diff --git a/notes/characteristics_of_pseudoscience.org b/notes/characteristics_of_pseudoscience.org
index 417fb448..9b999391 100644
--- a/notes/characteristics_of_pseudoscience.org
+++ b/notes/characteristics_of_pseudoscience.org
@@ -7,6 +7,16 @@
 - tags :: 
 - source :: https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/plvskm/a_guide_on_how_to_sniff_out_pseudoscience/
 
-* 10 points
+* 11 points
 
-1. Is *Unfalsifiable* (can't be proven wrong): Makes vague or unobservable claims
+1. Is *UNFALSIFIABLE* (can't be proven wrong): Makes vague or unobservable claims
+2. Relies heavily on *ANECDOTES*, personal experiences, and testimonials
+3. *CHERRY PICKS* confirming evidence while ignoring/minimizing disconfirming evidence
+4. Uses *TECHNOBABBLE*: words that sound scientific but don't make sense
+5. Lacks *PLAUSIBLE MECHANISM*: Now way to explain it based on existing knowledge
+6. Is *UNCHANGING*: Doesn't self-correct or progress
+7. Makes *EXTRAORDINARY/EXAGERATED CLAIMS* with insufficient evidence
+8. Professes *CERTAINTY*: Talks of "proof", with great confidence
+9. Commits *LOGICAL FALLACIES*: Arguments contain errors in reasoning
+10. Lacks *PEER REVIEW*: Goes directly to the public, avoiding scientific scrutinity
+11. Claims there's a *CONSPIRACY* to suppress their ideas