Quack quack

Adventures in Pseudoscience, part 3/3

Long-winded rant about why people believe science is dogmatic despite the fact that it just isn't. Summary :
- There are lots of things science doesn't know, and we probably need to say this a bit more often.
- Most pseudoscience is simply wrong. The fact that occasionally some seemingly outlandish ideas turn out to be correct doesn't avoid the fact that most "alternative" models are at odds with pretty well-tested ideas (and, sometimes, established facts).
- Saying "it's arrogant to think such-and-such" (like, "we can't be the only intelligent life in the Universe") is wrong - evidence, not opinions, determines what's arrogant and what's not.
- Actually, it IS only a theory. Attempts to define theory as being the same as fact are completely wrong. This only serves to confuse everybody. You can't disprove facts.
- Evidence is not the same as proof. Skepticism is not the same as denial. Science is generally skeptical of new results even when it supports mainstream ideas.
- In general, the media like to say, "science proves X" while in reality this is rarely the case. Never trust new results.
- Unfortunately genuinely arrogant scientists are very popular in the media, and can give the wrong impression of the way science is done.

There, that should do it.