Wow. Still reading, but I have to say, this is a very important discussion you have created.
Also good info about metatags. I'll have to remember that for future use. "Be Wary of Quackwatch" ...oh my non-existant-god! That is damning!
But you better watch out - you might be perpetuating the Cult of Science. As someone once told me in chat: "People on AN are very religious in their scientific views."
I notice how you never do say who the person is with whom you were conversing. I have a feeling he'll broadcast his identity loudly and proudly though, by posting a scathingly defensive comment that he falsely believes will "call you out", when in reality it is himself who is being called out.
Actually, there were quite a few - it may flatter the ego of the one that popped his head up through the whack-a-mole box to think it was all about him, but he is only a single pimple in an acne rash. I can't stop him volunteering himself as the problem - though it says a lot that he did. As I said, antivax is incidental - the core of the issue is bad information in general and extremely sloppy bad information handling habits. Antivaxxers have no monopoly on this - I have heard someone claim the Jews own the Vatican in these forums. If there is no pride in maintaining the integrity of the information we digest and disseminate, then we may as well just give up, hand in our brains and become born again xtians.
pretty lame forum that you created out of fear! I find you quite amusing attempting to challenge us that refuse to vaccinate using unsafe vaccines. Even today I heard another concern for folks with diabetes taking the h1n1 vaccine. When will the madness stop? Well, I 'll tell you, when you stop trying to limit my right, and the rights of others to question, challenge and research drugs that we feel are unsafe for our families.
I believe you've already discussed this issue, in great detail, with a scientist, yet you refuse to give in. It's obvious this a a case of fear combined with ego influencing your desire to "think" for everyone else.
I have news for you. Science is not a replacement for religion. Likewise, native medicines were used, quite successfully, before western medicine ever came along. We can take a long look at those wonderful medicines from nature. The basic cure for headache, pennicilin, treatment for the cold, and even the cure for polio all came from mother nature. Why then, is it so difficult for you to understand that there are those of us who do not want to poison our children? Why is it that you allow the WHO to manipulate your life? You're basically a programmed pawn in a chessgame. Get over yourself and allow others to find their own answers beyond your limited url's that provide general info for to appease the masses.
Nerd:I have a feeling he'll broadcast his identity loudly and proudly though, by posting a scathingly defensive comment that he falsely believes will "call you out"
Tada!
Humanist Mark:I have news for you.
No you do not have "news". You will never have "news". Nothing was "discussed". There was a lot that was "preached". There was nothing whatsoever in fact that has not been detailed in the article. At all.
Please state any and all conflicts of interest you may have before proceeding any further in this discussion.
You're basically a programmed pawn in a chessgame.
I know you don't read, you just react, so here it is again -
"...we now see that all the evils of religion can flourish without any belief in the supernatural... that self-styled humanists will persecute their adversaries with all the zeal of Inquisitors exterminating the devotees of a personal and transcendant Satan" -- Aldous Huxley
And seeing as there's no longer any need to protect the True Believers, here's a non-comprehensive list of things people feel they have a right to post here:
I also restate what I asked before and you have completely ignored -
If you are so certain about your assertions, I think you should post them to the forums at the James Randi and Richard Dawkins sites. If you are not confortable with doing that, could you please provide us with an explanation as to why you consider these videos appropriate here. Either the assertions in the videos are valid or they are not. By your confidence in them, they should be able to withstand all scrutiny.
Permalink Reply by Ben on November 12, 2009 at 11:58pm
Maybe A/N needs to be subdivided. And atheists can have a checklist when they sign up to say what kind of non-science they believe in. Yay for segregation!
Yes, there are looney atheists in here too. Being an atheist isn't a cure for stupid thinking. Just can't convince them all! Just like some of the other BS debates on here.
Should be divided into camps of who we follow the most! I am in the PZ Myers/Dawkins camp with a little of Dennett but that philosophy stuff is a little mind boggling to an engineer!