In the end, social skeptics are not actually selling debunking of ridiculous topics like orgone energy, pyramid aliens, leprechauns, and expanding Earth. What they are selling is their method of approaching the disposition of these topics.

By contending that their ‘method’ afforded them the basis of understanding from which to debunk easy topics, they further then hope to employ that same method to target and quickly resolve to their liking, other more controversial subjects.

No, their conclusions are not necessarily wrong.  The method is wrong, by which they arrived at them –  AND – Indeed, it is the method itself, which they are selling.

SSkeptics are contending

if R, then Q  : and if Q, given P  : therefore P  ≡ R

They hope that you fall for the trick of assuming that their false method is equivalent to science method (P  ≡ R), justified by public displays of gladiator / arena style debunking, media domination and celebrity.  This is not simply a magician’s trick, rather a sham.

sham

noun \ˈsham\ : something that is not what it appears to be and that is meant to trick or deceive people

I would place Fair Use Act compliant thumbnails up or cite examples of famous stage magician skeptics who practice this sleight-of-hand, but their organizations scour and regularly censor my blogs of thumbnails and text without my knowledge. They are allowed to defame organizations, professionals and all manner of people, without evidence, and with significant damage to reputation and business.  But no one is allowed to hold them accountable, and they have full power to censor your personal speech if they find that they do not agree with it.  This has happened at least 6 times, and probably more. So it is typically a waste of time for me to post observed examples. Nor is the purpose of this blog to bash specific people, with a few very high profile celebrity exceptions – when they foist pseudoscience for the masses.

This sham they employ is designated for further application in discrediting other very valid and pluralistic arguments, including but not limited to:

• pharmaceutical and medical cost inflation and oligarchy

• health damage from furtive food modifications targeting profits

• freedom from certain information they do not like

• destruction of religions competing with Nihilism

• control of media channels

• intimidation of scientists and researchers

• promotion of educational agendas

• restriction of supplements and treatments which compete with big pharma sponsors

• elimination of certain subjects from public and scientific discourse

• promotion of specific politics, movements and parties

• promotion of hate agendas for specific gender and races

• a shift of power from public to private hands.

All enabled via the deception techniques employed, along with the rush enjoyed, by a performing magician. Only, this process is a sham, since the difference between a sham and the work of a magician is that the magician admits that his process is one of deception.

Power is intoxicating. But power derived through sleight-of-hand is exhilarating.