Question

Would this example be considered science or pseudoscience? Support your decision with at least three reasons.

Answer 1

The Example : A team of researchers are working on a project to make a new kind of airplane fuel. During their experiment, there was an explosion that destroyed the lab. While they were cleaning up the debris, they discovered a number of pieces of frozen metal. The scientific community was amazed. The researchers were so excited to report that they had discovered a fuel that burns so hot that it becomes cold. They were not sure of the of their true importance discovery but they knew it was something that had never been seen before. The researchers quickly wrote up a report, created a press release, and applied for a patent. The news spread quickly through the world wide scientific community and soon other scientists were trying to replicate their experiment. Much to the relief of the original team or researchers, no other scientist could ever replicate their find.

Answer 2

Not science, since one can argue:
1) All results from experiments have to be verifiable by _repeated_ experiments, which is not the case
2) The described explosion made the researchers incapable of doing the experiment in _controlled_ environment, i.e. they don't know what or how it happened because there were too many uncontrolled variables
3) Patenting in haste and "to the relief of the original team of researchers" shows a very non-scientific attitude. All scientific research is _public_ and criticism is _welcomed_.