the website I used was http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/4/prwebxml117620.php
The article I found was about energy medicine. It claims that emotional energy medicine is the key to total health. According to Dr. Vida Baron, "the negative emotional energy of fear which is the source of most stress, can actually be transformed into a positive force for beauty and happiness." The belief that imaginary energy can be transformed is sort of weird. I found it interesting that an actual M.D. would believe in this sort of nonsense. Dr. Baron refers to emotional energy as the "software that runs the human brain and body." She believes that "emotional energy" has magical healing powers, which is course rediculous.
Monday, December 3, 2007
Sunday, December 2, 2007
College in the 1920's
The websites I used for this blog post were http://kclibrary.nhmccd.edu/decade20.html and http://cehd.umn.edu/History/Timeline/1920s.html
To give a brief overview of the 1920's, there were only 106,521,537 people in the united states. Approximately 2,132,000 people were unemployed, which comes out to an unemployment rate of 5.2%. Life expectancy for males was 53.6 years and for females it was 54.6 years. The average annual earnings was $1236 and a teachers salary was $970. Given this information, it is clear that there were a lot less people around, with a much lower life expectancy. So college might not have been such a high priority for people in the twenties and for most it wasn't even an option. The site I found that pertained to college life dealt specifically with the University of Minnesota. In 1921 the first Minnesota radio station formed at the University of Minnesota. In 1925 the famous Tennessee vs. John Scopes trial took place that dealt with the issue of evolution being taught in schools. This has been an extremely import case because today evolution is taught in schools and is widely accepted. In 1926 the SAT was administered to highschool students for the first time. Finally, in 1929 Minnesota law for the first time establishes teaching certification that requires professional training coursework. The college then modified its course offerings to satisfy the state law. It seems as though the twenties helped pave the road to modern day college.
To give a brief overview of the 1920's, there were only 106,521,537 people in the united states. Approximately 2,132,000 people were unemployed, which comes out to an unemployment rate of 5.2%. Life expectancy for males was 53.6 years and for females it was 54.6 years. The average annual earnings was $1236 and a teachers salary was $970. Given this information, it is clear that there were a lot less people around, with a much lower life expectancy. So college might not have been such a high priority for people in the twenties and for most it wasn't even an option. The site I found that pertained to college life dealt specifically with the University of Minnesota. In 1921 the first Minnesota radio station formed at the University of Minnesota. In 1925 the famous Tennessee vs. John Scopes trial took place that dealt with the issue of evolution being taught in schools. This has been an extremely import case because today evolution is taught in schools and is widely accepted. In 1926 the SAT was administered to highschool students for the first time. Finally, in 1929 Minnesota law for the first time establishes teaching certification that requires professional training coursework. The college then modified its course offerings to satisfy the state law. It seems as though the twenties helped pave the road to modern day college.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Faith Healing
the website I used was http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/faith.html
Faith healing is trying to cure disease by forcing divine intervention. People who practice this use certain spiritual techniques, or special prayers to try and cure disease. The article I read was written by a Medical Doctor who had done research on faith healing and interviewed faith healers, as well as people who claimed to be healed by faith healers. The ultimate conclusion is that faith healing is a scam. The Medical Doctor who wrote this paper has done 20 years of research on faith healing and has still not found one legitimate case of faith healing. Often times the healer will claim to cure some one of a disease that they don't even have. Faith healing boils down to deception and fraud. They often use people in the audience to act as if they have a certain disease and then they pretend to be cured. Just the fact that they purposely perform these "miracles" in front of an audience suggests that they are trying to gain something from doing faith healing. However, faith healing is fake and most sane people know that diseases are not cured by trying to force divine intervention. Diseases are cured by science and by medical physicians.
Faith healing is trying to cure disease by forcing divine intervention. People who practice this use certain spiritual techniques, or special prayers to try and cure disease. The article I read was written by a Medical Doctor who had done research on faith healing and interviewed faith healers, as well as people who claimed to be healed by faith healers. The ultimate conclusion is that faith healing is a scam. The Medical Doctor who wrote this paper has done 20 years of research on faith healing and has still not found one legitimate case of faith healing. Often times the healer will claim to cure some one of a disease that they don't even have. Faith healing boils down to deception and fraud. They often use people in the audience to act as if they have a certain disease and then they pretend to be cured. Just the fact that they purposely perform these "miracles" in front of an audience suggests that they are trying to gain something from doing faith healing. However, faith healing is fake and most sane people know that diseases are not cured by trying to force divine intervention. Diseases are cured by science and by medical physicians.
Plural Marriage
The Website I used was http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/daily/history/plural_marriage/History_EOM.htm
Plural Marriage is more commonly refered to as polygamy. Polygamy is the practice of having multiple spouses at the same time. Polygamy has been a common practice since the beginning of civilization. The emperor of China, for instance, had literally hundreds of concubines. Many sultans in the middle east also had multiple wives. However, most americans associate plural marriage with the Church of the Latter-day Saints. This practice of polygamy was one reason many people discriminated against the Mormons during the middle of the 19th century. The LDS publically announced their plural marriage practice in 1852. They (Utah) were not granted statehood until 1896, and they had to accept polygamy as being illegal. In 1882 many LDS men who were involved in polygamy were sent to jail because they violated the antipolygamy law. They argued that it was their constiutional right to have plural marriage. In fact, the LDS prophet Joseph Smith gave sermons promoting the practice of polygamy. According to the Book of Mormon, "He knew the voice of God—he knew the commandment of the Almighty to him was to go forward—to set the example, and establish Celestial plural marriage. He knew that he had not only his own prejudices and pre-possessions to combat and to overcome, but those of the whole Christian world…; but God…had given the commandment." Basically, he was saying that he knew society rejected this practice, but he believed this was the will of God that a man should have multiple wives. For this reason, plural marriage was openly practiced in Utah during the mid 1800's.
Plural marriage is very relevant to today's society because of the on going gay marriage debate. Polygamy was outlawed because there was a general consensus among U.S. citizens that a marriage should be between one man and one woman. This is an argument for outlawing gay marriage. If gay marriage was legalized then marriage would not be defined as between one man and one woman. Thus, plural marriage would also have to be legalized.
Plural Marriage is more commonly refered to as polygamy. Polygamy is the practice of having multiple spouses at the same time. Polygamy has been a common practice since the beginning of civilization. The emperor of China, for instance, had literally hundreds of concubines. Many sultans in the middle east also had multiple wives. However, most americans associate plural marriage with the Church of the Latter-day Saints. This practice of polygamy was one reason many people discriminated against the Mormons during the middle of the 19th century. The LDS publically announced their plural marriage practice in 1852. They (Utah) were not granted statehood until 1896, and they had to accept polygamy as being illegal. In 1882 many LDS men who were involved in polygamy were sent to jail because they violated the antipolygamy law. They argued that it was their constiutional right to have plural marriage. In fact, the LDS prophet Joseph Smith gave sermons promoting the practice of polygamy. According to the Book of Mormon, "He knew the voice of God—he knew the commandment of the Almighty to him was to go forward—to set the example, and establish Celestial plural marriage. He knew that he had not only his own prejudices and pre-possessions to combat and to overcome, but those of the whole Christian world…; but God…had given the commandment." Basically, he was saying that he knew society rejected this practice, but he believed this was the will of God that a man should have multiple wives. For this reason, plural marriage was openly practiced in Utah during the mid 1800's.
Plural marriage is very relevant to today's society because of the on going gay marriage debate. Polygamy was outlawed because there was a general consensus among U.S. citizens that a marriage should be between one man and one woman. This is an argument for outlawing gay marriage. If gay marriage was legalized then marriage would not be defined as between one man and one woman. Thus, plural marriage would also have to be legalized.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Torture Blog
I found the majority of my information at http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13463.html
I was assigned to report on the pro-Mukasey senators standpoint. The two most notable pro-Mukasey senators are California's Dianne Feinstein and New York's Chuck Schumer. While there are many republican pro-Mukasey senators, these two senators are democrats which makes them more controversial. This is because for the most part the republicans are in favor of electing Mukasey for attorney general, but the democrats are not. Since these two democratic senators have decided that they will vote for Mukasey, it seems as though he will be appointed the new attorney general. The reason Mukasey is so controversial in the eyes of the public is because he claimed not to know whether water boarding is torture.
Both Schumer and Feinstein offered explanations for why they supported Michael Mukasey. After having a private meeting with Mukasey, Schumer was assured Muksey would be a trustworthy attorney general. He said Mukasey agreed that if congress passed a law that prohibited water boarding the president would have to follow it. “He also pledged to enforce such a law and repeated his willingness to leave office rather than participate in a violation of law.” However, Mukasey is hypocritical in saying this because earlier he said that if national security is jepordized the president has the right to ignore certain laws. So he contradicts himself by saying that he will force the president to obey congress.
Feinstein had a different angle as to why she supports Michael Mukasey. Quite simply, her argument is that Mukasey is better than Alberto Gonzales. So basically her logic is that because Mukasey is not as bad as Alberto Gonzales, she will support him.
I was assigned to report on the pro-Mukasey senators standpoint. The two most notable pro-Mukasey senators are California's Dianne Feinstein and New York's Chuck Schumer. While there are many republican pro-Mukasey senators, these two senators are democrats which makes them more controversial. This is because for the most part the republicans are in favor of electing Mukasey for attorney general, but the democrats are not. Since these two democratic senators have decided that they will vote for Mukasey, it seems as though he will be appointed the new attorney general. The reason Mukasey is so controversial in the eyes of the public is because he claimed not to know whether water boarding is torture.
Both Schumer and Feinstein offered explanations for why they supported Michael Mukasey. After having a private meeting with Mukasey, Schumer was assured Muksey would be a trustworthy attorney general. He said Mukasey agreed that if congress passed a law that prohibited water boarding the president would have to follow it. “He also pledged to enforce such a law and repeated his willingness to leave office rather than participate in a violation of law.” However, Mukasey is hypocritical in saying this because earlier he said that if national security is jepordized the president has the right to ignore certain laws. So he contradicts himself by saying that he will force the president to obey congress.
Feinstein had a different angle as to why she supports Michael Mukasey. Quite simply, her argument is that Mukasey is better than Alberto Gonzales. So basically her logic is that because Mukasey is not as bad as Alberto Gonzales, she will support him.
The Orion Prophecy
The website I found my Article at was http://www.life-cycles-destiny.com/pg/ancient-maya-egypt-civilization.htm
The prophecy I found is called the Orion Prophecy. It was supposedly formulated by the ancient Eqyptians and the Ancient Mayans. They did not necessarily come to the exact same conclusion but they came to very similar conclusions. Both the Mayan and Egyptian prophecies are based on matheumatics and Astronomy. (which were probably not very advanced for today's standards) This article mainly deals with the ancient Eqyptian's prophecy of the Apocalypse. Basically the prophecy predicts that the world will come to an end in the year 2012. It will come to an end because the earth's magnetic field will turn over in a single moment causing massive earthquakes and tidal waves. which will end all life as we know it. Furthermore, the prophecy predicts that North America and Europe will shift to the north pole and their climate will be extremely uninhabitable. This is the jist of the prophecy.
It is important to take into account that this prophecy was merely translated from ancient Egyptian artifacts. This means the prophecy was really created by current day scholars. In the article it talks about how various pyramids, secrets labyrinths, and other monuments all have evidence that pieces together to create this prophecy. However, it is extremely unlikely that the scholars interpreted the prophecy correctly. For example, how could the ancient Egyptians have known about North America. Also, what basis do they have for their prophecy? In this article it also suggests that the ancient Mayans and the ancient Egyptians both came to the same conclusion because they are both descendants of the Atlanteans. The Atlanteans hail from Atlantis, which is burried under the South Pole. When the last apocalypse occured, the Atlanteans fled to South America and Egypt. This effectively shows that the believers in this prophecy are crazy.
The prophecy I found is called the Orion Prophecy. It was supposedly formulated by the ancient Eqyptians and the Ancient Mayans. They did not necessarily come to the exact same conclusion but they came to very similar conclusions. Both the Mayan and Egyptian prophecies are based on matheumatics and Astronomy. (which were probably not very advanced for today's standards) This article mainly deals with the ancient Eqyptian's prophecy of the Apocalypse. Basically the prophecy predicts that the world will come to an end in the year 2012. It will come to an end because the earth's magnetic field will turn over in a single moment causing massive earthquakes and tidal waves. which will end all life as we know it. Furthermore, the prophecy predicts that North America and Europe will shift to the north pole and their climate will be extremely uninhabitable. This is the jist of the prophecy.
It is important to take into account that this prophecy was merely translated from ancient Egyptian artifacts. This means the prophecy was really created by current day scholars. In the article it talks about how various pyramids, secrets labyrinths, and other monuments all have evidence that pieces together to create this prophecy. However, it is extremely unlikely that the scholars interpreted the prophecy correctly. For example, how could the ancient Egyptians have known about North America. Also, what basis do they have for their prophecy? In this article it also suggests that the ancient Mayans and the ancient Egyptians both came to the same conclusion because they are both descendants of the Atlanteans. The Atlanteans hail from Atlantis, which is burried under the South Pole. When the last apocalypse occured, the Atlanteans fled to South America and Egypt. This effectively shows that the believers in this prophecy are crazy.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
cryptozoology (the mud monster)
I found my article at http://www.webspawner.com/users/themurphysboromudmon/index.html.
My website was of a paranormal investigation report about an alleged "mud monster" in Murphysboro Illinois, which is in Southern Illinois. The report was made in February of 2000 but the actual sightings took place in the summer of 1973. The main sightings took place on June 25th 1973. It all started when a young couple had their car parked near the Big Muddy River that runs through Murphysboro. After a while they heard a strange shrieking noise. They then witnessed a huge creature walking toward their car. They described the creature as, "seven feet tall and covered with a matted, whitish hair. The "fur" was streaked liberally with mud from the river." The young couple quickly left the scene and reporting their finding to the police. Then, to make a long story short, the police came down to the river and chased the mud monster all around town. Severa other people claimed to have seen the mud monster as the police chased it into people's yards. One woman said she saw a
"muddy, white creature staring at them with glowing pink eyes". Also she said, "the creature probably weighed at least 350 pounds, stood seven feet tall, had a roundish head and long, ape-like arms." Anyways, the police ended up trcking the creature to an old abandon barn and even their German Shepard was scared to go in. They never caught the creature (or high school kid pulling a prank) that caused all this confusion.
The best part about this article is that in 1989, more than ten years after these sightings, the "mud monster" was a serious suspect in an attack that took place in a camp ground near by the river. I thought this was rediculous. Not only was the attack 16 years after these so called "sightings", but no one had any hard evidence that this "mud monster" actually existed. Also anyone who believes monsters are real are crazy. I'm not saying that the people of Murphysboro are outright liars, but I think they may be jumping to unrealistic conclusions.
My website was of a paranormal investigation report about an alleged "mud monster" in Murphysboro Illinois, which is in Southern Illinois. The report was made in February of 2000 but the actual sightings took place in the summer of 1973. The main sightings took place on June 25th 1973. It all started when a young couple had their car parked near the Big Muddy River that runs through Murphysboro. After a while they heard a strange shrieking noise. They then witnessed a huge creature walking toward their car. They described the creature as, "seven feet tall and covered with a matted, whitish hair. The "fur" was streaked liberally with mud from the river." The young couple quickly left the scene and reporting their finding to the police. Then, to make a long story short, the police came down to the river and chased the mud monster all around town. Severa other people claimed to have seen the mud monster as the police chased it into people's yards. One woman said she saw a
"muddy, white creature staring at them with glowing pink eyes". Also she said, "the creature probably weighed at least 350 pounds, stood seven feet tall, had a roundish head and long, ape-like arms." Anyways, the police ended up trcking the creature to an old abandon barn and even their German Shepard was scared to go in. They never caught the creature (or high school kid pulling a prank) that caused all this confusion.
The best part about this article is that in 1989, more than ten years after these sightings, the "mud monster" was a serious suspect in an attack that took place in a camp ground near by the river. I thought this was rediculous. Not only was the attack 16 years after these so called "sightings", but no one had any hard evidence that this "mud monster" actually existed. Also anyone who believes monsters are real are crazy. I'm not saying that the people of Murphysboro are outright liars, but I think they may be jumping to unrealistic conclusions.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Vampires Support website
The Website I used was http://www.sanguinarius.org/
The website I found is a site for people questioning whether or not they are vampires or not. It offers support for teenagers who think they are vampires or might be vampires but don't know how to tell for sure. The site has a lot of scary pictures and is very demonic looking. As stated in the website, the purpose of the site is to creat a global network of real vampies, which entails all "blood-drinkers, psi/energy drinkers, vampire life styles." Also the website is trying to help unify vampires under one vampiric culture and to gain protection and equal rights from the law. The website also has a calendar of events. Basically, the website provides meeting times and places for adult vampires and teen vampires. This website is pretty sick. Basically, the creators of this website think that they are being discriminated against (which they probably are) but the truth of the matter is that they are extremely messed up. In my opinion, these people should be seeking professional psychiatic help, not forming "vampiric" socities to fulfill their fantasy.
The website I found is a site for people questioning whether or not they are vampires or not. It offers support for teenagers who think they are vampires or might be vampires but don't know how to tell for sure. The site has a lot of scary pictures and is very demonic looking. As stated in the website, the purpose of the site is to creat a global network of real vampies, which entails all "blood-drinkers, psi/energy drinkers, vampire life styles." Also the website is trying to help unify vampires under one vampiric culture and to gain protection and equal rights from the law. The website also has a calendar of events. Basically, the website provides meeting times and places for adult vampires and teen vampires. This website is pretty sick. Basically, the creators of this website think that they are being discriminated against (which they probably are) but the truth of the matter is that they are extremely messed up. In my opinion, these people should be seeking professional psychiatic help, not forming "vampiric" socities to fulfill their fantasy.
Monday, October 15, 2007
A Giant Hoax
http://www.trivia-library.com/b/famous-hoaxes-history-of-the-cardiff-giant.htm
In 1869, on a little farm in New York, two workers uncovered a gigantic fossil of a man. The impressive fossil was about ten and a half feet tall. Once the media got a hold of this story, masses of people started pouring into the farm to have a look at the fossil. Not surprisingly, the owner of the farm, William Newell, charged the people a lot of money to see the fossil. He basically made a fortune within a few weeks. Expert paleontologists declared that the fossil was real. However some skeptics believed it was carved by a professional sculptor. Someone hired a professional sculptor to come examine it, and he noticed chisel marks all over the "fossil". He almost immediately could tell it was a fake. Then some rich guy came and tried to buy the "fossil" from Newell because he saw how much money Newell was making. When Newell refused to sell it, the rich guy simply hired a sculptor to duplicate it. However, both men displayed their "giants" on the same day in New York. But the rich man said he was showing Newell to be a fraud. Eventually the hoax was uncovered. Repoters found out Newell had contracted a sculptor in Chicago to make the statue. Eventually Newell confessed.
In 1869, on a little farm in New York, two workers uncovered a gigantic fossil of a man. The impressive fossil was about ten and a half feet tall. Once the media got a hold of this story, masses of people started pouring into the farm to have a look at the fossil. Not surprisingly, the owner of the farm, William Newell, charged the people a lot of money to see the fossil. He basically made a fortune within a few weeks. Expert paleontologists declared that the fossil was real. However some skeptics believed it was carved by a professional sculptor. Someone hired a professional sculptor to come examine it, and he noticed chisel marks all over the "fossil". He almost immediately could tell it was a fake. Then some rich guy came and tried to buy the "fossil" from Newell because he saw how much money Newell was making. When Newell refused to sell it, the rich guy simply hired a sculptor to duplicate it. However, both men displayed their "giants" on the same day in New York. But the rich man said he was showing Newell to be a fraud. Eventually the hoax was uncovered. Repoters found out Newell had contracted a sculptor in Chicago to make the statue. Eventually Newell confessed.
Monday, October 8, 2007
Mass Hysteira in Peru
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/070926_meteorite_hysteria.html
A few weeks ago, mass hysteria broke out in Peru as the result of a supposed Meteorite crash. The people living in the town nearest to the crater reported that 600 individuals fell sick. They attributed this wide spread sickness to fumes that were emitted from the crater. After visiting the crater, people reported feelings of “nausea, headaches and soar throats.” However meteorologists determined that there might not have even been a meteorite crash, and if there was one it would not emit fumes as the people described. The sickness people were experiencing was probably coming from other sources. For example arsenic is often found in the soil in Peru and it frequently contaminates the water. Most likely, people attributed their sickness to the mysterious crater because of mass hysteria. Also, the media came to this little Peruvian town and blew up the story of the meteorite crash. This probably amplified to the mass hysteria already present. Furthermore, whenever people hear about objects falling from the sky there is almost always an outbreak of mass hysteria.
A few weeks ago, mass hysteria broke out in Peru as the result of a supposed Meteorite crash. The people living in the town nearest to the crater reported that 600 individuals fell sick. They attributed this wide spread sickness to fumes that were emitted from the crater. After visiting the crater, people reported feelings of “nausea, headaches and soar throats.” However meteorologists determined that there might not have even been a meteorite crash, and if there was one it would not emit fumes as the people described. The sickness people were experiencing was probably coming from other sources. For example arsenic is often found in the soil in Peru and it frequently contaminates the water. Most likely, people attributed their sickness to the mysterious crater because of mass hysteria. Also, the media came to this little Peruvian town and blew up the story of the meteorite crash. This probably amplified to the mass hysteria already present. Furthermore, whenever people hear about objects falling from the sky there is almost always an outbreak of mass hysteria.
Monday, October 1, 2007
AIDS Conspiracy Theory
This website I used was http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=AIDS_conspiracy
Essentially what this article claims is that AIDS is not a natural epidemic, but it is really man-made government created disease meant to eliminate a certain unwanted portion of the population. In particular, this theory claims AIDS was create to exterminate blacks and gays in an act of genocide. This article describes many different AIDS conspiracy theories, but they all have the use the same premise that AIDS was created by the government. Also the article suggests that a cure for AIDS has already been found but the United States government is with holding it. There is no evidence to support this claim, however this seems irrelevant to the person making the claim. It does not seem that the people concocting these conspiracies are very credible sources. While two of the leading conspirists have their doctoral degree, it does not say what their degree is in.
A few of these men argue that "HIV is a genetically modified organism developed by US Government scientists." It seems as though perhaps the men formulating this conspiracy have read to many science fiction books. They claim HIV was introduced into the gay population between 1978 and 1981 through government experiments. Basically, they make rediculous claims without providing any support or evidence. However, since it is a top secret "government experiment" they do not have any concrete evidence. this seems to be a common fall back strategy for any conspiracy. Since its a top secret government ordeal, they can't provide any evidence. It's very fishy that the conspiracy happens to suggest the dates that the government started experimenting happen to be when the actual epidemic began. It's not hard to create a conspiracy theory. All one has to do is find some dates and random events, and then link them through rediculous occurances.
Essentially what this article claims is that AIDS is not a natural epidemic, but it is really man-made government created disease meant to eliminate a certain unwanted portion of the population. In particular, this theory claims AIDS was create to exterminate blacks and gays in an act of genocide. This article describes many different AIDS conspiracy theories, but they all have the use the same premise that AIDS was created by the government. Also the article suggests that a cure for AIDS has already been found but the United States government is with holding it. There is no evidence to support this claim, however this seems irrelevant to the person making the claim. It does not seem that the people concocting these conspiracies are very credible sources. While two of the leading conspirists have their doctoral degree, it does not say what their degree is in.
A few of these men argue that "HIV is a genetically modified organism developed by US Government scientists." It seems as though perhaps the men formulating this conspiracy have read to many science fiction books. They claim HIV was introduced into the gay population between 1978 and 1981 through government experiments. Basically, they make rediculous claims without providing any support or evidence. However, since it is a top secret "government experiment" they do not have any concrete evidence. this seems to be a common fall back strategy for any conspiracy. Since its a top secret government ordeal, they can't provide any evidence. It's very fishy that the conspiracy happens to suggest the dates that the government started experimenting happen to be when the actual epidemic began. It's not hard to create a conspiracy theory. All one has to do is find some dates and random events, and then link them through rediculous occurances.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Alternative Medicines
My webstie was
http://www.shopsofweb.com/categories.ASP?MainCategory=Health_%26_Beauty&SubCategory=Alternative_Medicine
This website is basically a store for a lot of scam "medicines". Most of the product descriptions use the word "natural" or "organic" to suggest that the product is from nature so it must be good. For example, the Bios Naturals store sells a wide varity of random products that I'm pretty sure don't cure anything. I'm not a doctor, but I'm pretty sure that eating "shark cartilage" or "deer velvet antler" will not cure anything. Call me crazy but I don't think Emu oil will cure skin diseases. Most of these stores do not even say what their product is spose to do. They just say that their product is natural and promotes healthiness.
Another form of alternative medicine that I found was listening to "hemi-sync" tapes that supposedly alter brain wave patterns. This is spose to help about twenty different disorders. From plain "health" to "ADD" to "surgery" and even "exploring states of the conciousness" this tape does it all. Not likely. I bet the scam artist who is selling this piece of garbage doesn't even know what brain waves are. I could not find any mention of a doctor recommendation of any of these "alternative medicines." Therefore, I have concluded that they are all scams.
http://www.shopsofweb.com/categories.ASP?MainCategory=Health_%26_Beauty&SubCategory=Alternative_Medicine
This website is basically a store for a lot of scam "medicines". Most of the product descriptions use the word "natural" or "organic" to suggest that the product is from nature so it must be good. For example, the Bios Naturals store sells a wide varity of random products that I'm pretty sure don't cure anything. I'm not a doctor, but I'm pretty sure that eating "shark cartilage" or "deer velvet antler" will not cure anything. Call me crazy but I don't think Emu oil will cure skin diseases. Most of these stores do not even say what their product is spose to do. They just say that their product is natural and promotes healthiness.
Another form of alternative medicine that I found was listening to "hemi-sync" tapes that supposedly alter brain wave patterns. This is spose to help about twenty different disorders. From plain "health" to "ADD" to "surgery" and even "exploring states of the conciousness" this tape does it all. Not likely. I bet the scam artist who is selling this piece of garbage doesn't even know what brain waves are. I could not find any mention of a doctor recommendation of any of these "alternative medicines." Therefore, I have concluded that they are all scams.
My revised paper with half the word count
Religion, Parental Influence, and Reason
Abortion is a highly controversial issue. Valid arguments are made on both sides. However, the arguments for it, with certain exceptions, outweigh the arguments against it. I came to this conclusion through parental influence and religious education class. This process of decision making deserves a careful explanation.
As a child, the Church was my sole influence on abortion. It was made very clear to me that the Church believes in life at conception. In the eyes of the Church, abortion is murder. The Church strongly opposes abortion, as it holds all life to be sacred. Since I was young and indifferent to the issue, I adopted these beliefs. However, I preferred not to talk about it because it spurred so much controversy. I never participated in any abortion protests, but if someone asked me if I was pro-choice or pro-life I would have responded pro-life. In retrospect, the only basis I had on considering myself pro-life was because it was the stance of my religion. Thus, at a young age my opinion on abortion was formed solely by my religion, I didn’t delve into the issue any further than what I was taught in my religious education class.
My parents had a great deal of influence in shaping my beliefs, including my beliefs on abortion. I remember coming home from school one day in eighth grade and telling my mom that someone had put bright orange “pro-choice” stickers on all the lockers during lunch. This was the first time I ever had a conversation about abortion with my mom. Both my parents are from large Catholic families and attended Catholic schools from preschool through college. Surprisingly, my mom was slightly pro-choice. She told me her main concern was for the safety of young women who feel the need to resort to desperate measures. She was the first to tell me about coat hanger abortions. I was appalled and thought that no one should have to be subjected to such torture. On the other hand, my mom told me stories of women she knew who had had an abortion and greatly regretted it years later. This created a dilemma in my mind, because I still thought abortion was wrong, but I also thought it was wrong to leave young desperate women to such horrific circumstances. It was clear she believed abortion was terrible and had many repercussions. However, it should be an option for desperate women, so they do not resort to self-mutilation. Essentially she was trying to convey that outlawing abortion would not stop it from happening, it would only create dangerous situations. This had a profound impact on me because I never considered this side of the argument before. After this conversation, I did not consider myself pro-life or pro-choice. I remained neutral on the issue.
Another significant influence on forming my opinion was my dad. He was the one that tipped me in favor of being pro-choice, which is surprising because in almost every respect my dad is conservative. His stance was that victims of rape or incest should have the option of abortion. He believed that society did not have the right to force a woman to have a child if she was raped. I completely agreed with my dad. I still thought abortion was a terrible thing, but I thought it should be legal for some extenuating circumstances.
As argued above, a complex decision takes careful thought and reflection. Reporting on this process requires analysis and the precise use of words, a useful exercise for any decision. Through this technique I came to have an opinion on abortion.
Abortion is a highly controversial issue. Valid arguments are made on both sides. However, the arguments for it, with certain exceptions, outweigh the arguments against it. I came to this conclusion through parental influence and religious education class. This process of decision making deserves a careful explanation.
As a child, the Church was my sole influence on abortion. It was made very clear to me that the Church believes in life at conception. In the eyes of the Church, abortion is murder. The Church strongly opposes abortion, as it holds all life to be sacred. Since I was young and indifferent to the issue, I adopted these beliefs. However, I preferred not to talk about it because it spurred so much controversy. I never participated in any abortion protests, but if someone asked me if I was pro-choice or pro-life I would have responded pro-life. In retrospect, the only basis I had on considering myself pro-life was because it was the stance of my religion. Thus, at a young age my opinion on abortion was formed solely by my religion, I didn’t delve into the issue any further than what I was taught in my religious education class.
My parents had a great deal of influence in shaping my beliefs, including my beliefs on abortion. I remember coming home from school one day in eighth grade and telling my mom that someone had put bright orange “pro-choice” stickers on all the lockers during lunch. This was the first time I ever had a conversation about abortion with my mom. Both my parents are from large Catholic families and attended Catholic schools from preschool through college. Surprisingly, my mom was slightly pro-choice. She told me her main concern was for the safety of young women who feel the need to resort to desperate measures. She was the first to tell me about coat hanger abortions. I was appalled and thought that no one should have to be subjected to such torture. On the other hand, my mom told me stories of women she knew who had had an abortion and greatly regretted it years later. This created a dilemma in my mind, because I still thought abortion was wrong, but I also thought it was wrong to leave young desperate women to such horrific circumstances. It was clear she believed abortion was terrible and had many repercussions. However, it should be an option for desperate women, so they do not resort to self-mutilation. Essentially she was trying to convey that outlawing abortion would not stop it from happening, it would only create dangerous situations. This had a profound impact on me because I never considered this side of the argument before. After this conversation, I did not consider myself pro-life or pro-choice. I remained neutral on the issue.
Another significant influence on forming my opinion was my dad. He was the one that tipped me in favor of being pro-choice, which is surprising because in almost every respect my dad is conservative. His stance was that victims of rape or incest should have the option of abortion. He believed that society did not have the right to force a woman to have a child if she was raped. I completely agreed with my dad. I still thought abortion was a terrible thing, but I thought it should be legal for some extenuating circumstances.
As argued above, a complex decision takes careful thought and reflection. Reporting on this process requires analysis and the precise use of words, a useful exercise for any decision. Through this technique I came to have an opinion on abortion.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
My Original Paper
Religion, Parental Influence, and Reason
Of the most controversial issues in today’s society, abortion ranks among those at the top. It’s not necessarily a new debate, but one that has been going on for quite some time. Since the Supreme Court case of Roe versus Wade in January of 1973, abortion has been a heatedly debated topic. The legalization of abortion alone has furthered the division of the right and the left in American society. Both sides full heartedly defend their position on this sensitive matter. The right argues for life at conception and equates abortion with murder, whereas the left supports women’s rights and pro-choice. Thus, as a member of society I was exposed to many different opinions on this issue. In order to form my own opinion, I had to take into account all of the opposing view points and come to a decision based on my own reasoning and logic. Of the many influences I’ve had, the three that stick out most in my mind are the Church, my mom, and my dad.
As a young child my main source of exposure to the abortion issue came through the Church. Being Roman Catholic, I was thoroughly taught the Church’s beliefs and standpoints concerning abortion. It was made very clear to me that the Church holds to the belief of life at conception. Therefore, in the eyes of the church, abortion is essentially the same as murder. This of course means the Church is strongly opposed to abortion as it holds all life to be sacred. During my religious education classes my teacher, Deacon Tony, conveyed to me the Church’s views on abortion. Since I was young, I didn’t care to think too much about the issue so I just adopted the beliefs of the Church as my own. I accepted the idea that abortion was morally wrong and that it should be illegal. However, I was young and didn’t feel as strongly about the issue as some of my classmates. In fact, I preferred not to talk about it because it spurred so much controversy. I never participated in any abortion protests or anything like that, but if someone asked me if I was pro-choice or pro-life I probably would have responded pro-life. In retrospect, the only basis I had on considering myself pro-life was because it was the stance of my religion. Thus, at a young age my opinion on abortion was formed solely by my religion, I didn’t delve into the issue any further than what I was taught in my religious education class.
Like most people, my parents had a great deal of influence in shaping my beliefs, including my beliefs on abortion. I remember coming home from school one day in the eighth grade and telling my mom that someone had put bright orange “pro-choice” stickers on all the lockers during lunch. This was the first time I ever really got into a conversation about abortion with my mom. Both my mom and dad are from large Catholic families and attended Catholic schools from preschool through college. However, they are both products of growing up in the sixties and seventies, which was a time notorious for liberalism. To my surprise I found out my mom was loosely pro-choice. She told me her main concern was for the safety of young pregnant girls who feel the need to resort to desperate measures. She was the first to tell me of the infamous coat hanger abortion. I was appalled at such a gruesome act and thought that no one should have to be subjected to such torture. On the other hand, my mom told me stories of women she knew who had an abortion and greatly regretted it years later. She said it was a huge psychological blow to these women. This created a dilemma in my mind, because
I still thought abortion was wrong but I also thought it was wrong to leave young desperate women to such horrific circumstances. It was clear my mom believed abortion was terrible and had many repercussions. However, her stance was that abortion should be an option for desperate women so they don’t resort to self-mutilation. Essentially what she was trying to get across was that outlawing abortion wouldn’t stop it from happening, it would only create dangerous situations. This really got the wheels turning in my head because I never considered this side of the argument before. I was never told about coat hanger abortions in my religious education classes. My religious education class didn’t take into account the safety of the pregnant women. After this conversation with my mom I didn’t really consider myself pro-life or pro-choice. In fact, I tried to remain neutral on the issue. Thus my mom contributed to my opinion on abortion, in some ways, more so than my religious education class.
Another significant influence on forming my opinion on abortion was my dad. He was the one that tipped me in favor of being pro-choice, which is surprising because in almost every respect my dad is conservative. However, what put me over the edge was the issue of rape and incest. His stance was that victims of rape or incest should have the option of not having the child. It was his belief that society didn’t have the right to tell an individual that they must have a child if they were raped. I completely agreed with my dad. I began to think of the abortion controversy more of an issue of providing a safe opportunity to have a medical procedure than the morality of the situation. Obviously I still thought abortion was a terrible thing, but I thought it should be legal for the reasons my dad explained to me. Through my own reason and judgment, I decided society didn’t have the right to force a woman to have a child if she was raped. Then I thought to myself, if abortion were made illegal what would be the punishment for women who had an abortion? Would they be sent to prison? I decided it would be ludicrous for society to have that power. Therefore, my dad was the one who tipped my internal pro-life pro-choice scale in favor of pro-choice.
It’s strange how people’s opinions can change throughout their lives. One moment they can feel one way about something and the next moment they feel the exact opposite. This is what happened to my own opinion on abortion. My original stance of pro-life was formed at young age by the guidance of my religious education teacher. Quite simply I was taught that abortion was bad, which I still believe it is. However, as I grew older and was exposed to different sides of the issue I came to have a new opinion of pro-choice. I decided upon this after various conversations with my mom and my dad. Both my parents agree with the teachings of the Church that abortion is bad, yet they still side with pro-choice. Neither of them believe abortion should be a form of birth control, such as using condoms or the pill, but they believe it should be an option for a few desperate situations. Being as it is that parents have a remarkable influence on their children, I to have adopted this stance on abortion. My opinion solidified when I heard Bill Clinton’s famous quote, “Abortion should not only be safe and legal, it should be rare”. Thus, my stance on abortion was formed by taking into account many sides of the argument and using my best judgment to form an opinion.
Of the most controversial issues in today’s society, abortion ranks among those at the top. It’s not necessarily a new debate, but one that has been going on for quite some time. Since the Supreme Court case of Roe versus Wade in January of 1973, abortion has been a heatedly debated topic. The legalization of abortion alone has furthered the division of the right and the left in American society. Both sides full heartedly defend their position on this sensitive matter. The right argues for life at conception and equates abortion with murder, whereas the left supports women’s rights and pro-choice. Thus, as a member of society I was exposed to many different opinions on this issue. In order to form my own opinion, I had to take into account all of the opposing view points and come to a decision based on my own reasoning and logic. Of the many influences I’ve had, the three that stick out most in my mind are the Church, my mom, and my dad.
As a young child my main source of exposure to the abortion issue came through the Church. Being Roman Catholic, I was thoroughly taught the Church’s beliefs and standpoints concerning abortion. It was made very clear to me that the Church holds to the belief of life at conception. Therefore, in the eyes of the church, abortion is essentially the same as murder. This of course means the Church is strongly opposed to abortion as it holds all life to be sacred. During my religious education classes my teacher, Deacon Tony, conveyed to me the Church’s views on abortion. Since I was young, I didn’t care to think too much about the issue so I just adopted the beliefs of the Church as my own. I accepted the idea that abortion was morally wrong and that it should be illegal. However, I was young and didn’t feel as strongly about the issue as some of my classmates. In fact, I preferred not to talk about it because it spurred so much controversy. I never participated in any abortion protests or anything like that, but if someone asked me if I was pro-choice or pro-life I probably would have responded pro-life. In retrospect, the only basis I had on considering myself pro-life was because it was the stance of my religion. Thus, at a young age my opinion on abortion was formed solely by my religion, I didn’t delve into the issue any further than what I was taught in my religious education class.
Like most people, my parents had a great deal of influence in shaping my beliefs, including my beliefs on abortion. I remember coming home from school one day in the eighth grade and telling my mom that someone had put bright orange “pro-choice” stickers on all the lockers during lunch. This was the first time I ever really got into a conversation about abortion with my mom. Both my mom and dad are from large Catholic families and attended Catholic schools from preschool through college. However, they are both products of growing up in the sixties and seventies, which was a time notorious for liberalism. To my surprise I found out my mom was loosely pro-choice. She told me her main concern was for the safety of young pregnant girls who feel the need to resort to desperate measures. She was the first to tell me of the infamous coat hanger abortion. I was appalled at such a gruesome act and thought that no one should have to be subjected to such torture. On the other hand, my mom told me stories of women she knew who had an abortion and greatly regretted it years later. She said it was a huge psychological blow to these women. This created a dilemma in my mind, because
I still thought abortion was wrong but I also thought it was wrong to leave young desperate women to such horrific circumstances. It was clear my mom believed abortion was terrible and had many repercussions. However, her stance was that abortion should be an option for desperate women so they don’t resort to self-mutilation. Essentially what she was trying to get across was that outlawing abortion wouldn’t stop it from happening, it would only create dangerous situations. This really got the wheels turning in my head because I never considered this side of the argument before. I was never told about coat hanger abortions in my religious education classes. My religious education class didn’t take into account the safety of the pregnant women. After this conversation with my mom I didn’t really consider myself pro-life or pro-choice. In fact, I tried to remain neutral on the issue. Thus my mom contributed to my opinion on abortion, in some ways, more so than my religious education class.
Another significant influence on forming my opinion on abortion was my dad. He was the one that tipped me in favor of being pro-choice, which is surprising because in almost every respect my dad is conservative. However, what put me over the edge was the issue of rape and incest. His stance was that victims of rape or incest should have the option of not having the child. It was his belief that society didn’t have the right to tell an individual that they must have a child if they were raped. I completely agreed with my dad. I began to think of the abortion controversy more of an issue of providing a safe opportunity to have a medical procedure than the morality of the situation. Obviously I still thought abortion was a terrible thing, but I thought it should be legal for the reasons my dad explained to me. Through my own reason and judgment, I decided society didn’t have the right to force a woman to have a child if she was raped. Then I thought to myself, if abortion were made illegal what would be the punishment for women who had an abortion? Would they be sent to prison? I decided it would be ludicrous for society to have that power. Therefore, my dad was the one who tipped my internal pro-life pro-choice scale in favor of pro-choice.
It’s strange how people’s opinions can change throughout their lives. One moment they can feel one way about something and the next moment they feel the exact opposite. This is what happened to my own opinion on abortion. My original stance of pro-life was formed at young age by the guidance of my religious education teacher. Quite simply I was taught that abortion was bad, which I still believe it is. However, as I grew older and was exposed to different sides of the issue I came to have a new opinion of pro-choice. I decided upon this after various conversations with my mom and my dad. Both my parents agree with the teachings of the Church that abortion is bad, yet they still side with pro-choice. Neither of them believe abortion should be a form of birth control, such as using condoms or the pill, but they believe it should be an option for a few desperate situations. Being as it is that parents have a remarkable influence on their children, I to have adopted this stance on abortion. My opinion solidified when I heard Bill Clinton’s famous quote, “Abortion should not only be safe and legal, it should be rare”. Thus, my stance on abortion was formed by taking into account many sides of the argument and using my best judgment to form an opinion.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Holocaust Denial
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/holohoax.htm
The article I chose to read was titled, "Is the Holocaust a Hoax?" The main claim of the article was that the holocaust was fabrication made up by the Allies after world war two. The author tries to discredit any evidence of the holocaust ever happening. However, his own evidence is sketchy and questionable at best. For example, he talks about how a man named Fred A. Leuchter, who is suposedly a specialist on the design and fabrication of execution equipment, scraped samples from the gas chambers in Auschwitz. Leuchters finding were that the walls contained no cyanide residue and that they must if gas had actually been used in the chamber. In my opinion, its going to take a little more than some evidence from skecthball Fred A. Leuchter. I mean come on he's a specialist in execution equipment, he must know what he's talking about. First of all, what makes him a so called "leading specialist" on the design and fabrication of execution equipment. Usually in an article like this if the author references an expert his name will be followed by the letters Phd or atleast give some explanation as to what qualifies him as an expert. The author offers absolutely no explanation as to what makes Leuchter an expert. For all we know he could just be some nut whos hobby is learning about killing people. Furthermore, the author goes on to say that the Polish Government tried to disprove Leuchter but came to the same result. Once again the author doesn't provide any evidence of this experiment carried out by the Polish Government. He thinks the reader should believe him just because he said it. Its ironic that the same thing he is accusing the "fabricators of the holocaust" of, he himself is doing. He goes so far as to say the diary of Anne Frank was a fake. His overwhelming evidence is that a portion of the diary was written with a ball point pen and that these pens were not in use at the time of Anne frank. Once again, where is the evidence? He is making a lot of claims and providing no credible evidence. In the end he fall back on the claim that all the corpses people found at the concentration camps died of Typhus. This seems to be a favorite explanation for all holocaust deniers. The Iranian television program said the same thing. In summation, the author offers absolutely no credible evidence for any of the claims he is making and its obvious he is not very fond of Jewish people to begin with.
The article I chose to read was titled, "Is the Holocaust a Hoax?" The main claim of the article was that the holocaust was fabrication made up by the Allies after world war two. The author tries to discredit any evidence of the holocaust ever happening. However, his own evidence is sketchy and questionable at best. For example, he talks about how a man named Fred A. Leuchter, who is suposedly a specialist on the design and fabrication of execution equipment, scraped samples from the gas chambers in Auschwitz. Leuchters finding were that the walls contained no cyanide residue and that they must if gas had actually been used in the chamber. In my opinion, its going to take a little more than some evidence from skecthball Fred A. Leuchter. I mean come on he's a specialist in execution equipment, he must know what he's talking about. First of all, what makes him a so called "leading specialist" on the design and fabrication of execution equipment. Usually in an article like this if the author references an expert his name will be followed by the letters Phd or atleast give some explanation as to what qualifies him as an expert. The author offers absolutely no explanation as to what makes Leuchter an expert. For all we know he could just be some nut whos hobby is learning about killing people. Furthermore, the author goes on to say that the Polish Government tried to disprove Leuchter but came to the same result. Once again the author doesn't provide any evidence of this experiment carried out by the Polish Government. He thinks the reader should believe him just because he said it. Its ironic that the same thing he is accusing the "fabricators of the holocaust" of, he himself is doing. He goes so far as to say the diary of Anne Frank was a fake. His overwhelming evidence is that a portion of the diary was written with a ball point pen and that these pens were not in use at the time of Anne frank. Once again, where is the evidence? He is making a lot of claims and providing no credible evidence. In the end he fall back on the claim that all the corpses people found at the concentration camps died of Typhus. This seems to be a favorite explanation for all holocaust deniers. The Iranian television program said the same thing. In summation, the author offers absolutely no credible evidence for any of the claims he is making and its obvious he is not very fond of Jewish people to begin with.
Monday, September 10, 2007
UFO's
http://www.rickross.com/reference/ufo/ufo7.html
The article I read is about a 28 year old who gave up his job as the owner of an online company worth three billion dollars to search for alien life. Being as he is financially set for life, money is of no object to him. The article states that he has spent millions of dollars in his quest to find alien life. The article says, "Joe Firmage believes in aliens - visitors, UFO's. Not just that they exist. That they're here. They walk among us." In my opinion these are some pretty far fetched beliefs. He offers some explanations for his beliefs but I think they all boil down to theories not facts. He talks of a strange experience that he had when an "image of a being" appeared above his bed and spoke to him of space travel. He also believes alot of the world's religions were formed by off worlders. Personally I think what he says is interesting, and I think its cool that hes putting alot of money toward finding extraterrestrial life. However, I don't think he has any factual grounds for his beliefs. Overall though he sounds like a pretty interesting guy. It sounds like he knows a whole hell of alot about computers and physics, but in the end I think his imagination is getting the best of him.
The article I read is about a 28 year old who gave up his job as the owner of an online company worth three billion dollars to search for alien life. Being as he is financially set for life, money is of no object to him. The article states that he has spent millions of dollars in his quest to find alien life. The article says, "Joe Firmage believes in aliens - visitors, UFO's. Not just that they exist. That they're here. They walk among us." In my opinion these are some pretty far fetched beliefs. He offers some explanations for his beliefs but I think they all boil down to theories not facts. He talks of a strange experience that he had when an "image of a being" appeared above his bed and spoke to him of space travel. He also believes alot of the world's religions were formed by off worlders. Personally I think what he says is interesting, and I think its cool that hes putting alot of money toward finding extraterrestrial life. However, I don't think he has any factual grounds for his beliefs. Overall though he sounds like a pretty interesting guy. It sounds like he knows a whole hell of alot about computers and physics, but in the end I think his imagination is getting the best of him.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
This is my first post on my new blog. One instance that I can recall when I had difficult understanding someone was when I had a conversation with one of my friends about dinosaurs. My friend happens to be a creationist and takes every word written in the Bible literally. I happen to be a contextualist and believe when one reads the Bible they have to take into account the context in which it was written. Anyways, one night a couple of my friends and I got into a brief discussion on dinosaurs. None of us denied that dinosaurs ever existed but my friend believed that dinosaurs could only have existed after the creation of earth five thousand years ago as written in Genesis. I couldn't understand any of the logic in his arguments because he always fell back on, "its in the Bible". Nonetheless, we are still friends but I think he has some very strange beliefs.
-Peter
-Peter
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)