h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hi, GB! Nice entry, as usual. My question is whether either a re-edit or a separate article might be called for to deal with minority (and even heretically so) scientific opinion on science that is almost intrinsically highly speculative. I don't expect that anyone here would be in a position to render a very forceful opinion of the values of differing points of view, but I think some discussion of the other viewpoints and note of who holds them might be warranted. Of course, I myself have not been doing anything at all here, much less researching and writing articles, so this is in no way a criticism of what you or your reviewers have done. I just thought I'd ask, and of course I'm not addressing only you and others may comment.

Also, not that it necessarily applies here, though I think it might (probably does in some small way or other, at least), if anyone can tackle an anecdotal mini-history of scientists falling prey to groupthink, that seems like it might make a worthwhile article if handled sensitively. Clearly, such an article would need to make clear that the scientific enterprise is almost wholly sound, but it could say something of value about the fact that it is still a human enterprise and has erred at the margins on numerous occasions. Many people probably believe that when scientists turn out to have been incorrect some kind of insidious conspiracy is at work. Such people may not be here, but there is something to be said for prevention on the matter. (Of course, when scientists are motivated badly, they may engineer results or spin the interpretation of data, but this shouldn't be all the layperson knows about the matter.)
Just some thoughts. I don't know if anyone can or will take them up. I still intend to play a more substantial role here when I can.

I believe I get what your talking about. I like to at least listen to "wildly fantastic ideas" which may give me food for thought or maybe just needs to sit on the back burner for a while. I love to listen to theoretical physicists and often their ideas are poo poohed. Also, their mathematics is far beyond me as Betelgeuse is beyond Pluto. The idea is what matters and the research can come later.
The idea of heresy is going to take a bit more thought. Your mention of "history" is more easily grasped when trying to think of examples. In modern science, from a layman's view, watchers of television, it seems that no idea is too farfetched or "crackpotted", is that a word?

I consider that entertainment and human interest. Such as, these ghost shows or one of my recent favorites, this person using "divining" rods, can't remember what their "scientific" term for it, to find remnants of ancient Chinese ships that may have been on the west coast(US) before Colombus/Vikings or whoever. I have my own Crackpot theories about that; remember the Kon Tiki or perhaps travelers across ice and glaciers before that.
When you speak of conspiracy or possibly unethical behaviour, I can't by thinking of the pharmaceutical industry. I'm going to leave that alone for now.

Hi Eveneye--Eegogee--Julzes. We think you're right - if handled correctly, an Entry looking at the slightly wilder end of scientific theorem would certainly be a great addition to the site. Are you saying you would like to write it, with some assistance? Cheers

Possibly, but not in the near future. I'm pretty tied up with a collapse in my living situation at present.