Oh, the Burning!

Read this post and watch the videos. No, don't turn them off. Sit through that shit. Soak it in. Now, remember when I asked why people believe crap like this? Today I have a new question: Why does the media give quacks like this a voice? Why do they get ANY time in the spotlight? I'm all for freedom of speech, but when that freedom of speech actually misinforms the public and potentially causes harm, isn't it like screaming "FIRE" in a crowded theater?

Also: Sorry it's been slow lately. I'm working on three big ol' posts for The Boneyard. The art is taking awhile.

More Medical Quackery

I didn't have the energy to find these links before, when I was talking about idiots who treat their kids with homeopathy and/or prayer, but I've since run across them.

Prayer does not cure diabetes, Part the First.
Prayer does not cure diabetes, Part the Second.
Herbs and ionized water probably aren't going to help with cancer.
Here's the proof.

If you read some of those links, you'll notice that in many cases the parents are being strung up on criminal charges, which I support entirely. The child's rights are being quashed by the religious/nutjob beliefs of the parents, who are voluntarily sending their spawn to an early grave. On the one hand, this does get rid of idiots from the gene pool (parents die and they killed their offspring already), but on the other hand, I really hate these people. My desire to see justice done outweighs my apathy towards the death of morons.

So again I ask: what drives people to such incredible acts of cognative dissonance? When your daughter is days from death's door, what moves you to email your friends and ask for "emergency prayers?" Because prayer worked so well until that point! A few emergency prayers will do the trick! ACK!

*storms out of the room*

As a brief aside, here's a great Discover magazine story about those moronic anti-vaccine activists and why, even after all their claims have been discredited, they still parade their cause.

ANGRY POSTSCRIPT: Look, just because your fringe, nutcase belief is not supported by science or, perhaps, the public in general, does not mean that there's a gigantic conspiracy going on to subdue said belief. Life is not the The X-Files. Here's how science works: If you don't have a falsifiable theory to support your claim, you MUST defer to the theory that DOES have the evidence, at least until you can present actual evidence to your claim. This is a principle I really want to hit the BAND members over the head with (among other groups). If you can't show me a basal crurotarian or archosaur who shares multiple non-convergent synapamorphies with birds that are not plesiomorphies, shut the fuck up and move on. Merely trying to poke holes in established theories is NOT science. You have to come up with a falsifiable alternative yourself, too. If all available evidence shows that vaccines do NOT cause autism, get the fuck over it and move on with your life. Why is it so difficult for people to accept falsifiability? ARGH!

*storms out of room again*

Water: The Magical Cure-All

Homeopathy kills a child. Now, I'm not surprised that this happened (or happens). What I'm curious about is the motivation for such irrationality. What drives people to seek out bizarre, unproven, "mystical" treatments for maladies that are perfectly treatable with real medicine? Humans have a talent for cognitive dissonance. Even if all evidence points to the contrary, Jenny McCarthy still believes (and that's the proper term) that vaccinations cause autism. Holocaust deniers still believe that Hitler did not, in fact, kill a bunch of Jews. AIDS conspiracy theorists believe that AIDS is a government-created disease meant to thin the population and/or get rid of homosexuals.

But here's my question: why do people believe this nonesense? What is the draw? If I can explain something in perfectly reasonable terms in a way that's clearly observable, why does that not suffice? Why does mysticism have to play a part at all? Look, here's an example. Let's say that one of your friends believes that keeping a dryer sheet in your pocket will keep mosquitoes away. That's an attractive proposition, given that Alaska's mosquitoes are the size of songbirds and darken the skies with their numbers during the height of summer. So you try this. It does not work. You rub the dryer sheet all over your head and neck. Still nothing. You pack several dryer sheets in your pockets. Nada. The mosquitoes don't care. You know what does work? Mosquito repellant, easily purchased as the grocery store for like two dollars. It's a little like suntan lotion, although there's a spray-on kind, too. The point is, repellant works, but the dryer sheet does not.

But your friend still believes that dryer sheets work. Why? When all evidence to the contrary demolishes one's belief, what is the point in retaining that belief? This question applies to a great many subjects including conspiracy theorists, members of the BAND*, homeopaths, religion in general, this guy, and many more.

So I guess my question is this: why do people believe crazy things when they have absolutely no evidence to back those claims up? And why, when contrary evidence is introduced, do they hold on to those beliefs, often with a tightened grip?

*Birds Are Not Dinosaurs

I can't think of a subject line for this!

Holy Mother of I Dunno What. Here's a question for you: If God is loving and kind and all that good stuff, why does S/He let this kind of shit happen? Why weren't all those crazy people in that crazy cult taken out by searing bolts of lightning?

Well, maybe the baby really was a demon. I guess that's entirely possible.

Explain something to me.

This post is not meant to be some self-righteous, morally authoritative rant. Do not take it that way. I am genuinely curious about human motivation here.

So, I'm wondering about drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes. I honestly don't care if people use drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes. I don't, and that's my own choice. I have my own reasons, and the biggest one is: It's just not healthy. Even red wine, which contains a heart-healthy chemical called resveratrol, is ultimately worse for your health than simply eating synthesized resveratrol (which is being developed as we speak).

So here's my question: With all the well-known health risks associated with cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs, why do people voluntarily use them? This is not a question of "Why would you DO that?" But rather, "WHY would you do that?" I'm trying to discover the motivation behind it. And, as a secondary question: If there are some, even fleeting, benefits from cigarettes, alcohol, or drugs, are those benefits simply unavailable from alternative, perhaps healthier sources?