A lot more things are pseudoscience than you might think
A lot more things are pseudoscience than you might think
11 comments
-
-
Wait Stockholm syndrome isn't real?
-
Seems like other things can be explained to cover what's happening: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome
First time I'd heard of this, and it's fascinating.
-
Police wanted the hostage to die, so they sided with the kidnapper on that one. Just one weird case, never encountered again. not a syndrome
-
11 comments
I mean obviously not everything everyone is going to talk about is going to be scientifically accurate. Those two examples give big “Uhm ahcktualllly” energy as they’re simply helpful to explain simple patterns because everyone knows what you mean by them.
Better examples (in my mind) would be real woo-woo shit like alt medicine or energy crystals.
I think it's pretty damn important to know that basically all forensic science you've seen on TV besides DNA matching is bullshit.
This includes most forensic science seen in actual court cases
Never forget that a DNA match gives evidence of two samples matching. It does not work as a proof that someone is guilty or innocent. And even the most scientific procedures might be botched or tampered with.
the point is that even skeptic people believe in love language, and stockholm.. not so many in energy cristal
But what does “believing” in love languages mean? Everyone I know who’s talked about them has framed it as how they enjoy showing and receiving affection, which is not pseudoscience- people have preferences. I’d be annoyed as shit if someone gave me tiny presents on a regular basis, and physical touch reassures me, this is important information to share with a potential romantic partner. Do you disagree there or is there a different issue with love languages?
Hate to break it to you but stockholm is in fact a real city