This is a list of topics that are generally considered pseudoscience by the scientific community. Pseudoscience consists of statements, beliefs, or practices that claim to be scientific or factual but are inherently incompatible with the scientific method. Detailed discussion of these topics may be found on their main pages.
Criticism of pseudoscience, generally by the scientific community or skeptical organizations, involves critiques of the logical, methodological, or rhetorical bases of the topic in question. Some of the listed topics were subject to scientific research in the past and today are considered refuted, but resurrected in a pseudoscientific fashion. Other ideas presented here are entirely non-scientific, but have in one way or another impinged on scientific domains or practices.
Many adherents or practitioners of the topics listed here dispute their characterization as pseudoscience.
Pseudoscientific medical practices are often known as quackery. In contrast, modern medicine is (or seeks to be) evidence-based.
Paranormal topics concern events that are beyond the normal range of human experience or are not explainable by scientific theories.
Spiritual and religious practices and beliefs, according to astronomer Carl Sagan, are normally not classified as pseudoscience. However, religion can sometimes nurture pseudoscience, and "at the extremes it is difficult to distinguish pseudoscience from rigid, doctrinaire religion", and some religions might be confused with pseudoscience, such as traditional meditation. The following religious/spiritual items have been related to or classified as pseudoscience in some way:
Creation science or scientific creationism – is a branch of creationism that claims to provide scientific support for the Genesis creation narrative in the Book of Genesis and disprove or reexplain the scientific facts, theories and scientific paradigms about geology, cosmology, biological evolution, archaeology, history and linguistics.
The following concepts have only a very small number of proponents, yet have become notable:
…the aliens' advanced technology, which uses nonpolluting fuel, could revolutionize the transport of goods and people on this planet and rejuvenate the biosphere.
We have reviewed the scientific literature on GE crop safety for the last 10 years that catches the scientific consensus matured since GE plants became widely cultivated worldwide, and we can conclude that the scientific research conducted so far has not detected any significant hazard directly connected with the use of GM crops. [...] The literature about Biodiversity and the GE food/feed consumption has sometimes resulted in animated debate regarding the suitability of the experimental designs, the choice of the statistical methods or the public accessibility of data. Such debate, even if positive and part of the natural process of review by the scientific community, has frequently been distorted by the media and often used politically and inappropriately in anti-GE crops campaigns.
teils ergänzend und teils ersetzend zur konventionellen MedizinCited in Ernst, E (2008). "Anthroposophic medicine: A critical analysis". MMW Fortschritte der Medizin. 150 (Suppl 1): 1–6. PMID 18540325.
Since the publication of our previous systematic review in 2000, several rigorous new studies have emerged. Collectively they shift the weight of the evidence against the notion that distant healing is more than a placebo.
The majority of rigorous trials show no effect beyond placebo. (Edzard Ernst)
Research suggests that iridology is not an effective method to diagnose or help treat any specific medical condition.
Our AMA believes that iridology, the study of the iris of the human eye, has not yet been established as having any merit as a diagnostic technique.
{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: deprecated archival service (link)Not only are magnetic fields of no value in healing, you might characterize these as "homeopathic" magnetic fields.
Among all who had heard of [magnet therapy], 14 percent said it was very scientific and another 54 percent said it was sort of scientific. Only 25 percent of those surveyed answered correctly, that is, that it is not at all scientific.
Another energy-based therapy that is claimed to identify and treat allergies...is called the Nambudripad allergy elimination technique (NAET; Nambudripad, 2003). However, a dearth of studies is not the same thing as evidence which conclusively proves that NAET is either ineffective or dangerous. Organizations that do rigorous clinical trials would have little interest in studying NAET because it is non-drug based. Funding is not usually available for assessing any alternative healing modalities. Defenders of alternative and holistic healing point out that most family doctors treat patients who have a wide range of underlying emotional issues that impair the patient's health. This could happen, for example, through elevated cortisone or adrenaline levels from prolonged stress. NAET testing is carried out through applied kinesiology while a person is holding small vials that are said to contain the energetic essences of various substances. Once the allergies are identified, treatment is carried out through stimulation of points along the spine. These vials contain substances prepared in a process similar to that of homeopathic preparation. Mainstream science claims this method has not been shown reliable or valid in assessing a client's sensitivity to environmental toxins.
There is no evidence that megavitamin or orthomolecular therapy is effective in treating any disease.
So other than a lower admissions standard and the focus on a pseudoscientific belief system, there is no difference between the two educational systems. So why should this two-tiered system even exist? It is time to rid ourselves of this pre-scientific, dual system of medical education.
There is no relationship between the conventional medical uses of electromagnetic energy and the alternative devices or methods that use externally applied electrical forces. Available scientific evidence does not support claims that these alternative electrical devices are effective in diagnosing or treating cancer or any other disease.
Despite this lack of evidence, TT is now supported by major nursing organizations such as the National League of Nurses and the American Nurses Association.
What's missing from all of this, of course, is any statement by Krieger and her disciples about how the existence of their energy field can be demonstrated by scientifically accepted methods.
neither the external energy fields nor their therapeutic effects have been demonstrated convincingly by any biophysical means.
...acupuncture points are no more real than the black spots that a drunkard sees in front of his eyes.
Shiatsu incorporates acupressure, which is similar but applies pressure for longer on specific pressure points on meridians, following Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM)
What many exotic cable manufacturers do is start off with a real engineering premise and stretch them beyond what would even be considered believable as Star Trek physics, hence the pseudoscience is born.
The "Letters" pages have been filled by readers who have taken us to task for not adhering to rigorous scientific methods in the evaluation of components, those rigorous scientific methods usually being equated with double-blind listening. Other readers have praised the magazine for its stance that an educated listener in a familiar, relaxed environment will be more accurate in his or her assessment than an average of trained and untrained listeners in unfamiliar, stressful circumstances.
...blind listening tests fundamentally distort the listening process and are worthless in determining the audibility of a certain phenomenon.
Well, we had discovered that metal was relatively impervious to the telepathic effect, and had prepared for ourselves a sort of tin pulpit, behind which we could stand while conducting experiments. This, combined with caps of metal foil, enormously reduced the effects on ourselves.
In the 1970s, Holocaust denial took up more sophisticated pseudoscientific methods and began to portray itself as a movement of historal revisionists...
The following are examples of claims that might best be placed in each of these three bins... Pseudoscience: creationism, Holocaust revisionism, remote viewing, astrology, Bible code, alien abductions, unidentified flying objects (UFOs), Bigfoot, Freudian psychoanalytic theory, reincarnation, angels, ghosts, extrasensory perception (ESP), recovered memories.
The preacher produced a nearly 40-minute video, "Did the Holocaust Really Happen?," in which he espoused what Deborah Lipstadt has called "hardcore" Holocaust denial, "den[ying] the facts of the Holocaust" in an "outright and forceful fashion." Though his "scientific" evidence for the "Holocaust hoax" or "Holocaust myth," as he often refers to the Holocaust, is mostly a regurgitation of the pseudoscientific arguments made by a more established group of Holocaust deniers, Anderson adds a spiritual dimension to Holocaust denial to make it attractive to Christian viewers.[permanent dead link]
On the one hand, there is science denialism, such as climate change scepticism, the anti-vaccination movement, and holocaust denial, which attacks well-established scientific theories and practices. On the other hand, there is the promotion of pseudotheory, the attempt to get doctrines like homoeopathy and intelligent design accepted as sciences even though they have no warrant for such merit (Hansson, 2017). Both types of pseudoscience have harmful effects on health, environment, education, and society...Paradigmatic pseudosciences can also be very different from one another. Think of, say, intelligent design, Holocaust denial, ancient astronaut hypothesis, homoeopathy, the anti-vaccine movement, astrology, or climate change scepticism. Because there are different forms of pseudoscience, one cannot rule out the possibility that different criteria are needed to distinguish them from science.[dead link]
This is a total quack procedure that has actually killed children.
In summary, then, it seems that graphology as currently practiced is a typical pseudoscience and has no place in character assessment or employment practice. There is no good scientific evidence to justify its use, and the graphologists do not seem about to come up with any.
...dozens of scientists have pointed out that Myers-Briggs is pseudoscience. There is no peer-reviewed, statistically significant, double-blind research demonstrating that it works.
The overwhelming majority of scientists consider parapsychology, by whatever name, to be pseudoscience.
Few tragedies can be more extensive than the stunting of life, few injustices deeper than the denial of an opportunity to strive or even to hope, by a limit imposed from without, but falsely identified as lying within.
There have been abundant illustrations of pseudoscientific theories-monocausal theories of human behavior that were hailed as "scientific"-that have been applied with disastrous results. Examples: [...] Many racists today point to IQ to justify a menial role for blacks in society and their opposition to affirmative action.
For the first one hundred and fifty years evolution was – and was seen to be – a pseudoscience.
Ruse's somewhat surprising yet intriguing claim is that "before Charles Darwin, evolution was an epiphenomenon of the ideology of [social] progress, a pseudoscience and seen as such..."
Belief in pseudoscience is relatively widespread...At least half of the public believes in the existence of extrasensory perception (ESP).
[M]ost scientists, both psychologists and physicists, agree that it has yet to be convincingly demonstrated.
Belief in pseudoscience is relatively widespread... A sizable minority of the public believes in UFOs and that aliens have landed on Earth.
We should not underestimate how persuasively physics can be invoked to buttress mystical notions. We physicists bear some responsibility for the way our discipline is exploited.
[...] not a single psychiatrist of standing has given it a second thought [...] more than one psychoanalyst has pointed out that [it] is an extremely convenient device for avoiding any real understanding of the roots of a neurosis.
Narconon, a subsidiary of Scientology, and the association "Yes to Life, No to Drugs" [...] responsible scientific reviews have long since "eliminated" dianetics and purification from the lists of therapies – relegating them to the great bazaar of medical fraud.
When Narconon opened its Chilocco facility in 1991, the Oklahoma Board of Mental Health issued a blistering assessment in denying its application for certification. "There is no credible evidence establishing the effectiveness of the Narconon program to its patients," the board concluded. It attacked the program as medically unsafe; dismissed the sauna program as unproven; and criticized Narconon for inappropriately taking some patients off prescribed psychiatric medication.(courtesy link)
An independent medical consultant in Maryland who reviewed the program for the city of Shreveport, La., dismissed Hubbard's treatment as "quackery." [...] the program itself, developed not by physicians or scientists, but by the founder of the Church of Scientology, has no recognized value in the established medical and scientific community. It is quackery.
[...] 1990 on charges of fraud, conspiracy to defraud and the illegal practice of medicine [...] accused in France, of quackery at its illegal anti-drug clinics called "Narconon."
TM is a movement led by Maharishi Mehesh Yogi
The small number of studies included in this review do not permit any conclusions to be drawn on the effectiveness of meditation therapy for anxiety disorders. Transcendental meditation is comparable with other kinds of relaxation therapies in reducing anxiety
Scientific research on meditation practices does not appear to have a common theoretical perspective and is characterized by poor methodological quality. Firm conclusions on the effects of meditation practices in healthcare cannot be drawn based on the available evidence.
All the randomized clinical trials of TM for the control of blood pressure published to date have important methodological weaknesses and are potentially biased by the affiliation of authors to the TM organization.
As a result of the limited number of included studies, the small sample sizes and the high risk of bias
All 4 positive trials recruited subjects from among people favourably predisposed towards TM, and used passive control procedures ... The association observed between positive outcome, subject selection procedure and control procedure suggests that the large positive effects reported in 4 trials result from an expectation effect. The claim that TM has a specific and cumulative effect on cognitive function is not supported by the evidence from randomized controlled trials.
In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.
We therefore find that Professor Behe's claim for irreducible complexity has been refuted in peer-reviewed research papers and has been rejected by the scientific community at large.
True in this latest creationist variant, advocates of so-called intelligent design [...] use more slick, pseudoscientific language. They talk about things like 'irreducible complexity' [...] For most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience.
The Discovery Institute and ID proponents have a number of goals that they hope to achieve using disingenuous and mendacious methods of marketing, publicity, and political persuasion. They do not practice real science because that takes too long, but mainly because this method requires that one have actual evidence and logical reasons for one's conclusions, and the ID proponents just don't have those. If they had such resources, they would use them, and not the disreputable methods they actually use.