Category talk:Paranormal

message: note: moved all content from :Category:Paranormal phenomena to this :Category:Paranormal here and sorting subcategories. --Ollj 10:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: *knowledge (latin word menaing)
*must adhere to the scientific method (observing, making a model/hypothesis, testing the model/hypothesis)
**Falsifiability (must be able to be tested wrong)
**Must be reliable, repeatable, valid for any time.
**Control possible occurences as far as possible, as opposed to the passive acceptance of opportunistic data. (to exclude bias)
(needs "what science is not" sources)
===Pseudoscience===
*"false knowledge" (word definition by greek roots 1843)
*inaccurately or deceptively described as science.
*not science.
*no sufficient scientific research or diverges from the required scientific standards (methods)
*no application of the scientific method. (from fringe science)
*Reproducibility is typically a problem. (from fringe science)
===Protoscience===
*Appears to conform to the scientific method.
*Needs further research.
*Has potential to become a science or leads to a scientific field. Superseded scientific theory
*Not (yet) falsifiable because of limited physical abilities. (would need more time, a larger accelerator)
*Not (yet) accepted as science or verified by a consensus of scientists.
===Fringe science===
*unliely, unusual, fantastic
*not irrational (you gotta love double negatives)
*basis in some established scientific principle. (you gotta love the "some" limitation)
*some resemblance to the norms of the scientific method.
*no manipulatiopn, bias, agenda
*reproduceable (claimed indirectly in its article)
===Junk science (bunk science)===
*agenda driven
*scientific data, research, analyses or claims which are perceived to be driven by political, financial or other questionable motives (e.g. ridiculing scienctific methods). 
*no standard methodology (fringe science)
*not science. (logical conclusion)
====Scientific misconduct====
*violation of scientific ethic; Misleading, manipulation, plagiarism,improper credit or violation of ethical standarts.
--Ollj 12:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Category.Funtamental.Nature.[[Science]]

message: *agenda driven
*scientific data, research, analyses or claims which are perceived to be driven by political, financial or other questionable motives (e.g. ridiculing scienctific methods). 
*no standard methodology (fringe science)
*not science. (logical conclusion)
====Scientific misconduct====
*violation of scientific ethic; Misleading, manipulation, plagiarism,improper credit or violation of ethical standarts.
--Ollj 12:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Junk science]] (bunk science)

message: *violation of scientific ethic; Misleading, manipulation, plagiarism,improper credit or violation of ethical standarts.
--Ollj 12:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Scientific misconduct]]

message: I thought it best to add Category:Anomalous Phenomena as a sub-category for now, if only so it can easily be found for proper sorting later. Probably the two articles in it belong in just the Paranormal category. —Helfaery 05:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since I've merged Canneto di Caronia fires into Caronia (see Talk:Caronia), which is in the Paranormal Places category, there is only one article (New England's Dark Day) in Category:Anomalous Phenomena. I'm leaving that article in the category, however, since I don't know whether the Anomalous Phenomena category will/should be deleted. --Helfaery 06:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anomalous Phenomena category 

message: I changed the definition of paranormal basically because paranormal usually includes such things as UFOs, Bigfoot, Psi, etc, which are not outside the range of scientific investigation.  I doubt that most of the subjects of pages included in this category can be assumed to be "not observable in nature, and therefore beyond verifiable measurement."  To say that they are usually supernatural is a POV, it assumes that they can't be observed no matter what.
Martinphi 21:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change definition

message: There's a discussion over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Paranormal#Category:Paranormal about whether :Category:Paranormal should be categorized under :Category:Pseudoscience or its parent :Category:Fringe theory. We could use some more opinions so please join in. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 08:08, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  category