A Freethinkin' interview

By Phil Plait | May 29, 2009 4:01 pm

I was interviewed by the UBC Free Thinkers recently about, well, thinking freely. We talked vaccinations, the JREF, and other topics, including what it means to be a skeptic.

They split it into two parts and it’s up on their blog as YouTube videos. They also have a Facebook group, too. So go over there and check them out!

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Antiscience, JREF, Science, Skepticism

Comments (9)

  1. Joe

    It looks like they misspelled your name on the intro screen. Either that or you misspell your name daily…

    Interesting interview none the less!

  2. Sort of off topic Dr. Plait, I hope you don’t mind. :)

    Hey folks, we have http://www.factsnotfantasy.com up and running, and looking a bit better now. One thing we could use are a few more contributors. I don’t make a living writing blogs, so my occupation does tend to interfere with my ability to make daily posts there. If any of you most totally awesome BA Bloggees are interested in collaborating, I’m sure Todd W., IVAN3MAN, The Chemist, and I would welcome the company.

    In the meantime, please distribute the link wherever you can. Also, if you have suggestions for content, please let us know as well. Thank you.

    Now go watch the video (slideshow?). I swoon every time they show that picture. ūüėõ

  3. NewEnglandBob

    Great Interview Dr. Plait.

    I had to laugh at “……..NOOOO! You’re dead!”

  4. Torbjörn Larsson, OM

    Suggestions for FnF content? Sorry, just negative criticism so far (but it’s a great site, I recommend visiting).

    Like that the suggested abiogenesis paper is a paywall paper. It may be interesting but would an outsider who needs the FnF material benefit from that?

    Or that the “science vs creationism” flowchart, while funny and effective enough, really depicts the “change vs revolution” description of science which is philosophical so inapplicable and, worse, technically wrong.

    [I mean, if you reject a theory based on its failure you don’t “change” it, you have to make up a new one. In the end the distinction between “change” and “revolution” becomes iffy and probably undefinable. What would be the observable qualitative difference?

    Hmm. “Revolution” in science would be more like when the consensus shifts drastically due to some new data or idea. Like when Hubble, COBE and WMAP revolutionized cosmology. That would be an observable social phenomena analogous to a state change.]

  5. fred edison

    Excellent interview. Parts 2a & 2b should be posted as YT videos soon. I’ll be looking to hear them.

    Last but not least, my congratulations to Bad Astronomy on being chosen as one of Time magazine’s 25 best blogs for 2009. That’s no small feat in the vast universe of the Internet. Awesome work, Phil, and well deserved.

  6. Torbjorn, thank you for the comments. I sincerely appreciate your comments (even if critical). I suppose living in an area that makes Benny Hinn look like a moderate can colour my attitude, and is is beneficial to have folks keep me in line. :)

    You know when that paper will get in the public domain, or something similar that I can link to instead?

    And yes, the flowchart is strictly humour, but that fact may be lost on the audience. :)

  7. Izzy

    Alright, so people are afraid their children will be autistic if they get vaccinated because the frustrated parents of autistic children want to put the blame on someone or something. Really, it’s like convincing the population to commit mass murder. Kids will die. There will still be autism. Is anti-vax a cult?

  8. @Larian et al
    Great job on Facts Not Fantasy guys.


Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!


See More

Collapse bottom bar