People that know me personally, know I'm just a tad opinionated - suddenly this blog's name makes a bit more sense. And of all the topics I rant about, none deserve it more than the spectrum of shitty reasoning, and muddy thinking, called pseudo-science.
Some of you might know pseudo-science by a plethora of aliases such as: astrology, homeopathy (just terrible), orgone energy, Power Balance bracelets, psychics, telepathy, etc. Basically, anything that claims to use scientific principles to explain extraordinary effects or behaviour.
In the words of one my intellectual mentors, Christopher Hitchens:
extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Every time one of these pseudo-scientific practices are tested for effectiveness in a non-biased way, they fail spectacularly. In fact, James Randi, a prominent skeptic and author, maintains a standing reward of $1,000,000 to the first person able, under normal scientific observation, to successfully demonstrate paranormal, supernatural, or otherwise miraculous behaviour. To date, and we're talking 30 some odd years and numerous attempts, no one has succeeded. Big surprise.
Anyway, I recently came across a blog maintained by McGill University called Office for Science & Society, and it's great. Basically, it specializes in debunking pseudo-scientific claims, explaining why the topic of the entry is wrong, but also enlightening the reader in the relevant scientific theories involved. It's really good, and I highly recommend browsing through their archives.
So, what pseudo-sciency claims do you despise? Disagree with my categorization of your favourite chakra as bunk? Comment early, comment often.