Debunkers.org Blog

From this news article, we learn of the latest amusing episode of Canada’s health care system. And we learn of the media that covers up for it. Get the lede on this article:

A critically ill Hamilton preemie turned away from McMaster Children’s Hospital is all alone in a Buffalo intensive care unit because her parents don’t have passports to get across the border.

Uh, no. The premature infant is all alone because Canada does not have enough neonatal intensive care units. Period.

The infant is in Buffalo, because a decaying ex-industrial town in the United States has more health care resources than an entire Canadian province.

Enjoy the contrast in these two lines of the news story:

A second area mom has also been separated from her children since being turned away from McMaster’s NICU, which is closed to new admissions about 50 per cent of the time….

Dr. Peter Fitzgerald, president of McMaster Children’s Hospital, said he’s in discussions with the Ministry of Health about getting more beds for the NICU, which is already the largest and most modern in Ontario.

That’s what politically correct university academics really want us to be.

–SPQR

Reported in The Register, a Japanese panel is expressing skepticism on the supposed “consensus” about anthropogenic global warming.

Three of the five researchers disagree with the UN’s IPCC view that recent warming is primarily the consequence of man-made industrial emissions of greenhouse gases. Remarkably, the subtle and nuanced language typical in such reports has been set aside.

One of the five contributors compares computer climate modelling to ancient astrology. Others castigate the paucity of the US ground temperature data set used to support the hypothesis, and declare that the unambiguous warming trend from the mid-part of the 20th Century has ceased.

Hat tip to JustOneMinute blog.

–SPQR

We’ve been experiencing a lot of spam attacks on our discussion forum and bots have been filling our login request emails with bogus login names.  So we apologize if you tried to sign up and we didn’t activate the login.  Please use the contact page on the bottom of the top level page on our website to give us a heads up that you are a legitimate user when you sign up.

–SPQR

SPQR - Jeff Norman gives us this in the Global Warming topic:

The word “agnotology” doesn’t show up at dictionary.com but it can be found at wikipedia where it says:

Agnotology, formerly agnatology, is a neologism for the study of culturally-induced ignorance or doubt, particularly the publication of inaccurate or misleading scientific data. The term was coined by Robert N. Proctor,[1][2] a Stanford University professor specializing in the history of science and technology.[3] Its name derives from the Greek word ἀγνῶσις, agnōsis, “not knowing”; and -λογία, -logia.[4] More generally, the term also highlights the increasingly common condition where more knowledge of a subject leaves one more uncertain than before.

Dr. Proctor was quoted using the term to describe his research “only half jokingly,” as “agnatology” in a 2001 interview about his lapidary work with the colorful rock agate. He connected the two seemingly unrelated topics by noting the lack of geologic knowledge and study of agate since its first known description by Theophrastus in 300 BC, relative to the extensive research on other rocks and minerals such as diamonds, asbestos, granite, and coal, all of which have much higher commercial value. He said agate was a “victim of scientific disinterest,” the same “structured apathy” he called “the social construction of ignorance.”

Robert Proctor is a professor of the History of Science. I first came across him and his word in an interview in Discover magazine where he applied the term to the tobacco industry and climate change.

Stanford now has workshops on agnatology Agnotology: The Cultural Production of Ignorance where you could hear presentation like:

David Magnus, Director, Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University

“Agnotology as a Strategy in the Debate over Genetically Engineered Organisms: The Precautionary Principle versus Risk Assessment”

Naomi Oreskes, Associate Professor, Department of History and Program in Science Studies at the UC, San Diego

“Deny, Deny, Deny: How to Sow Confusion over Climate Change”

Hmmmm.

Am I an agnotologist or is the person diagnosing my denial the agnotologist?

What is it with these “history of science” people?

I can find “history” at dictionary.com. It says history is “the branch of knowledge dealing with past events”.

What is the past?

From dictionary.com again, “of, having existed in, or having occurred during a time previous to the present”.

How can a “history of science” person pass judgement on something that is currently being debated?

There is currently no physical evidence linking CO2 emissions to warmer global temperatures. There is no physical evidence linking warmer temperatures to degraded conditions. These are hypotheses that are being promoted by certain individuals and organizations and hotly debated in various forums. Computer modelling is used to promote the acceptance of these hypotheses as facts.

It is my experience that those promoting these hypotheses tend to be ignorant sometimes willfully ignorant of the physical processes they think are taking place and general rely of some authority to make their argument for them.

It is also my experience that the more an individual learns about the physical processes, the more skeptical they become of the arguments put forward by those promoting these hypothesis.

If agnotology is a culturally-induced ignorance then perhaps they are applying the word incorrectly in this debate.

Further discussion in the Global Warming topic of the Discussion Forum.  Link at right.

The American Council on Science and Health always has its toxicity of thanksgiving dinner up for posting now-a-years:

Yikes - don’t be eating Turkeyday dinner:

I’m (as I said in the forum), just quoting through ‘C’ toxicants and toxins:

NATURALLY OCCURRING MUTAGENS and CARCINOGENS FOUND in FOODS and BEVERAGES

Acetaldehyde (apples, bread, coffee, tomatoes)—mutagen and potent rodent carcinogen

Acrylamide (bread, rolls)—rodent and human neurotoxin; rodent carcinogen

Aflatoxin (nuts)—mutagen and potent rodent carcinogen; also a human carcinogen

Allyl isothiocyanate (arugula, broccoli, mustard)—mutagen and rodent carcinogen

Aniline (carrots)—rodent carcinogen

Benzaldehyde (apples, coffee, tomatoes)—rodent carcinogen

Benzene (butter, coffee, roast beef)—rodent carcinogen

Benzo(a)pyrene (bread, coffee, pumpkin pie, rolls, tea)—mutagen and rodent carcinogen

Benzofuran (coffee)—rodent carcinogen

Benzyl acetate (jasmine tea)—rodent carcinogen

Caffeic acid (apples, carrots, celery, cherry tomatoes, cof-fee, grapes, lettuce, mangos, pears, potatoes)—rodent carcinogen

Catechol (coffee)—rodent carcinogen

Coumarin (cinnamon in pies)—rodent carcinogen

Come comment in the forum at here

November 11th is a holiday in the United States and many other countries, now called “Veteran’s Day” it was originally commemorative of the end of WWI - Armistice Day - which ended on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month of 1918.

Usually I post McCrae’s In Flanders’ Fields but today, I’ll post Wilfred Owen.

Dulce et Decorum Est (written in 1917 and published posthumously in 1921) is a poem by World War I soldier Wilfred Owen. The work’s horrifying imagery has made it one of the most popular condemnations of war ever written. It was originally drafted as a personal letter to the famous pro-war poet Jessie Pope.

— Excerpted from Dulce et Decorum Est on Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.

Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of tired, outstripped Five-Nines that dropped behind.

Gas! Gas! Quick, boys!–An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling
And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime...
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.

In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.

If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,–
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.

--SPQR

By the way, if you have not visited our discussion forums, I’d like to point you to the best part of our forums.  The book discussion forum which has some great book reviews of non fiction works by our own Setnakt.  Not to be missed, as it is truly the best part of the discussion forums.

I had some. Then I (re-recognized) realized this is a travesty.

On all sides.

It’s not just the people running who are skum (an expectation); with the advent of YouTube, we’re seeing how revolting the voters are; basically in real-time.

I reaffirm my non-vote this year. Except for ballot  initiatives.

Evidently Western society collapsed recently, and someone forgot to tell me.  In Switzerland, a researcher was required to demonstrate that his experiment would not “trample” upon a plant’s dignity.  Wall Street Journal report

Dr. Keller recently sought government permission to do a field trial of genetically modified wheat that has been bred to resist a fungus. He first had to debate the finer points of plant dignity with university ethicists. Then, in a written application to the government, he tried to explain why the planned trial wouldn’t “disturb the vital functions or lifestyle” of the plants. He eventually got the green light.

The rule, based on a constitutional amendment, came into being after the Swiss Parliament asked a panel of philosophers, lawyers, geneticists and theologians to establish the meaning of flora’s dignity.

“We couldn’t start laughing and tell the government we’re not going to do anything about it,” says Markus Schefer, a member of the ethics panel and a professor of law at the University of Basel. “The constitution requires it.”

It is unfortunate that they did not laugh at this ridiculous lunacy.  Because failing to laugh at it, is what makes it take on more life and spread.