It is concerning that you are not as critical over the information you gleaned from the "Vaxxed" movie as you are of medical literature. @reddust or should I say @redhanded??
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
It is concerning that you are not as critical over the information you gleaned from the "Vaxxed" movie as you are of medical literature. @reddust or should I say @redhanded??
It’s concerning you don’t care about the millions of vaccine injuries. Bring up the movie rather than content, deflection tactic.
you are trying to reason emmotionally, not based on reasoning. I clearly invited you to be critical of published science and literature and demonstrated that the evidence you are using:
You then showed little knowledge of the events surrounding the anti-vax movements leading researcher, additionally you are unable to defend using the Hypoglosal Nerve paralysis report paper (it is not a study) as evidence for anti vaccination.
Your time is better spend ending private automobiles and guns on the street. Perhaps, you want to divert funding from public health to the military instead to fight proxy wars for business interests. That too should be a concern of yours.
It is concerning how little you actually care to put in the right efforts in making vaccinations cost effective and safe, if millions of children's lives are actually at stake.
I am critical of all sides and when you assume I am reasoning using the emotional fallacy and accusing me of an emotional mind state, I know you are manipulating the argument. Thank you for showing your true colors.
My concern is with the millions of people who have been and are injured or have died by allopathic medicine war on disease. You will not be able to sidetrack this dialogue through condescending remarks. The net has opened up all the information regarding the lies the vaccine industry has sold the general population since 1850s.
You did not attack the Vaccine industry until very late in the argument. Since it was not in your opening remarks, arguing in such a manner is sidetracking.
You have presented evidence that has been specifically refuted. You decline to defend your positions, and instead resort to tit-for-tat commentary. This led me to believe you are just arguing out of emotion instead of putting the right effort into sticking with the evidence that you bring up to support your position.