What's the point of Pseudoscience and Speculation?

[Theophrastus]

In all honesty, I'm not really sure why I'm even making this post, as it is of direct relevance, however, I don't understand, what with the tedious clarifications of what science is, in the pseudoscience and speculations section, what is the point of the pseudoscience and speculation forum. Surely, any reasonable, and reputable speculations can be placed in their designated area, and if not, they can be placed in general sciences. Why, by creating the pseudoscience and speculation forum, isolate and encourage these kinds of thought, sharing propaganda myths, and conspiracy theories, unless you expect to attempt to enlighten the ignorant. Or is it rather some kind of isolation, to prevent interruption in the other threads? Might I attain an answer, as every time I go to the main page where the forums branch off, I always wonder why anyone bothered to even make a sub- category devoted solely to pseudoscience and speculations? Am I the only one unnerved at this?

[Sisyphus]

Sometimes it is helpful to talk about why a given topic is not scientific, or to have a place where one can be free to speculate more freely on topics perhaps tangentially related to science but not constrained by the same need for actual support. That's what I think, anyway. You're free not to participate, which is made easier by the fact that it's a separate subforum.

[brain-in-a-vat]

There is a fine line between speculation and pseudoscience. I came across one method used to help make the distinction and I went into some detail about it in this post in my thread in this very same Pseudoscience and Speculation forum.

 

The method is called the CONPTT approach.

http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/lessons/conptt.html

 

Read and enjoy .

Edited April 22, 2009 by brain-in-a-vat

[ajb]

I sometimes think the same thing.

 

Surely it is in agreement with the forum rules to post something "speculative" within the main sections provided the framework of such speculation is with in accepted scientific thought or near enough. (Remember when doing research no-one knows the answers and many dead ends may need to be pursued.)

 

Such conjectures and speculations should be encouraged. However, there does seem to be many posts on this forum that simply fly in the face of accepted science. It is these and other ideas that simply cannot be addressed by science that live in this section.

 

Pseudoscience I think is more of an attitude and approach as opposed to a subject.

[swansont]

It is sometimes a useful exercise to debunk mistaken or unscientific notions, and show why they are not supported by science. Even if the poster does not acknowledge it. Putting discussion there has the added benefit of telling the casual reader that they should not take claims made there as being supported by any evidence other than what is presented.