Picture an intenet forum where people pretend to believe that they know what they know they do not know... Well, you have just found Vic Stenger's forum, avoid-L! On March 15, 2007, I joined this bizarre "skeptic" burrow. I stayed there until December 27, same year. God, I payed the price! (Worse: I was soon afterwards forced to return there to dispell some libels that were being spread about my critical contributions to the Wikipedia entry "William Jefferys"; as a consequence, I decided to stay there forever now, even though in a kind of "stand-by" state...) After these many months, I came to realize why Vic's books are of so poor quality, and the reason is: poor peers. Below, I will depict this forum's numerous vices, and its few virtues too. Main culprits will be named, bizarre events will be depicted... What the reader will come to know is a place where, instead of being an online Academia of reason and critical thinking, blinding emotion sets the tone and determines the content of the debates and of the analyses. Farewell to Reason...

Before taking to a critique of some top forum members, it is important to take a look at the issue that forced me to get back there (to the forum) to set things right.


The Forum Where Even Racism Thrived...: I admit that it may have been so in an inadvertent manner. But the net result of the event depicted below was that some Avoid-L members, for some time, ended up endorsing racist impact on society.  First, renowned scientist James Watson (non avoid-L member) made racist remarks (this link; alternative link here). Then, Richard Dawkins (non avoid-L member) supported the ethical right (!!!) of Watson to make these racist remarks... (this link; alternative link here). Then, Bob Zannelli and Brent Meeker (avoid-L members) claimed that Dawkins was right. Last, but not least, Lawrence Crowell and William H. Jefferys went one step further into the abyss, and declared that I was being nonsensical and ridiculous when I claimed that Watson had been unethical in his remarks. So, you reader, judge the issue for yourself... In the box below, I present Watson's supposedly "perfectly ethical remarks", as some Avoid-L members would have us believe.

Watson's first racist remarks http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article2630748.ece He (James Watson) says that he is “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really”, and I know that this “hot potato” is going to be difficult to address. His hope is that everyone is equal, but he counters that “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true”. He says that you should not discriminate on the basis of colour, because “there are many people of colour who are very talented, but don’t promote them when they haven’t succeeded at the lower level”. Dawkins saying Watson was ethically Ok... http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article3078883.ece Professor Richard Dawkins, who was due to conduct a public interview with Dr Watson next week in Oxford, said that if Dr Watson is wrong he will be wrong scientifically, not ethically, and it is a scientific argument, not an ethical one, that will demonstrate his error. "What is ethically wrong is the hounding, by what can only be described as an illiberal and intolerant 'thought police', of one of the most distinguished scientists of our time, out of the Science Museum, and maybe even out of the laboratory that [he] has devoted much of his life to building up a world-class reputation," Professor Dawkins said. The furthest Watson went in an attempt to redeem himself. Never acknowledging having been, in the first place, unscientific and unethical... http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article3075642.ece Alternative link here. We do not yet adequately understand the way in which the different environments in the world have selected over time the genes which determine our capacity to do different things. The overwhelming desire of society today is to assume that equal powers of reason are a universal heritage of humanity. It may well be. But simply wanting this to be the case is not enough. This is not science.

So, it may very well be that these Avoid-L members arenot indeed racist. But the fact is that they have highly endorsed unscientific/unethical racist remarks (and therefore they have endorsed racist influence on society). It is just not true that all scientific testing has shown blacks to be inferior (in intelligence) to whites. And it is just unethical to encourage employers to avoid promoting blacks in certain situations, for it is obvious that if you stress that you should avoid promoting blacks in these situations, you are strongly implying that your restriction does not apply to whites.

So we must all demand and wait for these guys (Richard Dawkins - Bob Zannelli - Brent Meeker - Lawrence Crowell - William H. Jefferys) to step forward and apologize for this socially harmful behaviour that they have engaged in. Until then, I will put up with exchanging ideas with them no longer.

Follow-up on this sad issue above: I went to Wikipedia to report the important information that, according to the way I saw things, William Jefferys had been endorsing racism on the web. I did this by including a brief note on the "William Jefferys" entry of the Wikipedia. Jefferys, then, accused me of being libelous, and said that, actually, he had a life-long stand against racism. As a matter of fact, as he assured us, both his father and grandfather had similar highly honorable anti-racism past. I believe what he says is true. So, whatever racist impact Jefferys' conduct might have had in this incident described by me above, this impact was dissolved by what he said afterwards. I detailed my critical position towards Jefferys' actions, and they can be read in these two documents (first one, and second one).

As to the other Avoid-L members, including Brent Meeker and Bob Zannelli, they, sadly, never stepped forward to make their position unambiguous. Crowell, specifically, simply kept on with his juvenile monkey mocking. I consider this particularly bad and sad, especially because I believe that Meeker and Zannelli are not racists. Zannelli has (almost always) a very "politically correct" stand in the Avoid-L forum. Similarly, Meeker has quite good attitude towards most issues, and he even pointed out to me that he (Meeker) had often been critical of some of Dawkins' remarks and stands. So, I wonder, why this paralysis (from Meeker/Zannelli) to admit that Dawkins' remark had, too (like Watson's), been a racist one? The bad feeling that I get is that this paralysis stems from the fact that both the Avoid-L forum and Richard Dawkins belong to the so called "Skeptic Movement" (or "Humanist Movement", or "Secularist Movement", whatever).

Curiously enough, the beginning of all this issue was a message posted by Bob Zannelli himself, promoting the NYC Conference on Secularism, held in November 9 - 11, 2007. The main headline of the advertisement read: "Richard Dawkins Joins NYC Conference on Secularism." (Apparently they chose the date 9 - 11 because they believe the World Trade Center attack by Al Qaeda was driven by the irrationality of religion, and not by the economic and social oppression of the USA on the Arab world... Rationalists!). And a take a look at the picture below (from the ad) to see just who appears right next to Richard Dawkins...



The Typical Vices and Virtues of the avoid-L Forum: Vices, since the average avoid-Ler is the retired or almost retired physicist, with a good career and lots of academic connections, there seems to be a tendency in this forum to belittle the possible contribution from those who do not have a deep knowledge of physics. They tend to "flock together", that is, to avoid disagreeing among themselves, apparentely for fear of academic conflict (social and/or political). Thus the tendency never to criticize the "Cardinals" (or the "Moseses"...) of the skeptic movement in the USA and Britain (like Ray Hyman, Richard Dawkins, etc). Victor Stenger, specifically, does not like to be criticized, and does not seem to pay due importance to well based pieces of criticism (like the ones I presented to him, this link). It is very very rare that they acknowledge being wrong... So the vices seem to be neatly summarized by the "Double P Factor": Pride + Politics... Their knowledge regarding parapsychology is highly faulty and fiercely and emotionally biased (i.e. distorted). Virtues, they seem to have an honest desire to help those with questions, especially in the area of their expertice (physics mostly). They seem to be constructively interested (and/or involved) in politics, aiming at the welfare of people in general (but not to the point of acknowledging that one of their Cardinals - like Richard Dawkins, for instance - has supported racist statements. Rather, they prefer to end up supporting racism themselves... Again, the Double P Factor - "Society is important, but my own career comes first...". But, sorry, I was talking about virtues. :-) ). They usually refrain from being too offensive, with some exceptions... (i.e. this does not apply always, and does not apply to everyone there). They tend to listen to (i.e. read) criticism, sometimes reflecting upon it rather fairly (Vic Stenger is an exception in that, for he tends to shut himself in his oyster clam in such situations). Enough of virtues...

Main Contenders and Sinners During my Stay: some very bizarre and even quite funny incidents happened during the time I stayed in Vic's forum. They are very important incidents, since they may cast serious doubts on the validity of the very reasoning of some of the most prestigious avoid-Lers. I mean, they are good thinkers. But depending on the situation, or on the interests at stake, they may go very feeble in their arguments and in their logics. I will comment only (and briefly) on Bob Zannelli, Brent Meeker, Lawrence Crowell/Yonnatan Fishman (aka Sinclair Brothers), William H. Jefferys, and Victor Stenger himself.

This page is under construction XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX