It’s been a while since I’ve tangled with the skeptics, and for good reason. I’ve pretty much stopped reading anything at “science” or anyone that advertises the skeptics circle.

However, I did come across “this article”: on pseudoskepticism, and pretty much points out everything that bothers me about these blogs I’ve kicked from my periodic reading list. Not listed in the bullet points is that trying to carry on a reasonable, logical argument against a pseudoskeptic is like trying to convince a brick wall to back away so it doesn’t hurt so bad when you bang your head.

Maybe one day I’ll write about my good ol’ nemesis Orac again. After all, every once in a while it is fun to give a thrashing to a pseudoskeptic who pretends to believe that science disproves things he doesn’t believe in.

In the meantime, I will confess an interest in a lot of fields that may be better described as “protoscience”:, or fields that strive to remain coherent within the scientific framework, but which have not quite yet achieved experimental verifiability according to the principles of repeatability and replicability. I think we have a lot to learn from such fields, and they tend to stretch our understanding about reality and how we learn about reality.

Technorati Tags:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: