I'm extremely interested in the upcoming book (and associated documentary) Authors of the Impossible (book released May 15). Authored by Jeff Kripal, Professor of Religious Studies and Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at Rice University, Houston, Texas, the book surveys the history of the paranormal and how it bridges the often-ignored space between the extremes of belief (fundamentalist religions on the one side, fundamentalist atheists at the other). It does so by grounding itself in the research and writings of four important personages in the history of the paranormal, including a few of my favourites:

Most scholars dismiss research into the paranormal as pseudoscience, a frivolous pursuit for the paranoid or gullible. Even historians of religion, whose work naturally attends to events beyond the realm of empirical science, have shown scant interest in the subject. But the history of psychical phenomena, Jeffrey J. Kripal contends, is an untapped source of insight into the sacred and by tracing that history through the last two centuries of Western thought we can see its potential centrality to the critical study of religion.

Kripal grounds his study in the work of four major figures in the history of paranormal research: psychical researcher Frederic Myers; writer and humorist Charles Fort; astronomer, computer scientist, and ufologist Jacques Vallee; and philosopher and sociologist Bertrand Méheust. Through incisive analyses of these thinkers, Kripal ushers the reader into a beguiling world somewhere between fact, fiction, and fraud. The cultural history of telepathy, teleportation, and UFOs; a ghostly love story; the occult dimensions of science fiction; cold war psychic espionage; galactic colonialism; and the intimate relationship between consciousness and culture all come together in Authors of the Impossible, a dazzling and profound look at how the paranormal bridges the sacred and the scientific.

Though the book is still a couple of months away from release, you can get a good taste of the thinking behind it by heading to the official website for the documentary. There's you'll find a journal/blog exploring some of the ideas in the book, and I have to confess that a lot of it resonated very strongly with me. Here's the early trailer for the documentary (no interview excerpts included though):

Also on the site you'll find the Impossible Talk Podcast, where so far there are in-depth interviews with Jeff Kripal, Dean Radin, and Stephen Braude - all academics who have been open enough to approach the taboo topic of the paranormal. You can also pick up some eye candy in the form of desktop wallpaper, and view interview excerpts - just the one at the time of writing, but impressive enough to finish with. It's writer Doug Moench discussing one of the scariest synchronicities I've ever heard:

Authors of the Impossible is available for pre-order from Amazon for release on May 15. Keep your eye on the official website for more info and clips from the documentary and/or subscribe to their YouTube channel.

There has been plenty of debate in recent years about 'New Atheism', most notably its growing antitheism aspect (the active opposition to religion and belief in a god) - characterised by the likes of Richard Dawkins, P.Z. Myers, and Christopher Hitchins. This idea generally takes the form that religious belief is harmful to individuals and societies...the 'root of all evil', as some might have it.

A large part of the criticism of New Atheism has been directed at its inability to see redeeming or helpful features to religion. So while atrocities committed in the name of Catholicism feature often in the literature, little is said about positive work done by believers. And now, that criticism has perhaps found its apotheosis. Witness the epic fail that is P.Z. Myers.

In short, Myers posted one of his usual caustic rants yesterday, this time about the refusal of the Australian government to help fund next year's 'The Rise of Atheism' Global Atheism Conference. He began by attacking the government's claim that the conference didn't meet the correct criteria, and then moved on to a second target, Reverend Tim Costello. His problem? That Costello was the religious person mentioned in a news article, even though he was discussing his own conference when he said that "In a global context, most of the world is profoundly religious, and there literally can't be peace without religious peace."

Myers accused Costello of lying, going on to say "we also will not have peace through religion." But Costello didn't say that - he simply pointed out the majority of the world's population is religious, and therefore there can't be peace without religious peace (vs "there can't be peace without religion"). Taking it further, Costello's comment actually sounds more to me like a criticism of religions; the fact that they are in conflict and thus inhibiting world peace. But Myers got his dander up and went off early without reading things carefully. What could have upset this intelligent scientist so much in order for such a serious lack of judgement?

I thought this was a well understood principle; the danger in a democracy is the tyranny of the majority, and safeguards have to be put in place to protect the rights of minorities. Since Costello is a "reverend", unfortunately, that probably means he's an ignorant ass who has never learned anything that matters.

Ah, he's a "reverend"! So he therefore is probably an "ignorant ass" who has "never learned anything that matters" about threats to democracy and the rights of minorities. Wow, epic fail on a galactic scale...

For those that don't know 'Reverend' Tim Costello, here's a quick CV:

In 1987, the Reverend Tim Costello, along with a team of others, rebuilt the congregation at the St Kilda Baptist Church, opened a drop-in centre and worked in a legal practice for those for whom the law is normally inaccessible...

...As elected Mayor of St Kilda Council in 1993, he became well known for championing the cause of local democracy...

...From 1995 to 2003 he was a Minister of the Collins Street Baptist Church and the Executive Director of Urban Seed, a Christian not-for-profit organization created in response to concern about homelessness, drug abuse and the marginalisation of the city’s street people.

...He has been Patron of Baptist World Aid, a member of the Australian Earth Charter Committee, a council member of the Australian Centre for Christianity and Culture, a spokesperson for the Interchurch Gambling Taskforce, a member of the National Advisory Body on Gambling and a member of the Alcohol Education and Rehabilitation Foundation.

...Throughout the late 1990s and early 2000s he was frequently seen in the Australian national media commenting on gambling and other social problems.

...In 2004, Costello was appointed CEO of World Vision Australia. He was awarded Victorian of the Year 2004 in July 2004, in recognition of his public and community service. He was made an Officer of the Order of Australia in June 2005. He is the 2008 winner of the Australian Peace Prize awarded by the Peace Organisation of Australia. He is also listed by the National Trust as a 'National Living Treasure'.

Yep, that's definitely an "ignorant ass" who's "never learned anything that matters". Or, perhaps, the prime example of where 'New Atheism' is going badly wrong.

So, on the world's premiere science blog, there would have been plenty of intelligent people ready to set the record straight in the 200-or-so comments that followed such an epic fail? Right? Hmmm? No. Because, sadly, Myers is what he so despises himself. A rigid fundamentalist who will ignorantly spout off at someone just because they don't have the same view as him, leading a flock of his own faithful who don't dare criticise (or simply, don't even see the flaws because they've drunk so much Kool-Aid). And, sadly, lowering the level of debate about religion - a topic that deserves much more intelligent discussion and criticism. This is the man put forward as the spokesperson for rationalism?

Fail.

Gary Lachman has written a great piece for Seed Magazine titled "2013: Or, What to Do When the Apocalypse Doesn’t Arrive" - an excellent read. I'm a bit of a skeptic when it comes to predictions about 2012, and it seems the majority of TDG readers agree. In the article, Gary points out the long history of expectations of massive world changes, giving the 2012 hysteria some historical context:

While I’ve been lucky enough to have missed anything like the French or Russian revolution and the First World War, my own lifetime has been peppered with quite a few millennial expectations. Growing up in the 1960s, through the media I was aware of the modern Brethren of the Free Spirit in places like Greenwich Village and Haight-Ashbury. I was also aware that something called the Age of Aquarius either was on its way or had already arrived (the jury is still out on this). Linked to this was the idea that the fabled lost continent of Atlantis - which I read about in comic books and fantasy paperbacks — was due to surface sometime in 1969. Both were heralds of a coming golden age, when “peace will guide the planets and love will steer the stars.” By the early seventies such anticipations had fizzled, but in 1974 they were briefly revived when comet Kohoutek sparked new interest in apocalyptic beliefs. A Christian group called the Children of God — who, incidentally, advocated “revolutionary lovemaking” (read: promiscuity) — distributed leaflets announcing doomsday for January of that year, which my friends and I read with interest. Predictably, Kohoutek fizzled as well. That same year, the science writers John Gribbin and Stephen Plagemann published The Jupiter Effect, a bestseller predicting the devastating results (earthquakes, tidal waves, etc.) of a curious alignment of the planets on one side of the sun. When the alignment took place and nothing happened, they wrote a second book, The Jupiter Effect Reconsidered, explaining what went wrong. Not surprisingly, this sequel didn’t sell as well.

There were other millennial dates too. Remember the solar eclipse of 1999 and Y2K, the millennium bug? But the most significant millennial date so far in my lifetime surely was 1987, the year of the Harmonic Convergence — another planetary alignment — which was seen as the kickoff for the most anticipated apocalyptic event in recent years, the year 2012.

Gary also points out that the 2012 meme includes two of the major responses of civilizations to periods of crisis:

In his Study of History, an account of the rise and fall of civilizations, the historian Arnold Toynbee argues that there are two stereotypical responses to what he calls a “time of troubles,” the crisis points that make or break a civilization. One is the “archaist,” a desire to return to some previous happy time or golden age. The other is the “futurist,” an urge to accelerate time and leap into a dazzling future. That both offerings are embraced today is, I think, clear. The belief that a saving grace may come from indigenous non-Western people untouched by modernity’s sins is part of a very popular “archaic revival.” Likewise, the trans- or posthumanism that sees salvation in some form of technological marriage between man and computer is equally fashionable. The 2012 scenario seems to partake of both camps: It proposes a return to the beliefs of an ancient civilization in order to make a leap into an unimaginable future. What both strategies share, however, is a desire to escape the present.

What do you think? Is Gary on the money here, or do you think that 2012 really is going to bring world-shaking changes? Head over to Seed for the full article.

A few months ago I linked to some tres cool online video from the PBS Closer to Truth series. Lots of beautifully shot personal chats with some of the best thinkers alive, on some of the deepest philosophical questions. So, I was very excited today to hear that host Robert Lawrence Kuhn has now expanded the series into a full-length documentary feature film, titled Into God. Here's the full 9-minute-long trailer:

Hard to go wrong when you've got so many eloquent and intelligent individuals (of diverse beliefs and non-beliefs) discussing 'the big question' - including Michio Kaku, Paul Davies, Freeman Dyson, Daniel Dennett and so on. And beautifully presented as well. Yum.

Previously on TDG:

• Closer to Truth: Pop Goes My Bandwidth
• Steven Braude and the Gold Leaf Lady
• Michio Kaku - Impossible Science