[wyldterv]

Originally Posted by Fallon

So those space men come before or after the re-birthing to abduct the horse? Gotta know when I'm supposed to look for them.

(I gotta head in now lol. Have a great night! Thanks for the laugh.)

After... I think....

BonnieM... VERY excellent Post... In the end, the people that whine and gritch and itch over the fact that, OMG, people SELLLLLLL their SERVICES (uh ALL Pro trainers sell their services, just not all get a book written or a DVD made or asked to do a TV or Radio show ) are really just truly jealous that they had not thought of it first themselves

Making Training animals your full time lively hood means you give up a LOT of personsonal time... it's NOT an 8am-5pm kind of job, MORE like a 5am-midnight kind of job, 7 days a week, 365 days a week.

[MaggieSue]

and what makes an opinion different to a fact is that a 'fact' has evidence to back it up. an opinion is just an unproven theory! a fact is a proven one

Proven by who? Scientists who agree on something? Many things are 'proven', but many 'tests' are flawed. For instance, they talk about how certain things can be bad for you, but who do they test them on? Monkeys, rats, etc...they don't test on humans-so how can they know? Back in the 60's and 70's cholesterol was the 'big thing' then. It was studied so much, that people were afraid to eat anything with cholesterol in it because it was 'bad' for you. Eggs had cholesterol, butter, etc. But then there was 'new research' done and they found that there is actually 'good' cholesterol! So, who was right? And in 'studies' for diets, the FDAs food 'program' has people eating more carbs and less protein, while other 'scientific studies' show the exact opposite to be true!! Dr. ATkins found that if you eliminate 'carbs' from your diet, you will actually loose more weight and you will be much healthier. So...which 'scientific study' is right? The Scientists in the 1400's thought the world was flat...now we know better. When I was in school there were 9 planets, now there's more?!?! Now, I'm not saying they don't have their place, but don't tell me that they are the 'Gospel' 'End of Conversation'. What I'm saying is that 'scientific fact' changes everyday.

[wyldterv]

Originally Posted by MaggieSue

. What I'm saying is that ' MAGGIE SUE fact' changes everyday.

As in it is ONLY FACT if MS deems it so with no peer reviews to back up those facts mind you

[LGGL]

When I was in school there were 9 planets, now there's more?!?!

Actually less... they elliminated Pluto. Now are you talking about other solar systems, we always knew there would be more as our knowledge grew and our ability to see farther in space.

Proven by who? Scientists who agree on something? Many things are 'proven', but many 'tests' are flawed.

Just because something is proven within the confines of the known fact as we know it doesn't make it theory or wrong. At that moment in time it is a fact. We are constanstly evolving and changing so todays facts may change because the surroundings may change. As well as new knowledge allows us to look at things in a different perspective.

Now lets bring this back to the horse world. Is what you post on here fact or opinion? Is what you practice on and with horses based on fact,opinion or theory? Not an easy answer. Because there a variables. Each horse is different , while having lots in common. So is each individual human that associates with the horse.

So MS the work you do, the equine massage, theory, proven, opinion? So why would anyone want to use your service, based on your premise that tests are flawed? Because as many people that you could produce to say proven, there are probably just as many that would say it's a waiste of money.

[Friesiangirl]

Actually the atkins diet isn't all that good for you. It can raise hormones in your brain and make you mean, as well as putting stress on your digestive tract. Thought i'd jump in...

[JBandRio]

Originally Posted by MaggieSue

Proven by who? Scientists who agree on something?

It's too bad MS won't see this, but here goes
Things get "proven" by repeatedly coming up with the same results doing the same test, and then seeing if modifying the test, according to the theory, will produce an expected result. Things are also disproven this way

Many things are 'proven', but many 'tests' are flawed. For instance, they talk about how certain things can be bad for you, but who do they test them on? Monkeys, rats, etc...they don't test on humans-so how can they know?

The DON'T test on humans? OMG, how do you think drugs get approved by the FDA - HUMAN TRIALS! Do you know how many drugs haven't been approved because the human trials failed?

Back in the 60's and 70's cholesterol was the 'big thing' then. It was studied so much, that people were afraid to eat anything with cholesterol in it because it was 'bad' for you. Eggs had cholesterol, butter, etc. But then there was 'new research' done and they found that there is actually 'good' cholesterol! So, who was right?

LMAO, you just went against what you have said before about new questions never being asked. Studies get redone because NEW QUESTIONS get asked.

And in 'studies' for diets, the FDAs food 'program' has people eating more carbs and less protein, while other 'scientific studies' show the exact opposite to be true!! Dr. ATkins found that if you eliminate 'carbs' from your diet, you will actually loose more weight and you will be much healthier. So...which 'scientific study' is right?

Food intake is such a broad topic that it is entirely possible nobody will EVER know "the best way" to eat. It has been PROVEN though that the Atkins diet, long-term, is detrimental to your health. High protein diets are detrimental long-term. High fat diets are detrimental long-term. I think this likely means that everything in moderation is just fine.

The Scientists in the 1400's thought the world was flat...now we know better.

But according to you, this could change, because the test could have been flawed.

When I was in school there were 9 planets, now there's more?!?! Now, I'm not saying they don't have their place, but don't tell me that they are the 'Gospel' 'End of Conversation'. What I'm saying is that 'scientific fact' changes everyday.

The number of planets changed because scientists decided that the definition of a planet needed to be revised based on new things they have discovered over the years (yep, that's right, they asked new questions!!!).

Your point in all this is.... what again? Oh wait, you can't see me. Drats, I'd REALLY love to play with you on this subject

[BonnieM]

Originally Posted by MaggieSue

Proven by who? Scientists who agree on something? Many things are 'proven', but many 'tests' are flawed. For instance, they talk about how certain things can be bad for you, but who do they test them on? Monkeys, rats, etc...they don't test on humans-so how can they know? Back in the 60's and 70's cholesterol was the 'big thing' then. It was studied so much, that people were afraid to eat anything with cholesterol in it because it was 'bad' for you. Eggs had cholesterol, butter, etc. But then there was 'new research' done and they found that there is actually 'good' cholesterol! So, who was right? And in 'studies' for diets, the FDAs food 'program' has people eating more carbs and less protein, while other 'scientific studies' show the exact opposite to be true!! Dr. ATkins found that if you eliminate 'carbs' from your diet, you will actually loose more weight and you will be much healthier. So...which 'scientific study' is right? The Scientists in the 1400's thought the world was flat...now we know better. When I was in school there were 9 planets, now there's more?!?! Now, I'm not saying they don't have their place, but don't tell me that they are the 'Gospel' 'End of Conversation'. What I'm saying is that 'scientific fact' changes everyday.

Oh Maggie Sue, you can have all that... you win. You can think all that all you want...it all has little to do with the issue here.

The thing is that you lay out your opinions and defend them as fact, when IN FACT, you know so little about so called "Natural Horsemanship" that it is silly for you to be so vehement.

ALSO, I went to your website, and the trainers you think very highly of and have linked to, profess to practice Natural Horsemanship, right on their website, and explain their process nicely.

So which is it? Apparently you LIKE and RESPECT their training methods.

I am confused.

BonnieM

[MaggieSue]

If anyone would bother to ACTUALLY read my posts-I don't say anything bad about NH!! I have said MANY MANY TIMES that MOST of the training methods are good. What I have a problem with is how THEY portray ALL other methods as evil and cruel!! If you don't profess to be an NHer, then you are a mean, cruel trainer.
If everyone would actually read what I write, this would be much simpler for everyone.
That is why I put them on my website-because they are good people and good trainers, I don't care HOW they do it.

The thing is that you lay out your opinions and defend them as fact, when IN FACT, you know so little about so called "Natural Horsemanship" that it is silly for you to be so vehement.

I know alot more than you think-because it looks to me like you don't think much.

I am confused.

I can tell, why don't you actually read what I write, that would help.

[ches]

Ooh ooh I got the 1000th post!

[LGGL]

If anyone would bother to ACTUALLY read my posts

All of us have and for most of us, we keep asking what is your point?

What I have a problem with is how THEY portray ALL other methods as evil and cruel!! If you don't profess to be an NHer, then you are a mean, cruel trainer.

Aren't you doing what you clam they do to you. You are just one generalization after another.

That is why I put them on my website-because they are good people and good trainers, I don't care HOW they do it.

That is really big of you to associate with trainers that use Natural Horsemanship. And as far as "I don't care HOW they do it" ? What has been your point in all this?