Disenchanted with Liberals, Conservatives & NDP?

[PoliticalCitizen]

If these supplements are causing real, physical changes, you are not going to notice a difference over a one or two day period. The difference you notice over such a short period of time sounds like the reverse of the placebo effect, where you feel something will go wrong if you miss taking your regular supplements.

I'm more in the camp of advocating good diet, exercise, and plenty of sleep, for becoming healthier. Whenever I've been approached by people, especially at work, about how to lose weight or how to get back into shape, I get questions about supplements, what to eat, and even what kind of exercise to do -- but one thing I've noticed consistently, is that the people who are frustrated consistently even though they are trying to diet and exercise to lose weight or just to feel healthier, is that they are not getting enough sleep at night. If people are busy and get in the habit of sleeping 6, 5, or 4 hours a night, their bodies will adjust to the routine, but they will pay the price with weight gain, muscle or joint soreness, and being prone to catching colds or getting sick easily. The problem I have with the supplement industry is that they are implying that the cure is in a little bottle that costs 15 to 30 dollars for a months supply. The real solution for good health usually requires some major lifestyle changes that many people are unable or unwilling to make.

We only got into the whole supplement and natural remedy discussion because of the C51 bill.

I personally believe that everything is controlled by energy. As I said before - there are many ways to increase your energy levels: healthy lifestyle (physical and spiritual), meditation, practice of eastern energy techniques (tai-chi, chi-gong, etc.), nutritional supplements, natural remedies, falling in love, self-actualization etc.

Obtaining a stable higher energy level transforms your life - you become happier, feel better, do more, tire less, etc.

Each chooses what fits him the most. I think a combination of approaches works best.

[Bryan]

I personally believe that everything is controlled by energy. As I said before - there are many ways to increase your energy levels: healthy lifestyle (physical and spiritual), meditation, practice of eastern energy techniques (tai-chi, chi-gong, etc.), nutritional supplements, natural remedies, falling in love, self-actualization etc.

Obtaining a stable higher energy level transforms your life - you become happier, feel better, do more, tire less, etc.

Where is the evidence for this "energy"? How do you measure it? How many units of this energy do you need to achieve this transformation?

[PoliticalCitizen]

Where is the evidence for this "energy"? How do you measure it? How many units of this energy do you need to achieve this transformation?

Evidence is within us. You feel the difference.

You can measure different energetic levels but the "scale" is individual and personal. There are no "units".

You can say you've achieved a small transformation (and there can be many such "transformations") once you became stable on a higher level.

Now if you're genuinely interested I could tell you more or you could just start reading on your own.

If you were trying to provoke me into sharing a "revelation" - give it a rest.

I used to be a staunch materialist

[segnosaur]

Do you honestly think that if a person is lving a 'physically and spiritually healthy lifestyle' they will never need modern medicine or get sick?

With the exception of accidents (such as over-exposure to extreme elements, poisoning or physical trauma) - yes, I do. Even if they do get sick sometimes they should get better on their own, without doctors or drugs.

I see...

So, if that's the case, where are the people who are immortal? After all, everyone ends up dying of something (either illness or trama). If there really are these people who lead 'healthy' lifestyles, there should at least be a few who avoid accidents, and if they never get sick, they should live forever.

So, of the 2 million people who died every year from Smal Pox in the middle of this century (a disease that was wiped out via modern medicne, not one of them was living a 'healthy lifestyle'?

That's an extreme case... but so could have been SARS... all I can say is the ones that did survive could have been the ones that were bodily and spiritually healthy or genetically meant to survive.

Smallpox, an 'extreme case'? It affected (at one point) approximatley 10% of the population.

I could also point out polio (almost irradicated in the western world), measles (much lower incidence now), or any one of a dozen diseases.

So, once again, are you saying that not one person who ever lived a 'healthy lifestyle' ever caught smallpox? You're talking millions of victims here.

The practice of ancient healing arts relies on concepts such as spiritual energy, soul, afterlife and reincarnation just as much as on natural remedies.

...

The science is unable to acknowledge the above concepts because of its materialistic limitations, just like in the dark ages mainsream Christian religion was unable to acknowledge scientific methods.

Actually no... science doesn't acknowledge 'spirititual energy', 'souls', etc. because it actually expects things to have real evidence. Christianity didn't acknowledge science because it challenged church ignorance.

We're the same basic humans that we were thousands of years ago; what has changed is that in the 1600s-1800s, we started getting a critical mass of scientific knowledge and a few key ideas.

Before you go assuming that just having kowledge that goes back thousands of years makes a concept valid, remember that for centuries people believed the sun went around the earth. Why exactly are you relying on 'knowlege' that came about at the time people didn't even know the fundamentals of the solar system?

That is a very good example of how newly-gained knowledge can be proved wrong in a couple of hundred years.

Ummmm... no. I think you got that backwards.

The idea of a geocentric solar system was not the 'newly gained' knowledge.. it was something people 'knew' going back to the ancient greeks (thousands of years ago). Just like your belief in 'alternative' medicine, it was long standing knowledge, and it was up to science to eventually dispell that knowledge.

What I'm talking about is knowledge that dates back thousands of years.

The 'knowledge' from a thousand years ago was that the sun went around the earth, that there was a global 'flood', and a whole host of other nonsense.

By the way, I haven't mentioned this before (because genearally there are just so many flaws in your knowledge), but I should mention it now...

You keep suggesting that 'alternative medicine' actually goes back thousands of years... but does it really? The process of vaccination goes back to 1796, so we've been using it for around 2 centuries. On the other hand, consider some of the most common 'alternative' medicine treatments:

- Most of the early homeopathic work actually begun in the early 1800s, years after vaccination was successfully demonstrated

- The process of chiropractic dates to the late 1800s, almost a century after the first vaccinations

- Reiki (energy healing)... early 1900s

- Reflexology? Early 1900s.

I could go on and on...But the point is, many of these alternative heatlh care practices are a lot younger than the modern scientific approach to medicine.

What we think we know today may be proven wrong in a couple of decades (just look at what happened to the "elemental" particles).

Actually, we weren't wrong about elemental particals. We have refined our knowledge, but the type of elementrary physics taught in high school is still valid.

You have totally ignored the issue, so I will state it again...

It is irrelevant whether you yourself are religious. However, other people have the exact same evidence that you do that 'faith healing' works.... They have 'experienced' improvements, and the practice of faith healing has lasted for thousands of years.

Because of that, do you pleave that Peter Popoff and other 'evangalists' have healed people?

I don't know who Popoff is and I believe Christianity as a religion is too limited and narrow to allow spiritual evolution. As a matter of fact, most religions are.

Your suggestion that you don't know who Popoff is is basically another ploy to avoid answering a question that would make you look bad. A 5 second google search would provide all you needed to know. Even if you didn't know who popoff was, I gave more than enough of a description for you to understand who he was. And even if you STILL didn't know/care who popoff was, the fact that I also mention 'televangilists' should give you an idea what I'm talking about.

Popoff was one of these TV religious ministers who claimed to heal people During his 'shows', he would approach audience members that he had never met before, and describe their illness in detail before 'healing' them. However, noted skeptic James Randi managed to use a radio scanner to find out that Popoff was actually receiving information from his wife via a hidden receiver. (I chose Popoff because his fraud was perhaps more obvious than others.)

Now, the 'evidence' that Popoff was healing people was exactly the same as the 'evidence' you've provided for your alternative healing. There is a 'long history' going back thousands of years for people being able to heal by touch. And just like with your 'evidence', there were plenty of anecdotes from people who had gone to his shows and seen people 'cured' by him.

So, once again... if you think that 'history' and 'anecdotes' are adequate proof to show that alternative medicine works, do you believe that Peter Popoff was actually healing people. Its a simple question. Just a yes or no. (Not that I'm expecting you to actually answer it... after all, the issue has exposed a critical weakness in your argument.)

In our case: Harper's "environmental policy" is the equivalent of doing NOTHING. The Green (and liberal) policies will have AN IMPACT. It may work out as it did for the European countries that took same approach or may not, the time will show that.

Really? According to the conservative web site they have plans to add caps to certain emissions, they plan to offer tax incentives to people buying fuel efficent cars, and they have plans to invest billions in renewable fuels and hydrogen technology. Now, all that may (or may not) work, but they do indeed have a plan.

So, how does a policy that encourages people to buy more fuel efficent cars NOT beneficial to the environment? How does investment in alternative fuels NOT help the environment?

Compare that to the Liberal/Green party carbon tax plan... they want to add taxes to fossil fuels. But why? To encourage people to save energy? In fact, people already have an incentive to save energy. Its called their heating bill.

Actually I know quite a bit about C-51... I've read through the bill, and I've seen quite a few 'claims' about the bill and the debunking of those claims.

Any bill that can allow for interpretations like the ones I quoted, no matter how far-fetched they are, sholdn't pass.

But the thing is, the bill doesn't allow those interpretations. For the most part, all those claims of the extra 'powers' that it will give the government are either outright lies or distortions. Its only the gullible people who believe the stories by the alternative medicine groups about the 'evil' of the bill.

You know, I challenged you to provide a reference in the bill for some of the 'bad things' it has... such as how it will prevent people from 'talking about' alternative treatments. You still haven't provided any such reference. Pretty revealing when you make some big claim about the big bad bill, but can't actually show where in the bill it gives the powers you claim it does.

A terminally ill patient who wants to live will try ANYTHING, including the poisioning by chemotherapy and the slow death of radiotherapy. Both are not only ineffective but detrimental in the worst way.

Chemotherapy is like poisoning a city to try to kill a few criminals.

Actually, chemotherapy drugs are targeted to act on faster-growing cells (which are likely to be cancerous), and leave lower-growning cells alone. Your 'anology' fails because the poison would not be directed at all people in the city.

My grandmother got chemotherapy. It gave her several years that she would not have had otherwise, and she was glad for it.

Radiotherapy is like nuking a region of the country to get rid of the mutants concentrated there and hoping that the radiation will not create new mutants.

Again, radiation therapy is aimed at the tumour, and has a very good success rate.

Compared to the above anyhting: fasting, natural remedies, spiritual healers, urinotherapy - you name it - makes more sense AND may yield same or better results EVEN IF they could be attributed to the placebo effect.

Ummm... do you even know what the 'placebo effect' is?

The 'placebo effect' is not some alternate method of healing, or some way to measure how well a drug works. With the placebo effect, a non-active substance (e.g. plain water) is given to a patient. (i.e. nothing that would actually help them to get better). If the person claims to have gotten better, that is the placebo effect.

If you try any sort of 'natural remedy', and it has the same success as the 'placebo effect', it means that whatever natural remedy you got was absolutely ineffective in actually helping the patient. Any improvements were just the body healing itself. The patient would have been just as good doing nothing at all.

Really, do you know anything about science?

Actually, in a way, I have to thank you. You're a perfect representative for the Green Party. You see, early on, I suggested that perhaps the Green Party would be a failure because many green party supporters were scientifically illiterate. Well, you've certainly manage to prove my theory. With your talk of 'healing energy', and your claims of sciences 'failing' because they don't believe whatever claptrap new-age healers try to push, you've demonstrated that yes, indeed, scientific ignorance does cut clear across party lines.

I do intend to vote conservative in the next election, not because I'm a member or because I like all their policies, but because I am a moderate libertarian and believe the concervative policies are the best ones to obtain the desired freedoms. However, I do cringe whenever I hear of conservative supporters who believe in such nonsense as creationism, and have a hard time defending such people. However, at least I can point to people like you in the green party and say "see? non-scienctific attitudes exist everwhere'. (I have to wonder if there are green party members who have a more critical-thinking mindset who cringe just as much when they read one of your posts.)

[WIP]

We only got into the whole supplement and natural remedy discussion because of the C51 bill.

I personally believe that everything is controlled by energy. As I said before - there are many ways to increase your energy levels: healthy lifestyle (physical and spiritual), meditation, practice of eastern energy techniques (tai-chi, chi-gong, etc.), nutritional supplements, natural remedies, falling in love, self-actualization etc.

Obtaining a stable higher energy level transforms your life - you become happier, feel better, do more, tire less, etc.

Each chooses what fits him the most. I think a combination of approaches works best.

I get a little queezy when I hear spiritualists and new age healers on the radio talking about "energy;" I start wondering what form of energy they're talking about -- kinetic, potential, thermal, nuclear, electromagnetic! -- it always seems to be some form of energy like Chi, that somehow can't be measured and leaves no physical evidence of its existence.

On Bill C-51, if you do a google search, you'll soon find out that Big Pharma is somehow not big enough to show up in the first four pages of websites that are taken by anti-Bill C51 groups. This ought to give some indication of the money and power behind Big Natural Health that's putting supplements, homeopathy cures and other quack medicines right in your local drug store:

Organizing protest rallies and urging Canadians to write and phone their MPs in complaint, the StopC51.com campaign spread the word through the web and through mass emails. The conspiratorial International Advocates for Health Freedom mailing list noted with approval that over 18 million emails had been sent to “dietary supplement consumers, supplement company CEOs, health food store owners, Naturopaths, Chiropractors, and other Alternative Practitioners triggering massive traffic to http://www.stopc51.org [sic]. So many people have been accessing the site that at times it won’t open and at other times the images on the site can’t be seen due to the effects of the traffic.”11

The Company in the Shadows

But who was behind it all? Nothing at StopC51.com disclosed the authors of the site, nor did the site provide a contact address for the site’s administrators.12 This coy façade was evidently good enough for many anti-C-51 activists, who promoted the url and the claims from the site without probing the heavily biased source.

But, it was a pretty thin facade: the 1-888 contact number for StopC51.com rally organizing13 is actually the phone number for a controversial online supplement company called Truehope Nutritional Support Ltd. (also called the Synergy Group of Canada Inc — both entities share the same directors and are involved in selling the same product14 ). In fact, the rally information number even spells “1-888-TRUEHOP.”

[segnosaur]

... the 1-888 contact number for StopC51.com rally organizing13 is actually the phone number for a controversial online supplement company called Truehope Nutritional Support Ltd.

Yeah... pretty amazing.

People suggest 'big pharma' is somehow the source for all mis-information, yet they end up listening to an organization that's got even more incentive to lie about C51.

[PoliticalCitizen]

I get a little queezy when I hear spiritualists and new age healers on the radio talking about "energy;" I start wondering what form of energy they're talking about -- kinetic, potential, thermal, nuclear, electromagnetic! -- it always seems to be some form of energy like Chi, that somehow can't be measured and leaves no physical evidence of its existence.

On Bill C-51, if you do a google search, you'll soon find out that Big Pharma is somehow not big enough to show up in the first four pages of websites that are taken by anti-Bill C51 groups. This ought to give some indication of the money and power behind Big Natural Health that's putting supplements, homeopathy cures and other quack medicines right in your local drug store:

Organizing protest rallies and urging Canadians to write and phone their MPs in complaint, the StopC51.com campaign spread the word through the web and through mass emails. The conspiratorial International Advocates for Health Freedom mailing list noted with approval that over 18 million emails had been sent to “dietary supplement consumers, supplement company CEOs, health food store owners, Naturopaths, Chiropractors, and other Alternative Practitioners triggering massive traffic to http://www.stopc51.org [sic]. So many people have been accessing the site that at times it won’t open and at other times the images on the site can’t be seen due to the effects of the traffic.”11

The Company in the Shadows

But who was behind it all? Nothing at StopC51.com disclosed the authors of the site, nor did the site provide a contact address for the site’s administrators.12 This coy façade was evidently good enough for many anti-C-51 activists, who promoted the url and the claims from the site without probing the heavily biased source.

But, it was a pretty thin facade: the 1-888 contact number for StopC51.com rally organizing13 is actually the phone number for a controversial online supplement company called Truehope Nutritional Support Ltd. (also called the Synergy Group of Canada Inc — both entities share the same directors and are involved in selling the same product14 ). In fact, the rally information number even spells “1-888-TRUEHOP.”

If you saw Moore's "Sicko" you remember that there's something like 3 health and pharma lobyists per congressman.

What's wrong with the nutritional supplement companies sponsoring a website?

Edited October 7, 2008 by PoliticalCitizen

[PoliticalCitizen]

Really, do you know anything about science?

I don't think I like your condescending tone.

Show some respect if you want to have a discussion.

[M.Dancer]

I don't think I like your condescending tone.

Show some respect if you want to have a discussion.

Respectfully. do you know anything about science? From what I have read I can guess the answer.

[segnosaur]

What's wrong with the nutritional supplement companies sponsoring a website?

Well, for one, people like you accept any bunk they say as being the real unbiased 'truth' without ever considering the fact that they have a very powerful incentive to distort the truth. (And it should be noted that the 'stop c51' web site does not make its relationship with herbal companies clear.)

Do you accept research into global warming produced by the oil companies? What about studies on taxes done by right-wing think tanks? If you automatically accept the 'facts' as presented by the 'stop C51' website (as you seem to have), then you should also be willing to accept studies done by other potentially biased groups.

[WIP]

If you saw Moore's "Sicko" you remember that there's something like 3 health and pharma lobyists per congressman.

What's wrong with the nutritional supplement companies sponsoring a website?

Maybe it's a Canadian thing then; it seems like Big Natural sure has a lot of clout in this country! Every day, our local radio station runs a health show at noon, which is sponsored by a major drug store chain, yet features naturalpaths, homeopaths, chiropractors, and assorted loose ends talking about "healing energies." I don't know if Big Pharma is in on the action, but the drug stores seem to be giving more and more floor space to their "natural health" products sections -- to them, it's all about business. I don't think they care if people are coming in to buy prescriptions or health food remedies, as long as products are moving off the shelves!

Anyway, we've been talking about Bill C 51 long enough! It's not a determining issue for me in an election, especially in comparison to a coming economic meltdown and the growing environmental catastrophe that is occurring so gradually, that most people can't comprehend that the Earth is already going through a mass extinction cycle.

I guess TV and computers are causing ADHD or something, because the shocking report about mammal extinctions at the World Conservation Congress in Barcelona (At least one-quarter of the world's mammal species in the wild are threatened with extinction), has already disappeared from the news cycle with no follow up stories. Last year, there was a big story about amphibian extinctions; three years ago, a survey sponsored by the National Geographic, indicated that a mass extinction of insect species is going on unrecognized outside of the community of scientists who study insect populations.

Add all the pieces together and it indicates a drop in biodiversity on the level of previous mass extinctions being studied by paleontologists digging through the record buried in the rocks. Will the sporadic bad news about the environment and extinctions be enough to keep the attention of the general public? I don't know, but I am sure that the MSM isn't interested in maintaining focus on this issue, and just wants to jump to the next big story of the hour to try to win the news cycle.

Earlier this afternoon, I tuned in to the Charles Adler show on the radio; he has Lorrie Goldstein on as a guest, complaining about Stephan Dion's Green Shift plan, and why we need to stop talking about the environment and start focusing on the collapsing world economies -- well, when is it a good time to focus on the environment? Goldstein says dropping demand for oil and energy will reduce CO2 emissions anyway -- maybe so, but what about after the coming recession, or depression, or whatever the hell we're going to get hit with now that all of these high finance ponzi schemes are starting to fall apart! That may be true as a general principle, but a government that is desperate for some economic good news is more likely to approve dirty projects like tar sands developments, and when the economy improves, there is no indication that they would pick up where they left off on environmental policies!

If the Liberals somehow win the election, Dion has already promised to shelve or delay his Green Shift Plan for the indefinite future -- so all of the hysterical Conservative commercials afraid of being taxed for essentially using the atmosphere as a garbage dump, are just alarmist nonsense -- the Liberals will do nothing either, under the present circumstances.

A Conservative or Liberal minority government will be propped up by the NDP, which has already tipped their hand that they are going to give all of their attention to jobs and the continued support of the unions who provide the money and run the party. So, in the end, that is the main reason why I will be voting for the Green Party is because they are the only party that can't afford to shift their focus off of the environment and the need for taking action. My own riding is already locked down by the NDP and is a guaranteed NDP seat regardless of what's going on in the rest of the country. But for what it's worth, I want my vote to go to a party that keeps the focus on the most important issue of all -- sustainable solutions for the continued survival of the human race on this planet.

[PoliticalCitizen]

Actually no... science doesn't acknowledge 'spirititual energy', 'souls', etc. because it actually expects things to have real evidence. Christianity didn't acknowledge science because it challenged church ignorance.

That is a very good example of how newly-gained knowledge can be proved wrong in a couple of hundred years.

Science chose not to study the spiritual world(s).

The most likely cause is that science is rooted in materialism and there are no instruments to measure spriritual events or observe energetic entities.

Ummmm... no. I think you got that backwards.

The idea of a geocentric solar system was not the 'newly gained' knowledge.. it was something people 'knew' going back to the ancient greeks (thousands of years ago). Just like your belief in 'alternative' medicine, it was long standing knowledge, and it was up to science to eventually dispell that knowledge.

The 'knowledge' from a thousand years ago was that the sun went around the earth, that there was a global 'flood', and a whole host of other nonsense.

By the way, I haven't mentioned this before (because genearally there are just so many flaws in your knowledge), but I should mention it now...

You keep suggesting that 'alternative medicine' actually goes back thousands of years... but does it really? The process of vaccination goes back to 1796, so we've been using it for around 2 centuries. On the other hand, consider some of the most common 'alternative' medicine treatments:

- Most of the early homeopathic work actually begun in the early 1800s, years after vaccination was successfully demonstrated

- The process of chiropractic dates to the late 1800s, almost a century after the first vaccinations

- Reiki (energy healing)... early 1900s

- Reflexology? Early 1900s.

I could go on and on...But the point is, many of these alternative heatlh care practices are a lot younger than the modern scientific approach to medicine.

Actually, we weren't wrong about elemental particals. We have refined our knowledge, but the type of elementrary physics taught in high school is still valid.

Natural healing is rooted in shaman traditions and knowledge that dates back 10,000+ years.

The Vedas that describe breathing techniques are 3,000+ years old.

Modern science is what, 300?

Your suggestion that you don't know who Popoff is is basically another ploy to avoid answering a question that would make you look bad. A 5 second google search would provide all you needed to know. Even if you didn't know who popoff was, I gave more than enough of a description for you to understand who he was. And even if you STILL didn't know/care who popoff was, the fact that I also mention 'televangilists' should give you an idea what I'm talking about.

Popoff was one of these TV religious ministers who claimed to heal people During his 'shows', he would approach audience members that he had never met before, and describe their illness in detail before 'healing' them. However, noted skeptic James Randi managed to use a radio scanner to find out that Popoff was actually receiving information from his wife via a hidden receiver. (I chose Popoff because his fraud was perhaps more obvious than others.)

Now, the 'evidence' that Popoff was healing people was exactly the same as the 'evidence' you've provided for your alternative healing. There is a 'long history' going back thousands of years for people being able to heal by touch. And just like with your 'evidence', there were plenty of anecdotes from people who had gone to his shows and seen people 'cured' by him.

So, once again... if you think that 'history' and 'anecdotes' are adequate proof to show that alternative medicine works, do you believe that Peter Popoff was actually healing people. Its a simple question. Just a yes or no. (Not that I'm expecting you to actually answer it... after all, the issue has exposed a critical weakness in your argument.)

Why would I lie?

I have never watched TV Evangelists or listened to them or read about them.

If you would have asked me about whether a Yogi / Tai Chi / Chi Gong master could heal with energy I'd say I think it's possible.

Really? According to the conservative web site they have plans to add caps to certain emissions, they plan to offer tax incentives to people buying fuel efficent cars, and they have plans to invest billions in renewable fuels and hydrogen technology. Now, all that may (or may not) work, but they do indeed have a plan.

So, how does a policy that encourages people to buy more fuel efficent cars NOT beneficial to the environment? How does investment in alternative fuels NOT help the environment?

Compare that to the Liberal/Green party carbon tax plan... they want to add taxes to fossil fuels. But why? To encourage people to save energy? In fact, people already have an incentive to save energy. Its called their heating bill.

According to what I heard in the debate the Conservative environment policy is not even supposed to kick in until 2010.

[PoliticalCitizen]

If the Liberals somehow win the election, Dion has already promised to shelve or delay his Green Shift Plan for the indefinite future -- so all of the hysterical Conservative commercials afraid of being taxed for essentially using the atmosphere as a garbage dump, are just alarmist nonsense -- the Liberals will do nothing either, under the present circumstances.

A Conservative or Liberal minority government will be propped up by the NDP, which has already tipped their hand that they are going to give all of their attention to jobs and the continued support of the unions who provide the money and run the party. So, in the end, that is the main reason why I will be voting for the Green Party is because they are the only party that can't afford to shift their focus off of the environment and the need for taking action. My own riding is already locked down by the NDP and is a guaranteed NDP seat regardless of what's going on in the rest of the country. But for what it's worth, I want my vote to go to a party that keeps the focus on the most important issue of all -- sustainable solutions for the continued survival of the human race on this planet.

I agree.

We need at least a few Greens in the Parliament to ensure that the warring factions do not forget about the environment as they play their blame games.

[segnosaur]

Science chose not to study the spiritual world(s).

Actually, there have been investigations into the "spiritual world". Its just that such investigations always turn up empty.

The most likely cause is that science is rooted in materialism and there are no instruments to measure spriritual events or observe energetic entities.

If such things actually existed, there would be ways to detect them... as I mentioned before, through properly controled double-blind studies. That seems to be a concept you are having trouble grasping.

Us skeptics are a resourceful bunch... groups like the James Randi Educational Foundation are experts in coming up with ways to test claims of the supernatural. The problem is, all such claims have fallen flat on their faces.

Natural healing is rooted in shaman traditions and knowledge that dates back 10,000+ years.

The Vedas that describe breathing techniques are 3,000+ years old.

Modern science is what, 300?

But I wasn't talking about those practices. I was talking about other 'alternative therapies' which have been around a lot less time than 'modern science'.

Do you believe that homeopathy and chiripractic are 'bunk' because they're younger than modern science (and for the most part have been shown not to work)?

So, once again... if you think that 'history' and 'anecdotes' are adequate proof to show that alternative medicine works, do you believe that Peter Popoff was actually healing people. Its a simple question. Just a yes or no. (Not that I'm expecting you to actually answer it... after all, the issue has exposed a critical weakness in your argument.)

Why would I lie?

Because, any answer you give will likely expose the failure in your arguments. So, you are using any means necessary to avoid actually answering the question.

I have never watched TV Evangelists or listened to them or read about them.

If you would have asked me about whether a Yogi / Tai Chi / Chi Gong master could heal with energy I'd say I think it's possible.

Thank you for illustrating my point again. Instead of actually answering my question you avoid it again. I predicted you would. Maybe I'm psychic.

I have never watched/listend to TV evangelists either, but I know enough about what they do and how they operate. I really don't think its possible for anyone to live in North America and not know what TV Evanglists are. (For the most part utter frauds posing as 'holy men'.)

So, once again, so we can all see you squrim away ....

if you think that 'history' and 'anecdotes' are adequate proof to show that alternative medicine works, do you believe that Peter Popoff was actually healing people.

Just one word... yes or no. You can do it. Come on... use that amazing 'energy enchanced' brain to answer the question.

(If you wonder why I and other skeptics have such distain for people like you, perhaps you should consider your responses to the above question. I've asked the same thing multiple times. Why should we even consider the validity of your 'theories' if you can't even answer a simple question?)

According to what I heard in the debate the Conservative environment policy is not even supposed to kick in until 2010.

You do realize that regardless of what party gets into power (and whatever environmental legislation is proposed), any sort of regulations won't kick in for many months or years after. It DOES take time for the goverment to change its infrastructure, and for businesses to plan for any shifts in their practices.

Edited October 7, 2008 by segnosaur

[PoliticalCitizen]

Actually, there have been investigations into the "spiritual world". Its just that such investigations always turn up empty.

If such things actually existed, there would be ways to detect them... as I mentioned before, through properly controled double-blind studies. That seems to be a concept you are having trouble grasping.

Us skeptics are a resourceful bunch... groups like the James Randi Educational Foundation are experts in coming up with ways to test claims of the supernatural. The problem is, all such claims have fallen flat on their faces.

There are people who could prove the some "supernatural" things to the skeptics... but the thing is - they're not interested in doing that.

There are some institutes, however, that study states and techniques of transcending into alternate realities:

http://www.lucidity.com studies lucid dreaming;

http://www.botany.hawaii.edu/era/PsychoPlants/index.html studies psycotropic plants.

To achieve these states through meditation would require years or decades of practice.

But I wasn't talking about those practices. I was talking about other 'alternative therapies' which have been around a lot less time than 'modern science'.

Do you believe that homeopathy and chiripractic are 'bunk' because they're younger than modern science (and for the most part have been shown not to work)?

A lot of these "new" therapies are based on the same old knowledge, usually stripped of "questionable" content and wrapped in modern words and "science". At least the ones that work are.

There's also a lot of fraudulent and pure bullshit "alternative therapies".

One has to gain some independent knowledge to be able to sort through the crap and find something real.

But then again, if you begin on the path of personal evolution you should not require any "healers" as your body starts healing itself.

Because, any answer you give will likely expose the failure in your arguments. So, you are using any means necessary to avoid actually answering the question.

Thank you for illustrating my point again. Instead of actually answering my question you avoid it again. I predicted you would. Maybe I'm psychic.

I have never watched/listend to TV evangelists either, but I know enough about what they do and how they operate. I really don't think its possible for anyone to live in North America and not know what TV Evanglists are. (For the most part utter frauds posing as 'holy men'.)

So, once again, so we can all see you squrim away ....

if you think that 'history' and 'anecdotes' are adequate proof to show that alternative medicine works, do you believe that Peter Popoff was actually healing people.

Just one word... yes or no. You can do it. Come on... use that amazing 'energy enchanced' brain to answer the question.

(If you wonder why I and other skeptics have such distain for people like you, perhaps you should consider your responses to the above question. I've asked the same thing multiple times. Why should we even consider the validity of your 'theories' if you can't even answer a simple question?)

Since you keep bugging me about some silly evangelist I looked it up on Wikipedia. JUST FOR YOU! He appears to be a fraud.

In Soviet Union we had a guy named Kashpirovski who was not an evangelist but performed "healing sessions" and "charged water" on TV. Some people claimed he helped them, others that he's a fraud. But unlike Popoff, Kashpirovski wasn't selling anything.

I have no idea why this is so important to YOU, you being a skeptic and a man of science

You do realize that regardless of what party gets into power (and whatever environmental legislation is proposed), any sort of regulations won't kick in for many months or years after. It DOES take time for the goverment to change its infrastructure, and for businesses to plan for any shifts in their practices.

The party in question will most definitely be in NO RUSH to protect nature.

They DID, however, find it useful to sponsor the biggest polluter meanwhile.

[M.Dancer]

There are people who could prove the some "supernatural" things to the skeptics... but the thing is - they're not interested in doing that.

The main reason for that is they have learned that every time they do they are shown and proven to be con arrists.....hello Yuri Geller?

[PoliticalCitizen]

The main reason for that is they have learned that every time they do they are shown and proven to be con arrists.....hello Yuri Geller?

It's quite funny actually as most if not all "supernatural" abilities that were demonstrated on stage or to the media are fake or fraudulent and are mere tricks performed to collect money.

The people genuinely capable of spritual feats are least interested in becoming clowns in a circus.

[segnosaur]

Actually, there have been investigations into the "spiritual world". Its just that such investigations always turn up empty.

If such things actually existed, there would be ways to detect them... as I mentioned before, through properly controled double-blind studies. That seems to be a concept you are having trouble grasping.

Us skeptics are a resourceful bunch... groups like the James Randi Educational Foundation are experts in coming up with ways to test claims of the supernatural. The problem is, all such claims have fallen flat on their faces.

There are people who could prove the some "supernatural" things to the skeptics... but the thing is - they're not interested in doing that.

As I said before, there are skeptics groups that are very interested in testing paranormal claims. The James Randi foundation I metioned before even offered one million dollars for anyone who could actually prove any sort of paranormal activity. I'm sure many of your 'alternative therapies' would fit in to that mold.

Many have tried to claim the prize, none have come anywhere close to succeeding. Usually, one of 2 things happen:

- The person wants to 'prove' themselves, but they never actually come out and say what exactly they can do,

- the person does get tested, but once proper controls are put in place their 'evidence' falls flat on its face.

Of course, the problem is, its usually the small fish that try to claim their prize. The larger, more well known frauds tend to avoid the challenge because they know they will fail and don't want the publicity.

There are some institutes, however, that study states and techniques of transcending into alternate realities:

http://www.lucidity.com studies lucid dreaming;

http://www.botany.hawaii.edu/era/PsychoPlants/index.html studies psycotropic plants.

Lucity institute? They offer 'workshops' for over $1000 per person. Nice scam if you can work it. (Again, not the irony where you have criticized 'big pharma', yet you're willing to shill for some 'institute' that probably earns hundreds of thousand of dollars a year.)

As for the Botany institute... I'm not sure if you know exactly what it is. Frankly I'm not sure myself. But, from the looks of things, they don't seem to be investigating 'plants' themselves, but surveying peoples opinions about them. (It should be noted that there is some validity to the study of plants to serve as the basis for some modern medicines.)

A lot of these "new" therapies are based on the same old knowledge, usually stripped of "questionable" content and wrapped in modern words and "science". At least the ones that work are.

There's also a lot of fraudulent and pure bullsh*t "alternative therapies".

I see...

So, just wondering, how exactly do you identify one of these 'bullsh*t' alternative therapies? Do you count chiropractic and homeopathy under that list? And if someone claims they 'feel better' after using one of those 'bullsh*t therapeis', what do you attribute their improvement to?

But then again, if you begin on the path of personal evolution you should not require any "healers" as your body starts healing itself.

Once again, since you ignored the question before, where are the immortal people? If you think that people won't get 'sick' if they engage in your particular brand of healing, and they never get into accidents, then there should be people who are thousands of years old.

if you think that 'history' and 'anecdotes' are adequate proof to show that alternative medicine works, do you believe that Peter Popoff was actually healing people.

Since you keep bugging me about some silly evangelist I looked it up on Wikipedia. JUST FOR YOU! He appears to be a fraud.

Finally, some progress.

Now, the real questions start: If Popoff was a fraud and wasn't healing anyone, then how do you explain the people who claimed they were healed by him?

And why the double standard? Yes, Popoff was a fraud. But look at the evidence he has supporting him:

- A long history going back thousands of years supporting the process of 'faith healing', just like your 'treatments'

- Multiple anecdotes of claims he helped people, just like your claims about how you have 'improved energy'

- The idea that his faith healing treatment is outside the realm of 'scientific testing', similar to your arguments about how there are 'energies' that are undetected

So, why are you accepting the 'evidence' supporting your particular method of healing, but rejecting the evidence supporting his healing success? Why the double standard?

I have no idea why this is so important to YOU, you being a skeptic and a man of science

Because, I wanted to expose a failure in your arguments, in this case the hypocracy of accepting evidence supporting YOUR beliefs, but rejecting OTHER beliefs.

You do realize that regardless of what party gets into power (and whatever environmental legislation is proposed), any sort of regulations won't kick in for many months or years after. It DOES take time for the goverment to change its infrastructure, and for businesses to plan for any shifts in their practices.

The party in question will most definitely be in NO RUSH to protect nature.

If you want to argue that they won't make the environement a priority, I'd accept that. But at least some of their environmental platform WAS to be enacted immediately, even if the targets were in the future. (Going by memory, I think they had plans to invest in alternative fuels right away.)

[segnosaur]

It's quite funny actually as most if not all "supernatural" abilities that were demonstrated on stage or to the media are fake or fraudulent and are mere tricks performed to collect money.

The people genuinely capable of spritual feats are least interested in becoming clowns in a circus.

You know, we hear that sort of argument over and over again in the skeptical community. Remember that million dollar JREF prize I mentioned earlier for people that can prove the 'paranormal'? When you mention that to believers and practictioners, the excuse is often "Oh, we don't want to be greedy", or "We're doing this for the benefit of or patients" or whatever. Yet at the same time, they earn thousands or hundreds of thousands selling their 'snake oil'.

Perhaps those people capable of "spiritual feats" don't have enough of a stage presense to become famous doing their acts. Or perhaps they are smart enough to stay out of the spotlight since they know their stuff doesn't work, slowly bilking their customers rather than trying to go for the big score.

[PoliticalCitizen]

As I said before, there are skeptics groups that are very interested in testing paranormal claims. The James Randi foundation I metioned before even offered one million dollars for anyone who could actually prove any sort of paranormal activity. I'm sure many of your 'alternative therapies' would fit in to that mold.

Many have tried to claim the prize, none have come anywhere close to succeeding. Usually, one of 2 things happen:

- The person wants to 'prove' themselves, but they never actually come out and say what exactly they can do,

- the person does get tested, but once proper controls are put in place their 'evidence' falls flat on its face.

Of course, the problem is, its usually the small fish that try to claim their prize. The larger, more well known frauds tend to avoid the challenge because they know they will fail and don't want the publicity.

OK, here's the deal as I see it: most spiritual practitioners never go beyond relatively basic steps and beginner level in their lifetime. At that level one can interact with the spiritual world and communicate with the entities but is like an infant in a strange world and as such the "experiences" they can describe may be incoherent and limited. So all they can feel and see is personal and can only be a proof to themselves.

Another aspect is that it is much easier to interact with and influence another person using your spriritual abilities than it is inanimate matter. A simple example from everyday life: if you stare at someone who's not facing you they will eventually "feel" your stare and look back. It's an everyday thing and people got used to it without going too deep for explanations.

Lucity institute? They offer 'workshops' for over $1000 per person. Nice scam if you can work it. (Again, not the irony where you have criticized 'big pharma', yet you're willing to shill for some 'institute' that probably earns hundreds of thousand of dollars a year.)

Unlike scientology you do not have to pay them to gain knowledge and they're not the only ones describing the techniques of lucid dreaming. You may or may not have heard of Carlos Castaneda - look him up.

I see...

So, just wondering, how exactly do you identify one of these 'bullsh*t' alternative therapies? Do you count chiropractic and homeopathy under that list? And if someone claims they 'feel better' after using one of those 'bullsh*t therapeis', what do you attribute their improvement to?

You use your best judgement. Or try it on yourself.

When convincing enough, bullshit CAN work at a psychological level by removing an internal block. It is usually effective on people whose will is weak and they need someone else, an "authority", to tell them that they're not sick or that they HAVE TO get better. Sometimes the placebo effect works.

Chiropractors are hardly "alternative". Homeopathy is a slow process that doesn't really need a healer, maybe only to give momentum in the proper direction, then the body will take care of itself.

Once again, since you ignored the question before, where are the immortal people? If you think that people won't get 'sick' if they engage in your particular brand of healing, and they never get into accidents, then there should be people who are thousands of years old.

I thought I answered that, but it may have gotten lost with the posts being so long...

You, as a "man of science", surely know that our mortality is genetically programmed.

On a spiritual level death is a necessary step of one's evolution that takes place over many incarnations.

Finally, some progress.

Now, the real questions start: If Popoff was a fraud and wasn't healing anyone, then how do you explain the people who claimed they were healed by him?

And why the double standard? Yes, Popoff was a fraud. But look at the evidence he has supporting him:

- A long history going back thousands of years supporting the process of 'faith healing', just like your 'treatments'

- Multiple anecdotes of claims he helped people, just like your claims about how you have 'improved energy'

- The idea that his faith healing treatment is outside the realm of 'scientific testing', similar to your arguments about how there are 'energies' that are undetected

So, why are you accepting the 'evidence' supporting your particular method of healing, but rejecting the evidence supporting his healing success? Why the double standard?

Because, I wanted to expose a failure in your arguments, in this case the hypocracy of accepting evidence supporting YOUR beliefs, but rejecting OTHER beliefs.

That's a no-brainer

You see a clown on TV claiming he's healing people, reading people's minds and asking for money - he's a fraud.

I don't have "beliefs" - my knowledge is based on many different schools and personal experience.

I believe all approaches are equal as long as they are FREE and allow for personal evolution.

Always question the intentions of someone who is asking for money.

The best things in life are free

[segnosaur]

As I said before, there are skeptics groups that are very interested in testing paranormal claims. The James Randi foundation I metioned before even offered one million dollars for anyone who could actually prove any sort of paranormal activity. I'm sure many of your 'alternative therapies' would fit in to that mold.

Many have tried to claim the prize, none have come anywhere close to succeeding.

OK, here's the deal as I see it: most spiritual practitioners never go beyond relatively basic steps and beginner level in their lifetime. At that level one can interact with the spiritual world and communicate with the entities but is like an infant in a strange world and as such the "experiences" they can describe may be incoherent and limited. So all they can feel and see is personal and can only be a proof to themselves.

Quite a mass of irrelevant statements that you've posted.

Still doesn't explain why none of these supposed spiritual 'gurus' have ever come close to claiming the prize, regardless of their experiences. Heck, you'd think that as a group they'd be willing and eager to benefit society with their supposed abilities/discoveries, and winning some grand prize would certainly help with that.

Another aspect is that it is much easier to interact with and influence another person using your spriritual abilities than it is inanimate matter. A simple example from everyday life: if you stare at someone who's not facing you they will eventually "feel" your stare and look back. It's an everyday thing and people got used to it without going too deep for explanations.

Actually, that would be something very easy to test for, and I've heard of test regimes set up for similar 'powers'. Again, nobody has won the prize.

You see, humans have this very strange tendency... we remember the successes and forget the failures. That's the reason psychics work... they make 1 right 'guess', and 9 wrong guesses. We become fixated on the single success and ignore 90% of the 'failures'. Same with the idea that you may 'feel' someone staring at you... if you feel someone staring and turn to find nobody, you block it out of your mind. If you don't feel someone starying at you and they are, you wouldn't even know. But, when you turn and find someone staring at you, then and only then does it take on imporance in your mind.

Edited to add: They actually have done experiments to test the 'staring effect'... and guess what? the ability to determine whether someone is starying at you is actually worse than what you would expect from random chance.

http://www.csicop.org/si/2000-03/stare.html

http://www.csicop.org/si/2000-09/staring.html

Lucity institute? They offer 'workshops' for over $1000 per person. Nice scam if you can work it. (Again, not the irony where you have criticized 'big pharma', yet you're willing to shill for some 'institute' that probably earns hundreds of thousand of dollars a year.)

Unlike scientology you do not have to pay them to gain knowledge and they're not the only ones describing the techniques of lucid dreaming.

You may not have to pay them, but it sure helps.

Really, are you that naive? They're in it to earn money. So are drug companies. But unlike your 'lucid dreaming' institute, drug companies have to, you know, prove there stuff works.

You may or may not have heard of Carlos Castaneda - look him up.

You know, I had never heard of Carlos before... after looking him up, I have to say, who cares? Am I supposed to be impressed? (According to wikipedia, the guy sold millions of books. Don't you think he'd benefit from the royalties paid on those books?)

So, just wondering, how exactly do you identify one of these 'bullsh*t' alternative therapies? Do you count chiropractic and homeopathy under that list? And if someone claims they 'feel better' after using one of those 'bullsh*t therapeis', what do you attribute their improvement to?

You use your best judgement. Or try it on yourself.

You still haven't the question... how do you identify what a bullsh*t therapy is?

And remember, whatever you consider as bullsh*t, others consider effective. How do you know your assesment is right and theirs is wrong?

When convincing enough, bullshit CAN work at a psychological level by removing an internal block.

I see... so you see the beneifit of giving people false hope.

Chiropractors are hardly "alternative".

Actually, the chiripractic care is considered alternative. See: http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/pcahc-...comp_define.pdf

The definition of 'alternative health care' involves whether a particular technique is taught in medical schools, of which chripractic is not (Regardless of the number of people who believe or use it).

Homeopathy is a slow process that doesn't really need a healer, maybe only to give momentum in the proper direction, then the body will take care of itself.

Ummm... do you actually know what homeopathy is? Its a type of treatment where they take some substance, dilute it to the point where it has absolutely nothing left of the original material, and then pretend that its some sort of drug.

I thought I answered that, but it may have gotten lost with the posts being so long...

You, as a "man of science", surely know that our mortality is genetically programmed.

There are certain processes that do fail as we get older, but we never actually die of 'old age'... we will die of heart disease, or of cancer, or of pnemonia, or of any one of a hundred different diseases. If your magical 'treatments' prevent any such problems, then anyone should be able to avoid any of these illnesses that ultimately cause their death.

Now, the real questions start: If Popoff was a fraud and wasn't healing anyone, then how do you explain the people who claimed they were healed by him?

And why the double standard? Yes, Popoff was a fraud. But look at the evidence he has supporting him:

- A long history going back thousands of years supporting the process of 'faith healing', just like your 'treatments'

- Multiple anecdotes of claims he helped people, just like your claims about how you have 'improved energy'

- The idea that his faith healing treatment is outside the realm of 'scientific testing', similar to your arguments about how there are 'energies' that are undetected

So, why are you accepting the 'evidence' supporting your particular method of healing, but rejecting the evidence supporting his healing success? Why the double standard?

That's a no-brainer

You see a clown on TV claiming he's healing people, reading people's minds and asking for money - he's a fraud.

Any things that you take to boost your energy likely cost money (and probably a lot more than it costs to produce, giving them a nice little profit). People who write any books you read (like the author you referred to earlier) get royalties. Many alternative health care practicioners charge fees for their services. There's more than one way to blilk money out of the masses. Even if the people you buy your cr*p from aren't as wealthy as Popoff was, they're still making a profit off of you.

So why are YOUR alternative health care beliefs more valid while someone who believes Poppoff cured them is wrong?

I don't have "beliefs" - my knowledge is based on many different schools and personal experience.

Many of the people who went to Popoff had the "personal experience" that they were cured by him.

So, again, why are your 'personal experiences' somehow valid at proving your alternative healing works, while people's "personal experiences" with Popoff were invalid?

Edited October 8, 2008 by segnosaur

[PoliticalCitizen]

Quite a mass of irrelevant statements that you've posted.

Still doesn't explain why none of these supposed spiritual 'gurus' have ever come close to claiming the prize, regardless of their experiences. Heck, you'd think that as a group they'd be willing and eager to benefit society with their supposed abilities/discoveries, and winning some grand prize would certainly help with that.

My statements were supposed to be an indirect explanation of the situation. Here's some more:

- Once one steps on the path of spiritual evoluition there are sertain laws must be obeyed. One of them is the law of conservation of spiritual energy. Every "supernatural" feat requires a great deal of energy.

- Another law requires your goals to meet a certain standard. If you dedicate a lot of effort to achieve a lowly selfish goal you will be set back a few years in your evolution. This is also helpful to know when dealing with TV "magicians" - they are most likely 100% fake.

- The advanced practitioners of the spiritual arts are either quite wealthy or not interested in wealth.

Actually, that would be something very easy to test for, and I've heard of test regimes set up for similar 'powers'. Again, nobody has won the prize.

You see, humans have this very strange tendency... we remember the successes and forget the failures. That's the reason psychics work... they make 1 right 'guess', and 9 wrong guesses. We become fixated on the single success and ignore 90% of the 'failures'. Same with the idea that you may 'feel' someone staring at you... if you feel someone staring and turn to find nobody, you block it out of your mind. If you don't feel someone starying at you and they are, you wouldn't even know. But, when you turn and find someone staring at you, then and only then does it take on imporance in your mind.

Edited to add: They actually have done experiments to test the 'staring effect'... and guess what? the ability to determine whether someone is starying at you is actually worse than what you would expect from random chance.

There is a subtle difference between just staring and intently staring. The metaphisical interpretation is that when you intently stare your energetic body reaches out to the other person's energetic body and thus they feel it.

There are certain processes that do fail as we get older, but we never actually die of 'old age'... we will die of heart disease, or of cancer, or of pnemonia, or of any one of a hundred different diseases. If your magical 'treatments' prevent any such problems, then anyone should be able to avoid any of these illnesses that ultimately cause their death.

You see the disease as being the ultimate cause of death. I see the aging as being the primary cause of both disease and death. Aging is programmed. It may be a check to ensure you don't have time to stray too far away from the purpose of your incarnation.

Any things that you take to boost your energy likely cost money (and probably a lot more than it costs to produce, giving them a nice little profit). People who write any books you read (like the author you referred to earlier) get royalties. Many alternative health care practicioners charge fees for their services. There's more than one way to blilk money out of the masses. Even if the people you buy your cr*p from aren't as wealthy as Popoff was, they're still making a profit off of you.

Higher energy levels can be achieved without any plants or supplements. The problem is that the "pure" way of increasing energy requires a certain lifestyle, absense of stress (no driving in traffic), plenty of sleep, lots of meditation time... all the things a middle-class modern man doesn't have / cannot afford. That's when the supplemenst can be of assistance.

So why are YOUR alternative health care beliefs more valid while someone who believes Poppoff cured them is wrong?

Many of the people who went to Popoff had the "personal experience" that they were cured by him.

So, again, why are your 'personal experiences' somehow valid at proving your alternative healing works, while people's "personal experiences" with Popoff were invalid?

Whatever I believe in and practice (as time allows) is FREE, requires no teacher or guru and does not prohibit anything as religions do. There are not cheap tricks and stage miracles. The progress is very slow but appears to be irreversible.

Edited October 9, 2008 by PoliticalCitizen

[capricorn]

Two Green Party candidates in Quebec are calling on their supporters to vote Liberal. (Sorry, nothing in the English media reporting this)

Stéphane Dion, pour sa part, a lancé un appel surprenant aux électeurs du Bloc québécois pour qu'ils se serrent les coudes avec les habitants du reste du pays en ces temps d'incertitude financière.

Les appels lancés par Stéphane Dion semblent avoir être entendus, sinon par des bloquistes, à tout le moins par des verts. Deux candidats québécois du Parti vert, l'un dans la circonscription de Longueuil-Pierre-Boucher et l'autre dans celle de Montmagny-l'Islet-Kamouraska-Rivière-du-Loup, ont invité hier leurs supporters à voter pour le candidat libéral local.

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites/elect...la-campagne.php

Not surprising as this election is the weirdest I can remember.

PS, if you know French, this article is mainly about Jean Chretien coming to Dion's rescue at a planned Liberal gathering in Halifax.

[PoliticalCitizen]

Two Green Party candidates in Quebec are calling on their supporters to vote Liberal. (Sorry, nothing in the English media reporting this)

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites/elect...la-campagne.php

Not surprising as this election is the weirdest I can remember.

PS, if you know French, this article is mainly about Jean Chretien coming to Dion's rescue at a planned Liberal gathering in Halifax.

Great find and interesting read.

Obviously the Green Party would support the Liberals who support the carbon tax.

To defeat Harper some ridings have to vote strategically, too bad NDP is not joining in.

Jack Layton's delusions of grandeur will not take him too far.

[capricorn]

Here's coverage in the English media of the Quebec Green candidates openly backing the Liberals.

Despite a declaration by Green Party Leader Elizabeth May earlier in the campaign that she had no deal to throw support behind the Liberals on the final stretch, two Quebec Green candidates asked their supporters yesterday to back their Liberal competitors.

---

Both May and Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion have said there is no deal between them, other than a courtesy arrangement not to run competing candidates in each other's riding. Prime Minister Stephen Harper predicted early on that May would endorse the Liberals in the campaign's last days.

In an interview, Moreau said May was not aware of her decision.

"It was a decision between me and my official agent," Moreau said. She said she knew she would not be elected in the riding, and since her main goal is to get rid of Harper, supporting the Liberal candidate, Ryan Hillier, was the best choice.

---

Gaumond told Radio-Canada in Rimouski yesterday that "we must all get behind Mr. Dion. In spite of some hesitations and difficulties with respect to his charisma, he has nonetheless a coherent views on a plan for the environment."

Moreau, 36, who is studying to be a food inspector, said she has been influenced "a bit" by May's recent pronouncements. "It was more from the bottom of my heart, asking myself, `What can I do right now for the environment?'"

---

May could not be reached for comment, but John Bennett, the party's director of communication, said what the candidates did "is not the policy of the Green Party of Canada."

Bennett said the candidates did not call the party or May. "Had they contacted us we would have urged them not to do it."

Bennett also said May has never supported strategic voting, despite the fact she told the Star last month that in order to defeat Harper, she wanted Canadians to examine their ridings and figure out how to best keep the Tories from winning. Referring to the Quebec Green candidates, Bennett said they have "totally misunderstood."

http://www.thestar.com/FederalElection/article/515241#

These types of moves will do nothing to help the Greens build credibility among prospective supporters. To the contrary it leaves the impression that the Green Party does not believe in their own ideology and policies. I guess the Green Party equals the Liberal Party.

Edited October 10, 2008 by capricorn