Reiki Rubbish

[Guest]

Rwald,


I understand the structure of claims.

You have my claim entirely wrong. I'm not saying that 'no data exists on JREF experiments'.

I AM saying that 'the raw JREf data is not made available in the public domain or in any peer reviewed journal'.

Should it be? I don't know, but it is a suggestion so people could analyze it, and so much more people would take it more seriously, that is, more than interesting entertainment.

And it isn't just me who would like to see the data. A lot of people would find it interesting.

Rwald, maybe you could help me..

For starters, I'm looking for a breakdown of the types of claim per year the JREF gets.

I can't seem to find this information anywhere.

Maybe you can help me?

 

[Unas]

How can I make any graph when I or no one else has access to the data?

Whodini has yet to provide any evidence for this assertion. Mere repetition of the accusation does not suffice as evidence.

 

[rwald]

I just said, look in the commentary. It's right there.

 

[TechHead]

The vast majority of peer-reviewed scientific journals are copyrighted.

In the US, copyrights are automatic, for all published material, whether it is explicitly stated or not. So, I expect that all (US) journals are copyrighted.

Whodini is welcome to his opinion. His original claim, however, was that the JREF results were not being made available.

He has yet to support that claim with any facts.

I brought up a specific Randi test in the original thread (JREF Science) for which the results are not available. I've even spoken to Randi directly about this. It is the only case I know of, but it is an example of what you asked for.

But it is not the sole reason for getting JREF tests published in an easily accessible manner. Having the test data online would be quite useful for a number of reasons and, going forward, would be quite effortless.

 

[Guest]

I just said, look in the commentary. It's right there.

Could you please reproduce even one of those sample graphs for us all ?

All the data is "right there" for you to do it with.

 

[rwald]

I never said that I wanted to see the graphs. You did.

You'd need to basically go through all the commentaries to get the data. Yes, it's tedious. But if you're not willing to do the work, than why should the JREF?

 

[Guest]

I never said that I wanted to see the graphs. You did.

You'd need to basically go through all the commentaries to get the data. Yes, it's tedious. But if you're not willing to do the work, than why should the JREF?

LOL, exactly what I thought Rwald.

And you're right, one would need to go through all the commentaries, and even then, you'd only be getting partial information.

That isn't exactly the same as all the raw data available to anyone in a convenient manner.

Surely you understand that.

 

[Guest]

----
I never said that I wanted to see the graphs.
----


Does it matter if you want to or if you don't want to? The point is that you can't because not all the data is available for anyone to do it in the first place!

 

[Unas]

The point is that you can't because not all the data is available for anyone to do it in the first place!

Again: Repeating the claim does not make it true. Whodini appears to have difficulty grasping this simple concept.

It has been suggested to Whodini that he make an attempt to obtain the data he speaks of. He has declined to do so. It becomes more and more difficult to avoid drawing the conclusion that Whodini does not actually want the data -- he would appear to be much more interested in complaining about the data's alleged unavailability.

 

[Guest]

Last time I'm telling you this Unas, then you are on ignore until you talk to me.


a) Because I suggest the data should be available, does not in any way imply that I have to be the one to make it available. And that does not in any way imply that I don't want the data.


b) I have looked over ALL the Commentaries and there is 95% commentary (as expected) and 5% data. One can get great experimental design, but very very minimal statistics. Commentaries are words about the data, not the data.


c) You are clueless as to what attempts I have made to get the data in question. You have assumed that I haven't made any, which very clearly shows your bias.


d) The fact that I request utterly simple graphs, and no one here can reproduce any of them with real data, does suggest that the data is unavailable to people on a large scale in a practical manner. The fact that I am making the claim has nothing to do with the other fact that if the data was available, then you and others should be able to obtain it easily.

Should it be made available? Is it legally something the JREF can do? Do they even keep very detailed records? I don't know the answer to any of those questions, but Hal Bidlack will get back to me sometime in the future on this topic, and I'll share the results with you.

Until then Unas, please point out the errors I've made.

 

[Unas]

Because I suggest the data should be available, does not in any way imply that I have to be the one to make it available.

No one has suggested that Whodini should be the one to make the data available. It has, however, been suggested that Whodini should determine whether or not the data is available before making the claim that it is not.

And that does not in any way imply that I don't want the data.

Whodini's repeated rejection of the suggestion that he should attempt to obtain the data most certainly does imply that he does not want the data.

Commentaries are words about the data, not the data.

Agreed. How does this fact support Whodini's claim that the data is not available?

You are clueless as to what attempts I have made to get the data in question.

And that would be because Whodini hasn't bothered to provide information on such attempts, if any.

The fact that I request utterly simple graphs, and no one here can reproduce any of them with real data, does suggest that the data is unavailable to people on a large scale in a practical manner.

Suggestions are not evidence. It is worth noting that Whodini's requests for these "utterly simple graphs" was a rather obvious ploy to distract attention from the lack of evidence for his original claim.

The fact that I am making the claim has nothing to do with the other fact that if the data was available, then you and others should be able to obtain it easily.

Whodini continues to insist that it is the job of others to disprove his claim. His argument is an example of the argumentum ad ignorantiam, or argument from ignorance: because he does not know whether the data is available, he assumes that it must not be.

Until then Unas, please point out the errors I've made.

That's simple, and I have been doing so all along. The chief error that Whodini has repeatedly made has been making a claim that he cannot support with a single fact.

 

[garys_2k]

So, Whodini, have you requested copies of some of the test submissions or other data directly from JREF? I assume you did, so please share their replies with us.

 

[DrMatt]

Greetings, folks. I'm at it again, debating a (different) woo-woo on e-budo. (Where do they all come from?) After the no-touch KO debacle, which thread the moderator actually deleted because the woo-woo just descended into calling me all sorts of vile names (note that, unlike JREF, profanity is banned on e-budo), I thought the woo-woos might give it a rest, but no, here's a guy charging people money for therapeutic touch ("reiki"), and claiming he's curing them of sickness.
Come on over to e-budo and join in the fun!

Back to the topic of this thread....
University of Michigan Medical Center is devoting research funds to a Center for the Study of Complimentary And Alternative Medicines. To this day, a public University of Michigan web site declares Reiki a "new therapy". A recent copy of the University Record had a full-page cover photo showing a middle-age Asian lady in a white lab coat gesticulating around a patient, and the accompanying article described this research project--without any sign of criticism that this is a gross misuse of medical center resources and prestige.

And yes, we are still required to carry Verizon pagers with hourly-updated Horoscope maildrops on them.

 

[Guest]

Kimpatsu, how are your challenges going?


Kimpatsu posted:


----
Fine, ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊. You want to challenge me, come here. I'm a Shorinji Kenshi, and I can wipe the floor with you. Come to Japan and find out. Coward. You duck the challenge, and I bet you'll duck this. If I'm ever in New Zealand, you are in serious trouble.
----

----
So give the prize money to charity. You keep ducking that point too, as if I hadn't made it many times. You are a liar, a fraud, a cheat, and a coward. I look forward to meeting you, so I can prove it in person. Coward.
----


Not too good apparently. Perhaps you aren't coming off too friendly and sincere?

I guess your martial arts training is paying off.

 

[-=Vagrant=-]

My first contact with Reiki was this:

Dad and I were working in our store, when a young man came and asked for permission to stamp an advertisement to our window. It was about a Reiki instruction class. One course for only 120€. That's a BARGAIN!!!
Anyways, he offered to make a demonstration with my dad. Dad sat on a chair and the man put his hands on my dads shoulders, knees and chest. This took about 10 minutes. He talked about the weather, and how some people think reiki is just a hoax.
He got the permission to put his advertisement on our window.
He left our store.
And daddy said something that I liked: "◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊!" Translated from Finnish.
He ripped the advertisement off.