A revolution in thought

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Yeah, where are they? If these treatments work really well why aren't there more success stories being shared?

There are success stories LadyShea, plenty, but if you follow the money there isn't a lot to be made from natural products. Pharmaceutical companies have a lot of money invested in research and development, which is why we get bombarded with advertisements for their drugs.

You said "follow the money" but there isn't the kind of money in the alternative world that can be found in pharmaceuticals that are patented, and surgerical procedures.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

The Burzynski clinic charges in the 10's of thousands. What are you talking about?

I don't know what his story is. I wonder how much profit he is actually making, or is he using the money to keep his clinic running? I am not here to defend Burzynski, and I'm not here to condemn the medical establishment. Personally though, I would rather take something natural than to take a pharmaceutical, if at all possible, because there is much less chance of side effects. I didn't think this article written by Mike Adams was going to cause such a stir and cause us to be sidetracked once again. Anyway, this thread is beginning to get to me and I don't think I can hold out much longer.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

What are you babbling about great honor and snobbery? I use my skepticism to help me navigate life...because it is the best method I have found of doing so.

I think Lessans displayed fallacious reasoning...I demonstrated exactly what I thought was fallacious and why I thought so. You can refute it anytime you wish.

What? Important to whom?

I am important to myself in determining what I think is true.

Yes, I have even stated multiple times that everything I've claimed is my opinion. What else would I express other than my thoughts and opinions?

I could be wrong about lots of things and am open to correcting my understanding of those things.

I am not speaking for anyone but myself

If you had put the phrase "is it possible" before your sentences, I would have been able to tolerate your self-righteousness, but instead you accused him of making assertions and all kinds of things he didn't do. I call that intellectual snobbery. I'm glad you admit that you could be wrong about lots of things and that you're open to correcting your understanding of those things. I only wish you had kept that promise to yourself in this thread, but you haven't. You still don't understand why this work is not a modal fallacy or a meaningless tautology, and at this point it makes no difference to me what you believe.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

There are success stories LadyShea, plenty, but if you follow the money there isn't a lot to be made from natural products. Pharmaceutical companies have a lot of money invested in research and development, which is why we get bombarded with advertisements for their drugs.

That stops people telling their success stories to the media?

I don't know what his story is. I wonder how much profit he is actually making, or is he using the money to keep his clinic running? I am not here to defend Burzynski, and I'm not here to condemn the medical establishment. Personally though, I would rather take something natural than to take a pharmaceutical, if at all possible, because there is much less chance of side effects. .

Alternative medicine is a 34 billion dollar a year industry. More money is spent out of pocket on alternative therapies than on traditional medicine. There is plenty of money there. Quit being so gullible.

As for surgical money, there is much more to be made doing breast augmentations than in mastectomies, and no need to discount costs due to negotiated insurance pricing.

I didn't think this article written by Mike Adams was going to cause such a stir and cause us to be sidetracked once again.

It was pretty predictable considering how much we've discussed quackery and your faith in alternative practitioners.

Anyway, this thread is beginning to get to me and I don't think I can hold out much longer

So you keep saying.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You still don't understand why this work is not a modal fallacy or a meaningless tautology, and at this point it makes no difference to me what you believe.

Another lie, if it really didn't make any difference, you wouldn't respond to LadyShea's posts.

Oh, and the work is both a 'Modal Fallacy' and a 'Meaningless Tautology', and I understand it perfectly, and that worries me.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Anyway, this thread is beginning to get to me and I don't think I can hold out much longer.

We can only hope.

[LadyShea]

If you had put the phrase "is it possible" before your sentences, I would have been able to tolerate your self-righteousness, but instead you accused him of making assertions and all kinds of things he didn't do.

He should have refrained from labeling his ideas "undeniable" and he should have supported his claims with ample evidence if he didn't want to be charged with assertion.

You still don't understand why this work is not a modal fallacy or a meaningless tautology

Feel free to refute the demonstrations of both modal fallacy and tautology. Unless you can do so, the charges stand

at this point it makes no difference to me what you believe.

Okay

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

That stops people telling their success stories to the media?

Alternative medicine is a 34 billion dollar a year industry. More money is spent out of pocket on alternative therapies than on traditional medicine. There is plenty of money there. Quit being so gullible.

Yes, it's becoming more lucrative as these therapies and natural products get accepted as safe and effective options. The problem is that when researchers are creating a pharmaceutical drug which alters the chemical structure and therefore makes it patentable, it takes a long time to see what the side effects are once it's on the market. Even if people get injured or die as a direct cause, it isn't that easy to get the drug off the market, as there is a lot of money tied up in it. The well-being of individuals is not always first and foremost on an investor's mind, it seems.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

As for surgical money, there is much more to be made doing breast augmentations than in mastectomies, and no need to discount costs due to negotiated insurance pricing.

True, but mastectomies can bring in another stream of income. Multiple streams of income are more lucrative than one or two. Again, I am not trying to turn these people into bad guys (I'm sure they got into the field with the intention to help people), but you must consider that the medical field is a business, just like any other business, and profit is paramount.

I didn't think this article written by Mike Adams was going to cause such a stir and cause us to be sidetracked once again.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

It was pretty predictable considering how much we've discussed quackery and your faith in alternative practitioners.

It's not that I have faith in alternative practitioners across the board. I, like you, want to see results. But I do like their basic philosophy which is to treat the whole person and strive for optimal wellness, not just disease prevention. Of course, you don't go to a alternative practitioner when you're bleeding to death. You go to the ER. But when you have a long term health problem, to me it's better to try to find the root of the problem than to cover it up with a pill (which has it's place sometimes), which may temporarily relieve symtoms but doesn't solve the problem longterm. I'm not telling anyone what to do. Everyone is entitled to make their own choices.

Anyway, this thread is beginning to get to me and I don't think I can hold out much longer

So you keep saying.

It's unfortunate but the lack of progress in here along with the constant tomato throwing has really gotten to me.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

He should have refrained from labeling his ideas "undeniable" and he should have supported his claims with ample evidence if he didn't want to be charged with assertion.

But they are undeniable LadyShea, and if this knowledge gets confirmed, you will understand why he said the word undeniable. It is an appropriate word whether you see it or not. That's what I mean when you challenge him. You wouldn't challenge Einstein because you're not on the same level as him. But you feel that you can challenge Lessans because you really don't know the depth of his intellect. When he becomes well known for the discovery he made, you will know exactly what I'm talking about, and why it was so hard for me.

You still don't understand why this work is not a modal fallacy or a meaningless tautology

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Feel free to refute the demonstrations of both modal fallacy and tautology. Unless you can do so, the charges stand

Okay

This is the intellectual snobbery I'm talking about. You call it an open mind that wants to learn, and I see someone completely different. Someone who makes charges that are false before she knows herself what is true and what isn't. I have no desire to talk to someone when I am constantly feeling defensive. I can't work this way anymore in an environment where I feel this way. Your attacks also prevent you from grasping his reasoning. It actually blocks you. That's why I was able to understand these principles. I didn't have any agendas and I was able to see what he was talking about. If I hadn't, do you actually think I would be working this hard just because he was my father? Uh uh. No way in the world, which is why I resent people saying this. All the attack and lies about me and him are astounding, and so completely wrong.

[Spacemonkey]

Is this helping you, Peacegirl? Are you getting anything at all out of this charade?

[peacegirl]

Intermission: Here's another article about the pros and cons of what Jolie did. This is just another opinion, so don't shoot me.

Was Angelina Jolie ‘Medically Hexed?’ | Care2 Healthy Living

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Intermission: Here's another article about the pros and cons of what Jolie did. This is just another opinion, so don't shoot me.

Was Angelina Jolie ‘Medically Hexed?’ | Care2 Healthy Living

Why are you putting these out there if you don't want to discuss it? This article is very problematic from a criticial thinking POV

They even state flat out that they make a slippery slope argument, which is fallacious in this context BTW

The Slippery Slope of Elective Surgery

Once we start surgically removing healthy body parts, it’s a slippery slope. Should we cut out appendixes and gallbladders in babies, since appendicitis and gallbladder disease can kill you? Should we cut out uteri and ovaries after childbearing, since all they’re doing is waiting to get cancer? Should we cut off all moles because some could become melanomas?

Read more: Was Angelina Jolie ‘Medically Hexed?’ | Care2 Healthy Living

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

But they are undeniable LadyShea, and if this knowledge gets confirmed, you will understand why he said the word undeniable. It is an appropriate word whether you see it or not. That's what I mean when you challenge him.

I don't see any reason to believe his ideas are undeniable nor any reason to think confirmation is forthcoming. Of course I challenge that as an unsupported assertion. It remains unconfirmed and unsupported yet is labeled undeniable. That is a definitive example of assertion!

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You wouldn't challenge Einstein because you're not on the same level as him.

If Einstein wrote a book where he had labeled his ideas undeniable while failing to provide any mathematical or scientific support for them, and his daughter was going around the Internet saying "look here at this undeniable knowledge!", yes I would challenge that.

Einstein didn't work that way though, and had he worked that way nobody would have ever cared what he had to say...he would have been dismissed as a crackpot.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

But you feel that you can challenge Lessans because you really don't know the depth of his intellect.

He failed to demonstrate any unusual depth of intellect in his writing.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

When he becomes well known for the discovery he made, you will know exactly what I'm talking about, and why it was so hard for me.

If he becomes well known, it will be as the eccentric guy with some crackpot ideas with the very tenacious daughter. I know it's hard for you to accept that, because of your deep faith that he had solved the world problems and your frustration that nobody shares your faith.

This is the intellectual snobbery I'm talking about.

And this is the weaseling I am talking about. You have the opportunity to refute the charges and instead resort to name calling.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You call it an open mind that wants to learn, and I see someone completely different. Someone who makes charges that are false before she knows herself what is true and what isn't.

Start refuting the charges! The demonstrations of both modal fallacy and tautology were detailed , tear them apart logically. That's how critical thinking works.

All this whining is just a weasel way to distract me. Do you think if you can piss me off or hurt me I will change my mind? What exactly do you hope to achieve with this frequent analysis of my motives and mindset?

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I have no desire to talk to someone when I am constantly feeling defensive. I can't work this way anymore in an environment where I feel this way.

So you keep saying.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Your attacks also prevent you from grasping his reasoning. It actually blocks you.

His reasoning is poor. I have shown you how it is poor. If you can demonstrate I am wrong then start doing so!

What's stopping you from stomping my guts debate wise with your superior arguments?

Originally Posted by peacegirl

That's why I was able to understand these principles. I didn't have any agendas and I was able to see what he was talking about.

No agenda? LOL! You had an agenda to support and believe in your father whom you loved very much. That's wonderful, but it doesn't have anything to do with the veracity of his ideas.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

If I hadn't, do you actually think I would be working this hard just because he was my father?

I think you wholeheartedly believe your father was correct, but I don't think you are able to objectively examine his work or the criticisms of others due to his being your father.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

...you must consider that the medical field is a business, just like any other business, and profit is paramount.

Do you think that this does not apply to alternative medicine as well?

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

But they are undeniable LadyShea, and if this knowledge gets confirmed, you will understand why he said the word undeniable. It is an appropriate word whether you see it or not.

The fact that people who have read the book are not convinced of the truth of its claims is prima facia evidence that those claims are not undeniable. This is undeniably the case.

[Cynthia of Syracuse]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

That's true, and I'm not condoning quack therapies either. For those therapies that may have value in the alternative world, there's one major difference between those therapies and those offered in the medical establishment. It's very rare to see a serious side effect from taking a supplement or from receiving a non-invasive treatment. It is not so rare that someone may get a serious side effect from a pharmaceutical given by a trusted medical staff, or from surgery where there is always the potential for unexpected complications. Remember the Hippocratic oath which says: First do no harm.

What's the Harm?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Is this helping you, Peacegirl? Are you getting anything at all out of this charade?

This is not a charade and it never was.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Do you think that this does not apply to alternative medicine as well?

It is a business as well; there's only one major difference which I mentioned; patented drugs have to make money, lots and lots of it in order to make a profit. That means that even when a drug is known to have serious side effects, it is not always mentioned in the literature. That's scary. And alternative practices don't usually involve invasive therapies, which may or may not be necessary. We've seen this with C-sections that are much more profitable than vaginal, and why they have skyrocketed. I'm not the only one that sees this.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

The fact that people who have read the book are not convinced of the truth of its claims is prima facia evidence that those claims are not undeniable. This is undeniably the case.

And you think this is productive Angakuk? Paaleeeassseeee give me a break.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Do you think that this does not apply to alternative medicine as well?

I believe it also applies to people who write, compile, and publish books. So now we know why Peacegirl is here.

[thedoc]

What is amazing, and just a bit hypocritical, is that all of Peacegirls criticism is directed at others but she doesn't understand that it applies even more-so to her.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

But they are undeniable LadyShea, and if this knowledge gets confirmed, you will understand why he said the word undeniable. It is an appropriate word whether you see it or not. That's what I mean when you challenge him.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

I don't see any reason to believe his ideas are undeniable nor any reason to think confirmation is forthcoming. Of course I challenge that as an unsupported assertion. It remains unconfirmed and unsupported yet is labeled undeniable. That is a definitive example of assertion!

These observations are 100% absolute. This law is invariable and it was observed. There is no way to prove that his observations are valid unless you can see the mathematical relations. This has nothing to do with his opinion. Call it an assertion all you want; but your response is equivalent to a child in grade school who just doesn't get it.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You wouldn't challenge Einstein because you're not on the same level as him.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

If Einstein wrote a book where he had labeled his ideas undeniable while failing to provide any mathematical or scientific support for them, and his daughter was going around the Internet saying "look here at this undeniable knowledge!", yes I would challenge that.

No you wouldn't, you would not challenge what you can't understand. You would wait to hear what other respected scientists have to say. You would be quiet and not open your mouth. You're fooling yourself LadyShea to think that you would challenge Einstein directly.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Einstein didn't work that way though, and had he worked that way nobody would have ever cared what he had to say...he would have been dismissed as a crackpot.

He didn't work that way because he was dealing with physics which can be tested empirically by simulating certain events. This knowledge can also be tested, but it will take time to to prove it. God is very patient. Time is on His side. This day is coming, and the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. This new world, a world we all want, is just as matter of time because we have now have the key to unlock it.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

But you feel that you can challenge Lessans because you really don't know the depth of his intellect.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

He failed to demonstrate any unusual depth of intellect in his writing.

That's not true LadyShea; it's only because you're not reading in depth. You are reading superficially because you're not taking it seriously. Trust me for once, will you? Of course not.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

When he becomes well known for the discovery he made, you will know exactly what I'm talking about, and why it was so hard for me.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

If he becomes well known, it will be as the eccentric guy with some crackpot ideas with the very tenacious daughter. I know it's hard for you to accept that, because of your deep faith that he had solved the world problems and your frustration that nobody shares your faith.

Isn't it sad that you are using your own experience here to determine what will happen with this book? And you don't see this as self-righteous and cocky? You really need to take a careful inventory of yourself and your motivations. How in the world can you know for a fact who is going to read this book and what they are going to think about it? Are you a fortune teller? I thought you didn't believe in those things. So what are you basing your conclusions on? These forums? This has become so biased, you don't even see what you're doing. You are so far from being the objective person that you think you are, that you tell me that this all has to do with the fact that he was my father. Do you think that's objectively fair? Instead of answering, just think about it.

You still don't understand why this work is not a modal fallacy or a meaningless tautology

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Feel free to refute the demonstrations of both modal fallacy and tautology. Unless you can do so, the charges stand

at this point it makes no difference to me what you believe.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Okay

This is the intellectual snobbery I'm talking about.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

And this is the weaseling I am talking about. You have the opportunity to refute the charges and instead resort to name calling.

I have refuted these and you ignore them. It seems to me that when you ask me to refute these charges, you are challenging me to a dual. You have a better than thou attitude that will never allow you to grasp this knowledge; it's a lost cause. I don't think you are really interested because you've already made up your mind that he's a crackpot. How very unfortunate. If you were interested you wouldn't have this attitude, you would have asked me to explain what I meant, not challenged me to a debate. You have a win/lose mentality and that's not easy to overcome. If you could just be a little teeny weany bit more humble, maybe I would go over it with you, but not with this attitude of yours. It is preventing you from learning.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You call it an open mind that wants to learn, and I see someone completely different. Someone who makes charges that are false before she knows herself what is true and what isn't.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Start refuting the charges! The demonstrations of both modal fallacy and tautology were detailed , tear them apart logically. That's how critical thinking works.

I spent many many pages going over this. If you aren't sure, then ask in a nice way to go over it again. Don't charge him with an assertion when you're not capable of determining this. It's total hubris for you to do this.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

All this whining is just a weasel way to distract me. Do you think if you can piss me off or hurt me I will change my mind? What exactly do you hope to achieve with this frequent analysis of my motives and mindset?

No, I want you to understand this knowledge. What I cannot tolerate is your smart-alecky way of responding. It is so snippety and patronizing, I don't know how to handle it because you're so completely off base.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I have no desire to talk to someone when I am constantly feeling defensive. I can't work this way anymore in an environment where I feel this way.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

So you keep saying.

Yes I do, and it's getting ever so close.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Your attacks also prevent you from grasping his reasoning. It actually blocks you.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

His reasoning is poor. I have shown you how it is poor. If you can demonstrate I am wrong then start doing so!

THIS IS YOUR EGO TALKING. THIS IS WHAT YOU WILL HAVE TO CHANGE IF YOU WANT ME TO TALK TO YOU. YOUR REASONING DOESN'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO HIM. YOU ARE COMPARING YOURSELF TO SOMEONE WHO IS LIKE AN EINSTEIN. DO YOU KNOW HOW IDIOTIC YOU ARE COMING OFF? GET OFF YOUR HIGH HORSE OR IT'S OVER LADYSHEA. I WILL HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

What's stopping you from stomping my guts debate wise with your superior arguments?

I will, but I have no desire when you act like you know so much and you don't at all on this topic. Everytime I explain something you throw it in my face and scream "assertion" when it is anything but an assertion. You need to change your bedside manner or we're done. It's okay, this thread is history. I refuse to talk to Vivisectus (he suddenly turned on me out of nowhere), Angakuk doesn't have a clue, and Spacemonkey calls this a non-discovery. Thedoc and NA I pay no attention to; these two are the most ignorant people I've ever had the honor to meet online.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

That's why I was able to understand these principles. I didn't have any agendas and I was able to see what he was talking about.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

No agenda? LOL! You had an agenda to support and believe in your father whom you loved very much. That's wonderful, but it doesn't have anything to do with the veracity of his ideas.

Yes, that's my agenda but what isn't my agenda is to share something only on the basis of being his daughter. Stop throwing this in my face. I cannot help that I was his daughter, but I know he was right because I got it. I got what he was explaining and I am in awe of God's law that will bring us out of the troubled world we are in.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

If I hadn't, do you actually think I would be working this hard just because he was my father?

Originally Posted by LadyShea

I think you wholeheartedly believe your father was correct, but I don't think you are able to objectively examine his work or the criticisms of others due to his being your father.

I understand that people want more proof, but that does not mean his observations can't be seen and recognized for their validity. The part on the eyes can be researched at greater length. I don't even care about that right now; what is most important is the knowledge regarding the will of man and conscience, and his observations are 100% accurate. I also know how difficult it must be for all of you to believe that a discovery such as this could actually be made, and here I am talking to you. Well, it's true, so give yourself a little credit for my being here. If you weren't searching for truth, I would have never found you.

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

This is not a charade and it never was.

Is it helping you? Are you getting anything out of it?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by Spacemonkey

Is it helping you? Are you getting anything out of it?

Only if G(g)od does.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

THIS IS YOUR EGO TALKING. THIS IS WHAT YOU WILL HAVE TO CHANGE IF YOU WANT ME TO TALK TO YOU. YOUR REASONING DOESN'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO HIM. YOU ARE COMPARING YOURSELF TO SOMEONE WHO IS LIKE AN EINSTEIN. DO YOU KNOW HOW IDIOTIC YOU ARE COMING OFF? GET OFF YOUR HIGH HORSE OR IT'S OVER LADYSHEA. I WILL HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU.

Is this your demonstration that I am wrong? Comparing Lessans to Einstein and calling me names in all caps?

You really think I am the one who looks like an idiot?

[Spacemonkey]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Only if G(g)od does.

Is what you are doing here at FF helping you? Are you getting anything out of posting here?