Notices
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Pseudoscience board has wrong name

  1. #1 Pseudoscience board has wrong name 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    20
    The description "The Discussion regarding theories, methodologies or practices that do not conform to what is currently accepted by the scientific community" refers to alt-science, not pseudoscience. Pseudoscience is when one lacks scientific foundation. Calling the board Pseudoscience makes the presumptuous assumption that anyone who disagrees with mainstream science has no scientific foundation.

    Alt-science and pseudoscience can overlap, but so can mainstream science and pseudoscience. History shows that authorities on science are not always right.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,867
    If you can find anything in pseudoscience that isn't outright crackpottery you may have a case... Until then, it fits quite well, if you are not following the methodologies or practices of science, you are not doing science (but pretending to) so pseudo is a good definition...

    What you are calling "alt-science" which is often, but not always, bullshit would fit in "personal theories" here.

    Be careful of playing the "scientists aren't always right" card. It is a crank red flag, while it is true science is always open to correction (that is the beauty of the method) , non-scientific approaches to scientific problems are a waste of time.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    20
    Alt-science is science that contradicts mainstream science. Pseudoscience is fake science. We should think about those two as two different concepts because they are. I do not get the point of confusing different concepts into one concept. Even if you think that the mainstream scientific community is always right, why do you feel need to make them right by definition?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,121
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyber View Post
    Alt-science is science that contradicts mainstream science.
    Such as?
    If it's genuine then it's science (just a differing interpretation of science).
    I'm reminded of Tim Minchins comment regarding "alternative medicine": "By definition, alternative medicine has either not been proved to work or been proved not to work. Do you know what they call alternative medicine that's been proved to work? Medicine."
    Likewise "alternative science".

    We should think about those two as two different concepts because they are.
    Yet to be shown.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,867
    Cyber, as the duck has said, something is either science or it isn't. You're coming across as a bit of a fruitcake!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,121
    Still waiting for an example of "alt-science"...
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,643
    Also, pseudoscience is a long established and widely used term. It describes perfectly the sort of crackpottery regularly posted on science sites.

    On the other hand, I have never come across "alt-science" before. I wonder if it is a recent invention to go along with America's "alt-right" and the general denialism and fake-news mentality associated with the current US administration.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Still waiting for an example of "alt-science"...
    Using the word science loosely (since this is technically history), the moonlanding hoax theory. The original moonlanding video has tons of flaws proving it to be fake, all telemetry data was supposedly erased (it's only the supposed greatest achievement in human kind, why back it up, right?) and in addition they still have trouble going to the moon despite the fact that they supposedly did it around 1970 and technology has come a very long way since then.

    In the end there is no proof but the word of authorities. Contradicting the moonlanding faith is not pseudoscientific. But it is alt-science.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    20
    Accidental double post.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,121
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyber View Post
    Using the word science loosely (since this is technically history), the moonlanding hoax theory. The original moonlanding video has tons of flaws proving it to be fake, all telemetry data was supposedly erased (it's only the supposed greatest achievement in human kind, why back it up, right?) and in addition they still have trouble going to the moon despite the fact that they supposedly did it around 1970 and technology has come a very long way since then.
    Wrong.
    There was no scientific evidence "proving it to be fake" - merely pseudoscience and ignorance.
    Ergo it's not "alt-science" it's ignorance, pseudoscience and conspiracy theories.
    As for "they still have trouble going to the moon despite the fact that they supposedly did it around 1970 and technology has come a very long way since then" perhaps you're (very) cleverly ignoring political will.

    In the end there is no proof but the word of authorities.
    Other than the physical proof you mean.

    Contradicting the moonlanding faith is not pseudoscientific.
    Wrong.

    But it is alt-science.
    No.

    ETA: the fact that you write this - "The original moonlanding video has tons of flaws proving it to be fake" - says a great deal about your knowledge of actual science/ technology and, possibly, an equal amount about your level of gullibility and lack of critical thinking.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Mod Note: I have never come across the term “alt-science” before. Either way, we already have two separate boards for what you are referring to - “Pseudoscience”, and “Personal Theories & Alternative Hypotheses”, so the distinction is clear. There is also the “Trash Can”, and “General Discussion”. It’s simply a matter of appropriately categorising threads, which - it must be said - is not always an easy task.

    The naming and distinction is appropriate as it is, and will not be changed.

    Btw, the example you gave would belong into the “Alternative Hypotheses” section, not pseudoscience.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,643
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyber View Post
    Using the word science loosely (since this is technically history), the moonlanding hoax theory.
    There is no science involved there. There may be pseudoscience when the cranks try and analyse photos and films to make there claim. But these are so profoundly ignorant and/or dishonest, that I don't think it is fair to call it pseudoscience.

    The original moonlanding video has tons of flaws proving it to be fake, all telemetry data was supposedly erased (it's only the supposed greatest achievement in human kind, why back it up, right?) and in addition they still have trouble going to the moon despite the fact that they supposedly did it around 1970 and technology has come a very long way since then.
    Exactly the sort of lies and idiocy used by the hoax believers.

    In the end there is no proof but the word of authorities. Contradicting the moonlanding faith is not pseudoscientific. But it is alt-science.
    So your new word "alt-science" means "an insanely deluded conspiracy theory." Glad we have cleared that up.

    There is, of course, a mountain of evidence that the Apollo missions landed on the moon. And much of this comes from independent sources.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,116
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post

    So your new word "alt-science" means "an insanely deluded conspiracy theory." Glad we have cleared that up.
    The term "Alt-science" seems to me as the same type of re-branding that the term "Intelligent design" was meant to be for creationism. Give it a new name and maybe nobody will notice that its the same old crack-pottery and pseudoscience.
    "Men are apt to mistake the strength of their feelings for the strength of their argument.
    The heated mind resents the chill touch & relentless scrutiny of logic"-W.E. Gladstone


    Edit/Delete Message
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Janus View Post
    The term "Alt-science" seems to me as the same type of re-branding that the term "Intelligent design" was meant to be for creationism. Give it a new name and maybe nobody will notice that its the same old crack-pottery and pseudoscience.
    I agree. I'd never heard of it before this thread either, but as presented by the OP, it seems to be just pseudoscience dressed up to appear legitimate.

    Science often has a conflicting hypothesis--it's still referred to as science, both sides published and researched attempting to match expectations (predictions) with empirical data--it's never referred to as alt-science.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Samurai of Logic Falconer360's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Washington
    Posts
    532
    I ran into the term alt-science when I got into an argument with an anti-vaccer a few months ago on facebook. Seems like just another woo term to try and justify their pseudoscience crap. I do wonder which group of woo-meisters started the term though. Was it the climate change deniers, the 9/11 truthers, anti-vax idiots, creationists, etc.
    "For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled." Hunter S Thompson

    "It is easy to kill someone with a slash of a sword. It is hard to be impossible for others to cut down"
    - Yagyu Munenori

    "Only a warrior chooses pacifism; others are condemned to it."
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Writer On Board
    By Kage Kazumi in forum Introductions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: December 16th, 2012, 11:54 AM
  2. Hello Board!
    By Vom in forum Introductions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 12th, 2011, 07:13 PM
  3. Chemist on Board
    By Steve Griffin in forum Chemistry
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: April 20th, 2010, 12:05 AM
  4. Maharashtra Board
    By poonam086 in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 19th, 2010, 07:03 AM
  5. Replies: 14
    Last Post: October 15th, 2009, 07:23 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •