The OFFICIAL "Fringe Science" thread...

smokey said:
To everyone else... just to clarify what I mean't here. To get feedback from real scientists (and people who are heavily read on the subject) as to what fields might be considered plausible, yet at the same time are highly improbable based on our current (and in some opinions, very limited) knowledge of science (in general). Not just physics, but chemistry, biology etc etc.

I only put it here because this is where anyone with scientific backgrounds is likely to post. To put this in current affairs is pointless and likewise in philosophical discussions (seeing as this is not philosophy)...
Click to expand...

Current fringe science in Biology?
1) Sequencing the genome of a person for under $1000.
2) Measuring gene expression changes in diseased vs normal cells as a diagnostic and prognostic tool for under $1000. And of course getting it all done on one slide would be great. Agilent and Affymetrix are one of many companies trying to do this.
3) Accurately measuring the binding affinity of millions of compounds to proteins involved in disease in a short space of time.
4) Measuring the complete proteome of an organism and mapping all the interactions of the proteins in a given state. Check Systems Biology.
5) Understanding epigenetics and developing the technology to reprogram the epigenome of various different cell types, for e.g. reprogramming nerve cells into stem cells so that they can differentiate again to form new connections with other neurologiaclly important cells. Has great potential in treating diabled people.
6) Also reprogramming stemm cells to grow into organs.
7) Then of course discover the functions of all the different RNA elements previoulsy thought to be useless.

Lots more to be done. Should this be excluded from the science section?
 
Oh dear.. see what I mean about thread pollution *sigh*

Its simple folks.. does it comply with the scientific method?

" To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

FYI. Because of the "Intelligent design" agenda being pushed here I personally choose to ignore anything phronesis says.. but you are welcome to buy into his line if thats what you choose.
 
Last edited:
Phronesis said:
Current fringe science in Biology?
1) Sequencing the genome of a person for under $1000.
2) Measuring gene expression changes in diseased vs normal cells as a diagnostic and prognostic tool for under $1000. And of course getting it all done on one slide would be great. Agilent and Affymetrix are one of many companies trying to do this.
3) Accurately measuring the binding affinity of millions of compounds to proteins involved in disease in a short space of time.
4) Measuring the complete proteome of an organism and mapping all the interactions of the proteins in a given state. Check Systems Biology.
5) Understanding epigenetics and developing the technology to reprogram the epigenome of various different cell types, for e.g. reprogramming nerve cells into stem cells so that they can differentiate again to form new connections with other neurologiaclly important cells. Has great potential in treating diabled people.
6) Also reprogramming stemm cells to grow into organs.
7) Then of course discover the functions of all the different RNA elements previoulsy thought to be useless.

Lots more to be done. Should this be excluded from the science section?
Click to expand...

I think it should be excluded from this thread. Simply because the majority of the stuff you have mention (under $1000, in minimal time etc) is not fringe science, it's just a tendancy towards commercialisation. Make it affordable for everyone and you will make more money. Make it take less time to discover an illness and you can sell more, newer drugs. Simple economics really.
 
w1z4rd said:
Oh dear.. see what I mean about thread pollution *sigh*

Its simple folks.. does it comply with the scientific method?

" To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

FYI. Because of the "Intelligent design" agenda being pushed here I personally choose to ignore anything phronesis says.. but you are welcome to buy into his line if thats what you choose.
Click to expand...

Dude, the reason fringe science is considered fringe is because it gets uncertain conslusions even though the scientific method is used. Not junk science (making the facts suit your arguement even through the use of the scientific method) or pseudoscience (which doesnt use the scientific method at all... well most times).
 
With regard to TP and TK I agree that they or on the outer fringe, but you never know. :)

Here is an interesting artical on it

Telekinesis and Quantum Field Theory
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/02/18/telekinesis-and-quantum-field-theory/

Others

Nanotechnology - This is a growing field, but many would consider it fringe

A.I.

Space elevator - The Japs are seriously looking at this

Growing replacement bodyparts - I know they can make bladders already

Alternative medicine
 
w1z4rd said:
Oh dear.. see what I mean about thread pollution *sigh*
Click to expand...
A question was asked that was relevant :rolleyes:.

w1z4rd said:
Its simple folks.. does it comply with the scientific method?

" To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
Click to expand...
Have you ever actually done anything in a lab? Ever done any scientific research? Do you even have an interest in science and biology? Your obvious lack of understanding simple biology is staggering, yet you want to tell others what science is and is not.

w1z4rd said:
FYI. Because of the "Intelligent design" agenda being pushed here I personally choose to ignore anything phronesis says.. but you are welcome to buy into his line if thats what you choose.
Click to expand...
What happened to the original article? Was it a lot of BS in the first place?
I am sorry, but you telling others what is and what is not science is laughable. Go and push your anti-religious agenda like usual in the mud pit where you are free to make worthless generalizations.
 
Last edited:
Anyways... good luck with defining where pseudoscience stops and fringe science starts :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X