Many of you might be familiar with this well of stupidity and misinformation that is the whale.to website. It is a centre for propagation of bad science and misleading information that have probably led a number of people into rejecting vaccination thus resulting in the recent outbreaks in the UK and US. So let’s expose some of their ludicrous ideas!
Homeopathy: no science behind it, no sense behind it, no conclusive reports, goes against proven science and medicine. Yet people still believe in it and still waste money on it…
Damn them I say! They are exerting their influence in all directions in an effort to belittle our good religion and promote their immoral, Nazi-friendly, totally improbable, Darwinian views!
Most charlatans, while typically saying absurd things like: “science cannot test my [woo woo]”, sometimes they will simply misuse science to try to add credibility to their woo woo. This can come either out of pure ignorance (with a hint of stupidity) or purposely in a propagandist style. Rebutting their claims is typically quite easy due to the vast amounts of stupidity they contain.
A favorite methodology amongst cranks and woo-meisters is to take legitimate scientific research, and distort or misrepresent its findings until they suit the crank’s presumptions and belief system. And since we all know that Homeopathy is the biggest branch of woo, let’s see how they torture scientific evidence using a huge manufacturer as a use case: Boiron.
Everyone has a beef. Everyone has a problem with something or someone. Some beefs are normal, or rational, like being annoyed when someone tests your resolve to situations evolving near the border of acceptable social behaviour (the common “I – eat – a – smelly – tuna – sandwich – in – your – face – while – packed – like – sardines – in – the – morning – rush – hour – tube” situation for example). But some beefs are baseless and irrational. Lets have a look at those beefs and their proponent characteristics -because they make for funnier writing!
Does morality come from God? Instead of defending an evolutionary approach to morals (where others have done a pretty good job), I would like to take on a different approach and discuss how God and/or religion could never provide us with the moral guidelines we currently have -and which are of course continuously evolving.
Following Adobe’s policies and recommendations, everyday language would become a bit less comprehensive, and sometimes funnily unbearable! Read on for examples and to contribute your own.
This is a handful checklist/guide on how to miss your flight (100% guaranteed)
Yes, this is the World Homeopathy Awareness Week, 10-16 April 2008. So please raise your awareness on homeopathy.
My reply to an arrogant comment by a Christian vividly illustrates my split personality: my skeptical and rational self, versus my religious self (I am a Pastafarian after all). Which one will prevail?