Boobquake on the Colbert Report »« And the boobquake experiment has begun…

And the Boobquake results are in!

Boobquake is finally over across the world. It’s time to crunch some numbers – did women dressing immodestly really increase earthquakes? Can we find any data that supports Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi’s hypothesis?

(click here for larger image)
Photo by David Collins. Yes, that’s the biological hazard symbol. Yes, I found that funny. In case you didn’t notice, I’m a geek.

Many people seemed to misinterpret the planned analysis of this event. We’re not just trying to see if any earthquakes occurred, since dozens happen every day. What we want to see if we actually increased earthquakes in either number or severity. Let’s first look at the number of earthquakes that occurred on Monday, the 26th, and compare it to earthquakes in the past couple months. All data was taken from the USGS Earthquake website.

(click here for larger image)
Each data point represents the total number of earthquakes per day going back to February 5th (the extent of the online database). Days are measured in Coordinated Universal Time. That red square is boobquake. As you can see qualitatively, our provocative dress didn’t really seem to affect the frequency of earthquakes. There were 47 earthquakes on the 26th, which falls well within the 95% confidence interval for number of earthquakes (about 0 to 148).

So did our cleavage/thighs/ankles/hair increase the number of earthquakes? No.

“But Jen!” the internet cried, “what about the 6.5 magnitude earthquake in Taiwan? Surely that shows our bosoms have supernatural powers!”

Sorry to be a buzzkill – hey, I’d like magical control over plate tectonics too – but that single earthquake wasn’t significant. Earthquakes between 6.0 and 6.9 magnitude happen, on average, 134 times a year. That means we had about a 37% probability of an earthquake of that magnitude happening on boobquake just due to chance alone – hardly an improbable event that needs to be attributed to an angry deity.

But just to be safe, let’s look at the overall distribution of the magnitudes of earthquakes on boobquake. Did they differ from the types of earthquakes we’ve seen since February? These samples span from the entirety of the event – midnight at the earliest time zone to midnight at the last time zone – so the data encompasses more than 24 hours.

(click here for larger image)
The box indicates the first and third quartiles (within which 50% of the data points fall). Not only did all of the earthquakes on boobquake fall within the normal range of magnitudes, but the mean magnitude actually decreased slightly!

Now, this change isn’t statistically significant, but it certainly doesn’t support the cleric’s claim. In fact, I think it develops an even more interesting alternative hypothesis: Maybe immodest women actually decrease the amount of earthquakes! Man, that would certainly be a fun way to provide disaster relief. Of course, before we can make any claims about that, we’d have to greatly increase our sample size. You know, I have this gut feeling that a lot of people would like to do our boobquake experiment again…

Obviously this study had its flaws. We didn’t have a large sample size, and we didn’t have a control planet where women were only wearing burkas. We didn’t have a good way to quantify how much we increased immodesty (what’s the unit of immodesty anyway? Intensity of red on blushing nuns?). Maybe women did dress immodestly, but we didn’t lead men astray enough. Maybe God really was pissed, but he couldn’t increase earthquakes for us because that would provide proof for his existence (or maybe it’s his existence that’s the problem).

Or of course, maybe God is just biding his time. If you hear a news report in the next couple weeks saying a bizarre Indiana earthquake killed a science blogger, well, then maybe we’ll have to rethink our conclusions a bit.

But you know what? Boobquake was originally intended to be a humorous exercise in scientific and skeptical thinking – that we should test claims people make, especially when they’re ridiculous. And what could be a better way to do that than to question the methods of boobquake itself? That’s why science is such a wonderful tool for investigation – research must not only go through rigorous peer review, but it also must be able to be overturned in light of new data. I think it’s awesome reading all the scientific flaws people keep noticing – feel free to keep pointing them out!

I’m pretty sure our results aren’t going to change Sedighi’s mind. People tend to find any way possible to justify their superstitious beliefs, no matter how illogical. I’m sure the next time a big quake hits we’ll get a “See? Told you so!” even if the event wasn’t statistically significant – he didn’t care about science before, and he probably won’t now. Even if he says that, I think boobquake succeeded. We exposed these beliefs for their ridiculous nature, encouraged people to think skeptically, and of course, had some fun. What else could someone ask for? (Less creepy misogynistic guys who miss the point? Yeeeaah, agreed.)

So, sorry Sedighi. To quote something that was floating around twitter – women can move mountains, but they don’t cause earthquakes.

Don’t forget that boobquake shirts are on sale here. All profits will be donated to the Red Cross and James Randi Educational Foundation.

EDIT: If you want a more scientific explanation of earthquakes and boobquake, there’s an excellent article here by Dr. Lawrence Braile, professor and earthquake expert at my own Purdue University.

Comments

  1. Viktor says

    I have a feeling that the Annals of Improbable Research (http://improbable.com/) would gladly accept a submission if you care to write something up. Publish or Perish!PS. Box plot sounds like another kind of immodesty.

  2. Susie says

    Sounds as if you need to add another tshirt to your line up.”These Mountains Do Not Cause Earthquakes”

  3. Nasima says

    Maybe the “earth moves” for him (Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi) when he sees immodest women. Doesn’t take much for some guys LOL!

  4. says

    Ha! I loved this! Brightened up the start of my week. You even made it to the evening news here in the Netherlands. Way to show those religious nutters what we think of them!

  5. says

    Well done, Jen. I escaped Indiana in 1996. Next time you find yourself in the Blue Mountains, west of Sydney, you’re invited to test the theory that coffee tastes better at 1000m above sea level. :)

  6. says

    This post has made my morning.I love that you took the trouble to not only include frequency, but magnitude distribution. Wonderful.It also highlights the (albeit fun) non-scientific confirmation bias inherent in the media and public with the Taiwan earthquake brouhaha.Might I suggest an annual boobquake?It could be randomly generated every New Years Day to eliminate any annually cyclical bias.There should also be a MoobQuake to see if Men’s topless immodesty has any effect one way or the other.Okay I need to get back to work.

  7. ChristinaTaylor says

    I would certainly like to see this again. ^_^ Didn’t get to do it this time around, would certainly love a chance to do it another time … ^_^

  8. says

    Well done, Jen. And congrats on all the balooba and spreading the good word.As to pointing out flaws in the experiment, I have to admit to flashing my man-boobs this morning, and maybe that countered all the female immodesty in some form of reverse male shame continuum, turning the god(s) from anger and rage to shame and hiding. Hard to tell, really.

  9. brdavis says

    Way to follow up what could have been a throwaway humorous moment with an actual teachable blog post. Thank you – not (just!) for Boobquake (Oh, the pictures… oh my eyes!), but for this follow-up that’s even better than the original event in terms of showing people how to think rationally.

  10. says

    We only have a sample size of one, which isn’t enough to prove anything. To test the significance of the correlation coefficient, we need a sample size of three or more, i.e. three days.

  11. says

    I <3 Boobquake. I recommend multiple experiment repeats, just to make sure about this geological phenomenon (or lack thereof).(That’s a heart there in the first sentence, not a rack. Just want to clarify.)Excellent work. Seeing Science in action made me smile, lots and lots.

  12. Abijeet Anand says

    That’s the way it should be. Boobs are one of the best creations of nature (I won’t say GOD, cause if he exists, created a person like Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi on the contrary of artful creation). Like I always say: “If thou respect thyself, thou shalt respect women and their boobs” Cheers to you Jen, may nature bless your bosoms :)

  13. Chuck C says

    “what’s the unit of immodesty anyway? “Boobjoule-hours (BjH). No. of boobs x cumulative length of cleavage in cm x hours of exposure

  14. May God Bless You says

    “Many people seemed to misinterpret the planned analysis of this event. We’re not just trying to see if any earthquakes occurred, since dozens happen every day”Fail #1)That is because you were quite vague, hoping for nothing to happen, yet something DID happen, and now you need to brush up your experiment. “Earthquakes between 6.0 and 6.9 magnitude happen, on average, 134 times a year. That means we had about a 37% probability of an earthquake of that magnitude happening on boobquake just due to chance alone”Fail #2)Chance alone eh?Very intelligent.What weren’t you going to call chance alone? If 10 earthquakes in 10 different countries happened simultaneously? Get real.Stop with you post-hoc reasoning to cover your failure. This earthquake was significant to be covered on the news.and it happened on your Boobquake day.”Not only did all of the earthquakes on boobquake fall within the normal range of magnitudes, but the mean magnitude actually decreased slightly!”Fail #3)Another post-hoc reasoning to cover your failure. It seems you are now changing your experiment to something that could not possibly fail. As I said above, it seems the only way you’d admit defeat would be if 10 earthquakes, 10 rictor each, on 10 different location in the world would happen at once. With such post-hoc conditions, you are only trying to cover your defeat at your failed experiment.”Obviously this study had its flaws.”Fail #4) Not only your study has flaw, your reasoning and logic have flaws too.Get real for one second. Get off your high horse and open your eyes.It is as simple as this.1) You provoke women to be immodest 2) You managed to gather a couple of hundred thousands women to accept your invitation to immodesty3) The number of followers were very insignificant4) A 6.5 rictor earthquake DID happen. You cannot deny it. And it happened on YOUR boobquake day. NOW… since you failed your re-designing what was initially quite vague into something that COULD NOT be defeated unless the earth opened and mountains flipped. You are trying to cover your failure by post-hoc reasoning and conditions to keep your fan base happy and to continue to sell your products.This is as obvious as the sun on a sunny day.You are not fooling ANYONE but yourself and your fan base.Go ahead, make fun of religions, claim there is no God. That is not what is important. What is important is you set and experiment, fueled by arrogance and designed with ignorance to do nothing but to sell your products and get your 15 minutes of fame on TV. That is all.Let us not forget that ALL TV stations are YEARNING for someone to come out to ridicule anything related to Islam or Iran. Your opportunism just found the right time to blossom. That is all. I REALLY hope that people do read what I wrote and stop supporting pseudoscience and arrogant individuals who are striving hard with post-hoc reasoning and conditions to cover their failures to sell products and grab attention.In a society that worships celebrities, I can understand why some try to grab onto any thread they find to get their 15 mins. of fame on TV. Anyways, I hope one day in the future, you remember these words, and realize that a life that is fueled by arrogance and lived through ignorance will not be a fulfilling life at the end, when your fans are not around to support you and when the media isn’t around to promote you.If there is a God, may He open your heart.

  15. Didi says

    You made my day!(And yesterday probably also a lot of (wo)men!)Like the way how you interpret the results in such skeptical but still humorous way =)If you have any more (fun) experiments like this…I’m in!

  16. andyinto says

    I applaud your statistical analysis (somewhat, it’s a very small sample – 1 day) HOWEVER, I submit to you that a factor you did NOT account for was — participation in BOOBQUAKE.I’m sure a sunny weekend day on beaches (in say LA or St. Tropez or Rio, etc.) would probably provide more cleavage exposure than any extra your event ‘brought to the table’ yesterday.For any reasonable CAUSE and effect, you need to create an event that provides a significant increase in the amount of cleavage exposed.

  17. mrboomtastic says

    GREAT research, but flawed. Following Netwon’s 3 laws of motion will show why. First, “an object at rest tends to stay at rest” (Law #1). In order for Boobquake to actually move mountains, boobs must move! Otherwise everything is equal. Run to law #3 which basically states “every action has an equal an opposite reaction”. So if you got the boobs moving, THEN you’d have some quake action. Making sense now? So because of the error I am willing to offer myself up as a faithful study buddy to you for your next experiment .. ;)

  18. Manth says

    I love this!As I said to my Taller Half this morning – the Religious Types tell us that Man was made in God’s image. Since Men like to look at immodestly dressed women (or so he assures me!), then obviously God must like looking at them as well. Earthquakes are therefore a problem when God can’t see ENOUGH immodest women! He gets ticked off and bored and sends earthquakes to get some excitement happening. Since your results showed a slightly lower than usual incidence of earthquakes on April 26th, it must be true.

  19. scrim says

    Did you just use a 2 month dataset to try to prove something geological? Things in geology are measured in millions of years, if you’re going to do this, at least have proper data.

  20. prowess64 says

    Wow, amazing how some people want you to fail regardless of reality. I think Boobquake proved the point it set out–and brilliantly. It engaged people across the world in a conversation that we should not be afraid to have everyday, it gave women the opportunity to embrace their femininity and use it for empowerment (yes, something I recognize many feminists I’ve known find debatable) and it got people thinking about MANY things… not bad for somewhat half-hearted sarcastic response to something you read a week ago! Personally, it gave me the other opportunity to remember to be proud of myself… and my body. Kudos!

  21. deebles says

    Meh. I did feel that the primary outcomes should have been stated beforehand… however, it is worth stating that the only one she mentioned specifically (“an earthquake in Indiana”) definitely didn’t happen, and the rather undramatic 6.5 which did happen in Taiwan was, as pointed out, of a size that happens 1 day in 3. You claim it was important because it made the news. However, do you really think it would have done had Boobquake not been happening?And as for the fame-seeking allegation… there are many, many easier and more certain ways to fame than to write an atheist blog. Why be so ungenerous as to assume the worst of motives?

  22. As Expected says

    Did ANYONE expect her to post ANYTHING other than what she posted today? Did ANYONE expect her to be honest and say, “yes, an earthquake of 6.5 did happen on the day I chose to invite immodesty, and this makes me think.”Did ANYONE expect her to say “The results were NOT as expected?” Did ANYONE expect her to admit to the significance of the earthquake that DID happen on her boobquake day?NO.This post is JUST as it was expected.It was expected to produce excuses to demonstrate how her claim was right and remain correct.She did JUST as she was EXPECTED to do.Let’s be real.At the end of the day, you manage to keep your own circle of fans and achieved your 15 mins. of fame. But that is ALL.No right-minded person, no religious person, would change his/her mind because of “experiment.”If a significant earthquake on YOUR OWN designated day has not made you think twice, then NOTHING else will.You’ll continue to make excuses and your fans will continue to buy them. That is all.I really do hope that you do spend time to think about life from a different perspective, different from what is EXPECTED of you.

  23. grahambn says

    MoobQuake? I’d rather the earthquakes.Seriously though, I hope the girls had fun. If so, feel free to do it again.

  24. says

    What a fantastic paper. Interesting conclusions, written quickly and very readable as well!A fun experiment and an even better result! Thanks for coming up with a teachable moment and executing on it so well. You’ve done all rational people a great service.

  25. Guest says

    Jen, I can see two flaws with your analysis:1) You forgot to control for the background level of female immodesty. Plenty of women dress “immodestly” every day and without some numbers we don’t know if the increase in such behavior due to your event was significant relative to the background level. 2) IIRC, the idiot cleric’s thesis held that women’s immodest clothing provoked more adultery to be going on, and this is what actually caused the earthquakes. So again, for proper results you need some measurement of the amount of, er, “earth-shaking” going on to determine if yesterday saw a significant increase over the background. What you need, then, is a world-wide survey of cleric-angering behavior over time so you can compare that to seismic activity. Further research is definitely called for before you can jump to any firm conclusions.

  26. says

    I have a feeling that if the statement had been made by a Baptist preacher in Wyoming, Boobquake would have still been the result. I do not feel that it was a slam against Islam or Iran. Signed, Boobquake participant!!!

  27. says

    “Anyways, I hope one day in the future, you remember these words, and realize that a life that is fueled by arrogance and lived through ignorance will not be a fulfilling life at the end”I hope you remember these words too.

  28. mcbender says

    Nice work, Jen; seeing this analysis made my day. It’s unfortunate that you’ve already got some idiots claiming you’re biased and in denial and such such because they don’t understand how it is that science works in the first place… but I suppose given the amount of attention this was getting, that was inevitable. I’d almost be amused if it weren’t so pathetic.

  29. Guest says

    @May God Bless YouNo, I did not find god reading your post. I just became unbelievably bored. Talk about high horses! You need to lighten up. I suspect you’re a failed scientist or a failed reality star who’s just terribly envious of Jen’s good luck.This experiment was an wonderful act of empowerment: normal little people like us can actually do something to show big time crazy ayatollahs that we’re not all fooled by their foolishness. Let us have our fun and don’t be such a bummer.Actually, why are you waisting your time in this site? You’re looking to be in a bad mood?

  30. Guest says

    No, I did not find god reading your post. I just became unbelievably bored. Talk about high horses! You need to lighten up. I suspect you’re a failed scientist or a failed reality star who’s just terribly envious of Jen’s good luck.This experiment was an wonderful act of empowerment: normal little people like us can actually do something to show big time crazy ayatollahs that we’re not all fooled by their foolishness.Let us have our fun and don’t be such a bummer.Actually, why are you waisting your time in this site? You’re looking to be in a bad mood?

  31. says

    I worked most of the day yesterday, but you better believe that when I got home, the cleavage was RELEASED! And may I say, my husband thinks this should be an annual event, as do I. I would happily attend! I love the fact that this topic has started some discussions. And I was surprised to see what some of the topics were and where they led. Amazing!

  32. says

    Or perhaps the act of spouting ridiculous religious propaganda in order to control the actions of others causes earthquakes.Side note: Please remember that many people who believe in God are neither crazy nor corrupt. We just tend to be quieter about it.

  33. Chaos_Descending says

    The only problem was that i think the priest said that immodestly lead men to adultery, (thank for making another responsible for MY actions), and THAT caused god’s wrath.

  34. Callipigus says

    Dear Jen,However much I appreciate you momentous attempt at dispelling obscurantism with a flash (not exaclty of light), I must admit that I find your experiment flawed or rather, incomplete.As you hint yourself in your analysis, according to the well constructed Sadigih’s Theory of Boobquakism, it is not the increase in Amount of Immodesty (AoI) that will cause an increase in the number of earthquakes but rather the consequent “corrupt[ion of] [young men] chastity and spread [of] adultery”.I therefore see myself forced to refute your current conclusions. You boobed.But given your very evident predispositions at being a star in the bosom of science, I would encourage to further pursue your research! I propose you design an experimental setup that unquestioningly links AoI with LoC (loss of chastity) and SoA (spread of adultery) and possibly onwards to earthquakes. I am starting to have vague ideas linking a manifold of boobs; young Catholic Priests / Imams fres out of the Madrasa; and the San Andreas fault. It may just work…

  35. lalabowden says

    Oh goodness, writer of that sincere (I think) analysis of the experiment – that was the FUNNIEST reply I’ve ever read! Even more hysterical if its meant to be serious than if it was written in jest. I loved it! Thanks for the gigantic laugh at 8:00am.

  36. says

    One point we discussed here at work is that you didn’t do an ethical study beforehand. If there was any way this could actually have caused damaging natural disasters, one would need to weigh the knowledge gained against the potential damage to property and human life.Obviously that’s ridiculous in this case, but helping people understand that scientists like yourself would normally do ethical studies before an experiment with a real risk of that sort would be educational.It’s possible to take that too far, but it might be something to consider.

  37. says

    “I really do hope that you do spend time to think about life from a different perspective, different from what is EXPECTED of you.”Do you?

  38. olivianeutronbomb says

    Go Jen! And hooray at least that Sedighi’s ridiculous comments have brought this issue to the massively public fora to highlight many peoples’ attitude towards women.I just wanted to say snaps to my 85 year old grandma, who is the cutest and wore a red dress and bright red lippy on Monday to participate in the experiment as a “scarlet woman”.And to mention her point that the Gold Coast, where she lives, does not experience earthquakes every Friday and Saturday night and yet “you should see some of the getups young ladies deem as appropriate evening wear these days!” hahahahahah I love you grandma!

  39. says

    I see one major flaw in the research. Simply, were there more immodestly clad women across the planet that day than any other day? Perhaps even though you orchestrated this scientific experiment (which I made sure to wholeheartedly support and instructed all of my friends to do likewise) there was in fact a lower proportion of scantily clad women in the world due to adverse weather conditions, public holidays or other unforeseen variables. I think this will require a series of experiments throughout the year to take these factors into account. For example, it was fairly cold in northern Europe which could have led to a far lower proportion of low-cut shirts that day. That would then skew the results of your research.I’m only looking at this from a very scientific method point of view (having a degree in Molecular Biosciences and Biotechnology AND having done an internship at NASA, I’m somewhat qualified to do so) :)I think additional research will be required and that at least four events per year will be needed in order to start dwindling the probability that those other unaccounted for factors had some affect on the research.OK, you got me (I can’t believe you’re still reading this), I really just want more scantily clad women in the world, and I’m an evil scientist bent on world domination.

  40. Aleric says

    I must insist you reschedule for two reasons;1) Your scientific method is flawed. A single trial is not a basis for making a reasonable scientific conclusion and2) I missed it. I recommend weekly trials until at least labor day. Possibly Fridays as we can take advantage of casual Fridays at work. I really think you need a much larger attendance of boobquake to really get a good sampling

  41. Bad Wolf says

    As Jen described, quakes of 6-6.9 happen about every 3 days under normal conditions. Ergo, the chance that one would happen yesterday is about 1/3. Claiming that a statistically normal event somehow proves God’s displeasaure at immodestly dressed women is silly at best.May Scince and Reason open your mind.BTW, Jen, I saw one article where you were described as a “Brainy beauty” – I agree without reservation – based only on a few week’s reading of your blog. Keep up the good work.

  42. says

    You’re hero and an inspiration, and very brave to stand up to ignorance. With the pan and the keyboard, you have joined a long fight against that, and the tyranny it preserves. You may not realize it, but you are a true warrior

  43. says

    Indeed, the illustrious imam’s assertion was that it was the immoral acts of men which actually cause the seismic activity (mere women have no such power), but Ayatollahwhaddafuck was quite specific on his knowledge that these immoral acts were initiated by excessive babeliciousiosity. Therefore, Jen’s admittedly coarse experiment did in fact test the theory, though indirectly. There’s more data points than there were before, though repetition is required to level out the results.

  44. olivianeutronbomb says

    Dawn, I so agree, this whole experiment had NOTHING to do with religion and I wish people would stop tying religion to the issue.Except has anyone else noticed the discussion surrounding boobquake has uncovered a scary amount of people who believe that sexual assault against women occurs only in the islamic culture?? Seriously????????? As someone who’s worked in Rape Crisis with many female survivors of assaults, I’d love to hear their explanation for why so many sexual assaults (vast majority unreported because of the stigma they face in society) occur in non Islamic countries…One particular person tried to explain that sexual violence in the UK occurred because it was now a “predominantly Muslim” country. Seriously, WTF???

  45. says

    You know, I think you’re being a little hasty to conclude that increased immodesty doesn’t cause earthquakes. It’s a big, big planet and it may take a little time for things to get started. Let’s keep an eye on things over the next month and see if our boobages contributed to any build-up of pressure or shift in the earth’s crust.

  46. Batman says

    The only scientific logic flaw of your experiment that I can see is that you presuppose that God and Science can’t exist at the same time. While Sedighi’s claim is indeed ridiculous, at the same time, your experiment only disproves his thesis, not that God doesn’t exist.And while I’m here, less creepy misogynistic guys is probably an oxymoron, but only if creepy misogynist is redundant.

  47. Lurker says

    As a matter of interest, “boobquake” rated a mention on the BBC Radio 1 breakfast show news here in the UK (the show has a listenership around the 7 million mark).Way to go!

  48. Lencyclopedie says

    First, congrats for a merry event, for all that joie de vivre! …:) Second, from a more analytic perspective, Boobquake can be viewed as having had two major aims: (i) initiating discussion on how various causal (and pseudo-causal) claims can be tested (or not tested at all, because of their pseudo/quasi nature) and what that means and must mean for public discussions and decision making(ii) focusing attention on the harmful influence (particularly for many women) of repressive and reactionary attitudes towards sexuality and sensualityBoth aspects are inextricably linked together in many fundamentalist ideologies: hence they must be addressed together to fight them successfully.I think it is pretty clear that by and large both aims have been reached. Not all of us (=science-friendly and liberal secularists) agree, to be sure. I have the greatest admiration for Jerry Coyne and tend to agree with what he thinks and says on most issues (as I follow him on Twitter). Which is precisely the reason why I develop here my thoughts against the background of his critical remarks. I understand why Jerry Coyne did not like Bookquake, but I think that here, for once, he was and is in error. Why? Because Jerry, perfectly well knowing that as an experiment this cannot be on the level of real scientifically powerful experiments (LHC and all that), seems to ignore the aspect I referred above in my point (i). It is initiating discussion of what genuine no-bullshit experiments and evidence could be in matters relevant for our social life. Here the Boobquake, judging on the lively web discussions, has actually succeeded. We desperately need public awareness on how we can or cannot rationally justify and criticize causal claims. Remember Pat Robertson on the Haiti earthquake? I also think that Jerry seems to have a rather resigned attitude towards the way manifestations of sex and sensuality are generally seen. Hints of sex and sensuality and this is sufficient to disqualify the person (especially young women) as rational persons capable of rigorous scientific thinking. In fact, Jerry seems to be afraid that this very campaign had precisely this effect and that nothing could be done about it, the choice between the “scientific madonna” and the “unscientific whore” is unavoidable. How very sad if that were true! Let us not concede the point to Jerry too easily, let us continue in trying to make sex and sensuality as acceptable and even very desirable parts of the Good Life, even among the nerdy and the geeky!…:)

  49. Logan says

    I think we should all remember that there still is a chance that the said immodestity caused these earthquakes. Not a good chance but a chance none-the-less.

  50. PNW Greg says

    It is clear that the sample size was inadequate to prove that the results are not anomalous. I refer not, of course, to the magnitude of the samples, which were clearly up to the task in every scientifically measurable way, but to the extremely brief duration of the experiment. As a practiced seismologist,I professionally request that this project be extended to a multi-year period of observation commencing immediately. If we want to continue to benefit from the profound scientific breakthroughs we just experienced, we can no longer keep active research constrained behind the outmoded social and political restraints of the day before yesterday.

  51. sostila says

    Well, the beaches did not close on Boobquake day; the extra immodesty just added to what was already there.

  52. BoobieGirl says

    The problem is that wingnut radicals are NOT logical and reasonable… the fact that there was a quake (and a damned sizable one!) on the day designated for Boobquake, even though it OBVIOUSLY had no correlation to anything done by anyone, will still confirm for him (and other whackjob nutters like him) that he is right. It does not matter one red damn, and the fact of that earthquake is a serious shame. They will take it as confirmation, despite all facts to the contrary. Unfortunately, due to that, Boobquake probably inadvertantly did more harm to the cause than good. :(

  53. Hossein says

    Dear JenI am an Iranian student. There are very few people even in Iran who believes in ideas of clerics like Mr. Sedighi. However, I want to remind you that even the most scientific issues might be outcomes of very primitive principles which God might have set to create the universe in a stigmergic way. Actually, now, we don’t know the principles but one day might understand its relations. For years scientists thought that Newton’s Laws are enough to understand motion. But, theory of relativity proves that Newton’s Laws are reliable only in some special cases. So, I think if we cannot see something at now, we shouldn’t say that it doesn’t exist at all.About God and Religion, I think you have ignored history of human being. You are making decisions with principles of “Markov Decision Processes”, However, I think that we should also consider previous states and events to make the best decision.Good Luck

  54. storkdok says

    Excellent work! I have never enjoyed science as much as the Boobquake experiment! And I see you have attracted some comments from some of the religiousy misogynists…excellent work!My only question is…when can we repeat the experiment?

  55. BoobieGirl says

    Um, yes. Yes, it would have made the news even without Boobquake. A 6.5 earthquake is significant enough to make the news any day, whether our boobies are out or not. And if there are quakes of that significance “every 3 days” as claimed, then the experiment should have been carried on for at least SIX days straight, and then total tallies looked at. However, per my previous post, even if NO quakes at all occurred but the one 6.5 quake during the entire 6 days, that one quake damned the whole thing. Nutters and whackadoos will STILL call that “proof” of what they want to believe. Boobies don’t hurt anybody – but a big ol’ quake on Boobquake day kills the whole thing. Sorry. Nuts will be nuts.

  56. says

    Agreed with all the positive comments about the post; it’s light-hearted, but with charts, so that makes it even better.Particularly agree with @Lencyclopedie'(ii) focusing attention on the harmful influence (particularly for many women) of repressive and reactionary attitudes towards sexuality and sensuality’THAT is the point. Not ‘disproving God’ – was that even stated in the original ‘aims’ of the experiment? The writer even states quite specifically that there’s no way to draw a conclusion of any kind about god here so I don’t know why people keep bringing it up.It’s not even really about Islam.It’s about some ignorant bastard claiming that women are the cause of all the world’s ills. Even though it’s the weaknesses of men, according to him, that are the actual instigator. How about having a go at men for being weak?! Oh, right, because he is one and clearly men can do no f*cking wrong.I tend to dress modestly myself, not because I’m ashamed of myself (I believe the definition of narcissism is if one can look in the mirror and think ‘yeah, I’d shag me’ – well, I think I probably would, in fact!!) but because I feel comfortable and I don’t think being particularly ‘fleshy’ is very appropriate for my job, FOR ME. Some people are just as relaxed showing us a bit more of themselves. Fine, whatever. They can do what they like!The fewer (sorry, not less, grammar pedantry ahoy!) creepy misogynists is an important point that’s too overlooked, I think.People are misinterpreting the purpose. It’s about removing the taboo, not titillating (sorry for the pun) – sure, it’s sexy, but the point is that even so, this should not alter people’s behaviour. In always treating women as sexual objects, it is essentially condoning the kind of misogyny that leads to stupid comments about how women and their sexy sexy bodies are the root of all evil. It’s the kind of thing that leads to ‘well she looked so good, she was clearly asking for it, therefore it’s not rape’.That may seem like a big leap, but it’s all part of the same spectrum and it’s indicative of cultural issues that need to change everywhere, not just in Iran.

  57. Tazzy says

    I don’t really appreciate the snide comments both this report and in the replies towards God and people with “superstitious” beliefs. :/ As a religious person, I feel like I’m being lumped in with Sedighi here, regardless on how I feel about his comments (and, to clarify, I think they’re ludicrous just as you do).I’m not trying to hinder your free speech or anything (say whatever you want), but I do think this scientific report loses its professional air with the insertion of those small side comments.

  58. says

    To all of those people saying that an earthquake did happen…are you referring to the one in Taiwan? That was at 11am Taiwan-time. And, since most of the ladies participating in boobquake were in N. America and Western Europe, that was several hours ahead of any of these lovely ladies getting out of bed. (11am in taiwain is 11pm in the Eastern USA, and about 4am in the UK).So that one happened before boobquake started. Therefore, it doesn’t count anyways. The fact that you don’t really get it is astounding.

  59. JustMe says

    Perhaps God decided to strike early and in the form of tornadoes in the southern US instead of making it too obvious. *shrug* Just sayin’.

  60. Seahare says

    I had fun, as did several of my friends. Who knew that a bunch of menopausal women would post pictures of their cleavage? And who knew that clipped photos of just the cleavage would look so much like plumbers’ cracks. Are men turned on by the cleavage or by the similarities to butt cracks? The science of earthquakes doesn’t have me thinking but what turns men on does have me thinking.

  61. says

    But, Sedighi’s statements were nonsense, still. So they were shown to be in a fun way. Do you really not get it?And, you’re right about Newton, but guess what? You know what corrected Newton’s laws? MORE SCIENCE! Not relying on revelation or scripture, not tradition, not authority. More testing and mathematics. What part of human history has anyone here ignored? We accept our animal ancestry, and we accept that humans have believed nonsense in the past as well as today. Not sure what your point was.

  62. says

    I am beginning to think, that you all weren’t dressed immodestly enough. Topless is the only way to go at this point. Pics or it didn’t happen, also…Hey, I tried.

  63. Jim Jenal says

    Jen – great job – your future as a teacher of science as well as a practicing scientist will be bright.A couple of questions on your data analysis – I wonder what your distribution would look like if you weighted the distribution based on the energy released by the event (since presumably the energy released is directly proportional to the diety’s displeasure). Also, what would your results for the magnitude distribution look like if you applied the Olympic data smoothing “trick” – excluding the high and the low from your sample?Eagerly awaiting supplemental graphs!

  64. Hamuel says

    I don’t think there is enough data to come to a conclusive finding. Might I suggest we have ladies show cleavage throughout the month of May?

  65. Lucyloo says

    saw it on CBC morning news (Canada), i immediatley put on my black lace bra and a 6.9 on the richter scale top, and since my neighbourhood is predominently muslim, I was able to gage the resulting tremors with the naked (you’ll pardon the esspression) eye. …oh and by the way i led my man astray upon awakening before i even knew it was boobquake, how’s that for phychic super powers

  66. says

    I totally agree! I mean, what if God didn’t have enough time to plan. Only by giving Him/Her adequate preparation time can we have an accurate measurements!

  67. andyinto says

    Again, if BOOBQUAKE was meant to show cause and effect and this study was a professional scientific experimentThere should have been a census of # of BQ participants.I doubt there were enough to make a significant world-wide % daily increase.To my point…..if you took all the beaches in the world into account, on a weekday you might get X-thousand ‘immodest women’, however on a weekend, that number could be 3 to 7 times higher.Under those assumptions – weekend earthquakes would be much higher.In any case, I believe this IS an experiment worth repeating (over and over until we get it right!!!)

  68. Anti-Boobquaker says

    YOU MISERABLE FUCKS LOST!! EARTHQUAKE IS AN EARTHQUAKE COWARDS, Dont go around counting the number of times it happens in a year!! All you sluts flauting ur bodies will burn in hell!! :-D

  69. dave_13 says

    hey, you’re right. if boobs = tectonic plate movement, then earthquake frequency should be directly proportional to climate. On a hot day in July you’ve got a lot more people baring their flesh than when its -20 (degrees celsius) in January. What’s the primary scientific literature say about that?Also, im in the middle of reading A Crack In The Edge of the World (by Simon Winchester), about the San Francisco earthquake in 1906. Good read, btw. Anyway, there’s precious little information regarding turn of the century cleavage levels in that book. But the fact that it occurred really early in the morning would make it likely that most people were modestly covered by blankets at the time.And as a side note, Jen – just discovered your site today. Read about it in the Toronto Sun, where pictures (from behind, unfortunately) of boobquakin’ topless ladies made the 2nd page! good job! i’ll definitely be back on a regular basis.

  70. Greg23 says

    Sorry if this is old news but did you know Boobquake day was Charles Richter’s birthday? Yes, THAT Charles Richter.Was that planned?

  71. Boobquake lover! says

    Now the real results should be, how many women got laid on Boobquake? Those are statistically significant! Woo hoo Boobquake day!

  72. dave_13 says

    “No right-minded person, no religious person, would change his/her mind because of ‘experiment.’ “how about because of…”reality?”also, make up your mind. are you talking about right-minded people? or religious people?

  73. says

    It’s 60 comparative data points. It’s not duration/type of thing that matters, it’s number of points. A long time may even be bad, as over millions of years, tectonic shifts can have a substantive impact on number of quakes by virtue of different stress layouts. The analysis was fine. 1-10 years would have been more robust, but that’s just because of the sheer number of points.

  74. deebles says

    You’ve got a good point, here, and I may have overstated the case (although I do think that the existence of the Boobquake magnified media coverage of that particular quake somewhat).To be a serious experiment, it should have been run for longer, yes – but then it might have been a bit too serious. To have any rigor, it should really have stated its primary outcomes beforehand – to the extent that it did (an earthquake in Indiana), those were not fulfilled, but some agreed measure of a globally unusual level of earthquake activity should have been worked out as an outcome before this. (I think something like “a larger earthquake than any in the past 60 days, or a more devastating earthquake than any in the past 60 days, or more earthquakes with a magnitude greater than 4 than on any other single day in the past 60 days” might have sufficed, to give at least 95% confidence of a genuine association if any of these events happened, although we’d also have had to define the 26th – whether GMT only, or local time at the epicentre, the source of the data etc.). Maybe something like that would do for next year…

  75. chrishegarty says

    I definitely am blogging these results; it’s too much of a triumph for science to pass up.

  76. says

    I suggest you hold boobquake days at random intervals and then analyze the data using time series methods to determine if such days are correlated with subsequent seismic activity. The larger sample size would obviously enable you to draw more statistically meaningful conclusions. Randomization would address the problem of boobquake being possibly correlated with other things that might be correlated with seismic activity. And a time series methodology would address the time lag (by my reading of the Sedighi hypothesis, anyhow, since it takes time to lead men astray and time for God to respond) between cleavage and hypothesized earthquakes.

  77. Tyler says

    I appreciate women as much as the other guy but I’m not sure what the over all point of this experiement was… It was originally prove that Earthquakes aren’t caused by immodesty – earthquakes happened, Piss off the people in the middle east perhaps – I’m sure this wasn’t making our relationship w/ them any better, Free oppressed women – Afterall… nothing says “Free women from being oppressed” like turning them into objects! I’m disappointed w/ this project Jen. It was a funny idea but now that it’s done and earthquakes did happen (not to mention the one in Taiwan) u can use logic all u want… THEY STILL HAPPENED. We all know it wasn’t cleavage related but you’re right Sedighi’s mind will not be changed by this… and i don’t know that anyone’s mind was changed. Men just simply got a free show by chicks that were “trying to make a statement”. I guess I’m a little lost in what was really gained by this experiment… seems like a lose-lose to me… Just sayin’…

  78. dave_13 says

    lolthats awesome! i especially love the smiley face at the end. priceless.ah, damn, thats a good one. im still laughing. top-drawer sir, top-drawer.

  79. Amanda says

    The Flying Spaghetti Monster approves of your statistical rigor! Just to be safe, in replication we should also track the effect of boobage in revealing pirate costumes. I posit that the frequency and severity of global natural disasters overall will decrease (not just earthquakes, but also hurricanes, tornadoes, volcanic eruptions, meteor strikes, and solar flares).

  80. says

    wow, you really don’t get it do you….Of course this is pseudo science. Jen _said_ it was pseudo science, a joke, light hearted mockery. The only intent was to ridicule the inane rantings of a misogynistic muslim cleric. I think you’re the one that needs to get off his high horse and open his eyes. Clearly, you are the only person on the fucking planet taking this seriously. It was a joke you humorless bloviating shitbag. Here’s _your_ big fail”if there is a god…”We know where you stand. You’re pissed off that no statistically significant event happened, and you’re ranting is an ignorant, arrogant attempt to scold in a thinly veiled religiously moral self righteousness.People like Jen are not the problem in this world, they are the solution. People like you, refusing to admit your silly fairy stories are based in the same ignorance and arrogance you accuse Jen of, are the problem.Of course, you’re so proud and confident of your position, you posted your comment anonymously. Jesus would be so proud of you.The hypocrisy in your last paragraph is astounding, and just as laughable as the inane rantings of muslim cleric that claims immodesty is the root cause of earthquakes.Hows this: “Anyways, I hope one day in the future, you remember these words, and realize that a life that is fueled by arrogance and lived through ignorance will not be a fulfilling life at the end, when your god are not around to support you and when the media isn’t around to promote you.”It cuts both ways, asshole.

  81. says

    @ May God Bless You Today 07:42 AMwow, you really don’t get it do you….Of course this is pseudo science. Jen _said_ it was pseudo science, a joke, light hearted mockery. The only intent was to ridicule the inane rantings of a misogynistic muslim cleric. I think you’re the one that needs to get off his high horse and open his eyes. Clearly, you are the only person on the fucking planet taking this seriously. It was a joke you humorless bloviating shitbag. Here’s _your_ big fail”if there is a god…”We know where you stand. You’re pissed off that no statistically significant event happened, and you’re ranting is an ignorant, arrogant attempt to scold in a thinly veiled religiously moral self righteousness.People like Jen are not the problem in this world, they are the solution. People like you, refusing to admit your silly fairy stories are based in the same ignorance and arrogance you accuse Jen of, are the problem.Of course, you’re so proud and confident of your position, you posted your comment anonymously. Jesus would be so proud of you.The hypocrisy in your last paragraph is astounding, and just as laughable as the inane rantings of muslim cleric that claims immodesty is the root cause of earthquakes.Hows this: “Anyways, I hope one day in the future, you remember these words, and realize that a life that is fueled by arrogance and lived through ignorance will not be a fulfilling life at the end, when your god are not around to support you and when the media isn’t around to promote you.”It cuts both ways, asshole.

  82. DV8 says

    Hey shitbag,She’s EXPECTED to dress demurely, worship your god, and not question when people tell her how she should behave.She’s NOT doing as she’s expected to do, and that’s your problem with it.

  83. Wut? says

    Wooo, let’s make pretty graphs and call it science!Sorry, but there was nothing scientific about what you did (other than testing a hypothesis). 200,000 people on one day? How are you supposed to infer anything from that? To present these findings as science makes you almost as ignorant as Sedighi.

  84. Heather says

    How about doing a study on locations that have the most regular nudity? Like nude beaches, nudist colonies, and third world countries that are naturally scantily clad?

  85. DV8 says

    It was a joke, stupid. she said repeatedly it was a joke. woooo! Let’s all take this too seriously and force our own morality on others! Moron. To not see that this whole thing is a joke when jen clearly said it was light hearted mockery makes you just as ignorant as sedighi.

  86. Jon Dark says

    I thought I felt a little tremor but not quite sure. Maybe there should be much more effort . . . . please!!

  87. Red says

    Considering this is primarily an atheist blog (from what I’ve seen), the religious comments are to be expected. However, I think they’re mostly directed at the people who insist that EVERYONE should believe in God, and try to twist every little thing into proof that God exists. The kind of people who say “Look at that! That means God exists! BELIEVE DAMN YOU!!!”

  88. Wut? says

    No, it started as a joke. But once Jen found out that people were actually paying attention, she tried to turn it into something real. If it was still a joke, then there should be a huge disclaimer on this post. Because believe me, there are other “morons” that are going to take this seriously.

  89. anonymous says

    @ May God Bless You: You’re spot on and I appreciate your post! I too am confused that the results have been taken as “37% Probability” Did boobs cause the earthquake? Probably not. Did this exercise wind up being something to make a buck and piss of muslims… kind of leaning towards yes. Even if it was a joke it was done in a mean spirit. Just sayin’. Oooh just a side note… the people getting pissed off by your post are using the word “ignorant” SEVERAL times. To me, that just tells me they were debate students in highschool and have everything figured out… (You only used it once which is telling me u thought things out before u wrote it…) don’t take it personally!

  90. says

    (what’s the unit of immodesty anyway? Intensity of red on blushing nuns?)As someone who hangs out with a lot of nuns (cloistered and non), let me tell you, those women don’t embarrass easily.

  91. Aloha says

    boob-quake will definitely causes pennis-ache… it leads to bed-shake… this is the ultimate earthquake, you dummy…

  92. says

    I believe that the results show the opposite of what the Iranian mullah believed. Boobquake might have had a dampening effect on earthquakes. God may have found it harder to shake the earth if one or possibly both, depending on how manly of a God God is, hands were, how shall we say, busy.Maami Wata and Jesus

  93. Dennis says

    This is the first Blog I have ever followed, and no not because of cleavage, but because it directly challenged the lunacy of religious leaders. Kind of like we need a chart of how many times wars and rumors of wars, famine and earthquakes has meant the end of the universe in the last 2000 years. Natural events are not caused by any action, or inaction, of the human primate. As to the arguement that a womans dress causes male immorality which causes earthquakes, also stated by this religious shaman, well that being true we would have to assume that the experiment by its nature caused an increase in adulterous behaviour again disproving the idiocy of religious dogma. This has been a very funny and enjoyable week. I wonder if you e-mailed this “religious” person if he would be man enough to retract his statement.

  94. says

    “No right-minded person, no religious person, would change his/her mind because of “experiment.””Right – because only ‘religious’ people are ‘right minded’.Is that what you meant?

  95. elementalchick1 says

    What a great way to start the week! I like your alternative hypothesis. It would help explain why California never has fallen into the ocean.

  96. says

    “If you don’t want your beliefs ridiculed, don’t have such ridiculous beliefs.”See the big red “A” up there at the right? It’s an atheist blog.If you really want to feel put upon, then look around for atheist humor about religion.

  97. Tabatha Hines says

    So what about women who choose to dress modestly by choice and not for a religious purpose? I dress modestly and I’m married to a man who appreciates my modesty. I see my modest dress as a way to separate myself from a world that tells me my body should be on display because men need entertainment. It does not empower me to show my body. It creates an atmosphere where people take me less seriously. Also, your movement is rooted in intolerance and bred intolerance of all Islamic people, and lumped them all together. One idiot having an idiotic belief that not even Muslims believe is not the same as the entire group of people being backwards. There were so many derogatory and flaming and scathing words said about Islam that even if I had been interested in participating, I wouldn’t have because I cannot be a part of a hate group.

  98. David says

    As in one of the previous posts you forgot about the nudist, clothing optional and swinger resorts/campgrounds. I don’t think that “Imam” (I use that loosely) is aware of Hedo II, Hedo III and the shit load of other adult resorts. For all of you who wish to comment and don’t use your name, all I can say is loser.

  99. says

    So wait, God was mad at the participation with Boobquake in America, across Europe, Australia, and Japan?So he created an earthquake in Taiwan? God’s aim seems a bit off. Maybe his omnipotence needs a tune up?

  100. anidaadler says

    I for one dressed way more immodestly than I would normally have, and I would imagine that was the case with hundreds of other women. Many more bodies than usual were on display yesterday, from a lot of people who would not normally display them. Therefore, the normal immodesty that would have been going on anyway was no doubt given a boost. It’s a pity we can’t get numbers on that, but wtf, it was all a fun way to highlight the ridiculousness of a sour old bastard’s prattling. I think the whole thing was a gigantic win.

  101. ethanol says

    Awesome! Long time reader, glad to see this get so much attention, even if some of it is stupid. But now for the nerdy statistics question; when you averaged your earthquakes for the day, did you average the logarithmic values reported or did you average the 10^magnitude values and then convert back to the logarithmic values? I believe that the former method preferentially weights small earthquakes in the average: for example, the average of 4 earthquakes with magnitudes 1, 1, 1, and 5 would be 2 if you just averaged those numbers but would 4.4 if you averaged the actual (non logarithmic) magnitudes.

  102. DV8 says

    No, it still is a joke. If you can’t see that, you’re even more ignorant than sedighi. The hypothesis was posed as a joke, and the findings are presented as pseudo science. There is not one shred of evidence to suggest _anyone_ besides you and that moron who posted 4 ‘failures’ of the validity who are taking it seriously. That you are taking it seriously, and you characterize those who do as morons speaks volumes.On that note, can you name or point to any commenter here that seems to be taking it seriously besides you? Be careful, I know you fundie idiots claim to have all the answers, but you better be able to point to someone who actually states – seriously- that boobquake disproves the clerics claims and get verification from them _before_ you reply. Get it through your morally self-righteous attitude – this is a joke, everyone knows it’s a joke, and your just pissed off because there _was_ no wrath from your silly god.

  103. Cyn says

    I for one thought the “boobquake” idea was great! I dressed immodestly and it helped the cause and got me more tips and increased business on what would have been an otherwise slow Monday! Thanks for the fun day!!!

  104. Tony says

    Tabatha you are a perfect example of what these radical and oppressive clerics are trying to suppress. You choose to dress immodestly because it suits you – it is your choice not something that someone who is in a tremendous position of power and influence has imposed upon your society. The problem isn’t with Islam it is with, as it always is, people in positions of power and authority abusing that power and authority for their own purposes. If women choose to expose some cleavage or thigh and do so because it suits their needs they should have the same right and choice that you have to dress in an immodest fashion. As I see it Boobquake was not about dressing immodestly it was about mocking a power hungry authoritarian who deserved to be mocked irrespective of his religious affiliation

  105. KyBoiler says

    To the religious nuts claiming, “EARTHQUAKE HAPPENED! ON TV SO IT’S SIGNIFICANT! HURP DERP JESUS!” So sad that you don’t understand the real world. I realize it wasn’t a well controlled official experiment, but basic, high school level statistics show everything was in normal levels. A day with absolutely ZERO earthquakes would have been extraordinarily significant. Geologic activity yesterday doesn’t stand out at all when charted over the last few months, as our well endowed hostess has shown (and cited the sources as you people are so afraid of doing).Thanks for the amusing few days Jen. I’m a Boiler at one of the Statewide Technology campuses, wishing I could be at West Lafayette. Good luck with your classes.

  106. anidaadler says

    Sweetheart, do you not get that on any given day, there are many more earthquakes than we’re aware of? They happen either in places where their influence is not felt, or so deep under the crust of the earth that the tremors aren’t catostrophic on the surface. Statistically, boobquake day did not have more earthquake activity than normal. Nobody’s trying to skew the results. As for hoping Jen will spend time to think about life from a different perspective from what is expected of her, that is what she’s doing already: thinking differently from what is expected of her in a very religious environment.

  107. zen says

    “Even if it was a joke it was done in a mean spirit”.Certainly less of a mean spirit than claiming immodest dress is a root cause of earth quakes.And lets talk about the mean sprightliness of subjugating women to subservient status based on religion? There was nothing mean spirited about the experiment. Cynical? Sarcastic? Certainly, but not mean.You probably don’t like the idea that people mock you silly little god, but you need to get over it, especially if you intend on commenting on an atheist blog. No one took the ‘experiment’ seriously except for your little buddy ‘god bless’, hence the revelation of his ignorance. It was a joke, he didn’t get it, and neither apparently do you.

  108. Martin says

    Hi Jen !Well, some scientific criticism : your experiment is complete nonsense as it is ! You have no conclusive data to rule out boob-caused earth quakes ! BECAUSE (you should have noticed yourself) you only have a short time span to analyse !!!You need a 365d boob-quake-effort to show anything AT ALL !SO, cleavage all year !!!

  109. says

    That’s BS. This has gone a long way toward promoting “feminism” – a movement used to establish and promote equal rights toward women.Jen’s fun display (sorry for the pun) was used to counter an anti-female point of view carried by a majority of conservative religious figures – namely that women lead men into evil, and should be hidden away, silenced, covered up.It was feminism when women burned their bras – why is it not feminism when women protest other coverings – especially coverings dictated by a religion bent on diminishing women.It is a very noble achievement. Feminists should be hailing Jen.

  110. anidaadler says

    The way I read it, the imam seems to say that it’s adultery that causes earthquakes, though he does say it’s women dressing immodestly who cause adultery, and so cause earthquakes. …Maybe we should have a shag-quake day sometime?

  111. tomrush says

    My guess is that in order to create an actual BoobQuake, you would have to gather together over 100,000 or more women in one spot on the planet and all shake your immodestly covered breasts at once. Perhaps then you will have created a BooBQuake!! If you manage to get such an event organized, let me know, I would love to watch!

  112. LyndaLBD says

    Thank you Jennifer – I participated in your Boobquake theory over here in El Paso Texas. I thought it was hilarious. And it just goes to show, the futile attempt by men to suppress, repress and oppress women, for their ego’s sake – Maybe women should take over the world and rule – maybe then we would get something done, and done correctly. (My excuse – I have a husband)

  113. says

    I did. Did you read your own words?As far as I can tell, Jen didn’t fling her top off. Nor did she advocate toplessness. And if she did either, so what? Is your point that women SHOULD follow the dictates of men when deciding what to wear? And if so, how does that help feminism?Isn’t feminism about equal rights for women? Why is it okay for a man to go topless, but not a woman?

  114. Niki M. says

    What about you indeed? No one’s saying those that choose to dress modestly are making a bad or wrong choice. You’ve made a decision about what you choose to wear, good for you. Some women choose to do likewise, some choose not to. And that’s all okay. But please don’t make yourself sound “better” than those that make an opposite choice. “Displaying ones body” or not “Displaying ones body” is not where empowerment comes from. It’s just a choice of what you wear. It’s when it’s not a choice that it’s a problem, and Boobquake wasn’t even about that. It was merely putting some idiots words about immodest women to a psudo-scientific test. That’s all.And surprise, it’s an atheist blog. Get ready to hear disparaging opinions about most religions. It’s just Islam’s turn to get spanked.

  115. eeee says

    This is kind of an aside, but if the world does end at the end of 2012 and the dude is alive after that, what’s to stop him from attributing it to a delayed boobquake?

  116. Godzilla says

    You were the one headlining this event, and THAT is as much cleavage as you could “possibly” show? Lame… where’s your dedication to science?!?

  117. Physchim62 says

    It doesn’t actually matter, beacuse Jen took the median. The median will be the same whether you correct for the logarithmic scale or not. Jen should be slapped on the wrist for calling the median “the mean” in her discussion, but I’m quite sure she knows the difference and it doesn’t actually affect her analysis of the results.

  118. linda says

    Hilarious! You got some religious idiot (why do they always use CAPS?) to take this seriously! To the religious idiot: it is SATIRE (using caps so you read it properly) not a “real” scientific experiment. …It’s curious how lack of intelligence and humor so often seems to coincide with religiousness

  119. ethanol says

    Actually Jen acknowledged on this problem (small sample size). And while it isn’t yet conclusive in the scientific sense, it is an infinitely more valid approach than the unsupported theological assertions it is meant to counter. I realize that I am taking your post to seriously, but I felt like I had to say that anyways.

  120. says

    I actually tried to use the energy released instead of magnitude, but I kept doing something wrong in Excel with my formulas and couldn’t figure out what it was. If I figure it out eventually, I’ll make an update :)

  121. Chris H says

    If someone wanted to do some really serious statistical analysis about cleavage vs earthquakes, I imagine there is already a mountain of data to mine to make correlations.We already know there are several places in the Americas where certain events do increase the number of immodestly dressed women. Spring Break in Florida, So Cal, and Mexico; Mardi Gras in New Orleans; Fantasy Fest in the Florida Keys; Carnival in Rio; the annual Porn Trade Show in Vegas; etc. I’m sure there are others worldwide as well.By taking one or more of these places, and looking at hotel occupancy rates, visitor statistics, temperatures, etc over a long period – IE, years – then comparing that to earthquake data for the same period you should see a corresponding pattern, IF immodestly dressed women do cause earthquakes.

  122. Skeptic says

    Your logic amazes me. Please get real and understand that there are are also other opinions based on real evidence. Your whole response is flawed. It is like trying to defend the existence of the tooth mouse!!

  123. Dude says

    Pat Buchanan and Fred Phelps gloats over Swedish tsunami dead because of Sweden’s tolerance towards gays and lesbians. But I guessed these clowns didn’t attract too much of attention

  124. That Guy from That One Time says

    Still, I believe that it is absolutely imperative that we repeat this study over a longer period of time, so that we can obtain more conclusive results. Maybe a month.You know, for science.

  125. Chris H says

    @Dude – well, it’s easy to dress immodestly for a day. Not so easy to become gay for a day.

  126. anonymous says

    Atheist jumping to the conclusion that the Christian doesn’t think that God can take the punch. Ouch. Ok good thing we got that out of the way… back to the main topic.Sarcasm and cynicism pushed to the max (especially w/ thousands of people backing such a thing) directed towards something or someone turns into hate.Like I said before I thought it was a funny idea to start out w/ but then I took a step back and I realized that w/ so many people laughing it wasn’t funny anymore. This whole deal managed to fit into the “we-do-what-we-want/ Mystical-God (that isn’t Allah)-Bless-Amurikuh-we-hate-Muslims-and-don’t-care-what-they-say” Stereotype. That’s the way they picture us already and we just once again sealed the deal (to save u the time on another God bashing post… that’s whether u believe in God or NOT) I don’t wanna be associated w/ that stereotype and i hope that u don’t either.I’m not expecting you to understand where I’m coming from because it’s almost too big of an idea to fit into modern logic but i figured I owed u a response because you’re missing where I’m coming from entirely.

  127. Skeptic says

    It is very tough to remain impartial on religious matters when one has to defend the existence of factual science. Unfortunately, religious people have made it hard for non-believers to voice their opinion. They speak from their “moral high ground”, and disregard every word that goes against their belief. In this instance I think atheism is making a bit of mockery of “beliefisms” in the same way religion is doing with atheism all the time. Take the knock and realize that not all the people in the world are attracted to a invisible powers.

  128. ATheist Turk says

    You did really good job! I hate all religions especially Islam. My family is Muslim, I used to be Muslim as well. Muslims believe what religion leaders say. They dont even question what they believe what is going on.I hope “Boobquake” will raise awareness about the importance of science :)

  129. Craig says

    Jen, you know that in order to truly be called science, the results need to be repeatible. Therefore, we must have additional studies of a similar vein in order to achieve more data.Please let us know when you plan on doing this. In the immortal words of the Interwebz, “Pics, or it didn’t happen!”

  130. says

    It’s a shame that you missed Jen’s update posts that she wrote – big shock – before the event took place, otherwise you’d realize that your comment is pretty rediculous.Then again, you just blamed Jen for the fact that I showed my cleavage off a little bit yesterday, implying that women can not think for themselves and are so feeble-minded as to easily be led astray, and then tried to guilt her with the coincidence of the Taiwan earthquake (who here missed the fact that seismic activity has been numerous lately, with Haiti, Chile, etc?).”Anyways, I hope one day in the future, you remember these words, and realize that a life that is fueled by arrogance and lived through ignorance will not be a fulfilling life at the end….”You may wish to look up the definition of hypocrite.

  131. says

    “If a significant earthquake on YOUR OWN designated day has not made you think twice, then NOTHING else will.”Are you saying that we caused it? Because man, I didn’t realize my boobs held so much power.

  132. disapointedInYou says

    Jen, you are worse than any religious cleric I’ve ever heard.You wrote on April 19th you wrote: “If not, I’m sure Sedighi can come up with a rational explanation for why the ground didn’t rumble.”When an internationally reported earthquake did happen on April 26th, you decided to dismiss it, and come up with a rational explanation for why the ground DID rumble. Earth tremors might happen everyday, but internationally reported earthquakes do not. On all the days between April 19th and April 25th, there was no reported earthquakes. On April 26th, (the day of your experiment) there was.Secondly, how many of the earthquakes that you pulled from the web data were actually felt by human beings? Or does an earthquake not felt by anybody still count as an earthquake to you?You look like a religious cleric hack fudging away what you “really meant”. It’s pathetic.Something else I am curious about. Do you have any data to tell you how many people were extra immodest for boobquake, rather then just dressing like they always do?

  133. Nabeshin says

    I just wonder how many HR complaints were opened due to this lil’ experiment.Don’t get me wrong, I like a good show of cleavage as much as the next guy (If not more-I’m a self proclaimed BUST Pirate), and I can’t abide organized religion of any kind.So part of me says, “Stick that in yer pipe and smoke it, Mr. Intolerant misogynistic assface.”And another part of me says, “Save for giving a lot of really creepy guys a metric asston of stroke material, what did this really accomplish?”*shrug*Maybe I need to loosen up a little. But there’s my .02-40% of which will most likely be taxed and given to Goldman-Sachs as an additional bailout payment.

  134. extrinsecus says

    haven’t you ever wondered why there exists no disaster in the so-called divine heaven? There is no disaster in heaven cause its girls are extremely immodest. Keep it going and bring peace upon the earth

  135. Zandali says

    All of this is irrelevant, The true question is,What were all those bitches doing out of the kitchen

  136. Ifyouwanttogettechnical says

    Actually depending on the news source you read the earliest reports of the Taiwan earthquake came just before midnight on the 25th. Here are the times of the quake in North America according to their timezone. North America:Monday, April 26, 2010 at 12:29:52 AM (NDT) – Newfoundland Daylight (St. John’s)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 11:59:52 PM (ADT) – Atlantic Daylight (Halifax)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 10:59:52 PM (AST) – Atlantic Standard (San Juan)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 10:59:52 PM (EDT) – Eastern Daylight (New York, Toronto)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 09:59:52 PM (EST) – Eastern Standard (Jamaica)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 09:59:52 PM (CDT) – Central Daylight (Winnipeg, Chicago, Mexico City)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 08:59:52 PM (CST) – Central Standard (Regina, Costa Rica)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 08:59:52 PM (MDT) – Mountain Daylight (Calgary, Denver Mazatlan)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 07:59:52 PM (MST) – Mountain Standard (Phoenix)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 07:59:52 PM (PDT) – Pacific Daylight (Vancouver, Los Angeles, Tijuana)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 06:59:52 PM (AKDT) – Alaska Daylight (Anchorage)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 05:59:52 PM (AHDT) – Aleutian Daylight (Adak)Sunday, April 25, 2010 at 04:59:52 PM (HST) – Hawaii Standard (Honolulu)As you can see this shows that in reference to “Boobquake” the Taiwan Earthquake occurred on April the 25th and not the 26th.

  137. dejahT says

    Oooh, another righteous religionist posting anonymously. We all know where that leads.Please be sure and clean off the keyboard and screen before your mommy comes down to the basement to use the computer.

  138. dejahT says

    Don’t have the guts to post a name, eh?You clearly didn’t get the whole point. Also, either you don’t understand the principles of feminism, or you don’t care to. In either case, you’ve showed us your lack reading comprehension.

  139. dejahT says

    And two points to the idiot who didn’t read the original posts or the updates. And yet, still wants to get all high and mighty. What’s your point? Can’t refute the idea that it was a consciousness-raising exercise and a JOKE!!! So you hid behind high-and-mighty whining masquerading as criticism. Get over it, douchebag. It was a JOKE. Get it? It was meant to be all in fun. If you don’t like was run, invent your own meme and go test it. That’s the beauty of science. Bleh. Why do I argue with idiots?

  140. says

    One of the things I love about science is that you can, in fact, apply it to answer completely silly questions like “do immodestly-clad women cause earthquakes?”.I can think of a few other examples, like using theological arguments to “prove” the existence of the Invisible Pink Unicorn, or the tenured professor in Pratchett’s (?) book who came up with the Very Strong Anthropic Principle, that the universe exists to produce tenured philosophers, but those are few and far between, and rarely used by workers in a field to poke fun at their own field.

  141. Hendel says

    I’m forty-something. And married. Got a great kid and everything. But damn, Jen – your combination of cute/geek/smart/funny… Me -20 would be outside your window with a boom-box on my shoulder. Just sayin’. :-)

  142. readourconstitution says

    As a native So. Cal gal (Christian, btw) who regularly displays her God-given 34Cs by way of cleavage baring clothing I was concerned I might somehow skew your results. Instead I figure my usual mode of “un”dress factors me in as a “control”. My manner of dress is more the stardard than the anomaly here so it has me pondering… could our constant display of our jiggly parts be the true cause of our quakes? Could it ?http://earthquake.usgs.gov/ear… First glance at the overwhelming number of California temblors would seem to bear out the possibility of a probability that the revealing of flesh really can rock your world. But this theory doesn’t play out when you realze that Alaska has a greater average frequency, magnitude and energy release with a lesser show of boobage or ass-cleave. For science, however, I will continue to test this by switching from SoCal winter skank-wear to even skimpier summer attire. All for science of course.

  143. says

    I didn’t see this post until after Boobquake Day, but in a strange turn of events I not only wore a low cut shirt but also attended an erotica writers’ club! Strangely, no earthquakes hit Seattle. Too bad!

  144. dave_13 says

    clearly it succeeded. is it not painfully obvious that the trial was to see if any seismic activity OUT OF THE NORMAL occurred? If all tectonic movement had COMPLETELY COME TO A STANDSTILL, then THAT would have been a sign of some kind of supernatural occurrence. The whole point is that thousands of boobs were temporarily liberated, and nothing seismically out of the ordinary occurred. boobquake was a success. deal with it.

  145. says

    The overwhelming response to Boobquake was American and European, with some Australian and a little Japanese thrown in.Are you claiming that an earthquake in Taiwan is God’s response? If so, God’s ability to aim seriously sucks.And why a statistically insignificant quake placed over 160 miles offshore of Taiwan? How many plates did this quake rattle in Jen’s kitchen cabinet?This is pretty weak sauce, I’m sure you’ll agree.—added:However, I think you are probably right.It probably did fail to convince those people who are so blinded by religion that they will grasp at any straw, no matter how tenuous, to prop up their belief system.To those on the fence, and to those who embrace reason, the foolishness was amply demonstrated.

  146. says

    Maybe we went about this wrong. Maybe our test was invalidated because MEN didn’t do their part. After all the cleric said, “Many women who do not dress modestly… lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes.” So we have to develop a way to ensure men will be properly lead astray and corrupted.

  147. Razzle says

    You used the wrong form of your. This renders your argument invalid. Feel free to try again next boobquake.

  148. Guest says

    oh, i had so much fun doing boobquake! i also went to my friends’ weekly monday Drinking Club (yes, it’s exactly what it sounds like), and got to explain WHY i had a shirt cut down to my sternum on, over and over! everyone else was so bummed they weren’t wearing low-cut shirts. we should do fun science experiments all the time!

  149. Jenna says

    I find it amazing that no one was injured/killed in the 6.9 magnitude quake…could this be the result of divine intervention? Do boobs actually save lives? I think we need more research on this.

  150. CricketOnTheWall says

    You and your methods are awesome! I thoroughly enjoy reading your scientific and theologic wit. Boobquake is the first reason I’ve had to read your blog, but I’m definitely subscribing! Boobquake went over like a fat kid with cake here at ETSU in East Tennessee, and I hope everyone had as much fun with it.

  151. says

    It really doesn’t matter, does it? Those who wish to believe in religion would count any tremblor this week as a “win” for their god.

  152. SaintStephen says

    I dunno, Jen… the spellings of Taiwan and Tehran are pretty similar…LOLMagnificent job on Boobquake 2010!

  153. A-M says

    The part I find very strange about the cleric’s statement, is the area he lives in (Iran) has a lot of seismic activity. And yet the women there are among the most conservatively dressed in the world. However my particular corner of the UK is FULL of scantily-clad ladies nearly all the time, and we NEVER get earthquakes. The earthquake in Taiwan appears to confirm the idea that the sinners aren’t necessarily the targets of god’s wrath. From that I conclude that either god doesn’t care who he punishes for man’s sins (so he isn’t benevolent), or he has piss-poor aim (so he isn’t omnipotent), or he doesn’t know about it (so he isn’t omniscient), or assuming god even exists, there is no correlation between the two. That is from a linguist’s point of view, not a scientist. I don’t know enough about scientific method to question your analysis.

  154. Ifyouwanttogettechnical says

    Those who wish to believe in fanatical religion would count walking too close to a jackhammer and feeling it’s vibration’s as an earthquake and “win”for their god. If no earthquake had occurred they would claim it was god’s will to show mercy. Really there is no “winning” against religious fanatics as they treat every situation as a “win” and merely asign different excuses as to why, even when the results go against their original claims. We typically call it hypocrisy.

  155. says

    I used to own a book, published in 1979, called “The ’80s: A Look Back”. One of my favourite events in it was the “International Year of the Simultaneous Orgasm” – at the, er, climax of which, the Earth did actually move!

  156. 36-D says

    I would like to volunteer for the International Natural Disaster Prevention Team, to travel the world in a push-up bra and spaghetti strap tank protecting communities from earthquakes, tornados, tsunamis, volcanos, etc. I think we could secure funding for this…

  157. Jay says

    The analysis is based on the assumption that any effect must be instantaneous, and we have no reason to assume that. Consider by analogy: “More people have sex on February 14, but there is no increase of births on February 14. Therefore, sex doesn’t cause childbirth.” Or “Nobody died at sea the day the Titanic struck an iceberg (it was just before midnight), so the iceberg collision caused no deaths.”All that boobquake has proven is that any effect it has takes longer than a day. If we want to prove more than that, we need to keep it up permanently, and see if it ever causes a permanent increase in seismic activity.All in favor, say, “Aye!”

  158. Coolwater says

    Your sample size is probably bigger than you realize. I know of four or five immodest women, myself included, who didn’t register, but we did flash cleavage.

  159. Nelson Cruz says

    I think comparing earthquake activity from summer months vs winter months (on the northern hemisphere where most people live) should be enough to disprove that cleric’s idea. If he believed in science at all, that is…

  160. Craig says

    Do manboobs count towards the boobquake?Or should there be a separate experiment to test this theory.Personally I’d like to test the theory that extended facial hair growth correlates with an increasing failure of cognition. Easier to test in males than females however.

  161. says

    Thank you for your boyant spirit and firm support of a pair of really great causes: empiricism over supernatural thinking and women’s liberty over masculine theocratic control. I’m a believer myself, but empiricism trumps any interprretation of any faith. As one pseudoscience skeptic has it: if your religeon is in conflict with scientific observation, your religeon is wrong. Deal with it. Also, if you accept the miracles of the God of the Abrahamic faiths as in the Old Testament, He tends to be pretty definite with miraculous signs. Bush on fire without being consumed? No other possible explanation? O.K., Word from On High time. The plagues? Other possible explanations for each but not likely all together. Perfectly natural phenomena are, by definition poor God messages and you’d think he’d know that.

  162. Sunburn Sarah says

    You are my hero, and I loved participating, all the way in tiny Santa Maria, CA

  163. Ficer67 says

    I liked the Boobquake event. Just goes to show what millions of women are willing to get on board with.Is it possible that the event may need to be extended? I mean, one day of provocative dress is hardly enough to reach a conclusion, even if all the women in the world participate. It would be a more thorough experiment if the ladies dressed this way for a longer period of time.If that does not create an earthquake, then we might want to consider that something was lost in translation between Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi and us. Just a thought.Ficer67

  164. says

    Okay, so the Iranian cleric hasn’t been proven correct.On the other hand, Gnostics everywhere can celebrate proof that G-d is evil. I mean, when I think of how many interviews of boobquake participates there out there, and when I think of how I’m forbidden by my religion to watch any of them, the first think I want to do is shake my fist at G-d. So at least you’ve furthered somebody‘s religious views!:P

  165. Daemon says

    What a stupid idea….. if you think this will work, why not just go on a shooting spree? Seismic activity kills people. My guess is you’re just a guy that wants to see scantily clad women. If you really want to prove something, dress modestly to see if you can DECREASE seismic activity. If you still want to try and increase it, I can only hope you buried in a landslide caused by your own increased activity.

  166. says

    A friend of mine just pointed out that absent the proof of the existence of G-d, one cannot prove that the Gnostics were correct regarding G-d.So how about this instead: this experiment shows that given the hypothetical assumption of a G-d whose laws are those of the Bible, then this G-d’s characteristics conform to those postulated by the Gnostics.

  167. But what if... says

    How do you know there’s not a delay between the immodest event and the resulting earthquake? What if your assumption that the result would be instantaneous is wrong? After all, we are talking about an immortal god who holds grudges against puny immortals here… I mean, I guess just because he has nothing else better to do with infinity (plus one).

  168. says

    I thought plate techtonics caused earthquakes? Silly me. Love the boobquake thing. I missed it this time, but I’m always showing some cleavage. God made me that way. :)

  169. Crux Australis says

    Jen, I think I love you. For your brain. Definitely your brain. But you have nice jugs too. But mostly for your brain.

  170. eg says

    I think you’re really missing the point. How could any scientific study be done in this way? Yes it’s ad hoc. This action and it’s statement was simply an absurd response to an absurd statement. It wasn’t saying anything about “Islam is wrong” or anything, it was simply saying “someone says earthquakes are caused by immodesty.” That’s the same as saying “a sunrise is caused by the rooster’s cock-a-doodle-doo.” So, in turn, boobquake (another absurd statement) was made in response. If you can’t see the absurdity of both the statement and the response, then you you are simply taking the absurd and turning into the obscene. This is what creates conflict, which, I feel, we just need less of.

  171. Robyn says

    Boobquake was fabulous, and I think it would be awesome if it became an annual thing! To bring awareness to the ridiculous excuses people make to suppress women, and general breast health.

  172. Benito says

    THIS MOMENTOUS DAY!Not one day in anyone’s life is an uneventful day, no day without profound meaning, no matter how dull and boring it might seem, no matter whether you are a seamstress or a queen, a shoeshine boy or a movie star, a renowned philosopher or a Down’s syndrome child.Because in every day of your life, there are opportunities to perform little kindnesses for others, both by conscious acts of will and unconscious example.Each smallest act of kindness – even just words of hope when they are needed, the remembrance of a birthday, a compliment that engenders a smile – reverberates across great distances and spans of time, affecting lives unknown to the one whose generous spirit was the source of this good echo, because kindness is passed on and grows each time it’s passed, until a simple courtesy becomes an act of selfless courage years later and far away.Likewise, each small meanness, each thoughtless expression of hatred, each envious and bitter act, regardless of how petty, can inspire others, and is therefore the seed that ultimately produces evil fruit, poisoning people whom you have never met and never will.All human lives are so profoundly and intricately entwined – those dead, those living, those generations yet to come – that the fate of all is the fate of each, and the hope of humanity rests in every heart and in every pair of hands.Therefore, after every failure, we are obliged to strive again for success, and when faced with the end of one thing, we must build something new and better in the ashes, just as from pain and grief, we must weave hope, for each of us is a thread critical to the strength – the very survival – of the human tapestry.Every hour in every life contains such often-unrecognized potential to affect the world that the great days for which we, in our dissatisfaction, so often yearn are already with us; all great days and thrilling possibilities are combined always in THIS MOMENTOUS DAY! – Rev. H.R. WhiteExcerpt from Dean Koontz’s book, “From the Corner of His Eye”.It embodies the idea of how the smallest of acts can have such a profound effect on each of our lives.

  173. QuifMaster says

    This project was inherently flawed to begin with. Boobs cause tornadoes, no earthquakes. It’s miniskirts that cause earthquakes!

  174. Steeev says

    Lots of earthquakes occur in the “Ring of Fire” around the Pacific Ocean. The Pacific Ocean is surrounded by… beaches! Coincidence?

  175. islandbrewer says

    “Secondly, how many of the earthquakes that you pulled from the web data were actually felt by human beings? Or does an earthquake not felt by anybody still count as an earthquake to you?”So, you’re proposing that, in response to women showing cleavage, God shows his disdain by sending insignificant earthquakes to places where no one will ever notice them?Wow! Beware his wrath! You might just miss it if you don’t monitor it closely!

  176. DobyGS says

    This experiment was so much better than the post-hoc claims that Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell usually make after natural disasters occur blaming homosexuality and deals with the devil.

  177. Noofies says

    “you manage to keep your own circle of fans”I suspect she increased her circle of fans, probably by quite a few. This middle-aged feminist is a new fan, as are at least a dozen of MY circle of fans – all of whom bared as much skin yesterday as was possible without causing traffic accidents all over the country.

  178. islandbrewer says

    I’m wondering when people will start demanding that we “teach the controversy” in public schools.Will Geology and Earth Science classes include copies of “Juggs” and “Bigguns” with their textbooks? Will the educational filmstrip industry move to the San Fernando Valley?

  179. ethanol says

    I hadn’t actually noticed the whole mean/median mix up. It is true that the median value wouldn’t be changed by not converting from logarithmic scale, but its also not the value you would want to use in this comparison. If the Taiwan quake had been a magnitude 10, the median value for the day would have been unchanged, so it really tells you more about the the low-magnitude quakes. Of course I’m not sure how I would go about making these comparisons, so I greatly appreciate the link in Jen’s edit. While Dr. Braile doesn’t average the previous earthquakes, he certainly puts yesterday’s quakes in context shows that they don’t stand out at all against the activity of last month.

  180. says

    Just saw your article on The Daily Beast, and something you brought up touched upon what had occured to me earlier today but didn’t want to mention because I was afraid of sounding like a dick.You mention that you don’t want to go to Seattle work known as “the Boobquake girl.” I don’t think you have to worry about this. I think Boobquake is one of those “twice as bright, twice as fast” things. This is the type of viral meme that just explodes and is forgotten about as quickly as it spread. Unless you plan a series of follow-ups (and accept turning into a one-hit wonder), this will just be remembered as one of those “news of the weird” things that can pad a few minutes of airtime and which people forget about in a week or two.Not to take away from your success or write-off all the attention you’ve gotten…but getting people to spread a sex-related joke online isn’t quite the same as fundamentally altering their view of the world or how they challenge preconceptions.Hopefully you’re not going to lose the thousands of new followers and ‘friends’ you’ve gotten. Well, the bandwagon people, sure, the people who just wanted to show that they’re ‘with it.’ But your stock in the atheist community has certainly gone up and, best case scenario, the people who actually were in on the joke (as in, understood the real science and satire of it) will stick around and you’ve gotten a lot more, actually thinking, followers.

  181. Susan says

    Boobquake was an excellent idea. Congrats, Jen, on blending science, feminism, and cleavage in a thought-provoking way. As an ecologist, I have often wished for a control planet. But I must say, I hope not all the women there have to wear burkas!

  182. Claire says

    CAN THERE BE ANOTHER BOOBQUAKE NEXT YEAR?I found out about it the day after, and I would have loved to participate. (Also, because I am taking statistics right now, im actually understanding all your graphs and stuff. Weird.)

  183. Anodesu says

    I am SOOO down for boobquake 2011!I shall be buying a tshirt this summer once I obtain some money!

  184. geraldcummings says

    You are a ASSHOLE! Because of people like you I got to remove my shoes before I get on an airplane. Take your rug and go to Mecca.

  185. efrique says

    Kudos on showing stupidity up for what it is.[This reduction effect in your graph – the anti-boobquake effect, if you like – is interesting. Maybe it only falls short of significance because of the small sample size. Replication appears to be called for]I support the call for a submission to the Annals of Improbable Research – this looks like a strong candidate for it.

  186. says

    Jen, Congratulations on a splendid skeptical response to an Imam with Issues! Like others, this has brightened an otherwise dreary day – thanks!

  187. says

    Actually, it was an unseasonably warm and sunny day here in California. There were an awful lot of cute little sundresses bouncing around for so early in the season, including the one I was wearing. Just sayin’….

  188. AussieSkeptic says

    I can’t believe how many people just don’t get it.What Jen did was mockery, and if just one fanatic feels mocked then more power to her.No it’s not real science, nor does it tow the current feminist line; but it’s clever, funny and makes a point.Well done to all the women who took part, unfortunately I couldn’t (it’s a chromosome thing).

  189. The weasel says

    I’m sorry to be the advocatus diaboli here but for the sake of scientific method: your experimental setup is bollucks! The chain of cause and effect proposed by Sedighi involves young men being led astray and subsequent moral decay resulting in god’s wrath. Both are processes that require years to take place. To properly test the imam’s hypothesis it would require women of a certain area to dress immodestly over a period of (my guess) 10 to 20 years. Since god is supposed to be fair (in a really odd and indirect way) this should increase the number of earthquakes IN THAT AREA. This experimental setup is quite time intensive and requires a lot of effort so luckily for us, we can test it by analysing empirical data. Has aboriginal populations getting in contact with western civilisation and subsequent spread of t-shirts and short instead of for example penis gourds and nothing decreased the number of earthquakes in the respective areas? Has the inreasingly immodest fashion in the western world over the last 10 centuries lead to an increase of earthquakes in europe and north america? Now go and redeem yourself, I’m eager to see your results.

  190. hoozardere says

    But maybe y’all just need to keep trying?? Could be, if you keep the cleavage on display for long enough, one or more easily distractable deities who had been attending to other issues elsewhere will finally notice and give you the spike (so to speak) in earth moving activities (so to speak) that you’re looking to test. Science demands a sustained and longitudinal (um) study!!And this is not just because I’m a guy. Not at all. It’s all for the science!

  191. Belamocity says

    Sympathizing with a Muslim, no less! Since this Christian and a few other tards like her can agree with a Muslim on this, maybe they will next concede that they are naively worshiping the same god under different names! :O

  192. Belamocity says

    You dress modestly because you are afraid that if you show your body, you’ll get raped or called a whore and such. Your fear is irrational. Do you wear a sweater and jeans on the beach? Also, what you call modesty is shameless sexual advertisement compared to what others, Muslims, for example, consider modest. Stop being so self-centered and try to see the world from other perspectives.

  193. Belamocity says

    Jen, you’re friends with a friend of mine, she and I had art classes at Purdue together.Anyway, you’re brilliant, and witty. Don’t listen to these haters and religious nuts and bible-thumpers. If they don’t get a joke, don’t get upset about it. I especially lol at the fools stressing that your “experiment” was a failure and then proceeding to give you tips and instructions. They are just helping to make you famous, any way.

  194. flitandersen says

    If “Slick” was still in the WH you wouldn’t have to smell it – you’d be drowning in it…

  195. EdenBunny says

    From the end ofhttp://www.blaghag.com/2010/04… which was posted on April 21, well in advance of boobquake day and the continuation of :”And to the scientists … I know many earthquakes happen on a daily basis, so we’re looking to see if Boobquake significantly increases the number or severity of earthquakes. Or if an earthquake strikes West Lafayette, IN and only kills me, that may be good evidence of God’s wrath as well (I’m not too concerned). And yes, I know I need a larger sample size to make this good science. Maybe I’ll include Mardi gras in my calculations. “In any event, there seems to be some confusion regarding the Taiwan earthquake as to exactly what time it happened. Although in Taiwan, it happened around 11 AM on April 26th, in Indiana the time (EDT or CDT) was about 11 PM or 10 PM on April 25. Want proof? Go to:http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_d…This means that these women’s mammaric seismological abilities were so potent that the result happened even faster than instantaneously! As it can thus be seen that the effects of female immodesty transcend even the limits of normal time flow, it is very likely that the Taiwan quake was just a warning. Looking at Jen’s graph of recent earthquake frequency, it is impossible to miss that peak near the end of February. Certainly that peak cannot have been caused by anything other than the boobquake event.

  196. Darryl says

    Control Planet 1 – no humansControl Planet 2 – Burka!Control Planet 3 – no clothes

  197. Cheese N. Quakers says

    Really? Why isn’t the sample size 24, with each hour separating out a different 15 degree portion of the earth? You could even argue such a sampling strategy helps counteract any rotational angle bias. Really, it is still an open question as to how you slice up the data to the point where calling in statistical tests is reasonable.And I don’t know much about earthquake intensity and frequency distributions but I have doubts on assuming they are Gaussian, which calls into question the posted confidence intervals. Or, at least, I’m pretty sure the underlying distribution is an important question to look at before one starts defining the analysis and criterion for rejecting the null hypothesis. Maybe the observed distribution should be the dependent variable?It’s all good. I just love science that starts out with an immodest proposal.

  198. Cheese N. Quaker says

    I don’t see how it makes a huge difference to the main point of the experiment. The cleric claimed immodesty of females CAUSES immoral acts in men, and these in turn cause earthquakes. Measuring the earthquakes is just a proxy measure for direct measurement of immorality of men, which might be harder to objectively measure, and is less sexy since it does not start measuring the interference of God/Quetzalcoatl on plate tectonics. Even if you can only conclude the increased immodesty did not yield an increase in men behaving badly, its a win for the experimenter. If you can’t rule out men behaved worse but can conclude it did not affect earthquakes, the cleric is still a boob and it is a win for the experimenter.

  199. justanothermommyblog says

    I thought that this was absolutely hilarious and brilliant. Congrats on such a huge exposure on the net. Question now is, What are you going to do with it now?

  200. Laraesque says

    Our scientist hostess did already suggest that in various interviews. Now to get funding.

  201. Laraesque says

    Your arguments do not hold up. There are hundreds of tremors every day. There are often temblors that are felt. Only analysis of the total activity is really valid. We could have had “the big one” in California, and still wouldn’t have proven a connection. It could all be coincidence unless we can repeatedly cause earthquakes. Besides, you are getting emotional over something that started out as a joke. There are no counts of total participants, no measure of relative amount of immodesty, no correlation of modesty density to distance from epicenters. So cool down and let her run the numbers. The results were very preliminary. In the mean time, check out the USGS site to get a good cross-section of seismic activity, at least in the U.S.

  202. Johno says

    I think what the cleric was saying, is if all women who don’t wear bra’s jumped up and down at the same time then it would cause an earthquake by their immoral dress code.

  203. Nabeshin says

    Barring that, a few facial and/or adominal contusions. Of course, this is highly on cup size and the effects of gravity over time.For those playing along at home, we’re talking perky/kneeshooters.

  204. Pangolin says

    I think scientific rigor demands an annual repeat of the experiment until we get it right. More immodest dress, more cleavage, more men witnessing in order to be properly led morally astray……I wasn’t led nearly morally astray enough on monday and therefore believe the experimental design had flaws. Repeat!

  205. Jon says

    Don’t give up now… we need to keep trying. Less clothes each time, more women. Do it every Monday until we destroy the world. Maybe we blokes were too restrained, could it have been our fault? Maybe we needed to be more influenced by the boobs? If that’s the case I apologise. Next time I promise to look more, have more wicked thoughts and stray from my wife as a result.

  206. says

    It was interesting to discover that Boobquake Day coincided with Charles Richter’s birthday. I had a quick peek over at Wikipedia to do a bit of fact-checking and sure enough, there it was. Judging by the look on his face in his portrait photo, he’s enjoying the sight of all the extra boobage on display.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C…Way to go!

  207. Zak says

    Great job! Although thorough and in depth, however, I think you missed one important factor that initiates an earthquak; it is cup SIZE. I think small sizes have no real effect. Please do some research on this factor and post for our benefit.

  208. says

    A friend of mine suggested that the best way to fully evaluate the scientific nature of #boobquake would be to have the @Mythbusters follow up on it. I’m sure Jamie and Adam could quantify BjH in the name of science. :)

  209. EvilMikey says

    You didn’t dress immodestly enough or near enough to me to verify the results ;-)The religious point of view will likely be (I’m guessing I’m an Atheist): –However more women converted to islam and dressed more modestly countering the effects and god/allah/GWB (Texans need their god listing too) moves in mysterious ways. He/She/It will punish you in the future.As an Atheist I say: –Way to go, MFW!

  210. Orwells Ghost says

    I think to further prove the point is to have another in order to silence the people pointing to the earthquake in Taiwan.With a 37% probability rate of a 6-6.9 magnitude earthquake daily, 2 more experiments would officially prove there is absolutely no connection.Boobquake: The Aftershocks I & II.Do them back to back over this or next weekend, and when no earthquake happens…

  211. TM says

    Clearly you don’t have enough data for conclusive results. To get a proper sample size, I think boobquake should continue daily for one year. This will also help neutralize orbital position variables.

  212. oncruydtfritskrom says

    It was an extremely useful experiment. I suggest to make every 26th of April into a BOOBQUAKE DAY! Within the fine lines of decency, but at the utmost brink of challenging and ALWAYS smiling we MUST be able to shake, shock & quake the earth. Sorry, not WE, ’cause I’m an man.

  213. jjohnson says

    @Jen McCreight I think what happened or didn’t was your ugly flap cleavage canceled out many other cleavages. You interfered with your own experiment. Bad show for a scientist, bad show.

  214. says

    One sample isn’t enough, we need more data sets. And since showing leg is, to some, a provocative action as well, I suggest a legquake too. For more data. For Science. Just saying (OK, maybe pleading).

  215. get over it says

    If god were trying to prove Jen and the rest of the rational people wrong, the earthquake would have been bigger and it would have been in Indiana. -Wait… we don’t know how many women in Taiwan participated in Boobquake. It could be that it happened there based on the amount of participation. GET OVER IT! It’s too bad that you’re unable to appreciate what this “experiment” was really about. I am pleased to see that the negativism is minimal, it slightly increases my faith in humanity.Jen – you did a fabulous thing here! You brought people together in a fun and harmless manner to make a statement all over the world. We need more people like you. You deserve the fan-base and fame!BTW…If there is a god I believe that s/he would be very proud of Jen and the rest of us who supported boobquake for the peaceful, light-hearted tactic. I can’t believe that there could be a “force” or “being” superior to us that would approve of or encourage the evil doings and words that are linked to religious beliefs.

  216. getoverit says

    Not really. It certainly got people talking and that will be the first step in making real change.

  217. women_are_better says

    Jen, you RULE, Sister. You did such a great job using power instead of judgmental force. It is very “soft power” of you! This is how women use their power.Now , please dont stop with your momentum. May I suggest to use it as a platform for social change?How can we change the societal issue that women cannot show their breasts legally in public? I feel like males have a major mental issue with this…I dont care what males say about it. They have a million excuses that are all unacceptable. And we still can’t take our shirts off without either getting harassed by males or arrested. Jen,( or any of the other women in this forum), what do you think?

  218. huh? says

    As a male, I wouldn’t have a problem with topless women. I would keep my comments to myself and just bask in the glory that are boobs. But aren’t women more judgmental than men?

  219. Ali Baba says

    No one said that the earthquake would occur in the exact same day as the breast exposure. There could be a lag time.

  220. Mark says

    This definitely has my seal of approval. There are all sorts of religious claims like this, it’s good to see someone proving one of them wrong (though it shouldn’t have been necessary haha).

  221. Darryl says

    Tee heeDaemon… You one funnee guy…You change name again ! I like old one… anonymous name silly.

  222. Darryl says

    God knocks on Valhalla’s gates:”yo, Odin… My aim is off… can I borrow some of your OMNI-TUNE?Thanks,Golf Tuesday?”

  223. Darryl says

    YupOak tree parts everywhere, and a few people had to enjoy a candle-lit dinner.Wait… that might actually have been fun!

  224. Darryl says

    Jen is Minoring in Psychology.I understood that I was part of the experiment. (I was born in the year of the rat – I understand experiments really, really well)Didn’t you know…(Oh, sorry, Jen, wasn’t I supposed to tell them?)

  225. Guest says

    …and you think your science is any better? if there ISN’T a god, may the universe itself rise up and smash you for being a right twat.

  226. Chris says

    I don’t find your results compelling. Was the number of women who showed their cleavage during the test period significantly greater than the number of women who usually show their cleavage? A better test would be to have a huge population of women around the world cover up and see if the number of earthquakes decreases.

  227. r89 says

    Clearly religious nuts have no understanding of the scientific method, not that this was unexpected, seeing as they’d likely have been busy quoting scripture whenever someone bothered to try and enlighten them, but to not be able to understand that 137 days out of 365 (0r 366) doesn’t detract from the statistical result was surprising.(seeing one play around with the term ‘ad hoc’ was hilarious though, they would do well to understand the distinction between legitimate analysis and cover-up justifications despite the fact that both occur with hindsight!)All obvious flaws were acknowledged in the article and without being presumptuous, may be easily remedied by making this a longitudinal study (annual perhaps, going by the nature of the phenomenon) and involving a great number of participants (so that even if the distribution involved is unknown the central limit theorem will guarantee that a confidence interval from the Gaussian distribution is a good approximation. the theorem’s assumptions not being clearly in violation), who would normally wear what should be found to be cleric-approved clothing. Along with perhaps some way of quantifying exactly what the critical level of immodesty is (this may be the tricky part, since it might involve getting the concerned Iranian cleric to ‘sign off on’ suitable attire! Or perhaps perusing Iranian obscenity laws will help. If neither of these work out, it’s likely a safe bet to make the event topless).I’d also like to point out that this wouldn’t be ‘pseudo science’ so long as the scientific method is adhered to. Just because we don’t know the cause of a link between phenomena (no underlying theory proposed, the mechanics of which are clear) doesn’t make the process of testing for one pseudo science!It’s a little redundant to keep on pressing the point when it is obvious that experiments, no matter how well crafted and executed can never make or break a claim- what they DO is provide an inductive basis for proceeding under the assumption that a claim is true (or not), which is a fine functional approach.

  228. ZaC says

    Ignorance is bliss! This is the world we live in now. Instead of been modest, women group up for the Clevage competition and try to prove clreic wrong. Give me a break. To be honest it just shows how arrogant this world has become. In islam woman have given more respect and rights than a man and been asked to treat woman with respect and dignity. If some ignorant muslim does something wrong then why we become so stereotype and point that all muslims are like this? Clreic made his point and done his homework! so there you go more woman joined to show clevage instead of been modest.

  229. Rob H says

    Good effort. I haven’t read everything to make sure my comment isn’t duplicated – but doesn’t this analysis merely show that your own effort doesn’t add any more earthquakes, yet all earthquakes every day may still be caused by females baring too much?? You need a control period where all females are dressed in burqas, and then a test period where they’re not. Good luck =)

  230. sam says

    :)))And one more thing – there is a possibility, that it affects not immediately – maybe it takes a year, week, month ?

  231. says

    Dear Jen, you may be interested to know that boobquake has reverberated in Italy. Here is my modest popularization of your initiative on my blog, “Cassandra Effect”http://ugobardi.blogspot.com/2…I have also translated the term “boobquake” into an Italian neologism “tetterremoto” which can’t be back-translated but I hope you’ll like the sound. It is all very amusing, but in the end you are doing good science! Keep at it.

  232. Alice says

    Before you condemn superstition entirely, think aobut how many times you’ve said “bless you” or “Gesundheit” when someone sneezes. :)

  233. says

    As a Christian (who isn’t going to spend time here promoting his beliefs, which are based in faith rather than science)… I say, “You go, girl.”To the Right Wing/Conservative Christian Wing of the Churches: If you attribute physical phenomena to God, expect people to demand scientific proof. If you can’t provide it, don’t attribute physical phenomena to God. “EPPE SI MUOVE.”

  234. lozerette says

    “Many women who do not dress modestly … lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes”So it isn’t the immodest dress that causes earthquakes, it’s the “corrupted chastity” and adultery. Now we need a counter-experiment: Keep it in Your Pants Day – during which all men stop screwing around, and we see if earthquakes significantly decrease.If they do, then it’s not women’s immodest dress that is the problem, but rather a lack of will power on the part of the men. =P

  235. B Lowdes says

    Really? the very idea of feminism triggers my gag reflex! Get a new hobby, the fact that you think women are still oppressed in todays society is not only bunk but really sad as well. I weap for you.

  236. Steve Rapaport says

    Obviously, it takes however long until the next big earthquake. Sedighi will let us know that when it happens. :D

  237. says

    You need to get out of wherever you are more to see that women are still oppressed in many parts of the world. If you are a woman, why don’t you see how far you get when you try to go out on your own in Saudi Arabia, or try to drive a car there?PS I think you meant “weep”.

  238. B Lowdes says

    Good points Tim and I’m sorry about “weep”. However, I can’t begin to think that this ignorant woman is going to change the abuse women in the middle east suffer. Ya ya, bring attention to their stories and whatever else, bs, all you’re doing is clogging FB space and wasting the time of those who shouldn’t be concerning themselves with this nonsense. Kinda like Jen and her attemts to make the world a better place one Godless loser at a time.

  239. Keena says

    I think you missed the point; the experiment was not to disprove God, but to show that, if indeed there is a God, He/She/It does not take such great offense to immodestly dressed women as to cause earthquakes. Disproving Sedighi’s thesis WAS the point.

  240. Keena says

    This was to protest sexism in the “Middle East”, not sexism in the “West”, which are, for the most part, 2 different forms of sexism. This was to protest telling women they must cover up, not to protest telling women they must dress to attract men.

  241. Keena says

    Maybe you would realize that you’re not being logical if you stop to think about it.It’s not about whether an earthquake is covered by the news, it’s about whether or not it is STATISTICALLY significant.If, because of the extra attention given to earthquakes by the media that day who were aware of Boobquake, all the media reported a 3.0 earthquake occuring in the middle of the Pacific, would that have made it any more or less statistically or physically significant? no.

  242. Keena says

    The Cleric “done his homework”? Do you mean that you agree that immodestly dressed women cause earthquakes?And do you call having no choice over what you wear, not being allowed to drive, not being allowed to be alone in the presence of a man who is not your husband, not allowed to leave your home without a male escort, not allowed to go to school without acid being thrown on your face “having more respect and rights”? Because all these things I’ve mentioned have happened to women in predominantely muslim countries.I would like to state that I don’t believe this is because they are _Muslim_ countries, but because they are largely run by religious fanatics. If a country was run by fanatics of _any_ religion I would expect similarities.

  243. arseholozone says

    Part of an earlier email. – June 25 – 27 G8/G20 is in Canada. A good time for round two? …To keep things genuine and filter out the dozens of spamers you might consider putting together a BoobQuaker’s page of links. Assemble a group of bright minded ladies from each country or region. Canada – I nominate Elizabeth May. Alaska USA – Jeanne Devon. Continue to attract, involve all kinds. Please don’t leave me out.

  244. says

    In islam woman have given more respect and rights than a manLiar. Examples:1) A man can divorce a woman at will, the same is not true in reverse.2) A man can marry up to four women, the same is not true in reverse.3) A woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man in sharia.4) After divorce, the man has the right to keep the children, not the woman.Tell me, ZaC, what is the point of telling such an obvious lie?

  245. says

    I have also translated the term “boobquake” into an Italian neologism “tetterremoto” which can’t be back-translatedHuh? Anything that can be translated can be back-translated, that’s the whole point. If the back-translation by a second translator does not give you more or less what you started with, then either the back-translation or the original translation was incompetent. This is used to check translations of international questionnaires in particular. At any rate, those are the only back-translation assignments I ever see. Sometimes you find that the first translator has indeed misunderstood something. You give “tetterremoto” to someone who has never heard of BQ and it will be translated as “Tit Earthquake” or similar, depending on the favourite demotic term for mammaries. That’s good enough for government work, as they say; the back-translation would be adjudged a success since it ends up with the same meaning as the original; it’s not required to yield identical wording, since English has so many synonyms. (I don’t speak Italian, but your term is transparent enough to someone with a little Spanish. I see that the Swedes and Germans have also created their own neologisms. As I said earlier, I would bet folding money that Boobquake makes at least the shortlists for 2010 neologisms.)

  246. Ugo Bardi says

    Well, of course “tetterremoto” can be back-translated into “tit quake”, but it won’t maintain the same flavor of combining two words “tette” and “terremoto” into a single one, “tetterremoto”, cutting out a piece of each. Oh, well, it is just for fun, anyway…..

  247. Brian says

    Arrogance? Wow, son!! You are just so full of yourself aren’t you? Listen to you talking. You’re saying she’s arrogant because she questions religion? No/ What arrogance is is making a statement such as “Immodesty causes earthquakes” and not even have any proof to back it up. All she did was put this idea to the test…and did it in the spirit of fun. And oh BTW, genius (note the sarcasm, in case I have to spell it out for you) she already KNOWS that earthquakes happen on a daily basis!! Her poi t of this was experiment was to prove that thousands of women wearing bikinis or low cut tops aren’t gonna have any drastic changes on the earth’s plate tectonics. So you wanna sit there and try to tell somebody off so you can feel good about yourself…well yaaaayyy good for you. Here’s a cookie! In all seriousness I’ve read your so-called evidence as to why you think she failed and I hate to piss on your parade, son, but you’ve proven nothing!! All you have is a bunch of whiny, self-righteous arguments as to why you think her immodesty is immoral and unjust, based on your own personal religious beliefs. And in doing so, you’ve ironically done nothing but prove YOUR OWN ARROGANCE. Now, how you feel about immodesty or whatever you call it is up to you, but before you decide to go on your little soapbox and start preaching hellfire and brimstone, I suggest YOU get your facts straight before running off at the mouth… or in your case, talking outta your ass.

  248. gamoonbat says

    I would not trust the guy with his hand in his pocket. He looks like he is hiding something to me.

  249. ndg says

    I hope this hasn’t already been said but I think this result needs to be reproduced before we can take it seriously. At least weekly, and hopefully near my place :)

  250. barb6984 says

    Since I am a person who is about 110 lbs. overweight, and it was too cold to go to the beach, I had to limit my participation to a T-shirt and capris. Any less would have been an assault on the eyes!I am a religious person who happens to believe that God and science are not incompatible. I also happen to love science, especially biology, though I am quite familiar with basic plate tectonics. I also happen to believe that God has better things to do than cause calamities simply to prove a point, Old Testament stories non-withstanding. While I know that this particular “study” was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, I would love to see a more rigorous study done, if only to demonstrate that you can’t blame women for the ills of the world. People can point to Sodom and Gomorrah as “proof” that God does such things, but they conveniently forget that God was willing to spare an entire city of sinners if even only 5 just men could be found. The point of that story was that God does not punish the innocent just to make sure the guilty are punished. Anyone who claims otherwise had better hope that God is willing to temper justice with mercy; for as they judged, so will they be judged. In the meantime, continue on with science. It’s fascinating, and fun!

  251. says

    If that is what you meant, and I do take your point, I think I overreacted to the term “back-translation”, sorry. That does have a specific technical meaning, you see, whereas the loss of flavour is another thing. I’m a pedantic nerd, so sue me :-)

  252. Sam says

    O.k. Showing the boobs didn’t cause any quakes. But I am sure if Jen and her friends around the world take off their pants in public and open their legs (wide open), that certainly cause a strong quake. I am sure all men would be present to scientifically document the event. Jen would you please give this a try?

  253. Saeed says

    Liar. Examples:1) A man can divorce a woman at will, the same is not true in reverse.2) A man can marry up to four women, the same is not true in reverse.3) A woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man in sharia.4) After divorce, the man has the right to keep the children, not the woman.Tell me, ZaC, what is the point of telling such an obvious lieKnockgoats, you are wrong:1-Women can divorce man if they mention it as a provision to the marriage.2-Yes men can marry up to 4 women because they physically need more sex than women. Taking this away from men was a reason that men fall for prostitution. On the other hand, In islam, women can be with different men but only one at a time.3-This is not the case for all testimonals, but only in the case of criminal acts and that is because women are more sensetive than men.4-That’s again depends on the situation of the man. If he is not suitable (mentally, financially etc) the children go to the woman.So before considering something as a lie, you better investigate more about it.

  254. Pullyourboobsin says

    There was another small earthquake here in Haiti today.Thanks a bunch.

  255. sandyvc says

    All changes have to start with people being aware that a change is needed. People have short memories and need to be reminded. Apparently in this time period, they go out of their way to forget. Street theatre and rabble rousing have stood the test of time. Things are different now than in genuinely revolutionary times; people in general do not care about anything beyond their small circle. This ignorant woman did a damn fine job with this and producing amazing LOL statistics. Great fun and international. There is never anything wrong with giving your best shot nor with trying new things. The Widow’s Mite story tells it all.

  256. sandyvc says

    I hope it chokes you. A gag is not good enough for bullies like you though a gag might do the trick. I have no idea what “weap” means but I will not weep for you.

  257. sandyvc says

    I know lots of wonderful men who can use their whole brain and I would not wish this fate on them. It should only be on men who have openly spit on feminism on this topic. :)

  258. sandyvc says

    I don’t think most people do it out of superstition. I think it is a cultural habit. I only do it to be polite. If it were superstition, maybe people would say it when they are alone to themselves.

  259. sandyvc says

    I am pedant but, hay zeus, that was way over the top for a bit of fun. Do you trash everyone who plays with words?

  260. sandyvc says

    Good grief. Ignorance is hilarious. No one thought it was science. No one thought it was about earthquakes. The upshot was that it went global and it had Muslim men letting us know they were for women’s rights. It allowed Muslim women to have a bit of naughty fun responding. Of course, it brought out the jerks and bigots of all kinds. That, in turn, led folks all over the world join together to stick it to the bullies.

  261. sandyvc says

    My son works in a college and is trying to learn more about Islam. He talked to an Imam at an information event who gave him a Koran. The translation was hard core and very bigotted. Then he bought one with a different translation and it was much milder. He is disturbed by how many times the book orders the death of all none Muslims. He has not read any other “holy” books so it is not through comparison he finds the Koran violent and filled with hatred. Compared to the holy books of other faiths; which I have read it seems to be more of a guide to day to day life and war than a spiritual manual as is, say, the Diamond Sutra or the Psalms in the Jewish Books. On the other hand, the Koran is very decent about women and their place and roles. I see no veils or burkas or hiding behind a screen to worship. Which is it?

  262. Paul D'Aura says

    Study the records on earthquake frequency where women dress scantily ( Miami Beach) vs where they don’t (Iceland or Japan)

  263. lozerette says

    2-Yes men can marry up to 4 women because they physically need more sex than women. Taking this away from men was a reason that men fall for prostitution. On the other hand, In islam, women can be with different men but only one at a time.Pardon me while I finish laughing… Must not be talking about the women I know. Once a woman has discovered what really pleases her and accepts her desires, they tend to be as insatiable (if not more so) as men in my experience.Instead of more wives to make up for their current wife’s (perceived) failure, how about a little willpower? Even better, take the time to find out what makes her tick and let good times be had by all?To your other points:1 – Do men also have to mention it as a provision? Or is it just their right? ‘Cause that still seems a bit unfair to me, considering that most people don’t go into a marriage intending to need a divorce.3 – What a sexist outlook. There are no sensitive men and all women burst into tears at the drop of a hat?4 – Personally, I think the Western tradition of awarding custody to the mother in almost all cases is sexist. The children should go to the best parent. Period.

  264. Skeptic says

    Two points. You did not measure the level of immodesty before and after to control it such that any changes in the earthquakes – frequency and/or magnitude – correlates with the level of immodesty. For all we know, people who turned up may already be dressing “immodestly” every other day. Secondly, what the cleric said was that dressing immodestly leads to lost of chastity and adultery, which leads to earthquake. You jumped his hypothesis by only measuring the relationship between immodesty and earthquakes. Earthquakes, to him, are caused by adultery and lost of chastity.I propose to redo the experiment, and this time round with greater scientific rigor. Don’t want any pseudo-science do we?

  265. says

    But cleavage in the tropics doesn’t just cause earthquakes in the tropics. Don’t you remember that God has horrible aim? Otherwise, why would all the tornadoes be in the religious parts of America?

  266. says

    “No right-minded person, no religious person, would change his/her mind because of ‘experiment.'” Do you mean THIS “experiment,” or did you just admit that evidence does not cause religious people to change their minds?

Leave a Reply