Democrats still haven’t received the message…

[Ihaveswag29]

I am a mathematician. That is a science. Mathematics is a PURE science. The only other pure science is God.

I am saying one out of every 2,000 children had autism over thirty years ago. Today, the CDC estimates there is one in 150 kids. You are told there is no link to autism and kids are just better diagnosed today, and so you believe the science.

The mathematician analogy I tried to make is that there is a 16.67% chance of anyone rolling a seven with two die. If you get into a game where they are rolling sevens 80% of the time for thirty years, there is something wrong. There is another factor, and the casino is telling you there is no link. I am saying that follows that that casino is making money. You are saying you will stay in the game because it is science, and in another twenty years it will all straighten out and I will see the seven was rolled 16.7% of the time. I am saying the pharmaceutical companies have scientist who say there is no link with vaccines to autism, and PURE science disagrees.

Have you interacted with autistic kids. There is tremendous research today that is helping them cope but you can tell that they are on the spectrum. Did you ever interact with kids over thirty years ago. How many of kids did not speak and had limited verbal skills that went undiagnosed and you now believe were undiagnosed autistic kids? Maybe one?

Do you think there may be more diagnoses because the definition and ability to detect autism changed? Or would that not affect things?

As the mathematician that you are (and I know I won't change your mind, but I am interested in this thought process), how are you arguing stats that show there is not a difference in percentages of kids with autism between those that are vaccinated and those that aren't? If vaccines truly cause autism, as you allege, then wouldn't it be more likely that vaccinated people actually get autism? Here's a study about it: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1124634/.

Tbh, I was going to just let this conversation go. But a kid in Texas just died because he wasn't vaccinated. So it is obviously topical. Here's an article about it: https://www.foxnews.com/health/first-measles-death-reported-west-texas-growing-outbreak.

 

[mediaexpert]

Thirty years ago, I researched this subject and found many linking vaccines and autism. Over a three-year period, I spoke each year with approximately fifty parents who had a child with autism, and around 98% of them reported that their child began showing signs of autism within weeks of receiving vaccinations. A doctor at the time published a book highlighting the correlation between the rising autism rates and the increasing number of additives in childhood vaccines. The findings were compelling, yet immediately afterwards, these claims were widely dismissed, with studies—such as the Danish study—countering the association.

Over the years, I remained actively involved with non-profits, and I’ve noticed a shift in how leaders address the causes of autism. Many have become increasingly vague while acknowledging the possibility that vaccines or environmental factors, such as electromagnetic waves, could play a role. Nevertheless, the public consistently states there is no link between vaccines and autism.

Recently, I watched a discussion featuring Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and parents of autistic children, where approximately only 80% of them attributed their child’s condition to vaccines. This raises concerns about how narratives are shaped as authoritative studies gain traction. I still believe they cannot override firsthand experiences.

BTW, I think RFK Jr will change the narrative just like Dr. Barry Sears changed mine thirty years ago on the authoritative narratives on the food pyramid. And just like Trump is changing the public’s thinking of eight years ago that we have to be in constant conflicts and wars.

 

[Ihaveswag29]

Thirty years ago, I researched this subject and found many linking vaccines and autism. Over a three-year period, I spoke each year with approximately fifty parents who had a child with autism, and around 98% of them reported that their child began showing signs of autism within weeks of receiving vaccinations. A doctor at the time published a book highlighting the correlation between the rising autism rates and the increasing number of additives in childhood vaccines. The findings were compelling, yet immediately afterwards, these claims were widely dismissed, with studies—such as the Danish study—countering the association.

Over the years, I remained actively involved with non-profits, and I’ve noticed a shift in how leaders address the causes of autism. Many have become increasingly vague while acknowledging the possibility that vaccines or environmental factors, such as electromagnetic waves, could play a role. Nevertheless, the public consistently states there is no link between vaccines and autism.

Recently, I watched a discussion featuring Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and parents of autistic children, where approximately only 80% of them attributed their child’s condition to vaccines. This raises concerns about how narratives are shaped as authoritative studies gain traction. I still believe they cannot override firsthand experiences.

BTW, I think RFK Jr will change the narrative just like Dr. Barry Sears changed mine thirty years ago on the authoritative narratives on the food pyramid. And just like Trump is changing the public’s thinking of eight years ago that we have to be in constant conflicts and wars.

So why are you are dismissing the Danish study again?

And this does go back to my initial point. Talking to people that feel that “x” occurred because of “y” is not a real metric. As a mathematician, how many people would you have to talk to that felt 2+2=5 before you thought it did too?

And can you point to the many studies you found?

Yeah RFK going down this path is insane. Probably going to kill a lot of children and bring back diseases that we previously had under control.

 

[mediaexpert]

So why are you are dismissing the Danish study again?

And this does go back to my initial point. Talking to people that feel that “x” occurred because of “y” is not a real metric. As a mathematician, how many people would you have to talk to that felt 2+2=5 before you thought it did too?

And can you point to the many studies you found?

Yeah RFK going down this path is insane. Probably going to kill a lot of children and bring back diseases that we previously had under control.

Yes, I take firsthand experience over a study.

If A, then B; therefore, C. You and I are arguing over C, and I am saying A or B is wrong. If you, as an engineer, showed me proof that a 200-pound man cannot walk across Bridge C and therefore we need to replace it. And you are to be paid ten million to replace it. However, I walked across that bridge, and I weigh 230. You can convince the town with media editorials and many more studies, BUT I have first-hand experience. Nevertheless, I would still want a new bridge because families want to cross that bridge together.

JFK Jr and I are not anti-vaccine. Please rid yourself of that fallacy. I am saying the bridge is necessary, but please examine the elements being used to construct the bridge. The elements in the vaccines are having an adverse reaction on some children.

Trump's audience with Muslim countries and religious leaders in 2017 was insane, but then we negotiated the Abraham Accords. Trump calling Kim Jong-un Rocketman was insane, but we got back hostages and Korean War remains, and we calmed him down.

 

[Ihaveswag29]

Yes, I take firsthand experience over a study.

If A, then B; therefore, C. You and I are arguing over C, and I am saying A or B is wrong. If you, as an engineer, showed me proof that a 200-pound man cannot walk across Bridge C and therefore we need to replace it. And you are to be paid ten million to replace it. However, I walked across that bridge, and I weigh 230. You can convince the town with media editorials and many more studies, BUT I have first-hand experience. Nevertheless, I would still want a new bridge because families want to cross that bridge together.

JFK Jr and I are not anti-vaccine. Please rid yourself of that fallacy. I am saying the bridge is necessary, but please examine the elements being used to construct the bridge. The elements in the vaccines are having an adverse reaction on some children.

Trump's audience with Muslim countries and religious leaders in 2017 was insane, but then we negotiated the Abraham Accords. Trump calling Kim Jong-un Rocketman was insane, but we got back hostages and Korean War remains, and we calmed him down.

Got it.

So, yeah. To round out this conversation. This is a great example of why I switched from being a Republican. I just can’t relate to ignoring scientific data to reach a conclusion I want, and that seems to be a big part of what the republican base and platform is built upon.

 

[mediaexpert]

And that is why I went from being politically agnostic to endorsing Trump. I was told to go to war with Vietnam to stop communism, I had to accept Obamacare to pay for my employees' health insurance, politicians have to have much better health insurance for free, politicians naturally become multimillionaires, I am racist if I hire someone on merit, science proved there are more than two genders, and we need illegals because there are jobs that Americans won't do. I worked in the fields during the week as a busboy and dishwasher on weekends, studied hard on the side, graduated, worked hard, and kept my nose clean. I do not want to send my hard-earned money to promote transgender plays to a country where they kill homosexuals and to countries that support their wars and don't want peace.

 

[tjreese]

So why are you are dismissing the Danish study again?

And this does go back to my initial point. Talking to people that feel that “x” occurred because of “y” is not a real metric. As a mathematician, how many people would you have to talk to that felt 2+2=5 before you thought it did too?

And can you point to the many studies you found?

Yeah RFK going down this path is insane. Probably going to kill a lot of children and bring back diseases that we previously had under control.

I haven’t read the links and really don’t have the desire at this time. That said when testing for differences between two things of uncorrelated data and not getting into variations to possibly alter the
total degrees of freedom a confidence level is
chosen. It may be two tailed which is just looking for difference
Or single tailed which is looking either larger or smaller.

A standard or typical test is 95% confidence. So you would fail if you only showed 94% difference between means. I’m not saying this or that shows a difference or not, but rather trying to illustrate that the null starts out with a no difference approach. In Japan they might accept a lower confidence
Limit on some things

 

[Ihaveswag29]

I haven’t read the links and really don’t have the desire at this time. That said when testing for differences between two things of uncorrelated data and not getting into variations to possibly alter the
total degrees of freedom a confidence level is
chosen. It may be two tailed which is just looking for difference
Or single tailed which is looking either larger or smaller.

A standard or typical test is 95% confidence. So you would fail if you only showed 94% difference between means. I’m not saying this or that shows a difference or not, but rather trying to illustrate that the null starts out with a no difference approach. In Japan they might accept a lower confidence
Limit on some things

This is all well and good. But that’s not even what he is saying. He is not disputing the data or any aspect of it. Just saying he is ignoring it because it doesn’t align with how others feel or what he thinks.

If there were some issue with the data or some counter study to consider, that’s an entirely different conversation. The fact those aren’t even part of the conversation is my point.

 

[BB62]

Yes, I take firsthand experience over a study.

If A, then B; therefore, C. You and I are arguing over C, and I am saying A or B is wrong. If you, as an engineer, showed me proof that a 200-pound man cannot walk across Bridge C and therefore we need to replace it. And you are to be paid ten million to replace it. However, I walked across that bridge, and I weigh 230. You can convince the town with media editorials and many more studies, BUT I have first-hand experience. Nevertheless, I would still want a new bridge because families want to cross that bridge together.

JFK Jr and I are not anti-vaccine. Please rid yourself of that fallacy. I am saying the bridge is necessary, but please examine the elements being used to construct the bridge. The elements in the vaccines are having an adverse reaction on some children.

Trump's audience with Muslim countries and religious leaders in 2017 was insane, but then we negotiated the Abraham Accords. Trump calling Kim Jong-un Rocketman was insane, but we got back hostages and Korean War remains, and we calmed him down.

I don't take any advice, especially when it comes to science, from someone who makes this statement.

"The only other pure science is God."

I can't think of a more ridiculous thing to say.

 

[mediaexpert]

This is all well and good. But that’s not even what he is saying. He is not disputing the data or any aspect of it. Just saying he is ignoring it because it doesn’t align with how others feel or what he thinks.

If there were some issue with the data or some counter study to consider, that’s an entirely different conversation. The fact those aren’t even part of the conversation is my point.

I am not disputing the data because, for thirty years, I have read similar studies. It is what I was trying to say that if A, then B, and therefore C. I am saying that if studies are saying C, then A or B is wrong because I have witnessed it firsthand. It has nothing to do with what I feel because then you would be correct, and I have ignored the science. Science is what you observe at the time of a perfectly normal child morphing into autism within a month. This was substantiated when others say they observed this, too, with their perfectly normal child from immediately to a short time. This is science.

I have heard the media repeatedly say that being against vaccines is anti-science. That is what I tried to explain to you about RFK Jr earlier. Unfortunately, people do not question reports. We all know that if you ask a mathematician what time it is, he will tell you what time do you want it to be, Ask scientists what they will write in their study, and they will ask you how much? Having said that, I still believe most studies are accurate; therefore, I won't dispute the data. But like I said, I will change my mind if they had an alternative like electromagnetic waves with the vaccines.

On a separate topic, you need to study how much propaganda the media allows that influence people.s opinions.

 

[mediaexpert]

I don't take any advice, especially when it comes to science, from someone who makes this statement.

"The only other pure science is God."

I can't think of a more ridiculous thing to say.

What is your definition of God?

 

[BB62]

What is your definition of God?

You mean a god?

If you're referring to the god of Abraham, I don't have a definition because I don't believe in it. I can use your definition if you like.