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.

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)