OCEAN 320 Lecture Notes - Lecture 1: Dowsing, Pseudoscience, Intelligent Design
Unit 1A: Science & Systems
Pseudoscience Video
Pseudoscientists intend to sift through science to determine what is “good” science and
what is “bad” science, or debunk
o Ex: marijuana dowser; must weigh both the successes and the failures and decide
whether product is effective and functional or not; must weigh full database!
The objective is not always to decide that something is impossible or illogical; sometimes
the intent is simply to modify a subject or hypothesis to make it more logical
“Way of looking for natural explanations for all phenomena”
Linguistic place-fillers: beginning of causal chain for science, end for intelligent design
creationists
o Basically, words that are used to fill in for a subject we know little or nothing
about are good ways for scientists to explain what they know and decide variables
to further investigate, but interrupt the flow of an overall truth or certainty from
being proven
o That’s where pseudoscientists come in; if there are too many of those “place-
filler” words, it becomes obvious that the topic is too broad, not possible,
illogical, etc
o Must ask: what is more likely? What is the more naturally explained and proven
explanation?
All of science aims to find a balance between data and theory
o Ex: Galileo & Saturn
Was no theory of planetary rings
Data was grainy and fuzzy; made it hard to get hard evidence
Concluded that Saturn had 3 bodies; proves that without proper data it is
hard to make accurate theories
Theories can inevitably have cognitive biases
o Ex: tendency to see faces, like the “Face on Mars;” higher quality photographs
make it hard to see the face, but lesser quality data makes it more obvious! Shows
the better the data, the more accurate the theory
Document Summary
Pseudoscientists intend to sift through science to determine what is good science and what is bad science, or debunk: ex: marijuana dowser; must weigh both the successes and the failures and decide. Way of looking for natural explanations for all phenomena . What is the more naturally explained and proven. All of science aims to find a balance between data and theory explanation: ex: galileo & saturn. Data was grainy and fuzzy; made it hard to get hard evidence. Concluded that saturn had 3 bodies; proves that without proper data it is hard to make accurate theories. Theories can inevitably have cognitive biases: ex: tendency to see faces, like the face on mars; higher quality photographs make it hard to see the face, but lesser quality data makes it more obvious!
