David Gerard wrote:
I'm coming across as much more strident in this
thread than I mean to
be. But the point is that pseudoscience is in fact *bullshit*, not
science, and there's going to be no label that doesn't puff up the
subjects with false respectability that won't soon carry the same
connotations. Because it is in fact bullshit.
I wholeheartedly agree with the above. Pseudoscience is nothing more
than dogmatic and irrational thinking trying to pretend it's exactly the
opposite to get public support. It should not be given a single bit of
credibility at all - and not giving it credibility would fit perfectly
with our policy of neutral point of view.
Chris