The discoverer pitches the claim directly to the media.
The discoverer says that a powerful establishment is trying to suppress his or her work.
The scientific effect involved is always at the very limit of detection.
Evidence for a discovery is anecdotal.
The discoverer says a belief is credible because it has endured for centuries.
The discoverer has worked in isolation.
The discoverer must propose new laws of nature to explain an observation.
There have obviously been great scientists and great scientific discoveries that broke some of these rules, but they've been remembered precisely because they were rarities. Now, think about the claims made for [name of recent innovation in IT goes here]: how many of these rules do they violate?
comments powered by Disqus