Your obvious condescension was.
-
-
Jim Hogan once pulled that gambit four years ago. It did not go over well.https://respectfulinsolence.com/2016/05/18/john-horgan-is-skeptical-of-skeptics-or-homeopathy-and-bigfoot-versus-the-quest-for-world-peace/ …
-
Finally, I’d argue that there’s a real need for some “debunking” skills in medical academia, given the infiltration of pseudoscience and quackery there over the last three decades.https://respectfulinsolence.com/2016/06/03/spoon-bending-at-the-university-of-alberta-bigfoot-skepticism/ …
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I am generally accepting of this arguement—there is always something more compelling to someone else. That said, I feel like a lot of “woo-debunking” both falls on deaf ears & speaks to the already convinced. It does not mean it is completely unimportant.
-
In your case, I very much appreciate your writing on breast cancer screening and similar issues. The audience may be smaller, but I believe more engaged and more likely to be open to persuasion.
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.