mondojohnson

From Sense About Science comes the latest news on the British Chiropractic Association’s libel suit against science writer Simon Singh. Today is a big deal; I will post news as I hear it:

“Simon Singh’s libel case with the British Chiropractic Association appears before the Court of Appeal in London [...] Tuesday 23rd February. His case will be heard by three of the most powerful legal figures in the UK, Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge, Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger and Lord Justice Sedley and has been named one of the top ten cases to watch in 2010 by The Lawyer magazine.”

[I would like to point out that The Lawyer nicked my title -- "Simon Singh's Bogus Journey" -- which I first used in a post on May 15, 2009, and many times after. Frikkin' lawyers. Totally bogus. ]

I went to see the much-hyped Paranormal Activity yesterday evening, and was nicely disturbed and jolted by its effective, minimalist spookiness. When I arrived home I happened across an episode of Ghost Hunters on SyFy and was struck by how the use of “webcam verite” can yield such different results. Paranormal Activity had my heart pounding even in some of its effects-free, static camera moments; whereas Ghost Hunters induced yawns, even during its ostensibly scary moments.

Of course, I understand that these are two different animals: Paranormal Activity is a creative work for which I was willing to suspend disbelief, while Ghost Hunters is what passes for a “reality” show. To those who haven’t seen it, the show follows a sad team of credulous pseudoscientists as they trip over things in the dark. South Park gave the show a well-deserved reaming in its Season 13 opener, “Dead Celebrities” (the episode is not currently available on the South Park site, but it will return there soon).

So I am probably guilty of comparing apples and oranges, but it was interesting to observe how a similar collection of images can effect me so differently. It reminds me of the famous film school editing exercise in which a man staring deadpan at the camera can evoke radically different emotional states, all depending on what images precede the shot.

I highly recommend Paranormal Activity, particularly in this Halloween season. I can’t say I’d advise watching Ghost Hunters, except for a laugh.

God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

• Author: Christopher Hitchens
• Year: 2009
• Publisher: Twelve
• ISBN: 0446697966

I’ve always enjoyed Christopher Hitchens. Even in my deepest disagreement with him (re: W’s war), the man never fails to construct nearly impregnable arguments, and he does so with the tartest tongue in the living English language.

I’ve read Hitchens on the subject of religion many times before, so I went into this book with low expectations — I sort of figured it would be like eating some nice microwaved leftovers. Pleasant, but nothing new.

I was wrong, though. His previous writings on theism and religion were skillfully placed banderillas; with this book, Hitchens slays the bull. I thought, as a long-time infidel, that I had figured out all of the anti-god / anti-religion arguments. But this book lays out a few that hadn’t occurred to me, and it breathed some ferocious new life into some of the standard ones (e.g. the easy demolition of the “argument from design”).

Read the book, if only for the forceful and elegant use of the English language.

I’ve read Hitchens on the subject of religion many times before, so I went into this book with low expectations — I sort of figured it would be like eating some nice microwaved leftovers. Pleasant, but nothing new.

I was wrong, though. His previous writings on theism and religion were skillfully placed <em><b>banderillas</b></em>; with this book, Hitchens slays the bull. I thought, as a long-time infidel, that I had figured out all of the anti-god / anti-religion arguments. But this book lays out a few that hadn’t occurred to me, and it breathed some ferocious new life into some of the standard ones (e.g. the easy demolition of the “argument from design”).

Read the book, if only for the forceful and elegant use of the English language. // –>

It may sound oxymoronic — but the FOX network has become a refuge for rational thought.

I must hasten to say that I’m referring to broadcast, prime-time FOX, not its idiot troglodyte child the Fox News Channel. Clearly there’s not much safe haven for reason on those windy airwaves.

But the daddy FOX network has an impressive track record of bringing unapologetically rational characters. Tonight I tuned into “Bones” and saw the main character scoff at the pseudo-scientific aspects of psychology, and to my pleasant surprise she wasn’t punished in the final act for her disbelief.

FOX also gives us Brian Griffin each week on “Family Guy” — Brian is a strident atheist; in one episode he even used Richard Dawkins’ “The God Delusion” to pick up a like-minded chick.

And of course, the best of the lot is House, M.D., who is my cuppa tea. Dr. House is actively hostile to religion, superstition and unclear thinking. His irritation with fuzzy thought makes him a hard pill to swallow for others, but the writers never steer him toward some warm and phony redemption… he can’t have his brilliance without his pain and anger.

The only show on the prime-time lineup that toys with science-phobia is “Fringe”, which I enjoy quite a bit. But it does have an undercurrent of “science can do unspeakable things” which is kind of a 1950′s approach to sci-fi.

But all in all, kudos to Rupert Murdoch for letting rationality occupy a tiny corner of his media empire.

No one says it better than Richard Dawkins when it comes to calling bullshit on religion. Check out this interview on BBC’s Newsnight, where Dawkins discusses his new book, The God Delusion.