|
Ddraig posted:If it came down to this choice: Its less that, and more lacking in knowledge of exactly how dangerous diseases are. A mother hears that your child might be turn autistic if you get him vaccinated thinks "Well, if he gets sick I can take him to the doctor and we can get medicine for that sickness. . . but autism has no cure and that's *FOREVER!*" So in the pros/cons of things, they view it as a short term con and a long term pro. Their child might get sick, but we have doctors and if vaccines can stop people from getting sick surely medication can cure a sick child, but there's no cure for mental issues like autism. Not defending them, I just can see how someone whom doesn't know how exactly diseases work and that any disease if it hits the child in the right way can be loving fatal, would look at it like that.
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 02:54 |
|
|
Gen. Ripper posted:Blame Autism Speaks for that, as I understand it they really really heavily play up the "AUTISM IS LITERALLY A TRAGEDY SO DEVASTATING THAT PARENTS CONSIDER MURDER-SUICIDE WITH THEIR KIDS" angle. That wasn't just a random Mom, that was a member of their *board*. The only thing that stopped her from killing her autistic child, and herself, was the thought of the 'normal' child locked away inside of it....Which doesn't exist. Here's some more fun facts about Autism Speaks: Autism Speaks does not have a single autistic member on their board. Autism Speaks only spends 3% of their budget on “family services”. Much of Autism Speaks’ money goes toward research, and much of that research centers on finding a way to eliminate autism, and thus, autistics (which will likely be done through a prenatal test, in the same way that the Down’s Syndrome test is conducted). Autism Speaks produces advertisements, small films, etc. about what a burden autistic people are to society. Autism Speaks is responsible for the atrocity known as “I am Autism”, a short film produced by the Academy Award Winning Alfonso Cuaron, who also directed the 3rd Harry Potter movie (yes, really) and features an ominous voice saying things like “I am autism…I know where you live…I work faster than pediatric AIDS, cancer, and diabetes combined…I will make sure your marriage fails.”
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 06:21
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:
She was Alison Tepper, their Executive Vice President at the time. She's now Alison Tepper Singer, and she later founded the Autism Science Foundation after she left or was kicked out of Autism Speaks for opposing research into the thoroughly debunked Autism/Vaccine link. ~ My friend who knows far more about this than I ever will. Here are a few other terrible things that Autism Speaks has done recently. This woman’s job offer was rescinded after she asked Autism Speaks for accommodations in caring for her autistic son. They refused, and she made necessary accommodations for childcare, but they withdrew her offer anyways. Autism Speaks shared the news of Google removing hate speech regarding autistics from Google’s autofill feature, completely erasing any mention of autistic people’s flashblogs having anything to do with the change. It was only after a member of the autism community (and not a parent, but an autistic person themselves) spoke with a reporter about the flashblog and a statement was released to the media that Google decided to make this change. Autism Speaks highlighted AAC use, while erasing those those who actually use AAC devices to communicate. The focus was on the caretakers, not on the autistic people themselves. (The attached link has a link to a rebuttal by a nonspeaking autistic person, Amy Sequenzia). Autism Speaks has violated copyright and has profited off an autistic advocate’s writing for three years. Source: http://thecaffeinatedautistic.wordpress.com/so-what-is-the-problem-with-autism-speaks/
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 07:48
|
|
Jesus. I knew they were a bunch of ignorant self-absorbed assholes but Jesus Christ.
|
Caros posted:I know a lot of people love their autistic siblings or children, but at the same time they struggle deeply with the fact that especially low functioning people with autism can be a tremendous burden. Congrats, you're parroting speaking points from Autism Speaks.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 10:26
|
|
|
Autism Speaks thread is up and here. All you people discussing the anti-vaxx movement can rest your sphincters.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
Ogmius, the ads on that picture are basically child porn. delete it. Please.  I clicked on it, thinking it was a TIMG, and it took me right there and the ads on the top.
E-Tank fucked around with this message at 09:43 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 09:38
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Ughhh yeah sorry. First free image host google found. (Although I didn't get adds like that. Are they targeted ads I don't search for that stuff if that's what you're asking/implying. All I know is I clicked the image, and suddenly CP ads in my face. E-Tank fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:I feel like this is another one of those cases where the people just flat out don't understand science or chemistry. Yeah, mercury is toxic by itself. So is chlorine. How insane will these people go when somebody informs them that salt has chlorine? That and in sufficient enough doses, everything is toxic.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
Harik posted:I think he meant it's stupid that we keep weaponized stocks of smallpox just in case we find another continent full of natives that need blankets. I mean, I know they love their toys, and it did do the trick of genocide once, but is that really something we can ever bring ourselves to do again? (Sadly, yes.) The reason we keep it, is because if someone decides to try to get a hold of a load of it and drop it somewhere, we can make a vaccine. Its one of those issues where in order to make a vaccine for X, we need a sample of X. That and while I agree that smallpox is a horrible horrible disease and we should never *ever* let it out in the wild again, I'm hesitant to destroy such a thing simply due to potential research uses. What if we discover something that operates a lot like smallpox? Or what if we could take smallpox, a debilitating disease that is easily spread, and manage to genetically engineer it into a new beneficial bug? We have it contained, there's no need to just destroy an organism that's evolved like this and can possibly provide scientific benefit. I don't really think we have 'weaponized stocks'. Its more we have samples of the disease that if someone bad got a hold of could use to infect a lot of people, but since we've got samples all over the world, we can vaccinate everybody fairly easily. Barring any screaming anti-voxxers saying they'd rather let their children die horribly and painfully than possibly get autism, of course. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:We don't need those samples to make more vaccine. It's absolutely unclear why the last small pox samples have not been destroyed. Probably because he US and Russia are stupid stubborn fools. http://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-science/how-are-vaccines-made.html quote:How Are Vaccines Made? So if we want to make vaccines, we need to be able to breed the virus, so we can take parts of the virus, to make the vaccine. E-Tank fucked around with this message at 22:46 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:The smallpox vaccine is made from a virus that infects cows. You should at least google something before you try to call someone out. Huh, could have sworn that was what they did *at first* before realizing it'd be more effective to just do a partial virus or something. My apologies, I was totally wrong. I'll still claim that we shouldn't destroy it. A: Why should we? Its for strictly anti-biological weapon purposes. B: If somehow it could become useful, and we've destroyed it? Well that's loving it. Any potential gains or research we could have gotten is gone. Forever. C: War of the Worlds, Man. War of the Worlds.  kidding, but seriously. Do we really want to deny others the ability to study something and possibly get breakthroughs from it?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2014 01:00
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:So? Smallpox isn't needed to make smallpox vaccines; we use closely related viruses like cowpox and vaccinia. Also, the only other country with a stockpile is Russia. So the frigging scientists of all people are saying that we should keep it around, and you're saying that we shouldn't because its scary locked up in its giant vault for research purposes. Yeah I'm gonna go along with the scientists instead of you. No offense.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 11:31
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:But isn't that a good enough reason? We can't think of any circumstance in which we'd need them, but there are circumstances we can't think of. Once it's gone, it's gone forever. I'd say its a good enough reason. Ogmius815 posted:It's interesting that the proponents of maintaining the virus samples are just saying "Well what if we need the samples in the future?" but aren't articulating what we could possibly need them for. It's literally the same as saying "we need to keep smallpox around because reasons". Why do you want it destroyed anyway? Russia and America both have it, and if it's so drat easy to get a vaccine without needing to use it, why bother destroying it at all? Seems to be a waste of a fascinating little disease that we've basically made impotent, and can still teach us a lot. We're already driving species left and right to extinction, I'm not entirely sure I can get behind the drive to cause the extinction of yet another form of life. E-Tank fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Jul 9, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:As we know, there are known knowns; there are things that we know that we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know. Okay. You're saying that we should destroy it. I am asking you. Straight up. Why should we destroy it? You've made the argument quite clear that we don't need the samples to produce a vaccine, but you haven't given us a reason as to *why* we should wipe out another species of life from this earth. I can only guess that it's because you're afraid it'll be used against everyone in some way or another. Again however, you've proven multiple times that we can whip up a vaccine lickity split, so there's nothing to be afraid of. Therefore there can be no true 'bad' reason to keep it around. Only research possibilities and potential cures for other debilitating diseases. Why do you want to destroy it so much if you've gone to such lengths proving that Smallpox is no threat, therefore we don't need to keep it around for vaccines?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:there literally are no benefits. QuarkJets posted:But this research scientist says that we should keep it, and he outlines the reasons why: quote:Currently, the only real benefit to destroying all known remaining stockpiles of variola in the world would be the elimination of the extremely unlikely possibility of unleashing a lethal epidemic due to the theft or accidental release of the virus from one of the remaining official stocks. In reality, this destruction would provide only an illusion of safety, and the drawbacks are many. Ogmius815 posted:Even if the rich countries would be fine in an outbreak (the CDC has a massive vaccine stockpile, just in case) poorer countries might be hosed. I'm 90% sure that in order to maintain that smallpox will never gain a foothold on the world ever again, everybody will pretty much go 'gently caress that poo poo.' and just vaccinate everybody.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 03:42
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:I don't know maybe Russia wants to gently caress up Estonia or something. Russia would immediately have the entire loving world breathing down their neck. UN sanctions would be the least of their problems as attempted biological warfare would basically bring the entire world's wrath down upon them. It's been explained numerous times, that smallpox is a *really* lovely biological weapon. It'll hit your people just as hard, unless they're all vaccinated, and I'm pretty sure that the world'd notice at some point or another that Russia is hurriedly vaccinating all their citizens against smallpox. Ogmius815 posted:Maybe the virus just gets out because of poor security in some lab in eastern Europe. If they have the virus, they have the vaccine, and they are ready to apply it whenever they need to in case of an accident. Ogmius815 posted:This is just science fetishism; "I am going to dismiss this scientific paper because it doesn't agree with what I'm saying. I do this based on the fact that I am right, and he is wrong. What proof do I have that this is bullshit? Umm....It's bullshit." I'm not trying to be a jerk, and I'm sorry if I'm coming across that way, but you're getting antsy over nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
GROVER CURES HOUSE posted:Be careful, Pakistan has nukes and might do a terrorism!!!! Clearly if we don't destroy them it'll only lead to bad things happening, because there are no beneficial reasons for them to have nukes. At least none that anyone has articulated to me. And it's just *going* to happen eventually. Because countries aren't stable forever. We need to just nuke them first, really it's the only reasonable option.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:The fact that I'm now being mocked for being anti-nuclear proliferation is really telling. We're not mocking you for being anti-nuke proliferation. Hell, I'm not even mocking you. I'm trying to point out that you're getting upset over something that is completely illogical. Smallpox does not make for a good weapon, and kills indiscriminately. Meaning your citizens are going to get sick and die, as well as anyone else who happens to be in the area. Which will turn it from a single attack on one person, into an international incident that infects dozens of countries, because tourism exists. Meaning *Yes* Every single country would get involved. Ogmius815 posted:Are you unaware that polio is reemerging in areas it was thought to be eliminated from? What a coincidence, we're talking about a bunch of people in this thread that are against vaccines and are causing outbreaks of diseases that previously weren't as big a problem as before. I wonder if these two things are connected.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:The U.S. can't stop Syria from gassing its own people but BOY HEY if a major power ever decided to use a bio-weapon here comes the world police! You're right. we should have immediately gotten into another war that would have led to thousands more dead, to oust another dictator and install a puppet governme- oh wait, we don't have to install a government or even shoot bullets to fight a smallpox outbreak. I mean I guess they could shoot darts with the smallpox vaccine on them, but that'd be silly.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Guys we can't get rid of all these world-destroying nuclear weapons, they might eventually be useful for mining Veldspar from asteroids in Jita. Again, we should clearly go and immediately nuke all countries with nuclear weapons. After all there is a chance that either through an accidental launch, or an outright attack, that they will hurt us, or other people. It's the only logical choice. And yeah, 'Pandemic'. Not so much, Sorry buddy, Anthrax doesn't spread from person to person like a virus would.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 04:11
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:No you don't understand, all of these very real risks mean nothing because we "might" be able to do "something" with smallpox samples in the future. Once it's gone, it's gone forever. As will be any potential scientific benefit from it in the future. Yes, we 'Might' be able to do something with it, just as it 'Might' be used as a weapon, or released accidentally. I'm beginning to see a pattern here in our arguments. They seem to boil down to "What if we need it?" "What if we don't?" And frankly I'm getting tired of it. I think I'm just going to say 'I'll have to agree to disagree'. This has gotten to be a big derail and if we really want to discuss this we should probably make another thread about it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 04:22
|
|
|
God bless whomever gave Ogmius his new avatar.  Adding to the Chiro chat, I went to one purely out of desperation. I was suffering from a headache that had lasted for nigh 3 years at that point. I was borderline suicidal. The medication I was on to take the edge off of it was *really* strong and there was a chance at any loving time it could just go rogue on me and do something nasty to my brain. I thought, and still believe that 90% of them are quacks who either honestly believe the poo poo they're shoveling, or are just the biggest band of scam artists imaginable. But to be entirely blunt, I didn't have much to loving lose at that point. The one I went to was at least somewhat upfront with me. He didn't say anything about sublaxion or whatever the gently caress it is. He took an X-ray of my head, the first person to suggest doing that for the *massive* headache I had. He claimed that I had a small deviation in my spine from a previous injury. This headache had plagued me for 3 years. I'd been on pain killers, even a new non-opium based painkiller that was supposedly much harder to get addicted to. Still got addicted to it. That loving sucked. In 2 weeks, my head stopped hurting. This man gave me my life back. It may have been bullshit, it may have been placebo. I still don't recommend going to chiropractors, but this one time one sort of saved my life. I await everyone telling me I'm an idiot with bated breath.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I would imagine this is just because the risk of serious injury from acupuncture is very low (as opposed to chiropractic), even if it's been shown to not perform any better than placebo. I was desperate, but not desperate enough to visit an acupuncturist. When our bodies evolve to needing a needle shoved into our skin and nerves in order to heal, we need to stop, turn civilization off, and go back to the primordial ooze to think about where we went wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:You guys are idiots. I'm going to get We understand how the hydrogen bomb is created. We understand what we need to create it, and thus can watch for others trying to make their own hydrogen bombs, and understand how to counter it. You seem to believe that all research is strictly "How to make a really big boom" and nothing else. You're asking us to willfully incapacitate our capability to study stuff. Yes, we'll learn how to create bigger and potentially more deadly things, but there's a flipside to that. If you understand how something works, you know how to make it *not* work. You know how to stop it. You know how to disrupt it and possibly save billions of lives. You're saying we shouldn't know gently caress about it, even if we can actually use that knowledge to defend against it. You're making the arguments that all scientists are Frankenstien, and to be quite honest that's like something from Dees or the anti-vaxxers.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2014 19:20
|
|
again for this but this is the same kind of reasoning that lead to the creation of the hydrogen bomb. No doubt you people would probably support that too because 
it lead to some useful technologies
|
Nintendo Kid posted:But we must destroy the samples because otherwise ????? will happen. Sure I can't actually come up with a problem that will happen but it's still dangerous because eventually ????? will happen. He's given reasons, the problem is that his reasons are poo poo. He's terrified that there'll be an outbreak, which is drat near impossible due to the security around the viruses. Yes, there have been accidental exposures before. Security has tightened to the point that its virtually impossible. He's also terrified that it'll be used as a biological weapon, which makes no loving sense. The only idea of it is if you really don't give a gently caress if you and your people die just as much as the other people. You'd have to begin vaccinating your citizens against smallpox which is going to raise some alarm bells, and then if you drop smallpox somewhere, you'll get everybody on your rear end. It makes no sense to try and use barring some sort of 'gently caress it, we'll kill everyone, ourselves and them'. In which case nukes would be much better, easier, and has no vaccine to protect victims.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:What benefit weighs against that risk? You haven't a loving clue. "Well, the war is over. And these tanks are now to be destroyed, immediately because there will never be a war ever again. There is absolutely no benefit to having a standing army because we're not at war now, and nobody has a clue if there'll ever be another war, so why should we hold onto them? Those who say we should hold onto them just say 'What if we need them', which is stupid and foolish." No, we don't have a clue, because we're not loving PSYCHIC YOU DENSE MOTHERFUCKER.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:The only reason the CDC claims they need their virus samples is because of their pride and arrogance. They don't want to give up something that the bear has. You are making assumptions on things. You are literally saying 'They don't want to give it up for this reason even though there's no evidence to say that's whats happening'. You're making the claim, bring the loving evidence. Ogmius815 posted:EDIT:And gently caress it, we'd be better off with no machine guns ever. And no bombs and nerve gas too. You motherfuckers make the least persuasive arguments I swear. Yes, it would. sadly that's not the world we live in, because that's not going to happen. We'll always need armies to defend ourselves with because the human being is not loving perfect.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Bring the evidence that smallpox might be useful. You'll need to do better than "we need to do more experiments to get around the bureaucracy" or "we might need it for some reason I can't explain". We already have. You keep ignoring it. You need to tell me what proof there is that the CDC is not holding onto it for any reason beyond 'they have it too' or arrogance. We've answered your demands, and you're making the statement of contention right now. Where is the proof that the CDC holds it only because of arrogance?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:What is the argument? What sad necessity of the world specifically means we need to keep smallpox around? You were saying that my argument was flawed because it'd be great if guns didn't exist. And I agree. It would be great. But it's not the loving world we live in and thus you can't take an argument and try and say 'that's not persuasive because I say its not' by saying "Well I'd want guns destroyed too so there". Your argument is literally 'But they're arrogant!'  While providing absolutely no evidence that they are being 'arrogant' or that there is any benefit to destroying them beyond letting you rest your sphincter, being terrified of a loving outbreak of a virus that we have a vaccine for and is basically held one tenth of a centimeter from extinction. Basically attempting to close off all potential future research gains from something that could very well save billions of lives in the proper manner, all because you're terrified of it being a weapon, something we've proven is bullshit, or being unleashed, something we have proven is also bullshit.You are terrified of shadows. You are letting your emotions overrun any logical discussion. It's no longer just that the viruses are deadly and a ticking time bomb, it's that the CDC are a bunch of arrogant pricks. Why? Because you say so. You are not arguing in good faith, and nothing you have said here has any loving bearing on our discussion beyond you being scared shitless and refusing to listen to reason. You know, much like the people against vaccinations, or against gun control, or against gay people, or against progression in the human race in general. Stop, and think. For just a minute. Ogmius815 posted:Well genius, other pox viruses don't infect humans or are less lethal, so there's much less risk. "B-b-but they might make those other pox viruses more lethal through genetics! That's how it worked in the comic books, they just opened that virus up and took out a +20 to damage gene and glued it in there!"  
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Something hasn't happened in thirty years, and therefore it never will happen. "We've not found anything else to study Smallpox with right this moment, therefore we will never find anything to potentially save billions of lives."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:There are ways to research Thalidomide without risking an epidemic of an extinct illness. We. Have. A. Vaccine. You. Idiot. It would not get beyond a small group of infection, if at *ALL*. The loving security measures are obscene, and you're basically saying that we cannot ever take any risks on anything, even if there's no mathematically significant chance.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:That's emphatically not what I am saying. I'm saying, if we take a risk, we should expect a reward. This is rational human behavior 101. You need to demonstrate that the reward you expect is more than a fantasy. So you're saying unless I can literally create a tech tree for the *real world* showing how many research points it takes to turn Smallpox into a geneticly altered virus that allows us to boost or alter the immune system, AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT NUMEROUS TIMES IN THE LINKS WE'VE SHOWN, or any other things we could possibly make from it, you don't think its worth it. I have to be able to look into the future and know what exactly we could get out of the smallpox virus, before you will admit to being wrong. You are legitimately claiming that since we do not know what we might get out of it, we shouldn't even bother trying. Following that line of thought: Since Madam Curie could not have possibly seen what could come from her research on radiation, Such as the idea of nuclear power plants and the ability to use said power plants to help billions of people world wide, she died for nothing, and she should never have started. You are anti-science, anti-rationality, and basically screaming that since we cannot look into the future and tell you what exactly we will get out of further study, which we don't know, hence the further STUDY part of that statement, we should take something that we have contained, that is no longer dangerous, and instead of trying to turn that into something to better mankind, kill it. Slaughter it. Make sure that we can never ever turn it into something more that can help us all. All because you are terrified of an outbreak that will never happen, or a biological attack that is impossible. You're either completely and utterly idiotic, or a troll of the highest caliber. I sincerely hope its the latter because then I'll at least know that you're not really this stupid. Either way, I'm done. I'm done entertaining that you have any semblance of good faith in this argument, and that you won't simply continue to spout the same inane statements regardless of how many times we've pointed out that you're continually acting like an idiot.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:I'm looking for a bare loving minimum standard of evidence here E-tank. I'm looking for you to explain some basic facts about why it might be possible for us to save "billions of lives" with variola as you claim might be possible in the future. Otherwise it's a totally unsupported claim. E-Tank posted:All the way back here. quote:
Look. hey look. Look. It says. It says that there's an ability to alter the immune response of its human host. That could be used. That could be used to do untold things. That could be used to alter the immune response of people suffering from Rheumatoid Arthritis. Suffering from pain due to the immune system attacking the joints. We could possibly use it to make it so people don't reject transplanted organs. Instead of being on immunosuppressant drugs for the rest of their lives. What if we could alter the immune response so where it accepted the organs? There are diseases that are brought about due to the immune system loving up and attacking important parts of the body. Lupus could be cured if we could find a way to alter the immune system to NOT DO THAT. So far back. We explained. What might come. How it might be useful. And you told us that it was science fetishism. You told us that it was loving pathetic how we believed that all 'science was good'. You literally have been screaming at us, and now you have the loving balls, to say you're asking for 'bare loving minimum'. We've given you more than the bare loving minimum. Far more than you've given us. You still have yet to explain how the CDC is 'arrogant'. Either answer that or  E: The thing that loving pisses me off the most? You want us to remain ignorant. You want us to not 'try things' because something might go wrong. You don't want us to experiment, to learn, to improve things because 'science run mad' scares that come right out of a christian fundie's handbook. E-Tank fucked around with this message at 03:42 on Jul 13, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 03:39
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:In germany one time at a BSL-4 lab someone accidentally stuck himself with ebola. The problem was handled well in that case, but what if that person had panicked (like human beings do)? There's clearly risk potential. Your claim of zero risk doesn't hold up. Just because the pathogen happened to be ebola and not smallpox is irrelevant, because BSL-4 protocols were in use. It only takes one mistake. And now you're ignoring my post. The post talking about what we can do with it. Because you won't admit you're wrong. Because you won't admit that you hosed up. You're ignoring something that we brought up days ago. That you ignored. That you dismissed as 'science fetishism'. When you have been claiming 'but there's no potential benefit...that *I* can see' 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:That's just the same bullshit from earlier in the thread. Why can't other kinds of poxvirus be used for that research? Because it literally says the smallpox virus you disingenuous cretin. It and it's experimental vaccine creating copy.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Hey guys the CDC says they should get to keep their toys. Better drop everything. Bare loving minimum. I gave you the bare loving minimum and even more. I gave you what you wanted. Congratulations you loving moron, you just showed everyone what kind of a person you are. You moved the goal posts. You're making the claim that the CDC is going to lie to try and keep the virus. What evidence do you have to back up this claim? What evidence do you have that marks the CDC as 'arrogant'? This is what I want to know. You have 3 posts to answer that question. If you fail to do so, I will consider your argument forfeit. Pussy Cartel posted:I remember when we had a thread about the anti-vaccination movement, and not a thread where everyone tries to argue with one gigantic stubborn idiot with a penchant for lovely antics and ad hominems. I remember that too. I tried leaving it, but everybody kept on talking and finally I just had enough and had to tell him exactly how stupid he's acting. E-Tank fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Jul 13, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Yes if that's plausible, I agree. But you have to say that. that's the part that makes the argument work. People were literally going "I don't have to say how smallpox can be useful, it's We had *said* that. We literally pointed you to it days ago. What it did. That it could alter the immune system. AND YOU loving IGNORED IT YOU loving IDIOTIC PIECE OF poo poo. You told us that it was a conspiracy by the CDC to keep their 'toys'. You said this because you are an idiot who cannot reasonably contend with the idea that you might be loving wrong. It's not possible that your statements are founded in fear and stupidity, you're so smart it has to be a loving conspiracy. Congratulations, you're on the mental level of people who think the government was behind 9/11, or the jews control everything, or that lizards from space are in charge of the world. Take your pick.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 04:19
|
|
. Why do you hate science?
|
Ogmius815 posted:You all literally said that you didn't have to justify research because science is just always good. You all said that. You are all idiots for saying that. Sorry. Knowledge is good. Research is good. You ultimately choose what to do with the research. You can make an atomic bomb with what we know. Or we can harness the energy released for power. Science is not bad, what people do with it can be. you idiotic piece of poo poo, the adults are speaking here.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 04:22
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Even if that's the case (and it isn't, E-Tank's recent post is the first I've seen anyone in this thread provide any explanation), you all still said that it didn't matter because you didn't need to provide that explanation. You do. Well I'm sorry, I guess I assumed I wasn't talking to an idiot when I linked you to something saying that it can loving ALTER THE IMMUNE SYSTEM. And even then you had to be shamed into it because you were so nakedly moving the goal posts you almost dropped it on your dick flapping in the wind.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 02:54 |
|
|
Yarbald posted:...we did? He's willfully misinterpreting how we were saying that scientists say that there are some benefit to keeping it, therefore we, people who aren't loving scientists, shouldn't have to explain it. And even then, research by itself is not horrible, it's what is done with said research that can be horrible. Ogmius815 posted:I just don't have the expert knowledge to say. Its almost like we should trust the experts on this. Like we've been saying. This entire loving time. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2014 04:32
|
|