@DawnOz100 Which thinker?
-
-
Replying to @calestous
@calestous You as a thinker.....it didn't seem to fit with your other frameworks.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DawnOz100
@DawnOz100 You're confusing sharing information on Twitter with supporting the contents. You can disagree with the source1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @calestous
@calestous If you don't critique something like Ayurvedic, it sounds like you are in favour of it. Ayurvedic is more than pulverising.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DawnOz100
@DawnOz100 Homeopathy has been shown to junk science through scientific review not just critique. The same will be with the claim1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @calestous
@calestous I guess I meant that if you don't contextualise your sentence, then it can be assumed that you find no fault - just clarifying.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DawnOz100
@DawnOz100 To move from assumption to judgement is a big leap. Nanotech is testing traditional medicine worldwide. Evidence will tell1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @calestous
@calestous You are more generous than I am. I prefer to stay with science and not give in credence to frameworks which are untestable.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DawnOz100
@DawnOz100 These claims are testable using nanotech methods. And they are being tested. That is the whole point.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @calestous
@calestous The herb is, not their framework which divides people. It's based on nonsense.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@DawnOz100 You are free to judge. It is your right. Thanks for chatting on this topic.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.