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 2021.
| Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.|
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with !
Talk:Science of Discworld
Doing random hits again. Question, is the "bad science" link here cause the books are crappy at explaining science? or is it here cause it's debunking bad science? that wasn't clear in the article.--En attendant Godot 20:10, 22 June 2011 (UTC)