Thinking of getting vaccinated?

[Katman]

Because it is "he said, she said" limp biscuit.


Can I respectfully direct you back to your point No.1 in your previous post?

[mada]

Can I respectfully direct you back to your point No.1 in your previous post?

"he said, she said" as in someone else is stating what he said.

It's like me quoting someone posting about you as evidence of what you have said... rather than quoting you.

[Katman]

"he said, she said" as in someone else is stating what he said.

It's like me quoting someone posting about you as evidence of what you have said... rather than quoting you.

Dr Thompson has made at least two written statements regarding the deliberate covering up/destruction of "statistically significant information".

[TheDemonLord]

Dr Thompson has made at least two written statements regarding the deliberate covering up/destruction of "statistically significant information".

And has he released any evidence that would back up these statements?

[Drew]

Oh no, maybe not.

https://www.drugwatch.com/ssri/suicide/Not on the antidepressants at the moment, and they were a different type to those listed.


There goes your final shred of decency :facepalm:

Just because there's a keyboard and pc between you and the wider world, doesn't mean there isn't real people on the other side.
It's cool. I was completely open on the bookface when my mental got the best of me and I was peaking out three or four times a day. Lot of bikers might be surprised at some of the other people that described suffering the same shit for years.

Back to the quack next week to discuss some stuff, if he suggests pills, I'll knock 'em back happily (well...as happy as an axious depressed freak can be).

[bogan]

"he said, she said" as in someone else is stating what he said.

It's like me quoting someone posting about you as evidence of what you have said... rather than quoting you.

There's another mental illness on the rise though, Clinical psychologist Darshani Kumareswaran has been investigating it:

"I also found that someone who creates conspiracy theories is more likely to have some form of psychopathology, or mental illness such as paranoid thinking, compared to those who believe in conspiracy theories but do not create them, or people who do not believe in them at all"

Given the strong correlation with not vaccinating, one can conclude Vaccinations prevent conspiracy theories. Which is in itself a conspiracy theory, init; because of course the Vril would like to see a decline in the conspiracy theory truth seekers.

Fuck it's easy to create this shit; how come all the actual conspiracy theories are so fucking terrible? Is that part of the illness? or is it simply gateway illogic that gets them to statistical impossibilities like:


So has anyone given any thought to what society is going to be like in the 2030's once every second one of us is autistic?

:facepalm:


Not on the antidepressants at the moment, and they were a different type to those listed.


It's cool. I was completely open on the bookface when my mental got the best of me and I was peaking out three or four times a day. Lot of bikers might be surprised at some of the other people that described suffering the same shit for years.

Back to the quack next week to discuss some stuff, if he suggests pills, I'll knock 'em back happily (well...as happy as an axious depressed freak can be).

You're obviously coping well, but I'll stand my by judgement that personal attacks for such a condition is a despicable act.

[RDJ]

Katman's form of discussion = diss & cuss on everyone who presents valid information that is contrary to his opinion.... :niceone:

Precisely, this.

[husaberg]

He was struck for a perceived conflict of interest and failing to gain approval from the Ethics Committee.

That's an outright untruth, yet you claim to have read the ruling........


In January 2010 the UK's General Medical Council (GMC) decided that Wakefield had acted “dishonestly and irresponsibly,” a ruling that led to him being struck off the medical register four months later.


The Panel is satisfied that you had such a duty, as set out in paragraph 31.c.ii.The Panel is persuaded by all the correspondence in the Lancet Journal volume 351 dated 2 May 1998 regarding a suggestion by correspondents to the Lancet that there was a biased selection of patients in the Lancet Paper of 28February 1998, of which you were one of the senior authors. The Panel has found that your statement as set out in paragraph 35.a. does not respond fully and accurately to the queries made by correspondents to the Lancet. The Panel is satisfied that the statement you made would be considered by ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people to be dishonest. Additionally, you knew that this statement omitted necessary and relevant information, such as the active role you played in the referral process, and the fact that the referral letters in four cases made no mention of any gastrointestinal symptoms and the fact that the investigations had been carried out under Project 172-96 for research purposes. Therefore, the Panel is satisfied that your conduct in this regard was dishonest and irresponsible


c. In the circumstances set out at paragraph 31.b. above, and asone of the senior authors of the Lancet paper, you,

i. knew or ought to have known the importance of accurately and honestly describing the patient population,
Admitted and found proved
ii. had a duty to ensure that the factual information in the paper and provided by you in response to queries about it wastrue and accurate,
Found proved
In reaching its decision, the Panel has taken into account the guidance from the Lancet, published in October 1997,which states “he or she [authors of the paper] must share responsibility for what is published.” The Panel is satisfied that, as one of the senior authors of the Lancet paper, you had a duty to ensure that the factual information contained in the paper was true and accurate. In his evidence, Professor Rutter also referred to the importance of accuracy in scientific papers. In evidence, you accepted that when providing information in response to queries about the contents of the paper you had a duty to ensure that such information was true and accurate.



Your conduct as set out at paragraph 32.a. was,
i. dishonest,
Found proved
ii. irresponsible,
Found proved
iii. resulted in a misleading description of the patient population in the Lancet paper;
Found proved


In reaching its decision, the Panel notes that the project reported in the Lancet paper was established with the purpose to investigate a postulated new syndrome and yet the Lancet paper did not describe this fact at all. Because you drafted and wrote the final version of the paper, and omitted correct information about the purpose of the study or the patient population, the Panel is satisfied that your conduct was irresponsible and dishonest. The Panel is satisfied that your conduct at paragraph 32.awould be considered by ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people to be dishonest.


b. In the circumstances set out in paragraphs 32.a., 34.a. and 34.b.this statement was,
i. dishonest,
Found proved
ii. irresponsible,
Found proved
iii. contrary to your duty to ensure that the information provided by you was accurate;
Found proved


The Panel is satisfied that you had such a duty, as set out in paragraph 31.c.ii.The Panel is persuaded by all the correspondence in the Lancet Journal volume 351 dated 2 May 1998 regarding a suggestion by correspondents to the Lancet that there was a biased selection of patients in the Lancet Paper of 28 February 1998, of which you were one of the senior authors. The Panel has found that your statement as set out in paragraph 35.a. does not respond fully and accurately to the queries made by correspondents to the Lancet. The Panel is satisfied that the statement you made would be considered by ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people to be dishonest. Additionally, you knew that this statement omitted necessary and relevant information, such as the active role you played in the referral process, and the fact that the referral letters in four cases made no mention of any gastrointestinal symptoms and the fact that the investigations had been carried out under Project 172-96 for research purposes. Therefore, the Panel is satisfied that your conduct in this regard was dishonest and irresponsible.

That's without Deers investigation

In the first part of his investigation, Deer showed how Wakefield was able to manufacture the appearance of a medical syndrome that would hoodwink parents and large parts of the medical establishment with a fraud that “unleashed fear, parental guilt, costly government intervention, and outbreaks of infectious disease."
In the second part, he shows how the discredited doctor planned secret businesses intended to make huge sums of money, in the U.K. and the U.S., from his allegations.
The BMJ report says that Wakefield met medical school managers to discuss a joint business even while the first child to be fully investigated in his research was still in the hospital; and how just days after publication of his Lancet article, he brought business associates to his place of work at the Royal Free Medical School in London to continue negotiations.
Drawing on investigations and information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, Deer says Wakefield and his associates used financial forecasts that predicted they could make up to £28 million (about $43.7 million) a year from the diagnostic kits alone.
Deals Could Have Netted Millions
The kits in question were for diagnosing patients with autism. Deer obtained one 35-page document marked "private and confidential" which confidently predicted: “It is estimated that by year 3, income from this testing could be about £3,300,000 rising to about £28,000,000 as diagnostic testing in support of therapeutic regimes come on stream.”

Would-be investors were told that “the initial market for the diagnostic will be litigation-driven testing of patients with AE [autistic enterocolitis, an unproven condition concocted by Wakefield] from both the UK and the USA”.
Deer’s investigation also reveals that Wakefield was offered support to try to replicate his results, gained from just 12 children, with a larger validated study of up to 150 patients, but that he refused to carry out the work, claiming that his academic freedom would be jeopardized.
A further claim in the BMJ article is the existence of a business, named after Wakefield’s wife, which was intended to develop his own "replacement" vaccines, diagnostic testing kits, and other products which only stood any real chance of success if public confidence in the MMR vaccine was damaged..
http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/ne...journal-claims

[Katman]

You're obviously coping well, but I'll stand my by judgement that personal attacks for such a condition is a despicable act. :violin::violin::violin::violin::violin:
:violin::violin::violin::violin:
:violin::violin::violin:
:violin::violin:
:violin:

You get the full orchestra bro.

[bogan]

:violin::violin::violin::violin::violin:
:violin::violin::violin::violin:
:violin::violin::violin:
:violin::violin:
:violin:

You get the full orchestra bro.

Demonstrably false, since...

"An orchestra (/ˈɔːrkᵻstrə/ or US /ˈɔːrˌkɛstrə/; Italian: [orˈkɛstra]) is a large instrumental ensemble, often used in classical music, that contains sections of string (violin, viola, cello and double bass), brass, woodwind, and percussion instruments."

I know wrong is your default state, but; I've got to ask, are you so far down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole you can no longer tell what the difference between something demonstrably correct, and demonstrably false?

[Katman]

That's an outright untruth...

Sue me or go fuck yourself.

[Katman]

Demonstrably false, since...



Ok, I lied.

You just got the violin section.

[bogan]

Ok, I lied.

More of your default state I guess.

But since you changed the topic again...

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BvkqREHiJVo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Drew]

You're obviously coping well, but I'll stand my by judgement that personal attacks for such a condition is a despicable act.
Still mental, dunno how well I cope. I just admit it and talk about it freely. All the bollucks people talk about helping out and supporting us nut jobs is great an' all, but the biggest thing I can do for the rest is demonstrate that no one gives a fuck. They won't be thought less of for something they don't control. The rest is just warm fuzzies and free bikkies at support groups.

Back on topic however.

Taking everything the majority have said in this thread and throwing it away, and just leaving the stuff where source named info and stats are given. Steve's position on the subject is shot entirely to pieces.

So fuck the topic, let's have an old fashioned sagging fest. Personal attacks and name calling like.

Who's keen? I'LL BURN YOUR FUCKEN HOUSE DOWN!.

[Kickaha]

Who's keen? I'LL BURN YOUR FUCKEN HOUSE DOWN!.
Try it cunt, I'll stab you in the fucking throat with a screwdriver

[Drew]

Try it cunt, I'll stab you in the fucking throat with a screwdriver

You carry a step ladder with you everywhere stumpy?

[Katman]

Try it cunt, I'll stab you in the fucking throat with a screwdriver

I'm gunna make a fraudulent insurance claim.

[Drew]

I'm gunna make a fraudulent insurance claim.

You own a bike workshop. You make half your income from ripping off insurance companies cunt, shutchafuckenface or I'll break this Heineken bottle over your crazy old fucking head.

[scumdog]

Try it cunt, I'll stab you in the fucking throat with a screwdriver

Meh, I'd just shoot him.

Don't want to get TOO close to them Mairs I heard...

[Drew]

Meh, I'd just shoot him.

Don't want to get TOO close to them Mairs I heard...

You don't gotta worry. Never let no stinking cop get even close enough to read the plate on the bike before, and I don't plan to start any time soon.

[Katman]

You own a bike workshop. You make half your income from ripping off insurance companies cunt, shutchafuckenface or I'll break this Heineken bottle over your crazy old fucking head.

That's hilarious.

I just put in an invoice to an insurance company charging them the $40 freight I'd estimated in my quote instead of the $60 it ended up costing me.

That'll teach the cunts.

[Drew]

That's hilarious.

I just put in an invoice to an insurance company charging them the $40 freight I'd estimated in my quote instead of the $60 it ended up costing me.

That'll teach the cunts.:facepalm:
You don't seem to understand the new direction I've steered this train wreck in old fella.

[Kickaha]

Meh, I'd just shoot him.

Don't want to get TOO close to them Mairs I heard...

Don't have a gun, I'll use the tools I have at hand

You'll never take me alive copper

[Katman]

:facepalm:
You don't seem to understand the new direction I've steered this train wreck in old fella.

https://i.ytimg.com/i/QrRM-XDjBk19KnAOQPoFYA/mq1.jpg?v=9eecbe

[Drew]

https://i.ytimg.com/i/QrRM-XDjBk19KnAOQPoFYA/mq1.jpg?v=9eecbe

You fucking cunt! I spat a whole mouthful of beer out laughing at that.

[Katman]

You fucking cunt! I spat a whole mouthful of beer out laughing at that.

I bet you barred up a bit too.

[Drew]

I bet you barred up a bit too.

......so?.....

[Virago]

So fuck the topic, let's have an old fashioned sagging fest...

Leave my moobies out of this, please.

[mashman]

NO SHOT. NO DAYCARE. NO SCHOOL. EVERY CHILD. EVERY VACCINE. SB 277 signed into Law and is EFFECTIVE July 1, 2016 (http://www.sb277.org/)

[Ocean1]

NO SHOT. NO DAYCARE. NO SCHOOL. EVERY CHILD. EVERY VACCINE. SB 277 signed into Law and is EFFECTIVE July 1, 2016 (http://www.sb277.org/)

Well, y'know, if we must protect fuckwits from the consequences of their evolutionary failure then the least we can do is isolate them so their fuckwitism doesn't harm others.

[RDJ]

Well, y'know, if we must protect fuckwits from the consequences of their evolutionary failure then the least we can do is isolate them so their fuckwitism doesn't harm others.

Much as I like riding there (outside of the big cities) it's not for nothing CA is known as "the land of fruits, flakes and nuts".

[mashman]

Well, y'know, if we must protect fuckwits from the consequences of their evolutionary failure then the least we can do is isolate them so their fuckwitism doesn't harm others.

:killingme :crybaby: :killingme ... so their fuckwitism doesn't harm others :killingme

[Ocean1]

Much as I like riding there (outside of the big cities) it's not for nothing CA is known as "the land of fruits, flakes and nuts".

Think the critical threshold is about 3% anti-vaxxers. And there's several such enclaves of fuckwits in the US around that figure.

Hence the Darwin reference, there's no reason to let them kill off non fuckwits as they die...

[mada]

Meanwhile in places like Angola where people don't have access to vaccinations, let alone the luxury to bitch about them or find youtube conspiracies - it is life and death.


Almost 80 years after the yellow fever vaccine was created in a New York laboratory, a massive outbreak of the disease has killed hundreds of people in Angola, where most were never immunised.

Now, the virus is jumping across borders into other nations whose populations are also largely unvaccinated.

More than 3000 suspected cases are in Angola and 1000 in neighbouring Congo, making this the biggest urban epidemic in decades. More than 400 people have died. There are growing concerns that Chinese workers - of whom there are thousands in Angola - will carry the virus to Asia, where nearly all of the rural poor are also unvaccinated.

The explosion of yellow fever has put severe strain on stockpiles of the vaccine. And the four major manufacturers that produce the vaccine cannot make enough to conduct the kind of campaign that would quickly halt the spread of the disease in other parts of the region.

Yellow fever was once a devastating scourge in the West - in 1702, New York City lost 10 percent of its population to the virus. Thanks to the vaccine and mosquito eradication programmes, it faded in the United States long ago. The fact that the disease is emerging again as an international threat reflects a lack of preparedness by local and global health institutions, and Africa's transformation into a more urbanised and interconnected continent.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11664217

[TheDemonLord]

Meanwhile in places like Angola where people don't have access to vaccinations, let alone the luxury to bitch about them or find youtube conspiracies - it is life and death.



http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11664217

It's almost like Vaccinations stop people from dieing from preventable diseases and NOT getting Vaccinated makes you more likely to contract a fatal virus and die horribly.

Who'dathunkit

[RDJ]

Think the critical threshold is about 3% anti-vaxxers. And there's several such enclaves of fuckwits in the US around that figure.

Hence the Darwin reference, there's no reason to let them kill off non fuckwits as they die...

This. Let me buy you a (virtual) beer...

[RDJ]

It's almost like Vaccinations stop people from dieing from preventable diseases and NOT getting Vaccinated makes you more likely to contract a fatal virus and die horribly.

Who'dathunkit

I know! How could this possibly have been foreseen, predicted, avoided???? It's a complete mystery.

/sarc off

No joke. When I am doing remote oversight in my profession, I am dealing with the consequences of this cluster fark in Angola on a very regular basis. The Corruptocrats always ensure that They and Their (admittedly innocent) loinfruit are protected. The rest of the citizenry, can and do go to perdition as far as They are concerned.

[Katman]

Forget the fact that the article starts off talking about Jim Carey. After all, what would a comedy actor know about anything other than comedy, right?

But, continue reading and you'll find plenty of links to studies (yes, published in medical journals) that question the safety of what goes into vaccines.

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2016/06/28/this-is-exactly-why-jim-carrey-called-out-government-fascism-in-response-to-mandatory-vaccination-law/

[TheDemonLord]

Forget the fact that the article starts off talking about Jim Carey. After all, what would a comedy actor know about anything other than comedy, right?

But, continue reading and you'll find plenty of links to studies (yes, published in medical journals) that question the safety of what goes into vaccines.

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2016/06/28/this-is-exactly-why-jim-carrey-called-out-government-fascism-in-response-to-mandatory-vaccination-law/

Interesting Article - did you actually read any of the Studies cited (particularly those talking about Metal Toxicity in Infants)?

Cause most of them seemed to say:

'It might be an issue, but we have no clue and we haven't done the research to confirm whether it is or isn't'

None of them say:

"We did the actual science and found a Causal link" or "we found that dosages above x mg/m3 were found to have these effects"

Interesting reads, and certainly deserving of further research - but consider the amount of Metal in a Vaccine and the amount of Metal that one is exposed to as part of everyday life (one of the article even talks about the amount of Aluminium that passed to an infant if they are breast fed) and the half lives they are citing (10 days) - they would need to have some pretty solid experimental evidence to further their claims.

[Katman]

Cause most of them seemed to say:

'It might be an issue, but we have no clue and we haven't done the research to confirm whether it is or isn't'

All I've ever stated is that if there is the possibility that certain vaccines aren't as safe as we've been led to believe, caution should be exercised while further (transparent) study is conducted.

Much like Andrew Wakefield says.

You on the other hand don't seem to give a fuck whether certain vaccines are causing harm.

[TheDemonLord]

All I've ever stated is that if there is the possibility that certain vaccines aren't as safe as we've been led to believe, caution should be exercised while further (transparent) study is conducted.

And if there is Evidence that they aren't safe, then by all means - Study should be done. And if a peer reviewed, Double Blind study on a large enough population size confirms no Causal link - then the possibility should be rejected.

It's the last part you seem to have trouble with - in fact you have such trouble with it that you still mention Mr Wakefield below as some form of authority.


Much like Andrew Wakefield says.

I couldn't give a flying fuck what the Slimy Conman says - in fact I was thinking about that God-Awful interview that you insisted everyone watch (that was even worse than my incredibly low expectations) - He must know that a Drug and a Vaccine work in completely different ways (if he doesn't then he is an idiot, and therefore his opinion is worth even less) - and yet while the director or producer was spouting off his nonsense - he keeps quiet.

maybe because he doesn't want to bite the hand that feeds him - He's found the perfect Mark for his Con and doesn't want to jeopardize his paycheck....


You on the other hand don't seem to give a fuck whether certain vaccines are causing harm.

Okay - I'll make it really simple for you.

Let's assume that everyone of your BS and disproved claims about Vaccines are true. So - we are assuming that Vaccines cause Autism etc.

Death is worse than Autism.

Therefore it is preferable to Vaccinate (to prevent Death) and risk Autism than to not Vaccinate (to prevent Autism) and risk Death.

Now, let's apply that same login in the real world where there is no Causal link:

It's preferable to Vaccinate (to prevent Death) than to not Vaccinate and risk Death.

[Katman]

Okay - I'll make it really simple for you.

Let's assume that everyone of your BS and disproved claims about Vaccines are true. So - we are assuming that Vaccines cause Autism etc.

Death is worse than Autism.

Therefore it is preferable to Vaccinate (to prevent Death) and risk Autism than to not Vaccinate (to prevent Autism) and risk Death.

Now, let's apply that same login in the real world where there is no Causal link:

It's preferable to Vaccinate (to prevent Death) than to not Vaccinate and risk Death.

It's preferable to produce safe vaccines - especially if you're planning on demanding that everyone takes them whether they like it or not.

[TheDemonLord]

It's preferable to produce safe vaccines - especially if you're planning on demanding that everyone takes them whether they like it or not.

But:
IT HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN THAT THEY ARE UNSAFE

Once you can grasp that concept, then maybe we can have a discussion.

[Katman]

Dude, using big letters doesn't validate your opinion.

[TheDemonLord]

Dude, using big letters doesn't validate your opinion.

I put it in big letters so that you might be able to read and comprehend it.

I guess that was wishful thinking on my part....

I'll try a different tack then - have you ever looked at the differences between the UK (where there is a high level of Vaccination) and Japan (where there isn't).


First up - Surprise Surprise - Guess which country has one of the highest Autism Rates in the world...

Why! It's Japan!

a Whopping 181/10,000 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3763210/:


followed by a Japanese study estimating the prevalence to be 181.1/10 000 [Kawamura, Takahashi, & Ishii, 2008].

Now - lets look at what the Mortality rate for JUST Measles is like in Japan.

I can't find recent data - but this article in the Lancet has for the year 2000 this http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(04)16715-9/fulltext:


measles is still endemic in Japan: there were an estimated 200 000 cases and 88 deaths (mainly in children) in 2000.1, 2

Lets compare to the Same time period in the UK shall we?

http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Measles%201996-2014.PNG

Now - lets factor in that Japan has double the Population of the UK - so we will double the UK rates. Now, I know that Maths isn't your strong suit - but you should be able to see from the Graph, that the rate isn't around 100,000, it isn't around 1,000 - hell, it isn't even around 500 - it's somewhere in the 100-200 range.

So lets compare:

Country with the MMR Vaccine: 100-200 cases, with zero deaths
Country without the MMR Vaccine: 200,000 cases with 88 deaths.

Even if we factor in the Population sizes:

200-400 cases, zero deaths vs 200,000 cases, 88 deaths.

That is somewhere between 500-1000 times greater incidence.

Oh and not to mention that the UK's Autism rate is about 100/10,000 - which considering that is adjusted for Population size - would make it about HALF the Autism rate in Japan.

So, Tl;DR - You are a fuckwit and contribute to the needless deaths of Children.

[Katman]

So, Tl;DR - You are a fuckwit and contribute to the needless deaths of Children.

And I don't think I've ever seen anyone as eager as you to bend over and be fucked up the arse by the pharmaceutical industry.

[TheDemonLord]

And I don't think I've ever seen anyone as eager as you to bend over and be fucked up the arse by the pharmaceutical industry.

What was that?

Can't rebut solid data that completely blows your dangerous, Batshit Crazy, Child Killing Theories so far out of the water that NASA would be forgiven for thinking that there was a new celestial body in Orbit?

Quick! I know what will show them! Let's insult them and not address any of the points that show the idea to be blatantly wrong!

88 Kids a year Dead that didn't need to die.
200,000 vs less than 200 that didn't need to get infected.

Yeah - That Evil Pharmaceutical company is definitely fucking us up the arse by preventing our children from needlessly dieing.

Cunt.

[Katman]

88 Kids a year Dead that didn't need to die.


And how many died from every other preventable cause?

[TheDemonLord]

And how many died from every other preventable cause?

What is your point?

Or more to the point - why don't you want to discuss the solid Data that shows your ideas to not only be 100% full of Shit, but also Dangerous - to the point that 88 children died that didn't need to and around 199,800 were infected with Full Blown Measles (with all the 7% serious complication rate that follows - which is about 13,000 children).

Face it Katman - You are full of shit, you have Nothing to backup your loopy theories with (as per usual) but in this instance, there is solid data that not only are you completely and utterly wrong, but also that you (and all the other fuckwits like you, who really need to be Vaccinated against Stupidity - preferably with a 12 gauge lobotomy) are contributing to the Deaths of Children by disseminating and continuing to champion this Fraudulent BS.

[Katman]

What is your point?

Or more to the point - why don't you want to discuss the solid Data that shows your ideas to not only be 100% full of Shit, but also Dangerous - to the point that 88 children died that didn't need to and around 199,800 were infected with Full Blown Measles (with all the 7% serious complication rate that follows - which is about 13,000 children).

Face it Katman - You are full of shit, you have Nothing to backup your loopy theories with (as per usual) but in this instance, there is solid data that not only are you completely and utterly wrong, but also that you (and all the other fuckwits like you, who really need to be Vaccinated against Stupidity - preferably with a 12 gauge lobotomy) are contributing to the Deaths of Children by disseminating and continuing to champion this Fraudulent BS.

At the risk of further increasing the chance of you popping a blood vessel, if it comes down to 88 deaths a year versus unleashing a plague of autistic fuckwits like yourself on society, I've gotta say, it's a tough choice to make.

[TheDemonLord]

At the risk of further increasing the chance of you popping a blood vessel, if it comes down to 88 deaths a year versus unleashing a plague of autistic fuckwits like yourself on society, I've gotta say, it's a tough choice to make.

Except - in a country that doesn't Vaccinate - the Autism rate is almost twice as high as one that does?

Or did you miss that Part?

And Further More - Autism is a better outcome than Death.

And for the record - We've got the Red Rep, the Accusations of Autism, The refusal to discuss the points that show you to be blatantly wrong - I've got $5 that says what is soon to come from you....

[Katman]

Except - in a country that doesn't Vaccinate - the Autism rate is almost twice as high as one that does?

What are you talking about?

http://japanhealthinfo.com/child-health-and-childcare/vaccination/


I've got $5 that says what is soon to come from you....

So what was the fiver on?

[TheDemonLord]

What are you talking about?

http://japanhealthinfo.com/child-health-and-childcare/vaccination/

Are you actually that stupid or just being intentionally thick?

We are talking about the MMR vaccine - which Japan does not use. It even says so in that link you posted.

Seriously, you are either monumentally Stupid or you are so deadset on this world view of yours that you will actively deny reality to make it fit - which is also known as being Insane.


So what was the fiver on?

I said soon, but if I tell you, it will give the game away.

[Katman]

Are you actually that stupid or just being intentionally thick?

We are talking about the MMR vaccine - which Japan does not use. It even says so in that link you posted.

Seriously, you are either monumentally Stupid or you are so deadset on this world view of yours that you will actively deny reality to make it fit - which is also known as being Insane.


Dude, it might seem in your tiny autistic mind as though this discussion is solely about the MMR vaccine.

I've got news for you - it's not.

[TheDemonLord]

Dude, it might seem in your tiny autistic mind as though this discussion is solely about the MMR vaccine.

I've got news for you - it's not.

I know - its about batshit crazy lunatics and their monumentally stupid beliefs that everyone is out to get them.... It's also about these ideas that they have contribute to dead and seriously ill children.

but to recap - Japan stopped using the MMR (around 1991 I think) vaccine and lots of children got sick and some died. The UK continued to use the Vaccine, very few got sick none died. Japan has twice the incidence of Autism than the UK.

Interesting link:

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.IMM.MEAS?locations=JP

You'll note the lowest vaccination rates were between '93-95 - and so come about school age (5 on up) you have a load of un-vaccinated children coming into contact with each other - and surprise surprise - thats around the year 2000.

There was another outbreak in around 2007 I believe - which would be when all those unvaccinated walking biological weapons would have going to Highschool and the cycle repeats - and interestingly enough it was the High schools where the problem was happening and were forced to close.

This means several things:

1: You are wrong.
2: You are really Wrong.
3: You are wrong as per usual
4: MMR and Vaccines don't cause Autism
5: Not vaccinating causes children to get seriously ill and Die
6: You are still wrong
7: Andrew Wakefield is a Fraud and should never be mentioned with any semblance of seriousness in any discussion about Autism/Vaccines except for as an example to mocked and ridiculed
8: You are still monumentally wrong.
9: See Points 1-3,6 and 8 for details.

Finally - Japan has seen the error of it's ways and has re-introduced a vaccination program, but it is being hampered by an entire generation that weren't vaccinated.

[Ocean1]

You are wrong.

What the fuck took you so long?

[TheDemonLord]

What the fuck took you so long?

It was taken as a given, the purpose of the exercise is to objectively demonstrate this and the magnitude of the wrong-ness

[Ocean1]

It was taken as a given, the purpose of the exercise is to objectively demonstrate this and the magnitude of the wrong-ness

But they like being wrong.

I mean, they could randomly choose conclusions and fail nowhere near as badly as they do now, how else can you explain it?

[TheDemonLord]

But they like being wrong.

I mean, they could randomly choose conclusions and fail nowhere near as badly as they do now, how else can you explain it?

There is not time enough nor space enough to adequately explain it.

but there are some interesting common factors - Low confidence/self esteem, Persecution complex, need to be accepted by a group, distrust of authority etc.

There's even been a couple of studies done on it - the one I found most interesting was that once someone believes one Conspiracy, they are far more likely to accept a Conspiratorial answer than a non-conspiratorial answer - now which KB members does that remind you of?

[bogan]

Dude, it might seem in your tiny autistic mind as though this discussion is solely about the MMR vaccine.

I've got news for you - it's not.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/VcgO2v3JjCU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

You should watch this, you fucking dumb flatulent-hobo-fellating shitlord; oh, and stop using an iron as a dildo, it'll give you arse cancer.

[husaberg]

Are you actually that stupid or just being intentionally thick?

We are talking about the MMR vaccine - which Japan does not use. It even says so in that link you posted.

Seriously, you are either monumentally Stupid or you are so deadset on this world view of yours that you will actively deny reality to make it fit - which is also known as being Insane.



I said soon, but if I tell you, it will give the game away.
He's already been told that, but it appears facts don't permeate the katmans brain.
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/159661-Thinking-of-getting-vaccinated?p=1130981233#post1130981233



They predict that if the current rate of increase continues, by 2030 we'll be at 1 in 2 diagnosed with autism.


You mean like in Japan
The MMR scare caused a low percentage of mumps vaccination (less than 30%), which resulted in outbreaks in Japan. There were up to 2002 measles caused deaths in Japan while there were none in UK, but the extra deaths were attributed to Japan's application of the vaccine at a later age. A spokesman for the Ministry of Health said that the discontinuation had no effect in measles, but also mentioning that there were more deaths by measles while MMR was being used.
In 1994 the government dropped the vaccination requirement for measles and rubella due to the 1993 MMR scare.
Japan is nowadays the only developed country with large measles epidemics. It has been called a "measles exporter" by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As another consequence of the scare, in 2003, 7 million schoolchildren had not been vaccinated against rubella.

Yet Autism rates continued to rise in Japan after the discontinuation of the MMR vaccine, which disproves any large-scale effect of vaccination.
Like I said, you don't know shit from a shovel.

So have your animals been vaccinated Katman?
What about you, have you been vaccinated?

[Ocean1]

Are you actually that stupid or just being intentionally thick?

Wouldn't it take a damned good lashing of both to explain the sheer quantity of fail involved?

[Katman]

You should watch this, you fucking dumb flatulent-hobo-fellating shitlord; oh, and stop using an iron as a dildo, it'll give you arse cancer.

Well clearly the answer to the question 'is science reliable?' is a resounding 'not when humans try doing it'.

It would suggest that any medical research needs to be treated with scepticism - even if that research states that vaccines don't cause autism.

[bogan]

Well clearly the answer to the question 'is science reliable?' is a resounding 'not when humans try doing it'.

It would suggest that any medical research needs to be treated with scepticism - even if that research states that vaccines don't cause autism.

You should watch the video though. Or do we need to find an interview about the video so you can 'understand it'.

[Katman]

You should watch the video though. Or do we need to find an interview about the video so you can 'understand it'.

I did watch the video, you stupid cunt.

Did you?

[Virago]

Well clearly the answer to the question 'is science reliable?' is a resounding 'not when humans try doing it'.

It would suggest that any medical research needs to be treated with scepticism - even if that research states that vaccines don't cause autism.

Would it then be fair to say that any non-scientific conspiratorial waffle should also be treated with scepticism?

[Katman]

Would it then be fair to say that any non-scientific conspiratorial waffle should also be treated with scepticism?

Probably just as much as any story from an official source.

Didn't you watch the video?

[mada]

The only source one can truly trust:

http://shop.countdown.co.nz/Content/ProductImages/zoom/94547733.jpg/Watties-Squeezy-Tomato-Sauce.jpg

[bogan]

I did watch the video, you stupid cunt.

Did you?

Fuck off noddy, if you watched it you'd know how dumb your '- even if that research states that vaccines don't cause autism.' addendum was :facepalm: in addition to the 'medical' precursor...

[Katman]

Fuck off noddy, if you watched it you'd know how dumb your '- even if that research states that vaccines don't cause autism.' addendum was :facepalm: in addition to the 'medical' precursor...

Of course I watched it, you stupid fuck.

It starts off telling how difficult it can be to replicate someone else's test results (especially if you're not looking for the exact same thing) and questions the validity of a lot of stuff that gets published in medical journals. It then goes on to explain how easy it is to make mistakes in your research if the pharmaceutical company hasn't been entirely honest in their description of the antibodies they've provided you with, than moves onto the suggestion that medical journals don't much like publishing 'negative' results anyway.

Gotta admit, the bit about the P values tested my endurance limits but unless from now on you only produce test results with a P value of over 0.05 I'm going to ignore them.

All in all, the gist of the video is that science needs to be questioned - regardless of whether you end up with the answers you wanted or not.

So did you watch it?

[bogan]

Of course I watched it, you stupid fuck.

It starts off telling how difficult it can be to replicate someone else's test results (especially if you're not looking for the exact same thing) and questions the validity of a lot of stuff that gets published in medical journals. It then goes on to explain how easy it is to make mistakes in your research if the pharmaceutical company hasn't been entirely honest in their description of the antibodies they've provided you with, than moves onto the suggestion that medical journals don't much like publishing 'negative' results anyway.

Gotta admit, the bit about the P values tested my endurance limits but unless from now on you only produce test results with a P value of over 0.05 I'm going to ignore them.

All in all, the gist of the video is that science needs to be questioned - regardless of whether you end up with the answers you wanted or not.

So did you watch it?

There we go, now we've established you can summarise videos and shit. So no excuse for not doing so in future.

Dance little puppet, dance :wari:

Brings up the point that demon and many other have made before, why don't you question the science you post?

[Katman]

There we go, now we've established you can summarise videos and shit. So no excuse for not doing so in future.

Dance little puppet, dance :wari:

How old are you?

[bogan]

How old are you?

Down boy, I'm just not that into you.

[Katman]

Down boy, I'm just not that into you.

Well, you know where I am if you ever want to test out that purdy little mouth of yours.

[Katman]

https://www.focusforhealth.org/dr-brian-hooker-statement-william-thompson/

http://wakeup-world.com/2016/06/22/cdc-concealed-link-between-thimerosal-autism-over-decade-forced-release-incriminating-documents/

[TheDemonLord]

https://www.focusforhealth.org/dr-brian-hooker-statement-william-thompson/

http://wakeup-world.com/2016/06/22/cdc-concealed-link-between-thimerosal-autism-over-decade-forced-release-incriminating-documents/

That's $5 you owe me.

Also - none of those either produce the evidence that Dr Thompson claims to have nor do the science to prove what levels of Toxic Metals cause adverse affects in children.

So that would be 0/10 - It's the same BS you trotted out several pages ago, nothing has changed since, it's still just as wrong as when you first posted it.

What's more, you still haven't got the balls to discuss Japan (No MMR Vaccine, Multiple Measles outbreaks, dead children and hundreds of thousands of cases and one of the highest instances of Autism in the world)

What's the matter? Afraid a little hard truth might expose your batshit insane and dangerous beliefs for what they really are?

[Katman]

That's $5 you owe me.

Get it off Akzle.

He might even throw in a bag of chips.

[TheDemonLord]

Get it off Akzle.

He might even throw in a bag of chips.

I prefer Crisps.

[Katman]

(While I'm on a roll). (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/2/19/838659/-)

So why would anyone think that Merck should be trusted any more than Monsanto?

[bogan]

(While I'm on a roll). (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/2/19/838659/-)

So why would anyone think that Merck should be trusted any more than Monsanto?

Well it's a good thing he was high up in the company and could access the evidence he needed to validate his claims... oh wait :facepalm:

At the risk of continuing to be astounded by your absolute lack of rational thought, who the fuck is Merck and what does it have to do with Monstano?

[TheDemonLord]

(While I'm on a roll). (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/2/19/838659/-)

So why would anyone think that Merck should be trusted any more than Monsanto?

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/9a/b0/7d/9ab07dc4139b2029249c3904a46d4e4e.jpg

[Katman]

Well it's a good thing he was high up in the company and could access the evidence he needed to validate his claims... oh wait :facepalm:

Like a Managing Director of a country's operation perhaps?


At the risk of continuing to be astounded by your absolute lack of rational thought, who the fuck is Merck and what does it have to do with Monstano?

Is that a serious question?

[bogan]

Like a Managing Director of a country's operation perhaps?



Is that a serious question?

Yeh, given that he was so high up, and it happened so long ago, where is the evidence to substantiate his claims?

The second bit of it certainly is, the first is just preamble to make sure we're discussing the same thing, cos conspiracy theorists often say on thing and then say they mean another...

[Katman]

The second bit of it certainly is, the first is just preamble to make sure we're discussing the same thing, cos conspiracy theorists often say on thing and then say they mean another...

The connection is that both companies have now been implicated in fraudulent practices.

That shouldn't have been too hard to figure out.

[bogan]

The connection is that both companies have now been implicated in fraudulent practices.

That shouldn't have been too hard to figure out.

Ah, and the evidence, absent in both too I guess...

Roll away little puppet :killingme

[TheDemonLord]

The connection is that both companies have now been implicated in fraudulent practices.

That shouldn't have been too hard to figure out.

So, Dr Williams has made is evidence public then?

Oh Wait, no he hasn't

So it would be Accused, and as we all know - that which is submitted WITHOUT EVIDENCE, may be dismissed without evidence.

[Katman]

So it would be Accused

Yeah, in this context 'accused' means much the same as 'implicated'.

[bogan]

Yeah, in this context 'accused' means much the same as 'implicated'.

Ah, word pedantry, goodness me your argument must be a strong one :killingme

[TheDemonLord]

Yeah, in this context 'accused' means much the same as 'implicated'.

Not so - Implicated implies (you see what I did there) that some evidence has been presented with the accusation.

They Key point being that no such evidence has been presented.

[Katman]

Ah, word pedantry, goodness me your argument must be a strong one :killingme

I'm just pointing out that the choice of word doesn't change the context.

Or are you too stupid to figure that out?

[Katman]

Not so - Implicated implies (you see what I did there) that some evidence has been presented with the accusation.

You should probably fuck off and learn English.

[bogan]

I'm just pointing out that the choice of word doesn't change the context.

Or are you too stupid to figure that out?

And I'm pointing out that your focus on the words, over their context, meaning, and implications; is the act of somebody too stupid to acknowledge when they are wrong. I mean, some bloke said some things about some shit you want to beleive... so what? that's how scammers work, stop buying into this shit KM.

[TheDemonLord]

You should probably fuck off and learn English.

And that would be one more thing to add to the ever increasing list of things you are wrong about:

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/implicate

to show to be also involved, usually in an incriminating manner

The definition implies some level of objective proof, which is absent from the definition of accuse

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/accuse?s=t


to charge with the fault, offense, or crime (usually followed by of)

[mashman]

(While I'm on a roll). (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/2/19/838659/-)

So why would anyone think that Merck should be trusted any more than Monsanto?

bwaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaa... cannot spread for you again etc...

[yokel]

Well we did the old antenatal class thing last night and the chick running it said that "I'm contractually obligated to only promote vaccinations"

Next week some dumb cunt's going to be there doing a talk on all the bullshit about getting vaxxed, I'm going to giver fucking run around asking all sorts of cunty questions.

Eg, what the fuck kinda information can be obtained by a picture of some baby with measles?

Oh yeah some other useful idiot from the IDR will be there too, I'm going to fuck with them by saying that I'm not going to get a birth certificate and IRD number for my child.

Should be fun.

[bogan]

Well we did the old antenatal class thing last night and the chick running it said that "I'm contractually obligated to only promote vaccinations"

Next week some dumb cunt's going to be there doing a talk on all the bullshit about getting vaxxed, I'm going to giver fucking run around asking all sorts of cunty questions.

Eg, what the fuck kinda information can be obtained by a picture of some baby with measles?

Oh yeah some other useful idiot from the IDR will be there too, I'm going to fuck with them by saying that I'm not going to get a birth certificate and IRD number for my child.

Should be fun.

My money is on you getting there, realising you're no longer behind a keyboard and getting all meek and compliant...

Perhaps you should reflect on that.

[yokel]

My money is on you getting there, realising you're no longer behind a keyboard and getting all meek and compliant...

Perhaps you should reflect on that.

Speak for yourself you lame vjj.

[bogan]

Speak for yourself you lame vjj.

Take a vid then you pussy. Show us all how much better than The Man you are :killingme

[yokel]

Take a vid then you pussy. Show us all how much better than The Man you are :killingme

If you want to beat the man, you gota be the man.

Chances are you don't even know what being a man is??

[husaberg]

If you want to beat the man, you gota be the man.

Chances are you don't even know what being a man is??

Hint Yokel.... A real man an man doesn't need to source his wife out of a catalogue from a third world country.
A real man also puts the welfare of his children and spouse ahead of his own.
They do this by casting aside their prejudices and putting the needs of their family ahead of his wants.

[yokel]

Hint Yokel.... A real man an man doesn't need to source his wife out of a catalogue from a third world country.
A real man also puts the welfare of his children and spouse ahead of his own.
They do this by casting aside their prejudices and putting the needs of their family ahead of his wants.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

What a fucking white knight clown.

[TheDemonLord]

Well we did the old antenatal class thing last night and the chick running it said that "I'm contractually obligated to only promote vaccinations"

Next week some dumb cunt's going to be there doing a talk on all the bullshit about getting vaxxed, I'm going to giver fucking run around asking all sorts of cunty questions.

Eg, what the fuck kinda information can be obtained by a picture of some baby with measles?

Oh yeah some other useful idiot from the IDR will be there too, I'm going to fuck with them by saying that I'm not going to get a birth certificate and IRD number for my child.

Should be fun.

All I am going to say is that I hope - for your Child's sake, that if you don't Vaccinate, they don't catch one of the Viruses.

And yes, included in that statement is the knowledge that if this happens, you will forever gloat about how right you where etc.

Because in this case, the alternative (me being right) is that an innocent child suffers because they had the misfortune of having a fucking idiot for a Dad.

And I'd rather be wrong than have an innocent Suffer.

[yokel]

All I am going to say is that I hope - for your Child's sake, that if you don't Vaccinate, they don't catch one of the Viruses.

And yes, included in that statement is the knowledge that if this happens, you will forever gloat about how right you where etc.

Because in this case, the alternative (me being right) is that an innocent child suffers because they had the misfortune of having a fucking idiot for a Dad.

And I'd rather be wrong than have an innocent Suffer.

That's almost as sad as a sack of drowning kittens, Thanks.

[bogan]

If you want to beat the man, you gota be the man.

Chances are you don't even know what being a man is??

Considering the whole notion of 'the man' is just one big conspiracy theory, as are your thought processes; perhaps that mantra is your problem.

In any case, you going to video such a towering intellectual triumph as you have described? or are you too chicken shit to even pipe up with your anti-vaccer bullshit irl. For me, I know I'd handle irl shit differently, I'd just ignore or laugh at you; which is probably why you're too scared to voice it there.

[Katman]

And I'd rather be wrong than have an innocent Suffer.

Tell that to the children who have suffered massive psychological and physical setbacks due to adverse reactions to their vaccinations.

And tell it to their parents.

Fuckwit.

[husaberg]

lol
https://i.imgur.com/n5TJdtZ.jpg

The old dollar each way double conspiracy bluff trick..............;)

[Akzle]

Oh yeah some other useful idiot from the IDR will be there too, I'm going to fuck with them by saying that I'm not going to get a birth certificate and IRD number for my child.

Should be fun.

sound idea. but registering a live berth (or a dead one, for that matter) is, ahem, "compulsory"

"not going to get a berth certificate" is legal as. a certificate only acknowledges title as entered in the registry.

and the registration creates the entry in the ledger, which is given the number. you never "apply" for an IRD number, you're assigned it when your parents sign your person over to the state, vis, registration.

ahhh. fun and games.

[Drew]

Tell that to the children who have suffered massive psychological and physical setbacks due to adverse reactions to their vaccinations.

And tell it to their parents.

Fuckwit.Find ANY actual evidence of a REAL link between the two things, and I'll go apologise to any autistic person you can name.

I have actual experience here. You don't. My kids are immunised. They don't have buckled fucked up legs, and measles mumps and rubella haven't afflicted them either.

On top of that, they aren't anywhere near in the autistic spectrum.

[TheDemonLord]

Tell that to the children who have suffered massive psychological and physical setbacks due to adverse reactions to their vaccinations.

Which ones exactly? And before you try, known side effects not withstanding.



And tell it to their parents.

Tell them what? I'd more likely ask for proof that it was definitively the Vaccine that caused it, as opposed to the ol' leap of conclusion that something happened around the same time therefore god, I mean Vaccine.



Fuckwit.

Well, Yokels child has my sympathy - I mean just wait till Daddy tries to help with their Maths and Physics homework, if they arent hospitalized before then from a preventable virus

[Katman]

Which ones exactly? And before you try, known side effects not withstanding.

Are you saying no child has ever suffered severe and lasting adverse reactions due to their vaccinations?

Are you saying all those parents who say their child has, are imagining things?

Would you stand up in a room full of those parents and tell them that?

Fuckwit.

[Katman]

On top of that, they aren't anywhere near in the autistic spectrum.

Yay for you.

[husaberg]

Well, Yokels child has my sympathy - I mean just wait till Daddy tries to help with their Maths and Physics homework, if they arent hospitalized before then from a preventable virus

Assuming that hes the father of the child that is yet to be born, It also will have 1/2 of yokels genetics, it therefor should have all our sympathy..........:whistle:

[TheDemonLord]

Are you saying no child has ever suffered severe and lasting adverse reactions due to their vaccinations?

There are those that have suffered the known side effects, but these are known, There are zero however that have developed Autism or any other 'Psychological setback' directly caused by a Vaccination.


Are you saying all those parents who say their child has, are imagining things?

Yes.

Just like all those people that say God exists are imagining things.
Just like all those people that say they were abducted by Aliens are imagining things.
Just like all those people that say that 9/11 was an inside job are imagining things.

Let me put it in a way that you understand - almost every child gets Vaccinated (93% I think is the current rate, previously was as high as 99%), Some children develop conditions, it is therefore inevitable that sometimes a Vaccine dose will coincide with something else happening - but it does not mean that it caused that thing to happen.

To put it another way - its like you drinking a glass of water, getting hit by a car and saying 'I drank some water before the accident, therefore drinking water causes being hit by a car in special circumstances' - which is as retarded as claiming that Vaccines cause Autism.


Would you stand up in a room full of those parents and tell them that?

It's no different than standing in another other room full of misguided at best or delusional at worst people and telling them that their beliefs are all horseshit.


Fuckwit.

What's the Matter - Jealous?

[Akzle]

Just like all those people that say God exists are imagining things.
Just like all those people that say they were abducted by Aliens are imagining things.

given that you are only able to speak to your own perceptions, that's a big (and stupid) claim.

and how do you explain away >80% of thinking-capable adults having a belief in some kind of god?

do you claim that there is nothing science can't measure?



Just like all those people that say that 9/11 was an inside job are imagining things.
i cbf, so i'm going to share KM's sentiment:
fuckwit.

[TheDemonLord]

given that you are only able to speak to your own perceptions, that's a big (and stupid) claim.

On the Contrary, its simply a statement that there is no objective evidence for any form of God, and a review of history shows that things which used to be attributed as proof of God have, with greater understanding, been shown to be in fact a natural (and not supernatural) process or mechanism that can be replicated.


and how do you explain away >80% of thinking-capable adults having a belief in some kind of god?

Some kind, but not the same kind - that should be the hint that it is something we (as humans) made them up. And think on this - if 80% of the adult population are believers (and presumably pray daily to their God(s)) - why are things so fucked up? - to borrow Epicurus on this matter:


Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Not to mention Argumentum ad Populum.


do you claim that there is nothing science can't measure?

On the Contrary, only that there are things Science can't measure at this moment in time and that the absence of our ability to measure does not automatically mean God.


i cbf, so i'm going to share KM's sentiment:
fuckwit.

Faith is Faith, so it's to be expected.

[Akzle]

On the Contrary, its simply a statement that there is no objective evidence for any form of God,
≠

Just like all those people that say God exists are imagining things.


and a review of history shows that things which used to be attributed as proof of God have, with greater understanding, been shown to be in fact a natural (and not supernatural) process or mechanism that can be replicated.
and what of the god that asks no proof?

the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

do you believe dreams to be real? or more accurately, and to avoid you weaseling, do you believe people's perception of dreams to be real?


Some kind, but not the same kind - that should be the hint that it is something we (as humans) made them up.
hints? in science??
i know the platform you're observing from (lets call it ignorance) and going back to your point above god has historically been used to explain phenomena. but again, what of the gods that don't?


Not to mention Argumentum ad Populum.
valid.
but what then gives rise to such a popular idea?


On the Contrary, only that there are things Science can't measure at this moment in time and that the absence of our ability to measure does not automatically mean God.
and the absence of evidence...



Faith is Faith, so it's to be expected.

nono. i think you've proved it more'n once.

[Katman]

There are those that have suffered the known side effects, but these are known, There are zero however that have developed Autism or any other 'Psychological setback' directly caused by a Vaccination.

So the 3.5 billion dollars sitting in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund is just there to cover minor headaches and rashes, is it?

[TheDemonLord]

So the 3.5 billion dollars sitting in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund is just there to cover minor headaches and rashes, is it?

what part of Known side effects are you struggling to comprehend?

[Katman]

what part of Known side effects are you struggling to comprehend?

Well what side effects are you talking about then?

Do me a favour and see if you can get onto this page. It's the official government website dealing with vaccine injury compensation. For some reason it's not allowing me access to the page. (I think it might be a conspiracy). :sherlock:

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/

[TheDemonLord]

≠

Okay then: I have a 300 foot tall, invisible Fire breathing dragon in my Garage who has Magic powers.

Do I have a Dragon in my Garage?
If your answer is yes - then you are either Guillible (in which case, I have $20,000,000 from a recently deceased Prince that you can claim, if you will only forward me a down payment of $10,000 to cover lawyers fees) or you are going to blindly cling to that idea to avoid exposing the hypocrisy of your argument

If your answer is no - then I would ask on what basis you answer no - you could pick any of the following:

It's impossible for a 300 foot tall Dragon to exist in a 3 meter high garage,
Dragons don't exist
There is nothing known in science or nature that is truly invisible
Magic doesn't exist
There is no evidence of any form that any parts of my claim are true

And then I would proceed to say - ah but what if 2 people said it exists, or 10, or 100, or 1000? At what point does the number of people believing in Nonsense become any form of evidence to the contrary? The answer is there isn't. The claim is evaluated on its objective merits. Thus either you believe in my Garage Dragon or you are a hypocrite.


and what of the god that asks no proof?

The proof is not asked by any diety (quite the opposite - they are so fond of Faith) but by the Skeptic who says it's BS.


the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

True, but the proof relies on the person who makes the claim - e.g. that not only is there a supernatural being(s), that exists outside of the laws of nature*, but that we also know which God it is and by extension we know its will.

*Beings of supposed godlike power from possessing technology/science beyond our understanding are not Gods.


do you believe dreams to be real? or more accurately, and to avoid you weaseling, do you believe people's perception of dreams to be real?

Okay - define what you consider perception?

To clarify my position - last night I dreamt of an orgy with the Sweden womens Beach Volleyball team - and yet when I woke up, my hands and face were not covered in liberal amounts of Honey, Oil and dried pussy juice.

I conclude then that it was something I imagined, and in my imagination seemed real, but objectively did not occur.



hints? in science??
i know the platform you're observing from (lets call it ignorance) and going back to your point above god has historically been used to explain phenomena. but again, what of the gods that don't?

Show me a God or God(s) that do not attempt to explain something about the natural world (where we came from, Why Man is special, why bad shit happens etc.)

And yes, the platform I am observing from IS ignorance, the real question is, do you know why I would agree to that?



valid.
but what then gives rise to such a popular idea?

Some of our Innate traits maybe? Our need to explain why we are special, Our need to understand things, Our desire to explain where we came from


and the absence of evidence...

See Above


nono. i think you've proved it more'n once.

Again, Faith is Faith, and the actions of a few fit the pattern to a T.

[TheDemonLord]

Well what side effects are you talking about then?

Do me a favour and see if you can get onto this page. It's the official government website dealing with vaccine compensation. For some reason it doesn't seem to be allowing me access. (I think it might be a conspiracy). :sherlock:

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/

Yup, its definitely a Conspiracy - I forwarded your IP address to the NSA the other day. If you see someone in a suit pull up - you might want to run and never return.


Vaccines save lives by preventing disease.

Most people who get vaccines have no serious problems. Vaccines, like any medicines, can cause side effects, but most are very rare and very mild. Some health problems that follow vaccinations are not caused by vaccines.

In very rare cases, a vaccine can cause a serious problem, such as a severe allergic reaction.

So, Again - Apart from Known Side Effects (most commonly Allergic reactions, which the people administering have procedures in place for, and for some people with weak or compromised immune systems they can experience something approaching the full virus) - What in all Fuck are you referring to?

[mashman]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9f/Black_and_White_Minstrel_Show.jpg

[Katman]

So, Again - Apart from Known Side Effects (most commonly Allergic reactions, which the people administering have procedures in place for, and for some people with weak or compromised immune systems they can experience something approaching the full virus) - What in all Fuck are you referring to?

So I'll ask again.....

The 3.5 billion dollars sitting in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund is just to cover minor headaches and rashes, is it?


Yup, its definitely a Conspiracy - I forwarded your IP address to the NSA the other day. If you see someone in a suit pull up - you might want to run and never return.

So were you able to access the website?

[TheDemonLord]

So I'll ask again.....

The 3.5 billion dollars sitting in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund is just to cover minor headaches and rashes, is it?

See my previous statement - which covers this point entirely. What you are trying to do is setup a Stawman from a position of Stupidity.


So were you able to access the website?

Considering I quoted from the site - what do you think?

[Katman]

Considering I quoted from the site - what do you think?

You quoted something that I didn't know where it came from. Like I said, I can't access the page.

So is there a page in there detailing the compensation payouts?

And what would you define as a 'severe allergic reaction'?

[oldrider]

Vaccine from another perspective? - http://drsircus.com/medicine/scaremongering-from-the-vaccine-crowd/?utm_source=Dr+Sircus+Newsletter&utm_campaign=d608494ab1-Article_380_7_5_2016&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ea98c09673-d608494ab1-9531509

[Katman]

Am I really the only one who can't access that government vaccine compensation webpage? :scratch:

[TheDemonLord]

Vaccine from another perspective? - http://drsircus.com/medicine/scaremongering-from-the-vaccine-crowd/?utm_source=Dr+Sircus+Newsletter&utm_campaign=d608494ab1-Article_380_7_5_2016&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ea98c09673-d608494ab1-9531509


Doctor of Oriental and Pastoral Medicine

Nuff Said.

[TheDemonLord]

You quoted something that I didn't know where it came from. Like I said, I can't access the page.

You asked me if I could go to a website to get details for you
I then quoted something with details in

I know Logic isn't your forte, but one follows the other.


So is there a page in there detailing the compensation payouts?

There was a page detailing the compensation process, the payout is awarded by a Judge, and thus would be up to their discretion.


And what would you define as a 'severe allergic reaction'?

Wouldn't it be convenient if the Medical community already had a definition... (https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=severe+allergic+reaction&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=fNd-V7edMtvqugTI3KmADA)

[Katman]

Wouldn't it be convenient if the Medical community already had a definition... (https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=severe+allergic+reaction&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=fNd-V7edMtvqugTI3KmADA)

Wow, that sounds serious.

So can vaccines actually cause that?


There was a page detailing the compensation process, the payout is awarded by a Judge, and thus would be up to their discretion.

Is there any info on that page detailing what vaccine court judges have actually awarded in compensation? Or is that all 'undisclosed'?

[TheDemonLord]

Wow, that sounds serious.

So can vaccines actually cause that?

So can Peanuts, Grass, Water, Bannanas, Strawberries etc. etc. Allergic reactions are not the sole domain of Vaccines. And besides - they are Known Side Effects.

Ironically though - there is this link on the page you can't get to:

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/vaccineinjurytable.pdf

I'd suggest a different browser than your default or trying to access through a free Proxy.


Is there any info on that page detailing what vaccine court judges have actually awarded in compensation? Or is that all 'undisclosed'?

Not on specific cases - but there is this that gives total doses of all the Vaccines, total cases, total dismissed, total compensated and then the grand total of the compensations - you could do a mean average to get an approximate figure

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/data/statisticsreport.pdf

(again, Diff browser, or a Free Proxy)

Interesting thing to note is that the rate of injury for a case that the courts deem valid is 1.37 x10-4% - which compared to the rate of injury for the road (using US stats) is 0.78%

[Katman]

So can Peanuts, Grass, Water, Bannanas, Strawberries etc. etc. Allergic reactions are not the sole domain of Vaccines. And besides - they are Known Side Effects.

Ironically though - there is this link on the page you can't get to:

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/vaccineinjurytable.pdf

I'd suggest a different browser than your default or trying to access through a free Proxy.



Not on specific cases - but there is this that gives total doses of all the Vaccines, total cases, total dismissed, total compensated and then the grand total of the compensations - you could do a mean average to get an approximate figure

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/data/statisticsreport.pdf

(again, Diff browser, or a Free Proxy)

Interesting thing to note is that the rate of injury for a case that the courts deem valid is 1.37 x10-4% - which compared to the rate of injury for the road (using US stats) is 0.78%

I can't access either of those pages.

[TheDemonLord]

I can't access either of those pages.

Did you try using a Free Proxy or a different browser?

[Katman]

Did you try using a Free Proxy or a different browser?

Dude, I'm not an IT nerd.

I wouldn't know what a free proxy is if it fucked me up the arse.

And why wouldn't I be able to access the site using Chrome?

[Akzle]

Okay then: I have a 300 foot tall, invisible Fire breathing dragon in my Garage who has Magic powers.

Do I have a Dragon in my Garage? [waffle removed ]
my answer is no, for the reason that a) you don't believe dragons exist and b) you're a bit of a dick, and dragons are fairly scrupulous in who they hang out with.


If your answer is yes - then you are either Guillible (in which case, I have $20,000,000 from a recently deceased Prince that you can claim, if you will only forward me a down payment of $10,000 to cover lawyers fees) or you are going to blindly cling to that idea to avoid exposing the hypocrisy of your argument

If your answer is no - then I would ask on what basis you answer no - you could pick any of the following:

It's impossible for a 300 foot tall Dragon to exist in a 3 meter high garage,
Dragons don't exist
There is nothing known in science or nature that is truly invisible
Magic doesn't exist
There is no evidence of any form that any parts of my claim are true

And then I would proceed to say - ah but what if 2 people said it exists, or 10, or 100, or 1000? At what point does the number of people believing in Nonsense become any form of evidence to the contrary? The answer is there isn't. The claim is evaluated on its objective merits. Thus either you believe in my Garage Dragon or you are a hypocrite.




The proof is not asked by any diety (quite the opposite - they are so fond of Faith) but by the Skeptic who says it's BS.
becomes irrelevant when you know it's from a position of (seemingly wilful) ignorance.

like asking a colourblind human what purple tastes like. you simply lack the mechanism to comprehend, or even observe.

this does not mean purple isn't delicious.


True, but the proof relies on the person who makes the claim
your claim being that no form of god exists. prove it.
(with science.., proving a negative and whatnot)


- e.g. that not only is there a supernatural being(s), that exists outside of the laws of nature*, but that we also know which God it is and by extension we know its will.

*Beings of supposed godlike power from possessing technology/science beyond our understanding are not Gods.

laws of nature ≠ higher technology/science

indeed, the laws of nature could well be called god.

seriously dude, you're failing.
pass it to the left.


Okay - define what you consider perception?

To clarify my position - last night I dreamt of an orgy with the Sweden womens Beach Volleyball team - and yet when I woke up, my hands and face were not covered in liberal amounts of Honey, Oil and dried pussy juice.

I conclude then that it was something I imagined, and in my imagination seemed real, but objectively did not occur.

but your perception of the dream DID occur. does that make it "not real"?
science couldn't tell you that you did or did not perceive it.

similarly, science cannot tell that people do or do not perceive god.



Show me a God or God(s) that do not attempt to explain something about the natural world (where we came from, Why Man is special, why bad shit happens etc.)
no. go look it up.
you seem to base most of your ignorance on christian (>roman) and moslem ideology, while you may have a glancing knowledge of judaism, budhism or krishna, again, you're blinded by yourself.


And yes, the platform I am observing from IS ignorance, the real question is, do you know why I would agree to that?
because it's scientifically verifiable fact :bleh:


Some of our Innate traits maybe? Our need to explain why we are special, Our need to understand things, Our desire to explain where we came from
innateness doesn't exist.
not all god-ologies claim humans are special, or different to, seperate from, have dominion


Again, Faith is Faith, and the actions of a few fit the pattern to a T.

https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwoodni.com.au%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2Fold-coal-iron-9.jpg&f=1

[TheDemonLord]

Dude, I'm not an IT nerd.

I wouldn't know what a free proxy is if it fucked me up the arse.

And why wouldn't I be able to access the site using Chrome?

You have Google.

Stop being Useless.

Google Free Proxy.

Click on the First Link.

Put Link in where it says to put the Link.

If I thought it was in anyway difficult (and considering my low opinion of your capability) I wouldn't have suggested it.

As for why can't access from Chrome, could be any number of things, but it works fine in my instance of Chrome.

[oldrider]

Nuff Said.

Hadn't noticed that actually - had to go back and check - but hey maybe all of that and your reaction says more about you than about him? :scratch:

[Katman]

You have Google.

Stop being Useless.

Google Free Proxy.

Click on the First Link.

Put Link in where it says to put the Link.

If I thought it was in anyway difficult (and considering my low opinion of your capability) I wouldn't have suggested it.

As for why can't access from Chrome, could be any number of things, but it works fine in my instance of Chrome.

Wow, 3.3 billion dollars have been paid out in compensation since the introduction of the VICP.

:gob:

[Katman]

Can anyone point me to where I might find info on what ACC might have paid out in vaccine injury compensation over the years?

[TheDemonLord]

my answer is no, for the reason that a) you don't believe dragons exist and b) you're a bit of a dick, and dragons are fairly scrupulous in who they hang out with.

Except you have not proved (by the same standard you are trying to hold a Deity to) that my Dragon doesn't exist.

(And besides, I listen to Metal, and Dragons are Metal as Fuck)


becomes irrelevant when you know it's from a position of (seemingly wilful) ignorance.

Actually, no it doesn't because we have Mormons and Scientologists (created by Conmen, which would be a very objective definition of Wilful Ignorance)


like asking a colourblind human what purple tastes like. you simply lack the mechanism to comprehend, or even observe.

But suppose the Human gave an answer - by your reasoning, the Answer MUST be valid (if we are talking about matters of perception),


this does not mean purple isn't delicious.

Unless of course what was being referred to as Purple was in fact Chocolate - and therein lies the fundamental flaw with Perception.


your claim being that no form of god exists. prove it

Close, but no Cigar. That argument pre-supposes that God is the default position. What evidence have you got that God should be the default position?

My position is that the default is no God, there is no evidence to prove god, therefore there is nothing to change my position from there being a god.


(with science.., proving a negative and whatnot)

See Above - there is no evidence to prove the positive claim that any God or Gods exist.


laws of nature ≠ higher technology/science

Perhaps I should rephrase - an Aircraft flies because of well understood physical principles, but go back 300 years, it would have been considered a Miracle (or Act of God)


indeed, the laws of nature could well be called god.

Nope, a Key attribute of any Deity is that they are personal and have conscious and will - Laws do not, they are constants.


seriously dude, you're failing.
pass it to the left.

See above.


but your perception of the dream DID occur. does that make it "not real"?
science couldn't tell you that you did or did not perceive it.

See above for the problem of Perception based realities.


similarly, science cannot tell that people do or do not perceive god.

But we have (with limited replication) been able to induce a religious experience by subjecting parts of the brain with Magnetic fields - which then brings us to occams razor:

If we can replicate the experience in a Lab, using things occuring in nature (magnetic fields certainly exist) what is more likely: An all powerful being that exists outside of natural world or you were experiencing the effects of a specific Magnetic field, effectively tripping balls.


no. go look it up.
you seem to base most of your ignorance on christian (>roman) and moslem ideology, while you may have a glancing knowledge of judaism, budhism or krishna, again, you're blinded by yourself.

It's broader than that, but Okay then, show my a religion that doesn't have some form of creation Myth?


because it's scientifically verifiable fact :bleh:

The Point. You missed it.


innateness doesn't exist.

Mashman, is that you? Are you saying that none of the things you do are innate to you as a human, you as a mammal, you as a social creature (with the biological definition of Social being used)?


not all god-ologies claim humans are special, or different to, seperate from, have dominion

Not all, but most do in some form or another, and almost all have creation myths - the point being there is a repeating pattern of things that are associated with any deistic belief, may not have all of them, but all have some of them.

[TheDemonLord]

Hadn't noticed that actually - had to go back and check - but hey maybe all of that and your reaction says more about you than about him? :scratch:

That he's not an actual doctor and his phony degrees aren't worth spit and his entire blog is an attempt at Argument from Authority?

[TheDemonLord]

Can anyone point me to where I might find info on what ACC might have paid out in vaccine injury compensation over the years?

At a guess, I'd say you would have to request that, but even then the data is likely to be incomplete (considering that unlike the US, our free Healthcare system would cover a lot of the costs that the US system would have to pay out in a settlement)

I'll admit it would be interesting - but again, the rate of incidence is astronomically low.

[Katman]

I'll admit it would be interesting - but again, the rate of incidence is astronomically low.

If the US Vaccine Courts have paid out 3.3 billion dollars in compensation over the last 30 years or so, why do you think they're currently sitting on a nest egg of 3.5 billion dollars in the fund?

Are they preparing themselves for an astronomical increase in the number of compensation claims?

Or is the whole system just another way to make money?

[TheDemonLord]

If the US Vaccine Courts have paid out 3.3 billion dollars in compensation over the last 30 years or so, why do you think they're currently sitting on a nest egg of 3.5 billion dollars in the fund?

Are they preparing themselves for an astronomical increase in the number of compensation claims?

Or is the whole system just another way to make money?

Probably the Latter, or there may be some mandate that dictates they have to have x amount, where x is a function of how many vaccinations are done.

[Katman]

....or there may be some mandate that dictates they have to have x amount, where x is a function of how many vaccinations are done.

That almost sounds like a guilty conscience.

[TheDemonLord]

That almost sounds like a guilty conscience.

Of course it does....








If you are a delusional loony who sees conspiracy in everything

[Katman]

Of course it does....








If you are a delusional loony who sees conspiracy in everything

Why would they have a mandate like that for any other reason than preparing for a worst possible scenario?

[Akzle]

Except you have not proved (by the same standard you are trying to hold a Deity to) that my Dragon doesn't exist.

(And besides, I listen to Metal, and Dragons are Metal as Fuck)
no. the'yre objectively not.

my presupposition of your dragon, as with your presupposition of god, is negative.


But suppose the Human gave an answer - by your reasoning, the Answer MUST be valid (if we are talking about matters of perception),

jesus, with all of your words in my mouth how can i be expected to say anything else :facepalm:


Unless of course what was being referred to as Purple was in fact Chocolate - and therein lies the fundamental flaw with Perception.
one can define god. fairly unequivocably. and one can state, equally unequivocably, that >80% of adults experience or perceive god.


Close, but no Cigar. That argument pre-supposes that God is the default position. What evidence have you got that God should be the default position?

My position is that the default is no God, there is no evidence to prove god, therefore there is nothing to change my position from there being a god.
what evidence... I know god.
your failure to be able to measure or perceive that/it really isn't my problem.


Nope, a Key attribute of any Deity is that they are personal and have conscious and will - Laws do not, they are constants.
according to whom.

and, what laws are constant :laugh:


But we have (with limited replication) been able to induce a religious experience by subjecting parts of the brain with Magnetic fields - which then brings us to occams razor:

If we can replicate the experience in a Lab, using things occuring in nature (magnetic fields certainly exist) what is more likely: An all powerful being that exists outside of natural world or you were experiencing the effects of a specific Magnetic field, effectively tripping balls.
so too can be induced by yoga, or simply breathing differently, or in the abcense of those specific magnetic fields (or, "any" fields).

your argument = hitting you in the head with a bat would cause a headache.
but that does not mean every headache (there's another one for you to explain) was caused by a bat.


It's broader than that, but Okay then, show my a religion that doesn't have some form of creation Myth?
don't bring religion into it. it's against the rules.


The Point. You missed it.
All of The Points. You missed .


Mashman, is that you? Are you saying that none of the things you do are innate to you as a human, you as a mammal, you as a social creature (with the biological definition of Social being used)?
no. but it is something he opened my eyes to.
how, if god is not innate, have so many come to know it? if your ideas are right, you being human (i assume), your ideas must be innate, why do most people disagree with you?


Not all, but most do in some form or another, and almost all have creation myths - the point being there is a repeating pattern of things that are associated with any deistic belief, may not have all of them, but all have some of them.
the point actually being, that in a world before internets, how did remote cultures with no scientifically known means of communication, come up with pretty much the exact same stories, at the exact same times.

[Katman]

And let's not forget that it's not the pharmaceutical industry that has stumped up the 3.3 billion in compensation already paid and the 3.5 billion squirreled away for a rainy day.

It's the US taxpayer.

So the pharmaceutical industry isn't even responsible for compensating for the damage their products may cause.

[yokel]

When a discussion turns to whether God exists then you've run out of bullshit to bring up.

BTW DNA is no random accident.

[Banditbandit]

BTW DNA is no random accident.

Now I suppose you're going to tell us it was "false flag" ???

[Katman]

Not all, but most do in some form or another, and almost all have creation myths - the point being there is a repeating pattern of things that are associated with any deistic belief, may not have all of them, but all have some of them.

Your problem is in your perception of 'god'.

My perception of 'god' is an all encompassing energy source.

The sort of energy source that makes atoms vibrate.

[TheDemonLord]

Why would they have a mandate like that for any other reason than preparing for a worst possible scenario?

If the approximate rate of side effects is known, then it would be prudent to have a fund based on anticipating the number cases of side effects.

See. No Conspiracy needed.

[Katman]

If the approximate rate of side effects is known, then it would be prudent to have a fund based on anticipating the number cases of side effects.

Well 3.5 billion dollars should cover a fair few 'severe allergic reactions' at least.

[TheDemonLord]

Your problem is in your perception of 'god'.

My perception of 'god' is an all encompassing energy source.

The sort of energy source that makes atoms vibrate.

Then why call it God?

[Katman]

Then why call it God?

I don't.

I only used the word so you'd know what I was talking about.

(And that's why I don't bother to capitalise the word).

[Akzle]

Your problem is in your perception of 'god'.

My perception of 'god' is an all encompassing energy source.

The sort of energy source that makes atoms vibrate.

"source" implies it's seperate and remote from you... and has a destination

[Katman]

"source" implies it's seperate and remote from you... and has a destination

Don't fret - I'm plugged into the source.

[TheDemonLord]

no. the'yre objectively not.

my presupposition of your dragon, as with your presupposition of god, is negative.

BS, and you know it. Either My Dragon exists and so does God, or My Dragon doesn't exist (and neither does god) - because the evidence presented for both the existence of My Dragon and the Existence of God is the same.


jesus, with all of your words in my mouth how can i be expected to say anything else :facepalm:

Or, I'm just pointing out the problem with a perception based worldview - that perceptions can be wrong. That's why Science works and other methods don't, because Science doesn't rely on perceptions (and no weaseling about perceptions of measurements).


one can define god. fairly unequivocably. and one can state, equally unequivocably, that >80% of adults experience or perceive god.

Again, with the Argumentum ad Populum - at one time 100% percent of people perceived the world to be Flat, Is the world Flat? If your answer is no, then it doesn't matter what % you throw at me, it doesn't mean spit.



what evidence... I know god.

you THINK you know God.


your failure to be able to measure or perceive that/it really isn't my problem.

It is when you are saying that your God is real and not just an imaginary friend.



according to whom.

It's one of the characteristics of God


and, what laws are constant :laugh:

Most are, until you get to a Black hole or down to the Quantum level - but that is where the quest for the Unified Theory comes in.


so too can be induced by yoga, or simply breathing differently, or in the abcense of those specific magnetic fields (or, "any" fields).

Soooo, you can experience God by doing Yoga, and this proves that there is an all powerfull supernatural being that controls everything.

Occam weeps in his Grave.



your argument = hitting you in the head with a bat would cause a headache.
but that does not mean every headache (there's another one for you to explain) was caused by a bat.

No, but it does mean that if we can replicate the experience we can find the cause - and if your God turns out to be nothing more than a unique chemical reaction in the brain, then what?


don't bring religion into it. it's against the rules.

Wah.


All of The Points. You missed.

Quite, but still doesn't excuse you from a very key point that I was making.



no. but it is something he opened my eyes to.
how, if god is not innate, have so many come to know it? if your ideas are right, you being human (i assume), your ideas must be innate, why do most people disagree with you?

the point actually being, that in a world before internets, how did remote cultures with no scientifically known means of communication, come up with pretty much the exact same stories, at the exact same times.[/QUOTE]

It's almost like we evolved from a single species and through the process of Natural selection developed and reinforced certain traits (which were successful in being passed on to the next generation) and then when we migrated out of Africa, we took those common traits with us.

Traits like care for your offspring (which are as close to universal as you can get, even more so than God)

Oh Wait....

[oldrider]

That he's not an actual doctor and his phony degrees aren't worth spit and his entire blog is an attempt at Argument from Authority?

Weird he may well be - the reference material provided is more interesting than his blog - but your mind was probably already made up! :cool:

[Akzle]

BS, and you know it. Either My Dragon exists and so does God, or My Dragon doesn't exist (and neither does god) - because the evidence presented for both the existence of My Dragon and the Existence of God is the same.
have you perceived a dragon in your garage?


Or, I'm just pointing out the problem with a perception based worldview - that perceptions can be wrong. That's why Science works and other methods don't, because Science doesn't rely on perceptions (and no weaseling about perceptions of measurements).
except it isn't and you're grasping for hurdles to fall over to reinforce your beliefs.


Again, with the Argumentum ad Populum - at one time 100% percent of people perceived the world to be Flat, Is the world Flat? If your answer is no, then it doesn't matter what % you throw at me, it doesn't mean spit.
i never did.
not that i have any evidence that it isn't. do you?


you THINK you know God.
no, im pretty sure i know what i know. and that infact there's nothing i don't know, as far as im aware.


It is when you are saying that your God is real and not just an imaginary friend.
no. no it really isn't.


It's one of the characteristics of God
according to whom


Most are, until you get to a Black hole or down to the Quantum level - but that is where the quest for the Unified Theory comes in.
so, except for some, all laws are constant. as far as you can perceive. glad we could clear that up, that this is a your-failing-perception issue rather than a fact issue.


Soooo, you can experience God by doing Yoga, and this proves that there is an all powerfull supernatural being that controls everything.
according to whom


No, but it does mean that if we can replicate the experience we can find the cause - and if your God turns out to be nothing more than a unique chemical reaction in the brain, then what?

then i'd roll and smoke it.


Quite, but still doesn't excuse you from a very key point that I was making.
you'll have to be a bit clearer. i must have missed it in the waffle.



It's almost like we evolved from a single species and through the process of Natural selection developed and reinforced certain traits (which were successful in being passed on to the next generation) and then when we migrated out of Africa, we took those common traits with us.

Traits like care for your offspring (which are as close to universal as you can get, even more so than God)

Oh Wait....
yes, wait indeed, because that was irrelevant as fuck.
re-read it and try again.

[Katman]

And anyway, getting back to the matter in hand.......

Is no-one curious as to the settlement amounts for successful vaccine injury claims?

Like, if you found out that someone was awarded a sum numbering in the hundreds of thousands of dollars (or even into the millions), would you at least say to yourself "fuck me, that must have been a fucking severe allergic reaction" or would you maintain an air of complete disinterest? (Like I suspect TDL would).

[TheDemonLord]

Weird he may well be - the reference material provided is more interesting than his blog - but your mind was probably already made up! :cool:

It was partially made up within the opening parapragh (his comments about thermisol for example), then after skim reading through it, I saw his creds and didn't recognise them, so I looked them up, and found them to be Bogus - that was the point my mind was fully made up.

[TheDemonLord]

have you perceived a dragon in your garage?

What matters (according to you) is that I say I have.


except it isn't and you're grasping for hurdles to fall over to reinforce your beliefs.

Then we have reached an Impasse, Because either Perceptions are 100% reliable (in which case you have to believe I have a dragon in my Garage) or Perceptions can be and frequently are wrong (which is my entire argument)


i never did.

It was subtle, but you did - you said that 80% experience or perceive god, based on the popular belief of who/what god is.


not that i have any evidence that it isn't. do you?

I've flown around the world (across the Pacific and across the Atlantic), the Law of Gravity by some extrapolation means that an object must be spherical, and finally distant objects are only seen by their top most feature when on a 'flat' surface (ie the Ocean)


no, im pretty sure i know what i know. and that infact there's nothing i don't know, as far as im aware.

I'll come back to this


no. no it really isn't.

Why? because that would make you borderline insane? Kinda sums up my views on people with a deistic beliefs...


according to whom

I'll concede there is debate - but most Theologians tend to define God as have conscious, will and thought, which is different from Energy (which is absent of these things) - I've seen debates about God = Energy, and most tend to stick with the definition that I am using (mainly because Plucky Atheists say that if God has no conscious will and thought, he's not really a god then is he)


so, except for some, all laws are constant. as far as you can perceive. glad we could clear that up, that this is a your-failing-perception issue rather than a fact issue.

Laws and constants are not subject to perception, a proof of a law is objective - that is the fundamental difference - it's one of the reasons that Science (as a method for explaining why things are) has been vastly more successful than any other method.



according to whom

No one, that was Reductio ad absurdum




then i'd roll and smoke it.


you'll have to be a bit clearer. i must have missed it in the waffle.

Maybe if you laid off the Rolling and the Smoking you wouldn't have missed it

I said I would come back to this comment:


no, im pretty sure i know what i know. and that infact there's nothing i don't know, as far as im aware.

I admit that everything I do is from a position of Ignorance, and in recognizing this fact, I go out into the world to learn and to maybe make that position of Ignorance a tiny bit smaller. This is the very foundation of the Scientific mind - The statement 'I know' is not as profound as the statement 'I do not know' - for where we do not know, there is the chance for discovery and Knowledge.

And then we come to your statement that there is nothing you don't know that you are aware of. How then do you acquire new knowledge? Or have you closed your mind off so completely as to not care? Either way, I pity you if that is your world view, I can't think of anything more boring.


yes, wait indeed, because that was irrelevant as fuck.
re-read it and try again.

Step 2 from Mashie's playbook - Something disproves my entire world view - let's just dismiss it as irrelevant.

[TheDemonLord]

And anyway, getting back to the matter in hand.......

Is no-one curious as to the settlement amounts for successful vaccine injury claims?

Like, if you found out that someone was awarded a sum numbering in the hundreds of thousands of dollars (or even into the millions), would you at least say to yourself "fuck me, that must have been a fucking severe allergic reaction" or would you maintain an air of complete disinterest? (Like I suspect TDL would).

Did ya factor in that the US doesn't have subsidized health Care? So a Premature birth, with 2 months of Neonatal care: $900,000, also the precedents with regards to emotional distress etc. I really wouldn't be surprised if a compensation package went into the Millions in the US

[Katman]

I admit that everything I do is from a position of Ignorance, and in recognizing this fact, I go out into the world to learn and to maybe make that position of Ignorance a tiny bit smaller.

Well that exercise has been a dismal failure for you then, hasn't it?

[TheDemonLord]

Well that exercise has been a dismal failure for you then, hasn't it?

Well, considering how often I'm able to beat you soundly in a debate to the point where you just start hurling insults, red repping and generally acting like a child who has just been told 'No', I'd beg to differ.

(plus I'm able to use Google without being told to)

[Akzle]

What matters (according to you) is that I say I have.



Then we have reached an Impasse, Because either Perceptions are 100% reliable (in which case you have to believe I have a dragon in my Garage) or Perceptions can be and frequently are wrong (which is my entire argument)
except that you've never asserted you have perceived a dragon, you just bowled a hypothetical.



It was subtle, but you did - you said that 80% experience or perceive god, based on the popular belief of who/what god is.
i don't do subtle. i stated fairly explicitly.
a) who PERCEIVED the world to be flat, not just ran with the science of the day ?
b) do you truly mean to say that no-one like me existed that, if not just to be contrary, would say "no, more of a round shape"?



I've flown around the world (across the Pacific and across the Atlantic), the Law of Gravity by some extrapolation means that an object must be spherical, and finally distant objects are only seen by their top most feature when on a 'flat' surface (ie the Ocean)
really? or were you put into a metal thing with engines and flappy bits, drugged, hypnotised and taken to a truman-esque set of "another country"


Why? because that would make you borderline insane? Kinda sums up my views on people with a deistic beliefs...
:killingme :killingme

...borderline :laugh:



Laws and constants are not subject to perception, a proof of a law is objective
objective... as perceived by scientists.

No one, that was Reductio ad absurdum
no that was reductio ad stupidum, you being the provider of stupid.
that's not logic at all. that's you, yet again, applying your own prejudice to achieve digestable confirmation bias for your tum-tum.

Maybe if you laid off the Rolling and the Smoking you wouldn't have missed it
maybe if you actually had a point you could articulate it.


And then we come to your statement that there is nothing you don't know that you are aware of.
and then we insert an image with you implied as a dot referenced by an arrow and the word "point"


Step 2 from Mashie's playbook - Something disproves my entire world view - let's just dismiss it as irrelevant.

excepting you didn't disprove shit.
just said some literally, objectively, empirically irrelevant shit.

[Katman]

Did ya factor in that the US doesn't have subsidized health Care? So a Premature birth, with 2 months of Neonatal care: $900,000, also the precedents with regards to emotional distress etc. I really wouldn't be surprised if a compensation package went into the Millions in the US

Yeah, I imagine the costs associated with managing a permanent dose of encephalopathy would be astronomical.

[Katman]

Well, considering how often I'm able to beat you soundly in a debate.....



:killingme

[TheDemonLord]

Yeah, I imagine the costs associated with managing a permanent dose of encephalopathy would be astronomical.

Actually, Death tends to be quite cheap.

[Katman]

Actually, Death tends to be quite cheap.

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at there.

Are you equating a permanent case of brain damage to death?

[mada]

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at there.

Are you equating a permanent case of brain damage to death?

Imagine you're an evil conspiring government intent on suppressing the truth about vaccines with your evil drug making funders and media lackeys as part of the Axis of Evil.

What logic is there in you setting up a specific court to listen to claims regarding vaccination injuries and award damages???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_court

<_<

What if the claims were actually false flags, designed by the government to undermine the credibility of respectable people like Andrew Wakefield and distract him by getting him to waste time on pointless appeals? I mean has anyone actually seen the money physically being handed over after a court ruling? And did anyone actually check that the dollar bills were in fact legal tender and not fake marked cash.:confused:

[Katman]

Imagine you're an evil conspiring government intent on suppressing the truth about vaccines with your evil drug making funders and media lackeys as part of the Axis of Evil.

What logic is there in you setting up a specific court to listen to claims regarding vaccination injuries and award damages???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_court

<_<

What if the claims were actually false flags, designed by the government to undermine the credibility of respectable people like Andrew Wakefield and distract him by getting him to waste time on pointless appeals? I mean has anyone actually seen the money physically being handed over after a court ruling? And did anyone actually check that the dollar bills were in fact legal tender and not fake marked cash.:confused:

The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (and it's associated Vaccine Courts) was introduced in the late 80's to put an end to pharmaceutical companies being sued for the damage caused by their products.

(Although I imagine you already know that and were simply being deliberately moronic).

[TheDemonLord]

except that you've never asserted you have perceived a dragon, you just bowled a hypothetical.

And that makes a difference?


i don't do subtle. i stated fairly explicitly
a) who PERCEIVED the world to be flat, not just ran with the science of the day ?
b) do you truly mean to say that no-one like me existed that, if not just to be contrary, would say "no, more of a round shape"?

a) Everyone, since we are not at sufficient altitude to percieve the curvature of the earth
b) probably was, and they were promptly tortured by the various institutions.


really? or were you put into a metal thing with engines and flappy bits, drugged, hypnotised and taken to a truman-esque set of "another country"

Close, except for the Drugged, Hypnotised and the Truman reference. Also Time Zones.



:killingme :killingme

...borderline :laugh:

Right


objective... as perceived by scientists.

And that is the beauty of science - don't think it's right? You are free to recreate the experiment yourself


no that was reductio ad stupidum, you being the provider of stupid.
that's not logic at all. that's you, yet again, applying your own prejudice to achieve digestable confirmation bias for your tum-tum.

Of course it's stupd - its taking your argument and extending it to the point to show its absurdity.


maybe if you actually had a point you could articulate it.

If you fail to understand the point being that I accept there are things I don't know (the position of Ignorance) and actively seek to enlighten myself, then maybe your position of: there's nothing i don't know, as far as im aware.

might have a few problems with it.


and then we insert an image with you implied as a dot referenced by an arrow and the word "point"

That door swings both ways.


excepting you didn't disprove shit.
just said some literally, objectively, empirically irrelevant shit.

It's the Literal, Objective and Empirical part that makes it Relevant.

[TheDemonLord]

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at there.

Are you equating a permanent case of brain damage to death?

Shit, you are right - I forgot about you and Yokel!

[Akzle]

And that makes a difference?
yes, because i can't tell you (nor prove either way, except by going into your garage) that you did/do not perceive it, if you honestly (with yourself) assert you do.


a) Everyone, since we are not at sufficient altitude to percieve the curvature of the earth
your mum's not at sufficient altitude



Close, except for the Drugged, Hypnotised and the Truman reference. Also Time Zones.
given that "time" as you reference it, is entirely a human construct (and poorly implemented at that), that means fuck all.
and how do you KNOW that? how do you know that everyone who goes to the "airport" isn't given the same dose and treatment?
how do you know the world hasn't been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth...


Right
toast.
http://mentalfloss.com/article/60013/11-extreme-toasters-your-breakfast-pleasure


And that is the beauty of science - don't think it's right? You are free to recreate the experiment yourself
have a turn on nibiru/ planet x theory


Of course it's stupd - its taking your argument and extending it to the point to show its absurdity.
no, that's not taking my point at all. that's your flawed extrapolation of where you'd like my point to lead.


there's nothing i don't know, as far as im aware.
still not getting it, huh.


That door swings both ways.
your mums door swings both ways.

[TheDemonLord]

yes, because i can't tell you (nor prove either way, except by going into your garage) that you did/do not perceive it, if you honestly (with yourself) assert you do.

And that is the entire point - you can prove by going into my Garage and from that proof you can either conclude that I am lieing or I am delusional. To be clear - that what I perceived is not in line with reality.


your mum's not at sufficient altitude

She is short...


given that "time" as you reference it, is entirely a human construct (and poorly implemented at that), that means fuck all.
and how do you KNOW that? how do you know that everyone who goes to the "airport" isn't given the same dose and treatment?
how do you know the world hasn't been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth...

GPS, Jet Lag, Observable changes in the land mass, Different meteorological conditions, the water swirls the opposite way down the plug hole, The Constellations that are visible in night sky have changed to be 6 months out. Different Flora and Fauna (especially Migratory specied) Different Seasons.

Shall I go on?


have a turn on nibiru/ planet x theory

you should know by now my thoughts on unsupported Quackery.


no, that's not taking my point at all. that's your extrapolation of where my flawed point leads.

Fixed it for you.


still not getting it, huh.

As I said, what a boring existence.


your mums door swings both ways.

But at least her door isn't attached to a Barn.

[Akzle]

last one.

And that is the entire point - you can prove by going into my Garage and from that proof you can either conclude that I am lieing or I am delusional. To be clear - that what I perceived is not in line with reality.
it would be your reality. your perception becomes no less real for not being shared.
but i have a fairly good relationship with dragons and if you did have one im pretty sure i'd know about it.


She is short...
your mum's sh//
o, wait...


GPS, Jet Lag, Observable changes in the land mass, Different meteorological conditions, the water swirls the opposite way down the plug hole, The Constellations that are visible in night sky have changed to be 6 months out. Different Flora and Fauna (especially Migratory specied) Different Seasons.

Shall I go on?
the truman show.
how, especially how, can you believe a GPS.


you should know by now my thoughts on unsupported Quackery.
disprove it.




Fixed it for you.
no you didn't. you just reaffirmed your bias.



As I said, what a boring existence.
STILL not *getting* it. huh.




But at least her door isn't attached to a Barn.
if by "barn" you mean "uterus" and by "door" you mean....

[TheDemonLord]

last one.

it would be your reality. your perception becomes no less real for not being shared.
but i have a fairly good relationship with dragons and if you did have one im pretty sure i'd know about it.

That's kinda the very definition of 'Delusional' - when your perception is not inline with reality.


the truman show.

Me thinks the Ice you are in is thin - considering Man cannot manipulate the Stars.


how, especially how, can you believe a GPS.

When it gives a reading that is in unison with all the other factors, then....


disprove it.

Wrong - the burden of proof is on the one making the claim - you raised the theory, burden of proof is on you to prove it is valid.


no you didn't. you just reaffirmed your bias.

That is the only response you can make because anything else collapses your house of cards.


STILL not *getting* it. huh.

Or the alternative.


if by "barn" you mean "uterus" and by "door" you mean....

No, I was implying something along the lines of Bestiality and your Mum.

[bogan]

Equating the belief or disbelief in god to that of antivaccers disbelief in basic science is at a cursory glance, a poor choice of strawman. Simply because there is widespread belief for a higher power, and scientific scrutiny cannot disprove it. But then if you look closer, it's some sort of reacharound strawman, since applying similar scientific scrutiny to an antivaccer's belief, gives a much different overall answer, yet one that is similar to the zeolots and cultists. Is that what anti-vaccers are, just more zealots and cultists championing uneducation and illogic?


Now I suppose you're going to tell us it was "false flag" ???

Post of the week :laugh:

[Drew]

Why would they have a mandate like that for any other reason than preparing for a worst possible scenario?No one has said that there aren't people who react to the vaccines. He government obviously knows it too, and is prepared to compensate the families of those kids. I don't see how that backs up anything you are trying to say.


Your problem is in your perception of 'god'.

My perception of 'god' is an all encompassing energy source.

The sort of energy source that makes atoms vibrate.All matter is energy condensed to a slow vibration giving the illusion of solidity. So all things are your interpretation of God.


Then why call it God?Why not. God cannot be defined, so the word can mean whatever anyone wants it to be.


And anyway, getting back to the matter in hand.......

Is no-one curious as to the settlement amounts for successful vaccine injury claims?

Like, if you found out that someone was awarded a sum numbering in the hundreds of thousands of dollars (or even into the millions), would you at least say to yourself "fuck me, that must have been a fucking severe allergic reaction" or would you maintain an air of complete disinterest? (Like I suspect TDL would).
I'm not wondering. It makes exactly the same sense as ACC sitting on a huge chunk of change for when Muppets hurt them/ourselves.

There are things outside of anyone's control that aren't for seen. So when it goes tits up, they are prepared for it.

[Katman]

So when it goes tits up, they are prepared for it.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I was suggesting Drew.

And to take that thought a little further, it could suggest that they're actually expecting vaccine compensation claims to go 'tits up' sometime in the not too distant future.

[bogan]

And to take that thought a little further, it could suggest that they're actually expecting vaccine compensation claims to go 'tits up' sometime in the not too distant future.

You think the money they have squirreled away would cover any sort of negligence on the scale you imply? How cute, your grasp of numbers is like a 2 year old saying 'twelve' when asked how old mummy is :laugh:

[Katman]

You think the money they have squirreled away would cover any sort of negligence on the scale you imply? How cute, your grasp of numbers is like a 2 year old saying 'twelve' when asked how old mummy is :laugh:

Ah well, if it's sitting at 3.5 billion at the moment it could be considerably more than that by the time they actually need to call on it.

And if they really get desperate they could just up the 75 cents levy on each vaccine to $1.50.

They could be sitting on eleventy billion before you know it.

[bogan]

Ah well, if it's sitting at 3.5 billion at the moment it could be considerably more than that by the time they actually need to call on it.

And if they really get desperate they could just up the 75 cents levy on each vaccine to $1.50.

They could be sitting on eleventy billion before you know it.

:killingme sounds like that not to distant future is being backpedaled into the distance :laugh:

[Katman]

:killingme sounds like that not to distant future is being backpedaled into the distance :laugh:

Yeah, my crystal ball is broken at the moment so we'll just have to wait and see instead.

[bogan]

Yeah, my crystal ball is broken at the moment so we'll just have to wait and see instead.

So, as usual, your illogic was examined and found lacking, who else is it that keeps crying doom then backing down and telling us to wait and see about a thing; something about a rapture isn't it?

[Drew]

Ah well, if it's sitting at 3.5 billion at the moment it could be considerably more than that by the time they actually need to call on it.

And if they really get desperate they could just up the 75 cents levy on each vaccine to $1.50.

They could be sitting on eleventy billion before you know it.
Didn't you give figures on what's been paid out already? I might have imagined it.

I reckon it's making claim payments already. Just not as much as is being put away is all. Same as ACC.

[Katman]

Didn't you give figures on what's been paid out already? I might have imagined it.

I reckon it's making claim payments already. Just not as much as is being put away is all. Same as ACC.

3.3 billion dollars have been paid out since the compensation program started in 1986.

[Drew]

3.3 billion dollars have been paid out since the compensation program started in 1988.

So they're paying out to the unfortunate cunts that get the disease and die anyway.

I'd probably give a lot more weight to your argument if there were successful cases paid out for autism or even gastrointestinal issues.

[Katman]

So they're paying out to the unfortunate cunts that get the disease and die anyway.

I'd probably give a lot more weight to your argument if there were successful cases paid out for autism or even gastrointestinal issues.

Do yourself a favour Drew and read up on the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program before making yourself look even more silly.

[Drew]

Do yourself a favour Drew and read up on the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program before making yourself look even more silly.
Easier to look silly here and let some other sap do the leg work. What do I care what anyone that frequents this place thinks?

[Katman]

Easier to look silly here and let some other sap do the leg work. What do I care what anyone that frequents this place thinks?

Well I'll cut you some slack Drew.

I'll continue to make you look silly when you give me the opportunity but I won't call you names.

[husaberg]

Easier to look silly here and let some other sap do the leg work. What do I care what anyone that frequents this place thinks?

Drew in the USA there is nothing they will not file frivolous lawsuits over.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3567429/Woman-sues-Starbucks-5-million-putting-ice-drinks.html

Liebeck v. McDonald's
coffee spilled in lap.....
2.7 million dollars

Aitken v. NBC
$2.5 million
Fear factor was too icky

Roller v. Blaine & Copperfield
Magicians stole his secret powers
$2 million

Peters v. Universal Studios
Horror movie was too scary

Bank Robber Gets Shot After Pointing Gun at Deputy; Sues City for Medical Bills
After receiving a pair of slugs while fleeing a police officer, this bank robber sued the County for $6.3 million

8-year-old New York Boy is Sued by His Aunt for a “Careless” Hug

Two New York Women File $40 Million Lawsuit Over ‘Like, Five or Six Scratches’ They Received From a Gas Explosion Blocks Away

Florida Woman is Suing FedEx for Tripping Over a Package Left at Her Doorstep

Allen Heckard sued Michael Jordan and Nike founder Phil Knight for $832 million. He claimed to suffer defamation, permanent injury, and emotional pain and suffering because people often mistook him for the basketball star.

[Katman]

Drew in the USA there is nothing they will not file frivolous lawsuits over.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3567429/Woman-sues-Starbucks-5-million-putting-ice-drinks.html

Liebeck v. McDonald's
coffee spilled in lap.....
2.7 million dollars

Aitken v. NBC
$2.5 million
Fear factor was too icky

Roller v. Blaine & Copperfield
Magicians stole his secret powers
$2 million

Peters v. Universal Studios
Horror movie was too scary

Why are you talking about lawsuits?

The VICP was introduced to avoid lawsuits.

[husaberg]

Why are you talking about lawsuits?

The VICP was introduced to avoid lawsuits.

Which is exactly the point............. or do you not comprehend what a frivolous lawsuit is?
Don't bother answering. We know you don't answer questions........

[Katman]

Which is exactly the point............. or do you not comprehend what a frivolous lawsuit is?
Don't bother answering. We know you don't answer questions........

What the fuck are you on about?

[husaberg]

Why are you talking about lawsuits?
The VICP was introduced to avoid lawsuits.



What the fuck are you on about?

I would say three levels of common Logic beyond what you can comprehend. Likely two beyond Yokel.
Don't worry its just a conspiracy, created to make you look stupid. I am sure you think you are clever, and lets be serious, it's only your opinion that matters:tugger:

Your Mate Andrew Wakefeild.
Its very odd that your CONSPIRACY RADAR can't see anything amiss with him............



In February 2004, after a four-month investigation, reporter Brian Deer wrote in The Sunday Times of London that, prior to submitting his paper to The Lancet, Wakefield had received £55,000 from Legal Aid Board solicitors seeking evidence to use against vaccine manufacturers, that several of the parents quoted as saying that MMR had damaged their children were also litigants, and that Wakefield did not inform colleagues or medical authorities of the conflict of interest. When the editors of The Lancet learned about this, they said that based on Deer's evidence, Wakefield's paper should have never been published because its findings were "entirely flawed." Although Wakefield maintained that the legal aid funding was for a separate, unpublished study[ (a position later rejected by a panel of the UK General Medical Council), the editors of The Lancet judged that the funding source should have been disclosed to them. Richard Horton, the editor-in-chief, wrote, "It seems obvious now that had we appreciated the full context in which the work reported in the 1998 Lancet paper by Wakefield and colleagues was done, publication would not have taken place in the way that it did." Several of Dr. Wakefield's co-researchers also strongly criticized the lack of disclosure.

Deer continued his reporting in a Channel 4 Dispatches television documentary, MMR: What They Didn't Tell You, broadcast on 18 November 2004. This documentary alleged that Wakefield had applied for patents on a vaccine that was a rival of the MMR vaccine, and that he knew of test results from his own laboratory at the Royal Free Hospital that contradicted his own claims. Wakefield's patent application was also noted in Paul Offit's 2008 book, Autism's False Prophets.

In January 2005, Wakefield sued Channel 4, 20/20 Productions, and the investigative reporter Brian Deer, who presented the Dispatches programme. However, after two years of litigation, and the revelation of more than £400,000 in undisclosed payments by lawyers to Wakefield, he discontinued his action and paid all the defendants' costs.

In 2006, Deer reported in The Sunday Times that Wakefield had been paid £435,643, plus expenses, by British trial lawyers attempting to prove that the vaccine was dangerous, with the undisclosed payments beginning two years before the Lancet paper's publication. This funding came from the UK legal aid fund, a fund intended to provide legal services to the poor.



Your conduct as set out at paragraph 32.a. was,
i. dishonest,
Found proved
ii. irresponsible,
Found proved
iii. resulted in a misleading description of the patient population in the Lancet paper;
Found proved


The Panel is satisfied that you had such a duty, as set out in paragraph 31.c.ii.The Panel is persuaded by all the correspondence in the Lancet Journal volume 351 dated 2 May 1998 regarding a suggestion by correspondents to the Lancet that there was a biased selection of patients in the Lancet Paper of 28 February 1998, of which you were one of the senior authors. The Panel has found that your statement as set out in paragraph 35.a. does not respond fully and accurately to the queries made by correspondents to the Lancet. The Panel is satisfied that the statement you made would be considered by ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people to be dishonest. Additionally, you knew that this statement omitted necessary and relevant information, such as the active role you played in the referral process, and the fact that the referral letters in four cases made no mention of any gastrointestinal symptoms and the fact that the investigations had been carried out under Project 172-96 for research purposes. Therefore, the Panel is satisfied that your conduct in this regard was dishonest and irresponsible.


b. In the circumstances set out in paragraphs 32.a., 34.a. and 34.b.this statement was,
i. dishonest,
Found proved
ii. irresponsible,
Found proved
iii. contrary to your duty to ensure that the information provided by you was accurate;
Found proved


In reaching its decision, the Panel notes that the project reported in the Lancet paper was established with the purpose to investigate a postulated new syndrome and yet the Lancet paper did not describe this fact at all. Because you drafted and wrote the final version of the paper, and omitted correct information about the purpose of the study or the patient population, the Panel is satisfied that your conduct was irresponsible and dishonest. The Panel is satisfied that your conduct at paragraph 32.awould be considered by ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people to be dishonest.


The Panel is satisfied that you had such a duty, as set out in paragraph 31.c.ii.The Panel is persuaded by all the correspondence in the Lancet Journal volume 351 dated 2 May 1998 regarding a suggestion by correspondents to the Lancet that there was a biased selection of patients in the Lancet Paper of 28February 1998, of which you were one of the senior authors. The Panel has found that your statement as set out in paragraph 35.a. does not respond fully and accurately to the queries made by correspondents to the Lancet. The Panel is satisfied that the statement you made would be considered by ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people to be dishonest. Additionally, you knew that this statement omitted necessary and relevant information, such as the active role you played in the referral process, and the fact that the referral letters in four cases made no mention of any gastrointestinal symptoms and the fact that the investigations had been carried out under Project 172-96 for research purposes. Therefore, the Panel is satisfied that your conduct in this regard was dishonest and irresponsible

That's without Deers investigation


In the first part of his investigation, Deer showed how Wakefield was able to manufacture the appearance of a medical syndrome that would hoodwink parents and large parts of the medical establishment with a fraud that “unleashed fear, parental guilt, costly government intervention, and outbreaks of infectious disease."
In the second part, he shows how the discredited doctor planned secret businesses intended to make huge sums of money, in the U.K. and the U.S., from his allegations.
The BMJ report says that Wakefield met medical school managers to discuss a joint business even while the first child to be fully investigated in his research was still in the hospital; and how just days after publication of his Lancet article, he brought business associates to his place of work at the Royal Free Medical School in London to continue negotiations.
Drawing on investigations and information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, Deer says Wakefield and his associates used financial forecasts that predicted they could make up to £28 million (about $43.7 million) a year from the diagnostic kits alone.
Deals Could Have Netted Millions
The kits in question were for diagnosing patients with autism. Deer obtained one 35-page document marked "private and confidential" which confidently predicted: “It is estimated that by year 3, income from this testing could be about £3,300,000 rising to about £28,000,000 as diagnostic testing in support of therapeutic regimes come on stream.”

Would-be investors were told that “the initial market for the diagnostic will be litigation-driven testing of patients with AE [autistic enterocolitis, an unproven condition concocted by Wakefield] from both the UK and the USA”.
Deer’s investigation also reveals that Wakefield was offered support to try to replicate his results, gained from just 12 children, with a larger validated study of up to 150 patients, but that he refused to carry out the work, claiming that his academic freedom would be jeopardized.
A further claim in the BMJ article is the existence of a business, named after Wakefield’s wife, which was intended to develop his own "replacement" vaccines, diagnostic testing kits, and other products which only stood any real chance of success if public confidence in the MMR vaccine was damaged..
http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/ne...journal-claims

[Banditbandit]

Do yourself a favour Drew and read up on the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program before making yourself look even more silly.

Ackshally .. this summary is quite interesting. The VICP was set up in America over 1980s fears for the over the DPT vaccine (diphtheria, pertussis (whooping cough), and tetanus.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_court

[mashman]

My interview with Sharyl Attkisson: vaccines, exposing the CDC (https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/07/22/my-interview-with-sharyl-attkisson-vaccines-exposing-the-cdc/)

"It was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story.".

[Katman]

My interview with Sharyl Attkisson: vaccines, exposing the CDC (https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/07/22/my-interview-with-sharyl-attkisson-vaccines-exposing-the-cdc/)

"It was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story.".

The CDC caught lying?

Shirley not.

[Katman]

If we're talking conflict of interest......

https://sharylattkisson.com/what-the-news-isnt-saying-about-vaccine-autism-studies/

[Katman]

Some studies.

http://yournewswire.com/30-solid-scientific-studies-that-prove-vaccines-cause-autism/

[bogan]

Some studies.

http://yournewswire.com/30-solid-scientific-studies-that-prove-vaccines-cause-autism/

None of which prove any link, if you actually read them. But I guess finding blogs and shit that say what you want to hear is more important than understanding reality, again. That's be your sheeple syndrome coming to the fore again...

[Katman]

None of which prove any link, if you actually read them.

Wow, did you read them all in the space of 11 minutes?

[bogan]

Wow, did you read them all in the space of 11 minutes?

Did you?

I've seen them before; you know, doing that whole independent research thing. But I mean if you want to pick one (hint, the first one is not the best choice there) and show just how well the prove it; go right ahead and we can discuss it. If you want to continue on in your sheeple approach of ignorantly following just what you want to hear; then I guess you'll just throw out some more mindless insult and take the topic off track like every other time someone calls you out on your bullshit...

[Katman]

I've seen them before; you know, doing that whole independent research thing.

You sound like Ed.

[bogan]

You sound like Ed.

Not at all, he would say that and tell everyone they need to do research until they agree with him. I say that so you know we can discuss the subject matter... but we can't can we? you're just not capable of it :facepalm:

[Katman]

Not at all, he would say that and tell everyone they need to do research until they agree with him. I say that so you know we can discuss the subject matter... but we can't can we? you're just not capable of it :facepalm:

Did you read the full study reports or just the Abstracts?

[bogan]

Did you read the full study reports or just the Abstracts?

First the abstract (it may surprise you how many of those articles have nothing to do with autism), then the full one if it were warranted. Use sci-hub for full texts.

We're still waiting for you to pick one to discuss :wait: Or should we check back when you've had time to actually read even just the abstracts? :laugh:

[Katman]

First the abstract (it may surprise you how many of those articles have nothing to do with autism), then the full one if it were warranted. Use sci-hub for full texts.

We're still waiting for you to pick one to discuss :wait: Or should we check back when you've had time to actually read even just the abstracts? :laugh:

Let me guess....

You got as far as this (http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2013/08/-those-lists-of-papers-that-claim-vaccines-cause-autism-part-1.html) page and decided "well if liz ditz says it's crap, that's good enough for me".

[bogan]

Let me guess....

You got as far as this (http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2013/08/-those-lists-of-papers-that-claim-vaccines-cause-autism-part-1.html) page and decided "well if liz ditz says it's crap, that's good enough for me".

Who the fuck is Liz Ditz? I used sci-hub, the place where you can get the full articles from.

Pick a paper and let's discuss it. Stop following other people's baaaaaahd interpretations.

[Katman]

Who the fuck is Liz Ditz? I used sci-hub, the place where you can get the full articles from.

Pick a paper and let's discuss it. Stop following other people's baaaaaahd interpretations.

I tried searching on the sci-hub site for one of the study and was taken back to the NCBI page which only has the Abstract.

[bogan]

I tried searching on the sci-hub site for one of the study and was taken back to the NCBI page which only has the Abstract.

Try another then, who knows, you might learn something.

Like how many on the list weren't actually published, or were retracted :rolleyes:

Let us know when you pick one though eh... I mean, it's almost looking like you just read the article title and posted it without looking into any of those in the list of 30 'proving' autism :killingme

[Katman]

Try another then, who knows, you might learn something.

Like how many on the list weren't actually published, or were retracted :rolleyes:

Let us know when you pick one though eh... I mean, it's almost looking like you just read the article title and posted it without looking into any of those in the list of 30 'proving' autism :killingme

Have you had a look at the leftbrainrightbrain website that claims to have 'debunked' all the studies?

[bogan]

Have you had a look at the leftbrainrightbrain website that claims to have 'debunked' all the studies?

Nope, have you read any of them yet? or picked one for discussion?

[Katman]

Nope, have you read any of them yet? or picked one for discussion?

Go on, you pick one.

[bogan]

Go on, you pick one.

Nah, you brought it up, onus is on you to make a point.

But again, I think we both know you lack the capacity for independent thought; I mean fucking hell, you just found two other websites debunking them you thought I must have read since it seems so absurd to you that I just read and understood the articles directly without blindly following another's opinion. Your sheeple way of life is deeply ingrained I fear...

[Katman]

Nah, you brought it up, onus is on you to make a point.

But again, I think we both know you lack the capacity for independent thought; I mean fucking hell, you just found two other websites debunking them you thought I must have read since it seems so absurd to you that I just read and understood the articles directly without blindly following another's opinion. Your sheeple way of life is deeply ingrained I fear...

All the 'debunking' claims simply seem to lead back to the leftbrainrightbrain website - a blog site.

[Drew]

All the 'debunking' claims simply seem to lead back to the leftbrainrightbrain website - a blog site.

I'll give you some advice that you continuously give me.

Shut up before you make yourself even more stupid.

[Katman]

I'll give you some advice that you continuously give me.

Shut up before you make yourself even more stupid.

I'm interested to see what credence bogan places on blog sites when they suit his purpose.

'Cos he seemed rather disparaging of them a few posts back.

[bogan]

I'm interested to see what credence bogan places on blog sites when they suit his purpose.

'Cos he seemed rather disparaging of them a few posts back.

Fuck all, obviously. That's why I keep asking to discuss the actual articles, not the articles discussing the articles. Drew gets it. How the fuck do you struggle to understand this? you do know there is a way to 'know' shit which isn't just being a sheeple right?

[Katman]

Fuck all, obviously. That's why I keep asking to discuss the actual articles, not the articles discussing the articles. Drew gets it. How the fuck do you struggle to understand this? you do know there is a way to 'know' shit which isn't just being a sheeple right?

Go on, you post up one of the full studies.

Sci-hub's not playing the game for me.

[Ocean1]

Sci-hub's not playing the game for me.

It's probably got you on ignore...

[bogan]

Go on, you post up one of the full studies.

Sci-hub's not playing the game for me.

No, you have to pick the best one, otherwise I'll post one up, explain why it's wrong, and you'll just gish gallop along to the next one. Here's a tip though, see if sci-hub (or any other source) works for you to actually read the fucking thing you post up for discussion; so you might actually learn not to sheeple.

[Katman]

No, you have to pick the best one, otherwise I'll post one up, explain why it's wrong,

Go on then.

[bogan]

Go on then.

Have you read any yet? If it's tricky, you just sound out the words. go get em tiger, you can do it :sunny:

[Katman]

Have you read any yet? If it's tricky, you just sound out the words. go get em tiger, you can do it :sunny:

Ok, let's start with this one.

http://www.rescuepost.com/files/theoretical-aspects-of-autism-causes-a-review1.pdf

What's your thoughts on the section regarding vaccines?

[bogan]

Ok, let's start with this one.

http://www.rescuepost.com/files/theoretical-aspects-of-autism-causes-a-review1.pdf

What's your thoughts on the section regarding vaccines?

What are yours?

[Katman]

What are yours?

My thoughts are that what the author has written sounds feasible.

How about you?

[bogan]

My thoughts are that what the author has written sounds feasible.

How about you?

Mine are that it is a literature review. I mean, good on you for moving on from blogs, but it is still one step removed from the actual science. But, since progress must be rewarded, I read the vaccine section; it summarises the theories presented in the other papers (what literature reviews do), there is no summary for any results showing any indication that those theories have been verified.

[Katman]

Mine are that it is a literature review. I mean, good on you for moving on from blogs, but it is still one step removed from the actual science. But, since progress must be rewarded, I read the vaccine section; it summarises the theories presented in the other papers (what literature reviews do), there is no summary for any results showing any indication that those theories have been verified.

So the idea that exposure to mercury (and the individual's genetic ability/inability to rid their system of that mercury) may indicate a link between vaccines and autism, is worthy of some consideration?

[bogan]

So the idea that exposure to mercury (and the individual's genetic ability/inability to rid their system of that mercury) may indicate a link between vaccines and autism, is worthy of some consideration?

Tally ho then, go forth and consider...

[Katman]

Tally ho then, go forth and consider...

Well it was actually a question. (That's what the squiggly line at the end of the sentence meant).

[bogan]

Well it was actually a question. (That's what the squiggly line at the end of the sentence meant).

I figured it was rhetorical, obviously it is worthy of consideration, that's why I suggested you go do so (hint, I've already done so, this isn't new shit to me).

[Katman]

I figured it was rhetorical, obviously it is worthy of consideration, that's why I suggested you go do so (hint, I've already done so, this isn't new shit to me).

How about this one?

http://www.meerwetenoverfreek.nl/images/stories/Tomljenovic_Shaw-CMC-published.pdf

[bogan]

How about this one?

http://www.meerwetenoverfreek.nl/images/stories/Tomljenovic_Shaw-CMC-published.pdf

So how about it? finding it is one thing, what are its implications?

[Katman]

So how about it? finding it is one thing, what are its implications?

That the use of aluminium as a vaccine adjuvant might not be as safe as we've been led to believe.

You would have known that if you had read it.

[bogan]

That the use of aluminium as a vaccine adjuvant might not be as safe as we've been led to believe.

You would have known that if you had read it.

...and?

Remember how you are trying to show us this stuff causes autism. How does that article show it?

[Katman]

...and?

Remember how you are trying to show us this stuff causes autism. How does that article show it?

I'm not trying to show you anything.

I'm just raising questions.

[bogan]

I'm not trying to show you anything.

I'm just raising questions.

Ah, that old cop out again. Thanks for playing.

[eldog]

Does anyone else on here have to deal with autistic people?

My hat goes off to those who have to deal with the serious cases(not just autistic cases either)

It's no wonder people used to be locked up, now they are just on drugs to pacify them

I am waiting for the wheels to fall off a case I am dealing with.:facepalm:

[mada]

Does anyone else on here have to deal with autistic people?

My hat goes off to those who have to deal with the serious cases(not just autistic cases either)

It's no wonder people used to be locked up, now they are just on drugs to pacify them

I am waiting for the wheels to fall off a case I am dealing with.:facepalm:

Yep hats off to those who who have to manage the serious cases and those who make the calls to keep us safe. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11648771

[TheDemonLord]

I'm not trying to show you anything.

I'm just raising questions.

I see Ol' Faithful is as predictable as always (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/170344-Who-still-believes-9-11-was-carried-out-by-terrorists-with-box-cutters?p=1130987198#post1130987198)

[bogan]

I see Ol' Faithful is as predictable as always (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/170344-Who-still-believes-9-11-was-carried-out-by-terrorists-with-box-cutters?p=1130987198#post1130987198)

To his credit, he got a lot further along than usual.

[Ocean1]

Yep hats off to those who who have to manage the serious cases and those who make the calls to keep us safe. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11648771

Aye, there was a similar article in the Dom. The piece was hugely inflamitory, a real stitch up, and the comments following it were simply amazing. It did mention the 300+ assaults, (which was summarily ignored by all) and it did mention the shortage of staff.

They didn't link the two, though. Maybe they should have pointed out the number of staff on ACC, (past and present) as a direct result of having attempted to make a difference.

Not all problems are fixable. And of those that are teh govt is responsible for just a few.

[mada]

Aye, there was a similar article in the Dom. The piece was hugely inflamitory, a real stitch up, and the comments following it were simply amazing. It did mention the 300+ assaults, (which was summarily ignored by all) and it did mention the shortage of staff.

They didn't link the two, though. Maybe they should have pointed out the number of staff on ACC, (past and present) as a direct result of having attempted to make a difference.

Not all problems are fixable. And of those that are teh govt is responsible for just a few.

Spot on. The present situation is not ideal, but it is better than the alternative of having such people in prisons.

On the flipside when people get the freedom and go on to kill themselves or others we can blame those who failed...

The great feat of the modern day is we can all go online and point fingers, sign online petitions, and blame others and pat ourselves on the back for doing our bit (pumping our egos) without actually contributing anything to making things different. :brick:

[husaberg]

324105..................

[mashman]

Hear This Well (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIMEV6ButQw)