What does it mean to cast doubt on something you feel is not right, despite popular consensus?

What does one refer to when judging whether or not something is real?

The following is a crash course on common claims that have failed under proper scientific scrutiny.

Homeopathy
Reiki
Magnetic Healing
Applied Kinesiology
Iridology
Vertebral Subluxations (meaning having your back cracked by a Chiropractor)

Acupuncture
Chi
(Pretty much every form of alternative medicine)

Childhood Vaccinations Causing Autism

The plausibility and existence of supernatural entities
(such as ghosts, poltergeists, angels, and gods. this includes any and all gods) creationism/intelligent design, miracles and the power of prayer

As well as the existence of:
ESP/telekinesis
Psychic Powers
Telepathy
Thus the Credibility of Parapsychology

Any form of:
Spoon Bending
Tarot Card Reading
Palm Reading
Fortune Telling
Astrology
Clairvoyance
Dream Premonitions

Topics in crypto-zoology:
Bigfoot
The Loch Ness Monster
Chupacabra
Mothman
Rod Insects
Yetti
Unicorns
Fairys etc

Alien Visitations
UFOs
Crop Circles
Repressed Memories
Dowsing
Conspiracy Theories and the list goes on

No one wants to be called gullible.

When all else fails you must ask yourself , “how likely is the claim”. “who is informing me of this claim and is their a chance they could be biased towards it”. “what natural laws or scientific theories does the claim bend or completely defy in order to be possible?”. “has real scientific evidence been presented, or does it rely on testimonial evidence, or any subjective evidence”?

consider this a primer for a greater understanding of reality. It might be difficult at first to look skeptically at a commonly accepted claim or belief system, but you owe it to yourself to find the truth as it is based in reality. The scientific method is our legacy, it is a testament to the need to really know why and to the many great thinkers who came before us and cleared a path through the think entanglement of superstitions and pseudo-science. It’s in our nature to as “Why” and we developed the discipline of skepticism to make sure our answers are based in reality. Because if our answers aren’t based in reality, then they are just bullshit.

Duration : 0:9:22

[youtube wtCsstLXL9M]

Duration : 0:4:23

[youtube rLaZUkFKX6Q]

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com

Whitley Strieber, Author and Radio Host of UnknownCountry.com writes about this treatise:

“From Whitley Strieber:

http://www.unknowncountry.com/mindframe/opinion/?id=23

“A Brilliant Rebuttal to the Skeptics

It is no secret that many scientists are becoming disenchanted with skeptics groups and the skeptical paradigm in general. Skeptics groups have been losing membership, and some institutions now take a dim view of membership in groups like CSICOP, the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal.

This is because of a growing concern that skeptics groups and publications are interfering with the progress of science by attempting to compel the rejection of evidence that does not fit existing models of reality. Institutionalized skepticism is beginning to appear more like a religious practice, far removed from the ideals of scientific objectivity which inspired founders such as Dr. Carl Sagan.

Winston Wu has now written an essay that brilliantly and decisively rebuts the general skeptical arguments against the paranormal. This is among the best essays ever written on this subject, and deserves extensive study. The essay carefully moves through the entire skeptical lexicon of arguments, rebutting each in turn.

As it reveals the fallacy in each argument, it builds a crucial case against the whole skeptical approach to reality, suggesting that it is, essentially, a form of superstition that has the effect of filtering out data if it cannot be explained by accepted scientific theory.

The essay suggests that a clear-eyed view of evidence is essential, and that it is lacking both among believers and skeptics. Essentially, Mr. Wu is asserting that the evidence is undigested by science as a result of its being too uncritically embraced by believers and rejected by skeptics.

Mr. Wu identifies a difference between healthy skepticism and the cynicism of blanket rejection of evidence.”

Other reviews:

“Your article “debunking pseudo-skeptical arguments on paranormal debunkers” is a must read to any person who seeks to understand the nature of pseudoskepticism.”

“Your treatise “debunking pseudo-skeptical arguments of paranormal debunkers” is the best refutation of pseudoskeptics’ arguments, tactics and fallacies to reject the evidence for paranormal phenomena. I’ve recommended your article to every person that I know.”

“I’m Jürgen and I write you from Germany. Let me tell that your article about debunkers/pseudo-skeptics of PSI is the best handbook to debate with them. I used to debate pseudo-skeptics as a pastime, using the arguments and tactics of your article.”

You can read more reader responses at:

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Reader_Responses.htm

Duration : 0:1:40

[youtube 1me_MmgjUsc]