…and this is a 
Is this part of the official Cephalopodmas celebration?
Category: Cephalopods • Reproduction • Weirdness
Posted on: November 20, 2006 9:12 AM, by PZ Myers
Oh! Respectful Insolence uncovers more woo-woo nonsense, a scheme called Global Orgasm that urges everyone to get it on on one particular day.
The intent is that the participants concentrate any thoughts during and after orgasm on peace. The combination of high-energy orgasmic energy combined with mindful intention may have a much greater effect than previous mass meditations and prayers.
The goal is to add so much concentrated and high-energy positive input into the energy field of the Earth that it will reduce the current dangerous levels of aggression and violence throughout the world.
Exactly what is this "high-energy orgasmic energy" that will be injected into the earth's "energy field"? How does it compare to, for instance, UV from the sun? I think that if you actually measured it, at best what you'd get is a negligible amount of extra heat. It will have exactly the same effect as mass meditations and prayers, i.e., none. Or perhaps we'll now be told that science can have nothing to say about this business?
Haven't these people ever heard of mass spawning? I think the prayers of a few copulating people are going to be totally swamped out by the pleas of corals, algae, echinoderms, etc., and if this stuff actually worked, the earth would be 99% ocean and humans would be extinct…and who wants to encourage a practice that urges you to have sex only once a year?
Worst of all, though, these people are usurping my holiday, Cephalopodmas. That's right, all this woo-woo New Age nonsense is scheduled for 22 December. I say we need to steal it back: go ahead and have sex on Cephalopodmas, but out of appreciation for biodiversity, do something effective and use birth control.
Comments
Sexin' for science!
Posted by: Llamaturtle | November 20, 2006 9:16 AM
Scary thought: Now that PZ's mentioned it, there'll be a troll defending this stuff.
Posted by: Bronze Dog | November 20, 2006 9:17 AM
Hmmm....when I was a senior in high school, I started a movement called FFWP (F*** For World Peace) that sounds an awful lot like this, only less hokey. The general idea was that if everyone existed in a constant state of afterglow, we wouldn't really get bent out of shape so often, thereby causing a reduction in world tension and aggression.
By my freshman year of college, membership in FFWP swelled to six members, most of whom drank so hard and so regularly it was hard to actually, you know, participate in club activities.
Drink Heavily for World Peace just didn't have the same energy, and as a result, the world never had a chance to become be more harmonious place I envisioned.
Posted by: Erin | November 20, 2006 9:20 AM
Are these the same people who did World Jump Day?
Posted by: Andy | November 20, 2006 9:26 AM
Is there any chance of a script to just parse through the random quotes? Or am i the only one going crazy with page refresh just to see what i can get.
Posted by: Mick | November 20, 2006 9:29 AM
You know, if we had an Orgasm Police who enforced the requirement that everyone have an orgasm at least once a day, we'd be too tired to fight.
About the random quotes: go to the "About" tab at the top of the page. There's a link to the complete quotes file.
Posted by: PZ Myers | November 20, 2006 9:36 AM
At least this has a measurable ($) benefit for a good cause.
Posted by: coturnix | November 20, 2006 9:38 AM
Just wondering... why cephalopodmas and not "squidmas"? S'kinda catchier, no?
Posted by: rwxr-xr-x | November 20, 2006 9:54 AM
. . . there'll be a troll defending this stuff.
That would be me: I can't vouch for the psychic energy rationale, but this isn't going to be any less effective than most mass peace demonstrations, and sounds like vastly more enjoyable.
Posted by: Molly, NYC | November 20, 2006 9:57 AM
Someone nees to ask Eric Keroack what this will do to world Oxytocin levels. It might not be such a good idea.
Posted by: George | November 20, 2006 10:04 AM
Oh, sure, and "Happy Holidays" is more inclusive than "Merry Christmas", isn't it? You must be one of those Bill O'Reilly types who insists that we have to pander to your specific religious affiliation with our midwinter greetings.
Posted by: PZ Myers | November 20, 2006 10:05 AM
I don't think a global orgasm holds a candle to usual cosmic orgasms.
Also, thoughts *during* orgasm?! Not only woo, but downright kooky woo.
Posted by: Torbjörn Larsson | November 20, 2006 10:10 AM
Yeah, I think most people's thoughts during orgasm basically reduce to "WOOHOO! I'M HAVING AN ORGASM!" If that.
Anyway, I like Skepchick's proposal that we counteract this woo by declaring a "Screw for Science Day" instead.
Although there's nothing that says we can't celebrate Cephalopodmas with orgasms. Just ask the Japanese...
Posted by: Joshua | November 20, 2006 10:22 AM
I posit that if you can manage to have a coherent thought during orgasm, you've done it wrong in the first place.
Posted by: JavaElemental | November 20, 2006 10:41 AM
Aw, come on. The "science" is woo but the idea is whee! It's like going to the annual polka-n-brats-n-beer brouhaha held by the church down the street--I like fun and I'm there every year. This is just a private (?) polka.
I think this calls for "research." You know--investigation of pseudoscience and all that. It's a testable hypothesis, isn't it? Too late to apply for a Templeton Foundation grant?
Of course, I'm looking for a post on this at UD. Or I will conclude that there is no Santa Claus! Not even parents as Santa! ;-)
Posted by: Kristine | November 20, 2006 10:43 AM
my first thought was....couldn't hurt. fun for all. but whoa. we aren't short of people. there is that reproduction angle to orgasms.
Posted by: roger | November 20, 2006 11:08 AM
1. If you're concerned about the reproductive angle, have the event sponsored by Durex.
2. I think I'm obliged to get one of our single friends to join us for the occasion...I mean, if if it's for world peace, I think i'm obliged to make sure she has an orgasm, no? :P
Posted by: gracchus | November 20, 2006 11:15 AM
Erm, err .... isn't there a Japanese word for this - "Bukkaki? Bukkakee? Bookakend?"
Something like that, anyway.....
Posted by: G. Tingey | November 20, 2006 11:20 AM
there is that reproduction angle to orgasms
There is?
Excuse me, aren't we being a little phallocentric here? There are lots of things...lots of things...lots of other, other things to do.
Maybe when I get home tonight I post some suggestions at my site. (That should ratchet up the hits.)
Posted by: Kristine | November 20, 2006 11:37 AM
What are my chances of getting a letter from a real scientist, confirming my need- no, my obligation, to include all of my wife's single friends in the festivities? There are at least a couple that it would just be impolite not to have share this magical woo joy. I am concerned, however, about the effect on this global event of the dreaded fake orgasm and how it could effect the success or failure of the experiment.
My new project involves billions of track-cleated humans massed along a single longitudinal starting line and, at a signal, beginning to sprint in the opposite direction of the earth's spin. Obviously, at first, this would merely simulate a treadmill but, then, on my signal, they would stop in unison with a digging in of track spikes. My hypothesis is that the world will stop spinning and those who wish to get off, may then do so.
Posted by: raindogzilla | November 20, 2006 11:58 AM
How much sperm would that be if every male on the planet ejaculated at the same time?
Average ejaculation = 1.5-5ml.
Number of males on the planet in 2006 = 3,286,482,000.
Some number of those are too young to ejaculate, so err on the low side:
4,929,723,000 ml.
That's about a billion teaspoons, right?
Wow.
Posted by: George | November 20, 2006 12:10 PM
Don't most animal species that engage in population-wide mass-sex tend to die immediately after?
Posted by: Stanton | November 20, 2006 1:02 PM
I too support the idea of a massive for-charity fornicate-a-thon. Maybe Trojan could sponsor?
Posted by: Brian X | November 20, 2006 1:15 PM
The fundies would have to be kept out of this-there would only be half the number of possible orgasms in that case.
Posted by: Mena | November 20, 2006 1:31 PM
Are you sure it's a good idea to have gazillions of people moaning/gasping/screaming "Ohgod ohgod ohgod ohgod.....ohgod....oh..god." all at once? The demand on prayer gratification might be excessive and ambiguous.
Also, this is reminiscent of bonk night, the occasion of dedicated action by couples who wanted to deliver children on 1/1/00. Sedulous research can probably pick out the inevitable drop in world violence that resulted. Or didn't.
Posted by: hal | November 20, 2006 1:56 PM
How much sperm would that be if every male on the planet ejaculated at the same time?
Don't forget that women can have multiple orgasms, so we've got you beat. (And so can men, if they don't ejaculate. You know that, right?)
Posted by: Kristine | November 20, 2006 2:01 PM
"Don't forget that women can have multiple orgasms, so we've got you beat. (And so can men, if they don't ejaculate. You know that, right?)"
Sure, sure, I knew that, Kristine.
[he said, furiously Googling.]
Posted by: George | November 20, 2006 2:13 PM
I'll post it tonight. ;-)
Posted by: Kristine | November 20, 2006 3:29 PM
"Yeah, I think most people's thoughts during orgasm basically reduce to "WOOHOO! I'M HAVING AN ORGASM!" If that."
AFAIK "if that" is the correct answer - they have measured that the higher centers of our brains shuts down momentarily. Or it is another urban legend, I can't say where I read that.
Posted by: Torbjörn Larsson | November 20, 2006 10:34 PM
Can I have George Clooney?
Posted by: Cathy in Seattle | November 20, 2006 11:24 PM
I was under the impression (means I read in a stupid norwegian tabloid pretending to refer science) that men lose consciousness momentarily during orgasm. That might explain why there is being done nothing to ensure world peace today.
Posted by: Magnus | November 21, 2006 9:20 AM
Well, at least they're getting something out of it. ;)
Posted by: Kayla | November 21, 2006 10:59 PM