David Icke on Vaccines (Newsletter Preview)

[Mac53]

Bold and Underlie is my stuff....
Here it is....

The David Icke Newsletter Goes Out On Sunday

Jane Burgermeister has filed bioterrorism charges with the FBI against Avir Green Hills Biotechnology, based in Austria; Baxter AG, also in Austria; and its parent company Baxter International in Deerfield, Illinois. Guess which company is providing much of the swine flu vaccine for mass inoculation - Baxter International. This is the same Baxter International that sent bird flu virus to European laboratories 'by mistake' earlier this year and it was mixed with a seasonal flu virus to create a much more dangerous strain.

Last year at least 81 people were killed by Baxter International's contaminated blood-thinning product, heparin, which was made in China from, among other things, pig intestines. Isn't pharmaceutical medicine wonderful? The contaminated heparin also seriously injured hundreds of others and it was revealed that the factory of Baxter's Chinese supplier had never been inspected by either American or Chinese public 'protection' agencies.

More than 50 dialysis patients died in 2001 because of faults with Baxter International equipment, and this month Baxter Healthcare Corporation, a subsidiary of Baxter International, reached an out-of-court settlement of two million dollars with the State of Kentucky. Baxter had been caught inflating the cost of intravenous drugs sold to Kentucky Medicaid by as much as 1,300 per cent.

This is clearly a company you can trust and it is now is a major source of the swine flu vaccine that governments across the world want to impose upon entire populations with the most minimal safety checks. The vaccine is being fast-tracked through the regulatory system with safety trials lasting less than a week. The London Times reported:

'Regulators at the European Medicines Agency said the fast-tracked procedure has involved clinical trials of a "mock-up" vaccine similar to the one that will be used for the biggest mass vaccination programme in generations. It will be introduced into the general population while regulators continue to carry out simultaneous clinical trials.'

My emphasis.

The scale and speed of the planned vaccination programme is insane given that the overwhelming majority of those who have contracted the virus have had very mild symptoms. Dr Peter Holden of the Rothschild-controlled British Medical Association said that although swine flu was not causing serious illness they were eager to start a mass vaccination campaign, beginning with 'priority groups'. Ugh?? This is not about public health and never was.

This sounds interesting anyone care to debunk or is he on the money (except for pitching in the Rothschild ownership stuff).

Has anyone done some extensive research in this field???

[LightinDarkness]

You've got to be kidding me. This is the standard anti-vaxx woo propaganda.

All it is is the use of hasty generalization - because someone somewhere died due to a medical product made by a vaccine manufacturer, we should all act hysterical and never take vaccines. Of course it forgets to mention that tens of millions of people have had their lives saved by such products.

This is called far mongering, and it is a staple of what David Icke does. Vaccines - including the swine flu vaccine - are safe and perfectly fine for 99.99% of people to take.

[Dr. Lao]

I lost a friend on facebook over this. He posted a video by this nut, and I challenged him about the shapeshifting aliens. He didn't like that, and refused to answer.

No great loss, he is a really angry man who believes any and all conspiracies, and has really fallen down the nut hole in the last year.

[Mac53]

I lost a friend on facebook over this. He posted a video by this nut, and I challenged him about the shapeshifting aliens. He didn't like that, and refused to answer.

No great loss, he is a really angry man who believes any and all conspiracies, and has really fallen down the nut hole in the last year.

Well, regarding the Alien thing David Icke himself has not proven it as fact and admits it is just viewpoint from around the world. He related the different account of the serpant etc... You see people take things to far and discredit him before they realize that he never said it was fact....

I think Most CTs just do believing not so much understanding and getting the full info, they seek the conclusion.

Where does it say that a vaccine has saved millions of lives? And where is it that you say few people died form the vaccine? I think your just perpetuating a simple newsletter preview.

"The scale and speed of the planned vaccination programme is insane given that the overwhelming majority of those who have contracted the virus have had very mild symptoms. Dr Peter Holden of the Rothschild-controlled British Medical Association said that although swine flu was not causing serious illness they were eager to start a mass vaccination campaign, beginning with 'priority groups'. Ugh?? This is not about public health and never was."

This is his point i do not think he says anywhere in this post that vaccines kill people but rather the government or what ever is pushing it without good evidence of an epidemic.

he also goes on to say the deaths that the laboratory has caused based on negligence. Once again your making **** up from nowhere. I have presented info and you have added info based on a general conspiracy that vaccines are made to kill people or something.

If your going to add some ridicules point based on no evidence at least link me to where david icke says it or something.

Sigh...i expected more from this forum... (some people posted good stuff but this one i regret posting. No real info.)

[LightinDarkness]

Well, regarding the Alien thing David Icke himself has not proven it as fact and admits it is just viewpoint from around the world. He related the different account of the serpant etc... You see people take things to far and discredit him before they realize that he never said it was fact....

This is insane. Because someone claims alien reptilians "is just an opinion" does not make the idea anymore legitimate.


I think Most CTs just do believing not so much understanding and getting the full info, they seek the conclusion.

CTs like you, you mean?


Where does it say that a vaccine has saved millions of lives? And where is it that you say few people died form the vaccine? I think your just perpetuating a simple newsletter preview.

I think your trying to spread anti-vaxx woo and completely ignore the obvious. That is the point - the "newsletter" IGNORES that millions of lives have been saved by vaccines and attempts to make a hasty generalization fallacy that because someone has died from a medical product, we should all not trust them to create a safe vaccine. If you can't read your own propaganda talking points, its not my problem.


"The scale and speed of the planned vaccination programme is insane given that the overwhelming majority of those who have contracted the virus have had very mild symptoms. Dr Peter Holden of the Rothschild-controlled British Medical Association said that although swine flu was not causing serious illness they were eager to start a mass vaccination campaign, beginning with 'priority groups'. Ugh?? This is not about public health and never was."

Actually, yes, it is. And it has always been about public health. Do you even read the garbage you quote? The Rothschilds do not control the British Medical Association. The swine flu is a pandemic, it is most certainly a public health issue.


This is his point i do not think he says anywhere in this post that vaccines kill people but rather the government or what ever is pushing it without good evidence of an epidemic.

Wrong. There is plenty of evidence, you just choose to ignore it:


(Geneva) -- The swine flu pandemic is moving so quickly it's pointless to try to count every case.

That's the word from the World Health Organization, which has revised its requirements so that authorities only need to report clusters of severe cases, distinctive outbreaks or deaths.

Trying to track every case saps the ability of agencies to investigate serious cases.
The agency declared swine flu had reached pandemic stage in June.

The WHO says, quote, "in past pandemics, influenza viruses have needed more than six months to spread as widely as the new H1N1 virus has spread in less than six weeks." Experts estimate at least one million people are infected with swine flu in the U.S.



he also goes on to say the deaths that the laboratory has caused based on negligence. Once again your making **** up from nowhere. I have presented info and you have added info based on a general conspiracy that vaccines are made to kill people or something.

Yet again you are spreading David Icke propaganda without facts. There is no evidence that these deaths occurred due to negligence. You have presented no information.


If your going to add some ridicules point based on no evidence at least link me to where david icke says it or something.

I have - its all in the propaganda you've quoted.


Sigh...i expected more from this forum... (some people posted good stuff but this one i regret posting. No real info.)

No, you didn't. You are a conspiracy theory shill trying to act like a skeptic and you thought if you would just copy and paste David Icke propaganda that people would somehow fall for it. Sorry, doesn't work that way.

[Nogbad]

Swine flu is relatively mild as flus go but still there are deaths. Although classed as mild, I was talking to someone who had it she said she thought she was a goner - it was horrible.

Is there a mad panic to vaccinate? They say it won't be ready until October by which time it may well have taken a turn for the worse and be more vicious.

Rather than in a hurry to vaccinate for strange reasons might it not be the case that Governments are in a hurry to get a vaccine ready because if hundreds start dying they will get the blame for not doing enough?

Never misunderestimate the venal desire for self preservation on the part of politicians.

David Icke is a nice chap but he really has taken the scenic path to the land of weird.

[sleepy_lioness]

the Rothschild-controlled British Medical Association

:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:boggled:

Sorry, but to anyone who's ever had any dealings at all with the BMA, the thought that anyone in the world can 'control' them is just hysterical ... have you ever tried to get a group of senior doctors to do *anything* they didn't want to do??!

[T.A.M.]

History tells us that the second wave of a particular flu can be much worse then the first. I suspect this trend, combined with the fact that this particular strain of flu seems to have an increased percentage of serious sequelae in the younger age group, is why we are being prepared for a much worse scenario. I get regular briefings by fax on the h1n1 flu, and the most recent is calling for all physicians to be properly fitted for a mask.

In the end, who knows, we will see what happens in the fall.

TAM:)

[T.A.M.]

:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:boggled:

Sorry, but to anyone who's ever had any dealings at all with the BMA, the thought that anyone in the world can 'control' them is just hysterical ... have you ever tried to get a group of senior doctors to do *anything* they didn't want to do??!

Have you been able to do so with Dentists? Engineers? Self-employed business men?

TAM:)

[sleepy_lioness]

Have you been able to do so with Dentists? Engineers? Self-employed business men?

TAM:)

Dunno - I've never been employed in a position where I had to negotiate with them :)

Plus, doctors as a group, especially senior consultants, are not known for their modesty and lack of arrogance ...

(don't get me wrong, I admire the medical profession hugely - it's just that having had dealings with the BMA I found it very funny to think of them being 'controlled' by anyone - herding cats doesn't get close)

[T.A.M.]

Dunno - I've never been employed in a position where I had to negotiate with them :)

Plus, doctors as a group, especially senior consultants, are not known for their modesty and lack of arrogance ...

(don't get me wrong, I admire the medical profession hugely - it's just that having had dealings with the BMA I found it very funny to think of them being 'controlled' by anyone - herding cats doesn't get close)

Sorry, I meant you in the British people/British govt sense.

My point was that Doctors are no different then any other professional (engineer, dentist, etc...). They all tend to be an independent bunch who don't take lightly being told what to do. Especially physicians who are Fee-For-Service, and hence self-employed (more so in America where they are not paid by the govt, as they are here in Canada, and most of Europe).

TAM:)

[Mac53]

Bold is mine..hope you respond this time.
This is insane. Because someone claims alien reptilians "is just an opinion" does not make the idea anymore legitimate.



CTs like you, you mean?

Because i question things, seek information? Why can people not have opinions, science is opinion based on current facts which change and do change. So if your going to throw away all possible theorys based on the fact you don't like david icke then what is it your going to learn, and better yet how does the world evolve? The people who change the world generally are challenge by the simple minded people afraid of the vary change. Look at history and shut the **** up.

I am not a CTs, i am someone who tries to look at everything and say that is possible, sounds reasonable. Because with more information maybe it will turn out to be true. When you take away possibilities you leave not but an unexplained world which will never be explained.

I think your trying to spread anti-vaxx woo and completely ignore the obvious. That is the point - the "newsletter" IGNORES that millions of lives have been saved by vaccines and attempts to make a hasty generalization fallacy that because someone has died from a medical product, we should all not trust them to create a safe vaccine. If you can't read your own propaganda talking points, its not my problem.

Millions of lives have been saved based on what fact? Do tell me? Sounds liek a conspiracy. Where these people dieing and get the vaccine or took the vaccine and nothing happened. So if i have cancer eat and apple cancer goes away the apple had ot do it right? This coming from the guy who says im a conspiracy theorist and i spread anti vax woo. Yet you just assume..things.

When did i say "DONT TAKE VAX, because i want you all killed? I did not, i asked people what proof is there, no links nothing jsut "they said so and i read somewhere. I am looking for info and you accuse me yet again of **** that is untrue. Seems as if you have more traits of a conspiracy theorist.

Actually, yes, it is. And it has always been about public health. Do you even read the garbage you quote? The Rothschilds do not control the British Medical Association. The swine flu is a pandemic, it is most certainly a public health issue.

Read my original post, i specifically said to ignore the Rothschild stuff because it is a bunch of crap speculation. Yet you liek to ignore things i see and draw your own conclusion to look smarter?

Seems to me the swine flu is a pandemic in the news. I don't or have never heard anyone within my city even die of such a thing maybe it only exists in some places? How did it originate, what caused it and how did people catch it?

Wrong. There is plenty of evidence, you just choose to ignore it:


Links please. You words mean nothing. Once again, you assume your right which you may be and completely turn this into a "i must prove him wrong" argument/thread. I am looking for info.


Yet again you are spreading David Icke propaganda without facts. There is no evidence that these deaths occurred due to negligence. You have presented no information.

What propaganda can you link to me where i say "Do not take the vacine" I don't care what you do, i don't control your life and i will nto tell someone to do or not do something with their health. Do link that line where i have "spread propaganda" or you jsut assuming **** again?

I have - its all in the propaganda you've quoted.



No, you didn't. You are a conspiracy theory shill trying to act like a skeptic and you thought if you would just copy and paste David Icke propaganda that people would somehow fall for it. Sorry, doesn't work that way.

I am acting like no one. I am questioning what this article means. I posted it and said "can i get some facts and have people debunked this" What did i get back? "you a shill, there is evidence" Yet you shown nothing but talk smack, assume a whole lot and identify me as a stereotype.

How am i a conspiracy theory shill? Dosn't shill means i'm against it? Or you jsut adding more words to make it seem interesting? I am a skeptic? No no, i am looking at evidence which seems to not be linked nads asking for it. While you spend your posts talking about assumptions and CTs and what your belifs about things are. I don't care what oyu think i want to know what you know. I want to know facts, good sources or information. (you provided none.

I am not supporting david icke and as well, why is it you trash all his information have you read it all and disproved every single point or hear about reptilians and assume as you liek to do, that he is some crazy mad nut. He has some thing that may be wrong or speculative and based on very little to no evidence but what have yo upresented in this thread? And you slam David Icke who shows what evidence he has (many peopel aroudn hte world, posts information etc) I have not read all his info, i don't agree with all of it. But he says some things that are spot on and then some that arn't.

Are you just looking to be controled by someone else because you can't think for yourself? Do you jsut want to think the media reports 100% fact/truth and therefore your brain can go into a sleeping mode?

You really need to rethink what you say and start by posting evidence and stop assuming crap. I expected this forum to be filled iwht people with information that i can ask because so many sources of information are biased. Media is biased Alternative media is biased to a subject.

And you can join those two.

Looking forward ot more assumptions...

[LightinDarkness]

Bold is mine..hope you respond this time.

I've responded every time.


I am acting like no one. I am questioning what this article means. I posted it and said "can i get some facts and have people debunked this" What did i get back? "you a shill, there is evidence" Yet you shown nothing but talk smack, assume a whole lot and identify me as a stereotype.

As usual the facts debunk you...again. You are not questioning what the article means, you posted it to spread anti-vaxx propaganda. The only person smack talking is you.


How am i a conspiracy theory shill? Dosn't shill means i'm against it? Or you jsut adding more words to make it seem interesting? I am a skeptic? No no, i am looking at evidence which seems to not be linked nads asking for it. While you spend your posts talking about assumptions and CTs and what your belifs about things are. I don't care what oyu think i want to know what you know. I want to know facts, good sources or information. (you provided none.

You advocate for conspiracies while trying to act like a skeptic. You don't care about the evidence, otherwise you would do a simple google search and see the reams of evidence that debunks anti-vaxx woo. Even wikipedia has an article debunking it.

You have provided nothing.


I am not supporting david icke and as well, why is it you trash all his information have you read it all and disproved every single point or hear about reptilians and assume as you liek to do, that he is some crazy mad nut. He has some thing that may be wrong or speculative and based on very little to no evidence but what have yo upresented in this thread? And you slam David Icke who shows what evidence he has (many peopel aroudn hte world, posts information etc) I have not read all his info, i don't agree with all of it. But he says some things that are spot on and then some that arn't.

David Icke believes Alien reptilians reside in people like George Bush and the Queen of England. He is a crackpot. This is your same old tactic of using the argument from ignorance fallacy: I do not need to read and watch every single one of David Icke's propaganda films or money making newsletters to know he is nuts. Just like I don't have to know by touching fire that it is hot, I can put my hand near it and know it.

Nothing David Icke says is "spot on." Please provide examples of where David Icke is correct.


Are you just looking to be controled by someone else because you can't think for yourself? Do you jsut want to think the media reports 100% fact/truth and therefore your brain can go into a sleeping mode?

Ding, ding, ding - further proof we have a conspiracy theorist on our hands here. Using the classical CT approach of claiming that anyone supporting the facts can't think for themselves. The irony here it is that, like all CTs, it is you who want to have other people - crackpots, in this case - do your thinking for you.


You really need to rethink what you say and start by posting evidence and stop assuming crap. I expected this forum to be filled iwht people with information that i can ask because so many sources of information are biased. Media is biased Alternative media is biased to a subject.

I've already posted the evidence that has debunked you. You need to learn the concept of burden of proof: it is you who have proposed anti-vaxx propaganda, now provide the evidence. David Icke isn't "alternative media", by the way.


And you can join those two.

Looking forward ot more assumptions...

Still waiting for you to do something other than make assumptions and cry for evidence to disprove your CT claims...

[dudalb]

I am not supporting david icke and as well, why is it you trash all his information have you read it all and disproved every single point or hear about reptilians and assume as you liek to do, that he is some crazy mad nut.

:dl:
Great FSM, if somebody thinks that most of the leaders of thw world are secretly alien reptilians in disguise, what the hell are we supposed to think about that person?
That is the kind of belief that makes just about anything he says VERY suspect.

[Mac53]

:dl:
Great FSM, if somebody thinks that most of the leaders of thw world are secretly alien reptilians in disguise, what the hell are we supposed to think about that person?
That is the kind of belief that makes just about anything he says VERY suspect.

Oh sorry forgot about the perfect people that only show up on the internet.

Why is that theory not possible? Because it sounds crazy. So does the earth begin round as opposed ot the fact of it being flat. Not that the two are somehow connected. But the thing is people support what ever there beliefs are. If you didn't you would not be sure of anything and therefore sit in your room all day long and not certain about anything.

Just because someone either makes a mistake or believes in something crazy does not disprove or discredit something else.

So should i judge what you wrote here as your entire character and everything you are? So if the first post i read about you is an error of typing or information, do i assume your a moron who doesn't know what he is talking about and therefore i should not listen to anything he says?

What logic is it that one person makes a mistake or does something different and there for everything they do is 100% wrong. So i assume that you are perfect have done nothing wrong, live a perfect ideal life and laugh at al lthe morons and their urological theory's of reptilians?

I am not defending the theory so so you don't go off and say i'm a nut as well which i notice is a common theme on this forum or maybe just topic. Life isn't about 2 things. Write nad wrong, there is many option that combine the two and you got to examine all of them. But of course in the idealistic mind of yours everything is either right or wrong. Nothing is pure right and nothing is pure wrong thus my search of more information.

I expect more from someone who joins a sophisticated forum or at least i assumed so. Or is it jsut a biased forum towards a certain type of belief?

I enjoy ranting since everything i say is assumed to be something other then what it is. So i take more time to explain. if you find any more flaws in this post feel free to post it.

I think david himself has admitted there is no proof for reptilian HYBRIDS ( i assume you did not even look into the theory just the general crap to then spite it) It is reptilian hybrids. but what do you care, you hear david icke and think wrong. and i can say i think of you and think illogical moron who basis his arguments based on his belief system...

[LightinDarkness]

The more Mac responds, the more he shows himself to be a CTer.

Oh sorry forgot about the perfect people that only show up on the internet.

This is again another logical fallacy and a straw man.


Why is that theory not possible? Because it sounds crazy. So does the earth begin round as opposed ot the fact of it being flat. Not that the two are somehow connected. But the thing is people support what ever there beliefs are. If you didn't you would not be sure of anything and therefore sit in your room all day long and not certain about anything.

Again, argument from ignorance fallacy.


Just because someone either makes a mistake or believes in something crazy does not disprove or discredit something else.

Straw man again. But the truth is that if someone believes in the insane, without any evidence for it, it does indeed give insights into their thinking process that can be used in a valid manner for their other "theories."


So should i judge what you wrote here as your entire character and everything you are? So if the first post i read about you is an error of typing or information, do i assume your a moron who doesn't know what he is talking about and therefore i should not listen to anything he says?

Yep. Anytime I or any other JREFer posts that alien reptilians are controlling the world, you would be perfectly valid in believing we are nuts.


What logic is it that one person makes a mistake or does something different and there for everything they do is 100% wrong. So i assume that you are perfect have done nothing wrong, live a perfect ideal life and laugh at al lthe morons and their urological theory's of reptilians?

Again, yet another straw man. Still waiting for you to say something that is not a logical fallacy.


I am not defending the theory so so you don't go off and say i'm a nut as well which i notice is a common theme on this forum or maybe just topic. Life isn't about 2 things. Write nad wrong, there is many option that combine the two and you got to examine all of them. But of course in the idealistic mind of yours everything is either right or wrong. Nothing is pure right and nothing is pure wrong thus my search of more information.

Relativism fallacy.


I expect more from someone who joins a sophisticated forum or at least i assumed so. Or is it jsut a biased forum towards a certain type of belief?

I'm sorry we don't so easily fall for your propaganda. You won't be the first CTer to join and lament that the JREF did not fall in line and praise your in depth wisdom of the truth.


I enjoy ranting since everything i say is assumed to be something other then what it is. So i take more time to explain. if you find any more flaws in this post feel free to post it.

Well so far all you've contributed is a series of rants and logical fallacies. We don't really have much to discuss because you have yet to do anything but attempt to spread propaganda.


I think david himself has admitted there is no proof for reptilian HYBRIDS ( i assume you did not even look into the theory just the general crap to then spite it) It is reptilian hybrids. but what do you care, you hear david icke and think wrong. and i can say i think of you and think illogical moron who basis his arguments based on his belief system...

Again, argument from ignorance. There is no such thing as reptilian aliens - hybrid or otherwise.

[Mac53]

The more Mac responds, the more he shows himself to be a CTer.



This is again another logical fallacy and a straw man.

Your opinion., no fact, no evidence. Just you hate towards a certain tpye of person. I am questioning this. Unlike you who just believes it.

Again, argument from ignorance fallacy.

What does this prove? You ignore my statment and say it's fallacy good tactic.

Straw man again. But the truth is that if someone believes in the insane, without any evidence for it, it does indeed give insights into their thinking process that can be used in a valid manner for their other "theories."

Wonderful, where is you evidence i asked you about 7 times or more now? On many different threads. I am asking questions about the vaccines and wanted to know what people thought of this and to provide evidence. Once again you attack me and what i think instead of hte information given. Ego boost? Stick to he info show the evidence.

If it is fallacy then show the evidence.

Yep. Anytime I or any other JREFer posts that alien reptilians are controlling the world, you would be perfectly valid in believing we are nuts.

No, i would ask for evidence and dismiss the claim for not having evidence of such claims. And would just say that you do not belive in it.

If a black man steels it it completely valid to say "it is because it is black". This this not what i believe i jsut use your logic.

Again, yet another straw man. Still waiting for you to say something that is not a logical fallacy.

again another ignorance of the statment. You said it 3 times. And you ignored my question and fail to provide the links so i cna do research and gian the facts as you did. Or are you just interesting in increasing you ego boost by bashing me for questioning both sides? If i am a CT and a beliver in fallacy then why is it that i in the other thread have dismissed 3 of the claims of Bill Cooper. Funny how someone who believes in fallacy would dissmiss claims based on the fact they where proven incorrect or invalid.

Relativism fallacy.

ignore the posts more, and jsut stick in "it's fallacy, cuz i said so and therefore i am right" Evidence..why i jsut enjoying bashing people and wasting time.

I'm sorry we don't so easily fall for your propaganda. You won't be the first CTer to join and lament that the JREF did not fall in line and praise your in depth wisdom of the truth.

What propaganda? My questioning of theorys both CT and normal? I have already dismissed many CT and are only questioing tings. As form the start of the post i have told you i want information. I use ot be a CT. I just want to know where the facts lie, you want to bash me, insult me ignore my posts and increase your self eesteem? You provide no evidence, you do not disprove it with the facts.

Am i suppose to just believe what you say? Is that what you want? Can you not jsut say, hey www.conspiracytheoriesdebunked.net is a great site and here is another link within that site spcifically about vaccines. Noe you still hang on to repeating the fact i'm a CT which makes no difference to the claim and thread. If you want ot call me a CT fine. I object and say i am only questioing and belivign in the possibility and dissmiss those that are proving invalid. But go make a thread Mac53 is a CT.

Well so far all you've contributed is a series of rants and logical fallacies. We don't really have much to discuss because you have yet to do anything but attempt to spread propaganda.

All i did was copy paste the David Icke newsletter and wanted opinions and facts about vaccines from the people wh have studided it. If these claims that David Icke make are false, wonderful show the links to the proof and i am on my wy to discover the truth. What is the need for all the bashing and saying it propaganda? If i wanted ot spread propaganda i would just post "David icke is right, vaccines kill people." Read original post and STFU.

Again, argument from ignorance. There is no such thing as reptilian aliens - hybrid or otherwise.

Coming form you i will laugh. You ignored everything i said with the statement it's fallacy. I use your logic now. Your argument is fallacy as well. I have no proof i just like to bash people online because it feels great.

Show the proof becuse i want to see it, and understnad what it is your saying. HENCE ME MAKING A THREAD. here let me show you a quote of what i said and maybe you can STFU get the evidence and we cna move on.

"This sounds interesting anyone care to debunk or is he on the money (except for pitching in the Rothschild ownership stuff).

Has anyone done some extensive research in this field???"

Funny, how you bash me when i ask that. Funny how you spin your own crap to try to insult me. Are you here to reconfirm your belifs and bash people for questioning you?

Evidence please SO I CAN RESEARCH. you don't need to proove anything just point me to the evidence.

[LightinDarkness]

Yawn. Same old, same old. Repeating the same tactics won't result in a different result, Mac.

Coming form you i will laugh. You ignored everything i said with the statement it's fallacy. I use your logic now. Your argument is fallacy as well. I have no proof i just like to bash people online because it feels great.

Wow, another statement on the CT mindset. You don't know what logical fallacies mean, do you? It means that you attempted to argue a point that is a well known fallacy, and that as such, there is nothing for me to respond to. No point was made by you, you followed classical disinformation tactics using typical logical fallacies by CTs that have been well documented.


Show the proof becuse i want to see it, and understnad what it is your saying. HENCE ME MAKING A THREAD. here let me show you a quote of what i said and maybe you can STFU get the evidence and we cna move on.

This is a lie. If you cared about all the reams of evidence debunking this you could have done a simple google search or read a wikipedia article on it. Both result in tons of results debunking this anti-vaxx propaganda points.

But instead, you have engaged in the classical CT propaganda method: purpose a insane idea and then demand that everyone debunk it. That isn't how this works. You have the burden of proof. You have to present the evidence that shows these anti-vaxx points are correct.


Has anyone done some extensive research in this field???"

As you would know if you cared to do a simple google search, research has been done and debunked this since the anti-vaxx movement started.


Funny, how you bash me when i ask that. Funny how you spin your own crap to try to insult me. Are you here to reconfirm your belifs and bash people for questioning you?

More whining from you - sound and fury signifying nothing.


Evidence please SO I CAN RESEARCH. you don't need to proove anything just point me to the evidence.[/B]

No one is going to do your research for you. You don't want to do any research. You thought you were going to get away with shifting the burden of proof. Doesn't work that way. Present your evidence that these propaganda points are real, and we are happy to debunk you...again.


Coming form you i will laugh. You ignored everything i said with the statement it's fallacy. I use your logic now. Your argument is fallacy as well. I have no proof i just like to bash people online because it feels great.

Yet again, the fact that you do not understand what logical fallacies mean is not my problem. I suggest you do the research instead of trying to use them over and over again - perhaps then you won't act hysterical when it is pointed out what you are doing.


Show the proof becuse i want to see it, and understnad what it is your saying. HENCE ME MAKING A THREAD. here let me show you a quote of what i said and maybe you can STFU get the evidence and we cna move on.

Wrong. It is up to you to show the proof that anti-vaxx propaganda is correct. That is how burden of proof works.

[Mac53]

Yawn. Same old, same old. Repeating the same tactics won't result in a different result, Mac.



Wow, another statement on the CT mindset. You don't know what logical fallacies mean, do you? It means that you attempted to argue a point that is a well known fallacy, and that as such, there is nothing for me to respond to. No point was made by you, you followed classical disinformation tactics using typical logical fallacies by CTs that have been well documented.



This is a lie. If you cared about all the reams of evidence debunking this you could have done a simple google search or read a wikipedia article on it. Both result in tons of results debunking this anti-vaxx propaganda points.

But instead, you have engaged in the classical CT propaganda method: purpose a insane idea and then demand that everyone debunk it. That isn't how this works. You have the burden of proof. You have to present the evidence that shows these anti-vaxx points are correct.



As you would know if you cared to do a simple google search, research has been done and debunked this since the anti-vaxx movement started.



More whining from you - sound and fury signifying nothing.



No one is going to do your research for you. You don't want to do any research. You thought you were going to get away with shifting the burden of proof. Doesn't work that way. Present your evidence that these propaganda points are real, and we are happy to debunk you...again.



Yet again, the fact that you do not understand what logical fallacies mean is not my problem. I suggest you do the research instead of trying to use them over and over again - perhaps then you won't act hysterical when it is pointed out what you are doing.



Wrong. It is up to you to show the proof that anti-vaxx propaganda is correct. That is how burden of proof works.

You seem to think i want to prove this Anti Vax "hoax". I am just asking for evidences i can read up on what your facts are. Or is this not aloud? Your facts are sacred things?

I care not for your opinion.

Just point me to the research you have done and we are on our way. No need for your opinion on what the truth is. Just want ot get pointed towards the facts. Thats all. The guy in the BIll cooper thread posted sutff. Can't you just do the same?

I'll type this one more time jsut so you understand.

I am as of now denying every CS as fact. I do not have the facts for them so i am looking for the facts that deny them I came ot JREF from a guy who pointed me here to learn about 9/11 and stuff like that. Can you lease point me to the evidence or not?

Your logic seems as if i am supose ot belive it because everyone else does and there is no proof disregarding it or i fail to provide it. i am just trying to learn. You are trying ot bash me over and over again. Stop. Just post what i am looking for and i'l lstop posting.

Thanks

Mac

[LightinDarkness]

[B]You seem to think i want to prove this Anti Vax "hoax". I am just asking for evidences i can read up on what your facts are. Or is this not aloud? Your facts are sacred things?

Wrong. You have asked for evidence to debunk anti-vaxx propaganda but have failed to offer any proof that anti-vaxx propaganda is true. If you want evidence you could have used google or wikipedia, you did not because you don't care about the evidence.


I care not for your opinion.

You interpret everything that debunks you as a opinion.


Just point me to the research you have done and we are on our way. No need for your opinion on what the truth is. Just want ot get pointed towards the facts. Thats all. The guy in the BIll cooper thread posted sutff. Can't you just do the same?

Point me to the research you have done that shows we should not take vaccines and that they are dangerous. If you have not done any research and can provide no links, then we don't have anything to debunk.


I'll type this one more time jsut so you understand.

Mac53 translation: I know I've been exposed but I hope if I repeat the same things over and over no one will notice.


I am as of now denying every CS as fact. I do not have the facts for them so i am looking for the facts that deny them I came ot JREF from a guy who pointed me here to learn about 9/11 and stuff like that. Can you lease point me to the evidence or not?

If you don't have any facts or evidence in favor of these CTs how are we supposed to debunk them? Why aren't you using google to do your own research?


Your logic seems as if i am supose ot belive it because everyone else does and there is no proof disregarding it or i fail to provide it. i am just trying to learn. You are trying ot bash me over and over again. Stop. Just post what i am looking for and i'l lstop posting.

Yet again, another attempt to confuse burden of proof. You are not trying to learn, because anything that doesn't fit what you want to believe you dismiss.

[LightinDarkness]

This takes 5 seconds to pull up and provides peer reviewed and scientific sources that debunk anti-vaccination propaganda:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_controversy

You mean to tell me you spend hours insulting me and everyone else who posts on these boards and demand that we provide you evidence, and you could not find this?

[Mac53]

Wrong. You have asked for evidence to debunk anti-vaxx propaganda but have failed to offer any proof that anti-vaxx propaganda is true. If you want evidence you could have used google or wikipedia, you did not because you don't care about the evidence.



You interpret everything that debunks you as a opinion.



Point me to the research you have done that shows we should not take vaccines and that they are dangerous. If you have not done any research and can provide no links, then we don't have anything to debunk.



Mac53 translation: I know I've been exposed but I hope if I repeat the same things over and over no one will notice.



If you don't have any facts or evidence in favor of these CTs how are we supposed to debunk them? Why aren't you using google to do your own research?



Yet again, another attempt to confuse burden of proof. You are not trying to learn, because anything that doesn't fit what you want to believe you dismiss.

So i take it you won't show me evidence os i can learn and therefore must try to prove the case true and if that fails then the case is false?

I suppose the answer is yes?

I did find this link, not by some crayz guy making up claims but has lots of sources etc. Seems interesting Opinions on this?

http://www.whale.to/b/hoax1.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/022617.html (this is from naturalnews, a site about naturalk health and that is against the bi9g pharma, not sure how reliable)

will post more as i find them. Instead of arguing with me just say. "I do not have ot post evidence, you bring up a claim try to prove it."

Ok thanks.

MAc

[LightinDarkness]

So i take it you won't show me evidence os i can learn and therefore must try to prove the case true and if that fails then the case is false?

I suppose the answer is yes?

JREF is not your personal google board. You need to provide evidence of a claim and state what the claim is, which can be debunked.


I did find this link, not by some crayz guy making up claims but has lots of sources etc. Seems interesting Opinions on this?

http://www.whale.to/b/hoax1.html

Actually, the guy is quite crazy, and there is no scientific evidence on that page. Just a whole bunch of logical fallacies (particularly appeal to authority).

But anyways, every issue on that page has been debunked:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_controversy


will post more as i find them. Instead of arguing with me just say. "I do not have ot post evidence, you bring up a claim try to prove it."

Ok thanks.

MAc

But you aren't really doing anything but link spamming without citing any claims. This is not evidence. You need to provide specific claims and evidence for those claims, which can then be debunked.

[Mac53]

JREF is not your personal google board. You need to provide evidence of a claim and state what the claim is, which can be debunked.



Actually, the guy is quite crazy, and there is no scientific evidence on that page. Just a whole bunch of logical fallacies (particularly appeal to authority).

But anyways, every issue on that page has been debunked:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_controversy

wiki? ARE YOU SERIOUS? this is your facts and how they are debunked.

Ok i'm done. Was taking this seriously. There is no evidence? Guy is crazy? WTF? You read all that in 5 mins? Boy what is your reading speed?

WIKI. And this is the source of your proof. Wow. And then you call me a CT sourcing wiki and saying the link is debunked.

LOL. epic

But you aren't really doing anything but link spamming without citing any claims. This is not evidence. You need to provide specific claims and evidence for those claims, which can then be debunked.

i'll jsut do my own research, i'm done here was under the impression i cna ask questions get answers. I ask questions get insulted. Ok thanks though.

Mac

[LightinDarkness]

i'll jsut do my own research, i'm done here was under the impression i cna ask questions get answers. I ask questions get insulted. Ok thanks though.

Mac

You aren't interested in doing research, you want to believe in woo. Otherwise you wouldn't be posting here demanding that things be debunked that you provide no evidence for.

By the way, in case you haven't noticed Wikipedia has citations - as does that article. But you didn't look at them because you don't care about the evidence. I'd much rather trust Wikipedia over the personal website of a CT loon. LOL. EPIC! (By the way, you really must be a kid with all this GTFO and EPIC language).

[Mojo]

I did find this link, not by some crayz guy making up claims but has lots of sources etc. Seems interesting Opinions on this?

http://www.whale.to/b/hoax1.html


Yeah, lots of "interesting" sources on there.

Ever heard of Scopie's Law (http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Scopie%27s_Law)?

[timhau]

:dl:
Great FSM, if somebody thinks that most of the leaders of thw world are secretly alien reptilians in disguise, what the hell are we supposed to think about that person?


Hey, it's just an opinion.

[Mac53]

Yeah, lots of "interesting" sources on there.

Ever heard of Scopie's Law (http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Scopie%27s_Law)?

why do you link to wiki? And then laugh at "interesting sources"

I just asked for links to where i can research the topics, you cna just provide them and keep you opinion to yourself.

Ask yourself, is it rational to bash someone? Is it worth time? Just provide the link(s) they want or point them into the direction of which research(proper research) can be done. I don't get half hte things people say, do people get offended by CT?

Get over it, people belive crazy things. If your offended by it it shows how secure you are about your beliefs.

I did find hte resources, after looking myself. I really don't like this forum, just because more arguing over if i am a CT was done then just linking me ot resources i can use. Unless i am suppose to just go to Google and hope i land on the correct sites that support the "truth".

I provide something, in this case a preview to an article and i only get opinions of david icke or Anti Vax hoax. And i think one post about the information itself. And then obviously no links where i cna study this, (some where given i think)

Mac

[Dr. Lao]

Dude, learn to type, spell and use the english language.

Icke is a nut, there are scads of evidence about it.

You have to prove that he is NOT a nut, you are the one sticking up for the crazy man, so convince us that he isn't crazy.

Reptiles rule the earth?

Proof

[Mac53]

Dude, learn to type, spell and use the english language.

Icke is a nut, there are scads of evidence about it.

You have to prove that he is NOT a nut, you are the one sticking up for the crazy man, so convince us that he isn't crazy.

Reptiles rule the earth?

Proof

I care not for your opinion of people. Should i construct my opinion of you based on the few posts i seen of you. Did i say i believe David Icke? Did i say vaccine are toxic and contain lead. Did i say that reptiles exist?

I asked for places to research this stuff. So i can be informed. I did the same thing towards 9/11 and was misunderstood by the replys. People assumed i was sticking up for 9/11 CT but rahter was looking for the resources which was pointed out to me after i read all the thread of hate, flaming and opinion of me and obviously found a "go to the resources to debunking 9/11 at top of page"

So i did, read most of the stuff, and realize the valid theory here is that the official Story holds up.

I still don't understand the need to share your opinion of the poster. Is it relavant to the information given? Heres a thought...

Say you encountered with CT or a person researching them. You then are asked to disprove the Inside Job CT. Instead of ranting on and on just say "look at top of page there are resources for researching this" end thread.

Simple as that. So why do we have like so many reply and no links, directions ot resources so that OP(me) can find the information i am looking for?

Keep it simple, no need ot bash people for what they believe.

So does anyone have any useful resources i can use in the researching of the topic Vaccines? And any resources on Debunking Icke besides your opinion of him being a "nut".

Why does it matter what you think of David Icke, just debunk his theory's. What is the need for people on the internet to share their opinions of people, in a hateful way with insults against people they don't like. Is that not discrimination? Do you also insult James Randi? Or jsut look at his info and study his works?

I bet the lot of you here that insult David Icke would not have the courage to do so in a real life situation. You would not even have the courage to walk up to him. i am not defending icke but presenting my observations of a problem i see amongst the Internet people and discrimination against groups/individuals they simply don't like based on there information.

Off topic but i feel i needed to present my observations. Back on topic, can anyoen provide me with some resources or do i need ot do this myself and struggle to find the correct information?

[T.A.M.]

So i take it you won't show me evidence os i can learn and therefore must try to prove the case true and if that fails then the case is false?

I suppose the answer is yes?

I did find this link, not by some crayz guy making up claims but has lots of sources etc. Seems interesting Opinions on this?

http://www.whale.to/b/hoax1.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/022617.html (this is from naturalnews, a site about naturalk health and that is against the bi9g pharma, not sure how reliable)

will post more as i find them. Instead of arguing with me just say. "I do not have ot post evidence, you bring up a claim try to prove it."

Ok thanks.

MAc

www.whale.to was enough for me to lose confidence in your research. That site is a well known CT site, and 90% of what is on it is PURE BUNK.

As for naturalnews, or any other natural products sites, they have as much of a vested interest in their side of things, as big pharma does in theirs. Did you know that almost all "natural" products are unregulated or extremely poorly regulated?

At least when you get Cipro 500mg, you know you are getting 500mg of Ciprofloxacin...you cannot say the same for any of the natural products...take at own risk, and at risk of own pocket book.

Don't even get me started on the vaccine ********.

TAM:)

[T.A.M.]

I care not for your opinion of people. Should i construct my opinion of you based on the few posts i seen of you. Did i say i believe David Icke? Did i say vaccine are toxic and contain lead. Did i say that reptiles exist?

I asked for places to research this stuff. So i can be informed. I did the same thing towards 9/11 and was misunderstood by the replys. People assumed i was sticking up for 9/11 CT but rahter was looking for the resources which was pointed out to me after i read all the thread of hate, flaming and opinion of me and obviously found a "go to the resources to debunking 9/11 at top of page"

So i did, read most of the stuff, and realize the valid theory here is that the official Story holds up.

I still don't understand the need to share your opinion of the poster. Is it relavant to the information given? Heres a thought...

Say you encountered with CT or a person researching them. You then are asked to disprove the Inside Job CT. Instead of ranting on and on just say "look at top of page there are resources for researching this" end thread.

Simple as that. So why do we have like so many reply and no links, directions ot resources so that OP(me) can find the information i am looking for?

Keep it simple, no need ot bash people for what they believe.

So does anyone have any useful resources i can use in the researching of the topic Vaccines? And any resources on Debunking Icke besides your opinion of him being a "nut".

Why does it matter what you think of David Icke, just debunk his theory's. What is the need for people on the internet to share their opinions of people, in a hateful way with insults against people they don't like. Is that not discrimination? Do you also insult James Randi? Or jsut look at his info and study his works?

I bet the lot of you here that insult David Icke would not have the courage to do so in a real life situation. You would not even have the courage to walk up to him. i am not defending icke but presenting my observations of a problem i see amongst the Internet people and discrimination against groups/individuals they simply don't like based on there information.

Off topic but i feel i needed to present my observations. Back on topic, can anyoen provide me with some resources or do i need ot do this myself and struggle to find the correct information?

you seem like a sensible person, so I will try to address the above issues...

1. You did not say any of the things you mention in your first paragraph, but often ones approach, and the language and tone, can make people perceive a certain intent or stance on the given subject. This forum gets people joining ALL THE TIME, who claim to be agnostic or just curious about a subject, but within a few dozen posts it becomes clear they have a strong opinion, and were BSing with their "I am an agnostic" line.

2. I am glad you took peoples advice, and read the 9/11 links. Just as I said above, and perhaps ten times more so, on the CT subforum we get people coming there continuously, claiming to be agnostic and just asking questions, and it is all just a sham.

3. This is a forum. Forums are like communities. They are filled with all sorts of people and all sorts of backgrounds, opinions, and ways of doing things. Now you can ask, and wish for everyone to be congenial, helpful, and pleasant, but it ain't likely gonna happen. Instead, do what you would do if your encounter occurred in real life, either (A) give as good as you get, or (B) use the ignore feature and limit your discussions and encounters with those that treat you the way you like.

4. Vaccines - The FDA, the AAFP and AMA are good places. These sites are run by PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, not bitter people with grudges or anger issues.

5. I would have no problem with walking up to Mr. Icke and telling him his ideas are absolutely insane, and that he might want to seek psychiatric help. Would not think twice about it if I ever met the man.


TAM:)

[Mac53]

you seem like a sensible person, so I will try to address the above issues...

1. You did not say any of the things you mention in your first paragraph, but often ones approach, and the language and tone, can make people perceive a certain intent or stance on the given subject. This forum gets people joining ALL THE TIME, who claim to be agnostic or just curious about a subject, but within a few dozen posts it becomes clear they have a strong opinion, and were BSing with their "I am an agnostic" line.

2. I am glad you took peoples advice, and read the 9/11 links. Just as I said above, and perhaps ten times more so, on the CT subforum we get people coming there continuously, claiming to be agnostic and just asking questions, and it is all just a sham.

3. This is a forum. Forums are like communities. They are filled with all sorts of people and all sorts of backgrounds, opinions, and ways of doing things. Now you can ask, and wish for everyone to be congenial, helpful, and pleasant, but it ain't likely gonna happen. Instead, do what you would do if your encounter occurred in real life, either (A) give as good as you get, or (B) use the ignore feature and limit your discussions and encounters with those that treat you the way you like.

4. Vaccines - The FDA, the AAFP and AMA are good places. These sites are run by PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, not bitter people with grudges or anger issues.

5. I would have no problem with walking up to Mr. Icke and telling him his ideas are absolutely insane, and that he might want to seek psychiatric help. Would not think twice about it if I ever met the man.


TAM:)

Yea i agree. I have "strong opinion" on 9/11 in the form of questions really. That where unanswered for me because the truth movement is filled with incomplete theorys and information. it is a faith based ideology.

Can you believe i thought all this time that there was no evidence and thought it was only scientific opinion. Only to look at NIST having saved steel and stuff like that...

The truth movement is like marketing, if you want to sell a ******, half ass product you got to make sure people don't know about it. You need to create the image it is all good, and the rest people will believe in.

the other day i saw on the DI forum a sticky about the WTC 7 building known to collapse 20-30 min before it did. This has been debunked by the BBC people. They cling on ot that, and people become dumb and believe it. It makes sense, until it is proved by the people who made a mistake in the report.

Thanks, i will be posting around as i find stuff i need some help on.

Thanks for the support!

Mac

[Dr. Lao]

Mac, simple. I hire people. If they can't put together a resume, have spelling errors or are unable to construct a sentence, they don't get looked at.

As for your so called open mind. You have been an Icke follower before you came here. You are pulling the same old CT tactics.

You can't prove any of Icke's claims, you want us to disprove them.

That's not how it works, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

[dudalb]

AND I don't think evidence that most of the world's leaders are Reptilian Aliens in disguise is coming out anytime soon.

[wicked_ways]

<snip> big time

Off topic but i feel i needed to present my observations. Back on topic, can anyoen provide me with some resources or do i need ot do this myself and struggle to find the correct information?


Yes, Mac53, do the bolded part.
Find the information, read it, and then argue your point.
Yes, look it up.
Please, in the name of FSM, look it up!


ETA, sorry Mac53, I see you are getting it.

[Mojo]

why do you link to wiki? And then laugh at "interesting sources"

I just asked for links to where i can research the topics, you cna just provide them and keep you opinion to yourself.


the trouble is that the "I'm just asking" approach (especially when accompanied by an OP which simply quotes at length from a questionable source without any real comment on it beyond "is this right or wrong") is one frequently employed by proponents of the views quoted. It allows them to post the material without having to defend it.

[dudalb]

the trouble is that the "I'm just asking" approach (especially when accompanied by an OP which simply quotes at length from a questionable source without any real comment on it beyond "is this right or wrong") is one frequently employed by proponents of the views quoted. It allows them to post the material without having to defend it.

We even have a term for the "Just Asking Questions" routine..."JAQing off".

[Mac53]

Ok, thanks for responses. I'l lignore the people who need to repeat what been said 25 million times.

I posted this thinking i cna get some opinions and sources on the topic. Next time i will bring certain points with evidence and i guess that will be the way...

Thanks.

Mac

[AbelovPes]

Hahaha, this was a good read - like exchange of two frustrated teenagers... hey guys did you actually really watched/read his stuff or just made it through two lines and a picture and become instant experts?

I listened to the David Icke and in most parts his delivery was rather coherent mostly about loss of personal freedom and the dangers of socialist type of governance.

Except until he ventured into the reptilian agenda. I simply couldn't understand why he had to nearly always end up there until I watched his earlier stuff. Then I understand.

After watching some of the much earlier TV interviews with him in his "blue" period when he was dressed in some jogging suit and claimed to receive message from above, it become clear - he was probably a good journalist who got a very strange ideas about his very own importance in a form of borderline madness or schizophrenia.

That's my honest open-minded asessment of himself as he can be both very real and surreal two sentences apart.

His reptilian message is as good as His Noodly appendage - it has no real value that can be extracted from it. It is like saying, "the powers to be are crashing economy and society by large, but hey, they are reptilians so its ok, that's what reptilians do".

And as to the anti-vaxx, the usage of ethylmercury and increased usage of squalene especially in children annual flu vaccines is a controversial topic even between doctors. And the flu-vaccine effectiveness is another topic du jour.

[LightinDarkness]

And as to the anti-vaxx, the usage of ethylmercury and increased usage of squalene especially in children annual flu vaccines is a controversial topic even between doctors. And the flu-vaccine effectiveness is another topic du jour.

Oh really? Looks like the science is quite settled to me:

On ethymercury -


The risk of autism and other autistic-spectrum disorders did not differ significantly between children vaccinated with thimerosal-containing vaccine and children vaccinated with thimerosal-free vaccine (RR, 0.85 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.60-1.20] for autism; RR, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.88-1.43] for other autistic-spectrum disorders). Furthermore, we found no evidence of a dose-response association (increase in RR per 25 µg of ethylmercury, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.90-1.06] for autism and 1.03 [95% CI, 0.98-1.09] for other autistic-spectrum disorders).


Hvlid, A., Stellfeld, M, Wohlfahrt, J, & M. Melbye. 2003. Association between thimerosal-containing vaccine and autism. Journal of the American Medical Association, 290: 1763-1766.

On flu vaccine effectiveness (note: this is for the most at risk group - elderly - effectiveness for less at risk groups would be even higher) -


The virus‐vaccine match was excellent for year 1 and fair for year 2. Both years, during peak and total periods, vaccination reduced all causes of death and hospitalization for pneumonia and influenza: hospitalizations were reduced by 19%–20% and 18%–24% for years 1 and 2, respectively, and deaths were reduced by 60%–61% and 35%–39% for the same periods. These results show that all elderly persons should be immunized annually for influenza.


Nordin, J., Mullolly, J., Poblete, S., Strikas, R., Petrucci, R., Wei, F., Rush, B., Safirstein, B., Wheeler, D., & K.L. Nichol. 2001. Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Preventing Hospitalizations and Deaths in Persons 65 Years or Older in Minnesota, New York, and Oregon: Data from 3 Health Plans. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 184: 665-670.

[AbelovPes]

Oh really?
Yes really. Your google searching exercise goes only so far....they do actually discuss those issues specially in regard of the squalene and young children. The settled science in medicine is just an illusion that changes every year.

[LightinDarkness]

Yes really. Your google searching exercise goes only so far....they do actually discuss those issues specially in regard of the squalene and young children. The settled science in medicine is just an illusion that changes every year.

And where is your evidence for these claims? Did you think you'd be able to snipe back with your little "google exercise" remark and just be able to summarily dismiss the peer reviewed research findings, which I have quoted, which debunk you? The evidence is not in your favor.

Both of these articles are years old and a search for those citing them does not show any article that disproves them - indeed, they are cited dozens of time by articles which support their findings.

The scientific consensus is clearly against your claims.

[AbelovPes]

And where is your evidence for these claims? Did you think you'd be able to snipe back with your little "google exercise"

Why? is your google button broken or biased?
2000 Carlson The Endogenous Adjuvant Squalene Can Induce a Chronic T-Cell-Mediated Arthritis in Rats

2001 Holmdahl Arthritis induced in rats with nonimmunogenic adjuvants as models for rheumatoid arthritis.

2002 Holm The arthritogenic adjuvant squalene does not accumulate in joints, but gives rise to pathogenic cells in both draining and non-draining lymph nodes

2003 Satoh Induction of lupus autoantibodies by adjuvants

2004 Adjuvant oil induces waves of arthritogenic lymph node cells prior to arthritis onset

2004 Kuroda Autoimmunity induced by adjuvant hydrocarbon oil components of vaccine

2006 Kuroda Induction of lupus-related specific autoantibodies by non-specific inflammation caused by an intraperitoneal injection of n-hexadecane in BALB/c mice

Can immunization precipitate connective tissue disease? MDSteven A. Oldera, b, , Chief, DODaniel F. Battafaranoa, b, Staff, MDRaymond J. Enzenauera, b, Assistant Chief and MDArthur M. Kriega, c,

Freund's adjuvants: relationship of arthritogenicity and adjuvanticity in rats to vehicle composition
M. W. Whitehouse, K. J. Orr, Frances W. J. Beck, and C. M. Pearson

Cozine WS, Jr, Stanfield AB, Stephens CA, Jr, Mazur MT. Adjuvant disease--the paradox of prevention and induction with complete Freund's adjuvant. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1972 Dec;141(3):911–914

etc...

And for you:
"Controversy is a state of prolonged public dispute or debate usually concerning a matter of opinion."

My google is better than yours.

[T.A.M.]

Don't eat grape seeds. Don't eat too much cheese. Don't eat red meat. Don't protect your children from measles (let them leech off the herd immunity provided by others). Don't live under power lines. Don't live near an airport.

TAM:D

[LightinDarkness]

Why? is your google button broken or biased?

Nope, it appears as though I know how to do research and you don't.


2000 Carlson The Endogenous Adjuvant Squalene Can Induce a Chronic T-Cell-Mediated Arthritis in Rats

2001 Holmdahl Arthritis induced in rats with nonimmunogenic adjuvants as models for rheumatoid arthritis.

2002 Holm The arthritogenic adjuvant squalene does not accumulate in joints, but gives rise to pathogenic cells in both draining and non-draining lymph nodes

2003 Satoh Induction of lupus autoantibodies by adjuvants

2004 Adjuvant oil induces waves of arthritogenic lymph node cells prior to arthritis onset

2004 Kuroda Autoimmunity induced by adjuvant hydrocarbon oil components of vaccine

2006 Kuroda Induction of lupus-related specific autoantibodies by non-specific inflammation caused by an intraperitoneal injection of n-hexadecane in BALB/c mice

Can immunization precipitate connective tissue disease? MDSteven A. Oldera, b, , Chief, DODaniel F. Battafaranoa, b, Staff, MDRaymond J. Enzenauera, b, Assistant Chief and MDArthur M. Kriega, c,

Freund's adjuvants: relationship of arthritogenicity and adjuvanticity in rats to vehicle composition
M. W. Whitehouse, K. J. Orr, Frances W. J. Beck, and C. M. Pearson

Cozine WS, Jr, Stanfield AB, Stephens CA, Jr, Mazur MT. Adjuvant disease--the paradox of prevention and induction with complete Freund's adjuvant. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1972 Dec;141(3):911–914

etc...

Nice try, but please cite the specific passages which support your points - the truth is none of these support your point at all. The first three have absolutely nothing to do with what you claimed. For example, from the first one:


Squalene is a cholesterol precursor, which stimulates the immune system nonspecifically. We demonstrate that one intradermal injection of this adjuvant lipid can induce joint-specific inflammation in arthritis-prone DA rat....Our demonstration that an autoadjuvant can trigger chronic, immune-mediated joint-specific inflammation may give clues to the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis, and it raises new questions concerning the role of endogenous molecules with adjuvant properties in chronic inflammatory diseases.


This has absolutely nothing to do with your claims regarding vaccines. What, did you think a random google search for "squalene" counts? Indeed, on one of the very few that actually had anything to do with vaccines the authors admit the findings cannot be generalized to human vaccinations:


Whether this is relevant in human vaccination is a difficult issue due to the complex effects of vaccines and the fact that immunotoxicological effects vary depending on species, route, dose, and duration of administration.




And for you:
"Controversy is a state of prolonged public dispute or debate usually concerning a matter of opinion."

My google is better than yours.

Unfortunately, your research skills fail so your ability to google doesn't really matter. And look, its another woo tactic - throwing out pointless quotes.

Still waiting for your peer reviewed evidence. Somehow I doubt we'll ever see it, just more pompous remarks and google copy and pastes that don't provide any evidence for your claims.

[AbelovPes]

This has absolutely nothing to do with your claims regarding vaccines.


On what data you base your claim of the link having absolutely nothing to do with adjuvant in vaccines? All tests were done by intradermal injection of squalene.

Did you actually read it?
"Our demonstration that an autoadjuvant can trigger chronic, immune-mediated joint-specific inflammation may give clues to the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis, and it raises new questions concerning the role of endogenous molecules with adjuvant properties in chronic inflammatory diseases"

"Injection of not only the classical complete Freund's adjuvant but also mineral oil without mycobacteria and pure adjuvants such as pristane and squalene, induce severe arthritis in many rat strains."

"The majority of squalene remained at the injection site (79%). The amounts recovered in peripheral joints (<1%) were equal to that recovered in other organs that can be targets in autoimmune diseases."

Those are from the first three you say have absolutely nothing to do with adjuvants in vaccines and I say you are absolutely wrong.

[LightinDarkness]

On what data you base your claim of the link having absolutely nothing to do with adjuvant in vaccines? All tests were done by intradermal injection of squalene.

None of them, except the one which admits it can't be generalized to humans, involve your vaccine claims about squalene being dangerous for at risk groups (you mention children). Please cite the specific passages of the research which support your claims, because none of the ones you cite have anything to do with them. The use of squalene in everything you've tried to cite as proof is much more than its presence in vaccines.

Your attempting to make the very familiar woo claim that if large doses of something are dangerous, small doses must be dangerous. The woos do this all the time with mercury, and your doing it with squalene.

[AbelovPes]

I think you demonstrated your ability to put your own words into others mouth then calling it a "familiar woo" claim. Doesn't it remind you of something?

You wrote: "your vaccine claims about squalene being dangerous".

Weeeelll.. Here is the major flaw: this is all invented by you and calling it my claim. I had never claimed such things. My claim was of "controversial topic" and ongoing "discussion".

I even offered you a definition of controversy which you then called "another woo tactic" of "throwing out pointless quotes". (You like word "woo" it seems, unfortunately I am not very familiar with this part of your language, the definition talks about : "to sue for the affection of and usually marriage with" and I am failing to see any corellation)
Hence I would suggest to read again what controversy means, and no, it isn't "danger".

I am waiting for your tantrum of more "woo" here and "woo" there., but the fact is that there is a state of prolonged public dispute or debate concerning using oils in intradermal injection (otherwise the papers you say have nothing to do with subject would not exist)

[timhau]

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/2281/loltrekke3.jpg

[AbelovPes]

Just to show you your sloppy (woo?) way of "research". If you read a paragraph just a notch further from the very same article you quoted as having absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand (while even your quote is in fact related to it) you will see that the whole reason for this very research was:
"Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory joint disease that leads to impaired joint function, severe pain, and reduced life expectancy. 1 This putative autoimmune disease affects more than 2.5 million people in the United States 2 and thus constitutes a serious health and cost problem for individuals and societies."

And the results of the research state:
"After squalene injection, macroscopic signs of inflammation were evident only in the joints. Arthritis developed in 100% of DA rats,..."

And in the discussion:
"The discovery that an endogenous lipid can trigger arthritis in rats could have wide pathogenetic implications in humans. The aim of this study, therefore, was to characterize SIA with special reference to the common chronic inflammatory disease RA."

and the final word:
"In conclusion, arthritis induced with the cholesterol precursor squalene shares notable similarities with rheumatoid arthritis, and raises interesting questions concerning the role of endogenous molecules with adjuvant properties in chronic inflammatory diseases."

This is all from the first article you said has absolutely nothing to do with the subject in hand (being squalene in vaccines). It is called a form of denial as even this single article does show that there is a controversy (in their words it "raises interesting question"). (controversy [dispute/debate] was my original claim)

Woo?
I think this is just another typical woo tactic (to quote yourself) to copy/paste a small part of the article without reading it in full and then say it has absolutely nothing to do with the subject. Then if the argument doesn't hold another proof is offered in form of generalization and smearing such as this is "another woo tactic" and "familiar woo claim" and then twist the original claim as being something that recursively fit into your own answers. (such as your baseless accusation that I claimed vaccines to be dangerous, instead of the true claim that using adjuvants in vaccines is a subject of controversy)

So I put the significant quotes from the "absolutely nothing" article here which you probably again in your own denial or inability to accept new ideas process as "absolutely nothing" to do with squalene in vaccines (and the autoimmune disease [RA] that it may or may not trigger if injected in humans which is the topic of the dispute/debate).

With this I am departing

[LightinDarkness]

Just to show you your sloppy (woo?) way of "research". If you read a paragraph just a notch further from the very same article you quoted as having absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand (while even your quote is in fact related to it) you will see that the whole reason for this very research was:
"Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory joint disease that leads to impaired joint function, severe pain, and reduced life expectancy. 1 This putative autoimmune disease affects more than 2.5 million people in the United States 2 and thus constitutes a serious health and cost problem for individuals and societies."

And the results of the research state:
"After squalene injection, macroscopic signs of inflammation were evident only in the joints. Arthritis developed in 100% of DA rats,..."

And in the discussion:
"The discovery that an endogenous lipid can trigger arthritis in rats could have wide pathogenetic implications in humans. The aim of this study, therefore, was to characterize SIA with special reference to the common chronic inflammatory disease RA."

and the final word:
"In conclusion, arthritis induced with the cholesterol precursor squalene shares notable similarities with rheumatoid arthritis, and raises interesting questions concerning the role of endogenous molecules with adjuvant properties in chronic inflammatory diseases."

This is all from the first article you said has absolutely nothing to do with the subject in hand (being squalene in vaccines). It is called a form of denial as even this single article does show that there is a controversy (in their words it "raises interesting question"). (controversy [dispute/debate] was my original claim)

Woo?
I think this is just another typical woo tactic to quote a small part of the article without reading it in full and then say it has absolutely nothing to do with the subject. So I put the significant quotes here which you probably again flag as "absolutely nothing" to do with squalene in vaccines (and the autoimmune disease [RA] that it may or may not trigger which is the topic of the dispute/debate)

For someone with such a pompous attitude, your research skills are horrible. With all your ranting, crying, and hysteria in the last two posts you have still yet to provide ANYTHING which supports your points. You made no claims about arthritis but cite studies about them, except nothing you cite uses the same dosage that are present in normal vaccines. What you claimed was that there was some serious debate based on anti-vaxx woo, particularly involving at risk populations like children. What you have provided evidence for is that certain vaccine preservatives may be linked to arthritis in rats, with huge disclaimers that such findings cannot be generalized to humans.

You have not only failed completely to prove your claims, you have shown that the findings you did drag up aren't applicable to humans according to the research.

Another woo debunked. I'm still waiting for your peer reviewed research evidence. Is your google broken?

[LightinDarkness]

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/2281/loltrekke3.jpg

My thoughts exactly when I started reading his posts :D

[AbelovPes]

For someone with such a pompous attitude, your research skills are horrible. With all your ranting, crying, and hysteria in the last two posts you have still yet to provide ANYTHING which supports your points. You made no claims about arthritis but cite studies about them, except nothing you cite uses the same dosage that are present in normal vaccines. What you claimed was that there was some serious debate based on anti-vaxx woo, particularly involving at risk populations like children. What you have provided evidence for is that certain vaccine preservatives may be linked to arthritis in rats, with huge disclaimers that such findings cannot be generalized to humans.

You have not only failed completely to prove your claims, you have shown that the findings you did drag up aren't applicable to humans according to the research.

Another woo debunked. I'm still waiting for your peer reviewed research evidence. Is your google broken?

Getting ashamed? Since you again failed to grasp the serious differences of this issue here it is with points so even a child can understand:

1. read my initial claim of using squalene in injections as being controversial. I did not use "dangerous", nor "serious debate", those are all your words. I precisely used "controversial".

2. read my offered definition of word controversy which you called pointless and a "woo tactic" yet further completely proved you don't understand its meaning of debate/discussion, rather later you freely exchanged it for a word "danger" and say this is what I claim. It is not the same, nor similar, nor something I claim.

3. read my list of offered peer reviewed papers that does show that an ongoing controversy [debate/discussion] does exist about the role of adjuvants in autoimunne dissases.

4. As one paper state "wide pathogenetic implications in humans" is related to vaccines. There is currently no other way an mineral oil such as squalene would be injected into human body except in vaccines.

But it is getting worse:

5. By stating: "What you have provided evidence for is that certain vaccine preservatives may be linked to arthritis in rats.." you proved that you absolutely don't understand the topic at all and had not read anything (not even the provided quotes) and simply pretend to be an expert in something you don't understand. Again you are putting words into my mouth but worse, this is completely nonsense.

There is absolutely no evidence that any vaccine preservative was ever linked to arthritis in rats or any other animals or humans. I had never stated such idiotic claim, nor anybody else I know. None of the papers presented such claim. This is a pure fabrication of such claim on your part or simply complete lack of understanding of the role of preservatives and adjuvants.

It is again you who now call squalene a preservative. And you call my research skills horrible? You don't even understand the terms we use here yet have a strong opinion about the issue?

Please show me at least one peer reviewed paper that would correlate squalene (or other mineral oils) with preservative functions in vaccines in any way. I doubt you can provide anything because you made that up or simply don't understand the difference.
You didn't even looked at wikipedia definition of it.

A mercury is a preservative. It does not trigger arthritic in rats nor in any animal. Never did. Adjuvants such as Squalene (but it can be any other mineral oil) are not preservatives and had never been. Again, read this slowly because I feel another "absolutely nothing" and "typical woo tactic" from you. It shows your complete lack of clue about the topic and what is worse you are not even trying to understand it. Just using words as you go. Any words.

From wikipedia: "In vaccine development, squalene has been used as an adjuvant, which increases the immune response of vaccines that would otherwise be too weak to offer protection."

I think this is a typical response of a denier who simply use big words as he pleases without being aware of their meaning. We are talking about adjuvants and squalene for few posts after which at the end you brand them as preservatives and calling "another woo debunked". Well done! Can you see the complete fallacy of such post? Probably don't, but trust me it is rich. Rich!

Since you are not understanding the difference between adjuvant and preservative and are somehow mixing those two in a read-one-line way and exchanging them as you please, I think there is no point in any further discussion about adjuvants in vaccines. You simply don't understand the role of preservative and the role of adjuvant no matter how many "absolutely" you wrote. You don't. You mixing them up as being the same!

Please, post some other nice pictures and write more keywords such as "woos, absolutely, debunked and tactic" to gain a weight to your otherwise uninformed posts, because that's the only thing what is left after your merging squalene with preservatives.

"With all your ranting, crying, and hysteria in the last two posts" - ranting, maybe, but crying? Nope, but I can't prove it. And Hysteria means "state of mind, one of unmanageable fear". Please provide examples of crying and unmanageable fear in my post because it was you who (woo) invented words like "danger" and put them in my mouth.

You really didn't read anything about the topic, did you? You just made this adjuvant/squalene is a preservative by yourself as a self made expert, did you?

Another denier debunked (to paraphrase)

[Caustic Logic]

Not to nitpick, but:


and the final word:
<snip>raises interesting questions


How are interesting questions a final word?

[Caustic Logic]

Getting ashamed? Since you again failed to grasp the serious differences of this issue here it is with points so even a child can understand:

See, and I was cnsidering even trying to figure out what you're saying and whether it made any sense, since medicine is a complex field I have almost no grasp on. You say some stoopid like that, I not read any more. Whatever you're saying it's wrong. Peace.

[AbelovPes]

See, and I was cnsidering even trying to figure out what you're saying and whether it made any sense, since medicine is a complex field I have almost no grasp on. You say some stoopid like that, I not read any more. Whatever you're saying it's wrong. Peace.

Caustic Logic, there is no point. I knew that "Whatever you're saying it's wrong" would be the response when I point out a really serious error on the other disussing part where it shows he thinks adjuvants are preservatives.
It is not just "whatever" or "it's the same thing". The crucial point is that preservatives in vaccines were used for nearly 80 years while adjuvants are much more recent development (and have no function of preservative but rather "increases the immune response of vaccines") never had been used in public vaccination en masse (mostly military and special vaccines) and a controversy exist. (back to first post)

But ending discussion with "Whatever you're saying it's wrong" feels remarkably like a tantrum of 8 years old.

[T.A.M.]

Caustic Logic, there is no point. I knew that "Whatever you're saying it's wrong" would be the response when I point out a really serious error on the other disussing part where it shows he thinks adjuvants are preservatives.
It is not just "whatever" or "it's the same thing". The crucial point is that preservatives in vaccines were used for nearly 80 years while adjuvants are much more recent development (and have no function of preservative but rather "increases the immune response of vaccines") never had been used in public vaccination en masse (mostly military and special vaccines) and a controversy exist. (back to first post)

But ending discussion with "Whatever you're saying it's wrong" feels remarkably like a tantrum of 8 years old.

So what exactly is the point of your posting here? What were you hoping to see or gain? What is the purpose. With that, you have not been clear.

TAM

[LightinDarkness]

Getting ashamed? Since you again failed to grasp the serious differences of this issue here it is with points so even a child can understand:

Yawn. Yet again, your endless rants, raves, hysterics, and ad hominem attacks are amusing but irrelevant to the thread. We are still awaiting your evidence of your claims that there is some sort of "controversy" among doctors about vaccinations.

Here, so far, are the real order of events:

1) You claim that there is some sort of "controversy" about vaccinations, particularly in at-risk groups.
2) I post two peer reviewed articles, citing specific passages which debunk your claims.
3) You get an pompous attitude - which you have retained throughout all your posts (really, its just a message board, calm down). You use personal attacks to dismiss the evidence without providing any.
4) I point out your lack of evidence and use of personal attacks and ask that you provide real evidence.
5) You copy and paste articles from google without look at them or reading them which do not provide support for any of your claims and have nothing to do with them.
6) I ask you to cite specific passages from your articles which have nothing to do with your claims to see if there is any evidence in them.
7) You cite random sentences from their abstract, clearly not understanding or reading them, which show again that they have nothing to do with your claims.
8) I point this out, and you continue with the hysterics and rants.

Your claim: There is some sort of "controversy" about vaccinations, particularly in at-risk groups.
Your evidence: Random articles showing that when exposed to dosages far higher than what is present in normal vaccines, mice sometimes get arthritis. Conclusions that state these cannot be generalized to humans for obvious reasons.

No amount of personal attacks is going to change the facts here - you've shown 0 evidence for your claims and your woo has been debunked. Dismissed.

[Mac53]

So what exactly is the point of your posting here? What were you hoping to see or gain? What is the purpose. With that, you have not been clear.

TAM

What are you hooping to see or gain? What is the purpose. With that you have not been clear.

Funny how it applies to you, if you have figured it all out why do you bother wasting time on a forum? Why not do something great with you scientific fact, instead of wasting your days with this WOO nonsense?

The question is, you provide nothing, only support the claim of the already known. Yet you keep posting one -two liners, in purpose of what?

I know why, i could assume why but then you'll make a dumb post trying to attack me back.

I am already seeing the next post...

"welcome back mac, into woo again are you?" Even though, i have not expressed any only defending the ignorant statements.

This is not science this is a popularity contest.

I like how you people say Vaccines are safe, i watched a video of a woman who took the swine flu vaccine after it was put into the population after 1 death in 1976? She was paralyzed. But lets ignore that, because vaccine are safe.

Icke must be a retard looking for money. If i were him, and if i wanted to make money i would just write ebooks and make a killing. He tpyes his own **** while hving arthitis but once again morons here will time and time again dismiss his suffering for "he lieks the reptiles"

If you agree with that mentality then you are a loner. You see fault in everyone. And you should go kill yourself. Your no use to this world but to spin the ******** begin spun.

You think everything is okay and science and the government has it under control. There are no secrets, god is not real it's just the earth humans and the sun and an empty universe.

The wars, are for freedom obviously. Killing people is the right thing to do because they hit us first! The Federal reserve is obviously a non for profit bank helping the world prosper.

Health care cures all disease and the rest of society are a bunch of nuts with those herbs and junk. Only drugs can cure disease.

LOL. I make a funny rant post for fun. I know the idiots here on JREF are going to break this down point by point call it woo, talk some crap. Spin there story and move along with a greater self esteem.

WHy does it bother you that some people believe in woo? Does it hurt your reality and self security? Do you feel as if your factual world may not be so factual? Do you realize that science is ever changing and facts are merly scientific opinion based on Current evidence. Using facts is a loaded term as useing the truth is.

I thought this site would be people persuasion science. Investigating things, discussing tings with facts, evidence. Instead it's heres a CT this is why it's woo, yet you cont to reply to it. You will never belive it, you know by fact its a "fallacy" and yet here you are reading my post to try to attack me back because i hurt your ego that your fallacy has brought upon you.

Thanks. Don't reply. Doing so will show the amount of friends, and self esteem you really have.

Go kill your self with drugs lol! I love mindless Americans!

[SunnO]

And you calling people idiots is clearly the way to present your case ? :confused:

[Tomblvd]

What are you hooping to see or gain? What is the purpose. With that you have not been clear.

Funny how it applies to you, if you have figured it all out why do you bother wasting time on a forum? Why not do something great with you scientific fact, instead of wasting your days with this WOO nonsense?

The question is, you provide nothing, only support the claim of the already known. Yet you keep posting one -two liners, in purpose of what?

The purpose most of us are dragged into the anti-vaccine posts is for the benefit of parents who are truely confused by the celebrity "experts" like Jenny McCarthy, who, by virtue of their notariety alone, try to scare parent away from vaccinating their infants. Here, we get a chance to address their specious claims, submitted by proxy, and give parents the truth about vaccinations.



I like how you people say Vaccines are safe, i watched a video of a woman who took the swine flu vaccine after it was put into the population after 1 death in 1976? She was paralyzed. But lets ignore that, because vaccine are safe.

Can you point to one statement on this thread where anybody has stated categorically that vaccines are 100% safe?




Icke must be a retard looking for money. If i were him, and if i wanted to make money i would just write ebooks and make a killing. He tpyes his own **** while hving arthitis but once again morons here will time and time again dismiss his suffering for "he lieks the reptiles"

If you agree with that mentality then you are a loner. You see fault in everyone. And you should go kill yourself. Your no use to this world but to spin the ******** begin spun.

You think everything is okay and science and the government has it under control. There are no secrets, god is not real it's just the earth humans and the sun and an empty universe.

The wars, are for freedom obviously. Killing people is the right thing to do because they hit us first! The Federal reserve is obviously a non for profit bank helping the world prosper.

Health care cures all disease and the rest of society are a bunch of nuts with those herbs and junk. Only drugs can cure disease.

LOL. I make a funny rant post for fun. I know the idiots here on JREF are going to break this down point by point call it woo, talk some crap. Spin there story and move along with a greater self esteem.

There is nothing funny about your rant. It is rather pathetic.

WHy does it bother you that some people believe in woo? Does it hurt your reality and self security?

No, it bothers me that they convince other people to believe in woo, and some of those people can be harmed. Like the child that died recently because his parents were convinced that prayer instead of real medicine was the only way to cure him.

Do you feel as if your factual world may not be so factual? Do you realize that science is ever changing and facts are merly scientific opinion based on Current evidence. Using facts is a loaded term as useing the truth is.

You see, that is why the other posters keep asking you for evidence for your beliefs. That's the way it works. You have a theory. Someone does a study that invalidates your theory. They publish their study. It is then up to individual scientists all over the world to evaluate both sides and see which one is right.

I thought this site would be people persuasion science. Investigating things, discussing tings with facts, evidence. Instead it's heres a CT this is why it's woo, yet you cont to reply to it. You will never belive it, you know by fact its a "fallacy" and yet here you are reading my post to try to attack me back because i hurt your ego that your fallacy has brought upon you.

Ironic that you talk of evidence, yet ducked every opportunity to give some and discuss it. Face it, if you really had the evidence to back you up, you would have posted it. But there is none.


Go kill your self with drugs lol! I love mindless Americans!

You do realize that there are posters from all over the world here, don't you?

[Mac53]

The purpose most of us are dragged into the anti-vaccine posts is for the benefit of parents who are truely confused by the celebrity "experts" like Jenny McCarthy, who, by virtue of their notariety alone, try to scare parent away from vaccinating their infants. Here, we get a chance to address their specious claims, submitted by proxy, and give parents the truth about vaccinations.



Can you point to one statement on this thread where anybody has stated categorically that vaccines are 100% safe?




There is nothing funny about your rant. It is rather pathetic.



No, it bothers me that they convince other people to believe in woo, and some of those people can be harmed. Like the child that died recently because his parents were convinced that prayer instead of real medicine was the only way to cure him.



You see, that is why the other posters keep asking you for evidence for your beliefs. That's the way it works. You have a theory. Someone does a study that invalidates your theory. They publish their study. It is then up to individual scientists all over the world to evaluate both sides and see which one is right.



Ironic that you talk of evidence, yet ducked every opportunity to give some and discuss it. Face it, if you really had the evidence to back you up, you would have posted it. But there is none.



You do realize that there are posters from all over the world here, don't you?

Have been doing research and thinking on the matter. I am interested why it is you care if people do not take vaccines? Why it is you care that these people you call "woo woos" peddle their nonsense? Why?

Because if one looks at it logically, and vaccines protect us according to you and the facts. (I mean you as in everyone here, not the poster individually) Well would then stupid people die and allow for the "survival of the fittest" theory come into play. What would left on this world would be nothing but smart, intelligent people, capable of critical thinking.

You want to save these insane people? I guess with this logic you may want to save Hitlers life to. he was insane too.

I just wonder why it is you people care at all about the opinions of others. Present your case and move on? Allow the people of JREF to read it and gain an understanding, not your understanding but there through the information alone, not your bias understanding...

I haven't posted in 2 weeks and don't really think i will continue posting here. it bus me that a bunch of random no name people are putting out information based on a video or an article just by a trusted source. That's not real science...as far as i am concerned.

Real science would is, here is an investigation, evidence experiments. this is our findings, let's examine them and give our opinion. Done.

What is done on JREF, and not only here but everywhere on the internet is a link to an article and some no name unqualified random decides he has the intelligence to interpret the science of an experiment based on a summary.

If your searching from where these dilutions came from, i'd say the internet and people making up theories based on real science.

Anyway, no need to ramble on more, as i have already. I am just curious... Why do you care about the "woo woos" of this world. So much so that you insult them and attack them the moment they make any single post. I see this poster LightinDarkness (Look at name, he feels he is enlighten based on his internet research of Wikipedia.) who continues to be on this conspiracy theory topics just to simply argue against people will alternative views...

He deconstruction every argument, calls it fallacy and feels good. End of the day what is the accomplishment beside an ego boost?

Makes me wonder, why the rumor of the Internet is 99% lies is so true looking at in this way.

Sorry for added rant...

Mac

[sleepy_lioness]

Have been doing research and thinking on the matter. I am interested why it is you care if people do not take vaccines? Why it is you care that these people you call "woo woos" peddle their nonsense? Why?

Because if one looks at it logically, and vaccines protect us according to you and the facts. (I mean you as in everyone here, not the poster individually) Well would then stupid people die and allow for the "survival of the fittest" theory come into play. What would left on this world would be nothing but smart, intelligent people, capable of critical thinking.

You want to save these insane people? I guess with this logic you may want to save Hitlers life to. he was insane too.



Have you heard of 'herd immunity'? There are plenty of people on here who can explain it far better than I can, but the basic idea is as follows ... no vaccine is 100% effective. In a small minority of people it simply doesn't 'take'. This means that those people are at risk of catching diseases from the woos who refuse the vaccine. There are also people who can't safely have vaccinations because of other illnesses, or simply because the schedule hasn't got to them yet (eg, newborn babies), and they too are at risk if there are large numbers of unvaccinated 'stupid people' out there.

Also, we are often talking about children, and there is a legitimate debate as to whether parental stupidity should be allowed to affect the health of their children.

ETA: it's a public health issue, not merely an individual health issue.

[dudalb]

What are you hooping to see or gain? What is the purpose. With that you have not been clear.

Funny how it applies to you, if you have figured it all out why do you bother wasting time on a forum? Why not do something great with you scientific fact, instead of wasting your days with this WOO nonsense?

The question is, you provide nothing, only support the claim of the already known. Yet you keep posting one -two liners, in purpose of what?

I know why, i could assume why but then you'll make a dumb post trying to attack me back.

I am already seeing the next post...

"welcome back mac, into woo again are you?" Even though, i have not expressed any only defending the ignorant statements.

This is not science this is a popularity contest.

I like how you people say Vaccines are safe, i watched a video of a woman who took the swine flu vaccine after it was put into the population after 1 death in 1976? She was paralyzed. But lets ignore that, because vaccine are safe.

Icke must be a retard looking for money. If i were him, and if i wanted to make money i would just write ebooks and make a killing. He tpyes his own **** while hving arthitis but once again morons here will time and time again dismiss his suffering for "he lieks the reptiles"

If you agree with that mentality then you are a loner. You see fault in everyone. And you should go kill yourself. Your no use to this world but to spin the ******** begin spun.

You think everything is okay and science and the government has it under control. There are no secrets, god is not real it's just the earth humans and the sun and an empty universe.

The wars, are for freedom obviously. Killing people is the right thing to do because they hit us first! The Federal reserve is obviously a non for profit bank helping the world prosper.

Health care cures all disease and the rest of society are a bunch of nuts with those herbs and junk. Only drugs can cure disease.

LOL. I make a funny rant post for fun. I know the idiots here on JREF are going to break this down point by point call it woo, talk some crap. Spin there story and move along with a greater self esteem.

WHy does it bother you that some people believe in woo? Does it hurt your reality and self security? Do you feel as if your factual world may not be so factual? Do you realize that science is ever changing and facts are merly scientific opinion based on Current evidence. Using facts is a loaded term as useing the truth is.

I thought this site would be people persuasion science. Investigating things, discussing tings with facts, evidence. Instead it's heres a CT this is why it's woo, yet you cont to reply to it. You will never belive it, you know by fact its a "fallacy" and yet here you are reading my post to try to attack me back because i hurt your ego that your fallacy has brought upon you.

Thanks. Don't reply. Doing so will show the amount of friends, and self esteem you really have.

Go kill your self with drugs lol! I love mindless Americans!

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_188404a92e50f7158b.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=17399)

[dudalb]

Anyway, no need to ramble on more, as i have already. I am just curious... Why do you care about the "woo woos" of this world. So much so that you insult them and attack them the moment they make any single post.

Because on some topics..and medical science is at the top of the list...the woo woos can do real damage until they are stopped.

[pgwenthold]

Have been doing research and thinking on the matter. I am interested why it is you care if people do not take vaccines? Why it is you care that these people you call "woo woos" peddle their nonsense? Why?


I used to not be too concerned about the anti-vaxxers (other than to consider them irrational idiots) until I had a child of my own. As has been described, the decision to not vaccinate is not just about your health - it puts MY child at risk. At that point, I care.

[Lynx2174]

As rude as everyone was to Mac53, it sure looks like they were spot on with their generalizations.

[dafydd]

Icke is a looney,he used to be a sports comentator and then one day he appeared on my tv screen dressed in a purple robe,claiming to be the new messiah.He is more than a few sandwiches short of a picnic,a total fruit and nutcase.

[dafydd]

And you calling people idiots is clearly the way to present your case ? :confused:

He takes some of Icke's statements seriously so who does the word idiot apply to?