Response to discussion

How would you respond to a discussion like this:

Carefully define the terms 'science' and 'pseudoscience'. Thoroughly explain the difference between them and provide your references.

Science is defined as a body of knowledge consisting of measurable or verifiable facts that are acquired through application of the scientific method and generalized into scientific laws or principles.  Science is a means for uncovering truth that investigates casual explanations to discover empirical facts about how the world works.  Pseudo-science is defined as a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.   Pseudo scientific explanations are often overly complex, raises more questions, and doesn't fit in with what we already know about how the world works.

Also, give at least one example of what counts as science, and of what counts as pseudoscience. Explain how you can tell the difference.

An example of science is the metamorphosis of a caterpillar to a butterfly.  During my childhood, I would visit my grand mother in N.C. She lived in an area surrounded by nature's beauty, and butterflies were rampant at her house.  It was there that I first witnessed the transformation of a caterpillar into a butterfly.  I was young, and had no preconceived ideas about what was supposed to transpire, so I was completely fascinated about the wondrous process of this event.  I didn't consider the science behind this. nor did I ask pertinent questions to verify my claims.  I was just a witness to a beautiful creation, which happened to be science.  An example of pseudo-science is homeopathy.  This is a system of treating a sick person by giving extremely small amounts of natural substances that, if given in larger amounts to healthy people would produce the same effects as the disease.  In this case, the difference between science and pseudo- science is the fact that it has been proven and shown beyond any doubt how a caterpillar becomes a butterfly.  With the case of homeopathy, it claims to work, however, when you ask the necessary questions about the claim, for instance, does it fit with the way the world works,  has the claim been verified with someone else, or has anyone tried to disprove the claim, it falls into a pseudo-science category.

Are there any pseudo-scientific claims that you hold? If yes, why is it? 

I actually believe there's something to the Bermuda Triangle, which is also known as the Devil's Triangle.   This is an area of many unexplained events like airplanes and ships disappearing under mysterious circumstances.   Because of so many weird occurrences, I would never consider going near that area.

Determine at least two (2) ways in which the material discussed this week has changed your own thinking.

One subject that has sort of changed my thinking is the video discussing the effects of a full moon.  I work in the health care field and whenever there's a full moon, we brace ourselves for a hectic night.  Before watching the video, I really thought there was some scientific correlation between the full moon and how it effects certain people.  Another take away from this discussion were the pseudo-science theories, other than the Bermuda Triangle, I considered scientific, like Astrology, and Herbalism, or Reflexology, which I totally believe in.

Has to be 5 or more sentences.