Just apply the same rule to ALL media sources that Neal Boortz tells listeners to apply to anything they here on his show or read on his website…

“Don’t believe anything you read on this web page, or, for that matter, anything you hear on The Neal Boortz Show, unless it is consistent with what you already know to be true, or unless you have taken the time to research the matter to prove its accuracy to your satisfaction.”  from boortz.com

Damn fine rule to apply to everything nowdays.

i would have given him the money. with my experance in retail i have learned to never piss off fat people, there is nothing scarier that a angry fat man.

very cute, i think i saw that in a movie with Helen Hunt once.

We got two dogs; Chelsea (pronounced “Kelsea”), a wacked-out, weird, squirrelly little Border Collie, and Alexi, a big (compared to the Collie), dumb, but funny German Shepard. Lots of entertainment from both of them :D.

If you qualify for financial aid, the expensive private colleges may actually be quite cheap. For example, I’m paying 36 per year, but my girlfriend is paying like 6, 10 in Student loans, and the rest is paid by the school.

It was actually cheaper to go to PC than URI for her.

If someone reveals their opinion to you and you bring it into conflict with your own, then you will remain behind closed doors.
If someone reveals their opinion and you try to absorb it and learn from it, you will instantly broaden your horizons.

-Brandon Gleve

Thanks Jermofoot . . .
Hmmmm
i’m not sure how to best dive in here.
well . . .here goes.
For one - you’re right.  Do not confuse homeopathy with “natural remedies”.  And keep in mind that the thing that tends to separate the “natural producst” from “pharmaceuticals” is that while many pharmaceuticals are natural, they ALL are subject to many trials demonstrating efficacy and elucidating side effects.  Furthermore their pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics are well known.  So-called “natural products” - while invariably “natural” do not have the studies to back them up, nor is there much in terms of side-effect, pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic literature available.
Homeopathy is the idea that “like treats like”.  If you have a disorder/symptom complex, than the theory is that something that causes this - if given in an immeasurably tiny dose (like by diluting it by 10 nine times) should cure this.  The question is - how do you know that it is the substance that is curing it, and not some impurity in the glassware (kind of a joke really).
We had a homeopath come to give a lecture to our class.  She basically mocked herself (non-intentionally, of course).  She said stuff like:
“homeopathic cures are the safest and most efficatious treatments available”
“i nearly killed one of my children and gave another one asthma with homeopathic remedies”
“we all know that the adenovirus causes adenocarcinoma”  (this is utter nonsense.  If this were true, many of us with a common cold would die of cancer).

Having said that, there have been some trials out there:
Reference 
Linde K, Clausius N, Ramirez G, et al. Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials. Lancet 1997;350:834-43. 
Study design: 
Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials 
Setting: 
Other (homeopathic practitioners) 
Synopsis 
The authors performed a systematic review of randomized trials. They found 186 trials of which 119 met the authors inclusion criteria. From these, 89 provided enough data to perform meta-analysis. Studies were rated for quality. Subjects receiving homeopathy were twice as likely to benefit compared to placebo (OR 2.45, CI 2.05-2.93). If only high quality studies are used (n=26), the benefit was less (OR 1.66, CI 1.33-2.08).

so the more rigourous the study, the less benefit homeopathy appears to convey.

Hhhmmm, it sounds more like an American Congressman who wants to ban death in order to keep their district from being re-districted out of existence with the next census :-)

Of course, the US tried a variant of this about 40 years ago.  While we did not ban death, we determined that death was no hindrnace to voting… at least in Metropolitan Chicago!  LOL

They used the long lance torpedo system, advocated for shallow waters learned from the experience that the British used against the Italians at Taranto.

OK next question: which islands other than Oahu were attacked by the Japanese on dec 7th?

that is pretty funny Z. my girlfriends one of those girls that you can fart or burp in front of and instead of getting mad she rates it on a scale of 1-10, 10 being the best. you know you got something special when that is going on.

you can make a strong argument for either side. missing on your list of ratting him out: in some ways, it is the “right” thing to do. you are helping the justice system work, and it works on this very kind of situation. people get immunity all the time for cooperating with police to allow them to get a conviction on someone else. i know your situation is a hypothetical, but could you modify it at all? because as it is, its unlikely that if the two of you are partners, and neither is the mastermind/a bigger criminal, that you would be offered a deal. is it a set situation? if not, i would say that for some reason, they want your partner more than you, or maybe they cant prove much on you, but they can on him. etc. maybe this doesnt impact the argument at all, i dont know how your debate works, but the other side could fault your situation, which would surely work against you.

@F_alk:

Clausewitz would be quite astonished.

touche! :wink:

@Janus1:

http://www.rapex.co.za/x/
interesting…

It’s a shame the world has come to this…
Can’t say I’d blame anyone for using it, though.

yawn.

and falk you have consistently took my comments out of their context with your  cute “sound bites” that dont convey the full flavor of the sentiment.

10 bucks? You’ll have to refresh my memory, I get into so many of these things that I can’t keep 'em all straight :D.