In an attempt to resolve these deficiencies, I introduced the concepts of pseudoscience and the investigation of anomalies into the curriculum of second-semester general and analytical chemistry courses at Mount Saint Mary's College during the spring semester of 1996. While the investigation of the unusual and the unknown has sometimes led to great scientific discoveries, it has more often led to great embarrassments. A study of the experimental procedures and motivation of the researchers in cases of pseudoscience can be extremely instructive, and fits in quite well with traditional topics in general and analytical chemistry, such as pH, chemical kinetics, intermolecular bonding, colligative properties, atomic structure, electrolysis and trace element analysis. Students can learn how to properly approach a scientific problem in a critical, but open-minded manner, thus avoiding pseudoscientific pitfalls. Here is science at work, for both good and bad, with a strong moral and scientific message.
Scientists are people and people make mistakes.
What separates the scientists from the pseudoscientists is the ability to recognize and admit error. While the examples of pseudoscience are a very small portion of these traditional courses in general and analytical chemistry, they will undoubtedly be some of the most memorable particulars that the students recall in future years. And if the examination of scientific foibles by these students helps to avoid future cases of pathological science on their part, we have gained much with little investment. It provides detailed information about five specific areas of pseudoscience, pathological science, or anomaly investigations that are applicable to chemical education, and describes two student special projects and student experiences at a conference on controversial research. A compilation of further instances of pseudoscience, pathological science and anomaly investigations, and discussions of specific uses, can be found on the Reference Page .