# Sceptics, a little less snark please? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 12, 2018, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858 "2018-10-12T15:25:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Beckdawrek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beckdawrek/32/3647_2.png) [@Beckdawrek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beckdawrek)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/21 "2018-10-12T19:27:56Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > Quick, someone call Leonard Nimoy!! Uh, Nimoy’s dead. Call Zac Quinto, instead. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/22 "2018-10-12T19:39:06Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > Quick, someone call Leonard Nimoy!! > [@Beckdawrek](#): > > Uh, Nimoy’s dead. Dammit. I _said_ quick.:mad: ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/23 "2018-10-12T20:05:43Z")
> [@markn\_1](#): > > It’s most commonly spelled (or spelt) “sceptic” in British English. But they pronounce it as “shEp-tik”, as in “Did you put the shEp-tik on the shEd-ule before or after Boxing Day?” Oh, you wacky, iconoclastic British, what with your royals and your colonizing and your opium wars. As for skeptics, it can be really difficult to take someone seriously when they are referencing heavily edited and repeatedly translated fables as evidence for their belief in an invisible but omnicient deity, or someone who earnestly believes in the existance of the Sasquatch despite a complete lack of any definitive evidence and only blurry, distant videos when we’ve had a decade of people carrying high resolution video cameras with them everywhere and routinely videoing common activities. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/24 "2018-10-12T20:33:45Z")
> [@Atomic\_Alex](#): > > Take this entry on RationalWiki on the Travis Walton case for example: [Travis Walton - RationalWiki](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Travis_Walton) > “on the off chance that some guy dressed like the construction worker in the Village People will wander close to their spaceship.” > > Is that really necessary? I thought that line was pretty funny. Plus, you know [who else](https://www.straightdope.com/who-is-cecil-adams/) sometimes throws a little snark into their skepticism? People who write things like this are trying to be informative _and_ entertaining, presumably in the hopes that that’ll reach more people than being informative and dry-as-dust. Or they, personally, just find it more fun that way. I’m not saying that you don’t have a legitimate complaint. The snark _can_ go too far or be too mean-spirited sometimes. But I don’t that was a good example. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/25 "2018-10-12T20:40:49Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > People who write things like this are trying to be informative _and_ entertaining, presumably in the hopes that that’ll reach more people than being informative and dry-as-dust. Or they, personally, just find it more fun that way. It is a fact that whenever I post online as part of an argument\* it’s largely a form of performance art, and if I can amuse myself and others that’s really the most important thing. I mean, it ain’t like I’m going to convince anybody of anything, after all. \*or not as part of an argument ---
**Author:** ![Filbert](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/filbert/32/3433_2.png) [@Filbert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Filbert)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/26 "2018-10-12T20:42:04Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > But they pronounce it as “shEp-tik”, as in “Did you put the shEp-tik on the shEd-ule before or after Boxing Day?” Oh, you wacky, iconoclastic British, what with your royals and your colonizing and your opium wars. Do we? I am sceptical. I can add some snark if you’d like? In the spirit of the thread, of course. ---
**Author:** ![yanceylebeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yanceylebeef/32/12290_2.png) [@yanceylebeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yanceylebeef)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/27 "2018-10-12T20:48:44Z")
Sorry, but if you (The royal you, of course, not anyone in particular.) are going on about ear candling or detoxifying shoe inserts the disdain is real. It comes from having to listen, again, to someone espouse that this time THIS TIME, it really works. ---
**Author:** ![JB99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/439d5e/32.png) [@JB99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JB99)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/28 "2018-10-12T21:12:33Z")
It has become increasingly clear to me that the people who offer up these theories are not interested in debate. They are interested in validation and indulging their narcissism. The most effective weapon against these kinds of people is to point out their stupidity. It may not change their mind, but it lets them know I won’t give them the validation they want. Over time I have essentially given up hope that these people are actually reasoning or interested in good faith discussion. It has become my default to simply assume they are narcissists, trolls, or morons, and treat them accordingly. Especially so when I see the same claim made repeatedly. This is a large part of why I gave up on sites like Quora. Lastly, I have to ask, what tools should we be using? They don’t acknowledge fact, and they don’t acknowledge reason. What does that leave us with? ---
**Author:** ![DCnDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dcndc/32/2842_2.png) [@DCnDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DCnDC)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/29 "2018-10-12T21:25:08Z")
> [@JB99](#): > > Lastly, I have to ask, what tools should we be using? They don’t acknowledge fact, and they don’t acknowledge reason. What does that leave us with? Fire? ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/30 "2018-10-12T21:34:27Z")
> [@yanceylebeef](#): > > Sorry, but if you (The royal you, of course, not anyone in particular.) are going on about ear candling or detoxifying shoe inserts the disdain is real. It comes from having to listen, again, to someone espouse that this time THIS TIME, it really works. An encylopedic entry is, however, generally not expected to be written as though you’re talking to the reader like you were pals, drinking a beer together. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/31 "2018-10-12T21:35:15Z")
> [@Filbert](#): > > Do we? I am sceptical. Not really, but you did apparently steal a bunch of vowels from the Czechs and insert them quasi-randomly into your own words, leaving the poor Czechs to _strč prst skrz krk_. It’s just one of many cultural attrocities committed by the British Empire upon civilization, starting with steamrollering over the Subcontinent and continuing today in your queen’s obsession with ugly hats. You did give the world P.G. Wodehouse, Douglas Adams, John Oliver, and Monty Python, or course, but given that those are all dedicated to satarizing essential Britishness, I’m not sure that is much of a complement. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![DCnDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dcndc/32/2842_2.png) [@DCnDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DCnDC)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/32 "2018-10-12T21:40:37Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > An encylopedic entry is, however, generally not expected to be written as though you’re talking to the reader like you were pals, drinking a beer together. Sure, but RationalWiki is _not_ an encyclopedia. Their front page states their purpose quite clearly: > [@RationalWiki front page](#): > > Our purpose here at RationalWiki includes: > > [ol] > [li]Analyzing and refuting pseudoscience and the anti-science movement;[/li][li]Documenting the full range of crank ideas;[/li][li]Explorations of authoritarianism and fundamentalism;[/li][li]Analysis and criticism of how these subjects are handled in the media.[/li][/ol] Also see: [What is a RationalWiki article?](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki:What_is_a_RationalWiki_article%3F) ---
**Author:** ![DavidwithanR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3bc359/32.png) [@DavidwithanR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidwithanR)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/33 "2018-10-12T21:41:00Z")
OP: You have shown by starting this thread that the ridicule and disdain are having a useful effect - namely, getting you to notice that no, the ideas you’re talking about don’t deserve an exception either - that they are exactly as true and exactly as valid as the tooth fairy. ---
**Author:** ![DinoR](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dinor/32/2821_2.png) [@DinoR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DinoR)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/34 "2018-10-12T23:12:45Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > So how do you convey to somebody that their belief is not to be taken seriously, and have them understand that’s what you really feel? You might want to check out the [Debunking Handbook](https://www.skepticalscience.com/Debunking-Handbook-now-freely-available-download.html) coauthored by a climate scientist and a cognitive scientist. It’s only a couple pages. The Worldview Backfire Effect section is probably most relevant to this thread. It’s one of the ways that we can actually strengthen the mistaken beliefs that we think we are arguing against. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/35 "2018-10-12T23:22:22Z")
> [@DCnDC](#): > > Sure, but RationalWiki is _not_ an encyclopedia. Their front page states their purpose quite clearly: > > Also see: [What is a RationalWiki article?](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki:What_is_a_RationalWiki_article%3F) The same applies for an analytical text. Obviously, the managers are accepting of the format that they’ve ended up with, but that doesn’t mean that the site has value or should be that way. It may serve sufficiently as a place for skeptics to blow off steam, but that’s not terribly useful as a source of general information and background on the topics at hand. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2018, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/36 "2018-10-12T23:29:03Z")
> [@DinoR](#): > > You might want to check out the [Debunking Handbook](https://www.skepticalscience.com/Debunking-Handbook-now-freely-available-download.html) coauthored by a climate scientist and a cognitive scientist. It’s only a couple pages. The Worldview Backfire Effect section is probably most relevant to this thread. It’s one of the ways that we can actually strengthen the mistaken beliefs that we think we are arguing against. And the instruction on how to deal with the Worldview Backfire Effect is “forget the believers; play to the undecideds.” (Along with a note about avoiding trigger words and making them happy about other things to catch them in a good mood, if you have \*no choice \*but to try to convince the fools.) And thus, snark! It’s comedy, baby! Though if one is really intending to snare the lurkers one should be wary of sounding too malicious. I’m not sure that’s an issue for Rational Wiki, though - people don’t go there if they’re not already at least somewhat skeptical. ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2018, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/37 "2018-10-13T00:50:40Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > \*Usually a male _H. sapiens_ at or past puberty. > . That’s an interesting statistic, which, if still true, perhaps indicates the amount of time different groups spend on the internet. ‘Poison Pen Letters’ were a traditional female crime even when the anonymous author described themselves as male. (In much the same way that hitting people is a traditional male crime) ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2018, 9:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/38 "2018-10-13T09:22:48Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > Quick, someone call Leonard Nimoy!! > [@kayaker](#): > > Dammit. I _said_ quick.:mad: We’ll send out a search party… ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2018, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/39 "2018-10-13T15:47:40Z")
It should be noted that people who are credulous about ghosts, the Lost Kingdom of Atlantis or the diseappearance of the Mary Celeste are relatively harmless, and I’m not eager to piss on their parade. It’s a different story for those who promote false cancer cures, supplements/diets that address the mythical Root Cause of All Disease or antivaccination idiocy. Such delusions deserve a) factual debunking, which if repeatedly ignored (or answered by charges that the debunker is a Pharma Shill or a part of the Bill Gates Depopulation Conspiracy) are highly deserving of a heaping helping of derision. As for RationalWiki, while it certainly takes on snarky tones, its articles in my experience carry a high degree of accuracy. Wooists don’t like the implication that they’re irrational and try to pooh-pooh the source, but what they’re consistently unable to do is challenge the evidence therein\*. \*I’ve seen the same sort of sneers directed at Wikipedia. It doesn’t matter that the Wikipedia article may be excellent and contain links to solid published research, it’s seemingly enough for these folk to say “Ha, Wikipedia? LOLOLOL”. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2018, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858/40 "2018-10-13T15:58:13Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > It should be noted that people who are credulous about ghosts, the Lost Kingdom of Atlantis or the diseappearance of the Mary Celeste are relatively harmless, and I’m not eager to piss on their parade. [Credulity is not a virtue.](http://dissonancepod.com/the-skeptics-creed/) As an aside, “Gloryhole, motherfucker” as a shout-out to any fans of Tom&Cecil. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sceptics-a-little-less-snark-please/822858.md?page=3)