Episode #338

[JuniorSpaceman]

Nice podcast!

I enjoyed hearing from Martin, as always. I just wonder why Sweden seems to be so enamoured of this particular branch of pseudo-science, whereas most of us elsewhere in the world think of Scandinavia as a particularly rational area.

Also, although we may get sick of it, I love the 'Quickie with Bob' segment  8)

[smithkhome]

Nice podcast!

I enjoyed hearing from Martin, as always. I just wonder why Sweden seems to be so enamoured of this particular branch of pseudo-science, whereas most of us elsewhere in the world think of Scandinavia as a particularly rational area.

Also, although we may get sick of it, I love the 'Quickie with Bob' segment  8)

Interesting how each area of the world seems to have its own favorite pseudoscience.

US: Creationism, UK: Homeopathy, Sweden: EMF sensitivity?

[smithkhome]

Thanks guys and Happy New Year. WTN starts at 38:00 and the new Noisy is at 41:13 .. but I think smithkhome has probably nailed it.

Heard "parent" and "empower". First thing that came to my mind was a lot of the anti-vaxxer arguments.

Maybe someone has a more specific answer?

[pchemist]

Also, although we may get sick of it, I love the 'Quickie with Bob' segment  8)

I love the idea. If I ever see a live show I'm yelling it out (whether they decide to honor it or not).

[alanog]

Isn't Jay's prediction (that no predictions made on the show this year will come true) subject to some kind of Godelian trap, where if it's true, then his prediction is true, which would then make his prediction untrue?
I've just finished reading Godel, Escher, Bach so I'm probably primed for this kind of thing.

[synsei]

Hey guys, best wishes for 2012.
• One way to expose the psychic twins would be to find out whether or not
their sister's number is stored in their cell phone directory. Why should it be?
• If the butterflies mimicking heliconius doesn't have photoreceptors making
them able to distinguish heliconius from their own specie, shouldn't that trick them
into mating (or trying to) with the heliconius they mimick?
• About the levitation platform: if Rebeca was refering to the superconductivity and
"quantum levitation" cool videos with these magnetic monorails,
this is not a prediction, not just because it hasn't become a human transportation technology "yet",
but because these things hovering and rotating above a magnet at -300°F have been around for years, even decades.
• Earth sized planets and planets holding water but not being the same would count as a hit in fortunetellers' own standarts.
This makes Steve the skeptic psychic of the year for 2011. Also Luc Montagnier is kind of dead to science,
at least as long he doesn't realise he's researching rationializations for something non existing.
• Jay's prediction is unfillable, it holds a paradox. "None of our predictions [...] will come true."
If every other's prediction happens to fail, that would make Jay's prediction true, therefore it would be false,
therefore it would be true, therefore....
Thanks for that great episode.

[pchemist]

Isn't Jay's prediction (that no predictions made on the show this year will come true) subject to some kind of Godelian trap, where if it's true, then his prediction is true, which would then make his prediction untrue?
I've just finished reading Godel, Escher, Bach so I'm probably primed for this kind of thing.

It's like this question:
If you were to randomly choose an answer to this question, what is the probability you would be correct?
A- 16%
B- 25%
C- 50%
D- 25%

[Anders]

Nice podcast!

I enjoyed hearing from Martin, as always. I just wonder why Sweden seems to be so enamoured of this particular branch of pseudo-science, whereas most of us elsewhere in the world think of Scandinavia as a particularly rational area.

Also, although we may get sick of it, I love the 'Quickie with Bob' segment  8)

Interesting how each area of the world seems to have its own favorite pseudoscience.

US: Creationism, UK: Homeopathy, Sweden: EMF sensitivity?

EMF Sensitivity is big here; the Green party has adopted the cause.

[Citizen Skeptic]

Nice podcast!

I enjoyed hearing from Martin, as always. I just wonder why Sweden seems to be so enamoured of this particular branch of pseudo-science, whereas most of us elsewhere in the world think of Scandinavia as a particularly rational area.

Also, although we may get sick of it, I love the 'Quickie with Bob' segment  8)

Interesting how each area of the world seems to have its own favorite pseudoscience.

US: Creationism, UK: Homeopathy, Sweden: EMF sensitivity?

EMF Sensitivity is big here; the Green party has adopted the cause.

So the Green party has jumped the whaleshark?

[Anders]

Actually I'm not entirely certain; I know a prominent Green politician (Per Gahrton) has adopted the cause. I'm trying to get onto their website but the lag is horrible.

[Trinoc]

Actually I'm not entirely certain; I know a prominent Green politician (Per Gahrton) has adopted the cause. I'm trying to get onto their website but the lag is horrible.

Not surprising if they try to run a web server without electricity.

[Anders]

I got the following message:

Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.

Exception Details: System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.

Source Error:

An unhandled exception was generated during the execution of the current web request. Information regarding the origin and location of the exception can be identified using the exception stack trace below.

Stack Trace:

[NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.]
   mpHtmlCache.PageRipperDB.deletecacheObject(cacheObject tempObj)
   mpHtmlCache.PageRipperDB.rippPage(String www, String QueryString, DateTime expireDate, Boolean isCachePage)
   mpHtmlCache.PageRipperDB.rippPage(String www, String QueryString, DateTime expireDate)
   mpHtmlCache.PageRipperDB.getPage(String www, String QueryString, DateTime expireDate, Boolean forceReCache, Boolean returnOnlyCachedPages)
   mpHtmlCache.Mct_177.getPage(PageRipperDB prp, String www, String queryString, DateTime expireDate, Boolean forceReCache, Boolean returnOnlyCachedPage)
   mpHtmlCache.Mct_177.Page_Load(Object sender, EventArgs e)
   System.EventHandler.Invoke(Object sender, EventArgs e) +0
   System.Web.UI.Control.OnLoad(EventArgs e) +67
   System.Web.UI.Control.LoadRecursive() +35
   System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain() +750

What the hell was that about?

[MagnusM]

Isn't Jay's prediction (that no predictions made on the show this year will come true) subject to some kind of Godelian trap, where if it's true, then his prediction is true, which would then make his prediction untrue?
I've just finished reading Godel, Escher, Bach so I'm probably primed for this kind of thing.

It's like this question:
If you were to randomly choose an answer to this question, what is the probability you would be correct?
A- 16%
B- 25%
C- 50%
D- 25%

I have to disagree with you. I don't think that question is paradoxical. The correct answer is 0%, but that answer is not given. In my opinion a multiple choice question that has a correct answer, but does not list it, should not be classified as paradoxical. However, I think you might be able to make it paradoxical by changing option A from "16%" to "0%". At least then self-reference will lead to there being no possible correct answer. Having option A be "16%" seems arbitrary anyway.

[pchemist]

Isn't Jay's prediction (that no predictions made on the show this year will come true) subject to some kind of Godelian trap, where if it's true, then his prediction is true, which would then make his prediction untrue?
I've just finished reading Godel, Escher, Bach so I'm probably primed for this kind of thing.

It's like this question:
If you were to randomly choose an answer to this question, what is the probability you would be correct?
A- 16%
B- 25%
C- 50%
D- 25%

I have to disagree with you. I don't think that question is paradoxical. The correct answer is 0%, but that answer is not given. In my opinion a multiple choice question that has a correct answer, but does not list it, should not be classified as paradoxical. However, I think you might be able to make it paradoxical by changing option A from "16%" to "0%". At least then self-reference will lead to there being no possible correct answer. Having option A be "16%" seems arbitrary anyway.

Fair enough.

[mazeedt]

Nice podcast!

I enjoyed hearing from Martin, as always. I just wonder why Sweden seems to be so enamoured of this particular branch of pseudo-science, whereas most of us elsewhere in the world think of Scandinavia as a particularly rational area.

Also, although we may get sick of it, I love the 'Quickie with Bob' segment  8)

People are always going to be people...
You can't change that