it’s a hypothesis… making hypotheses and verifying them is how science progresses. you can’t dismiss every single unproven hypotheses as pseudoscience. that is in fact, unscientific.
on the other hand, i am tired of media sensationalising as well…
Pseudoscience is claiming something as fact when you have no evidence. Portraying an hypothesis as fact is an example of pseudoscience.
It isn’t the hypothesis that makes things scientific, it is the testing and falsification of the hypothesis that makes it scientific. No such has been done.
Until you have the evidence and results, all you have is a sophisticated guess.
I absolutely can dismiss every unproven hypothesis as pseudoscience if it is used as if it was a proven hypothesis. You should too.
it’s a hypothesis… making hypotheses and verifying them is how science progresses. you can’t dismiss every single unproven hypotheses as pseudoscience. that is in fact, unscientific.
on the other hand, i am tired of media sensationalising as well…
Pseudoscience is claiming something as fact when you have no evidence. Portraying an hypothesis as fact is an example of pseudoscience.
It isn’t the hypothesis that makes things scientific, it is the testing and falsification of the hypothesis that makes it scientific. No such has been done.
Until you have the evidence and results, all you have is a sophisticated guess.
I absolutely can dismiss every unproven hypothesis as pseudoscience if it is used as if it was a proven hypothesis. You should too.
The bigger problem here is that the paper is stating an (as of currently) unsupported hypothesis as a definitive fact