Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
teedub #1525681 10/07/18 09:19 PM
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,259
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,259
What? What scientists have said vaccines cause autism? The only real name is Andrew Wakefield, and he's lost his medical license as a result of spreading the FUD around vaccines.

I also said nothing about any scientist proposing a paper sowing doubt about AGW to not be a serious view. Consensus is not unanimous. It means that it's generally agreed upon. If a scientist discovers that CO2 is rising non correlative to man made sources then it would be enough to challenge the consensus.

I again need you to elaborate on my saying only formal educated people need a seat at the table. Can you quote me on this?


#gmstrong
Razorthorns #1525824 10/08/18 06:54 AM
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,075
T
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
T
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,075
Originally Posted By: Razorthorns
Originally Posted By: teedub
Originally Posted By: Razorthorns
The earth has been going through cycles of hot and cold since it was born. It's why we have ice ages and swamp ages. The earth will survive just fine.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't do everything we can to fix the things that are harming the planet. From what I have seen China is the one working the hardest to improve the world's climate by planting billions upon billions of trees yearly. Imagine if we took 1 million of the homeless population and gave them food, and shelter and paid them minimum wage to just plant trees full time. That is about 14 billion dollars a year to eliminate huge sections of desert and reverse desertification.

It's completely possible to turn desert into land with green grass, trees, and even rivers. The only thing stopping us is laziness. We already spend 455 billion on welfare. For just a bit more we can absolutely change the planet of the better.


I dont disagree to do somethings.....but your statement of do "everything" is unattainable, unrealistic and economic suicide. I work in an environmental industry (I have the certificate gage....multiple in fact)....the clients I serve spend millions cleaning up their water and waste....that water we discharge to local rivers are 1000s of times cleaner the the actual local water ways...yet the local waterways have issues...so we are being required to polish our already super clean water even more at a steep cost....you see removing 98% of the pollution is easy and can be do e cost effectively...the next 2 percent is crazy hard and expensive...yet that is the goal we are being forced into.....all the while other non point source discharges are blowing billions of tons of the same pollutants out and never even looked at to reduce their contributions.

I could theorize that doing everything in our power should include a limit on the number of internal combustion vehicles you own that gets a minimum 30 mpg to 1 per family of 4 and a limit to the number of gallons of gas you are able to buy per month. then one additional engine but just one for riding mower, push mower,weedeater,snowblower,leaf blower etc..thermostat control no warmer the 65 while heating..no cooler the 78 when cooling... cremation For everyone as cemeteries would better serve our mother earth if planted with trees and not needing crews constantly running mowers over the pretty grass ...all of these things will reduce your CO2 foot print and fall in the category of " doing everything we can...I can come up with more to illustrate if needed.....that's the fallacy of the emotional statement EVERYTHING.


Look I don't pretend to be an environmental expert. I do know that some things are easier to clean up and deal with than others. I also know that some toxic substances cause severe and long term damage. I don't expect pure clean water to come out but I do expect us to stop companies from putting toxic chemicals into our water supply. If you can't run your business without poisoning the water then your business should be shut down because clean fresh water is the most important need of all human beings. We CAN'T live without clean water.

I will grant that there is probably too much regulation but if that 2% contains truly toxic material then of course it has to be fixed. I mean I'm sorry just because your company wants to make money doesn't give them the right to poison the water. IF that 2% is fairly harmless then I agree with you that it should be loosed up a bit.

I don't agree with any argument though that says since "A" doesn't do it then "B" shouldn't have to do it either. Instead we should make "A" do it too so that everyone is doing what they need to do not move towards having it so no one does what they need to do.


Ok let me be more specific...muni wastewater plants put out very clean effluent...the sewage sludge is highly regulated and treated and very environmental friendly when it comes to beneficial reuse via pathogen reduction, vector attraction and nutrient recovery. It also has a variety of use and setback restrictions that must be followed as added precautions. The current issue of the day in environmental circles is phosphorus removal. Most waste water plants are very effective and getting phos out of their flow to levels under 2 mg/L...getting it down to 1 mg/l or lower is expensive....yet the phos bank that is building in farm fields from fertilizer application and the spreading of untreated manure with little regard to set backs which allows runoff from farm fields and animal lots to far exceed water quality standards that point source dischargers are held to....and we wonder why the rivers and streams are not getting better. If you buy an abandoned house that was trashed and you need to clean it up to sell it you dont just start off by dusting which is where we are at in the US dealing with phosphorus in our rivers.

gage #1525827 10/08/18 07:08 AM
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,075
T
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
T
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,075
Originally Posted By: gage
What? What scientists have said vaccines cause autism? The only real name is Andrew Wakefield, and he's lost his medical license as a result of spreading the FUD around vaccines.

I also said nothing about any scientist proposing a paper sowing doubt about AGW to not be a serious view. Consensus is not unanimous. It means that it's generally agreed upon. If a scientist discovers that CO2 is rising non correlative to man made sources then it would be enough to challenge the consensus.

I again need you to elaborate on my saying only formal educated people need a seat at the table. Can you quote me on this?


You have stated implied several times in this thread that layman views are just talking points regurgitated from news sources and that any layman that discusses the issue in a way that goes against what some scientists say is kinda pointless...you used a surgeon example in a response to 40..you also had a pilot example...surgeons do surgery, pilots fly plans, scientists do science...layman??? well you implied they need to take a back seat and let the professionals handle it.

As far as vaccines....you said layman find vaccine/autism links controversial...as they should because there is no real science behind it besides a guy that has been debunked and a few celebrities...but then you lump the vaccine issue in with evolution and AGW as if the "controversy to layman issue" is apples to apples...i can put evolution and AGW in a similar category....but vaccines causing autism?? I get it...new parents have irrationale fears of every boogie man that gets mentioned...I see it with my brother who has a kid under two.

teedub #1525865 10/08/18 09:08 AM
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,002
R
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
R
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,002
Originally Posted By: teedub
Originally Posted By: Razorthorns
Originally Posted By: teedub
Originally Posted By: Razorthorns
The earth has been going through cycles of hot and cold since it was born. It's why we have ice ages and swamp ages. The earth will survive just fine.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't do everything we can to fix the things that are harming the planet. From what I have seen China is the one working the hardest to improve the world's climate by planting billions upon billions of trees yearly. Imagine if we took 1 million of the homeless population and gave them food, and shelter and paid them minimum wage to just plant trees full time. That is about 14 billion dollars a year to eliminate huge sections of desert and reverse desertification.

It's completely possible to turn desert into land with green grass, trees, and even rivers. The only thing stopping us is laziness. We already spend 455 billion on welfare. For just a bit more we can absolutely change the planet of the better.


I dont disagree to do somethings.....but your statement of do "everything" is unattainable, unrealistic and economic suicide. I work in an environmental industry (I have the certificate gage....multiple in fact)....the clients I serve spend millions cleaning up their water and waste....that water we discharge to local rivers are 1000s of times cleaner the the actual local water ways...yet the local waterways have issues...so we are being required to polish our already super clean water even more at a steep cost....you see removing 98% of the pollution is easy and can be do e cost effectively...the next 2 percent is crazy hard and expensive...yet that is the goal we are being forced into.....all the while other non point source discharges are blowing billions of tons of the same pollutants out and never even looked at to reduce their contributions.

I could theorize that doing everything in our power should include a limit on the number of internal combustion vehicles you own that gets a minimum 30 mpg to 1 per family of 4 and a limit to the number of gallons of gas you are able to buy per month. then one additional engine but just one for riding mower, push mower,weedeater,snowblower,leaf blower etc..thermostat control no warmer the 65 while heating..no cooler the 78 when cooling... cremation For everyone as cemeteries would better serve our mother earth if planted with trees and not needing crews constantly running mowers over the pretty grass ...all of these things will reduce your CO2 foot print and fall in the category of " doing everything we can...I can come up with more to illustrate if needed.....that's the fallacy of the emotional statement EVERYTHING.


Look I don't pretend to be an environmental expert. I do know that some things are easier to clean up and deal with than others. I also know that some toxic substances cause severe and long term damage. I don't expect pure clean water to come out but I do expect us to stop companies from putting toxic chemicals into our water supply. If you can't run your business without poisoning the water then your business should be shut down because clean fresh water is the most important need of all human beings. We CAN'T live without clean water.

I will grant that there is probably too much regulation but if that 2% contains truly toxic material then of course it has to be fixed. I mean I'm sorry just because your company wants to make money doesn't give them the right to poison the water. IF that 2% is fairly harmless then I agree with you that it should be loosed up a bit.

I don't agree with any argument though that says since "A" doesn't do it then "B" shouldn't have to do it either. Instead we should make "A" do it too so that everyone is doing what they need to do not move towards having it so no one does what they need to do.


Ok let me be more specific...muni wastewater plants put out very clean effluent...the sewage sludge is highly regulated and treated and very environmental friendly when it comes to beneficial reuse via pathogen reduction, vector attraction and nutrient recovery. It also has a variety of use and setback restrictions that must be followed as added precautions. The current issue of the day in environmental circles is phosphorus removal. Most waste water plants are very effective and getting phos out of their flow to levels under 2 mg/L...getting it down to 1 mg/l or lower is expensive....yet the phos bank that is building in farm fields from fertilizer application and the spreading of untreated manure with little regard to set backs which allows runoff from farm fields and animal lots to far exceed water quality standards that point source dischargers are held to....and we wonder why the rivers and streams are not getting better. If you buy an abandoned house that was trashed and you need to clean it up to sell it you don't just start off by dusting which is where we are at in the US dealing with phosphorus in our rivers.


I understand you. I agree that everyone needs to do their part. It's one of the reason I prefer more modern aquaponics farming to traditional farming because it uses zero fertilizers, completely organic, uses zero pesticides, and produces a far superior tasting product with zero pollution. Not to mention it yields thousands of pounds of fish that have zero contaminants and 100 percent healthy to eat.

I'm also against raising livestock that doesn't get to graze naturally and isn't moved from one pasture to another. Herds of livestock that are moved around from large grazing area to another is actually beneficial to the environment. The big problem is when they coral them and force feed them in small areas that then get destroyed from overgrazing or no grazing at all. I actually think there should be a livestock treatment act passed that forces commercial farmers to treat animals with some decency. I personally hate seeing animals kept in a tiny metal pen their entire lives.


You can't fix stupid but you can destroy ignorance. When you destroy ignorance you remove the justifications for evil. If you want to destroy evil then educate our people. Hate is a tool of the stupid to deal with what they can't understand.
teedub #1525871 10/08/18 09:16 AM
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,002
R
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
R
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,002
When it comes to vaccines things have improved quite a bit. Doctors have started to stagger them so they are not giving 5 vaccines at once and if you request it they will even have the 3 in one vaccines done one at a time. They also don't use such high mercury content preservers anymore for most vaccines which was the big issue for many worried about vaccines causing autism.

I do think it was a real issue and I am glad it was fought over. I also think it has been addressed and corrected for the most part and there is zero reason not to get immunized. If you have a doctor that refuses to stagger the immunization shots then get a new doctor.


You can't fix stupid but you can destroy ignorance. When you destroy ignorance you remove the justifications for evil. If you want to destroy evil then educate our people. Hate is a tool of the stupid to deal with what they can't understand.
BuckDawg1946 #1525954 10/08/18 11:55 AM
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,075
T
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
T
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,075
I assume the lack of staggering vaccines was in large part due to the high probability that people would not return their child in a timely manner to get the vaccines as needed.

as far as vaccines and autism go...I kinda question the use of the varicella vaccine...that vaccine was in use during the 60/70/80/early 90s. The rate of autism diagnosis is said to been on the rise since 2000 (actually on the rise or just better diagnosis of patients then in years past...legit question)...If it is on the rise one wonders what is different between now and the 70's....yea lots...but an obvious one is the chicken pox vaccine..talk about a vaccine for convenience sake. But could its increased use be correlated with the autism rise...I don't know...but I do know there is not much use for the vaccine.

teedub #1526138 10/08/18 04:59 PM
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,259
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,259
Originally Posted By: teedub
You have stated implied several times in this thread that layman views are just talking points regurgitated from news sources and that any layman that discusses the issue in a way that goes against what some scientists say is kinda pointless...you used a surgeon example in a response to 40..you also had a pilot example...surgeons do surgery, pilots fly plans, scientists do science...layman??? well you implied they need to take a back seat and let the professionals handle it.


I don't think you need to have a degree to be considered a professional in a field. Experience trumps education for me most of the time because education is mean to prepare you for what you see in the field. I only have 2 years education (practically uneducated) and manage people with bachelors and masters degrees. Yet I am their resource and mentor because my experience beats theirs by 10+ years.

It appears you are in effect asserting that if a layman proffers a viewpoint that is in contrast to the professional community consensus, that it must be given equal consideration. I disagree because that's a waste of time.

Example: If a layman tells me that writing my code in C++ is wrong and I should be using C# or Go, and their "evidence" is that C++ is an old language, I'm going to shake my head and laugh. I won't spend time trying to debate and argue why they are wrong. I will not talk about stuff that goes over their head like garbage collection, portability, application binary compatibility, or runtime performance for my applications. They won't get it. The same thing would happen explaining AGW to laymen. Understanding the whole picture and why certain decisions are made take alot of data, time, and analysis. Saying "clouds mean AGW doesn't exist" would be like me telling someone to make a computer program faster by "just threading the whole thing" and then waiting for their resignations because their boss (me) is an idiot.

Quote:
As far as vaccines....you said layman find vaccine/autism links controversial...as they should because there is no real science behind it besides a guy that has been debunked and a few celebrities...but then you lump the vaccine issue in with evolution and AGW as if the "controversy to layman issue" is apples to apples...i can put evolution and AGW in a similar category....but vaccines causing autism?? I get it...new parents have irrationale fears of every boogie man that gets mentioned...I see it with my brother who has a kid under two.


I'm not sure I get this here so I'll just further clarify: There is absolutely no link found between vaccinations and autism. Even if there WAS a link, in the numbers typically cited, it's still better to vaccinate. Your kids chances of getting autism would be much lower than your kids chances of getting polio/measles/mumps/etc in a non vaccinated world. So yes, it is apples to apples. The only people wondering about the link between vaccines and autism are people who have no professional background in the fields of medicine required to make an educated statement. The only reason people in the medical field even put forward papers debunking it was because Wakefield had at one time an air of authenticity, and due to the overall outrage from people who aren't doctors.


#gmstrong
BuckDawg1946 #1526144 10/08/18 05:16 PM
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622
O
OCD Offline
Legend
Offline
Legend
O
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622
Has anybody else noticed gas is $3 a gallon again? It always seems to skyrocket when a republican is in office. Trump might want to do something about that for working folks.

BuckDawg1946 #1528280 10/13/18 03:35 AM
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
Hall of Famer
OP Offline
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
Too much renewable energy in the United States,

Shot across the bow to republicans and south. Slaves, tobacco, oil, these are generational landmarks. We are losing the one thing we can’t replace, biodiversity.

Planet Earth is an extremely diverse place, don’t lose that.


President - Fort Collins Browns Backers
BuckDawg1946 #1537884 10/28/18 12:12 AM
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
Hall of Famer
OP Offline
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
I’m still waiting for republicans and the south to give counter evidence. You don’t believe humans significantly impact our climate.

Amongst college educated humans on planet earth, you represent 2% of authorities on the matter. You should all be ashamed. You rallied for the 1%, big oil, while kicking biodiversity to the wasteside.

You are a puppet, of the darkest points in United States history, congratulations. You know it, yet you stand behind your elephant and confederate flag. I weep for your children.


President - Fort Collins Browns Backers
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Oil

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5