To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (157252 ) 7/3/2001 4:50:25 AM From: Johannes Pilch Respond to of 769670 You said: What is really amazing is the fact that a person as articulate as you and who seems to be intelligent failed to pick up my sarcasm vis-a-vis homeopathy. Well, to be frank, I did not expect you would ever so drastically overestimate yourself. You initially claimed showering in pure water was like showering in homeopathic medicine, and then in a “clarifying” post railed against homeopathy concluding with an encouragement to me to enjoy my “homeopathic showers.” For your benefit I tell you that your sarcasm was misdirected (did it even exist?). It slighted showering in pure water while boorishly assaulting homeopathy. Good sarcasm should be subtle and well-placed, perhaps even cleverly disguised, but containing a grain of truth that betrays cynicism about and/or produces abuse of a subject.“I’m big on homeopathic medicine. Every day I drink pure water.” Here we have a well-placed, moderately subtle attack on homeopathic medicine that can by no means be construed as an attack on drinking pure water. This sarcasm gains particular force when it is given amidst a conversation on homeopathic medicine.Person 1: “I take homeopathic remedy #1 for sinuses. I am also looking into getting some of that homeopathic remedy #2. Person 2: Really? Well I take homeopathic remedy #2 all the time. I get it from a friend who is a wonderful homeopath. Person 3: “Hey! I’m big on homeopathic medicine too! Every day I drink pure water!” That is biting sarcasm. You did nothing of the sort. What you did was something akin to the following:Person #1: “I drink pure water from a great filter system.” Person #2: “Really? I drink really good water from a water service. I like the taste and it’s pretty pure.” THEN YOU COME ALONG TO SAY: “Drinking pure water is like drinking homeopathic medicine!” (Ahem) Duh??? My friend, this is obviously sarcasm by dummies for dummies (which is why I rejected it). Your statement could mean drinking pure water is just as worthless as drinking homeopathic medicine. It could mean other things. It does not necessarily equate homeopathic medicine with pure water. Indeed, taken in context, it appears to abuse drinking pure water. You said: To put it bluntly I was trying to be a little witty with a person who I thought was fairly worldly. Well you obviously failed. You said: It was my misjudgment and I apologize. Accepted. You said: But now that you've explained you views and demonstrated such little scientific interest or competency in science I now understand why my comment went over your head. You understand no such thing, unless you’ve read my comments above and learned from them. You said: I also find it astounding that you know there is a god because you can see "him" in your computer screen… (???) Another abortive attempt at sarcasm, I see… You said: …and I think you said you arrived at your belief in the troika of Christianity all without benefit of published references… I said no such thing. I said the belief arrived at me. You said: …but yet [you] demand empirical evidence for anything here in the physical world. Well of course. I am a physical being and relate to the physical world via my senses. If a thing is physical and yet can by no means interface with my senses, that thing effectively does not exist for me, just as God does not exist for you. You said: And for your information, most scientific conclusions are based on empirical evidence gained from well controlled experiments. Perhaps most are, and perhaps eggs are good for you, now bad for you because of the rest of these “scientific conclusions.” Apparently it is not most of these conclusions that puts the fly in the soup. It is the myriad conclusions that are not part of this “most” that does it. You said: This is true in chemistry, physics, medicine, etc etc. A scientist's hypothesis or speculation remains just that until the empirical evidence to make it a fact is obtained. And this explains why eggs are good for you, now bad for you, now good for you. Facts just make them so. You said: You don't seem to comprehend that it is scientific people who are professionally skeptical not religious people. Oh, I understand it quite well. “Scientific people” are wondrously skeptical (as well they should be), and Christians are not (and they certainly should not be). You said: You have totally missed the point...., when you said you had 100% water, ie H2O, I jokingly (I thought) said you were showering in homeopathic medicine… Oh no, my lord. You did not say this. You said my showering in virtually 100% pure water was “like” showering in homeopathic medicine. Surely you should be able to see the difference. Perhaps your being a joyous skeptic causes you problems here too (grin). You said: I had hoped to provoke some believers in homeopathy into debate. A bit of advice: The next time you aim to do something, don’t rely on your wit. You said: So sorry to have confused you. Again, accepted. No need to be profuse about it. You said: BTW, your reverse osmosis system is not giving you "100 %" water… Well of course that is exactly why I used the word “virtually” in my post. You said: …but it is close enough for electrical engineers or religious people. A good engineer or religious person understands that this depends upon the engineer or religious person. On the other hand, a skeptic doesn’t know his arse from his appetite and yet thinks himself fit to make pronouncements like the one above. (Big day today. Gotta go shower in some pure water)