Slashdot Mirror
10 Great Snake-Oil Gadgets
The Byelorussian Strikes Again writes "Wired offers up 10 of the most awesome snake oil gadgets, from industrial cables sold as $200 ionized pain-relieving bracelets to a plastic chip that cures anything, improves gas mileage and cleans swimming pools.
One truly sad development: the infamous $500 wooden volume knob is no longer on sale."
Mac OSX
If a baby duck is a "duckling," why would anyone want to eat "dumplings?"
How can I be expected to take you seriously? Your arguments are clearly tinged with high emotion. --And you are obviously commenting before having looked at the evidence at hand. (A VERY common occurrence with people who get rude so quickly).
--I mean, if you'd taken the time to look into the Randi challenge, you wouldn't be suggesting that his standards are 'too strict'. Randi is just this side of egomaniacally nuts. --There are actually scanned letters from Randi showing how he totally loses his cool and calls people names when they approach him about his challenge. One fellow claimed that he could stop eating for a year and wanted to take the challenge, but rather than Randi positing tests or asking questions as any reasonable person might be expected to do given that his challenge is supposedly designed to test exactly these kinds of claims, he instead wrote back calling the man a liar and then proceeded to tell him where to go in rather colorful language. Your post was actually less aggressive. In any case, it was quite pathetic, and very revealing of Randi's character. And it was hardly an isolated item. He also has a track record of changing the rules mid-game, of making up silly explanations for how certain tests were accomplished which had they been achieved in the manners he suggested, would have been even greater feats than the ones being tested for. Basically, Randi acts like a petulant child and he doesn't play well with others. --This is the guy you're defending.
Anyway, you should re-read your own response. You are attacking points I never made, and you are being rude, and you are making patently silly arguments. --Suggesting that real dowsers would drive fake dowswers out of business simply by being real is. . . Well, that's like saying bad building contractors cannot exist because good building contractors would drive them out of business. --That's a far closer analogy than your 'cars have engines' argument. Like I said, it's very hard to take somebody like you seriously. You may even be a smart guy, but you have to admit, you're not presenting yourself very well here.
I'm sorry, but I've been in far too many debates with rude people who bluster and shout and refuse to listen to any sort of reason to want to waste a lot of time with you. At the very least, do some research on Randi before leaping to his defense with your +1 "text of boldfacing", okay? Thanks.
-FL
Blah dee blah blah. Doesn't anybody do their own thinking anymore?
The amazing truth here is that nobody really CARES about proving anything to people who don't want to believe. Those for whom dowsing works benefit from it and are secure in this knowledge, and those who are angry about the concept of dowsing are free to be chumps. Plain and simple.
Your level of awareness is your problem. If you want to know more, go exploring, but don't expect people to want to waste their energy forcing knowledge upon you.
-FL