nyuuzyou/wikis huggingface dataset:
Drowning Christian story

The Drowning Christian story is a lighthearted fictional anecdote that encourages Christians to try to help themselves and use common sense instead of relying on God to fix their problems for them. Christians and atheists alike enjoy the story. Other names that the story goes by are "Parable of the Flood", "I Sent You a Rowboat",I Sent You a Rowboat Stories for Preaching. and "The Drowning Man".The Drowning Man Truth Book.
==Versions==
This version is told by Troy DuFrene.Two Boats and a Helicopter: Thoughts on Stress Management
Other versions mostly follow the same plot, with minor detail changes, such as the man being religious instead of a preacher,Truth Book: The Drowning Man him clinging to his house instead of a church,Stories for Preaching: I Sent You a Rowboat or hanging from a branch off a cliff. Also, different things (cars, canoes, etc.) might be sent to his rescue.Epistle: God Will Save Me It even shows up in a movie, The Pursuit of Happyness.Quotes: The Pursuit of Happyness
==Discussion==
Arguably, this story stands against the Bible story of Peter walking on water (), in which Peter leaves the safety of the ship to join Jesus walking on the water, but then briefly loses faith and falls into the sea (but still survives when Jesus reaches out and lifts him up). In contrast to Peter, the preacher in the Drowning Christian kept his faith without wavering, yet he still drowned.
The story is a contrast to how Jesus responds when tempted by the tempter/Devil/Satan in and (and, presumably, whatever happened in ), where Jesus essentially points out that God says, "Don't be an idiot."
This story provides an excellent counterpoint to denialists like antivaxxers who say that they should rely on faith instead of modern medicine to protect them (how do they know God didn't send vaccines?). The COVID-19 pandemic led to a version of the story in which the person dies of COVID, having refused to get vaccinated or wear a mask.
In Islam, there is a similar instruction given by Prophet Muhammad, “Tie your camel first, and then put your trust in God.” (Hadith relayed by scholar Al-Tirmidhi)
Atheists may use this story to point out the uselessness of faith. "We're capable of overcoming just about any tough situation — it requires perseverance and loved ones. God is nowhere in the equation," comments a guest writer at Friendly Atheist.The Miracle Isn’t Going to Happen If You Just Sit There
==See also==
* Atheist professor myth — a less rational story
* Snake handling — another real-life example of the consequences of faith short-circuiting self-preservation
==References==
Category:Religion
Category:Christianity
Category:Denialism
Drug abuse

Drug abuse refers to the systematic use of drugs for pleasure (rather than medical) reasons. 
==Disorder==
To be classified as as a disorder, it has to have most of the following characteristics:
#It results in physical, mental, and/or emotional harm to the abuser and/or the people in the abuser's life
#The user requires increasing dosages to achieve the same kind of "high" 
#Such a significant portion of the abuser's time is dedicated to thinking, using, and acquiring drugs that their life becomes impacted.
==Users not addicted==
A "chipper" (when it's not a machine for shredding Christmas trees is a person who uses many different drugs while avoiding addiction to any specific one. Chippers may, for example, smoke pot on a daily basis, but use "harder" drugs less often enough that they don't become addicts.http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/chippers Chippers may be at risk of becoming addicts.
==Drugs subject to abuse==
Virtually every drug can be abused, though some are much more harmful than others, and some are relatively harmless but extremely addictive. Alcohol, amphetamines, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, caffeine, nicotine, and opiates are by far the most widely used drugs.
The most popular recreational drugs are alcohol, caffeine, tobacco, marijuana, heroin, cocaine, Ecstasy (MDMA), methamphetamine, and crack cocaine. 
The Health Officers Council of British Columbia released a study in 2005 entitled A Public Health Approach To Drug Control in Canada, which studied the effects of drugs on Canucks. Well, it is assumed everybody knows that all the French-loving arctic hippies do is smoke weed and act "commie".
==The war on drugs==
One argument proposes that the War on Drugs (? to present) has increased rates of drug abuse, paralleling events during the 1920-1933 alcohol prohibition era in the United States. Since usage is pushed into back alleys, there are no checks on usage or on purity, and no restriction of sales. And since the demand for the product is not magically eradicated by legislation against it, people will continue buying and using it behind the government's back.
Warring on drugs also becomes extremely expensive to maintain, with costs accruing from the cops policing the drugs, the court system, and the jails to hold people for a crime that ultimately harms no one but themselves — assuming it even harms them. The cost per-day to keep someone in jail averages at USD $94.82https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/30/2018-09062/annual-determination-of-average-cost-of-incarceration#:~:text=The%20fee%20to%20cover%20the,per%20day)%20in%20FY%202017. — money that could probably be better spent in education and (or just letting users live with a habit and not forcing people to degrade themselves because American society still considers the concept of sin-and-punishment reasonable and valid).
But it looks good for politicians and makes private prison systems lots of profit, so there isn't much of a hurry to end the war on drugs.
==References==
Category:Drugs
Category:Culture
Due diligence

Due diligence is a business and legal term used to describe the process of researching an investment or other business opportunity through independent sources in order to avoid making bad investments, bad business decisions, or even falling victim to fraud. Although a term of art in the business world, due diligence is a good idea for just about anyone in any field where acceptance of the unfamiliar is required. Establishments that rely on an individual's faith or trust, from politics to religion to pseudoscience, generally don't encourage due diligence from their "faithful", as it can lead to rather uncomfortable questions. Due diligence tends to lead to a more detailed understanding of the weaknesses and strengths of any position.
Generally speaking, due diligence involves researching the risks you may be exposed to, learning enough about the investment area to understand and research the risks and, if necessary, hiring professionals to help analyse the situation. Classic examples would be hiring a professional inspector to check a house you are considering buying, hiring a lawyer to check a contract you are considering signing, or recommending that an independent mechanic you trust checks a (used) car you are interested in.
Due diligence is often more honoured in breach than in observance, leading to much wringing of hands, gnashing of teeth, and raiding of pension funds.
The Latin phrase "caveat emptor", which means "let the buyer beware", is often used in purchasing decisions. 
==See also==
*Bullshit
*Do your own research — due diligence, conspiracy style
*Logical fallacy
Category:Business
Category:Evaluating arguments
Category:Informal fallacies
Category:Law
Dulce base

Dulce base is a supposedly super secret underground base near the town of Dulce, New Mexico where aliens hang out and conspire to subjugate the human race. 
== Alien plot ==
According to the folks at reptoids.com (who believe that aliens are intelligent reptilians evolved from dinosaurs) Dulce is only one of the many underground lairs the evil race of lizard people use to orchestrate evil genetic experiments on humans.http://www.reptoids.com/Vault/ArticleClassics/dulceTEChistory.htm reptoids.com It's not like we didn't try to fight back. Supposedly a huge underground gun battle took place at Dulce between aliens and the US military. But the aliens managed to win because they had advanced ray guns. What's worse is that the reptoids are in cahoots with the grey aliens who naturally are committed to their own secret plots against the human race. We know this because secret interviews with supposed former base employees just before they died have now been published on Internet web pages.http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/branton/esp_dulcebook11.htm bibliotecapleyades.net...the ultimate Spanish batshit repository
The Dulce base story was apparently invented by Paul Bennewitz, an Albuquerque, New Mexico electronics buff who became convinced that evil aliens were secretly manipulating humans using electromagnetic mind control waves. Bennewitz monitored radio communications from nearby Sandia National Laboratories on his scanner and interpreted what he heard as aliens in the process of landing their spacecraft.http://www.paraview.com/bishop/ paraview.com As details of the plot were "revealed" to him - such as humans controlled by alien implants, government disinformation campaigns, connections to cattle mutilations, a broken treaty between the US and the aliens, and so much more - Bennewitz became increasingly unstable and eventually went completely mad.Barna William Donovan, Conspiracy Films: A Tour of Dark Places in the American ConsciousMichael Barkun, A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America Wouldn't you?
==See also==
*Roswell 
*Alien abduction
*Mark Richards
==References==
Category:Conspiracy theories
Dunbar's Number

Dunbar's Number is a theoretical limit on the number of close social contacts an individual human can have. It is based on data from other primate groups where there is a strong correlation between group size and the size of the brain's neocortex. Thus, extrapolating from the human cranium would put Dunbar's Number somewhere between 100 and 200. 
This has huge import in the modern day of "web 2.0", where we all seem to interact with thousands of relative strangers on a daily basis. The number of these people we actually know anything about, or could relate to, might be constrained to this range.
==Dunbar's predictions for previous stages of hominid evolution==
Using estimates for the brain size of early humans, and extrapolating from this relationship, Dunbar, along with Leslie Aiello predicted the cognitive group size for earlier stages of hominid evolution. While the original numbers are more specific and go into decimal points, they are rounded off by Steven Mithen as follows:Mithen, S. Prehistory of the Mind, 132Mithen, S. Prehistory of the Mind, 107
*Homo erectus - 111
*Archaic Homo sapiens - 131
*Homo neanderthalensis - 144
*Australopithecus spp. - 67
*Homo habilis - 82
By comparison, chimpanzees have a mean cognitive group size of 60.
==The Monkeysphere==
The monkeysphere is a term coined by David Wong, editor of Cracked. The idea is based on Dunbar's Number with the premise that people tend to dehumanize those outside of their particular "Monkeysphere":
The argument goes on to make three recommendations as to how this knowledge can be incorporated into a more enlightened worldview: T.R.Y.
==Criticism==
Since the complexity of each individual personality makes each relationship more complex in itself, it can be argued that increased intelligence/brain complexity does not increase the number of possible relationships. Furthermore, there is no clear difference in group size between apes and human hunter-gatherersHunter-gatherer groups tend to be between 15 and 40 individuals (although the quality of each relationship of course differs significantly). Studies of computer networks have given much higher numbers.Often exceeding 200 and sometimes close to 300 In addition, that animals tend to have a particular group size does not necessarily mean that they are cognitively unable to have a larger size, and statistical analysis requires a several further assumptions.
==See also==
* Other
==External links==
* (on the adverse effects of excessive social density)
==References==
Category:Psychology
Category:Sociology
Duncan MacDougall

Duncan MacDougall (1866-1920) was a medical doctor in Haverhill, Massachusetts, who in 1907 attempted to prove the existence of the human soul in a scientific manner. His reasoning was that the soul has a certain physical weight, which would leave a person at the moment of death (or up to a minute later, if the person had had a "sluggish temperament"), causing them to become lighter.
MacDougall tested his theory on a grand total of six people and fifteen dogs, laying them on a large precision scale-cum-bed in his office that he had built himself and waiting for them to kick the bucket. In recounting the experiments, he stated that his human subjects lost three-quarters of an ounce at death, or about 21 grams, but the dogs did not lose any weight.
Nobody has been able to reproduce the results of his experiment, which suffered from the classic problems with anecdotal evidence: the sample size was far too small, some confounding factors were not taken into account (body temperature, for example), and the results were wildly inconsistent (with one case having to be excluded due to "interference by people opposed to our work").
==External links==
* snopes.com on Duncan MacDougall
*Does the Soul Weigh 21 Grams? Massimo Pigliucci
Category:Pseudoscience promoters
Dvorak Simplified Keyboard

The Dvorak Simplified Keyboard is a keyboard layout designed for the use of English speakers, created by Dr. August Dvorak in 1932. The goals of the layout included reducing fatigue and increasing typing accuracy and speed. Although the ubiquitous QWERTY layout is used by the great majority of typists, the Dvorak layout is the second most popular layout for English-speaking typists.
Dvorak users often promote the layout as a way of improving typing speed and reducing the risk of repetitive strain injury from typing. This is due to various features designed to reduce the amount of movement necessary to type a given word. Dvorak skeptics consider such claims a form of woo. If so, it may at least be a relatively innocuous form, as switching between Dvorak and QWERTY layouts is quick and easy on most computer operating systems, no longer requiring special hardware. The main inconveniences of using Dvorak are the time invested in becoming proficient with that layout, and the potential for confusion when a QWERTY typist and a Dvorak typist use the same computer.
== Is it superior? ==
The issue of whether Dvorak is really better than QWERTY is difficult to settle, in part because the largest and most well-known studies on the matter are contradictory, fairly old, and considered biased (generally by whichever side doesn't agree with a given study). August's original study with the Navy Department showed an increase in typing speed for Dvorak users, but the Navy's follow-up study failed to replicate that result. Large, well-controlled studies are difficult to perform, because the popularity of QWERTY predisposes most people to have more experience and more interest in that layout. Dvorak typistsSuch as this one. Or this one. may feel that switching to Dvorak has reduced typing fatigue, but non-anecdotal evidence is hard to come by.
Oddly enough, the Dvorak/QWERTY debate has developed a political aspect. QWERTY has sometimes been used as an example of how an inferior technology can become widely adopted, and thus, used as a counter-example to claims that the free market always results in the best product. Unsurprisingly, this provoked a reaction from a few libertarians.Stan Liebowitz and Stephen E. Margolis. "Typing Errors." Reason. June 1996.
The choice of keyboard layout, at least between QWERTY and Dvorak (ignoring other possibilities like Colemak) is largely an endian dispute (which is chosen doesn't matter, but a choice must be made) and QWERTY holds on because the effort involved in switching to a layout hardly anyone uses is judged to be a greater inconvenience than the claimed failings of QWERTY.
==References==
Category:Technology
Dwight Schultz

William Dwight Schultz is an American actor and conservative political commentator. He is primarily known for his role as Howlin' Mad Murdock in the 80s TV series The A-Team, itself famous for firing a million-and-one bullets at people and never killing anyone. He also played the neurotic Lieutenant Reginald "Broccoli" Barclay on a few episodes of Star Trek.
Schultz made a name for himself as a Rush Limbaugh wannabe, hosting the conservative talk radio podcast Howling Mad Radio,Howling Mad Radio hosted by Dwight Schultz. Archived from Podcast Alley, 7 July 2013. writing on the blog Big Hollywood (Breitbart)Dwight Schultz. Archived from Big Hollywood, 2010. and acting as a substitute host for America's favorite talk-radio Republican Michael Savage. The Howling Mad Radio podcast ended in 2009.
Schultz is a big Donald Trump fan and is critical of both Republicans and Democrats who are against Trump. Schultz criticized John McCain for criticizing Trump, gone after Fox News host Chris Wallace for being upset after Trump called the news media an enemy of the American people, called Debbie Wasserman Schultz a liar for warning that Republican policies were dangerous for Israel, and called Barack Obama a "hard left socialist", among other disparaging declarations.Dwight Schultz notes. Archievd from "the official Dwight Schultz fansite," 2014.
==References==
Category:Actors
Category:Political pundits
Category:Radio
Category:Living people
Category:Denialists
Dynamiclear/correspondence

The following is a short piece of correspondence with Apothecaries Clinical Research, which is cited on the Dynamiclear page.
E-mail excerpt sent to Apothecaries Clinical Research:
I have several major concerns about this study. The first is even conducting a phase III trial when there is no published evidence of any phase I or phase II work having ever been conducted. This would seem to be a pretty gross violation of India' GCP standards.
My second major concern is over the size of the study, since when is a hundred odd participants a phase III study?
And lastly, failure to use any blinding or controls on the study seems to be a major oversite that calls into question the works as a whole.
Is there anyone that can respond to my concerns? Is this essentially a marketing tool that Dynamiclear paid you for, or is this the standard that you use when conducting all your phase III trials. Do you think if I were to send this to a major drug regulatory service in the US or Europe they would say it was a successful phase III trial and approve the drug or would they have concerns as well?
Excerpt of reply from Apothecaries Clinical Research:
1.The clinical trial was conducted as per a protocol that received approval from Indian regulatory authorities as well from concerned ethics committees and to the best of our knowledge and belief – there was no violation of any applicable law or GCP guidelines.
2.A Phase III (or any phase study) does not necessarily happen with a pre-ordained number of patients. The sample size is calculated based on the objectives of the study. This study was conducted as a proof-of-concept study and number of patients were accordingly determined by the Sponsor.
3.Many proof of concept studies are conducted without any comparators or controls. In several cases - no comparator products may be available. Scientific attitude is founded on inquisitiveness and questioning: that is the grain of science. The study being referred by you has been conducted as per the protocol and results have been objectively reported. It is for the reviewer of study report to decide if the protocol and data are sufficient and usable for the purpose for which user is reviewing the data. Likewise, it is for regulators to decide if they are satisfied with the study protocol (including study design and number of patients) before they decide to register a product. Likewise, it may not be considered necessary to conduct a Phase I and Phase II study for well known substances: you would not need a Phase I study to explore a new indication for Acetyl Salicylic Acid. Regulatory pharmacology does tend to be fuzzy at most times: else – we will not need regulators as software would suffice to apply straight-forward regulatory logics.
4.As an independent CRO providing services to various global blue-chip pharma companies based in US and Japan – we are retained to conduct clinical trials that comply with the protocol and all applicable regulations and guidelines. We’ve no stakes in outcomes of the studies. I can assure you that it was same for this clinical trial too.
== See also ==
*Lenski affair
Dynastic gymnastics

Dynastic gymnastics, often called baby yoga, is a quack alternative medicine for babies. It involves swinging babies around, sometimes quite violently. Babies can be as young as just a few days old.
The practice is fairly popular in Russia but is also practiced in other countries,Someone who does this in the UKhttp://www.birthlight.com/page/baby-yoga although the Russian variant seems to be the most extreme. Broader general awareness of the practice originated via a truly hair-raising YouTube video (seriously, try to watch it without wincing in disbelieving horror at least once) in which the arguable guru of the practice, Lena Fokina, whirls a baby around in the air like a pair of nunchaku, coming within a hair's breadth of dropping it several times.
The purported claims are that it makes infants "more open" (whatever that may mean), more sociable, and more relaxed; Baby gymnastics: Russia's 'potentially dangerous' therapy another practitioner claims that babies who undergo this therapy "are early readers, singers, talkers, swimmers".http://www.cbsnews.com/news/baby-yoga-video-is-real-and-real-scary-but-safe-video/ These claims are unproven, and no research has been performed on this practice. Not only is it too crazy to take seriously, but research would also be unethical due to the likely dangers and lack of informed consent. Consider being picked up and swung around in all directions. Would this make you happy? Relaxed? More sociable? Improve your reading skills? Or would it make you dizzy, sick, and fairly annoyed at the person who was doing the swinging?
== Dangers ==
Unlike some other quack nonsense, this particular breed has some very clear and direct dangers:
* Death, we repeat, DEATH from shaken baby syndrome. SBS isn't necessarily fatal; the lucky babies end up blind or with a motor and/or cognitive impairment.
* Serious trauma (and again, possible DEATH) from hitting something (furniture, floor, etc). Consider doing this 20 hours a week for a living; do you think it's possible that at some point you slip up, no matter how careful you are? There is a very low margin for error here.
* Dislocated joints. Unlike adults, a young child's elbow can become quite easily dislocated (this is called a 
==See also==
*Snopes page
*Yoga
*Paida lajin, the Chinese style of "therapeutic" baby abuse
==References==
Category:Alternative medicine
Category:New Age
Category:Manipulative therapy