In an effort to expand my little world, I picked up Fortean Magazine at Borders last night, based solely on the little tag lines at the top of the cover ( meant to be seen if behind other magazines) : Zombie Assassins, Ufo’s over Chechnya and Seattle Monolith. ( I ask you, Who can resist an article about Zombie Assassins?)
[intangent]I had never seen this magazine before and I am a bit of a magazine-o-phile, so you can imagine my surprise to find this publication. I enjoy picking up off the wall stuff that one would not necessarily read in the Doctor’s office.
(My neighbors, after seeing some of my yoga magazines in the bathroom/library/salon, think I am a bit of a kook.Like that is a bad thing.) [/intangent]
I love a good paranoid delusional article as much as anyone, fraught with crack pot conspiracy theories, however, I am not really sure what to make of this magazine. When I think it is frivilous, it proves to be pretty skeptical over such subjects as Orb photography, but then it has the amusing sideline articles that are long the lines of News of the Weird from around the world that are suppose to be taken, I think, seriously, just because it was printed in the Queensland Times-Picayune-Gazette, if you catch my drift.
So, I don’t know what to think, though I must say, I am throughly enjoying this magazine just because it is so different. Different is good. I don’t think I can afford the subscribtion rate of $59.40 for one year, US.( Well, I could but that would mean I would have to sell one of my children.
I’d like to get some opinion of anyone else out there who might read this periodical.
(anyone care to donate back issues to the not-for-profit Amuse Shirley, Inc. )
I am not a Fortean, but I think Fort’s books are hilarious. Charles Fort’s three main workks are published in a single volume called, appropriately enough “The Books of Charles Fort.” I picked up a first edition at a used bookstore cheap, and laughed my way through the whole thing. I have since read some informal biographies of Mr. Fort, and from what I can see the guy was either joking around (most probable) or was totally off his onion.
I also see some new Fortean publications coming out the UK, mostly collections of newspaper stories on odd occurances. I’ll have to look for the magazine. I think the largest groups of Forteans are in the New England area, where Mr. Fort lived and wrote, and the UK (no clue why).
It would be hard to sumarize Fortean philosophy, because Fort’s books are so rambling, but the basis of it seems to be that all evidence should be weighed equally, regardless of it’s source, and that because a theory is invalid if any evidence contradicting it exists, essentually all theories are invalid. He also goes on about how scientists frequently protect theories they like even in the face of contrary evidence, and that old established theories die hard. He is frequently right on this point, but as the skeptics say “extrordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” I think that in cases of overwhelming evidence science accepts the changes stoicaly and marches on, frequently viewing the change as an advancement rather than a setback, and also an opportunity.
Great mag. Of course, you could always visit http://www.fortantimes.com and read all the back issues. And $5 an issue to read the only magazine ever that printed one of my letters? Bargain!
THE FORTEAN TIMES is my absolute favorite magazine and has been since I happened to stumble on an issue.
The photos alone are worth the cover price.
This is skepticism with a wry sense of humour. The magazine pretty much presents its stories, usually without judging their veracity, and lets you draw your own conclusions. It's not the credulous believe-anything you usually find in New Age publications but it's also a far distance from the brutal no-nonsense approach of the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. I read it to pieces.
Yes, “wry” is a good word to use. Fort is hilarious, while making some good points; my first time through “The Book if the Damned” was when I was young and gullible and, now that I am older and open-minded (there’s a difference, but not much), I started reading it again a while back, except I seem to have lost it. No suspicious Fortean explanations needed to explain its disappearance, especially if you’ve seen my housekeeping. Or met my wife, the queen of “What makes you think I threw that out?” (Usually, its presence in the garbage is my clue. Nowadays she blames the kids; before they were born she would accuse me of being crazy.)
I wouldn’t call Skeptical Inquirer’s approach “brutal”. It’s a “just the facts, ma’am” approach. I can’t imagine why anyone would find a few simple facts “brutal”. I suggest people who have not read SI to do so and judge for themselves. You can read some articles at http://www.csicop.org/si/ .
I do read FT occasionally for its entertainment value, but it’s hardly a great scientific source. I wouldn’t call a magazine “skeptical” and humorous which, for instance, prints a serious interview with Harold Puthoff. I think “credulous” fits pretty well. Not really that far from “Fate” and other such publications.
I’ve been reading the Fortean Times for years - it’s one of my favourite monthly treats. I tend to take the sidelines with a pinch of salt and if something really intrigues me i’ll have a look on Snopes or similar. Anything cited from News Of The Weird i tend to be very skeptical of.
I love the articles though, simply because they’re entertaining. You just have to use your brain - if you think something sounds a bit odd or ridiculous, either do some more research or don’t pay much attention to it. I think there’s quite a good balance between credulity and skepticism and if they’re wrong they usually admit such. Like Zgystardst said - it pretty much lets yoy draw your own conclusions. They occasionally do some really interesting things - disputing urban legends, the psychology of mass panic attacks, that sort of thing.
I reckon it’s well worth my pennies every month, but then i live in the UK and buy it in a newsagent.
I have read and enjoyed SKEPTICAL INQUIRER for the past few years (my subscription is up for renewal) and the magazine does take a certain glee in demolishing borderline beliefs. It documents everything put forth and goes into exhaustive detail. Still, there is that obvious delght in proving other people’s ideas wrong.
There is a great deal of debunking in FORTEAN TIMES. Often the bulk of an issue is given to disproving a belief or misconception. Most often, reports and occurences are dropped on the table for the reader to consider.
One of the things about FORTEAN TIMES I love is how it recounts fads and fallacies from decades or centuries ago. A lot of rare photos and illustrations accompany articles on odd stuff that has long been forgotten. Alien abductions and government conspiracies are examples of older goofiness resurrected in odermn disguise.
I love the Fortean Times, although I can’t get it here, and have to read it online… Where else would I find out that some people got a full-body cast of a saquatch from a mud-wallow in Oregon (or was it Washington?). I’m looking foreward to seeing one of our gigantic brethren in a zoo sometime soon!!
I consider myself a Fortean, though not a very dedicated one. To me the essence of Fort’s philosophy is that scientists who immediately reject observations that don’t fit their expectations are not really being good scientists. He argued that checking into seemingly outlandish evidence was the only way to strive towards an accurate world view. For example, it may be awfully difficult to conjecture alien life forms visiting Earth, and therefore the likliest explanation for a supposed alien encounter would not be that it was a real alien visiting, but if you really want to know the truth about it you would look at all the evidence and not reject any explanations before some fact ruled them out.
)