What is pseudoscience?

[Tim]

I covered this topic back in this thread:

What is pseudoscience and why is Intelligent Design considered pseudoscience?

On a previous thread, I responded to a peremptory demand from @colewd: No. That would simply lead to a long, and completely unnecessary, digression – which seems to be your stock-in-trade for these discussions. I stand by that opinion, as a discussion of “What is pseudoscience and why is Intelligent Design Pseudoscience?” would have derailed that topic. It seemed to me to be sufficient for the topic of “Is the Wikipedia page on Intelligent Design biased?” to point out that there appears to be widespread consensus in the scientific community that ID is pseudoscience, for the application of that label to ID in its Wikipedia article to not be considered biased, without the need for that thread to digress into why they consider ID to be pseudoscience. That does not however mean that this isn’t a good topic for its own thread. In skimming the issue, I cam across this list of questions, in Michael Shermer’s chapter, ‘Science and Pseudoscience, The Difference in Practice and the Differe…

You might want to take a look at Michael Shermer’s ten questions, which I quote in that thread’s OP.