Debunked! is a translation (by Bart K.
Holland) of the French book, Devenez
Sorciers, Devenez Savants (2002), written by Nobel‑laureate physicist
Georges Charpak and physics professor Henri Broch. Though astrology, fire‑walking,
and dowsing are among the mysteries debunked, one mystery that remains is why
Johns Hopkins University Press would bother publishing this book. Though Debunked! has its serious shortcomings,
consider first several bright spots.

After explaining how
astrologers use vagueness to produce convincing forecasts, the authors note
that politicians also exploit vagueness to produce seemingly profound speeches
that are vacuous. Included is a construct-a‑political‑speech chart,
allowing the reader to produce such speeches by stringing together phrases
randomly selected from each of the chart’s four columns. A second bright spot
involves the authors’ skepticism regarding the astrologers’ claim that
planetary positions can determine personality traits ‑‑ that, for
example, those born at the end of July exhibit the characteristic traits of
Leos. The authors note wryly that, although those born two thousand years ago
at that time of year would have been
born when the Sun was in Leo, those born today at that same time of year, given
the precession of the equinoxes, are actually born when the Sun is in Cancer! The
demystification of walking on hot coals is entertaining, as is the authors’ amusing
graph illustrating that the weight of objects allegedly moved by psychokinesis
has, over time, decreased as our ability to falsify such phenomena has
increased. Readers will also enjoy the explicit directions for creating a
convincing but fraudulent demonstration of telephone telepathy. (Entertainer/author
Max Maven recognizes the authors’ modus operandi:
it was devised by John N. Hilliard and used in the first "telephone
telepathy" trick ever published; see Hilliard’s "Twentieth Century
Telepathy," in the magicians’ journal, The
Sphinx (February, 1905).)

The book’s delights do not
redeem its flaws.      First, the book is
badly organized. Chapter 1 includes detailed discussion of astrologers’
use of "the well effect" ‑‑ the use of vagueness to
generate statements that, like a well, sound deep but are thoroughly empty. The
authors then meander, presenting material on visual persistence, the
reliability of memory, ESP, walking on coals, fake body piercing (à la arrow‑through‑the‑head),
and levitation. This mish‑mash that does not serve well as a careful,
cohesive introduction to debunking. The authors indicate that Chapter 2 ("Amazing
Coincidences") is about chance, but they soon interrupt themselves by chiding
movie‑makers who include spaceship sounds in outer‑space scenes
(when there is no medium in outer space to transmit sound waves) and by
explaining why the American flag planted on the Moon appeared to wave when
there are no lunar breezes. Chapter 3 includes exposés of dowsing and the
mysterious appearance of water in a sarcophagus at Arles‑sur‑Tech, plus
sustained discussion of alarmist concerns about radiation. Oddly, however, Chapter 3
ends with two short paragraphs excoriating the advisors and examiners who approved
a Sorbonne sociology student’s doctoral dissertation "extolling the
virtues of astrology". If this condemnation belongs at all in Debunked!, then it surely belongs with the
discussion of astrology that appears in Chapter 1, not as the finale of a chapter
on dowsing, an aqueous sarcophagus, and radiation.

A second problem is that, in
several places, the authors fail to make clear why what they offer is relevant
to debunking. With a clever example involving one’s recalled image of eating
breakfast, the authors discuss the reliability of memory. Given the important
role that memory plays in legitimate scientific confirmation, the physicists
presumably don’t want to foster radical skepticism with respect to all memory claims; so what is the point of addressing
here the reliability of memory? (The authors miss an opportunity to discuss the
importance of corroborating evidence.) The authors also discuss visual
persistence, but don’t make clear why, or if, this phenomenon is relevant to
debunking. As noted earlier, the authors provide detailed directions for
performing trick telephone telepathy. There is
good reason to expose the mentalist’s modus
operandi, but the authors fail to make clear the scientific significance
of providing a natural explanation for an apparent instance of ESP.

Finally, whatever the intended
purpose of the book, the authors don’t serve it well. The authors may have
intended Debunked! to be simply a
survey of debunked mysteries, but there are better surveys: James Randi’s Flim‑Flam! (Prometheus, 1982) and
Martin Gardner’s Science: Good, Bad, and Bogus
(Prometheus, 1990) are better organized, more readable, and broader in scope.
If instead the authors intended to produce for the novice an introduction to what
good science involves and why it does not warrant belief in various
pseudoscientific claims, then their book falls far short of the mark. For
example, few non‑academic readers will understand the authors’ passing
mention of Galileo’s plight, of Marxists inspired by a "religion of science",
of postmodernist lunacy, and the absurdity of scientologist
L. Ron Hubbard’s ramblings about radiation. More seriously, there is
little effort to articulate general principles of scientific confirmation and
to explain how, exactly, the purveyors of pseudoscientific claims are guilty of
violating these principles. Ronald N. Giere does this clearly and succinctly in
his short chapter on "Marginal Science" in Understanding
Scientific Reasoning (Wadsworth, 1996).

Those interested in debunking would
be far better served by Michael Shermer’s Why
People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions
of Our Time (Owl Books, 2002). After addressing skepticism and
the difference between science and pseudoscience, Shermer carefully articulates
twenty‑five fallacies that give rise to unfounded beliefs and then evaluates
a host of bizarre claims, ranging from ESP and alien abductions to creationism
and denials of the Holocaust. He closes with explanations for why even
intelligent people fall prey to belief in the outlandish. Whereas Shermer’s
book is a broad, structured, engaging introduction to scientific confirmation
and skepticism regarding the weird, Debunked!
reads like a hurriedly pieced patchwork of examples culled from the authors’ debunking
files.

Ó 2006 H. Scott Hestevold

H. Scott Hestevold,
Ph.D., Department of Philosophy, University of Alabama.

Categories: General