"anoldfriend" wrote in message ...
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 14:06:37 -0400, carole wrote
(in article m):


"Bob Officer" .@. wrote in message
...
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 03:27:58 +1100, in misc.health.alternative,
"carole" wrote:


"Bob Officer" .@. wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 21:14:35 +1100, in misc.health.alternative,
"carole" wrote:


"Bob Officer" .@. wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:55:43 +1100, in misc.health.alternative,
"carole" wrote:




What you're describing john sounds like the patriarchal culture,
where the macho men reign by secrecy, authoritarian
regimes,
hierarchical systems and brute force.

However, that doesn't sound like science at all. All the science that
counts is published in publicly available journals,
often
available at libraries or over the internet for free. The abstracts
(summaries) of the articles are almost always available
for
free.

Ah yes, but Jeff, only certain health research is considered worthy of
funding.

Yes, research which shows promise.

No, research which doesn't threaten big pharma.


Who decides what is and what isn't worthy of funding?

Well I guess you would actually look at avenues which haven't been
explored. After all how many times do you spend money to find the
evidence doesn't support Iridology or some other already explored
avenue shown to be a failure?

That was a rhetorical question bob.

It didn't look like one, Carole. I actually thought it was a
sarcastic question but a good one. I gave a good answer.

Since we know the structure of the iris is fixed in a person to the
extent it can be used for identification using iris scans, It pretty
much places the practice of iridology into the area of
pseudoscience...well not even really pseudo science, but pure
bull****.

We don't know that the iris is fixed bob.

yes we do.
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/TechReports/UCAM-CL-TR-635.html
http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_det...csnumber=38750
http://www.irisbase.com/ - non-functional
http://google.com/patents?id=KRkpAAAAEBAJ
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/jgd1000/irisrecog.pdf
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~jgd1000/patrec.pdf
http://www.cbsr.ia.ac.cn/users/zfhe/publications.html
http://iris.nist.gov/ICE/ICE_2005_Re...0March2006.pdf

According to a book that I have called The Science and Practice of Iridology
by Bernard Jensen, where he consistently talks about
iris changes caused by both disease and healing.

So who do we believe, Bernard Jensen or Joshua David Mather Sr.?

http://www.quackwatch.org/01Quackery...nfessions.html

I can't recall ever seeing this confession before.
Who was/is Joshua David Mather Snr?


--
Carole
www.conspiracee.com
"For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy
that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion
instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice.

It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine
that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

Its preparations are concealed, not published.
Its mistakes are buried, not headlined.
Its dissenters are silenced, not praised.
No expenditure is questioned, no secret is revealed.

That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy.
I am asking your help in the tremendous task of alerting the people." --President Kennedy