SSM Plebiscite

[deags]

I know that. The point I'm making is that materialist science is quite happy to accept a hypothesis without evidence, so long as that hypotheses comes from within science. It the source is from elsewhere and has no evidence, it is dismissed and poo pooed by the scientific community as pseudoscience etc.

I kind of get the point you are trying to make, and I "think" I disagree. Could you give me an example of the pseudoscience you are referring to?
I mean the scientific community as a whole rarely agrees on any hypothesis until there is enough evidence to show that it is true at this point in time, based on other things we as a society/they as a scientific community believe to be true. Pseudoscience is rarely tested let alone have any data to show that it is in fact correct. I would like to know though, which pseudoscience you are referring to to try and better understand your argument?