Ted Rall for February 09, 2015

Quite exceptional indeed.

Religion of Dumb Celebrities.

Don’t get your medical advice from an ex-Playboy Bunny.

Don’t get your geology from your minister, either.

HA-ha. religion is dumb.

He’s right, you know! The religious ones should be thrown in the nut house.

non-vaccine will lead to natural selection

@habfan. True, except the kid shouldn’t suffer because his parent is a moron.

Religion cannot be proved or disproved. To say God doesn’t exist because we can’t prove it is basically saying we know everything, which is incredibly arrogant.

Either religion or science can be used by for evil purposes by those who seek power.

One can believe what ever they choose to believe in. It only becomes a problem when they impose those beliefs on others. Children should be protected from their parents insanity until they are of legal age. Disneyland, doctors offices, schools and other public places should prohibit those who put others at risk for the same reason we lock up violent offenders.

Despite what some of the trolls appear to believe, the anti-vaccination crew are NOT totally or even primarily from one side of the political spectrum. They appear to be evenly split.Public Policy Polling (PPP) asked a number of questions about conspiracy theories, and found that 20% (twenty percent!) of their sample thought there was a link between childhood vaccines and autism. When split according to 2012 presidential vote, 19% of those who voted for Obama believed this utterly false concept, and 22% of those who voted for Romney believed it.The poll is fascinating, though scary, reading.http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_National_ConspiracyTheories_040213.pdf

Actually, religion and science have the same wellspring. The big difference is that science is always seeking interim findings that are perpetually subject to revision as new evidence is examined. The stories that science makes up to explain things are constantly evolving. Religion tends to evolve much more slowly, if at all. Science has an issue with relying on measurement, and you cannot measure the non-empirical. both are based on some sort of faith. Science has faith in its methods and practices. Religion has faith that relies on revelatory texts and stories. I have little faith in religion, except to sooth the troubled using stories and pablum. Comforting to many, but with little or no basis in my experience. Scientific explanations are pretty powerful though, demonstrably so, because they can be duplicated and repeated. The biggest issue with science is that the self organizing non linearity of the universe is very hard for humans to grasp. Our biology, our scale, and or consciousness all mitigate against certain understandings.

John Locke I did not say I would force the parent to vaccinate, I would only prevent them from harming other people. Courts already intervene when a parent’s religious beliefs keep a child from receiving life saving intervention. It is just common sense not a government conspiracy.

There is the very simple argument of the First Cause, Ted. That makes belief in a Creator, at least, more tenable than a faith in the Great Pumpkin, or Spaghetti Monster, or what have you.

Back in 2008, Barack and Hillary both admitted that fears of vaccination having adverse effects on a number of infants was reasonable enough to warrant further investigation. It is clearly not a partisan issue.

At present, anti-vaccine politics is spread across the political spectrum. However, it can be easily politicized, because it is a conflict about the powers of authorities, not about facts.

So many people who are naturally anti-corporation are suddenly 100% all in when it makes them feel good.

A lot of people are just saying there is a lot of money in these vaccines and the science is far from 100% bullet-proof.

Why did we go from 7 vaccines (in 2 shots and an oral) around the age of 5 in the 70s to over 24 shots by age 2 in less than 40 years? Not to be anti-progressive but that’s a huge change in a relatively short period of time and no way to be sure that has not caused some problems.

To say your sure it hasn’t is you being anti-science. Do some research about shingles for an unintended side effect of mass vaccination.

Love is a made-up belief too, right Teddy?

ungenious

And religion follows rules that science does not. No, they are both rule-following pursuits. The difference is that the rules for science must have an empirical basis and are intended to establish causality. Repeatability is the key, here. In religion, the rules are much different. The religious rules are established by revelatory texts, probably inspired by charismatic schizophrenics. Sorry, believers, but that seems likely to me. With the possible exception of the Buddha, that is, and even he is a question, really. Then, these revelatory texts are used for the basis of clerical interpretation, with each sect having special rules and rituals to accompany the clerics. The outcome of religious rules is different however. Repeatability, measurement, isolation of variables, interpretation of experimental results etc, are foreign concepts to the rules of religion. But both systems of thought have rules.

So 21% of voting American citizens are morons. I imagine that 100% of those who did NOT vote do not believe that vaccination does not cause autism.