569
15 signs of pseudo-science
& quot; ... As editor of two major portals CIS dedicated to various fields of science, I regularly get emails from people who, for example, guarantee an increase in sales of any product four times, or prove that humanity comes from the dolphins, or appeared on the moon ...
Here are some signs, which can be distinguished from pseudo-scientist scientist. Of course, there are exceptions, so the alarm - a combination of several characteristics.
Author I.L.Vikentev: vikent.ru/enc/5316/
1) Country regalia.
In our country, there is a Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), several specialized academies (Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, the Russian Academy of Education, Russian Academy of Architecture and Construction Sciences, Russian Academy of Arts). And a lot of fake academies. For example, the New York Academy of Sciences - a nonprofit organization; become "academic" can be for $ 129.
Membership in the "strange Academy" (of the "International Academy of Future Studies"), and even more so in a number of such structures is not talking about qualifications, but rather the desire of using the purchased jewels splurge gullible public.
Look to the regalia!
2) He has a degree specialist in one area of science, "the brilliant discovery" makes completely different.
For example, candidate of Physics and Mathematics. Science develops a new theory that by what incredible technologies were built the Egyptian pyramids.
"But he's a scientist!" - Will object viewer. "Scientists in general" - it is just as real a thing as "all fruit" or "all the athlete." Fencing Champion hardly show good results in wrestling. A skilled linguist who wants to carry out research at the interface of linguistics and genetics - humbling the pride, seek the advice of genetics. Otherwise - the inevitable errors and inaccuracies.
Speculate on vysokoumnye theme loved by many. If we find out, it is usually an expert on some specific topic (ie, scientists, professional engaged in this direction for many years and have their own results) can literally be counted on one hand, see. For example, estimate the number of creative people in the community. This is the "small majority", whose opinion in this case is important.
3) The use of phrases "official science", "the official paradigm» ...
The word scientists have applied to the "mainstream" is often quoted:
Quote 1 (from the Internet): "These" scientists ", the official proponents of scientific paradigm, has been written theses and currently sit on grants for public contracts - and did not want to share».
Quote 2 (from the film shown on REN-TV): "Independent experts believe that the moon has long inhabited by some beings, but official science hides» ...
A very alarming symptom. Probably before you an alternative talent - "fomenkovets", "zadornovets", "paleokontaktёr", "mladozemelschik» ...
Note: the "official science" opposed "independent experts" with whom someone "did not want to share." Produced very comfortable psychological substitution: we are moving from an alien inhabitant scientific evidence is clear and close rossiyaninu plane intergroup warfare (almost said - "cutting the budget"). Do the powers that be, "the official scientists" - read, bureaucrats, officials usurped the "manger"; It is the "opposition" - independent fighters for the truth ...
Discussions on Privileges, carefree life and wealth "champions of official science" is especially funny to someone who is personally acquainted with these Russian scientists (many of whom, regardless of the degree and wide fame, are forced to work in 3 jobs to support his family).
4) The constant claims to the scientific community (referred to "conspiracy of scientists", "silence" and even "the destruction of unwanted certificates" naughty "official scientists" ...).
This allows you to use an irrefutable argument: the facts are not there because they do not exist, but because they hide them.
Quote: "Then Potocki invented a new trick. He wandered through the monastery. He is lying in wait for another group near the grave. We wait until the end of the tour. Responds headman and spoke in a whisper:
"Entre well! Between us! Collect thirty cents. I will show you the true grave of Pushkin, the Bolsheviks hide from the people! »
Then, a group led away into the woods and showed the tourists a nondescript mound. Sometimes a meticulous tourist asked:
- But why hide this grave?
- What for? - Sardonically grinning Potocki. - Are you interested in - why? Comrades, citizens interested in - why?
- Oh, yes, I understand, I understand - babbled tourist ... »
Sergei Dovlatov, "Reserve»
5) increased emotional, appeal to the senses and not to reason.
The texts of this is manifested in the use of aggressive punctuation (abuse of exclamation marks, bold, capital letters) and labeling.
Quote: "Why are primates left the relative safety of the rainforest floor for walking on the ground on his short, curves, flat feet? !!»
6) Excessive global generalizations and judgments of positiveness. Using the word "no," "never» ...
Quote: "No one living in the south, will not go live on the Kola Peninsula. Only if you can trade. And the monkeys in the south, it is not necessary to figure becomes a man, and so they have monkeys bounty full ».
Mikhail Zadornov, www.1tv.ru/gordonkihot/pr=10025 π = 11389
Serious scientist, speaking about the hypothesis, even if supported by numerous testimonies - understood risks categorical statements - usually adds, "likely", "you can assume", "most experts agree that ...". This is - a good tone in a scientific publication.
Pseudo-scientist expounding his view of the events that took place in 1000 (or a million) years ago, describes them as confidently as if everything had seen with my own eyes ...
7) The list of references at the end of a scientific article or a book:
- Non-existent;
- It contains only Russian-language resources;
Science is international, and leading scientific journals, alas, are issued outside the Russian and English
- Does not contain sources of last year / decade;
The situation in science is changing very rapidly. This scientist aware of what is happening in his field today, not half a century ago ...
8) Among the sources used by the author, not dominated by scientific works and popular books, fiction, news sites, Wikipedia articles and other "non-authoritative sources».
9) whether the author correctly quoted by other authors in the text?
Correctly identify the source up to the page.
Wrong:
- Do not refer ...
- Reference in the style of "I. Peter wrote "; "Familiar talking"; "Scientists have proved» ...
Quote 1: "Scientists have proved an interesting fact: when the head in the cold, the brain becomes thick».
Mikhail Zadornov // 1tv.ru. "GordonKihot», 19.09.2008
Quote 2: "One ethologist told that of all mammals, primates are fighting young. In boars fighting seasoned cleavers, youngsters do not allow. Wolves also the first to go into battle of matter - the leader, the she-wolf. A monkey fighting people - youngsters and experienced the full force of the males - are watching. "
Tulchinsky GL, Stories for life experience personological systematization, St. Petersburg, "Aletheia", 2007, p. 194.
10) Negligence / fault, for example, in Latin or geographical names ...
11) The use of very simple logic in the study of complex objects / phenomena: for example, if B follows from A, then B follows A.
Example: Dolphin - aquatic mammal, and has no hair. Man nude - means (continue themselves) ...
The authors do not confuse that:
- Many aquatic mammals with the hair okay (seal, beaver, otter ...)
- Some completely non-aqueous mammals wool deprived or have a rare scalp (rhinos, elephants, naked mole rat) ...
Unfortunately, it is this simplified hypothesis makes available to the general reader, and - consequently - appealing in its simplicity.
12) An appeal to the "obviousness».
Quote: "Any ensign is obvious that such a structure as the Pyramid of Cheops, it is impossible to erect without the aid of modern building techniques ...»
13) Using the arguments from "politics" and "religion." Especially - with a "national bias».
Quote: Many of those involved in "archeology" of the Russian language, it is believed that the word "love" means "the people of God Veda!" "Junior" - "People", "BO" - "GOD", "B" - "Veda". It's funny, but if the word "love" to throw the syllable "BO", meaning "God," will "LYUV" - almost English «LOVE». It seems like they love - it's almost ours, but without God. Maybe that's why they are to love more business-like than we do: for example, before you get married, sign marriage contracts, working on terms of marriage, the rights and obligations of each other, have assured their notaries, "I promise to love you to the grave ! If you leave this world, you fall out of love - I've had a penalty! ».
Lately it has become fashionable in the West, a brilliant statement: "Let's go make love!". Love equated to business! And all because of the holy God threw the word "love", which ... must save the world!
Mikhail Zadornov, a third ear www.zadornov.net/3uho/
14) The lack of specificity.
In a normal scientific literature (similarly to the correct citation) made in the description of the facts to give them as specifically as possible - so that the reader could, if necessary, verify that the information is valid. This is - a typical insurance against the risks of scientific error.
For example, if you specify archaeological find - in the normal literature to indicate the exact location of the find, the author and the catalog number.
When told about the features of the animal - modern or extinct - must show specific species Latin name.
15) the omission of alternative hypotheses.
The author discusses his hypothesis, without comparing it with other approaches to the problem of (often not even aware of them), in the extreme case - a brief mention (like waving). (Option: The author chooses among the many hypotheses nabolee weak - and easily crushes her to the applause of the public ignorant ...)
But it is important not only that the explanation seems logical - it should be better, more accurate than other existing versions - for example, consistent with the large number of facts.
Conclusions:
1. There are people engaged in business, and there are, unfortunately, people who parasitize on this matter. Science - is no exception.
2. pseudo-science - motley crowd. Among them - and outright crazy and crooks, and sparkle of showbiz figures, and, alas, degraded real scientists. (By the way, this brother would crazies - it seems less dangerous, because they at least easiest to recognize ...) Understand in detail the motivation of these people - a thankless time. Important - Keep your head ... Perhaps you can help in this material given in 15 signs.
3. From any rule there are exceptions. Eccentricities and oddities found among real scientists. The scientist - a living person who can make mistakes, and not free from prejudice. Therefore one separately taken a sign from the given list - in any case, not a sentence. But the more signs to "meet together" in the analyzed your articles, books, TV shows, etc. - The more reason for alarm.
4. Do not let God be influenced by the pseudo-scientist, especially the tender young age ... & quot;
All.
Source:
Here are some signs, which can be distinguished from pseudo-scientist scientist. Of course, there are exceptions, so the alarm - a combination of several characteristics.
Author I.L.Vikentev: vikent.ru/enc/5316/
1) Country regalia.
In our country, there is a Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), several specialized academies (Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, the Russian Academy of Education, Russian Academy of Architecture and Construction Sciences, Russian Academy of Arts). And a lot of fake academies. For example, the New York Academy of Sciences - a nonprofit organization; become "academic" can be for $ 129.
Membership in the "strange Academy" (of the "International Academy of Future Studies"), and even more so in a number of such structures is not talking about qualifications, but rather the desire of using the purchased jewels splurge gullible public.
Look to the regalia!
2) He has a degree specialist in one area of science, "the brilliant discovery" makes completely different.
For example, candidate of Physics and Mathematics. Science develops a new theory that by what incredible technologies were built the Egyptian pyramids.
"But he's a scientist!" - Will object viewer. "Scientists in general" - it is just as real a thing as "all fruit" or "all the athlete." Fencing Champion hardly show good results in wrestling. A skilled linguist who wants to carry out research at the interface of linguistics and genetics - humbling the pride, seek the advice of genetics. Otherwise - the inevitable errors and inaccuracies.
Speculate on vysokoumnye theme loved by many. If we find out, it is usually an expert on some specific topic (ie, scientists, professional engaged in this direction for many years and have their own results) can literally be counted on one hand, see. For example, estimate the number of creative people in the community. This is the "small majority", whose opinion in this case is important.
3) The use of phrases "official science", "the official paradigm» ...
The word scientists have applied to the "mainstream" is often quoted:
Quote 1 (from the Internet): "These" scientists ", the official proponents of scientific paradigm, has been written theses and currently sit on grants for public contracts - and did not want to share».
Quote 2 (from the film shown on REN-TV): "Independent experts believe that the moon has long inhabited by some beings, but official science hides» ...
A very alarming symptom. Probably before you an alternative talent - "fomenkovets", "zadornovets", "paleokontaktёr", "mladozemelschik» ...
Note: the "official science" opposed "independent experts" with whom someone "did not want to share." Produced very comfortable psychological substitution: we are moving from an alien inhabitant scientific evidence is clear and close rossiyaninu plane intergroup warfare (almost said - "cutting the budget"). Do the powers that be, "the official scientists" - read, bureaucrats, officials usurped the "manger"; It is the "opposition" - independent fighters for the truth ...
Discussions on Privileges, carefree life and wealth "champions of official science" is especially funny to someone who is personally acquainted with these Russian scientists (many of whom, regardless of the degree and wide fame, are forced to work in 3 jobs to support his family).
4) The constant claims to the scientific community (referred to "conspiracy of scientists", "silence" and even "the destruction of unwanted certificates" naughty "official scientists" ...).
This allows you to use an irrefutable argument: the facts are not there because they do not exist, but because they hide them.
Quote: "Then Potocki invented a new trick. He wandered through the monastery. He is lying in wait for another group near the grave. We wait until the end of the tour. Responds headman and spoke in a whisper:
"Entre well! Between us! Collect thirty cents. I will show you the true grave of Pushkin, the Bolsheviks hide from the people! »
Then, a group led away into the woods and showed the tourists a nondescript mound. Sometimes a meticulous tourist asked:
- But why hide this grave?
- What for? - Sardonically grinning Potocki. - Are you interested in - why? Comrades, citizens interested in - why?
- Oh, yes, I understand, I understand - babbled tourist ... »
Sergei Dovlatov, "Reserve»
5) increased emotional, appeal to the senses and not to reason.
The texts of this is manifested in the use of aggressive punctuation (abuse of exclamation marks, bold, capital letters) and labeling.
Quote: "Why are primates left the relative safety of the rainforest floor for walking on the ground on his short, curves, flat feet? !!»
6) Excessive global generalizations and judgments of positiveness. Using the word "no," "never» ...
Quote: "No one living in the south, will not go live on the Kola Peninsula. Only if you can trade. And the monkeys in the south, it is not necessary to figure becomes a man, and so they have monkeys bounty full ».
Mikhail Zadornov, www.1tv.ru/gordonkihot/pr=10025 π = 11389
Serious scientist, speaking about the hypothesis, even if supported by numerous testimonies - understood risks categorical statements - usually adds, "likely", "you can assume", "most experts agree that ...". This is - a good tone in a scientific publication.
Pseudo-scientist expounding his view of the events that took place in 1000 (or a million) years ago, describes them as confidently as if everything had seen with my own eyes ...
7) The list of references at the end of a scientific article or a book:
- Non-existent;
- It contains only Russian-language resources;
Science is international, and leading scientific journals, alas, are issued outside the Russian and English
- Does not contain sources of last year / decade;
The situation in science is changing very rapidly. This scientist aware of what is happening in his field today, not half a century ago ...
8) Among the sources used by the author, not dominated by scientific works and popular books, fiction, news sites, Wikipedia articles and other "non-authoritative sources».
9) whether the author correctly quoted by other authors in the text?
Correctly identify the source up to the page.
Wrong:
- Do not refer ...
- Reference in the style of "I. Peter wrote "; "Familiar talking"; "Scientists have proved» ...
Quote 1: "Scientists have proved an interesting fact: when the head in the cold, the brain becomes thick».
Mikhail Zadornov // 1tv.ru. "GordonKihot», 19.09.2008
Quote 2: "One ethologist told that of all mammals, primates are fighting young. In boars fighting seasoned cleavers, youngsters do not allow. Wolves also the first to go into battle of matter - the leader, the she-wolf. A monkey fighting people - youngsters and experienced the full force of the males - are watching. "
Tulchinsky GL, Stories for life experience personological systematization, St. Petersburg, "Aletheia", 2007, p. 194.
10) Negligence / fault, for example, in Latin or geographical names ...
11) The use of very simple logic in the study of complex objects / phenomena: for example, if B follows from A, then B follows A.
Example: Dolphin - aquatic mammal, and has no hair. Man nude - means (continue themselves) ...
The authors do not confuse that:
- Many aquatic mammals with the hair okay (seal, beaver, otter ...)
- Some completely non-aqueous mammals wool deprived or have a rare scalp (rhinos, elephants, naked mole rat) ...
Unfortunately, it is this simplified hypothesis makes available to the general reader, and - consequently - appealing in its simplicity.
12) An appeal to the "obviousness».
Quote: "Any ensign is obvious that such a structure as the Pyramid of Cheops, it is impossible to erect without the aid of modern building techniques ...»
13) Using the arguments from "politics" and "religion." Especially - with a "national bias».
Quote: Many of those involved in "archeology" of the Russian language, it is believed that the word "love" means "the people of God Veda!" "Junior" - "People", "BO" - "GOD", "B" - "Veda". It's funny, but if the word "love" to throw the syllable "BO", meaning "God," will "LYUV" - almost English «LOVE». It seems like they love - it's almost ours, but without God. Maybe that's why they are to love more business-like than we do: for example, before you get married, sign marriage contracts, working on terms of marriage, the rights and obligations of each other, have assured their notaries, "I promise to love you to the grave ! If you leave this world, you fall out of love - I've had a penalty! ».
Lately it has become fashionable in the West, a brilliant statement: "Let's go make love!". Love equated to business! And all because of the holy God threw the word "love", which ... must save the world!
Mikhail Zadornov, a third ear www.zadornov.net/3uho/
14) The lack of specificity.
In a normal scientific literature (similarly to the correct citation) made in the description of the facts to give them as specifically as possible - so that the reader could, if necessary, verify that the information is valid. This is - a typical insurance against the risks of scientific error.
For example, if you specify archaeological find - in the normal literature to indicate the exact location of the find, the author and the catalog number.
When told about the features of the animal - modern or extinct - must show specific species Latin name.
15) the omission of alternative hypotheses.
The author discusses his hypothesis, without comparing it with other approaches to the problem of (often not even aware of them), in the extreme case - a brief mention (like waving). (Option: The author chooses among the many hypotheses nabolee weak - and easily crushes her to the applause of the public ignorant ...)
But it is important not only that the explanation seems logical - it should be better, more accurate than other existing versions - for example, consistent with the large number of facts.
Conclusions:
1. There are people engaged in business, and there are, unfortunately, people who parasitize on this matter. Science - is no exception.
2. pseudo-science - motley crowd. Among them - and outright crazy and crooks, and sparkle of showbiz figures, and, alas, degraded real scientists. (By the way, this brother would crazies - it seems less dangerous, because they at least easiest to recognize ...) Understand in detail the motivation of these people - a thankless time. Important - Keep your head ... Perhaps you can help in this material given in 15 signs.
3. From any rule there are exceptions. Eccentricities and oddities found among real scientists. The scientist - a living person who can make mistakes, and not free from prejudice. Therefore one separately taken a sign from the given list - in any case, not a sentence. But the more signs to "meet together" in the analyzed your articles, books, TV shows, etc. - The more reason for alarm.
4. Do not let God be influenced by the pseudo-scientist, especially the tender young age ... & quot;
All.
Source: