It’s a contentious term when applied to someone’s closely held theories. We all want the accreditation of science for our pet ideas, discoveries that we may believe revolutionary, even if the goal is to be the next Galileo, or prove Einstein wrong – again, and again, and again.
No one likes their ideas to be branded as pseudoscience, and this is understandable.
But science is a meat-grinder, and while open to new and revolutionary ideas, it demands that those ideas prove their merit by its standards and rules. Failure to abide by those rules and standards, even outright refusal to, is the hallmark of science that is often so seriously flawed that it isn’t even worthy of being wrong: pseudoscience.
There is no fine dividing line between science and pseudoscience, more of a continuum between extremes. These are primarily distinguished by how they are done, rather than what they are.
This page will serve as the new home to this blog’s posts and other online resources dealing with pseudoscience, its hallmarks, and its methods. You will find no ridicule or scathing ad hominem attacks here. To find those you must look elsewhere, as I do not consider those valid argumentation.