Not all evidence is equivalent. One birther theory is that Obama was born in Kenya, and a copy of a Kenyan birth certificate has been produced. This piece of evidence is not as strong as the Hawaiian birth certificate. For example, it says “Republic of Kenya” on it, a country that did not exist at the time (Kenya was a british colony until 1963). It’s not possible for me to check all these facts myself, but I have a fair degree of trust in the mainstream press. There is nothing blind about this trust. The press is not a single monolithic entity with a single agenda, it is a large number of competing organisations, from the full range of the political spectrum. They are to a large degree self-policing, at least where reportage of the basic facts are concerned (editorials are a whole other matter). “Journalist lies” is a huge story itself, and competing news organisations are motivated to check facts for themselves. When a journalist claims something, they are putting their reputation and career on the line. I do expect journalists to carry out this kind of cross-checking. It can be a messy process, but often the truth will bubble up to the surface. There are actual reasons to have more trust in the press than some random guy on the internet.
Since experimental conditions often end up with better results than control conditions, how is it that experimenters have so frequently (and inadvertently) prevented love from acting upon one group and not the other?
If, as you argue, they’ve failed to account for it, then there would never be any differences between experimental and control conditions. Yet there are. Constantly.
Modern medicine and pharmaceuticals work little different then medicine men of the past being lead to certain plants and like for healing. There is the healing Love of God in those plants combined with the healing Love of God in the heart of the medicine men.
Today we have the healing Love of God for those modern medicine chemicals and processes and from the heart of some who work at the pharmaceutical plant - these people are medicine men (and women), just working in a modern setting.
People heal because God wants them to and provided a method. It usually comes in the form of stuff in creation delivered and/or provided by someone who really cares (has a heart for) the sick.
So most of the time you will find a difference in double blind studies between someone giving a sugar pill lets say made by workers who don’t care about the condition and the chemical pill produced by someone who really cares and wants to see people get better.
Like in everything it is the heart that matters, and double blind studies don’t measure this though there is a different level of healing love getting to one group then the other.
Ok, I see your point here, but that is not what I am saying. I am not saying take my word for it, I’m saying try it yourself and find out, and here is my experience.
I was very much like others on this board, thinking things like homeopathy can not work as there is no active ingredient that we can detect. Scientifically it could not make sense.
A false premise starts, that of if science can not prove it it can’t heal and I dismissed it and discredited the people who use it. This based on a logically incorrect conclusion that many have formed (homeopathy can not heal), the correct conclusion is that science is unable to prove the healing qualities.
What I did is start to seek out for myself (yes I believe with divine guidance), and not take science’s word for it. If it works for me what do I care if science doesn’t know how it could work.
So the love in the manufacturing process, rather than in the application to the individual is the healing ingredient?
And you’re suggesting that pharmaceutical manufacturers are full of love, whereas manufacturers of inert substances are not full of love?
What about circumstances where the comparison condition isn’t a sugar pill, but is a treatment as usual condition, or the comparison between one active substance and another? In the latter condition, you have two loving pharmaceutical manufacturers laboring with love, yet one condition often leads to better healing than another.
How is that possible, given equal levels of love in the manufacturing?
What about when it isn’t the administration of a substance, but an empirical test of one technique versus another? What about the comparison of a psychological treatment strategy versus another?
It seems that in your OP you are calling for empiricism, but you seem to be abandoning it now. Which shall it be? Woo or empiricism?
Try pine sap.
There are many plants in nature that can be used for all sorts of remedies.
On Edit here are some more:
Science doesn’t speak. Science has no words. People do.
Apparently, the power of love is so weak that it can be undone by simple scientific blinding methods.
Oooh, I forgot about this in my post above. Do trees produce things with different levels of love? So, if a natural substance does not effect healing, what is the explanation? Shouldn’t natural substances be infused with god’s love?
Yet they typically fail to heal! How can this be?
And why should we take your word and try it? 
Not everyone will have your experiences with homeopathy. Why should yours be given priority? In a broader sense, we cannot try everything in the world. We need information to make decisions. That’s why something like science, which offers a consistent methodology in approaching things, is useful. Your approach is that we can’t or shouldn’t make conclusions on a large scale, which creates two problems: we need to take someone’s word for things, and we can’t prioritize whose word we take.
This is wrong.
“And you should take my word for it that it works.”
The mainstream press is where you place your trust in, it is who you have faith in, which is fine and you make a perfectly sound defense as to why you feel you can trust them.
I have faith and put my trust in God, and from what I have seen there is nothing blind about that either.
Other people place their trust in other things and will come to different conclusions.
Have you every met someone who has a real heart for their work, something they love to do. And they seem to do it a little better then anyone else. Not something measurable, but you would rather go to this guy’s shop for a item then any other’s even if the other shops are cheaper. The difference is Love.
In this example it is more likely for the manufacturer to have workers who care about a particular condition that they are trying to cure then to get that same motivation from workers making a sugar pill. Yes the sugar pill manufacturers may care about condition X, but more likely that people who care about condition X will be the ones working specifically to cure condition X as opposed to making a generic sugar pill. Also makers of the sugar pill will find obsticalls like not including plant extracts that may be the route of healing.
God wants to heal a condition certain way. Though both companies have loving worker medicine men, God chooses who He wills the cure comes through.
The caring of any people along the way are possible routes to healing. All you need is one heart that cares for the condition, perhaps even a parent of a child with such a condition who helped come up with the test, and God can use that heart. God can use anyone with such a heart.
Open minds or at least be aware when you call someone closed minded because they chose to find out for themselves instead of taking others word for it
But this is one of the central tenets of woo-advocacy. Everyone is different, what works for one may not work for another, science is corrupt and cannot be trusted in any of its conclusions*, and you just need to keep trying things until you find something that works for you, until it doesn’t and you go find something else. One alt med website termed this being “a human guinea pig”, a most attractive thought.
I have known and read the writings of numerous physicians and scientists who put their faith in God, but on a working basis rely on the tools that they feel God has given them, including the scientific method. The idea that God would tell people to use homeopathy or any other form of quackery is something they find false and repellent, if not actually blasphemous.
*unless you’re bleeding out from trauma or have ruptured diverticulitis, in which case the urgency of the moment permits you to trust in Evil We$tern Medicine.
If they do the job better, it doesn’t matter if they love it. It might be more enjoyable to talk to someone who lives his job or visit that person’s store, but it doesn’t magically make the product better.
Uh oh! You’ve undone your own “manufacturer with love” argument.
Because if anyone along the process can interject love, then the researchers (who are very invested in healing the conditions that they have devoted their lives to studying) will be involved at the point of delivery to the patient-subjects. So, healing love should be present for everyone regardless of the uncaring placebo makers. This is especially true if the researchers are blind to which group is which. Their love is a confound.
Yet we still reliably see differences, and they now cannot be attributed to manufacturers.
What now?
The two are not the same, the trust I have in the press is not unqualified. I don’t have faith in the press. There is no news source I treat as authorative.
This is true** Marley23**, not everyone will. But to try it is not taking my word that it will work, it’s taking my suggestion to find out for yourself, be open minded to other ideas based very ancient ones that humanity has been successfully using for ages as well as modern one. One poster commented as to why they had to use a modern antiseptic for a wound to prevent infection. This shows the disconnect between people and their environment, since there is and always has been so many plants that can be used as antiseptics, yet we don’t consider them because they were not made in some factory with someone stamping a seal of approval on it.
I’m not saying not to use science. But people who trust in science to the exclusion and discreditiment of other practices make the exact same error that religious folk who refuse medical treatment because they believe God will heal them directly.
Science is just one of many method God uses, and by excluding other methods you exclude paths of healing.
To me is it as equally distasteful and borderline abusive when care is withheld from a child who is in obvious need of it on the grounds that they need to be cured only by science or only by religious prayer. Though I realize they (both groups) are doing what they feel is right so there is no blame to place.
My approach is think for yourself, try things for yourself, find out what works, and when they don’t keep searching.
But earlier you said:
These two statements are 100% contradictory.
In other words, everyone would be cured if God wills it. Is that right? It is not dependent on what you take or don’t take, it is simply a matter of what God wants? If so, how do you explain the steady progression in medicine of being able to cure people today than in the past? Does God love us more now?
The trust I place in God is not unqualified. If you have no faith in the press you would not be using them to qualify your Obama statements.
Your last statement does not follow and is a bit of a dishonest bait and switch. You are stating there is no (single) news source you treat as authorative. That is all well and good but has nothing to do with you placing your trust and faith in the press as a whole.
To make a comparison I have faith in God, you have faith in the press. I don’t take any single message as if I understood it, you don’t take any single news source as authoritative. I seek out answers from God using multiple ways and draw my own conclusion, it sounds like you do the same with the various news sources. In the long term everything, even my misunderstandings are worked out, and for you even errors of the press will be exposed by the way the press works.
We will have to agree to disagree for now on this. IMHO yes the product is magically better. 
You are forgetting about healing through creation. Certain chemicals that God may want to use combined with love coming through certain people.