Archive for ‘homeopathy’

September 2, 2017

A Homeopathic Bracelet Gave an Infant Lead Poisoning, Says the CDC

Some homeopathic remedies are, at worst, useless. This one was much, much worse.

Source: A Homeopathic Bracelet Gave an Infant Lead Poisoning, Says the CDC

Advertisements
January 1, 2017

7 bad science and health ideas that should die with 2016 – Vox

Source: 7 bad science and health ideas that should die with 2016 – Vox

January 1, 2017

Fake treatments for real diseases: A review of allergy and asthma advertisements by naturopaths, chiropractors, homeopaths and acupuncturists – Science-Based Medicine

A majority of Canadian chiropractic, naturopathic, homeopathic and acupuncture clinics claim that they can diagnose or treat allergies, sensitivities and asthma.

Source: Fake treatments for real diseases: A review of allergy and asthma advertisements by naturopaths, chiropractors, homeopaths and acupuncturists – Science-Based Medicine

November 1, 2015

The Truth About Homeopathy – Consumer Reports

Sales of homeopathic medicines are surging, but some experts say there’s no evidence that these remedies work. Consumer Reports examines the evidence surrounding homeopathy.

Source: The Truth About Homeopathy – Consumer Reports

September 24, 2015

The Baloney Detection Kit: Carl Sagan’s Rules for Bullshit-Busting and Critical Thinking | Brain Pickings

Necessary cognitive fortification against propaganda, pseudoscience, and general falsehood.

Source: The Baloney Detection Kit: Carl Sagan’s Rules for Bullshit-Busting and Critical Thinking | Brain Pickings

June 29, 2013

I don’t give no respect

…But you must respect the beliefs of others, even if you disagree with them.

A common  statement proffered by religionistas and their apologists, often after you have revealed to  them how utterly ridiculous their beliefs are, or in order to avoid having to contend with logic and reason. It’s hogwash of course.

I will acknowledge the existence of their beliefs but I need not respect them, or treat their ideas respectfully.  The fact is that many of them believe in imprisoning, torturing,  even murdering people who have beliefs contrary to their own. Many of them believe that women have lesser rights and  can and should  be enslaved, raped,  and even killed at the whims of their male masters. Many of them believe them many of my friends  should lose their rights because of their race or their sexual orientation.  They want me to respect those beliefs. They want me to respect them,  supposedly adult humans who  still talk to their imaginary friends in the sky and believe in magic clothing.  They want me to respect their “faith”. Fuck that. I’ll acknowledge those beliefs, I may ignore those beliefs, but I’ll never “respect” their. That doesn’t mean that I won’t love  some of them or enjoy their company, but don’t tell me I have to be respectful when it comes to these beliefs.

 

 

July 4, 2012

God’s Belly Button | graygoosegosling

Great post. SOB

Jack had a ready answer, “God the father does not have a belly button. God the son had a belly button. God the Holy Spirit does not have a belly button. That’s one out of three for belly buttons.”

“Jack, who are you to claim you know about such things. What does your church say about it?”

“Hmmm, You know, I really don’t have any idea.”

I thought not. “What about DNA? Was Jesus haploid or diploid. Did he have half the number of Chromosomes or the same number as other humans?”

“Hmmm, I don’t know, but I do know he probably had genes from his mother.”

“Wait a minute Jack. It says in the bible that Jesus was descended from the house of David, so he also must have had genes from David’s line. Right?”

Jack looked confused.

God’s Belly Button | graygoosegosling.

June 6, 2012

Atheist Camel: Watching a Theist Explode: Witnessing the end of faith?

 

I’ve bee reading Atheist Camel for a while and I found this post particularly enlightening as I’ve had similar experiences with theists. Read and enjoy then  book mark Atheist Camel. SOB

Atheist Camel: Watching a Theist Explode: Witnessing the end of faith?.

May 13, 2012

10 Commandments of Logical Fallacies

The 10 Commandments of Logical Fallacies:

ladyatheist:

  1. Thou shall not attack the person’s character, but the argument. (Ad hominem)
  2. Thou shall not misrepresent or exaggerate a person’s argument in order to make them easier to attack. (Straw man fallacy)
  3. Thou shall not use small numbers to represent the whole. (Hasty generalization)
  4. Thou shall not argue thy position by assuming one of its premises is true. (Begging the question)
  5. Thou shall not claim that because something occurred before, it must be the cause. (Post Hoc/False cause)
  6. Thou shall not reduce the argument down to two possibilities. (False dichotomy)
  7. Thou shall not argue that because of our ignorance, claim must be true or false. (Ad ignorantum)
  8. Thou shall not lay the burden of proof onto him that is questioning the claim. (Burden of proof reversal)
  9. Thou shall not assume “this” follows “that” when it has no logical connection. (Non sequitur)
  10. Thou shall not claim that because a premise is popular, therefore it must be true. (Bandwagon fallacy)

Source: ladyatheist

April 15, 2012

The Myth of New Atheism

What is this New Atheism?  New atheism is a type of Atheism — if we can even call it that — that is criticized for being outspoken.  Furthermore, it is shunned upon by so called old Atheists for scientifically testing religion and for its anti-theistic undertone.  However, new Atheism is a concoction of haughty-minded Atheists who pride themselves in near total silence and read the philosophy of Baron d’Holbach, David Hume, Friedrich Nietzsche, John Stuart Mill, Thomas Paine, Mark Twain and Karl Marx; just to name a few.

Didn’t these men write publications?  Weren’t they as outspoken as possible when considering that some of them were at risk of persecution, censorship, or even execution?  Please, do tell, were they able to rely on science?  Definitely not in the manner in which we are able to rely on it.  The major scientific findings that undermine what was previously regarded as religious truths came after most of these men.  For instance, even after the publication of The Origin of Species, the evidence for Evolution wasn’t nearly as strong as it is today.  Therefore, the only real difference between some of today’s Atheists and Atheists in the past is a reliance on science.  However, one can argue that there’s no difference there either:

Science is the true theology.

Portrait of Thomas Paine by Matthew Pratt, 178...

Portrait of Thomas Paine by Matthew Pratt, 1785–1795 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Thomas Paine, quoted in Emerson, The Mind on Fire pg 153

There is scarcely any part of science, or anything in nature, which those imposters and blasphemers of science, called priests, as well Christians as Jews, have not, at some time or other, perverted, or sought to pervert to the purpose of superstition and falsehood.

Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence.

David Hume

How about anti-theism as defined by Oxford: opposition to the  belief in the existence of a God or as some interpret it, opposition to religion?

The most detestable wickedness, the most horrid cruelties, and the greatest miseries that have afflicted the human race have had their origin in this thing called revelation, or revealed religion.

Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo. Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower.

Karl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right

Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool.

Mark Twain

All religious notions are uniformly founded on authority; all the religions the world forbid examination, and are not disposed that men should reason upon them.

Baron d’Holbach

Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous.

David Hume, A Treatise Of Human Nature

Note: none of these quotes specifically mention a particular religion; thus, demonstrating anti-religious views.

A reliance on science existed prior to new Atheism.  Anti-theism also existed prior to new Atheism; let us ignore the fact that most old Atheists conveniently disregard the alternative definition of anti-theism:  disbelief in gods.  Thus, that implies that some old Atheists rely on science to some degree.  Moreover, some of them also subscribe to anti-theism.

I ask again, what exactly is the difference?  Let us forget the negative connotations of the label.  Let us forget the air of condescension implied by individuals who call fellow Atheists ‘new’ Atheists.  Thankfully, I live in a country that grants freedom of speech; therefore, I am outspoken.  However, let us not forget the many around the world who hide in anonymity.  Let us not forget them who are at risk of penalty and death.  They harbor many of our sentiments; some are fortunate enough to express their ideas, albeit anonymously.  All Atheists share a disbelief in gods.  Some choose to reserve their views either because of imagined pride or the risk of penalty and death.  The former has no reason to criticize the approach of another Atheist.  The latter has no choice but to hide in darkness.  Ultimately, there is no new Atheism.  Whoever thinks there’s a such term is severely misinformed, especially when considering that the ideas they subscribe to came about via the writings of authors who held similar views to today’s ‘new’ Atheists.

Freedom From Religion Foundation

Freedom From Religion Foundation (Photo credit: Wikipedia)