I'm interested in examples that others have encountered or know of for the following points concerning Pseudoscience. Karl Popper (Philosopher of science) defined a critical attitude as necessary for any academic or scientific endeavour. A Critical Attitude is a willingness and commitment to open up "Favoured Views" to "Severe Scrutiny" and a basic in all science, distinguishing it from pseudoscience.

Feminism As Pseudoscience - A Check List
ꞏ Uses the trappings of science without the substance (such as scientific sounding language: “proven,” “clinically tested”).
ꞏ Relies on testimonials and anecdotal evidence.
ꞏ Is not skeptical; is not self-correcting.
ꞏ Equates an open mind with an uncritical one.
ꞏ Overuse of ad hoc hypothesis to avoid refutation; ignores or explains away falsifying data. Indifferent to facts.
ꞏ Absence of connection with scientific findings.
ꞏ Relies on vague, exaggerated, or untestable claims (Vague language).
ꞏ Produces beliefs and faith but not knowledge.
ꞏ Is often not testable.
ꞏ Seeks confirming data rather than seeking to critically test assumptions.
ꞏ Often contradicts itself.
ꞏ Reverses burden of proof.
ꞏ Makes little progress.
ꞏ Creates mystery where none exists by omitting information; uses obscure language.
ꞏ Relies on the wisdom of the ancients, the older the idea, the better.
ꞏ Appeals to unfounded authority (or authority without evidence), emotion, sentiment.
ꞏ Personalizes issues.
ꞏ Argues from alleged exceptions, errors, anomalies, and strange events.
Eileen Gambrill (20 February 2012). Propaganda in the Helping Professions. Oxford University Press, USA. p. 226. ISBN 978-0-19-532500-3.