Fuken science pricks and shit

[mashman]

Obviously someone does, but you keep insinuating they have their tendrils in the scientific community, as you are quick to blame sciency types for this possible trouble. Are you just having a wee tanty by chance? or do you actually plan on effecting some change?

You said that the govt listens to the scientists. It would stand to reason that there are scientists that are pro-fluoridation would it not? They are who I refer to as "they". The pro mob. Those who greet noises about removing fluoride from the water with stern finger wagging and furrowed brow beating. The change I will attempt will allow for the pro and anti mobs to work together and come up with a solution that is the best for the peeps of the land... primarily as funding won't be a problem. Til then, I guess it's up to community's to rattle their sabres in regards to getting what they want. I chortled at tanty.

[bogan]

You said that the govt listens to the scientists. It would stand to reason that there are scientists that are pro-fluoridation would it not? They are who I refer to as "they". The pro mob. Those who greet noises about removing fluoride from the water with stern finger wagging and furrowed brow beating. The change I will attempt will allow for the pro and anti mobs to work together and come up with a solution that is the best for the peeps of the land... primarily as funding won't be a problem. Til then, I guess it's up to community's to rattle their sabres in regards to getting what they want. I chortled at tanty.

What do you mean stands to reason? either there are or there aren't, all this stuff is published if you want to look for it.

Again, who greets such noises with stern finger wagging?

You gotta stop with the pro and anti bias, it just isn't there. Anyone can use the findings or data from one study/article in their own work, that is how sciency types work together, and it works pretty damn good.

Sabre rattling is well and good when it is done with a coordination/direction, what you're doing is more like somebody carrying a bucket of sabres who has just fallen down a very long flight of stairs.

[mashman]

What do you mean stands to reason? either there are or there aren't, all this stuff is published if you want to look for it.

Again, who greets such noises with stern finger wagging?

You gotta stop with the pro and anti bias, it just isn't there. Anyone can use the findings or data from one study/article in their own work, that is how sciency types work together, and it works pretty damn good.

Sabre rattling is well and good when it is done with a coordination/direction, what you're doing is more like somebody carrying a bucket of sabres who has just fallen down a very long flight of stairs.

So, we're back to you pleasuring yourself. Meh.

[bogan]

So, we're back to you pleasuring yourself. Meh.

There were plenty of reasonable questions there you've left unanswered. See this is why you guys are not taken seriously, your crap just doesn't stand up to a reasoned analysis. The shitter of it is, you do have a point that fluoride shouldn't be in the water supply; but you go and fuck it up by blaming the wrong people, and leaving other gaping holes in your argument.

[mashman]

There were plenty of reasonable questions there you've left unanswered. See this is why you guys are not taken seriously, your crap just doesn't stand up to a reasoned analysis. The shitter of it is, you do have a point that fluoride shouldn't be in the water supply; but you go and fuck it up by blaming the wrong people, and leaving other gaping holes in your argument.

"You guys"? That's where you came at this from ... I had already answered your questions, but as seems to constantly be the case, you aren't happy with the answers you receive. Moreover I don't think they're the answers you expect, which would only lead me to the conclusion that you're being deliberately obtuse or, with lashings of irony, you've come into the discussion with your position cemented firmly and refuse to accept anything other than the answers you want.

Firstly you stated that my only foundation for entering the discussion was the Chinese study. Secondly you stated that I was flying off the handle. Thirdly you decided that I was biased. Fourthly you decided that I was a hateful sheep for daring to state that the anti-brigade existed. Filthy you thought you decided that I was telling you to fuck off. Sixthly you said I wasn't being reasonable. Seventhly you decided that my language suggested bias. Eighthly you seemed to think that I was proposing that there was conclusive evidence. Ninthly you said that scientists were smarter than those who use their findings (stupidest comment you've made in a while). Tenthly you decided that me questioning the pro brigade was tantamount to me dismissing their abilities. Eleventhly you decided that I had no right to "blame" (you could have read question, but that didn't suit) sciency types. Twelfly
you decided I was having a tanty. Thirteenthly you told me that I had to stop the pro and anti (you could have read for and against) even though you obviously didn't comprehend how and why I was using those terms and that I had decided that science was uselss. Fourteenthly you made a funny, compeltely out of context, but funny. Fifteenthly you decided that I had directed rage towards the scientific community.

To that end, your analysis isn't reasoned, some might take it as insulting, but given where it came from.... Meh.

[bogan]

"You guys"? That's where you came at this from ... I had already answered your questions, but as seems to constantly be the case, you aren't happy with the answers you receive. Moreover I don't think they're the answers you expect, which would only lead me to the conclusion that you're being deliberately obtuse or, with lashings of irony, you've come into the discussion with your position cemented firmly and refuse to accept anything other than the answers you want.

Firstly you stated that my only foundation for entering the discussion was the Chinese study. Secondly you stated that I was flying off the handle. Thirdly you decided that I was biased. Fourthly you decided that I was a hateful sheep for daring to state that the anti-brigade existed. Filthy you thought you decided that I was telling you to fuck off. Sixthly you said I wasn't being reasonable. Seventhly you decided that my language suggested bias. Eighthly you seemed to think that I was proposing that there was conclusive evidence. Ninthly you said that scientists were smarter than those who use their findings (stupidest comment you've made in a while). Tenthly you decided that me questioning the pro brigade was tantamount to me dismissing their abilities. Eleventhly you decided that I had no right to "blame" (you could have read question, but that didn't suit) sciency types. Twelfly
you decided I was having a tanty. Thirteenthly you told me that I had to stop the pro and anti (you could have read for and against) even though you obviously didn't comprehend how and why I was using those terms and that I had decided that science was uselss. Fourteenthly you made a funny, compeltely out of context, but funny. Fifteenthly you decided that I had directed rage towards the scientific community.

To that end, your analysis isn't reasoned, some might take it as insulting, but given where it came from.... Meh.

Heh, showing a profound lack of logic in you estimations of my points, but I guess you like to change the focus to fit your ideals wherever possible. So I'll clarify things.

Ze fucker is... given that this fuckin fluoride issue has been in tin foil feckin hat territory for many fookin years (decades) and refuted by the farkin (govt) scientific community as nothing more than fuggin bullshitty fuck, then it hardly comes as a fornicating surprise that there's some form of effin truth to it.

Where/when has the scientific community said that fluoride is nothing more the 'fuggin bullshitty fuck'? This is a simple, reasonable, completely not insulting question you have failed to answer so far. Fobbing it off with, 'well the govt listens to them so it must be a thing' is inadequate, as we all know how the scientific community's findings can be twisted into something they do not mean (see post 1 in this thread).

The tin-foil hat territory is that some muppets seem to think it is a deliberate plot to make the populace stupider, which is best not brought up at all as it removes weight from any legit arguments on the subject.

[mashman]

Heh, showing a profound lack of logic in you estimations of my points, but I guess you like to change the focus to fit your ideals wherever possible. So I'll clarify things.

... yeah, that's the way it went down.

Where/when has the scientific community said that fluoride is nothing more the 'fuggin bullshitty fuck'? This is a simple, reasonable, completely not insulting question you have failed to answer so far. Fobbing it off with, 'well the govt listens to them so it must be a thing' is inadequate, as we all know how the scientific community's findings can be twisted into something they do not mean (see post 1 in this thread).

The tin-foil hat territory is that some muppets seem to think it is a deliberate plot to make the populace stupider, which is best not brought up at all as it removes weight from any legit arguments on the subject.

Dropping the (govt) doesn't help. Given that fluoride is still in the water and given that there are sciency types who say it doesn't need to be there, and given that there are potential health risks, then what else other than fuggin bullshitty fuck is being given as a reason to leave it in the water?

The scientific community is not part of the government, the govt takes their findings and makes a decision

So you're saying that the govt don't listen to the sciency community? The entire scientific community is anti? If either of those answers is no, then why is there still fluoride in the water? Not exactly a large jump to go all tin foil hatty is it. Sure it removes weight from the argument, but if there isn't any evidence to suggest that that isn't happening, then shouldn't that be taken seriously? Have govts ever suppressed medical findings before?

Of the tin foil hatters I've spoken with in regards to water fluoridation, they all bring up the pineal gland and its reaction to fluoride as the primary reason for the dumbing down argument. A cursory read over the pineal gland and its reaction to fluoride, coupled with its importance to our well being (supposedly) doesn't do anyone any favours either... but it's still a consideration (don't read direct consequence if you can help it.) There's an interesting paper out there somewhere from the 90's that highlights this concern, as well as the concern that was no research being undertaken in that direction.

[bogan]

Dropping the (govt) doesn't help. Given that fluoride is still in the water and given that there are sciency types who say it doesn't need to be there, and given that there are potential health risks, then what else other than fuggin bullshitty fuck is being given as a reason to leave it in the water?

So, sciency types are saying it doesn't need to be there; yet you still blame the scientific community for it being there despite only having evidence to the contrary?

So you're saying that the govt don't listen to the sciency community? The entire scientific community is anti? If either of those answers is no, then why is there still fluoride in the water? Not exactly a large jump to go all tin foil hatty is it. Sure it removes weight from the argument, but if there isn't any evidence to suggest that that isn't happening, then shouldn't that be taken seriously? Have govts ever suppressed medical findings before?

Of the tin foil hatters I've spoken with in regards to water fluoridation, they all bring up the pineal gland and its reaction to fluoride as the primary reason for the dumbing down argument. A cursory read over the pineal gland and its reaction to fluoride, coupled with its importance to our well being (supposedly) doesn't do anyone any favours either... but it's still a consideration (don't read direct consequence if you can help it.) There's an interesting paper out there somewhere from the 90's that highlights this concern, as well as the concern that was no research being undertaken in that direction.

They don't listen to them all the time. And sometimes how they listen is similar to how post #1 fucked it up. Ie, govt asks for risk analysis, scientist come back with, we recommend a longer term study, but so far cannot conclude there are any significant health risks. Govt then takes that and goes, fuck the long term stuff, they didn't find any risk, put all the fluoride in the water.
You getting the picture yet?

[Akzle]

jesus fucking fuck, you two are still going!!

[bogan]

jesus fucking fuck, you two are still going!!

Teaching conspiracy theorists to use logic is hard work...

[mashman]

So, sciency types are saying it doesn't need to be there; yet you still blame the scientific community for it being there despite only having evidence to the contrary?

Am I blaming the entire scientific community? No bro... you be seeing things that just ain't there.

They don't listen to them all the time. And sometimes how they listen is similar to how post #1 fucked it up. Ie, govt asks for risk analysis, scientist come back with, we recommend a longer term study, but so far cannot conclude there are any significant health risks. Govt then takes that and goes, fuck the long term stuff, they didn't find any risk, put all the fluoride in the water.
You getting the picture yet?

Oh I understand how it works, have done since before you started, mentioned as much too... I guess you missed it, or at least decided to translate it into something entirely different.

jesus fucking fuck, you two are still going!!

I'm all for helping people get their jolly's.

[bogan]

Am I blaming the entire scientific community? No bro... you be seeing things that just ain't there.

I think it pretty obvious you were to begin with, but now you aren't. So I feel I have made a difference here, whether you admit it or not, you're obviously slightly better educated now than you were at the start

[HenryDorsetCase]

so, havard and shit have done a study. NOW (as opposed to before science), flouride is a neuro development inhibiting fuken thing, ie makes people stupid. (and docile and easy to police/control)

Who'd have thought.

Im looking at you, auckland.

Clearly not you big boy.

Is "Havard" anywhere near "Harvard"? Do they have a medical school or School of Public Health?

Did this study appear in a respectable, peer reviewed academic journal, or some fucking loony corner of the internet that only you, and you handful of gun nut, bigoted idiotic friends hang out in? Put up a link and let me mock you.

[mashman]

I think it pretty obvious you were to begin with, but now you aren't. So I feel I have made a difference here, whether you admit it or not, you're obviously slightly better educated now than you were at the start

... I had a dig and rightly so as far as I'm concerned. The are "experts" on both sides (i.e. those who want it in the water and those who don't... no other nefarious or malevolent intention is meant by that statement). They are my public health official when it comes to the fluoridation of water. And to that end I will apportion some "blame" to the scientific community for not being able to conclusively prove either way and still allow that the water be fluoridated. Yes, that's a bit harsh (more research being required, bloody politics, lack of funding etc... yet plenty of reasons for fluoride not to be in the water), but it's far from tin foil hattery and it's a military mile away from the slandering of the entire establishment that you seem to have me pegged for. Did I learn anything new......... no, not really as I will still use the same language, I will still have a dig where I see fit, I will still be misinterpreted, I will still misinterpret others... I'm a cunt, I expect more.

[Banditbandit]

so, havard and shit have done a study. NOW (as opposed to before science), flouride is a neuro development inhibiting fuken thing, ie makes people stupid. (and docile and easy to police/control)

Who'd have thought.

Im looking at you, auckland.

Isn't that why the powers that be want to put it in the water ???