SGU Episode 853

This episode was transcribed by the Google Web Speech API Demonstration (or another automatic method) and therefore will require careful proof-reading.

This transcript is not finished. Please help us finish it! Add a Transcribing template to the top of this transcript before you start so that we don't duplicate your efforts.

Template:Editing required (w/links) You can use this outline to help structure the transcription. Click "Edit" above to begin.

SGU Episode 853
November 13th 2021
(brief caption for the episode icon)
SGU 852                      SGU 854
Skeptical Rogues
S: Steven Novella
B: Bob Novella
C: Cara Santa Maria
J: Jay Novella
E: Evan Bernstein
Quote of the Week
When people see a story as an external object, then someone challenging the story is just making an intellectual argument. But when believers identify with a story, someone challenging the story is a personal threat. And since our brains are notoriously bad at distinguishing between our psychological identity and our physical body, the personal threat doesn’t feel like an insult—it feels like danger.
Tim Urban, writer/illustrator
Links
Download Podcast
Show Notes
Forum Discussion

Introduction

Voice-over: You're listening to the Skeptics' Guide to the Universe, your escape to reality.

Answer to previous Noisy:

Two Indri lemurs

3126.24 3127.44 S: All right, Jade, who's that noisy time?

3127.44 3128.44 J: All right, guys.

3128.44 3129.68 J: Last week, I played this noisy.

3129.68 3134.68 C: I know what it is.

3134.68 3141.68 C: I know what it is.

3141.68 3147.96 E: Yeah, I know what it is too, but Cara, you go first.

3147.96 3153.36 C: It's a dolphin party in which the dolphins realize that funny noise when you let air

3153.36 3157.44 E: slowly out of the balloon. Well, air out of the balloon was going to be mine.

3157.44 3158.44 J: Yeah.

3158.44 3163.60 J: All right, well, because it's a somewhat funny noise, I got a lot of people writing in funny ideas.

3163.60 3165.40 J: Let me get through what I got here.

3165.40 3167.28 J: William Steele wrote in, said, hi, Jay.

3167.28 3173.92 J: My guess for this week's noisy is a bird, I'll say a parrot, imitating a noisemaker party favor.

3173.92 3177.08 J: You know the kind that roll out when you blow into them?

3177.08 3179.04 J: You know, like a big long tongue.

3179.04 3180.60 J: Yeah, I got it.

3180.60 3183.16 J: That's funny, but that's not it, buddy.

3183.16 3184.64 J: Let's go on to the next one.

3184.64 3187.64 J: Richard Smith, he said, who's that noisy?

3187.64 3195.44 J: Well, I'm tempted to say this week's noisy is two people playing Canadian Smarties boxes back before they had glued down the end flaps.

3195.44 3196.44 J: I think that's hilarious.

3196.44 3197.44 J: What?

3197.44 3202.60 E: Yeah, remember you had the, you'd blow into the box, it would make some sort of weird whistling

3202.60 3208.04 J: noise. He said, it's far more likely to be a pair of white cheeked gibbons singing.

3208.04 3210.48 J: Not a bad guess, but not correct.

3210.48 3213.26 J: These are not white cheeked gibbons.

3213.26 3216.84 J: Another guest here by Tara DeVries, long time listener, first time guesser.

3216.84 3223.12 J: I think the noisy from this episode sounds like air being released in small bursts from an inflated latex balloon.

3223.12 3224.12 J: Cara.

3224.12 3225.12 J: Right.

3225.12 3231.02 J: So there's, she goes on to describe how your hands would do that.

3231.02 3232.84 J: And every kid did that growing up.

3232.84 3235.24 J: That was a very fun thing to do.

3235.24 3236.24 J: I still think it's fun.

3236.24 3237.92 J: I got another guest here from Jim Kelly.

3237.92 3244.46 J: Jim says, hi Jay, I think this week's noisy is a small group of baby elephants engaging in general frivolity.

3244.46 3245.46 J: That's not correct.

3245.46 3248.68 C: Hey guys, we have a winner.

3248.68 3250.60 J: And guess who the winner is.

3250.60 3251.60 J: Visto Tudor.

3251.60 3252.60 J: You got it.

3252.60 3254.18 J: He won this week.

3254.18 3256.48 J: He beat the next person by four minutes.

3256.48 3257.48 J: Isn't that right?

3257.48 3258.48 J: Meat leg.

3258.48 3259.48 J: Remember meat leg?

3259.48 3260.48 B: Oh my God.

3260.48 3261.48 B: Of course I remember.

3261.48 3262.48 J: What happened to meat leg?

3262.48 3264.52 J: He's out there living the best life I hope.

3264.52 3265.52 J: Come back meat leg.

3265.52 3266.52 E: Oh yeah.

3266.52 3267.72 E: Send us an email meat leg.

3267.72 3273.80 J: So Visto, my friend, he said, I have heard this noise at the zoo, but damn it, I didn't look what animal it was.

3273.80 3275.92 J: It's the, it's in the African section.

3275.92 3276.92 J: I love that.

3276.92 3281.16 J: He goes, I'm guessing it's a lemur screaming on the sexy boy.

3281.16 3282.44 J: And lemurese of course.

3282.44 3283.44 J: Yes.

3283.44 3284.44 J: Yes, indeed.

3284.44 3287.48 J: These are, these are the Indri lemur.

3287.48 3288.48 J: It's two of them.

3288.48 3289.48 J: Yep.

3289.48 3290.48 J: Cool.

3290.48 3293.48 J: So they, they, they have like these incredible calls that they do.

3293.48 3294.48 J: You know, they're black and white.

3294.48 3296.98 J: They're, they have piercing green eyes.

3296.98 3303.48 J: They like to perch very high up in the rainforest canopy and they're, they're from, you know, experts and people say they're tough to spot.

3303.48 3310.36 J: I have a fun fact for you that another listener wrote in that these, this is the only animal in addition to humans that sing in various rhythms.

3310.36 3311.60 J: I think that was interesting.

3311.60 3313.08 J: So listen again real quick.

3313.08 3314.08 J: These are lemurs.

3314.08 3315.08 None Pretty cute.

3315.08 3316.08 None Pretty cute.

3316.08 3317.08 C: You lemurs.

3317.08 3328.80 E: Isn't a lemur that character in Madagascar, the Sasha Baron Cohen character.

3328.80 3329.80 E: I like to move it.

3329.80 3330.80 E: Move it.

3330.80 3333.00 C: It's a lot of different lemur species.

3333.00 3334.60 E: Oh so my memory's good there.

3334.60 3335.60 C: Okay.

3335.60 3336.60 C: Was that a ring-tailed lemur?

3336.60 3337.60 C: I never saw it.

3337.60 3338.60 C: You didn't see Madagascar?

3338.60 3339.60 C: Mm-mm.

3339.60 3342.20 C: But ring-tailed lemurs are like the ones that most people think of when they think of lemurs.

New Noisy (55:42)

[constant electronic droning sound with MIDI-like tones playing a melody]

3342.20 3344.10 J: Guys, I've got new noisy for you this week.

3344.10 3345.10 J: Are you ready?

3345.10 3347.60 J: This was sent in by a listener named Marco.

3347.60 3349.40 J: And I like Marco because he said.

3349.40 3353.92 J: This is the first two words that he said in his email to me.

3353.92 3354.92 J: Hello, Jayduardo.

3354.92 3359.26 J: Look he had me at the second word.

3359.26 3375.46 J: So here is his noisy.

3375.46 3376.46 E: Wonderful sound.

3376.46 3381.90 E: Yeah, that's the introduction music to E.T. the Atari game, you know, the ones they buried in the desert.

3381.90 3382.90 E: I remember.

3382.90 3383.90 E: I watched the whole doc about that.

3383.90 3384.90 E: It sounds so unbelievably 8-bit.

3384.90 3385.90 J: I know.

3385.90 3386.90 J: It's a great doc.

3386.90 3387.90 J: I know.

3387.90 3393.18 J: I know how noisy he is or please, if you've heard something cool and you know, you do, you are hearing things cool.

3393.18 3399.50 J: You just got to remember to think of me and email me that sound at WTN at the skeptics guide dot org.

J: So if you think you know what this week's Noisy is or, please, if you've heard something cool

Announcements (56:39)

3399.50 3400.50 J: All right.

3400.50 3408.10 J: So, guys, it's been months and months and months that I've been telling everybody, everybody about the Denver extravaganza that got sold out.

3408.10 3409.98 J: We have two private shows.

3409.98 3419.26 J: I increased the audience size on both of them because they got to the point where they got sold out and I just didn't want to turn anybody away because so many people got turned away from the extravaganza.

3419.26 3425.10 J: So there are some seats left at the Denver private show and at the Fort Collins private show.

3425.10 3429.06 J: Both of these events happening in Colorado, in the United States.

3429.06 3437.94 J: If you hear this before or on the 19th, right, the 19th, it's not too late.

3437.94 3442.74 J: If you're listening to this at some point during the day on the 19th, you could still make it to one of these shows.

3442.74 3447.02 J: Go to the skeptics guide dot org forward slash events for details.

3447.02 3448.42 J: Steve, one more announcement.

3448.42 3450.30 J: Guys, we have a new swag store.

3450.30 3451.30 J: Super excited.

3451.30 3453.60 J: We finally got onto a platform that works.

3453.60 3456.42 J: You go to shop dot the skeptics guide dot org.

3456.42 3458.54 J: I've got a lot of options in there.

3458.54 3462.14 J: Please, you know, feel free to email me at info at the skeptics guide.

3462.14 3468.62 J: If there's something you would like to see in there and if, you know, I get a lot of people asking for the same things, I will absolutely do it.

3468.62 3469.70 J: Thank you so much, guys.

3469.70 3470.70 J: Have a great week.

3470.70 3478.38 S: One other quick announcement, this is for our friends down under November 20th to 21st, 2021.

3478.38 3485.14 S: This year is the Australian and New Zealand Skeptics Joint Annual Convention Skepticon 2021.

3485.14 3488.62 S: Go to skepticon dot org dot au.

3488.62 3492.82 S: The dot au is important and you will see all the details.

3492.82 3498.02 S: Well, everyone, we're going to take a quick break from our show to talk about one of our sponsors this week, KiwiCo.

3498.02 3506.06 C: KiwiCo creates super cool hands on projects designed to expose kids of all ages to concepts in science, technology, engineering, art and math.

3506.06 3514.50 C: And this year, KiwiCo wants to invite you and your family to make the holidays a little less prepackaged and a little more hands on, all while learning a thing or two along the

3514.50 3526.68 E: way. Kids can discover the engineering and mechanics behind everyday objects, the science and chemistry of cooking, brand new art and design techniques and so much more all through seriously fun hands on projects.

3526.68 3533.06 E: Each crate is designed by experts and tested by kids, and each line caters to different age groups.

3533.06 3537.74 E: Each monthly box comes with kid friendly illustrated step by step instructions as well.

3537.74 3544.02 J: KiwiCo has a lot of holiday based crates that could be a lot of fun to do with your kids during the holidays.

3544.02 3547.78 J: As an example, they have a reindeer one, which is like a little pop up machine.

3547.78 3550.30 J: As you turn the crank, the reindeer go up and down.

3550.30 3556.94 J: They have a Christmas village, like an advent calendar type of Christmas village, like a Santa's light up workshop that you could build.

3556.94 3560.50 J: A lot of these holiday based crates will really help the family get into the spirit.

3560.50 3564.14 B: This holiday, don't just teach kids how to buy, teach them how to build.

3564.14 3570.66 B: Give them a gift of a hands on holiday with a KiwiCo subscription and celebrate a love for hands on learning all year long.

3570.66 3576.60 B: Get 50% off your first month plus free shipping on any crate line with the code skeptics.

3576.60 3582.58 B: That's 50% off your first month at KiwiCo.com promo code skeptics.

3582.58 3585.06 S: All right guys, let's get back to the show.

Questions/Emails/Corrections/Follow-ups (59:45)

_consider_using_block_quotes_for_emails_read_aloud_in_this_segment_ with_reduced_spacing_for_long_chunks –

Email(s) #1: Organic Farming

3585.06 3589.08 S: All right, we have one question, which is really many questions.

3589.08 3599.18 S: Many people emailed us in response to our discussion about Sri Lanka and their decision to go 100% organic.

3599.18 3609.46 S: The gist of many of these emails was that we didn't really give any background as to why we are so negative about organic farming.

3609.46 3610.46 C: These must be new listeners.

3610.46 3613.46 S: They meant in that episode.

3613.46 3625.50 S: Yeah, but I mean, the impression I got was these were all newer listeners that were not aware of the fact that we've done multiple deep dives on this.

3625.50 3632.10 S: But because there were so many, I figured, okay, well, maybe we need to update this a little bit and make sure that we're all on the same page.

3632.10 3641.38 S: And we often do hit topics we've discussed before without doing a complete retread of the whole huge, massive topic.

3641.38 3642.38 S: You know what I mean?

3642.38 3644.72 S: There's a little bit of a cumulative nature to this.

3644.72 3653.54 S: But it's always a balancing act between we want to encapsulate what we've discussed before without retreading it too much and without bogging down the show.

3653.54 3662.62 S: But the number of emails indicated to me that maybe we should just give a quick review of the entire issue of organic farming.

3662.62 3668.26 S: Now my position is that organic farming is a complete scam.

3668.26 3671.78 S: I don't think that there honestly, I don't think there's anything legitimate there.

3671.78 3674.98 S: Its origin was in pure pseudoscience.

3674.98 3677.18 S: You have to plant under the full moon or whatever.

3677.18 3679.14 S: It really was just-

3679.14 3680.14 E: Astrology based.

3680.14 3687.02 S: Yeah, it was kind of like astrology based farming. And then it evolved into the appeal to nature fallacy.

3687.02 3691.86 S: That was also there, but that became the marketing core of it.

3691.86 3695.86 S: And then what I mean by that is that organic farming is entirely about method.

3695.86 3697.50 S: It's not about the produce.

3697.50 3700.50 S: You can't tell that an apple is an organic apple.

3700.50 3703.50 S: You just have to be told this apple was farmed organically.

3703.50 3704.50 S: Right?

3704.50 3705.50 C: That's it.

3705.50 3708.90 C: Sometimes I can tell because they rot within two days of me getting them.

3708.90 3712.58 C: Yeah, well- Or they cost 20% more.

3712.58 3714.58 C: But even then- But yeah, they cost more.

3714.58 3716.06 C: My bill is higher at checkout.

3716.06 3718.02 S: Yeah, you know because you're paying more for it.

3718.02 3722.62 S: But I'm just saying, it's because it's labeled organic and you're being charged more for it.

3722.62 3727.26 S: But if somebody moved them to the non-organic section, you wouldn't really be able to tell.

3727.26 3731.90 C: Same as the idea of conventionally grown versus GM.

3731.90 3733.90 C: There's nothing- Mm-hmm.

3733.90 3736.98 C: We can, under the microscope, there's no way to know.

3736.98 3737.98 C: Yeah.

3737.98 3738.98 C: It's the same food.

3738.98 3739.98 E: Right.

3739.98 3741.58 E: Double blind to taste test and figure it out, right.

3741.58 3749.02 S: So you have to, you couldn't- So taste tests do not tell the difference between organic and non-organic and conventionally grown.

3749.02 3750.02 S: Nope.

3750.02 3755.62 S: But in any case, in the US there's a specific USDA regulation about what it takes to be labeled organic.

3755.62 3757.82 S: It's all about the method of the farming.

3757.82 3760.38 S: It's nothing to do with the produce itself.

3760.38 3764.52 S: And it's just, everything has to be quote unquote natural.

3764.52 3767.02 S: It's not based upon the most sustainable methods.

3767.02 3769.38 S: It's not based upon the most science-based methods.

3769.38 3775.02 S: It's only based upon things that are arbitrarily determined to be quote unquote natural.

3775.02 3776.02 S: That's what I mean.

3776.02 3777.54 S: So it's not really outcome-based or science-based.

3777.54 3780.66 S: It is this ideology, appeal to nature based.

3780.66 3783.66 S: For example, they don't allow irradiation of food.

3783.66 3784.66 S: Why?

3784.66 3785.90 S: Because it's not natural.

3785.90 3790.18 S: And does it, does it any evidence that it harms the food or does anything bad to it?

3790.18 3791.18 S: No.

3791.18 3794.78 S: What it does do is prolong the shelf life of food, reducing waste.

3794.78 3798.02 S: And that's a good thing, but we can't, you can't do that if you want the organic label.

3798.02 3801.10 S: And of course they exclude all genetically modified organisms.

3801.10 3803.30 S: Is that because there's any evidence that they're bad?

3803.30 3804.30 S: No.

3804.30 3806.38 S: It's because it doesn't fit their brand.

3806.38 3816.66 S: And they have definitely, definitely augmented their brand by being the non-GMO brand and tying very closely to fear of GMOs.

3816.66 3827.10 C: They also require no synthetic pesticides or herbicides, which mean then that they are required to use non-synthetic pesticides and herbicides.

3827.10 3828.10 S: Yeah.

3828.10 3831.74 S: Well, they do use fewer pesticides overall.

3831.74 3838.38 S: That is true, but they can use quote unquote natural pesticides and some of which are actually fairly toxic.

3838.38 3839.38 C: Yeah.

3839.38 3840.38 S: Like copper.

3840.38 3841.38 S: Yeah.

3841.38 3842.38 S: They're not better.

3842.38 3843.38 S: They're just natural.

3843.38 3844.38 S: They're just natural.

3844.38 3845.98 S: And they're not using the best pesticides.

3845.98 3848.14 S: They're using the ones that are arbitrarily natural.

3848.14 3849.14 C: Exactly.

3849.14 3853.42 C: So they're using ones that don't work as well, which means that their yields aren't often as good.

3853.42 3854.42 C: And they use more of it.

3854.42 3855.42 S: They have to do more applications.

3855.42 3856.42 C: Then they have to use more.

3856.42 3857.42 C: Yeah.

3857.42 3858.42 S: Absolutely.

3858.42 3859.42 S: So that's what it is.

3859.42 3861.54 S: It's not, again, not evidence-based, not science-based.

3861.54 3865.34 S: It's ideology appeal to nature-based, which is not a good thing.

3865.34 3870.30 S: But nevertheless, regardless of the origins and the philosophy, does it work?

3870.30 3874.54 S: Well, the answer to that is pretty clearly no as well.

3874.54 3883.26 S: So there's been 50, 60 years now of studies looking at the health effects of organic versus non-organic or traditional farming methods, and there's no difference.

3883.26 3887.82 S: There's no health benefit to consuming organic produce.

3887.82 3888.82 S: They've been blinded.

3888.82 3901.94 S: Taste tests, whenever you compare apples to apples, pun intended, whenever you're looking at the same cultivar, but just one farmed organically and one farmed with mainstream farming techniques, not limited to organic techniques, you can't tell the difference.

3901.94 3913.90 S: Now, of course, if you're comparing like a tomato that is optimized for the store shelf and was shipped across the country versus an heirloom tomato grown locally, there's going to be a difference.

3913.90 3916.98 S: But that has nothing to do with organic farming.

3916.98 3935.26 S: If that local heirloom tomato was farmed using artificial fertilizer, it still would taste better than an organically grown tomato that was used of a cultivar that is optimized for shelf appeal and shelf life and not for taste and nutrition.

3935.26 3938.98 S: So the farming method itself is there's no advantage to it in terms of nutrition.

3938.98 3941.54 S: There's no advantage to it in terms of health.

3941.54 3945.02 S: And so then the final thing is, well, it's better for the environment, right?

3945.02 3953.58 S: And that's, I think, the most common argument that I get today, although when people get surveyed, they always say it's more healthy, it clearly isn't.

3953.58 3961.06 S: But when you get into an argument with people and you sort of point out, well, here's the evidence, you know, it's not more healthy, it's not better tasting, they say, well, it's better for the environment.

3961.06 3962.06 S: Actually, it isn't.

3962.06 3965.02 S: It is worse for the environment.

3965.02 3974.10 S: And you know, many people may feel shocked with that because the organic branding has successfully positioned themselves as the quote unquote sustainable option.

3974.10 3975.56 S: But it really isn't.

3975.56 3983.22 S: The biggest problem with organic farming is that it uses about 20 percent more land for the same production.

3983.22 3988.62 S: And the land use is the single most harmful thing about to the environment of farming.

3988.62 3989.62 C: Of course.

3989.62 3990.62 C: Yeah.

3990.62 3991.62 C: It's it's it's why we have deforestation.

3991.62 3992.62 C: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

3992.62 3993.62 S: Exactly.

3993.62 3999.00 S: And of course, the more you try to scale organic farming right now, it's like two percent worldwide or something like that.

3999.00 4001.18 S: The more you try to scale it, the worse it gets.

4001.18 4004.82 S: And it introduces problems at scale that don't don't exist now.

4004.82 4014.38 S: For example, we've mentioned that half of about a little bit more than half of our food comes from nitrogen sourced from manure.

4014.38 4019.82 S: And but the other half is from, you know, artificial fertilizer like the Haber-Bosch process.

4019.82 4023.70 S: So if you went 100 percent organic, where would all that come from?

4023.70 4030.84 S: The other thing is, is that a lot of the nitrogen in the maneuver in the manure comes from food that would comes from artificial fertilizer, too.

4030.84 4040.82 S: So if you look at the whole nitrogen cycle, we're putting a lot of that nitrogen back into the system through the artificial fertilizer.

4040.82 4045.80 S: And the whole system could not work with just with just organic fertilizer.

4045.80 4046.80 S: It wouldn't work.

4046.80 4050.58 S: So you introduce new problems when you try to scale up.

4050.58 4052.06 S: The numbers just don't add up.

4052.06 4053.06 S: It wouldn't work.

4053.06 4057.02 C: And what about just basic yield, like just feeding all the mouths on the planet?

4057.02 4058.02 S: That's what I'm saying.

4058.02 4059.02 S: Yeah.

4059.02 4060.94 S: And what do people say when you point that out?

4060.94 4065.66 S: A lot of disingenuous things, which I think are like they're just scrambling for justifiably.

4065.66 4069.98 S: Well, you know, we'll just increase efficiency, we'll decrease waste.

4069.98 4071.42 S: Like 30 percent of food is wasted.

4071.42 4073.94 S: It's like, OK, do that first.

4073.94 4075.02 S: Go ahead.

4075.02 4080.26 S: You get rid of that 30 percent of food waste and then talk to me about, you know, shifting some farming over to organic.

4080.26 4081.26 C: Right.

4081.26 4082.82 C: Those are two very different categories of action.

4082.82 4083.82 C: Right.

4083.82 4088.68 S: But the thing is, if that's so if that's so easy, then do it now.

4088.68 4089.68 S: Do it.

4089.68 4090.90 S: I know it would help.

4090.90 4094.34 S: Tell me what we need to do to get rid of food waste, because there's just a certain.

4094.34 4104.62 S: Meanwhile, their methods increase food waste because they issue things that will increase shelf life like GMOs and irradiation.

4104.62 4109.06 S: So actually doing they would worsen the food waste problem.

4109.06 4118.34 S: The other thing that biotech is trying to do is trying to improve the taste and nutrition of produce that was optimized for the store shelf.

4118.34 4119.34 S: Right.

4119.34 4120.34 S: Right.

4120.34 4122.78 S: Trying to make the basically get the advantages of both worlds.

4122.78 4131.26 S: You get the taste and nutrition of heirloom cultivars, but with the hardiness and the shipability of the grocery store cultivars.

4131.26 4137.18 C: And hardy once it's picked, but also hardy while it's on the vine, resistant to pests, resistant to drought.

4137.18 4138.78 C: Those things matter.

4138.78 4139.78 S: Absolutely.

4139.78 4144.62 S: So then they say, OK, so the food waste thing is just a, you know, just hand waving.

4144.62 4149.34 S: It's like if there was any some magical way we could reduce food waste, we just go ahead and do it.

4149.34 4150.34 C: Right.

4150.34 4151.34 C: That's like a red herring.

4151.34 4152.34 S: Yes, a red herring.

4152.34 4153.34 S: Totally.

4153.34 4156.76 S: They say, OK, well, we'll get rid of meat because that's hugely wasteful in the system.

4156.76 4158.06 S: We went over these numbers before.

4158.06 4160.06 S: It's actually not that wasteful.

4160.06 4161.06 S: It is.

4161.06 4170.38 S: I mean, the efficient we could get some 20 percent or so efficiency out of switching over from from more from the bodies to more vegetable calories.

4170.38 4177.70 S: But but actually, you know, meat is is actually a very efficient way of getting some non-food calories into our food system.

4177.70 4178.70 S: Right.

4178.70 4186.42 S: Because a lot of the calories in in cattle, for example, comes from from grazing, for example, or eating things that are not suitable for human consumption.

4186.42 4191.06 S: And only a very small amount of it is actually suitable for human consumption or or.

4191.06 4192.06 S: Right.

4192.06 4196.18 S: Or it's using up using up farmland that would be could be producing food for human consumption.

4196.18 4202.12 S: But in any case, that doesn't work either, because they say we're going to fertilize all of our food with manure.

4202.12 4204.30 S: And in order to make that work, we're going to get rid of all the calves.

4204.30 4208.94 C: I'm going to say because that's a like that's a red herring to this.

4208.94 4209.94 C: Yeah.

4209.94 4210.94 C: Yeah.

4210.94 4215.62 C: But it actually is necessary for organic farming because where are you going to get your fertilizer?

4215.62 4216.62 S: Yeah, exactly.

4216.62 4217.62 S: They're good.

4217.62 4218.70 S: They're not thinking about the system.

4218.70 4221.10 S: It's like this manure doesn't come out of nowhere.

4221.10 4224.62 S: It comes out of those all those cows that you say we shouldn't have.

4224.62 4232.18 C: I see this all the time with one of my best friends who is one of these like diehard believers in organic kind of culture and lifestyle.

4232.18 4240.42 C: And it's so frustrating because I feel like the arguments always break down when I try to get her to look outside of like her neighborhood.

4240.42 4245.90 C: Like I'm like, it's such a and she'll she'll say things like, I admit that it's a privilege to be able to eat this way.

4245.90 4249.22 C: And I'm like, then what about the rest of the world?

4249.22 4252.02 S: And she thought, well, let's talk about the rest of the world.

4252.02 4253.02 S: You can't.

4253.02 4254.02 C: Yeah, exactly.

4254.02 4255.02 S: Yeah.

4255.02 4257.98 S: The more you try to scale it up, the harder it gets, the more ridiculous it gets.

4257.98 4263.58 S: But here's the other thing is when someone you point that out, it's like the nitrogen balance thing doesn't work.

4263.58 4266.70 S: You know, the waste thing is a red herring argument.

4266.70 4268.58 S: The environment is worse for the environment.

4268.58 4270.10 S: There's no real advantage to it.

4270.10 4273.74 S: It just sounds good, you know, to certain people.

4273.74 4277.90 S: But at the end of the day, they say, well, there's too many people.

4277.90 4281.46 S: And if we had if we had population control, then we could farm organically.

4281.46 4283.86 S: It's like, OK, that's that's wrong on two levels.

4283.86 4293.10 S: One is that no matter what the population and no matter how much farmland we need, it's still always going to be a bad thing to use 20 percent more land.

4293.10 4294.94 S: It's still going to be less efficient.

4294.94 4304.06 S: Yeah, it's still that could be natural ecosystems if we were using more efficient farming, if we were optimizing our calorie production per acre of land.

4304.06 4307.02 S: That's always going to be the best thing for the environment at any level.

4307.02 4309.66 S: So that's again, it's another red herring argument.

4309.66 4316.54 S: But the other thing is, it's like and how exactly are we going to get to this lower population that you say that we need?

4316.54 4327.62 S: If you want to go organic farming first, it certainly sounds like you want to starve half the world to get to your sustainable system.

4327.62 4335.78 S: And like while they won't come right out and say it, I mean, you know, some people are like shocked that they never thought through the implications of what they were saying or they just don't believe it.

4335.78 4340.06 S: And other people are like, well, you know, like, I'm not going to say it out.

4340.06 4346.22 S: Yeah, like the population, they'll say something like, well, the worst thing we do for the environment is the population.

4346.22 4347.78 S: So you're saying you want to starve half the planet.

4347.78 4349.34 S: I mean, that's basically what it comes down to.

4349.34 4353.06 C: You know how lucky you are to be born where you were born.

4353.06 4354.06 C: Yeah.

4354.06 4358.22 C: And to have the privileges that you were given that you didn't work for any of them.

4358.22 4360.60 C: This was all just like a roll of the dice.

4360.60 4364.02 C: And it's so scary how many people just don't think that.

4364.02 4366.82 C: And they just think, oh, I deserved all of this.

4366.82 4369.90 C: I was, you know, I was supposed to be born in a rich nation.

4369.90 4375.50 S: Well, they they just know it's like the movie Titanic when someone's like, of course.

4375.50 4376.50 E: Yes.

4376.50 4379.30 S: And half the people on this ship are going to drown.

4379.30 4381.26 S: And the guy says, not the better half.

4381.26 4382.66 S: You know, that's right.

4382.66 4384.54 S: It's like half the planet's going to starve.

4384.54 4388.70 S: You know, they're thinking at some level to get but not the half I'm in.

4388.70 4391.10 C: You know, that's not the worst that's going to start.

4391.10 4393.58 C: And they're also like, I don't know.

4393.58 4399.46 C: And I don't have to see it because what they don't realize is that this is not a hypothetical.

4399.46 4400.98 C: People are starving.

4400.98 4401.98 C: Yeah.

4401.98 4403.98 C: And they are not bearing witness to it.

4403.98 4404.98 S: Right.

4404.98 4409.98 S: And then they get the other sort of non seconds like, well, that's because of food distribution, not because of we're not making enough food.

4409.98 4412.62 S: Like, yeah, no one said we're not making enough food right now.

4412.62 4415.86 S: But we're going to have 10 billion people, you know, in not too many decades.

4415.86 4416.86 S: Pretty fast.

4416.86 4425.78 S: And the point is, if there won't be enough food, if we try to go all organic and the whole agricultural system collapses because you don't know what you're doing.

4425.78 4434.66 S: So but the final piece here is that the best solutions we got on the table are all GMO.

4434.66 4437.50 S: And they're the ones that organic farming are trying to destroy.

4437.50 4439.20 S: They're trying to nip them in the bud.

4439.20 4445.66 S: So if you're worried about the effect of fertilizer runoff on the environment, I'm worried about that, too.

4445.66 4449.58 S: And that's a huge problem that we need to address with your best practices.

4449.58 4455.50 S: But also, what if we could make wheat and corn and some staple crops that fix their own nitrogen?

4455.50 4456.50 S: Yes, baby.

4456.50 4460.82 S: You don't have to fertilize them with, you know, with nitrogen fertilizer.

4460.82 4466.58 S: That's only organic, only GMO is going to achieve that.

4466.58 4471.98 S: And that is a game changer that's beyond anything else in this equation.

4471.98 4485.98 S: Or we could, you know, they're working on ways of improving the efficiency of photosynthesis, which could, again, boost yield by another 20 percent or, you know, again, having increasing yield by reducing loss to drought or to pests, et cetera.

4485.98 4490.62 S: There are, you know, some GMO varieties reduce the use of pesticide.

4490.62 4500.26 S: So there is so much potential in genetic modification as a scientific tool to improve our farming.

4500.26 4502.38 S: And they're taking it off the table.

4502.38 4504.18 S: They are taking it off the entry.

4504.18 4509.14 C: It's like the best way to get to an organic view of farming.

4509.14 4512.78 C: Yet by its definition, it can never be organic.

4512.78 4513.78 C: Right.

4513.78 4515.58 C: So change the definition.

4515.58 4516.58 C: Yeah.

4516.58 4527.82 C: And that's one of those interesting things that, like, again, you know, to talk about sort of my personal experience with my friend, I don't think I've completely converted her to being pro GM, but she's not anti GM anymore.

4527.82 4534.98 C: And one of the things that I notice is that when we have these kinds of deep discussions, she's always like, well, let's put that on the shelf.

4534.98 4542.22 C: Let's put the GM question on the shelf, because I agree, like some of these, you know, scientific advancements are really important.

4542.22 4561.70 C: And I'm like, that's so interesting that I've been able to find some common ground there faster and easier than common ground with regards to, you know, her frustrations with monocropping, for example, or her frustrations with some of the, like you said, the more like legitimate concerns about agribusiness.

4561.70 4571.12 S: Yeah, but it's like there are legitimate concerns about, you know, the how modern medicine functions in terms of insurance companies, whatever.

4571.12 4574.30 S: But alternative medicine is an answer to none of that.

4574.30 4575.30 C: Exactly.

4575.30 4576.30 S: That doesn't solve the problem.

4576.30 4579.64 S: That is just pseudoscience exploiting the problems.

4579.64 4583.26 S: And the same thing, like, yes, there are challenges and problems with modern farming.

4583.26 4589.02 S: We're trying to squeeze a lot of calories out of all the available land, basically, on the planet.

4589.02 4593.88 S: Yeah, and we're pushing the planet to its limits in order to do that.

4593.88 4596.78 S: But organic farming is an answer to none of those problems.

4596.78 4597.78 S: Exactly.

4597.78 4605.42 S: It's just shifting to an inefficient method that doesn't have any practical or pragmatic advantage at all.

4605.42 4608.98 S: It's just a marketing scam, totally.

4608.98 4611.26 S: And that, you know, that's why I'm against it.

4611.26 4618.18 S: You know, and the other thing is it sucks all the oxygen out of the room of sustainable farming by pretending that that's what it is.

4618.18 4621.90 S: It's like, no, we need to optimize the sustainability of our farming.

4621.90 4623.14 S: Of course we do.

4623.14 4624.14 S: Everyone agrees with that.

4624.14 4627.42 S: The other thing is, you know, like the pro-organic people saying they're killing the soil.

4627.42 4629.06 S: It's going to be dead in a few years.

4629.06 4632.10 S: And I've been hearing that for 50 years.

4632.10 4633.46 S: You can go back to the 1950s.

4633.46 4634.46 S: They were saying the same thing.

4634.46 4641.10 S: So we've been killing the soil for the last 70 years, 100 years, and it's still sustainable, right?

4641.10 4643.78 S: And the other thing, why would farmers kill their own soil?

4643.78 4646.78 S: You know, that's their livelihood.

4646.78 4652.18 C: And that's what I was saying the last time we talked, when it's like, have you ever talked to a farmer?

4652.18 4653.18 C: Talk to a farmer.

4653.18 4654.18 C: And ask them why.

4654.18 4662.26 C: They literally, I have people in my life who literally think that the reason farmers buy Monsanto seeds is because Monsanto is holding a gun to their head.

4662.26 4663.26 C: Right.

4663.26 4665.26 C: And I'm like, no, they buy Monsanto seeds because they're good.

4665.26 4666.26 C: Because they make money.

4666.26 4667.26 C: Because they get good yields.

4667.26 4668.26 C: Yeah.

4668.26 4671.74 C: And they use Roundup because they like the outcome of using Roundup.

4671.74 4673.30 C: Nobody's forcing them to do that.

4673.30 4676.26 S: Yeah, because otherwise they'd have to hire a whole bunch of labor.

4676.26 4678.38 S: And that's not good for the soil.

4678.38 4684.26 S: Tilling, if you want no-till farming, which is good for the soil because it keeps the carbon in the soil, it's good for the environment.

4684.26 4685.94 S: It's good for the global warming issue.

4685.94 4686.94 C: And you need pesticides.

4686.94 4687.94 C: You need pesticides.

4687.94 4688.94 S: Absolutely.

4688.94 4689.94 S: Yeah.

4689.94 4690.94 C: Herbicides, absolutely.

4690.94 4691.94 C: Or sorry, yeah, herbicides.

4691.94 4692.94 S: Sorry, misspoke.

4692.94 4693.94 S: You're right.

4693.94 4694.94 S: You need herbicides.

4694.94 4695.94 C: Herbicides actually are under the umbrella of pesticides.

4695.94 4696.94 S: Oh, they are.

4696.94 4697.94 S: It sounds weird.

4697.94 4698.94 S: Herbicides, fungicides, insecticides.

4698.94 4699.94 S: Yeah, herbs are pests by the nomenclature.

4699.94 4700.94 S: Gotcha.

4700.94 4701.94 S: That makes sense.

4701.94 4702.94 S: Yeah.

4702.94 4703.94 S: Okay.

4703.94 4704.94 S: Yeah.

4704.94 4707.90 S: So in any case, you have to think about the whole system.

4707.90 4717.04 S: You can't extrapolate from these tiny boutique services and think that you're going to magically feed the world and it's all going to work out.

4717.04 4720.68 S: And when you do these kind of systems approaches, you realize that, no, I understand.

4720.68 4722.22 S: Organic farming is unworkable.

4722.22 4723.56 S: It's a dead end.

4723.56 4731.28 S: It's a boutique luxury for people with disposable income and never experienced a food insecurity.

4731.28 4732.28 S: That's what it's for.

4732.28 4733.28 S: Right.

Science or Fiction (1:18:52)

Answer	Item
Fiction	Eyewitness identification consistency
Science	Human neurons differ from mammals'
Science	Sun-like stars engulfing systems

Host	Result
Steve	win

Rogue	Guess
Evan	Sun-like stars engulfing systems
Jay	Eyewitness identification consistency
Bob	Eyewitness identification consistency
Cara	Eyewitness identification consistency

Voice-over: It's time for Science or Fiction.

Item #1: MIT scientists find that human neurons differ from all other mammalian neurons tested, having a significantly lower density of ion channels. Item #2: A new analysis suggests that as many as 35% of sun-like stars may engulf and consume their planetary system. Item #3: A new study finds that eyewitness identification can have greater accuracy with multiple testing to demonstrate consistency.

Steve Explains Item #2

4733.28 4737.88 S: All right, guys, let's go on with science or fiction.

4737.88 4747.20 C: It's time for science or fiction.

4747.20 4750.50 S: Each week I come up with three science news items or facts, two real and one fake.

4750.50 4754.94 S: And then I challenge my panel of skeptics to tell me which one is the fake.

4754.94 4756.42 S: Three regular news items this week.

4756.42 4757.54 S: Is everyone ready?

4757.54 4768.94 S: Item number one, MIT scientists find that human neurons differ from all other mammalian neurons tested having a significantly lower density of ion channels.

4768.94 4778.96 S: Item number two, a new analysis suggests that as many as 35% of sun-like stars may engulf and consume their planetary system.

4778.96 4786.88 S: And item number three, a new study finds that eyewitness identification can have greater accuracy with multiple testing to demonstrate consistency.

4786.88 4788.80 S: Evan, go first.

4788.80 4802.38 E: First one about the scientists have found that human neurons differ from all other mammalian neurons tested, all other ones that they tested, with a significantly lower density of ion channels.

4802.38 4803.38 E: Okay.

4803.38 4809.00 E: I was following everything on that except the ion channels part, which I don't quite know.

4809.00 4815.64 S: So ion channels are proteins on the surface of all cells, but they're specialized in neurons.

4815.64 4818.80 S: That's basically how neurons conduct electricity, right?

4818.80 4819.84 S: That's how they function.

4819.84 4827.08 E: So therefore, why would the human ones be different from all the other mammals that they've tested?

4827.08 4828.92 E: Does it have to do with our diet?

4828.92 4834.56 E: Does it have to do with brain function or something?

4834.56 4835.56 E: Our connectome?

4835.56 4836.56 E: Wow.

4836.56 4839.16 E: I like that, Bob.

4839.16 4841.16 E: So that's really interesting.

4841.16 4844.96 E: I can't think of a good reason why that would be off the top of my head.

4844.96 4854.04 E: The next one about the analysis suggesting as much as, or as many as, 35% of sun-like stars may engulf and consume their planetary system.

4854.04 4855.04 E: Okay.

4855.04 4858.28 E: So sun-like stars, we have kind of this medium-sized star.

4858.28 4864.36 E: When our star goes into its expansion mode, I don't think it's going to consume our entire planetary system.

4864.36 4865.52 E: Let me clarify that.

4865.52 4866.88 S: That's not when it goes nova.

4866.88 4869.56 S: That's early on in its life.

4869.56 4870.82 S: You know what I'm saying?

4870.82 4872.24 S: It's not when it goes-

4872.24 4874.56 E: During its initial formation. Wow.

4874.56 4877.28 S: Sun-like stars don't know- I would say early on in its life.

4877.28 4880.40 S: So it doesn't have a planetary system because it's eaten it already.

4880.40 4882.88 E: May engulf and consume their planetary system.

4882.88 4888.00 B: So before they become planets, like the accretion disk or-

4888.00 4890.20 S: Not necessarily. It could be after they become planet.

4890.20 4895.60 S: But if you looked at all the sun-like stars out there, 35% of them have already eaten up their planets.

4895.60 4899.16 E: Well, I mean, a lot of gravity going on there.

4899.16 4908.98 E: So I don't see why this one wouldn't be science per se, just based on what you're writing here, Steve.

4908.98 4912.08 E: It doesn't seem implausible to me in some way.

4912.08 4916.64 E: I suppose you could mess with the percentage and say it was 95, not 35.

4916.64 4920.12 E: The last one about the eyewitness identification, this is the interesting one.

4920.12 4921.12 E: All right.

4921.12 4928.96 E: Eyewitness identification can have greater accuracy with multiple testing to demonstrate consistency.

4928.96 4935.32 E: Eyewitness identification can have greater accuracy with multiple testing to demonstrate consistency.

4935.32 4937.40 E: I love how the first person always has to do that.

4937.40 4941.52 E: They have to be like, wait, what are you even saying?

4941.52 4952.96 E: Meaning that you look at the same thing, the person looks at the same thing under multiple testing conditions and it remains consistent throughout.

4952.96 4954.44 E: I'm a little lost there.

4954.44 4961.52 S: So basically you're just adding internal consistency as a criteria for determining how accurate someone's eyewitness testimony is.

4961.52 4962.52 E: Internal consistency.

4962.52 4963.52 C: Okay.

4963.52 4969.48 C: Like this cop asked them the question, then that other cop asked them the question, and then on this other day they asked them a question and they said the same thing all three times?

4969.48 4972.64 S: Yeah, but it's not just testimony, it's eyewitness identification.

4972.64 4974.92 S: It's specifically that, yes, that's the guy I saw.

4974.92 4975.92 S: Gotcha.

4975.92 4982.04 S: They say, you see the picture a week later, they say, yeah, that's their identification is internally consistent.

4982.04 4983.04 E: Right.

4983.04 4990.44 E: And we've talked a lot on the show about how in a lot of cases eyewitness identification can lead you astray in so many ways.

4990.44 4995.84 E: So I would imagine there is greater, there is maybe only room for improvement.

4995.84 5006.28 E: So yes, you would by sort of definition, because you're starting with a low bar to begin with, have greater accuracy if you were to introduce that sort of consistency.

5006.28 5008.44 E: It's not like it would get worse.

5008.44 5011.24 E: And it's already probably pretty bad to begin with just on its base.

5011.24 5013.52 E: So I think that one's going to be right.

5013.52 5018.32 E: Therefore, I don't, I don't understand the mammalian one.

5018.32 5019.72 E: I got to put my nickel down.

5019.72 5025.04 E: I'll say the one about sun like stars engulfing and consuming the planet system.

5025.04 5027.08 E: I don't have a good feel for that one.

5027.08 5028.08 S: Okay, Jay.

5028.08 5040.60 J: All right, so the first one here about the MIT scientists saying that the human neurons are different than other mammals with a different density of ion channels.

5040.60 5044.04 J: Steve, did you tell Evan what the implication of that is?

5044.04 5045.04 J: He did not.

5045.04 5046.04 C: Yeah.

5046.04 5048.96 C: Well, no, but he, no, but he told him what an ion channel does.

5048.96 5049.96 C: Right.

5049.96 5051.56 E: I asked what the ion channels were.

5051.56 5052.56 J: All right.

5052.56 5054.88 J: That one, you know, I don't know that much to base it on.

5054.88 5057.12 J: Let me just go on to the second one.

5057.12 5062.84 J: So we have this analysis that says that 35 percent of some like stars may have engulfed and consumed their planetary system.

5062.84 5066.16 J: So engulf the entire system or a portion of the system?

5066.16 5069.08 S: Yeah, it's basically the whole thing.

5069.08 5072.26 S: But obviously that doesn't mean every last little asteroid and rock.

5072.26 5075.12 S: But essentially they've consumed their planets.

5075.12 5076.12 J: All right.

5076.12 5077.12 J: That's interesting.

5077.12 5080.24 J: Yeah, I mean, I could that that seems reasonable.

5080.24 5088.04 J: You know, you're thinking about the formation of the star and the planets are probably forming along with that disk, that disk movement.

5088.04 5089.04 J: I could see that.

5089.04 5095.20 J: I mean, you know, I could see it both ways so easily that it could be low or really high.

5095.20 5097.92 J: But I don't see any reason to think that that's not true.

5097.92 5106.80 J: And the last one about the eyewitness identification thing, whenever I hear eyewitness identification can be anything, had greater accuracy with multiple testing.

5106.80 5108.36 J: I just don't think so.

5108.36 5115.84 J: I think that eyewitness identification, anything to do with eyewitnesses is going to be very low consistency, no matter what they do.

5115.84 5117.32 J: And I think that was a fake, Steve.

5117.32 5118.32 S: OK, Bob.

5118.32 5123.60 B: Yeah, I've got a little bit of a problem with the first two, but a bigger problem with the third one.

5123.60 5126.04 B: And I don't need to talk about the neurons.

5126.04 5128.28 B: I just wouldn't think that would be true.

5128.28 5131.00 B: But it's not like outrageous.

5131.00 5133.60 B: The more annoying is this is the star one.

5133.60 5135.00 B: How do we know?

5135.00 5136.84 B: How do we know that it ate its planets?

5136.84 5140.16 B: What's, you know, there's nothing left.

5140.16 5141.40 B: Did they leave a goodbye letter?

5141.40 5142.88 B: I don't know.

5142.88 5157.72 B: Maybe they did a study and determined that, you know, with the Jupiter's migrating in, it could often, you know, completely expel or maybe they found that it could knock out planets that make them fall into the sun.

5157.72 5159.24 B: I guess that's possible.

5159.24 5162.60 B: So I'm not liking it, but I can kind of make sense of it.

5162.60 5165.60 B: But the biggest problem, though, is this eyewitness identification.

5165.60 5167.40 B: I mean, who cares about consistency?

5167.40 5175.36 B: If you pick, if you pick the wrong person the first time and you pick the same wrong person the second, third and fourth time, so what?

5175.36 5177.08 B: You're consistent, you're consistently wrong.

5177.08 5178.72 B: It doesn't mean you're more accurate.

5178.72 5181.24 B: So that one to me doesn't make sense.

5181.24 5182.24 B: So I'm going to say that's fiction.

5182.24 5183.24 C: Okay.

5183.24 5184.24 C: And Cara.

5184.24 5194.92 C: Yeah, I mean, I'm struggling with the first and the last one so that the ion channel density and the eyewitness testimony, the ion channel, like a lower density of ion channel sounds interesting to me.

5194.92 5195.92 C: And I can't imagine why.

5195.92 5202.68 C: But I do think that the human brain is has certain components that are fundamentally different.

5202.68 5209.60 C: I think that it's yes, there is an argument to say that like our brain is just like the brain of a chimpanzee, except not.

5209.60 5217.96 C: And except that we have a larger frontal cortex, except that we have a little bit more wrinkliness, except that we have like more neuron density or, you know, whatever the case may be.

5217.96 5227.80 C: But like, compared to all other mammals that we have a lower density of ion channels, which what does that reduce neurotransmission?

5227.80 5231.16 C: Like it's weird, unless it's like an efficiency issue.

5231.16 5235.74 C: I can't imagine why that would be science.

5235.74 5238.12 C: The sun one sure it's science.

5238.12 5239.12 C: I don't know.

5239.12 5250.24 C: But then the last one, I also can't imagine why that would be science for number one, the reason that Bob said the reasons that Jay said, the idea that we know that memory changes every time we access it.

5250.24 5255.16 C: So in some ways, that's sort of like a point for Evan on this one.

5255.16 5265.12 C: Like if each time you ask me a question about an eyewitness, am I going to now integrate a bunch of new information and change it?

5265.12 5268.76 C: But see, that would make me think yeah, that it would be less accurate.

5268.76 5281.88 C: I think it would be less accurate the more times I have to perform a memory that that sort of task that identification task, because now we're corrupting everything with more information.

5281.88 5288.32 C: So yeah, I guess I have to say that that one's the fiction, although I'm really curious about number about the ion channels.

5288.32 5292.88 S: All right, well, we'll start with that one since everyone agrees that that one is science.

5292.88 5301.14 S: MIT scientists find that human neurons differ from all other mammalian neurons tested having a significantly lower density of ion channels.

5301.14 5307.64 S: You guys all think this one is science and this one is science.

5307.64 5308.64 S: Nice.

5308.64 5309.64 J: You're so far.

5309.64 5310.64 J: It is weird.

5310.64 5324.96 S: It was unexpected because it's been with mammalian, you know, brain research, it's been pretty well established that the ion channel density remains constant even through a very large range of neuron size, right?

5324.96 5330.56 S: So if the big neurons have the same ion density as the small neurons, that's a pretty constant.

5330.56 5340.12 S: And then when they compared it to humans, they wait a minute, humans have a lower ion density than these 10 mammalian species that we just tested, you know, across different, you know, different clades.

5340.12 5342.12 S: Did they look at other primates?

5342.12 5343.12 C: Yeah, so absolutely.

5343.12 5346.00 S: And so the question is why?

5346.00 5357.24 S: And actually, Cara, you mentioned the reason that they think this is the case, and that's efficiency, because it's more efficient.

5357.24 5362.16 S: And when you're trying to, again, when you scale up, you run into new problems, right?

5362.16 5373.36 S: So this is a strange connection to the farming thing is that when you try to, you can't just make the brain bigger and think it's going to be a bigger version of a smaller brain.

5373.36 5378.28 S: You start to get into new problems like it's using a lot of energy.

5378.28 5393.34 S: And so the lower ion channel density may be a way of optimizing the efficiency of the brain so that it has enough energy to do all the other stuff it's trying to do because it is, you know, a massive organ that is very energy hungry.

5393.34 5395.28 C: It's like the EV problem.

5395.28 5397.76 C: It's like we're going to get bigger batteries.

5397.76 5400.60 C: We got to have these batteries be more energy efficient.

5400.60 5401.60 C: Right.

5401.60 5402.60 C: I love that.

5402.60 5403.60 C: That's cool.

5403.60 5404.60 B: So I was right, Evan.

5404.60 5405.60 B: I said connectome.

5405.60 5406.60 E: It ultimately is because of the size of the connectome.

5406.60 5407.60 B: You did, and you were.

5407.60 5408.60 S: Yeah.

5408.60 5409.60 S: I learned something new today.

5409.60 5410.60 S: The key word was efficiency.

5410.60 5411.60 S: That's what they think it's for.

5411.60 5412.60 S: Cool.

5412.60 5413.60 S: But it was a surprising result.

5413.60 5414.60 S: It was, yeah.

5414.60 5415.60 S: Yeah, different than everyone.

5415.60 5416.60 S: That was cool as Bob's word.

5416.60 5417.60 E: Thank you, Evan.

5417.60 5418.60 S: Let's jump to number three.

5418.60 5423.84 S: A new study finds that eyewitness identification can have greater accuracy with multiple testing to demonstrate consistency.

5423.84 5425.16 S: No, half of the way.

5425.16 5436.20 S: What do you guys think if with, but what if they're using that, the consistency to weed out the bad eyewitnesses and the ones you're left with are the ones that are accurate?

5436.20 5437.20 S: But how do you know that we did them out?

5437.20 5438.68 C: But no eyewitnesses are accurate.

5438.68 5439.68 C: Like that's the thing.

5439.68 5441.40 C: Like none of us are really all that accurate.

5441.40 5443.36 S: That doesn't mean we're always wrong.

5443.36 5445.52 S: Most people are accurate in what they report.

5445.52 5450.00 C: Yeah, but I don't think the way to show that that person is accurate is internal consistency.

5450.00 5451.00 S: Right.

5451.00 5452.00 S: All right.

5452.00 5453.00 S: Well, let's see.

5453.00 5455.04 S: This one is the fiction.

5455.04 5458.44 S: Yeah, because you guys are correct.

5458.44 5468.76 S: The primary reason is in fact the recommendation that was just made by a group of psychologists writing a paper about this saying you should only ever test them once.

5468.76 5481.12 S: Because once you've done that, you have now contaminated them for any future eyewitness identification is now contaminated by the first one that you did.

5481.12 5483.68 S: Because let's say you do a lineup and there's six people in the lineup.

5483.68 5496.84 S: One of them is one of the suspects and whether they, they can't pick them out, but they've seen the person now and now if at any point in the future they're asked to identify that

5496.84 5498.84 C: person. There's a familiarity.

5498.84 5499.84 C: Yes.

5499.84 5502.48 C: It's like Bob, it's like what you said.

5502.48 5504.24 C: It's they're just wrong every time.

5504.24 5505.52 C: That doesn't really help anybody.

5505.52 5506.64 S: But it's worse.

5506.64 5507.64 S: It's worse.

5507.64 5509.96 S: It actually makes them worse over time because it's content.

5509.96 5510.96 C: Yeah.

5510.96 5511.96 S: Testing.

5511.96 5512.96 S: It's a contamination.

5512.96 5513.96 S: Yeah.

5513.96 5515.72 S: So they're like, just do it once.

5515.72 5522.80 S: And if you get what you get and if you can't take multiple bites at that apple because you're now you're just creating the outcome you want.

5522.80 5527.76 S: You're not actually testing their ability to identify somebody.

5527.76 5529.60 C: It's the same problem with interrogations.

5529.60 5533.68 C: Like the longer you do it, the more questions you ask, the more you feed them.

5533.68 5534.68 S: Absolutely.

5534.68 5535.68 S: It's such a science.

5535.68 5537.92 S: I mean, you have to be so careful.

5537.92 5540.32 B: And you know, it's all about contamination.

5540.32 5541.88 S: It's all about contamination.

5541.88 5542.88 S: Absolutely.

5542.88 5547.04 S: Anyone in any investigatorial profession needs to be a skeptic.

5547.04 5548.04 S: That's the bottom line.

5548.04 5555.68 S: And if you're not, it's so easy to be led down, you know, confirmation bias and again, witness contamination, leading testimony.

5555.68 5558.16 B: You should write down your memory and then that's it.

5558.16 5559.16 B: It's not.

5559.16 5560.16 B: Right.

5560.16 5561.16 B: That's it.

5561.16 5562.16 B: You're done.

5562.16 5564.04 B: Don't think what you think about it afterwards is irrelevant.

5564.04 5569.28 B: The best you're going to get, the most high res picture you're going to get is what you stay is what you wrote down.

5569.28 5570.28 B: And that's it.

5570.28 5571.28 S: The first thing.

5571.28 5576.12 C: And the only real questions that should be asked are questions that elicit more detail.

5576.12 5577.56 B: Can you tell me more about that?

5577.56 5579.52 B: And even yeah, but then it gets even murkier.

5579.52 5585.36 B: The more detail you try to pull out of them, the more likely they are to be confabulating and shit.

5585.36 5586.36 S: They're allowed.

5586.36 5587.56 S: They're allowed in the United States.

5587.56 5591.44 S: Police officers are allowed to use all kinds of shady techniques to try to get testimony.

5591.44 5594.96 C: They're allowed to be like, we have the blood being tested right now.

5594.96 5598.16 C: And when it comes back positive, you're going to not get the same deal.

5598.16 5600.60 C: It's like, totally allowed to lie to them.

5600.60 5609.04 S: OK, anyway, so that all that means that a new analysis suggests that as many as 35 percent of sun like stars may engulf and consume their planetary system.

5609.04 5610.40 S: Bob, you hit upon a quick question.

5610.40 5611.40 S: How do they know?

5611.40 5612.40 S: Right.

5612.40 5614.24 S: What do you think the answer is now that you know that this is true?

5614.24 5615.24 S: It's the goodbye.

5615.24 5616.24 S: The goodbye card that they wrote.

5616.24 5617.24 S: It's the note.

5617.24 5618.24 B: Yeah, the note.

5618.24 5622.72 B: So, I mean, the chemical signature of the of the planet of the sun.

5622.72 5623.72 B: You got it.

5623.72 5624.72 S: Yeah.

5624.72 5625.72 S: Here's the title of the article.

5625.72 5629.60 S: Chemical evidence for planetary ingestion in a quarter of sun like stars.

5629.60 5630.60 S: Nice.

5630.60 5631.60 S: Nice.

5631.60 5632.60 S: So, yeah, it was 20 to 35 percent.

5632.60 5634.08 S: I said as that's why I said as much as 35.

5634.08 5643.52 S: But it was 20 to 35 percent probability that a sun like star will actually that the planets will fall into the star early on in the in the star's life.

5643.52 5649.72 S: And that a configuration of planets that is stable over billions of years may be uncommon.

5649.72 5652.26 S: You know, you know, the stability of our solar system.

5652.26 5653.76 S: We don't know how typical it is.

5653.76 5655.28 S: Again, there's a certain percentage.

5655.28 5669.68 S: I think the percentage now is 10 percent have the hot Jupiters where a large Jovian planet from the outer solar system migrates in, gets close to the star and, of course, along the way knocks the other planets out of their orbits.

5669.68 5676.96 S: So you only like the Jovian planets close up to the star, clearly not going to be any Earth like planets and that kind of system.

5676.96 5680.16 B: But this is a moon, maybe a moon orbiting 20.

5680.16 5681.16 S: Yeah.

5681.16 5682.92 S: That's still pretty hot.

5682.92 5683.92 S: That's very close.

5683.92 5684.92 S: Just a.

5684.92 5685.92 S: And that.

5685.92 5690.08 S: But now in a quarter or so of sun like stars, the planets may be just gone.

5690.08 5694.32 S: So the other chemical they were looking at actually binary systems.

5694.32 5697.96 S: You know, so there's, you know, systems around two stars.

5697.96 5701.68 B: Oh, the difference, the difference between the two, they looked at the.

5701.68 5702.68 S: Yeah.

5702.68 5703.68 S: In in homogeneities.

5703.68 5704.68 S: Yes.

5704.68 5713.68 S: And they and they found that it was so there was different hypotheses about what was, you know, causing the inhomogeneities.

5713.68 5726.00 S: And it was that was it was it problems with the protostellar gas clouds or is because one star consumed planets and their results support the conclusion that the one of the stars ate the planets.

5726.00 5728.52 S: And that's what changed their chemical composition.

5728.52 5733.42 S: And given that that's true, that suggests that that may happen a lot, you know, not just.

5733.42 5734.42 B: Yeah.

5734.42 5744.48 B: Because if it was one star, then it's like, well, you know, maybe that's that's just the way the star was because the star would be have a similar chemical makeup to the planets because you all came from the same cloud, right?

5744.48 5746.44 B: You're all from the same condensing cloud.

5746.44 5751.84 B: But the two stars, one would eat the planets and then it would create that inhomogeneity.

5751.84 5752.84 B: So that makes sense.

5752.84 5753.84 S: So.

5753.84 5754.84 S: Yeah.

5754.84 5764.08 S: So they said this opens the possibility of using this chemical analysis of these stars to identify which ones are most likely to host planets.

5764.08 5765.08 S: Yeah.

5765.08 5766.08 S: Right.

5766.08 5767.60 S: That star has not eaten its planet.

5767.60 5769.40 S: So let's look there for planets.

5769.40 5770.40 E: That one has all right.

5770.40 5772.64 E: The one you can skip by another hint.

5772.64 5773.64 B: Still hungry.

5773.64 5774.64 B: I like it.

5774.64 5775.64 S: Yeah.

5775.64 5776.64 S: Yeah.

5776.64 5777.64 S: Pretty cool.

5777.64 5778.64 S: All right.

5778.64 5779.64 S: Good job, guys.

5779.64 5780.64 S: Evan, you were in the pole position.

5780.64 5781.64 S: That's, you know, that could be challenging.

5781.64 5782.64 S: Yeah.

5782.64 5783.64 S: Good.

5783.64 5784.64 E: Vanguard, you know.

Skeptical Quote of the Week (1:36:24)

When people see a story as an external object, then someone challenging the story is just making an intellectual argument. But when believers identify with a story, someone challenging the story is a personal threat. And since our brains are notoriously bad at distinguishing between our psychological identity and our physical body, the personal threat doesn’t feel like an insult—it feels like danger.
– Tim Urban, writer/illustrator and editor of Wait But Why website

5784.64 5785.64 E: All right, Evan, give us a quote.

5785.64 5790.92 E: Quote this week was supplied by listener Gary Ehrichardt from Asheville, North Carolina.

5790.92 5791.92 E: Thank you so much.

5791.92 5802.60 E: He writes, he wrote to us and said, I've been reading one of the epic, extremely entertaining and extremely informative long form blog posts on Tim Urban's blog, Wait, But Why?

5802.60 5806.16 E: And came across this quote I thought you'd enjoy.

5806.16 5813.84 E: When people see a story as an external object, then someone challenging the story is just making an intellectual argument.

5813.84 5820.12 E: But when believers identify with a story, someone challenging the story is a personal threat.

5820.12 5830.26 E: And since our brains are notoriously bad at distinguishing between our psychological identity and our physical body, the personal threat doesn't feel like an insult.

5830.26 5831.26 E: It feels like danger.

5831.26 5832.26 E: That's funny.

5832.26 5833.52 C: We use that word a lot.

5833.52 5840.28 C: Like it's threatening to somebody's sense of self or threatening to their ideology, threatening to their membership in a certain group.

5840.28 5841.28 C: Yeah, their tribe.

5841.28 5842.60 S: Yeah, no, that's absolutely correct.

5842.60 5844.08 S: And there's research to bear this out.

5844.08 5853.96 S: The more somebody identifies either personally or their tribe with a position, the more they dig in their heels and get defensive and defend and will be irrational.

5853.96 5856.00 S: That's kind of what I was saying about the organic thing, too.

5856.00 5867.32 S: Like if you think that organic farming is the way to rescue your nation from imperial colonial whatever, then you're invested in it to a degree that goes beyond scientific evidence or logic or reason.

5867.32 5871.72 S: And of course, anyone who's like citing studies is a shill for big agriculture.

5871.72 5872.72 S: You know what I mean?

5872.72 5876.12 S: It's just you lose all rationality at that point.

Signoff/Announcements ()

5876.12 5877.68 S: All right, guys.

5877.68 5879.44 S: Thank you all for joining me this week.

5879.44 5880.44 S: Sure, man.

5880.44 5881.44 S: Thanks, Steve.

5881.44 5882.44 S: See you.

5882.44 5883.44 S: See you, December.

5883.44 5887.32 S: Next week's episode, the next episode I think is the one we recorded for DragonCon.

5887.32 5888.32 S: Right.

5888.32 5889.32 S: Oh, DragonCon.

5889.32 5892.40 S: And we'll be recording shows while we're on the road next week.

5892.40 5897.56 S: So the show after that will be one of the live shows that we record in Colorado.

5897.56 5902.76 S: So we're not going to be back into our normal schedule for three weeks.

5902.76 5903.76 S: Right.

S: —and until next week, this is your Skeptics' Guide to the Universe.

S: Skeptics' Guide to the Universe is produced by SGU Productions, dedicated to promoting science and critical thinking. For more information, visit us at theskepticsguide.org. Send your questions to info@theskepticsguide.org. And, if you would like to support the show and all the work that we do, go to patreon.com/SkepticsGuide and consider becoming a patron and becoming part of the SGU community. Our listeners and supporters are what make SGU possible.

[top]                        

Today I Learned

• Fact/Description, possibly with an article reference
• Fact/Description
• Fact/Description

References

Vocabulary