|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
 Posted - 11/25/2006 : 17:26:41 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by FE6666
[COLOR=RED]QUACKBUSTERS CRUSHED BY SUPREME COURT[/COLOR]
(Friday, November 24th, 2006)
I don't know how the "quackbusters" can even come out in public any more. Their constant humiliation in the US Court system has got to be incredibly embarrassing. I don't know how they can withstand the solid stream of laughter from the general public....
Yesterday, November 20th, 2006, the California Supreme Court voted unanimously (all seven Justices) to slap down the latest "quackbuster" attempt to use, and abuse, the US Court system to silence their critics. The case, originally known as Barrett v. Clark, then for the appeals process renamed Barrett v. Rosenthal, began over five years ago when three individuals decided to sue "a room full of people..."
http://www.bolenreport.net/
You psycho New Age quack fruitcake, are you still around? If you get sick (I mean physically, we know your mental condition), be sure you don't come begging to scientific medicine for help.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2006 : 17:51:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by FE6666
[COLOR=RED]QUACKBUSTERS CRUSHED BY SUPREME COURT[/COLOR]
(Friday, November 24th, 2006)
I don't know how the "quackbusters" can even come out in public any more. Their constant humiliation in the US Court system has got to be incredibly embarrassing. I don't know how they can withstand the solid stream of laughter from the general public....
Yesterday, November 20th, 2006, the California Supreme Court voted unanimously (all seven Justices) to slap down the latest "quackbuster" attempt to use, and abuse, the US Court system to silence their critics. The case, originally known as Barrett v. Clark, then for the appeals process renamed Barrett v. Rosenthal, began over five years ago when three individuals decided to sue "a room full of people..."
http://www.bolenreport.net/
Tim Bolen is nothing but Hulda Clarks lap dog. Free speach protecting quacks is all this is. It doesn't make her not a quack and it doesn't make Tim Bolen not her lap dog...
http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/bolen.html |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2006 : 18:42:53 [Permalink]
|
| Indeed. So what if Barrett lost a SLAPP suit? It certainly doesn't mean that any particular alternative-medicine therapy works, as nothing of the sort was tested (in court or elsewhere). The whole thing began as a defamation suit, and not about the legality or morality of promoting alternative meds. And if it were really about using the courts to "silence their critics," why are there so few of these cases pending, at trial or resolved? It's about free speech, at best, and the quacks' right to spread nasty information about their critics (their only weapon, since they can't win in the science lab). |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2006 : 20:28:18 [Permalink]
|
Just for the record about the proof of hunger example, the scientific process allows for subjective and objective evidence. Subjective evidence is included in thousands and thousands of peer reviewed studies.
The difference in anecdotal evidence which is not conclusive and subjective evidence which might be is how it is systematically (or not) observed, recorded, compared and so on.
I can collect anecdotal evidence and use it in a number of ways in science. The most common way anecdotal evidence is used is when it surfaces, hypotheses can be formed. But they must also be tested to confirm the anecdotes are consistent and show some association. Next an association needs to be tested to see if there is a cause and effect relationship or merely an association.
Example: 10 people who got a flu shot in one office building became ill the next day. That is anecdotal evidence. I hypothesize the flu shots are associated with the illness. To test the hypothesis I collect information from everyone in the office building on whether or not they got flu shots and whether or not they got sick within 48 hours of the day the shots were given. I then compare percentages.
Now I have more systematically collected data. It shows 10% of the people who didn't get flu shots got sick and 30% of the people who did get them got sick. Now it looks like the shots at least made 20% of the people ill. But that is only another hypothesis at this point. Now I need to do two things. One, I need to see what the people who got sick had in common besides the shots and how else they differed from the people who didn't get sick.
Now it turns out the people who got sick all attended a meeting together and 80% of the people who didn't get sick did not attend the meeting. Now I can't say if it was the shots or the meeting but there is stronger evidence it was the meeting. Now I need to compare the 20% who didn't get a flu shot and went to the meeting and didn't get sick with the 30% of the flu shot group who attended the meeting and did get sick. And I choose to include the people who got a shot, didn't get sick and went to the meeting.
Now it turns out 100% of the people who got ill ate salad and none of the people who didn't get ill ate the salad. Two people got ill and didn't eat the salad but they worked closely with other people who got ill.
And so on goes the research until you get to reliable results. The problem is not anecdotal or subjective evidence, the problem is assigning cause and effect based on unsystematically collected anecdotes and subjective evidence. The problem is drawing conclusions without looking at all the possible variables and without using control groups to filter out unknown variables.
Unless one understands this, one cannot understand why people's personal experiences are not valid evidence by themselves. It has nothing to do with believing a person's anecdotes. It has to do with confirming the conclusions they believe based on their experience.
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2006 : 21:47:26 [Permalink]
|
Nice epidemiological example of evidence weighing, B! It might be summed up by saying that subjective "evidence" is not ignored by science, but that it's the beginning, not the end, of investigation. Right? Or maybe that's too crudely put.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2006 : 22:22:16 [Permalink]
|
No, not right either. We use subjective evidence all the time. If I want to evaluate pain control, I can test something like range of motion, objective, or just ask you to rate the pain on a scale of 1-10. Both are valid evidence. Objective is considered a tad more reliable but that's what placebo controls are for.
Some people are confused when the statement, "it's anecdotal evidence" is equated so often with unreliable. But what is really unreliable is the conclusions people tend to draw from personal experience or from small samples of anecdotes in uncontrolled situations. I wore my hat backwards and the Mariners won the game. I got a flu shot and was ill the next day. Those two statements, both draw equally invalid conclusions from anecdotes as the only evidence.
But I can actually collect anecdotal evidence systematically and as long as I follow proper scientific process, the conclusions I draw can be valid. We do it all the time when retrospective studies are done. I interview a hundred patients who received pain med x and a hundred who received pain med y. If the two groups are fairly identical with only the pain med differing, then the comparison is valid. The definitive study would then be to assign the two pain meds randomly in a double blind study but we don't always have the luxury of the best research.
|
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 12/27/2006 : 20:26:59 [Permalink]
|
1. Fix your links, Frank, so people don't have to scroll back and forth to read your rambling nonsense.
2. Make your point instead of just posting the rambling nonsense.
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 12/27/2006 : 22:30:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by GeeMack
1. Fix your links, Frank, so people don't have to scroll back and forth to read your rambling nonsense.
2. Make your point instead of just posting the rambling nonsense.
He's clearly make his point: That he's a whack-o, third-rate, suck-up propagandist for a dangerously parasitic, loathsome quack.
|
“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 12/27/2006 22:33:23 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 12/27/2006 : 23:35:20 [Permalink]
|
Tell me, FE6666: Is it true that Jomanda, this "healing" woman so sickeningly involved in the death of Sylvia Millecam, reveres and actively promotes the late Dutch spiritualist, anti-Semite, racist, and treacherous Nazi collaborator, Jozef Rulof?
Nazi Quisling bastard, Jozef Rulof
If so, why? Has Jomanda ever spoken out against, or divorced herself from the contemptible ideology of this man who once said, when referring to the Holocaust (while it was happening!), "Adolf, finish your task!"?
I hope you don't mind me asking, but bluntly put, are you yourself a racist or anti-Semite, FE6666?
|
“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 12/28/2006 00:03:33 |
|
|
|
Trust me
New Member
2 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 01:54:16 [Permalink]
|
And from that moment on FE6666 became remarkably quiet.
Jomanda is indeed a propagandist of the late Dutch spiritualist writer -and to my opinion racist and antisemitist- Jozef Rulof. Seven of his books have already appeared in English translation and more translations are being prepared. During her numerous so-called healing gatherings and radiotalks Jomanda manoevres however by avoiding the more controversial parts of these books.
For your information, last week in Belgium, the editor and distibutor of Rulof's books were presented at court after 4 years of postponement. The prosecutor, on behalf of the Belgian national 'Centre for equal opportunities and opposition to racism', said that denial of the holocaust, even in very small proportions, are not admissable in a modern society that maintains highly democratic standards. Verdict next month.
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 05:29:34 [Permalink]
|
Welcome to SFN, Trust me!
Thanks for that further information. I hadn't really noticed that the Nazi stuff shut up FE6666, but you may be right. I just posted above, then moved on without checking back.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 07:40:04 [Permalink]
|
| What I am always wondering about is why nutjobs like FE6666 and cosmicbrat always need to present their information in a way that makes it immediately known as rubbish. It's something about the formatting or paragraph division that always ticks me off on how sane they are from the start. Anyone else have similar experiences? |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 13:42:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by tomk80
It's something about the formatting or paragraph division that always ticks me off on how sane they are from the start. Anyone else have similar experiences?
Oh, yeah...
Definitly been there. |
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. |
|
|
|
Trust me
New Member
2 Posts |
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 06:32:08 [Permalink]
|
Mijn god... Die foto alleen al...
(translated: My god... The photo alone...)
*head explodes in disbelief* |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Psychic Jomanda/Millecam: the true story
Topic Locked
