(Linking does not constitute endorsement or agreement. Stay skeptical.)
• Steven Novella’s momentous statement on the limits of skepticism, along with my addendum and PZ Myers’ response.
• Daniel Loxton discusses Joseph Rinn and early 20th-century skeptical activism in New York City.
• Wesley Smith thinks that artificial intelligence “Might Emulate the Brain But Never the Mind.”
• A new study of the retrospective altering of consciousness finds that we sometimes filter perception after the fact.
• Never mind what that new book says. Dave Gamble warns us to “Beware the Logic of Sherlock Holmes.”
• Neuroskeptic looks at a new explanatory model of how short-term memory might work.
• Paul Bloom and Dena Skolnick Weisberg ask, “Why Do Some People Resist Science?“
• The New Yorker asks whether Dr. Oz is doing more harm than good. Hint: not good.
• Mark Fischetti on Joseph LeDoux’s discussion with Ned Block on the nature of consciousness
• Neuroscience sheds light on the “positivity resonance” of love. Aww.
• Sharon Hill cautions us about the use of the word “pseudoscience.”
• The electronic rerelease of 1964′s “Thirty-Eight Witnesses: The Kitty Genovese Case” raises serious questions about how publishers should accommodate the evolution of facts.
