Scientist Cure Cancer but...
0
pspkiller626 wrote...
Right... why is it that every SD thread turns into a battleground?Not every one does. This one kind of turned into one because...I can't stand the hubris of this guy. He finds some random article claiming cancer's been cured and posts it going, "HA HA HA! I KNEW IT! YOU ALL DOUBTED ME BUT I KNEW IT!" and when people point out problems wit hthe articel, point out that it's known on Snopes to be at best, just a rumor, when people point out that he's adding a personal bias to this that is heavily skewing his interpretation rather unfairly...his response is essentially, "I don't care. You're all just as bad as me, I'm just honest about it. Oh, and I'm still right, so there."
It's infuriating.
0
BigLundi wrote...
pspkiller626 wrote...
Right... why is it that every SD thread turns into a battleground?Not every one does. This one kind of turned into one because...I can't stand the hubris of this guy. He finds some random article claiming cancer's been cured and posts it going, "HA HA HA! I KNEW IT! YOU ALL DOUBTED ME BUT I KNEW IT!" and when people point out problems wit hthe articel, point out that it's known on Snopes to be at best, just a rumor, when people point out that he's adding a personal bias to this that is heavily skewing his interpretation rather unfairly...his response is essentially, "I don't care. You're all just as bad as me, I'm just honest about it. Oh, and I'm still right, so there."
It's infuriating.
That's the reason why I'm not discussing it. He started the topic in SD, but he doesn't seem willing to discuss it seriously. Instead of challenging your argument with a counter-argument of his own, he instead challenges you personally with his arrogance.
This guy's stupidity pisses me off.
0
Daedalus_ wrote...
BlackShogunFox wrote...
At Daedalus: When was DCA an internet meme?
I don't know if it is an internet meme but that isn't relevant. The main point is that DCA is not a magic one-shot cure to all cancers. You can't just take some and magically cure all your cancer. It might reduce cancer marginally and for that, it might be a good chemotherapy drug. It won't get rid of all the cancer and so it is not an ideal cure that you are seeking and over-hyping. None of this is proven with good clinical trials that test efficacy of DCA alone (a trial where all the other treatments don't interfere with testing DCA). You are trying to put DCA on some kind of miracle pedestal where it doesn't belong and criticize pharmaceutical companies for not sharing your deluded view. It's not really even up to the pharmaceutical companies to approve it for cancer treatment anyway, it's the FDA's, so you're really pulling at the "straw man argument" there.
Pfft...Hahahahahahaha! Come come now I know your not serious. The only thing I said was even remotely titled miracle was marijuana. I also want to point out when you posted those links everything stated in those articles was relevant to what you were trying to state. So don't give me that bullcrap because those articles was about as relevant as a nun inside of a condom factory.
BigLundi wrote...
BlackShogunFox wrote...
Then why did you just not say that? Dang your sound like your trying to bite my head... On another note you are talking about the last article I was talking about the first one. My main point is flawed? I tell you this if you are talking about the title of this topic congradulations you missed the point. I am focusing mainly on how the industry looks past this and many other treatments because of their personal bias...
But you haven't SHOWN that there's a 'personal bias' unless the bias is towards only accepting cures that actually have evidence to support their effectiveness.
All you've essentially said is, "There's a cure for cancer, and the only reason big pharma isn't telling anyone is cause they can't make money off it". Not only haven't you shown that there IS a cure, but you've made a huge speculation as to why pharmaceutical companies don't publicize it with no evidence other than your own personal conspiratorial bias. That's why people don't take you seriously in this thread. Meanwhile I've posted a link showing how 'cure studies' can easily be screwed methodologically, Daed has shown that Snopes already covered this so-called 'cure' in the past, and no evidence supports your position. Yet over and over you simply re assert that "This is the way things are, Big Pharma are being corporate greedy fat cats" and a whole bunch of other buzzwords of a conspiracy theorist.
The know-it-all-wannabe why do you keep labeling me a "conspiracy theorist". Hell I have been labeled a terrorist by our lovely government already so...Why should I take you seriously anymore then them?
Tell me, why should ANYONE take you seriously?
Hmm...because I do not stand to gain anything out of this...
At Daedalus: When was DCA an internet meme?
At fatman: Ok...riddle me this what about the other hundreds of drugs on the market at this very moment that have been tested on people and have caused them harm? Harmful and toxic must mean two different things to you. Right?
At fatman: Ok...riddle me this what about the other hundreds of drugs on the market at this very moment that have been tested on people and have caused them harm? Harmful and toxic must mean two different things to you. Right?
Name a single drug that does more harm than good, and the peer reviewed study that demonstrates this to be the case. Go.
Not only that, but name me a single drug people are forced to take, and don't have a choice in the matter. That'll be even more fun.
All drugs are optional. Chemotherapy, is optional. Going to a hospital, is optional. Nobody's forcing you to take their cures or their medicine, but people go anyway, because they're the BEST places to get these things. Why? Because they rely on evidence. Peer reviewed double blind studies and tests to figure out whether or not any remedy is worth prescribing. And they ONLY stick to remedies that WORK, and DON'T do more harm than they cure.
The amount of rigors conventional medicine has to go through to be accepted in modern hospitals is insane. Doctors and pharm reps remain intensely skeptical at all new 'cures' until they pass the rigors of the scientific academia. Meanwhile you read that something cures cancer on a personal blog site and simply accept it at face value.
Why?
@ Legendary Dollci
I don't want to post any proof
Then you'll excuse us if nobody takes your opinion seriously. Or cares about what you have to say.
BigLundi there is two things Penn State will never teach you. How to accept defeat and handle a shotgun. When you finally lose your sanity you will be able to do both at the same time...lol!
Not every one does. This one kind of turned into one because...I can't stand the hubris of this guy. He finds some random article claiming cancer's been cured and posts it going, "HA HA HA! I KNEW IT! YOU ALL DOUBTED ME BUT I KNEW IT!" and when people point out problems wit hthe articel, point out that it's known on Snopes to be at best, just a rumor, when people point out that he's adding a personal bias to this that is heavily skewing his interpretation rather unfairly...his response is essentially, "I don't care. You're all just as bad as me, I'm just honest about it. Oh, and I'm still right, so there."
It's infuriating.
It's infuriating.
Ha. I did it again I got Lundi mad on the internet because of what I had to say. Lundi I can tell when your mad look at how many typos you did in your last post. What the heck it is infuriating? Ha...stay on topic come on.
That's the reason why I'm not discussing it. He started the topic in SD, but he doesn't seem willing to discuss it seriously. Instead of challenging your argument with a counter-argument of his own, he instead challenges you personally with his arrogance.
This guy's stupidity pisses me off.
This guy's stupidity pisses me off.
Funny I did all you just mentioned on taking this topic seriously however you said you did not want to discuss it but you still posted...fail logic, logic is fail...
P.S Keep on negative repping me c'mon you are doing exactly what I want you to do. Dance my puppets!
0
BlackShogunFox wrote...
Daedalus_ wrote...
BlackShogunFox wrote...
At Daedalus: When was DCA an internet meme?
I don't know if it is an internet meme but that isn't relevant. The main point is that DCA is not a magic one-shot cure to all cancers. You can't just take some and magically cure all your cancer. It might reduce cancer marginally and for that, it might be a good chemotherapy drug. It won't get rid of all the cancer and so it is not an ideal cure that you are seeking and over-hyping. None of this is proven with good clinical trials that test efficacy of DCA alone (a trial where all the other treatments don't interfere with testing DCA). You are trying to put DCA on some kind of miracle pedestal where it doesn't belong and criticize pharmaceutical companies for not sharing your deluded view. It's not really even up to the pharmaceutical companies to approve it for cancer treatment anyway, it's the FDA's, so you're really pulling at the "straw man argument" there.
Pfft...Hahahahahahaha! Come come now I know your not serious. The only thing I said was even remotely titled miracle was marijuana. I also want to point out when you posted those links everything stated in those articles was relevant to what you were trying to state. So don't give me that bullcrap because those articles was about as relevant as a nun inside of a condom factory.
You are trying to discredit me because of... what? If you don't find the articles relevant then read the clinical trials. They support what I've been saying: DCA is not a one-shot cure for any cancer type. It might be a good chemo drug and nothing more.
BigLundi there is two things Penn State will never teach you. How to accept defeat and handle a shotgun. When you finally lose your sanity you will be able to do both at the same time...lol!
...
Ha. I did it again I got Lundi mad on the internet because of what I had to say. Lundi I can tell when your mad look at how many typos you did in your last post. What the heck it is infuriating? Ha...stay on topic come on.
...
Funny I did all you just mentioned on taking this topic seriously however you said you did not want to discuss it but you still posted...fail logic, logic is fail...
If any moderator is here I would ask to consider a lock based on the OP not arguing critically and ignoring reason with Ad hominem attacks mainly against BigLundi. It feels like the whole thread is less about making sure cancer patients are getting the best treatment and more about attacking a person.
0
You are trying to discredit me because of... what? If you don't find the articles relevant then read the clinical trials. They support what I've been saying: DCA is not a one-shot cure for any cancer type. It might be a good chemo drug and nothing more.
I read them...I read the entire thing. What you are STILL not grasping is that I never said or stated it was a miracle drug. Daedalus please you are ruining the party go back towards the table and find more chips and dip to stuff your mouth with...lol! (At this point you are repeating yourself. When I already confirmed that I did not state that. I told you what this was about already you assume I am not listening but it is really you who is not.)
If any admin is here I would ask to consider a lock based on the OP not arguing critically and ignoring reason with Ad hominem attacks mainly against BigLundi. It feels like the whole thread is less about making sure cancer patients are getting the best treatment and more about attacking a person.
Are you sure that is not YOUR personal bias? Lundi is attacking me as much as I am attacking him(it is all in good fun I have nothing against him). Like I said it is not focusing on the patients it is about the industry get it through ya thick skull. You don't like this thread you can always go elsewhere my friend...
0
BlackShogunFox wrote...
I read them...I read the entire thing. What you are STILL not grasping is that I never said or stated it was a miracle drug. Daedalus please you are ruining the party go back towards the table and find more chips and dip to stuff your mouth with...lol! (At this point you are repeating yourself. When I already confirmed that I did not state that. I told you what this was about already you assume I am not listening but it is really you who is not.)
The title of the thread is "Scientists Cure Cancer" and you've been treating it as if it would. If that's not what you're saying then what points exactly are you trying to argue?
0
The title of the thread is "Scientists Cure Cancer" and you've been treating it as if it would. If that's not what you're saying then what points exactly are you trying to argue?
You missed the "but..." part of the title. Hell even Lundi knows what I am trying to do here. That is the beautiful thing about knowledge. You have to search it out like a treasure. I am not about to hold your hand and explain everything to you. Figure it out on your own...
0
BlackShogunFox wrote...
The title of the thread is "Scientists Cure Cancer" and you've been treating it as if it would. If that's not what you're saying then what points exactly are you trying to argue?
You missed the "but..." part of the title. Hell even Lundi knows what I am trying to do here. That is the beautiful thing about knowledge. You have to search it out like a treasure. I am not about to hold your hand and explain everything to you figure it out on your own...
If you're going to avoid answering the question on why I have to argue with a man that has no argument then there is no point to being here, so bye.
0
>all OP's linked sources are .coms
Come back with some peer reviewed sources, .org, .edu, or articles from scholarly journals of medicine.
Come back with some peer reviewed sources, .org, .edu, or articles from scholarly journals of medicine.
0
gizgal wrote...
>all OP's linked sources are .comsCome back with some peer reviewed sources, .org, .edu, or articles from scholarly journals of medicine.
Seems your kind of right I will get on that...
0
BlackShogunFox wrote...
Randumb wrote...
BlackShogunFox wrote...
Randumb wrote...
Your sources seem kind of ... flimsy.There's obviously more money in a cure than in treatment. The one who discovers the universal cure becomes lord and savior to millions, and they rake in ungodly quantities of money from the patent.
Also, none of the sources you cited suggest a universal cure for cancer, which is on a completely different scale than a treatment for one man's lymphoma. Every person's cancer is different, and the variance can be drastic in terms of what does and does not aid in treatment, drugwise.
It was stated that it killed brain, breast, and lung cancer.
That is more than one type of cancer killed...To try again you must insert another quarter!?
Facepalm. Just ... okay, one more attempt at explaining this.
Not all cancers are the same. If a drug kills a dozen people's tumors, it may go on to kill a dozen people. Nothing is consistent. Because of that, your main point is flawed.
Then why did you just not say that?
I did. I had to rephrase it for you.
0
BlackShogunFox wrote...
The know-it-all-wannabe why do you keep labeling me a "conspiracy theorist". Hell I have been labeled a terrorist by our lovely government already so...Why should I take you seriously anymore then them?
Because yo uare a conspiracy theorist. I didn't think this was even at issue. You think "Big Pharma" is out to keep people sick so they can make money. that's a conspiracy theory. You espouse it. Hence, you're a conspiracy theorist. Pretty simple.
Tell me, why should ANYONE take you seriously?
Hmm...because I do not stand to gain anything out of this...
Hmm...because I do not stand to gain anything out of this...
UFO abductees don't stand anything to gain from telling everyone they saw little green men. In fact they stand a lot to lose, because many people label them as crazy. They still say it, and I don't take them seriously for it. The fact that you have "nothing to gain" doesn't make your opinion more credible.
BigLundi there is two things Penn State will never teach you. How to accept defeat and handle a shotgun. When you finally lose your sanity you will be able to do both at the same time...lol!
Classic Blackshogun. No counter to my argument that you can give. I suppose this is you admitting you have no counter points then. Thanks for conceding defeat on this front.
Ha. I did it again I got Lundi mad on the internet because of what I had to say. Lundi I can tell when your mad look at how many typos you did in your last post. What the heck it is infuriating? Ha...stay on topic come on.
..Maybe one typo? And I was on topic. I was on topic to a different guy who was confused as to why this topic was essentially devolving into a shit flinging contest. I informed him it's because of your arrogant certainty over that which you have no evidence for, that other people have evidence against, that you refuse to listen to. Simple.
P.S Keep on negative repping me c'mon you are doing exactly what I want you to do. Dance my puppets!
If I neg rep someone it's because their opinions are not supported, because they're being unintelligent and arrogant about it, or that they're trolling.
I don't think my reasons differ from most people's reasons. So...yo want people thinking you're considered unintelligent, arrogant, a troll, and an over opinionated ass?
Good luck with that then.
0
I also find it difficult to take you(BlackShogunFox) seriously when every post of yours that i saw before this thread was obvious troll.
0
I did. I had to rephrase it for you.
Ha. I like how you used part of my post to make you look good. I also wanna point out you still did not answer my question though.
Because yo uare a conspiracy theorist. I didn't think this was even at issue. You think "Big Pharma" is out to keep people sick so they can make money. that's a conspiracy theory. You espouse it. Hence, you're a conspiracy theorist. Pretty simple.
Not simple... You are no differnt then cops who think every young black person is a thug. You just assume... You must have the machine from the minority report...lol!
UFO abductees don't stand anything to gain from telling everyone they saw little green men. In fact they stand a lot to lose, because many people label them as crazy. They still say it, and I don't take them seriously for it. The fact that you have "nothing to gain" doesn't make your opinion more credible.[quote]
Neither does it make what you just said any more credible than mine. Speaking of which... You believe in aliens? Ha. That is rich.
[quote]Classic Blackshogun. No counter to my argument that you can give. I suppose this is you admitting you have no counter points then. Thanks for conceding defeat on this front.
Neither does it make what you just said any more credible than mine. Speaking of which... You believe in aliens? Ha. That is rich.
[quote]Classic Blackshogun. No counter to my argument that you can give. I suppose this is you admitting you have no counter points then. Thanks for conceding defeat on this front.
Classic Lundi. You are the one who conceded defeat. It is simple really Lundi. You trying to beat me in debating is like you trying to drown a shark in an ocean.
Maybe one typo? And I was on topic. I was on topic to a different guy who was confused as to why this topic was essentially devolving into a shit flinging contest. I informed him it's because of your arrogant certainty over that which you have no evidence for, that other people have evidence against, that you refuse to listen to. Simple.
Maybe one? Your post just now is riddle with typos. So you and Daedalus are typing jive behind my back. When you are more than welcome to post it here. Man Lundi I did not expect you (I expected Daedalus)to be on some school girl gossip like crap on here. Out of... Who am I kidding this is no surprise. What gets me about you and his evidence is that the scientist stated and I quote "DCA could possibly be carcinogenic to humans." See either it is or it is not. All that research and these people cannot even be decisive on that.
If I neg rep someone it's because their opinions are not supported, because they're being unintelligent and arrogant about it, or that they're trolling.
I don't think my reasons differ from most people's reasons. So...yo want people thinking you're considered unintelligent, arrogant, a troll, and an over opinionated ass?
I don't think my reasons differ from most people's reasons. So...yo want people thinking you're considered unintelligent, arrogant, a troll, and an over opinionated ass?
See that is where you and me differ I posted facts on how the video game industry was going to fail before to and I still got negative repped. So that statement you just made is irrelevant because I do not care how ignorant someone is to what I know I would never negative rep someone. I just read and make a response. What you just described is some bitch made shit which fits your character perfectly...lol!
I cannot tell people what to think they have the ability to do that themself. I am listening you assume I am not. All that knowledge you have and this is what you come up with? You need to chill...
Good luck with that then.
I could have sworn scientist don't believe in luck...(I don't wanna hear it was a figure of speech. You done goofed up.)
I also find it difficult to take you(BlackShogunFox) seriously when every post of yours that i saw before this thread was obvious troll.
Assumptions will get you nowhere just like your silence. You got something to type I'm all eyes so type it. Troll? What is this weaksauce ass internet shite suppose to mean to me anyway? I don't speak a dorknese... Try again please?
0
Mr.Shaggnificent wrote...
I also find it difficult to take you(BlackShogunFox) seriously when every post of yours that i saw before this thread was obvious troll.It's beyond me why a person who's even admitting in a few threads that he's just trying to get people angry, in other words, trolling, doesn't get banned.
0
[quote="BlackShogunFox"]
Not simple... You are no differnt then cops who think every young black person is a thug. You just assume... You must have the machine from the minority report...lol!
So you're saying having a conspiracy theory doesn't make you a conspiracy theorist? Please explain that one. Should be entertaining.
Neither does it make what you just said any more credible than mine. Speaking of which... You believe in aliens? Ha. That is rich.
No, I don't believe in aliens, and even said "I don't take them seriously for it either". Also, you just agreed with my point, rendering your argument moot. That's even more rich.
Classic Lundi. You are the one who conceded defeat. It is simple really Lundi. You trying to beat me in debating is like you trying to drown a shark in an ocean.
Well it's really special of you to be able to SAY I conceded defeat, or that I'm trying to drown a shark in an ocean, but saying that, and demonstrating it, are two different things. Currently, to draw an analogy, I'm playing chess, and you're punching the board until all the pieces fall down and declaring victory.
Maybe one? Your post just now is riddle with typos.
Considering the grammatical mistakes in this sentence, I find the irony hilarious.
Another conspiracy theory? When does it end with you? I haven't shared a single message with Daedalus. The only time I addressed him was in the thread, where I quoted him Snopsing you, and laughed about it.
Because intellectually honest people in science remain tentative about all things. If you think this is a point to ridicule, then you're anti-science. And if you don't think you're being anti-science, then you clearly don't understand the methodological epistemology of science. Either way doesn't bode well for you.
See that is where you and me differ I posted facts on how the video game industry was going to fail before to and I still got negative repped.
Didn't see the thread, don't honestly care, but since you thought that your opening post in THIS thread had 'facts', I don't think you know what a fact is...so I'll remain skeptical that you actually have 'facts' to support yourself when you get neg repped. :)
So you would NEVER negatively rep someone? If that's true, then you're not a very good forum user. There's a reason neg repping is an option, and it's not just for trolling. On a forum, a negative rep is the same thing as a negative deterrent towards someone doing something that people don't like. If I don't want someone to post irrelevant, ill researched nonsense and hubristically claim it as absolute fact, then I neg rep them when they do it. Hopefully they'll get the clue and do better research in the future, helping both them, and me.
No, you're not listening, and have actually said as much. Remember? "All that's just gonna go in one ear and out the other." You actually said that to me, concerning data I gave you. So...you're either a liar, and you were listening, or you're still a liar, and you're only now listening. Either way...you're a liar.
I could have sworn scientist don't believe in luck...(I don't wanna hear it was a figure of speech. You done goofed up.)
Who's a scientist? Certainly not me. Though no, I don't believe in luck. Good luck...is a figure of speech. I don't care if you 'don't wanna hear it'. Too bad. You're going to hear it.
Assumptions will get you nowhere just like your silence. You got something to type I'm all eyes so type it. Troll? What is this weaksauce ass internet shite suppose to mean to me anyway? I don't speak a dorknese... Try again please?
Nobody's 'assuming' anything, my posts, and Shaggnificent's, from what I've seen thus far, or at least concerning his comment at you, are based on rational empirical and verifiable observation. Your responses are inconsistent, typical 'internet tough guy' silliness. The fact of the matter is that you thought you had a smoking gun about a cure for cancer that the pharmaceutical companies are keeping from the public so they can 'make money'. It's been shown to be wrong, and you're still arguing, but you're not even arguing your original point anymore. You're just arguing...for the sake of arguing. And that's just pathetic.
Not simple... You are no differnt then cops who think every young black person is a thug. You just assume... You must have the machine from the minority report...lol!
So you're saying having a conspiracy theory doesn't make you a conspiracy theorist? Please explain that one. Should be entertaining.
Neither does it make what you just said any more credible than mine. Speaking of which... You believe in aliens? Ha. That is rich.
No, I don't believe in aliens, and even said "I don't take them seriously for it either". Also, you just agreed with my point, rendering your argument moot. That's even more rich.
Classic Lundi. You are the one who conceded defeat. It is simple really Lundi. You trying to beat me in debating is like you trying to drown a shark in an ocean.
Well it's really special of you to be able to SAY I conceded defeat, or that I'm trying to drown a shark in an ocean, but saying that, and demonstrating it, are two different things. Currently, to draw an analogy, I'm playing chess, and you're punching the board until all the pieces fall down and declaring victory.
Maybe one? Your post just now is riddle with typos.
Considering the grammatical mistakes in this sentence, I find the irony hilarious.
So you and Daedalus are typing jive behind my back.
Another conspiracy theory? When does it end with you? I haven't shared a single message with Daedalus. The only time I addressed him was in the thread, where I quoted him Snopsing you, and laughed about it.
When you are more than welcome to post it here. Man Lundi I did not expect you (I expected Daedalus)to be on some school girl gossip like crap on here. Out of... Who am I kidding this is no surprise. What gets me about you and his evidence is that the scientist stated and I quote "DCA could possibly be carcinogenic to humans." See either it is or it is not. All that research and these people cannot even be decisive on that.
Because intellectually honest people in science remain tentative about all things. If you think this is a point to ridicule, then you're anti-science. And if you don't think you're being anti-science, then you clearly don't understand the methodological epistemology of science. Either way doesn't bode well for you.
See that is where you and me differ I posted facts on how the video game industry was going to fail before to and I still got negative repped.
Didn't see the thread, don't honestly care, but since you thought that your opening post in THIS thread had 'facts', I don't think you know what a fact is...so I'll remain skeptical that you actually have 'facts' to support yourself when you get neg repped. :)
So that statement you just made is irrelevant because I do not care how ignorant someone is to what I know I would never negative rep someone. I just read and make a response. What you just described is some bitch made shit which fits your character perfectly...lol!
So you would NEVER negatively rep someone? If that's true, then you're not a very good forum user. There's a reason neg repping is an option, and it's not just for trolling. On a forum, a negative rep is the same thing as a negative deterrent towards someone doing something that people don't like. If I don't want someone to post irrelevant, ill researched nonsense and hubristically claim it as absolute fact, then I neg rep them when they do it. Hopefully they'll get the clue and do better research in the future, helping both them, and me.
I cannot tell people what to think they have the ability to do that themself. I am listening you assume I am not. All that knowledge you have and this is what you come up with? You need to chill...
No, you're not listening, and have actually said as much. Remember? "All that's just gonna go in one ear and out the other." You actually said that to me, concerning data I gave you. So...you're either a liar, and you were listening, or you're still a liar, and you're only now listening. Either way...you're a liar.
I could have sworn scientist don't believe in luck...(I don't wanna hear it was a figure of speech. You done goofed up.)
Who's a scientist? Certainly not me. Though no, I don't believe in luck. Good luck...is a figure of speech. I don't care if you 'don't wanna hear it'. Too bad. You're going to hear it.
Assumptions will get you nowhere just like your silence. You got something to type I'm all eyes so type it. Troll? What is this weaksauce ass internet shite suppose to mean to me anyway? I don't speak a dorknese... Try again please?
Nobody's 'assuming' anything, my posts, and Shaggnificent's, from what I've seen thus far, or at least concerning his comment at you, are based on rational empirical and verifiable observation. Your responses are inconsistent, typical 'internet tough guy' silliness. The fact of the matter is that you thought you had a smoking gun about a cure for cancer that the pharmaceutical companies are keeping from the public so they can 'make money'. It's been shown to be wrong, and you're still arguing, but you're not even arguing your original point anymore. You're just arguing...for the sake of arguing. And that's just pathetic.
0
Maybe he put out a lot of sources which mostly no one believes.
However did you question yourself this, that it MIGHT be a possibility that there is some truth behind it?
Pharmaceutical industries are not exactly truthful when it comes to cures and treatments that can Guaranty your recovery. All they say most of the time that it wears the sickness off for a period of time and eventually come back.
I wanna ask you guys this.
If a scientist did in fact find cure for cancer, AIDS, STD's and such, and he sells it to the public for little price because the ingredients are not expensive, then would the people not be needing to go to the doctors or hospitals anymore?
The truth is, they wouldn't, and because of this logical fact, the industry would be actually making LESS money and in the future, the pharmaceutical structure would eventually not be needed anymore.
So How do they need keep making money?
That's right, by keeping the people sick or manipulating the cures effect so that it last's for a period of time.
This whole structure, is based on a cycle that needs to be kept cycling or else the whole structure collapses and BOOM, that structure is destroyed.
This might sound like a conspiracy theory, but I assure you that this is how business rolls and keep making it's money.
So maybe there is truth in this cure, and maybe they didn't make this story big since it would threaten the very structure that they worked so hard for to build.
However since I am just pointing out stuff ( Like that cute pic with the anime girl who shouts RULES ) this wouldn't be believable since nobody actually takes time to learn of it's structure and the people who operate it.
I am just writing my own opinion on this, and maybe this might spark off another reply and all, but I don't wanna reply any solid answers, since it is just my opinion that I am writing about.
However did you question yourself this, that it MIGHT be a possibility that there is some truth behind it?
Pharmaceutical industries are not exactly truthful when it comes to cures and treatments that can Guaranty your recovery. All they say most of the time that it wears the sickness off for a period of time and eventually come back.
I wanna ask you guys this.
If a scientist did in fact find cure for cancer, AIDS, STD's and such, and he sells it to the public for little price because the ingredients are not expensive, then would the people not be needing to go to the doctors or hospitals anymore?
The truth is, they wouldn't, and because of this logical fact, the industry would be actually making LESS money and in the future, the pharmaceutical structure would eventually not be needed anymore.
So How do they need keep making money?
That's right, by keeping the people sick or manipulating the cures effect so that it last's for a period of time.
This whole structure, is based on a cycle that needs to be kept cycling or else the whole structure collapses and BOOM, that structure is destroyed.
This might sound like a conspiracy theory, but I assure you that this is how business rolls and keep making it's money.
So maybe there is truth in this cure, and maybe they didn't make this story big since it would threaten the very structure that they worked so hard for to build.
However since I am just pointing out stuff ( Like that cute pic with the anime girl who shouts RULES ) this wouldn't be believable since nobody actually takes time to learn of it's structure and the people who operate it.
I am just writing my own opinion on this, and maybe this might spark off another reply and all, but I don't wanna reply any solid answers, since it is just my opinion that I am writing about.
0
Data Zero
Valkyrie Forces CO
After reading the topic and trying to make the mental picture, I cannot help to start to think about it deeper than i should and then i come with crackpot theories.
To hell with that! Here is an vid:
Make your opinions after watching the part of the move.
PS! Recommend watching entire movie RIP! A Remix Manifesto. Tells alot about Copyright law and how it became so fucked up.
PSS! Failing with making a post.
To hell with that! Here is an vid:
Make your opinions after watching the part of the move.
PS! Recommend watching entire movie RIP! A Remix Manifesto. Tells alot about Copyright law and how it became so fucked up.
PSS! Failing with making a post.