In the United States, junk science is any scientific data, research, or analysis considered to be spurious or fraudulent. The concept is often invoked in political and legal contexts where facts and scientific results have a great amount of weight in making a determination. It usually conveys a pejorative connotation that the research has been untowardly driven by political, ideological, financial, or otherwise unscientific motives.
The concept was first invoked in relation to expert testimony in civil litigation. More recently, invoking the concept has been a tactic to criticize research on the harmful environmental or public health effects of corporate activities, and occasionally in response to such criticism. In these contexts, junk science is counterposed to the "sound science" or "solid science" that favors one's own point of view. This dichotomy has been particularly promoted by Steven Milloy and the Advancement of Sound Science Center. This is somewhat different from issues around pseudoscience and controversial science.
Read more about Junk Science: History, Use As Corporate PR, Use By Scientists
Famous quotes containing the words junk and/or science:
“Kitsch ... is one of the major categories of the modern object. Knick-knacks, rustic odds-and-ends, souvenirs, lampshades, and African masks: the kitsch-object is collectively this whole plethora of “trashy,” sham or faked objects, this whole museum of junk which proliferates everywhere.... Kitsch is the equivalent to the “cliché” in discourse.”
—Jean Baudrillard (b. 1929)
“Today the function of the artist is to bring imagination to science and science to imagination, where they meet, in the myth.”
—Cyril Connolly (1903–1974)