The 60th Meeting of the Skeptics' Circle: Reality in danger

It's that time again! Has it really been a fortnight since the last time the skeptics of the blogosphere met to apply desperately-needed critical thinking skills to the woo, credulity, and general lack of critical thinking in which the blogosphere is continually awash?

I guess so.

This time up, we have a rather unusual presentation of the Circle for the 60th Meeting of the Skeptics' Circle over at Infophilia. This time around, the threat is real:

"So, here's the situation. Woos have struck at the foundation of reality, and it's now determined by the popularity of ideas. Simply put, the argument from popularity actually works now. Many like-minded woos have grouped together so that in certain areas, their beliefs will take form."

"Wait, hold on," one skeptic says. "You're going to have to excuse me if I'm a bit skeptical of all of this. Woo taking over the world in one night? Seems very far-fetched, even taking into account the Bigfoot abduction sighting and the ghost of Hahnemann."

"Perfect. Keep up that attitude and we might have a chance. The firmer your grasp on reality, the better you'll be able to fight back. But just remember, now isn't the time to get stuck in an Ivory Tower of skepticism. Tonight, we have to fight.

Kinda makes you want to paint your face blue, just like Mel Gibson in Braveheart and shout, "Skepticism!" doesn't it?

Can our intrepid band of skeptics hold back the tide of irrationality? What will become of the very nature of reality? You'll have to tune in to the rest to find out.

Assuming reality survives the attack, next up to host will be Rebecca at Memoirs of a Skepchick. Start getting your best skeptical entries together for her, just in case the war isn't over by then and reality is still threatened. Better yet, if you want to join the army of skepticism as an officer rather than as enlisted personnel (by volunteering to host your very own Skeptics' Circle, natch!), head over to HQ, check out the skeptical regs and the manual on what is expected in an officer and then drop me a line. If you meet the requirements (no woo on your site, for one thing), I'll put you on the schedule to host.

More like this

In honor of Towel Day, the theme of the latest meeting of the Skeptics' Circle is The Hitchhiking Skeptic's Guide to the Galaxy. Join Rebecca (a.k.a. The Skepchick) as she takes you on a tour of the skeptical blogosphere. But don't do it for me. Don't even do it just for Rebecca. Do it for Douglas…
Yes, it's that time again, time for the latest edition of the Skeptics' Circle to land on the blogosphere like a nuclear explosion of reason, rationality, and science designed to demolish the credulity that is so rampant. OK, I'm exaggerating a bit, but we here at the Skeptics' Circle do try to do…
It's that time again, time for a respite from the annoying credulity that permeates the blogosphere. Indeed, that credulity has even invaded Respectful Insolence in the form of two--count 'em, two!--homeopaths invading an old throwaway post about homeopathy and a woo-meister in my recent chelation…
Time passes. What once was new is old, and what once seemed far in the future is now just around the corner. In other words, the Skeptics' Circle is rapidly approaching again; it's a mere four days away! This time around, the 61st Meeting of the Skeptics' Circle is scheduled to be hosted by Rebecca…

I've been looking more at Skeptics culture and was thinking of participating in this but thought I should wait to learn the folk ways better. I've got a question that I've seen little mentioned in all of this would be skepticism. How often are the Skeptics themselves put to the test? I mean the real kind of tests that they advocate for others as well as the basic ones to see if their skepticism is truly skeptical or if it's just the appearance of doubt in service to firmly held beliefs. Are the Skeptics willing to submit to skeptical investegation? Please suggest some examples of where they have.

Thinking this over later, do you really want Mel Gibson, I mean, MEL GIBSON! as the emblem for skepticism? I hated that movie. It promotes anti-gay violence.

Not Mel Gibson per se, William Wallace. Methinks you read too much into my flippant little comment. I was referring to nothing more than a convenient and memorable movie example of troops getting fired up to go into battle. Whatever you may think of the rest of the movie or of Mel Gibson, that particular battle scene was one of the best battle scenes ever put to film in any movie in any decade.