1. Pseudoscience

2. What is pseudoscience?
Things that claim to have scientific support, but that don’t survive scientific testing, and don’t follow scientific principles.

3. Big Idea #6
All Sciences are based on the same principles that you can use to tell if something is science or not.

4. Principles of Science 1. Observable
Science only deals with natural patterns and mechanisms that can be observed with the senses or with scientific tools like microscopes.

5. Principles of Science 2. Natural
Scientific explanations cannot include mysterious or supernatural forces, because such forces can’t be disproved.

7. Principles of Science 3. Repeatable
Scientists performing an experiment or making an observation will get similar results every time. (Although the conclusions may be different)

8. Principles of Science 4. Testable
Science makes specific predictions that can be tested to be true or false.

9. Principles of Science 5.Tentative
Scientific theories are never finally “proven.” Theories are always being tweaked, and modified, or even rejected as we learn more. Theories consistently explain observations of naturally occurring events.

12. Science: Follows all the Principles Is observable Is natural
Is repeatable
Is testable
Is tentative

13. New or Young Science: Follows most of the Principles
May be limited by knowledge or technology
Ex. Comas

14. Non-Science: Doesn’t follow the Principles
Things you have to use authority, logic, or intuition to know about.
Ex. Religion, philosophy, personal opinions, ethics

15. Pseudoscience Doesn’t follow the Principles
Claims to have scientific support
Ex. astrology, feng shui, ghost hunters, balance bracelets

16. Identify each statement as following or breaking the principles of science with a yes or no, and then identify the specific scientific principle it followed or broke.
Yes or No Which Principle?
____________ ___________ 1.Green plants will grow towards a light source.
____________ ___________2.Green plants use sunlight to make energy
____________ ___________3.Santa Claus delivers presents to every child in the world on Christmas Eve while they sleep.
____________ ___________4.Extraterrestrial beings have visited Earth.

17. Yes or No Which Principle?
___________ ____________5.Some plants eat other things. ____________ ___________6.If you are a Sagittarius, your horoscope for today is “you’ll be saying, ‘I feel rich.’ The position of the moon high lights unexpected money coming your way” ___________ ____________7.We know that the world began about 6000 years ago, and nothing will change that

18. In August 1996, a panel of scientists revealed a secret held for two years. They unveiled the first evidence of possible life on the Red Planet. The Mars meteorite research team, led by Dave McKay and Everett Gibson, described startling findings in an ancient meteorite which was blasted off Mars and landed in Antarctica. This rock contains organic molecules and microscopic bits of iron oxides like those produced by bacteria. Even more amazing are images of worm-like forms so small that they can only be seen by the most powerful electron microscope. Even though there are other interpretations of each of the pieces of evidence, taken together, “We believe that these tiny guys can be interpreted as fossil bacteria” says McKay.

19. Reactions of other scientists to the discovery have been skeptical, and in some cases, downright hostile. Some scientists, who have studied the meteorite, say that the carbonate minerals containing these features formed at temperatures too high for life to exist. Ralph Harvey suggests the worm- like forms aren’t microfossils, but elongated iron oxides, formed in volcanic fumaroles too hot to support life. Luann Becker suggests that the organic molecules are produced by contamination in Antarctica.

20. The debate rages hot and cold
The debate rages hot and cold. The Life on Mars team continues to collect more data- magnetic and isotope chemistry suggest a cold origin. Meanwhile, the naysayers add more lines of negative evidence: the fossil-like forms are too small to hold a molecule of DNA. Tim Swindle, who took an informal poll of planetary scientists, says it came out even, with most scientists sitting on the fence waiting for more data.