What if I Weren't a Skeptic?
by David Bloomberg
The title of this article may seem to be a bit of an odd
question. However, let me assure you that I’m not going to go into a deep
philosophical discussion here, just a short examination of the way both skeptics and
non-skeptics think.
Let me first say that I consider it an honor to be called a "skeptic." I have
seen it used as an implied insult by some, but to me it says that I am a critical thinker,
and certainly thinking cannot be a bad thing (unless you’re a failed school board
candidate, but that’s another matter [see "REALLity
Check" in Vol. 3, #10 and "REALLity
Checklist," this issue]). More |
The Sacrament of Confirmation
by Bob Ladendorf
Speaking to a standing-room only crowd of more than 50 people
at the February REALL meeting, Prof. Charles Schweighauser lambasted astrology and alleged
UFO evidence based on principles of physics and astronomy.
Citing various scientific reasons for disproving astrology, Schweighauser asserted that
a human desire to know what the future holds and outright charlatanism motivated by money
are the two main reasons for its continuing appeal. As for UFOs, he pointed out the high
improbability of any physical visitations by aliens based on the vast distances to travel,
extreme mass of fuel to launch a spacecraft at the speed of light, and the friction of
atoms that would tear any craft apart.More |
The
REALL News