Monday, 10 December 2018

Chinese internet retail scam

I recently saw an advertisement pop up on Facebook offering the Cosmo Intelligent Robot.  Click on this link to see the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA_MaSWMC9Y

This is a scam by Everyonedays who have scammed many, many people by advertsing Cosmo Intelligent Robot, but sending the item in the following image.  This is a plastic doll that does nothing but say something in Chinese while its eyes flash.  That's it.  No intelligence, no movement, nothing.  Notice on the packaging that they've stated that the item in the package is only worth US$5.  I paid NZ$51.




The following are screenshots of the purchase and shipping confirmation.


The following are a few more screenshots related to this company and my purchase.



Here's a link to their website http://www.everyonedays.com/sale/index


The following is my correspondence between them and myself.  Read the email from the bottom up as each new email is added to the top.  I managed to get a full refund only by sheer perseverence by emailing them constantly over a six week period.  They pushed my patience hoping I would fold and either give up altogether, or just accept their 65% refund.


Mason Torrey
Dec 11, 14:54 CST
Thank you.  I appreciate you coming to a reasonable agreement.

Kind regards,

Mason


##- Please type your reply above this line -##
Your request (#1223) has been updated. To add additional comments, reply to this email or click the link below:

TAN (jiahong)
Dec 11, 09:52 CST
Dear Customer,
Thanks for your message.
We will give you a full refund in 7-15 business days. Please note that.
We are really really so sorry for the unhappy experience. Please kindly accept our sincerely apologize again.
Evelyn



Mason Torrey
Dec 10, 10:59 CST
As in have stated, I never received the product I ordered.  I made no mistake, you made the mistake.  You're responsible for fixing the mistake, not me.


TAN (jiahong)
Dec 10, 10:54 CST
Dear Customer,
We are so sorry that if you want a full refund,you must send it back to us,we will refund you after we receive it.

Best regards,
Evelyn

Mason Torrey
Dec 8, 16:28 CST
No, not 65%.  You owe me a 100% refund since I never received the product.



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------
Date: 8/12/18 3:25 PM (GMT+12:00)
To: Mason Torrey <torreynz@gmail.com>
Subject: [jiahong] Re: Fwd: Congratulations on your order


TAN (jiahong)
Dec 8, 10:25 CST
Dear Customer,
Thanks for your message.
We will give you a 65% refund in 7-15 business days.
Refund to the payment method of the product you purchased at the time.
Please note that.
We are really really so sorry for the unhappy experience. Please kindly accept our sincerely apologize again.
Evelyn

Mason Torrey
Dec 8, 06:17 CST
How do I get the refund?


TAN (jiahong)
Dec 3, 10:25 CST
Dear Customer,

How about accepting a compromise to keep the item and gain a 65% refund?Are you agree it?
Best regards,
Evelyn

Mason Torrey
Nov 30, 10:41 CST
Give me a refund. If you want the cheap piece of plastic back, you pay shipping.


TAN (jiahong)
Nov 30, 10:33 CST
Dear Customer,
We are so sorry that the goods you received can not meet your satisfaction.
If you send the item back to us, the shipping costs are expensive.
How about accepting a compromise to keep the item and gain a 65% refund?If you want a full refund,you must send it back to us,we will refund you after we receive it.
Best regards,
Evelyn

Mason Torrey
Nov 30, 03:20 CST
I didn't ask you to send a plastic doll.  If you want it back, you pay the shipping.  I paid for Cosmo Intelligent Robot and you never sent it.  Either you send it to me, or give me a full refund for the goods that I never received.


TAN (jiahong)
Nov 29, 10:33 CST
Dear Customer,
We are so sorry for that if you want a full refund,you must send it back to us,we will refund you after we receive it.
If you have any decision, please feel free to contact us, we are more than happy to serve.
Have a nice day!

Mason Torrey
Nov 28, 11:11 CST
Because you refuse to give me a full refund despite the fact that you scammed me, I'm taking this to the media so everyone is warned about your scam.  I'll provide the screenshots of what you promised to send me and also these emails that prove that you refuse to refund me in full.


TAN (jiahong)
Nov 28, 10:42 CST
Dear Customer,
We are so sorry that the goods you received can not meet your satisfaction.
If you send the item back to us, the shipping costs are expensive.
How about accepting a compromise to keep the item and gain a 65% refund?We are sorry that this is the highest refund we can give you.If you want a full refund,please send it back to us,we will full refund you after we receive it.
Best regards,
Evelyn

Mason Torrey
Nov 27, 10:27 CST
Because you will not refund my money and you are deceptive and take money from people for items that don't exist, I'm informing our country's media so they can warn everyone else about this scam so no one else is taken advantage of by you.

TAN (jiahong)
Nov 27, 09:43 CST
Dear Buyer,
We are so sorry that the goods you received can not meet your satisfaction.
This is our return policy:

Please return it to the following address:
Room 309,Lvchuangyungu Building ,Gaoxin North 6th Road, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China 518000
Please note that you have to pay the shipping fee. We will full refund you after we receive it.And after you have sent out the parcel ,we hope you can provide us with a logistics number for us to check .
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us, we are more than happy to serve.
Have a nice day!
Evelyn

Mason Torrey
Nov 26, 16:59 CST

You advertised the Cosmo Robot.  I watched the video and read the advertisement which showed and described the Cosmo robot.  You sent me a doll in the shape of a robot.  I can buy a doll like this in a store for less that $2.  You are deceptive and you continue to lie about this.  I expect a full refund.  If you want this $2 piece of plastic to be returned, you pay the shipping cost.  It's your fault that this has happened, not mine.




-------- Original message --------
Date: 26/11/18 3:17 PM (GMT+12:00)
To: Mason Torrey <torreynz@gmail.com>
Subject: [jiahong] Re: Fwd: Congratulations on your order


TAN (jiahong)
Nov 26, 10:17 CST
Dear Customer,
We are so sorry for that the goods you received can not meet your satisfaction. And if you do not need this any more. You can return it back. But you have to pay the shipping fee. We will full refund you after we receive it. Please keep it original,don't effect the second sale.We are very sorry for your inconvenience.
If you have any decision, please feel free to contact us, we are more than happy to serve.
Have a nice day!

Mason Torrey
Nov 23, 19:37 CST
Your reply is definitely not acceptable. Through your false advertising I ordered the Cosmo fully functional robot.  You're advertisement included a video of the Cosmo robot and specified what was included with the purchase which was the Cosmo intelligent robot, the three cubes and instructions on how to interact with the robot.  What you sent me wasn't a robot at all.  You sent a doll in the shape of a robot which I can buy from a store for less than $2. I expect a full refund.


CSR8 (jiahong)
Nov 23, 18:57 CST
Dear customer,

You can choose to return the goods to us.

We will give you a full refund.

But you need to pay the shipping cost because our company does not support free returns and exchanges.

You can also accept our apologies and we will refund 60% for you,
Waiting for your reply and Have a nice day.
If you think this solution is not acceptable, please contact us and we will try our best to serve you.
Best regards,

Mason Torrey
Nov 23, 14:33 CST
Stop lying about the advertisement.  Your advertisement was for Cosmo robot.  You sent me a cheap toy.  Give me a refund.


CSR8 (jiahong)
Nov 23, 14:27 CST
Dear Customer
The product you receive is the product in the advertisement. The pictures in the advertisement are post-processed. It is normal to have a difference with the actual object.
Sorry for your dissatisfaction with our product.

As for the rule of Paypal,you need to return the item to us,and pay for the freight,this fee may beyond 10 USD,received the money after we received the item.

So to avoid those troubles,how about we refund you 50%,and you can keep the item.OK?

Please let us know your decision,we will process accordingly.

Best regards

Customer Service


Mason Torrey
Nov 23, 12:56 CST
This is your fault that I should receive a refund, not mine.  You didn't send what I ordered.


CSR8 (jiahong)
Nov 23, 11:10 CST
Dear customer,

You can choose to return the goods to us.

We will give you a full refund.

But you need to pay the shipping cost because our company does not support free returns and exchanges.

You can also accept our apologies and we will refund 50% for you, you can give it to your friends or family as a gift, ok ?
Or simply resell it if you could find someone who needs it.
If you still need the original item, you can make a new order after refund
Waiting for your reply and Have a nice day.
If you think this solution is not acceptable, please contact us and we will try our best to serve you.
Best regards,

Mason Torrey
Nov 21, 11:59 CST


Attachment(s)

TAN (jiahong)
Nov 19, 10:13 CST
Dear Customer,

We are sorry that we didn’t receive what you sent pictures,please try it again.

Have a nice day!
Evelyn

Mason Torrey
Nov 18, 10:08 CST
I sent you the invoice already.  I expect a full refund.  That fact that you don't resend items isn't my problem.  Your advertisement was a lie so you are responsible to refund me in full.


TAN (jiahong)
Nov 18, 09:40 CST
Dear Customer,
Can you provide your Invoice ID(Like c.XXXXXXX.1) when you purchased it?Or provide the delivery tracking number on the package label.
We are so sorry for that the goods you received can not meet your satisfaction. As our company don’t support to resend the item. How about accepting a compromise to keep the item and gain a 25% refund?
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us, we are more than happy to serve.
Have a nice day!
Evelyn

Mason Torrey
Nov 18, 08:23 CST
I've sent photos as you requested.  I'm still waiting for my refund.


TAN (jiahong)
Nov 10, 10:19 CST
Dear customer,
We are sorry that can you provide some pictures for us?We need to check it.
Have a nice day!
Evelyn

Mason Torrey
Nov 9, 16:52 CST
So what's happening?  Are you going to refund my money since you lied to me about the product I purchased?



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

-------- Original message --------
Date: 2/11/18 7:26 PM (GMT+12:00)
To: Mason Torrey <torreynz@gmail.com>
Subject: [Request received]


TAN (jiahong)
Nov 8, 16:05 CST
Dear customer,
Thanks for contacting us ,
We feel so sorry for that trouble caused to you,
Could you please do us a favor to provide us some pictures(with the shipping label and product ID on the package) to show what do you receive and the screenshot of your order info(with your order number) ?
Please kindly upload the picture to the airbridge link: https://www.myairbridge.com/en/eng/
The step to upload:
1)open the link, then click"send date using link"
2)then choose the picture need to send to us
3)then click" send"
4)finally send us the linkage to us after uploading completed
We will check the problem and will give you good solution after confirmed
Really appreciate and hope to hear from you soon!
Have a nice day.
Evelyn

Mason Torrey
Nov 2, 14:26 CST


Hi there,

I orded the Cosmo Intelligent Robot as shown below.  What arrived is something completely different and I'm not happy.  I would like a refund.  

Regards,

Mason Torrey

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: everyonedays@emailcxs.com <everyonedays@emailcxs.com>
Date: Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 10:06 AM
Subject: Congratulations on your order
To: torreynz@gmail.com <torreynz@gmail.com>


Dear Mason Torrey

Thank you so much for your great support on us.
Goods are ready for shipment.Usually it takes about 7-12 days for the item to reach you.

Cozmo Intelligent Robot
Color:White
$ 34.98
x 1

Product
$34.98
Shipping
0

Total
$34.98
Payment method
Credit
Any question, feel free to contact us and we will reach you at the soonest.
Have a nice day!
Best Regards
Mason Torrey
Need help? Reach us anytime at everyonedays@emailcxs.com
Copyright 2018 everyonedays. All Rights Reserved.
This email is a service from jiahong. Delivered by Zendesk
[7OVY64-L732]

Thursday, 27 April 2017

The Problem With Atheists These Days

Most Muslims are ok.  Most Christians are ok.  Most people, in general, are ok, including atheists.  But then you get the extremists and by this, I don't mean hairy little men running around donning the finest in tea-towel head equipment and high-yield explosive devices as their latest fashion accessories. Oh no, no.  I'm talking about the irrational passionates whose reaction dials are permanently set to 'knee-jerk'.  This is kind of like most microwave ovens which are never set to any power setting other than high.


Yes, I agree that Christianity has dominated Western culture for quite long enough and religious privilege is driving secularists such as myself up the wall.  Here in New Zealand, Christianity is still permitted to be taught in secular schools which in this day and age is quite absurd really.  In the long run, this needs to be addressed, but it's not - or rather should not at all be - a priority call (see my blog Abolishing Religious Instruction From New Zealand Secular Schools) as there are much more pressing issues at stake, such as religion having a direct influence on legislation.  The lesser issues and everything else?  Meh, we'll get around to dealing with them when we've got some spare time.  Well, at least that's how it should be anyway.


Unfortunately, we have individuals, groups, and organisations rallying together to speak up and fight the little things and believing quite incorrectly that the little things will lead to rectifying the greater issues.  Nope, not at all.  That's not how the church plays ball and whether you like it or not, the church is setting the rules and the knee-jerks are playing precisely the way the church anticipates them to play.  Not only are the knee-jerks ingorant of this fact, they DON'T WANT TO KNOW.  I guess it's a pride thing.  You know, we wouldn't want religious people to be smart and ahead of us now, would we?


So the problem with atheists these days, or more accurately, the outspoken anti-theist atheists, is that they react to anything and everything religious and have little or zero understanding of the battle they are fighting or whom they are fighting against.  They exhibit no tolerance at all and quite frankly, they are no different to religious fundamentalists who won't even so much as allow a lesbian to enter a bridal shop.  Yes, we need to separate religion and state because bigotry has no place in society and its governing legislation, but is witnessing a small thank-you prayer before a corporate meal or school exam really shoving religion down one's throat?  Is it something to lose our minds over?


The very psychology behind the closed mindedness that keeps people religious and irrational is the exact same psychology that causes the anti-theist to seek out and smack down anything and everything religious.  Or to put it more bluntly, to deny all religious people of any religious freedom whatsoever, regardless of whether it has any effect on those around them or not.

At the end of the day, being such an intolerant insolent because of a harmless superstitious tradition makes you look like a fool when you react so strongly to a practice that you insist you don't believe in. The people who do take public prayers seriously (a lot don't and only say these prayers to keep other traditionalists happy) will take one look at you and triumph at the fact that the power of prayer is demonstrably real by the manifestation of the evil within you trying to resist God's power. Not only that, but they will get up to tell everyone in Church how God is working through them because yet another non-believer has been defeated by the power of Jesus Christ through prayer. You think that sounds like utter tripe? Then get a grip and stop making the rest of us look like weak non-religious pansies.



Sunday, 21 August 2016

But You're Not A Scientist!

In recent discussions with evolution deniers, quite often I've been told two things.  One is that I'm not a scientist so how would I know what I'm talking about and the other is that I have to take a scientist's word on faith.  At first glance, these seem like reasonable statements, however, when you slow them down and look at them more closely, you will find that they aren't so accurate.

Let's first look at the fact that I am not a scientist.  The definition of scientist is as follows:

"A person engaging in a systematic activity to acquire knowledge that describes and predicts the natural world. In a more restricted sense, a scientist may refer to an individual who uses the scientific method."

Now let's look at the definition of expert:

"A person who is very knowledgeable about or skillful in a particular area."

A scientist is a person who acquires knowledge and an expert is a person who learns about and understands the information acquired by the scientist.  We aren't all scientists.  It takes scientists to figure out how to design a working helicopter, but it takes an expert engineer to build one and an expert aviator to fly one.  Most helicopter pilots would be unable to build one and most helicopter engineers would be unable to fly one.  Then there are scientists who not only figure out how to build better helicopters, but can also engineer and fly them.  Having said this, you don't necessarily have to even be an expert to fly one.  Every pilot has to start somewhere, right?

For over 150 years, scientists have been studying and acquiring knowledge that contributes to the continually developing theory of evolution.  These scientists have provided the information and all we need to do is learn this information.  A person who studies a particular topic, such as the theory of evolution, is usually an expert compared to those who don't understand it at all.  If you are unsure about someone's expertise on a particular topic, just check their claims by going back to the original source of information provided by the scientists.

Let's look at the second claim made about me.  I have to take a scientist's word on faith.  The two definitions of faith are as follows:

1. "Complete trust or confidence in someone or something."
2. "Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof."

Usually, when someone accuses you of accepting a scientist's word on faith (yes, this is an accusation), they are using a logical fallacy called false equivocation.  This means they are using one definition of a word that doesn't match the context in which that word is being used.  In this case, the accuser is using the second definition of the word faith which is belief without evidence rather than the correct definition which is trust or confidence in the scientist.

Now even using the correct definition can cause reason to doubt considering the fact that it's possible to trust someone who is wrong, but trusting a scientist's word doesn't by necessity have to be by belief without evidence.  Trusting a scientist can and should be based on looking at the evidence presented.

Bill Nye is often ridiculed by doubters for not being a scientist.  As I've demonstrated, there's a difference between being scientist and being an expert.  You don't need a PhD in physics to pilot a helicopter.  You don't need a PhD in biology, paleontology, geology, zoology, chemistry, molecular biology, taxonomy, mathematics, cosmology, physics, probability, anthropology, archaeology, history or philosophy to learn about and be an expert among your peers on how evolution works.





Thursday, 18 August 2016

If Something Can't Come From Nothing, Then Who Created The Universe?



See this storm cloud?

To say it came from nothing would be absurd, right?  Of course it would, but would it be sensible to say that there must have been a mind behind it, or would that be equally as absurd? To say that because you can't get something from nothing, the only conclusion is that it had to have been intelligently designed, that is called a false dichotomy, or false dilemma.

In ancient times, before humans had knowledge of the behaviour of warm and cold air, air pressure, precipitation, etc, it seemed perfectly sensible to them to assume that a thunderstorm was the manifestation of the gods since there was no other explanation available.  This may seem ridiculous to us now, but we do still hear claims of the very same false dichotomy being made today.  Just as our distant ancestors didn't understand the physics of meteorology, we do not yet understand the causes behind the existence of our universe.  Claims are continually being made that because something can't come from nothing, then the only other explanation is intelligent design.  This is a false dichotomy saying it has to be one or the other and deliberately leaving no room for further exploration of what may have preceeded our universe as we know it.




Saturday, 30 July 2016

Is There One Piece Of Evidence That Proves Evolution?

Time and time again I've had people say to me, "Show me one piece of evidence that proves evolution to be true."  What an annoying request.  It's a silly request.  It's like saying, "Show me one piece of evidence that proves agriculture to be true."  Where do you start?  Is there one stand-alone example capable of proving agriculture?  No, and one of the reasons that evolution deniers make this ridiculous demand is because they don't understand (nor want to know) what the word theory means in science.

In everyday language, theory most commonly means hypothesis, or an idea that hasn't been tested.  For example, if I found a broken glass on the kitchen floor, in answer to what happened, I could say my theory is that the four year old running around the house knocked it off the counter top.  This seems perfectly reasonable since she's knocked over other things during the course of the day.  But that is only a hypothesis and looking back through the security footage, I would find that it was in fact the cat that broke the glass.  So you see, theory in this sense is just a baseless hypothesis, or educated guess that is prone to inaccuracy.

In the scientific community, theory has an entirely different meaning.  While laypersons use the word theory to cover multiple meanings, the scientists use less ambiguous language - hypothesis, theory and law.  Hypothesis is an idea that needs to be tested and proven.  Theory is an explanation of how a particular area of science works.  Law is a statement of fact.  If a scientific law is ever proven to fail, it ceases to be law.  A scientific theory is usually continually being developed and refined.  You may hear people say that theories are always changing so you can't trust them, but that is a dishonest statement.

When a new scientific discovery is made, it adds to the relative theory, usally filling in gaps or adjusting a small part to a more accurate explanation.  Change in a scientific theory does not mean the entire theory is thrown out and replaced with another theory, which is what evolution-deniers would like you to believe.  The same goes for the claim that science is always changing its mind.  No, science is always being refined and added to.

Let's look at some other applications of the word theory in science.  We have gravitational theory.  It doesn't mean we're guessing that there is gravity (although flat earth believers would make that claim), it is an explanation of how gravity works, how it behaves, etc.  We have germ theory.  It doesn't mean we're guessing that there are germs, it is an explanation of how germs behave, how they evolve, how they affect other animals, etc.  We have music theory.  It doesn't mean we're guessing that music exists, it is an explanation of how different frequencies of sound are produced, behave, interract, etc.  And then we have evolutionary theory.  It doesn't mean that we're guessing that evolution happened, it is an explanation of how biological life evolved, how natural selection works, etc.

So going back to one peice of evidence that proves evolution, the reason we can't provide once piece of evidence is because the theory of evolution is a thorough explanation of the diversity of life.  It covers many fields, such as biology, molecular biology, chemistry, paleontology, taxonimy, zoology, and so forth.  Just as I can't give you once piece of a puzzle to prove the puzzle is a picture of a tiger, I can't give you one piece of evidence to prove the theory of evolution to be fact because the entire theory of evolution can't be proven with one piece of evidence alone. 

Thursday, 23 June 2016

Did We Land On The Moon?

This is likely one of the greatest and most argued conspiracies of all time.  The problem now is that there is so much information readily available from both sides of the debate and it's difficult to distinguish the truth from the fiction.  Both sides present such compelling 'evidence' to support their arguments that you may possibly find it tiresome and end up just picking a side and going with it - and I fear that this has happened in many cases.
In this article, I will look into the observable evidence available to us.  Before I start, we need to be clear on what observable evidence is.  A common misinterpretation of observable evidence is the need to see an event take place.  For example, evolution deniers will say we have no observable evidence in support of the theory of evolution because we weren't there millions of years ago to see it take place.  This is a false equivication.  Evidence for a past event is not the event itself but the clues left behind.  We do have an overwhelming amount of observable evidence for the theory of evolution, such as the fossil record, geological record, molecular biology, etc.  If my house was burgled last night while I was out, the observable evidence available would be fingerprints, DNA, security footage and any other telling signs that may be found, like a dropped driver's license (wouldn't that be hilarious!).


The Footage

When the first Apollo mission lauched in 1969, there were plenty of spectators there witnessing the event, but eyewitness accounts are the most unreliable sources of evidence.  Nevermind, because we have visual footage of this happening.  There is no doubt that a rocket was launched, but what if it was just for show and never actually landed on the moon?  Good question.  We have footage of the lunar modual descending onto the lunar surface.  But what if it was fake footage made in a studio in the Nevada desert?  Good question.  They did not have the technology to create a continuous film at that length.  For a video offering a more in depth explanation of the technology that would be required to pull off such a hoax, click here.



Retroreflector

One of the purposes of landing on the moon was to set up a retroreflector.  This is a reflector that will reflect light back to its source from a wide range of angles with minimum scattering of light.  In other words, you can point a laser at it and the laser will reflect right back to you.  There are a number of retroreflectors on the lunar surface now and scientists use them to experiment with light, such as accurately measuring its speed.


Samples of Moon Rock

While the astronaughts were moonwalking, they spent a great deal of their time collecting samples of lunar soil and rock and lots of it.  But how do we know they came from the moon and not some desert here on earth? Good question.  The composition of space rock is quite different to rock you find here on Earth.  How do we know they aren't meteorites?  Good question.  These rocks show no signs of reaching extreme temperatures caused by air friction when entering the Earth's atmosphere.


Items Left Behind

Yep.  If you can't accept the observable evidence available to you, then go back to the scene of the crime.  There are many items left on the moon after the lunar missions, such as the lunar rover, flags, trash, retroreflectors as we mentioned earlier, golf club, golf ball, hammer, feather and many other items that the Apollo crews needed to discard to keep the lunar module as light as possible.


Here is a video comparing original landing footage with recent flyby footage of the landing site.




On a humourous note, take a look at this brilliant performance by Mitchell and Webb on faking a moon landing.