DIY Honda CRX Gen 2 Ignition Switch Replacement


  • If you start the car and the radio doesn’t turn on, then wiggle the key and it turns on.
  • Most often, the dash will go dark when the car stalls (no warning lights, no shift indicator, no electrical, except the horns.)
  • The speedometer and tachometer drop momentarily and come back up.
  • Car runs fine when key slightly held at start position.
  • Car stalls then can be restart, then stalls after driving or idling.
  • Once started the the car starts for a second and dies after letting off the key.
  • In some cases, the ignition key is warmer than normal and the electrical switch is hot.
  • On rare cases, all of the gauges go dark when in the ON position but if held between the on and start position they light up.
  • On rare cases, if held between the on and start position the system check bulbs light up on the instrument panel.
  • On severe cases, when the key turns to ON the usual clicks under the dash is not heard as well as the check system light but the horns work okay.
  • In severe cases when the key turns to START nothing happens (no electrical) but the horns or brake lights work okay.


  1. Disconnect the negative battery terminal (for your safety.)
  2. Remove fuse cover.
  3. Remove the steering column cover cover. (three screws under the steering wheel)
  4. Lower steering wheel if possible and if required.
  5. Make sure the ignition key is turn to “0”
  6. Disconnect the electrical switch harness from the fuse box.
  7. Remove the two screws from the side of the ignition switch cover with a wrench, monkey wrench or socket wrench. This is done by loosen the two small bolts/screws holding the electrical switch. Once they are loosen, you may then continue to loosen them with your fingers or tools. In my photos I used a screwdriver bit, having no other suitable tool available.
    20120319-094608.jpg 20120319-094615.jpg
  8. Remove the old electrical switch, taking note where the harness routes.20120319-094551.jpg
  9. Simply insert your new ignition switch, screw it in, and reinsert the sockets!


If you open your damaged ignition switch you should see pitting one of the contacts located on the black component of the ignition switch; this should not be restored. It should be discarded.

20120319-094635.jpg 20120319-094625.jpg

With thanks to TechAuto, information used from here.

Stuff you may have missed for March 18, 2012

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Stuff you may have missed for March 11, 2012

Digest powered by RSS Digest

QualiaSoup: Putting Faith in its Place

A while back I came across QualiaSoup, a UK artist and secular humanist discussing critical thinking, science, philosophy & the natural world. Their YouTube channel has a number of well-produced videos and after having a friend recently share with me a video from QualiaSoup, I thought I would share one each week as a way to promote the videos.

This weeks’ video from QualiaSoup is about putting faith in its place, exploring why faith has no place demanding agreement or punishing disagreement.


I strongly recommend looking at the rest of the videos on the channel, or you watch the select few that I Post here. Check them out at QUALIASOUP.

Winston Wu, Pseudoskeptic Extraordinaire!

Winston Wu is a writer who has “written extensive and thorough critiques” of Christian Fundamentalism and what he calls “PseudoSkepticism”. Winston isn’t a new face to some, but to me he is; having found out about him after he posted about “Debunking the Law of Attraction and “Thoughts Create Reality” Religion” within the Australian Skeptics Facebook Group.

Winston Wu

After reading much of his article, I commented that his assessment was “OK overall”, except for what I saw as a few flawed conclusions; Winston makes non-specific references to research done by “Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR)”, and reference to a “psi wheel” as evidence of psi-attributed anomalies. Because of this, I believe that Winston does not have a good grasp of statistics; he mentions that the reported “effects produced are MICROSCOPIC”; That is to say,of no statistical significance; In any area of investigation you are likely to get false-positives, or indeed anomalous results – thus the demand by those who follow the evidence, for such studies that show an anomalous result to be replicated; or indeed improved upon with better controls that prevent researcher bias, and indeed unintended interference.

But, it seems Winston refuses to acknowledge that independent research replication is part of doing good science.

It may very well be the case that Winston is simply credulous, and accepts of the research at face-value because it supports his views; Winston is an avid advocate of various phenomena reported to have of paranormal cause; and has been looking to have his beliefs verified by scientific investigation after he believed he had an experience where he “knew” his girlfriend was in an car accident around the time she was indeed in an accident.

When I questioned Winston about his article, he responded with (the inserted image):

I may be an amateur skeptic, but I found a number of problems with this, his first response:

1. Winston declares that science and his personal investigation has confirmed it (psi) as a real phenomena, yet does not provide any details of the research, or indeed the methodology used in his “personal investigation”;

2. Winston then refers me to a published book to demonstrates Psi is “a proven FACT”; apparently I am being asked to accept this book as being 100% true and correct, and free of any possible methodological errors. Winston expects me not to question it.

3. Winston then refers me to the work of a Biologist, who runs a few online experiments; his page he includes a disclaimer about the research results:

“Because these experiments took place under uncontrolled and unsupervised conditions, we cannot eliminate the possibility that some people were cheating, or that some starers were inadvertently giving clues to the subjects by the way they gave the signal for the beginning of the trial or by unintentional sounds that were different in the staring and the not staring trials.”

4. And Winston finishes with a personal attack, implying that anyone who does not accept that Psi is “a proven FACT” must be “establishment defenders”, are “not critical thinkers, or “objective truth seeking investigators”, and must be “biased to uphold a certain world view”.

To me, it seemes that Winston accepts a lower level of scientific integrity in studies that he assesses when they supported his beliefs. For instance, in his assessment of the LOA (Law of Attraction), if not for the acceptance of poorly controlled studies as good evidence for paranormal phenomena, the article overall would have been decent. I remarked this; and after a little while, Winston posted again; continuing on with his personal attack against people who he sees as being “pseudo-sketpical (image below)”:

What struck me as ironic, is that his article on the LOA (Law of Attraction) was on a website called “debunking skeptics”. While the DebunkingSkeptics website does indeed assert many good traits a skeptical person should indeed have (albiet in a flippant and informal prose), it also includes a number of assertions that is NOT part of good skepticism.

The website itself uses language that indicates a strong paranormal bias, and the imagery is suggestive of this too; the website is more about rejecting what is seen as the “status quo” or “establishment”, and less about following the evidence – regardless.

The authors of the website assert that when someone points out when a poor line of reasoning has been employed, that person is a “pseudo-skeptic”; rather than being what is is – someone pointing out that their line of reasoning is flawed.

Winston trumpets in his response that “Skeptics fail to understand that skepticism involves being skeptical of your own position,” yet he attacks anyone who questions his position and refuses to be skeptical of his own position.

As part of his foray in to the Australian Skeptics Facebook Group Winston posted a link entitled “Characteristics and Behaviors of PseudoSkeptics vs. True Skeptics” and I just had to comment; I noted to Winston:

In “True skeptics” it says “When all mundane explanations for a phenomenon are ruled out, are able to accept paranormal ones”.

This is fallacious. It ignores what the evidence says; to conclude that a phenomena MUST be paranormal because all “mundane” explanations known to the experimenter have been exhausted, is an appeal to personal ignorance.

That is not skepticism. It’s not even science.

I have no problem accepting a paranormal explanation, provided there is evidence for it.

I will not, due to my own personal ignorance, simply conclude something is paranormal because something is a mystery to ME; I am not so arrogant to do so.

Winston was also eager to provide reference to an article entitled “Dr. Michael Persinger Announces Telepathy as Proven Fact! : Psychic Phenomena / ESP / Telepathy“. Because it formed part of the Debunking Skeptics website, we can see Winston’s responses, and in it Winston declares:

“Some people do have a connection to each other that distance doesn’t block. That is true. Twins or lovers often have this type of connection. No mundane explanation can explain it. End of story.”

This go against some of the very things listed on the Debunking Skeptics website.

Winston has done exactly what I, as a responsible skeptic, did not do – Impose on myself a belief in a paranormal phenomena despite having no good reason to do so; he has decided that because he personally was unable to conclude the cause, that it must be paranormal; Winston doesn’t want to find out the answer, he wants to ASSIGN an answer.

The Debunking Skeptics website exposes his pseudo-skeptical behavior and lists this as “Does not ask big questions to try to understand things, but judges them by whether they fit into their fixed beliefs”

Winston has arrogantly assigned an answer based with no good reason, instead of simply reserving judgement. It is of no consequence to accept that we personally do not know everything, it is perfectly OK to say: “At this time, I do not have enough information to come to a rational conclusion, as such I will reserve judgement till I have enough information to come to a conclusion, and if new evidence should come to light, I reserve the right to change my answer based on that new evidence.”

The Debunking Skeptics website exposes his pseudo-skeptical behavior and lists this as “Unable to accept mysteries and uncertainty, cannot think in terms of possibilities

The above evidence demonstrates that Winston Wu is only skeptical when that being investigated it does not infringe on the imagined world of the paranormal.

The Debunking Skeptics website exposes his pseudo-skeptical behavior and lists this as “Applies “critical thinking” only to that which opposes their beliefs and the status quo, but never to the status quo itself”

Finally, because of the above behavior, he infringes on another listed behavior on the Debunking Skeptics website; “Not interested in truth, evidence or facts, only in defending their views

Determined by the very website he writes for, Winston Wu, is indeed a pseudo-skeptic.