Why did a keynote speaker overestimate his research skills?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

`

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is an article by John Eades at Learnloft on June 25, 2026 titled Why Most Leaders Overestimate Their Presentation Skills which opens by stating a startling ‘statistic’ that: 

“Fear is real, and there are a couple of common things people fear.

A survey revealed that people’s two biggest fears are public speaking and death.

Comedian Jerry Seinfeld landed a joke about the survey when he said, ‘Most people would rather be in the casket than giving the eulogy.’

It’s funny because it’s true. Most people despise the idea of public speaking.”

John did such superficial research that he confused a joke with a 1973 survey where death actually was seventh. Both are shown above. And that misquote is a paraphrase of what Jerry said in 1993. Back on April 8, 2018 I blogged about Misquoting Jerry Seinfeld and inflating fear five times.

 

He also has a 9-minute YouTube video at The Leadership Lens on June 25, 2026 titled Most Leaders Think They’re Good Presenters. They’re Not. Both the article and video have some useful content:

 

“The Three Types of Presenters

 

Since leadership is more art than science, leaders can be introverted or extroverted. They are women and men. They are quiet and loud. However, after watching leaders across industries, most fall into one of three categories when presenting.

 

The Informer

The Informer knows their content cold. Their slides are detailed, their data is accurate, and their presentation is thorough. However, they confuse information transfer with communication. That doesn’t mean it’s bad, but it can be boring. The audience might even learn something. Their presentations are forgettable, not because they couldn’t be better or because their content is weak, but nothing makes it stick.  

 

The Rambler

The Rambler has real experience and genuine passion. When it lands, it’s magnetic. But without structure, the audience works too hard to follow. They leave inspired by the energy but unclear on the point. The Rambler’s biggest blind spot is thinking passion is enough. While it’s better than someone who doesn’t care, passion without structure is just noise with enthusiasm.

 

The Inspirer

The Inspirer knows their content and their audience. They don’t present at people, they present for them. They use story, tension, and intentional moments to connect ideas to emotions. They take chances by using authenticity to show their true self. The audience doesn’t just remember a few of the things they said – they remember how it made them feel.”

 

 

On June 18, 2026 David Murray published his 4,493th post in the Writing Boots blog he started back in 2008

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

David Murray edits the magazine Vital Speeches of the Day and runs the Professional Speechwriters Association. On June 18, 2026 he published his 4,493th post in the Writing Boots blog he had started back in 2008. It is titled Writing Boots: I Can’t Live With It, and I Can’t Live Without It. (I only have 3157 posts or ~70% of his total). I enjoy reading his blog, which he posts at almost every weekday (although Fridays usually are just a linked video).

 

He says he has used this blog:

 

"as a chance to sharpen my knives.

 

to remind myself, on muggy gray Tuesdays between magazine articles and books and other public stunts, that I exist.

 

to draw crowds by starting fights.

  

to be a self-righteous prick.

 

to write gentle poems that you wouldn’t read otherwise.

 

to make reading my thoughts, your habit.

 

to get things off by chest.

 

to settle scores.

 

to preen.

 

to figure out what I think.

 

to force myself to say something, every day.

 

to make saying something every day easy and natural. (It’s easier to write every day than once a week, a daily columnist and I agree).

 

To say whatever the fuck I want.

 

To keep from complaining that I’m not allowed to say whatever the fuck I want."

 

The writer image was cropped from Wikimedia Commons.

 

 

A claim about public speaking that wasn’t really in the 2023 Chapman Survey of American Fears

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is an article by Kathryn Janicek at LinkedIn Pulse on May 24, 2026 titled Your Body Is Sabotaging Your Speech Before You Say a Word. In her section titled The Part Nobody Prepares For she claimed:

 

“According to the Chapman University Survey of American Fears (2023), public speaking anxiety ranks among the most prevalent fears in American adults - above financial concerns and job loss for a significant portion of those surveyed.”

 

Why was she vague about the exact percentage and rank for the allegedly prevalent fear of public speaking? The survey has a web page with list of 97 fears ranked by percent. Public speaking was feared by 28.7% and only was ranked #53, which is not even in the upper half. There was not a question about financial concerns; Economic/financial collapse was #2 at 54.7% - far above public speaking. And there was not a question about job loss; Computers replacing people in the workforce was #47 at 31.6% and Being unemployed was #74 at 24.9%. On October 20, 2023 I blogged about how Corrupt government officials (60.1%) was the most common fear in the ninth 2023 Chapman Survey of American Fears. Public speaking was only ranked #53 (28.7%).

 

I also tried Google searching on the phrases “financial concerns” and “job loss” along with “Chapman survey” but came up empty.

 

But why didn’t she look at the most recent 2025 survey? On October 23, 2025 I blogged about how In the eleventh Chapman Survey of American Fears for 2025, public speaking was only ranked #46 of 67 fears at 33.7%.

 

 

Idaho’s Wassmuth Center for Human Rights celebrates its thirtieth anniversary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An article by Valentin Termite at the Idaho Capital Sun on June 18, 2026 is titled Believing in the goodness of people: Idaho human rights center celebrates 30-year anniversary. It links to their web page on Wassmuth Powerful Practices, which briefly are titled (and then also explained in detail):

 

Collect Joy

Design for Belonging

Listen Deeply

Stay Curious

Notice and Name Bright Spots

Align Actions with Values

 

To collect joy you should:

 

“Notice, savor, and share moments of connection, warmth, and delight as expressions of human dignity and belonging. Paying attention to what is life-giving cultivates hope and sustains commitment to building a better world for all.” 

 

And, to listen deeply you should:

 

“Offer your full presence to another person without interruption, judgment, or trying to fix. Seeking to understand feelings, perspectives, and needs affirms that every person matters.” 

 

On October 27, 2024 I blogged about A new building at Boise’s Wassmuth Center for Human Rights with quotations carved in stone.

 

The border for the thirtieth came from OpenClipArt.

 

 

Who is a pseudoexpert?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a useful article by Joffrey Fuhrer et al. in Frontiers in Psychology on November 11, 2021 titled Pseudoexpertise: A Conceptual and Theoretical Analysis. Their abstract says:

 

“Some people publicly pretend to be experts while not being ones. They are pseudoexperts, and their presence seems to be ubiquitous in the current cultural landscape. This manuscript explores the nature and mechanisms of pseudoexpertise.

 

We first provide a conceptual analysis of pseudoexperts based on prototypical cases of pseudoexpertise and recent philosophical work on the concept of expertise. This allows us to propose a definition that captures real-world cases of pseudoexpertise, distinguishes it from related but different concepts such as pseudoscience, and highlights what is wrong with pseudoexpertise.

 

Next, based on this conceptual analysis, we propose a framework for further research on pseudoexpertise, built on relevant empirical and theoretical approaches to cultural cognition. We provide exploratory answers to three questions: why is there pseudoexpertise at all; how can pseudoexperts be successful despite not being experts; and what becomes of pseudoexperts in the long run. Together, these conceptual and theoretical approaches to pseudoexpertise draw a preliminary framework from which to approach the very troubling problem posed by persons usurping the capacities and reputations of genuine experts.”

 

I have discussed one well-known pseudoexpert in a post on October 7, 2025 titled Surrounded by bad books from Thomas Erikson. In that post I mentioned that:

 

“An article edited by Lotten Kalenius from the Swedish Skeptics Association (VoF) on April 15, 2024 is titled One of Sweden’s biggest scientific bluffs which discusses the book and Thomas Erikson. It has a section titled Is Erikson an authority in behavioural science? When he was looked up: 

 

‘So, we used Ladok, the register of everyone who has studied at Swedish colleges and university, to see if we could find the courses taken by Erikson. There was no-one with his name and birthdate registered. In fact, Erikson’s professional background is in sales, first for the bank Nordea and then running his own business training salespeople. It is most likely that his only educational background is, at best, the Swedish equivalent of a high school diploma.’ 

 

Lotten noted that Erikson was named Fraudster of the Year in 2018 by VoF and also added:

 

“He has as much right as my poodle to call himself a behavioural scientist.”

 

Guests on the Coast to Coast AM late-night radio show often are pseudoexperts who discuss their poorly researched books or videos.

 

The cartoon was adapted from the March 17, 1897 issue of Puck magazine at the Library of Congress.

 

 

Polystyrene foam revealed by a demonstration

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

There is an interesting article by Joe Schwarcz at the McGill Office for Science and Society on June 9, 2026 titled The Case of the Missing Coffee Cup. He describes a demonstration:

 

“It is a demonstration that never fails to draw oohs and ahhs from students. Pour a small amount of acetone into the bottom of a beaker and drop in a foamed plastic coffee cup. It instantly seems to melt into the liquid and within seconds just vanishes.

Of course, matter cannot just vanish, but it can change from one form into another. Like sugar dissolving in water, the plastic dissolves in the acetone. How can so much plastic dissolve so quickly in so little acetone? Because there is actually very little plastic in that coffee cup.

Yet that little plastic has been expanded by being filled with gas bubbles, much like blowing up a balloon. As the plastic dissolves, the air is released, and we have an apparent magical effect.”

I repeated it using a cubical sample of polystyrene foam insulation placed in a glass custard cup as shown above. When acetone was added, it became just a small puddle. That got even smaller after the acetone evaporated.

A Wikipedia page for Polystyrene has a section on Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) – commonly known as Styrofoam.

 

 

 

 

Joy is the most enjoyable path to learning

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a useful 2024 book by David Novak titled How Leaders Learn: Master the habits of the world’s most successful people. Google Books has a preview of its first sixty pages and six chapters.

 

On page 143 David says that:

 

“Joy is our source of purpose, passion, mission – and the most enjoyable path to learning.

 

Of course, pursuing your joy requires that you know where to find it in your life and work. Not many people consider what makes them happiest, beyond things that aren’t necessarily within their control. When I wrote Take Charge of You with sports performance coach Jason Goldsmith, we tackled this question at the start. If you’re going to coach yourself to success, you need to know what you’re coaching yourself toward. We suggested people start by mining their experiences for joy blockers (we’re a bit better at remembering negatives) and then shift and search for their joy builders.

 

Try asking yourself this: What’s getting in the way of my joy? If you’re not sure, think back to some of your worst days, or a job that frustrated you or made you miserable or unfulfilled. What made it so difficult for you? Be as specific as possible. Did you want to be in a different role? Was there one specific thing that you were required to do that you dreaded doing? Was there a person or team you had to work with that brought you down?

 

I’m sure you can think of examples. We all hate our jobs sometimes. Even if you can think of examples, though, you may never have deeply reflected or logically analyzed why you were unhappy in a particular situation or environment.

 

I wish I could give a good example of this kind of reflection from my own life, but I’ve rarely felt that way. And I don’t think most active learners have much experience with it either, at least not for long. When active learners find themselves in a situation that’s too full of their joy blockers, they learn their way out of it or they learn their way around the blockers fast. They know if they don’t, they’ll stagnate. They also know that just because a job or situation doesn’t come preloaded with joy builders doesn’t mean it’s the wrong choice. It just means it’s up to them to find a way around the blockers.

 

….What are your joy builders? And how can you pursue them? Think about some of your best days or jobs – times when you felt especially purposeful, powerful, optimistic, and joyful. What was happening? What were you doing? Who were you doing it with? What specific things made you feel happy, excited, or energized? Try looking at your joy blocker examples and asking, What would have made me happier in those situations?”

 

My cartoon was assembled using a brick wall and stairs from OpenClipArt.