On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 04:43:26PM -0300, juan wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jan 2017 22:07:09 -0500 John Newman <jnn@synfin.org> wrote:
On Jan 26, 2017, at 8:34 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:57:19 -0800 Razer <g2s@riseup.net> wrote:
... but the 'truthers' got derailed years ago. That's the problem with conspiracy theory (X) as an analysis of global events.
American fascist rayzer dutifully doing his job - constantly taking pot shots at anybody who doesn't toe the US military party line.
The anti-conspiracy nutcases are exactly the same kind of people who used to burn witches....or 'cure' gays with electroshocks and lobotomies - all based on True Science of course.
Someone who doesn't buy into a particular conspiracy does not (necessarily) share any traits with the religious whack jobs that burned witches at the stake. They were driven by ignorance and religious fervor.
Not really. Witch hunting, although a time honored joo-kristian tradition, isn't driven by ignorance. It's a political phenomenom (like religion itself). People who don't parrot the 'community's' party line are treated like criminals, or are considered 'sick' and need to be 'cured'.
Of course, the hunters don't have any rational argument, but that's not the same thing, at all, as being ignorant. They are not just 'ignorant'. They are 'ignorant' on purpose.
Whatever, you get my point.
It seems you would like to have it both ways - denying the validity of science when it suits you, and at the same time using your own brand of scientific speculation to support a particular conspiracy,
Except I never denied the validity of science. If anything, what you said describes you better than it describes me.
The problem is that when you say Science, you are not really talking about a rational search for truth, which is also known as philosophjy. You are mostly talking about the establishment's party line, with a 'scientific' veneer.
That's not at all what I'm talking about. You aren't the arbiter of all that is correct.
again when it suits you. Either science is real, or it isn't. Hint: science and the scientific method are fucking real.
I never said that truth and rational inquiry are not 'real'.
You've made plenty of outrageous claims - that global warming is a hoax, that children can't suffer from cognitive disabilities, etc.
Huge mistakes in medical sciences have most definitely been made,
Mistakes? Are you referring to the 'mistakes' of the 'medical' 'science' of psychiatry? As I explained above those are not mistakes.
There have been mistakes besides atrocities like the lobotomy. Early experimentation with radiation, heparin adulteration out of china, exploding breast implants, all sorts of toxic shit before the FDA came around, etc, etc.
And if you believe that rational inquiry can lead to that sort of 'mistake' you don't really understand what rational inquiry is, and you are in no position to lecture me or anynody else about 'science'.
Rational inquiry is what leads to the correction of mistakes. I would think that is obvious.
but they tend to be self correcting over time. That's how science works.