OrgoneConclusion said:

The ONLY people who use these two words together are sensationalist reporters and people trying to promote pseudoscience with highly questionable 'evidence'. It is a made up position as an appeal to emotionalism. Nothing more.

In real science, no subject is off-limits or out-of-bounds. There may be silly endeavors such as 'Free Energy', but nothing is verboten (short of immoral extremes like cruel Nazi science experiments on live subjects).

---

johnm214 said:

AlphaFalfa said:

Lol - OC is biting his nails now. An insider of his precious health science industry just split the beans,

No surprise that he hasn't commented on her post.

To bad, I would like to see him eat it.

---

What exactly is in her post that is contrary to any of his claims or those of the proponents of science?

You seem to think there's a problem with funders desiring particular scientific investigations, but you don't explicitly say how this is a problem.

Wow, this is one of the most naive points I have ever seen. I've stated over and over what the problem with this is! You are clearly not reading my posts.

But whatever, Ill re-hash.

The scientific inquiry is supposed to be objective!!!!! OMFG I can't even believe I have to say this to you. No offence.... Look this is really rather simple; a methodological investigation that attempts to observe and make conclusions about causal links between phenomena without bias/subjectivity is clearly in DEEP DEEP DO-DO when the interest of individual human beings forces its bias into its investigation.

And although you are probably thinking that it would be impossible for human interests/bias to not influence a human activity, the medical science industry claims to be doing just that and clearly isn't. THATS WHERE THE PROBLEM IS!!!

If the medical science industry primarily funds research into  therapies for diseases that can be patented and thus profited from, this scientific investigation into maximizing health and well-being ceases to be scientific, but a rat race to find the most profitable product that can be mass produced!!!!

Knowledge is good.  Someone funding a study whos results will likely be profitable for them is no more a perversion of science than a disinterested party (like the US Navy) funding sea cucumber research or some other asinine bullshit.  At least pharmaceutical or medical research generally has some practical application, unlike much of the crap you get when those paying for the research have no clear interest in its usefulness.


Again, these kinds of implied problems seem to often fall back on gullible people, clueless media producers, and ignorant marketing teams- none of which have anything to do with science nor offer any clear rebutal or limitation on the positive aspects of science.  (Mr.Mushrooms was someone who used to make these kinds of arguments a lot: he'd cite newsweek articles that screw up the science as an example of bias in science or something, lol- clearly the problem with newsweek isn't indicative of a problem in science)

---

Icelander said:

See, at least you have some soft porn to take the edge off your misery.  Life is good.

---

Thats about the only time that I feel alrite; while having sex.



Luckily I still have that going for me.

johnm214 said:

Aside from that ample portion of incredulity, you seem to be basing this on your claim that such biases as previously illustrated are affecting the scientific investigation and thereby rendering them incorrect or something. 

You haven't done anything more than declare this to be the case, however.  What can you back this up with?

---

Plenty of anecdotal evidence that suggests there needs to be a wider variety of research on therapies for degenerative diseases. There are plenty of people on the internet who have reversed diseases that were thought to be terminal by the health science establishment. I am one and I know of others personally who have as well. I also have a few studies that show the effectiveness of these therapies. However, they are never followed up by any heavily funded research.

All of these therapies cannot be patented and their rights cannot be owned because they are either natural substances and/or diet, exercise and lifestyle regimens. Do you think that is a coincidence????

I know it isn't personally, because I bothered to do research and attempt to find answers on my own and boy did it pay off.

What evidence do you want that this is happening in this industry. A guy in a black suit handing a breifcase full of money to a scientist doing research on the guy in the black suits drugs????



Finally, what evidence do you have that shows that this is not taking place????

Funny, you seem to be all skeptical and unbiased yet you do not research of your own and seem to have blind trust the mainstream health science industry. Thats not skepticism thats simply regurgitating your conditioning in this society and that sucks because there is alot to gain in thinking for yourself.

Quote:

What evidence do you want that this is happening in this industry. A guy in a black suit handing a breifcase full of money to a scientist doing research on the guy in the black suits drugs????

---

johnm214 said:

More appeals to incredulity, but nowhere do I see you backing up your central claim that this source of bias is affecting scientific investigations and rendering them invalid.

Your personal discussion of me and my knowledge is likewise irrelevant, as is your unsupported claim that you saved yourself, that others have, via therapies ignored by somebody, somewhere.

Quote:

What evidence do you want that this is happening in this industry. A guy in a black suit handing a breifcase full of money to a scientist doing research on the guy in the black suits drugs????

---

While I don't find your straw man arguments as humorous as you apparently do, I'm further confused at the relevance of this scenario at all.  I am clearly challenging your assertion that there is some problem with the science being produced.  That some guy gave a researcher money does not establish this conclusion to be true.

And lets stop with the irrelevant appeals and fallacies, k?

---

OrgoneConclusion said:

And The Conspiracy extends so far as to prevent people like Alpha from entering the field and pursuing his passion to help mankind.

---

Diploid said:

This oil companies are keeping the research down. Don't you people know anything?

---

They might, for they have a stake in it.

Pharamceuticals are largely derived from petro-chemicals.

Honestly though, you sound ridiculous and I think that a moderator should know better than to insult someone whom they haven't even bothered to respond to in a coherent manner.

OrgoneConclusion said:

And The Conspiracy extends so far as to prevent people like Alpha from entering the field and pursuing his passion to help mankind.

---

Wow this is ridiculous. How many times does it take to get it through your head;

EVEN IF I ENTERED THE FIELD I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO THE RESEARCH REQUIRED WITHOUT HAVING MILLIONS TO MY DISPOSAL.

Why is this so hard for you to understand???

Icelander said:

Mainstream science is his God.

---

I hate these arguments he brings....I don't think I will ever take him seriously again.

Not that he even cares.