Brian, skepticism, and Revison3

[gabe_utsecks]

I have been watching Scam School since the beginning, but after seeing the New York magic show (especially the fire eating part), I realized how talented Brian actually was and decided to google him. I found, on youtube, a lecture he did called "Scams, Sasquatch and the Supernatural," in which he goes through dozens of types of pseudoscience and explains why they are bullshit, their origins, and why people believe in them.

(the videos are collected neatly here (http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/news/article.php?storyid=517))

I recommend it to everyone.

(I also recommend the podcast The Skeptics' Guide To The Universe (http://www.theskepticsguide.org/); the televison show Penn & Teller's Bullshit; and books or videos from James Randi, Richard Wiseman, Richard Dawkins.)



Anyway, it makes me very happy to see that Revision3 has a card-carrying skeptic on its roster, and I have a few questions for Brian:


1.) Who, among the Revision3 people, are the most skeptical?

2.) And who is the least skeptical of the Revision 3 crew? Is there someone always talking about their horoscope and feng shui and whatnot?

3.) Are you spreading your skepticism throughout Revision3?

[guytheninja]

Well, maybe this is splitting hairs, but he didn't disprove them. What he did do is show evidence that there is a high probability that these phenomena do not exist.

In order for him to disprove Bigfoot's existence, he must perform a negative proof:
http://www.safalra.com/philosophy/fallacies/negativeproof/

Negative proofs are impossible. In order for Brian to prove Bigfoot's non-existence, he will have to check everywhere at the same time -- under every bush, rock, cave, etc. Now that is a daunting task!!!

However, if Brian wanted to prove Bigfoot's existence, he would just have to find him, hanging out in the woods somewhere.

[shwooddotcom]

good points, both of you guys. (guytheninja's right: you can't prove a negative, which I think I'm pretty careful to state in the opening of the program).

I want to give a thoughtful response to your questions, but as I'm writing this, I have a flight in 7 hours, and only 4.5 hours available for sleep. Okay if I postpone my response for a day or so?

-Brian

[guytheninja]

good points, both of you guys. (guytheninja's right: you can't prove a negative, which I think I'm pretty careful to state in the opening of the program).

I want to give a thoughtful response to your questions, but as I'm writing this, I have a flight in 7 hours, and only 4.5 hours available for sleep. Okay if I postpone my response for a day or so?

-Brian

Sure, please answer this when you get back,
I would love to know why I can't see the face on my LCD monitor while everyone at the NYC event was able see it. (That's my biggest question).

[therage800]

I have been watching Scam School since the beginning, but after seeing the New York magic show (especially the fire eating part), I realized how talented Brian actually was and decided to google him. I found, on youtube, a lecture he did called "Scams, Sasquatch and the Supernatural," in which he goes through dozens of types of pseudoscience and explains why they are bullshit, their origins, and why people believe in them.

(the videos are collected neatly here (http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/news/article.php?storyid=517))



I just watched all 11 video's. Brian really is amazing, even in lecture!

[gabe_utsecks]

Well, maybe this is splitting hairs, but he didn't disprove them. What he did do is show evidence that there is a high probability that these phenomena do not exist.

...Negative proofs are impossible.

You are right, of course, about proving a negative being impossible.

To be clear, though, I didn't say he disproved the claims, and I would never say that, because -- like you -- I know that it would be an impossible task. I said that he explained why they were bullshit, and showing that something is bullshit doesn't require one to actually prove it wrong. You simply have to, as you said, show that there is a very high probability that the phenomena in question does not exist.


The lack of evidence against something is not proof of it's existence. The burden of proof should not be on the skeptics, but on the people making the extraordinary claims. And on top of that, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

You can't just make an unfalsifiable claim and then say that since it hasn't been disproven, it must be true. It's sad that so many people fall for that little piece of backward logic.




And Brian, it's perfectly fine to delay your answer. It's no big deal. Get your sleep!


(I too would love it if you could give a quick explanation of the face-in-the-static trick. What method was used so that the face showed up on the cameraphones? Did it really even show up on the cameraphones?)

[murphy1d]

Sure, please answer this when you get back,
I would love to know why I can't see the face on my LCD monitor while everyone at the NYC event was able see it. (That's my biggest question).

I'm going to guess before Brian explains it, and no there has not been any wiki checks, I'm just throwing out a guess. I'm either on the right track or I'm not.

Let's say that video is equal to 30 frames per second (someone will correct me on this, as I don't know). I would believe that the picture is there every X frames and is replaced with static every X +2 frames. Thus (let's say) the image is there a total of 20 frames in a given second, and static is there 10 frames of every second. The camera phone then takes a shot that is (again, let's say) 1/2 second exposure. The picture would be there 10 out of 15 frames and thus would permeate the camera image.

But, our eyes may not form the image because the static that is in every X +2 frames is moving and keeps the image from remaining long enough to register on the corneas. In the end our eyes would not form an image because the moving static

My opinion, how'd I do?

[rabidbadger]

I'm going to guess before Brian explains it, and no there has not been any wiki checks, I'm just throwing out a guess. I'm either on the right track or I'm not.

Let's say that video is equal to 30 frames per second (someone will correct me on this, as I don't know). I would believe that the picture is there every X frames and is replaced with static every X +2 frames. Thus (let's say) the image is there a total of 20 frames in a given second, and static is there 10 frames of every second. The camera phone then takes a shot that is (again, let's say) 1/2 second exposure. The picture would be there 10 out of 15 frames and thus would permeate the camera image.

But, our eyes may not form the image because the static that is in every X +2 frames is moving and keeps the image from remaining long enough to register on the corneas. In the end our eyes would not form an image because the moving static

My opinion, how'd I do?

That was my guess too, I really can't see any other way.

[shwooddotcom]

I have been watching Scam School since the beginning, but after seeing the New York magic show (especially the fire eating part), I realized how talented Brian actually was and decided to google him. I found, on youtube, a lecture he did called "Scams, Sasquatch and the Supernatural," in which he goes through dozens of types of pseudoscience and explains why they are bullshit, their origins, and why people believe in them.

(the videos are collected neatly here (http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/news/article.php?storyid=517))

I recommend it to everyone.

(I also recommend the podcast The Skeptics' Guide To The Universe (http://www.theskepticsguide.org/); the televison show Penn & Teller's Bullshit; and books or videos from James Randi, Richard Wiseman, Richard Dawkins.)

Anyway, it makes me very happy to see that Revision3 has a card-carrying skeptic on its roster, and I have a few questions for Brian:

1.) Who, among the Revision3 people, are the most skeptical?

2.) And who is the least skeptical of the Revision 3 crew? Is there someone always talking about their horoscope and feng shui and whatnot?

3.) Are you spreading your skepticism throughout Revision3?

As for questions 1 and 2, I really don't know. When we talk, it's not usually about this sort of thing.

As for 3, we'll see: I had a feeling that scam school would pull some of the skeptics out of the woodwork, and I'd LOVE to do another Rev3 program with a skeptical tilt. As always, the chances of this happening depend largely on how well scam school continues to grow, and the interests of the viewers.

It can't hurt that you guys have already sought out and watched the Scams, Sasquatch, and the Supernatural lecture, or that a number of people have already posted skeptical questions... what do you think? what's the "market" for a skeptical program on the internet?

[mrpopular]

Whatever you do Brian, I'm there... I'd be up for anything you do. I seriously just want to stick you in a room and pull all the knowledge out of you.. I haven't seen one thing I haven't liked... I mean a few months ago I was hooked when you were just the scam school guy... I've just pulled the picture back and found their so much more you have to offer. From Sasquatch to Mr. Happy Pants & Fire eating inbetween.. I'm totally in for whatever you want to do

[patrickd]

It can't hurt that you guys have already sought out and watched the Scams, Sasquatch, and the Supernatural lecture, or that a number of people have already posted skeptical questions... what do you think? what's the "market" for a skeptical program on the internet?

Consider all the people that use the Internet to breed skepticism on topics like the moon landing and September 11th. I'd rather see skepticism on legitimate topics.

Although there are already a number of web sites and TV shows out there that *ahem* bust myths...there's always room for another, I think. ...and I'll continue to believe this until my relatives stop sending me forwarded e-mails about some of these urban legends about crap like cell phones giving off enough radiation to pop popcorn or how Bill Gates will donate $100 to some fake charity if they forward that e-mail to 10 people.

...which reminds me, I think it's time for me to try destroying a toy (http://chibiproject.com/) using supernatural forces. ;)

[rabidbadger]

My ex father-outlaw, was a huge skeptic, and a subscriber to skeptic magazine, et all. He's not computer literate, so when I found Skepticality podcast/website (http://www.skeptic.com/), I'd burn them for him. He was so grateful, that stuff don't exist in mainstream media, which is all he had. Minus a tv. He don't do tv. haha.

But anyway. To clarify a bit, I think, the folks who deny moonlandings, and espouse theories about 9/11 are not skeptics, they are conspirorists. Skeptics place provable science over unprovable alternate theories. Not totally putting down conspirorists, some day their alternate thoughts might actually find something. In fact to this day I still think there is something fishy about the Kennedy assasination, but I will let them find any new provable facts.

Thing about skeptics, though, and most contraversal, is the fact that to be one, you pretty much gotta be an athiest, or at least agnostic. Religion is a tough hanger-onner in the days of modern science, but people still cling to it, mostly out of habit and comfort. Hard to talk Skepticism without talking religion.

But that said, dammit, NO ONE EVER is allowed to take my Nessie from me!

http://z.about.com/d/paranormal/1/7/1/B/loch_ness_2_lg.jpg

[dingo8baby]

As for questions 1 and 2, I really don't know. When we talk, it's not usually about this sort of thing.

As for 3, we'll see: I had a feeling that scam school would pull some of the skeptics out of the woodwork, and I'd LOVE to do another Rev3 program with a skeptical tilt. As always, the chances of this happening depend largely on how well scam school continues to grow, and the interests of the viewers.

It can't hurt that you guys have already sought out and watched the Scams, Sasquatch, and the Supernatural lecture, or that a number of people have already posted skeptical questions... what do you think? what's the "market" for a skeptical program on the internet?

I would hope the market is high. After all, look how shitty all the religious, conspiracy (have you SEEN those 9-11 sites? yeesh), and generally ignorant websites are. Save for the 9-11 bullshit, i don't think those sites generally attract a lot of traffic, either. As long as it's entertaining and smart, i don't see why it wouldn't have a decent audience. Skeptics need to fight back against the wave of ignorance and superstition that plagues our society now, and the internet is the perfect platform, in my opinion.

[guytheninja]

As for questions 1 and 2, I really don't know. When we talk, it's not usually about this sort of thing.

As for 3, we'll see: I had a feeling that scam school would pull some of the skeptics out of the woodwork, and I'd LOVE to do another Rev3 program with a skeptical tilt. As always, the chances of this happening depend largely on how well scam school continues to grow, and the interests of the viewers.

It can't hurt that you guys have already sought out and watched the Scams, Sasquatch, and the Supernatural lecture, or that a number of people have already posted skeptical questions... what do you think? what's the "market" for a skeptical program on the internet?

What will you be skeptical about, please list:

[shwooddotcom]

I just googled "pseudoscience topics," and it looks like this list is a good starting point:

Alien autopsy
Amityville Horror
Animal mutilations (by aliens or satanic cults)
Area 51 and Hanger 18
Bible Code
Champ: Lake Champlain monster
Crop circles
Crystal power
Dianetics (L. Ron Hubbard)
Dogon Tribe and Sirius B
Dowsing
Electomagnetic Photo fields
ESP
Faith healing
Feng shui
Ghosts
Graphology
Heaven’s gate cult and Comet Hale-Bopp
Homeopathy
“Jupiter Effect” (planetary alignments causing geologic upheaval on earth)
Loch Ness Monster -
Lunacy (full moon correlations)
Miraculous images of Jesus or Mary (on bridge abutments, dental x-rays, tortillas)
Nostradamus
Numerology
Orion’s Belt/Egyptian Pyramids
Ouija Boards
Palmistry
Psychic pets
Psychic surgery (connection to actor Andy Kaufman)
Psychokinesis (Uri Geller et al.)
Pyramid power
Repressed memories
Sasquatch ("Bigfoot")
Satanic cult human sacrifices -
Speaking to the Dead (John Edward, et al.)
Tarot cards
Trance channeling (eg. JZ Knight and Ramtha)
Weeping/bleeding icons
Yeti

[guytheninja]

Maybe you should have a show about crazy science fiction ideas propagated in Anime -- that become pseudoscience.

Hokuto No Ken - Fist of the North Star Intro
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw3JTZl0cmQ&feature=related

Can you really make a man's head explode by hitting "power points" on his body -- the inquiring minds want to know :D.

[veras126]

I just googled "pseudoscience topics," and it looks like this list is a good starting point:

Alien autopsy
Amityville Horror
Animal mutilations (by aliens or satanic cults)
Area 51 and Hanger 18
Bible Code
Champ: Lake Champlain monster
Crop circles
Crystal power
Dianetics (L. Ron Hubbard)
Dogon Tribe and Sirius B
Dowsing
Electomagnetic Photo fields
ESP
Faith healing
Feng shui
Ghosts
Graphology
Heaven’s gate cult and Comet Hale-Bopp
Homeopathy
“Jupiter Effect” (planetary alignments causing geologic upheaval on earth)
Loch Ness Monster -
Lunacy (full moon correlations)
Miraculous images of Jesus or Mary (on bridge abutments, dental x-rays, tortillas)
Nostradamus
Numerology
Orion’s Belt/Egyptian Pyramids
Ouija Boards
Palmistry
Psychic pets
Psychic surgery (connection to actor Andy Kaufman)
Psychokinesis (Uri Geller et al.)
Pyramid power
Repressed memories
Sasquatch ("Bigfoot")
Satanic cult human sacrifices -
Speaking to the Dead (John Edward, et al.)
Tarot cards
Trance channeling (eg. JZ Knight and Ramtha)
Weeping/bleeding icons
Yeti




where's chupacabra?!?!?!?!


well, the chupacabra was all in for animal mutilations so maybe he is in there, but he needs his own topic I mean, its CHUPACABRA....

I'm actually very interested in

Nostradamus
Repressed memories
Psychokinesis
Orion’s Belt/Egyptian Pyramids
Electomagnetic Photo fields
Crop circles