theweaselking: (Default)
[personal profile] theweaselking
In our eagerness to focus on the supply side of pseudoscience - the dismal outpourings of flaky humanities graduates in the media and the bogus pseudoscience of people with products to sell - we've neglected an important area of study: the impact on the end market. Take this from reader Richard Neville, last weekend, who was simply trying to get a drink: "I was at the bar buying a round," he begins. "'Grapefruit and soda please.' I said. The barman adopted a pained expression. 'I should point out to you, sir, that this juice is 100% pure organic and, therefore, I don't like to add chemicals - you see, I don't know what's in soda water.' 'Well,' I said, 'I think it's mostly water - which, of course, is a chemical plus a little bicarbonate of soda and added carbon dioxide.' He didn't look happy, while I just looked thirsty and persisted: 'Well,' he warned, 'if you'll take full responsibility ...'"

So it occurs to me: if I have a grandiose delusion, it is that we're engaged in a useful project here, the study of the Public Misunderstanding of Science. And this is uncharted territory. So I'm asking for qualitative research; I'm asking for your help in a grand experiment, with the widest possible sampling frame, that is: you. Only you can help me to document the stupidity that's out there.
======================
[livejournal.com profile] sclerotic_rings has an excellent example that should be emailed to M. Goldacre.

(no subject)

Date: 2005-08-16 08:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rimrunner.livejournal.com
AWESOME.

Although he's wrong that it's uncharted territory. I point in particular to the books of Martin Gardner, and of course Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark.

I don't know about positive thinking, but the power of wishful thinking would be enough for a midsize town if they could figure out how to hook up the generator.

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Feb. 7th, 2026 10:48 am