On 21/07/05, Sam Korn <smoddy(a)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.
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk