Late Night Talk Radio Malaise

[Kidnostad3]

. BTW, I'm sure there are probably skeptic podacasts out there somewhere, if that's your thing now. 

I'm not interested in those that set out to disprove paranormal claims because they are often as dogmatic and unshakable in their aims and beliefs as the worst flat earth earthers when it comes to the point where something is unapprovable as in proving a negative.  What I look for is something that is well supported and plausible and comports with known facts or at least appears to be within the realm of possibility.  There are many appearing on these shows and posting in bellgab who try to sell something that just doesn't add up when all known facts are considered.  They cherry pick information and most always deal in sophestries and even outright lies to support a self serving and most often sensational conclusion that satisfies their particular cognitive biases and and/or garners a certain amount of acclaim and monetary profit.  I am open to all possibilities but most often I can identify horseshit when I see it. 

[Kidnostad3]

You can just say Clyde Lewis, you won't get in trouble.

I have listened to your podcast a few times and like what I hear.  Keep up the good work.

[Chocolate coated jackboot]

There's always Brother Stair or Old time radio shows

[Corona Kitty]

I have listened to your podcast a few times and like what I hear.  Keep up the good work.

Thank you, there's a whole lot more coming.

[Dr. MD MD]

I'm not interested in those that set out to disprove paranormal claims because they are often as dogmatic and unshakable in their aims and beliefs as the worst flat earth earthers when it comes to the point where something is unapprovable as in proving a negative.  What I look for is something that is well supported and plausible and comports with known facts or at least appears to be within the realm of possibility.  There are many appearing on these shows and posting in bellgab who try to sell something that just doesn't add up when all known facts are considered.  They cherry pick information and most always deal in sophestries and even outright lies to support a self serving and most often sensational conclusion that satisfies their particular cognitive biases and and/or garners a certain amount of acclaim and monetary profit.  I am open to all possibilities but most often I can identify horseshit when I see it.

I'm not knocking skepticism. I consider myself an open minded skeptic but here's the problem with a skeptic show or podcast. It would go something like this:

Host #1: Well, I think it's most likely all bullshit.

Host #2: Yes, I agree.

Host #1: Great! Well, that's it for this show. We'll see you back here tomorrow night when we'll do exactly the same thing.

[K_Dubb]

I'm not knocking skepticism. I consider myself an open minded skeptic but here's the problem with a skeptic show or podcast. It would go something like this:

Host #1: Well, I think it's most likely all bullshit.

Host #2: Yes, I agree.

Host #1: Great! Well, that's it for this show. We'll see you back here tomorrow night when we'll do exactly the same thing.

I agree completely.  Making the show turn on the host's opinion of the topic is an amateurish attention-grab.  We get to know regular hosts pretty well and their individual opinions up or down aren't all that interesting after a while.  The host isn't a star but a proxy for the audience, trying to draw out the story and ask the same questions the audience might have.