Global warming err Climate change HOAX

[row_33]

" the actual science"

 

bless your naive and tender little heart...

 

[westerndecline]

6 hours ago, row_33 said:

" the actual science"

 

bless your naive and tender little heart...

 

I think the earth is warming slightly but its cyclical and the human excuses are simply for funding

 

In other words there's wildfires, give x foundation $$$

 

 

If you can't blame humans, the $ stops.

 

It's confirmation bias 

[DC Tom]

28 minutes ago, westerndecline said:

I think the earth is warming slightly but its cyclical and the human excuses are simply for funding

 

In other words there's wildfires, give x foundation $$$

 

 

If you can't blame humans, the $ stops.

 

It's confirmation bias 

 

That's not confirmation bias. 

You are hilariously ignorant.

[westerndecline]

If you have a preconceived notions humans are causing global warming, and you only look for evidence confirming human caused global warming, yes Tom u weird person, that's confirmation bias

 

 

[row_33]

2 hours ago, westerndecline said:

I think the earth is warming slightly but its cyclical and the human excuses are simply for funding

 

In other words there's wildfires, give x foundation $$$

 

 

If you can't blame humans, the $ stops.

 

It's confirmation bias 

 

1. All research is funded by someone, either (for the sake of simplicity) government or private interests.  They have an agenda, even if is it totally disinterested and holy and pure, and determine WHAT is to be studied and WHAT the parameters of study are and WHAT will constitute PROOF. You can't get away from this in total objectivity, and that doesn't necessarily make it bad.

 

2. Everyone with a learned specialty, be it chemical engineering or accounting or plumbing or cold-call sales, has a specialist's vocabulary and KNOWS that people who don't have this learning are missing out on definitions and nuances and cheat-codes when we present our findings to outsiders. This can be a total scam on the unknowing public, it doesn't make it necessarily a bad thing all the time, a surgeon doesn't tell you everything about what is going to happen to your loved one...

 

Put both things together and it makes a hash of science as CNN reports in terms of written in stone.

 

It doesn't make it a bad thing or conclusion, but it's sitting there for those of us who know this....

 

 

[DC Tom]

19 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

1. All research is funded by someone, either (for the sake of simplicity) government or private interests.  They have an agenda, even if is it totally disinterested and holy and pure, and determine WHAT is to be studied and WHAT the parameters of study are and WHAT will constitute PROOF. You can't get away from this in total objectivity, and that doesn't necessarily make it bad.

 

2. Everyone with a learned specialty, be it chemical engineering or accounting or plumbing or cold-call sales, has a specialist's vocabulary and KNOWS that people who don't have this learning are missing out on definitions and nuances and cheat-codes when we present our findings to outsiders. This can be a total scam on the unknowing public, it doesn't make it necessarily a bad thing all the time, a surgeon doesn't tell you everything about what is going to happen to your loved one...

 

Put both things together and it makes a hash of science as CNN reports in terms of written in stone.

 

It doesn't make it a bad thing or conclusion, but it's sitting there for those of us who know this....

 

 

 

This is pretty much how it works:

 

[row_33]

I have a friend in medical research and he says his role is basically to present percentages on possible mental and health issues that a fetus may develop, which he says basically lets people feel better about an abortion because there's a .01% chance of something wrong

 

I've met 6 people whose mothers were told larger percentages, 40% as the highest (which didn't happen)  and they went ahead with their child anyway.

 

 

so embracing some mystical concept of "science" as always objective and doing wonderful things isn't always a good idea...

 

Edited December 9, 2017 by row_33

[/dev/null]

Just now, row_33 said:

I have a friend in medical research and he says his role is basically to present percentages on possible mental and health issues that a fetus may develop, which he says basically lets people feel better about an abortion because there's a .01 chance of something wrong

 

I've met 6 people whose mothers were told larger percentages, 40% as the highest (which didn't happen)  and they went ahead with their child anyway.

Your friend should just let people go full retard.  Tell them there is a 100% mortality rate in all children born with at least one X chromosome

 

And for double jeopardy, any expectant mothers that continue with pregnancy should be warned of the correlations between birth defects and mothers who drink water during pregnancy 

 

[row_33]

he's very militant choice on the matter, but finds it ripping into his conscience at times

 

when a doc advises to abort based on small percentages it's getting past, ah eff it... i've said enough....

 

 

[DC Tom]

6 minutes ago, row_33 said:

I have a friend in medical research and he says his role is basically to present percentages on possible mental and health issues that a fetus may develop, which he says basically lets people feel better about an abortion because there's a .01% chance of something wrong

 

I've met 6 people whose mothers were told larger percentages, 40% as the highest (which didn't happen)  and they went ahead with their child anyway.

 

 

so embracing some mystical concept of "science" as always objective and doing wonderful things isn't always a good idea...

 

 

That's not science, it's either marketing of psychology (not that there's all that much difference.)

And medicine is barely science.  There's too much variations in humans, and too many external factors that can impact development.

2 minutes ago, row_33 said:

he's very militant choice on the matter, but finds it ripping into his conscience at times

 

when a doc advises to abort based on small percentages it's getting past, ah eff it... i've said enough....

 

 

 

It's wrong.  The doc's job should be to ensure the woman's choice is informed.  Not "advised."

 

Of course, even with complete information people still make bad decisions.  But it's no one's fault but theirs they don't have proper risk analysis skills.

[ExiledInIllinois]

22 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

But it's no one's fault but theirs they don't have proper risk analysis skills.

Until they stop vaxxing their children, then it's all our problems.

 

I got into this argument w/an AA co-worker... It all started with that recent article on the last 3 people who use an iron lung.  Co-worker is 50 and never heard of what an iron lung is.  Never heard of herd immunity, etc... Well, he doesn't vax his kids because it "poisons Africa" and the risk of getting harmed by the vax is "too great."  Maybe polio needs to make a comeback to sharpen his risk analysis skills.  Heck, not sharpen, instill at least a hint of them.

 

And you thought I was crazy.

[3rdnlng]

5 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Until they stop vaxxing their children, then it's all our problems.

 

I got into this argument w/an AA co-worker... It all started with that recent article on the last 3 people who use an iron lung.  Co-worker is 50 and never heard of what an iron lung is.  Never heard of herd immunity, etc... Well, he doesn't vax his kids because it "poisons Africa" and the risk of getting harmed by the vax is "too great."  Maybe polio needs to make a comeback to sharpen his risk analysis skills.  Heck, not sharpen, instill at least a hint of them.

 

And you thought I was crazy.

Polio has started to make a comeback.

[DC Tom]

17 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Until they stop vaxxing their children, then it's all our problems.

 

I got into this argument w/an AA co-worker... It all started with that recent article on the last 3 people who use an iron lung.  Co-worker is 50 and never heard of what an iron lung is.  Never heard of herd immunity, etc... Well, he doesn't vax his kids because it "poisons Africa" and the risk of getting harmed by the vax is "too great."  Maybe polio needs to make a comeback to sharpen his risk analysis skills.  Heck, not sharpen, instill at least a hint of them.

 

And you thought I was crazy.

 

Vaccines, as a public health issue, are an exception I'd make.  

Abortion...that's a personal decision, not a public health issue.  !@#$ up your risk management all you want.

[ExiledInIllinois]

15 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Polio has started to make a comeback.

Trying telling that to some of these anti-vaxxers.

 

Tom hit the nail.  Risk analysis is at an all time low.  Too much playing high-risk, high reward.  In this case, I am not sure what that reward is outside of a 1 in 10,000 (not really sure what the odds are, but they are no doubt bad) of getting harmed by the vax.

2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Vaccines, as a public health issue, are an exception I'd make.  

Abortion...that's a personal decision, not a public health issue.  !@#$ up your risk management all you want.

Agree.

Edited December 9, 2017 by ExiledInIllinois

[DC Tom]

3 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Tom hit the nail.  Risk analysis is at an all time low.  Too much playing high-risk, high reward.  In this case, I am not sure what that reward is outside of a 1 in 10,000 (not really sure what the odds are, but they are no doubt bad) of getting harmed by the vax.

 

Permanent harm?  Pretty low.  Guillian-Barre from a flu shot is about a 1 in 500,000 chance.  For MMR, serious and long-term reactions are virtually unheard of (so rare, it's statistically impossible to link them to the vaccine.)  Yellow Fever vaccine, about 2 per million will suffer organ failure and die...which is still a hell of a lot better than getting Yellow Fever (by a factor of about 100,000).

Temporary discomfort?  Hell, anytime I get a flu or tetanus shot (every five years...having a wood shop, it seems prudent) I get sick for a couple days - low fever, discomfort, achy.  Because that's what a vaccine is supposed to do: trigger an immunological reaction.  That's what a fever is.  It's not a reason to not get a shot - it tells you the shot is working, and your immune system is responding properly to it.  

 

Americans expect to live in not just a low-risk, but a zero-risk society.  Frickin' snowflakes.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

Permanent harm?  Pretty low.  Guillian-Barre from a flu shot is about a 1 in 500,000 chance.  For MMR, serious and long-term reactions are virtually unheard of (so rare, it's statistically impossible to link them to the vaccine.)  Yellow Fever vaccine, about 2 per million will suffer organ failure and die...which is still a hell of a lot better than getting Yellow Fever (by a factor of about 100,000).

Temporary discomfort?  Hell, anytime I get a flu or tetanus shot (every five years...having a wood shop, it seems prudent) I get sick for a couple days - low fever, discomfort, achy.  Because that's what a vaccine is supposed to do: trigger an immunological reaction.  That's what a fever is.  It's not a reason to not get a shot - it tells you the shot is working, and your immune system is responding properly to it.  

 

Americans expect to live in not just a low-risk, but a zero-risk society.  Frickin' snowflakes.

Thanks for the numbers!

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Thanks for the numbers!

 

You knew I'd give them.

Less severe side effects are more common, of course.  Like...fever from a tetanus shot, and even then, I'm still an outlier (one in ten thousand, maybe).  But when EVERYTHING is THE BIGGEST TRAGEDY IN THE HISTORY OF EVERYTHING, and WE'RE ALL VICTIMS OH-MY-GOD WHY ISN'T SOMEONE PROTECTING ME, a fever is the end of the goddamn world.

[ExiledInIllinois]

17 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

You knew I'd give them.

Less severe side effects are more common, of course.  Like...fever from a tetanus shot, and even then, I'm still an outlier (one in ten thousand, maybe).  But when EVERYTHING is THE BIGGEST TRAGEDY IN THE HISTORY OF EVERYTHING, and WE'RE ALL VICTIMS OH-MY-GOD WHY ISN'T SOMEONE PROTECTING ME, a fever is the end of the goddamn world.

On top of it... Taking your children in to get vaxxed, they hand you all the stuff on what to do if harmed... How to seek remediation, etc...  And people still go off the deep end.

 

To steal your main theme: Idiots!

[DC Tom]

Just now, ExiledInIllinois said:

On top of it... Taking your children in to get vaxxed, they hand you all the stuff on what to do if harmed... How to seek remediation, etc...  And people still go off the deep end.

 

To steal your main theme: Idiots!

 

You know, I've been calling people idiots for years...pretty much ever since I could talk, really.  It may have been my first word.  And my mother always used to yell at me..."Don't say that!  That's not nice!  People aren't idiots!"

 

Then a couple years ago she calls me and says "You know what?  I'm sorry for yelling at you.  You're right.  People ARE idiots!"  

 

Then she went and voted for Trump.

 

People are idiots.

[KD in CA]

4 hours ago, row_33 said:

I have a friend in medical research and he says his role is basically to present percentages on possible mental and health issues that a fetus may develop, which he says basically lets people feel better about an abortion because there's a .01% chance of something wrong

 

I've met 6 people whose mothers were told larger percentages, 40% as the highest (which didn't happen)  and they went ahead with their child anyway.

 

 

so embracing some mystical concept of "science" as always objective and doing wonderful things isn't always a good idea...

 

 

But..but....what if it's "settled science"?