<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">

    <title type="text">CFI Forums</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/atom/" />
    <updated></updated>
    <rights>Copyright (c) 2013</rights>
    <generator uri="http://www.pmachine.com/" version="1.6.8">ExpressionEngine</generator>
    <id>tag:centerforinquiry.net,2013:05:24</id>


    <entry>
      <title>Gun control &#45; again</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/15762/" />      
      <id>tag:centerforinquiry.net,2013:forums/viewthread/.15762</id>
      <published>2013-04-09T12:47:03Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>macgyver</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>In the past two days there have been two cases of four year olds who shot ( in on case killed) someone with a gun that was carelessly left around. That&#8217;s reason alone to reconsider the number of guns in our society, but this <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/lone-star-stabbing-184840929.html">STORY</a> grabbed my attention today. Gun advocates are fond of saying the guns dont kill people, people kill people but look at this story and contrast it with what happened at Georgia tech or in Sandy Hook. This individual didnt have gun, just a knife. yes there were 14 people injured but the point is they were &#8220;injured&#8221;. There are 14 people for the ER to take care of not 14 bodies for the coroner to examine.
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Hallelujah: We&#8217;re saved!</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/15912/" />      
      <id>tag:centerforinquiry.net,2013:forums/viewthread/.15912</id>
      <published>2013-05-22T19:31:34Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Lois</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Pope Francis Says Atheists Who Do Good Are Redeemed, Not Just Catholics</p>

<p><br />
<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/pope-francis-good-atheists_n_3320757.html?ref=topbar">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/pope-francis-good-atheists_n_3320757.html?ref=topbar</a>
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Islamic Attack In London</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/15915/" />      
      <id>tag:centerforinquiry.net,2013:forums/viewthread/.15915</id>
      <published>2013-05-23T04:32:01Z</published>
      <updated>2013-05-23T04:32:44Z</updated>
      <author><name>mid atlantic</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/22/police-respond-serious-incident-woolwich">http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/22/police-respond-serious-incident-woolwich</a></p>

<p>I hope the British learn from this&#8230;.
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Any scientific evidence to support official WTC 7 fall theory&#63;</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/13759/" />      
      <id>tag:centerforinquiry.net,2012:forums/viewthread/.13759</id>
      <published>2012-07-01T19:16:31Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Michael Fullerton</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Can anyone here provide any scientific evidence whatsoever to support the official explanation that WTC 7 fell on 9/11 2001 due only to fire damage? If not, why does CFI and most of its members favor an explanation with absolutely no scientific supporting evidence and reject the only explanation with scientific supporting evidence?</p>

<p>In the following page:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.cficanada.ca/ontario/events/9_11_truth_debate_and_discussion/">http://www.cficanada.ca/ontario/events/9_11_truth_debate_and_discussion/</a></p>

<p>it is claimed that 9/11 skeptics such as myself make &#8220;few attempts at public debate&#8221;. However, I have been trying to get someone with a science background to debate me with no success as all. All CFI groups I have contacted but one have completely ignored my proposal for scientific debate.</p>

<p><a href="http://vernon911truth.org/wtc7debate.html">http://vernon911truth.org/wtc7debate.html</a>
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Ideas for Changing the State of Alternative Medicine</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/15893/" />      
      <id>tag:centerforinquiry.net,2013:forums/viewthread/.15893</id>
      <published>2013-05-18T10:56:28Z</published>
      <updated>2013-05-18T11:00:15Z</updated>
      <author><name>drparent</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Last night, I attended Harriet Hall&#8217;s &#8220;I Don&#8217;t Need No Stinkin&#8217; Science&#8221; at PSU. This got me thinking about ways that we might change society to eliminate the propagation of expensive placebos touted as effective treatment.</p>

<p><b>Proposal #1: &#8220;Alternative Medicine&#8221; to &#8220;Experimental Medicine&#8221;</b></p>

<p>I think that lobbying to change the umbrella term &#8220;Alternative Medicine&#8221; to &#8220;Experimental Medicine&#8221; would have several positive effects:</p>

<p>1. Some Alternative Medicine practices have been under researched. Labeling them Experimental clearly defines their state.<br />
2. Some Alternative Medicine practices have already been researched and proven ineffective. Labeling them Experimental gives immediate reason to end the practice, and will prevent future ineffective treatments from gaining ground.<br />
3. The word &#8220;Experimental&#8221; carries a connotation of risk with the general public. People will ask more questions about procedures, effects and side effects, and weigh the risks for themselves. The public will be more skeptical of practitioners.<br />
4. &#8220;Experimental&#8221; may encourage research.</p>

<p><b>Proposal #2: An exit strategy for Alternative practitioners</b></p>

<p>Practitioners of Alternative Medicine have made a living for themselves and have incentive to promote and continue their practice. Once their practice is proven ineffective, currently their only alternative is to abandon their business and start over at great expense. They need a way to transition to a new lifestyle, else they will fight us tooth and nail at every turn. Let&#8217;s give them a &#8220;bailout&#8221; option by subsidizing proper education in established, well researched and effective practices for some ailment. Clearly, it is completely infeasible to send someone to medical school to learn how to cure cancer, which is why I say &#8220;some ailment&#8221;. We can give them a list of reasonable options to choose from.</p>

<p><br />
What ideas do you have?<br />
How can we begin implementing something?
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Should employers be allowed to opt out of offering treatments they object to&#63;</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/15918/" />      
      <id>tag:centerforinquiry.net,2013:forums/viewthread/.15918</id>
      <published>2013-05-23T13:47:19Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>macgyver</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>There is a challenge in the courts right now from several companies that want protection from a part of the ACA that requires employers to cover the morning after pill. I could go into the ignorance behind this complaint ( ie: that the pill induces an abortion - it does not) but the real question is whether we should allow exemptions at all. What if a company were owned by the Jahova&#8217;s Witnesses. Should they be allowed to deny coverage for blood transfusions to their employees? </p>

<p>Just one more reason why we need universal coverage. Its just another example of insanity in the existing system. You may have serious gaps in  your coverage depending on who you work for and you may not even know it.
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Tornado Conspiracy: We knew it would happen</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/15916/" />      
      <id>tag:centerforinquiry.net,2013:forums/viewthread/.15916</id>
      <published>2013-05-23T08:33:27Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Lois</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>You Just KNEW There Would Be &#8216;Tornado Truthers,&#8217; Didn&#8217;t You? by Jason Linkins Lest you think that the Boston Marathon bombing had brought America to peak Trutherism, rest assured, we are nowhere near that point yet. Because, naturally, the Alex Jones conspiracy set is pretty sure that the tornadoes that hit Moore, Okla. were probably maybe some sort of &#8220;false flag&#8221; event, brought on by the &#8220;weather weapons&#8221; that of course the federal government has at its disposal, for the purpose of ... incurring massively expensive disasters on ourselves? This probably makes sense to somebody.</p>

<p>Conspiracy talk show host Alex Jones, increasingly a favorite of conservative media for his extremely vocal support of gun rights, outed himself Tuesday as a tornado truther by telling a caller on his show, “Of course there’s weather weapons stuff going on.”</p>

<p>Jones, a longtime proponent of the idea that the U.S. government can manipulate and even produce weather systems like tornadoes and hurricanes, went on to say that if people saw helicopters or small aircraft in the area, then “you better bet your bottom dollar they did this.”</p>

<p>“But, who knows if they did?” he asked. “You know, that’s the thing. We don’t know.”</p>

<p>As Max Rivlin-Nadler points out, conspiracy theorists who believe in &#8220;weather weapons&#8221; primarily focus their paranoid worries on HAARP&#8212;the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, not the Muse album of the same name (though Muse frontman Matt Bellamy has similar fixations). The program is &#8220;a scientific endeavor aimed at studying the properties and behavior of the ionosphere, with particular emphasis on being able to understand and use it to enhance communications and surveillance systems for both civilian and defense purposes.&#8221;</p>

<p>As HAARP draws funding from the U.S. Air Force and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (the folks what brought you the Internet!), it seems only logical to conclude that HAARP is actually being used to manipulate the weather and cause hurricanes&#8212;if by &#8220;logical to conclude&#8221; you mean, &#8220;left alone in a room filling with some sort of gas that makes your brain feel all wibbly-wobbly.&#8221;</p>

<p>Normally, you&#8217;d see people sort of decrying the toxic influence of Jones and his ilk, but in a counterintuitive way, I like to see Jones&#8217; continued existence as evidence of the fact that a certain baseline of charity and prosperity still exists in America, that accommodates the notion that one can be a crazy conspiracy nutter as your job, in the same way a few people can make their living as &#8220;ghost hunters.&#8221; Had Jones been an original Jamestown colonist, his colleagues would have probably greeted his ravings with a genial, &#8220;Shut up and farm something, nutsauce, we are dying&#8230;.&#8221;
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Dire outlook despite global warming &#8216;pause&#8217;: study</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/15911/" />      
      <id>tag:centerforinquiry.net,2013:forums/viewthread/.15911</id>
      <published>2013-05-22T17:26:01Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Write4U</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <blockquote><p>Dire outlook despite global warming &#8216;pause&#8217;: study</p></blockquote>

<p><a href="http://phys.org/news/2013-05-dire-outlook-global.html#ajTabs">http://phys.org/news/2013-05-dire-outlook-global.html#ajTabs</a>
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Pendulum waves</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/15848/" />      
      <id>tag:centerforinquiry.net,2013:forums/viewthread/.15848</id>
      <published>2013-05-05T19:56:51Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Lois</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>This is fascinating to watch</p>

<p>Pendulum Waves<br />
 <br />
 <br />
You may recall from a physics course<br />
that the period of a pendulum is proportional<br />
to the square root of the length of the line<br />
suspending the weight; i.e., the longer the<br />
pendulum, the slower it swings.</p>

<p>Harvard students built a device with a series<br />
of 15 pendulums in a row, each one slightly<br />
longer than its neighbor, then set them in<br />
motion and filmed the result.</p>

<p>The resulting patterns in this short video<br />
are fascinating to watch..<br />
 <br />
 <br />
Read the article to get an idea of what you&#8217;ll see in the video.</p>

<p><a href="http://sciencedemonstrations.fas.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=k16940&amp;pageid=icb.page80863&amp;pageContentId=icb.pagecontent341734&amp;state=maximize&amp;view=view.do&amp;viewParam_name=indepth.html#a_icb_pagecontent341734">http://sciencedemonstrations.fas.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=k16940&amp;pageid=icb.page80863&amp;pageContentId=icb.pagecontent341734&amp;state=maximize&amp;view=view.do&amp;viewParam_name=indepth.html#a_icb_pagecontent341734</a><br />
            <br />
 
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>BAM! (aka the BRAIN iniative)</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/15913/" />      
      <id>tag:centerforinquiry.net,2013:forums/viewthread/.15913</id>
      <published>2013-05-22T21:38:52Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>TimB</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRAIN_Initiative">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRAIN_Initiative</a></p>

<p>Man, I hope this comes to fruition.&nbsp; If it does, the potential benefits could outshine those of the Human Genome Mapping, the building of the Interstate Highway system, and the Lunar Landing combined.
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>


</feed>