" 
 ::::::Yeah, it's a terribly under-sourced list, too. Since we've reached consensus here, we might want to move the discussion over to that page, but I would probably suggest over there something similar to the rules implemented on List of common misconceptions, where there is a 4-pronged test for inclusion, including a requirement for a citation that 1. it's a misconception and 2. it's common. Something similar can be done over there to include some reference specifying that it's explicitly about scientific skepticism, not just something skeptics would be interested in.  [/contrib] "