Do we need a new rule for pseudoscience/crackpots?

Administration 31 Comments
By Dave Munger

Our guidelines for individual posts and registering blogs are fairly robust: They allow us to take a careful look at posts and blogs to decide whether they should be allowed on

But as becomes a higher-profile organization, it also increasingly becomes the target of pseudoscientists and crackpots advancing personal agendas that are not supported by serious research.

Because these individuals are highly motivated, they often take special care to couch their blogs in the trappings of legitimate research. Still, it doesn’t take long for a serious researcher to examine their work and see through the veneer to the real agenda behind it.

What does take a long time — what is, in the end, nearly impossible — is convincing the pseudoscientist/crackpot that her/his blog does not represent real research, and therefore isn’t acceptable.

But we don’t need to convince them — what we need to do is to convince our readers that we have real standards. From this arises the question: Should we have a new rule designed to eliminate pseudoscientists and crackpots from consideration without the benefit of extensive deliberation?

As it currently stands, if a blog is rejected due to insufficient rigor, the blogger is given the opportunity to defend him/herself publicly on this blog. We’ve done that once before, and our decision wasn’t changed. We’re currently working behind the scenes on two other such requests. Handling these requests according to our existing guidelines takes a lot of time and effort. We have to recruit experts in the relevant fields to accumulate evidence that the blogs should not be approved for our site. But we already know these blogs are unacceptable — this is essentially wasted effort.

I think we ought to give site administrators the latitude to reject obviously pseudoscientific / “crackpot” blogs simply by consulting informally among themselves and their colleagues — just as they already have the latitude to approve blogs that are obviously high quality. Only on true borderline cases should a formal review or public debate be necessary. But maybe our readers disagree — perhaps such a review is essential to the site’s mission.

What do you think? Let us know in the comments. Or make a post on your own blog, then post the link here.

31 Responses to “Do we need a new rule for pseudoscience/crackpots?”

  1. Rense Nieuwenhuis Says:
    September 30th, 2008 at 9:45 am

    I’d say: go ahead. As the organisers of a very well designed initiative you should be able to control who participates. Already you decide whether or not to approve blogs for aggregation, which does not happen publicly either. However, I would argue to do make public the blogs that you excluded, and still allow a blogger to defend. This makes your process less demanding, and still has some ‘checks and balances’.

    This is part of a longer post on the subject, to be found here:

  2. Sandra Porter Says:
    October 1st, 2008 at 11:58 am

    I agree. I think you’ve proposed a reasonable solution.

  3. Dave Munger Says:
    October 2nd, 2008 at 11:17 am


    I’m not sure about the idea of a public debate for everyone. Why should we offer free publicity on our blog for every obscure crackpot and pseudoscientist that comes knocking?

    Instead, what I’m considering is requiring a vote among administrators (we have a minimum of three in each language). If there is a split decision (e.g. 2-1 to reject instead of 3-0), then we might consider having a public debate. The blogs I’m talking about are so clearly not based on real research that it would only help them and harm us to offer them the chance to debate.

  4. Rense Nieuwenhuis Says:
    October 3rd, 2008 at 9:18 am


    I agree with you when stating that should not become a stage for the people you want to ban. On the other hand, I strongly believe that openness is not something to be scared of. Additionally, the discussion would not take place on researchblogging itself, but on the news-forum (or even: a forum / blog with specifically that purpose).

    So, let people discuss all they want: It doesn’t harm the casual reader of researchblogging, and still allows people to form their own opinion.

    (Please note that I don’t object against the administrators banning blogs, especially when unanimous. I just think there should be some degree of justification.)

    A minimum-option would possibly to just mention the banning of bloggers somewhere, without the opportunity to react to that.

  5. Bjørn Østman Says:
    October 14th, 2008 at 12:05 am

    I second Rense in the suggestion that at least a list of banned blogs on the site. It would be interesting read, but also be more open. Perhaps a short description of why the blog was not accepted. No opportunity to react is also fine.

  6. Jeremy Yoder Says:
    December 1st, 2008 at 1:32 am

    I like documentation, except when I have to provide it.

    However, if a list of banned blogs is to be published, it must include justification to short-circuit the “stage for the people you want to ban” effect. Then the list can defend itself, especially to people who don’t already agree with the banned blogger. A documentation page need not include a forum for debate, though.

  7. casino sports betting Says:
    January 6th, 2012 at 5:46 am

    Really good blog you have here. You’ll find me looking at your stuff often. Saved as a favorite!

  8. Margo Gatto Says:
    January 17th, 2012 at 10:46 am

    Really successfully written information and facts. It is going to be priceless to everyone who usess it, together with myself. Sustain the very good function ?§C for good i will attempt added posts.

  9. Krishna Pang Says:
    January 24th, 2012 at 4:38 am

    Oh i understand, thanks!

  10. List of infectious diseases Says:
    March 2nd, 2012 at 12:04 pm

    I really enjoy reading your articles your amazing way to see things is what keeps me fascinated. I suggest, you could include more topics about health like infectious diseases Thanks so much!!!!

  11. heart diseases in children Says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 1:59 pm

    Hello! I searched for the words heart diseases and found this site. You must include this website on a free directory is really interesting…

  12. colon cancer information Says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 4:46 pm

    Hello!… I am enjoing your article it is very complete, the information provided helped me to add some tips on my list to try the colon disease. Thanks for the Info.

  13. dental problems information Says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 4:54 pm

    Appreciate you sharing with us this good blog, very informative and useful but could include more health articles like dental care. Thanks…

  14. health solutions and treatments Says:
    March 14th, 2012 at 10:45 am

    Great website!.. I like to read your topics but I suggest you add a little more information according to health news. Nice work. Thanks for the Info

  15. health news Says:
    March 14th, 2012 at 10:54 am

    Fantastic, this is exactly the type of site that I wanted, really nice post very useful info about healthy advice and other topics… Till next time!

  16. ear infection advices Says:
    March 14th, 2012 at 12:54 pm

    Hi, awesome blog I found your website when I was searching in yahoo about ear infection news. Thanks for the Info provided really helped me.

  17. HIV symptoms in men Says:
    March 19th, 2012 at 12:49 pm

    You’ve got a very good way of expression, I’m really enjoying your blog the info provided helped me a little bit with my health problem HIV Thanks, very informative and interesting…

  18. skin diseases Says:
    March 19th, 2012 at 2:04 pm

    I found your site in google when I was searching about skin care, very good and helpful info…


  19. wow secret places Says:
    April 9th, 2012 at 3:36 am

    Hello, just wanted to say, I enjoyed this article. Keep on posting!

  20. Vicky Earlywine Says:
    April 24th, 2012 at 2:57 pm

    I’ll right away grab your rss feed as I can not find your e-mail subscription hyperlink or newsletter service. Do you’ve any? Please let me know so that I may subscribe. Thanks.

  21. Vergleichsportal für Versicherungen Says:
    April 26th, 2012 at 4:35 am

    Hi, i think that i noticed you visited my web site thus i came to go back the choose?.I’m trying to to find issues to improve my website!I assume its good enough to make use of some of your ideas!!

  22. iphone hacks Says:
    May 10th, 2012 at 3:10 am

    Hello, I believe your post is awesome.

  23. biżuteria Says:
    June 22nd, 2012 at 7:21 am

    The processor is really the ultimate which includes all the attachments one should ever have a use for.

  24. androstenone Says:
    September 10th, 2012 at 4:28 am

    I am fond of your website, the way I am fond of air. Ok just kidding but really good thoughts though .

  25. Aatmadeva Says:
    September 23rd, 2012 at 4:42 pm

    Hare Krishna – This web-site has helped bring pleasure to my spirit. Shout the praises having to do with Lord Krsna.

  26. serwer cs 4fun Says:
    April 21st, 2013 at 9:21 pm

    I’ve noticed a difference between European and American dairy. If I use raw organic milk to make butter, will that be closer to the European butters? Really cool article. Thanks much!

  27. thomas kish Says:
    November 16th, 2015 at 3:01 pm

    Interesting topic but I’m not sure that I agree with you. Things like this have chanbged the way the web was formed and created. Is it really as simple as changing out the direction and watching the web change?

  28. enrich financial Says:
    November 18th, 2015 at 7:46 pm

    This is pretty much the exact information I was looking for! I really appreciate it. I did a quick Google search and came across this page, which was obviously helpful.

  29. Lloyd Segal Says:
    November 30th, 2015 at 4:27 pm

    They will provide you with a free diagnostic of your problem and a recommended solution. But you are under no obligation to have us do the repairs.

  30. L L Realty Says:
    December 3rd, 2015 at 5:54 pm

    Get to know your friends and family members better though this type of entertainment, it’s guaranteed to make you think twice.

  31. David Gluck Says:
    February 24th, 2016 at 8:32 am

    We have inadvertently designed a system in which being good at what you do as a teacher is not formally rewarded, while being poor at what you do is seldom corrected nor penalized.

Leave a Reply

Icons by N.Design Studio. Based on a theme by Ben Swift.
Entries RSS Comments RSS Log in