So what are the above pictures? Are they real? Faked? What?
This bottom one is the same type of thing Morgellons sufferers find.
So what are the above pictures? Are they real? Faked? What?
This bottom one is the same type of thing Morgellons sufferers find.
I think if you start picking stuff off your skin and putting it under a microscope you may find all kinds of things. You don't know what it is an you make up a little story that spreads. Look at the "chemtrails" are they real? Fake? Well they're real contrails, but the story about what they are is made up.
If I had that/them on/imbedded in me, (which apparently thousands of people have), I would be extremely concerned. 'Scientific' assurances that it was 'fluffnstuff' is condescending and an outright lie, (if they are examining what is in the pictures and the pictures are not fake).
If you found them on you, what would you conclude?
If you found them on you, what would you conclude?
I can't assume the pictures are not fake, there are too many questions.
Fibers with serial numbers on them? Someone on FB recently posted a CLOUD that they said had "2 letters and a number". Sure enough, if you blew up the photo, it looked like it had a couple of letters and a number on it. You believe THAT?! Bugs that grow a leg after I yank it off? I'd google "skin parasites". I can assure you the last thing I would think if ...
If I had that/them on/imbedded in me, (which apparently thousands of people have), I would be extremely concerned. 'Scientific' assurances that it was 'fluffnstuff' is condescending and an outright lie, (if they are examining what is in the pictures and the pictures are not fake).
If you found them on you, what would you conclude?
Exactly. And when it comes to claims such as that the crystal "grew legs", it appears more likely to me that some fibers got stuck to the object after she pulled it off of herself. Keeping in mind that the observer in question claims that if you put a fly with some fibers in a container and leave them in the freezer, you will eventually end up with two flies, I think that the methodological rigor can be called into question here.The pictures are not fake, but they do just seem to show stuff you find in dust, and hence on the skin. When people have neurotic excoriations of compulsive skin picking, then thing like that get trapped in the serum and scabs.
http://www.aafp.org/afp/2001/1215/p1981.html
The pictures are not fake, but they do just seem to show stuff you find in dust, and hence on the skin. When people have neurotic excoriations of compulsive skin picking, then thing like that get trapped in the serum and scabs.
http://www.aafp.org/afp/2001/1215/p1981.html
[*=left]Acne and Rosacea
[*=left]Autoimmune Skin Diseases: Discoid Lupus, Scleroderma, Dermatomyositis
[*=left]Blistering Skin Diseases: Epidermolysis Bullosa, Pemphigus, and Pemphigoid
[*=left]Dermatitis: Allergic Contact Dermatitis, Irritant Dermatitis
[*=left]Eczema and Atopic Dermatitis
[*=left]Fungal Infections, Dermatophytosis, Tinea Corporis, Tinea Pedis,
[*=left]Hair Diseases: Alopecia, Male and Female Pattern Hair loss
[*=left]Hyperhidrosis (excessive sweating)
[*=left]Melasma and Skin Hyperpigmentation
[*=left]Nail Diseases
[*=left]Occupational Dermatoses (work-related skin diseases)
[*=left]Pigmented Lesions and Moles (Nevi)
[*=left]Psoriasis
[*=left]Skin Allergy
[*=left]Skin Cancer
[*=left]Skin Rash
[*=left]Vitiligo and other depigmentation disorders
If they are not fake, it must be growing 'legs' because you can clearly see that is not 'just some fibre caught on it'.
I find the apparent zeal to attribute these type of problems to some form of 'neurosis', as amazing.
I can't assume the pictures are not fake, there are too many questions. Fibers with serial numbers on them? Someone on FB recently posted a CLOUD that they said had "2 letters and a number". Sure enough, if you blew up the photo, it looked like it had a couple of letters and a number on it. You believe THAT?! Bugs that grow a leg after I yank it off? I'd google "skin parasites". I can assure you the last thing I would think if I found anything anywhere is some convoluted explanation such as "it's a nano bot that the government developed in a secret lab, built special spray planes, and hired pilots (or programmed to have robots fly) to spray it over my town in order to make my body a giant radio receiver in order to mind control me through a secret facility in Alaska that everyone knows about but only a select few know it's real use" or "it's a life form that the government developed in a secret lab, built special spray planes, and hired pilots (or programmed to have robots fly) to spray it over my town in order to infect me with a disease."
How can you clearly see that? You see a photo of something that looks similar "on her skin", then you see a photo of something a week later. How do you know what happened in between?
I "little nanonbots" are growing legs, then it would be pretty easy to document. These two photos are not documentation, they are a claim without evidence. It looks like a sebum plug and some clothing fibers (dark cotton). Like this:
Source: https://picasaweb.google.com/morgellonswatch/NotMorgellons?fgl=true&pli=1
There's a wide range of people who think they have Morgellons. Sadly a few of them "work" at their skin for several hours a day with a needle, tweezers or worse. But there's no single explanation to cover everyone with Morgellons, and it's a mistake many debunkers make, coming up with "maybe it's ...."
Ok, you think they are fake... fair enough, there are plenty of fake pictures around. It is disturbing that so many people would go to the trouble of faking them tho.
Yes but disregarding the 'last thing you would think', what would be the first thing that you thought... if you did find them in/on you? And what if it went on and on?
So funny an example of the logic, it's worth more than just a 'thanks'.
Bravo.
im not really sure why my assertion that [...] was flagged as offensive. i mean i do... but its seriously [...]
The goal of metabunk.org is honest debunking. Exposing and removing falsehoods. It has been my experience that being perceived as polite is very helpful when debunking. If someone feels that you are not being polite, or that you have in any way denigrated or belittled them, then they will start complaining about that instead of addressing your points, and will be far less likely to listen to you with an open mind. It also greatly effects the perception of more neutral readers, who respond similarly to the person being insulted.
So, please:
- Do not insult people either directly or indirectly
- Do not call them names, such as "stupid", "ignorant", "uneducated", or "liar"
- Do not describe their theory as "stupid", "moronic", "idiotic", "deluded", etc
- Do not suggest they get an education, or take some classes
- Do not criticize their spelling or grammar
- Do not respond to the tone of their post instead of the content
- Do not mock people, or make jokes at their expense
- Do not suggest they are mentally ill, or that they need help
- Do not suggest anyone who believes in [any particular theory] is mentally ill.
The above applies regardless of if it is true or not. If someone perceives something as rude, then it is impolite.
Instead, please:
- Show them where they are wrong
- Try to help them understand their misconceptions. Politely.
- Stick to the facts
- Ignore any insults that they might use
- Focus on individual key points, not the general tone
The above policy will be enforced. I will delete or edit posts that do not conform to it, and I will ban people who repeatedly violate it (initially for 24 hours, then for longer periods).
It will not be applied evenhandedly. Since censoring the bunk believers is often viewed as impolite and is hence counterproductive, then they will be given more leeway. Debunkers generally have far thicker skins. The bunk believers' insults do not help their case, and so it's not so important to remove them. I will still remove more extreme insults that would derail the conversation.
Threats of any kind will not be tolerated, and will likely lead to a ban.
Remember, this is not about politeness per se. It's about debunking. We are being polite so that the debunking is more effective, not to conform to some code of manners, and not to avoid hurting their feelings. The only goal here is honest debunking. Politeness just helps a lot.
I greatly appreciate your help with this. I know this is not for everyone, but there are many places on the internet where you can interact with bunk believers with no such restrictions. The politeness policy is the basis for the nature of Metabunk.org, and for this to remain the unique little debunking site it has become, the politeness policy needs to be observed.
Thank you,
Mick West
this detritus is being touted as peer reviewed proof....
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257881/
Those things that I isolate from my body using a mixture of coconut oil and olive oil with a few drops of juniperus oxycedrus and Trachyspermum ammi.
I just discovered this site today, and then I heard about chemtrails for the first time and then Morgellons, also for the first time. This is fascinating stuff. You couldn't make something like this-- wait... you can make stuff like this up. Anyway, from my limited perspective, I'm guessing this is the place chemtrails met Morgellons. Am I right or am I right, or am I right?
To believe so wholeheartedly in the honesty and intentions of governments, as you do,