I doubt it. And you should too.

Welcome to the Doubtful blog run by Sharon Hill (idoubtit).

This site features original content on the topics of science and the public, skepticism and popular paranormal subjects. Click on the categories section to see all posts on a certain topic. Be sure to visit the pages listed above, especially the “Best of…” page. Thanks for visiting.

Check out Doubtful News for the latest in paranormal and pseudoscience news for skeptics (because people really believe this stuff).

Sounds Sciencey is now UP

I just got a new spot on the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (formerly CSICOP) web page. It’s a column called “Sounds Sciencey” Unmasking “scientifical” claims, sham inquiry, and science imposters in popular culture.

Come on over and see my first post, a long one, about being sciencey and “scientifical”

“Scientific”: It’s just a catchphrase!

I’m really excited about it.

Also exciting is the success of the Doubtful News site. It’s a lot of work but I get a feel for the way the media covers these stories and how the reader OUGHT to be wary and critique them. We’ve also had some personalities themselves visit and provide comments. I try to moderate pretty tightly but discussion is encouraged.

It’s a really busy time but I’m enjoying it. Thanks for visiting.

Follow on twitter @idoubtit and @doubtfulnews

Mind the gap: Entering strange new territory on my Bigfoot weekend

Are you a believer or a skeptic?

Awful categories, aren’t they? No one fits neatly into one or the other all the time. I apologize in advance for using these words as descriptors. I couldn’t think of a good way to express what we mean when applying these as processes, not a broad brush label.

Everyone is skeptical about something. Some of us apply it more evenly or have embraced it more thoroughly (as a process we use to judge claims). Even true believers harbor doubts about aspects of their subject. Sometimes, the doubts win and they drift away from their believing community.

I’m not talking about God, I’m talking about ghosts and Bigfoot.

I want to share some interesting episodes that took place in what I’m calling my Bigfoot weekend of October 21-23. I discovered many people existing in the gap between skepticism and the paranormal. They can tell us a whole lot about these topics we might otherwise miss.

Blogging roundup for October

As I mentioned in the Ups and Downs post, I’m blogging at different locations these days.

First, make sure you head over to Doubtful News, updated every day (except the occasional day where I’m not able to be online). The purpose of that site is to provide a one stop location for all paranormal and skeptical news hot off the internet. I work pretty hard to be first so check in often to find stories before they hit the mainstream. Some are ridiculous (alien and Bigfoot reports) and some are very serious (children’s health). But all are hand-picked to be interesting. And, we try to be funny. That sometimes works out. T and I were happy to have the blog syndicated on Skeptic.com as well.

Follow @doubtfulnews on Twitter for some live tweeting, like I recently did from the premier of the movie The Bigfoot Hunter:  Still Searching and from the PA Bigfoot Convention. I’ll have more about those events coming up here. Hopefully. Kinda busy…but it was a great weekend.

The ups and downs of skeptical blogging

I’ve had this blog since December 2006. It took a while to get it to a place where it received more than a few dozen regular daily visitors. During this run, I noticed a few things that I thought might be worthwhile to share.

Did zoo animals predict the Virginia earthquake? Look closer.

A day after the east coast earthquake (now forever to be remembered by me as “the best birthday present ever!”), the Smithsonian issued a press release about the behavior of animals at the National Zoo, more than 80 miles from the epicenter of the quake. Some media outlets reported on the news as “animals go wild”, “animals went berserk”. Many said “how animals predicted the quake”.

All of those are wrong.

What really happened?

New cryptozoology: less credulous, more scientific

There is a stereotype about Bigfoot and Nessie devotees. Typically, they are middle-aged or older men, often with facial hair. They seem obsessed and the public might see them as a bit “off”.  It’s true that there is not that much diversity in the list of monster researchers. But, cryptozoology is changing.

Today’s researchers are examining questions from a new perspective. They can organize and communicate better thanks to the internet. There are new types of books and media. I feel positive about the future of the field of cryptozoology and excited for new things to come. At The Amazing Meeting 9 (TAM 9) in Las Vegas in July, gathered together was a group of people that had everything to do with my positive attitude.

All the people in this photo contribute to moving the subject of cryptozoology away from the stereotypes and the paranormal realm and into the circle of popular cultural and scientific understanding. This group is no less excited by the idea that cryptids are real, unknown animals. It’s just that we are realistic about it. We don’t assume the stories can be taken at face value because we know mistakes are made. We do not come in with a presupposed notion about what a person saw. Our scope is larger; our conclusions are based on what we know is likely true, not what we wish to be true.

From left: S. Hill, B. Smith, B. Radford, D. Prothero, J. Nickell, M. Crowley, K. Stollznow, D. Loxton

Photo by M. Crowley

Bigfoot “facts” for kids?

A very useful website, Bigfoot Evidence, has posted a link to a website called “Is Bigfoot Real” [refrain from clicking unless absolutely necessary] which contains a page called “Bigfoot Facts for Kids”. See the full page here on the B.E. site instead.

The so called “facts” given are as follows:

• Where Has Bigfoot Been Seen? Bigfoot has been spotted all over the world. People often see Bigfoot in wooded areas or high in the mountains.
• What Does Bigfoot Eat? Bigfoot is an omnivore. This means he eats both plants and animals. Researchers say Bigfoot eats nuts, berries, fish and deer.
• How Does Bigfoot Act? Bigfoot is shy. He likes to live with others of his own kind but doesn’t like being around people. He doesn’t like to have his picture taken so it’s hard to get him on film. Bigfoot talks to each other by making loud calls across long distances.
• Does Bigfoot Hurt People? No, Bigfoot doesn’t try to hurt people on purpose. Sometimes though, when people accidentally wander into his territory, he’s been known to throw rocks at them to frighten them away. Bigfoot isn’t trying to be mean. He’s just trying to protect his home and family.

Your friendly neighborhood mon$ter

In a recent post on Skeptoid blog, I suggest that paranormal-based tourism, such as ghost tours and monster festivals, which are growing in popularity, border on fraud.

“Even if there are long-standing legends of strange events occurring at some location, to suggest that a place is haunted just to freak people out is contemptible.”

“Ghost tours and monster festivals are fun. But, their apparent frivolity disguise an underlying invitation to buy into an idea just because it’s entertaining while having no basis in reality.”

Commenters remarked that I might be getting too worked up over it. Meanwhile, I found this commentary from a local who thinks his town needs one of them monsters to draw tourists and he is not beyond creating one from scratch.

Today’s edition of being scientifical: UFO research and homeopathy

Ever on the lookout for scientifical examples, here are two that I thought were interesting.

The first relates to my interest in amateurs being scientifical. UFO researcher Budd Hopkins presented the results of a study he conducted at a conference about UFO abductees. According to Robert Sheaffer (Skeptical Inquirer V. 35 No. 3 May/June 2001 p 25-27), he was roundly taken to task. Hopkins devised an image recognition test supposedly to determine if children were being abducted. He also conducted a Roper poll to find out how many Americans believed they have been abducted. His research lacks the basic protocol of credible research. Why? Hopkins is not a scientist.