Skepticism with receipts and a pulse.
Serious Inquiries Only is a skeptical politics and science show with a sharp conversational edge. It moves from placebo research and sci-fi biology to ICE hearings, Minnesota fraud claims, sexism online, and the wreckage of bad information.
PRESS PLAY
Serious Inquiries Only is a brisk, skeptical show about science, politics, media distortion, and the institutional messes that sit where all three overlap. It has the feel of smart people working through a file while still annoyed that the file exists. Recent episodes range widely: placebo-effect research, the biology of Project Hail Mary, claims around Minnesota fraud, an ICE whistleblower hearing, sexism in online celebrity narratives, and research on how authoritarian turns can be reversed. That range is the point. The show is interested in how claims get made, how evidence gets stretched, and how confidently people talk when the facts are still several exits behind them. It can be funny, but the humor usually works as oxygen during dense or grim material. A joke about a bad witness or a strange methodological choice quickly gives way to the actual problem: what was claimed, what the source says, and what the public is being invited to believe. The science episodes are strongest when separating real uncertainty from popular nonsense, as in the placebo discussion and the critique of flashy ADHD-related content. The politics episodes tend to lean into hearings, memos, statements, and the information environment around them. Fraud is treated not only as a legal or administrative question, but as a story people use to launder broader conclusions. That makes the show especially attentive to scale, framing, and missing context. It does not smooth out its reasoning into bland authority. It doubles back, revises, and gets visibly irritated when the discourse deserves it. The result is a show for people who like skepticism with human texture: analytical, conversational, blunt, and allergic to easy certainty.
Made for: For listeners who want science and politics handled with evidence, impatience, and conversational heat. It especially fits people who enjoy hearing claims tested in real time rather than polished into tidy certainty.
What sets it apart: The show makes the information environment itself part of the story, tracking how studies, hearings, videos, and fraud narratives get distorted. It pairs close reading with dry banter, so the argument feels alive without losing the thread.
Join Thomas for some critical thinking on questions of science, philosophy, skepticism and politics. These serious topics are discussed with some serious guests, but in an entertaining and engaging way! This is not your typical interview podcast; it’s a friendly dialogue, conducted thoughtfully and with plenty of humor. It's Serious Inquiries Only; but like, not boring or anything.
Based on 6 episodes we listened to · September 2026
Serious Inquiries Only tests scientific and political claims by examining their methods, assumptions, numbers, and institutional machinery.
Thomas Smith treats a claim as a working problem: identify its assumptions, inspect the evidence, and follow the numbers until the argument either holds or gives way.
From Texas voter math to Project Hail Mary's biology, Thomas expects you to check the premise.
Press play if you want
Short reviews from the PlayNext desk, based on the episodes we processed.
A fast, irritated look at Minnesota fraud claims and the noise around them.
Serious Inquiries Only turns Minnesota fraud into a running complaint about the information swamp around it. Thomas Smith and Lydia open with a joke before Thomas says he has been obsessing over the story and keeps landing on search results that steer him toward right-wing…
An ICE hearing, a warrantless home entry, and a memo that does not change the legal problem.
Serious Inquiries Only spends its hour on an ICE whistleblower hearing built around a blunt legal question: what happens when officers enter a home without a warrant signed by a judge, then point to a memo as if it could alter the Fourth Amendment?
A four-of-six screening rule, ASMR oddities, and a method debate that keeps spiraling outward.
The episode takes a hard look at a study that counted videos as useful only when they cleared four of six screening questions, with anything short of that branded misleading.
A brisk fact-check of a Texas voting claim, with enough process detail to show why the numbers do not add up.
Serious Inquiries Only spends this episode on a Texas voting claim and another story about news moving faster than the checking behind it. The Texas section is the strongest stretch.
A grounded primer on how health agencies, emergency powers, and public data systems could be reshaped.
Serious Inquiries Only takes a practical worry about health, science, and medical agencies and follows it into the less visible machinery that keeps public health functioning.
A skeptical look at where Project Hail Mary lines up with biology and where it stretches plausibility.
Thomas Smith and Dr. Eric Jaffe use Project Hail Mary as a way into real biology, and the episode is strongest when it keeps pressing the book's ideas against what the science can actually bear.
True crime with street-level criminal justice context.
Particle accelerators, compost piles and Queen's guitarist, all explained.
Steven Novella and a rotating panel dissect weekly science news and debunk pseudoscience claims.
Serious Inquiries Only episode 468 examines Trump’s HHS nominees and what they could change at Medicare, Medicaid, the CDC, FDA, NIH, and the Surgeon General’s office.
This episode continues a conversation with Dr.
This episode continues a discussion with Alejandro and Julia, critiquing AI studies like one claiming Google AI has better bedside manner than human doctors, from an anti-capitalist perspective.
Thomas Smith hosts Dr.
Host Thomas and Janessa revisit three classic child-development tests, the marshmallow test, the Sally-Anne false belief test, and water conservation, and show how later studies changed what each one is thought to measure.
Serious Inquiries Only’s SIO530 examines OpenAI’s claimed Navier–Stokes result and the mathematicians’ questions about its method and credit.
At Princeton University, psychologist Tania Lombrozo argues that explanations matter because they support predictions about unfamiliar cases, not just known correlations.
This episode discusses a recent incident involving Chappell Roan to illustrate pervasive sexism and online misogyny, emphasizing the need for awareness.
This episode explores the science behind the placebo effect, debunking common myths and discussing how charlatans exploit it to potentially harm people.
This episode features a discussion with Dr.
This episode discusses a research paper showing that authoritarian regimes can often be successfully reversed through 'U-turn' episodes where autocratization is followed by democratization, based on analysis of 102 cases from 1900 to 2023.
This episode of Serious Inquiries Only delves into ongoing fraud cases in Minnesota, examining the cases against Ellison and Walls, debunking claims, and discussing the polluted information environment surrounding these issues.
Thomas Smith and Lydia open with a joke about fraud.
Thomas says this one is a tweener.
The host and the other voice spend the opening stretch arguing over a study's rule for deciding when a video counts as useful.
Janessa and Thomas open with a grab bag of short finds.
This episode features an interview with Nick Fish, president of American Atheists, discussing how organizations can prepare for potential government weaponization by the Trump administration against political opponents.
This episode explores new research suggesting that negative mental health outcomes in kids with ADHD and autism may stem from the stress of navigating a world not designed for neurodiversity, featuring an interview with Dr.
This episode discusses concerns about potential changes to health and science agencies under the Trump administration, featuring insights from Dr.