What is Pseudoscience?

Forums: Pseudoscience
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Fake science?

Some disciplines are not worthy to be called science even though they employ scientific methods.

How do we know when some science is on the verge of pseudoscience and science?

It is important to draw a distinction line here for clarity’s sake.

I am not anti-science; I fully support science. I do think that many pseudosciences have for years masqueraded as science such as homeopathy, acupuncture and even psychology (which ascribes to taking a patient deeper into trauma with the thinking that this is the only way to cure them).

Some pseudosciences have a lower cure rate than "prayer" and, calling in the clergy.

Perhaps this is why the clergy is, more often than not, called in only after death.

Under what criterion are we to trust pseudoscience?

Creationist cosmologies (sounds authentic, doesn't it?)
Climate change denial (who knew this was a pseudoscience? Of course it is, it is run by a bunch of greedy loonies too.)
Water-fueled cars
Flood geology
Modern flat Earth beliefs
Trumpism... (a new one I have added)

At what point do people who follow these pseudosciences find out they are a bunch of hogwash?

Maybe never...

Please post and discuss pseudoscience here and how it has affected your life.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 4 • Views: 4,617 • Replies: 167
Topic Closed

@TheCobbler,

The simple answer.

Science is based on experiment. A scientific fact is testable and independently reproducible. The word "testable" means that there is a way to disprove the theory, if there is ever two objects with mass that don't have a gravitational attraction... you will have disproven the theory of Universal Gravitation.

0 Replies

@TheCobbler,

There is a lot of pseudo-science on the political left... where people start with a result and then find data to support it (this is the opposite of "testable" since it there was never any doubt that the "wrong" result would be found).

A good example is the "1 in 5 women in college are raped" number. This is a political result, and if anyone listens the data scientists admit that this number is bogus. But everyone of a certain political side believes it is true without question because it fits the narrative.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

How do you test if the Earth is flat?

Look at it...

1 Reply

@TheCobbler,

The scientific theory is that the Earth is roughly spherical (rather than flat). That is easily testable (which means there is an experimental result that will disprove the theory).

Something that is roughly spherical doesn't have an edge. If you can show me a definitive edge that I can not pass either from the ground, or from space, then that would disprove the round Earth theory.

The "Flat Earth theory" is not a scientific theory. If it were, someone would be able to identify an experimental result that would get them to reject it.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

I don't complain about thumbs, but I do find it interesting. My rather benign example of how a scientific theory is tested got more downthumbs than my possibly ill-advised swipe at liberal extremism. If I was going to downthumb one of these, it would be the latter

1 Reply

@TheCobbler,

It ain't right winger's science. They believe science is a fairy tale for wimpy libtards.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Ill go a step farther. Pseudo "Sciences" cannot even develop and plan out a program of research that can provide them much needed facts and evidence to verify their sciences, they dont have the interdisciplanary know how to make it so. think about it, what areas have you seen the 'alternate science" guy ver come up with anything at all orth consideration??

You can feed them possibilities (What I call, the questions most difficult to answer and how do they relat?) and they choke , or else start going intofull frontal denial.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

It ain't right winger's science. They believe science is a fairy tale for wimpy libtards.

It is a myth that liberals are any more science-based than conservatives. Yes, there is plenty of scientific research on this topic.

There are plenty of examples where liberals reject science. GMOs, biological differences in gender and agriculture. And liberals also have the tendency to exaggerate science (which is just as bad as denying it).

A discussion on the difference between science and psuedo-science is interesting. The idea that one side of the political divide is more scientific than the other is ridiculous.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

I agree with Farmerman (which is always nice).

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

There is a lot of pseudo-science on the political left... where people start with a result and then find data to support it (this is the opposite of "testable" since it there was never any doubt that the "wrong" result would be found).

Id like you to test the validity of your above statement .Im amazed how you tag things with politically based origins. You do it so out-of-hand that Id think that pople believe you when your asumptions are fairly baseless
The Koch brothers, who togther were the biggest sources of PBS

scince programs, are (were) two of th biggest climate change, evolution,
anti-environmentalism yahoos. Now that thres only one, hes backed off his politics . i guess hes heard that the scientific method isnt a Southern Baptist ordained means of birth=control.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

The scientific theory is that the Earth is roughly spherical (rather than flat). That is easily testable (which means there is an experimental result that will disprove the theory

cmon, thats not even close to cobblers request, its a complete avoidance of your threads position

1 Reply

@farmerman,

My position is that A scientific theory needs to be testable. I backed up that statement with my example.

What else do you want from me? I am not going to back up a statement that I didn't make.

1 Reply

Let me add this...

Not all theories are scientific theories. Science has nothing to say about the existence of God, or about the meaning of life or the value of human life even though these are all important ideas.

If you believe that human life is sacred. Good for you, so do I.

This isn't science since it isn't testable. This also isn't psuedo-science because I am not pretending that there is anything scientific about it. I can't think of any experiment to test the sacredness of human life. It is just a Truth to which I hold.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

Yes science does not propose to test whether if a white haired man with big beard is up in the sky moving the planets around and fixing lottery numbers for his favorite people and sending baseballs out into left field to throw a game. Scientist leave that up to gullible fools to speculate half their life about while scientists develop vaccines and discover quantum particles and the such.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

1 Reply

@TheCobbler,

What do you say to the scientists who develope vaccines and believe there is a God?

According to Pew, over half of scientists believe in a higher power, and two thirds of those say they believe in a God.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

It is called humility even the sun in the sky could be considered a "higher power".

What do I say to a scientist who believes in 7 day creation and Noah's flood?

Really?

There really is a gray haired man in the sky? lol

1 Reply

@TheCobbler,

What is the purpose of the Pyramids, on the Giza Plateau?
Who or What erected them?
When?
Why?
How?

Have a Great Day

1 Reply

@TheCobbler,

There is no contradiction between believing in God and being a scientist. About a third of scientists say they believe in God (not just a higher power).

You can believe in God and design cutting edge mRna vaccines.

1 Reply

What is Pseudoscience?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know