Search results

You don't like those things why? Name scary? All you are saying is, despite the scientific knowledge, facts and evidence, you assume an ignorance about chemicals and how they are applied will give you a better understanding. pfft. Don't be so pathetic. It is completely obvious these are not...

The Indiana Law is not the same as RFRA 1993 or pretty much any other state's law. Indiana Law is based on RFRA 1993 but has additional provisions which allow free exercise of religion rights to any corporation, business or groups, irrespective of their religious beliefs . RFRA does not do...

You're wrong as DBP and Ricter point out. It's different to other laws in its construct by allowing for discrimination against others. All they need do is word it better so that there cannot be room for that. Other states have.

Oh, is it really?... So it's actually NOT about the ingredients themselves. Not about what they are. Not that they are "foreign substance", as you went ahead with vaccination. But rather it's about the amount and the combination. That much being obvious all along except to...

Your kid got the ingredients. He was vaccinated. So it's definitely not about the ingredients you idiot.. YOU just decided those ingredients, should not be given in combination contrary to the science. The same science which provides all the knowledge to do with vaccination in the first place...

You're not making any sense so I suppose nothing unusual there. It's not about the ingredients you goof, you have decided to vaccinate your child. It is about the ignorance you display to do with combined vaccines. Whatever, keep making shit up so your ego can play at being a smart ass...

Fact is that, combined vaccine is still a tiny drop in the ocean when compared to the bombardment your brat's immune system ordinarily faces every day. You simply put it at some risk for longer by delaying between vaccines. Your choice, your paranoia, your conspiracy theory.

That's the thing. The facts don't belong to me or you and you're arguing against them. The wingnut paranoia informing you that I'm trying to tell you what to do with your kids, will also be driving your ignorance and stopping you educating yourself to their benefit.

Good point. Going by the kind of posts he makes here, the kid is going to be more at risk from his dumb ignorance than a combination vaccine.

.....so fck the facts.

Your concerns will be from ignorance of the fact that a babies and children receive massive amounts of mixed immunological challenges every day from thousands of different kinds of bacteria breathed in and from taking food. 10 vaccine shots at once is nothing. They are extremely mild in...

...just the irony really.

Let's put it down to you can't read then:rolleyes:

Fasting? I didn't mention it. I'll forgive your lack of comprehension.:p

Perhaps In the meantime you could address why... ...your alternative at the extreme.... ..does not fit with the recommendation you posted. Is it that anti-AGW proponents are content to set up any kind of response, even strawmen like that, no matter how transparent it clearly is?

Lent. Lol. Ah I forget.The wooly pious hypocrisy of the religious. Something is deemed sinful or bad enough to be given up for 40 days , should surely be abstained from permanently. At least that would appear to be a more honest way of going about things. Jem's posts are certainly bad, not to...

Note to self. Remember to go whining to Magna next time Jem repeat posts that Susskind vid that doesn't even say what he also keeps repeating it does for the fkn ten thousandth and infinite'umth time.:rolleyes:

Anyone genuinely interested in the debate understands that is a false dichotomy which won't alter the facts and the science which does predict problems.

Predicted and confirmed scientifically. Check. Predicted and confirmed scientifically. Check ...and if it doesn't? It is predicted scientifically there would be serious problems. Under debate surely is why would anyone even think of taking such a ridiculous gamble just because the final half...

Apparently the anti-AGW argument boils down to - scientific papers are wrong, so here's a scientific paper to say scientific papers are wrong. Anti-AGW papers are not considered capable of being faulty, whilst all AGW science is. That's just the lack of positive skeptisim known as denial.