Serious Inquiries Only

That's the claim made by many right wing anti COVID restriction people. What's more, it seems to be based on a CDC report. So is there anything to it? Find out! Links: Yard et al (2021) CDC report, Popular press coverage of report 1, 2, 2020 CDC report (claiming that adolescent ED visits for mental health increased by 31% in 2020 compared to 2019), CDC Reports on decline in total ED visits for March/April 2020, Through March 2021, Timing of State and Territorial COVID-19 Response, CDC Mortality data 2014-2019, 2020-2022 (provisional), WISQARS nonfatal injury reports, WISQARS fatal injury reports, Lindsey's Graphs

Yeah it's some commentary about the Joe Rogan controversy. I couldn't help it. People are being too wrong on the internet.

You might have seen the coverage recently of a study that claims to show that giving poor mothers cash payments changed their babies’ brain activity in ways associated with stronger cognitive development. So what is the study, and does it hold up to SIO science thingy scrutiny courtesy of Dr. Lindsey Osterman? Find out! Links: NYT write-up, Troller-Renfree and colleagues (2022) The Impact of a Poverty Reduction Intervention on Infant Brain Activity, Other publications from Baby’s First Years

We had a number of questions from the November QnA that never happened to get to, as well as some new ones for January. Here's to getting back to regular on these!

What the saga around the subreddit r/antiwork says about our society and capitalism's death grip on us.

It's time to give another viral thingy the Dr. Lindsey Osterman treatment! A viral tweet summarizing the findings of a political science study alleges that the people have "near-zero" impact on public policy. What is this study, what did it find, and was it good science? Find out! Links: Gilens & Page (2014) - Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens, Vox article on Gilens and Page and rebuttals, Bashir (2015) – Response to Gilens and Page, Enns (2015) - Response to Gilens and Page, Middle class income calculator (by region)

The Facebook Whistleblower's testimony and interviews have made some alarming claims about social media and the harms it may cause. But do all of those claims hold up to scrutiny? Maybe not! Let's see what psychologist Dr. Lindsey Osterman has to say! Lindsay's billion links: Internal Report 1, Teen Mental Health Deep Dive, Internal Report 2, Hard Life Moments: Mental Health Deep Dive, Whistleblower Full Senate Hearing Transcript, Body image dissatisfaction in preadolescent children, Disordered eating and the transition to college: A prospective study, Prevalence of body dissatisfaction among a United States adult sample, Prevalence, Onset, and Course of Suicidal Behavior Among Adolescents and Young Adults in Germany, Lim et al (2019) Suicidality and Self Harm in Children and Adolescents, Swannell et al (2014) Prevalence of NSSI in nonclinical samples, Woods & Scott (2019) #Sleepteens, Keles et al (2002) Social Media and Depression, Anxiety, and Distress, Ferguson et al (2013) Peer, TV, and Social Media Influences on Body Dissatisfaction, ED Symptoms and Life Satisfaction in Adolescent Girl, Orben et al (2019) Social Media’s Enduring Effect on Adolescent Life Satisfaction

Is it ghosts? Dave Chappelle's boring unoriginal transphobia, rat jacket fetishes, Democratic party bashing, and more! Here's that Grandpa Joe blackface post.

It's part 2 of our Littman breakdown, find out what her latest junk study says. This time it's about detransitioning and it suffers from many of the same problems as her first study we covered in part 1. Also, friend of the show Aaron Rabinowitz, host of Embrace the Void, dug up some of the questions Littman asked. Which ones were and were not included says a ton about what the answers must have been. Links: MacKinnon (2021), Littman (2021), Turban (2021)

Recently, a study by Lisa Littman has been making the rounds among the anti-woke. You may remember Littman mentioned in the amazing 2 part series debunking The End of Gender. She is the inventor of the transphobic bull shit concept "rapid onset gender dysphoria" which is science words for "kids these days." In this two part series, Dr. Lindsey Osterman breaks down both of her bogus studies and why they are terrible science thingies.

In a vital follow up to our police bias episodes, today we break down a new study that shows police killings were undercounted by MORE THAN HALF. This confirms what many of us have suspected about the "official data" on police violence, and it's only the tip of the iceberg. Links: Lancet article, Fatal Encounters, Mapping Police Violence, The Counted

We've got some great questions as always! This time we start with some personal slash whimsical stuff including what song lyrics we have been wrong about. Other great segments include sex stuff and why Jordan Peterson is wrong about evo-psych. Or just... everything. Links: Dwulit & Rzymski (2019) - Associations of Porn Use with Sexual Dysfunctions

It's part 2 of our sex stuff series. Dr. Lindsey Osterman did a deep dive into porn related research. Either that or I caught her looking at porn and she proposed this series as an elaborate cover. But either way you're getting some great stuff! Does the anti-porn side of the argument have the weight of evidence on their side? Is porn actually totally fine? Find out! Links: Michael Hobbes, Human Trafficking, Cyber Civil Rights Initiative, Revenge porn laws by state, Fisher & Kohut (2017) Pornography viewing: Keep calm and carry on, Grubbs et al (2018) Pornography problems due to moral incongruence, Reward Foundation (promotes porn abstinence; one of the authors on a review article claiming that porn is bad holds a position at this foundation), Ferguson and Hartley (2020) Pornography and sexual aggression: Can meta-analysis find a link?

But don't take my word for it, Dr. Lindsey Osterman is here to break down the social science for us! And guess what, SURPRISE SURPRISE, it doesn't support the conservative war on porn and sex work. And it's not just conservatives, it's NYT's Nicholas D. Kristof, and prominent anti-porn feminists like Catharine MacKinnon. Listen as Lindsey explains why the war against sex work is bad for everyone. You're Wrong About: Sex Trafficking, The Butterfly Effect, Perry (2021) "Scientific authority, religious conservatism, and support for outlawing pornography", Platt et al (2018) "Associations between sex work laws and sex workers’ health: A systematic review and meta-analysis of quantitative and qualitative studies", McCarthy et al (2021) "Job attributes and mental health: A comparative study of sex work and hairstyling", Cowen & Colosi (2021) "Sex Work and Online Platforms: What Should Regulation Do?", Jiao et al (2021) "Information and Communication Technologies in Commercial Sex Work: A Double-Edged Sword for Occupational Health and Safety", Bleakley (2014) "500 Tokens to Go Private”: Camgirls, Cybersex and Feminist Entrepreneurship, Cunningham et al (2018) "Behind the screen: Commercial sex, digital spaces and working online"

Therese Chan, an actual vet (though not a horse doctor) is here to talk about Ivermectin. What is it, what does it do, what does it not do, why are so many people taking it, will it turn you into a horse, will it turn you back from a horse to a human, is this a simulation, no really is it, how is any of this real, and more!

It's that time again! Patrons asked some fantastic questions. Like, what's our favorite piece of visual art? Is Bari Weiss right about Amy Cooper? What are Lindsey's thoughts on tenure? Are morals taught or learned? When should people resign in protest vs. staying and fighting? And more!

... AGAINST ANTI GAY ACTIVISTS. Yeah. It's a bad science thingy. But bad science thingies are a bat signal for Dr. Lindsey Osterman, who is here to break down this study for us! What does the study prove? What does it definitely not prove? Find out! Uzarevic et al. (2021) "Are Atheists Unprejudiced?", Uzarevic et al. (2017) "Are Atheists Undogmatic?", Speed & Brewster (2021) "Christians, but not Atheists, Show High In-Group Favoritism"

You might have seen the very scary headlines about a Massachusetts outbreak in which 74% of those infected were vaccinated. That sounds terrifying! But is it? What does actual science person Dr. Lindsey Osterman make of these numbers? The news is actually far better than you might think! Find out why! In a quick first segment, Lindsey gives us a hilarious recap of how thoroughly Sam Harris accidentally parodied the hell out of himself! Links: WaPo article on Provincetown Outbreak, Original CDC Report on Provincetown Outbreak, Bear Week, CDC data, Delta’s dominance in US, NYT Tracker of MA COVID cases, COVID-19 Vaccine Report, from MA Dept of Public Health, Tegan and Sara Study

After some thrilling haircut talk, we get to this month's questions! Topics this time include: choosing government by sortition, Manchin and Sinema ruining the country, who was the best movie president, vaccinating yourself vs. your children, a general strike, and neoliberalism!

Continuing from the last episode, Lindsey backs up her claim that the bulk of the terrible science was yet to come. WOW. This study was complete garbage. You really ought to hear how terrible it is. Lindsey, as usual, did other people's homework for them. She got a hold of some of the data and did her own work with it, which revealed some interesting stuff. Here is the doc. Links: the study, the article, Moss & O’Connor (2020b; origin of White Identitarianism Scale), Pew Poll, Political Polarization in the American Public, Master’s thesis (origin of the PC scales)

Holy both sides, Batman! Yeah no suspense on this one, Quillette is garbage and the study this article references is garbage. But how garbage and why exactly? Is there any truth to it? As usual, Lindsey is here to give us the breakdown! This is a part 1. In order to grab part 2 early, make sure to pledge on patreon! Links: Moss & O’Connor (2020b; origin of White Identitarianism Scale), Pew Poll, Political Polarization in the American Public, Master’s thesis (origin of the PC scales)

This episode was inspired by this Insider article, Baby Boomers Are More Sensitive Than Millennials. Science is often butchered by the media, so I sent it along to our own Dr. Lindsey Osterman to see if the study backs up the article. As it turns out... not really. But it does say some interesting things. Listen in and find out! Wetzel and colleagues (2017), The Narcissism Epidemic is Dead; Long Live the Narcissism Epidemic

Today Lindsey and I are joined by Dr. Caleb Lack. Caleb is a full professor of psychology at the University of Central Oklahoma, and he's here to talk about evidence based mental healthcare. When it comes to treatment, what is actually evidence based and what is unsupported at best and pseudoscience at worst? Also, find out how Caleb trolled a predatory academic journal! Check out Caleb's book, Critical Thinking, Science, and Pseudoscience. Leave Thomas a voicemail! (916) 750-4746, short and to the point! Support the show at patreon.com/seriouspod! Come watch us on Twitch! Follow us on Twitter: @seriouspod Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/SIOmembers For comments, email [email protected]

It's episode 300! And also the June patreon QnA! Topics covered include: moral panics – does the left engage in them too? Syria and an old SIO guest. Are we close to full institutional breakdown? How f*cked are we in 2022 and 2024? Who would we root for in a war against America? Christian socialists, critical race theory, people on the left wanting to lift mask mandates. And, what episodes are good for reachable right wing people?

You've seen Critical Race Theory discussed everywhere thanks to an entirely ginned up moral panic by Christopher Rufo, but have you gotten to hear someone who actually teaches it talk about what it's really about? If not, I hope you'll listen as Dr. Ery Shin takes us through some basics, and also answers a few anti-CRT talking points from James Lindsay's Christian Nationalist funded New Discourses.

with special guest Aaron Rabinowitz! You know him from Embrace the Void and Philosophers in Space, but today he's here to philosophize at us. A paper on pointlessness was published in the first issue of the Journal of Controversial ideas. How good is it? How controversial? Find out!

Perhaps some number of them did, but neither these atheist leaders, nor the movement as a whole "merged with the far right," as this Salon article says. I suppose it may seem like a minor point to some, but I think it's pretty significantly journalistically irresponsible to have a headline as explosive as that, with the picture like that, and not have it be supported by the article.

Recently, Jeff McMahan, Francesca Minerva and Peter Singer started a journal called The Journal of Controversial Ideas. In it, people can post racist transphobic stuff that is TOO controversial for other journals! (except that it totally isn't.) Lindsey and I give some background, and do a fair bit of yelling about the race science paper published in the first issue of the journal. Links: "Who Is The Victim In The Anna Stubblefield Case?", "Gender Muddle: Reply to Dembroff", "Cognitive Creationism Compared to Young-Earth Creationism", Holly Dunsworth's essay, VBW on IQ & Race, pt 1 https://www.verybadwizards.com/122 and pt 2 https://www.verybadwizards.com/123

Lots of great questions from our patrons! Lindsey gives us a taser research update; why are puppies cuter than humans? Is PZ Myers wrong about EvoPsych? Spike proteins, anti-vax stuff, and more! Links: TASER study, Kurzban's response to PZ, Russian fox domestication experiment, Contrapoints on AGP, Blogpost on spike proteins, Aaaaaand one bonus link for you

Nikole Hannah-Jones, Pulitzer-winning journalist and developer of the 1619 Project, was appointed to a tenured professorship at UNC Chapel Hill. This is a position that is funded by the Knight foundation. However, a board of old white lawyers who happen to be the Trustees of the University, denied Hannah-Jones tenure, against the recommendations of, well... everyone who should matter in the decision making process. Many people have made bad faith arguments and whataboutisms, but Dr. Lindsey Osterman (tenured professor) is here to give us real perspective on it. NYT: Nikole Hannah-Jones Denied Tenure, The 1619 Project, UNC Chapel Hill Faculty Handbook, Hussman School of Journalism Tenure Procedures, Open letter from the Hussman faculty, "We Are Critics of Nikole Hannah-Jones. Her Tenure Denial Is A Travesty.", Criticisms of her appointment, NYT note explaining revision of Hannah-Jones's essay, NC Policy Watch's Special Report on NHJ's tenure denial

The CDC recently made a surprise announcement that vaccinated people don't need to wear masks, with only a few exceptions. This was greeted with some excitement, but also with vigorous pushback by people on the left. So what's the science behind this decision, and what are the practical concerns? We break it down! Then, we talk about a very premature victory lap taken by Bret Weinstein over the lab-leak hypothesis being confir... I mean not quite technically disproven. ***FACTUAL CORRECTION*** I said that 27 states never had mask mandates. I misread that. 27 didn't have them in place at the time of the CDC's announcement. 11 states never had mandates. Links: CDC Updates To Recommendations, CDC Science Brief, KFF Report on Vaccine Hesitancy/Enthusiasm, Science Letter, "Investigate the origins of COVID-19", NYT Article on Science Letter

It's part 2 of our debunk of the disgraceful anti-vaccine garbage being spewed from the Dark Horse Podcast. It's a YouTube show featuring two biologists who ABSOLUTELY should know better, but don't. Since I forgot links on part 1, here are ALL the links: Two articles who interview experts about the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines: 1, 2; Edited Fauci clip; Longer Fauci clip; Summary of WHO report on origins of COVID-19 pandemic; WaPo article about Joe Rogan; The Atlantic, The Pandemic’s Wrongest Man; Worst Year Ever, “Vaccines are Dope;” Absolute vs. relative risk reduction; Salk Institute news release about spike proteins study; That elusive full text article about spike proteins; CDC Chart of Risk By Age:; FDA, on Ivermectin; NIH, on Ivermectin; “Ivermectin and Covid-19: How a cheap antiparasitic became political”

Joe Rogan said healthy, young people shouldn't get the COVID vaccine. This is dangerous and anti-science and incorrect. Though Rogan apologized, Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein took to their YouTube channel to double down on Rogan's claims and do further damage to the cause of science and the effort to vaccinate and protect the public against this deadly disease. It's shameful, and Lindsey is here to explain why they are wrong.

We got some great questions from patrons, and we ended up answering almost all of them! They include: How did Sam Harris end up being so wrong? Should we ignore the Supreme Court? Evopsych, non-lethal weapons, parasocial relationships, and more!

This is the second part of our racial bias in criminal justice episodes. This one focuses on sentencing, and explores studies showing just how desperate the death penalty is, and how racial bias drives that. Baldus et al (1998) -Racial Discrimination and the Death Penalty in the Post-Furman Era Eberhardt et al (2006) – Looking deathworthy: Perceived Stereotypicality of Black defendants predicts capital-sentencing outcomes Eberhardt et al (2004) – Seeing Black: Race, crime, and visual processing

This episode is the sequel to the last one, so make sure to check that out. I go into the "whataboutism" around the AHA Dawkins award thing, and talk about a really terrible thing another atheist said that I think people should know about.

Sorry, we interrupt the scheduled programming to bring you a yelly rant episode about how terrible all the arguments around the Richard Dawkins humanist award revocation are. It's a bunch of the "smartest people on the internet" saying really stupid things and I've had enough.

Official co-host Dr. Lindsey Osterman is here to give us a breakdown of some studies measuring racial bias in Criminal Justice. Part 1 talks about split decision shooting studies, part 2 will focus on sentencing discrepancies. Links: Meta-analysis on racial bias in first-person shooter tasks, Across the Thin Blue Line: Police Officers and Racial Bias in the Decision to Shoot, When Fatigue Turns Deadly: The Effects of Cognitive Depletion and Sleep Deprivation on the Decision To Shoot, When Practice Fails to Reduce Racial Bias in the Decision to Shoot: The Case of Cognitive Load

Here is Part 2 of our debunking of a book by Dr. Debra Soh called "The End of Gender: Debunking the Myths about Sex and Identity in Our Society." Soh is someone with a relevant credential, which perhaps makes her anti-trans schtick even more dangerous. Within the text are kernels of truth about the science of sex and gender, but she abuses that science beyond recognition to defend cultural conservative norms. Lindsey has the breakdown for us! Links: (for both parts) Proposal about the definition of "sex," Nature editorial responding to the definition, Teen vogue video on gender diversity, Myth of persistence, Response to Soh re: rapid onset gender dysphoria, Original study on ROGD, Transgender suicide, Review on current best practices in care of transgender youth

Somehow, esteemed co-host Dr. Lindsey Osterman got through all of the terribly transphobic book by Dr. Debra Soh called "The End of Gender: Debunking the Myths about Sex and Identity in Our Society." Soh is someone with a relevant credential, which perhaps makes her anti-trans schtick even more dangerous. Within the text are kernels of truth about the science of sex and gender, but she abuses that science beyond recognition to defend cultural conservative norms. Lindsey has the breakdown for us, and it's too much for one episode so look for part 2 tomorrow! Links: (for both parts) Proposal about the definition of "sex," Nature editorial responding to the definition, Teen vogue video on gender diversity, Myth of persistence, Response to Soh re: rapid onset gender dysphoria, Original study on ROGD, Transgender suicide, Review on current best practices in care of transgender youth

What is the "What the FUP?" Podcast, you ask? It's none other than Dr. Lindsey Osterman's new show with physicist Dr. Brian Gentry! We all watched "What the BLEEP Do We Know?" with a mind to critique it, but the episode turned into a fascinating Quantum Physics 101 lecture because there was so much to go over before we could even dive into how wrong the documentary is on every level!

If you're thinking "are they still doing this whole thing?" about 'campus craziness' then you're not alone. But fortunately Dr. Lindsey Osterman is here to do some debunking for us! Did a professor get fired for racist tweets? Did a research paper get retracted due to progressive outrage? Find out! Links: Jussim's blogpost, Articles on the Negy firing: Orlando Sentinel, NYT, pro-Negy article about it: Inside Sources Sources for the AlShebli retraction: Original article, Retraction note from the editors, Response, More Response: https://osf.io/ybfk6

Somehow we've all been podcasting for 10 years in atheism and never done anything together (except a midnight tryst back on NYE) but Frank and Dan of Thank God I'm Atheist are finally on the show! We talk about their background and also their drive to get more atheists into office! That could mean you! Click on the link and check it out, but also listen to this really fun interview!

After last week's episode with Carrie Poppy, I got a number of responses saying we might have been a little too dismissive of the evolutionary case for repressed memory. As it turns out, Dr. Jennifer Freyd, has developed a theory that could account for something like it. Yes, that Jennifer Freyd, the accuser whose story was told in The Cut's article that started this whole thing! The entire situation is as fascinating as it is tragic for virtually everyone involved, but Dr. Lindsey Osterman is here to give us a more complete understanding of the science!

A recent article in The Cut discusses allegations of sexual abuse which were made based on "recovered memories." Regardless of the truth or falsity of the accusations, the science of memory may have been very badly represented in this article, to harmful effect. Carrie of Oh No Ross and Carrie breaks it down for us! Complete with a Satanic Panic tie-in. (Link to the letters.)

It is unfathomable to me that Senator Kyrsten Sinema wants to preserve this idiotic accident of history. It is not anything the founders intended. It's not in the constitution. It's pure crap that stands in the way of not just progress but basic governance. I do a mini break down of how we got here, and I have a few ideas of how we could get around the filibuster and not make liars out of Manchin and Sinema.

The only thing that could possibly wrestle the internet back from Bernie Sanders's warm mittened hands is the GameStop madness. Joining me to break it down and try to explain and comment on approximately 1 billionth of everything to it is Phil Ferguson of the Phil Ferguson Show! Leave Thomas a voicemail! (916) 750-4746, short and to the point! Support the show at patreon.com/seriouspod! Come watch us on Twitch! Follow us on Twitter: @seriouspod Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/SIOmembers For comments, email [email protected]

A recent article by Jonathan Jarry made a few waves on the internet recently, as it claims that the Dunning-Kruger effect might not actually be real! Official SIO Science-splainer Lindsey Osterman is on with a full breakdown! Is the effect real or is it just statistical noise? Tune in and find out! Links: (Original paper) Kruger & Dunning (1999), (Review chapter) Dunning (2011), (Response to early statistical critiques) Kruger & Dunning (2002), (First Nuhfer paper): Nuhfer et al (2016), (Second Nuhfer paper): Nuhfer et al (2017)

It's a celebratory show! I've got some thoughts on it all, and why we shouldn't waste any time being mad at Joe Manchin. Also, this election was closer than 2016 and that blew my mind.

A few weeks back I had Eli Bosnick on to talk about Nicholas D. Kristof's Pornhub article. Eli attacked some of the fundamentalist Christian sources for the piece, and talked about the plight sex workers who had been left without income after the backlash. Tom, from Cognitive Dissonance and Citation Needed, has major disagreements with Eli on the topic and wanted to respond.