We know that astrology is regarded in India and other nations in that area of the world — Afghanistan, Assam, Bhutan, Burma, Kashmir, Nepal, Pakistan — with great respect. Why, is hard to figure out. All important events are determined by official astrologers, and marriages are arranged between persons who are astrologically suited to one another, especially on high levels of society. Elections, holidays, travels, business deals, signing of documents — every major event is decided by the horoscope-casters.
This should not make us of the Western world in any way smug. On Wall Street, astrologers work out the likelihood of suitable mergers based upon the incorporation dates of the respective corporations, and the IPO date of a stock is considered along with the client's birth date — for compatibility — when stock purchases are being considered. We are perhaps not equally gullible about astrology, but we're getting there.
One of the astrologers to the royal house of Nepal, the Shah dynasty, has confessed that the recent massacre of the royal family in a hail of bullets was quite unforeseen by him and his colleagues. "No one expected it," Mangal Raj Joshi, admitted. "Heavenly planets control the situation on the ground and sometimes we are unable to explain them adequately" said Joshi, whose family has worked for more than 20 generations for the Nepalese kings. His failure — and the abject failure of astrology itself, in this catastrophic matter, has not affected his position, though. He continues as astrologer to the new monarch, King Gyanendra. His first official task for Gyanendra was to determine the most auspicious time for his crowning. We are not told if he ventured to see if flying bullets were in the new king's future.
Apparently there was a determination made by the court astrologers that king Birendra's son and heir, Dipendra, should not marry before he had attained the age of thirty-five. The royal family was warned that ignoring their star-woven fate would bring about the end of the Shah dynasty. Perhaps Prince Dipendra did marry secretly, since the Shah family is now just about out of existence. Dipendra himself has also died, and reports indicate that king Birendra holds onto his throne with difficulty.
Though the official view of the government of Nepal was that the shooting of the king and queen and eight other members of the royal family was "an accident," it is generally recognized by the rest of the world that Crown Prince Dipendra himself gunned down the victims with an automatic weapon after an argument over his choice of bride.
Astrologer Joshi confessed to the media that he had "lost" King Birendra's horoscope, a chart that according to the astrologer would have mapped out the dead king's life — and fate — in detail. The Himalayan kingdom of 22 million people is rife with poverty and political infighting, and sooth-sayers, star-gazers, and card-readers are depended upon to bring wisdom to the citizens and the officials who govern them. In my opinion, a little more common sense might be introduced somewhere along the way.
Can we imagine that astrology might ever play a part in the operation of our White House and/or the conduct of our government here in the USA? Of course not.
The strange behavior of our Patent Office in Washington that I have been writing about on this page, has attracted much curiosity. Readers have been looking into this situation, and Bill Lyon offers his comments:
The other abomination contained in the peanut butter and jelly patent is the use of the word "comprised": "The upper and lower fillings are preferably comprised of peanut butter and the center filling is comprised of at least jelly.". This is not legalese, but simply ignorant use of a $5 word. Comprise means literally "to embrace" not to compose. Therefore, a zoo may comprise lions and tigers and bears, Oh my! but a zoo is not "comprised of" anything.
Bill, have you ever read legal papers? A lawyer's distortion of the language can induce a rush of dismay that comprises more than you might imagine.
But there's more re patents. Zan Hecht and other readers sent me an alarming notice, that the PB&JS patent has actually come up in court:
Ohio-based jam magnates J. M. Smucker have managed to patent the venerable peanut butter and jelly sandwich, or at least a particular crustless version of same. So discovered Albie's, a food manufacturer and restaurant in Gaylord and Grayling, Mich., best known for its version of Michigan's most famous delicacy, pasties. Albie's started making crustless PB&JSs for their customers last summer but have now been hit with a cease and desist letter saying that they are infringing on patent # 6,004,596 issued in December 1999, to a Smucker unit for the "sealed crustless sandwich." The Smucker people say the crimped edge makes all the difference.
That's astonishing indeed, but this next one is even more so. Mike Fried, among others, informs us that U.S. Patent No. 6,080,436 covers (please sit down) the making of toast! The abstract and the claim read:
CLAIM:
1. A method of refreshing bread products, comprising: a) placing a bread product in an oven having at least one heating element, b) setting the temperature of the heating elements between 2500 F. and 4500 F., and c) ceasing exposure of the bread product to the at least one heating element after a period of 3 sec. to 90 sec.
2. The method of claim 1 including the step of exposing the bread product to electromagnetic radiation in the wavelength range between 1.2 and 3.4 microns.
3. The method of claim 1 including the step of selecting said bread products from rolls, muffin, buns and bagels."
ABSTRACT: A method of refreshing a bread product by heating the bread product to a temperature between 2500 degree(s) F. and 4500 degree(s) F. The breadproducts are maintained at this temperature range for a period of 3 to 90 seconds."
Seriously, folks, can I patent a process for furnishing one horizontal surface of a bread product that has been treated under patent # 6,080,436, with a partially-penetrating film of a substance such as butter, commonly prepared from mammalian sources, or said film of a product similar in appearance and texture to said substance, known by various names such as oleomargarine, such substance(s) to be applied and conveyed to the said horizontal surface by means of one edge of a blade of a knife? Is this what we pay federal agencies to do for us ?
Jim Knepley keeps us up-to-date on the latest scientific discoveries:
Add YET ANOTHER reason why magnets work. You'd think that the industry would at least get their story straight before they open their mouths publicly. Given this, one could reasonably conclude than an MRI would have a profound beneficial heating and oxygenation effect on the blood, yet MRIs aren't used as a therapy. Odd....
I got this in a SPAM I just received, offering to give me a free magnetic bracelet:
How does magnetic therapy work? Ions in the blood carry either a positive or negative charge. As they pass through a magnetic field they are either attracted or repelled which causes them to accelerate. The ions push against the vessel walls dilating, or opening them, allowing increased blood flow. Heat is generated by this increase in motion and enhances circulation. Oxidation is a by-product of ion collisions which carries toxins away from the damaged area so that it may be filtered. Energized and oxygenated blood cells help heal the damaged tissue.
On the 5th of this month, I was on the Larry King Live TV show, which is seen all over the world, and in repeats as well. The appearance brought me masses of e-mail responses, as I'd suspected it would. It involved yet another "psychic" who claims to speak to dead folks. Many who saw the show commented on the accuracy of her readings, and since the performance hadn't sounded all that great to me, I decided to look back at the video tape to see what had been so impressive.
Now, host Larry King did just what we might expect: he singled out the "hits" and ignored the misses that the "psychic" came up with. As we know, this is a guessing game, with names, initials, words, ideas, notions, all being mumbled and "tried on" for fit by the victims. And remember that those who called in to the program were chosen for on-air participation based on their "need" for a reading. Such people are very accepting , of course, and will follow the instructions of the "psychic" to hunt around for any connection they can find, when nothing seems to fit immediately.
The "psychic" on the Larry King show began each reading with a disclaimer, saying that she "had" a spirit in sight, but didn't know if it was the correct one. She pointed out that she might be hearing some other entity, perhaps one not even connected with the person inquiring. This way, any and all failures can be explained away, of course. This, and the requirement that the victim search for a connection, makes it impossible for the "psychic" to fail.
What we saw on the video met our expectations, not varying at all from the usual run of such "cold readings" with which we're very familiar. Adding up the guesses, noting the analysis, and one can see just how "accurate" this reading was. It's always a surprise.
Reader Steve Zinski, among many others, had very constructive and perceptive comments on the show and my participation in it. I will leave it to this independent observer to show you how well an amateur analyst can see through the methods:
She "read" a woman's mother by saying that she died of cancer, then made some statements about a new renovated house. You correctly pointed out that lots of people die of cancer. Also, you correctly pointed out that lots of people buy new houses. But you failed to point out that the psychic was reading her dead mother and not her brother, who is the one who recently bought the new house. Why would a dead mother talk about the woman's living brother's new house? Again, it's like you said: they make the situation fit.
And I'd like to point out something about the "ask a relative" trick. When a psychic says that they must be right and to consult a relative about the reading, think about this. It works like a pyramid scheme or chain letter. The subject asks mother and father about a girl who got killed on a bicycle by a car. So now there's two possible chances they'll know of someone who matches this scenario. Then mother/father ask their brothers/sisters/mothers/fathers, etc., and now there are even more people looking for a fit. Then they ask their friends/relatives, etc., and the odds grow exponentially until someone makes the vague story fit. And then it's considered a "hit." You need to point this out to people.
I really enjoyed seeing you on the show. I only wish you hadn't let the "psychic" get the upper hand. She even had Larry on her side by the end of the show, or at least that's what she was trying to make the audience think.
I saw you on Larry King Live last night . . . and I must say that I believe the "psychic" had the upper hand. She seemed very likeable and it didn't help much when her first two readings were "hits." You did very well too, but I think you needed to more specifically address certain points of her "reading." Let me explain.
Okay, Steve. Part of my problem was that I was distant from the site of the broadcast. I had a very bad audio connection, which eventually broke down completely, and I had no data about what happened during the commercial breaks. From previous experience of this show, I can tell you that the "psychic" was able to listen in on the phone calls coming in, and was likely given a choice of accepting or rejecting which ones would be used. That has been my experience of the show, when I've been in the studio. The psychic had previously "read" for Larry King — a fact unknown to me — and he had declared that he was convinced she'd contacted his dead mother. Unarguably, that has to somewhat bias him in favor of her powers. Furthermore, it is just not possible to educate the viewing audience on statistics, or on what is needed for a proper examination of a claim. In the time provided, that is. Note that this psychic not only would not answer my question on what she could do, and with what accuracy, but she also refused to be tested. Friend of Sylvia Browne, perhaps?
In more detail, in this reading, the psychic guessed at: grandmother, or connected with someone in the studio, a lady (not described in any way), died of cancer, very sick before she died, a hospital, her end was "sort of quick, it was a blessing when it happened, talk about a house, a new house, a move, renovations to part of the house, something about the roof, a roof collapsing. 14 guesses.
The response: cancer: yes. The caller, not the psychic, identified this as her mother. When this data is added to the observations made by Steve, above, is this reading now taking on a different complexion? But when Larry asked the caller, "Everything she said was on the mark?" the caller answered, "Yes"!
FACTS: the woman was not grandmother, was not connected with anyone in the studio, was never identified by the psychic, and thus could have been the mother, daughter, sister, aunt, grandmother, friend, neighbor, etc., and any of those would have been acceptable. She died of cancer, one of the two most common causes of death in this country. The type of cancer was not specified, and "hospital," "very sick," "blessing," must apply, and were applied, once the psychic found out (not from the spirit world, but from the caller) what the relationship was. Not one detail was given about the appearance of the spirit, who the psychic said was standing there, plainly visible to her. The "talk about a house" had nothing to do with this person, and could have been anyone's house, past, present, or future. There was no roof problem, and nothing collapsed — but had that been a "hit," you can depend on it that much would have been made of it. This is the sort of high-risk guess that is occasionally thrown in, on the chance that it might succeed.
Later, the psychic referred to someone wearing "a uniform." Wow! Think for a moment: that could be army, navy, air force, marines, postal worker, Sear's delivery person, hospital worker, sanitation person, police officer, fireman, taxi or limo or bus driver, restaurant employee, airline employee, you name your own. At some point in time, almost everyone has a relative who was in uniform. The psychic smoothly changed a guess about a beret into a cowboy hat, and her last reading was a complete flop, and not extolled by King or by anyone else. In that one, there were guesses about a teenage girl who died in a bike accident, then when that brought no reaction, the direction changed toward a "plump" lady. Still no hits. When asked by King for verification, the caller actually said, "No, I cannot find anything." Asked if a guess about a mother dying of a heart problem was correct, the caller said simply, "No." Concerning the total failure of the dramatic guesses about a teenage girl killed in a bike accident, the psychic launched into a fervent appeal to the caller:
What I would... what I would say to this lady, and I know this, I know it's happened on this show, you know, we tell people something, and, and I would say to you, please go home and check with your family about this young girl, because somehow she's connecting to you, and sees you as a connection to someone in your family.
I received several inquiries about how the psychic came up with a reference to "two rosebushes." I don’t find that remarkable, at all. That caller had said her father was planting a rosebush when he died, and the psychic suggested that there were two. The caller agreed there actually were two plantings, one on a former occasion, but never mentioned if there were more than two. Where's the psychic revelation here? Mind you, if the caller had denied there were two, the psychic has the perfect "out" by saying that she's speaking of another occasion, another planting. And the caller, of course, would grant her that guess.
If you have a videotape of this show, and you believe that this psychic was even moderately successful in her guessing game, go back to it and see what others have seen. I rest my case.
Matt Fields, commenting on the very clever music-coding system devised by Denys Parsons, writes:
*RUD code is an example of a hash code — an encoding that seems to help classify information but doesn't guarantee uniqueness. A similar code could be applied to melodies by discarding pitch information altogether and recording only their rhythm. This the basis of the song "Bingo," and the snare drum parts in the Bartok Sonata for Two Pianos and Percussion. Good hash codes are hard to find, and have very important uses in engineering, when storing large amounts of data in a searchable fashion is important. Locating data in piles based on their hash codes may help reduce the amount of stuff you have to wade through when you want to retrieve the data.
Thanks, Matt. The Parsons system "identifies" a tune but doesn't "define" it. Denys found out that with 16 notes coded, there were very few duplicates. In many cases, eleven or twelve are sufficient. I recall that Denys told me there was one outstanding case in which the full 16-note pattern was repeated for two quite different tunes: one is a Mozart piano concerto, the other a pub song titled, "Knees Up, Mother Brown." The latter, I believe, is not listed in his book. We also feel sure that neither Mother Brown nor Wolfgang Amadeus were aware of this curious fact.....
Self-styled psychic Uri Geller is described on his web page as the "world famous explorogolist, businessman and artist of thirty years." Don't ask me what an "explorogolist" is. I'm afraid to find out. In any case, he may be setting aside spoon-bending and peddling charged/charmed crystals, in favor of a web-page design service, the blurb for which quotes "Nicholas Negro-Ponte" (who might be Nicolas Negroponte of MIT) on the future of the Internet. This is refreshing news indeed, though we can suspect that mangled cutlery will still be showing up in the wake of the Israeli showman.
Jet Propulsion Labs of California are internationally renowned for their astounding scientific achievements. Somehow, they have now managed to ignore rationality in favor of Political Correctness — or perhaps there are some at the Labs who are just not very smart. As part of their Asian Pacific American Month events, they featured a lecture at their Von Karman Auditorium by Angi Ma Wong, described in their official news release as a "Feng Shui Expert." Such association of mythology and superstition with genuine scientific activities, can only be viewed with alarm. The JPL announcement of this event read:
The Chinese have long believed that five things create one's destiny: fate, luck, "feng shui", charity/philanthropy and education/self-development. "Feng shui", literally "wind-water", is a 5000-year-old Chinese art of environmental placement, with principles based on energy flow and balance.
We can look forward to future JPL lectures on Fate and Luck, no doubt. And can a graduate course in Santa Claus be far behind.....?
From TIME Europe we read:
What's your sign? When the film director Otto Preminger, no stranger to stars of the cinematic kind, was once asked the question, he replied, "I am a do-not-disturb sign."
Right on! I usually say, the "dollar" sign, but I prefer this one. But scientists in the UK are taking a close look at aspects of human personality and fortunes to see if they can find correlations with astrological forecasts. This may have been brought about because astrologers are campaigning for the introduction of university-level courses in astrology, a project that seems well on its way in France. Says Christopher Bagley, a social psychologist at the University of Southampton, "Astrology in the academic community is a tender plant." He has set out, he says, "to disprove the theory that astrology shapes people's lives or determines their personality and psychology in any way." He heads up the Research Group for the Critical Study of Astrology.
I must object to that intent of professor Barley. In my opinion, he should be setting out "to investigate whether or not astrology shapes people's lives or determines their personality and psychology in any way." That would be the proper scientific attitude. I don't believe that the findings would be any different; I just differ on the statement of intent.
But Richard Dawkins, professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University, says quite simply, "Astrology is in the same category as fairies. By all means, study them if you want to, but universities have better things to do with their money, time and effort than put them into departments of fairy studies. The same goes for astrology." Well, I agree, but I've always said that if good funding were available to do a knock-down-drag-out fight over astrology in the form of a definitive investigation that would survive a few generations, it could be useful....
Puzzle time. Lots of correct answers to the chain problem, and a few very strange — and wrong — ones. Briefly, if you open all the links in the 8-link piece, that's 80 cents, and using them to join the others means another 160 cents. Total: $2.40. But look closer. With the 3- and 4-ring pieces, if you separate all of them, one of your opening costs is circumvented, and you can save a total of 40 cents! So, yes, you can do the job for less than $2.40.
Consider these three intersecting blue lines. And no, you may not use the black lines. Answers, as always, to randi@randi.org. And please note: this is my only e-mail address now. Adjust your address books, and thanks.
