Anonymous Carrot Wrote: (04-26-2012 07:53 PM)
Grace Wrote: (04-26-2012 07:40 PM)
Anonymous Carrot Wrote: (04-26-2012 06:55 PM)
How many market points do I earn if I participate in your survey?
Why be so sensitive about a question that involves medicinal modalities when you supply sources that the Skeptic Organizations in North America and the Sceptic Societies in the UK and Europe use to attempt to debunk: the paranormal and the occult, alternative medicine, ETs and UFOs, cryptozoology, the supernatural and metaphysical, etc?
Since you're a sceptic and you rely on the "skeptic" sources, you must have taken the time to actually investigate the Skeptic Organizations and Sceptic Societies themselves, no?
I chose to ask you a question about allopathic medicine because I'm most familiar with the Skeptic Organizations "work" to attempt to debunk alternative medicine.
We've discussed many topics on this thread and it's sometimes helpful to the dialogue to understand why someone would choose to share the sources they do.
I wasn't sensitive about your questions, I was just making fun of you.
As for those sceptic organisations, I don't know what sources they use since I'm not familiar with them.
All in good fun I suppose.
Here's a lttle help to start you off researching the skeptic groups:
Skeptical Organisations and Magazines
A Guide to the Skeptics
Although the title of CSICOP implied that it is engaged in scientific investigation, the only instance in which the Committee actually carried out an investigation was a fiasco. Right at the beginning of CSICOP's history, Kurtz attacked the astrological findings of Michel Gauquelin, who claimed to have found that the position of Mars at a person's birth was related to sports ability. Data were collected and analysed by CSICOP, with results that supported Gauquelin's findings. Some members of the committee charged Kurtz with trying to cover up these findings and suggested that the outcome, favourable to Gauquelin, should be frankly acknowledged.
Kurtz was enraged by this opinion and refused to heed it. Several members of the CSICOP committee resigned in protest. (A detailed account of this controversy by Dennis Rawlins, one of the co-founder's of CSICOP can be read at CSICOP controversy
In 1981, CSICOP adopted a formal policy of not conducting research.
In his book The Trickster and the Paranormal (2001), George P. Hansen has published an interesting analysis of CSICOP and its activities. Here are some of his conclusions: "The Committee's primary function is to marginalize the paranormal….Status consciousness is one of the Committee's salient characteristics. CSICOP goes to considerable lengths to assure its status and respectability in the eyes of scientific, academic, and media elites.
Media Skeptics: A Popcorn Gallery
The “Randi Challenge” : is anyone fooled?
All this is explained in detail in an essay called sTARBABY, written by Dennis Rawlins, originally a cohort of Randi and co-founder of the CSICOP group. Rawlins was expelled from the group as a result of wanting to come clean. Randi, on the other hand, went along with the cover-up. Mr. Rawlins reveals some interesting facts about Randi, and the challenge:
He assured me how cautious he was in the testing for his well-publicized $ 10,000 prize for proof of psychic abilities (for which he acts as policeman, judge and jury — and thus never has supported my idea of neutral judgment of CSICOP tests. ‘I always have an out,’ he said. 
Another telling piece of research into CSICOP’s activities ties Randi and his cohorts into an even bigger web of deceit:
On both sides of the Atlantic, CSICOP carried out a sustained campaign against alternative medicine. There are close ties with the National Council Against Health Fraud with continual debunking and ridiculing of any therapies which do not meet its approval, specifically to do with cancer and AIDS. It is notable that approval is inevitably given to treatments deriving from the products of multinational drug companies: Welcome, Hoffman, LaRoche, Eli Lily, etc., all of whom are not only linked to the US foundations through hospitals and research institutes, but also the government in the guise of the FDA (Federal Drug Administration), who approve the use of new drugs for sale, so implying their safety.
It is also legitimate to question why senior members of the US government, politicians, the military, industry, bankers, the foundations, religion, universities and the media meet clandestinely in the USA under the auspices of an organisation founded in 1973 by David Rockefeller, the Trilateral Commission, and how their decisions are then implemented – if not through their own organisations, then their offshoots and associated companies. 
Over the years Randi’s prize has been evaluated by a variety of potential challengers and organizations and found to be a sham:
and many more links on this site: