Talking to one of those water-wielding witchdoctors

[MRaverz]

So I'm half way through talking with a real life homoeopath and they say this:

I'm sure THE world, like me, doesn't know what you're talking about. I think its YOUR world man. Your little boring rational perfect world that can all be explained by randomized controlled studies. What a lifeless dead existence you have. Wouldn't be so bad if you didn't try to spread it like a virus.

Now, bar the fact that half of this is clearly an ad hominem and an attempt to simply brush off the mountain of evidence which shows homoeopathy to be nothing but water and sugar pills, is there something more to this? Does this show a certain way of thinking which we may not have considered before or simply an adaptation of a known one?

The idea that having a rational approach to life would lead to a lifeless or joyless one life in itself is a claim we've probably all heard before, but 'MY world'. Is this a case of someone using (and potentially 'prescribing') a medicine because they, in part, think that it's more fun or interesting to play with water rather consider weighing up the pros/cons of medicine which has evidence pointing towards it working? If so, is it potentially a criminal act to act in a position of care without being concerned with whether or not a treatment can be shown to work?


I also like how they keep loosely referring to things like kidneys and viruses like a real doctor. :lol:

 

[BrainBlow]

It annoys me how these pseudo-science proposers act like if they are like "the scientists of old" who were ridiculed, yet they were right.
Conveniently they chose to forget the fact that the "opposition" before didn't use the same standards as we do today(as much). And the theories that were right, still passes on today's standards(that they call "dogmatic and closed minded").

This is my main problem with these fuckers. They ignore history so that they can think they'll be part of the suppressed minority that will be revered by future generations as the upstanding "scientists" who fought the "dogma".

 

[MRaverz]

It annoys me how these pseudo-science proposers act like if they are like "the scientists of old" who were ridiculed, yet they were right.
Conveniently they chose to forget the fact that the "opposition" before didn't use the same standards as we do today(as much). And the theories that were right, still passes on today's standards(that they call "dogmatic and closed minded").

This is my main problem with these fuckers. They ignore history so that they can think they'll be part of the suppressed minority that will be revered by future generations as the upstanding "scientists" who fought the "dogma".

Perhaps it's a case of simply being ignorant of history and not being honest enough to be curious about it?

 

[BrainBlow]

Ignorance is just no excuse.
They have simply peeked at the history of several of these figures and then claim themselves(and their spokespeople) to be of the same Caliber.