Marriage is under fire!!

[Rich Grise]

Kevin Aylward wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:

Yes, you claim that, and you claim that it's "scientific."

Yep. Until you present some credible evidence to the contary, science
says ignore it as if it don't exist, by and large.

Well, there's a difference between "ignore it as if it doesn't exist"
versus "proclaim that there is no such thing". And you still seem to
think I'm talking about Santa Claus.

That is, life is *essentially*, how we see it.

OK, here we differ. Life, as _you_ see it, is essentially how you see
it.

Nope as *we* all see it. Like, stroll on down to the bus stop, were you
accosted by any headless horsemen?

Here's your fundamental error.

According to the larger paradigm, each person's life is as he or her sees
it, no more and no less. Reality as it's currently manifest is based on
consensus.

The most extreme example of egregious misuse of this principle would
be something like "let's vote on what everybody's favorite color is."

And part of the misunderstanding of Reality is trying to apply local
observations as if they're a universal law.

If you think everybody sees Reality the way Kevin Aylward sees Reality,
or worse yet, _should_, then you probably need medical attention.

Hope This Helps!
Cheers!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

Kevin Aylward wrote:

I claim that your an ignorant twat.

Notwithstanding this doesn't make any grammatical sense, I'll
take it to mean that you couldn't care less if I ever respond
to you again.

OK.

 

[Rich Grise]

andy wrote:

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:58:56 -0500, John Fields wrote:

please show me the scientific evidence for this so-called humourous
enzyme.

Look to anatomy - why do you think the technical name for your

funnybone is "humerus"?

;-)

 

[Rich Grise]

Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:43:37 GMT, Rich Grise <null@example.net> wrote:

Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

Now you are backing off of what I've read from you, so that you make it
sound we
were talking about something else. That's not what you've been saying.
Deal with your earlier words, Rich, and don't retreat this way by trying
to summarize it all so reasonably.

OK, refresh my memory. There are what seems like about a half-dozen sub-
threads going on here, and I've evidently lost track.

You know yourself better than I, Rich. I'd rather not have to go digging
back
through and do the work, here. Suffice it that I was not talking about
acupuncture as you somehow seemed to imagine. If you want, go back
through the thread and try and justify your decision to discuss
'acupuncturists' when I had told you that you need to "do your work."

I did. Wanna see the thread? OK.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
andy <news4@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
Message-ID:
<pan.2004.08.16.19.56.04.297259@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
References:
<1c5afd3b.0407291231.6e515f8d@posting.google.com>
<gMlOc.9724$28.8104@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<f8b945bc.0408101715.2f9ac0f5@posting.google.com>
<0ynSc.115956$28.105087@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.11.18.19.39.745343@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<fvtSc.117115$28.65245@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.11.20.10.08.327131@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<3NESc.118017$28.71789@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.12.21.21.58.216879@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<BoZSc.122051$28.11586@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.13.18.33.20.234598@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<9tiTc.128038$28.15438@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.14.08.33.31.736882@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<cMoTc.130406$28.32832@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.15.21.58.54.177959@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<OTYTc.143822$28.141505@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.16.12.12.49.378922@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<WV6Uc.146057$28.24687@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
--
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:20:38 +0000, Kevin Aylward wrote:

andy wrote:
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 06:55:42 +0000, Kevin Aylward wrote:
....
One example is asian medical traditions like acupuncture and
shiatsu. I suffer from some mental health problems which are mostly
around excessive fearfulness/paranoia. In chinese medicine, the
emotion of fear is seen as related to the kidney meridian, which
runs from the big toe up the inside of your legs, and then up the
sides of the chest.

There is no logic to this idea. Fear is an emotion evolved to achieve a
certain function. i.e. make sure people take the appropriate action to
maximise their interests in the face of danger. The idea that this
"kidney meridian" has an effect on the brain is rather incredible. Sure,
maybe getting kicked in the kidneys might promote some response, but
there is no rational way a general relationship between fictitious
contours on the body and brain electrochemical responses can occur. It
just don't wash. Its simply stuff ignorant peasants dreamed up before
they had any idea of how the brain and body works.

which is exactly the sort of reply that shows you can't see what the fuck
I'm talking about.

It's just that most of the theoretical terms, and the signs and
symptoms connected with them, can't easily be translated into western
scientific terms.

I doubt it. If this er... "theory" made any real sense, it could be
expressed in a more normal concise language. Usually obtuse terms and
vague ideas are just a cover up for lack of any real substance. Its done
all the tome by palm readers, tea leaf readers, astrologists etc.

you're doing the exact thing I was talking about - rubbishing chinese
medicine because its ideas are expressed in a language that you can't
translate into western terms and go - ok I see how that works.
--------------------------------------
From:
"Kevin Aylward" <salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk>
References:
<1c5afd3b.0407291231.6e515f8d@posting.google.com>   <f8b945bc.0408101715.2f9ac0f5@posting.google.com> <0ynSc.115956$28.105087@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk> <pan.2004.08.11.18.19.39.745343@earthsong.free-online.co.uk> <fvtSc.117115$28.65245@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk> <pan.2004.08.11.20.10.08.327131@earthsong.free-online.co.uk> <3NESc.118017$28.71789@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk> <pan.2004.08.12.21.21.58.216879@earthsong.free-online.co.uk> <BoZSc.122051$28.11586@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk> <pan.2004.08.13.18.33.20.234598@earthsong.free-online.co.uk> <9tiTc.128038$28.15438@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk> <pan.2004.08.14.08.33.31.736882@earthsong.free-online.co.uk> <cMoTc.130406$28.32832@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk> <pan.2004.08.15.21.58.54.177959@earthsong.free-online.co.uk> <OTYTc.143822$28.141505@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk> <pan.2004.08.16.12.12.49.378922@earthsong.free-online.co.uk> <WV6Uc.146057$28.24687@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk> <pan.2004.08.16.19.56.04.297259@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
Message-ID:
<JQhUc.149160$28.99821@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
Date:
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 06:46:01 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Date:
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 07:46:01 BST
Xref:
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 02:46:02 EDT (nwrddc02.gnilink.net)
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
--
andy wrote:

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:20:38 +0000, Kevin Aylward wrote:

andy wrote:
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 06:55:42 +0000, Kevin Aylward wrote:

....
simply stuff ignorant peasants dreamed up before they had any idea
of how the brain and body works.

which is exactly the sort of reply that shows you can't see what the
fuck I'm talking about.

Look, I am well aware of the principles that are referring to. I have
considered it and rejected it in this instance.
....

I doubt it. If this er... "theory" made any real sense, it could be
expressed in a more normal concise language. Usually obtuse terms and
vague ideas are just a cover up for lack of any real substance. Its
done all the tome by palm readers, tea leaf readers, astrologists
etc.

you're doing the exact thing I was talking about - rubbishing chinese
medicine because its ideas are expressed in a language that you can't
translate into western terms and go - ok I see how that works.

I don't accept it as I se no credible scientific evidence that it
actually works. Like, controlled independent double-blind experiments
using 10000's of people, by several independent qualified research
groups.

Kevin Aylward
-=------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
Rich Grise <null@example.net>
References:
<1c5afd3b.0407291231.6e515f8d@posting.google.com>
<pan.2004.08.11.18.19.39.745343@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<fvtSc.117115$28.65245@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.11.20.10.08.327131@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<3NESc.118017$28.71789@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.12.21.21.58.216879@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<BoZSc.122051$28.11586@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.13.18.33.20.234598@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<9tiTc.128038$28.15438@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.14.08.33.31.736882@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<cMoTc.130406$28.32832@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.15.21.58.54.177959@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<OTYTc.143822$28.141505@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.16.12.12.49.378922@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<WV6Uc.146057$28.24687@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.16.19.56.04.297259@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<JQhUc.149160$28.99821@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
Message-ID:
<VBjUc.26810$SC1.16634@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>
Date:
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 08:46:45 GMT
X-Received-Date:
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:46:43 EDT (nwrddc02.gnilink.net)
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
--
Kevin Aylward wrote:

andy wrote:

you're doing the exact thing I was talking about - rubbishing chinese
medicine because its ideas are expressed in a language that you can't
translate into western terms and go - ok I see how that works.

I don't accept it as I se no credible scientific evidence that it
actually works. Like, controlled independent double-blind experiments
using 10000's of people, by several independent qualified research
groups.

That's because nobody wants to invest millions of dollars in researching
something that could break their dogma.

Cheers!
Rich
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan@easystreet.com>
Message-ID:
<kb14i0t5bqlgq4ha43p142hbm5r2al8dle@4ax.com>
References:
<cMoTc.130406$28.32832@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.15.21.58.54.177959@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<OTYTc.143822$28.141505@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.16.12.12.49.378922@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<WV6Uc.146057$28.24687@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<pan.2004.08.16.19.56.04.297259@earthsong.free-online.co.uk>
<JQhUc.149160$28.99821@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
<VBjUc.26810$SC1.16634@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>
Date:
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:57:33 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Date:
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 09:57:33 EDT
X-Received-Date:
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 09:57:33 EDT (nwrddc02.gnilink.net)
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
--
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 08:46:45 GMT, Rich Grise <null@example.net> wrote:

Kevin Aylward wrote:

andy wrote:

you're doing the exact thing I was talking about - rubbishing chinese
medicine because its ideas are expressed in a language that you can't
translate into western terms and go - ok I see how that works.

I don't accept it as I se no credible scientific evidence that it
actually works. Like, controlled independent double-blind experiments
using 10000's of people, by several independent qualified research
groups.

That's because nobody wants to invest millions of dollars in researching
something that could break their dogma.

Actually, it's because no one should spend their time and money on your
claims.  Try doing your own diligence and spending your own time doing the hard
work to demonstrate a case.

Some years ago, I spoke with an engineer who really thought he had a hot
project
worth investing
in.  He had detailed diagrams, specifications, specific parts,
and he had tried hard to shop them around to all the businesses who might be
interested as well as others, without any
luck.  He complained to me that no one
seemed to see what he saw in his product idea and he felt everything was
hopeless.

I surprised him a little by asking, "Do you own a
home?  Still own a car?  Why
should anyone else believe in your idea if you don't,
yourself?  If you aren't
willing to risk your own capital on your idea, why should you expect others
to
do so?"

That's why nobody wants to invest millions in researching your something.
Until you've shown that you are willing to risk your own sorry hide in doing
the
hard work to make a clear, objective case, no one should bother listening to
you, Rich.  That silly dogma trip you are spouting is nothing more than your
imagination.

Don't expect any scientists to do your work for you, when you yourself
cannot
be bothered.

Good day, Rich.

-------------------------------------
Good-bye.
Rich

 

[Jonathan Kirwan]

That's just a bunch of grabs of Kevin and you talking, with a bit of me in
there. I wasn't asking for a core dump, Rich. So where in all that, Rich, did
**I** bring up acupuncturists?

Please point it out.

Good day,
Jon

 

[Kevin Aylward]

Rich Grise wrote:

Kevin Aylward wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:

Yes, you claim that, and you claim that it's "scientific."

Yep. Until you present some credible evidence to the contary, science
says ignore it as if it don't exist, by and large.

Well, there's a difference between "ignore it as if it doesn't exist"
versus "proclaim that there is no such thing". And you still seem to
think I'm talking about Santa Claus.

You are.

That is, life is *essentially*, how we see it.

OK, here we differ. Life, as _you_ see it, is essentially how you
see it.

Nope as *we* all see it. Like, stroll on down to the bus stop, were
you accosted by any headless horsemen?

Here's your fundamental error.

Ahmmm....

According to the larger paradigm, each person's life is as he or her
sees it, no more and no less. Reality as it's currently manifest is
based on consensus.

In a limited sense, but this does not mean there is not an objective
reality, or that all views of reality are correct. Some are clearly
wrong.

The most extreme example of egregious misuse of this principle would
be something like "let's vote on what everybody's favorite color is."

And part of the misunderstanding of Reality is trying to apply local
observations as if they're a universal law.

However, there does appear to be universal laws that apply everywhere.
The fact that you exist is a strong indication of this.

If you think everybody sees Reality the way Kevin Aylward sees
Reality,

Of course I dont.

Kevin Aylward
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

 

[Rich Grise]

Kevin Aylward wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:

And part of the misunderstanding of Reality is trying to apply local
observations as if they're a universal law.

However, there does appear to be universal laws that apply everywhere.
The fact that you exist is a strong indication of this.

Exactly. There do appear to be universal laws that apply everywhere.
But just because it appears that way to you doesn't mean:
A) it appears that way everywhere
B) that your law _should_ apply universally, or
C) that you really have any idea what exactly these "universal laws"
_are_.

Kevin, I could draw a Venn diagram of you.

Right next to Santa Claus.

Sheesh.
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

That's just a bunch of grabs of Kevin and you talking, with a bit of me in
there. I wasn't asking for a core dump, Rich. So where in all that,
Rich, did **I** bring up acupuncturists?

Please point it out.

You didn't. The thread was about acupuncture, and Kevin Aylward and andy
were fighting about whether it's "scientific" or not, Someone demanded
double-blind studies, and that they'd demand research, putting all the
ideas inside preconceived boxes, and that sort of thing, and I remarked
that while the establishment has no interest in spending squillions of
dollars to prove that everything they know is wrong, but the acupuncturists
have no interest in proving that it works, to people who would dismiss
them anyway.

Then you chimed in with some degree of attitude, quite off from some
tangent, as far as I could tell.

So, there's the thread to review, if you feel like apologizing for
being such a twit.

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Kevin Aylward]

Rich Grise wrote:

Kevin Aylward wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:

And part of the misunderstanding of Reality is trying to apply local
observations as if they're a universal law.

However, there does appear to be universal laws that apply
everywhere. The fact that you exist is a strong indication of this.

Exactly. There do appear to be universal laws that apply everywhere.
But just because it appears that way to you doesn't mean:
A) it appears that way everywhere

Er.. then its not a universal law. dah...

B) that your law _should_ apply universally, or

Er.. then its not a universal law. dah...

C) that you really have any idea what exactly these "universal laws"
_are_.

Oh dear... look dude I am way, way ahead of you. You keep making these
daft assumptions that we are all as ignorant as you. Jon has already
given you the gist of what science is all about. e.g. science is about
generating arbitrary axioms and deducing results from those axioms.

For example, consider special relativity (SR). It is based on the
assumptions of invariant speed of light, and the notion that it is
impossible to detect absolute uniform motion. This leads to some
equations, i.e. The Lorentz Equations. This equations work. However, an
entirely different set of axioms can also be made, that is, the speed of
light is constant only with respect to an aether reference frame, but
due to interactions with this aether is only apparently constant, that
is, measurement rods contract when moving in the aether. The resulting
equations are also the Lorentz Equations. This is called the Lorentz
Ether Theory (LET). That is, it is impossible in principle to know which
one is "correct". The General Theory has a similar issue. Either space
is really curved, or the exchange force mediated by gravitons gives the
illusion of curved space. Either way, the equations are identical.

So we have situations where the equations appear to be universal, but
the physics behind them is open to philosophical debate.

Kevin Aylward
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

 

[Jonathan Kirwan]

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 06:57:02 GMT, Rich Grise <null@example.net> wrote:

So, there's the thread to review, if you feel like apologizing for
being such a twit.

Only if you point out what you think was a transgression to you (only you can
say what this may be) and I agree with you. You must feel there is something.
I don't, at this point.

Jon

 

[andy]

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 02:00:59 +0000, Rich Grise wrote:

andy wrote:

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:58:56 -0500, John Fields wrote:

please show me the scientific evidence for this so-called humourous
enzyme.

Look to anatomy - why do you think the technical name for your
funnybone is "humerus"?

;-)

So the humourous enzyme is secreted from nodules in the arm bone that's
connected to the shoulder bone? This is all very new to me, but I am
taking careful notes, so I hope I'll pass the exam if I try hard.

--
http://www.niftybits.ukfsn.org/

remove 'n-u-l-l' to email me. html mail or attachments will go in the spam
bin unless notified with

 or [attachment] in the subject line.

 

[John Fields]

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 16:16:26 +0100, andy
<news4@earthsong.free-online.co.uk> wrote:

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 02:00:59 +0000, Rich Grise wrote:

andy wrote:

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:58:56 -0500, John Fields wrote:

please show me the scientific evidence for this so-called humourous
enzyme.

Look to anatomy - why do you think the technical name for your
funnybone is "humerus"?

;-)

So the humourous enzyme is secreted from nodules in the arm bone that's
connected to the shoulder bone?

---
Well, almost... You just didn't go far enough.

"Arm bone connected to the shoulder bone,
Shoulder bone connected to the back bone,
Back bone connected to the neck bone,
Neck bone connected to the head bone,
Now hear the word of the Lord"

The "hear the word of the Lord" part is figurative and has to do with
perception, that perception being recognized by modern science as
happening inside the head bone, where the humorous enzyme is created
and liberated (much like endorphans are) in reponse to various
stimuli.
---

This is all very new to me, but I am
taking careful notes, so I hope I'll pass the exam if I try hard.

---
Eager grasshopper has learned humility... Good!

--
John Fields