I want to start a new series, but I need your help.
There are bloggers and other individuals out there that just offer themselves up as punching bags. They are always anti–science. But I can’t find them all. For instance, my most recent punching bag, Neil, only came across my radar because of how wildly confused he is between the science of development and the subjectivity of “humanity”. Not everyone is that blatant in their misunderstanding of basic science. (Okay, so every single creationist is that blatantly confused, but I want to find some people more worthy of my time.)
So I’m not looking for people who raise legitimate scientific questions; I’m not about to get into a match with Jerry Coyne over how to define “species” (especially since I generally agree with him anyway). I want punching bags: people who mangle legitimate science for the sake of their point of view – a point of view they formed independently of anything to do with science. Alt-med quacks are always good, though creationists will work when the issue is topical, i.e., new hot-topic research. I don’t want the big names like Chopra for this series, but don’t be afraid to send me that sort of malarkey as well.
If you find something you think would fit these posts you can either make a post right here or email me at firstname.lastname@example.org. Just be on the outlook for buzzwords like “quantum” or for people who draw nebulous connections between real studies and their worldview. Those people make up the most solid candidates.