A discussion about the recent overuse of the word bullshit in science and skeptic journalism. Must we really have to just call everything "bullshit" this often now in journalism? Is there no more room to use sophisticated, varied and non-inflammatory language to make a point? Does it not also affect the credibility of an otherwise important message when resorting to fifty cent words? Or is this simply a clickbait, sensational and opportunistic journalistic approach?
Last night, SCTS was tagged in a post from a new age spiritual page. It's not clear why, but we ended up, unsurprisingly, disagreeing with the claims being made and had some interesting conversations.A subscriber on that page contacted me last night and asked me a few questions. I thought I would share our response. TLDR warning! Question: I really enjoyed the debate but you left me hanging without a response on several issues. The unanswered question I'm most curious about is: if everything must come from something, how does science explain initial creation? Maybe I'm wrong but you guys believe in the Big Bang right? Where did all of that energy come from in the beginning if there was no creator? I've never been able to ask an atheist this question. I'm honestly and sincerely curious of your response. Thanks! XXX