One Million Rupees Offer to prove "Homeopathy is Paranormal"

I would ask if there is any proof that the Million Rupees actually exists...

But it hardly seems worth it as we can't actually apply for the challenge in the first place.

And, like, about 50 other reasons.
 
Rolfe said:
The screamingly funny bit about all this, as has already been pointed out, is that we don't think homoeopathy is paranormal, and have never claimed that it is. We think it is a fraud. (And as a corollary, we point out that if it did have the effects claimed for it, it would indeed be magic, or paranormal.) But we're not claiming that, we're simply claiming that it's a fraud.

It's Dr. Mas who claims it's paranormal, implicitly, by claiming that there is an effect but being unable to provide a scientific explanation for such an effect, and explicitly, by attributing at least a part of the effect to divine intervention.

He should just pay himself the money.
Click to expand...
Only if he can prove it works.
 
Zep said:
Kumar, if this is true then you are denying one of the very basics of homeopathy. What you are saying is that the homeopathic "Law of Infinitesimals" (I think that's the right name) is complete bunkum because potencies never actually get diluted. But we have been told continually that they DO have to get diluted to "work". So which is correct? The homeopathic law, or your theory?
Click to expand...

"The law of infinitesimals, states that the more diluted a remedy, the stronger and more lasting its effect."

What is the problem? Individualization of molecules or some molecules in small group makes remedies more diluted. An integral part of potentization is the vigorous shaking between each dilution, called succussion & mixing 9/99 parts of carriers[in one part of previous potency] in every potency. All these can dilute origional substance in individual or small group of molecules & keep them seprated by carriers molecules.

Eddied to add;[in one part of previous potency] to make it clear for new people here.
 
You know, I really don't think the average person in the street realises just how ludicrous homeopathy really is.

If only we could get Kumar, Dr Mas and Homeopath Syed on TV or on radio or in the newspapers, it would really help.
 
Kumar said:
"The law of infinitesimals, states that the more diluted a remedy, the stronger and more lasting its effect."

What is the problem? Individualization of molecules or some molecules in small group makes remedies more diluted. An integral part of potentization is the vigorous shaking between each dilution, called succussion & mixing 9/99 parts of carriers in every potency. All these can dilute origional substance in individual or small group of molecules & keep them seprated by carriers molecules.
Click to expand...
The problem is that when you keep diluting the active substance, eventually you only have the carrier left. What you are currently proposing is that homeopathy doesn't work because it's being diluted, but because it's not being diluted.

BTW, that's remarkable English.
 
Kumar said:
Individualization of molecules or some molecules in small group makes remedies more diluted.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting definition of "more diluted". You're saying that it means more separated, more individualized? Most other people would say it means there is less and less molecules of the starting material in the mixture after each dilution step.
 
Kumar said:
*snip* Individualization of molecules or some molecules in small group makes remedies more diluted.

What??? What does individualization of molecules mean?

Anyhow, nothing you do to molecules changes the dilution.

Adding pure carrier does.

An integral part of potentization is the vigorous shaking between each dilution, called succussion & mixing 9/99 parts of carriers in every potency.

OK; Kumar, I consider your front finally blown. That sentence was not written by the "Kumar" character. Now, cut the silly Kumarese once and for all, will you?

Anyhow, when you mix 99 parts carriers, what do you get? More dilution. Every time yo ud othis, you REMOVE 99% of the original substance.

All these can dilute origional substance in individual or small group of molecules & keep them seprated by carriers molecules.

It makes no difference whether the molecules group or not.
Click to expand...

On the last legs, now.

Hans
 
Wow I totally missed that Hans. That is no way on Earth the same Kumar who normally posts.

What is the problem? Individualization of molecules or some molecules in small group makes remedies more diluted. An integral part of potentization is the vigorous shaking between each dilution, called succussion & mixing 9/99 parts of carriers in every potency. All these can dilute origional substance in individual or small group of molecules & keep them seprated by carriers molecules.
Click to expand...
Compared to how he normally posts:
What thing was wrong, which was mass existing...... made for really good & without added vested commercial interests, ignorances, mistake etc. in real/dynamic thinking/taking? Do you know anything like it? Tell me.

Moreover, don't assume just degrees/readings can only make you to know everything, dynamic & different. You may need something other than this, otherwiseall equally degree holders would had been equal . We have different constitutions & entitlements.
Click to expand...
There is absolutely no doubt. Kumar is either lying about his English skills, or multiple homeopaths are logging on to single user IDs.

This is all very interesting. Homeopath collective User IDs.

(And they still can't create a convincing argument.)

This all explains a lot.
 
Maybe it would help if Kumar and Dr. Mas got together and tried to get their story straight.
An integral part of potentization is the vigorous shaking between each dilution, called succussion & mixing 9/99 parts of carriers in every potency. All these can dilute origional substance in individual or small group of molecules & keep them seprated by carriers molecules.
Click to expand...
Can you confirm that this new drop which was taken as new starting material contain 1/99 ratio of probablity?

Remember, according to probality law, it is quite possible that the 2nd starting material drop may not contain any molecule of 1st starting material (because that drop was picked up blindly from the bottle) and it may or may not contain 50% of the 1st starting material or may contain 99% of the starting material.
Click to expand...
So, is this stuff shaken sufficiently to ensure even mixing, or not?

Rolfe.
 
Ashless:

Yeah, it seems all trolls eventually flame out, in one way or another. Some just leave, but the persistent ones end up painting themselves into a corner, where they have no resort but just repeating themselves, or blowing their cover.

Kumar has tried just repeating, and since his sequences are long, it worked for a while, but we have been calling that, so now his mask is cracking.

Interesting process.

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:
On the last legs, now.

Hans
Click to expand...

I edited & corrected previous post--to be understoodable by new ones or who can't understand by indications.

I am not yet satisied about glass porosities. How glass takes paint, coating for making mirror etc., if it is not even 1% porous?
 
Kumar said:
I am not yet satisied about glass porosities. How glass takes paint, coating for making mirror etc., if it is not even 1% porous?
Click to expand...
What's that got to do with anything?

If you don't understand something why don't you go and research it?

Maybe, just maybe, paint sticks to things not because of how porous they are. Sorry if this doen't fit in with your personal paint adherence theory.
It's to do with electrical attraction between surface molecules.

It nothing to do with porosity.

It's remarkable really.
Kumar comes up with a theory. It is repeatedly explained his theory makes no sense because of the properties of certain materials. Kumar can't accept that those prperties are real because it doesn't fit in with certain other random theories he has.
How many levels of theories do we have to go through?

If we demonstrate that it is because of electrical attraction will you then complain that it can't be because this all doesn't fit in with your personal atomic theories?

It's not worth explaining anything to you Kumar because you don't listen - obviously deliberately.
 
Ashles said:
What's that got to do with anything?

If you don't understand something why don't you go and research it?

Maybe, just maybe, paint sticks to things not because of how porous they are. Sorry if this doen't fit in with your personal paint adherence theory.
It's to do with electrical attraction between surface molecules.

It nothing to do with porosity.

It's remarkable really.
Kumar comes up with a theory. It is repeatedly explained his theory makes no sense because of the properties of certain materials. Kumar can't accept that those prperties are real because it doesn't fit in with certain other random theories he has.
How many levels of theories do we have to go through?

If we demonstrate that it is because of electrical attraction will you then complain that it can't be because this all doesn't fit in with your personal atomic theories?

It's not worth explaining anything to you Kumar because you don't listen - obviously deliberately.
Click to expand...

Ashles, just respect my efforts not language. I know you people know much more of science than me. But still some miss in understanding & relating any concept with anything can be there, which probably we may understand during discussions, by chance. Furthur, we are discussing a concept which is yet minimal in science, so don't make it a point that everything can be clear & in accordance with science, immediately. we are just trying, may be in dark, but sometimes you can locate a thing in dark also. In Dr.Mas language it may be just 'hit & trial'. So just carry on if you like it, otherwise you are free.
 
Dr. MAS said:
kindly visit this page and do not shout.

http://www.nchpakistan.com/news&events2.htm

Hans has raised his hands up.

You can still win.
Click to expand...
Bzzzzt! Sorry, no bananas for you. This is NOT an application form/page/whatever. Nothing about where to apply, nothing about protocols, NOTHING AT ALL! So you are STILL trying to exclude me from your challenge - how unfair you are.

I'm really beginning to think your "challenge" itself is completely homeopathic - it's so dilute that it has disappeared completely without any trace! Typical - tell people it's there, but you know really it isn't. There's another word for that - starts with "l" and ends with "iar".

To quote your reference:
The managing director of www.hhomeopharma.com Dr. Hafiz Matie ullah announced to sponsor the prize money in support of World Homeopathic Computer Club's offer to prove "Homeopathy is paranormal in nature and scientific laws / principles cannot apply over homeopathy".
Click to expand...
So this is simply the story about the sponsorship of the "challenge".
 
I claim that since I can show scientifically that there are no molecules of the original remedy substance in the "high-potency" homoeopathic preparations, if they are prepared honestly and without cheating, then any effect they might have is paranormal in nature, that is unable to be explained by normal scientific means.

As a side-issue, I also note that Mas claims that divine intervention is necessary for homoeopathic remedies to work, and by definition divine intervention is paranormal.

Now, if Dr, Mas admits that homoeopathic remedies have no effect, I will agree with him, and agree that there is nothing paranormal happening.

If he claims that there is remedy substance present because all people preparing are dishonest and either do not make the dilutions as described, or introduce more of the mother tincture or related substances to later stages of the diluting process, then I will leave it to the homoeopathic community to deal with him.

However, if he denies both of these scenarios, I contend that he has to disprove my proof that there are no molecules of the original mother tincture in the overwhelming majority of bottles of a 30C remedy (the exception only allowed for the possibility of one molecule in one bottle in several thousand million).

Now, where can I apply?

Rolfe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom