How I Learned to Love Pseudoscience

[Spongebob]

Nice video for anyone with 10 or so minutes to spare.

But something she said really irks me: "The word 'skeptical' has suffered in recent years because a lot of science-deniers now claim to be 'skeptics.'"

And you know what? She's right. But I am loathe to call science-deniers skeptics. I think the skepticism inherent in science is way more rigorous than the skepticism of anti-vaxxers and such. And that's why I don't want to call these people skeptics. It's skepticism without rigor. And that hardly counts as skepticism at all in my book.

What do you think? Do science-deniers qualify as skeptics?

You are completely right to call them out on this.  No, antivaxxers and such are not skeptics; they are wing nuts.  Just like people screaming that not wearing a mask represents freedom.  It's a corruption of the terminology.  You also have ding dongs who claim they are scientists but do nothing of the sort.

---

There are specific warning signs to distinguish between skeptics and pseudos (nutjobs). Skeptics apply sound logic, reason and evidence in an effort to question the efficacy of whatever topic is in play. The others employ a wide array of nonsensical tools to obscure the topic to the point that their position can't reasonably be understood so it is accepted by default by some. Some of these are questioning the sources, use of vague or exaggerated claims or even confusing language, confirmation bias, appealing to secrecy, claims of conspiracy. These types of people often continue making claims after those claims have been definitively demonstrated to be false. They utilize almost every logical fallacy in the book. Their claims are famously lacking in peer review and often rely on special pleading when challenged. There are scores of such approaches they employ and they will try as many as needed until some of the pay off.