Wrong. At least it is if you’re Kim Hébert at SkepticNorth.com and her crack team of skeptical reviewers. When Bryce Wylde responded to an article on Skeptic North with a list of 21 of his “favourite” papers supporting homeopathy, Kim took him to task.

The result is a thorough review of all 21 papers and a short analysis as to what they actually show, and the subsequent complete humiliation of Bryce Wylde. You should go read it for yourself. It’s awesome.

Evidence Check: Bryce Wylde’s 21 Favourite Papers

There are two things that I firmly believe about politics.

1) No matter who ends up getting elected, it doesn’t really change things all that much. Especially if you’re only talking about the person at the very top, and ignoring the larger decision making bodies (city council, house of commons, congress, etc.) and bureaucratic institutions.

2) Politicians should be judged by the decisions they make, their policy proposals, and how they guide political discourse. Not by whether you think they’re stupid, or bigoted. I find it all too convenient when a politician’s efficacy is pre-judged based on whether their political leanings match yours.

I have legitimate questions about this law. Not questions as in the “this law is complete bullshit” sense, but legitimate questions that I feel weren’t adequately answered based on what I’ve read about this law. I’m not saying the answers aren’t out there (in fact, they almost certainly are) — I’m just saying that I’m too lazy to go out and find them. And really, I feel like the politicians proposing the law should have answered these questions.

1. Is this law actually solving a problem?
   It’s already illegal to drink and drive, so this issue isn’t about drunk driving. New drivers (non-fully licensed drivers) in Ontario also aren’t allowed to have a BAC above 0, so this isn’t an issue about new and inexperienced drivers. So is there a real problem with 19-25 year olds, driving around with a BAC of less than 0.05, causing accidents? I have no reason to doubt the claim that young drivers are involved in more accidents involving alcohol (it makes sense, to me), but are these accidents being caused by people who are under the (old) legal limit? I don’t know, but I’m sure there’s statistical data that could answer this question.
2. What’s the average relatively level of impairment caused by a BAC of 0.05 or under?
   How impaired are you if your BAC is between 0 and 0.05? I have no doubt that there’s a measurable effect, but is it more serious than any number of other factors that can affect/impair a driver? (Drowsiness, distractions, medications, etc.) Or, basically, should we be sending out the message that having a beer or glass of wine with dinner significantly impairs your ability to drive?
3. Are drunk driving laws effective?
   Maybe the goal of this law isn’t what I assumed in the previous question. Maybe the goal is to normalize the idea in young people that you shouldn’t drink and drive. In that case, I’d like to know what the effectiveness of laws against drinking and driving actually are. How do harsher punishments and more strict regulations correlate to instances of impaired driving and related injuries and fatalities?

Those are my thoughts on the issue.

I wonder how long it takes for the sense of urgency about my readings and essays to fade?

Of course, being somewhat inconveniently located in the middle of Canada’s biggest city, the main campus thoroughfares are never too empty.

Occasionally, even the stars can be seen over the city’s light pollution.

I love the city at night.

I snapped this picture today with my iPhone. It’s of my dog, Mozart, as seen through the distorted glass of the front door. I’m quite happy with the way it turned out.

I can feel the religious tolerance*… can’t you?

*Tolerance is the same thing as irony, right?

Blasphemy day, which takes place on September 30 to commemorate the publication of these cartoons, is a celebration of our right to free speech, and a reminder that there is still a very real threat in this world to people being able to express their ideas freely, and without fear of reprisal. It is my firm belief that all ideologies should be subjected to fair and open criticism, and that laws should exist to protect the rights of people — not sacred cows. Does that mean some people will get offended? Sure. However, the minute you step into a free and democratic society, based on the notion that not everybody does (or wants to) live their life in the same way that you do, you forfeit your right to not be offended.

With this in mind, the University of Toronto Secular Alliance, joined by the Centre for Inquiry, took to the streets yesterday to create a “free speech zone” on the University of Toronto’s campus. We set up an information booth, showed “blasphemous” videos, allowed people to write blasphemous messages on a public notice board, and generally allowed people to speak their mind. I am happy to say that we had a wide spectrum of people show up — not just atheists and agnostics. People chose to express their opinions in different ways — from shouting matches to quiet conversations — and it was all done in the spirit of free speech and diversity of opinions. The event was a huge success, and I am proud to have been able to take part.

Below are some of the photos from the event:

The full set can be found on Flickr, here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mgerskup/sets/72157622490928466/

—

Also, while we’re on the issue of free expression, I’m happy to announce that I will be contributing to a new Canadian Skeptic’s blog called Skeptic North. The site just launched today, and I’ll be submitting my first contribution this weekend. There are some very talented people contributing to this blog, so why not go check it out?

http://www.skepticnorth.com/

Click to enlarge.

However; perhaps a bit more interesting than a run-of-the-mill psychosomatic disorder, is the origin of the sudden interest in the topic. This sentence, found at the bottom of The Sun’s article*, might explain why:

Steve’s new Afterlife album, Electrosensitive, is out now on Defected Records.

*This is one of the articles quoted in the Ars article.