Current Skepitcal Inquirer; All UFO issue

[edhopper]

FYI;
The current issue, January 2009, of Skeptical Inquirer is devoted to UFOs.
Of course no amount of debunking will stop the woos, but it's a good read.

[fadedrose]

1. I just speed-read an article there

http://www.csicop.org/si/2008-05/morrison.html

It's about Nibiru.

How this guy could go on and on without mentioning the name of Zechariah Stichin (has a website), who's written at least 9 books on the subject, covering Nibiru, man's evolution combined with alien dna tampering . . . is beyond me.

I read Sitchin's books maybe 6 or so years ago, and true or not, they are a fascinating read. THE TWELFTH PLANET is the first. Way over my head, most of it, but I understood enough to think that Sitchin makes a lot of sense.

I also speed read the Phonenix Lights Story on the Skeptical Inquirer website and saw where "hoax" makers debunk the sightings. I saw the hoax makers themselves debunked, but don't remember where, but Phoenix still takes the sightings seriousy.

[cosmik debris]

2. Why would a skeptic care about Zechariah Stichin

There are a lot of suckers who have fallen for this scam.

What makes that sucker more interesting than any other sucker?

They are all just suckers.

(Remember, this is the skeptics group. Not the support group for scam victims.)

[fadedrose]

3. I am becoming very skeptical of you skeptics

Colin Powell read Sitchin, so have the pope's top guys.

I don't believe everything he wrote, but some of it rings true.

He's very learned and knows ancient languages better than most of us in here know English...

The magazine can't talk about Sumerians without mentioning Sitchin, who figured out the theories they are discussing. 2012 doesn't figure to be the year Nibiru comes back (3600 year orbit), I don't know where that figure came from, but it's not from Sitchin. All kinds of doomsday sayers got their ideas from Sitchin but took the liberty of making up their own date.

According to SW Indian legends, 2012 is the end of history, but not because of Nibiru.

I read so much of that stuff that I can't remember any of it well enough to discuss it much further.

[Pale Blue Dot]

4. "Colin Powell read Sitchin, so have the pope's top guys."

:rofl:

[fadedrose]

5. Pope's astronomers (not astrologers)

and Powell - I put that there so that you would know that people very unlike myself have also read Sitchin.

Don't you ever go to Amazon to see about a book and then they say, "people who bought this book also bought..."

Do I have to explain everything???

[Pale Blue Dot]

13. "Pope's astronomers"

:rofl:

Have you ever heard of the argument from authority? Probably not. :rofl:

[fadedrose]

16. I don't understand your question nt

[nickgutierrez]

26. "Argument from authority" is a logical fallacy.

It assumes the truthfulness of a statement based not on a factual basis, but on the person making the statement.

You provided us with a classic example, two posts up. To us, by and large, it doesn't make a bit of difference whether the pope or Colin Powell or some sort of g-d read something asserting a certain brand of nonsense - it's still nonsense.

[moggie]

22. What do the Vatican's astronomers have to say about his theories?

I'm not interested in Powell, but what astronomers have to say about hypothetical planets is obviously of more value. So, do you have any favourable quotes?

Don't you ever go to Amazon to see about a book and then they say, "people who bought this book also bought..."

Er, what does that have to do with anything? People who bought The Lost Book of Enki also bought Ron Paul's The Revolution. Browsing through the "also bought" lists for Sitchin's books shows an awful lot of pseudoscience and conspiracy theory, and no real science or history.

[fadedrose]

23. I dunno

I read where the pope met with Sitchin...or his emmissary did. They have an observatory in the US, Arizona, Wyoming, I forget, some western state.

That Nibiru thingy at Skeptical Inquirer has nothing to do with Sitchin's theory. Only that there is a hypothetical planet that will return.

Sitchin's Nibiru passed earth maybe (I have to say maybe, I gave the book away some time ago) a million years ago. From memory (and I take Ginko because I'm 70) it seems that Mars bumped into Tiamet, which was a really huge planet. Tiamet split, part became Earth and the pieces became the asteroid belt. Our moon was not affected.

Every 3600 years, Nibiru made this eliptical orbit that swung around our sun to way out past Pluto and who knows after that. Sitchin claims that one of the times it came back was when the visitors "finished" man, and again when Moses crossed the red sea and other calamities happened, and perhaps another time when Joshua fit the battle of Jericho. Now I don't happen to believe the story of Moses the way it is in the bible because there's NO EVIDENCE but there are ruins of Jericho. So, I don't know when the Jerico thing happened, but it seems that Sitchin's Nibiru won't be around for hundreds of years...astronomers shouldn't be able to see it yet, if ever.

[cosmik debris]

6. Colin Powell? The one who fell for the WMD scam?

And he is your supporting witness?

:rofl:

I have to know, since you have been told several times that this is the skeptics group, and since you are a sucker, not a skeptic, what the hell are you doing in this group. What compels a person who obviously doesn't belong to linger where he is not respected or wanted? Are you agitating here just because you are an asshole, or is there some other reason? Maybe you feel the need to be humiliated?

[fadedrose]

8. You make me laugh...

All I have to do is read one of your posts and I giggle....

[cosmik debris]

10. So your purpose in disrupting this group is to get giggles?

How long do you expect that to last?

[fadedrose]

17. As long as you continue to sound like Don Rickles nt

[salvorhardin]

7. On what basis?

I don't believe everything he wrote, but some of it rings true.

On what basis do you form your opinion on what you believe about Sitchin's book and what you don't?

Colin Powell read Sitchin, so have the pope's top guys.

That's an argument from authority. Colin Powell may well be an excellent military strategist and "the pope's top guys" may well be tops in whatever field they're tops in, but why should I care what they think?

The magazine can't talk about Sumerians without mentioning Sitchin...

Why not? The article appears to be based on questions the author has received. If the questioners didn't mention Sitchin, then why should the author?

I read so much of that stuff that I can't remember any of it well enough to discuss it much further.

Isn't this really the same as saying, "I don't know enough to form an opinion"??? Then why would you then go ahead and form an opinion on the topic, and more to the point, an opinion at odds with the facts?

[fadedrose]

9. I believe in his theory about man...

How evolution took man out of the ocean and made him into a hairy human like early man. I think I like the idea that aliens on Nibiru using their dna knowhow and finishing man to what he is now. The creature they used was docile and non-meat eating and they altered his dna.

I don't know if I buy the reason that the Nibiruns messed around with man..they wanted workers to work in mines to get gold for their atmosphere. They were warlike, greedy and jealous of each other.

I am skeptical of the biblical story of creation, no, not skeptical, I just don't believe it. Ya, Cain went away and found a wife...who in the hell could believe that? And the earth is billions of years old..

My problem with evolution is that I thought evolution meant evolving into something that was better suited to earth's environment. Man did not evolve well. We lost our feathers, fur, nighttime vision, ability to fly, live in water. What we gained was intelligence (debris thinks I have none) and a glorious musical talent and appreciation. Millions of tunes, instruments, types of music - this had to be by intelligent design.
Plus, we are a virus. We need homes, shelter, heat, clothing, etc...

THe creature who was hairy and docile and walked upright was better suited to the earth.

I can buy the 3600 year orbit, but it's just not time yet.

When it's late and I'm sleepy I say all kind of goofy stuff that the next morning I wonder why did I say that...better close.

Am skeptical of that magazine..

[TZ]

11. I would suggest you read a bit more evolutionary biology

and a bit less self serving woo. (ie the theories you purport sound like they are more to sell books more than anything else)
If you think man didn't evolve well then you have NOT studied actual biology (and I have).
There is plenty of biological evidence to support man's evolution.
There is ZIP EVIDENCE to support your claims.
So you are skeptical of people who like to have scientific proof (and I don't consider he wrote a book so he must be right evidence) before they are convinced of anything? I suggest you read about what skepticism really IS...
http://wikipedia.ws/wikipedia/sc/Scientific_skepticism.html
"When we hear a fantastic claim we say, "that's nice, prove it."." So far you have not given any acceptable proof of the claims you have made re:UFO's. Therefore we remain skeptical.

[cosmik debris]

12. Education won't help her.

She is disrupting this forum for her own amusement.

I feel certain she will not stop until the moderators intervene.

[fadedrose]

18. The only thing

that I claimed about UFO's is I wonder what they are. Never went any further than that, and I still wonder what they are.

As far as evolving goes, my common sense tells me that somethin' didn't go right. We can't live without destroying or polluting what's around us. The only animals guilty of that are possibly the ones we moved from their element to another for our amusement.

[greyl]

25. Common sense isn't as reliable as it says it is.

fadedrose: As far as evolving goes, my common sense tells me that somethin' didn't go right. We can't live without destroying or polluting what's around us.

You are assuming that what is true for our culture is true for all of the human species. Our culture is neither the sole, nor ultimate example of how homo sapiens sapiens live. You do realize there are many other cultures out there, right?

The second image here represents reality much better than the first:

[salvorhardin]

15. As turtlensue noted, part of the problem is that you don't really understand evolution

You don't understand what evolution is, or how it works. I'm not trying to be mean when I say this. The popular portrayal of evolution is highly inaccurate so if that's all you've got to go on you're very likely to come to some very strange conclusions. Complicating the matter is that there are players out there consciously trying to muddy the waters, such as The Discovery Institute.

If you're interested, and it sounds like you are, then a good jumping off point is this article appearing in New Scientist from earlier this year.
Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13620?DCMP=NLC-nletter&nsref=dn13620

Going further in depth is the excellent Understanding Evolution site, sponsored by the Museum of Paleontology, University of California, Berkeley
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_01

Finally, the National Center for Science Education has a number of easily understood primers online.
http://ncseweb.org/evolution/science/evolution-primers

As far as Sitchin's bad science fiction, I can suggest a much better piece of science fiction with a similar storyline. James P. Hogan's Inherit The Stars is the first installment of his Giants trilogy (sometimes collected as The Minervan Experiment). It's notably different than Sitchin's book in that it doesn't lie about being fiction and that the story actually imparts a little bit about how science and scientists work. Which is kind of sad in a way because in recent years Hogan has become something of a crank follower of pseudoscience along with becoming a HIV/AIDS and holocaust denialist.
http://www.amazon.com/Giants-Novels-Inherit-Gentle-Ganymede/dp/0345388852

[fadedrose]

19. I will read the links you post, I promise

and I am interested.

Thank you for your post - I really appreciate it.

[fadedrose]

28. Just got a reply to my email inquiring as to whether...

my local library had the Giants Trilogy and it said:

"This is available in our network so if you go to your local library they will be able to place an interlibrary loan request for you.
Yours truly,
Barbara King
Reference Librarian"

And I emailed my request the day you posted this...long time to wait.
I wasn't quite sure how to ask for it:

"James P. Hogan's Inherit The Stars is the first installment of his Giants trilogy (sometimes collected as The Minervan Experiment)."

Too bad he's a nut who doesn't believe in the holocaust. Nobody's perfect.

I don't know why I have to go to the library to get the book(s), but I just happen to be going tomorrow, taking my grandson to the library's used book sale to get him a bagful...

Have been very busy since Christmas, baking, company, and reading..I hope to get to some of the other links you post when I finish up some of the stack I have now.

Thanks again.

[cosmik debris]

29. Please remember, it is FICTION.

That means it is not true.

That means he just made it up.

That means it has no basis in fact.

That means you should not believe it.

That means he is not telling the truth.

Get the picture?

[Orrex]

31. What are you trying to say?

:wtf:

[cosmik debris]

32. It was pointed out by several posters

That fadedrose did not understand the theory of evolution by natural selection.

Salvorhardin was kind enough to recommend several sources that may improve her understanding of that theory.

She chose the ONLY one in the list that was fiction.

It was clear from her previous posts that she had been more influenced by fiction than by fact.

It was clear from her previous posts that she is not particularly good at distinguishing the difference between fact and fiction.

It was clear from her previous posts that she tends to believe whatever she reads.

I thought it might be appropriate to point out that books written for entertainment are not as reliable for information as books written to educate.

She had admitted that she accepted as fact parts of another sci-fi novel.

I thought it might be appropriate to forestall that repetition.

[Orrex]

33. Does this mean that The Hobbit is not an accurate travelogue?

Good grief--I'll seriously need to reevaluate my reading list!

[fadedrose]

35. There was a time I was too snobby to read fiction

I read about birds, gardening, trees, shrubs, etc., and religion. Mostly critical books. Lived near a university that had more books in its religion section than the library in my town has in its whole library.

Wanted to die for a while, so I started reading the bible to find out how to get to heaven, see'in as how I knew some folks there. Bible didn't say where heaven was. So I went into Christian origins, Dead Sea scrolls, the Pseudepigrapha, the Jesus Seminar, Barbara Theiring (author of Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls - what a read, churches made quite a fuss about it)...anyhow, I came away with the conclusion that nothing I believed was true and religion was a means of controlling people and making money in some cases. But, I did stop wanting to die.

Discovered fiction through my daughter, who loves it. I now appreciate how difficult it is to come up with a mystery, characters, plot, clues, humor, and what skill it takes to hold my interest for 300-400 pages. It is a gift both to write and enjoy it and I feel sorry for you if you can't enjoy a good mystery. Very relaxing compared to nonfiction.

[fadedrose]

37. I don't know what science fiction novel you speak about nt

[WoodrowFan]

34. Huh??

http://notalwaysright.com/thats-commitment/1448


Me: “Thank you for calling your local 24-hour pharmacy, how may I help you?”

Customer: “Yeah, what time do you close?”

Me: “Sir, we never close. We’re open 24 hours.”

Customer: “Well, that’s just ridiculous. How can you put up with that?”

Me: “Sir?”

Customer: “So if I show up at 4 in the morning with a prescription, you’d be there?”

Me: “Yes sir, we’d be open.”

Customer: “And what time do you open?”

Me: “Sir…we never close, we are always open. Think of it like a 24-hour diner; there’s always someone here to help you.”

Customer: “Oh man, that must stink - when do you get time to go home and sleep?!”

Me: “Er…we have cots in the back.”

[salvorhardin]

30. Good reading then!

I hope you like them. I recently reread Inherit The Stars after finding it in a used bookstore for $1. It's a very entertaining and fast-paced read although it's a bit of an anachronism in science fiction. Although written in 1977 one could mistake it as being right out of the golden age. Characterization is extremely two-dimensional, there's no real character development and women are relegated to all but a minor role. As I mentioned, one of the highlights of Inherit The Stars is that it gives a fair representation of how real science works. That's also one of the novel's flaws as there are long lecture-ish passages about what we knew of evolutionary development at the time. For all its flaws though, Inherit The Stars is a highlight of hard science fiction. It's been nearly twenty years since I read the other two books in the series and to my memory they don't hold up as well, but I'd certainly reread them if I ever come across a copy.

[fadedrose]

38. I'm on about pp 50 of Inherit the Starts..

and Hogan has a very nice style of writing. I think I'll like the books (tho they're all in one volume).



But...Like it or not.....Sitchin is not fiction.....he has more degrees than a thermometer.....and may interpret things in a way that other scientists disagree ......but these things do exist (cave drawings, artifacts, temples, etc)....and there is no "story" as in a novel.

Even so, I do NOT believe everything he says, but some things give me pause. If no one else here has read him, how can anyone have the nerve to ridicule him or me - based on some other person's views?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

39. Hmm?

"If no one else here has read him, how can anyone have the nerve to ridicule him or me - based on some other person's views?"

Because he (and you?) believe that people are descended from aliens that crashed here thousands of years ago. Based on his interpretations of ancient sumerian literature.

Any way you cut it, that's just dumb.

[fadedrose]

40. Have you read any of his books? nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

41. Why the fuck would I waste time reading that shit?

:shrug:

[salvorhardin]

42. "....he has more degrees than a thermometer..."

Can you please list Sitchin's degrees, from which universities he earned them, and when?


As far as I know he only has one degree, and it's not even an advanced one, from the University of London in Economic History.

The lack of any degree in Astronomy or Earth Science might explain why Sitchin doesn't seem to understand that the seasons are due to the tilt of the Earth and not its distance from the sun. Or that Nebiru would spend 99% of its time in near total darkness.

[fadedrose]

44. You are right, I was wrong...

According to this pro-Sitchin website:

"Zecharia Sitchin was born in Russia and raised in Palestine, where he acquired a profound knowledge of modern and ancient Hebrew, other Semitic and European languages, the Old Testament, and the history and archeology of the Near East. He is one of the few scholars who is able to read and understand Sumerian. Sitchin attended and graduated from the University of London, majoring in economic history. A leading journalist and editor in Israel for many years, he now lives and writes in New York."
- Connecting Link Issue 17

I assumed that to become knowledgeable in ancient languages, Sumerian, Accadian, etc., that one had to have studied at a higher institution.

I don't know about the earth tilt problem you mention, but I'm sure he is aware of it.

I haven't read Sitchin for at least 9 years or so and can't remember much of it, only the main conclusions. I do know that he drew from all sources, including mythology, Greek gods and the like, to come up with his theories. And he compared flood stories from many sources.

Some critics are religious and have attacked his writings because they more or less do not agree with the bible's creation of man and other key events.

[fadedrose]

36. I read the first link you posted

and many of the links it mentions. I found it had many words, same as Sitchin - he has many words too.

There was no proof, no DNA charts, no pictures of the evolving man (only drawings).

When President Obama was in 7th grade, I had my library order "The Minervan Experiment," and guess what, it came today, 2/24. Finally. I have 21 days to read it. I'll let'cha know how I like it - it looks pretty old, and and it seems like a long read.

[Silent3]

27. If your argument held up, every animal other than man...

...would be a feathery, furry, night-seeing, flying, swimming, running thing with great night vision. Nothing has "evolved well" by the standard you propose.

What you fail to understand is that many seemingly positive features in one environment are detriments in another. Fur and feathers are great for keeping warm, but they're terrible for avoiding parasites like fleas and lice. Larger eyes suitable for night vision are more vulnerable to injury simply by virtue of being a larger target, plus they displace room in the skull that could be used for larger sinuses, a thicker, more-protective skull, or a larger brain. Bodies best suited for living aquatically are less well suited for handling tools or walking on land.

What we gained was intelligence (debris thinks I have none) and a glorious musical talent and appreciation. Millions of tunes, instruments, types of music - this had to be by intelligent design.

It has to be by intelligent design because you assert that it has to be? Because you simply can't imagine the benefit? Because you mistakenly think only traits which directly promote survival in the wild can be produced by evolution?

Our appreciation of music might simply be a side effect of other brain developments, like those supporting our language ability, which do have clear survival benefits.

Suppose a specific mutation alters a protein that controls the length of teeth. For a predator, this might be a beneficial mutation, and the mutation will give the predator an advantage which favors the frequency of that mutation in the gene pool. The very same mutation might also make the nose slightly smaller, or change the color of the fur, but as long as those changes don't create any competitive disadvantages that cancel out the long-tooth advantage, those changes simply go along for the ride.

[edhopper]

14. Morrison answers this

in the current issue (you know, the one I recommend you read).
He basically says that he was answering direct questions to NASA as an Astrobiologist. And he is not competent to discuss ancient myths.
He also says that of the 500 or so letters on this subject, only three or four mentioned Stichin.
The full answer is in the letters section.

[fadedrose]

20. Would this be the Jan-Feb issue?

"UFOlogy 2009: A Six-Decade Perspective" is the title of the article? And you say "Morrison" is the guy to look for?

Anyway, the first time I looked up the magazine it didn't list this issue, so I think I went to a site showing older issues...

Thank you and I will read....

Just a glance at it has peaked my interest.

It's easy to find UFO sites, but most of them are by people who believe in a lot more than I do, but I am still curious.

[edhopper]

24. Yes that issue

in the letters section in the back.

[fadedrose]

21. Can't find letters section...

Was surprised to not see a book I read years ago, JESUS AND THE RIDDLE OF THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS by Margaret Theiring when I was looking thru the index. This is an interesting magazine.

[Orrex]

43. Wasn't Nibiru the demon/bad-guy in the Blue Devil comic book series?

Oh, wait. That was Nebiros.



Anyway, I'd rather read the comic book than that Sitchin crap.