Date:   6/26/2005 7:56:36 PM ( 19 y ago)
Hits:   4,647
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=423041

0 of 0 (0%) readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

"That is a very rambling post. I don't see what there is to get confused about with the word fixation BTW.

The problem boils down to this ( I feel we need some lucidity here): you say the Lancet paper needs a control. I KNOW it doesn't. That is not double standards.

What reason would there be for a control?

Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean that explanation isn't valid. I did try to explain which you describe rather bizarrely as changing the subject.
"

1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further
justification for credibility.

and

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.

and

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.

Disinfo Tactics
 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.03 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=423041