Stop oppressing him with your science.
He already said he's using an unscientific standard of evidence.
Y'know? The one with the trippy higher maths?
I'd be 100% sure that he is a troll if I didn't know that homeopathy survives off of fuckers just like this.
no, here's the deal
i made no claim of the sort you impute to me (if you think i did, demonstrate where, please)
i did witness people getting better
i have no compulsive need for an explanation in the manner that you appear to do
re: "I posted a study which showed that Homeopathy does jack shit."
you posted a newspaper article about a parliamentary committee's report, which contains some vague references to an ultimately meager set of experiments purporting to show that homeopathy is not effective, but which are totally ill-designed and ill-suited for the purpose
i agree with you, the majority of what gets done under the label of 'homeopathy' is not homeopathy at its best, and a good part of it is indistinguishable from quackery
but i don't think statistical significance is the only kind of significance, and, anyway, i believe a statistically significant minority practice the homeopathic way of life to some significant extent at least
yes, actually, i do think the woo is the same woo that has been called the tao or even the chao, and by a number of other names
"So would it be unreasonable to say that whenever this woo does work it is not because of the methods of homeopathy but is rather a complete fluke? Now If I offered a cancer treatment where I cut you open and just started tearing things out because my dowsing rob told me to, most people aren't going to get much out of that. Occasionally however I'm going to hit the mark and tear the cancer out."
you are not going to like it, but the best i have to say to that is that from what i have seen, homeopathy's results are just way to impressive to be a fluke
now if you are willing to be genuinely open and not spiteful because you think you already know the answer, and if you are willing to accept that i am just being plain honest with you without reserve, i will relate some stories
"So wouldn't you be better off isolating and studying this great and powerful woo so as to develop more effective methods of tapping in to it, instead of defending a bunch of idiots who think water has memory?"
this is the scientific-hegemonising-taker mindset, yes
understand it (which usually pretty much equals figure out a way to dominate it, make it do what you want it to, and to kill it)
but what if this woo takes exception to being so treated, as it appears to?
also, they are not a bunch of idiots, and, believe me, not particularly interested in furnishing the ontological explanation for why the stuff they do works for them
seriously, i would be very happy to see homeopathy relegated to the ranks of tarot, i ching, astrology
provided it was left alone
gullible people will be exploited, they have been and are being exploited using diverse methods, including facts manufactured in the fact-ories of science
but if you, champion of science, object to the pure white labcoat being thus sullied, then by all means, feel free to be hypocritical and let us declare that homeopathy is a church (after all, there is already a tradition of people expecting to be and being healed in churches)
i think your view about why people attack homeopathy is incorrect
stealing money from sick people would bother me (it does in the health service), but i don't think the homeopaths are doing that
they believe in and base a significant part of their professional lives on a system of thought that is scientifically not supported, though i think they could be, using tests of a very different sort
but i thought that was allowed
freedom of conscience, a human right, or something?