Science Guardian

Truth, beauty and paradigm power in science and society

I am Nicolaus Copernicus, and I approve of this blog

News, views and reviews measured against professional literature in peer reviewed journals (adjusted for design flaws and bias), well researched books, authoritative encyclopedias (not the bowdlerized Wiki entries on controversial topics) and the investigative reporting and skeptical studies of courageous original thinkers among academics, philosophers, researchers, scholars, authors, filmmakers and journalists.

Supporting the right of exceptional minds to free speech, publication, media coverage and funding against the crowd prejudice, leadership resistance, monetary influences and internal professional politics of the paradigm wars of cancer, HIV(not)AIDS, evolution, global warming, cosmology, particle physics, macroeconomics, information technology, religions and cults, health, medicine, diet and nutrition.

***************************************************

HONOR ROLL OF SCIENTIFIC TRUTHSEEKERS

Halton C. Arp wki/obit/txt/vds/txt/txt/bk/bk, Henry Bauer txt/blg/ blg/bks/bk/txt/bk/vd, John Beard bk, Harvey Bialy bk/bk/txt/txt/rdo/vd, John Bockris bio/txt/ltr/bk, Donald W. Braben, Peter Breggin ste/fb/col/bks, Darin Brown txt/txt/txt/txt/txt/vd, Giordano Bruno bk/bio/bio, Frank R. Buianouckas, Stanislav Burzynski mov, Erwin Chargaff bio/bk/bio/prs, James Chin bk/vd, Nicolaus Copernicus bk, Mark Craddock, Francis Crick vd, Paul Crutzen, Marie Curie, Rebecca Culshaw txt/bk, Roger Cunningham, Charles Darwin txts/bk, Erasmus Darwin txt//bk/txt/hse/bks, Peter Duesberg ste/ste/bk/txt/vd/vd, Freeman Dyson, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman bio, John Fewster, Rosalind Franklin, Bernard Forscher tx, Galileo Galilei, Walter Gilbert vd, Goethe bio/bk/bio, Nicolas Gonzalez tlk/rec/stetxt/txt, Patricia Goodson txt/bk/bk, Alec Gordon, James Hansen, Etienne de Harven bk/txt/vd, Alfred Hassig intw/txt, Robert G. Houston txt, Steven Jonas vd, Edward Jenner txt, Benjamin Jesty, Adrian Kent vd, Thomas Kuhn, Fred Kummerow, Stefan Lanka txt/txt/vd, Serge Lang, John Lauritsen vd, Paul Lauterbur vd, Mark Leggett, Richard Lindzen, James Lovelock, Andrew Maniotis, Lynn Margulis, Barbara McClintock, Christi Meyer vd, George Miklos, Marco Mamone Capria, Peter Medawar, Luc Montagnier txt/txt/vd, Kary Mullis, Linus Pauling prs/vd/vd, Eric Penrose, Roger Penrose vd, Max Planck, Rainer Plaga, David Rasnick bio/vd/bk, Robert Root-Bernstein vd, Sherwood Rowland, Otto Rossler, Harry Rubin, Marco Ruggiero txt/txt/intw/vd, Bertrand Russell Carl Sagan vd, Erwin Schrodinger, Fred Singer, Barbara Starfield txt, Gordon Stewart txt/txt, Richard Strohman, Thomas Szasz, Nicola Tesla bio/bio, Charles Thomas intw/vd, Frank Tipler, James Watson vd/vd, Alfred Wegener vd, Edward O. Wilson vd.

ACADEMICS, DOCTORS, AUTHORS, FILMMAKERS, REPORTERS AND COMMENTATORS WHO HAVE NOBLY AIDED REVIEW OF THE STATUS QUO

Jad Adams bk, Marci Angell bk/txt/txt/txt, Clark Baker ste/txt/rdo/vd, James Blodgett, Tony Brown vd, Hiram Caton txt/txt/txt/bk/ste, Jonathan Collin ste , Marcus Cohen, David Crowe vd, Margaret Cuomo, Stephen Davis BK/BK,/rdo, Michael Ellner vd, Elizabeth Ely txt/txt/ste, Epicurus, Dean Esmay, Celia Farber bio/txt/txt/txt/vd, Jonathan Fishbein txt/txt/wk, T.C.Fry, Michael Fumento, Max Gerson txt, Charles Geshekter vd, Michael Geiger, Roberto Giraldo, David Healy txt, Bob Herbert, Mike Hersee ste/rdo, Neville Hodgkinson txt /vd, James P. Hogan, Richard Horton bio/vd/vd, Christopher Hitchens, Eric Johnson, Claus Jensen vd, Phillip Johnson, Coleman Jones vds, William Donald Kelley, Ernst T. Krebs Sr txt, Ernst T. Krebs Jr. txt,/bio/txt/txt/ltr, Paul Krugman, Brett Leung MOV/ste/txt/txt/tx+vd/txt, Katie Leishman, Anthony Liversidge blg/intv/intv/txt/txts/txt/intv/txt/vd/vd, Bruce Livesey txt, James W. Loewen, Frank Lusardi, Nathaniel Lehrman vd, Christine Maggiore bk/ste/rec/rdo/vd, Rouben Mamoulian txt/txt/txt/txt/txt/doc/flm/flm, Noreen Martin vd, Robert Maver txt/itw, Eric Merola MOV, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, Michael Moore bio/MOV/MOV/MOV, Gordon Moran, Ralph Nader bk, Ralph Moss txt/blg/ste/bks, Gary Null /txt/rdo/vd, Dan Olmsted wki, Toby Ord vd, Charles Ortleb bk/txt/bk/intw/flm, Neenyah Ostrom bk, Dennis Overbye, Mehmet Dr Oz vd, Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos ste/vd, Maria Papagiannidou bk, Thomas Piketty bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk, Robert Pollin txt/vd/bk, Jon Rappoport bio/bk/bk/ste/bk/bk/vd, Janine Roberts bk/bk, Luis Sancho vd, Liam Scheff ste/txt/bk/bk/rdio/vd, John Scythes, Casper Schmidt txt/txt, Joan Shenton vd/vd, Joseph Sonnabend vd, John Stauber, David Steele, Joseph Stiglitz bk/txt, Will Storr rdo Wolfgang Streeck, James P. Tankersley ste, Gary Taubes vd, Mwizenge S. Tembo, John Tierney vd, Michael Tracey, Valendar Turner rec, Jesse Ventura bk, Michael Verney-Elliott bio/vds/vd, Voltaire, Walter Wagner, Andrew Weil vd, David Weinberger bio/bk/blg/blg/BK/bk/pds, Robert Willner bk/txt/txt/vd, Howard Zinn.

*****************************************************
I am Albert Einstein, and I heartily approve of this blog, insofar as it seems to believe both in science and the importance of intellectual imagination, uncompromised by out of date emotions such as the impulse toward conventional religious beliefs, national aggression as a part of patriotism, and so on.   As I once remarked, the further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.   Certainly the application of the impulse toward blind faith in science whereby authority is treated as some kind of church is to be deplored.  As I have also said, the only thing that ever interfered with my learning was my education. I am Freeman Dyson, and I approve of this blog, but would warn the author that life as a heretic is a hard one, since the ignorant and the half informed, let alone those who should know better, will automatically trash their betters who try to enlighten them with independent thinking, as I have found to my sorrow in commenting on "global warming" and its cures.
Many people would die rather than think – in fact, they do so. – Bertrand Russell.

The progress of science is strewn, like an ancient desert trail, with the bleached skeletons of discarded theories which once seemed to possess eternal life. - Arthur Koestler

One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison. – Bertrand Russell

Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it. - Samuel Johnson

A sudden bold and unexpected question doth many times surprise a man and lay him open. – Sir Francis Bacon (1561 – 1626)

He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. – John Stuart Mill

Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform. – Mark Twain

Although science has led to the generally high living standards that most of the industrialized world enjoys today, the astounding discoveries underpinning them were made by a tiny number of courageous, out-of-step, visionary, determined, and passionate scientists working to their own agenda and radically challenging the status quo. – Donald W. Braben

An old error is always more popular than a new truth. — German Proverb

I am Richard Feynman and I approve of this blog

When even the brightest mind in our world has been trained up from childhood in a superstition of any kind, it will never be possible for that mind, in its maturity, to examine sincerely, dispassionately, and conscientiously any evidence or any circumstance which shall seem to cast a doubt upon the validity of that superstition. I doubt if I could do it myself. – Mark Twain

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his income depends on his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair

A clash of doctrines is not a disaster, but an opportunity. - Alfred North Whitehead

Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it. – Samuel Johnson

Man’s mind cannot grasp the causes of events in their completeness, but the desire to find those causes is implanted in man’s soul. And without considering the multiplicity and complexity of the conditions any one of which taken separately may seem to be the cause, he snatches at the first approximation to a cause that seems to him intelligible and says: “This is the cause!” – Leo Tolstoy

The evolution of the world tends to show the absolute importance of the category of the individual apart from the crowd. - Soren Kierkegaard

Who does not know the truth is simply a fool, yet who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a criminal. – Bertold Brecht

How easily the learned give up the evidence of their senses to preserve the coherence of ideas in their imagination. – Adam Smith

Education consists mainly in what we have unlearned. – Mark Twain

The mind likes a strange idea as little as the body likes a strange protein and resists it with similar energy. If we watch ourselves honestly, we shall often find that we have begun to argue against a new idea even before it has been completely stated. – Arthur Koestler

Whenever the human race assembles to a number exceeding four, it cannot stand free speech. – Mark Twain

People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith

There isn’t anything so grotesque or so incredible that the average human being can’t believe it. – Mark Twain

He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. – John Stuart Mill

It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere. – Voltaire

People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come into the mind of others.- Blaise Pascal.

Illusion is the first of all pleasures. – Voltaire

The applause of a single human being is of great consequence. – Samuel Johnson

(Click for more Unusual Quotations on Science and Human Nature)

Important: This site is best viewed in LARGE FONT, and in Firefox for image title visibility (place cursor on pics to reveal comments) and layout display. Click the title of any post to get only that post and its Comments for printing. All posts guaranteed fact checked according to reference level cited, typically the original journal studies. Full guide to site purpose, layout and how to print posts out is in the lower blue section at the bottom of the home page.
---Admin AL/E/ILMK---

American Inventor reality

Poignant crackpot show suggests source of HIV∫AIDS infatuation among scientists

But is there a lesson for HIV dissidents? Will “everything be alright”?

Why HIV dissidents may need a Therapy Buddy

p6072349.JPGAmerican Inventor is back! It has reappeared tonight (Wed Jun 6) on ABC in all its former camp glory, with even more useless, uninventive and often scatological ideas than last year put forward by possessed crackpot amateurs, frequently furious at their rejection by the judges.

Their honest wrath is especially directed at the obligatory toffee nosed Brit judge, the critical Peter Jones (click pic left), who like Simon Cowell (who happens to be co-creator of the show) is quite liable to tell contestants they are “utterly mad” if he thinks so.

Fellow judges Pat Croce and blonde Sara Blakeley are kinder, in the polite American tradition of saving other people’s feelings, and George Foreman is kindest of all. But as a fellow Brit it seems to us that Cowell is often bluntly saying what anyone uninvolved can see, which is that most of the contestants are deluded.

Is it science in microcosm?

We think there is a lesson in all this for all paradigm challengers. American Inventor may be a parable for the ways ideas are bought and sold in HIV∫AIDS science, at least in some crucial respects. The parade of nonsense may be at the low end of the intellectual spectrum, but the human factors are similar.

One question in both reality show and in HIV∫AIDS science is, why don’t the aspiring inventors or the scientists who are their counterparts – the ones who came up with the new and (as insiders said then) the very silly idea of HIV as the cause of AIDS twenty two years ago – see it?

Well, evidently, as American Inventor shows, for any average human, fathering (or mothering) an intellectual idea can be much the same in emotional terms as parenting a child.

Daddy or Mommy feel the same fierce loyalty, devotion and deluded overvaluation of their brain’s unique offspring as the parents of human babies do.

And equally clear, according to the show, is the fact that the inventor’s friends and loved ones either have equally bad judgement or are unwilling to tell him/her the obvious, for in every case no one has been willing to rain on the inventor’s parade, however unlikely his/her brainwave product.

An abundance of bad ideas in good faith

To any outsider not invested emotionally or financially in the outcome it is immediately obvious that most of the clumsy inspirations on American Inventor are not good ideas:

A jacket and cap with straps to hold your head straight while sleeping in a plane seat (“Are you mad? Must be mad! Definitely no!” says Jones);

Paper with drawings that turn colorful when peed on (to be put into the toilet to encourage children to “go”) which a realtor, Bridgette, had spent $11,000 to develop, but luckily did not have a child on hand to demonstrate as such (“what happens when you poo?” asks Jones);

A strap-on feeder pouch for a dog to be sick in (“You’ve invented something that doesn’t need to be invented” – Jones )

A personal aluminum sack to escape house fires in (“I’m speechless!” – Jones).

Anger at critics

None of these was the next Great American Invention worth $1 million investment, clearly. But it was useless to ask the inventors. All of them thought they were front row contenders, and were extremely put out, even angry, when they were not recognised as such.

Sound familiar? The phenomenon of personal hostility towards critics on the part of the chief HIV∫AIDS paradigm promoters is well known.

Mark Wainberg of Montreal, President of the International AIDS Society and Canada’s best known and most aggressive defender of the status quo, has called for the imprisonment of those “psychopaths” who advocate a formal review and reassessment of the hypothesis that HIV is the root cause of AIDS ills.

mark_weinberg.jpgWainberg is notorious in this paradigm war for suddenly getting up, removing his microphone and storming off the set when he was being interviewed on camera by Robin Scovill, a documentary maker who asked him what he thought of the Duesberg challenge. It was a quintessential American Inventor moment.

(The clip can be found under the name Free To Question (click here) at The Other Side of AIDS, the site of the documentary that resulted. For earlier posts on Wainberg, search this front page for his name in the index on the right.)

Bad ideas, utmost conviction

Slightly better though not particularly inventive was the next undeserving inspiration:

The Auto-Bib (paper bib for eating in an auto, which half of American drivers do at least once a week – accepted as an LA finalist, tears, hugs from the family, yells).

But things went downhill from there with

The Boom-Brella (umbrella with speakers attached inside),

The Household Sponge Gloves with sponge built onto palm and fingers. (“I say Yes!”- Foreman),

The Sober-Key (key with alcohol breath detector “I have one similar device in my car already!” says Sara; “But does it stop you using your car!?” asks Foreman),

The Potty Sniffer (seat-attached deodorizer with fan sniffs contents of toilet bowl and emits scent when necessary – “I vote yes, I give a lot of parties! – Foreman),

The Diaper-Wiper (Handiwipes stuck to each diaper in a pack, from a 10 year old boy who cries bitterly into his huge Mom’s stomach when rejected as uninventive, and finally

The A-Cycle, a bicycle with large spinning wheels attached to the normal wheels. This from Steve, who before his audition is revved up to the max, shouting “I am the American Inventor!” and banging on the door of the judge’s room.

The wheels attached as hubcaps will have environmental messages on them, he explains, even though they spin and keep spinning when the bike stops.

Steve is summarily rejected, but is initially incredulous. “Are you serious? This is about saving and changing lives!” he replies, standing stock still in shock and disbelief and apparently undecided as to whether to leave or advance on the increasingly nervous judges. There is a whiff of mad aggression in the air. Is Steve totally under control?

Finally he walks out, muttering “I put my life into those wheels! This is ridiculous! I am not monkeying around! You guys are going to see this all over the world! Don’t worry, I am not going to snap, guys!”

“You had my back, right, George?!” says Pat to ex-heavyweight champion George Foreman. “Oh yeah” laughs George.

Out of the mouths of babes

The entertainment value of all this striving human frailty arises from the unlikelihood of the “inventions” combined with the resentment of the contestants and their defensive remarks.

A high point is the rejection of a cute little 10 year old girl’s brainwave of an “Indoor Camping Kit”, complete with a miniature fake fire, a Smars “roaster that actually roasts Smars” and some sound effects.

p6072314.JPGThe cute one smiles winningly and confidently, until she realizes she is rejected, when she looks down and mutters (about Peter Jones) “I want to punch him really badly!”

“REALLY REALLY BADLY!” she adds more loudly, warming to the thought.

Another summary rejection is earned by a man who explains that he has made a machine that runs forever on one fill of salt water, but that he hasn’t had time to get it ready.

The blindness of authority

However, there was at least one item the appeal of which Jones did seem to misunderstand.

Why reject the Protector, a small display of moving messages attachable to a car back window which will signal to other drivers “Help! Kidnapped!” when you are carjacked and put into the trunk, where you can switch it on? “Are you kidding me?” says Jones, turning it down.

“One day when he is stuffed into a trunk he will is not going to think this idea is so silly!” says the husband of the husband and wife team darkly, once they are safely outside the judging room doors.

But Jones did like Guardian Angel, a fireman’s idea of a device to attach to a fake Christmas tree to sound an alarm and douse it with water if it catches fire, which is often a cause of the death of children. The fireman made it through.

Faith in a very bad idea

All of this must have spoken to any dissident in HIV∫AIDS watching the program, for the phenomenon of extremely strong faith in and fondness for a very bad idea is familiar to all jaundiced critics of that disputed paradigm.

The inverse difficulty of getting a good idea through the head of some judge new to it is also familiar to critics, who universally find that interest in reviewing the HIV∫AIDS paradigm is minimal to zero among scientists in the field, scientists outside the field, doctors, health workers, patients or the population at large.

Of course, this is not too surprising. Ideas that differ from conventional wisdom in any sphere are generally viewed with a jaundiced eye, with most present wondering if the iconoclast is nuts. Not to mention that, in common with some of the American Inventions, there is even an unwelcome scatological aspect to HIV∫AIDS to discourage close examination.

But the apathy with which heterosexuals view the possibility that their romantic life has been queered by scientific nonsense funded at vast public expense, and that numerous gays and Africans have been sacrificed in this cause, and billions wasted which could have gone into cancer or African health infrastructure, shows how much easier it is to be skeptical of novelty than the status quo, in the Peter Jones mode.

“Everything will be alright. Believe it.”

On the other hand, HIV∫AIDS dissenters may have found faint encouragement in the finale of the program, which was a lesson in making a triumphant comeback. This was provided by a determined contestant from last year trying again, who proved that faith in his product and perseverance in promoting it could triumph over its perceived inherent absurdity as judged by Peter Jones.

p6072322.JPGRichard Kopelle’s My Therapy Buddy is a large soft anthropomorphic toy with no more than a smiley for a face on its round head. It is designed to comfort insecure adults, who can cuddle it as it tells them in a somewhat computerized tone that “Everything is going to be alright!”.

This inspiration was rejected summarily last year by Jones, on the somewhat illogical grounds that “If I needed a cuddly toy to tell me it’s alright I would know everything was not alright!”

“This is American Inventor, not British Inventor!” responded Kopelle, 61, meaning that Jones just didn’t understand the American market.

Apparently he was right, since he has brought a pair of My Therapy Buddys back to compete again, claiming that in the year intervening that it has become a “national phenomenon”. (According to his web site, it is for sale at $70, and many comments on the Web are enthusiastic).

This time he has better luck. “Richard, can I hug one?! asks Sara. “I happen to think that the judges last year were wrong!”

“I know I am not crazy!” says Richard. “Peter has been my nemesis for a year. It’s difficult for some men to understand we need a touch. Everybody goes through some bad times once in a while. Everybody needs a Therapy Buddy. Peter, you need to hug this thing!”

“I am never going to hug that thing!” says Peter.

“Everything is going to be alright! Believe it!” says the toy.

Therapy Buddy is right, as it turns out. The toy “invention” is voted in to the LA finals. Richard wins a ‘Yes’ from Pat, Sara and George, and thus a place in the LA finals. “Good gracious me!” exclaims Peter Jones. “You’ve passed the Therapy Buddy! Everything is not alright!”

“I’m vindicated!” cries Richard, embracing and dancing in circles with his male partner outside. “I am ecstatic but I am not surprised, cos I know the American public is with me and this is going to be the Great American Invention!”

Do dissidents currently need a Therapy Buddy?

therapybuddytshirt.jpgDissidents in HIV∫AIDS seem to have been somewhat winded by the gross failure of Harpers Magazine’s 15 pages of exposure of the skulduggery, mendacity and misguided science in the field in March last year to incite its less perceptive and independent minded peers in the magazine realm, such as Atlantic and the New Yorker, into similar investigations.

They may like to take courage from this story of how perseverance pays. Or at least, purchase a Therapy Buddy.

For in recent weeks it appears that some key figures in the fight for good science in this area have retired at least temporarily from the fray.

Harvey Bialy posted the last contributed post on his critical blog You Bet Your Life on May 12 and has announced to colleagues that he considers that he has said everything necessary on the topic for the time being, and has retreated into a Buddhist sanctuary presumably to cleanse his soul of bitterness.

Celia Farber has found another role in bringing justice and human rights to the world and for the moment at least is also leaving the field to other contestants.

Even we recognize the sad lack of response to the Harpers article – and the uninformed nature of Specter’s recent piece in the New Yorker, as we noted in our recent post – as an indication that the likelihood of making headway against the mountain of human politics that HIV∫AIDS has engendered is not much greater than Don Quixote moving the Great Cheops pyramid without splintering his lance.

In fact we judge that with Bill Clinton about to get an award from the Business Coalition to Fight AIDS, with $30 billion now to be poured into the Federal HIV∫AIDS trough by George Bush, and with the New Yorker and all the other elite media still under the unbroken spell of the NIAID, as shown by the new Vanity Fair, a fat issue on Africa edited by Bono, it does not seem that anything but a sudden perception of political advantage for a leading politician, or a positive AIDS test for the son or daughter of a billionaire, or a very sensational court case inside the United States, will make any difference at all to the status quo and its continuing global expansion.

As a result, while we are not planning to buy a Therapy Buddy ourselves we also feel that we have said quite enough on this topic in past posts to show any interested reader both sides of the debate.

We therefore will be expanding to other paradigm war fronts in future to show other examples of how modern science is now a very different system than it was half a century ago, and how progress through paradigm replacement – by definition the only major progress in science – is now increasingly difficult in every field where vast sums are poured in from the public and the private sectors.

4 Responses to “American Inventor reality”

  1. MacDonald Says:

    One is almost tempted to think the Truthseeker has posted this in response to John Moore’s toe cringing attempt at humour (if not in reponse to the idea of an HIV vaccine. How would Peter Jones rate that idea on the crankometer?):

    http://aidstruth.org/crank-how-to.php

    One will know this piece is funny because JP says so in the introduction.

    Of course, it cannot have escaped anyone, not even JP himself, that he isn’t often voluntarily funny. Perhaps this is why he hasn’t had the courage to risk the leap from clown to satiric author but preferred to borrow his “crank-how-to” step by step guide from Mark Hoofnagle – another one of the many academic nobodies who, like Scalise, are trying to prop themselves up by shooting ex cathedra at any and all targets thought to be soft enough.

    http://barnesworld.blogs.com/barnes_world/2006/12/bialy_correspon.html

    Why, since JP possesses the sound scientific judgment not to author any satirical pamphlet himself, that same judgment has failed him so miserably in thinking that Hoofnagel is any more talented in this area, is part of the riddle of the man. The reader is invited to compare with the curious circumstance that JP is quite capable of reviews of HIV science that would make the trumpets of Joshua sound like a lullaby to the inhabitants of Jericho, and still they are not sufficiently loud to tear down the walls in his own critical mind.

    Perhaps JP lacks the heart to follow where his mind leads, and therefore chooses to follow the lead of intellects inferior to his own. In this case, he seems to have acted on Hoofnagel’s ultimate advice to aspiring cranks.

    Finally don’t forget other cranks are an excellent resource! Cranks usually like to hear about other cranks ideas, even if they conflict with their own crank ideas (…) Remember, intellectual consistency doesn’t matter as long as you are both criticizing the orthodoxy. These other cranks can mention your idea. They will undoubtedly find it “interesting” (…) Ideally they will link your site, join your webring, mention your ideas, and many other cranks will promptly arrive to acknowledge your genius

    And indeed, JP has linked Hoofnagel’s innovatively named “denialism” blog. Is this the beginning of a “webring” one wonders?

  2. Truthseeker Says:

    As you note, MacD, this remarkable example of “satire” that fails in the first duty of the form, which is to be cleverer than its victims, is borrowed from its proper place on its originator’s blog, at Crank HOWTO. This blog, “Denialism Blog” , appears to be run on the principle that debate can most easily be stifled if it is labeled “denialism”, since its subhead is “Don’t Mistake Denialism for Debate”. (But then it is a proud member of “scienceblogs”, a home for bloggers who typically extend the witless pandering to orthodoxy of the juvenile editors of the sponsoring Seed Magazine, a newish “cultural-political significance of science” magazine whose fitful stops and starts signal funding problems which they hope to escape by this policy.)

    That is why we already had it listed in our right hand margin index of sites relevant to paradigm challenge under the heading “Misleading”, even though it appears that the intellectually heavy footed Mark Hoofnagel (who bills himself as “a MD/PhD Candidate in the Department of Molecular Physiology and Biological Physics at the University of Virginia. His interest in denialism concerns the use of denialist tactics to confuse public understanding of scientific knowledge.”) shares the blog with his brother, Chris (“an attorney with experience in consumer protection advocacy in Washington and Sacramento. His interest in denialism concerns the use of rhetorical tactics by various industries in dumbing down policy debates”).

    Chris is the author of The Denialists’ Deck of Cards, another blog entry which seems slightly more intelligent and based on practical realities than his brother’s leaden footed caper, perhaps because he is a lawyer and not a doctor by training. Why is it that doctors, whose training by nature is almost all a drill, are so contemptuous of new ideas? One would think they would teach medical students some history at some point, at any rate enough to show them that conventional medicine has made huge paradigm leaps in the past, which by definition shows they should value new ideas as possible improvements.

    There is something we find inescapably irritating about not very clever people such as Mark trying to satirize not very clever people, as in this case, and we are not quite sure why this is. There are much better guides to crackpots around, but it is not that. Is it the missed opportunity? Is it the arrogance of ignorance? Perhaps here it is the J. P. Moore et al habit of boomeranging arguments against the “dissidents” which apply to himself and his colleagues. As our post tried to suggest, it is Moore who is a crank, not his critics.

    While it is true than almost every general critique in this paradigm challenge can be reversed against the other side, there is something especially annoying (to those that care about language) about the paradigm promoters’ myopia when it comes to seeing that the word “denialist” applies so much more appropriately to their denial of review, of science, and of common sense, than it does to the HIV∫AIDS critics, who are merely pointing out that there is not a single good reason to support the paradigm when it is examined against the scientific literature.

    But of course this set of blinkers is the reason that their satire falls flat. It is hard to dance when you can’t see the edge of the stage. You end up making the audience laugh alright, but for the wrong reasons.

  3. drpsduke Says:


    As a result, while we are not planning to buy a Therapy Buddy ourselves we also feel that we have said quite enough on this topic in past posts to show any interested reader both sides of the debate.

    I think dissidents already have the perfect therapy buddy in the person of Elani Papadopulos-Eleopulos. She is, after all, very willing to sleep with any HIV-infected person.

  4. Truthseeker Says:

    I think dissidents already have the perfect therapy buddy

    Drpsduke, thank you for this comment, which is below the standards of this science blog in several respects, not least of which is that it is very silly and therefore quite funny, which redeems much in our book. However, Eleni Papadopoulos-Eleopulos merely stated in court in a certain context in answer to a question that she would have no medical concern in sleeping with an HIV-positive person out of fear of the action of HIV, which is a valid statement justified by the scientific literature from several points of view, including the absence of any evidence in 22 years that HIV causes any illness, that HIV is tranmissible between heterosexual lovers, and the difficulty of locating any peer reviewed paper by any competent thinker that justifies such a concern.

    She stated her lack of concern in this context and according to the science of the matter, and was not expressing any social attitude to justify your (and other adolescents) implication that she is willing to indulge in indiscriminate liaisons with HIV-positives or anyone else, and we find insults of this kind to be a little questionable, even if they were meant in a jocular spirit, for they imply a lack of respect for a respectable, widowed lady, and for the hallowed environs of this blog, which we should remind you is a rare if not unique refuge for apolitical scientific analysis on the Web.

    Anyhow, what precisely is wrong with purchasing a Therapy Buddy for $69.99 and sending same to the dissident of your choice, if you are persuaded that they are in need of comfort? We have to say that we think you are praiseworthy for sympathizing with the plight of truthseekers in the modern world, for it is certainly an uphill battle they fight when at any moment $30 billion is liable to be thrown into the pot against them.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Bad Behavior has blocked 1449 access attempts in the last 7 days.