I’d say considering the audience for the alternative medicine stuff and in many cases the potential for harm to the broader population it’s a greater public service to provide articulate critique. In fact, harder than engaging in a debate with other intellectuals.
-
-
I'm not aware of any legit skeptics that do it. Most have learned the lesson of the Gish Gallop. A much more effective model is what is shown by Kevin Kruse takedowns of D'Souza. Analyze, educate, use humor, mock and shame where needed, and inoculate against future BS exposure.
-
There is value in showing that these guys are jokes. So it's a little odd that at the same time he acknowledges debate with denialists isn't fruitful, he tone polices about delegitimizing the illegitimate. Exposing liars and buffoons is inherently impolite - but necessary.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
