Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.skeptic,alt.consciousness,sci.psychology,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.bio,sci.philosophy.meta,rec.arts.books,rec.arts.sf.science
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!news.alpha.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uop!pacbell.com!amdahl!netcomsv!forte!mikes
From: mikes@forte.com (Mike Schilling)
Subject: Re: Roger Penrose's New Book (in HTML) 1.0
Message-ID: <1994Oct20.214734.15940@forte.com>
Organization: Forte Software Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
References: <383svn$js9@galaxy.ucr.edu>
Distribution: inet
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 1994 21:47:34 GMT
Lines: 46
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.physics:97172 sci.skeptic:92558 sci.psychology:28288 comp.ai.philosophy:21227 sci.bio:22545 sci.philosophy.meta:14251

john baez (baez@guitar.ucr.edu) wrote:
: 
: 			THE CRACKPOT INDEX
: 	     A simple method for rating potentially 
: 	     revolutionary contributions to physics.
: 
: 1) A -5 point starting credit.
: 2) 1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.
: 3) 2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.
: 4) 3 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent.
: 5) 5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful
: correction.
: 6) 5 points for using a thought experiment that contradicts the results 
: of a widely accepted real experiment.
: 7) 5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for those
: with defective keyboards). 
: 8) 10 points for each claim that quantum mechanics is fundamentally
: misguided (without good evidence).
: 9) 10 points for each favorable comparison of oneself to Einstein, or
: claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided
: (without good evidence).
: 10) 10 points for pointing out that one has gone to school, as if this
: were evidence of sanity.
: 11) 20 points for suggesting that you deserve a Nobel prize.
: 12) 20 points for each favorable comparison of oneself to Newton or
: claim that classical mechanics is fundamentally misguided (without
: evidence).
: 13) 20 points for every use of science fiction works or myths as if 
: they were fact.
: 14) 20 points for defending yourself by bringing up (real or imagined)
: ridicule accorded to ones past theories. 
: 15) 30 points for each favorable comparison of oneself to Galileo,
: claims that the Inquisition is hard at work on ones case, etc..
: 16) 30 points for claiming that the "scientific establishment" is 
: engaged in a "conspiracy" to prevent ones work from gaining its 
: well-deserved fame, or suchlike.
: 17) 40 points for claiming one has a revolutionary theory but
: giving no concrete testable predictions.
: 
: John Baez
How many points for utter cluelessness?  I remember seeing a fad diet
quack compare herself to Madam Curie, whom everyone laughed at when she 
insisted on handwashing to get rid of germs.  Surely this is worth more
than 1.

Mike
