness or halucinated.

You say also 'There is really no way of knowing till we have some kind of proof'.

How can we find 'Truth' in light of fantasies, people making stuff up off top of their head, liars, human error, fraud/hoaxes, belief,..etc...

Hmm.. Maybe we should make something up that would do that...

Science, perhaps?


We are gifted with an incredible ability of imagination. To imagine things that are not real, that perhaps can become. And to imagine things that are not real, that perhaps never will be.

I was talking about the people not on drugs... Things reported by reputable people like astronauts and airforce pilots which corresponded to a radar signal etc that have yet to be explained.
Something entirely made up or reported by someone delusional was not in the scope of what I was refering to.

As for UFOs I was just explaining the definition of unidentified FLYING objects. Just like SHC stands for spontaneous human combustion. Combustion means burning up so if someone is just burning up for any reason, it is by definition combustion.

A balloon flying through the air is an unidentified flying object til someone identifies it as a balloon. A person who suddenly ignires on fire is combusting spontaneously. You can't use words to define something and then ignore the words you used.

[Psi Baba]

Originally posted by MoonDragn
A person who suddenly ignires on fire is combusting spontaneously. You can't use words to define something and then ignore the words you used.
The scientific term "spontaneous combustion" refers to self-ignition, in which the heat necessary for combustion is generated by the object or substance itself (such as a pile of oily rags or a heap of coal spoils), rather than by some external source. Something suddenly catching on fire is not spontaneous combustion. You can call it "sudden combustion" I suppose, but that doesn't mean much. According to forensic pathologist Mark Benecke, "In forensic practice, there are no known cases in which internal organs of a burned corpse were damaged more severely than the outer parts. This practical observation is further proof that combustion never starts from inside a human body."
Source: http://www.benecke.com/combust.html

Originally posted by 42
Oh, and they interview the farmers who the wheat fields belong to. Lol, guess what they think?
That farmer was the best guy on the program! Totally down to earth, obviously intelligent, and quite sensible. He knows what's going on.

[-42-]

Originally posted by MoonDragn
I was talking about the people not on drugs... Things reported by reputable people like astronauts and airforce pilots which corresponded to a radar signal etc that have yet to be explained.
Something entirely made up or reported by someone delusional was not in the scope of what I was refering to.


Identified Flying Objects are of little interest. They also receive very little imagination from those who see, or hear about them.

Unidentiied Flying Objects also of little interest....But can be fun to figure out what they are, I guess, like a thread recently about a strange light pattern trying to figure out what plane it was.

Though, people often jump straight to offworldly with "UFO" - Your comment about the alien aircraft, well, actually I'd be leaning towards a skeptical 'perhaps'. ;) Though probably not on our planet, more conviently as Alien-AIR on theirs.

[CFLarsen]

There are 10 shows that I know of - all excellent.

Highly recommendable. I can watch them again and again. Stellar appearances by Joe Nickell, Ben Radford, Shermer and Randi.