Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
In his last post in this thread Admin Noronha told us that he has had his last word. But quite predictably, even that was not a truthful assertion from him. I guess he had not had his last innuendo or word salad. In what he has written below it appears that he has been offended by the fact that I have written about other medical, health-related and scientific issues that were part of my medical and scientific curriculum besides neuroscience, as well as social, political and internet-related matters of interest to me, instead of sticking to my profession. He also appears to offended by the fact another active Goan forum besides Goanet has been created by me over which he does not have any control. Oh well, too bad. Cheers, Santosh --- On Sun, 12/5/10, Frederick Noronha wrote: > > A very interesting twist to the argument, one which > certainly does > merit to the GMC debating champ of 197X (or 196X). > > It reminds me of those discussions of the yesteryears, > which went > something like this: "Even Albert Einstein believes that > socialism is > an inherently superior system." > > Now, as we all know, this is an appeal to misleading > authority! > > Not for a moment am I contesting Neuroscientist Santosh A. > Helekar's > (M.D., Ph.D., Associate Research Professor of Neuroscience > of the > Methodist Neurological Institute) knowledge or credentials > in > neuroscience. > > But even a humble hack like me (whose work lies > primarily in > disseminating information or ideas received from others) > reserves the > right to challenge the logic of someone who gains from the > projection > of being an expert in a range of issues. > > Issues that spread from alternative systems of health-cure > to > oncology, superstitions, the demerits of homeopathy and > ayurveda, > demography including the complex relationships between life > expectancy > and infant mortality rates, British and Portuguese > colonialism, the > politics of funding involving NRI Indians, the motives > behind communal > strife (or was it non-communal strife?) in Orissa, Naxalite > politics > and motivations, paradigms and principles of journalism, > the art and > ethics of running a mailing list, tracking IP addresses, > and the > weaknesses of Goanet vis a vis endeavours like > GoenchimXapotam or > whatever -- and much more. > > > See FN, if you were aware, you would NOT have scripted > the Times of > > India report based on the fudged Chagas da Silva > "alcoholism" study. > > Please could you point what you are referring to here, and > what > exactly is your problem with it? > > The author in question seems to have published quite a bit > on this topic: > > http://www.google.com/search?q=chagas+da+silva+alcoholism+Goa&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t > > Or is it that you just shoot the messengers when you don't > like the > message they're carrying? Or, are some achievers in > academia more > equal than others? FN > > > Frederick Noronha :: +91-9822122436 :: +91-832-2409490 >
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
Here is what I want to tell people who might be misled into believing the opposite of what the world-renowned British medical skeptic Ben Goldacre is saying in the article linked in the post appended below. Ben Goldacre is a medical scientist who has made his life's work to debunk quackery and pseudoscience of the type that is promoted on Goanet from various bogus websites. Please see for example the following link to the recently concluded symposium at McGill University in which he gave a talk on the threat posed by pseudoscience, alternative medicine and quackery on the internet and elsewere: http://tinyurl.com/DebunkingGoanetQuackery1 Here is the actual webcast of his talk along with those of Michael Shermer and David Gorski. Gorski is a man who has also refuted the garbage from Huffington Post that was recently recycled several times on Goanet. http://tinyurl.com/DebunkingGoanetQuackery2 I would encourage people to read the writings of Ben Goldacre and others. They explode the myths perpetuated on Goanet and the various pseudoscientific websites circulated by various people in this forum much better than me. Cheers, Santosh --- On Sun, 12/5/10, Dr. Ferdinando dos Reis Falcão wrote: > > If some did not understand why I posted this site under > this thread, > here’s why. > Some excerpts from the site: > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/03/bad-science-manipulate-mind-causality > > > 1- …(this is one reason why, in evidence-based medicine, > "expert opinion" is ranked as the least helpful form of > information…. > > > > 2- …This is just the latest in a whole raft of research > showing how > we can be manipulated into believing that we have control > over chance outcomes, > simply by presenting information differently, or giving > cues which imply that > skill had a role to play… > > > > 3-… One series of studies has shown that if you > manipulate someone > to make them feel powerful (through memories of a situation > in which they were > powerful, for example), they imagine themselves to have > even greater control > over outcomes that are still purely determined by chance, > which perhaps goes > some way to explaining the hubris of the great …. > > COMMENT : It is so obvious from the above excerpts that > “expert > opinion” is not at all helpful on Goanet. The posts > presented on Goanet by some > “expert opinion”, by claims of some internet sites are > bogus and the ones they cite are genuine is pure > manipulation. And lastly, when we have some handful of > adulators it goes some way to explaining the hubris of > the “expert opinion”. > > Dr. Ferdinando dos Reis Falcão. >
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
[1] re this from : See FN, if you were aware, you would NOT have scripted the Times of India report based on the fudged Chagas da Silva "alcoholism" study. [2] Frederick Noronha wrote the following: Please could you point what you are referring to here, and what exactly is your problem with it? The author in question seems to have published quite a bit on this topic: Or is it that you just shoot the messengers when you don't like the message they're carrying? Or, are some achievers in academia more equal than others? == JC's response: Well Well . as I perceive some cuteness in display ...let me put it this way. Preface: The issue at hand is NOT what the "author" eventually got published. The issue is the Times of India article which (as per your own acknowledgement) YOU scripted to "help a young Goan doctor", and the TOI headline of which + the conclusions contained therein. were challenged by both Santosh Helekar and me (and about which the author wrote to me indicating that "statistics in Indian studies are always fudged" ) (which may be true but I do not believe it to be true "always") 1: Do you remember the article in question? 2: Do you remember the GoaNet e-debate 200X not 197X (;-) which involved you? 3: If you do Are you still wondering what my problem was with the TOI article you scripted and sent off? 4: If you really wish to know, do submit it again to GoaNet - so that independent minds can refresh themselves of what the problem might be. You appear to repeatedly hide behind the "cliche skirt" (have omitted the accent -as GoaNet does a number on the accent) - so I will ignore the well worn 'shoot the messenger' bit. jc
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
On 5 December 2010 07:11, J. Colaco < jc> wrote: > You may not be aware but Santoshbab is one learned gentleman - holding > his own at a major and very competitive US teaching Institution. I am > not sure what your (FN's) experience has been (or is) with the level > of competition (for status as well as for research funding) within > (even) Indian Universities but I can tell you that in 2010, in the US, > one is either with substance or one is on the street. A very interesting twist to the argument, one which certainly does merit to the GMC debating champ of 197X (or 196X). It reminds me of those discussions of the yesteryears, which went something like this: "Even Albert Einstein believes that socialism is an inherently superior system." Now, as we all know, this is an appeal to misleading authority! Not for a moment am I contesting Neuroscientist Santosh A. Helekar's (M.D., Ph.D., Associate Research Professor of Neuroscience of the Methodist Neurological Institute) knowledge or credentials in neuroscience. But even a humble hack like me (whose work lies primarily in disseminating information or ideas received from others) reserves the right to challenge the logic of someone who gains from the projection of being an expert in a range of issues. Issues that spread from alternative systems of health-cure to oncology, superstitions, the demerits of homeopathy and ayurveda, demography including the complex relationships between life expectancy and infant mortality rates, British and Portuguese colonialism, the politics of funding involving NRI Indians, the motives behind communal strife (or was it non-communal strife?) in Orissa, Naxalite politics and motivations, paradigms and principles of journalism, the art and ethics of running a mailing list, tracking IP addresses, and the weaknesses of Goanet vis a vis endeavours like GoenchimXapotam or whatever -- and much more. > See FN, if you were aware, you would NOT have scripted the Times of > India report based on the fudged Chagas da Silva "alcoholism" study. Please could you point what you are referring to here, and what exactly is your problem with it? The author in question seems to have published quite a bit on this topic: http://www.google.com/search?q=chagas+da+silva+alcoholism+Goa&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t Or is it that you just shoot the messengers when you don't like the message they're carrying? Or, are some achievers in academia more equal than others? FN Frederick Noronha :: +91-9822122436 :: +91-832-2409490
[Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
If some did not understand why I posted this site under this thread, here’s why. Some excerpts from the site: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/03/bad-science-manipulate-mind-causality 1- …(this is one reason why, in evidence-based medicine, "expert opinion" is ranked as the least helpful form of information…. 2- …This is just the latest in a whole raft of research showing how we can be manipulated into believing that we have control over chance outcomes, simply by presenting information differently, or giving cues which imply that skill had a role to play… 3-… One series of studies has shown that if you manipulate someone to make them feel powerful (through memories of a situation in which they were powerful, for example), they imagine themselves to have even greater control over outcomes that are still purely determined by chance, which perhaps goes some way to explaining the hubris of the great …. COMMENT : It is so obvious from the above excerpts that “expert opinion” is not at all helpful on Goanet. The posts presented on Goanet by some “expert opinion”, by claims of some internet sites are bogus and the ones they cite are genuine is pure manipulation. And lastly, when we have some handful of adulators it goes some way to explaining the hubris of the “expert opinion”. Dr. Ferdinando dos Reis Falcão.
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
I had initiated this thread by presenting facts that contradict several myths perpetuated on Goanet. Here is that post of mine: http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2010-December/202417.html If you read that post, you will find that nowhere have I even mentioned Admin Noronha's name in it, let alone tried to smear him or say anything negative about him. If any reasonable person had a disagreement with what I wrote, he could have simply stated his disagreements, and provided reasons and facts to support them. But instead of doing so, Admin Noronha used the last two posts in this thread to attack me personally using his trademark smear and fabrication techniques that have now become well-known among several regular contributors to Goanet, and that have been shamelessly used by him again in his latest post appended below. Here are his last two posts: http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2010-December/202435.html http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2010-December/202504.html Please read the above two posts and the post appended below, and tell me if they are simple honest disagreements/refutations backed by evidence, stated by an innocent man who is not interested in tearing down the person with whom he has a disagreement. Of course, now that Admin Noronha's fake pretense of being engaged in a simple disagreement, and the fact of not being able to back up any of his fabrications with facts, has been exposed, what else can he do? It is time for him activate his other trademark defense mechanism - whine and squeal about nouns and adjectives, and take offense in being called an administrator of Goanet. And then take his marbles and slink away, pretending once again that he is still the nice guy who never has the last word. It is the other guy who is mean to him. But thankfully, I was not served any word salads this time. Having said that I would like to present evidence to support my claim that four myths have been perpetuated on Goanet: "1. That we Indians were better off when we were under colonial occupation." There are numerous Goanet posts that state and/or imply this in many ways. In response to one of them Admin Noronha even asked the following: "Nice one! Can we get the Portuguese and British back, for a start?" Admin Noronha Please see: http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2010-June/194050.html Here is another random one in this genre: http://www.mail-archive.com/goanet@lists.goanet.org/msg28627.html "2. That we lived longer in the olden days." Here are two posts out of many that claim this. http://www.mail-archive.com/goanet@lists.goanet.org/msg70545.html http://www.mail-archive.com/goa...@goanet.org/msg08943.html "3. That scientific progress and modern scientific medicine have not improved our lives." Here are two posts, one by Gilbert and another by Con providing a link to the same article on Huffington Post from a homeopathy publicist who claims this: http://www.mail-archive.com/goanet@lists.goanet.org/msg60559.html "4. That ancient superstitions, faith-based nostrums, religious rituals and paranormal practices were better and more effective than modern scientific procedures." Here is an example of such a post with a claim that has been repeated over and over again: http://www.mail-archive.com/goanet@lists.goanet.org/msg45040.html Here is another such claim among many: http://www.mail-archive.com/goanet@lists.goanet.org/msg46620.html Is there any chance now that Admin Noronha will provide evidence to back up his own claims, smears and fabrications? I am hoping that at least this time he will not run away from his responsibility as a journalist and Goanet administrator. Cheers, Santosh --- On Sat, 12/4/10, Frederick Noronha wrote: > > "Write with nouns and verbs, not with > adjectives and adverbs." -- > Strunk and White's The Elements of Style, Page 71. When the > adjectives > come thick and fast, you know you've lost it! > > In the earlier post from Helekar, I could entertain myself > counting: > bogus insinuations (aside: are their genuine > insinuations?)... > fabricated narratives... not a [...] genuine intellectually > honest > argument, spurious ideological smear... bogus propaganda > ... blatant > falsification of the facts... fabrication of a purely > self-serving > ideological narrative... hackneyed straw men... red > herrings and > insinuations... claim is dishonest and bogus... outright > fabrication... any scientifically literate person knows > [there's still > space for scientific illiterates to disagree]... a bogus > narrative as > well as dishonest insinuation... gratuitously > smearing others with > bogus insinuations and innuendo... recycling of a political > canard... > buzz words and dog whistles ... discredited... > political > propaganda word salad... bogus and disingenuous these > charges... > and so on. > > With some many adjectives, where is th
[Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
Read here why do clever people believe stupid things? http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/03/bad-science-manipulate-mind-causality Dr. Ferdinando dos Reis Falcão
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
[1] from < jc> to Santoshbab Helekar I accept that one cannot convert hard heads with science and reasonable debate. But, has the information provided by you (or for that matter, me) changed the views of those who had no opinion? [2] Frederick Noronha responded: My dear JC-bab: [2](1) Whatever made you believe that changing people's views was the goal of such an exercise? [2] (2) We just want to feel superior and more right than someone else, no? [3] And we all believe we are on the side of righteousness, truth, science or reasonable debate. [4] Whether it was the Inquisition or the 21stCentuisition jc's response My dear FN-baba, With due respect, I will ignore # [4] above. I do not enjoy fish (as in red herrings) on Saturdays. I will stick to the topic of "medical advice and challenges to urban myths" as proffered by Santoshbab. wrt # [2] I am not aware of your experience with the scientific community, but I come across (usually at scientific conferences) very learned individuals who go out of their way to "show" others the difference between what is right and what is less right or even wrong. Some stubborn heads ignore wise counsel (usually on the basis on non-knowledge) but most individuals either accept the new realities OR "test the null hypothesis" themselves, if they have the time, funds and ability to do so. You may not be aware but Santoshbab is one learned gentleman - holding his own at a major and very competitive US teaching Institution. I am not sure what your (FN's) experience has been (or is) with the level of competition (for status as well as for research funding) within (even) Indian Universities but I can tell you that in 2010, in the US, one is either with substance or one is on the street. In that regard, I find your slight against Santoshbab (and you may deny it) replete with ignorance of what really scientific research is about in 2010. The days of fudging,swiping and plagiarising at will .are gone. Just ask Robert Gallo - his eventual 'clearing' having been noted. It might interest you to learn that until some years ago, I held views which you hold now. My views were ignorant of the reality of how research was done and how research papers were analysed. Then, I was "dumped into the deep-end of the pool" during my PG stint in Ireland. I soon realised that I could no longer reel out inferences and conclusions based on crude (say 45%) statistics. There had to be a study design, a significant "p" value indicating that the result was not obtained purely by coincidence AND the study-result had to be independently reproducible. See FN, if you were aware, you would NOT have scripted the Times of India report based on the fudged Chagas da Silva "alcoholism" study. Hopefully, in future, you may consider consulting individuals who have been through the rigors of the research process & personally handle their own statistical tests - before you rush to print. If you request such a person, it is more than likely that he/she will request additional information e.g. How the sample size was generated, How the subjects were randomised, if the study was double-blind, how the data was collected, How bias was excluded, What statistical tests were used to 'test the hypothesis' AND the raw data minus the names of individuals in order to protect client-confidentiality. Now, do you believe that I am being self-righteous or do you believe I am being reasonable? Let's face it - if one goes out for a walk on the street, one will find some folks who are taller, others shorter than us; similarly - some richer, some less richer, some more capitalist like you and me, some less capitalistic like Santoshbab, I conclude by stating the obvious: You (Frederick) and I will never, in the foreseeable future, know more about Research and Neuroscience than Santoshbab, about Colo-Rectal disease than Anil Desai, about Radiation Oncology than Gilbert Lawrence, about Cardiology than Tony Gomes or about music than Lea Rangel-Ribeiro (just a few examples .there is a huge list of Goans who know more about their specialty than you (Frederick) and me. Please let us research the level of their training and international competition they have 'seen off ' before we shoot our mouths from the hip. It is best that when they speak about their areas of specialty, we (especially you and me) listen or at least just sit quiet .instead of blowing the horns founded on gas and non-knowledge. Nobody says that one cannot challenge them in their respective fields but it is hardly the place for tin to challenge gold, is it? (Tin and Gold used metaphorically to denote level of specialty knowledge) BTW: Your sniper attacks on Santosh's intentions points to a rather crude attempt to 'silence' him. That is my opinion and you may disagree with me. good wishes and have a pleasant Sunday and week ahead. jc
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
"Write with nouns and verbs, not with adjectives and adverbs." -- Strunk and White's The Elements of Style, Page 71. When the adjectives come thick and fast, you know you've lost it! In the earlier post from Helekar, I could entertain myself counting: bogus insinuations (aside: are their genuine insinuations?)... fabricated narratives... not a [...] genuine intellectually honest argument, spurious ideological smear... bogus propaganda ... blatant falsification of the facts... fabrication of a purely self-serving ideological narrative... hackneyed straw men... red herrings and insinuations... claim is dishonest and bogus... outright fabrication... any scientifically literate person knows [there's still space for scientific illiterates to disagree]... a bogus narrative as well as dishonest insinuation... gratuitously smearing others with bogus insinuations and innuendo... recycling of a political canard... buzz words and dog whistles ... discredited... political propaganda word salad... bogus and disingenuous these charges... and so on. With some many adjectives, where is the logic? It has been noted earlier too that anyone who disagrees with Helekar's viewpoint are "smearing" him (or people he ideologically agrees with). When he disagrees with someone else, of course, it's all for the greater good of diminishing scientific illiteracy, or some such entirely laudatory (if self-appointed) task. To be able to use the word "admin" as a insult is another achievement, more so when Goanet is not just any highly unsucessful network whose main model is based on offending, insulting and abusing one another. To easily dismiss people he disagrees with, Helekar claims that unnamed persons are making all kind of ludicrous arguments on Goanet. It would be very interesting to see who said what Helekar claims they said, and where. I don't believe anyone is fool enough to argue on Goanet, as Helekar claims that people on Goanet have been saying: QUOTE: 1. That we Indians were better off when we were under colonial occupation. 2. That we lived longer in the olden days. 3. That scientific progress and modern scientific medicine have not improved our lives. 4. That ancient superstitions, faith-based nostrums, religious rituals and paranormal practices were better and more effective than modern scientific procedures. UNQUOTE. Issues involved are far more subtle and complex than Helekar makes them out to be; creating strawmen is anyway a good way to "win" cheap arguments. Over to anyone else to continue with last-wordism on labour this point. I've said my bit. FN Frederick Noronha :: +91-9822122436 :: +91-832-2409490
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
My dear JC-bab: Whatever made you believe that changing people's views was the goal of such an exercise? We just want to feel superior and more right than someone else, no? And we all believe we are on the side of righteousness, truth, science or reasonable debate. Whether it was the Inquisition or the 21stCentuisition :-) FN On 4 December 2010 21:05, J. Colaco < jc> wrote: > 'cost-effective'. I accept that one cannot convert hard heads with > science and reasonable debate. But, has the information provided by > you (or for that matter, me) changed the views of those who had no > opinion?
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
Dear Josebab, Regarding cost, when it comes to Goans, and my friends, relatives and guests, my time is free. So for me the value of effectiveness divided by cost is infinite, no matter how small the value of effectiveness is. But more importantly, any rational fact-based write up in the public domain on important topics such as public health, scientific literacy and secularism has intrinsic value, irrespective of whether anybody is influenced by it or not. I am keenly aware that most fully formed mentalities cannot be changed, especially those that were conceived before the enlightenment, reformation, industrial revolution, 1510 or 1961, or in the New Age. Cheers, Santosh --- On Sat, 12/4/10, J. Colaco < jc> wrote: > > My dear Santoshbab, > > I do not disagree with you. I wonder though IF the effort > is > 'cost-effective'. I accept that one cannot convert hard > heads with > science and reasonable debate. But, has the information > provided by > you (or for that matter, me) changed the views of those who > had no > opinion? > > I doubt it. > > The basic problem appears to be one of an uncanny inability > to > comprehend the fundamental need for those who 'preach > medicine and the > successes of their alleged cures' to submit to independent > analysis. > > I wonder if they know WHY practitioners of modern medicine > are legally > expected to adhere to 'standards of care' and better follow > 'NICE > guidelines' and other accepted protocols. > > I wonder if they know that the State has a duty to protect > its > citizens from those who claim to provide medical care (and > that > includes practitioners of modern medicine). That is why > doctors are > required to be registered and should have malpractice > insurance - so > that IF a patient his harmed by way of negligence, that > patient can be > duly compensated. > > But how can anyone drill this into a community wherein > "anything > goes" and where the Rule of Law has been replaced by > vigilante > behaviour, vandalism, corruption and dadagiri? > > jc >
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
[1] J. Colaco < jc> wrote: For instance, I do not understand why Santoshbab tries to correct the >unsupportable views of every Con, Dona and Larry on GoaNet. [2] Santosh Helekar wrote: Not all unsupportable views of every Con, Dona and Larry. Only those unsupportable views in which I have an interest, and about which I know something, or have the inclination and the ability to find out from authentic sources. jc RESPONSE: My dear Santoshbab, I do not disagree with you. I wonder though IF the effort is 'cost-effective'. I accept that one cannot convert hard heads with science and reasonable debate. But, has the information provided by you (or for that matter, me) changed the views of those who had no opinion? I doubt it. The basic problem appears to be one of an uncanny inability to comprehend the fundamental need for those who 'preach medicine and the successes of their alleged cures' to submit to independent analysis. I wonder if they know WHY practitioners of modern medicine are legally expected to adhere to 'standards of care' and better follow 'NICE guidelines' and other accepted protocols. I wonder if they know that the State has a duty to protect its citizens from those who claim to provide medical care (and that includes practitioners of modern medicine). That is why doctors are required to be registered and should have malpractice insurance - so that IF a patient his harmed by way of negligence, that patient can be duly compensated. But how can anyone drill this into a community wherein "anything goes" and where the Rule of Law has been replaced by vigilante behaviour, vandalism, corruption and dadagiri? jc
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
--- On Fri, 12/3/10, J. Colaco < jc> wrote: > > For instance, I do not understand why Santoshbab tries to correct the > >unsupportable views of every Con, Dona and Larry on GoaNet. > Not all unsupportable views of every Con, Dona and Larry. Only those unsupportable views in which I have an interest, and about which I know something, or have the inclination and the ability to find out from authentic sources. I also do not have anything to say against Con, Dona and Larry, unless they say something against me first. Cheers, Santosh
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
I always like a genuine argument based on facts and honest disagreement, which does not involve bogus insinuations and fabricated narratives that are repeated over and over again. Unfortunately, the post appended below is not an example of a genuine intellectually honest argument. It is a clear example of a spurious ideological smear piece, of the type that I and others have spoken out against. Please note that as is the case quite often this bogus propaganda is being carried out by the administrator of Goanet, himself. As usual, it involves blatant falsification of the facts that I have stated, and fabrication of a purely self-serving ideological narrative, complete with hackneyed straw men, red herrings and insinuations. An example of outright falsification of the facts that were presented in the video I had provided is the following claim: "The Swedish video is an interesting one, but I couldn't help notice that it talks about the economy -- and not about what Helekar labels scientific progress or modern scientific medicine." Admin Noronha The above claim is dishonest and bogus because any objective person who watches the video will note that the graph shown is not just about the economy. On the Y-axis life expectancy of human beings in years is presented. Any scientifically literate person knows that life expectancy is a good measure of progress in medicine and health care. It is also well known that economic development, as indicated by increase in per capita income (shown on the X-axis) over the last 200 years is because of scientific and technological progress. Indeed, Prof. Hans Rosling in the video explicitly mentions industrial revolution and technological advancement as causes of the rapid rise in income. Two examples of outright fabrication of a bogus narrative as well as dishonest insinuation, that have nothing to do with facts presented, are the following: QUOTE By simply reducing a lengthier web address to a tiny-url and embedding Goanet's name in it does not make the debate any more relevant to the wider issues (including, a critique of corporatised science and its implications) often discussed on Goanet. UNQUOTE Admin Noronha QUOTE Goanet has also been "used" by people with an undying faith in a science-can-do-no-wrong ideology, and their own ideology is tasteless, colourless and odorless enough to them and therefore implies a lack of ideology. Or by those who believe that taunting individuals with a particular point of view is the best way to diminish "scientific illiteracy" and take rationalism forward. UNQUOTE .Admin Noronha Regarding the first quote, please ask yourself: Why would anybody want to make a big deal of the simple fact that a tiny url was used for convenience of the readers? Why would any person, let alone a Goanet administrator, want to use this insinuation to malign a contributor to a public forum? Any reasonable moderator/administrator of an internet forum would have welcomed such a practice because the readers are better served by it. Regarding the second quote, besides being another clear demonstration of Admin Noronha's habit of gratuitously smearing others with bogus insinuations and innuendo, it is also the recycling of a political canard (with buzz words and dog whistles of his own political ideology) that has been discredited several times before by me and others, including the late Cornel Da Costa and George Pinto. Examples of these tools of political propaganda are meaningless word salads such as "science-can-do-no-wrong ideology" and "corporatised science". Instead of wasting time on them again, let me point to the following earlier posts and pertinent quotes of mine, in which I have shown how bogus and disingenuous these charges are: http://www.mail-archive.com/goanet@lists.goanet.org/msg13779.html QUOTE Not a single sentence he (Admin Noronha) has ever written on Goanet about science or my attitude towards it is true. He simply makes up things about both and puts those words in my mouth. So as usual, his claim that I believe science can do no wrong is pure garbage. Those who have understood what I have written over the years know that I have always maintained that science is simply a method of thinking critically and evaluating the truth of any proposition based on objective evidence. A scientist has no illusions about being righteous or knowing the absolute truth, whatever the heck that may be. As I have said time and again, s/he merely tries to seek the best rational explanation for the natural world based on observation - an explanation that has predictive power and practical significance. Far from claiming to be infallible, science thrives on falsification of hypotheses. It is every young scientist's dream to improve upon or overthrow a previously held best scientific explanation. UNQUOTE .Santosh Helekar http://www.mail-archive.com/goanet@lists.goanet.org/msg51114.html
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
Dears, I found the following Frederick Noronha [FN] very well scripted post a mixture of known truths, appropriate and inappropriate interpretations, figments of non-knowledge, misrepresentation and a possible attempt to either taunt or suppress Santosh Helekar. Allow me to state again that I personally find almost all of Santosh's writings quite well researched and scientifically supported and defensible. I do expect that those, like me and FN, who are not in Santoshbab's intellectual genre, will not always understand Santoshbab. Happens! For instance, I do not understand why Santoshbab tries to correct the unsupportable views of every Con, Dona and Larry on GoaNet. To me, it is a painful process - for another 'bright spark' will come and say something really brilliant e.g. If Sardars in the UK are exempt from using helmets, why should I have to wear them in Goa? Some might believe that Frederick is smarting from criticism of his own misuse of Goanet (as in flagrant and repeated violation of GoaNet rules) and the WWW spreading of stories in which truth was admixed with obvious 'bogusities'. The added issue is the refusal of folks like Frederick to correct their errors. (Let me acknowledge in advance a well used worn cliché i.e. Doctors mistakes bury etc). Does FN acknowledge that untruths spread by journos eventually hurt the populace? Does he (at least now) accept that the (financially motivated IMHO) 'TRS Vasco da Gama disturbance' actually hurt the relationships between Catholic and Hindu Goans? Anyway ..now to the individual points in FN's message. On 3 December 2010 00:49, Frederick Noronha [FN] wrote: FN [1] Goanet has also been "used" by people with an undying faith in a science-can-do-no-wrong ideology, and their own ideology is tasteless, colourless and odorless enough to them and therefore implies a lack of ideology. jc: and by others including FN for their own purposes. - FN [2] Or by those who believe that taunting individuals with a particular point of view is the best way to diminish "scientific illiteracy" and take rationalism forward. jc: As though FN has never taunted anyone. - FN [3] The claims made below have more to do with creating straw-men and then going about demolishing the same with great ease. Naturally. jc: another cliché - FN [4] To be fair, I think what has often been argued on Goanet is not what Helekar claims, but the following: [5] 1. That not everything is necessarily better off in post-colonial times, and a few things have actually deteriorated for the worse since. jc: Where has Santoshbab claimed the above? - FN [5] 2. That life expectancies were far lower, on average, in earlier times (whether colonial or not, including in the non-colonised world), but some people did live healthier lives then too. Also, the diseases of affluence, which have since crept in and turned widespread today, were restricted to a tiny section then. jc: On what basis is FN making the above argument? There are, I submit, multiple factors involved. Has FN studied them enough to make a judgment? - F [5] 3. That "scientific progress" and "modern scientific medicine" is not the only factor to be credited with improving human lives. That even the "progress" of science and medicine has come accompanied with some gross errors, the misuse and abuse of science and technology (for purposes like war, etc) and the like. jc: Abuse and Misuse having been accepted, Who has claimed the sole credit for improving human lives? - FN [5] 4.(a) That there could be alternative routes to healing, which may well work in some cases, and still is the only or main option for a large number of people in the planet -- for reasons of economics, preference, tradition, access, whatever. jc: There surely could be BUT ...what exactly is Santoshbab suggesting and the 'alternativos' refusing to submit to? Does FN believe in the Rule of Law? Does he believe that the State has a right to impose legal guidelines which require that ALL medications which are given to the citizens of the State, be tested? Accepting that Indian is wrought with adulteration, fraud, inducement etc in the health industry and profession, does it justify the turning off .of the Rule of Law? Haven't modern medicines come from plants after testing and purification? What is Frederick Noronha saying: Do not test the medicinesjust allow folks to prescribe bush or arsenic? http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20091018/arts/arts5.html - FN [5] 4 (b) These can neither be wished away, nor should people who opt for these be blocked from accessing the same using the excuses and labels like "ncient superstitions, faith-based nostrums, religious rituals and paranormal practices". jc: Education and Information isn't "just wishing away". Individual adults have a right to consume what they wish, even Methylated Spirits and Hashish. The State has a duty to protect its citizens. Enough said excuse any typos scripted at one
Re: [Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
Goanet has also been "used" by people with an undying faith in a science-can-do-no-wrong ideology, and their own ideology is tasteless, colourless and odorless enough to them and therefore implies a lack of ideology. Or by those who believe that taunting individuals with a particular point of view is the best way to diminish "scientific illiteracy" and take rationalism forward. The claims made below have more to do with creating straw-men and then going about demolishing the same with great ease. Naturally. By simply reducing a lengthier web address to a tiny-url and embedding Goanet's name in it does not make the debate any more relevant to the wider issues (including, a critique of corporatised science and its implications) often discussed on Goanet. To be fair, I think what has often been argued on Goanet is not what Helekar claims, but the following: 1. That not everything is necessarily better off in post-colonial times, and a few things have actually deteriorated for the worse since. 2. That life expectancies were far lower, on average, in earlier times (whether colonial or not, including in the non-colonised world), but some people did live healthier lives then too. Also, the diseases of affluence, which have since crept in and turned widespread today, were restricted to a tiny section then. 3. That "scientific progress" and "modern scientific medicine" is not the only factor to be credited with improving human lives. That even the "progress" of science and medicine has come accompanied with some gross errors, the misuse and abuse of science and technology (for purposes like war, etc) and the like. 4. That there could be alternative routes to healing, which may well work in some cases, and still is the only or main option for a large number of people in the planet -- for reasons of economics, preference, tradition, access, whatever. These can neither be wished away, nor should people who opt for these be blocked from accessing the same using the excuses and labels like "ncient superstitions, faith-based nostrums, religious rituals and paranormal practices". The Swedish video is an interesting one, but I couldn't help notice that it talks about the economy -- and not about what Helekar labels scientific progress or modern scientific medicine. To bandy issues of economy with science, colonialism with affluence seems to me to be more ideological thrust rather than a logical, convincing argument. FN On 2 December 2010 23:07, Santosh Helekar wrote: Goanet has been used by both right wing and left wing ideologues, such as apologists for colonialism, anti-scientific and anti-establishment activists, anti-capitalist or communist ideologues, religious chauvinists, communal propagandists, and promoters of alternative medicine and other superstitious and New Age practices, to spread the following myths: 1. That we Indians were better off when we were under colonial occupation. 2. That we lived longer in the olden days. 3. That scientific progress and modern scientific medicine have not improved our lives. 4. That ancient superstitions, faith-based nostrums, religious rituals and paranormal practices were better and more effective than modern scientific procedures. If you want to visualize how an exquisite 4-min presentation of hard facts explodes all these bogus myths in one go, please watch the following video: http://tinyurl.com/ExplodingGoanetMyths
[Goanet] Exploding the myths on Goanet
Goanet has been used by both right wing and left wing ideologues, such as apologists for colonialism, anti-scientific and anti-establishment activists, anti-capitalist or communist ideologues, religious chauvinists, communal propagandists, and promoters of alternative medicine and other superstitious and New Age practices, to spread the following myths: 1. That we Indians were better off when we were under colonial occupation. 2. That we lived longer in the olden days. 3. That scientific progress and modern scientific medicine have not improved our lives. 4. That ancient superstitions, faith-based nostrums, religious rituals and paranormal practices were better and more effective than modern scientific procedures. If you want to visualize how an exquisite 4-min presentation of hard facts explodes all these bogus myths in one go, please watch the following video: http://tinyurl.com/ExplodingGoanetMyths Cheers, Santosh
