Page 4 of 7
Often contradict themselves, even in their own terms. When such logical contradictions of pseudoscience are pointed out, they are imply ignored or rationalized away.
Deliberately creates mystery where none exists, by omitting crucial information and important details. Anything may be made "mysterious" by omitting what is known about it or by presenting completely imaginary details.
Does not progress. There are fads, and pseudo-masters may switch from one fad to another; but within a given topic, no progress is made. Little or no new information is uncovered. New theories are seldom proposed. Old concepts are rarely modified or discarded in light of new discoveries, since pseudo-masters rarely make new discoveries. The older the idea, the more respect it receives. No natural phenomena or processes previously unknown to science have ever been discovered by pseudo-masters. Indeed, pseudo-masters almost invariably deal with phenomena well known to scientists, but little known to the general public, so that the public will swallow whatever the pseudo-master wants to claim, such as fire walking.
Attempts to persuade with rhetoric, propaganda, and misrepresentation rather than valid evidence (which presumably does not exist). Books written by pseudo-masters offer examples of almost every kind of fallacy of logic and reason known to scholars, and they have invented some new ones of their own. A favorite device is what pseudo-masters call the "Galileo Argument." This consists of a pseudo-master comparing him or herself to Galileo, and saying that just as the pseudo-master is believed to be wrong, so Galileo belief that the earth was round was thought wrong by his contemporaries. Therefore, the pseudo-master must also be right, just as Galileo was. The conclusion is invalid. Moreover, Galileo's ideas were tested, verified, and accepted promptly by his scientific colleagues. The rejection came from established religion that favored the pseudoscience that Galileo's findings contradicted.