Nice source lol
more like, great bait  |
|
|
|
It must suck to be you guys.
it must suck to be a troll. |
|
|
|
Great example of my point, thanks. I know, from experience and observation, that aloe makes my sunburn better. I didn't need the validation from statistical evidence provided by RCTs. Some less independent herd-minded people do, because they live in a world filled with fear, uncertainty, and doubt (but that's their problem).
so your logic is: I got sunburn, put on aloe, and now sunburn is better. therefore, aloe heals my sunburn faster. if you had any critical thinking skills, you will see there are tons of biases and variables that you're not accounting for. for all i know, it could be placebo, or your skin healing naturally. RCTs are great for establishing aloe's method(s?)/agent(s?) of action, but it would be silly to suffer needlessly waiting decades for their results when relief can be provided immediately.
the problem is that studies has not shown that aloe vera aids in skin healing. if aloe vera really did help to heal skin, the results should be reproducible. Evidence of the senses is a form of empirical evidence. A first-hand account is a form of primary evidence. RCTs are secondary sources.
there's nothing wrong with empirical evidence you collected yourself. however, unless the evidence was collected from many sources and in a controlled environment, the result will be subject to bias. i, along with a overwhelming majority of the scientific community prefer RCTs because they were done in a controlled environment, with a large sample group, and conducted in a way to minimize biases. Anecdotes are stories you hear from others. If you're unfamiliar with Objectivist epistemology you should read Kelly's above quoted book.
see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence#Scientific_context |
|
|
|
|
wait for it to sync (about a day). make sure you have at least 6 connections.
|
|
|
|
If I get a burn (especially sunburn  ) I don't need RCTs to tell me that applying aloe vera is a good idea. I learned that from my grandma, and it's common sense. bonus: https://i.minus.com/iVyoG5NjLNBzb.pngAgain, trusting the FDA's medical advice (RCTs be damned) is like trusting the SEC for investment advice ("Madoff? Sure, he's a great guy. A real mench!").
Or like trusting public schools to educate your children.
Or like trusting the Fed with the power to print money.
Or like trusting the FEC to ensure free and fair elections.
how is this relevant to colloidal silver? your argument is based on mistrust of goverment agencies (opposite of appeal to authority). but even that fails, because I wanted RCTs, regardless of source. So you don't like randomized controlled trials. What experiments/proof can you provide that shows ingestion of colloidal silver can cure, prevent or diagnose a disease? The evidence you presented so far either do do not lead to the aforementioned conclusion, or is purely speculative. You may, but I do not live in a socially-constructed reality. My epistemology is based on rational individualism, which does not discount (and indeed exalts) the evidence of the senses:
Would you so kindly explain what "evidence of the senses" is? Is it just anecdotal evidence? |
|
|
|
I've seen this deal floating around various communities and I'd like to share it. - register account at artscow
use a working email because they will confirm it. also make sure "Yes, please send me special offers and discounts." box is checked. - design a large mousepad and put whatever bitcoin logos you want
- add design to cart and checkout
- apply coupon code Z099PLAYW78YP and your total should be $0.991
 - pay with paypal
- wait 3 weeks for the mousepad to arrive
- keep the mousepad for yourself or give it away to your friends
1disclosure: the coupon code can be substituted with any other account's code, obtained from http://www.artscow.com/unique-code. whoever generated the code will get $1 from each purchase. if you use someone else's code, it's theoretically possible to create a chain where everybody gets free mousepads, but ordering with money earned from referrals is spotty at best. |
|
|
|
iCEBREAKER, always nice to have you back.  It's not FUD. There is just no evidence presented in this thread. If you think I missed a piece of evidence, please redirect me to which source I missed. Please note that evidence refers to empirical evidence (from RCTs), not how many physicians wrote about it, or how long the practice has been around. There you go again, moving the goal posts to the horizon by purposefully defining "evidence" in as artificially narrow a way as possible. Ever heard of the phrase "Evidence of the Senses?" No? It's going to come as a shock to you, but there are plenty of kinds of evidence produced outside of RCTs.  Tell me how RCTs are considered as narrow. RCTs are the standard in modern, evidence based medicine. You should also know that "Evidence of the Senses" is basically anecdotal evidence, and therefore not reliable. Also, whether or not RCT results can be reproduced outside of RCTs does not have anything to do with the reliability of non-RCT results. I have never denied the oligodynamic effect. This has been said many times, even you acknowledge this in your posts. Of course you never denied the oligodynamic effect. That would be stupid. But so is being unable to discuss colloidal silver without ranting about '9/11 nutjobs.' uh... ok? history of use does NOT constitute evidence unless there were properly controlled trials proving its effectiveness. Again, you should be able to make that point without resorting to red herrings intended to instigate flame wars. But thanks anyway for sharing the ugliness of your thought process and depth of your strangely emotional antipathy towards colloidal silver. How is that a red herring? You were arguing that colloidal silver was effective because of its use throughout history. oh isn't that convenient? a product that has been around for thousands of years has never had its validity verified by modern science? Must be some big phrama conspiracy there. Again, just because it's "common sense" doesn't mean it's automatically true. Remember when it was "common sense" that low temperatures caused the cold?
Again with the "conspiracy" trigger words. Why is it so hard for you to understand that a product must be patentable and potentially very profitable in order for a company to justify the massive trouble and exorbitant expense of RTCs? And FYI, cold temps are conducive to viral propagation for several different reasons. Now go back to debunking something less complicated and more in line with your limited capabilites, like chemtrails, homeopathy, or astrology.  >implying all RCTs are funded by drug manufacturers >implying all RCTs are done solely for the purpose of getting regulatory approval for a drug >implying universities don't do RCTs for the purpose of advancing human knowledge case in point: acetylsalicylic acid, an out-of-patent drug has recently shown to reduce the risk of heart attacks and strokes. |
|
|
|
[...] FedEx First Overnight within 24 hours of arrival.
[...]
shipping included? |
|
|
|
I followed these instruction, not sure where to find the software after it's installed, where did gitian go, I tried putt gitian-builder into the run box but it didn't work.
if the build succeeds, the files are in bitcoin-release |
|
|
|
it's still in stock, and I can add 300 to cart without any problems.  |
|
|
|
Past trades1| User | Item Traded | Transaction Value | Escrow? | Date completed | | daruma | amazon purchase | $30 USD | No, daruma went first | 2013-05-08 |
1only trades completed after May 7, 2013 are listed.
|
|
|
|
|
how is this bitcoin related?
|
|
|
|
I'm sure the victims need support, but why do they need money ?
The guy that freed the victims has done something great and courageous, but why does he need money?
If they don't need money, I don't see the point of donating to them, better donate to someone or an organization that actually needs money.
Unless they really do need money ?
Are you kidding? Ill donate the first few bitcoin. If you feel they don't need help and support all of witch money can bring then don't donate. Don't come on here and throw your selfish excuses here and try to destroy something good. Please don't continue trying to stop me from getting something going to help these victims by posting bs. I will put up 2 bitcoins to this cause. ITT: people who watched CNN all day and want to throw money at the problem. |
|
|
|
|
1. open up windows explorer
2. in the address bar, type in %appdata%\litecoin
3. hit enter
4. delete the files
|
|
|
|
they never respond to emails nor do they respond to tickets. |
|
|
|
but I really don't understand why we have to implement transaction filtering in a way that is invisible to the user.
Becuase setting it sanely is not obvious. There is no NAK in the bitcoin protocol. If you go an set it to 1.0 or whatever you're effectively a 1/8th DOS attack on your peers, if a bunch of people set it to totally random value transactions will start randomly failing because they end up with peers that aren't forwarding the transactions. I explained that in the pull request thread linked to in this thread as well as in some of the other threads here on the subject. "you should probably not touch this unless major Bitcoin ninjas that you trust are telling everyone to touch it". Ok, I see why silently dropping transactions from peers is a bad idea. Thank you. But is there a way to penalize dust spam? Say, delay relay of dust spam transactions for 10 minutes. Who cares?! It's not a big deal if people can't send less than 5300 satoshis. Who actually sends that small an amount?
see: You're making the news Gavin, but not with something intelligent or innovative like you have us used to... [...] You guys continue refusing to implement solutions useful to all of us and then impose arbitrary limits in the client? Take for example the interface to limit "dust" by user choice. What happened to that and why Gregory closed it like it did? |
|
|
|
LIKE: blocking dust spam DISLIKE: default limit, undocumented options, invisible to user the filtering part of jonls' patch may be controversial, but I really don't understand why we have to implement transaction filtering in a way that is invisible to the user. |
|
|
|
|
spawning random processes is pretty suspicious.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
