SciAM on the Naturalism of Science 2011-02

here, I cite from a recent Scientific American article on the naturalistic basis of science [see 001., below]:

001. Michael Shermer writes in "Houdini's Skeptical Advice: Just Because Something's Unexplained Doesn't Mean It's Supernatural" [2011-02-04]:

"just because something is unexplained does not mean that it is paranormal, supernatural, extraterrestrial or conspiratorial. Before you say something is out of this world, first make sure that it is not in this world, for science is grounded in naturalism, not supernaturalism, paranormalism or any other unnecessarily complicated explanations [hear, hear]."

Note: overcomplicating an explanation is known as a violation of parsimony or Occam's Razor.

 

Meanwhile, naturopathy places within science: the science-ejected and the supernatural.  They state that their foundation is science, and then they go off into cloud-cuckoo land [often SECRETLY: on that SCNM, the VMN-HPN science-ejected vitalistic centerpiece of naturopathic thought is coded, and their requisite science-ejected supernaturalism has been excised!].

So, they violate the boundaries of science, and the boundaries of professional transparency.

The lack of transparency reminds me of the antics of Scientology, actually.