We should face reality - paranormality has won.

[The Atheist]

I'm beginning to think that the war on stupid is slowly being lost.

I see growth in areas of paranormality, while I see precious little in scepticism. Taking NZ as a classic example, hundreds of "psychics" are scamming thousands of people weekly, generating enormous cashflow, while the few of us out there attacking these charlatans do it for love, not money.

Aside from extremely high-profile people like James Randi, there are few sceptics who could earn a living from it, while any jack-**** piece of flotsam can claim psychic powers, advertise his phone number and he will get business. This is a fairly recent phenomenon and I don't believe that anyone was actually making a living out of pretending to be psychic 30-35 years ago, when I was growing up.

To make matters worse, I find this stuff going on (and who cannot recal the recent, acrimonious exchanges on JREF's experiment with Google ads:

The Bad Astronomer, hoping to find a pillar of reason, I find:

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s97/TheAtheist/badastronomy.jpg

That Google ad is for a monthly psychic/astrological readout, hence the 18+ requirement - it starts off looking like a simple, fun thing and ends up with a contracted provision of messages at a cost of around $10 p.mth. Going by the sheer numbers of these ads, they must be making a fortune.

Here it is again, this time at another hoped-for-bastion of reason, Museum of Hoaxes:

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s97/TheAtheist/museumofhoaxes.jpg

Then, far more dangerous, this on the Straight Dope pages - once an monumentally sceptical site:

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s97/TheAtheist/straightdope.jpg

Advertising psychics is one thing, getting people to drink tea to cure AIDS is downright immoral.

Do these people not see that debunking something one minute, while running ads the next is just insane?

Clearly not.

Alex, from Museum of Hoaxes had this to say in response to my e mail to him:

I have little control over what appears in the google ads. But
honestly, I have no problem taking money from psychics. It's not
going to make me say nice things about them.

-Alex

I'm sure he has no problem taking money from psychics, but how is this perceived by the punters?

I think the Bad Astronomy guy's a member here, so I'll shoot him a PM if someone doesn't beat me to it, but I'd be interested to see his rationale.

Overall, I think we're preaching a message nobody particularly wants to hear. TV has played its part in re-opening what was essentially dispensed with as witchcraft centuries ago, and it looks like the internet is proving an even better weapon in the paranormals' war chest.

Can we turn it around?

[The Atheist]

Oh yeah, I forgot this complete drop-kick:

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s97/TheAtheist/frat.jpg

If anyone knows this bloke, give him an uppercut!

[Miss Whiplash]

Those of us who use Google AdSense (https://www.google.com/adsense/www/en_US/adsense_gen.html?sourceid=aso&subid=ww-en-ha-adsense_lptest_gen&medium=sem)have no control over what ads are displayed on our websites. The ads are chosen by Google depending upon site content and readership. If you want to beat up on someone, go beat up on Google.

How Adsense Works (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdSense#How_AdSense_works)

[Apology]

I wanted to second what The Vampire said about Google AdSense. It's a terrible program and even the advertisers are often upset about where Google puts their ads. It's unlikely that anyone on friendlyatheist.com is going to click on an ad for Christian products, but they still have to pay for the ad. It's all based on keywords. If someone posted "Christ, I have a headache," that's enough to trigger the Jesus-Christ-Real-Story ad.

[Miss Whiplash]

What gets me is those who complain about the Google ads can never seem to find the "Donate" button on the other side of the screen. If more people hit that "Donate" button, at least on my site, the Google ads would vanish. :D

[hmmm...]

Overall, I think we're preaching a message nobody particularly wants to hear. TV has played its part in re-opening what was essentially dispensed with as witchcraft centuries ago, and it looks like the internet is proving an even better weapon in the paranormals' war chest.

Can we turn it around?

Probably not ! But it's fun trying.

[Wowbagger]

I get the sense that the tide is turning, that science is slowly, but surely, winning the battle. If you sense a surge in paranormal ads and activities, it might be because the businesses are feeling threatened.

Maybe. I could be wrong, though.

[Jeff Corey]

I get the sense that the tide is turning, that science is slowly, but surely, winning the battle. If you sense a surge in paranormal ads and activities, it might be because the businesses are feeling threatened.

Maybe. I could be wrong, though.
I hope you're right. Maybe we are just becoming more aware of this apparent pandemic of fecencephalopathy because of the exposure afforded by boards like this.

[bokonon]

I don't think the overall level of woo is rising, it's just suffusing into more subsects. Where once it was just tea and tarot cards, now it's feng shui and aura color charting.

It may be that the internet is making the market more efficient -- anyone who wants to find a dog whisperer can now do so -- but I seriously doubt that the ordinary garden-variety psychic is raking in loads of cash. The celebrities who get on TV probably are, but they're also probably siphoning away money that would previously have gone to a televangelist.

Of course, I don't have any hard statistics, so I could be completely wrong.

[buzz lightyear]

I'm beginning to think that the war on stupid is slowly being lost.


There is no war ,Athiest, just consciousness changing.
Admittidly, a few stragglers like yourself are finding it difficult, and are clinging desperately to your old ways.

And the charlatans are profiting, as they always have done in times of change.

But like Canute, you can not hold back the tide, we are (thank god) an evolving species.
Future generations will have the psychic abilities that are being explored at the moment.
It is a bit like a distant bushfire, we can see and smell the smoke (that is why you guys are agitated), but there is nothing you can do to stop it.

[hmmm...]

Future generations will have the psychic abilities that are being explored at the moment.

I say, that's jolly good news! What psychic powers might we look forward to do you think?

[Jeff Corey]

There is no war ,Athiest, just consciousness changing.
Admittidly, a few stragglers like yourself are finding it difficult, and are clinging desperately to your old ways.

And the charlatans are profiting, as they always have done in times of change.

But like Canute, you can not hold back the tide, we are (thank god) an evolving species.
Future generations will have the psychic abilities that are being explored at the moment.
It is a bit like a distant bushfire, we can see and smell the smoke (that is why you guys are agitated), but there is nothing you can do to stop it.
Well, some of are actively trying to stop stupidity, ignorance, bald faced lies, and people who can't spell words such as "atheist" and "admittedly". Future generations are about as likely to develop psychic abilities as wings.

[The Atheist]

Those of us who use Google AdSense (https://www.google.com/adsense/www/en_US/adsense_gen.html?sourceid=aso&subid=ww-en-ha-adsense_lptest_gen&medium=sem)have no control over what ads are displayed on our websites.

I'm well aware of that - it's precisely why I won't use them.

What gets me is those who complain about the Google ads can never seem to find the "Donate" button on the other side of the screen. If more people hit that "Donate" button, at least on my site, the Google ads would vanish. :D

Well, if this is your website- and I'm assuming it is as it's in your sig - then you would think that way:

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s97/TheAtheist/mondosk.jpg

I don't know what your traffic is like, but I'd be highly impressed and surprised if it was anywhere near that generated by my websites. I neither seek donations nor allow ads.

If you're doing it to make a profit, fair enough. If, on the other hand, you want to be taken seriously, then advertising how to develop psychic powers on the same page as dissing Sylvia isn't a good look, as far as I can see.

I get the sense that the tide is turning, that science is slowly, but surely, winning the battle. If you sense a surge in paranormal ads and activities, it might be because the businesses are feeling threatened.

Maybe. I could be wrong, though.

It might be because they've got more customers than they can handle, so are happy to undertake multi-million dollar ad campaigns, as the "over 18 only" ads show. I spoke to a fairly astute internet/site developer friend and he estimates that that organisation has spent over $US1M in advertising based on the number of sites and clicks they're generating.

That doesn't sound like a business in trouble.

I hope you're right. Maybe we are just becoming more aware of this apparent pandemic of fecencephalopathy because of the exposure afforded by boards like this.

But did the pandemic exist previously?

I see tv programs being shown, both dramas and "reality" programs which would have been laughed off the screen only 20 years ago, now having huge audiences of believers.

Which leads to the next question...

I don't think the overall level of woo is rising, it's just suffusing into more subsects. Where once it was just tea and tarot cards, now it's feng shui and aura color charting.

It may be that the internet is making the market more efficient -- anyone who wants to find a dog whisperer can now do so -- but I seriously doubt that the ordinary garden-variety psychic is raking in loads of cash. The celebrities who get on TV probably are, but they're also probably siphoning away money that would previously have gone to a televangelist.

Of course, I don't have any hard statistics, so I could be completely wrong.

Statistics would be helpful, but I'm unable to find anything.

I agree that most psychics probably don't get rich from it, but again, winding the clock back 20 years, the only "woos" making a [meagre] living out of it were a few writers in women's magazines. Now, I'm bombarded with ads in every newspaper, magazine and website. I know that most psychics have multiple phone listings, but there are unquestionably noticeable numbers of people making a livelihood out of being a charlatan which just didn't used to exist.

I don't see televangelists on the breadline just yet, either.

[schlitt]

Atheist, i feel your frustration, and i beleive these superstitions are gaining ground also.
The problem is much larger than humans beleiving in illogical, untrue things.
The problem is WHY people beleive in illogical , untrue things - and this is something that cannot be rectified, except maybe through another few thousand years of evolution.

But we should not give up the fight, there are those out there with the capacity for solid reasoning, that have just not been presented with the right information yet.

[Gravy]

It is a bit like a distant bushfire, we can see and smell the smoke (that is why you guys are agitated), but there is nothing you can do to stop it.I'm of a mind to mosey over there and pee on it anyway. Who's with me?

[Slimething]

I'm not sure who's winning or losing at the moment. One thing to consider is that a saturated advertising market is a sign of a mature market. IOW, there's a glut of psychics and they're all competing furiously for the next dollar. I sure hope that's it.

Whether we're winning or losing, it doesn't matter much. We skeptics need to push against that wall, whatever may come.

[The Atheist]

Atheist, i feel your frustration, and i beleive these superstitions are gaining ground also.
The problem is much larger than humans beleiving in illogical, untrue things.
The problem is WHY people beleive in illogical , untrue things - and this is something that cannot be rectified, except maybe through another few thousand years of evolution.

This is the part which bothers me the most - I think we have a reasonably good grip on why people like Buzz think the world's run by gigantic reptiles, but it doesn't seem to slow the process down at all.

I'm of a mind to mosey over there and pee on it anyway. Who's with me?

Where do we stop educating and start being simply contrarian if people don't want to hear the message?

I'm not sure who's winning or losing at the moment. One thing to consider is that a saturated advertising market is a sign of a mature market. IOW, there's a glut of psychics and they're all competing furiously for the next dollar. I sure hope that's it.

I hope you're right, but to think that without exploring the facts would be a touch delusional. I was hoping someone could come up with some details/trends/etc.

Whether we're winning or losing, it doesn't matter much. We skeptics need to push against that wall, whatever may come.

Even if pushing against the wall is a complete waste of time? Wouldn't we be better off just saying, "**** it" and go fishing?

[Slimething]

I hope you're right, but to think that without exploring the facts would be a touch delusional. I was hoping someone could come up with some details/trends/etc.

I see what you mean. I do believe there's hope for optimism in that I've heard, but cannot instantly put my finger on the basis, that:

belief in the paranormal is correlated with IQ and education
people are generally getting smarter, based on IQ testing
more people are getting educatedI know this is just hand-waving right now but I'll try to pull together some facts.

[The Atheist]

I see what you mean. I do believe there's hope for optimism in that I've heard, but cannot instantly put my finger on the basis, that:

belief in the paranormal is correlated with IQ and education
people are generally getting smarter, based on IQ testing
more people are getting educatedI know this is just hand-waving right now but I'll try to pull together some facts.

Love to see some, because I know for certain that higher intelligence equates to fewer kids, so unless thick people are having lots of smart kids, we're going to get swamped!

[rjh01]

All I see in this thread is the fact that woo still exists. No evidence that it has increased since date x. Not even a mention of a date x. All I know is that if I look at newspapers published at the start of the 1900s or even in the 1950s the amount of woo in them was a lot greater than now.

[The Atheist]

Here's one study (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_5_29/ai_n15400020), showing 75% belief in some paranormal BS - in USA.

One interesting note in the comments on the Gallup survey is this bit:

Data from similar polls going back to 1990 indicate a steady, if slow, rise in belief in a number of the items listed.

And apparently 66% of non-christians hold at least one paranormal belief.

Here's an excellent article from 1994 (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-15383301.html)
(pity lots of the better-looking pages are sub-only ones)

[schlitt]

Amoung the infinite reasonings behind the resurgence of superstition i see two key issues (these are by no means the only key issues however).

1.) Why people beleive - the psychology behind belief and critical thinking capability
2.) Factors that induce belief - the role society plays

1.) This is something largely beyond the control of anyone. The fact is some people do not have the capacity to cross reference information in their mind and come to accurate conclusions. You may construct a perfect argument for someone, which steps logically through information, and then draws to a conclusion, based on the information given, but the fact is, it still requires the person to work through the information logically, cross reference it in their mind, and formulate a conclusion. If the person is unable to arrive at the conclusion, because they do not have the capacity, then the argument is meaningless to them.
Others may technically have the capacity to think logically, but through prior circumstance this has been silenced by emotional factors, or misinformation.
With these types of people it then becomes a case of providing the exact type of input for their brains to process the information which can be cross referenced with their current thinking, with which an accurate logical conclusion can be drawn. The challenge is; there is know way to know the information that is required to do this, as it is different for each person, and directly relative to their current brain state.

2.) Todays society is largely made up of people who work/waste around 40% of their waking hours dedicating their lifes to making someone else money, and then using a large majority of their free time sitting catatonically in front of a televsion which imparts all manner of ill thought out, misinformed information directly into their brain. People then take this information on board, and regurgitate it in their mind and to others, as their own opinion.
(I realise this is a huge generalisation, and is not always strictly the case, but im sure you get my drift :))
Television is driven almost exclusively by profit. Paranormal phenomena has been proven to be very successfull entertainment concept, Skepticism... not so much. As long as television is driven by what ratings and money (forever), then pro superstition programming will outweigh skeptical programming by a HUGE margin. Because humans seem to have a desire for this nonsense to be true, and they are increasingly being bombarded with it, they accept it as truth, because it seems like the right thing to do.

Number 2, we can do something about, and people like James Randi, Richard Dawkins, Robert Lancaster are. Number 1 is a little trickier.

[rjh01]

Data from similar polls going back to 1990 indicate a steady, if slow, rise in belief in a number of the items listed.
This suggests that in 1990 there was another poll done. The main difference was that in 1990 they put fewer items in the poll. It does not indicate any growth in woo.

Again the 1994 article does not mention over what time period it is talking about. It is very vague.

[Sherman Bay]

The Google adsense choices bother me a lot, too, and it seems to clash with their extremely high-tech culture. I think Google needs to be leaned on a bit and implored to think about what they are doing. Isn't their motto, "Do no evil"? If so, even if psychic sites are a major source of income, they need to consider how much evil they are propagating with that liberal policy.

[The Atheist]

Again the 1994 article does not mention over what time period it is talking about. It is very vague.

Pretty much everything on the subject is. Feel free to find more relevant figures. I will e mail CSICOP.

[The Atheist]

Amoung the infinite reasonings behind the resurgence of superstition i see two key issues (these are by no means the only key issues however).

1.) Why people beleive - the psychology behind belief and critical thinking capability
2.) Factors that induce belief - the role society plays

Number 2, we can do something about, and people like James Randi, Richard Dawkins, Robert Lancaster are. Number 1 is a little trickier.

Yep. Agree entirely. I've long harboured the suspicion that very, very few people are completely untainted by paranormal beliefs and I've seen nothing to disspell that notion yet.

Excellent points.

[Cuddles]

I don't think paranormality has won or that it ever will. In fact, I think science is a sure thing to come out on top, although woo will never disappear completely. The important difference is that science can come up with new things. Woo can't. Sure, they dress their ideas up in new clothes, but there are only really a few basic types of woo.

Healing. Sure, there's a big market for woo here, but just think how much there used to be. More than about 200 years ago, virtually all healing was woo. Then science came along and gave us all kinds of cures. The role of woo in healing is now almost exclusively a supporting one, the vast majority of people use real medicine, even if they use woo as well. There's still a little way to go, but science has pretty much won this battle, there's just a bit of cleaning up left.

Communication. It used to be everyone's fantasy to see distant things and talk to people around the world. Now we can. There are still a few people who claim telepathy or clairvoyance, but who wants to waste time with woo when someone has already stuck a webcam wherever it is you're trying to look? Science won this one with the invention of the radio, and for the most part even the woos realise this.

Telekinesis. Using this to mean any kind of action at a distance. Just imagine if you could turn your TV on without touching it. Or unlock your car or garage by remote. What if you could have a whole building full of automatons making things with a single human controlling them? What if you could kill people just by pointing a specially carved stick at them? Aside from a few party tricks, what does woo have here that science can't do much, much better? Yes, some people still believe in this crap, but it's not exactly taking over the world.

Psychics and mediums. These have always existed and, when it comes down to it, this is all woo really has left. This is the only area, aside from religion, that that can make genuinely untestable claims, and it seems to be the only area of woo that is still going strong without taking a good kickin from science at every turn. Yet even this area is smaller than it used to be. Time was when virtually every single person in the world believed in spirits, psychics, ghosts, god and whatever. Such belief is still widespread, but nowhere near as much as it used to be. Science may not have won this battle yet, but it is certainly not losing.

In the end, there are far more people around now who don't believe in woo than there ever have been before. Possibly even worse from the woos' point of view is that there are even more people who just don't care. There always have been and always will be a smallish group of harcore woos and a smallish group who oppose them. In the past, the woos have always relied on the default position of the general public being belief, and so the non-believers could be largley ignored, and even helped by using the old "They oppose it so there must be something in it" technique. This approach does't work so much any more, because when presented with the claim "I'm psychic", the reaction from the general public is "Meh", and when presented with "I can see what's in another room without being there and talk to someone on the other side of the world", the general reaction is "So can I".

[cyborg]

Admittidly, a few stragglers like yourself are finding it difficult, and are clinging desperately to your old ways.

*Sigh* It is rather unfortunate that all that is seemingly required to turn an entire proposition about reality on its head in the human mind is simply for a chemical switch to go one way rather than the other.

It is you who are having problems comprehending reality - clinging desperately to outdated notions about it.

And the charlatans are profiting, as they always have done in times of change.

Yeah... so where are all those non-charlatans hiding then?

But like Canute, you can not hold back the tide, we are (thank god) an evolving species.

I like the unknowing irony of this sentence.

Future generations will have the psychic abilities that are being explored at the moment.

Hmm... no.

It is a bit like a distant bushfire, we can see and smell the smoke (that is why you guys are agitated), but there is nothing you can do to stop it.

Yeah. I'm trying to stop it. I must be. That can be the only explanation that could possibly explain why I am skeptical of such claims.

Yep. I must hate it. Nothing else would make any sense. I must want to strip people of psychic powers and round them up in gulags.

[Miss Whiplash]

I'm well aware of that - it's precisely why I won't use them.



Well, if this is your website- and I'm assuming it is as it's in your sig - then you would think that way:

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s97/TheAtheist/mondosk.jpg



I don't know what your traffic is like, but I'd be highly impressed and surprised if it was anywhere near that generated by my websites. I neither seek donations nor allow ads.

If you're doing it to make a profit, fair enough. If, on the other hand, you want to be taken seriously, then advertising how to develop psychic powers on the same page as dissing Sylvia isn't a good look, as far as I can see.



*sarcasm* Gee! No **** Sherlock! I would have never thought that at all! The idea never crossed my mind! *sarcasm*

You must have deeper pockets than I do, or use free services. If you'd like to donate the $200/yr to keep the webpage up, like I said, the ads will go.

I patiently await your pushing the "Donate" button, Atheist. (Come on big guy. I know you can find it!) As you get so many hits on your sites. I know it will not be a problem.

And yes, that is my website. That's why it's in my sig and the screen names are the same and I link to it a lot here. (Man! How did you ever figure that out!)

[Ryan O'Dine]

One thing to bear in mind is that hard-core modern science has been around only two or three hundred years. Superstition, OTOH, is a fixture of human cognition and has been around since Adam and Eve (er... you know what I mean). No doubt there’ll be fluctuations in the amount of woo over the course of decades, but when you think about it, it's amazing science has made as much headway as it has in the brief time it's been around.

So you can despair about the short-term trends, and maybe I'll join you. But if you think that woo will crowd out science in the long term -- that "paranormality has won" -- well, you're on your own, my friend.

Just ask the once-powerful tobacco lobby how easy it is to kill off science.

[Miss Whiplash]

One thing The Atheist did not address in his whining over Google AdSense ads, is there are many times these ads are showing science products on our pages.

[JoeTheJuggler]

I don't think paranormality has won or that it ever will. In fact, I think science is a sure thing to come out on top, although woo will never disappear completely.

Exactly. I realize "religion" is just a subset of "paranormality", but let's not forget that everything that is now the realm of science was once the realm of religion.

[Langis]

We should face reality - paranormality has won.

My petty pride won't allow such an event to register in my brain.

Other than taking over the world (which I've been preparing to do since I was 10), the only thing to do is to keep fighting the good fight. Question the woo 'til the end of your days. That's what I'll do.

[Denver]

I don't think it is 'winning'. But it is, and always has been, 'on the move'.

If we divide the playing field into two main areas, with accepted science on the left, and the unknown/theoretical/mysterious on the right, there is a sweet spot in the middle. This area, while unproven (or sometimes even unprovable), is far enough away from 'unknown' not to be rejected outright by many, but close enough to the scientific/known that it even looks plausible. This is the perfect place for charlatans to set up shop.

Science, of course, continues to do its best to push this line back. As Science moves to the unknown side, this sweet-spot must move too.

So, while you will continue to see the paranormal come up with new ideas and new scams, some old ones will either be falling, or scrambling to evolve and adapt to science's new positions. I would say, then, that there is no need to be discouraged. What you perceive as growth in the paranormal field, is really retreat from earlier strongholds and entry into new ones.

But the chase goes on.

[ImaginalDisc]

Yes, Ogtek, this heresey of "science" is now dead.

Yesterday, as I was propitating the angry spirits of my ancestors and begging them for a bountiful hunt, I reflected on how little this "science" effects our lives. I threw my spear (with a crude, pointed wooden end, lacking even the simple benefit of fire hardening) at an elk, and only grazed the beast. I had angered it, rather than slain it. It ran me down and I was wracked with demons of pain and bleeding.

As my soul drifted away I had a vision of a terrifying and confusing world where people communicate with one another sing glowing boxes and clicking, clacking boards. These people were swallowed by gleaming firebirds and disgorded when the thing took roost. They made hollow thorns and stuck one another with them to fend off the spirits of illness, rather than sacrificing animals. In their madness, they even dreamed that they had touched the moon and the stars.

Oh, Ogtek. I picked my way across the steppes and now I lay dying, my body polluted with the spirits of pus and fever. I am glad to be warmed by your words, assuring me that our "science" is gone. What a terrible world it would be if it won. We are right to celebrate the triumph of woo.

[Wowbagger]

I hope you're right. Maybe we are just becoming more aware of this apparent pandemic of fecencephalopathy because of the exposure afforded by boards like this.Of course, what I wrote earlier could just be my cautious optimism talking.

It might be because they've got more customers than they can handle, so are happy to undertake multi-million dollar ad campaigns, as the "over 18 only" ads show. I spoke to a fairly astute internet/site developer friend and he estimates that that organisation has spent over $US1M in advertising based on the number of sites and clicks they're generating.

That doesn't sound like a business in trouble.Perhaps it depends on the business. Some of the woo stuff is thriving, because people are soaking it up; other woo stuff is seeking more aggressive promotion because people are not.

[The Atheist]

You must have deeper pockets than I do, or use free services. If you'd like to donate the $200/yr to keep the webpage up, like I said, the ads will go.

Well, there's your problem - $200 annually is a ridiculously high cost. Shop around.

And yes, that is my website. That's why it's in my sig and the screen names are the same and I link to it a lot here. (Man! How did you ever figure that out!)

Well, lots of websites in sigs aren't owned by the poster, so I was making sure rather than assuming anything. I dislike assumptions.

One thing The Atheist did not address in his whining over Google AdSense ads, is there are many times these ads are showing science products on our pages.

Whining? How is it whining? I've said that everyone is clearly free to use Google Adsense, I just happen to think it creates a fairly hypocritical look to be claiming to be a sceptic then advertising the very thing you're railing against.

Other than taking over the world (which I've been preparing to do since I was 10), the only thing to do is to keep fighting the good fight. Question the woo 'til the end of your days. That's what I'll do.

So you can despair about the short-term trends, and maybe I'll join you. But if you think that woo will crowd out science in the long term -- that "paranormality has won" -- well, you're on your own, my friend.

Don't be misled, I wasn't suggesting that we're about to enter another era of warlocks, witches and alchemy - I'm not shutting down my own sites, let alone recommending anyone else do that.

What is bugging me is the unlimited growth of this stuff, the love for it in tv-land (which is feeding on itself to create more growth) and the inability of rationality to force its way into the thick heads of the believers.

The core problem is that the growth appears to be far stronger than it was a generation ago.

It may be time for a new approach. What that might be, I have no idea, but a good start would be some kind of legal challenge to people who charge money for psychic services. Take the MDC and Edge as a case in point. Edge has failed a challenge and would certainly fail again, yet he thinks he might get it right this time. Stupidity is endemic and recurring.

In the end, there are far more people around now who don't believe in woo than there ever have been before. Possibly even worse from the woos' point of view is that there are even more people who just don't care

That doesn't appear to be borne out by what little information we do have.

Also, in your list, you missed a couple of things which have grown exponentially from almost zero 30 years ago - feng shui and Paganism. In the west, feng shui was virtually unknown and almost all of Paganism had died out hundreds of years previously, yet nowadays they have millions of followers.

You did notice the study which showed that 75% of people believe at least 1/10 of kinds of "paranormal activity", and that the list was nowhere near complete?

[The Atheist]

Perhaps it depends on the business. Some of the woo stuff is thriving, because people are soaking it up; other woo stuff is seeking more aggressive promotion because people are not.

Well, I think it's a lot simpler than that - there aren't too many ways to make money out of telekinesis, while there are out of Feng Shui, psychic messages & healing and astrology.

[geni]

The ads are largely meaningless. What skeptical services or producs are people going to be interested in advertiseing with those keywords? Thus even penny paranormaly product ads are going to predominate.

[The Atheist]

The ads are largely meaningless. What skeptical services or producs are people going to be interested in advertiseing with those keywords? Thus even penny paranormaly product ads are going to predominate.

I think you've contradicted yourself a bit here - how can they be meaningless when there's a huge proliferation of them? You're right about scepticism having nothing to sell, though.

[Miss Whiplash]

Well, there's your problem - $200 annually is a ridiculously high cost. Shop around.

Gee, like I've never thought of that either. In reality, it's the best bargain for my needs - storage and transfer. And I shop around every year when renewal time comes around. Oh, Athey fella, prices may be different here in the US.

Well, lots of websites in sigs aren't owned by the poster, so I was making sure rather than assuming anything. I dislike assumptions.

Really? Two nettlesome harpies called "Vampire"? Someone else here posting "I've put this up on Mondo?" You're assuming I'm some noob that's too dumb to know what's on my own website.


Whining? How is it whining? I've said that everyone is clearly free to use Google Adsense, I just happen to think it creates a fairly hypocritical look to be claiming to be a sceptic then advertising the very thing you're railing against.

I'm not advertising anything. Google is advertising. Depending upon the visitor or content on any given day, the ads can be for telescopes and science products. They have been in the past. If you have a problem with AdSense, contact Google as I said before. Perhaps they will give us more control over content. The Rational Response Squad has had to put up with ads for Christian crap.

And I see you've not made a donation either. Take the challenge man! Put your money where you mouth is! Pony up and adsense vanishes. The button is on the left. (Surely you aren't going to let a frail American woman call your hand. )

[ChristineR]

Here's what I see:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/732946f7fb100e46e.jpg

Are things getting worse? Maybe in the short term. But there's no way I'd want to go back to 1407, or even 1907. In the meantime, get Adblock. It's good for your heart.

[Ryan O'Dine]

I hate to rag on something like this because I think your arguments have value, but your thread title says, "We should face reality - paranormality has won." While your main point seems to be...

The core problem is that the growth appears to be far stronger than it was a generation ago.


Which strikes me as a fairly big difference. So perhaps you can understand why some of us may have been -- to use your word -- "misled."

On your other point, the idea of using legal tactics to combat woo seems like a good idea in many ways. I suspect the change would require promoting new laws rather than enforcing existing ones, but I'm no legal scholar and would be interested in more knowledgeable opinions.

[Space_Ed]

I get the sense that the tide is turning, that science is slowly, but surely, winning the battle. If you sense a surge in paranormal ads and activities, it might be because the businesses are feeling threatened.

Maybe. I could be wrong, though.

I pray to God that eventually atheism will triumph....

I hope you are right. I do see a resurgency in religion and mysticism but I hope that through proving itself to trump religion in all practical purposes- science and reason will triumph. I can understand completely the desire for mysticism and I don't know how many people will be able to label themselves 'spiritual' in the same way Dawkins (and I) do.

[geni]

I think you've contradicted yourself a bit here - how can they be meaningless when there's a huge proliferation of them? You're right about scepticism having nothing to sell, though.

The numebrs exist because they are so cheap and the companies don't really have any other way to pic up custom online.

[Wowbagger]

Well, I think it's a lot simpler than that - there aren't too many ways to make money out of telekinesis, while there are out of Feng Shui, psychic messages & healing and astrology. That's one way to put it.

Although, I hasten to add that there really is only one way to make money out of Feng Shui, psychic messages & healing, astrology, etc.: Lying about them. Sooner or later, I gather most people will eventually realize this.

[Myriad]

Is it a waste of time to build a bridge, because the river is still there?

Is it a waste of time to build a roof, because the rain still falls?

Is it a waste of time to paint a mural, because the rest of the street remains ugly?

Is it a waste of time to pull out a splinter, because eventually we all die anyhow?

Here's how Italo Calvino answers The Atheist's question, in Invisibile Cities:

The inferno of the living is not something that will be; if there is one, it is what is already here, the inferno where we live every day, that we form by being together. There are two ways to escape suffering it. The first is easy for many: accept the inferno and become such a part of it that you can no longer see it. The second is risky and demands constant vigilance and apprehension: seek and learn to recognize who and what, in the midst of the inferno, is not inferno, then make them endure, give them space.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[Gravy]

Where do we stop educating and start being simply contrarian if people don't want to hear the message?If you could convince me that no people want to hear the message, I'd stop doing this. But that would be a long row to hoe. I've received hundreds of emails (three so far today) thanking me for my efforts, many of which came from people whose minds were changed utterly by the information I organized and made accessible to them. That's good enough for me. I have modest expectations.

[The Atheist]

I hate to rag on something like this because I think your arguments have value, but your thread title says, "We should face reality - paranormality has won." While your main point seems to be...

Which strikes me as a fairly big difference. So perhaps you can understand why some of us may have been -- to use your word -- "misled."

Fair enough, I should have said "winning" instead of "won". I was right to use "won" though, at least it's given Buzz his one moment of victory in all his life. That has to be worth it.

On your other point, the idea of using legal tactics to combat woo seems like a good idea in many ways. I suspect the change would require promoting new laws rather than enforcing existing ones, but I'm no legal scholar and would be interested in more knowledgeable opinions.

Yeah, I gather this is what Randi meant with the "changes to the challenge" bit. There must be some legal recourse, even it's via a libel/slander case.

The numbers exist because they are so cheap and the companies don't really have any other way to pic up custom online.

Nope, that doesn't fit either. Newspaper and magazine advertising isn't a cheap option - I know, I pay for enough of it - yet I can assure you that the same psychics who advertise online each will have at least a couple of ads running permanently.

If you could convince me that no people want to hear the message, I'd stop doing this. But that would be a long row to hoe. I've received hundreds of emails (three so far today) thanking me for my efforts, many of which came from people whose minds were changed utterly by the information I organized and made accessible to them. That's good enough for me. I have modest expectations.

That's probably it - you have to like moving mountains by teaspoon. I'm naturally a bulldozer kind of bloke.

[Gravy]

That's probably it - you have to like moving mountains by teaspoon.That would be true if I were trying to move mountains. I'm not. I'm just doing what I can, the way I want, in the spare time I have. :)

[The Atheist]

Gee, like I've never thought of that either. In reality, it's the best bargain for my needs - storage and transfer. And I shop around every year when renewal time comes around. Oh, Athey fella, prices may be different here in the US.

Really? I wasn't aware that prices differ from country to country. I thought that the $US19-95 p.a. I pay for hosting by a US-based ISP would still cost $US19-95 if I lived in USA. You're saying that they charge US residents more? Don't you have anti-competition rules to cover that kind of thing?

Really? Two nettlesome harpies called "Vampire"? Someone else here posting "I've put this up on Mondo?" You're assuming I'm some noob that's too dumb to know what's on my own website.

Ah, you're mistakenly assuming I read any of it. Seeing the Sylvia Browne pics is fairly unavoidable. I only wanted to look at the ads and as I said, lots of people advertise websites in their sig which don't belong to them - me, for instance. I also dislike making assumptions. You, on the other clearly have no problem with it - in fact, your posts are littered with them. Quite a few of them appear to be wrong, which isn't all that surprising. I believe the success rate for assumptions is quite low. Thomas Aquinas is a great case in point if you wish to read further on the subject.

The "I'm putting it up on Mondo" isn't a phrase which springs readily to mind as something I've seen before, sorry.

I'm not advertising anything. Google is advertising.

Tell that to the punters. ;)

Google pays you to advertise on your site. By accepting the ads, you are de facto advertising the products/services. You can choose to see it differently, but you're only fooling yourself. That's ok, you're a skeptic, they're good at that.

Depending upon the visitor or content on any given day, the ads can be for telescopes and science products. They have been in the past.

Oh weally, wabbit?

Funny, I've been there twice and on both of those occasions, psychic ads are present.

This is this morning's one. I didn't mention the word "irony" yet did I?

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s97/TheAtheist/vamp.jpg

If you have a problem with AdSense, contact Google as I said before. Perhaps they will give us more control over content. The Rational Response Squad has had to put up with ads for Christian crap.

What on earth would make you think I had any problem with Google Adsense? It's a very smart, legitimate business and I have no issues with them at all. I explored the option a couple of years ago, realised what it meant and asked myself which was more important - a chicken-**** amount of money or my integrity?

Guess what won?

And I see you've not made a donation either. Take the challenge man! Put your money where you mouth is! Pony up and adsense vanishes. The button is on the left. (Surely you aren't going to let a frail American woman call your hand. )

Oh yes, I'm a hard-hearted man and will fail to be drawn by that feeble challenge.

As to putting my money where my mouth is, please note that I fund an entire paranormal challenge. My gums are overflowing with how far I do just that.

[Miss Whiplash]

Really? I wasn't aware that prices differ from country to country. I thought that the $US19-95 p.a. I pay for hosting by a US-based ISP would still cost $US19-95 if I lived in USA. You're saying that they charge US residents more? Don't you have anti-competition rules to cover that kind of thing?

It's a competitive price. For the amount of bandwidth I use. Wrap that around your noodle.



Ah, you're mistakenly assuming I read any of it. Seeing the Sylvia Browne pics is fairly unavoidable. I only wanted to look at the ads and as I said, lots of people advertise websites in their sig which don't belong to them - me, for instance. I also dislike making assumptions. You, on the other clearly have no problem with it - in fact, your posts are littered with them. Quite a few of them appear to be wrong, which isn't all that surprising. I believe the success rate for assumptions is quite low. Thomas Aquinas is a great case in point if you wish to read further on the subject.

That's your loss.



The "I'm putting it up on Mondo" isn't a phrase which springs readily to mind as something I've seen before, sorry.

Tough out on the billabong, eh?



Tell that to the punters. ;)



Google pays you to advertise on your site. By accepting the ads, you are de facto advertising the products/services. You can choose to see it differently, but you're only fooling yourself. That's ok, you're a skeptic, they're good at that.

So pay up or hush up or come up with a better idea.




Oh weally, wabbit?

Funny, I've been there twice and on both of those occasions, psychic ads are present.

This is this morning's one. I didn't mention the word "irony" yet did I?

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s97/TheAtheist/vamp.jpg



When science stories were taking up more of the first page, that's when the science ads appeared. You missed that too. Your loss.

What on earth would make you think I had any problem with Google Adsense? It's a very smart, legitimate business and I have no issues with them at all. I explored the option a couple of years ago, realised what it meant and asked myself which was more important - a chicken-**** amount of money or my integrity?

Guess what won?

OoooooOOOOoooooo! Calling me a chicken****,huh? Tough talk from a little gelding standing upside down.



Oh yes, I'm a hard-hearted man and will fail to be drawn by that feeble challenge.

As to putting my money where my mouth is, please note that I fund an entire paranormal challenge. My gums are overflowing with how far I do just that.

Then you can afford to donate! Hit that button. Show me you can and adsense will vanish.

Sonny you aren't half as hard as me. I've been spanking little wise ass punks like you for many years. Now run along before I make your mama regret she ovulated. I don't waste time with geldings. Remember, I may be a chicken**** for using AdSense and psychic ads popping up, but at the end of the day I have twice the cojones than you have and most likely more women.

[Fnord]

Television is driven almost exclusively by profit. Paranormal phenomena has been proven to be very successfull entertainment concept, Skepticism... not so much. As long as television is driven by what ratings and money (forever), then pro superstition programming will outweigh skeptical programming by a HUGE margin. Because humans seem to have a desire for this nonsense to be true, and they are increasingly being bombarded with it, they accept it as truth, because it seems like the right thing to do.

And there, I think you have it. Commercial television is where you'll find shows popularizing the paranormal, whether those shows are based on fiction or "fact." They have commerical sponsors -- corporations that care less about the validity of the contents than the do about product placement, viewership, and market share. They want sexy, attractive people, and emotion-charged action, with a feel-good resolution.

Organized religions have their own separate channels, or use the least-profittable timeslots on commercial stations -- "Public Service" time slots, they're called (correction, please?).

Scientifically-oriented shows can be found mostly on PBS stations. Few of them directly address the paranormal in a critical sense. Most present science in either an academically-themed format (deep) or in a "Gee, isn't that amazing!" (shallow) format. Neither of these is "sexy" enough for commercial TV. Also, PBS station have to beg for funding, so they can not afford the slick packaging of another "Cosmos" -- and Nova, while good in its own right, is unable to live up to Dr. Sagan's epic.

Suggestions:

(1) Find the next Carl(a) Sagan, and give him/her all the money needed to present science in a way that would do the Good Doctor proud.

(2) Produce a science-fiction show that adheres to known science, without positing extra dimensions, psionics, or anything remotely wooish.

(3) Make learning science (and math) easier and more attractive for those students who have just enough money set aside for a four-year degree.

If you knew that you had only so much money, but that even a liberal arts degree would set you up comfortably for life, would you take on Theoretical Physics and Calculus if you could avoid it?

Another thing, I spent this weekend at a church conference. There were people insisting on sending recruiters from Bible academies to high schools and college campuses to "get the best minds into the ministry." (quoted) So...

(4) get scientists to visit high schools and make a pitch for science majors before they have a chance to decide to become ministers, artists, and business administrators.

Finally, there are a lot of brilliant (devious) minds in the "Psychic" field. Where was the BIG tuition money when they needed it? Where would Sylvia Browne be today if she had been able to complete her four-year degree, then another year or two on a master's degree, then maybe earn a doctorate? Would she still be another chain-smoking shyster, or would she have found greater opportunity in a more legal field?

(5) Set up more scholarship funds, not just for the straight-A students, but for the B-graders, as well. Even if their 4-year degrees are "English Major/Physics Minor" (or something like that), more scientifically-trained people with college degrees will be out there, using their skills of reason, and their talent for learning.

Anyway, that's what I think. Make Critical Thinking more attractive for everyone, not just an elite few, and you'll find more critical thinkers.

[Hokulele]

Bah. Don't look at it as paranormality winning, think of it as job security.

Seriously though, I don't think it is any more prevalent today than 100 years ago. I feel that there are three things that may be contributing to your point of view.

1) Confirmation bias. If you look for it, you will find it.
2) New information media. Just because it is more easy to access, doesn't necessarily mean a higher percentage of people believe it.
3) Reclassification of things. Some things that are currently described as "paranormal" may have been considered "normal" 100 years ago and vice versa. Advances in medicine, technology, and psychology can make certain notions outdated very quickly.

[The Atheist]

OoooooOOOOoooooo! Calling me a chicken****,huh?

No. Your reading comprehension is letting you down badly.

Just to clarify so that you understand (know) what I meant, I said the amount of money was chicken-****.

That means that the amount of money paid for hosting Google ads is quite small and insignificant (not worth bothering with). Nothing to do with you at all, so you can leave that one out. Thanks.

Sonny you aren't half as hard as me. I've been spanking little wise ass punks like you for many years. Now run along before I make your mama regret she ovulated. I don't waste time with geldings. Remember, I may be a chicken**** for using AdSense and psychic ads popping up, but at the end of the day I have twice the cojones than you have and most likely more women.

:dl:

I'd nominate that for pith, but I have a sneaky suspicion you might actually believe it!

As to the "sonny", you may find it prudent to check birth dates before you look sillier than you aleady do. ;) My one happens to be correct.

[buzz lightyear]

I'm of a mind to mosey over there and pee on it anyway. Who's with me?

This little gem would have to be the best description of the "skeptic" movement, in particular Mr Randi's version, that I have read so far on this site.

It doesn't involve understanding or exploring, just pissing on. Thanks Gravy.

Perhaps you should also note that this upsurge in "woo" also coincides with the high degree of access to information that we have today.
So you can rule out ignorance as one of the factors, particularly in the western world.

We also have religious freedom that hasn't existed for the last thousand years. The dominance of the church has played a huge role in suppressing ideas outside their parameters.

It appears this role has been taken by the church of skepticism with it's own pope, his holiness James Randi.

[Miss Whiplash]

No. Your reading comprehension is letting you down badly.

Just to clarify so that you understand (know) what I meant, I said the amount of money was chicken-****.

That means that the amount of money paid for hosting Google ads is quite small and insignificant (not worth bothering with). Nothing to do with you at all, so you can leave that one out. Thanks.

Sure. But you really can't speak for what is significant to me or not, can you?





:dl:

I'd nominate that for pith, but I have a sneaky suspicion you might actually believe it!

As to the "sonny", you may find it prudent to check birth dates before you look sillier than you aleady do. ;) My one happens to be correct.

But honey, your voice is getting higher and higher pitched. Are you ok? Is something caught?

[FenrisWolf]

(awesomeness snipped)

Nominated! Holy crap, what a great perspective.

[Gravy]

This little gem would have to be the best description of the "skeptic" movement, in particular Mr Randi's version, that I have read so far on this site.

It doesn't involve understanding or exploring, just pissing on. Thanks Gravy.Gosh, you're right: I've neither explored, understood, nor accurately communicated factual information about the topics I've studied. And your sense of humor is finely tuned!

[Fnord]

:catfight:

(There seems to be a lot of it going around.)

[The Atheist]

Bah. Don't look at it as paranormality winning, think of it as job security.

Seriously though, I don't think it is any more prevalent today than 100 years ago.

Are you able to show any evidence to support that belief? I certainly wasn't around a century ago, but I can guarantee that 25-40 years ago there were virtually no newspaper ads for psychics, whereas now they rate their own column.

[Miss Whiplash]

Read it and weep:

Portugese Fortune Teller Ad, cira 1923 (http://artdecoblog.blogspot.com/2007_09_09_archive.html).

I personally have a large collection of ads for fortune tellers, voodoo and hoodoo items and psychics from 1890 -1960.

Edit: I think we exceeded the bandwidth for that image. Here is the blog archive.

[Hokulele]

Are you able to show any evidence to support that belief? I certainly wasn't around a century ago, but I can guarantee that 25-40 years ago there were virtually no newspaper ads for psychics, whereas now they rate their own column.


I will go through my library and pull out some titles you can read. Seances, mediums, hypnosis (aka animal magnetism) and such were very much of popular culture in both America and Europe in the 1800's. Even Scientific American was dragged into the wooishness with their infamous 1923 committee looking into Mina Cranden. Much of the pharmaceutical advertising at the time would now be considered dangerous woo (get yer radioactive tonics here!). Anyway, most of my reading has been in books, rather than through Googling, but I may go and give Amazon and browse and see if I can link you directly to some neat reads.

ETA: Thanks, The Vampire. I haven't seen that one myself, but it is a fairly common topic.

ETA2: Is that link working? I can't see the ad.

[Gravy]

Are you able to show any evidence to support that belief? I certainly wasn't around a century ago, but I can guarantee that 25-40 years ago there were virtually no newspaper ads for psychics, whereas now they rate their own column.I assume you're talking about the existence of a business model, psychic readings via expensive telephone call, that didn't exist then. Nor were credit and debit cards nearly universally-owned then. I have no reason to think that these scams would have been any less prevalent years ago, had the technology existed to make them profitable.

Many papers also have page after page of phone sex ads. Weren't people horny years ago?

[Hokulele]

Are you able to show any evidence to support that belief? I certainly wasn't around a century ago, but I can guarantee that 25-40 years ago there were virtually no newspaper ads for psychics, whereas now they rate their own column.


Here is one of the books I have read and enjoyed that discusses the prevalence of one particular type of woo (mesmerism). It is interesting to note that even after being thoroughly debunked by a committee including the likes of Benjamin Franklin and Antoine Lavoisier, it remained popular.

http://www.amazon.com/Mesmerized-Powers-Mind-Victorian-Britain/dp/product-description/0226902234

[tkingdoll]

Little-known fact, but the most popular mediums of the day around 100 years ago provided more services than just talking to the dead.

Basically, men could go to a seance and in the dark the medium would guide the guy's hand up her skirt to cop a feel.

I'm not sure it goes on now but it proves that both mediums and horniness existed then...

[Miss Whiplash]

Astrology was almost forgotten until R.H Naylor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._H._Naylor)invented the newspaper astrology column in 1930.

I can't speak for other countries, but unless you lived in a large city, reading material was limited in a good portion of America 100 years ago. Almanacs were plentiful though and had plenty of ads for psychics and good luck charms and last but not least, quack medicine and medical devices.

[Hokulele]

Little-known fact, but the most popular mediums of the day around 100 years ago provided more services than just talking to the dead.

Basically, men could go to a seance and in the dark the medium would guide the guy's hand up her skirt to cop a feel.

I'm not sure it goes on now but it proves that both mediums and horniness existed then...


Don't forget those poor doctors working valiantly to cure "female hysteria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria)".

[Gravy]

Don't forget those poor doctors working valiantly to cure "female hysteria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria)".One of the greatest leaps forward in sexual relations was when the cry of "Oh! Oh! I'm hysterically paroxizing!" was replaced with a more concise phrase.

[tkingdoll]

Don't forget those poor doctors working valiantly to cure "female hysteria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria)".

Awesome!

such cases were quite profitable for physicians, since the patients were at no risk of death but needed constant treatment.

It was popular? Ya think? :D

But wait...

The only problem was that physicians did not enjoy the tedious task of massage: The technique was difficult for a physician to master and could take hours to achieve "hysterical paroxysm.

Pft. Nothing changes...

[Hokulele]

There's no need to thank me, I'm just putting the "E" in JREF.

[RSLancastr]

Shouldn't we then be facing fantasy?

[Slimething]

Basically, men could go to a seance and in the dark the medium would guide the guy's hand up her skirt to cop a feel.

Now, that would raise a few tables! :D

[schlitt]

It's a competitive price. For the amount of bandwidth I use. Wrap that around your noodle.



That's your loss.



Tough out on the billabong, eh?






So pay up or hush up or come up with a better idea.




When science stories were taking up more of the first page, that's when the science ads appeared. You missed that too. Your loss.



OoooooOOOOoooooo! Calling me a chicken****,huh? Tough talk from a little gelding standing upside down.





Then you can afford to donate! Hit that button. Show me you can and adsense will vanish.

Sonny you aren't half as hard as me. I've been spanking little wise ass punks like you for many years. Now run along before I make your mama regret she ovulated. I don't waste time with geldings. Remember, I may be a chicken**** for using AdSense and psychic ads popping up, but at the end of the day I have twice the cojones than you have and most likely more women.

The Vampire, i am not sure whether to take offence at your statements about, little geldings standing upside down.
Is this a shot at people who live in our part of the world? (NZ, Aussie)

[Miss Whiplash]

I've sent you a PM. Sorry if that was offensive. The inside joke on the David Farrant thread was the only funny thing I could come up with at that moment.

I don't apologize for saying gelding, though. What I was said in real life would have melted your computer.

[schlitt]

I've sent you a PM. Sorry if that was offensive. The inside joke on the David Farrant thread was the only funny thing I could come up with at that moment.

I don't apologize for saying gelding, though. What I was said in real life would have melted your computer.

Ok, i thought i may be missing something.
Cheers :)

[geni]

Nope, that doesn't fit either. Newspaper and magazine advertising isn't a cheap option - I know, I pay for enough of it - yet I can assure you that the same psychics who advertise online each will have at least a couple of ads running permanently.

The numbers who do that are rather lower. Given the profit margins involved constant advertiseing suggests limited repeat customers.

[The Atheist]

I assume you're talking about the existence of a business model, psychic readings via expensive telephone call, that didn't exist then. Nor were credit and debit cards nearly universally-owned then. I have no reason to think that these scams would have been any less prevalent years ago, had the technology existed to make them profitable.

Not so sure the technology has done more than make it easier for the marks - people wanting fortune told in earlier years just had to make the visit personally, as many still do.

I can't ever recall seeing psychics doing theatre tours, while now there are a constant stream of them.

There were definitely no psychic training schools then, either.

Here is one of the books I have read and enjoyed that discusses the prevalence of one particular type of woo (mesmerism).

Thanks. What we need is some actual data, I guess and I'm hoping that PSICOP can provide some.

Little-known fact, but the most popular mediums of the day around 100 years ago provided more services than just talking to the dead.

Basically, men could go to a seance and in the dark the medium would guide the guy's hand up her skirt to cop a feel.

Maybe that's why they're mediums, I guess large wouldn't have had the same popularity.

The numbers who do that are rather lower. Given the profit margins involved constant advertiseing suggests limited repeat customers.

I think that's pretty much a given - once you've had someone tell your fortune, I'd imagine it would be several years at least before you got another one done. That kind of confirms the point about the spread of it - the sheer numbers employed solely as psychics with little or nor repeat business would indicate a large and growing customer base.

[Hokulele]

Thanks. What we need is some actual data, I guess and I'm hoping that PSICOP can provide some.


Like the actual data given in your OP? (Just yanking your chain. ;))

What type of data would be conclusive? Percentage of total advertising? Advertising budgets per industry?

I think that's pretty much a given - once you've had someone tell your fortune, I'd imagine it would be several years at least before you got another one done. That kind of confirms the point about the spread of it - the sheer numbers employed solely as psychics with little or nor repeat business would indicate a large and growing customer base.


I would assume that a lack of repeat business would indicate a decrease in success. You would think that if a satisfactory reading was given the first time, the client would want more advice, perhaps specific advice in other areas. If they do not come back, perhaps they were dissatisfied with the initial reading. Are there any hard numbers on repeat traffic?

Again, I am thinking that you are experiencing a bit of confirmation bias, especially due to the types of sites your have cited in your posts. I haven't seen much of this type of advertising on sites that are not paranormal-related.

And I am truly shocked that you had no comment on the "female hysteria" link. You, of all people.

[Gravy]

Not so sure the technology has done more than make it easier for the marks - people wanting fortune told in earlier years just had to make the visit personally, as many still do.That's my point. The marks existed then also. Now it's much easier to reach them, and they can be billed later for the service.

I can't ever recall seeing psychics doing theatre tours, while now there are a constant stream of them.How did these psychics become popular? Through the mass-medium of television. In the US, paranormalists of all sorts have traditionally thrived on theater tours, revival meetings, carnivals, medicine shows, etc.

There were definitely no psychic training schools then, either.I don't know how many there are now. Most of the psychic training programs I've seen are new-agey things meant for people who actually think they have psychic powers that can be developed, and who are easily roped into spending more and more money on increasingly esoteric and worthless "training." Again, I think those people have always existed, but the means to entice lots of them hasn't always existed. I haven't read a lot about it, but the training provided by psychic call centers seems to be rudimentary. In the past much of the training was done within families and small circles of crooks. The old-time practitioners were very good, because they had to be: they worked face-to-face and didn't have the benefit of impersonal mass-scamming marketing or technology. I think you'd be impressed by the variety of paranormalist scammers and scams that a 1950 New York bunco squad detective had to deal with.

Edit: I just searched "1950 bunco squad," looking for quotes from that era, and found out that there's a movie called "Bunco Squad" that was made in...1950. I'm psychic!
Dull lead Robert Sterling plays the dully named detective "Steve Johnson." He's in the title squad investigating a phony medium racket lead by Cortez, who is trying to bilk a believing widow out of her fortune.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0042289/

[schlitt]

A study has been done in NZ indicating there is a large problem with addiction to psychic hotlines.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4154127a11.html

I am pretty sure this would be a fairly recent trend.

The difference between beleivers in the early 20th century and beleivers today is vast. I am not talking numbers, but the the way they beleive.

Back 100 years ago, people were naive to paranormal phenomena, and treated it with wonder and mystique. It was something to be treated with caution, and respect.
Now days, people are much more self righteous in their beleifs, and take it for granted that their beleifs are not mysterious phenomena, but documented facts. so while the percentage of beleivers may or may not be increasing, the attitudes of the beleivers is changing, and become much more arrogant, self righteous and harder to penetrate with logic.

N.B This is just my opinion so please dont hound me for evidence :)

[rjh01]

If scientists say 'we have a major problem' then the majority of people will believe them. Example (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7010522.stm)

Large majorities in many countries now believe human activity is causing global warming, a BBC World Service poll suggests.


I doubt if you could get that if all the woos said the world was going to end.

[PBTree]

“In the first place God made idiots; that was for practice; then he made school boards. ”
Mark Twain.

Maybe the woo'ers are increasing because the first people in this quote are the believers of the world and the second lot have decied to join the first lot (in a lot of schools) and now our kids are being trained as idiots.

Just a thought.

[Gravy]

A study has been done in NZ indicating there is a large problem with addiction to psychic hotlines.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4154127a11.html

I am pretty sure this would be a fairly recent trend.

The difference between beleivers in the early 20th century and beleivers today is vast. I am not talking numbers, but the the way they beleive.

Back 100 years ago, people were naive to paranormal phenomena, and treated it with wonder and mystique. It was something to be treated with caution, and respect.
Now days, people are much more self righteous in their beleifs, and take it for granted that their beleifs are not mysterious phenomena, but documented facts. so while the percentage of beleivers may or may not be increasing, the attitudes of the beleivers is changing, and become much more arrogant, self righteous and harder to penetrate with logic.

N.B This is just my opinion so please dont hound me for evidence :)It would be interesting to see a study that measured the strength or fastness of these beliefs and the intransigence of the believers, through the years.

The article you cited doesn't indicate the prevalence of use of psychics, except to say that it's a billion-dollar industry in the U.S. I do question some of the numbers. A psychic hotline worker who herself spends NZ$6000 a month (that's a rate of US$52,800 a year) on psychic hotlines?

One thing we rarely learn from such studies is what percentage of the customers are true believers and what percentage just want to talk with someone who acts like they care.

What do many women wish? That their man was more communicative, easier to confide in, and more intuitive. Result: over 90% of users of psychic services are women.

What do many men wish? That their woman would stop nagging about expressing feelings and sharing innermost thoughts, and just get it on. Result: over 90% of visitors to prostitutes are men.

[Cuddles]

That doesn't appear to be borne out by what little information we do have.

I don't know what information you're looking at, but all the information I have says that science was pretty much non-existent a few centuries ago and that virtually every single person on the planet believed in at least a few kinds of woo. If you have some evidence that the world used to be full of rational atheists and that religion and woo has only recently become established I'd love to see it.

Also, in your list, you missed a couple of things which have grown exponentially from almost zero 30 years ago - feng shui and Paganism. In the west, feng shui was virtually unknown and almost all of Paganism had died out hundreds of years previously, yet nowadays they have millions of followers.

Paganism is just another religion, which I included with psychics. This is the largest area of woo around because, as I said, it is really the only one that can get away with making untestable claims and therefore is the hardest to challenge. However, I would generally say that Paganism is a step in the right direction, compared to Christianity and related religions, because there is more about understanding nature and less about doing whatever the invisible sky fairies tell you to. In any case, the very fact that it was prevelent hundreds of years ago and is now making a comeback makes my point pretty well. Woo is still here and always will be, but it is not any worse that it has been and in most cases is getting better.

As for feng shui, I really don't know much about it. I don't think I've ever met anyone who believed in it and I've hardly ever seen it mentioned in the news, or anywhere else. Maybe it is big in some places, but it hardly seems to be taking over the world. From what I understand it's basically just interior decorating with extra dragons. Not really something worth getting worried about.

You did notice the study which showed that 75% of people believe at least 1/10 of kinds of "paranormal activity", and that the list was nowhere near complete?

And what do you think the results would have been a few centuries ago? I would think it would be 100% of people believing in at least 9/10 kinds of paranormal activities. What's your point? Yes, lots of people still believe in silly things. They always will. But they believe in less silly things than they used to be, so your claim that woo has won just isn't true. If anything, woo is losing, although it is far from beaten yet.

[cyborg]

I would like to know what magic method you think there is that would allow the human brain to automagically tell the difference between woo and science - I really would. Otherwise you're going to have to accept that the human brain is basically superstitious.

[Fnord]

If by "superstitious" you mean "easily fooled" then you're on the right track.

[The Atheist]

I don't know what information you're looking at, but all the information I have says that science was pretty much non-existent a few centuries ago and that virtually every single person on the planet believed in at least a few kinds of woo. If you have some evidence that the world used to be full of rational atheists and that religion and woo has only recently become established I'd love to see it.

Now, there's no need to go creating strawmen - I've never suggested the world had ever been "full of atheists". Also, I have consistently noted that I'm talking about the past 100 years or so.

100 years ago, nearly everyone believed in some god or other, but psychics and astrologers didn't command anything like the following they have today.

As for feng shui, I really don't know much about it. I don't think I've ever met anyone who believed in it and I've hardly ever seen it mentioned in the news, or anywhere else. Maybe it is big in some places, but it hardly seems to be taking over the world. From what I understand it's basically just interior decorating with extra dragons. Not really something worth getting worried about.

I'm not worried about it for an onstant, but Feng Shui has become enormously popular in many countries, having been exported from China. It is something which was completely unknown here only 20 years ago, but now there are full time Feng Shui consultants - some of whom are even European. I used to bonk one a while back and was amazed to find that most of her customers were Kiwis who'd bought into the rubbish.

It's so prevalent here - as are Chinese - that houses at street number 8 or 88 in certain suburbs are worth more than identical houses next door, simply because the Feng Shui on 8 is good.

And what do you think the results would have been a few centuries ago? I would think it would be 100% of people believing in at least 9/10 kinds of paranormal activities. What's your point? Yes, lots of people still believe in silly things. They always will. But they believe in less silly things than they used to be, so your claim that woo has won just isn't true. If anything, woo is losing, although it is far from beaten yet.

Far more pertinently, what were the details 50 years ago?

[Tokenconservative]

The ads are largely meaningless. What skeptical services or producs are people going to be interested in advertiseing with those keywords? Thus even penny paranormaly product ads are going to predominate.

Indeed. Look at "Darwin Fish" those little parodies of the Christian fish (personally, I find them rude...) with the little feet and the name "Darwin" inside the fish.

They sell, sure...but then look at the Christian products market...it's ENORMOUS. Everything from jewelry, to books and vids and music and art and...well, you name it, if you slap a Christian cross on it, it will sell and you will make money.

You can pick those Darwin fish up at sci fi conventions and headshops, they cost a couple of bucks and there are probably 500 people around the planet making them. Gross yearly, worldwide sales of these probably don't equal that of Christian chewing gum sold in one Christian products store in Podunk Idaho.

Tokie

[Tokenconservative]

Now, there's no need to go creating strawmen - I've never suggested the world had ever been "full of atheists". Also, I have consistently noted that I'm talking about the past 100 years or so.

100 years ago, nearly everyone believed in some god or other, but psychics and astrologers didn't command anything like the following they have today.



!?

You need to look more closely at he Spiritualist Movement of the mid 19th century to mi-20th century...Madam Blavatsky, anyone?

Or a fellow whose name was changed from Schiklegrubber?

This stuff was tremendously popular, to the point that lawas against it were passed across the US and Europe (not sure about Aus/NZ), and it's what drove people like Conan Doyle and Houdini to take the stands they did.

Tokie

[PBTree]

I'm not worried about it for an onstant, but Feng Shui has become enormously popular in many countries, having been exported from China. It is something which was completely unknown here only 20 years ago, but now there are full time Feng Shui consultants - some of whom are even European. I used to bonk one a while back and was amazed to find that most of her customers were Kiwis who'd bought into the rubbish.

It's so prevalent here - as are Chinese - that houses at street number 8 or 88 in certain suburbs are worth more than identical houses next door, simply because the Feng Shui on 8 is good.



Could the feng shui and kiwi link be because of the following:
[url="http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s823810.htm[/url]

sounds suspicious.....

[schlitt]

One thing we rarely learn from such studies is what percentage of the customers are true believers and what percentage just want to talk with someone who acts like they care.



This is true, but suffice to say you would not find people such as yourself (i.e crtitically thinking) spending $4 a minute to talk to a psychic, just because you wanted a listening ear.

Perhaps this is a cultural thing. The Atheist and I both live in NZ, and both seem to share the opinion the belief in woo is increasing.
I find it hard not to run into some fool who beleives in "the secret" reguarly. If i turn on my television i see an ad for "Medium" or "the ghost whisperer" or "Sensing murder". Just yesterday a colleagues wife was, as he put it "becoming enlightened" at a Depak Chopra seminar along with thousands, and to top it all off, someone who plays a huge role in my life has recently started going to a spritualist medium.
I realise things like confirmation bias, play a role, but it truly seems to me that superstition is gaining ground.

[The Atheist]

Could the feng shui and kiwi link be because of the following:
[url="http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s823810.htm[/url]

sounds suspicious.....

Haha! Nice try, but the ones who are getting Feng Shuied are generally well-off white people - apart from the Asians.

Perhaps this is a cultural thing. The Atheist and I both live in NZ, and both seem to share the opinion the belief in woo is increasing.

Good point. Maybe that's why it's so noticeable to us, because there was little supernatural belief anywhere not long ago - we've never even been a religious country, for starters.

Need some stats, need some stats - no reply from CSICOP yet.

And yes, Deepak Chopra. We must look like a soft touch at the moment, Benny Hinn and Deepak Chopra in the same year.

[SamanthaMc]

Hi TA!

So I'm driving down the street a few hours ago, and I run across a sign announcing the opening of a new store in town! And I thought, hmm, I wonder who else would think the name of that store was comical yet pathetic and sad? And I thought, I bet TA would get a kick out of it! And here you are, with your own little thead about the paranormal. Coincidence? I think not! Well, yeah, it's a coincidence. ;)

Anyway, the name of the store is Bible Barn. :rolleyes: Sometimes it's all too much. Be glad, be very glad you aren't in the Bible Belt, my friend.

[SamanthaMc]

OoooooOOOOoooooo! Calling me a chicken****,huh? Tough talk from a little gelding standing upside down.





Then you can afford to donate! Hit that button. Show me you can and adsense will vanish.

Sonny you aren't half as hard as me. I've been spanking little wise ass punks like you for many years. Now run along before I make your mama regret she ovulated. I don't waste time with geldings. Remember, I may be a chicken**** for using AdSense and psychic ads popping up, but at the end of the day I have twice the cojones than you have and most likely more women.

So TA says the price of something is chicken-****, you mistakenly think he is calling you a chicken-****, so you proceed to call him a wise-ass punk, a gelding, a man with half the balls as you and someone who has poor luck with women.

He points out that you misunderstood him and you pretty much ignore that.

Yet you apologize and PM someone you might have possibly offended while you were insulting TA.

Is a civil debate about AdSense out of the question just because you use it? It's not a personal attack against you, for Ed's sake.

And furthermore, aren't we supposed to not be insulting each other outside of Forum Community?

Sigh. It really bothers me that we can't disagree about something without slinging mud all over the damn forum.

The personalised bickering between TA and TV must stop. I arrived in this thread too late to address it earlier, and chose to leave it rather than split it all out, as the thread was back on topic. Please do not continue it any further.

And - you are not supposed to insult each other anywhere - even FC.

[The Atheist]

Hi TA!

So I'm driving down the street a few hours ago, and I run across a sign announcing the opening of a new store in town! And I thought, hmm, I wonder who else would think the name of that store was comical yet pathetic and sad? And I thought, I bet TA would get a kick out of it! And here you are, with your own little thead about the paranormal. Coincidence? I think not! Well, yeah, it's a coincidence. ;)

Anyway, the name of the store is Bible Barn. :rolleyes: Sometimes it's all too much. Be glad, be very glad you aren't in the Bible Belt, my friend.

Mate!!!!

Glad to see you here.

Yes indeed - I'd get tempted to burn the damn thing down! We have a few fundy churches around here, somewhat surprisingly. My favourite of the signs I've seen to date is outside the christian college, advertising courses:

SPEND A YEAR IN THE SON!

but I always thought they were anti-gay...

[Cuddles]

Now, there's no need to go creating strawmen - I've never suggested the world had ever been "full of atheists". Also, I have consistently noted that I'm talking about the past 100 years or so.

There is no straw man involved. I said that there are less people now who believe in woo than there were in the past, to which you responded that that isn't supported by the evidence. If you believe that to be the case then you must be claiming that there used to be more people who didn't believe in woo. It's not a straw man, it's what you said. And it is flatly contradicted by you next sentence.

100 years ago, nearly everyone believed in some god or other, but psychics and astrologers didn't command anything like the following they have today.

Nearly everyone used to believe in woo. Lots of people don't now. Therefore there is less woo than there used to be. As for psychics and astrologers not having following, have you read anything that anyone else has posted? There have been plenty of examples showing how widespread that sort of thing was. The difference between then and now is that it is much easier to communicate. This doesn't mean there is more woo, it simply means that it is marketed differently. Where people used to have local adverts and go on theatre tours, they now plaster their crap all over the internet and go on TV.

In any case, talking about the last 100 years is completely pointless. That's like looking at the climate over the last hundred years and coming to conclusions about the overall trend. If you only look at the short term, you will only see short term variations. I have no doubt that woo gains and loses popularity all the time, what is important to determine if "Woo has won", as you claim, is the long-term trend, not the short term. So what if woo has got slightly more popular over the last 50 years (although I don't think it has)? Compared to, say, 500 years ago it has taken a right beating. You can hardly claim that it is all over for science when science knows more than ever before and woo is just about at it's least prevalent since humans first started being capable of believing.

I'm not worried about it for an onstant, but Feng Shui has become enormously popular in many countries, having been exported from China. It is something which was completely unknown here only 20 years ago, but now there are full time Feng Shui consultants - some of whom are even European. I used to bonk one a while back and was amazed to find that most of her customers were Kiwis who'd bought into the rubbish.

It's so prevalent here - as are Chinese - that houses at street number 8 or 88 in certain suburbs are worth more than identical houses next door, simply because the Feng Shui on 8 is good.

The way you describe it sounds more like people migrating and bringing their culture with them. There will always be new people who buy in to it, but if the majority are Chinese people believing the same things they always have, that is hardly woo taking over, it is simply moving house.

Far more pertinently, what were the details 50 years ago?

As I say above, this is not only not far more pertinent, it is utterly irrelevant.

[geni]

Indeed. Look at "Darwin Fish" those little parodies of the Christian fish (personally, I find them rude...) with the little feet and the name "Darwin" inside the fish.

They sell, sure...but then look at the Christian products market...it's ENORMOUS. Everything from jewelry, to books and vids and music and art and...well, you name it, if you slap a Christian cross on it, it will sell and you will make money.

You can pick those Darwin fish up at sci fi conventions and headshops, they cost a couple of bucks and there are probably 500 people around the planet making them. Gross yearly, worldwide sales of these probably don't equal that of Christian chewing gum sold in one Christian products store in Podunk Idaho.

Tokie

On the other hand the vactican is haveing issues with trying to not sell stuff:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7012421.stm

[Darth Rotor]

@ Joe The Juggler: some people hold religion to be a subset of philosophy, or of social philosophy, and related to it. Edit Out: Dewey Decimal ref was wrong.

That you choose to class it with contemporary paranormal modes is your spin, or your view, on where it fits. That seems to me an unnecessarily narrow view.

@ Atheist: you post as though there is an end to the war, the fight, the battle. A war isn't over until one side quits fighting. So, unless you are throwing in the towel, no one has "won" but it may appear to you that one side is "winning," at the moment.

Consider a rugby match, early in the second half. The All Blacks are behind 12-10 against the Aussie side. Have the Aussies won, are are the winning at the moment?

Play is continuous. I don't think the war is over, regardless of which side one is on. As far as I am concerned, the War On Stupid is as eternal a struggle as the fight of Good against Evil, in the general sense.

DR

[The Atheist]

@ Atheist: you post as though there is an end to the war, the fight, the battle. A war isn't over until one side quits fighting. So, unless you are throwing in the towel, no one has "won" but it may appear to you that one side is "winning," at the moment.

Consider a rugby match, early in the second half. The All Blacks are behind 12-10 against the Aussie side. Have the Aussies won, are are the winning at the moment?

Play is continuous. I don't think the war is over, regardless of which side one is on. As far as I am concerned, the War On Stupid is as eternal a struggle as the fight of Good against Evil, in the general sense.

DR

Damn right.

Personally, I won't be throwing any towels in, in fact I've started a whole new fight against a particularly nasty infection of psychics and we're sure as hell rattling their cages! Pretty NZ-centric, but you might get a laugh here. (http://www.immortality.co.nz/sensing.htm)

As I said earlier, I don't actually think "woo" has won, but when overtly sceptical websites are advertising the crap for them, they've got us deep in the trenches waiting for the bombardment to stop.

The big problem is the state of the relevant finances of the sides - the stoopid team have all the income. JREF makes half a buck a year. I see the loose quote from that newspaper article that psychics are a "billion-dollar industry" in USA. That's a throwaway line, but it may not be too far from the truth. Even basing the figures on a NZ x 80 for the population difference suggests that it isn't too far wrong.

That's one helluva war chest they're building up.

As always, I'm searching for alternatives, because what we're doing at the moment - with the possible exception of stopsylviabrowne.com - doesn't seem to be working too well.

[The Atheist]

As I say above, this is not only not far more pertinent, it is utterly irrelevant.

It's quite clear then that we're talking about completely different things.

I am discussing the present, apparent rise in psychics. Accordingly, I am interested in the growth over the past century.

Given the stringent new mod rules, as clearly evinced by the absurd mod box in this very thread, I suggest that that is sufficiently off-topic to rate its own thread. Perhaps you could go start a thread about "Woo over the past millennium" or such title as suits.

Cheers.

[cyborg]

As I said earlier, I don't actually think "woo" has won, but when overtly sceptical websites are advertising the crap for them, they've got us deep in the trenches waiting for the bombardment to stop.

You sound like a conspiracy theorist.

It is NOT that sinister. It is just the way AdSense works as you have damn well been told. It is the fault of the skeptical webmasters for not changing the controls. (You can, you see, filter inappropriate adverts out).

[Alice Shortcake]

Paganism (and especially Wicca) seems to be a modern invention, not a genuine pre-Christian survival.

[The Atheist]

You sound like a conspiracy theorist.

It is NOT that sinister. It is just the way AdSense works as you have damn well been told. It is the fault of the skeptical webmasters for not changing the controls. (You can, you see, filter inappropriate adverts out).

Since you clearly didn't notice it the first time I said it, I know very well how Adsense works - that is precisely why I don't use it.

Classic example, The Bad Astronomer just replied to me before I came back to this thread. He said:

Re: Google ads

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The ads are served by Google, and it's difficult to keep track of them. There is a filter, and I use it to keep such things off my site... but I can't filter them if I don't know about them. I ask my readers to send me the URL of the advertiser so I can filter them out.

-phil

It simply doesn't work.

Webmasters can only work retrospectively in filtering this stuff out. Since you seem to be singularly lacking in the facts, (amazing how often a little abuse covers up for that, eh ;) ) I can help you with the simple fact that even if you have every current site filtered out from Adsense, the one I start up tomorrow won't be included in your list, so unless you're refreshing your page constantly to check for ads needing blocking, the task is impossible.

Please explain how anything I've said has any relation at all to CT. I also recommend you revisit the thread in management on why this site canned Adsense.

[schlitt]

You sound like a conspiracy theorist.

It is NOT that sinister. It is just the way AdSense works as you have damn well been told. It is the fault of the skeptical webmasters for not changing the controls. (You can, you see, filter inappropriate adverts out).


No its not a conspiracy, but the very fact that psychic adverts/television shows/books are so prevelant, is a reflection of society at this point in time.

[cyborg]

) I can help you with the simple fact that even if you have every current site filtered out from Adsense, the one I start up tomorrow won't be included in your list, so unless you're refreshing your page constantly to check for ads needing blocking, the task is impossible.

You realise this and yet you bitch about the nature of the fact that most people, and corporations especially, don't really give a crap if people believe angels watch over them unless it is actually particular costly.

Yet again I ask: by what automagical mechanism do you wish the brain to determine science from woo?

[The Atheist]

You realise this and yet you bitch about the nature of the fact that most people, and corporations especially, don't really give a crap if people believe angels watch over them unless it is actually particular costly.

Is there supposed to be a point in that? If so, it went straight by me.

Yet again I ask: by what automagical mechanism do you wish the brain to determine science from woo?

I hadn't answered it because it didn't seem worth answering. It seems to be another completely pointless question and I have no idea what "automagical (http://www.reference.com/search?db=web&q=auto+magic)" means. Maybe you could try to explain that at the same time. (Nice side-step, by the way)

[RSLancastr]

If you could convince me that no people want to hear the message, I'd stop doing this. But that would be a long row to hoe. I've received hundreds of emails (three so far today) thanking me for my efforts, many of which came from people whose minds were changed utterly by the information I organized and made accessible to them. That's good enough for me. I have modest expectations.This exactly echoes my experience, Gravy. I'm glad to hear you're having similar success.

That's probably it - you have to like moving mountains by teaspoon. I'm naturally a bulldozer kind of bloke.Do you have any suggestions for "bulldozer" approaches which would work?

That would be true if I were trying to move mountains. I'm not. I'm just doing what I can, the way I want, in the spare time I have. :)Stop reading my mind!!!

Perhaps you should also note that this upsurge in "woo" also coincides with the high degree of access to information that we have today. So you can rule out ignorance as one of the factors, particularly in the western world.Access to information does not, in and of itself, eliminate ignorance.

What do many women wish? That their man was more communicative, easier to confide in, and more intuitive.And that their man was more knowledgeable and proficient at inducing and treating Female Hysteria.

Perhaps this is a cultural thing. The Atheist and I both live in NZ, and both seem to share the opinion the belief in woo is increasing.I have recently haerd (perhaps from one of you) that this is true of NZ.

Is there supposed to be a point in that? If so, it went straight by me.TA, I'm wondering what is the point of the thread? Are you saying that skeptics should simply give up the fight? That we should change our tactics? Or just what?

My apologies if this has been made clear somewhere in the thread. I may well have lost track of it, as the signal-to-noise ratio in the thread has not been optimum.

[The_Animus]

I would agree that there does seem to be a recent increase in the overall size of woo beliefs and institutions.

I also believe that humans will slowly evolve and that over a long period of time false beliefs will diminish and die out.

I think that our technology and worldwide communication/information ability is increasing faster than we can adapt. There is so much information available to people today that it requires a large effort and much time and patience to sift through everything to figure out what is crap and what is true and useful information.

Also today's world is absolutely filled to the brim with frivolous unimportant things. It makes me very sad how many people care more about clothes, wallpaper, drugs, food, makeup, sports, and so forth than philosophy, reason, logic, and learning.

Many people also have very short attention spans. As such trying to get them interested in skepticism, and critical thinking is harder than the promise of having your future read to you.
In my opinion there are three main areas that need a massive overhaul in order to put people back on the right track.

1. The education system. We need to stop going backwards in our education. No more allowing religious or creationist classes. No more allowing 'creative teaching' in the form of teaching lies and woo. Instead we should add new class requirement for all students. Classes that teach lifelong skills of reasoning, logic, skepticism, and critical thinking. A big part of the problem seems to me that people aren't taught how to properly research a topic, and how to discern fact from fiction.

2. The media. Advertising of woo and other false beliefs need to stop being presented as fact by media outlets. No more Sylvia on Montell. No more ads on TV, radio, newspapers, and the internet for psychic readings, or creationist theory, etc. The media gives the appearance of credibility to these things by even acknowledging them.

3. Business. More specifically government agencies that have to do with regulating business. This in particular is one of my buttons. I am so sick of web sites and business that are allowed to stay open when the only thing they do is 'legally' steal from people. You probably know what I'm talking about. One example would be an online magazine web site called magsforless.com. They claim to sell discount prices magazine subscriptions. What they actually do is take your money and send you nothing. Companies such as these have giant records with organizations like the BBB. They show numerous complaints that the company takes your money and does not send the product. Any attempt to contact the company are ignored. So ultimately you have to call your credit card company and have them refund your money. Meanwhile the web site is allowed to remain up and to continue stealing money from people. And I'm sure there are thousands of web sites and companies like this. This would include companies that sell products that make false claims. The government needs to seriously step up and take legal action against these businesses and shut them down.

I think these three things would have a major impact on the level of false beliefs in the world.

[The Atheist]

TA, I'm wondering what is the point of the thread? Are you saying that skeptics should simply give up the fight? That we should change our tactics? Or just what?

Partly a rant, partly a desire to see if there is any actual hard data about paranormal belief and the apparent growth of it, partly to point out that sceptical websites shouldn't be assisting to advertise the very stuff we're railing against and partly to see if anyone has any other suggestions.

If it's working, great. If not, we need to change.

[The Atheist]

I think these three things would have a major impact on the level of false beliefs in the world.

Unarguably put. to my mind.

Next we just need to find how to make it all happen!

[The_Animus]

Time, patience, and effort.

Or blow everything up and start over from scratch.

I think the second one might be the quicker route :D

[Autolite]

I'm beginning to think that the war on stupid is slowly being lost.

I am afraid that I am pretty much of the same opinion but I don't claim that the war is lost so much as unwinnable. Consider that it is not a level playing field. Atheists/skeptics employ logic, reason and rationale to combat emotion. It is akin to trying to win at a game of chess when the other person is playing Dungeons and Dragons. I am not suggesting that skeptics should give up the fight, however, as winning over a single individual should be considered a grand victory of sorts ...

[PBTree]

[QUOTE=Darth Rotor;3001097
Consider a rugby match, early in the second half. The All Blacks are behind 12-10 against the Aussie side. Have the Aussies won, are are the winning at the moment?

DR[/QUOTE]

I think you are right TA. If this isn't an increase in woo, I don't know what is.

Normally in the second half we convicts are in front 22-10, especially in World Cup finals.

[rjh01]

IN this entire thread have not seen much hard evidence to suggest that woo is increasing, rather than it still exists. It is down a lot over the last 50 years. I cannot say about the last 10 years, or even how to measure it.

I know over the last year thanks to a few people on this forum (you know who) SB has been hit hard. She is the number 1 woo. What has happened to her can happen to others.

[The Atheist]

It is down a lot over the last 50 years.

That looks suspiciously like a statement of fact. Got any facts to back it up with?

[Big Les]

Cuddles is right. You're defining the "war" on your own chronologically limited terms and declaring a loss. In anything but the un-predictable, un-imaginable, uber-long-term, the "war" just isn't winnable. Human nature, sans critical thought, predisposes us to believe to some extent in the dreaded woo, and also to want to believe in it. It will always be with us, and for many, will always be the more attractive choice. But there will always be others for whom it doesn't appeal, and as well as those people there will be a minority of actual sceptics. I see no reason to believe that these other non-woo groups will ever "die out", which is what it would take for said "war" to be lost. As long as the other groups are present, history has shown us that woo will ebb and flow, and the popularity of science will also rise and fall. The reality of the situation is that gains and losses will be made by either side over the decades and centuries.

Even if you see mass-media as the woo equivalent of the enlightenment, that still only puts the two sides on a par (as there have always been more believers (there being many stripes of believer) than non-believers and sceptics). More people are aware of more types of woo than ever - that will increase their numbers some, sure. But likewise scientific thought is reaching more people than ever. We need to look at the long-run to see which side edges ahead more often and to the greater extent.

What reason do we have to believe that the historical pattern will go out the window and that either side will ever "win"? If you're proposing that, you need to give us some evidence that goes beyond the last 50 years, because that (as has been said) is explained entirely by the rise of mass-media. It may be that more effective use of this "weapon" will lead to some sort of victory for woo over rationality, but I don't see it, personally. I'd suggest that it's more likely that a plateau is reached, with the same order of majority believing in woo as have ever done (in terms of proportions - I agree that more people than ever will be buying into more types of woo than ever), but also with more "recruits" to the rational side than ever before. I'm pretty sure that without the internet, I would still be using subjective plausilibity as my main BS detection tool rather than scepticism.

[cyborg]

Is there supposed to be a point in that? If so, it went straight by me.

How unsurprising.

Let me try again: most people simply do not give a crap. Why therefore are you really surprised to see such things advertised as if they should magically stop being around just because they're wrong?

Simple enough for you to comprehend?

I hadn't answered it because it didn't seem worth answering.

And yet here you are complaining that "paranormality" has won without even understanding the battle field, the battle or the nature of the combatants.

I have no idea what "automagical (http://www.reference.com/search?db=web&q=auto+magic)" means.

It means "automagically".

Maybe you could try to explain that at the same time.

It's really shame your ability to research is so thoughourly poor.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/automagical

(Nice side-step, by the way)

It's not a side-step to ponit out your irrational overreaction to irrationality. Do you even know what it is you're really bitching about?

[The Atheist]

I'm pretty sure that without the internet, I would still be using subjective plausilibity as my main BS detection tool rather than scepticism.

Cheers. Fair points, I guess. It could be that we're seeing a typical "dead-cat" bounce, but the amount of stupid around nowadays is a little wearying.

I don't expect stupid beliefs to ever disappear, I just find it fairly disappointing that people swap one stupid belief for another.

[Cuddles]

It's quite clear then that we're talking about completely different things.

I am discussing the present, apparent rise in psychics. Accordingly, I am interested in the growth over the past century.

Given the stringent new mod rules, as clearly evinced by the absurd mod box in this very thread, I suggest that that is sufficiently off-topic to rate its own thread. Perhaps you could go start a thread about "Woo over the past millennium" or such title as suits.

Cheers.

Bollocks. Look at the title of thread. "Paranormality has won". It hasn't, and I've pointed out very clearly how we can see this. If you want to focus only on one tiny little thing, feel free to make a thread called "Paranormality has had a slight increase over the last couple of decades, and even though this is nothing more than a slight glitch in the overall trend, I'm going to run around shouting that the sky is falling". Accusing others of being off topic just because they've refuted your claim isn't exactly the most honest debating technique.

[bokonon]

I don't expect stupid beliefs to ever disappear, I just find it fairly disappointing that people swap one stupid belief for another.
I guess it's one of those glass half empty things. I'm actually encouraged that people have exchanged one stupid belief for another in the case where religion has been exchanged for (or, more accurately, diluted by) belief in psychics.

Religion is hierarchical and authoritarian. It has the capability of mobilizing masses of people with a common objective.

In contrast, psychics are unorganized and authoritarian. For the most part, a person's interaction with a psychic is one-on-one. Any action taken as a result of the advice received is going to be more like brownian motion in a bathtub than a tidal wave. It's hard to imagine a new crusade arising from millions of phone calls to psychic hotlines.

I'm not so worried about what nonsense people believe as the practical result of those beliefs. I don't expect the psychic hotlines are going to result in a grassroots movement to bombard legislators to restrict funding for stem cell research. Sometimes the lesser of two evils is less evil.

[The Atheist]

...just because they've refuted your claim ...

You have only refuted your own strawman at this stage, but feel free to keep suggesting something else.

Simply put, humans don't live for 500 years, so the people who believed in witches then are all dead. Virtually everyone alive was born during the past century and I'm a lot more interested in live people than dead ones.

THAT is the point, but continue whining at your leisure.

If you're unable to note that I've said several times that the title was provocative and that the truth is "winning" rather than "won", then that's really your problem rather than mine.

[The Atheist]

I guess it's one of those glass half empty things. I'm actually encouraged that people have exchanged one stupid belief for another in the case where religion has been exchanged for (or, more accurately, diluted by) belief in psychics.

Religion is hierarchical and authoritarian. It has the capability of mobilizing masses of people with a common objective.

In contrast, psychics are unorganized and authoritarian. For the most part, a person's interaction with a psychic is one-on-one. Any action taken as a result of the advice received is going to be more like brownian motion in a bathtub than a tidal wave. It's hard to imagine a new crusade arising from millions of phone calls to psychic hotlines.

I'm not so worried about what nonsense people believe as the practical result of those beliefs. I don't expect the psychic hotlines are going to result in a grassroots movement to bombard legislators to restrict funding for stem cell research. Sometimes the lesser of two evils is less evil.

Yep, I'd go along with that - at least the variety of idiocy is getting less harmful.

[The Atheist]

Let me try again: most people simply do not give a crap. Why therefore are you really surprised to see such things advertised as if they should magically stop being around just because they're wrong?

You keep wanting "magical" solutions to things. I hate to tell you, but there aren't any.

Given that "most people" don't care, then I guess we should all give up? That would pretty much agree that the war has been won

And yet here you are complaining that "paranormality" has won without even understanding the battle field, the battle or the nature of the combatants.

That being the case, I'm delighted that someone as knowledgeable on the subject agrees that the war has been won.

It means "automagically".

Ah, Wiktionary, the language authority.

Magical solutions again. What is with you and magic?

It's not a side-step to ponit out your irrational overreaction to irrationality.

No, the sidestep was avoiding the question. That I'm over-reacting is entirely your own hypothesis.

[Big Les]

Cheers. Fair points, I guess. It could be that we're seeing a typical "dead-cat" bounce, but the amount of stupid around nowadays is a little wearying.

I don't expect stupid beliefs to ever disappear, I just find it fairly disappointing that people swap one stupid belief for another.

I think the number of people being exposed to woo that might not have succumbed pre the information "revolution" is probably still going up as the internet grows and other media struggle to compete. And there are more permutations and re-inventions than ever to fall for. With only a "Detector, Bovine Fecal, Mk.I" to rely upon, that's inevitable - and for the foreseeable future most people will only ever have that, IOW "we" will continue to "lose" to some degree. I still think it will level out at some stage, and probably even dip as cultural mores and the delivery methods change once more. You'd have to be psychic to know that of course ;)

Bottom line is that "we" can only plug away, and aim to equip more people with critical thinking skills. Best case - with critical thinking widespread in schools, in decades time we'll have only a hardcore of reality-resistant woo-woos. That's by no means certain to happen, but as they say in Yorkshire, we can allus try.

[schlitt]

A large problem we face with modern woo, is the way it is dressed up in pseudo-science, making it more plausible to the average person.
Since only a small minority like to research things before we beleive them, this is a brilliant way to get people to buy into woo.

[cyborg]

You keep wanting "magical" solutions to things. I hate to tell you, but there aren't any.

No, you're the one who seems to want the magical solutions around here.

Given that "most people" don't care, then I guess we should all give up? That would pretty much agree that the war has been won

Your ability to miss the point is unlimited I see.

The point you should be grasping here is that most people in the middle just get swayed about by those on the outlying edges who do give a crap one way or another.

If you war is to get the apathetic to give a crap you sure as hell have lost that one.

That being the case, I'm delighted that someone as knowledgeable on the subject agrees that the war has been won.

It is not to be won; it is to be fought.

There is no 'end game' for a war of ideas. What the hell were you thinking?

Ah, Wiktionary, the language authority.

Nice side-step.

Magical solutions again. What is with you and magic?

It is what is with you and magic that is an issue here.

No, the sidestep was avoiding the question. That I'm over-reacting is entirely your own hypothesis.

And yet you provide this thread as wonderful evidence of it.

[Ryan O'Dine]

A large problem we face with modern woo, is the way it is dressed up in pseudo-science, making it more plausible to the average person.
Since only a small minority like to research things before we beleive them, this is a brilliant way to get people to buy into woo.


I was just thinking about this. It seems the more mysterious actual science gets, the more woo it generates. Every other woo idea these days is 50 parts “quantum,” 30 parts “Einstein”. But ask any quantum woo peddler what the eigenvalue of a Hamiltonian represents, and you’ll get, “the what of a what, now?”

Personally, I think the biggest failing in society here is the education system. Children are simply by and large not being formally exposed to the principles of critical thinking. It may often be an explicit a part of many subjects, but rarely is it a subject itself. It needs to be introduced in the primary grades, and rise to an independent, freestanding requirement for H.S. graduation.

[The Atheist]

Bottom line is that "we" can only plug away, and aim to equip more people with critical thinking skills.

A large problem we face with modern woo, is the way it is dressed up in pseudo-science, making it more plausible to the average person.
Since only a small minority like to research things before we beleive them, this is a brilliant way to get people to buy into woo.

I was just thinking about this. It seems the more mysterious actual science gets, the more woo it generates.

Personally, I think the biggest failing in society here is the education system.

Well, you three clearly agree with each other and I'll throw my hat into that ring as well. Fixing it is the problem.

Here's a thought:

Are we trying to teach our kids too much at school, which leaves gaps for those pseudo-scientific bits to sneak in?

Perhaps things like science have become so complicated that we should instead be teaching scientific thinking rather than doing stuff with copper sulphate? I know that my kids get taught some shocking rubbish at school and wonder how parents who don't know how wrong it is get on. Do we blame the school, or the stoopid frigging parents who don't teach their kids why it's necessary to think and think in a logical and objective manner?

[Fnord]

Are we trying to teach our kids too much at school, which leaves gaps for those pseudo-scientific bits to sneak in?

IMHO: No. It isn't so much that the kids are being taught too much, as it is that they are being given too much rote-work. Once a kid knows page 37, teach him page 38. Don't keep him on page 37 until the slower students catch up. A smart kid will easily get bored, and go looking for something to occupy his mind. It might be a violent video game, pornography, or the latest woo-theory of reality. The first two are deemed "unsuitable" while the third is not controlled at all.


Perhaps things like science have become so complicated that we should instead be teaching scientific thinking rather than doing stuff with copper sulphate?

IMHO: Both should be taught -- the critical thinking (CT) AND it's applications.

I know that my kids get taught some shocking rubbish at school and wonder how parents who don't know how wrong it is get on. Do we blame the school, or the stoopid frigging parents who don't teach their kids why it's necessary to think and think in a logical and objective manner?

IMHO: Blame the politically-motivated Administrators who each try to push their favourite teaching methods and subject matter in order to promote their own careers, regardless of whether or not those methods work and the subjects are relevant. CT, if taught early, will have a lasting impression on a person. Unfortunately, parents who try to teach their children CT will often receive reports from their kids' teachers that the children are being disruptive. I received "requests" from my kids' teachers to stop trying to teach my 7-year old CT, because he was asking too many questions (and taking time away from the "slower" students), and even questioning the teachers' authority (ye olde "Bad Attitude" report). Today he 25 and double-majoring in Mathematics and Philosophy at CSU.

I expect that if parents start teaching CT to their kids at home, they will run into much the same resistance that teachers usually reserve for parents who teach their kids Creationism. With all their pleas for parents to take a more active role in their children's education, teachers seem to want the parents to teach nothing that is not part of the "official" curriculum, whether it is CT or KJV.

[Ryan O'Dine]

Well, you three clearly agree with each other and I'll throw my hat into that ring as well. Fixing it is the problem.

Here's a thought:

Are we trying to teach our kids too much at school, which leaves gaps for those pseudo-scientific bits to sneak in?

Perhaps things like science have become so complicated that we should instead be teaching scientific thinking rather than doing stuff with copper sulphate? I know that my kids get taught some shocking rubbish at school and wonder how parents who don't know how wrong it is get on. Do we blame the school, or the stoopid frigging parents who don't teach their kids why it's necessary to think and think in a logical and objective manner?

Well, Fnord pretty much beat me to it, but I'll post what I was about to anyway, with apologies...



From my perspective in the U.S., part of the problem is that education has become a political instead of a scientific issue. For instance, the difference between teaching the "controversy" rather than the fact of evolution comes down to school board elections, as Dover demonstrated. Similarly, on the national stage, the requirement of teaching to the test in the framework of "No Child Left Behind" makes it ever harder to establish stand-alone critical thinking classes.

What really confuses me is the state of educating the educators. Your example of "doing stuff with copper sulfate" is a case in point. Teachers should be promoting critical thinking at every turn, yet the main purpose of chemistry lab in H.S. seemed to be about going through the rote procedure and coming up with the final product. Actual chemistry is about thinking. To a large extent, anyway.

Why education isn't more scientific in general, I don't know. But it seems to me it's at the root of much of the woo phenomena we see today. And whereas I don't think we can expect the majority of the population to cultivate critical thinking in their kids without having been educated in it themselves, I do think parents have the responsibility to demand that students be educated by the scientifically best means possible, rather than the most politically expedient.

Unfortunately, I don't see the current political situation in the U.S. lending itself to that outcome. Perhaps the economical realities of an uneducated population will eventually remedy that. Not the most pleasant thing to hope for, though.

[CFLarsen]

Little-known fact, but the most popular mediums of the day around 100 years ago provided more services than just talking to the dead.

Basically, men could go to a seance and in the dark the medium would guide the guy's hand up her skirt to cop a feel.

I'm not sure it goes on now but it proves that both mediums and horniness existed then...

Oh, it still goes on. And in your neck of the wood, too.

I got stories to tell at TAM6...



There is one thing that some seem to have forgotten. While woo has always been around, there is something new added to the pot.

Us.

[Fnord]

Oh, it still goes on. And in your neck of the wood, too. I got stories to tell at TAM6... There is one thing that some seem to have forgotten. While woo has always been around, there is something new added to the pot. Us.

Congrats on your 36,600th post!

:bcake:

[CFLarsen]

Congrats on your 36,600th post!

:bcake:

Oh.

Who's counting? :D

[Ryan O'Dine]

Sorry, posted to wrong thread.

[kmortis]

Oh, it still goes on. And in your neck of the wood, too.

I got stories to tell at TAM6...



There is one thing that some seem to have forgotten. While woo has always been around, there is something new added to the pot.

Us.

So, are we the asofetidia, or the lentils?

[AmyWilson]

I'm beginning to think that the war on stupid is slowly being lost.

Experiences aren't stupid.

Stuff happens to people that is unknown.

Deal with it.

[Hokulele]

Experiences aren't stupid.


Mine aren't, can say as much about yours.

Stuff happens to people that is unknown.


The stuff is unknown? The people are unknown? :confused:

Deal with it.


I am dealing with it. I am doing my level best to expose the fraud, the nonsense, and the ignorance that fuels the industries TA is discussing. :)

[danielk]

Whoa, it seems I finally finished wading through this thread. All I have to say is that I'm in complete agreement with Cuddles. There's a simple reason why the woo faction will lose in the end:

They cannot deliver.

That's it, really. A while ago a topic on the Skeptics' Guide to the Universe was woo in China. On that show, they interviewed an Australian (if I remember correctly) who at that time lived and worked in China. Among the many interesting things he had to say was his observation that it were the poor masses who consulted traditional Chinese healers. Apparently, those who can afford it turn to Western medicine instead! Now why is that?

Simple -- because it actually works. When push comes to shove, the vast majority of people will turn to science simply because they depend on it in their daily lives. Real Luddites are a vanishingly small minority. Modern medicine, air conditioning, cars, computers, the internet, you name it. In the end, the anti-science mentality is all just show. A fad. No amount of woo is ever going to replace a lost limb (http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/). But with science, we will eventually be able to do just that. I think the woo woos know it in their hearts, too.

Of course not all is well. Shortterm to midterm, human progress could slow down significantly. We could end up with a two-class population of the educated few and the uneducated many, and it wouldn't even require force to create such a system. But that's where us skeptics come in. :) I think an occasional nudge here and there to prevent the irrationality from going overboard would make the whole process a lot less painful.

Let's adapt.

[schlitt]

Well, you three clearly agree with each other and I'll throw my hat into that ring as well. Fixing it is the problem.

Here's a thought:

Are we trying to teach our kids too much at school, which leaves gaps for those pseudo-scientific bits to sneak in?

Perhaps things like science have become so complicated that we should instead be teaching scientific thinking rather than doing stuff with copper sulphate? I know that my kids get taught some shocking rubbish at school and wonder how parents who don't know how wrong it is get on. Do we blame the school, or the stoopid frigging parents who don't teach their kids why it's necessary to think and think in a logical and objective manner?


I understand you logic i think.
In a weird way a good analogy for this is the old "give a man a fish, and it will feed him for a night, but teach a man to fish, and it will feed him for a lifetime."
It is the principles which build a foundation of capacity to understand which should be being taught, not just the outcomes of a select few experiments.

[The Atheist]

That's it, really. A while ago a topic on the Skeptics' Guide to the Universe was woo in China. On that show, they interviewed an Australian (if I remember correctly) who at that time lived and worked in China. Among the many interesting things he had to say was his observation that it were the poor masses who consulted traditional Chinese healers. Apparently, those who can afford it turn to Western medicine instead! Now why is that?

You'd like to think it's because Chinese people have realised that actual medicine works.

On the other hand, how would you then account for the vast numbers of people who can afford actual doctors, have been taught about science at schools, yet choose to use homeopathic remedies, acupuncture, reiki and prayer instead of actual medicine?

Simple -- because it actually works. When push comes to shove, the vast majority of people will turn to science simply because they depend on it in their daily lives.

The vast majority?

You can say that with a straight face when the religious still outnumber the non-religious by 4:1? And when a very large number of people - seemingly around 70%, believe in one of the ten paranormal options given to them in the survey quoted above? Science has been working for a considerable number of years but belief in stoopid is still high.

Strange kind of "vast majority".

Real Luddites are a vanishingly small minority.

Lucky we weren't discussing Luddites, real or imaginary.

Modern medicine, air conditioning, cars, computers, the internet, you name it. In the end, the anti-science mentality is all just show. A fad.

You should be right, but as has been shown time and time again, give something enough publicity and you'll scam more admirers, and the other side is filling its coffers at the rate of an unspecified amount of dollars over $US1B worldwide annually. What do you think the sceptical income is?

Remember the old saying? Money talks and BS walks? Well, I wonder how that dynamic works out when the BS has the money.

To be frank, sitting back and letting the results of science speak for thinking just isn't working - that's one of the problems I see at the moment and the idea is best encapsulated by Big Les and others above who point out that pseudo-science has a great number of admirers because people can't tell the difference without thinking about it. That course of inaction doesn't seem like a good plan.

No amount of woo is ever going to replace a lost limb (http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/). But with science, we will eventually be able to do just that. I think the woo woos know it in their hearts, too.

But where are their wallets? Which do you think is a bigger number - the amount donated annually to medical research, or paid to astrologers?

Of course not all is well. Shortterm to midterm, human progress could slow down significantly. We could end up with a two-class population of the educated few and the uneducated many, and it wouldn't even require force to create such a system. But that's where us skeptics come in. :) I think an occasional nudge here and there to prevent the irrationality from going overboard would make the whole process a lot less painful.

Let's adapt.

Here, we're on very much the same wavelength. The trouble is that the ill-educated tend to have a lot more children than the educated.

[danielk]

On the other hand, how would you then account for the vast numbers of people who can afford actual doctors, have been taught about science at schools, yet choose to use homeopathic remedies, acupuncture, reiki and prayer instead of actual medicine?

I didn't deny any of this. I specifically said "when push comes to shove".

Strange kind of "vast majority".

Look, my point was about the big picture. It doesn't really matter whether 70% or maybe even 90% of the population have woo beliefs today. The vast majority of them isn't going to rely on a faith healer to bring back a lost limb. And that was precisely my point.

To be frank, sitting back and letting the results of science speak for thinking just isn't working - that's one of the problems I see at the moment and the idea is best encapsulated by Big Les and others above who point out that pseudo-science has a great number of admirers because people can't tell the difference without thinking about it. That course of inaction doesn't seem like a good plan.

I'm not advocating inaction; all I'm saying is that even if we wouldn't act at all real science would still win in the long term, because unlike all the woowoo out there real science can actually deliver! Of course we might manage to blow up Earth before it comes to that, but I don't think that'll happen so easily.

But where are their wallets? Which do you think is a bigger number - the amount donated annually to medical research, or paid to astrologers?

A lamentable state of affairs, of course, but it doesn't change the fact that astrologers are never going to deliver like real science does. As I said, setbacks, even drastic ones, are quite possible. But in the end real science will prevail for the simple reason that it actually works.

Here, we're on very much the same wavelength. The trouble is that the ill-educated tend to have a lot more children than the educated.

And that is, unfortunately, at least in part the fault of the educated. Well, at least that's true for Europe, the numbers from the US appear to be more favorable.

[rjh01]

If you measure woo by what % of people get married in a religious way as opposed to civil marriages then woo is losing in Australia. An increasing majority of people get married by civil celebrants cf ministers of religion (61.3% cf 40.5% (Total 101.8%)). Ref ABS (http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3306.0.55.001?OpenDocument). (The relevant graph, Category of celebrant, 1986-2006,Australia, is about 80% of the way down).

To our USA skeptics, go green with envy with these figures.

[Slimething]

If you measure woo by what % of people get married in a religious way as opposed to civil marriages then woo is losing in Australia. An increasing majority of people get married by civil celebrants cf ministers of religion (61.3% cf 40.5% (Total 101.8%)). Ref ABS (http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3306.0.55.001?OpenDocument). (The relevant graph, Category of celebrant, 1986-2006,Australia, is about 80% of the way down).

To our USA skeptics, go green with envy with these figures.

You forgot the :p after your last sentence. :D

That would be a good metric but I wonder if there is some economic contribution to that statistic. I don't know for a fact but I suspect it's cheaper to use civic officials to bind you to a long life of woe and strife than using religious officials.

[rjh01]

The ceremony itself would not be expensive. I doubt that cost would be a factor in a change to using civil ceremonies.

[Orphia Nay]

I haven't read this whole thread, but I thought it was a provocative OP.

It inspired me to start a topic at a woo forum I go to several days ago:
http://www.freedomcrowsnest.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=63851

It seems a lot of woos barter for their psychic readings. And some even have doubts as to the abilities of psychics.

I wouldn't put nails in skepticism's coffin yet. ;) :)