1. Show Evidence of Progress?
2. Use Technical Words with Murky Definitions?
3. Inside or Outside of Well-Established Physical Laws?
4. Lack References?
5. Use Anecdotal Evidence?
6. Claim to be Error-Free or use "Crucial Experiments"?
7. Taught at Non-Credit Institutions?
8. Using Old (È20 yrs.) Primary Texts?
9. Repeatable by Others?
10. Exhibit the "Shyness" Effect? (i.e. Intermittent Power)
11. Claim to be Marginalized?
12. Have Alleged Expertise in Other Areas?
13. Respond to Criticism by Counter-Attack or Self-Reflection?
14. Make Appeals to History? (old=correct)
15. Use True but Unrelated "Facts"?
16. Make Appeals to Ignorance?
Moller, ÒBCS Debates a Qi Gong Master,Ó Rational Enquirer 6.4 (1994)