a second "welcome" posting?

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by LarryDoc, Oct 30, 2004.

  1. LarryDoc

    LarryDoc Guest

    Bev et al,

    I vote for including this in the Monday posting or, as Bev suggested, a
    second posting later in the week under the heading: Welcome To SMV:
    Advice and Consent.

    I edited Dr. Mike's excellent post following. Mostly, added the three
    names in the second paragraph and added a concluding paragraph.

    PS: In the last few weeks I've completely avoided their posts but have
    noted a significant decline in "real" queries and discussion. Too bad.

    Best regards,
    Larry, O.D.
    LarryDoc, Oct 30, 2004
  2. LarryDoc

    Evaristo Guest

    Like most public newsgroups, there is no moderator in sci.med.vision, nor
    So, why you and others stand up as the pseudo-moderators ?
    Say your things and be done. If someone disagrees with you,
    please do not laugh at him/her, but answer or be quiet. This
    is the nature of and un-moderated newsgroup and of free-speech.

    Live and LET live.
    Since there are only three people that have doubts about the ability
    of the formal trained to CURE people from their eye problems then
    it means that the current vision science and medicine is right and the
    three people are wrong. Hmm that could be, but could be NOT.
    You quoted Asimoov without understanding what he was saying.
    So easy that you avoid to do it ?
    You haven't read a book that you say has false assumptions and
    emotional appeals. When asked to spot where they were,
    you withdrew.
    You would like to be the only one that can do this ?
    When the medical establishment claims to be curing people
    when in fact is wandering in the dark, it is not an intelligent
    thing to do to follow their advice.
    There is no conscious conspiracy, but these people are not interested
    in curing people from their diseases, they are only interested in
    their business. Otherwise they would investigate why some cases
    don't fit their theories and methods.
    Conventional knowledge about vision and eyes is wrong.
    Plain and simple. The records of the discovery of what is wrong
    was made available by the man that discovered it but conventional
    "scientists" avoid investigating and reproducing the experiments
    described in those publications. Why they avoid it ? Because it
    is of no use to anyone apart to the patients that are willing to
    give their money to anyone with a certain degree of authority,
    out of desperation about their condition, obviously.
    The original publications of that man are full of practical
    experiments to prove the following assertions that are mere
    descriptions of facts that can be observed by ANYONE
    replicates those experiments.

    The archaic-ness point is weak if you think that your current
    beliefs about vision, accommodation and the like are WAY OLDER
    than these about the man that made the discoveries. Way older.
    As usual.
    The entertainment goes away when you are left with embarrassment.
    Investigate why is like this.
    Read the publications made by the discoverer of it.
    Understand what's written in there.
    TRY ON YOURSELF the full advice that is written in there,
    without being poisoned by unfounded beliefs and superstitions
    that these unfair businessmen try to cast upon you cunningly
    using your fear about losing your ability to see to fill their pockets
    with your money.

    This is the real archaic way to do business. Middle-age stuff.
    Otis is wrong with his beliefs because all kind of glasses force
    the mind to a certain degree of refraction hindering the normal
    accommodation to take place.
    Prevention simply lays in the teaching of how not to use the
    eyes in the wrong way (i.e. interfering with them trying to see
    with a conscious/unconscious effort)
    There are publications that describe scientifically how this
    could be proven. True scientist have to follow the scientific
    method and have to try to reproduce the same experiments
    in the same conditions to see if the results are the same. If
    the experiments could be reproduced with the same results,
    then there is something right in the writings. This hasn't be
    done. Why ? Because is of no interest of anyone in the field
    to do such a thing. The status quo is more than satisfactory
    to those unfair businessmen. Here in Italy the first company
    of the state is the producer of eyeglasses. Go figure!
    This is the usual crippled statement that someone that has
    not better arguments can put forth. Why are you crippling
    and generalizing everything instead of asking more about
    it ? This is the way an unfair businessmen dismiss things
    that are opposite to his interests: he exaggerates and
    distorts information taking it to extremes. No one said
    all blindness, no one said staring at the sun.
    Certainly you have to think it if you want to play it !
    Lol !!! Is it sufficient ? Probably not if you are not a musician,
    but if you have been trained to music you could easily play it
    thinking about it. In fact if you can even play it without thinking
    about it !

    The accommodation theory that glasses sellers are using as
    scientific proof of their business being right are of a man
    called Herman Ludwig Ferdinand von Helmoltz born in 1821
    and died in 1894.

    The fact that he made important discoveries in other fields
    doesn't necessarily mean that he was right about the eyes
    also. This is again the authority principle and its fallacies.
    Evaristo, Oct 30, 2004
  3. LarryDoc

    Evaristo Guest

    This is how a baby behaves: stomps his feet on the ground,
    cries and don't want to hear anything. He does this because
    his reactions are purely emotional and not logical. Usually the
    mother has to calm him down and teach him how to use
    reasoning to solve problems. (If the mother has imperfect
    sight, usually what happens is that she gets upset, screams
    scold the child and make him tense. The net result is that the
    boy learns how to take things hard and learns how to strain
    his mind, around 12 his normal sight leaves him...)
    This is false. The "Docs" here are continuously laughting at
    arguments instead of addressing points. Their analogies
    are of a ridiculing nature, and often are plainly wrong.
    Yes, like babies.
    What hinders you to go on with your discussions ?
    No censorship or moderation is being done ?
    Are you annoyed by my writings ? Don't read them.
    It's a free world (at least it tends to be a free world).
    Who started the "you are trolls" flame wars ?
    Who started to say "listening to people with obvious
    mental illness." ? Don't listen! Read your Docs and be
    happy !
    PROBLEMS of free speech ???
    Your talk like fascists did here in Italy before WW2 !!!
    Why don't you put on a vote and create a
    sci.med.vision.moderated ? It is not that difficult to do.
    Just enough votes to get it created.
    The solution is very simple.
    If people want to listen to biased opinions will go to
    the moderated newsgroup, if they want to read what
    ALL have to say they will come here. THIS is the nature
    of free-speech, this is why some newsgroup are NOT
    moderated. To avoid fascist-minded people to censure
    free-speech that "has problems" like you said.
    It relates to this discussion because must to let
    people say and HAVE their own opinion. And more than
    that you must let them express it, whatever it is.
    This is your opinion. Mine is different because I'm cured
    from vision problems and feel very very healthier now than
    when I was imperfect sighted.
    If you are so superstitious to have that belief it is your
    problem, let us express our experiences with vision problems.
    One of them is have them cured.
    So why the ODs should be right and we wrong ? This is
    a silly point.
    This explains my statements about the wandering in the dark.
    It is really like this, they ARE wandering in the dark and I KNOW
    it from my experience. They are trying to solve a problem looking
    in the wrong direction. Putting glasses on people has this strange
    effect, while it helps to see better through them at the same time
    it aggravates the underlying problem that it tries to solve.
    You believe who you want. I have no problem with it !!!
    What I KNOW is that my experience with facts are that they
    ARE WRONG because their pseudo solutions made me see
    worse in the years and then when I tried the other solution
    I got cured. The reality of the facts that happened to me are
    a way more stronger "argument" than the years of study.
    I have studied books and I know that science is a becoming
    phenomenon and that usually when new discoveries are made
    the old books go down the drain.

    People where more inclined to follow what Popes said and
    so they killed women calling them witches.

    By the way, more name calling from you, thanks.
    Please point out where it didn't happen in my posts.

    The same thing ? The different opinion from theirs !!!

    Please define "kindly" ? Is laughing at and calling someone troll a
    kindly act ?

    By the way a "weekly" warning post isn't a flooding of the same
    thing ? Pay a little more attention at what you say.

    ? Are you kidding ?
    If you don't like someone's posts, use the filter.
    Why you and your "professionals" are doing exactly this to
    us different-opinioned people ?
    So what's the point ? Have you read my recent posts ?
    Please spot where there is name-calling or anything of the sort.
    It is clear that you are the one wanting attention.
    What is this need to suggest others to do this ?
    Do you think they have not the ability to think with their heads
    and decide ? My posts are FULL of very interesting points
    and you are annoyed and scared by the content. Since my
    arguments are strong people like you (with the strong superstitious
    beliefs that hold) are scared by them and trash the discussion.
    The professionals stop answering because they see that their
    errors are being exposed. The smarter ones stop answering,
    the less smart trash the discussion on the trolls plane. This is
    evident ! People like you don't even read or understand my
    arguments and fascistly try to obscure free-speech (that as
    "problems" as you previously said).
    Good for you!
    What do you want from me ?
    To stop annoying you ?
    Don't read me !

    I have very strong points against your kind "professionals" and
    this annoys you and them. The problem is that they (and you) are
    completely wrong about vision, but you prefer to stick with your
    superstitions. It is you that will get worse and worse with your
    vision, not me !
    But one !!! Lol.
    Read my last 10 posts and tell me where the flooding is (except in
    reply to someone's flooding).
    Bless GOD !
    Yes, I have this problem. Because the "professional" are doing such
    a great harm to people that I cannot stay silent. Intelligent people
    are reading and forming an opinion based on the content of the posts
    not basing their judgment on superstitions.
    You want to change the behavior of people. You are acting like
    fascists did before WW2.
    Childish behavior.

    Thank you.

    My suggestion to you--cure your eyes!
    Evaristo, Oct 31, 2004
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.