To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
Show all languages
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.

List of scientific skeptics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a list of notable people that promote or practice scientific skepticism. In general, they favor science and are opposed to pseudoscience and quackery. They are generally skeptical of parapsychology, the paranormal, and alternative medicine.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    1 260 864
    202 488
    1 068
    424 569
  • Why People Don't Believe In Climate Science
  • Your House Isn't Haunted: Here's What The Science Says
  • Naomi Oreskes - Conspiracy? Scientists Aren't That Organized!
  • Is There Life After Science? - This Week in Science (TWIS) Podcast - Episode 661
  • 1. Climate Change -- the scientific debate


[MUSIC] Our last video gave you a nice, neat list of facts explaining why scientists are so sure that climate change is real and that humans are the main cause. We’ve filled libraries with reports and graphs and books about climate change, more facts than you can shake a hockey stick at. Still, four out of ten Americans aren’t convinced. And consider this: Among the majority that do accept the science of climate change, folks don't seem to be doing much about it. Today we’re going to look at a few of the reasons why facts don’t always work, how our brain fights with itself to keep us from responding to threats, and the science of why some people don’t believe in climate science. [MUSIC] Kurt Vonnegut once said “I was taught that the human brain was the crowning glory of evolution so far, but I think it’s a very poor scheme for survival.” The problem is… we’re human. Psychologist John Tooby says “our modern skulls house a Stone Age mind.” Now we’ve come a long way since our cave-dwelling days, but what Tooby means is we’re dealing with the threats of today using tools from our brain’s evolutionary past. The issues that really grab our attention involve P.A.I.N. According to psychologist Daniel Gilbert, we respond most strongly to threats that are personal, that represent abrupt changes in our environment, that are immoral or indecent, and that are affecting us now. Climate change is a gradual, impersonal thing that always seems to live in the future. But if climate change threatened these puppies, wouldn’t you pay more attention? Our one brain is really two: One rational and one emotional. The rider looks like they’re in control, but the elephant really has the last say. Lots of the time, our emotional brain elephant isn’t even listening. Let’s say the rider loved that article about how climate change is threatening banana crops, but the elephant isn’t motivated to act until the bananas are gone. According to psychologist Daniel Kahneman, when we’re faced with uncertain threats about things we might lose in the distant future, our brains will invent all kinds of excuses not to act on them today. I mean, look at the way we talk about climate change. It always seems to happen in the future tense. "Caretakers of the future" "what the future holds" "sheltering future generations" "stand up for our future". A poll by Yale University shows 65% of people think climate change will harm future generations, and just 38% say it will harm them personally. This is what Kahneman calls our “optimism bias”, assuming we face lower risks than others do. Car accidents won’t happen to us, or the next big hurricane surely won’t hit here, because bad things only happen to other people. I can point to extreme storms like Hurricane Sandy or Typhoon Haiyan as obvious effects of climate change, but someone else might point to them as proof the climate is random. We have a tendency to cherry-pick evidence that supports our existing beliefs. It doesn’t help that many climate change threats are becoming so familiar that they’re just… normal. "A new United Nations report raised the threat of climate change to a whole new level" "Severe, pervasive, and irreversible." "Longer, hotter, drier droughts, and it will only get worse." "The world is ill-prepared for what is to come." "Without action there could be irreversible damage" "The fundamental systems that support human civilization are at risk." Hurricanes and wildfires are always on the news. September 2014 was the 355th month in a row of higher than average temperatures. It’s like a broken record… People also doubt climate change because they’re uncertain about uncertainty. When scientists talk about uncertainties, all the known knowns, known unknowns, unknown unknowns, many people think they're not confident in their findings, when the opposite is true. Less than one in four Americans think that there’s a scientific consensus about climate change, yet 97% of scientists are in agreement. What we’ve got here is failure to communicate. What’s weird is we don’t apply this uncertainty about uncertainty to other issues. A one percent chance of a terrorist attack and we’re sounding the alarm. "Instead of drifting along toward tragedy we'll set a course toward safety" Nearly certain global disruption from climate change? "There is not agreement around the fact of exactly what is causing this." "The climate is always changing, between pauses, and we are not capable with our limited knowledge of predicting which way it will go next." "Eight inches of snow on the east coast. I've got an explanation that's not climate change, it's called winter." Thanks to today’s hyperbole-infused media, we’re almost numb or indifferent to anything that isn’t about to literally kill us. Why aren’t more people worried? Patricia Linville and Gregory Fischer argue that we have a finite “pool of worry” and climate change isn’t allowed in the water. We view and make sense of our world through frames, not just so we can focus better on what’s inside, but also to decide what we can ignore. For some people, your frame is built based on your political party, for others it’s carved out of your religious beliefs or economic philosophy. Viewing the world through the same frame as your social “in-group”, whatever that might be, is important to remaining part of that in-group. Basically, we’re all puppets controlled by the strings of social conformity. It’s not a choice, it’s just who we are. From the time we’re kids, we read social cues from people around us, like how to talk or not burping in public. Our survival used to literally depend on being part of a social group. So if you’re part of some social group that doesn’t believe in climate change, you have two risks to weigh: Climate change and all of its uncertainties, or the very personal risk of becoming an outsider. Sociologist Stanley Cohen writes that climate change denial isn’t not knowing, or refusing to know. It’s about choosing not to notice or talk about it, so they don’t rock the in-group boat. Climate change is almost the perfect problem. We’ve gotta do something about it, but every one of its attributes goes against our psychology. It’s like that black cloud from "Lost", it has no identity, no home, no single cause, and no single solution. And it’s about more than science, it involves economics, morals, human rights, ideology, technology. It’s really hard. In another video we laid out the facts about why man-made climate change is real. And here we talked about the many reasons why facts don’t always work. But I haven’t answered the most important question: How do we get people to act? Truth is, I don’t know. Action is the destination, but I’m not sure about the path we should take to get there. I mean, is anyone? I want to know what you think. When it comes to tackling climate change, to exploring solutions and adapting to the new future, what are you worried or unsure about? What are you hopeful about? What do you want us to explore? We’ll definitely be coming back to this in the near future, so let me know down in the comments, and we can figure out where to go together. I think the psychology behind climate science might be even more interesting than actual climate science. If you want to read more, check out “Don’t Even Think About It: Why Our Brains Are Wired To Ignore Climate Change” by George Marshall. Link down in the description. Stay curious.

See also


  1. ^ a b c d Edwin C. May; Sonali Bhatt Marwaha (June 23, 2015). Extrasensory Perception: Support, Skepticism, and Science [2 volumes]: Support, Skepticism, and Science. ABC-CLIO. pp. 131–. ISBN 978-1-4408-3288-8.
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Skeptical Inquirer Magazine Names the Ten Outstanding Skeptics of the Century
  3. ^ "Banachek - Mentalism and Skepticism". Point of Inquiry. November 13, 2009. Retrieved April 17, 2016.
  4. ^ Bryan Farha (2007). Paranormal Claims: A Critical Analysis. University Press of America. pp. 165–. ISBN 978-0-7618-3772-5.
  5. ^ "Maarten Boudry". Konrad Lorenz Institute. Retrieved April 17, 2016.
  6. ^ a b c d e "What is Skepticism?" (PDF). Doubtful News. 2013. p. 7. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 8, 2016. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  7. ^ "Books by Robert Todd Carroll". The Skeptic's Dictionary. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  8. ^ a b Paul Kurtz (October 29, 2010). Exuberant Skepticism. Prometheus Books. pp. 167–. ISBN 978-1-61592-970-2.
  9. ^ "Derek Colanduno and Robynn McCarthy". Skepticality. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  10. ^ Colquhoun, David (June 1, 2013). "If a medical cure looks too good to be true, it probably is". The Guardian. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  11. ^ Plait, Phil (April 7, 2010). "Astrologers jump on Cox". Discover Magazine. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  12. ^ Barry, Ellen (August 24, 2013). "Battling Superstition, Indian Paid With His Life". The New York Times. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  13. ^ Pollak, Michael (August 24, 1997). "Taking the Wind from Silly Sails". New York Times. Retrieved 2 December 2014.
  14. ^ Bernstein, Evan. "Remembering Perry DeAngelis Today". The Rogues Gallery. The Rogues Gallery. Retrieved 22 May 2014.
  15. ^ Miles, Jack (June 29, 2006). "A Scientific Approach to Atheism". The Washington Post. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  16. ^ Shermer, Michael (January 12, 2016). Skeptic: Viewing the World with a Rational Eye. Henry Holt and Company. pp. 20–. ISBN 978-1-62779-138-0.
  17. ^ "Deniers are not Skeptics". The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI). December 5, 2014. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  18. ^ Dunning, Brian. "Welcome to". Skeptoid Media. Retrieved 24 June 2017.
  19. ^ "Portland Humanist Film Festival". Archived from the original on November 9, 2011. Retrieved November 17, 2011.
  20. ^ Dunning, Brian. "Principles of Curiosity". Skeptoid Media. Retrieved 24 June 2017.
  21. ^ "Mark Edward - Guerrilla Skepticism (part 1)". YouTube. 2011-08-03. Retrieved 2011-03-14.
  22. ^ Edward, Mark (July 1, 2013). "National Geographic Supports Pseudoscience". Skeptic Blog. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  23. ^ "Editorial Board". Skeptic Society. Retrieved 31 May 2016.
  24. ^ Gerbic, Susan. TAM 9 Guerrilla Skepticism on Wikipedia (Motion picture). Retrieved August 29, 2015.(
    Speaker Icon.svg
    Page will play audio when loaded)
  25. ^ "Why Science Remains Culturally Irrelevant". The Atlantic. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  26. ^ Gay, Pamela. "About Me". Star Stryder. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  27. ^ "Wikapediatrician Susan Gerbic discusses her Guerrilla Skepticism on Wikipedia project". The Center for Inquiry. Retrieved 8 January 2017.
  28. ^ Hegarty, Shane (September 7, 2007). "Surely it's not the sceptics?". The Irish Times. via HighBeam (subscription required). Archived from the original on May 29, 2016. Retrieved April 18, 2016. The author of the Guardian's weekly Bad Science column, Dr Ben Goldacre, and physicist and author Vic Stenger will also speak.
  29. ^ Gorski, David (April 18, 2016). "Acupuncture does not work for menopause: A tale of two acupuncture studies". Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  30. ^ "Articles by Harriet Hall - CSI". Retrieved 13 October 2017.
  31. ^ Dugan, Dan; Daar, Judy (March 22, 1994). "Are Rudolf Steiner's Waldorf Schools 'Non-Sectarian?'". Free Inquiry. via HighBeam (subscription required). Archived from the original on June 19, 2014. Retrieved April 18, 2016. Waldorf schools are the most visible activity of the international Anthroposophical Society, which has been called "the most successful occult religion in Europe" by Sven Ove Hansson, a Swedish skeptic.
  32. ^ Fields Millburn, Joshua. "Waking Up: Sam Harris Discusses the Benefits of Mindfulness". The Minimalists. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  33. ^ Mongia, Gurmukh (Spring 2017). "A Visit to 15 Credibility Street". Skeptical Briefs. 37 (1): 13.
  34. ^ Saunders, Richard (March 3, 2013). "The Skeptic Zone #228". The SkepticZone (Podcast). Event occurs at 0:06:40. Retrieved 2013-03-17.
  35. ^ Shermer, Michael (November 1, 2010). "In the battle for ideas, scientists could learn from Christopher Hitchens". Scientific American. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  36. ^ Romm, Joseph (November 5, 2015). Climate Change: What Everyone Needs to Know?. Oxford University Press. pp. 189–. ISBN 978-0-19-025019-5.
  37. ^ Plait, Phil (November 14, 2015). "George Hrab Shows You How to Think". Slate. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  38. ^ a b Hill, Kyle (May 6, 2013). "A Decade of Explosions: What Mythbusters Taught Me". Scientific American. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  39. ^ Plait, Phil (January 8, 2010). "African skeptic needs our help!". Discover Magazine. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  40. ^ a b Jillette, Penn (July 3, 2008). "'I don't know' -- and that's no act". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  41. ^ Leighann, Lord. "Meet the 2019 AHA Humanist Arts Awardee, Leighann Lord". The Humanist. The Huminist. Archived from the original on 14 August 2020. Retrieved 14 August 2020.
  42. ^ "Michael Leunig, Conscience, and The Choice to Vaccinate". Evidence please. Retrieved November 18, 2016.
  43. ^ James Willow Jr (September 2016). The art and times of Ash Lieb. University of Tasmania. pp. 13–. ISBN 978-1-8629587-5-3.
  44. ^ Karen Stollznow (March 19, 2010). "Scott Lilienfeld - Real Self-Help". Center for Inquiry. Retrieved 2 January 2017.
  45. ^ "Meet Pat Linse". skeptic. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  46. ^ "Editor, Daniel Loxton". skeptic. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  47. ^ Nienhuys, Jan Willem (September 2014). "IN MEMORIAM: Rob Nanninga, Skeptic Leader and Editor". Skeptical Inquirer. 38 (5): 11–12.
  48. ^ Kean, Leslie (July 9, 2010). "Skeptic misses point behind UFO book". NBC News. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  49. ^ Park, Robert L. (1997). "Alternative Medicine and the Laws of Physics". CSI. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  50. ^ "Massimo Pigliucci". CSI. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  51. ^ Plait, Phil. "The Perils of the Skeptic". Slate. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  52. ^ Carroll, Robert (July 29, 2012). Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!. pp. 35–. ISBN 978-1-105-90219-2.
  53. ^ Singh, Rahul (November 2, 2009). "The Spell Breaker". Outlook Magazine. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  54. ^ a b "Squaring the Strange". Squaring the Strange. Archived from the original on 15 October 2017. Retrieved 15 October 2017.
  55. ^ Kolata, Gina (April 1, 1998). "A Child's Paper Poses a Medical Challenge". The New York Times. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  56. ^ Achenbach, Joel; Guarino, Ben; Kaplan, Sarah (22 April 2017). "Why people are marching for science: 'There is no Planet B'". Washington Post. Retrieved 17 June 2017.
  57. ^ "Podcast #524 - July 25th, 2015". The Skeptics Guide to the Universe. Archived from the original on 1 October 2017. Retrieved 1 October 2017.
  58. ^ "Talk Nerdy By Cara Santa Maria". Apple. Retrieved 1 October 2017.
  59. ^ Leeuw, Nederlandse. "Cara Santa Maria's recorded bio". Wikimedia. Retrieved 1 October 2017.
  60. ^ "Eugenie Scott". Skeptic. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  61. ^ "Robert Sheaffer". CSI. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  62. ^ Gorski, David (May 11, 2009). "The British Chiropractic Association versus Simon Singh". Science-Based Medicine. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  63. ^ "Julia Sweeney". Skeptic. December 24, 2004. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  64. ^ Watson, Rebecca (October 24, 2012). "It Stands to Reason, Skeptics Can Be Sexist Too". Slate. Retrieved April 18, 2016.
  65. ^ Zenon, Paul. "Paul Zenon". Archived from the original on 4 October 2013. Retrieved 14 June 2013.
This page was last edited on 14 August 2020, at 13:52
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.