Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Criticism of pseudoscience, generally by the scientific community or skeptical organizations, involves critiques of the logical, methodological, or rhetorical bases of the topic in question. [1] Though some of the listed topics continue to be investigated scientifically, others were only subject to scientific research in the past and today are ...
Pseudoscience is a broad group of theories or assertions about the natural world that claim or appear to be scientific, but that are not accepted as scientific by the scientific community. Pseudoscience does not include most obsolete scientific or medical theories (see Category:Obsolete scientific theories ), nor does it include every idea that ...
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) which also discusses some of the items on the list of characteristics of pseudoscience. Statistical significance of supporting experimental results does not improve over time and are usually close to the cutoff for statistical significance.
Zitterbewegung-- target for edits that insert pseudoscience refs. linas 21:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC) Zero-point energy-- mish-mash of phsyics and pseudoscience. Of course, these days, zero-point energy is about both, but each of these topics should be treated distinctly. linas 21:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC) Black hole. It seems like about once ...
An attempt to link Morgellons to the cause of Lyme disease has been attacked by Steven Salzberg as "dangerous pseudoscience". [ 34 ] Multiple chemical sensitivity [ 35 ] [ 36 ] is an unrecognized controversial diagnosis characterized by chronic symptoms attributed to exposure to low levels of commonly used chemicals.
What is the difference between a list titled "List of pseudoscience topics" and one titled "List of topics for which there is a general consensus as being pseudoscience"? 172.250.119.155 21:17, 20 August 2013 (UTC) We can find plenty of good quality references establishing the consensus view that, say, astrology is a pseudoscience.
List of topics characterized as pseudoscience Support: Eldereft, Fyslee, Landed_little_marsdon, Hgilbert, QuackGuru, 2 Crohnie, Snalwibma, Verbal 2 Oppose: Levine2112, MaxPont, Tony_Sidaway. 6+2 / 3 I would like to interpret this as a consensus to rename the article to List of topics characterized as pseudoscience (or something
Criterion: This is a list of pseudosciences and pseudoscientific concepts. The criteria for inclusion in this list is that the topic (1) has sustained inclusion in Category:pseudoscience; (2) is a field, practice, endeavor, or concept; (3) has its inclusion justified (preferably in the list, but at least in the original article). Argument: