Webs’ Random Ideas

Orac has an interesting article about a debate happening at the University of Connecticut between homeopathy and well… science and reason I guess. Homeopathy is the ridiculous notion and I will let you read about it here.

So is there anything to debate, no. I think those creating this debate want to use it as an opportunity to show the nonsense of the topic. But there is a problem with this and Orac points it out beautifully…

The fact is, pseudoscientists, pseudohistorians, and cranks desperately want to debate accepted experts in the field in which they apply their crankery. The reason is simple. While, knowingly or (more commonly, unknowingly) they crap on science and the scientific method, at the same time they desperately crave its validation and acceptance.
[...]
This is because getting a scientist to agree to a debate allows them to portray their pseudoscience as being on equal footing with accepted science, or at least in the same ballpark. Thus, simply being seen on the same stage on an equal footing with a respected scientist, is a victory for the pseudoscientist. Regardless of what actually happens in the debate, it is a virtual certainty that the crank and the supporters of crankery will trumpet it as a “victory” or, at the very minimum, as a “validation” that science is beginning to take them seriously.

The bold section above pretty much sums it up. There are plenty of studies done showing the flaws in the topic, all this debate is going to do is give the cranks a leg to stand on by allowing them to say, “See we are debating science…” Having a debate on issues that are not scientifically accepted or discussed in scientific literature is misrepresenting information in that area or field.

Or to explain it how a medical scientist did in Richard Dawkins’ “Enemies of Reasons” series, (when referring to homeopathy) (keep in mind this is poorly paraphrased) “It’s really terrible, and for us disheartening, that we can spend 10 years presenting research on a drug or a procedure to get it introduced. And to have those working in homeopathy say what we are doing is bunk and have no problem getting in their ideas.” Basically it’s a slap in the face for those that do real science to see the progress of homeopathic ideas.