 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / April 2008The Anti Alts who have been here for years.
Does it seem odd that these people are Sooooooo dedicated to saving us from our use of Alternatives? I can understand that they might check in from time to time, take a few snipes and then go back to whatever they call a life. But these guys are here everyday, and night, and weekends too. Now that is some serious dedication! I think it indicates one or more of a few reasons. ONE: The ever popular getting paid to do it. Doubtful. TWO: They believe the trash they spew. To some degree I think yes. THREE: They are nasty social rejects who like the love starved child, will do bad things for attention, any kind of attention will do. I think number three has the best chance of being the true reason. Think about it, they come to an Alternative group everyday to put down Alternatives. Classic attention grab. > Does it seem odd that these people are Sooooooo dedicated to saving us from > our use of Alternatives? I can understand that they might check in from time [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > being the true reason. Think about it, they come to an Alternative group > everyday to put down Alternatives. Classic attention grab. Exactly! This is what I discovered when I first naively posted some pro Homeopathy comments. A fusillade of disparaging remarks almost immediately appeared in response from denizens of this group who, I learned later, where part of the loose knit anti-alternative cabal. Now, if Homeopathy were REALLY the complete waste of time and unscientific nonsense they claim it is, they would hardly be motivated to rush to their keyboards, symbolically foaming at the mouth, at the mere mention of the word. Somehow, the aunties (sic, instead of antis, cute nickname for them) feel THREATENED by almost any alternative medicine system and particularly threatened if there is the slightest implication that the patient might have done better with the alternative treatment rather than "standard" medicine. Contemporaneous with this attitude, they manage to IGNORE scientific research, done by well qualified and fully credentialed researchers in the alternative medicine journals, somehow disparaging all of it as "unacceptable" yet blindly accept as OK, articles in the "approved" medical journals such as Lancet - even when Lancet allowed politics and innuendo to invade its once hallowed pages as it launched its 1995 witch hunt against Homeopathy in an article filled with errors, misrepresentations and omissions of successful research carefully timed to go against a presentation in favour of Alternative Medicine by Prince Charles of England before the World Health Organization a few months earlier. How VERY DIFFERENT from their 1997 article on Homeopathy which honestly compared research results clearly showing positive effect. Likewise, the slightest research with negative results, such as a news program's failed repetition of a famous experiment, whose protocols were altered by ANONYMOUS "experts", somehow becomes the definitive and disqualifying result which forever impugns the validity of Homeopathy and we are expected docilely believe this and agree that all additional research should be permanently stopped and banned. Meanwhile the numerous research with POSITIVE results is ignored or contemptuously and/or irrationally dismissed as irrelevant, mistaken or "flawed". That this same experiment was successfully repeated in 3 out of the 4 international laboratories that tried it is somehow ignored and dismissed as "error" without the slightest attempt document such assertions. Foaming at the mouth about "science" and "reason" these appear to be the first two things the "aunties" loose once they join their holy crusade which, had this been several hundred years ago, might have been quite at home during the inquisition, but which is clearly out of place in this century in which men and women of reason will make up their own minds about the systems of health that they wish to use and the research will continue and new discoveries will continue to be made no matter if they condemn the vaccinators and pharmaceutical pill makers or merely relegate them to their ultimate place next to bloodletting and hydrotherapy as historical dead ends obstructing the progress of true science. Citizen Jimserac > > Does it seem odd that these people are Sooooooo dedicated to saving us from > > our use of Alternatives? I can understand that they might check in from time [quoted text clipped - 100 lines] > obstructing the progress > of true science. Do you have a homeoquackery cure for projection? > > > Does it seem odd that these people are Sooooooo dedicated to saving us from > > > our use of Alternatives? I can understand that they might check in from time [quoted text clipped - 102 lines] > > Do you have a homeoquackery cure for projection? Many thanks for both the speed of your response and its content, completely supportive of my main points! It's good to know you're always around when needed! Citizen Jimserac > > > > Does it seem odd that these people are Sooooooo dedicated to saving us from > > > > our use of Alternatives? I can understand that they might check in from time [quoted text clipped - 109 lines] > It's good to know you're always around > when needed! Speed in merely coincidental as to when I log on. As for the content, you whine, and whenie...and say nothing. Your project the weaknesses of homeoquackery onto everything that poroves it to be utterly flase. On Mar 23, 4:33 pm, Citizen Jimserac <Jimse...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 23, 4:14 pm, Mark Probert <mark.prob...@gmail.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 125 lines] > It's good to know you're always around > when needed! Speed in merely coincidental as to when I log on. As for the content, you whine, and whenie...and say nothing. Your project the weaknesses of homeoquackery onto everything that poroves it to be utterly flase. Oh dear, Mark is now on a roll. Getting enough attention for your poor little unloved self yet? > On Mar 23, 4:33 pm, CitizenJimserac<Jimse...@gmail.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 119 lines] > project the weaknesses of homeoquackery onto everything that poroves > it to be utterly flase. "poroves to be utterly flase"??? Rllealy?!! Citizen Jimserac On Mar 23, 4:33 pm, Citizen Jimserac <Jimse...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 23, 4:14 pm, Mark Probert <mark.prob...@gmail.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 125 lines] > It's good to know you're always around > when needed! Speed in merely coincidental as to when I log on. As for the content, you whine, and whenie...and say nothing. Your project the weaknesses of homeoquackery onto everything that poroves it to be utterly flase. === poroves....flase. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v324/A1974true/73819e3a.gif On Mar 23, 2:06 pm, Citizen Jimserac <Jimse...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 23, 1:17 pm, "t" <tool...@gmail.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 111 lines] > obstructing the progress > of true science. Do you have a homeoquackery cure for projection? Well it sure did not take long for the first poor rejected child to jump in with a line , hoping to get some attention. Well here ya go Mark. Do you feel better yet? You really should see someone about your issues you know. > Do you have a homeoquackery cure for projection? > Well it sure did not take long for the first poor rejected child to jump in > with a line , hoping to get some attention. Well here ya go Mark. Do you > feel better yet? You really should see someone about your issues you know. I think it is time someone tells him the war in Viet Nam is over--- except the chemical mess we left behind---maybe since he made the mess, he should go clean it up.... > > Do you have a homeoquackery cure for projection? > > Well it sure did not take long for the first poor rejected child to jump in > > with a line , hoping to get some attention. Well here ya go Mark. Do you > > feel better yet? You really should see someone about your issues you know. > > I think it is time someone tells him the war in Viet Nam is over--- I am well aware that it is over. > except the chemical mess we left behind---maybe since he made the > mess, > he should go clean it up.... I never made a chemical mess. > > > Do you have a homeoquackery cure for projection? > > > Well it sure did not take long for the first poor rejected child to jump in [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I never made a chemical mess. You "personally" never made a chemical mess but someone did. And we continue to do this around the world today. Our bodies were not designed to handle the assault of the combined toxin exposure. Some people are better able to handle it than others. This is true about everything. This forum is both entertaining and disturbing at the same time. It could be a place for civil academic debate over ideas. Instead it is a toxic soup. People (and you know who you are) are ready to swoop down from above to attack, insult, and attempt to discredit anybody posting an idea that does not go along with the status quo. This behavior is not new. It has happenned throughout history with people such as Galileo and it continues today.We have not learned from the past.The internet has made this easier and has increased its intensity. Instead of looking for an exchange of ideas some just look to attack with no regard for a civil exchange of ideas. Civility is not part of the equation. The internet has made it highly impersonal to sit at your keyboard and type away, never having to speak to a person face to face and often never revealing your actual name. Annonymous, behind the screen posters, often are ore abusive and less courteous than if they were sitting and speaking to a person face to face. This only makes matters worse. In my opinion this has led to the impersonal nature of our society and has not improved the human condition that is integreal for both success and happiness in everday life. Imagine if everyone here treated each other with respect? It is not going to happen and that is a sad commentary about the human condition. > > > > Do you have a homeoquackery cure for projection? > > > > Well it sure did not take long for the first poor rejected child to jump in [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > - Show quoted text - I would like to hear the feedback on the above post. > > > > Do you have a homeoquackery cure for projection? > > > > Well it sure did not take long for the first poor rejected child to jump in [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > - Show quoted text - D.C. Please give me your expert opinion on this above post please. > > > > Do you have a homeoquackery cure for projection? > > > > Well it sure did not take long for the first poor rejected child to jump in [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > - Show quoted text - To D.C.: You will not respond to the above post for exactly the reasons stated in the post. Certainly shows what you are all about . On Mar 23, 9:39 pm, Bee <Butterflies2...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 23, 2:19 pm, "t" <tool...@gmail.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I think it is time someone tells him the war in Viet Nam is over--- I am well aware that it is over. > except the chemical mess we left behind---maybe since he made the > mess, > he should go clean it up.... I never made a chemical mess. == Another anecdote. According to YOU, they are Bullshit, made up stories and most like not true. > On Mar 23, 2:06 pm, Citizen Jimserac <Jimse...@gmail.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 118 lines] > with a line , hoping to get some attention. Well here ya go Mark. Do you > feel better yet? You really should see someone about your issues you know I do not need your attention. You attention is akin to the attention one gets from a leech. On Mar 23, 5:19 pm, "t" <tool...@gmail.com> wrote: > "Mark Probert" <mark.prob...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 126 lines] > with a line , hoping to get some attention. Well here ya go Mark. Do you > feel better yet? You really should see someone about your issues you know I do not need your attention. You attention is akin to the attention one gets from a leech. You poor thing. [125 lines snipped] >> Do you have a homeoquackery cure for projection? >> Well it sure did not take long for the first poor rejected child to jump in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I do not need your attention. You attention is akin to the attention > one gets from a leech. It's good you don't need attention, but why do you make us wade through an extra 125 lines to give it to you anyway? | The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" | | The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" | +---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+ "D. C. Sessions" <dcs@lumbercartel.com> wrote D. C. Sessions...............Auntie Leech, has a nice ring to it. > It's good you don't need attention, but why do you make us > wade through an extra 125 lines to give it to you anyway? > > -- Why don't you and the rest of the ILK who absolutely HATE or LOATHE alternative health care, why not start your own threads for which the "PRIVATE CLUB" can just respond to, and we will all leave you be so you can talk amongst yourselves, give yourselves all of the gold stars, and points, that you can trade pats on the back amongst yourselves. This way, no one can be falsely accused of attempting to stifle your speech, and you can have your own conversations based upon your opinions. It's not about if you agree or disagree with someone about their opinions and ideas, but it would appear that slamming people up against the wall for daring to have those opinions is y'all's idea of FUN. It is not mine. And what happens here on a daily basis, has gotten to be quite laughable because the smart squirrels know what's goin' down. There appears to be light years of difference of education, religious upbringing, school of thoughts, gender orientation, and preference between all of us. Those that are "book smart" are clueless to the real life experiences. All books are, are people's opinions. Even professors in collegiate settings teach their opinions, and the minute you dare go against their beliefs they come unglued. I will never forget this openly gay instructor that taught a Psychological course that I took on values and ethics. This was in the early 80's. At the same time I was taking a Business Ethics course in the Philospophy discipline. The information I was getting about values and ethics from both classes did not jive, as the professor in the Business Ethics class was hetrosexual and Christian. Their opinions were miles apart. I happened to agree more with the Christian professor's point of view about ethics in the workplace, than I did with the Psychology instructor. I wrote good solid papers in both classes. In fact due to the nature of a report, I was able to write one report, and use it in both classes. I got an A+ from the Business Ethics professor, and a C- from the Psychology professor. So, I challenged the Psychology instructor to re-read my paper before I went to the Academic Vice President. He refused to change the grade. I took both papers, and took them to the Academic Vice President, who read the paper and called in the Psychology professor to explain, why my grade was so low on the well written report. His answer was that "He didn't share my opinion about ethics." The Academic Vice President called for the rest of the papers to be returned to him so that he could read the other students papers. The ones that agreed with his opinions he had given A+'s to, the ones that didn't agree with his teachings he gave C-'s to. The Academic Vice President had no choice but to put the professor before the Disclipinary Hearing Committee to decide the fate of the professor. Needless to say the professor that gave me the C- was not given a contract for the following year, and the papers were read by other Psychology professors, and the grades were re-done. The Kiss-a.ses grades got changed as well. Apparently I was not the only student to complain, but there was never any evidence until I wrote one report for two classes and they were miles apart in grades. Without this evidence, it looked like those that were complaining did not like him because he was openly gay at a time that being out of the closet was not "cool." So this is a perfect example of what transpires here and what has transpired here on a regular basis. It would be very easily to see how the RICO act could be used in any courtroom setting where alternative health care is on trial. Just look at all of the board posters over the years that have openly attacked, stalked, followed, computers hacked into, eavesdropped upon, had their credit reports gotten into, had identities used, etc.--is this your job to protect "conventional medicine?" Just when did Congress pass a bill and just when did President Bush sign it that prohibited individuals from using alternative healthcare??? I do not believe there is any such law in place in the United States of America, and until there is, my question to those that attack, stalk, eavesdrop, hack, follow, and harass those of us that enjoy forms of alternative healthcare, why are you doing it, and who for? I had my attorney look and he was unable to find any such law on the books, so there is absolutely no reason for those of us that enjoy different forms of health care to be put ridiculed in the manner in which this newsgroup has come to be. This is no longer an exchange of ideas but blood bath. It is no different than a soldier fighting in counties that they do not even want to be in, so that the people can be free......why, oh, why, are you that attack, trying to take my health freedom of choice away from me, an American. It makes you really make you wonder.....why people would act in the manner in which they are acting unless there was something in it for them..... > > It's good you don't need attention, but why do you make us > > wade through an extra 125 lines to give it to you anyway? [quoted text clipped - 101 lines] > manner in which they are acting unless there was something in it for > them..... Well worded post Bee. I wonder the same things. I am curious to see the response to your post as well as to mine. Possibly no response is as telling as an actual response. >> It's good you don't need attention, but why do you make us >> wade through an extra 125 lines to give it to you anyway? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > speech, and you can have your own conversations based upon your > opinions. Nice rant, but what does it have to do with my smacking Mark Probert for his crappy (and rude) post editing? > It's not about if you agree or disagree with someone about their > opinions and ideas, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > has gotten to be quite laughable because the smart squirrels know > what's goin' down. The irony is thick here. Aren't you complaining about people going all personal? And yet ... > So this is a perfect example of what transpires here and what has > transpired here on a regular basis. It would be very easily to see [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > attack, trying to take my health freedom of choice away from me, an > American. Sweetums, if you want to file a RICO suit naming me go right ahead. Please. Pretty please. With sugar on it. Your connections with lawyers is, you assure us, very good so you should have no problem getting them to take it on contingency. RICO lets you collect MAJOR moola -- it's a gold mine. Go for it. > It makes you really make you wonder.....why people would act in the > manner in which they are acting unless there was something in it for > them..... Indeed many of us wonder what's in it for you. However, posts like this tend to provide many clues. | The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" | | The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" | +---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+ > In message <6a8a9c05-bcb3-4b4b-8f93-e14c49198...@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Bee wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 72 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Seems that your post supports the assumptions that I have made and Bee have made. You only answer what you want to answer and then twist those things around. Thank you for making it crystal. > Seems that your post supports the assumptions that I have made and Bee > have made. > You only answer what you want to answer and then twist those things > around. > Thank you for making it crystal. Ofcourse it is Crystal---Crystal Blue Persuasion----it's a new sensation, for the older generation to handle...... How did that Beatles song go.."I'm looking through you....." Yes, they are so transparent..... > > Seems that your post supports the assumptions that I have made and Bee > > have made. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > How did that Beatles song go.."I'm looking through you....." Yes, > they are so transparent..... Bee: You are quoting the lyrics from the best band of all time: The Beatles. I just basically askede D.C. a straight forward question as to whether he could engage in a civil academic discussion with an open mind. He didn't answer. The fact that he did not answer is itself the answer. He simply can't. "Who's the little old man?" "He's Paul's Grand dad." "He's a very claen old man." > I just basically askede D.C. a straight forward question as to whether > he could engage in a civil academic discussion with an open mind. > He didn't answer. > The fact that he did not answer is itself the answer. > He simply can't. Of course there couldn't POSSIBLY be any other explanation. Yup, open minds all over the place. | The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" | | The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" | +---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+ > In message <2d5c726f-f228-4f1b-bc21-0b2738819...@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Kulacz wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > | The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" | > +---------- D. C. Sessions <d...@lumbercartel.com> ----------+ How do you spell DIVERSION. Can't respond to the questions and comments D.C.can you. I guess that you cannot be civil and open minded. It is like a person that is color blind unable to see the color green. They simply do not have the ability. I guesss that you either simply do not have the ability or instead choose your behavior consciously. What other explanation are you alluding to? (Let's add projection right here) Very straight forward questions and observations. Are you paranoid? > I guess that you cannot be civil and open minded. Of course you do. > What other explanation are you alluding to? (Let's add projection > right here) Inferences from silence are always so -- unconstrained. In this case I didn't read the message in the first place. It's a habit of mine -- when there isn't anything for the first several pages but a single great-grandparent post quoted three layers deep and no value added it's a very good sign that the post isn't worth reading, since it's almost certain to be nothing but an <AOL> response. Sometimes I will go to the bother of nagging the poster over bad netiquette, but it's not normally worth the trouble. Although it was funny having Bee launch off of one of those where I was dressing down Mark Probert. That one was a hoot. | The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" | | The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" | +---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+ > In message <620f0960-a905-4b82-bde3-88834d1eb...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Kulacz wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > | The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" | > +---------- D. C. Sessions <d...@lumbercartel.com> ----------+ Lame excuse.Maybe "liar" is a better description of you. How do you know that the post was not worth reading unless you read it? It was not a very long post. Further, I had simplified the question to one oir two lines and you still will not answer. If you truly wanted to do the above you would have answered. So silence is the same as an answer. Do not think for one minute that anybody buys your reason. You are just who you are and cannot admit that you cannot be open minded, respectful, academically engaging without resorting to hurling insults at every turn. Reason: Genetic? Environmental? Financial? Or a combination. My bet is on financial. Whatever the reason, you have clearly shown the type of person that you are. >> In message <620f0960-a905-4b82-bde3-88834d1eb...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Kulacz wrote: >> >> > I guess that you cannot be civil and open minded. > Lame excuse.Maybe "liar" is a better description of you. > Do not think for one minute that anybody buys your reason. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > My bet is on financial. | The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" | | The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" | +---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+ > In message <4d717c28-df16-4400-8166-53d7d9f4b...@c19g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Kulacz wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > - Show quoted text - I have shifted gears. Now I am on this forum for laughs only. I have repeatedly asked you about open minded, civil, academically engaging without resorting to insults but you refused to acknkowledge that this is somehting that you desire to do. So what you referenced in my post is unfortunately not possible. So now, instead, this is sort of a Saturday night Live show or a stand up comedic venue where the purpose is pure entertainment since what I have proposed is not acceptable or desireable to you. So why bother? The posts are not taken seriously and are stricly for entertainment purpose and not for a productive, civil exchange of ideas. You have made that clear in your answers, or rather non-answers, as well as your post history that this is the way that it is here when there is any disagreement on philosophy or ideas. >I have shifted gears. >Now I am on this forum for laughs only. And you're providing lots of them. Keep up the fine work. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher > In article <1a20ec66-289b-4b33-bcb0-a211ba3ec...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" > -- Bill Maher Too bad you cannot understand them. Forgot to mention that I admire you, Peter Moran, D.C. etc. for your brilliant and always 100% accurate posts that never need any discussion. Why discuss your posts when you ae so perfect. Now I understand why you insult people. You are always (W)right. I will be sure to "keep it up." Works better that way. >> In article <1a20ec66-289b-4b33-bcb0-a211ba3ec...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >Too bad you cannot understand them. You just keep telling yourself that, sport. It'll help you retain whatever shards remain of your self-esteem. >Forgot to mention that I admire you, Peter Moran, D.C. etc. for your >brilliant and always 100% accurate posts that never >need any discussion. As well you should. But you can discuss them anyway if you like. We don't mind. >Why discuss your posts when you ae so perfect. Now I understand why >you insult people. You are always (W)right. It's just so easy, so much of the time. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." -- John Dolan > In article <879dae26-687f-4c49-a951-8e0daf457...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." > -- John Dolan Dave: Please explain to me why we do not know the mechanism of action for about half the drugs in the Physicians Desk Reference yet we continue to use them?Maybe we should stop using all drugs that we do not have an absolute understanding of mechanism of action and all side effects. Clearly that is not going to happen and in most cases it should not happen. We can strive for this goal but the complexity is limiting. It really was not relatively long ago that we actually had a mechnism of action for aspirin.(Which still may not be 100% clear) You are not an MD, DO, DDS. Yet you post on a medical forum. Are you an employee of the drug or insurance companies? It really does not matter. Excellent discussions could be had on this forum. This is not to be. I have completed my "silly" post. Cheers > > In article <879dae26-687f-4c49-a951-8e0daf457...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > Yet you post on a medical forum. > Are you an employee of the drug or insurance companies? That is, to anyone who is a supporter of evidence based medicine, an attack. I have told you this, but you ignored it. Repeat: That was an attack. > It really does not matter. > Excellent discussions could be had on this forum. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > - Show quoted text - > > > In article <879dae26-687f-4c49-a951-8e0daf457...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Evidence based medicine is undergoing revisions to allow for useful data that formerly did not adhere to what was proclaimed as the gold standard. We are realizing that things are more complex than can be explained by our traditional approach. Now to someehtindg important.. 1. How was my statement an attack? Please explain because I certainly never want to attack anybody. 2. Why should I expect legal papers? What are you claiming that i said that would warrant legal action? In the same breath you think that people should have thicker skin. I do not know what you are referring to. Please make yourself clear. People all over this forum have called me numerous names from idiot to whatever. i do not keep track. Should I sue them? Of course not.America has gane lawsuit crazy. > > > > In article <879dae26-687f-4c49-a951-8e0daf457...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > 1. How was my statement an attack? Please explain because I certainly > never want to attack anybody. Inferring that a person is an employee, etc. is a lame version of the logical fallacy of Poisoning the Well, and I consider any effort in that regard an attack. Like I said in other posts. supporters of alternative medicine seem to be hung up on WHO is saying something. YOU have claimed numerous times that YOU wish that there be civil discourse. The only way that there can be civil discourse is that these lame attacks and the use of personalized logical fallacies cease. > 2. Why should I expect legal papers? What are you claiming that i said > that would warrant legal action? Actually, YOU have said nothing. You take my comment out of context and personalize it. My point is that the legal actions which you decry are comenced against those who use some quite vile verbiage to attack their "enemies". (You do not.) One of the main targets of those, one who does commence legal actions, is Barrett. He was a practising psychiatrist until he reitred (and was not "de-licensed" like Bloen likes to claim). As apsychiatrist who has studied alternative medicine and quackery, he should have realzied that there are screwballs who use incredibily offense language, language that is either slanderous or bordering on it, and should have developed a thicker skin. Harry Truman's quote about hot kitchens comes to mind. > In the same breath you think that people should have thicker skin. > > I do not know what you are referring to. Please make yourself clear. > > People all over this forum have called me numerous names from idiot to > whatever. i do not keep track. Should I sue them? Not for name calling. > Of course not.America has gane lawsuit crazy You are quite right about that. Now, for a favor.... My comments, while in a post responding to yours, are not directed at you personally. I would appreciate it if you could keep thatin mind, and do not personalize what I have to say. If so, I would not have to type so many disclaimers. You can rest assured that if I want them directed at you, there would be no question of my intent. > - Show quoted text - > Like I said in other posts. supporters of alternative medicine seem to > be hung up on WHO is saying something. YOU have claimed numerous times > that YOU wish that there be civil discourse. The only way that there > can be civil discourse is that these lame attacks and the use of > personalized logical fallacies cease. That's because it's "sectarian medicine" more than "alternative medicine." Look around: they're all hung up on "vital forces" and "etheric influences." In other words, magic. Stuff you can't measure, can't detect, can't even *propose* a falsifiable experiment to verify, etc. and only exists as a hand-waving excuse to justify a ritual invoking its powers. That's part and parcel of the ancient reliance on the unique insights of the Great Ones, with the consequent primacy accorded to those closer in time and the chain of apostolic succession to the Founder. Ask any of them to replicate their woo on an animal and see how fast the silence rings down. | The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" | | The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" | +---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+ On Mar 28, 12:42 pm, Kulacz <drkul...@optonline.net> wrote: > On Mar 27, 11:06 pm, wri...@l1000.prodigy.net (David Wright) wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > Yet you post on a medical forum. > Are you an employee of the drug or insurance companies? That is, to anyone who is a supporter of evidence based medicine, an attack. == Please do tell us how exactly much of *evidence based medicine*? I have told you this, but you ignored it. Repeat: That was an attack. === LOL!! Jack Reid ding..ding...dong. > It really does not matter. > Excellent discussions could be had on this forum. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > - Show quoted text - > In article <1a20ec66-289b-4b33-bcb0-a211ba3ec...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Keep up the fine work. No, I thank you, David...you are creating the stage for all of the laughs... I think you need a new cow--your New Jersey is getting a little old! > I have shifted gears. > Now I am on this forum for laughs only. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that you desire to do. So what you referenced in my post is > unfortunately not possible. I told you it was funny-----you have to keep laughing--laughter is the best medicine!! And best of all--it is FREE, not one single solitary pharmaceutical company can get rich off of it either!!! That's the whole problem with alternative medicine, pharmaceutical companies have yet to figure out how to bottle up, package and sell the alternative health care treatments that work. Acupuncture in a Jar--Take two pills--while stabbing yourself with sewing needs on the points? Detoxification in a hot sauna in a capsule form? Massage therapy as a roll-on? Oh yes, how about making Oxygen Therapy in a Bottle--I saw that once--couldn't figure out how it worked --couldn't figure out how they got that much oxygen in such a tiny bottle. Actually go back and watch Nightline with the same sense of humor. SPIN DOCTORS NEED SPIN Cheerleaders---and they all need SPIN MEDIA!! What was that song, written by Freddy Weller and Tommy Joe in the late 60's---"Dizzy...." "I'm so dizzy, my head is spinning, like a whirl pool it never ends...." Just like the world of conventional medicine----its.."Making me dizzy." Vertigo, compliments of the Loop Group!! Now, chosing making your health care professionals and the magic pills has gone beyond...."Is one enough, is two, too many?" It is funny....but watch out...laughter may not be considered alternative health---and you may be accused of stepping into the world of..."Conventional Medicine..." once you get there...they may never let you go home....just be certain, bring your ruby red slippers....and click twice---if you live somewhere besides Kansas it might be awhile before you can get back. >> > Seems that your post supports the assumptions that I have made and Bee >> > have made. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >The fact that he did not answer is itself the answer. >He simply can't. DC is one of the most civil posters here, moreso than myself, certainly. He and Peter Moran are remarkably restrained in the face of really bad and nasty postings from the likes of Cee, and snottily superior postings from the likes of you. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher > In article <2d5c726f-f228-4f1b-bc21-0b2738819...@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Hey Davey: You certainly rank with the rest. Love the "snottily superior" line. First time I have been called that. "Living is easy with eyes closed Misunderstanding all you see" Glad you could make the show Dave. Inferiorly, RK >> In article <2d5c726f-f228-4f1b-bc21-0b2738819...@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, >> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >Love the "snottily superior" line. >First time I have been called that. Must be an oversight on the part of those who've known you longer than those here on m.h.a. >"Living is easy with eyes closed >Misunderstanding all you see" > >Glad you could make the show Dave. >Inferiorly, >RK So am I. Always fun watching people like you, who think they're so incredibly smart, make fools of themselves once they stray outside their area of expertise. Now, in most cases, I wouldn't argue with you over matters of dentistry, other than perhaps the supposed dangers of amalgam fillings. But when you start uttering howlers about how information is never destroyed, boyo, you're more fun than Saturday Night Live. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher > In article <7d8d0f14-95fc-4f87-9375-b4d037fef...@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Hey. You used my my line about Saturday Night Live. If you look at quantum holography (do you know what that is) we are finding that infirmation is retained. This is not thermodynamics as D.C suggested. How do you know the amount of training that i have in physics? Is medicine or dentistry your expertise? Are you an M.D or a DDS? If not then you are straying from your supposed area of "expertise" on this forum. You have certainly made a fool of yourself many times over and that is why this is so fun and comments by fools calling me a fool are benign. P.S. I do NOT think that I am incredibly smart. Just smarter than you. I can't wait for the comeback. This is much more fun now. > I can't wait for the comeback. This is much more fun now. What was that Bobby Vee song..."Come back when you grow up, girl...you're still sitting in a paperdoll world...." Yes, I'm sitting on the edge of my chair waiting...with you.....for the comeback--it's almost like playing tennis!! (without the racket!) I am so glad, Dr. K, to have met you here----all of the "Alties" as Probert likes to call people that don't go along with his programming, seem to excel with a good sense of humor. It really helps! > > I can't wait for the comeback. This is much more fun now. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > with a good sense of humor. > It really helps! This has really been fun Bee. Amusing to read the various posts. Funny how D.C. never addressed the points about civil, academicly open minded, non abusive discussions. Insteead good old Dave comes to his defense and puts in a few shots of his own. Very predictable which makes it even more fun. Quite a place this forum is.!!! OUT............... >> In article <7d8d0f14-95fc-4f87-9375-b4d037fef...@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, >> [quoted text clipped - 60 lines] >finding that infirmation is retained. >This is not thermodynamics as D.C suggested. But what's really comical is how far you have the cart before the horse. You're hell-bent on proving that homeopathy can be explained by quantum holography. Trouble is, you left out the steps where you show there's anything to homeopathy. You need to show that there's a good solid foundation for the Law of Similars. Then you need to show that there's a good foundation for the Law of Infinitesimals. Then you need lots of good solid clinical evidence that homeopathic treatment works better than placebo. Once you've got all that, *THEN* you can start looking for a mechanism to explain it all. Until then, you just look silly. >How do you know the amount of training that i have in physics? >Is medicine or dentistry your expertise? >Are you an M.D or a DDS? No, as I have said many times here. >If not then you are straying from your supposed area of "expertise" on >this forum. Pointing out that you look silly doesn't require extraordinary expertise. >You have certainly made a fool of yourself many times over and that is >why this is so fun and comments by fools calling me a fool are benign. > >P.S. I do NOT think that I am incredibly smart. Just smarter than you. I suppose we all kid ourselves one way or another. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." -- John Dolan > So am I. Always fun watching people like you, who think they're so > incredibly smart, make fools of themselves once they stray outside [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > fillings. But when you start uttering howlers about how information > is never destroyed, boyo, you're more fun than Saturday Night Live. I have yet to figure out what exactly your area of expertise is, David. What is it that you specialize in? I know it certainly isn't alternative health which is what the newsgroup is about. Do enlighten us--exactly what your area of expertise is....I'll be waiting with baited breath. >> So am I. Always fun watching people like you, who think they're so >> incredibly smart, make fools of themselves once they stray outside [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >What is it that you specialize in? I know it certainly isn't >alternative health which is what the newsgroup is about. I use various forms of alternative medicine and have tried others along the way. That's all the "expertise" anyone needs to participate here. >Do enlighten us--exactly what your area of expertise is....I'll be >waiting with baited breath. Just keep holding that breath as long as possible. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher > >>David: So am I. Always fun watching people like you, who think they're so > >> incredibly smart, make fools of themselves once they stray outside > >> their area of expertise. > >I have yet to figure out what exactly your area of expertise is, > >Bee: David. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > David: Just keep holding that breath as long as possible. As Probert would say, "Diversion." I'm beginning to think the advanced degree you allege that you have is in Women's Studies. You appear to be very menopausal most of the time. I am beginning to think you don't actually have one. >> >>David: So am I. Always fun watching people like you, who think they're so >> >> incredibly smart, make fools of themselves once they stray outside [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >You appear to be very menopausal most of the time. I am beginning to >think you don't actually have one. Gotta love it -- you're a woman who thinks you're insulting me by calling *me* a woman. How long have you been dealing with this self-hatred? -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." -- John Dolan > In article <e6ffcee1-fa40-4ce1-8c42-ba21e6a32...@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > How long have you been dealing with this self-hatred? I wouldn't exactly call what Debbee does "dealing". It seems more like denial. > -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net > These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. > "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." > -- John Dolan- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - On Mar 25, 6:02 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > I wouldn't exactly call what Debbee does "dealing". It seems more > like denial. You should know Andrew what I do....you seem to have a real "ear" for it. > On Mar 25, 6:02 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > You should know Andrew what I do....you seem to have a real "ear" for > it. We only know what you tell us, Deb. On Mar 25, 7:02 pm, The One True Zhen Jue <Andrew_King...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > You should know Andrew what I do....you seem to have a real "ear" for > > it. > > We only know what you tell us, Deb. You should listen more carefully then. >>> >>David: So am I. Always fun watching people like you, who think they're so >>> >> incredibly smart, make fools of themselves once they stray outside [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >Gotta love it -- you're a woman who thinks you're insulting me by >calling *me* a woman. Remember, this is a woman who was so offended by being called a man that she contacted someone's ISP and complained. Such a sorry Dilbert. >How long have you been dealing with this self-hatred?  SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > Remember, this is a woman who was so offended by being called a man > that she contacted someone's ISP and complained. And the problem with turning people in? Not a problem. No self hatred either. I'm simply giving back in the same manner others have dished out over the years. Apparently Davy doesn't like it---and neither do you--if you are going to dish it out, be prepared when it comes back.....in the same manner that you have dished it out over the years. > > Remember, this is a woman who was so offended by being called a man > > that she contacted someone's ISP and complained. > > And the problem with turning people in? Not a problem. Plenty of a problem. The approrpiate response to speech is...drum roll.... MORE SPEECH not playing Gestapo like you, and your ilk do. No self > hatred either. > I'm simply giving back in the same manner others have dished out over > the years. Oh? Please document ANY circumstance where anyone on "my side" has reported anyone on "your side" to their ISP. > Apparently Davy doesn't like it---and neither do you--if you are going > to dish it out, > be prepared when it comes back.....in the same manner that you have > dished it out over the years. With you saying that, I guess you would support my reporting several of the posters here. > > And the problem with turning people in? Not a problem. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I'm simply giving back in the same manner others have dished out over > > the years. If you are going to dish it out, Probert, in an alternative health newsgroup, and make fun of people on repeated basis that don't share your viewpoints, calling them idiots, stupid, morons, etc., over and over and over, then then the tide turns, you do not happen to like it, that's my entire point. Most of the posters that believe in freedom of healthcare choice practice bits and pieces of all it. We have our own opinions about diseases, prescription drugs, and the healthcare professionals that we choose to associate with. We live in America, Probert -- the flag stands for freedom. Every time I read a post from an alleged Veteran that puts down alternative healthcare and freedom to choose and freedom to express themselves, it makes me wonder about that Veteran. It's like that Veteran is spitting on the American flag. >> > And the problem with turning people in? Not a problem. >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >etc., over and over and over, then then the tide turns, you do not >happen to like it, that's my entire point. So you will be castigating (*) not-a-Dr Cee the next time he refers to Dr Moran as "Petey Moron". (*) The word "castigating" should not be confused with "castrating", as it is highly unlikely that the latter procedure could be applied to not-a-Dr Cee without the aid of a microscope with at least the resolution of a Rife Special. >Most of the posters that believe in freedom of healthcare choice >practice bits and pieces of all it. We have our own opinions about >diseases, prescription drugs, and the healthcare professionals that we >choose to associate with. I am consuming a herbal preparation even as we type and I will be taking my daily vitamin supplement shortly. I also use diet and exercise to control my diabetes, both prescribed for me by my real doctor. >We live in America, Probert -- the flag stands for freedom. Every >time I read a post from an alleged Veteran that puts down alternative >healthcare and freedom to choose and freedom to express themselves, it >makes me wonder about that Veteran. It's like that Veteran is >spitting on the American flag. Nobody is trying to take away anyone's rights, other than the right to be lied to and harmed by charlatans, lunatics and crooks. SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > >> > And the problem with turning people in? Not a problem. > [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Unfortunately there are charlatans, lunatics and crooks in EVERY aspect of medicine including "conventional" medicine. You just choose to ignore these "charlatans, lunatics and crooks. A major cause of illness and death is prescibed medications.. If you are going to comment on "ratbags" etc. include all of them and do not single out a particular group and give "conventional "medicine a free pass. Science (and in medicine's case, the art and science) should show no bias. This is clearly impossible to do with some of the posters on this forum. Unfortunate. > This is clearly impossible to do with some of the posters on this > forum. > > Unfortunate. I agree with your opinions. The subject matter is the issue, not the person that makes the post. I do believe in consumer protection against anyone doing anything that is actually illegal. There are fraudsters everywhere in the medical world in all areas of it. Ethics is the key here---it would appear people have lost their sense of responsibility to others without any self gain. Professional jealousy comes in to play as well. How could something that is not in medical studies work--- hmm it must be fraud...that's the sad thinking process of today's world. Yea old Medline... if it isn't there, it must not work.....it's not the medical bible.... > >> > And the problem with turning people in? Not a problem. > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > Nobody is trying to take away anyone's rights, other than the right to > be lied to and harmed by charlatans, lunatics and crooks. And that is done with more speech in the Free Market Place of Ideas. > Nobody is trying to take away anyone's rights, other than the right to > be lied to and harmed by charlatans, lunatics and crooks. Why is it "YOUR JOB" to decide who is this or who is that? It's not your job, and belittling our citizens is not your job either--- Stop spitting on our flag, and for which it stands.....get your own flag, and do whatever you want to do with it----but leave American healthcare alone..... > > Nobody is trying to take away anyone's rights, other than the right to > > be lied to and harmed by charlatans, lunatics and crooks. > > Why is it "YOUR JOB" to decide who is this or who is that? It's not > your > job, and belittling our citizens is not your job either--- It is his choice to do what he wants to do? Who appointed you net nanny? As for Australia, that country has supported the US in many of our wars, and is a strong ally of ours. We should be thankful we have friends like that. > Stop spitting on our flag, and for which it stands.....get your own > flag, and do whatever > you want to do with it----but leave American healthcare alone..... No one is spitting on the flag. You just cannot stay away from red herring. > No one is spitting on the flag. You just cannot stay away from red > herring. reply to the subject matter of the post, and not the poster. > > No one is spitting on the flag. You just cannot stay away from red > > herring. > > reply to the subject matter of the post, and not the poster. Pointing out that you use logical fallacies is responding to the subject matter. There is NO doubt that you were aiming your comments vis-a-vis veterans at me. You used logical fallacies, and I pointed that out. > There is NO doubt that you were aiming your comments vis-a-vis > veterans at me. You used logical fallacies, and I pointed that out. reply to the subject matter of the post, and not the poster. > Why is it "YOUR JOB" to decide who is this or who is that? It's not > your > job, and belittling our citizens is not your job either--- Au contraire. You, Madame, are proposing that good men stand by and do nothing. Since I know a bit of Mark Probert's family history, I will yield precedence to him. | The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" | | The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" | +---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+ >> Nobody is trying to take away anyone's rights, other than the right to >> be lied to and harmed by charlatans, lunatics and crooks. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >flag, and do whatever >you want to do with it----but leave American healthcare alone..... Oh, so you're saying Peter Bowditch has no freedom of speech -- at least when he's saying something you don't want to hear. Typical. You rant and rave about people who are supposedly trying to stifle the freedom of expression of others, then it turns out you're just the kind of person you complain about. This is called "projection." You could look it up. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." -- John Dolan > Typical. You rant and rave about people who are supposedly trying to > stifle the freedom of expression of others, then it turns out you're > just the kind of person you complain about. reply to the subject matter of the post, and not the poster. >> Typical. You rant and rave about people who are supposedly trying to >> stifle the freedom of expression of others, then it turns out you're >> just the kind of person you complain about. > >reply to the subject matter of the post, and not the poster. Up yours, bitch. I replied to what you wrote. Too bad if you don't like it. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." -- John Dolan > In article <f6766379-e9f2-4500-bf61-ea953419e...@e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." > -- John Dolan WOW!! Anger management time Davey big time. You are WAY out of line with that comment to Bee. I am correct that this is an EVIL place with EVIL people. It appears you have serious psychological issues. Try taking some of the psychotropic medications you support, or possibly having a lobotomy. >> In article ><f6766379-e9f2-4500-bf61-ea953419e...@e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Anger management time Davey big time. >You are WAY out of line with that comment to Bee. Nope, it's quite appropriate. She's trying to dodge her own words and dictate what others may or may not discuss. I don't recall giving her that authority. Do you? >I am correct that this is an EVIL place with EVIL people. Try a mirror. >It appears you have serious psychological issues. Yeah, right. I always get my psychological diagnoses remotely from dentists. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." -- John Dolan > Nope, it's quite appropriate. She's trying to dodge her own words and > dictate what others may or may not discuss. I don't recall giving her > that authority. Do you? It is perfectly normal to get angry---but the topic is not me, the topic is learning to be nicer to everyone. No one here is an angel, everyone here has participated. Be respectful of ideas that are no shared by everyone is the key. Dictating what one may discuss? Absolutely not. Discuss the subject matter and do not attack the poster, that's all. Its a new way of thinking. Challenging at first, learning to communicate in a different way instead of insulting. No stifling speech of anyone. Learning to discuss without insulting. > WOW!! > Anger management time Davey big time. > You are WAY out of line with that comment to Bee. Apparently for some getting angry at a computer screen makes sense. Laughter is the best medicine, whether alternative or conventional. It crosses the line and makes and it is something that can be shared by all perspectives. Getting angry is fine, many people do not get angry enough, and leave it all bottled up inside, blood pressure rises, etc. It's okay to get angry at the topic. >> WOW!! >> Anger management time Davey big time. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >leave it all bottled up inside, blood pressure rises, etc. It's okay >to get angry at the topic. Or at the posters, where appropriate. Of course, dear ol' Deb, whenever she gets caught, will announce that it's all humor and nobody should be taking it seriously. A favorite tactic of the bully, or aspiring bully. "Hey, can't you take a joke?" Sure I can. But when the originator isn't really intending it as a joke and is just using it as a lame defense, that's a different matter. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." -- John Dolan |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message