Dan Nave wrote: > Sorry, I thought it was so obvious that I ended up not being clear... > > Randi operated on the premise that if he could reproduce an effect by > trickery, > then the person who originally produced the effect *must* have done it > by trickery also. > > With some exceptions, people usually judge others based on what they, > themselves, are like. Randi is a faker and a conn man, so he sees > everyone else in this light. > > I feel that anything that he is associated with is totally discredited > thereby.
It was Randi who disproved homeopathics was it not? If I remember right, I think he was the "researcher" behind that disproval that was published in one of the Science magazines (Nature?). If I recall correctly, this magazine had published some results that confirmed that homeopathics worked, but then Randi did another study and showed that they did not. If I remember right, he or his henchmen made the second set of homeopathics wanting them to not work. So, since many (if not most, including me) people who have researched homeopathics have found that INTENT is one of the major forces behind the success of homeopathics, it is completely expected that those made by someone INTENDING to disprove them would not work. For those who understand this, this actaully tends to add support to the concept, not disprove it as the article claimed. If I am recalling incorrectly, I welcome anyone with better information (or memory) to correct me. Marshall -- The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: [email protected] Silver List archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html Address Off-Topic messages to: [email protected] OT Archive: http://escribe.com/health/silverofftopiclist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
