What is Pseudoscience?

Stryder

Stryder

Keeper of "good" ideas.
Valued Senior Member
I thought it might be about time to try and work out what the "Pseudoscience forum" is actually about, afterall everybody has their perception of why it's here but no real statement about what it actually contains.

Pseudoscience itself means "Pretended or Spurious Science" (from the Oxford English Dictionary). This can be broken down to suggest that it deals with science that has no evidence (But does not suggest it should lack plausibilty) or that the particular science in question is constantly being redefined and therefore not stable enough to be classed as mainstream science.
(What good would it be if text books had to keep being written, and laws that define the universe kept altering.)

Pseudoscience is a forum for "brainstorms" for hypothesis of the "What could happen".

If you have a Scientific theory then you will need evidence and a peer review, you will have to stand up to criticism and people pulling apart what you say, piece by piece. If your theory and evidence can withstand the peer review then you'll know that your theories place isn't meant for the pseudoscience section.

[The usual way people get around the peer review is to find peers that believe them no matter what, for a true peer review you need proper established scientists to put forwards their statements on how they percieve a theory etc.]

Pseudoscience isn't about Science fiction completely, if you want to do that then use the SCIFI forum since Science isn't about artistic creativity.

Now I've said all this, I ask each of you this question and ask that you write what you think Pseudoscience is. Theres no prizes for writing but it will give everyone a better understanding of what the forum is actually about.
 
I can't remember where I picked these up, so I cannot give proper
credit, but they might help your discussion. Pseudoscience -

- Often has a negative attitude toward skepticism
- Does not require repeatability
- Is often not testable
- Is often incompatible with existing knowledge
- Explains away or ignores falsifying data
- Uses vague language
- Is not empirical
- Relies on anecdotal evidence
- Is vulnerable to experimenter effects
- Is not self-correcting
- Produces belief or faith but not knowledge

:m: Peace.
 
In its more nefarious form, pseudoscience is a fiction that wraps itself in enough real facts and jargon to be able to pass itself off as legitimate. The goals of pseudoscientists are probably many, but among them are likely some satisfaction of needs like status, self-esteem, self-worth; as well as outright greed and desire for capital gain.

In more subtle forms, pseudoscience is just bad science. A researcher who gets hung up on a pet theory and fails to revise hypotheses, seeks only nods of approval, rejects critics and finds justifications.

In a science discussion site, the pseudoscience forum is best used by those who are "science-minded" to expose and discuss pseudoscience rather than embrace it. The wild speculations of alien wars, anti-gravity, alien abductions, ghosts, ESP, remote viewing, etc. would be able to survive in the "hard science" forums of Astronomy, Physics, Human Sciences, etc. if there were any real evidence supporting their hypotheses.

Pseudoscience is fast becoming the great detracter of our society as more and more people buy into creationist beliefs, alien encounters, and New Age poppycock, all the while abandoning the scientific method and their critical thinking for so-called "out-of-the-box" thinking (which really isn't out of a box at all, but very conformist to whatever belief system is the influencing factor, such as UFO/ETI).

Even the current Presidential administration is being accused of pseudoscientific pursuits as Bush & co. eliminate any science advisors that express opinions counter to the Bush religiocentered belief system regarding the administration of scientific research in this nation. The Bush admin is spending $15 million on fighting AIDS in Africa, focusing on abstinence and monogomy programs, stating that "condoms really have not been effective" statistically. Bush also fired some proponents of stem cell research from his science advisory board.

Pseudoscience comes in many flavors, but none taste like the truth to the connoisseur. (gratuitous cliche in honor of our favorite pseudoscientist)
 
Pseudoscience is fast becoming the great detracter of our society as more and more people buy into creationist beliefs, alien encounters, and New Age poppycock, (skinwalker)

can this claim be quantified? are you implying irrationality is on the rise?
 
Psuedoscience is a science , or belief that is not accepted by mainstream science.

pseu·do·sci·ence ( P ) Pronunciation Key (sd-sns)
n.
A theory, methodology, or practice that is considered to be without scientific foundation.

in otherwords, something that can easily be dismissed as nonsense, which seems to describe this board pretty well.
 
1. [a] (often used in combination) not genuine but having the appearance of. More...
2. [n] a person who makes deceitful pretenses. More...

Acronym Definition PSEUDO- False (Prefix)

pseu·do [ sdō ] adjective not genuine: not authentic or sincere, in spite of appearances
[14th century. From Greek pseudo- , from pseudēs (see pseudo-).]

2 entries found for pseudo.
Main Entry: pseu·do
Pronunciation: 'sü-(")dO
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from pseudo-
: being apparently rather than actually as stated : SHAM, SPURIOUS
<distinction between true and pseudo humanism -- K. F. Reinhardt>

Does that help?
 
I'll tell you what Pseudoscience isn't.. Pseudoscience although claimed to be false science that portrays itself as science but is false (i.e. Perpetual Motion systems) it shouldn't be mixed up with "Protoscience" where the prototyping of theory has yet to be proven or complete Science Fiction.

I mention this as there seem to be a few that have nothing better to do than write "pseudoscience theories" that isn't actually because they believe the theories to be correct but because they are too lame at dreaming content up for their "unviewed" websites, and feel that getting people to their site involves critical acclaim or fame.
(i.e. when a rocks seen as more than a rock, when it's just a rock)

I do suggest that "Pseudoscience" should really be termed as the place where Science Fiction and Fact split away from attempted "Protoscience" endevours. Hopefully in the future, it will be possible to determine which Category a topic fits into.
 
what people choose to do with their free time is not your concern. does impartiality translate to spiteful digs now?

what is your concern is the immediate closure of any thread that play the game of....name that object!

be it a frikkin rock (look! a tail, a tail!) or a speck (wow, the mothership!) in the sky, it irritates the shit out of me

i propose the immediate banishment of both the iniators and the debunking respondents of threads in this manner. better yet, behead em all!

peace out!
 
I would say that pseudo-science really allows the real science to evolve.Some of non-conventional ideas like General Relativity must have been pseudo-science in those days? isnt it? I would say that Unconventional Thoughts that do not fit into conventional science and for which science cannot provide satisfactory answers,(presently) would come under Pseudo-Science...


bye!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top