Looking at 2 out of 8 links provided is the definition of cherry picking. Nowhere did I say that you have to ignore anything. What I gave you is a broad example of many different studies. You zeroed in on two examples, ignored the rest, and then started making wild claims about the quality of research. If you had any genuine interest in the subject, you would’ve actually gone through all the links provided and then examined the available evidence before making further comments. But obviously you just wanted to confirm your existing biases and that’s what you proceeded to do.
My guy, they’re your evidence. If I start reading through your own evidence, get a quarter of the way through, and have seen nothing of substance yet, how much more of my time am I supposed to spend curating your evidence for you? Maybe you should have curated your own list down to things that genuinely support your claims instead of getting mad at someone who points out you brought poor quality evidence?
If there’s nothing wrong with it, then why did you get mad at them for cherry picking it? If you actually brought quality evidence, it should be impossible to cherry pick. The simple fact that you even leveled the accusation is in itself an admission that you brought poor quality evidence.
Also, how are you almost immediately pulling upvotes in a three month old thread? I know I’m responding late, but I saw the notification pretty quick and just didn’t have time to respond at the moment, and you already had it. That kinda looks like vote manipulation with extra accounts.
Cherry picking means taking things out of context to misrepresent the state of the facts. I gave a broad overview of many different studies, large and small, which all show the same thing. Let mew know what part of that you’re struggling to understand here.
Also, it’s hilarious that you think I’m secretly upvoting myself here or something like I give a shit about picking up votes on some old thread.
there are plenty of peer reviewed studies showing that acupuncture is effective, here are just a few examples:
Then someone actually checks your evidence and finds they’re admitting to using low quality studies/evidence. That’s entirely in context. You just don’t like being called out for it.
Looking at 2 out of 8 links provided is the definition of cherry picking. Nowhere did I say that you have to ignore anything. What I gave you is a broad example of many different studies. You zeroed in on two examples, ignored the rest, and then started making wild claims about the quality of research. If you had any genuine interest in the subject, you would’ve actually gone through all the links provided and then examined the available evidence before making further comments. But obviously you just wanted to confirm your existing biases and that’s what you proceeded to do.
My guy, they’re your evidence. If I start reading through your own evidence, get a quarter of the way through, and have seen nothing of substance yet, how much more of my time am I supposed to spend curating your evidence for you? Maybe you should have curated your own list down to things that genuinely support your claims instead of getting mad at someone who points out you brought poor quality evidence?
You used a lot of words to say that you have poor reading comprehension.
Fucking hilarious coming from a guy who doesn’t realize the list of evidence he brought is crap.
Nah, there’s nothing wrong with the list of evidence I brought. But feel free to continue the clown act, it’s adorable.
If there’s nothing wrong with it, then why did you get mad at them for cherry picking it? If you actually brought quality evidence, it should be impossible to cherry pick. The simple fact that you even leveled the accusation is in itself an admission that you brought poor quality evidence.
Also, how are you almost immediately pulling upvotes in a three month old thread? I know I’m responding late, but I saw the notification pretty quick and just didn’t have time to respond at the moment, and you already had it. That kinda looks like vote manipulation with extra accounts.
Cherry picking means taking things out of context to misrepresent the state of the facts. I gave a broad overview of many different studies, large and small, which all show the same thing. Let mew know what part of that you’re struggling to understand here.
Also, it’s hilarious that you think I’m secretly upvoting myself here or something like I give a shit about picking up votes on some old thread.
The context that you provided was
Then someone actually checks your evidence and finds they’re admitting to using low quality studies/evidence. That’s entirely in context. You just don’t like being called out for it.
Whatever helps you sleep at night I guess.