This is a longer version of my research posted at The Examiner.  You can comment there without having to sign-in.

As a vocal skeptic, I’ve become known among my friends and family as the go-to person to determine whether or not news stories or photos on the Internet are true.  Sometimes this just means going to Snopes.com to check and see and see what the folklore researchers have come up with.  Other times I have to dig in and do the research myself.  The latest piece of dubious dumbness to come across my desk is a photo purported to be of Arizona Hispanic protesters out complaining about the new state law the state just passed.

This photo is currently circulating in e-mails. It appears to be a fake.

It is an e-mail with the subject line of “VERY SCARY: Give us free” and contains this image, along with the following text:  

I started by checking the Snopes site, but so far they don’t have an analysis up.   Message boards battered back and forth on whether or not the sign could be real.  Some people feel that even if the photo is fake, that this is a real sentiment in the Arizona Latino community.

But does it show a real sign?  Many investigators are looking to find a copy of the original photo, or supplemental photos of the setting to see if any other evidence supports the idea that the sign is real, or evidence that will falsify it.  I suspect the latter is more likely.

Original photo of protest of WBC. Courtesy SkepticRN

Here is a crude fake of that photo wherein I replaced the perfectly sensible original message with something silly.

Areas around the lettering show thick black and the letters stark white.

  

 Now, let’s compare those known fakes to the the “Arizona” protest photo.  First, again, here is the protest photo that has been doing the rounds on the chain e-mail circuit, and directly below it is the ELA analysis:

ELA of the "Arizona" photo also shows distinct areas of alteration.

 The similarities between my admitted fake and this photo are quite obvious.  They are especially apparent in the lower sign, the one threatening future cop killings. This suggests that the top part of the sign may not have been as heavily altered.

Just to be clear, this image shows very, very strong evidence of being altered.

History is full of people faking evidence to fulfill their bigoted fantasies or support their ideologies.  From the Protocols of the elders of zion to Obama’s birth-certificate conspiracy theory, people have used their creative powers to make the world the way they think it ought to be.   Still, with the Internet it is now possible for serious researchers to join together and collaborate to get to the truth.  

A skeptic investigator wants to be as definitive as the evidence will allow.  In this case the evidence strongly supports this being a faked photograph altered to create the incendiary message it currently carries.  It is extremely likely that other photos from the May 1st protest at the LA Times will come out and show what this man’s sign actually said.  But we don’t need that to know this photo is faked.

I was taking advantage of some downtime from playing Army today, and checked out the AJC site to see what was happening back home. I came across a blog post from Jim Galloway highlighting the state of the current debate over the military’s ban on openly gay soldiers, or the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

For those who don’t know I’ve served in the Infantry for twelve years with three combat tours and I’ve seen it all. I’ve jumped out of airplanes, blew stuff up, shot big guns, and generally put foot to ass for the country that I love, warts and all.  And, to be honest, I didn’t think that having openly gay soldiers serving alongside heterosexual soldiers was a good idea, not even a little bit. My own personal belief was that it would hurt unit cohesion, and when kicking down doors you MUST be able to trust the people around you. If you have family you wouldn’t trust with a potato gun… you know what I’m talking about. » Continue reading “Time to Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is”

As I drove into work this morning in the rain, again, my thoughts went back to a dry day in November 2007. That day the governor of the state of Georgia, Sonny Perdue, joined lawmakers and ministers at the Capitol Building to pray for rain. Naturally, this brought the question of church vs. state and made headlines worldwide. I think more than the religious connotations, it also brought up the idea of looking to mystical ideas to change natural events outside of our direct control. Why not do a rain dance or start some human sacrifices while we’re at it?

God was apparently slow in answering that prayer as the rains didn’t return in force until fall of 2009. And, boy howdy, did the rains return! Much of North Georgia had what was categorized as 500-year flooding in October. Rehearsals for a show I was in at the time were canceled due to rain, something I’ve never experienced before. Since October, we’ve had regular rain, and will probably continue to have rain through the spring. This is all thanks to El Niño, which means “the boy” in Spanish. I’m thinking of petitioning for a name change to El Bastardo.

Anyway, I was thinking of all of this on my morning commute. Apparently, I’m the only one as that prayer meeting in 2007 seems to be old news. No one is blaming the governor for the flooding and non-stop rain. I wonder if we had only received moderate rainfall, bringing Lake Lanier up to full pool over time instead of overnight, would people have praised Perdue for “taking action” in 2007? Is the only reason no one is linking the increase in rain to that prayer because of how destructive the rain has been, because that couldn’t possibly be what God would do, could it? I’m not sure what logical fallacy that might fall into, maybe a form of confirmation bias, it’s just something I find interesting.

As for me, I do blame the governor for all this rain, not because I think the prayer did anything at all, but just because I can. Well, that and he threatens to veto any law allowing Sunday alcohol sales, but that’s a whole different story.

Despite Republicans running all Georgia government, the Christian right in Georgia has lobbied heavily in opposition to a couple of Republican-sponsored bills in the legislature.  They held a press conference together today.  The groups who made it to the press conference were the Georgia Christian Alliance, the Georgia Christian Coalition, Georgian Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom Coalition, and the Georgia Baptist Convention.  Georgia Eagle Forum president and former state senator Nancy Schaefer is leading efforts against these bills.  Republican gubernatorial candidate John Oxendine was at the press conference, but did not speak there.  Most of this information comes from this AJC article/blog entry.

The weighty issue they are screaming about, against the Republicans who presented these bills?  The bills would allow young girls (under 16) to be placed into diversionary programs instead of arresting them and putting them into the criminal system with prostitution charges.  The argument in favor of these laws is that legally, children cannot consent to sexual intercourse, and so, legally, cannot be considered guilty of prostitution.  The argument against these bills, best as I can determine, is that the pseudoChristian protestors are just implementing the words of Jesus Christ, when He was asked about the 12-year-old prostitute: “Let that ho fry!”

» Continue reading “Georgia Christians support sending little girls to jail?”

Generally I support the idea that politics should stay out of science and vice-versa, but when talking about problems that can be accurately measured and quantified, I think science can lend a hand in providing solutions. Case in point: the new super speeder law that has become official on 1 January 2010. This law will tag on an additional two hundred dollars to a speeding ticket when the measured speed is thirty-five miles over the posted limit.

There are two stated reasons for this extra fine: the first is that Georgia lawmakers want to reduce the amount of speeding in the state. If you’ve ever been on any part of I-285 you know what I’m talking about; it’s a frakking racetrack. The second reason stated that this extra money will go fund trauma centers, but (fine print) the legislature can do whatever they want with it.

I don’t want to talk about Georgia politics, (but I will if given half a chance); instead I want to focus on the idea that higher fines will decrease speeding. Surely, other states have tried this approach. There should be a mountain of data out there confirming or unconfirming this idea. Can we move this from an idea to a testable hypothesis? » Continue reading “Evidence Based Government”