The fact is, when you look closer at the movement, those shared goals aren’t as identical as it would first appear. There are not only different strategies and angles of approach, but significantly different shades of desire. Some are keen to address the nature of religious privilege, wishing to enhance the social respect of atheists without caring less about the wellbeing of people of faith. Others are focused on providing sound scientific literacy, without minding if its shares ground with metaphysical and sacred beliefs. Drawing a line and claiming they aren’t true skeptics because they don’t share your view of the overarching goals is to commit a clear logical fallacy.

Far from semantics, such discussions as these are vital for retaining the strength behind skeptical thinking and keeping it from being a homogeneous belief system.

I am all for differences of opinion, for reasoned, even fierce debate as long as those who are in the debate, those who are making the noise actually have some expertise in the area.

I was astonished for example at a recent high profile sceptical group who awarded a derogatory prize to one of our educational institutions over changes to the national curriculum.

This group to my knowledge did not engage with the curriculum body, did not engage any curriculum experts, and did not make one bit of difference to the perceived problem they were trying to address.

As a result I do not participate in organised scepticism, and while I can’t be sure, there are I suspect others like myself who will walk away because idiots are waving a flag and asking sceptics to rally under it.

I disagree that differences of opinion means we are thinking. Holding an opinion and defending it, requires little thought. Of those two situations mentioned DBAD and elevatorgate, lack of critical thought and lack of ability to perceive that one might be wrong were in clear evidence.

I say let the in fighting continue. I’ve had my own opinions about social issues and politics radically changed in the many years since I’ve become aware of skepticism or atheism as movements, and it’s the blowouts like DBAD and elevatorgate that do more to inform my views on these things than anything else. I celebrate our differences of opinion because it means we’re thinking. At the end of the day, we all have the same goal, the reduction of pseudoscience and magical thinking so far as it negatively affects our quality of life. The rest is just semantic garnishment.