The Skeptics Society’s Distinguished Science Lecture Series: Now on Vimeo On Demand
Since 1992, the Skeptics Society has sponsored the Distinguished Science Lecture Series, hosting hundreds of the biggest names in science. This series has covered cutting edge discoveries and controversial topics, and enabled students, educators, and the general public to hear what’s new in science and skepticism.
You can learn more about our upcoming lectures at Skeptic.com. Many of our past lectures are available to purchase on DVD at Shop Skeptic. Today, we’re excited to announce another option: we’ve now made 22 of our most popular science lectures (over 33 hours!) available to RENT instantly through Vimeo on Demand!
RENT ONE lecture for $3.95 and watch it for a 72-hour period. Or, RENT ALL lectures for $49 on a 1-year subscription.
Big names. Even bigger ideas. Watch the series trailer below, then choose your preferred rental option.
The Distinguished Science Lecture Series (TRAILER) from The Skeptics Society on Vimeo.
Like Daniel Loxton’s work? Read more in the pages of Skeptic magazine. Subscribe today in print or digitally!
Your list of 22 does not include the one I most want to see. The Bjorn Lomborg debate described in this post:
http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/11/16/throwing-cold-water-on-a-hot-topic/
Funny that you should bring that up Canman.Just yesterday I was culling through some unsorted bookmarks and ran across this page comparing errors and flaws of Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ to both Bjørn Lomborg´s ‘Cool It’ and ‘The Skeptical Environmentalist’.
http://www.lomborg-errors.dk/GoreversusLomborg.htm
That link didn’t include the Lomborg error discussion,only the tally,so here is the main link:
http://www.lomborg-errors.dk/
Groan…I had to wade through page after page of strident, invective rhetoric with such subtitles as Lomborg´s hidden agenda, Lomborg´s texts have many errors, Many errors are deliberate, Derogation of opponents, How Lomborg cheats and utilises the media, What could be the explanations that people still trust Lomborg? …
When I finally found a list of six example errors, they were full of dense hairsplitting minutia that made my eyes glaze over. The summaries made my eyes glaze over. I’m sure the author might have some valid points of contention, but I suspect that a lot of it is open to interpretation. I’d guess that he is carrying a huge chip of confirmation bias on his shoulder.
Why do people still trust Lomborg? Well me and Dennis Miller find him sucinct and sensible:
http://www.dennismillerradio.com/b/Bjorn-Lomborg-Interview/1831.html
The errors in Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient (… um …) Truth” are at least a little more numerous than noted in the link, according to a British High Court Judge:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3310137/Al-Gores-nine-Inconvenient-Untruths.html
Interestingly they seem to apply to all the factors often quoted as ‘proof of AGW’ in the press.
Canman- I give you credit for actually looking at the criticisms.That’s more than many would do. I didn’t think it would change your opinion of Lomborg’s credibility much,but there are many who see him as being either too motivated by his economic views to fairly access the problem,and some who think he is just basically dishonest,and playing to a lucrative base. I have no idea myself.
Hey tmac, I read ‘em all too. Credit please. :-)
Ok markx here’s a gold star sticker for you *
Nap time!
We may add that lecture to Vimeo eventually. But, for now, it’s available on DVD: http://www.skeptic.com/productlink/av103
I think more debates might generate more interest in skepticism, which might spill over on some of the other great work you guys do.
I would like to suggest a debate on the subject of asteroid impacts and mass extinctions between Donald Prothero and Richard Muller. Luis Alvarez discovered the iridium layer left by the impact at the end of the cretaceous period and came up with the impact theory of extinctions. His protegee, Richard Muller came up with a theory that the sun has a companion star that periodically passes through the Oort comet cloud, disturbing it and causing a huge increase in the number of comets crossing the solar system. This explains an observed periodicity in extinctions. Prothero’s book, Catastrophes! debunks this theory.