It appears as if Zero Powers <email@example.com> wrote:
|Heaven is his chosen, er, "retirement community." Obviously I have no
|method, scientific or otherwise, of proving or refuting heavenly claims. My
|point was that simply because you can't decisively refute a claim, does not
|exempt the claim from being a fraud.
My personal attitude is that if one can neither prove nor refute <foo>,
then <foo> belongs to the cathegory I call ``Irrelevant''.
|If you make affirmative claims which can neither be proven or disproven, I
|think that opens you up to possible charges of fraud, particularly where you
|are making lots of money by persuading people that your unprovable claims
Depending on the policy of the local power mongers, I can become prosecuted
for virtually anything, so that does not any difference in my book, as it were.
I feel more interest in the search of scientific information than in what the
local power mongers may have to say on the subject.
On the subject at hand, acupuncture, I laconically state that the method works
for a number of humans, and wish to find out whether the reason for this in a
scientifical manner. I have noted that humans currently like to use a number
of ``mumbo jumbo'' methodologies, and I would like to establish _scientically_
whether or not acupuncture falls in that cathegory.
End of verbiage.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:11:41 MDT