See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: How Not To Argue That We’re Running Out Of Oil
Source:
Council on Foreign Relations
URL Source: http://blogs.cfr.org/levi/2012/01/2 ... -that-were-running-out-of-oil/
Published: Jan 28, 2012
Author: Michael Levi
Post Date: 2012-01-28 12:06:03 by lead.and.lag
Keywords: None
Views: 3742
Comments: 257
you can read this article here at the CFR site. the author, Michael Levi, is the David M. Rubenstein Senior Fellow for Energy and the Environment at the CFR, and his artticle is a mixture of disinformation, bad metaphors, and haywire logic. his argument, although it's kinda hard to pin down, seems to be: party on, dudes, and dont worry about oil. my comments, which are languishing, and most likey will die, in "awaiting moderation" limbo, go like this... does this mean that the PNAC/AEI/exxon people didnt have to do 9/11 in response to peak oil? 3000 american lives, countless lives elsewhere… wasted, because nobody saw shale oil coming. what a tragedy." and... http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/1215/pnacprogress6272011.jpg this article is being discussed at theoildrum, despite attempts to derail it to a discussion of newt's moonbase scheme. "oh, man…
"here’s a map PNAC’s efforts in response to their misperceptions of peak oil.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 84.
#1. To: lead.and.lag (#0)
Kikes. That says it all.
yup, they gotta blow smoke in case people start connecting the dots... good thing to blow a little smoke back at them, once in a while... but i got to admit i'm suruprised that the CFR, as of right now, posted that first comment i made... not the map, though... that's getting a little too close to home.
If it wasn't for us being over in the ME in the fist place, due to the oil, israel would be screwed. They'd have been pushed into the Med to drown like the rats they are, years ago. They have to keep us involved. Small wonder that kikes write things like this. BTW, I am only going off your interpretation of the article. I didn't read it. I didn't have to.
We are not in the Middle East due to the oil. The oil is purely secondary and is important only in that excessive oil production lowers the profit margins of the major oil companies, and provides the income for Arab countries to modernize. No, the reason we are in the Middle East is to prevent Arab countries from modernizing. Pooooooooooooooor little Israel quakes in their boots at the mere though of an educated and organized Arab world. That is the reason Iraq and Libya were taken down as well as the current assaults on Syria and Iran (the Israeli destruction of Lebanese infrastructure is another). Israel sees its geopolitical and regional dominance at its height by keeping their neighbors mired in the 11th century of Muslim Fundamentalism. Iraq and Libya had a couple of things in common: They were pluralistic and granted full rights to women, and they were rapidly modernizing and spending their oil money on building up infrastructure and human capital i.e., education. Notice in post war Iraq and present day Iran the murder of intellectuals and the well educated - particularly scientists and engineers. And the most important point tying them together is that none of them had/have a ROTHSCHILD CONTROLLED Central Bank. Even worse Ghadaffi was working to create an African monetary union which would have disempowered Rothschild control through much of Africa. Trying to spin this as about "Oil" when oil is abundant and readily available is flat bullshit - it is misdirection and blowing smoke up people's asses. It is a classic disinformation technique - spin the available evidence toward a "plausible" but false alternative. Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation 15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place. Example: 'The cargo door failed on Flight 800 and caused a catastrophic breakup which ruptured the fuel tank and caused it to explode.' Proper response: The best definitive example of avoiding issues by this technique is, perhaps, Arlan Specter's Magic Bullet from the Warren Report. This was eloquently defeated in court but media blindly accepted it without challenge. Thus rewarded, disinformationalists do not shrink from its application, even though today, thanks in part to the movie, JFK, most Americans do now understand it was fabricated nonsense. Thus the defense which works best may actually be to cite the Magic Bullet. 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imaginative twisting of facts rivals that of Arlan Specter's Magic Bullet in the Warren Report. We all know why the impossible magic bullet was invented. You invent a cargo door problem when there has been not one shred of evidence from the crash investigation to support it, and in fact, actual photos of the cargo door hinges and locks disprove you. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 15 - fit facts to an alternate conclusion)?' 20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
I dont give 2 shits if you agree with me or not. Trying to spin this as about "Oil" when oil is abundant and readily available is flat bullshit - it is misdirection and blowing smoke up people's asses. It is a classic disinformation technique - spin the available evidence toward a "plausible" but false alternative. Even though I dont care what you think, I thought that was funny. I know it wasn't intentionally funny, and that makes it even more funny. having the kikes in 'israel' gives us a foothold in the ME, AND it also gives the kikes a lot of leverage in getting what they want. And that is all about oil. Unless, it's all about finding sand for the kids sandboxes.
How can it be all about oil when producing states are more than anxious to sell it as a source of much-needed income and also know that American exploration and drilling technology is the best in the world? Iran, for example would love to be selling oil but is constrained from doing so by crazy Jews forcing America to prevent sales through sanctions orchestrated by same crazy zios. In return for oil Iran could use refinery technologies, aircraft and other machine parts from US, an arrangement which would provide much needed jobs for Americans. The oil angle dates back to outdated thinking when everyone thought it should remain at $3/bl. Oil companies subsequently discovered they could become enormously richer with $50 and $100/bl oil with virtually no effect on automobile use.
a couple things, here... first, america was built to accommodate the car, so even though mileage driven has been dropping, we're getting pretty close to minimum possible, given that cars are a necessity, at least the way things are set up now. then there's the cost of getting the crude... a new semisubmersible like the globwater horizontal or whatever might cost $500 million dollars, and the cost of operating it is horrific, seeing as how it might be drilling 200 miles offshore in 10,000 feet of water. ...this compared to the old wells that, when discovered, blew out tens of thousands of barrels a day, on dry land, with the convenience and consequent low expense that implies. then you've got the fact that we've apparently discovered all the huge fields like ghawar, cantarell, da qing, etc... compared to the big old giants, the new discoveries are dribs and drabs. then you got a production decline rate in the old fields, maybe 4-6% a year. then you got rising global competition for the remaining oil, as china industrializes to defend itself from israeli america, and india in its eternal paranoia about china, attempts to keep up by allying itself (temporarily?) with the neocons. what all this adds up to is flat global production of crude oil and condensate (the liquid stuff that comes out of the ground at the wellhead) since late 2004, despite horrendous increases in price and a doubling of drills working since 2001. so until production starts picking up, we have to assume that we've reached peak oil... at least temporarily... and judging from how hard people have been looking for oil since american production peaked in 1970, we're simply not gonna find replacements for those big old giants that have been producing so long, and it's likely that this is it, this is the peak. and that explains exxon's alliance with the AEI, which spawned PNAC, which admitted it needed a "new pearl harbor" to rally support for its project to achieve "benevolent global hegemony" by controlling energy supplies. and we all know by now, or should know, that the AEI is the american wing of the likud party of israel.
...this compared to the old wells that, when discovered, blew out tens of thousands of barrels a day, on dry land, with the convenience and consequent low expense that implies. But it's a conspiracy! The Satanic Illuminati Bohemia Grove Inc is behind it! We're "floating" on oil. OI said so, so it must be true. (he is so smart). So to hell with offshore drilling. Just grab a shovel and start digging. There is no shortage of oil, just as there is no shortage of stupidity.
Who says there's a shortage of oil?
Would you go to the expense and trouble of offshore drilling if you didn't have to? How about shale deposits? I'm no expert by any means, but I know this is not an efficient way to get oil. THey are starting to grasp at straws. Before long, they will be fighting over those straws. Or perhaps that is what they are fighting over now. I think that is more likely. What else are we doing over there? What's the mission? Tell me, because fuck if I know.
How about shale deposits? I'm no expert by any means, but I know this is not an efficient way to get oil. Good points. I don't really know the answers and could look for them but don't really care at this moment. Thing is I don't believe what "they" say, so if they say there's a shortage of oil I'm inclined to disbelieve them. Also, it doesn't make sense that oil is made of fossils. I seriously doubt there were that many dead creatures to make that much oil. The theory of abiotic oil seems far more likely.
It provides support to the illusion that oil is scarce, and provides justification for higher prices. People assume, wrongly, that the operations are solely and only for money. The Alpha Psychotics have more money than they could ever spend rationally. What they are interested in is power and total control.
People assume, wrongly, that the operations are solely and only for money. The Alpha Psychotics have more money than they could ever spend rationally. What they are interested in is power and total control. Illusion? LOL! Yeah, it's all a huge conspiracy. Everyone is in on it. And WTF is an "alpha psychotic"? You just made that term up. Trying to sound smart again, I see. You fail, again. But it would make a great band name.
People assume, wrongly, that the operations are solely and only for money. The Alpha Psychotics have more money than they could ever spend rationally. What they are interested in is power and total control. Illusion? LOL! Yeah, it's all a huge conspiracy. Everyone is in on it. And WTF is an "alpha psychotic"? You just made that term up. Trying to sound smart again, I see. You fail, again. But it would make a great band name. I am glad to see you are as amused as if you were in your right mind. Common disinformation ploy - try to ridicule a contention you cannot disprove by inflating it and turning it into a Strawman Argument. Because a lot of people believe something does not mean they are conspirators and neither does it make it true. Commonly held false truths are easy to propagate as you so ably demonstrate. Hitler had a name for as did Joseph Goebbels i.e., "the big lie". Repeat a lie often enough and people begin to believe it. As well commonly held theories fall under the weight of accumulated contradictory observations. For example And so Dead Dinosaurs was the latest and greatest theory of oil creation at the end of the 19th Century. So, one can most reasonably conclude that what we are seeing in the continued belief in a decrepit theory is as Thomas Kuhn pointed out in "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" that the old school will hold onto discredited theories unto death since they could not possibly have spent their entire life forwarding a now disproven theory. That others, with baser motives, have simply sought to further the conventional wisdom because it accrued to their benefit and the benefit of their plans is nothing new, and it does not require more than a handful to continue to propagate the lie. The late Arthur C. Clarke summarized it thusly: CLARKE'S LAW OF REVOLUTIONARY IDEAS: As for the term "Alpha Psychotic" - yes it is of my own coinage. Rather apt I think. It fits our top dog Psychotics to a "t". Oh, and I didn't "just" invent it - I've been using it for several years now. As for your usual lame attempt to attack me:
That just goes to show that you don't learn. Do you know that there is a difference between psychotics and psychopaths/sociopaths? No? Well, now you know. Please make a note of it. I don't want to have to repeat myself. So not only did you make up the term, you make up an inaccurate term. That was pretty stupid of you. Now, about those vaccines? I don't give a fuck what Clark says about anything. That is a blatant yet wordy attempt to distract. I guess you think that your ideas are "revolutionary" ideas that will be accepted as truth. Not likely. About those vaccines? What sayest thou?
Why should things change now? After all you have your stock talking points that you repeat, in different forms, over, and over, and over, and over again. But at least you are consistent - consistently wrong. Did you know that there is a difference between black and white? I believe I used the term Psychotic - however the behavior of the Alpha Psychotic Banksters, Psychiatrists, and many of their minions (not mentioning anyone in particular mind you) are also sociopathic in their behavior. However, Psychiatric terms are often vague and subjective labels which blend one into another. So, in the case of our Vearless Leahders both terms are descriptive of their behavior as their sociopathy flows out of their psychosis. They could also be named megalomaniacs as well, or if you prefer simpler teminology - monsters - wannabe Hannibal Lectres. As for vaccines: http://www.naturalnews.com/News_000647_Bayer_vaccines_HIV.html Once again your talking points book has betrayed you:
I can see that you still don't know what you are talking about. Perhaps you should just call them "strange". I bet you know what that means. If not, let me know and I'll try and explain it to you. http://www.naturalnews.com/News_000647_Bayer_vaccines_HIV.html Blah blah blah. I already said that I don't know of any 100% safe medical procedures. Even placebos have a risk of choking on the tablets. So you take the tiny number medical hard cases and try to turn them into huge typical examples. You're not alone, others do that too, when they have an agenda they are pushing. I'd say that chances are, you're alive today because of these evil vaccines.
No one here has ever contended that there are any 100% safe procedures. However, the question was the efficacy and safety of vaccines, and there is a growing body of evidence which strongly suggests that they have been misrepresented by people with other agendas such as greed, and reducing the population. This IS science. Either the evidence is there to support them, and to discredit the evidence against or there is not. Given that the increasing body of evidence supports my position from a factual, empirical and clinical, point of view all you can do is your usual sputter and throw hissy fits attempting to distract from the fact that you cannot support your position and that it is nothing more than cut and paste arguments, with a little gratuitous nastiness thrown in, from your talking points. You don't think you regurgitate, and it beginning to smell awfully bad. And your evidence and support for this unsupported assertion is? I didn't think so. You say lots of things without anything to back them. So, this one is different from the last 10,000 how? You can gnash your teeth and stamp your feet all you want. Please feel free. I believe in freedom - even in your right to spout the same repetitive unsupported illogic over, and over, and over, and over, and over again. However, one definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.
Unmitigated bullshit. Vaccines are common. Why are we not dropping like flies in a blizzard? I'll tell you why. It is because the danger is minimal, next to the risk of contracting these diseases. That's why. There is no such evidence that you claim. None. All you have are the ravings of idiots. And believing them makes you an idiot. I bet you have had the advantage of being vaccinated. You got yours but if you got your way, everyone else would be SOL. It's evident that you want them to die of these diseases. There is no other way to put it. It is you that is the psychopath. You would deny others the protection that you enjoy. I told you I had you pegged. You're a psychopath.
LOGICAL FALLACY ALERT! LOGICAL FALLACY ALERT! WARNING! WARNING! LOGICAL FALLACY ALERT! As well your two statements are not logically connected i.e., one does not imply the other nor does either support the other. The statement "Vaccines are common" proves nothing. It is an assertion of a fact which can be true or not true but in and of itself it proves nothing as regards the efficacy of vaccines. Example: "Rain is common. Why are we not all drowning?" The preceding illustrates the fallacy of the alleged argument. The second statement is fallacious as it begs the question and includes an implied premise which is false. The implied effect is, by implication, limited only to death as a consequential adverse side effect of toxic vaccines when there is in fact quite a few other observed side effects and the side effects are dependent upon the vaccine and whatever contaminants may be included in the vaccine. For example Mercury used as a preservative may not cause immediate death but the effects of Mercury poisoning are well known - brain damage being one of the primary effects - which is where the term "Mad as Hatter" comes from as felt hats were, in prior days, blocked using mercury as a wetting agent and over time Hatters acquired sufficient brain damage to make them appear quite mad to others. Kidney disease is a noted side effect of Flu Vaccines and yet is not immediately deadly, but in the long run it degrades quality of life and will shorten a person's life. Not all vaccine side effects are immediately deadly and neither have the manufacturers done any long term studies. It is just "show me the money". Vaccines are big business and the numbers of vaccines "reccomended" has increased almost exponentially. As well many vaccines are given to babies who do not yet have a developed immune system and thus the immunological reaction that the vaccine is supposed to create, based upon the immunological response, is physically impossible. One that has received a lot of attention over the last few years, because of the numbers of deaths and neurological disorders following and consequent to administration of the HPV Vaccine (Gardasil) has been very marked and noted despite attempts to cover it up. The last count I was aware of 47 girls had died following the administration of the Gardasil vaccine and an unknown number of others have suffered severe neurological problems. The upshot is that your implied premise that the only adverse outcome is death is proven to be the fallacious assumption it is. The following article provides a lot more background in support of my arguments: (NaturalNews) A lot happened in the vaccine industry in 2011 -- a year of accelerating change and increased awareness among the people. One of the big realizations that hit home in 2011 is that vaccines are far more dangerous than most people previously thought, and even conventional scientists are starting to question the over-vaccination of infants and children. Fallacies violated: Also we have: Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation Again completely divorced from logic or reason. Oh, do wipe the drool from your chin it's bad for the carpet and leaves ugly stains. Again an implied premise i.e., that getting vaccinated is an advantage. That is proven by no evidence which you have provided to support your assertion. And again you resort to Argumentum Ad Hominem. Since you cannot support your foam flecked spittle laced non-arguments, which are logically false, you resort to name calling. Does your mother really wear combat boots? Again Argumentum Ad Hominem. Since there is nothing in your argument which is logically sound and contains nothing more the drooling slack jawed invective - why did you bother. Oh, I forgot - it's a paycheck.
#86. To: Original_Intent (#84)
(Edited)
OK, psycho, let's start from the top. #1 - Japanese children die from vaccines Yet more evidence emerges of the deadly side effects of vaccines: http://www.naturalnews.com/031616_vaccines_Japan.html "Japan halts vaccines from Pfizer, Sanofi after deaths of four children " OK, 4 kids died. Why did they die? The article doesn't say. That article doesn't say much at all. It gives a headline to catch ones initial attention, but it says almost nothing at all to explain that headline. It's just a rambling mess. But the article says this: "What's clear from all this is that vaccines are great at one thing: Population control." Clear? Only to a madman. That website is worthless. They're just as psycho as you are. It is people like you that demand population control, by refusing people vaccines. You want to be a mass murderer, but you don't want to get your hands dirty. If you're not a kike, you sure do act like one.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest..Levi,... Rubenstein
#2. To: PSUSA2 (#1)
#3. To: lead.and.lag (#2)
#8. To: PSUSA2, BSUSATOO, christine, TwentyTwelve, cornhuskerkid, Jethro Tull, Lod, James Deffenbach, HighLairEon, wudidiz, intotheabyss, abraxas, lead.and.lag, Phant2000, all (#3)
If it wasn't for us being over in the ME in the fist place, due to the oil, israel would be screwed.
#10. To: Original_Intent (#8)
#37. To: PSUSA2 (#10)
And that is all about oil
#40. To: Tatarewicz (#37)
(Edited)
#43. To: lead.and.lag (#40)
then there's the cost of getting the crude... a new semisubmersible like the globwater horizontal or whatever might cost $500 million dollars, and the cost of operating it is horrific, seeing as how it might be drilling 200 miles offshore in 10,000 feet of water.
#44. To: PSUSA2 (#43)
#46. To: wudidiz (#44)
Who says there's a shortage of oil?
#48. To: PSUSA2 (#46)
Would you go to the expense and trouble of offshore drilling if you didn't have to?
#50. To: wudidiz (#48)
Would you go to the expense and trouble of offshore drilling if you didn't have to?
#53. To: Original_Intent (#50)
(Edited)
It provides support to the illusion that oil is scarce, and provides justification for higher prices.
#62. To: PSUSA2, wudidiz (#53)
It provides support to the illusion that oil is scarce, and provides justification for higher prices.
Yeah, it's all a huge conspiracy. Everyone is in on it.
We now know that Leakey's Lucy was just a monkey.
It was once believed that all of the planets and stars were encased in crystal and revolved around the earth - the so-called Celestial Sphere. Then it progressed to "the sun revolves around the earth". Which of these do you believe?
The French Academy was on record in the 18th Century with the firm pronouncement that "rocks don't fall from the sky". Today we call them Meteorites.
The work of Fr. Gregor Mendel, the father of modern genetics, lay dormant for a century after his death as it "could not possibly be true".
The Smithsonian Institution would not publish the achievement of the Wright Brothers at Kittyhawk for two years after the fact because they knew that powered flight was impossible. Oh, and that wasn't a conspiracy either. Like many scientific organizations they held onto a discredited theory in preference to observed facts.
Every revolutionary idea - in Science, Politics, Art or Whatever - evokes three stages of reaction.
1. "It is impossible - don't waste my time."
2. "It is possible, but it is not worth doing."
3. "I said it was a good idea all along."
#65. To: Original_Intent (#62)
It fits our top dog Psychotics to a "t". Oh, and I didn't "just" invent it - I've been using it for several years now.
#66. To: PSUSA2 (#65)
That just goes to show that you don't learn. Do you know that there is a difference between psychotics and psychopaths/sociopaths? No? Well, now you know. Please make a note of it. I don't want to have to repeat myself.
That just goes to show that you don't learn. Do you know that there is a difference between psychotics and psychopaths/sociopaths?
Vaccination Debate
Review: Vaccination: 100 Years of Orthodox Research Shows that Vaccines Represent a Medical Assault on the Immune System
New Proof that Flu Shots are Unnecessary and Ineffective
The Ineffectiveness of Vaccines from a Historical Perspective
Ron Paul Speaks Out Against Dangerous Vaccines
#67. To: Original_Intent (#66)
I believe I used the term Psychotic - however the behavior of the Alpha Psychotic Banksters, Psychiatrists, and many of their minions (not mentioning anyone in particular mind you) are also sociopathic in their behavior. However, Psychiatric terms are often vague and subjective labels which blend one into another. So, in the case of our Vearless Leahders both terms are descriptive of their behavior as their sociopathy flows out of their psychosis. They could also be named megalomaniacs as well, or if you prefer simpler teminology - monsters - wannabe Hannibal Lectres.
#73. To: PSUSA2 (#67)
I already said that I don't know of any 100% safe medical procedures. Even placebos have a risk of choking on the tablets.
So you take the tiny number medical hard cases and try to turn them into huge typical examples. You're not alone, others do that too, when they have an agenda they are pushing.
I'd say that chances are, you're alive today because of these evil vaccines.
#79. To: Original_Intent (#73)
No one here has ever contended that there are any 100% safe procedures. However, the question was the efficacy and safety of vaccines, and there is a growing body of evidence which strongly suggests that they have been misrepresented by people with other agendas such as greed, and reducing the population. This IS science. Either the evidence is there to support them, and to discredit the evidence against or there is not. Given that the increasing body of evidence supports my position from a factual, empirical and clinical, point of view
#84. To: PSUSA2 (#79)
Vaccines are common. Why are we not dropping like flies in a blizzard?
Red Herring
Strawman Argument
Here are the 10 biggest vaccine news stories of 2011, reported on NaturalNews.com:#1 - Japanese children die from vaccines
Yet more evidence emerges of the deadly side effects of vaccines:
http://www.naturalnews.com/031616_vaccines_Japan.html#2 - U.S. government recruits churches to push flu shots on congregation members
Take that flu shot, or you'll go to Hell! That's the new message the U.S. government is trying to pound into the heads of church pastors and priests:
http://www.naturalnews.com/034394_churches_flu_shots_vaccinations.html#3 - Top CDC vaccine scientist indicted for fraud
You probably never read this story elsewhere, but one of the CDC's top researchers was indicted for allegedly stealing vaccine research money and using it to buy fancy vehicles and a luxury home:
http://www.naturalnews.com/032216_Thorsen_fraud.html#4 - IOM admits MMR vaccines cause seizures and measles
In a groundbreaking report, the Institute of Medicine openly admitted that vaccines actually cause the very measles they claim to prevent. The mainstream media, of course, misreported this research and utterly failed to cover the real story.
http://www.naturalnews.com/033447_Institute_of_Medicine_vaccines.html#5 - CDC openly admits flu vaccines don't work
Here's news you don't see every day: The CDC openly admits that vaccine flu shots "wear off," meaning they simply do not work in the way vaccine-pushing immunologists told us they did.
http://www.naturalnews.com/032558_flu_shots_wear_off.html#6 - Merck vaccine scientist Dr. Maurice Hilleman admits vaccines contain cancer-causing viruses
The actual admission happened decades ago, but news of it only went viral in 2011 as alternative news websites like NaturalNews publicized the once-secret audio recordings revealing shocking admissions by Dr. Maurice Hilleman.
http://www.naturalnews.com/033584_Dr_Maurice_Hilleman_SV40.html#7 - HPV vaccines found contaminated with HPV!
Pretty clever, huh? Just lace the HPV vaccines with the DNA of HPV itself, and you can spread the disease to create more fear that sells more vaccines!
http://www.naturalnews.com/033585_Gardasil_contamination.html#8 - Swine flu vaccine admittedly causes neurological disorders
2011 was the year that the nation of Finland openly admitted on the record that swine flu vaccines "conclusively" cause neurological disorders. It then offered to pay the lifetime medical costs of those damaged by such vaccines.
Remember, the USA continues to absurdly claim that vaccines cause NO damage (not to anyone) and are perfectly safe for infants, children and even pregnant women!
http://www.naturalnews.com/033816_swine_flu_vaccines_neurological_disorde...#9 - Science says flu vaccines only work on 1 out of 100
Now, even the scientists can't argue with their own science, can they? Rigorous studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals reveal that flu vaccines hardly work at all and are wasted on 98.5 out of 100 people who take them.
http://www.naturalnews.com/033998_influenza_vaccines_effectiveness.html#10 - Hallmark caught distributing flu shot compliance cards to new moms
Yes, even the Hallmark card company is now pushing vaccines. Plotting alongside state agencies in Florida, Colorado and elsewhere, the company pushes out cutesy flu shot "compliance" cards that urge new moms to have their newborn babies injected with dozens of combination vaccines, complete with mercury and chemical adjuvants that cause neurological disorders:
http://www.naturalnews.com/034365_Hallmark_vaccines_newborns.html
---------------------------------------------- End of Article "There is no such evidence that you claim. None. All you have are the ravings of idiots. And believing them makes you an idiot."
Argumentum Ad Hominem
Loaded Words
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
"I bet you have had the advantage of being vaccinated. You got yours but if you got your way, everyone else would be SOL. It's evident that you want them to die of these diseases. There is no other way to put it. It is you that is the psychopath. You would deny others the protection that you enjoy."
"I told you I had you pegged. You're a psychopath."
Replies to Comment # 84.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 84.