January 1990 +quot;BASIS+quot;, newsletter of the Bay Area Skeptics Bay Area Skeptics Info
January 1990 "BASIS", newsletter of the Bay Area Skeptics
Bay Area Skeptics Information Sheet
Vol. 9, No. 1
Editor: Kent Harker
"I predicted last year before New Years on KGO radio and TV [San
Francisco] and KCBS that there would be a 5.2 earthquake this year
with some aftershocks, but that I didn't see a major 7-pointer
destroying the Bay Area." -- Terri Brill, Psychic Astrologer, "San
Francisco Chronicle", October 14, 1989 [three days before the
by Rick Moen
[This article is our November meeting review of astronomer David
Morrison's talk. Dr. Morrison, a CSICOP Fellow, is a planetary
scientist and head of the Space Science Division at NASA's Ames
Dr. Morrison spoke on "catastrophism", the school of thought that
has revolutionized astronomy in the past few years and stirred
debate among biologists as well. In the course of his talk, he
also expounded on the "quack catastrophisms" of Immanuel Velikovsky
and the creationists, by way of contrast. Within mainstream
planetary science, there are two basic approaches to explain the
geological and biological record: Uniformitarians hold that the
land and lifeforms of Earth were produced by continuous activity
over very long time spans, producing gradual, cumulative changes.
This was the traditional view, which prevailed over the past 150
years, until recently.
The dissenting "catastrophists" have suggested that periodic
intense bursts of geological activity have produced the bulk of
this change, through such means as meteor strikes, or cataclysmic
floods and volcanic explosions. Recent developments in astronomy
and geology have lent their position powerful support.
Morrison felt that the influence of catastrophism may have been
somewhat delayed because of the affair of Immanuel Velikovsky,
whose theories bear at least a surface resemblance, and was at some
pains to point out the difference. Velikovsky published in 1950 a
work called "Worlds in Collision", describing his ideas about a
kind of planetary ping-pong that supposedly brought our solar
system to its current configuration: Venus sprang out of Jupiter
during an encounter of that planet with Saturn, and swung by Earth
circa 1500 B.C., causing such events as the parting of the Red Sea,
the sun standing still for Joshua's benefit, the collapse of the
walls of Jericho, and the plagues in Egypt.
Venus then knocked Mercury off course, into several near-collisions
with Earth, in the seventh and eighth centuries B.C., causing
further upheavals. For good measure, Velikovsky had Saturn
showering the Earth with water, thus accounting for the Deluge, and
the moon being captured by Earth, all also within human history.
If this were not amazing enough, Velikovsky adduced as his primary
evidence various "myths" from different cultures, employing his own
idiosyncratic form of extreme literalism. Everywhere gods were
mentioned, they were IN FACT planets: Zeus and Ares having a tete-
a-tete actually meant a near-collision of Jupiter and Mars. He was
thus able to tie various peoples' written records and mythologies
to his hypothetical planetary ballet and its terrestrial side-
effects (e.g., volcanoes and meteorites), making adjustments as
needed (such as eliminating 4 Egyptian dynasties to synchronize
Velikovsky's work met with a harsh and perhaps disproportionate
blast of criticism from the scientific establishment, mostly
because it was published by Macmillan & Company's textbook
division. He and his followers thus were able to follow the well-
worn path of the self-described martyr, gaining from it
considerable publicity and sympathy from the unwary, as have cranks
in all ages.
Like the creationists, Velikovsky insisted on fitting everything
into the human record, and so came up with an anthropocentric view
of the universe, with an implausibly young solar system. He used
a very narrow conception of history, postulated physical forces
that are no longer at work today (and thus are not testable),
distorted the human record to make the various myths world-wide and
simultaneous, and ignored conflicting evidence from astronomy,
physics, geology, and archeology.
All his major predictions turned out to be false (e.g. Venus giving
off heat, because of its supposed recent formation), in spite of
numerous attempts at rationalizing, as was pointed out by
Velikovsky's many scientific critics (not least of whom was David
Morrison himself). Yet some of his followers have persisted to this
day, keeping the faith alive even after his death in 1979.
Creationism, the other major variety of "quack catastrophism," has
itself undergone a type of radical change. As early as the 18th
century, many writers attempting to reconcile biblical cosmology
with scientific findings had concluded that the Deluge (however
inaccurately recorded) must have been the most recent of a SERIES
of catastrophes. Biblical literalism had been set aside or relaxed
Around the turn of the present century, a "new U.S. creationism"
began to be popular. It involved strict biblical literalism, the
occurrence of only ONE flood caused by the collapse of an overhead
vapour canopy, and worldwide volcanic eruptions. These events
produced all the Earth's continents and other landforms, geologic
strata and fossil deposits, over the course of a SINGLE year, and
all of cosmic history was required to fit within a timescale of
less than 10,000 years (instead of billions of years). As with
Velikovsky's theories, no physical evidence for this Deluge
catastrophism exists: It contradicts the fundamentals of geology
and astronomy, and is unrelated to (and fails to explain) the
observed patterns of mass extinctions, evolution, and other
elements of biological history.
In contrast to these variants, Morrison described the "new
catastrophism" emerging from astronomy. For a long time scientists
entertained the idea that infrequent, catastrophic events made the
dominant effects in geology and biology. In the same way that
sudden floods produced most of the erosion that formed the Grand
Canyon, one could conceive of astronomical events that cause
worldwide upheaval and consequent rapid change. The Cretaceous-
Tertiary and Permian extinctions were cited as possible examples
of these effects. Only recently, however, have plausible mechanisms
and other supporting evidence for such rapid and dramatic change
come to light.
Studies of the comets and asteroids, as well as of impact craters
on the Earth and other bodies, have made apparent that collisions
with the Earth have occurred quite frequently (on the cosmic
timescale). The comets pass Earth orbit both inbound and outbound,
and perturbations in asteroid orbits occasionally eject some of
them into the inner solar system. The several largest of the
roughly 30,000 asteroids are not too far short of planetary scale,
and dwarf the remainder added together. One of these could be
expected to strike Earth on the order of every 5 to 100 million
Astronomers now think that, in the most dramatic such episode,
around 4.5 billion years ago, a body the size of Mars struck the
earth, nearly splitting apart the Earth, and creating the moon.
Some scientists thus speculate that life may have formed several
times on Earth, with the Earth being "sanitized" by massive impacts
Another clear collision on a lesser scale occurred at the time of
the Cretaceous extinction (when the dinosaurs died out): The late
BAS Advisor Luis Alvarez pointed out that the high concentration
of iridium from that geological layer is best explained by a
collision with some sizable iridium-bearing body (as some comets
are thought to be).
Stephen Jay Gould and others have suggested that at ordinary times,
species can in general adapt to the small, gradual changes in their
environment, but have no such survival mechanism equal to the
challenge of such catastrophic events. It is on such occasions that
ordinarily-unimportant quirks, like living mostly underground (as
the ancestors of mammals did at the time of the dinosaurs' demise)
suddenly become important survival traits, and enormous biological
changes become possible as the environment changes drastically.
Although the craters resulting from some past impacts can be found
in places around the Earth, constant erosion makes the record a
relatively brief one: Better information can be found by examining
the Moon. Part of the surface there, the "old highlands," consists
of heavily cratered terrain -- craters on top of craters, of great
age. The lunar "maria", by contrast, are volcanic flow plains
formed about 3.5 billion years ago, and so were a "clean slate" at
that time, and are thus useful for studying the more "recent"
period since then. Only 5 craters of 50 km or more appear on the
Extrapolating to the 80-times-greater area of the Earth (and
ignoring the stronger gravitational field), one would expect 400
such impacts in 3.5 billion years, or about one every 10 million
years. (Note that the Cretaceous extinction, 65 million years ago,
fits this model.) These would be massive impacts, utterly dwarfing
the effects of even the most massive volcanic explosions, or any
other known geologic processes. Each such meteor (of, say, 10 km
diameter) would release kinetic energy of about 10 million megatons
of TNT, excavating 10 to the 15th power tons of material,
sufficient to blot out all sunlight for months and leave a layer
several feet deep around the earth.
Evidence from the time of the Cretaceous extinction suggests that
just such global effects occurred at that time. Alternatives to
this impact scenario have been offered and considered. The only
plausible event of enough severity is explosive volcanic eruption.
Such cataclysms as the explosions of Thera (Santorini), Krakatoa,
and Mt. St. Helens have seemed devastating to human onlookers, but
have never been shown to reach more than one-millionth the power
of the (inevitable) impacts already mentioned.
Krakatoa made possible the stunning beauty of Turner's painted
sunsets, but was certainly not catastrophic on a global scale. So,
unless one accepts the ad hoc hypothesis of million-times-magnified
volcanoes, it seems more reasonable to expect impact events to have
What does all this mean for us? For an individual, the chance of
having one's day ruined by a meteor is minuscule: For a
once-per-million-year event (a several-km-wide meteor causing a
several hundred thousand megaton impact), one chance in 2 0,000.
However, for CIVILISATION, the risk of such an impact is
significant, since the loss of sunlight would cause crop failure
and starvation of most of humankind, much like the hypothetical
"nuclear winter." The risk to individuals can be put into
perspective compared to more familiar death risks:
Botulism: 1 chance in 2,000,000
Fireworks: 1 chance in 500,000
Tornadoes: 1 chance in 50,000
Air Crashes: 1 chance in 20,000
Meteor Impact: 1 chance in 20,000
Firearms: 1 chance in 200
Car Crash: 1 chance in 100
Or, to put this another way, Morrison listed the expected average
deaths per year in the U.S. from each cause:
Botulism : kills a few
Fireworks: kills a dozen
Tornadoes: kill a hundred
Air Crashes: kill several hundred
Firearms: kill 20,000
Car Crash: kill 50,000
Averaging over a long period of time, impacts could, like air
crashes, be expected to kill several hundred per year, or wipe out
the U.S. population once per million years. What should be done
about this? Well, considering the amount spent on such preventative
measures as tornado watches, aircraft safety (a comparable hazard,
not counting the civilisation threat), and food inspections, it
seems reasonable to expect some proportionate societal effort.
Several hundred people lost (on average) per year equates to
roughly a loss of some hundred million dollars or so in lost
earnings power, as another point of comparison. Such comparisons
based on the number of lives at risk would suggest spending several
hundred million dollars per year on research and protection.
Morrison urges intensified telescope searches, missions to examine
comets and asteroids, and continued research on impacts, nuclear
winter scenarios, orbital chaos theory, etc. He envisions, in the
next decade or so, effective defenses from such disasters, using
explosive devices to deflect incoming meteors when they are still
far enough to nudge off course, a REAL space defense for everyone.
Dr. Morrison has gone into this matter in greater (and more
eloquent) detail in his book "Cosmic Catastrophes" -- just out --
and many of those in attendance were able to buy copies at the
lecture site (the Academy of Science). Keep your eye out for this
well-written and interesting work.
A near catastrophe of much lesser proportions grazed Morrison not
too long ago: He was a co-defendant, with CSICOP and several other
local skeptics, in the recent Hawaii lawsuit filed by self-
described psychic Gareth Pendragon. The skeptics prevailed, but we
hope to give Dr. Morrison a safer environment here in the Bay Area,
earthquakes notwithstanding, and extend to him a warm welcome --
and a thank you for a wonderful talk.
A note of gratitude to Daniel Sabsay for a keen eye and some great
recommendations to improve the appearance of "BASIS". Look around
and see if you can see the changes. We are always pleased to
receive the comments and suggestions of you, the talented people
out there. Pull out your rulers, graphic-art minds and send your
ideas to make things better. The improvements to our newsletter
have almost all come from very caring people, some of them
professionals. Thanks to you all.
by Robert Pease
[Robert Pease is an electronics engineer who saw some gibberish in
the "San Francisco Chronicle" Home Entertainment section alleging
that splicing speaker wire is to be avoided because it degrades the
sound quality. He wrote to the "Chronicle", challenging the claims
of their article. What follows is background and part of the
rebuttal to the newspaper. -- Ed.]
In the olden days, the soothsayer would require you to cross her
palm with silver before she would assure you that you could win the
hand of your true love, etc. These days, there are other areas
where you have to have faith in the unexplainable to win the prize.
For example, you have to trust and spend $$$ according to the
advice of the Hi-Fi Expert. You have to take his word for it that
an expen$$ive amplifier made with vacuum tubes sounds better than
any amplifier made with the best transistors. You have to take his
word for it that $200 speaker cables "sound better" than $5, $50,
or $100 speaker cables.
This whole thing is lifted to new levels of absurdity when a man
named Somerfield comes along and says, if you have a perfectly
adequate set of speaker wires, and you need them 5 feet longer,
well, throw them away and buy new ones at the new length so you can
avoid splices in the wires. After all, you wouldn't want to add
splices which would "hamper the sound quality," would you? I have
done some measurements and can say that this is hogwash.
I took some 12-gauge stranded wire and spliced it simply by
twisting the strands together. Unspliced wire has a resistance of
about 150 micro ohms per inch. With the twisted splice, about 900
ohms -- the equivalent of an unspliced wire six inches longer --
was added. When the splice was soldered, making the splice more
solid, the increased resistance was only about 40 ohms, or less
than .3 inches of wire! I have also checked other effects of
splicing, such as impedance, with the same negligible effects.
I have proposed a test and challenged Mr. Somerfield to tell me
which wires, spliced or unspliced, "sound better." I asked him to
pick out an unspliced wire from a group of wires with up to 10
splices in each wire. Obviously, even HE knows he has no chance to
do that. He'd have to be clairvoyant to guess which wire has a
splice, because at microwave frequencies, (200 - 800 MHz), one
might be able to notice a tiny difference. At the highest end of
human hearing (20 kHz), no way.
Many of these "Golden Ear" fellows really do have good ears, but
too often they claim to be able to hear things that are just not
there. Some of these people claim things that border on the
paranormal, and they cry out to be rebutted to help prevent even
a duped yuppie from getting ripped off.
The notion that a properly spliced speaker wire is sufficiently
inferior as to "hamper the sound" is so absurd that next they'll
be telling us that a speaker wire in a knot will cause the sound
to be "constricted" or "strangled." Often, when a "Golden Ear"
claims that amplifier A has "less distortion when overdriven" than
amplifier B, or that speaker system C has "smoother phase" than
system D, we laymen are not in a position to argue, because the
experts' opinions are subjective and because it would cost
thousands and thousands of dollars for us to duplicate the
experiment. Here, we are talking about a few dollar's worth of wire
and some very basic comparisons: either a wire with one or two
splices is noticeably different from unspliced wire or it is not.
Self-proclaimed experts must beware of making pompous
pronouncements which cannot be supported when challenged.
(Note: As of press time, Mr. Somerfield has not responded)
by Rex Springston
[The following is a June 1988 excerpted article from the Richmond,
Virginia "News Leader".)
Cassandra Hoyer said she was being thrown to the ground by 30
Satanists when a woman drove by and stopped her car to help. "They
dragged her into the woods, hung her on a cross and sacrificed her
by fire," Ms. Hoyer alleged. Another time, Ms. Hoyer and a teenager
were harassed and dipped into vats of blood, she said. She claimed
that both rituals occurred in the summer of 1987 in a rural part
of Goochland County, Virginia, she said.
At the time, investigating Police found nothing -- no car, no
missing person report, not even a drop of blood from the vats, said
chief deputy Leslie Parrish. Does he believe the stories? "I'm a
little iffy on it," he said. Sue Bane says she has witnessed 50 to
70 human sacrifices by Satanists in the Richmond area. The most
recent occurred about six months ago in Henrico County when a baby
was sacrificed on an altar, then cut up into pieces, she said. The
police have found nothing.
Hoyer, 42, and Bane, 28, call themselves survivors of Satanic
cults. They are representative of hundreds of such "survivors"
across the country. Both have had intensive psychotherapy, and both
suffer from multiple-personality disorders, their psychiatrists
say. Neither has physical evidence to support her contentions.
"Survivors" across the country have told extremely similar stories
of torture and sacrifice without corroboration by physical
evidence, experts say. The stories -- given great play on talk
shows and in the mainstream press -- help feed the notion that
Satanic cults are conducting sacrifices with regularity across the
country. Many experts say that notion is a myth.
Two outspoken local advocates of the Satanic-conspiracy theory,
Richmond police Lt. Lawrence Haake and Hanover County private
investigator Patricia Pulling, say "survivors" are key sources of
their information. "People are saying the same thing all over the
country, and those people are totally unrelated to one another, but
what they say is consistent -- to me that is a degree of
credibility," said Haake.
Some mental health professionals say the survivor accounts are
simply delusions suffered by mentally disturbed people and passed
to the public as fact by unskeptical therapists, police officers
and news reporters. The delusions may be reactions to genuine, but
non-Satanic, abuse they received as children, experts say. "The
true cult is the people who believe in this," said Dr. Park Dietz,
a Newport Beach, CA forensic psychiatrist.
Ms. Hoyer, a toy-store cashier who was brought up in New England
and has lived in Richmond since 1980, has spoken in public meetings
and in news stories of being chased by a Satanic cult, being
repeatedly raped and being forced to witness two local sacrifices.
Her story was the basis for a January 1988 feature article in
"Style Weekly", a weekend newspaper insert. Mrs. Bane has spoken
about Satanism to Richmond police training groups, according to her
and Parrish. She is writing a book, "Freedom from Satan's Horror".
She revealed she had 17 personalities, and some of them wanted to
be in the cult. She said therapy and faith in God fused her 17
personalities into one. "I prayed, and through a miracle, I was
completely integrated," she said. Her husband, Nathan, a 35-year-
old plumber, said the whole thing had been a "nightmare." He said
he never saw the rituals; his wife would slip out at night to go
to them. Ms. Hoyer and Mrs. Bane said they began to realize they
were Satanic cult victims while undergoing psychotherapy in recent
Adults are not the only ones to describe Satanic rituals. According
to officials, a dozen or more children in the Richmond area have
described them, as logged by various Virginia state and local
departments. The children reported -- or indicated through play and
passing comments -- seeing sacrifices, dismemberment and other
"They are not saying they witnessed it. They are talking about it
as if they know about it, and that's what makes us suspicious,"
said Bettie Kienast, a Social Service director. She said her
department had dealt with four such children in about four years.
The stories are consistent with unconfirmed reports from children
across the country. Many experts say the children may have picked
up the stories from adults or other children or even from movies
and other popular culture. The stories also may be fantasies or
false reports induced by leading questions, experts say. In some
cases, the children may have been victims of real but non-Satanic
abuse, or of abuse by pedophiles who use the trappings of Satanism
as a means of control, some experts say.
Kenneth Lanning, the FBI's chief expert on sex crimes against
children, has been consulted in more than 299 case involving
Satanic themes. He would not discuss specific cases but he said he
was aware of claims of sacrifice in the Richmond area. He said he
knows of no bona fide Satanic cult sacrifice -- not only in Central
Virginia, but nationwide. Regarding Mrs. Bane's story, Lanning
said, "It's unlikely that a group of individuals could come
together, commit 50 to 70 human sacrifices, and no one ever finds
any evidence, no mother of a (sacrificed) child ever has second
thought . . . nobody ever makes a mistake."
[Note the great similarity in reports of Satanic ritual and UFO
They recently reuned in Foster City, CA to discuss the growing
problem of alien abductions. J.R. Wheeler sent us the story from
the 8-7-89 "Peninsula Time Tribune" detailing the conference. More
than anything, it appears that it was an occasion for the faithful
to swap stories: "You know what happens when you leak any of the
UFO information? You get snuffed out," said a society member who
preferred to stay anonymous as he leaked UFO information.
The general topic of discussion was the vast government cover-up,
about which everyone on the planet knows. One of the reasons given
for the success of the plot is that we are getting great
technological secrets from the aliens in exchange for silence
guaranteeing that nobody knows they are here. We must be very
careful to see that people don't write books or have meetings about
DEGREES OF FOLLY: PART IX
by William Bennetta
Parts I through VIII of this article ran in earlier issues of
"BASIS", starting in February 1989. Here is a summary: By law, no
unaccredited school in California can issue degrees unless the
school has been assessed and formally approved by the
superintendent of public instruction -- the chief of the State
Department of Education.
In August l988, the Department's Private Postsecondary Education
Division (PPED) staged an assessment of the ICR Graduate School
(ICRGS). The ICRGS is an arm of the Institute for Creation
Research, a fundamentalist ministry that promotes the pseudoscience
called "creation-science." The founder and president of the ICR is
Henry Morris, a preacher and former engineer who poses as an expert
in geology, biology, paleontology and various other fields in which
he has no detectable credentials.
The Department's assessment of Morris's school was made by a five-
man committee that had been chosen by, and was managed, by a PPED
officer named Roy W. Steeves. The committee included two ringers
who had been linked closely to the ICR or to Morris, and the
committee's report was bogus: It hid the real nature of the ICR,
promoted the ICR's scientific pretensions, and said that the
superintendent of public instruction, Bill Honig, should approve
the ICR as a source of masters' degrees in science and in science
Two of the committee's legitimate members then sent separate
reports to Honig, telling the truth about the ICR. But Roy Steeves,
in memoranda to the PPED's director, Joseph P. Barankin, endorsed
the ICR and urged that it should be approved. Honig, in statements
that he gave to the press in December 1988, refused the approval;
but in January 1989 the Department drew back from that decision and
began to negotiate with the ICR.
On 3 March 1989, Joseph Barankin and the ICR reached an agreement.
The ICR would revise its curriculum, purging "ICRGS's
interpretations" from courses that would count toward degrees. To
learn whether the ICR had made the revisions, the Department would
send a new examining committee; one member would be selected by
the ICR. Despite the agreement, the ICR continued to advertise the
ICRGS as a "Graduate School of Creationist Science," devoted to
"scientific and Biblical creationism."
The new committee visited the ICR in August 1989. Four of the
committee's five members are scientists from campuses of the
University of California or the California State University. The
fifth, evidently selected by the ICR, is from a Bible college in
Ohio. The committee is being managed not by Roy Steeves but by
Jeanne Bird. Bird joined the PPED in the spring of 1989, as a staff
consultant, and became one of the PPED's assistant directors a few
Henry Morris and the other ICR men, according to their own
statements, expect that the committee will declare the ICRGS
unworthy of approval, and that Honig will follow the committee's
judgment. On 31 August, in an effort to win sympathy from the press
and the public, the ICR men held a "news conference" to denounce
Honig and to distribute a fiercely misleading account of their
transactions with his Department.
They achieved only modest success, however: Most news organizations
apparently recognized that the ICR men's only "news" was their own
desperation. The committee has not yet given its report to Honig.
I recently asked the Department about the status of the committee's
work, and I shall tell here what I learned. -- W.B., 14 December
On 20 November 1989, Jeanne Bird replaced Joseph Barankin as
director of the PPED. Bird's title is "acting director"; she
presumably will manage the PPED through the end of this year, when
it will go out of business. (See sidebar.) According to the
Department's public-relations officer, Susie Lange, Barankin now
has a special assignment and works for Bill Honig's deputy
superintendent for specialized programs, Shirley Thornton.
As a part of that assignment, Lange says, Barankin is still
handling the ICR case. Responsibility for the case, however,
remains with Jeanne Bird in the PPED, even if Barankin no longer
WHAT'S TAKING SO LONG?
Early on 4 December I telephoned Jeanne Bird to learn how the case
was developing. She said that she had to go to a meeting and would
return my call in the afternoon. The person who called me in the
afternoon, however, was Gregory Roussere, the Department's lawyer
who has overseen the ICR case and who accompanied the members of
the new committee during their visit to the ICR.
According to Roussere, each member of the committee had submitted,
in August or in early September, an account of what he had observed
during the visit. Jeanne Bird then had directed the synthesis of
those accounts into a draft of the committee's report; and copies
of the draft had been sent to all the members, in mid-November, so
that they could offer comments and corrections that would be
reflected in a new draft.
Further drafts will be generated until all the members reach a
consensus and sign a report that can be delivered to Honig. "We'd
like to finish it as soon as we can," Roussere commented, "but as
a reality, we probably won't have a final report until the first
of the year."
Why, I asked, has the writing of the report proceeded so slowly?
The chief reason, Roussere said, is that the PPED has been
preoccupied with preparations for implementing some new legislation
that will take effect on 1 January 1990. That legislation governs
the assessment and approval of vocational schools.
The ICR men, meanwhile, have just distributed another batch of
religious pamphlets, including the December issues of "Impact" and
"Acts & Facts". "Impact" offers an end-of-the-world piece --
"Earthquakes in These Last Days" -- by Steven A. Austin, of the
ICR's Geology Department. (For a note about one of Austin's earlier
ventures in pseudoscience, see "A Truth Patrolman Tracks Prof.
John," in "BASIS" for October.)
Austin mentions the California earthquake of 17 October 1989, links
some biblical passages to earthquakes, and then tells how recent
earthquakes should be interpreted:
Jesus Christ spoke of them as "signs" of His coming again
to earth. He said, "There will be earthquakes in divers
places" (Matthew 24:7; Mark 13: 8), a fact now verified
by the global distribution of earthquakes recorded on
seismographs. Furthermore, He said this sign is the
"beginning of sorrows" (Matthew 24:8; Mark 13:8). The
word translated [as] "sorrows" in many English Bibles is
the Greek [word] for "birth pangs." Just as we know that
a woman is going to give birth to a child because of
birth pangs, Jesus says we know that the intolerable
anguish of God's judgment and the return of His Son is
[sic] at hand.
Austin concludes that "our basis for understanding earthquakes"
should be this: They are divine devices for judgment, deliverance
and communication. An unsigned article in the December "Acts &
Facts" says that the California Republican Assembly (CRA) last
October adopted a resolution supporting the ICR' s attempt to get
approval from Bill Honig.
According to the article, the resolution accused Honig of intending
to deny the ICR men's academic and religious freedom; it also
called for investigations of Honig's actions by the federal Civil
Rights Commission and by the attorney general, among others. I have
not yet been able to get the CRA's comment about the "Acts & Facts"
SIDEBAR: SB190 IS NOW LAW
SB190 -- State Senator Becky Morgan's bill for reforming the
regulation of unaccredited schools that operate in California --
was signed into law by Governor George Deukmejian on 1 October.
The bill had been approved in the Senate (by a vote of 31 to 1) on
19 June. It then had been amended by the Assembly, which passed
the amended version (by a vote of 70 to 5) on 13 September. Two
days later, the Senate accepted the amended text (by a vote of 23
to 4); and on 20 September the bill went to the governor.
Since 1977 the responsibility for regulating vocational schools and
unaccredited, degree-granting organizations has resided, by
statute, with the superintendent of public instruction -- the chief
of the State Department of Education. Morgan's law will transfer
that responsibility to the California Council for Private
Postsecondary and Vocational Education, a new agency that will come
into existence on 1 January 1991 and will be devoted entirely to
overseeing postsecondary schools.
Concomitantly, the new law will abolish the Department of
Education's Private Postsecondary Education Division (PPED) and the
Council for Private Postsecondary Educational Institutions, an
agency that was established in 1977 to advise the superintendent
of public instruction. It will not, however, affect the California
Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC), an advisory body that
serves the governor and the legislature. A committee convened by
CPEC will prepare, by 1 October 1990, a forecast of the new
council's operating budget, including an estimate of any subsidy
that the council may need, from the state's general fund, to
supplement the fees that will be paid by regulated schools.
The council will have authority to establish "minimum criteria"
governing the operation of unaccredited, degree-granting schools
and to grant or deny approval to such schools. No unaccredited
school will be able to grant degrees, legally, unless it has won
approval. The council will begin practical operation on 1 July 199l
and will have 15 members: the superintendent of public instruction,
the secretary of state, a representative of the California Student
Aid Commission, six representatives of schools that fall under the
council's jurisdiction, and six people from the general public.
(The text of the law adds: "It is the intent of the Legislature
that the members of the general public . . . have a strong
interest in developing private postsecondary and vocational
education, and include representation from businesses that employ
persons in positions requiring academic, vocational, or technical
Any civil-service employee who may be working for the PPED on 31
December 1990 will become an employee of the new council; and any
school that may be holding an approval under current law will have
its approval extended "for a period not to exceed four years from
the date of the institutions's last approval review."
The new law offers a new opportunity and mechanism for policing
unaccredited schools and for driving bogus outfits from the state,
but it is not as potent a law as it might have been. One glaring
weakness lies in the composition of the council: Two-fifths of the
council's members will come from unaccredited schools -- that is,
two-fifths of the regulators will be regulatees -- but none of its
members need come from ACCREDITED ones.
Hence there is no clear, mandated link between the council and the
mainstream academic community, nor any clear, mandated safeguard
against the council's turning into a mutual-certification club. The
law's actual effect will depend on the integrity of the council's
members and technical staff, their diligence in resisting attempts
by diploma mills to vitiate the law, and the willingness of the
legislature and the governor to support the council with money. If
the council must depend entirely on license fees for its funds, and
must see its own budget shrink when it refuses to approve or
reapprove a school, then both the intent and the letter of the new
law may be compromised. -- W.B.
SAI BABA BABBLING
The sleight-of-hand cum-psychic, Sai Baba, is so confident of his
unswerving support that he feels he can be as reckless and carefree
as he pleases. B. Premanand, head of India's CSICOP-like
organization, has exposed the Indian guru many times, but his
followers remain stalwart. (Premanand visited the Bay Area and told
about the god-men of India, of which Sai Baba is the most
In July of 1989, another rationalist, Abraham Kovoor, uncovered an
utterly shameless attempt by Sai Baba to claim he had materialized
a unique Seiko watch "from thin air" for the head of the Japanese
watchmaker company when he was on a visit to the god-men in India.
Sai Baba claimed that the watch in question was locked in a vault
in the corporate headquarters in Japan, yet he was able to
materialize the timepiece and hand it to the dignitary during the
Kovoor did some painstaking investigations and found that the truth
was quite different. He wrote repeatedly to Sai Baba's office for
details of the miracle, but his letters went unanswered. He then
wrote to the Seiko company who told him that no Seiko company
official had visited India near the time in question, let alone to
Sai Baba. Therefore no watch had been produced. Most significant
is the simple fact that no such unique watch exists in the first
The entire episode from start to finish was a fiction. This
incident should remind us that when miraculous claims are spouted,
the FIRST explanation we should consider is that it is simply a
THE NEW SCIENCE FRAMEWORK: WHY SCIENCE WON BIG.
Dr. Kevin Padian, a professor of evolutionary biology in the
department of Integrative Biology at U.C. Berkeley, an advisor to
BAS and a member of the board of the National Council for Science
Education said that he learned a lot about the political tactics
used by creationists in the fight over California's science
curriculum. The public need to know more about the threat to
science eduction. As a member of the "Science Framework Committee"
drafting the new guidelines for science education, he discovered
that it wasn't all rational science or obvious public policy. The
stakes are high, and the creationists have an agenda.
The editor of "The Origin of Birds and the Evolution of Flight"
(1986) he had to come down to earth and confront these very real
opponents of sound scientific education. But "science won big," he
insisted. Find out why, despite last minute compromises and wording
changes, your children's future as science students took a leap
forward. Come and hear Dr. Padian's step-by-step analysis of what
really happened in Sacramento.
Opinions expressed in "BASIS" are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect those of BAS, its board or its advisors.
The above are selected articles from the January, 1990 issue of
"BASIS", the monthly publication of Bay Area Skeptics. You can
obtain a free sample copy by sending your name and address to BAY
AREA SKEPTICS, 4030 Moraga, San Francisco, CA 94122-3928 or by
leaving a message on "The Skeptic's Board" BBS (415-648-8944) or
on the 415-LA-TRUTH (voice) hotline.
Copyright (C) 1990 BAY AREA SKEPTICS. Reprints must credit "BASIS,
newsletter of the Bay Area Skeptics, 4030 Moraga, San Francisco,
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank