Find an article that claims to be genuinely scientific but is actually pseudoscientific. This article might use scientific evidence but must ultimately make a claim that can not be defended scientific

Find an article that claims to be genuinely scientific but is actually pseudoscientific. This article might use scientific evidence but must ultimately make a claim that can not be defended scientifically.(You can use tabloids and pop science articles.) For general instructions on discussion posts, see the document posted in Week 1.Attach the article to your discussion post or provide reference information (title, author, etc.). Then critique the article, answering the following questions in 300 words: What is nonscientific about this article? What steps or principles of the scientific method does this article violate? Is it possible for the author(s) to be right about their claims anyway? What would be a more scientific way of exploring this topic? Include a link or full citation for your source material.Next, write substantive, thoughtful replies to at least two of your peers' posts. Reply posts should address the following prompts: Do you agree with the assessment in the original post? If you do agree, indicate what convinced you. If you don't agree, explain why. Can you think of another scientific way of examining this topic? You may also share any prior knowledge or personal experience you have with the topic to enrich the discussion.