Monday, January 21, 2019

Are We Even Allowed to Debate an Issue?

There are people who disagree with the claim from other people that global warming/climate change (Or whatever they are calling it today) is real and is caused by man. We will call this group - Group A. The adherents of this claim say that "The science is indisputable" or "All scientists agree" or "Deniers should be jailed," etc. We will call the believers - Group B.

Those who disagree with this claim, Group A, will cite other scientist's reports and data showing that the claims of "agreement" among all scientists are simply not true. These people will point to studies done by scientists who have no reason to skew their reports (No money from the government or big oil to "encourage" certain results). They tell the believers, Group B, that they should open their minds to real science, to differing opinions, to new, more recent data showing that there is, in fact, disagreement among those who study such things.

I fall into Group A (As if you didn't already know that). I have searched and found numerous studies and lots of data that show there is a dispute in the scientific/research community regarding global climate change. I have looked at both sides and compared data, listened to scientists from both sides, I have a knowledge of history, I know how governments lie and manipulate and use money to influence results, and applying commonsense, I have decided that global warming is a hoax designed to give government more power, money, and control over our lives. There are people who disagree with me. That is to be expected and that is their right.

I am also an advocate of and try to apply in my own life, intellectual honesty and consistency. Would that others strove to do the same. My particular point in this post regards Group A and its lack of the intellectual honesty and consistency I speak of. When they deal with any member of Group B they are often confrontational, even dismissive or angry. I readily admit that I have found myself doing this, as well. The difference between me and the others is that I apply that same disdain to both sides of issues, when warranted.

The issue I am addressing now regards vaccines and those who question their efficacy and those who not only believe in them, but DEMAND that everyone has to get them. These people are usually found in Group A above. While Group A is quick to dismiss the pro-climate change folks and their science, this same group dismisses, looks down upon, even demonizes those who show any skepticism at all about vaccines.

Group A people dare not question or hear anything about the ingredients in vaccines, the potential dangers of vaccines, the vast number of vaccines administered to children before the age of five, the potential side-effects, the new and increasing studies showing that there are problems with vaccines and that these problems must be addressed. These are studies done by doctors, scientists, statisticians, people who look at the numbers of those affected, people who test the vaccines for the ingredients they contain and the effects that these ingredients can have on the human body and brain.

Group A will tell you that "The science is settled." There can be no argument, there is no need for discussion, skeptics should be jailed and their children taken from them and forcibly inoculated. My point? When it comes to vaccines Group A sounds a lot like Group B does when Group B is talking about global climate change. Think about it and then open your mind.

I have included this article that I read and that ignited this post. There are many others, along with scientific data and research that one can look up, if one cares about such things.