How does one discern fact from fiction? How do you know when someone is purposely deceiving you out of debt to religious dogma or from ignorance?

You do this by learning to think critically. You begin by examining the argument. Is the argument false or relies on a well known fallacy? What about the evidence? Is the evidence as rigorous in quality to satiate the burden of proof?

My own skeptical path took a different route. I was a skeptic of evolution, science and the historical method before I became to advocate for them. I was a skeptic of skepticism. I was also something of an Old Earth Creationist after deconverting from Christianity, basing my worldview in Eastern religions (Hinduism) and a love for crypto-zoology. I let my sci-fi fantasies get the best of me where the "face on Mars" was concerned. Yes, I believed at one time in advanced antidiluvean civilizations, ancient technologically-advanced civilizations on Mars, or that Mary and Jesus were part of an extra-terrestrial cloning experiment. And worse.....

Ultimately, that skepticism turned back on itself. I got online and tracked down the evidence and read what the skeptics had to say. Basically, I renewed my critical thinking skills.

Anyway, I want to suggest a few skeptical books and other resources from my own book shelf. I'm not including pure science books at this time, although, many of these books do rely on the scientific method.

Skeptical Books
The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. The late Carl Sagan writes about UFO and other spurious beliefs, but gives you tools to detect bad arguments and how to assess the evidence in respect to the claim. A really, great read. Essential.

Truth, Knowledge, or Just Plain Bull. Benard M. Patten. Great primer for you to develop your reason and to identify fallacies in arguments.

Why People Believe Weird Things. Dr. Micheal Shermer covers pseudo-science, creationism, and even holocaust denial.  A great book!

Scientists Confront Creationism. A series of short essays which examine the historical arc of creationism to the arguments that creationist use. Short and too the point, this book examines the argument of creationists and how they have not one new argument or shred of evidence since the Civil War. Edited by Laurie Godfrey.

Religious Skepticism
Atheism: The Case Against God. George Smith's hard-hitting skeptical book about belief in god. Clear, easy to understand.

The Case Against Christianity. Micheal Martin examines the claims of Christianity and why they do not work and are objectively false.

The Age of Reason. Revolutionary founder, freethinker Thomas Paine's classic book against Christianity. A crucial, necessary read and a great introduction to Enlightenment reason where belief in a god is concerned.

Podcasts
The Skeptics Guide to the Universe. Dr. Steven Novella, president of the New England Skeptic Society, and the other rouges with Skepchick Rebecca Watson examine all the recent psedeo-science in the news. A great entertaining listen!

Point of Inquiry. DJ Groethe brings interviews with leading authors and skeptics defending science and reason and advancing a naturalistic worldview. Essential.

Skeptoid. Great podcast that examines everything from Free Tibet to UFOs and even Big Foot. A TV pilot is in the works.

Websites
Exchristian.net. A place for ex-Christians if you question your religion, or have recently deconverted for support. Want to debate religion? The Arena, the Colosseum, or the Lions Den may be the place for you. The Testimonies of Former Christians section is a must read. 

NeuroLogica Blog. Dr. Steven Novella examines the claims of psedeo-science and psedeo-medicine.

Skeptics Annotated Bible. Essential reference tool in examining the Bible skeptically. Fast links that index the violence, cruelty, absurdities, and  contradictions of the Bible.

Basic Logic
Atheism: Logic and Fallacies. Great introduction on writing clear arguments and associated fallacies.

NoBeliefs. List of Common Fallacies. Great quick read summarizing many basic bad arguments used on the web.

Of course, I can not include every book or resource out there - just the a few of the ones I am familiar with. There are other great authors you should consider. Bart Erhman and Robert Price on New Testament textural criticism. Anything by Carl Sagan or Micheal Shermer is a worthwhile read. On evolution, you can not go wrong with Richard Dawkins or Richard Leakey. On the nature of belief, I would also highly recommend Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett.

Have any favorite skeptical books or links to share? Add them here.
________

Programing note: I've had to cut back on the number of my post in the past week. I've been reading with my spare time and will be back in college, taking classes of interest this fall. I've missed school greatly! I expect a reduction in the number of posts. This will probably be of great relief to the haters out there.

As I was cleaning my car over the weekend, I heard intermittent segments of a NPR story about a Chicago-area stand-up comedian who immigrated from Pakistan to attended college in the United States. I am a little unsure of his name even after a google, it was either Azhar Usman or Mohammed Amer that was interviewed.

As a student, away from the pervasive religious environment of Pakistan, this would-be stand-up comedian came to terms with his Islamic beliefs. Muslims share a similar belief that many Christians have about the Bible, that the Koran is the innerrant and literal word of God – or God's own words. After all, Christians, Jews and Muslims share the same belief in the God of Abraham. At college, our comedian learned to think critically and systematically about Islam which helped him to see the absurdity of the Koran, and to reject that notion of the Koran's inerrancy.

When asked by the interviewer, doesn't his deconversion confirm the fear and suspicion by many Muslims that once their children go to American schools they become "liberalized" by Western culture and leave the religion of their parents? Funny thing, this is exactly the same kind of criticism that fundamentalist Christians likewise make about American colleges. I had an ex-girlfriend, a fundamentalist Christian, who said the very same thing. If I recall correctly, he answered yes.

To the Muslim and Christian critics of American colleges, the answer is true – of course. Studies have shown that the more educated you become, the more likely you will abandon theism. (There are notable exceptions of course.)

Why?

Once a person develops their critical thinking, that person can become quite invigorated in challenging everything that was assured to you, as a child, as unquestionable. To the newly minted skeptic, every belief becomes a new test case in examining a claim's reliability. For me, thinking critically became a compliment to my natural curiosity of the world.

The interviewer went on to ask the comedian if he had any sort of theistic belief after his deconversion. He answered that he was now an atheist.

When you examine the content of the blogs at LCL, there is nothing but criticism of other beliefs, such as the endless debates pitching conservatism against liberalism, or the skepticism regarding global climate change. Since our public discourse is equally as rigorous to these secular beliefs, why is religion beyond reproach and examination? Therefore, I want to ask the Christians who read my blog a series of questions - but anyone can feel free to chime in.

Do you feel that this comedian threw the baby out with the bathwater? Do you approve of this comedian's deconversion? His athiesism?

If you approve of his athiesism, should he then convert to Christianity? Why? If it is reasonable for this comedian to question and reject Islam, why is it not reasonable for the Christian to question his faith and perhaps ultimately reject it?

Staking their fortunes almost solely on Internet-based content may have been the 9/11 deniers’ biggest mistake. What seems like a perfect place for pseudoscience — the Internet is un-edited, without fact-checkers or minimum publishing standards of any kind — also became a perfect place for a rapid-response system of blogs and forums to fight back. Drawing on the freely available technical information from the NIST, FEMA, and academic journals which most colleges let their students access for free, skeptical sites like ScrewLooseChange.blogspot.com and debunking911.com are able to defuse 9/11 denier claims as they arise.

What you are about to read will play a role in determining the future of the world. Yes! No kidding! Hyperbole you say? I'll explain in a moment why not.

Introductions first. Hello, I am MC Pickard, a new community blogger at Lake Country Living.com. I've lurked on these blogs for months now, reading, but never participating. I decided to change that, because there is much that is not being said and much that should be said on this forum. I would like to add my voice.

So just how will my blog at Lake Country Living.com play a part in determining the future of the world? By the pseudeoscholarship that I hope to provide. What is pseudeoscholarship and who are pseudoscholars? Benard M. Patton, in his book, Truth Knowledge or Just Plain Bull, observes that the pseudoscholar "controls the church and state, the educational systems, the press, and the economy." And just who are these psedoscholars? It is us.We are not the specialist. And if you ever attempted to read an abstract in JAMA, you know what I mean. Despite this, concepts do trickle out, like Einstein's Theory of Relativity (ToR). Other than acknowledgment of the iconic equation of E=mc2, do you think the majority of people really understand the wider and deeper implications of the ToR and how it came to eclipse Newtonian physics? Probably not. (I don't pretend to either.)

Likewise, with the public understanding of the Theory of Evolution (ToE), Americans are generally misinformed. In 2005, the school board of Dover, PA lost a definitive ruling to teach Intelligent Design (ID) along side of the ToE in science class as a full-fledged science. This overt redefining of creationism as a science not only had implications as to what we mean when we think or practice religion, but how we think and practice science as well. Reason won the day with a solid defense of the ToE, and by uncovering the motives behind the ID movement, thus reaffirming the separation clause of the First Amendment. Creationism has reformulated its attack however, instead of positioning ID and creationism as science, ironically, as an appeal to academic freedom. One such bill is currently working its way through legislation in South Carolina and elsewhere.

Why do court cases like Dover happen? There are numerous reasons of course, but if I had to pick just one, I would say basic human credulity. Reason is one sure hallmark of our species, but we seem to constantly fail in the practice of it. No more apparent  when cherished beliefs are perceived to be threatened. We tend to accept easy answers that confirm our biases, or that comport to an imparted worldview. While Americans are no more credulous than anyone else and public acceptance for the ToE is at a pathetic all-time low, we are still the world's premier superpower industrial society. (For instance, take a look at this study of high school biology students and teachers attitudes toward the ToE and literal, Biblical creationism in the classroom.)

Although, I do condemn the Dover board for their actions, its hard for me to lay blame solely on them. The Discovery Institute (DI) and likewise partisans are just as complicit. The DI, in the late 90's, issued the Wedge Document (Discovery Institute, 1998; Forrest and Gross) to "reverse the stifling materialist world view and replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions" and to "affirm the reality of God." In order to do, as Barbara Forester explains that the goal of the Wedge Strategy was "to create an opening for the supernatural in the public’s understanding of science—and in the minds of policymakers." This was to be accomplished, not through the scientific method and serious peer review study, but with public relations. Meaning, the alleged controversy over the ToE became a self-fulfilling, well-funded, manufactured public controversy abrogating the magisteria of religion with the magisteria of science while undermining philosophical naturalism that science is predicated upon.

Of course, one could argue what the Dover School Board did was a victimless crime. But our beliefs do inform our actions. No more so than the case of Madeline Neumann of Wausau, who died because her parents ignored a noticeable and non-fatal diabetic condition for faith healing by prayer. Likewise, the honor killings of Jasbir and Sunita in Southern India, or the murder of Rand Abdel-Qader in Southern Iraq for a teenage crush. These are tragic, criminal cases against the basic rights of humanity and freedom of conscious, and a logical consequence of these religious belief systems. I don't want to single out the religious only in this regard, as there just as many examples of secular abuses based upon adherence to political dogmas. It's important to recognize that these crimes are based upon irrational worldviews, even though those beliefs are coherent within their own framework.

Let me reiterate, our beliefs do inform our decisions and our actions, and do have real world implications.

So where does this leave the pseudoscholar? Does this mean, that as a society of pseudoscholars that we can not determine the likely-hood of claims and make reasonable, sound decisions regarding their veracity? Yes, we can. Does this also mean that bona fide scholars always get it right? No. The Sokol Hoax and Piltdown Man, exposes just how fallible we humans can be. We are just as susceptible to confirmation bias, errors in reasoning, pseudeo-science, and woo just like the scientific and academic practitioners of our societies. What is important is the methodology by which we use to ferret out specious arguments and claims, like Piltdown. After all, it was science (a methodology) and not creationism that exposed the Piltdown hoax.

I am a pseudoscholar just like yourself, and now you probably now have some idea about the positions I hold dear. Undoubtedly, the values I advocate for will be of great irritation and polemical to some. Confronting our collective myths always incurs outrage. However, I am prepared for the inevitable denouncements and the numerous Pascal's Wagers that I am sure to be peppered with.

So why bother? I deeply care about reality, that is, holding on to as many true beliefs as opposed to false ones. It is by hard work, self-examination, and by a rational methodology that we can do the right kind of things for our society. Although, we've evolved as an altruistic species, we are still an epistemologically immature one. In time, hopefully, we will transcended superstition, credulity, and cruelty as our knowledge of nature deepens and matures. It is my hope that my contribution, from an entirely under-represented view of American civic life, will add value to this public forum and where it matters most - locally. Therefore, I want to craft this blog to be educational, yet critical of current events, pseudo-science, religion, woo, and that of church and state entanglements.

Otherwise, I'm pretty much like yourself negotiating through the world and trying to get by as best I can. We are the masters of the future - let's try to be coherent as possible and make the future as great as possible.