PSEUDOCIÊNCIAS /

LISTA DE PSEUDOCIÊNCIAS

Fonte: Wikipédia

Esta é uma lista de tópicos caracterizados como pseudociência pela comunidade científica internacional, por notáveis organizações céticas ou por notáveis acadêmicos ou investigadores.[1]

Estas caracterizações foram feitas no contexto de formar o público sobre as reivindicações questionáveis ​​ou potencialmente fraudulentas ou perigosas e práticas de esforços para definir a natureza da ciência. A crítica da pseudociência, geralmente pela comunidade científica ou por organizações céticas, envolve críticas das bases lógica, metodológica ou retórica do tópico em questão.[2]

Apesar de alguns dos tópicos listados continuarem a ser investigados cientificamente, outros foram sujeitos à pesquisa científica no passado e atualmente são considerados refutados porém "ressuscitaram" de forma pseudocientífica. Outras ideias aqui apresentadas são inteiramente não-científicas, mas têm, de uma forma ou de outra infringido áreas ou práticas da ciência.[3]

Cada seção resume os aspectos pseudocientíficos dos tópicos.

Astronomia e Ciências Espaciais

Terra e Ciências da Terra

Paranormalidade e Ufologia

Assuntos paranormais [7][12][21][22] têm sido objectos de críticas de uma ampla variedade de fontes, incluindo as seguintes alegações de significado paranormal:

Psicologia

Biologia

Saúde e Medicina

Crenças religiosas e espirituais

Crenças e práticas religiosas e espirituais, de acordo com Carl Sagan, não são normalmente classificadas como pseudociência.[166] No entanto, os seguintes itens religiosos / espirituais foram relacionados ou classificados como pseudociência de alguma forma:

Referências

  1. Hansson, Sven Ove (10 de fevereiro de 2014). «Science and Pseudo-Science». The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Consultado em 21 de setembro de 2014
  2. Pollak 2002
  3. Pracontal, Michel (2004). A impostura científica em dez lições. São Paulo: Editora UNESP. ISBN 85-7139-521-7
  4. Ian O'Neill (2008). «2012: No Geomagnetic Reversal». Universe Today. Consultado em 27 de maio de 2009
  5. "2012: Tsunami of Stupidity: Why the latest apocalyptic cult is a silly scam." by Ron Rosenbaum, Slate.com, May 22, 2009 (accessed 26 May 2009)
  6. «April 27th: Will the World End in 2012?». 365daysofastronomy.org. 27 de abril de 2009. Consultado em 22 de setembro de 2009
  7. Ir para: a b c d e f g h i article on the website of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific. Astronomical Pseudo-Science: A Skeptic's Resource List (Version 3.0; August 2003)
  8. Knier, Gil; Becky Bray (30 de março de 2001). «The Moon Landing Hoax». NASA. Consultado em 2 de dezembro de 2007 "Did we actually send humans to the Moon in the 1960's? Of course we did!"
  9. «The Universe At Your Fingertips Activity: Activities With Astrology». Astronomical Society of the Pacific. Consultado em 3 de dezembro de 2007 "These activities help students to understand the difference between science and pseudoscience by investigating some of astrology's claims."
  10. Ir para: a b c statement from the California Academy of Sciences.[1]
  11. Ir para: a b c statement from the Iowa Academy of Science.[2]
  12. Ir para: a b statement from the Russian Academy of Sciences.[3]
  13. National Science Foundation (2002). Science and Engineering Indicators – 2002. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. pp. ch. 7. ISBN 978-0160665790 "Belief in pseudoscience is relatively widespread... More than 25 percent of the public believes in astrology, that is, that the position of the stars and planets can affect people's lives."
  14. Ir para: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q entrada em The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience.
  15. Trefil, James (março de 2007). «Who Were the Ancient Engineers of Egypt?». Skeptical Briefs. Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Consultado em 1 de dezembro de 2007 "the pyramids, as impressive as they are, give no evidence at all for the presence of advanced technology at work in ancient Egypt."
  16. Brendan O'Neill (4 de agosto de 2008). «Do they really think the earth is flat?». BBC News
  17. Plinio Prioreschi (1998). Edwin Mellen Press, ed. A history of medicine. [S.l.: s.n.] p. xxxiv. ISBN 1888456035. Since the Renaissance, there has been a pseudo-scientific counterpart for each of the various sciences. The existence of pseudo-scientific counterparts for physics, astronomy (...) is indicated, respectively, by the activities of the believers in perpetual motion, the members of the flat earth society, (...)
  18. Govert Schilling. The Hunt For Planet X: New Worlds and the Fate of Pluto. [S.l.]: Copernicus Books. p. 111
  19. David Morrison (2008). «Armageddon from Planet Nibiru in 2012? Not so fast». discovery.com. Consultado em 2 de abril de 2009
  20. Myles Standish (16 de julho de 1992). «Planet X - No dynamical evidence in the optical observations». Astronomical Journal volume= 105 (5): 200–2006. Consultado em 30 de abril de 2009
  21. «Indicators 2000 - Chapter 8: Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Public Understanding - Belief in the Paranormal or Pseudoscience». www.nsf.gov. Consultado em 21 de abril de 2012
  22. Ir para: a b Beyerstein, BL (1997). «Distinguishing Science from Pseudoscience» (PDF). Consultado em 14 de julho de 2007
  23. Ir para: a b c Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Public Understanding - Science Fiction and Pseudoscience
  24. "They call it cerealogy", CNN.com
  25. Bell, David (2005). Science Technology and Culture. [S.l.]: McGraw-Hill International. p. 114
  26. Prothero, Donald R.; Carl Dennis Buell (2007). Evolution. New York: Columbia University Press. p. 13
  27. Ir para: a b c Scientific American
  28. Parapsychological Association website, Glossary of Key Words Frequently Used in Parapsychology. Retrieved January 24, 2006.
  29. Alcock, James E. «Eletronic Voice Phenomena:Voices of the Dead?». Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Consultado em 8 de março de 2007
  30. Carroll, Robert Todd, The Skeptic's Dictionary 2003, Wiley Publishing Company, ISBN 0-471-27242-6
  31. Shermer, Michael (2005). «Turn Me On, Dead Man». Scientific American. Consultado em 28 de fevereiro de 2007
  32. Terrence Hines, Pseudoscience and the Paranormal: A Critical Examination of the Evidence, Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY, 1988. ISBN 0-87975-419-2.Thagard (1978) op cit 223 ff
  33. Parapsychological Association website, Glossary of Key Words Frequently Used in Parapsychology. Retrieved December 24, 2006.
  34. "extrasensory perception" Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.
  35. National Science Foundation (2002). Science and Engineering Indicators – 2002. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. pp. ch. 7. ISBN 978-0160665790 "Belief in pseudoscience is relatively widespread... At least half of the public believes in the existence of extrasensory perception (ESP)."
  36. «Levitation». Skeptic's Dictionary
  37. Randi, James (1989). The Faith Healers. [S.l.]: Prometheus Books. ISBN 0-87975-535-0
  38. David Vernon in Skeptical - a Handbook of Pseudoscience and the Paranormal, ed Donald Laycock, David Vernon, Colin Groves, Simon Brown, Imagecraft, Canberra, 1989, ISBN 0-7316-5794-2, p47
  39. «"Psychic surgery" -- 40 (3): 184 -- CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians». Consultado em 28 de julho de 2007
  40. Carroll, Robert Todd. «Psychic Surgery». The Skeptic's Dictionary. Consultado em 28 de julho de 2007
  41. «Psychic surgeon charged». The Filipino Reporter. 17–23 de junho de 2005. Consultado em 28 de julho de 2007
  42. Vyse, Stuart A. (1997). Believing in Magic: The Psychology of Superstition. [S.l.]: Oxford University Press US. p. 129. ISBN 0-19-513634-9. [M]ost scientists, both psychologists and physicists, agree that it has yet to be convincingly demonstrated.
  43. Stableford, Brian M (2006). Science fact and science fiction: an encyclopedia. New York: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-97460-7
  44. "Russian Alien Spaceship Claims Raise Eyebrows, Skepticism", Robert Roy Britt, SPACE.com
  45. The Universe, LIFE Science Library, 1970.
  46. National Science Foundation (2002). Science and Engineering Indicators – 2002. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. pp. ch. 7. ISBN 978-0160665790 "Belief in pseudoscience is relatively widespread... A sizable minority of the public believes in UFOs and that aliens have landed on Earth."
  47. «Book Review — NEJM». www.nejm.org. Consultado em 21 de abril de 2012
  48. http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=search.displayRecord&uid=2002-14079-003
  49. «The Pseudo-science of Sexual Orientation Conversion Therapy» (PDF). ANGLES, the policy journal of the Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies (IGLSS), www.iglss.org. 1999. Consultado em 4 de abril de 2009
  50. «Barry Beyerstein Q&A». Ask the Scientists. Scientific American Frontiers. Consultado em 22 de fevereiro de 2008 "they simply interpret the way we form these various features on the page in much the same way ancient oracles interpreted the entrails of oxen or smoke in the air. I.e., it's a kind of magical divination or fortune telling where 'like begets like.'"
  51. «The use of graphology as a tool for employee hiring and evaluation». British Columbia Civil Liberties Union. 1988. Consultado em 22 de fevereiro de 2008 "On the other hand, in properly controlled, blind studies, where the handwriting samples contain no content that could provide non-graphological information upon which to base a prediction (e.g., a piece copied from a magazine), graphologists do no better than chance at predicting the personality traits"
  52. Thomas, John A. (2002). «Graphology Fact Sheet». North Texas Skeptics. Consultado em 22 de fevereiro de 2008 "In summary, then, it seems that graphology as currently practiced is a typical pseudoscience and has no place in character assessment or employment practice. There is no good scientific evidence to justify its use, and the graphologists do not seem about to come up with any."
  53. James W. Polichak, "Memes as Pseudoscience", in Michael Shermer, Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience. P. 664f.
  54. MOTA, R; FLORES, R.; SEPEL L.; LORETO, E. Método Científico & Fronteiras do Conhecimento. Santa Maria: CESMA, 2003.
  55. Schmidt, Helmut (1969). «Clairvoyance Tests with a Machine'». Journal of Parapsychology. 33
  56. Schmidt, Helmut (1970). «PK Experiments with Animals as Subjects». Journal of Parapsychology. 34
  57. Schmidt, Helmut (1973). «PK Tests with a High Speed Random Number Generator'». Journal of Parapsychology. 37
  58. «Scientific Validity of Polygraph Testing: A Research Review and Evaluation». Washington, D. C.: U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment. 1983. Consultado em 29 de fevereiro de 2008
  59. «Monitor on Psychology - The polygraph in doubt». American Psychological Association. Julho de 2004. Consultado em 29 de fevereiro de 2008
  60. Vergano, Dan (2002). «Telling the truth about lie detectors». USA Today
  61. Magendie, F (1843) An Elementary Treatise on Human Physiology. 5th Ed. Tr. John Revere. New York: Harper, note: "pseudo-science" (p.150).
  62. Fodor, JA. (1983) The Modularity of Mind. MIT Press. p.14, 23, 131
  63. Primal therapy homepage
  64. Moore, Timothy (2001). Primal Therapy. [S.l.]: Gale Group
  65. Merkin, Daphne (5 de setembro de 2004). «Psychoanalysis: Is It Science or Is It Toast?». New York Times
  66. Currie, G; Musgrave, A (eds) (1985) "Popper and the Human Sciences (Nijhoff International Philosophy Series)" SpringerVerlag, pp13-44
  67. Popper KR, "Science: Conjectures and Refutations", reprinted in Grim P (1990) Philosophy of Science and the Occult, Albany, pp. 104–110
  68. Cioffi, Frank (1985). «Psychoanalysis, Pseudo-Science and Testability». In: Currie, Gregory; Musgrave, Alan. Popper and the human sciences. [S.l.]: Springer. ISBN 9789024729982 . Reprinted in Cioffi, Frank (1998). Freud and the question of pseudoscience. [S.l.]: Open Court. ISBN 9780812693850
  69. Ir para: a b Westen et al. 2006 "Psychology: Australian and New Zealand edition" John Wiley.
  70. «Urban Legends Reference Pages: Business (Subliminal Advertising)». The Urban Legends Reference Pages. Consultado em 11 de agosto de 2006
  71. Reflections on Stephen Jay Gould's The Mismeasure of Man (1981 por JOHN B. CARROLL publica em A Retrospective Review in Intelligence 21, 121-134 (1995)
  72. Measuring Intelligence: Facts and Fallacies por Bartholomew, David J. (2004). Publicado por Cambridge University Press. pp. 73, 145–146. ISBN 9780521544788.
  73. National Science Foundation survey: Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Public Understanding. Science Fiction and Pseudoscience.
  74. von Rohr et al., "Experiences in the realisation of a research project on anthroposophical medicine in patients with advanced cancer", Schweiz Med Wochenschr 2000;130:1173–84
  75. Ernst, Edzard, "Anthroposophical Medicine: A systematic review of randomised clinical trials." Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift, ISSN 0043-5325, 2004, vol. 116, no4, pp. 128–130
  76. María Luisa Torres (29 de setembro de 2012). «El Verso De La Medicina Ortomolecular» (em espanhol). Consultado em 23 de março de 2016
  77. Quackenbush, Thomas R. (2000). Better Eyesight The complete magazines of William H. Bates. [S.l.]: North Atlantic Books. p. age 643. ISBN 1-55643-351-4
  78. Worrall, Russell S.; Jacob Nevyas, Stephen Barrett (12 de setembro de 2007). «Eye-Related Quackery». Consultado em 17 de novembro de 2007. The claims Bates made in advertising his book were so dubious that in 1929 the Federal Trade Commission issued a complaint against him for advertising "falsely or misleadingly.
  79. Pollack P. (1956). «Chapter 3: Fallacies of the Bates System». The Truth about Eye Exercises. [S.l.]: Philadelphia: Chilton Co.
  80. Leanna Skarnulis (5 de fevereiro de 2007). «Natural Vision Correction: Does It Work?». WebMD "No evidence was found that visual training had any effect on the progression of nearsightedness, or that it improved visual function for patients with farsightedness or astigmatism, or that it improved vision lost to diseases, including age-related macular degeneration, glaucoma, or diabetic retinopathy."
  81. Gardner, Martin (1957). «Chapter 19: Throw Away Your Glasses». Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science. [S.l.]: Reprint: Courier Dover. pp. 230–241. ISBN 0-486-20394-8 "Actually, Bates' theory of accommodation (so necessary to explain the value of his exercises) is so patently absurd that even most of his present-day followers have discarded it."
  82. Robyn E. Bradley (23 de setembro de 2003). «Advocates See Only Benefits From Eye Exercises» (PDF). The Boston Globe (MA)
  83. Marg, E. (1952). «"Flashes" of clear vision and negative accommodation with reference to the Bates Method of visual training.» (PDF). Am J Opt Arch Am Ac Opt. 29 (4): 167–84
  84. Randi, James (11 de novembro de 2006). «Swift: the weekly newsletter of the JREF». Consultado em 17 de novembro de 2007. This is pure old quackery, it's wishful thinking, and it's profitable.
  85. «Biological Rhythms: Implications for the Worker». OTA-BA-463 Box 2-A pg. 30. Office of Technology Assessment. Setembro de 1991. Consultado em 21 de fevereiro de 2008 "No evidence exists to support the concept of biorhythms; in fact, scientific data refute their existence."
  86. Carroll, Robert Todd. «Biorhythms». Skeptic's Dictionary. Consultado em 21 de fevereiro de 2008 "The theory of biorhythms is a pseudoscientific theory that claims our daily lives are significantly affected by rhythmic cycles overlooked by scientists who study biological rhythms."
  87. Hines, Terence (1998). «Comprehensive Review of Biorhythm Theory» (pdf (summary)). Psychological Reports. 83 (1): 19–64. PMID 9775660. doi:10.2466/PR0.83.5.19-64. Consultado em 20 de fevereiro de 2008 "The conclusion is that biorhythm theory is not valid."
  88. «Brain Gym - FAQ». The Official Brain Gym Web Site. Consultado em 11 de agosto de 2008. BRAIN GYM works by facilitating optimal achievement of mental potential through specific movement experiences. All acts of speech, hearing, vision, and coordination are learned through a complex repertoire of movements. BRAIN GYM promotes efficient communication among the many nerve cells and functional centers located throughout the brain and sensory motor system.
  89. About Brain Gym
  90. «Neuroscience and Education: Issues and Opportunities» (PDF). the ESRC's Teaching and Learning Research Programme website. Consultado em 3 de agosto de 2007. The pseudo-scientific terms that are used to explain how this works, let alone the concepts they express, are unrecognisable within the domain of neuroscience.
  91. Goswami, Usha (2006). «Neuroscience and education: from research to practice?» (fee required). Nature. 7: 406–413. doi:10.1038/nrn1907. Consultado em 11 de agosto de 2008. Cognitive neuroscience is making rapid strides in areas highly relevant to education. However, there is a gulf between current science and direct classroom applications. Most scientists would argue that filling the gulf is premature. Nevertheless, at present, teachers are at the receiving end of numerous 'brain-based learning' packages. Some of these contain alarming amounts of misinformation, yet such packages are being used in many schools.
  92. «Sense About Science - Brain Gym». Sense About Science. Consultado em 11 de abril de 2008. These exercises are being taught with pseudoscientific explanations that undermine science teaching and mislead children about how their bodies work. ... There have been a few peer reviewed scientific studies into the methods of Brain Gym, but none of them found a significant improvement in general academic skills.
  93. Hyatt, Keith J. (2007). «Brain Gym - Building Stronger Brains or Wishful Thinking?» (fee required). SAGE Publications. Remedial and Special Education. 28 (2): 117–124. ISSN 0741-9325. doi:10.1177/07419325070280020201. Consultado em 12 de setembro de 2008. a review of the theoretical foundations of Brain Gym and the associated peer-reviewed research studies failed to support the contentions of the promoters of Brain Gym. Educators are encouraged to become informed consumers of research and to avoid implementing programming for which there is neither a credible theoretical nor a sound research basis.
  94. «News in brief». London: The Times. 5 de abril de 2008. Consultado em 1 de setembro de 2008. Paul Dennison, a Californian educator who created the programme, admitted that many claims in his teacher's guide were based on his 'hunches' and were not proper science.
  95. «An Introduction to Chiropractic». National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Novembro de 2007. Consultado em 6 de janeiro de 2009
  96. «Standards for Doctor of Chiropractic programs and requirements for institutional status» (PDF). The Council on Chiropractic Education. 2007. Consultado em 14 de fevereiro de 2008
  97. Nelson CF, Lawrence DJ, Triano JJ; et al. (2005). «Chiropractic as spine care: a model for the profession». Chiropractic & Osteopathy. 13. 9 páginas. PMC 1185558Acessível livremente. PMID 16000175. doi:10.1186/1746-1340-13-9
  98. Grod JP, Sikorski D, Keating JC (2001). «Unsubstantiated claims in patient brochures from the largest state, provincial, and national chiropractic associations and research agencies». Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 24 (8): 514–9. PMID 11677551. doi:10.1067/mmt.2001.118205
  99. Keating JC Jr, Cleveland CS III, Menke M (2005). «Chiropractic history: a primer» (PDF). Association for the History of Chiropractic. Consultado em 16 de junho de 2008
  100. Keating JC Jr (1997). «Chiropractic: science and antiscience and pseudoscience side by side». Skept Inq. 21 (4): 37–43
  101. Michael, DeRobertis; Lewis Vaughn, Matt Nisbet (3 de fevereiro de 1999). «Nobel Laureates Criticize York University Affiliation with Chiropractic». Skeptical Inquirer. Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Consultado em 6 de janeiro de 2009
  102. DeRobertis, Michael (verão de 2001). «York U. Rejects Chiropractic College» (PDF). The Ontario Skeptic. Skeptics Canada. Consultado em 6 de janeiro de 2009
  103. Ernst E, Canter PH (2006). «A systematic review of systematic reviews of spinal manipulation». J R Soc Med. 99 (4): 192–6. PMC 1420782Acessível livremente. PMID 16574972. doi:10.1258/jrsm.99.4.192
  104. Bronfort G, Haas M, Evans R, Kawchuk G, Dagenais S (2008). «Evidence-informed management of chronic low back pain with spinal manipulation and mobilization». The Spine Journal. 8 (1): 213–25. PMID 18164469. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2007.10.023
  105. Assendelft WJ, Morton SC, Yu EI, Suttorp MJ, Shekelle PG (2004). «Spinal manipulative therapy for low back pain». Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1): CD000447. PMID 14973958. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000447.pub2
  106. Barrett, S (9 de março de 2008). «Gastrointestinal Quackery: Colonics, Laxatives, and More». Quackwatch. Consultado em 2 de setembro de 2008
  107. «ACS: Colon Therapy». Consultado em 7 de dezembro de 2008
  108. Campion EW (1993). «Why unconventional medicine?». The New England Journal of Medicine. 328 (4): 282–3. PMID 8418412. doi:10.1056/NEJM199301283280413
  109. Carroll, Robert Todd. «crystal power». The Skeptic's Dictionary. Consultado em 28 de julho de 2007
  110. Stephen S. Carey. A Beginner's Guide to Scientific Method. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing. ISBN 0-534-58450-0 Predefinição:Pn
  111. Röösli M, Moser M, Baldinini Y, Meier M, Braun-Fahrländer C (2004). «Symptoms of ill health ascribed to eletromagnetic field exposure--a questionnaire survey». International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health. 207 (2): 141–50. PMID 15031956. doi:10.1078/1438-4639-00269
  112. National Science Foundation (2002). Science and Engineering Indicators – 2002. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. pp. ch. 7. ISBN 978-0160665790 "Belief in pseudoscience is relatively widespread... Polls also show that one quarter to more than half of the public believes in ... faith healing."
  113. Frazier, Kendrick (janeiro de 2005). «In the Land of Galileo, Fifth World Skeptics Congress Solves Mysteries, Champions Scientific Outlook». Skeptical Inquirer. Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Consultado em 18 de dezembro de 2007 "The majority of rigorous trials show no effect beyond placebo." (Edzard Ernst)
  114. Rev. Charles Capps, Concepts of Faith.
  115. Kayne SB, Caldwell IM (2006), Homeopathic pharmacy: theory and practice (2 ed.), Elsevier Health Sciences, p. 52.
  116. Goldacre, Ben (17 de novembro de 2007). «Benefits and Risks of Homoeopathy». The Lancet. 370: 1672. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61706-1 "Five large meta-analyses of homoeopathy trials have been done. All have had the same result: after excluding methodologically inadequate trials and accounting for publication bias, homoeopathy produced no statistically significant benefit over placebo."
  117. «Homoeopathy's benefit questioned». BBC News. 25 de agosto de 2005. Consultado em 30 de janeiro de 2008 "Professor Egger said: "We acknowledge to prove a negative is impossible. "But good large studies of homeopathy do not show a difference between the placebo and the homoeopathic remedy, whereas in the case of conventional medicines you still see an effect.""
  118. «Homeopathy: systematic review of systematic reviews». Bandolier. Consultado em 30 de janeiro de 2008 "None of these systematic reviews provided any convincing evidence that homeopathy was effective for any condition. The lesson was often that the best designed trials had the most negative result"
  119. «Questions and Answers About Homeopathy». National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Abril de 2003. Consultado em 30 de janeiro de 2008 "In sum, systematic reviews have not found homeopathy to be a definitively proven treatment for any medical condition."
  120. Comitê para a Investigação Cética, cited in National Science Foundation Subcommittee on Science & Engineering Indicators (2000). «Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Public Understanding Science Fiction and Pseudoscience». National Science Foundation. Consultado em 13 de julho de 2007
  121. «NCAHF Position Paper on Homeopathy». National Council Against Health Fraud. 1994. Consultado em 14 de julho de 2007
  122. Tyler, Chris (setembro de 2006). «Sense About Homeopathy» (PDF). Sense About Science. Consultado em 29 de janeiro de 2008 "The scientific evidence shows that homeopathy acts only as a placebo and there is no scientific explanation of how it could work any other way."
  123. «Questions and Answers About Homeopathy». National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Abril de 2003. Consultado em 30 de janeiro de 2008 "a number of its key concepts do not follow the laws of science (particularly chemistry and physics)."
  124. «What is Homeopathy». American Cancer Society. 5 de janeiro de 2000. Consultado em 30 de janeiro de 2008 "Most scientists say homeopathic remedies are basically water and can act only as placebos."
  125. "In a statement, the Royal College of Pathologists said they were "deeply alarmed" that the regulation of medicine had "moved away from science and clear information for the public"."Scientists attack homeopathy move, BBC News, 25 October 2006. Retrieved 2 February 2008.
  126. «Hypnosis». American Cancer Society. Consultado em 25 de fevereiro de 2008
  127. Lynn, Steven Jay; Timothy Lock, Elizabeth Loftus, Elisa Krackow, and Scott O. Lilienfeld (2003). «The remembrance of things past: problematic memory recovery techniques in psychotherapy». In: Lilienfeld, Scott O. Science and Pseudoscience in Psychotherapy. New York: Guilford Press. pp. 219–220. ISBN 1572308281 "hypnotically induced past life experiences are rule-governed, goal-directed fantasies that are context generated and sensitive to the demands of the hypnotic regression situation."
  128. «Iridology». Natural Standard. 7 de julho de 2005. Consultado em 1 de fevereiro de 2008 "Research suggests that iridology is not an effective method to diagnose or help treat any specific medical condition."
  129. Ernst E. Iridology: not useful and potentially harmful. Arch. Ophthalmol. 2000 Jan;118(1):120-1. PMID 10636425
  130. «H-175.998 Evaluation of Iridology» (PDF). American Medical Association. Consultado em 30 de julho de 2009 "Our AMA believes that iridology, the study of the iris of the human eye, has not yet been established as having any merit as a diagnostic technique."
  131. Park, Robert L. (2000). Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud. New York, New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 58–63. ISBN 0-19-513515-6. Not only are magnetic fields of no value in healing, you might characterize these as "homeopathic" magnetic fields.
  132. National Science Foundation (2002). Science and Engineering Indicators – 2002. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. pp. ch. 7. ISBN 978-0160665790 "Among all who had heard of [magnet therapy], 14 percent said it was very scientific and another 54 percent said it was sort of scientific. Only 25 percent of those surveyed answered correctly, that is, that it is not at all scientific."
  133. Pilkington, Mark (15 de abril de 2004). «A vibe for radionics». The Guardian. London. Consultado em 7 de fevereiro de 2008 "Scientific American concluded: 'At best, [ERA] is all an illusion. At worst, it is a colossal fraud.'"
  134. «Eletromagnetic Therapy». American Cancer Society. Consultado em 6 de fevereiro de 2008 "There is no relationship between the conventional medical uses of eletromagnetic energy and the alternative devices or methods that use externally applied eletrical forces. Available scientific evidence does not support claims that these alternative eletrical devices are effective in diagnosing or treating cancer or any other disease."
  135. Helwig, David (dezembro de 2004). «Radionics». In: Longe, Jacqueline L. The Gale Encyclopedia of Alternative Medicine. [S.l.]: Gale Cengage. ISBN 978-0787674243. Consultado em 7 de fevereiro de 2008
  136. Wallace, Sampson; Lewis Vaughn (24 de março de 1998). «"Therapeutic Touch" Fails a Rare Scientific Test». CSICOP News. Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Consultado em 5 de dezembro de 2007 "Despite this lack of evidence, TT is now supported by major nursing organizations such as the National League of Nurses and the American Nurses Association."
  137. Unschuld, Paul Ulrich (1985). Medicine in China: A History of Ideas. [S.l.]: University of California Press. ISBN 0520062167
  138. Ir para: a b c d «Traditional Chinese Medicine: Principles of Diagnosis and Treatment». Complementary/Integrative Medicine Therapies. The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. Consultado em 12 de fevereiro de 2009
  139. «The Roots of Qi». CSICOP. Consultado em 12 de fevereiro de 2009
  140. Barrett, Stephen (30 de dezembro de 2007). «Be Wary of Acupuncture, Qigong, and "Chinese Medicine"». Quackwatch. Consultado em 4 de janeiro de 2009
  141. Ir para: a b c «NCAHF Position Paper on Acupuncture (1990)». National Council Against Health Fraud. 16 de setembro de 1990. Consultado em 30 de dezembro de 2007
  142. Maciocia, Giovanni (1989). The Foundations of Chinese Medicine. [S.l.]: Churchill Livingstone
  143. Barrett, Stephen (28 de março de 2008). «Why TCM Diagnosis Is Worthless». Acupuncture Watch. Consultado em 16 de fevereiro de 2009
  144. Ir para: a b Felix Mann: "...acupuncture points are no more real than the black spots that a drunkard sees in front of his eyes." (Mann F. Reinventing Acupuncture: A New Concept of Ancient Medicine. Butterworth Heinemann, London, 1996,14.) Quoted by Matthew Bauer in Chinese Medicine Times, Vol 1 Issue 4 - Aug 2006, "The Final Days of Traditional Beliefs? - Part One"
  145. Kaptchuk, 1983, pp. 34–35
  146. Ir para: a b c d Ernst E, Pittler MH, Wider B, Boddy K. (2007). «Acupuncture: its evidence-base is changing». Am J Chin Med. 35 (1): 21–5. PMID 17265547. doi:10.1142/S0192415X07004588
  147. White AR, Filshie J, Cummings TM (2001). «Clinical trials of acupuncture: consensus recommendations for optimal treatment, sham controls and blinding». Complement Ther Med. 9 (4): 237–245. PMID 12184353. doi:10.1054/ctim.2001.0489
  148. Johnson MI (2006). «The clinical effectiveness of acupuncture for pain relief--you can be certain of uncertainty». Acupunct Med. 24 (2): 71–9. PMID 16783282. doi:10.1136/aim.24.2.71
  149. Committee on the Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine by the American Public. (2005). Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the United States. National Academies Press.
  150. Madsen MV, Gøtzsche PC, Hróbjartsson A (2009). «Acupuncture treatment for pain: systematic review of randomised clinical trials with acupuncture, placebo acupuncture, and no acupuncture groups». BMJ. 338: a3115. PMC 2769056Acessível livremente. PMID 19174438. doi:10.1136/bmj.a3115
  151. Ernst E (2006). «Acupuncture--a critical analysis». Journal of Internal Medicine. 259 (2): 125–37. PMID 16420542. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2796.2005.01584.x
  152. Furlan AD, van Tulder MW, Cherkin DC; et al. (2005). «Acupuncture and dry-needling for low back pain». Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (1): CD001351. PMID 15674876. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001351.pub2
  153. Lee A, Done ML (2004). «Stimulation of the wrist acupuncture point P6 for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting». Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (3): CD003281. PMID 15266478. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003281.pub2
  154. Acupuncture: Review and Analysis of Reports on Controlled Clinical Trials. World Health Organization, 2003. Section 3. Section 3 (HTML); [4]
  155. «Definition of Chinese meridian theory». National Cancer Institute. Consultado em 16 de fevereiro de 2009
  156. Shermer, Michael (julho de 2005). «Full of Holes: the curious case of acupuncture». Scientific American. 293 (2): 30. Consultado em 16 de fevereiro de 2009
  157. Stenger, Victor J. (junho de 1998). «Reality Check: the energy fields of life». Skeptical Briefs. Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Consultado em 25 de dezembro de 2007 "Despite complete scientific rejection, the concept of a special biological fields within living things remains deeply engraved in human thinking. It is now working its way into modern health care systems, as non-scientific alternative therapies become increasingly popular. From acupuncture to homeopathy and therapeutic touch, the claim is made that healing can be brought about by the proper adjustment of a person's or animal's "bioenergetic fields.""
  158. «Traditional Medicine and Pseudoscience in China: A Report of the Second CSICOP Delegation (Part 2)». CSICOP. Consultado em 15 de fevereiro de 2009
  159. «Traditional Chinese Medicine: Overview of Herbal Medicines». Complementary/Integrative Medicine Therapies. The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. Consultado em 12 de fevereiro de 2009
  160. Yuehua, N; Chen, J; Wu, T; Jiafu, W; Liu, G; Chen, Jin (2004). «Chinese medicinal herbs for sore throat (Review)». doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004877
  161. Praities, Nigel (7 de agosto de 2008). «GPs warned over Chinese medicine». Pulse. Consultado em 16 de fevereiro de 2009
  162. Gardner, Martin (2001). Did Adam and Eve Have Navels?: Debunking Pseudoscience. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. pp. 92–101. ISBN 0-393-32238-6
  163. Novella, Steve. «Cupping – Olympic Pseudoscience». Science-Based Medicine. Consultado em 10 de agosto de 2016
  164. Williams, William A. (2000). Encyclopedia of pseudoscience. New York: Facts on File. ISBN 0-8160-3351-X
  165. Reis, Widson. «A Pseudociência nas Universidades Brasileiras». Livre Pensamento. Consultado em 21 de junho de 2018
  166. Carl Sagan, "Does Truth Matter? Science, Pseudoscience, and Civilization", Skeptical Inquirer, 1996
  167. Ir para: a b statement from the International Council for Science.ICSU Insight
  168. Till, Farrell (1990). «What About Scientific Foreknowledge in the Bible?» (self published). The Skeptical Review: 2–5
  169. Discovery Institute, Center for Science and Culture. Questions about Intelligent Design: What is the theory of intelligent design? "The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." Questions About Intelligent Design
  170. Ruling, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Conclusion "In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."
  171. Christopher Riche Evans (1974). Cults of Unreason. [S.l.]: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. ISBN 0-374-13324-7 Chapter 6.
  172. Russell Miller. Bare-faced messiah: The true story of L. Ron Hubbard. [S.l.]: Key Porter
  173. Dr. Peter Banys in the SF Chronicle
  174. defined as pseudoscience at Skeptic's Dictionary
  175. "Dianetics, that unholy alliance of psychoanalysis and cybernetics, rates a special chapter." - Some Comments on Popular-Science Books, John Pfeiffer, Science (New Series), Vol. 117, No. 3042 (Apr., 1953), pp. 399–403, referencing Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science by Martin Gardner
  176. (Vários colaboradores) Buckingham, Will; et. alli. - O Livro da Filosofia - Editora Globo - São Paulo, SP - 2011 - ISBN 978-85-250-4986-5
  177. Cartner, Rita; et alii - O Livro do Cérebro - Rio de Janeiro - Agir - 2012 - ISBN 978-85-220-1361-6
  178. Edwin Joshua Dukes, The Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, T & T Clark, Edinburgh, 1971, p 834
  179. Monty Vierra. Harried by "Hellions" in Taiwan. Sceptical Briefs newsletter, March 1997.
  180. Dukes, op cit, p 833
  181. Park, Robert L. (2000). Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud. New York, New York: Oxford University Press. p. 39. ISBN 0-19-513515-6 "[People] long to be told that modern science validates the teachings of some ancient scripture or New Age guru. The purveyors of pseudoscience have been quick to exploit their ambivalence."
  182. Stenger, Victor J. (janeiro de 1997). «Quantum Quackery». Skeptical Inquirer. Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Consultado em 7 de fevereiro de 2008 "Capra's book was an inspiration for the New Age, and "quantum" became a buzzword used to buttress the trendy, pseudoscientific spirituality that characterizes this movement."
  183. Gell-Mann, Murray (1995). The Quark and the Jaguar: Adventures in the Simple and Complex. [S.l.]: Macmillan. p. 168. ISBN 0805072535 "Then the conclusion has been drawn that quantum mechanics permits faster-than-light communication, and even tha claimed "paranormal" phenomena like precognition are thereby made respectable! How can this have happened?"
  184. Kuttner, Fred; Bruce Rosenblum (novembro de 2006). «Teaching physics mysteries versus pseudoscience». Physics Today. American Institute of Physics. Consultado em 8 de fevereiro de 2008 "We should not underestimate how persuasively physics can be invoked to buttress mystical notions. We physicists bear some responsibility for the way our discipline is exploited."
  185. Bell, J. S. (1988). Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. [S.l.]: Cambridge University Press. p. 170. ISBN 0521523389 "So I think it is not right to tell the public that a central role for conscious mind is integrated into modern atomic physics. Or that 'information' is the real stuff of physical theory. It seems to me irresponsible to suggest that technical features of contemporary theory were anticipated by the saints of ancient religions ... by introspection."
  186. Damon, P. E.; D. J. Donahue, B. H. Gore, A. L. Hatheway, A. J. T. Jull, T. W. Linick, P. J. Sercel, L. J. Toolin, C. R. Bronk, E. T. Hall, R. E. M. Hedges, R. Housley, I. A. Law, C. Perry, G. Bonani, S. Trumbore, W. Woelfli, J. C. Ambers, S. G. E. Bowman, M. N. Leese, M. S. Tite (fevereiro de 1989). «Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin». Nature. 337 (6208): 611–615. doi:10.1038/337611a0. Consultado em 18 de novembro de 2007
  187. Rogers, Raymond N.: "Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin." Thermochimica Acta, Volume 425, Issue 1–2 (20 January 2005), pages 189–194
  188. Ball, Philip. "To Know a Veil". Nature online, 28 January 2005.
  189. Nickell, Joe "the scientific approach allows the preponderance of evidence to lead to a conclusion: the shroud is the work of a medieval artisan". «PBS "Secrets of the Dead" Buries the Truth About Turin Shroud». Consultado em 18 de novembro de 2007

Bibliografia

 

Uma pseudociência é qualquer tipo de informação que se diz ser baseada em fatos científicos, ou mesmo como tendo um alto padrão de conhecimento, mas que não resulta da aplicação de métodos científicos.