Skeptigator

I know this is a bit of an old article, Feb. 10, 2009 but I just stumbled across it. Alien Census: Can We Estimate How Much Life Is Out There?: Scientific American.

A paper published recently estimates based on computer modeling that “there should be 361 advanced, stable civilizations in the Milky Way” on the low end and upwards of 38,000 depending on some your assumptions (like that panspermia is possible).

The article doesn’t detail what assumptions were made. I’ll have to go pull the paper if I can find it but I’d be curious as to the assumption the author of the paper made regarding the length of time an advanced civilization would last and how much of that time period it would be capable of generating radio signals that could be detected (or other detectable signs of life).

I’ve always found the Time component of the Drake Equation ,N=R* fs fp ne fl fi, to be the most fascinating. Its one thing to figure out how many star systems in a given galaxy could produce intelligent life like we would expect but its another thing entirely to consider that this civilization will only “inhabit” a certain extraordinarily small slice of time, relative to the Universe itself.

Our entire civilization could come and go long before any other civilization could detect us. If memory serves our omni-directional FM radio and TV signals attenuate to the point of being unrecognizable as being generated by an advanced civilization before they even leave our solar system and certainly are so low-powered by the time they reach our nearest stellar neighbor as to be unrecognizable. I think the power of our radio/tv signals are governed by the Inverse Square Law and that if intelligent life on Alpha Centauri had been broadcasting tv signals for the last 20+ years it’s not likely we’d be able to detect even with the Arecibo array. This means we’d literally have to have an alien civilization drive right by us cosmically-speaking. And the only way we’d know someone from another civilization existed is if they shot high-powered, narrowband transmissions right at us. I’m also going off of memory here but I think I remember reading that our earliest transmissions would have only made it a little over 100 Light Years (LY) away by now. Nevermind that they would probably be indistinguishable from background noise.

Alright, enough of that, the point of the preceding was to put into perspective the distances and the narrow slices of time our nearest intelligent neighbors would have to inhabit for us to detect them. So the next question is: 361 sounds like a lot of intelligent life, what’s the average distance in Light Years between us and our potential galactic cousins?

I did some quick lookups and found the volume of the Milky Way is 23 trillion light years but you probably need to take out the galactic center owing to the likely inhospitable supermassive blackhole there and you take out very edges of the Milky Way which are very cool and don’t support very hospitable stars. Yes I’m rigging the game here but let’s just assume that all 361 civilizations roughly inhabit a narrow ring in the Milky Way’s spiral arms and you end up with 250 million light years of volume.*

250,000,000 / 361 = 690,000 cubic light years per civilizations.
Taking the cube root of 690K and you get 630 Light Years between us and our nearest neighbor.

Now look back at those numbers from our own radio and tv signals. Our nearest neighbors would have to have begun broadcasting radio/tv signals during the 1400’s CE in order for them to even begin to get to us and it wouldn’t really matter because their signals would have attenuated so badly we’d have no shot (at least currently) of distinguishing their radio broadcasts from noise.

We really only have a reasonable shot at detecting life at this stage if a) advanced life is waaaay more abundant than we could imagine or b) they somehow know we are here and have for some time and they’ve already been shooting signals straight us. Here’s an interesting article at faqs.org regarding,  How far away could we detect radio transmissions?

When I consider the Universe it can be very humbling. Carl Sagan was right, we inhabit a pale blue dot. I can’t help but feel an tremendous feeling of awe and wonder. Those the best words I’ve got but they seem inadequate when describing the 

There’s an op-ed in Wired Science called, Stop Trying to Save the Planet.

The author tries to make the points that we essentially live in a “used” planet and have for several thousand years. And that our idea of “natural” or the “wild” really means, “hasn’t been touched by humans in awhile.”

He then details three lines of evidence, which boil down to 1) mass extinctions of large fauna that cannot be explained climatologically, 2) the planet is covered almost uniformly with signs of human presence and 3) geological evidence shows a correlation between the rise of human civilizations and greenhouse-gas levels.

His point obviously isn’t that we shouldn’t be recycling or trying to conserve green spaces but that we need to alter our idea of what we’re trying to get “to”. Wherever we think that is probably hasn’t existed nor will it for some time.

I’ve finally gotten around to moving my blog from WordPress’s free hosting to my own hosting. Which means I have to setup WP and configure it, etc. I’ve already had to get into the php, ugh, I hate php. It reminds me of Classic ASP and its spaghetti-code.

This php stuff is supposed to be great ’cause it’s free or open-source or Jesus loves it or something. So far, my verdict is FAIL. I’m having flashbacks of #include files and rs.EOF’s.

Anyway, I’m bitching, that’s what happens when you’ve spent way more time simply “moving” a blog than it should take.

It only gets better from here, DNS should be all set, content is back. I pretty much just have template/widget issues to work out.

Like any good Skeptic a large part of applying skepticism comes down to understanding to some extent human psychology.  Understanding how people think or why they think the way they do can go along way to understanding someone else’s beliefs.

Any good Skeptic should also be fully prepared to turn their critical eye on themselves. Knowing common logical fallacies people make can be used to improve the quality of your own arguments but also highlight weaknesses in other’s arguments.

When evaluating medical claims of herbal supplements I usually apply a “back of the envelope” litmus test to such claims. Failing this litmus test doesn’t inherently disqualify something 1) because its not a fool-proof system 2) I’m not a medical doctor but it does raise some red flags.  Some of those tests are:

“Kitchen Sink” claims
Does this [insert alt med herb/treatment] claim to cure all known diseases, like cancer, memory loss, toxicity and diarrhea simultaneously?

Argument from Naturalness
Does it seem like the biggest thing this [insert herb/claim] has going for it is that its “All Natural”. It shouldn’t need to be said but the claim “natural” is a meaningless term. I’m sure you love your All Natural Wheatgrass/Guava/Arsenic fruit smoothie but I’ll pass.

Does it have Side Effects?
If it doesn’t have any side effects it probably doesn’t have any *main* effects either.

I’ve never really compiled a list of these little litmus tests before and this is certainly not complete. I’d be interested in hearing anyone else’s tests or if someone has already put together a list of these before.

Just like “alt-med” claims there are other little litmus tests that could be applied in specific areas such as investments. Certainly all claims should be thoroughly understood but sometimes you need a cheat sheet.

Here’s a list from U.S. News & World Report on investment scams, The Psychology of Investing Scams. Below is a brief outline to a rather brief article.

While the old adage “if its too good to be true” should always be followed, here are some specific variations on a theme.

The “Phantom Riches” Tactic
If you are guaranteed decent (or extraordinary) and steady returns on an investment, you could end up in a Madoff-style investment/Ponzi Scheme.

The “Source Credibility” Tactic
Anybody can claim to be a financial planner but his she really? Is she registered with an accredited/recognized trade group, like the National Association of Personal Financial Advisers. Are the products sold/marketed registered with the SEC?

The lack of credentials or the registered status of an investment doesn’t disqualify it from being a sound investment but you’ve just removed some level of independent verification and you really, really need to understand how the investment vehicle can generate capital including the risks. You’ve certainly increased your homework.

The “Social Consensus” Tactic
This is fundamentally peer pressure. Everyone else is investing in mortgage-backed securities. Why aren’t you? This is a tough one because in many instances because, “I invested in something because [insert person whose judgment you trust] invested as well.”

The “Reciprocity” Tactic
I call this the “there’s no free dinner” rule. If you are given a free dinner at a nice restaurant and all you have to do is sit through an investment seminar, be prepared for the hard sell. You’ll see this with Buyer’s Clubs where you’ll get a key to a “new car” and all you have to is sit through the sales pitch. The Nigerian Email scam is a grandiose version of this, although this one plays very much to someone’s greed.

The “Scarcity” Tactic
Just as you might assume, “this opportunity will only last for the next 10 minutes so CALL NOW!!!” I think QVC or HSN have perfected this tactic, there’s a reason they show a running clock and slowly dwindling numbers of “items left in stock”. Any long-term investment (and most short-term ones as well) worth being involved in will not disappear overnight. The rhinestone-encrusted unicorn cigarrete lighter/tape recorder on the other hand is only available While Supplies Last.

Cross-posted at FreeThought Fort Wayne

This is the first in a series of posts for FreeThought Fort Wayne to assist its members (and readers) in being able to get the most out of their internets.

Who is this for?

You’ve probably heard the term RSS before but haven’t been able to get any clear direction or information on what it is exactly. This first post will be dedicated to the non-geeks out there. You know who you are and I won’t hold it against you I will publish a second half of this discussion that will delve a little deeper into some advanced features of RSS, despite how simple RSS really is there is an incredible amount of power in the protocol. 

What is RSS?

Before you can use RSS you have to be able to find an RSS feed. Any decent website, blog or podcast will very clearly label their feed. It will be labeled as “Subscribe to our feed” or “Subscribe via RSS” or simply “Subscribe” (like FreeThoughtFortWayne.org, look in the upper right hand part of the webpage). Often times the RSS feed will be identified by an orange icon with white “radio” waves (See the image to the right).

I believe the hallmark of a company that will have the greatest difficulty in adopting a “paperless office” paradigm is it’s commitment to the use of Staplers.

Think about it

I know this stuff is random but I feel compelled to blog about it anyway…

• Moped and Scooter Traffic Enforcement Campaign (Indianasnewscenter.com). As a side-note, I made a “run for the border” late last night and saw a swarm of cops out and this morning I saw 2 moped-ists pulled over on my way to work
• Behavior and “anchoring” (Long Run blog). Yes I’m a dork and find this fascinating, sue me. Btw, the last 2 digits of my SSN are fairly high and my wife’s are very, very low. That explains a lot.
• The Numbers on Teen Pregnancy (Freakonomics) Who’s Bristol Palin?
• Google’s “Chrome” (Kottke.org). It’s a web browser, see dork comment above
• Study links gene variant to men in marital discord (WashingtonPost.com). “Sorry honey but it’s my DNA, I can’t help it.” Let me know how that works out for you, lol

And in case you didn’t know the Republican National Convention is going on as we speak

• Welcome to John McCain’s Party (Salon.com) I believe the commetntary last night talked about the surreal nature of Joe Lieberman’s speech, I agree, wtf? But then I find out that McCain wanted to pick Lieberman as his VP until the social conservative members of his party overruled him. Wait? I thought McCain was a party maverick and would kowtow to the Party*.
• Gustav, global warming and Sarah Palin (Salon.com) That’s funny, Sarah Palin has the same last name as that Bristol girl.

*  Subject to approval by The Party, apparently

Science is reporting, “Genography” puts European ancestry on the map, on recent research out of the University of California.

Population geneticist, John Novembre (cool name, btw), plotted the genetic fingerprints of 1300+ Europeans on a map and found that our DNA provided a “sort of global positioning system” for where your genes originated. Check out the map that accompanies the article, it vaguely looks like the continent of Europe.

Now they had a highly prejudicial sample population, specifically that each person tested was clearly associated (through to their grandparents) to a specific region. So the likelihood that “foreign” DNA wouldn’t likely be introduced for several generations but still an interesting process. This process could simply look at your DNA and not only tell you that you were from Switzerland but likely what village or set of villages you came from.

As reported by ABCNews and Wired, Obama answers your science questions.

At this point it appears that neither candidate will be participating in the ScienceDebate2008. So the fine folks trying to get at least some information on each candidates science policy offered up 14 questions for each campaign to answer. No word yet on McCain’s answers.

Every wanted to know what I read on a daily basis? I’d like know myself. So I kept a browser up all day and every time I read something online I just left the article up just to see the kind of stuff I read in one day.

Here’s the analysis of the 54 webpages I left up and running (holy crap!).

1) Roughly half were skepticism or freethought related (No surprises there), sites like

• skepchick.org,
• friendlyatheist.com,
• freethoughtfortwayne.org or
• badastronomy.com

2) I did have about 4 articles up from my new favorite blog, thelongrunblog.com. It’s an economics plus skepticism blog from one of the SGU Rogue’s Gallery bloggers, Jon Blumenfeld.

3) About a quarter of my articles were local or national news items

• local boy hit twice crossing the street
• Zimbabweans using gas coupons as currency instead of actual Zimbabwean currency (essentially they’ve switched to a modern day “gold standard”, of course, meaning their “currency” now is backed by something tangible instead of the good faith and credit of Zimbabwe which apparently has run out)

4) and then just a bunch of random stuff that I don’t even know how to classify,

• How Obama reconciles dueling views on economics (NY Times)
• Top economic misconceptions of the lay people you wish you could correct? (Marginal Revolution)
• D-minus for 3-D by Roger Ebert (Chicago Sun Times)
• What does it take to get a Wine Spectator Award of Excellence? (Osteria L’Intrepido Di Milano)

So there you have it, the semi-eclectic readings of Skep