L Ron Hubbub wrote:
Oh yeah, I have seen a lot of that stuff too.
The fact that 'happy-go-lucky' actually believes that he is getting better
fuel ecomony because a magnet is strapped to his fuel line is utterly
amaxing.
And that he comes out swinging to defend his completey undefendable beliefs
is just more testament to how utterly pathetic a human being becomes because
of lack of any science knowledge.
But he offers no rebuttle or debate to defend his claim. Just little
insulting jabs.
Literally a country bumpkin that used to be had at county fairs or now by TV
evangelists and cults like scientogy.
The macaroon that believes something because it is printed.
But I wish I had a whole bunch of 'happy-go-luckies.'
They make great worker slaves.
If you tell them they are doing a good job for the good of the company they
will work until they drop dead - and for mimum wage!! HA HA HA.
They just can't see that they are like the tools they use. Or maybe just as
dumb as the 'box of hammers' we hear so much about...
But wow do they have 'faith' placed in the weirdest things. And I do not
mean religion.

Why do you demean him? Some very smart people believe very strange
things. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, he of the Sherlock Holmes tales and
obviously a writer who understood logic and reason, believed in fairies
with little wings, like Tinker Bell. It was because of a hoax by two
children who planted fake photos of winged nymphs outdoors where he
could see them, but not close enough to inspect.

World-famous scientists have been taken in by "mindreading," mental
spoonbending, and other stage fakery that is part of any good
magician's trick bag.

Totally rational, intelligent people subscribe to aura therapy, which
involves passing the hands around the "patient's" body without touching
it, even though an experiment by a 9-year-old girl completely disproved
its validity a couple of years ago.

How about we stick to the pros and cons and not make personal attacks?
We're way OT as it is.

"Avery W3AVE" wrote in message
ps.com...

L Ron Hubbub wrote:

snipped

Why do you demean him? Some very smart people believe very strange
things. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, he of the Sherlock Holmes tales and
obviously a writer who understood logic and reason, believed in fairies
with little wings, like Tinker Bell. It was because of a hoax by two
children who planted fake photos of winged nymphs outdoors where he
could see them, but not close enough to inspect.

World-famous scientists have been taken in by "mindreading," mental
spoonbending, and other stage fakery that is part of any good
magician's trick bag.

Totally rational, intelligent people subscribe to aura therapy, which
involves passing the hands around the "patient's" body without touching
it, even though an experiment by a 9-year-old girl completely disproved
its validity a couple of years ago.

How about we stick to the pros and cons and not make personal attacks?
We're way OT as it is.


Another item I've not seen mentioned - maybe I missed it - are those "Copper
Bands" or "Magnetic Bands" that people wear to improve Arthritis and such. I
think the majority of us know the real truth; however - you're going to be
hard pressed to convince those who believe in said items - of them "not"
working.

So - though "we" may not buy into it - as long as they're willing to spend
their money and if they have what would be deemed "faith" - not tied to any
religion - that the item works - God Bless them! At least to them - they're
getting results for the money they spent. And, that is all that truly
matters!

Many people believe in Psychics too - that they can tell the future. IF they
were so "psychic" - we would have a lot more lottery winners. They would
continue to give the lucky numbers and they themselves would be playing it
as well. Oh but wait - they claim they aren't allowed to do such things!
BULL CRAP. That is an easy out for their explanation of NOT being able to
predict anything. Point is, many still go to these people. There will ALWAYS
be snake oil sales pitches - both real items (copper bands, gas tank
magnets, etc) and the imagined (psychic tales) - and their will always be
those who believe in such things to support the trades as they apply. It has
been that way for centuries, why change now?

Therefore - there is no need or reason to defame or demean any one for their
own beliefs. As the man said - there are many "prominent" people who follow
those paths. If they're happy, who are we to interfere?

Just my 2 cents.

Lou

Avery W3AVE wrote:
[snip]
Some very smart people believe very strange
things. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, he of the Sherlock Holmes tales and
obviously a writer who understood logic and reason, believed in
fairies with little wings, like Tinker Bell. It was because
of a hoax by two children who planted fake photos of winged
nymphs outdoors where he could see them, but not close enough
to inspect.

World-famous scientists have been taken in by "mindreading," mental
spoonbending, and other stage fakery that is part of any good
magician's trick bag.

Totally rational, intelligent people subscribe to aura therapy, which
involves passing the hands around the "patient's" body without
touching it, even though an experiment by a 9-year-old girl
completely disproved its validity a couple of years ago.

How about we stick to the pros and cons and not make personal attacks?
We're way OT as it is.

One of the co-inventors of the transistor was famous for another reason:
he espoused his opinions about Africans being inferior because he said
their brains were small. World-famous scientists, or authors, or anybody
else with training in a specialized discipline, should be questioned
just like the greenest college student when they speak outside their
area of expertise.

There are, sad to say, cases where ad hominem attacks are warranted, and
this is one of them. The original post is off-topic, but that's a minor
offense on Usenet. However, the claims _ARE_ laughable, and anyone who
champions such nonsense deserves to be offered a discount on a bridge:
if nothing else, it's a chastening reminder that, in the future, those
who were disposed to believe them should drop a gold brick on the ground
before negotiating a purchase.

Paraphrasing Richard Pryor: "Your dignity will heal a lot faster than
your bank account balance".

William
P.S. I would set the followups, but I can't think of a group where this
discussion belongs.

--
A little learning is a dang'rous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring;
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.
-- Alexander Pope, Essay on Criticism

nonoise wrote:
[snip]
There are, sad to say, cases where ad hominem attacks are warranted, and
this is one of them. The original post is off-topic, but that's a minor
offense on Usenet. However, the claims _ARE_ laughable, and anyone who
champions such nonsense deserves to be offered a discount on a bridge:
if nothing else, it's a chastening reminder that, in the future, those
who were disposed to believe them should drop a gold brick on the ground
before negotiating a purchase.

William

William, I was with you until this paragraph. Even the most laughable
claims, in my opinion, warrant one of two reactions online: Ignore
them, or explain, using facts and not just assertions, why you believe
them to be nonsensel. I disagree that ad hominem attacks are EVER
appropriate in response to a claim concerning UFOs, fuel line magnets,
political conspiracies--you name it. My usual response is to roll my
eyes and move on. The only reason I posted this time was because the
issue has been researched by responsible parties and I thought it might
be worthwhile to make that known.

Why bother with personal attacks? The faceless, no-consequences
Internet makes that too easy as it is. No way do I believe that some of
the meanspirited garbage that stains too many NGs (spend 15 minutes on
antiques radio/phono or shortwave) would come from somebody's mouth in
a real conversation, even one conducted over the phone and not in
person.

Avery W3AVE wrote:
nonoise wrote:
[snip]
There are, sad to say, cases where ad hominem attacks are warranted, and
this is one of them. [snip]

William

William, I was with you until this paragraph. Even the most laughable
claims, in my opinion, warrant one of two reactions online: Ignore
them, or explain, using facts and not just assertions, why you believe
them to be nonsensel. I disagree that ad hominem attacks are EVER
appropriate in response to a claim concerning UFOs, fuel line magnets,
political conspiracies--you name it. My usual response is to roll my
eyes and move on. The only reason I posted this time was because the
issue has been researched by responsible parties and I thought it
might be worthwhile to make that known.

Why bother with personal attacks? The faceless, no-consequences
Internet makes that too easy as it is. No way do I believe that
some of the meanspirited garbage that stains too many NGs
(spend 15 minutes on antiques radio/phono or shortwave)
would come from somebody's mouth in a real conversation, even
one conducted over the phone and not in person.


You are correct, in the sense that an "ad hominem" attack is against a
person instead of his/her argument: it's a logical fallacy, and should
be avoided for that reason. However, as you point out, another poster
had already refuted the claim: I though it obvious that no further
evidence was needed.

Someone who asserts that the moon is made of green cheese, or that the
earth is flat, or that magnets affect gasoline - or that Africans are
inferior - should be answered with skepticism. Even the most wild
speculation can attain the status of "fact" when enough people believe
it: my father was fond of saying "A million Frenchmen can't be wrong",
and Joseph McCarthy proved that Americans are never short on
gullibility, so I remain convinced that an appeal to preconceived
notions, either of racial purity or oil company conspiracies, deserves,
if not derision, at least to be received with an extra measure of caution.

In other words, the burden of proof is on the claimant: if someone
believes that magnets can improve gasoline mileage, let him step up and
demonstrate it. If he can't, let him take his lumps.

I'm sorry to crabwalk here, but I believe my concerns are real, and I
have seen otherwise "normal" people hire "Feng shui" "practitioners" to
place magnets in their work cubicle (so as to assure that the stars were
in alignment or the worm had turned or the entrails were favorable, or
whatever it is that convinces "normal" people to open their wallets).
The one constant of the human race is that David Hannum _was_ right:
"There's a sucker born every minute".

Our history has shown that a million suckers _can_ be wrong, but it also
demonstrates, as Galileo would attest, that they can be very vicious
when confronted with the newest version of the truth. I know I make your
argument for you here, but with a point in mind: those with outlandish
ideas had best be ready for a lot of hard stares and possess a lot of
hard facts.

William
P.S. Suggestions as to a more appropriate forum are, of course, welcome.

--
A little learning is a dang'rous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring;
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.
-- Alexander Pope, Essay on Criticism

nonoise wrote:

You are correct, in the sense that an "ad hominem" attack is against a
person instead of his/her argument: it's a logical fallacy, and should
be avoided for that reason. However, as you point out, another poster
had already refuted the claim: I though it obvious that no further
evidence was needed.

Someone who asserts that the moon is made of green cheese, or that the
earth is flat, or that magnets affect gasoline - or that Africans are
inferior - should be answered with skepticism. Even the most wild
speculation can attain the status of "fact" when enough people believe
it: my father was fond of saying "A million Frenchmen can't be wrong",
and Joseph McCarthy proved that Americans are never short on
gullibility, so I remain convinced that an appeal to preconceived
notions, either of racial purity or oil company conspiracies, deserves,
if not derision, at least to be received with an extra measure of caution.

In other words, the burden of proof is on the claimant: if someone
believes that magnets can improve gasoline mileage, let him step up and
demonstrate it. If he can't, let him take his lumps.

I'm sorry to crabwalk here, but I believe my concerns are real, and I
have seen otherwise "normal" people hire "Feng shui" "practitioners" to
place magnets in their work cubicle (so as to assure that the stars were
in alignment or the worm had turned or the entrails were favorable, or
whatever it is that convinces "normal" people to open their wallets).
The one constant of the human race is that David Hannum _was_ right:
"There's a sucker born every minute".

Our history has shown that a million suckers _can_ be wrong, but it also
demonstrates, as Galileo would attest, that they can be very vicious
when confronted with the newest version of the truth. I know I make your
argument for you here, but with a point in mind: those with outlandish
ideas had best be ready for a lot of hard stares and possess a lot of
hard facts.

William
P.S. Suggestions as to a more appropriate forum are, of course, welcome.

At the risk of repetition and belaboring the obvious, there isn't
anything at all in your response with which I disagree. "An extra
measure of caution"..."answered with skepticism": exactly.

sci.skeptic is one place that someone who is genuinely curious about an
improbable claim
might find help. It is no place for those who believe regardless of the
lack of evidence.