Difference between revisions of "Fake science"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(what exactly do the references have to do with describing junk science?) |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
*[http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.25458/pub_detail.asp Burying Evidence: The Union of Concerned Scientists' Unscientific Claims about Air Pollution and Health] - Joel Schwartz - January 16, 2007 | *[http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.25458/pub_detail.asp Burying Evidence: The Union of Concerned Scientists' Unscientific Claims about Air Pollution and Health] - Joel Schwartz - January 16, 2007 | ||
Revision as of 14:33, May 11, 2007
Junk science consists of giving poorly done scientific work the same authority as work which conforms to the scientific method. It is akin to politicized science, i.e., the selective use of scientific evidence to reach predetermined conclusions and support extra-scientific political goals.[1]
All sides in scientific controversies say that they condemn junk science, so this leaves the lay reader with the task of determining who is telling the truth. The best way is to examine the facts and reasoning in scientific reports.
First, of course, the reader must penetrate the maze of confusing disinformation surrounding any controversy.
- The three great strategies for obscuring an issue are to introduce irrelevancies, to arouse prejudice, and to excite ridicule.... ---Bergen Evans, The Natural History of Nonsense [2]
References
External links
- Burying Evidence: The Union of Concerned Scientists' Unscientific Claims about Air Pollution and Health - Joel Schwartz - January 16, 2007