Hosted by Linton Weeks
Washington Post Staff Writer

Thank you for visiting "The Navigator – Live." Today's chat ended at 3 p.m. EDT.

Chip Denman, a founder of the National Capital Area Skeptics.

Our guest today was Chip Denman, a founder of the National Capital Area Skeptics. Chip, 44, is a statistician at the University of Maryland and teaches an undergraduate honors course in "Science and Pseudoscience". "As far back as I can remember, I've had an interest in spooky topics," says Chip, "and how easily very smart people could be fooled by very simple tricks." He answered questions about apparitions, UFOs, communicating with the dead or other paranormal phenomena.

"The Navigator – Live" appears each Thursday from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. Eastern time. It's a live, moderated discussion offering washingtonpost.com users the chance to talk directly to intriguing and sometimes unusual guests who are shaping the digital world. "The Navigator" appears in The Washington Post print edition every Thursday. You can read past columns by following this link.

Linton Weeks: Chip, welcome. I know it's launch time, but we're glad to have you here to dispel all our silly notions and chase away our worst fears.

Linton Weeks: First tell us where you were born, where you grew up and how you became a card-carrying skeptic.

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: I was born in Memphis, TN, and grew up mostly around there until moving to NJ in high school. I was a math and science geek at Cornell, where I gained an appreciation for a cold winter. I came to Maryland for grad school, never expecting to still be haunting these halls.

As long as I can remember, I've loved science. I remember forcing my mom to read to me from an astronomy book from the school library before I could quite read it on my own. My dad has an engineering background. So I've had a good exposure to reality all my life. But I also had a fascination for the weird and spooky. I watched the Twilight Zone and scared myself silly at monster movies and then started reading the "strange but true" kinda stories long before I figured out that just calling it "true" didn't make it so.

And somewhere early on, I also got hooked on magic tricks. At first science and magic seemed like completely different worlds. But eventually it clicked that magic tricks were all based on science - not just physics and chemistry and such, but also psychology. And, wow, it was cool to realize that simple methods could fool very, very smart people-especially when the trick seemed to be about ESP or psychic powers.

One particular thing really opened my eyes. One night in grad school -while avoiding the math book I was supposed to be reading-I found a book in the library by a magician who came right out and challenged the psychics head on. That was James "The Amazing" Randi's book on the superstar spoonbender Uri Geller. For the first time, I was reading something that didn't get wishy-washy. Randi went step by step explaining why we shouldn't buy this "psychic" stuff. It was really refreshing!

Later I discovered magazines like Skeptical Inquirer, and eventually in 1987 my wife Grace and I joined up with a few other folks -including professional magician Jamy Ian Swiss-and started the National Capital Area Skeptics.

Linton Weeks: I love the name of your group, National Capital Area Skeptics. You must have a gazillion members. Washington's overrun with skeptics. How many belong to the NCAS? Do you meet? Do you have a newsletter?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: I'm glad you like the name-it often gets a laugh. I usually have to explain that we are skeptics, not cynics. We have about 200 members who get our monthly mailings and our web site is www.ncas.org. We host a free public lecture series with topics ranging from ghost folklore to the latest scientific debates on alternative medicine.

The next program will be the Hon. Durke G. Thompson, Associate Judge, Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Maryland talking about historical and modern standards used in federal and state courts for the admissibility of scientific evidence. He will cover landmark cases like the Scopes "Monkey Trial", DNA evidence, and "emerging science" on "multiple chemical sensitivity". It's Saturday, Nov. 14, 2 p.m., at the Bethesda branch of the Montgomery County Library, 7400 Arlington Road. It's free, and all are

Washington, DC: Hi Chip. It's Barry from U. of Iowa, visiting at N.S.F. in Arlington this year. I just wanted to urge you to provide information about joining NCAS. Sorry I haven't been able to attend the meetings, but I appreciate getting the Newsletter! Keep up the great work!

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: Hi, Barry. We'll make sure you get the info.
Likewise for anyone else who requests it from our web page. Hope to see you at a meeting.

Linton Weeks: What do you think about the ritual of Halloween?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics:
I love Hallowe'en! My wife and I met at a Hallowe'en party, and we were married one year later on Oct 30. For us, it's a great excuse for a party. And I love the fantasy element of it-Hallowe'en is very clearly labeled as make-believe, at least for most of us. As long as the supernatural is clearly marked as fiction, not fact, I'm happy. And that goes for movies, stories and other entertainment too. But the sensational shows that play fast and loose with the truth, while implying a "documentary reality" -those creep me out.

One of the first major activities of the National Capital Area Skeptics, 11 years ago, was a theatrical séance-13 shows in the weeks before Hallowe'en. Jamy Swiss and I performed a number of effects based on traditional seances and spook shows. We tried to be as convincing as possible during the show, but when the lights came up at the end, there was no doubt that there was nothing supernatural going on.

Linton Weeks: Can you tell us a brief ghost story, then explain it away?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: I never claim to explain away stories from other people -especially if they are second hand and about something that happened long ago. But I have a few personal stories that I can tell.

When we were researching our own séance show, we heard about a "real" séance that was to be held in suburban Virginia. My wife called and confirmed that it was not a show or put-on, but the real deal. She and I and another skeptical friend, Randy Lockwood, went to check it out. We knew we couldn't do any sort of scientific investigation, but we decided in advance to do a little test. We knew we'd be asked about spirits we'd like to contact. Grace asked about her recently deceased grandmother; Randy made up a completely fictitious uncle; and I gave the name of "John Mulholland." I never met Mulholland, but he had been a leading authority on magic until his death in 1970, a friend of Houdini, and a skeptical ghostbuster in his own right. At the séance, the medium claimed contact with all three spirits, and each taught us something different: Grace confirmed that the medium wasn't bad at guessing generalities but missed specifics. "John's" recollection of our non-existent good times together showed that even generalities could be dead wrong. And the fictional "uncle" showed that the medium wasn't stopped by a lack of spirit.

Another time I went with several others to meet with someone who had been hearing ghostly noises in her home. I had been expecting -hoping for-a big Victorian mansion. It turned out to be a suburban townhouse about 10 years old. The owner and her daughter had repeatedly heard footsteps in an upstairs bedroom when it was quite empty. We poked around for a while and discovered that if one of us walked in one bedroom, the floor boards creaked in the next room. We couldn't prove it, but we offered the suggestion that perhaps the "ghost" was the result of someone walking around in the upstairs of the adjoining townhouse. I don't know if we completely convinced the homeowner, but I think she was relieved to have some sort of normal explanation to think about.

Bethesda, MD: Are you saying that people who believe in ghosts are ignorant?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: Absolutely not. I'm not talking about smart vs stupid. We are all -myself included-subject to mistakes and fallacies of reasoning. Under the right circumstances, anyone can be mislead -perhaps by someone else or perhaps by self-deception.

A trivial example, but I sometimes do magic tricks as demonstrations for my university students. They usually work pretty well. But I would never try those same tricks for young kids. Kids have different expectations about how the world is put together-the tricks wouldn't fool them. I have respect for the magicians who work for children - it seems much harder to me than fooling adults.

Washington, DC: Chip,

I meant that you should provide membership information to readers/viewers today I'm already a member (of course!!)

--Barry

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: Got it, Barry!
The web site is www.ncas.org and the phone is 301/587-3827.

Little Rock, AR: Do you think it's wrong for children to be told there is a Santa Claus? What's wrong with that?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: I don't claim to be an expert in child psychology. But personally I don't see any harm in it. Fantasy can be very appropriate in some circumstances.

Linton Weeks: Why take all the fun out of suspended belief? Isn't there something in the human soul that wants to believe in the unbelievable, to have faith in the unfathomable?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: Oh, I don't think I'm taking any fun away at all. I love a mystery, but as a starting point, not a final resting place. A mystery is an opportunity to discover something, and discovery is a cool feeling. I'm happy to say, "I don't know -- let's find out!"

This hour I'm up against the shuttle launch. That's based entirely on science and smart people working hard. How cool is that?

New York, NY: With the shuttle launch today, I was wondering what you think of space travel and colonization? It's a very scientific undertaking, but not very practical.

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: Very dependent on science. I don't know about the practicality-we hear about spin off products and such, but I don't think that's a complete measure. As an advocate of skeptical thinking, I do think we should ask hard questions about such programs. But I also know that the value can't always be measured in dollars and sense. There is an exhilaration in exploration and discovery.

Denver, CO: Do you play games of chance? Or cards? Sometimes I hit a lucky stretch in poker and there's no stopping me! How do you explain that?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: What do we mean by "luck" anyway? I think that "luck" is taking probability personally.

Probability is the branch of mathematics that deals with ways to quantify chance, uncertainty and error. It's the big picture of how things shake out in the long run. Statistics is the branch of mathematics that deals with drawing conclusions even in the face of uncertainty. I'm a statistician at the University of Maryland - it's my job to tease information out of messy data.

But when you lose sight of the big picture and take probability personally -focus on the good or bad that's just happened to you- that's called "luck."

On September 6, 1995, Baltimore shortstop Cal Ripken Jr. played in his 2131st consecutive game.
As he was closing in on that record, Maryland and Pennsylvannia lotteries both sold their limits for bets on 2131 and it's permutations. THOSE PEOPLE were trying to take probability very personally. It didn't work; those were not winning numbers.

Unlikely things happen rarely. But in a large enough world there are many, many opportunities and so even very unlikely things are likely happen from time to time. Statisticians Persi Diaconis & Fred Mosteller call this the "Law of Truly Large Numbers."

Penn Jillette (of Penn & Teller) puts it this way: "A million to one shot happens 8 times a day in New York City."

I personally don't gamble, but it has nothing to do with ethics or morals. For me it just doesn't seem like fun. But if you think of it like buying a theater ticket for a few hours entertainment, and not as an investment in the future, I have no problem with it.

Chicago, IL: As a skeptic myself, I'm constantly faced with the problem of dealing with people who give the, "I know what I saw and that's enough for me," or the "if x (i.e. homeopathy, acupuncture) makes people feel good, what's wrong with that?" rationale. How do you respond to those people?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: Like so: "Cool!"

Or sometimes, "That's nice. Prove it."

I don't intend that as dismissive at all. Extraordinary things do happen-things for which we don't have explanations. But a lack of an explanation shouldn't mean that we rush to embrace a mystical or supernatural explanation. I also know that people are not always reliable reporters. Our hopes and expectations strongly influence what we perceive. A lot of post-processing goes on in the survival-adapted "wetware" of our brains. And especially when we are talking about pain and stress and other conditions that are hard to measure, our mental state has a huge influence on how we feel.

I try to get comfortable with admitting that sometimes I just don't have a clue. That's not easy. We all have a tendency to seek closure and find solutions. That's a good thing. But we also are so good at seeing patterns, we sometimes see them when they aren't really there at all. We see faces in the clouds and on the planet Mars! We are natural pattern finders, and sometimes that leads us to slip on a mental banana peel and land on a spectacularly wrong conclusion.

Washington: Hey, are ya'll college buds? Also, and relevant to this discussion, do you think belief in the supernatural has geographical or socioeconomic relations? For example, people who live in the dark throughout part of the year in Alaska or vatos in rural mexico, are they more likely to believe?

Linton Weeks: Maybe in an earlier life. Just kidding, Chip. I grew up in Memphis, too, but don't think I ever crossed paths with Chip.

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: Nope, I never talked to Linton until this week--at least as far as I can remember.

The question about cultural connections to supernatural beliefs is a very good one. Barry -- who has chimed in here-- is a sociologist and in a better position to answer than this humble statistician. Supernatural beliefs are certainly different -- and yet with similar themes-- across the globe. I have to say "I don't really know."

Linton Weeks: We're about half-way through here. While I take a sip of iced tea, I want to thank Vic Sussman and J Weis, two of the smart folks who make this show possible. Keep those questions coming for Chip.

Linton Weeks: Have you ever walked on burning coals? Does a skeptic have to test every unbelievable activity?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: I haven't personally. But I know folks who have-folks who have . There was an excellent program on ABC a few weeks ago - The Power of Belief with John Stossel-in which they showed footage of perfectly ordinary folks walking on hot coals. Nothing mystical about it - no energy fields or auras. And yes, the coals really are hot. But according to the physicists, the embers are very poor at transmitting their heat to your foot. Think about putting an iron pot and a block of wood in your oven at 400 degrees. The metal would burn you badly, but you could handle the wood without too much difficulty.

Does a skeptic have to test everything first hand? No. But we need to learn to gauge what sources we can trust.

Science is a social activity. The image of the lone scientist in the mountain castle, lightening flashing, is very misleading. Science depends on a community of trained, skilled critiques, all ready to pounce on any individual error. Debate is essential to the enterprise. Any one individual can come up with any sort of idea -it doesn't much matter how - as long as it is held up to the scrutiny of the rest of the community. The building of consensus and the knowledge that everything is subject to review and revision give us some assurance that we don't each have to experience it all firsthand.

Bethesda, MD: How do you explain those Las Vegas hypnotists who put people to sleep and make them do silly and stupid things?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: I have several friends who have done such acts. I understand that stage acts are not necessarily the same as what may go on in psychologist's office.

On stage the hypnotist cares about putting on a show. He or she seeks out the folks who will cooperate the most. And at the same time, the person from the audience suddenly has an excuse to act silly. It's OK to act like a chicken-- the other guy is really in control! Some performers even claim that there is no such thing as a real trance. It may just be a bond of cooperation. I think that question is not completely resolved, and you'll find good scientists on both sides.

Chicago, IL: Another comment regarding very NON-skeptical folks...I guess my question wasn't clear. How do you respond so that the people you're talking to don't feel as if it's some sort of personal attack on their character? I know when I've said, "Well, prove it," they say, "I don't need to...I saw it (heard it, whatever) and that's enough." With strangers, it's not as big of a deal, but it's harder when dealing with loved ones.

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: There's no easy answer there. I try to make it clear that I'm interested in their honest impressions. My intent is to learn and understand -- and to best convey my understanding-- and not to win a battle.

You have to engage in such a debate with absolute respect and honesty. Don't try to pull a fast one, but make sure you really really listen. Assume they are at least as smart as you are.

Berwyn, IL: Is it sufficient for a skeptic to question a phemenon (like dowsing or homeopathy), or does he actually have to come up with an alternative explanation?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: Good question.

I never promise to have all the answers. My main position is that it is essential to ask hard questions.

Professionally, as a statistician, that's often my most important role. I'm the allegedly impartial naysayer who asks questions about the data, the experient and everything else -- hopefully before its too late to fix any problems.

And with skeptical issues, its important to stress that the absence of an explanation does not count as proof of a supernatural one.

Washington, DC: Regarding the question about patterns in supernatural beliefs, the answer is yes. Such beliefs are pretty universal, but some studies have shown variations cross-nationally, by region within countries, by religion, education, etc. But these variations aren't very great, and different surveys show conflicting results.

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: If this is Barry again, thanks!

Bethesda, MD: My college roommate insisted she summoned Jim Morrison to our room using a Ouija board and refused to stay in the room afterwards. Why did she react so strongly? (No one else saw Jim, darn it.)

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: I've been talking about Ouija boards (originally manufactured in Baltimore!) and related things in my class this week. The effect can be very compelling--when that pointer (called the planchette) moves, it's spooky.

The effect is due to "ideomotor response" -- the tendency we all have to subconsciously cause our muscles to move in just the way that it takes to cause the bigger motion. Dowsing rods move in the same way, and so do pendulums used for divination.

A few years ago, one student brought her roommate to my office. They had played with a Ouija board and were freaked out. I didn't talk about the board, but I did a trick where I seemed to read their minds with the motion of the pendulum. Once that happened, in my very non spooky office, then we were able to better talk about what scared them.

PEARL HARBOR, HI: CHIP,
How about the power of prayer. I understand there have been a number of books/studies on the subject. They imply organized prayer (focused thought?), coming from individuals or groups, can impact the health of others, the growth of plants, ... Rich Hess

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: In my opinion, the studies so far are lacking in rigor. Especially the claims regarding intercessory prayer.

The studies that claim a positive effect for personal prayer are more plausible to me. A person's mental state surely has an effect on the physical, so it doesn't seem too farfetched that prayer or meditation or some other activity that helps a person cope, would be a good thing.

Linton Weeks: Chip, you seem to have kept your skepticism from spilling over into cynicism. Is that a rare thing among self-proclaimed skeptics?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: Thanks.
I don't think it is all that rare. That's why I enjoy being a part of a group like the National Capital Area Skeptics. There is a sense of community. And if most were cynical scoffers, I'd wouldn't still be there!

There are similar groups all around the world. The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of Paranormal (CSICOP) in Buffalo helps these groups stay in touch. If you aren't in the DC area, check them out.

Bethesda, MD: Are there any psychic phenomena that you cannot explain?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: There are plenty of stories and events that I can't explain. That doesn't make them psychic! I've never seen anything that seemed to need that label.

Washington D.C.: Chip,

What does your skeptics group do for fun?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: Well, you might be surprised at how much fun the public lectures are. But in a much sillier vane, my wife and I often invite small groups over for a skeptical movie night. It's sort of a Mystery Science Theater for skeptics. We pick a fun movie with a SF or supernatural theme, and have some fun.

We like to think that the group has three goals:
to encourage critical and scientific thinking,
to serve as an information resource on extraordinary claims,
and to provide the extraordinary evidence that skeptics are cool!

Bowie, MD: In your opinion, is our culture more dependent on science or pseudoscience, and does it really make a difference in our daily lives?

Chip Denman, National Capital Area Skeptics: We live in a world that, for better or worse, depends heavily on science and technology. The scientific method is the best tool we have for understanding how this world works. The method works whether we are buying a used car, deciding on a medical treatment, or studying the heart of a star.

If we, as a global community, are going to make sound decisions to deal with real problems, we need to have strategies based on way of thinking that really works.

Science works.

Linton Weeks: Well, that's all, folks. I must admit, Chip, I was a little skeptical about having you as a guest, but it's been delightful and enlightening. I hope everyone will join us next Thursday at 2 p.m. Eastern on Navigator--Live. My guest will be Chuck Martin, author of Net Future. Until then...

   |       |   

Back to the top