| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/28/2007 8:44:45 PM | Now I'm not advocating the science of religion, but religion certainly can bring up some philisophical debates, therefore if one could sift through the subleties of parables one might find a small thread of truth. Scientifically proven of course.
Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. (read the quote in context)
The fanatisism of religion has squelched imagination for thousands of years.
Though fanatics can be found in any belief system, even in science.
I Like that open mind approach. | |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/28/2007 9:05:22 PM |
I wanted to promote some discussion on the POF forums to see what this segment of sociey thought and felt about being duped from the relentless media hype.
I would imagine that every side of any issue would be able to benefit from the media hype. And certainly the respective media will have their own political agendas, which would slant the coverage in its desired light.
Pseudoscience (in this generalized thread) is certainly a term that would find respective authorities in their fields lining up on alternating sides of discussions depending on the specific topic.
I wouldn't believe we would find these "experts" dividing themselves up along party lines like our political parties do. | |
|
Mr H2O
|
Joined: 10/31/2006
Msg: 28 | |
| |
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/29/2007 4:35:29 PM |
Fraud only benefits the one making the profit.
Just because a lie is told often and loudly doesn't make it into a truth.
The same could be said for what is considered a truth and then later found not to be true at all. Thus the need for critical thinking and the application of a scientific method olgy. Remember the earth was considered flat at one time.
It is with the expansion of consciousness and knowledge that we expand our horizons.
Fraud and truth are opposite sides of a coin. | |
|
Mr H2O
|
Joined: 10/31/2006
Msg: 30 | |
| |
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/29/2007 6:45:16 PM | Truth and fraud are a matter of perspective.
And as is commonly seen in science, truth often changes.
So truth evolves, and fraud being its polar opposite must evolve also.
So couldn't you also say that what is considered truth at this time, and can be used as a profit for someone, subsequently its validity comes in question and thus becomes fraudulent.
Should we give the profit back?
That might make religions squirm. | |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/30/2007 2:44:34 AM | Why teach it in school?
Lack of morals and values, fill the vacuum. At the very least it is going to bring up the topic and I am of the position that almost any value that keeps kids from shooting each other over a pair of tennis shoes or a jersey would be a good thing.
Right now we have the parents blaming the schools. I see some areas where no one wants to take responsibility. Now I think it really should be up to the parent to educate them as to their childs preference for religious and spiritual matters but if they are so devoid of any values at all teaching anything in school that encourages though in this realm would and will be helpful.
Shoot, I see I saved that first nonsensical paragraph in my last post, I meant to change that before I saved it. I hate these boxes, things get out of site on them and I forgot. | |
|
rake_
|
Joined: 7/16/2006
Msg: 33 | |
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/30/2007 9:47:37 AM | Technically, I agree it should be properly labeled as history and taught as religion but if our world is so twisted we can't have the bible's creationism taught in school yet we can have Coke machines making corporate fat cats richer while the kids get early onset osteoporosis and early onset arthritis ...etc...etc....ad nauseum.... then I am just fine with Creationism being relabeled or mislabeled as Intelligent Design and taught as that. It's important to know.
I think that both sides of the camp can concede that religion in any context is relevant insofar as it is an intrinsic part of who we are and how we have defined ourselves as humans for thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of years. The issue is in the context itself and how it is presented. Who amognst us is best suited to teach our young, our legacy, which religion is the true religion? Is it me? Is it you? And if neither, who then? A priest? A rabbi? And which theological events should be considered literal versus mythical? Should the Christian version of creation be taught by a Priest a Minister, Pastor perhaps? Or maybe it can be an evangelist...a tele evangelist perhaps? They're good with crowds. Or maybe a fundamentalist would be best suited. I got it....an ecclesiastical dignitary, maybe even the Pope? And that's just Christianity. What about all the other religions? Are they any less relevant? Some might argue that since Native American's inhabited North America for hundreds of years, their creation account is no relevant historically, if not socially, than say a muslims or a clegyman's...You could even stretch this argument to include the Big Bang as a valid creation account for some....why not get a physicist to teach that account? Although I would tend to agree with the counter-argument that since its a recent view, it is not part of our social and cultural heritage in the same way other religions are, which then I would counter-counter with how long does a creation account have to be before it can be be considered relevant?
Clearly this takes splitting hairs to a whole new level....and I don't suggest that the debate should delve down to that level. But I'm also not saying that it shouldn't.
What I am saying, or rather asking is, is there a compromise here? And if there is, where is it? Namely, Which religions should be preserved. Whoe gets to preserve them ? How should they be preserved? | |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/30/2007 11:58:08 AM |
What I am saying, or rather asking is, is there a compromise here? And if there is, where is it? Namely, Which religions should be preserved. Whoe gets to preserve them ? How should they be preserved?
Oh, and who's going to do the deciding Mr Scientist???
You???
Yeah that makes sense, put the guy who thinks a 'Big Bang' started it all in charge of people's faiths. And that's another thing, why do you scientologists look down from Mt Fuji at us mortals and think yourshelves so super-pe-doopty?
Does a 'Big Bang' sound any more smarter than 'Let there be Lite!'? | |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/30/2007 12:53:25 PM | I suggest reading up on what Michael Crichton has to say about the present state of science.
If you get your science from TV or the daily newspaper you are getting mostly pseudo-science. That is, preconceived notions and wishful thinking, validated by selective observation. One day somethings good for you, the next day it's bad for you. This is what happens when science serves the purpose of the profit motive.
The Creationist looks at a completed jigsaw puzzle and declares, " It must have been created just this way, it couldn't have all come together through random chance " !
It doesn't occur to them that it came together from patient trial and error.
The Nazis went to a lot of trouble justifying what they did to the Jews by way of science and statistical analysis.
There were reputable scientists in this country writing scholarly works up until the 60's, " proving " that blacks were naturally inferior to whites.
Truth is often times dictated by fashion.
If it's fashionable for something to be true, then it is true. Today multivitamins are good for you, tomorrow they are bad for you. If you wish to prove that colored lights will cure disease, it is an easy thing to do. Some people think that sexual abstinence and a vegetarian diet will let you live 1000 years.
Inconvenient facts are easily overlooked.
The hard part is deciding for yourself. You get to choose what you believe.
No one can take that right from you, except you can choose to forfeit it. | |
|
| |
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/30/2007 5:52:42 PM |
Why teach it in school?
Lack of morals and values, fill the vacuum.
Morals and values can and often are instilled independent of religious indoctrination. It wouldn't be difficult at all to cite many fine examples of highly moral people with deeply instilled valid and ethical values who don't base their character on any particular religious faith, and by the same token I could cite many immoral acts performed based on blind allegiance to a specific religion, as well as deeply flawed value systems.
Having said that, I have no problem with a public classroom studying religion. I do have a problem with a class PROMOTING a PARTICULAR religion. There is much to be learned by observing the development and evolution of the various faiths, and such a study could easily be linked with serious discussion of appropriate morals and values.
Where many faith practitioners go astray, in my opinion, is by asserting that THEIR faith is superior to all others, sometimes to the extent of flat out condemning all who don't practice all their particular rituals.
The challenge is that so many of us have so much difficulty feeling both secure in our own values and comfortable with others who arrive at theirs through a different path. I do believe some things are essentially right or wrong, but those things have nothing to do with who or how or if one worships.
Just my two cents,
Dave | |
|
Mr H2O
|
Joined: 10/31/2006
Msg: 38 | |
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/30/2007 7:35:24 PM | This was not meant to be a religious thread - it was meant to expose faulty thinking.
I was thinking more along the lines of stuff like this :
Magnets and "catalysts" for softening water, magnetic laundry balls,
waters that are "oxygenated", "clustered", "unclustered" or "vitalized"
(purporting to improve cellular hydration, remove toxins, and repair DNA),
high zeta-potential colloids and vortex-treated waters to raise your energy levels,
halt or reverse ageing and remove geopathic stress
— these are being aggressively marketed via the Internet, radio infomercials,
seminars, and by various purveyors of new-age nonsense. | |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/30/2007 7:55:12 PM | This was not meant to be a religious thread - it was meant to expose faulty thinking.
It has.
Magnets and "catalysts" for softening water, magnetic laundry balls,
waters that are "oxygenated", "clustered", "unclustered" or "vitalized"
(purporting to improve cellular hydration, remove toxins, and repair DNA),
high zeta-potential colloids and vortex-treated waters to raise your energy levels,
halt or reverse ageing and remove geopathic stress
— these are being aggressively marketed via the Internet, radio infomercials, seminars, and by various purveyors of new-age nonsense.
Are you saying none of those things work? Oh no~
Actually, in theory magnets can soften water. If water has the correct type of Fe content then it would attract the iron. Hardness of water is determined by concentration of minerals in aqueous solution. So if magnets were to pull out some of the iron then the water would be softened. Although, if I were to apply critical thinking and a little research I would discover that the type of iron usually found in water deposits is an organic iron, therefore not magnetic.
Now about this oxygenated water. You of all people should know Mr. H2O that water is indeed oxygenated.
Just applying a little levity here.
P.S. Forgive me, I think I mentioned the "R" word.
P.S.S. Something just occured to me. - - - If it wasn't for fraud, how would we know the difference? | |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/30/2007 8:23:15 PM |
Now about this oxygenated water. You of all people should know Mr. H2O that water is indeed oxygenated.
Just applying a little levity here.
Actually, quantity of disoloved oxygen is indeed a measurable water parameter. I'm no scientist, but in my early environmental work I spent a lot of time working with systems to clean up acid mine drainage, and nothing coats limestone with iron quicker in such systems than water high in disolved oxygen. I could go on, but then I'd once again be guilty of diverting the thread. Suffice it to say that if oxygenated water refers to water high in disolved oxygen, it is definitely NOT pseudoscience.
Dave | |
|
Mr H2O
|
Joined: 10/31/2006
Msg: 41 | |
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/30/2007 8:33:31 PM | There are thousands of quacks using convoluted logic out there :
Example
Joseph Mercola- a very popular health information site
Now the FDA is involved and attempting to prosecute him for 4 products
-Vibrant Health Research Chlorella XP
-Fresh Shores Extra Virgin Coconut Oil
-Momentum Health Products Vitamin K2
-Momentum Health Products Cardio Essentials Nattokinase NSK-SD
Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act bans unapproved claims for products
that are intended for curing, mitigating, treating, or preventing of diseases.
Why soooo many people forget this rule is a mystery to me. | |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/30/2007 10:42:50 PM | "Mr H20" I wish you could get the folks on the cancer sites to understand this rule.
Also in regards to truth verses fraud....truth is a fact proven and fraud is a
distortion of the truth.
Skunk | |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/30/2007 11:04:36 PM | "There are thousands of quacks using convoluted logic out there "
ANd that is why you have to think critically folks...don't take everything at face value...
I mean, if a 10% coupon bond is issued on the market but the market is demanding an 11% return, you're just going to have to understand that you issue that bond at a discount...
As humans we can be arbriters of our own oral projections(or in this case written) andit is important to let only those pronouncments out that are verifiably legitmate, it;s like your tax return, aare you going to claim a rent deduciton on your IRS/CRA tax return if you don't have receipts or records to back it up...I MEAN COME ON PEOPLE...
it's absolutely important to experientially verify your sh*t come on, I can spout out a plethora of retarded theories but the ones that matter are the ones that predict without failure consistently....not like the superbowl of course which would not adhere to any predictable theory, but a theory that has some kind of substantiative backing that says this is what will happen if this happensand then when you test it, it happens...you want to show me the observations alright go ahead, show me the observations
Are you goingto talk esoterics here or are you talking my language, what does this predict and why does it predict that...of course some rudimentary technical knowledge is necessary to even be able to distinguish the retarded theories from the legitimate ones, but the theory should still display structural valididty.
sincerely,
an accountant trying to be a physicaist/philosopher | |
|
Mr H2O
|
Joined: 10/31/2006
Msg: 44 | |
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/31/2007 10:28:11 AM | Enough with the religious stuff, okay folks, - start your own thread , leave mine alone !
There are so many items in the PseudoScience realm where
people spend enormous amounts of money hoping to be healed.
The internet propogates myths, fallacies, inconsistencies and outright lies.
People like Kevin Trudeau should be locked away for years with no food or water.
His book "Natural Cures They Don't Want You to Know About," has made him millions.
Trudeau is permitted to sell his book since, under the First Amendment,
it does not qualify as a "product."
As part of his agreement with the FTC, he paid $2 million in "consumer redress."
Trudeau has no medical training and no particular health expertise.
THIS is the kind of stuff people need to know about !!!
Trudeau posed as a doctor in 1990 in order to deposit $80,000 in false checks.
He swindled AmEx out of $122,735.68.
Trudeau spent two years in jail.
| |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/31/2007 4:50:55 PM | Science depends upon
1) the observation of phenomenae for which
2) theories are proposed, theories that
3) generate testable hypotheses, the findings of which
4) can be replicated and checked for accuracy
5) under rigorous conditions.
Pseudoscience stops at step #1 and has none of the following steps, and depends on its popularity mostly by just trying to "sound sensible" to people with inadequate BS meters. | |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/31/2007 5:28:47 PM | Science is a method not a form of knowledge. In fact, it is the scientific method. False knowledge masquerading as scientifically valid assumptions. You're talking about the Educamation Factor (EF). EFing people have been purporting the dumbest EFing things ever since the first EFing idiot found out their EFing baloney could sell soap to hayseeds.
Look to religion for the reason it works. The vast majority of people are raised to believe in imaginary beings living in the sky working miracles. If that's not the mother of all EFing concoctions, then what is? | |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/31/2007 6:23:53 PM |
You're talking about the Educamation Factor (EF). EFing people have been purporting the dumbest EFing things ever since the first EFing idiot found out their EFing baloney could sell soap to hayseeds.
Really?? I had no idea.
So what are you selling?
The truth? Or something someone told you was the truth?
How do you know?
Question everything - Which applies itself more to the holy grail of science (empirical methodology) than blindly following every piece of media blitz you've been spoon feed. | |
|
| |
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/31/2007 6:36:08 PM |
I think that both sides of the camp can concede that religion in any context is relevant insofar as it is an intrinsic part of who we are and how we have defined ourselves as humans for thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of years. The issue is in the context itself and how it is presented. Who amognst us is best suited to teach our young, our legacy, which religion is the true religion? Is it me? Is it you? And if neither, who then? A priest? A rabbi? And which theological events should be considered literal versus mythical? Should the Christian version of creation be taught by a Priest a Minister, Pastor perhaps? Or maybe it can be an evangelist...a tele evangelist perhaps? They're good with crowds.
Rake.....
You raise some very interesting facts in Your hypothesis.....but I'm still trying to figure out the secret of the Cara milk Bar.
Pseudoscience
even if it's a stab in the dark some have to start some where. | |
|
| Pseudoscience - knowledge which masquerades as science
Posted: 3/31/2007 6:48:27 PM | leroy~
who to believe... that is too true indeed...but that is why peer review is so important. there have been many times in history where people that have made new discoveries were vilified for doing so. even scientists can get it wrong...but usually things eventually correct themselves... ie: the guy who discovered that ulcers are caused by h-pylori instead of "stress," the commonly held dogma of the day. he was highly criticized for his discovery but now it is excepted as fact.
have faith... the facts will eventually come to light...
lar | |
|
Home
login 
