'' The thing that vaccines work is bad stuff.'' What?
Around half the kids in the U.S. are on drugs of some sort to the delight of the pharma companies and physician's trade organization such as the AMA. And to the benefit of their coffers. As the study indicated by this thread title shows, vaxxed kids suffer more ailments. School performance is dismal compared to many other countries, and we have a population who are quite prone to absorb 'truth' from the mainstream media and anyone officially labeled a 'doctor' or 'scientist'...provided that that label has not been revoked by corp/gov. As always:
Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society
Simon and Schuster, New York, 1953
Page 30:
It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the State with money and equipment.
This subject will make great strides when it is taken up by scientists under a scientific dictatorship. Anaxagoras maintained that snow is black, but no one believed him. The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at. First, that the influence of home is obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before the age of ten. Third, that verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. Fourth, that the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. . . . It is for future scientists to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black, and how much less it would cost to make them believe it is dark gray.
Pages 50-51:
Fichte laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished. But in his day this was an unattainable ideal: … In future such failures are not likely to occur where there is dictatorship. Diet, INJECTIONS, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so.
Page 51:
Children will, as in Plato’s Republic, be taken from their mothers and reared by professional nurses. Gradually, by selective breeding, the congenital differences between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organized insurrection of sheep against the practice of eating mutton.
They certainly got you, scrow. Misleading studies though. ''vaxxed kids suffer more ailments.'' It's probably true that people who are heavily vaccinated or even using a lot of drugs have weaker immune systems, a baby living in perfect conditions will not be able to develop a strong immune system, however you also have to understand that those vaccines were needed at the time to prevent and eradicate terrible diseases. But it takes like a year for your liver to clean up your system from only one vaccination.  Vaccines are needed, anyone who says they are not is a moron just like anyone who says all vaccines are 100% safe is also a moron. |
|
|
|
https://www.pexels.com/search/earth/A normal person sees these pictures and says round. A mentally disturbed moron looks at those pictures and says flat. Identifying a round object from a picture isn't the most difficult thing a person can do! You have a poor discernment and you're probably blind. You're only good for deleting posts - trashman. Many awakened already knows that nasa pictures are a fake joke, a horrible photoshop.   bonus video for salty guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38yZH903wdQ&tReason nr1 people believe the earth is a sphere: evidence We also have videos and livestreams of space you dumbass |
|
|
|
If they took you to Mars how could you prove you were really there on the luminary we see in the sky? Maybe the Cavendish Experiment will work better on Mars and you can test the gravity!
Any concern we cannot get to the moon at 238-239k miles away but they are planning trips to Mars at 34 million miles away? Are you going to go first?
How can you prove you are the one writing this and it's not all fake? Yeah, check mate. You are forgetting, the sun is actually 3,000 miles away (4800km) so that'd make Mars ~1750km away, and its only 500 feet in diameter, smaller than some cruise ships. At that distance, you could make out a person waiving to you from mars with a kid's telescope, or maybe a really good pair of binoculars if we get a nice clear night. Its only like an hour flight, so it should be easy enough to settle. Though, the planet isn't big enough to have a runway, so you need to parachute off when you get close, and hope that you are more dense than whatever the atmosphere is there so you don't fall back to earth instead. pff, you forget the sun is just a holographic projection noob. |
|
|
|
''Cops, on the other hand, aren't supposed to do anything bad.'' And again, a 10 year old would have better logic than your peanut brain. It doesn't matter what they are supposed to do or not, if a group of 100 people are doing bad things, all of them, it doesn't matter if that's what they think it's good because what they are doing is factually and morally wrong. A group of 100 murderers is worse than a group of 100 people who has 1 murderer, it's simple fucking logic man, if you can't even understand that then I don't understand how you can function in real life. - Your problem is that in your analysis, you are among the 100 doing bad things by not analyzing correctly, and by painting a picture that is way different than reality.
''how that 0.09% is extremely faulty. It's probably more like a full 20%. '' Go ahead and prove it, I already gave you the statistics and evidence, you never bring any statistics at all and yet you keep claiming stupid shit. - To use your terminology, prove your statistics are accurate, and are not simply something somebody made up. I explained how your statistic is wrong. click back through a couple of posts to see.
If you want to call that extremely small percentage of cops/humans that murder people worse than ISIS, go ahead although even then it wouldn't be true since ISIS intention is to kill everyone that doesn't believe. All the murderers in USA most likely don't want to kill everyone else. So you are wrong 100% of the times basically.
That "small percent" is way larger than you state. Your willingness to condone it by not recognizing what is happening around you, is starting to make you way worse than ISIS right along with the cops.Again, if it's way larger you wouldn't have any problem in showing the statistics and evidence. Yet you keep refusing to provide any statistics. How can one provide statistics when the statistic makers are instructed to hide bad-cop statistics? And, if they show the statistics, the cops gang up on them and terrorize them in subtle ways, right in their own neighborhood. However, Google "bad cops" or "police brutality" to see what is going on behind the scenes. And check out Why All Police Are Bad — for Society.Checking a few videos of ''bad cops'' doesn't show how all cops are bad, it shows specific cops breaking the law or abusing it, if you want to claim all police is worse than ISIS then you have to prove that a big part of them are indeed bad not just a few. I can certainly find thousands of videos of cops doing good things, would that convince you they are good? |
|
|
|
wow, such an interesting topic. especially for an atheist. i`m not close to religion at all, it doesn`t run in my family. so i even don`t understand what religious people feel. and the comments are very readable for me
This topic might be interesting in some ways, but what about scientific proof? Check out the Scientific proof that God exists? - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.0 - thread. I mean, recognizing that God exists, and that He made everything, is the start to finding out about salvation... resurrection... life from death... everlasting life. I mean, if He can make it once, why can't He make it again? It's a start. You are still unable to prove the universe had 1 cause and not multiple so... |
|
|
|
'' The thing that vaccines work is bad stuff.'' What?
Around half the kids in the U.S. are on drugs of some sort to the delight of the pharma companies and physician's trade organization such as the AMA. And to the benefit of their coffers. As the study indicated by this thread title shows, vaxxed kids suffer more ailments. School performance is dismal compared to many other countries, and we have a population who are quite prone to absorb 'truth' from the mainstream media and anyone officially labeled a 'doctor' or 'scientist'...provided that that label has not been revoked by corp/gov. As always:
Bertrand Russell, The Impact of Science on Society
Simon and Schuster, New York, 1953
Page 30:
It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the State with money and equipment.
This subject will make great strides when it is taken up by scientists under a scientific dictatorship. Anaxagoras maintained that snow is black, but no one believed him. The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at. First, that the influence of home is obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before the age of ten. Third, that verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. Fourth, that the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. . . . It is for future scientists to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black, and how much less it would cost to make them believe it is dark gray.
Pages 50-51:
Fichte laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished. But in his day this was an unattainable ideal: … In future such failures are not likely to occur where there is dictatorship. Diet, INJECTIONS, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so.
Page 51:
Children will, as in Plato’s Republic, be taken from their mothers and reared by professional nurses. Gradually, by selective breeding, the congenital differences between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organized insurrection of sheep against the practice of eating mutton.
They certainly got you, scrow. Misleading studies though. ''vaxxed kids suffer more ailments.'' It's probably true that people who are heavily vaccinated or even using a lot of drugs have weaker immune systems, a baby living in perfect conditions will not be able to develop a strong immune system, however you also have to understand that those vaccines were needed at the time to prevent and eradicate terrible diseases. |
|
|
|
If you stick a stick in the (sticky) ground, it will produce a shadow. The shadow moves as time passes (which is the principle for ancient Shadow Clocks). If the world had been flat, then two sticks in different locations would produce the same shadow
That's only if you assume the sun is 93 million miles away, the sun is a projected object whose distance can be measured with sextant. The measured distance to the sun is about 3,000 miles and at that distance the sun's light rays are divergent. The shadows cast by sticks are consistent with a close small sun (measured at a diameter of ~32 miles) over a flat and motionless plane. Do you understand how much bullshit you're full of? Why are they telling us this lie? If indeed flat earth is true why lie to us? If you don't know where you're at what do you call that? LOST. If we don't know where we are we're lost as a people and have no chance of figuring out who we are. Because somehow knowing that the earth is flat means we know where we are? No but if you're deceived into believing something that is not true would you not agree you are much further away from knowing true self? If you can see that the proofs you were given regarding shape of the earth are false it opens a new set of doors to go through. If you believe the earth is round then I believe you have an entire playbook to follow regarding your life and who you are so I would proceed to follow that path if I were you. You don't seem to be taking a single bit of this information in. Why would you waste your time here? Ill write you from Mars in 2030. Knowing the earth isn't flat and the universe is vast only makes people want to explore more, if you wanted to control people you would tell them the earth is flat and there is no way to go. If they took you to Mars how could you prove you were really there on the luminary we see in the sky? Maybe the Cavendish Experiment will work better on Mars and you can test the gravity! Any concern we cannot get to the moon at 238-239k miles away but they are planning trips to Mars at 34 million miles away? Are you going to go first? How can you prove you are the one writing this and it's not all fake? Yeah, check mate. |
|
|
|
A whole new genre used in dice- EOS platform with having a dice game and a lottery. The graphics do catches out my attention, you can switch into plain color into an another space theme.
The only thing that i dont like is that 2% House edge.
Yes, it looks really nice compared to a lot of other gambling websites, 2% house edge but it's totally fair and you can check every bet/ticket. |
|
|
|
If you stick a stick in the (sticky) ground, it will produce a shadow. The shadow moves as time passes (which is the principle for ancient Shadow Clocks). If the world had been flat, then two sticks in different locations would produce the same shadow
That's only if you assume the sun is 93 million miles away, the sun is a projected object whose distance can be measured with sextant. The measured distance to the sun is about 3,000 miles and at that distance the sun's light rays are divergent. The shadows cast by sticks are consistent with a close small sun (measured at a diameter of ~32 miles) over a flat and motionless plane. Do you understand how much bullshit you're full of? Why are they telling us this lie? If indeed flat earth is true why lie to us? If you don't know where you're at what do you call that? LOST. If we don't know where we are we're lost as a people and have no chance of figuring out who we are. Because somehow knowing that the earth is flat means we know where we are? No but if you're deceived into believing something that is not true would you not agree you are much further away from knowing true self? If you can see that the proofs you were given regarding shape of the earth are false it opens a new set of doors to go through. If you believe the earth is round then I believe you have an entire playbook to follow regarding your life and who you are so I would proceed to follow that path if I were you. You don't seem to be taking a single bit of this information in. Why would you waste your time here? Ill write you from Mars in 2030. Knowing the earth isn't flat and the universe is vast only makes people want to explore more, if you wanted to control people you would tell them the earth is flat and there is no way to go. |
|
|
|
If you stick a stick in the (sticky) ground, it will produce a shadow. The shadow moves as time passes (which is the principle for ancient Shadow Clocks). If the world had been flat, then two sticks in different locations would produce the same shadow
That's only if you assume the sun is 93 million miles away, the sun is a projected object whose distance can be measured with sextant. The measured distance to the sun is about 3,000 miles and at that distance the sun's light rays are divergent. The shadows cast by sticks are consistent with a close small sun (measured at a diameter of ~32 miles) over a flat and motionless plane. Do you understand how much bullshit you're full of? Why are they telling us this lie? If indeed flat earth is true why lie to us? If you don't know where you're at what do you call that? LOST. If we don't know where we are we're lost as a people and have no chance of figuring out who we are. Because somehow knowing that the earth is flat means we know where we are? |
|
|
|
This is precisely why evolution is such a good religion. 1000 years is nothing in evolution. So, nobody can test DNA over the last 10,000 years to see if there really was any evolution. Modern science has been around (sort of) for the last 300 years. Absolutely no way to prove for evolution is such a short time as that. But that's what evolutionists like. It gives them a job, always looking for proof where and in ways they can never find it. It allows them to change theory (doctrine) to suit their whims. And most of all, it lets them feel good about themselves... when people praise them for their great thinking and hard work. Well, the evolution religion is dying, right now. More and more people are recognizing it for the scam that it is. Many schools don't require more than a single credit for it any longer, and the only reason they require that, is so that they look good in the eyes of schools that require more. Evolution is a complete hoax... except where it is a religion.  |
|
|
|
^^^ The camera pans and the ''holographic wave'' stays with the moon, it's possible the cameras operating frequencies are at play in the generation of the effect but, after some consideration I believe it can be witnessed by eye with a telescope. In either case the moon being a holographic projection from an elctro-mechanical projection system is the most likely cause as objects illumined by the sun don't exhibit this behavior.
Funny that no one in history has ever observed that. |
|
|
|
^^^ No you, your claim is observational error. The top-left corner has an edge, where's waldo?  Source: CRROW777I don't claim anything, again, how do you know that's a ''holographic wave'' and not a simple camera defect / effect? How are you measuring all this? |
|
|
|
...  ... And you are telling me there is no shadow in that photo? Are you blind? That's not the argument I'm supporting here, you have nothing but stawmen. Every area that's lit is illuminated evenly with the exception of the area adjacent to the delimiter line. The moon is not consistent with a sphere illuminted by the sun, go rope yourself. How are you measuring it? How do you know every area is illuminated evenly, what measurement tools did you use to make that claim? |
|
|
|
When are you jokers going to remember that this topic is about evolution. Even if there were nothing that showed evolution to be impossible, evolution would still be so extremely far from being proven, that it should be dropped simply because it is a big waste of time - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1917510.msg47076294#msg47076294. However, since it is touted as factual... Evolution is a hoax. That'a nice way to not admit being wrong about c&e and randomness. Shows you are intellectual dishonest. If you had any proof for evolution that could contradict what I said at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1917510.msg47076294#msg47076294, wouldn't you use it? Wouldn't you get right in there and show how I am wrong, step by step? But you can't. So all you do is beat around the bush. Since you don't have any evolution example that is factual evolution... Evolution is a hoax. Well, I already debunked your ''random doesn't exist theory'' which is half of what you wrote there but you are unable to admit it so why should I continue further if you are never going to admit when you are wrong? |
|
|
|
There are about 99% of scientists that disagree with you.
Even if that were true, it would be standard... since they all disagree with each other on something. So you admit vaccines work? Nobody is stating that vaccines don't work. You can inject just about anything into people and get some kind of results. The thing that vaccines work is bad stuff. '' The thing that vaccines work is bad stuff.'' What? |
|
|
|
It's funny because you don't realize that what you are saying directly disproves god. ''But we don't have even one factual spontaneous generation.'' So you are saying god did not spontaneously generate the planets, stars, animals, the universe?
is it required that God created the universe by spontaneous generation? We don't know how He created the universe, scientifically. God, being outside the universe, has His own ways of doing things. Just because we recognize many things within the universe as being made by other things in the universe, doesn't mean God did it that way, or spontaneously, when He made the universe. What ever way He did it, we don't know, scientifically. As an example, at least one religion says that He spoke the universe into being. I don't mean to make this into a religious post. All I am showing is an example of a kind of cause that we don't understand. That's why God is scientifically called, at times, The Great First Cause. It seems like you don't like the idea of God, whatever He/It happens to be. So you limit your ability to think objectively, just to focus on what you want, rather than what exists. Why are you so against science that you won't accept scientific proof when you are shown it, yet you often accept as scientific proof, some scientific theory, which is known to not be factual? What do you have against science? You said, there is only ''1 thing outside the universe'' which you claim it's god. If god created the universe, where did he get the ''materials'' to do so? Was it not spontaneously generated? |
|
|
|
yes.
...
If the earth was flat we wouldn't have to use a satellite or as you suggest "bounce signals off balloons or aircraft". Building a tower higher than any structure would give perfect line of sight and this would allow them to broadcast to anywhere in the world. Because of the curvature of the globe this isn't possible. On a flat earth line of sight radio broadcast would be much easier to achieve and would require lower powered equipment because bouncing it off an active or passive reflector in the sky would require it to travel much further.
I'm sorry but your understanding of radio signal propagation over long distances is flawed, radio waves are the same as light only with longer wavelengths and they suffer from the same limiting effects. For example, the giant mylar weather balloon can reflect the sun's light down to you but you can't see the sun directly due to perspective and other limiting effects. The longer the distance you want to transmit your signal the higher the altitude you need your antenna, that or bounce your signal off the ionosphere or troposphere but that trick only works with certain frequencies. The DirecTV type "satellite" dish systems that are commonly in use today use troposcatter technology developed by the US military:  "tropospheric scatter: 1. The propagation of radio waves by scattering as a result of irregularities or discontinuities in the physical properties of the troposphere. [NTIA] [RR] [JP1] 2. A method of transhorizon communications using frequencies from approximately 350 MHz to approximately 8400 MHz. (188) Note: The propagation mechanism is still not fully understood, though it includes several distinguishable but changeable mechanisms such as propagation by means of random reflections and scattering from irregularities in the dielectric gradient density of the troposphere, smooth-Earth diffraction, and diffraction over isolated obstacles (knife-edge diffraction). Synonym troposcatter." -- https://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/dir-038/_5617.htm
Once the fallacy of "spacecraft" (there is no outer space) and the fallacy of celestial objects as heavy balls in the sky (they're projected lights) is dispelled, all that remains for an artificial satellite (weather balloon) is a circular path that follows the sun.
So not an orbit then. Did you lie to us?  Also, just out of curiosity - what's the air pressure in your flat-earth dome? Assuming it's filled with air there would be 3000 miles of it trying to crush us. No I didn't lie, your definition of orbit is a fallacy and I've redefined it with the justification that it reflects the motion of celestial objects such as the moon. As for the air pressure go buy a barometer and a length of rope, then go rope yourself. And you are telling me there is no shadow in that photo? Are you blind? |
|
|
|
^^^ Your concept/definition of evenly lit is in error.   Have you ever looked up? |
|
|
|
When are you jokers going to remember that this topic is about evolution. Even if there were nothing that showed evolution to be impossible, evolution would still be so extremely far from being proven, that it should be dropped simply because it is a big waste of time - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1917510.msg47076294#msg47076294. However, since it is touted as factual... Evolution is a hoax. That'a nice way to not admit being wrong about c&e and randomness. Shows you are intellectual dishonest. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
