Tag Archives: Skeptic

Thoughts on the Dorset Monkey

News broke earlier this week of a monkey sighting in the Dorchester area of Dorset reported by a 17-year-old girl who said

‘‘It looked about the size of a small gorilla. It was walking like one as well, using its arms and feet. It was such a shock I couldn’t believe what I was seeing at first. I managed to get a photo but it quickly went out of sight. I couldn’t see it very clearly. It was definitely a monkey because you could tell by its hunched back and the way it scampered across the field and up the tree. It wasn’t a black dog. I have no idea what the monkey was doing there. It could have escaped if someone was keeping it as a pet.’

Here is the photo taken by the eye-witness that allegedly shows a monkey.

monkey in Dorset

Although what we’re looking at does indeed look monkey-like I wasn’t convinced when I first saw this, and although the eye-witness herself says that she saw a monkey I wasn’t about to just accept her word as proof of that – especially after my 2009 sighting of a ring tailed lemur in Bradford on Avon, Wiltshire that turned out to be a black and white dog…

I sent a curious email off to Monkey World in Dorset to ask for their opinion on this. They’re an Ape and Monkey Rescue Centre who offer not only a great visitor attraction, but also educational outreach work and rescue and rehabilitation for primates bought as pets by people who quickly realise they’re not ideal domestic pets. Basically, Monkey World rocks.

A spokeswoman got in touch to answer my questions and explained that they are not missing any apes or monkeys. She also told me that they were unable to identify the animal as a monkey or ape

You are correct that the picture is of poor quality which is surprising with all the modern technology and advancements today with camera phones. As the picture is of such poor quality, we are unable to identify exactly what it is and as I have been telling reporters for days now, I can confirm that all of our rescued monkeys and apes are safe and well at the park.

A personal opinion was offered that this looks like a deer grazing – side facing the photographer, with it’s head down on the left hand side of the photo, and I think that is a good possibility. I thought it initially looked like a large black dog facing away and to the right from the photographer, with its head obscured by its shoulder (head would be on the right).
.
Of course, just because Monkey World aren’t missing a monkey or ape doesn’t rule that out completely. It could be an escaped animal from a private collection, but let’s think rationally about that for a moment. The eye-witness reported that it ‘It looked about the size of a small gorilla.’ A small Gorilla is still pretty big considering adults are roughly 5 foot plus in height –  adult male gorillas usually measure in at around 5.5 – 6 foot in height, while females are slightly shorter. I am extremely skeptical that a rogue gorilla would go unnoticed other than for this brief sighting. Gorillas do not make such popular pets as chimpanzees and other primates and zoos are usually very keen to ‘snap up’ gorillas that need re-homing.  Not only that, but we also know that eye-witness testimony isn’t great for accuracy because our memories can so easily distort information over short periods of time. I refer you back to my ring-tailed-lemur-that-was-a-dog sighting.

‘It had a long tail! With black and white rings! It was running like a lemur!’

‘It’s a bloody dog’

So, if not a gorilla could it be a smaller primate? You can certainly own certain primates once you have been granted a Dangerous Animals License by your local council – this involves inspections from the local authority and other such measures to ensure you have adequate space, and can prevent escape and the spreading of disease etc. I have made contact with Dorset County Council about whether a license has ever been granted for a Gorilla, but I’m not sure I will get a response (I’ll update this blog post, if I do). This was something I questioned the Monkey World representative about. Their response

There is a growing problem in the UK with people keeping primates as pets and there are several species that are legal in the UK as long as you have the correct licences available from local authorities, however these generally tend to be smaller primates, nowhere near the size of the thing in the picture. For example squirrel monkeys, marmosets and capuchin monkeys – we know all about this as we generally end up picking up the pieces from members of the public who buy them thinking they are cute and very soon realise that natural behaviour (such as urine washing) is not conducive to living in a house.
.
Often these primates are in a poor state of health by the time we are called in to assist, although small, these primates require companionship, the correct diet and veterinary care, adequate space, housing and mental stimulation and in most cases this is not provided to them. It is entirely possible that someone could have bought one of these primates from a pet shop, got bored with it and let it out, but I can assure you that the blurred image shown in damn nearly every single newspaper is not a squirrel monkey, capuchin or marmoset. The thing is far too big to be any of these.
You can read more about the problem of primates being kept as pets here, it truly is an appalling problem. So although it could possibly be a Gorilla or perhaps a giant sized monkey, I think it’s more likely that what we’re looking at here is an object (there is no evidence other than testimony that it was moving) or animal that has been misidentified.

flattr this!

The Heretics: thoughts from a skeptic who used to be an enemy of science

Just six years ago I could be found sitting at a table in a dark room, eyes closed with concentration as my team mates and I built up psychic energy to allow ghosts to use the table to communicate with us. Earlier this month the president of the James Randi Education Foundation, DJ Grothe, referred to me and others as the workhorses of skepticism who actually do scientific paranormal investigations of claims’.

Why am I telling you this? So that you know exactly the kind of skeptic that I am. There’s a stark difference between who I was and who I am, and it’s one shaped by belief.

hereticsI’m not content with simply pointing out ‘it can’t be a ghost because ghosts defy the rules of physics’. The difficult and often lonely transition that  I went through – discarding my beliefs and picking apart the very things that had defined me as a person – makes me the kind of skeptic who knows what it is like to be wrong, to hold her hands up and say ‘holy shit, look how wrong I’ve been all of this time!‘. I’m the kind of skeptic who is sympathetic to those who believe weird stuff because I know why they do and how easy it is to convince yourself that you are right.

It’s this theme that runs through The Heretics: Adventures with the Enemies of Sciencein which journalist Will Storr documents his often scary adventure to discover why people believe strange and bizarre things. It isn’t just the unconventional belief systems that Storr is interested in though, it’s why those he meets believe what they do, and how they interpret the skeptical world around them.

Storr also speaks to a wide range of experts about neurological, psychological, and environmental factors that cause people to reach weird conclusions, with fascinating insight being presented that often demonstrates how everyone is biased and susceptible to irrational thinking – but he has received criticism for giving scientific research an equal footing to the ideas promoted by the likes of Holocaust denier David Irving, homeopathic practitioners, and ESP researcher Rupert Sheldrake.

“It is not enough for Storr to consider why people believe weird things; he also wants to challenge whether these things really are weird. He seems to accept, deep down, that they are, but he doesn’t want to admit this. He is like the child who still wants to believe in Father Christmas, but who is just old enough to know better. Life would be more magical, more fun, if the story were true. So it is that homeopaths are given a more sympathetic hearing than sceptics, with no discussion of the harm that unscientific medicine can do” Mark Henderson, The Guardian

Although at times it did feel as though Storr was too trusting of people with faulty reasoning, the reviewer at The Guardian could have stopped to ask why those with odd ideas are given a more sympathetic hearing. In Heretics Storr admits that when attending a Skeptics conference he cannot justify why he feels a dislike of those in the audience. Perhaps, as one of the skeptics on stage with Prof Chris French I should feel offended, yet Storr goes on to wonder if it might be because of the time he has spent with people who might be considered as stupid by those who identify as skeptics, and as someone who used to be mocked by skeptics I can confirm it probably is that. Even now, as I stand in front of audiences of skeptics as a speaker, I sometimes feel as though I don’t quite belong. Like I’m some sort of an imposter who will be outed at any moment – ‘you used to *feel* psychic energy, get the fuck out!’

That said, not all skeptics are killjoys who parrot every word of the big name skeptics such as Dawkins, Goldacre and more. Storr writes about peoples beliefs stemming from their stories, and it’s exactly the same for nonbelievers. Someone who has never believed in ghosts probably isn’t going to be as sympathetic to the biased thought-processes that someone who does believe in ghosts is going to use to convince themselves they are right. People arrive at their skepticism through different means, and that’s often reflected in their approach to different ideas and topics. Skeptics often have an image problem because the conclusions they reach and the ideas they are skeptical of are what other people use to form their worldview. That cannot be helped, but the way in which skeptics communicate can be. It’s something I’ve written about many times before – how the ‘Ghost don’t exist, move on’ approach isn’t going to convince anyone who disagrees with you that you’re right.

A therapist happily explaining to Storr how Satanic cults eat babies might sound like a ludicrous idea to an outsider,  but when you know how easy it is to fall into the routine of validating your ideas, you know why that sounds plausible to her. A voice-hearer whose fantasies of being recruited as a spy turned into an alternative version of reality for him tells Storr how he used to turn the radio on and “detune” it to pick out messages being transmitted to him by those recruiting him as a spy. To demonstrate this to Storr, he “detunes” the kitchen radio and a voice on the radio says ‘…the British Government has a shoot-to-kill policy’ shocking Storr and the others in the room. It’s a random broadcast, but listened to by someone convinced secret messages are being transmitted, it becomes something entirely more than just a chance coincidence. It reminded me of the hours spent listening to Dictaphones to hear the voices of the dead – when you seek validation you often find it, even though it isn’t even there…

Listening to people with strange beliefs, getting to know both them and what they believe can make you more understanding of them than you might feel if you’d just heard about the ideas they think are true. That isn’t a bad thing. A passage at the end of the book summed things up perfectly:

I will try to remember though, that as right as I can sometimes feel, there is always the chance that I am wrong. And that happiness lies in humility; in forgiving others, and in forgiving myself. We are creatures of illusion. We are made out of stories. From the Heretics to the Skeptics, we are all lost in our own neural tjukurpas, our own secret worlds. We are just ordinary heroes fighting phantom Goliaths, doing our best in the service of truth when the only thing that we really know are the pulses.
- Will Storr, Heretics, 

Go and buy this book,I loved it. Read it, and read it again. Take notes, explore the ideas being discussed for yourself, and take time to ponder. Be warned though, fans of James Randi might be forced to make some difficult considerations about the leader of the JREF. Though, it’s important to point out that unsavory views held by an individual do not represent all of those who identify as a skeptics, and that surely the comments made by Randi just provide further proof that we are all biased in our beliefs one way or another, intelligent or not…

flattr this!

Coming Soon – Be Reasonable!

Next week sees the launch of a new monthly podcast from the Merseyside Skeptics Society, featuring Hayley Stevens (me!) and Michael Marshall: Be Reasonable.

Each month, we’ll be speaking to people who believe in ideas and theories that run contrary to the mainstream scientific and skeptical worldview, in order to examine how such beliefs are constructed and what evidence people feel supports their case.

Be Reasonable is about approaching subjects with respect and an open mind, engaging with people of differing viewpoints in an environment where debate is polite and good-natured, yet robust and intellectually rigorous.

Episode One features an interview with Anita Ikonen - a Swedish national who describes herself as a medical intuitive. Anita believes she can detect medical information about a person by simply looking at them. She runs a website called Vision From Feeling which documents her abilities, and her attempts to test them.

You can find Be Reasonable at the Merseyside Skeptics website, on iTunes, follow us on Twitter and Facebook, and you can get in touch with the show by contacting reasonablepod@merseysideskeptics.org.uk.

We look forward to exploring the other side of skeptical issues with the people who strongly believe them, and we hope you’ll join us.

flattr this!

Community. You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means…

I used to think there was a skeptic community. Then when I saw people being assholes to other people, saying stupid stuff, or focusing on things I didn’t think were important I decided that I didn’t belong to ‘the community’. I was naive.

Then I came to the conclusion that the community that I had thought existed – the all-encompassing community that contained everyone who called themselves a skeptic, didn’t exist and so I proclaimed that there was no such thing as a community. It seemed to me that the idea of The Skeptic Community was inconceivable given the variance of people and ideas involved. Again, I was naive.

There is such a thing as a community within skepticism, but I don’t believe that there is just one community that we all automatically belong to. Okay, I guess technically there is a wider global community of those who identify as skeptics, but that’s a loosely defined community that I personally don’t feel overly connected with. The only connection people within that community have is that they apply the term ‘skeptic’ to themselves. Nothing more.

I feel more connected with smaller skeptical communities – communities of people who research and investigate the paranormal, for example. I feel connected with some British skeptical communities, I feel as though I am a part of a community of people who attend QEDcon every year and meet up to talk, think, and laugh. I feel connected to a community of skeptics who nobody has really heard of who, despite this, are asked to speak at big events, I feel connected to a community of skeptical paranormal bloggers and podcasters, I feel connected to those who write for certain publications, those who are evidence based feminists, or a community of skeptics that I am mutual friends with that I speak to online.

Yet those communities are not clearly constructed – you wouldn’t find a list of rules, or a list of members, or a guideline on how to become a member of said communities. They shift, they’re things you self identify with, but they’re not necessarily representative of you – just as you’re not representative of those who also identify as belonging. What an individual takes from or invests in identifying with those communities probably changes from person to person. As do ideas on ‘what works best’ and ‘what is right’. So when I see people on Twitter, Facebook, and on blogs talking about how certain negativity has brought down ‘The Skeptic Community’ I remember how easy it is to think that everything is connected by a concrete bond, and how actually, it really isn’t like that.

This is a point that was hammered home for me late last year. I used to be very involved with the online fighting involving groups such as FreeThoughtBlogs, Skepchicks, and what are often coined (in some cases unfairly) as trolls and misogynists within ‘The Skeptic Community’. I used to think ‘this really makes us all look stupid and intolerant‘. I used to write in support of those involved that I agreed with, because I felt that as a member of ‘The Skeptic Community’ being spoken of, I had a role to play in defending good ideas. Then one day, by simply retweeting as ‘worth a read’ an article that was critical of a member of the Skepchick blog, I got unfriended on Facebook and unfollowed on Twitter by all of the Skepchicks I had been previously connected with and supportive of. I wasn’t told why, and I guess it was because the article was by someone that was accused of having been unfairly critical of that Skepchick in the past. However, I didn’t know that, and I guess by not knowing that and retweeting the critical article I had broken some unknown rule that was expected of me. However, I still identify as part of skeptical communities, even if others would shun me from their communities because I have opinions or ideas they don’t agree with.

The point I’m trying to make with this example is that just because some people within a community you identify with act in a way you don’t agree with, doesn’t mean the community as a whole is corrupt, broken, to deteriorating. There are certain things said and done that are wrong, but don’t be mistaken in thinking they represent you, don’t be mistaken in thinking you don’t belong simply because others would have you think you’re not welcome, and don’t be mistaken in thinking that differences of opinion aren’t compatible within the same community.

 

Community (plural Communities)

1[noun] a group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common
2[mass noun] the condition of sharing or having certain attitudes and interests in common

flattr this!