Why are post involving medicines (or quackery)on this sub-forum?

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by ElectricFetus, Sep 10, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    I just got back here and notice those dam homeopathy cultist still posing stuff here, I think this is a subject better suited to the Biology & Genetics sub-forum, I just have the strangers idea that medical question should go there.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231
    A better question would be why aren't they in the pseudoscience forum? Homeopathy runs contrary to accepted rules of science. As such, it shouldn't be discussed in either the General Science or Biology and Medicine forums. I wish the moderators here were a little more on-the-ball.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Quasi Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    50
    Religion is true to the ignorant, false to the wise, and useful to the politician. I think some greek scholar wrote this a few millenia ago. Anyway, to the homeopaths, homeopathy is completely true, so why not post here?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    Not disagreeing with you Quasi but wouldn’t the Biology & Genetics sub-forum be better for a medical "science" (really it is a psuedo-science, but if they believe its a science... )
     
  8. BigBlueHead Great Tealnoggin! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,996
    I hate to say it but I understand what Quasi's saying...

    For the homeopaths to post on the Pseudoscience forum would be tantamount to admitting that they were wrong, which they will never do. Some people have careers bound up in this stuff, and some people wouldn't be able to get out of bed in the morning if they didn't have it to believe in.

    I once had a philosophy class on pseudoscience; one person in the class freaked out when the prof said astrology was a pseudoscience. They said that astrology was part of their religion and he should show his religious tolerance by saying that astrology was a science.
     
  9. river-wind Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,671
    the definition of science is the use of the scientific method to define causal agents of witnessed phenomena.
    http://teacher.nsrl.rochester.edu/phy_labs/AppendixE/AppendixE.html

    If the topic does not fit that definition, then IMO, it should be in a topic subgroup other than science.

    Biology and Genetics would be a fine place. Psuedoscience would also be an ok place, however, as you mention BigBlueHead, that won't happen.

    Every idea which has not followed the scientific method should start out in psuedo science; until it becomes more plausable due to extensive, verifiable and structured testing, it should remain there. Unfortunatly, the term "psuedo" gives it the connotation of being "false" (per the definition) as opposed to "not yet proven", which is the current meaning of the word psuedoscience.

    If someone wants to post here about homeopathy, that's cool, but verafiable numbers and quantitative data must be shown. A detailed procedure of the experiment/test/proving would also be an important factor in the topic being taken seriously. No beliefs, no asumptions, no insults. Just a description of the cause and effect, and allow the people reading the post determine if there is something to be said for the methods used.
    If the treatment works, it will speak for itself.
     
  10. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    What if we change it to Quasiscience?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Remember how retarded use to be the scientific definition, but was used so often and became a insult so they had to make a even more politically correct definition (Mentally Handicap or my favorite “Special”

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ) perhaps psuedoscience disserves that same make over.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2003
  11. BigBlueHead Great Tealnoggin! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,996
    We could call it Retarded Science...
     
  12. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    No no that would be insulting we should call it "Logically Handicap Sciences" or " "Special" Sciences"

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. river-wind Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,671
  14. Hahnemannian Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    383
    TimOkay and I started posting here because we're looking for people to help us resolve homeopathic pharmacology, but people with NO knowledge of homeopathy and big mouths kept getting in the way.

    I couldn't give a rats ass what those ignorant about homeopathy think of it because their opinions are based on nothing, just like all of their other views -- assuming it's typical for fools to express opinions about things they're ignorant of or upon erroneous assumptions like all things allopathic based upon the natural sciences.

    We're looking for lost or misplaced findings showing anything about succussed solutions.

    Shiu Yin Lo accidentally confirmed an hypothesis of a homeopath from the 1950s and '60s when he caught water crystals at room temperature with an electron microscope.

    That was just a few years ago, and an explanation is in order.

    It's expected that electromagnetism is involved in homeopathic pharmacology because it doesn't seem that any other force could be active from vigorous shaking of half-full vials.

    So we're looking for well-informed people or those with big brains to possibly help resolve this issue.

    That's why we're here.

    If the people who know nothing about homeopathy would keep their big mouths shut, things would go a long ways toward resolving this issue and avoiding our reactions to abject quackery being accepted as scientific medicine when they should be executed for the killers they are and always will be.

    And if any of you guys had any brains, you'd recognize that a system openly stating it is therapeutically incompetent (the definition of quackery, guys) in ALL viral, chronic and psychiatric cases belongs to quasi-science and the ash-heap of history.

    Unfortunately, there are bozos like you all who like keeping us in the tail end of the Dark Ages and like being part of mass murder, so we are destined to remain in this status quo so long as you jackasses have the ability to express opinions rather than getting dead.

    Okay dokie?
     
  15. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    Yaaaaaaaaa, thats still does not answer why you don't post this crap in the Biology & Genetics sub-forum???

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    beside some of the people I know in the Biology & Genetics sub-forum might actually be to whom you seek. Try PMing paulsamuel.
     
  16. Hahnemannian Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    383
    Okay, then I'll spell it out for you: Because it's general science we're looking into rather than anything about medicine.

    Better?
     
  17. Hahnemannian Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    383
    (posted twice)
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2003
  18. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    OK I get it now, sorry man don't think you will find anyone except for people that will laugh at you.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. Hahnemannian Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    383
    Did I say I care what idiots think?

    When they can do what I do, then I will care what they think.
     
  20. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    Ya being a totally delusional and finding idiots to sucker money out of at the same time must be hard for you man, got to respect that.
     
  21. BigBlueHead Great Tealnoggin! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,996
    Hahnemannian...

    All I've seen you do is what we do - argue on sciforums. I hate to break this to you, but you're not going to get any credibility for homeopathic remedies here. Sciforums is more like a wrestling match that never ends, so don't expect to win.

    Also...

    1) The theories you've espoused so far in the forums are patently stupid

    2) Your "black box" concept of human physiology is deeply uninformed

    3) Homeopathic pharmacology as a field needs to spend some time and effort extricating itself from the astrologers, palmists, phrenologists and psychic surgeons people tend to associate with it

    4) You argue like a religious fanatic.

    Ah... the gentle voice of reason. All who oppose you should die - because they are mass murderers.

    Well... there's an old saying that when you're a doctor you can bury your mistakes. Maybe that's why I don't hear a lot of stories about people who were killed, or whose lives were not saved (which is apparently murder in your book) by homeopathic remedies.

    Why is that? Hmm...

    Oh yes! It's because Homeopathy doesn't have any form of accountability. However, what it does have is a bunch of rabid fans who accuse all scientists of being dog-raping baby-eaters.

    So? Why then are you too good for our criticism? Since you're calling us mass murderers and all. Fields like yours have a long history of refusing to stand up under peer review, and instead claiming that their detractors were monsters and demons.

    Unfortunately for you, sciforums doesn't even qualify as peer review! So... Your insults and haranguing are wasted here. If you want credibility, go publish a proper study that shows that your homeopathic remedy actually helped someone. Then, you won't need to desperately battle for your cause here.
     
  22. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231
    No, it would be admitting that homeopathy runs contrary to accepted rules of science – which it obviously does. Consider these descriptions of homeopathy:

    http://www.abchomeopathy.com/detail.htm
    http://www.homeopathy-cures.com/html/about_homeopathy.html
    http://www.homeopathy-soh.org/web/pages/leaflet3.htm

    Does that sound at all scientific to you? If you want to believe in homeopathy, fine; you have the right to believe and discuss whatever you want. Just do it in the appropriate place. The pseudoscience forum is the place to discuss things that aren't supported by science. If people associate pseudoscience with falseness because pseudoscientific topics run contrary to established scientific ideas, that's just too bad.

    For a more skeptical evaluation of homeopathy (as if their own literature doesn't do a good enough job of discrediting them) take a close look at http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html .

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Homeopathic medicine makes extraordinary, almost unbelievable claims. This in and of its self doesn't mean that it's wrong, but it needs to provide strong, convincing proof the back its claims if it wishes to be taken seriously and/or considered scientific. The evidence has never materialized. There are only a handful of highly questionable studies indicating that homeopathy even might work, and dozens upon dozens indicating that it is quackery.

    The bottom line is that if homeopathy really worked it would be trivially easy to conduct double-blind studies that prove its effectiveness. It's easy to do a double blind study that shows the effectiveness of penicillin or aspirin.

    Note to the homeopaths: please don't bother responding unless you can offer logical, reasoned criticism. Your pseudo-religious ranting is of no interest to anyone.
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2003
  23. timokay Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    155
    It's just that you know nothing about it. Everyone feels they are justified in forming an opinion on Homeopathy without ever even spending five minutes studying the subject.

    I don't know why that is. I studied it without prejudice and came to a different conclusion to you people.

    Hahnemannian has spent 25 years in this profession. I can hardly believe the extent of his ability to restrain himself with people here who have nothing to offer to the discussion except boys club instinctual behaviour.


    No doubt it will follow. There is nothing else from you, and it is impossible for you to keep quiet.

    Tim
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page