h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

hi naita,
am interested in doing an article on skepticism, and the proper application of skepticism in everyday life. i think it is only right that we examine every new claim that comes along - not simply to debunk it, but to examine it with an open mind in the event that it's actually for real. (of course, plenty of 'em turn out to be pseudoscience and hocus-pocus) the thing is... i think it's healthy to practice skepticism to a certain degree; however i think that too many people are getting it wrong nowadays. i mean, i was browsing the net the other day, and came across this article where this fellow was making claims that 'dihydrogen oxide' was bad for your health! H2O! so it's like... i think people *should* be critical of things, given the amount of hogwash that's flooding the market and the media nowadays, but i think that when they argue about a certain topic that they should have scientific justification for it, and not argue about it just because they're biased agains the researchers etc. that means that they should have read up for themselves what it is (and not just base their opinions on some other reviewer's opinions), and then form their own opinions based on what they've learnt in science - otherwise they come off sounding really, really stupid. (like for example the fellow who criticized ayn rand's works, but later admitted he'd never even read a single one of her books. or like those radicals who debunked a research carried out on the role semen plays in pleasure, because the research was 'carried out by males')... so i was thinking, maybe one could do an article guiding would-be skeptics in examining and criticizing things, and the hazards of skepticism without foundation (ie. sounding like a total ass). the thing is, it's a huge topic, and i don't really think anyone could handle it on their own. do you know anybody in the ars who would be interested in collaborating? or maybe we could make this a conversation topic or something, and open it for discussion and see what people say?

I know that JD was planning to write an article on everyday use and abuse of the scientific method, which is sort of what you are describing. But I don't know when he'll have the time. Procrastination seems to be something many of us do very well.
And you're right that skeptics are often guilty of using false arguments, like attacking the person. The Dihydrogen monoxide article however isn't a skeptic gone mad. It's a very good joke. I first came over it as a webpage in uni, but according to www.dhmo.org it was written in 1988. www.dhmo.org doesn't seem to have a 'serious' page, but I seem to recall reading elsewhere that it was originally a science paper.

I don't know what the best way to get an article like that going would be. You could drop a post into ars and see what kind of response you'd get. Some of the people on FFFF also are purdy good at arguing fairly. The easiest thing to do, I think, would be to write the start of the article as you'd like it to be and put it in the creative writing workshop, and then invite ARS'ers and others to contribute and discuss. I certainly would.

naita,

here's my contribution to the ars: A932654. it's an article on homeopathy, so if the link doesn't take you there it means i've gotten the number wrong.

cheers!