Dr. Serhii Huliienko on Pseudoscience, Magical Thinking, and Wartime Science in Ukraine
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The New Enlightenment Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2026/05/03
How does Dr. Serhii Huliienko assess pseudoscience, magical thinking, and scientific cooperation in Ukraine during wartime?
Dr. Serhii Huliienko is an associate professor at the National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute,” specializing in membrane separation, reverse osmosis, nanofiltration, and process simulation. His research examines fouling, regeneration of spiral-wound modules, concentration polarization, mass-transfer resistance, BaCl₂ separation, CFD analysis, spacer design, and channel-curvature effects. Across experimental and mathematical studies, he contributes to optimizing pressure-driven membrane technologies for chemical engineering, wastewater treatment, separation-equipment design, and industrial applications worldwide more broadly.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen interviews Dr. Serhii Huliienko about pseudoscience, magical thinking, and scientific culture in Ukraine. Huliienko describes becoming more attentive to weak dissertations, “torsion field” claims, geopathogenic zones, implausible technologies, and religious or quasi-religious healing performances. He compares Soviet and post-Soviet pseudoscience, notes limited direct effects on technical work, and emphasizes cooperation among scientific groups to identify flawed claims, while wartime attacks disrupt infrastructure, equipment costs, and research communities.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: So you are part of a group that discusses scientific topics as professional scientists from a wide range of disciplines, people who spend all their time working in one specific branch of science. Impressive people who know what they are talking about.
A big topic in every country, whether openly discussed or not, is the level of magical thinking, pseudoscience, or supernatural beliefs. Science deals with the natural world, empiricism, experimentation, and the scientific method.
When you come across pseudoscience or magical thinking, what do you do? What do you feel? How do you address it in this country?
Dr. Serhii Huliienko: When I started working with my кафедра, I was in a very narrow professional focus, and I did not pay attention to pseudoscience. I knew that some people had religious or anti-scientific thinking, often connected with religion, but it was not related to my work.
I began paying attention to these topics after I finished my dissertation. I defended it in 2016 and worked on it for almost seven years. At that time, it was possible to spend more time, but now postgraduate students usually have about four years.
After finishing, I became interested in the situation within the scientific community in Ukraine. In my department, scientific groups were quite separated from one another.
I found groups that analyze dissertations and identify cases of pseudoscience. There were scandals involving topics like “smart materials,” questionable quantum concepts, and other claims that did not have a solid scientific basis. Some theories were very weak, although they were presented as serious work.
Before and after the COVID quarantine, the visibility of these issues changed. The level of public attention decreased for a time, with less discussion in social networks and scientific communities. Interest in such cases returned when controversial dissertations appeared again.
There was a controversial figure who defended a PhD thesis in 2021. Later, after the full-scale invasion, he became a collaborator and was killed in Russia. His case brought attention back to the issue.
Recently, I found other examples that were surprising. For instance, teaching materials that claim to address the protection of public health from the negative impact of mobile phones, electronic devices, and so-called “geopathogenic zones,” although I do not clearly understand what those zones are supposed to be.
This was quite troubling for me, especially when such materials mentioned the reality of “torsion fields,” which I consider an example of pseudoscience. It is real technical terminology. It is used for screws. I need to translate this, I prefer to use a more precise term.
It can also be translated as “twisting” or “torsion.” In medieval catapults, torsion was used for proto-artillery. In elevators, there are torsion bolts that protect against overload. When the system tries to lift too much mass, the torsion mechanism can switch off the electric motor. That is real torsion.
But the so-called “torsion field” is presented as something like an electromagnetic field. It looks like fake science, or pseudoscience. I was very upset when I saw this in my university. That was one of the moments when I really noticed the problem.
Jacobsen: Would you say there was more pseudoscience in the Soviet Union or after it?
Huliienko: I am not so old, but I remember situations like this. My parents once took me to something like a show. I saw that it was fake, people went on stage and claimed they had become healthy after a long illness, but I could see they were being helped onto the stage.
So I decided to look at it critically, almost like a reverse show. You can see similar things today in certain religious or quasi-religious settings. I think the level of pseudoscience is at a similar level now compared to the Soviet period.
Jacobsen: There are some indications in research that supernatural belief, religious affiliation, and superstitious practices have increased in both the Russian Federation and Ukraine. In Russia, it is often occult beliefs and fortune tellers. In Ukraine, it is more traditions and superstitions that provide routine and a sense of stability during the war. So both are increasing, but for different reasons. Have you seen this affect your work or your community?
Huliienko: That is a hard question. I would not say it has a direct impact on my work. I spend most of my time in a technical environment, so it is difficult to see a strong influence.
Some people in my environment may have personal beliefs or religious practices, but I have not seen a significant impact on scientific work.
There was a person who tried to promote a technology with a claimed efficiency of about 200 percent. It is necessary to explain that such claims are not realistic. I understood that this person was trying to present himself as a serious technologist, but it was not credible.
Communication among scientific groups is important to identify and challenge such cases.
Cooperation is not very developed, as I see it in my department. Last year, I saw some movement in a positive direction. I hope it will continue to improve.
In a technical sense, we need to find a good way to define cooperation between different groups. But in our field, it is very difficult, so I need to think more about it.
There have also been direct impacts from the war. Some facilities have been attacked. A few weeks ago, there were strikes that damaged infrastructure. Oil refineries were attacked at the beginning, and many industrial objects related to my field have also been affected.
Because of this, plans have changed, including increased costs for equipment. Some important centers in the community have been damaged.
Jacobsen: Thank you very much for the opportunity and your time, Serhii.
Photo by Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 