Glossary of Terms Used in Teaching About the Nature of Science, p. 6 Fact: In science, an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed. Inference: Description of (or conclusion about) an observation that has been made based on prior knowledge and past experiences.  Law: A descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances. Hypothesis: A testable statement about the natural world that can be used to build more complex inferences and explanations. Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.

Our current access to massive quantities of un-regulated, biased, un-reviewed information, (to which anyone with any motive/background can contribute) can easily cause serious problems.  We are constantly bombarded by claims (or we easily find 'answers' to serious questions) that might appear to support any products, services and/or ideas we wish to "confirm".

Unfortunately, the significant increase in social media platforms/use over the past couple of decades not only "facilitate the creation and sharing of information, ideas, interests, and other forms of expression through virtual communities and networks" (Wikipedia), they can spread Fake news 10 times faster than legitimate news stories. ... and have a much wider reach than true stories. (Internet Society)

When we are offered the opportunity to purchase (or accept) a solution to a problem or desire (health, financial, etc.), or accept an idea as true, how can we determine whether it is legitimate or a scam?  These strategies will help you identify and avoid the more blatant scams.  Complex, well-constructed scams and controversies that are driven more by ideology than facts, however, are more difficult to identify, understand and avoid.  These methods employ some of the processes of Critical Thinking summarized here (no Java).

Those who promote scams will always present you with a body of 'evidence' or information that is designed specifically to convince you that their product, service or idea is valid.  This 'evidence' is usually a clever mix of facts, fiction and fraud:

• Facts:  Information (statements about the natural world) that is true and accurate to the extent that the details and claims can be tested scientifically and validated (confirmed) by anyone anywhere at any time.  It is important to realize that facts are not necessarily invariable Truth - facts are subject to modification (or rejection) as science evolves.  Facts can be thought of as Working Truths, since they provide reliable information about a specific subject at a specific point in time.
• Fiction:  Statements made-up about the real, natural world or about imaginary worlds that have not (and cannot) be tested and validated as accurate and truthful by any legitimate method.  Fictional statements can be used by authors and performers to create compelling stories that resonate with our emotions and provide entertainment &/or valid insights into the natural world and our place in it. 
• Fraud:  Unfortunately, fictional statements can be used by scam artists (sometimes in conjunction with a few legitimate facts) to create compelling stories that resonate with our emotions and convince the unwary individual that the product they're selling or the idea they are promoting is legitimate and based on Facts.
• It is often not easy to separate fact from fiction, particularly if you are not an expert in the subject that is being promoted.  You really have only the word of the scam artist that all the information you have been provided is accurate.  Unless you take the initiative to step away from the wondrous 'opportunity' you have just been offered and carefully evaluate the evidence provided, you stand a very good chance of being scammed.  Critical Thinking is the flame that can help you distill accurate facts from the fiction and illusions presented by scam artists.

Those who successfully develop, promote and execute scams of any kind (from sham beggars, the newest diet fad, nutritional miracle foods, fortune telling, e-mail/Internet hoaxes, structured energized water, to elaborate ponzi schemes) are masters at hijacking our emotions and beliefs by presenting compelling stories and creative performances that effectively present false information as truth.  They know exactly how to deactivate our mental warning systems, present compelling evidence, deflect criticisms, engage our emotions, manipulate our strengths and weaknesses and otherwise deceive us into believing we absolutely must acquire their product or accept their idea as true.  Con artists take advantage of some of our most basic human traits, including:
--- positive attributes - trust, hope, empathy, compassion and a desire to succeed
--- survival instincts like fear and caution
--- negative characteristics - greed, laziness, a desire for power, etc. 
They are also wizards at camouflage and misdirection, so they blend in almost perfectly with legitimate business enterprises.  Fortunately, most scams can be spotted and avoided if you always pay attention to and question each new 'opportunity' that someone offers you.

If you are serious about understanding whether health or performance claims regarding specific water-related products are true and accurate (and not a scam) these guidelines will help you get started.  Most scams rely on the same techniques of deception, so these suggestions will also help you evaluate the thousands of other products, services and ideas falsely marketed as providing some benefit to you:

• You will first need to suspend your belief in any conclusions you might already have about the products, services and or ideas someone offers you. 
• Never automatically assume that someone who claims to be a Reliable Authority on the subject actually is. 
• Never automatically assume that individual stories (testimonials) describing benefits of any 'opportunity' actually prove their effectiveness - no matter how believable they seem. 
• Fortunately, you do not have to be an expert in physics, chemistry, biology, medicine or other field of study to identify and avoid most products, services and ideas for which unsupported claims are made that have no actual basis in fact or reality.  Check for these warning signs:
• 'If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.'
• You must make a decision to accept the 'opportunity' immediately or lose it.
• You hear during a promotional presentation that a health product or service will treat and/or cure a specific disease.  Request official company literature and make sure the same specific claims are made.
• Testimonials are used as the primary method to prove effectiveness instead of controlled, experimental evidence.
• The only evidence of effectiveness comes from those who market the 'opportunity'.  There is no independent validation of claims --- or the alleged evidence is very weak and unsupported.
• Fear is used in the marketing process - if you don't accept this 'opportunity' something bad will happen to you or your family --- or something bad is already happening that accepting our 'opportunity' will correct.  Note, there is generally no independent evidence of the alleged harm - you must take the word of the promoter.  Fear of losing out on a wonderful and rare 'opportunity' to increase your wealth if you fail join the team" is another strategy commonly employed with various pyramid schemes.
• The methods, knowledge and ethics of traditional science and medicine are called into question.
• You were contacted by the person or organization offering the 'opportunity' instead of initiating a search for the solution to a problem yourself - you often discover that you 'have a problem' you were completely unaware of.  Those who market legitimate products, services or ideas also initiate contact, so this action is only an indication to be cautious and watch for other warning signs.
• Invest the time to do an extremely thorough search on the product, service or idea in which you are considering investing - particularly if there are any warning signs.
• How long has the product, service or idea been available, where did it come from, and can the history be traced reliably from independent sources?
• Search for evidence that the product, service or idea is recognized as legitimate by other related groups independent from the manufacturers and promoters.
• Use the Internet and other resources to search specifically for anti-information about the investment 'opportunity' you have been offered.
• At this point in your investigation, you don't need to actually understand details of the criticisms you may find.
• However, be aware that if you don't really understand details of the product, service or idea you are researching (and it really is a scam), you will eventually have to accept either the scam promoters or the critics as the Trusted Authority, and that choice will determine your actions.
• Individuals and organizations that market competing products, services and ideas can be a source of undeserved (and inaccurate) criticism for a legitimate product or service.
• Read blogs and the resulting comments for and against the product, service or idea you are researching. 
• Restrict the search for information about the investment 'opportunity' you are researching to .edu and .gov sites. 
• Check Wikipedia.
• Locate and study skeptical sites specific to the topic you are researching.
• What now, if your initial research turns up warning signs of a scam?
• Cautions and limitations - things are seldom as simple and straightforward as they first appear.

These guidelines are explained in greater detail in the Bottom Line Expanded (Guidelines for Identifying Fiction & Fraud) section of this page.
My What's The Harm page provides some background on the real dangers of products, services and ideas that are marketed by preying on people's fears, manipulating their emotions and providing false hopes based on pseudoscience and wishful thinking.

This section provides details to the guidelines outlined in The Bottom Line:

• You will first need to suspend your belief in any conclusions you might already havea bout the products, services and or ideas someone offers you. 
  "A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it is not open.", Frank Zappa.
  Start with an open mind - think of your open mind as protection from falling into the pits of deception and gullibility.  This is the primary, and perhaps the most difficult, challenge for anyone who is seeking the truth about claims made for ANY product or service or idea - both those that are legitimate and those that are apocryphal, pseudoscientific nonsense. 

  If you begin your research with your mind already made up, and you are only seeking evidence that supports your beliefs, you will very likely be able to find it.  But you will never be able to consider alternate facts and ideas that might actually be true - you will never be able to discover which claims are legitimate and which are false.  Understanding Confirmation Bias is key.

• Never automatically assume that someone who claims to be a Reliable Authority on the subject actually is.  It follows that you should also never automatically assume that the 'evidence' provided by these self-proclaimed Authorities is valid.  Individuals and groups can have powerful motivations (financial &/or ideological) to convince others that their fabricated, fake products/services/ideas with their illusory benefits are valid.

  Scams would not be possible unless the scam artists were exceptionally good at convincing others of their expertise and their sincere desire to provide beneficial products, services and ideas.  If a charlatan can convince you of their expertise, sincerity and desire to help, they are more than half way to selling you on their scam. 

  Often, particularly with bogus products sold by multilevel marketing schemes, the individuals who are actually selling the product are not the actual scam artists.  They are sincere believers who have bought into the 'opportunity', have experienced an expected benefit and are passionate about sharing their story - and earning a profit.  Often these individuals have  have absolutely no scientific or medical background.  They use company-provided terminology, with no real understanding of what they are actually promoting.

• Never automatically assume that individual stories describing benefits of any 'opportunity' actually prove their effectiveness.  These stories (testimonials or anecdotes) may be numerous, passionate and compelling, and the story-tellers are usually sincere and convinced the benefits they experienced were caused by the product, service &/or ideas that they believed in and expected to work.  However, there are almost always other, more reasonable, explanations for the experienced benefits that are dismissed by the 'true believers' because they do not support their beliefs.  If you decide to follow the guidelines below you will read story after story from individuals who absolutely attribute some miraculous event in their life (healings, financial windfalls, etc.) to their use of a specific product, service or idea.  

  I discuss the specific problems with testimonials here.

• It might be instructive to start a list of all the specific benefits attributed to the specific subject you are researching.  Particularly with health-related subjects, you will often discover that a single product, service or idea is advertised as a 'cure' for dozens of different, and unrelated health issues.  Ask yourself why, if this product, service or idea is so incredibly effective and helps cure so many health problems, has mainstream medicine not taken advantage of the financial opportunities available to sell these cures. 

  'Big Pharma' and 'Big Industry' are always interested in making a profit.  What better way to make even more money than selling these hugely effective products, services or ideas - these companies easily have the resources to purchase or outcompete the original manufacturers and promoters. 

  For example, there is no patent on electrolysis machines for making alkaline water: why then have huge medical supply companies that are extremely interested in making a profit chosen to ignore the alkaline water market?  They have the resources to conduct studies that could provide legitimate evidence of effectiveness (and increase sales).  Ask these questions and use your common sense.

• Unfortunately, when you encounter a scam, you are frequently one or more levels removed from the actual scammer.  You are hearing the 'story' and the claims of effectiveness first-hand from individuals who have invested in the 'opportunity' and sincerely believe the product, service or idea has benefited them, the claims and stories they have been told are evidence of effectiveness, and that their own positive experience was caused by accepting the 'opportunity'.
• Fortunately, you do not have to be an expert in physics, chemistry, biology, medicine or other field of study to identify and avoid most products, services and ideas for which unsupported claims are made that have no actual basis in fact or reality.  If you accept the three guidelines above as valid and conduct your search for accurate, trustworthy information with an open mind, there are some fairly simple strategies you can use to expose the claims for most bogus products, services and/or ideas as questionable and suspicious.

  These bogus claims are supported only by carefully fabricated (and often very persuasive), but fundamentally flawed and inaccurate, pseudo-evidence - a house of cards that, with a measure of common sense and a dash of suspicion, can be dismantled.  Below I outlined some initial steps you can take to evaluate claims made by someone trying to persuade you to believe that some product, service or idea with extraordinary properties is worth investing in.

  If the sales pitch has any of the characteristics described below it would be to your advantage to use extreme caution, enlist the help of independent, legitimate subject experts who are NOT in any way associated with the 'opportunity' you are offered and make every effort to track down the truth behind the marketing pitch.

  Warning signs:

• 'If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.' This is perhaps the most widely used warning about potential scams, and it's a good place to start your investigation.  Any time you are offered an 'opportunity' that promises some remarkable reward (significant health or financial benefits, for example) with exceptionally low risk &/or cost, it is remotely possible that the opportunity is valid.  It's far more likely, however, that someone is trying to benefit themselves at your expense.
• You must make a decision to accept the 'opportunity' immediately (i.e. with no time to conduct an effective investigation) or the opportunity disappears.  It is possible that you have a rare chance to accept a legitimate opportunity with a legitimate narrow window for acceptance - but it is far more probable that a scam artist does not want to provide an opportunity for you to research the claims that were made or consider possible negative consequences of the decision.  Once you accept the 'opportunity' it is usually too late to do your research.
• You hear during a promotional presentation that a health product or service will treat and/or cure a specific disease (like arthritis, diabetes, cancer, chrone�s, etc.).  Request official company literature (or check the official company website) and see if the same specific claims are made.  Official health claims from companies that manufacture and promote pseudoscientific, ineffective products and services are almost always vague (reduces aging, provides more energy, helps detoxify your body, etc.) because it is illegal to make claims of treating specific diseases without valid experimental evidence of effectiveness -- and, since the products/services don't actually perform any differently from a placebo, legitimate supporting evidence is impossible to obtain.

  Typically those in the field who actually market the products, services &/or ideas will include the vague claims but they will add more dramatic claims of disease treatment with testimonial supporting evidence.  Any disconnect between official, published claims and those made by independent marketers (who typically rely only on supporting testimonials) is a red flag.  Sometimes you have to read the official claims very carefully to realize that specific health claims for the product/service are not actually being made.

• Testimonials are used as the primary method to establish effectiveness.  Since pseudoscientific products, services and ideas are no more effective than placebo (deliberately inactive) substances in experiments, the only way to provide 'evidence' of effectiveness is by repeating stories of how well they worked from satisfied customers.  While individual experiences can be important in suggesting ideas for further study, they do not (and cannot) by themselves prove cause and effect relationships between the product, service &/or idea and the perceived benefit - no matter how many there are, and no matter how passionate they might be presented.  I discuss the specific problems with testimonial evidence here.
• The only evidence of effectiveness comes from from those who market the 'opportunity'.  There is no independent validation of claims --- or the alleged evidence is very weak and unsupported.  Often, the promotional materials simply state that research proves effectiveness and provide absolutely no details.  If you are researching alternative products that make some sort of health claim always insist on the actual supporting evidence supported by independent, published research (instead of testimonials) that the product is effective.

  As an example, I searched on 'clustered water' and randomly selected one of the 51,000 available options - the actual product doesn't matter, they all are equal in their hype and and in their complete lack of credible evidence.  In this case, however, for example, you can purchase a bottle of Clustered Water for only $80.71!  According to the claims: "Drinking clustered water effectively hydrates human cellular tissues with bound water promoting healthy cells, removal of toxins, promoting health, increased energy level, boosting cellular communication for your active and happy lifestyle.  Dr. Lee Lorenzen's Cluster X2 creates clustered water.
  > Delivers essential nutrients more efficiently.*
  > Increases Cellular hydration .*
  > Improves cellular function and communications.*
  > Promotes waste removal and elimination of toxins.*
  > Replinishes levels of clustered water in our bodies, which decline naturally as we age.*
  Additional claims
  * These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA"

  Not surprisingly, references to any of actual supporting research were conspicuously absent from this site.  There was a lot of science-sounding lingo and a story about how the benefits of clustered water were discovered.  This scenario is typical of most of the claims made for processes that allegedly alter the structure, energy or behavior of pure water molecules - no actual supporting research is presented because water molecules can't be altered in any sustained or meaningful way.

  A search on - clustered water scams - or - clustered water fraud - is an excellent way to begin evaluation of the claims.

• Fear is used in the marketing process - if you don't accept this 'opportunity' something bad will happen to you or your family --- or something bad is already happening that accepting our 'opportunity' will correct.  Note, there is generally no independent evidence of the alleged harm - you must take the word of the promoter.

  An excellent example of this strategy is promotions for alkaline water - which is actually a good subject to illustrate most of the scam marketing practices.  Fear of cancer can be a strong motivating force, and "The AACI chose Alkaline Ionized water as our Number One recommended natural product for cancer patients and cancer prevention."  This claim, states "One of the major health benefits of alkaline ionized water is its ability to destroy and/or inhibit the growth of cancer cells, and inhibit the�formation�of new cancers in the body."  The risk of cancer is scary, and who wouldn't want to buy a product that will protect or heal you and your loved ones...

• The methods, knowledge and ethics of science and traditional medicine are called into question.  Science must be discredited because, not only is it impossible for pseudoscientific products, services and ideas to be tested and proven effective by valid scientific processes, science provides the tools to debunk the pseudoscientific claims.  

  So, you will hear claims that: 

  -	The scientific establishment is only interested in making big money and squashing the competition;
  -	Scientific theories are completely unreliable because they keep changing;
  -	Big mistakes have been made in the medical industry that have led to marketing products that have killed or injured thousands; etc., etc.

  What you will not hear is that: 
  

  -	The marketers of the 'pseudo-opportunities' are also very interested in making big money, and they try to squash their most significant competitor, science;
  -	These 'opportunities' also change over time, but they change in response to implementation of new marketing schemes - in contrast, scientific theories can change but the changes are in response to a better understanding of the natural world;
  -	Accepting these 'opportunities' has harmed many individuals, but there are no requirements to test 'alternative' products for safety and effectiveness or record and report any adverse events to regulatory agencies.  In contrast, legitimate medical products and procedures are required to be tested for safety and proven to be effective, and any adverse events must be recorded and reported to the FDA.

• You were contacted by a person or organization offering the 'opportunity' instead of initiating a search for the solution to a problem yourself..  Those who market legitimate products, services or ideas also initiate contact, so this situation is only an indication to be cautious and watch for other warning signs.  If someone approaches you and offers an 'opportunity' to invest in a product, service or idea that will solve some 'problem' or 'issue' you might not have even realized you had, that can be a red flag.  Few people expend the time and resources to actively promote 'opportunities' unless they stand to gain some benefit.  It is definitely OK for reputable individuals and groups to initiate the contact as they market their products, services or ideas.  If the offer is legitimate both manufacturers/marketers AND the buyer (you) will benefit from investing in the opportunity that's presented.  The trick, of course, is to accurately identify whether the opportunity legitimate.
  
• Invest the time to do an extremely thorough search on the product, service or idea in which you are considering investing.  The larger the required investment you must make, and/or the more significant the promised benefits, the more extensive your investigation should be.  If you are careful, the Internet can be a good place to discover valid information, but using other experts in the subject matter should also be considered.  Investigate:
• How long has the product, service or idea been available, where did it come from, and can the history be traced reliably from independent sources?  Often extremely imaginative yarns are constructed to provide a compelling background story.
• You will have probably been provided with 'evidence' that is as convincing as possible that the 'opportunity' you are considering buying into is a valid investment.  Search for evidence that the product, service or idea is recognized as legitimate by other related groups independent from the manufacturers and promoters - in other words, groups that have no financial or ideological investments in the 'opportunity'.  Independent confirmation of marketing claims is important - if the only supporters are those who developed and market this 'opportunity of a lifetime' that should be cause for concern.  Check with local resources; science teachers, reference librarians, etc.
• Use the Internet and other resources to specifically search for anti-information about the investment 'opportunity' you have been offered.  If you are looking for information about alkaline water, for example, search for: alkaline water scam | alkaline water quackery | alkaline water hoax | alkaline water fraud | alkaline water skepticism | are alkaline water claims legitimate | alkaline water pseudoscience | alkaline water reviews.  Use other names for the product, service or idea in your searches - for example you can substitute ionized water, electroreduced water, antioxidant water, electrolyzed reduced water, structured water, clustered water and ERW water for alkaline water.  Other descriptors can include, complaints, problems, trustworthy, myth, etc.  These different searches will find many of the same articles, but will cover most of the bases. 
  Bottom line - Ignore claims from manufacturers, non-science reviews, personal opinions on social media information, etc. unless they are clearly supported by reputable science-based sources
• At this point in your investigation, you don't need to actually understand details of the criticisms you may find.  If you follow these guidelines and begin to uncover the warning signs that are discussed, the prudent decision would be to avoid the 'opportunity' all together, or at least continue your research at a deeper level.
• However, be aware that if you don't really understand details of the product, service or idea you are researching, you will eventually have to accept either the promoters or the critics as the Trusted Authority, and that choice will determine your actions.  Also, be aware that a successful con artist will be well prepared to answer any criticisms you bring up based on your research.  Their success absolutely depends on their ability to create and maintain a believable and desirable illusion.  If you receive some scientific-sounding answer to your questions that you don't understand, get the answer in writing and check it with an expert who is not involved in the 'opportunity'.  
• Individuals and organization that market competing products, services and ideas can be a source of undeserved (and inaccurate) criticism for a legitimate product or service.  Companies that sell effective water filters, for example, have been known to suggest that drinking distilled water is harmful -- and companies that sell quality distillers can state that drinking only pure, distilled water is healthy.  These competing claims can be a source of confusion, but at this stage of your investigation, you can probably ignore them and focus on other warning signs of fraudulent products, services or ideas.
  
• Read blogs and the resulting comments for and against the product, service or idea you are researching.  Internet searches will often list blogs written both by 'true believers' and 'true skeptics' who will provide arguments and evidence that the product, service or idea either is or is not effective.  Get a feel of how the arguments and evidence is presented both for and against the 'opportunity' you are investigating.  It has been my experience that in most cases the 'true believers' in a pseudoscientific product, service or idea consistently present four main arguments:
1. 'don't knock it if you haven't tried it'
2. 'it has absolutely healed/helped me, my family and numerous acquaintances, so it must work, and that's proof enough for me.' 
3. 'my experiences and the experiences of others are more reliable than scientific experiments in proving the true effectiveness and validity of a product, service or idea.'
4. variations on the theme that 'the tools and processes of science and medicine can't be trusted.  Science don't really provide any useful solutions.  Solutions that are provided by science often change, and the establishment-approved solutions often cause more harm than benefit.'
For example, check out several blogs on Alkaline Water, Andrew Norton Webber and my 1-star review of The Miraculous Properties of Ionized Water.  Also read the comments from those who support these products or ideas - they are often instructive.
It makes sense to me that if it is not possible to provide reliable, reproducible scientific evidence of effectiveness, the next best thing for the promoter is to criticize the processes and tools of science.  Keep in mind, though, that pseudoscientific ideas are untrustworthy precisely because claims that are made can't be independently validated by independent research.

If some unique idea is initially classified as pseudoscience, but it provides claims that can be validated and built upon by other to expand knowledge, it will eventually become part of mainstream science.  Truly pseudoscientific ideas have never contributed anything of value to an understanding of the natural world or lead to the development of products, services or ideas that actually helped solve the real problems and issues that face humanity.

• Restrict the search for information about the investment 'opportunity' you are researching to .edu and .gov sites.  This strategy significantly reduces the 'noise' found on the marketing-focused .com websites.  If you are researching a legitimate 'opportunity' you will probably see a number of education and government sites with information confirming the promotional materials the company provides.  Content on these sites (with the exception of public forums) can usually be trusted to provide mostly accurate information - unlike the .com sites where anyone can post anything, .edu & .gov sites typically have some oversight and regulations. 

  Any product, service or idea that has real, measurable benefits for ordinary people will not remain unnoticed and ignored by the scientific and academic communities or by the government.  The restricted searches would be: alkaline water site:.edu | ionized water site:.edu | alkaline water site:.gov | electroreduced water site:.gov | etc.  More often than not, because the promoters frequently hijack legitimate scientific terms and used them in a meaningless context, when you search in the .edu and .gov sites you will often find legitimate sites that use the same terms but have no relationship to the product, service or idea you are researching. 

  Searching websites that are (or used to be) reserved for non-profit organizations, site:.org, is a possible source of useful information, but there are significant hazards to locating reliable, unbiased information on these sites.  Some non-profits can be extremely partisan and provide exclusively biased and one-sided information.  In recent years, pseudo-org sites have been formed that are obviously commercial ads of pseudoscientific products and services that have a search on alkaline water site:.org returned the following links: alkaline.org/alkaline_water.htm, alkalinewaterionizers.org, ionizers.org, and waterionizer.org - none of which appear to be non-profit organizations, and all return strictly marketing pages for alkaline water.

  Also consider using scholar.google.com "a simple way to broadly search for scholarly literature. From one place, you can search across many disciplines and sources: articles, theses, books, abstracts and court opinions, from academic publishers, professional societies, online repositories, universities and other web sites."  If scientific claims for some product, service or idea are made that are legitimate, you should be able to locate references here.

• Check Wikipedia.  Not all subjects you investigate will be covered, (or covered completely accurately) but any information you might find there will provide additional data for your search and give you a better picture of the 'opportunity' you are researching.
• Locate and study skeptical sites that are specific to the topic you are researching.  If you are researching water-related 'opportunities' in which to invest your time and money, please spend some time on Dr. Lower's website.  He is a retired chemistry professor who has obviously spent a tremendous amount of time researching water-related scams and publishing his results because, "Chemistry is my favorite subject, and I hate to see it misused to confuse, mislead or defraud the public."

  Examine the site content carefully, make notes, take the criticisms to the individual promoting the 'opportunity' you are investigating and see what the response is.  What seems to be the driving force behind the critical site - why has the author invested time and energy in researching the issue and making it public?

  Again, be aware that severe criticism may come from individuals or groups that have a financial or ideological agenda that conflicts with the opportunity you are researching.  The critics themselves may or may not be legitimate.  Consequently, criticism by itself is often not sufficient reason to reject the opportunity.

• What now, if your initial research reveals warning signs of a scam?  If one or more of these preliminary investigations uncovers any information that casts doubt on the glowing claims and testimonials you have been provided about the 'opportunity' for investment you have been offered it would be prudent to 'back off' and either politely decline the 'opportunity' or take the next steps to explore the claims in greater depth.
• Cautions and limitations - things are seldom as simple and straightforward as they first appear:  Hopefully these guidelines will be effective at enabling you to identify and avoid many scams - and accept legitimate opportunities where both you and the promoter benefit.

  The guidelines above should be sufficient to begin the process of exposing most of the outright scams that are perpetuated by pseudoscientific charlatans which mainly involve the goal of appropriating your money.  However, there are many important issues that have advocates with diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive positions on exactly the same topic.  Examples of several of these controversial topics include:

• scientific evolution vs. biblical creationism
• supporters vs. opponents of drinking water fluoridation
• supporters vs. opponents of vaccination
• those who believe climate change is happening now and is caused by human activity vs. those who believe climate change is either not real or whatever might be going on is not the result of human activity
• supporters vs. opponents of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). 

As you go through the process outlined above for these and related topics,  you will discover that the advocates on each side claim to have valid scientific evidence that supports their position and proves the other side is wrong.  Examining these topics to determine which side has the most reliable evidence and conclusions requires a more complex evaluation of the claims than described above.  Some expertise in the subject matter is also helpful so you can review the scientific evidence that's provided instead of relying on the expertise of others - who may contribute their own biases to the evaluation.  Assistance for this next level of exploration can be found in my discussion of Critical Thinking and related subjects.

There are times and places where it may be appropriate to provide short, simple answers.  My website is not one of them, and if you are serious about really understanding complex issues this is not the place for simplistic explanations. 

Visitors who are sincerely seeking reliable, truthful answers to their questions are not stupid, and you deserve complete and accurate answers, not just a superficial review.

I tend to go into extreme depths trying to explain the concepts on my website because I don't believe short and easy descriptions are a legitimate or useful way to explain complex subjects -- and drinking water related topics (whether they are treatment or health related) are complex.  In my experience the more important a decision or choice I need to make is, the more 'shades of gray' there are that need to be evaluated.  In fact, one of the primary indications I use as a warning that explanatory information is not to be trusted is when it is completely one-sided -- any contrary information is either not provided or summarily dismissed as false or irrelevant.

One common strategy used by promoters of scams and pseudoscientific beliefs is to provide quick and easy 'answers' and 'solutions' to explain extremely complex issues.  These simplistic 'answers' and 'solutions' are found on Internet searches, in marketing propaganda, from testimonials of acquaintances, and in the pronouncements of self-proclaimed experts.  As noted elsewhere, though, there is often no real, factual substance to these easily acquired 'answers/solutions', and they are subjective, biased and incomplete (only one perspective is presented), flawed, just plain wrong, and occasionally they are completely fraudulent - particularly when the groups or individuals that provide these 'answers/solutions' have a serious monetary or ideological agenda. 

In my experience this readily acquired, quick and easy (and scientifically inaccurate) information can't be countered with a quick and easy rebuttal that will convince someone who is seriously looking for real answers and solutions not to waste their time, energy and resources - particularly those who are not experts in the subject. 

For example, if you don't have the background and experience to understand chemistry and the way the digestive system and body manage pH, it is extremely difficult to determine which of these two alkaline water claim is accurate.  The claim by those who promote alkaline water that:
"Drinking alkaline water daily may help the body excrete toxins"
can't realistically be countered with my rebuttal that
"There is absolutely no reliable scientific evidence that alkaline water (pH above 7) will have any different, and better effect on toxin removal (or any other health issue) than drinking regular water (pH around 7)."

• The claim of health benefits comes from the 'experts' at waterionizerexpert.com - a team with "over 20 years of combined experience", featuring dozens of stories (testimonials) from individuals who reported experiencing miraculous health benefits from drinking alkaline water, and offering about two dozen ionizers ranging from $1,000 to $4,000.  Similar health claims and testimonials can be found on all other water ionizer (and altered/enhanced water) websites. 
  Descriptions of these products/services have been carefully covered with a thin veneer of scientific-sounding phraseology, and passionate stories have been collected to 'prove' their effectiveness.  The 'science' that's provided is either very easy for a non-expert to understand (or so detailed and convoluted that it just looks impressive and convincing), and the testimonials are compelling.  If the health claims and supporting stories are well presented with conviction and enthusiasm, someone seeking better health can easily be persuaded they are reliable evidence of actual effectiveness.
   
• The counter-claim that virtually all alleged health benefits mentioned on the waterionizerexpert website (and on all other ionization and altered/enhanced water sites) are NOT the result of any special chemical or physical properties of alkaline water (or any other specially treated pure water) comes from, well... me (with over 20 years experience) - and others who have a passion for helping people understand the distinction between science and pseudoscience.

A typical visitor trying to sort out fact from fiction faces a significant challenge: which information source is a Trustworthy and Reliable Authority on the subject -- whether the subject is alkaline water or any other 'magical' product or service on the market. 

Should you  trust the product manufacturers, promoters and those who provide the glowing testimonials who are promising a cure for your health problems (which you may desperately need)? 
Or
Should you trust the skeptic who warns you to be cautious, invest the time and effort to do some serious research, and hopefully save your money (and perhaps your health) by avoiding the temptation to purchase a product or service (or buy into an idea) that fundamentally does not (and cannot) work as advertised?

Manufacturers and promoters of pseudoscientific products, services and ideas ('opportunities') have significant advantages over the skeptics who are trying to inform people and warn them about the potential pitfalls of buying into these deceptions.

It is extremely simple to make a claim of miraculous benefits and provide dozens of glowing testimonials for these 'opportunities'.  Providing simple refutations on my website will probably not demonstrate sufficient Authority to counter the claims of effectiveness made by the marketers and those who provide supporting testimonials.  It has been my experience, both talking with people personally and communicating with website visitors, that a very detailed case needs to be developed to unravel and expose the many layers of deception used in the pseudoscientific promotions.  After all, someone who is looking for information on these 'opportunities' probably has some persistent health (or other) problem that traditional treatments have not been able to fix -- they may be willing to try anything.

As a consequence, the content on my website is extensive, and my explanations of any specific subject tend to be quite long and detailed.  I try to provide as much information as possible as well as relevant references where visitors can go to verify that the material I provide is accurate and obtain additional information if required. 

Most pages on a specific topic will begin with The Bottom Line, a section that provides a brief outline of my conclusions about the topic under discussion.  If you believe my conclusions are accurate and valid, you do not need to read further.  However, if you would like to evaluate the reasoning and/or references behind my conclusions, they are provided in the detailed content on the rest of the page.

Wishing you success on your quest for accurate, relevant knowledge.

One of our most important and deeply engrained survival mechanisms is trust in others.  This instinct was built up over millennia of homo sapiens' development.  During most of our history, before we learned to farm (around 10,000 - 12,000 years ago) and create sufficient food supplies to enable hundreds and thousands of individuals to live closely together, people lived in small tribes of hunter-gatherers.  "Besides having different methods of food acquisition, hunter-gatherer peoples differed from modern agricultural societies in several cultural respects. Because of the limited distribution of wild resources, the number of peoples that could survive on a given area of land was limited by the land�s capability of producing a sustainable food supply. Therefore, hunter-gatherers typically lived in �band�-level social units, consisting of one to several families. These bands were typically egalitarian, shared resources and hunted and gathered cooperatively. These groups could split up or join with other bands in order to best exploit resources (Academic American Encyclopedia, 1997)."

The key concept in this early lifestyle was cooperative living - everyone's survival depended on sharing resources and accurately transferring survival skills and knowledge from one generation to the next by verbal story-telling and demonstrations.  Relationships, trust and communication were the key to survival - you listened carefully to stories and watched demonstrations on how to survive (from the survivors), trusted that their wisdom was communicated accurately and hopefully were able to build a successful life on that knowledge - you could not read a book on how and when to find fruits or Google the best way to hunt a mastodon.  It is unlikely that wholesale fraud would have been a successful strategy during this period of human development - transferring deliberately inaccurate information to specific tribal members might have helped promote one's own status, but there would have been a limited number of potential 'marks'.  Wholesale deception of the community would have probably lead to the tribe's demise.

Once agricultural societies developed, however, many unrelated people could live in the same area - stable villages, towns and eventually cities arose.  Survival no longer depended on the coordinated efforts of a small group of people.  According to The Ascent of Humanity by Charles Eisenstein, "With agriculture, a new category of being came into existence: the stranger.  Before then, humans lived in tribes of at most 500 people, comprising bands of about 15-20 people each.  It is not difficult to know 500 people by name and face, especially after a lifetime of frequent association, but beyond that the identifying structures of kith and kin become tenuous and some people necessarily fall into the category of "other".  ...Relationships in primitive societies are guided by kin structures that provide each person a place relative to each other person.  When society expands in scale to the point where two people are strangers, unable to place each other in their respective constellations of self, then there is a serious potential for conflict.  Some kind of impersonal governance is required in the absence of structures of known relationship.  After all, when someone is not "self" then he is a potential competitor whose interests might be at odds with ours. Practically speaking, if someone is a stranger there is no rational reason not to cheat them.  Since he is not linked to your own social network, the consequences need never come back to haunt you."

With the rise of agricultural societies division of labor and job specialization became possible.  It is easy to imagined that one of the first industries of the agricultural age consisted of con artists - individuals who learned how to manipulate people's innate belief and trust in story telling and performances that had evolved to ensure survival to their exclusive advantage.  These early con artists discovered that by crafting a convincing story and delivering a believable performance they could hijack someone's emotions and beliefs, gain their trust and convince them to believe wholeheartedly in whatever product or idea they were promoting. 

Story-telling and performances continue to be an important part of human culture today, and they remain a primary component of early childhood learning.  Even as adults, a well-told story or an engaging performance can lead to an extremely emotional experience.  For example, think of a well written and performed fictional story, play or movie you have experienced - how how emotionally powerful it was and how real it seemed.  If you have ever seen a well performed magic trick, you know how incredibly deceptive and effective at producing an illusion of reality a good magician can be. 

Magic tricks, fictional stories, plays and movies are intentionally deceptive and entertaining.  The authors of these illusions and literary devices make no claim that their creations are factual.  Con artists promote their scams as factual using many of the same devices and psychological tricks.  However they conceal their deceptive practices and employ all their presentation and performance talents to present their stories and illusions as true.  Their goal, of course, is to build trust and empathy, convince people that their remarkable 'opportunity'  is legitimate and sell their product, service or idea to those who have let down their defenses.  go to YouTube and watch some well-performed magic tricks.

As noted elsewhere, those who fall for scams are not necessarily unintelligent, ignorant or uneducated - they have simply not activated their Critical Thinking abilities and have enabled the con artist's skills to convince them that a fictitious story and ineffective product is legitimate.  Scams can be identified and avoided, but it takes effort --- and your opponents, the individuals or organizations presenting the extraordinary 'opportunities' are often extremely skilled at avoiding detection.

Fiction, biases, scams and pseudoscience are different manifestations of the same fundamental characteristics, and they can be detected and avoided using many of the same processes.

If you are seriously interested in learning how to separate true, reliable facts from the tangled web of fiction that's available at the click of a mouse - or the swipe of a finger - the resources below will help.  If you do not have a strong background in the sciences it will be easy to become overwhelmed.  I probably shouldn't generalize, but it seems as though many people prefer information that's quickly available and neatly packaged in easily consumable and understandable bites. 

The problem with this expectation is that the more biased and less reliable the information is, the easier it is to package and distribute in neat, consumable, understandable (but deceptive) bites.  Science, on the other hand, is often messy and not easy to simplify.  Information provided by reliable sources who attempt to counter fiction and pseudoscience not only must present understandable valid facts, they must include specific details outlining why fraudulent claims are inaccurate - and it can take pages of details to explain the fictional claims - check out my alkaline and enhanced water pages for two examples. 

Complicating the problem is the fact that those who distribute fraudulent, fictitious information actively market their products, services or ideas.  They relentlessly promote their alkaline, structured, vortexed, energized water, their failsafe get-rich scheme, miracle cures, a fortune telling or s�ance session, etc., etc.  They are proactive, energetically engaging with people for the specific purpose of selling their 'opportunity', and they display their wares in the most compelling and convincing manner possible.

Those who wish to counter the scams, however, are generally more reactive - I am speaking for myself and from my observations.  We provide information to assist seekers who have questions about the legitimacy of various 'opportunities' find reliable answers.  However, we typically are not 'out there' going door to door with 'Believe in Science' tracts, handing out 'Science-is-Better' flyers in malls and holding anti-scam parties.

Consequently, those who are looking for reliable answers must initiate the process.  They must first recognize that an 'opportunity' they have been offered might not be legitimate.  Then they must take the initiative to seek out information that is available, hope they put in the right search terms, trust that Google has indexed trustworthy sites and finally open the sites with reliable information.  Then the content of the chosen site must be compelling enough to convince the seeker that their 'opportunity' is a scam - or in some instances is legitimate.

If you are not a science geek who is very familiar with how the processes of science work, it might be instructive to read content from the first few references below.  Then take a look at how scammers bypass and deflect the protection of scientific validation to perpetuate fraud.  Finally, come back around and examine the characteristics of pseudoscience.

References that describe the Characteristics of Science:

Understanding Science 101:  "To understand what science is, just look around you. What do you see? Perhaps, your hand on the mouse, a computer screen, papers, ballpoint pens, the family cat, the sun shining through the window �. Science is, in one sense, our knowledge of all that � all the stuff that is in the universe: from the tiniest subatomic particles in a single atom of the metal in your computer's circuits, to the nuclear reactions that formed the immense ball of gas that is our sun, to the complex chemical interactions and electrical fluctuations within your own body that allow you to read and understand these words. But just as importantly, science is also a reliable process by which we learn about all that stuff in the universe. However, science is different from many other ways of learning because of the way it is done. Science relies on testing ideas with evidence gathered from the natural world. This website will help you learn more about science as a process of learning about the natural world and access the parts of science that affect your life."  This is an very well presented description of what science is (and is not) and how it works to provide accurate and useful information to understand the universe we live in.  Developed by the University of California Museum of Paleontology

What is Science?  "Science is the concerted human effort to understand, or to understand better, the history of the natural world and how the natural world works, with observable physical evidence as the basis of that understanding. It is done through observation of natural phenomena, and/or through experimentation that tries to simulate natural processes under controlled conditions."  This is an excellent series of articles on the basics of science by Bruce Railsback, Professor of Sedimentary Petrology & Geochemistry at the University of Georgia Franklin College of Geology. (also here)

Why Do Many Reasonable People Doubt Science? - Joel Achenbach, National Geographic, March 2015 (Available as PDF)
(also published in The Washington Post, February 2015, as Why science is so hard to believe)
"We live in an age when all manner of scientific knowledge—from the safety of fluoride and vaccines to the reality of climate change—faces organized and often furious opposition.  Empowered by their own sources of information and their own interpretations of research, doubters have declared war on the consensus of experts.  In a sense all this is not surprising.  ...Our lives are permeated by science and technology as never before.  For many of us this new world is wondrous, comfortable, and rich in rewards—but also more complicated and sometimes unnerving.  We now face risks we can't easily analyze."

Probably the most famous set of guidelines for identifying false information that's presented as scientific fact is Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit described in his book, TheDemon- Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark and "The Fine Art of Baloney Detection, 1995". A deception arises, sometimes innocently but collaboratively, sometimes with cynical premeditation. Usually the victim is caught up in a powerful emotion—wonder, fear, greed, grief. Credulous acceptance of baloney can cost you money; that's what P. T. Barnum meant when he said, "There' a sucker born every minute" But it can be much more dangerous than that, and when governments and societies lose the capacity for critical thinking, the results can be catastrophic—however sympathetic we may be to those who have bought the baloney. In science we may start with experimental results, data, observations, measurements, "facts" We invent, if we can, a rich array of possible explanations and systematically confront each explanation with the facts. In the course of their training, scientists are equipped with a baloney detection kit. The kit is brought out as a matter of course whenever new ideas are offered for consideration. If the new idea survives examination by the tools in our kit, we grant it warm, although tentative, acceptance. If you're so inclined, if you don't want to buy baloney even when it's reassuring to do so, there are precautions that can be taken; there's a tried-and-true, consumer-tested method. What’s in the kit? Tools for skeptical thinking. What skeptical thinking boils down to is the means to construct, and to understand, a reasoned argument and—especially important—to recognize a fallacious or fraudulent argument. The question is not whether we like the conclusion that emerges out of a train of reasoning, but whether the conclusion follows from the premise or starting point and whether that premise is true. Among the tools: Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the 'facts'. Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view. Arguments from authority carry little weight — "authorities" have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that in science there are no authorities; at most, there are experts. Spin more than one hypothesis. If there's something to be explained, think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests by which you might systematically disprove each of the alternatives. What survives, the hypothesis that resists disproof in this Darwinian selection among "multiple working hypotheses," has a much better chance of being the right answer than if you had simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy. Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours. It's only a way station in the pursuit of knowledge. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don't, others will. Quantify. If whatever it is you're explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you'll be much better able to discriminate among competing hypotheses. What is vague and qualitative is open to many explanations. Of course there are truths to be sought in the many qualitative issues we are obliged to confront, but finding them is more challenging. If there's a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise) — not just most of them. Occam's Razor. This convenient rule-of-thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler. Always ask whether the hypothesis can be, at least in principle, falsified. Propositions that are untestable, unfalsifiable are not worth much. Consider the grand idea that our Universe and everything in it is just an elementary particle — an electron, say — in a much bigger Cosmos. But if we can never acquire information from outside our Universe, is not the idea incapable of disproof? You must be able to check assertions out. Inveterate skeptics must be given the chance to follow your reasoning, to duplicate your experiments and see if they get the same result.

How to Identify & Avoid Scams - Arm Yourself Against Exploitation

The SMELL Test - Won't Get Fooled Again:  "It's now up to us to construct our own truth filters in the face of a communication revolution that has created profound paradoxes:" polarized and contradictory news and views; anyone with access to the Internet can now be a "journalist", and there is no longer consistent, reliable oversight to ensure published information is accurate and reasonably unbiased.  When faced with information claiming to be factual, employ the SMELL Test.  First consider the Source, then their Motivation, next examine the Evidence - is that evidence Logical and is anything Left out.  This article was written to help the reader identify legitimate balanced news, avoid false reporting and recognize strong bias where you are only getting a carefully selected part of the truth.  The guidelines presented, however, translate to identifying information provided to support most scams, and is well worth reading.

Think Before Hitting "Share":  "When you are active on social media, whether personally or professionally, it is important to be able to distinguish content that can be trusted from rumor. Often a quick search will tell you if there is evidence to support the content being shared. Before you retweet or share something on social media, take a moment to assess the reliability of the info. One quick way to test information for reliability is to use the CRAAP Test. CRAAP is an acronym that stands for Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose."  This article is also not specifically about recognizing product scams, but again the principles are transferrable. 

Avoid Scams:  "Scam artists use clever schemes to defraud millions of people around the globe each year. Being on guard online can help you maximize the benefits of the internet and minimize your chance of being defrauded. Learn how to recognize common scams and what you can do to avoid them."

The psychological tricks that scammers use:  "...certain behavioral patterns have been exploited by hustlers for centuries and that victims behave that way not because they're uncooperative or stupid but because the human psyche is made that way."

How Con Artists Work:  "You might think you can spot a con artist because he's someone you instinctively "don't trust." But the term con artist is short for confidence artist -- they gain your confidence just long enough to get their hands on your money. They can be very charming and persuasive."

How con artists trick your mind:  "IIntelligence and experience offers no protection against scammers, says Modic. �If it did, then better educated people and older people would be less likely to fall for scams. And that is not supported by my research.  ...�

7 Online Scams and How to Avoid Them::  Readers Digest

SCAMWatch - is a website run by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). SCAMwatch provides information to consumers and small businesses about how to recognize, avoid and report scams.  How to protect yourself./a>

The Red Flags of Quackery - 16 warning signs that will help you avoid many scams.

Drinking Water and Water Treatment Scams - "Everyone is susceptible to being scammed regardless of age, sex, race, religion, education or professional background. Those who lack a basic understanding of scientific principles are easier prey for scam artists, but many people are susceptible to scams simply because they want to believe in miracles."  A slide show based on this article.

Nutrition Misinformation: How to Identify Fraud and Misleading Claims - "With the growing body of knowledge supporting the connection between diet and overall health, many consumers are taking personal health and nutrition decisions into their own hands. Individuals are becoming more reliant on nutrition information from sources such as websites, television, radio, newspapers, advertisements, friends, and family, thereby creating opportunities for nutrition misinformation and health fraud. Health fraud is defined as misrepresentation of health claims, and can range from a self-proclaimed medical expert who has discovered a so-called �miracle cure,� to a food supplement or drug that is promoted with unsubstantiated health claims."

Snopes.com - Check out the validity of rumors you might encounter: "The snopes.com website was founded by Barbara and David Mikkelson, who live and work in the Los Angeles area. What they began in 1995 as an expression of their shared interest in researching urban legends has since grown into what is widely regarded by folklorists, journalists, and laypersons alike as one of the World Wide Web's essential resources."  Another Urban Legend resource.

Characteristics of Pseudoscience

How to Spot Pseudoscience - "I've created a 15-point checklist that I call "How to Spot Pseudoscience." When you hear any claim about a new product, a new discovery, or some paranormal ability, run it through these fifteen questions and you'll get a pretty clear idea of whether or not it has any merit.  ...With this checklist, anyone is well equipped to filter out the chaff from the wheat. Questions like these are what should be taught in schools, encouraging young people to begin looking at all the crazy misinformation in our world with critical analysis. The ability to tell fact from fiction is essential to our progress as a species as we search for the next great discoveries in medicine, space exploration, computing, power generation, and every other scientific field.  Brian Dunning

Distinguishing Science and Pseudoscience - "The word "pseudo" means fake. The surest way to spot a fake is to know as much as possible about the real thing�in this case, about science itself. Knowing science does not mean simply knowing scientific facts (such as the distance from earth to sun, the age of the earth, the distinction between mammal and reptile, etc.) It means understanding the nature of science�the criteria of evidence, the design of meaningful experiments, the weighing of possibilities, the testing of hypotheses, the establishment of theories, the many aspects of scientific methods that make it possible to draw reliable conclusions about the physical universe."  Rory Coker, Ph.D.

Hauntings, homeopathy, and the Hopkinsville Goblins: using pseudoscience to teach scientific thinking - "From Dr. Oz promoting homeopathy to Deepak Chopra extolling the virtues of quantum healing, students are bombarded with questionable claims that require careful examination. Although students have access to more information than ever before, many do not possess the skills to distinguish good information from bad. Exacerbating this problem is the prevalence of pseudoscientific information available in the popular media, online, and even the classroom."

How to Recognize Pseudoscience - "There are certain clues which tend to indicate the presence of pseudoscientific methodology. These are not hard and fast rules - just because a theory fits some of the criteria below does not mean it should be discounted. Remember that many genuine scientific discoveries began life as the subject of ridicule so be fair when you pass judgment."

10 Questions To Distinguish Real From Fake Science - "Pseudoscience is the shaky foundation of practices�often medically related�that lack a basis in evidence. It�s �fake� science dressed up, sometimes quite carefully, to look like the real thing. If you�re alive, you�ve encountered it, whether it was the guy at the mall trying to sell you Power Balance bracelets, the shampoo commercial promising you that �amino acids� will make your hair shiny, or the peddlers of � natural remedies� or fad diet plans, who in a classic expansion of a basic tenet of advertising, make you think you have a problem so they can sell you something to solve it."

Where is the proof in pseudoscience?  "The word 'pseudoscience' is used to describe something that is portrayed as scientific but fails to meet scientific criteria. This misrepresentation occurs because actual science has creditability (which is to say it works), and pseudoscience attempts to ride on the back of this credibility without subjecting itself to the hard intellectual scrutiny that real science demands."

Teaching the Nature of Science using Pseudoscience - "What makes science different from other ways of knowing, including philosophy or religion? How do you distinguish between genuine science and pseudoscience? Many introductory science courses have a goal to teach these ideas. However, without practice students are unlikely to achieve these important goals. Hence, the following curriculum. It can be taught using perhaps 5-10% of the time available in one semester." Dr. Douglas Duncan, University of Colorado