http://www.dbskeptic.com Skepticism. Critical thinking. Podcast. Community. Sun, 11 Sep 2011 01:30:05 +0000 en-us hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 Digital Bits Skeptic brings skepticism and critical thinking to a world of new age, religion and credulous pop culture. Andy Kaiser clean Andy Kaiser skeptic@dbskeptic.com skeptic@dbskeptic.com (Andy Kaiser) 2009 Skepticism and critical thinking in a world of new age, religion and credulous pop culture skeptic, skepticism, critical thinking, new age, religion, pop culture, skeptical articles, critical thinking articles, philosophy http://www.dbskeptic.com/images/dbskeptic-logo-144.jpg http://www.dbskeptic.com/category/pop-culture/ http://www.dbskeptic.com/2011/02/09/defaulting-to-ignorance-what-bill-oreilly-and-the-insane-clown-posse-have-in-common/ http://www.dbskeptic.com/2011/02/09/defaulting-to-ignorance-what-bill-oreilly-and-the-insane-clown-posse-have-in-common/#comments Thu, 10 Feb 2011 03:57:18 +0000 Andy Kaiser http://www.dbskeptic.com/?p=2137 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2011/02/09/defaulting-to-ignorance-what-bill-oreilly-and-the-insane-clown-posse-have-in-common/feed/ 4 Andy Kaiser By Andy Kaiser Article ID: 154 - Bill O'Reilly is a conservative political commentator who is best known for his TV show "The O'Reilly Factor" and its many associated books. Recently, he got into some hot water over comments he made about life, By Andy Kaiser Article ID: 154 Bill O'Reilly is a conservative political commentator who is best known for his TV show "The O'Reilly Factor" and its many associated books. Recently, he got into some hot water over comments he made about life, the universe and everything. This is the quote you'll hear often regarding this issue: "Okay, how did the moon get there? How'd the moon get there? Look, you pinheads who attacked me for this, you guys are just desperate. How'd the moon get there? How'd the sun get there? ...Can you explain that to me? How come we have that and Mars doesn't have it? Venus doesn't have it. How come? Why not? How'd it get here?" Here's the video of the above: This comment was made in response to viewer feedback, after an earlier broadcast had him claiming that the Earth's tides were proof God created the Universe - since we didn't know how the tides worked, O'Reilly claimed, that was proof of the existence of God. Every commentary I've read on this issue so far addressed the point that O'Reilly is factually wrong: Yes, we do know how the tides work. We know how the moon and sun "got there". These issues have been addressed in plenty of detail by people much smarter than I. So I'm not going to tackle them here. Most criticism of this issue misses a more important point than O'Reilly being factually wrong. Yes, he didn't know some basic science. He then proceeded to plant himself deeper in his hole by backing up his claim with more examples of Stuff We Don't Know, although it turns out We Do. O'Reilly's problem is not in knowing specific answers. His problem is in assuming that because we don't know something, then "God did it". In his response to scientific criticism, O'Reilly moved from talking about the tides to talking about the moon and the sun. I see where he's going with this. If we then tell him how the moon and sun are formed, he'll pull back the camera to encompass an even bigger picture. He might say something like: "Okay, pinhead, then how'd the solar system get here? How'd the Universe get here? Why is there anything at all?" O'Reilly claims that because we don't know something, God (presumably the Christian god) is the answer, because if something exists, it must have had a creator. That sounds nice on the surface, until we use his technique and pull back the viewpoint. We might respond with something like this: "Okay, Bill, then how'd the Universe get here? You say your god made it? How did your god get here? Why is there anything at all?" The answer to this question: God always existed. He exists outside of time and space. However: 1) How is it that a god can always have existed, but the Universe can not? It's frustrating to me that, when religious people claim that their god created the Universe, they don't worry about the creation of their god, who supposedly has always existed. If you can accept a god that always existed, why can't you accept a Universe that always existed? 2) Saying 'I don't know' does not mean 'I give up'. O'Reilly's attitude indicates that a sensible person must respond to him with, "because I can't answer your question, God must be the answer". Listen to the rest of his commentary - he seems to believe this himself, and expects his audience to follow this same logic. However, I don't have a problem saying 'I don't know'. But I do have a problem with people who explain their ignorance by defaulting to an even more unknowable and complex explanation. They shrug their mental shoulders and default to a "god did it" explanation. To me, this is the same as saying, "Because I do not have an answer myself, there must be a supernatural answer and I will not search further. I see no need to learn about this or research it. I won't evolve and life will not improve." This is the refusal to explore our world's many mysteries. Even worse, it's to state that you have no interest in doing so. This is willful ignorance. This is mental stagnation. Andy Kaiser clean 8:20 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2011/01/23/the-myth-of-military-testing-standards/ http://www.dbskeptic.com/2011/01/23/the-myth-of-military-testing-standards/#comments Mon, 24 Jan 2011 04:39:05 +0000 Andy Kaiser http://www.dbskeptic.com/?p=2112 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2011/01/23/the-myth-of-military-testing-standards/feed/ 5 Andy Kaiser By Andy Kaiser Article ID: 152 - [Pretend you're hearing a bunch of click-clacky gun-loading noises right now. Shotguns being loaded, pistol slides being racked, ammo cartridges being slammed into place.] - By Andy Kaiser Article ID: 152 [Pretend you're hearing a bunch of click-clacky gun-loading noises right now. Shotguns being loaded, pistol slides being racked, ammo cartridges being slammed into place.] Anyone who's seen a shoot-em-up Hollywood ... Andy Kaiser clean 7:50 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2010/11/21/skeptical-parenting-critical-thinking-around-the-family-dinner-table/ http://www.dbskeptic.com/2010/11/21/skeptical-parenting-critical-thinking-around-the-family-dinner-table/#comments Sun, 21 Nov 2010 20:22:39 +0000 Andy Kaiser http://www.dbskeptic.com/?p=2080 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2010/11/21/skeptical-parenting-critical-thinking-around-the-family-dinner-table/feed/ 1 Celestia Ward By Celestia Ward Article ID: 1414 - Is skeptical fun possible with children? I have heard this question voiced by people who think childhood must be a sacred place, populated with Easter bunnies, unicorns, lollipops, Santa, fairies, dragons, By Celestia Ward Article ID: 1414 Is skeptical fun possible with children? I have heard this question voiced by people who think childhood must be a sacred place, populated with Easter bunnies, unicorns, lollipops, Santa, fairies, dragons, and a co... Andy Kaiser clean 17:49 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2010/06/01/the-myth-of-computer-security/ http://www.dbskeptic.com/2010/06/01/the-myth-of-computer-security/#comments Tue, 01 Jun 2010 05:09:23 +0000 Andy Kaiser http://www.dbskeptic.com/?p=2019 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2010/06/01/the-myth-of-computer-security/feed/ 28 Andy Kaiser by Andy Kaiser Article ID: 1411 "The computer: an extension of the human intellect. ...soon, the ultimate tool will become the ultimate enemy." - Tron (1982) Greetings, programs! - Let me tell you about a myth, a story, by Andy Kaiser Article ID: 1411 "The computer: an extension of the human intellect. ...soon, the ultimate tool will become the ultimate enemy." - Tron (1982) Greetings, programs! Let me tell you about a myth, a story, a fable that’s been concocted and perpetuated by certain groups in the media. It’s a story about how – with proper protection – your computer is immune to cyber attacks, viruses and other malware. That’s the story but it’s not true. I’m talking about the myth of computer security. There’s no conspiracy here, just unprepared software. Microsoft and various security companies are doing their best against the bad guys, who are attacking faster and more creatively than the good guys can keep up. The days of the independent lone hacker are gone. They’re still around, of course, but the brunt of the malware industry is focused at a much higher level, where the bad guys are multinational groups, or are sponsored by enemy governments, or are run by organized crime syndicates. So yes, there is a war. And the good guys are not winning. With increased complexity comes increased chance of failure The problem is that the methods of computer attack are so advanced, we need extremely complex software to protect against them. It’s so complex that security software sometimes causes more problems than it’s worth. In May of 2010, the “Sunbelt Vipre Enterprise” antivirus software released updated versions of their malware protection, which they do multiple times per day. However, the update versions 6272, 6273 and 6274 caused the PC CPU to max out, essentially making the computer inoperable. The fix was to kill the Vipre process long enough to install the quickly-released patch, often requiring a system reboot. That’s not too bad, right? It could be worse. It could be, for example, like what happened in April 2010 with the McAfee VirusScan Enterprise product’s recent update version 5958. That update mistakenly identified a critical system process as being a virus. The result is that affected computers would crash and bluescreen and would no longer boot. The fix usually required a few minutes of physical access to the PC. Some unlucky users had to reinstall Windows. I’m picking on these companies because they were recently in the news at the time I wrote this article. I can easily blame other antivirus products as well. In fact, I love McAfee VirusScan Enterprise – I’ve personally recommended it to and set it up for many of my clients. Same with Sunbelt’s Vipre Enterprise – in fact, that’s my employer’s current software of choice. They’re good products. But the very nature of what they’re meant to fix makes them complex, more invasive and unstable. [Author's edit: Many readers took the above to mean that I endorse or recommend all versions of McAfee. Not true. I hate the preinstalled and retail McAfee junk. But the corporate-level, partner-resold McAfee software – "McAfee VirusScan Enterprise" is a good product, and is something a home user would never see. This is the only McAfee product I like. Unlike their bloated, ugly home versions, VSE is lightweight, has a tiny footprint, is super-functional and customizable, and is easily managed. My goal in writing this section was not to recommend any AV package over another, but just to illustrate that no solution works really well, and all are open to self-inflicted damage.] Remember that in the above cases with Vipre and McAfee, I’m not talking about single PCs in someone’s home. I’m talking about centralized networks of hundreds or thousands of computers. How would you like to be an IT admin that day, when you realize that one thousand of the computers you are responsible for are completely out of commission? Phishing and user tricks The previous examples are just problems where our protection fails us. But there is yet another class of malware, the kind that either tricks the user into installing it, Andy Kaiser clean 14:18 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2010/02/01/mental-percolations-on-the-league-of-scientists/ http://www.dbskeptic.com/2010/02/01/mental-percolations-on-the-league-of-scientists/#comments Mon, 01 Feb 2010 05:04:32 +0000 Andy Kaiser http://www.dbskeptic.com/?p=1877 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2010/02/01/mental-percolations-on-the-league-of-scientists/feed/ 6 Andy Kaiser By Andy Kaiser Article ID: 144 - As some of you know, I'm writing the first book in what will hopefully be a young adult mystery series called "The League of Scientists". It takes place in the "real world" - it's not fantasy or science fiction. By Andy Kaiser Article ID: 144 As some of you know, I'm writing the first book in what will hopefully be a young adult mystery series called "The League of Scientists". It takes place in the "real world" - it's not fantasy or science fiction. It's about the adventures of friends who use critical thinking and applied science to solve seemingly-supernatural mysteries. It's already been accepted by "Science, Naturally!", a traditional book publisher, but it's not yet available in stores. It should be available in late 2010 or early 2011. Here's the latest: Things have gone very well with the book, of which the full title is "The League of Scientists and the Ghost in the Water". While I'm sure future efforts will be faster, it took me quite a while to write it, even when I don't have the length of a standard adult book. My comparatively short 35,000 words still took a lot of keypresses. I've been meeting with the cover artist on a weekly basis to design and approve the artwork. After more than 70 hours of work (which includes conceptual designs as well as the actual final oil paining), we're pretty much done. The book itself has its own website at LeagueOfScientists.com, but some of you may have seen it elsewhere. You can follow it on Facebook and Twitter, and of course here on Digital Bits Skeptic. I've also had it mentioned and introduced on the "Swift Blog" of the James Randi Educational Foundation. I'm very lucky to have the JREF's continued interest and promotion. Special thanks to outgoing President Phil Plait and the Randi.org editor Brandon Thorp. I also have a surprise. You know how some books have a "famous person's quote" on the book jacket? Mine will have one of these, too. And the person I've got to do the promotion... well, let's just say that most everyone in the skeptical community - and many outside of it - have heard of him. This skeptical celebrity is... ...going to remain a surprise for just a little longer. I can't say who it is right now. While he's already committed to getting me a review and a quote, I don't yet have it in my greedy electronic hands. Heck, worst case is that he may not actually like the book! So, I'll let you know after I have the review. Believe me, the Digital Bits Skeptic audience will be the first to know. Your only hint is that this person is not female. That cuts the field by quite a bit. Record your guesses, good luck, and I'll let you know later if you guessed right. What's next? If there's anyone interested in the nuts and bolts of the publishing process, speak up and I'll give some detail. But to keep things simple, I'll just say that, for the most part, the book is completely done, and what's next is the actual draft revision, proofing, and then publicity and publication. And, yes, I've already started writing The League of Scientists #2. That's right - you heard it here first! The current beta title for this work in progress is "The League of Scientists and the Magician's War". I'm still in the outlining stage right now - because these books are mysteries, I can't just start writing them without a general direction of where I'm going. I, just like you, have to figure out the mystery, only I have to know "whodunnit" a little bit sooner than you. So, the first book - "The Ghost in the Water" - is pretty much done and will hopefully be available within a year, assuming the publisher keeps to their schedule. Book #2 - who knows? Depending on how life's treating me, I can be a really pessimistic guy. In this case, I think my personality flaw is appropriate: if I keep my expectations low, no matter what happens with the book, I'll be happy with the results. Hopefully you will be, too. Andy Kaiser clean 3:19 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/12/13/water-on-the-moon/ http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/12/13/water-on-the-moon/#comments Sun, 13 Dec 2009 18:19:29 +0000 Andy Kaiser http://www.dbskeptic.com/?p=1701 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/12/13/water-on-the-moon/feed/ 4 Andy Kaiser By Andy Kaiser Article ID: 1348 - On October 9, 2009, NASA's LCROSS mission (Lunar CRater Observation and Sensing Satellite) slammed a "Centaur" rocket into the moon, into a dark, ancient crater named "Cabeus". After a silent explosion of moon guts, By Andy Kaiser Article ID: 1348 On October 9, 2009, NASA's LCROSS mission (Lunar CRater Observation and Sensing Satellite) slammed a "Centaur" rocket into the moon, into a dark, ancient crater named "Cabeus". After a silent explosion of moon guts, the rocket was destroyed. The resulting ejecta was huge, measuring six miles across. NASA then surveyed that moon plume, and found water. Even in the tiny section of the plume that the instruments could survey, they found about 27 gallons of water! H2O! Translucent gold! By Earth standards, the moon is still extremely dry, about as dry as a desert. But, even a desert can still hold enough water to support life. NASA's LCROSS mission is the first indicator of significant amounts of water in Earth's neighborhood. A critical person might say, "so what?" This is not the first discovery of water in outer space, or even on the moon. Other planets and moons contain ice, and perhaps liquid water, though we don't yet know how much of what states there are. The discovery of water on the moon is still very significant. Here's why: 1) Knowledge: We add to the current store of scientific knowledge. It puts another piece in the puzzle of how the Universe works, how the moon formed, and ultimately helps us to improve the human condition. 2) Alien life: It provides additional evidence to the notion that life could exist outside of Earth. For those who believe life originated on Earth through a natural process, having a higher abundance of life-making ingredients increases the chances of there being alien life. What do we need for life? From our current understanding, we need water, carbon, and an energy source. Carbon is everywhere. We know that water is remarkably abundant. Energy sources abound (we're not just talking about the sun). Get the right catalyst in place, and so-called miracles can happen. 3) Moon bases: When we get to the moon, we could "live off the land". There are two significant aspects: Humans who live there could drink the local water. They could also move around the moon with vehicles powered by a hydrogen/oxygen fuel source, all extracted from available water. And, there's another use for the oxygen: breathing! Fuel, water and life support are very expensive items to transport from the Earth to the moon. Having them already in place will make a moon base far easier to create and maintain. 4) Human life in off-world colonies: You don't think a moon base is important? Well, it is. Right now, we Earthlings are horribly susceptible to complete extinction. Our entire species could easily be wiped out. Take your pick of any horrible natural disaster. Just ask the dinosaurs why they didn't do anything about the fire from the sky, the killer rock that, so many millions of years ago, destroyed them all. There are also more embarrassing (but just as effective) ways to die, by killing off our own kind, something which we humans are perversely good at. In order to survive, we must spread the human species from off this planet. Here's a video, courtesy NASA, of the LCROSS mission and resulting lunar impact by the "Centaur" rocket. You can't actually see the rocket hit the moon, but it's still interesting to see the process to get the rocket to the moon itself: The discovery of water on the moon is powerful, no doubt. Don't just shuffle it aside as needless fact-gathering. This advance is just as important for scientific cheerleading as it is for powering future technology and off-planet living. This discovery doesn't just tell us more about our celestial neighborhood. It also gives us the ability to not only know our place in the Universe, but to change it. I can think of no better way to end this article than with this quote by Carl Sagan: "The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars." For those who really like the audio version of that quote, here's the full video: Andy Kaiser clean 7:00 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/12/06/facilitated-communication-and-rom-houben/ http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/12/06/facilitated-communication-and-rom-houben/#comments Sun, 06 Dec 2009 17:57:21 +0000 Andy Kaiser http://www.dbskeptic.com/?p=1683 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/12/06/facilitated-communication-and-rom-houben/feed/ 2 Sandra L Hubscher By Sandra L Hubscher Article ID: 1347 Editor’s note: The author submitted this article with the following private message. It’s important enough that, with the author’s permission, I’m posting it here: “I enjoyed writing this article in that I enjoy... By Sandra L Hubscher Article ID: 1347 Editor’s note: The author submitted this article with the following private message. It’s important enough that, with the author’s permission, I’m posting it here: “I enjoyed writing this article in that I enjoy writing, but other than that, really I hated it. The subject is so irredeemably sad, and filled with anguish for so many, that I wouldn't want to write something like this again anytime soon. It's hard to imagine facing these parents and telling them these things. I know they've probably all heard it before and none of them will likely take the time to read this, but even if they've been slapped a hundred times before by this information, the 101st isn't much lessened.” Update 03/02/2010: Months after the sensational news of Rom Houben’s ‘awakening’ via facilitated communication (FC) from a decades-long, traumatic brain injury-induced silence, there has come a retraction from his physician, Steven Laureys. After rigorous testing involving a number of facilitators and their clients, including Mr. Houben and his facilitator Linda Wouters, Dr. Laureys has declared: “We did not have all the facts before. To me, it's enough to say that this method [FC] doesn't work.” Three facilitators and their clients were involved in the testing, which was carried out by Dr. Laureys and others, including a Belgian skeptics group. In Mr. Houben’s case, he was shown or heard a list of 15 objects without his facilitator being present. When the facilitator was readmitted and Mr. Houben was asked to list the objects, there was not a single success. It is important to note, as Belgian Skeptics pointed out, that this was not a test of Mr. Houben, but rather of the method of communication others have imposed on him. Mr. Houben’s brain scans reveal activity very much like that of an uninjured brain and many, including Dr. Laureys, continue to have hope that they will find a method for him to reach out and ‘speak’ to the world. In November of 2009, a sensational story appeared out of Belgium: Rom Houben, a man who as a result of a catastrophic car accident had been in a persistent vegetative state for more than twenty years, was re-diagnosed as being fully conscious, indeed conscious for the whole twenty-plus years! Furthermore, he was now communicating to the world by typing on a large touch screen, giving words to the years of imprisonment in his own body. The story twinges our imagination wonderfully and terrifyingly - entrapment in plain sight, helplessness, rescue and reunion – hope to all of those in dire circumstances. Immediate to the story’s release, another narrative developed among skeptics – unwitting deceit and good intentions gone awry. While the diagnosis by Steven Laureys, Houben’s neurologist, is best left to fellow neurologists, the technique of facilitated communication, the method used on Houben to bring his ‘words’ out of him by typing, is a well-studied and understood phenomenon,  and is, unfortunately, a fraud. Facilitated communication, first developed in Australia in the 1970’s, has now spread worldwide and purportedly allows those with disorders like cerebral palsy, severe mental retardation, autism and others, to undertake the otherwise impossible task of communication. How does this work? A facilitator holds the hand or arm of the impaired person or client, supposedly giving the strength and steadiness necessary for the client to type with a single finger, one letter at a time. A video of Houben, including his facilitated communication, can be seen here: While it is possible that Houben’s facilitator is willfully perpetrating a heartless con, it is more likely in this case, and in all uses of facilitated communication, that the facilitator’s actions are attributable to the ideomotor effect. Familiar to anyone who’s seen a Ouija board in action, the ideomotor effect is defined as purposeful movement by a person not consciously aware of his movement. Andy Kaiser clean 8:59 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/11/15/the-flight-of-dragons-movie-magic-versus-science/ http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/11/15/the-flight-of-dragons-movie-magic-versus-science/#comments Mon, 16 Nov 2009 03:06:45 +0000 Andy Kaiser http://www.dbskeptic.com/?p=1621 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/11/15/the-flight-of-dragons-movie-magic-versus-science/feed/ 10 Andy Kaiser Editor's note #1: This article contains spoilers about The Flight of Dragons movie. - Editor's note #2: This article uses many audio clips from The Flight of Dragons. To fully appreciate this article, listen to the podcast or use the above audio play... Editor's note #1: This article contains spoilers about The Flight of Dragons movie. Editor's note #2: This article uses many audio clips from The Flight of Dragons. To fully appreciate this article, listen to the podcast or use the above audio player. By Andy Kaiser Article ID: 1345 "Look down there, Gorbash my friend. On that troubled earth below us, confusion and chaos reign. All mankind is facing an epic choice. A world of magic, or a world of science. Which will it be?" The movie "The Flight of Dragons" begins with that brief monologue, spoken by wizard to dragon. The rest of the movie answers the question while providing great entertainment. When I say "entertainment", though, I don't mean all sunshine and flowers. The next scene in the movie is of a swan, paddling down a river. A few tiny fairies hop on the swan for a ride. Suddenly, in the river ahead, there appears a gigantic waterwheel, spinning fast to power a mill in a nearby house. The swan can't escape the waterwheel's current, and swan and fairies are sucked underneath and killed. Here we have an eerie visual of one of the movie's themes: Magic versus science. Will one destroy the other? Which one? Can they possibly coexist? "The Flight of Dragons" takes place in a world of magic - where wizards ride dragons as casual transportation, where magic does exist - and it's powerful - but it bows to the will of science. The movie is primarily about a quest involving four wizard brothers. Three are good. One is bad. You may recognize the evil red wizard "Ommadon" as voiced by James Earl Jones, also the iconic voice of Darth Vader. The wizards argue whether or not they and their world can coexist with magic. One wizard proposes building "The Last Realm of Magic", in order to hide from the physical world and safeguard what magic remains. The evil wizard Ommadon disagrees. This scene is even more powerful and takes on more meaning when you see it with the video. Those last words, where Ommadon says, "I'll teach [Man] to fly like a fairy!" are spoken to a visual of a slowly spinning nuclear bomb. "The Flight of Dragon" movie's main plotline is simple - in order to stop Ommadon, the good wizards try to steal his magical crown, the source of all the red wizard's power. Peter Dickinson and The Flight of Dragons Yet, the surrounding themes are not so simple. To find a hero, the wizards are told by an oracle to recruit an unusual choice: the long-distant relative of "Great Peter, the Dragonmaster", seven hundred and seventy-seven generations removed from the original. Why this particular descendant? Because, the oracle says, this man is the first of the decendents who is a man of science. Later, this comes in very important. The man is Peter Dickinson. He lives in the late twentieth century. We see a flash-forward to the future - it appears to be the late 1970s or so, which makes sense - the movie was released in 1982. We see Peter Dickinson talking to a pawn shop owner, and find that not only is Dickinson a dragon fanatic, he's also written a book, called "The Flight of Dragons". Here's a spot where this supposed kid's movie breaks convention. There really is a Peter Dickinson. He really does love dragons. He really did write a book called "The Flight of Dragons", in which he attempts to show how dragons could've existed, flew and breathed fire. We get to see this detail in the movie, as our hero analyzes dragons and develops a scientific theory of how dragons fly! Through some magical hijinks, Dickinson is transported into a dragon's body and mind, and there he remains for most of the movie. It's fun watching him try to figure out dragon-flight and dragon-life, and it gives the magical quest a new level of difficulty. While "The Flight of Dragons" book is non-fiction, the movie is very close adaptation, and not just in the book's subject matter. The artwork, particularly the background images, the wizards' towers, Andy Kaiser clean 18:32 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/11/08/the-league-of-scientists/ http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/11/08/the-league-of-scientists/#comments Sun, 08 Nov 2009 20:47:52 +0000 Andy Kaiser http://www.dbskeptic.com/?p=1615 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/11/08/the-league-of-scientists/feed/ 3 Andy Kaiser By Andy Kaiser Article ID: 1344 - Hi everyone, Andy Kaiser here. - The majority of people who visit Digital Bits Skeptic are - you’ll be shocked to know – mostly skeptics. Many of us here have related interests in critical thinking, in science, By Andy Kaiser Article ID: 1344 Hi everyone, Andy Kaiser here. The majority of people who visit Digital Bits Skeptic are - you’ll be shocked to know – mostly skeptics. Many of us here have related interests in critical thinking, in science, and in wondering about how the world works. This is just a guess, but it’s an educated one; these topics often go hand-in-hand. It is with this shared interest that I’d like to introduce you to my latest project, a book called “The League of Scientists”. If the book is successful, we’ll take it to a series. The full title for this first book is “The League of Scientists and the Ghost in the Water”. The League of Scientists stars several science-minded young adults. They use their knowledge along with skepticism and critical thinking to solve seemingly-supernatural mysteries. Kinda like what a lot of skeptics do, isn’t it? This is a “real” book – it’s not from a print-on-demand company or a vanity press. It’s been accepted by a traditional book publisher (Science, Naturally!), and I’m working with an editor to finish, edit and get it published. You’ll eventually be able to find it in big bookstores near you, and of course at the usual online places. I’m telling you about The League of Scientists because investigating our world and exploring mysteries with science and critical thought is important to a lot of skeptics. It is to me – that’s why I’m writing the book. (And knowing a little bit about the publishing industry, believe me, it's not for the money.) If you’d like to know more, visit LeagueOfScientists.com. The book isn’t available yet – the writing, editing, promotion and publishing process takes a while, particularly for a new, unproven writer like me – but, I wanted to get the word out to start driving interest. The sooner the better, because, well, it’s a lot of work and it takes a while. If you have kids, and if they like science and mysteries, go to LeagueOfScientists.com, visit the “Info” page, and sign up for email updates. I’ll let you know as I make progress on the book, and you’ll of course be notified when it’s available for purchase. If you are a young adult, and want to know more – anything from questions on the publishing process to The League of Scientists characters and story - let me know. This is my first experience working with a book publisher, but I’m happy to share what I know. And I'll share more League of Scientists updates as they occur. Stay tuned. Andy Kaiser clean 4:50 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/09/24/modeling-population-and-technology-why-havent-you-starved-to-death/ http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/09/24/modeling-population-and-technology-why-havent-you-starved-to-death/#comments Fri, 25 Sep 2009 01:38:12 +0000 Andy Kaiser http://www.dbskeptic.com/?p=1539 http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/09/24/modeling-population-and-technology-why-havent-you-starved-to-death/feed/ 8 Navin Kumar By Navin Kumar Article ID: 1338 - Of all the interesting, insightful models produced in the last two or three hundred years of economics existence (I’m not including the models of financial markets: those are neither interesting nor insightful) few h... By Navin Kumar Article ID: 1338 Of all the interesting, insightful models produced in the last two or three hundred years of economics existence (I’m not including the models of financial markets: those are neither interesting nor insightful) few h... Andy Kaiser clean 8:58