The 2005 Pigasus Awards have been announced by The Amazing Randi himself. The categories:
Category #1, to the scientist who said or did the silliest thing related to the supernatural, paranormal or occult.
Category #2, to the funding organization that supported the most useless study of a supernatural, paranormal or occult claim.
Category #3, to the media outlet that reported as factual the most outrageous supernatural, paranormal or occult claims.
Category #4, to the "psychic" performer who fooled the greatest number of people with the least talent:.
Category #5, for the most persistent refusal to face reality.
Good to see Randi back in action. Go here to read who the "winners" were.
More like this
I got a bit behind on my work yesterday, so I'll be brief. Yesterday, the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) announced its annual Pigasus Awards. Sadly, each and every year, there are far more "deserving" candidates than there are awards to give. However, this year marks something awesome,…
After writing that last post, I decided to have a look at the comments to macht's essay. I found another delightful instance of macht being clueless.
Commenter Daniel wrote:
“if some modern scientist happened to introduce something supernatural into science and it was testable”
See, I don't get…
As promised, I watched Phenomenon, and I've got to say, I'm unimpressed. The premise of the show is there are 10 people with paranormal abilities vying for a 250,000 prize (they could make more if they tried Randi's challenge - I wonder why don't they?). The one that impresses the judges - fraud…
Ah, April Fools' Day!
I had thought of trying to do a typical April Fools' Day post, you know, something like trying to write something but the last time I tried to do that it fell really flat, so flat that I'm not even going to link to it. It's better not to remind my readers of my jokes that…
This finally gives me a peg to hang a question I've been meaning to ask. I'm a full-fledged skeptic, an atheist, etc. But I'll admit that I LOVE the tv show "Medium." I don't take it as factual, any more than I did "Dead Zone" or did "Buffy." (And I think this year they've dropped the ending note that claims that it is based on a 'real person.') But is simply a good, solid, well-written and acted show, the plots are solid, and the surprises and twists usually work.
The question is if I have to hide my 'Skeptic club' button when I watch it, and if many other skeptics admit to enjoying it as well.
(After all, time travel is equally absurd, but I'm glad to be hopping a ride on the TARDIS every week.)
And a personal question. What do you, as a doctor, think of HOUSE?
In my view these shows are fine as long as they don't claim to be factual. My favorite movies are Alien and Bladerunner, and I grew up watching Doctor Who on the TV, but I don't believe aliens have actually been here. I am a Buffy fan too. But I refuse to watch Medium since it is supposed to be based on Dubois' "real life", so I can't comment on whether it is good or not.
House is so bad I regard it as a comedy. And is it me or does Hugh Laurie have a really bad American accent? I wonder if that bad accent is part of the joke that this series secretly is.