Average rating:

0
out of 0 ratings.

Bad news

by Bad Advuse on Feb 06, 2018
Rating: ★☆☆☆☆

This podcast doesn’t know the difference between natural medicine that ha been in use for successfully and for profit scams. My Naturopath is board certified M.D. from Columbia university. My acupuncturist graduated from Harvard. This podcast is crap.

Declining quality

by pgm60640 on Aug 16, 2017
Rating: ★★☆☆☆

I once looked forward to this podcast as a well-edited compilation of diverse voices from the scientific and skeptic community. These days, quality and diversity seem lacking. A recent May 2017 episode had a seemingly unedited 30+ minute discussion of Wikipedia editing. Some of the sound quality of the contributors is also quite grating.

Good podcast that used to be great

by DigitalSorceress on Jul 18, 2017
Rating: ★★★★☆

I generally enjoy Skepticality. It's a decent podcast. However, after discovering it a couple years back, I went and listened to the back archive to "catch up" and I really really loved it... it was a bit more quirky and I loved several of the regular contributors.. but in the lst few years, several of those old regulars have stopped appearing and I really find they were my favorite part of the show.Again, its a really good podcast, but it'st eh past catalog which gets my 5 stars.

Useful

by PerryBorenstein on May 24, 2017
Rating: ★★☆☆☆

This is a useful podcast for those who want information on skeptical books, events and activism. The interviews would benefit from editing; they often ramble. Sometimes it seems the interviewer has forgotten there is an audience. Thirty minute interviews can drag on for half again as long. This could be addressed with more focused questioning and better sound editing to keep the conversation moving.

A bit generous...

by Jerm vvarfare on Apr 19, 2017
Rating: ★★★★★

I'm gaming the system a little by giving 5 stars. The truth is these guys/gals aren't the best entertainers. Derek can be a little hard to listen to, especially when reading anything prepared... "Awkward" is probably the best description. But there's good information and conversation to be found. I can't knock a solid source for skeptic content, because of a little lack of polish and occasional cringy awkwardness.

Lost Their Focus

by Sausage King on Dec 29, 2016
Rating: ★★☆☆☆

Turned into a Trump bashing festival. Sore losers.

Science!

by junior chomsky on Jul 26, 2016
Rating: ★★★★★

Lots of ideas I never considered. Challenges me to think, in a good way.

Irresponsible Podcast

by STL_LFC on Mar 28, 2016
Rating: ★☆☆☆☆

This is actually one of the worst podcasts I have listened to. I have suffered through 10 episodes to give this a chance. As little as that may seem, that is far more research than is put into to this podcast. The production quality is right there with the worst I have come across but you can usually get past that. What you can't get past is that the arguments are very surface level and the hosts and guests are not well versed on the arguments and beliefs of the other side. When they need to fill time, they turn to mocking the subject. Perfect example of "beware of what you find on the internet".

Awesome

by ZzzZzzZzzAWAKE on Jan 22, 2016
Rating: ★★★★★

This is a very well done podcast. I love all the different voices and the interviews are fantastic. Highly recommend.

Unlistenable

by No one who is really important on Oct 16, 2015
Rating: ★☆☆☆☆

The host talks so fast, that I turned it off within the first minute.I tried again the next day, but after a few more minutes, the “phaser” effect turned me off in its entirety.If you like to strain in order to get a message, you might like it.I don’t.