Skepticism is NOT a bad thing...

[psiEnergos]

I have to admit that a guilty pleasure of mine is watching some of the paranormal television shows currently airing.  With the success of shows such as Ghost Hunters, and Ghost Adventures, came several more in the same vein. These were more ghost hunting reality shows, re-enacted ghost stories, or just generalized shows that seem to cover a wide spectrum of paranormal topics ranging from ghosts to UFOs.  Needless to say, I found myself hard pressed to keep track of them long enough to make a judgment determining whether or not they were worth the time to continue watching.  I have recently noticed an interesting pattern that seems to be emerging in some of these shows however, that I find a little disturbing.  What seems to be happening a lot more now is that people who are referred to as skeptics, are being done  so in a negative way, as though this is somehow a bad thing.  I noticed this most blatantly on an episode of a new show on A&E called 'Psychic Kids, Children of the Paranormal'. In this episode, there were two boys who claimed to have psychic abilities.  Their fathers (stepfather in one case) freely admitted that they were very skeptical of the boys abilities.  This in itself did not seem out of the ordinary.  What was odd was the host, another self proclaimed psychic1, was putting the fathers in a seemingly negative light BECAUSE they were skeptics! The American Heritage dictionary defines skepticism as: 'A doubting or questioning attitude or state of mind'.  I had to ask myself, "When did this become a bad thing?".  The paranormal field is filled with all sorts, many of which will accept any out of the ordinary event as paranormal without question. This is not a healthy attitude with regards to any experience, whether it be a possible disembodied voice, or a fish stick that looks like the Caucasian Jesus likeness that has been popular since medieval times when it was created by Caucasian artists. It is always important to  step back and ask questions. Unfortunately I believe that due to the efforts of some of what I call 'extreme' skeptics, the term has been painted with a broad brush in the media as someone who simply refuses to believe anything that is not 'black and white'.  There are those that call themselves skeptics who actually make their living selling books and magazines that truly do not believe any evidence put before them not matter how credible. Instead they will formulate an improbable alternative and claim it is simply 'more' probable (at least to them) than what you are proposing.  The problem with this methodology is that when you do not know enough about the paranormal thing in question (and by the very name, implies pretty much any or all of it) then probability goes right out the window since you DON'T know the probability of the paranormal item! For example, if you were in the desert and you saw something flying that did not resemble anything you've ever seen (bird, plane, whatever). You would be inclined to believe you saw a UFO.  Now if you did your research and eliminated weather balloons, test aircraft, etc., you would eventually reach the conclusion that it was 'possible' you witnessed a craft that was not of this world. The extreme skeptic would proclaim you saw the reflection of the sun through swamp gas and declare your experience 'debunked'.  If you counter with the fact the you were in the desert and there is not likely any swamp gas for miles, he will counter with 'well lets use Occam's Razor; what more likely, you saw an alien spacecraft, or reflections of the sun through swamp gas?' Since we don't really know for sure whether or not alien spacecraft exist, you really can't answer the question with any real certainty.  There is certainly mountains of evidence that seems to argue for the existence (of alien space craft), but until one lands on public grounds  with hundreds of camera phones present (owned by people from all over the world to prevent cover-ups), we will never be 100% sure. The problem with positing Occam's razor at all lies in the fact that probability does not even fall into the equation. Occam's Razor, in simplistic form basically says that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.  An alien spacecraft is (in many ways) a much more simple explanation than the swamp gas theory in a desert, so in cases where it is used to the extreme, this sort of skepticism can be associated with foolishness2. That said, these extreme skeptics should not be setting the standard for the definition.  Otherwise, skeptic and fool will soon be synonymous. A true skeptic is one that doesn't automatically accept conclusions brought by others without first examining the evidence for themselves. Being skeptical and open minded do not need to be in conflict. Having an open mind can be just as useful in debunking claims as it is in accepting the possible validity of them when all other identified explanations have been eliminated.  An open mind also allows you to forgive yourself if you have to change your mind when new evidence comes to light. I know it probably appears to the reader at this point that I have hopelessly steered off course from the original point.  I felt it was necessary to pass on the previous information in hopes that it will drive home the real point of the article; being skeptical is not a bad thing.  Yes, there are extreme versions of skepticism that will at times put it in a bad light, but healthy skepticism does not fall into this category. One should not allow fad reality shows to distort what our definition of a skeptic is either. 1I don't label it this way to be negative, but the fact is, ALL psychics are self proclaimed as such since there is no psychic certification process that I know of right now.  They can't even reproduce it (whatever ability they profess to have) reliably in the laboratory.  This does not mean that I am saying it isn't possible for folks to have these abilities, they are just too damn unreliable.  Psychic abilities, like lightning, never seem to have the same accuracy twice! 2Another humorous example of this I watched recently when someone was discussing the idea that something like the Baghdad battery could have been used to power something like light bulbs in the pyramids of Egypt.  When presented with all the evidence of how the ancients easily created these devices and how they could be used for a power source, a particular skeptic said 'So what? (he's quite famous for this line when he has nothing substantial to offer I have noticed, but I do  respect a great deal of his work), where is the other evidence?  Where are the wires?'.  My answer was simple, IF (and that's a real big 'if') the theory was true, it is easy to account for the missing wire; it was melted down and used for something else! If you have kept up on news stories, at least in the Southwest, copper is constantly being stolen, sold, and melted down to use for something else.  I think I would be more shocked if we actually found wire!