I do feel that there is value in creating a website that alerts visitors to businesses that participate in woo-woo - kind of a "stay clear, this crap isn't based on science and is only successful of relieving you of your money" site.
I realized that it'd be time consuming - compiling the list of businesses and entering the data about what they claim to do as well as getting valid contact information for the business. The idea was good, but the data collection process would be a substantial burden for a single person.
It would be nice if you could get people to volunteer to submit their own information about their own woo-woo establishment and even have them maintain the data but that is a bit unrealistic - who would volunteer to be giggled at?
Well, someone has successfully started such a site and with some mild success (it is sure to grow). The part that I didn't think about was where she pretends to be a legitimate site supporting pseudoscience and tricks (hey, they started it!) woo-wooists to send in their information.
People in Sarnia, thanks to one enterprising woman (why is it that most of the people listed in the directory are women, by the way??), now have a place to go to see if they are being fleeced. Simply search the directory for a type of service you are interested in and, odds are, if it is listed, it's woo-woo.
Though I don't like to promote whack-jobs and woo-woo pushers, this site is far from that - it is disguised as a valid "holistic services" directory but it is really just a method of getting woo-woo artists to self identify! Check it out for yourself - http://www.holisticbusinessnetwork.com. Congratulations Lin Oliver - you are an inspiration to all skeptics. (What? Lin is a Reiki Master/Teacher? Oh well, I guess WE'll just have to use the site for identifying woo-woo practitioners while others use it to find their favourite fleecer.)
Note: If you didn't click on the Reiki link, you'll miss a funny story about a major woo-woo group slamming another woo-woo method. Enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Hey Skeptic,
This is Dave again. You know, the guy who intentionally took advantage of you in your moment of vulnerability and called you on your clear lack of objective reasoning in regards to the death of Jim Stokely?
Anyway, in perusing your blog and visiting some of the links you suggested, I couldn't help but notice that most of the contributors/administration of these projects are a majority of men. As you rightly asked, "why is it that most of the people listed in the directory are women, by the way??". I would pose the same question to you regarding the atheist/scientific reasoning community. Maybe my math is off but here's what I found in about ten minutes of counting while visiting two different websites that you obviously hold dear.
The Reason Project Advisory Board 17/19 are men.
The Reason Project Trustees 2/3 are men
JREF Swift Blog Biographies 8/10 are men
JREF Administration 6/8 are men
richarddawkins.net - Database of Lecturers: all 4 are men
So perhaps this would be framed better as a Battle of the Sexes between "foo foo" Venus women, and "logical, common sense" Mars men. Just as a figurative line in the sand has been drawn by you between believing in Science and believing in God, so too does it seem that you are perpetrating the ever so common line between genders. Isn't your "type" supposed to be about equality and all that stuff? Think very carefully before answering that my friend as you need to remember that up until this point, you have fit well into the stereotype that you are so desperately attempting to be. You wouldn't want to break the seal on that now would you?
Also, I don't think it would be that difficult to find "a funny story" about one scientist "slamming" another scientist's logical methods for the purpose of producing a similar or completely different conclusion.
Dave
as a "alternative" medicine practitioner I know that the field is mostly women because most of what we do has to do with comforting and listening and I suggest that women are more often looked to for that sort of assistance. I am not proposing that women are better at it but that there may be a greater demand for these services from women
there are good alternative solutions and it isnt fair to classify everyone together because there is a science basis for what some do
Hey Dave,
Behind many atheist men are atheist women who are just as involved and dedicated but don't write as well :)
Dave - if only you did so much research, you'd realize that your god is likely a complete fabrication - by men.
Unfortunately, you're right. There are a greater number of men versus women "leading" the skeptical movement. Unfortunately, however, that is changing. I recently visited a University and the professors informed us that more and more (by percentage) of biology (and other hard sciences) students are women. What is unfortunate about that is it isn't just a result of increased enrollment by women in these fields, there also hasn't been the sustained levels of men applying.
Some of the most prominent figures in the evolution/ religion/ skepticism debate are women. Eugenie Scott, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Harriet Hall to name a few.
That's much more than can be said for most church leadership.
Happy surfing.
"If only you did so much research, you'd realize that your god is likely a complete fabrication - by men."
If only you did so much research you would realize that I am just as against your religious dogmatic devotion to empirical scientific fact as I am against Christian's revered devotion to a moral code defined by a god. That's quite an assumption that I believe in a system of control perpetrated by men in the name of a god. I specifically haven't stated any of my beliefs on this forum (yet) but rather have attempted to show you how your type of skepticism is weak and outdated. When you draw a line in the sand between "your side" and "their side", you miss a huge minority of people. Your loss (unless of course you'd like to meet with me someday and we could get to know each other)
"Unfortunately, you're right. There are a greater number of men versus women "leading" the skeptical movement. Unfortunately, however, that is changing. I recently visited a University and the professors informed us that more and more (by percentage) of biology (and other hard sciences) students are women. What is unfortunate about that is it isn't just a result of increased enrollment by women in these fields, there also hasn't been the sustained levels of men applying."
Welcome to a slowly changing predominantly female-driven culture my friend. Where empirical reasoning is a part of the past.
"Some of the most prominent figures in the evolution/ religion/ skepticism debate are women. Eugenie Scott, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Harriet Hall to name a few."
I'll check these ladies out...thanks.
"That's much more than can be said for most church leadership."
Again, it seems as though you think that I will disagree with you on this. Not so.
Dave
Oh come on! Now you're approving blog comments. How friggin' lame can you be when you run a blog man?
Anyway, let's hang out sometime. I think we'd agree on way more things than you think.
519-479-0549
And yes, my real name is Dave
Hey Skeptic,
What's the deal? Did you lose my comment? Did you deem it unsuitable? Why are you attempting to censor all opinion other than your own on this site?
I suppose this site is only a site that preaches to those that follow religiously after your perception of objective reasoning.
It is too bad because you have definitely put a sour taste in my mouth towards atheists and to anyone that chooses to follow the teachings of Richard Dawkins and others who obviously do not encourage a proper skepticism.
I have officially lost interest in your blog and will not be visiting anymore. Perhaps this is what you intended by not responding, however do you not think that this approach that you have chosen is lacking of any sort of a backbone? When someone is skeptical of your "skepticism", your only response is to ignore it?
Perhaps your comment "happy surfing" is more a reflection of how you go about your online world. I don't just "surf" around the web to find blogs that I agree with (I assume you do). I type specific blogs out in full into my web browser because I know that there is a chance that I may or may not agree with what that person has to say. The fact that it is out in the public sphere is generally considered an indication that they are open to discussion in that same sphere.
Clearly you are only interested in your own opinion. Perhaps starting a support group with 12 steps might be a little more productive for you.
In conclusion, may your surfing cease and your skepticism become skeptical and open to public discourse.
Dave
Post a Comment