See other Immigration Articles
Title: Dengue fever outbreak in Mexico causing concern in Texas
Source:
KENS 5 Eyewitness News
URL Source: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/me ... 1805.kens.dengue.88b9f586.html
Published: Aug 19, 2005
Author: Angela Kocherga
Post Date: 2005-08-19 00:34:51 by robin
Keywords: outbreak, causing, concern
Views: 218
Comments: 20
Angela Kocherga An outbreak of dengue fever in Mexico has health officials here in Texas keeping a watchful eye across the border. More than 100 people have been infected in the southern state of Morelos. Several people have the hemorrhagic strain of the disease that causes bleeding and, if untreated, possibly death. To prevent the spread of the disease, health workers need to enlist the help of the residents. Oswaldo Zambrano, dengue fever prevention program director, says the enemy lives among them. He warns residents that they are providing a safe haven for the mosquitoes that carry dengue fever. Many homes have standing water, which provides a perfect breeding ground for infected mosquitoes. A chemical that is safe for human and animal consumption must be mixed into the water to prevent new infestations. The movement of people poses another challenge. If someone from an area where there's been an outbreak of dengue fever travels to another place, that person can be bitten by mosquitoes in the new location and the infection will spread. Thus, it is critical to control the disease in every region of Mexico and reach every home during the rainy season. And if you're planning a trip to an area of Mexico where there's outbreak, use mosquito repellant.
KENS 5 Eyewitness News
Submit feedback to Angela To report a news tip, press #5 on your Cingular phone. More coverage Center for Disease Control
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Red Jones, robin (#0)
At the risk of hijacking robin's thread (please forgive me), I made the point on another thread: Well, dengue is contagious and spreads among squalor. So, robin's article reports: And if years from now we find that chemical wasn't as safe as scientists thought, will the Mexican and Texan health officials be guilty of mass murder, or only Israeli's if they use use it also?
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
Fartwind, if Sharon ever came to a sudden halt your face would cram halfway up his ass.
This subliminal advertising is brought to you by The HonkeyMotherFucker Corporation for Internet Blogging ©2000-2010 all rights reserved worldwide
Ah, the ad hominem attack, last refuge of the bankrupt argument.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
Nah, more like a simple observation. You're not looking for valid argument. You're looking for yes-men like your creed insists on. I've argued you into corners and you know it. Just search comments from "Lebowski" to "wind" if you need a refresher.
This subliminal advertising is brought to you by The HonkeyMotherFucker Corporation for Internet Blogging ©2000-2010 all rights reserved worldwide
lol - yeah, with you leading the way into those corners everytime. Here's your most recent: http://www.freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=6940&Disp=67#C67 Lurkers can back track from there
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
http://www.freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=6940&Disp=67#C67 Lurkers can back track from there Thanks for bringing that up. You never did explain why I should be impressed with Dr. Schroeder's skills at division. Following speculation that the universe is X amount of years old, extrapolate a number for each of the six days in creation and viola they all add up. I can do it too! More importantly, since you're so good at timelines why did dinosaurs and other featherless bipedal hominids precede man on this earth already equipped mentally any physically to be mean to each other? Doesn't that pretty much blow the concept of original sin to shit? Or has the Asiatic sky-emperor and son that you debase yourself before just not sat down in their rightful place in history next to Osiris and Horus?
This subliminal advertising is brought to you by The HonkeyMotherFucker Corporation for Internet Blogging ©2000-2010 all rights reserved worldwide
lol - that would be because he didn't use division, though his math was laid out in front of you, you didn't understand it. And now I'm done hijacking robin's thread.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
I know the Hebrew (Dr. Schroeder is an Orthodox) mind as well as anyone. Their science always starts out with a conclusion and works it's way backwards. From your own post: The calculations come out to be as follows: The first of the Biblical days lasted 24 hours, viewed from the "beginning of time perspective." But the duration from our perspective was 8 billion years. The second day, from the Bible's perspective lasted 24 hours. From our perspective it lasted half of the previous day, 4 billion years. The third 24 hour day also included half of the previous day, 2 billion years. The fourth 24 hour day -- one billion years. The fifth 24 hour day -- one-half billion years. The sixth 24 hour day -- one-quarter billion years. When you add up the Six Days, you get the age of the universe at 15 and 3/4 billion years. The same as modern cosmology. Is it by chance? Forward: And now I'm done hijacking robin's thread. What scared you away Fartwind? The dinosaur question? What does Dr.Schroeder have to say about that?
This subliminal advertising is brought to you by The HonkeyMotherFucker Corporation for Internet Blogging ©2000-2010 all rights reserved worldwide
What you see were the results of Dr.Schroeder's "calculations", the answers. The math, as previously explained repeatedly to you which you still don't seem to get, were Einstein's relativistic time dilation between two accelerating reference frames. Essentially the formula is: I'll leave it to you now to show us all the "division".
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
Oh this is great. I've read also that West Nile virus was brought here through the immigrant population. Who needs to go to Mexico? It's surrounding us.
They're bringing in bedbugs too.
Euw.. although it's said they dont carry disease. Can we be so sure? These bugs prey on bats too. And I wonder if any real research has been done on this? I'll have to do a search.. gee thanks :P {{shudder}}
Okay surely. Let's say the 15-odd billions years isn't confirmed, and it really isn't. After all they made thousands of scientifically based guesses as to the Earth's age before finding out for (relative) certain. Let's say a conclusive piece of evidence comes along and nearly doubles the current 15 billion years of the universe. Humor me here, say in the future it is definitively dated at 30-odd billion. Dr. Schroeder can say: Day 1 - 16 Billion years Day 2 - 8 Billion Years Day 3 - 4 billion years Day 4 - 2 billion Day 5 - 1 billion Day 6 - 1 half-billion Gee wasn't that neat? It all adds up. Now if I may pose a question. God did everything perfectly relative to making mankind, right. No room for improvement. Far be it from a invisible vindictive perfectionist to leave his work up to outside factors like environment. So how come in the span of only 140,000 years the three races: mongoloid, caucaziod and negroid evolved to suit their respective climates and diets? The ones in the North took up fair skin, and body hair to compensate for the lack of sun. The ones in the East lost body hair and took up slanted eyes to contend with their windswept plains. The ones in the South have darkened skin and flat noses to reduce exposure to the sun. That's evolution, Sparky. And if such differences can come through evolution in merely 140,000 years then what can happen given billions? And where to all the other humaniod dead-ends whose remains are strewn about the fossil record play into the creation story? They're forgotten or just not worth mentioning?
This subliminal advertising is brought to you by The HonkeyMotherFucker Corporation for Internet Blogging ©2000-2010 all rights reserved worldwide
lol - not hardly. Humoring you then (one last time), assuming an age of the universe of 30B years, you have yet to properly apply Einstein's relativistic time dilation formula. The formula derives a time T for the object reference frame given a velocity of expansion v for time t in the inertial frame. The age of the universe does not enter into the formula - that was a false assumption on your part - but rather the age(s) of the universe is derived from the formula. What does enter into the formula is the velocity of expansion which Dr. Schroeder dervied from the expansion rate quoted in his article: Using the velocities v there from and six Genesis time periods t (inertial reference frame) of 24 hours each, the formula then yielded the 6 object reference frame ages shown under "The calculations come out to be as follows: Dr. Schroeder did not 'work backwards' from 15B years, he worked forward from the expansion rate of the universe and six 24 hour times periods and the result closely corresponds to the observed age of the universe. And if you wish to quibble about the age of the universe, you can contact the scientists I listed at http://www.freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=6940&Disp=65#C65 and pass on to them your corrections. I'm sure the depth of your understanding will compel them to reconsider their findings. You, OTOH, merely fudged your results to suit your theory - tres' highschool labwork, no? So, even humoring you, No. All you did was simplistically double the ages Dr. Schroeder already derived (which you could not have done for yourself - you depended on his work), added them up and rounded off to 30B years and then pretended to use that as your starting point. 'Course you had no choice really because you didn't understand how Dr. Schroeder obtained the changing durations of the ages in the first place, and unless you maintained a linear scale up, you could not get answers that looked 'plausible' (well, plausible to you anyway). You don't seem to know the Hebrew mind as well as you boasted. Dr. Schroeder actually did his own work under real cosmological limits to derive an age that approximates observations. Whereas all you did was copy his answers to your own paper, customize them without a clue as to what you were doing, and turned it in expecting a passing grade. How ya like that corner now? BTW, for extra credit to redeem yourself, there are 3 errors in the formula as I erroneously stated it in my post #9, errors which you did not recognize or understand at this point. What are they? (The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
I wasn't propounding a theory I was showing how one can work backwards from a predetermined conclusion. Like how predictions made in the 6th century can impress those who believe they were written in the 2nd. Including the use of languages not in use at the time (Greek) . (In case you want to know, this exponential rate of expansion has a specific number averaged at 10 to the 12th power. That is in fact the temperature of quark confinement, when matter freezes out of the energy: 10.9 times 10 to the 12th power Kelvin degrees divided by (or the ratio to) the temperature of the universe today, 2.73 degrees. That's the initial ratio which changes exponentially as the universe expands.) It's funny how you try to legitimize the creation with scientific analysis but revert to reasoning like a child when it comes to explaining the talking animals or 900 year old living men or why the remenants of evoloution are present in our bodies, ie. a tailbone, body hair, an appendix, previously elongated jawbones which cause wisdom teeth to grow in impacted. BTW, for extra credit to redeem yourself, there are 3 errors in the formula as I erroneously stated it in my post #9, errors which you did not recognize or understand at this point. What are they? I'm not playing this on your terms. You have repeatedly ducked my questions, which if someone could answer to my satisfaction would have me never question the faith again. How hard is that?
This subliminal advertising is brought to you by The HonkeyMotherFucker Corporation for Internet Blogging ©2000-2010 all rights reserved worldwide
Oh please. Go back and count the number of questions I did answer - everyone of them on the prior thread. Your memory is as poor as your reasoning. And why bother to take the time I have to answer them? Answering them has not improved your civility, honesty, comprehension or memory one wit. There comes a point, long since reached with you, of casting pearls before swine. Whether you agree or disagree, you aren't interested in understanding the answers given - you've amply demonstrated that - no, you are only intersted in deriding and ridiculing - target practice. Well, knock yourself out - it's about all you seem capable of.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
I did answer - everyone of them on the prior thread. Your memory is as poor as your reasoning. That's Bulltrace21230. I got answers like "uh because the geological studies don't understand God's wisdom yet." And you have no problem reiterating Schroeders bunk till the Miss Parkers come home, but you shy away from the tough ones. Maybe you need Schroeder to theorize on that before you can answer? you've amply demonstrated that - no, you are only intersted in deriding and ridiculing Pot-kettle. I've seen 3 or 4 other 4um posters, during the course of our discussions call you onto the carpet for your abrasive, unchristian attitude. But I guess that's why a large portion of you are self-righteous corn holes. I wonder if being Christian and also prodigiously narcissistic is tantamount to serving two masters. Not my dilemma.
This subliminal advertising is brought to you by The HonkeyMotherFucker Corporation for Internet Blogging ©2000-2010 all rights reserved worldwide
Whereas my exact words in post #54 were: The lies are yours (yet again). I answered your questions, you went and searched and didn't find any unaswered, did you, and so you made one up. Only RickyJ and also for my response to your unprovoked derision and ridicule. Get over it. My sarcasm and exposure of your inane arguments pales in comparison to your ad hominems and vulgarity. And there's the ad hominem yet again. The bankrupt argument you started this thread with.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
Why is our DNA 98% identical to chimpanzees instead of say, lobsters? Why do we share many commonalities with the lower forms? We were made in God's image, right? Does he have a tailbone and hair on his underparts too, or just a prolific sense of humor? You also grant that dinosaurs preceded man, yes? But wait, I thought we were supposed to be wards of the Earth, master of the beasts? How then could we be masters of beasts that tower over us and could consume us in one fell swoop? And why were they already killing each other when Adam and Eve hadn't corrupted anything yet? And if they hadn't corrupted everything humans would just be ignorant non-free-will-having automatons and where would Yahweh get those burnt altar sacrifices he's known (Leviticus) to like? BTW I'd wager you're behind on those. And there's two reasons to ad hom. One is a bankrupt argument and the other is if one happens to be arguing with a douchewagon. I'm ad homming for the latter reason.
This subliminal advertising is brought to you by The HonkeyMotherFucker Corporation for Internet Blogging ©2000-2010 all rights reserved worldwide
And when you can get a civil (and honest) hand on your keyboard, I might answer. Until then feel free to post all the ad hominems you want.
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
they had a contagious disease resulting from their prior squalid living conditions (not unlike the squalid living conditions in other countries that today give rise to other diseases).
A chemical that is safe for human and animal consumption must be mixed into the water to prevent new infestations.
#2. To: Starwind (#1)
will the Mexican and Texan health officials be guilty of mass murder, or only Israeli's if they use use it also?
#3. To: Dude Lebowski (#2)
>> Fartwind, if Sharon ever came to a sudden halt your face would cram halfway up his ass.
#4. To: Starwind (#3)
Ah, the ad hominem attack, last refuge of the bankrupt argument.
#5. To: Dude Lebowski (#4)
I've argued you into corners and you know it.
#6. To: Starwind (#5)
Here's your most recent:
#7. To: Dude Lebowski (#6)
You never did explain why I should be impressed with Dr. Schroeder's skills at division.
#8. To: Starwind (#7)
lol - that would be because he didn't use division, though his math was laid out in front of you, you didn't understand it.
#9. To: Dude Lebowski (#8)
The calculations come out to be as follows:
T1 - T2 = ( t1 - t2 ) [1 - (v2/c2)].05
Dr. Schroeder plugged in his understanding of the velocity v at given delta's of time t for the inertial reference frame and computed the resulting delta's of time T you see for the object reference frame.
#10. To: robin (#0)
if you're planning a trip to an area of Mexico where there's outbreak, use mosquito repellant
#11. To: Zipporah (#10)
#12. To: Grumble Jones (#11)
They're bringing in bedbugs too.
#13. To: Starwind (#9)
I'll leave it to you now to show us all the "division".
#14. To: Dude Lebowski (#13)
Gee wasn't that neat? It all adds up.
(In case you want to know, this exponential rate of expansion has a specific number averaged at 10 to the 12th power. That is in fact the temperature of quark confinement, when matter freezes out of the energy: 10.9 times 10 to the 12th power Kelvin degrees divided by (or the ratio to) the temperature of the universe today, 2.73 degrees. That's the initial ratio which changes exponentially as the universe expands.)
#15. To: Starwind (#14)
#16. To: Dude Lebowski (#15)
I was showing how one can work backwards from a predetermined conclusion.
Sheesh you are dense! Yes I know that's what you did. The problem is you seemingly lack the cognitive skills to understand that is not what Dr. Schroeder did, and I'm outta patience trying to 'splain it further. You have repeatedly ducked my questions, which if someone could answer to my satisfaction would have me never question the faith again. How hard is that?
#17. To: Starwind (#16)
#18. To: Dude Lebowski (#17)
I got answers like "uh because the geological studies don't understand God's wisdom yet."
Consequently, there is no conflict between the cosmological age of the universe and the biblical age of the creation. Consequently there is ample time for the development of the geologically and biologically old specimens that we observe on the earth. Do I agree we (humans) evolved from apes, no. But I do agree speciation took place over millions of years. Do I agree we (humans) are as old as Neanderthals and other hominids (Homo erectus, Homo antecessor, Homo heidelbergensis and Homo rhodesensis)? No. But science hasn't yet proven that we are their genetic evolutionary descendants, either.
I've seen 3 or 4 other 4um posters, during the course of our discussions call you onto the carpet for your abrasive, unchristian attitude.
But I guess that's why a large portion of you are self-righteous corn holes.
#19. To: Starwind (#18)
Consequently, there is no conflict between the cosmological age of the universe and the biblical age of the creation. Consequently there is ample time for the development of the geologically and biologically old specimens that we observe on the earth. Do I agree we (humans) evolved from apes, no. But I do agree speciation took place over millions of years. Do I agree we (humans) are as old as Neanderthals and other hominids (Homo erectus, Homo antecessor, Homo heidelbergensis and Homo rhodesensis)? No. But science hasn't yet proven that we are their genetic evolutionary descendants, either.
#20. To: Dude Lebowski (#19)
And there's two reasons to ad hom. One is a bankrupt argument and the other is if one happens to be arguing with a douchewagon. I'm ad homming for the latter reason.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest