the official site of Michael Shermer

Order from Skeptic.com

ORDER the hardcover book
ORDER the lecture based on the book (VHS only)

About the book

In The Borderlands of Science, Michael Shermer takes us to the place where real science, borderline science — and just plain nonsense — collide. Shermer argues that while science is the best lens through which to view the world, it is often difficult to decipher where valid science leaves off and borderland, or “fuzzy” science begins. To solve this dilemma, he looks at a range of topics that put this boundary line in high relief. For instance, he debunks the many “theories of everything” that try to reduce the complexity of the world to a single principle. He examines the work of Darwin and Freud, explaining why one is among the great scientists in history, while the other has become nothing more than a historical curiosity. And he reveals how scientists themselves can be led astray, as seen in the infamous Piltdown hoax — the set of ancient hominid bones discovered in England that after decades turned out to be an enormous forgery.

From SETI and acupuncture to hypnosis and human cloning, this enlightening book will help readers stay grounded in common sense amid the flurry of supposedly scientific theories that inundate us every day.

Order from Skeptic.com

ORDER the hardcover book

About the book

A scientist pretends to be a psychic for a day — and fools everyone. An athlete discovers that good-luck rituals and getting into “the zone” may, or may not, improve his performance. A historian decides to analyze the data to see who was truly responsible for the Bounty mutiny. A son explores the possiblities of alternative and experimental medicine for his cancer-ravaged mother. And a skeptic realizes that it is time to turn the skeptical lens onto science itself. (continue reading…)

To be of true service to humanity, science must be
an exquisite blend of data, theory and narrative

Over the past three decades I have noted two disturbing tendencies in both science and society: first, to rank the sciences from “hard” (physical sciences) to “medium” (biological sciences) to “soft” (social sciences); second, to divide science writing into two forms, technical and popular. And, as such rankings and divisions are wont to do, they include an assessment of worth, with the hard sciences and technical writing respected the most, and the soft sciences and popular writing esteemed the least. Both these prejudices are so far off the mark that they are not even wrong. (continue reading…)