I feel like I have successfully negotiated a Hollywood rite of passage. I was being interviewed on camera for a TV pilot, when I took off my microphone, tossed it aside, and stormed off. How awesome is that??
Not so awesome at all, actually, but it did happen. I much prefer a low-drama lifestyle, and it takes a certain kind of talent to get me that annoyed. Nothing to be proud of; I should have been more careful in learning what the show was about in the first place.
The backstory is that I was called on the phone by producers at a company I had never heard of, but that means nothing, as I haven’t heard of the vast majority of TV production companies. [Update: name of the company removed because I signed a non-disclosure agreement. They didn’t complain, just being cautious.] They wanted to come to campus to interview me for a pilot they were producing. I’ve done the drill before, for respectable outlets like the History Channel, Science Channel, and National Geographic. It’s a couple of hours of work, no heavy lifting, and hopefully you get to explain some cool science that will be seen by a much larger audience than I could possibly reach by giving a thousand public lectures. And it’s fun — I get to be on TV, which growing up wasn’t the kind of thing I ever thought I’d get to do.
They explained that they wanted me to talk about quantum teleportation. I countered by mentioning that there were surely better experts that they could talk to. But they really just needed some background information about quantum mechanics and relativity, and were comforted by the fact I had appeared on camera before. And the producer emphasized that they knew perfectly well that teleportation wasn’t realistic right now, but thought it was interesting to speculate about what might ultimately be consistent with the laws of physics. So I agreed. There was a slight hint of sketchiness about the operation — they seemed to be unable to come to an agreement with Caltech in regards to consent forms, which National Geographic or the History Channel never had trouble with. But my antennae weren’t sensitive enough to set off any alarm bells.
So the taping was this afternoon, and it consisted of me chatting informally with the show’s two hosts, while taking a leisurely walk around Caltech’s quite lovely campus. But as soon as we started talking, things went rapidly downhill. The first question was what I thought about claims that people had actually built successful teleportation devices. When I expressed skepticism, one of the hosts challenged me by asking whether I would just be repeating the “party line” of the scientific establishment. I admitted that I probably would, as I think the party line is mostly right. And that we have very good reasons for thinking so.
They next asked whether it wasn’t possible that people had built teleporters by taking advantage of extra dimensions. I explained why this wasn’t possible — extra dimensions are things that physicists take very seriously, but if they are macroscopically accessible they would have shown up in experiments long ago. From there, the downhill spiral just continued. They asked whether I was familiar with the “black projects” conducted by the CIA and the military? What about eyewitness testimony of people who had been to Mars and back? Was it possible that ghosts and/or extraterrestrials used quantum mechanics to travel through walls?
It sounds even worse in retrospect than it did at the time, because they would intersperse the craziness with relatively straightforward questions about physics. But I think that even the straightforward questions were just an accident — they were trying to be goofy, but didn’t understand the difference between what is possible and what is just crazy. (“Do you think it’s possible to travel into the future at a faster rate than normal?”) The producer would occasionally interrupt with some sort of suggestion that they actually say something about quantum teleportation. “I don’t really know anything about that,” replied the host to which I was speaking.
Eventually one of the hosts mentioned psychic remote viewing, and smirked when I tried to explain that it’s easier to disbelieve a few eyewitness reports than to imagine a complete breakdown of the laws of physics. With that, after having resisted the temptation for a good fifteen minutes, I cut it off and walked away. The producers tried to get me to come back, but there was no way. I don’t know whether they will go ahead and use any of the footage from my interview; I don’t think I said anything I would later regret, but I did sign a consent form. Hopefully they will try to salvage a shred of their own respectability, and not use me on the show.
The problem for me wasn’t primarily the credulous attitude toward craziness — although there was that. The real problem was dishonesty. In their last-ditch effort to get me to come back, the producers tried to explain that they really were interested in quantum teleportation, and the hosts had simply wandered off-script. The show wouldn’t be biased in favor of the paranormal, they assured me. The problem is, nowhere in talking to me about the show was the word “paranormal” ever mentioned. I was given the impression that it was a straightforward science show, and that was simply untrue.
There is a perfectly reasonable debate to be had, concerning the extent to which respectable scientists should publicly engage with pseudoscientific craziness. Under the right circumstances I could conceivably be willing to participate in a show that discussed paranormal phenomena, as long as I could be convinced that it was done in a sensible way and my views would be fairly represented. This was nothing like that — all of my pre-interview communication with the producers was strictly about quantum mechanics and teleportation, with no mention of pseudoscience at all. Once the cameras started rolling, it was all ghosts and remote viewing. Completely unprofessional; hopefully next time I’ll be more careful.
Also, for future reference: no brown M&M’s in the green room!
They asked whether I was familiar with the “black projects” conducted by the CIA and the military? … Eventually one of the hosts mentioned psychic remote viewing
Roll-eyes. Some “black” programs have a “no stone unturned” philosophy to explore any conceivable phenomenon with possible military use. That such a program would look into a possible phenomenon should not be considered endorsement of it. Also, the military and black programs have their share of wackos, just like the rest of the world (possibly worse, since the blackness inhibits oversight and duly earned mockery).
These people will use the fact that the U.S. Army funded a program on remote viewing for some time as supporting evidence for its worth, but the fact that the army eventually cancelled that project oddly doesn’t seem to count as evidence against.
I can’t really hold it against them that they brought you in under false pretenses. Obviously these guys are wackos, but when Sacha Baron Cohen does it, the fact that he can claim to be one thing allows him to capture footage he otherwise would not be able to. Or Bill Maher’s Religulous, where people were told they were making a documentary about faith, not an attack on religion.
I know it seems unprofessional, but allowing people to do this has a greater total benefit–I think–than prohibiting it. I think you feel the same. I’m just responding to some of the commenters here.
None of the “educational” or “science” channels on cable TV have ANYTHING to do with reality. Hitler’s secret UFO bases, Nostradamus, The-World-Is-Going-To-End-Any-Minute, yada-yada-yada. As soon as these peckerheads figured out that the public would sit still for wrestling midgets, fat guys running pawn shops, drunken rednecks with chainsaws, and endless discussions of whether the 43rd Saturnian moon is made of boiling ice (and why we need to spend trillions to get there and find out), Science was a goner. Welcome to The Last Days of New Rome.
I wouldn’t lump remote viewing in with the other craziness. It could simply be a type of psychic ability, which would have a moderately sane basis in real world quantum mechanics. Whether you call it religion’s connected soul, Jung’s collective unconscious, or mother’s intuition, there is enough there to believe that it’s not only possible but probable.
I just hope you didn’t reveal any information concerning the secret Stargate program. Oops, I said too much already.
It amazes me when people ask questions and then seem to not want to hear the answers.
I wouldn’t rule them out as being from History Channel. They recently aired a series on “Ancient Aliens” that was all about how aliens made the pyramids and stuff. I watched one episode and it was edited in a way that was kind of like this situation. They would ask a reputable scientist about the possibilities of life on other planets or some straight forward innocuous question then they would cut to some conspiracy theory nut who would then proceed to say stuff about aliens visiting Earth. They used the scientists to give the show credibility and hoped viewers wouldn’t notice that it was the crackpots saying the crazy stuff.
Pingback: Science Schmience « Vis Viva
My guess is “UFO Hunters”
@bittergradstudent
Well, my point still stands. What science is NOT about is either theism, creationism or any other spiritual belief (i.e. belief without evidence). Science is about observable evidence. Funny that you think science is about polls of scientist’s personal beliefs. Perhaps 45% of scientists eat chicken on Thursday, it has nothing to do with science. So, um, your comment is kind of irrelevant.
It would be nice to think all scientists have robotic impartiality but they don’t. They are human and are as flawed as the rest of us! There are no scientists who don’t have a belief system! The prevailing scientific zeightgeist is a belief system. Science is not infallible and neither are scientists. There are plenty of legitimate scientists who believe in ghosts, ufos the loch ness monster you name it! Is this a problem? No – it’s only a problem if it gets in the way of the principles upon which science are based. Too many scientists and too many lay people have no knowledge or interest in the philosophical principles which underpin science. This is why idiots will still believe anything (yes I include religion) and idiotic scientists will enter the fray and pretend to know the truth. A good scientist knows that they do not know truth a bad scientist thinks they do know truth. The same applies to the non scientific community. We are all clueless but some of us are more clueless than others!
As someone who has some first hand knowledge of the Ancient Aliens show I just want to say that the producers were completely clear with everyone involved as to what the subject of the show was. That being said, many producers are complete dirt bags who will do whatever it takes to get what they need for their piece.
@Jeremy
Science isn’t about scientists personal beliefs, except when the opinions of scientists is the field in question. If you’re going to flip out at a news organization for saying that scientists are divided on religion because you think scientists are nigh universally atheist or agnostic, then you should provide some evidence to back that up, or else, just admit that scientists are divided on the issue.
Who does not feel uncomfortable signing a consent before something is edited – You have to trust and to trust blindly is a little crazy and unscientific ? no ?
James: I wouldn’t lump remote viewing in with the other craziness….
I would.The first question is: is there any evidence that it works?
Supply that first, before I will waste any effort in figuring out how it might work, or which mythical powers it corresponds to.
The show presented itself as a survey of scientific thought on the subject. So a claim that they are “divided” on the subject suggests that the scientific community (i.e. peer-reviewed science) is “divided”. There is no such division. Perhaps scientists are personally divided, but so what?! Why should anyone care what scientists are personally divided about? It’s disingenuous. I”m sure they’re personally divided about lots of things. Maybe we should find out what plumbers are personally divided about. It’s called politics or philosophy or just plain opinion. Not science. And it should not be presented as science just because scientists hold these opinions. I believe it is very irresponsible for the show to suggest that there is science (again, peer-reviewed science with reproducible results) suggesting that there is a divine creator.
So how will you be more careful in the future? Interview the hosts off-camera? Maybe ask about their science background, or probe their paranormal beliefs? Since they were being purposefully dishonest, is there a good way to pierce that?
Maybe you should craft a set of questions inspired by those at the beginning of Neal Stephenson’s ANATHEM: “Has anyone you know ever been ritually mutilated because they were seen reading a book?”
It probably isn’t that bad a diva moment. Any reasonable, clear-thinking person grounded in reality won’t stand for this madness!
Sean had to run, before the guys in the black helicopters came to get him for talking too much.
Sean, in no PR/media expert, but it seems to me you should have ended the interview after the second question about towing the party line for the ” scientific establishment”. Any one who thinks there is such a party line that needs towing is obviously an anti- science wackadoodle.
Actually, upon further thought, I’d like to expound. My last post was from my phone so please ignore the typos and the misuse of “towing” instead of “toeing”, damn predictive keyboard!
Anyway, I’m not a scientist, but I am a Skeptic, and I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night. You Sean strike me a scientist with a skeptical bent but you don’t seem to be the type that spends a great deal of time listening to, or arguing with the type of nut-job that you were accosted by, and that may have caused you to miss some early red flags. I only have reason to think this based on your response that you “may” be toeing the party line, but that you happen to think that the party line is correct.
Here’s the problem with that. What conspiracy theorists of all stripes mean when they talk about any “establishment” is not the community of like minded experts that you appear to think of it as. To them, it’s quite literally a secret cadre of evil people, intent on covering up the truth and oppressing the common man.
This is true of “Big Pharma”, “Big Agro”, the Illuminati, Darwinists or any other “secret society” these whackadoo’s can invent in order to justify their paranoid delusions. By answering the question the way you did, you played right in to their hands. You have just admitted that there is such an “Establishment”, and that you are a part of it.
At the end of the day I think you did the right thing, but a certain amount of experience with the tactics of conspiracy theorists in general may have set off your BS-ometer much sooner. Skeptics can usually spot a deluded, critically thinking adverse fruitcake from a mile away as they all have certain traits in common, traits that we’re extremely familiar with and always on the lookout for.
I hope I am not being presumptuous. I’m not trying to question your skeptical street cred or anything, this is just an observation from a fan of your work. It’s not my intent to single you out either, this seems to be a problem for scientists across the board. I think the skeptical community (are you listening Phil?) would do well to offer it’s coaching and guidance in this arena to any scientists who wish to engage the media.
lol, after writing that up I had this vision of a scientist always bringing a skeptic along to every interview who whisper’s in their ear after every question. “I’m sorry but my skeptic advises me not to answer that question on the grounds that any answer can be distorted to fit whatever insane pet theory you are working off of.”
I am shocked and disturbed that these deceptive media types would exploit our Ancient Alien Benifactors for commercial gain.
what a Diva! Whats next, no brown M&M’s?
Good for ya!
Perhaps you were just being “interviewed” for the next series of MK-ULTRA experimentation. Frighteningly sad when the Office of Scientific Investigation is a giant pool of crazy. I do think it is RUSH rather than Air Supply though.