Episode 191 – 14th June 2013

This week we speak to pro-vaccine hero Dr Paul Offit about his new book, discover what they were protesting about at Bilderberg, ask pertinent questions about the Mid-Staffordshire Hospital investigation, and discover the science behind cosmetics.

[Direct MP3 Link] [Podcast Feed] [Add to iTunes]

Please Donate & Support the Pod Delusion

Paul Offit Interview (1:49) by Liz Lutgendorff
Bilderberg Protests (18:28) by Rob Brotherton & Mike Wood
MidStaffs (38:41) by Drew Rae
Girl On The Net (45:49) by Sean Ellis
Beauty By The Geeks (51:06) by Julie Gould
The sketch at the end is by David Lovesy & Brian Two

Follow-Up Links:

Buy Tickets to see Dr Paul Offit at Soho Skeptics on June 27th

Sell Tickets through

8 thoughts on “Episode 191 – 14th June 2013

  1. Thanks for the link. I hope the full report is more representative of the people at Fringe than the collection I heard in the show.

  2. I think you guys are psychologically damaged. Trust in so called authority figures, is not a good trait. I think this comes from childhood when the authority figure is the parent. We have no choice but trust the parent as we do not have the tools to understand the world fully.

    Whats happening now it seems in certain groups are giving a carte blanche pass card to the “leaders/authority” figures in the bilderberg group. This seems to be an automatic reaction, rather than one based on rational thought.

    Its healthy to be skeptical of these people. Do you really think they meet just for tea and biscuits and a good old chin wag? A basic understanding of human nature should tell you that highly unlikely. Im not willing to trust the “Tea & Biscuits” hypothesis

    The psychology of “Conspiracy Theorists” is talked about quite often. But the psychology of the “Non-Conspiracy Theorist” needs exploring.

    Both ends of the pendulum swing seem extreme to me. And even if you think there is nothing to Bilderberg. Are you really willing to let a wanker like Ed Balls go unaccounted for?


  3. Interesting point Doug – though I’d argue that re: Bilderberg, it depends on how you perceive the conspiracy.

    ie: There’s a huge difference between “they’re all lizards and doing evil” and “these politicians and business interests are having a huge off-the-record lobbying opportunity” – so business leaders may well be persuading politicians to do their bidding, but it’s not because they’re lizards, but because it’s what they would do in any other meeting. I’d be strongly in favour of my transparency in the discussions at Bilderberg.

    1. Thanks for the reply. I really think you are drawing on a terrible lazy characterization of people who are interested in conspiracy’s. We don’t know each other and we are having an interesting text discussion on the possible nature of Bilderberg, and then you bring up Lizards!

      Quite why highly advanced reptilian creatures would bother with semi-chimp humans, who for the most part have a really boring existence is beyond me. But perhaps I don’t fit your idea of what kind of people engage about critical thinking in this area.

      Ive always thought most leaders have a psychopathic brain chemistry or structure, and ego projection problems. The higher they rise, the more the ego sated.

      I personally try to live up to the following quote attributed to gautama siddhartha

      “Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it”


  4. Okay, so Lizards is a lazy characterisation – but substitute that for any of the common conspiracy theorist tropes: new world order, moon landing conspiracies, 9/11 being an inside job, etc.

    What I mean is that we should be concerned about Bilderberg like we should be concerned about David Cameron getting too close to Rupert Murdoch.

    I’m intellectually on-board with the idea of questioning authority – I listen to punk, so love sticking it to the man. What I don’t buy into are the logically implausible claims conspiracy theorists make – and I think you can explain many things people attribute to conspiracies without the need for outside agencies. (Eg, the Iraq war didn’t need a shadowy group of Illuminati plotting it or whatever, but you can see why politicians were motivated by national security calculations to secure resources, etc).

  5. Can you get a word to the young women of Beauty by the Geeks that they reallllllly neeeeed to stop talking at the same time.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *