Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] Pseudoscience

I agree. That is the text that I used for the portion of my core physics course that dealt with pseudoscience. They give a wonderful step by step check off of criteria. They also devote a chapter to handling those cases like cold fusion where the criteria are met, but there are still some people doing legitimate investigations on the topic. I have asked the publisher to reprint it, but the market just wasn't there. A few of the examples are probably outdated by now.

Bob at PC

From: [] On Behalf Of brian whatcott []
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] Pseudoscience

On 10/12/2010 9:36 AM, Espinosa, James wrote:
The best reference I know that should clear up any confusion about the meaning of pseudoscience is: Science and Unreason by Daisie Radner and Michael Radner. It was published in 1982 and is unfortunately out of print, but copies can be found in used book bookstores. I have my students read it so that they will know the difference between what is science and what is not.

James Espinosa
Forum for Physics Educators

Science and Unreason
by Daisie Radner and Michael Radner (Paperback - Mar 1, 1982)
5 new
from $11.43 31 used
from $0.05
Forum for Physics Educators