jts

Members
  • Content Count

    2,383
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by jts

  1. Sometimes the universe is 'benevolent', sometimes 'malevolent', sometimes something between, using those words metaphorically, not literally. For example if you are a zebra being eaten alive by a pack of lions, you might have difficulty at that moment believing the universe is benevolent. Bad things can happen to humans too -- earthquakes, tornadoes, giant ocean waves, hereditary disease or disability. You can avoid most of these things by rational and intelligent thinking but I suspect that even the greatest Objectivist super heroes (with cape and the sign of the dollar on their chest) are not always in complete control of reality. For example even the greatest Objectivist super hero would get old and die.
  2. Smoking does not cause lung cancer. If it did, everybody who smokes would get lung cancer. Clear proof that smoking does not cause lung cancer.
  3. Causes are not necessarily that simple. What if cause c1 and cause c2 must both exist to produce effect e? Then the statistics might show that only 2% of the cases of c1 have e and you would conclude that their is no causal relationship between c1 and e. Here is a question to look into. What is the autism rate in populations that reject vaccines? ALS is an example of multiple causes, or maybe we should say cause factors. ALS means simply motor neurons die. The question is why do the motor neurons die? ALS (death of motor neurons) can be produced in lab animals at will. One way is a combination of low motor neuron energy and excess concentration of glutamic acid near the motor neuron. Either one alone will not do it but both together will. It gets more complicated than that because we can ask what causes low motor neuron energy and what causes excess concentration of glutamic acid, and in both we have multiple cause factors Another example is breaking a bone. Let us imagine most of the population slips and falls on ice but only 1 in 90 breaks a bone. If you are consistent in your reasoning you would conclude that the hypothesis that slipping and falling on ice causes broken bones is poppycock. Falling on ice is only 1 cause factor. Another cause factor might be weak bones. Maybe autism has multiple cause factors, like most things have.
  4. I do not understand the word 'evidence'. Dr. Russell Blaylock wrote a book titled 'Exccitotoxins: The Taste that Kills'. This book bashes MSG and other excitotoxins. Prior to writing this book he was warned by another doctor that if he wrote the book the wrath of the MSG industry would be upon him and his life would be hell. Blaylock decided to write the book anyway because people needed to know the truth. To protect himself against the MSG industry he documented everything with air tight evidence (whatever that word means). Surprisingly not a peep from the MSG industry. He said he had private conversations with some of their 'top guns' and he said if it came to him vs the MSG industry, they would lose and they know it and that is why they are silent. But I hear that the book contains no evidence. Perhaps someone can explain why the book contains no evidence. What is evidence?
  5. How do you want me to present his evidence? Do you want me to transcribe him? What do you mean by evidence? Do you mean consensus? Do you mean quoting authorities? What would you accept as evidence? If a study shows that unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated children, is that evidence? If the evidence is from a website or a person you don't like, does that invalidate it?
  6. Did you read some of his books and listen to some of his lectures? I did.
  7. According ro Dr. Russell Blaylock and the evidence he presents, vaccines do roughly the same to the brain.
  8. Let's see if I correctly understand Bob Kolker. Someone takes a bullet to the head at point blank range and dies almost instantly. Most people would think it's a reasonable hypothesis that the cause of the death is the bullet to the head at point blank range. But this would be sloppy thinking. Maybe it's just coincidence that he took a bullet to the head at point blank range and died very soon after. To conclude that there is a cause and effect relationship would be post hoc ergo propter hoc. A cause always produces the effect, not merely sometimes. A single example to the contrary is enough to prove that it is not the cause. T. C. Fry (a health nut) took a bullet to the head at point blank range and survived! It contributed to his health problems but didn't kill him. This proves that a bullet to the head at point blank range does not cause death. Anyone who thinks it did cause death in a specific case is doing sloppy thinking.
  9. Can and does. You wanted a mechanism. Russell Blaylock explains the mechanism. Now you don't want a mechanism.
  10. In the Blaylock video I posted above, he explains how vaccination can cause autism.
  11. On the question of whether Dr. Russell Blaylock wrote stuff that got published in a peer reviewed scientific journal. For people who think that matters. Here is a list. https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/58885645_Russell_L_Blaylock
  12. Your distrust of Dr. Russell Blaylock seemed to be based on your trust of majority opinion and/or government approval. I reject the whole idea of trust except where it is unavoidable. Question: What is your definition of 'quack'? How did you reach your conclusion that Dr. Russell Blaylock is a quack? He has the standard credentials, went to medical school and all that. Let me guess. You consider him a quack merely because he says things contrary to the establishment. Did I guess right?
  13. With you it's about trust, meaning authority. That's religion, not science. Practise the Objectivist virtue of intellectual independence.
  14. Dr. Russell Blaylock explains how vaccines induce autism. The usual response to Dr. Russell Blaylock is he is not mainstream, he is a kook, his ideas are not generally accepted, etc. Fallacies of reasoning. Dr. Russell Blaylock usually has an abundance of peer reviewed scientific evidence in support of everything he says.
  15. You are saying either A always causes B, or A never causes B. It can't be A caused B in this particular case. Causes have contexts. The elderly woman in my example probably had weak bones. The weak bones would be a context. It is not necessary to say vaccination always causes autism in order to say vaccination caused autism in this case.
  16. Notice, I did not say it is causation. I asked a question. Let us assume that it is happenstance and not causation. Then all 3 of them would have gone down within hours of the time of the vaccination even if they did not get the vaccination. Can you figure out the mathematical probability of all 3 going down in this narrow time frame without the vaccine?
  17. Some years ago I knew an elderly woman who slipped on ice and broke a bone and had to go to the hospital. That was happenstance. The slipping on ice had nothing to do with the breaking of the bone. I slipped on ice, fell down, and didn't break anything.
  18. If you don't want to watch/listen to the video, you can read a transcript of it here. https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-12-23-triplets-all-become-autistic-within-hours-of-vaccination-see-shocking-video.html If you want more medical/scientific garbage about vaccines. go here. http://vaccines.news/ Also every vaccine is supposed to have an insert. Find out the name of the vaccine and google the insert and read it.
  19. Is this a statistical possibility if it's not causation? A math problem. Does the source (Brighteon) invalidate the video?
  20. The video at the top of this thread seems to be more about judicial system than about prison reform. On the topic of prison reform, here is the way they do it in the country of origin of the current world chess champion. But maybe we should get rid of prisons and government. Here is how Stefan Molyneux imagines might happen in a world without government.
  21. How do you square this with the only proper function of government is to protect individual rights? Here we have highway robbery by the police.
  22. Probably every person who is familiar with chess has seen this. In chess, unlike in geometry, the shortest distance between 2 points is not necessarily a straight line. And in chess, unlike in geometry, it is possible to go 2 directions at the same time. This composition is elegant in its simplicity (only 1 pawn each side, you can't get much simpler than that) and is almost magical in its defiance of geometry. Maybe some people will call it a paradox, like Aristotle's wheel paradox. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Réti_endgame_study