hackmore.net

As it turns out they are almost the same thing. Some tricks used by both:

First is the Rainbow Ruse—the "statement which credits the client with both a personality trait and its opposite." ("I would say that on the whole you can be rather a quiet, self effacing type, but when the circumstances are right, you can be quite the life and soul of the party if the mood strikes you.")

The Jacques Statement, named for the character in "As You Like It" who gives the Seven Ages of Man speech, tailors the prediction to the age of the subject. To someone in his late thirties or early forties, for example, the psychic says, "If you are honest about it, you often get to wondering what happened to all those dreams you had when you were younger."

There is the Barnum Statement, the assertion so general that anyone would agree, and the Fuzzy Fact, the seemingly factual statement couched in a way that "leaves plenty of scope to be developed into something more specific." ("I can see a connection with Europe, possibly Britain, or it could be the warmer, Mediterranean part?")

And that’s only the start: there is the Greener Grass technique, the Diverted Question, the Russian Doll, Sugar Lumps, not to mention Forking and the Good Chance Guess—all of which, when put together in skillful combination, can convince even the most skeptical observer that he or she is in the presence of real insight.

I am a big fan of Bill Maher. He recently had an excellent commentary at the end of the "New Rules" section of "Real Time with Bill Maher". Go and watch New Rules: Article of Faith. Now go forth to think critically, be a rationalist, and vote.

Just for fun here are a few more clips featuring Bill Maher with a skeptical bent.

• A Stand-up bit on religion

• Interview with Christoper Hitchens

• Mormonism and Religion in Politics

• Pat Robertson's Law School

• "Eulogy" for Jerry Falwell

• A quick slam on 9/11 "truthers"

While I am a fan of Mr Maher it is important to note that he does not speak authoratatively on all topics. Here we see that he is definitely on the wrong side of the evidence in the "do vaccinations cause autism" debate.

Occasionally the differences between cultures hits me like a ton of bricks. I happened to glance at this fine product at the grocer last night, and I thought to myself "Oh, I'm sorry you don't have enough food poor little third world child. Do you know what we use wheat for in my country?" <sigh>

Arguing with conspiracy theorists is often one of the most frustrating activities one can engage in. At least new age wackjobs and religious types don't pretend to be thinking critically. You know up front that their faculties for evaluating evidence have been critically compromised.

Conspiracy theorists, on the other hand, often appear with evidence in hand and ask that you take a look at it and draw your own conclusions. At first glance this sounds like an eminently reasonable empirical request. What you don't know is that they have cherry picked the evidence, and that if you really do examine the evidence for yourself instead of following the primrose path they have laid for you they will get quite upset. If you reach any conclusion other than "the conspiracy is real" you will find that they decide that you are part of the conspiracy's disinformation campaign.

Why are these theories so popular? This New Scientist article examines just that, and even offers a hand DIY guide for making your own conspiracy theory.

So what kind of thought processes contribute to belief in conspiracy theories? A study I carried out in 2002 explored a way of thinking sometimes called "major event - major cause" reasoning. Essentially, people often assume that an event with substantial, significant or wide-ranging consequences is likely to have been caused by something substantial, significant or wide-ranging.

[...]

To appreciate why this form of reasoning is seductive, consider the alternative: major events having minor or mundane causes - for example, the assassination of a president by a single, possibly mentally unstable, gunman, or the death of a princess because of a drunk driver. This presents us with a rather chaotic and unpredictable relationship between cause and effect. Instability makes most of us uncomfortable; we prefer to imagine we live in a predictable, safe
world, so in a strange way, some conspiracy theories offer us accounts of events that allow us to retain a sense of safety and predictability.

Why is there something rather than nothing? An excellent question. I don't know the answer, but I like the taxonomy of possible explanations put forth by Robert Lawrence Kuhn, the author of this article in Skeptic magazine entitled
"Why This Universe? Toward a Taxonomy of Possible Explanations" [PDF]

This bit of bad science has been floating around on blogs and what not this week. Phil Plait of Bad Astronomy takes it apart nicely.

It is fairly clear that the term aura as it is typically used is completely bogus and without meaning. However, those who suffer from migraines or epilepsy may experience a period of altered perception, also called an aura, immediately before the onset of a headache or a seizure.

This state is thought to be caused by a tiny seizure affecting only a small portion of the brain. As the electrical disturbance spreads out to affect the rest of the brain more and more senses and brain systems can be thrown out of whack. Ultimately the disturbance is either brought under control or a tonic-clonic seizure acts as a reset button and reboots the brain.

I am very interested in ways the brain can malfunction and the strange mental states that can result. Ever since reading this thread (also archived here) I have secretly wanted to have a seizure just to experience the aura.

However, this brings up very strange epistemological questions. Since a major seizure almost always results in short term memory loss I would very likely have no memory of experiencing the aura. For some strange reason I still think it would be a good experience to have, but I cannot for the life of me form a coherent justification for that belief.

Some designs for products make supernatural claims without even thinking about it. First read this then take a look at this.

Holy crap! There is a secret society of engineers in Canada. They wear Iron Rings which legend has it were originally hammered manually from the steel of a beam from the Quebec Bridge, which collapsed during construction in 1907, killing 75 construction workers due to poor engineering. Although that bit isn't true the collapse of the bridge did inspire the creation of the organization.

They even have an initiation ritual written by Rudyard Kipling, The Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer. It is good stuff too. It has Morse Code and reading from Apocryphal books of the Bible (2nd Esdras).

A list of tools to help get your finances in shape.