tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post2260643458644916728..comments2024-03-29T07:34:02.037-04:00Comments on Bayblab: Quack of the week: Gary GoodyearKamelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15548259062576527751noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-80245318957719923552012-07-23T14:12:36.569-04:002012-07-23T14:12:36.569-04:00Whether Colins is creationist or evolutionists isn...Whether Colins is creationist or evolutionists isn't really the point. That's why we live in America: so that people can believe what they want and still make living. The fact is: he's a good chiropractor.Dan with Kirkland Chiropractorshttp://www.kirklandspine.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-2973830098847184192009-04-06T11:59:00.000-04:002009-04-06T11:59:00.000-04:00I agree with you wholeheartedly DocII a lot of the...I agree with you wholeheartedly DocII a lot of the patient care in hospitals is pseudoscience. In fact a surgeon colleague of mine estimates that 50-90% of the things doctor do have not been properly examined and tested, and are only done this way, because previous generations of doctors did it this way. It is deplorable. Thankfully we are now building stronger foundation by thoroughly testing new drugs and procedures. This frame of mind, that there is an explanation and a mechanism behind healing and that it can be tested is what sets apart medicine and alternative medicine. Because the minute something in the "alternative" bin is tested and proven to work it becomes part of modern medecine. I don't see why chiropratice shouldn't undergo the same scrutinyt. We should know what the odds are to make things worse like we know the risk for surgery or chemotherapy. It's about informed consent really.Anonymous Cowardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13315733940344340689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-46241069429200838912009-03-29T22:08:00.000-04:002009-03-29T22:08:00.000-04:00Let's not forget...the unproven practice of chrio-...Let's not forget...the unproven practice of chrio-quackyness is not only wasting people's time and money, it's also causing a lot of serious and irreversible injuries.Baymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03436172198266062229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-42557150869913735672009-03-28T03:28:00.000-04:002009-03-28T03:28:00.000-04:00The day somebody performs a large double blinded r...The day somebody performs a large double blinded random clinical trial of chiropractic methods is the day I take this "practice" seriously. The only ones to blame are the poor saps who pour mountains of money down the drain that is pseudoscience...<BR/><BR/>I want to start a new political party... "Scientists For INFORMED Consent".Brookehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08637472223943435172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-72919327839868244512009-03-25T18:20:00.000-04:002009-03-25T18:20:00.000-04:00A lot of chiropractic care may be based on nonscie...A lot of chiropractic care may be based on nonscientific principles, but a lot of it isn't. And not all chiropractors are "anti-science." Not by a long shot. And you can't even compare the number of adverse events, not to mention deaths, caused by "scientific" medicine, every day, in hospitals there, and here, with the very very very small rate of adverse events associated with chiropractic. I know, that's a different issue. But still. And no, I'm not a chiropractor. I'm a PhD geneticist. I'm just tired of people equating (even through implication) all chiropractors with words like "pseudoscience" and "quack."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-25710904314746500462009-03-19T19:16:00.000-04:002009-03-19T19:16:00.000-04:00I think it shows severe ignorance to suggest that ...I think it shows severe ignorance to suggest that evolution is a question of religion. It's not. Just like gravity, gas laws, and quantum physics...whether you're a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Atheist or Buddhist has no impact on these realities of the universe. To think that one's religion can somehow bend the laws of the universe is ridiculously egotistical and idiotic.Baymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03436172198266062229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-88501697718861658492009-03-18T10:06:00.000-04:002009-03-18T10:06:00.000-04:00I hate to move this conversation elsewhere but if ...I hate to move this conversation elsewhere but if you think the Bayblab is conducting a witch hunt, you got to see what the uncompromising <A HREF="http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2009/03/gary-goodyear-clarifies-his-stance-on.html" REL="nofollow">Dr. Larry Moran has to say about this issue.</A><BR/><I>"That pretty much settles it for me. Goodyear is a creationist. He rejects one of the fundamental concepts of biology. That makes him anti-science.<BR/>The man in charge of science in Canada is anti-science. Heaven help us."</I>Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11878582460269426199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-89293047572242417002009-03-18T09:17:00.000-04:002009-03-18T09:17:00.000-04:00Thanks for your comments, anonymous.I guess what I...Thanks for your comments, anonymous.<BR/>I guess what I'm saying is that I agree with you, in that I don't like Goodyear as minister of Science and Tech, but also for the reason that he won't explicitly support evolution. It's possible you are correct, that he is trying not to cross the religious community. However, if in doing so he can't recognize publicly the fact of evolution he is doing a disservice to the country, and is IMO an embarrassment to his post.<BR/>Perhaps you also have an issue with the fact of evolution. To me, the article might have well read:<BR/><I>"Minister of Science in Canada, do you believe that the earth is round?"<BR/>“I'm not going to answer that question. I am a Christian, and I don't think anybody asking a question about my religion is appropriate,”</I>Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11878582460269426199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-81002921065538627952009-03-18T08:01:00.000-04:002009-03-18T08:01:00.000-04:00Yes, I read the article. That's why I'm asking wh...Yes, I read the article. That's why I'm asking where he rejected evolution. That you see no other way to interpret it sounds like a personal problem. <BR/><BR/>He self identifies as both a scientist and a Christian. One interpretation (yours) is that he refuses to answer because he's a creationist and doesn't want to cross the science community.<BR/><BR/>Another interpretation is that he refuses to answer because he doesn't want to cross the <I>religious</I> community that he also sees himself a part of.<BR/><BR/>Don't get me wrong. I don't like Goodyear as minister of Science and Tech. There are plenty of reasons not to. But you "scientists" seem happy to go after him based on his beliefs and words <I>he explicitly did not say</I>. Good luck with your witch hunt.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-82780449291577392792009-03-18T07:35:00.000-04:002009-03-18T07:35:00.000-04:00Did you read the article?To the question, "Do you ...Did you read the article?<BR/>To the question, "Do you believe in evolution?" according to the article his answer was:<BR/><I><BR/>“I'm not going to answer that question. I am a Christian, and I don't think anybody asking a question about my religion is appropriate,” Gary Goodyear, the federal Minister of State for Science and Technology, said in an interview with The Globe and Mail.<BR/></I><BR/>Anyone, not to mention the Minister of State for Science and Tech, who doesn't answer that question because they say they are a Christian and that the question is about religion is a closet creationist. His being a Christian is only relevant if he is a creationist. I don't see how you could interpret that any other way.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11878582460269426199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-23121666447161883842009-03-17T23:58:00.000-04:002009-03-17T23:58:00.000-04:00Collins is a Christian not a creationist.Exactly. ...<I>Collins is a Christian not a creationist.</I><BR/><BR/>Exactly. Why do you assume that Goodyear is a creationist when all he's explicitly said is that he's Christian? Where has he rejected evolution? Why assume that he's placating scientists when he refuses to answer the question, rather than placating religious leaders??<BR/><BR/>Bayman: Are you saying that Collins had nothing to do with completing the human genome project?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-30588125166438237222009-03-17T18:52:00.000-04:002009-03-17T18:52:00.000-04:00Were you outraged by Francis Collins directing the...<I>Were you outraged by Francis Collins directing the National Human Genome Research Institute or his leadership of the Human Genome Project?</I><BR/><BR/>What leadership? If it had been left to Collins we'd still be 6000 years away from a full genome sequence...Baymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03436172198266062229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-10040446780832835092009-03-17T15:53:00.000-04:002009-03-17T15:53:00.000-04:00Anonymous,Sorry I should have writtenIf he was up ...Anonymous,<BR/>Sorry I should have written<BR/><I>If he was up front about his belief in creationism... then I would hope there would be some serious outrage.</I><BR/>I just had to point out the microscopy bit from the article.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11878582460269426199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-5355960710420447742009-03-17T15:10:00.000-04:002009-03-17T15:10:00.000-04:00Nice try. Collins is a Christian not a creationist...Nice try. Collins is a Christian not a creationist. He fully accepts evolution as the best possible explanation for the diversity of life. That being said, you can find plenty of people outraged at Collins... I for one think he displays a poor understanding of abiogenesis, and that is reconciliatory ideas don't do much for science.Anonymous Cowardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13315733940344340689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-72645956886110716922009-03-17T13:54:00.000-04:002009-03-17T13:54:00.000-04:00If he was up front about his belief in a creator, ...<I>If he was up front about his belief in a creator, not visible by microscopy quite yet (see article), then I would hope there would be some serious outrage.</I><BR/><BR/>Were you outraged by Francis Collins directing the National Human Genome Research Institute or his leadership of the Human Genome Project?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14815894.post-47226483847297291432009-03-17T13:34:00.000-04:002009-03-17T13:34:00.000-04:00Scary.I'm at least glad he knows not to admit he i...Scary.<BR/>I'm at least glad he knows not to admit he is a creationist. It suggests he is aware that it would not be an acceptable position as Science Minister.<BR/>If he was up front about his belief in a creator, not visible by microscopy quite yet (see article), then I would hope there would be some serious outrage.<BR/>Unfortunately, he fully admits to being a chiropractor.<BR/>I somewhat sympathize with the conservatives. It must be tough to find a good scientifically educated person who supports their agenda. Obviously, or we would not have this story.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11878582460269426199noreply@blogger.com