[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: "No Bolides!"

McReese writes;

>If science is not the persuit of truth then why is
>everyone one in an uproar about psuedo-science?  How can there be psuedo
>science if science has nothhing to do with truth?

Good question, however there is a difference.

The problem here deals with the tactics/steps that one takes to
 "prove" a point.  In the realm of pseudo-science (in quotes since we
 never really prove anything for all time), the steps taken are far
 from rigorous, and tend to be based more on the researchers opinions,
 or financial goals, rather than what the facts/experiments may
 suggest.  For example: a chemical company making an
 untested/poorly-tested claim on a new product (all to common).  Also,
 pseudo-scientists tend use the mass media to spread their ideas
 (trying to sway public opinion), rather than submitting them to a
 scientific journal for peer review.  The main concern here is a
 question of rigorous testing over ideas that are slopped together and
 shipped to market.

With Laughter,

"In the beginning the universe was created...this has made many people
 very angry and has widely been regarded as a bad move."