# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Paranormal and Pseudoscience Assignment 1

# data[].attributes.body
Hilarious, but true.

# data[].attributes.body
It is the human tendency to connect things that are not connected. We tend to search for patterns in things where there isn't one. It is to help explain something or to make meaning of something unknown. Michael Shermer is one of the worlds deepest thinkers and in his book "The Believing Brain" he explains peoples need to find "meaningful patterns in both meaningful and meaningless data."

Connection: Below is a summary on Dr. Shermer's work and his book he wrote on his comprehensive theory of how beliefs are born and mended into real life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shop Skeptic: The Believing Brain, by Dr. Michael Shermer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In The Believing Brain, Dr. Michael Shermer synthesizes 30 years of research to answer the questions of how and why we believe what we do in all aspects of our lives, from our suspicions and superstitions to our politics, economics, and social beliefs.

# data[].attributes.body
“We don’t see with our eyes, we only see with our mind” (lecture, 1986 Richard Rose’s Psychology of the Observer: The Path to Reality Through the Self)

Perception and Observation is based all in ones own conditioned mind and beliefs. We see with our minds as Rose states not our eyes. How we view the happenings in the world and our perception of it is based all on our own existing thoughts. How you view someone or something is not entirely the same as what someone else sees with their mind. An example would be how many eye witness accounts to crimes can all differ from one another, resulting in the wrong imprisonment of so many people.

"In fact, according to the Innocence Project, a non-profit organization that assists prisoners who can be proven innocent with DNA testing, mistaken eyewitness identifications contributed to more than 75 percent of the more than 200 wrongful convictions in the United States that have been overturned on the basis of DNA ...Mar 25, 2008"

Connection: Below is an article on one wrongful eyewitness account of a rape that resulted in Julius Earl Ruffin being sentenced to prison with five life sentences.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Julius Earl Ruffin knows all too well how inaccurate eyewitness identification can be.

On May 3, 1982, in a Norfolk, Va. circuit court, the 29-year-old was convicted of a rape that he did not commit and was sentenced to five life sentences.

The case rested solely on the testimony of the victim, Ann Meng, a young mother of three who confidently pointed to Ruffin as her assailant.

Twenty-one years would pass before Ruffin was able to prove his innocence with DNA evidence. He details his experiences in the book "Why Me? When It Could've Been You!"

Watch the story on "Primetime" tonight at 10 p.m. ET

Ruffin's story is not unusual. In fact, according to the Innocence Project, a non-profit organization that assists prisoners who can be proven innocent with DNA testing, mistaken eyewitness identifications contributed to more than 75 percent of the more than 200 wrongful convictions in the United States that have been overturned on the basis of DNA evidence.

"Primetime" wanted to see what would happen if we set up scenarios where we asked onlookers to identify the person involved in a purse snatching.

We hired actors to play the role of the victim and the thief. Because scientific research has found that race plays a significant role in the accuracy of a witness' ability to identify a perpetrator, we chose three different actors for the experiment: a Caucasian, an African-American, and a Hispanic.

Along the edge of Atlanta's Piedmont Park we positioned seven hidden cameras at Willy's Mexicana to capture the scene from every possible angle. The customers were unaware of what was about to interrupt a leisurely weekend lunch at the outdoor cafe.

In the first scenario Justin, the white actor playing the "thief," walked up to Elizabeth, the "victim," and asked if she had a pen that he could borrow, explaining that he needed to write down a phone number. And then, suddenly his whole demeanor changed.

"Give me your purse! Sit down! Don't move!" he barked at her. Justin quickly grabbed the handbag and ran away.

Elizabeth was horrified and asked the other customers if they saw anything, knowing she'd need witnesses to help pick out the thief.

At that point ABC News correspondent John Quinones walked over to let people know that what just happened was not an actual robbery but instead an experiment about eyewitness identification. John asked the people to describe the thief.

Eyewitness Memory

Joe Donnelly recalled that "he had blond hair, had a hat on, about 35, 6 feet 1 inch."

But William Stark described him as "late 20's, white male ... I would guess 5 feet 10 inches maybe."

Both were certain they could pick him out of a lineup.

But when we showed the videotape of the experiment and the bystanders' reactions to Professor Jennifer Dysart of New York's John Jay College of Criminal Justice, a psychologist who consults on criminal cases, she was doubtful.

"Eyewitness memory ... does have its downfalls though, in that it is particularly susceptible to influences and biases," she said.

To test this idea we put together a line-up with six headshots of different Caucasian men, including Justin's, and showed it to the customers from Willy's Mexicana who represented many different races and ages.

We asked why they chose the photos they did.

William Stark noticed Justin's facial features and his hat, but added, "It's not so much that I recognize him exactly, but I tried to eliminate the ones that I strongly felt were not the guy."

It's exactly that kind of strategy that can lead to faulty identifications, according to Dysart.

"The lineup is supposed to be a memory test for the witness," she said. "And so therefore if you look at this particular lineup, this six-pack, you see it's almost like a multiple choice question ... this tends to be the type of procedure that leads to inaccurate choices."

It's one reason this type of line-up is widely criticized.

Dwayne Winrow, a customer who came very close to the robber, was so sure about his choice that he claimed he "would probably go as far as to press charges."

But even though Winrow seemed very certain he chose the right person, it turned out that he was 100 percent wrong. Dysart cautions that "eyewitness certainty or confidence doesn't necessarily predict how accurate a witness is going to be."

ABC's results show just how faulty eyewitness accounts can be: 25 percent of the customers got it wrong; they identified someone other than the actor Justin as the thief. Those are not good odds when one's freedom is at stake.

Cross-Racial Identification

The next set-up involved Aemon, a black actor. It was a perfect example of what happens during cross-racial identification - when someone of one race is asked to pick out someone of another race.

Amazingly, during the line-up every single one of the black eyewitnesses correctly identified the African-American "thief." One customer, Landon Williams recalled a key characteristic: his facial hair.

"I remember the hair that he had, the lower lip, it had connected to his beard," he said.

But most of the whites got it wrong. Seventy percent chose someone other than Aemon.

There's an interesting explanation for why the whites did so poorly and why the blacks did so well. It has to do with the particular details we notice and remember to describe when looking at people.

Dysart explained "that we tend to look maybe at the wrong cues. And so, for example, a white person would probably look at someone's hair and eye color. Unfortunately, that's not very helpful if they're being asked to distinguish amongst black people or Asians, in which hair color and eye color really doesn't vary too much. "

Scientists at Stanford University wanted to look at what actually happens in the brain during cross-racial identification and what they found is fascinating.

They took brain scans of 19 subjects while they were shown more than 100 pictures of Caucasian and African-American faces. Later they were shown some individual faces that were part of the previous group and asked if they had seen them before.

The images produced by the brain scans showed that when a white person looked at another white face, the area of the brain responsible for facial recognition lit up, indicating that it is active, the Stanford scientists said. CLICK HERE to view the image.

But when the white subject was shown a black individual's face, a much smaller area of the brain was highlighted and identification by the white person was less likely to occur, they said.

Perhaps this partly explains why eyewitness identification tends to be wrong.

In experiments no one suffers the consequences of a misidentification. But in Julius Earl Ruffin's case he paid dearly.

Still, he sees the bigger picture. He forgave his accuser but he cannot forgive the system that relied on her testimony.

"I'd been in prison 21 years, you know? For a crime I didn't commit, and ... what had happened had happened, and I still felt like that it was a mistake, you know? It had to be a mistake," Ruffin said. "And, she didn't make it by herself. The judicial system had something to do with it also, you know."

to visit The Innocence Project, an organization dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted people.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Julius Earl Ruffin knows all too well how inaccurate eyewitness identification can be. On May 3, 1982, in a Norfolk, Va. circuit court, the 29-year-old was convicted of a rape that he did not commit and was sentenced to five life sentences. The case rested solely on the testimony of the victim,...

# data[].attributes.body
It is a use of many fallacies that use emotion in place of logic to win an argument.

"By appealing to both the brain and the heart, you will persuade the greatest number of people." Brinton, A. (1988). Pathos and the “Appeal to Emotion”: An Aristotelian Analysis. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 5(3), 207–219.

Below is a link to an article where it shows how advertisements for a lot of successful brands reach out to consumers by "connecting with the heart not the mind."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Building Emotional Connections | Branding Strategy Insider

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Building a strong emotional connection to your brand is a requirement for 21st Century brands. We show you how to build emotional connections in the following thought pieces.

# data[].attributes.body
Below is an article on the loss of trust on the "all natural" claim:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
New signposts are appearing with more frequency on the road to a healthier lifestyle. Product claims such as "100% Natural" or "All Natural" are showing up on food and beverage products more frequently as indicators of wholesome nutrition.

However, some are worried the terms are rife for abuse and that consumers don't quite understand them since there are few rules. Plus, the organics industry fears that shoppers think "natural" is better than "organic."

There's no doubt that people want foods that are less processed and without ingredients that require a science degree to understand. They're certainly spending more time looking at packaging claims and ingredient lists. According to a recent Angus Reid poll commissioned by Loblaw, almost seven out of 10 say they look at the nutritional information on packages.

Manufacturers and retailers have responded by expanding their product lines to include healthier food options, and the "natural" claim has become a favourite. In November, Wal-Mart Canada created a new line of natural foods called Wholesome Goodness. And last month Safeway in the U.S. launched one too, under the name Open Nature that company officials say will come to Canada.

Loss of trust in 'natural' claims in general could be significant

The "natural" claim is here to stay, with growth in every category from confectionery to soft drinks, according to Mintel, a market research firm. Two years ago in certain U.S. cities, for instance, Pepsi launched a cola called Pepsi Natural, made with natural sugar, natural caramel and kola nut extract.

However, the term "natural" remains ambiguous. It does not have any standards or requirements. While the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), responsible for the administration of food labelling policies, does have a definition of "natural" for labelling purposes, it admits that terms like "nature," "mother nature" and "nature's way" are often misused. CFIA makes it clear "advertisements should not convey the impression that 'nature' has, by some miraculous process, made some foods nutritionally superior to others." This last point is critical because, as it turns out, consumers actually trust "natural" more than that other good-food guarantee: "organic." That's according to an online poll of 25,000 Canadians conducted last year by BrandSpark International, a Toronto-based brand agency.

The results were an unhappy surprise to organics' manufacturers, says Dag Falck, organic program manager at Nature's Path. Unchallenged, the trend toward natural poses a "significant threat" to the organic industry, concluded a white paper published by the Canada Organic Trade Association (COTA) in August 2010, and "threatens to weaken all segments of the organic industry."

Falck, a member of the task force that compiled the white paper, says growth of the natural channel at the expense of certified organics impacts the industry on several levels: increased environmental contamination and financial loss to farmers, processors, manufacturers and government who have all invested in the benefits of a regulated organic system.

In addition, consumers lose, as they believe they are getting "added value" when they choose "all-natural" foods and beverages. "Nobody benefits from a fraudulent marketplace," he says. Organic makers may fret, but that's not stopping grocery aisles from being filled with products that are natural, as well as those that claim to be. Last year there were 18,750 products launched with no additives or preservatives-a 20% increase from three years earlier, according to Mintel.

Claims will come under fire, as consumers seek accountability

The challenge for grocers and food manufacturers is that these products must live up to their advertising. Otherwise there's risk of a consumer backlash. A recent survey by Mambo Sprouts Marketing reported one in three consumers are not confident in the current natural labelling, and two in three would be interested in purchasing more natural products if there were clear standards in place.

Mintel recently predicted that natural claims will increasingly come under fire, as consumers seek accountability from product brands. Matthew Holmes, executive director at COTA, agrees that retailers and manufacturers walk a fine line when they base product claims on an ill-defined term. "The loss of trust in brands and 'natural' claims in general could be significant," he says.

That's not to say retailers and manufacturers aren't setting their own ground rules. Some manufacturers have pared down their ingredient list to, as the new slogan goes, "ingredients you can actually pronounce." Safeway says its all natural line is made only from natural sources and the meats contain no added hormones or artificial preservatives, and animals are raised without antibiotics and fed an all vegetarian diet. Wal-Mart's natural line is made by U.S.-based Wholesome Goodness, a company that says its goal is to combine all-natural ingredients with affordable prices. That is certainly a worthy aim.

If there is an upside to the natural tag, it's that it gives shoppers a broader range of meal options. This has led to increased demands of accountability from those further along the path of health. It has also banded the organic industry to act in a co-ordinated and meaningful way to communicate the benefits of a regulated organic system to consumers and policymakers with such events as the first-ever Organic Week and Parliament Day last fall.

On the road to a healthier lifestyle, the "natural" claim may not be perfect, but the direction it is taking consumers and the grocery channel will eventually be the right one.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
All-natural claims: shopper confusion and a problem for other brands

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
New signposts are appearing with more frequency on the road to a healthier lifestyle. Product claims such as "100% Natural" or "All Natural" are showing up on food and beverage products more frequently as indicators of wholesome nutrition. However, some are worried the terms are rife for abuse and that consumers don't quite understand them since there are few rules.

# data[].attributes.headline
 When I see something full of complicated words and strangely long sentences

# data[].attributes.subject
 When I see something full of complicated words and strangely long sentences

# data[].attributes.body
Verbosity:

# data[].attributes.body
Energy has a lot of names behind it. When it comes to pseudoscience energy is referring to chi, chakra, aura, energy field, energy balance and so on.

Connection: Here is a link to a youtube vlogger named Kalel. In this video she goes to a spa where they claim to cleanse not only her face but her energy. The first 3 minutes of the video is of her time at the spa. The rest of the video is unrelated.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you're in the LA area, I highly recommend checking out Skin Worship! http://skinworship.com (my aesthetician is Jacqueline) ------------------------------- Well, I was hoping that documenting my life would help me try new things? haha xx ------------------------------- ☆ SHOP MY VIDEO!

# data[].attributes.body
Something that claims is made of all or mostly natural ingredients.

It is used in a lot of cosmetic and hygienic commercials. Also very famously "all natural" has been slapped on numerous amounts of food brands,. It is the same just as when the very popular "gluten free" craze took off and products that never even had gluten in it in the first place started using the label to appeal to a wide variety of consumers.

Connection: Below is some makeup products that claim to be organic and natural. All natural and organic products appeal to consumers because people desire more honesty in what they buy. By purchasing something that claims to have no hidden ingredients and are essentially "pure" of all these chemicals and toxins speaks to people on many levels. However not many people know that just because something is labeled "organic" or has "all natural" ingredients, doesn't actually mean it 100% does.

# data[].attributes.body
When you search for information purposefully to support ones existing beliefs or ideals.
Connection:

The picture below depicts a cartoon where they make a joke out of confirmation bias, but it is still accurate. It shows an exact example of the definition.

# data[].attributes.body
Using  authority as evidence in your argument when there really isn't any authority. When you use something or have someone that looks like they hold authority (like a doctor, or a sports star) promoting something or advertising something.

Connection: Below is a few advertisements that were posted on youtube. They show the use of appealing to authority  when targeting audiences to buy their products. This is a perfect example by having famous and powerful people or people who look informative selling a product.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Identify Fallacies and Appeals in Commercials

# data[].attributes.body
Something that is meant to be misleading and distracting. People will change the focus of a topic or argument to avoid answering questions.

This is also something used commonly in debates. President Donald Trump has used it many times in his arguments

Connection:
The example below is from an episode of "Family Guy" where Lois is running for mayor against Adam West.

# data[].attributes.body
Is used in an argument, when someone, like a politician, uses complex words or phrasing that is hard to follow or understand. When the argument is unclear it would make it so your opponent is unable to make an argument against it which will make the one using verbosity seem like they know more or understand what they are talking about even when the audience doesn't. It is a commonly used attack in debates.

Connection: Here is a youtube video by Nerdwriter1 Published on Dec 30, 2015