<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cartoon beyond belief!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/</link>
	<description>I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:09:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Irishman</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51906</link>
		<dc:creator>Irishman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:29:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51906</guid>
		<description>John W. said:
&gt; This is excellent advertising/misdirection on the part of the chiropractic industry. A lot of people tend to think that, because Chiropractors manipulate your spine, they are therefore only concerned with back injuries. This is not, however, what they do: they believe that the manipulation of the back re-aligns â€œchakrasâ€ which promote or block the flow of energy, in much the same way that an acupuncturist believes that needles re-direct the flow of â€œchiâ€/â€qiâ€ energy.

This is correct.  A lot of people think that as podiatrists are &quot;foot doctors&quot; and cardiologists are &quot;heart doctors&quot;, so chiropractors are &quot;back doctors&quot;.  This is false, but something that chiropractic takes advantage of.

Chiropractic is Reflexology for the back instead of the foot.

TAMU Student said:
&gt; â€¦ many Chiropractors view their subject much more scientifically than it was viewed in the past, they are like better-trained physical therapists.

While it may be true that some chiropractors view things &quot;more scientifically&quot;, but chiropractic itself is founded on mystical nonsense.

&gt; I mean, the AMA even says that Chiropractic therapy can be beneficial, and their opinion far outweighs this guyâ€™s.

Some scientific study has shown chiropractic to be beneficial in limited use. The limited use?  Control of mild lower back pain.  The studies showed chiropractic to be about as effective as stretching and exercise or massage.  Now let&#039;s examine further.  Pain is a subjective experience - there is no independent way to measure it. All pain treatment is measured by &quot;rate your pain experience&quot; - self evaluation. Subjective experience is the type of condition most succeptible to placebo effects.  Low back pain is one of those widespread ailments with limited recourse.  Note that the two mainstream medical treatments essentially involve stretching and massage.  Chiropractic as implemented is essentially stretching and massage. Popping the back consists of applying pressure in the region, and perhaps twisting.   It is, therefore, questionable that the underlying methodology and theory of chiropractic is what is responsible for the effectiveness of treatment in these limited cases.  It is likely that the benefits are largely coincidental through similarity of results, or else placebo.

http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/chiro.html

Now consider that many (most?) chiropractors do not limit their practice to merely spinal manipulation.  Chiropractors have a tendency to engage in a whole slew of &quot;alternative and complementary&quot; practices of questionable validity.  These include homeopathy, applied kinesiology, contact reflex analysis, and herbal supplements.  Some chiropractors can be anti-medicine, claiming the spinal alignment is the true means to fight disease and illness.  They can also be anti-vaccination.

Quackwatch does include an article from a &quot;rational chiropractor&quot;.
http://www.chirobase.org/07Strategy/goodchiro.html

This article describes a chiropractic practice that eschews the roots of chiropractic (spinal alignment is the cause of disease), cautions against excessive use of spinal adjustments, and limits chiropractic to musculo-skeletal issues.  The descriptions sound like they are basically physiotherapy.  If this is the &quot;more scientific&quot; form of chiropractic that you mention, then I agree it has more scientific footing.  But I wonder what makes it &quot;chiropractic&quot; over physiotherapy and osteopathy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John W. said:<br />
&gt; This is excellent advertising/misdirection on the part of the chiropractic industry. A lot of people tend to think that, because Chiropractors manipulate your spine, they are therefore only concerned with back injuries. This is not, however, what they do: they believe that the manipulation of the back re-aligns â€œchakrasâ€ which promote or block the flow of energy, in much the same way that an acupuncturist believes that needles re-direct the flow of â€œchiâ€/â€qiâ€ energy.</p>
<p>This is correct.  A lot of people think that as podiatrists are &#8220;foot doctors&#8221; and cardiologists are &#8220;heart doctors&#8221;, so chiropractors are &#8220;back doctors&#8221;.  This is false, but something that chiropractic takes advantage of.</p>
<p>Chiropractic is Reflexology for the back instead of the foot.</p>
<p>TAMU Student said:<br />
&gt; â€¦ many Chiropractors view their subject much more scientifically than it was viewed in the past, they are like better-trained physical therapists.</p>
<p>While it may be true that some chiropractors view things &#8220;more scientifically&#8221;, but chiropractic itself is founded on mystical nonsense.</p>
<p>&gt; I mean, the AMA even says that Chiropractic therapy can be beneficial, and their opinion far outweighs this guyâ€™s.</p>
<p>Some scientific study has shown chiropractic to be beneficial in limited use. The limited use?  Control of mild lower back pain.  The studies showed chiropractic to be about as effective as stretching and exercise or massage.  Now let&#8217;s examine further.  Pain is a subjective experience &#8211; there is no independent way to measure it. All pain treatment is measured by &#8220;rate your pain experience&#8221; &#8211; self evaluation. Subjective experience is the type of condition most succeptible to placebo effects.  Low back pain is one of those widespread ailments with limited recourse.  Note that the two mainstream medical treatments essentially involve stretching and massage.  Chiropractic as implemented is essentially stretching and massage. Popping the back consists of applying pressure in the region, and perhaps twisting.   It is, therefore, questionable that the underlying methodology and theory of chiropractic is what is responsible for the effectiveness of treatment in these limited cases.  It is likely that the benefits are largely coincidental through similarity of results, or else placebo.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/chiro.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/chiro.html</a></p>
<p>Now consider that many (most?) chiropractors do not limit their practice to merely spinal manipulation.  Chiropractors have a tendency to engage in a whole slew of &#8220;alternative and complementary&#8221; practices of questionable validity.  These include homeopathy, applied kinesiology, contact reflex analysis, and herbal supplements.  Some chiropractors can be anti-medicine, claiming the spinal alignment is the true means to fight disease and illness.  They can also be anti-vaccination.</p>
<p>Quackwatch does include an article from a &#8220;rational chiropractor&#8221;.<br />
<a href="http://www.chirobase.org/07Strategy/goodchiro.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.chirobase.org/07Strategy/goodchiro.html</a></p>
<p>This article describes a chiropractic practice that eschews the roots of chiropractic (spinal alignment is the cause of disease), cautions against excessive use of spinal adjustments, and limits chiropractic to musculo-skeletal issues.  The descriptions sound like they are basically physiotherapy.  If this is the &#8220;more scientific&#8221; form of chiropractic that you mention, then I agree it has more scientific footing.  But I wonder what makes it &#8220;chiropractic&#8221; over physiotherapy and osteopathy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ronn! Blankenship</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51905</link>
		<dc:creator>Ronn! Blankenship</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2007 01:51:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51905</guid>
		<description>(Hmm, that didn&#039;t work.  Trying again.)

Re: DennyMo,

I guess I didnâ€™t make my earlier comment clear.

I am very familiar with the claims of Richard C. Hoagland (as well as those of Velikovsky, von Daniken, von Flanderen, the Heavenâ€™s Gate group, etc. â€” as anyone who teaches general astronomy these days needs to be to answer questions on those topics from students and the general public). In fact (sorry, Phil!) I was very familiar with Hoagland and his claims wrt the â€œfaceâ€ on Mars, the pyramids, the billion-year-old â€œruins of crystal domesâ€ on the Moon, the position of Orion as seen from the Apollo 11 landing site, the â€œspecialâ€ properties of the number 19.5, etc., years before I first heard of the Bad Astronomer. When I got the BA blog e-mail yesterday and read â€œThese are some funny cartoons [â€¦] let me just point you to this one,â€ however, my initial thought was that the *single panel shown there* was the entire cartoon and since it seemed to be a simple statement of face (&quot;Richard Hoagland says Mars has a face.&quot;)  I spent awhile examining the panel closely to try to find the punch line hidden somewhere in that panel which I obviously must have been overlooking . . .</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Hmm, that didn&#8217;t work.  Trying again.)</p>
<p>Re: DennyMo,</p>
<p>I guess I didnâ€™t make my earlier comment clear.</p>
<p>I am very familiar with the claims of Richard C. Hoagland (as well as those of Velikovsky, von Daniken, von Flanderen, the Heavenâ€™s Gate group, etc. â€” as anyone who teaches general astronomy these days needs to be to answer questions on those topics from students and the general public). In fact (sorry, Phil!) I was very familiar with Hoagland and his claims wrt the â€œfaceâ€ on Mars, the pyramids, the billion-year-old â€œruins of crystal domesâ€ on the Moon, the position of Orion as seen from the Apollo 11 landing site, the â€œspecialâ€ properties of the number 19.5, etc., years before I first heard of the Bad Astronomer. When I got the BA blog e-mail yesterday and read â€œThese are some funny cartoons [â€¦] let me just point you to this one,â€ however, my initial thought was that the *single panel shown there* was the entire cartoon and since it seemed to be a simple statement of face (&#8220;Richard Hoagland says Mars has a face.&#8221;)  I spent awhile examining the panel closely to try to find the punch line hidden somewhere in that panel which I obviously must have been overlooking . . .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ronn! Blankenship</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51904</link>
		<dc:creator>Ronn! Blankenship</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2007 01:44:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51904</guid>
		<description>Re: DennyMo,

I guess I didn&#039;t make my earlier comment clear.

I am very familiar with the claims of Richard C. Hoagland (as well as those of Velikovsky, von Daniken, von Flanderen, the Heaven&#039;s Gate group, etc. -- as anyone who teaches general astronomy these days needs to be to answer questions on those topics from students and the general public).  In fact (sorry, Phil!) I was very familiar with Hoagland and his claims wrt the &quot;face&quot; on Mars, the pyramids, the billion-year-old &quot;ruins of crystal domes&quot; on the Moon, the position of Orion as seen from the Apollo 11 landing site, the &quot;special&quot; properties of the number 19.5, etc., years before I first heard of the Bad Astronomer.  When I got the BA blog e-mail yesterday and read &quot;These are some funny cartoons [...] let me just point you to this one,&quot;  however, my initial thought was that the &gt;&gt;&gt; single panel shown there &gt;&gt; entire cartoon &gt;&gt; must</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: DennyMo,</p>
<p>I guess I didn&#8217;t make my earlier comment clear.</p>
<p>I am very familiar with the claims of Richard C. Hoagland (as well as those of Velikovsky, von Daniken, von Flanderen, the Heaven&#8217;s Gate group, etc. &#8212; as anyone who teaches general astronomy these days needs to be to answer questions on those topics from students and the general public).  In fact (sorry, Phil!) I was very familiar with Hoagland and his claims wrt the &#8220;face&#8221; on Mars, the pyramids, the billion-year-old &#8220;ruins of crystal domes&#8221; on the Moon, the position of Orion as seen from the Apollo 11 landing site, the &#8220;special&#8221; properties of the number 19.5, etc., years before I first heard of the Bad Astronomer.  When I got the BA blog e-mail yesterday and read &#8220;These are some funny cartoons [...] let me just point you to this one,&#8221;  however, my initial thought was that the &gt;&gt;&gt; single panel shown there &gt;&gt; entire cartoon &gt;&gt; must</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lurchgs</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51903</link>
		<dc:creator>Lurchgs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:06:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51903</guid>
		<description>I won&#039;t presume to speak on all chiropractors - but the few I have had (peripheral) knowledge of.  A good friend of mine has a rather rare degenerative bone disease.  The doctors when he was growing up missed it completely, ascribing his problems to bad posture.

it&#039;s very painful, and - in the end - terminal if not addressed.

Worse, it&#039;s hereditary - both is father and son have it.

I&#039;m not passing this on to you to play with your emotions... it&#039;s background.

In the case of his father, it presented late in life and the doctors were able to do something about it (sure,it required surgery, and will again, but his quality of life is normal, and he&#039;s expected to not die from it.

In the case of the son, I fear for his life.  The boy lives with his mother, who in a marvelous demonstration of turning a blind eye to the facts, insists there&#039;s nothing wrong.  And her chiropractors - WHO KNOW THE FAMILY HISTORY - agree. (I say chiropractorS, because she&#039;s gone to 3 or 4 in the past 8 years - changing when her current favorite proves to be ineffectual.  What&#039;s that saw about repetition and insanity?)

I can deal with the denial on her part, she&#039;s lay, under educated, and clearly unwilling to face facts. But the Chiropractors I condemn wholeheartedly and moneygrubbing charletans worthy of nothing  but scorn.  if they were honest in their beliefs and actually thought of themselves as medical people, they&#039;d not hesitate to refer the case to another doctor.

So, based on an admittedly short base line, I extropolate and declare all chiropractors liars, thieves, and charletans. Be damned to them all.

Visitor,  Completely ignoring our differing opinions regarding chiropractors, I think pointed attacks on unproven concepts are entirely valid. It may come across as mean-spirited (and may even be meant that way ) but it serves a purpose.  If you simply pan the idea, or just offer polite amusement, you aren&#039;t getting the other side *involved*.  Ideally, heaping ridicule and scorn on the idea will get *some* of the adherents to actually buckle down and prepare to defend their beliefs.  Generally, this means acquiring data and information.  Many of these people aren&#039;t stupid - they just haven&#039;t thought their position through.  Make them mad, and they just might.

In my usual roundabout way, I&#039;m pointing out that, when it comes down to the final analysis, this is a war, and only a fool fights a war with a single bullet.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I won&#8217;t presume to speak on all chiropractors &#8211; but the few I have had (peripheral) knowledge of.  A good friend of mine has a rather rare degenerative bone disease.  The doctors when he was growing up missed it completely, ascribing his problems to bad posture.</p>
<p>it&#8217;s very painful, and &#8211; in the end &#8211; terminal if not addressed.</p>
<p>Worse, it&#8217;s hereditary &#8211; both is father and son have it.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not passing this on to you to play with your emotions&#8230; it&#8217;s background.</p>
<p>In the case of his father, it presented late in life and the doctors were able to do something about it (sure,it required surgery, and will again, but his quality of life is normal, and he&#8217;s expected to not die from it.</p>
<p>In the case of the son, I fear for his life.  The boy lives with his mother, who in a marvelous demonstration of turning a blind eye to the facts, insists there&#8217;s nothing wrong.  And her chiropractors &#8211; WHO KNOW THE FAMILY HISTORY &#8211; agree. (I say chiropractorS, because she&#8217;s gone to 3 or 4 in the past 8 years &#8211; changing when her current favorite proves to be ineffectual.  What&#8217;s that saw about repetition and insanity?)</p>
<p>I can deal with the denial on her part, she&#8217;s lay, under educated, and clearly unwilling to face facts. But the Chiropractors I condemn wholeheartedly and moneygrubbing charletans worthy of nothing  but scorn.  if they were honest in their beliefs and actually thought of themselves as medical people, they&#8217;d not hesitate to refer the case to another doctor.</p>
<p>So, based on an admittedly short base line, I extropolate and declare all chiropractors liars, thieves, and charletans. Be damned to them all.</p>
<p>Visitor,  Completely ignoring our differing opinions regarding chiropractors, I think pointed attacks on unproven concepts are entirely valid. It may come across as mean-spirited (and may even be meant that way ) but it serves a purpose.  If you simply pan the idea, or just offer polite amusement, you aren&#8217;t getting the other side *involved*.  Ideally, heaping ridicule and scorn on the idea will get *some* of the adherents to actually buckle down and prepare to defend their beliefs.  Generally, this means acquiring data and information.  Many of these people aren&#8217;t stupid &#8211; they just haven&#8217;t thought their position through.  Make them mad, and they just might.</p>
<p>In my usual roundabout way, I&#8217;m pointing out that, when it comes down to the final analysis, this is a war, and only a fool fights a war with a single bullet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Deepsix</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51902</link>
		<dc:creator>Deepsix</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:15:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51902</guid>
		<description>Best so far:  http://cectic.com/045.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Best so far:  <a href="http://cectic.com/045.html" rel="nofollow">http://cectic.com/045.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John W</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51901</link>
		<dc:creator>John W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:10:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51901</guid>
		<description>&quot;Here (New Zealand), chiropractice is thought of by most people as a form of physiotherapy. &quot;

This is excellent advertising/misdirection on the part of the chiropractic industry.  A lot of people tend to think that, because Chiropractors manipulate your spine, they are therefore only concerned with back injuries.  This is not, however, what they do: they believe that the manipulation of the back re-aligns &quot;chakras&quot; which promote or block the flow of energy, in much the same way that an acupuncturist believes that needles re-direct the flow of &quot;chi&quot;/&quot;qi&quot; energy.

And, much like acupuncture and homoeopathy, the practitioner believes that a chiropractic can cure an endless list of ailments.

The success of the chiropractic silence on many of these matters has resulted in many people thinking that it is simply a branch of osteopathy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Here (New Zealand), chiropractice is thought of by most people as a form of physiotherapy. &#8221;</p>
<p>This is excellent advertising/misdirection on the part of the chiropractic industry.  A lot of people tend to think that, because Chiropractors manipulate your spine, they are therefore only concerned with back injuries.  This is not, however, what they do: they believe that the manipulation of the back re-aligns &#8220;chakras&#8221; which promote or block the flow of energy, in much the same way that an acupuncturist believes that needles re-direct the flow of &#8220;chi&#8221;/&#8221;qi&#8221; energy.</p>
<p>And, much like acupuncture and homoeopathy, the practitioner believes that a chiropractic can cure an endless list of ailments.</p>
<p>The success of the chiropractic silence on many of these matters has resulted in many people thinking that it is simply a branch of osteopathy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Deepsix</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51900</link>
		<dc:creator>Deepsix</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:11:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51900</guid>
		<description>Great cartoon for &quot;Ghost Hunters&quot;.  He nailed that one.  But that&#039;s kinda what all &quot;woo&quot; believers do- ascribe what they can&#039;t explain to what they already believe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great cartoon for &#8220;Ghost Hunters&#8221;.  He nailed that one.  But that&#8217;s kinda what all &#8220;woo&#8221; believers do- ascribe what they can&#8217;t explain to what they already believe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DennyMo</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51899</link>
		<dc:creator>DennyMo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:45:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51899</guid>
		<description>This one reminded me of the campaign to ban Dihydrogen Monoxide:
http://cectic.com/055.html

Ronn!: If you &quot;don&#039;t get it&quot;, you must not have been reading this site for very long...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This one reminded me of the campaign to ban Dihydrogen Monoxide:<br />
<a href="http://cectic.com/055.html" rel="nofollow">http://cectic.com/055.html</a></p>
<p>Ronn!: If you &#8220;don&#8217;t get it&#8221;, you must not have been reading this site for very long&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: boggis the cat</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51898</link>
		<dc:creator>boggis the cat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 10:59:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51898</guid>
		<description>Some good points there, although I&#039;m not so sure about chiropractors.  Here (New Zealand), chiropractice is thought of by most people as a form of physiotherapy.  I assume physiotherapy is considered of some merit in  North America?

(I wouldn&#039;t recommend letting anyone twist your spine about unless you are really sure that they are qualified to do so, though!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some good points there, although I&#8217;m not so sure about chiropractors.  Here (New Zealand), chiropractice is thought of by most people as a form of physiotherapy.  I assume physiotherapy is considered of some merit in  North America?</p>
<p>(I wouldn&#8217;t recommend letting anyone twist your spine about unless you are really sure that they are qualified to do so, though!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lyle Gaulding</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51897</link>
		<dc:creator>Lyle Gaulding</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 01:23:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51897</guid>
		<description>Evidently the German Eden drawings are based on the idea that before the fall, Adam and Eve could do anything except eat that special fruit. In one or two, I wasn&#039;t quite certain what was going on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Evidently the German Eden drawings are based on the idea that before the fall, Adam and Eve could do anything except eat that special fruit. In one or two, I wasn&#8217;t quite certain what was going on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ronn! Blankenship</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51870</link>
		<dc:creator>Ronn! Blankenship</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 18:06:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51870</guid>
		<description>I guess I am the only person left in the world who doesn&#039;t automatically click on every link I see as soon as I see it, because I looked at the single panel shown of the Hoagland cartoon for some time thinking, &quot;I. Don&#039;t. Get. It.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess I am the only person left in the world who doesn&#8217;t automatically click on every link I see as soon as I see it, because I looked at the single panel shown of the Hoagland cartoon for some time thinking, &#8220;I. Don&#8217;t. Get. It.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Troy</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51867</link>
		<dc:creator>Troy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 16:09:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51867</guid>
		<description>In regard to Visitor&#039;s perspective.  I feel a bit the same about the cartoon Mallard Fillmore, sometimes the conservative cartoonist of that comic is right on and very funny, sometimes I find myself laughing at him or commonly rolling my eyes.  The notion that religious belief should be exempt from normal skeptical analysis is common but I don&#039;t agree.  For example the CSICOP organization splits its periodicals into Free Inquiry (the atheist periodical) and Skeptical Inquirer (usually doesn&#039;t touch religion in any way).  In my opinion the more sacred cows slaughtered on the altar of reason the better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In regard to Visitor&#8217;s perspective.  I feel a bit the same about the cartoon Mallard Fillmore, sometimes the conservative cartoonist of that comic is right on and very funny, sometimes I find myself laughing at him or commonly rolling my eyes.  The notion that religious belief should be exempt from normal skeptical analysis is common but I don&#8217;t agree.  For example the CSICOP organization splits its periodicals into Free Inquiry (the atheist periodical) and Skeptical Inquirer (usually doesn&#8217;t touch religion in any way).  In my opinion the more sacred cows slaughtered on the altar of reason the better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paulo Roberto</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51866</link>
		<dc:creator>Paulo Roberto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:49:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51866</guid>
		<description>Great, just added to my feeds list.

And I&#039;ve lol&#039;ed: http://cectic.com/019.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great, just added to my feeds list.</p>
<p>And I&#8217;ve lol&#8217;ed: <a href="http://cectic.com/019.html" rel="nofollow">http://cectic.com/019.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Helena Constantine</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51869</link>
		<dc:creator>Helena Constantine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 14:04:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51869</guid>
		<description>Here is a link to some cartoon made in Germany about the year 1900. They might be of interest here as they are strangely prescient of the current conflict with creationists. They show Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden having sex with dinosaurs:


http://picasaweb.google.com/Lesbika/LostParadise


Before you look at them at work, again, bear in mind that they show Adam and Eve having sex with dinosaurs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here is a link to some cartoon made in Germany about the year 1900. They might be of interest here as they are strangely prescient of the current conflict with creationists. They show Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden having sex with dinosaurs:</p>
<p><a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/Lesbika/LostParadise" rel="nofollow">http://picasaweb.google.com/Lesbika/LostParadise</a></p>
<p>Before you look at them at work, again, bear in mind that they show Adam and Eve having sex with dinosaurs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: K</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51868</link>
		<dc:creator>K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:57:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51868</guid>
		<description>AND it&#039;s compatible with GOOGLE reader!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AND it&#8217;s compatible with GOOGLE reader!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Grand Lunar</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51892</link>
		<dc:creator>Grand Lunar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 12:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51892</guid>
		<description>TAMU student,

From what I gathered, it didn&#039;t stab at chiropractors in general, but more at those that use acupuncture or some other non-medical means of &quot;therapy&quot;.

Visitor,

 The attacks on the metaphysical, &quot;godheads&quot;, ect, seem mostly to stem because people use such beliefs to reject what science teaches us about the universe.
Also, there are those that use people&#039;s beliefs in such things to make money for themselves or to take advantage of a person&#039;s situation, or to make a name for themselves. Often, it may be one or more of these things.
The point that I get is to not take such concepts seriously. There are plenty of mysteries left in our universe without our own desire to believe in &quot;godheads&quot;, ect, to add to confusion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TAMU student,</p>
<p>From what I gathered, it didn&#8217;t stab at chiropractors in general, but more at those that use acupuncture or some other non-medical means of &#8220;therapy&#8221;.</p>
<p>Visitor,</p>
<p> The attacks on the metaphysical, &#8220;godheads&#8221;, ect, seem mostly to stem because people use such beliefs to reject what science teaches us about the universe.<br />
Also, there are those that use people&#8217;s beliefs in such things to make money for themselves or to take advantage of a person&#8217;s situation, or to make a name for themselves. Often, it may be one or more of these things.<br />
The point that I get is to not take such concepts seriously. There are plenty of mysteries left in our universe without our own desire to believe in &#8220;godheads&#8221;, ect, to add to confusion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TAMU Student</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51891</link>
		<dc:creator>TAMU Student</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 07:56:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51891</guid>
		<description>&gt; Visitor

Personally, I think part of the reasoning behind the dislike of these groups stems from their insistence that scientists are part of some evil conspiracy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; Visitor</p>
<p>Personally, I think part of the reasoning behind the dislike of these groups stems from their insistence that scientists are part of some evil conspiracy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: visitor</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51880</link>
		<dc:creator>visitor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 07:16:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51880</guid>
		<description>I found some of the cartoons truly hilarious, but others I found to be really mean-spirited.  I consider myself skeptical of pseudo-science and the claims of religious literalists who claim that their spiritual traditions can explain the physical world.  At the same time, unfortunately, the ideology that I sense from the â€œcecticâ€ cartoons is one that alienates me from feeling any commonality with the skeptic movement as it is often presented: a hubris that physical science, especially as it is understood today (or at any given time), contains the totality of all that is true.  It also radiated a mocking dismissiveness of anything that doesnâ€™t conform to both its paradigm and its body of knowledge.  I cannot hold with the concept that everything in â€œtraditionalâ€ (non allopathic) medicine for instance, is nothing more than superstition, and persons who use non-allopathic forms are fools to be mocked.  In fact, modern medical treatment has often learned from the practice of traditional cultures, and I am skeptical of a point of view which seems to suggest that the only valid medical treatments issue from the labs of big Pharma.  Similarly, I cannot accept the point of view (repeatedly and rather viciously evinced in these cartoons) that anything to do with the spiritual or metaphysical must be definitively untrue.  I can accept that metaphysical explanations are not a reasonable recourse to explain physical phenomena, but it does not follow from that that physical science can necessarily be used to explain or â€œdebunkâ€ metaphysical concepts. In my opinion, science cannot prove that a â€œgodheadâ€ doesnâ€™t exist, it can only prove that such a godhead cannot be detected or measured as a physical (natural) phenomena.  Generally, I hate to find myself put into the same category as religious true believers or pseudo-science advocates, but I also am repulsed by the concept that skepticism means positive rejection of any concept not currently included in the canon of science as it exists today.  Am I credulous or superstitious?  I donâ€™t think so.  I simply have the philosophy that we do not know all knowledge, that there are things that may yet be learned, and that skepticism (as I think I practice it) is not synonymous with general dismissiveness and a self-conceited superiority.  This, I fear, makes me a â€œbad skepticâ€ in some of your eyes; so flame away, I guess.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I found some of the cartoons truly hilarious, but others I found to be really mean-spirited.  I consider myself skeptical of pseudo-science and the claims of religious literalists who claim that their spiritual traditions can explain the physical world.  At the same time, unfortunately, the ideology that I sense from the â€œcecticâ€ cartoons is one that alienates me from feeling any commonality with the skeptic movement as it is often presented: a hubris that physical science, especially as it is understood today (or at any given time), contains the totality of all that is true.  It also radiated a mocking dismissiveness of anything that doesnâ€™t conform to both its paradigm and its body of knowledge.  I cannot hold with the concept that everything in â€œtraditionalâ€ (non allopathic) medicine for instance, is nothing more than superstition, and persons who use non-allopathic forms are fools to be mocked.  In fact, modern medical treatment has often learned from the practice of traditional cultures, and I am skeptical of a point of view which seems to suggest that the only valid medical treatments issue from the labs of big Pharma.  Similarly, I cannot accept the point of view (repeatedly and rather viciously evinced in these cartoons) that anything to do with the spiritual or metaphysical must be definitively untrue.  I can accept that metaphysical explanations are not a reasonable recourse to explain physical phenomena, but it does not follow from that that physical science can necessarily be used to explain or â€œdebunkâ€ metaphysical concepts. In my opinion, science cannot prove that a â€œgodheadâ€ doesnâ€™t exist, it can only prove that such a godhead cannot be detected or measured as a physical (natural) phenomena.  Generally, I hate to find myself put into the same category as religious true believers or pseudo-science advocates, but I also am repulsed by the concept that skepticism means positive rejection of any concept not currently included in the canon of science as it exists today.  Am I credulous or superstitious?  I donâ€™t think so.  I simply have the philosophy that we do not know all knowledge, that there are things that may yet be learned, and that skepticism (as I think I practice it) is not synonymous with general dismissiveness and a self-conceited superiority.  This, I fear, makes me a â€œbad skepticâ€ in some of your eyes; so flame away, I guess.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C. Birkbeck</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51871</link>
		<dc:creator>C. Birkbeck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 04:43:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51871</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;But at least the cartoon put astronomy first.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Yes, but first and foremost, there was geology. We win.

&lt;blockquote&gt;So, did any non-Canadians get this one ?

I&#039;m Canadian, and it took me awhile to realize the joke.

Now that stupid song in my head.&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>But at least the cartoon put astronomy first.</p></blockquote>
<p>Yes, but first and foremost, there was geology. We win.</p>
<blockquote><p>So, did any non-Canadians get this one ?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m Canadian, and it took me awhile to realize the joke.</p>
<p>Now that stupid song in my head.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TAMU Student</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51882</link>
		<dc:creator>TAMU Student</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 03:46:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51882</guid>
		<description>While I like the comic, I don&#039;t understand this guy&#039;s problem with Chiropractic... many Chiropractors view their subject much more scientifically than it was viewed in the past, they are like better-trained physical therapists.

I mean, the AMA even says that Chiropractic therapy can be beneficial, and their opinion far outweighs this guy&#039;s.

Seems a bit harsh to lump them in with Homoeopathy, Hogland, etc., when they actually behave in ways appropriate to the medical community.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While I like the comic, I don&#8217;t understand this guy&#8217;s problem with Chiropractic&#8230; many Chiropractors view their subject much more scientifically than it was viewed in the past, they are like better-trained physical therapists.</p>
<p>I mean, the AMA even says that Chiropractic therapy can be beneficial, and their opinion far outweighs this guy&#8217;s.</p>
<p>Seems a bit harsh to lump them in with Homoeopathy, Hogland, etc., when they actually behave in ways appropriate to the medical community.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Evolving Squid</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51885</link>
		<dc:creator>Evolving Squid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 03:16:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51885</guid>
		<description>Hey, no dissing our molluscan friends.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, no dissing our molluscan friends.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Depleted Cranium &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Now that&#8217;s a funny cartoon&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51875</link>
		<dc:creator>Depleted Cranium &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Now that&#8217;s a funny cartoon&#8230;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 02:46:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51875</guid>
		<description>[...] Via: Bad Astronomy [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Via: Bad Astronomy [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Cates</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51874</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Cates</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 01:38:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51874</guid>
		<description>It appears I don&#039;t know how to embed a link but I&#039;ll try again.
&lt;a href=&quot;http://cectic.com/027.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://cectic.com/027.html&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It appears I don&#8217;t know how to embed a link but I&#8217;ll try again.<br />
<a href="http://cectic.com/027.html" rel="nofollow">http://cectic.com/027.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Cates</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51886</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Cates</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 01:31:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51886</guid>
		<description>So, did any non-Canadians get &lt;a href=&quot;http://cectic.com/027&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this one&lt;/a&gt; ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, did any non-Canadians get <a href="http://cectic.com/027" rel="nofollow">this one</a> ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kimpatsu</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/comment-page-1/#comment-51887</link>
		<dc:creator>Kimpatsu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 00:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/10/13/cartoon-beyond-belief/#comment-51887</guid>
		<description>&quot;But at least the cartoon put astronomy first.&quot;
And saved the best for last, Phil?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;But at least the cartoon put astronomy first.&#8221;<br />
And saved the best for last, Phil?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk

Served from: blogs.discovermagazine.com @ 2012-02-14 15:24:38 -->
