Vig-E-O games

[Tiberius]

I would love to produce this 'evidence', but I don't know where to look or who to trust. I have seen a lot of stuff in these well respected journals and publications that I think is a load of hooey. As a proper freethinker (but not allowed in a freethinkers organization), I try to come to my own conclusions within my own sphere of understanding. It may be smaller than the understanding held by 'scientists', but it is un-fuck-with-able. If I had a good friend, who I knew in real life, and he or she was a 'scientist', and they knew some interesting facts, I would be happy to hear them out, and adopt the information. But I can't afford to base my opinions on something as subjective as the ideas of strangers.

"As subjective"??? Guess what Pippy? You friends' thoughts are also subjective, as are your own ideas! Freethinking isn't about using your own sphere of understanding to come up with conclusions, but about not depending on dogma. Listening to the the scientific community is a very good form of free-thinking, as most of the time, the more studies that are done, the better the research, and the more conclusive the idea. These people are also experts, who have a greater understanding than you do in the specific area they research. I'll probably never be able to truly understand or comprehend the Big Bang or Quantum Mechanics, but I read the research and listen to popularisers of science explain it in a simplified way, and I accept it.

Sometimes you have to accept the things that are told to you by the people who know the most about them. If everyone followed your kind of free-thinking, progress would grind to a halt as people would go with their intuition rather than what the experiments tell us. You aren't earning any freethinking points by saying "I've seen a load of well respected journals and the papers are a load of hooey". Journals are usually very hard to get published in, and only papers that have been peer-reviewed and held up as the best research get into the best journals. If you think it's a load of hooey, you are well within your rights to think that, but your opinions won't reflect reality as presented by the numerous studies you dismiss.

I have read some articles about TV being good for you, and TV being bad for you. I would rather talk about my and your guys extensive personal experience with TV watching and its effects. Seems more constructive.

Every time one of us has told you that we don't feel hypnotised, or feel the symtoms you tell us we "should feel", you've gone on the offensive, telling us you are "flabbergasted" , that the symtoms are "unquestionable". Yet you produce no evidence to back up any of this; only your hearsay and stuff that our parents told us when we were children. So excuse me if we think that "personal experience" counts for nothing in terms of actual hard fact about what happens when we watch TV. Sure, talk about how we each feel individually, but there is no point in continuing the discussion without evidence being presented...

I think you guys should base you opinions more on personal life experience, and less on what others tell you to believe. There is a lot of untruth out there. A lot.

Science doesn't tell us what to believe, it tells us which explanation most closely resembles the truth. Whether you believe it or not is ultimately up to you, but you would be a fool not to follow the evidence provided by numerous studies, collaborative research, and the findings of peer-reviewed papers in journals. Unless you have some amazing omniscience-like insight into the issue, your personal experience can't be quantified, and is yours alone.

This type of talk coming from a known conspiracy theorist however, doesn't surprise me. You people regularly reject all reason and evidence in order to support and already drawn up conclusion that someone is telling a massive lie. It doesn't impress me, and I think I speak for most people here when I say that it certainly doesn't impress any of them.