RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $5800Goal: $6000
Information icon.svg The 2018 moderator election has started! We are electing 6 moderators and 2 alternatives to serve in 2019. Nominate users here and read their campaign slogans here!


From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon philosophy of science.svg

This Philosophy of science related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


'Let's breed some more scientific amoebas.' (talk) 15:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

I feel I'm on thin ice right now and don't feel up to editing main space, nor do I know of any interesting examples of this subject, but I would like to recommend that the article woozle effectWikipedia's W.svg be incorporated into this one as article. The Wikipedia page is sufficient and mentions the associated logical fallacies so their is little to improve on, I'm not sure what the snarkiest example would be from science which wouldn't just be making fun of a well known urban legend or conspiracy theory. What would the most snarky examples of the woozle effect be, and are there any examples of firming up of language in science? X-Factor (talk) 22:51, 9 June 2017 (UTC)