- -Use of vague, exaggerated or untestable claims
-Over-reliance on confirmation rather than refutation
-Lack of openness to testing by other experts
-Absence of progress
-Personalization of issues
-Use of misleading language
Identifying pseudoscience
Moderator: CharmQuark
Forum rules
Any controversial topic can be discussed. Freedom of expression is encouraged. The scientific validity of things posted in this forum may stray from reality quite wildly and the reader is advised to keep that in mind. Please refrain from bad language and DO NOT get overly abusive with other members. You MUST post in English. It is OK to have fiercely intense debate. This forum has no connection with CERN, the LHC or my site. The views here do not represent the forum's views or my views in any way. It is meant as a place to debate or discuss subjects that may create heated debate. Almost no moderation will occur in this forum at all.
Any controversial topic can be discussed. Freedom of expression is encouraged. The scientific validity of things posted in this forum may stray from reality quite wildly and the reader is advised to keep that in mind. Please refrain from bad language and DO NOT get overly abusive with other members. You MUST post in English. It is OK to have fiercely intense debate. This forum has no connection with CERN, the LHC or my site. The views here do not represent the forum's views or my views in any way. It is meant as a place to debate or discuss subjects that may create heated debate. Almost no moderation will occur in this forum at all.
Identifying pseudoscience
How to identify pseudoscience (without knowing s.th. about the actual topic):
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
I'd definitely add
- Extrapolating analogies way, way ... WAY outside of their applicability (e.g. LHC is more dangerous than cosmic radiation because sunlight is more dangerous when focussed by a magnifying glass)
to that list, but nice start
- Extrapolating analogies way, way ... WAY outside of their applicability (e.g. LHC is more dangerous than cosmic radiation because sunlight is more dangerous when focussed by a magnifying glass)
to that list, but nice start
- tswsl1989
- LHCPortal Guru
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:22 pm
- Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
- Contact:
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
See also: Crackpot Index as referenced elsewhere on this forum
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
I don't mind calling what I bring up pseudoscience as it is surely the case because it hasn't been proved.Mailo wrote:LHC is more dangerous than cosmic radiation because sunlight is more dangerous when focussed by a magnifying glass
But to call my loupe-analogy pseudosciences is lame. The lhc creates a concentration of particles with high velocity, for pete's sake they use themselves cosmic rays as an analogy. The lhc increases the intensity, just like a magnifying glass does with photons. And using a funnel as a safety test, isn't far fetched.
btw if you have comments on what I say, post them where it is relevant: link
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich
- CharmQuark
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
- Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
Excuse me Chelle but why have you not made your own thread and insisted in taking over Ivans? this bugs me terrible
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.
- tswsl1989
- LHCPortal Guru
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:22 pm
- Location: Swansea, Wales, UK
- Contact:
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
Mailo was using one of your points to illustrate a relevant comment in this thread.chelle wrote:btw if you have comments on what I say, post them where it is relevant: link
Comments about your views *have* been made in the appropriate place.
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
chelle Create your own thread separate from Ivan. Thats fair..
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
Not about this specific argument, so my above comment is relevant, because I believe my loupe-argument is funded, as I pointed out. So why should I accept that someone goes bringing up arguments in an other thread while he doesn't debate them where its due?tswsl1989 wrote:Mailo was using one of your points to illustrate a relevant comment in this thread.chelle wrote:btw if you have comments on what I say, post them where it is relevant: link
Comments about your views *have* been made in the appropriate place.
ok guys, I see that you are not comfortable with me making comments in the other thread, so Chris it's ok for me if you cut it where "tswsl1989" first suggested, perhaps you could call "Combustion".Xymox wrote:chelle Create your own thread separate from Ivan. Thats fair..
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
FYIMailo wrote:- Extrapolating analogies way, way ... WAY outside of their applicability (e.g. LHC is more dangerous than cosmic radiation because sunlight is more dangerous when focussed by a magnifying glass)
Focussing the beam allows its width and height to be constrained so that it stays inside the vacuum chamber. This is achieved by quadrupole magnets, which act on the beam of charged particles exactly the same way as a lens would act on a beam of light http://www.lhc-closer.es/php/index.php?i=1&s=4&p=6&e=2
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
Technophobia and attempted justification by stretched analogy. Dear oh dear oh dear.
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
What's wrong with you?mrgumby wrote:Technophobia and attempted justification by stretched analogy. Dear oh dear oh dear.
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
Chelle wrote:What's wrong with you?mrgumby wrote:Technophobia and attempted justification by stretched analogy. Dear oh dear oh dear.
I'm allergic to B.S. I'm afraid
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
That's ok.mrgumby wrote:... I'm afraid
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
Let's play~Chelle wrote:I ... bring up pseudoscience as it is surely ... is lame.
Re: Identifying pseudoscience
Kasuha wrote:ay~
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich