3 posts shown.
hollowtrucker77 said:Look, I don't work for the FDA or anything, but I've spent enough time looking at alternative medicine to see how much of it is total nonsense, not just bad science
Personally, I have nothing against people using unofficial methods if they actually help
But that doesn't mean every random guy can just walk up with some half-baked idea, claim it's a miracle cure, and start scamming or misleading people
As for me? I don't even give charlatans the time of day. They have zero credibility. Honestly, "spirituality"—or whatever label people want to slap on it—is basically a playground for these types. You could practically call anyone studying alternative therapies a fraud, because let's face it: it’s just easier to believe in a quick fix than to put in the actual work required to get real results and form an objective opinion. But that's a whole different conversation, isn't it? This thread is supposed to be about "questions for the administration."
hollowtrucker77 said:Maybe because an alternative shouldn't involve sheer stupidity or selling people snake oil?
Or at least, it shouldn't.
I’m honestly lost on what you mean by "idiocy" or "snake oil." If you're implying that rejecting everything not officially labeled "mainstream science" is foolish, then fine—let's just drop the subject entirely. But if you aren't part of the site administration—and we both know you aren't—then continuing this conversation feels pretty pointless. I'm looking for a direct answer to a specific question. I'm not interested in debating how things *ought* to be. Can we stick to the facts?
I have a question regarding this whole "alternative" vs. "science" dynamic here. Why is it that certain members get a free pass to insult others by implying they’re on cocaine or by mocking their education levels? It feels like people are throwing around insults constantly. Yet, the moment a user dares to bring up Alex Jones—specifically when discussing facts about the harmful nature of energy-saving bulbs—they get threatened with a ban by an admin or moderator. Seriously? If someone brought up Thomas Edison during a thread about lightbulb technology, would we see that kind of reaction? Why is this hypocrisy tolerated? Why do these self-proclaimed "scientists" get to lecture everyone else? And what's with all the talk about sanatoriums and similar nonsense? If the "alternative" crowd has just become Tesla, then I guess I understand. But has anyone else noticed how the "science" group relentlessly attacks the "alternative" users, while the reverse almost never happens? For those of us trying to be reasonable, enough is enough. I really want to know who is allowing this hypocrisy, these double standards, and the constant insults to slide. I've seen some colorful warnings handed out, sure, but a warning card is one thing; being threatened with a permanent ban just for mentioning a person who is presenting facts on a relevant topic is quite another. Thanks.