scope

What, If Anything, Can Skeptics Say About Science? (2009)

Daniel Loxton (Old) Skepticblog, Posts , , , , , , 0 Comment

This article was originally published at the defunct Skepticblog.org on Dec 22, 2009. An archived version is available here.

NASA visualization of arctic surface warming trends. NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Scientific Visualization Studio, Larry Stock, Robert Gersten

As many skeptics know by now, legendary skeptical trailblazer James Randi set off a firestorm last week with two Swift blog posts about global warming. His first post carried his strong suspicion that consensus science on climate change is incorrect, while his followup post wondered “whether we can properly assign the cause to anthropogenic influences.”

Skeptical bloggers were swift to respond. Critics (including PZ Myers, Orac, Sean Carroll, and James Hrynyshyn) chastised Randi for speaking outside his domain expertise; for dissenting from current consensus science; and for lending his name to the disreputable “Oregon Petition Project.” Others, like Phil Plait, corrected Randi while sensibly reminding us that “anyone, everyone, is capable of making mistakes.” And, inevitably, global warming deniers seized upon the event. (One headline, at Britain’s Telegraph.co.uk, gleefully crowed “James Randi forced to recant by Warmist thugs for showing wrong kind of scepticism.”) Read more

Steven Novella Takes On Some of the Oldest Clichés About Scientific Skepticism—Again (2013)

Daniel Loxton (Old) Skepticblog, Posts , , , , , 0 Comment

This article was originally published at the defunct Skepticblog.org on Jan 29, 2013. An archived version is available here.

Skepticblog’s Steven Novella has an interesting post up at Neurologica this morning, in which he addresses some issues of conflation between scientific skepticism and other movements or interests. Specifically, Novella discusses the very old (and demonstrably false) complaint that scientific skepticism refuses to “take on” religious claims, and the similarly perennial complaint that skeptics ought to get into the business of political claims.

On religion, he emphasizes once again the same point he has made throughout his career (a point on which I precisely agree, and which has for decades been the practical, time-tested, virtually universal position of scientific skepticism as a movement): Read more

So… Who ARE You Gonna Call? (2015)

Daniel Loxton (Old) Insight blog, Posts , , , 0 Comment

This article was originally published at the defunct Insight blog at Skeptic.com on Dec 3, 2015. An archived version is available here.

Outside of Junior Skeptic (my primary ongoing project [2002–2021]) a surprising amount of my professional output—most of my blogging, stage appearances, op-eds (PDF), and interviews—is given over to the oddly controversial argument that my field should exist.

It’s my opinion that “scientific” skepticism should be acknowledged as a distinct field of study with a unique mandate: the critical, science-informed, scholarly examination of paranormal, pseudoscientific, and other fringe claims. Consequently, I’ve rejected (PDF) periodic suggestions that skepticism should shift its focus from fringe topics toward arguably “more important” matters, or that skepticism ought to be subsumed as a side-project within some other sphere (such as “science,” humanism, or atheism). Read more

Bigfoot Versus the Quest for World Peace? (2016)

Daniel Loxton (Old) Insight blog, Posts , , , , 0 Comment

This article was originally published at the defunct Insight blog at Skeptic.com on May 17, 2016. An archived version is available here.

For the entire history of scientific skepticism, folks in our weird and wonderful little field have heard two criticisms offered with metronomic regularity from people who are “skeptical of the skeptics.”1 One is the obvious: “Skeptics are closed-minded!” The other, no less predictable or routine, is my topic today: “Why do you bother with this trivial stuff about pseudoscience and the paranormal? Aren’t there more important things to worry about?” Read more