Pseudoscience is exactly what its name suggests: false science. In other words, it is an "investigation" that relies on non-scientific evidence, whose conclusions have not been reached through the scientific method, or that seeks to answer a question to be answered. which science cannot answer, as a question of faith. Pseudoscientific claims can usually be identified by their scandalous nature. Science is a slow process, and scientists generally do not make sweeping claims that completely deviate from accepted theory. For example, in 2013, a scientist claimed to have found evidence of extraterrestrial life from microbial fossils on a meteorite. As this news spread like wildfire among the public, the scientific community was completely shocked by such an outrageous claim and quickly investigated it through the prism of skepticism. They found that the conclusion drawn by the scientist claiming that there was extraterrestrial life was not supported by any evidence. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Pseudoscience actually has its roots in human biology. In fact, it's really because of evolution that humans succumb to pseudo-scientific claims. Most life forms are evolutionarily predisposed to assume false positives in the environment, rather than false negatives. For example, it is safer for a forest creature to always assume that the rustling of bushes is due to a predator rather than the wind - a possible false positive - rather than to assume that there is no predator and that it is simply the wind. create the sound - a possible false negative. The animal most often becomes defensive in reaction to rustling in the bush. This makes sense, because if there actually was a predator in the bush, the animal might have simply avoided becoming lunch. However, if there is no predator and the bush is simply rustling from the wind, there is no real harm in assuming otherwise. Similarly, humans will “seek” the false positive claims provided by pseudoscience, rather than risk being wrong with the false negatives. After all, isn't it safer to assume that aliens are attacking us and preparing the bunkers and war machines, rather than taking the risk and assuming that these claims might simply be false? (Fig. 1) (Shermer) The difference between pseudoscience and science is that pseudoscience seeks to make an unfalsifiable or unverifiable claim, while science seeks to create falsifiable and testable claims. The term falsifiable does not necessarily mean that the claim is false, but rather that it can be refuted. Scientific theories can be refuted by additional evidence, whereas pseudoscientific claims are presented as absolute. The predictions of science are useful to society, while pseudo-scientific claims do not actually advance their fields. The best way to tell the difference between pseudo-scientific claims and actual scientific claims is how they seek to prove themselves. A pseudo-scientific claim generally works by refutation. For example, a pseudo-scientist might claim "we have proven that the object flying in the sky is not a bird, a plane, a helicopter or an optical illusion, so it must be a UFO." Not only does this ignore severalother cases that could explain the phenomenon, but this can only be true if the pseudo-scientist assumes that UFOs exist, which is a circular logic. A scientist would approach this problem differently, working to gather data about the incident and attempting to identify what the object was without assuming it was a UFO before starting. According to an article by a self-proclaimed ufologist, the term "flying saucer" was coined by a private pilot, who claimed to have seen "shiny crescent-shaped objects" traveling at over 1,000 mph. This started the “flying saucer craze.” In 1949, a US Air Force report on the phenomenon coined the term "UFO", for Unidentified Flying Object, to replace the term "Flying." After that, UFO sightings usually came in waves Every few years these sightings are correlated with news reports. Typically, a sighting would be reported locally and as word spread, UFO reports would increase. In 1966, a book was published detailing it. Hill couple's alleged alien abduction The Hills claimed they were abducted on a desert road late at night while driving While they claimed they "lost time" during the incident, Betty Hill. claimed to have nightmares of abduction experiences When they sought help from a hypnotherapist, they were able to “remember” the event in a hypnotic state. This story marked the beginning of the transition. UFO sightings to reports of alien abductions, a craze that continued into the 1990s, and which appears to have a correlation with entertainment and news media. In the 1980s, a book published about the "Roswell Incident" – the alleged crash of an alien spacecraft followed by the government cover-up in 1947 – brought the issue into popular culture. In fact, almost no UFO books mention Roswell before this publication. As these reports continued, the idea that the government was behind a cover-up or conspiracy became more popular. Some have even claimed that the government may be behind the UFOs themselves, or communicating with extraterrestrials! The fear and mystery of the subject have left it wide open to exploitation by pseudoscientists. “UFOlogists”, the name given to those who “study” UFOs, use numerous arguments with varying levels of solidity. The most common argument, and probably the weakest, is that the number of people reporting UFOs is so large that they must exist. In fact, entire organizations have been dedicated to tracking these UFO sightings. Websites are now available to map sightings near a location. Likewise, some people claim to have had personal encounters with UFOs and extraterrestrials. Like the Hill couple, some describe experiences of abduction by extraterrestrials in these UFOs. Some of these people have undergone psychiatric and polygraph examinations in an attempt to prove the legitimacy of their claims. UFO proponents also claim to have physical evidence. It's hard to go online these days without seeing a picture of a "REAL LIFE---NOT A HOAX" UFO. While many images are recognized as hoaxes, some groups use their photos to claim the existence of UFOs. Thanks to modern technology, ufologists have created crowdsourced UFO sighting maps online (Image: UFO Stalker). Likewise, with the advent of the personal camcorder, many groups claim to havecaptured video of these devices. Some use videos from NASA space shuttle missions to show the existence of these craft in space, and even claim that the government could communicate or collaborate with these aliens from the space shuttle. This idea, which the government is aware of and even works with extraterrestrials, is a common theme in ufology. The term Area 51 refers to a base in New Mexico where the US government is claimed to be capturing aliens and testing aliens. their technology. Testimonies from "government scientists" and anonymous sources claim that the government is holding aliens at this base and conducting clandestine negotiations with alien races (such as the claim that the government allows aliens to abduct humans as long as that aliens are allowing the government to study their technologies), and that the government is involved in a planet-wide cover-up. Some UFO researchers claim that this is why it is so difficult to obtain physical data, because the government participates in scientific efforts, altering laboratory results to prevent the public from realizing the presence of UFOs. . There is a small amount of non-photographic physical data. evidence. A man claims to have found a UFO fragment and says laboratory analysis shows it is made of an extraterrestrial isotope. Others claim they have had "alien implants", and many undergo surgeries to remove them. However, due to the unpredictable nature of UFOs, it is difficult to gather physical evidence. The scientific community, even if it is not expressly opposed to the existence of UFOs, is very strongly opposed to the methods used by "ufologists" to prove their claims. Ufologists rely heavily on the use of refutation to support their claims. In other words, ufologists spend their time attacking the claims of skeptics rather than supporting their own claims. Likewise, ufologists also ignore any evidence contrary to their argument, rather than acknowledging it. They also make extensive use of testimony. If testimonies can serve as proof, ufologists are unaware that human memory can be deceived. To prove that a testimony is "true", it is common to have a psychologist evaluate the "witness" for mental instability or insanity. However, you don't have to be crazy to suffer from delusions. Completely normal people delude themselves every day. Likewise, polygraph tests are not helpful in this process because they only test whether a person is knowingly lying or not. If they truly believe in a false memory, they will pass this test. The biggest criticism leveled at ufologists is their reliance on a logical fallacy to prove their point. They typically use a type of reasoning called argumentum ad ignorantiam. It relies on rebuttal to counter an argument. For example, a magician might say, "No one can deny that I used magic to pull a rabbit out of a hat." Therefore, I had to use magic. This reasoning is obviously erroneous. Just because the evidence proving that magic was not involved in the hat trick is not readily available does not mean that the magician used magic. What a UFOlogist using this reasoning might say to prove his point is that "no scientist can think of a more reasonable explanation for the phenomenon, therefore UFOs must be responsible for the phenomenon." Another area.