I just read the article in The Atlantic. She tries to defend “fringe scientists” by praising their creativity and inquisitive natures, saying that’s just like real scientists’ motivations. She omits the most important difference between the two groups: real science has to agree with the available evidence and be consistent with the science already extant. Also, science has to both explain and predict. Fringe science fails at all of that.

Lizzie’s article is like praising dotty Aunt Tillie for suggesting the electricity leaks out of an empty light socket, so you’d better put a bulb in so you don’t waste it.

I may write something about this later. Right now, I am a tourist on holiday.