It's disheartening to discover government corruption and incompetence, for example; but is it better not to know about it? Whose interest does ignorance serve? If we humans bear, say, hereditary propensities toward the hatred of strangers, isn't self-knowledge the only antidote?I couldn't agree more. Humans seem to be developing an even stronger sense of egotism and narcissism as time goes on. I see it in so many people today. Thinking the whole Universe is created for us only serves to increase that delusional sense of entitlement.
If we long to believe that the stars rise and set for us, that we are the reason there is a Universe, does science do us a disservice in deflating our conceits?
In the Genealogy of Morals, Friedrich Nietzsche, as so many before and after, decries the "unbroken progress in the self-belittling of man" brought about by the scientific revolution. Nietzsche mourns the loss of "man's belief in his dignity, his uniqueness, his irreplaceability in the scheme of existence."
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Which attitude is better geared for our long-term survival? Which gives us more leverage on our future? And if our naive self-confidence is a little undermined in the process, is that altogether such a loss? Is there not cause to welcome it as a maturing and character-building experience? (pg 12)
Showing posts with label carl sagan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label carl sagan. Show all posts
A Wonderful and Welcome Dose of Reality
Here is another installment of my favorite parts of The Demon-Haunted World by Carl Sagan.
Happy Carl Sagan Day - November 9
Happy (slightly belated) Carl Sagan Day! Yesterday was Carl's birthday and that's a good reason to celebrate the wonders of the Cosmos. Not that we need an excuse.
As you may remember, I'm reading The Demon-Haunted World and this is my second post sharing some of Carl's most inspiring and thought-provoking passages.
This is something you can do even on Facebook, or with your friends and family, or as a blogger. We can all help spread this important information that is obviously not getting to most people.
As you may remember, I'm reading The Demon-Haunted World and this is my second post sharing some of Carl's most inspiring and thought-provoking passages.
Science arouses a soaring sense of wonder. But so does pseudoscience. Sparse and poor popularizations of science abandon ecological niches that pseudoscience promptly fills. If it were widely understood that claims to knowledge require adequate evidence before they can be accepted, there would be no room for pseudoscience. But a kind of Gresham's Law prevails in popular culture by which bad science drives out good. (p 6)How depressingly true. So what can we do about it? What can you and I do about it? We can drive this point home, to everyone we know, that knowledge requires adequate evidence. Then follow up with what adequate evidence means (such as, not (usually) anecdotes, etc).
This is something you can do even on Facebook, or with your friends and family, or as a blogger. We can all help spread this important information that is obviously not getting to most people.
The Most Precious Thing
For my book club, and for Carl Sagan Day - November 9th - I am reading The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl Sagan (kindle edition).
This is one of those books that I never knew about when it came out. Once I became a skeptic several years ago, I just never had a chance to read it. It's one of those books that every skeptic should read, really, so it's about time.
I want to share it with you as I read it. Just the really wonderful bits that are too good to keep to myself.
This is one of those books that I never knew about when it came out. Once I became a skeptic several years ago, I just never had a chance to read it. It's one of those books that every skeptic should read, really, so it's about time.
I want to share it with you as I read it. Just the really wonderful bits that are too good to keep to myself.
"My parents were not scientists. They knew almost nothing about science. But in introducing me simultaneously to skepticism and to wonder, they taught me the two uneasily cohabiting modes of thought that are central to the scientific method." (pg xiii)This, to me is the greatest gift you can give to someone. The gift of genuine wonder and skepticism. The whole world becomes amazing as it can only do with science. And skepticism helps you avoid falling into delusion as well as to help avoid being duped and scammed.
"All our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike - and yet it is the most precious thing we have." Albert Einstein (pg 2)
Everything Happens For A Reason?
Just the other night at dinner with my heathen friends, a woman I had just met (who labels herself something like "nonreligious") had this mini conversation with us:
Woman: "Everything happens for a reason."
Me (to myself): cough cough... Bullshit! (I couldn't think of a nice, non-aggressive way to say this so I took another bite of my dinner)
Butch (my atheist husband): "I don't believe that it does. Think about all the bad things that happen to good people."
At which point I can't remember what happened. I think someone changed the subject.
But I get this a lot. And to be honest, it probably wasn't that many years ago that I used to believe it myself.
If you're religious, which most people are, I understand your thinking that God and Satan basically guide you, tempt you and otherwise have a hand in your life. Ok. You have a personal god who is active in your life. You are a puppet.
But when a nonreligious person says it, then I start to wonder a bit more, and of course it makes me reflect on my progress from Christian to Spiritual to Skeptical Naturalist/Atheist.
Just because someone doesn't believe in gods, it does not follow that they automatically don't believe in anything supernatural. Even though I know this intellectually (and went through that spiritual/new age phase myself after becoming an atheist), I still find it jarring.
My question to you, though is, Why? Why do think that there is an invisible force acting in your life?
Woman: "Everything happens for a reason."
Me (to myself): cough cough... Bullshit! (I couldn't think of a nice, non-aggressive way to say this so I took another bite of my dinner)
Butch (my atheist husband): "I don't believe that it does. Think about all the bad things that happen to good people."
At which point I can't remember what happened. I think someone changed the subject.
But I get this a lot. And to be honest, it probably wasn't that many years ago that I used to believe it myself.
If you're religious, which most people are, I understand your thinking that God and Satan basically guide you, tempt you and otherwise have a hand in your life. Ok. You have a personal god who is active in your life. You are a puppet.
But when a nonreligious person says it, then I start to wonder a bit more, and of course it makes me reflect on my progress from Christian to Spiritual to Skeptical Naturalist/Atheist.
Just because someone doesn't believe in gods, it does not follow that they automatically don't believe in anything supernatural. Even though I know this intellectually (and went through that spiritual/new age phase myself after becoming an atheist), I still find it jarring.
My question to you, though is, Why? Why do think that there is an invisible force acting in your life?
A Cosmos Sequel Hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson!
There is one bit of bad news. It's going to be on Fox on prime time. And they are taking their time. It won't be on until 2013.
Ann Druyan (Sagan's widow and Cosmos writer) is going to write and produce it, along with astrophysicist Steven Soter and Seth McFarlane, the creator of The Family Guy. It will be called Cosmos: A Space-Time Odyssey and will be 13 episodes long. The National Geographic channel will co-produce it, so it will air on their station as a same-night encore later in the evening.
McFarland said, "Never more than at this moment in the modern era have we needed a profound reminder of the colossally important and exciting role that science, space exploration and the human quest for knowledge must continue to play in our development as a species. We should be vigorously exploring the solar system by now, and who better to inspire us to get there than Ann Druyan, Steven Soter, Neil deGrasse Tyson and, of course, Carl Sagan."
Carl Sagan's Cosmos: A Personal Voyage was first broadcast in 1980 on PBS and was the most widely watched series in the history of American public television for 10 years. As of 2009, it was still the most widely watched PBS series in the world. It won an Emmy and a Peabody Award and has been broadcast in more than 60 countries and seen by over 500 Million people. There is also an accompanying book.
~
~
~
Resources:
The Universe Owes Us Nothing
At a holiday party awhile ago, a cousin told us about how she wasn't able to do what she wanted to do, to take a path she had chosen for herself. A family relative who was religious said, "As one door closes, another opens. It will all work out for the best."
Today my friend Jeff realized he had forgotten something. You know how it is. You remember you forgot something, but no matter how you try to jog your memory, it's just out of reach. I used to say, "If it was important, you'll remember." As if the universe knows what's important and what's not and would never let us forget something that we'll need.
But the universe does not owe us anything, and the universe does not have agency. It's easy to fall into these comforting mindsets, but that doesn't make them real.
There isn't someone for everyone. I know people who have been alone most of their lives, or who have never really had successful relationships. It really sucks. As a friend, I want so much to find them someone, but sometimes for whatever reason, they've been alone and there's nothing they can seem to do to get themselves in a happy relationship.
Things don't always work out for the best. Sometimes it's obvious that the worst happens instead. But most times there's just no way to know if it's better or worse given a turn of events. It's another platitude that makes us feel better when we've been stung, but it's not true. Of course, in hindsight, we might try to find a way to see a silver lining on a bad event, which is good. Maybe you can learn a lesson, or find a way to turn a bad situation into something positive, or find a way to improve yourself. But believing the universe is looking out for you and making sure that every bad thing that happens to you has a silver lining is delusional. Some things are just bad all around. Should you make the best of it? Absolutely. But do you have to sugar coat it? Hell no. That wouldn't be healthy.
And if you forget something, the universe isn't making sure you'll remember it just because it was important. When you forget, sometimes it will be really important things forever irretrievable. Just look at the tragedy of Alzheimer's and dementia as an example. Or if you write something down that's important, the universe isn't keeping track of that paperwork for you if you misplace it. It could be lost forever, along with some special memento or keepsake that you lost. We like to think that if it's important information, art, music, science, etc, that it can't be lost forever. But it can and does, probably even more often than important things being saved.
I've seen people comment about this on HDC regarding events like the destruction of the Library of Alexandria. We know that thousands and thousands of books were destroyed forever in that fire. We know this partly because other books in other places refer to the destroyed ones. That priceless information can never be retrieved.
Why am I saying all this? It sounds so depressing, doesn't it? But it's not. It's just reality.
And as the wonderful Carl Sagan said, "It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
So, as we get ready for the Rapture (or if you're like me, the After Rapture Parties on Sunday), let's all embrace reality. Sometimes it sucks, sometimes it hurts, but it's always completely real and honest.
And before you go giving me a hard time, let me just be clear. I am advocating pragmatism and realism. There's no need to be pessimistic, which I think is unhealthy. But in that vein, while it's helpful to have a positive attitude - I recommend it highly - it's actually delusional to be overly optimistic.
Pragmatism/Realism = Good
Optimism/Pessimism/thinking the universe is watching out for you = delusion = unhealthy.
One more thing before I go. I've found that most people are the way they are. In other words, if you're an optimist, you're probably always going to be that way. I can't really help being the way that I am, which is mostly pragmatic, with a tinge of pessimism in some circumstances and a pinch of optimism in others. I do consciously aim to be as pragmatic as possible, though, as I think being realistic is the healthiest approach to life. But I also try to have a positive outlook and perspective.
Have I gone off my medication? Does any of this make sense? I hope so! If not, send all hate mail to philosophicalmumbojumbo@bs.com :P
~
EDIT: here are some definitions to clarify:
Delusion: a mistaken or unfounded opinion or idea; a belief held in the face of evidence to the contrary, that is resistant to all reason
Optimism: a state of mind in which one always hopes or expects that something good will happen; a general disposition to expect the best in all things
Pessimism: A tendency to stress the negative or unfavorable or to take the gloomiest possible view; a general disposition to look on the dark side and to expect the worst in all things
Pragmatism: A practical, matter-of-fact way of approaching or assessing situations or of solving problems; action or policy dictated by consideration of the immediate practical consequences rather than by theory or dogma; a philosophical system stressing practical consequences and values as standards by which the validity of concepts are to be determined
Realism: An inclination toward literal truth and pragmatism; awareness or acceptance of the facts and necessities of life; a practical rather than a moral or dogmatic view of things; Naturalism
The Great Prayer Experiment
I was told by a religious friend of mine recently that I had nothing to lose by reaching out to God and praying. If there's no God (which is my position, as you know), then saying a prayer does nothing but take up a minute or two of my time. But if God exists (and of course, she means her Abrahamic god), then I have everything to gain, because her god is a god of Love.
After thinking about it for awhile, I had to agree with her. There really is nothing to lose by praying. As a skeptic, sometimes you have to do research. So I thought I'd do an experiment with God.
Here is how I did it. First, she supplied me with a prayer by a former atheist who, once he said this, found God reaching out to him. So it (anecdotally) worked once already. Unfortunately his prayer would have been untrue for me.
Here it is as he said it originally:
Dear God,
I know (because I can prove it with the certainty that a geometer can prove opposite angles are equal) that you do not exist. Nevertheless, as a scholar I am forced to entertain the hypothetical possibility that I am mistaken. So just in case I am mistaken, please reveal yourself to me in some fashion that will prove your case.
If you do not answer, I can safely assume that either you do not care whether I believe in you or you have no power to produce evidence to persuade me. The former argues you are not beneficent, the latter not omnipotent - in either case, unworthy of worship. If you do not exist, this prayer is merely words in the air, and I lose nothing but a bit of my dignity. Thanking you in advance for your kind cooperation in this matter,
John Wright
First, in my view, John is wrong. As we just discussed in the comments of a previous article, there are atheists who feel we can "know" God doesn't exist. I'm not one of them. I come from the standpoint that you can't prove a negative (and the burden of proof lies on the person making the positive claim, so you don't have to) Anyway, I can't say the first line. And I think he is weak in his request. He sets it up so that God can be any kind of confirmation bias (a pet peeve of mine). So I rewrote it a bit differently.
Some of his second paragraph is pretty good so I used it. Here is the prayer I came up with:
Labels:
Atheism,
Atheist,
believing problem,
burden of proof,
carl sagan,
confirmation bias,
critical thinking,
evidence,
experiment,
god,
pilot study,
prayer,
Proof,
Science,
skeptic,
Study,
supernatural
Seek and You Will Find
Ok. Awesome. The bible says all I have to do is ask. All I have to do is seek.
Oh, will you look at that, it's in the following passages as well! (Bear with me. Feel free to skip down a bit.)
Luke 11:9-13 "ditto"
and
Matthew 18:19 Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven.
and
Matthew 21:22 And all things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive.
and again...
Mark 11:24 Therefore I say to you, all things for which you pray and ask, believe that you have received them, and they will be granted you.
and again...
John 14:13 Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
wait there's more...
John 15:7 If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.
and again...
John 15:16 You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you.
and again...
John 16:23 In that day you will not question Me about anything Truly, truly, I say to you, if you ask the Father for anything in My name, He will give it to you.
Ho Hum, even more...
James 1:5 But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and it will be given to him.
This is really getting repetitive...
1 John 3:22 and whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do the things that are pleasing in His sight.
Finally, the last one!
1 John 5:14 This is the confidence which we have before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us.
Whew! Sorry for going biblical on you. But obviously if the "good book" repeats the same message twelve times, it must be important and it must be relevant. I should be able to believe in it as a Christian. Right?
I guess this is why people rely on prayer so heavily, even in this day and age when it's pretty obvious that prayers aren't answered any better than chance. But I digress. I have a point to make.
Labels:
Atheism,
Atheist,
believing problem,
bible,
carl sagan,
christian,
Christians,
critical thinking,
faith,
Freethinker,
god,
jesus,
joy,
occam's razor,
pale blue dot,
Quest,
Reason,
religion,
Think
Happy Carl Sagan Day!
In the last couple of years I've discovered the world of citizen science. And I've also discovered skepticism and, as you know, many wonderful podcasts that have inspired me with talk of great men like Carl Sagan. If I had to choose, astronomy is not the most interesting subject to me, but the Cosmos is wonderful. And Carl Sagan made everything fascinating. Watching Cosmos recently, I was filled with so much inspiration and wonder about the universe and our humble, small place in it. Cosmos has been seen by a billion people in sixty countries, according to the Carl Sagan Portal. What a legacy!
The 11th episode of Cosmos, The Persistence of Memory, is probably my favorite, even though I found them all to be excellent and still relevant today. Here is the episode in 6 parts. If you can, watch the whole series. You'll be glad you did! See below for some quotes from this awesome man that is such a wonderful inspiration.
Part 1
Part 2
Sunday Looms Menacingly
Before that, I'd have to go back to my troubled religious youth to remember being in church. Sitting uncomfortably in straight backed pews; singing vapid, falsely cheerful songs of unworthiness and worship to an invisible sky daddy; sipping grape juice and eating stale bits of savior; getting baptized 3 times in 3 different churches to ward off eternal damnation and gnashing of teeth in the sulfurous, burning pits of hell; dealing with fake smiles on fake faces adorned in Avon makeup and festooned in Sears and Roebuck Sunday best outfits; parroting bible stories carefully cherry-picked from the sordid pages of a book filled with murder, slavery and hate.
None of it was all that pleasant. All of it was forced. No one ever seemed genuinely kind or compassionate. When I learned about hypocrisy at the age of 12 I promptly called bullshit on the whole mess of religion and refused to go again. My parents were furious, but in the end they gave up on me, content that I'd eventually get my just reward in the fiery lakes of hell.
This Sunday we're going to the mega-church about 45 minutes away. I don't want to go but my local group wants to experience it. Since I'm the Official Cat Herder, I feel like it would be a good thing to go along. Part of me wonders what it's like in a mega-church. What is the feel of the place? Something I thought church should do for people is give them a sense of belonging, of community. How can you get that in a huge auditorium? I have no idea how big this place is. So it's only fair that I actually experience it, I guess.
I have some questions that I want to answer on Sunday. Feel free to comment with other questions I can try to answer as well. Here's what I have so far. I will take notes while I'm there.
Occam's Razor: Part 1 of Our Critical Thinking Toolkit
One important tool is going to be Occam's Razor: "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity" (entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem). That's it in a nutshell right from William of Ockham, a Franciscan monk and English philosopher, theologian and logician in the 14th century.
Another way to put it is: The simplest explanation is usually the correct one. But don't get confused by the term, simple. It means: The hypothesis with the fewest assumptions is usually the correct one. When giving explanatory reasons for something, don't posit more than is necessary. Or, don't make any more assumptions than you have to.
So let's say you have 2 competing hypotheses that are basically equal in most respects. Then this principle would suggest that you choose the hypothesis that makes the fewest assumptions while still sufficiently answering the question. In science Occam's Razor is used as a rule of thumb (a heuristic) to help researchers develop good models.
In your life it can help you make decisions and choose what to think and what to believe (or not believe). You can use it as a heuristic as well, a great rule of thumb in your Critical Thinking Toolkit.
Sometimes atheists use Occam's Razor to argue against the existence of god since everything can be explained through natural means without complicating it with the supernatural.
Another example: Crop circles. There used to be 2 competing ideas for where crop circles came from. One was that flying saucers from an alien world made them. Another was that a person (or people) used some type of instrument to make the designs in the grass. Since there is no evidence for the flying saucers from outer space, and given how complicated and how many assumptions need to be made to make that argument work, Occam's Razor would suggest that the simpler explanation would be that humans did it with instruments. That is the argument that makes less assumptions.
Of course, the second argument could be wrong, but until there was more information, it was the preferable hypothesis. Then 2 guys admitted to the crop circle hoax in the 1990's. So that ended that debate for most people.
A quote by Carl Sagan is appropriate here: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. When it comes to the supernatural, Occam's Razor is a very valuable tool indeed.
Sources:
Pareidolia On Toast
Have you ever caught a glimpse of something out of your eye and thought, "oh that looked like a face!" "Look, Jesus is in my bar of soap!" "That cloud looks like a dog running!" That's pareidolia. You see something random and your mind fills in the blanks so that you think something is there.
Pareidolia: a psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) being perceived as significant.
In psychology, the Rorschach test is a series of images used to invoke pareidolia to delve into the psyche of the patient. In religion and superstition, a vague stimulus is believed to be divinely sent. Here is a news story of Mary in bird shit. Notice how the people react to a random stimulus.
No matter how much I look at this picture, it looks like a face. The sink looks a bit shocked or frightened.

Carl Sagan hypothesized that detecting faces is a hard wired evolutionary advantage. This allows people to use only minimal details to recognize faces from a distance and in poor visibility but can also lead them to interpret random images or patterns of light and shade as being faces.
In 2009 a study was done to show that objects incidentally perceived as faces evoke an early (165 ms) activation in the ventral fusiform cortex, at a time and location similar to that evoked by faces, whereas other common objects do not evoke such activation. This activation is similar to a slightly earlier peak at 130 ms seen for images of real faces. The authors suggest that face perception evoked by face-like objects is a relatively early process, and not a late cognitive reinterpretation phenomenon.
Which would explain why everyone sees the following simple line drawing as a face:
Pareidolia: a psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) being perceived as significant.
In psychology, the Rorschach test is a series of images used to invoke pareidolia to delve into the psyche of the patient. In religion and superstition, a vague stimulus is believed to be divinely sent. Here is a news story of Mary in bird shit. Notice how the people react to a random stimulus.
No matter how much I look at this picture, it looks like a face. The sink looks a bit shocked or frightened.
Carl Sagan hypothesized that detecting faces is a hard wired evolutionary advantage. This allows people to use only minimal details to recognize faces from a distance and in poor visibility but can also lead them to interpret random images or patterns of light and shade as being faces.
In 2009 a study was done to show that objects incidentally perceived as faces evoke an early (165 ms) activation in the ventral fusiform cortex, at a time and location similar to that evoked by faces, whereas other common objects do not evoke such activation. This activation is similar to a slightly earlier peak at 130 ms seen for images of real faces. The authors suggest that face perception evoked by face-like objects is a relatively early process, and not a late cognitive reinterpretation phenomenon.
Which would explain why everyone sees the following simple line drawing as a face:
A Universe Not Made For Us: Carl Sagan
I found this video the other day and wanted to share it with you. It's Carl Sagan reading from his book, Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space, from the chapter titled A Universe Not Made For Us.
I read a Terry Pratchett book recently called Reaper Man (it was great, of course). In it, he said, "In the Ramtop village where they dance the real Morris dance, for example, they believe that no one is finally dead until the ripples they cause in the world die away - until the clock he wound up winds down, until the wine she made has finished its ferment, until the crop they planted is harvested. The span of someone's life, they say, is only the core of their actual existence."
In that sense, Carl Sagan is still very much alive.
I read a Terry Pratchett book recently called Reaper Man (it was great, of course). In it, he said, "In the Ramtop village where they dance the real Morris dance, for example, they believe that no one is finally dead until the ripples they cause in the world die away - until the clock he wound up winds down, until the wine she made has finished its ferment, until the crop they planted is harvested. The span of someone's life, they say, is only the core of their actual existence."
In that sense, Carl Sagan is still very much alive.
Funny Tidbits To Make You Smile
Just a few funny tidbits to entertain you. Plus the Pale Blue Dot for a bit of awesomeness. :)
"There have been numerous cases where practicing christians have been obliged to obey the same laws and abide by the same rules as everybody else." (How Barbaric!) Jesus and Mo

God! It's like everyone I've ever slept with is here.

"There have been numerous cases where practicing christians have been obliged to obey the same laws and abide by the same rules as everybody else." (How Barbaric!) Jesus and Mo
God! It's like everyone I've ever slept with is here.
The Greatest Destruction of Knowledge
History might credit him with a much darker deed though, not surprisingly one the church usually fails to mention or attempts to brush under the rug. Although not official of course, some have referred to him as the patron saint of arsonists. His leadership possibly brought about what is probably the single most destructive annihilation of knowledge in human history.
Labels:
Alexandria,
art,
astronomy,
books,
carl sagan,
change,
Cosmos,
fascinating,
History,
Hollywood,
Hypatia,
interesting,
Islam,
jesus,
Johnny,
knowledge,
movie,
religion,
Science,
video
The Fine Art of Baloney Detection
Skeptical thinking is such a wonderful tool to have. It means you don't get scammed or BS'ed nearly as much by shoddy news or dodgy advertising. You also get to save money because you'll be less apt to buy gimmicky cure-alls that do nothing but drain your wallet and give you false hope. In his book, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
, Carl Sagan wrote about this. It's called the Baloney Detection Kit. (see below for an excerpt)
Michael Shermer recently made a great companion video talking about The Baloney Detection Kit: (approx. 14 min)
Here are the 10 points from the video:
Michael Shermer recently made a great companion video talking about The Baloney Detection Kit: (approx. 14 min)
Here are the 10 points from the video:
Labels:
advice,
baloney,
baloney detection kit,
believing problem,
carl sagan,
critical thinking,
demon-haunted world,
Facts,
Freethinker,
helpful stuff,
Important,
logic,
michael shermer,
Science,
skeptic,
Skeptical,
skepticism,
Think,
video
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



