On 21/07/05, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
strictly limited. If we had a category of "things which are widely regarded, by scientists and others of a similar bent, as being less than fully established science, but which are often, by those who are not scientists, put forward as if they were science" then we'd have less trouble, I think.
How about "disputed science" or "disputed scientific theories"?
But this doesn't really work. The steady-state universe is a disputed scientific theory; impact-driven mass extinctions ditto... cold fusion is about as wacky as you get whilst still being a disputed scientific theory.
Lots of pseudoscience isn't a scientific theory which is disputed; it's a theory the "scientificness" of which is disputed, if that makes sense.