Fringe science in the context of "Non-standard cosmology"

⭐ In the context of non-standard cosmology, how is a theory’s status as ‘non-standard’ best characterized?

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Fringe science

Fringe science refers to ideas whose attributes include being highly speculative or relying on premises already refuted. The chance of ideas rejected by editors and published outside the mainstream being correct is remote. When the general public does not distinguish between science and imitators, it risks exploitation, and in some cases, a "yearning to believe or a generalized suspicion of experts is a very potent incentive to accepting some pseudoscientific claims".

The term "fringe science" covers everything from novel hypotheses, which can be tested utilizing the scientific method, to wild ad hoc hypotheses and mumbo jumbo. This has resulted in a tendency to dismiss all fringe science as the domain of pseudoscientists, hobbyists, and quacks.

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<

👉 Fringe science in the context of Non-standard cosmology

A non-standard cosmology is any physical cosmological model of the universe that was, or still is, proposed as an alternative to the then-current standard model of cosmology. The term non-standard is applied to any theory that does not conform to the scientific consensus. Because the term depends on the prevailing consensus, the meaning of the term changes over time. For example, hot dark matter would not have been considered non-standard in 1990, but would have been in 2010. Conversely, a non-zero cosmological constant resulting in an accelerating universe would have been considered non-standard in 1990, but is part of the standard cosmology in 2010.

Several major cosmological disputes have occurred throughout the history of cosmology. One of the earliest was the Copernican Revolution, which established the heliocentric model of the Solar System. More recent was the Great Debate of 1920, in the aftermath of which the Milky Way's status as but one of the Universe's many galaxies was established. From the 1940s to the 1960s, the astrophysical community was equally divided between supporters of the Big Bang theory and supporters of a rival steady state universe; this is currently decided in favour of the Big Bang theory by advances in observational cosmology in the late 1960s. Nevertheless, there remained vocal detractors of the Big Bang theory including Fred Hoyle, Jayant Narlikar, Halton Arp, and Hannes Alfvén, whose cosmologies were relegated to the fringes of astronomical research. The few Big Bang opponents still active today often ignore well-established evidence from newer research, and as a consequence, today non-standard cosmologies that reject the Big Bang entirely are rarely published in peer-reviewed science journals but appear online in marginal journals and private websites.

↓ Explore More Topics
In this Dossier

Fringe science in the context of Ufology

Ufology, sometimes written UFOlogy (US: /juːˈfɑːləi/ or UK: /juːˈfɒləi/), is the investigation of unidentified flying objects (UFOs) by people who believe that they may be of extraordinary origins (most frequently of extraterrestrial alien visitors). While there are instances of government, private, and fringe science investigations of UFOs, ufology is generally regarded by skeptics and science educators as an example of pseudoscience.

↑ Return to Menu

Fringe science in the context of Fringe theory

A fringe theory is an idea or a viewpoint that differs significantly from the accepted scholarship of the time within its field. Fringe theories include the models and proposals of fringe science, as well as similar ideas in other areas of scholarship, such as the humanities. In a narrower sense, the term fringe theory is commonly used as a pejorative, roughly synonymous with the terms pseudo-scholarship and conspiracy theory. Precise definitions distinguishing widely held viewpoints and unaccepted theories are difficult to construct. Issues of false balance or false equivalence can occur when fringe theories are presented as being equal to widely accepted theories.

↑ Return to Menu

Fringe science in the context of Scientific skeptic

Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism (also spelled scepticism), sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry, is a position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking scientific evidence. In practice, the term most commonly refers to the examination of claims and theories that appear to be unscientific, rather than the routine discussions and challenges among scientists. Scientific skepticism differs from philosophical skepticism, which questions humans' ability to claim any knowledge about the nature of the world and how they perceive it, and the similar but distinct methodological skepticism, which is a systematic process of being skeptical about (or doubting) the truth of one's beliefs.

The skeptical movement (British spelling: sceptical movement) is a contemporary social movement based on the idea of scientific skepticism. The movement has the goal of investigating claims made on fringe topics and determining whether they are supported by empirical research and are reproducible, as part of a methodological norm pursuing "the extension of certified knowledge".

↑ Return to Menu

Fringe science in the context of Anti-vaccine activists

Anti-vaccine activism, which collectively constitutes the "anti-vax" movement, is a set of organized activities expressing opposition to vaccination. These collaborating networks often seek to increase vaccine hesitancy by disseminating vaccine misinformation and disinformation. As a social movement, it employs tools ranging from traditional news media to various forms of online communication. Activists have primarily—though not exclusively—focused on opposing childhood vaccination, and have sought to expand their influence from niche subgroups into national political debates.

Ideas that later coalesced into anti-vaccine activism predate vaccines themselves. The movement, along with fringe doctors, has propagated various myths and conspiracy theories, alongside misinformation and disinformation. These efforts have significantly increased vaccine hesitancy and influenced public policy regarding the ethical, legal, and medical aspects of vaccination. In contrast, there is no substantive debate or hesitancy within mainstream medical circles about the benefits of vaccination; the scientific consensus is "clear and unambiguous" in favor of vaccines. Despite this consensus, the anti-vaccine movement has been partially successful in distorting the public understanding of science in popular culture.

↑ Return to Menu