rationalskepticism.org

generalsemanticist wrote:

Shrunk wrote:
We all know, of course, that the plural of "anecdote" is not data, right?

No, we all don't know this, this is your stupid saying that you like to repeat ad nauseum.

So you believe anecdotal evidence is sufficient to scientifically demonstrate something. Glad that's cleared up. I look forward to your introducing us to the Loch Ness monster.

(BTW, I don't believe I've ever quoted this before here. Are you mistaking me for someone else?)

Shrunk wrote:
Which, I'm sure, he just gives away without any profit to himself.

I guess its hard for you to believe that some people are actually interested in helping others without making tons of money from it.

Like Andrew Weil or Deepak Chopra, for instance?

BTW, would you care to answer any of the other questions in my post?