O documento discute fontes de informação em ciência e tecnologia, comparando ciência e pseudociência. Ele fornece exemplos de como distinguir entre elas usando critérios como falsificabilidade, lógica, compreensibilidade, honestidade, repetibilidade e evidências suficientes. O documento também explora porque as pessoas acreditam em pseudociência e fornece um estudo de caso de teste duplo-cego para astrologia.
1. Fontes de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia Prof. Dr. Marcelo Knobel IFGW – UNICAMP Curso de Especialização em Jornalismo Científico – Labjor/NUDECRI/UNICAMP Baseado em: What is Pseudo-Science? - John Lattanzio ver: http://www.sci.monash.edu.au/subject/sci2010/resources/Sg2.htm Pseudoscience in the New Millennium - Michael De Robertis
27. Finally, as I was leaving Newman's property, he trotted alongside the car and insisted on adding to his comments that the theory of "vortices" also explained water dowsing, hurricanes, earthquakes, prophecy (Jeanne Dixon, Nostradamus, and the rest), ESP, and psychokinesis. It is a significant indicator, in all crackpot theories, that the inventor claims he has explained most mysteries of mankind all in one unified notion.
31. Estudo de casos: “ fadas” de Cottingley Glen http://www.randi.org/library/cottingley/index.html Adivinhadores muitas vezes não são mentirosos! Eles acham que realmente conseguem fazê-lo Mas isso não é ciência Testado… e comprovado!
32.
33. Ciência Patológica ( Pathological Science ) – Cientistas enganando-se Ciência Lixo ( Junk Science )– Ciência feita de modo errado Pseudociência – Sem qualquer base científica Ciência Voodoo ou Borderline Science – Ignorância, inocência, falsidade, etc… Definições
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48. Estudo de caso: Astrologia "A Double-Blind Test of Astrology," Nature , Vol. 318, pp. 419-425, 1985 http://psychicinvestigator.com/demo/AstroSkc.htm http://www.sas.org/CarlsonCV.html Teste feito por Dr Shawn Carlson Publicado na Nature Enquanto ele era estudante !!
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58. Testando a Astrologia We are now in a position to argue a surprisingly strong case against natal astrology as practiced by reputable astrologers. Great pains were taken to insure that the experiment was unbiased and to make sure that astrology was given every reasonable chance to succeed. It failed. Despite the fact that we worked with some of the best astrologers in the country, recommended by the advising astrologers for their expertise in astrology and in their ability to use the CPI, despite the fact that every reasonable suggestion made by advising astrologers was worked into the experiment, despite the fact that the astrologers approved the design and predicted 50% as the "minimum" effect they would expect to see, astrology failed to perform at a level better than chance. Tested using double-blind methods, the astrologers' predictions proved wrong. Their predicted connection between the positions of the planets and other astronomical objects at the time of birth and the personalities of test subjects did not exist. The experiment clearly refutes the astrological hypothesis. Shawn Carlson
59. A dicotomia falsa: Utilidade vs. Validade Cientista: Leigo: “ Não!” significando, “não é valida” “ Sim!” significando, “é útil” “A Astrologia Funciona ??”
60.
61.
62. Mas de fato: quaisquer afirmações? “ Tenho um Unicórnio em meu jardim…” “ Mas ele é invisível” “ e ele pode voar…” “ Mas ele odeia estranhos, e sempre foge quando alguém se aproxima…” Vamos realmente investigar essa afirmação?
82. O que podemos fazer? “ Thinking is skilled work. It is not true that we are naturally endowed with the ability to think clearly and logically without learning how, or without practicing. People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge players, or pianists.” Alfred Mander, Logic for the Millions