Featured Post

5 Astroturf Groups You Should Stop Sharing From

After a hefty helping of inspiration from blogger Dawn's Brain's series on Facebook pages that people need to stop sharing from, t...

Sunday, February 21, 2021

The Bromance Continues: Kevin Folta Hearts Patrick Moore

The most recent episode of Talking Biotech podcast is yet another chapter in one of the love stories for the ages, that between Kevin Folta and Patrick Moore. We've seen their affection on display before in Turning a Blind Ideology.



Despite the title, the topic of climate change comes up for a large portion of this interview. Folta's description at the end also understated Moore's stance just a little bit. 



The dude is a full on denier.


In order to save you the pain of listening, I have summarized their discussion as follows


In addition to spouting utter BS about climate, Moore says to Folta “People have been indoctrinated to believe plastic is destroying the oceans.” Regarding the great pacific garbage patch, “It’s a fake, it doesn’t exist. It’s is not there. There is no pacific garbage patch.”

 
He continues, “It is a photo shop on the internet.”
After you read his book, unless you are “completely indoctrinated into the cult of climate catastrophe,” you will believe what he’s saying. Also, polar bear counters are lying.
 
Kevin now chimes in to say he’s not a climate skeptic, he’s a skeptic of the catastrophic interpretations....then a half ass push back on one of Moore’s claims, who talks over him a bunch to declare, “we are actually in a 6,000 year cooling period now.”
 
“Read my book Kevin.”
 
“I’m a member of the CO2 Coalition. (A front group) Our conclusion is clear, increased CO2 is 100% beneficial for the environment.” 

Kevin then says he relies on the info from the National Academy of Sciences re climate, then asks Moore “who am I supposed to trust?” Moore bashes the NAS, and spews more propaganda. “We (humans) have restored a balance to the global carbon cycle.”
 
Folta reiterates his question about who can people trust, Moore says read my book.

Folta continues glossing over Moore’s ridiculous claims and kisses his ass.

Moore unsurprisingly says, “The solution is nuclear energy.”
He then sings the praises of fossil fuels, and goes on a tangent about nuclear again.

Nuclear, nuclear, nuclear.
 
Kevin loves it.

Kevin loves Patrick.

Fin.

In all seriousness, this is bad. Kevin has given this guy a platform to sell his book and promote his brand of ideological pseudoscience. Folta once again demonstrates how he gives Moore a pass on  climate science (and basic fucking ecology and logic). He weakly challenged Moore's assertions which just adds to the evidence that any credibility afforded to Folta by virtue of his teaching position at the University of Florida is undeserved. This whole podcast was an embarrassing farce. 

Several on Twitter also noticed this and voiced their criticism.



Sadly though, many who should definitely know better, including one of the organizers for the March for Science liked Kevin's shares of the podcast with Moore. Facepalm.

If you want to learn about climate science, here's a list compiled by MPH@GW, the George Washington University online Master of Public Health program. They don't list Moore, his book, The CO2 Coalition, or Kevin Folta, so you should probably be okay.







Sunday, February 7, 2021

A Skeptic Promotes DDT...Again

Just in case we aren't already on the same page that getting your science information from people who call themselves babes is a bad idea, Yvette d'Entremont Ross (SciBabe) decided to make sure it was heard loud and clear with her "Moment of Science" dated January 30, 2021.

While the world is upside down and on fire, we can all take great comfort in the fact that Yvette is out there swooshing her lab coat over to the computer to type up a citation-less, expletive-peppered missive in defense of toxic chemicals and launch it onto her Facebook page.




DDT, the "miricle pesticide"


Here is the TL;DR version -

  • Early pesticides were very toxic and bad!
  • Enter organic chemistry...
  • DDT saves half a billion lives! Wow!
  • DDT safe!
  • DDT safe!
  • Everything's a chemical!
  • Rachel Carson's book is just overblown bullshit!
  • Okay so DDT was sorta bad for some birds...and it's a persistent organic pollutant...
  • It's also a probable carcinogen, but coffee, so just ignore that.
  • Risk is something I'm going gloss over in this sentence.
  • INVOKE 500 MILLION LIVES STAT AGAIN FOR MIC DROP
  • "DDT is good for me-e-e!" 🎶
  • People will know I'm full of shit when they read this, but...
  • Oh well! 

There is a veritable library of information on this topic, should readers wish to learn more about the history of DDT and malaria that Yvette seems to think isn't "nuanced" enough to include in her hastily written Facebook take. 

This isn't the first time SciBabe has used her platform to share myths about DDT, and it probably won't be the last. 

Saturday, October 24, 2020

The Babelist

Alright, the time has come to make another list. A list of Babes. A list of the persons surfing the waves of the internet on a tired-ass trope meant to mock Vani Hari, the Food Babe. This tactic has worked to some degree, judging by the number of Babes known to me up 'til now. If you happen to know of others, don't hesitate to send an email or drop a comment below.

Now, onto the list. Since you can't really rank dumpster fires, I think I'll just start at the beginning of the story.


Food Babe, Vani Hari




The Original Babe, Vani has become a favorite punching bag for Skeptics and the agriculture industry. The mouth-foaming diatribes, lectures, flaming arrows and take-down articles aimed at her brand peaked around 2015-16. 


Kevin Folta, a big fan of Ms. Hari's work



The attacks launched on Hari (an easy target for debunking) are what some refer to as "fame trolling."




And so, borne of the desire to elevate one's own brand by scrambling to the top of a gigantic heap of the picked clean bones of Vani Hari, Gwyneth Paltrow and the like, the world has been bestowed with a bevy of bogus Babes.


Bring in ze FemBOTS!!!




SciBabe, Yvette d'Entremont

Yvette d'Entremont



I've written entirely too much content on this Babe, so we will just go with a brief synopsis here by  another Babe - ChiroBabe - whose name is a play on SciBabe. If SciBabe is the anti-Vani, then ChiroBabe is the anti-Yvette, in the form of a blogger who gives a lesson on the history of chiropractic in this hilarious rebuttal to one of her articles. An excerpt:

The first time I encountered Yvette d’Entremont was when she wrote a blog for that esteemed, peer-reviewed scientific journal, Gawker, entitled “The Food Babe Blogger is Full of Shit.”

SciBabe and her brand of bully babe scicomm still lives on after numerous "This Person/Thing is Bullshit" articles, an artificial sweetener affiliate deal, gluten-free bath bombs, a porn podcast and a show on the weather channel which wrapped up its first season with an episode called "Ghost Apples and Space Jelly."


*Yvette picks her teeth with Vani's bones* "I'm so done with take downs." *belches* 


Also, it's totally normal for a science communicator to have a list of COI on their website, right? 


Food Science Babe, Erin Something or Other

Everything is a chemical!



Food Science Babe, not to be confused with the aforementioned SciBabe or the Artist Formerly Known As Science Babe, works in the food industry, and has a BS in Chemical Engineering from the University of Minnesota. One would assume from her branding that she has a degree in food science but I guess you can just get a degree in Chemical Engineering and still get a job as a "food scientist" anyway! And she wonders why people don't trust the food industry…

She's "clearing up the myths about food and the food industry to give you factual information that’s based on science." An example:


You would think that as a chemical engineer, she'd have a better grasp on the toxicity of "ChEMiKiLLz" like PFAS - scientists suggest a limit of 1ppt - and chlorpyrifos, which has been found by the EPA to harm children's brains at the "safe" levels found in foods.

Maybe she's too busy stocking her store to research this stuff?


I Looked For "The Store"!


Farm Babe, Michelle Miller




From the Farm Babe website:
Honest. Funny. Insightful.

With an average social media reach of 2-3 million a month and 120K followers, Michelle has made a name for herself as a dedicated myth-buster in the food industry.

Michelle brings a unique perspective as a big city globetrotter turned Iowa Farm girl, and plants the seed inside the minds of those looking to understand the truth about modern agricultural production. With one of the most popular and vibrant food and farming social media followings, the Farm Babe™ is the real deal.

Michelle answers the hard questions.


Such an original name! HowEVER did she come up with that one? Spoiler alert: she copied Vani Hari.

(Wait. You saw that right? Did she actually fucking trademark the name Farm Babe?)

Anyway, Miller's stolen branding has won her the accolades of none other than Leslie Kelly of High Heels and Canola Fields, and Dr. Kevin Folta of Unrestricted Grant and Hidden Consulting fees fame. Her client list also includes, Weston Sharp the Vice President of the Iowa Agricultural Aviation Association and Robert D. Saik, the founder of Agri-Trend. 

She is often published in AgDaily where she recommends you fact check sources using Activist Facts dot com, a website from the infamous "Dr. Evil," Rick Berman of the Center for Consumer Freedom an industry lobbyist and front group puppet master to the stars. 

She can be found on social media, defending harmless agrochemicals like chlorpyrifos...


...and selling CBD oil. Don't forget to use the coupon code for free shipping!




Swine Babe, Paige Something or Other




The Swine Babe Facebook page seems pretty defunct, but it harkens back to a golden age of CAFOS, gestation crates, and sequined ruffles, where synchronized swimmers do choreographed moves in pink manure lagoons while an orchestra plays in the background.

But seriously, I'm going to spare you the pics of semen collection and artificial insemination demo.

...Moving on now!


Biology Babe,  Lauren Uhde




Yet another defunct babe persona, Biology Babe's social media accounts are all 404 now. 

She once appeared on the podcast of the David Avocado Wolfe of Fake Skeptics - A Science Enthusiast - and was a writer for the site.

There is not much to be found from this bygone babe, save for a few echoes from the past.




Chow Babe,  Some Dude





This character was clearly meant as satire to bag on Vani Hari. 

Though most people assumed the person behind the screaming apple pic was female, rumor has it Chow Babe was actually male. Yup, Sheena was a man.


Ah, the days when pop songs about date rape drugs were in the top forty.


Nobody but Chow Babe really knows for sure why "she" disappeared from the public eye. But, like the Funky Cold Medina, Chow Babe is now just another cringy af relic of the past. Word to your mother.


The End of an Era?


Are there more babes in our future? Perhaps this Halloween...




Or, have the babes hit their peak? Are they going the way of the dodo? 

God I fucking hope so.

Well, that wraps up the Babelist, and I hope that you have been both enlightened and inspired by the stupidity of the human race today. Don't forget to drop some babes in the comments if I missed any!












Sunday, March 17, 2019

Turning a Blind Ideology

Perhaps, like me, you've noticed an overlap into a specific ideology within the Skeptic community, as they're sometimes referred to. There's this distinctly pro-industry mindset among certain people who are very cozy with the Skeptic crowd (as well as being rampant among the Skeptics themselves). These aren't your typical celebrity Skeptics, we're talking about people that Skeptics use as sources, and run in the same social circles.

Some are really easy to spot - they hate activists, non profit consumer groups, journalists who investigate corporate malfeasance, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and they love to defend industry.

If you were to do a Google search for someone who fits that bill, like David Zaruk for instance, he shows up with numerous Skeptics, like Dr. Kevin Folta, and Cameron J. English "freelance science writer" in addition to the Consumer Choice Center, a tobacco funded astroturf group.


Cameron is also the creative force behind the American Council on Science and Health website called Deniers for Hire where the ACSH attacks journalists and others who question industry tobacco science tactics.

ACSH has been described in Monsanto internal emails as such:


Their former president, Hank Campbell, mentions our friend Zaruk here in this totally bizarre article about Astroturfers and Friends if they were a Dungeons and Dragons team. In addition to keeping such stellar company, Zaruk harbors a dirty little secret that's not so well kept about the Skeptic community.






They give a free pass to climate science deniers...so long as they toe the line on the other fundamental conclusions of modern fake skepticism.

One example of the hard line they take on scientific topics can be found in this graphic that been distributed online.




This graphic came from GMO apostate Mark Lynas' website where he uses Celeber Cavilla and nutpicking to discredit critics of industrial agriculture by taking an explosively hot button issue like vaccination and comparing it to the polarizing issue of agricultural biotech. Glenn Stone appropriately calls the rhetorical weaponry Lynas regularly engages in "discursive ventriloquism–appropriating your opponents' voice to cast their position in an unfavorable light." In this case, he tries to portray anyone who is critical of genetic engineering as an insane tinfoil hat-wearing kook.

Skeptics insist that if you are pro science - you cannot question vaccines or GMOs. "You can't criticize one while believing the other." Let's be real, anyone who questions or criticizes GMOs or vaccines at all will immediately put themselves on the outs with Skeptics, being labeled an "Anti." (This is easily testable, scoffers.) Same with evolution. No (insert label here) allowed in Skeptic Club!

So if we apply the logic of  Mr. Lynas and look at the other unquestionable conclusions of modern skepticism, what do we find?


Course taught by Celebrity Skeptic Kevin M. Folta at UF

Consistently, we come across these main four, but many such similar lists exist with slight variations.

Share this meme to show the world how you Critical Think all by yourself!

Do not worry about the PCBs and PFAS in the water behind me though...

Despite these lists of conclusions Skeptics are obliged to pledge their uncritical and undying allegiance to should they want to be seen as "science literate" and "critical thinkers" there is the one issue mentioned at the outset where those social rules get a little bit loosey goosey. Climate change.

David Zaruk is not the only friend of the Skeptics whose ideas on climate change goes against club conclusion (and against the overwhelming scientific evidence).  One can only speculate on why this is exactly.

Not only do Skeptics regularly use several of these people as sources, but they also promote them and vice versa, as well as attending events with them as I have documented here before.

Recently, writer and coal baron Matt Ridley who was once described as a "climate-change-denier villain" wrote this steaming hot fucking garbage pile published in the UK Spectator. Genetic Literacy Project picked it up of course, and our good friend Kevin Folta sang Matt's praises on Twitter.

Folta: This needed to be said 'because he's defending Roundup, er, ah, I mean science! Yes that's right!

Ridley isn't the only climate change denier Folta has publicly praised. Patrick Moore, founder of Golden Rice Now, (not Greenpeace) has been mentioned by Kevin on Twitter also.

The POTUS Tweets Moore's comments about climate change. 

Folta promotes Moore's organization.

You are the wind beneath my wings.

Another fine example of discursive ventriloquism is found in this We Love GMOs and Vaccines, graphic.



Clearly a copycat of the meme Mark Lynas shared on his website above, the theme of nutpicking and zero tolerance for deviation from the Skeptic belief set continues.

And yet, the creator of this list also turns a blind eye to a couple of climate change deniers when it suits his beliefs.



The Intercept reports that Dick Taverne has "argued in the House of Lords that as much as 80 percent of global warming might be attributable to solar activity, even though that theory had been discredited two years earlier."

We Love GMOs and Vaccines has also promoted an article written by Bjorn Lomborg who has been granted the distinction of being in a top ten list of climate change deniers.



To be fair, We Love GMOs and Vaccines founder did wag his finger at a couple other climate change deniers once with this exercise in virtue signalling that was basically ignored by other Skeptics. Because blind eye, you know.

Mark Lynas mentioned earlier, plays similar games when it comes to deniers. Owen Patterson (brother-in-law to Matt Ridley) spoke at an Alliance for Science event in 2016.



How likely then are we to see them host someone with differing views on say GMOs, then?














Thursday, January 3, 2019

Empathy Deficiency Syndrome


Abbey Stanford describes herself as "a writer who has been living with a chronic neurological disorder since my early teens, but which was only diagnosed 3 years ago. I often write about disability and the effects of illness, as well as wider issues such as women and those from lower-income backgrounds. I often write with humour to address serious issues, especially those around my own health."

On Dec 28th she made a tweet which I rather tend to agree with.



People who take advantage of sick and suffering people, have a special place on my shit list. Another special place on that list belongs to people who pretend they are the champions of sick and suffering people, waving their science flags,


bravely fighting the quacks on behalf of the innocent. When in reality...


...they view the victims as punching bags not worthy of an ounce of common decency. 


Somehow, and I don't care how many science degrees you have, or how "evidence based" you claim to be,  it's kinda difficult to accept that loads of people are really going around pretending to have life-changing chronic illnesses for attention or because they are bored. Even a person with a mental illness that would cause delusions or pathological attention seeking still has a real illness. They are sick, and they deserve compassion, not derision from up on your high science horse.

Someone like SciBabe who has a couple of chronic conditions herself, shows her true colors in this now deleted post. Her Skeptic fans, even when confronted with evidence, which they are so fond of, still do a song and dance routine to try to cover for their favorite dirty joking porn critic as I quickly found out the other day.







Apologies for the epic screenshots, but I got such a laugh out of this exchange that I just had to share. Skeptics are not immune to the things they accuse so many others of. When confronted with evidence, they say that they change their minds. But in my experience they try to infer that you are a kook, and whip out all manner of logical fallacies. In this case, all to protect one of their club celebrities. And for what?

Skeptics claim to be fighting for the little guy - protecting the public from 'woo' and 'quackery'. But is their activity having a net positive effect and helping people that are suffering and sick? Or, is this behavior really just a cover for their hatred of certain groups of people?

Vaccinate your damn kids or we will stab them with a rusty nail! Why won't you listen to us?!?

They definitely have their favorite punching bags, and Lyme disease I've noticed is a big one. 

In this uniformed, painfully ignorant post from Rebecca over at Skepchick, she displays the same attitude as our previous examples.



"It’s because David doesn’t have Lyme Disease. His family claims he has “chronic neurological Lyme disease,” which, I am happy to inform you, does not exist. Congratulations, David, you’re cured!"

These Skeptics call 'chronic Lyme' a fake disease, but if they actually cared about helping people who are suffering, they'd be advocating for funding research into Post Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome (PTLDS) in order to answer the question of why some people remain ill after treatment with antibiotics instead of arguing over semantics.


The CDC says the cause of PTLDS is not known. Well, what are you waiting for, Skeptics? Aren't you guys the gatekeepers of all things science?

One surefire way to keep people from wasting time and money on miracle cures and scam artists like this is to develop accurate tests to look for the presence of the disease, thus answering the question of whether or not persistent infection is a cause of some people not getting well after treatment.

People with misunderstood and stigmatized ailments could really use help - but Skeptics are busy selling t-shirts, doing podcasts, and making You Tube videos and snotty memes. That debunking and self promotion takes precedence for these people really says it all, even if they are verbally stating that they care or even retweet Ms. Stanford's thread at the beginning. This is all an act.

Science was not created to use as a power play against people you don't like, to use sick people as a punchline or to pretend you are a champion of the people, fighting quacks on their behalf.

Real ethical skeptics and scientists put the knowledge they gain from the scientific method to good use to help people and solve problems. Even fake diseases can save lives.

History gives us plenty of examples where a syndrome or illness or cause thereof was denied by many in medicine or by Skeptics. Such closed minded individuals will not be the ones who solve our most pressing mystery ailments. Do not rely on them for an unbiased take when it comes to these issues. Look for those who show compassion and bravery to speak on behalf of those who are ill, advocate for patients, and support using science to find answers.