Some of these signs revolve around how the scientist himself approaches the claim, such as whether he submits it to rigorous study and peer review or whether he issues press releases and runs paid advertisements. Obviously, just because a claim is mentioned in a press release doesn’t mean it’s bogus, but valid claims will usually be subjected to peer review, because most scientists want the badge of honor that comes after their discovery has been proven by their peers.

Other signs deal with the kind of evidence presented, the quality of the evidence, or whether the claim is consistent with already-understood science.

What struck me is that these signs also apply to political discourse. Briefly, you should suspect a political argument if: