Y’know, I keep reading this page, and I keep still not understanding it. She cast a horoscope… for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter? Does pseudoscientific nonsense work any better on inanimate objects than it doesn’t on humans?
Of course, she says the horoscope for LRO is really bad, but only a few days after she posted that page NASA released those incredible pictures LRO took of the Apollo landing sites. And maybe someone should tell her that LRO is going to do a wee bit more than "crash a rocket into the Moon".
I love this part too:
If we’d invested the same $583 million into research and into constructing resources to conserve and purify water here on earth, it would have been infinitely more valuable for our future.
Besides being a total non sequitur and a false dichotomy — I explain that here — I might suggest that had we spent that on education in science and critical thinking, she need not have cast that horoscope in the first place.
And don’t forget, kiddies:
 |
Tip o’ the wizard’s hat to JREF fan Gary.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:42 am
How, exactly, do you figure out a satellite’s birthday anyway?
July 31st, 2009 at 11:54 am
*facepalm*
July 31st, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Even with education and cirtal thinking people will still beleve in weird things like astrology . look at wall street investors , Pre Regan, and some corpret presidents I don’t know to stop it the only thing I can think of is to hope people who beleve will relize that astrology has not worked for them and dosen’t work period.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Off topic: I had a thought last night. Is it possible to use a really large array of very tiny, flat, moveable mirrors, to create a telescope mirror? I’m imagining you could combine small arrays of these mirrors into larger arrays as necessary, change the focal length and quickly swap out any dirty sections. Things like that. Has that been tried before, could it work?
July 31st, 2009 at 12:16 pm
I think astrology is a lot like religion. People belive it to be real no matter how much you educate them. I don’t see either going away soon.
I hope that her actions have opened somebody’s eyes to space exploration and astronomy though.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Yeah, when is a spacecraft “born”? When construction starts? Ends? When its software comes online? Launch? Orbital insertion?
I know of two fictional AIs (are there other kinds?) that have birthdates, HAL9000 and Skynet. I wonder what the stars augured for them?
July 31st, 2009 at 12:18 pm
@ mike
Huh?
July 31st, 2009 at 12:21 pm
@foolfodder
Its been done with six mirrors:
http://amazing-space.stsci.edu/resources/explorations/groundup/lesson/scopes/mmt/index.php
I dunno if there are practical reasons why it can’t be scaled up.
I like the spinning tub of mercury mirror, myself…
July 31st, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Probably wouldn’t work, fodder, unless the flat mirrors were nano-scale. If the small mirrors were paraboloid, then that’s another matter. No changing focal lengths, though.
Back on topic:
I gave my talk on parallax astronomy to the astrologer group at McCormick Observatory a week ago. I avoided coming right out and telling them that they believe in total horse shirt, instead opting for a subtle approach. I explained the scientific method and how it works little by little to refine our knowledge base. I told them that science is a method for acquiring and refining knowledge, not a dusty book full of numbers.
I hope something stuck, but I doubt it. These were true believers and no ammount of talking is going to dissuade from their preconceived notions. They did leave happy, though, and enjoyed themselves. They got to see Jupiter and a globular cluster in the 26″ Clark refractor, though.
I planted a seed that hopefully will grow into a 2×4 that will then hit them on the head and knock some sense into them.
I just heard (from the TV that my daughters are watching in the other room) that Jenny McCarthy will be on the Ellen DeGeneris show next week (Monday?). If I can keep my head from ‘splodin’ I might watch…
July 31st, 2009 at 12:26 pm
She’s talking about the LRO/LCROSS mission, not just LRO. LCROSS is definitely designed to “crash a rocket into the moon”.
Not saying she isn’t loony, but nowhere does she mention LRO specifically.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Hi Richard,
I had this idea that if the tiny mirrors were smaller than each pixel of the image capturing device then it wouldn’t matter that the light was a little averaged out, but having thought about it a bit more there’s probably a problem with that at the focus as, I guess, the small difference at the mirror becomes a big difference at the focus. So I think you’re probably right, thanks for the feedback.
If the small mirrors are paraboloid, presumably it matters where they go in the array?
July 31st, 2009 at 12:35 pm
@foolfodder @Richard -> TMT (Thirty Meter Telescope) is taking an approach like this, though, like Richard says, they are using tiny paraboloids. To do it with flat ones, they would have to have a side-length on the order of the wavelength you are observing, which, as Richard says, for visible light is nanometers. Works great for radio tho!
@the topic: I’ll have respect for astrologers when they give specific, precise predictions, instead of vague, loose ones that can be fit to almost any situation.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:39 pm
For some odd reason, I can’t seem to parse this whacko’s logic past “If we’d invested the same $583 million into research. . .” What does she think we actually did with the money? Load it on to the LRO and shoot it into space? I’m constantly amazed at the people (particularly in my area) who are willing to lay off all the people NASA employs, not to mention devastate the economies of the areas surrounding companies like Morton-Thiokol, et al, and spend the paltry amount of money NASA does get on social programs that have much more serious records of failure than NASA. Personally, remembering the days when Huntsville, Southern Florida, Seattle, Huston, and a number of other “NASA towns” were booming (i.e., during the mid- to late-1960s), I can’t help but think we should be pouring money into NASA like water. Hell, it’s the only way I can think of we’ll ever get fuel effeciency numbers up on commercial aircraft. (Can we talk about the first “A” in NASA?) Sheesh.
July 31st, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Ok, I’m thinking it matters where the paraboloid mirrors would go in a normal setup. But is there a way to create the telescope so that the tiny mirrors are all identical? For example have the paraboloid mirrors all point to the same relative location to themselves, at that location there’s an array of flat, reorientable mirrors that can redirect the light at the focus. (This wouldn’t allow you to change the focal length, but if it works, all the tiny mirrors are identical, so should be manufacturable in bulk).
I’m thinking you have the array of tiny identical paraboloid mirrors in the same orientation (radially) where the main mirror would normally be, and then in an outer ring above the main array, you have all the reorientable flat mirrors, redirecting the light to the focus.
(I’m aware that I have no idea what I’m talking about and that this is probably a silly idea but I thought I’d share anyway in case it isn’t).
July 31st, 2009 at 12:55 pm
I was listening to a podcast once that one week had on a debunker, who had done cold readings as an act and explained exactly how they worked, performing one for the host who seemed completely convinced that it involves all the supernatural powers of pulling a quarter from your ear.
Then the next week, he hosted an Astrologer who did readings for a half-dozen callers using EXACTLY the techniques that were explained the week before, and nobody noticed!
July 31st, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Perhaps if people stopped spending millions and millions of dollars on astrology readings and if we invest those same millions into research and into constructing resources to conserve and purify water here on earth, it would be infinitely more valuable for our future.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Lunacy
July 31st, 2009 at 1:11 pm
Last night I saw one of the worst documentaries about the moon on the CBC called `Fly me to the moon`. On it had a astrologer talking about how the moon represented the femine yada yada yada, talking about the moon effect like it was real and the guy who is salling plots on the moon. What got me really upset was the previews talked about going back to the moon, this only took about ten minutes in a hour long program. Basically I have less manure in my garden then this program had.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Brian Schlosser:
Obviously, when someone first thought about designing it. After all, “life begins at conception”.
(Okay, stop it with all the groaning. I think it’s a great pun.)
July 31st, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Which brings up another thing about astrology. Why is it the day you’re born that controls your destiny? (Aside from being able to determine with better accuracy than the day of conception, for example.) Can you change your baby’s destiny by inducing labor early? What about those “born” via c-section?
July 31st, 2009 at 2:08 pm
I have heard other fans of astrology express opinions against space exploration. It is not suprising that some followers of woo are hostile to science. Maybe the idea that planets and moons are obejcts that we can understand makes it harder to convince people that they influnce our daily lives.
I am just waiting to hear that an astrologer or some other kind of charlatan is going to complain that impacting the moon will disrupt vibes and throw horoscopes out of balance. It could beconme a good excuse for casting a bad horoscope. The recent impact on Jupiter is likely getting blamed for some bad calls by astrologers.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:15 pm
“it would have been infinitely more valuable for our future.”
infinitely? INFINITELY? oh really? is she sure it wouldn’t be a quantum leap for our future?
July 31st, 2009 at 2:39 pm
@foolfodder:
It might not work for observation but it sure works for solar energy (click on my name for link).
Keep the ideas coming.
July 31st, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Gary, it already happened.
NASA was sued for the Deep Impact mission by a Russian astrologer.
She claimed it “ruin[ed] the natural balance of forces in the universe.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8474735/
July 31st, 2009 at 3:21 pm
“The chart for this most recent lunar launch is proof that we need an official national astrologer, perhaps as a cabinet post. It’s either that or else that there’s a secret—and government-funded—research project to find the worst possible electional charts (that is, charts for starting something) and then document their outcomes.”
I … I really don’t know what to do with this statement. The assumptions presented here just have so much wrong in them that … wow.
Not least of all is her assumption that not only is her woo real, but that other people should be just as cognisant of its ‘reality’ as she is.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Hey, if the LRO can twitter, it can have a horrorscope, right?
July 31st, 2009 at 3:55 pm
I love this part:
The combination suggests either a cloudy, unclear outcome—mechanical errors, data lost, misleading or inconclusive—or else that it will show that there is no water there.
Can one’s “prediction” be more couched than that?!
Hmmmmm….I predict…..this nutcase will do something silly….
Whoa! Nailed it!
@ Gary:
I’m surprised some enterprising astrologer hasn’t offered up “corrected” charts that take into account all that evil NASA hardware floating around up there, banging into the starry orbs.
July 31st, 2009 at 3:57 pm
And another thing…
If I were an alien (!) and I were born, say, on a planet orbiting Beta Cygni A, would an astrologer on Earth be able to cast my horoscope?
Or, what if I were human (!) and I were born in a space colony orbiting somewhere in the Kuiper belt. Same question.
July 31st, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Why doenst everybody here make a post there?
I did! lol
July 31st, 2009 at 5:17 pm
It could have been worse. She could have been into biorhythms.
July 31st, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Saturn’s transit in Scorpio predicted you’d say that, Phil….
July 31st, 2009 at 6:21 pm
I left a post there also, but it’ll not get posted. It’s awaiting moderation and will never see the light of day there. I told her that Astrology is the pre-scientific attempt by primitive people to explain the cosmos and that we have no more need of it. I told her to move on. She won’t, of course.
True believers are like that. Oh well.
July 31st, 2009 at 6:24 pm
For those who’ve read Stranger In A Strange Land, remember that the President’s Astrologer (Okay, technically his wife’s astrologer) is asked to ‘cast a horoscope’ for V. Michael Smith – who was born on Mars.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:44 pm
I left this comment for Donna. Still waiting to see if it is accepted. I said
Not that it will accomplish much.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:53 pm
I doubt this comment is going to get past her:
“Yup, the government needs an astrologer like the church needs more child molesters.”
August 1st, 2009 at 1:34 am
@foolfodder: You should really take this discussion to the BAUT Forums. That’s where all the cool kids hang out. Just click on my name.
Create a thread dedicated to your mental wanderings re: telescopes, and I can guarantee a spirited discussion, with lots of input from experts and amateurs alike.
For anybody with off-topic astronomy questions: BAUT is where you will get the most feedback, the most food-for-thought, and the most fun.
August 1st, 2009 at 5:59 am
As a confirmed scorpio, with Pluto rising in the west, plus being a rabbit and a hippopotamus rhomboid, my psychic indigo child crystal hugging powers are telling me that I need to do more reading about the propagation of gravity waves, or any other influence before I start waffling woo about astrology.;)
August 1st, 2009 at 6:06 am
And this mission isn’t reasearch?
I was married to an astrology believer once (she had other attributes attractive to a male in his 20s). It wasn’t the reason I left, but the reason did let me get the kid out from under her. And get a clause in the custody agreement giving me control of his religious training.
August 1st, 2009 at 6:07 am
John Paradox said:
Brrr!
Memories of Nancy Reagan’s astrologer influencing decisions at the highest level…
August 1st, 2009 at 6:07 am
And on the multi mirrored telescope. Doesn’t Arthur C. Clarke describe this in one of his early novels?
August 1st, 2009 at 6:10 am
She’s changed the page to something about a bear. Can’t seem to stand the heat from the blowtorch of reality.
August 1st, 2009 at 7:05 am
@Paul M – She can’t “bear” the thought of being wrong.
(let the groaning begin)
August 1st, 2009 at 7:08 am
Astrologers can’t even tell the present. The pictures were exciting and the mission was a great success. Of course anything in Lunar orbit will eventually crash on the moon, stable lunar orbits aren’t really possible.
August 1st, 2009 at 7:34 am
I’d put more credence in The Onion’s horoscopes.
What gets me about astrologers is when they say certain planets (they list the Sun as a “planet”) and constellations have an influence on our lives. If the constellation Virgo can influence us, why don’t they also talk about Carina, or Ophiuchus, or Draco doing the same?
Pluto is also described as having an influence, despite its size. Yet they don’t factor in Eris having more of an influence, since it’s larger than Pluto. And if the Sun is, astrologically speaking, a planet, then why don’t they mention the “planets” Alpha Centauri A, Sirius, or Procyon affecting us? By astrology’s definition they should, since they’re larger and more luminous than the Sun.
And what of the 300-plus extrasolar planets that have been discovered? Where is their influence, Mr. or Ms. Astrologer? Hmmmm?
Astrologers produce more hockey than the Stanley Cup playoffs.
August 1st, 2009 at 8:49 am
Sometimes you get the BULL.
Sometimes the BULL gets you.
In astrology, it’s either one or the other. Every time.
August 1st, 2009 at 8:51 am
You can access the page still via Google Cache (clicky my name), the only comments showing tho are some of the woo believers… alas ;( Funny to read tho…
RE: Astrology/Religion – what has really made my shake my head in the past is how a person can chuckle and shake their head at the concept of astrology, then head to church and worship a flying spaghetti monster… So astrology is whacky because planets and stars can’t really influence our moods or outcomes, but if I pray to that imaginary being in the sky enough, he can really change things! Wawaweewah! Religious people are so confused… “That other religion/belief is sooo silly, but mine is for reals because I’m sure of it!” /sigh
August 1st, 2009 at 8:56 am
@43 http://www.neptunecafe.com/asteroids.html
August 1st, 2009 at 9:35 am
It’s un-frakkin’-believable what some people believe in, and astrologers are among the worst. I had a run in with the president and vice-president of out local astrological group years back. I was doing a star party in our downtown area and was approached by these two gentlemen. They came to see the Jupiter through our scopes. Jupiter (they said) was in Virgo and was having a major influence in some going-ons of theirs. They wanted to see it up close and personal. At the time Leo was overhead and Virgo was still in the much of the haze and light pollution in the city skies. But I could still show them Jupiter, because it was “in” Leo. Well I though I stuck a bomb up their arse and set it off! I was SO wrong. How could Juptier be in Leo? Their calculation, based on their venereable Rosecrusian tables, clearly showed Juptier to be in Virgo. Then I pointed to Jupiter, then only a couple of degrees from Regulus, right were the heart of the lion would be. I slewed the scope to show them. Though they were astounded by the view Jupiter, they were clearly confused. How could I possibly be right? How could the evidence before them-visually being able to see Jupiter smack-dab in the center of the constellation of Leo-possibly be correct? What had I and the whole astronomical community done to Jupiter that caused it to slip a whole house? I was loudly accused of fabricating Jupiter’s presense in Leo in an effort to undermine the astrological association’s reputation. Our group was publically chastized for altering the universe for our own propaganda needs. Damn astronomers! Luckily we have an intelligent and forgiving public that likes what we do, and their rantings had little imapct on our audience (and it was good for a laugh or three!).
Which brings me to this…one of the quickest ways to debunk astrologers is to call their calculations into question. Donna Cunningham, for instance, claims Uranus was in Gemini, Neptune in Virgo, and Pluto in Leo, when she was born, and of course these influenced her path in life. Well, she got one in three correct, as Uranus was in Taurus and Pluto was in Cancer. Call this to their attention and let the hellfire rain!
Hehehehehe…..
August 1st, 2009 at 11:49 am
Well, I wanted to leave a comment too, but as often, you need to leave an email address to do that. I really didn’t want to disclose my email address to an astrologer.
August 1st, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Jean-Denis: RE: ‘disposable/spam’ emails
Here’s the trick: create a webmail account for questionable sites that request one, I have johnparadox@lycos.com as a filter account. I get 5-10 hits per day (lower numbers on weekends, as many as 20 – in the inbox, with another 50? already filtered during the week)
When the new stuff comes in, use checkboxes to ‘create filter/mark as spam’ to have any future mail from the same address automatically sent to the spam folder.
I also check through the spam for the really imaginative ‘nigerian money’ scams, and put them into a ‘favorite scams’ folder… and occasionally use the same account for ‘real’ email, but not often.
J/P=?
August 1st, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Why do we need to spend any money on “conserve and purify water here on earth” research.
We can ALREADY do that, with even the most contaminated water we can find. So, what in blazes hell is the women talking about?
Does she have a hard time finding water or something?
August 1st, 2009 at 3:34 pm
51. Derek Colanduno Says:
Why do we need to spend any money on “conserve and purify water here on earth” research.
We can ALREADY do that, with even the most contaminated water we can find. So, what in blazes hell is the women talking about?
Does she have a hard time finding water or something?
It’s all that ‘homepathic water’, after all, how do you purify water when the more you dilute it, the more ‘effective’ it becomes?
J/P=?
August 1st, 2009 at 5:54 pm
@ Derek Colanduno:
To be fair, I think she was making a comparison with a stated LRO mission objective of finding water on the moon.
Still a nutjob, though. Maybe she should take up dowsing to help her find water here at home.
August 1st, 2009 at 9:36 pm
[...] August 2, 2009 in endorsements and reviews Phil Plait on the how Astrology is bull. [...]
August 2nd, 2009 at 10:03 am
Dear Phil,
What is your problem with someone believing in Astrology? Its a religion and people will believe and follow it whether you like it or not. Does it really matter whether Astrology is Bull or Not? We have so much to do and discover in science. Then why this tirade against astrology? Why cant we focus on science.
Its hard to understand why a good astronomer like you does this thing.
regards
Deepak
August 2nd, 2009 at 10:28 am
@Deepak: Here’s a link for you.
- Lars
August 2nd, 2009 at 10:29 am
@Deepak: If you click my name, the link will take you to a site called “What’s the harm?”
I think it will provide the answers to your question.
August 2nd, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Richard Drumm Said in the 32 comment:
“I told her that Astrology is the pre-scientific attempt by primitive people to explain the cosmos and that we have no more need of it.”
Actually, Richard, Astrology was originally the calendar, and astrologers were the 1st keepers of calendars for primitve societies. These calendar keeprs counted lunations and kept the times, This allowed them to predict the times to plant and harvest foods. Even nomatic people needed to live lives in keeping with a calendar.
These calender keepers later in some societies became the parasitic priest class that lived in temples and required as much “mystery” as they could generate to remain parasites, living off the work of others in the community.
The very elaborate calenders which were horoscope birth charts were just complicated calenders.
Too much emphasis is put on the horoscope aspects. Some of the Mayan and Aztec Calender wheels are works of art.
Wait until 2012 and the Woo will flow. Too many of the gullible people do not understand the the Mayan and Aztecs understood the concept of the number zero and carrying over numbers to the next column. I fear the next few years will be just like the magical fear of the year 2000.
It too will two pass.
August 2nd, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Oogh, JestrBob:
I remember 2000 well (actually, 1999, when we did all the work.) Checked millions of lines of code, discovered a handful of bugs, none serious, missed one (a report that printed the date as January 1, 19100 because it appended a 2-digit year to “19″, and the 2 digits suddenly became 3 digits…) Like all the bugs, it could be easily fixed with a pencil. Oh, well.
Anyway, are we going to have to go through that all again in 2012? Check for things like assuming the day after Dec 31, 2012 is … Oops, it doesn’t exist! The program will break! Arghhh!!! Run for your lives!
August 2nd, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Oh, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with astronomy.
*wait for it*
Except, of course, a willingness to abdicate your will to someone else. And that someone else is charging you up the wazoo (or just to your ankles) with what he/she considers a “science.”
You could probably get the same kind of service from a “mentalist” for much less (well, maybe up to the ankles), or from a therapist for considerably more. At least the mentalist will be entertaining you and giving you a good show.
As had been previously stated, there is no known mechanism by which the planets or stars can influence one’s life. More so, why the stars and planets would pick only the day you were born to exert their influence is beyond, well, reality. (“Birth” just seems too arbitrary for one to be given such a celestial influence. Does a C-section still count? What about twins?)
By all rights, astrology should’ve gone in the Great Circular File of History when it was discovered by scientists that giant crystal spheres embedded with stars and planets (oh, and the moon and the sun) that encircled the earth did not exist. Instead, as it turns out, the earth and planets orbit the sun, the moon circles the earth, and the stars are at varying astronomical lengths away from our solar system.
Despite this newly discovered information (and by “newly,” I mean “hundreds-of-years old), Cunningham wants a national astrologer? What the frak! If astrology is a religion, then no frakking way should that happen.
Astrology still speaks volumes on the lack of critical thinking in society. Makes you want to facepalm most every time.
August 2nd, 2009 at 10:16 pm
@ Mick 46
Thanks to the link to the cache.
@ Derek 51
Although some of the astrology stuff almost made me choke (OK I was drinking soup at the same time – I should have seen that coming) she’s not entirely a million miles of base about the water.
Yes, we can technically purify the most pollutd water on the planet, however doing it cost efficiently and getting it to where it is needed is an entirely different matter. Demand for fresh water keeps increasing in almost all societies. There is a serious possibility (sorry, no references to hand so anecsdoteville at the moment) that easy access to water could become a serious matter of contention betwen nations in the not too distant future.
As for the rest of what she says, yeah OK fruitloop
August 2nd, 2009 at 11:05 pm
Deepak sez:
Its hard to understand why a good astronomer like you does this thing.
Errrr…because he’s a good astronomer?
August 3rd, 2009 at 8:19 am
foolfodder et. al.
I was thinking one could use a mirror array to direct the light from a telescope to the spectrometer. Nowadays people drill out holes in a plate and channel it the SM with optical fiber. I concluded it probably wasn’t worth it.
August 3rd, 2009 at 12:52 pm
@Brian (48):
The signs of the (Western) zodiac are not currently in the same place as the constellations they are named after, because the signs are a division of the ecliptic into twelve parts based on the equinoxes, which have drifted relative to the constellations since the naming system was introduced. The Wikipedia page on the zodiac gives more details. (I’m just a guy who read a short book on the history of calendars, not an astrologer.)
Your problem *would* be the same as that of people that say “evolution is just a theory” without understanding the proper meaning of the word “theory” … except neither of the astrologers pointer out the difference between signs and constellations either! Your post implies that quite a few more astrologers have failed to correct you either; how many?
August 7th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
I’ve read this person off and on for some time, and I think what’s really going on is that she’s a complete New Age Wiccan true-believer, so much so that she views space exploration–any kind of space exploration–as a threat to her religion. Not kidding. To her, the moon and the planets are mystical places and thus not to be trifled with, understood (except by the practitioners of Wicca) by mortals, or even to be explored. The moon especially, as her brand of Wiccan belief’s source of female power and mysticism, is an especially sacred object to her. For that reason, even the idea of exploring it appears to be sacriledge to her beliefs. If she could get NASA shut down she would, and hopes that by writing the things she does she can get the rest of the world to agree with her.
But I say… I’d rather spend the money on space exploration than most social programs. At least then I know where my money has been spent on.
October 28th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
There is a web site research project investigating astrology. it compares photos of people who share the same sun, moon and ascendants to see if they resemble each other significantly. the theory is that astrology is actually the cosmological model, the shape of space-time, with twelve dimensions, four major ‘elements’ each of which have 3 stages: a starting stage, an ever-present stage and an ending stage which all interact. the abstract there explains more details. take a look at the video at youtube – query “astrofaces”.
February 28th, 2010 at 9:11 am
Far be it from me to support dictatorships, but I think despite his being a madman, Stalin may have had the right idea pertaining to priests and other perpetrators of superstition and fraud. The evidence is already clearly in against psychics, religion, etc, we should just arrest priests, psychics and snake oil salesmen en mass for fraud and set an example for the public that way. If they were going to respond to logic, then polls wouldn’t continue to show 60% of the US population believing in creationism and 61% believing that Noah’s Ark really happened.