------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 09:01:56 -0400 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Paper 5 - MSE: Why Pseudoscience? Some ramblings.... To start of the discussion of Paper 5, I'd like you to think about the following concept. You're a college student, filled with dreams about changing the world, saving the environment, finding a cure for cancer, etc. While in some your classes you have the opportunity to express your aspirations and the challenges facing you, in your chemistry classes you either do standard, mundane experiments or at best, read about research being done at the cutting edge of science. There's no way that you're going to be able to actually participate in anything close to "relevant research." This is where "pseudoscience" comes in. It is, like computers, an aid to the educational process, a motivational factor that makes it more exciting to learn. College students do have the capability and knowledge base to research pseudoscientific claims and debunk them, and in the process they learn critical thinking skills and proper experimental design. I read that 30% of undergraduate chemistry students would buy a product that "contained no chemicals" because of its claimed health value! I read in a recent "Energy Efficiency and Solar Living" catalog about products that "end insect invasions using powerful negative ions", "eliminate detergents using activated ceramic laundry disks that emit far infrared electromagnetic waves and produce ionized oxygen", etc. I read where Brown's gas will revolutionize welding processes by reaching a flame temperature of 6000 - 8000 degrees C; etc. Pseudoscience is everywhere ... on the drug store shelves, in the supermarket checkout line, and every day in the news media. The investigation of pseudoscientific and/or controversial claims is something that students can actually participate in. It is relevant to their lives and can make an otherwise dull subject come alive. That, more than anything else, is what Paper #5 is about. ME Mike Epstein Research Chemist National Institute of Standards and Technology Michael.Epstein@nist.gov http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html .................................................... From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt .................................................... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 09:16:15 -0400 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Paper #5 - ME: A few examples of test questions based on pseudoscience The following is a question I used in general chemistry after we had covered colligative properties of solutions such as freezing-point depression and boiling point elevation. I had not discussed polywater in class and it was not mentioned in their textbok. ===================== In 1965, Professor Boris Derjaquin of the Moscow Institute of Physical Chemistry announced to the world the discovery of an anomalous form of water that he called Water II (as opposed to normal water.) Others called it "polywater" for polymeric water. He prepared it by placing quartz (pure silicon dioxide) capillaries in a container that was nearly saturated with water vapor. The liquid polywater would collect in the capillaries (later he also prepared it on flat quartz plates in a stream of water vapor). He found that the liquid form of polywater had a density of 1.4 g/mL, a molecular weight of 180, a freezing point of -50 degrees C and a boiling point above 200 degrees C. He also found that when you distilled polywater, as long as the temperature did not exceed 700 degrees C, the collected distillate was also polywater. He speculated that in the presence of quartz or glass (which acted as a catalyst), a very thin film of normal water was converted to polywater. His work was confirmed by a number of important scientists around the world. Based on what you have read concerning liquids, intermolecular bonding and stabilities (as well as any other references you might wish to use), answer the following: - List the properties of polywater (density, M.W., b.p., f.p.) next to those of normal water. What do the properties of polywater tell you about it's bonding and the stability of those bonds relative to normal water. - Does it make sense that polywater could exist? Why or why not? Could polywater be formed in nature as well as in the laboratory? If so, what would be the consequences? - How might you have studied polywater, other than measuring its physical properties? ====================== Out of 40+ students, 2 students drew the correct analogy between contaminated water (what polywater really was) and the observed boiling point elevation and freezing point depression ... despite the fact that the work was "confirmed by a number of important scientists around the world." On another test during the semester, they were asked to write a short essay regarding the application of Pascal's wager to scientific research. ME Mike Epstein Research Chemist National Institute of Standards and Technology Michael.Epstein@nist.gov http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html .................................................... From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt .................................................... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 09:31:28 -0400 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Paper #5 - ME: Response to question on student reactions >Don Rosenthal asked: >At the end of your paper you state: >"The students found many of the topics fascinating and those who >participated in actual experimental work and attended the conference >on controversial research found that the experience actually helped to >direct their career choices. >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >In an evaluation essay, it was described by one student as a >life-changing experience." >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >A teacher always hopes that what we teach and how we teach will >influence >the students. >Can you provide more information about how exposure to pseudoscience >helped to direct their career choices and serve as life-changing >experiences? ================== The students involved were the 3 coauthors on the paper. In the case of two of the students, it was not so much the pseudoscience in itself, which was a motivational tool to get them excited about projects in specific disciplines, but rather the scientific areas (analytical and forensic science) that the projects were related to. The pseudoscience made it far more interesting, because they were actually working on *real* cases, something they could never do at their level in conventional science. Furthermore, the rewards for success (prove the claim to be valid and receive a $1 million prize from the Randi foundation) were great, and there were even scholarships offered by the Randi foundation for quality student investigations of pseudoscientific claims. One student originally planned to go to medical school, but was rather ambivalent on the subject. After the analytical course, when he did the forensic investigation of the Katie foil, took a tour I arranged to a forensic laboratory, and consulted with the forensic scientist, he changed his career plans to something that really excited him: forensic science. He was accepted to programs at both George Washington and University of Alabama Birmingham, and chose the latter, being, I believe, the first PhD candidate in their new PhD-level forensic science program. He plans on getting that degree, then getting a law degree as a follow-up. Another student was totally unclear about her career directions. The combination of the analytical course and her project on biotransmutation, and her work during the summer in an analytical laboratory (I arranged for her to work in my lab at NIST) got her excited about analytical chemistry and she was accepted to a PhD program in analytical at the University of Minnesota. The third student made the "life-changing" comment regarding her experiences at the conference. I'm not in the position to speculate on what was behind the comment, except to say that perhaps her eyes were opened regarding the need for critical thinking to judge the truth of statements made by authoritative figures or appearing in the literature. ME Mike Epstein Research Chemist National Institute of Standards and Technology Michael.Epstein@nist.gov http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html .................................................... From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt .................................................... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 09:40:22 -0400 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Paper #5 - ME: Response to question on pseudoscience resources >Brian Tissue asks: >Are there compilations of pseudoscience examples, either on-line or in >print, that you would recommend as good resources for both students >doing projects and educators looking for ideas? As I mentioned a couple of days ago, I have added an extensive reference and resource page to the paper http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/ref.html as well as a number of hyperlinks to relevant WWW pages including two I added http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/taubes.html (review of "Bad Science" by Gary Taubes) and http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/free.html (editorial on academic freedom to do research on controversial science) And of course, Brian maintains an extensive page on scientific ethics at: http://www.chem.vt.edu/ethics/ethics.html ME Mike Epstein Research Chemist National Institute of Standards and Technology Michael.Epstein@nist.gov http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html .................................................... From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt .................................................... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 14:58:49 +0100 From: Hugh Cartwright Subject: Re: Paper 5 - HMC: Why Pseudoscience? Some ramblings.... Mike Epstein writes > College students do have the capability and knowledge base to > research pseudoscientific claims and debunk them, .... I read > ... about products that "eliminate detergents using > activated ceramic laundry disks that emit far infrared electromagnetic > waves and produce ionized oxygen" I can readily accept Mike's argument that pseudoscientific problems have an attraction for students. However, I am less sure that students have the knowledge base to debunk them. Many (all?) of us will be familiar with the claims made for the laundry disk. Readers of chemed-l will know how discussion occasionally flares up on that list regarding the merits(?) of the product. I have had e-mail discussions with several people about the disks and globes. I am convinced that the whole thing is a scam. In the dozen or so pages of "scientific" information I have seen from the promoters there is no substantive evidence to suggest that their product is any better than a few stones and a bucket of water. Nevertheless, it takes a fair amount of background scientific knowledge to work through all the verbiage. The "explanation" of how the disk "works" is wrapped up in plenty of scientific gobbledegook. I suspect students would need a fairly thorough grounding in science to be able to convince themselves that the product is worthless. If the evidence is predigested by Mike, and presented to students without the diverting language employed by the promoters, I can imagine students having a great time trying to pick holes in it. If the promotional material is presented unaltered, a sensible analysis of the claims would be a demanding - perhaps impossible - challenge for most 1st or 2nd year students. Could I ask Mike how much pre-filtering of this kind of information is needed before students get their teeth into it? Or am I being over-pessimistic about the ability of students to assess the material? Hugh Dr Hugh Cartwright Physical and Theoretical Chemistry Laboratory Oxford University, England hugh@muriel.pcl.ox.ac.uk http://physchem.ox.ac.uk/~hmc Tel (UK) 1865 275 400 (reception) (UK) 1865 275 483 (direct) FAX (UK) 1865 275 410 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 10:08:00 EDT From: to2 Subject: Re: Paper #5 - ME: A few examples of test questions based on >Out of 40+ students, 2 students drew the correct analogy between >contaminated water (what polywater really was) and the observed boiling >point elevation and freezing point depression ... despite the fact that the >work was "confirmed by a number of important scientists around the world." Those two were very courageous students, especially considering the very limited data that (I assume) they had at their disposal. It's not easy for students to doubt the experts - they have spent much of their student lives soaking up the conventional wisdom (most of it quite correct, at least for the present) from textbooks and lectures, etc. Did you give any context clues, in your presentation of this question, that would have alerted them to the possibility that polywater is not just another bit of conventional wisdom? I suppose that the scary thing (and the interesting thing) about pseudoscience evaluation is that it demands that we have faith in our scienctific reasoning abilities outside of the narrow and controlled confines of our little research territories. Not an easy thing for mere college professors. Tom ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom O'Haver Professor of Analytical Chemistry University of Maryland Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry College Park, MD 20742 Maryland Collaborative for Teacher Preparation (301) 405-1831 to2@umail.umd.edu FAX: (301) 314-9121 http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 15:14:12 +0100 From: Hugh Cartwright Subject: Re: Paper #5 - ME: A few examples of test questions based on pseudoscience Mike Epstein quotes the well-known and fascinating story of the discovery of polywater: > In 1965, Professor Boris Derjaquin of the Moscow Institute of Physical > Chemistry announced to the world the discovery of an anomalous form of > water that he called Water II (as opposed to normal water.) Others called > it "polywater" for polymeric water...... I have a (now fairly dim) recollection of a story which appeared in the British press shortly after the "discovery" of polywater. According to a tabloid newspaper in the UK, the government was particularly concerned about polywater. It was suggested that the Russians might turn the English Channel solid (presumably using some form of polywater catalyst...?) They could then simply roll their tanks through Europe and across the - now frozen - channel into the UK. The printing of such a threatening scenario in a newspaper, together with, as Mike points out, the observation that the Russian results could be repeated in independent labs, gave those findings a spurious credibility. Hugh Dr Hugh Cartwright Physical and Theoretical Chemistry Laboratory Oxford University, England hugh@muriel.pcl.ox.ac.uk http://physchem.ox.ac.uk/~hmc Tel (UK) 1865 275 400 (reception) (UK) 1865 275 483 (direct) FAX (UK) 1865 275 410 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 10:17:00 EDT From: to2 Subject: Re: Paper #5 - ME: A few examples of test questions based on >It was suggested that the Russians might turn the English >Channel solid (presumably using some form of polywater >catalyst...?) They could then simply roll their tanks through >Europe and across the - now frozen - channel into the UK. Interesing that they would have worried about this, since the "literature value" for the freezing point of polywater was reported as -50 celsius. Makes you wonder.... Tom O'Haver ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 11:34:04 -0500 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Re: Paper 5 - ME response to HMC on *pre-filtering* I certainly agree with Hugh that proper preparation of the students is necessary. My statement should have read "College students *can be given* the capability and knowledge to research pseudoscientific claims and debunk them". And some pseudoscientific claims are far more difficult to evaluate than others. One of the analytical chemistry special projects I thought about (but nobody did) was to take some of those disks and have the student design an experiment to test them .. both in terms of effectiveness in cleaning and in terms of any changes they induced in distilled water. As I mentioned in the section of the paper on the controversial science conference, the students did have difficulty seeing through claims presented professionally ... such as homeopathy. I reviewed the manuscript mentioned on the reference page that described deviations from the conservation of mass in chemical reactions. It was a very difficult review because I had to do an extensive literature search to discover where the investigators could be in error. But knowing that, I could then present to a class information regarding weighing procedures that they could use to debunk such a claim. So I agree with Hugh. Lot's of prefiltering is necessary. And even with the proper information, only 2 out of the 40 students were able to come to the correct conclusion on polywater. That says something I guess. Mike Epstein Research Chemist, Analytical Chemistry Division National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899 USA [Opinions expressed are mine ... not necessarily theirs] PHONE: (301) 975-4114 FAX: (301) 869-0413 Michael.Epstein@nist.gov WWW Home Page: http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html ======================================================== "From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt ======================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 11:38:45 -0500 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Re: Paper #5 - ME: Response to to2 on a few examples of test questions based on The test question was presented exactly as written. However, they knew my attitude on pseudoscientific claims, since we had talked about Pascal's wager and the pressure on scientists to publish, as well as blind and double-blind experimentation. At 10:08 AM 6/19/97 EDT, you wrote: >Did you give any context clues, in your presentation >of this question, that would have alerted them to the possibility >that polywater is not just another bit of conventional wisdom? Mike Epstein Research Chemist, Analytical Chemistry Division National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899 USA [Opinions expressed are mine ... not necessarily theirs] PHONE: (301) 975-4114 FAX: (301) 869-0413 Michael.Epstein@nist.gov WWW Home Page: http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html ======================================================== "From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt ======================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 11:49:12 -0400 From: "Timothy L. Pickering" Subject: Re: Pseudoscience Michael Epstein's paper on pseudoscience represents to me a well intentioned but tragically misguided and flawed effort to improve science education. I am saddened when I contemplate how much more Mike could have accomplished and contributed to the overall field if he had directed his energies in a more appropriate channel, say along the lines that Theresa Zielinski discusses so eloquently and with such passion. And it is all the more distressing that this effort would surface at an institution named Mount Saint Mary's College and Seminary. Although I could write at length on my objections to what Mike has done, I will try to hold it to a couple of paragraphs. First and foremost, we do our students no favors by trying to entertain them, especially at the cost of content and rigor. I object to his entire premise that "...the traditional topics of general chemistry [are] dry and boring." I can't imagine that general chemistry taught by some of the participants in this list would meet that description. And even if it did, dry and boring essentials are far more important for the student's future sucess than entertaining but useless trivia. Second, beginning students can't possibly have the requisite skills and knowledge base to meaningful address issues presented in many of his pseudoscience examples. (Mike's example about the "chemically free" health products only reinforces this point.) They are beginners who don't yet even know the basics, and now are not likely to learn them because they have been diverted into this "entertainment" mode by a Pied Piper. I could perhaps grant that such a course could be offered as an ELECTIVE for upper division students after they have covered the basics in chemistry, physics and math. However, I doubt Mike would get many subscribers among that audience. By that time, students have a pretty good feel for what is useful and what is a waste of time. However, those interested in "entertainment" and needing a few extra credits to graduate would probably enjoy such a course. Hey, I have no objection to having a little fun once in a while. But not at the expense of crucial introductory subject matter, and not in a course that is required of beginning students. Finally, I note thatMike's co-authors are undegraduates at St. Mary's. I want to make clear that none of my remarks apply to the co-authors, who are innocents that have participated in this effort in good faith. However, this will no doubt be an informative life experience for them. Scientists publish their work in the open literature, where it is subject to criticism from others regarding quality, accuracy, merit, etc. That will no doubt happen with this paper. Tim Pickering Virginia Tech ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 09:44:17 -0600 From: gary mort Subject: Re: Paper 5 - ME response to HMC on *pre-filtering* >So I agree with Hugh. Lot's of prefiltering is necessary. And even with >the proper information, only 2 out of the 40 students were able to come to >the correct conclusion on polywater. That says something I guess. > Among other things it may say that if we do not use strategies such as this there are a small but siginificant number of very capable students that we are not engaging in any meaningful fashion g Gary Mort Dixie College ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:10:59 -0500 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Re: Paper 5 - ME response to GM on engaging capable students Gary's comment brings us back to the discussion of how to properly test students and how those tests should not only be used to determine their knowledge, but also to develop their thinking skills. I have been (more than once) reproached by a student for an exam question with the words "you didn't teach us this ... how can we know the answer?" My standard reply is that "Look, I taught you A, B, and C, and if you put A and B and C together you can come to conclusion D. Knowledge isn't just regurgitation ... it's application as well" Mike Epstein Research Chemist, Analytical Chemistry Division National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899 USA [Opinions expressed are mine ... not necessarily theirs] PHONE: (301) 975-4114 FAX: (301) 869-0413 Michael.Epstein@nist.gov WWW Home Page: http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html ======================================================== "From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt ======================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:29:53 -0500 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Re: Paper #5: ME response to TP on Pseudoscience I see Tim and I are at odds again ... so be it. Tim, as I mentioned in my previous discussion with you regarding multimedia and the WWW, PLEASE READ WHAT I HAVE TO SAY *CAREFULLY*. I state in the abstract that these activities were only a very small part of standard courses, but I do think the students will remember those parts. >I am saddened when I contemplate how much more Mike could have >accomplished and contributed to the overall field if he had directed his >energies in a more appropriate channel, say along the lines that Theresa >Zielinski discusses so eloquently and with such passion. I seem to recall that I posted a description of co-operative learning and discovery lab concepts that I applied in my courses. These were a far more significant part of the courses than the pseudoscience. >And it is all the >more distressing that this effort would surface at an institution named >Mount Saint Mary's College and Seminary. Would you like to explain derogatory comment? How does an attempt to teach critical thinking reflect on Mount Saint Mary's College and Seminary. Are you implying that one shouldn't teach critical thinking at a Catholic College? >we do >our students no favors by trying to entertain them, especially at the cost >of content and rigor. I object to his entire premise that "...the >traditional topics of general chemistry [are] dry and boring." I can't >imagine that general chemistry taught by some of the participants in this >list would meet that description. And even if it did, dry and boring >essentials are far more important for the student's future sucess than >entertaining but useless trivia. The content and rigor are there Tim. And I'm sure that general chemistry taught by some of the participants in this list are *not* dry and boring .. because they make an extra attempt to bring the subject to life ... each in their own special way. I choose to use psuedoscience as a method of doing that ... as well as more conventional methods. >Second, beginning students can't possibly have the requisite skills and >knowledge base to meaningful address issues presented in many of his >pseudoscience examples. I'm sorry, but two of my students were able to do that and illustrate their critical thinking skills. You underestimate the ability of some of your students. >have been diverted into this "entertainment" mode by a Pied Piper. I could >perhaps grant that such a course could be offered as an ELECTIVE for upper >division students after they have covered the basics in chemistry, physics >and math. Again, you are forgetting that these are just very small parts of the course. They leave the course with the same knowledge they would get in any general chemistry course, but they also have a good feeling for experimental design and scientific integrity, as well as having a chance to develop critical thinking skills. >But not at the expense of crucial introductory subject matter, >and not in a course that is required of beginning students. No crucial introductory subject matter is left out. YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT. Each of these cases is used to ILLUSTRATE crucial subject matter and allows the students to apply the introductory subject matter to reach a conclusion. >Finally, I note thatMike's co-authors are undegraduates at St. Mary's. I >want to make clear that none of my remarks apply to the co-authors, who are >innocents that have participated in this effort in good faith. I am sure the students appreciate your comments >Scientists >publish their work in the open literature, where it is subject to criticism >from others regarding quality, accuracy, merit, etc. That will no doubt >happen with this paper. Indeed it will. > >Tim Pickering >Virginia Tech > > Mike Epstein Research Chemist, Analytical Chemistry Division National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899 USA [Opinions expressed are mine ... not necessarily theirs] PHONE: (301) 975-4114 FAX: (301) 869-0413 Michael.Epstein@nist.gov WWW Home Page: http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html ======================================================== "From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt ======================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 11:11:20 MDT From: Reed Howald Subject: Re: Paper 5 - RAH: Why Pseudoscience? Some ramblings.... Yes, Hugh. You are being over-pessimistic. Anyone, and especially young children can be taught to design an experiment to test if something works. And the laundry additives are an excellent example. And the result of the simple experiment of trying one is that you will get excellent cleaning action, and likely even suds. The truth is that the amounts of detergent suggested for use on all the packages is far beyond the optimum for good cleaning results in most cases. Thus there is plenty of surfactant present in the clothes from the last washing to do a good job. It is possible to teach students to do experiments, believe what they find repeatably, and learn to discount advertising from both detergent manufacturers and from those selling pseudoscience gimmicks. It is self defeating to convey the idea that it takes years of study to use the scientific method, and that ordinary people have no alternative but to believe what the experts tell them. Is smoking cigarettes harmful? Is nicotine addictive? The experimental evidence is there for anyone to see. Let us help our students learn to be able to apply the scientific method to their lives. Set us learn to do it ourselves. Let us apply the test of reproducible experimental evidence to assessing the ways we teach. We are failing to reach a large portion of our students right now. There are enough success stories even from inner city schools to show that teaching success is possible with average kids with deplorable backgrounds. Using pseudoscience in teaching science looks like a way that can be made to work with some students we are currently missing. I hope to hear next year that at least 50 teachers have experimented with some of Mike's ideas, with a report on a standard scale: 5 much better student learning 4 slighly better 3 about the same 2 slightly worse 1 a disaster I would expect mostly 3's, but with reports from 50 teachers we can see if the excess of 4's over 2's is statistically significant. From Mike's results there might well be some 5's and I would not expect 1's to be extremely rare. Reed Howald uchrh@earth.oscs.montana.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 13:37:01 -0400 From: Brian Tissue Subject: BT - paper 5: Re: Pseudoscience Tim Pickering wrote: >Although I could write at length on my objections to what Mike has done, I >will try to hold it to a couple of paragraphs. First and foremost, we do >our students no favors by trying to entertain them, especially at the cost >of content and rigor. I object to his entire premise that "...the >traditional topics of general chemistry [are] dry and boring." I can't >imagine that general chemistry taught by some of the participants in this >list would meet that description. And even if it did, dry and boring >essentials are far more important for the student's future sucess than >entertaining but useless trivia. I have to disagree with Tim's opinion of paper 5. When I stick to textbook material my lectures are so dry and boring that they almost put me to sleep. Motivating students to work through the dry and boring stuff is one of the things I find most difficult in teaching. I think Mike's approach and examples are very valuable. I would like to incorporate more in-depth real-world examples, pseudoscience, etc. into my teaching, but I'm not quite ready to risk being fired because I haven't brought in X dollars of research money. >Second, beginning students can't possibly have the requisite skills and >knowledge base to meaningful address issues presented in many of his >pseudoscience examples. This point is important, but we have to push students to think critically sometime. A question I have for Mike, and everyone else, is when and to what extent can critical thinking be introduced throughout the curriculum? (Yes, I'm sneaking in Tobias's department audit theme again.) Brian *************************************************************** Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 Assistant Professor of Chemistry FAX: (540) 231-3255 Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 13:57:54 -0500 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Re: BT - paper 5: Re: Pseudoscience Brian Tissue wrote: >I would like to incorporate more in-depth >real-world examples, pseudoscience, etc. into my teaching, but I'm not quite >ready to risk being fired because I haven't brought in X dollars of research >money. In the analytical course, I used the ACS publication ChemMatters extensively for outside reading assignments in addition to the standard course material. I used it a great deal in general chemistry as well. The "Mystery Matters" articles can be an excellent adjunct to the standard course fare, to help promote critical thinking. >>Second, beginning students can't possibly have the requisite skills and >>knowledge base to meaningful address issues presented in many of his >>pseudoscience examples. > >This point is important, but we have to push students to think critically >sometime. A question I have for Mike, and everyone else, is when and to what >extent can critical thinking be introduced throughout the curriculum? (Yes, >I'm sneaking in Tobias's department audit theme again.) There are a number of colleges and universities that offer courses in "critical thinking." One of the best is that taught by D.W.(Chip) Denman for the honors program at the University of Maryland ... and his techniques inspired some of the things I did (I had him come to MSM for a special lecture as well). What I was trying to do with Paper #5 is NOT to say that anyone should use pseudoscience extensively in chemistry courses, but rather that here are a number of examples that can be used and that relate directly to topics taught in general chemistry and analytical courses. These examples result from scientists who failed to think critically. I also believe that the use of discovery labs also encourage critical thinking, and can act as a bridge between structured labs that require following instructions exactly, and independent research. >Brian > >*************************************************************** > Brian M. Tissue phone: (540) 231-3786 > Assistant Professor of Chemistry FAX: (540) 231-3255 > Virginia Tech e-mail: tissue@vt.edu > Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212 http://www.chem.vt.edu/ > > Mike Epstein Research Chemist, Analytical Chemistry Division National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899 USA [Opinions expressed are mine ... not necessarily theirs] PHONE: (301) 975-4114 FAX: (301) 869-0413 Michael.Epstein@nist.gov WWW Home Page: http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html ======================================================== "From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt ======================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 18:52:01 -0500 From: Theresa Julia Zielinski Subject: tjz - paper 5 - pseudo science a closer look Dear Colleagues I found the paper on pseudoscience to be very interesting. It certainly fills a niche that I would not have time to research on my own and in which I would like to do a bit of reading. I would like here in this note to look more closely at what ME is doing with respect to using this set of topics in teaching non-science majors or other students. For non science majors we can consider several factors when designing a course for them. The World of Chemistry and Chemistry in Context and others. These present the traditional body of information in a direct linear way or in a context rich way with respect to things that we do and use every day. This I think is the majority approach and an easy one to implement given a good text and some videos. Easy is important for those of us who may teach 4-5 different courses per semester and or 15-18 contact hours. Developing a non-traditional course is more difficult. One must build in the chemistry and the thinking skills, especially critical thinking skills. One must also deal with administrative stuff like convincing the curriculum committee that a course called Food Chemistry is not a cooking course although cooking is a chemical process. In an introductory course, here I refer to non-science majors, we have the students for one or at best two semesters often with out a laboratory. Here at NU students are required to take only one non-lab science course for a bachelor degree. Now what do you put into one course that would interest the students and develop their thinking skills and make the course pleasant and even fun in spite of lots of reading and writing assignments. This is hard to answer. I can't hope to 'cover' much in one semester. So the most important thing for me for these students is to provide them with opportunities to see science as an open questioning endeavor, to increase their critical thinking skills in terms of not believing everything they read, to increase their self confidence that they can read science and figure things out. Numerous approaches can be taken to do this. Some of these rise spontaneously with materials students bring to class. One student brought a brochure to class describing how eggs were bad for you and the reasons why. Well it was full of pseudoscience such as how the yolks were made more yellow by injection of dyes. It was interesting to take the document apart and evaluate each part and see what the claim was and if the claim had supporting evidence and if it met with at least some common sense validity. After all when the students leave the University they will be on their own to evaluate claims and the ability to think something through is then more valuable than a bunch of traditional concepts and skills. Such skills also are important for science majors. The curriculum is so full that there is little room to investigate open-ended problems. Pseudoscience problems may be just such a type. From a critical thinking point of view I think that the pseudoscience problem is challenging as it requires thinking at higher levels of Blooms taxonomy and the Perry model. There is no right answer in the literature, there is rather a messy complex set of conflicting information that must be sifted through. Sounds like real life doesn't it. The fact that it is difficult to see through the gimmicks of pseudoscience makes it all the more attractive as a teaching tool. There is no right answer. We are left to devise our defenses and construct arguments and seek truth. What a powerful message this sends. We cannot shield our students from the strange things in the world. We can arm them with thinking skills to combat the strange things. Herein lies the false dichotomy in education. Some would argue that you can't teach process and content in a course. But as Craig Nelson wrote in one of his paper this claim is as illusory as unicorn horns. Under the careful tutelage of a fine instructor the conflict between pseudo science and science can be a powerful method of providing both instruction in process and content. I think the students who took this course will remember to be sceptical and to question everything. There is so much to be sceptical about as we travel the path of living in a complex society where data can be manipulated to say anything and were unscrupulous individuals are willing to adulterate foods or sell water as a miracle drug. The age of wooden nutmegs may be past but do you really know what is in the tin of nutmeg powder in your spice cabinet? One last thing we should consider. This is that lack of critical thinking about food fads extends even to Ph.D.'s in chemistry and physicians. I can recall telling physician friends and former students that aspartame is a dipeptide not a carbohydrate. These same physicians all had good biochemistry courses at the undergraduate level and in medical school. Beliefs and impressions are hard to shake even for those who have the opportunity to know better. If it is sweet it must be a carbohydrate. So in conclusion, although my work is rather conservative in its end product, I can appreciate what ME is trying to do and the positive effects it can have on the critical thinking skills of students. So now you all can blast me for my opinion. I guess I am a bit more radical than some think and too radical than others might like. I remain respectively yours in the land of ordinary people who know so little about science and many of whom think they are incapable of learning or doing science and yet they do it all the time. Theresa Theresa Julia Zielinski Professor of Chemistry, Niagara University Visiting Professor of Chemistry, U. Wisconsin - Madison ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 21:38:33 EDT From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: Paper 5 - DR: Some Unanswered Questions Michael Epstein address several questions to the participants of CHEMCONF (6-6-97 14:09) that have mostly not been answered other than partially by Peter Lykos (6-6-97 20:50). 1. What efforts are made within your departments to address issues of ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ scientific ethics? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Do you or does your school address the question? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 2. By college is it too late to address issues of scientific ethics . . ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ except perhaps to illustrate what happens to those chemists that ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ cross the line? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 3. Is using outlandish topics (as most pseudoscientific subjects are) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ a valid way of increasing student interest in what is, to many, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ a difficult subject . . . or is it opening a Pandora's box that should ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ just remain shut and ignored? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Will some of you answer Michael's questions. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 14:55:38 EDT From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: Paper 5 - DR: Science Mistakes and Pseudoscience Re: Scientific Mistakes and Pseudoscience In Paper 5 the following statement appears: "Scientists are people and people make mistakes. What separates the scientists from the pseudoscientists is the ability to recognize and admit error." I agree with this statement. I am not sure I would classify the polywater story as pseudoscience and place it in the same category with "The Miracle Blood of Saint Januarius", "The Coin in the Eye of the Shroud of Turin" and some of the other pseudoscience which Michael Epstein listed. Boris Derjaguin and his associates were well respected scientists. In the 1960s and early 1970s they reported that water condensed in a capillary tube had very different properties from normal water. They found that this water froze at -50 C and boiled at about 300 C. This water was more dense and more viscuous than normal water. I believe these observations are corrected. They explained these observations by postulating that a new form of water - polywater, i.e. a polymeric form of water - was prepared by their procedure. While there was some skepticism in the scientific community there were a large number of chemists who accepted their conclusions. I remember attending a symposium at an ACS National Meeting devoted to Polywater. I remember hearing and reading that polywater was the thermodynamically stable form of water under normal conditions, papers were presented on the structure and spectra of polywater. I don't remember skepticism reflected in this symposium. Criticisms eventually were expressed. Eventually, it was established that polywater was water which was contaminated by salts and other compounds in the capillaries. Initially, Deryaguin and his associates defended their position, but I believe eventually admitted their conclusions were in error. The contreversy extended for a number of years and is an interesting episode in the history of chemistry. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 23:26:11 -0400 From: Michael Chejlava Subject: Paper 5 MJC pseudoscience This was a good paper and I am glad that Mike Epstein submitted it. When I sarted teaching 15 years ago (Oh, god, has it been that long?) I would have felt that this type of "gimmick" was not needed and that every student was interested in learning what I thought was interesting. I am slowly learning that the real world is different. I have proposd similar projects for student research (particularly the laundry disks) an have yet to have any takers, but now that I know about the awards that might motivate a few students. (Thanks for includeing that Mike.) In this case I also find these type of problems interesting and think that students will. It is also part of our jobs to educate a public that is falling for many of these scams. We had a local problem here with a local newspaper column written by a loccal resident. In this column about gardening she stated that scientists bilieved in such things as planting by phases of the moon or days of the week. (Something about Sunday being ruled by the sun so it was dry.) I was ready to send in a scathing letter to the editor, but found out that this woman was a little old grandmotherly type and attacking her would be like taking on Mother Theresa. However, a student research poject that disproved her "theories" could be published in papers and help educate the general public. (At least the few who read.) -- Michael Chejlava Department of Chemistry & Environmental Science Lake Superior State University Sault Sainte Marie, MI ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 23:52:37 -0400 From: Michael Chejlava Subject: Re paper 5 MJC different types of pseudoscience. The use of pseudoscience can work at almost any level since there are some many different cases that one can be found to match almost any level of student experience and ability and almost any field of science. We should also be careful in not lumping all wierd ideas into the same category. There are several types. I seem to recall having read articles about this. Does anyone have any references? Here's what I recall. (If someone knows this better please correct this.) There is the bad science where a scientist gets too caught up in his or her own theory or an experimental artifact. The Magneto-optic analysis is this type. I think this is called pathological science> Then a related area is scientific fraud, where results are intentionally distorted. This is another area that must be dealt with in our courses. There is the wishful science types (astrology, numerology etc.) where a superstitious belief is covered with scientific trappings. I am not sure if the religious miracles would fit here or not? There are the probable con games. This would include the laundry disks those electronic water softeners, etc. A few years back drug stores were selling a sodium meter to detect sodium in foods. I bought one and sure enough it told me that orange juice and vinegar were high in Na. Of course it was just a conductility meter with an LED bar graph display. Actually now I wish I had bought a dozen since it was very similar to a conductivity meter written up in J. Chem. Ed. a few years back. There are also related cases of economic opportunists where the science works but the public is overcharged. The best example of this was a "miracle" metal alloy plate sold on TV which would polish silver if you added water and baking soda. They charged $19.95 + shipping & handling for what looked like a surplus electronics panel made of aluminum. Why didn't they just snd them a roll of Al foil? Then there are the cases where something seems to work but cannot be explained in our scientific terms. One case here is accupuncture. Finally, there are cases where the findings go against current theory. The heliocentric solar system was one of these. Might cold fusion be a current case. We have to be careful in these cases not to teach our own ignorance, but give students a way to make their own judgements based on the facts. The latest issue of Analog has an article on the current cold fusion research and also one about things that the "experts" said were impossible. (flight, nuclear power, etc.) (We also have to be careful since no one expects the Spanish Inquisition.) One last comment and I will stop. There are over 800 people registrered for this conference, but we keep hearing from the same 20 or so. What's the matter? Cat got your mouse? Let's here from some new face. (Er... new monitors?) -- Michael Chejlava Department of Chemistry & Environmental Science Lake Superior State University Sault Sainte Marie, MI -------------------------------- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 19:50:52 +0930 From: Bill Palmer Subject: PAPER 5- WPP- The Rise and Fall of N-Rays The Rise and Fall of N-Rays This is is my own story about N Rays, though I am not sure of its relevance to the history of science, but it is true. Events happened in December 1995 and I plan to use it somewhere, perhaps when I've read the book. A Story in Review - "N" Rays by R. Blondlot (translated by J. Garcin) There have been quite a spate of articles that tell the story of the discovery of "N" rays recently. These generally relate to the view that science is a human endeavour and is thus fallible. You may find the story an amusing one: it relates to my fondness for purchasing old science books. Nothing was further from my mind than N Rays as I went into a local second-hand bookshop in Winton near Bounemouth (UK) on a wet and blustery afternoon just after Christmas. Indeed I had been in this bookshop on a number of occasions over the years and knew very well that the bookshop did not have a strong science section, but I gave it a try in any case. Unusually, perhaps as there were no other customers, I had the full attention of the owner and the assistant and since the books were in no particular order they both pulled out books that might be related in some very vague way to my request for physics and chemistry books, so I was given books on philosophy, aesthetic physical education, astronomy etc and virtually nothing on my main quest. However the assistant then showed this 1905 book on "N" rays. He told me that it was really a very scary book and that "N" rays were incredibly dangerous. He was confusing "N" rays and X-rays as had Blondlot himself. I then regaled both the bookseller and his assistant with the story of the discovery of "N" rays more or less as it is told by ME. After a little haggling I purchased the book as I thought it would make a good story.It is now one of the minor gems of my collection. Perhaps I may ask whether readers think the above is a story about physics or about chemistry. Thanks for your patience. Bill Palmer Name: W. P. Palmer, (Bill Palmer) University Address :- Faculty of Education, Northern Territory University, DARWIN, NT, 0909, Australia. Work Tel :- 08 89 466 148 Fax Number (Education) :- 08 89 466 151 E-Mail number palmerw@darwin.ntu.edu.au URL at http://www.ntu.edu.au/education/blhmpg.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 07:55:32 -0400 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Re: Paper 5 - ME: Response to DR on Science Mistakes and Pseudoscience I agree with Don. I should point out that everything in my list should not be classified as "pathological science". Some is "controversial science" that should not yet (if ever) be branded *pathological*. Some is borderline .. there are different levels to all of this. The polywater case is interesting. How long does a scientist have to hold a controversial viewpoint against mounting evidence before it becomes pathological. In the case of polywater, I believe it was the cart before the horse. Theoreticians had a field day speculating on the structure of polywater before anyone had bothered to do adequate chemical analysis of the material. Scientists were looking for physical properties ... not chemical content. That scientists should ignore the possibility of contamination in microsamples (polywater could be prepared only in very small amounts, making the analysis difficult ... both of physical and chemical properties) is a bit surprising (speaking as an analytical chemist .. with 20/20 hindsight). But perhaps the "rewards of believing" (Pascal's wager) played a part as well. The Russian scientists did indeed admit the error, but only after a number of years. Don Rosenthal wrote: >I am not sure I would classify the polywater story as pseudoscience >and place it in the same category with "The Miracle Blood of Saint Januarius", >"The Coin in the Eye of the Shroud of Turin" and some of the other >pseudoscience which Michael Epstein listed. > >a symposium at an ACS National Meeting devoted to Polywater. I remember >hearing and reading that polywater was the thermodynamically stable form >of water under normal conditions, papers were presented on the structure and >spectra of polywater. I don't remember skepticism reflected in this >symposium. Criticisms eventually were expressed. Eventually, it was >established that polywater was water which was contaminated by salts and other >compounds in the capillaries. Initially, Deryaguin and his associates defended >their position, but I believe eventually admitted their conclusions were in >error. The contreversy extended for a number of years and is an interesting >episode in the history of chemistry. > Mike Epstein Research Chemist National Institute of Standards and Technology Michael.Epstein@nist.gov http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html .................................................... From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt .................................................... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 08:02:50 -0400 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Paper #5 ME response to MJC different types of pseudoscience. Michael's comments are right on the money. That was the point of my inviting the students to the SSE controversial science conference, for which they gave up 3 days of their summer vacation. They had an opportunity to do exactly what Michael suggests ... to make their own judgements based on the facts. I am reminded of Thomas Jefferson's famous comment that it is more likely that a Yankee preacher would lie than that stones (i.e., meteorites) would fall from the sky. Michael Chejlava wrote: >Finally, there are cases where the findings go against current theory. >The heliocentric solar system was one of these. Might cold fusion be a >current case. We have to be careful in these cases not to teach our own >ignorance, but give students a way to make their own judgements based on >the facts. The latest issue of Analog has an article on the current cold >fusion research and also one about things that the "experts" said were >impossible. (flight, nuclear power, etc.) (We also have to be careful >since no one expects the Spanish Inquisition.) > Mike Epstein Research Chemist National Institute of Standards and Technology Michael.Epstein@nist.gov http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html .................................................... From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt .................................................... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:49:19 -0400 From: Michael Epstein Subject: Re: Paper 5 ME response to MJC pseudoscience On Thu, 19 Jun 1997, Michael Chejlava wrote: > I was ready to send in a scathing letter to the editor, but found out > that this woman was a little old grandmotherly type and attacking her > would be like taking on Mother Theresa. Michael makes a very important point here. Perhaps the table in Paper #5 should require a warning label. One must be very careful when using these examples to present the facts and not opinions and allow students to come to their own conclusions. Careless use (or even careful use) can result in vicious attacks from anyone who interprets your activity as an attack on their sacred cow. For example, someone might interpret my examples of the investigation of two religious relics (the Shroud and the Blood) as attacks on Catholicism. Nothing could be further from the truth, since (a) the Catholic faith does not require belief in miraculous relics and (b) it is some of the *science* behind the investigations of the relics that I object to. Nobody would be happier than I if the Shroud turned out to be a 2000-year-old relic, the Januarius Blood turned out to really be miraculous, Brown's gas really could produce an 8000 degree C flame (very useful for analytical chemistry), cold fusion were real (I'm tired of paying energy bills in the winter), etc. But dammit ... the investigation has to be done right. I'm tired of those who use poor experimental technique and color results with their beliefs. Mike E. Mount Saint Mary's College ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 11:03:07 -0400 From: Brendan Flynn Subject: Paper 5-BF: Miracle Blood of St. Januarius Readers may enjoy Mark Twain's discussion of this phenomenon. In his book "The Innocents Abroad ", Chapter 19,the author describes the liquification of the clotted blood in a cathedral in Naples, Italy as "one of the wretchedest of all the religious impostures-----a dismal farce to collect money". It seems that the more people attending the event, the longer it takes the blood to liquify. But then, Mark was a confirmed skeptic. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:16:55 CST From: "James A. Carroll" Subject: P5 - JAC Reply to DR: Unanswered ME Questions > Michael Epstein address several questions to the participants > of CHEMCONF (6-6-97 14:09) that have mostly not been answered. > 1. What efforts are made within your departments to address issues of > scientific ethics? > Do you or does your school address the question? There is no campus support for this. From my experience writing a new academic integrity policy for the campus, Chemistry faculty are less likely to shove identified problems under the carpet. Actions speak louder than words. We do teach ethics. I teach a writing class in chemistry, part of the College requirements for graduation in any department. That class gives me plenty of opportunity to introduce scientific ethics. All I try to do is plant seeds. > 2. By college is it too late to address issues of scientific ethics? I don't believe so, largely on the basis of questions from students in the writing class and stories I've heard from our graduates, relating experiences from graduate schools. There is interest in the topic. Our mature (over 25 or so) students seemed to have formed attitudes pretty solidly, but others are still molding theirs. > 3. Is using outlandish topics (as most pseudoscientific subjects are) > a valid way of increasing student interest in what is, to many, > a difficult subject . . . or is it opening a Pandora's box that should > just remain shut and ignored? I have gotten calls from local businesses asking for help sorting out claims for products marketed to them - though none recently. In that light the topics don't seem so outlandish. Students have responded to my encouragement in general chemistry to bring in product labels which they question. I try not to deal with pseudoscience because I find it impossible to turn off the few (student) nut cases once they've been turned on by acknowledgement of their pet interest. Other students want to get back to "what's going to be on the test" [to quote other faculty, not the students] and have little patience for more than passing reference to inflated claims and pseudoscience not already in their experience. There is a physics faculty member on campus widely known for his support of claims of visits from extraterrestrials. While it certainly gets students interested, it doesn't seem to advance their understanding or strengthen their thinking. Students seem to sense they're no better off for having taken the class. It may dampen enthusiasm for [real] science classes. It appears to me that ME has avoided the traps of his introduction of pseudoscience, and is using it well. I don't believe the approach is a broadly applicable. I apologize for the anecdotal nature of my response. Perhaps some of those who have not responded are similarly hesitant at the prospect of asking 800 people to read such unreliable responses. Jim Carroll Phone (402) 554-3639 Chemistry Department Dept (402) 554-2651 University of Nebraska at Omaha FAX (402) 554-3888 Omaha, NE 68182-0109 jcarroll@unomaha.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 10:13:34 -0700 From: hemphill Subject: Paper 5 - RH: Some Unanswered Questions Dear all, I am one of the lurkers on this list. Michael Chejlava's exhorted the 800+ others-of-us on this list to contribute. So here goes. Donald Rosenthal reposted Michael Epstein's question: >3. Is using outlandish topics (as most pseudoscientific subjects are) >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > a valid way of increasing student interest in what is, to many, > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >a difficult subject . . . or is it opening a Pandora's box that should > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > just remain shut and ignored? IMO, use of topics outside the normal textbook topics _can_ effectively be used to teach the scientific process and to engage students (headed for science futures or not). In the high school in which I teach, we offer an advanced physical sciences topics semester-- limited to some 16 students. For the past two years, our advanced physics teacher (a very talented teacher who believes in the "hands-on" approach) has put together a large group cooperative class dealing with "Cold Fusion." He challenges the group of students in this class to _design_ and complete an experiment that corrects the errors of previous work. He places heavy emphasis in the use of primary literature, in use of proper controls, in replication and reproducibility. The entire class brainstorms the design of the expt. The class then divides into small groups, each with responsibility for part of the project: obtaining materials, contacting industry/universities in the area for use of materials or equiment, building the experimental setup, building the computer interface, data collection,,,writing the background, the final report, presenting it at a science fair, etc.. What is impressive is the enthusiasm, the full direction of effort by these students toward this one project. Many (if not all) of these high school students have gone on to colleges to major in science. I attribute this interest in science in good measure to their experiences in this class--built around the use of the scientific process on what might be called a "pseudoscience" topic. BTW, these classes have not been successful in completing their experiments, but, I think, that is beside the point. Rosa Hemphill Oregon Episcopal School Portland, OR hemphill@teleport.com http://www.canby.com/~hemphill http://www.teleport.com/~oeschem ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 19:34:19 +0000 From: DeGennaro-Al Subject: Re: Paper 5-BF: Miracle Blood of St. Januarius There was a very interesting article about this "miracle" in ChemMatters magazine about 3 years ago. I recommend it for adults and for students. Al DeGennaro Westminster HS Westminster, MD -------------------------------- Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 13:52:29 UT From: "William (Bill) Pfeiffer" Subject: Re: Re paper 5 WFPdifferent types of pseudoscience. Mike Chejlava wrote : (much removed here) One last comment and I will stop. There are over 800 people registrered for this conference, but we keep hearing from the same 20 or so. What's the matter? Cat got your mouse? Let's here from some new face. (Er... new monitors?) Because the folks that are writing are doing a fine job of expressing my few thoughts plus many additional better ones! Bill Pfeiffer also at: wpfeiffer@utica.ucsu.edu William F. Pfeiffer, Professor of Chemistry Utica College of Syracuse University Utica, NY 13502 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 11:44:48 -0400 From: Tom Kenney Subject: Re: Paper 5 - DR: Some Unanswered Questions On Thu, 19 Jun 1997, Donald Rosenthal wrote: > Will some of you answer Michael's questions? > > Michael Epstein address several questions to the participants > of CHEMCONF (6-6-97 14:09) that have mostly not been answered > other than partially by Peter Lykos (6-6-97 20:50). > > 1. What efforts are made within your departments to address issues of > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > scientific ethics? > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Do you or does your school address the question? > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >From my "Class Information Sheet" which is handed out on the first day of General Chemistry: "ETHICS: All activities in this class are governed by the Student Code of Conduct printed in the Student Handbook. Violations, such as plariarism, etc. are viewed most seriously. If you have questions, don't make assumptions; ask. We encourage working together, but punish copying." The Academic Dishonesty and Misconduct section of the Code of Conduct runs about 7 pages and specifically lists things like writing or submitting another's lab report, falsifying data, etc. (BTW, I teach at a public, 2-year school.) > 2. By college is it too late to address issues of scientific ethics . . > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > except perhaps to illustrate what happens to those chemists that > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > cross the line? > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > What does this question ask? A. Should we attempt to teach ethics even earlier than college? -OR- B. Are students so hopelessly corrupted by college that they cannot be taught ethics and honesty? My answer to A is Yes. My answer to B is No, but I am less sanguine about it than I was 30 years ago. > 3. Is using outlandish topics (as most pseudoscientific subjects are) > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > a valid way of increasing student interest in what is, to many, > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > a difficult subject . . . or is it opening a Pandora's box that should > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > just remain shut and ignored? > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > I'm willing to be convinced, by data, that the idea works. However, let's not confuse practicing pseudoscience with being on the losing side of a scientific controversy. The University of Maryland's molecular scpectroscopy labs were wrong about polywater. I hesitate to castigate the researchers as pseudoscientists on that basis. Tom Kenney e-mail: tkenney@umd5.umd.edu s-mail: Chemistry Department Montgomery College Rockville, MD 20850 ***Standard disclaimers apply.*** ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 16:20:22 -0400 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Re: Paper 5 - ME response to TK: Some Unanswered Questions Tom Kenney wrote: >>From my "Class Information Sheet" which is handed out on the first day of >General Chemistry: > >"ETHICS: All activities in this class are governed by the Student Code of >Conduct printed in the Student Handbook. Violations, such as plariarism, >etc. are viewed most seriously. If you have questions, don't make >assumptions; ask. We encourage working together, but punish copying." > >The Academic Dishonesty and Misconduct section of the Code of Conduct runs >about 7 pages and specifically lists things like writing or submitting >another's lab report, falsifying data, etc. > I would suspect that every school has a similar honor code or code of conduct. I was looking more for a specific effort, such as interdepartmental courses (it might be a collaboration between theology, philosophy and science departments) to deal with scientific ethics on both a historical and a contemporary basis. Henry Bauer teaches something like this at VPI I believe. Tom Kenney writes: >What does this question ask? >A. Should we attempt to teach ethics even earlier than college? >-OR- >B. Are students so hopelessly corrupted by college that they cannot be >taught ethics and honesty? Actually both. My personal opinion is that (A) is the responsibility of parents (earlier than college ethics training) and (B) some can and some can't. I've been really surprised by the honesty of some students and similarly shocked by the dishonesty of a few as well. Tom Kenney writes: >The University of Maryland's molecular >spectroscopy labs were wrong about polywater. I hesitate to castigate >the researchers as pseudoscientists on that basis. I would never call them pseudoscientists. The pseudoscientists, are the ones who stubbornly hold on to their controversial claims despite overwhelming evidence of the falseness of those claims *and* whose scientific efforts do not follow accepted rules of scientific inquiry (proper experimental design, blind experimentation, publication in peer reviewed journals) However, I would call what they did pathological science. I suspect most of us have done "pathological science" at one time or another in our careers. It's called taking a shortcut when you are absolutely sure of your data. One of the examples in my table is the *SRM effect*. SRMs are Standard Reference Materials. These are materials whose constituents (elemental or organic compound) are certified to be within a certain concentration range ( see http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/srms.html ) Every once in a while, for one reason or another, an incorrect concentration appears on an NBS certificate of analysis. Rarely, but it does happen. If one does a literature search after a number of years on publications that report concentrations for the incorrectly certified elemental concentration (SRMs are often used to validate new analytical methods), one finds a bimodal distribution, with one maxima at the true concentration of the element and the other at the concentration listed on the certificate. Why? Because there is such a trust in NBS (NIST) certified values that an analytical chemist will sometimes go against his better judgement (such as trusting results from one method of calibration compared to another) IF there is only a small difference (10 to 20%) between the true element concentration and the certificate concentration. These are certainly not pseudoscientists, but they are making a pathological error in their data handling. We see here a *very strong* belief system influencing the analytical results. So, the polywater scientists were not pseudoscientists, but I do think, because of the errors that were made, that they were doing pathological science. Mike Epstein Research Chemist National Institute of Standards and Technology Michael.Epstein@nist.gov http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html .................................................... From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt .................................................... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 08:17:00 EDT From: to2 Subject: Paper 5: TOH. Some Unanswered Questions Mike Epstein's "SRM effect" is real and easy to understand. You run some SRMs using your new technique or instrument that you have just perfected. Some of the results are good and some are not so good. Could you have made a mistake, overlooked some factor? Of course you could have. Might you need to re-examine and repeat some of the measurements? Of course you might. But which results need re-examining and repeating? The ones that agreed with the SRM ticket? No waaay - it's only the ones that did *not* agree that need work, right? So, suppose NIST makes a error on one of its measurements, and you make the same error (not hard to imagine - if NIST didn't catch the error, it's probably not an easily avoided error). Your results will look great and you won't have any reason to re-examine your results. Later, when NIST discovers and publishes the error, you now do have a reason to re-examine your results. If you find and correct the error, you get the new corrected results. If not, you keep keep old result. Voila! - a bimodal distribution. (The voice of experience speaking??) Michael Chejlava described another common type of pathological science related to the SRM effect: >There is the bad science where a scientist gets too caught up in his or >her own theory or an experimental artifact. There is also a less sick type of science - perhaps we could call it tired science - in which a scientist keeps on working and publishing on his or her "pet" thing long after all the real potential has been wrung out of it, trying to write a bunch of papers on one idea. We've all known examples of this - I've done it myself (some might say I've made a career out of it, but we won't get in to that). The scientist who writes a thousand papers on the same topic will still be known as a scientist who wrote a thousand papers.... Tom ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom O'Haver Professor of Analytical Chemistry University of Maryland Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry College Park, MD 20742 Maryland Collaborative for Teacher Preparation (301) 405-1831 to2@umail.umd.edu FAX: (301) 314-9121 http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 13:51:46 -0400 From: Leon Combs Chemistry Subject: paper5 pseudoscience I have to say that I have a little trouble with this paper. As everyone knows, pseudo means false, counterfeit, sham, etc. And even though some of the applications of this paper may indeed be shams, some are honest mistakes. I also don't like the sarcasm and cynicism which comes through, at least to me, in some of these presentations (the film of the Russian overflows with it). I don't think that we should be encouraging the young people to laugh in such a derisive manner at people. You all know the FBI story. Agents being trained to look for counterfeit money are never shown counterfeit money. They study the real thing so thoroughly that the false is easily recognized. Similarly I think that we can teach science by helping students go through the discovery method on validated concepts (but some of these may later be shown to be be false -- anybody out there remember being taught that H2 + Cl2 reaction was an elementary reaction?) and also put in one or two of the discoveries which have been shown to not be correct, but without derision of the people involved. After the students have been applying the scientific method on validated concepts, they can then be asked to seek for flaws in a process which is incorrect. This also is exciting and fun! We are all trying to help students develop their creative abilities, but I think that we should always seek to do it in positive ways. Real scientific shams should also be exposed. I like to ask my second quarter freshman students to bring to the last day of class a short report on a chemistry sham of some sort which they have seen in a commercial advertisement or in a published news report. I have gotten some very interesting papers. This turned too long. Thanks for the inspiring papers. Leon Leon L. Combs, Ph.D. Tel: 770-423-6159 Professor and Chair, Dept. Chemistry FAX: 770-423-6744 Kennesaw State University e-mail: lcombs@ksumail.kennesaw.edu 1000 Chastain Road http://science.kennesaw.edu/~lcombs Kennesaw, GA 30144-5591 CARPE DIEM ---- CORUM DEO ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 14:24:38 -0400 From: Linda Sweeting Subject: Re: Paper 5 - DR: Some Unanswered Questions see below for one college's response... *************************** Dr. Linda M. Sweeting Department of Chemistry Towson State University Baltimore, MD 21204 sweeting@midget.towson.edu http://www.towson.edu/~sweeting (410)-830-3113 *************************** On Thu, 19 Jun 1997, Donald Rosenthal wrote: > Michael Epstein address several questions to the participants > of CHEMCONF (6-6-97 14:09) that have mostly not been answered > other than partially by Peter Lykos (6-6-97 20:50). > > 1. What efforts are made within your departments to address issues of > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > scientific ethics? > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I teach a course for undergraduates on Professional Ethics in Science. Although it is not required, it fulfills an advanced writing course requirement and thus is reasonably popular. See my web page - address above - for details. > Do you or does your school address the question? > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > There is growing interest in the university in a variety of departments and we have started an e-mail discussionm list and had one joint meeting. Included were business, mass communications, health science computer sciecne and general science/ chemistry (me). The new dean of science and I are planning to have a workshop for faculty on the subject; meantime, I have sent out hints for how to incorporate ethics into discussions of data and notebooks. .. e.g. sig figs as an ethical issue. I was unsuccessful at getting a campus-wide discussion of even academic ethics started. > 2. By college is it too late to address issues of scientific ethics . . > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > except perhaps to illustrate what happens to those chemists that > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > cross the line? > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > It may be too late to prevent the people who would cheat, but it is very timely for everyone else. Moreover, it sensitizes the students to ethical issues so that they are on the lookout for them. Several of my students have taken action at their jobs during the course to report sloppy or fraudulent work. In addition, it sensitizes the faculty member teaching the course to the implicit messages sent by course requirements and teaching style about what is important. Do you care about cheating, and if so what kind??? Making junior scientists aware of the subtle ways that bosses push for the "right" answer, just as instructors do, prepares them to resist the pressure to fudge the data to please the boss. They may even educate their other instructors, although their awareness doesn't always result in action, for obvious reasons. They also become more aware of the little racial and gender slights that make life uncomfortable and unprofessional for some people and have a chance to intervene to help others. This sensitization is definitely worth doing. > 3. Is using outlandish topics (as most pseudoscientific subjects are) > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > a valid way of increasing student interest in what is, to many, > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > a difficult subject . . . or is it opening a Pandora's box that should > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > just remain shut and ignored? > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > It is definitely worthwhile talking about transient scientific phenomena like N-rays, polywater, etc., as errors like these still occur. A recent one was generation of enantiomeric excess by doing a reaction in a magnetic field (short-lived). The message to beware of research published in the newspaper is important. The main reason for dealing with these issues is to uncover and discuss the pseudoscientific beliefs the students have, like reincarnation, esp, alien abductions. Yes - science majors commonly believe in them. On the other hand, I was quite religious as an undergraduate and would not have appreciated my religious beliefs being laughed at as pseudoscience. I don't know how to examine *important* pseudoscience without alienating someone. > Will some of you answer Michael's questions. > Sorry - I guess I asked a lot of questions too. Bottom line - yes to each question. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 15:07:21 -0500 From: Mike Epstein Subject: Paper5: ME response to LC on pseudoscience Leon makes some important points that I want to clarify. Sorry for interrupting the discussion of Paper #6. At 01:51 PM 6/23/97 -0400, you wrote: >I have to say that I have a little trouble with this paper. As everyone >knows, pseudo means false, counterfeit, sham, etc. And even though some of >the applications of this paper may indeed be shams, some are honest >mistakes. I am not clear what an *honest mistake* is. To me, an honest mistake is something that, when made by a good scientist, is rapidly corrected by consulting with one's peers, doing a good literature search, and performing more experiments in a blind or double-blind manner. I do not see that in any of the cases listed. Polywater comes closest to that, but it still took a number of years for scientists to correct that error ... even though there were a number of voices at the beginning shouting "contamination". Again, as I noted before, these are not all pseudoscience, despite the title of the paper. Some are pathological science and some are controversial science ... but that would have made too long a title. >I also don't like the sarcasm and cynicism which comes through, >at least to me, in some of these presentations (the film of the Russian >overflows with it). I don't think that we should be encouraging the young >people to laugh in such a derisive manner at people. I understand this impression. James Randi comes on like that and irritates a great number of people. He used to be well-known for making fun of anyone with a PhD, because PhDs have ignored him because he doesn't have an advanced degree and is just *a magician*. Anyone who has read his books knows better. Furthermore, when you consider the abuse he has taken and the legal actions he has been subjected too for standing up for good science, he can be excused for some sarcasm and cynicism. Personally, I found Langmuir's paper on pathological science to be too sarcastic and cynical, so I guess we all have limits. In any event, if there are some other places in the paper where you felt I was too sarcastic and cynical, please send me personal email and so we can discuss it. >You all know the FBI story. Agents being trained to look for counterfeit >money are never shown counterfeit money. They study the real thing so >thoroughly that the false is easily recognized. Similarly I think that we >can teach science by helping students go through the discovery method on >validated concepts (but some of these may later be shown to be be false -- >anybody out there remember being taught that H2 + Cl2 reaction was an >elementary reaction?) and also put in one or two of the discoveries which >have been shown to not be correct, but without derision of the people >involved. After the students have been applying the scientific method on >validated concepts, they can then be asked to seek for flaws in a process >which is incorrect. This also is exciting and fun! We are all trying to >help students develop their creative abilities, but I think that we should >always seek to do it in positive ways. I agree completely and the use of these cases should be after students have been provided with the valid concepts. There is no attempt on my part to heap scorn on participants in the topics on my list, but rather to make students realize why scientists make mistakes and how they can be corrected. Case in point: The Allison Effect. I noted in the paper that the *honest mistake* he made was perfectly logical given the state of knowledge in emission spectroscopy at the time of the work. It became pathological because he held to the opinion for so long (and to my knowledge, never admitted an error) despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. >Real scientific shams should also be exposed. I like to ask my second >quarter freshman students to bring to the last day of class a short report >on a chemistry sham of some sort which they have seen in a commercial >advertisement or in a published news report. I have gotten some very >interesting papers. Go back to the case of the SRM effect. This is not a "real scientific sham" but it is pathological science. Students need to realize that small manipulations of data are as detrimental to the scientific process as "real scientific shams". >Leon >Leon L. Combs, Ph.D. Tel: 770-423-6159 >Professor and Chair, Dept. Chemistry FAX: 770-423-6744 >Kennesaw State University e-mail: lcombs@ksumail.kennesaw.edu >1000 Chastain Road http://science.kennesaw.edu/~lcombs >Kennesaw, GA 30144-5591 CARPE DIEM ---- CORUM DEO > > Mike Epstein Research Chemist, Analytical Chemistry Division National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899 USA [Opinions expressed are mine ... not necessarily theirs] PHONE: (301) 975-4114 FAX: (301) 869-0413 Michael.Epstein@nist.gov WWW Home Page: http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html ======================================================== "From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! Not today; no! Today I will be glad. And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" Motele - Theresienstadt ======================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 10:11:56 -0400 From: Aline Harrison Subject: LH - ethics - unans question Hi, Group, At York Coll, I teach a senior seminar for all sci majors except bio which has their own. I teach a "unit" on scientific issues and ethics. I have collected, from the past 3 yr or so, articles from "Science" and "C&En" which chronicle various topics...women in science, authorship, false data, etc. Initially I handed these out to people to read as background, then had a discussion day with invited faculty from philosophy (ethics course) and other disciplines (forensic sci) encompassed by the course. With the influence of chemconf and the on-line chem course, I now have them choose a topic from the several, give them those refs, tell them to do what they can in hunting added refs and prepare an on-line "paper" which they then write critical thinking questions about and we conduct an on-line session similar to this and the olcc courses. The point is to work this area and to bring them up to date on the on-line tool also. (This is the type of thing the entire course does b/c each reads and reports papers from his/her own sub-specialty, writes papers and finally a grant proposal from that area....so this fits in quite well. Cheers! Lindy Harrison York Coll of PA aharriso@ycp.edu or aharriso@eagle.ycp.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 22:44:01 +0000 From: DeGennaro-Al Subject: Pseudo <<< Subject: ME: Spoonful of sugar (TV commercials) For those who don't mind using a spoonful of sugar to make the medicine go down, I just put together a web site at: http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/tvcom.html dealing with using TV commercials for introducing topics in chemical education. It is keyed to chapters in Snyder's "The Extraordinary Chemistry of Ordinary Things" and is certainly not totally inclusive. I couldn't possibly list all the commericals that could be used. For those without graphical browsers, the references for the CD-ROM commercial collections are: 1 - TV Commercials Vol. 1: The 50s and 60s; Version 3.2; CD Titles 411 Waverly Oaks Road, Waltham, MA 02154; CDTitles@world.std.com; http://www.cdtitles.com 2 - TV Commercials of the 50s and 60s; Chesnut New Media CD-Roms; CDRP, Inc., PO Box 360, Cambridge, MA 02141; chestnut@world.std.com 3 - 3 - TV Commercials Vol. 2: The 60s and 70s; Version 3.2; same as Reference 1. ME > ======================================================== < > Mike Epstein < > Adjunct Professor, Department of Science < > Mount Saint Mary's College, Emmitsburg, MD < > [Opinions expressed are mine ... not necessarily theirs] < > PHONE: (301) 447-5376 FAX: (301) 447-5755 < > epstein@msmary.edu mse@enh.nist.gov < > WWW Home Page: http://esther.la.asu.edu/sas/epstein/epstein.html < > ======================================================== < > "From tomorrow on, I shall be sad - from tomorrow on! < > Not today; no! Today I will be glad. < > And every day, no matter how bitter it be, I will say: < > From tomorrow on, I shall be sad, not today!" < > Motele - Theresienstadt < > ======================================================== < --------------------------------