Quack busting, money on the table

"Is there any proof Randi has the $1 million to loose?"

Yes, as I recall the procedure for getting a formal proof of same from
the 3rd party holding the prize is found on the same link.

Is there any proof Randi has the $1 million to loose?

Being the skeptic that I am; how can I believe Randi has the money?

"Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Is there any proof Randi has the $1 million to loose?

Being the skeptic that I am; how can I believe Randi has the money?

Actually, yes... these guys found it, you can go through similar
machinations to check it yourself:
http://www.twopercentco.com/rants/allison_dubois_week.html

Also, you do not even have to prove it works. All you have to do is be able
to distinguish between unlabeled bottles which is the homeopathic remedy and
which is just the plain solvent (or sugar pills).

"[email hidden]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

let's use the homopathetic truth claims and do a test as an example of the
truth claims of the quack busters. The latter say that there is no
evidence showing that the homopathetic "drugs" are effective as claimed.
Here is a prize of $1000000 for anyone showing that homopathetic "drugs"
are effective and do as claimed. One may read the rules here:

" One Million Dollar Challenge"

http://www.randi.org/research/index.html

It will be interesting to see which one of the now familiar excuses for not
doing the test will be used. I have one in mind that fits the mindset of
the homopathetic choir, let's see if they use it as the first attempt as
such an excuse.

This man is deception manifested in the flesh. It boosts his credibility
when he exposes the fakes and decreases the credibility of natural
remedies simultaneously. Science in essence is the labeling of
unexplained or unknown things. Most of this labeling takes place at the
hand of *proof* (hypothesis, theories, studies, etc.) that do not exist,
can not be proven themselves or are flawed. We call this "fact" or
"proof" and give these people too much credit.

While he's at it he should extend the same challenge to pharmaceutical
companies. They're the ones jacking us up with their *medications* and
then pulling them off the market after they have made billions and so
many people have been killed. All of these medications were developed
with *science* and most of them do more harm than good. You know, help
the symptoms of 1 issue and cause 20 more.

What he's offering is almost impossible to win and he's brilliant enough
to know that. He will always find a way to discredit, transfer the
credit or explain away something that just works or just is. He
functions with an ulterior motive and you can see it in his eyes if you
look hard enough. I believe his motivation is false. He is motivated by
money, fame and intellectual esteem. Because of this, someone will prove
him wrong soon and win the prize. Remember you heard it here first.

It seems to me that science has been doing more harm than good, but
that's what we get for relying on man and labs and their hunger for
revenue. We can thank science for creating super viruses that are
perched and waiting to devour the masses of mankind with awesome speed.
I'll keep my faith in natural solutions that have worked effectively for
centuries, especially since we just happen to be natural beings.
--
Regards,

Revelation
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
"Some things are true whether you believe them or not." - Nicolas Cage
in City of Angels

"Revelation" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"[email hidden]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]:

....

snip...
Science in essence is the labeling of

Quoted message said:

unexplained or unknown things. Most of this labeling takes place at the
hand of *proof* (hypothesis, theories, studies, etc.) that do not exist,
can not be proven themselves or are flawed. We call this "fact" or "proof"
and give these people too much credit.

This has got to be one of the silliest "definitions" of science I have seen
in a long time.

Quoted message said:

...snip of unsubstantiated rant of a magician..

Quoted message said:

It seems to me that science has been doing more harm than good, but that's
what we get for relying on man and labs and their hunger for revenue. We
can thank science for creating super viruses that are perched and waiting
to devour the masses of mankind with awesome speed.

So is that your concise explanation of the 1918 Influenza Pandemic?

Quoted message said:

I'll keep my faith in natural solutions that have worked effectively for
centuries, especially since we just happen to be natural beings.

Then, please, for the sake that is your sanity STAY AWAY from anything which
may have used any form of science in its creation! That means that you
shall now need to step away from the computer right now, and never go near
it again.

Quoted message said:

--
Regards,

Revelation
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
"Some things are true whether you believe them or not." - Nicolas Cage in
City of Angels

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It will be interesting to see which one of the now familiar excuses for
not
doing the test will be used. I have one in mind that fits the mindset

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the homopathetic choir, let's see if they use it as the first attempt

as

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

such an excuse.

This man is deception manifested in the flesh. It boosts his credibility
when he exposes the fakes and decreases the credibility of natural
remedies simultaneously.

Bingo, just as predicted, I should have made myself a bet to boot. When
having the $1000000 prize put on the table a very common response is to
say he is a "bad" person of one kind or another. This goes with the
homopathetic choir mindset because anyone showing or suggesting, just like
the quack busters, the contrary it is only evil people trying to mash the
truth and prevent people from getting real health care. This is an
intresting twist on it, he is right some of the time but wrong every time
he shows the health quacks not able to demonstrate their truth claims.

"Revelation" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"[email hidden]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

let's use the homopathetic truth claims and do a test as an example of
the
truth claims of the quack busters. The latter say that there is no
evidence showing that the homopathetic "drugs" are effective as claimed.
Here is a prize of $1000000 for anyone showing that homopathetic "drugs"
are effective and do as claimed. One may read the rules here:

" One Million Dollar Challenge"

http://www.randi.org/research/index.html

It will be interesting to see which one of the now familiar excuses for
not
doing the test will be used. I have one in mind that fits the mindset of
the homopathetic choir, let's see if they use it as the first attempt as
such an excuse.

This man is deception manifested in the flesh. It boosts his credibility
when he exposes the fakes and decreases the credibility of natural
remedies simultaneously. Science in essence is the labeling of unexplained
or unknown things.

[censored]! Science is a way of learning the truths about the universe by
observing them. The methods of science are designed to prevent our fooling
ourselves about what we observe.

Quoted message said:

Most of this labeling takes place at the hand of *proof* (hypothesis,
theories, studies, etc.) that do not exist, can not be proven themselves
or are flawed. We call this "fact" or "proof" and give these people too
much credit.

Whatever "flaws" there are in science, it is the most remarkably successful
endeavor for knowledge in human history. Thanks to scientists, we understand
much of the world around us, from tiny quarks to quasars so distant that
their rhythmic signals began their journeys across the universe long before
the Earth was formed from a cloud of cosmic dust. Your whimper that
scientists get "too much credit" is pathetic in light of the mass of
knowledge that science has accumulated.

Quoted message said:

While he's at it he should extend the same challenge to pharmaceutical
companies. They're the ones jacking us up with their *medications* and
then pulling them off the market after they have made billions and so many
people have been killed. All of these medications were developed with
*science* and most of them do more harm than good. You know, help the
symptoms of 1 issue and cause 20 more.

That's a pretty bold statement. Have you any evidence that "most do more
harm than good?

Quoted message said:

What he's offering is almost impossible to win and he's brilliant enough
to know that.

Of course it is, and of course he is. The "paranormal" is [censored], and that
is the whole point.

Quoted message said:

He will always find a way to discredit, transfer the credit or explain
away something that just works or just is.

Not true. All you have to do to win is explain what you can do, and then DO
IT under conditions of observation that ARE AGREED UPON BEFOREHAND. No
tricks, no discrediting, no explaining away.

Quoted message said:

He functions with an ulterior motive and you can see it in his eyes if you
look hard enough. I believe his motivation is false. He is motivated by
money, fame and intellectual esteem. Because of this, someone will prove
him wrong soon and win the prize. Remember you heard it here first.

Believe me, I'll remember.

Quoted message said:

It seems to me that science has been doing more harm than good, but that's
what we get for relying on man and labs and their hunger for revenue.

Ignorance does more harm than knowledge. Prove that science "does more harm
than good".

Quoted message said:

We can thank science for creating super viruses that are perched and
waiting to devour the masses of mankind with awesome speed.

Science created viruses? That's an interesting theory. Where's your
evidence?

Quoted message said:

I'll keep my faith in natural solutions that have worked effectively for
centuries, especially since we just happen to be natural beings.

Science is the most natural activity of humankind. It's all about observing
nature.

Quoted message said:

"Some things are true whether you believe them or not." - Nicolas Cage in
City of Angels

And how can we know what things are true? I prefer the pragmatic
look-and-see of science to "faith" in the mythology of the ages.
--

--Rich

Recommended websites:

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
http://www.acahf.org.au
http://www.quackwatch.org/
http://www.skeptic.com/
http://www.csicop.org/

"HCN" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

"Revelation" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"[email hidden]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]:

...

snip...
Science in essence is the labeling of

Quoted message said:

unexplained or unknown things. Most of this labeling takes place at the
hand of *proof* (hypothesis, theories, studies, etc.) that do not exist,
can not be proven themselves or are flawed. We call this "fact" or "proof"
and give these people too much credit.

This has got to be one of the silliest "definitions" of science I have seen
in a long time.

For the sarcastic idiots that missed the context of the discussion, I
think I should have been clear by saying the sciences that deal mostly
with the explanation and manipulation of biological and other natural
phenomenon. People who try to figure out and explain what just is and
has been. The people who try to correct everything unexplained, wrong
with life and the planet with experimentation and so-called discovery.
The people who try to make things better and end up making things worse
because we are fallible and limited in our arrogant knowledge. Not the
scientists who have contributed to the development of personal computers
and iPods but more so the people who will fuse this type of technology
with mankind. Twit. Look at the Stepford Wives. We're not too far off
with this whole robot and AI mentality.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

..snip of unsubstantiated rant of a magician..

Quoted message said:

It seems to me that science has been doing more harm than good, but that's
what we get for relying on man and labs and their hunger for revenue. We
can thank science for creating super viruses that are perched and waiting
to devour the masses of mankind with awesome speed.

So is that your concise explanation of the 1918 Influenza Pandemic?

Of course not, but AIDS, Ebola, the new mutated Influenza, and many
other new disease strains caused by our unnecessary prescription of
antibiotics. They show the shows on TV all the time.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'll keep my faith in natural solutions that have worked effectively for
centuries, especially since we just happen to be natural beings.

Then, please, for the sake that is your sanity STAY AWAY from anything which
may have used any form of science in its creation! That means that you
shall now need to step away from the computer right now, and never go near
it again.

Quoted message said:

--
Regards,

Revelation
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
"Some things are true whether you believe them or not." - Nicolas Cage in
City of Angels

--
Regards,

Revelation
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
"Some things are true whether you believe them or not." - Nicolas Cage
in City of Angels

"Revelation" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"HCN" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

....>> > It seems to me that science has been doing more harm than good, but
that's

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

what we get for relying on man and labs and their hunger for revenue.
We
can thank science for creating super viruses that are perched and
waiting
to devour the masses of mankind with awesome speed.

So is that your concise explanation of the 1918 Influenza Pandemic?

Of course not, but AIDS, Ebola, the new mutated Influenza, and many other
new disease strains caused by our unnecessary prescription of antibiotics.
They show the shows on TV all the time.

What do viruses have to do with the overuse of antibiotics?

(try to use real references, not the use of TV)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'll keep my faith in natural solutions that have worked effectively
for
centuries, especially since we just happen to be natural beings.

Then, please, for the sake that is your sanity STAY AWAY from anything
which
may have used any form of science in its creation! That means that you
shall now need to step away from the computer right now, and never go
near
it again.

....

You really need to stay away from all electronics. You never know what evil
those spinning electrons will cause. Especially if you get your science
information from watching television.

I just went to your link and I can't find anything about Randi or
$1,000,000.
As proof I want a PDF of a bank statement or something tangible, not
just a link to some unknown blog. Proof!!!!!!!!!!!

Is there any proof Randi has the $1 million to loose?

Quoted message said:

Being the skeptic that I am; how can I believe Randi has the money?

Actually, yes... these guys found it, you can go through similar
machinations to check it yourself:
http://www.twopercentco.com/rants/allison_dubois_week.html

Also, you do not even have to prove it works. All you have to do is be
able
to distinguish between unlabeled bottles which is the homeopathic
remedy and
which is just the plain solvent (or sugar pills).

"Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
....> Actually, yes... these guys found it, you can go through similar

Quoted message said:

machinations to check it yourself:
http://www.twopercentco.com/rants/allison_dubois_week.html

...

Read the whole thing... in one page they show exactly how to get the
information. It takes a bit because it is not a static webpage.

Dan said:

Is there any proof Randi has the $1 million to loose?

Being the skeptic that I am; how can I believe Randi has the money?

Here we go again. "I won't take the test because there is no money".

What a laugh.

Do it. Prove it. Sue if you don't get the money. Easy.
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

Dan said:

Is there any proof Randi has the $1 million to loose?

Being the skeptic that I am; how can I believe Randi has the money?

Randi strikes me as a mental case who thinks that he is Harry Houdini.
Maybe somebody should tell him that magicians are nothing but
professional frauds? Anybody can offer to pay money fraudulently. Is
this the best that the science people can come up with? Randi is a
pathetic representative more fruity than homeopathy.

Revelation said:

All of these medications were developed
with *science* and most of them do more harm than good. You know, help
the symptoms of 1 issue and cause 20 more.

This was one of the more effective arguments of the Natural Hygiene
movement being offered at about the time of the American Civil War,
long before Shelton and the FTC arrived on the scene.

Of course this type of whining, does not benefit the consumer any. And,
only helps to sell fraudulent books like _Natural Cures_.

Quoted message said:

The latter say that there is no
evidence showing that the homopathetic "drugs" are effective as claimed.

I find the study of homeopathy very interesting. Try to bring up a
rational discussion of subject, and the science people will always
bring up this irrational B/S. This kind of tactic does NOT speak well
of science at all.

Homeopathy is basically based on the same science that says that
vaccines work.

Of course, the issue of what exactly homeopathy is and what exactly is
the 'correct' homeopathic medicine is for a given person for a given
health condition, of course, is never defined precisely because nobody
in favor of homeopathy can agree on it. Furthermore, the correct
homeopathic dosage is just as debatable.

Homeopathy, as such, really requires a 'female mindset' to believe in.

But what I find most interesting about the subject is that the response
of the science people is totally unscientific and is more irrational
than the subject that they are trying to attack.

Taking a close look at the Randi Challenge itself, this idiot is
actually asking for the challenger to prove that magic works. Nobody
who takes homeopathy seriously is remotely interested in accepting this
challenge simply because no self-respecting person is interested in
proving that magic works. The challenge simply is not rational.
Again, this Randi Challenge is totally fraudulent, on the face of it.

Quoted message said:

let's use the homopathetic truth claims and do a test as an example of the
truth claims of the quack busters.

What a load of [censored]. They just move the goal posts. It's all nonsense.

It's like the "Continuum" magazine that offered a reward for the proof
of the existence of HIV. Evidence provided was rejected for one
reason or another.

This offer is no better than the [censored] produced by AIDS denialists.

George M. Carter

I'm not that familiar with homeopathy. Would this prize apply only to
homeopathy or any "alternative" therapy?

Does science have to be able to explain it or just verify that the claim
is true? If it's the latter, iridology has already been verified. I
even remember seeing verification on TV (20/20, I think) where the
reporter took someone with known and medically documented health issues
to an iridologist. The iridologist was able to pinpoint the failing
organs and from that, make educated assumptions on the health issues
that were medically documented. The assumptions were correct.

I would assume that such verification is the reason why some state
accredited colleges and even a few accredited universities are now
offering courses on iridology.

Max.

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

let's use the homopathetic truth claims and do a test as an example of the
truth claims of the quack busters. The latter say that there is no
evidence showing that the homopathetic "drugs" are effective as claimed.
Here is a prize of $1000000 for anyone showing that homopathetic "drugs"
are effective and do as claimed. One may read the rules here:

" One Million Dollar Challenge"

http://www.randi.org/research/index.html

It will be intresting to see which one of the now familiar excuses for not
doing the test will be used. I have one in mind that fits the mindset of
the homopathetic choir, let's see if they use it as the first attempt as
such an excuse.

"Mr-Natural-Health" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dan said:

Is there any proof Randi has the $1 million to loose?

Being the skeptic that I am; how can I believe Randi has the money?

Randi strikes me as a mental case who thinks that he is Harry Houdini.
Maybe somebody should tell him that magicians are nothing but
professional frauds?

No, magicians are not professional frauds. They are showmen. Yes, they
decieve their audiences to entertain them, but the nature of the implied
contract is such that the magician does not represent himself as REALLY able
to make the rabbit appear out of thin air or able to saw the woman in half
and restore her, etc. Such representation would be indeed fraudulent. (A few
magicians, like Uri Gellar, DO commit this kind of fraud, and are held in
contempt by people like Randi. Although I doubt seriously that Randi "thinks
that he is Harry Houdini", certainly he is carrying on Houdini's tradition
of exposing purveyers of "paranormal" [censored].

Quoted message said:

Anybody can offer to pay money fraudulently.

What's fraudulent about offering a million bucks?

Quoted message said:

Is
this the best that the science people can come up with? Randi is a
pathetic representative more fruity than homeopathy.

"The science people" did not "come up with" Randi. Randi entered the
quackbusting field on his own. A magician is uniquely qualified to do this
kind of investigation, because magicians are familiar with all the methods
of deception. Scientists are as easily "fooled" by "magic tricks" as anyone.
--

--Rich

Recommended websites:

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
http://www.acahf.org.au
http://www.quackwatch.org/
http://www.skeptic.com/
http://www.csicop.org/

"Mr-Natural-Health" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The latter say that there is no
evidence showing that the homopathetic "drugs" are effective as claimed.

I find the study of homeopathy very interesting. Try to bring up a
rational discussion of subject, and the science people will always
bring up this irrational B/S. This kind of tactic does NOT speak well
of science at all.

It is neither irrational nor "B/S" to point out that homeopathy has never
been supported by a body of research.

Quoted message said:

Homeopathy is basically based on the same science that says that
vaccines work.

What absolute nonsense! The science behind vaccination, which is well
understood, is based on the body's ability to produce antibodies against
specific pathogens, and thereby effect immunity. Homeopathy has no such
sound scientific basis.

Quoted message said:

Of course, the issue of what exactly homeopathy is and what exactly is
the 'correct' homeopathic medicine is for a given person for a given
health condition, of course, is never defined precisely because nobody
in favor of homeopathy can agree on it. Furthermore, the correct
homeopathic dosage is just as debatable.

Could that be because the results are irreproducable?

Quoted message said:

Homeopathy, as such, really requires a 'female mindset' to believe in.

Now that would be an interesting study. Do homeopathic remedies "work"
better for female patients? Do they "work" better if prepared and
administered by females? A good grant writer could score some cash from the
NCCAM for this.

Quoted message said:

But what I find most interesting about the subject is that the response
of the science people is totally unscientific and is more irrational
than the subject that they are trying to attack.

How so?

Quoted message said:

Taking a close look at the Randi Challenge itself, this idiot is
actually asking for the challenger to prove that magic works. Nobody
who takes homeopathy seriously is remotely interested in accepting this
challenge simply because no self-respecting person is interested in
proving that magic works. The challenge simply is not rational.
Again, this Randi Challenge is totally fraudulent, on the face of it.

LOL! Randi is not asking for proof that magic works. He KNOWS magic works.
He's a magician, you know. He WOULD pay a million bucks to see a homeopath
prove that homeopathy works, though. Scratch that. You don't even have to
prove that it works. Just show that you can tell the difference between a
homeopathic preparation and the pure dilutent that was used to prepare it.
Simple. No "fraud" involved.
--

--Rich

Recommended websites:

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
http://www.acahf.org.au
http://www.quackwatch.org/
http://www.skeptic.com/
http://www.csicop.org/