Science!!!

Hot Jupiter loops around far away star ? News in Science (ABC Science)

r1161827_14662743.jpg
 
adgy-san said:
I've always thought of myself as living proof of this.
Click to expand...

"Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the Weather."
 
santiclaws said:
LSD is good for you, say Norway researchers - The Local
Click to expand...

Did anyone actually read this article? This is flawed "science", at best. Title says it could be beneficial, but offers zero evidence. Then it says 'Yes, it does have some bad effects, but they rarely cause serious damage', followed by, 'there's not enough evidence, in our opinion, to support claims of long-term effects."

So the lesson here is:
-Make claim supported by one sentence of unclear evidence/explanation. (LSD is good for you, supported by "In an earlier study, published last year, the two neuroscientists demonstrated that a single dose of LSD was an effective treatment for alcoholism.")

-Say claims of bad results of drugs are "exaggerated" (effectively admitting there are bad, long term results, but not as many as others thought before)

-Disregard evidence countering claim because there's not enough. (even though it's more than what you're presenting)


:facepalm:


Maybe LSD does have medical benefits. This article just does a ****ty job of arguing its title.
 
Last edited:
FishMonger said:
Did anyone actually read this article? This is flawed "science", at best. Title says it could be beneficial, but offers zero evidence. Then it says 'Yes, it does have some bad effects, but they rarely cause serious damage', followed by, 'there's not enough evidence, in our opinion, to support claims of long-term effects."

So the lesson here is:
-Make claim supported by one sentence of unclear evidence/explanation. (LSD is good for you, supported by "In an earlier study, published last year, the two neuroscientists demonstrated that a single dose of LSD was an effective treatment for alcoholism.")

-Say claims of bad results of drugs are "exaggerated" (effectively admitting there are bad, long term results, but not as many as others thought before)

-Disregard evidence countering claim because there's not enough. (even though it's more than what you're presenting)


:facepalm:


Maybe LSD does have medical benefits. This article just does a ****ty job of arguing its title.
Click to expand...

Always one Killjoy in the group :hippie:
 
JWR said:
Always one Killjoy in the group :hippie:
Click to expand...

Shouldn't a thread on science include rational thought and critical thinking?


... as I typed that sentence, I remembered where I was posting. Never mind. Carry on.
 
Last edited:
FishMonger said:
Did anyone actually read this article? This is flawed "science", at best. Title says it could be beneficial, but offers zero evidence. Then it says 'Yes, it does have some bad effects, but they rarely cause serious damage', followed by, 'there's not enough evidence, in our opinion, to support claims of long-term effects."

So the lesson here is:
-Make claim supported by one sentence of unclear evidence/explanation. (LSD is good for you, supported by "In an earlier study, published last year, the two neuroscientists demonstrated that a single dose of LSD was an effective treatment for alcoholism.")

-Say claims of bad results of drugs are "exaggerated" (effectively admitting there are bad, long term results, but not as many as others thought before)

-Disregard evidence countering claim because there's not enough. (even though it's more than what you're presenting)


:facepalm:


Maybe LSD does have medical benefits. This article just does a ****ty job of arguing its title.
Click to expand...

Like first. Read later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Now Chirping

Share this page

Back
Top