Added: 1 year ago
From: DonExodus2
Views: 139,786
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (1,117)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • SCIENCE > SUPERSTITION and CONSPIRACY THEORIES

  • since this video has been posted the Wakefiled has come forward and admitted that he knowingly and actively lied about the link between autisim and the vaccine in question/. If people want to endanger thier own kids lives thats thier business- but when you dont vaccinate you endanger other peoples kids- and that I will not tolerate!!!!

  • I dont disagree with vaccines at all, but I feel the combination vaccines all at once put unnecessary stresses on the immune system. Immune systems have been shown to become over taxed in certain instances. It makes me wonder if young bodies would better deal with vaccines if they were separated by perhaps a few months, and preventing possible immune system issues that we may not fully understand that could be caused by combo vaccines.

  • Jenny McCarthy is fucking retarded.

    Unbelievable; stupid bitch.

  • I hate all Vaccines!

  • Miss your videos & seeing you around!

  • great because I liked this I got a recommendation - MMR Vaccine Exposed: Think Twice! by ThinkTwiceGlobal

    watch?v=4gRfl0zzbDE

    It's just the anti-vac propaganda I didn't need to hear.

  • You know what? Autism isn't that bad. Mumps is some serious shit. Get vaccinated.

  • Comment removed

  • @lordnimr0d GO TO SLEEP SHEEEPPPPPP, GO TO FUCKING SLEEP, AND BE LED TO YOU SLAUGHTER

  • "rise in autism, add, adhd in children in the past X amount of years"

    This is easily refuted, a rise in diagnoses, does not mean a rise in the disorder. 40 years ago if you had a hyper kid who couldn't pay attention, did you think something was wrong with him and put him on meds? No, you just said hes hyper.

    Aspergers is another good example, 40 years ago if you had a kid showing signs of what today people call Aspergers, they'd probably say he was "eccentric, but very smart".

  • @ideasarebulletpr00f Aspergers doesn't make a child eccentric. It's the other way round.

  • I wouldn't mind having autism.

    I get free checks from the government

    get r' done!

  • Comment removed

  • TAKE YOUR TOBACCO SCIENCE AND STICK IT UP YOUR ASS!!!!!

    IF YOU THINK THIS WAY AND YOU ARE A DOCTOR ... THEN YOU TOO SHALL BURN BITCH!!!

  • Comment removed

  • WE WANT 100% MERCURY FREE VACCINES !!!!

    100% ALUMINUM FREE VACCINES!!!!

    100% TOXIN FREE VACCINES!!!

    YOU FUCKING MAGGOTS!!!!

  • NO ASSHOLE TEH EPIDEMIC IS AUTISM NOT(((( WHOOPING COUGH)) FUCK YOU AND YOUR BULLSHIT MESSAGE SOON YOU TOO WILL GO TO JAIL YOU MAGGOT.... MAY YOU ALL BURN WHO KEEP COVERING UP ALL THE FACXTS HAHAHAHHA YOUR GONNA BURN BITCH!!!!

  • @johnnytabaiee You're an idiot. You shouldn't be allowed to use a computer nor should you be allowed to breed.

  • @ilovesarakim You are a piece of shit, absolute fucktard. So I will love to see and your whole family poisoned with mercury filled vaccines. PLEASE GET VACCINATED ASAP :-)

  • @johnnytabaiee I would love to see why you think so, considering your vocabulary is equivalent to that of an 8th grader. I have been vaccinated, my whole family has. Only idiotic, misinformed hilbilies would not do so.

  • Do you trust the government? Millions of dollars are made on these vaccines - why would it not be possible to cover it up?

  • @twospot7777777 It is not about trusting the government, it is about analysing many papers from many scientific tests performed by different scientists across the world. "They" would have a motive for covering it up, but that doesn't mean "they" actually did. Unless you can present some solid analysis showing a clear causation between vaccines and autism, you can't rationally come to that conclusion

  • The only problem with this video (and others like it)...The people who need to watch this (them), won't.

  • The Supreme Court just rejected a case in which the family of a child with autism sued drug makers whose vaccines supposedly caused the autism. It was a great victory for medicine. Oh, and the judges who thought the cases had merit? Sotomayor and Ginsberg.

  • I had to re-subscribe to you. Not sure why.

  • @irojioqopiewjr The Amish differ from the mainstream population in a number of ways. They have a very different diet, live in less polluted environments, and are also less likely to have an autistic child diagnosed. Singling out a single difference among many between the Amish and mainstream population, the vaccinations, and concluding that that one thing is the cause of the autism difference is brash and foolish.

  • Better to have dead kids than autistic ones? Great parenting.

    Yes, the FDA and pharmaceutical companies DO need to nailed to the wall to prevent profiteering, but this one has been beaten to death. It has persisted because the age where vaccination is recommended falls right before the age where autism can be reasonably diagnosed. Parent sees 2 events and links them because they're upset and want to know a cause. If the vaccination age was pushed out to 3-4 years, all of the hype would vanish.

  • @jbxenia

    True if they were pushed back it would vanish, but so would the purpose of the vaccines for the most part.

  • Yes, the FDA and pharmaceutical companies DO need to nailed to the wall to prevent profiteering from extending problems that could otherwise be prevented/cured, but this one has been beaten to death. It has persisted because the age where vaccination is recommended falls right before the age where autism can be reasonably diagnosed. Parent sees 2 events and links them because they're upset and want to know a cause. If the vaccination age was pushed out to 3-4 years, all of the hype would vanish.

  • No guys it's OK clearly we should instead let children get measles, mumps and rubella, clearly this is better than one study letting you use confirmation bias to never ever trust any vaccines ever.

  • This is bull. Parents dont give your kids this jab. These "independent studies" he cites have been shown many times to be sponsored by big pharma and the FDA has been caught many times again, taking bribes and acting as a legitimate regulatory agency. You cant go wrong in the face of confusion to side with less medication and especially IV vaccines. Your kids will thank you

  • @bfess Fools like you would have deadly diseases return out of some illogical fear the pharmaceutical companies can somehow fudge all of the data from all respectable scientists and make them come to the conclusion that they want, despite the fact that studies have in the past shown that some medicines were more dangerous than originally thought to be and later pulled from the market, due to said studies.

  • You're absolutely right...i apologize. People need to place their trust more in the FDA and companies like Merck who produce MMR vaccines. Their motivation is obviously the public's health. Thanks for showing me the light

  • @bfess "motivation is obviously the public's health"

    The motivation of a company is to make money, by no means does that make their products ineffective. Would you show up to work if you weren't being paid? By your stupid logic since oil companies are corrupt their products don't actually effectively fuel motorized vehicles. There is no legit evidence whatsoever that links autism to vaccines, it's nonsense.

  • @bfess My kid brother is very sick in hospital with chickenpox/pneumonia as a result of thinking like yours. Vaccinate your kids people. I know we are talking about mmr but they seem to all get put in the same boat.

  • no facts just BILE

  • DonExodus2 in HD... oh hell yeah

  • @DonExodus2 Why not be skeptic about vaccines when its introduction were made when the diseases were declining?

  • Why would people try to spread lies? Lies that could kill millions. Remember "just have faith".... LMAO.... Yeah, since when is faith science....

  • Top class propaganda!

    

  • I have been watching a lot of Dons Videos and I wonder if he is just here to spread mis information? "Undisputed facts of the claim", with research this appears very disputed. In under 5 years you uploaded 4,595,224 videos? wow thats 2517 videos per day.

    Google.

    Summary Comparison of Characteristics

    of Autism & Mercury Poisoning

    This is very striking data. I'm interested in an educated opinion thanks.

  • @smoothpeople33 My bad those are video views? Wow still

  • Don I have one word concerning you, and all of your videos.

    More.

  • The same trait can appear 100% genetic and 0% environmental under conditions in which there is genetic variance in the population but no environmental variation in the population, then 0% genetic and 100% environmental under conditions in which there is little genetic variance and much environmental.

  • first i want to say i like your videos and i think you are very intelligent,however this being you tube please forgive my apprehension at taking what is said on here as undeniable proof,i mailed you about autism and asked if you are a doctor and credentials because some of his doctors say vacccines such as used for mumps mumps and there is more then one type for mumps and vaccines is a possible reason for it.

  • Btw, after watching your videos I called my parents and found out I hadn't been vaccinated. I promptly went and fixed that.

  • @Sqirril thx for the insult; i know i am on the right path when you provide no proof; now read real scientists and research it; "There's genetics and there's environment. And genetics don't change in such short periods of time," Hertz-Picciotto, a researcher at UC Davis' M.I.N.D. Institute, a leading autism research facility; also, physorg.com/news150636855.html ; well, CDC stats so high in a short period of time will NOT be explained by genetics or mutations; if you look at my first comment, i

  • @tumordick cont'd. i commented (which you have to click "show"; too many negative votes) ONLY on "environment" and NOT vaccines; in short, i say that increased rate in autism is NOT due to genetics; so, it must be environment; that said(commented), it could be vaccines, plus chemicals from pollution, and more; they might be alone as a factor or together as a factor; as scientists, it must not be ignored; that rate of increase is too high

  • @Sqirril sounds like you must be in high school still b/c universities will ask if you had them; i know lower education asks too but i only mentioned universities b/c you should be aware of what you had or not had given to you; if you didn't know while at a university then you are really not aware of anything if you aren't aware of your body

  • @tumordick No, High Schools will ask foreign students. Universities do NOT ask. I attend University and never had such a question ever during the course of applying or attending. How can I not be aware of something that happens with I'm a toddler? Da fuck? You are a retard.

  • odd, how advocates of darwin evolution childishly name call when confronted; like "redneck"; yet today, the evolutionists are the ones heading for the hills; AN OLD THEORY THAT CANNOT BE PROVEN HER ON EARTH SO THEY LOOK TO THE STARS WITH ALIEN SEEDING ANSWERS; if you can't see things are changing today and what is happening in these times, then good luck with your future in "SCIENCE"; all science will change soon to ALLOW ANY THEORY TO BE SCRUTINIZED IN A FREE OPEN SOCIETY! THIS WILL HAPPEN

  • @tumordick

    "odd, how advocates of darwin evolution childishly name call when confronted"

    - Darwinian evolution went out with gradualism when punctuated equilibrium was discovered back in the 60's., also confronted by what? you have failed to present actual evidence against evolutionary theory.

    "AN OLD THEORY THAT CANNOT BE PROVEN" - nothing in science can be conclusively proven (science doesnt operate in the realm of absolute truth) there is simply what the evidence supports.

  • @tumordick

    "SO THEY LOOK TO THE STARS WITH ALIEN SEEDING ANSWERS" - what your referring to is exogenesis and unlike abiogenesis it does it is not very well supported, it is however one of the few was Intelligent Design could be considered scientific; Richard Dawkins has already pointed-out something to this effect.

    "all science will change soon to ALLOW ANY THEORY TO BE SCRUTINIZED IN A FREE OPEN SOCIETY!" - this already happens, it's only the deluded who believe otherwise.

  • @types10000 i almost missed this comment of yours; weren't you commenting on my grammar? hehe can you please correct and send again BECAUSE IT MAKES NO SENSE?

  • @tumordick

    "i almost missed this comment of yours; weren't you commenting on my grammar?" - your mistaken, i wouldnt have bothered with something so trivial.

    my comment was debunking your claim that scientists switched from global cooling to global warming by showing how global cooling was never consensus or had as much evidentiary support as global warming does now.

  • @tumordick I think that tumor on you dick is also effecting your brain. You are quite insane, literally, not just figuratively, and I'm not going to waste any more time arguing with jibbering fool like you. Of course you are welcome to accuse me of going on the personal attack: I plead guilty; but do so in the confidence that EVERYONE out there who is capable of rational cognition knows that I am right about this.

  • @wheresmyoldaccount NO psych history whatsoever, no meds, and nothing complained about by others; so, yes you are not only attacking; you are attacking falsely for what? for a theory that darwin had doubts? sorry, DR. DARWIN; OH, SORRY HE WAS NOT A Ph. D.; NOR WAS HE A SCIENTIST; GOOD LUCK ALLLLLL TO THE DARWIN LOVERS OF SCIENCE WHO NAME CALL; YOUR HOUSE OF CARDS IS FALLING NOW; IT HAS BEEN SHAKING FOR SOME TIME BUT NOW IT WILL COME DOWN

  • I read a court case from America where a judge ruled in favor that vaccine was the link with a couples child having autism. I can't remember their names and just tried to look it up but am getting many vaccine autism court cases and can't find the one I was reading, but the judge ruled in favor because it was shown to at least that judge that the vaccine promoted a mitochondrial disease that caused the Autism. Is autism linked to mitochondrial dna?

  • How would a behavioral disease be a result of a VERY controlled exposure to MMR? The preservative used had been tested and retested for ANY kind of human harm. Our modern society has also put a large stretch on behavior disease which blankets people with very mild demonstrated behaviors. One could speculate that it is also the condition of our social perception that makes us most prone to "mental disease". Nonetheless, vaccinations are one of the most important human creations, they SAVE LIVES.

  • @NephilimFree “Look up the Dissent List of 800 scientists.”

    You obviously have not heard about Project Steve which makes this claim look ridiculous (just like everything else you say).

  • @tumordick Coming from user "tumordick" who types in all caps.... right- you know better than the entire scientific community.

    Hows that tinfoil hat fitting?

  • @DonExodus2 1) sometimes i just type in caps; quit your whining; it doesn't mean anything; see, i know how to type and when i start i am not redoing it; but, i guess u knew this 2) CAPS JUST TO ANNOY YOU, IT IS NOT THE "ENTIRE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY"; i hope people know so called "intellects" who say "entire", "consensus" and more are LYING TO US ALL; they do not want US to examine other views 3) i especailly hope people see how false these so called "intellects" are when WE read comments like

  • @DonExodus2 cont'd. CHUG20 uses insults like "clown" 4) i especially hope people see they change wording to mean what they want; my point was that the video is trying to exclude environmental causes; WHICH YOU DO NOT HAVE THE ANSWERS AND AS A "SCIENTIST" IF YOU ARE ONE, THEN YOU WOULD NOT EXCLUDE; BUT, DO NOT WORRY PEOPLE, WE ARE SEEING WHAT HE IS SAYING AS FALSE JUST LIKE GLOBAL WARMING, CLIMATE CHANGE, AND MORE IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE WAS FALSE; HEY, MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL

  • @tumordick Just because you want so much to believe that autism is due to environmental factors doesn't make it so. People like you who refuse to look at the science and only go off personal belief are just clowns.

    Fortunately, there are people who actually do the work and collect the data and try to find the real causes without stopping at "I believe it to be true, therefore it's true." Let those people do their work and stop getting in the way, clown.

  • @chug20 MY COMMENT WAS TO YOU ALSO; JUST LOOK AT DONEXODUS2

  • @tumordick

    Hey Captain Capslock, what's your degree again?

  • @SSTTEEAALLTTHH how witty that "SSTTEEAALTTHH" calls me "Captain Capslock"; did you forget about YOUR name? i do have multiple, multiple, multiple, multiple degrees; "SSTTEEAALLTTHH" HOW DID YOU LIKE HOW I STRESSED MULTIPLE MULTIPLE TIMES; KINDA LIKE YOUR NAME; NOT THAT ANYONE WOULD NEED MULTIPLE DEGREES TO ARGUE WITH ANYONE IN THIS GROUP

    MERRY CHRISTMAS ALL

  • @SSTTEEAALLTTHH do not know why your comment was marked as "spam"; ppl are seeing how you and others in your community are lying; see you claim i type in caps and your name is in ALL CAPS WITH MULTIPLE LETTERS; now, if you are NOT seeing how many scientists are exposing so called scientists which many in the IPCC are NOT scientists then you are a ignoring science; now, you assume i have no medical degree; does this mean i have to be a "medical" physician or do you mean Ph.D.? you assume i

  • @tumordick

    I didn't even bother to read what you said after "does this mean I have to be a medical physician". Learn to type and spell without Caps lock and I may reconsider. I don't care what you think about my degree, your opinion is of little value in the halls of science, luckily. You are not the first, nor the last to suffer Dunning-Krueger as someone pointed out. You have no clue, you have no education, now you are frustrated for not having that.

  • @tumordick

    Enjoy listening to Alex Jones. Now get of your horse, you haven't got anything, no peer reviews, no data, no correlation, nothing. Empty claims from an empty mind, that is too stupid too comprehend the difference between choosing a name for the sake of the available and typing a rant in all caps for attention. Have fun with your tinfoil hat and Illuminati-delusions.

  • @SSTTEEAALLTTHH thx, i will; now for your belief in an old theory like evolution; it is old; after it was published, it was accepted by ppl like you almost right away without proof; now, many years later there is still no proof; you and others had a chance to prove it; you could not do it; so enjoy your old ideas that ppl accepted for the wrong reasons; others will move on; ppl will see how you do not argue, you only insult and attack; this is simply your defensive behavior for your old ideas

  • @tumordick

    No proof for evolution? You are one of those people?

    Your attempt at trolling failed, go and let Alex Jones tell yo what to think, mindless tool. Off to the spam bin you are.

  • @SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1) in regard to physician, you didn't get the sarcasm, not imp 2) yes, no proof; you are blindly accepting transitions and origin from what? a cell? or what would you like to say? 3) you may want to take a FEW, JUST A FEW notes from you man RICHARD DAWKINS; he knows it can't be proven here so he will look to the stars hehe; what he says doesn't sound ridiculous to you? 4) again, you attack; alex jones doesn't discuss intelligent design(i mean focus on it); i listen for other ...

  • @tumordick

    "and REM band? are they still alive?" When you are already considered a troll that has yet to show any peer-reviews or data, ad hominem attacks about completely unrelated issues tend not to help your case. No thanks, I've waisted some time arguing with creationists. I could hit you dead with books and you would still believe in magical people springing out of the ground. I'm not in the mood. Bey now.

  • @SSTTEEAALLTTHH latter you correct my spelling; check your spelling and grammar; now i have tried to ask you simple questions to the flaws in your beloved old evolution theory; yet, NO ANSWERS; only bantering; just give some facts from your books to "hit" me dead; i am off now to listen to that old fossil band REM that you love so much; waiting and waiting for your answers

  • @tumordick

    Also, L€aRn To0 €Nglisj. Proper English may help you to come across a bit more serious. It's hard to take anyone who doesn't know the difference between "you", "your", and "you're" serious.

  • @tumordick

    I don't see what Richard Dawkins has to do with any of this, I'm not a fan, I think his books are boring and he have never read an actual contribution to biology by him, if he has any. To atheism maybe, but not biology. This is in complete line with the redneck-climatologist who will just randomly start blabbering about Al Gore in the middle of a conversation about global warming. Of course nobody mentioned him before but it's easier to attack people than actual scientific stances.

  • @SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1) i am not white, nor a redneck as you keep falsely calling me names; childish don't you think 2) global warming? you are still buying that too? you need to start changing that too 3) the reason you will keep buying any theory is that you do not have the ability to think for yourself; a follower 4) are you old enough to remember when the scientists claimed an ICE AGE was nearing?

  • @tumordick

    "global warming?" - it's what's supported by evidence, we find your denial of reality amusing.

    "the reason you will keep buying any theory"-scientific theories are things that have attained the highest level of scientific truth, that's what gives them credibility.

    "..remember when the scientists claimed an ICE AGE was nearing?" - no, and neither are you as scientists never claimed that. there were a few papers in the 50's indicating global cooling, but it was never consensus.

  • @types10000 oh, somebody else decides to speak up; great, here is a YT vid since you don't believe scienctists, govt, and scientific orgs claimed there was an ICE AGE nearing: watch?v=ttLBqB0qDko

    now, types10000, the links below the vid in the "more info" section have some articles at that time; HMMMM, look at NOAA, DISCREDITED, AND I WILL NEVER BE A PART OF THEM AGAIN; hmmm, RICHARD NIXON QUOTE AND CARTER SUPPORT; HMMM, BOTH PARTIES; now keep looking for more and you will find many more; thx

  • @types10000 this shows there was a movement saying the ice age was coming; movement promoted by those important orgs you cherish; hey, you know what; they had research backing it too; if you avoid the obvious, then nobody can help you; yes, you are right it was media hype; that is one of my points

  • @tumordick

    "this shows there was a movement saying the ice age was coming" - incorrect, again what you've pointed to is media hype, whilst there were a few articles back in the 50's that suggest global cooling, it was never consensus like global warming is now.

    "if you avoid the obvious, then nobody can help you; yes, you are right it was media hype; that is one of my points" - i'm not avoiding anything, im pointing out why your claims are false, media hype does not equate to science

  • @types10000 if you would like more info, then pls look to those who oppose it, not to those who SUPPORT it; i also forgot to mention MEDIA; ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT; do you realize how more FREE YOU WOULD BE IF YOU ACTUALLY HAD FREE MEDIA? not short clips on celebrities, especially celebs who promote the propaganda; NOW, LOOK UP WHO WROTE THE BOOK, "PROPAGANDA"; NOW LOOK UP THE AUTHOR'S RELATIONSHIP; NOW LOOK UP WHO USED THE BOOK IN WWII; this is not hard RESEARCH; NOW, DO IT YOURSELF!

  • @tumordick

    "this is not hard RESEARCH" - no truer a statement has ever been said, no, this is soft research made by a person not looking for evidence, just vindication of their religiously motivated bullshit.

  • @types10000 i showed you what the movement was like then; with articles related to orgs and their research and you still ignore it; and i asked you to look for more; it isn't hard; but you won't b/c yoiu would like to accept your theory and sway from ice age to global warming to whatever next the scientific/political climate is

  • @tumordick

    "i showed you what the movement was like then" - you've provided no evidence that the scientific community was advocating an ice-age.

    - whilst there were papers that advocated global cooling it was never consensus like global warming is now.

    - the media taking these papers that advocate global cooling and using it to claim 'an ice-age on it's way' does not equate to the scientific community claiming an ice-age.

  • @types10000 sad, you sound like an al gore mouth piece saying, "consensus"; WRONG; did you hear of climategate and read the docs? did you see how PHIL JONES WAS SUICIDAL? HE WANTS OUT; IF NOT, THEN HE WILL GET "OUTTED"(sorry, my word); you are NOT looking AND LEFT ALONE, THE FEW WHO HAVE WRONGED SCIENCE; NOW SCIENTISTS ARE STANDING UP !!!! ppl are seeing that you are wrong, there was nonsense propagated on ICE AGE COMING; look, i am not here to HURT you; like childish name calling; I AM HERE

  • @tumordick

    "sad, you sound like an al gore mouth piece saying, consensus" - you have failed to address my point.

    "WRONG...PHIL JONES WAS SUICIDAL...HE WILL GET OUTTED...NOW SCIENTISTS ARE STANDING UP...propagated on ICE AGE COMING"

    - the climate gate emails have been debunked, no charges have been levied because the only issue was with the American public's inability to understand scientific and colloquial language.

    - Phil Jones was indeed homocidal, but this was not through his own fault

  • @types10000 HOMOCIDAL OR SUICIDAL? do you know the difference? does matter b/c his backing of global warming KILLS many; yes, kills; so, maybe your mistake was right; no, it was not "debunked"; so the info was released b/c it had NO value? hahaha they release the info to show what lies and you believe the debunk lies; just read it for yourself; when done you so EDUCATED will see for yourself; it had nothing to do with numbers and stats; it had to do with them ADMITTING TO FALSIFYING DATA !

  • @tumordick

    "HOMOCIDAL OR SUICIDAL? " - it doesnt particularly matter as his state of mind wasnt caused by guilt, it was induced by the death threats against him and his family from psychotic idiots like you.

    the climate gate emails were indeed leaks, but their content was not indicative of a conspiracy; the controversy itself was because the American public failed to understand the mathematical trends and colloquial language used, and this is what was revealed apon investigation.

  • @types10000 you said homocidal, do you know the difference? as you commented above, you seem to blame his SUICIDAL IDEATION on those who made death threats; you really know what he is thinking; PHIL JONES KNOWS IT IS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY WILL BE FORCED TO EXPOSE THE LIES; you give me an article on "TREEHUGGER" hehe; you say consensus when many scientists are AGAINST GLOBAL WARMING; please visit climatedepot[.]com AND FIND ALLL LINKS WITH SCIENTISTS AND LOGIC

  • @tumordick i asked you about the amount of CO2 and you give me an answer about oceans; if we were to stop all human CO2; it would not have ANY affect on the globe; go to climatedepot[.]com; lots to read on it FROM SCIENTISTS, or you can just believe 'TREEHUGGER[.]COM"; as for EAST ANGLIA in that article from treehuggercom, But the panel of inquiry, led by former U.K. civil servant Muir Russell, did chide scientists at

  • @tumordick

    "i asked you about the amount of CO2 and you give me an answer about oceans"

    - i explained to you first how we knew increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere will result in a warmer temperature trend ie. due to CO2's known warming effect.

    - i then explained why calculating the exact CO2 to temperature increase is impossible (due to the other things that affect the temperature)

    i then supported the entire thing with an analogy to sea levels and flooding.

  • @tumordick

    "you said homocidal, do you know the difference?"

    - yes i do know the difference, it was infact a mistype.

    but in anycase it's not relevent to the point being made

    ie. his state of mind was the result of receiving death threats directed at him and his family and not (as you believe) the result of being exposed in some enormous conspiracy.

    "you give me an article on TREEHUGGER hehe" - the website is treehugger[.]com but the rundown it provides is available many places.

  • @types10000 cont'd. the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit for failing to share their data with critics. "We find that their rigor and honesty as scientists are not in doubt," Russell said; does that make sense? they failed to show such great proof; and no, scientists are still saying their research is invalid; SEE YOU CAN LIE TO PPL HERE, BUT THEY WILL FIND IT FOR THEMSELVES; go to climatedepot[.]com for all the available research; LOOK UP THE REPORT ON DISSENTING SCIENTISTS

  • @types10000 cont'd. YOU REPEATEDLY SAYING "CONSENSUS" WILL NEVER MAKE IT A "CONSENSUS"; SEE PPL AND SCIENTISTS ARE NOT AGREEING WITH GLOBAL WARMING; AND WE ARE SPEAKING NOW; YOU WANT ME TO HOLD YOUR HAD WHILE READING THOSE ARTICLES WITH RESEARCH FROM SCIENTISTS? SOUNDS LIKE MANY STILL SEE EAST ANGLIA AS LIARS AND SO THOSE WHO BETRAYED SCIENCE AND PEOPLE'S TRUST AND THEY WILL BE LEGALLY LIABLE SOON; IT IS HEADING IN THAT DIRECTION; THEY SEE IT; PHIL JONES SEES IT; Y NOT U?

  • @types10000 HAHAHAHAHA, "EVERY"; WOW, PPL WILL SEE RIGHT THROUGH YOUR LIES; AND NOBODY VISITED CLIMATEDEPOT[.]COM? WHAT BUBBLE DO YOU LIVE IN? DOESN'T MATTER, YOUR FALSE SCIENCE WILL BE ENDED SOON

  • @types10000 and to the ppl reading our discussion; please keep in mind the ramifications of this falsely based GLOBAL WARMING SCAM has on US in many ways; it is not for our benefit

  • @types10000 wrong, you don't know how CO2 increases temp; current trends show otherwise; look at research; actual research on climatedepot[.]com; now for your "analogy" just shows how you USE SCIENCE wrongly; you can't just guess or make uncalculated estimates; CASE CLOSED !!! i hope all see this is NOT science just guesses and GUESSES PROVED WRONG !!!!! hehe, i was just waiting for you to say "analogy"; THANK YOU; now all interested in SCIENCE, learn and appreciate it; not unproven guesses

  • @tumordick

    "wrong, you don't know how CO2 increases temp" - incorrect, we very much do; the warming effects of CO2 were ascertained independently of anything to do with global warming

    ie. it as a gas traps heat based on this, the conclusion that it would trap the heat that earth receives from the sun is just basic logic.

    "now for your analogy just shows how you USE SCIENCE wrongly" - that's not a refutation; it addresses none of the facts i brought up.

  • @types10000 hehe, analogies to show what YOU don't prove is even worse in SCIENCE!!

  • @types10000 YOU said YOU typing HOMOCIDAL is a typo? how does one get those two simple terms confused as typos?

  • @types10000 see YOU say CO2 and not man made; so this is really pointless, but YOU will never understand; NOTHING WE HUMANS WILL OR CAN DO WILL STOP IT "ACCORDING TO YOUR SCIENCE"; GOT THAT? please read other research; YOUR SCIENTISTS NOW ARE SAYING THE COLD WINTER AND MORE IS DUE TO YOUR "GUESS"; IT'S NOT SCIENCE; WHATEVER YOU SAY IS RIGHT; YET, IN THE PAST YOU AND YOUR SCIENTISTS DID NOT PREDICT THIS AND MORE; advice: some of your LEADING SCIENTISTS ARE OUT OF YOUR GUESS; YOU WILL BE ALONE

  • @tumordick

    "see YOU say CO2 and not man made...NOTHING WE HUMANS WILL OR CAN DO WILL STOP IT...THE COLD WINTER AND MORE IS DUE TO YOUR 'GUESS'...some of your LEADING SCIENTISTS ARE OUT OF YOUR GUESS"

    - could you please reiterate what your trying to say, most of that seemed pretty nonsensical.

  • @types10000 word of advice; they will NOT be there for you when global warming is destroyed AND they would NOT have been there for you IF it were to have successful; THE PLANS TO DEAL WITH IT WERE NEVER INTENED TO HELP YOU OR EVEN REDUCE CO2; Y CAN'T YOU SEE THIS;; DO YOU SEE INDIA OR CHINA ABIDING BY THIS NONSENSE? you have not looked at research or THE THINGS BEHIND THE RESEARCH; but, pls don't give up your backing; when everyone else has you will seem like a fool; most ppl didn't care before

  • @tumordick

    "word of advice; they will NOT be there for you when global warming is destroyed AND they would NOT have been there for you IF it were to have successful"

    - the evidence for global warming is solid; to the point where it's scientific consensus (which i pointed out earlier)

    "THE PLANS TO DEAL WITH IT WERE NEVER INTENED TO HELP YOU OR EVEN REDUCE CO2; Y CAN'T YOU SEE THIS"

    - because it's part of your deluded conspiracy theory.

  • @types10000 i am seeing YOUR problem as well as others in YOUR own science; YOU WILL NOT ACCEPT OTHERS VIEWS; and YOU COMPLETELY IGNORE THE OTHER INFLUENCES ON SCIENCE; i see YOU don't believe in SCIENCE; YOU believe ONLY YOUR science; YOU KNOW EXTERNAL FACTORS SUCH AS RELIGION, POLITICS, AND MORE INFLUENCE SCIENCE VIEWS; YET, YOU ARGUE FOR WHAT? SCIENCE WILL WIN AND YOU WILL FALL WITH MISGUIDE FOLLOWING OF GLOBAL WARMING AND EVOLUTION(whatever type of REVISED evolution theory)

  • @types10000 my deluded world you say??? i am talking about reality; what about COPERNICUS, GALILEO, PILTSDOWN MAN, TODAY'S INTELLIGENT DESIGN THEORISTS, AND ON AND ON; SO WHAT DELUSIONAL WORLD DO I LIVE IN????? PLS ELABORATE; REAL SCIENTISTS KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE; WHAT ARE YOU???

  • @tumordick Copernicus, Galileo, and Piltsdown (as far as I know, very obscure referance) all lived before 1850. You may wanna cite some more recent examples. Also, intelligent design was ruled as not scientific, so that's another bad citation.

  • @tumordick

    "i am talking about reality; what about COPERNICUS, GALILEO, PILTSDOWN MAN"

    - your incredibly far removed from reality, Galileo and Copernicus faced opposition from an oppressive catholic theocracy, not science.

    - piltdown man was a hoax committed when peer review was in it's infancy, it has no bearing on the confirmed transitionals of modern times.

    "TODAY'S INTELLIGENT DESIGN THEORISTS" - ID was found to be a religion in court.

    you delusional world of your own making.

  • @types10000 religion yes, enforced by political clout; you actually think A COURT can determine it to be religion? i think you don't live in reality; this by far has to be the most unbelievable comment you made so far(or close); religion may have been a motivator then, but today the same stands for evolution scientists who contend evolution is the ONLY possible theory; yet, it changes somehow to punctuated equilibrium AND THAT REVISION ONLY CHANGES A THEORY; NOT EXPLAIN MECHANISMS AND ORIGIN

  • @tumordick

    "religion yes, enforced by political clout; you actually think A COURT can determine it to be religion?"

    - YES. it was proven conclusively that ID is simply a rebranding of creationism.

    "i think you don't live in reality" - your projecting, your entire comments thus far have been a rejection of reality.

  • @tumordick

    "religion may have been a motivator then"- this is wrong for multiple reasons:

    - unless you have evidence religion was a motivating factor then you may as well have claimed chocolate icecream was a motivating factor.

    - their findings caused them to be persecuted BY RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS

    - the fact their findings contradicted the religious beliefs would have made it more likely a hindrance.

  • @tumordick

    1).

    "stands for evolution scientists who contend evolution is the ONLY possible theory; yet, it changes somehow to punctuated equilibrium AND THAT REVISION ONLY CHANGES A THEORY"

    your so ignorant i cant believe you havnt stopped breathing by accident:

    a scientific theory is the highest level of scientific proof; it is a well evidenced and thoroughly tested principle that explains a set of facts, it differs completely from theory in the colloquial sense (which is hypothesis)

  • @types10000 another term "delusional" which you evolutionists like to use, but really misuse; are you an EXPERT in the psych field too;nobody with a degree in the psych field would childish name call or make that accusation

    have you visited climatedepot[.]com yet? go visit all those scientists and call them "delusional" as well; i guess it is a "delusion" that if have a degree in psych too; huh? you will not win an agrument with childish insults or perceived higher intelligence; only with FACTS

  • @tumordick

    "have you visited climatedepot[.]com yet? go visit all those scientists and call them delusional as well; "

    - indeed i have, it's a propaganda site just as expected,

    - the number of scientists was few and the number with qualifications in relevant fields even less so.

    the problem for you is that none of them can substantiate their claims, as evidenced by the fact there are no scientifically peer reviewed articles; their claims remain opinions devoid of science

  • @tumordick

    "you will not win an agrument with childish insults or perceived higher intelligence; only with FACTS"

    - yes, my insults voice my frustration with your level of stupidity; the facts i've presented are what have won me the argument.

    the kind of stupidity you embrace is simply mind boggling:

    - allot of things affect temperature

    - you have a substance with known warming effect (CO2)

    yet you draw the conclusion that adding more of this substance will do nothing *facepalm*

  • @types10000 would you like me to give you a link to get the info on CLIMATEGATE? OH SMART ONE? I WANT YOU TO SAY YES IN THIS FORUM; BUT I KNOW NEXT WHAT YOU WILL SAY, SO I WAIT AND WAIT

  • @tumordick

    "would you like me to give you a link to get the info on CLIMATEGATE? OH SMART ONE?"

    - sure. here's a rundown of the third investigation (the latest one) which once again completely vindicated the scientists involved and reiterated that the work is sound, no data has been destroyed, and that the research is rigorous and of high quality

    treehugger[.]com/files/2010/07­/3rd-major-climategate-investi­gation-scientists.php

  • @types10000 cont'd. to give you a different perspective; A SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE; do NOT look, then you should NEVER COMMENT;

    NOW, YOU WANT A COMMENT ON "GLOBAL WARMING"; IT IS NEGLIGIBLE WHAT "MAN" CONTRIBUTES TO GLOBAL WARMING; NOW, WHY IS IT OTHER COUNTRIES ARE NOT ABIDING BY THIS GLOBAL WARMING? 1) IT IS FALSE 2) THEY WILL ADVANCE WHILE AMERICA DOES NOT ; SIMPLE AS THAT; DO YOU WANT AMERICA TO ADVANCE? YOU ARE PART OF THE POLITICAL PROBLEM; A FOLLOWER

  • @types10000 HEHE, NO PROOF HUH? let me ask you a question: how much "man made" CO2 pollution causes global warming? HEHE, NOW TELL ALL HERE SO I CAN DESTROY WHAT YOU SAY PLEASE

  • @tumordick

    "NO PROOF HUH?"

    - you posted that directly after asking for proof; i hadnt logged-in, in nearly a day.

    here's the link again:

    treehugger[.]com/files/2010/07­­/3rd-major-climategate-invest­i­gation-scientists.php

    "how much man made CO2 pollution causes global warming?"-that would be exactly the same as asking 'how much extra water in the ocean would cause floods'. our knowledge that CO2 from fossil fuels is causing warming comes from CO2's known warming effect in the atmosphere

  • @types10000 ALSO, RESEARCH IT HARD I SUGGEST TO YOU; WHY? BECAUSE NOW WE ARE GOING TO COME HARD AT YOU IN THE POLITICAL, SOCIAL, AND ECONOMIC LEVELS; so in your research, please do NOT think you will get by ONLY researching YOUR false evidence; BECAUSE OUR SIDE WILL EXPOSE YOUR WRONGS IN SCIENCE AND IF YOU ARE NOT PREPARED, THEN WILL NOT HAVE A REBUTTLA ; I DO THIS IN HOPES THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT OUR SIDE YOU WILL SEE YOUR FALSE RESEARCH; BUT HEY, TELL PHIL JONES I HOPE HE DOESN'T KILL HIMSELF

  • @tumordick

    "ALSO, RESEARCH IT HARD I SUGGEST TO YOU"

    your not in a position to be making such a suggestion as you clearly havnt researched it:

    - you thought climategate hadnt been debunked

    - you thought the scientific community flip-floped from global cooling to global warming.

    "TELL PHIL JONES I HOPE HE DOESN'T KILL HIMSELF" - interesting you should say as the reason behind his depression is from receiving death threats against himself and his family from people like you

  • @types10000 if you really want to learn, and i mean learn, to others who are providing evidence that is discredited without through examination; there arrrrrree many; here is an article on DNA testing of neanderthals( npr.org/2010/12/28/132243863/2­010-a-good-year-for-neandertha­ls-and-dna?ft=1&f=1006), but if you read you will see they will DNA test on mummies some 8000 YRS OLD in south america; HMMM, egypt dynasty dates back how far? (not that it is the oldest); elementary, but a start for ya

  • @tumordick

    "and i mean learn, to others who are providing evidence that is discredited without through examination; there arrrrrree many; here is an article on DNA testing of neanderthals( npr.org/2010/12/28/132243863/2­­010-a-good-year-for-neanderth­a­ls-and-dna?ft=1&f=1006)"

    - this article doesnt disprove anything.

    "if you read you will see they will DNA test on mummies some 8000 YRS OLD in south america; HMMM, egypt dynasty dates back how far?"

    - what's your point?

  • @types10000 see you want things explained word by word to you; in science, we try to observe what is not fitting current theories; nevermind, you have your mind set on something and don't want to see anything else; good luck in YOUR world of science

  • @tumordick

    "you want things explained word by word to you; in science, we try to observe what is not fitting current theories"

    - yeh, then we subject it to scrutiny and then based on it's evidentiary support it may become consensus.

    the fact of the matter is global cooling was never consensus and the scientific community certainly never advocated an ice-age (that was simple media hype).

    if you have evidence of your claim then present it, but your claims thus far are complete fabrications

  • @types10000 PLEASE READ HOW CLIMATEGATE EXPOSED THIS POLITICAL AGENDA; IF YOU DON'T THINK SCIENCE IS USED AS A POLITICAL TOOL, THEN YOU ARE A CHILD; SIMPLE AS THAT

  • @tumordick

    Q: did the scientific community swing from global cooling to global warming?

    A: NO, global cooling never had the evidentiary support or credibility in the scientific community that global warming currently has:

    - the amount of peer reviewed papers in favor of global cooling was always much less than for global warming

    - global cooling was never scientific consensus like global warming is now.

    media hype DOES NOT equate to scientific understanding.

  • @types10000 what are you reading? show me the proof of global warming then; please educate me; AREN'T YOU SEEING THE LIES IT IS BUILT UPON? YOU ARE BEING LEFT ALONE; THERE IS A NEW AGE COMING OF LEARNING WITHOUT THE POLITICAL INTRUSION; THIS IS OBVIOUS