How is science and pseudoscience similar ?

Both claim to be valid, predictive models of how nature works. Both tend toward jargon. Jargon always sounds official and impressive to those who don't know the jargon, which enhances the mystique and aura of power of both science and pseudoscience. Furthermore, similar jargon is used in both. For example, "energy." For a scientist or engineer, energy is measured in joules, (or calories, ergs, kilowatt-hours (=3.6 million joules), or British thermal units), and is an extremely useful quantity because it is conserved, which means that it can be put into different forms, but never created or destroyed. In pseudoscience the term energy is also used frequently, but a pseudoscientists "energy" is seldom, if ever, the same energy as used by a physicist. Instead, the pseudoscientist's energy is undefined or ill-defined, and is used with equal emphasis in such different contexts as the "energy" felt by a dowser looking for water, the "energy" exuded by the planets that astrologers tell us influence our lives, the "Chi energy" of Chinese spirituality, or the psychic energy concentrated in crystal balls. In pseudoscience, energy is an unknown agent that must be present in order to affect the material world, but whose nature is not known.

The answer is b hope this