…and this is a 
On the high velocity rotation of interred organic remains
Category: Skepticism
Posted on: September 2, 2008 3:41 PM, by PZ Myers
Let us all doff our hats in astonished disbelief at the brazen arrogance of the people who have created the Carl Sagan Institute in Brazil.
That is, the Carl Sagan Institute…of UFOlogy. That's right, a cranky gang of saucernuts have appropriated the name and likeness of Carl Sagan without authorization to flog their belief that Jesus is a flying saucer pilot. They claim that Sagan was secretly a believer in visitations by Little Green Men, who simply publicly lied, and now they want to use his dead body to beg for donations.
Anyone know a good Brazilian lawyer who'd like to fight this?
Comments
Posted by: AJ | September 2, 2008 3:45 PM
Like... what?
Posted by: Eli | September 2, 2008 3:47 PM
I don't know any Brazilians, but there has to be someone who would fight this absurdity. Can the estate of the late great do anything legally, or is it just stuck there, like the cathedral Our Lady of Pharyngula? (That's going up in your honor, PZ, if you ever stop blogging.)
Posted by: Ron Sullivan | September 2, 2008 3:48 PM
Well, at least in the billboard shot he's laughing.
Posted by: JoshS | September 2, 2008 3:55 PM
Ooooo. . .Ann Druyan is gonna be some pissed. You might want to drop her a note, PZ.
Posted by: Glen Davidson | September 2, 2008 3:56 PM
Well, if the IDiots claim science as the basis for ID, I don't know why the anti-woo Sagan should be appropriated for pro-woo nonsense.
Except that legally the issue may be different (remember, though, that dead guys are much easier to appropriate legally than are living persons).
It's always kind of a good tactic to take the offensive (in more ways than one) when you're pushing claptrap, since one can often thus determine the rules of engagement. They don't want a fair fight, they want a fight as tilted in favor of their woo as possible.
Glen Davidson
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Tony Sidaway | September 2, 2008 3:56 PM
According to the linked article, the Carl Sagan Foundation is aware of this and Ann Druyan has responded to queries on the matter. It is obviously not authorized. Presumably the Foundation will consult legal counsel on what to do about it.
Posted by: Cleon | September 2, 2008 3:57 PM
PZ, if nothing else, I'd like to commend you on the greatest article headline I've ever seen.
I'd suggest contacting Ann Druyan if you can. She will likely take a dim view of this, and although IANAL, I believe there are international intellectual property laws at play here. I don't have her contact info, but Randi probably does, and I'm sure Shermer does.
Posted by: Glen Davidson | September 2, 2008 3:59 PM
Oops, it (#5) should have had this correction:
Glen D
http://behefails.wordpress.com
Posted by: Matt7895 | September 2, 2008 4:03 PM
Sagan's family might be able to do something about this, but I have no idea what Brazilian law allows.
Posted by: Arwen | September 2, 2008 4:05 PM
This is horrifying to me. I'm sure Carl believed there is other life out there but NOT little green men.
Posted by: Blake | September 2, 2008 4:10 PM
Eeeehhhhh, I don't think you can be prosecuted for defaming a dead person. Sagan is as god-like a person is ever to get in my skeptically hardened opinion and the use of his likeness in such a way as to promote bullshit pseudoscience is disgusting beyond belief. But lawyers need not be involved.
Posted by: Holbach | September 2, 2008 4:12 PM
This is infuriating bullshit to me as I have a high regard for Carl Sagan, have all his popular books, and talked with him for several minutes in his office at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York in April of 1993. The walls leading to his office were plastered with photos of planets and moons and other photos of the Universe and he only had several minutes to spare as he had to fly to Houston for a NASA meeting. It was a privilege to meet this fascinating person and to renew it whenever COSMOS was being aired. Carl has never alluded to the crap that the Brazilians are alluding to and his books, especially the last few attest to a repulsion of superstitious crap. Those demented morons should aptly name their crap hole The Brazilian Bonkers Institute Of Shitheads. What a travesty of purloining a rational mind to serve their batshit third world mentality. Fucking morons.
Posted by: TSC | September 2, 2008 4:14 PM
Yeah, but anyone who likes green men will just mistake the image for Henry Winkler.
Posted by: Cleon | September 2, 2008 4:15 PM
Prosecuted in criminal court, probably not.
But there are issues of intellectual property at work here. The use of Sagan's name and likeness is the "property" (for lack of a better word) of the Planetary Society. It's not public domain.
They don't have permission to say "Carl Sagan endorsed us" (which is essentially what they're doing) just because he happens to be dead.
Posted by: raven | September 2, 2008 4:16 PM
OT but relevant. More is coming out about Sarah Palin. She is a religious lunatic picked by Dobson et al. Already known. Huffington post has some quotes from her minister. He is a far right wing wingnut who claims anyone who voted for Kerry or Gore is bound for hell. Iraq is a holy mission from god. And on and on.
To listen to this guys sermons is to conclude that god is a far right wing wingnut who always votes GOP.
Posted by: Andy from Sweden | September 2, 2008 4:18 PM
The sick thing is that a very small percentage of targeted people in brasil will ever read (or take in) a critical view of this. It feels like we´re always gonna fight a loosing battle. I really feel sad when I think about it, we're in such deep shit, (humanity). Religion is so whidespread (and spreading) that I really dont know what to fucking do.. It feels like I want to scream at all religious nuts.. Fucking wake up!!, WAKE the fuck up!! and I know theres nothing to it, religion is the shit. for every scientist or skeptic there's 10 brainwashed people following the word of Jebus... I'm going to bed.
Posted by: scotth | September 2, 2008 4:18 PM
In so far as I have 'heros', Carl Sagan and Richard Feynman are duking it out for my top spot (sorry PZ).
Wow, that is some kind of irritating.
I second the nomination for best headline ever.
Posted by: Raelyf | September 2, 2008 4:19 PM
I hope you realize PZ that as soon as you die I'm opening the PZ Myers Catholic Missionary Society. I just read your blog looking for good statements I can rip out of contexts for future use.
Scary thought.
Posted by: Zachary B. | September 2, 2008 4:21 PM
This enrages me as Carl Sagan is one of my heroes. I'm not sure how these people could just completely ignore everything he's said and make up some fairy tale about him believing this nonsense. Hope the issue is resolved without mush fuss.
Posted by: VegeBrain | September 2, 2008 4:24 PM
A million, brazillion, or billion; what's the diff?
Posted by: Andy from Sweden | September 2, 2008 4:25 PM
Zachary B:
Ignorance is what they are all aboute, no surprise there... Nonsense is what a lot of people choose to beleve in...
Posted by: W earl | September 2, 2008 4:30 PM
Sagan hated the USA and western civilization. Winner of the lefist Helen Caldicott Leadership Award ... Carl predicted that if Sadan Hussein set fire to his oil well (he did) that we would get a "nuclear winter" and our planet would freeze. People like PZ, Sagan and SJ Gould use science as a dodge to promote an anti-human/pro-Marxist view of life.
Posted by: Gitche Manito | September 2, 2008 4:30 PM
"They claim that Sagan was secretly a believer in visitations by Little Green Men, who simply publicly lied,
Not Little Green Men of course but he did not rule out alien visitations.
I know.
I asked him.
He said so.
Posted by: JoJo | September 2, 2008 4:34 PM
Thank you for your input, troll. Got any other fantasies you wish to share?
BTW, there's a Marxist under your bed. Be safe and sleep with your shotgun.
Posted by: Alan Chapman | September 2, 2008 4:40 PM
Is Cosmos, Carl made a compelling case against the credibility of UFO and abduction reports. It seems implausible to me that a sufficiently advanced civilization with the means to traverse light years would reveal themselves only to "cranks and weirdos," as Stephen Hawking put it. Thousands of astronomers looks into the sky every day and never see alien spacecraft, but we're expected to believe that some backwoods hillbilly just happened to be looking in the right direction one night and witnessed an alien invasion. Abduction reports are easily explained. They're the result of sleep paralysis and cognitive priming.
Posted by: cervantes | September 2, 2008 4:40 PM
The heirs should sue for billions and billions.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | September 2, 2008 4:41 PM
Of course Carl Sagan was a commie pinko bastard who hated America. I mean, here he is on TV with Ted Turner. What more proof do you need?
(Warning: only watch the aforelinked video if you want to get depressed over how little progress we as a society have made in two decades.)
Posted by: blf | September 2, 2008 4:44 PM
Any predications on the magnitude of the wobble Carl's spinning will induce?
Posted by: Holbach | September 2, 2008 4:45 PM
W earl @ 22 Does the "W" stand for; Wacko? Off to Brazil with you to join the other third world cretins. Maybe you can get a cesspit hovel in the Sao Paulo slums and practice your wacko ideas.
Posted by: Seamyst | September 2, 2008 4:52 PM
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
Oh, wait. They're serious, aren't they?
Posted by: Julian | September 2, 2008 4:54 PM
I'm not quite sure why it's ok to use the image of Jesus in ways that bear no relation to what he taught (see previous Pharyngula posts many) but not ok to use the image of Carl Sagan in ways that bear no relation to what he taught. Double standards? Sagan worship? Surely not.
Posted by: JStein | September 2, 2008 4:55 PM
W earl, you make me laugh with your stupid conspiracy theories.
But on to what sane people think. The truth is that Sagan was a sane, competent scientist, who didn't fall into craziness like this.
If only he were alive to shut these idiots up.
Pretty soon they'll be setting up the Dawkins-Myers Missionary Organization. We really do need a lawsuit protecting the name of sane scientists against this kind of stuff.
Posted by: Darwin's Dagger | September 2, 2008 4:55 PM
Given 20 years someone will probably open the PZ Meyers Institute of Transubstantiation. "He must of believed the cracker had something going for it for him to go to all the trouble of desecrating it."
Posted by: Patricia | September 2, 2008 5:01 PM
#12 - Holbach - Thanks comedian! You made me snort my ginger ale. ;)
Posted by: Bride of Shrek OM | September 2, 2008 5:08 PM
"Anyone know a good Brazilian lawyer.."
...um, well I'm a lawyer with a good Brazilian.
Julian at # 31
Quick answer is that Carl Sagan actually existed , Jeusus did not. Poeple like you who think you have some erudite point to bring across which, in reality, can be shot down in flames in two seconds, well, you just come across as being a total smartarse ok?
Posted by: Jackal | September 2, 2008 5:11 PM
For the first time, I may understand a bit of how religious people feel when someone portrays their idol in a light not to their liking. However, there is a difference. The CSI in Brazil is spreading lies about a real person with living heirs. It would be different if it was fiction or a cartoon, but they are actually trying to convince people that Carl Sagan believed in alien visits. Contrast this to something like Jesus and Mo: many find it offending and blasphemous, but no one thinks it's true. Further more, we don't know if the human embodiments of such religious idols existed, let alone what they were like. The feelings might be similar, but the situations are different.
Posted by: Filipe | September 2, 2008 5:11 PM
I am Brazillian. A very ashamed one.
Posted by: Turdus | September 2, 2008 5:23 PM
I saw a piece with Sagan where he DID rule out visitation. He stated that space was far too vast to allow for visitation. He did not rule out the possibility for other forms of life (intelligent or otherwise) but he felt that the likelihood that they would be able to travel such far distances to reach us to be too small. I will try and find a reference to this. It may have been in an interview around the time he released his last book "The Demon Haunted World: Science As A Candle In The Dark." Love that title, by the way.
Posted by: JJR | September 2, 2008 5:25 PM
I don't think any kind of "Fair Use" defense would fly, at least not under U.S. copyright law...I don't know about Brazilian law, but if Brazil belongs to WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization), it might have some bearing...
Just playing devil's advocate here, in order to claim Fair Use (at least under U.S. Copyright), my understanding is they'd have to claim, with a straight face, that their use of Sagan's likeness is DELIBERATE PARODY/CRITICISM, which, of course, is precisely NOT what they're trying to do...
So while I grudgingly accept what the EXPELLED producers did with the John Lennon audio clip, this so-called Institute is going to run afoul of the law, I think.
Any Brazilian copyright lawyers here?
Posted by: Randy Stimpson aka Intelligent Designer | September 2, 2008 5:32 PM
Who cares. I can think of more important things to worry about.
Posted by: Turdus | September 2, 2008 5:36 PM
I think Sagan ruled out visitation, but not contact.
Posted by: Jeff Bell | September 2, 2008 5:39 PM
Perhaps they will be forced to rename it "Intituto Butthead Astronomo".
While I'm here I'd like to recommend Poundstone's biography of Sagan.
Posted by: Julian | September 2, 2008 5:39 PM
Post #31 is not me, obviously, as the ignorance of its composition shows a complete ignorance of the point I made in the art post earlier today.
Woot! First time a religi-troll has tried to impersonate me; I'm moving up in the world!!
Julian receives +20 to rep with Interwebz!!
Posted by: Turdus | September 2, 2008 5:40 PM
Uh, Randy, if you don't care, than why not go back to pondering the ESP between you and your wife. Now THATS something important!
Posted by: Capital Dan | September 2, 2008 5:41 PM
They need to put a goatee on Carl. Then, maybe it'll fly like bizarro Spock or something.
Posted by: Julian | September 2, 2008 5:43 PM
As to Sagan, this seems like a pretty open-and-shut copyright case to me. If his image and name are under copyrighted by his foundation, that is.
and W earl is pretty hilarious, isn't he? Yup, its us scientists and atheists who believe in humanity's future and it's ability to live on its own without recourse to the superstitions of our long infancy who are anti-human, not the religions which universally reject the value of life in favor of a "perfect" death.
Posted by: Julian | September 2, 2008 5:44 PM
Oops, "under" shouldn't be in that second sentence.
Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | September 2, 2008 5:47 PM
With a notable difference between "did not rule out" and "believed there was credible evidence that it actually happened." It's called "being open-minded."Posted by: scooter | September 2, 2008 5:50 PM
Hollbach W earl @ 22 Does the "W" stand for; Wacko?
I think it stands for Wingnut Earl. Wingnut earl is what we use in the South to lubricate our wingnuts.
You can also spray it on your ball bearings so you don't get lost, or gender confused.
Posted by: Nibien | September 2, 2008 5:50 PM
The same reason it's ok to write Harry Potter Fanfic (well, at least it's legal, morally you will probably be quite filthy) that has him going to a normal high school but it's far less ok to put up a billboard of George W. Bush saying "I enjoy having sex with little children" as his quote.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | September 2, 2008 5:50 PM
If you've got some sort of consensus on what Jesus actually taught, you might want to let the over 30,000 denominations of Christian know. Given the variance among these groups concerning the interpretation of such straightforward lines such as "turn the other cheek", a portrayal of Jesus flying an F-16 with a whale penis and a Baobob tree for a head would be no less true to 'his teachings' than the average Evangelical liturgy.
But, by all means, don't let the facts get in the way of your indignation.
Posted by: Dahan | September 2, 2008 5:50 PM
W Earl, who is this "Sadan Hussein" you speak of?
That aside, you know we only laugh at people like you, right? If we, here, sometimes seem to act a bit arrogant, it's only because people like you come here and spout such inane nonsense that we can't help but feel superior.
Put yourself in our shoes. If a five-year-old came up to you and told you that his Mommy and Daddy were the smartest, prettiest, kindest, richest people in the world, you'd try to hold off a snicker, but it'd be hard. You know better. Not "think so", not "feel so" but know so. It's the same here. When you come here with stuff like that, you just look dumber than a box-o-rocks that's high on qualudes. We know better. Save it for your other five-year-old friends.
Posted by: Scott Hatfield, OM | September 2, 2008 5:52 PM
Ich. Inasmuch as I still use segments of Cosmos on an annual basis in my classes, this is pretty disturbing. And actionable. I mean, if the Three Stooges image can be owned, then Sagan's can, and I bet Ms. Druyan could probably make a pretty fair dinkum case that, with respect to Cosmos or other products, Sagan's image can't be used without her consent.
I hope she sues.
Posted by: Chiroptera | September 2, 2008 5:54 PM
The Julian who wrote #31:...but not ok to use the image of Carl Sagan in ways that bear no relation to what he taught.
Seems pretty rude and disrespectful, if you ask me. On the other hand, when I'm dead I doubt I'll care too much what people claim about me, so you might have a point.
-
I'm not quite sure why it's ok to use the image of Jesus in ways that bear no relation to what he taught....
Because Jesus, if he in fact existed, died long, long ago, and so have the people who knew what he taught. There is no way to determine what, if anything, he really did teach, and the people who claim to know all contradict each other, and so using the image of Jesus to promote anything in particular in no more offensive than, say, the American Family Association using Jesus' image to promote their ideas.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | September 2, 2008 5:56 PM
Stimpy wrote:
Who cares? is a question and as such requires a question mark. As for the next three words, we'll need more proof than your say-so before we accept evidence of your intelligence.
Posted by: Patricia | September 2, 2008 5:57 PM
All the decent trolls must be off somewhere looking at Palin porn.
(A truly terrible pun.)
Posted by: Dutch Delight | September 2, 2008 6:05 PM
Off topic, but still wanted to share this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOIYkLWY4Fc
Follow-up on the earlier undercover report on Saudi influence in British mainstream mosques.
Posted by: Bart | September 2, 2008 6:06 PM
I know a lawyer in Brazil. She doesn't do libel (is that what it is??) law, but she's a lawyer nevertheless. I've forwarded the links to the relevant sites to her. Whether she can/wants to do anything about it (or even bothers to reply to my message) is another question... :-)
Posted by: Chiroptera | September 2, 2008 6:08 PM
I just want people to know that posts like W earl's (#22) are the main reason I read the comments.
Posted by: scooter | September 2, 2008 6:23 PM
Patricia
All the decent trolls must be off somewhere looking at Palin porn. (A truly terrible pun.)
at least you didn't say Palin Nilap
Posted by: Mariana | September 2, 2008 6:31 PM
I'm Brazilian and I know lawyers who would be interested in this case - the same ones who offered to help me out when I wanted to file a complaint against the governor of my state when she proposed to "import" American creationism to be taught in public schools here (we ended up not having to do anything about it, since her proposal was rejected). I'll try to get in touch with them as soon as I recover from the shock and feel I can actually stomach even clicking the link. Eeww.
Posted by: Patricia | September 2, 2008 6:34 PM
Scooter - Whoose! Right over my head. ;)
Posted by: Davidlpf | September 2, 2008 6:45 PM
Crap.
Posted by: Scott Hatfield, OM | September 2, 2008 6:45 PM
Julian @ 31
I'm not quite sure why it's ok to use the image of Jesus in ways that bear no relation to what he taught (see previous Pharyngula posts many) but not ok to use the image of Carl Sagan in ways that bear no relation to what he taught. Double standards? Sagan worship? Surely not.
Let me break it down for you, Julian.
Let's ignore for a moment the quick retorts of those who doubt either the historicity or relevance of Jesus, and say for the purpose of discussion that Jesus existed, or even (say) exists.
Having said that, what evidence can you present that any particular iconic representation of the Nazarene actually bears his human likeness? No one has that market cornered, as Brownian remarks above. The images of Christ are symbols, and the culture appropriates them for better or worse as such, not as bona fide depictions of any actual human being.
Besides, the parodies of Christendom that you encounter here are not intended to misrepresent the teachings of Christ or any other religious figure: they are intended to satirize the way that some (perhaps all) religious behave. Christ is not being invoked as an authority on behalf of atheism, right? Atheists don't believe that Jesus or any other deity exists, so how could they regard them as authoritative?
Contrast that with some preachers, who enlist Jesus's image, his words or the authority of their particular understanding of Jesus to carry water for their own ideological ends or personal aggrandizement. They do, in fact, adorn themselves with the patina of Jesus's reputation and I think they are better targets for your misplaced concern.
Respectfully submitted...SH
Posted by: Fernando Magyar | September 2, 2008 6:46 PM
I sent it to my cousin's wife in Sao Paulo, she has a Phd in Brazilian Jurisprudence and is a practicing Brazilian attorney specialized in patent infringement. Sounds close but it may not be a cigar given that this is a very highly specialized area of law. I hate to say it but it probably isn't worth her while financially and she has more cases than she could possibly handle but she might drop a name or two.
Posted by: Sastra | September 2, 2008 6:53 PM
Julian #31 wrote:
Part of the difference is that this is not art. An artist would be perfectly free to do a painting of Carl Sagan on a space ship -- or with an erection -- or on a space ship with an erection. His admirers would not insist they are so "offended" that the artwork must be suppressed.
Another difference is that Sagan's endorsement is implied, and you're getting into copyrite violations, etc. Which leads to an interesting distinction.
There are a lot of fringe churches which claim to be the fulfillment of and advocates for Jesus Christ, and mainstream Christians have no recourse. Jesus is supposed to be ALIVE, not dead -- and you can contact him through private prayer. But only the worthy can do that.
Which means that no Christian can prove or demonstrate that Jesus Christ didn't place some nut (new messiah) in charge of a new church. They can call it the Church of Jesus Christ, Space Alien, if they want. Not so with Sagan.
Posted by: the great and powerful oz | September 2, 2008 6:57 PM
under the photo they claim
"Exclusive rights (c) CBPDV 2008, photo (c) Michael Okoniewski (1994)"
I wonder if they got permission to use the copyrighted photo.
Posted by: robotaholic | September 2, 2008 6:59 PM
OH NO YOU DIDN'T!!!! DON'T FUCK WITH CARL SAGAN'S LEGACY! I'll fucking stop you myself
Posted by: scooter | September 2, 2008 7:00 PM
Yeah, this is copyright and possibly trademark infringement. I'm sure Brazil has laws similar to the US and Europe, etc.
When a published person, and public figure dies, the royalties and naming rights and all are passed down to a relative or a foundation, this is clearly a violation but only the injured party can put a stop to it.
A well drafted Cease and Desist notarized in Brazil would probably shut these guys down.
Posted by: Katharine | September 2, 2008 7:04 PM
South America, besides the fact that it is infested by religion, also has a little too much other woo.
SRSLY, fuck Brazil .
Posted by: the great and powerful oz | September 2, 2008 7:11 PM
This guy must have been brewing this for some time.
Domain Name:INSTITUTOCARLSAGAN.ORG
Created On:02-Feb-2007 10:37:04 UTC
Last Updated On:22-Jan-2008 11:08:40 UTC
Expiration Date:02-Feb-2009 10:37:04 UTC
Posted by: Patricia | September 2, 2008 7:12 PM
#66 - Sastra - Dammit! There goes my drink out my nose again. Between you and Holbach today, I might as well give up ginger ale. ;)
Posted by: Ian H Spedding FCD | September 2, 2008 7:14 PM
Perhaps if someone - I'm not saying who - were to desecrate a model of a UFO or perform some unspeakable act with a Little Green Man...?
Posted by: Bill Dauphin | September 2, 2008 7:14 PM
Back when I lived in the South, it seemed most of the wingnuts were pretty well lubricated to begin with.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | September 2, 2008 7:15 PM
Pas du tout, mon baron. It stands for "Fearless Flightsuit".
Apart from that, I'm with comment 26.
Posted by: Nicole | September 2, 2008 7:28 PM
I don't know whether to be incredibly angry at the cajones on these guys, or incredibly amused at their stupidity.
Posted by: Holbach | September 2, 2008 7:33 PM
Katherine @ 70 How true your remark is. I read some time ago about various weird and obscene practices that the South Americans engage in, and these are separate from their religious rituals. But what can you expect from places that are settled by a combination of various ethnic types and equally voodoo and religious miasmas? Woo? Yes, in it's mildest description!
Posted by: Grendels Dad | September 2, 2008 7:40 PM
To: all condescending trolls,
Please, for all our sakes, before you post what you believe to be a devastating, snarky comment, stop and consider Julian at post 31.
Then consider the posts from ScottHatfield @64 and Sastra @66. I'm afraid that two such well reasoned posts, coming from totally orthogonal starting positions, and converging on just how wrong something is, presents a serious risk of ripping space-time. I'm talking end of the universe here people.
As Grendels Dad'd dad used to say, "Better to think a lot and say a little, than think too little and say, well, anything."
Posted by: Mariana | September 2, 2008 7:45 PM
Katherine @70? Am I missing the sarcasm in your comment or something?
Posted by: Ulairion | September 2, 2008 7:46 PM
W earl @ 22 Does the "W" stand for; Wacko? Off to Brazil with you to join the other third world cretins. Maybe you can get a cesspit hovel in the Sao Paulo slums and practice your wacko ideas.
Hollbach@#29
Damn it, don't you fucking DARE putting all third world in the same bag. At least 'round here* no one would ever suggest teaching creationism in a public school... shit, I think they don't even teach it in catholich schools either =P
*"here" equals Argentina, a bit south from Brazil and "third world" country acording to some.
Posted by: Andre | September 2, 2008 7:49 PM
I am Brazilian, and a very ashamed one.
I have read almost every book by Carl, and he was very important in making a skeptic out of me. He also helped spark my love for astronomy (Phil Plait, you rule! Sorry, PZ!). So, this is particularly sad for me.
But looking on the bright side, their website is not even working! Seems they are as incompetent as they are crazy!
Posted by: Chris Krolczyk | September 2, 2008 7:55 PM
W earl wrote (first draft in crayon?):
Sagan hated the USA and western civilization.
Amazing how he "hated" the very thing he was interested in preserving through better science education, isn't it?
BTW, which kind of cretin are you: the cretin who actually believes this crap, or the cretin who just posts it to get a rise out of people capable of counting past 9?
Posted by: Tony Sidaway | September 2, 2008 8:09 PM
W earl | September 2, 2008 4:30 PM #22
The "Carl Sagan said Saddam setting light to oil wells would cause nuclear winter" canard needs to be pinned down.
There is a reasonably accurate description of what Sagan actually said, and the actual results, and what Sagan responded, here. I'm afraid it's just another of those desperately underwhelming "Scientist makes modest prediction, acknowledges failure of prediction" scenarios and not the "Oh My God, The Planet Will Freeze" doom mongering being pushed by this silly troll.
Posted by: Chris Krolczyk | September 2, 2008 8:09 PM
Ah, it's a joy to read the uncanned drivel straight from the horse's mouth:
"Instituto Carl Sagan" mouthpiece Ademar Gevaerd:
"It's obvious that in his works he speaks the opposite, since in them he plays the game of skepticism, part of governmental functions. I doubt that today he would express himself the same way, but we will never know, will we?"
Likewise,
"I REALLY believe and maintain that Project SETI is a shameful waste of money."
Uh huh. Just like web sites that selectively misquote an opponent of the UFOlogy that they promote, right?
"And in USA, Carl Sagan, who lived and died claiming that UFOs didn't exist, was a partner of J. Allen Hynek for a long time in Cornell University, NY, and both were USAF consultants. But only Hynek admitted that later. Any real scientist don't dismiss the reality of extraterrestrial visitation."
So let me get this straight: according to Gevaerd, using Sagan's image as a mouthpiece from beyond is okey-dokey despite the fact that they state he was in cahoots with the USAF/MIBs/IPU, which makes him a tainted source in their Little Golden Book of UFOlogy?
How very...selective. And stupid.
Posted by: scooter | September 2, 2008 8:11 PM
Bill Dauphin @ 74
Back when I lived in the South, it seemed most of the wingnuts were pretty well lubricated to begin with.
That's why I quit going to church in Texas. Ya ever sit in a room full of wingnuts who have been eating Bar-B-Que and Beans and drinking Lone Star all night?
The preacher breathes fire, and the flock responds with brimstone.
uuuugh. I'm surprised those places don't spontaneously combust
Posted by: Holbach | September 2, 2008 8:14 PM
Mariana @ 79
What are we missing here?
Posted by: Mariana | September 2, 2008 8:19 PM
Eh, you know, if I had read the comments and actually clicked the links before going all "oh noes embarrassing", I would have remembered that we third world cretins here in Brazil do not teach creationism in our schools (no, not even in Catholic schools, same as in Argentina, Mr. Ulairion @80). Actually, most people here live in blissful ignorance of your non-cretin, first world troubles with fundies and creationism. There are lots of new agey dopes, as well as crazies who spend their money on things like "ufology". And, yeah, the Catholic church still does some harm here, but...I'll take those over your scary first-world Jebus people, thank you very much.
And even though the UFO magazine may have published articles about Jesus coming back in a spaceship, the people responsible for the Carl Sagan institute never mention xtianity and are just a bunch of loonies with no political power and no aspirations to acquire any.
So, while I agree that Carl Sagan deserves better than to be associated with this sort of teenage sci-fi fantasy, I'm pretty sure his legacy and his name will emerge unscathed from this, erm, fiasco.
In sum: storm, meet teacup.
Posted by: llewelly | September 2, 2008 8:31 PM
raven, #15:
Perhaps that explains why the Republicans believe they 'make their own reality'. They believe they've deceived and deluded their very own god.
Posted by: scooter | September 2, 2008 8:40 PM
Mariana @87
Catholics do not teach Creationism in their schools in the US, either.
Since public schools tend to get away with teaching creationist nonsense until sued by a parent, you could be in a unique position of sending your kid to a religious (catholic) school, to get them away from the creationists in Public schools.
Posted by: Kobra | September 2, 2008 9:05 PM
Man, that's bullshit. Sagan didn't "believe in little green men," he only made a case for extraterrestrial life. Bacterial life, if we're LUCKY.
Posted by: Felipe Campelo | September 2, 2008 9:06 PM
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls, but being a Brazilian I just can't keep silent here:
Holbach (12,29&77) is showing an unbelievable amount of racism (#77: "what can you expect from places that are settled by a combination of various ethnic types") and prejudice (#12: "to serve their batshit third world mentality" and #29: "Off to Brazil with you to join the other third world cretins"), all mixed together into a big bucket of logical fallacies.
Here are some comments on his posts:
1) Mixed ethnicity does not mean bigger susceptibility to superstitious ideas. A mere glance at the "white" bible belt or the LDS in the US should tell you that quite clearly;
2) While Brazil has indeed a population that is quite mixed (and, as a Brazilian, I can say we are very proud of that) and a culture that has received contributions from Portuguese, Italian, German, Japanese, Amerindian, and tens of different African traditions, most of other "third world" countries do not. In fact, most are quite ethnically "pure" (whatever that means);
3) While I am as shocked as you are by this abomination called "Carl Sagan Institute of Ufology", I am quite sure it is not a mainstream thing in Brazil. In fact, most of the Brazilian population doesn't even know this "Brazilian UFO Magazine" even exists;
4) If you take a look at any ufology magazine, be it in the U.S., Europe, Japan or Mozambique, I am sure you will find things as bizarre and revolting as this "Institute". Do not judge a whole country (or a whole set of countries, as you did with your "third world" comments) by a fringe publication with a few thousand readers (from a population of over 190 million people);
Anyway, great post PZ. I will contact the sceptical groups in Brazil and see if there is anything they can do about it (I could try if I were there, but being half a world away in Japan somehow limits my actions).