Skepticism 101: Don't Be Stupid

If you are not a Skeptic, you are an Idiot.

Before I get into the explanation as to why, I want you to think for a moment - how does that make you feel? I just called you stupid, how does that make you feel? Most people, when called stupid, feel insulted. They get annoyed, sad, upset or angry. Even if that particular comment didn't upset you, is that always the case? When someone confronts your intelligence or conflicts with your knowledge, how do you feel, usually? What about when it really matters, or what about if it's something that you care about? Do you usually get upset?

Most people do; some of us do all of the time, but all of us do some of the time. The fact of the matter is, even if you are a skeptic, you are ALSO an idiot. Everyone is an idiot. That’s the point I need to make, we are all simple, flawed humans and we all make stupid mistakes for stupid reasons.
The Word of the Day is: 'SKEPTIC'

Skeptic /'skeptik/ n. 1. A person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual. 2. A person who maintains a doubting attitude, as toward values, plans, statements, or the character of others. 3. A person who doubts the truth of a religion, especially Christianity, or of important elements of it. 4. (cap.) Philosophy a. A member of a philosophical school of ancient Greece, the earliest group of which consisted of Pyrrho and his followers, who maintained that real knowledge of things is impossible. b. Any later thinker who doubts or questions the possibility of real knowledge of any kind. ♦adj. 5. Pertaining to skeptics or skepticism; skeptical.

The basic idea is thus - as we are evolved creatures (just like every living thing), we are primarily motivated by death and sex - kill others before they kill you, and procreate before you die. Our larger brains evolved due to a few random mutations that allowed greater neuroplasticity, excess neuron growth and greater skull capacity. However, these mutations survived because it allowed those of us with these mutation to better adapt to dangers.
The capacity to imagine, to build, to speak - these are not selected for because “gee, wouldn't higher thinking be cool?”. These survived into our current species, because the ability to imagine includes the ability to foresee events before they happen, cooperate with others in our tribe, preempt consequences and plan for the future. This was an evolutionary advantage.
We currently use our brains for all kinds of things, it was not designed for - admittedly, that's because it wasn't designed at all, it was just a beneficial trait because smarter creatures were more careful, and so could live longer.

However, despite this, we still use our lizard-monkey brains for complex processes, from software to surgery to science. Don't get me wrong, due to our brains’ magnificent capacity it is very much CAPABLE of doing all that, but the system is not perfect. Just like using a razorblade as a kitchen knife, sure, it can work perfectly fine, but if you aren't careful, you'll end up with blood in your bolognese.
See, when your main goal is just to survive, “truth” doesn't matter, “truth” is useless.
When you see two eyes staring at you from behind the grass, it doesn't matter if that's actually a predator, or if it's a butterfly with convincing camouflage, because if you run away every time you will always survive. It doesn't matter whether the bitter vegetable is actually deadly or just an underripe turnip, all that matters is that if you avoid it just in case, you’ll never die from its poison. It doesn't matter if the bull/alpha/male is actually weaker than you, all that matters is that if you can make him back down, you get first dibs on the sex and food every time.
This is survival of the fittest. Not the fastest, not the strongest, the "fittest". it's not a square peg through a square hole, it's more like a semi-circle through a circular hole - it doesn't need to be the best, it just needs to "fit".
So, when we struggle to think critically and fail, it’s all just a result of us thinking like simple, imperfect animals. And, can you blame us? We are animals. When the goal is “survive”, truth is irrelevant, so when you use these same thought processes to find truth or attempt to determine reality, it's the metaphorical razorblade attempting to peel a metaphorical pumpkin. Not impossible, just not as easy.
But it does mean that “common sense” is fundamentally flawed. Sure, it makes "sense" that water looks blue because it reflects the blue sky; it makes “sense” that the sun goes around the Earth; it makes “sense” that blood in your veins is coloured blue; it makes “sense” that sugar makes children hyperactive & yes, it does make “sense” that that these simplistic ways of thinking are due to us having evolved from a less-developed lizard-monkey brain. However, not a single one of these things is actually true. The world is more complicated than our singular common sense allows. That's why we invented science, because we realized that a sometimes we are wrong. Science and other methodological enquiry is designed to curtail these stupid mistakes by slowly and carefully removing human error from the equation.

This is Skepticism 101: Remember that you are very capable of being very stupid. Even with the greatest education, the best of intentions, an astounding track record for efficiency and even if you have a desire to be a skeptic, you can still be wrong. So, you must accept that anything you do not know can be wrong. Even things you think you know can be wrong. Here's a perfect example:
  You are currently reading my blog post.This seems like an obvious thing to say, after all, if you weren't here to read it, then you wouldn't know what it says, right? Surely, this is true.
Well, not necessarily. For instance, who is to say that this blog post is mine? It's posted on "blogspot", and I don't know who owns this website domain. I am under the impression that the ownership for my blog falls under my intellectual property, but this may not be "my" blog post, I might be wrong there. Also, I do offer a translation function within this blog, for people who read languages other than English. If you have translated these words, perhaps these words are not precisely mine, but those of the translation program, so it may not be entirely mine.
Secondly, how do I know that you are reading it? Some people have some very clever text-to-speech programs, perhaps you are listening to this blog post, from some program, or perhaps a carer, parent or guardian is reading it to you.
Also, the word "currently" is ambiguous. Currently, from my perspective, I am the only one able to read this post, because I am still writing it. You won't read it until I have posted it. Although I wrote that sentence so that the meaning of the sentence was supposed to imply a current time contemporaneous to its perusal, but I can't assume that a reader would accept that implication.
Even a sentence which, according to common sense, is very much right, every single word in it is up for debate.

Now, of course, a lot of this might sound tiring. Do you really have to doubt everything?! Well, Yes; but pragmatically speaking, the goal is not to be mired by doubt and "accept nothing". Doubt is not the same thing as disagreement, and it is not believing the "opposite". It just means that when presented with something for which you do not have empirical data (which is to say, that which you have witnessed or investigated for yourself), that it very well could be wrong. Similarly, if you do not know something to be true and are not willing or able to investigate, then the correct answer must be "I don't know".
Remember, the goal is not to "never be incorrect", it's to be the most-correct that you can be. No, you can't always be right, but with some intellectual rigour, you can be less-wrong.

Sometimes, this can be as simple as giving more information. For example, I met a woman today that told me she had a rooster that laid an egg - this is not just an example, this is a true story, a hen wandered into our garden, so I went to a local lady who sells eggs to ask if the hen belonged to her. She came to have a look and determined, no, the chicken is not hers since it was a maroon chicken and she didn't own any red chickens, but she said she would take care of it and look for the owner herself. We had a bit of a chat, and she said she had some cheeky chickens, and one particular rooster that surprised everyone by laying an egg.
I asked her what she meant, and she claimed that it was most-likely intersex (my word, not hers, she said "had both parts"), but some researchers at the local university were interested in having a look, to see if it was fertile.

Now, this is a very unusual claim, but there are some factors that make it appear more plausible in my eyes. There is a local university nearby, and I know that many university students are required to write papers in order to pass their grade (and an intersex chicken would certainly be a paper worth writing). I also know that intersex creatures, although rare, do occur, and because of the various curiosities that come with intersexuality, determining its fertility is not only an interesting conundrum, but could help to determine the nature of its particular sex.
However, obviously, there is reason to doubt it. After all, roosters and hens don't have sexually dimorphic genitals like humans, but rather chickens of either sex both have a cloaca, so this could be a simple case of mistaking a hen for a rooster. Also, although it would be an interesting case if it were true, I don't actually know how or why a local university would become aware of this hen/rooster, since I'm not aware of any universities that go out on "anomaly" hunting missions. It's most likely the woman called them herself, and if it is the case that she did called them herself, then I can't understand why this university was inclined to take her claims seriously. Not to mention, science with a sample of 'one' isn't widely applicable, so I don't know why a university would consider such a case so interesting.

So, as a skeptic, what is the answer? Is there really an intersex chicken out there? a kind of hen/rooster hybrid? A 'hooster'?
Well, the only possible correct answer, as a skeptic, is . . . "I don't know".
I think she was telling the truth, but that's not very meaningful, because even if she's not lying, she could still be mistaken, so it doesn't answer the question of this chicken's sex. Also, whilst I do believe this is plausible, that's not very significant, because many things which do not happen are 'plausible'. I just don't know.

Do I need to go and investigate this case? No, not really. If the opportunity arises to look into this, I would if I had the time, but I am happy not knowing the truth about this chicken and it's chromosomes because this truth isn't relevant to me.
But, as much as it sounds like common sense that this is just a lie, should I really bother being so persnickety? Surely, I should accept that this woman was lying and move on with my life, rather than remain in doubt. However, I can't do that, because although irrelevant to me, this may be relevant to someone else, and I am not prepared to mislead them, just because it is "fit" for me to ignore the reality here. Also, in either case, I would rather be unsure, and conscious of that, than to claim certainty and be ignorant of my own stupidity.


That, you see, is why I am talking about Skepticism in this final day of the Halloween Countdown. Skepticism, by design, counters human error - and ignorance of reality, truth and science is a fundamental human error.
This is what makes Ignorance,to me, so scary. Although I spent this blog post explaining it, the basis of skepticism really is this simple:

1. Accept that you can be wrong.
2. Try not to be.

Most people get caught up on the first one, and those that don't often don't know how to accomplish the second. As to that, well, there's science and logic and methodological empiricism. But, so long as you are comfortable with step one there, recognizing that you are not perfect and can make mistakes, and you can be stupid, then you can start being less so.

Despite how simple this is, people still hurt and kill one another over stupid beliefs; they fight over problems that fighting cannot resolve; they harm themselves and others, due to misunderstanding and lies & they justify their own ignorance by claiming that others are ignorant of what they believe to be true.
Just like being an alcoholic, the first step is realizing you have a problem - most of humanity is in denial when it comes to accepting how bad we are at thinking . . . ironically, because they don't want to think about it.

I'm the Absurd Word Nerd, and I hope you have a very fun Halloween tomorrow. I know it can be a scary time, but there is nothing to fear. That's the beauty of Halloween, we recognize that our fear is yet another human flaw, that we are oversensitive to potential dangers and can react fearfully even to things which are not at all dangerous; but Halloween exploits this simple flaw, so that we can have fun. So, to all of my readers, I wish you the best of fun exploiting your over-active fear response for fun and entertainment, and I hope you have a safe and not-too-stupid time this Halloween. Goodnight.

Conspiracy Bleary

I have been talking about ignorance a lot, during this Countdown. Ignorant ideas, ignorant beliefs, ignorant people, ignorant movies. But it may seem, at a glance, as though I am just complaining for my own sake.
Maybe I'm just another upset progressive on the internet who is whinging and whining because things aren't going the way I want them to. After all, what kind of experience does the “Absurd Word Nerd” have with the real world? He is just a writer, he doesn't even leave the house that often. How do we know that he's not just making all this up, like all those other stories he's written?

Well, I am here today to tell you that I have, in fact, experienced my fair share of ignorance. For two months, I was the resident skeptic in a group of conspiracy theorists.

It wasn't an official title, mind you, that's just what I called myself. There was an online group that appeared to believe in every single conspiracy theory from Flat-Earth; Ancient Aliens; the Bermuda Triangle phenomenon; the Evil, Gay agenda; the Jewish cabal; Creationism; Chemtrails & even Magic.
I didn't seek out this group, one day the main administrators added me. They merely said “do you like debate?” I said “yes”, and lo and behold, I was added to a group of the most ignorant people I've ever interacted with. Despite disagreeing with most of what they said, I had a great many discussions with them.
I only was there for two months. Not because I left, mind you. I was banned. I was booted from the group three times in total. But the first time I was re-added, because of a conflict in one of the administrator’s beliefs. The last time, before I said anything, I was re-banned because the administrator once again, fell victim to his gullibility.
I'm not bothered to have been removed, since dealing with these people wasn't exactly "fun". Sometimes, I was disgusted at how prejudiced and bigoted they were, and although I was always kind and courteous, and gave people the benefit of the doubt and did my best not to be offensive, they showed no such restraint.

It is because of this group that, during this Countdown, I keep stating and restating that these people are not unintelligent. They are quite smart in several ways, but they SEEM stupid because some of the simple things we take for granted, they doubt or misunderstand horrendously. Don't get me wrong, their beliefs are cruel and shameful and I am not defending their bigotry, and my attempts to speak with them as a peer, and expressing my opinion, I was called a "Jew" a "fag" a "troll" a "moron" and a "paid agent of lies" - but, I am merely saying that it is foolish and self-delusory to call them "unintelligent".

I'm going to tell you a few of my experiences from this time. I don't have any transcripts, because the group was often reported for hatespeech, or "infiltrated" by what the group considered to be “neo-liberal trolls” and so they had to constantly delete the group and recreate it, meaning I have to repeat all of this from memory, but I could never forget some of these exchanges.
They changed their group code very often, it was #conspirative at one point, I think now it may be #conspirac, but (at least during the the time that I was a part of it, the group was titled “Anti-System”.

One of the first conversations I had in this group was about recreational drugs. Some of the members believed that drugs could broaden your senses, and allow for greater spiritual awareness. When I stated that I did not believe in the soul, one member with a username constructed of random letter from the Cyrillic and Greek alphabets insisted that I needed to try LSD, and then I would believe.
All I did in response was explain how drugs, whilst they could be enjoyable, did not promote so much as diminish our senses. I also spoke about the chemistry of LSD, as it often produces synesthesia by diminishing the connections in our brain, forcing the brain to reroute these connections, and as a result causing unusual sensory information. I explained that this was a dysfunction of the senses, not an expansion. For saying this, I was called close-minded.
I tried to explain that I was open to being convinced, that I could consider these concepts and was trying to understand, but the quality of their proof was insufficient, as it was either ill-informed, or not based on anything testable.
For this, I was told that I was a victim of system propaganda.

This is something that you will see often, if you ever encounter a conspiracy theorist. If you do not or cannot believe what they believe, then you are the one that is brainwashed - this is an "Argument from Incredulity".

In another conversation, someone was explaining how the world is flat, and gravity made no sense because “the horizon is a flat line”. I explained that the horizon rolls back further than our vision, and that if the world were flat, because of the density of air, then the horizon would not look flat but “blurry”. When you see mountains in the distance, they look blue and hazy, because they are further than the horizon can be at sea level. But, if the horizon was “infinite”, or as far as the radius of the world, then the horizon, where the land meets the sky, would be hidden behind the blur of air particles.
For this, I was called stupid and uneducated. I tried to explain the science, but once I had said that the "flat" horizon was evidence that the horizon was "not flat", they had decided that I was a moron, and unable to be reasoned with.

This is something else I faced often. If a conspiracy theorist doesn't understand what you're saying, they assume it's because you are wrong and too stupid to understand their much simpler explanation - this is the "Dunning-Kruger Effect".

I can't actually pinpoint a single instance of this, because it happened quite a lot, but on a few different occasions, I brought up the fact that I was an atheist. This was not something I sought out to do, but sometimes, when people were arguing for their particular conspiracy theory, they would explain that Allah (or the Qu'ran) was proof of their claim - more often than not, the theists in this group were Muslim, but I don't know if that's representative of the broader conspiracy theorist community [please, don't presume that it does] - and so, God's existence proves their theory. Now, I was not prepared to explain to these people that their preferred deity does not exist, because I was there to discuss their theories, not dismiss their theology. But, if they pressed the issue, I would explain (as kindly as I could) why their god did not exist. Whenever I did this, or sometimes when someone just went on a "fuck those atheists" rant, I was told that I just "hated god", that I "just wanted to sin" & that I was a "satanist".

In my experience, the reason why conspiracy theorists are so antagonistic towards disagreement, is because they don't actually know what others think, so they will tell you what they think you believe - this is called a "Straw man Fallacy".

There was one occasion that I will never forget, because at the time I was struck speechless at how unknowledgeable the person I spoke with was. On this occasion, I must reiterate, I had spoken to this person before, and they were educated in several other respects. But, on this occasion, they were severely uneducated. This person told me that the Earth was flat, because "of course it is". I told them that, in fact, the Earth is round. They pre-empted my claim by saying that I probably believed in gravity, and so I was being foolish because "gravity doesn't exist".
Confused, I asked this person what they thought made things fall down. I was simply told "weight", because "heavy things fall down". It took me a long, long time even to understand that he was, indeed, claiming that "weight" (i.e. the force that gravity exerts upon mass) not only made things fall down, but was somehow proof that gravity is a debunked theory.
I eventually asked them why the moon doesn't fall down, and I was told that the moon was not very heavy.

This, I'm afraid, is something that is often encountered when it comes to conspiracy theorists. They may be so uncritical of their thought that they can claim to believe something that is fundamentally wrong - or, as some might say "Not even wrong".

Now one final, and I fear, most important, little anecdote. A lot of the beliefs of this group were incredibly bigoted and prejudiced. They were vehemently anti-Semitic, blaming Jews for most of the world's problems, from ISIS, media and politics to the economy, and claiming that anyone who was part of the problem was most likely a secret Jew. But, worse (from my perspective) was that transgendered people were seen as sick, disgusting perverts and homosexuals were just considered to be sex-crazed paedophiles.
When I explained that this was wrong, and that homosexuality was basically just 'love' by a different name - the first time I said this, I was banned from the group.
I was eventually brought back in, but later when I explained that homosexuality was not paedophilia, I was presented with photos from LGBT Mardi Gras and Pride Parades, and bilous explanations that it was degenerate, disgusting filth.
Now, I've never been to a Gay Pride Parade, mostly because I'm not gay, I'm not really into self-declared "pride" and I'm not a fan of parades; but, they seem like a lot of fun for those that go. However, I was presented with pictures of men wearing little but jocks and peacock feathers, whom were called "ugly, disrespectful pigs" and drag queens and transgender women called "degenerate freaks". Worst, in my eyes, was the description of two men and a boy which - after some googling, I managed to find the picture - showed them kissing, and it was called "pedo scum".
Now, maybe I am just a brainwashed fool, mislead by the evil Jewish media, but to me that picture looks like two married men adopted a son, and on the day out one of his dads lifted him on his shoulders, and amidst an atmosphere of fun and community, the boy gave his dad a kiss. It's stuff like that which made it really exhausting to talk to conspiracy theorists.

But this is something I saw time and time again. Something innocent, natural, normal or easily understood by most, to them it was twisted and warped into something disgusting and despicable - this bias is just an "Appeal to Emotion".

So you see, I have dealt with ignorance, directly. For two whole months, I spent several thousand words a week dedicated to conversations with people that thought I was a "paid disinformationist", a "troll", a "Jewish agent" and a "devil"; and even the ones that didn't thought I was a moron, a brain-washed victim of the 'System' or a secret homosexual. All because I enjoyed debate, and I believe in equality.
I was capable of getting through to some people on some subjects, but because I was one person and they were almost fifty, my voice was often drowned out by those who wanted to reinforce their beliefs in their fellow conspiracy theorists. One man, alone, is not enough to convince forty-five strangers on the internet, some with a poor grasp of English (some spoke English as a Second Language, which made informed, scientific debate nearly impossible) that maybe "science" is more accurate than "common sense".

You can see why, after two months, I was actually gladdened to finally be banned at the same time as the group made yet another membership purge, and changed its name. I think they call themselves "The Elite" now, but I am not interested in joining. After all, I never "joined" in the first place, I only ever came along for the ride. But, as a final farewell, I sent the group administrator a final message, explaining (in genuinely heartfelt, but nonetheless curt terms) why his views of "Freedom of Speech" were contradictory with his desire to silence "Jewish and homosexual propaganda", and that he should practice some introspection, and ended with a list of every adjective that described his bigoted views, and ended with a 'gif' of an Obama mic' drop. I did not swear, but I admit that I was pretty annoyed, and it came across in my words.

See, I was ultimately sick of it. When it comes to fiction, conspiracy theories can be fun; but in the real world, it's just boring, time-consuming and frustrating.
I have a great deal of patience with those who disagree with me, and I can still look back and see these people as nothing more than some people that have made simple mistakes, leading to some potentially dangerous ideas, but I do not recommend this to anyone with a short temper or little patience.

But do you want to know what I consider to be the silliest part of the conspiracy theory crowd? Well, I have a theory of my own. Not a conspiracy theory,  just a hypothesis about a correlation between them. I call it the “Lens Cap” theory.
I believe that the cause behind most Conspiracy Theories is that conspiracy theorists don't understand how cameras work. Although this is somewhat amusing, it is not a joke, I'm serious. Think about it . . .
Bigfoot? Well, some people confuse photographs of darkly contrasted shapes and poorly focused creatures for a humanoid monster, they don't understand that it's just an illusion in the photo.
Ghosts? People don't understand how night vision cameras pick up light, and confuse dust for “spectral orbs”, or they confuse low-quality images for “ghost photography”.
Flying saucers? Well, people don't understand how poor photography is when taking photos of the sky, due to how far away most airborne objects are, or how extreme the contrast is at night, so confuse distant objects, or nearby insects, for alien craft.
Faked Moon Landing? Some people claim that the footage was faked on a soundstage,correlating test footage with a dress rehearsal or not understanding the particulars of “high speed” footage, and why it cannot explain moon landing footage.
Reptilian overlords? People don't understand that when a person on television blinks, even high-quality footage creates compression artifacts which make people's eyes look yellow during the freeze frame.
Flat Earth? Well, flat-earthers claim that “round earth” evidence (photos and footage of spheroidal planets, like Earth) are “faked” for various reasons from lighting issues to claims of CGI rendering - all explained by a misunderstanding of space photography.
September 11? Some people watch and rewatch WTC attack footage, looking for supposed anomalies, or look at photos of the related Pentagon crash, and report finding supposedly “anomalous” visual features, claimed to be inconsistent with a plane crash.
Chemtrails? Well, most of these claims are based around how some photographs of aeroplanes leaving contrails supposedly show “unidentifiable planes”, due to digital zoom and high contrast obscuring the plane. Or, they correlate unrelated photos of unpopulated cargo planes.
Anti-Vaxxers? Yes, even beliefs which linked the MMR vaccine to autism were based on faulty endoscopy readings (i.e. readings from the camera you stick down someone’s throat), and misinformation presented during this researcher's televised press conference.

This is just a theory, and we must remember that correlation is not causation - the fact of the matter is that images and short videos are much more easily transmissible viral memes, which could easily explain their correlation with popular conspiracy theories. And keep in mind that cameras have a complicated artistry behind them that many don't understand and they are one of the most sophisticated and also most easily accessible investigative tools available to the public. It's therefore not a surprise that the peculiarities of their function are often overlooked.
If you're interested in learning more about the inconsistencies in conspiracy theorist claims, then I highly recommend CoolHardLogic’s World of Batshit playlist on YouTube; he's considerably less forgiving than I am, often insulting and laughing at conspiracy theorists, but the content can be most enlightening, and this is presented as entertainment, as well as providing more evidence for my particular Lens Cap theory.

In conclusion, I'm the Absurd Word Nerd, and i want to make it perfectly clear - on the record - that I do consider my theory just a bit of fun. If anyone takes my Lens Cap theory as gospel, or claims that it is some kind of conspiracy by camera manufacturers to mislead the gullible, I will be incredibly disappointed in you . . .

Vampire Fruit Bats

The flight was hell. We spent more time in the airport than in the air, and I sat next to a mother with a baby. It didn't cry, but its mother doped it on something to keep it quiet, instead it just threw up. I got some on my trousers, it smells like sour milk.
And now that we're here, it's pouring rain. I'm used to rain, I'm an Englishman, but our dingy, little hire car has a hole in the roof which is pooling water in the backseat, so I'm huddled with my briefcase and jacket in the passenger seat, while Gary drives. We pull up to the driveway beside a van which sat in front of a dark grey slab of cliff that looms over us like a gothic cathedral.
  “Nah-three-apeba Nekh-ha?" read Gary, looking at the red letters on the green gate that guarded the cave entrance "The bloody hell does ‘at mean?"
  “That's not what it says," I say, opening the car door. "It's Serbian, I'm sure it says 'Zlotska cave'."
I step out, kick the door shut and run to the small, door-sized gate within the larger gate, to get out of the rain as quickly as possible.
  “Come on Gary!" I call back.
Gary squeezes out of the car and waddles as quickly as he can to get under shelter, but even in the short run, his short hair and the shoulders of his polo shirt were sodden.
  “Oi, mate, my legs aren't as long 's yours," he says, fetching his glasses out of his shirt pocket and drying them with a handkerchief from his trousers. The cavern proper was lit by some standing floodlamps, with tables set up near the side, where two men were already working at a table covered with books, and what looked like cooler boxes and thermoses of water and coffee. I recognized one of them as Doctor Markis, I worked with him in college once.
  “Robert?" I say, heading over. "So, what's the project this time?"
He turns to greet me with a wide grin.
  “Neobiology," he says, with an outheld hand. "Nice to see you again, I'm glad you could make it."
I shake his hand and he turns to Gary.
  “Mr Longfield, is it?"
  “Call me Gary," replied my colleague in his slack, Liverpudlian slur.
  “And, this is Doctor Radmilo Kovac, doesn't speak much English," said Markis, turning to the fourth man. "Radmilo, upoznajte moje kolege. Gary Longfield, i Theodore Waites."
  “Hello, good," said Radmilo, smiling at us. “Bat man?”
  “Wha’?” said Gary.
  “Have you been teaching him about your comic books?” I ask, wryly.
  “No, he wants to know if you’re the expert in bat-borne diseases.”
  “I’m an expert in viral microbiology and infectious diseases . . . Yes. I Am Bat Man,” I say slowly, so the poor fellow can understand. He nods, and gestures for me to follow him to another table, set up away from the food.
  “Should I . . .?” I ask Robert.
  “Yes, this is what you’re here for,” he says. “Drop your stuff here first.”
I set up my briefcase by the table, then walk to the other table with a dedicated flood lamp, I catch a glimpse of the eviscerated, bloody corpse and jump back.
  “For goodness sake!” I curse, seeing the bat, splayed out and pinned, so that its insides are showing.
  “Are you alright, Theo?” asks Robert.
  “You could’ve given me a heads-up,” I growl, stepping closer, “Ugh . . . that’s disgusting.”
  “Ona je pala sa plafona,” said Radmilo, putting on a pair of gloves. “Eh . . . Fall. Dead.”
  “Radmilo here is a local veterinarian,” said Robert. “I called him into sex some of the specimens, but some of them started just dropping dead on us. Even after an autopsy, he’s still not sure what’s killed them, but he suggests it could be viral.”
  “Necropsy,” I correct, “autopsies are done on humans. ‘Auto-’, ‘self’.”
I grimace, leaning forward, watching Radmilo pick up a scalpel from the table.
  “Ona gostili zaražene krvi . Posmatrati . . .” says Radmilo, he made an incision in the pink balloon I recognized as the stomach, immediately blood spills out of the cut, filling the whole cavity where she was cut open.
  “A stomach full of blood?” I say. “That’s one hell of an infection . . .”
  “That wasn’t caused by the infection, that’s the cause of the infection,” says Robert. “I think it drank the blood.”
I can’t help but chuckle, nervously.
  “Robert, I thought you were a biologist,” I say. “Even I know that this isn’t a vampire bat. It’s too big, I’ve seen an Attenborough documentary about it, they’re smaller than cricket balls, tiny.”
  “Postoje komada povrća takodje,” said Radmilo, picking out small, bloody chunks from the corpse.
  “Yurk! Get that away from me!” I yell, jumping back. “I don’t want to wear it!”
  “I know they’re not vampire bats. As Doctor Kovac says, it’s a fruit bat. But they’ve also been feeding on blood,” Robert puts a hand on my shoulder and looks me in the eye. “Fruit bats aren’t native to this region of Europe, and this facial structure bears unique features. We could be looking at a new species. Perhaps a hybrid. A ‘vampire/fruit bat’.”
  “Just, hold the phone,” I say, brushing his hand off my shoulder. “let me get my equipment and I’ll take a look before we start declaring a new species. Alright?”
  “Of course,” said Robert, beaming. “That’s what you’re here for . . .”

I ask Radmilo to collect from the dead bat and Gary begins preparing a Giesma stain, while I set up my microscope, glass slides and utensils on a cleared section of the first table. The other two watch me put on gloves and sit at the microscope. Peering through the viewer, I can’t help but be confused. It almost looked like Robert was right . . .
  “This is odd,” I say, adjusting the viewer. “This looks like human blood. The cell-count isn’t right for a bat . . .”
  “I told you as much,” says Robert, grinning. I look away from the sample to glare at him.
  “Don’t jump to conclusions, Doctor.”
  “Thee? Stains ’re ready,” said Gary, hobbling over holding two glass slides in each gloved hand.
  “Thank you, Gary” I say, taking them from him. I mount the slides, and peer through the viewer. After adjusting the placement, I find what looks like little, red worms on the pink-stained slide. “Ooh, that’s . . . T. rangeli? Gary, what do you think?”
I stand back and he hunches over, he steps back, shaking his head.
  “Cruzi,” says Gary. “It look’ like Tryp’ Rangeli, but you assume T. cruzi, ‘cos there’s a risk o’ Chagas disease.”
  “Well, Chagas would explain why some of them are dropping dead,” I say. “In chronic cases it can cause the heart to stop. Do you have protective clothing around here, Robert?”
  “Not really,” says Robert. “Why?”
  “Because this can transfer to humans. it’s bloodborne, but there’s still a significant risk. Gary and I brought ours, but you and Radmilo should suit up if you want to keep handling these bats, just in case.”
  “Right,” says Robert. “But, doesn’t this confirm my theory? Large vampire bats, drinking human blood?”
  “I don’t know, Robert, it doesn’t add up,” I say. “I mean, it looks like a fruit bat, the teeth are suited to gnawing, not nipping, ripping or suckling. And Chagas can cause facial swelling, that can explain away the unique facial features . . . besides, it’s too big to subsist on blood.”
  “Well, it might not be their main food supply,” says Robert. “Vampire moths usually consume juices, but they drink sweat, tears or even blood, to transfer the salts during mating season. This could be a feature of this new hybrid, this could very well be mating season.”
  “At the same time as the rainy season?” I say, shaking my head. “You’re reaching, Robert. Don’t presume your hypothesis, that’s just bad science.”
Robert sighs. “Alright, that is a fair point. But, this isn’t clouding my judgement, it’s just motivation. Even if I’m wrong, and these are just fruit bats with Chagas, I will still write a paper about fruit bats with stomachs full of human blood. But come and see the colony, you’ll see, these don’t act like regular fruit bats.”

I put on my protective chemical hazmat suit, yellow rubber coveralls with boots, gloves and a facemask with a air filter over the mouth to breath. Robert gets into Gary’s suit, which is considerably more baggy than mine, but nonetheless covers and protects him. Then we head deeper into the cave each of us with a torch to light the way.
  “Are you sure the suit is necessary?” says Robert.
  “The risk of infection is small,” I say, patting him on his shoulder with my free hand, “But with these on, it becomes nil.”
  “Alright, Theo, you’re the expert,” says Robert, his voice beginning to echo as we head further down the tunnel. After a hundred metres or so, the tunnel peels away into a much large section of the cave. I wave my torch around to see that the room is at least thirty metres across, with more tunnels on the other side of the cavern leading further down. To my right was a pile of rocks and vegetation, but above . . . the ceiling was blanketed with bats. Most of them were fast asleep, curled up into leathery bundles, but some of them jostled uncomfortably as my torchlight fell upon them. There was easily one hundred bats, if not more. I pointed my torch to the floor, so as not to disturb them
  “Well, that’s quite a colony,” I said to Robert, speaking low, but my voice still echoed through the whole space.
  “That’s not what we’re here to see,” said Robert, walking past me to the right. I followed him as he approached the pile of vegetation. “This is what we’re here for.”
As we neared the pile, I saw a collection of vegetables, amongst unidentifiable muck in a lumpy, fly-ridden mound that was knee-high and a twelve metres wide, piled against the wall. When we stood within three metres of it, the smell of rot filtered through my mask, making my stomach turn.
  “Smells like rotten cold cuts,” I say, scanning it with my torch, and I quickly see why.
  “It looks like the bats pile up corpses and fruit within their nest,” said Robert, “I believe them to be omnivorous, and when they finish with their prey, they drop it here. I also believe they defecate by this pile, which has lead to the growth of larger vegetables, perhaps for further feeding. This could account for the spreading disease.”
  “No, that doesn’t make sense,” I say, “Most of these fruits require sunlight. Someone must have brought these in here, whole.” I say.
  “Well, whoever it was, he fancies himself a collector,” says Robert. “Pumpkins, apples, plums, and watermelons; rats, birds, hare, weasels and . . . eugh, other bats. I mean, honestly, this isn’t the work of some madman, an animal did this, Theo. I’m saying the bats did this.”
  “It’s compelling, I’ll give you that,” said Theo, stepping towards the pile. “But you’re reaching again, Robert. This is why we failed that Chem’ final, you stretch your evidence.”
  “This isn’t college, Theo, sometimes you need to presuppose, take a leap and test it.”
  “How do we test this?” I ask, kneeling down. Up close, the pile wasn’t any prettier. I could see the half-rotten clumps of fur on white bone, glistening eyes, beetle-shells, teeth & moist viscera amongst seeds, vines and growing fruits. My eye was caught by a large watermelon near the front of the pile, bigger than a bowling ball, which seemed to have streaks of red across it, like half-coagulated blood.
  “Check for bite-marks, perhaps evidence of a trail in here, find out where these animals came from, check for evidence of hunting bats in . . . Theo, what are you doing?”
  “Look at this thing,” I say, pointing my torch at the bloodied watermelon. “Doesn’t that look . . . odd?”
  “What do you mean?”
  “Well, look, it’s a bit like a face,” I say, pointing. “See, there’s two closed eyes, and this long streak here is like-” the watermelon snaps open its jaws and bites into my hand!
  “What the bloody hell!” screamed Robert jumping down. I start flailing and screaming, but the heavy fruit weighs down my arm. I can’t stand, I just smack at the green skin, staring into two deep, black, shiny eyes As the green melon growls, and bites deeper, vicelike, into my knuckles with inch-long white teeth, thin like a piranha.
  “Get it off!” I scream. Robert swings his torch down like a lumberjack swinging an axe. With a splortch! melon cracks and spills red blood all over the floor. I scramble to my feet, cradling my hand. The teeth were small, but the force of the bite pulled and ripped the bitemark wound so that it quickly fills my gloves with blood.
  “What the hell was that?” asked Robert, coming over. “That’s a nasty wound, we’ve got to get out of here.”
We head for the exit, but I shine my torch behind me, at the pile, and I swear I saw more black, shiny eyes staring back.
  “The bats . . .” I say, through gritted teeth. “It’s not the bats. Not vampire fruit bats. They’re vampire fruit, bats that eat it . . . vampire fruit bats!”