PZ Myers Gets Sex All Wrong

So, last week neuroscientist Mario Beauregard wrote a provocative piece for Salon titled (somewhat ambitiously) "Near Death, Explained". In the article, Beauregard points at a couple of NDEs in which the experiencer apparently had a "veridical OBE" Book Cover for Brain Wars- that is, while dead, they said they had viewed the world from outside their body, with this information later corroborated.

Outspoken blogger P.Z. Myers took umbrage - shocking, I know - with such "tripe" from a "well-established kook" being published in Salon (and the "mystically inclined, quantum-woo-spouting diddledingles" who commented on the story) in a blog post on his site. But fair play to the magazine, because they reprinted Myers' criticism soon after as a response to Beauregard's original piece.

This was then followed by a response from Beauregard, in which he discusses another 'veridical' case, and then yet another follow-up from Myers was published in which the biologist blogger let readers know how unimpressed he was with the newly added case:

This new anecdote is more of the same. The patient is comatose and with no heart rhythm when brought into the hospital; over a week later, he claims to recognize a particular nurse as having been present during his crisis, and mentions that she put his dentures in a drawer.

I am underwhelmed. I must introduce Beauregard to two very common terms that are well understood in the neuroscience community...

Now, nobody's too surprised anymore when P.Z. flaps his lips and generic insults fall out everywhere, but the especially fun part of this one is when he gets all patronising ("I must introduce Beauregard..."). Because right above it where P.Z. notes the female nurse who put the dentures in the drawer? Yeah, wrong gender. The central testimony in this case comes from "T.G.", who was a *male* nurse.

I must introduce P.Z. to a term well understood in the science community, called "doing some research".

This is one of the problems of building a case on anecdotes; without knowledge of the range and likelihood of various results, one can’t distinguish the selective presentation of chance events from a measurable phenomenon.

Indeed. Especially when you don't even appear to have a passing familiarity with the original research that you're criticising. Myers tells us what's wrong with the case, and how it can be explained, when he doesn't seem to have read the original documents debating it (in which it is quite clear that the nurse is a male), which explain exactly why many researchers find it compelling.

There are certainly aspects to all of these 'veridical' cases that detract from them somewhat and require further debate and discussion, but there's also a growing list of testimony that suggests something strange might be going on. Hopefully these debates can be had in an honest, scientific manner, and further research can be done to help resolve the answers. Y'know, that science thing.

I have no idea why anyone would listen to P.Z. Myers' opinion on the matter though.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
emlong's picture
Member since:
18 September 2007
Last activity:
8 hours 15 min

Myers is just another tendentious brat. I can't believe people like that can still muster any audience at all.

Inannawhimsey's picture
Member since:
14 April 2009
Last activity:
51 weeks 4 days

PZ Myers (and Dawkins & James Randi & Hitchens etc etc) is small fry

There is this one blogger I know of, a Canadian, who has a FEAR MOSLEMS blog where he gets 1 million hits a month...

fear and anxiety can sell, i guess

---------
All that lives is holy, life delights in life.

--William Blake

chuck_heston's picture
Member since:
26 June 2010
Last activity:
2 years 9 weeks

As usual these "debates" are all about the dominant group maintaining its elevated status. The tone of the Myers reflects the strategic response of a bully who employs coercive aggression to gain dominance. He is the ringleader and the commenter his assistants. Why are NDEs so threatening? NDEs are taboo. They occur in the ambiguous borderland between Life and Death. By their very nature, they lie outside of our categories. As in all societies, discussions of taboo subjects must be shut down quickly because threaten the social order.

jupiter.enteract's picture
Member since:
21 January 2005
Last activity:
1 week 2 days

You hit the nail on the head.

jupiter.enteract's picture
Member since:
21 January 2005
Last activity:
1 week 2 days

Good points, Greg.

I've nothing against skeptics--but I have *much* against disingenuous skeptics.

Rick MG's picture
Member since:
2 May 2004
Last activity:
5 days 20 hours

As Greg pointed out on Twitter, a few Pharyngula acolytes take umbrage at Dr Beauregard not addressing PZ as Dr Myers in his rebuttal -- yet Myers himself, sorry, Doctor Myers, doesn't afford Dr Beauregard the same courtesy, nor do the Pharyngula acolytes. I've seen comments posted elsewhere and on Twitter (following hashtags such as #quantumwoo) from people doing the same thing, neglecting to mention Dr Mario Beauregard's credentials. I'm sure Dr Beauregard doesn't mind in the slightest -- it's his research that counts, not titles and egos.

~ * ~

@levitatingcat

teledyn's picture
Member since:
30 September 2006
Last activity:
5 days 14 hours

Someone should perhaps buy PZ a copy of Thomas Kuhn's best-seller; the whole process of this Science he professes is one of collecting up the inexplicable until some bright insight illuminates the why of it and the shift happens.

PZ (how does one pronounce that? P'zz? ;) sounds like a reasonable chap, however, in a different context might even be amicable, although in this domain he comes off as a reasonable person whose life-work paradigm is on the verge of being declared obsolete and discarded, like a mainframe COBOL programmer who's last chance at fame was the farcical Ghost of Y2K.

emlong's picture
Member since:
18 September 2007
Last activity:
8 hours 15 min

Well stated.