I find it rather disappointing sometimes how most atheists dispel statements/beliefs/arguments simply because the scientific research has not proven it. It's one thing for research to conclusively prove something but if the research is not there, it does not mean that it's not true. I've come across this a number of times in medicine and I'd like to share one of those examples.
When my oldest daughter was younger, she was in and out of hospitals. This placed a great deal of stress on myself and my wife. One day I started to see dark areas in my eyesight and went to the doctor. My doctor was a little shocked (don't you hate it when they don't hide their feelings too well and you of course think the worst). Anyway, he sent me to an eye specialist who told me that due to the stress I was under, a protective film in the back of my eye had deteriorated and was in the process of breaking down. This is an irreversible process that I could do nothing about.
Great, thanks for the diagnosis, doc. I immediately went to my naturopath who quite matter-of-factly told me she would fix it in 3 months. Sure enough, 3 months later, after taking all my anti-oxidant tablets, my eyesight cleared up. So much for irreversible.
This is a small example, that I have seen repeated many times with others around me. Clearly it is not in the interests of the multibillion dollar drug companies to conduct clinical trials of cheap off-the-shelf vitamin tablets that are capable of curing our diseases. Science is profits-driven. Today, great advances in science occur when large amounts of money are involved (or large amounts of people need to be killed). Sometimes, money is spent on science that has little or no monetary return (space program, CERN LHC, etc. Some of these things are driven by fear, some a dick-measuring exercises (ie Europe can say it now has a bigger collider than the USA). But basically, it comes down to scientific endeavour being undertaken by flawed individuals and driven by possible financial returns.
Then of course there are the scientific "studies" which are designed to show a desired outcome funded by big $$$. I'm old enough to remember the debate on the detrimental effects of cigarette smoking. Did anyone believe the scientific studied funded by the cigarette companies? You would be surprised!!! Today we have a similar debate on the detrimental effects of mobile phone usage. Finally some studies are coming out now that show the relationship between mobile phone usage and brain tumours on the side of the brain that the phone is used. Duh!
Just as there are lies, damn lies and statistics, the same applies to science. It is a tool that can be misused for nefarious purposes and when there is human nature and money involved, it usually is misused.
So, don't believe it just because a scientific study has shown it to be so and don't not believe something just because there are no scientific studies.
bad science is everywhere:
SUPER BOWLING FOR DOLLARS
The great American game is another chance to foist false research on a gullible media.
The push by advocates to gain publicity at any cost often involves local law enforcement. Once again, the Super Bowl became a platform to push a religious agenda and bogus numbers.
Last November, Dallas Police Sgt. Louis Felini was quoted predicting that up to 100,000 prostitutes would descend on the city for the Super Bowl.
“We believe, without a doubt, that God gave us the Super Bowl this year to raise awareness of what’s happening with these kids,” Deena Graves, executive director of Traffick 911, a local Christian group, told the Dallas Morning News.
Into this frothy mix of panic stepped the Women’s Funding Network’s Dallas affiliate. The WFN stirred up the fear even more by releasing a Texas edition of the bogus Schapiro Group study.
Becky Sykes, the chair of the Dallas Women’s Foundation, told the Dallas Morning News that the study’s January release was timed “to focus public attention on the problem because underage girls will be brought to Dallas and sold into prostitution during the Super Bowl.”
Like its sister studies in Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, and New York, the Texas report relied on guessing the ages of women in online photographs accompanying classified ads.
And it came up with the same outlandish conclusion of a local sex trafficking epidemic: 740 Texas teens were sold for sex in one month, according to the research.
But the hard data afterward told a far different story: Police reported that the massive dragnet, involving multiple jurisdictions and the FBI, produced just 105 prostitution arrests — and only two involving juveniles.