Can't tell if dumb bigots... or trolling (actually, I'm pretty sure it's trolling)

A few days ago while lurking around one of several skeptic Facebook groups that I belong too I came across this article from a website called Pink News.

The article was in concern over a flyer that was being posted around Clintonville, Ohio for... well, you can see for yourself:

Weirder things have happened, i suppose. Straight White Guy Festival, anyone? http://t.co/0mQKcItnOS pic.twitter.com/kib7tlx9hz
— Lauren Bagley (@TheREDison) July 18, 2014

Yes... you're reading that right. It's a flyer for a Straight White Guy Festival.

Now, I know many of you are probably thinking "this can't be real, right"?

Well it could be real because despite our society's advances in the field of race relations, there are still racist people in this country, but I don't think it's real, and I have several reasons why I believe this is so.

Lets take a look at what is not on this flyer that most would have had.

First, there's no contact information of any kind on these flyers.

Most racist groups would have placed on such a flyer either a mailing address, or a phone number, or an e-mail address. At the very least they would have put a website name on there inorder to help promote their group if they were unwilling to place on the flyer direct contact information.

The second thing that caught my eye is that the flyer doesn't say who is putting on and sponsoring this festival.

Any racist or bigoted group that was putting on and sponsoring such an event would not have left their name off. Most hate groups want people to know that they are sponsoring such an event in hopes of recruiting people into their group.

At the very least they would have put the name of a front group on the flyer in an attempt to hide who is really organizing this so called festival, while at the same time trying to recruit new members.

Now lets take a look at what the flyer does say on it.

First is the title of this "event" Straight White Guy Festival.

The name of this alleged festival looks more like something a dumb college frat boy would have created and doesn't realize that this sort of thing is racist and bigoted as hell, rather than a person that is part of a racist and bigoted group.

Now before anyone says it I'm very well aware that bigots are not known for their intelligence, but atleast they would try to come up with something a little more creative than that.

Second thing I noticed about the flyer was that it contradicted itself.

The flyer says "Come help us celebrate our enjoyment of being straight white and male" but it also says "Everyone welcome".

If this festival is intended for straight white males then how come the flyer is also saying that anyone who is not straight, white, or male can attend?

A racist and bigoted group would never have put "Everyone welcome" on such a flyer. They either would have put nothing on there, or they would have made it very clear that only straight white males would have been allowed to attend (or atleast straight white people).

The final thing about this flyer that leads me to believe that someone is trolling in real life is that while there is a location for this "festival", a date, a time, and that beer will be available, according to WBNS-10TV no permits have been taken for such a festival, and while I'm not sure of the local laws concerning festivals at local parks, most places would make you apply for a permit to hold such an event, and to sell beer at it.

Taking all these things into consideration I can only come to the conclusion that this is some kind of joke.

I'm not sure if the person that created these flyers intended on them being racist or anti-racist, but it's still pretty offensive either way.

Ofcourse it could be real and some racist group is intending to hold a festival without getting or knowing they have to get permits first, as well as not knowing how to make a proper flyer.

If they have their festival they'll find out the hard way that you need to have the proper permits.

10 Lies Anti-vaccers tell

The anti-vaccination has caused alot of harm over the years with their fear mongering and lies. These lies have caused parents to become to afraid to vaccinate their children, and themselves as well, despite the danger in not doing so.

The following is a list of ten lies the anti-vaccination movement has told, and why they are just bogus:

10. Studies indicate that vaccines cause autism.

While there are "studies" that claim that vaccines cause autism, only one of these so called studies have been published in a well respected, peer reviewed scientific and medical journal. That study, the Wakefield study (which was published in The Lancet in 1998) was retracted in 2010 after it had been discovered that the main author of the study, Andrew Wakefield, had committed fraud. On top of that the findings in the study itself had been long since discredited and disproved before the formal retraction.

The studies that followed since the Wakefield study that claim that vaccines cause autism have never been published in any credible medical or scientific journals. The only places that these studies have ever been published are either in non-credible pay-for-publish journals, or websites that promote alternative medicine and/or conspiracy theories.

9. Signs of autism show up in children only after they have been vaccinated.

As the old skeptics' saying goes "correlation does not equal causation".

Just because a child starts to show obvious signs of autism after they have had their vaccinations, it's far more likely that they were showing signs of autism before they received their vaccinations and that no one noticed simply because the child was to young to show any noticable signs of autism to anyone but trained professionals.

8. Adverse reactions to vaccines are common, often severe, and can cause death.

Actually only about one out of every 300 people will have adverse reactions to vaccines. Most of the time these adverse reaction are mirror, short lived, and are more annoying than debilitating.

Occasionally a person will have a severe adverse reaction to a vaccine, some of which can be fatal, but these types of adverse reactions are very rare, only about one to two out of every million people. You have better odds dying in a car wreck to get a vaccination than you from the vaccination.

7. Vaccines have never been shown to be effective against reducing the spread of disease, and has even been shown to increase the spread.

I'm sure smallpox and polio would disagree. Actually alot of diseases would disagree because it's been proven time and time again that anytime vaccines were in wide spread use the rate of infections of a disease that the vaccines are meant to protect against will go down dramatically, sometimes even eliminating a disease in an area.

6. Natural immunity is superior to immunity via vaccination.

If you try to get natural immunity from a disease (i.e. getting infected and sick from said disease) there is a pretty good possibility that the disease that you hope to make yourself or your child immune from will actually kill you or your child, or atleast cause a permanent disability. Also in many cases it takes several weeks for this form of immunity to happen, during which time you will be sick as heck.

On the other hand immunity via vaccination is much faster, doesn't leave you sick, and is far, FAR less likely to kill you than getting immunity from a disease by getting infected by that disease.

5. Vaccines contain aborted fetuses.

This is completely false and is a distortion of the fact that the weakened forms of some viruses in vaccines are grown in a culture of cell lines derived from fetal tissue of fetuses aborted in the 1960's.

There are no fetal cells at all in vaccines.

4. Vaccines cause shaken baby syndrome.

No, rapidly shaking a baby back and forth and causing their head to flop around causes shaken baby syndrome.

This isn't even just a bold faced lie, this is child abuse apology.

3. Vaccines contain high amounts of toxic ingredients.

While vaccines do contain chemicals that in high enough amounts are toxic to humans, the amounts of these toxins in vaccines are so low that it wouldn't hurt anyone even if they took that chemicals by itself.

As the old saying goes "the dose makes the poison" and no vaccine contains enough of a certain chemical to make it poisonous.

2. Vaccines cause SIDS.

While DPT/DPaT vaccines have been suspected of being one of the causes of SIDS in the past, current studies into SIDS point to that abnormalities in the development and function of medullary serotonin may be the more likely cause of SIDS, and that vaccines do not cause SIDS at all.

1. Most diseases meant to be prevented by vaccines are rare and mostly harmless, and thus there is no reason to vaccinate.

Most diseases prevented by vaccines use to be rare, but a few diseases such as measles and mumps are making a comeback due to people not getting their children the MMR vaccine. Outbreaks of more common diseases such as the flu and whooping cough are made worse if large groups of people do not get vaccinated.

Also, while many people can get over these diseases they are far from harmless and can kill, especially if the person is very old, or very young, or has something wrong with their immune system and they are unable to fight off the disease.

Even if a disease is rare there is still no reason not to vaccinate against it, as vaccinating will help guarantee that disease remains rare, and may even wipe out that disease.

5 Things I've noticed about... Mike Adams

Mike Adams, the creator of the website Natural News, and one of the biggest promoters of alternative medicine there is, also known as non-science and non-evidence based medicine.

Now many things have been said about him and the way he acts, and I myself have noticed a few things about him as well.

So here are five things I've noticed about Mike Adams:

5. He's a conspiracy theorist.

Mike Adams, despite the fact that his website, Natural News, constantly writes about stuff related to medicine (by that I mean bad mouthing science and evidence based medicine and promoting alternative medicine, no matter how ridiculous or dangerous it is) is neither a doctor, nor a scientist. He is a conspiracy theorist who promotes just about every conspiracy theory there is, although he mainly promotes "big pharma" conspiracy theories.

Even if he was an actual doctor or scientist with a legitimate degree in either science or medicine it still wouldn't matter, because what he's promoting is non-science based medicine, as well as other types of conspiracy theories besides just the big pharma ones, and he's using fear mongering and paranoia inorder to promote these things, as well as bash science and evidence based medicine.

Pretty much his only "connection" with the health industry is his self appointed title of "The Health Ranger", and that his website is used as an example by those in the health care industry and those who promote science based medicine as what a bad science website looks like.

4. He's against all forms of science based medicine.

Mike Adams isn't just someone whom believes that there are a few types of science based medicines and medical techniques that are bad for you. Nope, he's against them all, no matter how much scientific evidence there is showing that something works, like chemotherapy, or vaccines, or drugs that help fight HIV (which he thinks doesn't exist in the first place).

It almost seems like anything that's accepted and promoted by a valid and respected medical organization is automatically viewed by Adams as dangerous and part of a conspiracy. I bet he would even tell people who come to his website not to use homeopathy, acupuncture, or chiropractic "medicine" if several legitimate medical associations were to come out and say that this stuff works and works well. Infact I bet he would claim that people in homeopathy, acupuncture, or chiropractic "medicine" were hiding the fact that their stuff doesn't work, and that they were sending out shills, or just using brain washed idiots to spread disinformation and make threats to try to scare off people who questions them, and even go so far as to sue people who criticize them...

Hopefully you see the irony in the that last sentence there.

3. He's created a website that's a perfect example of Scopie's Law.

Scopie' Law read's as this:

"In any discussion involving science or medicine, citing Whale.to as a credible source loses you the argument immediately... and gets you laughed out of the room."

While the original internet law is referring to another pseudoscience and conspiracy theory promoting website, Whale.to, it can easily be applied to Natural News. Infact some people even mistake Natural News as being the website originally talked about in Scopie's Law, and not Whale.to simply due to it's notoriousness for being wrong about everything.

Citing Natural News for anything other than an example of what a really bad science website looks like will make even the most open minded of skeptics disregard either an article or someone's argument, and pretty much view it as being bogus and full of lies.

2. He hates skeptics.

All conspiracy theorists and promoters of pseudoscience hates skeptics. Mike Adams is no exception. What is exceptional however is his venomousness towards skeptics [read here for an example].

He thinks that skeptics are willing to accept anything that "big pharma" says is good without question, and that we're all mindless zombies, simply because we don't believe what he believes, when in reality we accept science and evidence instead of unproven or disproven claims.

That's is just how he feels about your average skeptic like myself. Now with professional and famous skeptics, he thinks they are outright evil and has accused many of them of committing just about every sort of crime there is.

Maybe he doesn't actually not like skeptics? Maybe he just doesn't like people telling him he's wrong, and then using science and evidence to show him why he's wrong.

1. He's the perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

What the Dunning-Kruger effect basically states is that people who are not very intelligent will often overestimate their own intelligence and don't question themselves over whether or not they are right or wrong.

Mike Adams is a prefect example of this.

His articles on his website are written in such a way that while it's obvious to most people that he doesn't know what he's talking about, it's also quite obvious that he thinks he knows what he is talking about.

This is probably the reason why he created a website like Natural News in the first place. He believes that alternative medicine is good for you, and that everything else is bad, and because he is so confident in his own intelligence he doesn't second guess himself, and doesn't believe that you should either.

How perception is used for deception in promoting pseudoscience and conspiracy theories

Perception is one of the most commonly used tools of advertisers. If done correctly it can be used to sell a person a product or an idea, even if it's something they do not want or need. All you need is an image combined with some information (factual or not) that catches a person's eye and makes them interested in whatever is being sold which ultimately leads them to buying whatever it is that is being sold.

Promoters of pseudoscience and conspiracy theories know this as well, and will often times create pictures on the internet of images coupled with text in an attempt to get you to "buy" whatever claims that they are making.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about:

Looks nice, doesn't it? The pretty, smiling young woman that catches your eye and causes you to read whatever it is that the picture says and perhaps even gets you to try or believe whatever it is that the text is saying, which in this case is an advertisement to get people to try out Earthing.

This is an example of using positive images inorder to fool people into believing that something that isn't true. In this case it the original creator wants you to believe that Earthing works.

Now lets take a look at this next picture, courtesy of Illuminutti.com:

Not as nice looking as the previous picture, is it?

Except for the photo in the bottom left side of the page, everything else about this picture is exactly the same as the one above this one.

Most people probably would not have bothered to read the text on the second picture due to the shear fact that they would be to disgusted by the photo to bother read the text. Even if a person did read the text they probably wouldn't try Earthing in the first place out of shear fear of ending up like that guy.

This is ofcourse why the creators of the first photo wouldn't use such a photo. They know that such a photo would probably make a person sick to their stomach and not even bother to read the text, more or less be even interested in Earthing.

Ofcourse while positive images work very well in promoting pseudoscience and conspiracy theories, negative images can often have the same impact, if not more so than positive images if it's done right:

Now for many people if they saw something like that and then read the text they would probably never eat any GMO foods again, and they probably wouldn't bother to do any research into the claims either. They would just see the image and be to scared to actually investigate what the text is saying, which is probably what the creators of that picture intended it to cause people do.

The fact is that anytime you see stuff like this on the internet you should always question the claims being made, and always assume that whomever made it is trying to screw with your perception inorder to deceive you and get you to to believe them without questioning their claims.

And down goes the DMCA hammer... or does it?

As many of you are probably aware of one of my favorite skeptics and debunkers, Myles Power, is being harassed by the creators of the HIV/AIDS denialist film, House of Numbers, by filing false DMCA takedown notices on Youtube concerning a set of five videos that Myles has made criticizing and debunking that film and showing the world just how deceptive it is.

Now, the creators of House of Numbers have made the killing blow and filed a forth DMCA takedown notice that will get his channel deleted in about a week from now.

This is wrong on so many levels. It is censorship of the worst kind. The makers of this film are trying to suppress the truth about their film and this can not be allowed!

Fortunately one of his friends, Science of Sarcasm, has uploaded all five videos on another video sharing website.

Now you can go to SoS's website and watch the videos there, or you can watch all five videos right below:


Debunking House of Numbers Part 1 by scienceofsarcasm



Debunking House of Numbers Part 2 by scienceofsarcasm


Debunking House of Numbers Part 3 by scienceofsarcasm


Debunking House of Numbers Part 4 by scienceofsarcasm


Debunking House of Numbers Part 5 by scienceofsarcasm

You if have a program that will allow you to download these videos (I'm using YTD Downloader myself, just incase you don't have a program that will let you download from Dailymotion, I recommend this one) please do so and reupload these videos on ANY of the popular video sites.

Do not let these people get away with this! Let them find out what the Streisand effect is, and let them find out just what happen when you try to silence free speech on the internet, or anywhere.

I hope that Myles fights this, and that he continues making more videos debunking House of Numbers, and Myles if you are reading this on behalf of the skeptics community we are with you!

Update: Petition asking Youtube to lift the DMCA takedown notices against Myles Power

A petition has been started on Change.org asking Youtube to lift the DMCA takedown notices. I ask everyone here to please it and tell Youtube to lift these notices against Myles and to stop these false DMCA takedown notices being brought against him!

https://www.change.org/petitions/youtube-lift-the-dmcas-filed-against-myles-power-powem1985-by-knowledge-matters-llc

Update: Parts 1, 2, & 3 are back up

I just check out Myles's Youtube page and parts one, two, & three are back up. Part five is still down, but you can still find that everywhere on Youtube, just search for "debunking House of Numbers" and you should easily find it.

Hopefully part five will be back up soon and that Myles will be able to finish what he started, but atleast his page is no longer in danger of being taken down.

Update: Part 5 is back up

Part Five of Debunking House of Numbers is finally back. All five videos are back up for all to view.

Myles Power and his DMCA Situation

A very messed up situation has been going on for the past few days concerning a series of videos by one of my favorite science promoters and debunkers on Youtube, Myles Power.

His videos in which he debunks the AIDS denialist movie House of Numbers are being sent illegal DMCA takedown notices by Martin Penny and Knowledge Matters, the creators of House of Numbers, and this is after he got sent a takedown notice by a conspiracy theorist by the name of Liam Scheff (which he later retracted), who was interviewed in the film and presented as an investigative journalist, but as you can see in this screen shot you can tell just what type of person he really is:

So, why is it that these people do not want you to see these videos? Could it be that they do not wish for you to not know the truth about their film, and how deceptive it is? Could it be that they don't want you to find out the truth about HIV/AIDS denialism, and how dangerous and deadly it is?

Well, I think that you do deserve to know the truth!

So please watch the fifth part of Myles's debunking of House of Numbers and see what Liam and the creators of that movie do not want you to see:



Also, please listen to Myles's statement on this whole situation as well:



If you wish to read his statement on this situation please go to his Facebook page and his blog.

Should we call Conspiracy Theorists "Conspiracy Theorists"?

Of all the things that I have observed about conspiracy theorists one of the things that has always stood out about them to me is that they hate the terms "conspiracy theorist" and "conspiracy theory". This is for two different reasons:

The primary reason is because they consider the terms to be insulting. This is actually understandable because skeptics and debunkers have used these terms in insulting tones and in an insulting way.

The secondary reason is because they claim that both terms to be "shill" words that were created by the CIA to discourage people from believing in a conspiracy theory (the terms actually first came into use in the late 1800's to early 1900's and pre-dates the CIA, it only came to be used in a derogatory way in the mid 1960's, but there is no evidence to suggest that the CIA had anything to do with that). Some even claim that only "shills" use the terms conspiracy theory and conspiracy theorist. Whether they actually believe this or are just claiming this inorder to get people to stop using these terms and/or to scare a skeptic off is another question entirely.

Regardless of the reasons why, the fact is that conspiracy theorists do not like the terms conspiracy theorist and conspiracy theory, and to be all honest I don't really like those terms either. The reason for this is that simply put a theory is based off of facts and evidence. Conspiracy theories are rarely made up of facts and evidence, and even the ones that do have some facts and evidence behind them are often mangled by conspiracy theorists and is manipulated into something that it is infact not...

To put it bluntly in my personal opinion using the word "theory" in conspiracy theory (and by extension conspiracy theorist) is actually inaccurate and inappropriate.

So what would be an accurate and appropriate term to replace conspiracy theory and theorist with?

From the conspiracy theorist side I've heard the terms "conspiracy realist" and "conspiracy fact". Both are obviously (atleast to a skeptic) inaccurate as hell due to the fact that conspiracy theories are rarely proven to be fact (most conspiracy theories that exist today either have been either disproven, or atleast have never been proven) and that most conspiracy theorists (especially the hardcore ones) aren't that realistic about... well anything really.

On the flip side however you have suggestions by skeptics like myself who have suggested terms such as "conspiracy lunatic", "conspiracy nut", and ofcourse paranoid conspiracy theorist and theory. While these terms may be more accurate (although the last one still uses the word theory) it is inappropriate because it does blatantly insult a person that seriously believes in conspiracy theories.

So the question remains is this: if none of these terms are either accurate and/or appropriate, then what would be an accurate and appropriate term to use in place of conspiracy theory and theorist?

Well, I have heard one suggestion that I feel is both appropriate and accurate, and it comes from a surprising source: Conspiracy theorists.

The term I am talking about is conspiracy hypothesis and hypothesizer.

These terms would be far more accurate as a hypothesis is what a person logically guesses (this varies from person to person) based off of an observation, as this is what a conspiracy theorist (or should I say hypothesizer) tends to do (minus the logic part): make observations. The only difference is that they often time just jump straight to the conclusion without gathering any real evidence.

I know that some of you will disagree with me on this, but think about it, aren't all conspiracy theories just based off of the opinions based off of someone's observations rather than actual facts and evidence?

Obama ordered $1 billion worth of disposable coffins for use in FEMA camps? More BS fear mongering.

Reblogged from Is that a FEMA Camp?

Recently the old FEMA camp myth has once again reared it's ugly head around internet, this time making it appear that President Obama has ordered $1,000,000,000 worth of "disposable coffins", as you can clearly see from this screen shot below:

And from this article here.

When I was reading the article one of the first things that clued me in that this was just a bunch of BS and anti-government fear mongering were the pictures.

All of these pictures have been spreading around the internet for years now in various conspiracy theorist websites and forums.

Despite what the website wants you to believe, these pictures are actually pretty old. Infact they've been around since the George W. Bush administration, as have these claims.

The pictures were also taken at a storage facility for Vantage, a company that manufactures plastic coffin liners, not some government storage facility. If it was a government storage facility the people who took the photos would most likely not have been given access to the facility for various security and liability reasons, or at the very least they would have been escorted around the facility to make sure they didn't hurt themselves or damage something.

Also, these so called "disposable coffins" are neither disposable nor coffins. They're meant to hold to coffins, and they're meant to stay in the ground for who knows how long.

While some coffin liners are bought by the government for things like military funerals, most of these purchases are made by funeral home to be used in private funerals.

The second thing I noticed about the article was the total lack of any references to back up all the claims made. All there was were some old pictures, an old video from 2 1/2 years ago that shows nothing but a few documents that means nothing and also has no links to the documents that are mentioned, and some ignorant people who clearly do not know that a coffin goes inside a coffin liner, and also makes up some outrageous claims without any sort of documents or evidence to back up these claims.

The fact is that there is nothing new about this story. This type of "story" has been floating around in one form or another for years and predates President Obama.

President Obama didn't order $1,000,000,000 worth of coffins, and Marshall Law is not about about to be implemented. All this is is more classic fear mongering being promoted by people who are very paranoid, or who hate the government, or (usually) both.

Anti-Vaccination Critics shutdown: How Facebook should prevent and punish Anti-Vaccination supporters (or anyone) who wrongfully get their critics banned from Facebook?

Over the past couple of weeks it's been revealed that Anti-Vaccination groups and their supporters on Facebook have been launching false flag attacks (and I don't mean types that Alex Jones thinks happens every time a shooting or a bombing or a natural disaster occurs in this country) against groups that are pro-vaccination and/or critical of anti-vaccination groups and their supporters and propaganda. These false flaggings have unfortunately resulted in the temporary (yet still wrongful) banning of multiple people and groups from Facebook who are critics of the Anti-Vaccination movement. This needs to stop. Infact not only does this need to stop, but the people who are making these false flag reports need to be punished.

While many of you have some ideas on what should be done inorder to curb false flag reporting (which I would love to hear from you in the comments section) I have a few suggestions of my own:

The first thing that needs to happen is that Facebook needs to make it easier to challenge a complaint and a ban. While you can do this even now, it's not an easy process. Plus a person should be given a chance to defend themselves before a ban is about to occur. No more automatic bans unless a certain amount of time has gone by after a complaint was sent (I say a minimum of six hours).

Now the second thing that should happen to help curb false flagging abuse on Facebook is that those that do abuse the reporting system need to have their ability to report posts and groups and individuals that they don't believe should be on Facebook more difficult. Granted I'm not saying they should be left unable to report someone or some group that really does contain offensive or illegal content (unless they continue to abuse the system even after restrictions have been placed on them, then their ability to report groups and people should be taken away, and they should be banned temporarily) but the process should be made more difficult for those that abuse the system, and probably should include a screen shot of any content that is being reported upon, as well as include more details about why something is being reported.

Going along side with the second suggestion that I believe Facebook needs to do inorder to curb false flagging abuse, after a person has already had restrictions put against for false flag abuse, if they do report someone or some group for their content and Facebook determines that it doesn't violate their policies, the person or group should be informed that someone sent a complaint against them that was struct down, and the person or group should be told whom that person is, and given the option of whether or not they want to block that individual.

Now these couple of suggestions might help against individuals who abuse the reporting system, but what about groups that do the same thing and organize their followers to report individuals and groups inorder to silence them (this can apply to any group, not just the anti-vaccination groups)?

First, for groups that do frequently abuse the reporting system, first give them a warning, then a ban if they continue, then a longer ban with a warning that if they continue to abuse the reporting system that their page will be removed and deleted, and if they continue to abuse the system, then Facebook should remove and delete that group.

The second thing that should be done to these groups that abuse the reporting system is that they should have the ability to control what is and isn't posted on their page and who can and cannot post on their page restricted as well.

Anti-vaccination groups (along with chemtrail, anti-GMO, fundamentalist groups, and generally any group that promotes conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, and bigotry) are notorious for blocking people and deleting any posts that they make that either counter-argues something that was posted in the group, or criticizes the group. One of the things that Facebook can do as a way to punish a group that abuses the reporting system is to alert the person whom has had a post deleted, or has been blocked, and give that person a chance to dispute the deletion or blocking. If they chose to try to prove that the deletion or blocking was unwarranted and didn't violate any of Facebook's rules, then Facebook will restore the post or unblock the person from the group, and also leave the group unable to delete anything else from that person, or block that person.

Now, do I believe that Facebook would do any of the things that I have suggested here? No, but I think that we all can agree that Facebook does need to do something inorder to curb false flag abuse.

10 reasons why the Anti-GMO and the Anti-vaccination movement are a lot alike.

The Anti-GMO movements and Anti-vaccination movements are probably two of the biggest and most well known pseudoscience movements out there, with millions of people that adhere to their claims.

Besides the fact that both groups do have millions of proponents world wide and promote pseudoscience, both groups are a lot alike in other ways as well. Infact I've come up with about ten different reasons why they are so much alike, starting with the fact that...

Proponents of both get very emotional when you criticize and/or debunk them.

Ever get into an online discussion with someone whom either promotes Anti-vaccination or Anti-GMO nonsense, and you start to tell them what they claim is BS, and tell them why what they are claiming is BS? If you've answered yes then you know what usually ends up happening, and that is that they tend to go off the deep end and use all of these made up "facts" and logical fallacies and conspiracy theories, and in the end threats and accusations of being a shill are often made.

A proponent of one tends to be a proponent of the other.

It shouldn't be to surprising, but usually if someone is an Anti-GMO proponent, they usually tend to be an Anti-vaccination proponent as well, and vice-verse.

While this isn't necessarily true many websites that promote Anti-vaccination nonsense also tend to promote Anti-GMO nonsense as well. Infact some websites that claim to be "natural health" websites promote both equally instead of one overshadowing the other. Also, another thing about proponents of both are...

They tend to promote alternative medicine.

It shouldn't be to surprising that people in the Anti-vaccination movement are big proponents of alternative medicine, but it shouldn't also be to surprising that people in the Anti-GMO movement are also big proponents of alternative medicine as well.

Infact many people in the Anti-GMO movement will, besides just promote the usual alternative medicine nonsense, claim that organic foods can heal you of just about anything and everything as well (including stuff that doesn't even exist).

The only papers they've ever had published in creditable scientific journals have been debunked and retracted.

There are lots of studies that have been published over the years about the "dangers" of vaccines and GMO foods, and while the number of papers published may look impressive to some the reality is that it isn't, especially when you consider the fact almost all of these papers are published in "scientific journals" that a person pays to be published in.

Infact the only Anti-vaccination and Anti-GMO papers that I know of that have ever been published in credible scientific journals are the Wakefield study (published in the Lancet) and the Séralini study (published in Food and Chemical Toxicology) both of which have been formally retracted by the respective journals that they were published in after it was found that both studies data was founded off of both unethical experiments and fraudulent data, and they were only retracted long after both studies had been thoroughly debunked.

They both claim the same things about the products in terms of health effects.

Both the Anti-GMO and Anti-vaccination movements not only claim that both GMO foods and vaccines are bad for you and cause a large amount of health problems (all of which have been proven to be untrue), but they also claim that they cause the same health problems!

Both most notably are claimed to cause autism, but both are also claimed to cause the spreading of diseases, and increases in infant mortality, and sterility, and cancer, and who knows what else. It almost seems like Anti-GMO and Anti-vaccination movements are claiming that GMO foods and vaccines causes something new every week.

They both claim that the products have ingredients in them that they do not.

One of the biggest and most obvious BS things that both the Anti-vaccination and the Anti-GMO movement tend to do is that they both claim that the respective products that they believe are bad for you also contain ingredients that infact they do not contain at all.

For the Anti-vaccination movement they sometimes claim that vaccines contain the remains of aborted human fetuses (they do not) and the Anti-GMO movement claims that GMO foods contain animal DNA in them (they do not). While these are the more outrageous claims made by both respective movements, both also claim that the products that they are protesting against contain other chemicals in them that infact they do not.

Both groups claim that there is little to no regulation in either industry.

One of the main "claimed" reasons by so many people in the Anti-GMO and Anti-vaccination movements is that they believe that GMO foods and vaccines are dangerous because they believe that there is very little to no testing and safety regulations what so ever in either industry.

In fact this couldn't be further from the truth for either one. Both the vaccine industry and the GMO foods industry are heavily regulated and go through numerous testing stages, and have to go through numerous government agencies before they are able to put their products onto market.

Both groups make claims of a conspiracy.

Both the Anti-GMO and Anti-vaccination movements claim that the respective industries that they are protesting are involved in some kind of conspiracy. These conspiracy theories range from the plausible, but still disproven corporate greed and not caring about the health of others and putting out a product that has very little to no testing type of conspiracy theories, to some type of New World Order mass depopulation type of conspiracy theory (which if true then they've done a horrible job at it).

Also both groups claim that there is a conspiracy to suppress "information" (i.e. Anti-GMO and Anti-vaccination claims) about the "truth" about GMO foods and vaccines. If this happened to be true then whoever is suppose to be suppressing this "information" has clearly done a terrible job at it because there are thousands of Anti-GMO and Anti-vaccination websites, not to mention multiple groups that promote their beliefs.

Both groups have caused deaths.

One of the dark yet well known little secrets of both of these groups is that both groups have caused the deaths of thousands of people.

For the Anti-GMO movement the deaths caused by their propaganda comes in the form of people in developing countries starving to death because the leaders in some of these countries refused to accept food donations because they believed that the donations contained GMO foods (wouldn't matter if it did or didn't) and believed the Anti-GMO movement's claims that such food were poisonous.

For the Anti-vaccination movement the deaths caused by their propaganda comes in the form of children who's parents believed the Anti-vaccination movement's claims and didn't vaccinate their children, and their children got an infection from a disease that was completely preventable if they had been vaccinated, and the child died from that disease. Also the deaths are by children who were to young to be vaccinated, or couldn't be vaccinate for some medical reasons, but got a disease from a child that was infact old enough to be vaccinated but wasn't, and they died because of some other parent's carelessness.

While this fact about both groups are often ignored by both groups, it is not however ignored by skeptics and critics of the Anti-GMO and the Anti-vaccination movements.

Both groups don't talk about the good things what they protest have done.

Both groups just love to talk about all the "bad" stuff (i.e. made up stuff) about GMO foods and vaccines. What they don't tell you is all of the good things that GMO foods and vaccines have brought us, such a extending our life expectancy, and suppressing and even eliminating certain diseases, and over all improving our quality of life, as well as helping prevent people from dying.

Infact talking about all of the good things about GMO foods and vaccines almost seems like a kind of blasphemy to these Anti-GMO and Anti-vaccination groups...

Was an alien spotted near where I live?

The other day I was searching through Youtube looking for "alien caught on camera" videos (I actually do look for that stuff when I'm bored) one thing lead to another and I eventually came across this article about an alleged alien encounter that occurred not only in my home town... but also about only a mile or so from my home (although it happened over two years ago and nothing like this has occurred near here ever since).

Suffice to say that if I believed that this close encounter of the third kind actually did occurred (read about it here) I might be scared out of my mind. Of course I don't believe it. I believe it to be a hoax, and I'll explain why:

First, lets examine the description of the "alien" by the eye witness:

• There was a grey figure, about 6'5" with very long fingers, no eyes, mouth or nose that I could see. The grey color of it was lighter on the bottom, and faded into a darker shade towards it's chest. And it's fingers were at least 10" long.

Now that's a very detailed description of this creature. What detail that was not given was how far away this person was from the creature, or where exactly was this creature was (I'm well aware of the area and how it looks like having lived here all my life and driven past this place hundreds of times, so I can tell you after reading the report that the person gave is that either the person is a local as well, or has passed through that section of road enough times to remember what it looks like)? Was the creature on the hill in the wooded area, or in the middle of the road, or across the street at the little pond next to the apartments that are at that intersection, or on the side of the road?

Also it was at 2:00 PM in the summer time, and according to the report given, it states that:

• Traffic was at a stand still as there were at least 7 cars stopped as we watched it walk up a hill into the forest on the side of the road. Eventually a couple of Roanoke county police came, and one went into the woods, only to come out pale and shaking.

So there are atleast nine other eye witnesses to this incident, and probably a lot more than that, yet this is the only report about this alleged incident that I can find, and no one there (including the person whom made this report) had enough sense to take a picture of this creature? In fact why hasn't more people come forward and said that they saw something? I can understand maybe a few people not wanting to have anything to do with this incident, but certainly there must have been atleast more that one person willing to come forward and tell what they saw?

Now there is actually one alleged picture of this creature, and it was taken at night via a trail camera:

Photo Taken by Game Cam of Unknown Creature in Roanaoke, VA.

Photo Courtesy of Unsolved Mysteries and Paranormal Society of Virginia.

http://www.paranormalsocieties.com/view_society.cfm?id=1528 

Now besides the fact that this photo is blurry and really doesn't show anything (and before you point out that the year is wrong that really is not that significant as the person who set up this camera could have set the year wrong) there is no way of knowing if this photo really is from Roanoke, or from the area which is being talked about? This is the only photo provided and as far as I'm concerned it provides no proof that this incident even occurred at all, or that it's in any way connected with it.

Another thing that makes me believe that this is a hoax are the last to sentences of this report:

• I have searched all over the local news to see if there has been any reporting on this incident because where it happened is a very populated area about half a mile from Tanglewood shopping center (at the intersection of Ogden and Colonial Road). I have found nothing in the local news.

My question isn't why wasn't this in the news, but why didn't the person whom made this report tell the local news stations themselves? I would have if I thought it was real and not just a hoax, and that there were multiple eye witnesses, and that it was in the middle of the day time...

In conclusion I believe this to be a hoax. While the details of the creature is very descriptive, there's very little other information (such as where exactly the creature was when the person first spotted it, and how far away the person believes that they were from the creature). This, combined with the fact that no one else has come forward to back up this story, nor did the person themselves report this to the news, and the lack of a follow-up interview the try to get more information (and a note in the report did state that the person did provide full contact information) has lead me to conclude that this is a hoax.

5 Things I've noticed about... The Illuminati

The Illuminati. That secretive group conspiracy theorists believe have a great amount of power and want to take over the world.

There are a lot of accusations leveled against the Illuminati, and out of all of those accusations I've noticed many things and traits about the group.

Now out of all of the things and traits that I have noticed about the Illuminati I've narrowed it down to five distinct things.

So here are five things that I've noticed about the Illuminati:

5. They are the most patient people in the world.

The Illuminati has to be composed of some of the most patient people in the world. I say this because according to people who "investigate" the Illuminati (i.e. people who spend most of their free time watching or creating Youtube videos about the Illuminati, and listening to Alex Jones) have been doing stuff for years in order to get ready to take over the world, as well as kill 80%-90% of the population, and enslave everyone else.

Now as to how long the Illuminati have been plotting to take over the Earth no one (and by "no one" I mean conspiracy theorists) is really sure because no one is really sure how old the Illuminati is. Most conspiracy theorists say they're around two and a half centuries old, although others say they're as old as civilization, or even older, while others say they're only about a century or so old.

Regardless of how old the Illuminati is, the fact that they have been allegedly at this taking over the world thing for a very long time clearly shows that they are composed of the world's most patient individuals... or the world's worst procrastinators.

Now I would think that there would be atleast a few people in the Illuminati who wants to really push forward in taking over the world. I say this because apparently the Illuminati has a huge membership, so I would think that there would be atleast a few ambitious individuals amongst themselves.

Infact when thinking about that huge membership of their's it almost seems like that...

4. Everyone is apart of the Illuminati.

According to conspiracy theorists there are a huge amount people (probably in the tens of millions) who are members, or atleast works for, the Illuminati. This alleged list includes actors, musicians (actually any celebrity really), rich people, politicians, high ranking military officers, anyone in the CIA, or FBI, or NSA, whistleblowers, religious leaders, myself and fellow skeptics, and even other conspiracy theorists. Heck, even Alex Jones whom constantly "speaks out" against the Illuminate has himself been accused of being a member of the Illuminati.

Now taking all of this "information" (a.k.a. accusations) into account by my estimates I believe there are only eight people in the world are not apart of the Illuminati...

I admit I might be a little off on my math there, but still that's an awful lot of people who are apart of this super secret organization (so secret that there is no real proof of it's existence).

Ofcourse when you also consider how many people who are apart of this alleged secret organization it shouldn't also be surprising to know that...

3. They control everything.

According to many conspiracy theorists the Illuminati controls everything from the media, to the military, to the manufacturing industries, the airline industry (because how else are they going to spray chemtrails), the entertainment industry, the UN, the European Union, the Free Masons, the US government, law enforcement, major religions, minor religious, cults, the Democrats, the Republicans, the banks, most other governments, the oil industry, the pharmaceutical industry... the list just keeps going on and on.

I'm not sure what is crazier: the fact that the Illuminati allegedly controls all this and so much more, or the fact that the Illuminati allegedly controls all of this and hasn't even bothered to officially take control of the world and continues to lurk in the shadows while leaving symbols on things that have little to no meaning to most people inorder to show those people that they are incharge despite the fact that most people don't even believe that the Illuminati exists, and with good reason...

2. There's no evidence of their existence.

There is no proof that the Illuminati exists. Despite the amount of people who have been accused of being apart of the Illuminati, and despite the numerous tragic events that the Illuminati are accused of orchestrating, no one has ever brought any proof that they do exist, nor that they were once a member of the Illuminati, nor that they are involved in any events what so ever.

The only thing that conspiracy theorists have that even comes close to being "evidence" (and even that is a stretch) are the numerous "symbols" that the Illuminati allegedly likes to place up on everything. Despite what conspiracy theorists believe these symbols are not evidence of the existence of the Illuminati, and most often times means something else entirely than what a conspiracy theorist (and even non-conspiracy theorists) believes it to mean.

These Illuminati conspiracy theories are just a bunch of blame redirecting by people who believe that all of the world's problems, or their own problems, are being caused by some shadowy group that controls everything. These conspiracy theories are entirely made up... well, maybe not "entirely" made up, because...

1. The Illuminati conspiracy theories sound an awful lot like the old Jewish conspiracy theories.

One of the most common traits that I have noticed amongst the Illuminati conspiracy theories (especially the basic ones) is that they very closely resemble the antisemitic, Jewish conspiracy theories of a few decades ago. Infact if you were to replace the word "Illuminati" with the word "Jewish" or "Jew" it would sound exactly like one of the old Jewish conspiracy theories.

I'm not sure if the people who created these Illuminati conspiracy theories either ripped off the old Jewish conspiracy theories and replaced the words "Jewish" and "Jew" with "Illuminati", or if "Illuminati" is a code word for "Jewish", but the people who created these conspiracy theories sure did get a lot of inspiration from the older Jewish conspiracy theories.

Also it shouldn't be to surprising that many of these Illuminati conspiracy theorists are they themselves antisemitic and often times try to tie in the Jewish people (or to a lesser extent Israel) with the Illuminati.

Anti-Vaccination pics should come with a disclaimer...

This morning while I was going through my Facebook page and looking around at some of the skeptics groups that I belong to I came across this anti-vaccination photo in one of these skeptics groups that was posted there for the sheer means of mocking and criticizing the anti-vaccination movement for their blatant hypocrisy:

Now ofcourse anyone who is either a skeptic or a medical professional can clearly see why this picture is being mocked and criticized, but for those who don't I'll explain why:

It's mocked because of the irony that people in the anti-vaccination movement actually believe that getting "information" off of a website that promotes pseudoscience and alternative medicine rather than a legitimate science and/or medical website or journal apparently makes you well educated, and that those who are in the anti-vaccination movement actually believe that they are well educated about vaccines.

Also, it's criticized because it gives the impression that people who advise against vaccination are themselves well educated, which is often not the truth and that in reality they are actually to dumb to realize that they don't know anything about vaccines other than what they've been told (or scared into) by the anti-vaccination movement. Even those that really are well educated have either just been fooled by the claims of the anti-vaccination movement into believing that vaccines are dangerous, or are just lying about their beliefs for reasons that are their own (usually because they don't want to admit that they are wrong).

If pictures like this were truly honest they would contain a disclaimer at the bottom that says either "all the information about vaccines that we get comes from websites that promote subjects that are considered to be pseudoscience and/or conspiracy theories" or "all information we get about vaccines are from sources that are not considered to be legitimate medical and/or scientific sources" or "it is against professional medical and scientific opinions that a person should not vaccinate their children, as well as may be in violation of the law in some areas" or perhaps even "many scientists consider this picture to be an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect and should be ignored and disregarded".

Regardless of what disclaimer should be placed on an anti-vaccination picture such as this one (or any anti-vaccination picture for that matter) it does show the arrogance within the anti-vaccination movement in that they regard themselves as being intelligent and well educated when it comes to vaccines, when in reality it is often the exact opposite, and that they actually don't know anything about vaccines and simply blindly follow some quack that poses as a doctor or as a medical expert that goes around claiming that vaccines are dangerous and can create all of these health issues in children rather than actually prevent health issues.

Perhaps one more type of disclaimer that should also be included with such a picture should say "all information we have regarding the dangers of vaccines have been discredited by legitimate scientific and medical institutions, or have been shown to be fraudulent."

5 Thing's I've noticed about... 12/21/2012

It's been almost a year since 12/21/2012, the day that the world was suppose to end... or change (depends on who you asked).

Now there was a lot that didn't happen that day that was suppose to, and there were certain things that day that did happen, just not what some people were expecting.

I've looked back upon what did happen that day, and I've come up with the five different things that I've noticed about that day and the whole doomsday prediction itself.

So here are five things I've noticed about 12/21/2012:

5. Nothing really important happen that day.

Well... not necessarily nothing per say, but in terms of the world shattering event that was suppose to occur (at least according to some people who mistook the ending of the Mayan calendar as being a Mayan prophecy foretelling the end of the world) nothing happened that day that was even worth bothering to remember.

The only thing that I really remember from that day is that me and several fellow skeptics laughed at all of those people who seriously thought the world was going to end that day, and the History Channel showing a bunch of programs about doomsday (because that is what the History Channel does).

Basically that's all that happened that day. Skeptics had a good laugh, the History Channel showed a bunch of BS (well a little bit more BS than usual) and that's it... well, that and fact that...

4. Millions of Doomers realized how stupid they were.

The amount of people who thought the world was going to end that day (or atleast something big was going to happen that day) was probably in the millions, most of which I'm pretty sure were relived that nothing happen (although I'm sure a few were disappointed, especially those who thought it would bring about some kind of human "transformation").

I say again that while I am pretty sure that most people who believed that the world would end that day were relived that it didn't happen, I'm also pretty sure that a lot of those people felt stupid for trusting some non-prophesy that a few people who were allegedly smarter than them completely mis-interpreted and got it into the public mindset in such a way that it ended up taking off like wildfire...

Ofcourse what probably made a lot of people feel stupid for believing in the 12/21/2012 end of the world prediction is the realization that...

3. It's not the first time a major doomsday prediction has fail.

The 12/21/2012 was not the first major doomsday prediction to fail, nor was it the first major one to create a kind of mass hysteria that caused people to waste their time and money on to prepare for, as well as possibly ruin relationships with the people in their lives. The 12/21/2012 prediction wasn't even the first major doomsday prediction of the century that failed. Infact it was the third major doomsday prediction of the 21st century that failed (the first one was the Y2K prediction, and the second one was Harold Camping's Rapture prediction of 2011).

Now I went to the Wikipedia page listing doomsday predictions (and these are just some of the more famous ones) and there were huge amount of them, and obviously they've all failed to come true. Infact I actually counted the number of doomsday predictions between the time I was born and the 12/21/2012 prediction, and according to the list the world should have ended atleast 47 times since my birth...

Now in my opinion the whole 12/21/2012 should never have been taken seriously in the first place. This is not only due to the sheer fact that doomsday predictions always fail, it's also due to the fact that...

2. It was pretty vague.

The people who believed in the 12/21/2012 prediction all agreed that "something" major was going to happen that day. It's just what that something was is where people who believed in that prediction disagreed with one another.

According to all of those who believed in the 12/21/2012 prediction that what was going to happen that day ranged from that we were suppose to enter a higher stage of consciousness, to that the world was suppose to be reduced to asteroids... and everything else you can possibly think of.

The main reason why so many people were claiming so many different things was that the Mayans themselves never said what was suppose to happen that day. Ofcourse the Mayans never actually said that anything was suppose to happen that day really.

The fact that nothing happened that day, combined with the vagueness of the "prediction" should have ended all of this doomsday stuff on 12/21/2012, but unfortunately...

1. The 12/21/2012 doomsday predictions didn't end on 12/21/2012.

While most people who believed that something was going to happen on 12/21/2012 have accepted the fact that this prediction was BS and that the world was never going to end, some people haven't.

There are actually a few people out there on Youtube and blogging sites who are claiming that the 12/21/2012 doomsday prediction was actually just the beginning of a process that was going to end several months later either with our transformation into higher beings, or destruction (depends on the person who is making the claims).

It shouldn't surprise anyone however that none of predictions came true either. Infact really the only thing about doomsday predictions that can be predicted is that they will fail.

Could the pyramids be 28 million years old? Answer, no.

Recently I read an article on a website that promotes Ancient Aliens and trying to rewrite history in the strangest way possible about how the Pyramids in Egypt are 28 million years old (read the article here).

Now the article tries to link a comet that allegedly exploded over the region 28 million years with the creation of the pyramids, but really when I tried to read it, it just sounded like a bunch of nonsense. Infact most of it made no sense what so ever and was actually hard to read at points.

At the end of the article it makes it sound like aliens might have built the pyramids due to the sheer fact that humans were not around 28 million years ago (atleast they got the fact that humans weren't around 28 millions years ago right).

So, are the pyramids 28 million years ago?

Not a chance.

First, if these structures were 28 million years old, then the only parts that would be left of them would be the foundations, and what ever was underneath the pyramids. Everything above would have eroded away by now.

Infact many of these pyramids are in various states of erosion due to where they are located and are almost gone. Some of them don't even look like human made structures anymore, and look more like hills or small mountains out in the middle of the desert.

Pyramid of Amenemhat III (Dahshur)

And while others are in far better conditions then the one pictured above, even they are visibly eroding away. One day they will disappear. It might take 10,000 years, or it might take 20,000 years, but they will erode into nothing one day.

Besides all this, if these structures were 28 million years old, they would most likely be in far better condition than what they are today (not only are they suppose to be surviving erosion, but also climate change, continental shift, and a whole lot of other stuff) nor would they have been built out of limestone, or any stone at all.

The article is nothing more than a prime example of what pseudoscience, and is nothing than a bunch of nonsense that tries to make it sound like aliens built the pyramids, and that they are far older than what they are when say a person with even a junior high school level of science education could debunk this.

The Death of Sylvia Browne

Yesterday one of the world's most famous fake psychics (I know, that's redundant) died.

Sylvia Browne, who had made many appearances on TV (most notably The Montel Williams Show and Larry King Live) died yesterday at the age of 77 (she had predicted should would die at age 88).

Now being a skeptic and someone whom believes that all psychics are frauds (apart form those that are mentally ill and really do believe that they have psychic powers) many people might assume that I am rejoicing, and perhaps even celebrating her death (especially those who believe that people can have psychic powers, or just people who don't like skeptics).

To be quiet honest I'm not sure how I should feel about her death, because there are just so many feelings I have about it that I can't seem to focus on one to just go with.

On the one hand I am sort of glad that she's gone because now she can no longer hurt people and mess with their emotions with her stage magician like "readings" while at the same time exploiting those people for fame and money.

On the other hand I'm also a bit angry, not only because of her exploitation that she basically got away with up until she died, but also because she would never would come clean about being a fake, despite the numerous failed readings and predictions she has had. Now that she's dead, she never will.

Yet on the other hand I also feel a tad bit sad for her, not only because she died having many people despise her, but also because she is leaving behind family, friends, and fans who all loved her and will miss her greatly, as well as got some inspiration from her.

Yet still I also feel a tad bit ashamed as well for being glad, and anger, and sad that she's gone.

I do infact feel ashamed for being sort of happy that she is gone, because despite the fact that she did exploit people for fame and money, I don't believe she was a truly evil person, plus you really shouldn't be happy that someone has died anyways.

I also feel ashamed for being angry that she's dead, because while she never did stop or ever come clean about her "powers" I also know that she'll never be able to hurt anyone again, and that I should let any anger for her go.

Yet I also feel ashamed for feeling sad about her death because despite the fact that she will be missed by many people, she also hurt a lot of people, and so therefore it might not be appropriate to feel sad about her death.

In the end I think it might be best that the only appropriate emotion to feel about here death is to feel no emotion at all about her death, and to let her fade from memory.

Frankenbull: GMOs run amuck, or a deception of the Anti-GMO movement

Recently I saw an article on a conspiracy theorist website concerning what they claimed was a genetically modified bull called the Belgian Blue (read the article here).

As you can clearly see that is one right big bull (although most bovine species do tend to be big creatures) and looks like a result direct genetic manipulation. Also, the way the article is worded (and the fact that the title of the article is "FRANKENBULL: GIGANTIC GMO BULLS Are Now A REALITY") makes it sound like the species was only recently developed, and that is was the result of direct genetic manipulation. This is not true for either one.

While the species is the result of a kind of genetic manipulation, it is not however the result direct genetic manipulation (which involves directly manipulating a life form's DNA) but instead indirect genetic manipulation through the use of selective breeding.

Infact the breed itself was first identified in the early 19th century, and the modern beef breed was developed in the 1950's through the use of artificial insemination. So it is not a new breed, and was not developed by messing with it's DNA (which is technology that scientists did not have back then). The article ofcourse doesn't mention any of this.

Heck, one of the photos in the article is also clearly not a modern photo either, and appears to be from atleast from either the 50's or the 60's:

Now by the standards of the Anti-GMO movement this freakish looking bovine is not a GMO animal because it's genetic manipulation is not the result of manipulating it's DNA, but the result of genetic manipulation through selective breeding (which almost all other species of domesticated plants and animals that are used for food are the result of in one form or another) and by their standards is okay to eat (which apparently it is).

The article is clearly being deceptive, and was only posted inorder to scare people away from GMO foods by making it appear that if scientists are willing to create something like that through direct genetic manipulation, then who knows what they are willing and able to do with the rest of our food. Infact you'd pretty much have live off the land and eat nothing but wild plants and animals inorder to have a diet that consisted of no foods that are the result of genetic manipulation of one form or another.

If the anti-GMO movement is so blatantly willing to lie about something like this that was so easy to find the truth about and debunk, then who knows what else they're willing to lie about inorder to make GMO foods look dangerous?

Of Elves, Abductions, and fake News Stories

The other day I came across this very strange "news" story on an blog that's been going around the internet about a Danish anthropologist by the name of Kalena Søndergaard, whom had apparently been abducted and held for seven years in Iceland.

Now normally this would be a tragic and horrible story, except the strange fact that (at least according to author of the story, C. Michael Forsyth) her abductors were elves (read the story here).

That's right, I said elves.

Obviously I'm skeptical of the story, and for good reason (mostly being that it is ridiculous as hell, and that the story itself written by a horror fiction writer).

Besides the obvious fact that the story was written by a horror fiction writer, and that it just sounds fake, the story itself has no links or references what so ever to show to show that this woman had ever been listed as missing, a major red flag telling that it was fake.

Infact when I did a Google search on her the only thing I could find out about Kalena were just copied and pasted portions of the story (or the whole story in itself) written by C. Michael Forsyth.

The second red flag that shot up for me was the fact that in the story there was information in there about the Homo floresiensis, a diminutive hominid that was very closely related to modern humans, and according to the story was a major part of the woman's doctoral thesis... about elves and how they might exist.

While I found the information to be interesting, the fact is that it had nothing to do with the story, and seemed to have been added in to attempt to prove that elves exist, or atleast give the possibility that elves exist more credibility.

The third red flag that shot up for me was the photos.

First the two photos showing a naked woman trapped on a cliff. I'm not sure whom that woman is, but I can tell you these two things about those photos: they are not of Kalena Søndergaard, and they weren't taken in Iceland. Infact they are of a nude sunbather who got trapped on a cliff while trying to get to Black's Beach in San Diego, California. The story itself is 2 1/2 years old and has nothing to do with Kalena (read story here).

The third photo of whom is suppose to be her shows a head shot of "Kalena" taken some time before here abduction. Now I'm not sure who that woman is either, but I can tell you one thing about her: She is not Kalena Søndergaard!

Again I did a Google search on the image found it to have no relation to Kalena except to the original story written by Mr. Forsyth. Infact the photo appears to be a stock photo as I have found this photo in numerous other websites that make no mention of Kalena, including Russian bride sites...

Now if the things that I mentioned above don't scream that this story is fake, the final piece of evidence does, and that is immediately after the end of the story there is an advertisement for the latest horror novel written by Mr. Forsyth. Not only is that very odd to me, it also seems very unethical as well to do something like that when concerning something as serious as this, and that the only type of person whom would do something like that is someone whom didn't take the story seriously.

Considering all the evidence here, and the fact that Mr. Forsyth is a fiction writer, I can only come to one conclusion: The story is completely fake.

"You Know You Are a Conspiracy Theorist If…" a deceptive test to make people believe they are a conspiracy theorist

A few months ago I came across this "test" (which I found to be laughable win I saw it) to help a person tell a conspiracy theorist or not (view the test here).

I have some things to say about this "test" and some comments about "questions" that were asked (well, they're not really questions) as well as a few questions of my own:

You are capable of critical thinking.

This is a paradox. If a conspiracy theorist was capable of critical thinking, then they wouldn't be a conspiracy theorist because people who are capable of critical thinking would figure out that a conspiracy theory was BS.

You distrust mainstream media.

So do most skeptics, although for entirely different reasons than conspiracy theorists do.

You like nature.

Lots of people do. What does this have to do with being a conspiracy theorist?

You think it’s a good idea to spend the Friday after Thanksgiving with your family rather than camping outside Best Buy to get a cheap plasma television made in China.

That doesn't make you a conspiracy theorist. That makes you someone who is smart enough not to waste their time in the cold waiting for some store to open in the hope of finding bargains.

You think it’s a little strange that WTC building 7 came down at free fall speed on 9/11 yet it was never hit by a plane.

This might make you a conspiracy theorist, as well as someone who has conveniently forgotten that WTC7 was hit by something... a skyscraper.

You think that drones in America might not be for Al Qaeda.

This might also make you a conspiracy theorist... or it might make you someone who knows drones that fly over America are also used for multiple benign purposes.

You would like to be able to get on a plane without having to engage in a mandatory radiation bath and digital strip search.

As do many Americans, especially those who have gone through that process.

You have read a book in the past year.

What does reading a book have to do with being a conspiracy theorist?

You think you have the right to protest.

According to the first Amendment I don't think I have the right, I have the right, period!

You think the War on Terror is a scam.

That depends on what your definition of "scam" is.

You think the War on Drugs is a scam.

Again, that depends on what your definition of "scam" is. Does your definition mean completely bogus and fraudulent, or wasteful and unnecessary?

You think the anger directed at America from the Middle East could possibly be related to our foreign policy rather than hating how amazingly free we are.

This just means you've done more than five minutes worth of research about the Middle East.

You think the Republicans and Democrats are exactly the same on the important issues affecting our country.

This could mean you're a conspiracy theorist... it could also mean that you're a Libertarian, or you're just ticked off at both political parties.

You think believing in The Constitution does not constitute a terrorist act.

Who the Hell believes that believing in the constitution is a terrorist act? The only people who believe that are idiots!

You have heard of the Bill of Rights and can even name what some of them are.

As most Americans have and can...

You question whether the government loves you.

The government is not a living entity. It neither loves nor hates, therefore it is pointless to ask if it loves you or not.

You think the right to bear arms is not for hunting, rather so citizens can fight back should the government become a bunch of tyrannical thugs.

Yeah, this could mean that you're a conspiracy theorist... it could also mean that you just don't like the government, or you're afraid that the United States "could" become a tyrannical dictatorship.

You don’t own a television, and if you do, all you watch is RT, especially the Keiser Report and Capital Account.

(Reading that alone makes me wonder if this is satire) If all you watch on television is RT (Russia Today) then there is no need to finish this test. You are a conspiracy theorist.

You don’t think the NDAA is the name of Kesha’s latest single.

Who's Kesha?

You think rich, powerful and connected people should be subject to the rule of law and go to jail if they commit crimes. Even if they are bankers and work at JP Morgan or Goldman Sachs.

I'm sure that Bernie Madoff would disagree.

You think corporations aren’t people.

As do most other Americans.

You think Warren Buffet is a phony and a crony capitalist.

This could make you a conspiracy theorist. This could also make you a socialist, some one who doesn't like the rich, or someone who doesn't like Warren Buffet.

You don’t care that Warren Buffet likes cherry coke, hamburgers and ice cream.  He’s still a bad guy.

What does what he likes to eat has to do with him being a bad person or not?

You know that gold was made illegal by FDR in 1933 and confiscated from the American people.  You know that gold bullion remained illegal for Americans to own until 1975.

So American history experts are now considered to be conspiracy theorists?

You think politicians that push for war should be sent to fight on the front lines.  If they are unable, their children should go.

Lots of people think this. It might mean that you're a conspiracy theorist, or it could mean that you're someone that is against war and feels that the ones who start them should be the ones who fight them.

You want your food to be labeled GMO so that you can make your own decisions on what you are consuming.

This could mean you're a conspiracy theorist, or it could meant that you're a health fanatic whom has been lead to believe that GMO foods are bad for you.

You grow your own food.

Lots of people do that. This has nothing to do with being a conspiracy theorist.

You buy raw milk.

You could be a conspiracy theorist, or much like with GMO foods, you could also be a health fanatic who believes that raw milk is better for you than pasteurized milk (the exact opposite is true).

You think food and energy should be included in inflation calculations.

I'm sure most economist would agree with this.

You are aware that the Department of Homeland Security has purchased 1.2 billion rounds of ammo in the past year.

A lot of people are aware of this. A lot of people are also aware that this is just another example of bureaucratic waste.

You question whether said ammo purchases are in anticipation of a Normandy beach style landing by Al Qaeda.

I'm sure if you believe that is the official explanation for why so much ammo was bought (instead of the real official explanation in that it was a good deal on the price it was being bought at) then you're probably a conspiracy theorist.

You think allowing a small group of unelected people (The Federal Reserve) to print unlimited amounts of money and distribute it as they please might not be a good idea.

I might be a conspiracy theorist if I thought this way too about the Federal Reserve, and I would think this way if it wasn't for the fact that members of the Federal Reserve board have to be confirmed by the Senate first before they can take office, and the fact that the Federal Reserve is not incharge of printing money (the Department of Treasury does that).

Now the final part of this "test" says this:

If you answered yes to more than five of the above, you might be a conspiracy theorist.
You also may be on the government’s terror watch list.  Be very alarmed and report it to the authorities immediately should you discover your neighbors engaged in such uncivilized thought.

I answered yes to 19 of them. I'm definitely not a conspiracy theorist, and I'm almost certain I'm not on any terrorist watch list.

This test is extremely deceptive, and is meant to make the average person believe that they are a conspiracy theorist by throwing in a bunch of mundane questions that almost every American would answer yes to, and enough of them that it would be nearly impossible for anyone not to answer yes to atleast five. Heck, most of these questions have nothing to do with being a conspiracy theorist, and should not have been on there.

Being a conspiracy theorist has nothing to do with growing your own food or having no trust in the government. It has everything to do with whether or not you believe in conspiracy theories.

5 Things I've noticed about... Conspiracy Theorists on Youtube

If you're someone that makes a hobby of investigating conspiracy theories, you will eventually be lead to one place: Youtube.

Youtube seems to the gathering center conspiracy theorists on the internet due to the huge amount a conspiracy theory videos on that website (and I mean huge).

Now there are a lot of things that I have noticed about conspiracy theorists on Youtube that I could talk about, but I have narrowed it down to five different things.

So here are five things that I've noticed about conspiracy theorists on Youtube:

5. They can come up with some pretty bizarre conspiracy theories.

If you want to find a really bizarre conspiracy theory, then there is no better place to look than Youtube, because the conspiracy theorists on that website can come up with some very bizarre conspiracy theories. In fact some of the weirdest conspiracy theories that I have ever heard of are from videos on Youtube.

These conspiracy theories on Youtube can get so strange, and combined with a person's own behavior either in a video, or in the comments section, that it makes one wonder if that person is either a poe, or a fraud that is looking for attention (or to scam people), or severely mentally ill. In fact some conspiracy theorist on Youtube have been proven to be either mentally ill or frauds.

Some of these videos are so bizarre that I've had to stop watching them at times because I felt that it was driving me crazy (mostly rage) and making me want to destroy my computer in frustration over not only how some one could come up with some thing that crazy and stupid, but also in frustration over why Youtube would allow such a video to stay on the website.

If such videos make me nearly go crazy then I can't imagine what they do to people who take these videos seriously.

4. Their videos can be extremely long.

Sometimes a conspiracy theorist's video on Youtube can be short, sometimes they can be half an hour long, and sometimes they can go on for hours and hours.

Some of the longest videos that I have ever seen on Youtube have been from conspiracy theorists, and I'm not talking about an hour or two long. Some of these videos can be three to four to six hours long. In fact I think the longest one I have ever seen (I didn't actually watch it, I just noted the time) was forty hours long!

The only way someone could watch such videos is if they were unemployed and/or had no life what so ever. They would have to spend all of their time infront of a computer watching these poorly made and researched Youtube videos which would become essentially their only source of information about the world...

Besides just making abnormally long videos, conspiracy theorists on Youtube also tend to do this:

3. They create videos of an event quickly after an event happens.

Thanks mostly due to cheap (many times free), widely available, and easy to use video capturing and editing software, conspiracy theorist can now create videos at astonishingly amazing speeds after some event happens, sometimes even within hours of an event happening.

Usually these videos are pretty short, as well as poorly made and edited, but give them a few days and they will create a far longer conspiracy theory video about that event... that will still be poorly made and edited.

In fact this seems to be a pattern with many conspiracy theorists videos on Youtube, because...

2. They're videos tend to be poorly made and edited.

Some of conspiracy theorist's videos on Youtube are just unwatchable, and it's not just because of the length, or subject matter, or lack of any evidence presented within them when a conspiracy theorist tries to make their case about a conspiracy theory that they claim is real, but because they are just horrible videos to begin with.

Many of the videos are made are just very poorly done, and the editing and placement of segments and commentary within them is just horrible at times and appears to be just thrown together. The commentary alone in these videos are often not well thought out, and many times is just incoherent and often times makes many contradictions, and for the most part makes no sense what so ever.

Kind of sounds like a conspiracy theorist is general rather than just the ones on Youtube.

1. They don't like "non-believers".

Most conspiracy theorists in general do not like people who don't believe them and doubt the conspiracy theories that they are promoting are real, but on Youtube they take it to a different level entirely.

Many of them are just rude and very hostile towards anyone questions them. They down vote comments they don't like and mark them as spam in hopes of hiding the comments that have offended them. They false flag videos they don't like (mostly debunking videos) and outright threaten people who post debunking videos or comments expressing doubt in a conspiracy theory.

That's just the ones who mainly post comments.

The ones who post videos on the other hand might do all of that as well, plus they might just delete your comments from their own pages, and block you.

Kind of shows how open minded they are, doesn't it.