Comments on: UK doctors condemn homeopathy as witchcraft and demand ban

By: Lacy

Lacy — Sat, 19 Feb 2011 15:03:36 +0000

Hey Maryanne, WTF??? Rapidshare Downloads

By: “Homeopathy is witchcraft” « A posteriori

“Homeopathy is witchcraft” « A posteriori — Mon, 31 May 2010 02:06:01 +0000

[...] is witchcraft” Doctors are coming together to ban public funding of homeopathy in the UK. I couldn’t be happier. Homeopathy is a bunch of “woo” and absolutely [...]

By: AndyD

AndyD — Fri, 21 May 2010 08:44:35 +0000

These are what are called assumptions,…
.
You don’t believe in an intelligent cosmic force and you do believe in science? Sorry, I must have been thinking of someone else.
.
You’re stuck on the fact that I assumed aluminium referred to an element and not a compound.
.
No. The fact you continued to refer to “aluminium” and “toxins” even after Maggie, myself et al had repeatedly mentioned things like table salt and essential nutrients and dosage, just confirmed the suspicions that you really have no idea what you’re talking about.
.
What initially gave you away was your tendency to just link and quote with very little personal input that suggested any understanding of the subject matter on your own part. You also have this strange (though common) tendency to appear to ask for information but then to assert your own conclusions regardless of any responses. So, if no one bothers to explain the biochemistry of intramuscular injection of aluminium salts to you, you conclude from this that it must be dangerous despite all the evidence that, regardless of the mechanisms, it isn’t. I can’t explain the chemistry or mechanics of an internal combustion engine but it doesn’t mean I avoid motorised vehicles.
.
If you are genuine, then you appear to want to be scared by anyone with websites magazines, books and DVDs to sell as long as they oppose vaccination or science in general. It’s a bit like wanting to be scared by ghosts, only more dangerous.
.
Feel free to clear up any bad assumptions I make. I’d hate to get the wrong idea about your continued crusade against reality.

By: Maggie

Maggie — Fri, 21 May 2010 08:07:12 +0000

Complain away.

By: oh please!

oh please! — Fri, 21 May 2010 05:57:33 +0000

alternate reality, driven by some intelligent cosmic force, is so much better than the one we inhabit, why don’t you use astral projection, remote viewing and psychic communication
.
These are what are called assumptions, which you are really really good at (as long as accuracy is not part of the criteria). Apart from a possible need to feel or seem superior I’m not sure why you so consistently and predictably go down this track,
.
Co$ is a cult.
Yes but the DVD is still worth taking note of.
Best definition I’ve ever seen for a cult is:” the church down the road from your church” – can’t remember who said it.
.
The article you linked to was a Scientology article – it said it in the headline and the link URL above. The opening paragraph of the article (did you even read it?) is…
.
What in God’s name (sorry) are you talking about?
The article was about a DVD made by the CCHR which is part of the CoS.
Try to follow me on this: if you look at the page address in your browser now the last bit will be “uk-doctors-condemn-homeopathy-as-witchcraft-and-demand-ban/….”
But the article on this page was not written by UK doctors was it?
No
So, in the same way the article I linked to was not written by the CoS. It was not about Scientology. It was not written by a Scientologist.
Are we on the same page now?

.
I’ve never linked to Mercola,…
.
Yes you have, in the “Mums’ Magazine” thread. Try to keep up.
.
Well done rain man, I’d forgotten that – it was before I said I wouldn’t link to any of those types of sites. Never mind that there was none of Mercola’s opinion on that page, it was simply the testimony from Graham regarding Vioxx which could have been found on other more “reputable” sites.
So now you’re settling for these little, irrelevant wins?
.

And no I don’t think your stupid, I think that you like wearing your pharma colored glasses a little too much.
.
As opposed to blinkers I guess. See Maggie, if the data supports big-pharma, the data must be wrong. Joe, Meryl and Tom Cruise say so and they should know because they aren’t a part of big-pharma and anyone who isn’t a part of big-pharma can be presumed to be honest and omniscient.
.
Once again, excellent job of making assumptions but as usual, totally incorrect and ultimately just more time wasting.

.
oh please, I seriously don’t see how, given your primary-school-level understanding of chemistry (and that might be a little generous), you feel you can lecture a cell biologist on the subject and tell them they are the one ignoring the evidence.
.
Your insistence at attacking me is highly amusing (at least for me). I know that you are an “internet” expert on all things, as anyone could appear to be who put in the time.
You’re stuck on the fact that I assumed aluminium referred to an element and not a compound. Let’s just keep whipping away with that one for a little longer shall we.
Or maybe I could retaliate with some of your loopy analogies, the parachute comes easily to mind.
And yes I know that Maggie is a cell biologist and if I seem like I’m lecturing her please pull me up, it’s not the intention. But please be specific, your generalisations are becoming tiresome.
.
Poe’s Law means it’s always difficult to differentiate parody from blind fundamentalism but I think the troll question is finally settled.
.
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29
“a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community”
This fits your last comment perfectly. Maggie is it you that I talk to to complain about a suspected troll?

By: Maggie

Maggie — Fri, 21 May 2010 03:41:14 +0000

@AndyD, sorry it was.

By: AndyD

AndyD — Fri, 21 May 2010 03:03:33 +0000

I’ll try again. Sorry if you get this multiple times. The cosmos hates me today…
.
Geez Andy for some-one that gets so dark on me when I assume things, you’ve just done a pretty good job of it yourself.
.
What assumptions? You’ve stated directly that you believe in some sort of intelligence of nature and scoffed at any anti-theistic sentiment so if you don’t believe in some all-powerful cosmic force today then you might want to take the blue pills, not the red ones. And your anti-science views are clear for all to see, even without you explicitly dismissing the value of science as you did above.
.
Co$ is a cult.
.
A modern alien-worshipping cult at that. Scientology doesn’t have the excuse of being pre-scientific or thousands of years of naive societal fellowship. It was just made up 50-odd years ago by a science fiction writer. Great source of medical advice.
.
The blog site is part of CCHR? I don’t think so but I might be wrong.
.
The article you linked to was a Scientology article – it said it in the headline and the link URL above. The opening paragraph of the article (did you even read it?) is…
.
I stumbled across “Making A Killing” — a new video produced by the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), which is a non-profit organization founded in 1969 by the Church of Scientology (my bolding)
.
Given your track record, I can see how you might have missed that though. What next, David Icke and the lizard people?
.
I’ve never linked to Mercola,…
.
Yes you have, in the “Mums’ Magazine” thread. Try to keep up.
.
And no I don’t think your stupid, I think that you like wearing your pharma colored glasses a little too much.
.
As opposed to blinkers I guess. See Maggie, if the data supports big-pharma, the data must be wrong. Joe, Meryl and Tom Cruise say so and they should know because they aren’t a part of big-pharma and anyone who isn’t a part of big-pharma can be presumed to be honest and omniscient.
.
oh please, I seriously don’t see how, given your primary-school-level understanding of chemistry (and that might be a little generous), you feel you can lecture a cell biologist on the subject and tell them they are the one ignoring the evidence.
.
Poe’s Law means it’s always difficult to differentiate parody from blind fundamentalism but I think the troll question is finally settled.

By: AndyD

AndyD — Fri, 21 May 2010 02:51:54 +0000

@Maggie, I think your spam trap might be set on “hair trigger” again.

By: Maggie

Maggie — Fri, 21 May 2010 01:23:44 +0000

How does that sit with the Uniting Chruch (all organised religions are “bad”) canceling the AVN’s venue?

Co$ is a cult.

By: oh please

oh please — Thu, 20 May 2010 23:29:42 +0000

Working away thinking about the shooting the messenger idea.
BTW, a little dyslexic this morning, CoS not SoC was what I meant above.
So the theory is that the CoS are a pack of fools and whatever they say or do will be “bad”.
How does that sit with the Uniting Chruch (all organised religions are “bad”) canceling the AVN’s venue?
From comments here & on Facebook the UC did a “good” thing and was even congratulated by many who think the UC are “bad”.
So this rule of “shooting the messenger” (often before the message is received)applies, what, some of the time?