Talk:Penn & Teller: Bullshit!

message: According to a commercial on showtime bullshit will be back for a 7th season "next year". Does anyone know where this should be put in the article (assuming we can find a good source or a copy of that commercial)? Father Time89 (talk) 06:01, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  7th Season 

message: First line of the second paragraph of the introduction starts: "Supernatural subjects of episodes include alien abduction, alternative medicine, the Bible, and ESP;". Whilst the show's standpoint may be that the Bible is fiction it still isn't supernatural, just like a childrens' fiction book isn't a supernatural subject. The childrens' book may revolve around supernatural occurances (though obviously unlikely) however the book itself is not supernatural. Please make the appropriate changes  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.110.90.58 (talk) 18:16, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the OP's point was that the Bible itself is not supernatural; it's just a book! The topic the Bible discusses, on the other hand, is indeed supernatural. Alien abduction stories sometimes have a supernatural motif -- "science/mankind cannot explain this" -- and in some cases are openly mystical, so at least some of the stories fall in the realm of the supernatural. 201.216.245.25 (talk) 21:16, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

text: Keep in mind that the sentence is pertaining to the subjects discussed in the show's episodes, not the subject itself. IE they're discussing alien abduction, not aliens. Although in the case of their bible episode it pertains to both supernatural portions of the bible as well as contradictions included in the actual book, but that doesn't change that the subject of the show pertains to the supernatural. The bible may not be a supernatural object, but the show discusses supernatural elements of it. I do not think the sentence needs to be altered to clarify that, as I don't think anyone reading the sentence is going to assume that the bible is a supernatural object, but that's me. BeardedScholar (talk) 15:29, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Surely the opening person who asked this question is nothing but a troll.  To claim that the Bible isn't supernatural is nothing more than being trollish.  Believe in it if you wish or don't if you prefer but to argue that it's anything but supernatural is either stupid, attention-seeking or absurd.--ЗAНИA talk WB talk] 19:59, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Bible is not a Supernatural subject 

message: Bullshit is very much all about Skepticism, so, why do we need a special Environmental skepticism section? They have done like 2 episode about the environment, so I don't see the need to add this as something special.--58.158.139.201 (talk) 10:37, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. That section is more about Lomborg than Penn & Teller. It also violates undue weight by devoting space to a very peripheral part of the show. The article is about the show, not Penn & Teller. I have added a POV tag. -- Brangifer (talk) 18:21, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Penn & Teller have never questioned the existence of the environment, hence cannot be said to be 'environmental skeptics.'  Section is neither necessary nor cited, and should be removed.  However, it may be a good idea to break out a section on the show's generally libertarian perspective, as that is a common theme spanning many topics covered on the show, and is a minority view in the skeptics movement. Poinete, ede ede; tachu tachu! (talk) 14:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Is there any reason for the section to stay at all? Not only does it not provide much real information, but it makes it seem like P&T have a particularly special interest in environmental issues. They've done a similar number of shows on human sexual behavior, people spending wasting money on supposedly superior quality purchases, the paranormal, etc. Penn and Teller are skeptics, period, and making a different section for any one particular subject they're skeptical of is misleading and unnecessary. I'm going to remove it for now as there seems to be complete agreement that it is unnecessary. BeardedScholar (talk) 15:04, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

text:  As long as we're doing that, I'm also going to remove the link to the environmental skepticism page.  Poinete, ede ede; tachu tachu! (talk) 15:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why do we need a Environmental skepticism section? 

message: In addition to paranormal and pseudo-scientific claims, Penn & Teller take a skeptical view of government authority.  This is a minority position in the skeptical movement and perhaps ought to be highlighted as it is a running theme throughout many topics on the show.  P&T are both fellows at the Cato Institute.  I don't know how to code the citations, but perhaps after work I'll do some reading up on that and get this section stated. Poinete, ede ede; tachu tachu! (talk) 16:32, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm wondering about the title to the section. Shouldn't it be something like "libertarian bias", "libertarian affiliation" or "libertarian leaning"? They're not skeptical of libertarians or any libertarian movements that I'm aware of, and the title of the section makes it sound as if they are. Generally a word followed by skepticism/skeptic implies that the person is skeptical of it. IE "Paranormal skeptic". But I approve of the actual section as their libertarian leaning is very prominent in the show and affects pretty much every subject they discuss. BeardedScholar (talk) 01:19, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I use this term because it is what I've heard this perspective called by Shermer and other prominent skeptics when they've discussed it on various podcasts, as for the grammaticality, they don't teach parts of speech in schools these days so I'm not 100% sure, but if I understood Grammar Girl's recent show on attributive nouns correctly, the noun 'libertarian' functions as an adjective to describe what type of skepticism is being practiced. I realize this gets muddled when compared to titles like 'global warming skeptic', and I don't have a good solution.  My concern with a title like 'libertarian bias' is that it would leave the impression that the show BS is peculiarly libertarian leaning, when in fact there is a schism in the skeptical community as a whole, and libertarian skepticism is itself a growing movement.  Poinete, ede ede; tachu tachu! (talk) 16:17, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Libertarian Skepticism 

message: On the october 31st Penn Point, Penn alludes to the fact that BS! is no longer on Showtime.  This implies that it is either cancelled, or that it was moved to another network, but not necessarily cancelled. 67.176.27.46 (talk) 00:40, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: When Penn & Teller were in Toronto last week, Penn mentioned after the show that Bullshit is going to a new network and it was not cancelled. Obviously I don't have a source for this, but it's not cancelled.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.132.148 (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cancellation 

message: With the removal of the episode on the Vatican from the DVD and Showtime's episode listings, one wonders who sanctioned the removal and why.  This sort of potential censorship seems very un-Penn & Teller-ish, to say the least, and deserves to be noted.70.185.254.116 (talk) 17:28, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  B.S. Vatican Episode Controversy 

message: When speaking to Penn after a show on January 3, 2011, I asked about Bullshit and it's status. He was busy with a lot of people, signing autographs and such, so I didn't get the chance to elaborate on his answer, but he said "we're moving to discovery." Because I didn't have a source to site I didn't edit the main article, but it would appear the discussions from November 2010 have gone through and the show is moving to Discovery, probably under the name BS or something. Again, I didn't get to elaborate with him but this is how I take it. He seemed almost disappointed when he said it, which I can understand being that you get a lot more exposure, but are obviously a lot less free on basic cable. If this is good enough source to provide, anyone is more than welcome to post it to the main article. I for one am excited to see Bullshit back.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.102.3.70 (talk) 02:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bullshit's Future 

message: The article states, under the section 'Title,' that the show can be found on Netflix, yet I cannot find the show on Netflix's website. May need edit.  Ferocioustick (talk) 09:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Saw the show in a popup in one of the "example of genre" things when personalizing netflix, which launched me on a hunt to find it. It took a while, but after typing the title "Penn & Teller: Bullsh*t" into the search bar I was directed to the title; only to find that it is now 'unavailable to stream'. 24.212.155.102 (talk) 03:45, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bullshit on Netflix 

message: In the Criticism section, there's a quote from a review saying Bullshit! isn't journalism, then explaining what it is. Not really criticism, since the show doesn't pretend to be journalism. More like saying an apple isn't an orange. In the organic food episode, Penn does a funny bit where he tries to be "the media", and quickly fails. That joke wouldn't work from a journalist (real or alleged), even less than all the other jokes journalists don't do.
Seems like it would be better suited for the section where we describe the show's general deal, but figured I should ask first. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:52, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move Noel Murray thing to Show Format? 

message: *Wikipedia:Peer review/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1
I've started a list peer review for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!, feedback to further along the quality improvement process would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1. — Cirt (talk) 01:24, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  List peer review for [[List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!]] 

message: #List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!
#Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1
I've started a Featured List nomination for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!.
Participation would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit!/archive1.
Thank you for your time,
— Cirt (talk) 15:29, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured List nomination for List of awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit! 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Penn & Teller: Bullshit!. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100528040406/http://www.libertarianism.com/pop_celebrity/penn-and-teller to http://www.libertarianism.com/pop_celebrity/penn-and-teller
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101123163614/http://www.atlanticcityweekly.com/news-and-views/cover-story/No-Bullshit-Penn-and-Teller-106638604.html to http://www.atlanticcityweekly.com/news-and-views/cover-story/No-Bullshit-Penn-and-Teller-106638604.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:05, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: — Assignment last updated by Zachscillia (talk) 11:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Topics in Ethics Calling Bullshit

message: The end of the Criticism section is not neutral, or encyclopedic, and assumes an opinionated point of view that aims to downplay the criticism. It is also unsourced. Criticism section is not the right place for a direct rebuttal of said criticisms. DommageCritique (talk) 06:41, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality of "Criticism" section 

message: — Assignment last updated by Okigbov (talk) 19:45, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Topics in Ethics C Calling Bullshit