The use of scientific-sounding language that is meaningless means using big, complex words or phrases that sound smart, but don’t really say anything useful or true.

This link talks about the use of structured water and what it promotes, including high-profile celebrities, who have made claims about its benefits, such as faster hydration, increased energy, weight loss, improved antioxidant status, better skin, and longer life. The scientific language used in this website such as; “hexagonal structure and exclusion zone” to talk about structured water doesn’t seem appropriate to use because it’s not coming from real scientists that we can trust (It’s not a vocabulary we all use or seen). Another term used on the website is “fourth phase of water” but it’s just a theory when looking more into it. They also mention things like "absorbing energy" and "crystalline phase," which sound smart but don’t really explain how the water works in a way that makes sense. The website talks about health benefits like better hydration and more energy, but there’s no solid evidence to show that structured water does any of this.

someone claims to have found something or proven something, other people can’t repeat the experiment or test to get the same results.

This article talks about how you can use turmeric as a natural hair removal treatment with added skin benefits. However there are no solid scientific claims or evidence to back it up. Turmeric has been used in tradition for beauty practices because of how cost effective and the benefits are.  The article doesn’t provide any studies or verified results to show that turmeric actually works for hair removal or improves the skin in this way. The article also mentions that the treatment can be messy and might stain the skin, which suggests that the benefits might not be as straightforward as they sound. This is a good example of skepticism, meaning we should question the evidence before accepting the benefits as true. Without scientific proof or reliable studies to back up the claims, we should remain doubtful and avoid jumping to conclusions based on appealing idea of it

Convinces by faith and belief (in spite of evidence) means believing in something strongly, even when there is evidence that shows it might not be true.

In this tiktok, the mother was explaining how she noticed regression with her child after receiving a vaccine at 15 months and why she doesn’t like them and had to space it out. Personally I think that her son’s brain and body are still developing, which could also be the reason why she is noticing some changes. I believe that this can be an example of “Convinces by faith and belief (in spite of evidence)” because Some people continue to believe that vaccines are dangerous because of stories they’ve heard or things they've read online, even though doctors and scientists have studied vaccines carefully and know what the major side effects are. These beliefs are often based on anecdotes,personal stories or experiences that people share, which can feel very real to those who hear them. But these personal stories are not the same as scientific evidence, which comes from carefully conducted studies and research that prove vaccines are safe and effective. Even when the scientific method shows that vaccines are safe, some people keep believing otherwise because of their faith in personal stories or misinformation they encounter, which is a key example of convincing by belief.

Ancient wisdom refers to knowledge, teachings, and insights that have been passed down through generations, often from ancient cultures or traditions.

Herbal medicine has been used for centuries by different cultures based on ancient wisdom passed down over generations. For example, ancient Egyptians used aloe vera and frankincense, and in India, turmeric has long been used to treat inflammation. In Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), herbs like ginseng were used to restore balance in the body. While these remedies have been trusted for a long time, they didn’t have the benefit of the scientific method to back up their claims. Today, we use critical thinking and the scientific method to test if these old remedies really work. The first thing we need to do is define the claim. The claim is  that turmeric helps reduce inflammation. Next, is to recognize any bias, like whether the person claiming the benefits of a herb might have a reason to promote it, such as making money from selling it. Next evaluate the source, The source  article comes from a well-known healthcare institution. Evaluate the evidence. Research shows that turmeric does help with inflammation, which makes sense since it's been used in Ayurvedic medicine for thousands of years. However, some herbs, like Ginkgo biloba, have mixed results, and we don’t have enough solid evidence to say it definitely works for improving memory. After evaluating the evidence. In conclusion based on what the studies actually show I think that this source backs up herbal medicine properties.

Defintion:

Appeal to Authority is a type of argument where someone tries to convince you that something is true just because an expert or a respected figure says it is, rather than providing solid evidence or reasoning.

When a hairdresser says that "going to sleep with wet hair causes mold," they are making an appeal to authority. This means they are using their job as a hair expert to make a claim that sounds true, even though it isn’t backed by facts. Hairdressers know a lot about hair, but they aren't experts on mold or how it grows. Mold needs certain conditions, like moisture and something organic to grow on, but not just from wet hair. The idea that mold grows in your hair from sleeping with it wet is not true. Mold usually grows on things like walls or carpets, not your hair. Wet hair might cause scalp problems like dandruff or fungal infections, but it doesn’t cause mold. This is a good example of how someone with knowledge in one area, like a hairdresser, can give advice about something they’re not trained in. It’s important to use critical thinking to question these kinds of claims and not believe everything someone says, especially if there is no real proof behind it.

Defintion:

Ideological Support refers to the way people or groups support and defend ideas, beliefs, or systems that align with their values or worldview.

A lot of people say that vaping is better than smoking cigarettes because it doesn’t have tobacco and might have fewer harmful chemicals. They claim that since vaping doesn’t create tar or carbon monoxide like cigarettes, it must be safer. This idea is often pushed by people who want to promote vaping or who are part of the e-cigarette market. But the truth is, even though vaping might have fewer chemicals than smoking, it’s still not safe. The problem with saying vaping is better is that many people ignore the risks. Yes, vaping might have fewer harmful chemicals than smoking, but it still contains nicotine, which is addictive, and other chemicals that can damage your lungs and heart over time. A lot of the arguments for vaping don’t consider the long-term health risks, which we still don’t fully understand because vaping is new. For example, people who say vaping is better often only talk about the studies showing it’s less harmful than smoking, but they ignore studies that show it can still cause lung damage and heart problems. This is an example of group-think where people just believe what’s popular or what others are saying, without really questioning it. By focusing only on the “good” parts and ignoring the bad, they are creating a distorted view of the truth. In reality, vaping isn’t safe. While it might be less harmful than smoking, it still has health risks. We need to debunk the idea that vaping is completely safe. There’s not enough clear proof to say that it’s harmless. So, just because something is new or sounds better doesn’t mean it’s good for you. It’s important to look at all the facts before making a decision.

Proof by Verbosity is when someone tries to convince you something is true not by providing clear evidence, but by saying a lot of words without really saying much.

The "Is water wet?" debate has become really popular on social media, especially on sites like Twitter and TikTok. People are arguing about whether water itself is wet or if it just makes other things wet. Some of the explanations people give are super complicated, and this is a good example of proof by verbosity. That’s when someone uses a lot of big, fancy words to sound smart but doesn’t actually answer the question. For example, I just had this conversation with my aunt the other day (she is a science teacher in Australia) and she said , "Water, when it touches a solid surface, creates an interaction that makes the surface stick to the water molecules." I personally have no idea what this means but  tt sounds scientific, but it doesn’t really help answer the question or make things clearer. The problem with these long explanations is that they don’t really add anything useful, they just make the conversation more confusing. Instead of answering the simple question, people are focusing on using complicated language to sound more convincing, even though it doesn't really get to the point. This shows how proof by verbosity works, using fancy words to make an argument sound smarter, even if it doesn’t actually explain anything.

it can prevent people from making informed decisions or fully understanding the issues at hand.

In this article it talks about the Canadian residential school and how Canada has failed to educate us on it. I think this is is a good example of Suppression by Authorities. The Canadian Residential School System is a sad example of how authorities tried to control and erase Indigenous cultures. For over 100 years, starting in the 17th century and lasting until the late 1990s, Indigenous children were taken from their families and sent to residential schools. These schools were meant to force them to forget their languages, traditions, and way of life. The government and churches said the schools were there to “help” the children, but in reality, they caused a lot of harm. One reason this system went on for so long was lack of practice in questioning what was happening. For many years, people didn’t stop to think about how harmful the schools were. The government and church leaders kept telling everyone that the schools were good for the children, and no one really challenged that. 

This lack of practice in thinking critically meant many people believed these schools were helping, even though children were being abused and hurt. 

group-think, where everyone just agreed with the main idea, even if it wasn’t true. The people in charge—like the government and the churches—believed that the schools were needed to “civilize” the Indigenous children. They ignored the voices of Indigenous people who fought to keep their children at home. Instead of listening to their concerns, the authorities pushed ahead with the schools, assuming they were right.

distorted view of truth. For many years, the government and churches told a story that the residential schools were for the children’s own good. They didn’t want to talk about the abuse, hunger, and pain that the children suffered. This distorted view of truth kept the real story hidden for a long time, so survivors couldn’t speak up. It wasn’t until the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was set up in 2008 that people started to hear the full truth about what really happened at these schools.

In the end, the residential school system lasted so long because of lack of practice in questioning it, group-think where everyone just went along with it, and a distorted view of truth that ignored the harm being done. Only when survivors spoke up and told their stories did the truth begin to come out. Now, Canada is starting to understand the damage caused by the residential school system, but the effects are still felt by Indigenous communities today. To truly heal, we need to listen, think critically, and face the full truth of what happened.

Agenticity is when we think something happens for a reason, even if there’s no real reason behind it.

A common superstition is that opening an umbrella inside brings bad luck. This belief is a good example of agenticity, which is when people think something random or ordinary has a purpose or intention behind it. In this case, people believe that opening an umbrella inside isn't just a harmless action; instead, it’s something that invites bad luck or misfortune, like there's an unseen force making it happen. There's no real evidence to support this idea, thoughit’s just a superstition passed down over time. But the belief that opening an umbrella inside causes bad luck is a way of attributing a sense of intention or purpose to something that doesn’t actually have any. It's a classic example of agenticity, where people feel like there’s a hidden force behind everyday actions. (I believe in this)

Set of beliefs or ideas that guide how people think about the world and make decisions

The idea of "family first" that my mom emphasizes is a great example of ideology because it represents a set of beliefs or values that shape how we live and make decisions. An ideology is a system of ideas and values that guide people’s actions and views about the world, and in this case, "family first" is the belief that family should always be the top priority. My mom has passed this down to us as a core value, and it influences how we handle things like work, social life, and even difficult situations. It's not just a saying; it’s a way of thinking that shapes how we treat each other, how we make choices, and what we value most. By teaching us this, she’s instilling an ideology that has been passed down in our family for generations, and it guides us in how we view the importance of family bonds and support

Patternicity is the tendency to see patterns or connections in things, even when they aren't actually there

I’ve always thought of the number 11 as my lucky number. Whenever I wear it during cross country or volleyball, I always seem to do well. It’s like whenever I put on my uniform with the number 11, I perform better. I’ve noticed this pattern a few times, so now it just feels like that number has something to do with my success. But, I know it’s probably just my brain looking for a connection that’s not really there. This is an example of patternicity—where we start to believe there's a link between two things, even if it’s just a coincidence. The truth is, my performance is probably more about my training, focus, and preparation than the number itself. It’s just that when I see the number 11 and do well, my brain makes a connection, and it starts to feel like the number is the reason I’m successful. I think we all do this in different ways, whether it’s wearing a specific pair of socks or following a certain routine before a big game. We notice these little patterns and start to believe they actually have an effect, even though it’s mostly just our brains making connections that aren’t really there.

Included in Assignment 1

Included in Assignment 2

Use of scientific-sounding language that is meaningless

YES

Results can’t be reproduced or verified

YES

Deliberately creates mystery

YES

Does not progress

YES

Often appeals to emotion

YES

Convinces by faith and belief (in spite of evidence)

YES

Money is often involved

YES

Red Flags

Included in Assignment 1

Included in Assignment 2

All Natural

YES

Ancient Wisdom

YES

Appeal to Authority

YES

Confirmation Bias

YES

Confusion of Correlation with Causation

YES

Ideological Support

YES

Mystical Energy

YES

Proof by Verbosity

YES

Red Herring

YES

Suppression by Authorities

YES

Reasons for Belief

Included in Assignment 1

Included in Assignment 2

Agenticity

YES

Emotional Connection

YES

Ideology

YES

Patternicity

YES

Perception and Observation

YES

Simplicity

YES

Unexplained

YES