Can Skeptics be Believers & opposite?

[jmercer]

I think it's the language structure and terms he uses. It almost makes sense... just close enough to tantalize the responder, as if there's a chance to reach a common basis for discussion.

I originally thought it was a language barrier, but I've been reviewing all of Kumar's recent posts in the newer threads. Regardless of topic, he reused the same terms, but varied the sentence structures. I'm certainly no expert, but I would expect a sincere person to at least attempt to explain either the definition of the terms they're using... or try different words.

Instead, Kumar seems content to permit people to assume what he means, and then "rebuts" their post by applying the exact same methodology - by changing the sentence structure while reusing the same terms.

When things start to calm down, he injects some semi-logical statement or comment... and when the interest resurges, retreats back to his fallback technique.

Ever tease a cat with a feather?

 

[MRC_Hans]

Yeah, I would have written him off as a troll long ago, except.. he makes similar posts at homeopathic forums (and they don't understand him there, either).

Hans

 

[Vikram]

Yeah, I would have written him off as a troll long ago, except.. he makes similar posts at homeopathic forums (and they don't understand him there, either).

That ought to be interesting to witness. Could you post a link to a homeopathic forum on which Kumar has peddled his illogic?

 

[jmercer]

Yeah, I would have written him off as a troll long ago, except.. he makes similar posts at homeopathic forums (and they don't understand him there, either).

Hans

Wow. In that case he's either an equal opportunity troll, or a demented personae...

 

[Mojo]

Yeah, I would have written him off as a troll long ago, except.. he makes similar posts at homeopathic forums (and they don't understand him there, either).

Hans

I've seen posts of Kumar's on other forums, and while his ideas are not really any more intelligible than here, his English seems to be better. Maybe he gets an easier ride elsewhere?

 

[jmercer]

Hm. That almost argues for the Troll viewpoint in a way.

 

[Vikram]

That ought to be interesting to witness. Could you post a link to a homeopathic forum on which Kumar has peddled his illogic?

Answering my own question:

I did a google search with the words 'homeopathy', 'adversities' and 'ego', and lo and behold, on the first search page I found this link

http://www.otherhealth.com/archive/index.php/t-3516.html

Kumar posts there under the name Kayveeh. You can also see there Hans' many rational and logical arguments constantly rejected by 'bwv11' who says that homeopathy is an 'art' and that its effects are 'immeasurable.

 

[Kumar]

Hello all,

Since we are not able to furthur contribue & entering in 'this & that type' talks here, better- we move onto other topic.

Conclusion of this topic can be that:-

God has created differant type of people/entities(12 as per astrology, 3-6 as per constitutions, 4 as per belief- Believer, half believer/half skeptic, skeptic & Gulliable, to maintain his purpose of balance, by creation, maintainance & destruction. Since HE is said to be 'omni-present so all can be HIS words so right in their shirts. Since HE is also said to be omni-scient & omni-potent, He may only be looking & handling all this drama. Since, we may just be differant chracters in this drama, we may have to behave accordingly as per producer's, story writer & director's instructions. But, we may still be the same i.e. part of HIM & so can behave similarily, when behind the stage or there. From my side this PLAY in this topic, is over, you are free to continue it furthur, if have extra time.

Thanks for contributions, participation & entertainment....or in whatever way you may interpret ,also in this forum.

Bye.

 

[PixyMisa]

Hello all,

Since we are not able to furthur contribue & entering in 'this & that type' talks here, better- we move onto other topic.

Who's this "we"?

Conclusion of this topic can be that:-

God has created differant type of people/entities

No.

(12 as per astrology

No.

3-6 as per constitutions

No.

4 as per belief- Believer, half believer/half skeptic, skeptic & Gulliable,

No.

to maintain his purpose of balance

No.

by creation, maintainance & destruction.

No.

Since HE is said to be 'omni-present so all can be HIS words so right in their shirts.

No... uh, what?

Since HE is also said to be omni-scient & omni-potent, He may only be looking & handling all this drama.

Or not.

Since, we may just be differant chracters in this drama, we may have to behave accordingly as per producer's, story writer & director's instructions.

No.

But, we may still be the same i.e. part of HIM & so can behave similarily, when behind the stage or there.

No.

From my side this PLAY in this topic, is over, you are free to continue it furthur, if have extra time.

So now, having learned nothing and contributed nothing, you are giving up your quest for... uh, what was it you were after anyway?

Thanks for contributions, participation & entertainment....or in whatever way you may interpret ,also in this forum.

Bye.

Yeah, whatever.

 

[jmercer]

There must be a God and He must have a sense of humor. Else, why create a Kumar?

The only problem is... the kind of God that would create a Kumar as a joke... well, frankly... reminds me of lifegazer!

 

[Kumar]

Finally, basis of everything can be same as PE/PM>>, but differances can be there as gross levels.

 

[Kumar]

Who's this "we"?

No.

No.

No.

No.

No.

No.

No... uh, what?

Or not.

No.

No.

So now, having learned nothing and contributed nothing, you are giving up your quest for... uh, what was it you were after anyway?

Yeah, whatever.

PixyMisa,

It was left.

Ok, pls tell me;

Whether homeoathy is scientific or not?

 

[PixyMisa]

Finally, basis of everything can be same as PE/PM>>, but differances can be there as gross levels.

No.

 

[PixyMisa]

PixyMisa,

It was left.

Ok, pls tell me;

Whether homeoathy is scientific or not?

No.

Homeopathy requires a complete denial not only of all scientific knowledge, but of the scientific method as well, and indeed of any sort of skepticism or questioning.

The principles of homeopathy are in direct conflict with vast amounts of extremely well-tested scientific knowledge.

What's more, homeopathy has been scientifically tested and found not to work at all.

No. Homeopathy is not scientific. It is woo-woo nonsense. (Since I can't use the more direct term for it on this forum.)

 

[Kumar]

No.

Homeopathy requires a complete denial not only of all scientific knowledge, but of the scientific method as well, and indeed of any sort of skepticism or questioning.

The principles of homeopathy are in direct conflict with vast amounts of extremely well-tested scientific knowledge.

What's more, homeopathy has been scientifically tested and found not to work at all.

No. Homeopathy is not scientific. It is woo-woo nonsense. (Since I can't use the more direct term for it on this forum.)

Thanks.

Then, whether homeopathy is paranormal and/or supernatural and/or pseudoscientific?

 

[PixyMisa]

Thanks.

Then, whether homeopathy is paranormal and/or supernatural and/or pseudoscientific?

Pseudoscientific is a good description for homeopathy.

As to whether it's paranormal or supernatural; well, it doesn't actually do anything, so it's not really either.

 

[Kumar]

Pseudoscientific is a good description for homeopathy.

As to whether it's paranormal or supernatural; well, it doesn't actually do anything, so it's not really either.

Whether a concept is tested in science & concluded the results, will be called scientific or not irrespective of fact there is nothing no active substance is in it? Whether scientific means which are concluded on scientific testing or not, irrespective of results are either positive or negative?

 

[MRC_Hans]

Whether a concept is tested in science & concluded the results, will be called scientific or not irrespective of fact there is nothing no active substance is in it?

Testing can be scientific, no matter whether there is a known mode of action. Thus, the test results can be scientific, too.

Whether scientific means which are concluded on scientific testing or not, irrespective of results are either positive or negative?

The scientific conclusion on homeopathy is that it does not work. It is a belief system.

Hans

 

[PixyMisa]

Whether a concept is tested in science & concluded the results, will be called scientific or not irrespective of fact there is nothing no active substance is in it? Whether scientific means which are concluded on scientific testing or not, irrespective of results are either positive or negative?

A concept can be scientific and wrong, certainly.

Homeopathy, however, is unscientific and wrong.

Homeopathy proposes that a remedy with no active substance in it can effect a cure.

Now, if it were scientific, what would have happened is this:

1. A hypothesis is formed: A remedy containing no active substance can effect a cure.
2. A test is proposed: Double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial.
3. The test is carried out.
4. The test finds results are not distinguishable from placebo.
5. Homeopathy is discarded as false.
   [/list=1]
   
   Homeopathy has done none of this. Skeptics have cornered homeopaths and carried out this exact trial, with exactly the findings expected: Homeopathy does nothing at all.
   
   If homeopathy was scientific in any way, it would have been discarded by now, because it does not work.
   
   Since homeopathy has not been discarded as false, it is clear that homeopathy is not scientific; it is pseudoscience, or as I put it earlier, woo-woo nonsense.

 

[ilk]

Well, he's certainly opening new frontiers in the field of ignorance and delusion. But I don't think he's insane in anything but the vernacular sense. I've actually spent some time in discussions with someone who was under treatment for paranoid schizophrenia, and it was... Different.

No, I'm afraid that Kumar is sane. For what good that is.

I guess I'll just file him under "insane" anyway. It is part of my belief system that communicating in a nonsenical way and believing that it is a meaningful and valuable process demonstrates a distinct lack of sanity