Did Adam and Eve Have Navels?: Debunking Pseudoscience

What a disappointment.

I've adored Martin Gardner since I first picked up "The Annotated Alice", and he was a one-of-a-kind historian, raconteur, critic, and general pioneer of common sense and rational thinking. I was also amazed, given he was very old at the time of writing this book, to think that he had it in him.

Instead, what I soon learned was that this book was clearly put together from essays, reviews, articles, and other miscellanea previously written. Which is fine, in and of itself. Malcolm Gladwell does the same thing. However in this case, most of these articles just don't work in this context.

Take, for instance, his chapter on the possibilities of extinction by meteor -- it falls off into a film critique of two Hollywood show more blockbusters! And not even a critique of the science, just of his dislike for the films in general! These may have worked in a weekly newspaper column or some such, but don't have the coherence and sting to be a major chapter in a book. By a similar notion, some of the articles that debunk or analyse heavy physics do so without providing enough information to the layman. Evidently they were first written for scientific magazines that catered to a more niche crowd.

Some chapters, even worse, don't "debunk" at all, as the title claims. Gardner just explains the issue at heart, and then maybe gives a brief precis of why people do it. His chapter on cult suicides is admittedly a tough example, since explaining that kind of situation is a complex debate. However, Gardner neither explains nor debunks. He effectively just recounts what happens, without looking at the science or psychology of cult worship and leadership, nor really debunking (beyond the obvious "it's ridiculous) the theories those people held.

I won't hold this against the memory of the late Mr. Gardner, since he was a remarkable man. But this book shouldn't have seen the light of day. show less

This collection of essays is an interesting criticism of popular pseudoscience, controversial in some areas. Gardner questions the arguments of popular and dubious science, and fringe religious teaching. Includes essays on creationists, astronomy, physics, medicine (reflexology and urine therapy), psychology, social science, UFOs, other fringe sciences, and religion. Criticisms of the Ba'hai, Jewish Caballah, and Islamic numerologists Louis Farrakhan and Dr. Rashad Khalifa, are likely to be controversial.
A healthy dose of scepticism, encouraging for those who prize logic and common sense.

These debunking books by Gardner typically address stuff that nobody who I know considers plausible. But this had a couple of chapters worth reading if you're interested.

TBR

¿Se pueden curar las enfermedades bebiendo la propia orina? Cuestiones risibles como éstas parecen ocupar las mentes de millones de personas día tras día, como si la gente estuviera hambrienta de cualquier migaja de conocimiento que se dé aires de ciencia y quisiera adoptar teorías que sólo provocan miedo y asombro. Sin embargo, estas ideas, por ridículas que parezcan, encuentran acogida en las tribunas de comunicación pública y muchas veces se convierten en temas de información respetables que no tardan en considerarse verdades. Eso dice Martin Gardner en este divertido y provocativo libro. Gardner, posiblemente el más ingenioso desenmascarador de fraudes científicos de nuestra época, hace uso de sus décadas de show more experiencia para desbaratar las proclamaciones de la Nueva Era y las investigaciones dudosas de eminentes científicos. Afrontando las máximas de la seudociencia con una mirada aguda y escéptica, ¿Tenían ombligo Adán y Eva? desenmascara afirmaciones engañosas en toda clase de campos, y reflexiona sobre cuestiones tan diversas como los suicidios de la secta Puerta del Cielo y el interés de algún senador norteamericano por lo paranormal. show less