|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 10/29/2006 : 20:55:48 [Permalink]
|
Thank you, Dave, for a glimpse at the real story behind Elisabeth Targ, the flawed, perhaps even fraudulent, research she was part of, and Targ's terrible death from the same rare cancer she was studying. Her cancer may have been incurable even when first diagnosed. It certainly was incurable by the time she began radiation therapy, thanks to her Rasputin-like "advisers."
When I read of something like this, I give thanks that, when I was diagnosed with cancer in 1984, I had enough scientific knowledge to reject a well-meaning New Age friend's advice not to get chemotherapy, but to rely upon "visualization therapy" alone.
Maybe that's why I get so damned angry at the New Age quacks. They are not providing "alternative therapy," they are providing alternatives to therapy. The quacks, abetted by their credulous defenders, are murdering people daily.
Edited to add: Sorry, looks like I one again fumbled with my keyboard, and sent an incomplete version of this post earlier. (My left hand hasn't all the feeling it should, and is awkward, as well. But at least I can blame it for stuff!)
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 10/29/2006 21:01:59 |
 |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 10/30/2006 : 04:01:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by FE6666
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
Upon the claimant lies the responsibility of proving the claim. I think that you need to study the linked site.
So ok, Mr. Messenger, as you are not Jomanda but merely pimp for her, suppose you go and tell her that we doubt that she is anything but a thief, a grifter, and a liar, and that she should drag her narrow ass in here and lay those doubts to rest. Hmmm?
You just evenmore proof the Skeptic-profile http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=566626 , in stead of at least trying to be a individual human being. Calling me/Jomanda names, bleating from out of your, as reality poves 'negative', fantasy (negative claims) will not help you, will not make me think differently, or will not make reality any any any different. But if it makes you feel happier about yourself, who am I to tell you different. It's your life. But a 'skeptic' discussion, as you so 'claim' to want to have, is in that manner not wise for me.
I called you a pimp becaust that's what you appear to be. I call Jomanda a lying quack, no better than John Edward, Benny Hinn or the rest of the frauds, because until either you or she can prove otherwise, that's what she is.
Here's Wikipedia's take on her: quote:
Jomanda
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Jomanda is a Dutch new-age guru.
Born as Johanna Wilhelmina Petronella Damman in Deventer on 5 May 1948, she is a Dutch spiritualist, and in her own words a healing medium. She claims to have psychic powers of clairvoyance, empathy and prescience, aided by her late father and other powers from the 'world divine'. She is known to be a devoted fan of paranormalist author Jozef Rulof.
in 1991 she gained national fame after making an appearance on a popular talkshow. In the next decade, she held public 'healing sessions' in Tiel, which drew in large groups of people. During these sessions she would 'infuse' bottles of tap water, which she claimed would make them gain healing properties. She also appeared on radio shows, where people were asked to put a bottle of water in front of their radio in order to have it remotely 'infused'.
She's not even the best quack the Netherlands has to offer. She only ranks # 15 on the Nederlandse Vereniging tegen de Kwakzalverij top 20 list.
There are hundreds of thousands of these "healers" in the world. The traits they all share are a lack of scruples and greed. Not a single one has ever proven any sort of extraordinary abilities beyond being skilled at the manipulation of the gullible.
Years ago, in the '70s, Uri Geller, another quack of some renown, was on TV and I and my ex happened to catch his act. He went through the bending bullshit, then instructed the TV audience to place a broken watch on the set, if we had one, and he might get it running with the power of his mind. Well, I don't wear watches, but my ex-wife had one that had gasped it's last some weeks earlier. She put it on top of the set. Geller projected whatever mental coniptions quacks project. The watch remained as inert as ever. As far as anyone knows, all of the broken watches remained as inert as ever.
Geller's another one who avoids Randi like the plague, and for excellent reason.
Does Jomanda/you really expect anyone with coherent thought processes to believe that placing a jug of tap water by the radio during her show will turn it into some kind of miracle juice? Pul-eease!
Easy enough to prove, though. Take a quanity to any reputable lab that is not too busy, and has time to test nonsense. Mere rhetoric won't prove anything.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/30/2006 : 07:06:52 [Permalink]
|
Red herring, but what the hell..... To mine a quote:
Michael Roll: quote:
WHAT IS MEANT BY SCIENTIFIC PROOF?
This must consist of repeatable experiments backed up with a theory that has a mathematical base. A good example is proving that the world is round and not flat. The Greek scientist Pythagoras was the first to put forward the idea that the world was round. This was 2,600 years ago. However, it was 300 years later that another Greek scientist - Eratosthenes - came up with the mathematical theory for a round earth. This lacked the scientific impact it should have had because the experiment had not taken place. This came much later when Magellan's crew sailed round the world in 1522. The experiment together with the mathematical theory completely, destroyed the medieval obscurants - the Flat Earth religious fanatics.
Proving survival after death is exactly the same, but not quite as easy, because here we are dealing with phenomena that are beyond the range of our five physical senses. In order to detect this type of phenomena we have to work with a medium - a machine that can do the job.
It was the invention of the achromatic microscope in 1830 by Joseph Jackson Lister that enabled his son to write his paper on antiseptic surgery. From this moment on we have had the proof that reality also exists in the invisible. Radio and television sets are also detecting normally invisible phenomena. They are mediums sorting out signals at different frequencies. This is the reason why we are forced to work with a human medium in order to prove survival after death. No machine invented so far is as sophisticated as the human mind and brain. However we have to be extra careful when carrying out experiments using people. There can be no room for error where lives are concerned.
Interesting..... And these human "mediums" are....?
Never mind; I already know. In fact, there is a brief article concerning them around here, somewhere.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
 Posted - 10/30/2006 : 11:53:57 [Permalink]
|
From FE666 rant about Victor Zammit
quote:
Instead they try to throw mud ! Hitherto, no scientist, no debunker, no skeptic - just no one has been able to rebut the classic objective evidence for the afterlife - if they could they would - and beat my $1,000,000 challenge! I've been waiting patiently for nearly NINE years for some debunker from anywhere around the world to take me on. But the silence is absolutely deafening !"
From wikipedia:
$1 million challenge
Victor's absolute conviction led him to organize sponsors to offer one million dollars to anyone who could rebut the existing evidence for the afterlife. Victor created the challenge in response to James Randi's $1 million dollar skeptics challenge, but the challenges differ in that:
Victor specifically states that his challenge is not legally enforceable - if every condition of the challenge is satisfied, the money still does not legally need to be paid to the applicant.
Randi's challenge is legally binding.
Not all details of the Victor's challenge is available up front. Upon proceeding to Stage 2, further challenge details are then provided.
For Randi's challenge, although the specific details of how a person is tested is negotiated with each applicant, all other details are made available to applicants up front.
The success or failure of Victor's challenge is decided by the opinion of a committee of unspecified individuals who are 'experts in afterlife evidence.' The details of how these people are selected, or how an unbiased assessment of a challenge application can be guaranteed, is not specified.
The success and failure conditions for Randi's challenge are always empirical(so it is always obvious as to whether an applicant has succeeded or failed) and the people involved in the testing are members of the scientific community not affiliated with Randi's organisation.
Where Randi's challenge requires that the applicant prove a positive (eg. Show they can fly, show they are telepathic, etc) something that can be assessed via standard scientific practice, Victor's challenge requires the applicant to prove a negative - something not capable of being done empirically.
"Absolutely no doubt at all in the minds of the Committee" is allowed as to whether reincarnation exists following the applicant's challenge.
Why am I not surprised...
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/30/2006 : 12:05:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by FE6666
A Lawyer Presents the Case for the Afterlife
( Victor Zammit http://www.victorzammit.com/ )
"Attackers and debunkers, especially those who are a 'nobody', 'non-entities' - only attack those who are perceived to have value.They attack the charismatics. They attack the successful - such as Allison Dubois, John Edward, James Van Praagh and others. These debunkers are trying to get some spark in their miserable boring lives. But notice very varefully, they NEVER attack my objective evidence for the afterlife because they now admit my objective evidence for the afterlife just cannot be rebutted. Instead they try to throw mud ! Hitherto, no scientist, no debunker, no skeptic - just no one has been able to rebut the classic objective evidence for the afterlife - if they could they would - and beat my $1,000,000 challenge! I've been waiting patiently for nearly NINE years for some debunker from anywhere around the world to take me on. But the silence is absolutely deafening !"
Objective evidence for the afterlife is never attacked simply because there is no objective evidence for the afterlife apart from the psuedo-hallucinations of Edward, van Praagh, Browne, and other "mediums." The churches rave about it, of course, but they don't have anything but the Book to go with. Which even they don't try to present as anything but faith; not often, anyway.
Or perhaps I am wrong -- I often am, you know. Is there indeed objective evidence for the afterlife? If there is, I would like to see it. It would upset a lifetime's lack of belief, but I'd like to see it anyway. That's what being a skeptic is all about. The truth as supported by the evidence.
Mr, Zammit in an interesting man who, apparently has done many good works, but I fear his "challenge" is a little meaningless. quote:
$1 million challenge
Victor's absolute conviction led him to organize sponsors to offer one million dollars to anyone who could rebut the existing evidence for the afterlife. Victor created the challenge in response to James Randi's $1 million dollar skeptics challenge, but the challenges differ in that:
Victor specifically states that his challenge is not legally enforceable - if every condition of the challenge is satisfied, the money still does not legally need to be paid to the applicant.
Randi's challenge is legally binding.
Not all details of the Victor's challenge is available up front. Upon proceeding to Stage 2, further challenge details are then provided.
For Randi's challenge, although the specific details of how a person is tested is negotiated with each applicant, all other details are made available to applicants up front.
The success or failure of Victor's challenge is decided by the opinion of a committee of unspecified individuals who are 'experts in afterlife evidence.' The details of how these people are selected, or how an unbiased assessment of a challenge application can be guaranteed, is not specified.
The success and failure conditions for Randi's challenge are always empirical(so it is always obvious as to whether an applicant has succeeded or failed) and the people involved in the testing are members of the scientific community not affiliated with Randi's organisation.
Where Randi's challenge requires that the applicant prove a positive (eg. Show they can fly, show they are telepathic, etc) something that can be assessed via standard scientific practice, Victor's challenge requires the applicant to prove a negative - something not capable of being done empirically. "Absolutely no doubt a |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/30/2006 : 12:11:49 [Permalink]
|
furshur, ya beat me to it! 
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 10/30/2006 : 18:35:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by FE6666:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by FE6666 -
I agree there no reliable evidence which complies with the great expectations of regular medicine. You might say then it is Jomanda is wrong, but you might also think that it is about these great expectations. Because how can one expect from alternative medicine / Jomanda to comply with these expectations, when this in reality is not and never possible ? Like demanding from a 'green' car, to act 'red' ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by R.Wreck -
The expectation for any medical treatment is to rid the afflicted of the disease, or if that is not possible, then to treat the symptoms in such a way as to provide the patient with the best quality of life available. If your "psychics" can't measure up to that standard, why are you promoting them?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like this measuring up to this standard...
The Case of Royal Raymond Rife
Royal Raymond Rife was the inventor of the Universal Microscope which he presented to the world in 1933. The scientist who discovered that the unique electronic 'signature' of each specific disease can be modified to ELIMINATE NEARLY EVERY AFFLICTION KNOWN TO MAN
WHY IS THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY SO AFRAID IF THIS MAN ?
http://www.cdromcsc.com/rife.htm
I had never heard of Mr. Rife before. Bit if it quacks like a duck...
quote:
Royal Raymond Rife (May 16, 1888 - August 11, 1971) became known for his unsubstantiated claim of finding a 100% effective cure for terminal cancer by means of his "beam ray" device, which was supposed to work by methods which conflict with contemporary and subsequent scientific theories. After his death his name became associated with an increasing number of devices purportedly useful in alternative research and practice but similarly lacking scientific evidence.
...
In 1933 Rife built his "universal microscope," an unnecessarily complicated 5,682-part optical microscope claiming a resolution greater than any contemporary device and higher than is theoretically possible for optical microscopes. The instrument supposedly used prisms, polarized light and ultraviolet light, overcoming physical limitations by heterodyning, a technique used in radio reception which at that time was quite new.
Rife claimed to have used his microscope to directly observe, in vivo in various media and living tissues, the life cycles of microbes too small for regular light microscopes. He also claimed to have discovered "cells" between the cells of human tissues. By rotating prisms to focus light of a single wavelength upon the microorganism he was examining, he could purportedly elicit resonance with a unique "spectroscopic signature frequency" of the microbe, causing it to become easily visible in UV without killing it. He claimed there was a certain "Mortal Oscillation Rate" at which the resonance would become so extreme as to kill the organism.
In sharp contrast, electron microscopy has failed to replicate his observations, making it extremely unlikely that these microscopes ever functioned as claimed.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by FE6666 -
So why don't I see the Skeptics attacking the Christians and Muslims, in the same manner as they do alternative medicine ? Maybe because alternative medicine could be a threat (some fantasies) to regular medicine (Big Pharma), and the churches etc. are not ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by R.Wreck -
You're just talking out your ass now. Go read the Religion forum on this site.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I might be, if you proof the opposite. And you still have not answered the question. Maybe behind the curtains the Skeptics whisper some tings about this, but I do not see the Skeptics on national television saying to millions of Muslims and Christians that e.g. their 'treatments' are "a danger to society", as Skeptics did about Jomanda / alternative medicine. So again, Why don't 'I see' on national television....? Why (see explanation in my above posting) does James Randi not ask the Pope to comply with his 1 million dollar test ? Or Pat Robinson ?
Skeptics don't challenge religious beliefs? Does the name Richard Dawkins mean anything to you?
quote:
So again, Why don't 'I see' on national television....? Why (see explanation in my above posting) does James Randi not ask the Pope to comply with his 1 million dollar test ? Or Pat Robinson ?
You obviously don't understand the Randi challenge. It is open to anyone who thinks they can prove their alleged paranormal talent. Randi doesn't ask anyone to do it. It is simply there for anyone willing to try. The last thing The Man In The Funny Hat or Putrid Pat want is an objective, scientific test of their claims that the Big Sky Daddy talks to them. Millions of the faithul gullible believe them already. Why screw up a very profitable gig by being shown to be fraudulent?
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by FE6666 -
Evidence of a heart attack doesn't disappear with medical or woo-woo treatment"
Stupid ? Wrong !!! I have both the cardiologists declarations.
JOMANDA ANCEDOTE:
CC "...(within 1,5 months) it became clear for me from a first hospital research an obvious heart attack, 4 cardiologists were there present (cardiologist declarations 1.), then preceded my wife went to Jomanda healing afternoon for me (Note - see IGZ-report S.M, also for Sylvia Millecam, XX. went to Jomanda's healings too find help for Sylvia Millecam, in her place). Then after that a second hospital research took place (cardiologist declaration 2.), where the second cardiologist in the second research stated that - 'At angiogarfie? becomes I.T.T angiografie? elsewhere, no pathology determined'. There was nothing anymore to be seen ! ..."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by R.Wreck -
This is unintelligible anectodal crap, not worth the electrons it's written in. Let's see something from a reputable medical journal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This 'is' not crap. YOU think it is crap and not worth anything. Do you believe only things that are published in medical journals ? Do you think that things do not exist if they are not publishesd in medical journals ? Ever been in love ? Can you not figure out life without medical journals by yourself ?
When it comes to deciding what medical treatments are likely to be effective, reputable medical journals are a great resource. Just as an Electrical Engineering textbook would be a great resource if you needed to design a circuit. It is foolish not to use the knowledge gathered by those who have devoted their time and talents to a field of knowledge.
And yes I have been in love, but what the fuck does that have to do with anything? Have you ever spanked your monkey?
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by FE6666 -
I agree that these case should be investigated and researched, because imagine if this would be true and reality, what this could mean for healthcare...!! And I thought research and policy was in favour of healthcare for the peoples, and not just in favor of healthcare for the benefit of regular medicine.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by R.Wreck -
I can imagine a lot of things that would be really cool if they were true. I don't expect anyone to give me money to research them because there is absolutely no evidence that they are true! Same goes for Jomanda and her ilk. In fact, since there is lots of evidence that this type of "treatment" causes harm by convincing the desperate not to seek actual medical care, the only investigation that should be done is of the criminal variety.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lots of evidence that this type of "treatment" causes harm:
extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.
If no research is done, you also will not know it they are true: a believeconviction.
I believe Dave has already pointed out the sad case of Elisabeth Targ.
quote:
If you want clinical trials so much, so that what you claim can be proven 'Jomanda's energised water does not work', why don't you put a bit of pressure, write a letter, to Prof. Piet Borst so that he will comply with his own bet to reseach Jomanda's energised water ?
Once again, and read this slowly: It is not up to anyone to prove "energized water" DOES NOT work. It is up to the claimant to substantiate the claim that it DOES WORK.
Frank, I don't know what else to tell you. You seem to lack even the most basic understanding of logic, physics, and medicine. I can only go back to a section of your original post to show what nonsense you are promoting:
quote:
JOMANDA-MIRACLE: CANCER CURED
( source - Tv-programme 'Barend & Witteman', 13 mei 1999, Sonja Barend ) -
[Sonja]-"In that book is a letter if a man who writes 'my brother had cancer on the throat. I have taken foto's of my brother to the healinghalle in Tiel and have also held the foto's continiously for the radio- and Tv- broadcastings of Jomanda. Endresult is that my brother has been cured of cancer of the throat'. So that is possible ? -[Jomanda]-"Yes that is possible. The energy which is released on that moment, also via the CD, or via my voice on the radio, that works thus on the person on that moment. The energy which is positive energy, and eventually when the body can handle that all, that positive energy, will attack the negative energy. And then e.g. such a person might get black stools in the toilet. Via a natural way, relief, wat for the person is an easy way, get rid of it via the toilet"
Listen to Jomanda on the radio, crap out your throat cancer. Come on Frank, you can't be serious.
|
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2006 : 09:45:49 [Permalink]
|
| I really love how you post "columns" that you wrote yourself. BTW, your father/son converstation made me LOL. Thanks for the comedy relief! |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2006 : 11:42:52 [Permalink]
|
Buy Jomanda's books, you say? Sure I will! Right after I buy a Bible or two....
Should I tithe to her as well...?
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2006 : 13:47:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
FE6666:
The son's desire was different from what the father presumed as normal because his library did not contain books which described research into this desire. The library did not contain books in which clinical trials described these kinds of desires from these kinds of people, or in which references stood to highly recommended medical journals in which such desires were reviewed.
The son died of hunger. And the father said: "Is wasn't me. It was the lack of evidence". A death, due to the desire of the son ? Or, while the oath of parenthood taken with the hand on the human heart sais to look after the health of one's children, due to father's lack of being an up-to-date librarian for whom fellow-humanity, a fellow-human's desire and daily reality was not a greater goal in daily life than (by him) Divine made evidence ? So much, for evolution of mankind ?
And here is where your analogy fails. There is empirical evidence that withholding all (no one ever died from not getting to eat a candy bar when other food was available) food for any great length of time will cause starvation. And when I say empirical evidence, I mean evidence that is so far beyond a doubt that it is ridiculous to even consider survivability without physical sustenance.
Can you actually say that about psi? While there may be some studies that suggest psi may be possible, (and without going into how the study was conducted, or by whom) there is not a single one that is conclusive. If you don't eat, you absolutely will die. Even a child knows that. But if you don't seek out and talk to a psychic, on matters as grave as life and death, even the most pro psi study does not conclude that you will be putting your life at risk.
And about alternative medicines, some work. Glucosamine and Chondroitin Sulfate are pretty good examples of food supplements that have been shown to be safe and effective for the relief of joint pain. As skeptics, that is all that we require. On the other hand, homeopathics are technically safe, because there is no medicine in that medicine. Or so little that it wouldn't matter anyhow. But since there is nothing in a homeopathic (due to the dilution process) there is no reason to think they can be effective beyond a placebo effect. And that can be dangerous. Especially if they are being used instead of evidence based medicine for a life threatening condition.
You make blanket statements about skeptics that are both silly and not true. The alternative medicine industry is a multi billion-dollar business with hardly any oversight. But for some odd reason, that does not ring any alarm bells in the mind of a woo woo like you Frank. But it should. You are so busy looking for a medical establishment conspiracy that you have blinded yourself to every claim from the purveyors of “natural wellness” and what they are selling. All you guys need is a good testimonial (easy to come by) and that particular AM gets your stamp of approval. Where do you draw the line Frank?
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2006 : 15:35:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by FE6666
So do the Skeptics attack the Christians and Muslims, in the same manner as they do alternative medicine ? If yes, where can I see that ? Originally posted by R.Wreck
Go get yourself a copy of James Randi's book, The Faith Healers, and check out what he's got to say for yourself. Originally posted by FE6666
Go get a copy of Jomanda's books and check out what she's got to say for yourself. Your arrogance in thinking that you can speak with authority on this topic while you actually wallow in ignorance is unbelievable
What the hell is the matter with you, FE6666?
First you question that skeptics treat all woo-woo equally. (you're entitled to. Really)
You ask for evidence of equal treatment.
R.Wreck provides you with a book title "the Faith Healers" about religious practitioners. But instead of acknowledging that he has provided an answer for you, you accuse him of being arrogant and wallowing in unbelievable ignorance.
Why don't you compare the number of posts made in the Pseudoscience folder and the Religion folder here at Skeptic Friends. Hell, why not add both Pseudoscience and Health folders (because psychic abilities counts as pseudoscience and psychic healing might with a far stretch go into health folder), and make the comparison.
Later in that very same post you write this tripe: quote:
# Son - " Dad, can I have a candybar, I want one ?"
# Father - "Can you proof it and show evidence that you really want one ?"
# Son - " I'am very hungry "
# Father - "Proof it. Show me the evidence"
# Son - " Well, my stumach is turning and making noises "
# Father - "From where I am standing, that does not proof anything...."
# Son - " How can I proof it than, when others do not do research, I can not proof" ?
# Father - " Then you have to take initiative to do research...."
Coming from you, I would have found it ironic if it hadn't been so inane. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2006 : 18:57:15 [Permalink]
|
FE6666, thank you very much for the diversion of the sad fantasy story about the father and his poor son, who for the lack of candy bars, starved. Much wisdom, on many levels, can be gleaned from that parable.
But was that your response to R.Wreck's question as to whether or not you've ever spanked your monkey? Maybe it's just my dense, literal, skeptical mind, but I can't see how the story relates much to the subject of monkey-spanking. Are you evading R.Wreck's question?
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2006 : 12:20:14 [Permalink]
|
| I hope your mental "spanking the monkey" felt good! |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
McQ
Skeptic Friend
USA
258 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2006 : 13:32:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by pleco
I hope your mental "spanking the monkey" felt good!
I don't know about anyone else, but this guy makes me almost like Kevin Trudeau.
 |
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Gillette |
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2006 : 19:45:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Orignally posted by FE6666:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by FE6666
So do the Skeptics attack the Christians and Muslims, in the same manner as they do alternative medicine ? If yes, where can I see that ? If no, why not, because equal treatment ? Or maybe James Randi should put his (non-discriminating) words to the test, and ask e.g. reverend Pat Robinson or the Pope, to comply with his 1 million dollar prize test, as many 'healings' are held by e.g. Christians, Catholics etc. by means of handlaying 'out of name of Jesus' by which many people miracleus get cured ? The only conclusion, if James Randi fails to do this is.....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by R.Wreck
Go get yourself a copy of James Randi's book, The Faith Healers, and check out what he's got to say for yourself. Your arrogance in thinking that you can speak with authority on this topic while you actually wallow in ignorance is unbelievable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Go get a copy of Jomanda's books and check out what she's got to say for yourself. Your arrogance in thinking that you can speak with authority on this topic while you actually wallow in ignorance is unbelievable
Actually, Frankfurter, it was Dave W. who referred you to Randi's book. I referred you to our Religion forum and Richard Dawkins. I guess it doesn't matter since you obviously haven't read or understood any of it. But I will agree with Dave in saying "Your arrogance in thinking that you can speak with authority on this topic while you actually wallow in ignorance is unbelievable."
quote:
Orignally posted by FE6666:
If that is the case, than that argument shows a believconviction out of itsself. Because than it is not at all (while in the meantime most Skeptics 'claim' it is) about content, not in reality at all about what has to be proven: claims of paranormal / claims of God, a deceptive argument to uphold own belief, but it than seems to be only about the compartment in which people are who make the claims. Because compartment 1. (Pope / Robinson) and compartment 2 (alternative medicine, Jomanda) both, looked at the content claim certain alike things, but only compartment 2. is 'Skeptically' attacked, or both are unbalanced attacked. Comp. 2 more open (e.g. in the media) than comp. 1. Unequal discriminating treatment. Something to be really proud of.
Where do I get the secret decoder ring to figure out what the hell you are talking about?
quote:
Orignally posted by FE6666:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by R.Wreck
You obviously don't understand the Randi challenge. It is open to anyone who thinks they can prove their alleged paranormal talent. Randi doesn't ask anyone to do it. It is simply there for anyone willing to try. The last thing The Man In The Funny Hat or Putrid Pat want is an objective, scientific test of their claims that the Big Sky Daddy talks to them. Millions of the faithul gullible believe them already. Why screw up a very profitable gig by being shown to be fraudulent?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No I have not. Have you read Jomanda's books ? It is open to anyone....... Maybe it would have helpen if you showed me a link (proof of what you claim) Skeptics don't challenge religious beliefs, because they themselves have religious believes (in the Divine God 'scientific evidence'), but have a hard time accepting and acknowledging that. Maybe some problem from a past lives. Who knows..
Time for your medications now Frank.
quote:
Orignally posted by FE6666:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by R.Wreck
And yes I have been in love, but what the fuck does that have to do with anything? Have you ever spanked your monkey ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Column
FAIRYTALE "CANDY, SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE & EVOLUTION"
31 october 2006, By Frank Eeken
It is sometimes difficult in real life to talk to people who will ask for evidence for everything that is said or claimed, which will slow down conversation, which all presume is not the real intention while some people find that debate is the core of forwardpushed, innovative and modern fast democracy and society. At some point in life, mostly during adulthood or consciousness, people have to learn to trust (a matter of feelings) each other without pointing the telling and accusational finger of Divine made father '(scientific) evidence' at the other to say that his or her reality is wrong or not accepted because of not complying with what one has read somewhere in e.g. a library.
# Son - " Dad, can I have a candybar, I want one ?"
# Father - "Can you proof it and show evidence that you really want one ?"
# Son - " I'am very hungry "
# Father - "Proof it. Show me the evidence"
# Son - " Well, my stumach is turning and making noises "
# Father - "From where I am standing, that does not proof anything...."
# Son - " How can I proof it than, when others do not do research, I can not proof" ?
# Father - " Then you have to take initiative to do research...."
# Son - " But I am no researcher and I do not get so much spending-money every week from you to finance such research...?"
# Father - " That is your problem, thus are the rules of scientific life"
# Son - " My present daily life is that I would like a candybar"
# Father - "You claim, so you must proof, if you cannot proof, you cannot claim"
# Son - "Well, maybe if you could take the trouble to just put your ear on my stumach, you can ascertain for yourself..."
# Father - "I could, but it would presumptively still not proof anything, it could be coincidence"
# Son - "Would it help if my little sister and mother would also like a candybar ?"
# Father - "No, anecdotes are not proof and no evidence according to my view"
# Son - "Well, maybe your view on my reality is twisted"
# Father - "No it is not, but you are being a fool, not real, and a pain in the ass, get lost, go somewhere else with you pathetic fantasy"
# Son - "Well excuse me, who sais you can order and kick me around like that"
# Father (irritated) - "Listen son, little one, at all times you must listen to me and believe me, because I have studied a very long time and afterall I am your supervisor and dad"
# Son (geirriteerd) - "Proof it. Show me the evidence"
# Father (loud voice) - "Maybe I should throw you out of the house and disinherit you"
Not a happy end -
In reference to a to the eye simple earthly question, after two weeks of discussion and conversation the son did not get his candybar. The son, being an individual part of the peoples, was unable to proof and show evidence of his sweet desire, which he thought was quit normal and real because many other kids around him at school ask for the same desire. But a desire which the father could not recognise because it was different from the desires he had as a child in his youth. The son's desire was different from what the father presumed as normal because his library did not contain books which described research into this desire. The library did not contain books in which clinical trials described these kinds of desires from these kinds of people, or in which references stood to highly recommended medical journals in which such desires were reviewed.
The son died of hunger. And the father said: "Is wasn't me. It was the lack of evidence". A death, due to the desire of the son ? Or, while the oath of parenthood taken with the hand on the human heart sais to look after the health of one's children, due to father's lack of being an up-to-date librarian for whom fellow-humanity, a fellow-human's desire and daily reality was not a greater goal in daily life than (by him) Divine made evidence ? So much, for evolution of mankind ?
Who is 'believed' ?
Fellow-humanity or (by a man made) Divineness ?
That post made my head hurt so much I had to reach for my own "energized water" infused with special fantastic healing qualities by the almighty Beefeater. A generous portion over ice with a few olives made it all better.
Honestly Frank, even allowing for the fact that English is not your native tongue, you present yourself here as being thisclose to a raving street corner lunatic. You really need to locate reality and try to get some kind of grip on it. |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Psychic Jomanda/Millecam: the true story
Topic Locked
