Pseudoscience

Author
Discussion

MartG

Original Poster:

20,771 posts

206 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
Now we've got a nice shiny new Science! forum, can we also have a 'Mumbo Jumbo' one for all the pseudoscientific crap that's turning up, e.g. UFOs, aliens building pyramids, etc. ?

Hoofy

76,682 posts

284 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
If God is willing...

Cyder

7,074 posts

222 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
Should we ask Eric first?

Robb F

4,578 posts

173 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
Let us consult the cyrstal ball!

Eric Mc

122,342 posts

267 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
I got told off by the mods for suggesting this a few weeks ago.

Seems the "Woo Woos" have taken over the asylum smile

However, I have no problem discussing the nature of "pseudoscience" as a cultural phenomenon. I would start the debate by suggesting people read this -


tankslappa

715 posts

208 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
Added to my Kindle list smile

I'm half way through the 2007 edition of 'Why People Believe Weird Things' by Michael Shermer and it's a good read so far.

Recently read 'Bad Science' by Ben Goldacre which I admit I enjoyed (even if you aren't to mention his forum around these parts).

Hoofy

76,682 posts

284 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
A stupid question, maybe, but what benefit do you get from reading such books? Isn't it just telling you that you're right... but you knew that already!

Eric Mc

122,342 posts

267 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
It helps point out who to avoid.

And there are always new weirdo notions arriving on the scene - so it's good to be aware of them.

And, indeed, reading stuff one agrees with is comforting. It allows one to think that perhaps the whole world hasn't completely lost its marbles.

I read Nigel Roebuck and Clive James for the same reasons.

Shaolin

2,955 posts

191 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
Hoofy said:
A stupid question, maybe, but what benefit do you get from reading such books? Isn't it just telling you that you're right... but you knew that already!
I find it fascinating why people will readily believe woo-woo in the absence of any half decent evidence, sometimes completely against the evidence while they will disregard proper proven beyond doubt science on the basis of it not being psychologically satisfying or counter intuitive.

I reckon it comes from the god/ghoulie bit of the brain that evolved to enable us to live in groups larger than the extended family - the key to Homo sapiens success.

Hoofy

76,682 posts

284 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
Ah right. Yes, makes sense, then.

I just trust nobody. biggrin

rhinochopig

17,932 posts

200 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
Ben Goldacre is a good read on this topic. Try the Sceptoid pod-casts too.

At the philosophical level most governments don't trust their population to know all their deepest darkest secrets for fear of being voted out of office or upsetting another friendly country. So they lie about a lot of stuff (Russian Spy Rock anyone?), and inevitably they get found out. Politicians are also regularly caught with their hands in the till so are frequently found to be an untrustworthy bunch.

Add in a pinch of modern education, which teaches critical thinking - but seldom taught well - and there is little wonder that a LOT of people wonder what they are covering up when the government says of course we landed on the moon.

And lets face it, the notion of aliens is actually pretty cool.

MagicalTrevor

6,476 posts

231 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
Hoofy said:
If God is willing...
hehe very good!

g3org3y

20,750 posts

193 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Highly recommended book. Very well written and interesting.

Also as mentioned, Ben Goldacre's Bad Science is a really good read and dispels many of the myths of 'popular/tabloid science'.

MOTORVATOR

6,993 posts

249 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
Surely if you refuse to listen to hypothesis then science discovery stands still and we are left with just disproving existing theories?

So you are assigning us to a backward course if we don't have open minds.

Eric Mc

122,342 posts

267 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
I think there is a difference between woo woo type nonsensical views and reasoned scientific debate and discussion.

I can tell the difference, can't you?

I will listen to anyone who puts forward their hypothesis based on normal scientific principles.

I have no time for those who just spout assertions and refuse to back these assertions up in any meaningful way.


MOTORVATOR

6,993 posts

249 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
To some extent I see what you are saying Eric but if we were to follow the route of every hypothesis having to accord with existing knowns then we are no better than the church was many years ago.

Edited by MOTORVATOR on Monday 30th January 19:11

Oakey

27,621 posts

218 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
you can't argue with 'woo'. There's a woman on a local forum who is a 'Feng shui Master' who I've argued with numerous times on the subject of her 'woo'. she regularly trots out that she's a'master' in Feng Shui as her top trump card as if that's supposed to give her opinion any more weight than someone elses. What she did reveal was that she'd spent £100k 'training' with the Grand Feng Shui Master in China to get her credentials. Seriously, if you've spent £100k on something you are hardly going to turn around at the end and say "you know what, this is complete horsest". Of course, the only evidence she provides that Feng Shui works are anecdotes and she expects everyone else to prove her wrong.

Her and her ilk charge between £300-£600 to come round and tell you where to position your furniture.


tankslappa

715 posts

208 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
I prefer Penn & Tellers' take on Feng Shui biggrin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLO1WeFgEdM&fe...

In fact, their entire Bullst! series is a good laugh as far as woo goes. Most of it is on YouTube, did it ever get broadcast over here?

tank slapper

7,949 posts

285 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
MOTORVATOR said:
To some extent I see what you are saying Eric but if we were to follow the route of every hypothesis having to accord with existing knowns then we are no better than the church was many years ago.
A scientific hypothesis is not just a guess about something though. It is usually educated by prior observation and knowledge. Where all of these pseudo-science things fail is that their believers are not willing to look at them objectively. They come up with an idea, and then grasp on to it and ignore any contrary evidence or disregard it with excuses about test conditions and other nonsense.

MOTORVATOR

6,993 posts

249 months

Monday 30th January 2012
quotequote all
tank slapper said:
MOTORVATOR said:
To some extent I see what you are saying Eric but if we were to follow the route of every hypothesis having to accord with existing knowns then we are no better than the church was many years ago.
A scientific hypothesis is not just a guess about something though. It is usually educated by prior observation and knowledge. Where all of these pseudo-science things fail is that their believers are not willing to look at them objectively. They come up with an idea, and then grasp on to it and ignore any contrary evidence or disregard it with excuses about test conditions and other nonsense.
I would have said just a guess is exactly what it is, isn't it the observation of the unexplained that leads to a hypothesis and hence to theory through reasoning.

The whole point of creating a hypothesis is to 'attempt' to explain something that hasn't been explained before.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that all the pseudo stuff is worthy just that one should keep an open mind for science discovery to continue progressing.