Author
|
Topic: Scams and Flimflams
|
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490
|
posted 13 September 2004 01:00 PM
A guy I know on IRC pasted me the URL to this website which purports to make "clustered water" in its water purifier. Now as anybody with even high school chemistry knows, the molecular structures they use to claim that their "special water" is a hexagonal polymer, even in the liquid state, are total bunk.This website debunks the scams, but I was just amazed at the extent to which con artists and flimflammers can sucker people with pseudoscientific garbage, camouflaged in the big words commonly used in chemistry and physics. Even reading Scam School left me relatively nonplussed at the degree of underhandedness and trickery that's out there, but somehow reading this clustered water thing just strained the limits of my belief in the credulity of people who should know better. My thoughts were, "How can people believe this crap? Haven't we all seen the formula for water a hundred times or more in our lives?" Comments? Thoughts? [ 13 September 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Piatkowski
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1299
|
posted 13 September 2004 02:29 PM
From the site quote: It ain't rocket surgery...
Do the authors of this site do this sort of extensive product testing for every piece of spam that they receive? [ 13 September 2004: Message edited by: Scott Piatkowski ]
From: Kitchener-Waterloo | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214
|
posted 19 September 2004 12:45 PM
Uninterestingly enough, from time to time I get to see guys at work wearing magnetic bracelets and necklasses for pain. I've seen a few of those "Q ray" "Ionized" bracelets on people around town, too. It's all quackery, of course. Another guy tried to get me to buy a "laundry puck" one time. It was supposed to clean clothes like soap, but some preliminary questions didn't satisfy me that it would be efficatious. It was later removed from the market and the manufacturer was charged with fraud. All these scams wouldn't work so well if we demanded some basic teaching of sceptical thinking in our schools.
From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
steffie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3826
|
posted 20 September 2004 09:48 AM
quote: Originally posted by Jingles: Chiropractors.Why otherwise intelligent people think that Chiropractic is an legitimate medical practice baffles me. Why not just go to an Exorcist? "Say boss, I gotta leave early Friday. I have an appointment with my Exoricist. Yeah, my back daemons' have been angry since I helped my buddy move last week."
I go to a chiropractor and find her quite helpful.
From: What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow / Out of this stony rubbish? | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322
|
posted 20 September 2004 05:19 PM
Say you have a broken foot. You go to a doctor. Doctor sets foot. Foot heals. Doctor takes off cast. You're happy, she's happy. Now you have a sore back. You go to a Chiropractor. Chiropractor does a voodoo dance. Back seems to feel a bit better. Chiropractor cashes your cheque and says "see you next week, chump... I mean champ". You limp home. Your unhappy, he's very happy. Why is it that you need to continue to see a Chiropractor? Either they are not doing any good, or are actually doing harm. I think one would be better off going to a masseuse like "Sinderella's Massage". You'd certainly feel much better, and relaxed, and satisfied after, and it would probably be cheaper for the health plan.
From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914
|
posted 20 September 2004 06:32 PM
quote: Originally posted by DrConway: Between the New Agers and the religious fundamentalists, basic scientific thinking is taking a beating in society and the school system. If people stopped to realize that reproducible results under controlled conditions, to see what parameter or parameters govern the circumstances, are the only reliable indicator of whether or not various phenomena claimed to exist actually do exist, I think we'd see a lot less flimflammery about magnets realigning peoples' chakras or whatever.
Be careful how you label "New Agers". Yes, there are many fools and charlatans out there who deny the usefulness of scientific method. My least favorite are various feminist "Gaians" or "Wiccans" who claim that the methods of science are nothing but a testorone-induced sham to be rejected in favour of an "intuitionism" (for lack of a better word) that is nothing more than seizing on the loudest inner rumbling, regardless of it's source (stomach, brain, or libido) and calling this 'truth'... All that aside, there are more principled investigators of human 'spiritualism' who openly apply the scientific method; insist on it, in fact. The two men probably most responsible for launching the 'New Age' movement in Europe and North America, G.I. Gurdjieff and Aleister Crowley, both recommended applying nothing but the most stringent scientific method and empiricism as the 'true' method of self-discovery and self-realisation. According to Crowley, for instance, scientific method is nothing more than formalised common sense.
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914
|
posted 20 September 2004 08:12 PM
quote: Originally posted by Contrarian:
Principled? Crowley? Drug-addict, animal torturer, 'sex-fiend' and all-round nasty piece of work?
Perhaps his greatest vice was cultivating the appearance of infamy... You don't really believe everything you read, do you?
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Agent 204
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4668
|
posted 21 September 2004 08:41 AM
quote: Originally posted by bittersweet: On the other hand, the public is right to doubt scientific claims. Scientists are not always reliable because they may have undisclosed links to corporations like, say, Monsanto. Their lab results are used to make all sorts of solid-sounding, but ultimately bogus claims.
Yes, science is corruptible. The things being discussed above, though, are worse, because they're not reliable even if they're not being corrupted. quote: Originally posted by Melsky: A friend of mine swears by coffee enemas. They are supposed to detox your liver. The same friend also thinks that rubbing alcohol causes cancer and that contrails from planes contain mind-control agents from the US government.
With friends like that, who needs enemas?
From: home of the Guess Who | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|