My ex-wife was a crystal yakkey-takkey specialist. She had a crystal almost every know ailment or situation. We had crystals under our bed. Was supposed to bring harmony into our lives. Every plug point or electrical appliance had a crystal attached to it or near it. This cancelled out the negative energies produced by them.

I even had a special crystal I was supposed to,carry in my pocket to,protect me from harm. It wore a hole in my pocket, that's all.

It's a heap of fuckwittery but there are so many people out there who believe in the magical properties these magic crystals bring.

And, it's big business.

I'm still trying to decide which is worse, homeoquackery, crystalfraudery or the running shoe industry.

Sendraks wrote:I thought amazonite was the stuff that allowed me to buy goods cheaply online and have them delivered the next day. Or is it simply the power source?

Amazon's one true weakness is a rare substance found in the most spiritual places of Earth that haven't seen the light of day for many aeons; if you try sending Amazonite by Amazon, the internet breaks.

Do not tempt me. This experiment would only cost £1.50 + p&p.

Sendraks wrote:

Rhubis wrote:I would like to return this Satyaloka Azeztulite as i've had it for over a week now and i'm not enlightened at all! And this Seraphinite has not allowed me to contact the angelic realms! Is this just a faulty batch of crystals?

I'd love to see the advice from trading standards on that.

Are Trading Standards really equipped to deal with philosophical paradoxes?

If someone was dumb enough to buy some enlightenment crystals, but realised a week later they were a fucking rip-off, wouldn't that be proof that they actually worked?

tolman wrote:

Sendraks wrote:

Rhubis wrote:I would like to return this Satyaloka Azeztulite as i've had it for over a week now and i'm not enlightened at all! And this Seraphinite has not allowed me to contact the angelic realms! Is this just a faulty batch of crystals?

I'd love to see the advice from trading standards on that.

Are Trading Standards really equipped to deal with philosophical paradoxes?

If someone was dumb enough to buy some enlightenment crystals, but realised a week later they were a fucking rip-off, wouldn't that be proof that they actually worked?

Depends upon how the advert is worded. If it makes subjective claims you can say what you like but if it makes an objective claim then that must be supportable by evidence.

byofrcs wrote:Depends upon how the advert is worded. If it makes subjective claims you can say what you like but if it makes an objective claim then that must be supportable by evidence.

Antibacterial Soaps have no objective evidence to support their claims.