Systematic Evaluation Quotes

I think it's very healthy to use journalistic and legal techniques to investigate the evidence for and against Christianity and other faith systems.

Scientific criticism has no nobler task than to shatter false beliefs.

Our staff not only received the reports from these agencies, they examined them. They questioned them.

Just because nobody complains doesn't mean all parachutes are perfect.

I don't have a particular recommendation other than that we base decisions on as much hard data as possible. We need to carefully look at all the options and all their ramifications in making our decisions.

Since philosophy now criticizes everything it comes across, a critique of philosophy would be nothing less than a just reprisal.

What's overwhelmingly clear is 'Havana' didn't work for people, but why it didn't work I don't feel I can put my finger on in a way I can learn from.

Re-examining our reasoning is not something that has come naturally to American statesmen.

When you're writing criticism or thinking critically, to draw a very limited minor conclusion from solid evidence is really not thinking.

I take a role because it makes sense to me, rationally.

If the code does indeed have some logical foundation then it is legitimate to consider all the evidence, both good and bad, in any attempt to deduce it.

When the intelligence is making a policymaker too happy, he ought to challenge it, and even if he doesn't, the intelligence briefer needs to launch a red team against his own conclusions to see if he can hold his ground.

I view my role now as providing more of a macro-level skepticism, rather than saying this poll is good or this poll is evil.