The World as We Know It appears to be Threatened by Pseudoscience!  It seems to be of the Highest Importance we are Able between This and the Real Thing...

This page is Hopefully going to be Helpful with that Mammoth task...

First, Lets make sure we're all talking about the Same Thing:

pseu·do·sci·ence  [ˌsjuːdəʊˈsaɪəns] na  

• Discipline or approach that pretends to be or has a close resemblance to science 
  
• A theory, methodology, or practice that is considered to be without scientific foundation.  

pseudo·scien·tific (-n-tfk) adj.
pseudo·scien·tist n. 

   Here are some "Characteristics of Pseudo-Science" i've found:

• Indifferent to facts 
  
• Looks only for evidence supporting hypothesis 
  
• Indifferent to criteria of valid evidence 
  
• Relies heavily on subjective validation 
  
• Depends on arbitrary conventions of human culture, rather than on unchanging regularities of nature
  
• Avoids putting its claims to meaningful tests
  
• Often contradictory
  
• Deliberately creates mystery where none exists, sometimes by omitting important details
  
• Does not progress
  
• Attempts to persuade with rhetoric, propaganda and misrepresentation
  
• Appeals to false authority, emotion, sentiment, or distrust of established facts
  
• Extraordinary claims and fantastic theories
  
• Often described by an invented vocabulary of words with ambiguous meanings
  
• Relies on anachronistic thinking
  
• Relies on anecdotes and testimonials
  
• Products often claim to be effective against a wide range of unrelated diseases
  
• Quick, dramatic results promised for one-time therapies; frequent re-treatments/maintenance treatments required for ongoing therapies
  

    Wiki Wisdom tells us: 

   "a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status. 
 
   Pseudoscience is often characterized by the use of vague, exaggerated or unprovable claims, an over-reliance on confirmation rather than rigorous attempts at refutation, a lack of openness to evaluation by other experts, and a general absence of systematic processes to rationally develop theories."

   as a Picture paints a Thousand Words, after Removing a what i see as a Small Bias in the original, here is My Graphic Interpretation of the General Consented Difference in Types of Science:

Mainstream science	Proto- or Fringe science	Pseudoscience	Superstitions
Presented as science or looks like science
Treated with scientific method
Systematized as scientific definition

   i must Confess that This appears More Complicated than i wanted to make it.   i thought after reading what the Official People had to say about it, there were only 2 kind of sience; 

&

 So, for now, i'm going to Ignore  "Proto- or Fringe science" and " Superstitions".