Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member


(7,670 posts)
27. Well, this man definitely represents bad science, and I can't see a difference...
Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:53 AM
Dec 2012

between it and religion, also, I don't know what the difference is between "good" and "bad" religion.

He makes unfalsifiable claims of a pseudo-scientific nature, or claims that are falsifiable and have been falsified already. Yet, instead of re-evaluating his theories, he sticks by them, and then complains about the "dogma" of "mainstream" science. This sounds like a classic case of fundamentalism and closed mindedness.

Or as one of my colleagues puts it: Turbineguy Dec 2012 #1
Both wise and perceptive, and a viewpoint that needs to be taken to heart. nt humblebum Dec 2012 #2
Ahh, that Rupert sheldrake Confusious Dec 2012 #3
I'm not that familiar with his scientific work, but I think his take here cbayer Dec 2012 #5
His recent resume is very much something to sneeze at LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #7
I think you make very valid points. cbayer Dec 2012 #9
Actually he's very good experimentalist tama Dec 2012 #13
When I was in grad school in the 70's Speck Tater Dec 2012 #26
"Observer bias" and "degree of plausibility" combined tama Dec 2012 #30
If one were to judge his argument by his resume, that would just be argument from authority.... xocet Dec 2012 #29
Couple points tama Dec 2012 #31
Actually, I first read this without any idea of who he was, and I found it interesting. cbayer Dec 2012 #36
Liberal materialism has become the dominant mode burnsei sensei Dec 2012 #4
Maybe - but one of the best-known practitioners of bad science is Rupert Sheldrake himself LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #6
I wasn't aware of this when I read the article, but have now done some further cbayer Dec 2012 #8
He's unorthodox, for sure tama Dec 2012 #14
He is not unorthodox - he is a purveyor of Woo intaglio Dec 2012 #17
Well then tama Dec 2012 #18
Blindfolding has little effect intaglio Dec 2012 #23
Actually tama Dec 2012 #24
Thanks, tama. I found his writing intriguing, and looking into cbayer Dec 2012 #22
While some of Sheldrake's stuff is way outside the box, Thats my opinion Dec 2012 #10
And so were/are a lot of crackpots and cultists. LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #11
The why don't you tama Dec 2012 #15
That's an idiotic comparison... Humanist_Activist Dec 2012 #28
Here's a free logic lesson from Carl Sagan: trotsky Dec 2012 #35
thats pretty rich coming from rupert sheldrake Phillip McCleod Dec 2012 #12
Phillip McCleod is a crackpot tama Dec 2012 #16
Which particular site? The Huffington Post? cbayer Dec 2012 #21
They are also home to a lot of crackpot woo. trotsky Dec 2012 #34
Dishonest and self-serving skepticscott Dec 2012 #19
"Bad science gets better. Bad religion stays bad." cleanhippie Dec 2012 #20
Sheldrake is a crank who probably has Schizotypal Personality Disorder. Odin2005 Dec 2012 #25
Well, this man definitely represents bad science, and I can't see a difference... Humanist_Activist Dec 2012 #27
Here's my take on Sheldrake Fortinbras Armstrong Dec 2012 #32
Message auto-removed Name removed Jan 2014 #37
Bad science can be countered (and conquered) by good science. trotsky Dec 2012 #33
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Why Bad Science Is Like B...»Reply #27