Humor Science Pseudo-Science Conflicts and their effects on us...

[C3PO]

I was at one time engaged to be married to a Greek-Orthodox "believer" that had somehow reconciled (in her mind): Astrology with Astronomy... Alchemy with chemistry (Paulo Coelio)... and even embraced MAGNETIC EARRINGS!

The real question here is this: Why are women more acceptable to stupid beliefs? Evolutionary biology has the answer to that.

I'm not even a woman and I find it a bit insulting. :shifty:

Do you really think that "unpleasant" truths should be hidden away and not be mentioned?

I recently saw a study that claimed exactly that. Women are more likely to believe in astrology, especially if it's endorsed by a so-called expert.

Without the "expert" the ratios were 35% of men and 50% of women believed that the horoscope was correct. But when an (false) expert had "reviewed" it, the ratios went to 40% for men and 82% for women.

 

[Hielor]

It is this ability to tell things apart that creates the illusion of time.

:rofl:

 

[Keatah]

Your attention flowing from one thing to the next is Time rendered in your head. Neither here nor there. It is. The transition between the quantum level and macro level is there arena where time can flow forwards and backwards, up and down, left and right, forth and since, according to observation by the most noted physicists.

 

[Hielor]

Your attention flowing from one thing to the next is Time rendered in your head. Neither here nor there. It is. The transition between the quantum level and macro level is there arena where time can flow forwards and backwards, up and down, left and right, forth and since, according to observation by the most noted physicists.

:rofl:

That's a nice little idea for a sci-fi novel you've got there. Too bad time only flows one way in reality. If not for that the idea might have some merit!

 

[Sky Captain]

Few years ago on another forum I encountered a guy who claimed a Moon is an alien spaceship. Then I made fun of him by starting to tell him various details about that "spaceship" like propulsion, internal layout, weapons systems, power plant as described in David Webers book Mutineers Moon :rofl:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutineers'_Moon
Guess what. He completely seriusly asked me where did I found such detailed data :rofl:

 

[Rtyh-12]

Few years ago on another forum I encountered a guy who claimed a Moon is an alien spaceship. Then I made fun of him by starting to tell him various details about that "spaceship" like propulsion, internal layout, weapons systems, power plant as described in David Webers book Mutineers Moon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutineers'_Moon
Guess what. He completely seriusly asked me where did I found such detailed data

That's kinda sad, actually. People can be so stupid at times... how can you believe that the Moon is a spaceship? :facepalm:

Though I must agree that it can be fun too.

 

[jedidia]

I recently saw a study that claimed exactly that. Women are more likely to believe in astrology, especially if it's endorsed by a so-called expert.

While it seems true that women are more partial to astrology than men, men are definitaly more partial to other pseudo-scientific nonsense, especially if political motives are involved. As such, it is still incorrect to claim that women are more gullible. They're simply prone to fall for another attractor than men.

In general, pseudo-science seems to develop a similiar nature as superstitions during earlier time: people piecing together an Idea of how things work on the basis of incomplete, wrongly understood or even utterly false information. It's not surprising. We had a short time where the basics of science were open to all and easily enough understood. THat time has passed. Although open to all, the common man simply has no chance of understanding them in any debt, because even scientists have to specialice in a field if they want to really understand what's going on. So really, what do we expect?

 

[T.Neo]

Do you really think that "unpleasant" truths should be hidden away and not be mentioned?

No, I think that people should avoid sexism...

I'm not going on about (obvious) statistics, I'm going on about "women believe in more pseudoscience, therefore they are more prone to believe in pseudoscience, therefore they are stupid".

That's just plain wrong.

 

[fsci123]

Few years ago on another forum I encountered a guy who claimed a Moon is an alien spaceship. Then I made fun of him by starting to tell him various details about that "spaceship" like propulsion, internal layout, weapons systems, power plant as described in David Webers book Mutineers Moon :rofl:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutineers'_Moon
Guess what. He completely seriusly asked me where did I found such detailed data :rofl:

This must be the same guy who produced ancient aliens on history...

 

[FADEC]

Like a friend of Krikkit (the second post) I am also in favour for alternative medicines, partly. But I do not see how this is a "fault".

Science does not necessarily mean something good (always objective/capable and not free from dogmas) and pseudo-science does not necessarily mean something bad.

Example: acupuncture. It was proscribed by scientists and physicians for many years. Today it gets supported by health insurances in Germany. I saw a documentary about acupuncture not too long ago. They accompanied German soon-to-be physicians on a trip to a big modern Chinese hospital to look at and learn something about acupuncture. A few were rather sceptical (noticeably the male students) but they all were actually baffled once they had to admit that it seems to work indeed. One male student remained perplexed only because there was no scientific rational explanations. One other female student replied to the reporter that she does not necessarily need scientific explanations. As long as it does help people she is fine with it. That's why she wanted to become a doctor in the first place, not because of scientific talk.

Maybe, in some cases, we are too narrow-minded. Science is not the answer to everything. That's why I actually like scientists like German Professor Harald Lesch (astrophysicist). He is a professing Protestant because, as he says, he often meets atheistic people which either think that he must be totally naive or that he must blow one's horn to religious people because he is a popular natural scientist and therefore atheist. But quite the opposite. I like it because it provokes people which think that science is the premium truth.

 

[Jarvitä]

Most of my family share this absurd belief that there's a wizard in the sky who created the universe, knows everything that's going to happen to it, has a plan for everything and everyone, and yet stops to listen to what we have to say to him about it. Real crazy guy too, apparently gets off punishing people for acting with accordance with the most basic instincts he supposedly gave them.

This pseudo-scientific belief comes in many versions that adopt to the cultural environment in which they're propagated, but can be highly harmful as it induces people to abandon rational thought in favour of blind submission. In many societies, refusal to do so is met by intense peer pressure or even legal action.

 

[fsci123]

Most of my family share this absurd belief that there's a wizard in the sky who created the universe, knows everything that's going to happen to it, has a plan for everything and everyone, and yet stops to listen to what we have to say to him about it. Real crazy guy too, apparently gets off punishing people for acting with accordance with the most basic instincts he supposedly gave them.

This pseudo-scientific belief comes in many versions that adopt to the cultural environment in which they're propagated, but can be highly harmful as it induces people to abandon rational thought in favour of blind submission. In many societies, refusal to do so is met by intense peer pressure or even legal action.

Uh that is called religion not pseudo-science... If i said socks crawl when people have smelly feet due to the odor reacting with the cotton in miniature explosions then that will be considered pseudo-science

 

[Tommy]

Example: acupuncture. It was proscribed by scientists and physicians for many years. Today it gets supported by health insurances in Germany.

Several tests have shown that acupunture is sort of bogus. It doesn't matter where you stick the needles - only that the patient believes that the treatment will create a result. In other words, acupunture works by the "placebo effect" - and has the same rate of success as placebos.

The funny thing is that the placebo effect is considered scientific - and no "treatment" is considered scientifically valid unless it's success rate is higher than the placebos success rate. Yet there is no real scientific rational for the placebo effect! It is pretty much universally accepted that it exists - with plenty of tests to prove it - yet the actual "mechanism" by which it works is unkown. It's "mind over matter", which is considered unscientific when applied to anything else.

Go figure!

Frankly, I don't care if it's "real" or "just a placebo" as long as it works.

Uh that is called religion not pseudo-science

Religeon became a "psuedo-science" about the time the term "Intelligent Design" cropped up.

 

[T.Neo]

And now, predictably, this turns into a hate-of-religion discussion.

How frustratingly annoying, that instead of defending against pseudo-science (read: presenting something as science, while having no scientific background to it), we have to instead focus hate on people's personal beliefs, in one of the biggest cases of hypocrisy around.

Can't we do anything more constructive? It annoys me that so-called scientific people, will absolutely decry religion or any sort of spirituality, not because of evidence, or liklihood, or probability, but simply because they don't like religion. Yeah. I'm not that fond of religion either. No reason to go around badmouthing people and their beliefs, unless they are somehow using them for nefarious purposes, or stuffing them down people's throats like a homeopath stuffing hopelessly diluted snake-liver down the throat of a cancer patient.

And even then, one should be civil...

 

[fsci123]

Religion and science strive for the same goal: Understanding
Without religion we would have science: Look at the Hippocratic oath and scientific morals
Religion makes people happy and i have to admit without it the world will be pretty dull...

 

[FADEC]

Several tests have shown that acupunture is sort of bogus. It doesn't matter where you stick the needles - only that the patient believes that the treatment will create a result. In other words, acupunture works by the "placebo effect" - and has the same rate of success as placebos.

Which tests you are referring to? Which kinds of treatments had been researched and how many?

Acupuncture against cancer for example might be bogus (but not necessarily because there are no known results), but not for other certain complaints. Also, it does work for people which did not believe in a result before. And if it works by the placebo effect only, it is still more effective than certain conventional "modern" therapies for certain complaints.

If we take a look at the German GERAC tests for example, which are the worlds biggest tests regarding the effectiveness of acupuncture (more than 30k treatments), it turned out that effectiveness of acupuncture therapies is twice and more of conventional therapies for back complaints and migraine. This is why in Germany acupuncture is payed by health insurances since 2007 for those complaints. It was a decision from the "Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss", something like common federal committee in English, which is the highest council of the German healthcare.

Results for chronic low back pain:

http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/167/17/1892

Frankly, I don't care if it's "real" or "just a placebo" as long as it works.

Me too. But it should be mentioned that placebo is not just a part of alternative medicines but also of our mainstream medicine and drug industry. About 60% of the drugs one can buy in German apothecary shops are placebos for example. Even chemotherapy might not work if one does not believe in it and say "I am dying anyway". Self-regulating forces are underestimated by our mainstream medicine. This is not necessarily evil or intentional. Our medicine mostly works well. But a lot of people are not aware that the actual healing processes of certain complaints and diseases are not comming from the medicine itself. It is mostly softening symptoms and assisting/accelerating the healing process. Chinese and other medicine works as well, but just slower because it is not that based on chemistry.

Religion and science strive for the same goal: Understanding

And they share one thing in common: doubts.

Religion makes people happy and i have to admit without it the world will be pretty dull...

Or to quote Albert Einstein: Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.

 

[Ross]

Science and Religion may share the same goal, but their avenues of inquiry are completely different. Religion uses faith, while science uses fact.

I grew up in a Catholic family, and my faith in God has diminished steadily since I was a kid...or at least my faith in the "Christian God"...nevertheless...if we are naive enough to believe that Science is the only valid method of inquiry, then I believe we are setting ourselves up for failure.

I listened to a lecture by B. Alan Wallace, and in response to a so called TOE or Theory of Everything, he said, "why should the physicists be the arbiters of reality?" Like, why should physicists have the final say on how our reality REALLY is, while discounting certain people's experiences, as if they didn't count, because they are not third-party corroborated in a lab.

With regards to the placebo effect, also the no-cebo affect; i.e...you convince yourself that taking a placebo will have adverse affects on your immune system, and then it does...they simply should not exist!! If the world is just made up of chunky stuff, then these things simply should not be.

So what is understanding? Is it knowledge? Well what is knowledge? Is knowledge power?

To quote Daniel Boorstin:
The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge.

In my personal opinion, it takes an open mind, able to experience multiple perspectives, to be able to really make sense of anything. It's all about perspective for me.

 

[Artlav]

Religion tries to fill the unknown with fantasy, science ignore the unknown until it can explain it. Neither is perfect, nor their mix.
What else is there?

 

[jedidia]

Religeon became a "psuedo-science" about the time the term "Intelligent Design" cropped up.

Let's not overgeneralize here. While Creationism clearly is a form of pseudo-science in that it tries to argue religious points by doubtfull scientific "evidence", that's hardly true for all of religion, or any religion, for that matter.

 

[RichWall]

Religion seeks to explain the difference between right and wrong based on the authority of a higher power.

Science seeks to explain the difference between what is and what is not, based on the authority that is within.