Happeh:
Impossible, blind and deaf. Clearly. There is no Authority or God that will give you permission to believe what I say.
That's right. You'll have to convince me with some kind of evidence. I won't accept your "authority".
There is no study that says what I say. You can treat what I say as a brand new theory just developled. As a scientist, it is your job to investigate the theory and see if it holds water. Not complain because God didn't tell you it was true.
As a scientist, I ask myself some questions when presented with a new theory, such as:
1. How does this theory fit in with what is already known?
2. Are there any independently verifiable facts which provide evidence in favour of the theory?
3. Are there any known facts which go against the theory?
Your theory doesn't fit anything already known. You admit there are no independently verifiable facts. And no current medical understandings support your theory, as far as I can tell.
You must examine what I call evidence, the symptoms of the damage. Then you must either agree that I am correct it is caused by masturbation, or you must provide an alternative theory.
But it is YOUR job to establish causation - a causal link between the "damage" you refer to and the masterbation. It is your claim, so the onus of proof is on you. You must provide evidence which cannot be explained in some other, less radical way by known science.
Foolishness. I have plenty to show for it. What you mean is I have not shown it to you.
Why not? How are you going to convince anybody of anything if you keep all your findings secret?
Look, why don't you just present your best evidence, and I'll take a look at it?
I have posted one picture, and 3 scientific studies. That is it. Yet the geniuses posting say that is enough to make a thoughtful conclusion.
Your picture does not establish the required causal link. There is no reason anybody should believed it was due to masterbation, other than your say-so. Right?
As for the scientific studies, people here have said they don't relate to your claim. In fact, they seem to be about completely different things. Again, it is up to you to establish a plausible link - something you haven't begun to do yet.
How many of you that are giving me grief are actually employed as scientist, or have scientific training?
Well, I have. And so does snakelord. For a start.
Is this the first time you've presented your ideas to actual scientists?
If you, or any other genius here, would take the time to look into Indian Ayurvedic medicine, you would find they council against excessive sexual activity.
Ok. Next we need to establish
why they counsel against excessive sexual activity. Why don't you tell us, Happeh? You say you're the expert. And please provide references, so we can check that what you are saying is true.
After we've done that, we can start to look at whether this Ayurvedic medicine is scientifically sound, or based on something like superstition. Ok?
Anyway, the first step is to see whether Ayurvedic medicine says anything like what you're saying.
Can you run a TIG welder? If not, does that mean TIG welding is a figment of my imagination? Does it mean that what I tell you about TIG welding is all lies? Or does it mean that it is YOU that is ignorant about TIG welding? You would know nothing about TIG welding unless I or someone else trained you.
In a very short time, I could contact 100 people qualified to explain TIG welding to me, if I wanted to. I could watch a demonstration. I could probably get videos verifying its existence.
But with your claims about masterbation, I don't have a single name of somebody who agrees with you. You show pictures which don't show any link to masterbation at all, as far as I can see. And the articles you've referenced are like me looking up a gardening book to learn about welding.
If I say the sky is blue because every morning the blue paint fairy comes out from behind a cloud and paints it when nobody is looking, will you believe me?
I might. Depends on how convincing you are.
Well, Happeh. I have news for you: that's not how science works. In science, it isn't a matter of how convincing somebody is, in terms of their ability to present themselves or argue a case. Scientific discoveries must be independently verifiable, otherwise they are worthless.
You are playing a game. I am not. If you want to call me a liar, what can I do? All I can say is trust me.
I'm not calling you a liar. Maybe you are just seeing something which doesn't really exist. Maybe you're ignoring important facts, and attributing everything to your "theory".
Either way, I'm not going to trust you, because science doesn't rely on trust in that way. I want independent evidence. And so does snakelord.
I don't understand your suspicions. What do you think I gain by doing this?
A personal ego boost. If you're right, then you are a great discoverer. You might even become famous.
I think you're doing this because you get a personal kick out of it. You think you're smarter than everybody else, because you can see what they obviously can't.
So prove me wrong. Show me the evidence.
This isn't a science forums. It is a psychology forums. Every single person talking to me has proferred their amateur psychological opinion to me.
Actually, at least one person has probably offered a professional opinion. We're not all amateur psychologists here, Happeh.
Do you know if I was as calculating and evil as the people responsible for your programming, I could make you dance to my tune instead? Those people have filled your head full of lies and attitudes designed to destroy society.
I was never taught anything about masterbation, Happeh. I have an open mind about it.
I must say, you sound a little paranoid. There's no grand conspiracy to suppress your ideas. In fact, we're trying to get you to express them in a more coherent way. That will help both you and us.
I don't believe anyone but myself.
That is an attitude which won't get you very far in life. You should try to be more open to alternative ideas. Sometimes, other people actually know more than you about some things.
Yes it is. Science is about correlation. You should know that. Masturbation is sex. Sex is sex. Viagra is for lots of sex. Viagra plus lots of sex = blindness. Therefore, there is a correlation between sex and blindness. The first sentence says Masturbation = Sex. So we can say that it is reasonable to conclude that Masturbation could be related to science.
...I should charge you guys money for showing you how to think like a scientist.
What you are saying is this:
1. Masterbation is sex.
2. Viagra is used to increase sexual activity.
3. Viagra can be shown to cause blindness.
4. Therefore, masterbation (sex) causes blindness.
Can you see the flaw in this argument? Here's a similar argument:
1. Eating cookies is a form of eating.
2. Compound X is a drug which increases appetite and leads to more eating.
3. Compound X can be shown to cause all your hair to fall out.
4. Therefore, eating causes all your hair to fall out.
Is this really the best you can do in your "thinking like a scientist"?
In case you missed it, the missing link is in showing that masterbation causes blindness, rather than showing that the drug Viagra causes blindness.
A
correlation between taking Viagra and masterbating more and going blind does not solve the
causation question of what causes blindness - the Viagra or the masterbation.
So, we're back to square one. Do you have any evidence that masterbation
causes blindness? Or only correlations of the Viagra kind?
Seriously James. You are not suited for science. Your mind does not work in a deductive way.
The university which employs me obviously thinks otherwise. But then, they are all "programmed", I guess. All part of the Happeh conspiracy.
Go get a job as a janitor, or something harmless where someone gives you explicit instructions on what to do and think.
No thanks. I quite enjoy "programming" young minds in the false ways of science.
