Funny. I thought the guiding principle was to continuously and vigorously apply the methods of science to navigate the treacherous straits between “know nothing” skepticism and “anything goes” credulity. Seems like your trending toward credulity lately.
-
-
-
Indeed. I was shocked and disappointed to see that Mr. Shermer once interviewed Stefan Molyneux and described him as "one of the most articulate podcasters for reason." THAT is NOT skepticism.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The full quote from Spinoza suggests something quite different.
-
How so?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Dude, when someone criticizes you for praising a guy who thinks ancient people somehow knew about the shape of the DNA molecule, & your best response is to dismiss this as "virtual signaling", then you have reached an excess level of arrogance & incompetence & should go to sleep.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Well stated Somehow it seems to be a never-ending battle to explain this to many people
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So will you start publishing climate denial now? Holocaust revisionism? Some ideas are prima facie absurd, obviously denialist, or racist and sexist garbage that don’t need amplification. The inability to distinguish tripe from t-bone isn’t a feature, it’s a bug.
-
Will you extend such courtesy next to Ken Ham? Alex Jones? David Irving? What is the limit? Or rather what is the weakness? Are MRAs and sexists an ideological blind spot like climate change once was?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You’re not the right mag for me.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.