“The man in question was NOT missing 90% of his brain”

“”

“”

“Points out factual problems with the theory”

“sorry, wrong link, meant to link to a specific article on this blog”

“”

“”

“”

“”

“”

“Points out Carrier's hypocrisy”

“Provides details of research that refutes the premise of this episode”

“Applies basic principles of skepticism to this psychiatrist's credulous tales”

“Presents a skeptical view of this psychiatrist's paranormal claims”

“Points out that the podcast was one-sided and presented an outdating and misleading view”

“Points out numerous errors in Myers' grasp of the subject”

“The target article advances strong causal claims about pornography based only on correlational evidence. ”

“”

“Describes how the ABC article is completely misleading, the original study reported on was not testing the paleo diet at all”

“Points out published evidence that rules out homicide”

“Rebuts claims that Japan has policy restricting the spread of Islam”

“Rebuts many claims that Japan has official policies against Muslims”

“Points out a broader campaign to restrict free speech based on flimsy rationales”

“Points out how ridiculously out of touch with the real world this article is”

“Points out blatantly false statements that do not even appear in the research paper being described”

“More explanation of why this paper's claims linking global warming denial with conspiracy theories are not supported by its own data”

“Shows that the study data invalidates the findings claimed by the authors”

“Rebuts the assertion that secularists are ignorant of religious knowledge”

“Highlights statistical problems with this study that result in misleading conclusions”

“Point-by-point refutation of errors and misunderstandings in the target article”

“Argues that a ban on sex robots is based on the idea that they would indirectly contribute to social problems; however it would make more sense to address said problems in a more direct manner”

“Points out that the arguments made in this campaign are weak and overly vague”

“Points out that there is actually no great gender divide in support for Sanders compared to Clinton”

“Notes that this report's definition of violence conflates protected free speech with more serious offences, which can have a chilling effect. Also notes the use of ludicrous supporting references that ruin the report's credibility.”

“Highlights multiple problems with references in this document, including blank and missing citations, citing of non-existent sources, plagiarism, and even a link to someone's hard drive”

“Scathing review of an awful book”

“Argues that it is highly unlikely that failed replications are due to hidden moderators”

“”

“A number of scientists have expressed scepticism and pointed out lack of sufficient evidence that this claim is valid”

“Critiques the study methodology as over-simplified”

“Shows that Anderson critiques a straw man caricature of atheism”

“”

“Points out that the supposed University of Hamburg study cited is a complete hoax”

“”

“Makes a case for the opposite argument, that a multiverse would help explain why intelligent life seems to be so rare in our universe”

“”

“Critiques the original study reported in this article”

“Provides an insightful critique of this study and the way it was reported”

“”

“Points out that not only does Walsh show a lack of humanity, but that his opinions contradict his professed religious beliefs”

“Argues that this paper is based on unfalsifiable premises and hence is pseudoscience”

“Explains that the claim in the title is inaccurate and misleading”

“Points out serious methodological problems in Zimbardo's research”

“Points out sloppy science in Zimbardo's claims”

“Points out factual inaccuracies in the description of Zimbardo's survey, as well as methodological problems with the survey itself.”

“Zimbardo makes sweeping assertions that reinforce traditional gender stereotypes while failing to provide supportive evidence.”

“Notes sweeping generalizations supported by little more than anecdotes”

“Points out reliance on anecdotes and a lack of research evidence to support the book's sweeping claims”

“Points out a serious misunderstanding of the constitutional limits on free speech, specifically what constitutes 'fighting words' and what does not”

“Points out that recipients of medical care want treatments that actually work”

“Points out that the letter writer's arguments are based on highly dubious postmodern ideologies that distort the facts”

“Argues that the author makes empty generalizations that explain nothing”

“Points out a host of misconceptions about the subject”

“Argues that such requests are unreasonable and not at all analogous to giving up one's seat to someone with a genuine need”

“Argues that belief in astrology can have harmful social consequences, such as bigotry”

“Robert Hare describes this book as "frivolous, shallow, and professionally disconcerting"”

“”

“”

“Shows that the article presents a grossly inaccurate description of the actual research study”

“Points out that Noah has misrepresented Scott's actual beliefs”

“Highlights a massive straw man argument by Watson”

“Notes many flawed concepts in the research cited, especially a misleading definition of 'spirituality'”

“Highlights new research showing that use of words like 'I' and 'me' are unrelated to narcissism”

“”

“”

“Points out that the social problems Brooks discusses are actually getting better not worse”

“Describes many methodological flaws in this study that render its conclusions invalid”

“Points out that Hitler's haplotype group is not rare and does not particularly suggest Jewish ancestry as claimed”

“Chopra presents a straw man version of skepticism”

“Point out the disingenuousness of Zvan's defense of Watson's talk”

“Points out that the article overstates the case and the paper cited is speculative”

“Points out that Rebecca Watson lacks accurate knowledge of the topic she discusses”

“Points out that the piece makes assumptions without evidence about the motives of the killer”

“Points out lack of substance and logical fallacies in Bruenig's article”

“Points out lack of evidence for bold assertions in this book”

“Points out that internet use cannot cause autism, because autism symptoms appear before the age of 2”

“Argues that Zimbardo makes sweeping generalizations without having serious supportive evidence”

“Argues that the relationship described in the books is not actually about deliberate abuse but an emotionally complicated relationship ”

“Argues that although the book does depict abuse, it is still fiction and as such relies on drama and suspense to move the story along”

“”

“Points out harmful pseudoscience”

“Points out the rather dubious scientific basis for health claims about semen”

“Points out that it is not popular opinion but objective differences in test scores used for selection that explain gender gaps in science”

“Points out that rather than shunning women, these fields select based on objective measures of ability”

“Points out that gender gaps are associated with differences in actual ability”

“Points out that fields associated with "raw brilliance" actually do require high ability”

“Points out that the evidence for this claim is not only far from convincing but seriously lacking”

“Points out lack of genuine evidence for this outlandish claim”

“Points out that this is a hate-filled rant relying on ad hominem attacks rather than a substantive review of the work in question”

“Points out that the article does not even substantiate its claim that Dawkins is sexist”

“”

“Points out cherry picking and lack of comparative data that would put the article's claims into context”

“Points out cherry picking and distortions of the facts by Aslan”

“”

“Video version of blog post, points out issues in interpreting racial disparities”

“Points out data showing that disparities between races in the US are not as simple as they first appear”

“Points out inaccuracies and distortions in Donohue's article and highlights its lack of human decency”

“Points out scientific inaccuracies in a sensationalised article”

“Lawrence Krauss points out scientific inaccuracies in the article, as well as the fact that the author is not a scientist”

“Points out lack of supporting data, and lack of qualifications by the authors of the study in question”

“Points out hyperbolic and far-fetched claims in the original paper referred to”

“”

“”

“Gives evidence against the idea that slavery has benefitted whites”

“Points out that free speech promotes tolerance in a diverse society, whereas blasphemy laws are divisive”

“Points out a number of misconceptions the author has about free speech”

“Makes a strong case that 'hate speech' laws limiting free speech undermine democratic principles”

“Points out that just about all the examples provided by the author fail to support the case being made”

“Points out that the hypothesised ”

“Points out that demands for allegiance to A+ conflate controversial and non-controversial positions, and that people may object to the former without objecting to the latter”

“Points out philosophical problems with the author's argument that make it unsound”

“Points out that the campaign was not actually effective in Edmonton”

“Points out how the author has cherry-picked data to make her case, and explains why the supposed effects are most likely due to chance. ”

“”

“Points out that this article presents an absurd straw man version of "rationalists" that shows appalling ignorance of the facts”

“Points out that the study discussed in the article "specifically mentions that it should not be used to conclude that psychiatric interventions like admission to a mental hospital could increase suicide risk."”

“Points out exaggerations about the benefits of lucid dreaming”

“Points out that many liberals treat Islam as a special case that is beyond criticism”

“Points out that many activities in daily life involve real risks, yet people think the risks are worthwhile”

“The title claim is inaccurate and out of date”

“The claim in the title is inaccurate: the FFRF currently has no plans to distribute the pamphlet in question”

“”

“Points out a number of errors in the article such as conflating atheism with science”

“Points out that a person does not need a degree in religious studies to criticise religious ideas”

“Points out that Benson deliberately omits the fact that Sam Harris was talking about a specific person, so the use of gendered language was common sense not sexism”

“”

“Points out that there are many things atheists get angry about but they do not actually care about this song”

“Points out that the article provides no examples whatsoever to support its headline”

“Article repeats claims about atheists being upset about the song without providing any substantiation at all”

“The article does not specify any atheists groups or individuals who were upset about or even cared about the song”

“Provides detailed critique of problematic advice from the source blog”

“Points out that contrary to the paper's claims, the studies included are not exact replications at all”

“The title of this article is also misleading, links between obesity and artificial sweeteners disappear when controlling for pre-existing health status”

“Points out that the title of the study is somewhat misleading, the results need to be treated with caution”

“Michael Shermer responds to allegations in the Buzzfeed article, which he states are completely untrue”

“Harris explains that he does not deny that there might be as many female atheists as male, points out that he was referring to active involvement in atheism, which is predominantly but not exclusively male”

“Explains that Harris does not deny that women are involved with atheism, and points out that he was talking about a general trend for more men than women to be actively involved. ”

“Explains the context of remarks by Harris that were criticised as sexist”

“Points out that ISIS self-describes as Islamic, and argues that there are no objective criteria for judging what is or is not a "true"religion, as they are all based on faith. ”

“Points out that Hawking was actually talking about the Higgs potential not the Higgs boson, which is not the same thing”

“Argues that Myers uses a poor analogy in making whatever point he is trying to make”

“Points out several false statements, and suggests that the wound in the skull was probably due to an infection rather than a shot”

“”

“Points out misinformation as well as poor ethics”

“Refutes many assumptions about human nature and male-female relations promulgated by the author”

“Points out dishonesty in watson's critique of Ron Lindsay's speech”

“Points out errors in calculation of cost/benefit ratios as well as inconsistent reasoning by the author of the target article”

“Points out that most atheists do not actually believe these things Yoffie discusses”

“Points out that Megalodon has been extinct for over 2 million years, and that supposed photos of the same are fake”

“”

“Points out Myers' callous lack of empathy in using a sad event to promote a political message”

“Points out self-contradictions in Oolon's post, then goes on to cite relevant research debunking the idea of rape culture”

“Points out that far from being 'normalised' in our culture, rape is regarded as a most heinous crime. ”

“Points out that there is no evidence that Thieves oil can treat any viral infection, let alone ebola”

“Points out false claim about ebola spreading abroad”

“Target site exaggerates threat of ebola so they can offer a bogus cure”

“Argues that reasoned debate is a better way to deal with bigotry than punishment, as the latter can backfire”

“Points out that this widely cited paper reaches exaggerated conclusions based on a small selection of studies”

“Points out that the article's title grossly exaggerates what was originally claimed”

“The researcher concerned never actually claimed "90%"”

“Points out misleading statistics in the target article”

“”

“Author notes that he apologised years ago for statements critiqued by Christina, and that she misrepresents his actual views”

“”

“”

“”

“Points out that pre-existing demographic factors can explain why minority groups are under-represented in atheist organisations”

“Points out that contrary to what Ham thinks, scientists are not motivated by rejection of the Bible but a desire to discover the actual state of the universe”

“Describes just how many advances there have been in modern technology since the Moon Landing, rebutting the idea that human capacity has declined. ”

“Argues that skyscrapers are not a good indicator of anything let alone the decline of western civilisation”

“Discusses how HeartMath mixes non-controversial claims with pseudoscience to create an illusion of respectability”

“Argues that irrelevant physical laws are used as a weak analogy for voting behavior. ”

“Makes a nuanced argument that it is unfair to demand that particular atheist organisations focus on issues that are outside their mission. ”

“Explains why the supposed "study" referred to is actually completely made up. ”

“”

“Points out key flaws in the methodology of the study discussed, such as selection bias that invalidate the results”

“Points out that the Woodley paper does not take into account selection bias and demographic differences between Victorian and modern samples that would account for IQ differences”

“Argues that Mitchell's makes naive and self-contradictory claims ”

“Rebuts common argument for objective morality by pointing out that Christian apologists claim that atrocities described in the Bible are morally justified”

“Argues that the premises of neoreaction are "spectacularly" untrue”

“Provides detailed rebuttals of neor-reactionary assertions”

“Argues that people have a right to follow their specific interests rather than being expected to follow Myers' agendas.”

“Points out that Myers misrepresents the basis of the current skeptical movement and that this movement is much broader than Myers seems think. ”

“Discusses how PZ Myers wants to hijack the skeptical movement to suit his own agendas and that political parties already exist to promote for this purpose”

“Highlights Carrier's intolerant and harsh thinking”

“Notes problems with Carrier's 'us vs. them' mentality - people can broadly agree on certain values while disagreeing about specific topics”

“Myers uses an ad hominem attack to ridicule those who disagree with his critqiue of 'dictionary atheists'”

“Points out straw man arguments in Myers' critique of "dictionary atheists"”

“Watson selectively uses troll comments to make blanket generalizations about the skeptic community. ”

“Notes that the Time article has a misleading headline and provides crackpot claims with more credit than they deserve”

“Points out that the author's definition of "special interest groups" is completely bogus”

“Points out that the article tries to conflate atheism with political agendas”

“The article is cynical and shows a lack of understanding of social science methods”

“Notes that waiting until people are "ready" to hear that religion is nonsense is misguided”

“Discusses many false assumptions about EP in this book”

“Shows that PZ Myers presents a straw man version of evolutionary psychology”

“Points out that Lehrer's nihilistic conclusions about the inability of science to prove anything are unfounded. ”

“This replication study failed to confirm previous findings that holding warm or cold objects influences behavior”

“Zimbardo's behaviorist claims about the "banality" of heroism are not based on evidence”

“Article provides no clear definition of what "God" is supposed to be”

“Zimbardo makes sweeping claims in support of his ideology with little evidence”

“Presents an alternative explanation of the results of the experiment that debunks role-based explanations favored by Zimbardo”

“Argues that Zimbardo misrepresented what actually happened during the experiment to favor his preferred explanation”

“Points out major flaws in the experiment and shows why it does not provide evidence to support sweeping conclusions drawn from it. ”

“Shows that Zimbardo does not present adequate evidence to support sweeping claims about the power of situations”

“The title of the Time article is misleading and inaccurate, and is contradicted within the article itself.”

“Refutes Sheldrake's claim that his Wikipedia page was targeted at all by the Guerilla Skeptics group”

“Biocentrism makes no testable scientific predictions and is based on arguments from ignorance”

“Rebuts claims 6-10, reiterates that there is no evidence for the central claim that consciousness can affect reality”

“Points out how Horgan straws mans evo psych; discusses research relevant to the topic”

“Points out that parapsychology has been an unproductive field and that this is the actual reason it has stagnated”

“Points out deceptive and misleading claims in the video, such as misuse of references”

“Rebuts the claim that parapsychology has been regarded as taboo by mainstream science”

“Points out that Horgan reveals that he knows that accusations against Napoleon Chagnon were false, but still refuses to recant his endorsement of them”

“Horgan's review repeats false accusations that have been conclusively refuted. To date Horgan has refused to retract his review. ”

“Horgan refuses to acknowledge that Tierney's accusations against Chagnon have been refuted, and he continues to stand behind his 2000 review which repeats these demonstrably false accusations”

“Highlights straw man attack against Napoleon Chagnon, and false dichotomy about "genetic determinists" vs. "normative anthropology"”

“Notes that the evidence provided by this study against IQ is based on a small sample and therefore weak. ”

“Points out that there is no research evidence that non-users are "suspicious"”

“Points out that there is no research evidence that non-users are "suspicious"”

“Points out that there is no research evidence that non-users are "suspicious"”

“Points out that there is no research evidence that non-users are "suspicious"”

“Rebutted article is factually inaccurate and engages in ad hominem attacks”

“Notes that Jezebel misquotes the journal article criticised”

“”

“Points out that the target article makes a nonsensical argument that anything at all might be real even if no evidence exists.”

“"Experiencing Zeus" provides no more credible evidence that Zeus exists than "experiencing" a fictional character. ”

“Points out that having a subjective experience does not provide objective evidence”

“Points out questionable features of the original study that prompt scepticism”

“The Slate article strongly criticises the study discussed by Lehmiller”

“Source article does not acknowledge already prominent women in atheism”

“Points out that the article is based on a faulty translation and was not fact checked. ”

“Points out that the term "militant atheist" is vacuous. ”

“Argues that de Waals' attack on new atheism is gratuitous and ignorant”

“Points out condescension and lack of empathy in de Waal's critique of new atheists”

“Points out that de Waal misrepresents atheist views on religion”

“Points out that Kanazawa blatantly contradicts himself in his disavowal of atheism”

“Points out evidence that contradicts Kanazawa's unsubstantiated assertions”

“Points out the weak arguments and lack of evidence for Kanazawa's assertions”

“Points out deliberate obfuscation and straw man arguments by the author”

“Points out errors in the original study that invalidate the article's conclusions”

“Points out that the authors misinterpret their own data”

“Points out the lack of justification for describing user generated content as "antisocial"”

“Argues that the SEP article presents a biased view of evolutionary psychology”

“Argues that Coyne misses the point in his parody of evolutionary psychology”

“Points out that the author has a deep misunderstanding of evolutionary psychology based on false stereotypes”

“Points out that Myers makes exaggerated claims about the article he critiques”

“Points out that Myers supposed example of genetic drift makes no testable predictions, whereas adaptationist hypotheses do.”

“Points out that the critique of evolutionary psychology is based on straw man arguments and lacks substance”

“Points out that there is a zero-relationship between the gene discussed in the article and cognitive functioning”

“Notes the lack of evidence that humans were ever solitary foragers in the course of evolution”

“Shows that the source article misquoted what the scientist actually said”

“Points out logical fallacies in the author's arguments against gay marriage”

“Points out that the newspaper has taken liberties in translation that misrepresent what the scientist actually said”

“Points out that moral reasoning is the concern of ordinary people not just philosophers”

“Points out that the author has been taken in by a known hoax”

“Points out that claims that women who view porn are more likely to be raped encourage victim blaming. ”

“Points out that the claim of a "50-500%" increase in masturbation is not based on any data ”

“Points out that the relationship between online porn use and masturbation is correlational only and that the 500% estimate is not based on any data. ”

“The import of the study's actual findings has been exaggerated”

“Shows the findings and their importance has been exaggerated”

“Shows that the actual findings have been exaggerated in importance.”

“Points out logical problems in the authors' theorising”

“Points out how the results have been misinterpreted and argues against the authors' conclusions.”

“Points out that the headline is an exaggeration of findings by a flawed study”

“Points out this is hardly "news" and the study it reports on is flawed.”

“Points out flaws in the study's methodology.”

“Points out that even if the universe had a beginning it might not have had an external cause, contrary to Craig's theology”

“Points out that Craig cherry picks the cosmology literature to suit himself”

“Shows that Ackerman is ignorant of basic science”

“Shows that the author has an inadequate grasp of probability and logic”

“Detailed analysis of the logical flaws in Swinburne's arguments”

“Shows that Swinburne's theological argument is far from cogent or convincing.”

“Points out that there is no evidence that "Facebook abstainers" are "suspicious" ”

“Argues that "Innocence of Muslims" does not qualify as "extremism"”

“Shows that one of the scientists in this expedition denounced the event as a staged hoax”

“Shows that this news "story" is a non-starter, the researcher in question has no evidence for any of her claims”

“Shows that the author's arguments are logically incoherent. ”

“Exposes the abhorrent moral views of an apologist for slaughter in the name of God. ”

“Shows that Craig's argument is not sensible and appeals to ignorance”

“Shows that Craig presents a distorted view of what Hawking actually says. ”

“Points out that the study referred to is a decade old, has not been replicated and is sloppy science”

“Points out that the study referred to is not at all "new" and is based on poor science”

“Shows that the claims made in the article are based on poor science”

“Points out poor research and methodology in original study”

“Points out that the study's actual results contradict the stated conclusions”

“Shows that the study reported is not based on good science”

“Critiques Castleman's coverage of the original study”

“Describes flaws in lit review and interpretation of data”

“Describes flaws in lit review and interpretation of data”

“Points out that the author's defence of Hell is incoherent and morally vacuous.”

“Shows that the article's particular claims are unfounded”

“Describes flaws in the background research and in the interpretation of the data”