Talk:N-Ray: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>George Swan (subpages) |
imported>Pierre-Alain Gouanvic (a pseudoskeptic fraud?) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{subpages}} | ||
== So this would be [[pseudoskepticism]]? == | |||
Hi George Swan, | |||
If this is what I think it is, congratulations for bringing this up! | |||
If I get this well, properly conducted experiments demonstrated the existence of something quite unusual, even spooky, which "competed" with X-rays, which were all the rage (I guess), and then a skeptic (Wood) from a leading scientific journal (Nature) came to reestablish the status quo by using fraud. | |||
Today, it is difficult to bring N-rays back in the spotlight because most scientist cannot afford to be associated to so-called pseudoscience... although the scientific fraud was perpetrated by a respected pseudoskeptic. | |||
This would merit a place in the Core controversial topics billboard. But tell me please if I'm mistaken! | |||
Revision as of 13:54, 25 June 2008
|
| Metadata here |
So this would be pseudoskepticism?
Hi George Swan,
If this is what I think it is, congratulations for bringing this up!
If I get this well, properly conducted experiments demonstrated the existence of something quite unusual, even spooky, which "competed" with X-rays, which were all the rage (I guess), and then a skeptic (Wood) from a leading scientific journal (Nature) came to reestablish the status quo by using fraud.
Today, it is difficult to bring N-rays back in the spotlight because most scientist cannot afford to be associated to so-called pseudoscience... although the scientific fraud was perpetrated by a respected pseudoskeptic.
This would merit a place in the Core controversial topics billboard. But tell me please if I'm mistaken!