Whenever you point out that some new claim or new phenomenon is not backed by any decent

evidence, it's inevitable that somebody's going to say that you're not open-minded.

I suppose it's true that one definition of open-mindedness could be to believe anything

even in spite of evidence to the contrary, but is it really so open-minded to refuse

to consider anything that is backed by evidence?

This is the profound philosophical conversation we're having today, Unskeptoid.

Hey everyone, Brian here.

A quick favor.

We're conducting an audience survey.

We'd be really grateful if you could take just a few minutes and answer our survey.

This is the kind of thing that's sort of an engineering and marketing necessity to make

the whole free podcast ecosystem flourish, so please check it out.

So surveys are fun.

You get to talk about yourself.

Please visit survey.prx.org-skeptoid to take the survey today.

That's survey.prx.org-skep-to-id.

Thanks.

You're listening to Skeptoid.

I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.

Who is closed-minded, the skeptic, or the believer?

The tagline for this podcast buried somewhere in the RSS feed that nobody ever sees is the

truth always hurts someone.

...