For those of you who don’t follow the skeptic movement (yes, there is such a thing) it’s basically a group of people who are fans of critical thinking, science-advocates, and debunkers of “woo.” Woo being magical thinking in general, and things like homeopathy, ghosts, bigfoot, astrology, psychics, vaccine denial, moon hoaxers, conspiracy theorists, some forms of religion and so on ad infinitum. And this group has a loose organizational structure, and meets and gathers in forums, and has conventions and leaders. So, that’s the background there.
Recently, within that group, there was a minor stir when Phil Plait, former President of the James Randi Educational Foundation, made a little speech about the tone of skeptical arguments. His message, as he often sums it up, was simply “don’t be a dick.” It’s a catchphrase he borrowed from internet maven, Wil Wheaton. He is “concerned” that skeptics are engaging in “childish, demeaning behavior” and “taking the low road.” He’s afraid that people are being aggressive, and calling people “retards” and “idiots.” He’s playing the role of the tone police, for lack of a better term.Continue reading »
“Git ‘er done!” The cry of the modern masses. It, perhaps, says something about our society that we prize the completion of tasks above all else. Why else, do we reward students for doing their homework, even if that homework teaches them nothing? Why else to we heap kudos upon those who finish a race, even if they run it so slow as to reap no physical benefit? Why else to we have social sites where people can crow their day’s accomplishments to an audience of peers and receive a chorus of congratulations for nothing more earth-shattering than eating breakfast?
Is it any wonder that I find this mentality….lacking? No one who knows me is surprised, I’m sure. I hate everything, I’m told.Continue reading »
I’ll admit it, I don’t get activism. I don’t get the modern charity ideal. Today is Earth Day, and being one of the world of Twits, I joined countless internet slacktivists in making vague meaningless statements about the earth on Twitter. Actually, that’s not true, I tried pointing my measly group of followers to the EPA website that directs people to green energy providers in their state. No doubt it didn’t get much attention, and whatever…no biggie. What bugged me were the things that do get attention. There was some touting of a climate rally, much re-tweeting of a “how green are you” poll, and some talk of websites like this one where you are encouraged to buy a bracelet and get water to dying children (not that it has anything to do with Earth Day, but whatever).
Saving the world one fad at a time.
Now I have nothing against these causes, let me be clear. It’s all well and good. What I wonder about is the nature of activism in America. It all seems inextricably linked with commerce. If you aren’t being basically guilted into going to a TV or corporate website to be sold their products, you’re basically just buying something for status or fun and being told that a portion goes to something. Why doesn’t a corporation just donate their product to the needy group? Nope, sorry, they have to donate one thingy they plan to donate for every widget you buy!! Look at Lance Armstrong’s yellow bracelet fad….there was a time when it was a must-have fashion accessory, but why couldn’t the money to make those bracelets have just gone to the cause instead of only a portion? Yeah, yeah, human nature…economics, advertising, blah, blah.
What about the rallies? Are they really convincing anyone, or just making people feel like they have control. Sometimes (like with tea party rallies) I hope it’s just the latter. But then make it a big event. Get the celebrities to show up! Get the corporations to donate free widgets for the attendees! Get politicians! Get Sting to sing a song! Make signs and chant chants! But in the end, what’s been changed? You’ve rallied for the environment, and maybe got some media attention. But what if each of those 50,000 attendees just went to the EPA website and told their electric company that they only wanted to buy green energy? What if they each got 2 friends to do the same? What if those corporate sponsors switched their companies to only green energy? Or what if they invested in green tech for their corporate offices and factories? Or what if they encouraged their employees to do the same? Or if they used that cash to pay the difference in price for every employee who switched?
Picture a serene scene. The most serene scene you have ever seen. One in a park of lovely green. (Forgive the Dr. Seuss treatment. I’ll stop.) Anyway, the grass is soft, the breeze light. Above you, the Brooklyn Bridge stands like some granite colossus, straddling the East River. It is majestic and powerful, enhancing the beauty and serenity of the surrounding park through it’s monumental architecture. A tugboat sounds a wistful horn in the distance. A gull soars overhead, starkly white against the bright blue of the sky. You are alone in a city of 8 million….lying cradled between the soft, cool grass and the warm midday sun.
Now, as you picture this wonderful scene, picture also a family of five. They stomp onto your soft delicate lawn, bickering, dropping litter, and dragging an assortment of towels, loud radios, kids, toys, lotions, hats, smells, and Teddy Grahams. They are a hurricane ravishing your oasis. They are a monster truck, tearing across your field of wildflowers, leaving a scar of mud and a cloud of diesel fumes. They march across the vast openness, and plop down, still bickering, right beside you. Your fortress of solitude is invaded, and you have been rendered powerless by the red sun of Krypton. (Okay, nerdy metaphor, but stay with me.)
Soon, a young couple arrives. They are ill dressed in spiky clothes and gothic makeup. They lie mere feet away from you, alternating between sharing a 7-11 slurpee and making out luridly. They smell funny. Their uncomfortably-tight yet trendy-in-some-circles clothing slips about to reveal rolls of fat and unsettling bulges. They grope and straddle each other openly in simulated love-making poses. You become sandwiched between them and the family of five.
Okay, okay! So I haven’t been keeping up on posts as promised. The Jury Duty thing has been interesting, at best, and frightening, at worst. If you’ve never had the opportunity to serve on a Grand Jury, I recommend it. The volume of cases is enlightening, as far as understanding the process of law. In addition, the interaction with the larger jury (a Grand Jury has 23 jurors rather than the 12 used in a trial jury) is a somewhat harrowing means for looking into the heart of the American judicial system. Okay, so it’s not as bad as all that. Naturally, the jury is comprised of everyday average people. I just wonder if maybe there’s anything skewing that average. If not, then the average is a bit more average than I expected.
The process is as follows: the prosecutor for a certain set of charges presents whatever evidence they have, the jurors are allowed to ask questions of witnesses (through the prosecutor), the charges are read by the prosecutor, and then the jury deliberates and decides if there is “legally sufficient evidence, and reasonable cause to believe” that the defendant can be indicted for those charges. It should be a very straightforward process… since the laws (as is the nature of laws) are very clear on what is required to charge an individual. Where the system falters is with the jurors, funnily enough.
The first thing I noticed is that most people don’t seem to have any grasp of relevance when it comes to what evidence is being presented. The question period, where the witness leaves the court and the jurors are allowed to ask the prosecutor any questions they want put to the witness, is particularly painful! Fortunately, the prosecutor acts as a legal advisor to the jury, telling them what questions are legally proper. In one case, an undercover officer was describing taking part in a drug bust at a certain location. He described the deal taking place at two cross streets (say 95th and Atlantic, as a hypothetical) and explained the rest of the process, such as the exchange of money and the search of the suspect resulting in the finding of 500 pills in separate baggies (narcotics). After the witness left, we were asked if there were any questions. Several members of the jury seemed concerned that 95th street didn’t intersect Atlantic, and the prosecutor was forced to call the witness back and clarify. Yep, he misspoke, it was 93rd or something. Totally irrelevant. The witness had testified that the bust took place in Kings County, and that was all that really mattered, as far as the law was concerned.
On to reading us the charges. One of the charges was possession of a controlled substance with the intent to sell. Well, no one seemed convinced that these 500 pills were intended to be sold! WHAT!?!?! “Well, maybe it was a prescription,” said one juror. I had to argue with her to convince her that pharmacists don’t hand out 500 pills at a time….particularly not of a narcotic drug! Furthermore, they don’t dispense drugs in little plastic baggies. The charge was hotly debated, since most didn’t think it constituted “proof” that the individual was planning to sell the drugs. A bunch of Law & Order fans, no doubt. We don’t have to have proof, just “legally sufficient evidence, and reasonable cause to believe.” This was lost on most, and the charge was dismissed. Yikes.
Another juror decided to excuse herself from the voting process on all charges, because “you guys are throwing these kids in jail! That’s someone’s SON!” Excuse me, but I’m pretty sure that every criminal on the planet (and every non-criminal, for that matter) is someone’s son (or daughter). Not to mention that the Grand Jury doesn’t throw anyone in jail, they are simply indicting them on charges, which will bring them to trial. And all these weird happenings are taken entirely in stride by the system! No one monitors the proceedings (they have to be conducted in secret, with only the jury in the room), and charges are held and dismissed on the whim of a group of people that seem to have no grasp of logic or reason, let alone law.
Follow me on Twitter 
