Also, there's Polio.
I don't see any crippled children from polio in the news, or in iron lungs.
That was also vaccinated to extinction.
But there I go again, citing logical arguments :)
Ok, tell us about Acute Flaccid Paralysis Syndrome. It's not a critical logical argument by a long shot, first iron lungs have long been outdated and replaced with smaller breathing devices, and the polio symptoms are exactly the same for AFPS, which is what it was reclassified as.
The smallpox vaccine didn't eradicate anything, in populations where it was forced vaccinations like the Philippines there was major outbreaks, and people developed other disease because of vaccination. You're spouting off nonsense in a thread begging you to research and calling your vomited "where's polio" strawmen critical logical arguments.
You were lucky is not a critical logical argument.
It's Sad, is not a critical logical argument.
Also there's Polio, I don't see any kids in iron lungs or the news, where's polio, that's not critical, logical or an argument, its nonsense.
I just did a google search for "smallpox cases 2017". The only "hit" that resulted in a direct case was a researcher who accidentally got infected studying it. That was in 1978.
You'd think in this always-connected world of smartphones and internet connections there would be an immediate alarm and flow of news stories if it were on the loose again.
I did the same search for polio, and only turned up a few cases in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in Africa, Syria, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Not particularly countries that have effective resources to combat such a disease.
But it seems you're emotionally invested in your position, so I won't bother going forward. I don't have unlimited time at my disposal. Believe what you want, reality has a way of intruding anyway.
'I just did a google search' is the most repeated cop out that I see these days. Scanning the first three results on the first page is not research.
I realize this is a difficult and many faceted subject, but dismissing this information because 'muh google' is not an argument, it's an appeal to google, so is that appeal to popularity, appeal from authority, perhaps genetic fallacy?