What is it about woo that upsets you?

[wegs]

In reading threads on here, and articles that border ''pseudo-science,'' there seems to be a lot of tension from the science community, towards people who espouse woo views. I see nothing wrong with debating against woo views, and trying to point out the errors of such thinking, if in fact, the person holding those views is passing the woo off to be fact. But, I've noticed angry posts directed at people who post in favor of some woo theories, and wonder why they are so offended?

So, thought I'd ask - what is it about woo that makes you angry? If some people are more gullible than others, how/why does this affect you? There are no right or wrong answers, just would like a healthy discussion to genuinely see the general viewpoint.

 

[spidergoat]

The error makes it annoying.

 

[billvon]

So, thought I'd ask - what is it about woo that makes you angry?

For the most part it doesn't. For example, I find FatFreddy's posts on how we never went to the Moon more funny than annoying.

But sometimes it isn't just funny or annoying. Andrew Wakefield's claims that vaccines cause autism have killed people - and he made those claims just to profit from his connections to ambulance chasers. That makes me pretty angry.

 

[wegs]

For the most part it doesn't. For example, I find FatFreddy's posts on how we never went to the Moon more funny than annoying.

But sometimes it isn't just funny or annoying. Andrew Wakefield's claims that vaccines cause autism have killed people - and he made those claims just to profit from his connections to ambulance chasers. That makes me pretty angry.

I'd agree that anyone who supports or uses it to hurt others, whether intentionally or not, is deplorable.

The error makes it annoying.

Do you try to correct their thinking?

 

[RainbowSingularity]

In reading threads on here, and articles that border ''pseudo-science,'' there seems to be a lot of tension from the science community, towards people who espouse woo views. I see nothing wrong with debating against woo views, and trying to point out the errors of such thinking, if in fact, the person holding those views is passing the woo off to be fact. But, I've noticed angry posts directed at people who post in favor of some woo theories, and wonder why they are so offended?

So, thought I'd ask - what is it about woo that makes you angry? If some people are more gullible than others, how/why does this affect you? There are no right or wrong answers, just would like a healthy discussion to genuinely see the general viewpoint.

i am very liberal spiritually & intellectually.
however most people do not understand what liberal means.(dumbformity?)

what specifically annoys me about woo is people asserting positions of assumed authority to dominate confined access to knowledge.
be that as a parent or as a school or education system.

trend-wise what does seem to be quite apparent is that scammers have targeted te psudo-science and mystic subscribers to scam them as easy prey.
current leadership is the babyboomers whom define the gullibility to give away money to scammers as a personal weakness and so the back flow addiction response is to hate on the critiquing of that process to avoid confronting personal issues about how those morals of self judgement and judgement of others is built and maintained.

it is very current with the alt-right nationalistic political movements around the world in all different religions and countrys.

 

[spidergoat]

Do you try to correct their thinking?

I do try sometimes.

 

[Seattle]

Very little I read on here is going to make me "angry". It can be annoying to constantly read those kinds of posts. In most cases, it seems to be the result of lazy thinking, refusing to learn, etc.

I guess it's annoying just because we shouldn't have to have these kinds of conversations in the 21st century. It's kind of like someone who is out of work, constantly complaining about not having a job, not having any money and then when asked if they have looked for work they answer "no".

If you don't want to know the facts, no one else should have to listen to, daily, their opinions.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

In reading threads on here, and articles that border ''pseudo-science,'' there seems to be a lot of tension from the science community, towards people who espouse woo views. I see nothing wrong with debating against woo views, and trying to point out the errors of such thinking, if in fact, the person holding those views is passing the woo off to be fact. But, I've noticed angry posts directed at people who post in favor of some woo theories, and wonder why they are so offended?

So, thought I'd ask - what is it about woo that makes you angry? If some people are more gullible than others, how/why does this affect you? There are no right or wrong answers, just would like a healthy discussion to genuinely see the general viewpoint.

This bein a “science forum”… some are offended (an rightly so) when woo ant stamped out as soon as its detected… but JamesRs enforcment aganst woo has been like a roller coaster ride which has led to more flame than discussion… but over a year ago when Sciforums was officialy determined not to be a science forum more woo has been allowed… an me… i dont have a prollem wit Sciforums bein a real science forum or not… as long as its made clear to the posters and the same rules apply to all.!!!

HTH

 

[wegs]

Very little I read on here is going to make me "angry". It can be annoying to constantly read those kinds of posts. In most cases, it seems to be the result of lazy thinking, refusing to learn, etc.

I guess it's annoying just because we shouldn't have to have these kinds of conversations in the 21st century. It's kind of like someone who is out of work, constantly complaining about not having a job, not having any money and then when asked if they have looked for work they answer "no".

If you don't want to know the facts, no one else should have to listen to, daily, their opinions.

The last time I had posted here, I remember you had started a thread topic about why the traffic was down here, and I believe one of the reasons provided (you or someone else posted it?) had to do with woo. How the forum has become sort of a safe haven for people who share their woo theories. I didn't post a reply, but in line with this thread, I'd say that the best discussions in life, usually have a variety of opinions. If this site was strictly science and math based, and all of the varying fringe sub forums were deleted/banned, you'd likely see a boring echo chamber. It would be like having a set of friends who never challenge you, and always agree with you. Boring, yes?

That said, it can be that someone who is posting woo, simply ''doesn't know any better,'' and it takes a science community of their peers to point them in the right direction. I'm not sure I've ever seen a die hard woo-supporter change their minds, but you never know until you try.

 

[wegs]

This bein a “science forum”… some are offended (an rightly so) when woo ant stamped out as soon as its detected… but JamesRs enforcment aganst woo has been like a roller coaster ride which has led to more flame than discussion… but over a year ago when Sciforums was officialy determined not to be a science forum more woo has been allowed… an me… i dont have a prollem wit Sciforums bein a real science forum or not… as long as its made clear to the posters and the same rules apply to all.!!!

HTH

I haven't really seen James ''enforce'' against woo, since there are sub-sections to have fringe discussions. I'd say woo should be banned out of the main science sections, though. There's plenty of other areas to advocate woo, if one so chooses. Is that what you mean?

 

[DaveC426913]

In reading threads on here, and articles that border ''pseudo-science,'' there seems to be a lot of tension from the science community, towards people who espouse woo views. I see nothing wrong with debating against woo views, and trying to point out the errors of such thinking, if in fact, the person holding those views is passing the woo off to be fact. But, I've noticed angry posts directed at people who post in favor of some woo theories, and wonder why they are so offended?

It's not the woo; it's the obligatory magical thinking that leads to a woo-ist espousing it.

I frequently engage fringe ideas, it is only when the underlying ignorance raises its head (and no desire to embrace facts) that I get impatient.

 

[wegs]

It's not the woo; it's the obligatory magical thinking that leads to a woo-ist espousing it.

I frequently engage fringe ideas, it is only when the underlying ignorance raises its head (and no desire to embrace facts) that I get impatient.

I like how you explained this, thanks.

 

[Seattle]

The last time I had posted here, I remember you had started a thread topic about why the traffic was down here, and I believe one of the reasons provided (you or someone else posted it?) had to do with woo. How the forum has become sort of a safe haven for people who share their woo theories. I didn't post a reply, but in line with this thread, I'd say that the best discussions in life, usually have a variety of opinions. If this site was strictly science and math based, and all of the varying fringe sub forums were deleted/banned, you'd likely see a boring echo chamber. It would be like having a set of friends who never challenge you, and always agree with you. Boring, yes?

That said, it can be that someone who is posting woo, simply ''doesn't know any better,'' and it takes a science community of their peers to point them in the right direction. I'm not sure I've ever seen a die hard woo-supporter change their minds, but you never know until you try.

I like hearing differing opinions. To me if one person is talking about a strong military being paramount to defense and another is stressing diplomacy and talking to enemies...that's differing opinions.

It might provoke thought. When someone is talking about a flat Earth or a "theory of darkness" or some such nonsense, it's not thought provoking. It's just a refusal to learn. It's generally someone who hasn't studied any science (or any other subject). Instead of reading, they have just pulled a nutty idea out of thin air.

I don't personally care if this site is predominately based around science. If it's a general discussion site that would be fine with me as well. I'm not too concerned with trying to promote science to those who are immune to learning and facts.

Woo isn't really a "subject" and therefore I don't find it interesting. Woo topics aren't generally too popular in our everyday lives either, are they? Do you have those kinds of conversations with friends or would you generally walk a clear path away from those spouting that kind of nonsense?

 

[cluelusshusbund]

I haven't really seen James ''enforce'' against woo, since there are sub-sections to have fringe discussions. I'd say woo should be banned out of the main science sections, though. There's plenty of other areas to advocate woo, if one so chooses. Is that what you mean?

Yeah i thank woo posted in non fringe areas is quickly moved to the fringe area... an i guess its like Dave said... impatience wit people who wont discuss woo in a more scientific way.!!!

So thar you have it... the reason for anger in the woo area

 

[wegs]

I like hearing differing opinions. To me if one person is talking about a strong military being paramount to defense and another is stressing diplomacy and talking to enemies...that's differing opinions.

Okay. True.

It might provoke thought. When someone is talking about a flat Earth or a "theory of darkness" or some such nonsense, it's not thought provoking. It's just a refusal to learn. It's generally someone who hasn't studied any science (or any other subject). Instead of reading, they have just pulled a nutty idea out of thin air.

I don't know. Of the woo ideas I've read on here, for example, there seems to be a mixture of actual facts and fiction, all in one. I think that is what makes such threads go on for ages. If it was straight up nonsense from the get go, not many people would reply.

I don't personally care if this site is predominately based around science. If it's a general discussion site that would be fine with me as well. I'm not too concerned with trying to promote science to those who are immune to learning and facts.

Maybe they just haven't been taught science in a proper way? Or course, there are people we should write off, as they are trolls. Not all woo purveyors are trolls, from what I can tell.

Woo isn't really a "subject" and therefore I don't find it interesting. Woo topics aren't generally too popular in our everyday lives either, are they? Do you have those kinds of conversations with friends or would you generally walk a clear path away from those spouting that kind of nonsense?

Um. Most of my friends are atheists, and pragmatic thinkers. But, we share mutual friends who are religious (I'm spiritual), and at times, there are conversations around evolution. Most atheists would consider creationism to be ''woo,'' but that would be an example. I was surprised to hear that a friend of mine, who is agnostic, believes that Big Foot exists. lol I might have to rethink that friendship.

 

[wegs]

Yeah i thank woo posted in non fringe areas is quickly moved to the fringe area... an i guess its like Dave said... impatience wit people who wont discuss woo in a more scientific way.!!!

So thar you have it... the reason for anger in the woo area

That should be an anger-free zone though, if it's being posted in the designated area.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

That should be an anger-free zone though, if it's being posted in the designated area.

Like i said before... "JamesRs enforcment aganst woo has been like a roller coaster ride which has led to more flame than discussion"... ie... sometimes enforcement is strict sometimes it ant... an thats just askin for trouble/anger.!!!

 

[Seattle]

Okay. True.

I don't know. Of the woo ideas I've read on here, for example, there seems to be a mixture of actual facts and fiction, all in one. I think that is what makes such threads go on for ages. If it was straight up nonsense from the get go, not many people would reply.

Maybe they just haven't been taught science in a proper way? Or course, there are people we should write off, as they are trolls. Not all woo purveyors are trolls, from what I can tell.


Um. Most of my friends are atheists, and pragmatic thinkers. But, we share mutual friends who are religious, and at times, there are conversations around evolution. Most atheists would consider creationism to be ''woo,'' but that would be an example. I was surprised to hear that a friend of mine, who is agnostic, believes that Big Foot exists. lol I might have to rethink that friendship.

I think most everyone has at least gone to high school and therefore they have been exposed to enough "science" for them to know better than to start most of these threads.

I disagree that the threads that go on and on must have a lot of truth to them. There are one or two people that keep most threads going forever.

Religion is mainstream woo so that's a different category just from a cultural perspective. If it wasn't it would be labeled a cult otherwise with the same set of facts.

Sure, some people say things like "there might be something to spiritualism" but that's just because it's such a nebulous term, it can mean anything (to them) and some people are just lazy (intellectually). If you know nothing about statistics, everything is a "miracle".

I know people who know little science and therefore anything seems possible (or unknowable). For many people, if they are religious enough, they don't look very hard for other explanations.

I know people who look around on a sunny day and say "I know there is a God" just from looking at nature. It's got to be created by God when you know nothing about biology, geology, physics, etc. You can mention a fact and they'll say "How do you know, you weren't there?". Anything before the written language or man is something that they think must be unknowable. That's a much easier tact to take when you actually don't know anything.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

That should be an anger-free zone though, if it's being posted in the designated area.

Yeah... i woud like the woo area to be for discussin woo any way you want wit-out flame... or discussed strictly scientifically wit no flame... or... everbody can flame all they want... just pick one an make it clear what the policy is.!!!

 

[Write4U]

know people who look around on a sunny day and say "I know there is a God" just from looking at nature.

This reminds of a Carlin skit;