In response to someone espousing an anti-science viewpoint:

What do you think science is?

There’s nothing magical about science.  It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results.  Which part of that exactly do you disagree with?  Do you disagree with being thorough?  Using careful observation?  Being systematic?  Or using consistent logic?

Dr. Steven Novella

 

The definition of science by Steven Novella

 

Dr. Novella can be heard on The Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe podcast (arguably, the best podcast for skeptics).

  • Bill Perron

    If only Steven Novella would practice what he teaches perhaps he would have some credibility, but he doesn’t. I have challenged Stevie Boy to look at the evidence that his hero homosexual professional pseudo skeptic James Randi is a liar, but little boy Stevie refuses to even look at the evidence. How scientific is that Stevie Boy? Refusing to even look at evidence is not scientific, it is fearful cowardice in the face of truth. Randi has a history of lies but “scientific investigator” Novella is afraid of the truth because the whole professional pseudo skeptic world is unscientific, and Stevie Boy obviously by his actions (which speak louder than his empty words) supports unscientific agendas because it is profitable.

    • Stevie boy

      I suspect that you, Billy boy, are a closet penis lover; hence your need to mention Randi’s orientation… As for your comments regarding Dr Novella, why would he engage with a blatant fool such as yourself?

      • Bill Perron

        Stevie boy when you’re a man you will understand, until that time you will post ignorance just as Mason does, please read my comments to him they apply to you as well.

        • Stevie boy

          I have read, and chuckled at your comments.
          It’s easy to imagine you clutching your pillow to your ears to block out the torrent of sense and politeness (undeserved) that Mason used so kindly to attempt reason with you. Some people are incapable of reason, and require a less polite skeptic, such as I, to say; ‘BOLLOCKS, ME OLD CHAP’
          The million dollar challenge is designed to filter out the deluded early on. I’m surprised you got through the front door.
          Since I’m sure you believe in Santa along with all the other childish nonsense, I’ll remind you to try try try not to be a knob this Christmas, and maybe you’ll get the gay encounter you’ve always wished for….
          Yours sincerely, Stevie boy

          • Bill Perron

            Stevie child I posted a litany of reasons why Novella and Randi are scum yet you only choose to focus only on the homosexuality aspect, why, are you a homosexual yourself and feel a need to defend degenerates? Your hero Randi is not only a homosexual liar he is also a pedophile, when he was sixty he smuggled a sixteen year young boy from Venezuela into this country to be his homosexual lover. That is considered pedophilia in the United States. It was revealed when they were caught fraudulently using another persons identity. Are you going to defend fraud and pedophilia also?

  • Mason

    First of all, calling names like “Stevie Boy” and referencing James Randi’s sexual orientation is childish and doesn’t help you prove your point. It’s an Ad Hominem (logical fallacy), it’s tasteless, and makes you look bad. You reference that Dr. Novella refuses to look at certain pieces of evidence – evidence for what? What lies? Are you referring to Randi’s Million Dollar Challenge? If you’re so concerned about it, take it. Prove him wrong. Even if – for example only – the money’s not real, wouldn’t you get great satisfaction by proving him wrong? The burden of proof is on you to show legitimate evidence for whatever agenda you’re trying to push.

    Also, you sound very familiar to another commenter on this site – Carlos Caliente – who often defends Bill Perron. It’s as if they’re one and the same!

    • Bill Perron

      Mason commenting on issues you know nothing about is childish, tasteless, and makes you look bad. If you knew what you were commenting on you would have known I already did apply and was accepted by Randi to test. But when I insisted we video tape the testing Randi cowardly lied to weasel out of my challenge, and he posted lies and defamatory articles and ridiculous photo shopped pictures of me at his site. Perhaps you are a wimpy sort who runs and has no self respect, that would be understandable because most pseudo skeptics are wimps. If you actually care about honesty, integrity, character, you would contact Randi and ask him why he runs from meeting me in a public forum as I have been trying to get him to do for over six years. I promised Randi I would be on his boney as until he either meets me or dies. All I want is justice, is that asking to much? Is that to difficult a concept for Mason to understand?

      • androsje

        I’m actually interested in watching what you proposed and how he lied and posted “defamatory articles”.

        • Carlos Caliente

          Why?

          • androsje

            Because I like listening (reading in this case) to both sides of the argument; and because I cannot believe nor trust those things just by reading his words, that’s why I’m asking for evidence.

            • carlos caliente

              So what evidence would u consider valid over an internet connection? Unless the participants are physically able to present their case it is just words. Google the lies of professional skeptics like Randi and Novello and Shermer. Lots of stuff comes up.

              • androsje

                I’d usually ask for peer-reviewed articles from science-based reputable sites, but this cases is a little bit more simple, so Bill Perron said that James Randi did blog posts referring to his personal case and that he declined the experiment, the evidence is the blog posts and the form by which James Randi stopped the experiment from happening. But just claiming and not presenting makes a person sound butthurt. Now, I’ve read dissertations to Randi’s challenge and dissertations to Shermer’s articles, but that doesn’t mean that they’re “debunked”. That’s why if someone claims something I prefer them to show their evidence or writings that they mention. Because Google is quite big and one may end up finding something different from what the interlocutor made reference in the first place.

                • Bill Perron

                  Well dude looks like for you this will just be one of those questions you will never have the satisfaction of having an answer that fits your criterion. Perhaps you should run your question by Randi, Shermer, or this cowardly liar Novello and see what they say.

                  • androsje

                    So, you won’t show those things you claimed Randi did to you?
                    Sorry, but I cannot believe just a person’s word for it.

                    • Bill Perron

                      Come on over here and I will be glad to show you everything. Would you like my address? Can’t think of any other way for you to view evidence unless we meet. I live in Los Angeles area.

                    • androsje

                      Sorry, but I don’t even live on the US, but you can publish online those things you claim to have, you don’t need a scanner, a picture/screenshot of the documents could suffice provided with the right sources (like the email address of the person who sent the emails). If there was a blog post, you can share the link to those posts or to the videos. It is quite easy to show and share these things.

                    • Bill Perron

                      Done that in the past and all all it did was conjure accusations of posting photoshopped evidence and false bullshit. Not going to put myself out like that again. If you’re ever in L.A. let me know I will be glad to meet u, and even show u around town if u wish. Or perhaps u know someone here u trust I can show them and they can relate to u what they see.