Changes

*Overestimation of one's own intelligence, knowledge, or proficiency.

*Overestimation of one's own intelligence, knowledge, or proficiency.

*Underestimation of the intelligence of critics and peers

*Underestimation of the intelligence of critics and peers

*Belief there is a conspiracy to either suppress their ideas or artificially bolster the prevailing idea.  

*Belief there is a [[Atheism and the suppression of science|conspiracy]] to either suppress [[Young earth creationism|their ideas]] or artificially bolster the [[Evolution|prevailing idea]].  

*A tendency to attack the most well-established scientists and scientific theories.

*A tendency to attack the most well-established scientists and scientific theories.

Mathematician [[John Baez]] developed a list of attributes known as the ''Crackpot Index'' which he bills as "A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to physics.<ref>http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html</ref>" The index contains a list of statements for the reader to consider, and assigns a point value to each item the reader agrees with. The more points accumulated, the more of a "crackpot" the reader is in the author's eyes. Some of the items include:

Mathematician [[John Baez]] developed a list of attributes known as the ''Crackpot Index'' which he bills as "A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to physics.<ref>http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html</ref>" The index contains a list of statements for the reader to consider, and assigns a point value to each item the reader agrees with. The more points accumulated, the more of a "crackpot" the reader is in the author's eyes. Some of the items include:

*"...claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided (without good evidence)."

*"...claim that [[Special theory of relativity|special]] or [[general relativity]] are [[Logical_Flaws_in_E%3Dmc²|fundamentally misguided]] (without good evidence)."

*"...arguing that a current well-established theory is "only a theory", as if this were somehow a point against it."

*"...arguing that a current [[Evolution|well-established theory]] is "only a theory", as if this were somehow a point against it."

*"...offering prize money to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory."

*"...offering [[Kent_Hovind#.24250.2C000_Offer|prize money]] to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory."

*"...claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions."

*"...claiming you have a [[Intelligent design|revolutionary theory]] but giving no concrete testable predictions."

   

   

== Crank style ==

== Crank style ==

Cranks often employ similar tactics during debate. These tactics may consist of, but are by no means limited to:

Cranks often employ similar tactics during debate. These tactics may consist of, but are by no means limited to:

*Routinely ignores the finer points that are prerequisite to understanding the mainstream theory.

*Routinely ignores the finer points that are prerequisite to understanding the mainstream theory.

*Failure to use standard methods of notation or terminology.

*Failure to use standard methods of notation or [[Baraminology#Baraminological_Terms|terminology]].

*Attempt to redefine established terminology.

*Attempt to redefine [[Creation Museum|established terminology]].

*Ignore all evidence that is presented that contradicts their own hypothesis.   

*Ignore all evidence that is presented that contradicts their own hypothesis.