Talk:Woo

	This Pseudoscience related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.
Editorial notes The article could use a few references, a "see also" section and another subsection to qualify for copper or bronze.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>

, (new)

Coffee Woo article?

(Looks at fingers. Realizes they aren't broken.) OK, I'll start the pumps. - 66.211.109.190 (talk) 18:16, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Origin?

Early Computer core memory used square loop hysteresis ferrite cores. How they worked was sorta magic to those without expert knowledge of physics. Substantial early work in the field was carried out by the Shanghai-born American physicists An Wang and Way-Dong Woo... So there! :-) 60.242.247.177 (talk) 21:50, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

"Woo" and "woowoo" is used in the 1941 war film Parachute Battalion as a reference to silliness in flirting (with females in general, but the dummy in particular). A war propaganda educational movie meant for a popular audience would only include it if it was recognised as fairly common popular usage. 60.242.247.177 (talk) 19:01, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Levels of woo

To what extent are there different levels of woo - from the relatively harmless to the 'causing serious problems' - and how can they be classified. 'Do not swim for half an hour after eating' and suchlike would be at the harmless end. 86.146.100.66 (talk) 22:51, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Today's woo

Is sometimes yesterday's area of exciting new research - and vice versa.

Probably most 'firm' topics have a 'halo of woo' around them - misunderstandings, false overlaps, creative misinterpretations, possibilities floating around the discussions, extrapolations into illogicality, those who want the comfort of a deeper structure that 'others do understand', those who make money or get authority by promoting certainty in a world which others find too inexplicable otherwise, etc, and some 'new areas of research' will be 90% woo and guff and 10% viable/sensible. #Some# of the theories will prove valid, helpful or just 'if you like it, might as well follow it.' Anna Livia (talk) 18:16, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Falsifiability

Would it be appropriate to add a lack of falsifiability to the characteristics of woo (often presented as a strength — "You can't prove that I'm wrong, so I must be right!"), or is that not actually part of the definition? --Luigifan18 (talk) 03:50, 16 February 2024 (UTC)