View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Locked Sagan Thread

Discuss PseudoSkeptics and their Fallacies. Share strategies for debating them.

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby Nostradamus » 25 Mar 2010, 11:56

He called me many names such as sucking scumbag


Reading is a must. I did not call you any names. What I wrote was:
To show other readers and prospect members of this forum that the scum-sucking, filthy, self-loathing, pitiful homophobes are a minority here, I offer some interesting incites into the paranormal via gay psychics.


Wasn't that thread also locked by the mods because of the abusive language and attitude that was taken by you and Kevin?

So your opinion is that Sagan was a kookster and that his medical treatment may have contributed to his death. That's your feeling on the matter and that's fine with me.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08






Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby highflyertoo » 25 Mar 2010, 12:07

Nostradamus wrote:
He called me many names such as sucking scumbag


Reading is a must. I did not call you any names. What I wrote was:
To show other readers and prospect members of this forum that the scum-sucking, filthy, self-loathing, pitiful homophobes are a minority here, I offer some interesting incites into the paranormal via gay psychics.


Wasn't that thread also locked by the mods because of the abusive language and attitude that was taken by you and Kevin?

So your opinion is that Sagan was a kookster and that his medical treatment may have contributed to his death. That's your feeling on the matter and that's fine with me.


No,the Mods are cringers....... Gay means Happy..... Gay doesn't mean homosexual....

Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree........ Gay your life must be.
Randi was no researcher of the paranormal even though he tried half heartedly.... Shows over.
highflyertoo
 
Posts: 400
Joined: 26 Jul 2009, 09:57

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby Kevin Kane » 25 Mar 2010, 13:17

Profwag posted a list of cancers that do well when treated with chemo/radiation. Most of these are lymphomas (Hodgkins/non-Hodgkins), which I've already addressed. Choriocarcinoma, in low-risk patients, but in high-risk patients it requires aggressive treatment and the diagnosis is much poorer.

"Childhood sarcomas (w/ radiation & surgery) 70-90" - Profwag

This is somewhat misleading because of the wide range of conditions and it doesn't include chemotherapy:

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/ ... onal/page5

"The largest prospective pediatric trial failed to demonstrate any benefit with adjuvant (chemotherapy) vincristine, dactinomycin, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin."


"Acute lymphocytic leukemia 60" - Profwag

Aggressive chemotherapy is indicated, with serious long term complications.

http://adam.about.com/reports/000086_4.htm
http://adam.about.com/reports/000086_9.htm


... because it's poison.
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby Nostradamus » 25 Mar 2010, 21:04

You've posted no studies. I noticed how you conveniently cherry picked from the web page at the NCI.

The role of adjuvant (postoperative) chemotherapy remains controversial.[25] A meta-analysis of updated data from adult soft tissue sarcoma patients from all available randomized trials concluded that recurrence-free survival was better with adjuvant chemotherapy.[26] The largest prospective pediatric trial failed to demonstrate any benefit with adjuvant vincristine, dactinomycin, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin.[15] Synovial sarcoma appears to be more sensitive to chemotherapy than many other soft tissue sarcomas, and children with synovial sarcoma seem to have a better prognosis.[27-31] A German trial suggested a benefit for adjuvant chemotherapy in children with synovial sarcoma.[32] A meta-analysis also suggested that chemotherapy may provide benefit.[33] Many treatment centers advocate adjuvant chemotherapy following resection of synovial sarcoma in children and young adults; unequivocal proof of the value of this strategy from prospective, randomized clinical trials is lacking.

Bolding mine.

More often than not studies show a benefit.

Now if you go to the study from which you chose to cherry pick a comment from a web page, not the study we learn this:
The administration of adjuvant chemotherapy according to the schedule and dosages used in our trial did not improve the outcome of children with resected NRSTS. In this study, tumor grade was the most important predictor of clinical outcome in patients with resected NRSTS, and this factor should be incorporated into the stratification of patients in future trials.


From the study which is said to state that chemo remains controversial.
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2008 Jun;8(6):929-38.
Role of chemotherapy in pediatric nonrhabdomyosarcoma soft-tissue sarcomas.

The definition of nonrhabdomyosarcoma soft-tissue sarcomas includes a varied group of malignant soft part tumors that can occur in childhood, but the majority are entities typically observed in adult age. Similar to their adult counterparts, pediatric nonrhabdomyosarcoma soft-tissue sarcomas are usually considered scarcely sensitive to chemotherapy, but treatment strategies for these tumors have changed to some degree in recent years, and multiple-modality treatments that also include chemotherapy have increasingly been attempted. Subsets of patients with specific histological subtypes and prognostic variables have been thought likely to benefit from chemotherapy. The recent development of new molecular treatment approaches to specific tumor targets may enable the current limits of systemic therapies to be overcome in the near future, possibly identifying specific agents tailored to each histotype. While awaiting these developments, however, a better use of standard chemotherapy may prove important in improving the cure rate for these patients.


The abstract above makes it clear that the goal is to improve the current standard, which is chemo, until better treatments are available.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby Nostradamus » 25 Mar 2010, 21:11

No,the Mods are cringers....... Gay means Happy..... Gay doesn't mean homosexual....


Cringers? Go ask Azrael about that?

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay
The term later began to be used in reference to homosexuality, in particular, from the early 20th century, a usage that may have dated prior to the 19th century.[1] In modern English, gay has come to be used as an adjective, and occasionally as a noun, that refers to the people, practices, and culture associated with homosexuality. By the end of the 20th century the word gay was recommended by major style guides to describe people attracted to members of the same sex.


Your claim that gay does not mean homosexual is wrong by around 100 years of such usage. I hope this fun fact brightens your day.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby highflyertoo » 25 Mar 2010, 22:40

I'm of the old school where gay still means happy. Homosexuals hijacked the word ''gay'',or they think they own the word called gay.

Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree
Merry merry King of the bush is he
Laugh Kookaburra Laugh Kookaburra
Gay your life must be

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQU7_uT4 ... re=related

This bird here can copy a gay kookaburra and a chainsaw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjE0Kdfo ... re=related
Randi was no researcher of the paranormal even though he tried half heartedly.... Shows over.
highflyertoo
 
Posts: 400
Joined: 26 Jul 2009, 09:57

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby Nostradamus » 25 Mar 2010, 22:58

It's ok to not understand a century of existence. There are a few people that hide their head in the sand.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby NinjaPuppy » 25 Mar 2010, 23:37

For the record here HF2, I am not a 'cringer'. I don't believe that Eteponge has shown any cringing in his Moderator decisions either.

If you think that cringing is the same as being polite and giving someone the benefit of the doubt, then maybe you're right. I also understand the minor differences with words and slang that range in their acceptability from country to country. Not to mention when English is a second or third language to a member. If I don't, I hit Google for an explanation before commenting or I will ask that member for clarification.

I'd like to take this opportunity to ask you directly if you are now playing games or if you are purposely trying to p!$$ the Moderators off? I welcome your rebuttal.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby Kevin Kane » 29 Mar 2010, 13:06

Nostradamus wrote:You've posted no studies. I noticed how you conveniently cherry picked from the web page at the NCI.


Cherry picking? The disease is Childhood Sarcoma. Information about efficacy of chemo in adults is not relevant. But keep searching for idiocy.

Nostradamus wrote:The abstract above makes it clear that the goal is to improve the current standard, which is chemo, until better treatments are available.


It's interesting how some dangerous methodologies which show results should be studied and improved, yet alternate medicines which show results should be ridiculed or ignored. But chemo hasn't changed much at all in the last 50 years, so maybe the method is flawed and should be abandoned. Who wants to survive cancer but go blind, impotent, or permenently weakened and vulnerable to diseases?
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby Nostradamus » 29 Mar 2010, 20:23

But chemo hasn't changed much at all in the last 50 years, so maybe the method is flawed and should be abandoned.

No changes? Not true at all.

Again, post some studies. When you quote don't cherry pick it looks bad.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby Kevin Kane » 30 Mar 2010, 02:17

A few pages back, I asked you politely to leave this thread. So I'm telling you:

Stop stalking, harrassing, insulting and confronting me (Trolling)

Stop trying the change the topic or inject off-topic irrelevence and spam (Trolling)

Stop trying to cause drama with other posters in this thread, or trying to get this thread locked (Trolling)

Get the 'f' out of my thread, damn Nostradamus troll!!!
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby Nostradamus » 30 Mar 2010, 02:26

Again, post some studies.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby NinjaPuppy » 30 Mar 2010, 03:04

Kevin - We can do without the profanity. Thank you.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby NinjaPuppy » 30 Mar 2010, 03:05

And we can also do without the name calling.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Locked Sagan Thread

Postby Kevin Kane » 30 Mar 2010, 07:29

Nostradamus wrote:
Again, post some studies.



Why would I post a study? Such a request is totally irrelevant to the topic. Do you even know what I'm discussing? A study is not called for. I told you to troll off, so please troll somewhere else.
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

PreviousNext

Return to PseudoSkeptic Fallacies

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests