A Skeptical Human | Anton Dybal

Candace Owens recently appeared on The Joe Rogan Experience, making a series of faulty and absurd arguments on climate change which I debunk in this video. To put it bluntly, she has absolutely no idea what she's talking about when it comes to global warming.

Contrary to what drug warriors argue, drug decriminalization in Portugal has been an outstanding success. Since the policy change, problem drug-usage rates have actually declined, as has the number of intravenous HIV/AIDS transmissions and drug-related deaths. These outcomes are the product of both decriminalization and harm-reduction programs working in concert. Here, I run through the data in these areas while also debunking some of the arguments made by critics of Portugal's decriminalization.

Global warming deniers claim that there was an 18-year pause in global warming which started in 1998. As I show here, this apparent hiatus was actually the product of biases in the data. Once these are corrected for, the pause evaporates. I also make some points about how to properly examine data, and I respond to the idea that these temperature corrections are part of a scientific conspiracy.

Climate-change deniers argue that there actually is not a 97% manmade global-warming consensus among scientists and climatologists. They claim the true statistic is anywhere from 52% to a laughable 1%.

Here, I take a very close look at the studies and surveys on these questions and provide accurate statistics on the percentage of climate change publications that reject anthropogenic global warming, and also the percentage of scientists, climatologists, and top-publishing climatologists that believe in AGW and believe that it's dangerous.

In the process, I also debunk many of the flaws in the arguments and critiques used by deniers to poke holes in these studies, reject this data, and support a much lower figure. Enjoy!

Charlie Kirk's debate performance at Politicon 2018 was a right-wing talking-point extravaganza. Here, I debunk his flawed arguments on subjects like corruption, socialism, government programs, and the impact of Democratic policies.

While many do come to the U.S. for healthcare, a much larger number of people leave the U.S. for care. Medical tourism takes place to and from many different countries for many different reasons, and the complex reality of the situation is nothing like the crude, one-sided picture that conservatives paint for us. There's also no good evidence to support the claim that the U.S. has the world's best doctors and medical facilities.

Conservatives argue that healthcare quality in the United States is superior to that of other countries with more progressive systems. An actual examination of objection healthcare outcomes, however, demonstrates that U.S. healthcare quality can only be described as average.

Conservatives argue that the U.S. healthcare system is responsible for a uniquely high amount of medical innovation. They also argue that higher U.S. healthcare costs supply the medical industry with the necessary income to fund their R&D—which the rest of the world benefits from. As I show here, these, and other related arguments, are not supported by the appropriate data and don't stand up to scrutiny.

Here, I compare wait times among various healthcare systems, assessing how single- or mixed-payer systems stack up against the private system of the United States. I also examine the question of rationing in healthcare as well as debunk a variety of flawed right-wing arguments that I come across.

Radiometric dating methods are very accurate and very trustworthy. Creationist arguments to the contrary are riddled with flaws, as is the scientific research used by them to support their position.