Epistemological Shame on You: You Just Can’t Believe Everything Terry Rozelle Philosophy 497: Senior Seminar; Fall, 1998 California State University Northridge "A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence"                                                                                David Hume Introduction I am a skeptic—not the historical kind of skeptic who doubts that we can actually know anything—but a skeptic about paranormal claims; and I think everybody should be skeptical to some degree. Claims of paranormal phenomena are sometimes referred to as "fringe" science; which is not science fiction, nor is it the frontier of science. It is that gray area where scientific respectability is questionable (Radner 1). Fringe science, also referred to as "pseudoscience," considers subjects that have little or no hard scientific support such as: astrology, numerology, biorhythms, palmistry, graphology, UFOs, alien visitations, mediums, psychokinesis, dowsing, haunted houses, ghosts, poltergeists, psychic detectives, clairvoyance, levitation, Kirlian auras, pyramid power, the Bermuda Triangle, and perpetual motion machines. Fringe science attracts many incredulous believers and is more pervasive than most of us like to think. A 1990 Gallup poll showed that: 49 percent of Americans believe in ESP (extrasensory perception). 25 percent feel that they’ve experienced telepathy. 21 percent believe in reincarnation. 17 percent feel that they’ve been in touch with someone who had died. 25 percent believe in ghosts. 14 percent feel that they’ve been in a haunted house. 55 percent believe in the Devil—and 10 percent believe they’ve either talked to or been talked to by the Devil. 14 percent have consulted a fortuneteller or psychic. 25 percent believe in astrology. 46 percent believe in psychic or spiritual healing; 25 percent feel they’ve healed their body using mental power alone. 27 percent believe that extraterrestrial beings have visited Earth in the past (Schick 6) In this paper I would like to draw attention to some popular paranormal claims and the people who question them: the scientists, philosophers, educators, and others who make up the growing field of organized skepticism. I also I want to look at organized skepticism with an inquiring eye. Are skeptics fair? Are they just closed-minded? Do skeptics provide a service to society? My story Why do I pay any attention at all to pseudoscience? If I think that claims of the paranormal are nonsense, why do I devote any time to them? The answer is that I wasn’t always a skeptic; in fact, I was once one of the very gullible. I truly thought the New Age had all the answers (‘just buy this crystal to attract the positive energy you need to reach your goal’). I spent a lot of time and a lot of money at the local metaphysical bookstore. I wasted years reading books about psychics and palmistry and the lost years of Jesus. My dream was to enroll in Duke University’s parapsychology program and study things like ESP (extrasensory perception) and psychokinesis (utilizing the power of the mind to lift solid objects). A good friend of mine, who actually dove much more deeply into New Age thinking than I, did all the things I wanted to do but couldn’t afford: he talked to psychics (who told him everything he wanted to hear); he flew across country in order to learn astral projection (deliberate out-of-body experiences…it didn’t work); he went to New Age seminars and learned how to do the firewalk. After successfully walking barefoot across a bed of hot coals without being burned, by using only the "power of his mind," my friend was convinced that he could do anything (like quit smoking and drinking…he didn’t). My thinking began to change in—of all places—my dentist’s office. It was in his waiting room that I picked up a copy of "Skeptical Inquirer" magazine, devoted to critical examination of claims of the paranormal. It just so happened that the featured article was firewalking! Imagine my surprise when this article gave an uncomplicated, but scientific, explanation of how people were able to walk across hot coals without being burned, and it had nothing to do with any extraordinary power of the mind! The secret to firewalking lies in the "distinction between temperature and heat (or internal energy)…different materials at the same temperature contain different amounts of thermal or heat energy and also have different abilities to carry the energy from one place to another (Leikind 29). This distinction between temperature and heat is not a part of our commonsense notions, although all of us are actually familiar with it. Stirring a pot of boiling water with a metal spoon can, before long, burn your hand; but you can stir that same pot of boiling water all day long with a wooden spoon, and the wooden spoon will not get hot! The difference is that metal is an excellent conductor of heat; wood is not. Firewalking is based on the same idea. The embers are light, fluffy carbon compounds. Although they may be at a high temperature (1,000º to 1,200º F), they do not contain as much energy as we might expect from our commonsense notions of incandescent objects. Thus, so long as we do not spend too much time on the embers our feet will probably not get hot enough to burn. In fact, because the capacity of the embers is low and that of our feet relatively high, the embers cool off when we step on them (Leikind 30). How do we know the embers cool off? The color and intensity of the light from the embers inform us of their temperature: yellow embers are hotter than orange, orange hotter than red, and so on. When people walk across the bed of coals darkened footprints appear where the coals have cooled because of contact with the feet. In a couple of seconds, combustion reactions restore the embers’ temperature and glow (Leikind 30). The firewalk suddenly lost its mystical enchantment for me and, instead, began to look like a scam. I was angry that Tony Robbins (a popular New Age positive-thinking guru) and others like him were making big money off of people who just didn’t know the facts. This one magazine article, found in a dentist’s waiting room, would soon turn all my thinking around. If one paranormal phenomenon could be explained so easily, were there more? My search for "answers" took a decidedly different turn. Brief history Contemporary interest in the paranormal began in 1848 with the start of spiritualism--a Christian faith with the added dimension of spirit communication through mediumship. Before the turn of the century, thousands of mediums were practicing across the Unites States and Europe. Sitters (clients of the mediums) claimed that spirits could be heard speaking through floating trumpets, cool breezes and mysterious touches were felt, and "ectoplasm," a substance supposedly exuded from the bodies of certain mediums, "materialized" in the form of spirits. In one form of mediumship called "table tipping," sitters would place their hands on a table’s surface and spirits answered their questions by tipping the table up or banging its legs on the floor. Physicist Michael Faraday (1791-1867) performed one of the first experimental studies on claims of the paranormal and showed that the "force" behind table tipping was quite simple. It was not spirits moving the table at all: it was the sitters’ own hands. Faraday suggested that the sitters were not frauds but used "unconscious muscular action" (Blackmore "Parapsychology" 1-2). First psychical research organization By the late Victorian era physics had become enormously successful and Darwinism had come as a threat to many people’s beliefs. The materialist view (evolution in particular) was strongly opposed by the Church and some saw spiritualism as providing the evidence needed to refute the materialists. If the spirits of the dead could appear and speak, then materialism was false. Scientists and scholars began to take the claims seriously and to investigate them and thus, in 1882, the Society for Psychical Research was founded in London (Blackmore "Parapsychology" 3). J.B. Rhine’s influence Without doubt the most influential figure in the history of psychical research is Joseph Banks Rhine who, in 1934 launched the term "extrasensory perception (ESP)". Rhine had become interested in spiritualism in the 1920s after attending a lecture by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Rhine conducted research in parapsychology, first at Harvard and then at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina where in 1935 he and his wife, Louisa, established the Duke Parapsychology Laboratory. The Institute for Parapsychology (successor of the Duke Parapsychology Laboratory) was set up in Durham in the early 1960s (Radner 13). The Rhines were trained as biologists. Their goal, as scientists, was to find evidence against a purely materialist view of human nature, yet they wanted to get away from any associations with spiritualism and bring their new science firmly into the laboratory (Blackmore "Parapsychology" 4). History of organized skepticism Interest in skeptical evaluation of paranormal claims arose during the early 1970s as a result of concern over much of the public’s uncritical acceptance, as true, almost every type of untested supernatural claim. In 1976, scientists, writers, educators, journalists, and philosophers formed the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP). The organization’s objectives include critical, unbiased, objective research into claims of the paranormal, publication of the results of these studies, and commitment to not "reject on a priori grounds, antecedent to inquiry, any or all [paranormal] claims, but rather to examine them openly, completely, objectively, and carefully" (Kurtz qtd. in Hines 14). Organized skepticism today In the twenty-three years since its beginning, the modern skeptical movement has developed a widely recognized international network of organizations. More than ninety skeptical organizations 33 countries are now involved in the examination of paranormal claims and the boundaries between science and pseudoscience (Frazier 5). What is an "organized" skeptic? Skepticism may draw its inspiration from ancient Greece philosophers like Socrates who observed: "All I know is that I know nothing." Although modern skeptics are often viewed as closed-mindedness nay-sayers, this perception confuses skepticism with cynicism. Skepticism involves a provisional approach to claims. It is a method, not merely a position: it is the application of reason to any and all ideas. When a skeptic hears an extraordinary claim he says, "that’s nice, prove it" (Shermer "Skeptic" 9). Why be skeptical? Critics of skepticism often ask, ‘Who cares if there really isn’t anything to astrology (or palmistry, or tarot cards)? What does it hurt to believe?’ (Hines 17). The answer can come from a number of perspectives. From a philosophical point of view, most people would agree that holding invalid beliefs is to be deluded. Generally speaking, we ought to base our lives on a correct view of how the world operates (Hines 17). From a practical and personal point of view, we should consider pseudoscientific and paranormal claims in terms of consumer fraud. Every kind of supernatural claim finds eager buyers. Psychics, palm readers, tarot card readers, and the like rarely lack for clients willing to shell out twenty, fifty, or even a thousand dollars for a reading. Enormous sums of money are wasted on phony psychics, phony gasoline additives, and phony "miracle" medicines that do not, and cannot, deliver what they promise. The personal damage done by uncritical acceptance of paranormal claims can be most clearly seen in faith healing and psychic surgery. People subject themselves to fraudulent healers and are often convinced, incorrectly, that they have been cured—consequently they do not seek legitimate medical attention. "By the time they realize that they have not, in fact, been cured, they may be beyond even medical help. Of all the proponents of pseudoscience, faith healers and psychic surgeons are the most dangerous—they kill people." The victims of medical quacks and fraudulent "faith" healers are most likely to be the least able to defend themselves—the elderly, the poor, and the desperate (Hines 17-18). Belief in pseudoscientific claims is most harmful when viewed from the point of view of society at large. Unquestioning acceptance of the paranormal by an uninformed public can be seriously damaging. Recall that in the witchcraft craze that swept Europe between the fourteenth and eighteenth centuries, well over two hundreds thousand people were burned, tortured or hanged as witches (Hines 18). Belief in the reality of witches is not much different than some popular paranormal beliefs of our own time; such as the "Satanic panic" of the 1980s or the "recovered memory movement" of the 1990s. Michael Shermer, in Why People Believe Weird Things asks, Is it really possible that thousands of Satanic cults have secretly infiltrated our society and that their members are torturing, mutilating, and sexually abusing tens of thousands of children and animals? No. Is it really possible that millions of adult women were sexually abused as children but have repressed all memory of the abuse? No. (100). Classic examples of belief in the paranormal belief and share many characteristics with modern-day paranormal belief systems. Proponents of the claim that UFOs are in reality extraterrestrial spacecraft argue that some of the strongest evidence is the reports by reliable, trained, sane observers. Yet history tells us that accusations and reports of witchcraft were, too, made by reliable, trustworthy witnesses (Hines 18). Not all paranormal beliefs carry the potential for damage inflicted by the witch hunts and the Holocaust. The point is, though, that uncritical acceptance of faulty evidence, intellectual shoddiness, deception, and twisted logic can lead to harm when presented in support of some of the more dangerous pseudosciences (Hines 20). Finding the occasional straw of truth awash in a great ocean of confusion and bamboozle requires intelligence, vigilance, dedication and courage.  But if we don't practice these tough habits of thought, we cannot hope to solve the truly serious problems that face us -- and we risk becoming a nation of suckers, up for grabs by the next charlatan who comes along (Sagan "Demon-Haunted World" 39). Mass media’s role Every day we are bombarded with television ads for one or another psychic networks. The rapid growth of these psychic networks can be attributed to the combination of belief in psychic power and the explosion of mass media. It began in 1984, when the FCC deregulated the amount of broadcast time stations could allocate to advertisements. With the average American watching four hours of television a day, entrepreneurs recognized a captive audience, and the infomercial was born. Television brought celebrities into America’s living rooms to tout the power of psychics, and network infomercials have made the impulse to act on credulous belief just a seductive phone number away. These psychic hotlines charge upwards of $3.99 a minute, potentially turning a 30-minute call into a $120 bill (Nisbet 5). What good is skepticism? Skepticism, and knowledge of the scientific method in general, gives one a useful and general tool for evaluating claims. Skepticism encourages the use of science and reason as defenses against irrationality. It uses the scientific method to bring the cold eye of reason to bear on primitive superstition and pseudoscientific nonsense. Skepticism has the goals of decreasing incredulity and educating an uninformed and misled public "being robbed of their health and hard earned money by unscrupulous charlatans" (Sofka 1), medical quacks and peddlers of fraudulent products. Dangers of belief in alternative medicine: Quackery "The amount of money wasted on cancer quackery is unknown but probably exceeds one billion dollars per year -- the amount spent for cancer research" (Jarvis 1). Quack medical therapies have caused needles death, disfigurement, serious injury, and unnecessary suffering. Cancer patients seeking "alternative" medicine have suffered cyanide poisoning from ingesting apricot pits or laetrile, salmonella dublin infection from drinking raw milk, electrolyte imbalance caused by coffee enemas, internal bleeding from deep body massage, and brain damage from whole-body hyperthermia (Jarvis 1). Jarvis mentions one breast cancer patient who was determined to beat her disease with diet therapy: Her first attempt at self-treatment was to apply the methods in the book The Grape Cure. This book claims that grapes have "powerful" and "antiseptic properties" to help "eliminate evil while building new tissues." According to the book, "cleansing" and "purification" are accomplished by eating nothing but grapes and grape juice (2). When the Grape cure did nothing to reduce the size of her tumor, the patient went to Mexico to try laetrile, another alternative cancer therapy. When the laetrile did not work, the woman came home to seek "orthodox" medical treatment. Unfortunately, it was too late and the patient died of her cancer (Jarvis 2). Difference between science and pseudoscience Pseudoscientific claims are presented to appear scientific, but they lack supporting evidence and plausibility (Shermer "Why" 34). Fringe science often cloaks itself in scientific lingo, and can be difficult to discern if one is not trained in sciences and familiar with the terminology. Many pseudoscientists like to use language from quantum mechanics because some of its phenomena are, like ESP phenomena, irreducibly statistical (Radner 61). We should never allow ourselves to be misled into thinking that just because something sounds scientific that it is scientific. It is only through properly controlled scientific investigations claims of the paranormal can be confirmed or disconfirmed. The laws of physics tell what kinds of things may happen in nature and what things not allowed to happen. Even a little knowledge of science can help a person confronted with unexplained phenomena to determine the probability of an extraordinary claim’s veracity. That phenomena is unexplained by science so far does not mean it is forever inexplicable, or that the explanation can only be supernatural. Scientific Method A great deal of literature exists on the scientific method, but there is little consensus among authors as to what, exactly the scientific method is. It is agreed, though, that the following elements are involved in thinking scientifically: Induction: Forming theories by drawing general conclusions from existing data. Deduction: Making specific predictions based on the theory. Observation: Gathering data, driven by theories that tell us what to look for in nature. Verification: Testing the predictions against further observations to confirm or falsify the initial theory (Shermer "Why" 19). The more evidence there is for a hypothesis, the greater its degree of confirmation. An unconfirmed hypothesis is one with minimal evidential support. A disconfirmed hypothesis is one with overwhelming evidence against it (Radner 36). A scientific theory is falsifiable. If a theory can be refuted by data, it is disconfirmed. The rule of falsifability is a guarantee that if the claim is false, the evidence will prove it false: if the claim is true, the evidence will not disprove it. If a theory is so constructed that each and every way things turn out is compatible with the theory, then it is not a scientific theory at all, but an ideology or article of faith. If nothing imaginable could ever disprove the claim, it would be pointless to even examine the evidence. The conclusion is already known—the claim is invulnerable. This would not mean, however, that the claim is true—instead, it would mean that the claim is meaningless (Lett 1). Consider, for example, the claim that crystal therapists can use pieces of quartz to restore balance and harmony to a person’s spiritual energy. What does it mean to have unbalanced spiritual energy? How is the condition recognized and diagnosed? What evidence would prove that someone’s unbalanced spiritual energy had been—or had not been—balanced by the application of crystal therapy? (Lett 2). Of course, just because a theory is scientific does not make it foolproof. The earth-centered solar system was replaced by the sun-centered system. Caloric theory was replaced by kinetic theory; ether was replaced by electromagnetic theory; and so on. The resulting feeling of impermanence is often exploited by believers in the paranormal when they say: "Our theories of the mind will change in the future to allow for ESP," or "Relativity will be replaced by a new theory that will allow us to travel faster than light" (O’Neill 37). In general, though, the evolution of scientific theories is from the less correct to the more correct, as instrumentation and experimental methods improve (O’Neill 37). Science and the scientific method are not infallible, but there is within science an important strength: self-correction. If a mistake is made or a fraud is perpetrated, "in time it will be flushed out of the system by lack of external verification. The cold fusion fiasco is a classic example of the system’s swift exposure of error" (Shermer "Why" 21). Testing Paranormal Claims Skeptics do not reject all paranormal claims out of hand. They don’t contend such claims have no place in science and ought to be ignored: the only ideas that science can do nothing with are the ones that have no measurable consequences and no testable predictions. "But if a theory makes predictions, however bizarre, then it can be tested" (Blackmore "Near Death" 89). Reports of stones falling from the skies were treated by the seventeenth-century scientific community with much the same disdain that is now displayed at UFO reports. Yet, meteorites are clearly real. Could UFOs be real, too? To find out, scientists have studied the phenomenon, and not just dogmatically insisted that it is "impossible" (Hines 15). Creationists claim that the Earth that is six thousand years old—their claims are not ignored--scientists have considered the purported evidence and then rejected the claims. Alternate Explanations Organized skepticism’s reputation as organized closed-mindedness comes from the impression that its purpose is only the negative removal of false claims. This is not the case. Proper skeptical inquiry is done in the interest of providing an "alternate model explanation, not as a nihilistic enterprise" (Gould xii). Alternate explanations to paranormal claims are often not at hand for believers: many have just never been exposed to the art of critical thinking. Natural explanations for unusual phenomena are often overlooked and, sometimes, deliberately discarded in favor of a supernatural construal. A classic example is the phenomenon known as "the waking dream" which occurs when a person is in the twilight state between waking and sleeping. Such dreams typically include perception of bright lights or other bizarre imagery, such as apparitions of strange creatures. Auditory hallucinations are also possible. Waking dreams are termed hypnagogic hallucinations if the subject is going to sleep or hypnopompic if he or she is awakened. Frequently the latter is accompanied by what is known as sleep paralysis, an inability to move caused by the body remaining in sleep mode. In the middle ages, waking dreams were often responsible for reports of demons (incubuses and succubuses) which, due to sleep paralysis, sometimes seemed to be sitting on the percipient’s chest or lying atop his or her body. At other times, waking dreams have been common sources of "ghosts," "angels," and other imagined entities (Nickell 16). Parapsychologists have for years studied astral projection, or out-of-body experiences, and have tried without success to detect evidence of the purported "astral body." Psychologists are now looking at the reports of out-of-body experiences and are putting forth alternative theories accounting for the experience in terms of changes in the body image or reconstructions from memory and imagination (Blackmore "Parapsychology" 15). About 10 percent of the population claims to have had this experience at least once in their life, but what is not widely known is that these experiences tend to occur in times of stress, sensory deprivation, deep relaxation, or when close to death. Drugs such as LSD or even nitrous oxide can induce comparable experiences (Blackmore "Parapsychology" 16). The point is that what has looked to some like evidence for a life beyond the physical body can be interpreted in alternative ways. What counts as evidence? "…[N]o testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish…" (Hume 77) We have all heard stories of spontaneous paranormal experiences from relatives, friends, and acquaintances, but this kind of non-scientific anecdotal evidence relies on the testimony of those who report it. As David Hume pointed out, an anecdotal report of an allegedly paranormal event (or anything else, for that matter) always entails exactly three logical possibilities: the report is true; or the report is false because the informant is mistaken, or it is false because the informant is lying (Colman xii). Proponents of paranormal claims will sometimes argue that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." In other words, just because evidence of ESP or astral bodies is lacking, it does not mean they do not exist. While this statement is logically correct, when looking for evidence to back up an extraordinary claim, absent evidence is often real evidence. Logical possibility is not the same as established reality. If the absence of disconfirming evidence were sufficient proof of a claim, then we could "prove" anything that we could imagine. Belief must be based not simply on the absence of disconfirming evidence but on the presence of confirming evidence. It is the claimant’s obligation to furnish that confirming evidence (Lett 4). Open Minds and the Burden of Proof Believers in claims of the paranormal often argue that since a hypothesis has not been disproved, it is reasonable to believe that hypothesis or regard it with an open mind (Adler 41). But in order to claim that we should keep an open mind, we need the stronger notion of serious possibility. Though being saved by a freak wind after jumping from a tall building is possible in the weak sense, it is not at all credible (Adler 42). Any extraordinary claim must be met with the knowledge that the burden of proof is on the producers, or purveyors, of that information (Giere 111). Fallacies in Reasoning. Bad reasoning runs rampant in pseudoscience. Consider some contemporary claims, all of which use bad logic: The fallacy of negation or the false dilemma, also known as "either-or" reasoning, dichotomizes the world into two positions and claims that if one position is wrong, the other must be correct. Creationists often use this type of reasoning: "either life was divinely created or it evolved." They then spend a great deal of time attempting to discredit evolution so that they can argue that creationism must be right. It is not enough, though, to point out weakness in the opponent’s theory. If the creationism theory is indeed superior, it must explain both the old data and any anomalous data not explained by evolution. "A new theory needs evidence in favor of it, not just against the opposition" (Shermer "Why" 57). After-the-fact reasoning, also known as "the gambler’s fallacy, or "post hoc, ergo propter hoc," literally "after this, therefore because of this" is, at its basest level, it is a form of superstition (Shermer "Why" 52). The fisherman wears his lucky socks and catches a big fish. The football player doesn’t shave and scores two touchdowns. As we learned from David Hume, the fact that two events follow each other in sequence does not mean they are causally connected. Correlation does not mean causation. An appeal to ignorance or lack of knowledge (also known as "Ad Ignoratiam") is a tactic often used by proponents of paranormal claims. Much like the "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" argument, appeals to ignorance rely on the contention that if you cannot disprove a claim it must be true. If scientists cannot disprove that UFOs are evidence of extraterrestrial visitation, then the claim must be authentic. "Multiple outs" abound in the realm of the paranormal. UFOlogists, lacking reliable physical or photographic evidence to support their claims, point to a secret government conspiracy that is allegedly preventing the release of evidence that would corroborate their case. Psychic healers say they can heal you if you have enough faith in their powers. Psychokinetics say they can bend spoons with their minds only if they are not exposed to negative vibrations from skeptical observers (Lett 2). When faced with skeptical counter-evidence against paranormal claims, proponents will often declare that "nothing is known for sure." But if we agree that at least some of our knowledge is certain, or at least verified to a high degree of certainty, then we are in a position to say that some events are not permitted by the laws of nature (Rothman 34-35). The person who prefaces all arguments with the statement that "we don’t know anything for sure" is exhibiting an extreme form of skepticism. His doubt is directed against scientists who claim that psychics cannot foretell the future or that UFOs cannot remain suspended above the earth with no visible means of support. Because the believer in the paranormal wants to believe that nature does allow such phenomena, he often wraps himself in the cloak of an excessively rigorous skepticism directed against scientific knowledge…(Rothman 35). Are Skeptics’ Arguments always Well-Reasoned? Skeptics, like believers, are human. As such they are subject to human failings, and skeptical arguments are not immune from employing bad reasoning. The kind of error most commonly made by skeptics is that of "going beyond the bounds of rational argument or beyond the available evidence in order to maintain a particular viewpoint" (Lippard 1). Review of the literature shows that skeptical writers have attacked their opponent's character, employed mockery and facetiousness, used appeals to emotion and loaded definitions. Skeptics are often highly skilled at tying up opponents in clever verbal knots, and are often just as guilty as pseudoscientists or anyone else to twist their language, logic, and facts to win an argument ("Stupid Skeptic Tricks" 1) Research for this paper provided numerous examples of Ad Hominem fallacies, name-calling, and character thrashing. Magician and skeptic James Randi refers to paranormal researchers Russell Targ and Harold Puthoff as "The Laurel and Hardy of Psi" (131). Skeptical author Martin Gardner has been brought to task by readers of his articles for attacking the character of paranormal claimants. Gardner brings up ESP researcher Harold Puthoff’s past involvement with Scientology: "Puthoff is on record as saying he no longer is associated with Scientology," Gardner writes, "but how much of it does he still buy? Does Dr. Puthoff still think that mental ills can result from experiences in previous lives?" (14). This kind of ridicule serves no good purpose except to earn skeptics their notorious reputation for name-calling. Attacking the character of those advocating paranormal claims does nothing at all to discredit the information the claimant purveys. Skeptics have the very human tendency to relish debunking what they already believe to be nonsense (Shermer "Why" 61), but if the business of organized skepticism is to help the public learn to see the difference between nonsense and valid claims, then skeptics have to leave silliness out of their refutations. Lumping moderate claims or propositions together with extreme ones is not only bad logic; it’s bad form. If a claimant suggests that Bigfoot can't be completely ruled out from the available evidence, then the skeptic must not facetiously suggest that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny can't be "completely" ruled out either. Public Opinion Polls indicate that many American believe that UFOs are actually alien visitors from space, and even think that the government is concealing evidence of such visits. Many skeptics love to ridicule this belief as being totally irrational. Yet consider these points: The government does try to conceal things from us. Many scientists think that life may be widespread throughout the galaxy, and well-known astronomers like Carl Sagan have even made considerable scientific efforts to detect radio signals from extraterrestrial civilizations. Space flight is clearly possible: we have gone to the moon and are planning a visit to Mars in the next century. In light of these points, is it really so preposterous that we have been visited? Without an understanding of the laws of physics and why the idea of faster-than-light space travel is ruled out, the notion that alien spacecraft might be traveling around our galaxy is not unreasonable. Without a knowledge of science, wouldn’t Evolution and its assertion that human consciousness evolved from a mixture of primordial molecules sounds preposterous? (Anderson 45). The aim of organized skepticism is to help people understand the logical possibility and the scientific possibility of the truth of extraordinary-sounding claims such as these. Too Skeptical? Or Too Credulous? Following is a long quote from astronomer and champion of skeptical inquiry, Carl Sagan, who recognized--what shall I call it—the Golden Mean?--between skeptical closed-mindedness and open-minded credulity: It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great openness to new ideas. Obviously those two modes of thought are in some tension. But if you are able to exercise only one of these modes, whichever one it is, you’re in deep trouble. If you are only skeptical, then no new ideas make it through to you. You become a crotchety old person convinced that nonsense is ruling the world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.) But every now and then…a new idea turns out to be on the mark valid and wonderful. If you are too much in the habit of being skeptical about everything, you are going to miss or resent it, and either way you will be standing in the way of understanding and progress. On the other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish the useful as from the worthless ones. If all ideas have equal validity then you are lost, because then, it seems to me, no ideas have any validity at all (10). Extraordinary Claims and the Internet Research for this paper turned up a number of entertaining, even if preposterous, websites.  For example, The Hallmark Naturopath College offers programs in the following: Herbology, Reflexology, Aromatherapy, and Native Medicine, Biologic Ionization Technician Vocational Program Naturopathic Counselor Program Certified Naturopath Program Naturopathic Training for Existing Professionals If, instead, one seeks to "benefit" from, rather than learn "alternative" therapies, there is: Homeopathy. This therapy contends that when certain substances are diluted to a degree that no molecules of the substance remain, they have great potency in curing a wide variety of ailments. Homeopathic remedies actually consist of nothing but distilled water, so it becomes necessary for its defenders to assume that, in some mysterious manner totally unknown to chemists, the water retains a "memory" of its vanished substances (Gardner "Temple University" 14). Urine Therapy. "Urine therapy," says one website, "has proven helpful in a great number of various diseases, ranging from a simple cold and a throatache, to tuberculosis and asthma, from minor skin problems such as itching, to more serious skin diseases such as eczema, psoriasis and even skin cancer." What exactly is urine therapy? Briefly, the claim is that if urine is ingested and/or rubbed into the skin, it purifies blood and tissues, provides useful nutrients and sends the body a signal about what is in or out of balance. This last effect is called (oral) auto-immunization.   http://utopia.knoware.nl/users/cvdk/urinetherapy/article-yoga.html#Yoga Iridology. Using iridology, it is possible to diagnose "health factors that are related to a given syndrome that may be very difficult to determine by other more ‘orthodox’" diagnostic procedures. What exactly is iridology? It is diagnosis of medical ailments by looking at the iris of an individual’s eye. http://www.ion.com.au/~iridology/ Polarity Therapy. Since, as this website claims, the Human Energy Field (whatever that may be) is affected by touch, diet, movement, sound, attitudes, relationships, life experience, trauma and environmental factors, Polarity Therapy is able to lends an energy-based perspective to all these subjects. http://www.polaritytherapy.org/polarity/index.html  The Inset Fuel Stabilizer. This amazing device, according to its inventor, is able to align fuel and air molecules "in an energy field" so that they completely burn inside the Stabilizer, resulting in close to 100 percent combustion of the fuel molecules. How does it do this? The inventor has no idea, but it works. The company that makes the Fuel Stabilizer claims that the molecules that make up hydrocarbon fuels are surrounded by a positive charge. This positive charge tends to attract other fuel molecules and that removing the positive charge causes the molecules to repel each other. This, then, allows oxygen molecules to attach themselves to individual fuel molecules instead of having to bond to clusters of fuel molecules. The increased level of oxygen in the mix produces a more even burn. Inset does not explain why positively charged "molecules" would attract other positively charged molecules, nor do they explain why a negatively charged molecule would repel rather than attract a positively charged one. Nor do they explain why oxygen molecules, which have no charge, would be attracted to negatively charged fuel "molecules." What is the Inset Fuel Stabilizer? It’s a 7-inch long piece of stainless steel with a bolt valve on each end that you insert into your vehicle’s fuel line. That's it; no more. How does a stainless steel pipe align molecules or change their charges? . How does it keep them aligned once they leave the pipe? No one knows. (Carrol 1). http://www.insetfuelstabilizer.com/ Conclusion Television programs such as "The X-Files" and radio programs such as "Art Bell" provide a forum for claims that the earth was visited in historical times by ancient astronauts, or that there is a mysterious area off the coast of Florida where ships and planes disappear, or that psychics can bend keys with sheer mind power. The proponents of these claims make millions from books, films, and lectures. In short, the public spends a great deal of time and money supporting pseudoscientific nonsense. Since "there is not one bit of evidence to support these pseudoscientific claims, and much evidence exists that flatly contradicts them" (Hines 17), the continued claims of these paranormal phonies "constitute nothing short of consumer fraud" (Hines 17). It is science, and not unsupported paranormal beliefs, that has staked its claim to provide a rational explanation of the natural laws by which the universe operates. In biology, study of anatomy uncovered an underlying unity to the structure of animals. Cell theory has revealed that complex systems are made up of simpler units; germ theory showed that microorganisms, rather than the wrath of God, causes diseases (Anderson 43). We could do worse than to use the formula Theodore Schick, Jr. and Lewis Vaughn give for evaluating extraordinary claims in their book, How to Think about Weird Things: State the Claim: Before critical examination of any claim is possible, it must be thoroughly understood. The claim must be stated as clearly and specifically as possible. The claim that "ghosts are real" is vague and nonspecific. A better claim is "the disembodied spirits of dead persons exist and are visible to the human eye." Examine the Evidence: What empirical evidence or logical arguments are there in the claim’s favor? What, exactly, is the evidence? Are there any reasonable doubts about the evidence? (distortions in human perception, memory and judgment, for instance). Does the hypothesis (the claim) in question actually explain the evidence? A good hypothesis must be relevant to the evidence it’s intended to explain. If it isn’t, there’s no reason to consider it any further. Consider Alternate Hypotheses: Is there a natural explanation for the phenomena the claim represents? A natural explanation may not be immediately obvious, but that doesn’t mean one doesn’t exist. Rate, According to the Criteria of Adequacy, Each Hypothesis: Cataloging evidence is not enough. Evidence must be put into perspective. Testability. Ask: can this hypothesis be tested? Many paranormal claims are just not testable (there is an invisible, undetectable gremlin in my head that causes me to have headaches) and are, thus, worthless. Fruitfulness. Ask: does the hypothesis (the claim) yield observable, surprising predictions that explain new phenomena? Scope. Ask: How many different phenomena can this hypothesis explain? Other things being equal, the more it explains, the less likely it is to be mistaken. Simplicity. Ask: Is this hypothesis the simplest explanation for the phenomenon? Simplest means makes the fewest assumptions (or postulates the existence of the fewest entities). Conservatism. Ask: Is the hypothesis consistent with our well-founded beliefs? That is, is it consistent with the empirical evidence—with results from trustworthy observations and scientific tests, with natural laws, or well-established theory? For example, any claim of a perpetual motion machine (a machine that never needs to draw on an external source for power) must be false because for such a machine to work, it would have to circumvent one of the laws of thermodynamics (the law of conservation of mass-energy, which says that mass-energy cannot be created or destroyed). The laws of thermodynamics are supported by a massive amount of empirical evidence gathered throughout centuries; and every attempt at building a perpetual motion machine has failed (238-242). I do take my skepticism seriously: it pains me to see people adopt irrational, unsupported beliefs. Skepticism is not, however, without its humor: The extrasensory powers of thousands of alleged psychics failed to predict misfortune and financial ruin at the nation’s first psychic phone network. The company that operates Psychic Friends Network filed in February, 1998 for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection; and not one psychic foresaw this tragic event (Nisbet 5). Recently a letter to the editor of "Skeptical Inquirer" magazine had this to say about dowsing: "…[W]e have a wonderful unique opportunity to Make significant use of dowsing (if it works), or Settle the issue once and for all. I’m referring to a worldwide desperate need to clear land minds. These exist in the hundreds of thousands, and claim hundreds of innocent victims every year. I would expect dedicated dowsers to welcome the opportunity to serve mankind, and at the same time accumulate a wealth of reliable data on the "art" (Studhalter). Works Cited Adler, Jonathan. "Open Minds and the Argument from Ignorance." Skeptical Inquirer January/February 1998: 41-44. Anderson, Wayne R. "Why Would People Not Believe Weird Things?" Skeptical Inquirer September/October 1998: 42-45, 62. Blackmore, Susan. "Near-Death Experiences: In or Out of the Body?" Skeptical Inquirer Fall 1991. Rpt. in The Outer Edge: Classic Investigations of the Paranormal. Ed. Nickell, Joe, Barry Karr, and Tom Genoni. Amherst, N.Y.: Committee for the     Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), Inc., 1996: 86-97. ---. "Parapsychology." Controversies in Psychology. Ed. Andrew M. Colman. New York: Longman Group Ltd., 1995: 1-20. Carrol, Robert T. The Skeptic’s Dictionary. Internet. 1 Oct. 1998. Available. http://skepdic.com/ Colman, Andrew M. Introduction. Controversies in Psychology. Ed. Andrew M. Colman. New York: Longman Group Ltd., 1995: xi-xv. Cooper, Will. "Science in the Public Eye." Skeptical Inquirer March/April 1988: 25-27. Estling, Ralph. "Gimme That Ol’-Time Logical Consistency." Skeptical Inquirer  May/June 1998: 58-59. Frazier, Kendrick. "Science and Reason, Foibles and Fallacies, and Doomsdays." Skeptical Inquirer November/December 1998: 5-8. Gardner, Martin. "Zero-Point Energy and Harold Puthoff." Skeptical Inquirer May/June, 1998: 13-15, 60. ---. "What’s Going On At Temple University?" Skeptical Inquirer September/October 1998: 14-17. Giere, Ronald N. Understanding Scientific Reasoning. 4th Edition. Fort Worth: Harcourt     Brace College Publishers, 1997. Gould, Stephen J. Foreword. Why People Believe Weird Things. By Michael Shermer. New York: W.H. Freeman and Co, 1997: ix-xii. Hines, Terrence. Pseudoscience and the Paranormal Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1988. Hume, David. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Ed. Eric Steinberg. Indianapolis: Hackett. 1993 Laudan, Larry. "Commentary: Science at the Bar—Causes for Concern." Science, Technology, and Human Values 7 no. 41 (Fall 1982): 16-19. Rpt. in Philosophy of Science: the Central Issues. Ed. Martin Curd and J.A. Cover. New York: W.W. Norton, 1988: 48-53. Leikind, Bernard J. and William J. McCarthy. "An Investigation of Firewalking." Skeptical Inquirer Fall 1985: 23-34. Lett, James. "A Field Guide to Critical Thinking." Internet 6 Dec. 1998. Available. http://www.csicop.org/si/9012//critical-thinking.html. Lippard, Jim. "Some Failures of Organized Skepticism." Internet. 9 Sept. 1998. Available: ftp://ftp.primenet.com/pub/lippard/some-failures. Nisbet, Matthew. "Psychic Telephone Networks Profit of Yearning, Gullibility." Skeptical Inquirer May/June 1998: 5-6. Nickell, Joe. "Alien Abductions as Sleep-Related Phenomena." Skeptical Inquirer May/June 1988: 16-18. Radner, Daisie, and Michael Radner. Science and Unreason. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1982. Randi, James. Flim Flam! Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1982. Rothman, Milton. "Science Does Not Support Paranormal Phenomena." Skeptical Inquirer Fall 1989. Rpt. in Paranormal Phenomena: Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. Terry O’Neill. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1991: 33-40. Sagan, Carl. "The Burden of Skepticism." Skeptical Inquirer Fall 1987. Rpt. in The Outer Edge: Classic Investigations of the Paranormal. Ed. Nickell, Joe, Barry Karr, and Tom Genoni. Amherst, N.Y.: Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), Inc. 1996: 6-14. ---. The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. New York: Ballantine. 1996. Shermer, Michael. "What is a Skeptic?" Skeptic. Vol. 5 No. 2:1997. ---. Why People Believe Weird Things. New York: W.H. Freeman and Co., 1997. Schick, Jr., Theodore and Lewis Vaughn. How to Think about Weird Things. Mountain     View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Co.,1995. Sofka, Michael D. "Myths of Skepticism." Internet. 17 Oct. 1998. Available: http://www.rpi.edu/~sofkam/talk/talk.html Studhalter, Walter R. Letter. Skeptical Inquirer January/February 1998: 62. "Stupid Skeptic Tricks." Internet, 8 Apr. 1998. Available: dowens6683@aol.com Newsgroups: alt.paranormal. Trocco, Frank. "How to Study Weird Things." Skeptical Inquirer September/October 1998:       37-41.