How to Spot Pseudoscience

I really like your podcast it is very insightful and well thought out. better yet i just got a degree in acupuncture and acupressure yay time to start rolling in the dough. (joking of course, i wouldn't scam people)
keep making more
thanks

bob, Minnesota
April 08, 2007 9:32pm

Brian, you've done it again! Only one typo though, 'psi', should have the s & i reversed!

Griff...

neil griffiths, Cardiff uk
April 09, 2007 2:24am

Wonderful podcast. I'd like to submit this to my theistic evolutionist friend; but I know he'll just dismiss the list, noting that it's been attuned specifically to defeat Creationist arguments and that the this is just another example of a "science's" bias against Creationism.

It comes down to this: he's willing to accept fantastic evidence which I/we can never disprove.

Thanks again for the BS detection list; it will be used!

Gllo, West Chester, OH
April 09, 2007 8:54am

Fantastic list Brian!

I absolutely love the podcast. And, I am going to borrow from your list (and give full credit where credit is due of course) and send out an e-mail to family and friends that NEED this list.

I hope it will then help stop them from buying magnetic healing jewelery and other mumbo jumbo.

Perhaps it will become a viral e-mail! And if that don't forward it to ten friends, they'll have bad luck! Ha!

Michael Kasun, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
April 12, 2007 10:12am

Brian,

Thanks for the fantastic list. Also, I was not aware of the LLN (Law of Large Numbers) specifically applying to the example you gave. The combination of frequent infrequent occurrences (such as a one-in-a-million chance of something happening actually taking place about once a month) and recall bias goes a long way towards explaining the staying power of superstition despite empirical evidence to the contrary.

Matlatzinca, Seattle, WA
April 19, 2008 10:43pm

One time I had this dream at night... in it, my grandmother died. It was amazingly real... I knew when she died (afternoon), where (house) and even went to the funeral! The next day I went to work but I kept feeling this nagging sense of dread, so I decided to call. I called in the evening after work, and someone other than my grandmother answered the phone... turns out it was her friend from the bowling league. I asked her where grandma was...

turns out she was in the can. She's never had a great bladder. She was happy I called, but a little confused when I kept insisting she must be dead because otherwise my dream must have not been some sort of precognition. Go figure.

eric thorn, Seoul, ROK
June 21, 2008 11:54pm

Kind of interesting that abioegensis and macroevolution stumble on points 1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 14, and 15. Not surprising just interesting. Thanks for the list, definitely very useful!

Joe, Richmond, TX
July 07, 2008 7:29pm

A great list that is very applicable (and on which macro-evolution passes on points 1, 4, 5 unless you actually consider a church a scientific authority, 6, 8, 9, and 15).

I'm going to link people to this so that I don't have to keep explaining to them why I won't accept some claims, or question the 'science' of Greenpeace.

Brandon, Falconer NY
July 15, 2008 8:23pm

Too bad Sagan didn't take his own advice seriously when he started talking about nuclear winter, which fails at least number three and fifteen, and a handful of others. Sagan was even a part of the media blitz on the topic, even though no serious scientific work had been done at the time. Freeman Dyson called it "half-baked."

anon, philadelphia, pa
July 17, 2008 1:13pm

Thanks for that insight, Anon. Regards to the rest of your family.

Marius vanderLubbe, Nullabour Plain, Australia.
September 02, 2008 7:36pm

I love this topic. I an going to share it with a few of my friends, especially the ones that believe in Environmentalism so much that it became their religion. Their claims are just as delusional as some of the ones I heard from religious peoples.

You know, When it comes to these cargo-cult science claims, I am wondering why some people did not take the red pill and go back to reality?

No, these people took the blue pill instead and insists that the rest of us are wrong somehow.

Joseph Furguson, Brawley, Ca
November 01, 2008 8:47pm

The field of economics falls down all over the place. Or maybe people realize economists who pretend to be able to predict anything don't rise to the level of science. It's more like astrology.

anon2, London, UK
November 30, 2008 8:47am

Very useful. But I'd also like to see an attempt at these rules using language aimed at people who are poorly educated, and have a limited understanding of science - explanations that include the rationale behind using the scientific method in the first place.

If I'm arguing with my colleagues about traditional African medicine, they say things like, "Why would we need to test it when we already know it works?" or "Scientists would want to break it up into test tubes to test it. And then it wouldn't be the same."

It would be good to have a set of rules like this aimed at people who didn't have much science education at school.

Alan Millar, South Africa
December 01, 2008 12:51am

well

"The same goes for auto manufacturers worldwide who are said to be "suppressing" new efficient engine technologies.

Please watch "who killed the electric car?"

I am sorry but this man is realy ill-informed

Marlo, Holland
January 15, 2009 1:41am

Marlo,

Have you considered watching that film with a skeptical eye?

Morgan, Tracy, CA
January 27, 2009 11:21am

o man o man

have you watched it?

please answer that question

Marlo, Holland
January 27, 2009 11:32pm

Tracey

Have you even considered watching the film at all?

Marlo, Holland
January 29, 2009 11:35pm

if you build this in:

"Do the claimants state that their claim is being suppressed by authorities?'

Then if there is a conspiracy it will be denied!!! wat idiot to built this in this way.
This world is filled with conspiracies!!!

This and more, like the title of his dvd, does me suspect brian might possibly be a high ranking freemason.

maybe he is a lightbringer of Jabulon? Brian knows what I mean ;)

Pindar, Holland
February 04, 2009 11:18pm

Thank you for this rational light in a very dark, dumb world. I come from a long line of whack-jobs - Grandpa was a Freemason/Psychic and Grandma Great kept her dead husband's suit pressed for when he visited her at night (there's no dry cleaning in heaven, I guess), my little brother's brand of religion exists on just one website, the rest of us are going to the H place, my cousin won't talk to me since I referred her to Snopes.
It's real quiet here around the holidays, just me and my cat playing cards - tarot cards, that is, real ones from Gypsies. The cat usually wins too. ;-)

Science rules, rock on.

~~Quark Lady

Durwood, Kirby, CT
February 07, 2009 8:58pm

People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true. People’s heads are full of knowledge, facts, and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool. - wizard's first rule

Someone, Somewhere
February 16, 2009 3:20pm

Religion breeds people to be gullible. As kids we are told to believe in Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny and let's not forget and unknown, unseen God the Abusive Father, who is out to smite us at every wrong turn. So, from a very early age we're programmed to believe in unsubstantiated claims. So it should not be a mystery why so many people fall for conspiracy theories, fantastical claims and pseudoscience if it's coming from somebody who tells us they have all the answers.
The solution is to bring kids up to question. To NOT fill their heads with imaginary critters and beings, to look at things in context and with logic. Then I will bet the gullibility factor decreases dramatically.
Hmmm. Something that should be tested.

Astor Gravelle, Hamilton, Ontario
February 18, 2009 7:42am

Quark Lady,

strange encounters with freemasonry?
Hmm.

But you are FOR science?
Hm ok, well dig deep and you will discover that our 'science' is founded by Freemasons and Rosecrucians by way of the 'Royal Society' to keep us from real knowledge.

and Brian is clinging like an idiot to this system!

Laugh it off or dare to investigate!

Pindar, Holland
February 18, 2009 10:36pm

The Freemason stuff always bothers me. It's a conceit by people to make themselves think they have this great privileged insight into how the world really works. The problem with it is that it's not real and people make life decisions based on their incorrect incorrect assumptions. The interplay of government, populations and media, are all visible for anyone who cares to watch.

Consider things like bureaucratic inertia and enlightened self interests before jumping to the conclusion that a secret society really runs things. We can generally make predictions about how people and groups will react to policies and legislation without resorting to a secret society explanation by looking at the myriad of pressures and interests on a population.

The way the world actually works is fascinating and complex. It's unfortunate you choose to miss out and be relegated to irrelevance by spouting off your freemason nonsense.

Craig, Washington DC
March 24, 2009 12:35pm

freemason nonsense??

I can conclude only one thing,

you haven't researched a yota!!!

maybe you should ask the Tavistock institute and its satellite organisations. ;)

I know, you don't know what I mean, that's ok, but maybe you should start researching!

or put int another way, how do you know it is nonsense?

Btw The idiot Randi is working for the oligarchy! He is their puppet

Try reading the book:

The Secret of the secret societies'

But I think I know what you are going to do

Pindar, Holland
March 25, 2009 1:30pm

I've seen Jon Rappoport's stuff on video. I'll assume most of his books contain the same weak scholarship, correlation equals causation faulty reasoning and "secret" evidence as the videos. Until he and Mr. Icke the rest of that crowd come up with real evidence for their claims it's nothing anyone needs to take seriously.

Craig, Washington DC
March 27, 2009 8:15am

on video?!

LOL

That is a bit lazy eh!!

A real skeptic unworthy!!!

Try reaing books by rappaport and Icke, if you dare.

Then come back with some proper reaction, this is too stupid, right?

Man o man who invented the skeptics?

probably God's flaw? ;)

critical is GOOD, skepticism is BAD

they even don't know the difference!!

Pindar, Holland
March 29, 2009 5:29am

Why waste the time and money? Is there going to be a real, unaltered photograph of George Bush changing into a lizard that wasn't in any of the videos? What possible indication could their be that either of their scholarship is going to get better because the medium changed? False correlations, bad fact checking and magical thinking are what they are whether they are in a video or a book.

If either of these two chuckleheads believed the nonsense they spewed, I mean really were concerned that there were secret societies, or reptile aliens and had real proof would they be communicating it by going around to conventions and telling it to the gullible fringe? Wouldn't they be telling the world for free and trying to organize some kind of resistance? No, they just write silly ass books and go to conventions and try to make people who exist on the margins of society think they are getting these really keen special insight.

Encouraging vulnerable people in their delusions for money is simply despicable.

Craig, Washington DC
March 29, 2009 6:30am

I often wondered about these conspiracies. If the Reptoids believers are convince that 2 billion people are actually reptiles from the center of the earth, how come they never include themselves in that number?

If these reptoids are real, then there is a chance they are one of them.

Joseph Furguson, Brawley, Ca
March 29, 2009 7:33am

If the Reptoids believers are convinced that 2 billion people are actually reptiles from the center of the earth, how come they aren't in a mental institution?

Max, Boston, MA
March 29, 2009 9:58am

If the Reptoids believers are convinced that 2 billion people are actually reptiles from the center of the earth, how come they aren't in a mental institution?


duh?????

Pindar, Holland
March 29, 2009 12:25pm

If there are two billion of them why hide? It's silly couldn't the lizard people things just take over? They are supposed to be smarter than us and have this shape shifting power thing right? They are hiding because why?

Craig, Washington DC
March 29, 2009 1:23pm

The best question yet is...

If there are a number of these ruthless, powerful reptoids out there, then why are the people pointing fingers at them still alive? With that much power, it would be easy to take out the first few websites and the people who created them.

If the reptoids are so powerful, getting away with outing them would be like trying to publish a book about the evils of Kim Jong Il in North Korea and then going on a book signing tour in North Korea and surviving, except more difficult.

Steve Loeffelholz, LeClaire, Iowa
March 29, 2009 10:25pm

If there are a number of these ruthless, powerful reptoids out there, then why are the people pointing fingers at them still alive?

that they dont' do that is no proof at all! It is just your interpretation, and actually, it is, like most 'science' circular reasoning.can't you see that?

Pindar, Holland
April 12, 2009 10:54pm

So they exist, but they do nothing?
They have all this power, but they do not use it. Some veiled threat that is.

If they are not going to do anything, then there is no point worrying about them, is there?

Look up pareidoilia before you respond again.

Jakob Ambrose, Holtville
April 13, 2009 6:52am

David Icke? Good god, on behalve of the rest of us here in Holland, I extend my apologies to the skeptic comunity.

Oh, and "Who killed the electric car" is right "up" there with the "best" of Micheal Moore's cinematography. I did watch it and there is just not much (read nothing) there there.

"Pindar" I sincerely hope you where joking.

E.Visser, Rotterdam/Holland
April 13, 2009 10:08am

"Pindar" I sincerely hope you where joking.

NO I AM NOT!

Pindar, Holland
April 15, 2009 1:14pm

Hey thanks for that list, and your challenge that this is what should be taught in schools.

My 12 year old has recently started pointing to the fact that his Catholic upbringing looks like an emperor without clothes. I'm very thankful a brave sceptic has entered my life, and challenges beliefs which i always thought were dodgy. i'll make sure he checks this site out, it will be very reassuring to him to know he is not alone.

Kil, New Zealand
April 15, 2009 2:34pm

So let me get this right. There is an invasion of reptoid monsters from God alone knows where, and instead of organising a resistance and rooting them out (as human beings have in EVERY other invasion they have ever faced - Norway, Italy, France, Greece, etc, etc, etc)... the faithful sell books and videos to each other.

In my part of the world, we have a word for people who behave like this, or who buy such books and seminars.

We call them "wankers".

Brenton, New Zealand
April 15, 2009 3:19pm

AGAIN with the Reptoids?

Seriously: this must be some kind of viral marketing for a sci-fi film. That would be pretty hilarious.

Anyways, I have several relatives who firmly believe in all kinds of pseudoscience.

Luckily, they don't consider these methods as REPLACEMENTS for conventional medicine, but more as an extra boost.

Sort of a "Pascal's Wager" concept.

Joel, Ottawa, Canada
April 16, 2009 5:54am

So let me get this right. There is an invasion of reptoid monsters from God alone knows where, and instead of organising a resistance and rooting them out (as human beings have in EVERY other invasion they have ever faced - Norway, Italy, France, Greece, etc, etc, etc)... the faithful sell books and videos to each other


Ok you have got the whiole picture now

pffffffffff

Btw study the higher ranks of Freemasonry and you will see what the eye on this website is for as well as the Dragons named on the DVD

They are very telling for who has eyes to see.

Pindar, Holland
April 16, 2009 8:40am

Oh yeah, we're still waiting on the expose of the whole Freemasons run the world thing. How's the evidence for that one coming?

Craig, Washington DC
April 16, 2009 9:18am

Why waste the time and money?

Ok then so you haven't read and researched it BUT you think you cAn comment, while you do nothing about it?

strange isn't it?

Pindar, Holland
April 21, 2009 8:02am

Actually, I rather know a lot about this particular irrational belief. Out of curiosity, do you like your Free Mason conspiracy theory with or with out the Knights Templar add on? I prefer it with; the Priory of Zion makes it a much more interesting read. There's no evidence for it with or without but it does draw in the reader.

Craig, Washington DC
April 21, 2009 10:37am

Actually, I rather know a lot about this particular irrational belief.

no you do not. you don't get what I say do you?

that you mention a few names doesn't say a thing.

you even admitted you don't know because it is a 'waste of time and money'

Who are you really kidding here?

You know!

Pindar, Holland
April 21, 2009 1:55pm

Well, if I watch a video of some guy's presentation and some fringe convention and he starts spouting off about the Priory of Zion, the Roscransians and the Jesuits being part of some Masonic conspircy I know he's either misinformed, a nut job, or a fraud.

However, to concede the point I should have said I know rather a lot about the actual history of the Masons, the Royal Societies and the Templars. This would be the real history of the organizations not some dreamed up conspiracy that lacks a basis in evidence. The truth of it is actually pretty interesting stuff, more interesting than the made up garbage out there.

Craig, Washington DC
April 22, 2009 12:27pm

Well, if I watch a video of some guy's presentation and some fringe convention and he starts spouting off about the Priory of Zion, the Roscransians and the Jesuits being part of some Masonic conspircy I know he's either misinformed, a nut job, or a fraud.

LOL really? Ok why is that?

Pindar, Holland
April 22, 2009 11:50pm

"LOL really? Ok why is that?"

Logic and Reason.

Seriously: check out this dynamic duo some day.

Joel, Ottawa, Canada
April 23, 2009 7:17am

"LOL really? Ok why is that?"

Logic and Reason.

My GOD!!!!

what a shallow anwwer!

Can't you realy not do better then that?

cause not!

Pindar, Holland
April 23, 2009 10:33pm

Well, that and the Priory of Zion is a fraud and doesn't exist. Here's a hot tip, if you're going to make a fraudulent document use ink that wasn't invented after the date on said document. The Jesuits and the Masons had nothing to do with each other, Catholics being decidedly anti Mason.

There were a large number of Masons who were in all the Royal Science societies. That had to a lot to do with Masons embracing Deism which was popular during the enlightenment. Masons also embraced free inquiry which would be pretty much what the Enlightenment was all about. There was never a rule that said to be a member of one you had to be a member of the other.

Moreover, no one can produce any evidence that the Masons are in control of anything except their own lodges. There's simply no evidence for it. So when I see a video of some author display weak scholarship and no critical thinking skills I will continue not to waste my time or money on them. If you need to believe you are in on some special secret about how the world works feel free. Just understand that your belief has no impact.

Craig, Washington DC
April 24, 2009 11:07am

Moreover, no one can produce any evidence that the Masons are in control of anything except their own lodges. There's simply no evidence for it

Really???????

ok then, maybe you where looking the wrong way! there is so much that proves it!!

maybe try another book!!

man o man

Pindar, Holland
April 24, 2009 12:00pm

You would have some evidence to offer then? If so do please share it with the group.

Craig, Washington DC
April 24, 2009 10:13pm

I have tons

But you won't be able to read it, but you probably don't know why, right?

Pindar, Alaska
April 25, 2009 12:54pm

Wow, I mention Freemasons and all hell breaks out.

I happen to possess my grandfather's "Scottish Rite" certificate, issued in 1958. I won't type out all the text, but the first couple lines read:
Ordo Ab Chao; Supreme Council;
Of S G Inspectors General; 33; Of the A A Scottish Rite.

He was an engineer and Protestant (Congregationalist) and deacon of our church; his best friend was our minister who had a Doctorate in Theology from Harvard.

They were two of the most intelligent and most benevolent men I ever knew and definitely not reptiles - and neither am I, his blood relative. And none of us had or has super powers.

My grandfather did investigate some of the paranormal pop-psuedo-science in vogue in the early 20th century, but knew enough not to take it seriously. My Great Grandmother, on the other hand, was a little nuts.

That conspiracy stuff is bogus and a waste of time, we humans have more important, real, things to do, like cure diseases and clean up the earth.

~~Quark Lady

Durwood, Kirby, CT
April 25, 2009 9:30pm

"They were two of the most intelligent and most benevolent men I ever knew and definitely not reptiles - and neither am I, his blood relative. And none of us had or has super powers."

Duh?

I never said it worked that way!
You make up your own bloody idiot theory and then claim I did, and then you shoot down your own theory,
and act like you shot mine down.

What is wrong with the so called skeptics today?

Thick!

Pindar, Africa
April 26, 2009 5:07am

Pindar from Holland, Alaska or Africa or wherever,

I don't know what you're talking about or why you're so upset; I didn't "make up" any "theory" or "claim" to shoot down yours, whatever it is. You're just talking nonsense, a far as I can tell, and getting all worked up in the process.

Calm down, dude. This is not the forum for insults and but you're bordering on being abusive, so why don't you quit while you're ahead?

Durwood, Kirby, CT
April 26, 2009 1:01pm

I don't know what you're talking about or why you're so upset; I didn't "make up" any "theory" or "claim" to shoot down yours, whatever it is. You're just talking nonsense, a far as I can tell, and getting all worked up in the process.

Calm down, dude. This is not the forum for insults and but you're bordering on being abusive, so why don't you quit while you're ahead?

LOL

I am not upset, I am having a laugh at these idiotic skeptics, who twist all things and think they can think, but if you really look at it they can't think at all!

well, that is what i think ;)

calm down

Pindar, Holland
April 26, 2009 10:57pm

"I never said it worked that way!"

So how does it work?

Craig, Washington DC
April 28, 2009 8:29am

Craig,

When I read your post I can't take your seriously, even if you pretend you wanna know, you and I know you don't wanna know

see ya

Pindar, Argentna
April 28, 2009 10:16pm

Obviously I at present, don't take your world view all that seriously. I'm really more curious to see if you can articulate your hypothesis of what reptoids are, what they are doing and why you think that. You appear completely incapable of presenting on coherent argument or forming and communicating a rational thought.

If you don't want to use reptoids feel free to explain the same thing about Free Masonry. You've stated you don't take me seriously, which is fine. Now why don't you try and present a reason as to why anyone should take you seriously. Thus far you have failed at that.

Craig, Washington DC
May 08, 2009 9:27am

"You appear completely incapable of presenting on coherent argument or forming and communicating a rational thought."

appear? You must be madder than I thoght!

btw communicating with a so called idiot skeptic is IMPOSSIBLE!
so why try , mate?

didn't you know that? ;)

Pindar, Germany
May 08, 2009 12:00pm

Ah yes you are right, I should have said that you are incapable of presenting a coherent argument or communicating a rational thought. Your gross incompetence on this point is very clearly much more than an appearance.

By the way, at work today someone mentioned the Freemasonry conspiracy theory. I discussed the history of Freemasonry and how the secret society beliefs came about. She stopped believing in them. I thought you would like to know that.

Craig, Washington DC
May 08, 2009 5:42pm

By the way, at work today someone mentioned the Freemasonry conspiracy theory. I discussed the history of Freemasonry and how the secret society beliefs came about. She stopped believing in them. I thought you would like to know that.

WRONG!!!!

see, not as clever as you thought!

Pindar, Belgium
May 08, 2009 10:37pm

How is he wrong? He didn't even make any sort of claim, so he can't be wrong. You, however, must be wrong, seeing as how you claim that he is not as clever as he thought, when he actually succeeded in convincing someone by communicating a rational thought.

Joseph, Norman
May 10, 2009 4:47pm

how is he wrong? He didn't even make any sort of claim, so he can't be wrong. You, however, must be wrong, seeing as how you claim that he is not as clever as he thought, when he actually succeeded in convincing someone by communicating a rational thought.

what a sentence about something you know realy nothing about

so, you are wrong too!!

see ya!

Pindar, Argentina
May 10, 2009 8:43pm

If you provide some evidence about Free Masons actually running the world, science, banking systems, the media... I'll be happy to consider it. Until you can provide that your views are of no significance.

Craig, Washington DC
May 11, 2009 9:48am

"If you provide some evidence about Free Masons actually running the world, science, banking systems, the media... I'll be happy to consider it. Until you can provide that your views are of no significance."

very wrong stated.
You should say "of no significance to me' to you that is.
there is a difference dear skeptic.
I thought skeptics knew that, I was wrong ,very wrong. they can't think straight and this is proof

Furthermore, you don't even know what your stated.

Pindar, Greece
May 11, 2009 10:01am

No, they are of significance to all small fringe community but that's all. It's not as if any policy decisions are being made based on your views. You're not really impacting anything important. You and your kind are just dismissed as kooks, which is fine. That's the way the world works. It's okay that you're dismissed, that's what should happen. Come up with some evidence for your claims if you want relevancy. Feel superior all you want but understand that the world will simply go on, indifferent to your smugness.

Craig, Washington DC
May 11, 2009 1:07pm

Craig,

It has nothing to do with feeling superior, but rather funny YOU mentioned it, something to think about, right?

pindar, idiotry
May 11, 2009 8:50pm

I'm a bit curious about your goal here. You're obviously not interested in intelligent debate. It's equally obvious that you're not interested in persuading anyone to your point of view. So, what is it you wish to accomplish?

It looks like you do wish to communicate your self assessed superiority to the moronic, stupid, idiotic skeptics. Most people don't direct that sort of language at people they consider to be intellectual equals. I will note that neither I nor anyone else on this board as far as I have seen has applied any of those words to you.

Craig, Washington DC
May 12, 2009 11:39am

Then why don't you offer information? I've asked you for information but all you come up with is some silly snide comment about how you think I don't really want to know. Offering some evidence might be a good first step toward being taken seriously.

Craig, Washington DC
May 13, 2009 9:03am

I will interject again;

I've had some dancing lessons at school, but Pindar shows true dedication and skill while dancing around an issue. I believe it's the salsa.

Also, has anyone else noticed that Pindar has multiplied? They sort of broke that illusion when one posted after the other; Skeptoid limits posts by IP addresses.

One of them said they had a Harvard degree or something but spelled as bad as the rest. ooh! ooh!

I think I understand something now.. the conspiracy is really Pindar! There's a secret society of them, trying to rip apart critical thinking with poorly construed logic, red herrings, and distribution!

man o man

Joseph, Norman, OK
June 06, 2009 7:44pm

It is interesting that, just two episodes after this, you support the anti-anthropogenic global warming (anti AGW) crowd and make them seem as though they are not on the fringe.

Test 5: How often do we hear these conspiracies that anti-AGW promoters babble about. In fact, Climate Audit does precisely this. It spreads around non-peer reviewed claims about peer reviewed articles in order to promote the idea of a "scientific conspiracy." No wonder these anti-AGW guys tend to be friends with Creationists and IDers (ex. Discovery Institute and AAPS).

Test 9: Looking at all the comments on episode 39, i see that all the anti-AGW crowd get their data from anti-AGW sources and many times advertise them. Other than unbiased peer reviewed journals (which all side with AGW, check!), if u want to look at these sides, look at both sides and weight their sources. AGW sites (realclimate and cliamteskeptic) all directly source peer reviewed articles while others (climateaudit and GlobalWarming.org) use either original non-peer reviewed analysis (unverified by experts and highly likely BS) or source questionable biased sources that arent listed in peer reviewed search engines (ex Energy and Enviornment).
Test 15: Obviously, there is no doubt the anti-AGW focuses on politicians (ex al gore) and not science.

Read my comment for episode 39. Check both sides and see what side fails what tests. Anti-AGW is sold alongside tons of other anti-science positions (ex: creationism anti vaccines).

Eric, Oklahoma City
July 26, 2009 11:18pm

This is a useful list.

I think many people who participate in the internet do not know some of the terminology or concepts used in the list. The effectiveness of this list (getting people to be less gullible )could be improved by explaining things at a lower level.

IMHO, having seen how people react to such lists it could be helpful to emphasize that the items on the list are not smoking guns, or laws.
Only warning signs of potential BS. Such an emphasis can help the list avoid seeming dogmatic.

beforewisdom, Washingtong, D.C.
September 06, 2009 7:17am

To add to the "toolbox" of bias-detection indicators, here are two I use:

1) When a perspective is presented with a tone of fear or great urgency, warning lights should go off. Example: government vaccine conspiracy assertions.

2) Anytime someone starts out saying "I find it interesting..." or "It's curious that..." or other similar phrase, it almost always means they are mad at you, and have quite likely compromised scientific detachment. They say "interesting" or "curious" or another similar word to try to disguise or balance the anger they have.

(An aside: Finding something to be "interesting" when you are really just mad reminds me of calling problems "issues." While calling problems "issues" does establish a clinical, objective tone to solving problems, it is also a way to try to avoid the grim meathook reality in many cases that if the problem is not solved, you will be fired or dumped or painfully ostracized or whatever.

I digress.)

Aloysius, Santa Cruz, CA
October 03, 2009 10:51am

Just wanted to comment on Eric from Oklahoma City's bit there on tests 5 and 9. Clearly this information wasn't available at the time but it's now been shown that some studies that had run contrary to the scientific consensus were actively rejected from peer-reviewed journals for political, not scientific, reasons. The whole ordeal has been nicknamed "Climategate."

Also, it's interesting to compare the "theory" of anthropogenic global warming against this list. I believe that most unbiased readers will find it fails nearly every test listed here.

Tim Wickstrom, Winnipeg, MB
December 17, 2009 12:41pm

One question... How does mention of "certifications, colleges, academies, and institutes." equate to hokey marketing if these are legit certifications, colleges, etc..

Personally I'm opening my own clinic and research center. I advertise that I'm a board member of my professional association, I have a degree from one of the top universities in the country and further diplomas and certifications in my field of expertise. I encourage anyone to check out those if they are skeptical of their credibility, but simply advertising my achievements doesn't make my clinic Hokey. Marketing yourself doesn't lessen your service. Seriously, no one would survive in business without some initial marketing to develop word of mouth references, or other medical referals. AS well just because your selling a service or product doesn't mean your out to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. We all have to pay bills, and the only way to do so is selling our services or products (whether as a self-employed person to a market, or as an employed person to their employer.). Be sketical of claims but if someone can back them up, you can't discredit them based on silly notions that someone else who was a fake used the same marketing tactic. Everyone would be discredited on that alone.

Josanne, Canada
January 19, 2010 9:22pm

"Everyone would be discredited on that alone."

And that's a bad thing why?

Seriously, what's the problem here? The whole point of science and empericism is to remove the observer from the equation as much as possible--at minimum to the extent that anyone with similar knowledge, experience, and equipment will yield similar results. And as far as marketing goes, my rule of thumb is to never trust advertisements. Instead, I use them as a first-round culling process, just to see if any major red flags jump out. It's not until I meet with people that I decide "Okay, this guy actually knows something". Anyone relying on an ad is already going to fall for pseudoscience.

Gregory, Alabama
May 04, 2010 10:10am

sorry the peer review is a catch 22. if you have a theory that goes against the established ideas you have no credibility unless peer reviewed but you will be refused peer review if your idea goes against established thought
science today are all whores for funding and will say what the fund source wants

lilbear68, cedar hill, mo
May 30, 2010 7:23pm

Lilbear68 you are misunderstanding the burden of proof. If you have an up and coming theory or hypothesis the burden is on you to prove that your idea is stronger (more valid). It isn't the job of those with the established theory to make your case for you.

Robert Mcbride, Columbia, MD
June 02, 2010 10:32am

"if you have a theory that goes against the established ideas you have no credibility unless peer reviewed but you will be refused peer review if your idea goes against established thought"

That's completely untrue. If you have a legitimately new idea, backed up by actual, legitimate evidence, then you can pass the peer review process. If you put forth an experiment that contradicts established scientific fact, then people will sit down and try the experiment themselves, and if they see what you see, then your ideas will have merit. If people try your experiment and find out that it's bullshit, then you get rejected. There's no conspiracy to keep out fringe views, it's just that the people who hold those views rarely have good reason for it.

Q, Illinois
June 02, 2010 10:33am

I'm an engineer and a scientist and this article reeks of pseudoscience and a total lack of scientific method. What was the methodology used for compiling this list? Announcing indebtedness to Quackwatchers and Carl Sagan is hardly scientific reference and does not legitimize the above information.

What are the sources for each of these 15 claims? Find a different hobby, Mr. Dunning.

P, Texas
August 25, 2010 11:59am

P, as a member of the engineering trade myself I have to ask what exactly it was that smacked of pseudoscience? The claims that were being debunked or the debunking? Do engineers in Texas make a habit of avoiding the scientific method, claiming the norm is wrong and making appeals to higher authorities like God or Psychics?
Or was it the section about checking the credentials of a "scientist"?

Tom H, Kent, UK
August 30, 2010 4:53am