I fear that somebody has stolen your AOL passwords, or possibly broken into the www.csicop.org web site. The following message, an obvious hoax, appeared in my mailbox. I first had a light chuckle (well, ok, I was in stitches), but then noticed the routing indicated the message was from AOL. Immediately I checked out the CSICOP-announcements web site, and the message was there also. I think you should look into this.

The message obviously is a fake. The clues are there for any rational thinker to see. Some are so transparent (such as the consistent misspelling of Spielberg, or appending the redundant ``opinion'' to the top of an opinion piece), that even less than rational thinkers are likely to comment.

But the clues are more pervasive, appearing in nearly every fiber of the document. First of course is the pointer to Jim Paul's highly favorable Salon article about George Lucas. There is nothing there in which to sink one's skeptical teeth. Lucas does employ mythological story lines and icons in his movies---it is what he is most famous for. The Original Star Wars movie (episode IV), is often described as a space-aged western, but what is a western except a modernized medieval tale of knights in shining armor. The association has long been noticed, and could not have been missed by a media critic versed in his art. (My copy of Hero With a Thousand Faces has a picture of Luke Skywalker on the cover.) This is an obvious ploy to make CSICOP look like a cabal isolated from the modern world, and not the active and vibrant organization that represents organized skepticism on the national level.

But the obvious parody elements do not end with some dyslexic letters, or pointers to irrelevant (even if favorable) articles. Immediately Spielberg and Lucas are taken to task for producing modern mythologies. Well yes, but that is kind of like taking CSICOP to task for debunking claims of the paranormal---it's what they do. The author of the hoax goes way overboard, however, in his portrait of Spielberg as an anti-intellectual by listing as representative samples of his movies: E.T., Close Encounters, and Jaws, while ignoring: The Color Purple, Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, and 1942. (Well, to be honest, Spielberg would prefer you ignore 1942). Such selective inclusion of supporting evidence, combined with an obvious blind eye to negative evidence, would never appear in an official CSICOP publication, even one emblazoned with the anemic excuse for largres, ``opinion.''

The hoaxer also gives him or herself away when claiming that Jurrasic Park was an anti-science movie, one in which ``greedy scientists recreate dinosaurs, but are unable to control them, thereby unleashing chaos and disaster.'' Only somebody who has never seen the movie, let alone read the book, could form such an impression. In Jurrasic Park a greedy corporation recreates dinosaurs, and is so blinded by the prospect of making money that they turn a blind eye to the risks. Only the most biased of observers could miss that the scientists are called in to help, that they raise a warning about the danger of introducing new species into an ecosystem. Alas, the warning was too late. The gredy corporation spawned a disgruntled employee who let loose the dinosaurs while engaged in industrial espionage. Does this hoaxer think that skeptics will accept that as a low-water mark of ``anti-science?''

Another sign that this hoaxer is out to make CSICOP, and through CSICOP all skeptics, look bad is the way any failure of complex technology is said to be anti-intellectual, or (if you can believe it) ``anti-enlightenment.'' True, I have talked with some who are so starry-eyed about science and technology that they will insist that anybody who questions the wisdom of a technocrat is a neo-Ludite. But that characterization does not apply to CSICOP. CSICOP was founded by scientists, philosophers and other thinking people, many of whom have raised concerns about our ability to manage complex systems. Take it from a programmer, systems fail, all the time, that's reality. When the functioning of those systems is important for life-and-death, people sometimes die. This is the reality the scientists in Jurrasic Park tried to warn Ingen (the greedy corporation) about.

Likewise, it is also doubtful the hoaxer saw Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, since that movie contains a very important expository scene that lays the groundwork for a rationalist, even scientific, basis for ``the force.'' CSICOP would, of course, never review a movie or film they did not see, but the scene in which the force is attributed to nano-life, or possibly nano-technology, could hardly be missed. This shamefull effort to make skeptics look like close minded ``know-it-alls'' should not, cannot, be allowed to stand. CSICOP must do something to set the record strait!

I think what really gives the hoax away is the gushing references to the age of enlightenment, an age that ended with the french revolution. Only regressive romantic could hold onto the enlightenment (with it's class system, slavery, and Platonic views towards meritocracy) as something to be desired. We have since then seen the rise of great democracies, the spread of education to the masses, a breakdown of the class system and an opening of society to self-examination and criticism---an age David Brin has referred to as the ``empirical society.'' It is noisy, it is cantankerous, but so far it works. Even such mythology based stories as E.T. show children defying authority---a very non-medieval attitude, but one necessary for democracy. Why somebody would think intelligent and well informed people such as those who read Skeptical Inquirer magazine would fall for the enlightenment is beyond me.

The final hint that the message is a hoax, is of course the gratuitous appeal to authority in the form of Carl Sagan. Carl Sagan has been much maligned by believers in UFOs and ESP, and quoting him out of context, as though he were some litany that skeptics must recite, is a sure sign the author of the hoax did not understand skepticism. The irony, that Sagan was himself a well read man with many connections to the arts, religion and sciences---invoking in his writings some of the very same icons as George Lucas---was probably lost on the hoaxer.

Clearly the hoaxer has an ax to grind with CSICOP. Perhaps you should take a clue from Michael Crichton and look for an inside job. Most cases of security breakins are inside jobs, and most industrial accidents have human error someplace in the chain of events---additional details that add to the veracity of Jurrasic Park. While an evil technocrat in a paperback thriller would suggest putting another fail-safe alarm on the system, real-life systems engineers know to look at the entire set of procedures---including people---to find out what went wrong. Perhaps the same approach should be taken by CSICOP, before another haox goes out the door undetected.

Good luck in tracking down the perpetrator.

Sincerely,
Michael Sofka.

--
Michael D. Sofka
CIS/SSS Sr. Systems Programmer  AFS/DFS, email, listproc, TeX, epistemology.
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.    http://www.rpi.edu/~sofkam/

------- Forwarded Message
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 4
Approved-By:  SkeptInq@AOL.COM
Date:         Thu, 27 May 1999 09:47:32 EDT
Reply-To: CSICOP Announcement 
Sender: CSICOP Announcement 
From: SkeptInq@aol.com
Subject:      SI DIGEST SPECIAL: STAR WARS
To: CSICOP-ANNOUNCE@LISTSERV.AOL.COM

 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER ELECTRONIC DIGEST
 May 27, 1999

 SI Electronic Digest is the biweekly e-mail news update of the Committee for
 the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP.)

 Visit http://www.csicop.org/.
 Rated one of the Top Ten Science sites on the Web by HOMEPC magazine.

 The Digest is written and edited by Matthew Nisbet and Barry Karr. SI Digest
is distributed directly via e-mail to over 3000 readers worldwide, and is
sent from CSICOP headquarters at the Center for Inquiry-International,
Amherst NY, USA.

 To subscribe for free to the SI DIGEST, go to:
 http://www.csicop.org/list/

 PERMISSION IS GRANTED TO REPRINT OR REPOST ON THE WEB.
 WE ENCOURAGE TRANSLATION INTO OTHER LANGUAGES.

 PLEASE FORWARD TO YOUR FRIENDS.
 Send comments, media inquiries and news to:
 SINISBET@aol.com (716-636-1425 x219)

 CSICOP publishes the bimonthly SKEPTICAL INQUIRER, The Magazine for Science
and Reason.  The May/June 1999 issue features two articles on Bigfoot, and a
special section on the urban legends of organ snatching and snuff films.

 To subscribe at the $17.95 introductory Internet price, go to:
 http://www.csicop.org/si/subscribe/

 In this week's SIDIGEST SPECIAL: STAR WARS



 --OPINION: The Phantom Menace of Superstition in Film and Television

 *For more on "The Medieval Mind of George Lucas", go to Salon magazine at:
 
        http://www.salon.com/people/bc/1999/05/18/lucas/index.html



 THE PHANTOM MENACE OF SUPERSTITION IN FILM AND TELEVISION

 Matt Nisbet

 This is an essay about George Lucas and Steven Speilberg, Dark Lords of the
Sith.  The modern mythology created by the two filmmakers through films like
Star Wars, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, and E.T., has been celebrated
in the world media, but there is a Dark Side to the stories weaved by
America's foremost storytellers.  In short, Darth Lucas and Darth Speilberg
have created a legacy of films that attack reason, sell transcendental
fantasies, and undermine appreciation for science and progress.

 The case against Lucas and Speilberg has its origins a long time ago, in a
galaxy far, far away, where science and reason were celebrated.  It was the
age of the Enlightenment, a period that dominated Western culture during the
eighteenth century.  The era praised and expanded the achievements of Bacon,
Voltaire, Locke, and Newton while offering rationalism and science as the
best means for navigating, shaping, and understanding the world.  The great
achievements of science and technology we enjoy today owe much to the
traditions of the Enlightenment.

 The Romantic period was an intellectual rebellion that followed the
Enlightenment, stretching through the nineteenth to the beginning of the
twentieth century.  If the Enlightenment was an age dominated by scientists
and philosophers, than the Romantic period was the era of poets and artists.
 Romantic poets Blake, Wordsworth, and Coleridge disdained science, and in
their writing admired transcendental fantasies, emotion, agrarianism over
industry, and intuition over reason.

 By the twentieth-century, the traditions of both Romanticism and the
Enlightenment co-existed, but in irreconcilable conflict.  In 1959,  English
scientist and novelist C.P. Snow described the development as "The Two
Cultures."  One culture was comprised of the arts and humanities while the
other was comprised of science.  Between the two, Snow described " a gulf of
mutual incomprehension."

 The most dominant art form of the century, however, came about through a
combination of the Two Cultures.  The scientific invention of cinema and
television merged music, drama, visual setting, and narrative into an assault
on the senses and emotions of mass audiences worldwide. Culture and society
were forever changed.

 As communication researcher George Gerbner points out, the privilege of
storytelling in our society has been given to the producers, writers,
directors, and owners of film and television. The role of storytelling is
critical to a culture as it shapes our conceptions of self and society, and
influences our aspirations, behavior, and knowledge.

 During the Enlightenment, storytelling was dominated by the philosophes,
journalistic popularizers and great public orators who propagandized the
achievements of science and reason.  The result was an educated public that
championed rationalism and personal freedom.

 One of history's great ironies then is that although science created the
medium, the dominant storytellers in film and television champion in their
stories the medieval, the romantic, the transcendental, and the
anti-scientific.  The influence of the electronic media has contributed to a
society of twenty-first century science and technology that is plagued by
twelfth century superstition and belief.  According to Gallup polls, more
than half of Americans believe in the Devil, a third believe that houses can
be haunted, three quarters believe in angels, and nearly a third believe in
crashed alien saucers.

 Enter filmmakers Lucas and Speilberg.  Lucas captivated a generation of
Americans with the release of Star Wars followed by Empire Strikes Back, and
Return of the Jedi.  This summer hordes journey to view Phantom Menace, the
prequel to the Star Wars trilogy dubbed "the most anticipated film of the
century."  Steven Speilberg emerged in the seventies with Jaws, followed by
Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Poltergeist, E.T., and his most
successful box office hit of the nineties, Jurassic Park.  Combined, Lucas
and Speilberg have grossed billions worldwide with billions more in
merchandising sales.  They have inspired nearly three decades of blockbuster
extravaganza films that play on Lucas/Speilberg themes, along with television
series, novels, fan clubs, conventions, web sites, action figures, college
courses, wall paper, bed spreads, lunch boxes, and children's swimming pools.

 Take a moment to deconstruct Lucas with me. The linkages to the Romantic
period in Star Wars are obvious.  The Force is a pantheistic energy that
offers a dark and light path. Certain individuals are born with a special
connection to the Force, and are trained as Jedi Knights.  Through monkish
servitude and meditation, the superhero Jedi Knights are able to harness the
Force, and develop supernatural powers that include incredible reflexes, mind
control, telekinesis, remote viewing, and divination.  After their death,
Jedi Knights appear as smiling and wise guardian angels to aid the
protagonists. In order to "use the force," Jedi Knights remind others to
"trust your feelings," "let yourself go," and "use your intuition." In an
interview in TIME magazine, Lucas described the phrase "use the force" as a
leap of faith.  "There are mysteries and powers larger than we are," George
Lucas tells Bill Moyers. "And you have to trust your feelings in order to
access them."

 Though the subjects of Speilberg's films are varied, the Romantic themes
remain consistent. Jaws is premised on the irrational fear of a sea monster
that lurks concealed in the great unknown.  In Close Encounters of the Third
Kind, aliens are angels basked in brilliant white light that shepherd humans
to the heavens.  In E.T., the alien is a fallen angel seeking to return home.
 Ancient buried spirits of Native Americans are awakened in Poltergeist when
suburban sprawl threatens to dig up their sacred graves to make way for
swimming pools and basements.  In Jurassic Park, greedy scientists recreate
dinosaurs, but are unable to control them, thereby unleashing chaos and
disaster.

 Speilberg is far from through with the paranormal.  He recently announced
plans for a twenty-hour Sci Fi Channel series on alien abduction.  Not to be
outdone, fellow filmmaker Francis Ford Coppola is producing a sixty-six part
series featuring alien invasion and the prophecies of Nostradamus.

 Americans under the age of thirty have been the subjects of a great
experiment.  Transcendental and supernatural stories have always been part of
world culture, but never before in history has a generation been inundated by
mythology through such a powerful medium as film and television. If we use
this technology to tell our children medieval stories, what can we expect in
return?

 Writing in his 1996 book Demon Haunted World: Science As a Candle in the
Dark, astronomer Carl Sagan noticed that even the bright students of Cornell
University suffer from gaping holes in knowledge.  "I can find in my
undergraduate classes," he wrote, "bright students who do not know that the
stars rise and set at night, or even that the Sun is a star."  Sagan's
undergraduates are indicative of a general public whose scientific literacy
is at an alarming five percent. The prolific author and scientist also
offered an indictment of the media. "An extraterrestrial being newly arrived
on Earth, scrutinizing what we mainly present to our children in television,
radio, movies, newspapers, magazines, the comics, and many books-might easily
conclude that we are intent on teaching them murder, rape, cruelty,
superstition, credulity, and consumerism."

 In an era of unprecedented technological sophistication, younger generations
risk growing up the most technologically proficient generation in history,
but also the most scientifically illiterate.  Fed a steady diet of fantasy,
it appears only a matter of time before technology turns into magic for a
population characterized by fundamental misunderstandings of science.  As we
face increasingly complex policy decisions on issues that include the
environment, the economy, education, and medicine, our democracy will be
tested if we continue to live in fantasy, and lack an appreciation for
science and reason.


 -30-

 Matt Nisbet is Public Relations Director for Skeptical Inquirer, The
Magazine for Science and Reason and Coordinator for the Council for Media
Integrity.   www.csicop.org/cmi
------- End of Forwarded Message