[rantOn]In a science class you should teach science. You do not necessarily have to just teach the straight and narrow but subjects that are absolutely not science have no place in a science curriculum. For homeopathy, some of its tenets have been experimentally validated, some have not. The point is, most of its claims are testable, even if it may be difficult to do so. I see no problem with it being part of a science class.[/rantOff]

The issue I have with people in audio and other debates claiming science is on their side is that the way they present science is not science at all. Much of what I've seen people debate when they refer to science is "Because of XYZ you should take this as true without question." which is the opposite. The same goes for quite a bit of what I've seen taught as science, where people should be learning to learn and find out things for themselves, not have their brain filled with so-called facts (which change every few years). Very few people anywhere I've found, are interested in discovering what's true and what's not about their beliefs or thoughts, let alone making the effort to truly learn, about anything.

/end rant.

What, I wonder, prompted grawk to bump this thread?

... The same goes for quite a bit of what I've seen taught as science, where people should be learning to learn and find out things for themselves, not have their brain filled with so-called facts (which change every few years). ..

QFT

We did a fair amount of work investigating claims support for potential homeopathic products at my former job. While certainly lacking the types of gold standard studies we are accustomed to in OTC/pharma land, there were at least a few somewhat compelling studies. But as I recall, most suffered from typical flaws with respect to powering, outliers, etc. Still, it was enough for me not to think of it as hokum. But I remain a skeptic.

Still, it was enough for me not to think of it as hokum. But I remain a skeptic.

I want to know why I can't dilute beer down 10,000 times and use that to get super drunk.

Your point about getting around FDA by declaring products homeopathic while still containing actives that actually do something is well taken. I will neither confirm nor deny such activities at any former employer.

I also forgot about the shaking part.

none of it has been experimentally validated in a properly designed double blind test. it's complete and total hokum.

Based upon my ecotoxicology and personal experience we will merely have to agree to disagree on this one.

Spritzer posted:-

I can't imagine going back to unwieldy commercial cables. I can wrap my cables around two fingers and they weigh next to nothing.

.

I can wrap my cables around my neck - and as long as I don't pull on the ends, I'm OK.

Edited September 12, 201016 yr by wink
overcoming dyslexic fingersss

Spritzer posted:-

I can't imagine going back to unwieldy commercial cables. I can wrap my cables around two fingers and they weigh next to nothing. .

I can wrap my cables around my neck - and as long as I don't pull on the ends, I'm OK.

Uh...what?

Why the fuck are you bumping this old thread for a retarded comment like that?

Spritzer posted:-

I can't imagine going back to unwieldy commercial cables. I can wrap my cables around two fingers and they weigh next to nothing. .

I can wrap my cables around my neck - and as long as I don't pull on the ends, I'm OK.

Cool story, bro.

That statement normally annoys me, but it's just so apt this time around.

That statement normally annoys me, but it's just so apt this time around.

Me, too, but I couldn't resist here.