Hell no, I would never pay Elon a dime. Seems to be free so I'll keep using it to blow holes in all the maga conspiracy tweets because when I use other AI, Growls dismisses it as Woke AI, LOL.
Vaccines for children
- Thread starter TigerGrowls
- Start date
This is for you pricks that refuse to even consider that something is not right.
Mason Bundy died within 3 days of receiving the DTaP vaccine after the pediatrician told his young parents that they would be "signing his death certificate" if they didn't agree to it.
From his mother...
“On March 5, 2011 at 12:06am, I found my four-month old son, Mason, dead in his bed.
I had just leaned over his pack n play to give him a kiss good night before going to sleep when I realized his skin was ice cold… and that he wasn’t breathing.
That’s the day that I stopped living.”
Please watch this interview with the parents. It’s only 8 minutes long.
Mason Bundy died within 3 days of receiving the DTaP vaccine after the pediatrician told his young parents that they would be "signing his death certificate" if they didn't agree to it.
From his mother...
“On March 5, 2011 at 12:06am, I found my four-month old son, Mason, dead in his bed.
I had just leaned over his pack n play to give him a kiss good night before going to sleep when I realized his skin was ice cold… and that he wasn’t breathing.
That’s the day that I stopped living.”
Please watch this interview with the parents. It’s only 8 minutes long.
Agree with this.
"You gotta be pretty stupid to think that autism is genetic. I'll be 50 this year. That means that I grew up BEFORE they started using babies as Big Pharma pin cushions. We didn't grow up with a bunch of nonverbal kids wearing diapers and unable to make eye contact. Genetics don't change that fast. It's clearly a result of some type of OUTSIDE influence.
But they are NEVER gonna admit that it's the shots and most of those parents won't admit it either, because that would involve some level of personal responsibility. They try to act like every little quirk and idiosyncratic behavior is "autism" so that they can blur the lines and cover up their crimes.
Autism is absolutely 100% triggered by those shots. I don't give a **** what your TV says. I've been in this battle for 20 years. I've been on the Vaxxed Bus and told my stories of warning people and them ignoring me and now they're raising autistic children. Not just one person, MULTIPLE people whose children will require care for the REST OF THEIR LIVES.
Between the genocide of the Rona shots and the poisoning of an entire generation, there really is no doubt about the cause of the carnage. We have some of the sickest kids in the world and if you're trying to normalize that, you're part of the problem."
- Winston Montag
"You gotta be pretty stupid to think that autism is genetic. I'll be 50 this year. That means that I grew up BEFORE they started using babies as Big Pharma pin cushions. We didn't grow up with a bunch of nonverbal kids wearing diapers and unable to make eye contact. Genetics don't change that fast. It's clearly a result of some type of OUTSIDE influence.
But they are NEVER gonna admit that it's the shots and most of those parents won't admit it either, because that would involve some level of personal responsibility. They try to act like every little quirk and idiosyncratic behavior is "autism" so that they can blur the lines and cover up their crimes.
Autism is absolutely 100% triggered by those shots. I don't give a **** what your TV says. I've been in this battle for 20 years. I've been on the Vaxxed Bus and told my stories of warning people and them ignoring me and now they're raising autistic children. Not just one person, MULTIPLE people whose children will require care for the REST OF THEIR LIVES.
Between the genocide of the Rona shots and the poisoning of an entire generation, there really is no doubt about the cause of the carnage. We have some of the sickest kids in the world and if you're trying to normalize that, you're part of the problem."
- Winston Montag
Long article, and I doubt any of you will read it, but this explains the actual reasons for the increase in diagnosis.
Please at least try to read the facts and be open minded. @fatpiggy
Please at least try to read the facts and be open minded. @fatpiggy
@fatpiggy
Have you had a chance to read this yet, all seriousness since we have discussed this a lot, I'd like your thoughts.
I’ll read tonight / morning.
Numbers do not lie.
When Fauci joined the NIH in 1968, only about 6% of American children had a chronic condition.
By the time he became director of NIAID in 1984, that number had nearly doubled to 11.8%.
Now, after 40 years of his leadership, over 60% of U.S. children suffer from at least one chronic illness.
Fauci didn’t lose a war on disease. He waged one on your kids.
When Fauci joined the NIH in 1968, only about 6% of American children had a chronic condition.
By the time he became director of NIAID in 1984, that number had nearly doubled to 11.8%.
Now, after 40 years of his leadership, over 60% of U.S. children suffer from at least one chronic illness.
Fauci didn’t lose a war on disease. He waged one on your kids.
I don’t have a problem with the article but there isn’t anything new in there.
His main argument is that there isn’t a singular cause to autism. Ok great, now what?
Should we not look for those causes? Can we design studies to try and figure it out? That’s what RFK is going correct?
Science is continually forming and testing hypothesis. Why would we stop doing science?
The article seemingly doesn’t like what he is doing. Ok, lots of ways to do science. But we tried the other guys way and we don’t have results.
My only position on this is “we should not exclude vaccines as a possible cause” and nothing in that article comes close to changing my mind on that. I think he farmed out 15 studies, many not having to do with vaccines. In addition to vaccines he is looking at the food supply, the water we drink, and the air we breathe . I understand vaccines are unlikely to be the cause but until we know for 100% what does cause it you can’t exclude anything. Don’t wan to allocate a large portion of resource? Fine. But ruling something out 100% seems silly to me.
I just don’t understand the resistance to science. You don’t like his science? That’s OK. But the current science isn’t proving to be good, why the resistor trying something else?
Last edited by a moderator:
3. **Broad Scope of Investigation**: The studies will explore a wide range of potential environmental factors, including food additives, mold, pesticides, medicines, prenatal ultrasound scanning, and parental health conditions like obesity and diabetes. Kennedy has emphasized that "everything is on the table," including vaccines, though he has committed to following the science regardless of findings.[](https://abcnews.go.com/Health/rfk-jr-lays-new-studies-autism-shuts-diagnoses/story?id=120882735)[](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj0z9nmzvdlo)[](https://www.science.org/content/article/claiming-autism-epidemic-rfk-jr-describes-nih-initiative-find-environmental-causes)
**Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s Stance on the Rise of Autism**
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., as the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, has characterized the rising rates of autism diagnoses in the United States as a "preventable" crisis-level "epidemic" driven by environmental toxins. He has dismissed the widely accepted explanation that the increase in autism prevalence—reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as rising from 1 in 150 children in 2000 to 1 in 31 among 8-year-olds in 2022—is primarily due to improved screening, better awareness, and broadened diagnostic criteria. Instead, Kennedy asserts that environmental exposures, such as food additives, mold, pesticides, medicines, prenatal ultrasound scanning, parental obesity, and diabetes, are the primary drivers of this increase. He has explicitly stated that "genes do not cause epidemics" but may provide vulnerability when combined with environmental toxins. Kennedy has also historically linked autism to vaccines, a claim repeatedly debunked by extensive scientific research, though he has recently emphasized a broader range of environmental factors over vaccines alone. His rhetoric has drawn criticism for being misleading, stigmatizing, and for perpetuating a narrative that autism is a "disease" rather than a complex neurodevelopmental condition influenced by genetic, biological, and environmental factors. Critics, including autism advocates and researchers, argue that his focus on an "epidemic" ignores the role of diagnostic advancements and risks harming the autism community by framing it as a preventable tragedy.[](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/16/us/politics/rfk-jr-autism.html)[](https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/04/16/nx-s1-5366676/autism-cdc-rates-rfk-research)[](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/16/rjk-jr-rise-autism-diagnoses)
**Studies Kennedy Is Currently Proposing**
Kennedy has outlined an ambitious initiative to investigate the causes of autism, with a focus on identifying environmental toxins. Key details of his proposed studies include:
1. **Comprehensive Data Platform**: The National Institutes of Health (NIH), under the direction of Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, is amassing private medical records from federal and commercial databases, including pharmacy chains, lab tests, genomics data from the Department of Veterans Affairs and Indian Health Service, private insurance claims, and data from smartwatches and fitness trackers. This initiative aims to create a "transformative real-world data platform" to enable researchers to study comprehensive patient data with broad U.S. population coverage, addressing the issue of fragmented health data.[](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rfk-jr-autism-study-medical-records/)[](https://people.com/rfk-jr-to-launch-autism-registry-using-private-health-records-11720156)
2. **Grant-Funded Research**: Kennedy plans to issue grants to 10 to 20 external research groups, selected through standard NIH processes, to conduct studies using this data platform. These studies will range from basic science to epidemiological and applied approaches to treat and manage autism, accounting for the spectrum of autism manifestations from high-functioning to severely disabled individuals.[](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rfk-jr-autism-study-medical-records/)
3. **Broad Scope of Investigation**: The studies will explore a wide range of potential environmental factors, including food additives, mold, pesticides, medicines, prenatal ultrasound scanning, and parental health conditions like obesity and diabetes. Kennedy has emphasized that "everything is on the table," including vaccines, though he has committed to following the science regardless of findings.[](https://abcnews.go.com/Health/rfk-jr-lays-new-studies-autism-shuts-diagnoses/story?id=120882735)[](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj0z9nmzvdlo)[](https://www.science.org/content/article/claiming-autism-epidemic-rfk-jr-describes-nih-initiative-find-environmental-causes)
4. **National Autism Registry**: Kennedy is launching a registry to track Americans with autism, which will work in tandem with the data platform to support research efforts.[](https://people.com/rfk-jr-to-launch-autism-registry-using-private-health-records-11720156)[](https://www.axios.com/2025/04/23/autism-registry-rfk-nih)
5. **Timeline**: Initially, Kennedy claimed that the causes of autism would be identified by September 2025, but he later revised this to state that "some answers" would be available by then, with grants expected to be distributed by that time. This timeline has been criticized as unrealistic given the complexity of autism and decades of prior research.[](https://abcnews.go.com/Health/rfk-jr-lays-new-studies-autism-shuts-diagnoses/story?id=120882735)[](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rfk-jr-autism-study-medical-records/)[](https://www.science.org/content/article/claiming-autism-epidemic-rfk-jr-describes-nih-initiative-find-environmental-causes)
**Criticism and Context**
Kennedy’s proposals have faced significant pushback. Autism researchers argue that decades of studies have already established that autism is multifactorial, with genetics playing a major role alongside potential environmental influences like prenatal exposure to certain chemicals (e.g., thalidomide, valproic acid) or parental age. The CDC’s recent report suggests that much of the rise in diagnoses is due to improved detection and access to services, particularly in underserved communities, rather than a true increase in prevalence. Critics, including the Autism Society of America, have called Kennedy’s plans "harmful, misleading, and unrealistic," expressing concerns about transparency, methodology, and the involvement of discredited figures like David Geier, a vaccine skeptic. There is also worry that Kennedy’s focus on environmental toxins may be a pretext to revisit debunked vaccine-autism claims, potentially undermining public trust in vaccinations and diverting resources from evidence-based research.[](https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/04/16/nx-s1-5366676/autism-cdc-rates-rfk-research)[](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj0z9nmzvdlo)[](https://time.com/7278787/rfk-jr-cdc-autism-study/)
Kennedy’s initiative, while ambitious, is seen by many experts as misaligned with current scientific understanding, which emphasizes a nuanced interplay of genetic and environmental factors rather than a single "toxin" as the cause. His approach has also sparked debate about the ethics of framing autism as a preventable condition, with advocates like Zoe Gross of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network arguing that it risks dehumanizing autistic individuals and ignoring their lived experiences.[](https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/04/16/nx-s1-5366676/autism-cdc-rates-rfk-research)[](https://www.axios.com/2025/04/23/autism-registry-rfk-nih)
**Note**: The information provided is based on available sources and reflects Kennedy’s public statements and reported plans as of April 24, 2025. Given the controversial nature of his claims, ongoing scrutiny and further developments may provide additional context or clarification.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., as the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, has characterized the rising rates of autism diagnoses in the United States as a "preventable" crisis-level "epidemic" driven by environmental toxins. He has dismissed the widely accepted explanation that the increase in autism prevalence—reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as rising from 1 in 150 children in 2000 to 1 in 31 among 8-year-olds in 2022—is primarily due to improved screening, better awareness, and broadened diagnostic criteria. Instead, Kennedy asserts that environmental exposures, such as food additives, mold, pesticides, medicines, prenatal ultrasound scanning, parental obesity, and diabetes, are the primary drivers of this increase. He has explicitly stated that "genes do not cause epidemics" but may provide vulnerability when combined with environmental toxins. Kennedy has also historically linked autism to vaccines, a claim repeatedly debunked by extensive scientific research, though he has recently emphasized a broader range of environmental factors over vaccines alone. His rhetoric has drawn criticism for being misleading, stigmatizing, and for perpetuating a narrative that autism is a "disease" rather than a complex neurodevelopmental condition influenced by genetic, biological, and environmental factors. Critics, including autism advocates and researchers, argue that his focus on an "epidemic" ignores the role of diagnostic advancements and risks harming the autism community by framing it as a preventable tragedy.[](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/16/us/politics/rfk-jr-autism.html)[](https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/04/16/nx-s1-5366676/autism-cdc-rates-rfk-research)[](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/16/rjk-jr-rise-autism-diagnoses)
**Studies Kennedy Is Currently Proposing**
Kennedy has outlined an ambitious initiative to investigate the causes of autism, with a focus on identifying environmental toxins. Key details of his proposed studies include:
1. **Comprehensive Data Platform**: The National Institutes of Health (NIH), under the direction of Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, is amassing private medical records from federal and commercial databases, including pharmacy chains, lab tests, genomics data from the Department of Veterans Affairs and Indian Health Service, private insurance claims, and data from smartwatches and fitness trackers. This initiative aims to create a "transformative real-world data platform" to enable researchers to study comprehensive patient data with broad U.S. population coverage, addressing the issue of fragmented health data.[](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rfk-jr-autism-study-medical-records/)[](https://people.com/rfk-jr-to-launch-autism-registry-using-private-health-records-11720156)
2. **Grant-Funded Research**: Kennedy plans to issue grants to 10 to 20 external research groups, selected through standard NIH processes, to conduct studies using this data platform. These studies will range from basic science to epidemiological and applied approaches to treat and manage autism, accounting for the spectrum of autism manifestations from high-functioning to severely disabled individuals.[](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rfk-jr-autism-study-medical-records/)
3. **Broad Scope of Investigation**: The studies will explore a wide range of potential environmental factors, including food additives, mold, pesticides, medicines, prenatal ultrasound scanning, and parental health conditions like obesity and diabetes. Kennedy has emphasized that "everything is on the table," including vaccines, though he has committed to following the science regardless of findings.[](https://abcnews.go.com/Health/rfk-jr-lays-new-studies-autism-shuts-diagnoses/story?id=120882735)[](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj0z9nmzvdlo)[](https://www.science.org/content/article/claiming-autism-epidemic-rfk-jr-describes-nih-initiative-find-environmental-causes)
4. **National Autism Registry**: Kennedy is launching a registry to track Americans with autism, which will work in tandem with the data platform to support research efforts.[](https://people.com/rfk-jr-to-launch-autism-registry-using-private-health-records-11720156)[](https://www.axios.com/2025/04/23/autism-registry-rfk-nih)
5. **Timeline**: Initially, Kennedy claimed that the causes of autism would be identified by September 2025, but he later revised this to state that "some answers" would be available by then, with grants expected to be distributed by that time. This timeline has been criticized as unrealistic given the complexity of autism and decades of prior research.[](https://abcnews.go.com/Health/rfk-jr-lays-new-studies-autism-shuts-diagnoses/story?id=120882735)[](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rfk-jr-autism-study-medical-records/)[](https://www.science.org/content/article/claiming-autism-epidemic-rfk-jr-describes-nih-initiative-find-environmental-causes)
**Criticism and Context**
Kennedy’s proposals have faced significant pushback. Autism researchers argue that decades of studies have already established that autism is multifactorial, with genetics playing a major role alongside potential environmental influences like prenatal exposure to certain chemicals (e.g., thalidomide, valproic acid) or parental age. The CDC’s recent report suggests that much of the rise in diagnoses is due to improved detection and access to services, particularly in underserved communities, rather than a true increase in prevalence. Critics, including the Autism Society of America, have called Kennedy’s plans "harmful, misleading, and unrealistic," expressing concerns about transparency, methodology, and the involvement of discredited figures like David Geier, a vaccine skeptic. There is also worry that Kennedy’s focus on environmental toxins may be a pretext to revisit debunked vaccine-autism claims, potentially undermining public trust in vaccinations and diverting resources from evidence-based research.[](https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/04/16/nx-s1-5366676/autism-cdc-rates-rfk-research)[](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj0z9nmzvdlo)[](https://time.com/7278787/rfk-jr-cdc-autism-study/)
Kennedy’s initiative, while ambitious, is seen by many experts as misaligned with current scientific understanding, which emphasizes a nuanced interplay of genetic and environmental factors rather than a single "toxin" as the cause. His approach has also sparked debate about the ethics of framing autism as a preventable condition, with advocates like Zoe Gross of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network arguing that it risks dehumanizing autistic individuals and ignoring their lived experiences.[](https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/04/16/nx-s1-5366676/autism-cdc-rates-rfk-research)[](https://www.axios.com/2025/04/23/autism-registry-rfk-nih)
**Note**: The information provided is based on available sources and reflects Kennedy’s public statements and reported plans as of April 24, 2025. Given the controversial nature of his claims, ongoing scrutiny and further developments may provide additional context or clarification.
Last edited by a moderator:
Would you agree that someone who doesn’t have their medical license and has been censured for practicing without one shouldn’t be funded by the government with one of these studies?
Fauci said, "I represent science," during a November 2021 interview with CBS's Face the Nation. The exact quote came when he was responding to criticism, stating, "Anybody who’s looking at this carefully realizes that there’s a distinct anti-science flavor to this... So if they get out there and criticize science, nobody’s going to know what they’re talking about. But if they get up and criticize me, I’m the target. I represent science." The phrase "I am the science" is often misquoted or paraphrased from this statement. Context matters: he was defending his role and scientific consensus against political attacks, not literally claiming to embody all science.
What do you call someone who continually lies about everything based on their petty, personal grievances?
Should he be the point man, probably not. Should he be excluded for his views, absolutely not.
Remember, just a short time ago (2022) we found out the basis for much of our Alzheimers research was based on fraudulent data. If we took the approach you all are advocating for autism, we would never know that data was falsified and we would be continuing on a dead end course.
Researchers and scientists are not infallible. There are dishonest ones and they also make honest mistakes like the rest of us.
Until we find the answer, leave no stone unturned. I am honesty at a loss of words and thoughts for why this is controversial.
Excluded from like, life? No of course not. But excluded from a government funded study? I do think so. I find it hard to believe they couldn't find someone qualified to look at that aspect. If they couldn't, that likely says something itself to me. But knowing the few truly scientific people I do, they would absolutely love to be the ones to discover anything groundbreaking like a cause of autism. Would be the thrill of a lifetime. And this idea that no scientific person is willing seems silly to me (I'm talking the true science nerds that most scientist are, not the politicians). But the government shouldn't be funding this guy in my opinion. He can do whatever study he wants, not saying they should bar anyone from studying anything. But that is a far cry from funding them.
Edit to add: it is controversial because by funding people that can't be trusted, can you see how that may actually set back the actual search? If you truly believe it is worth researching, I wouldn't want someone unqualified to touch it with a ten foot pole because it won't be trusted. Sort of a boy who cried wolf scenario. I wouldn't tell a qualified, peer reviewed professional they shouldn't study anything. They should follow their research, theories, etc, 100%. Even if, or perhaps especially if, they go against commonly held beliefs.
They did find plenty of people qualified. They got 15 DIFFERENT groups. Groups, not people. If this guy is one of them, that is fine. Why exclude his viewpoint? Because he failed before? Isn't that what science is? Testing and failing until you find the solution?
We need some far-out ideas because the ideas in front of our faces are not getting results.
This brings me to think about a comment Peter Thiel made not too long ago. America has become too risk averse. Cancel culture caused everyone to shy back into their shells and afraid to fail. Look at this board. There are many people here, but many are scared to discuss and put their opinions out there. I respect the people having the conversation even if i disagree with them. Much more respectable than staying silent.
We need to teach people that it is OK to fail. When you fail, you get back up and try again. That is the American way.
Hi Grok, Does Dr Fauci tell a lot of lies? https://x.com/i/grok/share/giS4VQWgwm8Cc9pAhkN2i1Jhn
I love the irony of the social media right-wing lie factory creating an AI tool that fact-checks all the misinformation spread on the site.
I am not saying to exclude any single viewpoint. I am saying to find someone professionally licensed to be supported by the government to research that viewpoint. Otherwise you seem to be supporting DEI. Wanting inclusion from other ideas whether they are qualified or not. Again, I am not against any viewpoint but rather giving money to someone not qualified. I am not against risk in research whatsoever. Science is constant failure and I have no issues with the other 14 studies failing at all either.
You are defending the beagle torturer. The one that approved the research that lead to the deaths of millions.Hi Grok, Does Dr Fauci tell a lot of lies? https://x.com/i/grok/share/giS4VQWgwm8Cc9pAhkN2i1Jhn
I love the irony of the social media right-wing lie factory creating an AI tool that fact-checks all the misinformation spread on the site.
Go right ahead my friend.
He is qualified.
Someone much smarter than @UrHuckleberry makes that determination.
We need people from the fringes. The mainstream is failing. Can you admit that we are failing? Or do you think we are having success?
"Tunisian Study Misattribution: A widely circulated image of beagles with heads in mesh cages, bitten by sand flies, came from a Tunisian study published in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. This study initially listed NIAID as a funder, but NIAID and the journal later clarified this was an error, and NIAID did not support that specific experiment. Despite the correction, the image fueled outrage, with claims Fauci funded “torture.”
Fauci’s Role: There’s no evidence Fauci personally designed or conducted these experiments. As NIAID director, he oversaw a $6.5 billion budget funding thousands of studies, some involving animals. Claims he “approved” specific grants, like a $420k beagle study, lack proof he directly signed off on them. The narrative targeting Fauci was amplified by conservative outlets and figures like Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Nancy Mace, often tying it to broader anti-Fauci sentiment over COVID-19 policies.
Public Reaction: The allegations led to thousands of threatening calls to Fauci’s office, with some X posts claiming he “ripped out vocal cords” or let flies “eat puppies alive.” These were exaggerated or false, but they reflect strong public sentiment, especially among animal rights advocates. A bipartisan group of lawmakers demanded answers, but NIAID’s responses emphasized the necessity of the research and denied funding the most graphic claims.
Being smarter than me thank goodness isn't a qualification.
I am saying if the government is going to hire someone to be a lawyer, barring they are Mike Ross, they should have a law degree and have passed the bar.
Dpic would deny strongly that water is wet if he thought it would hurt Trump. Total fact.
"Tunisian Study Misattribution: A widely circulated image of beagles with heads in mesh cages, bitten by sand flies, came from a Tunisian study published in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. This study initially listed NIAID as a funder, but NIAID and the journal later clarified this was an error, and NIAID did not support that specific experiment. Despite the correction, the image fueled outrage, with claims Fauci funded “torture.”
Fauci’s Role: There’s no evidence Fauci personally designed or conducted these experiments. As NIAID director, he oversaw a $6.5 billion budget funding thousands of studies, some involving animals. Claims he “approved” specific grants, like a $420k beagle study, lack proof he directly signed off on them. The narrative targeting Fauci was amplified by conservative outlets and figures like Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Nancy Mace, often tying it to broader anti-Fauci sentiment over COVID-19 policies.
Public Reaction: The allegations led to thousands of threatening calls to Fauci’s office, with some X posts claiming he “ripped out vocal cords” or let flies “eat puppies alive.” These were exaggerated or false, but they reflect strong public sentiment, especially among animal rights advocates. A bipartisan group of lawmakers demanded answers, but NIAID’s responses emphasized the necessity of the research and denied funding the most graphic claims.
It's not only that they are smarter than you, the person making the determination is one of the most qualified people in the country. And here you are saying he isn't qualified. Lol. Sorry, but I am going to go with Bachtarya (SP?) over @UrHuckleberry
Maybe you should say why you think Dr Bat isn't qualified to pick people for the study. That is what you are arguing, correct? Because fatpiggy didnt pick him.
Do you trust the experts or not? If you don't that is fine. I would then ask why we don't trust our experts? And then i would point to our lying ***, corrupt government and their actions during covid. And then i would point out that Dr Bat was the one who was closest to being correct during covid.
There’s no direct evidence from the provided information or general web data that specifically states whether a user or entity named "dpic73" has an explicit belief about whether water is wet. The search results and context focus heavily on the broader debate around the question "Is water wet?" and include scientific, philosophical, and casual discussions, but none tie back to dpic73.
The debate itself is split:
- Wet Camp: Argues water is wet because its molecules interact with each other via hydrogen bonding, making surfaces (or itself) feel wet. For example, some sources note that water’s cohesive properties mean it "wets" itself.
- Dry Camp: Argues water isn’t wet because wetness is a property that arises only when a liquid interacts with a solid surface. Water is the medium of wetness, not wet itself, like how fire isn’t "burnt."
Unless you were in the room, Dr Bat isn't the highest up that food chain, and may not have made that decision. At the end of the day, I've made my argument and why I believe what I believe.
Having been called a liar by Anthony Fauci for saying that "not one of the 72 vaccines mandated for children has ever been safety tested", RFK Jr. sued Fauci.
After a year of stonewalling, Fauci's lawyers admitted that RFK Jr. had been right all along.
"There's no downstream liability, there's no front-end safety testing... and there's no marketing and advertising costs, because the federal government is ordering 78 million school kids to take that vaccine every year."
"What better product could you have? And so there was a gold rush to add all these new vaccines to the schedule... because if you get onto that schedule, it's a billion dollars a year for your company."
"So we got all of these new vaccines, 72 shots, 16 vaccines... And that year, 1989, we saw an explosion in chronic disease in American children... ADHD, sleep disorders, language delays, ASD, autism, Tourette's syndrome, ticks, narcolepsy."
"Autism went from one in 10,000 in my generation... to one in every 34 kids today."