PseudoScience

Anirban Kundu
&
Partha Ghosh

Photo by Mikhail Nilov

Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice that is presented as scientific but does not adhere to the standards and methods of science. True science is based on repeated evidence-gathering and testing of falsifiable hypotheses. Pseudoscience does not adhere to these criteria. Pseudoscience is often known as fringe or alternative science. It usually lacks the carefully controlled and thoughtfully interpreted experiments that provide the foundation of the natural sciences and contribute to their advancement. In addition to phrenology (measurement of bumps on the skull to predict mental traits), some other examples of pseudoscience include astrology, reflexology, reincarnation, and Scientology.

So what is exactly the difference between science and pseudoscience? Everything that does not pass the rigorous tests of science but claims to be science is pseudoscience or fake science at best, and fraud at worst. One should remember this as a defining characteristic of any science: Doubt everything, and trust nothing, till there is irrefutable proof. Also, “proof” does not mean hearsay, or some statements written somewhere that you cannot actually test. “Ghosts exist” is not a scientific statement for obvious reasons, even if it is written in several books. Look for the following red flags if you suspect something is not science.

• It relies on statements and assumptions that are contrary to existing scientific knowledge.
• It depends more on and tries to justify popular beliefs and superstitions.
• It relies a lot on forgotten wisdom, some sort of imagined “deep knowledge” that existed in the past but is forgotten now.
• It relies more on statements made in scriptures rather than experiments to verify them.
• It is driven not by the quest for Nature but by stuff like petty nationalism and one-upmanship.

Let us try to understand the flags with examples.

1. Going against accepted scientific knowledge: One should be very skeptical about theories that assign mysterious properties to known or unknown objects. Astrology is an excellent example of pseudoscience or fake science. It assigns mysterious properties to known celestial objects to prove that they can affect us. One can easily calculate the force that any planet exerts on us --- you just need Newton’s law --- and you will see that this is abysmally tiny, completely negligible. The only two celestial bodies that affect the motion of the Earth are the Sun and the Moon. But it is even more ridiculous to say that you can prevent their bad effects by using certain stones. If that were the case, you should have used much bigger stones to cancel the gravitational attraction exerted by your bookcase or your car. Another example is the claim made a few years ago that in ancient India, there were flying machines that could stay still in the air or even go backward. Everyone with an elementary knowledge of aerodynamics knows that such things are not possible for propelled machines like airplanes (we are not talking about balloons or drones), it goes against physical laws.

2. Based on beliefs and superstitions: Most of us must have heard that one should not eat or drink anything during eclipses. This is a pure superstition. But some people try to invent a scientific reason behind this; they claim that during a solar eclipse, the number of harmful bacteria in your food increases as there is no sunlight to kill them. This is pure rubbish. If this were true, anyone eating or drinking anything at night would have fallen sick. The absence of sunlight for a few minutes can never harm anyone.

3. Forgotten wisdom: Pseudoscience is often based on logic like “this is written in some old texts, so those ancient people must have known all about this, and now we have forgotten it”. There are technologies that we have indeed forgotten, like the technology of mummification in ancient Egypt. We know this because we have discovered the mummies and not just found the reference in some papyrus, so we have a proof for the statement “mummification worked”. There are instances where we have rediscovered some ancient techniques, like the use of Pozzolanic ash in concrete used by Romans to build large structures that are astonishingly durable—the secret of which was only discovered very recently. But statements like “we had wireless technology 2000 years ago” or “we had medicines that could cure all diseases” are not science, and you know why: there is no way you can prove this, except maybe some stories in ancient texts, which may very well be fertile imagination of the writers. Things that are impossible to happen now could not have happened then. For example, we are sure that the ancient Indian surgeons knew how to replace a damaged nose with an artificial one, but replacing someone’s head with an elephant head is obviously a fictitious statement that only fools can take at face value and brag about the achievements of those wonderful surgeons. It does not mean that every piece of ancient wisdom is unscientific. Every ancient civilization contributed something to science. For example, the ancient Indians penned some important texts on mathematics, astronomy, chemistry, medicine, and surgery, based on hands-on experiments and inductive reasoning. The texts are often cryptic and do not show the intermediate steps of the logical chain, but the final results show that such a chain should have existed. A very good example is the Aryabhatiya of Aryabhata-I, which is composed of cryptic verses, and we had to rely on the notes by later mathematicians for a detailed explanation. Modern science is essentially Western and follows the Greek tradition of giving equal importance to the intermediate steps. Thus, while judging ancient texts, we have to be very careful about what is science and what might be a figment of imagination.

4. God-given truth: Sometimes, you will hear arguments like “This has to be true because this is written in some holy text, and that holy text can never be wrong”. You already know this is not science. No text was ever written or dictated by an omniscient person, so no wonder there are lots and lots of wrong statements, i.e., statements that people might have thought to be true at that time but we now know them to be false. A good example is the Genesis story of the Bible; archbishop James Ussher literally took the statements made in the Old Testament and calculated the date of creation of the world to be 4004 BC. Such examples can be chosen from any ancient text. Science does not depend on what the holy texts say.

5. Jingoistic attitude: There is nothing more harmful to science than jingoistic one-upmanship. Science is a precious possession of the entire humanity. Every civilization, big or small, contributed something to science. We have already seen the essential characteristics of science, and how it should be done. Calling anything that does not adhere to these rules, science, just because those things originated in a particular civilization, goes against the spirit of science.

Characteristics of Pseudoscience

Whether a field is actually science or just pseudoscience is not always clear. However, pseudoscience generally exhibits certain common characteristics. Indicators of pseudoscience include:

• The use of vague, exaggerated, or untestable claims: Many claims made by pseudoscience cannot be tested with evidence. As a result, they cannot be falsified, even if they are not true.

• An over-reliance on confirmation rather than refutation: Any incident that appears to justify a pseudoscience claim is treated as proof of the claim. Claims are assumed true until proven otherwise, and the burden of disproof is placed on skeptics of the claim.

• A lack of openness to testing by other experts: Practitioners of pseudoscience avoid subjecting their ideas to peer review. They may refuse to share their data and justify the need for secrecy with claims of proprietary or privacy.

• An absence of progress in advancing knowledge: In pseudoscience, ideas are not subjected to repeated testing followed by rejection or refinement, as hypotheses are in true science. Ideas in pseudoscience may remain unchanged for hundreds — or even thousands — of years. In fact, the older an idea is, the more it tends to be trusted in pseudoscience.

• Personalization of issues: Proponents of pseudoscience adopt beliefs that have little or no rational basis, so they may try to confirm their beliefs by treating critics as enemies. Instead of arguing to support their own beliefs, they attack the motives and character of their critics.

• The use of misleading language: Followers of pseudoscience may use scientific-sounding terms to make their ideas sound more convincing. For example, they may use the formal name dihydrogen monoxide to refer to plain old water.

Persistence of Pseudoscience

Despite failing to meet scientific standards, many pseudosciences survive. Some pseudosciences remain very popular with large numbers of believers. A good example is astrology.

Astrology claims to study the movements and relative positions of celestial objects as a means for divining information about human affairs and terrestrial events. Many ancient cultures attached importance to astronomical events, and some developed elaborate systems for predicting terrestrial events from celestial observations. Throughout most of its history in the West, astrology was actually considered a scholarly tradition and was common in academic circles. With the advent of modern Western sciences and the process of scientific inquiry, however, astrology was called into question. It was challenged on both theoretical and experimental grounds. Eventually, astrology was shown to have no scientific validity or explanatory power.

Today, astrology is considered a pseudoscience, yet it continues to have many devotees. Many people know their astrological sign, and some are familiar with the supposed personality traits associated with their "sign". Astrological readings and horoscopes are readily available online and in print media, and a lot of people read them, even if only occasionally. Some believe that astrology is scientific. Studies suggest that the persistent popularity of pseudosciences such as astrology is due to misunderstandings of scientific principles and methodology. Alternatively, some are not convinced by scientific arguments that go against their personal beliefs and this, in the end, can do real harm to themselves or others.

A Simple numerical Problem:
What's the gravitational effect of a 10 wheel, 20 Tonne truck (one passes you on any national highway every now and then) on you, compared to that of Jupiter, the king of Planets? You already realize that you have to use the Law of Gravitation:
\[ F = G \frac{M m}{r^2} \]
The other things that you need to know: 1 tonne = 1000 Kg, your distance from Jupiter \(\sim 615494306300\) meters and the mas of Jupiter \(\sim 1.898 \times 10^{27}\) Kg.
(Hint: If done correctly, the ratio of these effects should turn out to be almost 1. Now, which gemstone are you going to wear to cancel the effect of those trucks on you?)

Dangers of Pseudoscience

Belief in astrology is unlikely to cause any harm to a person, but belief in some other pseudosciences might — especially in healthcare-related areas. Treatments that seem scientific but are not may be ineffective, expensive, and even dangerous to patients. Seeking out pseudoscientific treatments may also delay or preclude patients from seeking scientifically-based medical treatments that have been tested and found safe and effective. In short, following pseudoscience instead of established healthcare practices may be harmful.

Scientific Hoaxes / Frauds and Fallacies

Pseudoscience is not the only way that science may be misused. Scientific hoaxes, frauds, and fallacies may misdirect the pursuit of science, put patients at risk, or mislead and confuse the public. An example of each of these misuses of science and its negative effects is described below.

The Vaccine-Autism Fraud: While it is not true, you may have heard that certain vaccines put the health of young children at risk. This persistent idea is not supported by scientific evidence or accepted by the vast majority of experts in the field. It stems largely from an elaborate medical research fraud that was reported in a 1998 article published in the respected British medical journal, The Lancet. The main author of the article was a British physician named Andrew Wakefield. In the article, Wakefield and his colleagues described case histories of only 12 children, most of whom were reported to have developed autism soon after the administration of the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine.

There were a whole host of problems with this study, including falsification of research, ethics violations, and experimental design problems. The paper has been retracted (a very big deal in the science community), most of the co-authors have retracted their authorship, and Wakefield lost his medical license. It also later emerged that Wakefield had received research funding from a group of people who were suing vaccine manufacturers. Thousands of follow-up studies have failed to show any association between the MMR vaccine and autism.

Unfortunately, by then, the damage had already been done. Parents afraid that their children would develop autism had refrained from having them vaccinated. British MMR vaccination rates fell from nearly 100 percent to 80 percent in the years following the study. The consensus of medical experts today is that Wakefield’s fraud put hundreds of thousands of children at risk because of the lower vaccination rates and also diverted research efforts and funding away from finding the true cause of autism.

Correlation-Causation Fallacy: Many statistical tests used in scientific research calculate correlations between variables. Correlation refers to how closely related two data sets are, which may be a useful starting point for further investigation. Correlation, however, is also one of the most misused types of evidence, primarily because of the logical fallacy that correlation implies causation. In reality, just because two variables are correlated does not necessarily mean that either variable causes the other.

This website famously lists a lot of misleading, i.e., 'spurious correlations'. The link is from an image captured by the internet archive project, as the main site is going through a major upgrade.

---