Are All Cranks Male? | Unification Theories

  • Thread starter Thread starter jostpuur
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the observation that most individuals claiming personal unification theories in physics are male, leading to questions about the presence of female counterparts in similar roles. It is suggested that women may be less visible in these areas due to societal pressures and a tendency to gravitate towards mysticism rather than theoretical physics. The conversation touches on the idea that women often engage with topics like astrology and paranormal phenomena, reflecting a broader cultural interest in magic and mysticism. The dialogue also explores the distinction between pseudoscience and cargo cult science, with participants debating the definitions and implications of these concepts. Humor and sarcasm permeate the conversation, highlighting gender stereotypes and the dynamics of belief in science versus mysticism. Overall, the thread examines gender representation in scientific discourse and the societal factors influencing these trends.
  • #31
arildno said:
She WAS really bad, besides, Evo couldn't let ZApperZ get his hands dirty. He had a full-time job exposing her intellectually..

WarPhalange said:
Are the threads still alive, or have they been deleted? I need a laugh.
They're probably still around.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Evo said:
Yeah, she's dead now. She was constantly vandalizing wikipedia too.

I ran into her on usenet/google groups years before I started posting here, and I didn't agree with her ideas or methods, but I'm sorry to find that she died of cancer.
 
  • #33
George Jones said:
I ran into her on usenet/google groups years before I started posting here, and I didn't agree with her ideas or methods, but I'm sorry to find that she died of cancer.
Yes, that is not something I would wish on anyone.
 
  • #34
Evo said:
Yes, that is not something I would wish on anyone.

Really? I wish it on four or five people a day. Doesn't seem to work though
 
  • #35
rootX said:
This must be wrong because men are always wrong :smile:

No, that's not true. As I explain to my boyfriend, he can be right sometimes...as long as he agrees with me. :biggrin:
 
  • #36
jostpuur said:
is there clear difference between pseudoscience and cargo cult science?
Yes: I've heard of pseudoscience.
 
  • #37
jostpuur said:
btw, (an off-topic question (I'm the original poster, I have right to go off-topic)) is there clear difference between pseudoscience and cargo cult science?

Well, I definitely would regard the study of cargo cults as a branch of legitimate science (anthroplogy, comparative cultural studies and so on), but I don't think that was what you meant by cargo cult science..
 
  • #39
jostpuur said:
I thought that everybody uses the term cargo cult science in the same way as Feynman did: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science
It would seem the difference is cargo cult science refers to being intellectually dishonest (falsifying or exagerating results in order to gain attention) and pseudoscience is bad science, basically unfounded beliefs claimed to be science.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 106 ·
4
Replies
106
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
7K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K