Weekly News and Blog Roundup

As we enter into 2010, this week’s post includes roundups of the past year and decade. We answer the question of how best to define the ‘noughties’, get you up to date on the 2009 Atheist Alliance International Conference and tell you how to most effectively shed your holiday weight.

The Noughties Are Defined By Fakery

There has always been fakery, but over the past decade the world has made every effort to do things bigger and better. In an article in the Guardian, Hadley Freeman, amidst a forgivable rant about Sarah Palin, argues that fakery, and particularly fake science, is what best defines the ‘noughties’. Perhaps we can push for a global New Year’s resolution. On the plus side, spell check still doesn’t recognise the word ‘noughties’.

You can also check out Ben Goldacre’s more detailed description of some of the year’s fake science here.

Atheist Alliance International 2009 Videos

This year’s Atheist Alliance International Conference reportedly hosted around 700 attendees, a marked increase from last year’s 450. The impressive line-up of speakers included Richard Dawkins, Dan Dennett, PZ Myers and Lawrence Krauss. The full length videos, listed in “descending order of awesomeness”, features Dawkins’ talk in fifth position out of a possible seven. Need I endorse the event any further?

[Via Common Sense Atheism]

“Dad Dancing” May Be The Result Of Evolution, Scientists Claim

Dr Peter Lovatt, a psychologist from the University of Hertfordshire, has concluded that cringeworthy “dad dancing” is an evolutionally created turnoff towards younger females, with the effect of making way for males who are in their sexual prime. Just the latest of a whole host of reasons for young lads to go out on the pull with their dads.

[Via Derren Brown Blog]

The Diet Delusion

Looking to shift a few of those extra pounds that you’ve put on over the Christmas holidays? According to David Colquhoun’s article, which is essentially a glowing book review of Gary Taube’s ‘The Diet Delusion’, Taube claims that there is more to dieting than all of that simple advice that you’ve known and ignored for as long as you can remember. But he is not pushing a line of scientific sounding pills or any other voodoo. Rather, Colquhoun reports that Taube is advocating the use of randomised trials to establish causality between diet, weight and biology, with some surprising conclusions.

[Via DC’s Improbable Science]

For those of you who are interested in the truth behind nutritionists and the pills and advice that they push, I highly recommend Ben Goldacre’s book, ‘Bad Science’, which also examines a range of interesting pseudoscientific topics, scientifically.

Gallup Poll: Americans Are Becoming Less Religious

As we leave behind the turn of the decade I can’t help that notice that we haven’t all got flying cars, everything isn’t dominated by Velcro and religion hasn’t been wiped out. We are making headway though. It has been the case for a while now that the number of those who do not identify with a religion is increasing in both the UK and the US. A recent poll showed that only half of Britons identify with Christianity, and recent polls conducted by Gallup conclude that Americans are cottoning on too.

 

[Via Friendly Atheist and Derren Brown Blog]

Interestingly, if somewhat predictably, the majority of believers, no matter the sample group in question, are women. Read about the theories currently offered as an explanation for this phenomenon here.

[Via 3quarksdaily]

Brand Skeptic

A recent article by Steve Cuno particularly resonated with me. The article addresses the negative connotations that are typically associated with the term ‘sceptic’ in common parlance. This was/is to be the subject of my first personal blog post (coming soon!). Cuno and I are in agreement that to abandon the term would be impractical, and so instead both of our articles suggest methods for rehabilitating the word. His however, focuses on what the individual can do to this end; while mine will discuss the steps that can be taken by the movement as a whole. Cuno’s suggestions are excellent, and seem to be perfectly fitted to become a personal list of New Year’s resolutions for any skeptic.

[Via James Randi Educational Foundation]

Official Vatican Newspaper Under Fire For Endorsing ‘The Simpsons’

I wouldn’t be so cruel as to deprive you of your weekly fix of FOX now would I? What monumental feat of journalistic brilliance have they accomplished this week, I hear you ask. Well they’ve managed to dig up some baby-faced Pope wannabe to tell us that one of his guilty pleasures, ‘The Simpsons’, is essentially “not good for American culture”. I’d argue that it’s actually one of the best things that American culture has come up with so far.

Watch the video here.

[Via Atheist Media Blog]

*********************************

Well that’s the last Weekly Roundup of the decade. I hope you enjoyed it. Here’s wishing you a happy New Year from everyone at Skeptic. Don’t do anything Jesus wouldn’t do.

Please feel free to leave a comment and I will do my best to reply as quickly as possible. Until next time, take care of yourself, and each other.

If you come across something that you think our readers would enjoy, send a tip my way at will [at] skeptic [dot] org [dot] uk.

    2 thoughts on “Weekly News and Blog Roundup

    1. The Diet Delusion is, indeed, well done. However, the idea that fat may have nothing to do with heart disease is suspect. Google “Why Omega-6 Fats Matter for Your Health” to learn what Dr. Bill Lands has to say about how seed oil products have increased the risk of dying from heart disease and cancer.

      • David

        Sorry for the delay in my response. I have been extremely busy lately and I wanted to have read a little around the subject and the literature that you directed me towards before replying to your comment.

        Firstly, I would like to reiterate that I have not read ‘The Diet Delusion’, and so I am in no position to attack or defend its claims.

        Regarding Bill Lands and his research, at the face of it, it all looks interesting. Having said that, I am always weary of any situation where a person is under the impression that their particular area of expertise is as all-encompassing as Lands seems to think his is. I do not mean to say that his conclusions are incorrect in any way other than perhaps their magnitude, but that is based on nothing other than a gut feeling. Maybe I am being overly cynical. Besides, I am no doctor, and as I’m sure you will appreciate, I have barely begun to scratch the surface of the subject. I promise I will read more into it though.

        As a point of interest, Bill Lands’ iteration of the fact that treating secondary biomarkers will not necessarily prevent the related disease reminded me of a discussion between Professor Richard Dawkins and Randolph Nesse that I thought might be of interest to you. The video can be found at

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcnCJqDa1us

        Consider it a token of my appreciation for your taking the time to comment.

        Thank you.

        Will