Joined: Jan 05, 2012 Age: 28 Posts: 246 Location: Birmingham, UK
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:05 am Post subject: Penn & Teller's Bullshit!
I've recently started watching this show and at first I thought it was very funny, I've liked P & T since I was a kid. But now I'm about 8 episodes in to the first series I'm finding it oddly distressing. For people who have never seen it here's a description from the IMDb:
"Using a combination of set ups, descriptions, rants and film of practitioners, Penn & Teller show the bullshit that's everywhere. The initial show covers mediums or Talkers to the Dead. Penn Jillette explains in the first program that while calling someone a liar or a con man is actionable, "bullshit" is safe. Each show has a topic such as Mediums, Feng Shui, Medical devices or Penis Enlargement. Using humor and experts, they debunk the bullshit."
Why distressing I hear you say? Unless you have seen the show then you would not believe the amount of stupid people out there and the number of con artists that are willing to take advantage of them (in some situations the people are not stupid, they are just vulnerable). It's got to a point now (after watching the creationism episode) where I'm just angry. I'm going to continue to watch the show but it's so absurd that sometimes I think to myself that it just cannot be true, some of the things that are happening, some of the cons that people pull, it's just hard to describe in words how distressed I am with the world sometimes. These con artists lie, cheat and basically steal your money (because they are giving nothing in return) and they end up being successful. Whilst honest people like myself who are too afraid of flies to hurt them are left to struggle through life. Anyway here's the full (26 min) episode I was talking about:
It's a great show and I would recommend it to all mature audiences (it's on Showtime).
It's a fun show, but it has a few flaws. It often picks fights with strawmen and the most soft targets imaginable, which is understandable since that's more entertaining. It also suffers from "show tiny bit of an interview and then voiceover explaining how stupid this guy is" syndrome, which always makes me wonder whether they are editing out bits where the opposition makes sense. But overall, it's a good overview of all the categories that weird deluded people fall into.
If you are into debunking nonsense - I would recccomend the James Randi Foundation.
James Randi is a magician (The Amazing Randi). He shows how so-called mediums, phsycis, spiritualists do their "tricks". As a magician, he has no problem with a magic show as entertainment - his concern is when people REALLY claim to do magic.
His foundation has a challenge to any psychic, supernatural healer (including Reiki practitioners and Therapeutic Touch practitioners). If they can prove their "powers" in laboratory conditions - his foundation will pay them $1 Million dollars. The money has never been paid out because the "powers" of these people does NOT exist and cannot be proven under lab conditions (where their tricks are exposed or it proves that their methods are no more accurate than chance or educated guessing).
I liked the episode about undertakers.
Some episodes I feel I want to object, but then I recall that almost every "reader's comment" on SkepDic starts "I enjoy your website very much, but in the case of [x], you are wrong".
But yes, this is entertainment.
I prefer reading Christopher Hitchens.
It's a fun show, but it has a few flaws. It often picks fights with strawmen and the most soft targets imaginable, which is understandable since that's more entertaining. It also suffers from "show tiny bit of an interview and then voiceover explaining how stupid this guy is" syndrome, which always makes me wonder whether they are editing out bits where the opposition makes sense. But overall, it's a good overview of all the categories that weird deluded people fall into.
+1
I thought the education and GMO episodes were pretty stupid too. Noam Chomsky is really someone who knows what he's talking about, and I get the sense they didn't really tell him the full context of the interview so they could chop the footage up and make him look senile or something.
On the GM crop episode, they didn't explain how Monsanto is prosecuting farmers for patent infringement for their crops being wind pollinated by Monsanto crops in neighboring fields. They've had good episodes, but I think the narrator is something of a loud mouth, bully, and idealogue.
