Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This is a list of topics that have been characterized as pseudoscience by academics or researchers, either currently or in the past. Detailed discussion of these topics may be found on their main pages.
IRWolfie has argued that this article is not a list of pseudoscience topics, but rather a list of characterized as pseudoscience. 172.250.119.155 has presented evidence that evolution has been characterized as pseudoscience. I don't think that this is a tolerable solution and we need to rethink what items actually belong on this list.
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 ...
[4] [5] A systematic review found no evidence for the term adrenal fatigue, confirming the consensus among endocrinological societies that it is a myth. [ 7 ] Autistic enterocolitis is a nonexistent medical condition proposed in 1998 by now-discredited British gastroenterologist Andrew Wakefield , who suggested a link between a number of common ...
[Note 1] Pseudoscience is often characterized by contradictory, exaggerated or unfalsifiable claims; reliance on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts; absence of systematic practices when developing hypotheses; and continued adherence long after the pseudoscientific ...
Some scientists might call some topic pseudoscientific, but there are at least two problems with this: 1) Not all scientists will agree, so the list is a list of what ONLY SOME scientist(s) call pseudoscientific, and 2) the label "pseudoscience" is a derogatory label indicating that the subject in question is not worthy of attention.
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
Main menu. move to sidebar hide hide