Thursday, November 24, 2022

Bait & Switch Scams on Facebook

 The feeds on many public groups (seems to be a lot of buy&sell groups like "Windsor Buy and sell car's, truck's, van's, suv's") are filled with scams. Some are fake lost persons, dogs, children etc. What these scammers do is get people to share these fake posts because of an emotional appeal and then later on will often switch the pic to another scam promoting a fake house rental (for example) with a link that will ask for information and possible banking information. https://fullfact.org/online/silver-alerts-missing-pensioners-false/?fbclid=IwAR1Wz3R7VKCqCt4TbuR7WIl82mmO9L-jXmuTTKT-MVXsOxdG1VwYB8-VBR0

These scammers are also showing fake catalytic thief photos (well they are real, just from years ago), too good to be true jobs, fake company promotions for coupons from McDonalds, Coca-Cola etc, to get you to share for the same reasons I stated above.

Be mindful of sharing things from profiles that are fake and have little to no posts and no info about them (click on them to check before sharing) These scammers will often turn off commenting to avoid people like me spending my time warning other people, contacting them to make sure they are not scammed.

Here's another example https://news.trendmicro.com/2022/11/17/tyler-griffin-missing-boy-scam-facebook/?fbclid=IwAR0fCzikQFlFFgTEDBmtikiNc9ratgw4uIMNp51o_FtUTxjBC6MFj15Q1C8


Attached to this post is a common photos being used right now












Sunday, March 6, 2022

Light Love Photons

 Recently I've seen this floating around on social media...


OOOOK?!.

So it says a "scientifically controlled study".    Well let's look at that shall we?  Here is a link to the "study"  https://journals.sfu.ca/seemj/index.php/seemj/article/viewFile/56/44

One of the first things that is apparent is this involves only one participant.  That is hardly anything credible or noteworthy.   This is clearly not scientific by any definition.

After a day of erratic reading, the meditator and the experimenter went to the experimenter's house for dinner and possibly (it's not clear from the test) slept over.   So there is a pretty big potential bias here.  Again, this is clearly not scientific.

An odd thing that makes no sense to me is that it says on the first day the meditator was nude "to eliminate florescence from fabrics and to prevent static electric discharges."   But there were black blankets in the dark room to keep the meditator wrapped up in and warm.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't blankets made of fabric?  lol.    I think that eliminates the "study" as scientifically controlled.

On the second day, the "study" says that he had a watch on (so not nude) that had a florescent dial.  They claim it was covered during the experiment, but there was no need for him to have it on.  Again, it eliminates the study as scientifically controlled.

In conclusion, this study is absolutely hogwash and laughable.