Critical look at zetetics

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

but absolutely, the placebo effect has some efficacy, it's scientifically proven, so why not take advantage of it?

Effectiveness of the second dose in Israel: 30% ... Same rate as the placebo ... Cretin.

[ABC2019]

Okay, I'm going to be nice, I'm going to clarify, I don't walk according to the criteria (which ones are yours?) But to the inner compass.

my criteria are their competence in the application of the scientific method, that is to say in particular if they understand well what a test of significance is. Unfortunately there are good and bad scientists.

If you do not have a criterion to distinguish the two, the most likely is that you believe those you want to believe, and therefore that your opinion on scientists is not very valuable, any more than that of religious beliefs.

because you are behind every scientist's ass to get what he does and how he does it?

You have to accept a part of irrationality in life. Attention I said a part.

no, we cannot control every scientist, but we can cross-reference different information, look at the quality of the documents presented, see if the same results were obtained by others, study the relevance of the critiques ...

I trust what I feel is true.
You can say that I validate my beliefs, if that reassures you.
I can't convince you that I feel some true and some wrong things and that it is overall effective.

It does not "reassure" me especially, you describe the usual mechanism of belief, which is at the base the mechanism of religions: people believe because they feel that it is true, it is called faith.

It's just different from the scientific method, which unfortunately often leads to accepting what you don't want to believe. That's why not everyone is psychologically adapted to accept it.

I'm not telling you that everyone has to be a scientist, I don't mind that there are dreamers, artists, or lunatics in the world. Just don't confuse the two, and don't call it science, that's all.

[Janic]

no, we cannot control every scientist, but we can cross-reference different information, look at the quality of the documents presented, see if the same results were obtained by others, study the relevance of the critiques ...

information like yours on vaccines? Fun! You are not even screwed to do a historical analysis on these and you think you are a scientist! Boastful!

It does not "reassure" me especially, you describe the usual mechanism of belief, which is at the base the mechanism of religions: people believe because they feel that it is true, it is called faith.

so you are, you have just admitted it once again, a religious of the worst kind; pseudo scientist!

It's just different from the scientific method, which unfortunately often leads to accepting what you don't want to believe. That's why not everyone is psychologically adapted to accept it.

you personally demonstrate this for a mentally disturbed narcissist type!

I'm not telling you that everyone has to be a scientist, I don't mind that there are dreamers, artists, or lunatics in the world. Just don't confuse the two, and don't call it science, that's all.

what bothers us is that a dreamer like you thinks he's a scientist, junk, and therefore incompetent. on most of the topics he hacks. So don't call your pseudo-zetetic fantasies for science!

[humus]

you describe the usual mechanism of belief, which is at the base the mechanism of religions: people believe because they feel it is true, it is called faith.

Well you're cut off from that while I have both mechanisms .
Who is winning?

[ABC2019]

you describe the usual mechanism of belief, which is at the base the mechanism of religions: people believe because they feel it is true, it is called faith.

Well you're cut off from that while I have both mechanisms .
Who is winning?

I don't mind that you have both mechanisms; It bothers me that you pass off one for the other.

[humus]

It bothers me that you pass off one for the other.

I distinguish between the two and both have their value.
You deny your inner compass, you are not "complete" and you are lost on certain subjects.
Mad people are very rational.

[ABC2019]

It bothers me that you pass off one for the other.

I distinguish between the two and both have their value.
You deny your inner compass, you are not "complete" and you are lost on certain subjects.
Mad people are very rational.

I am not lost on any subject, it's just you who are blocking and can no longer follow me. My compass is working fine, thank you.

[Janic]

abcon,

I am not lost on any subject,

wow, wow!

it's just you who blockades and can't follow me anymore. My compass is working fine, thank you.

yes your compass is demagnetized and it turns with the wind in any direction as evidenced by your all-out interventions.

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

I am not lost on any subject .....

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL! Word of PPPP (Pervers Paumé Pourri Prétentieux)!

[humus]

It bothers me that you pass off one for the other.

I distinguish between the two and both have their value.
You deny your inner compass, you are not "complete" and you are lost on certain subjects.
Mad people are very rational.

I am not lost on any subject, it's just you who are blocking and can no longer follow me. My compass is working fine, thank you.

Ah ba no you say only bet on reason and as you are contradictory, even your reason fails.
doubly lost