Joe Nickell's a cool dude.

There's this guy named Joe Nickell. There's a distinct non-zero chance of me going over a few of his books or articles here. I'm a pretty big fan of his, and he's always been super nice to me when we've met. We hung out for much of CSIcon in 2012. Here's us in Halloween costumes.





He did his makeup himself, by the way. He's done everything. He even has a list of what he calls "personas" on his website, numbering in the 4 digits, most of which have documentations. So, from this zombie thing, he is now a makeup artist, a movie actor, and a zombie. Three personas right there! The guy's pretty cool. He also doesn't have a computer.

One of the things I've been trying to do lately is write more things down. Dr. Nickell carries a notebook of good ideas with him at all times, then works on them. And, due to his wide range of interests, he stays productive and goes through his notebook much faster than one would think. If he gets tired of writing, he'll paint. If he gets tired of that, he'll do something else. The guy's really amazing. Magician, private investigator, glass blower, poet, this guy's done it all.

Anyway, his primary job is as a writer, and I love that stuff. I read things he writes in The Skeptical Inquirer, some of which can be found online at http://csicop.org, but some of which can't. In addition to this, he's written a few dozen books. They are all interesting, and indeed excellent bathroom reads. This is a major category of books for me. He put two out in the last year, if I recall correctly.





CSI Paranormal, which is available from CSICOP for only $5 (I bought two copies at that price), focuses on the art of paranormal investigation, but in a light manner. Benjamin Radford's book, on the other hand, couls almost be seen as a textbook on how to investigate the paranormal, albeit an interesting one. Dr. Nickell instead tells us all about how he does things, some past stories he likes to tell, and how his process allowed him to keep abreast of the reality of the situation, and not get caught up in either the gullible believer mindset or the armchair debunker mindset like so many of us on the internet.





The Science of Ghosts was also released, and it's about twice as long as CSI Paranormal, with a special focus on ghosts, investigating them, and how their existence is perceived to have been evidenced, at least by those who buy into it. Split into many 8-10 page chapters discussing specific cases and subjects for which he's specifically researched, the book is almost a definitive skeptical book on ghosts; a specificity often lacking in modern skeptical literature. I love it.

Anyway, as said, there is a non-zero chance of me going into further detail on these books later.

The Skeptical Inquirer should do more of these.

I've been plowing through a lot of my skeptical books lately, and The UFO Invasion, put out by The Skeptical Inquirer is fantastic. I don't have a massive back catalogue of Inquirers, only back to 2010 or so,  but I love them.





And, my favourite stuff? UFO stories, without question. Hence, a collection of Skeptical UFO analyses curated by 3 skeptics I like a lot is heaven for me. The best part is,  considering this book was published in 1997 as a collection of Skeptical Inquirer articles, there is almost no chance I have read any of these before. As I go through, some of it seems familiar, because I have heard about the investigations, like a couple of the Joe Nickell ones, and some have entered into the global skeptic consciousness for lack of a better word (I'm positive there's a better word, and I'm just too lazy to type it). But these are awesome.

May do a full non review later. Just wanted to get this recommendation out there.

I love it when people "harass" me about joining their religion, cult, etc.

Pictured: St. Patrick, famous for conversions.

When very religious people whose religion is one to which I do not belong talk to me, I am astonished at their lack of interest in my soul.

How do I know? I know from the degree of tolerance they give my divergent beliefs. No fundamentalist Christian, Mormon, Muslim, uh...whatever else there is out there that considers proselytizing a core virtue should ever be that way. It's taught that they are out there saving souls from punishment and a life of purposeless monotony without their particular brand of religion. They know I am not of that brand of religion, hence they do not care to bother themselves to save my soul.

Imagine you were talking to someone and he said "Oh, by the way, I'm going to go jump in front of a bus right now," and you made no effort to save him, but instead said "You know, I choose to not jump in front of busses, but you are making a perfectly legitimate life choice." That's pretty much what non proselytizing members of proselytizing religions or denominations of religions do.

I spoke to one today. I asked her why she believed the way she did.
"I have faith that I'm doing the right thing, and that Catholocism is the best way to be Christian."
"What do you mean by faith?"
"I mean that I know in my heart that Jesus is my saviour and his bible is true."
"You know? How do you know?"
"You just know. I know it more than I know I am here and you are here."

She has faith. She knows it as much as she knows she is in a shared reality with me, possibly more. She knows it as much as you know that busses are dangerous in the previous example. She was working with two admitted atheists and had not tried to convert either of them. She knew she was letting two souls go to hell, and did nothing.

This is why I love it when people try to get me to do their religion. I know they truly care about me, and they want me to have what they have. So, religious people. Don't ever stop trying to convert. Save as many souls as you can, it shows you care.

I don't know how to review a book.

As it turns out, I don't know how to review a book.

So, instead, I'm going to say what books I like and why I like them. This is one. The House of Silk by Anthony Horowitz. Most people who know me have literally no clue that I like Sherlock Holmes. If that is a pun, I'm sure I intended it. Which reminds me. The joke with the overly specific setup involving a pun contest, and someone not getting any of his ten puns a win is terrible. No doubt in my mind that it's one of the worst jokes of all time.

What was I talking about? Oh yes. The House of Silk is a Sherlock Holmes novel. Watson, as is typical in these pastiche stories, is the narrator,  and he opens with an explanation of why this story hasn't been heard before: it was too big of a deal. Sounds solid, but for Pete's sake, we can hear about the Scandal in Bohemia?

No matter. I said pastiche a moment ago...but I'm not sure if it is one. The intent is to emulate Arthur Conan Doyle's (I'm not going to say sir, since I don't like royalty, and, as a matter of fact, neither does Holmes, as stated in, if I recall correctly, The Noble Bachelor) writing style, but since it's an authorized sequel from the Doyle estate, do we really consider it as such? Is Colfer's And Another Thing a pastiche? I don't know. Now, this business about an authorized sequel is, frankly, irrelevant for several reasons, the chief of which is the fact that Sherlock Holmes as a character can be used anywhere for almost anything. The stories were written over a hundred years ago. But, it is still notable, since even The Exploits of Sherlock Holmes, by Adrian Conan Doyle, Arthur's son, didn't receive that distinction.

Anyway, it opens with this explanation of why we didn't hear it before, and, honestly, it goes on to read very much like a Doyle story. Other than the slightly modernized language (he still says the word hansom, for example, but I didn't hear some other things I find typical of late 19th century British writing), I barely noticed I wasn't reading a canon book. This is good, considering at the same time, I was reading The Sign of the Four, a canonical Holmes book, and one of the Day novels, I think the Copycat Murder one. The Day book, at every turn, reads like a non canon book, and this is to its detriment. The Horowitz novel, on the other hand, is every bit as good, and perhaps even better, than the originals. The same Holmes methods were applied, but there was just the right amount of lampshade hanging about the mystery format here, something Doyle never quite got right.

Every time, and I need to quit writing this so I can get to bed, Doyle would have Holmes say something like "Oh, and I suppose in your story, Watson, the doorbell would ring right about now," it brought me right out of the story. Then, other times, the problem with the formulaic nature of a mystery novel or story, or at least these ones, would make itself apparent without Doyle giving a reason. Now, any Sherlock Holmes fan knows that he's an arrogant butthead who deliberately keeps others in the dark for theatrical effect, but as a similar person in real life, I can tell you that people always bother me about it. If you're not going to fabricate a reason that the final exposition or indeed the process of solving the mystery isn't shown to the reader, then at least make sure the reader is reminded that Holmes is a jerk.

Holmes fans may argue with me that this isn't needed, since what we're supposed to be reading is Watson's slightly fictionalized accounts of the adventures and cases, but come on, that's almost what I'm talking about. There is a fine line that needs to be walked in terms of acknowledging the tropes and Horowitz does it. Bam, back on subject.

Except not really. Somewhere in there, I wanted to also point out some things about the recent (read: in the past 20 years) BBC 4 dramatizations of Sherlock Holmes and their continuations with Further Adventures and how lampshade hanging can work better in radio plays, even if they're still supposed to be dramas. Then, I was going to go on about those for a while. It's a disease, it truly is.

It's now 11 PM, and I've discovered this title is accurate. I can't review a book, nor can I even accomplish what I set out to do at the beginning of this post. Instead, I just kind of talked about Sherlock Holmes for a little bit. I may finish this aside on Silk later. I may just continue talking about Sherlock Holmes later, too.

---

It'll be exciting when I get my Transformer tablet and I can just go on for hours for no reason using that. Hopefully it will function just like this laptop. Oftentimes, tablet interfaces aren't written for power, which means, of course, that they will subconsciously limit the person's deranged mind from digressing down the dark dank direction his disposition may want him to. I don't actually like alliteration, and I don't know why I've not stopped writing, considering the blog post should have ended midway through the last paragraph.

This is the end now. 913 words.

I am going to review Ken Jenning's new book.

I am reading this book right now, and it's awesome. I am going to post a review about it later.

I don't have a hero.

This is Penn and Teller. Penn on the left, Teller on the right. This is a recent picture, as Penn is wearing a wedding ring, and he hasn't been married that long, comparatively. Penn and Teller have been together 38 years.



This is Richard Feynman. This is a picture from the 1960s, about when he won the Nobel prize in physics.



This is Adam Carolla. He makes funny jokes, and has hosted a few radio shows. He's offensive, but he genuinely cares about people, his fans, troubled youths, and getting people to understand things with humour. There is a reason Loveline was such a highly rated show.

Most of you who know me know I mention these people with some regularity, and what they're doing. My mom will call me if any of them are on TV, and I'll usually watch. I appreciate Penn and Teller because we agree on almost everything. Richard Feynman got me into physics. Adam Carolla made me appreciate comedy and improv. These people (only three of whom I have ever met, and even then, only a few times) have been instrumental in my life so far, and I bring them up when something they do may be relevant or interest someone else, and I don't have anything about them on my webpage.



This is my ex girlfriend's Twitter account. The person she's obsessed with at the moment, Marina Diamandis, is a girl who makes music. Not good music, either. Bad music. This is all she talks about, and all she does. I don't understand this. And if you think this is crazy, you should see her Tumblr page.

I've created my own life based upon things I enjoy, and include other things in my life based upon how much I like them. I have a purpose, and a goal, and don't need anyone to control or overtake my activity.

Holy crap, this is on a computer. There is no physical record of this anywhere. Astonishing!

The Hobbit

I've gone to see The Hobbit several times. It's astonishingly good. I love it. I have always liked Lord of the Rings, and Peter Jackson's movie is likely the best ever created. The Hobbit won't be as good, because that's impossible, but it should still be about 75% of LOTR, which means that if I wanted to just sit around one weekend and watch them all in a row, I should be good.



I've also just come up with an astonishingly good idea: what I'm going to do is just buy a fake Christmas tree and put it in the spare room so it's always Christmas. Except, of course, I didn't come up with it, I stole it from Sarah Milligan, who revealed this on QI recently.

This picture is of Danielle Sommer's mom's house's tree. It is very nice.