steveh_131
Grandmaster
jbmayes2000 said:I'll try this again. this thread is about specific topic: Vaccines and how they related to autism. Whether *I'M* inconsistent or consistent *(which you don't know)with science has no bearing on what I've stated about the science majority for this topic. Surely you can see how my views on other subjects don't affect what scientists say about this specific subject?
You asserted that a majority consensus among scientists is a good indicator that something is true. I'm simply asking you if you apply that to all scientific endeavors, or just this one? Either it's a reliable standard or it isn't.
I don't think that 'majority consensus' among scientists is a very good indicator of truth, personally. I'm noticing a very serious herd mentality that seems to be driven by money and politics. Dissenters are driven out of the scientific community as quacks and 'hucksters'. In all seriousness, scroll back to the beginning of this thread and look at the response received by the OP for posting an interesting article from a highly competent scientist. Is she right? Shoot, I don't know. I have my doubts. But the spiteful retorts really shake my confidence in the majority consensus among scientists and the public at large.
jbmayes2000 said:If signs of autism has such a broad range of when it's noticed, could you really make a stance with any correlation to vaccination that I couldn't do with any other such event that may happen to a baby between the ages of 0-14 months?
No, I really can't. You're quite right, it's been a heck of a thing to try to track down.
jbmayes2000 said:I do not suggest blindly doing anything. I'm actually not even against questioning vaccines. However, your questions have widely been discussed and answered by leading scientists, not to mention peer reviewed studies to show a lack of a connection between the two. You don't really acknowledge that and you sort of lead people on to believe these studies MUST be cronyism but then in the same breathe believe a different scientist who happens to agree with you.
I think that if you go back and read this thread more carefully, you'll see that this is not what I was asserting. There have been no studies, that I am aware of, regarding aborted fetal cell lines in vaccines. This is a new wrinkle. They aren't used in all vaccines, therefore studies regarding vaccines in general are not pertinent. Additionally, I didn't say that I believe this scientist or that I agree with her. I find it interesting and worthy of consideration, and not deserving of the vicious response she received among scientists and even INGO members.