I just had a thought that seems somewhat significant, so I thought I'd share it. The structure of most "arguments" that make up the flimsy backbone of pseudoscience very much remind me of the type of arguments that I, and all other children in my school, were encouraged to make in english class, perhaps in middle school. We were encouraged to think of some idea, and try to persuade others that the idea is right. We would then put together some facts and data that support the idea. Then, we would have a paragraph where we would refute the counter arguments. The idea was to make the counter arguments sound ridiculous in the context of the paper. However we were not encouraged to take into consideration that our argument could be completely wrong, and we were not encouraged to consider that the counter arguments may actually be correct. We would try to find the counter arguments that were easiest to refute. If we found one that we couldn't refute, we would simply leave it out of the paper. I find that most programs on the history channel (about ancient aliens.. etc.. ) follow this procedure almost exactly. Why don't we promote scientific thinking to our children in schools? There is no class for general scientific thinking. There is only classes where you learn some facts about science, but no where can they see how science actually works, and the processes of scientific thinking. To me it seems that this is a problem, and perhaps a cause of much of the pseudoscience and wild claims that we see nearly every day.