What Can/Should the JREF Do?

[Uncayimmy]

The thread asking what the JREF does has been dormant for a while now (hopefully we'll get some updates on progress soon). I think perhaps asking what the JREF can and should do would make an interesting topic. I can think of two things I'd like to see.

First, I'd like to see local chapters of the JREF. There are www.Meetup.com groups around the country for skeptics, but I think it would be great if there were also local JREF groups (some might be willing to convert). There could be a charter laying out the mission. The chapter president could be someone vetted by the JREF. I, for one, would be willing to submit credentials and undergo a phone interview. I'd gladly pay for a criminal background check.

This would greatly extend the outreach of the JREF. It would also be great if local news organizations could tap the group for comments on issues like UFOs, bigfoot, ghosts, psychics and so forth. Local TV news is much more likely to present "the other side" if they have a good visual to go along with it. Local newspapers would probably be more likely to publish letters to the editor or op-ed pieces from the President of the Phoenix Chapter of the James Randi Educational Foundation rather than yer UncaYimmy.

The second thing I would like to see would be educational materials we can use in the schools. I, for one, would be willing to approach a school and offer to teach a lesson about astrology or whatever. I would have a lot more credibility if the lesson plan came directly from the JREF. If I were associated with the local JREF chapter, that would be even better. Of course, teachers could use the materials themselves if they wanted. I think a teacher is much more likely to teach a class on cold reading if the materials were already in hand.

Anybody have any other ideas? I say for this thread we try not to get too bogged down in the details. I'd rather look at the big picture of things that might be useful, then try to figure out exactly how to make them work.

 

[NoZed Avenger]

That's not bad as a starting point for discussion. Off the top of my head, I like it.

 

[Doubt]

Not crazy about the idea of formally connected local groups. Could cause some political issues if local groups do things not liked by the rest of the organization. How to deal with such potential issues would require a lot of thinking. What is the perceived benefit of a formal organization over the existing informal relationships?

The educational idea is a good one. The BA himself mentioned that sort of thing shortly after taking the job as JREF Pres. I do not know if there has been any progress on the idea.

 

[athon]

The second thing I would like to see would be educational materials we can use in the schools. I, for one, would be willing to approach a school and offer to teach a lesson about astrology or whatever. I would have a lot more credibility if the lesson plan came directly from the JREF. If I were associated with the local JREF chapter, that would be even better. Of course, teachers could use the materials themselves if they wanted. I think a teacher is much more likely to teach a class on cold reading if the materials were already in hand.

I'm all for educational materials, if they are done well. I don't state that lightly, either.

'Education' is a term most people think they understand well, and a good percentage of people believe they are experts in. If you have electrical problems, you get in an electrician. If you go to caught, you consult with a lawyer. Got a rash? You see a doctor about recommended treatments. Yet time and time again I speak with people who believe they have the answers to how to improve education or do it justice.

Skepticism seems to attract such people, who often loudly proclaim their views on how education should be done (which rarely matches reality, or is supported by any research at all). I've delivered a few talks on this matter and still get a fair few people willing to advise me on how resources should be delivered (I have a folder at home of skeptical handouts and materials which I've collected, often from people giving them to me with the hope that I'll see to them being used in a resource program.)

I've worked for some time on educational resource programs, and can tell you that the difference between those that work and those that fail miserably is pretty small, often coming down to points that initially seemed trivial.

I'm not wishing to rain on anyone's parade, and personally would love to see more critical thinking resources being offered. Yet given I've waved that flag for some time now, with the JREF being relatively uninterested in considering what defines the 'E' between the R and the F, I'm not holding my breath any more.

Athon

 

[athon]

Not crazy about the idea of formally connected local groups. Could cause some political issues if local groups do things not liked by the rest of the organization. How to deal with such potential issues would require a lot of thinking. What is the perceived benefit of a formal organization over the existing informal relationships?

The educational idea is a good one. The BA himself mentioned that sort of thing shortly after taking the job as JREF Pres. I do not know if there has been any progress on the idea.

CTEG formed following the TAM before last on the back of discussions on what can be done to address skepticism and critical thinking in education. Phil was alerted to its formation. I'm not aware of any further correspondence, however.

To be perfectly blunt, in my experience skeptic groups have a tentative relationship with education circles. I've chatted personally with Randi twice about this - once about four years ago where he seemed hesitant to have much to do with school systems (I got the vague feeling at the time that it opened up too much of a litigation risk, however I didn't inquire further on that and might have misunderstood), and once during a radio interview I conducted, where I couldn't seem to nail down a firm answer on the practicalities of educational involvement.

I get the sense even here in Australia that activist skepticism is more concerned with education as a broad concept, rather than being informed about education as it is socially practiced currently. It feels as if skepticism is 'sexier' than pedagogy and critical thinking, and education can be accomplished by preaching rhetoric rather than understanding how people learn.

Athon

 

[Uncayimmy]

Not crazy about the idea of formally connected local groups. Could cause some political issues if local groups do things not liked by the rest of the organization. How to deal with such potential issues would require a lot of thinking. What is the perceived benefit of a formal organization over the existing informal relationships?

What are the currently existing informal relationships? Can you give some examples?

As for the benefits:

Pooled Resources - It doesn't appear to me that the various local skeptic groups talk to each other that much. The forums here could be leveraged to give a central location for the exchange of ideas on how to run a successful group. I'm thinking about agendas for meetings, topics to discuss, local projects, outreach, and building relationships with the local media and school systems.

Credibility - Issues near and dear to the hearts of skeptics periodically arise in the local media. If the news organizations are interested in an opposing viewpoint on the local UFO sighting, they are much more likely to take comments from a local organization affiliated with a national organization that is a properly constituted 501(c) with an internationally known figurehead than some group that only exists as an entry on www.Meetup.com. If the local media is not interested, then the group would be much more likely to get them to be interested if they had some backing. As I pointed out, a letter to the editor is more likely to get published in the author has some sort of reputation, even if that reputation is based on an affiliation.

Outreach - This ties into the credibility point in that people are more likely to join a group that seems to have their act together rather than a group that just gets together once a month to eat pizza and watch the latest episode of Penn and Teller's "********!" TV show.

Cooperative Events - Suppose there were 75 local chapters scattered across the USA. We could have a special event where on the same day each group debunks a the same claim like dowsing, for example. If one group does it, it's not likely to get any attention from the press. If 75 groups across the country do it at exactly 12:34 PM on 11-10-09, then there's a much better chance of getting press coverage locally and possibly nationally.

Letter Writing Campaigns - This is a cooperative event of sorts and could conceivably done without local chapters, but it could be done better with them. When there's a national issue like ID in schools, local chapters could organize letter writing campaigns or petitions to be sent to newspapers or the relevant organizations.

Million Dollar Challenge - The MDC currently requires an academic affidavit. That could be amended so that a demonstration in front of a local chapter of a skeptics group would also suffice. A group could even offer to work with a claimant to develop a protocol at one of the meetings, which has got to be more efficient than what goes on in the MDC forum right now.

As for the politics issue, that's just part of life. I don't mean to dismiss your concern, but it's inevitable that there may be some conflict. Steps can be taken to reduce that conflict. Right now there is no conflict because the JREF isn't actually doing anything useful at the local level. Everything comes at a cost. If churches can do it, why not the JREF?

In fact, churches are an excellent example of how to get a message out. The reason that the Mormon church is so successful is that the put boots on the ground. They know that the message needs to be delivered on the personal level. I'm not saying the JREF should send out people on bicycles, but the best way to get international growth will be at the local level.

 

[Doubt]

What are the currently existing informal relationships? Can you give some examples?

The one that comes to mind right away would be Geekgodess. She is the originator of the Huston skeptics in the pub group. Also know to contribute to swift. And their are many other connections to other regional skeptics groups.

sniping details to avoid making this too long:
As for the benefits:

Pooled Resources -

There is a lot of communication between groups. This message board being one source. TAM being another. And then there are people who travel a lot. Although there may be room for some formal work there. CFI does a lot of that sort of thing with their regional organizations already.

Credibility -

That one would still be an issue either way. Your average meat puppet on the local news has no idea what the JREF is so the affiliation would be meaningless.

Outreach -

Much the same problem as above.

Cooperative Events -

Now there is an idea I like. But that can also be done with loose affiliations.

Letter Writing Campaigns -

A great idea 30 years ago. Letter writing is dead. Although the current lack of use might make it more useful now if people were sufficiently motivated.

Million Dollar Challenge -

That would work against the reason for having the affidavits. They changed the rules to use affidavits to cut down on frivolous entries by those who will only waste the JREF's time. I am speaking from personal experience there since I worked on the protocol negotiations with two would be claimants. One was mentally ill and the other engaged in selective delusions that would not even convince the Weekly World News that he has something worth consideration. (This was when Kramer was running the Challenge.)

As for the politics issue, that's just part of life. I don't mean to dismiss your concern, but it's inevitable that there may be some conflict. Steps can be taken to reduce that conflict. Right now there is no conflict because the JREF isn't actually doing anything useful at the local level. Everything comes at a cost. If churches can do it, why not the JREF?

I would not want to see the JREF do anything that a church does. But that may just be me.

Edited to Add:

I don't want to be too negative. Even with the informal connections that exist, a lot more could be done to make connections and provide support. Who and how that could be done is likely to be an issue.

 

[Uncayimmy]

The one that comes to mind right away would be Geekgodess. She is the originator of the Huston skeptics in the pub group. Also know to contribute to swift. And their are many other connections to other regional skeptics groups.

I've been posting here for nine months and lurking even longer. I think I've seen Geekgodess around, but I had no idea about any affiliations nor have I seen any mention of any other affiliations, however loose they may be. If there are loose affiliations, and I have no reason to doubt you, it's a resource that is not being tapped. I'd like to start a group here in Phoenix, but there's nothing available to help me get started.

There is a lot of communication between groups. This message board being one source. TAM being another. And then there are people who travel a lot. Although there may be room for some formal work there. CFI does a lot of that sort of thing with their regional organizations already.

Where is this communication? I don't recall seeing CFI mentioned much, so I did a Google search on the forums. Sure enough, there's some activity, but not a lot. Again, I think this is a resource that could be tapped, regardless of how it's done. I think on that we agree.

That one would still be an issue either way. Your average meat puppet on the local news has no idea what the JREF is so the affiliation would be meaningless.

I disagree. Google News shows 89 hits for "James Randi" in 2009. There were 166 hits in 2008 including publications like the LA Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, and Boston Globe. His name has 408,000 hits on Google. There are 1,400 videos on YouTube associated with his name. He has been on TV around the world. He's had several books published.

I'm not saying he's Tom Cruise, but there's plenty there to be leveraged. It's a matter of getting the word out to the right people. To be quite honest, I think the JREF's Press page would have to be beefed up, but I think there's enough there to prop up any local chapter above the level of just another yahoo off the street. And with meatpuppets, that's all you need.

When it comes to starting local group, it's a lot easier to do it if you have your ducks in a row. By that I mean what if there was a website called Phoenix.Randi.org already in place? It could have links all of the resources the JREF already has such as the encyclopedia and past SWIFT articles. A group charter could already be in place. Suggestions for activities and agendas could be made available for any group that wanted to use them. Maybe the JREF could kick in a few bucks as seed money. An announcement could be made in SWIFT about the group. A new forum for all affiliated groups could be added to the existing forums.

That gives any new group a much better chance of getting started compared to some knucklehead forming yet another Meetup group that is going to die out after six months. In principle it's not much different than the advantages a franchise has over a mom and pop startup.

A great idea 30 years ago. Letter writing is dead. Although the current lack of use might make it more useful now if people were sufficiently motivated.

To be clear, when I say letter writing, I am not restricting it to snail mail, though as you point out, it might be effective due to novelty. I'm talking about e-mails and blog comments as well. Local newscasts sometimes talk about the amount of comments they received about stuff they broadcast, which rarely happened 30 years ago.

That would work against the reason for having the affidavits. They changed the rules to use affidavits to cut down on frivolous entries by those who will only waste the JREF's time. I am speaking from personal experience there since I worked on the protocol negotiations with two would be claimants. One was mentally ill and the other engaged in selective delusions that would not even convince the Weekly World News that he has something worth consideration. (This was when Kramer was running the Challenge.)

I disagree. No group would be obligated to deal with any claimant just as no university is obligated to deal with a claimant. If someone wanted to approach a group and demonstrate their ability, an affidavit from them would suffice. If they wanted to engage the claimant further, they could. Or not.

On a regular basis people engage potential claimants here on the forums. How much faster would things proceed if we could say, "Hey, why don't you contact the Phoenix chapter? Maybe they will sit down with you one evening and help you." This, too, could be done with loose affiliations. Right now the main website doesn't even provide a list of unaffiliated skeptical organizations.

I would not want to see the JREF do anything that a church does. But that may just be me.

Churches have websites, discussion forums and blogs. These are just tools. But if it makes you feel better, look at the success of www.MoveOn.org. Granted, they are political in nature, but when they have a hot issue, they actually get people to host events in their homes.

I don't want to be too negative. Even with the informal connections that exist, a lot more could be done to make connections and provide support. Who and how that could be done is likely to be an issue.

You asked for the potential benefits, I gave them. There are details to be worked out, of course, but it requires a positive attitude about finding solutions. It looks like the Australian Skeptics has affiliated but independent groups. Maybe that would be a good model. Lots of organizations have local chapters. It can be done.

 

[carlitos]

I'm bumping this, but I suspect that the location of the thread is the reason for its lack of activity. Perhaps it could be moved to General Skepticism or some place more active?

 

[alleracsum]

The IIG-West has a brand-new affiliate program under the CFI banner. IIG-DC is now up and running, IIG-Atlanta is forming and there is interest in Chicago, Northern California and elsewhere. In DC and Atlanta there was already a strong base of skeptics anxious to move more aggressively into outreach and investigations. What's more, CFI will be bank-rolling a 50K challenge that every IIG affiliate will be able to offer.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/dc/events/igg_seminar_-_scientific_paranormal_investigations/

 

[Susan Gerbic]

The IIG-West has a brand-new affiliate program under the CFI banner. IIG-DC is now up and running, IIG-Atlanta is forming and there is interest in Chicago, Northern California and elsewhere. In DC and Atlanta there was already a strong base of skeptics anxious to move more aggressively into outreach and investigations. What's more, CFI will be bank-rolling a 50K challenge that every IIG affiliate will be able to offer.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/dc/e...nvestigations/

Monterey County Skeptics is hoping to become IIG Monterey County in a few months.

 

[Foolmewunz]

I would not want to see the JREF do anything that a church does. But that may just be me.

The broad brush being trotted out, again?

You mean like hold potluck suppers? Feed the homeless? Have fund-raisers to build a new kindergarten? Speak their minds on political issues? Run summer camps to give kids something to do? Organize people who believe in things they believe in but are too timid to speak up?

Those aren't necessarily bad things.

"Church" doesn't really have to be a dirty word. I'm quite sure from his posts that Unca Yimmy wasn't proposing we dress in cassocks and burn incense, but using churches as an analogy to a group holding common interests getting themselves a little better organized. The churches that we're too familiar with have done too good a job of it to my atheist tastes, but I won't dismiss everything they do as being bad just because some church does it. I hear Pol Pot liked sushi. Should I swear off of one of my favorite foods because an evil sack of fecal matter also likes it?

 

[Uncayimmy]

I appreciate the sentiment, Foolmewunz, but I already contracted with a Project Runway runner-up to design our new cassocks.

I happened to be flipping around the tube the other night and caught one of the more prominent TV preachers (a female, can't remember her name). Her talk was really quite inspiring, rational, and well-considered. She was talking about the younger generation of pastors and youth ministers and what they bring to the table. She talked about embracing their perspectives and styles because they were simply different approaches to the same core set of values. Her flaw, of course, was her belief in religion, but if you accept that premise, everything else was brilliant.

The JREF's stated goal is, "We promote and teach critical thinking skills in relation to pseudoscientific, supernatural or paranormal powers, and provide reliable data to researchers, media, and the public." Their mission by definition involves outreach, and churches are excellent examples in that regard.

 

[Doubt]

The broad brush being trotted out, again?

Yes, you are correct. Better to state that I would not want to see the JREF act like a church. And by that I mean become an organization driven by dogma and ritual.

 

[JJM 777]

Randi has written a lot and made many videos, but not all of it is freely available online. One day he will kick the bucket, how widely his legacy will reach into the world depends upon whether he releases everything to public domain while he is alive or not. Inheriters of copyrights tend to just make the most money out of it.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I happened to be flipping around the tube the other night and caught one of the more prominent TV preachers (a female, can't remember her name).

Could have been Joyce Meyers.

Her talk was really quite inspiring, rational, and well-considered.

Oh.....never mind.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Could have been Joyce Meyers.

Oh.....never mind.

LOL! Yes, it was Joyce Meyers (thanks). I normally don't catch more than a couple of seconds (literally) by accident. However, in this case she wasn't talking about anything religious in particular. By that I mean for each brief reference to a religious goal you could have substituted any organization's goals. She was making excellent points about group dynamics and how organizations need to adapt. The key is to focus on the mission first and foremost and evaluate people and ideas based on how it furthers the mission. Times change, and organizations who don't embrace that change are doomed.

BTW, I think the reason I listed for a few minutes is because when I flipped by everybody in the audience was laughing. I wanted to see what was so funny, and as a result I caught a few minutes of an excellent public speaker convincing a mostly older audience that the younger generation shares the same goals but with different approaches.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

LOL! Yes, it was Joyce Meyers (thanks). I normally don't catch more than a couple of seconds (literally) by accident. However, in this case she wasn't talking about anything religious in particular. By that I mean for each brief reference to a religious goal you could have substituted any organization's goals. She was making excellent points about group dynamics and how organizations need to adapt. The key is to focus on the mission first and foremost and evaluate people and ideas based on how it furthers the mission. Times change, and organizations who don't embrace that change are doomed.

BTW, I think the reason I listed for a few minutes is because when I flipped by everybody in the audience was laughing. I wanted to see what was so funny, and as a result I caught a few minutes of an excellent public speaker convincing a mostly older audience that the younger generation shares the same goals but with different approaches.

How could you stand to look at her that long? And that voice? Yikes!

 

[ufology]

Well if all goes well here I wouldn't mind networking closer with the JREF. I know that many skeptics consider UFOs to be too woo-woo to take seriously, but I believe this can change in a positive way, and that with the right kind of presentation and networking it could be mutually beneficial.

j.r.

 

[AmyStrange]

.
The JREF should be impartial skeptics, which includes being skeptical of ALL skeptics,
.
Dave and Caty
.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

.
The JREF should be impartial skeptics, which includes being skeptical of ALL skeptics,
.
Dave and Caty
.

I disagree.

 

[carlitos]

.
I agree,
.
carlito and sons
.

 

[jiggeryqua]

Me and my imaginary friend are undecided on the issue.

 

[RandFan]

.
The JREF should be impartial skeptics, which includes being skeptical of ALL skeptics,
.
Dave and Caty
.

I disagree.

.
I agree,
.
carlito and sons
.

I agree and disagree. And I think this clearly demonstrates the power of moderate thinking. Skeptics should always be skeptical except in those cases when they shouldn't. And that is something we should never be skeptical about. That and the infield fly rule.