Maybe the Pope didn't say it as it is being reported...
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2010/12/16/16572196.html
When condeming "the West" for enforcing the strict separation of church and state, the Pope says: "denial of history and the rejection of religious symbols which reflect the identity and the culture of the majority of citizens". (Majority Rules!)
But..
"In the message for the Roman Catholic Church’s World Day of Peace, marked on Jan. 1, he also reiterated recent condemnations of lack of religious freedom in countries in the Middle East where Christians are a minority, such as Iraq and Saudi Arabia." (Hey, the minority rights matter!)
And then he adds this:
“The same determination that condemns every form of fanaticism and religious fundamentalism must also oppose every form of hostility to religion that would restrict the public role of believers in civil and political life.”
It's what the Bible says and endorses that worries me. Having people live it out in civil and political life is dangerous.
Tim Minchin said it best...
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Multi-level Marketing: The math doesn't work
This is an interesting topic to handle but since it is the holiday season and my wife is getting more and more invites to "parties", I thought I'd discuss, quickly, multi-level/network marketing.
Some of the most known multi-level marketing schemes (look up 'scheme' before you wrongly suggest that I'm poisoning the well) include Amway, Mary Kay, Qixtar, Tupperware, Avon, Herbalife, etc. Some of the newer/more recent ones that you might have heard about (or are hearing about) include: Arbonne (Cosmetics), Stampin Up, Tahitian Noni Juice, etc.
Most network/multi-level marketing organizations rely on recruitment to build an income. It is thinly veiled in the idea of selling a product and earning an income from that but sales, alone, don't allow for a real profit (unsustainable, at the very least).
For the most part, people are sold on the idea that they often buy many of the products that the particular MLM company is selling and "why not make money while using and selling the products you're going to buy anyway?" A simple and compelling concept - if it were true. They add in the idea of recruiting a few friends or family members who, like you, are also using these products in their homes. If they get a few people under them, too, and you're making commissions on their purchases and their sales, you can be making "thousands of dollars a week" or "conservatively, a couple thousand dollars a month" (these quotes directly from someone who was trying to get me to attend a "sales presentation" on Qixtar).
Without speaking about a specific multi-level/network marketing company, let us consider the simple math.
If they suggest profits based on having 5 people "directly below" you, that seems like a simple number to achieve. You have 5 friends or family members. They only need to get 5 people below them (each) - surely they know 5 people who'd be interested. If they each get 5 and that group, too, gets 5, and that group another 5 and you, along with them, sell $500/week (easy, huh, you'll spend $100 a week yourself and the people below you will as well.. all the way down the line) - you'll make $2000/month.
5 levels of 5 people - 3905 people
10 levels of 5 people - 12 million people
15 levels of 5 people - 5-6 full planets of people
Schemes like this can't simply work - there are not enough people on the planet to sustain them. Sure, the few people at the "top" might make a bunch of money (for a short time) but would you be comfortable with knowingly screwing your family and friends to make a bit of money in the short term?
Even if it only required 3 people - 363, 88572, 1/3 of everyone on the planet.
The companies selling the products/services are often selling over-priced items/services so not only are you not making money, you're spending more than you should on a product or service of similar quality/benefit. The net result is that you have better odds of making money at a casino than you do with any recruitment driven (no matter how much they try to hide that) method of earning/paying.
http://www.mlm-thetruth.com/
http://www.mlmwatch.org/
Some of the most known multi-level marketing schemes (look up 'scheme' before you wrongly suggest that I'm poisoning the well) include Amway, Mary Kay, Qixtar, Tupperware, Avon, Herbalife, etc. Some of the newer/more recent ones that you might have heard about (or are hearing about) include: Arbonne (Cosmetics), Stampin Up, Tahitian Noni Juice, etc.
Most network/multi-level marketing organizations rely on recruitment to build an income. It is thinly veiled in the idea of selling a product and earning an income from that but sales, alone, don't allow for a real profit (unsustainable, at the very least).
For the most part, people are sold on the idea that they often buy many of the products that the particular MLM company is selling and "why not make money while using and selling the products you're going to buy anyway?" A simple and compelling concept - if it were true. They add in the idea of recruiting a few friends or family members who, like you, are also using these products in their homes. If they get a few people under them, too, and you're making commissions on their purchases and their sales, you can be making "thousands of dollars a week" or "conservatively, a couple thousand dollars a month" (these quotes directly from someone who was trying to get me to attend a "sales presentation" on Qixtar).
Without speaking about a specific multi-level/network marketing company, let us consider the simple math.
If they suggest profits based on having 5 people "directly below" you, that seems like a simple number to achieve. You have 5 friends or family members. They only need to get 5 people below them (each) - surely they know 5 people who'd be interested. If they each get 5 and that group, too, gets 5, and that group another 5 and you, along with them, sell $500/week (easy, huh, you'll spend $100 a week yourself and the people below you will as well.. all the way down the line) - you'll make $2000/month.
5 levels of 5 people - 3905 people
10 levels of 5 people - 12 million people
15 levels of 5 people - 5-6 full planets of people
Schemes like this can't simply work - there are not enough people on the planet to sustain them. Sure, the few people at the "top" might make a bunch of money (for a short time) but would you be comfortable with knowingly screwing your family and friends to make a bit of money in the short term?
Even if it only required 3 people - 363, 88572, 1/3 of everyone on the planet.
The companies selling the products/services are often selling over-priced items/services so not only are you not making money, you're spending more than you should on a product or service of similar quality/benefit. The net result is that you have better odds of making money at a casino than you do with any recruitment driven (no matter how much they try to hide that) method of earning/paying.
http://www.mlm-thetruth.com/
http://www.mlmwatch.org/
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Santa Claus <> Real, Zombie Jew = Real
Forgive me for having to reiterate this. I spend countless hours trying to remember this and if what they say is true, by teaching everyone else, I'll learn this twice.
Archbishop Fabriciano Sigampa reminds us that it is Santa Claus that is not real but the Zombie Jew (aka Jesus) is.
Now that we've dealt with that, get back to celebrating the birth of the Zombie Jew - after all, he was born (though likely never existed) on December 25th - just like the bible says!
Whether you believe in a god or not, happy holidays (oh, and there is no war on Christmas). Enjoy this lovely Christmas song.
Archbishop Fabriciano Sigampa reminds us that it is Santa Claus that is not real but the Zombie Jew (aka Jesus) is.
Now that we've dealt with that, get back to celebrating the birth of the Zombie Jew - after all, he was born (though likely never existed) on December 25th - just like the bible says!
Whether you believe in a god or not, happy holidays (oh, and there is no war on Christmas). Enjoy this lovely Christmas song.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Hold your false look of surprise: Robbie lied
(Note: This is a cross post from http://www.stoprobbie.com/)
Well, the publication ban has been lifted on the Tori Stafford case and, as suspected, Robbie Thomas was NOT involved in solving that crime (he has never solved a crime using his claimed psychic abilities).
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2010/12/09/16485601.html
Details also show that, not only was Robbie not involved in solving the crime, he (as mentioned here and on http://www.stoprobbie.com/) actually told the family that Tori was alive and would be found alive and well - about a week after she was brutally murdered.
April 8 - Tori goes missing. (Abducted)
April 8 - Abductors buy garbage bags and a hammer.
April 8 - Lifeless body is disposed of.
April 13 - Robbie Thomas claims (on X-Zone radio) that Tori Stafford would be found alive and safe. (He also told the family this as was reported in the London Free Press and other websites)
I will make a prediction now. Robbie Thomas' solved cases counter will not change in the next 9 years. Robbie Thomas has solved 0 cases in 18 (or 20) years. A perfect record!
If you have a moment, congratulate Robbie - robbiethomas@cogeco.ca (and, if you do, carbon copy us - emailus@stoprobbie.com)
Well, the publication ban has been lifted on the Tori Stafford case and, as suspected, Robbie Thomas was NOT involved in solving that crime (he has never solved a crime using his claimed psychic abilities).
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2010/12/09/16485601.html
Details also show that, not only was Robbie not involved in solving the crime, he (as mentioned here and on http://www.stoprobbie.com/) actually told the family that Tori was alive and would be found alive and well - about a week after she was brutally murdered.
April 8 - Tori goes missing. (Abducted)
April 8 - Abductors buy garbage bags and a hammer.
April 8 - Lifeless body is disposed of.
April 13 - Robbie Thomas claims (on X-Zone radio) that Tori Stafford would be found alive and safe. (He also told the family this as was reported in the London Free Press and other websites)
I will make a prediction now. Robbie Thomas' solved cases counter will not change in the next 9 years. Robbie Thomas has solved 0 cases in 18 (or 20) years. A perfect record!
If you have a moment, congratulate Robbie - robbiethomas@cogeco.ca (and, if you do, carbon copy us - emailus@stoprobbie.com)
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Yes!!! Now we're getting somewhere!
I am so excited to see the latest marketing campaign from CFI Canada. Following up their "There's probably no god" from last year is a campaign focused on a wider set of claims.
What I like most about this ad is that we're not skirting around the issue - belief in god is just as wild and crazy as accepting the existence of bigfoot, zeus, psychics, homeopathy (and the site goes on to include: chiropractic, boogiemen, vampires, leprechauns and many more) or, from the other side, believing in homeopathy or zeus or boogiemen is just as wild and crazy as accepting that a god (or gods) exist(s).
Enjoy!
Monday, December 6, 2010
Amanda Brown Responds with what is in Homeopathic 'Treatments': Nothing
After posting the first entry on Watford's own Amanda Brown, I invited her to comment or add something to the discussion. Another post followed shortly and then, like magic (like Homeopathy?), an email from Amanda.
The content of her email was eerily similar to Homeopathy - empty but with some suggestion of content.
I do think that Amanda is sincere in her belief in magic (homeopathy) - I've never met a Homeopath who didn't appear to be. I think, like all of us, the desire to believe can sometimes allow us to cherry-pick information that agrees with our position (confirmation bias) and ignore the contradictory evidence.
Without a doubt, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of websites that contain countless anecdotes about people overcoming the impossible with the help of homeopathy. One must be reminded that the plural of anecdote, however, is not data.
In the past, I have linked to studies done on homeopathy (real studies) that show no benefit beyond placebo and I have linked to a couple of tiny studies that suggest further study is required and that there may be a small benefit to homeopathy. Small studies with limited (no) controls are not what science relies on. Larger and more complete trials have shown, conclusively, that homeopathy's benefit is simply equal to (if not because of - which I would suggest it is) the placebo effect.
The reality of homeopathy is that it isn't based on reality - to accept that extremely dilute substances, so dilute that they can't possibly contain a single molecule of the 'active' ingredient, can affect the natural history of a disease would require us to forget what we know about biology and chemistry (nevermind physics and modern medicine).
Amanda Brown is pushing products that have no plausible mechanism of altering specific outcomes of a disease but, as a result of seeking homeopathic "treatments", having people delay real treatment can have terrible effects. Homeopathy is not only silly, it has real potential consequences.
The content of her email was eerily similar to Homeopathy - empty but with some suggestion of content.
Sarnia Skeptic,I have, since, responded to Amanda with a request that she not only imply that there are "websites that confirm" but actually include them for us to consider. I suspect our communications have ended as a result - how dare me ask such impossible questions! (Almost a month has passed, as of this posting, and no response.)
I just wanted to let you know that I have now read both your blog entries, and you obviously have your mind made up about homeopathy and myself! Everyone has a right to their own option. I wish you would have made reference to all the websites that confirm the amzing things Homeopathy helps people to achieve. But like you said, you are Sarnia's very own Skeptic!!! I really do not have anything to add or to comment on, because I believe and stand behind Homeopathy 100%!
Thank you for pointing out my spelling error on my initial consultation form, I will be correcting that today!
Yours in health,
Amanda
I do think that Amanda is sincere in her belief in magic (homeopathy) - I've never met a Homeopath who didn't appear to be. I think, like all of us, the desire to believe can sometimes allow us to cherry-pick information that agrees with our position (confirmation bias) and ignore the contradictory evidence.
Without a doubt, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of websites that contain countless anecdotes about people overcoming the impossible with the help of homeopathy. One must be reminded that the plural of anecdote, however, is not data.
In the past, I have linked to studies done on homeopathy (real studies) that show no benefit beyond placebo and I have linked to a couple of tiny studies that suggest further study is required and that there may be a small benefit to homeopathy. Small studies with limited (no) controls are not what science relies on. Larger and more complete trials have shown, conclusively, that homeopathy's benefit is simply equal to (if not because of - which I would suggest it is) the placebo effect.
The reality of homeopathy is that it isn't based on reality - to accept that extremely dilute substances, so dilute that they can't possibly contain a single molecule of the 'active' ingredient, can affect the natural history of a disease would require us to forget what we know about biology and chemistry (nevermind physics and modern medicine).
Amanda Brown is pushing products that have no plausible mechanism of altering specific outcomes of a disease but, as a result of seeking homeopathic "treatments", having people delay real treatment can have terrible effects. Homeopathy is not only silly, it has real potential consequences.
The Real "Secret" - Alternative Medicine is a killer
From David Gorski at Science Based Medicine: Death by “alternative” medicine: Who’s to blame? (Revisited)
I hate stories like this. I really do. I hate them with a burning passion that makes it hard for me to see straight when I first find out about them.
In fact, you might even say that stories like this are a major part of the reason why I do what I do, both here and elsewhere. They’re a major part of the reason why I’ve recently branched out into public speaking, something that used to terrify me beyond belief but that lately I’ve become at least competent at–sometimes even not bad at all. Sadly, the story I’m about to tell is one I’ve told before, most recently at the Lorne Trottier Science Symposium, where I gave a talk on cancer cure “testimonials,” although at the time I gave the talk the story’s outcome, although predictable, was not yet known.
Now it is.
The woman to whom I refer is named Kim Tinkham, who was diagnosed with breast cancer over three and a half years ago. Regular readers may recall that Kim Tinkham achieved fame not long after that when she was featured on The Oprah Winfrey Show in an episode about The Secret, an episode I discussed posts entitled The Oprah-fication of Medicine and On the nature of “alternative” medicine cancer cure testimonials. I don’t want to discuss the utter nonsense that is The Secret in any detail here. However, for those unfamiliar with this particular bit of New Age woo, it’s important to point out that The Secret’s “Law of Attraction” takes the germ of a reasonable idea (namely that one’s attitudes and wishes influence whether one gets what one wants in life, something that’s been known for millennia) and goes off the deep end of woo by proclaiming that, in essence, you can get anything you want by wanting it badly enough and thinking positive thoughts. Basically “The Secret” is that you have the power to “attract” good to yourself by thinking happy thoughts (hence “the law of attraction,” which, according to Secret adherents always works). It’s an idea that resonates in so much of “alternative medicine,” such as German New Medicine or Biologie Totale. Of course, the implication of “Secret” thinking is that, if you don’t get what you want, it’s your fault, an idea that also resonates with so much “alternative” medicine, where a frequent excuse for failure is that the patient either didn’t follow the regimen closely enough or didn’t want it badly enough.
Basically, The Secret is what inspired Kim Tinkham to eschew all conventional therapy for her breast cancer and pursue “alternative” therapies, which is what she has done since 2007. Before I discuss her case in more detail, I’m going to cut to the chase, though.
This weekend, I learned that Kim Tinkham’s cancer has recurred and that she is dying. On Saturday, a reader of my other blog sent me an e-mail...
Continue Reading... http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=8745
I hate stories like this. I really do. I hate them with a burning passion that makes it hard for me to see straight when I first find out about them.
In fact, you might even say that stories like this are a major part of the reason why I do what I do, both here and elsewhere. They’re a major part of the reason why I’ve recently branched out into public speaking, something that used to terrify me beyond belief but that lately I’ve become at least competent at–sometimes even not bad at all. Sadly, the story I’m about to tell is one I’ve told before, most recently at the Lorne Trottier Science Symposium, where I gave a talk on cancer cure “testimonials,” although at the time I gave the talk the story’s outcome, although predictable, was not yet known.
Now it is.
The woman to whom I refer is named Kim Tinkham, who was diagnosed with breast cancer over three and a half years ago. Regular readers may recall that Kim Tinkham achieved fame not long after that when she was featured on The Oprah Winfrey Show in an episode about The Secret, an episode I discussed posts entitled The Oprah-fication of Medicine and On the nature of “alternative” medicine cancer cure testimonials. I don’t want to discuss the utter nonsense that is The Secret in any detail here. However, for those unfamiliar with this particular bit of New Age woo, it’s important to point out that The Secret’s “Law of Attraction” takes the germ of a reasonable idea (namely that one’s attitudes and wishes influence whether one gets what one wants in life, something that’s been known for millennia) and goes off the deep end of woo by proclaiming that, in essence, you can get anything you want by wanting it badly enough and thinking positive thoughts. Basically “The Secret” is that you have the power to “attract” good to yourself by thinking happy thoughts (hence “the law of attraction,” which, according to Secret adherents always works). It’s an idea that resonates in so much of “alternative medicine,” such as German New Medicine or Biologie Totale. Of course, the implication of “Secret” thinking is that, if you don’t get what you want, it’s your fault, an idea that also resonates with so much “alternative” medicine, where a frequent excuse for failure is that the patient either didn’t follow the regimen closely enough or didn’t want it badly enough.
Basically, The Secret is what inspired Kim Tinkham to eschew all conventional therapy for her breast cancer and pursue “alternative” therapies, which is what she has done since 2007. Before I discuss her case in more detail, I’m going to cut to the chase, though.
This weekend, I learned that Kim Tinkham’s cancer has recurred and that she is dying. On Saturday, a reader of my other blog sent me an e-mail...
Continue Reading... http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=8745
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)