D
Dawei
Guest
I think few of us would argue that the number of skeptics that are out there seem to be pretty well proportional to the total number of skeptic arguments over time--and by number I mean both variety as well as the quantity of places where the same argument may be repeated.
My question is, which do you think comes first? Do you think the number of skeptic arguments (presented on blogs, youtube videos, or any other site) rises first, which causes the number of skeptics to rise?
Or is it that the number of skeptic arguments are merely just matching the demand, i.e. giving skeptics the 'science' to support their dislike of the topic? (The efforts of which will lead to increased traffic, and thus increased online popularity & ad revenue for the blogger/webmaster.)
Or could some sort of positive feedback mechanism be at work?
My question is, which do you think comes first? Do you think the number of skeptic arguments (presented on blogs, youtube videos, or any other site) rises first, which causes the number of skeptics to rise?
Or is it that the number of skeptic arguments are merely just matching the demand, i.e. giving skeptics the 'science' to support their dislike of the topic? (The efforts of which will lead to increased traffic, and thus increased online popularity & ad revenue for the blogger/webmaster.)
Or could some sort of positive feedback mechanism be at work?