Is Homeopathy Effective?

[Subduction Zone]

And I only read that one sentence and now I am done.
I am tired of the constant criticisms, so as I told @Tiberius tonight...

Happy trails.

Free will is a charm when I use it to choose.

You can ignore me, but you yourself proved that you did not "study" homeopathy for four years. You failed on something that you should have learned in the first week. This is the problem with self study by the uneducated. They do not understand what they should be looking for.

 

[Trailblazer]

You can ignore me, but you yourself proved that you did not "study" homeopathy for four years. You failed on something that you should have learned in the first week. This is the problem with self study by the uneducated. They do not understand what they should be looking for.

I will not put you on Ignore so you can misrepresent me on this forum...

As far as my "failures" are concerned, maybe you should look at your OWN failures instead of mine.
Maybe you should ask yourself why you are compelled to point out MY failures, as it seems to be an obsession you have.

26: O SON OF BEING! How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of Me. The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 10

 

[Subduction Zone]

I will not put you on Ignore so you can misrepresent me on this forum...

As far as my "failures" are concerned, maybe you should look at your OWN failures instead of mine.
Maybe you should ask yourself why you are compelled to point out MY failures, as it seems to be an obsession you have.

26: O SON OF BEING! How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of Me. The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 10

You make your misunderstandings so obvious, and pretend to want actual answers. as you did in this thread. And then why your particular beliefs are shown to be wrong you switch to irrational mode.

Why are you not asking questions? If you did you would probably learn why you are wrong. Instead you force others to show how you are wrong and then just deny it.

There is a reason that I asked you the questions that I did. I was fairly sure that you could not answer them and they are fairly easy to understand. Are you willing to learn why your beliefs were exposed to be wrong?

 

[Truthseeker]

As I recall you still suffer from the effects of the drugs prescribed by the psychiatrist and you need another expensive medication for life to control the symptoms.

That was when I was taken off a drug that was there to control the anger that I had felt when I was in the throes of depression. The anti-depression drug was another drug. But I get your point. I'm too polite to whack your conviction about homeopathy. It's a pointless fight.

Yes, you remember those dark days when I had some bad development practically every day. I had such strange developments. To this day I can't sleep without taking Seroquel each night. Later I saw a character in a series do the same thing. I think it is supposed to be for anxiety, I'm not sure, but is sometimes used to help people sleep. Using drugs with side-effects means to me that medicine is still at a primitive stage. I don't know what else to do now, though.

The way drugs ae sometimes so expensive is outrageous. There's a fight about that sort of thing in the Senate now and many other things including money to fight climate change. This while the UN conference for climate change is going on and the US has little to demonstrate to the other nations yet. The climate change issue in the world is at a critical stage now. It's an issue that is important to me.

 

[Trailblazer]

That was when I was taken off a drug that was there to control the anger that I had felt when I was in the throes of depression. The anti-depression drug was another drug. But I get your point. I'm too polite to whack your conviction about homeopathy. It's a pointless fight.

Yes, you remember those dark days when I had some bad development practically every day. I had such strange developments. To this day I can't sleep without taking Seroquel each night. Later I saw a character in a series do the same thing. I think it is supposed to be for anxiety, I'm not sure, but is sometimes used to help people sleep. Using drugs with side-effects means to me that medicine is still at a primitive stage. I don't know what else to do now, though.

The way drugs ae sometimes so expensive is outrageous. There's a fight about that sort of thing in the Senate now and many other things including money to fight climate change. This while the UN conference for climate change is going on and the US has little to demonstrate to the other nations yet. The climate change issue in the world is at a critical stage now. It's an issue that is important to me.

That was many years ago... I think you are in it with the drugs for for the long haul now. But you have more tolerance than me for the side effects....

I am glad I got out while the getting was good. Aside from finding the Baha'i Faith, I will never be more grateful for anything than discovering homeopathy when I did. The homeopath told me that if I had stayed on the drugs any longer I would not have been treatable with homeopathy. In fact he said that most people who were on drugs as long I was, five years, are not treatable because the disease has been driven so deep.

 

[Tiberius]

I have no burden because I made no claims.

Happy trails.

You know no one at all is buying that argument, right? You've claimed to have studied homeopathy for several years, why do you not make claims about it? And I also specifically mentioned this little trick of yours in post 29. Anything you present will be taken as a claim. If you don't like it, don't present anything.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That was many years ago... I think you are in it with the drugs for for the long haul now. But you have more tolerance than me for the side effects....

I am glad I got out while the getting was good. Aside from finding the Baha'i Faith, I will never be more grateful for anything than discovering homeopathy when I did. The homeopath told me that if I had stayed on the drugs any longer I would not have been treatable with homeopathy. In fact he said that most people who were on drugs as long I was, five years, are not treatable because the disease has been driven so deep.

And you bought that nonsense. Why is it when checked using proper double blind studies that Homeopathy is no different from placebos?

Of course your homeopath may merely believe his own myths. Water does not appear to have a memory. No one can explain why it would have a memory.

If you want to go over the math it is not that hard, But when a homeopath gives you some medicine the water at its base is going to be pure water with not even a molecule of medicine in it at all. There is no trace, no vestige, not sign of the original material. There is no difference between a homeopathic medicine and a sugar pill.

 

[Tiberius]

And I only read that one sentence and now I am done.
I am tired of the constant criticisms and people speaking for me as if they know what I think or what I did in my life, all based upon their own biases, so as I told @Tiberius tonight...

Happy trails.

Free will is a charm when I use it to choose.

Maybe when you get a bunch of people all telling you the same thing, you should stop and think, "hey, maybe they can see something I can't."

 

[Trailblazer]

Anything you present will be taken as a claim. If you don't like it, don't present anything.

I don't care how anyone takes it. That's their choice.
I alone know what my intentions are so i know I make no claims.

 

[Trailblazer]

Maybe when you get a bunch of people all telling you the same thing, you should stop and think, "hey, maybe they can see something I can't."

Maybe when you get a bunch of believers all telling you the same thing, you should stop and think, "hey, maybe they can see something I can't."

 

[Subduction Zone]

Maybe when you get a bunch of believers all telling you the same thing, you should stop and think, "hey, maybe they can see something I can't."

Yeah, we do try to keep an open mind. The problem is that believers only seem to have belief. They can almost never support their claims rationally. Which tells us that they most likely have an irrational belief. Worse yet, they mire themselves in that belief by trying to learn if it is right or wrong themselves.

So who is more reliable when it comes to claim? Those that are willing to test and change claims if shown to be wrong, or those that are unwilling to properly test their beliefs? We know how that works with science. Those willing to change are those that make scientific advances. Those that refuse to do so are left in the dustbins of history.

You should be asking yourself why you want to believe so much.

 

[Tiberius]

I don't care how anyone takes it. That's their choice.
I alone know what my intentions are so i know I make no claims.

I don't think anyone buys that as a way to get out of having to support your claims.

 

[Tiberius]

Maybe when you get a bunch of believers all telling you the same thing, you should stop and think, "hey, maybe they can see something I can't."

Except they don't tell me the same thing, do they?

I have the Christians telling me one thing, Muslims telling me another, Jews telling me another, you're there telling me something different again...

So, ya know...

I just figure, "They can't all be right, but they sure as heck fire can all be wrong!"

And since NONE of them can provide any actual evidence (no, what you're presented is not evidence), the only thing they all have in common is a reliance on logical fallacies and subjective opinion that they THINK is objective fact.

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't think anyone buys that as a way to get out of having to support your claims.

Why would I care what you and your sidekicks buy? I could not care less what you think of me.
This is just a silly forum, not real life, in case you haven't noticed.

 

[Trailblazer]

Except they don't tell me the same thing, do they?

I have the Christians telling me one thing, Muslims telling me another, Jews telling me another, you're there telling me something different again...

Why would different religions teach the same things? Why would God send a new Messenger to reveal exactly the same things He revealed before? Why would the needs of humanity in this new age be the same as the needs of humanity 2000 years ago?

Some of what the new Messenger reveals is the same as what the previous Messengers revealed but some of it is new and different teachings and laws which were revealed to suit the needs of humanity who live the age in which the religion was revealed.

So, ya know...

I just figure, "They can't all be right, but they sure as heck fire can all be wrong!"

It is possible that all the religions are wrong, and if there is no God that would be true.
However, if there is a God then it makes sense that at least some of the religions are right or partially right.

For you to say that some of the religions are wrong so all of them must be wrong is the fallacy of jumping to conclusions and the fallacy of hasty generalization.

The truth is a little more complicated and it goes like this. All of the great religions teach the same spiritual truths so in that sense they are all right, but the older religions have been changed and corrupted my man over the centuries so they are no longer as true as they once were. The Baha'i Faith is the only revealed religion that has not been changed and corrupted by man because Baha'u'llah put protections in place to prevent that from happening.

And since NONE of them can provide any actual evidence (no, what you're presented is not evidence), the only thing they all have in common is a reliance on logical fallacies and subjective opinion that they THINK is objective fact.

All religions have evidence, the Messengers who revealed them and the scriptures that were revealed and the historical facts connected with their revelations.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why would different religions teach the same things? Why would God send a new Messenger to reveal exactly the same things He revealed before? Why would the needs of humanity in this new age be the same as the needs of humanity 2000 years ago?

Some of what the new Messenger reveals is the same as what the previous Messengers revealed but some of it is new and different teachings and laws which were revealed to suit the needs of humanity who live the age in which the religion was revealed.

It is possible that all the religions are wrong, and if there is no God that would be true.
However, if there is a God then it makes sense that at least some of the religions are right or partially right.

For you to say that some of the religions are wrong so all of them must be wrong is the fallacy of jumping to conclusions and the fallacy of hasty generalization.

The truth is a little more complicated and it goes like this. All of the great religions teach the same spiritual truths so in that sense they are all right, but the older religions have been changed and corrupted my man over the centuries so they are no longer as true as they once were. The Baha'i Faith is the only revealed religion that has not been changed and corrupted by man because Baha'u'llah put protections in place to prevent that from happening.

All religions have evidence, the Messengers who revealed them and the scriptures that were revealed and the historical facts connected with their revelations.

They don't teach the same things. Some of their moral teachings are the same because there is a rational approach to morality that is rather easy to understand. But there will be quite a few variations in the morality that they teach.

If they did all teach the same thing you might be able to use that as evidence. But the fact is that they do not.

 

[Trailblazer]

They don't teach the same things. Some of their moral teachings are the same because there is a rational approach to morality that is rather easy to understand. But there will be quite a few variations in the morality that they teach.

That's true.

If they did all teach the same thing you might be able to use that as evidence. But the fact is that they do not.

If they did all teach the same things why would that be evidence and what would it be evidence of?

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's true.

If they did all teach the same things why would that be evidence and what would it be evidence of?

I did not say that it would be evidence. I said that it might be evidence. And that would depend upon the argument made by the believer. I am not going to give a test that a believer would reject. I am merely showing how they could possibly find evidence under certain circumstances.

 

[Trailblazer]

I did not say that it would be evidence. I said that it might be evidence. And that would depend upon the argument made by the believer. I am not going to give a test that a believer would reject. I am merely showing how they could possibly find evidence under certain circumstances.

If they did all teach the same things why might that be evidence and what would it be evidence of?

 

[Subduction Zone]

If they did all teach the same things why might that be evidence and what would it be evidence of?

When a group teaches the same thing about some supposed ideal knowledge it at least does not refute itself.