Pete's Wicked Blog

Book Recommendation: Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood & the Prison of Belief

2013-05-08T19:00:00.000-04:00

If you want to see how to create a new religion in less than one generation, pick up this book:

Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood & the Prison of Belief by Lawrence Wright

I live pretty close to Clearwater, passed by the Scientology base there many times, I have seen their tables with e-meters in the local malls, and years and years ago, when I was working around Times Square in NYC, I peeked into their center there as well. For many years, I assumed it was a harmless cult for people in search of some spiritual need, the ultimate meaning and purpose of life, something new and exciting in their lives. After all, isn't that what all religions give us? However, as I was learning more about this particular cult, I realized that its dangers exceed any other religions we are familiar with, due to its secrecy, extend of its influence on people, and pure lunacy of its beliefs.

Now, after reading Wright's excellent book, I have even more contempt for this crazy cult and its followers, especially those who seem to have "brains" to think for themselves, and just refuse to do so, because they are too invested (either psychologically, or financially) in something that is so blatantly crazy.

The book has basically three logical parts:

L. Ron Hubbard's early years - his war "heroism", his science-fiction writing career and the beginnings of his methods of mind control.
Hubbard's "public" years - the crazy voyages across the seas, the beginnings of the religion of Scientology, dealings with foreign governments, the first battles with the IRS, and finally his "disappearance" (real and metaphysical).
Scientology under David Miscavige - the victory over the IRS, and the expansion of the church, especially into Hollywood.

While the book starts off a bit slowly, and the elaborate details of Hubbard's early life seem a bit boring, they do paint an excellent picture of the future cult/religion, and it's apparent success. Hubbard's personality and his imagination were instrumental in establishing foundations of Scientology. The history of the church under Miscavige is a different story altogether, which reads more like a good suspense, or crime novel, rather than an account of things that really happen.

"Going Clear" is not only an excellent primer on Scientology itself, but it is also a great study on how a new religion can be created in a very short time, given a charismatic leader, a few lies here and there, and a group of people with enough problems in their own lives, that they would follow anyone and anything like sheep. Scientology, along with the Mormon church, is the second "major" religion created in the last 200 years, with enough historical records to study this strange human behavior and better understand human needs for community and belonging, and how those traits can be used and abused by others.

I guess, the only complaint I have about Lawrence Wright's book, is its very ending, in which the author actually seems to be giving Scientology a free pass, by comparing it to older, more mature religions and implying that since most of us need some kind of religious affiliation in our lives, Scientology could, and should become just one of many religions, that guide us through our short and miserable existence.

Breakthrough In Physics: Florida Figures Out Time Travel!!!

2013-04-24T17:00:00.000-04:00

Yes, that Nobel Prize winning feast has been accomplished in Marion County, in Central Florida, where they are bringing back beatings in elementary schools.

Gradebook reports:

Marion schools bring back paddling punishment

As the Ocala Star Banner reports as well:

The board ruled that paddling can be used only if a parent gives a standing written OK once a year. In addition, the principal must obtain verbal permission at the time the punishment is handed down. Under the policy, corporal punishment can only be used at the elementary school level. It can only be used on a child once a semester.

I would giggle reading it, if it weren't a bit scary. It also made me double-check the calendar to make sure we are in 2013. So, I guess, they did figure out how to go back in time after all. Not very shocking, since that area of Central Florida is very "conservative", if you know what I mean.

The Worst of Humanity

2013-04-19T19:00:00.000-04:00

The worst of humanity comes out way too often. Columbine, 9/11, Aurora, Beslan, Sandy Hook, and now the Boston Marathon are just a few that come to mind when we think about evil acts that one human being can do to others. Some of those acts are unstoppable, as they come from the darkest corners of human psyche, some of them can be attributed to just plain craziness and mental instability and, as such, are even harder to predict and "control".

But should we give up and do nothing to protect ourselves, and our loved ones, just because it is almost impossible to predict the next act of terror, or the next deranged person who commits it? I don't think so. While removing all the danger is probably impossible, it is viable to limit access to the means of destruction and minimize the amount of damage that can be inflicted in our society, when a person, a group, or an entire country goes crazy (whether it is "real" crazy, or crazy for some ideology, is beyond this discussion). This is exactly why most of us agree that proliferation of nuclear weapons is not the best idea. We do not want a crazy regime (like Iran, for example) to loose their cool one day, and start nuking everyone around, even if it meant their own ultimate destruction. Totalitarian governments go nuts, and so do people, who can turn violent one day, without much warning.

In a western society that (most of the time) calls itself civilized and democratic, there is no need for individuals to posses means of killing others in large numbers. As individuals, we do not face threats greater that a single, evil or crazy person, and our means of defending ourselves should be adequate to such dangers. We also delegated personal protection duties to the society (in various forms: local, state, country, etc), as part of our contributions to this democratic and civilized society.

When individuals go crazy (again, call it crime, or madness, it is not relevant to this discussion, as it simply means taking that individual outside of bounds of our society), they should not have access to weapons that can kill scores of other people. Especially, weapons that are designed to do only one thing: kill many people quickly and efficiently. Evil people can always find a way, that's true, but we can make it as difficult as possible for those who just simply "flip". One way to make it difficult is to outlaw certain weapons (assault guns), make others difficult to obtain (especially for those who are already on the path to "crazy"), and control them all to some extent, so we have an idea where they are and how they are used.

Not doing that, and claiming that we are rational, intelligent beings, is immoral and just plain stupid. If we can take away the means of destruction and mayhem from evil and deranged individuals, but we refuse to do it for self-serving (money) reasons, we are showing the worst of humanity in all of us. The recent US debate about gun control (ban on assault weapons and large capacity magazines, and the extension of background checks to all gun sales) made it more visible than anything else could. One after another, those common sense measures were scraped under pressure from powerful, money welding interests, without even voting for them, with the last one (overwhelmingly supported by the public) being defeated in a vote two days ago, by the following senators:

Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Enzi (R-WY)
Fischer (R-NE)
Flake (R-AZ)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (R-WI)
Lee (R-UT)
McConnell (R-KY)
Moran (R-KS)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reid (D-NV) (voted "No" for procedural reasons)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)

Those senators went for the money, not the safety of us and our children. They decided that selling our peace of mind for their shady employment in Washington, is actually worth it. They showed us the worst of humanity, not because they did something illegal, but because they "rationally" and consciously chose to ignore morality and good of others. I don't expect much from my own Florida senator Marco Rubio, as he's been showing himself as nothing more than half-wit (the World is 6000 years old?) cynic (guns vs. immigration?), with no moral compass (please, don't bring his religion into it... it makes it even worse), but I was hoping that there are smarter and more decent people in the Senate. I was wrong...

As former representative Gabby Giffords said in her New York Times piece:

Mark my words: if we cannot make our communities safer with the Congress we have now, we will use every means available to make sure we have a different Congress, one that puts communities’ interests ahead of the gun lobby’s. To do nothing while others are in danger is not the American way.

Great idea! Let's vote them out next time we have a chance. They don't deserve to be any one's representatives.

Relative Morality

2013-04-17T03:00:00.000-04:00

My interest in moral dilemmas was "tickled" recently, when I had heard a religious person stating that "stealing a dollar from a rich person is not as bad as stealing it from a poor one". Now, my reaction to such a statement in any other setting would be to ask a few follow up questions, but in this case, what struck me the most is the fact that the statement came from someone, who would be the first one accusing others (especially non-religious) of moral relativism.

In my mind, if we do not have any additional information, the question is simple to answer: there is no difference, when you are stealing from poor, or rich. A theft is a theft and, since your actions cause harm (physical, or mental) to others, they are morally wrong. We can, of course, expand this problem, by introducing variables, like your own wealth, or your current situation (Les Miserables comes to mind), and such differences can considerably change the outcome.

In any case, the answer might never be as obvious as one would expect, but my surprise was not so much with the problem itself, but with the person who stated it and "solved" it using some pretty relativistic criteria.

To follow up, here are some interesting readings on various moral philosophies and dilemmas:
1. Moral Dilemma: Would You Kill One Person to Save Five?
2. Stealing from the Rich
3. On ethics, part I: Moral philosophy’s third way
4. On ethics, part II: Consequentialism
5. On ethics, part III: Deontology
6. Of trolleys and morality

MLMs, Pyramids and A Hope of A Quick Buck

2013-04-01T18:00:00.000-04:00

We have all been there... bombarded by hundreds of ads and commercials on how to make money fast, and, best of all, do it in the comfort of your own home. The salespeople make you feel guilty and stupid by showing off all the "successful" people who jumped in and made millions. MLMs, Multi Level Marketing schemes, or how I prefer calling them, scams, because after all those years, I still don't know anyone who actually made any significant amount of money out of them. That does not include those who set those scams up and profit from the people who fall prey to their marketing gimmicks and smooth talk.

I have seen Amway, coming and going in the early 1990s, then there was Herbalife, and numerous others, including some fancy "video e-mail/conferencing" in the mid 2000s, which seems to be making a comeback on Facebook in the recent months. For all of them, the idea is the same, but the math (and it's rather simple math) does not work, as you run out of potential customers very quickly.

However, there is always someone who's inventing new tricks to make money using old ideas.
As a good precaution, it's worth diving into this extensive article, published by The Verge, which explores the never ending variations on the good, old pyramid scheme:

Income At Home, Herbalife, and the $8 billion pyramid

It's also worth looking at some statistics on what is actually an average success rate for an MLM-type business:

The Likelihood of MLM Success

and, see the idea from a skeptical point of view:

MLM Watch

Getting Hot and Uncomfortable

2013-03-14T17:00:00.000-04:00

So, this is nothing new in my opinion, but the recent study on the quick and accelerating rise in global temperature is simply stunning:

Early Holocene (10,000 to 5000 years ago) warmth is followed by ~0.7°C cooling through the middle to late Holocene (<5000 years ago), culminating in the coolest temperatures of the Holocene during the Little Ice Age, about 200 years ago. This cooling is largely associated with ~2°C change in the North Atlantic. Current global temperatures of the past decade have not yet exceeded peak interglacial values but are warmer than during ~75% of the Holocene temperature history.

It's very bad news, especially for our kids, who will suffer most of the consequences of this global temperature rise, in the next hundred, or so, years. Check out this projection, from ThinkProgress:

Looks pretty ominous, especially because more and more scientists agree that the past projections were vastly underestimating the rate of temperature change, and now, it looks like we are in for a much bumpier ride.

Now, if you think all this has no immediate effects on your life, think again. If you complain of allergies, and most of the people I know do, you should thank our insatiable thirst for fossil fuels. A recent study (here is the CNN article about it, and the study itself - paid access required) showed that the amount of allergens in the air between the years 2000 and 2040 will increase dramatically. This will make us and our children feel more and more miserable.

So, the next time you'll vote for someone who's not willing to do something about global warming, or just flatly denies it, think back to the last allergy season, and realize that in less than 30 years it could get three times as bad if we don't come up with some solutions.

More on Dr. Oz

2013-01-30T18:00:00.000-05:00

Wow... Dr. Oz is really hitting the waves this week.

After a great article in The New Yorker, exposing Dr. Oz's bland disregard for facts and reality, as well as the real motivation behind his media persona (ratings, money and fame), he dives ever deeper into the abyss of irrationality and pure stupidity. Dr. Oz embraces and endorses homeopathy!

Homeopathy irks me more than other alternative medicine woo, simply because a few years ago I myself watched helplessly, while a homeopathic "doctor" milked hundreds of dollars from someone with no good outlook for improvement and with very limited resources. The money went into useless "interviews" that had nothing to do with the condition of the patient, and into even more useless, "custom-designed drugs" that did nothing (it was pure water after all).

I'm glad that there is finally some bad publicity Dr. Oz gets from the media. Maybe exposing his program for what it really is, an elaborate fraud, not to help people, but to stuff his pockets, will turn away some of his viewers. I'm not against stuffing your own pockets at expense of others, especially when they are willing participants (yes, I go to the movies, and sometimes I even pay to see a really bad movie). What's dangerous about Dr. Oz is the fact that he has positioned himself in a health care "edutainment" sector of the media, and by promoting dubious therapies and just pure intellectual junk, he endangers people who believe him.

In the meantime, there are usual places on the Web that do a great job analyzing Dr. Oz's homeopathic claims:

Orac: Dr. Oz’s journey to the Dark Side is now more than complete: It’s Oz and homeopathy versus science-based medicine

and

Science-Based Medicine Blog: Are You Ready For the Oz Manifesto

Dr. Oz - The Smooth Operator

2013-01-29T17:00:00.000-05:00

I am no fan of Dr. Oz. I've been watching (metaphorically speaking, as I can hardly take watching him on TV) his raise to stardom from Oprah's "America's Doctor" wonder boy, to his own TV show, and the beginning of his own Day TV media empire, and I see a scary, scary future ahead of us.

At first, I thought that Dr. Oz basically sells a very typical and widely known advice of good diet, exercise and less daily stress, heavily coated in nonsense of alternative and herbal medicine and, increasingly, in funky spiritualism and pure crap (examples abound). I do realize that just saying "eat well and exercise daily" is not going to sell well on TV, since most of us just want quick fixes for our problems. However, Dr. Oz's endorsement of unproven herbs, vitamins and modalities that belong in Middle Ages, not in the 21st Century, is more dangerous than useful. Dr. Oz is also a proponent of Reiki, which is basically a type of therapeutic touch, which was completely discredited by a 9 year old Emily Rosa years ago. So, there you have it... would you trust that doctor with your health?

I'm glad the mainstream media has finally started noticing. I stumbled on this great article from the New Yorker: "The Operator", written by Michael Specter (the author of “Denialism: How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet, and Threatens Our Lives”, which I also highly recommend).
There is a number of really good points in the article, but this one really shows what Dr. Oz is about:

Oz sighed. “Medicine is a very religious experience,” he said. “I have my religion and you have yours. It becomes difficult for us to agree on what we think works, since so much of it is in the eye of the beholder. Data is rarely clean.” All facts come with a point of view. But his spin on it—that one can simply choose those which make sense, rather than data that happen to be true—was chilling. “You find the arguments that support your data,” he said, “and it’s my fact versus your fact.”

His facts are driven by his popularity and how well his show is doing, not by objectiveness. That's why I would never trust neither them, nor him.

New Year Resolutions

2013-01-16T17:00:00.000-05:00

Yes, the New Year resolutions never really get done, or at least most of them don't, but it's still good to place some goals in front of ourselves to strive for better, more peaceful and reasonable world.

So, in the World that did not end in 2012, what's out there for me in this coming New Year 2013:
- keep the ridicule and doubt high, in the spirit of Thomas Jefferson:

“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them"

and

"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."

- follow one of the best advices I have ever heard, the one from Christopher Hitchens:

“What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.”

- finally, as Hippocrates said:

"There are, in fact, two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance"

All of the above can help us in making this "unreality"-based world, a better, more humane place to live.

Final Post: Good Bye!

2012-12-20T23:00:00.000-05:00

So, it's less than an hour before the December 21, 2012 is upon us, and, as we all know, our World will end soon. By the way, I assume the people in other time zones are toast already!

Therefore, I figured, some goodbyes are in order, to all who have ever ventured here...

I don't think we have any way out of this one, since the Mayan calendar (or at least its long count, known as b'ak'tun) ends tomorrow, and we all know how good the Mayans were with predicting the future. And if the Mayans don't get us (rightly so, for all the wrongs we've done to their great civilization), our own calendar ends just a few days later, so I do not think we'll see the light of day on January 1st, 2013.

Seriously though, click over to the Bad Astronomy blog and see why the World will probably NOT end tomorrow: Worried About the End of the World on Dec. 21? Don’t Be.

To those who still believe in this nonsense: please, send my your money, before you close down your bunker hatches!

Stupid Is As Stupid Does (Or Says)...

2012-12-20T18:00:00.000-05:00

One of our local Florida geniuses, Dennis Baxley, a State Representative from Ocala, said last Monday that we should give guns to our teachers to protect the kids in schools. Not a surprise, since he's a lifelong National Rifle Association member and a co-sponsor of the bill that became our "stand your ground" law.
My take on the NRA is pretty simple: they are here to protect moneymaking interests, at any cost, even when it means killing innocent children. They have no excuses anymore. They belong in the Dark Ages, not in the 21st Century civilization.

So, even after the unspeakable tragedy like the one in Connecticut last week, when it is pretty evident that making firearms widely available to anyone is a terrible idea, we still have people who want to turn our streets, stores, work and public places, and now even schools, into a wild West of the 1800s.
One can only hope that the cooler, more intelligent and rational heads in politics will finally wake up, get a spine and stand up to those special interests, that's been driving this pro-gun insanity recently.
You want to have a gun in your home, fine, even though it is a disaster waiting to happen (see here, here, and here) but no one in today's world needs a semi-automatic rifle, or a military grade weapons for private use. Period.

So, it's time to ban the assault weapons altogether, because, as data shows, it is very effective: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings. It's not only necessary to ban them, but it would be best to get the ones currently in private hands off the market by buying them back. In addition, stricter gun control laws should be imposed as soon as possible. Fighting guns in hands of crazy people with more and more guns, will only make the matters worse.

A great place to start is at demandaplan.org and mayorsagainstillegalguns.org

Finally, Rationally Speaking blog has a great (as always) entry on the topic, with some really, really good arguments. Massimo Pigliucci's final conclusion can't be expressed any better:

Another way to put this is in terms of virtue ethics. We need to think about what an openly armed society would do to our character as individual members of that society. I personally doubt even the quality of character of someone who thinks that hunting is a sport worth engaging in, but I am okay with that and other limited use of lethal weapons (“sport” is another questionable application, and even self-defense is reasonable only under fairly unusual circumstances and as a last resort). But I am pretty sure that there is something fundamentally flawed in the character of a person who thinks it’s a good idea to arm teachers and students in school, to allow concealed guns in churches and bars, or to provide citizens with the sort of weapons that other countries reserve only for their military. The most profound damage the NRA and its supporters are doing to this country is not just in allowing the sort of carnage of young children we have seen this past week, as horrible as it is. It lies in a deep corruption of our very character as human beings and in the threat to the very idea of a free and open society.

It is high time for some real action!

Vaccinate or Not? Different Year Same Questions.

2012-12-19T17:00:00.000-05:00

Very short post, as I seriously lack any time to blog...

I found a great article on Slate about the "controversy" that we all face every year: a flu vaccine.
I personally don't think it is a controversy, as data is pretty much in, and, with some necessary uncertainty found in any scientific problem, we know that generally flu shots are good for the general population as a whole.

In the end, it’s easy to ascribe sinister motives to flu control efforts, especially if you’re unwilling to tolerate uncertainty. With a slight shift in perspective, however, one can see our evolving flu control programs as a triumph of public health.

The article is a good read and it presents this complex issue rather clearly:

The Flu Vaccine Controversy

The Apocalypse Is Upon Us

2012-11-30T17:00:00.000-05:00

So... December 2012 is almost here and we have measly 21 days to go. As we all know on December 21, 2012, we are all toast!

You don't believe it? Have you seen the movie 2012? It was all there, with detailed explanations for every little disaster that will occur in just a few weeks. If you don't trust Hollywood, you surely would trust the SCIENTISTS!!! I mean, the books were all well researched and full of scientific language. And if that was not enough, what about all your friends, who told you about the terrible things that were to happen in 2012, about building bunkers, and buying survival gear? They surely must have been right?

We are only three weeks away from the final date, but I'm still making plans for the weekend of the 22nd. Can the Earth be destroyed on December 21st? Sure, there are plenty of ways for this to happen, as nicely described in Philip Plait's book "Death from the Skies!", but I would not bet on them, as the odds are pretty slim (on the other hand, say that to the dinosaurs). If we want to see the real Apocalypse, we need to wait 4 - 5 billion years for the Sun to turn this planet into a burnt out cinder (hey, NASA, time to get to work, and find us a new place to live).

The reality is that, as always (think May 21, 2011 and the "Apocalypse of Mr. Camping"), all the fear mongering is purely done for profit: books, movies, lectures, and don't forget big donations for churches and cults that spread the crazy news. As long as enough people fall for it, because they think people a few thousand years ago knew more about our universe than we do now, it'll continue, and I'm sure on December 22nd, 2012, we'll hear of a new date that will bring fire and brimstone to our little, insignificant planet.

In the meantime, I think we should start worrying about our own human-made apocalypses, like the global warming. Hurricane Sandy gave us a preview of what's to come, and given the latest news ("Rapidly melting polar ice raises concerns of rising seas", "Climate Change Threatens Long-Term Sustainability of Great Plains", and "This Drought's No Dry Run: Lessons Of The Dust Bowl"), and the current simulations ("What Could Disappear"), our children and grandchildren are not looking at a bright future.

Why Do We Pick Idiots To Run Our Country?

2012-11-19T17:00:00.000-05:00

Yes, I agree it's rather harsh to say that, but after Florida's very own senator, Marco Rubio said this:

I'm not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I'm not a scientist. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.

in an interview for GQ, as an answer to the question about the age of the Earth, the only two choices are:

1. Crackpot.
2. Liar, who knows the real and scientific answer, but lies to all of us for political reasons.

I admit, #2 is very probable for any politician, but I also want to believe that nobody would consciously and purposefully, expose himself or herself to this kind of ridicule, so I'll stick with my initial assessment.

Let me point to an excellent Bad Astronomy blog, for an expanded explanation of why we all should start picking our government representatives a bit more carefully: they are elected to make decisions that are very complex, require critical thinking skills and can affect all of us (and sometimes even the world). Of course, this is not new and not even rare, especially from the politicians on the right (a.k.a. the Republicans). The scary part is that Rubio is considered a "rising star" in the Republican Party and we might have to endure his misguided views more than we care for.

Finally, the 2012 Election is Over

2012-11-07T17:00:00.000-05:00

I'm very glad the crazy political season in America is over. This time around it was especially annoying, with all the adds and calls and e-mails, and just plain insanity of pushing one candidate over the other (and that's not to mention all the local political ads that were equally bad, if not worse).

I'm also very happy with local Florida voters overwhelmingly rejecting a few constitutional amendments, including misguided Amendment 8, which, despite its name (Florida Religious Freedom Amendment), was not about religious freedom, but rather about tax dollars funding religious activities. Amendment 6 also went down in flames and for good reasons, as it was injecting politics into personal health care issues.

Generally speaking, while it's good to see reason and critical thinking winning (I'm glad our president will not be making important decisions peering into a magic hat), it's still pretty scary to see that "unreason" can be sold to almost 50% of the nation, hook, line and sinker.

I also hope that, after highly political campaign, when some issues could not be mentioned, out of fear of loosing precious votes, we might finally deal with problems like global warming, especially since the Hurricane Sandy clearly showed us what direction our planet is heading.

Now, it's time to move on to more important things, like everyday skepticism and fighting lack of critical thinking in our lives.

Election Season

2012-10-26T18:00:00.000-04:00

There is not much on the US news recently outside of the Elections. Seemingly the rest of the world just stopped in a great anticipation, to see who will be the next, great "leader of the Free World".

Thanks to our great Postal Service, I already voted by mail, refusing to wait in those enormous lines, like four years ago. The choice was pretty clear this year, despite the fact that, as it happened too often in the past, it was more the vote of opposition, than approval.

In my book, the most important factor in making such decisions is The Golden Rule in a form of "live and let live" (or sometimes, unfortunately, "live and let die"). For me, it mostly means living your a good life, helping others as much as possible, and letting them do the same, without imposing any of my own views and beliefs on them. As long as everyone plays nice and does not try to impose their ways on others, we should be fine.

Rationality matters as well. Since the President of the Unites States has rather imposing powers, I would not want anyone in the office, who drinks Kool Aid too often. We all have our own "blind spots" of rationality, some coming from our culture, upbringing, people we meet in our lives, and some coming from our hard-wired brains that are very difficult to override.However, believing in divining rods, homeopathy, prophets, translating golden plates by looking into a hat with magic stones, and similar things, is a NO-NO in my humble opinion. The same goes for believing in some alternative history of America and other places, that has absolutely no basis in science and reality. When somebody has power to make decisions that influence millions of people, I want at least to hope that reality and reason are the main decision points.

Hopefully, this crazy season of unreason will be over soon, and we can all go back to fighting simple, everyday stupidity in our lives.

Ride to Defeat ALS - HELP NEEDED!!!

2012-10-26T11:07:00.000-04:00

As I mentioned before on this blog, I'm a part of a team to raise money for the ALS Association. We are doing it for a friend and co-worked who is affected by this horrible disease.
Our team is signed up for a 25 mile bicycle ride, which will take place on November 3rd in the Tampa Bay area.

We still need sponsors!!! I have been amazed to see that our team was able to raise over $6,500 in a few, short weeks. But we still need more. The money goes to the ALS Association, which helps not only the people affected by the Lou Gehrig's Disease as they go through this debilitating disease, but also provides invaluable resources and information to their families, to help ease their struggle as well.

Click on this link: http://web.alsa.org/goto/ptrzeciak and sponsor our team!!!

Thank you all for your help!!!

Quote of the Day - From a "Science-Loving" Politician

2012-10-09T19:00:00.000-04:00

So, where are we heading as a country, if a person, who sits on the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology says something like that:

“All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and Big Bang theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of hell, and it’s lies to try to keep me and all the folks who are taught that from understanding that they need a savior.”

Impressive and scary, given the fact that this guy, U.S. Rep. Paul C. Broun (R., Ga.), is partially responsible for making decisions that drive science and engineering in this country and potentially affect our future.

But... Mr. Broun is not alone on the committee. Salon.com has some additional "science-literate" politicians:

Least scientific members of the House Science Committee

It's also good to see the Science Guy, Bill Nye weighting in:

Bill Nye: Paul Broun 'Unqualified To Make Decisions About Science, Space, And Technology'

I guess, your brains are not really important in politics, but it should not come as a surprise after all. You can go pretty far in this country, believing that Jews came to America in 600 B.C. and left their story written on the golden plates that can be translated by looking into a magic hat with some stones in it... Priceless!

Ride to Defeat ALS - Support Needed!!!

2012-10-04T14:05:00.000-04:00

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (also here), or ALS for short, is a terrible, neurological disease, affecting people in their prime, usually in early to mid 50s. It debilitates a person rapidly, causing difficulty in speaking, walking and breathing, with a progressive muscle atrophy. The disease affects approximately 5 out of every 100,000 people.
There are some very well known people who suffered from ALS. Among them were: Lou Gehrig, a famous baseball player, and Stephen Hawking, the famous physicist, and author of "The Brief History of Time".

Like most of us, I did not know much about ALS until the day I found out that someone I know is affected by it.

So, now, in honor of a co-worker and a friend, Charlie, I'm taking part in the ALS Association's "Ride to Defeat ALS" here in Florida, which is a 25 mile bike ride on November 3rd.

To make a difference, help in funding research of this terrible disease and help those who suffer, I'm looking for donations to our team of bike riders.

My donation page can be found here: http://webfl.alsa.org/goto/ptrzeciak

Thank you for any donations!!! Every little bit helps!!!

Blogging Slump

2012-09-19T17:00:00.000-04:00

September has turned into a work nightmare, with very little time for following news and blogging on any interesting topics.

Not to mention that, given the upcoming elections, there is mostly political news out there to follow.

While my political preferences are rather solid this year, venturing into this topic is a minefield I do not wish to endure. It's enough to say that out of the two presidential candidates, one seems to be slightly more rational, slightly more compassionate and visibly more in-touch with reality than the other one. I can bet, each one of us can easily fit his, or her preferred winner into the description above, given enough cognitive dissonance.

Science Debate 2012

2012-09-04T18:00:00.000-04:00

I think we can safely bet that we are not likely to see a live, televised science debate between Obama and Romney on CNN (or, even less likely Fox News) this year. The candidates would expose themselves and their agendas, to a field in which real facts and established theories cannot be spun into a political "newspeak", in which all political figures are so well versed.

However, it's still great to see that both of this years presidential candidates have answered questions posed by an independent, on-line initiative started four years ago, called ScienceDebate.org

While, getting answers in a written form is not as revealing as a candidate's live "performance", the answers from both Obama and Romney, do give us a general feel of where they come from and where they want to lead us in the future.

Not surprisingly, at first glance, Obama wins over Romney in this field. I say "not surprisingly", because for many, many years, the Republican Party and most of its candidates at all political levels, have presented an incredible ineptitude for science, reason and critical thinking. They are known for embracing all kinds of unscientific thinking from promoting creationism and intelligent design in our schools, to fighting and denying every environmental issue, including, most recently, global warming.

And, Mitt Romney does not disappoint again... While his running mate, Paul Ryan, is a known global warming denialist, Romney articulates the same view (granted, he does some dancing around, to make himself look a bit less dumb):

I am not a scientist myself, but my best assessment of the data is that the world is getting warmer, that human activity contributes to that warming, and that policymakers should therefore consider the risk of negative consequences. However, there remains a lack of scientific consensus on the issue — on the extent of the warming, the extent of the human contribution, and the severity of the risk — and I believe we must support continued debate and investigation within the scientific community.

"Lack of scientific consensus?", yes, if you count some loony scientists, mostly not even in the field of climate research. That debate has been closed, at least in the scientific circles and the time is to look for solutions.

In general, the answers from the Obama campaign seem to be a bit more focused and to the point. Romney, on the other hand, has a lot of lofty ideas, with very little essence (create a "Reagan Economic Zone"? Who will join?).

However, it's still good to see those two sets of answers side by side, compare them and analyze them, which, at the end, helps all of us in making our minds in November.

As Thomas Jefferson said (which is wisely pointed by the ScienceDebate.org):

"Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government."

UPDATE 09/06/2012:
A summary from Slate: Romney Out-Debates Obama

Yes, out-debates... true, but is there a real essence there? I'm not so sure.

Book Review: The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines

2012-08-09T19:00:00.000-04:00

I have been following the climate change "controversy" for some time now. I've known for many years that the science behind it is sound and solid. However, the amount of vicious and coordinated attacks on the whole concept surprised me, even though I still remember attacks on the research into the ozone hole in the 80s.

As in the 80s, I could not understand why anyone with vested interests in our future (and by "interests" I mean our children, who will reap the "rewards" of our stupidity) would deny the facts and research with such viciousness.

So, I was happy when one of the most famous scientists involved in the climate research, Dr. Michael E. Mann, wrote a book, "The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines", detailing the last 20 years of his struggle with the climate change denial industry.

I wanted to see the details of this fight. I wanted to understand the possible reasons behind the people responsible for the attacks not only on science and research itself, but on individuals who dedicated their lives in pursuit of truths that benefit the entire human kind.

This book gave me not only a glimpse into the people who would not stop at anything to get their agenda ahead, no matter how disconnected from reality it was, like Senator James Inhofe, or Virginia's Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli. It also showed me how personal those attacks were and how they affected people whose only fault was being scientists.

However, the greatest benefit of this book is its amazing explanation of science and research behind our current understanding of the anthropomorphic global warming. Dr. Mann explains details with eloquence that makes those, sometimes difficult concepts, easy to grasp. Climate science is hard. It requires a firm understanding of many other disciplines. It requires statistical methods that are so far away from our daily routines, that their comprehension (and basic comprehension at best) needs an excellent teacher, who can bring them down to a level of a lay person.

I have to say, Dr. Mann does the job perfectly!

It's almost comical that I finished this book on the same day that July of 2012 was announced to be the hottest month on record in the US.

That's just one more reason to read Dr. Mann's book, especially if you are still sitting on a fence, not sure about the science of global warming. If you keep your political mind away, this book will change your mind.

Now, That's What I Call Crazy!!!

2012-08-08T18:00:00.000-04:00

Crazy... insane... out of this world? Just plain stupid... Nope... it's NRA.
Let me check the calendar... it is 2012, not 1812, right?

The National Rifle Association will seek to pass a bill legalizing the open carrying of firearms in Florida during the 2013 session of the state Legislature, renewing a crusade for expanded gun rights that faltered last year, a longtime lobbyist for the group said today.

Read the rest: Marion Hammer: NRA wants new open carry law in Florida

Thanks to plognark.com for the timeless image...

Pasco School Board Elections: Let's Stick With Competence

2012-08-01T18:00:00.000-04:00

As the election for the local Pasco County School Board is coming up on August 14th, I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who would like to see a candidate with some competence and sanity elected to this important position.

Two candidates are on the ballot this year, Joanne Hurley and Don Stephenson, and since I have a son in the local elementary school, I have a vital interest in how the local school district is managed and what future directions it takes.

I expressed some reservations about Don Stephenson in my previous posts: "2011 - Summary" and "Pasco School Board Elections - My Gripes", especially with his fiscal stance, his opposition to the International Baccalaureate program, and his support of the Amendment 7. As we see American students performing poorly in math, science and engineering, as compared to other developed nations, we need to ensure that more resources are available to our public schools. Freezing taxes, diverting public resources to private schools and religious institutions and dismantling well performing programs like the International Baccalaureate, is not an acceptable solution. It will make our kids less capable of competing in the global marketplace, with no knowledge of other cultures and points of view.

At the same time Don Stephenson's opponent, Joanne Hurley, seems to be well prepared for this position, having served on the Pasco School Board for the last four years. She has a lifetime of experience in this area and seems to be free of the extreme, right-leaning ideas that Mr. Stephenson presents (like branding the IB program anti-American???).

I'm very glad that the Tampa Bay Times also recommends Joanne Hurley for the School Board re-election and that its article shares a lot of my own reservations about Don Stephenson.

Politicians: Brains Not Required

2012-07-12T22:00:00.000-04:00

We all know that being smart is not required for being a politician. Having a good education is also not in the requirements for this particular position, which could have been clearly seen in the recent batch of the Republican presidential candidates.
However, when it comes to politicians without brains, I firmly say "Not In My Backyard!!!" (NIMB).
This is exactly what's happening in one of the Florida State House districts, where all three Republican candidates, Kim Kendall, Mike Davis and Ronald “Doc” Renuart, support teaching creationism in our public schools.
It is amusing, and yet scary at the same time, to hear from Renuart, who is a physician (with higher education and extensive scientific training, I presume):

Evolution is still a theory. It should be taught as a theory, not as a fact. Creationism, divine intervention — a lot of people share this belief.

and then:

[Vouchers] give[s] students a way out (of a failing school). It’s not full tuition. When we don’t provide options for students, what’s really left for them? (These schools) must meet the standards of public education.

What standards? The same he just demolished bringing religion into science classes?

Florida Citizens for Science has a short post about this topic as well.