Login |
New User
Over 1.5 million copies sold
Books by Richard Dawkins
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
Climbing Mount Improbable
by Richard Dawkins
Print
Supernatural science: Why we want to believe
by MSNBC
Thanks to Jesse for the link.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26268698/
Supernatural science: Why we want to believe
Monsters are everywhere these days, and belief in them is as strong as ever
By Robert Roy Britt
Monsters are everywhere these days, and belief in them is as strong as ever. What's harder to believe is why so many people buy into hazy evidence, shady schemes and downright false reports that perpetuate myths that often have just one ultimate truth: They put money in the pockets of their purveyors.
The bottom line, according to several interviews with people who study these things: People want to believe, and most simply can't help it.
"Many people quite simply just want to believe," said Brian Cronk, a professor of psychology at Missouri Western State University. "The human brain is always trying to determine why things happen, and when the reason is not clear, we tend to make up some pretty bizarre explanations."
A related question: Does belief in the paranormal have anything to do with religious belief?
The answer to that question is decidedly nuanced, but studies point to an interesting conclusion: People who practice religion are typically encouraged not to believe in the paranormal, but rather to put their faith in one deity, whereas those who aren't particularly active in religion are more free to believe in Bigfoot or consult a psychic.
"Christians and New Agers, paranormalists, etc. all have one thing in common: a spiritual orientation to the world," said sociology Professor Carson Mencken of Baylor University.
A tale last week by three men who said they have remains of Bigfoot in a freezer was reported by many Web sites as anywhere from final proof of the creature to at least a very compelling case to keep the fantasy ball rolling and cash registers ringing for Bigfoot trinkets and tourism (all three men involved make money off the belief in this creature). Even mainstream media treated a Friday press conference about the "finding" as news.
Reactions by the public ranged from skeptical curiosity to blind faith.
"I believe they do exist but I'm not sure about this," said one reader reacting to a story on LiveScience that cast doubt the claim. "I guess we will find out ... if this is on the up and up," wrote another. "However, that said, I know they exist."
A subsequent test on the supposed Bigfoot found nothing but the DNA of humans and an opossum, a small, cat-like creature.
Also last week, in Texas there was yet another sensational yet debunkable sighting of chupacabra, a beast of Latin-American folklore. The name means "goat sucker." In this case, law enforcement bought into the hooey with an apparent wink and nod.
Ellie Carter, a patrol trainee with the DeWitt County sheriff's office, saw the beast and was, of course, widely quoted. "It was this — thing, looking right at us," she said. "I think that's a chupacabra!" After watching a video of the beast taken by a sheriff's deputy, biologist Scott Henke of Texas A&M University said, "It's a dog for sure," according to a story on Scientific American's Web site.
Meanwhile, the sheriff did nothing to tamp down rampant speculation, expressing delight that he might have a monster on his hands. "I love this for DeWitt County," said Sheriff Jode Zavesky, who would presumably be just as thrilled to let Dracula or a werewolf run free.
With that kind of endorsement and the human propensity to believe in just about anything, it's clear that Bigfoot and chupacabra are just two members in a cast of mythical characters and dubious legends and ideas will likely never go away.
In a 2006 study, researchers found a surprising number of college students believe in psychics, witches, telepathy, channeling and a host of other questionable ideas. A full 40 percent said they believe houses can be haunted.
Why are people so eager to accept flimsy and fabricated evidence in support of unlikely and even outlandish creatures and ideas? Why is the paranormal realm, from psychic predictions to UFO sightings, so alluring to so many?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26268698/
Supernatural science: Why we want to believe
Monsters are everywhere these days, and belief in them is as strong as ever
By Robert Roy Britt
Monsters are everywhere these days, and belief in them is as strong as ever. What's harder to believe is why so many people buy into hazy evidence, shady schemes and downright false reports that perpetuate myths that often have just one ultimate truth: They put money in the pockets of their purveyors.
The bottom line, according to several interviews with people who study these things: People want to believe, and most simply can't help it.
"Many people quite simply just want to believe," said Brian Cronk, a professor of psychology at Missouri Western State University. "The human brain is always trying to determine why things happen, and when the reason is not clear, we tend to make up some pretty bizarre explanations."
A related question: Does belief in the paranormal have anything to do with religious belief?
The answer to that question is decidedly nuanced, but studies point to an interesting conclusion: People who practice religion are typically encouraged not to believe in the paranormal, but rather to put their faith in one deity, whereas those who aren't particularly active in religion are more free to believe in Bigfoot or consult a psychic.
"Christians and New Agers, paranormalists, etc. all have one thing in common: a spiritual orientation to the world," said sociology Professor Carson Mencken of Baylor University.
A tale last week by three men who said they have remains of Bigfoot in a freezer was reported by many Web sites as anywhere from final proof of the creature to at least a very compelling case to keep the fantasy ball rolling and cash registers ringing for Bigfoot trinkets and tourism (all three men involved make money off the belief in this creature). Even mainstream media treated a Friday press conference about the "finding" as news.
Reactions by the public ranged from skeptical curiosity to blind faith.
"I believe they do exist but I'm not sure about this," said one reader reacting to a story on LiveScience that cast doubt the claim. "I guess we will find out ... if this is on the up and up," wrote another. "However, that said, I know they exist."
A subsequent test on the supposed Bigfoot found nothing but the DNA of humans and an opossum, a small, cat-like creature.
Also last week, in Texas there was yet another sensational yet debunkable sighting of chupacabra, a beast of Latin-American folklore. The name means "goat sucker." In this case, law enforcement bought into the hooey with an apparent wink and nod.
Ellie Carter, a patrol trainee with the DeWitt County sheriff's office, saw the beast and was, of course, widely quoted. "It was this — thing, looking right at us," she said. "I think that's a chupacabra!" After watching a video of the beast taken by a sheriff's deputy, biologist Scott Henke of Texas A&M University said, "It's a dog for sure," according to a story on Scientific American's Web site.
Meanwhile, the sheriff did nothing to tamp down rampant speculation, expressing delight that he might have a monster on his hands. "I love this for DeWitt County," said Sheriff Jode Zavesky, who would presumably be just as thrilled to let Dracula or a werewolf run free.
With that kind of endorsement and the human propensity to believe in just about anything, it's clear that Bigfoot and chupacabra are just two members in a cast of mythical characters and dubious legends and ideas will likely never go away.
In a 2006 study, researchers found a surprising number of college students believe in psychics, witches, telepathy, channeling and a host of other questionable ideas. A full 40 percent said they believe houses can be haunted.
Why are people so eager to accept flimsy and fabricated evidence in support of unlikely and even outlandish creatures and ideas? Why is the paranormal realm, from psychic predictions to UFO sightings, so alluring to so many?
Add to del.icio.us
Posted: Thursday, August 21, 2008 | PermalinkComments 1 - 50 of 117 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #234534 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on August 21, 2008 at 2:08 pm
I remember as a 16 year old I didn't believe in ghosts or paranormal stuff or anything of that sort, but for some reason I would never touch a weejee board. I'm not sure why, but I had a feeling that there was something to it. Thinking back now I remember a lot of stories at the time of horrible things happening to people who used a board. I just can't understand why, if I cast off all that other stuff as rubbish, I fell for the wejee bollocks.Other Comments by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy
3. Comment #234537 by Sargeist on August 21, 2008 at 2:16 pm
HAVNB: I agree. It's something about the noise they make on the wet glass that always gets me.*shudder*
Other Comments by Sargeist
4. Comment #234538 by esuther on August 21, 2008 at 2:16 pm
"Why are people so eager to accept ....outlandish creatures and ideas??This may be one of the few things that separates humans from animals, that is, the tendency toward fantasy. Parents tell their children stories, in some households the stories are religious, in others they are just fairy tales. But it is hard to imagine a child growing up with no stories at all. Even in the absence of parental stories, children absorb narratives from outside and fantasize about themselves doing heroic things.
For some reason, we never quite seem to outgrow this. Even those of us who have the intellectual fortitude to reject religion and mysticism still are willing to suspend disbelief for a movie or a play or a good novel, and I am inclined to think the part of the brain operating is the same both for a good movie and for a good religion.
I remember myself as a young child being able to vividly imagine myself walking with the shepherds to a stable in Bethlehem to see the Christ child. It was so real to me. I shook off religion very early on, but the image of being on that hillside with the shepherds is still quite clear.
Something to do with infantile imprinting, I suppose. In any case, the pleasure, the sheer "reality" of fantasy is what made me a fiction writer. My characters are quite real and three dimensional to me, since I spend so many hundreds of hours creating them and having things happen to them. I can well understand how Jesus et al can seem real to a fundie. That part of the brain keeps functioning and in most people, it is more powerful than the rational part.
Other Comments by esuther
5. Comment #234539 by Logicel on August 21, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Why are people so eager to accept flimsy and fabricated evidence in support of unlikely and even outlandish creatures and ideas? Why is the paranormal realm, from psychic predictions to UFO sightings, so alluring to so many?____
Because we encourage such behavior in each other? Instead of saying, cut the crap out, we respect the belief, wanting to be so open-minded that our brains fall out, and then of course when that happens, we are doomed, staying mired within non-evidential beliefs. And the media and con-artists fan these flames of brain-dead idiocy.
Other Comments by Logicel
6. Comment #234542 by 8teist on August 21, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Maybe if all these supernaturalists could learn how to use a camera ,all I am asking for, is one infocus shot,then maybe we could start to believe that they are not all raving loonies. Other Comments by 8teist
7. Comment #234548 by nogodsever on August 21, 2008 at 2:39 pm
What does Bigfoot have to do with the supernatural? If it did exist, it would simply be an undocumented species. Not that I believe it does. Other Comments by nogodsever
8. Comment #234556 by Border Collie on August 21, 2008 at 2:57 pm
All I know is that many or most human minds project strange things into dark, empty places. I guess it's more fun than just walking over to the dark, empty place and checking it out with a flashlight. I mean, really, what's more fun, a scraggly stray dog or a chupacabra? And, the US, esp. the southern US, is filled with poorly educated people who get at least a weekly injection of the paranormal at church. What can be expected except Big Foot sightings? Oh, and we want to believe because it's easier. We don't have the tools to observe and analyze rationally. One actually has to go to school, study and learn for that.Other Comments by Border Collie
9. Comment #234558 by NewEnglandBob on August 21, 2008 at 3:02 pm
"Supernatural science" is an oxymoron. Just like "compassionate conservative" and "peaceful religion" Other Comments by NewEnglandBob
10. Comment #234561 by aceofspies2006 on August 21, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Oh come on! We all know that Bigfoot was actually Graeme Garden from 'The Goodies' cashing in on the gullibility of millions as the 'late' Arthur C. Clarke! Come to think of it, this Richard Dawkins chap - is there any actual proof HE exists!! I mean, a few books (like the bible) a few glimpses through the undergrowth (like Bigfoot)...I think we need a full investigation here! Richard Dawkins: Man or Myth??Other Comments by aceofspies2006
11. Comment #234563 by NightHiker on August 21, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Why are people so eager to accept flimsy and fabricated evidence in support of unlikely and even outlandish creatures and ideas?"
If you think in terms of natural selection, I believe there's an explanation:
During most of the time while our brains evolved, what was the most important source of information, often times even more than our senses? Teachings passed on by oral tradition.
Now, considering the fact that good stories, as far as natural selection is regarded, were the stories that kept our ancestors alive in order to reproduce, whether they were actually true or not was irrelevant.
Frightening stories about monsters are a great way to keep children away from real danger. The fact such monsters do not exist is moot, since it's better to be cautious and stay away from both real and imagined monsters than being eaten by the first, which usually fail to make as good an impression on our collective minds than the really bad, but fake ones.
That said, it seems logical that societies where such oral traditions existed and/or the individuals were more susceptible to them would have the competitive edge against those who relied only on the less persuasive "truth" or where people didn't fall for a white lie.
The imaginary state of most creatures began to be an issue only recently in the evolutionary context, after more than a hundred thousand of years learning through those stories made our brains gullible by default.
It takes a lot of training to not let oneself be mesmerized by such tales, and we cannot say the resulting skepticism is necessarily more gratifying or useful than the blissful ignorance of the average person, as everyone of us can easily testify after pretending such ignorance for the delight of watching and reading our favorite fantasy movies and books.
NH
Other Comments by NightHiker
12. Comment #234565 by kkelly on August 21, 2008 at 3:18 pm
5, Yes. Television shows on the supernatural almost always distort and omit. The con artist Erik von Daniken who wrote the book on extraterrestrial influences on ancient civilizations is treated as a respected archeaologist. Flying "rods", obviously insects and proven to be, are treated as likely mysterious life forms. As a kid I believed, or thought possible, supernatural claims solely BECAUSE these programs masquerade as honest and scientific. Other Comments by kkelly
13. Comment #234566 by nervouswreck on August 21, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Belief in these things all come from our brains processing senses into possible threats. You might at first think the stick is a snake...It's unfortunate that so many use this false recognition to explain miracles and as evidence of the supernatural without proof.
Of course, the thing I miss most about my youth is the vivid imagination.
Other Comments by nervouswreck
14. Comment #234568 by Dogrev on August 21, 2008 at 3:26 pm
I am beginning to feel like a bit of a freak. After having grown up in a family whose whole life revolved around a fundamentalist sect I rejected all forms of religion at around 12 years of age. I loved reading and lapped up all the usual child fantasy like The Saint, Biggles, and James Bond but as I matured I gradually lost interest in anything that seemed to be improbable or unprovable. I think Paul Gallico's "Hand of Mary Constable" influenced me. I have never believed any any form of alternative medicine and am fairly skeptical of some of the mainstream practices as well. It strange to me because none of my friends or acquaintances agree with my way of thinking. Other Comments by Dogrev
15. Comment #234569 by spacepenguin on August 21, 2008 at 3:26 pm
I wonder if perhaps there is an evolutionary way of looking at things like this.It has been said before that we have promiscuous agency detectors. This is advantageous as a tendency to false positive detections of, say, predators is far more adaptive than a tendency to false negatives.
However I would say there is the opposite selection effect for prey detection. A false positive there could result in your actual prey escaping (if, for instance, you threw your rock at the wrong target).
I wonder, then, if that is why reports of ghosts, bigfoot or things of that nature seem mainly to come from people that aren't looking for them?
Because the agency detector is set to attack rather than defence it is much less likely to come up with a false positive.
Other Comments by spacepenguin
16. Comment #234570 by The Schuermannator on August 21, 2008 at 3:26 pm
I still have difficulty looking into a mirror in a very dark room. Ever since around 3rd grade the good ole stories of Bloody Mary coming thru the glass. Now obviously, I know there's nothing on the other side of that mirrow except for my bedroom wall. But when walking by it at night I tend to turn my head away. It's a silly feeling, and it helps me to remember just how human I am, and how funny our brains are. Other Comments by The Schuermannator
17. Comment #234573 by NightHiker on August 21, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Dear Spacepenguin,Because the agency detector is set to attack rather than defence it is much less likely to come up with a false positive.
I don't think it is a matter of "attack" or "defense" as much as simply a matter of "focus". We are misled to believe we actually see and process everything around us, when we actually are able to really pay attention only to a very small visual arc at a time, our brains filling in the surrounding details from memory. When we look around, we are really "seeing" only a very small portion and imagining the rest.
Since when we are the predators we need to pay attention to the prey, we learn to focus on it. When we are unaware of a particular threat, however, our first perception of it will most likely come from the periphery of our visual field, the region where the information comes as much, if not more, from our memory than what we are actually "seeing".
But in order to fill in the blanks, we need to have mental images of the threat, and we're much more likely to draw them from imaginary mental images collected through oral tradition than real threats, because they may be much more vivid and present than memories of real threats. Better to think you are running from a monster from a story than stop to look back in order to focus on and be eaten by a lion.
NH
Other Comments by NightHiker
18. Comment #234577 by spacepenguin on August 21, 2008 at 4:04 pm
NightHiker:I think you're right that focus is a better way to put it.
It just occurred to me that you never seem to get successful ghost hunts (by that I mean self-reported success obviously). Or at least I haven't heard of one.
I wonder if the fact that they are looking for ghostly activity makes them less likely to misinterpret the various things people have mistaken as ghosts. Though this might seem counter-intuitive.
Other Comments by spacepenguin
19. Comment #234579 by Lucas on August 21, 2008 at 4:12 pm
esuther and NH, you've nailed it. Other Comments by Lucas
20. Comment #234580 by Jesus was a zombie on August 21, 2008 at 4:12 pm
16. The Schuermannator
I know exactly what you mean. I don't believe in ghosts, or at least I treat all ghost stories with a heavy dose of scepticism. However, lock me in a creepy old house that has groaning floorboards and suspicious noises coming from the attic and i'd be the first one to break down the door and make a run for it!
17. NightHicker
I remember being fascinated by the subject of peripheral vision in my biology a level class. You are indeed right, most of our peripheral vision comes from memory and on top of that we do not detect colour from our peripheral vision. If you bring a coloured pen slowly round into someones field of vision from behind their head(provided they stare straight ahead at all times) they will see the pen quite a while before they can tell you what colour it is. Also, if i remember rightly, your periphery lacks quite a bit of focus. Its astonishing once you realize how much your brain improvises with your vision that eye witness testimony is still held in quite high regard. (EDIT: especially were the supernatural is concerned!)
Other Comments by Jesus was a zombie
21. Comment #234581 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on August 21, 2008 at 4:14 pm
With all this talk of seeing things when you're not looking for them ... does that explain why I could only ever find Wally when I wasn't looking for him but just enjoying the picture?Other Comments by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy
22. Comment #234583 by moderndaythomas on August 21, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Ghosts don't like me much; I'm much to sceptical for them to be seen with. I have to ask myself, is it the absence of scepticism, or the presence of gullibility that ghosts prefer. Other Comments by moderndaythomas
23. Comment #234585 by Enlightenme.. on August 21, 2008 at 4:25 pm
We're rather overdue a few new sightings of the Loch Ness monster backed with some shaky mobile phone footage, I could fly over the Loch a couple of times I s'pose, and cast some shadows - Britain's tourist industry could do with a boost.
casting shadows link
Other Comments by Enlightenme..
24. Comment #234588 by NightHiker on August 21, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Jesus was a zombie,Regarding our irrational fears, at least we can blame natural selection when that happens.
On a side note...
DeWitt County - what an aptly named place, considering the sample thoughts we were presented with.
Other Comments by NightHiker
25. Comment #234599 by qomak on August 21, 2008 at 6:13 pm
The bottom line, according to several interviews with people who study these things: People want to believe, and most simply can't help it.
...
People who practice religion are typically encouraged not to believe in the paranormal, but rather to put their faith in one deity, whereas those who aren't particularly active in religion are more free to believe in Bigfoot or consult a psychic.
I cannot see how the conclusion mentioned in the first paragraph follows from this evidence. Almost all religions usually have a very clear position on many supernatural subjects and very often they deny any supernatural claim which is not their own. Given this, it is not surprising that followers of a religious sect will not subscribe to a different supernatural belief.
I don't think we can conclude that people have an inner desire to find replacements for their irrational beliefs, at least not by this evidence.
Without proper education on science and scientific method of course these superstitions will grow. The fact that we are biased towards false positives is pretty much proven.
Other Comments by qomak
26. Comment #234601 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 6:16 pm
"People who practice religion are typically encouraged not to believe in the paranormal"Perhaps the human mind can only hold so many foolish beliefs. Once you pack a whole religion in there there really isn't room for big foot.
Other Comments by J Mac
27. Comment #234602 by Goldy on August 21, 2008 at 6:23 pm
People who practice religion are typically encouraged not to believe in the paranormal, but rather to put their faith in one deity,...
Unless, of course, they are polytheist. Slight bias in this report, methinks...
Other Comments by Goldy
28. Comment #234604 by chewedbarber on August 21, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Why are people so eager to accept flimsy and fabricated evidence in support of unlikely and even outlandish creatures and ideas?
Because our universe and our existence is fucking outlandish, and without a proper introduction to it we might believe anything.
Other Comments by chewedbarber
29. Comment #234610 by Whistledink on August 21, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Steist: I always like to ask theists: "Why is it that the really cool stuff stopped happening after cameras were invented."Pisses 'em right off.
Other Comments by Whistledink
30. Comment #234614 by Double Bass Atheist on August 21, 2008 at 7:17 pm
The paraphrase of John 3:16 says it all: "For God so loved the world, He gave His only begotten son, that whoever believes in Him would believe pretty much any fucking thing." Other Comments by Double Bass Atheist
31. Comment #234618 by William Kaiser on August 21, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Richard Dawkins would gain millions, perhaps billions, of unquestioning followers if he would only promise them two things, eternal life and dinner with Bigfoot.Of course he should never deliver on those promises, he can have all his extremely rich and powerful descendants keep making the promise.
A religion is born!
WK
Other Comments by William Kaiser
32. Comment #234622 by Goldy on August 21, 2008 at 7:52 pm
For God so loved the world, He gave His only begotten son
Oddly, just been reading this, after looking up something about Genesis 6:1-4 (the "sons of God" passage...
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/sons.html
Seems our God has a few skeletons people keep forgetting about....
Other Comments by Goldy
33. Comment #234623 by Laurie Fraser on August 21, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Well done, Goldy - I knew that old bastard was screwing around. Other Comments by Laurie Fraser
34. Comment #234626 by mordacious1 on August 21, 2008 at 7:57 pm
god sounds like a rock and roll star.(sound of bugles) "I have children everywhere".
Other Comments by mordacious1
35. Comment #234627 by Goldy on August 21, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Seems odd people forget, Laurie - it's mentioned pretty much on the first page. Though after reading all them begats, I dare say one's mind begins to wander... ;-)
So, Jesus is from a line of illegitimate children. Hmmm.... thought that sort of thing was frowned upon in the more religious circles...
Other Comments by Goldy
36. Comment #234629 by Laurie Fraser on August 21, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Mate - they were begatting like buggery in those days, even Sarah had the misfortune to conceive at the age of about four thousand or something, when any respectable dowager would have given up the funny business ages before. Other Comments by Laurie Fraser
37. Comment #234630 by Brian English on August 21, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Laurie and Goldy, what I find a bit of a mind fuck is that God is his only begotten son.... Other Comments by Brian English
38. Comment #234634 by Goldy on August 21, 2008 at 8:14 pm
Laurie, odd thing about the ages because....(we're still in Genesis, btw)
6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
Brian, you know the implications of your post....Jesus is not only not his only begotten son - he is not even his son!
Other Comments by Goldy
39. Comment #234642 by mandydax on August 21, 2008 at 8:28 pm
A subsequent test on the supposed Bigfoot found nothing but the DNA of humans and an opossum, a small, cat-like creature.
Um, how is an opposum cat-like? It's a mammal, but that's as close as it gets, taxonomically.
Also, I think Tom Green was a chupacabra at one point. No, wait, that's chupavaca. It was definitely a cow teet he was sucking.
Other Comments by mandydax
40. Comment #234645 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Opposum cat-like .... yeah, sounded strange to me, but they can be around the same size as a cat.Road killed cat and Road killed opposum could be hard to tell apart.
I'm just not sure how a mixture of human and opposum parts got confused with BigFoot.
Other Comments by J Mac
41. Comment #234647 by Brian English on August 21, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Well, a road kill possum (not opossum) and road kill cat are easy enough to tell apart in most cases. Other Comments by Brian English
42. Comment #234650 by Goldy on August 21, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Road kill cat in NZ generally have a collar and a wee tag so you can post the flattened remains back. If you're lucky, there's smetimes a wee bell too which you can keep.
Possum just get flatter and flatter....
Other Comments by Goldy
43. Comment #234656 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 8:51 pm
"Road kill cat in NZ generally have a collar and a wee tag so you can post the flattened remains back."What a crappy way to start the day. I get all excited when I get mail that is hand addressed and not junk mail. So I'd get all excited just to tear it open and see....
Other Comments by J Mac
44. Comment #234661 by Goldy on August 21, 2008 at 8:56 pm
J Mac, geologist friends of mine, while mapping in Scotland, get a dead mouse from a cat they befriended. They then put the mouse into several zip-lock bags and posted it to a mate in Leicester Uni. Of course, this mate was not there as it was the summer holidays. It was a warm summer, as I recall. You can imagine what the mouse was like after about a month sweltering in the mail box :-) The smell just did not wash away... Other Comments by Goldy
45. Comment #234664 by J Mac on August 21, 2008 at 9:01 pm
HA... The best part of that I think is:"put the mouse into several zip-lock bags"
I suspect now that you mean they used multiple layers, but upon first reading I had the image of one mouse being partitioned into many bags.
Other Comments by J Mac
46. Comment #234667 by Goldy on August 21, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Heheheheh!
Yep, multiple layers. Didn't reduce the smell any.
Righty ho, off home for me.
TTFN!
Other Comments by Goldy
47. Comment #234669 by Brian English on August 21, 2008 at 9:18 pm
See ya Goldy Other Comments by Brian English
48. Comment #234670 by kkelly on August 21, 2008 at 9:25 pm
This all makes my intricately arranged dead mice Cinco de Mayo diorama seem normal. Other Comments by kkelly
49. Comment #234674 by chewedbarber on August 21, 2008 at 9:37 pm
35.I know you're joking, but some of the contradictions on the skeptics bible page are plain dumb and say very little in the way of highlighting actual inconsistencies.
There are so many real problems in scripture. There is no need for atheist to pretend to be ignorant of the complexities of language in order to fabricate even more inconsistencies. We are not unable to grasp that a change in meaning of the phrase "son of God" between the traditions of Genesis and the writings attributed to Luke is likely to have occured.
Other Comments by chewedbarber
50. Comment #234678 by Roy_H on August 21, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Re: The Bigfoot hoax. Any one with half a brain could see straight away it was a Gorilla costume!http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/aug2008/9/2/C06B97E1-F6BF-0CCA-74EBCFC145F9FEDA.jpg
Other Comments by Roy_H
Comment Entry: Please Login
Register a new account
Upcoming Events:
Mailing List
Enter your email:
DVDs
'The Enemies of Reason: The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Voices of Reason' DVD
'Richard Dawkins: Appearances & Events 2007-2008' DVD
'Enemies of Reason' DVD
'Root of All Evil?' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
'Voices of Science' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
1. Comment #234532 by robotaholic on August 21, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Other Comments by robotaholic