Customer Reviews

Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud

5 star:		(44)
4 star:		(25)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(14)

 

 

We live in the most technologically advanced country in the world, yet our citizens seem to be extremely scientifically illiterate. Does it seem possible that congress would hold a hearing on why a gentleman was refused a patent on a machine that seemingly has a higher energy output than input, which violates the first law of thermodynamics? I have often laughed at the Indiana legislature that many, many years ago passed a law fixing pi at 3.14. But here is Trent Lott and his pompous brethren now holding a hearing on a machine that the physicists of the nation have said is a fraud. As is typical at a congressional hearing the egocentric politicians made speeches instead of asking questions. Then Senator Glenn asked a few pertinent questions that caused the committee to finally sniff disaster. The matter was dropped. Later there was another hearing on the cold fusion matter in which congress was again embarrassed by its total scientific ignorance. How did our fine representatives react to being publicly humiliated by these science debacles? Well, in 1995 they abolished the Office of Technology Assessment whose purpose was to advise congress on scientific and technical issues. Why seek advice when you are already infallible?

This book provides the reader with a variety of scientific frauds that have hoodwinked not only congress, but also the nation. Sadly the media often further the cause of misinformation by presenting untruths as truths. They find it much more entertaining to present pseudo-science in a manner that suggests it might all be for real. Mr. Park also discusses how the media helped create the flurry over Electromagnetic Force (EMF) which proved to be total ado over nothing (a good book to read on how the media creates phony epidemics and trends is Culture of Fear by Barry Glassner). The author also decries the efforts of New Agers to misappropriate the terms of physics to espouse their theories (read also an interesting chapter on junk science in Wendy Kaminer's book Sleeping With Extraterrestrials.)

This is an excellent read for those interested in real science, even though the scientific stupidities presented will have you pulling your hair and rending your garments. The problem with the book is that it is much too short. Park just gets going, and whoops its page 213 and time to stop. This topic could easily fill a volume twice as thick. Let's hope there is a sequel.

Oh... one other matter. Another reviewer is distressed at author Park's dismissal of ESP when there is "a good body of hard evidence to support it". Park dismisses it because, as he states, the National Academy of Sciences undertook a complete review of all of the literature on the subject going back 130 years, and could find no scientific justification for its existence in the research that was studied. Park goes on to discuss why some people hang on desperately to theories despite continual research failures.

For years, Robert Park, a professor of physics at the University of Maryland, has written "What's New," a short weekly update on science issues for the American Physical Society. Park's quirky, pithy bulletins end with the phrase, "Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the APS, but they should be." Now he has written at length on some of the topics his column has touched on. His opinions may not be yours, but once you read _Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud_, they should be.

For Park has taken what ought to be the uncontroversial step of simply insisting that basic science is true, and that those who profit because they can supposedly violate scientific laws are fools or frauds, and the rest of us ought not to be fooled or defrauded. He keeps things basic; he never enters, say, the controversy of creation "science" versus evolution. His realm is physics. For instance, Park spends many pages describing perpetual motion machines. A machine that makes more energy than it takes in (or runs on the same amount of energy it makes) would violate basic thermodynamic laws, which Park carefully and lucidly explains. We may wish for the waterwheel that pumps enough water up to fall over the wheel again and thus keep going forever, but it will never happen.

Park covers plenty of other areas: homeopathy, magnet therapy, cold fusion, Star Wars / SDI, human versus robot exploration of space, therapeutic touch, extrasensory perception, alien abductions, Roswell, and so on. In each case, he simply aims cold, hard facts and physical laws at targets that fall under his good sense. "Most people who are drawn to voodoo science simply long for a world in which things are some other way than the way they are." With good humor and clear writing, Park has done us the favor of reminding us that the world is the way it is, that science shows the way it is, and that wishful thinking just won't do.

Bob Park's excellent book takes up company with recent works in the same vein by Dawkins, Gould, Sagan, Kaminer, and others. It is good reading and entertaining though you may find your blood pressure soaring at times. It seems idiocy knows no bounds.

Parks takes a slightly different approach from most of the recent books challenging fringe science and discusses at length how our elected representatives and the U.S. government has been seduced into being advocates of voodoo science. Parks played a role as the information officer for the American Physical Society which has given him an inside view of how this has come about.

The book also takes a look at our space program and Parks slices and dices manned missions versus robotic ones. The robotic ones come out on top without much of a struggle. Though I was aware that there was differences of opinion on this matter, I was not aware of the magnitude of the problem and I found this information rather startling and something not covered in any of the other similar books in the field. I don't think Parks is trying to equate manned flight with voodoo science but the discussion of the topic was something I found valuable nonetheless.

If you have read the other recent books in this field you may have had a deja vu all over again feeling as they each tended to cover pretty much the same ground. Parks refreshingly expands the playing field and really does provide some new approaches and new information.

Bob Park, a distinguished physicist, has done the general public as well as the science, media, and investor communities a great service by his in-depth analysis of the growing boom in pseudoscience, crank science, and activities which could go as far as fraud. Park's impeccable scientific credentials and detailed examinations of the worst cases of what he calls voodoo science should help the media spot fringe science and refuse to give it ink or air-time; a thorough read of the book might save investors from losing their shirts in hare-brained schemes.

And even the casual reader will learn the difference between real science and science on the fringe. The book and the science within are extremely accessible, even to the non-scientist.

Besides, the book is an amusing read.

by Tom Napier

About a year ago Eric Krieg and I had toyed with writing the definitive book on free energy. Well, Robert Park, physics professor and past president of the American Physical Society, has done a good part of our work for us by writing "Voodoo Science." This must rate as this year's most eagerly awaited skeptical book. Although the free energy hucksters are mercilessly skewered in this book, Park goes beyond them to explore what happens to innovators, be they back-yard inventors or credentialled scientists, when they discover that their pet concept is just not working out. Many admit failure, often being applauded by their peers for their integrity. However, Park has written his book about those who take the wrong turn and "descend from foolishness into fraud." Voodoo science is Park's term which encompasses the range from honestly believed but dubious science, through outright pseudoscience to deliberate fraud. He uses cold fusion as a case study of an idea which its originators continued to promote long after it had been scientifically discredited. Pons and Fleischmann had the opportunity to retract their claims and to move on with their professional careers scarred but intact. They muffed it. Homeopathy and the promotion of quack medicines get their own chapter. The promoters of "Vitamin O" allege that you can increase your oxygen intake if you consume their expensive salt water. Park's comment, "An attempt to extract the oxygen you need from water is called 'drowning.'" He also reveals that therapeutic magnets are so constructed that their magnetic field doesn't even penetrate the material they are wrapped in much less have any effect on your body. Park devotes a chapter to the idea that microwaves and the fields from power lines cause cancer and concludes that it is totally fallacious. A 25 year, 25 billion dollar, scare turned out to have been based on bad statistics and the determination of a few individuals to keep themselves in lucrative positions and in the public eye. More trustworthy research has demonstrated the falsity of the scare-mongers' position. A subsidiary theme of "Voodoo Science" is the extent to which the media spread misinformation. They broadcast what they think is human-interest entertainment but it appears to the viewers as solid information. Much of Joe Newman's early fame arose from a 1984 CBS program in which he played the home-spun hero who had confounded the scientific experts. A follow-up program in 1987 repeated the same story without a hint that Newman's claims had meantime been shown to be nonsense. One point in the saga of Joe Newman's Energy Machine which had always puzzled me was how in 1984 a special master appointed by the patent office had found in favor of an excess energy output. Park reveals that at the Congressional hearing into Newman's claims in 1989 it emerged that the special master had formerly been one of Newman's patent attorneys. As Park says, Congress may not know much about the conservation of energy but they can recognize a conflict of interest from miles away. I particularly liked the tale of the Fisher engine which failed, allegedly, because the room temperature rose above the critical point of the liquid carbon dioxide driving it. Fisher claimed that if the engine had been started earlier it would have kept the room cool. Well that would be a Second Law violation and as Park points out, echoing Eric Krieg, Lee has broken a lot of laws but he hasn't broken the laws of thermodynamics. Another of Park's minor themes is Pascal's wager, the argument that, if the potential gain is great enough, then any investment is justified. Power companies are sinking research money into Randall Mills' company, BlackLight Power, anticipating that a new power industry just might grow from his theory that hydrogen atoms can be induced to fall into a state below the ground state. There is no physical evidence for this oxymoronic concept. Missing from Pascal's wager is any distinction between the long-shot which might just pay off and an outcome whose probability is zero. As popularizers of science generally must, Park oversimplifies. He misquotes the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics, at least as they were first formulated. The First Law is not a general statement that energy is conserved, it relates only to the conversion of mechanical energy into heat energy. The Second Law does not say that "friction is inevitable." It states that no machine can generate mechanical energy from heat energy simply by making something colder. If anything it is the First Law which implies that friction, the conversion of useful mechanical energy into less useful heat energy, is inevitable. And if I see that folksy parody of the two laws, "You can't win and you can't even break even," in print once more I think I'll scream. In his chapter on space exploration, Park comes down solidly on the side of those who believe that space should be explored by robot probes while we sit comfortably at home. He claims that the space station is scientifically worthless. This is a view with which I would concur, with one proviso, it can serve as a dress rehearsal for a manned mission to Mars. This is a mission which Park discounts as too dangerous for the possible scientific return, citing the radiation danger posed by solar storms. Exploration has always been a dangerous pursuit and yet it has always paid off in the long run. How many mariners died in Atlantic storms before America was a going concern? A largely self-sustaining colony on Mars could be established in much less time than the three centuries it took the US to reach the same point. Another sample of Park's own voodoo science is to cite the cost of putting mass into Earth orbit to demonstrate that even if there were gold in orbit it wouldn't pay to fetch it. This argument has two flaws. It assumes that access to orbit will continue to require Shuttle launches. Interstate commerce wouldn't be practical either if everything had to be trucked in the trunk of a Ferrari. Too, the energy required to de-orbit a payload is a fraction of that required to boost it into orbit in the first place. A ton of gold could be returned to Earth with the same small retro-rockets as brought back the Mercury capsules. Far from seeking gold, future prospectors may be making their fortunes by supplying Earth's steel mills with nickel-iron asteroids. Men in space have already showed their value as fixers of damaged spacecraft and as makers of immediate decisions on the Moon. The last thing the human race must do is to sit on the Earth until we rot, or are killed off. However these are minor flaws in a tremendously worth-while book. If you haven't already, I recommend that you invest in Park's incisive analysis of life on the fringes of science.

Robert Park's Voodoo Science is an excellent expose of science gone wrong. Park defines three main problems: pathological science, when scientists deliberately continue down a mistaken path in spite of the evidence; junk science, claims made to convince laymen based not on probability or evidence, but on possibility only; and pseudoscience, beliefs without scientific foundation at all, but supported by scientific jargon.

But don't for a moment think that this is an attack on science itself--far from it. Park is a professor of Physics at the University of Maryland, and he is impassioned about the sciences and scientific discovery. Voodoo Science is an attempt to make science better, by calling on all concerned to exercise critical thinking over blind acceptance and to recognize the difference between entertainment, belief and truth.

He takes on fellow scientists, backyard inventors, new age gurus and healers, and especially (and deservedly) the media. I was incensed reading his accounts of the irresponsible reporting from the national media of many of these claims. But herein lies the problem--for those with a fairly strong general scientific background, Park's writing is easy to follow and his arguments compelling. But the media doesn't report for those people, primarily, and they apparently don't see their responsibility as education. I can't help feeling that most people reading this book will already agree with Park's point of view, although they may not have applied his reasoning to each of the cases he examines. I doubt that those of a less skeptical mind will be convinced, and certainly some of the other reviews bear out my expectations.

Park doesn't swing wildly, either; he restricts his aim to only a few targets. Most of his time is spent on perpetual motion machines and cold fusion; homeopathy also earns his scorn. Unfortunately, if you believe in the memory of water, and use liquid crystal displays as an example, you're not going to be convinced by the director of the Washington office of the American Physical Society, even if he knows what he's talking about and you don't. Park cites the X-File's Fox Mulder's office sign "I want to believe" and so obviously he is aware of the problem.

Less thoroughly covered is the category of pseudoscience, and I'm lead to wonder whether Park steered clear of this category out of fear of alienating his readers through confronting their religious beliefs. For example, creationism is totally ignored in favor of discussing the scare of high-power lines. But the examples of voodoo science are innumerable, and criticizing Park for leaving certain ones out is to miss the point. Park shows us a way to think, but as a true educator he leaves the thinking to us. We will all be better if we are less gullible.

The book clearly deserves more than five stars for its effective, level-headed exposure of unscientific ideas that don't hold water (like cold fusion, the Roswell incident as a UFO invasion, homeopathy, and perpetual motion machines).

Science is now evolving more rapidly than ever before. Some estimate that the total level of scientific knowledge doubles every few years. If you are like me, you cannot hope to keep up. And politicians, television, friends, and news stories are always touting new and intriguing ideas. What really is going on? What should we pay attention to?

Professor Park has a distinguished background in physics. He directs the Washington office of the American Physical Society, and is a former chairman of the Physics department at the University of Maryland. In his work with the society, he is often called upon by the press to comment about claims made by others. This experience allowed him to develop the information in this book.

If you are like me, you also have heard of or read about many of the claims discussed in the book. But, like me, you probably never heard how it all ended up. Whatever happened to cold fusion, for example?

The book looks at all kinds of badly done science, beginning with amateurs who don't know enough to understand what they are doing. Such amateurs often run the risk of becoming fraudulent if they fail to respond candidly to questions from scientists about their work.

The good news is that society seems to be getting better at challenging the ideas that are wrong. For example, the Supreme Court decided a case, Daubert, that now requires federal judges to get independent scientists to look at claims before allowing a jury to consider a point of view espoused by some "paid" experts. Congress seems to be getting better about asking relevant questions, rather than just supporting any crackpot who shows up with a wild story about perpetual motion machines.

In other cases of voodoo science, the people doing the work just haven't been cautious enough. For example, much of the ESP research done was flawed by a design that permitted those doing the research to throw out the results of any people they suspected of deliberately guessing wrong. As you can imagine, these probably included people who got mostly wrong answers! That certainly skewed the results.

The worst offenders in perpetuating incorrect beliefs about science seem to be television (especially CBS and ABC) and top secret status for information about the government. Apparently, some people in the networks believe that crackpot ideas should be covered as "entertainment" rather than as "knowledge" or "science." So even if they know the story is probably wrong, the reporter often leaves the impression that there may be something to the claim. Shame on them!

Government keeps things as top secret that would become top embarrassments if known. As a result, our confidence in the government is eroded.

Some of the other areas uncovered in the book include Joe Newman's Energy Machine, Star Wars (SDI) technology advanced by Edward Teller, the International Space Station, a manned mission to Mars, silicon gel breast implants, vitamin O, meditation as a solution for violent crime, Dr. Deepak Chopra's invocation of quantum effects from the mind on matter, power lines as a source of disease, healing auras, and James Patterson's metal beads to generate energy.

While I agreed with all of the comments the book made, there are places where other perspectives could change your mind on the issue. For example, manned space exploration is very expensive and dangerous. Essentially, everything can be done by robots faster, safer, and cheaper. Dr. Park concludes that it makes no sense to do such exploration. I disagree. I do agree that the objectives of the manned programs need to be much more intelligently formulated. I suspect that the main advantages from manned space flight will turn out to be in developing improved leadership, innovation, and management practices. If those rewards are great enough, and I think they could be, the expense may well be worth it. But our decision should be more informed and purposeful than it has been in the past about these areas.

I hope that this wonderful book will also become available as an on-going television program, newsletter, or Web site. We need more information like this in order to be thoughtful citizens, consumers, and family members.

After you have read this book, I suggest you think about some likely off-the-wall scientific claim you have heard. Then do some research to see whether that claim is likely to be valid or not, by reading what others already know about the subject. See if you can overcome some of these misconceptions on your own. I suspect that a good place to start would be with ideas for how to add to the energy supply of the United States.

Have fun eliminating false beliefs, wherever you find them!

Profrssor Park has written a clear and scathing book about fraud in the name of science. Whether the fraud is perpetrated by those who are pure of heart yet devoid of knowledge or those who are driven by greed and uncaring of knowledge. This is, quite simply a most necessary book in the present society, as we are bombarded by outrageous and dubious claims from celebrity hucksters. This extends from the government to those perveyor of quality widgets at the home shopping channels.

Professor Park's examples, from SDI proponents to UFO worshippers to technophobes to my favorite, perpetual motion machine enthousiasts truly covers a wide swath of people. Being an electrical engineer, I have had the distinct displeasure of dealing with two issues in particular, one is the perpetual motion machine and the other is the power line controversy. We all knew that the claims are bunk, but it was hard to convince the layman. Hence the opportunity for people to mislead themselves or to be mislead by others.

This book clears up a lot of the arguments presented by the voodoo scientists. The moment, as described by Professor Park, that these hucksters are revealed are the best moments of the reading. It redeems our faith in science and technology as well as strikes a blow for competent scientists everywhere.

His description of Edward Teller and SDI as well as the Space station fiasco very much reaffirms all that we have suspected and further reveals the lack of technical depth that is plaguing the leadership of our governemnt. His description of the expert panels mandated by law to review technical claims actually gave me a sense of relief, that yes there are redeemable qulaities for the legal profession.

Overall, this was a great book to read and it was all very enjoyable, especially if you have followed some of these cases closely.

An excellent book! Park addresses all sorts of nonsense, from cold fusion to perpetual motion machines; from ESP to homeopathy; from quantum quackery to therapeutic touch. He shows how these fail to live up to the requirements of science and, even worse, how their proponents fail to live up to their duties as scientists. Whether it's due to foolishness or fraud (or the former leading to the latter), it's just bad science. Park does a superb job of explaining why.

Voodoo Science is the best skeptical book I have read yet. Organizing itself loosely around the theory that well-intentioned people can go from being wrong about matters of science to investing so much in their wrong theory that they will eventually prefer to turn their backs on science rather than admit a mistake, the book, subtitled "The Road from Foolishness to Fraud," uses cold fusion and perpetual motion as its leading examples but also takes on a laundry list of odd or (in its author's opinion) unwarranted beliefs from UFOs and the French "sniffer plane" to global warning and the Star Wars missile defense shield. Author Robert Park, a physicist by training, explains his views with laudable brevity and the greatest clarity and common sense I have seen in a book of this type. His writing style is also funny, and it contains just the right amount of sarcasm. If you make too much fun of peoples' cherished paranormal beliefs, you just insult them; if you take them too seriously, they find a way to think you believe them. Park walks the fine line between in a way I find the most effective yet. (Of course, as a fellow-traveler of Park's, I admit I do not know whether my belief that Park's way is best is borne out by its effect on an unconvinced audience.)

Besides being short, cogent, and respectful enough for a wide audience, Voodoo Science was valuable to a committed skeptic like me for its wealth of understandable explanations for physical phenomena I had grasped imperfectly or had been unable to explain simply before I read it. Park's arguments are so good I even agreed with him where I disagreed with him - his chapter on the absurd cost/benefit ratio of the manned space program is right on target, but I'll take humans in space on any terms I can get them, while Park apparently thinks we should quit trying to get people out of the gravity well.

If I were king of the world, the first thing I'd do after getting Simon and Garfunkel back together would be to get a copy of Voodoo Science to every household with a TV set.