|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
 Posted - 02/18/2007 : 01:21:46 [Permalink]
|
| Joe, when was the last time a Federal judge was impeached? And the latest Supreme Court appointments have been mostly political footballs, with both parties looking more at win/loss ratios than appointee qualifications. And I'm not talking about the hearings, but the full-Senate votes. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 20:29:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Man, just as bad as the blind-faith-in-religion, is the blind-faith-in-science.
You tell me you are right because it is science, and here are the facts. I have heard that before from both the government and private industry.
You tell me your way is better because it will lead to something better, and while it may appear to do so, it may be just smoke and mirrors.
Then, becuase you cannot convince me otherwise, ou resort to personal attacks. You seem to think what you want and what you think is more important then what others think. You are a delusional utopianist preying at the alter of science, blinded by looking at too many statistcs to support your claims.
You claim that we are all chemical reactions without free-will. Yet you speak of ethics and morals when they cannot exist without free-will. If ethics and morals are just chemicals, howcan anyhting be unethical or immoral? Just a bit of hypocrisy on your part, to claim me immoral because you do not like my answers.
What is the difirence in creating shit that's bad and calling it a food, and creating shit that's bad and calling it a drug or vaccine? The same bod approves it. The same body that has given us numerous bad drugs, and numerous bad foods. The same body that is headed by a political appointee of the current group in power paying back their supporters.
So with all the bad science out there, I am supposed to take your, or the FDA''s word for it.
So what you are saying is that you trust no one and nothing. You don't trust facts from sources other than your own observation. You assume everyone and every source could be wrong. But you have no knowledge over a layman in any of the fields you doubt. Here was my point, your non expert opinion means nothing to me and is unconsiderable without evidence of its validity. Simply saying "the science could be wrong" and "everything should be better but I have no way to improve things" is shitting from the mouth. |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
| Edited by - Neurosis on 02/18/2007 20:31:16 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/19/2007 : 12:22:26 [Permalink]
|
Neurosis said:
quote:
Simply saying "the science could be wrong" and "everything should be better but I have no way to improve things" is shitting from the mouth.
And you have the sack to call me rude.... HA!
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 02/19/2007 : 14:45:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Neurosis said:
quote:
Simply saying "the science could be wrong" and "everything should be better but I have no way to improve things" is shitting from the mouth.
And you have the sack to call me rude.... HA!
No, I know I am rude. I am rude and mean to people after they loose track of the rational path and the calm nice way of explaining things fails. I wasn't calling you rude in the other thread because I dislike rude people. Be rude all you want, but Baxter didn't deserve to be rudely responded to yet in that thread and I think you were wrong, thus I got involved. It was more of an explanation of me getting involved then some sort of reprimand. In this case, OI has brought nothing to the table and openly has displayed a misunderstanding of the subject. Rather than acknowledge these short falls and seek more knowledge, he has resorted to "don't trust the scientist or science" tactics. Therefore, calling his moves as they are my be rude (hehe), but it is the only way I know of to get him to see how ludicrous his assertions are. |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2007 : 06:11:38 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Joe, when was the last time a Federal judge was impeached? And the latest Supreme Court appointments have been mostly political footballs, with both parties looking more at win/loss ratios than appointee qualifications. And I'm not talking about the hearings, but the full-Senate votes.
Sometimes I switch into "perfect world" mode... I usually only do that when asleep though...... Temporary insanity.....
Peace
Joe |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2007 : 06:24:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis
quote:
Man, just as bad as the blind-faith-in-religion, is the blind-faith-in-science.
You tell me you are right because it is science, and here are the facts. I have heard that before from both the government and private industry.
You tell me your way is better because it will lead to something better, and while it may appear to do so, it may be just smoke and mirrors.
Then, becuase you cannot convince me otherwise, ou resort to personal attacks. You seem to think what you want and what you think is more important then what others think. You are a delusional utopianist preying at the alter of science, blinded by looking at too many statistcs to support your claims.
You claim that we are all chemical reactions without free-will. Yet you speak of ethics and morals when they cannot exist without free-will. If ethics and morals are just chemicals, howcan anyhting be unethical or immoral? Just a bit of hypocrisy on your part, to claim me immoral because you do not like my answers.
What is the difirence in creating shit that's bad and calling it a food, and creating shit that's bad and calling it a drug or vaccine? The same bod approves it. The same body that has given us numerous bad drugs, and numerous bad foods. The same body that is headed by a political appointee of the current group in power paying back their supporters.
So with all the bad science out there, I am supposed to take your, or the FDA''s word for it.
So what you are saying is that you trust no one and nothing. You don't trust facts from sources other than your own observation. You assume everyone and every source could be wrong. But you have no knowledge over a layman in any of the fields you doubt. Here was my point, your non expert opinion means nothing to me and is unconsiderable without evidence of its validity. Simply saying "the science could be wrong" and "everything should be better but I have no way to improve things" is shitting from the mouth.
No, blindly following science and claiming it has all the answers and can predict the future with 100 accuaracy iswishful thinking.
Forcing people to fall into your line of thinking when you cannot possibly know the outcome is Fascist.
Again, chicken-pox........ Prove to me that the rewards outweigh the risks. Prove to me there will not be a problem 40 years from now.
HPV.... Prove to me that we will have a generation without birth defects.......
This is not small-pox. It's not measels. It's not hepatits. Find a vaccine for the bird-flu, and I would take it. Risk/Reward.
Peace
Joe
|
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2007 : 10:45:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
No, blindly following science and claiming it has all the answers and can predict the future with 100 accuaracy iswishful thinking.
Yes I blindly accept science. That explains why I study it about 5 hours a day plus all of my medical classes. That is why I have suggested that you go out and actually learn something about the subjects you talk about. You seem to think that someone can take the opposite position of the scientific evidenced consensus while remaining ignorant of the subject. You can't do so without admitting ignorance. If you have no idea about a subject, say immunology, then you should learn more about it before trying to debate about it. The fact is that if someone has evidence of how something works and you don't then you must accept that position because you have no reason for doing otherwise. If you do deny the evidence then you are the one using faith. For example you have no reason to expect that exposure to a immune stimulating substance in a hospital is different than in a classroom or boardroom, yet you accept that it is, on faith.
quote:
Forcing people to fall into your line of thinking when you cannot possibly know the outcome is Fascist.
So do you make up these fantasies often? What is the point of that statement? First, I have not tried to force anyone to any position, as forcing is cohersion. Second, showing the evidence is how someone proves a position. As a nation, people agree on certain ideas and those ideas are forced, even in non-fascist countries. The difference is how much cohersion versus evidenced debate leads to the 'forced' ideology.
quote:
Again, chicken-pox........ Prove to me that the rewards outweigh the risks. Prove to me there will not be a problem 40 years from now.
Sure Bill. Oh wait your not Bill, you sound so much like him. Prove to me that we will not be wiped out tomorrow with nuclear weapons. If we were,, at least we would not be suffering from chicken pox. Such an argument is stupid. Show some evidence instead of dooms-day conjecture.
quote:
HPV.... Prove to me that we will have a generation without birth defects.......
Well, since I can prove that none of the ingredients have ever been shown to produce birth defects and have been used for a long enough time to observe possible birth defects. I think that I have. Of course, you are a paranoid uninformed talking head, so I can see why you would not accept it.
quote:
This is not small-pox. It's not measels. It's not hepatits. Find a vaccine for the bird-flu, and I would take it. Risk/Reward.
Ha. You are hilarious! You don't find cervical cancer a risk, but a disease that only effects people that mess with chickens, you want a vaccine for. There is a very small risk of an avian flu epidemic, orders of magnitude less than getting HPV and then cervical cancer together. Even if there was an epidemic the H5N1 flu provides a hightened protection and developed countries would get over it fairly easily as epidemics go. Obviously, you are a dooms-dayer. |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2007 : 12:53:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis
There is a very small risk of an avian flu epidemic, orders of magnitude less than getting HPV and then cervical cancer together.
Well, Joe's personal chance of getting cervical cancer is zero, so of course he's going to consider avian flu a much larger risk.  |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2007 : 13:31:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis
There is a very small risk of an avian flu epidemic, orders of magnitude less than getting HPV and then cervical cancer together.
Well, Joe's personal chance of getting cervical cancer is zero, so of course he's going to consider avian flu a much larger risk.
That is exactly where my thinking was. |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2007 : 15:27:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis
quote:
No, blindly following science and claiming it has all the answers and can predict the future with 100 accuaracy iswishful thinking.
Yes I blindly accept science. That explains why I study it about 5 hours a day plus all of my medical classes. That is why I have suggested that you go out and actually learn something about the subjects you talk about. You seem to think that someone can take the opposite position of the scientific evidenced consensus while remaining ignorant of the subject. You can't do so without admitting ignorance. If you have no idea about a subject, say immunology, then you should learn more about it before trying to debate about it. The fact is that if someone has evidence of how something works and you don't then you must accept that position because you have no reason for doing otherwise. If you do deny the evidence then you are the one using faith. For example you have no reason to expect that exposure to a immune stimulating substance in a hospital is different than in a classroom or boardroom, yet you accept that it is, on faith.
No, I have lack of faith. I am not saying that I believe without a shadow of doubt, that this is going to bite us in the ass. You are saying it is.
IMHO, which all I have ever forwarded, chicken pox is not worth the risk. In your opinion, which you state as fact, there is nothing to worry about.
Same with HPV.... I want to see the data 10 years from now.
quote:
quote:
Again, chicken-pox........ Prove to me that the rewards outweigh the risks. Prove to me there will not be a problem 40 years from now.
Sure Bill. Oh wait your not Bill, you sound so much like him. Prove to me that we will not be wiped out tomorrow with nuclear weapons. If we were,, at least we would not be suffering from chicken pox. Such an argument is stupid. Show some evidence instead of dooms-day conjecture.
quote:
LOL... evudence, I have been asking you for evidence, but you have provided none. Show some evidence instead of Polyyanna conjecture.
quote:
[quote]
HPV.... Prove to me that we will have a generation without birth defects.......
Well, since I can prove that none of the ingredients have ever been shown to produce birth defects and have been used for a long enough time to observe possible birth defects. I think that I have. Of course, you are a paranoid uninformed talking head, so I can see why you would not accept it.
[quote]
Me a talking head, why? Because I question your psychic ability? Because I question your unquestioning faith in something that has been proven to be wrong (science)? Because when something happens, no matter the outcme, the reaction is, oh, well, we need to refine our theory?
Because you try to bully your way through an arguement proving nothing to me other then my lack of faith is well founded. That questioning things IN science is expected, but questioning science itself, especially when they are claiming to know the future.
[quote][quote]
This is not small-pox. It's not measels. It's not hepatits. Find a vaccine for the bird-flu, and I would take it. Risk/Reward.
Ha. You are hilarious! You don't find cervical cancer a risk, but a disease that only effects people that mess with chickens, you want a vaccine for. There is a very small risk of an avian flu epidemic, orders of magnitude less than getting HPV and then cervical cancer together. Even if there was an epidemic the H5N1 flu provides a hightened protection and developed countries would get over it fairly easily as epidemics go. Obviously, you are a dooms-dayer.
Again, I am not a doom-sayer, but you seem to have this utopian streak that is really bloody scarey......
And no, To me, I have no fear of HPV. For my daughter, she will be educated and able to make her own decision on it. I am not going to force it on her.
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2007 : 21:26:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
No, I have lack of faith. I am not saying that I believe without a shadow of doubt, that this is going to bite us in the ass. You are saying it is.
What? That makes no sense. I am saying that cervical cancer is a risk that can be minimized or even eliminated with a vaccine that is not dangerous. I have never said that people should be forced to be vaccinated. I have only said that it is stupid to say that nine year olds can't get the vaccine because it encourages pre-marital sex, bacause it doesn't. I have also been arguing against your position of ignorance. You and your "I'll buy it when I see it" attitude even though you can see it in parts already. It is like someone watching a practice session in which a gynastics routine was performed in parts, and yet still denying that all parts could be done one after another in session just because one hasn't seen them do it for the crowd.
quote:
IMHO, which all I have ever forwarded, chicken pox is not worth the risk. In your opinion, which you state as fact, there is nothing to worry about.
Actually, you are saying that there is a risk with no proof that there is one. I am saying that there is more risk of someone getting shingels (not a threat to me in the first place, just you) without being vaccinated and never exposed. I am also saying that vaccines are exposures to immune stimulating agents (antigens) and that getting the disease or the vaccine will not prevent the bodies immune system from naturally becoming less sensitive to a disease. You are trying to make vaccines different than exposures to antigens naturally, but there is not difference.
quote:
Same with HPV.... I want to see the data 10 years from now.
What data? The data on whether or not the ingredients can cause birth defects? Well that is already in because we have already used all of the ingredients for a while and the antigen itself has been infecting women for years also. I have said it before but you are worried about something that is not a threat for no reason even though it has data to show no danger, which is a doomsayer attitude to me.
quote:
Again, I am not a doom-sayer, but you seem to have this utopian streak that is really bloody scarey......
Uh... no. I simply go out and learn about a subject in order to form my conclusions. The data is that the chicken pox vaccine does not incourage shingles (no real threat anyway)and the HPV vaccine is not a threat to peoples health.
quote:
And no, To me, I have no fear of HPV. For my daughter, she will be educated and able to make her own decision on it. I am not going to force it on her.
Do you let her make her own decisions about coloring on the walls too? Actually, I agree and have all along, that the HPV vaccine should not be forced onto anyone. I am only saying that it is no threat to health and should be administered to females (and males?) before they are sexually active. |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2007 : 21:34:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Merck Stops Campaign to Mandate Gardasil Vaccine Use.
Public funding, who would have guessed. Since I am not one for public funding for anything but the absolutely necessary, this is good. I still think that parents should have the vaccine administered in order to better protect their children. |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2007 : 22:15:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis
quote:
No, I have lack of faith. I am not saying that I believe without a shadow of doubt, that this is going to bite us in the ass. You are saying it is.
What? That makes no sense. I am saying that cervical cancer is a risk that can be minimized or even eliminated with a vaccine that is not dangerous. I have never said that people should be forced to be vaccinated. I have only said that it is stupid to say that nine year olds can't get the vaccine because it encourages pre-marital sex, bacause it doesn't. I have also been arguing against your position of ignorance. You and your "I'll buy it when I see it" attitude even though you can see it in parts already. It is like someone watching a practice session in which a gynastics routine was performed in parts, and yet still denying that all parts could be done one after another in session just because one hasn't seen them do it for the crowd.
Not once have I said that it should note be available. Not once have i said it encourages premarital sex.
What I have said it is largely preventable by choice, and it is a choice itslef. I have said that the forcing of this, IMHO, is wrong.
Gymnastics, that's rich....... But you are right. All those really cool moves, in and of themselves are, well, cool as hell. When they combine them, they get cooler. When they try to combin the wrong ones, they get hurt.
quote:
quote:
IMHO, which all I have ever forwarded, chicken pox is not worth the risk. In your opinion, which you state as fact, there is nothing to worry about.
Actually, you are saying that there is a risk with no proof that there is one. I am saying that there is more risk of someone getting shingels (not a threat to me in the first place, just you) without being vaccinated and never exposed. I am also saying that vaccines are exposures to immune stimulating agents (antigens) and that getting the disease or the vaccine will not prevent the bodies immune system from naturally becoming less sensitive to a disease. You are trying to make vaccines different than exposures to antigens naturally, but there is not difference.
And you are saying there is no risk where there is no proof there isn't one.
quote:
quote:
Again, I am not a doom-sayer, but you seem to have this utopian streak that is really bloody scarey......
Uh... no. I simply go out and learn about a subject in order to form my conclusions. The data is that the chicken pox vaccine does not incourage shingles (no real threat anyway)and the HPV vaccine is not a threat to peoples health.
Damn, you are fixated on Shingles, and perhaps thaat is my fault. I am not talking about just shingles, I am talking about people having serious health issues from chicken-pox as an adult.
quote:
quote:
And no, To me, I have no fear of HPV. For my daughter, she will be educated and able to make her own decision on it. I am not going to force it on her.
Do you let her make her own decisions about coloring on the walls too? Actually, I agree and have all along, that the HPV vaccine should not be forced onto anyone. I am only saying that it is no threat to health and should be administered to females (and males?) before they are sexually active.
If she is 9 or 10 and still coloring on the walls.... I think I have more then an HPV vacccine problem, and at that point may make the decision for her.......
Peace
Joe |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2007 : 22:30:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Not once have I said that it should note be available. Not once have i said it encourages premarital sex.
Right and I wasn't talking to you about that. I was talking about it period. I was saying that you are claiming I have said something I haven't, that I am for forcing the vaccine onto people. When all I have said is that it is a good idea for everyone to be vaccinated in order to reduce or prevent cervical cancer.
quote:
What I have said it is largely preventable by choice, and it is a choice itslef. I have said that the forcing of this, IMHO, is wrong.
And I said that it is an invisible disease that is spread without the spreaders knowledge. It is retarded to expect people to remain truly monogamous all of their life.
quote:
Gymnastics, that's rich....... But you are right. All those really cool moves, in and of themselves are, well, cool as hell. When they combine them, they get cooler. When they try to combin the wrong ones, they get hurt.
[Sigh...] You have no understanding of chemistry and should go read something before saying anymore of the subject. Chemist can study how chemicals interact in a lab and guess what, they already know how the chemicals in the vaccine interact with one another and the body, and have been able to study this in real patients for a while since they have been administered in other vaccines, which have not produced any birth defects or any other problem. You just don't understand how conclusions are reached by tests in the lab and those tests are comparible to the use in the population. Chemicals will always react the way they do everytime without fail ever. It is the laws of nature.
quote:
And you are saying there is no risk where there is no proof there isn't one.
No, I am saying that there is no evidence for a risk in this case and there is plenty of evidence that there is not a risk.
quote:
Damn, you are fixated on Shingles, and perhaps thaat is my fault. I am not talking about just shingles, I am talking about people having serious health issues from chicken-pox as an adult.
And I am saying that people who get vaccinated are at little risk of ever getting chicken pox again, or shingles as it would present. It is also the same risk that people who catch it during childhood are at, and that people who have had neither are at orders of magnitude higher risk. I am also saying that chicken pox in old age is not a high threat. My 76 year old grandma got shingles (she was 70 at the time) and survived just fine. I have seen a few (four) other people get it at different ages also, with no problem. Also, of these four three had it as a child and one never had it. So in reality your worry over a shingles epidemic is stupid, but not as stupid as your avian flu worries. |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
| Edited by - Neurosis on 02/20/2007 22:41:24 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
