If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Water has memory, validating homeopathy
"Bob Officer" -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in message ... On Mon, 8 Nov 2010 05:23:20 +1100, in misc.health.alternative, "carole" wrote: "Steelclaws" wrote in message . 214.39... Bob Officer -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in : Sorry, Hans is a mediocre writer at best. The story lacks facts and substance and Evidence. So that makes you a clown. PRojection Carole. All I ask for is evidence, and there is none. Stories are not Evidence. Now if the story was backed by maybe a Hand written note signed by Rockefeller or even a directive or letter of agreement on Rockefeller Corporate Stationary signed by an employee of Rockefeller. All you have is mere-say. And mere-say is not ever considered evidence. This is called the Empty Hand Syndrome. You got nothing, no matter how much you wave those hands. (at least a clown is funny.) Well, if someone wrote it, published it in either printed or online form and it appears to support carole's assumptions, that's good enough for her. She does not appear to do any validity checks. Yes, I compare writings to others. Try comparing for facts. Not just others. This is where you are showing your limitations and its a fact that ESTJ's are sticklers for following and supporting the establishment position. "By the book" is standard MO for an ESTJ. For example, there is a lot of coverups in political areas ...stories are fed to the press ...explanations that cover situations enough but not the whole truth. And you web site is part of the problem, not the solution. Sorry bob, you're limitations are showing. People are left with questions and often its the best showman that gets away with things. For simple minded people. That simple mindedness can be fixed but it takes hard work to learn the right questions. When I say people are left with lots of questions, what I mean is that when people are fed spin and manipulations it is an unsatisfactory diet. Who said it and what evidence does he have to support it. Evidence is not mere-say. Is mere-say your word of the week? I have no idea what it means and I don't think anybody else has either. On the positive side it does rhyme with "heresay", but only useful if you are into poetry writing. There are three kinds of medicine: medicine that has been scientifically validated to work, medicine that has not, and medicine that has been scientifically shown not to work. -Orac And medicine that has had rigged studies and medicine that is suppressed and the inventors labeled as quacks. Absolutely all sorts. and then there are people like you, proud of their ignorance and arrogant the lack of ability to use logic and reason. I wouldn't exactly say I was proud of my ignorance, more than I've listened to enough crap to not take it seriously ...unlike yourself who still believes all crap and still pushes all crap. -- Carole www.conspiracee.com Bob Officer finally admits it -"I am a tool" http://groups.google.com.au/group/mi...ss+epidemic%22 |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Water has memory, validating homeopathy
"Steelclaws" wrote in message 4.39... "carole" wrote in nd.com: Well, if someone wrote it, published it in either printed or online form and it appears to support carole's assumptions, that's good enough for her. She does not appear to do any validity checks. Yes, I compare writings to others. I've yet to see you to show any evidence that you'd compare the sites you post to those that disagree with them or show that their claims are baseless. Broadly speaking, I've compared we're told by "experts" and "reliable sources" and what the alteranative views are on many topics. What I discovered is that the people are fed spin and lies and have absolutely no idea what really happens behind the scenes. Then we have people like bob who hangs on every word of the establishment and can't wait to support it and demonise anybody who disagrees with establishment views. Typical ESTJ -- they have their strong points and weak points. The weak point is you can't reason with them, they will stick to the establishment views whatever and rationalise them to the end. -- There are three kinds of medicine: medicine that has been scientifically validated to work, medicine that has not, and medicine that has been scientifically shown not to work. -Orac And medicine that has had rigged studies and medicine that is suppressed and the inventors labeled as quacks. Absolutely all sorts. Present _valid_ evidence for your claims. Also present _valid_ evidence that quackery works in anything else than relieving their dupes from their cash. Relieving dupes of their cash is what pharmaceutical medicine is expert at. -- The concepts of orthomolecular medicine are not biologically plausible and not supported by the results of rigorous clinical trials. These problems are compounded by the fact that orthomolecular medicine can cause harm and is often very expensive. -Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst Replace "orthomolecular" with "allopathic" and you're getting closer to the truth. -- Carole www.conspiracee.com Bob Officer finally admits it -"I am a tool" http://groups.google.com.au/group/mi...ss+epidemic%22 |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Water has memory, validating homeopathy
"Bob Officer" -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in message ... On Mon, 8 Nov 2010 05:20:48 +1100, in misc.health.alternative, "carole" wrote: "Bob Officer" -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in message ... On Fri, 5 Nov 2010 18:56:30 +1100, in misc.health.alternative, "carole" wrote: "Bob Officer" -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in message ... On Thu, 4 Nov 2010 00:16:14 +1100, in misc.health.alternative, "carole" wrote: "dr_jeff" wrote in message ... On 11/3/10 2:36 AM, carole wrote: I will go even one more, Homeopathy treatments and practice is a criminal act of defrauding the patient and public. Its practitioners should be treated as criminals. Your bias and ignorance is showing. Yes, a bias against treatments with no basis in scientific evidence, no scientific rational and no evidence that they work. Making people pay for these treatments is tantamount to theft. Jeff Hey Dr Jeff, its not my fault that modern medicine has been engineered to only support pharmaceutical solutions. Homeopathy was seen as competition and had to go along with any other therapies that cut into market share. The truth about the Rockefeller drug empire The Drug Story - by Hans Ruesch www.think-aboutit.com/health/TheDrugStory.htm "The history of the how the Rockefellers and their stooges in the Food and Drug Administration, the US Public Health Service, the Federal Trade Commission, the Better Business Bureau, the Army Medical Corps, the Navy Bureau of Medicine and thousands of health officers all over the country, combined to put out of business all forms of therapy that discourage the use of drugs. How the business with disease makes grants to medical colleges in exchange for a curriculum that favours drug-based medicine. No evidence there... "Is it any wonder, asked Bealle, snip It is still just a Post Hoc fallacy, Carole. Nothing has changed since the last time you posted this story. The big problem is you are taking Bealle's word about the so called influence, and he is not producing one iota of evidence to support his claim. Its the most probably story to explain the corruption of medical science, the bureacracy, and the suppression of alternative cures - because there is suppression. Occam's Razor applies. Your claim of suppression is a fallacy since the story and other false assumption stories of the same nature exist and can be found not only on Book Seller's shelves all over the world but on the internet as well. You can't blame a person for being sceptical of anything that comes out of mainstream since the public is routinely fed so much spin and lies. But that's the problem Carole you are not skeptical at all. You have a admitted bias and if what you read, agree with your bias you are happy. ditto. I one the other hand read everything without doubt, I look at claims, data and evidence. I check the protocol used for gathering evidence and look for evidence tampering. I discard mere-say, and check hear-say claims. (often the person misquotes the other person or misrepresents a statement. Like you do in your very dishonest quotation about me.) I example the protocol and determine if it is double blinded and random, What are the possible variables and how were the controlled or accounted for in the study. Yes, you accept mainstream establishment views as truth, as you compare their results to their methods, and their denouncement of alternative in accordance with their theories. Yes much of what is fed the public is wrong. Take Ioannidis actual paper and the popular press piece in the Atlantic. Would you say they agreed with each other? or was one spin to all inference of something the original paper didn't really say. You just can't handle it that Ioannidis found issues with research studies. Be skeptical and read the original paper to the point of understanding it completely and then write the spin piece in the Atlantic. Answer the question how closely to the two article agree with each other. I don't have to bob because I don't like pharmaceutical drugs and the whole industry, the studies and the peer review, is biased at best and corrupt at worst. But Ioannidis did say to ignore certain studies as they were useless. So After applying Occam's Razor we see you claim of "most probable story to explain" is actually the opposite, the least likely explanation. Not from my point of view. That's you bias and the Fact you are allowing mere-say as evidence, Carole. Just because the author says something in a story doesn't make it true. Jules vern often mix bits of history with his fiction. Have you read the "Mysterious Island" The story starts off describing a scene from the american civil war. and how they used balloons as observation platforms. Then he took the fiction off of a real events. Mere-say, here-say, poopoo-say, oops-lay. I'm merely (mere-say?) talking down to your biased, preconceived level. Hans Ruesch seems to have, without evidence to show otherwise, took a real event, Rockefeller contributions, and created a story of fiction maybe with a few other historical anchors, but without evidence it is no more that a fictional story at this point. You can't understand otherwise bob, because you are conditioned to view things from the establishment view. You will always rationalise everything in your mind to fit in with the way you have been conditioned from birth. You may have convinced yourself but I remain ever sceptical of anything coming out of mainstream where big monopolistic interests are concerned, where they spend 2/3 of their expenses on marketing and spin. Anyone that has ever tried to market/sell anything knows that of the cost of doing business marketing takes a big chunk of the cost. And you would also know that big business can be ruthless, that they will sell anything to anybody and put enough spin on it to do so. I notice you include Spin with Marketing. That is the real break down between the two? And how much of the break down is subjective? Marketing is selling a product, whereas spin is used to sell ideas. Big pharma first uses spin to reassure people that its products are "safe and effictatioius", cutting edge, the only true medicine --then uses marketing to the pubic, doctors, politicians, medical schools to promote its products. You best theory is that everything is fine and above-board, that anybody who disagrees with medical science is a quack, which is laughable compared to Hans Ruesch's explanation. Sorry, Hans is a mediocre writer at best. The story lacks facts and substance and Evidence. Sounds just fine to me and a refreshing change from all the politically correct crap we routinely get fed. Sorry Carole it is most mere-say and not really based on any facts. Do remain amused by it. but don't site it as factual. Fruit loops, you sure are flogging your word of the week. Bob, even if the Drug Story by Hans Ruesch isn't based on facts it has more truth than all the crap we're fed as fact. So no need to show concern in that regard. So that makes you a clown. PRojection Carole. All I ask for is evidence, and there is none. Stories are not Evidence. Now if the story was backed by maybe a Hand written note signed by Rockefeller or even a directive or letter of agreement on Rockefeller Corporate Stationary signed by an employee of Rockefeller. You really are a clown. No Carole. I am the skeptic. you are not. I question everything, you only question that which doesn't not agree with your person bias. The skeptic that debunks things that shouldn't be debunked, based on erroneous theories and ****ed up evidence. All you have is mere-say. And mere-say is not ever considered evidence. This is called the Empty Hand Syndrome. You got nothing, no matter how much you wave those hands. (at least a clown is funny.) Mere-say -- word of the week? For you it could be. do you understand the word and how it is used to separate what is evidence and what is not? Mere-say, heresay, oops lay, poopoo say. -- Carole www.conspiracee.com Bob Officer finally admits it -"I am a tool" http://groups.google.com.au/group/mi...ss+epidemic%22 |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Water has memory, validating homeopathy
"carole" wrote in
ond.com: I've yet to see you to show any evidence that you'd compare the sites you post to those that disagree with them or show that their claims are baseless. Broadly speaking, I've compared we're told by "experts" and "reliable sources" and what the alteranative views are on many topics. Just how would you manage to do that? By your own admission you can't use PubMed, and even if you could, you cannot understand the articles. -- There are three kinds of medicine: medicine that has been scientifically validated to work, medicine that has not, and medicine that has been scientifically shown not to work. -Orac And medicine that has had rigged studies and medicine that is suppressed and the inventors labeled as quacks. Absolutely all sorts. Present _valid_ evidence for your claims. Also present _valid_ evidence that quackery works in anything else than relieving their dupes from their cash. Relieving dupes of their cash is what pharmaceutical medicine is expert at. I said _valid_ evidence. Your opinion is not evidence. -- The concepts of orthomolecular medicine are not biologically plausible and not supported by the results of rigorous clinical trials. These problems are compounded by the fact that orthomolecular medicine can cause harm and is often very expensive. -Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst Replace "orthomolecular" with "allopathic" and you're getting closer to the truth. Yeah, right. Present _valid_ evidence that Singh and Ernst are wrong in their evaluation. -- One of the reasons for conspiracy theories is an assumption that people in high places always know what they are doing. When they do something that makes no sense, devious reasons are imagined by conspiracy theorists, when in fact it may be due to plain old ignorance and incompetence. - Thomas Sowel |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Water has memory, validating homeopathy
Bob Officer -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in
: Whereas your explanations depend on the body of science which is like a type of concensus rather than science. Science does not work on consensus, for heaven's sake! Anyone who makes that claim does not have the faintest clue about real science. Science works on evidence. She doesn't understand anything it seems. I doubt she has had any exposure to real science. There's this thing called being so open-minded your brains drop out. -Richard Dawkins Alternatively, you can have a mind closed tighter than a fish's arse where nothing can penetrate. That's what you once said you have - and I can quote your message on that, if need be. How quickly she forgets. That's why I suspected cannabis abuse. It's certainly a possibility. However - and too bad for her - my memory works perfectly. -- Quackery kills more people than those who die from all crimes of violence put together. -John Miner |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Water has memory, validating homeopathy
"carole" wrote in
ond.com: Whereas your explanations depend on the body of science which is like a type of concensus rather than science. Science does not work on consensus, for heaven's sake! Anyone who makes that claim does not have the faintest clue about real science. Science works on evidence. There is science and scientism which works on concensus. What you biased lot of sceptics talk about is scientism. Look it up. Try learning something about how real science works. I do understand it's quite fashionable - especially amongst the tinfoil hat crowd - to denigrate science as it has a habit of showing that their claims are wrong. There's this thing called being so open-minded your brains drop out. -Richard Dawkins Alternatively, you can have a mind closed tighter than a fish's arse where nothing can penetrate. That's what you once said you have - and I can quote your message on that, if need be. That won't be necessary. You lot have minds closed tighter than fishes arses, with preconceived ideas and bias. I'm not the one who said that "my mind is closed tighter than a fish's arse" - that was you. -- Quackery kills more people than those who die from all crimes of violence put together. -John Miner |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Water has memory, validating homeopathy
"carole" wrote:
I have no idea what it means and I don't think anybody else has either. I worked it out from the context. -- Peter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com I'm @RatbagsDotCom on Twitter |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Water has memory, validating homeopathy
"carole" wrote:
even if the Drug Story by Hans Ruesch isn't based on facts it has more truth than all the crap we're fed as fact. That's a keeper!! -- Peter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com I'm @RatbagsDotCom on Twitter |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Water has memory, validating homeopathy
"Bob Officer" -*-*.@.*-*- wrote in message ... On Mon, 8 Nov 2010 05:23:20 +1100, in misc.health.alternative, "carole" wrote: Profile of the ESTJ (at work - at home they are meek and mild) From Type Talk at Work by Otto Kroeger with Janet M. Thuesen, authors of Type Talk. " ESTJ- "Life's Natural Administrators More than most other types, the ESTJ is the proverbial jack-of-all-trades. Given to accountability, responsibility, productivity, and result, this type is remarkable at just about anything they do. You can find them in leadership positions in a cross-section of professions, from law and medicine to education and engineering. Outgoing, gregarious, usually quite direct, and very upbeat to be around (Extraversion), the ESTJs see the world in terms of hands-on, practical, realistic situation (Sensing). Those perceptions are translated into objective, nonpersonal, analytical decisions (Thinking) and freely imposed upon anyone within earshot (Judging) --always for someone else's good, of course. This combination of preferences gives ESTJs a penpensity for seeing a situation as it is and mving themselves and others to develop a series of procedures, rituals, or regulations that will not only take care of the situation at hand but will also provide a framework for any future similar situations. It is this special combination of hands-on perceptions and analytical judgement, focused outward and set in a lifestyle of structure schedule, and order, that makes ESTJs the administrators of the world. If you want a job done, a regulation established, a system implemented, or an ongoing program evaluated, call on an ESTJ to manage it. ....Because they are more common than any other type --in the United States there are more Extraverts, Sensors, Thinking males, and Judgers --ESTJ males fit most of the corporate norms, even the statistical ones. ... Because ESTJs are a take-charge type with very high control needs and because of their severe sense of accountability, they do not cope well when things do not go as planned. They have no tolerance for disorganisation, tardiness, sloppiness, or inappropriate behaviour (as defined by the ESTJ). All are invitations for a barrage of criticism. ESTJs have a short fuse when anything suggests they are losing control. The ESTJ can become loud, rigid, domineering, and can induce a great deal of stress within anyone nearby. (As a rule ESTJs are ulcer giveers, not ulcer getters.) Not that this is malevolent. Indeed it is intended to further what seems to be a self-ordained mission to keep the world running and to keep people doing what they should be doing." * * * -- Carole www.conspiracee.com Bob Officer finally admits it -"I am a tool" http://groups.google.com.au/group/mi...ss+epidemic%22 |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Water has memory, validating homeopathy
"Steelclaws" wrote in message 4.39... "carole" wrote in ond.com: I've yet to see you to show any evidence that you'd compare the sites you post to those that disagree with them or show that their claims are baseless. Broadly speaking, I've compared we're told by "experts" and "reliable sources" and what the alteranative views are on many topics. Just how would you manage to do that? By your own admission you can't use PubMed, and even if you could, you cannot understand the articles. As I said before, from my own experience I have discovered how to eliminate parasites, fungi, infections, various aches and pains, stomach troubles, constipation, headaches all with alternative remedies. -- There are three kinds of medicine: medicine that has been scientifically validated to work, medicine that has not, and medicine that has been scientifically shown not to work. -Orac And medicine that has had rigged studies and medicine that is suppressed and the inventors labeled as quacks. Absolutely all sorts. Present _valid_ evidence for your claims. Also present _valid_ evidence that quackery works in anything else than relieving their dupes from their cash. Relieving dupes of their cash is what pharmaceutical medicine is expert at. I said _valid_ evidence. Your opinion is not evidence. My opinion is more valid to me than the opinions of "experts" and "reliable sources". Consensus medicine - where everybody agrees on something that nobody agrees on. -- The concepts of orthomolecular medicine are not biologically plausible and not supported by the results of rigorous clinical trials. These problems are compounded by the fact that orthomolecular medicine can cause harm and is often very expensive. -Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst Replace "orthomolecular" with "allopathic" and you're getting closer to the truth. http://www.orthomolecular.org/ Orthomolecular medicine describes the practice of preventing and treating disease by providing the body with optimal amounts of substances which are natural to the body. Yeah, right. Present _valid_ evidence that Singh and Ernst are wrong in their evaluation. The fact that I can get rid of diseases that modern medicine would treat with pharmaceutical products, shows that it doesn't understand about nutritional remedies. But not only doesn't modern medicine understand nutritional remedies, but it doesn't want to understand. -- One of the reasons for conspiracy theories is an assumption that people in high places always know what they are doing. When they do something that makes no sense, devious reasons are imagined by conspiracy theorists, when in fact it may be due to plain old ignorance and incompetence. - Thomas Sowel I don't believe this saying. I think that people in the very highest places know exactly what they're doing and the way to go about achieving it. -- Carole www.conspiracee.com "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." -President Franklin D. Roosevelt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
10 Tricks To Boost Memory | [email protected] | Pregnancy | 0 | November 12th 07 08:19 AM |
In Memory Of | The Boogie Man | Foster Parents | 6 | May 4th 06 06:43 PM |
water cooler, water coolers, water dispenser, water dispensers,bottleless water cooler,bottleless water coolers,bottleless water dispenser,bottleless water dispensers | [email protected] | Pregnancy | 0 | January 5th 06 09:14 AM |
Review: The Memory of a Killer (***) | Steve Rhodes | General | 0 | August 25th 05 07:47 AM |
Best baby memory book | mypet | Pregnancy | 2 | May 21st 04 06:56 PM |