The Real Part 1: Nostradamus Effect and other shows of the same calibre.

My brother sent me a box full of old video games and a box of books, last night. In that box of books, I found the complete collection of translated prophecies by our favourite doomsayer, Nostradamus, complete in the original French, replete with translations in English and analyses of each quatrain. Now, these quatrains have long been used in a number of fictional ways as a premise to invoke the destruction of the world, or a number of other plot progressions. It's a pretty cool plot device, because the authors often use the quatrains to look forward, and predict things.

Sidebar: A quatrain is a stanza of four lines. The rhyming pattern in A, B, A, B. I don't think there's a meter, or a type of stress used. I'm also too lazy to think about poetry in French, right now. But, I need some credibility, so....It's iambic pentameter.

Now, I don't know if you all know anything about the Nostradamusian (<- New word! I make words up.) prophecies. If you want to learn, however, go to a library. Start studying the man before you blindly pick up a book, and start overlaying his ideas with modern history. This pursuit has led to the creation of myriad essays by, in some cases, reputable scholars, and in most cases, non-reputable "scholars", elevating Nostradamus to the tier of a prophet (something he himself denied vehemently) rendering him the most clairvoyant mind to have walked the Earth, based on the idea that he has foreshadowed some of the most globally-affected events in our history.

The death of Princess Di? Yeah, that's apparently in there.
Napoleon's attempt to take over the world? Yep.
Hitler? Uh-huh.
"Global Warming"? They're still looking for that quatrain.
9/11? Yeah, he guessed that. Like a boss.

Now, I'm more inclined to believe in Nostradamus, rather than people who interpret (and mistranslate) his works. He said he's no prophet, and I believe that.

Enter: Nostradamus Effect

Nostradamus Effect is one of the many shows on Discovery (Or the History Channel) that focuses on conspiracy theories, focusing on, in many episodes, the relationship between events in history and Nostradamus' writings. Now, I will admit that, yes, there is a disclaimer at the beginning of this hour program, that states ""We will neither refute, nor endorse, these theories; merely, present the evidence."

Except they don't "just present the evidence". In fact, in none of these conspiracy theory worshipping shows do they simply just "state" the evidence. My readers, you are well aware of what Socratic dialogue is. Ask and answer questions with someone, in an attempt to come to some truth. Well, these shows use Socratic dialogue, except instead of engaging in a discussion that leads to something fruitful, they plants questions into the audience's head, refer to these building questions (that, although hypothetical in nature, they continue to build upon as though they are explicit fact) and continue to delve into realms that I will lightly describe as unscholarly.  By planting and building upon erroneous conclusions (which help formulate further questions along the same mental strand), they bring the viewer into their world of ideas, legitimizing what they're saying as fact by building upon the mentally poisonous ideas they espouse. The outcome? The viewers have long forgotten about the disclaimer and wholeheartedly believe everything they've just seen, anxious to repeat it ad nauseum.

Most of these conspiracy theory shows use this same technique of bait and more bait and more bait. It doesn't matter if it's about aliens, if it's a documentary like "Loose Change", or that other one that talks about the illegal nature of the U.S. Treasury, they're all unabashedly biased, trying to prove their point, by repeatedly instilling their conclusion amidst a broken trail of half-facts and what I like to think is selectively edited interviews with professionals. And it crushes me.

I was going to mention the erroneous nature of using hindsight to state someone's a prophet, since such a technique would be rife with bias. You know, the whole, "Hey, how many parallels can we draw to these words and real life, in the most cryptic, symbolically-affluent way possible?".


This proves detrimental to my way of life. I can guarantee that a scholar of the likes of Nostradamus did not want future generations to recklessly compile erroneous information and disseminate it like a plague, and yet, that appears to be the real effect of this show.

Next time on the Page of Rage? I rant about puns.

People who still have credibility: This dude, who maintains objectivity in his books and show.
Picture on my dartboard: Everyone else.