"Water memory" - a myth that wouldn't die

Holy pseudoscience, Batman!

Homeopathy websites (too many to list; I found the material for this post here) are all gleefully abuzz today** with the following factoid - New Research From Aerospace Institute of the University of Stuttgart Scientifically Proves Water Memory and Homeopathy.

Going bananas over RotPotA...

Caveat Lector: This post may contain what one might consider spoilers. Therefore, if you haven't already watched the 2011 movie "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" and are planning to do so, please cease and desist from reading any further. This post contains some of my thoughts and impressions on the said movie.


In no uncertain terms, I quite liked this movie, which has been imagined as a 'prequel' to the long running "Planet of the Apes" franchise (originally made in 1968 by Franklin Schaffner, featuring Charlton Heston; reimagined by Tim Burton in his 2001 multi-award-nominated feature). The 2011 Rise of the Planet of the Apes, under Rupert Wyatt's competent direction, featured some spectacular CGI special effects, and a fabulous performance by Andy Serkis (of the LOTR Gollum fame) as Caesar, the chimp with genetically enhanced intelligence; I don't know how Andy did it, but he has copied the simian movements almost in toto, making for a highly believable Caesar through a performance capture CGI technique (where the motion capture session includes face and fingers in order to capture and reproduce subtle expressions). The storyline was taut and exciting, without a dull moment, and contained some emotionally-charged sequences which were brilliantly executed. James Franco did a decent enough job as the geneticist Will Rodman, and the mandatory feel-good factor (of course!) was provided by India's own Freida Pinto as the San Francisco primatologist, Caroline Alanha. All in all, an eminently watchable movie.


Image Credit: Weta Digital/20th Century Fox, via NY Times Movie Review Slide show

Human Echolocation: Ed Yong's Article on a PLoS One Study

Ed Yong (@edyong209 on Twitter) is a fabulous British science writer and blogger, who won in 2010 the prestigious National Academies Communication Awards, jointly presented by the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. His writing has been featured in New Scientist, the Times, WIRED, the Guardian, Nature amongst other places, and he currently blogs ("Not Exactly Rocket Science") at the Discover Magazine website.

Most of my readers here, I expect, already read and follow him. If you haven't had the pleasure, don't delay. Ed is a fantastic writer, very readable, and he presents the awe-inspiring and glorious world of science in a lucid enjoyable manner. I follow his blog religiously.

In a recent post, Ed presents a fascinating study - published in PLoS One - about how some blind human beings are able to use the technique of Echolocation; they make clicking noises with their tongue (or with an object like a cane) and - from the rebounding echoes - they are able to estimate not only the presence of objects in their paths, but also the distance, size, shape and texture of those objects. Much in the same way as dolphins and bats do, these people can "see" their world in sound. Daredevil, anyone?

Fresh Saga of Apologists for Religion Falling Over Backwards

The Religious and the Faithful across the world are quite diligent in trying to spread their beliefs around. Clearly, their intellectual laziness (inherent in their stance embracing 'goddidit' as a single unifying explanation of all natural phenomena) does not dull their proselytizing fervor. As a result, every so often, studies spring up purporting to show how deep and inherent religious belief is to the human nature. Whichever way these studies are constructed, the conclusions - always delivered with a hint of smugness - often seem to be the same:
(1) Religion and religious belief are deep-rooted and universal,
(2) They ain't goin' away nowhere,
(3) Atheists, just deal with it.

A new study from Oxford University under the aegis of the Cognition, Religion and Theology Project (funded by none other than the John Templeton Foundation - of course!), brings forth more of the same.

Of Correlations, Causations and the Divide Therein

An important maxim used in science, or more precisely, in the scientific study of relationships between/amongst variables, is that 'Correlation does not imply Causation'. Indeed, until and unless such causality has been verifiably established through independent means, any attempt to indicate that it does falls under the logical fallacy of questionable cause, cum hoc, ergo propter hoc (Latin for "with this, therefore because of this").

It is important for all to understand this concept - those who are engaged in scientific studies, as well as those who read about and interpret such studies.