User:ClockworkSoul/Crackpot

Recently, at the Wiki-Conference 2009, I was confronted by a man who approached me with the specific purpose of telling me why I, and all other molecular biologists, have "got it all wrong". Having little experience with such individuals, I unwisely listened for a time, astonished not only that his claims ran contrary to the accumulated body of biological evidence of the last 40 years, or even that they could be – and have been – readily disproved by a simple experiment, but that he showed a misunderstanding of the subject so profound that it was eclipsed only by his absolute immunity to evidence. In short, I was speaking to my very first real crackpot.

There are a couple of pretty good guides to spotting crackpots available on the Internet, like this one and this one, but I couldn't find anything to help somebody decide whether they're an outside-the-box thinker, or a genuine crackpot.^[1]

So I decided to start one.

You might be a crackpot if...

...you've ever used the phrase "but they laughed at (Semmelweis/Wegener/Tesla)!"
...you're surprised when "mainstream" scientists agree to speak with you.
...you've ever claimed that an entire mainstream field of research is fundamentally flawed.
...you don't actually have any education whatsoever in the area of your theory. And you aren't afraid to admit that because you feel that is no impediment!
- ...Actually you think that's a good thing, because "part of The Establishment" is actively harmful.
...you've ever compared yourself (favorably) to Einstien (Feynmann, Hawkins, etc).
...feel compelled to communicate your theories in large, colored , or ALL CAPITAL text.
...you've ever referred to your own theory as "the Truth".
...you believe that opponents to your theory are the reason behind Nazism (or some other great evil).
...you don't have a degree, but insist that your own knowledge and ability is equal to or exceeds that of acknowledged experts.
...you've ever offered prize money to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory.
...you use terms that you invented, but don't bother to properly define them.
...you've ever stated that a well-established theory is "only a theory", as if that were evidence against it.
...a psychiatrist has ever tried to talk you out of your theory.
...you think that the rejection of your theory is evidence of a cover-up or conspiracy against it.

...you don't realize that your "brilliant idea" is something that has been considered a classic reoccurring joke to scientists and mathematicians for several centuries:
...you have a "diagram" "proving" that you have squared the circle. We met one of these a few years ago! Invertzoo (talk) 13:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
...you are dying to explain to everyone your free energy machine (perpetual motion). I have come upon these people too! Invertzoo (talk) 13:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
...you repeatedly quote approvingly anyone who fulfils any (or all) of the above criteria. TheresaWilson (talk) 12:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Footnotes

^ Yes, I know a true crackpot would never pay attention to something like this. It's fun. Go with it.

[1] Yes, I know a true crackpot would never pay attention to something like this. It's fun. Go with it.

[1]