Real Sceptic

Teaching Evolution In A Climate Of Science Denial

I’ve written before on how the creationism and intelligent design movement, and the discussions surrounding it in the United States, is quite the alien concept to me. With the very few things that I do know about biology, evolution and the scientific method that these proposed “theories” have absolutely no scientific merit whatsoever.

So I’m still amazed at how effective they have been, and still are, at spreading their disinformation. They have been especially effective with creating arguments that sound convincing, but when you take a closer look you find out that it’s just not supported by anything in science. In almost every single case it’s an argument/question that has already been dealt with by scientists.

This is the reason the following post on SkepticTV caught my attention. It also shows why it is important that organisations like the NCSE exist, and how important they are with helping teachers and schools in countering the nonsense: Read more

The Tobacco “Scepticism” Template

I was already aware that current tactics of climate change deniers are very similar to what the pro tobacco lobby used during their campaign of obfuscation. But just how similar I didn’t realize till I saw the following on ClimateCrocks:

I was going to wait on this, but it’s too important. The point has often been made that the climate denial industry is based on the disinformation techniques pioneered and developed by the Tobacco industry – Naomi Oreskes does it elsewhere on this page. There’s a lot of footage here of tobacco flacks presenting to media and congress.

The parallels between “there is still debate about the link between smoking and cancer” and “there is still debate about the link between CO2 and global climate” are obvious.

See if you can pick out the specific techniques – and see if you can listen to this whole film without getting nauseous as I did.

For me it is just mind boggling how similar the arguments and tactics are. Which scares me to no end as these tactics were effective in delaying action for decades, decades we don’t have…

Do Human Races Exist?

Not that long ago there was a little spat on YouTube when the HeyRuka made a couple of videos about the differences between human races. One of her main points was that there is a difference in IQ between these races.

Understandably this caused an outrage on YouTube as this is quite a sensitive topic. But I don’t care about the race part, I cared more about the incredibly bad logic and lack of evidence she used to try to argue for her position. She failed even at giving a basic definition of what she considers a race, in all her attempts she was most successful in telling what she didn’t consider a definition of race. This alone should be a red flag.

In the end she didn’t succeed in defining race in a scientifically meaningful way that reflects anything in todays literature, or make a good case that some of these races are more intelligent. She failed in this as something like a race doesn’t exist. Race is a social construct and we can’t identify someone as being a member of a race from just looking at their DNA. Not to mention that the IQ differences are explained by the environment people live in, malnutrition alone has a huge impact.

The following video from C0nc0rdance gives a good introduction to why the concept of race has no value whatsoever in the scientific arena:

Monckton: Bringing the Crazy to Kiwi Land

One of the world’s most prominent, and controversial, climate change skeptics, has been in New Zealand this week. Lord Christopher Monckton, the 3rd Viscount of Brenchley, is here as part of a world lecture tour promoting climate change denial. Reporter Benedict Collins met Christopher Monckton in Auckland, and while the Viscount might not believe in global warming, it didn’t take long for the interview to heat up..

The tone from Monckton changes instantly as soon as John Abrahams is mentioned. Which is, in my opinion, quite telling.

John Abrahams published a presentation where he analyzed, and completely tore to shreds, one of Monckton’s presentations. It is truly recommended viewing for everyone that is interested in the climate debate. You can find the presentation made by John Abrahams on his page here.

Science Is Only Speculation

For me the internet can be a very scary place, case in point:

science is only speculation. and no matter with however much they speculate, they will ALWAYS be incorrect in their assumptions. even the question of 2+2=4, it only adds to 4 depending on your consciousness level or frame of mind.

I just cannot fathom why someone can have the idea that science is just speculation. That is just a slap in the face of the hard work real scientists put into their research, not to mention the billions we invest to discover some really cool and useful things.

But luckily most people don’t think like that and there are some true gems of reason on the internet that give me hope and joy.