So What's the deal with Hastings?

[peedeejones]

Robert Hasting is going to be speaking at my college this week.
The flyers posted at school about the lecture are fairly vague, something about the government's coverup of UFOs.

I am definately going to this lecture because I just am a glutton for punishment but I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on "psuedoscience" and conspiracy theories.

[Grand Vizier]

Robert Hasting is going to be speaking at my college this week.
The flyers posted at school about the lecture are fairly vague, something about the government's coverup of UFOs.

I am definately going to this lecture because I just am a glutton for punishment but I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on "psuedoscience" and conspiracy theories.

We used to invite whackos of all stripes to come and lecture at our student union back in the 70s just for a laugh. They were really grateful for a day out and they even enjoyed the heckling, which made them feel properly persecuted. Don't let him cadge too many drinks, though. Twinkies can be fun if properly disciplined, but they will try to take advantage.

[Gerrsun]

Ask if he has ever shot an elephant in his pajamas and if so, what was the elephant DOING in his pajamas?

[Hans]

If you are really cruel ask why the CIA hasn't swept him off to the UFO Gulag.

[ToSeek]

A search (http://www.google.com/search?q=robert+hastings+ufos) on "Robert Hastings UFOs" results in a remarkable number of articles about him in college newspapers, as if all he does is speak on campuses.

[Maha Vailo]

I've got for words for you:

Mystery Science Theater 3000.

- Maha "in the not-too-distant future..." Vailo

[Lurker]

If you are really cruel ask why the CIA hasn't swept him off to the UFO Gulag.
We'll get 'em... just waiting for the right time... 8-[

:wink:

[The Bad Astronomer]

Robert Hasting is going to be speaking at my college this week.


Your college just threw away $1500+.

He came to Sonoma State University a couple of years ago (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=598). His talk was awful. Not just bad in the typical-UFO-coverup-nonsense sort of way, but just bad. He used slide projectors, had no images at all (the UFOs shown were drawings), and at one point ran a tape recorder which played various themes from Close Encounters while a narrator (presumably Hastings, I don't remember) talked about the "coverup".

Here is my summary of his talk here (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=8537#8537).

[papageno]

Your college just threw away $1500+.

:-k Interesting.
Maybe I found a new career which does not require too much effort.

[lyndonashmore]

Anyone want a talk on Ashmore's Tired Light theory? Papageno could come too!

[JimTKirk]

Lyndon,
Please don't try to hijack this thread...


Thanks!

BTW: I think I found a great BA quote!


Let’s face it: our government couldn’t conspire to keep Monica Lewinsky a secret for a year, and only four people on the planet knew about Bill Clinton’s White House shenanigans. How could they hope to have thousands of politicians keep their mouths shut about aliens?

[Jigsaw]

Hah-rumpfh. [-X [daughter of college professor gets up on soapbox]


I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on "psuedoscience" and conspiracy theories

Fill in the blank:

I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...racism.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...the rise of the Nazis.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...the Holocaust.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...the modern rise of white supremacists.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...the KKK.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...eugenics.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...human cloning.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...women's rights.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...gay rights.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...abortion.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...fetal rights.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...manned expeditions to Mars.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...interstellar flight.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...the military-industrial complex.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...the Black Sea/Noah's Flood theory.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...plate tectonics.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...theories of Stonehenge.
I am surprised a college would be hosting a lecture on...theories of the Great Pyramid.


This is an important part of what colleges do, people--they open the door to Big Ideas on behalf of the student body (and also on behalf of the community at large in which the college exists), whether the Big Idea in question happens to be part of the current cultural mainstream or not. Plate tectonics used to be considered outrageously woo, too, remember? As did human cloning. "Total sci-fi. Never happen." Ditto "landing a man on the moon". And the Black Sea/Noah's Flood theory.

And sometimes it costs $1,500 to get the door opened to a Big Idea, so folks can come in and browse.

I wouldn't consider that money "wasted", any more than I'd consider money spent on bringing in the Grand Dragon "money wasted". Where else are students gonna have an opportunity to hear his ideas at first hand, in a non-confrontational setting, with no editing, so they can make up their own minds?

[Donnie B.]

Easy, there, Jigsaw, I think you're about to pop the blood pressure cuff! :wink:

Do you really not see a difference between a colloquium on UFOs and one on, say, the Holocaust? What if the latter was by a Holocaust denier?

I don't think anyone is advocating censorship or suppression of ideas. But if I had the job of finding speakers, I think I could find better ways to use that $1500 than handing it to a UFOlogist. Don't we get enough of that on Discovery Channel?

[Lurker]

Do you really not see a difference between a colloquium on UFOs and one on, say, the Holocaust? What if the latter was by a Holocaust denier?
But that's the point... a University should be a place for open discussion of ideas. If you do not expose students to the entire specturm of ideas how are you going to teach them to think for themselves. It reminds me of when I was a child and my father, a college professor, use to be angry that communist ideology could not be discussed in many classes because it was considered a diseased idea that would corrupt minds. Ideas don't corrupt minds... minds corrupt reality (or something like that... #-o )

[peedeejones]

Dude! :o

I know the difference between a lecture at a college about issues addressing human right such as racism or genocide and a lecture about UFO conspiracy theories.

Anyway, I am not afraid to ask questions of Mr. Hastings.
I had a meeting awhile back with astronaut Edgar Mitchell and questioned him about his UFO theories(which were very interesting to hear).

I'm just curious to find out which department scheduled Hastings to speak.
I will drop dead if I find out it was the astronomy department.

[lyndonashmore]

[quote="JimTKirk"]Lyndon,
Please don't try to hijack this thread...


Thanks!
Sorry but that was not my intention at all (it was the money)
However, being culturally separated from Hastings? (who is he?) and reading BA's comment about 'no pictures' surprised me. I was in Russia for the summer and went to a Russian lecture on UFO's. The thing, I found boring was that it was all pictures. Video after video of sightings. I don't believe in any of it but none the less, they were not 'normal' occurances. With more explanation it could have been made into something reasonable. Maybe Hastings should get himself to Russia, after all remember the spacecraft that crashed in Siberia? (sorry for that)
Cheers Lyndon

[Jigsaw]

Do you really not see a difference between a colloquium on UFOs and one on, say, the Holocaust?
Yes, but that's beside the point. The whole point I'm making here is that it's a mistake to allow only "mainstream", accepted, opinions--opinions that have "proof" of some kind--a turn at the microphone, a public venue.

What if the latter was by a Holocaust denier?
I'd authorize him $1,500 to come speak, too. Because...


a University should be a place for open discussion of ideas.

Thank you, Lurker. :D

End of story, as far as I'm concerned. ;) That's what colleges are for, see? There's no other place, no other time in your life, where a student can experiment with ideas in such a controlled environment, and an environment, moreover, where there is instant feedback. If the lecturer is F.O.S., it's dollars to donuts that during the Q-and-A period, that fact will come out, and the alert student will have a chance to rebut, to consider, to turn the F.O.S. idea over in his mind and decide for himself, aided by feedback from others in the audience, whether it is in fact F.O.S. Or whether it has merit.


I don't think anyone is advocating censorship or suppression of ideas.
But see, you are. What you are exercising (or would be, if you were the person holding the purse strings) is a kind of censorship; it is a kind of suppression of ideas. You are deciding what is--and is not--worthy to be submitted for consideration to the student body.

I firmly believe that a well-rounded education includes having any and all ideas, no matter how peculiar or repulsive, submitted for one's consideration. And I believe it's the college's unique job to do this, to allow even the peculiar and repulsive ideas free rein to be aired publicly.

Now, yes, at some level, because of inevitable budgetary considerations, somebody somewhere is going to have to decide, to prioritize--who shall we have *this* year? Shall it be James Randi, or Kent Hovind, or a panel on homeopathy?

I believe that the college that customarily, invariably, opts for the mainstream viewpoint, for the "safe" lecture--for NASA instead Hoagland, for the traveling Holocaust exhibit instead of David Irving--is doing a disservice to their students.

[Grand Vizier]

Jigsaw, that's sort of what I was saying. With the single important exception that you check out the market rates for that particular species of woo-woo and haggle 'em down (grief, I thought the US was the home of capitalism!). Buy 'em a couple of pints too while you're chatting, why not, greases the wheels, eh?

Most will be happy to get £200 and the attention for the most part (or are you saying you really really need mega quality woo-woos? OK, £500 tops, that's my Final Offer and I'm Cutting My Own Throat.)

So what's with all that ponsey stuff about Free Speech? :wink:

(posted from a nation of shopkeepers)

[Chip]

...Your college just threw away $1500+...

Yes. And $1500+ could have bought: a couple of well made 200mm Dobsonian telescopes for the science department - or some excellent eyepieces - or another desktop computer - or a bunch of important new books - or a lecture from a real visiting scientist who isn't famous but knows an area of research that is important - or helped pay for a proposed student astronomy experiment - or - or ... :roll:

[papageno]

Jigsaw,

the BA's point was that


His talk was awful. Not just bad in the typical-UFO-coverup-nonsense sort of way, but just bad.

The money was wasted because of the low quality of the talk, not because of the topic.

[Jigsaw]

Well, I'd have to disagree with that, too, even on that level, because the students who did come to his lecture nevertheless learned a valuable lesson, even if they didn't learn anything about UFOs--they learned that many woowoos are disorganized, illogical, and unable to present their cases coherently. They saw one in action, and ever after, their reaction to "UFOs" will be, "UFOs? Nah, I heard this guy give a lecture on them one time, and man, was it boring..."

To me, this would be worth $1,500 right there, for students to be able to experience at first hand that "woo is boring". :D

[Grand Vizier]

[...]
To me, this would be worth $1,500 right there, for students to be able to experience at first hand that "woo is boring". :D

Agree with rest of post, sure. $1,500 still seems a bit steep to me, but I guess it's a supply/demand graph - maybe we have a lot more spare woo-woos with time on their hands over here. Or maybe they've formed a union or something in the US? :)

[Lurker]

Agree with rest of post, sure. $1,500 still seems a bit steep to me, but I guess it's a supply/demand graph - maybe we have a lot more spare woo-woos with time on their hands over here. Or maybe they've formed a union or something in the US? :)
I would agree it seems a little high, but then its hard to know what the market is in these sorts of things, and what is covered in the price. So I am not outraged. In addition, it’s possible that there were students who wanted him to come and expose the cover ups. In that case I think $1500 is a bargain price to have him come and let students see him face to face.

The idea of the University is to prepare students to think critically. Students are there to make mistakes and learn in a controlled atmosphere. I would rather see $1500 spent there and have students streaming out saying what a nut, then have someone who never got the chance to make mistakes in school, appoint the nut to some high government post.

[kanon14]

Well, I'd have to disagree with that, too, even on that level, because the students who did come to his lecture nevertheless learned a valuable lesson, even if they didn't learn anything about UFOs--they learned that many woowoos are disorganized, illogical, and unable to present their cases coherently. They saw one in action, and ever after, their reaction to "UFOs" will be, "UFOs? Nah, I heard this guy give a lecture on them one time, and man, was it boring..."

To me, this would be worth $1,500 right there, for students to be able to experience at first hand that "woo is boring". :D
i'd have to disagree with that. why waste $1500 on something that could have the same effect by reading a book, watching a tv show, listening to a radio pregram, etc? i mean you don't have to actually listen to a woowoo in person to learn the properties of woowoo? you think $1500 is worth the price but like Chip says $1500 could bought the university more valuable stuff, be it a better equipment, more books or better quality lecture talk.

and more importantly, where do they get that $1500 from? From us the students! did they ask us whether we want to have such guest speakers? I'd much rather have phil than Hasting and i think that speaks for most of the people here.

[kanon14]

But see, you are. What you are exercising (or would be, if you were the person holding the purse strings) is a kind of censorship; it is a kind of suppression of ideas. You are deciding what is--and is not--worthy to be submitted for consideration to the student body.

I firmly believe that a well-rounded education includes having any and all ideas, no matter how peculiar or repulsive, submitted for one's consideration. And I believe it's the college's unique job to do this, to allow even the peculiar and repulsive ideas free rein to be aired publicly.

I'm all fine with opening for big ideas, but the problem is the quality of the lecture. Say there are two speakers for UFOlogy. One could present his ideas, theories, observation in a very clear manner and easy for all levels of audience, whereas the other speaker doesn't even know what he's talking about. the question is, which speaker would u want to invite?

i'd like to attend to lecture about UFOlogy, planet X, etc, but the quality of the lecture is always a problem for pseudoscience. your chances of getting a poor quality lecture is much higher than lecture on real science.


because the students who did come to his lecture nevertheless learned a valuable lesson, even if they didn't learn anything about UFOs--they learned that many woowoos are disorganized, illogical, and unable to present their cases coherently. They saw one in action, and ever after, their reaction to "UFOs" will be, "UFOs? Nah, I heard this guy give a lecture on them one time, and man, was it boring..."

umm... i don't think critical thinking is like that. the speaker presented in a boring manner thus making the students lose their interest is the least thing university wants. What critical thinking should look like is if a speaker presents UFOlogy in an interesting, organized, logical (somewhat) manner such that the students would do their own researches about the said topic then decide on their onw. THAT is critical thinking.

so my conclusion is it's not the topic that is important, but the quality of the lecture (or speaker).

[Excelsior]

Maybe it is somekind of a parody. :)

[R.A.F.]

I'm a little surprised at some of the responses to this...let me see if I got it right...

It's OK for a University to pay $1500 to a speaker who is obviously full of BUNK, just so the student body will have a chance to see a "quack" in action?

I was unaware that "schools of higher learning" had that much money to throw around...

...and of course the "speaker" doesn't care if he's believed or not...he's just looking for a check...

[Grand Vizier]

I'm a little surprised at some of the responses to this...let me see if I got it right...

It's OK for a University to pay $1500 to a speaker who is obviously full of BUNK, just so the student body will have a chance to see a "quack" in action?

I was unaware that "schools of higher learning" had that much money to throw around...

...and of course the "speaker" doesn't care if he's believed or not...he's just looking for a check...

Yeah. That is basically my quibble. I completely agree with Jigsaw's passionate appeal to freedom of speech and the educational nature of the event. Let them speak, by all means.

But this money usually comes from either student fees or from the taxpayer. Woo-woos always claim to be espousing some urgent cause - well, they're usually saving the planet. Since they are serving such a higher cause, they should be taking any opportunity to get the word out - which means lecturing for free if need be. Anything else shows insufficient committment, in my opinion. This should offer a degree of economic leverage. Like I said, haggle...

[R.A.F.]

I completely agree with Jigsaw's passionate appeal to freedom of speech and the educational nature of the event. Let them speak, by all means.

I agree also...it's the "money angle" that bothers me..


But this money usually comes from either student fees or from the taxpayer.

...or from parents!!!

[Musashi]

Or from attendance?

[Grand Vizier]

Or from attendance?

Good point. No-one mentioned the institution turning a fair profit from it. If there's a nice little earner involved, consider my objections withdrawn. Real good idea.

[The Bad Astronomer]

At SSU, they charged a minor fee to people who were not students, faculty, or staff. It was nowhere near enough to recoup the "loss" of the money they paid Hastings. The funds to pay him came from a University department that books events for students, and I think that money comes from student fees. So in the end the students paid for him.

Having people like that come to a University to speak would be okay if

1) They were not paid, and

2) There was a sponsored discussion afterward.

I think that a University has an obligation to expose students to different things, but I think that if they are to expose them to things that are patently false, the University has an obligation to at least have a discussion afterward, so the students can learn something from it. To simply invite a speaker like that, let him speak, and then let the students go, implies a tacit endorsement of the message. Worse, by paying him an honorarium it also implies support of that cause. Paying for travel and board is IMO acceptable, and even required, but anything more than that is questionable at best.

A University is more than a place where students learn form books and lectures; they should learn about life. This learning comes in many forms, and not all of these forms are pleasant. I readily admit that (some of the lessons I learned in school were pretty unpleasant). But if the University is going to sponsor such lessons, they need to follow through with a postscript of some sort, so the students get a chance to discuss what they saw.

[electromagneticpulse]

I agree with the BA's comments, students are expected to pay for all their books etc. Why should they have to pay for some quack thats talking rubbish. If i was in a university studying i would like the uni to get someone like Feynman in to talk (im watching one of his lectures now) as he's won a nobel prize, he knows what he's talking about and for the love of god he's one of the undisputed best lecturers in the world on physics. He also admits he doesn't know everything he makes mistakes he even laughs at himself, i'd want to pay for something i'd learn from not for something thats a waste of a few hours in a lecture hall.

Im glad im not going to uni yet because if their throwing money away like that i think its best i teach myself (which i am).

[Donnie B.]

It's been a while since I've had a chance to get back to this thread. It's nice to see that I'm not entirely alone in opposing the expenditure of funds on a UFO proponent.

Jigsaw, try this exercise: put yourself in the shoes of the person (committee?) responsible for scheduling these colloquia (or whatever they're called at this school). You have a limited budget, so you can only invite so many speakers -- perhaps a few more if they come cheap, or a few less if they demand higher honoraria. I'm assuming these events are "free" to the students; they don't produce any net income from admission fees. This is how the Physics department colloquia worked at my undergrad school.

Now, given that situation, how do you justify spending your budget on a UFO "researcher", given the many qualified (and truly fascinating) topics you have to select from? Even if you're limited to a relatively small part of the "idea space", such as Physics or Astronomy, there are scads of great people to choose from. Back in my undergrad days, in just one series of colloquia, our Physics/Astronomy department hosted Fred Hoyle (of cometary fame), a speaker on the technology of cruise missiles (a very controversial topic at the time), the Indian gentleman (whose name escapes me at the moment) who ran the "life from the primordial soup" experiments -- and many others. Now, which of those intriguing ideas do you exclude in order to bring in the UFO crackpot?

My point is, every choice you make as a colloquium scheduler will have the effect of limiting the range of ideas presented. How can you then rage about suppression of ideas, when that is an unavoidable part of the process?

[Jigsaw]

Sorry, I've been away, too.


But see, I'm not talking about the committee deciding, "We don't have room in our schedule for this UFO guy", or, "We don't have money in the budget to schedule this UFO guy--we only have funds for 10 speakers this year, and he's not making the cut."

I'm talking about the committee deciding, "This UFO guy is too silly to deserve a spot on our schedule. This UFO guy is too out in left field to deserve a spot on our schedule. This UFO guy is too woo to deserve a spot on our schedule."

That's the attitude that I'm objecting to--that judgement call that the UFO guy is too silly, or too woo, or too not-mainstream. I think that the criterion for choosing speakers ought to be that you choose what's going to be of interest to the most people, and then you find a "major player" on that subject and get him to speak. It's the same approach that you use when looking for a speaker on physics, or cooking. It's just being applied to UFOs, or special creationism, or geocentrism, or homeopathy, or whatever. What I'm objecting to is the attitude that anything "woo" is automatically disqualified from the selection process just because it's woo.

And I really think that bringing a big woo up on stage and simply turning him loose to spout off at will would be tremendously educational.

Actually, if you're going to talk about mainstream and non-mainstream subjects, UFOs are a lot more mainstream than, say, remote viewing. If the committee had scheduled a speaker on remote viewing, I'd be the one scratching my head, because RV is the fringe of the fringe. A LOT more people believe in UFOs than believe in, or practice, remote viewing. But UFOs, heck, they're everywhere. You can't budge without bumping into a movie or a book or a magazine that deals with ETs and UFOs. And I think students need to hear the exponents talk about it in a collegiate atmosphere, not while merely shooting the breeze at Pizza Hut, or on the Internet.

And if I were on the committee, heck, yeah, I'd find a slot for the UFO guy and his ilk, maybe not every year, but in, say, a 10-year rotation, I'd definitely find time for a number of woo speakers. I'd definitely want both Hovind and Hoagland up there at least once, for starters.

And yes, in my world, we would most definitely have a Q & A discussion period afterwards. I'd pay money myself to hear Hoagland try to answer questions from a bunch of smart-mouth college kids.

[electromagneticpulse]

It's the same approach that you use when looking for a speaker on physics, or cooking.

Not quite you want someone that deals with facts for example someone who has a correct basis, theory and actual work for what they do. I'll prove my point by using myself as an example in the cooking one you so graciously opened up, i am a reasonably good cook depending on what you want and im good at making up recipies. I wouldn't be someone you would want to invite to give a lecture about cooking because (and i'll list:
1, i have managed to set water on fire
2, i can set anything on fire in an oven of any type
3, pressure cooking is leathal
4, microwaves can cook anything
and finally
5, all things must be kept below 10 degrees in my kitchen

The above are a list of things i have to take note of every time i cook because bad things happen which i think number 1 covered quite well. BTW this isn't BSing i set my kitchen on fire with water and its kind of funny cause i didn't know what to put it out with thankfully it was a full pan of 2 litres of water so it didn't do a chip pan and go kaboom it just burnt.

This may be a bad example afterall other then dont make me cook :lol:

But Jigsaw what you say improves with this:

And yes, in my world, we would most definitely have a Q & A discussion period afterwards. I'd pay money myself to hear Hoagland try to answer questions from a bunch of smart-mouth college kids

Just let me spend 10 mins with him and i'll have him crying... we college kids aren't all just smart mouthed :D