Science by its very nature is comprised of provable theories, methods or data. Knowledge that is scientific is proven by rigorous valid and reliable data, theories or methods. Pseudosciences are those systems that use theories, methods or data and purport to be scientific but are not. The pseudosciences differ from the sciences because they are not capable of being proven. For example, even though many of these portended sciences remain unproven, many people still believe in them. ESP (extrasensory perception), astrology and graphology are examples of pseudosciences and even former first lady Nancy Reagan heavily relied on astrological information. However, scientists and others debate the validity of the pseudosciences. They feel that because fundamental laws cannot be discovered or proven in these systems then their existence remains unproven by the very definition of scientific knowledge. However, those who support and practice the pseudosciences argue that the high number of unexplained phenomena on record is proof of the validity of their beliefs. Of course, many pseudosciences are further eroded in terms of respect in the scientific community because the very unknown nature of their fundamental laws allows for many dubious practitioners to use them as a means of bilking unsuspecting individuals out of money. The profusion of 900-number psychic hotlines in the past few years is evidence of this. People are actually willing to pay out large sums of money per hour to get advice from practitioners of astrology and clairvoyance without any rational way of proving whether or not these practitioners are for real or just out to get rich quick.
While many may misuse pseudoscience as a means of getting rich overnight, this is not to say that those who validly practice in these fields or systems are wrong when they claim that just because something is unproven does not mean there is no proof for it.
...