RE: Science Denial on the Rise

RE: Science Denial on the Rise (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

pahunkboy -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 10:55:33 AM)
Doesn't the World Health Organization deserve to be trusted? I don't understand the motives that have led WHO to act in the absurd way it is acting. Absurd? Yes. Last May, WHO changed the official definition of a pandemic -- it changed from a logical definition (a pandemic is an infection of global proportions and with a high mortality) to an illogical definition (a pandemic is an infection of global proportions). What are the consequences of this change? Under the new definition of "pandemic", the annual [seasonal] flu more than meets the requirements to be one. Are we going to declare a world health alert every fall? Besides absurdity from the scientific standpoint, this has serious financial and policy consequences./from the link

mnottertail -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 10:58:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I am not going to search a link for you when most don't read my links or like my links. besides the onerous on on the manufacturer to PROVE it is safe. Not the other way around. / and of course we can not sue them if we are irreparably damaged. Can we? (no) onus, and we have a CDC and the Food and Drug Administration as well as the manufacturing controls and required diligence that slows down on the latent and government awakening hypodermic fusion bombing of people, why; I bet that no more than one in a million took those shots have had a miniature neutron bomb introduced into their bloodstream by this method. heres the site to back up my assertions Hunkie: http///somelooniefuckwearingtinfoil.com

philosophy -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:03:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy A Nun speaks out on the H1N1 Pandemic: "The WHO changed the official definition of a pandemic" Interview with Sister Dr. Teresa Forcades . An articulate and authoritative statement http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16059 ....well done, you found a link. i have one for you too. http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=4751 "Pandemic: An epidemic (a sudden outbreak) that becomes very widespread and affects a whole region, a continent, or the world." ....note the last time this page was edited. "3/26/1998 2:27:00 PM" This gives the lie to this part of the so-called proof you offered. According to your link... " Last May, WHO changed the official definition of a pandemic -- it changed from a logical definition (a pandemic is an infection of global proportions and with a high mortality) to an illogical definition (a pandemic is an infection of global proportions)." ....clearly this is incorrect as the definition of pandemic, circa 1998, makes no mention of mortality rates. Amazing what a small amount of research show aint it?

popeye1250 -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:07:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: Brain I am a pretty scientific person these days and if you can prove something to me based on evidence and facts I'm okay with it. Science Denial on the Rise From evolution to global warming to vaccines, science is under assault from denialists--those who dismiss well-tested scientific knowledge as merely one of many competing ideologies. Science denial goes beyond skeptical questioning to attack the legitimacy of science itself. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-newton/science-denial-on-the-ris_b_413848.html Brain, I was never a scientific person until this "global warming" crap came up and I started reading about it. Do you really think the words "science" and "global warming" belong in the same sentance? "Political science" maybe. "Might happen," "Could happen," "is possable" is not science it's pure conjecture! Now in real science who's doing all the denying? I don't see any. Political science is that used by the naysayers. Those that cannot seem to fathom that if your throw tons of Co2 into the atmosphere that there just night be some sort of ramifications. In far too many cases it is the naysayers hating the messenger more than the message. Hey Buckwheat, why don't the real scientists who do research on cancer, diabetes and other diseases have to do the "Hard Sell" on people like the "global warmer flat earthers" do? Or the researchers in Astronomy, Engineering, and a dozen other fields? We don't see the cancer researchers going around calling people "non-believers" like the "warmers" or "scientologists" do we? Pretty soon we'll see the "warmers" getting into fights with the scientologists for the best street corners to have people "fill out a few questions." "Get the fuck out of here! This ain't your corner anymore, tell it to Tom Cruise!" Ha! I'd like to see the "warmers" trying to "sell" the scientologists on "global warming", "Hey! "global warming is caused by,.....you guessed it,....."DYANETICS!"

Silence8 -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:13:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: Brain I am a pretty scientific person these days and if you can prove something to me based on evidence and facts I'm okay with it. Science Denial on the Rise From evolution to global warming to vaccines, science is under assault from denialists--those who dismiss well-tested scientific knowledge as merely one of many competing ideologies. Science denial goes beyond skeptical questioning to attack the legitimacy of science itself. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-newton/science-denial-on-the-ris_b_413848.html Brain, I was never a scientific person until this "global warming" crap came up and I started reading about it. Do you really think the words "science" and "global warming" belong in the same sentance? "Political science" maybe. "Might happen," "Could happen," "is possable" is not science it's pure conjecture! Now in real science who's doing all the denying? I don't see any. Political science is that used by the naysayers. Those that cannot seem to fathom that if your throw tons of Co2 into the atmosphere that there just night be some sort of ramifications. In far too many cases it is the naysayers hating the messenger more than the message. Hey Buckwheat, why don't the real scientists who do research on cancer, diabetes and other diseases have to do the "Hard Sell" on people like the "global warmer flat earthers" do? Or the researchers in Astronomy, Engineering, and a dozen other fields? We don't see the cancer researchers going around calling people "non-believers" like the "warmers" or "scientologists" do we? Pretty soon we'll see the "warmers" getting into fights with the scientologists for the best street corners to have people "fill out a few questions." "Get the fuck out of here! This ain't your corner anymore, tell it to Tom Cruise!" Ha! I'd like to see the "warmers" trying to "sell" the scientologists on "global warming", "Hey! "global warming is caused by,.....you guessed it,....."DYANETICS!" Thank Science that the internet has replaced so much paper publication. If your 12,000 odd posts were committed to print, we'd really be fucked.

pahunkboy -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:18:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy A Nun speaks out on the H1N1 Pandemic: "The WHO changed the official definition of a pandemic" Interview with Sister Dr. Teresa Forcades . An articulate and authoritative statement http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16059 ....well done, you found a link. i have one for you too. http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=4751 "Pandemic: An epidemic (a sudden outbreak) that becomes very widespread and affects a whole region, a continent, or the world." ....note the last time this page was edited. "3/26/1998 2:27:00 PM" This gives the lie to this part of the so-called proof you offered. According to your link... " Last May, WHO changed the official definition of a pandemic -- it changed from a logical definition (a pandemic is an infection of global proportions and with a high mortality) to an illogical definition (a pandemic is an infection of global proportions)." ....clearly this is incorrect as the definition of pandemic, circa 1998, makes no mention of mortality rates. Amazing what a small amount of research show aint it? I am afraid that you do not understand. Under pandemic 6 level- all nations fall under WHO laws. Not US laws. We now are at level 6. 6 is the highest level of pandemic. That means people should be dying in the streets- popping over like flies. Take all the injections you want. But don't force them on me. My entire family refused the h1n1 injection. And I am the craziest one. In the next "pandemic" I will re-evaluate all the facts and then decide if I need a vax. I wish I could undo most of them that I have already gotten. I should have more energy- and better stamina. And not I cant prove that- but I cant prove it reverse as well.

popeye1250 -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:19:01 AM)
Silence8, don't you think that's just a little anal-retentive?

MasterCharles099 -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:20:51 AM)
define evolution

pahunkboy -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:21:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Silence8 quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: Brain I am a pretty scientific person these days and if you can prove something to me based on evidence and facts I'm okay with it. Science Denial on the Rise From evolution to global warming to vaccines, science is under assault from denialists--those who dismiss well-tested scientific knowledge as merely one of many competing ideologies. Science denial goes beyond skeptical questioning to attack the legitimacy of science itself. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-newton/science-denial-on-the-ris_b_413848.html Brain, I was never a scientific person until this "global warming" crap came up and I started reading about it. Do you really think the words "science" and "global warming" belong in the same sentance? "Political science" maybe. "Might happen," "Could happen," "is possable" is not science it's pure conjecture! Now in real science who's doing all the denying? I don't see any. Political science is that used by the naysayers. Those that cannot seem to fathom that if your throw tons of Co2 into the atmosphere that there just night be some sort of ramifications. In far too many cases it is the naysayers hating the messenger more than the message. Hey Buckwheat, why don't the real scientists who do research on cancer, diabetes and other diseases have to do the "Hard Sell" on people like the "global warmer flat earthers" do? Or the researchers in Astronomy, Engineering, and a dozen other fields? We don't see the cancer researchers going around calling people "non-believers" like the "warmers" or "scientologists" do we? Pretty soon we'll see the "warmers" getting into fights with the scientologists for the best street corners to have people "fill out a few questions." "Get the fuck out of here! This ain't your corner anymore, tell it to Tom Cruise!" Ha! I'd like to see the "warmers" trying to "sell" the scientologists on "global warming", "Hey! "global warming is caused by,.....you guessed it,....."DYANETICS!" Thank Science that the internet has replaced so much paper publication. If your 12,000 odd posts were committed to print, we'd really be fucked. We sure would. That way he would not come back under 3 different IDs to make it look like a fake person is agreeing with the first person. Gotta LOVE the net.

NihilusZero -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:25:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail heres the site to back up my assertions Hunkie: http///somelooniefuckwearingtinfoil.com 30 points. Great laugh.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:40:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail heres the site to back up my assertions Hunkie: http///somelooniefuckwearingtinfoil.com I never realized that was an actual website.... but it would certainly explain a lot.

pahunkboy -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:41:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail heres the site to back up my assertions Hunkie: http///somelooniefuckwearingtinfoil.com 30 points. Great laugh. anytime a matter is monetized- and the quest if to GET money- we can expect players to GRAB for said money. ...so who IS wearing the tin foil hat? Same ones who took the h1n1 injection. We all were going to die. Level 6 pandemic- the worst there is. Sound familiar? Fear-mongering for profit. That is what America is ALL about.

pahunkboy -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:45:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I am not going to search a link for you when most don't read my links or like my links. besides the onerous on on the manufacturer to PROVE it is safe. Not the other way around. / and of course we can not sue them if we are irreparably damaged. Can we? (no) onus, and we have a CDC and the Food and Drug Administration as well as the manufacturing controls and required diligence that slows down on the latent and government awakening hypodermic fusion bombing of people, why; I bet that no more than one in a million took those shots have had a miniature neutron bomb introduced into their bloodstream by this method. heres the site to back up my assertions Hunkie: http///somelooniefuckwearingtinfoil.com And the White house passed a law giving Merck immunity from any lawsuits. Gee. Pretty safe for THEM- isn't it? So now we have oodles of people with MERCURY in them- but- they did not get the sniffles.

philosophy -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:47:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I am afraid that you do not understand. Under pandemic 6 level- all nations fall under WHO laws. Not US laws. ....really? Somehow i doubt that. But, of course, it backs up your assertion that we are all headed for some bizarre, eugenics-based, new world order. Sod stocking up and gold and silver........seems like you need to be stocking up on tin foil. quote: We now are at level 6. 6 is the highest level of pandemic. That means people should be dying in the streets- popping over like flies. ..NO IT BLOODY DOESN'T!!!!! The only person suggesting that pandemic necessarily involves high mortality rates is the discredited garbage you pointed us at in the link. The definition of pandemic has not been changed. It has nothing to do with mortality rates. Your continued assertion, despite being categorically proven to be wrong, is just evidence of your wholly anti-scientific mind set. You are the spiritual successor of those who wanted Galileo burned at the stake. i feel incredibly sorry for you, because i think you're headed for clinical paranoia if you're not there already. Please, get some help, fast, before you start seeing agents of the New world order in your local supermarket.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 11:52:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy I am afraid that you do not understand. Under pandemic 6 level- all nations fall under WHO laws. Not US laws. We now are at level 6. 6 is the highest level of pandemic. That means people should be dying in the streets- popping over like flies. No, PA, you're the one who doesn't understand. You have no idea what you're talking about, man. A pandemic is not the "highest" level of pandemic; it is the only level of pandemic. There are 6 stages on the scale, and a disease outbreak does not become a pandemic until it reaches Level 6. Here is an explanation, from the WHO website. You may notice that "people dying in the streets" is not listed anywhere among the citeria - quote: Phase 5 is characterized by human-to-human spread of the virus into at least two countries in one WHO region. While most countries will not be affected at this stage, the declaration of Phase 5 is a strong signal that a pandemic is imminent and that the time to finalize the organization, communication, and implementation of the planned mitigation measures is short. Phase 6, the pandemic phase, is characterized by community level outbreaks in at least one other country in a different WHO region in addition to the criteria defined in Phase 5. Designation of this phase will indicate that a global pandemic is under way. Link If you read it closely, you may also notice there is no mention of "WHO laws" (whatever the heck those are), or how American citizens somehow "fall under" those laws. PA, you're a great guy, and i know you mean well, but you clearly lack the ability to tell the difference between stuff that makes sense and stuff that just doesn't even come close. You've got to turn off that damned radio and use the computer to surf porn instead of www.lunatic.com.

popeye1250 -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 12:06:24 PM)
Hey Hunk, with all these "disaster" shows on the History Channel and National Geographic lately the "warmers" must be creaming their jeans! "Oh God! that's Sooooo fucking "possible", I have to go change my shorts now!" In the house next door the scientologists would be saying; "Oh Ron! That's soooooo fucking possable, I have to go change my shorts now!" "See? DYANETICS!" Hey,.....what if it is DYANETICS and not "CO 4" or whatever the "warmers" are trying to tell us this week? lol We could start up the "Friday Night Fights" again! "In this corner..... L. Ron Questionaire!" "In the opposite corner, .......CO 3 Boy! "C'mon CO3 Boy, I'll show you some "heat!"

pahunkboy -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 12:34:16 PM)
Well- Somehow I lived. Imagine. No h1n1 shot- and I lived. Amazing. So- that is $20 less the establishment made off the crises. ..and I and 100,000 Americans were supposed to die- as the Then there are residuals. You know- all the pills that they cant now sell me. Because of the flawed mercury injections into my muscles and immune system. I am the example of what happens when you don't get h1n1 shot. $20 richer- possibly the sniffles. and refused to get on the pillarama horsie go round. The Amish are right. The NWO is evil.

pahunkboy -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 12:36:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Hey Hunk, with all these "disaster" shows on the History Channel and National Geographic lately the "warmers" must be creaming their jeans! "Oh God! that's Sooooo fucking "possible", I have to go change my shorts now!" In the house next door the scientologists would be saying; "Oh Ron! That's soooooo fucking possable, I have to go change my shorts now!" "See? DYANETICS!" Hey,.....what if it is DYANETICS and not "CO 4" or whatever the "warmers" are trying to tell us this week? lol We could start up the "Friday Night Fights" again! "In this corner..... L. Ron Questionaire!" "In the opposite corner, .......CO 3 Boy! "C'mon CO3 Boy, I'll show you some "heat!" cap and trade is dead. A miserable try by the city of London and Londanistan to assess a global carbon tax 20% on us. Now resorting to terror acts so we fear for our life.... RUN- run for your life!!!!

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 2:03:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Hey Buckwheat, why don't the real scientists who do research on cancer, diabetes and other diseases have to do the "Hard Sell" on people like the "global warmer flat earthers" do? Or the researchers in Astronomy, Engineering, and a dozen other fields? We don't see the cancer researchers going around calling people "non-believers" like the "warmers" or "scientologists" do we? Pretty soon we'll see the "warmers" getting into fights with the scientologists for the best street corners to have people "fill out a few questions." "Get the fuck out of here! This ain't your corner anymore, tell it to Tom Cruise!" Ha! I'd like to see the "warmers" trying to "sell" the scientologists on "global warming", "Hey! "global warming is caused by,.....you guessed it,....."DYANETICS!" There isn't an anti cancer research lobby funded by big business, spreading misconceptions and making tiny irrelevant issues huge focal points. Ultimately nobody is going to have to sell you anything, your pleadings from a position of self interest rather than so called ‘opposing science’ will be ignored. People don’t build models around what the deniers of global warming say because such people can only argue about short term trends whilst ignoring many clear indicators in many separate fields of science that the climate is changing. Some of these people have stepped back from the position they once held that the climate wasn’t changing and say instead man didn’t influence this change. It’s those on the deniers side that are constantly watering down their views to fit in with more and more evidence to the contrary.

popeye1250 -> RE: Science Denial on the Rise (1/8/2010 2:16:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3 quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Hey Buckwheat, why don't the real scientists who do research on cancer, diabetes and other diseases have to do the "Hard Sell" on people like the "global warmer flat earthers" do? Or the researchers in Astronomy, Engineering, and a dozen other fields? We don't see the cancer researchers going around calling people "non-believers" like the "warmers" or "scientologists" do we? Pretty soon we'll see the "warmers" getting into fights with the scientologists for the best street corners to have people "fill out a few questions." "Get the fuck out of here! This ain't your corner anymore, tell it to Tom Cruise!" Ha! I'd like to see the "warmers" trying to "sell" the scientologists on "global warming", "Hey! "global warming is caused by,.....you guessed it,....."DYANETICS!" There isn't an anti cancer research lobby funded by big business, spreading misconceptions and making tiny irrelevant issues huge focal points. Ultimately nobody is going to have to sell you anything, your pleadings from a position of self interest rather than so called ‘opposing science’ will be ignored. People don’t build models around what the deniers of global warming say because such people can only argue about short term trends whilst ignoring many clear indicators in many separate fields of science that the climate is changing. Some of these people have stepped back from the position they once held that the climate wasn’t changing and say instead man didn’t influence this change. It’s those on the deniers side that are constantly watering down their views to fit in with more and more evidence to the contrary. SL4, could you send me an *E-MAIL* on that?

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625