Crackpot index: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:25, 24 September 2024

Latest revision as of 21:18, 20 October 2024

(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)

Line 2:

'''The Crackpot Index''' is a number that rates scientific claims or the individuals that make them, in conjunction with a method for computing that number. It was proposed by [[John C. Baez]] in 1992, and updated in 1998.

While the index was created for its humorous value, the general concepts can be applied i''''nin other fields like risk management.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eXPCBwAAQBAJ&q=%22crackpot+index%22&pg=PA137|title=The Failure of Risk Management: Why It's Broken and How to Fix It|last=Hubbard|first=Douglas W.|date=2009-04-27|publisher=John Wiley & Sons|isbn=9780470387955|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.wired.com/2006/01/every_field_of_/|title=Every field of study deserves its own Crackpot Index|author=Wired Staff|magazine=WIRED|access-date=2018-07-17|language=en-US|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180717124851/https://www.wired.com/2006/01/every_field_of_/|archive-date=July 17, 2018}}</ref>

== Baez's crackpot index ==

Line 17:

*5 points for each mention of "Einstien"{{sic}}, "Hawkins" or "Feynmann".

*10 points for offering prize money to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory.

*20 points for every use of science fiction works or myths as if they were fact.

*40 points for comparing those who argue against your ideas to Nazis, stormtroopers, or brownshirts.

*50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions.

The ''[[New Scientist]]'' published a claim in 1992 that the creation of the index was "prompted by an especially striking