4 News 5 Convention Notice 6 News and Views 8 Psychic Pabulum10 WA Murder Case12 Profile - Prof Ian Plimer16 Divining for Ships19 Prophets of Doom22 Review - Anti-Evolution27 Cricket Superstition34 Review - The Lotto Effect36 Review - TV Pseudodocumentaries37 Definition38 Review - The Mind of God39 Forum - Politics41 Forum - Music43 Forum - Physics46 Forum - Philosophy47 Forum - Popper49 Letters54 About our Authors

In 1985 some 200 people met in the Institution ofEngineers, Sydney, for what was then a unique event. Itwas the first National Convention of the youngAustralian Skeptics movement and the media had a fieldday with the novel idea that a group such as the Skepticscould even exist, let alone that we could have a seriouspurpose.

Since then, we have grown into an organisation thatis recognised as the voice of reason and as a body whoseopinions and responses have to be taken into account bythose who seek to promote irrational thought.Subsequently, we have had seven more successfulNational Conventions, held in Sydney, Melbourne,Canberra and last year, for the first time in a regionalcentre, Newcastle.

Those who have enjoyed and been enlightened by ourconventions are probably not fully aware of just howmuch work goes into making them successful, nor arethey aware of just how few people are actively involved

in organising these affairs. Now we are about to witnessour ninth annual convention and, as usual, a handful ofdedicated enthusiasts have put it all together.

At this convention, we will have the opportunity tomeet one of the world’s leading psychic investigators,James Randi, and to see and hear this remarkable manpresenting the evidence that has exposed more than afew peddlers of paranormal flim flam. As well, we willhear papers on many of the issues that concern us asSkeptics, from the dangers of untested therapies, throughthe burgeoning New Age movement, to the threat posedby a popular media which uncritically promotes magicalthinking.

Our hard working Victorian Committee deserves oursupport for putting this programme together and I urgeall our readers to attend the Convention and to bringtheir friends along.

Barry Williams

CONTENTS

From the President

winter 934

the SkepticVol 13, No 2All correspondence to:Australian Skeptics IncPO Box E324St James NSW 2000, AustraliaTel: (02) 417 2071Fax: (02) 417 7930e-mail: skeptics @spot.tt.sw.oz.au

State BranchesNew South Wales:PO Box E324St James NSW 2000

NSW, Hunter Region:c/- Prof Colin KeayDept of PhysicsUni of Newcastle NSW 2308

Victoria:GPO Box 1555PMelbourne VIC 3001Tel: (03) 850 2816

ACT:PO Box 555Civic Square ACT 2608

Queensland:GPO Box 2180Brisbane QLD 4001

South Australia:PO Box 91Magill SA 5072

Western Australia:25 Headingly RdKalamunda WA 6076

Tasmania:GPO Box 112KHobart TAS 7001Tel: (002) 62 4332

Editors: Barry WilliamsHarry Edwards

Subscription:1993 - $25.00 pa

the Skeptic is published four times per year by the National Committee ofAustralian Skeptics Inc. Views expressed in articles and letters are thoseof the authors and are not necessarily those of the National Committee ofAustralian Skeptics Inc. Articles may be reprinted with permission anddue acknowledgement to the Skeptic.

Coming Events

Randi forSydney

To ensure that our NSW readers donot miss out on an opportunity to seeand hear one of the world’s leadingprofessional magicians and exposersof Flim-Flam, James “The Amazing”Randi, our special guest at theNational Convention, will also bemaking a ‘live’ appearance inSydney. As we go to press, the finaldetails of Randi’s presentation arenot complete, but we can say that itwill be a mixture of a magicalperformance and a lecture onexposing charlatans which shouldappeal to Skeptics and the publicalike. A group of our local magicianswill be providing support for JamesRandi and we confidently predict thatthis will be a great night of magic.Admission is $10 for adults and $5for children and Concession holders.

The performance will take placeat the Manly Warringah RugbyLeague Club auditorium, 563Pittwater Rd, Brookvale onFriday, June 25 at 7.30 pm.

As we will also be advertising thisto the public, we advise Skeptics toarrive early to ensure a good seat.There will be no need to book inadvance. Write this date in your diarynow!

CompositeIssue

In the past two issues, we havepromised readers that a compositeedition of the first five years of theSkeptic will be published soon.

This has proved to be a muchlarger task than we anticipated, butwe now have all the relevant articlesin the computer, and all that remainsfor us to do is proof reading, layoutand printing. We are confident thatthis can be done within the next twomonths and the full details will becontained in the next issue.

MeetingWell known science broadcaster andwinner of the 1989 AustralianSkeptics’ Journalist of the Year,Robyn Williams AM, has beenawarded the 1993 Humanist of theYear. The presentation will be madeby Dr John Hirshman at the RoofTerrace of the Australian Museum,College St, East Sydney at 1pm, onWednesday, June 9. Robyn’s talk willbe “Keeping the Bastards Honest -the Humanist Approach”. Skepticsare invited to attend this free publicmeeting. For further information, callMollie Campbell on 389 4559.

5winter 93

Australian Skeptics Ninth AnnualNational Convention

The ninth annual Australian Skeptics NationalConvention, organised by the Victorian Committee, willbe staged at the Sunderland Theatre, MelbourneUniversity, Royal Parade & Grattan Street, Carlton onJune 19 and 20.

The programme arranged for the weekend is designedto be interesting and provocative, with something onoffer to attract our many Victorian and interstatesubscribers. The publicity planned for the conventionwill seek to attract the interest of members of the publicand the media.

A rapid growth in the number of subscribers to theSkeptic indicates that many people are becomingconcerned that the increasing tide of irrationalism posesa threat to the health of our society. And that irrationalthought is on the increase is difficult to doubt.

The UFO phenomenon, which has in recent years beendownplayed, appears to be due for a resurgence,particularly as the fantastic myth of abductions byextraterrestrial agents grows. A major Hollywood studiohas just released in Australia a movie based on an‘abduction’ which was exposed as a hoax by Philip Klassalmost two decades ago. The crop circle phenomenonappears to be waning, but myths and fantasticexplanations continue to circulate.

Last year’s promised expose of rampant Satanismnever eventuated but it continues to be promised. Theend of the world is nowhere in sight but, as the turn ofthe millennium approaches, we can expect many, manymore hysterical predictions of Armageddon and theproliferation of Apocalyptic cults. The events in Waco,Texas may just be the forerunner of worse outrages tocome.

The creationists, the believers in a 6000 year old‘young Earth’, continue their assault on the minds ofour young people, with their insistence that their simpleminded and intellectually unsustainable religious dogmais based on scientific fact and should be taught in publicschools.

Our health continues to be threatened by untestedremedies. As medical science does the hard work inendeavouring to find cures for AIDS and other serious

diseases, the proponents of ‘alternative’ remedies andtherapies continue to promise ‘no-pain’ solutions.

Astrology, palmistry, tarot reading, numerology,channelling and other irrational paranormal ‘New Age’philosophies continue to gain adherents, encouraged byan uncritical popular media.

Our program of speakers has been carefully selectedto provide intelligent, thought-provoking, evencontroversial arguments about these and other topics.Among the speakers will be:

James Randi, our special overseas guest, professionalillusionist, master magician and psychic investigator,who will instruct, entertain and amaze with hisprovocative presentations.

Dr Stephen Basser, convener of the Australian Councilon Science and Health, who will question the benefitsof the Therapeutic Goods Act. Why do pharmaceuticaldrugs have to undergo stringent testing, while‘alternative’ therapies do not?

Tony and Joan McClelland, parents who rescued theirchild from a cult and who will pass on their experiencesas a warning to others.

Professor Ian Plimer, who will cast his sceptical eyeover the prophets of Armageddon and show howevidence can be doctored to fool even scientists.

Dr Bob Stevens, physicists and astronomer, who willask why the skies are the focus of so much unreason.UFO’s and astrology will be his themes.

Barry Williams, National President of AustralianSkeptics, who will propose that ignorance kills and willsupport his argument with real life cases. He will questionthe role of the popular media in encouraging dangerouslyirrational thinking.

More details are contained in the ConventionProgramme in the centre pages of this issue.

Please book your tickets, using the enclosed slip, assoon as possible if you wish to attend what we believewill be one of the most exciting weekends of the year. Itis essential that you pre-book for the annual Skepticsdinner.

And in particular, please invite your non-Skepticfriends along. Why should we have all the fun?

winter 936

News and ViewsThe Natural Law Party, whichclaimed before the recent election tobe the fourth largest party inAustralia, stood candidates in morethan 100 seats, but failed to takeAustralia into a new age with their’scientifically proven’ policies tosolve all our ills. A quick glance atthe list of seats in the papers on theMonday after the election showedthat the NLP candidates ran last inmost of the seats in which they stood,with between 0.3 and 0.5 percent ofthe vote. In some seats, where theyreceived the advantage of the‘Donkey Vote’, they achieved as highas 3 percent. In the Senate race theywere outpolled by such parties asAustralian Shooters Party,Australians Against FurtherImmigration, the Call to Australia,and the Abolish Self GovernmentCoalition, among others. It appearsthat we are not yet a mature enoughsociety to meditate and levitateourselves out of recession.

* * *Speaking of elections, I trust it hasnot escaped the notice of the readersthat I made three accurate predictionsout of four in the last issue (Vol 13,No 1, p 6). The election was won bythe ALP, it was not won by the NLPand the campaign director of thesuccessful party was Mr Bob Hogg,who has a four-letter family name,the second letter of which is ‘o’ andthe third and fourth letters of whichare identical. A 75% accuracy ismuch better than your average‘psychic’ can achieve, certainlybetter than the record of Barry Eatonand Douglas Parker, whosepredictions were reported in the sameissue. If I cared to try the sort ofexcuse the average psychic uses,such as that my fourth prediction ‘the

Coalition parties will win’ was fairlyclose (they only lost by a few seats),then I could claim an 80-90%accuracy in political prediction.Political parties please note.

* * *Still on the topic of elections, cananyone tell us whether anyastrologer, psychic, clairvoyant orsooth sayer predicted the return of thegovernment? We realise that most ofthe political pundits got it wrong, butthey were relying on polls, gutreactions etc, while astrologers, forinstance, are supposed to get this sortof information from planetarypositions. Every psychic that wenoticed made predictions thatfollowed the general trends, butsurely some of them must have gotit right, if there is any validity in theirclaims of special knowledge. Failingthat, can any of our astronomersadvise us if perhaps Jupiter reversedits orbit in the last days of thecampaign?

* * *In a late breaking story on theelection front, the Sydney MorningHerald, Stay in Touch column ofApril 29, featured an interview withABC newsreader and astrologerBarry Eaton, quoting our item abouthis predictions in Vol 13, No 1.

Mr Eaton claimed a hit with hisprediction of a ‘politicalassassination’ saying that the murderof Chris Hani in South Africa fittedthat claim. He also claimed that hisprediction of a coalition win in theelection was a hit because “they wonthe election and blew it “. Now that’swhat I call gall.

After describing the Skeptics as a“most boring society”, Mr Eatondelivered himself of this gem, “Assoon as Copernicus discovered the

earth revolved around the sun and notthe other way around, they(presumably the Skeptics) brandedhim a heretic”.

Now I don’t want to be the one toteach Mr Eaton his trade, but thewhole basis of astrology depends ona geocentric universe. Astrologersmay pay lip service to the reality ofcelestial mechanics, which theyclearly do not understand, but anyhoroscope chart will leave one in nodoubt that they really do believe thatthe earth is at the centre ofeverything.

* * *As I was crossing a Sydney street theother day, my eye was caught by anotice attached to the traffic lightstandard. Consisting of a drawing ofone of the currently popular imagesof a UFO naut, the hand printed andphotocopied notice read:

THEIR HEREPLEIADEANS

and then went on to describe how onecould determine if the Pleiadeans hadkidnapped one.

The final warning advised that ifone had had such an experience, oneshould “contact an independentagency, not the government whowants you to think you are crazy”.There was no indication as to whichindependant agencies one shouldcontact. The NRMA? the RSPCA?Alcoholics Anonymous? the NSWRugby League?

Apart from the fact that theseanonymous Pleiadean experts areclearly illiterate, I am forced to ask,as I have asked before, why thePleiades? Can anyone pinpoint forme just when the Pleiades becamepart of the fantastic folklore of thededicated UFOnut?

Philip Klass, the prominent

7winter 93

American sceptical UFOinvestigator, has pointed out in hisSkeptical UFO Newsletter and in hisbook, “UFO Abductions: ADangerous Game” (PrometheusBooks, 1989), that in the USAkidnapping is a federal offence whichis investigated by the FBI.

Despite the oft repeated claims byabduction ‘guru’ Budd Hopkins andothers that there have beenthousands, even millions, ofAmericans kidnapped by aliens,there is no evidence that the FBI hasever investigated this serious crime.Klass also claims that there is noteven evidence that any ‘victim’ hasever reported the crime to the FBI,and he has had a standing offer since1987 to pay $10,000 to any victimwhose claim is verified by the FBI.

Meanwhile, the number ofAustralians who have been‘abducted’ remains inexplicably low,despite a recent visit by Hopkins andthe strangely ubiquitous clues heproposes as evidence for abduction.Have you ever found a minor woundand don’t know how you got it? Haveyou ever been unable to rememberevery minute that passes? If so,gentle reader, you have almostcertainly been taken aboard a UFOand had your genitals and noseinterfered with. It certainly makesyou think, doesn’t it?

* * *Recently I received a call from a manin Brisbane who wanted the Skepticsto observe an ESP course that wouldfinally convince us of the validity ofthis phenomenon. When I enquiredas to the nature of the course andwhat was taught, he said that one ofthe topics was fire walking andproudly claimed that he had walkedover hot coals unscathed. Myresponse was to assure him that manysceptics had done the same thing,without the benefit of mindimproving courses and that safe fire

walking had everything to do withthe laws of physics and nothing todo with ESP or any otherhypothetical mind powers. Thisseemed to nonplus him a little,especially when I suggested that headvise his teacher of the Skeptics’challenge to fire walkers to walkacross a metal plate at a much lowertemperature than that of glowingcoals.

He then changed the subject andtold me about the ‘healing’ that waspart of the course. It seems that onecan “merge your consciousness withanother person’s body, divine anyillness and teach the other body howto heal itself”. The ‘theory’ behindthis remarkable claim is that, as thebody’s cells are regenerated over aperiod of years, any illness shoulddisappear from any organ as the cellsare replaced. If the disease remains,it is because we want it to. Themerged consciousness teaches theother body how to do the trick at thecellular level.

Now a few objections to thistheory spring readily to mind. Myfirst question concerned how muchhe knew of anatomy. “Could you”, Iasked “point to your liver”? “No”was his response, but it did notmatter, all you did was ‘feel’ thatsomething was amiss and you couldfix it up. I demurred from thissimplistic claim, pointing out that, inone’s ignorance, one could teachanother person’s pancreas to startconverting itself into a second liver,which may just have drastic effectson their health. My secondsuggestion was that he try teachingany amputee he knew to regeneratea missing digit or limb. He allowedthat he had not seen it happen, butbelieved that it was possible.

As a final request, he asked that acouple of ‘open-minded Skeptics’might attend the course, a requestthat I said I would be happy to pass

along to the Queensland branch. Hethen exhibited final proof of hisunworldliness by advising me thatthe Skeptics would be required to pay$500 each for the privilege ofattending. My response to that is notfit to print in a family magazine.

* * *Thanks to Mark Dawson, a librarianfrom the ACT, for sending us anexample of the letters librariesreceive from creationists. Aphotocopy of an American formletter, it is written in pseudolegaleseby someone for whom English doesnot appear to be among their first fivelanguages. It demands that librariescarry more creation science books,particularly in the “560’s to the 577’s(Dewey Decimal) shelves”. Ratherthan try to paraphrase this diatribe, Iwill let it speak for itself.

“The destructive evolution theoryhas resulted in a huge increase incrimes, gangs - murder, assault,suicide, burglary, theft, drug andalcohol addiction, rape and othercrimes, in both adult and youth,including the class rooms where nowonly the theory of evolution is nowtaught, with immorality with a hugeincrease in teenage pregnancies...”This goes on for another five lineswithout a full stop.

“For a man to say that hiswonderful and loving mother, whopersonally carried him for 9 months,then brought him into the world andcared for him and loved him as longas life lasted, evolved from an ape,shows a terrible disrespect for hismother, the Creator and all thecreations, and the irrefutable andoverwhelming scientific andhistorical proof of the falsities of allevolution theories of life and theuniverse...”

Perhaps those shelves dealing withliteracy should be improved. BW

winter 938

MEDIA

Pop Psychic PabulumHarry Edwards

At a recent meeting of the National Committee, PresidentBarry Williams thrust a rolled up copy of Woman’s Dayinto my hand saying, “Do something with this.” Ignoringthe rude connotation, I placed the magazine on the tablebefore me and lo and behold it fell open like a wellthumbed copy of Lady Chatterley’s Lover at an‘exclusive’ to reveal four pages of titillating poses byRachel Hunter in skimpy swimware. Nodding myapproval I asked what I was supposed to do with it. “Notthat you bloody fool, read the articles and writesomething about them” came the admonishing response.

Curious to see what Superskep would find interestingenough to write about in a magazine already a pastrecipient of the Bent Spoon Award I thumbed throughthe mag.

‘Exclusive’ pics of Cher and her toy-boy; DeniseDrysdale defends her lover, (‘Exclusive’); an ‘exclusive’on cricket hero Shane Warne; another ‘exclusive’ on anAussie ‘hunk’ in Hollywood; four pages of pics of theinterior of the White House; more pics of socialites, filmand others personalities; and then...ah ha!

“CLOSE ENCOUNTERS” - three anecdotal accountsof Australians who claim to have been abducted (by youknow who!) or have had a close encounter with a UFO.For good measure a story on those “mysterious” cropcircles was thrown in under the heading “Aliens inAdelaide”, accompanied by a pic of a not so circularcircle and another of Colin Norris, director of AustralianInternational UFO Research, poking around in the dirt.His expert opinion? “I can spot a fake a mile off. This isno hoax. There has been a visit from an extra-terrestrialcraft here for sure.” An accompanying scientist(discipline not stated) carried out soil and radiation testsand found the salt content in the circle to be 40 per centhigher than the rest of the paddock and radiation wasup. As these characteristics are claimed to be peculiar toUFO circles (so the story tells us) what more proof couldone ask for?! Prior to this ‘landing’, Norris had receiveda call from the Air Force because they were getting somany reports of lights moving and standing still in theAdelaide Hills. I see exactly the same sort of activity onthe hills surrounding my residence...funny, I alwaysthought they were car headlights not alien spacecraft,

just goes to show how wrong one can be!The article starts with some comments from the

‘experts’, Roy Lake, chairman of UFO Studies, says,“You can’t dispute the evidence that is materialising tothe contrary”, and Tony Dodd, director of research forUFO Magazine, who believes the aliens have beeninvolved in genetic engineering for centuries concludesthat “because the similarities of the stories related bythe people under hypnosis are so strong, even skepticswould change their minds”.

Well, here’s one sceptic who won’t change his mindfor some very prosaic reasons. Firstly, anecdotalevidence, particularly under hypnosis, is not evidenceat all. Secondly, despite tens of thousands of allegedsightings and landings of UFOs over the past half century,not one piece of tangible evidence in the form ofhardware has ever been found, yet when the firstEarthlings landed on the moon they left footprints, tyretracks, electronic equipment, bits of space craft and amoon-buggy or two. Perhaps extra-terrestrials always“do the right thing”! Thirdly, one would have thoughtthat if crop circles were depressions made by alienspacecraft there would be some consistency in their sizeand shape. To my knowledge no two have ever beenshown to have had exactly the same dimensions.Fourthly, why would an alien civilization which, if itexists, would be far more technically advanced than ourown, send spacecraft through distances measured in lightyears just to park on Earth for a few minutes and thenwhiz off into space? Fifthly I would suggest that thereason for the similarity of descriptions of aliens byalleged abductees is patently obvious from anaccompanying photograph of one of them clutching acopy of Whitney Streiber’s Communion! And finally,as man has made enormous progress in the field ofgenetic engineering in a matter of a few years it doesn’tsay much for the aliens’ medical technology if they havebeen slugging away for centuries and are stillexperimenting on foetuses.

In a box labeled “UFO researchers believe” we aretold that an alien spaceship is spotted every 15 seconds;women up to three months pregnant are being abductedand their unborn babies snatched; male abductees are

9winter 93

Don’t Forget the Convention!

being used for bizarre experiments; 50,000 US securitydocuments are being withheld from the public andgovernments are covering up sightings to prevent masscivilian panic.

Having spent many a balmy night on my patio relaxingwith a coldie and a pipe gazing at the stars, I have neverspotted one of the 2,102,400 spacecraft allegedly passingoverhead each year and conclude that my suburb mustbe in a UFO free zone as well as a nuclear free zone.Woman’s Day readers can take comfort from that andmay like to note that I currently have a couple of vacantunits for lease and give a written guarantee that femaleoccupants will not be abducted - at least not by aliens!

The suggestion that governments are ‘covering up toprevent mass civilian panic’ is quite amusing when oneconsiders the number of government ‘secrets’periodically leaked, and surely if it were true, then thatknowledge in itself would create more panic thansuppressing it would.

Moving on through the mag we have Fiona McCullum,Australia’s “best known and most accurate clairvoyant”(aren’t they all?!) answering questions sent in by mail.There is no indication or confirmation that any of heranswers to the questions were accurate or otherwise.

Then we have “The Lovers’ Tarot”, the brainchild of“sex, psychology and psychic expert” Jane Lyle, whohas used the tarot to predict the course of love affairsover the past ten years.

Wait, there’s more! An exciting numerology guide byAustralian numerologist Christopher Mason, whichpredicts your good and bad days for work, love and play,and palmist Jan Sinden, who will read your palm from aphotocopy.

Had enough? There is also Joan Hanger revealing thesecret meanings hidden in your dreams, and AthenaStarwoman dispensing knowledge gleaned from theheavens.

A total of thirteen pages of unsubstantiated occultpabulum resulting in record sales.

OK Harry, so what’s the point of your article? Womenare the first to complain that they are discriminatedagainst, treated as second class citizens, consideredintellectually inferior and incapable of rational thought;and yet the popular media, which sell in the millions ofcopies per week, on which many of them rely forinformation and advice encourage irrational thinking,superstition and the uncritical acceptance ofunsubstantiated paranormal claims. It would seem thatsome women are their own worst enemies.

Stop Press

Since writing the above, a copy of New Idea (Dec 5,1992) has come into my hands and guess who’s makinga comeback - Uri Geller, not as a psychic but as the starof a Dorothy Dix column!

The article commences by saying that after years ofamazing the world with his psychic powers, Uri Gellerhas decided to channel his energies into helping peoplelead healthier lives.

One could be forgiven for suggesting that as he is nolonger able to get away with fooling the public with hisconjuring tricks this is simply another and less vulnerablebusiness venture.

He already has a newspaper column in Britain and inan ‘experiment’, involving special ‘energised’ orangepaint or ink, thousands of readers who took part reporteddramatic changes to their lives. The unemployed foundwork, people trying to sell their homes were inundatedwith offers, and some sufferers of chronic aches and painsfelt better. Of course the number of people who notedno change in their status or affairs was not reported. Thisparticularly ludicrous load of rubbish is now beingpromoted in Australia.

Also in the article there were the usual misleadingcomments on deja vu, linking it with psychic powers,and a paragraph about how Uri overcame bulimia. Inhis column Uri investigates a range of fascinatingsubjects - UFOs and star signs - and offers advice onhow to improve your sex life and how to communicatewith animals, from household pets to dolphins.

In another column in New Idea, Geller tells how hecontacted NASA about the jammed antenna on theGalileo spacecraft (en route to Jupiter), offering to usehis ‘powers’ to free it. As NASA engineers are doubtlessworking hard to overcome the problem and as they maypossibly have some success (just as they did with thejammed camera platform on one of the Voyagers) wecan expect to see Geller claiming credit for anyimprovement. Meanwhile, he still has not explained whyhe did not use his powers to prevent Scud missileslanding in his homeland, Israel, during the Gulf War.

For Australia, he is preparing a special column on thetelepathic abilities of Aborigines. Apparently he hasn’tseen the Telecom ad in which an Aborigine is using amobile telephone!

winter 9310

MEDIA

Mueder Case: Psychic no HelpDanny Varney

“Nauseating” and “disgusting” were the words beingbandied about Perth’s media when a local televisionstation brought in a ‘psychic’, Zara, to help solve themurder of a mother and her three children at Greenough,late in February 1993.

The basic story is that the mother had started living ina transportable house on an isolated block some 20 kmfrom Geraldton. She was about 32 and had a son 16,who had lived with his grandmother in Queensland for14 years. A month previously he had gone to live withhis mother and returned to school. The two youngerchildren, girls aged four and seven, had also just startedat the local primary school. The killer slew them all usingeither a hatchet or a meat cleaver. The mother and eldergirl had been sexually assaulted. Police confirmed themother had an involvement with drugs and that it couldhave been a ritual Chinese Triad killing of an informant.Geraldton was mentioned as a drop-off point for drugsentering Australia and drugs are readily available in thearea.

The West Australian (the morning daily) ran the storyand pointed out that neighbours had heard a dog barkingand also that the mother had been warned by “a Geraldtonspiritualist that the tarot cards indicated her life was indanger”.

A few days later, the media were allowed into the farmhouse and most television stations, including the ABC,had graphic footage of the interior of the house. Allcameramen seized on three photos of the children, oneeach of the two girls and one of the boy in a rabbit suit,with a clear view of his face framed by the ears.

The newspaper story gave details of Christmas cards,messages to Santa, school reports, essays, letters and thehundred and one details of family life. Later, home videosof the mother and two girls playing were released,showing the interior of the house.

One TV station brought the grandmother and anotherdaughter to WA and set them up in a studio. They thendid a cross to ‘Madam’ Zara in an outside broadcast.The medium had her head covered in an Arab-styleheaddress and completed the ensemble with a huge pairof ‘punk’ style sunglasses, so that only her lips could beseen. Zara went into her spell and, lo and behold, she

said she could see “rabbits” (remember, most TV newsprogrammes had shown the boy in the rabbit suit whilethe grandmother was en route to WA). This produced anatural and immediate reaction from the two women inthe studio. Both burst into tears and, in near hysteria,cried:

“Oh! How could she have known that...?”Cut to a smirking Zara:“I don’t know how it came to me...I saw rabbits coming

up here...”Cut back to the studio where the two women have

become even more stressed.“Oh that’s Danny ... how could she know ... he put

that suit on to earn money giving lollies away at schools,she couldn’t have known...”

A few days later Zara and the two women were takento the farm house. Zara poses in her mystic costumeoutside. Then, with crystal ball in one hand and makingpasses, enters the death house to make contact with thespirits of the murdered mother and children.

A zoom shot through the window, all that was allowed,showed Zara with the women. They came out and,complete with crystal ball and mystic costume, Zaraposes for the camera, lifts her arm, wriggles fingers and,pointing to the far distance, converses with a ‘spirit’:

“I hear a dog barking” (presumably the dog mentionedin press reports). Then she claims she knew “Whodunnit”, but cannot reveal it. Turning away, she statesfrom behind her glasses:

“The police are on the right track.”The grandmother and sister are now absolutely

convinced they are dealing with a ‘genuine’ psychicbecause she had never been in the farmhouse before, orknew anything about the family. Whereas every WesternAustralian could have told them the same things fromdaily front-page stories, plus page two and three, plusmovies and videos released by the police and shown bythe TV stations.

The TV station milked the story for all it could, afterall it had paid for the two women to come to WA. It keptit going with promos, night after night. It did streetinterviews on the merits and demerits of mediums(media?) and spiritualists. Most people were either

11winter 93

sceptical or unconvinced and there were only one or twobelievers.

After a few days the WA Skeptics were asked to givetheir views on mediums, and in particular Zara. It was aMonday public holiday in WA and I had a full half hour’snotice of an interview. Hastily grabbing what I couldfrom past issues of the Skeptic, on police work withpsychics, Tarot and ESP cards, a standard cold reading,a clean blue shirt, a quick shave and shower and a caband off to the TV studio.

On the way, I tried the standard cold reading on thetaxi driver, to get warmed up for the interview. Whilewaiting for the receptionist to fill in the cab voucher, Iasked the driver what he thought about the reading.

“Ninety nine percent accurate” he said.I tried it out on the receptionist and make-up lady.

Result? “It’s us”. Then into the studio for somepreliminaries:

“Do you want me with glasses on or off? ... Oh, onlygot two minutes..no time for that literature ... raise theseat ...hands on the table... Hello, you’re theinterviewer”... then, quite cold, shown the tape of Zaraand the two women.

Then into the questions, which went along the lines of:“How do psychics relate to police work?”“Absolutely useless, everywhere it has been tried it

failed. There are reports in police journals showing that...and in Tasmania, the police had to back-down whenthey brought in a psychic.”

“How do you account for the revelation about thebunny suit?”

“Easy, she threw out a lot of things like shotgunpellets..OK..she got a strike with the rabbit suit...I haveseen that clip only once but look at the way she reactedwhen she saw she had made a strike...she could havesaid a bluebird or a bent blade of grass. I don’t knowhow long a sequence you took but you certainly did someediting to get the shot.” (I didn’t know about the boy’sphoto in the bunny suit then.)

“You must admit that people in situations like that doneed some counselling and help.”

“Yes, but not from mediums. There are trained clinicalpsychologists to do this. They are professionals, andwould charge no more than mediums.”

Then I got a chance for a final shot at mediums. Ipointed out that before the previous state governmentchanged the laws last year, mediums were often beingarrested after foretelling the future for police officers.With all their alleged powers, they could not detect apolice officer out of uniform. The interview closed with

pleasantries and thanks. I was asked would I debate theissues with Zara.

“Too right, anywhere, anytime, but give me paper andpen. I will make a prediction.” I wrote out a predictionand folded it up. “Don’t open it until you have askedZara.” (Can fellow Skeptics guess what my predictionwas?) Alas, to date the TV station has not got back tome.

Overnight, I found the newspaper photo of the bunnysuit. At 9.10 next day, I rang the TV station, suggestingthat we could ‘nail’ ‘Madam’ Zara. “Thank you, we’llget back to you.” They never did, but they kept the promogoing for several days.

But that is not the end of the story. Two nights later Iwas practising sports medicine at my football club. Manyof the players had seen the interview and had also seenme doing magic at Players’ Reviews. They reckoned themedium was a fake and one of the player’s little daughterwas there. She came up to me and said “Saw you on TVthe other night...”

“You did, that’s good. Did you understand it?”“Yes”.“Well, who do you think was telling the truth, me or

her?”“Oh, you of course.”So fellow Skeptics, it does look as if we are wearing

them down. It’s very interesting to note that none ofPerth’s media were at all interested when I phoned themto say I had solved the bunny suit claim. None wantedany further part of the “nauseating” story, but all werealigned our way. Neither have the police availedthemselves of the services of the mystics, psychics or‘hypnotism’ of those who might be able to help.

And, as usual, we can expect murders to be solved bypainstaking police work, an odd lucky break or to go onfile as unsolved.

Those who are interested in the topic of police andpsychics can find the results of a survey of US PoliceDepartments and their response to psychic offers of helpin the Winter 1992 issue of The Skeptical Inquirer(available from Australian Skeptics $10). The report isvery unfavourable to the myth of psychic crime busters,with the majority of respondents stating that whileinformation from alleged psychics, as with any otherinformation received, must be investigated, it isinvariably a waste of police time and resources.

We would be very interested in publishing a report ifany of our readers chose to investigate the claimed useof psychics by any of Australia’s police forces. Ed

winter 9312

PROFILE

The Plimer PrinciplesSeeking the truth between rocks and hard places

Adam JosephRobin Williams on the ABC Quantum programobviously knew that someone was going to corner IanPlimer. What he didn’t know was who or when, so hegot in first with a series of finely crafted interviews withsome of Australia’s finest people of science. Puttingtogether such a list is no easy task, but in that list youwould have to include Professor Ian Plimer, holder ofthe Chair of Earth Sciences at Melbourne University.Distinguished in his field, he is also highly controversialfor his public attacks against ‘creation science’.

As the 1993 Australian Skeptics National Conventiondraws near, I thought I might try to look a little closer atthis Skeptic for the benefit of the many who have onlyread of his exploits, seen him on television, heard himon radio, or caught him on the lecture circuit. At theconvention this year, Plimer will be discussing“Armageddon - An Everypersons’ guide to FindingGeological Evidence for the End of the World”. No doubtit will be just as confronting and controversial as hisprevious talks. Maybe even more so this time as it willbe coinciding with the release of his new book “TellingLies for God”.

So what makes this Sydney born educator, who fellin love with rocks at the age of three and always knewhe was going to be a geologist, tick. I have alwaysbelieved that if you ask direct questions, the answerswill give an insight into the persona of a person. IanPlimer’s honesty is such that he deals in facts, sometimesgets emotional over facts, and it’s very hard to believethat everything he says is not based on those hard andhonest facts.

Adam Joseph. Publicly you are becoming betterknown as a fighter against creationists, does it everconcern you that some might construe your motivationsand see you as an advocate against all establishedreligions?

Ian Plimer.In my own field I guess I’m better known

internationally than I am in this country. In this countryI’m as well known for my public stands on various issues,

as for my science. And in the community at large I’mprobably only known for my anti-creationist activities,and not for my science. But if you were to interviewsomeone in Denmark, or the UK or the US, I wouldn’tbe known at all for any of my anti-creationist activities.The second thing is, creationism is anti-religious, it’santi -theology and it’s only the wacky cults and the fringefundamentalist religions that would want to view me asbeing as anti-religious; the rest of them are very stronglysupportive. So it’s not anti-religious; my stand supportsreligion, as a cultural fact; supporting culture againstthese wacky cults. Religion is a necessary part ofcivilised culture, it helps give a social structure.

Given the financial base of many of thesefundamentalist groups, are you concerned that this powermay be used to discredit you publicly, given your profileagainst creationism?

I have absolutely no doubt that they will be doingeverything possible to discredit me in public. We’ve givena lot of thought to that, on how to handle it, and we’veprepared for it. We’ve done all the homework and therehave been certain documents lodged in certain placesand with certain people in the media just in case thishappens. We know fully well what’s likely to happenbecause our fundamentalist friends have a fairly well-known pattern of doing things.

What kind of message would you like to send to twowell known creationists, Drs Carl Wieland and AndrewSnelling ?

If they want to take me on in public? They can go forit. We’ve done an enormous amount of home-work onthem, we have reams of information, we would love it toappear in the public arena.

Many academics cruise through life quietly. The publicperception is generally of studious, hard-working, hard-thinking, self-opinionated, but nevertheless introvertedpersonalities. Your persona contradicts this image.There’s a brashness or forthrightness in not onlypresenting things the way you see them, but in stronglypresenting your evidence as well. As opposed to thepublic perception ... what is it that makes Plimer run?

13winter 93

I’m a perfectly refined gentleman. For example, thelast Sabbath I spent in the Captains Flat Hotel, whichis a pub in a mining town, drinking with two aboriginalfootball teams playing two-up. I’m very much in myelement when I’m in all different quarters. I quite oftenspeak at international functions, to boards of majorcompanies, I work within the university structure, and Ispend a lot of time in the bush. So I’m very comfortablein all sorts of areas. Brashness is one part of that. Whatmakes me run? I guess its energy. I have an enormousamount of energy.

What are your thoughts on how educators educate?I reckon a lot of the kids haven’t got the basics. When

they come out of school theycan’t communicate as wellas they should, they can’t dosimple tasks that they shouldbe able to do, and thegreatest skill they miss outon is being critical. Theycan’t actually think. No onegets taught how to think andthat’s a real tragedy. Thesekids come out understandingthat research is just diggingup information from thelibrary rather than findingout new information forthemselves. They come outreally in an iron lung inmany ways and it’s a bit of aworry. I think creationism isvery much related to that; that these kids haven’t got theability to critically think.

So what do you think is wrong with the educators andhow they educate?

I think a lot of people are just cranking the handle,just handing out the same crap they were handed out,rather than forcing people to actually learn. The waythat I like to teach is the Socratean approach, have asequence of ordered questions to throw at them. ... soit’s question, question, question, question, all the time.

Many people would regard holding the Chair of EarthSciences at Melbourne University as the ultimate prizeat the prime of life. You appear to be just gathering steam,or is this just my perception? What’s the pot of gold atthe end of your rainbow, bearing in mind that we Skepticsdon’t necessarily believe in the Wizard of Oz?

I don’t see it as a prize of life, and I wouldn’t alsoconcede that I’m gathering steam. What’s happening is

I’m just refocussing various things. I’ve always beenflat out and I’m just putting energies into different thingsnow, whereas in the past I didn’t put the energy into thatarea. What do I want to do at the end of it ? I’d absolutelylove to have a television series on the evolution of theplanet. It would be fantastic. In fact I’ve dug up a lot ofinformation on that already.

There have been some close calls in your past whereyour life almost came to a very quick end. You were ina jet that went down and two helicopter crashes. Didyou at any stage during these events have your wholelife flash before you? Were you inclined to pray? Makehasty promises to change your ways? And did they

change your life in anyway?

Not at all. There was norepenting. I’m a greatadmirer of Don Giovanni-he went without repenting.No prayers. No life flashingbefore me. Just sheer angerthat some bastard had putme into this situation andit was out of my control.Someone who wascriminally responsible hadput me into this situation.So it was more anger that Iwas exposed to going outquicker than I thought Ishould. And it didn’tchange my life in any

fundamental way at all.Let me put a question to you similar to one you put

recently to Professor Paul Davies. How different is youridea of a creator of the universe from that of thecreationists?

I don’t really have an idea of a creator. The creationistshave this creator who is evil, who is small-minded, whois malevolent, and who is not very bright and can’t evenget his science right. Creationists have made theircreator in their own image in my view, whereas myconcept of a possible creator is certainly not that. Thereare some marvellous things that have occurred in nature,and natural science shows us some phenomenalprocesses which we don’t understand. Just because wedon’t understand it doesn’t mean we have to make acreator to explain it. I’m quite happy to have noexplanation. It’s the insecurity of no explanation thatcreates dogma.

winter 9314

In your scientific endeavours over the years, has therebeen anything that you believed in absolutely, with allthe evidence staring you right in the face, that was laterproved to be incorrect via new evidence coming alongto change your view?

I’ve never been in that situation, at that extreme. I’vebeen in the situation where I’ve had my work quiteseverely criticised, and as a result of the criticism I haveeither changed my views or collected more information.The first time it happened was a very close friend ofmine who actually wrote in scientific journals criticisingmy work, but of course he was doing it scientificallyand not personally. My biggest critics now are myresearch students and the research team around me, theyreally hop into me. I’ve never had the situation whereI’ve absolutely believed and got all the T’s crossed andhave then had to diametrically change my position. ButI’m always changing my position, with new evidence.That’s quite normal, if you don’t then you are notevolving.

What got you involved with Australian Skeptics?I was at a meeting at Macquarie University on

evolution and creationism in 1987. I gave a talk thereand this rather portly gentleman with a grey beard andthe lower two buttons of his shirt straining over the beltcame up to me and said “You should be one of us”. Itook a look at him and thought “Bloody hell no”. Hegave me some of his propaganda, which I was going tothrow in the bin, and I read it and thought “No, I will beone of them, they sound a pretty good group”. So it wasafter that memorable meeting with Sir James Wallabythat I joined the Skeptics.

Australian Skeptics has an image problem in somequarters, probably because we only seem to pop out ofthe woodwork when we are asked to debunk or refute aclaim being made. In that process, we sometimes stephard on years of cultural belief. Maybe the name Skepticsis a bad one. What do you think can be done byAustralian Skeptics to get the public to think morecritically ?

For a body with a thousand subscribers it is anincredibly effective organisation; it has an enormouslyhigh press profile and I think Australian Skeptics is goingfrom strength to strength. The name is established so,whether you like it or not, I don’t think we can changeit, although I do think the Skeptics have got an imageproblem, and the image problem is that they are‘knockers’. So I think that each and every one of us,who ever have to look into a camera or have themicrophone in front of us, must portray the positive view

that we’re a community watchdog group, and we’reconcerned about the paranormal and the pseudosciencein the community. It’s a lot of fun, but behind the funthere’s a seriousness.

Legal reasons do not permit you to talk about theincident last year with ‘Dr’ Allen Roberts and his‘Noah’s Ark’ but what can you tell us about theexperience ? Did it distress you ? Will we hear the fullstory at the end of the day ?

Can’t tell much because it’s before the courts, howeverwe have half a dozen reasons to suggest why we aregoing to win it. He has sued me for defamation, and ofcourse with defamation he can pull out at any time byjust paying the costs. My view is that we shouldn’t allowpeople of his ilk to go around doing that and then toescape unscathed. So I’ve initiated action against himfor Breach of Copyright, Trades Practices Act and FairTrading Act in the Federal court, so that even if hewithdraws the defamation against me, I’ve still got himwith his back to the wall in the Federal court . Boththose actions are going on concurrently, both of themare using the same sorts of evidence, and we will beattempting to prove in court that he hasn’t been defamedbecause he hasn’t got a reputation to defame. In termsof the Copyright, Trade Practices Act , that’s stillproceeding. We think we’re in an exceptionally strongposition. As far as being distressed, I was concernedthat there were little old ladies opening their purses anda large number of people going to his meetings knowingthe answers before they went there, and I was concernedthat there was a total uncritical acceptance of what hesaid. We certainly will hear the whole story. Sitting righton my desk is a book in progress called ‘The Sinking ofthe Ark’. Each day we add a little bit more when there’sa new legal twist. We will certainly see something comeout of this and the whole story will be told, which is whyI will not settle for an undisclosed settlement. I want theresult of any case to be made public.

You have a new book “Telling Lies For God” due forrelease shortly by Random House. Having read a pre-release copy, might I say that it’s the most confrontationalbook I have ever read in respect to tackling the followersof creationism. You name names, dates, places andevents. You accuse people of scientific fraud, deceit, andeven madness. My view is that the book has clearly beeninfluenced by the facts of nature. Having said that, italso throws down the gauntlet so hard, especially to theCreation Science Foundation, that this may end up inthe courts as well. Firstly, if some parties are gameenough, is that where you want creationism finally

15winter 93

contested? And secondly, what kind of confidence doyou have in the publishers to stand by you?

I take issue with you, I think I have been very temperatein this book. Okay I’m only joking. Yes I have been veryblunt, I have thrown down the gauntlet, and I have letthe facts speak for themselves, and I am praying to myGod that they take me to court. We have a huge amountof information on the leaders of the creationist movementand on the nature of creationism. The correct place todeal with this social issue is in public where they haveto make an affirmation, because they won’t swear onthe Bible, that what they say is true, and then be exposedto cross examination. We are just champing at the bit tocross examine the leaders of the creationist movementin public so that it can be reported each day in the press.I want to have creationism contested in the courts, thatis where we win. If we winthe case, we win thecause. And if we lose thecase, that’s fine becauseI’m a man of straw. Wehave been well preparedfor this for quite sometime and that (court) is theplace to deal with it. As forthe publisher standing byme, well, there is acontract and money haschanged hands, so I thinkthey are committed tostanding by me.

You have given manypublic presentations onscience vs creationism,you will also be givingone at the Skeptics National Convention in June. Theones that I have seen have been confronting, but nowherenear as confronting as in your book “Telling Lies ForGod”. Your presentation, ‘Armageddon - AnEveryperson’ s Guide to Finding Geological Evidencefor the End of the World’. How confrontational will yoube? What can the audience expect?

It won’t be confrontational. I will be showing howyou can ‘cook’ evidence, so that the lay person or theperson who is out of their scientific field doesn’t know.I’ll be using a technique to show the evidence and thelogical conclusion you can draw from it and what is thereal conclusion you make from it . I’ll be showing how,even if you get the correct evidence, you can con anaudience, and how easy it is to ‘prove’ that the world iscoming to an end. And we can put the date and time onit. There are not many in the community who know much

about geology, so if I use my field I can show you cancon people very easily. The audience can expect me toshow, firstly a number of myths which we can destroy,things like Atlantis, the frequency of increase inearthquakes and things like that. Secondly on how easyit is to con people. That’s why we have organisationslike the Creation Science Foundation that are thriving.

Finally, just on a slightly more philosophical bent,the world today has more knowledge than ever before,yet there seems to be a number of backward steps beingtaken. Religious cults are growing in number,communism has fallen, but even that seems to beopening up a new avenue for paranormal purveyorsrather than everybody taking advantage of intellectualfreedom to become more rational. Violence and hungerstill dominate many places. There seems to be no ‘New

World Order’ in sight, andthe more we know, themore problems we collect.How positive are youabout the future?Firstly in regard to a NewWorld Order. I would hateto have a New WorldOrder. I think that’s beentried many times in thepast and to have anAmerican-driven NewWorld Order, the thoughtis just frightening. We nowhave a planet of five anda half billion people,we’re approaching thelimits of growth, and partof the political

competition we have leads to violence and hunger. Theplanet is now full, there are too many people here.Technological advances are so rapid that people can’tkeep up with them and so they retreat into the simple,into the dogmatic. Combine this with enormousinsecurity: financial, political, emotional, religious, andyou get some of the ridiculous ideas that people arehaving about the end of the world. In the next ten yearswe are going to see a lot of problems arising because ofinsecurity and population and food problems. It’s hardto see a solution. However, I am very positive. The onlyway we solve these problems is through the young peopleand arming them with knowledge and critical ability.You can’t solve problems with dogma. This is why I’mso concerned about the educational threat ofcreationism, and I love education because I’ m dealingwith young people, and they are the future and they wantto solve problems.

winter 9316

The Victorian city of Warrnambool lies at one end of astretch of notoriously dangerous coastline. Early marinersdreaded the waters between Warrnambool and CapeOtway, with something like 600 vessels having been loston its cliffs and reefs.

Today the coastal towns capitalise on its heavymaritime toll, promoting it as the Shipwreck Coast. Oneauthor of a book of shipwreck stories coined the name‘Bass Strait Triangle’ for the waters bounded byWarrnambool, Cape Otway and King Island. It was a nononsense book of true stories, carrying no implicationof supernatural intervention in the many mishaps. Butrecent events cause me to conclude that this author wasreally on to something.

For the past year Warrnambool has been invaded by aseries of diviners with an extraordinary range of powers.So great has been this concentration of paranormal powerthat I believe Warrnambool does in fact lie at the apexof a mysterious disturbance of energy lines. Here, wherethe force lines intersect, must be some sort of energyvortex into which these gifted individuals are able totap.

My attention was first drawn to this paranormal paradeby an article in the local newspaper, the WarrnamboolStandard, about a chap named Richard Foord fromnearby Port Fairy who claimed he could dowsepractically any substance or object without leaving hisown home. All he needed was a pendulum and a map.His technique was to hold the pendulum above the mapand watch its behaviour as he moved it around. The wayit moved - the angle of the dangle if you like - told himeverything. He had, for instance, located various oil fieldsin the area and was able to specify the depths and sizesof these deposits. He could find other things too,including missing people. He had also located water atTennant Creek, 3000 kilometres away, without leavinghis home.

Within a week of the newspaper article, a small bookappeared in local shops called ‘Teach Yourself Divining’,written by the same Mr Foord. I bought a copy anddiscovered far more about this man’s remarkable powers.In his opening paragraphs Mr Foord pointed out that hispowers were nothing special. Everyone has them if onlythey take the trouble to tap into them, he said. The bookwent on to instruct novices in the art of divining. Stepnumber one was to learn to find water in a garden hose.Simply lay the hose out, turn it on and then let the rodreact as the user walks over it. Mr Foord recommended

DIVINING

Mahogany Ship Still MissingSteve Haynes

this as the very first step in learning to dowse, so Iassumed he would have little trouble doing so himself.It seemed, therefore, that the Skeptics’ buried pipes testwould present him with no problems.

So I challenged Mr Foord, via a letter to the paperwhich carried the article, to undertake a test with theSkeptics. I explained about the prize and outlined thenature of the tests which have so far been miserably failedby others.

All was silent for a several weeks until my work tookme away for a few days. When I returned there was amessage from the newspaper seeking my response to astatement by Mr Foord that he would submit to a test,providing the Skeptics had nothing to do with it. Thenewspaper had published his statement with a note thatI had been unavailable for reply. The essence of hisstatement was that he would predict the locality andextent of oil deposits in the region and submit hispredictions to BHP, which is currently carrying out oilexploration in the region. Validation of his claims wouldcome when BHP eventually drilled the sites, he claimed.

I rang Mr Foord to explain that the nature of his testwas unacceptable. Although BHP is carrying outexploration in this region, the likelihood of the companydrilling specific locations on the say-so of Mr Foord’swobbling pendulum seemed extremely remote. So hisclaims would go untested. I also pointed out that suchpredictions, even if correct, were statisticallymeaningless. There is oil in this region in a number ofplaces. His prediction, I explained, was rather likesticking a needle into a fruitcake and claimingsupernatural intervention when you skewered a raisin.

I asked why he would not agree to the much morequantitative test with buried pipes. His reply was that itwas not possible to detect such small quantities of water.One needed large amounts of water such as undergroundrivers or aquifers. I pointed out that this didn’t tally withthe instructions to novices in his booklet, recommendinga garden hose as an ideal first target. He was unable toresolve this inconsistency.

In his book Mr Foord claims he can locate objectsmade of almost any substance except gold. Gold is theone substance with which he has had little success. This,he says, is because where gold lode occurs there is usuallya surrounding area in which some gold has been carriedaway in suspension by water, leaving a broad area lacedwith specks of the metal. To quote from his text: “Asone atom of gold gives off the same radiation as a nugget

17winter 93

it is impossible for the diviner to identify any particularpiece.”

I put it to Mr Foord that many molecules of water arepresent in the soil between a diviner and any undergroundstream. Would not the same principle prevent the divinerdifferentiating between soil moisture and aquifers? Hewas again unable to resolve the paradox.

But Mr Foord does not stop at buried minerals andobjects. He claims to have successfully located ships atsea and missing people using his remote diviningtechnique. It just happened that at this time the VictorianGovernment offered a prize of $250,000 to any personor team that could find the legendary Mahogany Ship,supposedly buried in sandhills near Warrnambool.

The vessel was sighted many times between 1850 and1890, after which it was buried under drifting sand. Somehistorians believe it to be a Portuguese caravel, wreckedduring an exploration of the coastline in the late 1500s.There seems little doubt that some sort of wreck did exist,and the theory linking it to the Portuguese is at leastcredible. The full theory is outlined in KennethMcIntyre’s ‘The Secret Discovery of Australia’. If thevessel can be found it has the potential to rewrite thehistory of Australia’s discovery - hence the interest inrecent years.

I asked Mr Foord if he would be able to locate thevessel using his pendulum. To my surprise he said healready knew where it was. Yes, he was aware of theprize being offered, but his state of fitness didn’t allowtraipsing about the sandhills. No, he wasn’t interestedin guiding anyone else to the site. Neither was heinterested in supplying a set of coordinates to the searchcommittee for excavation by their team. A strangereaction indeed!

We had to part without Mr Foord agreeing to a test.His coup de grace was that the presence of scepticalminds was sufficient to interfere with the diviningprocess.

He did phone me the next day promising to set up atest independent of the Skeptics and overseen byscientists from the Warrnambool Campus of DeakinUniversity. He would allow me to be an observer. Healso invited me to put my viewpoint at a talk he wouldbe giving to a local Rotary Club. I waited. And I waited.After several weeks curiosity got the better of me, so Imade a few inquiries. I could find no-one at the universitywho had heard of him, and the Rotary club told me MrFoord had got cold feet and pulled out of giving his talk.

My letter to the newspaper also attracted the attentionof a Geelong diviner, Alan Fulton. Mr Fulton was onthe money trail. He rang me wanting to know where tocontact the Skeptics in order to set up a test. He was alsoabout to stake his claim on a patch of sandhills where hehad dowsed the Mahogany Ship some years ago. At the

time he had been refused a permit to excavate, but nowhe was to finally get his chance. I had been aware of MrFulton’s escapades for some years, particularly in relationto several fruitless and costly searches for Benito’streasure, a supposed stash of pirate booty hidden on theshores of Port Phillip Bay.

Mr Fulton did contact the Skeptics and passed on tome a letter from Victorian Branch secretary Chris Jones,informing him that a test was being arranged for a numberof interested diviners.

Mr Fulton’s methods were more conventional thanMr Foord’s, but he nevertheless made some extraordinaryclaims. He said that when driving to Warrnambool todowse for the Mahogany Ship he got a strong reading atTerang, 60 kilometres from the site. As he drove alongthe highway his wire swung gradually seaward until, atGorman’s Lane, it pointed directly into the sand dunes.It just happens that Gorman’s Lane is the one commonreference in many of the documented sightings.

Mr Fulton was unfazed by the suggestion that this priorknowledge had any influence on the antics of his wire.He offered to take me out to the site to watch him inaction and I happily accepted. I waited at home on thearranged day but he never turned up. The thought wentthrough my mind that maybe he couldn’t find my house,but I quickly dismissed the idea. After all, this man hadlocated a buried ship from 60 kilometres away!

I rang his home the next day and his wife told me hehad been taken seriously ill and had been unable to makethe trip. Mr Fulton died a couple of days later. His brotherwent ahead with drill testing at the site but found nothing.

But the story doesn’t end there. Next on the list ofsearchers was a Bob Sheen from Queensland. This fellowwas a no nonsense sort of diviner, the sort who walksaround with a bit of bent wire. Mr Sheen soon found histarget and it was not in some inaccessible part of thedunes. The ship, he claimed, was beneath a carpark usedfor beach access. He said it was 52 feet below the surface,which, strangely, placed it about 45 feet below sea level.The fact that all recorded sightings placed it well abovehigh water didn’t seem to worry him. Mr Sheen was ableto tell the length and breadth of the vessel as well aspinpoint a large metal object, the location of whichindicated that it was probably the galley stove. The wiresalso told him there was gold on board. Obviously thosewho observed the wreck last century hadn’t examined itvery thoroughly!

Conditions of the search restrict exploratory drillingto hand augers, due to the sensitive nature of the sanddune environment. Searchers are required to submit theirfindings or test data to the search committee, which willundertake full scale excavation of the most likely sitesafter a twelve month search period.

Because Mr Sheen’s site was not in the sensitive sand

winter 9318

dunes, he was given special permission to carry out fullscale drilling. He hired a drilling rig for several daysand finally came up with some fragments of wood whichhe sent off for testing. It turned out to be 70 to 80-year-old eucalypt. The drills never encountered the large metalobject or any gold.

Undaunted, Mr Sheen returned a couple of monthslater for another try. His wires were soon wobbling onceagain, and this time he was sure it was the MahoganyShip. This confidence came from the fact that he hadheld a piece of mahogany while divining to help himidentify his target more accurately. By the mostastonishing coincidence this site was also in the middleof a carpark, some six or seven kilometres from his firstsite. So again he was able to carry out full scale drilling.

After several days his drill had brought up a few scrapsof wood which he sent off for identification. Thelaboratory was unable to do anything with the tiny sampleand asked for a bigger piece. A larger drill was broughtinto action and a more substantial sample was unearthed.It was identified as indigenous wood, definitely notmahogany.

It has to be said that Mr Sheen is a trier. After anabsence of a few weeks he was back at the same siteconducting his third search, undaunted by the fact thathe had already spent $20,000 on the project.

Once again he drilled, and once again he brought uppieces of wood - hardly surprising considering the thickcoastal vegetation in the vicinity.

Eventually, after several weeks of drilling, the searchcommittee told Mr Sheen to go home. His search permitwas revoked on the basis that: “Bob Sheen has notprovided us with suitable information and proof thatwould warrant an excavation. He has provided us withlots of samples but none have looked anything like ashipwreck.”

Mr Sheen was down, but not out. Departing he was,but he was going in style. During his last days at the sitehe released details of a finding that will soon have themining companies falling over each other in the rush tosouth-west Victoria. The district, he claims, is sitting ontop of a vast gold field of inestimable value. He hasmarked out three areas, all of which are volcanic andcovered by deep basalt flows. The gold, he says, is underthe basalt, 240 metres below the surface.

“It goes for 100 miles,” he told the local newspapershortly before his enforced departure. “I would not betying up my time in it if I was not confident of what wasthere,” he said.

As “evidence” for his claim, Mr Sheen said tests onbasalt samples from the three areas had shown traces ofgold, copper, aluminium and diamonds. Just how thesurface rocks of geologically young basalt deposits couldcontain traces of gold from a reef deep in the bedrock

was a technicality he apparently regarded as irrelevant.He has applied for an exploration licence and hopes

to finalise “a deal with several companies to start drillingfor the gold”. He estimates the project will cost $3 millionto get started.

Despite getting the bum’s rush, Mr Sheen talked thesearch committee into giving him another go on the basisof some wood samples which had been identified ascoming from a coniferous tree. This, he said, proved thatthe wood came from another country, convenientlyignoring the many species of native pine that could havegrown in the area.

He was given permission to drill a hole of four feetdiameter in the hope of bringing up something moresubstantial. But Mr Sheen seemed to have finally runout of steam. He came back for a few more days drillingbut produced nothing more than excuses.

The time between Mr Sheen’s first two visits was keptlively by the arrival of another Queenslander, RaySoutter. He, too, employed an unusual method. Insteadof tramping the dunes, Mr Soutter used a helicopter.During a day’s aerial divining he claimed to have locatedfive wrecks. His findings have been forwarded to thesearch committee, which will decide if any are worthexcavating, based on the evidence submitted. Bob Sheenfaded from the limelight just as Victorian diviner PeterD’Aloisio stepped into it. Mr D’Aloisio hit town withthe claim that he had won the world diviningchampionships in Adelaide and would soon have theMahogany Ship mystery solved.

He wasted no time in coming up with yet anotherlocation, having identified a “large vee-shaped metalobject, possibly an anchor”. Days of drilling went by,each ending with an excuse but no evidence.

At the time of writing Mr D’Aloisio is still scratchingaround in the sandhills and two others diviners, AlanDennis from South Australia and Joe Doppler fromQueensland have been given permission to search.

But time is running out as the twelve months searchperiod is almost over.

Not all those attracted by the $250,000 prize wereperpetrators of paranormal piffle. A team from NewEngland University carried out a search usingmagnetometers and located what they believed to be thesite. It tallies closely with the historical record.

The CSIRO followed up with a search using groundpenetrating radar. They found something promising inthe same spot as the New England team. Their evidence,along with that from the various diviners, will be assessedwhen the search period expires, and the search committeewill then decide which are worth excavating.

It will be interesting to see which sites the committeeconsiders worth excavating. I have a feeling that, foronce, scepticism may rule.

19winter 93

It is said that there are only two things certain in thisworld - death and taxes. I would suggest that there arethree - the third being certain failure for those trying topredict the future. The second coming predicted by theMission for the Coming Days for 1 am October 29, 1992,was the latest in a long long list of let downs for thoseinclined to believe in man’s ability to make prophecy. Itwasn’t the first and it won’t be the last, particularly asthis century comes to a close. Let’s take a brief lookdown through the centuries at some of the unfulfilledprophecies.

The prophets of doom“...the Lord of Hosts will appear in his glory on theMount of Olives, the mountain that rises high aboveJerusalem, to war against the nations and to meteout retribution to them. At this awe-inspiringtheophany, the whole mountain will shake and becloven asunder, as the earth was convulsed in thegreat earthquake that occurred in the reign ofUzziak.”

Book of John

Apocalyptic forecasts span written history from pre-biblical times to the present day, and as I chronologuedthe dismal litany, I found it difficult to comprehend whatmotivates people to make them, particularly as therewould be no one left thereafter to gave an accolade forthe successful prophet.

The oldest apocalyptic ideas date back to Babyloniantimes; in the Bible alone theologians have found morethan 300 references to the coming of the Messiah, theanti-Christ and the end of the world.

About 90 CE, St John the Divine wrote explicitly abouta book closed with seven seals, the breaking of eachrevealing certain aspects of the apocalypse. The first fourbeing the horsemen of the apocalypse representing theevils of war, conquest, famine and death. The fifth, theslaughtered Martyrs; violent earthquakes on the breakingof the sixth; the seventh heralding the appearance ofseven angels with trumpets, the sounding of each trumpetbringing forth more disasters; hail, fire, blood, pestilence

and pollution, during which one third of the world’spopulation will perish. With the exception of trumpetblowing angels (unless we include an all-girls band), allthese disasters have in one form or another beset theworld since the New Testament was codified, but likeOle Man River, the world keeps rolling along.

In seeking why there is a conviction that the worldwill come to a sticky end one needs look no further thanthe Kingdom of Judea 600 years before the birth ofChrist, when the Jews believed God to be the divinejudge, rewarding and punishing as deserved.

After the crushing of Judea by the Chaldeans, theexiled Jews in Babylonia idealised the return of thekingdom and a king as the rewards of virtue in the future,referring to the coming of the Messiah, or anointed one.A description of the coming of God’s retribution andreward is given in the Book of Isaiah in which the oftquoted messianic prophecies are to be found.

The Jewish prophets became more graphic on theirreturn from exile, and the notion of Judgment Daybecame more and more extreme in the second centuryBCE.

Under the Romans during the occupation of Judea,there were a number of claimants to being the Messiah,among them Jesus of Nazareth, their followers beingcalled Messianics. The promise of a kingdom of heavenwas preached by John the Baptist, and as more and moreGentiles were converted the Greek word for Messiah(Christos) was substituted and the followers becameknown as Christians.

With the preachings of the Apostle Paul came the rapidconversion of Rome, Europe, and finally much of theworld to Christianity, and the accompanying persecutionby the Roman Emperors Nero and Domitian, fuellingthe apocalyptic promises (in particular the punishmentof enemies) of the Old Testament Book of Daniel thenrevived in the Book of Revelation.

The urge to believe in something or someone,encourages re-interpretation of the vague predictionsleading to further speculations of the Day of Judgmentand the Second Coming. One very popular formulainvolves the figure of one thousand years. In the Book of

PREDICTING THE FUTURE (I)

Prophets of DoomHarry Edwards

winter 9320

Revelation we read:“And I saw an angel come down from heaven,having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chainin his hand. And he laid hold of the dragon, that oldserpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and boundhim a thousand years. And cast him into thebottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal uponhim, that he should deceive the nations no more,till a thousand years should be fulfilled: and afterthat he must be loosed a little season.”

Rev. 20: 1-3Given that the ancients used arbitrary figures for

dating, ages and time spans generally, the onlysignificance I can see in the figure is its four figuresimplicity. However, others spend years trying tocalculate and read into it the date of the Armageddon.Many religious movements the followers of which areknown as “millennialists” later known as SecondAdventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses are examples.

Astrologers and PyramidologistsJohn of Toledo, a 12th century astrologer, correctly

forecast the conjunction of all the planets under the signof Libra for September 1186. Interpreting this to meanterrible storms and earthquakes, panic spread throughoutEurope and the Middle East, but the catastrophe failedto materialise.

The end of the world beginning with a deluge onLondon on February 1, 1524 was the consensus of agroup of astrologers in 1523. Twenty thousandinhabitants deserted the city and ... nothing happened.The astrologers had miscalculated, the end of the worldwas not due until 1624!

Johannes Stoffler, a German astrologer andmathematician made two attempts, one for February 20,1524, preceded by a giant flood, and when that failed tomaterialise, again for 1528. Coincidentally, there washeavy rain on February 20, and in the ensuing panichundreds of people lost their lives fleeing for higherground. Stoffler’s second forecast was ignored by thosewho had learned their lesson.

Using the measurements of the Great Pyramid ofCheops, pyramidologists have forecast the secondcoming for 1881, 1936, and 1953, but not the end of theworld, for in 2001 a new age will dawn better thananything we have known. John Stone, a Melbournebusinessman predicted in his book, “The DoomsdayCity” (1973) a Russian nuclear attack on that city.Together with 70 followers they constructed a“doomsday city” to wait out the holocaust. The date of

the forthcoming disaster was based on parts of the Bibleand his own calculations of the size of the pyramids andwas set for October 2, 15, or 31, 1978. Then just in case,September 23, 1979.

Layland Jensen and Charles Gaines stocked their fall-out shelters in the Rocky Mountains in preparation forWorld War III scheduled for 5.55 pm on April 29, 1980.When it failed to materialise their revised calculationspostponed it to May 7. Oh well, back to the computer.

Another who foresaw a nuclear explosiondisintegrating the world at 12.15 pm 1962 was WilmaBianco. To escape the coming catastrophe her brotherand 40 followers started to build an ark 7000' up MontBlanc. It is not stated whether the ark was supposed tofloat in space following the disappearance of planetEarth, however, the non-event was shrugged off withthe remark, “anyone can make a mistake!”

Nostradamus, in one of his quatrains, agrees with thepyramidologists, forecasting the long awaitedArmageddon - plague, fire, famine and death by themilitary hand for July 1999 in Century X. , Quatrain 72:

“In the year 1999, and seven months, from the skywill come the great King of Terror. He will bringback to life the great king of the Mongols, beforeand after the war reigns happily.”

However, this chronological preciseness is contradictedin Century VI, Quatrain 24 :

“Mars and the sceptre will be in conjunction, acalamitous war under Cancer. A short timeafterwards a new king will be anointed who willbring peace to the earth for a long time.”The only time such a conjunction will occur is on June

21, 2002. Nostradamus believed in hedging his bets - healso prophesied the end of the world when Easter fallson April 25. This has already occurred in 1666, 1734,1886, 1943 and will again in 2038.

Divine revelationThe English Divine, William Whiston announced the

beginning of the end for October 13, 1736, but most ofthe population was still around 25 years later, whenimmediately following an earthquake, a William Bellpredicted the end of the world for April 5. Mass hysteriafollowed and when nothing happened Bell wasincarcerated in Bethlehem Hospital (Bedlam), London’sinfamous mental asylum.

There is no doubt in my mind that to have faith onemust also have infinite patience. William Miller, thepalsied and stammering leader of the Second Adventists(now the Seventh Day Adventists) heard the voice of

21winter 93

God urging him to tell the world of the second comingand the end of the world to occur between March 21,1843 and March 21, 1844. ( Seems rather odd to me thatGod could not be a little more specific, ah well,“mysterious ways” you know!). Thousands believedMiller particularly when a magnificent meteor showerreminded them of the prophecy in Revelation, that after“the stars fell unto earth” the heaven would open up.The prophecy was given wide publicity and impetus inthe newspapers Signs of the Times and The MidnightCry. As the last day approached thousands gathered onthe hilltops only to go home next morning disappointed.Undeterred, Miller postponed the coming to October 22,1844. Hysteria grew, murder, suicide and panic prevailed,but once again the Messiah had a prior engagement.Evidently tired of waiting, Miller made his own wayheavenward to meet his maker in 1849. Succeeded byCharles Russell who founded the Jehovahs Witnesses,further predictions were made with equal success. Themovement flourished however under Joseph Rutherford,best known for his slogan “Millions now living shallnever die.” A statement I’m sure millions long gonewould hotly dispute if they could and one worthy to bealongside “no child will live in poverty by 1990”.

If by now you are wearing a wry smile and thinkinghow gullible they were in the old days to be taken in bysuch nonsense, I assure you nothing has changed. In 1925the Archangel Gabriel whispered in the ear of oneMargaret Brown of Los Angeles that the world wouldend at midnight on Friday the 13th. A frustratingly vagueprediction I might add, as Friday the 13th fell in themonths of February, March and November that year. Thisdidn’t deter Robert Reidt of Long Island however andhe advertised for people to join him on high ground toawait the sound of heavenly trumpets. When the buglesfailed to sound, he blamed the newspaper reporters forscaring off the archangel with their flashbulbs. He triedagain in 1932 after studying the Book of Revelation butafter the second non-event went back to house painting.

House painting somehow seems synonymous withpsychics. Gerard Croiset the psychic detective was ahouse painter, and it was a house painter by the name ofJohn Nash who predicted a tidal wave which woulddestroy the city of Adelaide on January 19, 1976. Acarnival atmosphere prevailed when Don Dunstan thethen Premier of South Australia joined with threethousand sightseers at the Glenelg jetty for the predictedevent. Hotels did a roaring trade from those who wouldslake their thirst before the worst, and a couple of spoil-sports called on Mr Dunstan to repent. Many who took

the prediction seriously sold up their homes, and threatswere made on the life of the prophet regardless ofwhether he proved to be right or wrong. After the non-event Mr Nash discreetly moved to Melbourne where,in an interview, he stood by his prediction saying that hewould not return to Adelaide because there would be noAdelaide to return to. Obviously a man of conviction!

As floods and earthquakes figure monotonously indoomsday forecasts it is refreshing to hear somethingdifferent. The Reverend Charles Long of Pasadenapredicted a graphic end for us all at 5.33 pm onSeptember 21, 1945. He said the world would bevaporised and its inhabitants turned into ectoplasm. Therevelation came to him in 1938 when a ghostly handwrote on a blackboard at the foot of his bed and a voicewhispered in his ear. During the years which ensued hewrote a 70,000 word tract on the coming destruction(based I assume solely on a time and a date) which heposted to the world’s leaders. While vaporisation wasnot to be civilisation’s lot, an awful lot of converts werebaptised by the Reverend and his son in their rentedauditorium in Pasadena. I’ve yet to figure out what ablackboard was doing at the foot of the Reverend’s bed!

Back on the farmMeanwhile back on the farm in Australia, the

Theosophists were hard at work at Balmoral Beach, aharbourside suburb of Sydney, preparing for yet anothersecond coming. Land had been purchased on which tobuild an amphitheatre, the purpose of which was subjectto rumour and speculation. Fuel was added to the flameswith the arrival of Miss Enid Lorimer, a London actresswho said that the building would be utilised for a newtype of outdoor pageant until needed for its “greatpurpose”. On July 24, 1924, an exotic ceremony wasperformed on the site by Charles Leadbeater, a prominentAnglo-Australian Theosophist, and prime mover in theenterprise. One year later the vision was manifest, anextensive three storied building structure towered overthe beach, its 70 foot open stage above. By October 1924the building was operational, Miss Lorimer’sAmphitheatre players performing, appropriately, Henryvan Dyke’s “The Other Wise Man”.

The auditorium could accommodate 3000 people andseats could be purchased for one hundred pounds in thefront row, ten pounds in the back five, or could be leasedfor twenty-five years. For one pound, one could havethe names of those “passed on” placed on a wall a Rollof Honour.

The purpose of the amphitheatre was no longer hidden,

winter 9322

the Order of the Star had as its sole purpose thepreparation of the way for the expected world teacher(Messiah). The principal declaration being, “we believethat a Great Teacher will soon appear in the world, andwe wish so to live that we may be worthy to know himwhen he comes”. No enterprise expressed so well theapocalyptic zeal of those who attempted to seize the hourand the failure of the coming was a severe blow to themall, including Walter Marks, a politician who astonishedparliament in the early twenties when he prophesied theSecond Coming through Sydney Heads in 1934!

The amphitheatre was sold in 1931, the last vestige ofthe structure disappearing under the demolisher’shammer in 1951.

Psychics and clairvoyantsOccult visions and voices seemingly know no frontiers

or language barriers and the track record for thoseallegedly possessing extraordinary faculties is no betterthan the millennialists. Edgar Cayce, seer and faith healer,goes for the end of civilisation in 2000 AD, but expectsto be re-incarnated in Nebraska a century later. Amonghis failed predictions are the re-emergence of themythical continent of Atlantis in 1968-69, and large partsof California, Florida, Japan and Europe disappearinginto the ocean following gigantic earthquakes. JeaneDixon, the American seeress whose prolific output isunequalled anywhere in the world, even allowing hervague and all encompassing predictions, has a successrate of one per cent, and that usually post-event.

The chaos and mayhem following apocalypticpredictions has in some cases already been enumerated,to them we can add, Munoy Ferradas, a Chileanastronomer who panicked thousands into selling theirhomes, turning to drink, committing murder and suicidewhen he predicted the end of all life on earth followinga collision with a comet in August 1944. Seventeenmembers of the True Light Church of Christ resignedtheir jobs which they thought they would no longer needafter 1970, when, so the Church said, the world wouldend. Despite their premature retirement, the membersstill cling to the other doctrines of that church.

Readers may be tempted to say that the law ofprobability will ensure that eventually one of the prophetswill get it right, but not through the medium of a vision,alien voices, astrology or pyramidology; the end of theworld can be predicted (give or take a few million years)by practical and reliable scientific methods.

Part II of this article will appear in the next issue.

REVIEW

Anti-EvolutionBarry Williams

Anti-Evolution: A Reader’s Guide to Writings beforeand after DarwinTom McIver, Johns Hopkins University Press.

This is an annotated bibliography of the writings of themany groups and individuals who, for various reasons,oppose the idea that life as we know it is the result ofevolution. It covers 1852 books, tracts and pamphletson the subject, with an objective commentary by theauthor on each of them. Occasionally, McIver, ananthropologist and research fellow at the (US) NationalEndowment for the Humanities, cannot restrain himselfand some of his comments show a sardonic sense ofhumour, no doubt as a reaction to having to wade throughthe turgid depths of so much of the writing.

In not confining himself to the peculiarities of the‘new-earth, Noah’s flood’ creationist stream of anti-evolutionary propaganda familiar to most Skeptics,McIver shows just how widespread and disparate, thoughessentially anti-intellectual, is opposition to Darwin’stheory. Christian ‘Old-Earth’ and ‘Gap Theory’creationist ideas are covered, as are writings from totallydifferent religious perspectives, together with variousoccult and ‘ancient astronaut’ propositions.

Nor are the subjects confined to those of Americanorigin, with Australia being represented by Setterfield,Snelling, Ham and MacKay, among others. “MeinKampf” rates a mention for its pseudo-historical Aryanmythology, as do the Theosophist writings of Blavatskyand others.

Some of the books covered are from the early to mid19th century, when the theory of evolution was notgenerally accepted and was still the subject of seriousintellectual debate, but by far the bulk are more recentworks published since the 1950s, which presumablyshows that an increase in wisdom does not necessarilyfollow from an increase in knowledge.

Because of its breadth and scope, Anti-Evolution isan invaluable resource for anyone, particularly educators,who have to confront the insidious spread of the anti-intellectual dogma of the creationist movement. It ishighly recommended.

23winter 93

CRICKET

Superstition Hit for SixBarry Williams

Cricket, as generations of commentators from the SCGto Sabina Park, from Lords to Lahore, have never tiredof iterating, is a funny game. And I have no doubt thateven in Holland, the only country to have a 100% successrate against Australia, some Netherlandish Bjil Lawrijhas more than once delivered himself of the observation,“Crijkit is a fjuni gejm”. Our many readers who havenominated the game of the flannelled fools as one oftheir interests, will probably agree.

Cricket is a game that has inspired more prose andpoetry than any mere sport; cricket doesn’t have rules, ithas Laws; cricket offers more statistics than a politicianat election time. And it is in cricket’s statistics andfolklore that the dedicated devotee can find hours ofinnocent enjoyment.

For instance, in what other field of esoteric knowledgecould one glean the intelligence that a team of Englishprofessional cricketers who visited the United States in1857, under the managership of a certain Fred Lillywhite,contained one Julius Caesar of Surrey. Julius Caesar?He must have been getting on a bit - or was this proof ofreincarnation? And what of CB Fry, who, around theturn of the century, held the world long jump record,played soccer for England, played in 26 test matches forEngland and is alleged to have been offered the throneof Albania. How many tennis players could match that?

Delving further, one comes across the remarkablerecord of one JEBBPQC Dwyer, who played 60 matchesfor Sussex in the years 1906-9 and who twice took 9wickets in an innings. An extreme example of the Englishparental eccentricity of giving more than two initials tofuture cricketers (PHB May, JWHT Douglas, DCSCompton et al) perhaps? Well, not really. John EliciusBenedict Bernard Placid Quirk Carrington Dwyer, thegrandson of an Irish convict, was born in Sydney in 1876.Placid? Wow!

Cricket consists of a series of ‘Golden Ages’, whichhave nothing to do with the ‘New Age’, but refer to thecricket played when the cricketophile was 10. Who couldforget the unbeaten ‘Immortal’ Australian 1948 touringside? Where others tried to remember the Seven Dwarfsto win a bar-room bet, the pre-war baby could rattle offBradman, Hassett, Barnes, Morris, Harvey, Brown,

Miller, Lindwall, Tallon, Johnson, Johnston, Loxton,Toshack, McCool, Saggers, Ring and Hammence,without looking at a book (and still can!).

Bradman! Every devout cricket lover knows SirDonald Bradman’s test batting record as well as theChristian knows the Apostle’s Creed. (52 tests; 80innings; 10 not outs; 334 highest score; 6,996 runs; 99.94average; 29 centuries.) And the lore. Needing only 4 inhis last test to finish with an average of 100, he wasbowled second ball by a googly from Eric Hollies for 0.His average is more than 50% higher than the next best.He scored a century or better every third innings. Hestill shares several test wicket partnership records,including the highest of all, 451 with Bill Ponsford forthe second wicket, against England in 1934 (59 yearsago). But only the truly devout could tell you The Don’stest bowling record (160 balls; 3 maidens; 72 runs; 2wickets; 36.00 average.) And who were these two victims(a guaranteed free beer in any bar for knowing this)?George Nathanial Francis (West Indies) lbw Bradman27, 1st Test, Adelaide, 1930 and the great WalterHammond (England) bowled Bradman 85, 3rd Test,Adelaide, 1933 during the infamous ‘Bodyline’ series.There must have been something in the Adelaide wicketthat suited The Don’s bowling.

Now hang on a bit, I hear the gentle reader cry, justbecause he is the editor, how can he justify inflictingthis harangue about cricket on us? After all, this is ajournal dedicated to exploring the mysteries of theparanormal and pseudoscience, not the arcane lore ofleather and willow. There is nothing paranormal aboutcricket unless, as an American is once alleged to havesaid while watching a test match, it is proof of eternity.

Well, let me tell you, there is a relevant point to allthis and I have just been setting the scene. And, aseverybody knows, if there is anything you can accuse acricket buff of, it certainly isn’t reticence.

What brought me to this happy state was hearing,during the recent West Indies series, one of the ABCcricket commentators discussing the notoriously‘unlucky’ score for Australian test batsmen of 87. Some20 years ago, pre-Skeptics and pre-computers, I hadsought to discover the truth of this superstition, whether

winter 9324

in fact Australian batsmen had a tendency to be dismissedmore frequently on 87 than on other scores in the 80s.Since then, I have lost my data, but I can vaguelyremember that there was no particular concentration ofdismissals on that score.

Readers will appreciate that it was no simple matterto research every score made by every Australianbatsman in the 520 test matches they have played in,from the first in 1877 until the lamented last test of therecent West Indies series. First to my local library tosearch Wisden’s Book of Test Cricket, which lists alltest matches between all countries. But where to begin?Clearly it would take at least as long as the famous‘Timeless Test’, (England v South Africa, Durban, 1939.This match was abandoned, and declared a draw, on thetenth day of play because the England team had to boardtheir ship home.), to list every score, so I decided toconcentrate only on those between 70-100. Additionally,I sought the times when a wicket fell when the teamscore stood at 87.

This research enlivened my lunch hours for more thana week, but was inconclusive because the Wisden in mylibrary listed tests up to 1985 only. Where next? A callto the NSW Cricket Association to seek access to morecurrent books, elicited the information that theAssociation’s librarian, Ross Dundas, should be able tohelp with my quest. Mr Dundas’ name was notunfamiliar, as I had seen his imprint on a number of booksof cricket statistics, so I called him. Not only did he havestatistics on all the tests up to and including the latest,but he actually had a computer listing of the number ofbatsmen who had made every score that had been madefrom 0 to 334 (Don Bradman, A v E, Leeds, 1930).Would he make his list available to me? Of course hewould; when cricket nut talks to cricket nut, nothing istoo much trouble.

What was the result, I hear you cry? Patience, dearreader, patience - triple centuries are not made in a day(well, not often at any rate - Don Bradman at Leeds,1930, made 309 in one day, the only time this has beendone in test cricket). While searching the figures for myprimary objective, I came across some other intriguingstatistics, which I am sure will interest my fellowcricketophiles among the readership. Some of theseshould certainly be useful for baffling the fellow next toyou in the pub. The lowest score at which no Australianhas ever been dismissed is 139, although one batsmanhas been left on 139 not out. The lowest score that hasnever appeared in the scorebook beside a batsman’s nameis 148, while no batsman has ever been out for 150,

though three have been left not out on that score. Betweenthis score and 200, eight scores have never been made,174, 175, 180, 186, 194, 195, 197 and 199. I could havegone on for ever, teasing Mr Dundas’ figures for theodd result, but still no nearer discovering why 87 hadattracted all the attention.

I had some figures to work with, but I had not comeany closer to finding why Australian commentators (andpresumably players) thought this particular score wasunlucky. Some suggested that it was because the scorewas 13 short of a century, but then 13 should be aparticularly unlucky score and, thanks to Ross Dundas’figures, I could see that 151 batsmen had been dismissedfor 13, while 159 had made 12 and 158 had reached 14.The most unlucky score of all, of course, is 0, the dreaded‘duck’ - 947 players have scored this non-score, 11.75%of all Australian test innings.

It was at about this time that there occurred one ofthose coincidences that makes even the most hardenedsceptic think that there must be some underlying purposeto the universe after all. In the February 6 issue of theSydney Morning Herald, Good Weekend magazine, wellknown sporting journalist and author, Philip Derriman,had written an article about Harry “Bull” Alexander, aVictorian fast bowler and now Australia’s oldestsurviving test cricketer *. Alexander played in only onetest match, the last of the 1932-33 Bodyline Series, andis remembered for hitting England captain DouglasJardine (as popular in Australia then as Saddam Husseinis in the USA now) several times during the match. Inthe course of the article, Mr Derriman referred toAlexander’s career as a Victorian Sheffield Shield bowlerand how he dismissed the then young Don Bradman in amatch in Melbourne in 1929. Watching the match was aten year-old boy called Keith Miller and, according tothe article, this dismissal was the genesis of thesuperstition about 87. As Miller grew up and began toplay cricket, the Bradman 87 stayed in his mind and henoticed how many other club or state players with whomhe played seemed to go out at the same score.

Intrigued, I contacted Philip Derriman and mentionedmy interest in this superstition. He suggested that I callKeith Miller and ask him about it. Now if Don Bradmanis a deified figure to cricketophiles of a certain age, thenKeith Miller is at least a demi-god. A natural cricketer,outstanding with both bat and ball, Keith Miller isprobably the greatest all rounder in Australia’s crickethistory. Faced with the choice of two cricketers to playfor my life, I would unhesitatingly select Keith Millerand Sir Garfield Sobers of the West Indies. When I was

25winter 93

ten years-old, I didn’t want to grow up to be like KeithMiller, I wanted to grow up to be Keith Miller (regrettablymy talent did not match my enthusiasm - my battingwas in the Bruce Reid mould and my bowling resembledDavid Boon’s). Now, more than 40 years later, I wasabout to speak to the man himself.

It was obvious that the decades since Keith had playedtest cricket had not diminished his interest in the GreatGame. He was very willing to discuss his career andanswered a couple of questions I have wanted to askhim for many years. Yes it was true, as I had read insome book, that he had whiled away his time in the fieldwhistling Beethoven symphonies and yes, he had, as aWWII RAF Mosquito pilot, diverted one of his return

flights via the German city of Bonn, so he could seewhere Beethoven was born.

Having cleared up those vital cricketing points, I askedKeith about his role in the 87 affair. Yes he had watchedDon Bradman bowled for 87 in a Sheffield Shield matchand he had retained that memory when he later began toplay club, state and test cricket and he had noticed thatthis number seemed to occur more often than chancewould dictate. He also said that he attributed this tonothing more than an interesting quirk and was surprisedto hear, sometime during the 1970s, ABC commentatorand former Australian batsman Paul Sheahan, discussingwhy the score of 87 was considered to be the Devil’sNumber. He attributed to Sheahan the suggestion that itwas because it was 13 short of a hundred. However, asthe figures below will show, Keith Miller was sufferingfrom a delusion that is very familiar to all Skeptics. Ifyou expect to see some pattern in anything, then youwill see it and will ignore those events that don’t conform.But an even more astonishing fact arose in recent years

when Keith was discussing his part in the history of thesuperstition with Philip Derriman. He referred to his 1929watching of the dismissal of Don Bradman by BullAlexander and, trying to ensure he had all the facts right,he looked up the scores for the match. There it was, inblack and white. Bradman, bowled Alexander 89. Keithbelieves that Bradman had been on 87 when he lastlooked at the scoreboard and this number had stayed inhis mind throughout the intervening time.

For those who are interested in such matters, I haveincluded a box which shows the numbers of batsmenwho have been dismissed on all the scores between 71and 100. This shows that only 10 Australian test batsmenhave achieved this score (yes, I know the box shows 11,

but someone did it twice). Much more common scoresin the vicinity are 85 (18), 83 (16), 88 (15), 89 (14), 92(13), and 100 (17). Curiously, 17 players have also scored112, when most of the scores around that figure havebeen achieved by only 6 or 7 players. Incidentally, I alsochecked on how many wickets had fallen in an Australianinnings when the team score stood at 87. The total was18, the lowest number for any score between 80-100.The highest number, 34, was when the score stood at97.

Thanking Keith for his time and information, I askedfor his address so I could send him a copy of the articleand was astonished by yet another amazing coincidence.He lives but a few doors away from Australian Skepticssecretary, Harry Edwards (it would be nice to be able toreport that he lives 87 doors away, but it isn’t true).

But a good cricket story is not put to rest until wehave milked every fact from it. So let me tell you whowere the Australian batsmen who fell at the Devil’sNumber.

winter 9326

* In a sadly ironic footnote, after this story was writtenbut before it was published, Harold “Bull” Alexander,died on April 15, 1993. He was 87.

The very first was George Bonnor who was dismissedfor 87 in the Sydney test against England in 1883. It wasBonnor’s second highest score in 17 tests, so could hardlybe considered unlucky. Australia won the test by 4wickets.

The second was Sammy Jones in the Manchester testagainst England in 1886. Jones, who lived to be 90, wasthe last survivor of the “Ashes” test of 1882. In 12 tests,87 was Jones’ highest test score. In this innings he wasbowled by none other than Dr WG Grace. England wonby 4 wickets.

In 1902, Clem Hill achieved the score against Englandin the Melbourne test, which Australia won by 32 runsand he did it again in the Sydney test of 1907, whichAustralia won by 2 wickets. Clem Hill played 49 testsfor Australia, including 10 as captain. In the 1902 series,he achieved scores of 99, 98 and 97 in successive innings.While captain, he indulged in a bout of fisticuffs with afellow selector and retired from test cricket shortlythereafter.

The immortal Victor Trumper, was next to achievethe score, in the 1910 Melbourne test against SouthAfrica. Australia won the match by 86 runs. Trumper,probably Australia’s second most revered cricketer,played in 48 tests and died of Bright’s Disease at thetragically young age of 37.

Next in line was Jack Ryder who made 87 againstEngland in Adelaide in 1929. He played 20 tests forAustralia, five as captain and was a long serving selectorin the post WWII years. England won this test by 12runs.

Twenty years were to pass before the score wasachieved again, by Jack Moroney in a test against SouthAfrica in Capetown, which Australia won by 8 wickets.Moroney made a century in each innings of theJohannesburg test in this series and made a duck in eachinnings of the first test of the next season against Englandin Brisbane. This may be the only time a batsman hasachieved this double double distinction. He played inseven tests for Australia.

Brian Booth was the next to make 87, in the drawnSydney test against South Africa in 1963. Booth, a classybatsman, also played hockey for Australia in theMelbourne Olympics. He played 29 tests, two as captain.

The next to achieve the score, and perhaps part of thecontinuing mythology, was ABC commentator KeithStackpole, against England in the drawn Adelaide testof 1972. An aggressive right handed opening bat, KeithStackpole played in 43 tests.

John Dyson made his 87 against Pakistan at Karachi

in 1982, a match Pakistan won by 9 wickets. Dysonplayed 29 tests for Australia and took one of the finestcatches I have ever seen on an Australian ground, whichvarious commentators ascribed to the fact that he wasalso a soccer goal keeper.

Recently retired spinner Peter Taylor was the lastplayer to date to make 87, in the 1990 Wellington testagainst New Zealand. It was Taylor’s highest test scorein test cricket.

But we could not allow this to conclude withoutreference to the only Australian player to have achieved87 not out. This was none other than that renownedpigeon fancier and Channel 9 commentator, WilliamMorris Lawry, in the 1963 drawn Brisbane test againstSouth Africa. Bill Lawry played 68 tests for Australia,27 as captain.

It is interesting to note that current Australian captainand world record test run scorer, Alan Border, has never,in 139 test matches and 10,000 plus runs, been dismissedfor 87 in a test match. No one has ever scored 87 againstthe West Indies, India or Sri Lanka. In fact, 87 appearsto be score achieved by fewer batsmen than would beexpected by chance and, as shown above, with three ofthe 11 scores either the highest or second highest scoremade by the player concerned, not a particularly unluckyone.

If one had to select an ‘unlucky’ score for Australiantest players while within sight of a century, then 85, 88or 99 would appear to fit the bill better. And what aboutthe ‘ton’ itself. No less than 17 players have beendismissed on the score.

I may have taken a long and circuitous route to reachthis conclusion, but that is the way we cricket cranksare. As a result, perhaps I have helped lay to rest one ofthe more curious and lasting superstitions that infectscricket and showed it to have little more substance thanmost other irrational beliefs. But I would not bet themortgage on it, for, as that commentator nonpareilRitchie Benaud has been heard to observe on more thanone occasion, “cricket is a funny game”.

I would like to express my sincere thanks to MessrsPhilip Derriman, Ross Dundas and Keith Miller forthe willing and invaluable assistance they gave me inresearching the information for this article. BW

27winter 93

HEATLH

Acupuncture: The FactsStephen Basser

IntroductionThe practice of acupuncture is fairly widespread inAustralia, and is used by both medically and non-medically trained persons. The technique is based onthe belief that the human body is subject to disease whenthere are imbalances in the level of invisible life forces.Balance can be restored by using fine needles, or othermeans, to stimulate various points located over the body.The needles are usually inserted and twirled and may beleft in for short periods. The points chosen for stimulationdepend upon the patient’s symptoms, the season, theweather, and the result of taking the pulse at the wrist.

Acupuncture is a therapy based on ancient Chinesephilosophy and was described for the first time in 90BC in the Shih-chi text. No known Chinese source priorto this time refers to the technique. 1

Modern authors (eg, Needham 2) have expressed viewson acupuncture that are not consistent with thedescriptions in the ancient Chinese medical texts. Thisis clearly inappropriate. Any assessment of acupunctureshould involve accessing these texts as the historicaldocuments they are, and not merely reinterpreting themto suit some other purpose. When this is done it is clearthat there is often little connection between the modernwestern form and understanding of acupuncture and thepast.

Only by accurate reference to source material can thosewho are interested in acupuncture determine whether itsconcepts are applicable in a meaningful way to moderntimes. Objectivity is an important scientific principle andprovides protection from the influence of pre-existingbeliefs or ideas. 3

History of AcupunctureThe earliest Chinese medical texts are those discoveredat the Ma-wang-tui graves in 1973, dating from 168 BC.4-6 These provide a picture of Chinese medicine as itexisted during the 3rd to 2nd century BC. Acupunctureis not mentioned in these texts, which record all modesof treatment in use at the time. 1

The Ma-wang-tui texts do describe eleven mo orvessels, which were believed to contain in addition toblood a life force known as ch’i or pneuma. 6 There was

no distinction made between vessels on the basis ofcontent and no information was provided on how theblood and ch’i circulated in the vessels, which did notmake up a connected system. 1

By the end of the first century BC it was believed thatthere were twelve vessels, and that these were connectedin a network. In addition a picture had developed of thech’i flowing through vessels separate from blood. 1,4,6

The most important text of this time - the Huang-tinei-ching - mentions twelve connected vessels withdifferent courses to the eleven described earlier 7 . Thesewere called “conduits” (ching) or “conduit vessels”(ching-mo). It also records a large number of holes whichare located over the body on these vessels. Most modernwriters refer to these vessels as meridians. 8,9

Ch’iDisease was closely related to the vascular system andwas, in earlier times, treated by causing bleeding from avessel with sharp stones or needles 6 . Later the conceptof a disease causing agent - the hsieh - was developed. Itwas believed that this could lodge in the vessels andinterfere with the flow in them. The concept of ch’i camefrom the term hsieh-chi, or evil influences which in turndeveloped from an earlier time in Chinese history whenthe agents of illness were thought to be demons (hsieh-kuei ). 1

The wind was originally regarded as a demon andtherefore an agent of illness. Later it was regarded merelyas a natural phenomenon, though it was still considereda warning of future events. As a spirit or demon the windresided, it was believed, in caves or tunnels. The termfor ‘caves’ is used in acupuncture literature to designatethe holes in the skin through which the ch’i is able toflow into and out of the body - hsueh. It was believedthat through the insertion of different kinds of needlesinto these holes the flow of ch’i could be increased ordecreased to achieve a more normal state of health.

Ch’i was considered to float through the air, and flowwith blood. The Chinese character used to represent ch’iis literally read as vapours rising from food 1.

Supporters of acupuncture like to use the word‘energy’ in association with the term ch’i , but it is clear

winter 9328

that:“the core concept of ch’i bears no resemblance tothe western concept of energy (regardless of whetherthe latter is borrowed from the physical sciences orfrom colloquial use).” 4(p5)

Celestial influenceOver time the connection between needling and ch’i,which formed the basis of acupuncture, was describedin the context of an emerging cosmological view of theworld, not evident in the earlier descriptions of medicalbleeding. Organic medicine was subsumed under thisemerging system of cosmological correspondences. 1,6

For example, the types of needles used were groupedtogether as nine because of the cosmological significanceof the number. When the system of openings or holesalong the vessels was first described there were 365, notbecause this number had been anatomically identified,but because this corre-sponded to the days in one year.Early texts make no reference to the openings - they arejust suddenly described, and there are 365 of them. Theabsence of any objective basis for the openings is shownby the fact that many texts describe a different totalnumber of them. 10

Contradictory elementsThe vessels, and not the openings, were the centralfeature of ‘ancient’ acupuncture, whereas in modernpractice the points appear to be of prime importance.The vessels have, over time, lost their association withthe vascular system 6 and in the west are now viewedprimarily as functional pathways linking the openings.The use of the term ‘meridian’ rather than ‘vessel’ merelyserves to aid in clouding the issue.

A further problem is an apparent contradiction in thatthe modern practice of acupuncture seems to be basedon the pre and post-circulation concepts. That is, thevessels are needled as if they constitute separate units,whilst at the same time most practitioners of TraditionalChinese Medicine also rely on wrist pulse palpation,which makes sense only if the flow through the vesselsis continuous.

If the flow was not continuous (i.e., the vessels notconnected) then each vessel would need to be palpatedfor its own pulse. This is, in fact, what was originallydescribed, and it seems that this basic contradiction hasarisen from a partial acceptance and a partial rejectionof history. 4 It is unclear why this occurred and how itwas decided what to retain and what to discard.

Yin, Yang and the Five ElementsMost people have heard of the terms yin and yang whichdescribe concepts that form an important part of thehistory of Chinese medicine and acupuncture. An illperson was considered to be out of balance with natureand these two opposing forces. Originally the termsmeant shady (yin) and sunny (yang) side of a hill 1.

The belief in these forces was based on the view thatmost of the natural world consisted of events that werecyclical, and therefore caused by the rise and fall ofopposite, but complementary, forces. There was also anelement of the ancient belief in a particular form of magic- that like corresponds to like. In other words, it wasbelieved that hurting a picture of a person would resultin real harm to the person, or eating food that lookedlike a particular body organ would be beneficial to thatorgan.

Another important natural philosophy in the historyof Chinese medicine was the doctrine of the Five Phasesor Elements (wu-hsing), which involved the categorisingof natural phenomena, in particular water, fire, metal,wood, and soil into five separate lines ofcorrespondence.11 A sixth component, grain, is alsodescribed.

The initial application of these philosophies tomedicine was characterised by a number of differentschools with different theories, many of themcontradicting each other (e.g. supporters of the FivePhases doctrine rejected the yin/yang concept). 7 Evenin the one book, virtually side by side, there could beguidelines based on mutually exclusive patterns ofknowledge. With the passage of time a kind ofreconciliation took place, but no formal standardisationof these conflicting views was attempted.

For example, do the terms hsin (heart), kan (liver) andp’i (spleen) refer to anatomical structures or abstractfunctional systems? In the Chinese medical literaturethere is reference to both and so neither is ‘correct’.

These problems arose because there was primarily areliance on subjective perceptions and no system foracquiring and recording information objectively.

The power of anecdoteThe early understanding of health and illness in Chinawas derived almost entirely from analogical conclusionsand not anatomical evidence 1,4,6 . It was not until theeighteenth century that it began to be acknowledged thata conception of function is of no use without anunderstanding of actual structure. Surgery was prohibitedfor a long time in China, since it was regarded as

29winter 93

unacceptable to open the body in this way 1.It is important to realise that acupuncture arose at a

time when there was no understanding of modernphysiology, biochemistry, or healing mechanisms. If aperson was sick, and treated with acupuncture, and theyimproved, it was assumed that the treatment had causedthe improvement. There was no formal study of diseasesand their natural history and no attempt was made todetermine whether the person would have improvedwithout the treatment.

Without having a scientific basis for determining thesuccess or failure of treatment the two events - giving atreatment and symptom improvement - were causallyrelated, and these specific treatments have been passedon untested to this day.

The early 1900sBy the early twentieth century Traditional ChineseMedicine (TCM) was regarded as an historical oddityand its use was mainly in rural areas 12-14 . The earlyChinese Communist Party expressed considerableantipathy towards TCM, ridiculing it as superstitious,irrational and backward, and claiming that it conflictedwith the Party’s dedication to science as the way ofprogress 13 . Acupuncture was included in this criticism.The person who would become the first secretary-generalof the Communist Party stated in 1919:

“Our men of learning do not understand science; thus theymake use of yin-yang signs and beliefs in the five elements toconfuse the world...Our doctors do not understand science:they not only know nothing of human anatomy, but also knownothing of the analysis of medicines; as for bacterial poisoningand infections they have not even heard of them...We will nevercomprehend the ch’i even if we were to search everywhere inthe universe. All of these fanciful notions and irrational beliefscan be corrected at their roots by science.”15(p135)

Mao Tse-tung and the Cultural RevolutionIt was left to Mao Tse-tung to save TCM, includingacupuncture, by casting it into the political arena 12,14,16,17.The era of Mao Tse-tung saw a resurgence of interest inTCM as a result of:

(1) Mao’s personal involvement,(2) The need to utilise all available resources to deliver

health care to rural areas. When the People’s Republicof China was formed in 1949, China was an unhealthyplace and the rural areas were particularly poorlyserviced. One of Mao’s primary aims was to improvethis situation.

(3) The Party’s desire for increased power and control.By 1968 the Ministry of Public Health had become

largely irrelevant and most of the pre-CulturalRevolution leaders had been removed and replaced witharmy representatives. Decision-making power residedalmost entirely with Party leaders.

Acupuncture and other traditional therapies such asherbal medicine were powerful political tools and wereused to judge support for the Cultural Revolution 1 , 14 .At one stage the head of the North-East Public HealthBoard was publicly denounced for expressing oppositionto TCM and the First Vice Minister who had been theHealth Care leader since the 1930s ‘confessed’ in thePeople’s Daily to having also opposed it. The reason forhis opposition was because he was “divorced from Partyleadership”. 14(p47) Doctors and patients also came underconsiderable political pressure to use traditionaltechniques, and critics were harshly treated.

In October 1966 the Chinese Medical Journal wasreplaced by a frankly political journal - China’s Medicine- whose banner included the words ‘official organ of theChinese Medical Association’.17 The editorial of the firstedition proclaimed:

“We will hold still higher the great red banner of Mao Tse-tung’s thought, creatively study and apply Chairman Mao’sworks and continuously advance the revolutionization of ourideology and work so that we may better serve the Chinesepeople and the revolutionary people of the world.”17(p112)

After the Chinese Medical Journal was recommencedin 1973 this policy of publishing material of a politicalnature continued.18,19 It was only after the demise of the‘Gang of Four’ in 1976 that this emphasis was discardedand there appeared for the first time revelations aboutthe impact the political climate in China had had onmedical practice.

In 1987, in a paper on the history of the ChineseMedical Journal, this period was reviewed:

“It is sad to recollect the gloomy days of the ‘CulturalRevolution’, which lasted 10 years starting in 1966. Whathappened to the Journal? CMJ was replaced by China’sMedicine, which appeared from 1966 to 1968, filled withpolitical documents, but very few medical papers...Althoughour Journal resumed publication in 1975, many authors stillstarted their scientific articles with superfluous politicalsloganeering... Low quality papers were also accepted.Fortunately, normalcy was gradually restored in the Journalafter 1979". 20(p438-39)

The modern eraIn China today medicine has adopted a more scientificapproach and whilst certain elements of traditionalChinese medicine are retained, there is a growing callfor objective scientific evaluation of past claims 12,21 .Western medicine and bio-medical science dominates,

winter 9330

and it is generally agreed that if TCM is to secure a placeit will only be through scientific research. This isconsistent with Mao’s teaching, as he called for themodernisation of Traditional Chinese Medicine 12 andurged the Chinese to “uncover the treasurehouse and raiseits standards”.1(p252)

Of the approximately 46 major medical journalspublished by the Chinese Medical Association not oneis devoted to acupuncture or its variants. In other partsof Asia such as Japan acupuncture has been all butrejected 22 .

In Japan western medicine was first presented as analternative to TCM in the 18th century 23 and by the late19th century had assumed the dominant position 24 .Proclamations of 1875 and 1883 restricted the practiceof Chinese style medicine and doctors were urged todiscard TCM and switch to western medicine.24

Fact from fictionWe have a more detailed knowledge of the human bodythan when acupuncture was first being described, andsince that time many of its beliefs have been examinedclosely. We can now confidently state that:

(a) The concept of ch’i has no basis in humanphysiology.

(b) The vessels, or meridians, along which the needlingpoints are supposedly located, have not been shown toexist and do not relate to knowledge of human anatomy.

(c) Specific acupuncture points have also not beenshown to exist - as noted earlier, different acupuncturecharts give different numbers and locations of points.

Evidence supporting acupuncture must support theview that it is a separate and distinct entity. That is, itmust support the claim that acupuncture has an effect asa result of needling specific points on the body thatcorrespond to the vessels as described historically.

Before this claim can be tested, though, we must knowwhich historical description is being used as the ‘true’one.Which description of the vessels is being used -eleven or twelve, connected or not connected - and howmany points are to be used? Why is this particular modelbeing used in preference to the alternatives? Thescientific assessment of acupuncture can proceed onlywhen this information is provided, and its source isdeclared. No scientific paper on acupuncture should bepublished which does not provide this vital information.

Assessing acupuncture: The crucial questionsMany of acupuncture’s apparent benefits are anecdotaland in assessing this technique it is important to quantify

the objective value conferred. That is, it is important toexclude natural history and the placebo effect so thatone can confidently ascribe any benefit seen to thetherapy 25 .

There must be clear evidence of a distinction betweengeneral sensory counter-irritant techniques shown tohave a mild analgesic effect - such as trans-electricalnerve stimulation (TENS) - and acupuncture. Theanalgesic effect of counter-irritant stimulation is regardedas a physiological phenomenon in which the transmissionof pain signals from one site or area is inhibited by theapplication of another noxious stimulus at a separate site,which may be remotely situated 26-30.

In addition there must be evidence that insertion ofneedles at random points on the body does not exert thesame effect as specific needling. This matter is crucial.Proponents of traditional Chinese acupuncture claim thatit takes many years of specialised training to be able toidentify the specific acupuncture needling sites. If anequivalent effect is seen when a needle is inserted in thesame way anywhere away from the specific site that thetheory requires, then this refutes the theory.

Those who continue to claim that traditional Chineseacupuncture is a specific modality must address theexisting scientific studies that refute this belief and notmerely quote supportive studies or anecdotes.

Acupuncture and hearing loss: A lesson learnedThe importance of objective testing is very wellillustrated in a published review of the use of acupuncturein sensorineural hearing loss 31 . This paper describeswell how easily an unproven remedy may beunquestioningly promoted, and how scientificassessment usually occurs pretty much as anafterthought. It describes the following process:

(a) A visit to China by a well-known, and respected,ear nose and throat specialist.

(b) Demonstrations for this person of apparent cureseffected by acupuncture. No inquiry made as to whetherthe patients ‘cured’ had had pre- and post-treatmentaudiometric testing.

(c) Return to the USA, whereupon reports of curesbegan to reach the public via the media, particularlypopular newspapers and magazines.

(d) Public demand for the treatment to be madeavailable as a result of the media reports of these cures,and the apparently high success rates being achieved bytrained local practitioners.

(e) The lack of objective scientific evidence for thereported cures is noted with concern, and research isconducted.

31winter 93

(f) Formal studies show that acupuncture has no effectupon hearing levels of individuals with sensorineuralhearing loss.

The specialist who originally travelled to China, andwrote of the remarkable demonstrations he saw there,wrote the following just three years later:

“...it is a tragic mistake to take a child - or an adult for thatmatter - for acupuncture treatment for neurosensory deafnessto any of the so-called acupuncture centers. There has notbeen one case of improvement demonstrated audiometrically,when a child or any deaf patient was tested before undergoingtreatment and then afterwards by any reputable otologist. Therehave only been unreliable and perhaps plantedtestimonials.”31(p433)

From East to WestThe early 1970s were a period during which visits toChina were popular and these usually involveddemonstrations of the almost miraculous effectivenessof acupuncture. These visits were then written up inwestern medical journals more as journalistic pieces thanas critical scientific reviews.32-34

The rapid increase in popularity of acupuncture in theWest followed on from the reports of these visits, and ithad captured the public’s imagination long beforescientific studies began to question the validity of theanecdotes.

Acupuncture researchCarefully designed and conducted scientific studies haveshown that traditional Chinese acupuncture is no moreeffective in providing pain relief than placebo or counter-irritant stimulation such as TENS.35-58

Many of these trials have compared ‘real’ acupuncture(needles inserted according to traditional theory) and‘sham’ acupuncture (needles inserted at other siteswhich, in some cases, were sites that the traditional theorysaid were least likely to reduce pain) - with no differencein effectiveness found.36,39,40- 42,44 Since many of thestudies were conducted with the cooperation andparticipation of professionals trained in traditionalacupuncture, it is insufficient to dismiss them as a partof some imaginary anti-alternative conspiracy.

It is accepted that there are modern theories that gopart of the way to explaining the analgesic action of thecounter-irritant techniques such as TENS 27-29,59-65, thoughit must be noted that not all studies confirm that thesehave an effect over and above placebo.66-68 There iscurrently no evidence to support the view thatacupuncture has an action or effect that is separate tothat seen with these techniques.

Some modern practitioners, in view of such evidence,have abandoned the ancient theories, including thevessels/meridians and even the acupuncture points. TheBritish practitioner Felix Mann has been noted to observewryly that if the modern texts are to be believed there is“no skin left which is not an acupuncture point”. 69

Pain is a subjective symptom and the perception of itis affected by other factors, including psychological state70 . There is evidence of a considerable placebo effect intrials of many pain conditions71 and any scientificevaluation of acupuncture must include an attempt tosee whether it can relieve pain or other symptoms betterthan placebo. As noted in the 1989 National Health andMedical Research Council (NHMRC) report:

“..it might well be that the clinical effectiveness of acupuncturein the reduction of pain is due more to psychological than tophysical factors”. 65(p46)

There is certainly no evidence to support the view thatacupuncture is of use in various systemic disorders (e.g.asthma 49,58 , arthritis38,40,55 ) and it is bordering on thefraudulent to suggest so.

Side effectsAcupuncture is not without its risks72-76 and if equallyeffective techniques are available that do not involvepuncturing the skin then it is hard to justify using thisinvasive procedure.

“Viewed in this way acupuncture is an elaborate butunnecessarily complicated means of achieving analgesia whena clinically safer and easier method is available.”65(p15)

Animal acupunctureSupporters of acupuncture sometimes refer to studies

in animals claiming that these clearly demonstrate ananalgesic effect and since animals are not suggestiblethe placebo effect is excluded.

Animals must be restrained to have acupuncture andit is well described that when animals are restrained thatthey can develop anaesthesia due to fear and catalepsy -the so-called ‘still reaction’.5,77 In addition the studiesdo not compare ‘real’ and ‘sham’ acupuncture andprovide no details as to the source of the acupuncturepoints used. Where is the description of acupuncture inanimals in the historical Chinese literature?

A desire for dialogue?Concern must be expressed at the views of somesupporters of acupuncture regarding whether there is aneed for closer cooperation with scientific medicine. For

winter 9332

example, advice given to acupuncturists by oneprominent author included a recommendation toundermine the public’s faith in modern medicine andscience and educate them as to their need for alternativemedicine.78

Attempts to obtain comments from a number ofacupuncture organisations on a draft of this ACSH paperwere met by either silence or mocking sarcasm. None ofthe organisations approached chose to provide even asingle specific comment on any part of the paper. Thisis particularly intriguing given that the 1989 NHMRCreport was condemned by acupuncturists on the basisof:

“..failing to invite traditional acupuncturists into an open debatein which they had the opportunity to hear and to endeavour tomeet points advanced against them.”79(p51)

ConclusionThe Australian Council on Science and Health assertsthat:

(1) The public must be made aware of acupuncture’scurrent scientific status. There is a marked differencebetween the claims of acupuncturists and the findingsof the clinical trials research.

(2) The onus is on those who are claiming thattraditional acupuncture is effective, and a distinct entity,to establish this by conducting well-controlled trials andsubmitting the results for peer review.

(3) There is a need for scientifically rigorous studiesof the effectiveness of acupuncture in a range ofconditions.

(4) Until such time as such supporting evidence isavailable acupuncture should not be offered without fullinformed consent - patients must be advised ofacupuncture’s unproven status and its possible adverseeffects.

(5) The public should not be made to pay for thisunproven therapy via Medicare rebates. The need formore research, and research of a higher standard, hasbeen stressed by authors of previous reviews ofacupuncture.54-58,80-82

References1. Unschuld PU. Medicine in China. A history of ideas. University of

California Press. Berkeley. 19852. Lu DG, Needham J. Celestial lancets. A history and rationale of

acupuncture and moxibustion. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.1980

3. West R. Assessment of evidence versus consensus or prejudice.Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 1992; 46: 321-2

4. Unschuld PU. Nan-ching - the Classic of Difficult Issues. Universityof California Press. Berkeley. 1986

5. MacDonald A. Acupuncture: From ancient art to modern medicine.Allen and Unwin. London. 1982

6. Epler Jr DC. Bloodletting in early Chinese Medicine and its relationto the origin of acupuncture. Bull Hist Med. 1980; 54: 357-67

7. Keiji Y. The formation of the Huang-ti Nei-ching. Asia Asiatica.1979; 36: 67-89

8. Worsley JR. Traditional Chinese Acupuncture.Vol.1. Meridians andPoints. Element Books. Salisbury. 1982

9. Weisner D. Alternative medicine. A guide for parents and healthprofessionals in Australia. Kangaroo Press. New South Wales. 1989

10. Lun L. Acupuncture develops in the struggle between the Confucianthinking and the legalist thinking. Scientia Sinica. 1975; 18(5): 581-90

11. Porkert M. The theoretical formulations of Chinese medicine:systems of correspondence. MIT Press. Cambridge. 1978

12. Rosenthal MM. Health care in the People’s Republic of China.Moving toward Modernisation. Westview Press. Colorado. 1987

13. Crozier RC. Traditional medicine in modern China. HarvardUniversity Press. Cambridge. 1968

14. Lampton D. The politics of medicine in China.WestviewPress.Colorado. 1977

15. Kwok DW. Scientism in Chinese thought. New Haven. 196516. Huard P, Wong M. Chinese Medicine. Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

London. 196817. Sidel VW. Health services in the People’s Republic of China. In:

Bowers JZ, Purcell EF, eds. Medicine and society in China. Josia Macey JrFoundation. New York. 1974

18. Editorial. Advance along the widening road pointed out by ChairmanMao. A report on the barefoot doctors of Chiangchen Commune, Ch’uanshaCounty, Shanghai. Chinese Medical Journal. 1975; 1(3): 159-166

19. Huang Sungyu People’s Commune Party Committee. Consolidatethe dictatorship of the proletariat and run cooperative medical service well.Chinese Medical Journal. 1975; 1(4): 233-36

20. Bao-xing C. A centennial review of the history of the ChineseMedical Journal. Chinese Medical Journal. 1987; 100(6): 434-42

21. Petty R. Images of China. Journal of The Royal College of Physiciansof London. 1991; 25(4): 344-46

22. Skrabanek P. Acupuncture and the age of unreason. The Lancet.1984; 1: 1169-71

23. Akihito. Early cultivators of science in Japan. Science. 1992; 258:578-80

24. Long SO. Health Care Providers:Technology, Policy andProfessional Dominance. In: Norbeck E, Lock M, eds, Health, Illness andMedical Care in Japan. Cultural and Social Dimensions. University ofHawaii Press. Honolulu. 1987

25. Charlton BG. Philosophy of medicine: alternative or scientific.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 1992; 85: 436-38

26. Gammon GD, Starr I. Studies on the relief of pain bycounterirritation. Journal of Clinical Investigation. 1941; 20: 13-20

27. Bing Z, Villanueva L, LeBars D. Acupuncture and Diffuse NoxiousInhibitory Controls: Naloxone reversible depression of activities oftrigeminal convergent neurons. Neuroscience. 1990; 37(3): 809-18

28. Bing Z, et al. Acupuncture-like stimulation induces aheterosegmental release of Met-enkephalin-like material in the rat spinalcord. Pain. 1991; 47: 71-77

29. LeBars D, Dickenson AH, Besson J. Diffuse Noxious InhibitoryControls (DNIC) 1. Effects on dorsal horn convergent neurons in the rat.Pain. 1979; 6: 283-304

30. Levine JD, Gormley J, Fields HL. Observations on the analgesiceffects of needle puncture (acupuncture). Pain. 1976; 2(2): 149-59

31. Taub HA. Acupuncture and sensorineural hearing loss: a review.Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders. 1975; 40: 427-33

32. Modell JH. Observations of “acupuncture anaesthesia” in thePeople’s Republic of China. Archives of Surgery. 1974; 109: 731-33

33. Dimond EG. Acupuncture anaesthesia: Western medicine andChinese Traditional Medicine. Journal of the American MedicalAssociation. 1971; 218: 1558-63

34. Bonica JJ. Therapeutic acupuncture in the People’s Republic ofChina. Implications for American medicine. Journal of the AmericanMedical Association. 1974; 228(12): 1544-51

35. Thomas M, Eriksson SV, Lundeberg T. A comparative study ofdiazepam and acupuncture in patients with osteoarthritis pain: a placebocontrolled study. American Journal of Chinese Medicine. 1991; 19(2): 95-

33winter 93

ApologyDr Stephen Basser has expressed some unhappiness atthe title, “Kicking against the Pricks”, which we gave tohis article (Vol 13, No 1) describing his attempts to seekconstructive dialogue with official acupunctureorganisations. His concern is that the title could beconstrued as a derisory comment on those who believein or perform acupuncture and could becounterproductive to the aims of the Australian Councilon Science and Health, which he heads.

The Editors of the Skeptic, while maintaining theirprerogative to edit contributions and to append titles toarticles, have no wish to alter the intent of articles, andwe apologise to Dr Basser for any disquiet this may havecaused him.

On the other hand, we were quite taken with theappropriateness of this title, which paraphrases aquotation from no less an authority than the Bible (Actsof the Apostles 9:5).

10036. Godfrey CM, Morgan P. A controlled trial of the theory of

acupuncture in musculoskeletal pain. The Journal of Rheumatology. 1978;5(2): 121-24

37. Fox EJ, Melzack R. Transcutaneous electrical stimulation andacupuncture: comparison of treatment for low back pain. Pain. 1976; 2(2):141-48

38. Helms JM. Acupuncture for the management of primarydysmenorrhea. Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1987; 69: 51- 6

39. Ghia JN, et al. Acupuncture and chronic pain mechanisms. Pain.1976; 2(3): 285-99

40. Gaw AC, Chang LW, Shaw LC. Efficacy of acupuncture onosteoarthritic pain. New England Journal of Medicine. 1975; 293: 375-78

41. Edelist G, Gross AE, Langer F. Treatment of low back pain withacupuncture. Canadian Anaesthetic Society Journal. 1976; 23(3): 303-6

42. Lee PK, et al. Treatment of chronic pain with acupuncture. Journalof the American Medical Association. 1975; 232: 1133-35

43. Lewith GT, Field J, Machin D. Acupuncture compared with placeboin post-herpetic pain. Pain. 1983; 17: 361-68

44. Tavola T, et al. Traditional Chinese acupuncture in tension typeheadache: a controlled study. Pain. 1992; 48(3): 325- 29

45. Moore ME, Berk SN. Acupuncture for chronic shoulder pain: anexperimental study with attention to the role of placebo and hypnoticsuggestibility. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1976; 84(4): 381-84

46. Laitinen J. Treatment of cervical syndrome by acupuncture.Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 1975; 7(3): 114-17

47. Mendelson G, et al. Acupuncture treatment of chronic back pain: adouble-blind placebo-controlled trial. American Journal of Medicine. 1983;74(1): 49-55

48. Cheng RSS, Pomeranz B. Electrotherapy of chronic musculoskeletalpain: comparison of electroacupuncture and acupuncture-like transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. Clinical Journal of Pain. 1987; 2:143-49

49. Tandon MK, Soh PFT, Wood AT. Acupuncture for bronchial asthma?A double-blind crossover study. Medical Journal of Australia. 1991; 154:409-12

50. Day RL, et al. Evaluation of acupuncture anaesthesia: Apsychophysical study. Anaesthesiology. 1975; 43: 507-17

51. Ekblom A, et al. Increased postoperative pain and consumption ofanalgesics following acupuncture. Pain. 1991; 44: 241-47

52. Haker E, Lundeberg T. Acupuncture treatment in epicondylagia :acomparative study of two acupuncture techniques. The Clinical Journal ofPain. 1990; 6(3): 221-26

53. Gemmell HA, Jacobsen BH. Time-series study of auriculotherapyin the treatment of shoulder pain. Journal of the Australian Chiropractors’Association. 1990; 20(3): 82-84

54. Richardson PH, Vincent CA. Acupuncture for the treatment of pain:a review of evaluative research. Pain. 1986; 24(1): 15-40

55. Bhatt-Sanders D. Acupuncture and rheumatoid arthritis: an analysisof the literature. Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism. 1985; 14(4): 225-31

56. Ter Riet G, Kleijnen J, Knipschild P. Acupuncture and chronic pain:Acriteria based meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 1990;43(11): 1191-996

57. Patel M, et al. A meta-analysis of acupuncture for chronic pain.International Journal of Epidemiology. 1989; 18(4): 900-06

58. Aldridge D, Pietroni PC. Clinical assessment of acupuncture inasthma therapy: discussion paper. Journal of The Royal Society of Medicine.1987; 80(4): 222-24

59. Hsiang-Tung C. Neurophysiological basis of acupuncture analgesia.Scientia Sinica. 1978; 21(6): 829-43

60. Eadie MJ. Acupuncture and the relief of pain. Medical Journal ofAustralia. 1990; 153: 180-81

61. Gracely RH, et al. Placebo and naloxone can alter post surgical painby separate mechanisms. Nature. 1983; 306: 264- 5

62. Mendelson G. Acupuncture analgesia II. Review of current theories.Australian and New Zealand Journal of Medicine. 1978; 8(1): 100-05

63. Basbaum AI, Levine JD. Opiate analgesia: how central is a peripheraltarget? New England Medical Journal. 1991; 325(16): 1168-69

64. Stux G, Pomeranz B. Acupuncture textbook and atlas. Springer-

Verlag. Berlin. 198765. National Health and Medical Research Council. Report of Working

Party on acupuncture. Canberra. 198966. Deyo RA, et al. A controlled trial of trans cutaneous electrical nerve

stimulation (TENS) and exercise for chronic low back pain. New EnglandJournal of Medicine. 1990; 322(23): 1627-34

67. Langley GB, et al. The analgesic effects of trans cutaneous electricalnerve stimulation and placebo in chronic pain patients. Rheumatol. Int.1984; 2: 1-5

68. Thornsteinsson G, et al. The placebo effect of transcutaneouselectrical stimulation. Pain. 1978; 5: 31-41

69. Botek ST. One doctor’s acupuncture odyssey. Medical Tribune. May2 1984.

70. Wilson PR. Pain research - The science and the art. (Editorial) TheClinical Journal of Pain. 1990; 6(3): 171-72

71. Evans FJ. The placebo response in pain reduction. Advances inNeurology. 1974; 4: 289-96

72. Carron H, Epstein BS, Grand B. Complications of acupuncture.Journal of the American Medical Association. 1974; 228(12): 1552-54

73. Blanchard BM (letter). Deep vein thrombophlebitis afteracupuncture. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1991; 115(9): 748

74. Goldberg I. Pneumothorax associated with acupuncture. MedicalJournal of Australia. 1973; 1: 941-42

75. Ritter HG, Tarala R. Pneumothorax after acupuncture. BritishMedical Journal. 1978; 2(6137): 602-03

76. Scheel O, et al (letter). Endocarditis after acupuncture and injection- treatment by a natural healer. Journal of the American Medical Association.1992; 267(1): 56

77. Simonov PV, Paikin D. The role of emotional stress in thehypnotisation of animals and man. In: Chertok L, ed. Psychophysiologicalmechanisms of hypnosis. Springer-Verlag. New York. 1969

78. Dale RA. The origins and future of acupuncture. American Journalof Acupuncture. 1982; 10: 101-20

79. O’Neill A. Sharpening the front end: investigating acupuncture.Australian Journal of Acupuncture. 1990; 14: 38- 54

80. Baumann R.(Chairman), on behalf of the Council of Medicine ofthe Academy of Sciences of the GDR. Statement regarding acupunctureby the Medical Council of the Academy of Sciences of the GermanDemocratic Republic. 1981

81. Mendelson G. Acupuncture analgesia 1. Review of clinical studies.Australian and New Zealand Journal of Medicine. 1977; 7(6): 642-48

82. Prance SE, et al. Research on traditional Chinese acupuncture -science or myth: A review. Journal of The Royal Society of Medicine.1988; 81(10): 588-90 {PAGE|4}

winter 9334

REVIEW

Lotto EffectJames Gerrand

The Lotto Effect-Towards a Technology of theParanormal,Damien Broderick, Hudson Hawthorn

Damien Broderick is a writer of science fiction and aregular reviewer of such works for The Australian. Hisbook makes claims that “Psi (paranormal ability) hasbeen detected in experiments at Cambridge’s CavendishLaboratory and the Princeton School of Engineering”.These claims do not stand up to scientific evaluation.

The Cavendish reference turns out to be based on apopular press report (Jan 92) that “while no subjectattained consistent success, the Cavendish experiments‘have shown the phenomenon’ (psychokinetic influenceover otherwise random-event circuits) occurring time andtime again”. One would have expected at least a scientificpaper as the basis.

The Princeton reference goes to the other extreme - amountain of statistical data claimed to produce a ‘mouse’,a psi influence. Such a mass of data now seems essentialto support any psi claim. Broderick states that “theprincipal claims ... made in a hundred years of psychicalresearch are that psi phenomena are sporadic, low inefficiency and resistant to normal teaching andreinforcement techniques”. However, the Princetonmouse, a psi influence of probability of 1 in 5000, hasbeen reduced to a ‘flea’, a probability of 1 in 19, byProfessor John Wendell (The Skeptical Inquirer, Fall1991) pointing out the need for a more accurate statisticalapproach. Such a flea could well have jumped by chanceupon the mountain rather than be produced by it.

Now to the claimed Lotto Effect. Again at the startBroderick claims “it is, as we shall see, the believers inpsi whose expectations (some of them at any rate) havebeen borne out”. Broderick, to support this claim, detailshow in a particular examination of nine Midweek drawshe got a result that was against the odds by 100 to 1.Using the same examination for 11 Saturday draws hegot a result against the odds by 700 to 1. Broderick doesthen admit that this ‘psi’ result was not sustained for theother 99% of the scores. A scientist, not a science fictionwriter, would have baldly concluded that the Lotto resultswere according to statistical chance.

Broderick, undaunted, then describes in a much laterchapter how he contrived a further manipulation of thedata and finds a result against the odds of 1 in 122 formidweek and 1 in 763 for Saturday. Broderick agreeswith the criticism that “my cut-off criteria...were...notpre-specified...” (Dr Nelson, Princeton EngineeringAnomalies Research - PEAR). The PEAR conclusionwas that there was no significant evidence from

Broderick’s Lotto work but that this was possibly dueto too few data, notwithstanding the mountain was manyhundreds of millions of Lotto guesses high! Broderick,still not dismayed, proposes in his final chapter an elevenstep approach to testing for ‘psi’, which includes usingmany operators to amass the even bigger mountain ofdata that now seems necessary. “The logistics of turningthe Lotto Effect back on itself are well beyond anindividual’s means. ... I hope ... the Tattersall company... launch a major precognition study ...”

I would think any company would have more moneythan sense if it were to put resources into a project wherethere is no surety that, after building an even biggermountain, any proven psi mouse will be born.

Broderick, as is common among non-scientists, ismisguided or off-hand, when not being abusive, of thescientific approach. Thus he tries to build up a theory toexplain the possibility of psi in our macro world usingquantum mechanics which deals with the microextremes. He also argues that since science has, at times,to accept the apparently illogical, such as light beingboth a particle and a wave, then the illogicality of psishould be acceptable. But this apparent illogicality oflight was only accepted when there was irrefutableevidence for behaviour both as particle and wave. Thereis no such evidence for the paranormal.

Broderick is off-hand when he tends to decry the workof CSICOP in scientifically examining the claims of theparanormal. CSICOP is “scientifically rationalist” (canwe be scientific and not rationalist?) “devoted, dedicatedand bull-headed”. Professor Ray Hyman, a principalCSICOP activist, gets a comment “Needless to say hedid not conceive his tenure (Chair of Psychical Researchat Stanford University) in terms likely to glorify his

35winter 93

subject matter”. No doubt Ray Hyman saw his job asbeing a scientist, researching, seeking the evidence, notas a science fictionist, glorifying his subject.

Broderick gives grudging praise to Hyman’s effortsto examine the evidence for the psi claims for theGanzfeld approach but does not agree with Hyman’sconclusion that the success rate is “probably very closeto what should be expected by chance...”.

Broderick finds it strange that the US Army, havingsince 1984 examined the claims for psi and finding “noscientific justification from research conducted over aperiod of 130 years for the existence of parapsychologicalphenomena...” should add a proviso “we do recommendthat research in certain areas be monitored...”. This isno different from CSICOP continuing to investigateparanormal claims even though there is no evidence frompast experience for the paranormal.

He becomes abusive when criticising CSICOP’sformer chief investigator, James Randi, who has earnedhis renown not only for his exposures of Uri Geller andpsychic surgeons for using magical tricks, but also formore straight-forward science such as testing waterdivining claims. Broderick rubbishes Randi’s four “Rulesfor Psychics”:

1. No psychic can produce phenomena oncommand or on a regular basis;2. Cheating is a compulsion with the psychic;3. Unless the detractor is able to explain all thepsychic phenomena as having been done by ordinarymeans, he has failed to prove his case;4. Psychics cannot be expected to produce resultswhen persons of negative attitude are present.These are Randi’s conclusions based on the many

hundred investigations he has carried out since CSICOP

was formed in 1975. Yet Broderick regards Number 2as a slur. Now I recall a similar conclusion by anotherAmerican investigator, Robert Sheaffer, that manypsychics originally believe they have the power but whenthey become professional they find they have to producepsychic phenomena on call and this is when they startcheating.

Broderick says it “isn’t sensible to assert with Randithat ‘there is simply no reason why these illogicalconditions should be accepted’. If we were to applysimilar rules to ...the science of astronomy we would belaughed out of court.” It isn’t sensible to Broderickbecause 200 years ago some sensible people such asThomas Jefferson refused to believe that meteorites fellfrom the sky. It is only because of scientific researchsince then that it has been established that this is so.

There are other important lacunae in this book. JamesRandi has pointed out the importance of having amagician in any team investigating a paranormal claimbecause only a magician knows how easily we can befooled. There is the fact that something like $250,000can be won by anybody scientifically proving aparanormal event. This amount is available when all thesums put up by Skeptics organisations worldwide aretotalled. Then there are the references to Rhine’s claimsat Duke University, without mentioning the seriousdoubts raised about Rhine’s work by Paul Kurtz andCEM Hansel among others. Broderick finds reality inthe performance of the 19th century medium, DD Home,without mentioning that his claims are now regarded asvery dubious.

I would recommend this book as a good science fictionread and also as a handy exercise for science students insifting science from non-science.

winter 9336

REVIEW

Pseudodocumentary PiffleSir Jim R Wallaby

The Seven Network, which promotes pseudoscientificconspiracies like the weekly womens’ magazinespromote New Age pseudoadvice, distinguished itselfduring the month of April by the presentation of not one,but two, spoofs on the pseudoscience genre show.

The first of the duo, the widely promoted The EinsteinCode, was screened ‘Live to Air’ on April 1 andpurported to link every possible conspiracy in the worldto a secret formula describing a ‘fifth force’, allegedlydiscovered by Albert Einstein in his later years. Theconspiracy encompassed the assassinations of John andRobert Kennedy, the death of Pope John Paul I, thedisappearance of Harold Holt, the devastating MexicoCity earthquake, the loss of the space shuttle Challenger,the crash of the Hindenberg, the sinking of the Titanic,various volcanic eruptions and almost anything else onecould think of.

It followed the traditional pattern of the typicalpseudoscience show; interviews with assorted ‘experts’and ever more dramatic and breathless ‘disclosures’.

Just before the scheduled end of the show, and just asthe ‘intrepid investigators’ were about to reveal somestartling piece of information, the screen went to ‘snow’and a ‘lost satellite’ signal flashed up, followed by a‘We apologise ...’ message. This was immediatelyfollowed by a credit for “April Fool Productions”.

The programme was cleverly done, in some ways toocleverly. The first inkling this viewer had that the showwas not just another load of exploitative rubbish wasquite early in the piece, when it became apparent that allof the ‘experts’ were far too fluent in their delivery.Professors of physics, NASA engineers, retired USmilitary officers and CIA agents just don’t deliver theirlines the way actors do, at least not in my experience.The real surprise of the night was that the show had beenproduced by Channel 7, Brisbane and they are to becommended for a good joke.

The second spoof went to air on the evening of April9 (Good Friday) and would almost certainly haveoffended most Christians and Jews who were unfortunateenough to have tuned in.

Titled Ancient Secrets of the Bible, the show was

fronted by an actor whose name may (or may not) havebeen William Devane (the last time I saw him, he wasportraying Robert Kennedy in one of those interminablytedious reconstructions of the Kennedy era).

This laughably inept production sought to show how‘the weight of scientific evidence now supports the literaltruth of the Bible’. Startling ‘new evidence’ wasproduced to show how the destruction of Sodom andGomorrah (volcanic eruption); the saltification of MrsLot (unexplained); the dispersal of all races after thedestruction of the Tower of Babel [or Babble as thenarrator insisted on calling it] (an ‘expert’ showing howall the different skin colours could have been aquired inone generation - skin colour? Well, scratch afundamentalist and find a racist, I always say); theburning bush talking to Moses (a bush that produces avolatile substance which burns without consuming thebush - there was no description of how this made thebush talk!); the parting of the Red Sea (an ‘expert’ withan ‘hydrological model’ of the Red Sea and the Gulf ofSuez, in a container no larger than a two litre milk bottlewhich, when ‘wind’ was made to blow across it, showedhow an underwater ridge was exposed. At the scale ofthe thing, I judged the ‘wind’ to be blowing at about10,000 knots); the destruction of the walls of Jericho(earthquake plus lightning) and the electrical nature ofthe Ark of the Covenant (shades of Erich von Daniken)(which zapped some follower with blue ‘lightning’ asseen in all the worst sci-fi movies), were all nowsupported by scientific evidence. It even had a segmenton the infamous Paluxy River footprints (‘human’ anddinosaur), in which the ‘expert’ Duane Gish sought toshow how these two species co-existed. Another equallyerudite ‘expert’ even claimed that similar dual tracksexisted in Russia and Australia. (Has any one ever heardof these tracks in Australia?)

The difference between this spoof and the previousone lay in the fact that the producers of Ancient Secrets...appeared to think they were producing a genuinedocumentary. It too had an array of ‘experts’, most ofwhom were labelled as “Geologist and Professor”,“Biblical Expert” or “Middle Eastern Historian” and

37winter 93

In his article “Definitive Definitions of the Indefinable”(the Skeptic Vol 13, No 1), Sir Jim R Wallaby invitedsubscribers to add to his list of pseudoscientific andparanormal cliches and to include their accepted meaningas well as their real meaning.

This response is from Prof Tim Griffin, Head of theDepartment of Behavioural and Social Sciences inHealth, University of Western Sydney, Nepean.

Other subscribers are invited to add their contributionsto our collection.

“It’s only a theory”

Accepted meaning:Don’t give this idea credence, its only an idea, only atheory - don’t take it seriously. This aphorism is widelyused by adherents of the paranormal and pseudosciences,especially the New Agers and Creation Scientists.

Ronald Regan, when on the campaign trail rounding-up the votes of fundamentalist Christians is reported tohave said when asked about evolution: “Well, it is atheory. It is a scientific theory only, and it has in recentyears been challenged in the world of science — that is,not believed in the scientific community to be asinfallible as it once was.”

Real meaning:According to Stephen J Gould (1984 - “Evolution asFact and Theory” in “Hens Teeth and Horses Toes:Further reflections on natural history”. NY: Norton —from where the above quote comes, p. 254), evolutionis not just a theory, it is a fact (though not in the absolutesense).

While there are competing theories about themechanisms for evolution, extraordinary evidence wouldneed to be produced to challenge the fact of evolution.

Theories are the best explanations for phenomenawhich we hold at a given time. The nature of scientifictheories is that they are open to challenge and changeand, when they fail to adequately explain, to being over-thrown by one which does a better job. A scientifictheory, therefore, is not “just a theory”, it is the best wehave.

even had some ‘skeptics’, one or two of whom Irecognised as genuine scholars in the field, but most ofwhom were of the von Daniken school of ancientastronaut believers. The ‘skeptics’ were allowed onesentence apiece and were then refuted by the ‘experts’,with a liberal dose of ‘serious, look-you-straight-in-the-eye sincerity’ from the narrator. Talk about straw men!

Nonetheless, the programme did produce some gemsof information that made the pain of viewing worthwhile.For instance, the ‘Angels of the Lord’, who looked andacted like extras in Hollywood street gang movies; thefact that the Tribes of Israel never numbered more than50 individuals at any one time (or so one would havegathered from the small numbers involved in the Exodusand the assorted battles); that the preferred garb offundamentalist ‘experts’ is the shiny polyester suit.

Some other things that stick in the mind (as opposedto the craw). The battle scenes which reminded me ofnothing so much as that Monty Python sketch about theTownswomens Guild staging a re-enactment of the Battleof Pearl Harbor. An Israelite arguing with Moses aboutleaving Egypt, who appeared to be wearing a cabbageon his head. The goings on at Sodom which looked tobe about as depraved as a Rotary Club dance. God usingthe same lightning bolt to knock down the same towerin Sodom, Babylon, Jericho, Egypt and a couple of otherplaces. The three Rabbis who had tunnelled into theTemple Mount and who were just about to discover thehiding place of the Ark of the Covenant, when they werestopped by the authorities and the tunnel sealed up. Twoof the Rabbis were interviewed and, as they appeared tobe about 80, it must have been a rather slow tunnellingjob.

The final gems came from the narrator who claimed“the Bible is now shown to be a scientific almanac” and“these matters are still controversial, but one thing iscertain, there is no scientific proof that the eventsdescribed in the Bible did not happen”.

I don’t know what the people who support this sort ofrubbish think they are doing, but if they are seeking toremove the Bible from its relatively respectable positionas a great religious work and are trying to have it acceptedas a scientific text, they should be aware that it will bethen judged by different rules. Far more stringent ruleswhich will show it to have no value at all.

On second thoughts, if a group of militant atheistshad set out to deliberately discredit the teachings of theBible, they could hardly have done better than to producethis specious load of drivel. Perhaps then it was a satireafter all.

DefinitionTim Griffin

winter 9338

The Mind of God - Science and the Search for UltimateMeaning, Paul Davies (Penguin Books, 1992)

“Theology is a device by means of which ministers whohave lost their faith can remain within the Church.” SirHumphrey Appleby in “Yes, Prime Minister/The Bishop’sGambit.”

I find it difficult to categorise this book. It contains somescientific information, but it is not a scientific book. Itcontains some material derived from philosophy. In theend, I can only say that it is unbridled speculation aboutmatters metaphysical and theological, packaged in avolume with a catchy title. As such, I found it easy toread but difficult to take seriously.

The author contends that Science (by which heprimarily means physics) is somehow leading to the pointwhere it is necessary to factor God into the equations. Inthis he is not speaking for all scientists, however, whohave a range of views on theological subjects as diverseas the rest of the community. I find his assumption ofthe role of spokesman quite irritating.

Davies does make the point that physicists believe thatthe universe is rational and mathematical and evenelegant as an article of faith, which is certainly true.Scientific endeavour is pointless unless the universe isrational. If Rationality is the physicists’ god, then it is aparticularly efficient one because it has almost alwaysanswered our prayers, although not always in the formwe expected. By this interpretation, the closest I haveever come to enlightenment is when I first grasped theMinkowski formulation of Maxwell’s equations.

Davies’ method of exploring the limits of scientificrationality is to ask a heap of questions, some not withoutinterest but most of which cannot be tackledscientifically. Why are there physical laws? Why is theuniverse rational? Can the Universe create itself? Is theuniverse a giant computer? Why are the laws of naturemathematical? Why does arithmetic work? I am not surethat it is even possible to discuss these logically, as toadmit these questions one must also doubt the validityof logic. Some questions he poses seem to be no morethan word games. The answers he provides lead himtowards a deity, which to my mind is no answer at all.

To add weight to these speculations, Davies mentionsa number of scientific theories and hypotheses. The bookfails to make the necessary distinction between scientifictheories that rest on a firm foundation (such as quantummechanics and relativity); theories that are currentlyaccepted but might be modified or even overthrown bynew work (such as much of cosmology); theories thatare basically speculation but are worth investigating(such as the Nemesis hypothesis, in its day); and theoriesthat physicists with a certain bent of mind might entertainover the fourth beer instead of discussing the four forcesof nature: sex, sport, money and politics. I fear that anon-scientist who reads this book would not only bemisled on the purposes and methods of science, but mightbelieve that physicists drink a lot.

In conclusion, I found the book entertaining in parts,irritating in others, but ultimately unsatisfying. Daviesis much too willing to resort to God to answer thequestions he raises. In essence, he is resurrecting the“God of the Gaps” by manufacturing new gaps.

In the previous issue, we published a photograph of HarryEdwards ‘levitating’ a matchbox and asked readers togive their versions of how it came about. Obviously westruck a chord with quite a few of you, as we receivedan avalanche of highly improbable explanations. Somany so in fact that Harry will be writing an article forthe next issue, itemising many of the more outrageoussuggestions. The winner of the book for the best answerwill also be announced in the next issue.

From my perspective, there are so many of you outthere with such devious minds that I think we shouldget together and start our own cult, thereby becomingimmoderately rich.

LevitationCompetition

BW

REVIEW

Science or Theology?Andrew Parle

39winter 93

In his “Politics and the Paranormal” (Vol 13, No 1), PhilShannon attempts to show the negative effects ofpseudoscience and mysticism by drawing upon historicalexample, but he makes a number of arbitrary assumptionsthat are clearly based on his support for Marxisthistoricism as exemplified by British Marxist historiansEP Thompson, Christopher Hill and EJ Hobsbawm, uponwhose works he heavily relies as sources. That is hisprerogative, as is his view that the worst thing about‘New Agers’ is their abstention from collective politicalaction to change a ‘wealthy, corrupt and power hungrystatus quo’.

I too decline to join in radical collective political actionto change the status quo, although I am not adverse topeaceful democratic political reform. Surely support forMarxist revolution is not a sine qua non for inclusion inthe ranks of what are broadly termed ‘sceptics’?Hopefully there is room for we political conservativestoo?

My political conservatism is based on suspicion ofchange for the sake of change. I need to see the benefitof any social or political change and measure the amountof sacrifice or pain required against the likely benefit. Ican personally reconcile this conservatism with my ideaof scepticism, even if others can’t. But I object to MrShannon’s sleight of hand trick which equates politicalconservatism with Nazism. Fascism is not politicalconservatism nor does it have the same roots.

Mussolini’s Fascists were a spin-off from the ItalianSocialist Party and the actual name of the Nazi’s partywas The National Socialist German Worker’s Party. Bothparties eschewed the ‘decadent’ democratic process andseized power in the name of the ‘dispossessed’. Theirideology was collectivist and ultimately totalitarian - justas was Lenin and Stalin’s Marxism.

It is futile and probably tasteless to argue about thenumbers or the ’quality’ of the genocide; suffice it tosay that while the Fascists gave us the Holocaust, theMarxists gave us the gulags. And, what’s more, after allthe suffering and pain, both systems failed.

Mr Shannon’s disdain for pseudoscience, theparanormal and other types of anti-rational mysticism is

strangely qualified according to his political bias.“The paranormal flourished in Hitler’s Germany,” we

are told, and “Hitler consulted astrologers”. So?Therefore mysticism equals Fascism? It strikes me it’s apity more Nazis didn’t rely upon astrology if, like me,you think it is bulldust. The V-2 rockets, the Panzerdivisions, the Luftwaffe, the gas chambers were notcreated by demented astrologers, but by hardened,cynical - sceptical? - scientists.

On the other hand, Shannon’s heroes of the EnglishRevolution, the Levellers and the Diggers, ie the Left,used “pseudoscientific ideas against King Charles’Cavaliers”. I thought they used muskets and superiormilitary tactics, but no, while these ‘ideas’ were‘scientifically irrational’ they ‘dispelled passivity andresignation’ and ‘encouraged political action by thepowerless’. In other words, even if the results were‘politically progressive’, the Glorious Revolution waswon partly because many of the revolutionaries weresuperstitious fools. No wonder Mr Shannon equivocateson the question of pseudoscience and mysticism.

Shannon quotes Christopher Hill’s contention that inthe 17th Century, alchemy had ‘social and democraticpossibilities’ as some alchemists believed that if theycould create gold they could ‘usher in a utopia of materialabundance and social equality’. Again, the assumptionsare based on a prejudice in favour of egalitarianism, noton reason as such. The alchemists support foregalitarianism might have had ‘social and democraticpossibilities’, but the alchemy had no possibilities at all.

Shannon counterpoises the likes of Owen and theChartists to millenarians and Methodists. In many cases,though, they were one and the same. This sort of thingstill goes on, it is not confined to a particular historicalstage. Millions of unarmed Iranians defeated the Shah’svery tangible and scientific military machine with onlythe Koran to wave, because they believed that if theywere martyred they would get to sit at the right hand ofAllah.

What’s the lesson? It’s called fanaticism and itsrejection of reason does not, unfortunately, prevent itfrom prevailing here and there during every and any

FORUM

Paranormal Politics: A ResponseRaymond Watson

winter 9340

historical epoch. The violent overthrow of one class byanother does not necessarily guarantee social progress,nor is support for it proof of a sceptical world view. Farfrom it, in many cases.

Mr Shannon’s example of gradual rationalenlightenment, the radical American folk singer WoodyGuthrie, is a bit of an embarrassment. Whereas onceWoody was influenced by psychic phenomena, theoccult, etc, as a reaction to the poverty in the US farmingdepression, he finally “...became a Communist, an atheistand an ardent admirer of science and technology aspromoted by the Roosevelt administration’s developmentof hydro-power.”

The communist party he supported, the CommunistParty USA, was, even then, more avidly pro-Soviet thanmost, denied the existence of the gulags, defended the‘show trials’ and mass executions and supported theHitler-Stalin Pact. Being an atheist was simply part ofcommunist ideology anyway, but it was as much an actof faith as is belief in God. Skeptics must be agnostic,surely, until we have the means to prove whether Godexists or not. Atheism cannot automatically be equatedwith scepticism.

Woody finally began to ‘admire science andtechnology’. So did Werner von Braun and AdolphEichmann. Even the ayatollahs needed the air force todefend the Islamic Revolution and their allies inLebanon, the Hezbollah (Party of God) may trust in Godbut they still pass the Western-manufacturedammunition!

In the first half of his article, Mr Shannon stresses hiscontention that “in post-Enlightenment times, theparanormal and supernatural have been largely alignedwith political conservatism”, but the second half islargely dedicated to ‘excusing’ his ‘historicallyprogressive’ classes for embracing the same superstitiousactivities. He then concludes with the sweepingstatement, “So, historically, the paranormal and thepseudosciences have been allies of the status quo”! Butsurely the essence of his own article is that people of allclasses of society, both the rulers and the ruled, the‘reactionaries’ and the ‘revolutionaries’ in all historicalepochs have dabbled in mysticism, the supernatural andpseudo-science.

Science is a tool and any social and political entity inthe 20th Century will use that tool, no matter the politicalcomplexion of the regime or where it stands on thepolitical spectrum. It is evidently necessary for survivalagainst the whims and depredations of nature and forthe transformation of nature to meet human ends. No

status quo concerned with the preservation anddevelopment of its own regime can do without it, and toutilise it requires at least an acceptance of its efficacy bythe bulk of the population. Even the ayatollahs needpower plants and oil rigs, ‘Allah willing’, of course!

It is not the status quo of this country that is spreadingarchaic fundamentalist religious cults, clairvoyance,astrology, psychic surgery and astral travel. The politicalestablishment really does want us to be thetechnologically advanced, scientifically skilled populaceenvisaged in the slogan ‘the clever country’.

One may argue that it wants to reap all the benefitsfor itself and dispossess the labouring classes and thepowerless, but that’s another highly debatable moral/socio-political question, not essentially an issue forskeptics trying to eliminate superstition andobscurantism. It belongs in a political journal, hopefullyone a little less partisan than what Mr Shannon wouldseem to prefer.

These ‘New? Age’ charlatans have been with us sincethe dawn of time, or to be more precise, since humanswere able to communicate ideas. I don’t pretend to knowwhy - or if - they are thriving right now. Other than thefact that most of them just want to do us out of our money- an ancient art, surely - it might be a last gasp revoltagainst the ultimate triumph of science. It is preciselybecause they are so aberrant in a technological era thatwe notice them and become infuriated with them. Butwhatever it is, it is probably far more psychologicallyand socially complex than any politically biasedconspiracy theory.

Colin Keay, President of our Hunter Region branch,brought the following to our attention.

The Newcastle WEA Course Programme for 1993offered a ‘Dinner for Two’ for the first person whocorrectly identified the ‘bogus course’ listed in theprogramme. The bogus course was “Bungee Jumpingby Correspondence”, conducted by “Hugo First” and,by the description, fairly obviously bogus. The coursewas available at $198.

A nice ploy to ensure that everyone read the entirebooklet, you might think. Perhaps, but within the firstweek from the release of the brochure, the WEAauthorities had received five cheques for enrolment intothe course.

Jumping at the Chance!

41winter 93

FORUM

Musical Myths: A ResponseDavid Hagar

Blair Alldis just narrowly misses answering his ownMusical Challenge. He is correct in that the putative‘myth’ involves temperament. The problem is shroudedin two and a half millennia of musical practice,mathematics and aesthetics.

The ancient Greeks were the first in recorded historyto muddy the swimming pool with their ‘doctrine ofethos’ in which the moral qualities and effects of musicwere based on the Pythagorean vision of music: amicrocosm of sound and rhythm ruled by mathematicallaws that operate in the whole of the visible and invisibleuniverse. Music could even be a force which could affectthe universe. Essentially the doctrine said that if youlisten to the right kind of music, you will be a desirablecharacter and if you listen to the other type you will be ascoundrel or worse.

These moral qualities imbued by music weredetermined by the various modes or scale systems then(and to a certain extent to this day) in use. Since thenvarious attributes have been ascribed to various keys,even beyond the major/minor division which is a remnantof early Greek thinking.

In the 12th to 15th Centuries, literature was limited tothe modified Greek modes and everything Catholic fitneatly into Aristotelian categories, including theintervalic relationships of pitch in music. Intervals ofthe unison, fourth, fifth and octave were considered‘perfect’, a term we still use today. When an interval ofa fifth, say, was juxtaposed simultaneously, it had a ‘ring’to it and the listener could hear no ‘beats’ or interferencewaves. In fact, the predilection for perfect intervals wasthe foundation of parallel organum in the Catholicliterature of that day.

This state of affairs had severe limitations with thegradual introduction of chromaticism. Several attemptssince the 16th Century have been made to devise a systemwhereby consonance can be sustained while musicbecame less diatonic, more chromatic and modulatory.

In England in the 13th Century, a radical developmentoccurred which virtually presaged our triadic polyphonyand homophony still used today, or at least untildodecadophony made its appearance around the turn ofthe 19th Century. This was the introduction of the gymel

and aesthetically moved away from the perfect intervalicrelationships so cherished by Continental Catholics.Gymelling was simply a melody similar to Gregorianchant, but doubled not at the intervals of perfect fourths,nor fifths. The doubling was at the sixth, or its inversion,the third. Perfect or open intervals were out. The ArsNova had supplanted the Ars Antiqua.

However, as in any evolutionary process (biologicalor cultural) vestigial organs (no pun here) remain.

Up until this time temperament only allowed andlimited tonal variety around a couple of closely relatedkeys. The further the tonality moved away from the keyof C, the more out of tune the music became.

Around the end of the 17th Century, a new system oftemperament was coming into vogue, which allowedmore variety and contrast in the literature. This led tothe publication of the ‘Old Testament’ of keyboardplayers, JS Bach’s “Well-Tempered Clavier” of 1772, aseries of preludes and fugues in each of the 12 majorand 12 minor keys. (The ‘New Testament’ of keyboardplayers are the Beethoven sonatas.) This half-waymeasure was known as ‘mean-tone’ temperament andwas still based in part on the ars antiqua system, butallowed for aesthetic adjustments to intervals of thesecond, third, sixth and, to a lesser extent, seventh, butstill retained the pristine perfect nature of the unison,fourth, fifth and octave. The continuation of the seriesof mean-tone fifths leads to a very noticeable discrepancybetween enharmonic sharp/flat pitches amounting to 41cents between , say, G# = 773 Hz and Ab = 841 Hz.Some keyboard instruments, notably pipe organs of theperiod, were constructed, as Blair stated, with separatekeys for Eb/D# and Bb/A# being the most common.

The latest development in the late 19th Century wasfor the keyboard instruments to be tuned using ‘equaltemperament’ and has been applied to both wood/brasswinds. The octave is divided into 1200 cents, with eachsemi-tone equal to 100 cents or the twelfth root of two,or 1.05946. This is a compromise at best and adesecration aesthetically to those who today may enjoyMonteverdi et alii heard correctly played.

In equal temperament, no interval is acousticallycorrect except the octave. Even that statement must be

winter 9342

A PleaThe Tasmanian Branch (or Twig, as James Marchantinsists on calling it) would like to buy a second handphoto copier, or to find a generous Tasmaniansubscriber who will make one available for use inproducing their local journal, Skepticus.

If anyone can help, please contact Dr JamesMarchant on 002 624 3323 or at GPO Box 1124K,Hobart 7001.

* * *A further Response

Daryl HaslamI am so grateful to Blair Alldis for his expose of theaffectations of some musicians and musicologists (Vol13, No 1).

Because my music teacher mother was never able todrill music’s finer points into me, I have never been gameenough to voice my disbelief of the so called sonorities,but here at last is a man prepared, not only to state thecase, but also to offer a neat way of proving it. Markyou, my sister (same music teacher but a far better studentthan I) takes a less subtle approach to this matter thanMr Alldis. She simply suggests lifting or lowering anymusic by one full tone and then challenging a ‘perfectpitch’ expert to pick it, and I reckon she’s right.

But further proof of Mr Alldis’ contentions wasprovided by Radio National on 21 March, when RalphCollins’ last item on his Concert programme was aMozart violin concerto. Collins was at pains to explainto his listeners that this was a most unusual recording inthat it was played on Mozart’s own original gut-stringviolin, accompanied by a 1780 piano. Because it wasMozart’s own violin, he explained, it was not possibleto tune it up to A 440, which clearly proves Mr Alldis’assertion that A 415 to A 429 was the norm for thatperiod.

qualified. Aesthetically, an exact octave is out of tune tothe human ear and must be ‘stretched’ upwards a coupleof cents for each octave above middle C. Likewise, eachoctave must be stretched downwards below middle C.Remember: every recently tuned piano is theoreticallyout of tune. Fine! That takes care of temperamentproblems with keyboards.

Orchestras are slightly different in their approach totemperament, which has everything to do with Blair’smyth. Orchestras have retained more of the traditions ofthe ars antiqua because they are not bothered with fixedpitch. One only needs to listen to the string section tuningup, listening for those nasty un-Catholic imperfect beats.String players tune exactly the same way Pythagoreanswould have. As a bass trombonist, I tune the same wayas my cellist colleagues. The proverbial A is intoned bythe oboe. I tune to that A by sounding a D a fifth belowand an E a fifth above and listen to the interferencewaves. When the beats disappear, I know I am in tune.

The orchestral musician, freed from the difficulties offixed pitch instruments, ‘leans’ on certain pitches,depending where they appear in the tonal system. If anF# is played in the tonality of D major or G (non-modal),that F# will be slightly higher, or sharpened by a coupleof cents. Similarly, an Eb in the tonality of Bb will beleaned on downwards as any fourth would be. Perfectintervals remain perfect except the fourth. Seconds,sixths and sevenths (all major) tend to be wide, majorthirds particularly so. Therefore, in orchestralperformance there is a difference between enharmonicsof C#/ Db, Fb/E, etc, depending upon the tonality andthe function of that particular pitch in the underlyingfunctional harmony.

To illustrate what is being said here abouttemperament, I suggest that the curious listen to the organentrance in Saint Saens’ Symphony No 3 and Strauss’Also Sprach Zarathustra. Another glaring clash oftemperaments is in the opening bars of the Bb MinorPiano Concerto of Tchaikovsky; those crashing ten fingerchords are miserably out of tune with the orchestra!

In general, in orchestral literature and its performance,players lean on and favour certain pitches, dependingwhere they are in the harmonic/tonal fabric.

Therefore, outside the obvious major/minor division,an opus in Ab major will have performers slightly leaningupwards on their C’s and G’s, whilst in E minor, theirG’s will sag a couple of cents.

Blair is quite correct about fixed temperament-equaltemperament instruments. No-one could tell thedifference if a Shostakovitch prelude were transposed

into another key. However, the nature of temperamentin an orchestra is a different matter. Flat keyed tonalitiessound warmer and sharp keyed tonalities sound brighter,major or minor.

PS I have intentionally omitted singers from thisdiscussion. I personally do not know what their tonality/temperament is, if even they have any!

43winter 93

FORUM

Is Mathematical Physics Paranormal?Andrew Parle

In his review of Paul Davies’ and John Gribbin’s “TheMatter Myth”, Alan Towsey (the Skeptic Vol 13, No1 p23) raised a few queries about the nature and methodsof mathematics and mathematical physics to which, as aformer practitioner, I feel the need to reply.

In an otherwise excellent article, Alan displays a deepdistrust of thought experiments, mathematical models,and the like, placing the value of this evidence on parwith evidence for the paranormal. Part of this distrustmay be rooted in the rather hyperbolic style that Daviesand Gribbin adopt: but then this is a popular book, not aphysical treatise. As mathematical physics has lead tosome of the most accurate and most certain science wehave, it is worth looking at why (and how) we trust inour discoveries - and why our scepticism is better directedelsewhere. In this article I will look at some of thequestions raised by Alan in his review.

Gravitons must exist, according to quantum theory.But how certain are we that quantum theory is correct?The answer is - so certain that on several occasionsscience funders have invested millions in confirming theexistence of particles (such as the omega minus and theintermediate vector boson) and always with success.Some predictions in my own field, quantumelectrodynamics, check out with experiment to fourteendecimal places. The predictions of quantum theory, nomatter how strange (and some are indeed against allcommon sense) have been uniformly confirmed byexperiment. Gravitons must exist because a quantumparticle must carry the force of gravity (action at adistance is not allowed).

Accepting that gravitons do exist, how certain can webe of their properties? These are derived in astraightforward way from what we know of gravity itself.Gravity is not affected by electric charge: thus thegraviton has no charge. Gravity has infinite range: thusthe graviton has no mass and must travel at the speed oflight (just like a photon). Because of certain symmetrywith properties of gravity (classically, it is described bya tensor) it must have a spin of 2 Planck units.

So if we know all about the graviton, how come wehaven’t seen them? The answer is because gravity is soweak, we have not yet been able to construct an

experiment sensitive enough to detect themunambiguously. Nevertheless the evidence of theirexistence is extremely strong.

Not all the results of quantum theory are so stronglysupported as the graviton. Much remains to be done,both in the interpretation of the findings which we alreadyhave and in the synthesis of the disparate areas of physics.There are always going to be way-out sounding theorieson the fringes of the discipline, but in quantum theoryyou can never be sure: such a theory may well turn outto be correct. Quantum theory has always sounded likemysticism to the uninitiated because it is so foreign toour everyday experience, but it is the hardest of hardsciences, pursued with an analytical rigor unknown inany other science.

Alan dislikes the Davies/Gribbin description of ahypothesis for the start of the universe - the ‘quantumflash’. Well, I don’t like it much either. The creation ofvirtual energy out of the vacuum is another quantumprediction which has been confirmed by experiment(except it is not created in the long term, just borrowedfrom elsewhere) but I personally would require a lot ofmathematics to convince me that it was physicallyreasonable.

Alan finds the idea of measuring a billionth of a secondincredible. Physicists regularly measure intervals of lessthan that (a nanosecond), whether Alan believes it ornot. In fact, we build machines which operate atnanosecond speeds. Look at any microprocessor, wherepulses pass between gates and transistors switch at theserates - with incredible reliability (microprocessors areamong the most reliable machines ever made, becausethey have no moving parts). Should we disbelieve incomputers, then?

Alan’s distrust of mathematics started with Zeno’sparadox, which (Alan thinks) proves mathematically thatAchilles could never pass a tortoise who had a head start.Basically, Zeno was the kind of person who likedstumping people: “Here, see if you can explain this!”.The paradox did not constitute a formal proof but wassufficiently intriguing to entertain and baffle theaudience. The hole in the reasoning lies in the assumptionthat an infinite sequence of ever increasing numbers has

winter 9344

no limit. Mathematically, there can be a limit: in Zeno’scase, that’s when Achilles passes the tortoise. Anymodern mathematician, and a few of the brighter highschool students, could point that out. Nothing paranormalthere.

The ancient Greeks could do a lot more with numbersthan just make entertaining paradoxes: they also inventedirrational numbers. Any primitive culture knows aboutcounting numbers: zero and negative numbers are a smallstep to make: rational numbers are the ratio of twointegers. The Greeks showed that there had to be othernumbers (the irrational numbers) for example, the squareroot of two. Together, the rational numbers and theirrational numbers make up the real numbers.

We, however, have gone even further. The square rootof two is well enough, but how about the square root ofminus 1? This brings on another new class of numbers,the imaginary numbers. The name is a mathematician’sjoke (imaginary vs. real) but both classes of numbersare just as real. Luckily, the process stops there, as themost general ‘number’ is the sum of a real part and animaginary part, and is called a complex number.

If you find the above unconvincing, then I have asurprise for you. Open any book on electricalengineering, and you will find that it’s full of complexnumbers. I trust your scepticism does not stop youenjoying the benefits of electricity.

Alan states that he distrusts mathematical models,thought experiments, and computer simulations. Suchdistrust is well merited in the case where the input datais wrong, the model badly constructed, or the programhas errors. However, all are powerful and accuratetechniques when properly applied. For example, Einsteinconstructed the theory of Special Relativity by means ofthought experiments with the well known but bizarreresults of mutable space and time. What he actually didwas construct mathematically the observableconsequences of living in a universe where the speed oflight was independent of the velocity of an observer. Hehad (and this is the original bit) dreamed up this conditionas a way of explaining some results of the Michelson-Morley experiment on the nature of light. The results ofhis cogitation were bizarre beyond belief, but have beentriumphantly corroborated by experiments ever since.

Such results are checked, not once but many times(one of life’s little pleasures is being able to point outwhere a colleague has made a mistake). Only the oneswhich can stand a thorough scrutiny end up in thescientific canon. The same cannot be said to popularpublications, where one often finds hypotheses which

are rejected or at least regarded with deep suspicion bythe scientific community.

Probability is another area where results are frequentlycounter-intuitive. Alan is quite wrong in saying that onecannot make statistical predictions of random events.For example, in throwing an honest dice, one can makethe statistical prediction that over a large number of trials,about one sixth will result in the number 2. The likelihoodof all possible outcomes can be easily calculated bymethods worked out centuries ago, and used by gamblersto fleece the unwary ever since. Now some events whichare deterministic are unpredictable in practice - after all,if we had all the elements of the dice’s trajectory weshould be able to predict how it would fall - but someevents are inherently non-deterministic and can still betreated statistically. The classic example is radioactivedecay, where the decay of a single atom is non-deterministic in principle, but we can treat the decay oflarge numbers by means of a simple statistical relation,the half-life.

Another confusion arises from the phrase “finite butunbounded”. Alan rightly points out that ‘finite’ isderived from a word which means ‘bounded’, and incommon speech they may well mean the same thing,but the situation is different in mathematics. To say theuniverse is finite means that you could in principlemeasure it’s volume in cubic light-years or whatever andcome up with a number. To say the universe is unboundedmeans that it doesn’t have an edge. If you headed off inone direction and kept on going, you would never cometo a boundary of the universe, but would (because it isfinite) eventually come back to where you started. If thisis difficult to conceive in four dimensions of space-time,consider a circle drawn on a sheet of paper as being aone-dimensional universe. It is finite: you can measurethe circumference without leaving the circle. However,you can travel on the circle forever without ever findingan end, because it doesn’t have one.

Bizarre results crop up in science from time to time:most of them are wrong, probably. However, it must bea religious conviction to be able to state that the truthmust always be obvious, that our human brains caninherently encompass the laws of the universe withouteffort. It is much more reasonable to expect that theuniverse is complex but rational, and that with the propertools, we can unravel that complexity, however bizarrethe results in the view of some. The nice thing aboutmathematics is that it works for everyone who is willingto put the effort into learning.

One last point. Popular books might explain the current

45winter 93

Astral Travel?

A little over a year ago, my mother flew to Sydney fromQueensland by Compass Airlines. While she was inSydney, the airline went broke. A couple of months ago,she flew to Sydney by another airline and while she wasin Sydney, Compass went broke again. Is this evidenceof a strange astral connection between my mother andCompass Airlines or what? BW

state of a scientific field well or badly, but it is a rarebook for a popular audience which can truly reflect howthat field has obtained its results. It is hardly surprisingthat such a book makes these results appear out of thinair or the imagination of scientists, but that is not thecase. Mathematics and mathematical physics are basedon as firm a foundation as any science (much more thanmost) and great confidence can be placed in the acceptedideas, properly interpreted. This does not mean that itsinitiates cannot make just as great fools of themselveswhen they venture outside their fields of study as anyother expert.

* * *More on Mythical

Mathematical MattersHans Wieler

I hope that after reading Alan Towsey’s “MythicalMatters?” (Vol 13, No 1) many will write opposing hisviews. To save the reputation of the true Skeptic, it shouldbe demonstrated that Alan Towsey fails to qualify as atrue Skeptic on some important points.

I agree that he is entitled to criticise a book on physicsas a layman, just as a first year university student isentitled to criticise a book on mathematics. But hiscriticism, like that of the student, must take a differentform from that of the expert. Thus, the student may objectto the lack of clarity of the text book; he may say, forinstance, that the author has failed to make it clear whatthe square root of minus 2 means, but he is not entitledto say (like Mr Towsey) that the square root of minus 2is as imaginary as dragons and unicorns. To say thiswould be the province of the expert mathematician who,of course, would not say it, knowing that it is well definedas the ordered number couple (0,-2).

Again, the statement: “the Universe is finite butunbounded” is dismissed by Alan Towsey as meaninglessbecause his Latin dictionary says: “finite = bounded”.As in the case of the square root of minus 2, the rejectionof the statement is not the province of a linguist butbelongs to the philosopher of science. All the layman isentitled to say is that he does not understand it and thatthe book has failed to explain it to him.

Note that in this context the difference is easilyexplained by the example of the surface of a sphere (eg

the surface of the Earth). The surface of a sphere is finitein the sense that its surface area is equal to a finite numberof square kilometres. For instance, only a finite numberof carpets of fixed size can be laid on the Earth withoutoverlapping or doubling up. But the surface is unboundedin the sense that you can draw a line in any directionwithout being stopped by a boundary.

Many laymen, like Alan Towsey, find it difficult tovisualise the three-dimensional analogue of a finite butunbounded universe, which requires that only a finitenumber of boxes of given size would fit into it, whileany line (straight or otherwise), could be drawn withoutever meeting a boundary.

I have not read the book which Alan Towsey criticisesand hence cannot say whether he is justified in sayingthat “much of the book is nothing but wild speculation”.But what he really means is that much of modern physicsis nothing but wild speculation. As a true Skeptic andlayman he should have said that it appears so to him.

In conclusion, I believe that both Susan Stebbing andAlan Towsey are wrong when saying that physicistsshould stick to physics and leave philosophy tophilosophers (heaven forbid!). Physicists need a greatdeal of philosophy, although not the type of philosophythey get from the traditional philosophers. Philosophersof science like Reichenbach, Carnap, Phillip Frank,Popper, Adolf Gruenbaum...have specialised in thephilosophy required by the modern physicist andmathematician. Their task is to clarify Alan’s “wildspeculations”, which are vital in the early stages of anew theory.

The true Skeptic humbly accepts this situation, forotherwise he ceases to be a true Skeptic and joins the“Skeptical Students” cited by William Grey on page 22of the Autumn issue.

winter 9346

FORUM

I Beg to DifferGerald Huber

In the Skeptic (Vol 13, No 1, p 48), William Grey makesa good point in showing that determinism is not selfrefuting (after all, not even the anti-determinist Popperbelieved this, see Mind, 1983 pp103- 4). He neverthelessthinks that determinism is in poor shape because“quantum theory tells us that physical systems don’t haveprecise states anyway”. But, in fact, quantum mechanicsis just as deterministic as classical mechanics. (Inpractice it is even more so than classical mechanics,because of the linearity of the Schrodinger equation,which excludes the appearance of so-called deterministicchaos.)

The difference is that quantum mechanics happens tobe the right deterministic theory. Classical mechanics isso imprecise that it could not even describe some of themost common phenomena without a curious addition toits axioms, namely randomness. Because seeminglyrandom events are so ubiquitous, evolution has providedus with an intuitive concept to help us visualise them.That is to say, we instinctively tend to think thatrandomness is a part of nature. This is understandable,but still totally invalid. Randomness is a secondary, semi-classical auxiliary construction.

Such auxiliary constructions are often used to make asemi-classical description of a system better fit the factswithout resorting to quantum mechanics. Possibly thebest known example is the atomic model proposed byNils Bohr. In this model, the atom is pictured as a littlesolar system in which the electrons go round the nucleusas the planets go round the sun. This classical modelgives rise to the problem that the moving electrons emitradiation, therefore they should slow down and fall intothe nucleus. All matter in the universe should long agohave been destroyed by this process. So Bohr saved hismodel by explicitly forbidding the electrons to emitradiation and therefore to gradually fall into deeper anddeeper orbits. He simply postulated that there are anumber of given orbits which are the only ones that theelectron can occupy.

The classical description plus this discrete-orbit-postulation gives one an excellent model forunderstanding the emission and absorption of photons

by atoms. For these special processes the model isappropriate, but we must not forget that this is not so forother purposes. It is no substitute for the full, quantummechanical description (which is deterministic).

Quantum mechanics has greatly supported the casefor determinism. For example, it explains in a totallydeterministic manner such ‘obviously random’ thingsas radioactivity.

Nature is, as far as we know, deterministic throughand through. The confusion arises from the fact that thisdeterminism cannot be formulated in pseudo-anthopomorphical terms, but only in mathematicallanguage. Thanks to quantum mechanics, determinismis in better shape than ever before in history.

So much for that. I also want to comment on RafeChampion (ignoring the danger of the rancid yak fat pot).In writing about what is wrong with Popper I’m goingto focus on one point.

Popper claims that he has solved the problem ofinduction by introducing his principle of falsification.The argument goes like this: No matter how many whiteswans we see, we can never exclude that we will notlater encounter a black one. So we are never justified inconcluding that all swans are white. Therefore the‘problem of induction’ is: how can empirical facts besaid to be certain? Popper says that as least as soon aswe have seen a black swan we are sure that the sentence“All swans are white” is false. So he argues we shouldsubstitute a demand for falsification for a demand for(an impossible) verification.

Although there is surely a practical difference betweenverification and falsification (ie some theories are easierto falsify than to verify and vice versa) there is no basiclogical difference between the two. This is evidentbecause to falsify proposition A is equivalent to verifyingnot-A. This is also clearly seen in the swan example.After we have discovered the black swan, the sentence,“All swans are white” can nevertheless be correct. Theblack swan might have been the last of his species andmay have died in the meanwhile. It might be that weerred in our observation and it was, in fact,not a swanafter all, but a yet unknown species, etc. Remember that

47winter 93

the ‘problem of induction’ was that we cannot gainsecurity through induction. That’s true. Neither can wegain security through falsification.

* The principle of induction is: as long as we haveonly seen white swans, we can firmly assume that allswans are white.

* The principle of falsification is: as long as wehave not seen a not-white swan, we can firmly assumethat all swans are white.Great progress indeed. Popper has not solved the

problem of induction as he claims in his “Conjecturesand Refutations”; rather he has reformulated it. Let mestate clearly that he is not to be chastised for not solvingit, but for claiming that he has solved it. I cannot seehow Popper’s philosophy is superior to that of DavidHume, who Popper accuses of bolstering irrationalism.

I agree with Alan Towsey (p23) that books by JohnGribbin have to be read with a healthy portion ofscepticism. I also agree that between the blatantly occultbooks and the few good popular scientific books thereis a large wasteland of half-truths and fuzziness.However, he suspects that “in logic, when one comes toan obviously absurd conclusion, one goes back andchecks both the premises and the line of reasoning, tofind out where one has gone wrong.” (p24)

Indeed, when I first encountered the theorem ofBanach and Tarski, it was used as an example in adifferential geometry course to demonstrate that therestriction imposed on the operations, which actually dothe suspicious transmutation, are not strong enough to

exclude such nonsense - and therefore another set ofpresuppositions is needed, if you want to describe onlyphysical realisable transmutations. The point is that thenonsense is not in the mathematical theorem, but in thepresuppositions. As long as the presuppositions are statedclearly, the mathematician has nothing to complain about- no matter how absurd they are. The physicist, of course,is an empiricist and has to think quite differently andTowsey is absolutely correct in pointing out that theauthors who he criticises fall down badly on the job ofbacking up their statements. But it is usually not themathematicians who “confuse the symbols with thethings they stand for”.

Every now and then, people turn up at a mathematicsdepartment claiming to have found an algorithm for thetrisection of the angle or squaring the circle. They don’taccept that these problems are unsolvable. Isn’t it obviousthat there has to be a square with the same area as acircle? Certainly there is one, but it misses the pointbecause the problem consists of producing such a squareby algebraic methods. Rancid yak fat is too good forthem.

Towsey is puzzled by the saying that “the universe isfinite but unbounded” and wants to know what it is tryingto express. Well, actually this statement is analogous towhat is expressed by the sentence, “The surface of theearth is finite but unbounded”. Although the world isfinite, you still can’t fall off the edge. The universe alsohas a finite volume but you can still travel in it aroundand around....

Popper: A DefenceBern Gandy

The Summer 92 edition (Vol 12, No 4) gave us theconcluding article of Dr Grey’s interesting series on theParanormal and letters from John Snow and JamesGerrand remonstrating with Dr Grey for referring to theviews of Popper, Kuhn and others. Both refer to DavidStove’s book Popper and After – Four ModernIrrationalists as the sort of talisman to ward off anyonewho questions the authority of induction, probability,verification etc, as the method of science.

James Gerrand questions Dr Grey’s dismissal ofverification to discriminate between science and theparanormal, assuring us that most scientists would

consider that the acid test of a scientific claim was“whether it could be verified, whether it could berepeated”. He says the Australian Skeptics has usedverification to test the validity of a paranormal claimand “there is still $30,000 to be won by verification”.

Does this mean that in a Skeptic trial, for say waterdivining, a lucky contestant could pick the correctlocations of the water, collect $30,000 and prove waterdivining as a science? Is this an example of inductionand verification as the method of science?

In “Popper and After”, Stove labels himself anInductive Probabilist and brands those who do not reason

winter 9348

from that premise as irrational. A great deal of the bookis taken up with criticism of words and phrases. Stoveneglects to mention, at least where Popper is concerned,the words and terms in question were the subject ofprotracted arguments with the Logical Positivists of theVienna Circle and their successors.

For example, Stove states that there has been an‘accumulation’ of knowledge in the past 400 years and,as Popper denies this, then Popper is irrational. ButPopper has been talking and writing on the ‘growth ofscientific knowledge’ for some 70 years (possibly beforeStove was born); and he has provided a clear demarcationof scientific knowledge from pseudoscience and theparanormal. A matter touched on at the end of this letter.Nearly one third of Stove’s book is devoted to an analysisof Hume’s attack on induction because, according toStove, that is the key premise of Popper’s irrationality.(The fact that Stove ignores Kant as possibly a greaterinfluence on Popper’s thinking is interesting). Notsurprisingly the outcome of Stove’s analysis of Hume isthat ‘the invalidity of induction is incurable’, as Russell,Popper and many others have long recognised. However,Stove says, “the inductive-probabilist still maintains thatsome inductive arguments are reasonable...he (theinductive probabilist) does not concentrate on the logicalfeature ...etc”. He neglects to inform us what theinductive probabilists does when the inductive argumentsare not ‘reasonable’.

On this question, it’s worth considering the views ofscientist Sir Peter Medawar, who took a considerableinterest in the history and philosophy of science. In“Pluto’s Republic” Medawar devotes several chaptersto an analysis of induction and hypothetico-deduction,with particular reference to the views of nineteenthcentury scientists and philosophers. Medawar’sconclusions diverge from those given by Stove. Heprovides a great deal of evidence supporting thehypothetico-deductive principle advocated by Whewell,150 years ago and developed by Popper; he agrees withPopper’s claim that there is no the method of science.(See pp 85-135, “Pluto’s Republic”, OUP, 1984)

If some of Stove’s criticism is valid, it fails to impressbecause of his obsession with words and meanings, oftentaken out of context. His approach to philosophy seemsclose to that of the Logical Positivists of whom Popperwrote, “I regard the ultimate cause of the dissolution ofthe Vienna Circle and of Logical Positivism as not itsvarious grave mistakes of doctrine (many of which I hadpointed out) but a decline of interest in the great

problems; the concentration upon minutia...andespecially on the meaning of words; in brief, itsscholasticism. This was inherited by its successors inEngland and the United States.” (“Popper, UnendedQuest”, p 90, Fontana 1980)

As this letter is a result of Dr Grey’s articles on theparanormal, it is appropriate to refer to Stove’s view ofknowledge. When ridiculing Popper’s claim thatscientific knowledge is tentative or conjectural, Stovemakes the statement “To say that something is known,or is an object of knowledge, implies that it is true, andknown to be true”. (“Popper and After”, p 14)

Stove’s statement not only involves infinite regress,it also implies certain knowledge and truth. This is easilyconverted by opponents of science to the charge thatscience is just another belief system, a dogma or faith.Scientific knowledge is thus equated with knowledge orbelief in the paranormal, with religious fundamentalismand the Creation Science movement. One of the ploysof the latter is to agree that creation science is a faith,just as science is a faith - and therefore both should betaught in the science curriculum.

On this issue, Skeptics may recall the famous Arkansastrial in 1981 when creationists attempted to establishlegal grounds for Creation Science to be taught alongsidescience in the State Schools. It was a landmark trialinvolving creationists, educators and many philosophersand scientists as witnesses.

In his detailed summing up, Judge Overton ruled thatCreation Science was in fact a religion and had nothingto do with science. He supported this decision byidentifying the essential characteristics of science as:

1. It is guided by natural law.2. It has to be explained by reference to natural law.3. It is testable against the empirical world.4. Its conclusions are tentative, that is, are notnecessarily the final words.5. It is falsifiable. *While the wording may be woolly, the judge’s

assessment comes very close to Popperian ideas. Nomention of induction, probability, meaning or verificationas ‘essential characteristics of science’. Judge Overton’sfinding is the more interesting because the Americanphilosophers and scientists who gave evidence at the trialare more likely to have been logical empiricists,physicalists (both fathered by logical positivism),instrumentalists or pragmatists, rather than Popperians.

49winter 93

LETTERSLetters to the editor on any

topic of interest to otherSkeptics are welcomed.

Letters should generally berestricted to no more thantwo pages of typed script.

MusicRegarding Ben Bensley’s questionsarising from my article on allegationsof satanism and criminality in HeavyMetal (Vol 13, No 1). The questionsraised in his letter are really non-sceptical ones, i.e. characteristics ofthe music and noise. I did not feelthat either was relevant to thesatanism/criminality/censorshipissue.

The issue of noise at concerts isan easy one to comment on. Noiselevels produced by any type ofconcert is simply a health and safetyissue that can be measured,investigated and resolved, usingstandard agreed procedures. Noise isan issue with many recreationalactivities besides concerts. I wouldalso point out that HM and Rock arenot alone in attracting such criticism.One of the main complaints aimedat the Maleny Folk Festival, whichis held near Brisbane each January,concerns noise levels inflicted onneighbouring residents.

The question concerning thecharacteristics of HM and Rock isdifficult to answer. The essentialproblem is that neither category ismonolithic and there will be manyexceptions to any generalisations onecares to make. In respect of HM, Iwould certainly refer readers toDeena Weinstein’s Heavy Metal: ACultural Sociology (LexingtonBooks, 1991) who provides adetailed answer as to what constitutesHM. Now to the questions ofinstrumentation and the use of trebleand bass.

Let us consider theinstrumentation used in that mostextreme form of HM: Death andDoom Metal. Most Death and DoomMetal bands rely on drums andguitars, but there are bands that have

added electronic keyboards, organs,violins, French horns, oboes, stringsections and female backing vocals.(e.g. Celtic Forest, My Dying Bride,Anathema, Amorphis, Paradise Lost,At The Gates, Nocturnus, MorbidAngel). One record reviewer haseven suggested that Wagner and CarlOrff have been more importantinfluences on some of these neweroutfits than older Metal bands likeBlack Sabbath. A case can be fairlyeasily made that some HM avoids thetreble range - although notableexceptions like Dream Theatre exist.Indeed, Doom Metal positivelyrejoices in the bass range. MostDoom bands have detuned theirinstruments to such levels thatplaying them has now become an artin itself. The net result is the slow,bleak musical landscape of Winter orthe deep, growling bass grind of MyDying Bride or Paradise Lost. Onemust bear in mind that the veryfeatures of HM that attract outsidecriticism of it are also the very thingsthat make it attractive to its fans.

Unlike HM, it is now virtuallyimpossible to make similarcharacterisations of Rock that are inany way meaningful. The creaturethat we refer to as Rock is now sodiverse that one must discussindividual genres (a point thatWeinstein stresses). Consider theyawning chasm that stands betweensuch Rock acts as Enya, U2, Laibach,MC Hammer and Frente, forexample.

Hopefully, I have provided somesort of answer here. Prof Weinstein’sstudy is compulsory reading forfurther clarification of most HMissues. Sadly there is no equivalentfor other Rock genres, although someRock encyclopaedias may containuseful information.

Greg CzechuraCaboolture QLD

More musicThe other night I had a friend overfor dinner. She loves PlacidoDomingo and owns all his albums.

A few days before I had comeacross a recording by a relativelyunknown singer, who sounds verymuch like the esteemed MrDomingo, and it was playing whenmy friend arrived.

Being an expert on PlacidoDomingo’s work, she was surprisedto hear what she thought was hisvoice singing something she hadnever heard.

“Is it a new release?” she askedenthusiastically as she hurried towardthe stereo. She was quite stunned tofind that she had been fooled by thevoice of an impostor.

Which just goes to demonstrate avariation of an effect well known toall Skeptics. Placebo Domingo canbe just as effective as the real thing.

Steve HynesWarrnambool, Victoria.

From the tenor of these, and othercontributions appearing in Forum, itis clear to me that the magazine isdue for a name change. Look out forPopper and Puccini, The Journal ofthe Cultured Sceptic. at a news standnear you. Ed

winter 9350

Who Dunnit?”Did Jesus arise from the dead?”While researching the question Icame across a book, “Secrets ofMount Sinai” by James Bentley, whostates that the Gospels were writtenin this order and at these estimatedtimes after the crucifixion. Mark (35years); Matthew (50 years); John (60years); Revelation (60-100 years). Ihave also run into a few otherquestions, such as, “Who moved thestone?”

In “Evidence that Requires aVerdict” by Josh McDowell (p 208),Prof Frank Morrison states, “Let usbegin by considering first the sizeand probable character..nodoubt...the stone was large andconsequently very heavy.” Marksays, “exceeding great”; Matthew, “agreat stone”; Peter, “for the stone wasgreat”; Prof Samuel Chandler says,“The women (Mary Magdalene andMary, mother of Jesus) couldn’t doit, the stone being too large for themto move”. I will attempt to showthese points to be incorrect. Matthewsays (28:2) “Suddenly there was aviolent earthquake; an angel of theLord came down from heaven androlled away the stone”. (Who sawthis?) Mark says (16:5) “So theyentered the tomb..they saw a youngman sitting on the right, wearing awhite robe” (Note, no mention of anearthquake and only one man). Theyoung man says (16:7) “Fear not,Jesus has risen...Now go and givethis message to his disciples”. Thatseems pretty clear, and rememberthat Mark wrote from closest to theevents, using supposedly eyewitnessaccounts, yet Matthew, writtenconsiderably later, puts in addedinformation. How did he know?Eyewitnesses that were missed 20years earlier? Then Luke, written

some time after Mark, says (24:3)“So they went in... (24:4)...they stoodthere puzzled by this, when suddenlytwo men appeared in bright shiningclothes and stood by them..”.

The answer (Mark 15:46) “Thenhe Joseph (of Arimathea) rolled alarge stone across the entrance to thetomb”. Matthew 27:60 says thesame; Luke 23:56, “The women wenthome to prepare spices for the body”.So, it appears the body was not inplace behind a “great stone”.

Perhaps Joseph of Arimathea whoplaced the body and stone alsoremoved the stone? Or perhapsNicodemus who visited Jesus atnight (John 19:39) removed thestone?

All of this has to be speculationon the writers’ part, written yearsafter the event and relying on oralstories. Note also that Matthewcontradicts all the other Gospelwriters, none of whom mentionearthquakes! The contradictions goon and on.

Ron BernardiBoolarra VIC

God is a Bloke!I say to Pearl Eisen (Letters, Vol 13,No 1) I know there is a god! TheHindus say he is a creator/destroyer,the Judeo/Christians say he createdman in his own image. ProfessorsPlimer and Davies say science andreligion (i.e. god) are moving closertogether. I say god is a male.

How do I know? Well, did not thiscreator/destroyer start the universewith a big bang and have not boysand men, cast in his image, beencreating big bangs ever since? Stoneson flints, fireworks, bombs, rockets,the atom bomb and god knows whatnext! Another universe perhaps?

Well, let’s hope it’s not as violent

as this one. So much of it is morallyindefensible from my femaleviewpoint. Let’s have some forwardethical planning this time, not just adisastrous and dangerous explosionleading ‘inevitably’ to life formsbased on a pyramid of cruelparasitism and suffering. What sayall forms of life use the elementsdirectly, without killing, stealing anddevouring energy from other lifeforms?

This god has much to answer for.Science should beware of associatingwith him.Denise WhiteDianella WA

Quantum SalesI am a little confused by yourPresident’s assertion (Vol 12, No 4 p46) that “Australian Skeptics takesno position whatever on religion”,when it is marketing books called“Then Fall Jesus” and “To Hell WithGod”. According to the reviews,neither of these is concerned withscientifically testable claims of thesort made by creationists. Yourdecision to market these books, andnot pro-religious ones, seems to meto indicate a fairly definite position.Please would you explain.

(Dr) Anthony GarrettGrantchester, Cambridge UK

As a theoretical physicist, you willbe familiar with Heisenberg’sUncertainty Principle, which states,as I understand it, that you candetermine either the position or thevelocity of a particle, but not both.It’s the same with Harry Edwards’Commercial Principle - the books areselling quickly, so we cannotdetermine our position. Does thatsolve your dilemma? BW

51winter 93

AstrologyI too have received the mail orderpromotion material from AstrologyToday. I agree with Harry Edwardsin your edition (Vol 12, No 4) thatthis business advertises very dubiousclaims. But you are illogical.

1.You need to differentiatebetween the awful advertising andthe astrology;

2.The special offers have no directbearing on astrology, dreadful as theyare. Many firms advertise like thiswho are not to do with astrology;

3.You act as if discrediting theantics of this strange outfit helps todiscredit the whole art of astrology.This is as logical as writing off thewhole of allopathic medicine on thegrounds that a newspaper ad for spotcream makes exaggerated claims.

Your magazine often publishessimilarly illogically conceivedresearch which always puzzles me.

Nevertheless I believe firmly inastrology and as before I wouldrecommend Alan Oken as an authorto start with if you wish to understandastrology rather than this schoolboyattitude of finding dodgy examplesto poke fun at.

Incidentally, Astrology Today’sactual printouts are probably from areputable astro-computer programmesupplier and are quite cheap and aslong as the operator is efficient andshould be as accurate as the birthtime given.

Angie LyndonFremantle WA

I hardly know where to begin inresponding to this letter. Harry’sarticle did not set out in this instanceto expose the astrology, but theassociated dubious claims made forthe products that were offered as ‘freegifts’. He would hardly need toexpose astrology as I doubt that there

is another pseudoscientific belief,with the possible exception ofcreation ‘science’, that has been sothoroughly investigated and exposedfor a sham, than has astrology.

For a most incisive commentaryon astrology, I commend “DoesAstrology Need to be True?” Part 1(Skeptical Inquirer, Winter 1986-87)and Part 2 (SI, Spring 1987). Bothof these articles have been collectedin The Hundredth Monkey(Prometheus Books, Buffalo, 1991).I also commend a paper “A doubleblind test of astrology” by ShaunCarlson (Nature, 318:419-423, 5December, 1985), as well as anumber of articles in the Skeptic,which can be found in the Indexprinted in this and the previous issue.Far from being ‘schoolboy’ inattitude, these articles ask questionsthat demand answers fromastrologers, if they hope to be takenseriously. Ed

AnorexiaPopular magazines, of the sortmentioned by Barry Williams in hisaddress “From the President” (Vol13, No 1), are permeated withinternal contradictions of an equally,if not more, dangerous sort than thehodge-podge of -mancys and -ologies that indirectly contributed tothe deaths of the three women thatBarry discussed.

In the Woman’s Day issue ofJanuary 18, there is a major articleon the near-death of a TV‘personality’ through anorexianervosa, a disorder that results in thedeath of thousands of people in thewestern world, every year. Not onlyis the rest of the magazine full of theusual array of patently anorexicmodels, being paid to reinforce thesimian idea that ‘skeletal is sexy’;

but, in flat contradiction to the “isn’tthis dreadful” stance of the foregoingarticle, there is a series of interviewswith other TV ‘personalities’ inwhich their ‘secrets for staying thin’(read, living in a state of near-death)are ‘revealed’.

Like the “dozens of pages ofspurious advice” Barry referred to,this sort of ‘journalism’“encourage[s] the sort of [distorted]view of the world that led thesewomen to their deaths”.

I might add, that the cartoon onpage 30 of the same issue is a goodexample, even in the context, of thesort of gender-stereotyping andtrivialisation of women that createsand feeds insecurities, and so givesstrength to the leaches of theappearance-industry.

Patrick SpeddingSandy Bay TAS

GreekOh, how could you? I refer to thearticle The Sceptical Student - 1992(Vol 13, No 1 p 22). I quote“Scepticism is derived from the Latinword ‘Skeptikos’ which means todoubt”. Conclusion correct - premisefalse.

Σκεπτικοξ is a Greek word - notLatin as stated. Take it from one whohas taught Ancient Greek for 18years. Also note the final sigma ‘ξ’ -not ‘σ’ as recorded in a previousissue. ‘σ’ is only a primary andmedial, ‘ξ ’ is final. HenceΣκεπτικοξ..

Lorraine R DelaneyEttalong Beach NSW

It wasn’t us who said Skepticism isderived from a Latin word, Lorraine,it was one of William Grey’sstudents, as were all the otherexamples in the article. As for ξ orσ, it is all Γρεεκ to me. Εδ Εδ Εδ Εδ Εδ

winter 9352

Free WillI was amazed by the reactionaryresponses to Danny Witmer’s lettersstating simply a position on the mindand free will. The responses comefrom both the dualists, to whom onlyparanormal explanations areacceptable, and from thephilosophers who cannot progresspast epistemology. The truth isextremely simple, and has long beenavailable.

The central question seems to bethe nature of the mind. As everyprocess or phenomenon must have amechanism, or means by which itoperates, then the choices availablefor the mind can lie in two classes:

(a) physical processes, which arestudied by science, and(b) non-physical processes.Events in the second category have

never been observed, and there is nomore evidence for them than forunicorns or the tooth fairy. Moreover,the forces known to science providea “complete” description of thebehaviour of matter, so non-physicalprocesses could not influence ouractions even should they exist. Thusmodern physics rules out spiritualentities independent of the body, suchas the “soul”, and the “psychons” ofSir John Eccles.

The first category fares ratherbetter. Let us review the evidenceidentifying mental functions withelectrochemical processes of thebrain.

Particular regions of the brain cannow be observed or influenced usingPET; localised anaesthesia; electricalmeasurement, stimulation orparalysis; effect of injury or diseaseetc. In this way, connections havebeen made between particularregions and physical processes of thebrain and mental capabilitiesincluding visual perception, hearing,language, feeling, memory, spatial

reasoning, mathematics etc.The regions and conditions

required for consciousness are alsowell known. Our awareness is totallydependent on supplies of nutrientsand oxygen. Drugs and alcoholmuddle our reasoning abilities andour subjective awareness of self, notjust our sensory perceptions. Perhapsthe dualists have never fainted or gotdrunk.

Sensory inputs to babies andchickens have produced observablechanges to brain structure, showingthat learning is a physical process.An experimental means of “Timinga Thought” was devised by Libet,which showed brain voltages arising0.4 seconds before the subject wasaware of deciding to initiatespontaneous actions. This indicatesthat the conscious thought originatedin a process, rather than caused it.

In summary, the evidence for themind being solely brain activity isoverwhelming and continues togrow. People who reject this asdemeaning, should consider that thebeauty experienced in a symphony isnot diminished through ourdiscovering that it is merelya time-varying sound pressurelevel.

Previous correspondents haveassumed materialism anddeterminism are linked. They haveargued that if mental processes havea physical mechanism, then ouractions must be preordained. Theyeven leap to an anti-punishmentstance. I will attempt to show thefallacy of this reasoning.

Firstly, consider a chess-playingcomputer, with its “pointer” dartingamong complex layers of algorithms,assessing strategies based onhypothetical “world-models” of howthe game might progress, and finetuning its connections as it learns (a“neural network” no less). To anobserver, the process is not

deterministic, in that he cannotgenerally tell what move it will make.Now add random processes, whichmay for example come frompseudorandom generators, quantumuncertainties, amplified thermalnoise, or chaotic events. Even thewriter of such a (real) programmecannot, even in principle, determineevery move.

Finally, consider the complexitiesmultiplied a million times, togetherwith the variety of inputs and outputsincluding language. Such a machinewould have no trouble displaying allthe intricacies of human and animalbehaviour. We have materialismwithout determinism.

If the machine claims to have freewill, which is of course a purelysubjective matter, then we are unableto refute it. Should it commit anantisocial action, then punishmentmay be justified so that its learningcircuits tend away from repeatingsuch an action. Similar machinesobserving may adjust their worldmodel and also be deterred.

As for my own experience, Ireached these conclusions at aboutage 17, during my science education.My thoughts were private, as suchthings could not be discussed in aChristian environment. At universityI was delighted to find many otherswho were also willing to face theevidence. For the following 26 years,the ongoing stream of research hassupplied continuing confirmation.David Denton’s “The Pinnacle ofLife” is an excellent summary.

So the real mystery is why somepeople, including correspondents tothis magazine, seek a fictitious andimpossible mechanism for thehuman mind and free will,disregarding the perfectlysatisfactory explanation which isindicated by all the evidence.

Ian R BryceRozelle NSW

53winter 93

A (sic) letterYou wanna watch it, you lot - glasshouses and all that y’know.

Having ripped a chunk off the 38page “How to Manual” for itsspelling errors (Vol 13, No 1, p 19),you then proceed to some sics of yourown, like:

p 20 - acheive (sic), mulit-tiered(sic);

p 27 - off (sic) - should be of;p 29 and p 46 - you seem to be

unable to choose - premisses orpremises;

p 43 - principle (sic) cause;p 46 - exists (sic) - should be exist.

Daryl HaslamGlen Iris VIC

Please accept one or more of thefollowing excuses:

1. So you were the subscriber thatreceived the special DeliberateMistake copy of Vol 13 No 1, Daryl.

2. Unfortunately our proof reader,a Mr Tim Mendham, wasunavoidably detained in KualaLumpur at the relevant time.

3. You complaint derives fromfalse premmissess.

4. I feel sic. Ed

TechniqueMr Schmidt has erred (“Soul Food”the Skeptic, Vol 12, No 4). He writesconcerning the AlexanderTechnique, “Technique for what?Chicken sexing?...UnderwaterLudo?...Conquering the knownworld?...Who knows?”

In asking “Who knows?”, I take itthat he does not know what the ATis about. Has he tried to find out?

I took some AT classes in the hopeof curing a chronic neck painproblem. ‘Conventional’ medication

from a doctor treated the symptoms.So did physiotherapy. I was advisedby such professionals to try theAlexander Technique and afterreading a book by a teacher of theAT, I was convinced that it was notjust another New Age philosophy.

Admittedly it is a little difficult tocategorise what the AT actually is. Ithas to do with good (spinal) postureand movement of the body. One ofits main doctrines is that we(westerners) are too concerned withachieving the goal and think littleabout the process of getting there -such as sitting down into a chair. Wetake for granted that all that mattersis being seated. We don’t realise whatrepetitive ‘slumps’ into a chair couldbe doing to our vertebrae.

If anything, the AlexanderTechnique favours a holisticapproach to the person rather that adualism of mind (or whatever it is)and body. Maybe this body to mindinteractionism makes the ATmisunderstood.

But I do not attempt to refute MrSchmidt just by appealing to myexperience, but also by pointing tohis poor methodology. So what if astrangely titled book is found in theNew Age section of a library. Thatclassification is not enough to rejectit a priori. This is what Mr Schmidtdoes. I take it then that he is adogmatic sceptic. Please be fairer.My pain in the neck has been cured.

Robert AndersonBerowra NSW

GenesisJohn McKeon’s article “WhichGenesis” (Vol 13, No 1) accusescreationists of misrepresentingscientific argument which does notfavour creation, whilst doing a fairjob of misrepresenting the narrativeof Genesis chapters 1 and 2.

Chapter 2 begins as a continuousnarrative dealing specifically withthe creation of Eden and itsoccupants, having only brieflytouched on the creation of ‘man’(mankind) in the previous chapter.

No wonder Mr McKeon seesconflict between 1:6 and 2:5, sincethe former speaks of heaven(firmament AV) and the latter ofearth. Furthermore, 2:5-6 is clearlydealing with vapour watering, andmost certainly not drought.

It is indeed the NIV translationwhich conveys the picture of a landwithout vegetation, and it is the oldKJV which gives the moreharmonious understanding of plantscreated before they grew from seed.

If creationists sometimes domisrepresent non-creationist writingsas badly as this, then Mr McKeon’spoint is well made.

Malcolm EdwardsMooroolbark VIC

What do you mean “sometimes”?Ed

Proof!Ah Ha! I have you! Radio Nationalin Hobart, at 9.00am on Friday,March 19, 1993, reported that ascientific survey had shown that anygiven person was up to 21% morelikely to have a heart attack on his orher birthday than on any other day.What more devastating confirmationcould you imagine of the validity ofastrology? Please send me my$30,000. No cheques please; cashonly, in old banknotes. Any obscureSouth American currency will do.

Prof OY KnottRichmond TAS

The small print of our challenge saysthat we do not pay people who usepseudonyms. Genuine nyms are OK. Ed

winter 9354

Coming up

In the next issue we will publish thetranscript of an interview betweenProfessor Ian Plimer and ProfessorPaul Davies, part of which wasbroadcast on the Victorian SkepticsLiars’ Club radio show on 3RRR.

In this article, two of Australia’smost distinguished and controversialscientists discuss their views aboutlife, the universe and everything. Weare sure that our readers will find thisarticle to be among the moststimulating and informative we haveever published.

We already have a number of itemsfor our next issue, but this should notdeter our readers from sending ustheir contributions. After all, it isyour magazine and we wish topublish your views. There is no‘party line’ in Australian Skeptics,although articles should address ourmain areas of concern, theparanormal and pseudoscience.Letters and contributions to Forumhave fewer constraints and canaddress a wider range of topics, butshould generally conform to ouraims. The other main criteria are thatthe contributions be understandableby our scientifically literate, but notnecessarily scientifically trained,audience and our pathologicalaversion to legal proceedings.

To assist in our production of theSkeptic we ask that, where possible,longer contributions be sent on a 5.25or 3.25 inch disc, in text format, orvia e-mail to skeptics @spot.tt.sw.oz.au. Typewrittencontributions are fine if not too longand handwritten contributions areacceptable providing they are bothlegible and short.

Dr Stephen Basser is a medicalpractitioner and administrator and isthe convenor of the AustralianCommittee on Science and Health.

Harry Edwards is really a sensitivenew age guy (SNAG). The onlyreason we keep him on as Secretaryis that he owns the pencil.

Bern Gandy is retired and is almostas great a fan of Karl Popper as isRafe Champion.

James Gerrand, aviationconsultant, was the foundingNational Secretary of AustralianSkeptics. He is a now a Life Member.

David Hagar, teacher, musician andAmerican, though not necessarily inthat order, utterly denies that he is inany way horrible.

Gerald Huber is a member ofGWUP, the German Skeptics group.If we were to spell that out, it wouldtake an extra page.

Steve Hynes is a journalist. He livesin an energy vortex, has visited ByronBay, Glastonbury and Sedona, yet theonly effect he can produce in nearbydiviners is severe irritation.

Peter Johnson, cartoonist, lives inAdelaide and claims that he still hasnot visited Atlantis.

Adam Joseph, multi-mediapersonality, consultant andalderentity, is a member of theVictorian committee.

Dr Andrew Parle, nationalcommittee member, is a physicist andrecently became a father for the firsttime. We have no reason to believethat there is a causal link betweenthese facts.

Danny Varney is the WesternAustralian Secretary of AustralianSkeptics. He is a retired magician.

Ray Watson is a freelance writerabout whom very little is known, atleast by the writer of this column.

Sir Jim R Wallaby is prepared todeny on oath that he had anything atall to do with introducing Ian Plimerto Australian Skeptics. Legal actionis pending.

Barry Williams is incensed that theSydney Eisteddfod has been renamedthe Sydney Singing and DancingCompetition or some such. Whateverhappened to multiculturalism, hewants to know?

X, our mystery cartoonist (see p 15)refuses to allow us to reveal hersecret identity. All we know is thatshe lives in Victoria, which seems tobe as good a reason as any forremaining incognito.

About our Authors