As I watched the film and monitored audience reaction, I grew convinced that although Expelled’s claims have been thoroughly debunked, the documentary’s long term impact remains dangerously underestimated.

In the film, the comedic actor Ben Stein plays the role of a conservative Michael Moore, taking viewers on an investigative journey into the realm of “Big Science,” an institution where Stein concludes that “scientists are not allowed to even think thoughts that involve an intelligent creator.” Expelled goes so far as to outrageously suggest that Darwinism, as Stein calls evolution, led to the Holocaust, and that today scientists have been denied tenure and that research has been suppressed, all in the service of hiding the supposedly fatal flaws in evolutionary theory.

Expelled employs several techniques common to political advertising. First, Stein’s narrative relies heavily on the use of metaphor. For example, his version of the “3 a.m. phone call” is to bookend the film with historic footage of the Berlin Wall and a repetitive emphasis on freedom as a central American value. The sinister message is that “Darwinism” has led to atheism, fascism, and communism. As a corollary, if Americans can join Stein in tearing down the wall of censorship in science it would open the way to religious freedom and cultural renewal.

Expelled also strategically employs emotion while playing on low levels of knowledge among movie-going audiences. As a way to trigger anger, Stein misleadingly defines celebrity atheists such as Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens as the representatives of “establishment science.” In interviews, as these scientists compare religion to fairies, hobgoblins, and knitting, the implication for viewers is that in order to leave room for God in society, the concept of intelligent design (ID) needs to be taken seriously.

In the screening I attended, somewhat predictably, there were chuckles and positive laughter in reaction to Stein while there was audibly negative emotion directed at the comments of Dawkins and the other scientists. As the film credits rolled at the end, there was even a strong round of approving applause.

Expelled’s misleading emphasis on atheist punditry as representative of science even had film critics bristling. In reviews otherwise harshly dismissive of the documentary, Jeffrey Kluger of Time magazine described Dawkins and Myers performance as “sneering, finger in the eye atheism,” while Justin Chang of Variety referred to Dawkins’ commentary as “atheism taken to hateful extremes."

There is no way to tell how nationally representative the Washington, DC opening night audience might have been, although I have observed similar emotional reactions among university students with whom I have tested Expelled’s YouTube clips. At various other locations across the country, several bloggers have reported that they were the only person in the theater for a Sunday matinee or a weekday evening show. One thing, however, is for sure: By documentary box office standards, Expelled has made its mark.

With more than $7.5 million earned at the box office, Stein’s propaganda film ranks as either the sixth or seventh top grossing public affairs documentary of all time. Only Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, Morgan Spurlock’s Super Size Me, and Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, Sicko, and Bowling for Columbine have grossed more than Expelled. (After controlling for inflation, add Moore’s 1989 Roger & Me.)

Premise Media Inc, the production company that marketed Expelled, targeted two key demographics for the film. Predictably, a main segment included Evangelicals and social conservatives, with the production company advertising heavily on political talk radio stations and by way of Christian media and church networks. But in running advertising spots during The Daily Show and on CNN, the company also hoped to appeal to less religious thirty- and twenty-somethings, an audience more familiar with Ben Stein as a comedic actor and satirist than with the recent political skirmishes over evolution.

Yet despite these savvy marketing efforts, Expelled was unlikely to break the forces of ideological selectivity that have snared even the most successful documentaries. For example, polling data shows that the theater audience for Fahreinheit 9/11, which earned $120 million dollars at the box office, skewed heavily liberal and was more likely to live in “blue” rather than “red” counties of the country. Moreover, a recent study finds that rather than converting movie-goers into supporting John Kerry during the 2004 election, the effects of the film were most likely to reinforce and intensify already strong anti-Bush sentiment. In short, Fahrenheit 9/11 helped activate and mobilize the existing anti-Bush segment rather than persuading new converts.

Survey data specific to Inconvenient Truth and Sicko reveal similar selectivity bias and ideological reinforcement. Although similar data is yet available for Expelled, according to news reports, Premise Media’s own exit survey data from theaters in six states showed that 80% of the film’s viewers during opening weekend considered themselves “born again” Christians.

Yet Expelled’s influence stretches well beyond the theater and any ideologically reinforcing impacts on viewers. As I review in a recent report to the Ford Foundation, these indirect influences can be tracked across several different dimensions with the most important impacts relating to the news and policy agenda.

For example, although many mainstream film critics have savaged the documentary, Stein’s arguments have received either uncritical or positive coverage in reviews at Christian or conservative Web sites, in appearances on CNN with Wolf Blitzer, ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel Live, and by way of strong endorsements on conservative talk radio and cable news programs such as Rush Limbaugh, Headline News’ Glenn Beck, and Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes.

Since the 2005 Dover court decision, intelligent design had been off the national news radar, yet Expelled helped restart the media conversation, at least temporarily. Perhaps most importantly, by way of columns, op-eds, uncritical features, and letters to the editor at local newspapers across the country, the film offered both an opening and a new “authoritative” reference point for ID proponents to once again misleadingly argue that there are holes in evolutionary theory and censorship in schools.

Perhaps most troubling have been the advanced screenings for policymakers, interest groups, and other influentials. Expelled’s producers have previewed the film for both the Missouri and the Florida state legislatures, connecting the film’s message to a proposed “Academic Freedom Act” in each state that would encourage teachers to discuss the alleged flaws in evolutionary science. As Stein strategically framed the matter at the screening in Florida: “This bill is not about teaching intelligent design. It’s about free speech."

With each of these dozens of screenings there has likely been a strong intensification of commitment and emotion among the conservative activist base in attendance along with advocacy training, the raising of money, and the distribution of other resources such as DVDs and literature. In particular, Expelled provides these activists with an increased repertoire of arguments, talking points, and examples to use with neighbors and friends.

There is even the possibility that the screenings helped anti-evolution groups link up with new conservative coalition partners not previously involved on the issue. For example, Stein has shown Expelled at several meetings and venues here in Washington, DC, including a special screening for Congressional staffers.

When the film moves to DVD distribution, expect more of these types of Expelled screenings, house parties, and church gatherings across the country, all aimed at mobilizing a political movement in favor of anti-evolution bills. As Reason magazine’s Ronald Bailey reports, at a April 15 press conference at the conservative Heritage Foundation, Expelled’s financial backer Walt Ruloff said that as many as 26 states had been targeted this year with so-called “freedom bills.” As of May 2008, bills introduced in Florida, Alabama, and Missouri have been voted down while similar bills are still up for full legislative vote in South Carolina and Louisiana.

Over the next few years, Expelled’s enduring impact will be to serve as a vehicle for recruiting and mobilizing anti-evolution activists at the state and local level across the country. The targeted audience will include school board members, church leaders, legislators, journalists, and other opinion-leaders. Shown in its entirety or perhaps more effectively repackaged in 10 to 15 minute outtakes, these screenings will combine emotionally powerful metaphors with the commentary of various outspoken atheists to manipulate for viewers the important differences between science, religion, and atheism.

“Bipolar disorder,” originally known as manic-depression, has been acknowledged as a problem for centuries. However, until very recently, it was considered a very rare and severe condition. Now diagnoses of “bipolar spectrum” disorders are reaching epidemic proportions. Nothing has changed in humans’ biology or natural environment to account for this rise in diagnoses. What does account for the increase is a “softening” of the criteria needed to diagnose a person with bipolar, an increase in aggressive marketing of new profitable prescription drugs for bipolar, and psychiatrists “upcoding” problems to get higher insurance reimbursement rates. A likely outcome of this increase in labeling people “bipolar” is not that more people in need of help are getting it but instead that millions of people are unnecessarily being put on powerful antipsychotic medications.

As the name suggests, people labeled bipolar are believed to alternate between the emotional extremes, or poles, of mania and depression. Prior to the publication of the third edition of psychiatry’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-III) in 1980, a patient would have to be hospitalized with a manic episode before a diagnosis of manic-depression was made. At that time rates of mania were estimated to be 0.4 to 1.2 percent of the population; prior to that, rates were estimated to be even lower. Currently some estimates of bipolar are as high as 10 percent of the population (Angst, et al. 2003), but rates of hospitalization for mania have not increased. What happened?

Just as a child with a hammer discovers new things that “need” to be hammered, when psychiatry finds new drugs it discovers new people who “need” to be treated with them. In 1949 Australian doctor John Cade reported that lithium salts could be effective in the treatment of “psychotic excitement” or mania (Cade 1949). As knowledge of this finding spread, so did the diagnosis of mania, as noted by Philip Mitchell:

One of the major driving forces determining the livelihood of particular diagnoses in medicine has been the availability of effective remedies. Psychiatry has not been exempt from this phenomenon, with the introduction of lithium into clinical practice in the late 1960s and early 1970s leading to substantial increases in the diagnosis of bipolar disorder over that time. For example, in Australia, Parker et al. demonstrated that in New South Wales, the diagnosis of bipolar disorder increased dramatically (with a concomitant decrease in the diagnosis of schizophrenia) from the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s, despite there being no overall change in the total number of those with “functional psychoses.” (Mitchell 2006, 279)

While there was no change in the number of people with “functional psychoses,” by 1968 more than 200 psychiatrists had applied to the FDA to study and use lithium for mania. Concurrently, three companies applied to market lithium. The FDA approved the applications and in 1970 approved the use of lithium to treat manic episodes of manic-depressive psychosis (Johnson and Gershon 1999). With the publication of the third edition of the DSM in 1980, the “mania” diagnosis was replaced with “bipolar disorder,” and the rates of bipolar remained stable.

In the last decade, rates of children being diagnosed with bipolar has increased by forty times, and the rates of diagnosis for adults almost doubled (Morero, et al. 2007)! Nothing overtly changed in American culture—not dietary practices, there was no mass exposure to toxic waste, and neither parenting nor educational practices were overhauled. Instead a culmination of less than scientifically justified factors resulted in the current explosion of people, many of them children as young as four years old, being diagnosed and misdiagnosed as “bipolar.”

The Tenuous Analogy: A Pharmaceutical Sleight of Hand

Without exclusive rights to a patented pharmaceutical, and with bipolar still a relatively rare “disorder,” sales of lithium, or any drug to treat this problem, could not be profitable. This rapidly changed when psychiatrists started to use epileptic, anticonvulsant, antiseizure medications in attempts to control mania (Healy 2006). Seizures occur in epileptics when there is sudden excessive firing of neurons; the initial firing is known as “kindling.” Anticonvulsants work by “stabilizing” the neurons and preventing or at least reducing the frequency of kindling and thus seizures. Perhaps because both seizures and mania appear to involve a high state of “excitability,” Robert Post (e.g., Post and Weiss 1989) suggested that manic states might be prevented with antiseizure medications analogous to how they prevent seizures in epileptics. But there is a difference in the excitability of neurons during seizures and the emotional excitability of mania. There is no evidence that nerurons fire uncontrollably and excessively during states of mania as they do during seizures.

Nevertheless, with this analogy, the term “mood-stabilizer” came into vogue, and in 1995 Abbott Laboratories’ Depakote became the first anticonvulsant approved by the FDA for treating mania. Yet, there is no agreement on what the term “mood stabilizer” means (Healy 2006), and although they may be called “mood-stabilizers,” anticonvulsants have never been shown to actually stabilize moods; rather, their use is simply based on an analogy, not science. Using anticonvulsants for mania, even though not developed for it, and calling anticonvulsants “mood stabilizers” though they have never been shown to stabilize moods, are just more examples of drug companies’ well-worn strategy of finding new, profitable “indications” for selling old, less profitable, drugs (see Flora and Sellers 2001 for another example). In the study “The Impact of Mood Stabilizers on Bipolar Disorder: The 1890s and 1990s Compared,” North Wales researchers found that despite the wide-spread use of mood stabilizers, rates of readmission for bipolar patients is higher now (77 percent) than it was one hundred years ago (8 percent). In the 1890s, 81 percent of the discharges were recovered, but only 17 percent in the 1990s were recovered. These findings forced the researchers to conclude: “These data are incompatible with simple claims that mood stabilizing drugs ‘work’” (Harris, Chandran, Chakraborty, and Healy 2005). Indeed, these findings indicate that not receiving treatment works better than pharmaceutical intervention. Similarly, University of Illinois researchers recently found that only 5 percent of medicated schizophrenia patients recover, but 40 percent of non-medicated patients recover (Harrow, Grossman, Jobe, and Herbener 2005; also see Harrow and Jobe 2007). In other words, schizophrenia patients are eight times more likely to recover if they are not on medications!

“Softening” Bipolar Sickness

According to Webster’s New Riverside University dictionary, “bipolar” is defined as “1. Relating to or having two poles. 2. Relating to or involving both of the earth’s poles. 3. Having or expressing two contradictory ideas or qualities” (1988). Thus, if “manic-depression” is “bipolar,” then the states of mania and depression need to be polar opposites as are the Earth’s north and south poles. Consisting of the polar states of mania and severe depression, the original notion of “bipolar disorder” matched the dictionary definition of “bipolar.” However, disregarding the very definition of bipolar, the psychiatric notion of “bipolar disorder” has been broadened and “softened” to include milder, decidedly nonpolar mood states in the now-called “bipolar spectrum disorders” (e.g., Akiskal, et al. 2000). Consequently, an individual who is simply very happy at times may be said to have periods of “hypomania” rather than mania; and if sometimes they are sad too they may be labeled “cyclothymic” within the bipolar spectrum. “Softening” is analogous to (geologically) studying Brazil and Mexico and claiming to be studying Earth’s poles. While this is merely ridiculous in geology, it is actually harmful in psychiatry. Yet this is exactly what is happening, because it is profitable for psychiatry and pharmaceutical companies. Even though normal life events expected to elicit happiness and sadness are recognized as contributing factors by psychiatrists, people experiencing happiness and sadness are nevertheless labeled cyclothymic in the bipolar spectrum, opening the door to reimbursable psychiatric care and unnecessary pharmaceutical prescriptions. For example, Akiskal et al., report:

slightly under 10% of a mental health clinic’s patients conformed to subsyndromal [nonpolar] mood changes over extended periods of time. These where young adults who presented clinically because of social disruptions in their lives, such as romantic failure, financial extravagance, repeated change of line of work or college studies, frequent geographical moves, and polysubstance abuse. The underlying affective diathesis was validated on the basis of phenomenological criteria that involved biphasic subsyndromal [nonpolar] changes in energy, activity, mood, and cognition, each phase typically lasting from 2 days to a week; some oscillated more in a depressive direction, . . . [t]he subthreshhold oscillation of hypomanic and subderessive periods occurring in 6.3% of the population at large. (Akiskal et al. 2000, S10, emphasis added)

What Akiskal et al. are arguing is that even though emotions do not reach the level of being a psychiatric syndrome (“subsyndromal”) and are caused by common emotional life events (e.g., “romantic failure, . . . repeated change of line of work or college studies, frequent geographical moves, and polysubstance abuse”), a significant portion of the population with these normal emotions should nevertheless be labeled “bipolar.” Indeed, their original article in this line of work was titled “Cyclothymic Disorder: Validating Criteria for Inclusion in Bipolar Affective Group” (Akiskal et al. 1977, emphasis added). Thus normal happiness and sadness become disorders “treatable” with pharmaceuticals.

“Upcoding”

As if “softening” the diagnoses of bipolar to cast a wider net for paying clients wasn’t questionable enough, psychiatrists have been “upcoding” individuals, particularly children, to more severe “bipolar” diagnoses to get greater insurance reimbursement. SUNY-Stony Brook psychiatrists Joseph Blader and Gabrielle A. Carlson (2007) found that from 1996 to 2004 rates of bipolar diagnoses among adults increased 56 percent, increased 296.4 percent among adolescents, and increased 438.6 percent among children! They suggest:

higher rates of inpatient admissions among youth associated with BD [bipolar disorder] may reflect . . . “upcoding” to putatively more severe conditions for reimbursement (107) . . . [and that] Clinicians may have responded to the higher hurdles for obtaining payer’s authorization for inpatient care by “upcoding” severe behavioral disturbances to a major mood disorder that connotes a more pernicious illness. (111)

Apparently, to gain these increased diagnoses, children with behavioral difficulties and conduct problems are receiving “upcoded” diagnoses of bipolar disorder (Blader and Carlson 2007). Diagnosing children who have behavioral difficulties with bipolar disorder (or any psychiatric disorder) and subsequently medicating them is particularly disturbing. The evidence is conclusive that to correct conduct and other behavioral problems, behavioral management programs and parent training programs are superior to medicating children (Flora 2007).

Selling Sickness with Direct-to-Consumer Advertising

In 1997 the FDA began to allow direct-to-consumer advertising, making the U.S. and New Zealand the only two countries in the world that allow the practice. This change opened the door for self-diagnoses, medical-seeking behavior, and disease mongering. According to writers in the British Medical Journal:

Some forms of “medicalisation” may now be better described as “disease mongering”—extending the boundaries of treatable illness to expand markets for new products. Alliances of pharmaceutical manufacturers, doctors, and patient groups use the media to frame conditions as being widespread and severe. Disease mongering can include turning ordinary ailments into medical problems, seeing mild symptoms as serious, treating personal problems as medical, seeking risks as diseases, and framing prevalence estimates to maximize potential markets. (Moynihan, Heath, and Henry 2002, p. 886)

This is exactly what has occurred with bipolar disorder. Advertisements for Abilify and Seroquel, two antipsychotic medications approved for bipolar disorder, are ubiquitous in periodicals, daytime television, and even plastered on phone booths. Just as anticonvulsants were used as “mood stablizers,” the current drugs being pushed for bipolar were developed for schizophrenia. According to company press releases, Abilify was approved in 2002 for the treatment of schizophrenia, producing over 3.7 million prescriptions between 2002 and 2005. Seroquel was approved for the treatment of schizophrenia in 1997 and produced sales of $2.8 billion in 2005. Pharmaceutical patents typically last for seven years, but if “new indications” can be found, then the patent can be extended for several more years, which will protect and likely increase profits. Using this strategy, the makers of Seroquel gained FDA approval for the treatment of mania in 2004 and for depressive episodes in 2006. The makers of Abilify gained FDA approval for “maintenance treatment” of bipolar in 2005.

Direct-to-consumer advertising coupled with happiness and sadness fitting into “softer” bipolar categories made for fertile ground in which drug companies could solicit for mental illness and thus increase sales. Because sales of drugs require a medical diagnosis, drug advertisements suggest to potential customers that they may have a “medical disorder” such as bipolar. Advertisements tell consumers to focus on feelings, behaviors, and sensations consistent with the disorder. Drug company-sponsored “educational” Web sites offer self-tests designed to lead the taker to admit symptoms consistent with bipolar. The test taker is encouraged to print out the results and share them with a doctor who can prescribe medication. “The Mood Questionnaire” Web site is nothing more than a promotion for Seroquel by its makers, AstraZeneca pharmaceuticals. The site tells survey takers: “Regardless of your results, we recommend that you print and share this questionnaire with a qualified health care professional who can provide you with a full evaluation” (emphasis added).

Showing up at a doctor’s office with a printout and concerns about bipolar will influence some doctors to prescribe medication. Previous research revealed that when “patients” visited doctor’s offices unannounced with complaints of adjustment difficulties, they received a prescription for medication 10 percent of the time. But when they made complaints of adjustment difficulties and mentioned a specific medication, they received a prescription for antidepressant medication 55 percent of the time (Kravitz, Epstein, Feldman, et al. 2005). Based on these findings, it is not hard to guess what will happen when a patient shows up with a questionnaire on bipolar from drug makers.

Side Effects

Medicating people for happiness and sadness is not without consequence. Antipsychotics used to treat bipolar work by interfering with the body’s dopamine and serotonin systems. These neurotransmitters are known to be involved in one’s ability to feel pleasure and initiate activities. Interfering with these abilities are likely reasons why up to 75 percent of patients refuse to take prescribed antipsychotics (Flora 2007, 113).

Common side effects of Seroquel include dry mouth (44 percent), drowsiness (34 percent), high triglycerides (23 percent), headaches (21 percent), agitation (20 percent), dizziness (18 percent), high cholesterol (16 percent), weakness (10 percent), constipation (10 percent), and fatigue (10 percent). Common side effects of Abilify include headaches (30 percent), anxiety (20 percent), insomnia (19 percent), nausea (16 percent), constipation (13 percent), vomiting (12 percent), and dizziness (11 percent) (eMedTV). Many other common side effects occur in between 2 and 10 percent of those who take these drugs. For example, significant weight gain occurs in 6 percent of people taking Seroquel and in 6.8 percent of people taking Abilify. This weight gain often leads to diabetes or morbid obesity. With the drug-induced decreased ability to feel pleasure and numerous aversive side effects, eating may be one of the only sources of enjoyment available for people labeled “bipolar.”

In conclusion, the broadening and softening of the criteria necessary to label one with bipolar disorder coupled with aggressive campaigns by pharmaceutical companies results in millions of people being told they have a severe psychiatric disorder. These misled patients are being prescribed powerful antipsychotic medications when in fact they are normal people dealing normally with ordinary life issues.

References

• Akiskal, H.S., M.L. Bourgeois, J. Angst, R. Post, H. Moller, and R. Hirschfeld. 2000. Re-evaluating the prevalence of and diagnostic composition within the broad clinical spectrum of bipolar disorders. Journal of Affective Disorders, (59): S5–S30.
• Akiskal, H.S., A.H. Djenderedjian, R.H. Rosenthal, and M.K. Khani.1977. Cyclothymic disorder: Validating criteria for inclusion in the bipolar affective group. American Journal of Psychiatry, (134): 1227–1233.
• Angst, J., A. Gamma, F. Benzaai, V. Ajdacic, D. Eich, and W. Rossler. 2003. Toward a re-definition of subthreshold bipolarity: Epidemiology and proposed criteria for bipolar-II minor bipolar disorders and hypomania. Journal of Affective Disorders, (73): 133–146.
• Blader, J.C., and G.A. Carlson. 2007. Increased rates of bipolar disorder diagnoses among U.S. child, adolescent, and adult populations, 1996–2004. Biological Psychiatry, (62): 107–114.
• Cade, J.F.J. 1949. Lithium salts in the treatment of psychotic excitement. Medical Journal of Australia, (14): 349–352.
• eMedTV. 2008. Abilify Side Effects. Available online at emedtv.com. Accessed Jan. 8, 2008.
• eMedTV. 2008. Seroquel Side Effects. Available online at emedtv.com. Accessed Jan 8, 2008.
• Flora, S.R. 2007. Taking America Off Drugs: Why Behavioral Therapy is More Effective for Treating ADHD, OCD, Depression, and other Psychological Problems. State University of New York Press. Albany, NY.
• Flora, S.R. and M. Sellers. 2003. ‘Premenstrual dysphoric disorder’ and ‘premenstrual syndrome’ myths. Skeptical Inquirer, (27): 37–42.
• Harris, M., S. Chandran, N. Chakraborty, and D. Healy. 2005. The impact of mood stabilizers on bipolar disorder: The 1890s and 1990s compared. History of Psychiatry, (16): 423–434.
• Harrow, M., L.S. Grossman, T.H. Jobe, and E.S. Herbener. 2005. Do Patients with schizophrenia ever show periods of recovery? A 15-year multi-follow-up study. Schizophrenia Bulletin, (31): 723–734.
• Harrow, M., and T.H. Jobe. 2007. Factors involved in outcome and recovery in schizophrenia patients not on antipsychotic medications: a 15-year multifollow-up study. Journal of nervous and Mental Disease, (195): 406–414.
• Healy, D. 2006. The latest mania: Selling bipolar disorder, PloS Med3 (4): e185.
• Johnson, G., and S. Gershon.1999. Early North American research on lithium. Australian and New Zealand journal of Psychiatry, (33): S48–S53.
• Kravitz, R.L., R.M. Epstein, M.D. Feldman, et al. 2005. Influence of patients’ requests for direct-to-consumer advertised antidepressants. Journal of the American Medical Association, (293): 1995–2002.
• Mitchell, P.H. 2006. Bipolar disorder 40 years ago: A critical period of transition. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, (40): 279–280.
• Moreno, C., G. Laje, C. Blanco, et al. 2007. National trends in the outpatient diagnosis and treatment of bipolar disorder in youth. Archives of General Psychiatry, (64): 1032–1039.
• Moynihan, R., I. Heath, and D. Henry. 2002. Selling sickness: The pharmaceutical industry and disease mongering. British Medical Journal, (324): 886–891.
• Post, R.M., and S.R.B. Weiss. 1989. Kindling and manic-depressive illness. In: Bolwig T.G. Bolwig and M.R. Trimble, editors. The clinical relevance of kindling. London: Wiley, pp. 209–230.
• Webster’s II: New Riverside University Dictionary. 1988. Boston, MA; Houghton Mifflin.

And of course I am equally honored and grateful to Ray Hyman for his account of this year’s gathering. I wish I could have been there and renewed acquaintances with so many good friends in the worlds of mathematics and magic. Ray mentions that several mathematicians gave proofs of unusual theorems. Allow me to cite one—an unexpected proof that was of special interest to me.

In one of my early Scientific American columns I reported on the famous discovery by England’s great puzzle maker Henry E. Dudeney of a way to slice a square into as few as four pieces such that if made of wood they could be hinged to form a chain that could be unfolded then folded a different way to make an equilateral triangle! Greg Frederickson, a mathematician at Purdue, is the world’s top expert on geometric dissections. His latest book, Plano Hinged Dissections: Time to Fold! (A.K. Peters 2006), deals entirely with his discoveries of beautiful hinged dissections.

At the last gathering, Erik Demaine, a young computer scientist at MIT, explained his remarkable proof, yet to be published, that any polygon of any shape can be cut into a finite number of pieces that can be hinged to form a chain that will fold to make any other given polygon of the same area! It is a great breakthrough in hinged dissection theory. Of course the task, far from easy, is to find a way to make the chain with a minimum number of pieces. I’m told that Demaine’s presentation produced prolonged applause.

Thanks, Ray, for bringing back so many happy memories.

Entertainment he will get, as will all readers of Joe Nickell’s latest book, Adventures in Paranormal Investigation, taken largely from his “Investigative Files” columns from Skeptical Inquirer. At no extra charge, the reader will also be imparted with knowledge leading to the realization that when the hard light of reality shines on these mysterious phenomena, they tend to dissipate like the fog on the cover.

Readers of this magazine need no introduction to Joe Nickell, who has devoted much of his life to the critical examination of strange reports and folklore. Perhaps the title and cover, however, will attract a larger audience who will discover a witty and absorbing private eye who has attempted to walk the fine line between critical inquiry and mere “debunking” (which is, as he points out, an a priori assumption that paranormal claims are not real and need disproving). Nickell approaches all such claims with gusto and an open mind.

It must be hard to maintain that attitude. Crop circles, ghostly hitchhikers, and weeping icons (to name but a paltry few) surely have gone beyond the need for serious examination into the realm of the merely kooky. Don’t we have more urgent mysteries that need answering? Aren’t these smaller and more ridiculous claims what Daniel Loxton, in a recent Skeptical Briefs article, called “unsinkable rubber ducks”?

Yes to both questions. But we can all be thankful that someone like Nickell is still out there plugging away at the myriad paranormal claims, some silly and some downright absurd, that saturate our human cultures. Given their ubiquity and the harm that can come from a habit of uncritical thinking, “somebody has to do it,” as Loxton said.

Nickell points out that his main challenge is in deciding which claims to investigate, especially those originating with “one puzzled person” or perhaps an “attention-seeking hoaxer.” A good guide should be the popularity of the purported phenomenon. Sure, Peter Popoff’s seeming gift for clairvoyance was exposed as fake years ago, but his act (via a receiver hidden in his ear) fleeced people out of millions of dollars and deserved the special attention that James Randi’s exposure gave it. And now that he’s back, Popoff is indeed deserving of even more than this Nickell’s worth of scrutiny.

Besides, it’s such fun! We armchair skeptics can sit back and watch a master at work. Some may look upon Nickell as a professional “wet blanket” telling people that their cool sightings or weird experiences were likely more human than supernatural. But who can resist lively accounts of examining an “alien” hand, a haunted gas chamber, ships of the dead, or fortune-telling birds?

Nickell is unfailingly thorough in his approach to investigations. Looking into the healing properties of a spa? The reader gets a short history of health spas, from ancient Greece to Aztec culture and on to medieval practices in a resort named Spa in Belgium. Interested in haunted castles? How about a history of Burg Frankenstein or Blarney Castle? And where else will you get a discussion of the possibility that the word “baloney” derives from “blarney” and the difference between the two? Quoting Fulton J. Sheen, Nickell explains that “baloney is flattery so thick it cannot be true, and blarney is flattery so thin we like it.”

The author turns briefly to personal issues as well. He discusses the joy of learning that he was the father of a previously unknown daughter and is curious about the “intuition” that had led her to first question her parentage while in her thirties. He gathers information about her upbringing and discovers several clues that came her way that could have led her to half suspect that her father was not who she had been told all along. Intuition is a powerful feeling that can be based on many such subtle hints “assembled unconsciously,” and when it turns out to be right, intuition can seem almost paranormal. As Nickell rightly cautions, it is not a consistently reliable indicator of the truth. It did, however, lead him to a new daughter and two grandsons.

There are, of course, serious issues mixed in with the fun. While some benign fortune-tellers may merely sell harmless optimism (“You will come into some money”), hucksters who “talk to the dead” generally prey upon the grief of others merely to line their own pockets. Psychic detectives cater to the credulous and waste the time of legitimate law enforcement. One shot at Randi’s million-dollar challenge would expose them all, so they wisely avoid skeptics. And a special place in the inner circle of shame and approbation must be reserved for psychic healers who exploit fear, detract from sound medical attention, and provide cruelly false hope.

For all of these reasons, someone like Joe Nickell is priceless. If that person who was attracted to the mysterious cover and tantalizing title discovers that testimonials and breathless eyewitness accounts are unreliable and that it can actually be more fun to exercise one’s critical-thinking faculties than to indulge in mere fantasy, then the reader will see that the door on the cover indeed opens into the sunlight.

“Are you sure you took everything?” asked the slender one.

“Of course!” said the shorter one, who was carrying a backpack. “I checked the inventory. I even took the infrared goggles and a telescopic steel rod.”

“Really?”

“Well . . . as a form of self-defense. You never know.”

The two reached a tall, black gate.

“It’s locked.”

“Hold this,” said the shorter one, handing the backpack to his colleague. After searching it, he took out a large ring with a dozen keys attached.

“Here they are! They assured me that with these there would be no problems.”

“We’ll see. . . .”

One at a time, the short fellow inserted the keys in the keyhole. But not one worked.

“Damn! I knew it. We should have checked first that it worked.”

The road was empty. Only one car had passed since Slender and Shorty stopped by the gate, but it did not slow down. The dark shadows hid them from the light.

“All right, if that’s the way it has to be. . . .”

Slender shined a pocket light into the keyhole. “It’s an old Wally model, there should be no problem.”

Shorty took a leather case out of his pocket and opened it. There were a dozen different lockpicks. One was chosen, and the operation started. “It should be no problem,” puffed Shorty, who was crouched on his legs while trying to pick the lock, sweat dripping from his face. “Yeah, it’s easy when you just hold the light and someone else has to do the dirty job.”

“Cut the chatter. Let’s move along.”

After a few more attempts there was a reassuring “click.” The door was open.

“Quick!” snapped Slender. “Stand up.”

“What . . . ?”

“I said quick, get inside!” Slender pushed his mate in the dark hallway and closed the gate. “Don’t say a word.”

They both hid behind a wall, holding their breath. A police car passed by without stopping.

“That was close!” sighed Slender.

Shorty protested. “Close for what? You make it seem like we are two burglars here!”

Slender smiled. “Yeah, and it’s more fun, isn’t it?”

“We are here on a scientific mission,” continued Shorty. “We are not on a secret hunt to rob lost treasures or something like that.”

Slender turned on his pocket light and did not reply. They were in a dark corridor, but down the hall a door that led to the field outside could clearly be seen. It was open when they reached it.

When they stepped outside, the pocket light was no longer needed. The moon was quite bright, but the field, full of a thousand flickering flames, was more luminous. Quite an unexpected view—surreal but almost romantic. Slender regretted he was there with Shorty and not with his girlfriend.

However, it was indisputable: a cemetery at midnight was a sight not to be missed.

Luminous Fungis and Earth Lights

The two mysterious figures in the story above are my friend and colleague Luigi Garlaschelli and myself. Actually, Luigi is not that short, but I needed an easy descriptor for him. And since he is just a little shorter than I am . . . my apologies, Gigi!

The night visits at the Major Cemetery in Pavia, Italy, took place some time ago when we decided it was time to investigate the “will o’ the wisp” phenomenon. Of course, we obtained official permission from the county administration—“scientific purposes” was the reason we gave for our requested visit. We were quite fascinated by this rare luminous phenomenon, a source of all kinds of supernatural tales.

Also known as ignis fatuus, Latin for temporary fire, will o’ the wisps are in fact said to be ghostly lights, usually seen around graveyards and marshes at night. They look like faint flames or a flickering, glowing fog, usually green, that sometimes appears to recede if approached. Folklorists have collected all kinds of legends related to these mysterious lights, including the fact that they could be some form of spirit lights or have a paranormal origin. Science, however, has precious few facts to offer.

Some have proposed that Armillaria, a parasitic kind of fungi known also as “honey fungus,” could be responsible for some of the apparitions. Some species of Armillaria are bioluminescent and may have been mistaken for will o’ the wisps.

According to another theory, the wisps are nothing more than barn owls with luminescent plumage. Hence, the possibility of them floating around reacting to other lights could explain their strange behavior.

In the 1970s, John Derr and Michael Persinger of the Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada, put forth a theory that these lights may be generated piezoelectrically under a tectonic strain.

The theory suggests that the strains that move faults also cause heat in the rocks, vaporizing the water in them. Rocks and soils containing piezoelectric elements such as quartz (or silicon) may also produce electricity, which is channeled up through soils via a column of vaporized water until it reaches the surface, somehow displaying itself in the form of earth lights. If correct, this could explain why such lights can behave in an electrical and erratic—or even apparently intelligent—manner.

Persinger thinks that his theory can be used to predict the manifestation of earthquakes and, along the way, explain many UFO sightings. “When the specific equations between UFO reports (the contemporary label for luminous events) and earthquakes in the central U.S.A. between 1950 and 1980 were applied to the 19th century (earthquakes were recorded then), there were predictable peaks in the numbers of luminous events for specific years,” says Persinger.

“Although there were no reports of ‘UFOs’ in the historical newspapers, there were reports of ‘odd air ships’ and ‘phantom balloons.’ The massive ‘flap’ of 1897, through several tens of states in the southeastern U.S.A., was followed by one of the largest earthquakes in the region.”

As interesting as this theory sounds, and as interesting as it would be to discover whether UFO “flaps” of the past century have been followed by major earthquakes or not, we wanted to test a different kind of will o’ the wisp. The kind that is said to appear in the presence of freshly buried bodies.

Decaying Bodies

One of the most popular scientific explanations for ghost lights is that the oxidation of hydrogen phosphide and methane gas produced by the decay of organic material may cause glowing lights to appear in the air. And this phenomenon is said to occur more easily in the proximity of “fresh” burials.

Thus, we positioned ourselves, with video cameras rolling, in an area of the cemetery where burials had taken place that same day and a few days before. The idea was to document on film the formation of a will o’ the wisp.

Luigi had even built an aspiring pump that would allow him to “suck” the wisp inside a hermetically sealed container in order to later test its chemical composition in the lab. In fact, Luigi has now been able to replicate the lights in his laboratory at the Department of Chemistry in Pavia with the help of his colleague Paolo Boschetti.

At first, the idea was to test the “cool fire” effect. Luigi explains it this way: “According to one hypothesis, the will o’ the wisp is a sort of cold flame, inconsistent with a normal combustion of methane, as reliable eyewitnesses have reported. ‘Cool flames’ can indeed be generated if vapors of suitable organic compounds (such as ethyl ether) come in contact with a hot surface kept at temperatures around 200–300°C [392–572ºF]. These luminescent pre-combustion haloes are sufficiently cool that a hand or a piece of paper can be put in them without being burned.”

The main objection to this interesting hypothesis is that the necessary vapors are not known components of marsh gases, and the presence of surfaces at such high temperatures is difficult to find in nature.

“It is often stated that the phenomenon originates from the spontaneous combustion of gases generated underground by anaerobic fermentation processes,” continues Luigi. “These gases consist mainly of methane and carbon dioxide. Small amounts of phosphine (PH3) and diphosphine (P2H4) [self-igniting on contact with the air] would act as a ‘chemical match’ for the combustible methane.

“Although this hypothesis is one century old, the presence of PH3 in marsh gases has only recently been demonstrated. If the will o’ the wisp indeed is a hot flame, this conjecture might be correct.” If, on the contrary, a will o’ the wisp is a cool “flame,” then the cold chemiluminescence of some compound naturally occurring in marsh gases appears to be a more appealing explanation.

Luigi reconsidered a century-old experiment conducted by German chemists in which phosphine, oxygen, and an inert gas were fed through three small nozzles at the base of a vertical glass tube. By carefully adjusting the flow of the inlets, a faint flickering luminescence could be seen in the dark near the top of the tube due to the chemiluminescence of phosphine.

Luigi built the necessary equipment with a 500 mL flat-bottomed flask, in which he put some solid phosphorous acid. The flask was stoppered by a silicone septum through which a mixture of air and nitrogen was stored on water within a gas tank and fed by a needle. A second needle in the septum provided for the necessary outlet. The flask was flushed with nitrogen and put on a hot plate that was heated to 200°C (392ºF).

“It works!” shouted Luigi, probably feeling a little like Dr. Frankenstein.

The decomposition of phosphorous acid generated phosphine, and a fog formed in the flask. When the air and nitrogen stream was fed into the phosphine vapors, a faint, pale-greenish light was clearly visible in the darkness.

The success in the lab, however, was not matched by success in the field. We spent the entire night at the cemetery, but nothing happened except buzzing and biting mosquitoes. After that there have been repeated visits to cemeteries, graveyards, marshes, and the like, and Luigi has started to carry with him a very sensitive phosphine detector—a portable Draeger Xam-7000—but so far with no luck.

Being able to reproduce spooklights in a lab is one thing. But to see it up close with your own eyes in a cemetery at night is quite another. Hopes are still high, however. There never is a shortage of fresh burials, and hunting season for will o’ the wisps is always open.

I like to read advertisements for quack remedies. I’ve come to suspect that “clinically proven” means “we gave it to three of our friends and got them to say it worked.” When the ads cite published medical studies, I like to track down and read those studies. I usually find that they have nothing whatsoever to do with the product in question and I get a lot of amusement from the pseudoscience and the testimonials.

I really hit the jackpot when I noticed an ad for a weight-loss product called Akavar 20/50. It made the usual claims: eat all you want and still lose weight. But it had the best advertising slogan ever: “We couldn’t say it in print if it wasn’t true!” I laughed out loud. Anyone can say anything in print until they get caught. These diet ads all say things that aren’t true, and the Federal Trade Commission can’t begin to catch them all.

The ad describes research results on Akavar as “staggering.” It claims to have published scientific research showing that twenty-three out of twenty-four patients using Akavar’s active ingredient lost weight and describes a controlled, randomized clinical trial of the actual product in which twenty-three out of twenty-four patients lost “a substantial amount of weight.” Two questions immediately came to mind: why were the numbers the same in both studies, and if a single active ingredient worked just as well, why was there any need to develop the Akavar formulation?

There was a toll-free number to call for further information. I called and asked where I could read the two studies they referred to. The man who answered was flummoxed: “No one’s ever asked me that before.” He had to go for help. Finally he came up with the names of two journals but no further information.

I searched PubMed for anything in either of those journals that might even remotely be considered studies of Akavar and couldn’t find anything. I wrote the company’s customer service representative and asked for more information. That led to the following surreal e-mail exchange over the next month and a half.

September 30: [Me] Your ad for Akavar describes a high rate of success in clinical studies. I’d like to read those studies for myself. I called your 800 number and the person who answered told me there were two studies published in the Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics and in the journal Medical Psychopharmacology. He was unable to give me the full citations, and I have searched PubMed and elsewhere and have been unable to locate the articles. Could you give me the exact citations (date, author, title of article, journal, volume, and page number)? Or better yet, could you possibly send me electronic copies of the articles? I would really appreciate it.

October 9: [Akavar] Thank you for your interest in Akavar 20/50. I will be happy to submit a request to our Compliance dept. and have these studies prepared for you to send via email or via mail. We request to know as to what use these will be used for and will require a phone number and address. As soon as I have this information I will submit the request and have these prepared for you to save any trouble of having to look these up yourself. Thanks so much.

October 9: [Me] I would prefer you send them by e-mail. What they will be used for? To help me decide for myself whether there is adequate evidence to recommend Akavar 20/50 to patients.

October 10: [Akavar] Thank you so much for this. I will forward this request to compliance and send via email when they have finished preparing the study.

October 15: [Me] I’m still waiting. The delay is making me wonder... if you really have legitimate scientific studies to back up your claims, why are they not posted on your web site or linked to the PubMed abstracts or at least listed in such a way that they can be located by interested physicians?

October 17: [Akavar] I apologize for the delay. I will follow up with our Compliance/Legal department to see if they have prepared these for you or not. I will let you know shortly.

October 30: [Me] It is now October 30, and I still have not received the studies. If they are not available in electronic format, all I really need is a proper citation: title of article, name of journal, names of authors, date, volume and page. If these studies really exist, and if they really support your product, your company certainly doesn’t seem very proud of them! If you cannot provide me with the citations, I will be forced to assume they do not exist and I will report your company for false advertising.

November 2: [Me again] OK. Still no response. I will have to give you a deadline. If you have not sent me the citations by November 5, I will take it as an admission that you are crooks who tell deliberate lies in your advertising and I will report you to the FTC. I will remind you that ALL I’m asking is that you tell me where I can find the clinical studies you advertise as supporting your product.

November 2: [Akavar] I just spoke with our Legal department as I have been out of the office this week. They informed me that they are contacting you via mail as they are requesting more information from you. I can not handle this request other than our legal department. This was sent to the address you provided me below and should be received within normal postal delivery time. [I never received anything by mail.] I apologize sincerely for this delayed response. It should be taken care of now. Thank you.

November 2: [Me] How about you give me the e-mail address of the legal department so you don’t need to act as intermediary? There is no reason for them to request more information from me—that is ridiculous! And even if they are mailing me copies of the studies, there is no reason they can’t also immediately provide me with the citation information via e-mail. Reputable companies usually display that kind of information proudly on their web sites, often with a link to the studies.

November 5: [Akavar] Our compliance/legal department has prepared the following for you and are sending via email at your request via the above attachments. Please respond accordingly. Thanks again for your patience.

[Attachment] We have received your request to provide you with all studies relating to our Akavar 20/50 product. Due to the confidential nature of these studies, we cannot release these studies without a signed Non-Disclosure Agreement. Our standard Non-Disclosure Agreement is enclosed. Pleases [sic] review and sign the Agreement. Upon receipt of the signed Non-Disclosure Agreement, we will happily provide you the information you requested. . . . [This was accompanied by a complicated, multi-page legal document.]

November 5: [Me] You have GOT to be kidding!! I did NOT ask for “all” studies relating to your product. I did NOT ask for any proprietary information. All I asked for was the correct citations for the two published studies referred to in your advertising. This is not anything that requires any signature or agreement. Published studies are in the public domain. This is becoming a surreal experience. Perhaps I’d better start all over again by copying my initial request: [My initial e-mail was copied here.]

Let’s make this really simple:

1. Are there two published studies?
2. If so, please provide me with the information I will need to locate and read those studies: Name of author(s), title of article, name of journal, volume, page number and date of publication.

November 7: [Akavar] Any update from MKF?

November 7: [Me] No. Who or what is MKF?

November 13: [Akavar] We regret that you refused to sign the NDA, which would have allowed us to provide you the highly confidential, proprietary data related to Akavar. We are, however, enclosing the citations for the published articles relating to Akavar’s efficacy. [Lieberman, H.R., Tharion, W.J., Shukitt-Hale, B., Speckman, K.L., & Tulley, R. (2002). Psychopharmacology (Berl), 164(3), 250–261. Andersen, T. and J. Fogh (2001). J Hum Nutr Diet 14(3): 243–50.] Any representation on your part that the published studies comprise the full substantiation for Akavar 20/50 or that the substantiation is lacking in any way would be false and intentionally misleading on your part since your [sic] were not privy to the full documentation. Again because of your refusal to sign a simple NDA. [This letter was signed by a paralegal.]

November 13: [Me] You did not provide the titles of the studies, but I easily found them. I can see why you didn’t provide the titles, and I can see why I didn’t find them when I looked before, because it is obvious that they were not studies of Akavar 20/50.The Lieberman study is titled “Effects of caffeine, sleep loss, and stress on cognitive performance and mood during U.S. Navy SEAL training. Sea-Air-Land.” The Andersen study is “Weight loss and delayed gastric emptying following a South American herbal preparation in overweight patients.” The herbal preparation was a mixture of yerba mate, guarana, and damiana. The patients initially lost a few pounds, but those who took the active drug for 12 months “maintained” their weight during that period. The abstract of the study does not say that the study participants were instructed not to alter their eating habits. And the numbers of patients do not correspond to either of the studies described in your ads.

Your ad says, “this is scientific fact, documented by published medical findings.” Are you now admitting that there are no published clinical studies of Akavar 20/50 and that the statements in your ads are false?

I never heard back from them, and I decided I had had enough fun. I reported them for false advertising. I was not the only one to complain. A class action suit was filed against the company for “fraudulent, deceptive, and otherwise improper advertising and marketing practices.” The lawsuit says, “Akavar has not undergone scientific evaluation by a team of doctors, nor has Akavar been tested in controlled random clinical trials.” The lawsuit also mentions that Akavar is identical to another of the company’s products, Estrin-D, which is also the subject of an unrelated lawsuit.

Later a friend contacted the company and signed the nondisclosure agreement to see what would happen. All he got was a written summary of some unspecified studies with no authors or publications listed.

Imagine a pharmaceutical company telling me they couldn’t divulge the title of an article about their new drug in the New England Journal of Medicine unless I signed a nondisclosure agreement! What planet are we on? Even worse, imagine if a pharmaceutical company asked the FDA to approve a new drug on the basis of two studies that had little or nothing to do with that drug, insisting they had more proof, but it was a secret!

I don’t know why I’m surprised. Quacks have to defend themselves any way they can, since they can’t defend themselves with facts.

You might be curious to know what ingredients are in this miracle product. Nothing even remotely likely to promote weight loss except for caffeine and related xanthines. Drinking lots of coffee is probably just as effective.

A recent issue of the Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database newsletter said:

Akavar 20/50 is a new supplement promoted for weight loss. It contains a long list of ingredients, including large amounts of caffeine from yerba mate, guarana, green tea, and kola nut extracts. It also contains damiana, ginger, schisandra, scutellaria, vitamin B6, magnesium, and other ingredients. Some research suggests that a few of these ingredients might help for weight loss, but this is preliminary. There is no proof that this specific combination of ingredients is effective. Product advertising says, “Eat all you want and still lose weight. . . .” Remind patients that if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

And remember, the Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database could say that in print if it weren’t true—but they wouldn’t!

The Eighth Gathering for Gardner (G4G8) took place at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Atlanta, Georgia, from March 26 through March 30, 2008. A Gathering for Gardner occurs in Atlanta every two years, celebrating the many facets of the polymath Martin Gardner. Martin, who rarely attends public meetings, attended the first two gatherings. Although he has not come to the latter six meetings, the organizers make sure that he receives a full report of all the presentations.

Attendance is by invitation only. To receive an invitation, a person must have some connection with Martin and share one or more of his myriad interests. At the earlier gatherings, most of the attendees were chosen by Martin himself. Since then, the criteria have become more inclusive. People are invited if their activities have been influenced or inspired by Martin and his writings. Most of the attendees have not met Martin personally, but many of them have communicated with him. Among many other amazing qualities, Martin somehow manages to engage in extended correspondence with hundreds of admiring disciples.

I first met Martin in 1950 at a “sodality” at Bruce Elliot’s apartment in Greenwich Village, New York. Bruce Elliot was a magician who held these sodalities every Friday night. Every major New York magician usually attended. I was a young college student in transition from finishing my undergraduate degree and beginning my graduate work at The Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. Because I had recently published some of my creations in a magic magazine, I got the attention of some of the New York magicians. They invited me to attend Bruce Elliot’s sodality whenever I came to New York. I made the trip to New York just to attend.

At my first sodality I was dazzled by the gathering of famous magicians whom I knew by reputation but had never met in person. I met Jay Marshall, Dai Vernon, and other luminaries, including Martin. Because Martin and I shared interests, not only in magic but also in skeptically evaluating paranormal and other pseudoscientific claims, we became good friends. We began a correspondence that still continues. Later, when I worked for General Electric Company at its New York headquarters from 1958 through 1961, Martin and I were neighbors. We lived only a few miles from each other and frequently had dinner together.

Martin’s mastery of magic; philosophy of science; recreational mathematics; optical illusions; the literary subtleties of L. Frank Baum, Lewis Carroll, and Arthur Conan Doyle; debunking pseudoscience; theology; and other topics have always impressed me. However, having attended all of the eight Gatherings for Gardner, I have become even more awed with the variety of subjects to which he contributed and for which many disciples credit him for inspiring. It is beyond my comprehension how one individual, without benefit of computers or assistants, can consistently write books, articles, reviews, and commentaries on so many different topics and at the same time maintain continuing correspondence with so many individuals around the world. And just as amazing is that the quality of the content of his writing and correspondence is consistently of the highest caliber.

So who attends these gatherings? What takes place? How do they serve as a tribute to this remarkable man? At the most recent gathering, registration began on Wednesday evening. Registrants assembled in many small groups. In some of the groups, individuals displayed new puzzles or challenged one another with puzzles. In other groups, magicians demonstrated new tricks. Discussions on a variety of topics were held. And, of course, participants reminisced about some of the previous attendees who have sadly passed away, such as Jerry Andrus and Jay Marshall. Very soon, news spread that Lennart Green, the dazzling magician and puzzle devotee who has been a fixture at all previous gatherings, would not be able to make it to this one. He had broken his hip on his way to the airport in Sweden. Although unable to attend, word reached us later that he was doing well.

Three hundred people registered for G4G8. In addition to participants from the United States, attendees came from England, Scotland, the Netherlands, Israel, Serbia, Italy, Japan, China, Denmark, Germany, Portugal, Spain, Hungary, and Canada. I suspect that several other countries might also have been represented.

The formal conference began at 8:30 Thursday morning, and later that evening we had dinner at the Sun Dial Restaurant, which sits atop the tower of the Westin Peachtree Hotel. The restaurant continually rotates so that each diner obtains a 360-degree panoramic view of Atlanta and its surroundings. We could see many boarded-up windows and other traces of the recent tornado that had swept through downtown Atlanta. Several magicians went from table to table entertaining the attendees. These included Dan Garrett, Thomas Fraps and Pit Hartling from Germany, and several others.

On Friday afternoon, chartered buses took the participants to Tom Rodger’s unique house for a Japanese lunch and dinner. Tom, who is the primary coordinator of the gathering, hired Japanese architects to construct his house in authentic Japanese style. His environs were landscaped with Japanese gardens, ponds, waterfalls, a tea house, and the like. Visitors were treated to Japanese Taiko Drumming, the erection of a group sculpture, a puzzle hunt, and a special performance by a dancer from Japan, as well as street magic.

Compass Points, a fifty-two-inch scupture designed by George W. Hart, is composed of sixty stainless-steel pieces, 120 brackets, and 510 nuts and bolts.

The dinner on Saturday at the Ritz-Carlton featured a tribute to the late Jerry Andrus as well as a magic show performed by Dan Garrett (filling in for Lennart Green), Pit Hartling, Thomas Fraps, and Mark Mitton. The mathematician Arthur Benjamin performed his very impressive and entertaining lightning calculator act.

Throughout the gathering, an exhibition room and sales room were available for participants. The exhibition room displayed rare puzzles, puzzles made out of special woods or precious metals, kinetic art, optical illusions, and other interesting items. The sales room provided the opportunity to buy a variety of puzzles, books, and gadgets related to the various themes of the gathering.

The major focus of the gathering was the presentations—ranging in length from ten to thirty minutes (each speaker who finished before his or her allotted time was awarded one dollar). More than ninety presentations were given. At previous gatherings, the range of topics—all related to Martin Gardner’s interests—included the construction of mazes, juggling, joggling (juggling while racing on foot), analysis of ancient puzzles, introduction of new puzzles, knot theory, the history of magic, mathematical magic, critiques of paranormal claims, paradoxes, new mathematical proofs, kinetic art, new and old optical illusions, various themes based on Escher’s art and geometry, specially designed Frisbees, demonstration of a model aircraft kept aloft by the slight breeze created by a person walking, and other delights.

This year’s contributions were no less varied. Several presentations focused on different ways to make mathematics fun for students—an endeavor that is dear to Martin’s heart. At one extreme, we had some rather arcane presentations of new mathematical proofs, such as one that dealt with a new computerized proof. Thomas Banchoff showed an excerpt of Flatland: The Movie. Several presenters provided proofs for various puzzles. We had talks on soap bubbles, the Knight’s Tour, puzzle food, Sudoku, and puzzle locks from India.

Adam Atkinson from the United Kingdom discussed “Applications of Vampires in Law and Medicine.” He used what we know about vampires from shows such as Buffy and Ultraviolet to suggest various ways they could be used to solve legal and medical problems. George Bohigian explained that in ancient times the ability to recognize and identify constellations and celestial bodies was used to test vision. The ability to detect the separation between the two stars that make up the double star in the Big Dipper was a common test. Bohigian showed how this ability correlated with the 20/20 line in the current Snellen visual acuity test. Arthur Benjamin performed and then taught us a wonderful card trick that depends on a subtle mathematical principle. And Michael Ecker regaled us with a survey of fun paradoxes such as “going back in time and killing both of your parents before they met.”

Participants of the Gathering for Gardner pose nect to the sculpture they helped assemble.

Peter Lamont, from the University of Edinburgh, discussed “The Rise of the Indian Rope Trick.” His presentation was an interesting addendum to his book The Rise of the Indian Rope Trick: the Biography of a Legend (reviewed in SI, November/December 2005). According to historians, the trick was witnessed by Marco Polo, and the Viceroy of India offered in 1875 a large reward for a single performance of the trick. Lamont’s careful research revealed that neither of these statements is true. The Indian Rope Trick, the stimulus for endless debates and speculation, was created as a journalistic hoax by John Wilkie that was published in the Chicago Daily Tribune on August 8, 1890. It was quickly picked up by newspapers around the world.

I was especially intrigued by the physicist David Finkelstein’s “Decoding Dürer.” When Dürer created his famous engraving Melencolia in 1514, he was one of the most gifted artists of his time. He was also, like Leonardo Da Vinci, talented in many other fields, such as technology, philosophy, and the like. Many, including myself, have found Dürer’s engraving fascinating because of its many occult, Biblical, and other symbols. Among other images in the engraving is a 4 x 4 magic square. Many art and other scholars have speculated about the message they think Dürer was trying to convey. Finkelstein argues that the engraving contains a “double message.”

“The overt message . . . is that absolute truth and beauty are inaccessible to the artist/scientist, causing the melancholy of the legend. The covert message, however, is that Natural Philosophy, Gateway I to Heaven, is superior to Mathematical and Theological Philosophy. The innocuous admission of the limitations of science veils a manifesto of the impending scientific revolution that would otherwise have been a capital offense,” said Finkelstein. His analysis is compelling, but I suspect many scholars will not buy it.

As you can surmise from this small sample of the content of the presentations, the topics not only ranged widely but all dealt with challenging puzzles, paradoxes, mysteries, and other themes to which Martin Gardner has contributed to or inspired others to contribute to. Each of the presenters gratefully acknowledged that they were inspired by Martin in pursuing these themes further.

A Capuchin Friar

Born Francesco Forgione on May 25, 1887, in the town of Pietrelcina, Pio grew up surrounded by superstitious beliefs and practices. His mother took him soon after birth to a fortuneteller to have his horoscope cast and at the age of two to a witch who attempted to cure an intestinal disorder by holding him upside down and chanting spells. As a boy he was tormented by nighttime “monsters,” and he conversed with Jesus, the Virgin Mary, and his guardian angel. He also had other mystical experiences (Ruffin 1982, 21–23, 79) that today are associated with a fantasy-prone personality.¹ He was “frequently ill and emotionally disturbed” and claimed he was often physically attacked by evil spirits (Wilson 1988, 88, 144).

In 1903, he entered The Order of Friars Minor, Capuchin—a conservative Catholic order that traces its origin to St. Francis of Assisi (1182–1226), the first stigmatic. The new initiate was called Fra (“Brother”) Pio (“Pious”), after the sixteenth-century pope, St. Pius V (Ruffin 1982, 35, 39). Pio continued to hear voices and experience visions, and in 1910 he began to experience the stigmata just after being ordained a priest.

As Padre Pio continued to exhibit the phenomenon, he began to attract a cult following. It was said he could look into people’s souls and, without them saying a word, know their sins. He could also allegedly experience “bilocation” (the ability to be in two places at the same time), emit an “odor of sanctity,” tell the future, and effect miraculous cures (Wilkinson 2008; Rogo 1982, 98–100). Village hucksters sold his credulous disciples alleged Pio relics in the form of swatches of cloth daubed with chicken blood (Ruffin 1982, 153).

The local clergy accused Padre Pio’s friary of putting him on display in order to make money. They expressed skepticism about his purported gifts and suggested the stigmata were faked.

The Phenomena

The claims of Padre Pio’s mystical abilities are unproven, consisting of anecdotal evidence—a major source being the aptly named Tales of Padre Pio (McCaffery 1978). Pio’s touted psychic abilities seem no better substantiated than the discredited claims of the typical fortuneteller or medium (e.g., Nickell 2001, 122–127, 197–199). Many of his “bilocations” are analogous to Elvis Presley sightings, while some are—at best—consistent with hallucinations (such as one reported during a migraine attack or others occurring when the experiencer was near sleep or in some other altered state [McCaffery 1978, 24–36]). The reputed “odor of sanctity,” said Pio’s accusers, “was the result of self-administered eau-de-cologue” (“Pio” 2008).

As to Pio’s miraculous healings, they— like other such claims (Nickell 2001, 202–205)—are not based on positive evidence of the miraculous. Instead, the occurrences are merely held to be “medically inexplicable,” so claimants are engaging in the logical fallacy of arguing from ignorance (drawing a conclusion based on a lack of knowledge). Faith-healing claims often have alternative explanations, including misdiagnosis, psychosomatic conditions, spontaneous remissions, prior medical treatment, and other effects, including the body’s own healing ability. Cases are complicated by poor investigation and even outright hoaxing. One man’s claim of instant healing of a leg wound by Padre Pio, for example, was bogus; his doctor attested it “had, in fact, been healed for six months or more” (Ruffin 1982, 159).

But it is Pio’s stigmata that have made him famous. Unfortunately, some examining physicians believed his lesions were superficial, but their inspections were made difficult by Pio’s acting as if the wounds were exceedingly painful. Also, they were supposedly covered by “thick crusts” of blood. One distinguished pathologist sent by the Holy See noted that beyond the scabs was an absence of “any sign of edema, of penetration, or of redness, even when examined with a good magnifying glass.” Another concluded that the side “wound” had not penetrated the skin at all (Ruffin 1982, 147–148). Some thought Pio inflicted the wounds with acid or kept them open by continually drenching them in iodine (Ruffin 1982, 149–150; Moore 2007; Wilkinson 2008).

Nevertheless, some of the faithful were so intent on defending Pio that they made incredible claims. One was the insistence that the hand lesions, which skeptics thought were superficial injuries, were through-and-through wounds—“so much so,” insisted Pio’s devoted family physician, that one could see light through them.” Of course, this is nonsense in view of authentic wounds in general and Pio’s thickly blood-crusted ones in particular (Ruffin 1982, 146–147).

There were other problems with the “wounds,” including their location. Only the gospel of John (19:34) mentions the lance wound in Jesus’ side, and John fails to specify which side. St. Francis’ was on the right, whereas Padre Pio’s was on the left. Also, witnesses described his side wound as in the shape of a cross; in other words, it had a stylized rather than realistic (lance-produced) form (Ruffin 1982, 145, 147).² Moreover, his wounds were in the hands rather than the wrists (some anatomists argue that nailed hands could not support the body of a crucified person and would tear away). When asked about this, Pio replied casually, “Oh it would be too much to have them exactly as they were in the case of Christ” (Ruffin 1982, 145, 150). (One is reminded of Therese Neumann, whose “nail wounds” shifted from round to rectangular over time, presumably as she learned the true shape of Roman nails [Nickell 2001, 278].) Moreover, Padre Pio lacked wounds on the forehead (as from a crown of thorns [John 19:2]).

For years Pio wore fingerless gloves on his hands, perpetually concealing his wounds (Ruffin 1982, 148). His supporters regard this as an act of pious modesty. However, another interpretation is that the concealment was a shrewd strategy that eliminated the need for him to maintain his wounds. Before his death, frail, weary, with “rheumy eyes seemingly fixed on another world,” Padre Pio celebrated Mass. According to Ruffin (1982, 305), “For the first time in anyone’s memory, he did not attempt to hide his hands at any point in the service. To the amazement of everyone there, there was no trace of any wound.” At his death on September 23, 1968, his skin was unblemished.

So, were Padre Pio’s phenomena genuine? Many other stigmatics—like Magdalena de la Cruz in 1543—confessed to faking stigmata. Maria de la Visitacion, the “holy nun of Lisbon,” was caught painting fake wounds on her hands in 1587. Pope Pius IX himself privately branded as a fraud Palma Maria Matarelli (1825–1888), insisting that “she has befooled a whole crowd of pious and credulous souls.” Suspiciously, under surveillance, Therese Neumann (1898– 1962) produced actual blood flows only when the phenomenon was “hidden from observation.” And as recently as 1984, stigmatic Gigliola Giorgini was convicted of fraud by an Italian court (Wilson 1988, 26–27, 42, 53, 147).

Even a defender of Padre Pio’s stigmata, C. Bernard Ruffin (1982, 145), admits, “For every genuine stigmatic, whether holy or hysterical, saintly or satanic, there are at least two whose wounds are self-inflicted.” Catholic scholar Herbert Thurston (1952, 100) found no acceptable case after St. Francis of Assisi. Thurston believed the phenomenon was due to suggestion, but Padre Pio himself responded to such theorizers: “Go out to the fields and look very closely at a bull. Concentrate on him with all your might. Do this and see if horns grow on your head!” (qtd. in Ruffin 1982, 150). As for St. Francis, his extraordinary zeal to imitate Jesus may have led him to engage in a pious deception (Nickell 2001, 276–283).

Canonization

Not only was Padre Pio accused of inducing his stigmata with acid, he was also alleged to have misused funds and to have had sex with female parishioners—in the confessional. The founder of the Catholic university hospital in Rome branded Pio “an ignorant and self-mutilating psychopath who exploited people’s credulity” (“Pio” 2008).

The faithful were undeterred, however, and after Pio’s death there arose a popular movement to make him a saint. Pope John Paul II—whose papacy sped up the process of canonization and proclaimed more saints than any other in history (Grossman 2002)—heard the entreaties. Pio was beatified in 1999. On June 16, 2002, he was canonized as Saint Pio of Pietrelcina, but not before at least two statues of him wept in anticipation. Unfortunately, the bloody tears on one turned out to have been faked (a drug addict used a syringe to apply trickles of his own blood), and a whitish film on one eye of the other was determined to have been insect secretion (“Crying” 2002).

Interestingly, neither of the two proclaimed miracles of Pio (one used for his beatification, the other for canonization) involved stigmata. Instead, they were healings, assumed miraculous because they were determined to be medically inexplicable. In short, the Church never affirmed Pio’s stigmata as miraculous.

Of course, not everyone was happy with the canonization of Pio. Historian Sergio Luzzatto wrote a critical biography of Pio called The Other Christ. Luzzatto cited the testimony of a pharmacist recorded in a document in the Vatican’s archive. Maria De Viot wrote: “I was an admirer of Padre Pio and I met him for the first time on 31 July 1919.” She revealed, “Padre Pio called me to him in complete secrecy and telling me not to tell his fellow brothers, he gave me personally an empty bottle, and asked if I would act as a chauffeur to transport it back from Foggia to San Giovanni Rotondo with four grams of pure carbolic acid” (Moore 2007). But if the acid was for disinfecting syringes, as Pio had alleged to the pharmacist, why the secrecy? And why did Pio need non-diluted acid?

Investigation shows the timing of this reported incident is significant. The previous September, Pio and some of the other friars at San Giovanni Rotondo were administering injections to boys who were ill with influenza. Alcohol not being available, an exhausted doctor left carbolic acid to be used for sterilizing needles and injection sites, while neglecteing to tell the friars it had to be diluted. As a result, Pio and another friar were left with “angry red spots” on their hands. When Pio was subsequently alleged to have exhibited stigmata, the other friar at first thought the wounds were from the carbolic acid. Although Pio allegedly exhibited stigmata on his hands as early as 1910, the “permanent” stigmata appeared, apparently, not long after the carbolic-acid misuse (Ruffin 1982, 69–71, 138–143).

Sergio Luzzatto drew anger for publicizing the pharmacist’s testimony. The Catholic Anti-Defamation League accused the historian of “spreading anti-Catholic libels,” and the League’s president sniffed, “We would like to remind Mr. Luzzatto that according to Catholic doctrine, canonisation carries with it papal infallibility” (Moore 2007).

Exhumation

Forty years after the death of Padre Pio in 1968, his remains were exhumed from their crypt beneath a church in San Giovanni Rotondo. The intention of church officials was to renew reverence and so boost a flagging economy. Padre Pio, explained the Los Angeles Times, is “big business” (Wilkinson 2008).

No doubt many anticipated that the saint’s body would be found incorrupt. The superstitious believe that the absence of decay in a corpse is miraculous and a sign of sanctity (Cruz 1977). In fact, under favorable conditions even an unembalmed body can become mummified. Dessication may result from interment in a dry tomb or catycomb. Conversely, perpetually wet conditions may cause the body’s fat to form a soaplike substance known as “grave wax”; subsequently, the body may take on the leathery effect of mummification (Nickell 2001, 49).

Alas, Pio’s body, despite embalment (by injections of formalin), was only in “fair condition.” So that it could be displayed, a London wax museum was commissioned to fashion a lifelike silicon mask of Pio, complete with his full beard and bushy eyebrows. The “cosmetically enhanced corpse” went on display April 24, 2008, in a glass-and-marble coffin (where it is to repose until the end of September 2009) “amid weeping devotees and eager souvenir-hawkers” (Wilkinson 2008; “Pio” 2008). For those who wonder: no, there is no visible trace of stigmata.

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to Herb Schapiro, who continues to send me useful news clippings, and Tim Binga, director of CFI Libraries, for his continued research assistance.

Notes

1. For a discussion of fantasy proneness, see Nickell 2001, 84–85, 298–299.
2. The three-inch side wound was seen relatively rarely and, although “most witnesses” said it was cruciform, others described it as being “a clean cut parallel to the ribs” (Ruffin 1982, 147).

References

• Cruz, Joan Carroll. 1977. The Incorruptibles. Rockford, Illinois: Tan Books and Publishers.
• Crying statue not a miracle. 2002. Available online at www.ananova.com; accessed March 12.
• Grossman, Cathy Lynn. 2002. John Paul II is history’s champion saintmaker. USA Today, October 3.
• McCaffery, John. 1978. Tales of Padre Pio: The Friar of San Giovanni. Kansas City, Kansas: Andrews and McMeel.
• Moore, Malcolm. 2007. Italy’s Padre Pio “faked his own stigmata with acid.” Available online at www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/ news/2007/10/2...; accessed October 24, 2007.
• Nickell, Joe. 1993. Looking for a Miracle. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus.
• —. 2001. Real-Life X-Files: Investigating the Paranormal. Lexington, Ky.: University Press of Kentucky.
• Padre Pio da Pietrelcina. 2008. Available online at www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/saints/ns_lit_doc_20020616_padre-pio_en.html; accessed April 28, 2008.
• —. 2008. Available online at www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pio_of_Pietrelcina; accessed April 28, 2008.
• Rogo, D. Scott. 1982. Miracles: A Parascientific Inquiry Into Wondrous Phenomena. New York: Dial Press.
• Ruffin, C. Bernard. 1982. Padre Pio: The True Story. Huntington, Indiana: Our Sunday Visitor.
• Wilkinson, Tracy. 2008. Padre Pio’s body attracts thousands. Buffalo News, April 25 (reprinted from the Los Angeles Times).
• Wilson, Ian. 1988. The Bleeding Mind: An Investigation into the Mysterious Phenomenon of Stigmata. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

Skeptical Inquirer readers may not be aware that a rogue planet on a 3,600-year orbit is about to enter the inner solar system and visit a catastrophe upon Earth. This threatening planet was discovered by the ancient Mesopotamians, who named it Nibiru. It was known also to the Mayans, who associated it with the end—December 2012—of their “long count” calendar. Although astronomers and space scientists are tracking Nibiru, this information is being kept from the public as part of a worldwide conspiracy. This official silence cannot be maintained for much longer, however, since by 2009 Nibiru will be visible to the naked eye from the southern hemisphere, and already Earth’s axis is tilting, changing the length of the day under its influence. As one aficionado recently wrote to me: “Why are you lying? It’s coming, and everyone knows it.”

I was introduced to this conspiracy theory in December 2007, when I began to receive questions about Nibiru submitted to NASA’s “Ask an Astrobiologist” Web site. I normally receive about a dozen questions per week from the public dealing mostly with life in the universe, but sometimes they include UFOs and visiting aliens. Nibiru seemed different, since it was claimed to be an actual planet that was being tracked by astronomers but hidden from the public. Knowing that the astronomers of the world, both professional and amateur, are a free-spirited group who couldn’t keep a secret even if ordered to, I assumed that Nibiru was the sort of Internet rumor that would quickly pass.

However, I also remembered that Nibiru had briefly been prominent among conspiracy buffs in 2003, when there was a similar rumor of the coming destruction of our civilization. The source of this information was a specific warning said to have been sent to the people of Earth by an advanced alien civilization on a planet orbiting the star Zeta Reticuli. A woman named Nancy Lieder claimed to be channeling this information from the Zetans, who warned that a worldwide cataclysm would strike the Earth in May 2003. Phil Plait described this situation in detail on his “Badastronomy” Web site. As it turned out, May 2003 passed with no pole shift or other cataclysms, so I figured that would end the Nibiru interest. Yet here it was again, the same story recycled with an end-of-the-world date reset to December 2012.

In the six months since I first mentioned Nibiru on my Web site, this topic has threatened to take over “Ask an Astrobiologist.” I now receive at least one question per day ranging from anguished (“I can’t sleep; I am really scared; I don’t want to die”) to the abusive (“Why are you lying; you are putting my family at risk; if NASA denies it then it must be true”).

This article is based on more than one hundred questions submitted in the first four months of 2008, only a few of which were actually answered online. Except for some condensing, I’ve left the questioners’ text as it was originally submitted.

Initial Questions: The Distinction between Nibiru, Planet X, and Eris

Although the name of the Sumerian god Nibiru is most often given to this object, I quickly learned that some Web sites were also calling it Planet X or Eris. Planet X is a generic term used by astronomers over the past century for any unknown or hypothesized planets beyond Pluto. Eris is an actual, newly discovered dwarf planet, a little larger than Pluto but much farther away. By conflating these, some were claiming that NASA had found Nibiru or that Eris was going to fly past Earth in 2012.

Q: I was on the NASA home page and searched Planet Niburu. Come to find out there actually is a planet beyond Pluto and they are calling it Niburu. Some said Planet Niburu didn’t exist but now we know it does! There haven’t been many straight answers on this subject so I don’t really expect to get the total truth, but here I go. Is there ANY chance of a Niburu flyby in 2012? And if there is why don’t the public have a right to know so that we can prepare ourselves?

A: I’m sorry if the NASA web page confused you. I just checked, and there is no mention of Nibiru other than recent statements that it does not exist and is a hoax. The web site does include a 2005 news story on the discovery of one of the transneptunian dwarf planets, 2003UB313. UB313 was subsequently given the name Eris, and there is plenty of information about Eris on the web, including a good introduction in Wikipedia. But this has nothing to do with Nibiru. Nibiru is a hoax, linked to a religious cult, and having nothing to do with science.

Q: How can you call Nibiru a hoax when your own IRAS detected it and you issued a press release in 1982 which made it to eight major newspapers?

A: When looking into this sort of thing, you need to read past the first paragraph, since new data are always coming along in science. IRAS (the first infrared survey satellite, which flew more than 20 years ago) cataloged 350,000 infrared sources, and initially many of these were unidentified (which was the point, of course, of making such a survey). All of these observations have been followed up by subsequent studies with more powerful telescopes both on the ground and in space. The rumor about a “tenth planet” erupted in 1984 after a scientific paper was published in Astrophysical Journal Letters titled “Unidentified point sources in the IRAS minisurvey,” which discussed several infrared sources with “no counterparts.” But these “mystery objects” were later found to be distant galaxies. The bottom line is that Nibiru is a myth, with no basis whatever in fact. To an astronomer, persistent claims about a planet that is nearby but invisible are just plain silly.

Q: I have been reading the questions and answers about Nibiru. I am glad you say it does not exist. However Eris does exist and I see they were going to call it Xena . . . planet X. On this Website when you type in Nibiru Eris comes up and it clearly states it is the 10th planet. Will Eris do a flyby since it is considered a planet and the 10th one? Is Eris coming toward us? Could this even be possible that we would be thrown off our axis? Are Pluto and others really slightly of their normal gravitational paths because of this planet that is supposedly coming toward us? Why do they say time is speeding up because of the magnetic pulse this planet is creating? Is this true that there are only really 16 hours a day now because time is moving faster? Is that possible? Why do the days seem so much shorter? I am scared about this whole 2012 thing. Eris seems to be in the position that everyone says Nibiru is and the same size. Maybe we are asking the wrong question. Maybe we should be asking about Eris and not Nibiru. Thank you for your time as I am scared to death!

A: There is no factual basis for the many Nibiru stories. This Internet chatter originated from the claim by Nancy Lieder that she was warned about this planet by aliens from the star Zeta Reticuli. In the absence of real information, however, people speculate and embellish this fictional story. One such addition is to link Nibiru with “Planet X,” a term used for many years by astronomers to refer to any unknown planet that might exist beyond Pluto. Far from being a real object, this term indicates an unknown or undiscovered object (that is why it is called “X”). Another false link is with Eris, the largest of the dwarf planets recently found beyond Neptune, designated 2003 UB313 when it was discovered in 2003. Before Eris was given its formal name, its discoverer, Mike Brown of Caltech, informally referred to it as Xena, a word play on “Planet X.” The name Eris was officially adopted by the International Astronomical Union in 2006. However, this has nothing to do with Nibiru. Nibiru is supposed to be a large planet on a highly elliptical orbit with a period of 3,600 years, which comes onto the inner solar system and will disrupt Earth in 2003 (the original claim) or 2012 (the current claim). Eris is a dwarf planet (smaller than the Moon) with a period of 557 years, currently far beyond Neptune or Pluto at a distance of about 10 billion miles. Its orbit will never bring it into the inner solar system; the closest it will come, in about 2255, is 4 billion miles. Eris does not match the fictional object Nibiru in distance, orbit, size, or any other property, and it does not threaten Earth in any way. The other items you mention from the Internet are untrue. Neither Pluto nor any other transneptunian object is deviating from its normal path. Time is not speeding up, and the days are not shorter. You know as well as I do that there are still the usual 24 hours in the day, not 16! Please don’t be scared; the entire Nibiru story, as well as any concerns about Eris threatening Earth, are a hoax, nothing more.

Trying to Contain the Topic

At the beginning of February, I combined several similar questions in the hopes that I could lay this topic to rest and get back to writing about real science.

Q: Recent questions about Nibiru: (1) I have found a lot of stuff about a so called planet. Planet x or Nibiru. If anything they say [is] possible like revolving around the sun clockwise and it has been said that its orbit is way far out past Pluto. Also there are statements that it has a 3600-year orbit around the sun and that [it] is supposed to return in the near future. Is this possible at all? It sounds fishy to me, but there are supposed pics of it and a lot of scientist talk about it. I even wikipedia searched it. I would just like to find out some info please. (2) Nibiru does exist and I can prove it. Nibiru is in the old testament Exodus 6:4. and you are watching Nibiru from a lab on the south pole. also I have images from a telescope of Nibiru. and people from the southern hemisphere can see Nibiru in the daytime. is that proof enough for you? (3) many signs tell that something big is out there coming and why wouldn’t it be true about nibiru / planet x? why build a telescope at the south pole an photos and such with this redish dwarf star moving fast in 1983 it was 50 billion miles away and 10 years later it is alot closer is it hiding behind the sun i know you all dont want to start a world wide panic. (4) I read were you said that Nibiru is a hoax. My question to you is why would anyone let the american population know about such a catastrophy? Isnt it the governments job to keep the population at ease? (5) What is this a picture of? http://www.greatdreams.com/nibiru-possible.jpg It’s said to be Nibiru, but as you say Nibiru is a hoax. so what is this really a photo of?

A: I hope this is my last comment on the Nibiru hoax, but questions like the above five keep coming in. Most of the entries on the Internet about Nibiru are false. Wikipedia has it correct when they write that “Nibiru is a name in Sumerian, Babylonian astrology associated with the god Marduk, generally accepted as referring to the planet Jupiter.” The rest is a hoax, including all the “stuff” questioner #1 found on the Internet. Questioners #2 and #3 mention the astronomical observatory at the South Pole, but I assure you these astronomers are not looking at Nibiru. The Antarctic is a great place for infrared astronomical observations, and it also has the advantage that objects can be observed continuously without the interference of the day-night cycle. Questioners #3 and #4 seem to think that the government would hide information about Nibiru and the catastrophe coming in a few years, but I can’t imagine why. My experience is, in fact, that sometimes parts of the government do just the opposite, as in the frequent references to various terrorist threats. In any case, the job of NASA scientists is to discover and tell the truth! Finally, questioner #5 asks me to identify two pictures. I can only guess that these might be images of an expanding gas cloud (nebula) ejected by a star in its old age. They are obviously very distant, since we see stars in the foreground superposed on the nebula. [A sharp-eyed reader later identified these photos as an expanding gas shell around the star V838 Mon].

Questions Become Angry and Threatening

Having called Nibiru a hoax on a NASA Web site, I had opened myself to a growing series of abusive emails (which I did not answer). Here is a sample:

Q: I can’t believe This!, you still have the gall to lie to the hole world about planetX Nibiru, How dare you do that, yet you keep on calling youself a Senior Scientist, shame on you, people must keep on knocking hard on your door until you give up and come clean.

Q: Sorry but you say Nibiru is a Hoax? Doesnt Exist? So maybe The Sumerian people doesnt exist also! Nibiru does exists and its the new Planet discovered in 2005 size of Pluto. It is talked about centurys ago in Sumerian Civilization. Stone Plates with the planet were found! Its possible to say that this planet giant orbit passes between Sun and Earth and causes the Glaciar Eras to happen. I talk about the facts! Like science usually does! So how can you say its a hoax???

Q: I hope I can get an honest answer and not a lie. I would like to know more about this Nibiru thing. Not that your really going to tell me the truth here are you? I have been told that by May 2009 it will be seen by the average person is this true? I will not take kind to someone endangering my family because they want to keep a secret.

Q: The question isn’t why are you lieing to the people about the exsistance of Nibiru, the question is do you think you will be spared when it’s effects come to pass.

Q: Why are we (the people) not informed of a possible catastrophe, especially one of this magnitude to take into consideration. I really don’t expect the truth from you guys.

Q: So if you all are watching Eris and it’s trajectory, why can’t you tell us about how it’s going to come between the sun and the earth? Where is the info on your webpage of the true trajectory which will cause the perturbing of all our solar system heavenly bodies? If this is nothing to worry about, then why don’t you talk about its trajectory? Why don’t you have people partnering to watch it, track it and be actively talking about this huge new planet that is coming? Why are you so quiet about this new discovery? Your behavior is suspicious and your actions will be discovered soon so I would suggest a full disclosure.

Q: I know for a fact that Nibiru is a planet the Sumerians knew this. We discovered Pluto in 1930 but the Sumerians knew it existed in 4500 b.c. Voyager 2 made the first close-ups from Neptune and Uranus in 1986 and we saw how the planets looked like up close. The Sumerians in 4500 b.c. knew that already. How is it that there info is so accurate and Nasa with all this technology cannot find Nibiru? Is Nasa keeping this planet from us?

Q: Why do you continue to claim this is a hoax? what is it in 1983 the heavenly body that you discovered then covered up saying it was nothing? why is it that closer to 2012 we see increased volcanic activity, earthquakes, tsunamis, flooding, droughts, and much more? its not from global warming! this activity is happining on other planets as well.

Q: I think NASA is trying to cover up the up coming of planet X or Nibiru in year 2012. Is it because this world is over population and some of us need to die? Why is NASA being fishy about this?

Q: Why would you people rather die than warn people and prepare for this kind of thing?!

Q: Don’t play stupid with me because you are obvisly not going to answer my question with truth not like its your fault but the goverments and higher powers.

Q: I understand you don’t want to loose your job. So I know your answer about Nibiru. You, Nasa, the USA government and whoever else will deny till it will be undeniable. Mankind is going to disappear and nothing will change this truth. I hope you couldnt live with this lie over your shoulders anymore.

Q: Everybody knows that planet x and nibiru exist, when is NASA and the government going to come clean and stop bold face lying to the american people. People have a right to survive this calamity. No wonder everybody say’s NASA stands for never a straight answer!

The Questions Keep Coming

Following are a few of the questions from March and April, which I (perhaps foolishly) have continued to try to answer. These include some new twists, such as the claim that the Sun will be in the center of the Milky Way Galaxy in December 2012, and this is what will cause “pole shifts” and other cosmic catastrophes.

Q: Now if the Nibiru topic is a hoax, then what are the infrared images of the alleged Nibiru??? And i also heard that NASA saw it with IRAS and reported it and all that.. Why does NASA deny anything about it instead of telling the public so (if Nibiru is in fact a hoax) they dont take drastic measures such as my family was planning on doing. I need more proof that Nibiru is a hoax because the government and NASA are keeping to much from us for us to make full judgement on it. . . .

A: I really am sorry that you have taken the Nibiru hoax seriously, and that this hoax is causing you and your family distress. This Nibiru stuff is all pure fiction, without any core of fact or truth. Specifically (1) The are no infrared images of Nibiru—period. (2) IRAS (the Infrared Astronomy Satellite, which carried out a sky survey for 10 months in 1983) discovered many infrared sources, but none of them was Nibiru or Planet X or any other objects in the outer solar system. (3) NASA scientists tell the truth. There is no reason why we would not do so, and besides truth-telling is a fundamental value of scientific research. (4) It is unreasonable to ask us to prove that Nibiru is a hoax. Your questions should be to Nibiru proponents to prove to you that what they are saying is true, not for NASA to prove it is false. The burden of proof falls on those who make wild claims. Remember the often-quoted comment from Carl Sagan that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary levels of evidence if they are to be believed.

Q: I understand that you said nibiru is a hoax but why on this website http://www.detailshere.com/niburu.htm they have live picture of nibiru.

A: The website you sent me is pretty funny. For example, the statement that the Earth’s axis had tilted and the Sun had shifted from its correct place in the sky; anyone with eyes can see this is not true. Or the comment about building observatories at the south pole to observe Nibiru. There is no celestial configuration possible that could be seen only from the Antarctic and not from the whole southern hemisphere. And they ask why no observatories have been built near the North Pole. The last time I looked, the North Pole was in the middle of the Arctic Sea, not exactly the sort of place to build a telescope. I am also bemused by the claims that Nibiru has remained hidden behind the Sun for years. The impossibility of such an orbit has been clear since Johannes Kepler published his first two laws of planetary motions in 1609. Anyway, thanks for a good laugh.

Q: When most of the planets align in 2012 and planet earth is in the centre of the milky way, what will the effects of this be on planet earth?

A: There is no planet alignment in 2012 or any other time in the next several decades. As to the Earth being in the center of the Milky Way, I don’t know what this phrase means. If you are referring to the Milky Way Galaxy, we are rather far toward the edge of this spiral galaxy, some 30,000 light-years from the center.

Q: I was wondering what the conclusions were about the possibility of a polar shift, and if that happened what the effects would be to everyday living.

A: Quite a few people have been asking me about the danger of a polar shift, and I must confess that I don’t know what you mean by the term. “Polar shift” seems to have become a buzzword on websites that promote catastrophist ideas and various conspiracy theories, and so this phrase gets passed on from one blog to another without ever being defined. If this means some sudden change in the position of the pole (that is, the rotation axis of the Earth), then that is impossible. There is no point in speculating about the consequences of something that has never happened and never will. Before geologists discovered the role of plate tectonics (about 60 years ago), there was some speculation that a polar shift was involved in transforming the Antarctic from a warm to a cold climate, but now we know it was the Antarctic continent that moved, not the rotation pole. The very small and gradual changes that do take place in the position of the pole are responses of the Earth to changes in the distribution of mass on the surface, for example due to freezing or thawing of glaciers. The bottom line is that there is no possibility of a “polar shift” and no danger associated with one.

Q: How can you say that a pole shift is impossible? The geological record shows repeated reversals of the Earth’s magnetic field.

A: Thanks for pointing out an ambiguity concerning the term “pole shift”. As I wrote in my previous answer, everything I have seen predicting destruction from an alleged pole shift concerns the rotational pole of the Earth. There is no chance that this rotational pole will shift to a significant degree. The magnetic pole is different; it regularly shifts position by a small amount, and as you note, the polarity of the Earth’s magnetic pole reverses roughly once per million years (on average). This magnetic reversal appears to be generated internally and not to be influenced by any outside events. There is no indication that it will happen anytime soon, but more to the point, a magnetic reversal would not cause any of the horrible consequences that you find associated with “pole shift” on the catastrophist Internet sites.

Q: If the world was going to end would you tell us?

A: The short answer is “of course I would tell you.” Science is about discovering and communicating the truth about nature, not keeping secrets. But on a more basic level, I don’t understand questions that ask about a possible end of the world in 2012. This world has been peacefully going its way for 4.5 billion years, with life evolving for probably 4 billion years. Do you really imagine that after 4 billion years it is all going to end 4 years from now? And how could it possibly happen? There is nothing around that could destroy a planet. The worst damage that we could inflict on our ecosystem is probably associated with global warming and loss of habitat, which are already causing a mass extinction, but none of that threatens the future of the planet itself.

Weirder and Weirder

As I write this in June, questions keep coming in. In addition, nine out of ten of the “most popular” questions and answers on “Ask an Astrobiologist” are about Nibiru, not astrobiology. This experience is baffling on several fronts. While I hope that many people who read my replies are pleased to learn that the world is not about to end, I am surprised at so many angry responses. These come from people who seem to want the world to end in 2012, who are upset to be told that this catastrophe will not happen. I am also struck by their lack of perspective about time or space. For example, my correspondents seem to accept the claim that the magnetic influence of Nibiru is already causing a pole shift even though the object is invisible to astronomers. Some even accept that the tilt is already apparent, or even that the world is “turning upside down.” They also accept that we will be in the center of the Milky Way Galaxy, 30,000 light-years away, in 2012. The fact that none of this is being reported in newspapers or on television is simply accepted as evidence of a grand conspiracy. Do they ever ask themselves why governments are pursuing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, worried about global warming, and conducting an energetic presidential election in the U.S. if they all know the world will end in four years? It has been a revelation to me to glimpse this underworld of conspiracy theories and doomsday predictions.

To conclude on a lighter note, the following recent questions are actually quite amusing:

Q: I have read about the things all about nibiru, and i was completely shocked from this matter, but for many years untill now as i gazed towards the sky during at night, i have noticed a huge star beyond us, I would like to ask is that eris? because the size has dramtically increased over the last couple of years?

Q: Recently there have been a good amount of scary stuff going around in the world. An earthquake and a cyclone. Not only that but it seems that the world is turning upside down.

Q: I am an experimental physicist. I am currently working on anti-gravity technology. I have recieved an infra-red reading of an object travelling into our solar system. This lab does not contain any astrophysicists but we believe this object (around 1.2 times the size of Jupiter) is the new planet Niribu (Planet X). As rumours here have circulated. Its orbit is highly eliptical and will pass into the inner-solar system. I would like to comfirm a couple of things for me. Is this accurate—Our facts are based on rumour, the scan is only a basic, find objects to test on scan. Does this object pose any danger to the Earth? Would any danger occur in a test of experimental technology to deviate the object from its current course? The generator we have created theoretically can move any object of any size, as mass should not affect the fields created.

Q: I hear that the beings who are on the Nibiru mother ship which houses smaller ships inside are coming to help the inhabitants of Earth to raise their polarity levels up so the plane would shift up to 4D. Have you heard about this? Please be honest. Theres a lot of information on YouTube that speaks about this. I always knew that another advanced lifeform was here and is working to get us ready for the shift. I would like for one of them to reveal theirselves on TV on CNN. Wouldn’t you?