Who will debunk the debunkers?


[Read the post]



And soon to be the number one citation for the climate denialist crowd…


Yup, and AIDS “skeptics,” and 9/11 “skeptics,” and Hilary isn’t a lizard person “skeptics”…


I doubt it.


/bu|[rn]t|[coy]e|[mtg]a|j|iso|n[hl]|[ae]d|lev|sh|[lnd]i|[po]o|ls/ matches the last names of elected US presidents but not their opponents.


…How does that even work? Richard Nixon was JFK’s opponent, but he was also an elected U.S. president. So the Regex would have to both match Nixon and not match Nixon.


The beauty of folklore is that it exists in every field.



Taxonomy is always controversial?

You’d have to ask Randall, they’re his words after all.


Well, OK. Am I, perchance, the only one here who has read both Darwin and Matthew? Because I don’t find Mr. Sutton’s argument that Darwin plagiarized Matthew to be very convincing, given the evidence. The two men were apparently both quite OK with the situation as it ended up, with Darwin freely giving Matthew precedence while claiming ignorance of the prior work.

That being said, I am strongly in favor of a healthy measure of skepticism… rock on, Mr. Sutton.


My metric for most human things is a binary:


I tend towards the helpful, b/c I lead by example, but sometimes both sides are needed to identify humanity.

To hurt is sometimes/always to help, such is the binary…

Metrics are complicated.


I never meta-skeptic I didn’t like.


As a meta meta skeptic skeptic, I find that unlikely


Except for the graphic nothing in this post mentions what is actually being talked about at all! And the graphic would only help if you’re already familiar with the story.


Popeye wouldn’t have had the same influence if he got his powers from canned chicken livers.

Y’know whatsk, Bluto? You can have her.


Is there a German word for things which ought to be true but aren’t?

Also reminded me of “When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.”


I’m skeptical of the motivations of the Darwin-skeptics.

It’s as if showing ole Charlie to be a bad person, a lier, a cheat, a bigamist, a jerk, or a villain means that evolution obviously can’t be true.


You know, it just occurred to me that “there must be a German word for it” and its equivalents have become so frequent that it should be filed as a popular trope, yet it isn’t documented even on Know Your Meme.


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.