DO you follow any of these quacks, charlatans, liars, mystics or self-promoters?

by Terry 127 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  PSacramento

  *cue the cheesy porn music*
• 

  OUTLAW

  Lots of toes have been stepped upon!

  Anybody else want to admit your affinity for the quackery?

  (Rather than rebutting, I am hoping some of you will do a bit of research on the harm these people are doing.)

  If I had to boil it down, I'd define woo as beliefs that clearly demonstrate magical thinking, uncritical acceptance of things for which no good evidence exists. This includes, but is not limited to, psychic phenomenon, ghosts, the paranormal, "energy healing," the use of "colon cleansing" and "liver cleansing" to rid oneself of "toxins," homeopathy (especially quantum homeopathy), and a wide variety of other mystical and pseudoscientific beliefs. Woo is resistant to reason. Indeed, woo has a double standard when it comes to what it considers to be good evidence. It is very accepting of a wide variety of fuzzy, mystical ideas, but is often incredibly distrustful and skeptical of anything having to do with "conventional" science or "conventional" medicine. Woos tend to be very quick to react to defend their particular brand of woo and very unforgiving of its being questioned.

  -- Orac, from the ScienceBlog Respectful Insolence.....Terry

  I have spent a large part of my life in the Health and Fitness Industry..

  I have many,many connections..

  I have seen first hand what Cleansing will do..

  I have seen first hand what Homeopathic Medicine will do

  I`ll tell you straight up Terry..

  You don`t know what your talking about..

  You disregard medicine that is useful..Follow the advise of people that suit you..

  Use that information to support your thread..Without any further research..

  And..

  Dismiss anyone who does not agree with you..

  Instead of Chastising people who do not meet your expectations..

  Lower the Bar,to where you keep it for yourself..

  

  ........................... ...OUTLAW
• 

  Terry

  Dang, Terry, you lumped a huge variety of things under one umbrella without discrimination. Evidence is not always objective and when your thinking is too black and white, you will invariably miss something. I would not want you as an investigator of anything where the stakes were life or death.

  We have to be able to "kill our darlings". (An editor's advice to writers.)

  In any compromise between a glass of water and poison it is the poison which wins.

  The water is clear, refreshing, cold and satisfying. But, the poison it contains is what kills you.

  I knew when I posted this topic there would be an emotional backlash.

  Why?

  I think EX-JW's, having lost so many things dear to their hearts are just not completely willing to give up all "woo-woo" thinking!

  You have to be willing to kill your "darlings" in order to heal.

  Sorry to offend. But, it is certainly worth self-questioning without lashing out at the messenger.
• 

  Terry

  I think Terry protests too much

  Think of me as a smoke alarm. The sound is annoying as hell......but......it is there to alert you that "where there is smoke there's fire!
• 

  undercover

  I think EX-JW's, having lost so many things dear to their hearts are just not completely willing to give up all "woo-woo" thinking!

  Maybe that should read, "Some ex-JWs..."

  It has been my observation that the majority of ex-JWs (though not all), at least on this site which is about the extent of my associtaion with former members, have moved well beyond the "woo-woo" thinking. That's why there are so many atheists and agnostics. The thinking is more rational and logical than that of a lot of worldly people I know.

  Most worldly people I know still grasp to some kind of "woo woo" thinking; mainly because they've never had their beliefs, so dear to their heat, ripped away...so they go through the motions of belief without ever really thinking about it. But many of us, know now that it's all a sham and we seek logical, rational solutions to our issues instead of relying on invisible magic men or talk show hosts.

  I understand the original post and stripped down to its barest element, it is true. But while some people may actually put faith in some of those characters, I think others may be able to read, view, listen to them to some extent without being brainwashed or overly influenced by them. They're willing to be open minded about it enough to investigate. Kinda like we keep reading WT literature and keep up with "new light" just to remain informed and, to be honest, expose it.
• 

  Terry

  I`ll tell you straight up Terry..

  You don`t know what your talking about..

  You disregard medicine that is useful..Follow the advise of people that suit you..

  Use that information to support your thread..Without any further research..

  And..

  Dismiss anyone who does not agree with you..

  Instead of Chastising people who do not meet your expectations..

  Lower the Bar,to where you keep it for yourself..

  Why, oh why, Outlaw would you possibly care about me chastising you or anybody else unless you are less than 100% confident

  about your stance on Homeopathy (or whatever other ox I've gored)?

  We are either discussing FACT or OPINION.

  Which am I disallowed from expressing here on the "discussion" board?

  I will challenge you on this!

  Have you ever heard of the website QUACKWATCH?

  I humbly suggest you visit QUACKWATCH.ORG and research Homeopathy.

  Because homeopathic remedies were actually less dangerous than those of nineteenth-century medical orthodoxy, many medical practitioners began using them. At the turn of the twentieth century, homeopathy had about 14,000 practitioners and 22 schools in the United States.

  But as medical science and medical education advanced, homeopathy declined sharply in America, where its schools either closed or converted to modern methods. The last pure homeopathic school in this country closed during the 1920s .

  Homeopathy's "law of infinitesimals" is the equivalent of saying that any drop of water subsequently removed from that container will possess an essence of redness. Robert L. Park, Ph.D., a prominent physicist who is executive director of The American Physical Society, has noted that since the least amount of a substance in a solution is one molecule, a 30C solution would have to have at least one molecule of the original substance dissolved in a minimum of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules of water. This would require a container more than 30,000,000,000 times the size of the Earth.

  Placebo effects can be powerful, of course, but the potential benefit of relieving symptoms with placebos should be weighed against the harm that can result from relying upon—and wasting money on—ineffective products. Spontaneous remission is also a factor in homeopathy's popularity. I believe that most people who credit a homeopathic product for their recovery would have fared equally well without it.

  Homeopaths claim to provide care that is safer, gentler, "natural," and less expensive than conventional care—and more concerned with prevention. However, homeopathic treatments prevent nothing, and many homeopathic leaders preach against immunization. Equally bad, a report on the National Center for Homeopathy's 1997 conference described how a homeopathic physician had suggested using homeopathic products to help prevent and treat coronary artery disease. According to the article, the speaker recommended various 30C and 200C products as alternatives to aspirin or cholesterol-lowering drugs, both of which are proven to reduce the incidence of heart attacks and strokes .

  If the FDA required homeopathic remedies to be proven effective in order to remain marketable—the standard it applies to other categories of drugs—homeopathy would face extinction in the United States . However, there is no indication that the agency is considering this. FDA officials regard homeopathy as relatively benign (compared, for example, to unsubstantiated products marketed for cancer and AIDS) and believe that other problems should get enforcement priority.
• 

  Terry

  I understand the original post and stripped down to its barest element, it is true. But while some people may actually put faith in some of those characters, I think others may be able to read, view, listen to them to some extent without being brainwashed or overly influenced by them. They're willing to be open minded about it enough to investigate. Kinda like we keep reading WT literature and keep up with "new light" just to remain informed and, to be honest, expose it.

  My opinion, for what it may be worth, is that an emotional outburst of anger or condemnation is an indication of something fragile and unsupported which is being clung to of an irrational nature.

  If you called me a big fat horse's ass I wouldn't be offended because I'm not. But, if you called me an ugly old man I might well react...once again..because there is an element of truth to it.

  Ex-JW's are not immune from jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. Those who think they've escaped magical thinking and irrational attachment to quackery can easily decieve themselves.

  Symptomatically, when your own "sacred cow" is attacked you'll get angry. That is the RED FLAG moment.

  What I do when this happens (yes, it happens to me!) I try and figure out which part is irrational and which part is defensible. I immediately answer the "alarm" by performing an autopsy!

  Others just lash out and resort to insults and ad hominem because their level of intellectual maturity is not fully developed.
• 

  cult classic

  A few of these "experts" actually helped me expand my thinking beyond WT. But as I continued to figure out why I was taken in by the cult for so long (I was a born-in and took it too seriously) I realized a pattern in the way I cope with life and have put down a lot of this type of reading. I'm always looking for ways to improve my coping skills. I l think it is good when anyone can help us think outside of the box, no matter how they do it. Just don't waste a bunch of money on their books, sign them out of the library instead.

  Terry who do you go to for advice?

  Cult Classic
• 

  THE GLADIATOR

  Think of Terry as:

  The slap round the face that a hysterical person needs.

  The lancet that helps a boil to heal.

  The anti-acid that is needed after over-indulgence.

  The fiscal squeeze that brings a sense of realism back into an economy.

  We don't need faith to know he exists. He is a living, breathing, bull-shit detector, appearing on a website near you - soon.

  Hail Terry!
• 

  Terry

  Terry who do you go to for advice?

  Cult Classic

  The writers who helped me most were (in no particular order)...

  1.Mortimer J. Adler

  2.Richard Feynman

  3.Isaac Asimov (non-fiction writing)

  4.James Randi

  5.Ayn Rand

  6.Joe Nickell/Michael Shermer

  7.Douglas Hofstadter

  8.Karen Armstrong

  9.Bart Ehrman

  10.Harold Bloom

  I've developed a rule of thumb for myself that goes like this:

  1.Be suspicious of anything I'm immediately certain of!

  2.Always discover the value attached to any strong emotion

  3.There is ALWAYS a hidden presupposition behind every belief. FIND IT immediately!

  4.Question the "obvious".

  5.Look for the thing everybody accepts as true and question its premise.

  6.Be willing to be wrong. Be willing to be wrong. Be willing to be wrong!

  7.Even the sanest person clings to an irrational belief and doesn't know it. Beware!