- Moderator
- #41
freeandfun1 said:Take ECO101.
Im thinking that might be alittle too complex for him. Maybe we should start him with high school econ.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
freeandfun1 said:Take ECO101.
musicman said:Exactly. I love it when liberals make these grand, sweeping statements. One in six - my God! Speaking VERY conservatively, we'd be talking about 10 or 12 million women, unable to give birth to healthy babies, due to a specifically identifiable cause. Does this guy imagine that information like that would go unnoticed???!!!
Merlin1047 said:Now wait a minute guys, let's not dismiss this too hastily. Wade may in fact have a point here.
How else would you explain the large number of libs in the country today? It has to be something either in the air or in the water.
wade said:Grrrr, I was saying those mining the coal do not have to support the unclean burning of that coal. The idea that the worker has to, by definition, support wrong practices of the industry in which he works, is what I was debunking.
Look at the article at the top of this thread and its discussion of Bush's coal industry policies. Then use the info there to do your own searches on the topic, and then tell me the Bush policies are reducing mercury being pumped into the air! NOT!
CSM said:So that means that 1 in six of every child born is unhealthy. I do not believe that. The US infant mortality rate is not that high nor are the other health indicators of children orn in the US.
wade said:Look at US infant health as compared to other 1st world nations. And, they don't consider being born stupid a negative health indicator so those stats are not meaningful. One in six women in the USA have children with an IQ 7-10 points lower than it would be except for the mercury in their systems.
wade said:Look at US infant health as compared to other 1st world nations. And, they don't consider being born stupid a negative health indicator so those stats are not meaningful. One in six women in the USA have children with an IQ 7-10 points lower than it would be except for the mercury in their systems.
CSM said:Alrighty then. Ever take an IQ test? I submit that an infant cannot be given an IQ test. The best a docotor can do is check for normal reaction to external stimulus, etc. Got any links to support this data?
CSM said:Alrighty then. Ever take an IQ test? I submit that an infant cannot be given an IQ test. The best a docotor can do is check for normal reaction to external stimulus, etc. Got any links to support this data?
no1tovote4 said:Don't you know that THEY told him?!
Therefore it must be scientific and based only an realatable evidence and numerous studies, otherwise using statistics in this way could be construed as a ruse to add believability to an argument not based in facts.
Let's see if I can do one too.
1 in 3 cows are born with fetal alcohol syndrome. God! Save the cows! And it is all true, I read it in a magazine somewhere at some time!
fuzzykitten99 said:hey wade...we are still waiting on your links to back up your claims.
wade said:Sorry Kitten, I replied about 3 days ago but then the database for this msg board was somehow out of wack and it would not post.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2004-02-08-mercury-usat_x.htm
http://www.nrdc.org/health/effects/mercury/index.asp
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1205-07.htm
IQ tests done at various ages clearly show that exposure to mercury, especially while in the womb, has a very obvious negative effect on children.
musicman said:Well, I'm glad this msg. board finally got it's database straightened out for you. It would have been better for you if it hadn't, since your links expose you as a rank, intellectually dishonest charlatan.
I wholeheartedly invite any and all to compare your "scientific links" with your shamefully disingenuous statements, such as:
"One in every 6 women in the USA today have mercury levels so high that they cannot give birth to healthy babies because of coal burning plants", and
"One in six women in the USA today have children with an IQ 7-10 points lower than it would be except for the mercury in their systems."
My God, man! The only sentence in any of your links that appears to even come from the same GALAXY as your statements was spoken - not by any scientist, environmental expert, or health official, but by a representative of an environmentalist group with a political ax to grind:
"As many as one in six U.S. women...might have mercury levels in their blood that could put their babies at risk, says Gina Solomon of the Natural Resource Defense Fund".
You are a fraud, sir.
GINA M. SOLOMON, M.D., M.P.H.
Senior Scientist, Natural Resources Defense Council, San Francisco
Assistant Clinical Professor of Medicine, University of California at San Francisco
Gina Solomon is a specialist in adult internal medicine, preventive medicine, and occupational and environmental medicine. She is a Senior Scientist in the Health and Environment Program of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). NRDC is a national nonprofit organization with over 550,000 members dedicated to the protection of public health and the environment. Dr. Solomon is also an Assistant Clinical Professor of Medicine at the University of California at San Francisco where she is an attending physician at the U.C. Pediatric Environmental Health Specialty Unit. Her work has included research on asthma, diesel exhaust, breast cancer, pesticides, contaminants in breast milk, and threats to reproductive health and child development. Dr. Solomon attended medical school at Yale and did her residency and fellowship training at Harvard.
Dr. Solomon served on the U.S. EPA's Federal Advisory Committee on endocrine disrupting chemicals, on the EPA Science Advisory Board Panel on trichloroethylene, and on the California Expert Working Group on Environmental Health Tracking. She is a scientific advisor to numerous organizations including the California Department of Health Services Environmental Epidemiology Section, the National Environmental Education and Training Foundation and the San Francisco Foundation. She is also co-coordinator of the San Francisco Bay Area Physicians for Social Responsibility's Environmental Health Project as well as a member of its Board of Directors. Dr. Solomon has authored numerous articles and reports, and is co-author of the book, Generations at Risk: Reproductive Health and the Environment, published by MIT Press in 1999. Dr. Solomon received The Breast Cancer Fund's Heroes Award in 2002.
musicman said:wade:
So - the representative of an environmentalist group with a poltlcal ax to grind, whose statement convicts you of the worst kind of intellectual fraud, is, in fact, a scientist. Wow - you really burned my ass with that one, wade.
wade said:According to you, all enviromentalists have an axe to grind. Prove she's not a credible source. She is certainly more credible than you. I bet you dig go out and dig a hole somewhere when no one is looking in which to dump your used motor oil. :happy2:
Where is the "fraud". As I said, as many as 1 in 6 US children are being born with deficits due to mercury.
musicman said:Re Gina Solomon: You're missing the point. The more you shore up her credibility, the more her statement damns you.
I neatly collected your allegations (presented by you as indisputable fact) in Post #53. Read them over, carefully. Now, check your links. Are you telling me there aren't any problems?
Admit it, wade - there are huge problems. In classic, half-cocked liberal fashion, you have thrown out absurd figures and insane assumptions as if they were scientific fact. Not only are you busted - you're convicted by your own hand! YOU provided the links that scream, "wade's full of shit"! What did you think - nobody was going to check them?
Just for future reference, may I offer what I think would be a great read for you? It's a little tome called, "See - I Told You So", by the great Rush Limbaugh. In it, he offers an admonition you might do well to study and understand:
"Words mean things".
wade said:I disagree. The main point I made was that a large number of US children are being born with defects caused by mercury. Where are you seeing anything that disputes this? The only ? is the numbers, 1 in 6 vs. 1 in 12.
wade said:I disagree. The main point I made was that a large number of US children are being born with defects caused by mercury. Where are you seeing anything that disputes this? The only ? is the numbers, 1 in 6 vs. 1 in 12.