The danger of vaccines that is being covered up

[Adama]

during 9/11.. building 7 falling, 2 crashes, 1 in Pennsylvania, 1 into the pentagon, with absolutely no wreckage. the one into the pentagon killing accountants which on 9/10/2001 had rumsfield on tv announcing over 2 trillion dollars was unaccounted for.

after 9/11.. the wars against enemies that don't exist in countries which had nothing to do with it. david silverstein cashing in on his wtc insurance policy. bush, rumsfield, powell, and others lying through their teeth, about how they found out about 9/11, about WMD in iraq, about everything.

and many more. none of that makes you curious?
^this guy made a fortune on 9/11

Yes, all very true. No plane wreckage around the Pentagon, which is now swept under the rug, but was at first readily admitted by broadcasters. Very odd. And a WTC 7 which also collapses even though it wasnt hit. Also very odd.

Plus Bush still going on about how Saddam was a threat. A threat to whom? Maybe a threat to the instability of the region (which Bush & co. want), 99 cent per gallon gasoline prices (oilgarchs want high prices) and the fact that his regime was unsympathetic to Israel (Zion must dominate the region). Still no established link between Saddam and Al Qaeda, yet Bush still makign the rounds on TV programs saying the man was a threat.

Then there are the underground bunkers Rumsfeld claims he knew Osama was hiding in for a fact, yet they also never existed anywhere on this planet.

<scratches> Several coincidences here that must add up to something.

[Adama]

Y
=========================

You guys want to prove to me that you have a clue then answer this:

Why did 911 occur on that day in particular?

My confidence that any of you know, is 0.000%

To reference the American-orchestrated coup overthrowing a leftist government in Chile on 9/11/1973 and installing a right-wing autocrat.

Without taking a position on what went down 9/11/01, I'd think Mossad would be clever enough to throw in that little wrinkle of authenticity, though god knows no one in the Bush administration would have known enough history to have thought of it. Mossad being competent enough to orchestrate the demolition of some big buildings -- conceivably I could buy it. The Bush administration and attendant neocons? No way.

Bush Neocons? Really? They are the same people. Israelis were in the cabinet. Maybe not Mossad, but definitely dual citizens of Israel served in that Presidential Cabinet. There is no essential difference on that level. Most of the advisors are Israeli or Jewish Zionists.

[globetrotter]

Dunning–Kruger effect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2 ... ger_effect

someone making a personal decision not to get vaccinated and not to believe blatant zionist lies regarding 9/11, means they're trying to correct a problem. it doesn't mean they've overestimated their competence. if someone used to do stupid things like get flu shots or believe in the US military as some benevolent force, it's because they had misplaced confidence in doctors/the medical establishment, and the US empire as a whole. By becoming competent, they have lost that confidence in corrupt institutions, and no longer assume everyone is as good natured or "competent" as themselves, regardless of other people's position of power.

This is a prime example of someone who lacks the meta-cognitive ability to accurately self-assess themselves.

You reflexively state 'do stupid things like get flu shots' when I have delineated in a clear, concise, logical format how testing for vaccine efficacy is performed and why it can be concluded that the reason it was administered was to reduce the incidence of disease.

What we have here are two products of the late 20th Century USA school system - Winston and LinuxOnly - who possess massive amounts of self esteem They ignore - every single time - any logical refutation to their point of view. Look at what happened above; LO simply did not comment upon my listing of the steps for drug clinical trials.

Why did he not comment?

Because he lacks the meta-cognitive ability to be able to realize that those steps disprove his thesis. To him it is just so much noise, or opinion.

Prime example:

By becoming competent, they have lost that confidence in corrupt institutions, and no longer assume everyone is as good natured or "competent" as themselves, regardless of other people's position of power.

But Linux and Winston are NOT competent. They merely assume that the information they have read on the Internet is true and they believe it reflexively because they lack the intellect to see the flaws in the arguments.

longer assume everyone is as good natured or "competent" as themselves,

Correct. You do so because you have massive amounts of self-esteem that exceed your intellect and your education. You automatically assume that you have competence greater than I and because you assume this bias that is fed by self-esteem PC indoctrination, you dismiss all arguments against your point of view.

You believe ABC, you have a right to believe ABC, and you will stick to that point of view.

Since you think like this, you also mistakenly assume that others are merely arguing from the similar point of view that they, or I, are as competent as people in positions of power merely because I think that I am. You think you are entitled to your opinion no matter what and you assume that what I am stating is opinion as well. This is not the case. I am using logic, reason, clear steps and known debate technique. You are not.

Since you cannot recognize these LO, or since you refuse to recognize them due to your errant belief that you are competent and any criticism must by opinion, you cannot recognize when you are wrong, or when you have erred, or when you have lost a debate.

Like all CT'ers you don't address the point at hand, you say 'Well what about this?'. You have not addressed my clinical trial steps, you said 'What about this' in the form of 'I am not exhibiting signs of D-K'. That is, btw, what any person with that bias would say. Someone like myself would admit that I do sometimes exhibit those signs and downplay my competence, as I know that there is so much that I do not know.

Then there is this passage of bad logic. Again instead of addressing an argument you just add more questions to the mix, just as Winston did above.

[globetrotter]

Y
=========================

You guys want to prove to me that you have a clue then answer this:

Why did 911 occur on that day in particular?

My confidence that any of you know, is 0.000%

To reference the American-orchestrated coup overthrowing a leftist government in Chile on 9/11/1973 and installing a right-wing autocrat.

Without taking a position on what went down 9/11/01, I'd think Mossad would be clever enough to throw in that little wrinkle of authenticity, though god knows no one in the Bush administration would have known enough history to have thought of it. Mossad being competent enough to orchestrate the demolition of some big buildings -- conceivably I could buy it. The Bush administration and attendant neocons? No way.

Bush Neocons? Really? They are the same people. Israelis were in the cabinet. Maybe not Mossad, but definitely dual citizens of Israel served in that Presidential Cabinet. There is no essential difference on that level. Most of the advisors are Israeli or Jewish Zionists.

Wrong, again.

9-11 refers to the Siege of Vienna in 1683. You are bogged down in 20th C and Internet-Era History.

This began in 610, but you do not know that so you assume all I post is opinion.

Read your history, for you simply do not know it.

[globetrotter]

during 9/11.. building 7 falling, 2 crashes, 1 in Pennsylvania, 1 into the pentagon, with absolutely no wreckage. the one into the pentagon killing accountants which on 9/10/2001 had rumsfield on tv announcing over 2 trillion dollars was unaccounted for.

after 9/11.. the wars against enemies that don't exist in countries which had nothing to do with it. david silverstein cashing in on his wtc insurance policy. bush, rumsfield, powell, and others lying through their teeth, about how they found out about 9/11, about WMD in iraq, about everything.

and many more. none of that makes you curious?
^this guy made a fortune on 9/11

Yes, all very true. No plane wreckage around the Pentagon, which is now swept under the rug, but was at first readily admitted by broadcasters. Very odd. And a WTC 7 which also collapses even though it wasnt hit. Also very odd.

Plus Bush still going on about how Saddam was a threat. A threat to whom? Maybe a threat to the instability of the region (which Bush & co. want), 99 cent per gallon gasoline prices (oilgarchs want high prices) and the fact that his regime was unsympathetic to Israel (Zion must dominate the region). Still no established link between Saddam and Al Qaeda, yet Bush still makign the rounds on TV programs saying the man was a threat.

Then there are the underground bunkers Rumsfeld claims he knew Osama was hiding in for a fact, yet they also never existed anywhere on this planet.

<scratches> Several coincidences here that must add up to something.

This is just factually incorrect.

An excellent example of someone with no ability to see reality.

All videos from that day clearly show planes hitting buildings and pieces of wreckage flying out the other side. Photos and videos from the Pentagon and PA show debris scattered about. Compressor blades lying about, etc.

What your flaw is that you assume something that is not the case. To you debris should be of XXX size and should be bigger. Since you do not know basic physics, or even what .5 * m * v^2 means, you dismiss all arguments based upon science as opinion.

This is, again, a lack of meta-cognitive ability to know that one does not know what one is talking about.

But since you have massive amounts of self esteem, since you are under 35, since you were mistakenly educated that you know as much as your professors, you see science as opinion, logic as opinion, reason as opinion.

You read all of this evidence on the internet, all of it posted by people just like you. Limited vocabulary, high-self-esteem, suspicious, untrusting, skeptical, paranoid, lacking an education in logic, science, reason, math or physics.

The lack of any math, logic, reason or the scientific method, and the lack of reference to all of those concepts, reveals that you do not know them.

If you did you could pencil in a PE and KE of the jets and you would quickly find out that they did, indeed, have enough joules of energy in their tanks and motion to melt steel or have equivalent energy to a bomb larger than the 1993 attack.

But you can't. Your self esteem exceeds your intellect and education so much that you merely dismiss my using it as nonsense, opinion, or as some conspiracy.

[odbo]

globetrotter is one useful idiot.

[Adama]

during 9/11.. building 7 falling, 2 crashes, 1 in Pennsylvania, 1 into the pentagon, with absolutely no wreckage. the one into the pentagon killing accountants which on 9/10/2001 had rumsfield on tv announcing over 2 trillion dollars was unaccounted for.

after 9/11.. the wars against enemies that don't exist in countries which had nothing to do with it. david silverstein cashing in on his wtc insurance policy. bush, rumsfield, powell, and others lying through their teeth, about how they found out about 9/11, about WMD in iraq, about everything.

and many more. none of that makes you curious?
^this guy made a fortune on 9/11

Yes, all very true. No plane wreckage around the Pentagon, which is now swept under the rug, but was at first readily admitted by broadcasters. Very odd. And a WTC 7 which also collapses even though it wasnt hit. Also very odd.

Plus Bush still going on about how Saddam was a threat. A threat to whom? Maybe a threat to the instability of the region (which Bush & co. want), 99 cent per gallon gasoline prices (oilgarchs want high prices) and the fact that his regime was unsympathetic to Israel (Zion must dominate the region). Still no established link between Saddam and Al Qaeda, yet Bush still makign the rounds on TV programs saying the man was a threat.

Then there are the underground bunkers Rumsfeld claims he knew Osama was hiding in for a fact, yet they also never existed anywhere on this planet.

<scratches> Several coincidences here that must add up to something.

This is just factually incorrect.

An excellent example of someone with no ability to see reality.

All videos from that day clearly show planes hitting buildings and pieces of wreckage flying out the other side. Photos and videos from the Pentagon and PA show debris scattered about. Compressor blades lying about, etc.

What your flaw is that you assume something that is not the case. To you debris should be of XXX size and should be bigger. Since you do not know basic physics, or even what .5 * m * v^2 means, you dismiss all arguments based upon science as opinion.

This is, again, a lack of meta-cognitive ability to know that one does not know what one is talking about.

But since you have massive amounts of self esteem, since you are under 35, since you were mistakenly educated that you know as much as your professors, you see science as opinion, logic as opinion, reason as opinion.

You read all of this evidence on the internet, all of it posted by people just like you. Limited vocabulary, high-self-esteem, suspicious, untrusting, skeptical, paranoid, lacking an education in logic, science, reason, math or physics.

The lack of any math, logic, reason or the scientific method, and the lack of reference to all of those concepts, reveals that you do not know them.

If you did you could pencil in a PE and KE of the jets and you would quickly find out that they did, indeed, have enough joules of energy in their tanks and motion to melt steel or have equivalent energy to a bomb larger than the 1993 attack.

But you can't. Your self esteem exceeds your intellect and education so much that you merely dismiss my using it as nonsense, opinion, or as some conspiracy.

Lee, I see you here telling others that they are factually fallacious. That is fine. But I also see you committing some of the same errors that you accuse others of. You have a much larger case of many of those you listed.

Yes, I am under 35. You are correct, I do not have a degree of physics. I do have a basic understanding. I do not claim that I have high level knowledge of any of this.

Re-read what I said, since you are the genius who chooses to insult others on the internet. I said these things are HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS and VERY COINCIDENTAL. AND the broadcasters did say there was no wreckage. As for whether or not there was actual wreckage, well I wasnt there.

It says something very petty about you also, that you feel you must insult the intelligence of others and who disagree with you on the internet, whether or not you think you are right. That's how children and women argue, not civilized people.

[Adama]

Y
=========================

You guys want to prove to me that you have a clue then answer this:

Why did 911 occur on that day in particular?

My confidence that any of you know, is 0.000%

To reference the American-orchestrated coup overthrowing a leftist government in Chile on 9/11/1973 and installing a right-wing autocrat.

Without taking a position on what went down 9/11/01, I'd think Mossad would be clever enough to throw in that little wrinkle of authenticity, though god knows no one in the Bush administration would have known enough history to have thought of it. Mossad being competent enough to orchestrate the demolition of some big buildings -- conceivably I could buy it. The Bush administration and attendant neocons? No way.

Bush Neocons? Really? They are the same people. Israelis were in the cabinet. Maybe not Mossad, but definitely dual citizens of Israel served in that Presidential Cabinet. There is no essential difference on that level. Most of the advisors are Israeli or Jewish Zionists.

Wrong, again.

9-11 refers to the Siege of Vienna in 1683. You are bogged down in 20th C and Internet-Era History.

This began in 610, but you do not know that so you assume all I post is opinion.

Read your history, for you simply do not know it.

Yes, you are the smart one here, Lee. Good job!!

BTW, if you have such a dislike for CT then why dont you resign from all the Men's rights forums? Or choose to ignore the members who post CT? That is, unless in your life in China you feel you still need to come online to argue with those of us still locked in the Matrix?? Wu has deemed CT acceptable on this forum. So the argument "Go make your own" doesnt hold water here.

[Adama]

globetrotter is one useful idiot.

Yes. I remember this character on the-niceguy actually defending Goldman Sachs stealing money from the citizens of the world, citing that how they manipulate the market is public knowledge. Public knowledge or not, it doesn't make it right.

[globetrotter]

globetrotter is one useful idiot.

Not one sound rebuttal, not one.

Your only reply is some cool, l33t internet meme graphic?

You have lost the debate, yet you don't know it.

[globetrotter]

BTW, if you have such a dislike for CT then why dont you resign from all the Men's rights forums? Or choose to ignore the members who post

CT? That is, unless in your life in China you feel you still need to come online to argue with those of us still locked in the Matrix?? Wu has deemed CT acceptable on this forum. So the argument "Go make your own" doesnt hold water here.

Because your 'reasoning' is precisely what Feminist do.

You use the same lack of logic, the same appeal to emotion.

[globetrotter]

Lee, I see you here telling others that they are factually fallacious. That is fine. But I also see you committing some of the same errors that you accuse others of. You have a much larger case of many of those you listed.

Yes, I am under 35. You are correct, I do not have a degree of physics. I do have a basic understanding. I do not claim that I have high level knowledge of any of this.

Re-read what I said, since you are the genius who chooses to insult others on the internet. I said these things are HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS and VERY COINCIDENTAL. AND the broadcasters did say there was no wreckage. As for whether or not there was actual wreckage, well I wasnt there.

It says something very petty about you also, that you feel you must insult the intelligence of others and who disagree with you on the internet, whether or not you think you are right. That's how children and women argue, not civilized people.

Let me try for the trillionth time to get you to understand.

Your flaws:
1) You invoke logical fallacies repeatedly. Doing so annihilates any points you are attempting to make. I read to the first fallacy, find it, and shitcan the rest of your post because it is now logically worthless.
2) You invoke coincidence as being meaningful and you do so repeatedly. This also annihilates any points you are attempting to make. Coincidence, as well as correlation, is irrelevant and you should know this if you claim to be smart and educated.
3) You engage in terrible debate and logical form. LO's post of a graphic is indicative of this. No logical rebuttal, just snark.

[odbo]

globetrotter is one useful idiot.

Not one sound rebuttal, not one.

Your only reply is some cool, l33t internet meme graphic?

You have lost the debate, yet you don't know it.

assume, thats all you do. when did the debate end or begin? i thought i was talking to a brick wall. notice you've never addressed any of my concerns either, you've only marginalized me as a "conspiracy theorist", repeatedly insulted my intelligence, and reminded me that you'd be dead if it wasn't for the polio vaccine. fine, i've lost the debate, does make your viewpoint any less ridiculous, any less worthless!? does it change lies to fact?

i'm after the truth, lets call it reality, you're on some ego trip after an invisible prize for internet arguments. you're only hurting yourself in the long run by believing the pile of manure that 9/11 was the work of an islamic conspiracy and injecting yourself with mercury is better than getting the flu.

the reason i used "emotion" as you called it, was because the only way to cure brainwash is for the person to see it themselves. i pointed out coincidences which you should find peculiar and further investigate. instead you brush them aside and call them "emotional".

why they can't give us any footage of a plane hitting the pentagon. it's one of the most guarded buildings in the usa and has many security cameras around it. are we supposed to believe a mcdonalds has better and more security cameras than the pentagon?

there's nothing emotional about a 47 story building suddenly collapsing causing you to think maybe there's something wrong here.
or about observing that the hijacker recorded over the radio system had an israeli accent. (and wondering who the attacks benefit)
or comparing various airline crashes you've seen with the one in pennsylvania which miraculously had less wreckage and bodies than a motorcycle accident.

no you can't just put up some equations to bluff your way out and say we simply don't know enough science. if this is a question of science it is in the realm of human manipulation. this is about an error in the process of your thought. there is something very emotional about believing you are smarter than everyone else and that you are never wrong. were you ever wrong? then what makes you so certain you aren't right now? that's basic introspection on the path to truth.

[globetrotter]

globetrotter is one useful idiot.

Not one sound rebuttal, not one.

Your only reply is some cool, l33t internet meme graphic?

You have lost the debate, yet you don't know it.

assume, thats all you do. when did the debate end or begin? i thought i was talking to a brick wall. notice you've never addressed any of my concerns either, you've only marginalized me as a "conspiracy theorist", repeatedly insulted my intelligence, and reminded me that you'd be dead if it wasn't for the polio vaccine. fine, i've lost the debate, does make your viewpoint any less ridiculous, any less worthless!? does it change lies to fact?

i'm after the truth, lets call it reality, you're on some ego trip after an invisible prize for internet arguments. you're only hurting yourself in the long run by believing the pile of manure that 9/11 was the work of an islamic conspiracy and injecting yourself with mercury is better than getting the flu.

the reason i used "emotion" as you called it, was because the only way to cure brainwash is for the person to see it themselves. i pointed out coincidences which you should find peculiar and further investigate. instead you brush them aside and call them "emotional".

why they can't give us any footage of a plane hitting the pentagon. it's one of the most guarded buildings in the usa and has many security cameras around it. are we supposed to believe a mcdonalds has better and more security cameras than the pentagon?

there's nothing emotional about a 47 story building suddenly collapsing causing you to think maybe there's something wrong here.
or about observing that the hijacker recorded over the radio system had an israeli accent. (and wondering who the attacks benefit)
or comparing various airline crashes you've seen with the one in pennsylvania which miraculously had less wreckage and bodies than a motorcycle accident.

no you can't just put up some equations to bluff your way out and say we simply don't know enough science. if this is a question of science it is in the realm of human manipulation. this is about an error in the process of your thought. there is something very emotional about believing you are smarter than everyone else and that you are never wrong. were you ever wrong? then what makes you so certain you aren't right now? that's basic introspection on the path to truth.

I am not on an ego trip.

I addressed your points, and I defeated your argument, but you lack the ability to recognize when this has happened.

there's nothing emotional about a 47 story building suddenly collapsing causing you to think maybe there's something wrong here.

You would only think so if you were ignorant of science, physics and building materials science.

When you toss a few hundred tons of debris on to a building from 53 storeys above, it might cause it to experience structural failure, don't you agree?

Shall I calculate the KE involved and compare it to a bomb blast?

if this is a question of science it is in the realm of human manipulation.

This is your belief system, it is not fact.

g is a known constant. So is c. So is .5mv^2. Your belief that they are alterable simply by human manipulation is a statement of deep ignorance.

Here are a few scientific facts not subject to the realm of human manipulation:

The KE of a 767 or 757, its passengers, crew, cargo and fuel at 500 mph.
The PE of the fuel contained within the 767's tanks.
The specific heat capacity of steel and aluminum.

The above formula and constants have been verified over and over and over again in labs. They are widely know to several significant digits.

[globetrotter]

no you can't just put up some equations to bluff your way out and say we simply don't know enough science. if this is a question of science it is in the realm of human manipulation. this is about an error in the process of your thought. there is something very emotional about believing you are smarter than everyone else and that you are never wrong. were you ever wrong? then what makes you so certain you aren't right now? that's basic introspection on the path to truth.

LinuxOnly I am wrong often.

However wrt to you, Adama and Winston in this thread I am not wrong.

I don't believe that I am smarter than everyone else. I merely know that I am correct and you are wrong.

You continually dismiss evidence that you don't wish to acknowledge. Read up thread where I posted that the reason I disagree is that back in 2002 I began to read ideas like yours, I thought about them for a second, realized the flaws, and then went to the videos and blogs and websites and fora and read your alleged proof.

Each time, there they were. The distortions, the errors, the lack of any scientific method, the illogical prose, the lack of logical debate.

I have read all of your proof, I know the websites, but it is all simply wrong.