CULT 'Scientism' ...: How scientific claims behind cancer, vaccines, psychiatric drugs & GMOs

a reply to: BO XIAN

I would have to agree (shock, right?) and disagree at the same time.

While science (and all the subsets within) have become majorly business orientated (that's the bit I agree with), the progress of science isn't as blinkered as some think it is.

I think the statements made in the op (not by the op) are too broad.

Sure, some areas are driven by money, corruption and self centred goals, but that doesn't mean all areas are.

originally posted by: projectvxn
Science follows evidence.

You cannot tell me with a straight face that the 1700 world wide studies were all paid for by monsanto.

You cannot tell me that the thousands of studies done on vaccines world wide are wrong, but your one guy is right.

You will not convince me that somehow all of these scientists got together and are plotting to hurt people.

This delusional anti-science garbage is peddled by discredited people who have had their licenses revoked to practice medicine, their "findings" completely destroyed by peer review, and still you people show up thinking you know more because some asshole who is selling essential oils and weed as a cancer cure said so.

Follow the money.

How often do we see things skewed to fit one narrative or another?

It throws a lot of things into question.

We're told one thing, one year, and then a few years later, told the opposite.

Let's go with Butter vs Margarine, or low-sodium vs sodium.

How about the recent article on Proton Pump Inhibitors?

Or statin drugs?

Vioxx (Rofecoxib)?

All these were "scientifically" shown to be safe, and there were STUDIES, and such done.

Science is a wonderful thing, but not when it's biased, or "financially influenced" to a pre-determined outcome.

Follow the money, and you will be able to have a clearer picture of the motives.

a reply to: TerryDon79

Oh dear me. You'd better sit down.

I agree with every sentence in that post . . . at least at first read.

I think I'll just leave it at that and not go back and examine it too closely. Sometimes it's just nice to bask in the rare agreement, consensus. LOL.

science is a lie

originally posted by: lavatrance
science is a lie

Which would make the device you're on, electricity and so much other stuff I'd be listing it for days, a lie.

Yeah, you didn't think that through, did you?

a reply to: BO XIAN

Being honest and accepting you may get some detractors is obviously a sin. That's sarcasm, by the way.

I am on your side, I'm not seeing how what's his name could have misread what you said. Crikey, some people just have to argue. I get misreading things, it happens, but to keep on with the argument is silly.

Then again, I forgot about the idiocy of American politics, so maybe I should just retract this whole post as everything regarding that is extremely silly and keeps on keeping on. Can't barely click a thread these days on ATS as it's all left/right nonsense "My team is better than your team" crap. Not a whit of which makes any sense as we don't have any say in the process.

I only throw this in to say something like "Why the heck should I post a thread on ATS about anything serious?".

Why bother? I just did one, not actually a important thread, mind ya(I actually forgot about it lol) and got reamed for starting it. One odd observation really just did me in, now I'm public enema #1.

It's all gone wonky, the world has moved on, blah blah blah bl.....freaking blah.

This Monty Python video kinda sums it up for me. Communication between us all is at a all time low.

a reply to: TheSpanishArcher

I thoroughly agree entirely. THANKS. Nice there's still someone around with some sensible activity between their ears.

In a sense, what you describe here is a mirror of the realm of science in terms of cancer, food toxins, pollution toxins, 'climate change,' UFO's, . . . sometimes even quakes.

This faction against that faction; this set of purportedly solid 'scientific' research [which really was a shyster operation from the beginning--funded by the folks it was purportedly going to show up as evil] against that set of research;

this set of whistle blowers against that set of paid shills;

this set of angry hugely attachment disordered jerks against that set of angry hugely attachment disordered set of jerks;

this set of media lobotomized terminally clueless drones and lumps on the public purse against that set of media lobotomized terminally clueless drones and lumps on the public purse; . . .

And the whole lot seemingly to have fallen down Alice's rabbit hole leaving reason and sensible dialogue in the death star garbage chute.

Sigh.

I work in science and I can assure you that we are all out to get you. All of us. We actually work with the government to bombard you with substances that will make your daily life miserable. You're our lab rat.

Or science doubled your lifespan. Whatever you want to believe.

a reply to: BO XIAN

However, I'm somewhat of an expert on religion. And much that goes for objective science these days is not.

Wait. Hold on a sec. You're saying that you are an expert on religion, and that science isn't anything but religion.

It has it's high priests, dogma, gate-keeping, purgatory and hell where no one gets tenured nor their fair share of the media or public square to present their evidence. etc. etc. etc.

Wow, BO. Bitter much? What happened to you over the last two years?

It sure does sound like you are blaming a disappointment of your own on people who presented science, rather than any weakness your preferred 'truth' has, quite intrinsically.

I realize that sets the True Believers in the Religion of Scientism's teeth on edge.

BO, it sets anyone's teeth on edge and is not much different than the edited-out remark with which you originally opened this thread.....something about going berzerk, wasn't it?

tsk tsk

Some few may get over it. Most won't, until the falsified dogmas of the Religion of Scientism bite them hard in their rear or hearts or some such.

This is such a strange thing for a highly educated professional to say. You are a prof of clinical psychology - how on earth can you come on here and defend the delusions of 'religion', which have no evidence whatsoever of being 'true' - and say that science is just a bunch of dummy sour-grapes posers who don't want to give someone tenure....

what?

= = = =

As to Natural News . . . so what.

Ever since my boss told me about the flakiest groups earliest and most accurately identifying Hitler and what he would do and become--I've been a LOT more generous about what I listened to; gave a fair chance; considered thoughtfully. And, over the following 45+ years, I've observed that I've been quite surprised by some gems out of some really smelly muck. Life is full of paradoxes.

Yeah, don't use Natural News. And especially I thought it was strange when you suggested we need MORE one-sided, sensationalist, alarmist tabloid sources than we already have - Alex J, Glenn B, Rush L, and please not NewsMax or The 700 Club, or anything Lee Strobel said. They are all con-men. I'm tellin' ya, BO - don't fall in their traps!


Yeah, life is paradoxical from time to time. But that doesn't mean that you can, with due dilligence, just decide to ignore peer-reviewed literature altogether in favor of your precious Bible. No! You can't do that in good faith as a PhD in Clinical Psychology; not and have your credentials known in your profession - ..... do you not realize you can be tracked?

These things you are saying seem, well, frankly, off-balance, BO. Not rational. Nor tempered or well-paced. The activity here from you seems so far out of bounds of normalcy that it prompts me to contact someone to request a welfare check on you.