Are claims about the effects of meditation most likely scientific or pseudoscience

The complete question is as follows:

Are claims about the effects of meditation most likely scientific or pseudoscientific?

A. scientific, because people have been claiming for thousands of years that meditation helps them

B. scientific, because observations of brain growth and chemicals are made carefully and repeatedly

C. pseudoscientific, because practices that are related to religion are based on beliefs and are subjective

D. pseudoscientific, because people have made claims about it but scientific observations have not been made

Option B, scientific, because observations of brain growth and chemicals are made carefully and repeatedly .

Explanation: Since observations have been made from time to time and same results were obtained, we can't say its pseudo-scientific. People have made claims about the effects of meditation and what it does to the brain activity. Thus, we would say meditation is a scientific process. Also, since brain activities were recorded, option B is correct.

step 1: nitrogen fixation- conversion of atmospheric no₂ into forms useful to plants by lightning, bacteria, and cyanobacteria.

step 2: nitrification-process of converting ammonia to nitrite or nitrate.

step 3: assimilation-plant roots absorb new form of nitrogen.

step 4: ammonification-conversion of organic nitrogen to ammonia by bacteria involved in decomposition.

step 5: denitrification-bacteria turns the decomposed matter back into n₂o, which is released into atmosphere; repeat cycle.

light dependent reactions:

light independent reactions:

hope this !