http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com Acupuncture and Chinese medicine journal for practitioners and students Mon, 06 Feb 2012 16:27:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/comment-page-1/#comment-23860 Rhianna does Medicine Year 2 Mon, 06 Feb 2012 16:27:02 +0000 http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/#comment-23860 I don't know about hateful, but sometimes some angry words are justified. When you see people pushing the same quackery, or telling the same lies time and time again when they have been corrected numerous times, it pushes people's limits. We are talking about people's health here. Nothing riles me more than quacks advising vulnerable people to avoid proper medicine at all costs and to use their magic water to treat cancer, epilepsy - you name it. Or those who lie through their teeth to fearmonger people into not vaccinating their kids. Or those who resort to personal attacks because they can't support their BS with evidence when asked. I think you're suffering from a confirmation bias - only seeing/rememberring what confirms your belief. If you want examples of some of the unbelievably vile personal attacks, threats and hate mail I receive from sCAM pushers, I keep them all. ------- EDIT: "so you think it is fine to make personal attacks as long as you can make a rational argument to yourself for behaving hatefully towards them". No, and I didn't say that. I said "sometimes some angry words are justified". ------- EDIT: "Do you or do you not think it is acceptable to personally abuse others in a written format in this forum?" I think you need to define "personal abuse". "Moreover, insults used as a technique in attacking an argument is a form of bullying." It's called arguing from ad hominem. A standard tactic used by the majority alties here, there and everywhere. It's a logical fallacy and you will rarely, if ever, see skeptics using it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem One altie here frequently suggests I have a homosexual relationship happening with James Randi. This happens every time he is pressed to provide evidence to support a claim, or is clearly defeated. He is not forwarding an argument from ad hominem, he is simply being insulting. This issue you have raised is more complex then you think. I don’t know about hateful, but sometimes some angry words are justified. When you see people pushing the same quackery, or telling the same lies time and time again when they have been corrected numerous times, it pushes people’s limits. We are talking about people’s health here.
Nothing riles me more than quacks advising vulnerable people to avoid proper medicine at all costs and to use their magic water to treat cancer, epilepsy – you name it. Or those who lie through their teeth to fearmonger people into not vaccinating their kids. Or those who resort to personal attacks because they can’t support their BS with evidence when asked.
I think you’re suffering from a confirmation bias – only seeing/rememberring what confirms your belief. If you want examples of some of the unbelievably vile personal attacks, threats and hate mail I receive from sCAM pushers, I keep them all.
——-
EDIT: “so you think it is fine to make personal attacks as long as you can make a rational argument to yourself for behaving hatefully towards them”. No, and I didn’t say that. I said “sometimes some angry words are justified”.
——-
EDIT: “Do you or do you not think it is acceptable to personally abuse others in a written format in this forum?” I think you need to define “personal abuse”.
“Moreover, insults used as a technique in attacking an argument is a form of bullying.” It’s called arguing from ad hominem. A standard tactic used by the majority alties here, there and everywhere. It’s a logical fallacy and you will rarely, if ever, see skeptics using it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
One altie here frequently suggests I have a homosexual relationship happening with James Randi. This happens every time he is pressed to provide evidence to support a claim, or is clearly defeated. He is not forwarding an argument from ad hominem, he is simply being insulting.
This issue you have raised is more complex then you think.

]]> http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/comment-page-1/#comment-23859 Anonymous Mon, 06 Feb 2012 13:46:52 +0000 http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/#comment-23859 I tried a similar question a long time ago, and if anything, the determined rationalisations have become even more entrenched and vociferous. (Rhianna) You are wrong, it is verbal abuse by dictionary definition. And the fact is that emotional abuse (insults and ridicule fall into this category) have mostly deeper and longer term damaging consequences in the recipient. Anyone who uses phrases such as “deserves it” or “begs for it” in relation to ANY type of abuse of ANY person is primarily concerned with themselves and their rights (sic). That attitude shows a clear lack of empathy for others. Now, the psychological definition of a sociopath includes the absence of empathy such that social interactions with people are often, perhaps usually, damaging. Maybe we should use their own logic to conclude that they are a bit too close on the continuum to a sociopath, particularly when they attack the person rather than the argument. (Nate) These are mutually exclusive. You yourself made the distinction with calling someone stupid or saying it is a stupid idea. You’re just reaching now. Your justifications weren’t strong to begin with and they are getting weaker as you go. Why don’t you answer TSC’s question about what useful purpose to others all of this personal abuse serves? I think Lo has expressed what actually happens best. As you and she have said, it’s an emotional reaction and that would be normal on subjects that are important to us. Taking that as far as attacking the character of the person happens a lot, but that doesn’t mean it is right or justifiable. Using intellectual games instead of flat-out insults doesn’t make it right nor reduce the impact. Indigo made an interesting observation - miserable people don’t have the space to care about others. To answer your specific question, anger is one emotion I feel, on a good day I might feel some pity, but my most common reaction is disgust. Reading the justifications written here just confirms for me that my disgust is warranted. I tried a similar question a long time ago, and if anything, the determined rationalisations have become even more entrenched and vociferous.
(Rhianna) You are wrong, it is verbal abuse by dictionary definition. And the fact is that emotional abuse (insults and ridicule fall into this category) have mostly deeper and longer term damaging consequences in the recipient.
Anyone who uses phrases such as “deserves it” or “begs for it” in relation to ANY type of abuse of ANY person is primarily concerned with themselves and their rights (sic). That attitude shows a clear lack of empathy for others. Now, the psychological definition of a sociopath includes the absence of empathy such that social interactions with people are often, perhaps usually, damaging. Maybe we should use their own logic to conclude that they are a bit too close on the continuum to a sociopath, particularly when they attack the person rather than the argument.
(Nate) These are mutually exclusive. You yourself made the distinction with calling someone stupid or saying it is a stupid idea. You’re just reaching now. Your justifications weren’t strong to begin with and they are getting weaker as you go. Why don’t you answer TSC’s question about what useful purpose to others all of this personal abuse serves?
I think Lo has expressed what actually happens best. As you and she have said, it’s an emotional reaction and that would be normal on subjects that are important to us. Taking that as far as attacking the character of the person happens a lot, but that doesn’t mean it is right or justifiable. Using intellectual games instead of flat-out insults doesn’t make it right nor reduce the impact.
Indigo made an interesting observation – miserable people don’t have the space to care about others.
To answer your specific question, anger is one emotion I feel, on a good day I might feel some pity, but my most common reaction is disgust. Reading the justifications written here just confirms for me that my disgust is warranted.

]]> http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/comment-page-1/#comment-23858 Rhianna does Medicine Year 2 Mon, 06 Feb 2012 08:40:35 +0000 http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/#comment-23858 Hmm.... I guess this has opened up a can of worms. Do I care what these bullies think of me? No. I will never reach out tho them. Questions like this and the answers they give allow others with a more balanced view on life to make their own judgments. These bullies are nothing but cowards. When asked to provide some scientific reasoning which contradicts their standard answers they either ignore it or try to ridicule it. Why? because they live in fear of thinking outside the square in case their peers reject them. I asked a question about placebo and not one single factual answer from the anti-altieshttp://nz.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind… They made a big mistake trying to label any of us as narcissist's. This was another of their misguided attempts to try and discredit us. First they tell us Alties we don't understand science. We do. We just can't overlook the flaws. Some of the stuff we believe in doesn't have "Scientific Evidence" but as the way of collaboration the evidence and the process of coming to conclusions is so corrupt we don't have too much faith in the models of "science" used. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't collect evidence but it does mean we need to find a better way of doing it than using the models available. They also accuse us of trying to stop patients seeing doctors for life threatening illness. No regulated practitioner would do that. The answer to this Problem? REGULATION!! So they attack what we do saying we are exploiting the weak and vulnerable. Thats not true either. I don't want a list of patients paying me if I can do nothing for them. it soul destroying having people you can't help. I don't know how GP's manage it! Patients see people like me because the medical profession can't help them. The medical profession is unfortunately arrogant enough to believe that if they can't no one else can. Now they are starting to attack us by trying to tell us we are mentally subnormal.... This is the latest little scheme in Steve's corrupt little mind. Every so often one of his minions blogs on here and comes up with all kinds of nonsense including the Profumo Affair to discredit perfectly legitimate practitioners and their qualifications. For example he loves telling everyone I didn't do A levels but went to UNI. He forgets to mention I qualified from one of the top 25% of the Uni's in the UK, that I did do some classes in Science up to A level standard to get in and that I had lots of work experience in technical fields before all that. In another blog he implied there was something homo-erotic about CST. Well I thought that said more about him than CST. I am sure there is nothing homoerotic about holding the head of an 80 year old man!! He's shut up for a while but he will be back and I will have no hesitation in humiliating him when he does. He knows the score and he shouldn't complain just like a boxer shouldn't complain when he walks in the ring for a bout that he got punched. Ironically these people actually believe the general public is as idiotic and stupid as they tell everyone WE are. The public can see through this BS. Just in case they can't I bring it to everyone's attention when I can. The bullies and cowards do this because they are afraid. They are afraid someone else will come along and show them how else things can be done and that they might have to share the top of the tree with someone else. They are afraid that Pharma isn't the only answer and that someone else may have something to contribute. They are afraid that everyone (not just a few) will know how wrong they have got it. Is it justified? I won't tell you that I've never hurt anyone or F****d them over but every single one of them has tried to F*** me first. I've just given it back to them with both barrels. I do this in life and on the net too. Do I pity them? No. Am i justified in how I behave? You have to judge for yourselves. I'm clever enough to know if you play with fire sooner or later you will get burnt. NB. Gary, Just to clear things Up I wasn't implying you were having a relationship with James Randi. I thought your Love was for Doctor Steve? I'm sure you do love James but not in any erotic nature. NB2. If you can't take the heat stay out of the kitchen. Hmm…. I guess this has opened up a can of worms.
Do I care what these bullies think of me? No. I will never reach out tho them. Questions like this and the answers they give allow others with a more balanced view on life to make their own judgments.
These bullies are nothing but cowards. When asked to provide some scientific reasoning which contradicts their standard answers they either ignore it or try to ridicule it. Why? because they live in fear of thinking outside the square in case their peers reject them.
I asked a question about placebo and not one single factual answer from the anti-altieshttp://nz.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…
They made a big mistake trying to label any of us as narcissist’s. This was another of their misguided attempts to try and discredit us.
First they tell us Alties we don’t understand science. We do. We just can’t overlook the flaws. Some of the stuff we believe in doesn’t have “Scientific Evidence” but as the way of collaboration the evidence and the process of coming to conclusions is so corrupt we don’t have too much faith in the models of “science” used. This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t collect evidence but it does mean we need to find a better way of doing it than using the models available.
They also accuse us of trying to stop patients seeing doctors for life threatening illness.
No regulated practitioner would do that. The answer to this Problem? REGULATION!!
So they attack what we do saying we are exploiting the weak and vulnerable.
Thats not true either. I don’t want a list of patients paying me if I can do nothing for them. it soul destroying having people you can’t help. I don’t know how GP’s manage it! Patients see people like me because the medical profession can’t help them. The medical profession is unfortunately arrogant enough to believe that if they can’t no one else can.
Now they are starting to attack us by trying to tell us we are mentally subnormal….
This is the latest little scheme in Steve’s corrupt little mind. Every so often one of his minions blogs on here and comes up with all kinds of nonsense including the Profumo Affair to discredit perfectly legitimate practitioners and their qualifications. For example he loves telling everyone I didn’t do A levels but went to UNI. He forgets to mention I qualified from one of the top 25% of the Uni’s in the UK, that I did do some classes in Science up to A level standard to get in and that I had lots of work experience in technical fields before all that.
In another blog he implied there was something homo-erotic about CST. Well I thought that said more about him than CST. I am sure there is nothing homoerotic about holding the head of an 80 year old man!!
He’s shut up for a while but he will be back and I will have no hesitation in humiliating him when he does. He knows the score and he shouldn’t complain just like a boxer shouldn’t complain when he walks in the ring for a bout that he got punched.
Ironically these people actually believe the general public is as idiotic and stupid as they tell everyone WE are.
The public can see through this BS. Just in case they can’t I bring it to everyone’s attention when I can.
The bullies and cowards do this because they are afraid. They are afraid someone else will come along and show them how else things can be done and that they might have to share the top of the tree with someone else.
They are afraid that Pharma isn’t the only answer and that someone else may have something to contribute. They are afraid that everyone (not just a few) will know how wrong they have got it.
Is it justified? I won’t tell you that I’ve never hurt anyone or F****d them over but every single one of them has tried to F*** me first. I’ve just given it back to them with both barrels. I do this in life and on the net too.
Do I pity them? No.
Am i justified in how I behave? You have to judge for yourselves.
I’m clever enough to know if you play with fire sooner or later you will get burnt.
NB. Gary, Just to clear things Up I wasn’t implying you were having a relationship with James Randi. I thought your Love was for Doctor Steve? I’m sure you do love James but not in any erotic nature.
NB2. If you can’t take the heat stay out of the kitchen.

]]> http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/comment-page-1/#comment-23857 Rhianna does Medicine Year 2 Mon, 06 Feb 2012 03:14:41 +0000 http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/#comment-23857 It really depends whether this "abuse" is warranted - if it is based on truth. I guess some people choose to keep silent in certain situations because their fear of offending compels them to be. I won't be a bystander to stupidity and willful ignorance. You've made a false equivalence in your example to Tink. If people justify their rape by saying the victim (man or woman) was "begging" for it, they're very clearly incorrect; otherwise it wouldn't be rape - it is an unjustified claim. "Do you realize that is the same argument made by racists and bigots?" Only their argument isn't rational, is it? You've made the assumption these people must be miserable and hate the object of their "abuse." Where did you come by this information? I dispute its accuracy. Sometimes you have to tell it like it is. And there's always this gem to consider: “Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions.” - Thomas Jefferson Edit: If a person, such as the one I assume you're talking about, operates in the way he does, yes, they open themselves up to people speaking their mind. That isn't to say I'm shifting responsibility. As I said, if someone has said something stupid, stepped out of line with the evidence, conducted themselves poorly, etc. I feel it's my responsibility to say so. Your word, abuse, implies this is wrong. If it is unjustified, I agree. Where it is justified...the truth hurts, as they say. You won't find many, if any post-modernists among the people you're referring, so pursue that angle at your own waste of time. Rationality is not subjective. It is either rational or it is not. You used the word rational, then "belief" in the succeeding sentence. Belief is almost by definition not rational. It is a position held by one with no evidence. And remember, a rationalization is not always rational. "Somewhere on a continuum you might say abusing a very young child is never justified. At what age does it become allowable?" I'd wager never. It would seem you don't subscribe to an objective truth and I don't think we can reconcile that. "Again so far, Gary has given the most honest and partially accurate answer. He has an emotional reaction." I suspect you mean to say you relate to his explanation the most. His honesty is not known to you any more than the other users; and I'm not sure how someone can have a partially accurate answer when you've asked for opinions. In fact, no one has actually answered you because your question is a false dichotomy. "This means that written abuse is more likely conscious and deliberate." In my case, yes. You've contradicted yourself, by the way. The spitting out of hate would be an emotional response, as was your original analysis. Now, you say the written process very likely removes this element. Edit: Can we clear something up that is wasting a lot of everyone's time? Do you think there is such a thing as a stupid person, an idiot, a moron; but it is forbidden of anyone to say so, lest they be labeled an abuser"? Or, do you think there is no such person and all of the above states are subjective, and, it is also forbidden to say so? Edit: I guess I should have said "can a person say idiotic things?" I wasn't referring to anything clinical. Following your reasoning, isn't saying racism is wrong subjective? Isn't inferiority in the eye of the beholder? "...It is attacking the person rather than the argument." They aren't always mutually exclusive. No one is making an ad hominem either. "Nate, you contradict yourself." I actually said it is warranted in some instances. I do think people can say idiotic, irresponsible, sometimes morally suspect things, and to call a spade a spade isn't as reprehensible to me as it is to you. If you're talking about my comment regarding children, I thought you were using abuse to mean physical in that instance. Condemnation doesn't have to be constructive to be warranted. Sometimes you need to speak out, regardless of the outcome. Racists aren't likely to change their minds, after all. I was using the quote as something to contemplate. I wasn't using it as an argument from authority. I don't think the demarcation between a person and a person's propositions is a stark as you make it out to be. It really depends whether this “abuse” is warranted – if it is based on truth. I guess some people choose to keep silent in certain situations because their fear of offending compels them to be. I won’t be a bystander to stupidity and willful ignorance.
You’ve made a false equivalence in your example to Tink. If people justify their rape by saying the victim (man or woman) was “begging” for it, they’re very clearly incorrect; otherwise it wouldn’t be rape – it is an unjustified claim.
“Do you realize that is the same argument made by racists and bigots?”
Only their argument isn’t rational, is it?
You’ve made the assumption these people must be miserable and hate the object of their “abuse.” Where did you come by this information? I dispute its accuracy.
Sometimes you have to tell it like it is.
And there’s always this gem to consider:
“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions.”
- Thomas Jefferson
Edit: If a person, such as the one I assume you’re talking about, operates in the way he does, yes, they open themselves up to people speaking their mind. That isn’t to say I’m shifting responsibility. As I said, if someone has said something stupid, stepped out of line with the evidence, conducted themselves poorly, etc. I feel it’s my responsibility to say so. Your word, abuse, implies this is wrong. If it is unjustified, I agree. Where it is justified…the truth hurts, as they say. You won’t find many, if any post-modernists among the people you’re referring, so pursue that angle at your own waste of time.
Rationality is not subjective. It is either rational or it is not. You used the word rational, then “belief” in the succeeding sentence. Belief is almost by definition not rational. It is a position held by one with no evidence. And remember, a rationalization is not always rational.
“Somewhere on a continuum you might say abusing a very young child is never justified. At what age does it become allowable?”
I’d wager never.
It would seem you don’t subscribe to an objective truth and I don’t think we can reconcile that.
“Again so far, Gary has given the most honest and partially accurate answer. He has an emotional reaction.”
I suspect you mean to say you relate to his explanation the most. His honesty is not known to you any more than the other users; and I’m not sure how someone can have a partially accurate answer when you’ve asked for opinions. In fact, no one has actually answered you because your question is a false dichotomy.
“This means that written abuse is more likely conscious and deliberate.”
In my case, yes. You’ve contradicted yourself, by the way. The spitting out of hate would be an emotional response, as was your original analysis. Now, you say the written process very likely removes this element.
Edit: Can we clear something up that is wasting a lot of everyone’s time? Do you think there is such a thing as a stupid person, an idiot, a moron; but it is forbidden of anyone to say so, lest they be labeled an abuser”? Or, do you think there is no such person and all of the above states are subjective, and, it is also forbidden to say so?
Edit: I guess I should have said “can a person say idiotic things?” I wasn’t referring to anything clinical.
Following your reasoning, isn’t saying racism is wrong subjective? Isn’t inferiority in the eye of the beholder?
“…It is attacking the person rather than the argument.”
They aren’t always mutually exclusive. No one is making an ad hominem either.
“Nate, you contradict yourself.”
I actually said it is warranted in some instances. I do think people can say idiotic, irresponsible, sometimes morally suspect things, and to call a spade a spade isn’t as reprehensible to me as it is to you. If you’re talking about my comment regarding children, I thought you were using abuse to mean physical in that instance.
Condemnation doesn’t have to be constructive to be warranted. Sometimes you need to speak out, regardless of the outcome. Racists aren’t likely to change their minds, after all.
I was using the quote as something to contemplate. I wasn’t using it as an argument from authority. I don’t think the demarcation between a person and a person’s propositions is a stark as you make it out to be.

]]> http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/comment-page-1/#comment-23856 Dr_ Stormy NZ Osteopath Mon, 06 Feb 2012 02:11:55 +0000 http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/#comment-23856 hey alternative medicines work 110% better then FDA approved meds. Plus if they are just going to try and push me pills maybe they should go to the pharmacy hey alternative medicines work 110% better then FDA approved meds. Plus if they are just going to try and push me pills maybe they should go to the pharmacy

]]> http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/is-there-something-in-chinese-medicine-that-will-get-my-wisdom-tooth-to-fully-come-in/comment-page-1/#comment-23862 ReneeGad Sun, 05 Feb 2012 23:50:29 +0000 http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/is-there-something-in-chinese-medicine-that-will-get-my-wisdom-tooth-to-fully-come-in/#comment-23862 A chinese dentist who can pull them out? A chinese dentist who can pull them out?

]]> http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/comment-page-1/#comment-23855 Dr_ Stormy NZ Osteopath Sun, 05 Feb 2012 20:44:09 +0000 http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/#comment-23855 I can't say I care either way. It's childish - though some people beg to be abused, and thus deserve it. Edit: You always give yourself away....and talk about anger and rage.....careful....you are projecting again.... I can’t say I care either way. It’s childish – though some people beg to be abused, and thus deserve it.
Edit: You always give yourself away….and talk about anger and rage…..careful….you are projecting again….

]]> http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/comment-page-1/#comment-23854 Rhianna does Medicine Year 2 Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:04:32 +0000 http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/#comment-23854 Is this about Lighty? Look, lets get something straight; When evidence is presented to Lighty that he does not like.... he rants. A lot. Some of his behaviour has narcissistic traits. This is highlighted at which point he whines and posts further questions/answers confirming these traits.Claiming he has these traits, when he demonstrably does, is not an insult and cannot be considered abuse. I don't think you really know what abuse is. Here's what started his lately hissy fit. I posted this question: http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind… Basically ridiculing the fact he feels the need to turn every argument, irrespective of the subject, into an argument about him and his "profession" He showed up with lots of fallacies, and then did this: http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind… Misrepresenting me as ad hominem.. and then this....http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind… Science denialists like Lighty deserve nothing but ridicule. Edit: To be clear, none of us skeptics are condoning abuse and name calling. We don't resort to these tactics. We don't need to, the weight of evidence is on our side. My answer was directly referring to the recent exchange I had with Lighty, which I thought this question was referring to- apologies if that is not the case. Snarky comments are not really insults. "Why don’t you answer TSC’s question about what useful purpose to others all of this personal abuse serves? " Personal abuse and name calling? None. However, ridicule is sometimes an effective way of making someone realize how wrong they are. Say a homeopath shows up claiming he can cure something..anything...and there is someone reading who may be considering this "treatment". They might read one of our answers, and realise just how ridiculous it is. Hows that a bad thing? In the case of Lighty, I would still have to disagree that saying he is a narcissist amounts to personal abuse....if anyone is claiming it does. Sometimes the truth does hurt... Is this about Lighty? Look, lets get something straight; When evidence is presented to Lighty that he does not like…. he rants. A lot.
Some of his behaviour has narcissistic traits.
This is highlighted at which point he whines and posts further questions/answers confirming these traits.Claiming he has these traits, when he demonstrably does, is not an insult and cannot be considered abuse.
I don’t think you really know what abuse is.
Here’s what started his lately hissy fit. I posted this question: http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…
Basically ridiculing the fact he feels the need to turn every argument, irrespective of the subject, into an argument about him and his “profession”
He showed up with lots of fallacies, and then did this: http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…
Misrepresenting me as ad hominem..
and then this….http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind…
Science denialists like Lighty deserve nothing but ridicule.
Edit: To be clear, none of us skeptics are condoning abuse and name calling. We don’t resort to these tactics. We don’t need to, the weight of evidence is on our side. My answer was directly referring to the recent exchange I had with Lighty, which I thought this question was referring to- apologies if that is not the case.
Snarky comments are not really insults.
“Why don’t you answer TSC’s question about what useful purpose to others all of this personal abuse serves? ”
Personal abuse and name calling? None. However, ridicule is sometimes an effective way of making someone realize how wrong they are. Say a homeopath shows up claiming he can cure something..anything…and there is someone reading who may be considering this “treatment”. They might read one of our answers, and realise just how ridiculous it is. Hows that a bad thing?
In the case of Lighty, I would still have to disagree that saying he is a narcissist amounts to personal abuse….if anyone is claiming it does. Sometimes the truth does hurt…

]]> http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/comment-page-1/#comment-23853 Rhianna does Medicine Year 2 Sun, 05 Feb 2012 11:04:44 +0000 http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/#comment-23853 I don't know what prompted your question as I haven't visited this board much lately. Interesting you should mention rape and racism, though - both of these have been used in vile abuse of sceptics who post in this section. You may have missed it, given your joining date, but one then regular contributor posted claiming that women who supported vaccination deserved to be raped - and then went on, in several posts, to single out Rhianna as particularly deserving of rape. A few other altie contributors supported his stance. Only one (Lighty, to his eternal credit) openly condemned this disgusting campaign. A former altie regular who has only just slipped off the 'best answerer' top 10 for this section frequently expressed vile anti Semitic views, aimed at sceptics who he seemed to assume were all Jewish. These views were expressed both in posts and in emails (I keep them too). Yes, I agree that abuse is unnecessary and childish. However, I have often found it hard to keep my temper when reading answers on this board from people assuring cancer patients they can cure their (sometimes stage 4) condition with seeds, positive thinking, tea, water, restricted diets, coffee enemas, guided imaging, refusing to accept they had cancer, mind over matter, electrical devices etc etc. And when that answer comes not simply from a well-meaning but ignorant person but from someone pushing the 'cures' offered by their own particular 'profession' - yep, I think I've perhaps resorted to what might be termed 'abuse'. Can't stand to see people being hoodwinked, lied to and fleeced, that's my problem. Emotional reaction, I guess you'd call it I don’t know what prompted your question as I haven’t visited this board much lately.
Interesting you should mention rape and racism, though – both of these have been used in vile abuse of sceptics who post in this section. You may have missed it, given your joining date, but one then regular contributor posted claiming that women who supported vaccination deserved to be raped – and then went on, in several posts, to single out Rhianna as particularly deserving of rape. A few other altie contributors supported his stance. Only one (Lighty, to his eternal credit) openly condemned this disgusting campaign.
A former altie regular who has only just slipped off the ‘best answerer’ top 10 for this section frequently expressed vile anti Semitic views, aimed at sceptics who he seemed to assume were all Jewish. These views were expressed both in posts and in emails (I keep them too).
Yes, I agree that abuse is unnecessary and childish. However, I have often found it hard to keep my temper when reading answers on this board from people assuring cancer patients they can cure their (sometimes stage 4) condition with seeds, positive thinking, tea, water, restricted diets, coffee enemas, guided imaging, refusing to accept they had cancer, mind over matter, electrical devices etc etc. And when that answer comes not simply from a well-meaning but ignorant person but from someone pushing the ‘cures’ offered by their own particular ‘profession’ – yep, I think I’ve perhaps resorted to what might be termed ‘abuse’. Can’t stand to see people being hoodwinked, lied to and fleeced, that’s my problem. Emotional reaction, I guess you’d call it

]]> http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/comment-page-1/#comment-23852 Indigo Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:34:31 +0000 http://www.chinesemedicinejournal.com/those-who-answer-with-abuse-of-others-make-you-angry-or-do-you-pity-them/#comment-23852 Well I just think they must be horrible people. They dont even know someone and just because they think something different they say there must be something wrong with them because of that. It does make sense if they are just miserable. That quote misery loves company means that miserable people try to make someone else feel miserable so they dont feel alone. But that is pretty selfish because that means they dont care about other people just about themselves. I guess if youre really unhappy you dont have any space to care about other people. It does make me angry to read it but maybe the other is right and I should feel sorry for them. Well I just think they must be horrible people. They dont even know someone and just because they think something different they say there must be something wrong with them because of that. It does make sense if they are just miserable. That quote misery loves company means that miserable people try to make someone else feel miserable so they dont feel alone. But that is pretty selfish because that means they dont care about other people just about themselves. I guess if youre really unhappy you dont have any space to care about other people.
It does make me angry to read it but maybe the other is right and I should feel sorry for them.

]]>