He doesn’t get atheism either

Posted on October 13, 2010 by Michael

It’s annoying enough when Christopher Maloney wades in over his head and pretends to know something about medicine beyond what a pre-med student might know. But it’s even more annoying when he goes after atheists. (And, I mean, does he really want to go down that road, what with yet offering a viable defense for his quackery?)

I’m constantly amazed that the spokespeople for religious points of view aren’t better at getting their points across. The atheists are the one group who could have picked their spokespeople logically and by open election, but they let the most grumpy of their brethren carry the flag. Here’s a comparison of Dawkins vs. Gervais. If Gervais were the spokesperson for atheism, there would be a lot more converts. He makes his point, and you can’t help liking him for it. Dawkins makes a clever (rehearsed- he gives the same mocking answer to others as well) response without engaging the speaker.

Here’s Richard Dawkins not answering a question. Or answering it, if answering with the same question is an answer.

He then links to this video of Dawkins where an audience member asks what happens if he’s wrong about the Christian god. Dawkins replies by asking the audience member what if she’s wrong about all the other gods. To Maloney, this isn’t answering the question.

Is Dawkins’ point really that hard to get? He’s saying that the only reason that question seems reasonable to the audience member is that she has been brought up in a Christian culture. His question about what it means if she’s wrong about Zeus or Thor or whoever is to show that it doesn’t matter about what god we want to ask the question. It’s a trivial issue that assumes a lot of culture with it. So what if he’s wrong about the Christian god? Then he goes to hell, to the glee of a so-called benevolent creator. And if the audience member is wrong about Allah, she can kiss heaven goodbye. Who cares? The whole question is just a rudimentary way of posing Pascal’s Wager, that piece of philosophical trash.

Oh, and I love how Maloney links back to religion and atheism, as if we need his help in defining the terms. (Well, maybe he needs some help in defining “atheism”.) And linking to the IMDb page for Dawkins? Gold. I love when the elderly use the Internet.

Filed under: Atheism/Humanism | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

I can’t believe Maloney is still lying

Posted on October 13, 2010 by Michael

I was searching for PZ Myers YouTube videos but moments ago when I came across this magnificent piece of garbage from Christopher Maloney.

Let’s start from the top:

Maloney did collaborate with Andreas Moritz. Maloney can keep claiming that PZ retracted this or that, but the fact of the matter is this is what PZ actually said:

However, at the very least, Maloney was used as a pretext to shut down the blog. WordPress sent Hawkins email demanding changes to his posts, specifically this one:

[Email from WordPress]

…Someone targeted Hawkins, and sent a demand to WordPress to shut him down. This is someone in communication with Maloney, because Maloney just sent me this email:

And he goes on to quote an email in which Maloney admits to being in contact with Moritz. There is no doubt that these two acted together to report me to WordPress; does anyone believe Maloney didn’t know what Moritz was doing? does anyone believe Maloney didn’t tell Moritz exactly what to send to WordPress? does anyone believe anything Maloney says?

Next Maloney claims my original letter about him has since been pulled from the Kennebec Journal, as if to suggest the paper saw how dastardly it was and just had to remove it! In fact, the KJ remodeled its website shortly after my letter was published – no letter from that period can be found. As evidence for my point, take a look at my response to a couple letters others wrote in response to what I wrote. Now try to follow the links to those letters back to the KJ’s website. (Let me know how that works out for you, Maloney.)

Maloney then goes on to claim he’s just a poor victim who is being harassed by the big mean mob. In fact, since destroying his web presence for getting my blog shut down with the help of Moritz, all the posts about him have been responses. I’ve often said he can’t make things better, he can only not make them worse. Apparently I was being too subtle: stop trying to promote your quackery and everyone will stop ‘harassing’ you. You, Maloney, make things worse by creating elaborate responses months after the fact – case-in-point, this YouTube video.

Next Maloney, for some bizarre reason, tries to say what atheists oppose: authoritarianism. It’s perplexing because atheism is not a philosophy, not an indicator of how to act (or how one will act), and it isn’t a normative position. Atheism is a position that says, for whatever reason, theism is not worth holding. Even then it is necessary to qualify that this only means it is not worth holding for that particular atheist. Many atheists are pro-theism and see it as a positive in the world; they just reject what they see as being positive as also being true. Of course, many atheists do happen to reject that theism is positive (mostly because arriving at atheism is generally for rational people and it’s only rational to see theism as a propagator of evil) but that does not mean that it is possible to know what positions an atheist holds by virtue of knowing he is an atheist. As usual, Maloney is out of his league.

After some rambling Maloney tries to bumble his way out of being called a quack by saying what he does doesn’t fit into the etymology of the word. Feel free to skip over that part of the video. He’s a quack because he practices a form of medicine for which there is no convincing evidence.

Weird that continued attempts to reestablish himself and promote his quackery have resulted in yet another blog post, huh?

Filed under: Pure bullshit | Tagged: , , , , | 4 Comments »

Letter to the editor: Vote Logan

Posted on October 8, 2010 by Michael

I’ve written in support of William Logan for House District 57 in Augusta, Maine in the past. I’ve now had a letter printed in the local paper.

William Logan is the right candidate to represent District 57, an area covering parts of Augusta west of the Kennebec, from Manchester to Sidney.

In a Sept. 28 Kennebec Journal article, Logan expressed his concern for the Maine Retirement System funding, offering an outline of his plan to tackle this looming crisis.

His opponent offered platitudes before admitting she had yet to do the research necessary to even hold a position, much less tell people how to fix the problem.

Logan also has some common-sense ideas that will utilize the immense power of science to decrease Maine’s energy costs while also improving the environment and creating jobs.

Logan is a candidate with deep knowledge, integrity with science, and he has quality plans for Augusta and the state as a whole. District 57 voters are lucky to have him on the ballot.

Vote for Logan.

I’m betting it was understood by those who I wanted to have an understanding of it, but I’ll clarify what I’ve put in bold here. When I say “integrity with science”, I mean it in a relative sense. Logan’s opponent is Christopher Maloney‘s wife. I think it’s more than safe to say she’s a supporter of woo. Thus, unless Logan is a woo-man himself, he has a level of integrity with science that neither Maloney can claim.

Filed under: Local, Politics and Social | Tagged: , , , , , | 3 Comments »

That’s how you do it

Posted on September 12, 2010 by Michael

Remember that scumbag Lawrence Stowe*?

Stowe charges exorbitant sums of money so he can insert IVs into people in some dank, run-down building in Mexico. One family sold their home to pay for Stowe’s bogus treatments. Others have paid tens of thousands of dollars of their savings with no results.

It’s hard to be a big fan of any sort of news that comes from TV these days, but there is still some worthwhile stuff that comes out of investigative reporting. Originating from “60 Minutes”, that information on Stowe should make everyone happy there are still good reporters out there.

In fact, I have to admit I’m a little jealous. I took part in the successful marring of the web presence of Andreas Moritz, another lying quack who steals from sick people. (I only say marred because while there are still hundreds of sites out there that expose him as the quack he is, he has unfortunately regained some footing, at least insofar as Google search** is concerned. However, the hits I get on my posts about him go through the same rough fluctuations as they did when I was number 2 in searches for his name. This isn’t so bad when considering 1) PZ’s post is going to obviously be more prominent and 2) typing “Andreas Moritz” into Google pops up several options, one of which is “quack”.) But this hardly compares with taking down a quack nationally as “60 Minutes” did.

And, of course, there’s our old friend Christopher Maloney. Google searches for his name bring up a lot of unrelated results, but “is a quack” remains a Google suggestion and a search of his name with “Maine” added brings up a whole slew of excellent and honest results. Regardless, this still isn’t much compared to the success of “60 Minutes”.

But these schmucks responded to criticism all wrong. They whined and moaned and tried to get an undergraduate’s blog shut down under the threat of a libel lawsuit and blah blah blah. They’re quacks and they sell snake oil in one form or another by virtue of their ‘professions’, so none of this was that surprising. But Lawrence Stowe is also a sleazy piece of trash; he causes real harm to the health of others, too. But what has his response been? Take a look.

Thank you for your interest in the Stowe Foundation. As a non-profit public charity our mission is to make available to the public an understanding of the human immune system through scientifically validated principles of Regenerative Medicine.

It isn’t until the second page of selling his snake oil that he even mentions “60 Minutes”. And when he does mention the show, he buries its relevance in a hog pile of pseudoscience and lies.

Stowe was clearly a bumbling buffoon when he was pinned down in front of the cameras. That’s what usually happens to snake oil salesman, and I suspect in front of a PZ Myers or Dr. Novella, bosom buddies Moritz and Maloney would suffer the same pathetic fate. But writing, especially on the Internet, is a different beast. Stowe doesn’t have to spend his time responding to every ounce of criticism flung his way; he knows he can’t. Just like the bosom buddies, he knows he’s utterly wrong in all the things he claims. Just as Moritz knows iridology offers no insight into other bodily ailments, and just as Maloney knows black elderberry absolutely does not “block” H1N1, Stowe knows he cannot cure ALS or any other disease. But unlike the bosom buddies, Stowe hasn’t deluded himself. He’s acutely aware that the falsity of his claims are not going to fool anyone. He knows he needs to dodge all criticism, not meet it head-on.

He’s a particularly dangerous snake oil salesman.

*I bring Stowe up again due to a sudden surge in hits. It appears “60 Minutes” updated their article on him (with what particular details, I’m not sure). It also appears that I’m number 2 in Google searches for his name. That would make me much happier if there were another 10,000 posts and articles about the scumbag immediately after FTSOS. (Or before. It isn’t about me; it’s about exposing quacks.)

**Another Google suggestion after searching for Moritz is “Wikipedia”. I took a look. Yes, Moritz has a Wikipedia page. And, gee, imagine that. Not a single disparaging word. Strange, huh? I wonder if that will change any time soon…

Filed under: Pure bullshit | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Richard Dawkins reads some hate mail

Posted on September 4, 2010 by Michael

Quacking Christopher Maloney has tried to say my paper that was largely about him was hate mail, but I feel he does the term a disservice. I don’t have a personal grudge against the guy and since hate mail is all about the personal (not to mention the, uh, whole mail thing), it was not hate mail he received. As I’ve told him before: Chris, I don’t hate you. I hate woo.

I mention the infamous quack because, though tiresome as he is, he helps to illuminate a point I wish to make. Hate mail is something significant. In order to get it, someone has to really get under someone else’s skin. There has to be a true, seething, crashing vitriol behind it if we’re to honestly call it hate mail. Provided there isn’t a bag-o-crazy behind the veil, I’m forced to view hate mail as a badge of honor. Sadly, I’ve never received any. I’ve been left to wallow in the intellectually and morally and legally bankrupt threats of libel lawsuits (and a surprising number of times, really), occasionally peppered with whining from Andreas Moritz supporters/cancer promoters. Perhaps I need to come out in favor of seal clubbing; something drastic is needed. Until then, I watch with envy this clip of Dawkins:

Filed under: Humor | Tagged: , , , | Leave a comment »

Americans aren’t using sunscreen

Posted on August 4, 2010 by Michael

…thereby raising their risk of cancer.

Despite the attention of the healthcare industry on the role of sunscreen in preventing skin cancer, about 40 percent of Americans never apply sunscreen at all before going out and only 9 percent wear it everyday, the poll of 1,004 people, showed.

One of the regions with the lowest use of sunscreen was the South, where 46 percent of people said they never using sunscreen at all during the summer. The age group with the lowest rate of sunscreen use was 18- to 29-year-olds at four percent.

Men were also much more likely not to use sunscreen before going outside with 48 percent saying they do not wear it at all.

The biggest factor in the lack of sunscreen use, I suspect, is laziness. It’s a pain to put on every time one goes outside. Then there’s the fact that people don’t want to smell like the stuff all day. And, as the article cites, income gaps contribute as well. Unfortunately, that isn’t where it ends. There are also quacks who say irresponsible things like this.

First of all: realize that sunscreen blocks all UV activity to the skin. Your skin provides countless functions not least of which is the absorption and manufacture of the steroid vitamin D. Any sunblock chemicals used in moisturizers, lip balm, and make-up should be eliminated if vitamin D levels are to be properly maintained.

The ineffectiveness of sunblock chemicals has been known for over a decade. Even though it is clear that the use of sunblock does effectively prevent sunburns, the prevention of skin cancers has not been found in the research. Furthermore, it is now clear that at least some of the chemicals in sunblock cause cancer changes in the skin.

This is Richard Maurer, naturopath. I don’t think I need to go much further in explaining his quackeriness. Unfortunately, this sort of vitamin D obsession is common with the alt med crowd. They take something good and go all after it. I suspect part of the reason has to do with the ease in which they can recommend it since they are limited in just what they can prescribe, but it’s also probably partially that many big drug companies don’t have vitamin D as a major focus. If those guys aren’t pushing it, well, it must work, right? Evidenced be damned. (For the record, I’ve never read where Christopher Maloney has excessively pushed vitamin D or recommended against basic skin protection; the problem is still common with the alt med crowd, but that doesn’t mean it is universal.)

Wear sun block.

Filed under: News | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Maloney makes it worse

Posted on July 27, 2010 by Michael

I’ve told Christopher Maloney (do I still need to provide background links on who he is at this point?) that he cannot make his destroyed web presence any better; he can only not make it worse. But as some readers may recall, he put an absurd amount of effort into creating a site about his ‘debate’ with Dr. Steven Novella. Since he failed to link back to Novella, I took the liberty of forwarding the link. The fortunate result is a new post where Novella demolishes Maloney.

Made clear by this exchange is the difference between the science-based approach and Maloney’s approach, which is typical of naturopaths. I look at all the evidence for plausibility, safety, and the reasonable potential for benefit. If I am convinced that I can offer my patients the probability of benefit in excess of harm, I will use a treatment (no matter how it is labeled) with proper informed consent. But I will then closely follow the evidence and will stop using a treatment if good clinical evidence is negative. Or I will start using a treatment when new evidence shows that it is safe and effective.

Maloney, on the other hand, appears to trade in wild speculation. In my opinion he has demonstrated sloppy, black and white thinking, an inability to understand the implications of published research, a bias against science-based medicine, and a willingness to prescribe treatments based upon the flimsiest of scientific justifications. He then accuses me of being “dismissive” and has the stones to declare victory in our exchange because I eventually tired of his evasiveness and crank tactics.

Further, Maloney, if anything, has demonstrated that the naturopathic/alternative approach has nothing to offer. The science is the science, and properly using scientific research as a basis for practice is the ideal of mainstream medicine. The optimal standard of this is what I have termed science-based medicine. Maloney, however, is laboring under the false dichotomy of “alternative” medicine. As evidence of how ultimately worthless this false category is, he pulls from the scientific literature to find alleged alternatives to science-based practice. He claims that supplements are alternative and “suspects” that I would ignore them because of this, when they have received research attention in accordance with the basic-science evidence without discriminating based upon their “supplement” status.

Lovely.

I like to think I recognize the limits of what I have to offer. For instance, one reader asked me a very specific (and very interesting) question about what method to use in a phylogeographic study. Instead of offering an answer which would be dubious at best, I simply fired off an email to one of the original researchers (and a former and hopefully future professor of mine) for the paper on which I based my post. He gave a succinct answer with a complete understanding. It would have been a display of hubris for me to take on the question alone.

But then I’m not a naturopath. I recognize the need for evidence or the awareness of evidence in order to start spouting off. Maloney, on the other hand, likes to throw out a bunch of Gish Gallop nonsense and then whine that no one is taking him seriously when they don’t spend hundreds of hours responding to his unevidenced garbage. Everyone just recognizes his complete lack of credibility since he has no evidence for any of his positions.

Of course, Maloney has already seen Dr. Novella’s post. (Frankly, I’m honestly impressed with his speed.)

I wonder if a certain unbalanced local well known to the police tipped you off about my poor little website?

Without revealing more than I should/can, the Augusta police don’t really take Maloney or his Official Police Complaint that I’m just a downright meanie very seriously.

If you encourage him enough, perhaps he will again play the midnight stalker and place hate mail on my neighbors’ porches. The encouragement of hate is a dangerous business, Dr. Novella. I suspect our mutual “friend” is trying to get the attention of his own father, a medical man like yourself. It’s called transference, and -tag- you’re it.

1) Maloney has also claimed that I intentionally went to his neighborhood to distribute my publication (“hate mail” as he calls it) at a time when I somehow magically knew he wasn’t home. So even though I knew he wouldn’t be home, I was still stalking him. Oh, and he has lied in the past about me leaving anything at his house. I specifically avoided his doorstep (and a house I couldn’t be sure wasn’t his) in order to honor his request that I do not directly contact him.

2) Given the fact my own father’s profession is not related to science in any way, I believe he means PZ when he references my father.

Dr. Novella pointed out (as did I) that Maloney did not link back to the blog post he quotes over and over. Maloney responded:

I cited your blog specifically, following all known copyright laws. I did not provide links because, my grandstanding fellow, you are very easy to find online. My own fame only arises from your attack upon me. You continue to libel me in the false headline that you and the unwashed rabble that follow you broadcast across the internet.

1) His fame arises from being in cahoots with Andreas Moritz to get my blog shut down for six days. PZ Myers, Richard Dawkins, Simon Singh, and half the Internet then helped restore my ability to promote science and fight quackery.

2) No one seems to understand what libel is, especially quacks. Perhaps Maloney should go talk to the British Chiropractic Association. They once had his same problem.

If you are sincere about your wishes to continue our discussion (which you have now suddenly done so after months of silence) I would be glad to do so, but I have no interest in playing for your motley crew of ignorant “science wanna-bes”.

1) This isn’t a discussion. It’s a beat down.

2) Maloney created his crappy summary site out of the blue. Shortly after I discovered it, I realized Dr. Novella would probably never see it if I didn’t send him the link. I sent it to him five days ago.

3) By continuing to address this six month old bitch slapping with all his new sites, Maloney is doing nothing but playing for everyone’s entertainment.

P.S. You are officially denied permission to reprint this letter on your hate blog. Feel free to link here, though.

Good thing he only denied Dr. Novella, right?

Oh, and quoting, citing, and addressing published work cannot somehow be denied, not “officially”, not magically, and not otherwise.

Filed under: Pure bullshit | Tagged: , , , , | 7 Comments »

Maloney: Responding to every ounce of criticism he has ever received

Posted on July 22, 2010 by Michael

Remember how I said it’s a terrible idea to respond to criticism too much? And how I said that based on, who else, Christopher Maloney? He didn’t get the memo.

The Novella Debates
Home | The first accusation and the response. | Second: Maloney apologies, Novella does not . | Third: The Challenge | Fourth: Alternative Treatments for Ear Infections | Fifth: Hypertension, No Proof of Placebo Effect. | Novella lets Enzo debate for him. | Maloney Claims Victory, Novella Denies. | Maloney Refutes “Busy,” Novella Calls Him a Crank | Maloney Argues That Novella Is Wasting Time | Enzo Defends Novella | Maloney Apologies, Answers Enzo | Novella Patronizes Maloney, Defends Quackbusting | Novella Taken to Task For Poor Reporting. | A Debate About What Constitutes Evidence | The Evidence Debate: Novella Disappears. | Novella Attacks Maloney Somewhere Else | Maloney Responds, Novella Claims Busy | Novella Discusses Libel | Maloney Provides Evidence, Readers Attack | Novella Takes the Second Challenge | An Alternative Treatment for ALS: Bacterial | Novella Ignores Evidence, Denies Validity | A Secondary Treatment for ALS: Supplementation | A Novella Reader Attacks | Maloney Responds With A Plea for Novella To Engage In Furthering Research | Maloney Declares Victory

Not sure what the hell all that is? It’s a series of links – 27 by my count – which Maloney has made about the ‘debate’ he had with Steven Novella. Despite the significant effort put forth in creating a site, dividing the topics, creating the links and summarizing all the posts, Maloney was unable to simply link to the original post.

This is fun. The guy takes criticism so poorly that he just can’t stop himself from responding to every little bit of it. Give it up. No one is going to suddenly take a look and say, “Oh, whoops. I guess we – and medical science – were wrong. Sorry.”

At least he has removed the link to ‘The Dirty Dozen’, effectively validating the previously leveled criticism for being so petty and arbitrary. It’s just too bad he only deleted it from one place – it still exists elsewhere.

Filed under: Pure bullshit | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Gosh, Chris

Posted on July 21, 2010 by Michael

It’s like Christopher Maloney wants me to blog about him. Why else would he say this?

Dear Michael Hawkins, Thank you for not leaving any more hate mail at my neighbors’ doors after dark. Please get help. A variety of Augusta counselors take Mainecare. I would remind you that you have never met me and you have never been a patient, so I am not bound by confidentiality restrictions concerning your situation. I wish you well, and I wish you healthy.

This is in response to a comment I left on a letter to the editor Maloney wrote. In the same comment section, he implied that he is a doctor. Given the false nature of that statement, I corrected him.

You are not a doctor. You are a naturopathic doctor. There is a significant difference.

The difference being that one is genuinely qualified to, well, do something. Take a stab which one I mean.

Of course it’s a bit of fun to see Maloney try and pretend like the reason I attack his ‘profession’ is that I have a “situation”, but it gets old when it has so long been known that if I have a “situation”, then so does half the Internet. Maybe he thinks being rational is a “situation”? I don’t know. But I give the guy credit. He can keep some things fresh.

Jarody, My wife and I are independent individuals and maintain separate professional lives. I am surprised that you would take the time to try to link my promotion of our local agricultural community to some sort of political agenda. Please clarify for any readers that you were planning on running against my wife but lost the local Republican primary. Are you currently voicing your own opinions or writing as part of a Republican committee? Just curious.

This is in response to the crazy ramblings of a crazy man who legally goes by a single, crazy name: Jarody. The guy ran for some locally elected position last year and lost big time. Because he’s crazy. I can’t imagine wasting much of my time responding to him. But then, I’m not Maloney; I’m not compelled to constantly hyper-respond with vitriol to every bit of criticism anyone throws my way. Honestly. Am I about to give an honest response to the “situation” comment, explaining the soundness of my mind? Would that really convince everyone of my position? Or might it just throw fuel on the fire because to respond to criticism too much is to fight a losing battle?

Filed under: Pure bullshit | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

The Table of Irrational Nonsense

Posted on July 17, 2010 by Michael

I can only wonder if element 68 wouldn’t be listed if FTSOS and Pharyngula and everyone else didn’t go after the nonsense of a certain quack.

Via Crispian Jago.

Filed under: Humor | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »