Comments on: Bad Science v Bad Lawyers

By: Jonny Dade

Jonny Dade — Tue, 05 May 2009 15:05:26 +0000

@skeptics, the other kind of bigots,

That’s just one experiment, it’s impossible to come to any real conclusion about anything based on the findings of 1 experiment. Generally when something like this has happened it’s worth looking a little deeper. Who funded it? What did they want to achieve with their results?

It’s like an experiment that says “fast food is actaully GOOD for you”. Clearly this has gone against the grain, so we look a little deeper and surprise surprise, it was funded for by Burger King or McDonalds.

Think outside the box

By: skeptics, the other kind of bigots

skeptics, the other kind of bigots — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:13:12 +0000

Homeopathic medicine works, it has been proven by experiment.

“To the researchers’ surprise, three of the four labs involved in the trial reported that the homeopathic histamine solutions caused statistically significant inhibition of the basophil degranulation reaction when compared with the controls. The fourth lab also observed that the ‘ghost’ histamine solution inhibited basophil degranulation, but it was not statistically significant.”

liquid water has crystalline structure observable by x-ray diffraction.

If homeopathic medicine did not work nobody will be using it.

There were bigots before you that claimed acupuncture did not work.

Only the ignorant think they are 100% right.

By: Larry

Larry — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:35:32 +0000

Individuals who buy into such total horses**t get whatever they deserve. It only takes average intelligence to follow a reasonably well-constructed, logical argument or the steps of the scientific method (Einstein was really not that smart guys — despite the “evidence” to the contrary). That said, people of average intelligence, not trained to think critically nor to question will fall quickly to the wiles of hucksters, charlatans and mountebanks. Fortunately, natural selection is still hard at work.

Two words: Jett Tra-volta.

Ha ha Scientology. Bring ‘em all back. I dare you.

I’m sick of being pleasant and/or objective; the gene pool needs a good chlorination.

By: sonofajoiner

sonofajoiner — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 19:54:58 +0000

TBH, Angela I think one of the reasons that people go in for all this CAM clap-trap is precisely because they believe that they ARE thinking for themselves and making an informed choice, going against the pack etc etc. We really do seem to live in an increasingly bizarre age where anything’s ok so long as you can justify it to yourself and a handful of other cretins.

By: Angela K

Angela K — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 11:13:02 +0000

Homeopathy has proved to be ineffective by double blind trails, properly conducted and peer reviewed so why do people cling on to this quackery? Probably the same reason people cling on to religion –you don’t have to think for yourself, provide evidence or seek other sources of information. There is possibly a placebo effect but certainly no chemical effect.

By: Jeni Barnett’s MMR scaremongering - the role of homeopathy « gimpy’s blog

Sat, 07 Feb 2009 11:00:07 +0000

[...] http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/2009/02/06/bad-science-v-bad-lawyers/ [...]

By: Jeni Barnett, LBC Radio and the MMR Vaccine Segment « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science

Fri, 06 Feb 2009 16:13:17 +0000

[...] Media Watch: Bad Science v. Bad Lawyers [...]

By: marc draco

marc draco — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 13:08:56 +0000

Actually, monitor, they can’t (and it stinks!)

I’ve detailed my own (probably unpopular) view on my blog.

What’s needed is better regulation of broadcasters.

By: simontheiceman

simontheiceman — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 12:31:09 +0000

would this explain why his site has been so difficult to access over the last 24 hours? I’m stuck at home with a broken arm and I need good ‘ol pharmaceuticals to keep the pain at bay – I wont be taking a punt wth any “scared” water stuff. yes I did mean scared and not sacred but now you come to mention it…