Author: Ophelia Benson

  • Bleaching away the autism

    Annals of horror. “Recovering” children from autism by dosing them with MMS, “Miracle Mineral Solution” aka bleach.

    Basically, MMS is 28% sodium chlorite in distilled water. In essence, MMS is equivalent to industrial strength bleach. Proponents recommend diluting MMS in either water or a food acid, such as lemon juice, which results in the formation of chlorine dioxide.

    MMS is what got Rhys Morgan started on his anti-quackery career, when he encountered people online recommending it for Crohn’s disease.

    David Gorski has learned that now people are recommending it for autism.

    Autism One, whose organizers claim that their conference is “all about the science,” featured a talk by a woman whose preferred form of therapy, besides hyperbaric oxygen, is to subject autistic children to industrial bleach in the deluded belief that she can “recover” autism with it. Rivera runs a clinic in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico that she calls AutismO2 Clinica Hyperbarica. If her website is any indication, Rivera gives autistic children MMS by mouth and by enema. (Yes, she subjects autistic children to bleach enemas.)

    Does it make them be not autistic? No.

    This is also the second time that I’ve seen autism quacks subjecting autistic children to what is, in essence, potentially nasty industrial chemicals. A couple of years ago, disgraced chemistry professor and mercury warrior Boyd Haley pumped autistic children full of an industrial chelator, claiming it was a “supplement.” Ultimately, Haley drew the attention of the FDA, which shut him down. Now, we’re seeing quacks douse autistic children in bleach, pump their colons full of it, and feed it to them until they start to have fevers and diarrhea, believing that the diarrhea and fever are evidence that the bleach is working to reverse autism. The diarrhea and fever might well be working to do something, but reversing autism is not part of that something. Making children sick is.

    Horror.

    Thanks to Rhys for alerting me to this new annal.

  • David Gorski on “Miracle Mineral Solution” and autism

    It’s bleach. People give it to children with autism. Bleach.

  • One of these things is not like the other

    Is a no harassment policy like the Taliban?

    Let’s start a little farther back. Is feminism like Nazism?

    No, feminism is not like Nazism.

    Nazism tried to kill all the Jews in Europe. Feminism does not try to kill all the Jews in Europe.

    Nazism killed gays, gypsies, people with disabilities, and political enemies.

    Feminism doesn’t kill gays, gypsies, people with disabilities, or political enemies.

    Nazism rounded up its enemies and put them in camps.

    Feminism does not round up its enemies and put them in camps.

    Feminism is not like Nazism. Rush Limbaugh is wrong.

    Is a no harassment policy like the Taliban?

    No, a no harassment policy is not like the Taliban.

    The Taliban forcibly keeps girls out of school.

    A no harassment policy does not forcibly keep girls out of school.

    The Taliban blows up schools that teach girls.

    A no harassment policy does not blow up schools that teach girls.

    The Taliban throws acid in the faces of girls going to school. It shoots to death people it suspects of having sex outside marriage. It stones women to death. It beats women for not wearing a burqa, or for showing a little wrist or hair while wearing a burqa. It forbids women to work, get an education, drive, get medical treatment.

    A no harassment policy does none of those things.

    A no harassment policy is not like the Taliban.

  • I get options

    I just took my temporary housemate, a black Lab named Cooper, to the beach for a good vigorous outing with the chuckit and tennis ball. We came back. I sat down at the desk, and he asked to go outside. I let him outside. He went around to the garden and then came back and sat outside the sliding screen door staring at me and making a low growly noise in his throat, as he does when he wants me to grasp that he wants something.

    I got up to open the sliding screen door so that he could come in. He didn’t come in, but stood still staring up at me, with his roadkill toy* at his feet. I was supposed to join him in the garden for a game of ‘throw the toy.’ I pointed out that we had just played and I wasn’t going to play any more right now, and closed the screen door.

    I sat down at the desk, he went around to the garden and then came back and sat outside the screen door staring at me and making a low growly noise in his throat. I got up, saying ‘Cooper you’re being a pest.’ I opened the sliding screen door so that he could come in. He didn’t come in, but stood still staring up at me, with his tennis ball at his feet. ‘You don’t want to play with roadkill; you want to play with ball?’

    Cooper in outside the door mode

    A flat plush squirrel with Xs for eyes and a tire tread across its middle

    For Cooper as a puppy –

  • Which political ideals and which customs?

    I’m reading Martha Nussbaum’s new book The New Religious Intolerance, and finding it as exasperating as I expected.

    For one thing, there’s what (or who) is not in the index. She puts much of the focus on Islam and what she uncritically calls “Islamophobia,” but who is missing from the index? Maryam. Irshad Manji. Kenan Malik. Taslima. Tarek Fatah. Deeyah.

    She argues that “European nations tend to conceive of nationhood and national belonging in ethno-religious and cultural-linguistic terms” [p 94] and that that makes it hard for immigrants to be seen as belonging.

    As we’ve seen, there is another option, realized in a wide range of nations around the world: to define national belonging in terms of political ideals, in which immigrants can fully share, despite not sharing the ethnicity, religion, or customs of the majority. [p 95]

    That seems to me to be bordering on self-contradictory, unless you add further stipulations about religion and customs (which she does not do).

    Look: some tenets of most religions are the opposite of the kinds of political ideals she has in mind (she didn’t suggest Nazi Germany as one example of that kind of nation, nor apartheid South Africa – she did suggest post-apartheid South Africa as one). She means political ideals like equality and universal rights. Well most religions include tenets that rule out equality and universal rights. So do many “customs.” How can it, then, be true that [all] immigrants can [without further ado] fully share in those ideals despite not sharing the customs of the majority?

    It’s not that easy. She makes it sound easy, and it’s not easy. It’s not easy and it doesn’t always happen. The demographics of US immigration are handing the Catholic church ever more power; I’m not comfortable saying that, but it’s true. The “good” news is that home-grown religion is reactionary and sexist too, so what the hell, but that doesn’t mean Nussbaum should skate over the tensions quite so fast.

    More later.

  • Atheism and Human Rights Abuses in Africa

    Today around the globe too many atrocities are being committed with impunity in the name of god, allah and other constructs which have, over the ages, been identified or associated with the so-called supreme being. The dream of a secular peaceful world where people of all faiths and none can coexist in harmony continues to elude many across the region. Millions of people – theists and atheists – continue to suffer and are abused due to superstition, religious fundamentalism and supernaturalism. In this piece I will focus on two of such areas.
    The rights of non-believers. I have heard it proclaimed at the UN that the rights of women are human rights. I have also heard it proclaimed that the rights of gay people are human rights. These proclamations changed the way human rights are perceived around the globe. Personally I have yet to hear it proclaimed at the UN, or at our regional and national human rights bodies, that the rights of atheists, agnostics and freethinkers are human rights. I do not want these rights to be implied or assumed as is currently the case in most countries. I want them to be expressly declared as universal human rights.
    In spite of the progress the world has made in terms of upholding human rights and liberties, and getting states to honour their obligations under various instruments and mechanisms, equal rights have yet to be extended to religious non-believers in most parts of the world particularly in Africa.
    I still do not know any African country where one can openly and truly say that the government recognizes the full human rights of non-believers including their right to life, freedom of expression, freedom from torture, inhumane or degrading treatment, freedom of association, freedom of conscience etc. There is no country in the region with an effective mechanism to protect the rights of those who profess no religion, those who change their religion, or those who are critical of religious and theistic ideas. Religious non-believers are treated as if they are not human beings, as if they do not exist or do not have the right to exist.
    There are no guarantees for the rights and dignity of infidels, apostates and blasphemers, as freethinkers are often called. Many governments have caved in to pressures from religious fanatics, from theocrats, jihadists and terrorists, so nonbelievers are denied their basic rights with impunity, sometimes as a matter of state policy or for the sake of ‘public order’, peace or ‘morality’. The situation is worse in countries that have an official religion or official religions. Unbelievers are targets of forced conversion, oppression, discrimination, persecution and murder, sometimes by states. Many governments pay lip service to freedom of religion or belief. Freedom of religion is often understood as freedom to profess a religion – the religion sanctioned by the state, by one’s family or community – not freedom to change one’s religion or freedom not to profess any religion at all as contained in article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
    So most people who do not profess any religion or belief in god are compelled to live or remain in the closets or to pretend to be religious, paying lip service to religions they do not truly profess, to religious dogmas that mean nothing to them or to a god they do not actually believe in. Non-believers live in constant fear for their lives because going open with one’s religious unbelief often comes at a price, at a very heavy price. In Africa, by going open and public as a freethinker, one risks being ostracized by families and communities, being persecuted by state and non-state agents, being expelled from schools. As an atheist, one can be sacked from jobs, domestically abused, disqualified from posts, demonized by faith groups, taunted as a person without morality or portrayed as the enemy of the state or society. Atheism is a freethinking position that still dares not mention its name in most parts of the continent.
    In many African states, apostasy and blasphemy are crimes punishable by death and imprisonment. Expressions of freethinkers are often taken to be blasphemies. Hence freethinkers are legally denied freedom of expression. Freethinkers are treated as criminals, not citizens; as undeserving of human rights protection.
    But we all know that the term ‘non-believer’ does not always refer to someone who does not profess a religion or who does not believe in god. In multi-religious societies, the term ‘non-believers’ often refers to those who profess other religions, or to religious minorities.
    So, protecting the rights of non-believers is critical to upholding the equal rights of all individuals to freedom of conscience. I urge anyone to show me a country where the rights of non-believers are not protected and I will show you another country where the right to freedom of religion or belief, or the rights of religious minorities, in fact, universal human rights are not respected.
    So now we need to get the world to break the ‘criminal’ silence over the violations of human rights of non-believers. At the UN, Commonwealth, AU etc, we must strive to get states to recognize and to take measures to protect the rights of atheists, freethinkers, skeptics, religious dissenters and infidels. We must ensure that states that violate the human rights of non-believers or governments that fail to protect the rights of non-believers are held accountable and responsible.
    Also we need to focus on human rights abuses that are perpetrated against people of faith in the name of religion by state and non state agents.
    As I noted above, it is not only non theists or non religious believers whose rights are violated in the name of religion, so many theists and religious believers across the world suffer abuses in the name of their own faith or the faith of others. Unfortunately, these abuses are so many and have been going on for so long. Due to fear of offending religious sensibilities, many states and human rights institutions have failed to rise up to the challenge of addressing these abuses. Many people are afraid of shining the light on faith related human rights violations because of fear of being attacked or killed by fanatics.
    Highlighting the abuses is often deemed to be offensive or a form of provocation and our governments do not want to offend or be seen to be offending the religious ‘sensibilities’ of fanatics even when if it means condoning grave human rights abuses, hence these violations persist.
    What we have in many parts of Africa and the world is a situation where the victims, not the perpetrators, are blamed for the abuses or a situation where harmful traditional practices are encouraged or condoned because doing otherwise would offend the religious or cultural sentiments of the people. Religious doctrines, traditions and sensibilities are cited to justify child marriage, the death penalty, corporal punishment, female genital mutilation, the denial of reproductive rights, homophobia, witch hunt, the subordination of women, etc. Even where there are enabling laws, governments lack the political will to enforce these laws.
     We must not only stand up for the rights of atheists and freethinkers around the globe but also the human rights of people of all faiths who are oppressed in the name of religion or god. For there are many, far too many, around the world who are victims of religious tyranny, violence and exploitation. They could be writers or artists whose works offend fanatics. They could be women, children and elderly persons who are persecuted in the name of witchcraft in Africa. They could be muslim women who are subordinated in the name of sharia. They could be christians and muslims who are shot and killed by extremist groups in Nigeria.
    They could also be albinos, people with hunch back and other disabled persons being hunted down and killed for ritual purposes in many parts of Africa.
    In conclusion, I know there are risks involved in speaking out against faith based human rights abuses. But I think we run a greater risk as a society, country and continent by not doing so. We are worse off by keeping silence in the face of religious tyranny and oppression. So, let’s muster courage and serve as the voice of hope, freedom and change. Let’s strive to herald this new dawn for Africa and for humanity. Let’s work to realize a new civilization and enlightenment with a global dimension.
  • Sara Azmeh Rasmussen

    Hey how about this – Melody tweeted a link to a story about two women honored in Norway

     for their outspokenness across cultural lines. Both have immigrant backgrounds, from Algeria and Syria…

    Oh! thought I, I might know one of them, and hastily skimmed down the page, and sure enough!

    Sara Azmeh Rasmussen, who immigrated to Norway from Syria in 1995, has been carrying on her efforts to promote tolerance, improve the rights of persons regardless of sexual identity and criticize Islam over what she views as its lack of tolerance and repression of women and homosexuals. Rasmussen has been a frequent participant in demonstrations and commentator in the media, not least in newspaper Aftenposten.

    I know her. When I was in Stockholm I went to a meeting of a group of atheist-humanist feminists who focus on women’s rights: Christer Sturmark, Sara Larsson, and Ulrika Magnusson of Fritanke, who published Hatar Gud Kvinnor? and were my hosts, and Lena Andersson, Eduardo Grutzky, a couple of other people whose names I have somewhere but don’t remember at the moment – and Sara Azmeh Rasmussen! She’s very, very cool. Everybody there was.

    That’s seriously exciting.

  • So you’re saying gay people are only born of other gay people?

    Have you seen Stacy Pritchard talking to Anderson Cooper?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUXDKnL4xGE

    Of course that was taken out of con – I mean yes, he said that, but of course he would never want that to be done. Of course people are going to take it and make it their own way and what they want to. But – ” more cheerfully – “I agree with what the sermon was, and what it was about.”

    Orilly, says Anderson: he said the thing about keeping gays behind electric fences until they die out; how do you know he didn’t mean what he said?

    She didn’t; it just seemed like the right thing to say to a fancy pants silver foxy smooth-talking hoity toity New York City libbrul tv guy…but not for long; she soon lapsed into frankness and agreed that that was exactly what should happen to gay people, because it is wrong.

    Shudder. She scares me.

    H/t Mano Singham.

     

     

  • The “ignore and it will go away” myth

    Indigo Jo takes a look at that myth via the report on sexual harassment in London.

    The second [striking thing in a discussion on BBC London] was the suggestion (which I recall Simister saying the police had given to her after her assault) that women should “just ignore it”, which prompted me to write an email to the show (which Feltz read out), because the police have said the same thing to people suffering from the anti-social behaviour of local yobs and to people with disabilities who are being harassed by yobs or haters. It’s a fallacy particularly beloved of teachers as well, who will say the same to a child who complains of being teased in the playground (even if the “teasing” is not just verbal or if it is stopping them going about their business): “ignore it and it will go away”. The problem is that it just is not true: if you ignore a harasser who is trying to get a reaction, they will escalate their behaviour to physical intrusions and assaults, as has been noted to happen in the playground and the classroom and in cases of sexual harassment, until they get what they want. The only way of dealing with them is for them to be fought off, or for someone in authority to come between the persecutor and the victim.

    It’s one of those platitudes like “the best antidote to bad ideas is better ideas.” That sounds good, but it’s not always true, and it’s obviously not always true. If that were true, bad ideas would never prevail, because better ideas would just always automatically trump them. Life isn’t like that. Same with the dreamily mistaken idea that if you ignore something nasty, it will [invariably] go away. Try that on a predator, for example.

    The “ignore it and it goes away” myth is an example of the “just world” fallacy, in which people defend their belief in a “just world” by pretending that someone who is continually suffering must deserve it somehow. It also enables people to get out of taking responsibility for wrong they see happening. In this case, there is an “obvious answer” to the problem which the victim can easily make work for him- or herself by just ignoring the harassment for long enough, or to put it another way, just putting up with it. It gives the teacher or police officer an easy way of responding to a situation rather than tackle the difficult job of making the harassment stop, as is their duty, and blame the victim (and brand them a nuisance) if the behaviour continues.

    The “just world” fallacy – I hadn’t heard that before, and it’s spot-on.

     Of course, the response may be appropriate when the complaint is just about a little bit of teasing, but there is a line between that and persistent harassment or physical assault of any kind…

    Precisely. A little bit of teasing is not persistent harassment. Persistent harassment is not a little bit of teasing. It’s good to get these things clear.

  • Life on the streets

    Surprise shock revelation: there is sexual harassment in London.

    The harrassment ranges from wolf-whistling and lewd comments to physical groping and sexual assault.

    Campaigners say that reported cases represent “the tip of the iceberg” and that authorities can no longer afford to ignore the issue.

    Research released today by the End Violence Against Women (EVAW) coalition shows 41 per cent of women under the age of 34 have been on the receiving end of sexual harassment in the street.

    Blacklist! Witch hunt!! Innocent until proven guilty!!! Feminazis!!!!

    Plus, you’re ugly!!!!!

    The true extent of sexual harassment across Britain is difficult to judge. Campaigners say there is an acute shortage of academic studies looking into women’s experiences. But anecdotal evidence and the few studies that exist suggest unwanted sexual attention is frighteningly common. Fiona Elvines, from the Rape Crisis Centre, south London, is one of the few academics researching public sexual harassment for a PhD. “The issue has been trivialised for so long that is hasn’t been seen as a valid subject to study,” she said. “But the effect it has is enormous, from everyday decisions women have to make to avoid such harassment – like pretending to talk on your phone – to longer term effects on how they view their bodies.”

    Whiners! Victims!! Waaaaaaa!!! Sluts!!!! Bitches!!!!!

    Sexual harassment victims speak out

    Lisa, Bath

    “It seems quite minor, but for me it really summed up how some men are such knobs sometimes. I was walking across [town]. A guy shouted ‘hello’ at me, I ignored him and carried on walking. He then shouted ‘what, not good enough for you? It really angered me that he turned his douchebaggery round on me. Suddenly, in his mind, he’s not an ass for shouting at me, it’s that I’m a bitch because I ignored him. So typical.”

    Smile, you bitch!

  • Sharia for Timbuktu

    More bad news – two warring rebel groups in northern Mali have decided to resolve their differences by…turning northern Mali into an Islamist state. Yeah, that’s the way to do it!

    Two rebel groups that seized northern Mali two months ago have agreed to merge and turn their territory into an Islamist state, both sides say.

    The Tuareg MNLA, a secular rebel group, and the Islamist group Ansar Dine signed the deal in the town of Gao, spokespeople said.

    Ansar Dine, which has ties to al-Qaeda, has already begun to impose Sharia, or Islamic law, in towns such as Timbuktu.

    Creep creep creep, Islamism expands its stranglehold week by week.

     

  • Catcalls, whistles, groping: sexual harassment in London

    Nearly half of young women in London were sexually harassed in public last year, with many forced to endure unwanted male attention on buses and trains, a new study shows.

  • Publishing the norms

    For a comic interlude (with uncomic implications and underpinnings, but never mind that for now) – the Vatican goes public with its formerly sekrit and super-technical Roolz for authenticating authentic sightings (or apparitions, as it helpfully calls them) of “the Virgin” Mary.

    The “Norms Regarding the Manner of Proceeding in the Discernment of Presumed Apparitions or Revelations” have been in use since 1978, but until now had been available only in Latin, never officially published and only circulated among bishops and specialists.

    Ya specialists, who have had like years and years of specialist training in how to tell the real apparitions from the fake ones.

    The Vatican document has now been translated into English and other languages to aid bishops in the “difficult task of discerning presumed apparitions, revelations, messages or … extraordinary phenomena of presumed supernatural origin,” Cardinal William Levada, the head of the Vatican doctrinal office, wrote in a companion letter last December that was published only recently on the Vatican website.

    Kind of mean not to help the poor bishops until now. Poor guys, sitting in their studies, taking a break from excommunicating nuns who fail to prevent abortions to save the life of the pregnant woman and telling secular legislators what to do  – taking a break, I say, to sift through the stack of tortillas and pieces of toast and open jars of Marmite on their desks to figure out which twin has the Toni, and not having a Vatican document in their own language to assist. It’s sad.

    The norms mandate that the local bishop must conduct a “serious investigation” to ascertain, with “at least great probability,” whether the Marian apparition effectively took place.

    The rules also require an evaluation of the “personal qualities” of the alleged seer, including his or her “psychological equilibrium,” “rectitude of moral life” and “docility towards Ecclesiastical Authority.” The contents of the “revelation” must be “immune” from theological error, and the apparition must bear “abundant… spiritual fruit,” such as conversions.

    The contents of the revelation must be immune from theological error? How do they arrange for that to be the case? Show your work.

  • Mali Tuareg and Islamist rebels agree on Islamist state

    The Islamist group Ansar Dine, which has ties to al-Qaeda, has already begun to impose Sharia in towns such as Timbuktu.

  • Vatican publishes rules for apparitions of Mary

    Because there are totally rules about it.

  • I’m suddenly a fan of Lady Gaga

    Lady Gaga has canceled a concert in Indonesia after religious bullies (Islamist chapter) threatened violence against her.

     Islamic hardliners rally against the Lady Gaga concert in Jakarta. 25 May

    Attaboiz – you do that – get together in a big bunch and threaten a woman for performing, and express a wish that she be tortured for eternity. Sucks to be you.

    Police in Indonesia had refused to issue a permit for the US pop star after Islamic groups objected to her show, claiming it was too vulgar.

    The hardline Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) had threatened to try to stop Lady Gaga getting off the plane.

    Islamists 1, secularism 0.

    The Islamist FPI had threatened violence if the concert went ahead, calling Lady Gaga a “devil’s messenger” who wears only a “bra and [underpants]“.

    Habib Salim Alatas, the group’s FPI Jakarta chairman, said the cancellation was “good news” for Indonesia’s Muslims.

    “FPI is grateful that she has decided not to come. Indonesians will be protected from sin brought about by this Mother Monster, the destroyer of morals,” he told AFP news agency.

    He added: “Lady Gaga fans, stop complaining. Repent and stop worshipping the devil. Do you want your lives taken away by God as infidels?”

    Because he knows that’s going to happen.  Habib Salim Alatas, stop complaining. Repent and stop worshipping a bigoted puritanical misogynist shit. Do you want your life taken away by god as a bullying asshole?

    Indonesia’s conservative Religious Affairs Minister, Suryadharma Ali, also welcomed the cancellation.

    “I strongly believe this cancellation will benefit the country,” he said.

    “Indonesians need entertainment and art which have moral values.”

    This is not the first time that Lady Gaga has faced objections during her Asian tour.

    Her concert in South Korea in April was made an adults-only event following protests from Christian groups.

    Protests also took place in the Philippines, with Christian groups accusing her of being blasphemous.

    Comrades!

  • Lady Gaga concert canceled after Islamist protests

    The Islamist FPI had threatened violence if the concert went ahead, calling Lady Gaga a “devil’s messenger”.

  • “Take Back the Flour” banned from Rothamsted site

    St Albans District Council’s executive leader said it had taken action to stop a demonstration on Rothamsted Research’s land that might “put historic crop trials at risk”.

  • ‘Cause baby look at you now

    Justin gets trash-talk too; he gets a Christian guy calling his infant daughter “ugly.”

    Isn’t that nice? Isn’t that just how people ought to be to each other?

    Fortunately she could pose for a dictionary definition of “adorable,” but the ugliness of saying things like that remains unchanged.

    I don’t get this at all. I’m probably sheltered, or clueless, or something, but I don’t. I say very harsh things about the pope, and various atheist-bashers, and theocrats – but even then I don’t taunt them for being ugly or fat or old or bald or short or any other physical thing. I don’t. And I don’t understand the mentality of people who do – apart from psychopaths, that is. I don’t understand non-psychopathic people who (by definition) have some conscience and some empathy and still talk that kind of shit about people.

    Ah well. You’re a beautiful baby, Zoe Griffith.

  • Note for anyone thinking of going to Rothamsted tomorrow

    Guest post via Bernard Hurley

    I have just received the following email from London Skeptics in the Pub. It might be of interest to anyone thinking of going to Rothamsted tomorrow:

    ====================================================

    Dear Bernard Hurley

    Just a quick note for folks who are thinking of, or are attending the counter protest against the needless vandalism of publicly funded research being conducted at Rothamsted Park tomorrow in Harpenden.

    Mark Henderson has put his chapter on GM in The Geek Manifesto online, if you’d like some further reading: http://geekmanifesto.wordpress.com/2012/05/24/the-geek-manifesto-on-gm-crops/

    It looks like it’ll be a nice sunny day for a protest, or failing that, a picnic.

    Please remember that this is a PEACEFUL protest, and Rothamsted would prefer no protests – for or against ( http://www.senseaboutscience.org/pages/rothamsted-letter-to-signatories.html ) – taking place tomorrow.

    Jules, from Geek in the Gambia has written a blogpost on directions and guidlines for the counter-protest and directions to the site here: http://geekinthegambia.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/guidelines-for-protest-in-rothamsted.html

    Transport: National Rail from Bedford to Brighton (there are some engineering works from certain stations on Sunday, so please check before travelling). For those of you in London, trains depart from London St Pancras. Trains are every half-hour and take about 30mins to get there. Return ticket will cost £12.70 Timetable: http://ojp.nationalrail.co.uk/service/timesandfares/London/HPD/tomorrow/0930/dep/tomorrow/1130/dep

    If you’re wondering who to look out/gravitate towards, The Pod Delusion will be there; So look out for James O’Malley and Liz Lutgendorff. Dr Evan Harris will be there, along with a band of trusty scientists.

    As always, take some sensible shoes, a hat, some sunblock, drink plenty of liquids and remember to dispose of your litter sensibly. We’re no ruffians.

    Best,

    Sid P.S. I’ll be at Conway Hall for CaSE Director Imran Khan’s lecture, but hope to join you all after we’re done. Details of future meetings can be found on http://london.skepticsinthepub.org

    You can also find us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/London-United-Kingdom/London-Skeptics-in-the-Pub/13256221934

    And follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/SITP