Wandapec
Sr. Member
  
Skeptical ability: +4/-0
Offline
Posts: 431
100% Proud Atheist/Skeptic
|
 |
« on: November 07, 2009, 10:17:01 AM » |
|
I am sorry in advance if this gives you a headache!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
DNA
Newbie
Skeptical ability: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 49
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2009, 15:51:03 PM » |
|
Oh man!!!!
What can you really say about this?
I've been spending time watching creationist videos and though that no-one would be able to screw science up as must as they do, but I have now been proven wrong.
Very, very sad.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Rigil Kent
Clotting Factor
Hero Member
   
Skeptical ability: +19/-3
Offline
Posts: 2467
Three men make a tiger.
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2009, 17:43:34 PM » |
|
So the energy and mass duality explains our health and vitality through Hawking strings and essential things and a drop of diluted reality
Mintaka
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Irreverend
Full Member
 
Skeptical ability: +9/-1
Offline
Posts: 222
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2009, 19:11:17 PM » |
|
Saw this at the JREF a few days back. What a blissfully ignorant kook is "Dr." Werner. Pity she's in a position to infect others with her variety of mental deficiency. Would it help to dilute her homeopathically?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
   
Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline
Posts: 3757
In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται
|
 |
« Reply #6 on: December 21, 2009, 19:35:54 PM » |
|
The only thing those links prove is how naïve (or maybe disdainful) homoeopaths are of the most basic physics. Two similar waves that are in phase reinforce one another; they do not cancel out. The first diagram on the first link’s page already gets it completely wrong, confusing constructive and destructive interference. That’s quite apart from (a) the fact that the whole wave thingy has no basis in any medical science (Hahnemann himself never spoke of it, did he?), and (b) the fact that it’s a homoeopathic straw man (i.e. a 24C dilution of dried grass) that conventional medicine treats disease by “opposites.” The only reason homoeopaths speak of “waves” and “vibrations” and “harmonics” and such is because it sounds weighty and resonates (no pun intended) with their own and their supporters’ imaginations. The second link invokes the scientifically discredited idea of “water memory.” Real physicists, when they are not chuckling about it, just ask for the evidence. It’s homoeopaths and other poorly educated people who think it’s mysterious that water should form similar crystal structures when subjected to similar pressure regimes during freezing. The only mysterious thing is how the woo-woos fail to learn anything from it and keep repeating the same undiluted pseudoscience. (Note: Homoeopathy calls for a single and highly diluted treatment.) 'Luthon64
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
   
Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline
Posts: 3757
In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται
|
 |
« Reply #8 on: December 23, 2009, 09:59:12 AM » |
|
John Benneth has an irritating demagogic manner, but perhaps the most disturbing part of that video clip is that he entirely misses the stunningly obvious conclusion that if even just one of his several physical claims about homoeopathic preparations was true, it would provide an easy way of distinguishing a genuine homoeopathic preparation from a blind mock-up. Among other techniques, the method could involve identifying telltale clathrate hydrates, radioactivity (  ) or the emission of electromagnetic signals from the nostrum. If Benneth can actually do this, the JREF million is his. 'Luthon64
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
   
Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline
Posts: 3757
In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται
|
 |
« Reply #10 on: December 25, 2009, 00:14:55 AM » |
|
How about you put your money where your mouth is? If in a double-blind test you can reliably distinguish, using whatever fair physical means you choose, a 30X homoeopathic preparation of, say, arnica from among twenty samples, nineteen of which are mock-ups, you will win yourself US $1,000,000.00. “Reliably” in this context means that you need to do it successfully seven times without any misses.
'Luthon64
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Dr. Nancy Malik
|
 |
« Reply #11 on: January 07, 2010, 12:48:07 PM » |
|
How about you put your money where your mouth is? If in a double-blind test you can reliably distinguish, using whatever fair physical means you choose, a 30X homoeopathic preparation of, say, arnica from among twenty samples, nineteen of which are mock-ups, you will win yourself US $1,000,000.00. “Reliably” in this context means that you need to do it successfully seven times without any misses.
'Luthon64
In fact there are more challanges than this one http://www.spontaneouscreation.org/SC/VaccineOffer.htm // 2.15 million dollar challenge to conventional physicians http://www.naturalnews.com/023476.html , http://www.naturalnews.com/023475.html // 10 thousand dollar challenge to pharmaceuticals http://www.naturalnews.com/025627.html //randi backs out from the challange
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
   
Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline
Posts: 3757
In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται
|
 |
« Reply #12 on: January 07, 2010, 15:32:34 PM » |
|
How does the existence of counterchallenges absolve you (or any other homoeopath) from delivering some actual evidence? How is your mentioning them not an attempt to avoid taking the challenge?
The test I suggested should not be hard to pass, given those last few posts of yours in which it is intimated how easy it would be to distinguish a homoeopathic preparation from a mock-up.
'Luthon64
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|