[fbbwsa]

hmm... correct.

my apologies, offense not intended, though looking back I can see that wasn't the nicest post by me. You didn't claim it was science and you're right it shouldn't be critiqued as such.

i AM a scientist by training, so sometimes the stuff i see on the internet people try to pass off as science perturbs me. i wrote that hastily after a quick read of the article and i confess i was out of line.

And you know what? I don't have a problem with it, and even if someone does, you should tell 'em to screw off. Worse than bad science, is when one person tries to prevent others from the act of content/idea creation. naysayers provide no value and you're right to be annoyed by my response. my initial response to your article wasn't intended to be in that spirit, so my bad, guy.

keep it up.

[randomwalker]

no worries.

i'm a scientist as well, look up my profile :)

[fbbwsa]

since we've already established that i was out of line, i just thought i'd revisit this topic of pseudoscience vs science since:http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/11/18.html

currently (as of Nov 19, 7:40am CST) is the number one ranked post on HN.

I think it reflects both of our sentiments.

Incidentally, I went to UT Austin as well.