The Newsletter of The
|
Volume 24 Number 2 |
February 2010 |
In this month's issue:
·
Journal Review on Herbal Medicine
Southern Fried Bigfoot
We
get e-mails. We get many e-mails. In fact, that is how most of our skeptical adventures
get started. Which
explains the following:
Cindy
And Sean Whitley wrote:
October
27, 2004
The
[etc]
To
Whom It May Concern:
I’m
currently making a low/no-budget documentary entitled “Southern Fried
Bigfoot!” It’s not a comedy or a mockumentary,
but an objective look at the Bigfoot legends and stories from the American
South. I’m really looking to illuminate and preserve a bit of Southern
folklore that many people don’t know about.
Over
the last two years, I’ve had the pleasure of interviewing anthropologists,
wildlife biologists, artists, writers, Bigfoot believers and skeptics.
I’d like to see if anyone from your organization might be interested in
granting us an interview for the project.
…
Sincerely,
Sean
Whitley
The
net result is Sean and his cameraman came over in January 2005 and shot a short
interview. Naturally, my contribution
was the skeptical viewpoint.
Then,
time passed.
In
2009 I received an e-mail telling me the documentary was finished, and Sean sent
me a copy. I was out in
Sean
followed up by e-mail, providing some particulars:
We
spent five years making the documentary and shot it on location throughout the
In
April 2009 The Documentary Channel aired SFB, where it continues to run three
to four times a month.
The
story of the southern Bigfoot closely parallels the more notorious Bigfoot of
northern
The
magnitude of the effort involved is evident in the breadth of the panel of
“experts” interviewed. Featured
creatures include the notorious Florida Skunk Ape, the Chupacabras,
and even the close-to-home Lake Worth Monster.
Naturally
Craig Woolheater is there. He heads up
the
Research Conservancy and hosts the Texas Bigfoot conference annually, usually
in
Viewers
will also see Dan Maloney, who is VP and general curator of the Audubon Zoo and
Vaughn Bryant, Professor of Anthropology at
No
matter concerning crypto zoology would be complete without Loren Coleman, and
he is there, as well. Wikipedia has this
to say:1
Coleman
writes on popular culture, animal mysteries, folklore, and cryptozoology and
the editor of the Skeptical Inquirer has said that “[a]mong
monster hunters, Loren’s one of the more reputable”. He has appeared on
television and radio interviews about cryptids. He has written articles and
books on cryptozoology and other Fortean topics. He was a publicity consultant
on The Mothman Prophecies.
I
showed excerpts from the video at the January meeting, and we will plan to do a
program on crypto zoology including a full-length presentation in the future.
You
can buy your own copy of the
DVD from Amazon. The NTS
will get a commission (if you use our link).
Here is the link:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B002LVVEG0/thenorthtexasske
References
1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loren_Coleman
February programSaturday 20 February 20102 p.m.Bad ScienceCenter for
Nonprofit Management
|
Board Meeting and Social DinnerSaturday, February 27, 2010, at 7 p.m.Gloria’s
|
Challenge activity
Periodically we like to update readers on the status of the NTS Paranormal Challenge. There has been turbulence in this area recently, so I need to give a quick summary.
In July 2009 Raymond Powell from
The prize is currently $12,000, so it should be attractive to anybody who can actually perform one of these paranormal feats.
Raymond apparently has limited communications resources, and at first he insisted on conducting the correspondence by phone. I reminded him that we prefer to conduct business related to the Challenge only by e-mail. We like it that way, because e-mail provides a traceable record of who said what and when they said it. The hope is to avoid messy recriminations later on if things don’t turn out the way the claimant likes.
And that is usually the case. We have been doing this for several years, and no claimant has ever had success of any kind.
We also like for all claimants to provide us with an up-front demonstration before we get serious about his claim. That avoids having a bunch of people wasting their time and resources processing a claim with no merit.
Additionally, I did some checking on Raymond Powell. I contacted James Underdown at the Center for Inquiry West, and I contacted Alison Smith, who is with the James Randi Educational Foundation. Alison previously gave a presentation at the NTS program meeting in August 2008.
Both Alison and James were familiar with Raymond Powell, and James mentioned he had previously attempted to conduct a test with Raymond, but nothing ever came of it.
Anyhow, Raymond finally got back to me by e-mail:
Tuesday, January 5, 2010 10:26 AM
From: RAYMOND POWELL
To: SKEPTIC75287@YAHOO.COM
DEAR MR. BLANTON, MY NAME IS RAYMOND EDWARD POWELL JR. WE SPOKE ON THE PHONE ABOUT ME READING THE BIBLE FOR 20 MINS. FOR THE CHALLENGE. YOU WILL NOT HAVE TO BE THE RECEIVER
YOU AND YOUR ASSOCIATES WE BE ABLE TO SEE EVERY WORD I READ, FOR 20 MINS. FOR THE INFORMAL CHALLENGE AND FORMAL CHALLENGE. I DID NOT KNOW THE FIRST PERSON DID NOT SEND YOU THE EMAILS AS HE TOLD ME HE DID. ITRULY APOLOGIZE IHOPE WE CAN AGREE ON DOING THIS AS WE SPOKE OVER THE PHONE. I WAS NOT ABLE TO SEND YOU THE EMAIL 1,04,2010 AS I HAD HOPED TOHAVE . IHOPE YOU,LL CALL ME AFTER YOU RECEIVE THIS EMAIL ASYOU ADVISED ME OVER THE PHONE YOU WOULD DO, IBELIEVE YOU WILL. THANKYOU RAYMOND EDWARD POWELL JR.
OK, Raymond also has some problems with the shift key on his computer, but we can work around that.
Raymond proposed to read a passage from the Bible. He would remain in
Raymond phoned at the appointed time, and stated he was prepared to read. He told me what passage he was going to read.
I stopped Raymond and reminded him this would not be much of a demonstration of paranormal abilities if I knew in advance what he was going to read.
Raymond agreed and started to read from another part of the Bible. This was supposed to be the King James Version, but I never did verify that.
Raymond read, and I concentrated very hard. I have to confess I did not feel anything coming from Raymond, but I imagined to the best of my ability what Raymond must be reading. My foreknowledge of the Bible was of no help in this instance, because I have none.
Finally I asked Raymond to stop reading and to tell me what he had read. Unfortunately there was no match between what I imagined Raymond was reading and what he told me on the phone. Not even close.
That was it for the day. Raymond was disappointed, of course, but he promised to think over the problem and get back to me.
I was surprised at the tone of Raymond’s e-mail when he got back to me on 19 January.
JOHN THE LAST THING I HEARD YOU SAY WAS HEY RAYMOND YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU SAY, AND THE SOUND YOU MADE WANTING ME TO BLOW IT OFF. I HAVE READ ALOT ABOUT YOU AND HOW PEOPLE OF RESPECT CLAIM THAT YOUR NOT AN HONEST PERSON.I WAS HOPING YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN HONEST WITH ME.PEOPLE FROM HONG CONG HAVE EMAILED CLAIMING THAT THEY READ EVERY WORD OF THE PASSAGE I READ THRU MY ABILITIES. GOD SAYS I WILL CURSE THE THAT CURSES THE ,AND I WILL BLESS THE THAT BLESSES THE .THE LIBRARY WAS,NT OPENED 1/18/10.
THANKYOU, RAYMOND EDWARD POWELL JR.
I must admit that I have been called a liar by some very upstanding people, but I was disappointed that Raymond thought I was being deceitful in any way.
I sent Raymond a follow-up e-mail reminding him of a few truths. These included that I was prepared to publish all correspondence, part of which you are now reading. I told Raymond:
Unfortunately your demonstration on Saturday failed, as I could not describe what you were reading.
If you would like, we can design another demonstration of your abilities. As I see it, there is a problem with the demonstration you designed:
Your demonstration depended on my ability to receive. Your design did not take into account the possibility that, even though you have the ability to transmit your thoughts, I may not have the ability to receive them.
Let me know if you would like to take another shot at designing a demonstration. We will be eager to work with you.
All correspondence related to the NTS Paranormal Challenge will be published in our newsletter and on our Web site.
After additional inflammatory exchanges, I received the following from Raymond Powell:
THE RULES STATE INFORMAL AND FORMAL DEMO NOT A VIEW
TIMES. JOHN WE DON,T HAVE TIME TO PLAY GAMES WHEN YOU ALREADY KNOW I HAVE
SOMETHING TO TEST OR YOU COULD NOT REPEAT WHAT JAMES UNDERDOWN FROM ILLG
50,000 PARANORMAL CHALLENGE SAID TO ME
AND HOW HE TESTED ME OVER THE PHONE. TO ME IT SEEMS THE PERSONS HOSTING THESE
CHALLENGES TRY TO CHANGE THEIR RULES AFTER THEY HAVE TESTED ME OVER THE PHONE
AND KNOW I,M THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN DEMONSTRATE AND TRULY WIN. THE RULES DON,T STATE I GIVE YOU A FREE DEMO AND WASTE MY TEAMS TIME. THE
WHOLE WORLD SEES YOUR EMAILS
AND SEES WHAT KIND OF MAN YOU ARE. THE
FOR EVERYONE SEES THEM.
THANKYOU,
RAYMOND EDWARD POWELL JR.
Raymond is correct on one point. The Challenge page on our Web site does not prescribe an up-front demonstration, but I always insist on one for reasons previously stated. And I always advise claimants of this requirement.
I sent the following to Raymond Powell:
Raymond,
The procedure described on our Web site at http://ntskeptics.org/challenge/challenge.htm does not prescribe a demonstration prior to setting up a formal test. However, I always insist on seeing whether a claimant has anything to show before I move to a formal test.
You had your chance at a demonstration on 16 January this year, and your demonstration was unsuccessful. This indicates why I require a demonstration prior to proceeding. It helps you refine your test procedure to ensure your test will be successful.
Based on the outcome of your demonstration earlier this month, I would ordinarily conclude you have nothing to show and would advise you not to waste any more of your time on this. However, you seem sincere, so I have advised you to make some changes to your demonstration if you want to continue. I am willing to continue to work with you on an up-front demonstration if you are serious about proving your abilities.
To perform a demonstration that is satisfactory to
you, you will need to provide your own receiver, and one or both of you will
have to come to
Best regards,
John Blanton
Skeptical Web Master
214-335-9248
As of this writing I have had no additional communication from Raymond Powell.
The full e-mail correspondence is on our Web site:
http://ntskeptics.org/challenge/powell/powell.htm
Journal Review on Herbal Medicine
Searching through the scientific journals in the course of my work, I found an interesting article in the Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis.1 Even though the article is about an analytical method to quantify multiple drugs, the paper reveals some of the of herbal medicines and dietary .
Herbal medicines and dietary supplements are considered by many as being harmless because of their natural origin and their supposed treatment of some diseases. Various herbal medicines and dietary supplements were analyzed with Liquid chromatography-Mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for illegal adulterations. It is necessary to clarify that an illegal adulteration on a natural product is a synthetic drug. The paper presents data on how some manufacturers included synthetic drugs in the formula of their products marketed as ‘herbal medicine’ or ‘dietary supplement,’ in order to improve or obtain the effect of their products. The adulterants tested are in Table 1. (See page 6.)
For some products, such adulterations are quite serious; for example sildenafil (Viagra) was recently found being included in many herbal medicines and dietary supplements which were claimed to have the effect of improving sexual ability and vitality. What is ridiculous is some of those products were even claimed to be capable of improving both male and female “sexual function.” Table 2 (on page 6) shows the summary of test results for enhancing sexual potency.
It is interesting to point out that the so called natural products are adulterated with synthetic drugs by the manufacturers, who usually claimed that the fact that their products came from “purely natural substances” (which means totally harmless, according to some manufacturers) was responsible for the effect of their products. No wonder some natural products sometimes work! Some adulterations are serious, such as sildenafil (Viagra) or diazepam. These adulterations violate regulations and laws of many countries.
(Refer to Tables 1 and 2.)
References
1 Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis 40 (2006) 305-311
Table 1. Nine adulterants tested in
herbal medicine and food supplements
|
Adulterant |
Number of samples examined |
Number of positive results |
Product claims |
Use of the synthetic drug |
|
Sildenafil (Viagra) |
81 |
28 |
Products declared having the effect of improving sexual ability |
Drug used to treat erectile dysfunction and pulmonary arterial hypertension |
|
Famotidine |
47 |
18 |
Products declared being capable of keeping the fitness of stomach and helping the cure for gastrosis |
Inhibits stomach acid production, and it is commonly used in the treatment of peptic ulcer disease and gastro esophageal reflux disease |
|
Ibuprofen |
14 |
3 |
Products declared being beneficial to the therapy for arthritis |
It is used for relief of symptoms of arthritis, primary dysmenorrhea, fever, and as an analgesic, especially where there is an inflammatory component |
|
Promethazine |
19 |
2 |
Products declared having the effect of tranquilization or improving ‘health status’ of old people |
Used as an antihistamine and antiemetic. It can also have strong sedative effects |
|
Diazepam |
11 |
3 |
Products declared being helpful to the remission of dysphoria and insomnia |
Commonly used for treating anxiety, insomnia, seizures, muscle spasms, sedative, and skeletal muscle relaxant |
|
Nifedipine |
16 |
6 |
Products declared being capable of preventing hypertension and angina pectoris, and maintaining cardiovascular health |
Its main uses are as an antianginal (especially in Prinzmetal’s angina) and antihypertensive |
|
Captopril |
19 |
8 |
Products declared being capable of preventing and healing hypertension |
Used for the treatment of hypertension and some types of congestive heart failure |
|
Amoxicillin |
22 |
2 |
Products declared being capable of healing tracheitis |
It is a moderate-spectrum, bacteriolytic, ?-lactam antibiotic used to treat bacterial infections |
|
Dextromethorphan |
22 |
4 |
Products declared being effective for relieving cough and resolving phlegm |
It is an antitussive or cough suppressant drug |
Table 2. Summary of test results of
products for enhancing sexual potency
|
Dosage form |
Number of samples examined |
Number of positive results by LC-MS/MS |
|
Capsule |
36 |
15 |
|
Tablet |
17 |
8 |
|
Oral liquid |
16 |
3 |
|
Medicated wine |
9 |
2 |
|
Honeyed pill |
3 |
0 |
|
Sum up |
81 |
28 |
NTS on Facebook and Twitter
If you are a Facebook or Twitter fan, you can now keep in touch with fellow Skeptics here. Seeking to firm up skeptical community relations we have added North Texas Skeptics groups to these services.
The link to our Twitter group is http://twitter.com/NTSkeptics.
For Facebook enter north texas skeptics into the search window, and you will be given the opportunity to join the group. At the time of this writing there were already 30 members in the group. Join Facebook by linking to Facebook.com and signing up.
Of course, you can still keep in touch with the NTS by e-mail. The official NTS e-mail address is skeptic75287@yahoo.com, which happens to come directly to the NTS Web master. For privacy concerns we do not give out e-mail addresses of members, so this might not be a convenient way for you to find other members. Twitter and Facebook solve this problem by allowing access to those who want to be known.
Shortly our Web site will feature icons pointing to our presence on Facebook and Twitter. Our site is, of course, at http://www.ntskeptics.org. See you there.
Skeptical Ink
By Prasad Golla and John Blanton
Copyright 2010
Free, non-commercial reuse permitted.
Now for a little fun:
