Heaving Dead Cats » Skeptical

I Believe In Miracles

Neece — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 21:55:49 +0000

Damn, now that song is going through my head. Who was that? Butch says it was Wild Cherry, but don’t hold me to it. Anyway, my friend Eric sent me a link to Michael Shermer’s site, to a page titled Miracle on Probability Street. He wrote it in 2004 but I thought I’d share it with you because it’s very good information.

We’ve all experienced a highly improbable event in our lives. Probably many, in fact. Some of us more than others, some more seemingly improbable than others. There is such a thing as the Law of Large Numbers that explains these coincidences and “miracles”.

The Law of Large Numbers simply stated (sans math): with a large enough sample many odd coincidences are likely to happen.

Coincidence: an occasion when two or more similar things happen at the same time, especially in a way that is unlikely and surprising.

Miracle: an unusual and mysterious event that is thought to have been caused by a god, or any very surprising and unexpected event.

On a side note, I was disappointed with Dictionary.com’s listing on these words so I thought I’d go to the Cambridge Dictionary. The definition above is from the Dictionary of British English. Out of curiosity, I looked up the word miracle in the Cambridge Dictionary of American English:

Miracle: an unusual and mysterious event that is thought to have been caused by God, or any surprising and unexpected event.

A very subtle but telling difference! I think I’ll be using the British version from now on.

Anyway, I digress, again! I like how the definition of miracle is either caused by god, or (moving the goalposts) unexpected. Those are two very different kinds of events. One is something supernatural, manipulated by god’s hand. The other is something merely surprising. And yet the definition combines them, basically rendering it rather meaningless.

So let’s get to the numbers that Michael Shermer shared in his article. He says:

I cannot always explain … specific incidents, but a principle of probability called the Law of Large Numbers shows that an event with a low probability of occurrence in a small number of trials has a high probability of occurrence in a large number of trials. Events with million-to-one odds happen 295 times a day in America.

Shermer quotes CERN physicist Georges Charpak and University of Nice physicist Henri Broch from their book, Debunked!: ESP, Telekinesis, and Other Pseudoscience:

In the case of death premonitions, suppose that you know of 10 people a year who die and that you think about each of those people once a year. One year contains 105,120 five-minute intervals during which you might think about each of the 10 people, a probability of one out of 10,512 — certainly an improbable event. Yet there are 295 million Americans. Assume, for the sake of our calculation, that they think like you. That makes 1/10,512 × 295,000,000 = 28,063 people a year, or 77 people a day for whom this improbable premonition becomes probable. With the well-known cognitive phenomenon of confirmation bias firmly in force (where we notice the hits and ignore the misses in support of our favorite beliefs), if just a couple of these people recount their miraculous tales in a public forum (next on Oprah!), the paranormal seems vindicated. In fact, they are merely demonstrating the laws of probability writ large.

So, for example if 23 random people are asked their birthdays, there is a 50% chance that at least 2 of them celebrate the same birthday. It may seem like an amazing coincidence, but it’s not amazing at all.

Then Michael Shermer refers to a review of the above book by another physicist, Freeman Dyson. He talks about Littlewood’s Law of Miracles:

“In the course of any normal person’s life, miracles happen at a rate of roughly one per month.” Dyson explains that “during the time that we are awake and actively engaged in living our lives, roughly for eight hours each day, we see and hear things happening at a rate of about one per second. So the total number of events that happen to us is about thirty thousand per day, or about a million per month. With few exceptions, these events are not miracles because they are insignificant. The chance of a miracle is about one per million events. Therefore we should expect about one miracle to happen, on the average, every month.”

So a miracle is basically a one in a million event, according to Littlewood who was a University of Cambridge mathematician. And we all have about a million little events in our lives every month. So we all get a miracle a month, or thereabouts (actually 35 days). See how cool math is? Of course, a miracle a month is rather commonplace, isn’t it?

Then, when observing and reporting events, there is the ever present loom of confirmation bias and anecdotal evidence, which is not very reliable, if at all.

One thing I’ve never understood is when people see Jesus or Mary in bird poop or a pizza pan or a stump. (Basic everyday pareidolia, of course). Nothing special happens except that they recognize a face in a random pattern. But before you know it a shrine is constructed and people are kissing the bird poop and praying at the stump. Not being religious, I find this completely silly, but they are True Believers. Does the miracle follow the sighting? I never hear about anyone claiming a bonifide miracle from one of these sightings. (Then again, no true miracle has ever been verified, not scientifically). And Mary needs a better agent if she’s reduced to showing up in bird poop, but that’s just my humble opinion.

Other resources:

Coincidences: Remarkable or Random?

Occam’s Razor: Part 1 of Our Critical Thinking Toolkit

Neece — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 01:54:47 +0000

The other day I wrote about Critical Thinking and how important it is. But knowing it’s good for you and actually using it in your daily life are two very different things. I want to put together a Critical Thinking Toolkit.

One important tool is going to be Occam’s Razor: “entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity” (entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem). That’s it in a nutshell right from William of Ockham, a Franciscan monk and English philosopher, theologian and logician in the 14th century.
Another way to put it is: The simplest explanation is usually the correct one. But don’t get confused by the term, simple. It means: The hypothesis with the fewest assumptions is usually the correct one. When giving explanatory reasons for something, don’t posit more than is necessary. Or, don’t make any more assumptions than you have to.

So let’s say you have 2 competing hypotheses that are basically equal in most respects. Then this principle would suggest that you choose the hypothesis that makes the fewest assumptions while still sufficiently answering the question. In science Occam’s Razor is used as a rule of thumb (a heuristic) to help researchers develop good models.

In your life it can help you make decisions and choose what to think and what to believe (or not believe). You can use it as a heuristic as well, a great rule of thumb in your Critical Thinking Toolkit.

Sometimes atheists use Occam’s Razor to argue against the existence of god since everything can be explained through natural means without complicating it with the supernatural.

Another example: Crop circles. There used to be 2 competing ideas for where crop circles came from. One was that flying saucers from an alien world made them. Another was that a person (or people) used some type of instrument to make the designs in the grass. Since there is no evidence for the flying saucers from outer space, and given how complicated and how many assumptions need to be made to make that argument work, Occam’s Razor would suggest that the simpler explanation would be that humans did it with instruments. That is the argument that makes less assumptions.

Of course, the second argument could be wrong, but until there was more information, it was the preferable hypothesis. Then 2 guys admitted to the crop circle hoax in the 1990′s. So that ended that debate for most people.

A quote by Carl Sagan is appropriate here: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. When it comes to the supernatural, Occam’s Razor is a very valuable tool indeed.

Sources:

Critical Thinking For Everyone

Neece — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 07:43:15 +0000

For some time now, I’ve wanted to talk to you about critical thinking. I remember the bad old days when most of my thinking was emotional and reactive and I had no idea that such a thing as critical thinking even existed. It wasn’t a happy time. Over the last few years I’ve learned to think for myself and I can’t express how liberating and empowering that is.

If there is one gift you can give to a child or anyone else, it is to teach them to think for themselves. The educational system doesn’t teach this important skill. It teaches rote memorization and focuses on test taking. Therefore it’s up to you to learn it for yourself.

Unfortunately, I’m self taught and have no formal training in this realm. Which means sharing it with you is harder. So instead of putting it off even longer, I thought maybe we could explore the subject together and develop a plan for sharing with others in our lives or on the web. First, let’s define it.

Here is a quote: [Critical thinking is a] desire to seek, patience to doubt, fondness to meditate, slowness to assert, readiness to consider, carefulness to dispose and set in order; and hatred for every kind of imposture. ~ Francis Bacon (1605)

Here is the short and sweet definition:

Critical Thinking: n: the mental process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information to reach an answer or conclusion.

But I’ve found that there are many different interpretations for this concept. You can see a whole page of them here.

Here’s another one:
“Critical thinking is best understood as the ability of thinkers to take charge of their own thinking. This requires that they develop sound criteria and standards for analyzing and assessing their own thinking and routinely use those criteria and standards to improve its quality.” Elder , L. and Paul, R. “Critical thinking: why we must transform our teaching.” Journal of Developmental Education, Fall 1994.

What makes a critical thinker? Here are some attributes:

asks pertinent questions
assesses statements and arguments
is able to admit a lack of understanding or information
has a sense of curiosity
is interested in finding new solutions
is able to clearly define a set of criteria for analyzing ideas
is willing to examine beliefs, assumptions, and opinions and weigh them against facts
listens carefully to others and is able to give feedback
sees that critical thinking is a lifelong process of self-assessment
suspends judgment until all facts have been gathered and considered
looks for evidence to support assumption and beliefs
is able to adjust opinions when new facts are found
looks for proof
examines problems closely
is able to reject information that is incorrect or irrelevant

Just about anyone can learn to think more critically. Even more importantly, you can use it in nearly every aspect of your daily living. You already think all the time, but if you are not consciously trying to think critically, your thoughts will be more biased, distorted, partial, uninformed and prejudiced. You’ll make decisions based on your emotions and feelings, you’ll rely on your “intuition” and your gut instinct, which can sometimes be useful but can often be quite flawed.

One way that flawed thinking is noticeable is through Logical Fallacies, which we talk about here at HDC.

Here are some other resources that you might find useful:

Well, that is enough to get us started. Do you have any great resources for learning to think critically that you would like to share?

What Level Of Woo Would Make Someone Undateable?

Neece — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 23:28:37 +0000

Here is a question for you. What level of woo would make someone undateable? What about unfriendable? Do you have a limit that you’ve drawn in your life or do you have a lot of woo woo people around you that you interact with? How do you get on with them? Do you find it difficult? Do you argue with them or are you silent about your woo disbelief?

Woo can be defined as anything supernatural, irrational or lacking in evidence. So it would include religion and any kind of pseudoscience.

On a side note, is there anything that could be defined as woo that you still believe in? If so, why?

For me, I’ve somehow whittled down my friend list from all woo-lovers to all skeptical atheists. I didn’t do this deliberately, but I guess with my skeptical talk and constant questioning (not aggressively, but I really did question all the woo I previously embraced), my woo-loving friends all went their separate ways and avoided me within months of when my quest for knowledge began.

I didn’t have many friends for awhile but then found the Morgantown Atheists where I found several people that have become good friends. Also, having HDC has let me meet new people who were rather like-minded as well.

With extended family, I still have to deal with woo, both religious and supernatural. They know Butch (my awesome husband) and I are die-hard atheists so we have come to an unspoken agreement that we don’t talk about religion. Or politics just to be safe and have nice dinners together.

I think I’m lucky in most respects. My skeptical atheist friends keep things lively by being smart and reason-based (most of the time, we’re not perfect, of course). And my extended family gives me an occasional glimpse into woo-land so I get to see what the majority of people are dealing with and believing. It’s enough.

I don’t avoid anyone based on their woo. But I tend to gently state my skepticism when I can so that I am not being dishonest about myself. Then people who are wrapped in woo tend to avoid me, not the other way around. I can’t emphasize enough that I am very nice about it, not aggressive or “militant” at all. I’m probably way too nice about it. The other evening, I let my sister-in-law go on about her visit to a psychic and only said two things about how cold readings work. When the other sister-in-law said the psychic (a 95 year old woman) insisted she give her her hand (she didn’t want a reading) and told her to never drive, to dump her boyfriend (who she just moved in with and is very happy with) and other negative things, I said a few things then. Mainly that it’s all made up and it’s nonsense and don’t let that upset her. But even though she said it was no big deal, she talked about it all night. I got the impression it really bothered her.

As you may know, I’m happily married to Butch (we’ve been together for 15 years). So I’m not looking to date anyone, of course. But if I did have to date, I think I would be pretty strict about how much woo my partner could be into and still be in a relationship with me. I think it would be such a clash of belief and skepticism that it would cause problems. I think I’d have issues with it.

Let us know what you think in the comments!

Atheists Deserve A Community Too

Neece — Mon, 03 May 2010 07:17:43 +0000

The other day I received the following email:

Without criticizing or judging your page in any way, I just would like to ask you, why are you so vocal about your non-beliefs?
Can you see any correlation to the obnoxious holy-rollers that most people dislike?
Perhaps its just a need for self-expression, expressed. I guess it was the “Atheist/Humanist/Skeptical/Freethinker Group” poll that got me. Why do you need help to think freely? Or company? How is it not the antithesis of a prayer group?
I just think perhaps you need balance. I found mine, or the closest I’ve ever come to it, in the martial arts. Self-defense, but a wonderful integration of the physical and the spiritual, however one defines that, and although its frequently tied to a religion, that can be left to the individual.
I ran across the movie “The Secret” and found your website from a Google search entitled “the secret is bullshit”.
Have a good one.
By the way, I am a political conservative and a Christian, although most would argue (if they were interested, which they are not) I am not a practicing one. Just a believer.

These days, when someone tries to subtly insult me, I usually just brush it off and move on. But this email reminded me that maybe I need to speak louder, slower and more clearly.

First, this blog is for atheists and skeptics, not christians and mindless believers. This blog is by a skeptical atheist for people who like to think and use their minds. If you don’t like it, no one is making you read it. Go mind your own business elsewhere. I’m not coming into your backyard and whining. I’ll thank you to give me the same courtesy.

Second, atheists are growing in number and we need community too. Not only do we need it, we deserve it, just like any other group in this country. In fact, it should be a basic human right to meet and socialize with like-minded individuals, especially for peaceful purposes. Unfortunately in some countries the people aren’t free and atheists are in danger if they expose themselves in any way. Now in Ireland it’s illegal to blaspheme. We’re going backwards!

Even small minority groups should be allowed to meet together and have a community. Why is that so threatening to believers? Why does that bother them so much? Well, here’s something interesting. After christianity, nonbelievers are the biggest group in America, bigger than judaism, islam, and all the others. In fact, we’re bigger than all those others combined. I guess that’s why they worry when we gather together. (Religion in the U.S.)

Third, my atheist meetings are not to help me think freely. I do that on my own. Mainly we get together to share ideas, learn new things, expand our minds, and share in our growing community of like-minded skeptical, freethinking nonbelievers. So only christians get to meet on a regular basis to have a community? You think christians have a monopoly on people spending time together? You think we’re uppity and should sit in the back of the bus? Get over yourselves.

Fourth, we are the antithesis of a prayer group, yes. Most definitely. Because we accomplish things. We get together to learn, expand our minds, stretch our horizons, to challenge our ways of thinking at times, to educate ourselves. And you know what? We also get together to help others. Sometimes we have donation drives for the less fortunate. We also have a campaign to help our local Botanic Garden in progress. One of our goals is to help our community. Pretty nifty, huh?

A prayer group is a bunch of people huddling together, praying to an unknown, unseen entity that has never answered a prayer. Ever. Why? Because he doesn’t exist. In hundreds of years of science, there has never been a rigorous scientific study that has found any evidence of god or the supernatural. Everything… EVERYTHING in this universe that we’ve investigated so far has turned out to be completely natural. No god needed. Especially not an angry local god from the Middle East with a penchant for wholesale slaughter and a bad temper. So sitting in a room praying to nothing does nothing. Nothing.

Why not go out and actually help someone in need instead of clasping your hands in prayer? Prayer merely lets the person praying feel superior for doing nothing but clasping their hands together.

How do atheists relate to obnoxious holy rollers? They don’t. Just because you compare two groups doesn’t mean they have anything in common. It’s completely meaningless.

We have ethics, while they shit on their own high and mighty biblical morals while preaching a hard-line moral code to their flock.
We get together in the name of reason, science, education and community. We are trying to build up good things. They preach and pray, people of one book, eschewing education, learning and critical thinking. They want people to stay the sheep that they are so they can bilk them for money. It’s greed and power, nothing more.

The list goes on and on. I don’t need to explain the good that our group does, even just by letting other atheists know they aren’t alone in a sea of religious dogma. That’s why we’re so vocal. There are many of us out there. We are now starting to gather together whether you like it or not. If you don’t like it, it’s probably because you feel threatened. I can see how reason, ethics and critical thinking can be scary.

If you’re a godless heathen, please consider joining a local group, an internet group, or forming your own. I wrote about how to start a group recently. While we aren’t going to agree on everything, you will probably be pleasantly surprised how awesome it is to hang out with like-minded heathens and critical thinkers. Who knows, it might do a lot of good for your community, but also for you! Let me know if you do.

What Would It Take To Make Me Believe In God?

Neece — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 15:37:02 +0000

So what would it take for me, a 7th degree black belt atheist, to believe in God? I’ve been thinking about this lately. Here’s what I’ve come up with so far.

1. God would have to personally reveal himself to me and correctly answer every question I throw at him.

2. God would have to reveal himself to every person on Earth at the same time, in a way that doesn’t make us all think we are suffering from some type of mass psychosis or delusion. Otherwise I might think I was just hallucinating.

3. God would have to demonstrate his power. He’d have to cure me and bring me to total health and fitness, end all suffering in the world instantly (after proclaiming to everyone that he would do so), end all wars, etc.

4. He would have to demonstrate his superior intelligence, and have an answer to every question that we have. He would have to have good answers for all of his stupid past behavior.

5. He would have to predict the future, in rigorous scientific experiments, with 100% accuracy.

6. He would have to bend the laws of physics and the natural world, but only in rigorous scientific experiments.

As you can see, I still won’t have blind faith. I would require testable, repeatable evidence in massive quantities to believe. In this sense, I wouldn’t “believe” so much as accept the evidence that would be available.

Now, if I believed in him, would I worship him? That’s a separate issue. I don’t think so, not the god of the bible. He’s a hateful, childish, vengeful, jealous, petty god with anger issues. I think I’d say thanks but no thanks. I require more godliness and love to actually worship anything. I also require a god that actually does good and not harm.

So what are your thoughts? I know my list isn’t complete. What else would you require to believe in God? And if you believed in him, what would it take for you to worship him?

Boobquake: Dress Immodestly For Science April 26

Neece — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 02:36:37 +0000

Update! Boobquake results are in: Our immodest hair and cleavage did not cause any earthquakes. In fact, the mean magnitude of quakes actually went down during the experiment. Read the full results over at Blag Hag.

Some ideas strike me as terribly clever. Jennifer over at Blag Hag decided to start something by asking women to dress immodestly to show that it doesn’t cause earthquakes. It was spurred on by some little Iranian man who said:

“Many women who do not dress modestly … lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes,” Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi was quoted as saying by Iranian media. Sedighi is Tehran’s acting Friday prayer leader.

Women in the Islamic Republic are required by law to cover from head to toe, but many, especially the young, ignore some of the more strict codes and wear tight coats and scarves pulled back that show much of the hair.

“What can we do to avoid being buried under the rubble?” Sedighi asked during a prayer sermon Friday. “There is no other solution but to take refuge in religion and to adapt our lives to Islam’s moral codes.”

“A divine authority told me to tell the people to make a general repentance. Why? Because calamities threaten us,” Sedighi said.

Minister of Welfare and Social Security Sadeq Mahsooli said prayers and pleas for forgiveness were the best “formulas to repel earthquakes.”

“We cannot invent a system that prevents earthquakes, but God has created this system and that is to avoid sins, to pray, to seek forgiveness, pay alms and self-sacrifice,” Mahsooli said.

So on April 26, I will show my cleavage for science. I dress for comfort, not looks, so I’m a perfect person to “tip the scales” towards total devastating earthquake on Monday April 26. This is a scientific experiment.

You can read the whole thing over at Blag Hag. She also clarifies that she’s not trying to offend anyone in a follow up.

There is a Facebook Event and you can twitter about it: #boobquake.

Here is what Jennifer says:

Sedighi claims that not dressing modestly causes earthquakes. If so, we should be able to test this claim scientifically. You all remember the homeopathy overdose?

Time for a Boobqauke.

On Monday, April 26th, I will wear the most cleavage-showing shirt I own. Yes, the one usually reserved for a night on the town. I encourage other female skeptics to join me and embrace the supposed supernatural power of their breasts. Or short shorts, if that’s your preferred form of immodesty. With the power of our scandalous bodies combined, we should surely produce an earthquake. If not, I’m sure Sedighi can come up with a rational explanation for why the ground didn’t rumble. And if we really get through to him, maybe it’ll be one involving plate tectonics.

So, who’s with me? I may be a D cup, but that will probably only produce a slight tremor on its own. If you’ll be joining me on twitter, use the tag #boobquake!

I think it would be good to post pictures to the facebook or twitter pages for scientific verification on the 26th, and to make sure to attend the event on Facebook, etc.

If you’re a skeptic woman, this is a good experiment. We’ll look for a significant increase in earthquake activity on April 26th to see if our immodesty pisses off God enough to tear the Earth apart in his jealous rage.

Again from Jennifer:

Dressing modestly won’t end earthquakes, so help out the victims of inevitable natural disasters at the Red Cross: http://www.redcross.org/

Heaving Dead Cats » Skeptical

I Believe In Miracles

Related posts

Occam’s Razor: Part 1 of Our Critical Thinking Toolkit

Related posts

Critical Thinking For Everyone

Related posts

What Level Of Woo Would Make Someone Undateable?

Related posts

Atheists Deserve A Community Too

Related posts

What Would It Take To Make Me Believe In God?

Related posts

Boobquake: Dress Immodestly For Science April 26

Related posts