Wind May Have Helped Moses Part Red Sea? Probably Not

This story got lots of coverage a few weeks ago (even NPR picked it up), but there were problems with the coverage and so I decided to write about it. Unfortunately, I just now realized that I completely forgot to post what I'd written!  So for better or worse, I decided to dredge up old news and clicked publish.

This story is a classic case of "science journalism FAIL" - despite all the media coverage, it seems nobody gave the story a critical look to see whether or not the conclusions actually follow from the research, and nobody seemed to be calling the authors' motives into question. PZ ranted about it here, Brian Keim over at Wired Science wrote this rather uncritical piece (where I left a couple of comments), and it was covered here at the lead author's place of employment.  Like Brian Keim's article, the NPR piece seems to lack much criticism, so here's my take on what they missed.

The Science of Denying Science

Have you ever wondered how people can rationalize away a scientific claim when it conflicts with other beliefs?  Or why being anti-evolution also seems to up the odds being anti-vaccine or a climate change denialist??

Then you should go check out When Science Clashes with Beliefs? Make science impotent, by John Timmer.

[Hat Tip to PZM]

"Gary Null is the Kent Hovind of Alternative Medicine "

If the embedded video above doesn't appear, try here, here or here.

D. J. Grothe on Skepticism, Humanism

You should find time to watch, or at least listen to the talk below. It's the keynote from the recent Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism (NECSS) given by the president of the James Randi Educational Foundation, DJ Grothe. The talk, entitled Skepticism is a Humanism, can be viewed in full here or on vimeo.

Previously on this blog, I've talked about what skepticism is and is not, but it's worth pointing out that much of the skepticism movement is driven by humanist principles. In his talk, Grothe defined humanism as...

Humanism 
       A naturalistic (as opposed to a supernatural) ethics focused on human well being.

While this is really a definition of secular humanism, it gets the point across: humanism is a set of morals and ethics based primarily (or solely) on human welfare.  You can read more about humanism from the American Humanist Association (AHA), or on Wikipedia here, here, here and here.

Grothe also takes pains points out that he's not saying "Skepticism = Atheism" nor that "Skepticism = Secular Humanism". Instead, he asserts that skepticism is both a method of inquiry, and a social movement to apply that method of inquiry towards humanistic goals (more from Grothe on skepticism starting around 11:30, and around 22:30).  Good stuff, though I wish he would have gone further to draw distinctions between these and related terms like rational inquiry, which in my mind is the "method" part of skepticism separate from the social movement (although I'm not sure that is the commonly accepted meaning of the phrase).

Thoughts?

[Hat tip to Phil Plait via Bad Astronomy]

Skepticism and Pseudoskepticism

I spent part of my afternoon today discussing science, skepticism and rational inquiry with a few like-minded individuals, and one of the topics we touched on was the problematic association of skepticism with what I would call denialism (though I'm not sure it's the right term).  I decided to take a small break from thesis writing this evening to offer a small suggestion towards resolving this problem: call it pseudoskepticism.

Before defining the term, you might first ask what is skepticism? Most people can't precisely answer that question, so if you're like most in this regard let me offer up a few definitions.

Skepticism \ˈskep-tə-ˌsi-zəm\

• A methodology that starts from a neutral standpoint and aims to acquire certainty though scientific or logical observation. [Wikipedia]
• 1 : an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object
  2a: the doctrine that true knowledge or knowledge in a particular area is uncertain  b: the method of suspended judgment, systematic doubt, or criticism characteristic of skeptics
  3: doubt concerning basic religious principles (as immortality, providence, and revelation)
  [Merriam-Webster's Online]
• skeptic - someone who habitually doubts accepted beliefs [wordnetweb.princeton.edu] 

Skepticism is basically a process by which one can decide whether to adopt, reject or remain neutral on a potential belief.  To give term some context, I like this line from the brief introduction to skepticism from The Skeptical Society:

The key to skepticism is to continuously and vigorously apply the methods of science to navigate the treacherous straits between “know nothing” skepticism and “anything goes” credulity.

So what is pseudoskepticism? Consider, for example, you're favorite conspiracy theorist and ask "Are they thinking skeptically?"  Based on the above definitions, it's clear the answer to that question is No".  They aren't following the evidence. Instead, I'd say such individuals are - at best - pseudoskeptics.  Without finding any dictionary definitions of the term, here's my attempt at a definition (based on one definition of the word pseudoscience):

Pseudoskepticism \ˌsü-dō-ˈskep-tə-ˌsi-zəm\

• a methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be skeptical, or that is made to appear to be skeptical, but which does not adhere to appropriate principles of rational or scientific inquiry.

Much as scientists freely caution against pseudoscience, true skeptics should use the term pseudoskeptic more vociferously to describe those who seem to be confused about what it means to be a skeptic, yet still claim to be on. While it certainly won't solve the problem completely, it's at least a step in the right direction.

Related Links on Skepticism

1. On Pseudo-Skepticism, by Marcello Truzzi
2. Pseudoskepticism, RationalWiki
3. A Skeptical Manifesto, by Michael Shermer (an excerpt from this book) 
4. Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science, by Robert L. Park

Mr. Deity on Intelligent Design Creationism and Science

If you've paid attention to the past few years worth of creationist attacks on science, you'll hopefully appreciate all the references packed into this latest episode of Mr. Deity. Enjoy!

Human Origins & The Aquatic Ape Hypothesis

I just saw this post by Greg Mayer (this Greg, not this one) over on Jerry Coyne's blog, Why Evolution is True, which knocks TED for spreading what Greg considers pseudoscience: the aquatic ape hypothesis. It does seem like a valid criticism, and not just a reaction to her calling evolutionary biologists "evolutionists" in the first few seconds of the talk.

Have a look at the video, and browse the above critique by Jim Moore, plus John Hawk's blog posts for more details.