pseudoscientific

Pseudoscientific refers to claims, beliefs, or practices that are presented as scientific but do not meet the criteria that define reliable science. Such claims rely on methods, standards, or authorities that fall outside established empirical testing, peer review, and open, falsifiable inquiry.

Common features include reliance on anecdotal evidence rather than controlled experiments, vague or shifting definitions, selective use of data, lack of reproducibility, and resistance to refutation. Pseudoscience often appeals to authority, tradition, or conspiracy theories rather than testable hypotheses.

In contrast, science develops testable hypotheses, subjects them to controlled observation and experimentation, requires replicable results, and invites revision in light of new evidence. Pseudoscience tends to avoid falsification, uses ad hoc explanations to shield ideas from counterevidence, and circulates mainly through non-peer-reviewed channels.

Examples frequently cited as pseudoscientific include astrology, homeopathy, certain forms of phrenology or cryptozoology, and various health or fitness claims unsupported by credible clinical trials. Some disputed fields, such as alternative medicine, straddle lines between experimental research and pseudoscience depending on the strength and openness of the evidence base.

The label is debated in philosophy of science and science communication. Critics warn that it can be misused to dismiss unconventional ideas, while proponents stress that distinguishing science from pseudoscience helps prevent the spread of misinformation and protects public understanding of evidence-based methods.

Pseudoscience is defined by its methodological weaknesses rather than by its popularity or content; recognizing its features supports critical evaluation of extraordinary claims.