(New Book) Cancer Cured: Victory Over The War On Cancer

[Westside PUFAs]

Do you still support the Flat Earth theory as you proposed in this thread you made; The Earth is Flat; Intellectuals Weep

Did you apply the same critical thinking to this book that you used to determine the validity of the flat earth theory?

Didn't know it was the same person.

 

[Elysium]

Congratulations! Will be THE book I recommend to all my friends with cancer. Beautiful dedication to your Mom.

You do that. Be sure to mention the book is a from a guy who perpetuates the flat earth conspiracy.

 

[Elysium]

Awesome and a big thank you! Courageous move on your part! Hopefully, this book hits more shelves than the poisonous propaganda of ACS.

Don't forget NASA !

 

[lollipop]

You do that. Be sure to mention the book is a from a guy who perpetuates the flat earth conspiracy.

Agreed. That particular theory is concerning.

 

[haidut]

Don't forget NASA !

What do you mean by that?

 

[Such_Saturation]

Do you still support the Flat Earth theory as you proposed in this thread you made; The Earth is Flat; Intellectuals Weep

 

[AretnaP]

You do that. Be sure to mention the book is a from a guy who perpetuates the flat earth conspiracy.

This is one of the biggest flaws with human beings, talking about the source of a theory rather than the validity of the theory itself.

Albert Einstein married his cousin! His first one at that! I guess all of his contributions to science are invalid. Only a stupid person married their first cousin.

 

[NathanK]

Anybody have a review to impart yet?

 

[Such_Saturation]

This is one of the biggest flaws with human beings, talking about the source of a theory rather than the validity of the theory itself.

Albert Einstein married his cousin! His first one at that! I guess all of his contributions to science are invalid. Only a stupid person married their first cousin.

What if relativity were about genetics? Wouldn't you have a bit of a problem with it then?

 

[AretnaP]

What if relativity were about genetics? Wouldn't you have a bit of a problem with it then?

No.
talking about validity of theory >>>>>>>>> talking about source of theory

 

[meatbag]

No.
talking about validity of theory >>>>>>>>> talking about source of theory

You have it backwards. The source is being questioned because the theory has already been invalidated.

 

[Travis]

This is one of the biggest flaws with human beings, talking about the source of a theory rather than the validity of the theory itself.

He makes a good point. Many people just accept "fashionable" theories.

I think we all here know that not all mainstream textbook theories are true. Accepting only "popular truths" only will leave one with quite a bit of erroneous information, such as: "saturated fat causes heart disease", "serotonin is the 'happy' neurotransmitter", and "Muslims did 9/11"*.

*But opinion polls show that the media and schools have only been able to convince about 80% of the world's population of this particular lie.

 

[yerrag]

He makes a good point. Many people just accept "fashionable" theories.

I think we all here know that not all mainstream textbook theories are true. Accepting only "popular truths" only will leave one with quite a bit of erroneous information, such as: "saturated fat causes heart disease", "serotonin is the 'happy' neurotransmitter", and "Muslims did 9/11"*.

*But opinion polls show that the media and schools have only been able to convince about 80% of the world's population of this particular lie.

We also have to consider that it's not only on the subject of the shape of the earth that we can disagree on. If we focus on what we don't agree on and make it the basis for each and every person's credibility, then we would really be lost. I didn't know that the author is a flatearther, but I don't really care as much. Neither about his religion and different other persusaions. He writes about cancer and its cure. I'll lend my ear. He may speak to a lot already of what I've learned in this forum, but making the effort to distill it to put it together in a book sure helps me. As well as those who know someone with cancer who could benefit from this book. Thank you Mark!

 

[meatbag]

He makes a good point. Many people just accept "fashionable" theories.

I think we all here know that not all mainstream textbook theories are true. Accepting only "popular truths" only will leave one with quite a bit of erroneous information, such as: "saturated fat causes heart disease", "serotonin is the 'happy' neurotransmitter", and "Muslims did 9/11"*.

*But opinion polls show that the media and schools have only been able to convince about 80% of the world's population of this particular lie.

That's why you have to look at the evidence for yourself. Just because an alternative is presented doesn't mean you should accept it. You know what flatearth is about and why it posted on this forum.

We also have to consider that it's not only on the subject of the shape of the earth that we can disagree on. If we focus on what we don't agree on and make it the basis for each and every person's credibility, then we would really be lost. I didn't know that the author is a flatearther, but I don't really care as much. Neither about his religion and different other persusaions. He writes about cancer and its cure. I'll lend my ear. He may speak to a lot already of what I've learned in this forum, but making the effort to distill it to put it together in a book sure helps me. As well as those who know someone with cancer who could benefit from this book. Thank you Mark!

Saying the earth is flat is equivalent to Ray Peat saying 2+2=5 or that humans are amphipians. It's a joke and it was posted here to make the forum and the people on it look like a joke.

This is one of the biggest flaws with human beings, talking about the source of a theory rather than the validity of the theory itself.

Albert Einstein married his cousin! His first one at that! I guess all of his contributions to science are invalid. Only a stupid person married their first cousin.

I understand what your saying but the nature of the earth and the cause and treatment of cancer both fall under the realm of science and require a basic understanding of math, physics and reasoning. Marriages like that were not so uncommon in the context of Einstein's life. I pointed out OP's post about flatearth because that theory tries to undermine the legitimacy of alternative scientific proposals discussed on this forum such as the AIH, koch's work, etc.

 

[yerrag]

Saying the earth is flat is equivalent to Ray Peat saying 2+2=5 or that humans are amphipians. It's a joke and it was posted here to make the forum and the people on it look like a joke.

Whether it was meant as a joke and to make the forum look bad is beside the point. That people here do question establishment propaganda is a good quality of this forum, and sometimes you may have people thinking out loud something that we may already consider off the table for discussion. But if this forum challenges us in this way, then it is doing a good job of it.

If Mark distills well and adds to the thoughts shared by Ray Peat and the forum, and is able to present it such that someone interested doesn't have to wade through all the disconnected pieces of this forum and that of Ray Peat's books, interviews, and articles, it would certainly make it easier for a person suffering cancer to consider a treatment for cancer along the ideas in this forum. Many people in cancer mode are being bombarded from friends and doctors and the internet and Mercola and Axe and whatnot, they get confused and end up just trotting off to the chemo doctor. If the book helps take this element away from a cancer victim, it would be a great benefit. Saying the author is a flatearther doesn't help. Saying Kyrie Irving is a terrible basketball player because he is a flatearther also makes no sense.

 

[meatbag]

Whether it was meant as a joke and to make the forum look bad is beside the point. That people here do question establishment propaganda is a good quality of this forum, and sometimes you may have people thinking out loud something that we may already consider off the table for discussion. But if this forum challenges us in this way, then it is doing a good job of it.

If Mark distills well and adds to the thoughts shared by Ray Peat and the forum, and is able to present it such that someone interested doesn't have to wade through all the disconnected pieces of this forum and that of Ray Peat's books, interviews, and articles, it would certainly make it easier for a person suffering cancer to consider a treatment for cancer along the ideas in this forum. Many people in cancer mode are being bombarded from friends and doctors and the internet and Mercola and Axe and whatnot, they get confused and end up just trotting off to the chemo doctor. If the book helps take this element away from a cancer victim, it would be a great benefit. Saying the author is a flatearther doesn't help. Saying Kyrie Irving is a terrible basketball player because he is a flatearther also makes no sense.

But it literally IS propaganda. That's why I asked the OP to address why he's promoting a theory made to stupify, divide, and confuse in one post

You're right, the Kyrie Irving argument wouldn't make sense because none of the skills involved in being a good basketball player are involved in determining the nature of the Earth. Do you see the difference? I wouldn't expect a cashier to be a good astronaut, but I would expect a chef to be able to fry an egg. If a chef said, with all seriousness, the best way to fry an egg was to throw it in the ocean, claimed that everyone who fried eggs in a pan was a mind controlled dummy, and then wrote book about cooking omelets wouldn't you be worried?

And I totally agree with your comment about information, that's why its so important to make sure people aren't spamming the forum with literal BS

 

[burtlancast]

David Icke, and to a lesser extent Alex Jones made a living out of decredibilizing people by association with ridiculous theories.

These people know what they're doing, and they're doing it for a reason.

OP's flat earth theory's right there with Fomenko's communist-backed new earth chronology.
Obviously a scam and an attention diverger.

 

[meatbag]

David Icke, and to a lesser extent Alex Jones made a living out of decredibilizing people by association with ridiculous theories.

These people know what they're doing, and they're doing it for a reason.

Couldn't agree more and that's why I asked OP to address the issue.

 

[Elysium]

What do you mean by that?

The author also fights the poisonous round Earth propaganda of NASA.

 

[meatbag]

.