I am of opinion that this professor was advocating for pseudoscience. Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but which does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status. Pseudoscience is often characterized by the use of vague, exaggerated or unprovable claims, an over-reliance on confirmation rather than rigorous attempts at refutation, a lack of openness to evaluation by other experts, and a general absence of systematic processes to rationally develop theories. Distinguishing scientific facts and theories from pseudoscientific beliefs such as those found in astrology, medical quackery, and occult beliefs combined with scientific concepts, is part of science education and scientific literacy.
The term pseudoscience is often considered inherently pejorative, because it suggests that something is being inaccurately or even deceptively portrayed as science. Accordingly, those labeled as practicing or advocating pseudoscience normally dispute the characterization.
Pseudoscientific thinking has been explained in terms of cognitive psychology. The human proclivity for seeking confirmation rather than refutation (confirmation bias), the tendency to hold comforting beliefs, and the tendency to over generalise have been proposed as reasons for the common adherence to pseudoscientific thinking. According to psychologist Barry L. Beyerstein humans are prone to associations based on resemblances only, and often prone to misattribution in cause-effect thinking.
Furthermore, pseudoscientific explanations are generally not analyzed rationally, but instead experientially. Operating within a different set of rules compared to rational thinking, experiential thinking regards an explanation as valid if the explanation is "personally functional, satisfying and sufficient", offering a description of the world that may be more personal than can be provided by science and reducing the amount of potential work involved in understanding complex events and outcomes. (The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine 1999 Vol. 3 No. 2)
Distinguishing science from pseudoscience has practical implications in the case of health care, expert testimony, environmental policies, and science education. Treatments with halo of scientific authority which have not actually been subjected to actual scientific testing may be ineffective, expensive, and dangerous to patients, and confuse health providers, insurers, government decision makers, and the public as to what treatments are appropriate.
The book Trick or Treatment by Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst (2008) records several occasions where patient's faith in medical pseudoscience has led to complications, further injury and death. http://www.trickortreatment.com/reviews.html
There are Christian and Muslim versions of pseudoscience. One of my classmates in Medical College, Trivandrum who is a devout Muslim wrote a book in Malayalam on the 'impact' of verses of Qur'an, a seventh century text, on modern medical science. The Christians whose faith in creation was challenged by science of evolution, invented 'intelligent design' in evolution.