> Most of us are not doing like randy does and making an experment out of it with all the checks and ballances that come with that. 

Science isn't rejecting the claims themselves so much as the evidence used to support them. Scientific evidence, by our definition, must be strong enough to win a consensus. That is an exacting standard. The scientist, like a stage magician, can't cover his hands at a critical part of the demonstration. The audience would boo and throw tomatoes. 

Science doesn't care how a scientist comes up with an idea: it does care, however, about the evidence the scientist uses to support the idea. It must be convincing to those who don't believe in Ouija boards, not just to those who do. 

Well-written pseudoscience, with its exciting generalizations and lack of mathematics, can always find a bigger audience than can carefully crafted, but necessarily tedious, rebuttals.

Cromer, A. (1995). Uncommon sense: The heretical nature of science. Oxford University Press.

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html