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