ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags cancer

Closed Thread
Old 2nd November 2003, 08:17 PM   #81
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Quote:
Originally posted by Kumar
There can be so many failures in allopathy also, then why don't we reject it fully. It is just how you think about any system.
Double-blind experiment. Look it up. If you don't understand what a double-blind experiment is, and WHY you need to be able to do one, then you're deluding yourself. Yes, it is just a matter of how you think about the system. It's a matter of whether you think about it rationally (double-blind experiments) or whether you're willing to delude yourself. So far, you're stuck doing the later. So don't bother the rest of us with this homeopathy junk until you've spent some time educating yourself about what a double-blind experiment is.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2003, 12:22 AM   #82
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
I dont think that there is any problem in doble blind experiments. If anyone want to carry out he can do the same. I think I have allready mentioned the requirements for the same. Some details in this respect in given at;
http://www.homeopathic.com/articles/...h/asthma_t.php

http://www.lyghtforce.com/King_bio/research.htm

http://www.holistic-online.com/Homeo...o_clinical.htm
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2003, 01:18 AM   #83
Zep
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,699
Quote:
Originally posted by Kumar
I dont think that there is any problem in doble blind experiments. If anyone want to carry out he can do the same. I think I have allready mentioned the requirements for the same. Some details in this respect in given at;
http://www.homeopathic.com/articles/...h/asthma_t.php

http://www.lyghtforce.com/King_bio/research.htm

http://www.holistic-online.com/Homeo...o_clinical.htm
From the first article:
Quote:
However, new research on the homeopathic treatment of asthma that has been published in The Lancet (December 10, 1994) suggests that relief is in sight for asthma sufferers.
Unfortunately, there appears to be no such article available from The Lancet. Would you mind giving us a reference, Kumar? Or are these people simply making this up in the hope that the gullible believers won't check?

In the second reference, the following is just a sample of the supporting references:
Quote:
2. Howard P. Bellows. The Test Drug Proving of the O.O. and L. Society: A Reproving of Belladonna (Boston: The American Homeopathic Ophthalmological, Otological, and Laryngological Society. 1906).

3. J. Paterson. "Report on Mustard Gas Experiments," Journal of the American Institute of Homeopathy. 37 (1944): 47-50. 88-92.

4. R.M.M. Owen and G. Ives, "The Mustard Gas Experiments of The British Homeopathic Society: 1941-1942," Proceedinas of The 35th International Homeopathic Congress. 1982, pp. 258-259.

5. Adam Sacks. "Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy of Homeopathic Remedies," Journal of Holistic Medicine, 5 (Fall-Winter 1983): 172-175: RB. Smith and G.W. Boericke, "Changes Caused By Succussion on N.M.R, Patterns and Bioassay of Bradykinin Triacetate (BKTA) Succussions and Dilution Journal of The American Institute of Homeopathy, 61 (November-December 1968): 197-212.

6, L.M. Singh and G. Gupta, "Antiviral Efficacy of Homeopathic Drugs Against Animal Viruses," British Homeopathic Journal, 74 (July 1985): 168-174.
This is hardly likely to inspire enthusiasm by outsiders, Kumar. Where is the peer-review of the original works? And such silly references as "The Mustard Gas Experiments of The British Homeopathic Society: 1941-1942" - I really do hesitate to ask what THAT consisted of...

The third reference makes broad sweeping claims and then SAYS that trials were conducted by "scientists," and then describes ALL the outcomes as positive. Amazing! So why isn't this used more widely? Real scientists would queue up to get such medicines for their patients if they were so efficacious. But could it be that they are not as good as claimed here? If so, why is that?

Please note that all these reference sites are preaching to the converted and trying to sell their own quack medicines - so they are telling you what you would LIKE to hear from them. So instead of these, please give us direct references of the Lancet, or BMJ, or NJM or whatever reputable medical journal articles you can find that support homeopathy. I won't be bothering if all you can do is drag out more homeopathy sites and self-references. They are tosh.
Zep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2003, 02:31 AM   #84
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 20,191
Debating homepaths is like being trampled to death by geese. I entred this board some weeks ago in order to collect information as I am working on an article on homeopathy. I did learn a lot. Kumar is there too, under another name (you won't have much difficulty recognizing him).

Some things keep coming up when you talk to homeopaths:

1) They suggest, or even demand, that you try out homeopathic drugs (it is called self-proving).

2) They have a mistrust of modern medicine, which they insist on calling allopathy, ranging from Kumar's moderate apprehension of side-effects, to people who claim that modern medicine has no effect at all and is only killing people.

3) Lots of case stories where people have allegedly been cured by homepoathy.

4) The basic steadfast conviction that "it works".

I have not been able to find out why they are so hell-bent on skeptics trying it (I know of several who did and found no effect).

The idea of "self-proving" is (somewhat simplified) that the medicine produces the same symptoms in a healthy person as it can cure in a sick person. So when you take such a medicine, you are supposed to feel some symptoms, and this is supposed to convince you of homeopathy. This is a bit funny, because even if it did produce some symptoms, that is absolutely not evidence of any curative effect.

Anyhow, the conditions for self-proving is symptomatic for homeopathy: You are supposed to feel carefully for symptoms and increase dose till you feel something! What are the chances that the average person will eventually feel something?

The mistrust of modern medicine comes from Samuel Hahnemann, the founder and inventor of homeopathy who, in practically all of his writings, devote about 25% of the text to lashing out at convenetional medicine, which he calls allopathy. Hahnemann, writing early in the 19th century, might have some justification in this, since general medical practice was indeed deplorable at his time, but when 21st century homeopaths claim that "allopaths" are evil and out to kill patients, it becomes pathetic. --- But if you can't support your own, you can always try to slander the opposition.

I have by now read dozens of case stories. They all basically go like this:

1) Patient presents with symptoms.
2) Homepath prescribes some homeopathic remedy.
3) Repeat #2 till there is improvement.
4) Grateful patient recovers.
5) Another victory is claimed for homeopathy.

The medication/recovery phase ranges from near instantaneous recovery, to cases that last years and where numerous prescriptions are tried. Since most diseases will pass whether they are treated or not, any regimen can claim cures this way.

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2003, 03:28 AM   #85
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Quote:
from Kumar's moderate apprehension of side-effects, to people who claim that modern medicine has no effect at all and is only killing people.
Mr Hans & others,

The above mentioning is an aggravated biased explaination of any of my mentioning which I don't know I have ever mentioned in this way. The essence of my understanding is that there are some good & bad points in every therapy and we should select & accept those good points. However, I feel that some/most people do not accept this concept and just go along with all types of points related to any one therapy which is fancy today(commercial angle).

However just read;

http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/brand.htm

http://www.whale.to/v/quotes2.html

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/diseases.html

Alas! I could not get anything pretaining to main question but we have only discussed- yes,no,but,can,can't,how,why...so on.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2003, 04:28 AM   #86
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 20,191
Kumar, I won't cite you from the other board, but you have repeatedly expressed worry about side-effects of modern medicine, and that you would like to replace it with homeopathy wherever possible for exactly that reason.

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2003, 07:17 AM   #87
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
but you have repeatedly expressed worry about side-effects of modern medicine,

No doubt this is the only worry which all will accept even MM. The new researches may be mostly pointing toword this aspect. If pollution is there & we worry & take care of that, it is not against the modren science in any sense.

that you would like to replace it with homeopathy wherever possible for exactly that reason.

It is next to impossible to replace it in current environment so even a fool can't think about it. But if homeopathy could achieve that confidance or patients can gain the confidence or new research proves it according to their requirements then nothing better can happen to the humanity.
__________________
To try reach to Absolute & Final(A&F) is my honest desire. Let the things be A&F or die in themselves, if odd. Just Logical & Equanimious Discussions, No commitments.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 01:07 AM   #88
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Lightbulb God, Nature and Life Expectancy

Dear Friends,
Greetings!

Just simple questions:-

1. Can predicted or estimated age of anything or being be affected by following unnatural modern interventions?

2. Can odd or unnatural modern interventions in nature bring major changes on earth or at universe level in view of following theories?

Relevant physical theory:
•Butterfly effect
•Cascading failure
•Causality
•Chain reaction
•Snowball effect
•Entrophy Change
Hormesis

This is not related to alt. systems.

Best Wishes
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 01:19 AM   #89
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,346
Just a quick note: by "unnatural modern interventions" Kumar probably means demonstrably effective medicines. See for example here, where he asks "whether today's prefered interventions are not effecting "surrvival of fittest" & propagating unfits to bring unfittness".

So, the answer to the first question is yes: people "following unnatural modern interventions" have a greater life expectancy than those in the past who didn't have access to "unnatural modern interventions".
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky

Last edited by Mojo; 19th April 2015 at 01:25 AM. Reason: typo.
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 01:24 AM   #90
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,854
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Dear Friends,
Greetings!

Just simple questions:-

1. Can predicted or estimated age of anything or being be affected by following unnatural modern interventions?
If the unnatural modern interventions are working properly, then yes.
__________________
I’d rather be a rising ape than a falling angel. - Sir Terry Pratchett
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 01:29 AM   #91
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
...
2. Can odd or unnatural modern interventions in nature bring major changes on earth or at universe level in view of following theories?
...
Only in so far as this is a consequence from the answer to your question 1, which Mojo answered.
__________________
homeopathy homicidium
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 01:30 AM   #92
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,346
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Hormesis

That gives the game away.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:05 AM   #93
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
...
This is not related to alt. systems.
...
It always is.
__________________
homeopathy homicidium
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:09 AM   #94
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Just a quick note: by "unnatural modern interventions" Kumar probably means demonstrably effective medicines. See for example here, where he asks "whether today's prefered interventions are not effecting "surrvival of fittest" & propagating unfits to bring unfittness".

So, the answer to the first question is yes: people "following unnatural modern interventions" have a greater life expectancy than those in the past who didn't have access to "unnatural modern interventions".
No you are taking it otherwise. You can not take that pollutions, global warming, nuclear weapons etc. are increasing life expectancy. So reply in this sense.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:09 AM   #95
Lukraak_Sisser
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,963
Can you give a single example of an actual unnatural modern intervention?
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:10 AM   #96
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Mashuna View Post
If the unnatural modern interventions are working properly, then yes.
What about pollutions, global warming tools, nuclear weapons etc.?
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:12 AM   #97
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
That gives the game away.
Nothing in odd sense to you. Since it display enhanced/biphasic affects, I just mentioned it.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:20 AM   #98
Lukraak_Sisser
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,963
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
What about pollutions, global warming tools, nuclear weapons etc.?
Pollutions are based on natural chemistry. The fact that we don't like it doesn't make it unnatural.
What is a global warming tool?
Nuclear weapons are based upon radioactivity, which is a natural process.
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:29 AM   #99
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
...
What is a global warming tool?
...
I suspect Kumar means a global warming mechanism.

E.T.A.: If not, perhaps Kumar has a tool shed with marked tools on the wall: wrench, screwdriver, global warming.
__________________
homeopathy homicidium

Last edited by Daylightstar; 19th April 2015 at 02:32 AM. Reason: E.T.A. added.
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:36 AM   #100
Manopolus
Metaphorical Anomaly
 
Manopolus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brownbackistan
Posts: 7,537
I'm not sure what all this is about (the language is fuzzy), but if there's an evolutionary angle, you're ignoring sexual selection. Survival isn't the only condition required for reproduction.

Then again, I have no clue what the point is at all, so I may be off topic.

Last edited by Manopolus; 19th April 2015 at 02:37 AM.
Manopolus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:43 AM   #101
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Manopolus View Post
I'm not sure what all this is about (the language is fuzzy), but if there's an evolutionary angle, you're ignoring sexual selection. Survival isn't the only condition required for reproduction.

Then again, I have no clue what the point is at all, so I may be off topic.
No I am trying to better understand reduced age due to following unnature and can unnature cause propagating, chain reaction type affects and reduce normal age. May it be age of all things and beings on earth or on universe--say so thought BIG BANG occur early.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:46 AM   #102
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
The topic starter has a hapless way of trying to reel people into his altmed/alt everything convictions.
An extremely hapless way.
__________________
homeopathy homicidium
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:49 AM   #103
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Pollutions are based on natural chemistry. The fact that we don't like it doesn't make it unnatural.
What is a global warming tool?
Nuclear weapons are based upon radioactivity, which is a natural process.
Emissions from modern vehicles, industries etc. can not be taken as natural to us, to earth and to universe. Natural: inharent sense of right and wrong.

Global Warming tools: whatever increase global warming eg. heat generated by vehicles, airconditioning,Industries, by nuclear and non nuclear usages. etc.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 02:52 AM   #104
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
Kumar, why don't you simply be honest and tell us what leads you to ask such questions.
Don't be vague and tell us you're just trying to find out/learn etc.
__________________
homeopathy homicidium
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 03:13 AM   #105
Lukraak_Sisser
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,963
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Emissions from modern vehicles, industries etc. can not be taken as natural to us, to earth and to universe. Natural: inharent sense of right and wrong.

Global Warming tools: whatever increase global warming eg. heat generated by vehicles, airconditioning,Industries, by nuclear and non nuclear usages. etc.
We are burning fossil fuels. Which come from nature and only restore earth to its natural temperature before the carbon was sequestered. Fire is also a natural process.
Neither of the processes negatively affects the earth, let alone the universe.
I'm getting the feeling that to you 'unnatural' = 'anything I don't like'
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 03:22 AM   #106
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 21,108
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Pollutions are based on natural chemistry. The fact that we don't like it doesn't make it unnatural.
What is a global warming tool?
Nuclear weapons are based upon radioactivity, which is a natural process.
That is a ludicrous definition of "natural". In that sense everything is natural, but one could hardly in any meaningful or useful sense of the term call the destruction of Hiroshima a "natural disaster" or the catastrophe of the Aral Sea a natural desiccation event. But yet, uranium "naturally" undergoes fission and the cultivation of cotton which destroyed the Aral Sea represents a natural growth process, as cotton grows in nature.

How ridiculous to define "natural" in that way, however.

ETA I now understand this post of yours.
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Can you give a single example of an actual unnatural modern intervention?
By your definition, there can not be any such thing as an unnatural intervention, so of course no example can be given which is not excluded by your use of the term.

Last edited by Craig B; 19th April 2015 at 03:26 AM. Reason: ETA
Craig B is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 04:45 AM   #107
Lukraak_Sisser
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,963
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
That is a ludicrous definition of "natural". In that sense everything is natural, but one could hardly in any meaningful or useful sense of the term call the destruction of Hiroshima a "natural disaster" or the catastrophe of the Aral Sea a natural desiccation event. But yet, uranium "naturally" undergoes fission and the cultivation of cotton which destroyed the Aral Sea represents a natural growth process, as cotton grows in nature.

How ridiculous to define "natural" in that way, however.

ETA I now understand this post of yours. By your definition, there can not be any such thing as an unnatural intervention, so of course no example can be given which is not excluded by your use of the term.
I know, but the hyperbole was mainly intended to get Kumar to define what he considers unnatural. As I (and some others here I presume) suspect it will end up being a thread about how anything but his version of homeopathy is unnatural and therefore somehow wrong for mankind.
Rather than wait for 20 pages for that to appear I though I'd see if he would get that out of the way early.

Besides something like a circle with corners or a triangle with 2 sides would be unnatural according to the definition I was using. Lovecraftian stuff and all that.
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 08:03 AM   #108
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,647
Personally I can never parse Kumar's posts into anything understandable in English. However, for a possibly contrary view, may I present the Carbonist Manifesto?

http://www.beyondweird.com/occult/carbonmf.html

Quote:
This essay describes some philosophical, ethical, and cosmological
implications of the Gaia hypothesis. Although loosely grounded in
recent research in ecology and paleoclimatology, this is clearly an
essay and not a scientific paper. It is also distinctly tongue in
cheek, but the author has spent some serious moments wondering
whether the belief system outlined below is any more unreasonable
than certain "mainstream" viewpoints.
Briefly, the Human Race exists to liberate carbon dioxide to cause Global Warming and restore Gaia's proper temperature.

We are doing God's Gaia's work.
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 09:40 AM   #109
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto View Post
Personally I can never parse Kumar's posts into anything understandable in English. However, for a possibly contrary view, may I present the Carbonist Manifesto?

http://www.beyondweird.com/occult/carbonmf.html



Briefly, the Human Race exists to liberate carbon dioxide to cause Global Warming and restore Gaia's proper temperature.

We are doing God's Gaia's work.
Whether Human Race akso exist for nuclear weapons, global warming by airconditioning, vehicle pollutions etc. Releasing CO2 on breathing is natural activity.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 09:44 AM   #110
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
That is a ludicrous definition of "natural". In that sense everything is natural, but one could hardly in any meaningful or useful sense of the term call the destruction of Hiroshima a "natural disaster" or the catastrophe of the Aral Sea a natural desiccation event. But yet, uranium "naturally" undergoes fission and the cultivation of cotton which destroyed the Aral Sea represents a natural growth process, as cotton grows in nature.

How ridiculous to define "natural" in that way, however.

ETA I now understand this post of yours. By your definition, there can not be any such thing as an unnatural intervention, so of course no example can be given which is not excluded by your use of the term.
Thanks. By natural, we can take it as "natural to us, natural to earth and natural to unniverse. Natural mean: to which an inharent sense of right and wrong exist.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 09:46 AM   #111
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
I know, but the hyperbole was mainly intended to get Kumar to define what he considers unnatural. As I (and some others here I presume) suspect it will end up being a thread about how anything but his version of homeopathy is unnatural and therefore somehow wrong for mankind.
Rather than wait for 20 pages for that to appear I though I'd see if he would get that out of the way early.

Besides something like a circle with corners or a triangle with 2 sides would be unnatural according to the definition I was using. Lovecraftian stuff and all that.
Unnatural: to which no inharent sense of right and wrong is there.

Anyway, I know you know what I am asking. Pls give direct awnser instead of pulling skin from hair.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 10:00 AM   #112
Sockor
Critical Thinker
 
Sockor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 321
If there is no inharent sense of right and wrong to sunlight?
Sockor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 10:10 AM   #113
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,346
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Anyway, I know you know what I am asking. Pls give direct awnser instead of pulling skin from hair.

OK. Homoeopathy doesn't work.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 10:13 AM   #114
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,516
If an ambulance gets you to hospital in time for your potentially fatal heart attack to be treated successfully your life expectancy will be increased.

If an ambulance runs over you, inflicting fatal injuries, your life expectancy will be reduced.

There are pros and cons to every technological innovation, Kumar. The questions in your OP are not 'simple', they are some of the most complex that can be posed. The cost/benefit analysis for any single innovation is almost impossible to calculate, let alone the sum total of all of them which is what you seem to be demanding.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 10:13 AM   #115
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,346
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
No you are taking it otherwise. You can not take that pollutions, global warming, nuclear weapons etc. are increasing life expectancy. So reply in this sense.

Even with all of these, the "interventions" you object to as "unnatural" have resulted in life expectancy being much greater today than it was before those "interventions" were available.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 10:18 AM   #116
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Sockor View Post
If there is no inharent sense of right and wrong to sunlight?
Yes, therefore you move in and out, in Sunlight and in shade as per your inharent sense of right and wrong. Quality may not matter but quantity matters.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 10:20 AM   #117
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
OK. Homoeopathy doesn't work.
Ok, then what next? I know you know the reply so avoid pulling skin from hair.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 10:23 AM   #118
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,346
Originally Posted by Kumar View Post
Ok, then what next?

Use something that works instead.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 10:27 AM   #119
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
If an ambulance gets you to hospital in time for your potentially fatal heart attack to be treated successfully your life expectancy will be increased.

If an ambulance runs over you, inflicting fatal injuries, your life expectancy will be reduced.

There are pros and cons to every technological innovation, Kumar. The questions in your OP are not 'simple', they are some of the most complex that can be posed. The cost/benefit analysis for any single innovation is almost impossible to calculate, let alone the sum total of all of them which is what you seem to be demanding.
Yes but I don't know what will be the final outcome of opting abnormal(unnatural) practices on ultimate. Still, you can tell about 'cons' for the purpose of this topic. Tell me, suppose 3rd world war happens(I shall not wish) and all nuclear and non-nuclear weapons are used, what will be its impact on earth and on universe. One impact can be assessed as direct damage other by chain/cascading damages. Can it bring Big Bang like damages. You need to concentrate more on chain/cascading type reactions.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th April 2015, 10:28 AM   #120
Kumar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,834
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Even with all of these, the "interventions" you object to as "unnatural" have resulted in life expectancy being much greater today than it was before those "interventions" were available.
I hate 'one sided approach.
Kumar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:27 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.